Canadian Vaccine Laws - Share The Wealth

Canadian Vaccine Laws

Like so many illegal things masquerading as legal, courtesy of vested interests, thought one should keep the following in mind when dealing with Draconian know it all authorities...

...""Unlike some countries, immunization is not mandatory in Canada; it cannot be made mandatory because of the Canadian Constitution... legislation and regulations must not be interpreted to imply compulsory immunization."

(This applies to everyone - the Constitution is there to prevent special interest groups from over-running individual rights based on their own arbitrary agendas.)

...There is no compensation, by anyone, for anyone injured from the vaccine.

...If someone (e.g. employer or health ministry) decides to take away another's freedom of choice, THEY should be the ones burdened with the responsibility of defending this - the burden should not be placed on workers to prove they are deserving of a right that the law already guarantees. The union should staunchly protect their rights - particularly since we are talking about a right engrained in The Constitution."

See also: Re: Canadian Vaccine Laws

Chris Gupta

Here is the attachment about the laws and regulations on our constitution about vaccines. This is written by Catherine J.M. Diodati, M.A.

Andrea
--------------------------------------------------
In the end, though, there are no laws mandating vaccination for anyone. The Canadian Constitution prohibits vaccine mandates. What some employers have neglected to understand is that the Constitution has been put in place to protect individuals from special interest groups who would try to deny our rights.

If she is still in school, of course the exemption would be valid. There is no other situation where there has been any legislation even requiring an exemption.

I prepared a list of arguments for someone a few weeks ago who was making a presentation to their union. I think that the points I listed would be helpful. Some of the info is directly related to the flu vaccine and health care workers, so I think it would all be helpful to her (particularly since the flu vaccine would be the most likely one suggested). I'll include these points below.

Feel free to contact me with any questions.

All the best,

Catherine
------------------------------------------------
Some points that may be helpful:

- The Health Care Consent Act Section 11 (1) #1 states that "The Consent [to treatment] must be given voluntarily."

- Enforced medical treatment is an assault and suspending employees who refuse to undergo medical treatment violates their security of the person's interests. (This is part of the Charney Decision, re: St. Peter's Health System members, Feb 7, 2002 and refers to The Constitution Act, 1982, Section 7).

- "Unlike some countries, immunization is not mandatory in Canada; it cannot be made mandatory because of the Canadian Constitution... legislation and regulations must not be interpreted to imply compulsory immunization."

Quoted from: Health Canada, "Canadian National Report on Immunization, 1996." Canada Communicable Disease Report - Supplement Vol. 23S4 May 1997

(This applies to everyone - the Constitution is there to prevent special interest groups from over-running individual rights based on their own arbitrary agendas.)

- There is no legislation authorizing anyone to mandate influenza vaccination (or any other vaccine) as a condition of work.

- Making vaccination a condition of work (whether suspension is temporary or permanent) is a mandate and is coercive in that the individual is put into the position of accepting a medical intervention they do not want or need or to face potential impoverishment. This is indeed taking away free choice.

- There is no compensation, by anyone, for anyone injured from the vaccine.

- Suspending healthy workers, due to an arbitrary ruling, will unnecessarily overburden facilities.

- Vaccinated workers can still contract influenza. Clinical influenza (according to a meta-analysis by Italian Epidemiologist Vittorio Demichelli et al, Vaccine 2000) found that the vaccine may prevent clinical influenza in only 24% of vaccinees but 69% of vaccinees will experience local reactions and 26% will experience systemic effects (flu symptoms) - from the vaccine. In a Canadian study, local reactions occurred in 86% and systemic effects were found to occur in 49%. (David W. Scheifele et al., "Evaluation of Adverse Events after Influenza Vaccination on Hospital Personnel," Canadian Medical Association Journal 142 no.2 (1990): 127-130.)

- There are NO studies (just see any that Health Canada uses to support Health Care Worker (HCW) vaccination) that PROVE that HCWs are the source of nosocomial (originating or taking place in a hospital) influenza infections. Also - there are no methodologically sound studies that demonstrate that vaccination of HCWs is an effective means of preventing flu in patients or reducing HCW sick time.

- Vaccination is not required for visitors and delivery persons entering the facilities. While the employees at the facility have more direct contact with patients, this also presents a higher stake (a greater personal and professional reason) for them to protect their patients by staying home while ill with ANY communicable disease.

- According to the LCDC's (Laboratory Centre for Disease Control (Ottawa, Canada)) yearly influenza strain characterization analyses, only about 10%-13% of URIs (upper respiratory inf believed by MDs to be influenza actually turn out to be influenza. The other URIs are from various other pathogens such as coronavirus, rhinovirus, adenovirus, and RSV (respiratory syncytial virus) which cause the same symptoms and complications as influenza and arise at the same time as influenza season. The flu vaccine does not address ANY of these other pathogens.

- If the union allows this sort of coercion to be established, it will set a precedent for any other interventions that come down the pipeline. (e.g. bio warfare vaccines, "preventive drugs", smallpox vaccines, etc.)

- The only time forced medical treatment has been legally allowed is when an already infected person refuses treatment for a communicable disease and presents a real risk to society.

- If someone (e.g. employer or health ministry) decides to take away another's freedom of choice, THEY should be the ones burdened with the responsibility of defending this - the burden should not be placed on workers to prove they are deserving of a right that the law already guarantees. The union should staunchly protect their rights - particularly since we are talking about a right engrained in The Constitution.

see also:

Vaccines

UPI Investigates: The vaccine conflict

FluMist vaccine

posted by Chris Gupta on Saturday November 29 2003
updated on Saturday September 24 2005

Print this article

TrackBack

URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2003/11/29/canadian_vaccine_laws.htm

Related Articles

Bills C-51 & C-52 Example letters
Here are a couple of letters that you can adapt and paste in the left hand side of Health Canada Abuse site to send to your representatives. Here is an extract from the site: Harper & Cabinet Ministers Standing Committee of Health Canadian Senators Canadian Members of Parliament Conservative MPs Liberal MPs NDP MPs BLOC MPs Independent MPs The current Status for Bill C-51 is here and for C-52 is... [read more]
May 28, 2008 - Chris Gupta

Dr. Carley's comments to PBS re: Autism, ADHD, Vaccinations...
"ADD & ADHD are primarily a result of vaccinations" Further to: Vaccines Often The Cause of "Multiple Sclerosis & Other DEMYELINATING Diseases" here is another excellent response to junk health PBS programs of late. "All are sponsored by the same cabal* who brought you this disease via the nutrient depleted, addictive and toxic chemical added processed foods; surgeries; and last but not least the supposed magic of generally toxic vaccines... [read more]
January 14, 2008 - Chris Gupta

Re: Vaccines
At 02:16 PM 29/05/2007, you wrote: Why do you lump all vaccines together as a category that is dangerous rather than treating them as individual cases? Is that a good way to find out if vaccines are dangerous in your opinion? Also, why would you trust eyewitness accounts rather than treat them with a well needed grain of salt? If I found eyewitness accounts that contradicted your opinion would you... [read more]
May 29, 2007 - Chris Gupta

Readers' Comments

I am a nursing student inquiring about information on immunization in specific provinces in Canada. Is it true that schedualed vaccinations for children are manditory in order to attend school and daycare in the provinces of Ontario and New Brunswick? If so, 1)How is this affecting/influencing their statistics of present vaccine-preventable diseases? 2)Why is this policy/law/mandate not adopted by other provinces??

Thank you for your time .

Posted by: J.R.R. on February 16, 2005 06:03 PM

Dear J.R.R.,

In all Canadian provinces, children can certainly attend school or daycare whether they are vaccinated or not. Ontario and New Brunswick (and Manitoba - but on a more limited basis) require either proof of vaccination or exemption forms for unvaccinated children. Essentially, it is the paperwork that is mandatory, not the vaccines. Although, it is my experience in Ontario, that people are rarely made aware of available exemptions and many are left with the incorrect assumption that vaccines are mandatory.

In 1983, Ontario tried to mandate vaccination for school children, but this was later rescinded because the mandate violated The Canadian Constitution. The Committee Against Compulsory Vaccination, now known as VRAN - The Vaccination Risk Awareness Network (www.vran.org ), diligently fought the mandate to restore our freedom of choice. No province in Canada can mandate vaccination.

Other provinces (besides Ontario, New Brunswick, and Manitoba) do not require exemption forms for unvaccinated children. I interviewed each of the Canadian Health Ministries a number of years ago and I recall one of the Medical Officers of Health mentioning that in his province, they saw no benefit to requiring exemptions. He felt that vaccine uptake in his province was certainly equivalent to others and also felt that they would have a revolution on their hands if they followed the Ontario example.

In truth, vaccination, like any other health care decision, must be left up to the individual. Vaccination is not without risks, so an informed decision is vital. Thus far, only Quebec has recognized a responsibility for compensating individuals who suffer vaccine injuries, while other provinces are turning a blind eye. The Canadian adverse event reporting system is poor at best and there is no enforceable legislation mandating adverse event reporting. Clearly said, we have no accurate statistics on the extent and frequency of vaccine-related adverse events experienced in Canada. Thus, it is difficult to identify trends in a timely manner, to identify those most at risk of an adverse event, or to disseminate information to our doctors and to the public.

I hope this helps answer your questions.

All the best,
Catherine

Posted by: Catherine Diodati on February 17, 2005 02:16 PM

Dear J.R.R.,

In all Canadian provinces, children can certainly attend school or daycare whether they are vaccinated or not. Ontario and New Brunswick (and Manitoba - but on a more limited basis) require either proof of vaccination or exemption forms for unvaccinated children. Essentially, it is the paperwork that is mandatory, not the vaccines. Although, it is my experience in Ontario, that people are rarely made aware of available exemptions and many are left with the incorrect assumption that vaccines are mandatory.

In 1983, Ontario tried to mandate vaccination for school children, but this was later rescinded because the mandate violated The Canadian Constitution. The Committee Against Compulsory Vaccination, now known as VRAN - The Vaccination Risk Awareness Network (www.vran.org ), diligently fought the mandate to restore our freedom of choice. No province in Canada can mandate vaccination.

Other provinces (besides Ontario, New Brunswick, and Manitoba) do not require exemption forms for unvaccinated children. I interviewed each of the Canadian Health Ministries a number of years ago and I recall one of the Medical Officers of Health mentioning that in his province, they saw no benefit to requiring exemptions. He felt that vaccine uptake in his province was certainly equivalent to others and also felt that they would have a revolution on their hands if they followed the Ontario example.

In truth, vaccination, like any other health care decision, must be left up to the individual. Vaccination is not without risks, so an informed decision is vital. Thus far, only Quebec has recognized a responsibility for compensating individuals who suffer vaccine injuries, while other provinces are turning a blind eye. The Canadian adverse event reporting system is poor at best and there is no enforceable legislation mandating adverse event reporting. Clearly said, we have no accurate statistics on the extent and frequency of vaccine-related adverse events experienced in Canada. Thus, it is difficult to identify trends in a timely manner, to identify those most at risk of an adverse event, or to disseminate information to our doctors and to the public.

I hope this helps answer your questions.

All the best,
Catherine

Posted by: Melissa on May 10, 2005 07:23 PM


	A Person Is Only As Valuable As She Can Be Of Help To Others

Home | Site map | About | Contact

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes.
Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice prior to any specific use of any of the non drug device or food based medicinal products referenced herein.

752


Self-Sufficiency Is The Key To Empowerment And Freedom