California
parents have yet a new problem thanks to big pharma and the recently passed state
Bill AB499.This is the latest news on Gardasil, the controversial (and rightfully
so) very costly drug that big pharma (in this case Merck) is banking on to reap
profits from. At the cost the basic rights of the children, their parents, and enormous
price tag to the state. I leave it to you just which of these three Merck
really cares about. It is not your child. It is not parental rights.
Could
it possibly be the enormous profit margin Merck stands to gain since each set
of vaccinations comes in at just under the thousand dollar mark per victim
child?
Here
are two pieces by Dr. Mercola. The first outlines the current situation and
offers actions that can be taken. The second is an older piece in which he
discusses in depth the medical consequences of this insidious vaccination
routine, let alone the manner in which the studies were set up.
.
A slick hip youthful advertising campaign cashing in on the "I have a dream" mindset.
September 16, 2011
The state of California has just passed bill AB499, which will permit minor children
as young as 12 years old to be vaccinated with sexually transmitted disease
vaccines like Gardasil without parental knowledge or parental consent.
This means that if you live in California, school or medical
personnel would be allowed to vaccinate your child against an STD without your
ever knowing it.
At issue, of course, is whether 12-year-olds are mature enough
to fully analyze the benefits versus risks of vaccination (or any medical
treatment for that matter), or recognize the alternatives to STD prevention,
such as abstinence.
Meanwhile, a child could suffer a vaccine reaction and the
parent, not knowing the child had been vaccinated, could mistake it for the flu
or another condition, delaying getting help until it is too late.
But, perhaps the greatest issue of all is whether this law
violates your basic right to be involved in important decisions regarding your
child's health.
.
.
HOW CAN PARENTAL CONSENT BE COMPLETELY IGNORED?
As Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) has stated, informed consent is a human right.
"The right to voluntary, informed consent to a medical intervention, including use of a pharmaceutical product such as a vaccine that can injure or kill you or your child, is a human right.While the State may have the legal authority to mandate use of vaccines, nobody has the moral authority to FORCE you to get vaccinated or vaccinate your child without your voluntary, informed consent," she says.We as parents, who know and love our children better than anyone else, we, by U.S. law and a larger moral imperative, are the guardians of our children until they are old enough to make life and death decisions for themselves. We are responsible for their welfare and we are the ones who bear the grief and the burden when they are injured or die from any cause.We are their voice and by all that is right in this great country and in the moral universe, we should be allowed to make a rational, informed, voluntary decision about which diseases and which vaccines we are willing to risk their lives for ~ without fearing retribution from physicians employed by the state."
Not only does AB499 remove a parent's right to give their
informed consent, but parents will not even have the right to be informed if their child is vaccinated. As Age of Autism recently reported, this could
be disastrous for the child's well-being for a number of reasons:
1. “A child will most likely not know his or her family history of allergies, autoimmune diseases, or adverse reactions to other vaccines or medications, all of which are essential to consider before the administration of any vaccine.2. A child is not capable of weighing the risks and benefits of vaccination, and under this bill, a parent will not be present to ask the appropriate questions to elicit this important risk/benefit information.3. A child can be easily swayed by a person of authority, his or her peers, and by misinformation4. .. Who will determine if the child falls within the category of those who should not be vaccinated on the label (especially in the absence of the child's medical records and the child's parent)?”
Informed consent is especially important when it comes to
vaccination, because there is no way for you or your physician to predict if
your child will be one of the children who has a devastating vaccine reaction,
such as brain inflammation, immune dysregulation, or even death..\
.
.
AB499 MORE ABOUT PROFITS THAN HEALTH
Pharmaceutical and medical lobbyists were heavily involved in pushing AB499 through the state legislature.
After all, by stripping parents of their right to make informed decisions about medical procedures that could harm their children, they have tapped a new market for their Gardasil vaccine. And, at a cost of $108 per dose to the government, Merck, the vaccine's manufacturer, stands to profit handsomely.
Meanwhile, California taxpayers will likely foot the bill for
the multi-millions of dollars this law will cost to implement. Parents are NOT
responsible for the costs (how could they be if they're not even informed that
a vaccine was given?), so the bulk will come from the government (i.e. the
taxpayers). As Fisher states:
"This proposed law would cost the cash-strapped state of California multi-millions of dollars to implement. Most of that money will go to Merck and other vaccine corporations to pay for multiple doses of each vaccine that will be aggressively promoted to young children, who are not yet physically, mentally or emotionally mature enough to make fully informed decisions about risk-taking, including whether or not to take a medical risk."
Further, has anyone considered who will be held responsible if a
child is permanently injured or killed from receiving a vaccination without
their parents' consent?
Neither physicians nor drug companies have any legal liability,
so the parents will ultimately be the ones who will have to carry the financial
burden if their child suffers damage from the vaccine.
.
.
IF YOU LIVE IN CALIFORNIA
TALK TO YOUR CHILD ABOUT GARDASIL RISKS!
You have the legal right to know the risks and complications of vaccines BEFORE you make the choice of whether or not to allow your child to be vaccinated.
If you live in California, this right may soon be taken away,
unless you ACT NOW to stop the Governor from signing it into law.
Still, it would be prudent to discuss this issue with your child
now, before they are given the opportunity to receive this vaccine, so they
will be able to make an educated decision when and if the time comes.
In the four short years since Gardasil came on the market, there
have been more than 21,000 reported incidents of adverse effects and death,
despite the fact that only two out of every 10 women in the approved age group
have gotten the vaccine so far.
Add to this the fact that an estimated 90 to 99 percent of all
adverse effects are never reported, and the abnormally large risks of the HPV
vaccine compared to other vaccines should give most people reason to pause.
Further, you and your child should know that:
1. Gardasil is NOT a cancer vaccine. It is simply a vaccine for two strains of human papillomaviruses (HPVs) that in some instances can lead to cancer in some women (Gardasil's other two HPV strains are for genital warts, which don't cause cancer). There is absolutely no proof and no clinical trials that show Gardasil protects against cancer in the long-term.2. Since there are at least 15 HPV strains that can lead to cancer, Gardasil-vaccinated girls can still get cervical cancer from the other 13 HPV strains not contained in the vaccine.3. The vaccine doesn't work if you've already been infected with the HPV strains in the vaccine.
In the United States, infection with HPV is very common, and it
is estimated that about 20 million Americans have an HPV infection at any given
time. In fact, HPV is so common that most sexually active people will get it at
some time in their lives.
The important thing to know about HPV is that in almost all
cases, it clears up on its own without any adverse health effects within two
years in most healthy people. So not only is the HPV vaccine one of the most unnecessary vaccines on the
market, it is also the most dangerous! If AB499 is
not vetoed, it's important, if you live in California, to arm your children
with these facts in advance.
.
.
URGENT ACTION ALERT FOR ALL PARENTS
If California parents can be stripped of their legal right to make informed medical decisions for their minor children, so too can parents in any state. I encourage you to get involved with the work that NVIC is doing to protect your right to choose which vaccines you want your children to get, including the legal right to use all, some, or no vaccines at all.
Register for the free NVIC Advocacy Portal that educates you
about how to communicate effectively with your elected state representatives
and protect vaccine exemptions in your state.
Stay informed about what is happening in your state and make
your voice heard.
For those of you who live in California, it is imperative that
you take part in NVIC's urgent action alert.
If Governor Brown does not veto
AB499, vaccine exemptions for sexually transmitted disease vaccines become NULL
and VOID in California. Please take just 5 minutes to help support this cause
by:
Posting the link to this alert on Facebook, blogs, or other social media sites:
http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Resources/VetoAB499.aspxContact Governor Jerry Brown and ask him to VETO AB499. The most effective way is to call the Governor’s office. They’ve already added a simple voicemail button for a "yes" or "no" vote on the legislation.
- Call: (916) 445-2841
- Fax: (916) 558-3160
- Email Web Form: http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
Register for the NVIC Advocacy Portal so you can receive updates
Our entire country needs to come together and send the state
government of California the strong message:
KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OUR KIDS!
DON'T GIVE THIS TO YOUR
DAUGHTER
~ DESPITE WHAT YOUR DOCTOR
SAYS
By Dr. Mercola
November 05 2010
It's been four years
since Gardasil debuted as a blockbuster vaccine with sales that rocketed to
over $1.1 billion in its first nine months.
Touted as a wonder
vaccine that would end cervical cancer, it was supposed to be the savior of
both mankind and Merck's Vioxx-damaged bottom line. But now, according to CNN Money, it's
a dud.
It just posted $219
million in sales. But in the pharma world, that's a paltry pittance, nothing
short of an in-flight explosion that's caused Merck stock to drop 3 percent,
with analysts and investors scrambling to figure out what went wrong.
So what happened?
How did a vaccine that
was supposed to be Merck's beacon for higher profits in the 21st
Century go from flagship to flop?
THE SCIENCE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF
CNN Money calls
Gardasil's crash a "design flaw" and faults the economy, puritanical
parents, bad press, and Merck itself for contributing to the fallout.
The article ends with the
hypothesis:
"Or, maybe people just aren't ready for a cancer vaccine when it's for a sexually transmitted disease."
I think they're way off
the mark.
ED: That comment is utterly facetious and typical of these creatures without conscience.
The real reason Gardasil
is a flop is that people have become educated about this vaccine.
They've looked at the
science and weighed the risks vs. the supposed benefits, and have made a choice
not to get it for themselves or their children.
The word is out: despite
what the CDC would have you believe, Gardasil's safety record is in serious
question. As of September 28, 2010, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) has
more than 18,000 Gardasil-related adverse events listed in it, including at least 65 deaths.
As a vaccine used in the
developed world, the science speaks for itself: Gardasil can't ~ and never will
~ replace Pap smears, which are the reason that the incidence of cervical
cancer is so low in the United States after decades of including pap smears in
routine medical care for women.
Today, cervical cancer is
not even in the top 10 cancers that kill American women every year.
As a vaccine for children, it doesn't make sense to vaccinate to try to prevent an infection that is cleared from your body without any negative effects within two years in most healthy persons, and is not transmitted in a school setting like other airborne diseases that are easily transmitted in crowded conditions.
Gardasil is designed to
prevent only two of at least 15 strains of HPV that can lead to cervical cancer
in those who do not clear the virus from their body within two years and become
chronically infected.
There is also some
evidence that Gardasil-induced immunity may wane after about five years.
Pre-licensure clinical trials did not follow young girls or women for decades
to find out if the vaccine does, in fact, prevent cervical cancer.
Gardasil is NOT new. And this byline, "You could be one less...."
does have that sinister eugenic touch to it, does it not
What went wrong with
Gardasil is that this may be a vaccine that set many more health care consumers
on a course of self-education that helped them make an informed decision about
whether or not to take it ~ and there are several good reasons why many are
deciding NOT to take it.
SCIENCE VS. POLITICS
First, the science:
Peer-reviewed journal articles widely available on the Internet show that
Gardasil is not what it was made out to be in the "one-less" TV
commercials that jumped into people's living rooms a few years ago.
Consumers now know that:
1. Gardasil is NOT a cancer vaccine. It is simply a vaccine for two strains of human papillomaviruses (HPVs) that in some instances can lead to cancer in some women (Gardasil's other two HPV strains are for genital warts, which don't cause cancer).2. Since there are at least 15 HPV strains that can lead to cancer, Gardasil-vaccinated girls can still get cervical cancer from other 13 HPV strains not contained in the vaccine.3. The vaccine doesn't work if you've already been infected with the HPV strains in the vaccine.
But the politics of this
information is that you won't hear it or read it in the mainstream press.
Instead, what you get is
a repetition of the politically charged mantra that parents don't want their
young daughters or sons to get a vaccine associated with sexual behaviors, and
complaints about the vaccine's high cost.
However, the real truth
is that Gardasil's downfall has nothing to do with sex or money.
.
THE TRUTH ABOUT HPV AND CANCER
It is important to
distinguish between HPV and cancer: Just because you currently have HPV, or may
have had the infection in the past, does NOT mean you have cancer or will get
cancer.
HPV is NOT cancer. It is
a viral infection that can lead to cancer in some people if the virus does not
naturally clear from your body, as it does for most people within two years.
Some high risk factors for
developing chronic HPV infection are:
1. Smoking2. Co-infection with herpes, Chlamydia or HIV3. Long term birth control use4. Multiple births
In
the US, infection with HPV is very common, and it is estimated that
about 20 million Americans have an HPV infection at any given time. In fact,
HPV is so common that most sexually active people will get it at some time in
their lives.
The important thing to know about HPV is that in almost all cases, it clears up on its own without any adverse health effects within two years in most healthy people.
Genital
HPV infection that is persistent, and more likely to lead to cancer, is most
common in men and women who have had multiple sex partners. According to the CDC, other
contributing risk factors to HPV infection that leads to cervical cancer
includes smoking, having herpes, Chlamydia or HIV (the virus associated with
AIDS), or another health problem that makes it hard for your body to deal with
infections.
Using birth control pills
for a long time (five or more years) or having given birth to three or more
children is also a risk factor.
Also, certain populations
in the US are more prone to getting cervical cancer. According to CervicalCancerCampaign.org:
"Cervical cancer occurs most often in certain groups of women in the United States including African-American women, Hispanic women, white (non-Hispanic) women living in rural New York State and northern New England, American Indian women, and Vietnamese-American women.Hispanic women have twice the rate of cervical cancer compared to non-Hispanic white women. African-American women develop this cancer about 50 percent more than non-Hispanic white women".These disparities are due, in part, from poor access to health care. The women who are most at risk for the disease are women who do not have regular check-ups that include pap tests.
Official reports from the
CDC and WHO estimate that between 11,000 and 12,000 women in the US are
diagnosed with cervical cancer each year, and 3,800 to 4,100 die from it.
About half of these women
had never had a pap smear
before they discovered they had cervical cancer. The majority of the others had
not had a pap smear within the previous five years.
"Cervical cancer is an uncommon consequence of HPV infection in women, especially if they are screened for cancer regularly with pap tests and have appropriate follow-up of abnormalities.The purpose of screening with the pap test is to detect cervical abnormalities that can be treated, thereby preventing progression to invasive cervical cancer, and also to detect invasive cervical cancer at a very early stage. If detected early and managed promptly, survival rates for cervical cancer are over 90 percent."
A study published in 2000
in the Archives of Family Medicine also
showed that in the US, women who are elderly, unmarried, and uninsured are more
likely to be diagnosed at a late stage of cervical cancer.
THE TRUTH ABOUT GARDASIL
According to a 2006 report to the international group Program for
Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), Gardasil and
Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline's two-strain HPV vaccine) are only effective in young
women and men (boys are now approved to receive HPV vaccine) who have never been infected with HPV.
According to Merck's
package insert on Gardasil, the end-point in its clinical trials for the
vaccine's efficacy, or effectiveness, was NOT cancer, but instead was the
presence, or non-presence, of vaccine-relevant pre-cancerous lesions (CIN 2/3).
There is absolutely no proof, and no clinical trials
that show Gardasil protects against cancer in the long-term.
In fact, in clinical
trials, Gardasil's protection against cell dysplasia leveled off at four years,
and clinical trial participants were given a fourth dose to
boost the number of antibodies measured in the blood (immunogenicity) of those
who got the vaccine. This is the efficacy being reported by Merck, even though
the vaccine series is marketed as three shots, not four.
And, according to Dr. Diane Harper, a
lead researcher for Gardasil, its efficacy against genital warts is only two years.
1. Gardasil does not eliminate the necessity for pap screening2. It does not treat active infections, lesions or cancers3. And it may not result in protection for all vaccinees
An outstanding question
is whether the mass use of Gardasil (and Cervarix) by all girls and boys will
put pressure on other HPV strains not contained in the vaccines to become
more dominant and perhaps more virulent in causing cervical cancer.
The
"replacement" effect has happened with other infectious organisms
that have developed resistance to vaccines used on a mass basis, such as
pertussis (whooping cough) and pneumococcal vaccines.
THE TRUTH ABOUT GARDASIL'S CLINICAL TRIALS
Only 27 percent of girls who have
received the Gardasil vaccine have gotten all three shots in the vaccine's
series. Merck blames it on forgetfulness, and has launched a
"reminder" program that contacts vaccinees, and urges them to
complete the series.
CNN Money suggests that it has to do with the vaccine's
high cost ~ just under $400 for a three-shot series, although some private doctors charge up to $875 for a three-shot
series.
But neither has
considered the third possibility ~ that the reported reactions girls are
suffering after getting one or two shots of Gardasil are so severe that they
decide not to go back for more.
In any drug trial,
whether it's for a vaccine or not, safety should be the top priority ~ and
Gardasil's safety should have been thoroughly investigated before it was
licensed and put on the market and recommended by public health doctors for ALL
young girls to use.
But Merck used bad
methodology in its pre-licensure safety studies that did NOT contain a true
placebo. In reporting systemic adverse reactions to the vaccine, instead of
using a true placebo that is not reactive on its own, Merck used a vaccine
component (aluminum) in what they called the "placebo."
Aluminum can cause
inflammation in the body and can make your blood brain barrier more permeable,
allowing toxins to pass into your brain and cause damage. It is definitely not
appropriate to use an aluminum-containing "placebo" to measure the reactivity of an
experimental vaccine like Gardasil that will be given to children.
Researchers did use a saline placebo in one clinical
trial, but only reported it in reference to injection site reactions. In those comparisons, the saline
placebo had significantly fewer reactions than either the vaccine or the
aluminum-containing placebo.
When it came to reporting the actual adverse, systemic events with the vaccine, Merck combined the aluminum and saline placebos, thus making the "placebo" results nearly the same as the vaccine's ~ and impossible to objectively judge true safety comparisons.This encouraged the perception that the vaccine is "safe" because the adverse events associated with it were nearly the same as the aluminum containing “placebo."
Another important outcome
of the clinical trials that was not properly investigated before licensure was
the potential association between the deaths that occurred in the clinical
trials and the Gardasil vaccine.
A number of the girls who
died during the trials were killed in car crashes. Yet, Merck did not report
whether the girls were the drivers or passengers at the time of the accidents.
This could be critical
information in determining the vaccine's true safety, since one of the most
common post-marketing adverse events is syncope (sudden fainting) as well as
dizziness, seizures, and neurological events that could have contributed to a
car accident if the person had just received a Gardasil shot and was driving at
the time of the accident.
THE TRUTH ABOUT GARDASIL AND ITS THOUSANDS OF
INJURIES AND DEATHS
The federal Vaccine
Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) has been in place since 1986, but many
experts believe that only 1 to 10 percent of all serious health problems that
occur after vaccination, including hospitalizations, injuries and deaths, ever
make it into the VAERS database.
Most doctors and other
vaccine providers do not report vaccine-related adverse events to VAERS even
though it is a requirement under federal law since 1986 with the passage of the
National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
Gardasil was a "fast
tracked" vaccine and with so little active reporting of Gardasil-related
health problems to VAERS, this means that Gardasil should be on the red-alert
list for agencies like the CDC, the FDA, and the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP).
Yet these three federal
health agencies and medical organizations urging doctors to give Gardasil to
children and young women have joined Merck in insisting that Gardasil is safe,
despite mounting evidence to the contrary.
These tragic entries
posted by Gardasil casualties is stark testimonial to the fact that something
isn't right with this vaccine ~ and what isn't right is that the list of
Gardasil victims just keeps growing.
The unfortunate fact is
Merck only studied the vaccine in fewer than 1200 girls under age 16, and most
of the serious health problems and deaths in the pre-licensure clinical trials
were written off as a "coincidence."
And now, since those
adverse reactions aren't listed as possible warning signs that the vaccine can
cause harm, health officials are still ignoring them, even while girls die and
others suffer ongoing, and often permanent, injuries and disabilities from it.
.
For example, a rough comparison of Gardasil and Menactra (a vaccine against meningitis) adverse event reports to VAERS through November 30, 2008 revealed that:
1. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least twice as many emergency room visit reports; 4 times more death reports; 5 times more "did not recover" reports; and 7 times more "disabled" reports.2. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with all of the reports of blood clots. All 23 reports of blood clots following Gardasil occurred when Gardasil was given alone without any other vaccines.3. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 4 times as many cardiac arrest reports. All 9 reports of cardiac arrest following Gardasil occurred when Gardasil was given alone without any other vaccines.4. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 6 times as many fainting reports and at least 3 times as many syncope reports.5. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 4 times as many lupus reports. 27 reports of lupus following Gardasil occurred when Gardasil was given alone.6. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 15 times as many stroke reports. 16 reports of stroke following Gardasil occurred when Gardasil was given alone.7. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 3 times as many syncope reports.8. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 33 times as many thrombosis reports. 34 reports of thrombosis following Gardasil occurred when Gardasil was given alone.9. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 5 times as many sasculitis reports. 11 reports of vasculitis following Gardasil occurred when Gardasiil was given alone.10. Compared to Menactra, receipt of Gardasil is associated with at least 30 times as many rechallenge reports, which involve a worsening of symptoms experienced after previous receipt of Gardasil.
What's disturbing about
this is that these reports in all likelihood are just the tip of the iceberg
because most physicians are making their reports to Merck, rather than to
VAERS, and Merck is forwarding such poor quality information to VAERS that the
CDC and FDA can't follow up on the majority of reports that Merck makes.
As reported in the Journal
of the American Medical Association in August 2009, Merck
made 68 percent of the reports to VAERS and 89 percent of them had information
that was too insufficient to review!
IS THIS A VACCINE THAT YOU WOULD WANT?
An editorial in the
August 19, 2009 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association
(JAMA) commented specifically on the risks and benefits of vaccinating with
Gardasil, Merck's marketing of it, and the safety issues that are so obvious
with this drug:
"When weighing evidence about risks and benefits, it is also appropriate to ask who takes the risk, and who gets the benefit," the JAMA author said."Patients and the public logically expect that only medical and scientific evidence is put on the balance. If other matters weigh in, such as profit for a company or financial or professional gains for physicians or groups of physicians, the balance is easily skewed."The balance will also tilt if the adverse events are not calculated correctly."
The commentary is so
poignant that it's a wonder that the mainstream media still hasn't' picked up
on the impact of what this author is trying to say ~ that maybe, just maybe,
people shouldn't be so quick to jump on the Gardasil bandwagon.
The JAMA commentary goes
on to say that one of the core questions of all medical decisions should be:
When is the available information about harmful adverse effects sufficient to conclude that the risks outweigh the potential benefits?
It's apparent that that
question is in the minds of anyone who has really taken the time to study this
vaccine.
What happened to Gardasil
is that consumers looked at the science and lots of them made a choice to not
use this vaccine.
And that, CNN Money, is
why Gardasil is a flop.
WHAT YOU CAN DO TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE
Don't sit this one out!
We need to take action NOW.
Tell your friends and
your family. Tell everyone. With a little bit of effort, we can make big
strides toward preserving our freedom to make voluntary health decisions
affecting our future, especially our children's future.
One of the top goals for
NVIC is preserving your freedom of choice about when to use vaccines. This
non-profit charity has been fighting for your right to make informed VOLUNTARY
vaccine choices since 1982.
Mercola.com and
NVIC are dedicating Nov. 1-6, 2010 Vaccine Awareness Week in a joint effort to
raise public awareness about important vaccine issues.
Vaccine Awareness Week
will feature a series of articles and interviews on vaccine topics of interest
to Mercola.com
newsletter
subscribers and NVIC Vacine E-newsletter readers.
During this Vaccine
Awareness Week, NVIC is also launching the online NVIC
Advocacy Portal that will give you the tools you need to take
action to protect legal medical, religious and conscientious belief exemptions
to vaccination in YOUR state.
And while you are at it, please make a donation to NVIC so
they can continue fighting on behalf of all Americans to make sure we don't
lose our informed consent rights when it comes to vaccination.
Your Donations to the
NVIC help fund efforts that raise vaccine awareness, including the following
excellent vaccine resources:
For
information about legally avoiding immunizations in Canada, please see the
Canadian Vaccination Liberation website
www.vaclib.org.
Stay tuned to this newsletter for more updates, or follow the National Vaccine Information Center on Facebook. Together we CAN make a difference!
No comments:
Post a Comment
If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.