Alberta Bill 28 has received Royal Assent and is now in force.
About the Bill
A press release from the Alberta government:
Improved childhood disease protection behind Bill 28 – The Public Health Amendment Act would mean a faster response to vaccine-preventable outbreaks in schools.
Alberta residents, please contact Premier Notley with your concerns.
Template letter to Premier Notley for Alberta residents (thanks to Jen for this letter)
We are very concerned that Bill 28 will infringe on personal privacy rights regarding medical records, will pose a threat to Informed Consent rights regarding disclosure of children’s vaccine status, and will further increase a climate of coercion and bullying of families who, for reasons of health, conscience or religion, choose to either vaccinate their children selectively, or not at all.
Vaccine Choice Canada’s letter to the Premier is below:
November 28, 2016
Sent via e-mail to premier@gov.ab.ca and via Fax to 780-427-1349
Premier Rachel Notley
Office of the Premier
307 Legislature Building
10800 – 97 Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2B6
Dear Premier Notley,
Re: Bill 28: Public Health Amendment Act, 2016
Vaccine Choice Canada was formed in response to growing parental concern regarding the safety of current vaccination programs in Canada. We are writing to you today with our concerns regarding your government’s Bill 28, which has passed third reading as of November 22, and is awaiting the Lieutenant Governor’s signature for Royal Assent.
Of particular concern is the November 9, 2016 letter sent to Health Minister Hoffman by the Information and Privacy Commissioner Jill Clayton, who stated,
“My office first saw the Bill when it was introduced and our review of the proposed amendments is continuing; however, our preliminary review has raised some questions. As Commissioner, I want to ensure the broader public health policy objectives of the Bill are appropriately balanced with Albertans’ privacy interests. “
We do not see the Privacy Commissioner’s concerns addressed in the Third Reading of the Bill, where the Health Minister stated, on November 22, thirteen days after the Privacy Commissioners letter, “Both departments have already begun work on privacy impact assessments to help inform this legislation.” Shouldn’t these assessments be completed prior to this bill receiving Royal Assent?
The group Parents for Choice in Education detailed their concerns with Bill 28. They state,
“PCE is not taking an unequivocal hard-line stance against Bill 28. We are saying that important questions need to be answered before forging ahead. It is entirely reasonable, in respect of any and all legislation, to demand that relevant questions be answered fully and thoughtfully before passing this bill into law; a bill that may have a detrimental impact on the freedom and autonomy of Alberta families.” [emphasis ours]
Have you or your Health Minister responded to the important questions posed from Parents for Choice in Education?
A CBC media report stated “Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children will be counseled on the benefits of immunization and asked to sign a form if they continue to resist.”
Will this counselling be mandatory? Will signing the form be mandatory if parents “continue to resist”? Could you please provide us with a copy of the form that parents will be required to sign if they choose not to vaccinate their children?
From the CBC article above, “Health Minister Sarah Hoffman said she hopes the vaccination holdouts will think harder about the consequences of their choice. ‘I hope that they take a moment to pause and think about how important it is to their child’s safety, as well as those who have medical conditions that don’t allow them to be vaccinated,’ she said.”
If the Health Minister is concerned about children who have “medical conditions that don’t allow them to be vaccinated” then she should also be concerned with people (adults and children) who have recently vaccinated with live/attenuated virus vaccines including measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, shingles, rotavirus, yellow fever, and Flumist. Will your government acknowledge and protect the immunocompromised by keeping the recently vaccinated out of school for at least the length of time shown in the manufacturers package inserts and medical journal studies that live virus vaccines are capable of transmitting the virus to others? For example, see our references below where the Varivax package insert states, “Due to the concern for transmission of vaccine virus, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid whenever possible close association with susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks following vaccination with VARIVAX.”
We look forward to your response to our questions as well as answers to the questions of the group Parents for Choice in Education posed.
Will the Health Minister also show the same level of concern for children and adults who have medical conditions due to vaccine injury? This ought to include a provincially funded vaccine injury compensation plan that compensates families for the deaths and life-long disabilities incurred from the government approved vaccine program.
Sincerely,
Rita Hoffman, Secretary, on behalf of
The Board of Directors of Vaccine Choice Canada
cc: Lieutenant Governor of Alberta, Her Honour, the Honourable Lois E. Mitchell, CM, AOE, LLD
cc: Alberta Health Minister Sarah Hoffman
cc: CBC Edmonton
cc: CBC Calgary
cc: Global News Calgary
cc: Global News Edmonton
cc: Calgary Herald
cc: Edmonton Journal
cc: Calgary and Edmonton Sun
References:
Live/attenuated Virus Vaccine Shedding warnings
http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/v/varivax/varivax_pi.pdf
“5.4 Risk of Vaccine Virus Transmission Post-marketing experience suggests that transmission of vaccine virus may occur rarely between healthy vaccinees who develop a varicella-like rash and healthy susceptible contacts. Transmission of vaccine virus from a mother who did not develop a varicella-like rash to her newborn infant has been reported.
Due to the concern for transmission of vaccine virus, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid whenever possible close association with susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks following vaccination with VARIVAX.
Susceptible high-risk individuals include:
- Immunocompromised individuals;
- Pregnant women without documented history of varicella or laboratory evidence of prior infection;
- Newborn infants of mothers without documented history of varicella or laboratory evidence of prior infection and all newborn infants born at <28 weeks gestation regardless of maternal varicella immunity.”
Flumist, this from the CDC, “One study of 197 children aged 8 through 36 months in a child care center assessed transmissibility of vaccine viruses from 98 vaccinated children to the 99 unvaccinated children; 80% of vaccine recipients shed one or more virus strains (mean duration: 7.6 days).”
Chickenpox: Transmission of varicella-vaccine virus from a healthy 12-month-old child to his pregnant mother – “A 12-month-old healthy boy had approximately 30 vesicular skin lesions 24 days after receiving varicella vaccine. Sixteen days later his pregnant mother had 100 lesions. Varicella-vaccine virus was identified by polymerase chain reaction in the vesicular lesions of the mother. After an elective abortion, no virus was detected in the fetal tissue. This case documents transmission of varicella-vaccine virus from a healthy 12-month-old infant to his pregnant mother.”
Pediatrics, “Chickenpox Attributable to a Vaccine Virus Contracted From a Vaccinee With Zoster” which states, “Five months after 2 siblings were immunized with varicella vaccine, 1 developed zoster. Two weeks later the second sibling got a mild case of chickenpox. Virus isolated from the latter was found to be vaccine type. Thus, the vaccine strain was transmitted from the vaccinee with zoster to his sibling.”
Rotavirus vaccine has caused disease, see, “Sibling Transmission of Vaccine-Derived Rotavirus (RotaTeq) Associated With Rotavirus Gastroenteritis” in the journal Pediatrics where “We document here the occurrence of vaccine-derived rotavirus (RotaTeq [Merck and Co, Whitehouse Station, NJ]) transmission from a vaccinated infant to an older, unvaccinated sibling, resulting in symptomatic rotavirus gastroenteritis that required emergency department care.” Also, in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, see “Vaccine-acquired Rotavirus Infection in Two Infants with Severe Combined Immunodeficiency“.
The journal Vaccine. Horizontal transmission of a human rotavirus vaccine strain–a randomized, placebo-controlled study in twins. – “Transmission of excreted vaccine-derived infectious virus from vaccinated to unvaccinated individuals is possible within close contacts. “
MMR in journal Vaccine, “Transmission of mumps virus from mumps-vaccinated individuals to close contacts.” – “We conclude that, in this particular outbreak, the risk of a close contact becoming infected by vaccinated patients was small, but present.”
Eurosurveilllance, “Case of vaccine-associated measles five weeks post-immunisation, British Columbia, Canada, October 2013.” – “We describe a case of vaccine-associated measles in a two-year-old patient from British Columbia, Canada, in October 2013, who received her first dose of measles-containing vaccine 37 days prior to onset of prodromal symptoms. Identification of this delayed vaccine-associated case occurred in the context of an outbreak investigation of a measles cluster.”
The Lancet see “Brother-to-sister transmission of measles after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation.”
We received a reply from Health Minister Hoffman via e-mail on January 16, 2017. You can view this letter in PDF format here.
