Authoradmin
Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Releases New Documents on Risks of Whooping Cough and the Pertussis Vaccine (DTaP and Tdap)

The One-Page Educational Documents Provide Answers to Important Questions About the Whooping Cough Vaccine

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., May 5, 2023 (Newswire.com) – Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) has released two new educational documents packed with critical statistical data on pertussis (whooping cough) and the pertussis vaccine (DTaP and Tdap). With information compiled from sources such as the National Center for Health Statistics, the PIC documents help parents compare disease risks to vaccine risks, in order to make more informed vaccination decisions.

Because six doses of the pertussis-containing vaccine are injected into infants and children, beginning at 2 months of age, it’s important to know the relevant statistical data concerning vaccination. Through the PIC documents “Pertussis (Whooping Cough) – Disease Information Statement (DIS)” and “Pertussis (Whooping Cough) – Vaccine Risk Statement (VRS),” readers will:

  • Learn what parents need to know about whooping cough infection
  • Understand the basics about the whooping cough vaccine (DTaP and Tdap)
  • Learn the risks of the whooping cough vaccine and the limitations of safety research
  • Assess whether the whooping cough vaccine is safer than whooping cough infection

“There are two very illuminating points about whooping cough and its vaccine that are explained in PIC’s Pertussis DIS and VRS,” said Dr. Shira Miller, founder and president of Physicians for Informed Consent. “One is that it’s estimated that even without mass vaccination the risk of an American infant dying of whooping cough is about 1 in 46,000 or 0.002%, and the other is that an FDA study indicates that the whooping cough vaccine doesn’t prevent asymptomatic infection or the spread of infection. This shows how unscientific it is to exclude kids who haven’t had the whooping cough vaccine from attending private or public schools — which is happening in California and a few other states; especially because all the whooping cough vaccines currently contain aluminum — a known neurotoxin.”

Many parents aren’t aware that in the 1980s, lawsuits against vaccine makers were mounting due to severe vaccine injuries in children, and vaccine manufacturers threatened to stop producing vaccines. In reaction to this threat, Congress established the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. Through this law, manufacturers and healthcare professionals became exempt from liability for vaccine injuries and deaths. A no-fault compensation system was devised, and parents and taxpayers — instead of vaccine manufacturers and physicians — were made to carry the responsibility and burden of children’s vaccine injuries and deaths.

To protect children’s health, it’s essential that parents are able to access reliable infectious disease and vaccine education. PIC makes scientific data freely available with its education program, a growing collection of concise, reader-friendly one-page educational documents that support parents, physicians and policymakers in calculating the risk-benefit ratio of vaccination. To read the newest DIS and VRS documents on pertussis (whooping cough) and the pertussis vaccine (DTaP and Tdap), visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org/pertussis.

Press Contact:

info@picphysicians.org
925-642-6651

###

CLICK HERE to view on Newswire.
CLICK HERE to view on Instagram.
CLICK HERE to view on Facebook.
CLICK HERE to view on LinkedIn.
CLICK HERE to view on Twitter.

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes Proposed HPV Vaccine Mandate in California Schools

3/22/23 Update: HPV Vaccine Mandate for Grades 8-12 Blocked in California. Legislative Debate Now Shifts to Colleges.

What can you do? Read the PIC position letter and TAKE ACTION below.

March 5, 2023

Re: AB 6591 (Aguiar-Curry, Weiner); HPV vaccine mandate for all public and private schools in California, with no religious or conscientious exemption

Position: Oppose

Dear California Legislators,

On behalf of Physicians for Informed Consent, a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit organization, I am writing to oppose AB 659 because it has not been scientifically proven that the HPV vaccine poses less risks than HPV infection and because HPV is sexually transmitted.

Please consider the following:

  1. Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a virus, with over 200 different types, which is transmitted sexually, generally causes no symptoms, and 90% of the time resolves spontaneously within two years.2,3
  2. Cervical cancer, representing 0.7%4 of all cancers, is the most common HPV-related cancer and most frequently occurs in women aged 35–49 (average age of diagnosis is 50) — it is rarely diagnosed in women younger than 205,6 and is six times more common in women with HIV.7 Together, Pap and HPV testing can successfully screen 95% of potential cervical cancers.8
  3. In California, between 1999–2019, there have been about 400–500 cervical cancer deaths every year, which is a rate of about 2.1–2.9 per 100,000.9 Overall, 97% of deaths from HPV-related cancers are in high-risk populations (i.e., smoking, women not screened every three years, and risky sexual behavior),10 and the annual risk of an average-risk person dying from an HPV-related cancer is about 1 in 900,000.11
  4. The currently available HPV vaccine consists of proteins (virus-like particles) made from yeast through recombinant DNA technology for nine different types of HPV, and 500 mcg of aluminum,12 which are injected intramuscularly in three separate doses.13
  5. The HPV vaccine was first approved in 2006 after clinical trials; however, the placebo was not inert and contained aluminum,14 and serious adverse events have been reported,15 so its safety is controversial and currently being litigated in California.16
  6. The purpose of the HPV vaccine is to prevent HPV-related genital warts and cancers and its effectiveness up to 11 years has been demonstrated.17 However, as it takes 15–20 years18 to develop cervical cancer in most women, more time and research are needed before definitive effectiveness claims can be made.
  7. Since for most people the chance of dying from an HPV-related cancer is about 1 in 900,000, and safety studies of HPV vaccines include only about 25,000 subjects,19 there is not enough statistical power to conclude that the HPV vaccine is safer than the risk of HPV-related cancers.

We urge you to oppose AB 659 as the HPV vaccine has not been proven safer than HPV infection and schoolchildren are not at risk of developing HPV-related cancers.

Respectfully,

 

Shira Miller, M.D.
Founder and President
Physicians for Informed Consent

[1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB659
[2] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/hpv.html
[3] https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/about-hpv.html
[4] https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/cervix.html
[5] https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cervical-cancer/about/key-statistics.html
[6] https://gis.cdc.gov/Cancer/USCS/#/Demographics/
[7] https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cervical-cancer
[8] https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/cncy.21544
[9] https://gis.cdc.gov/Cancer/USCS/#/Trends/
[10] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33003480/
[11] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33003480/
[12] https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/aluminum/
[13] https://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/g/gardasil_9/gardasil_9_pi.pdf
[14] https://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/g/gardasil_9/gardasil_9_pi.pdf
[15] https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/gardasil-vaccine-safety
[16] https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/judge-appoints-four-lawyers-to-lead-gardasil-mdl-multidistrict-litigation-301647703.html
[17] https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/infectious-agents/hpv-vaccine-fact-sheet#how-effective-are-hpv-vaccines
[18] https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cervical-cancer
[19] https://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/g/gardasil_9/gardasil_9_pi.pdf

About Physicians for Informed Consent
Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational organization focused on science and statistics. PIC delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination. In addition, the PIC Coalition for Informed Consent consists of over 300 U.S. and international organizations that represent millions of people. To learn more, please visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org.

TAKE ACTION!

Contact your legislators through tools offered by PIC’s
Coalition for Informed Consent Members and ask them to oppose AB 659:

Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids (PERK)

A Voice For Choice Advocacy (AVFC)

California Health Coalition Advocacy (CHCA)

National Vaccine Information Center Advocacy (NVIC)

Stand for Health Freedom (SHF)

STAY CONNECTED!

Join Physicians for Informed Consent to receive our latest updates.

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Successfully Obtains Federal Court Injunction Protecting Freedom of Speech Regarding COVID-19

Federal Judge bars enforcement of California’s COVID-19 “misinformation” law on grounds the new law is unconstitutionally vague 

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., January 26, 2023 (Newswire.com) – With lead litigator Richard Jaffe, Esq., Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), a nonprofit educational organization, succeeded this week in blocking the enforcement of AB 2098/Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 2270 (2:22-cv-01980-WBS-AC).

The doctor-censorship law targeted supposed COVID-19 “misinformation” spoken to patients. The judge criticized the new law for its vagueness and granted the multiple plaintiffs’ requests for preliminary injunction, thereby protecting all PIC members from enforcement of AB 2098—at least until the case, Hoang et al. v. Bonta, is finally decided.

Senior Judge William B. Shubb of the Eastern District of California Court in Sacramento, in his preliminary injunction order, thoroughly dissected the meaning of AB 2098’s definition of “misinformation” (“false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care”) and determined that it caused the statute to be “unconstitutionally vague.” He wrote:

  • “Put simply, this provision is grammatically incoherent.”
  • “The statute provides no means of understanding to what ‘scientific consensus’ refers.”
  • “By its very nature, the standard of care applies to care, not information.”
  • “The statute improperly conflates ‘information’ with ‘advice’ or ‘treatment.'”
  • “More importantly, defendants’ interpretation does nothing to address the chilling effect caused by the statute’s unclear phrasing and structure.”
  • “…drawing a line between what is true and what is settled by scientific consensus is difficult, if not impossible.”
  • “…because COVID-19 is such a new and evolving area of scientific study, it may be hard to determine which scientific conclusions are ‘false’ at a given point in time.”

Judge Shubb favorably referenced cardiologist, PIC member, and expert witness Dr. Sanjay Verma’s declaration frequently in his preliminary injunction order to underscore the vagueness of AB 2098. For example, Judge Shubb wrote, “Dr. Verma cites numerous examples of contrary guidance provided by the CDC on the issues of masking and vaccination.”

Dr. Shira Miller, PIC founder and president, was present at the hearing. After reading the Court’s order, Dr. Miller shared her optimism: “We are grateful for the Court’s decision and hopeful that soon all California physicians will be able to stop self-censoring and be able to communicate openly and honestly with their patients.”

The court has not ruled yet on the merits of PIC’s first amendment arguments, and until the case is decided only PIC members and Children’s Health Defense, California Chapter, members are protected by the preliminary injunction, as well as the physicians in the related Høeg et al. v. Newsom lawsuit, as the Court expressly stated, “Pending final resolution of this action, defendants, their agents and employees, all persons or entities in privity with them, and anyone acting in concert with them are hereby ENJOINED from enforcing Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 2270 as against plaintiffs, plaintiffs’ members, and all persons represented by plaintiffs.”

Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofit educational organization supported only by the generous contributions of our members and supporters. Click here to join today.

Press Contact:
info@picphysicians.org
925-642-6651

###

CLICK HERE to view on Newswire.
CLICK HERE to view on Facebook.
CLICK HERE to view on Instagram.
CLICK HERE to view on LinkedIn.
CLICK HERE to view on Twitter.

Posted on by adminLast updated

PIC Updates Its 'Aluminum - Vaccine Risk Statement': Document Includes Data on Association Between Aluminum in Vaccines and Childhood Asthma

Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) Updates Its ‘Aluminum – Vaccine Risk Statement’: Document Includes Data on Association Between Aluminum in Vaccines and Childhood Asthma

According to PIC, adverse effects of aluminum may not be restricted to neurological conditions*

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., December 29, 2022 (Newswire.com) – Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) has released an update to its Aluminum  – Vaccine Risk Statement (VRS) titled “Aluminum in Vaccines: What Parents Need to Know.” The concise, two-page educational document — which serves to answer important questions about the risks of aluminum-containing vaccines — now includes important data about a study’s link between aluminum in vaccines and asthma. Asthma is a disease that affects the lungs. It causes repeated episodes of wheezing, breathlessness, chest tightness, and nighttime or early morning coughing.

Developed from data compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), the PIC document provides reader-friendly Q&As on topics such as:

  • Why is aluminum in vaccines?
  • Which vaccines contain aluminum?
  • How much aluminum is in vaccines?
  • Is exposure to aluminum from vaccines safe?

The document explains that both the FDA and ATSDR have raised concerns about the negative effects of aluminum exposure in humans. Scientific studies have shown that small amounts of aluminum can interfere with cellular and metabolic processes in the nervous system. Some of the most damaging effects of aluminum range from motor skill impairment to encephalopathy (altered mental state, personality changes, difficulty thinking, loss of memory, seizures, coma, and more).

Studies have also shown that adverse effects of aluminum may not be restricted to neurological conditions.* A study referenced in the PIC document and published in Academic Pediatrics found that asthma occurred in 1 in 183 vaccinated children for every 1 mg (1,000 mcg) increase in aluminum exposure. In the United States, up to 22 doses of aluminum-containing vaccines are administered to children, with 11 doses administered from birth to 6 months of age.

“Overexposure to aluminum may lead to significant harm,” said Dr. Shira Miller, founder and president of Physicians for Informed Consent. “In California, where PIC is headquartered, since Senate Bill 277 (SB 277) was enacted in 2015, numerous doses of aluminum-containing vaccines are mandated for public and private K-12 school attendance — with no exceptions for religious or personal belief exemptions. PIC asserts that vaccine mandates are unscientific and unethical and a threat to public health. SB 277, and any other law that coerces vaccination, needs to be repealed.”

To read or download the educational document “Aluminum in Vaccines: What Parents Need to Know,” please visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org/aluminum.

* In 2008, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), a division of HHS, used studies of the neurotoxic effects of aluminum to determine that no more than 1 milligram (mg) (1,000 micrograms [mcg]) of aluminum per kilogram (kg) of body weight should be taken orally per day to avoid aluminum’s negative effects.

Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational organization focused on science and statistics. PIC delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination. In addition, the PIC Coalition for Informed Consent consists of over 300 U.S. and international organizations. Click here to make a donation.

Press Contact:
info@picphysicians.org
925-642-6651

###

CLICK HERE to view on Newswire.
CLICK HERE to share on Twitter.
CLICK HERE to share on Facebook.
CLICK HERE to share on Instagram.
CLICK HERE to share on LinkedIn.

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Sues State of California, Argues That Doctor Censorship Bill AB 2098 Violates the U.S. Constitution

Physicians for Informed Consent Sues State of California, Argues That Doctor Censorship Bill AB 2098 Violates the U.S. Constitution

Federal Court to weigh controversial bill that PIC argues is an unlawful targeting of scientific dissent as ‘misinformation’

Newport Beach, CA — December 7, 2022 (Newswire)

Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), an educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics, has filed a First Amendment free speech lawsuit (2:22-cv-02147) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, and request for preliminary injunction, against the State of California and Osteopathic Medical Board of California in order to protect the free speech of all physicians in California.

The Plaintiffs are PIC and one of its founding members, physician LeTrinh Hoang, D.O., together with Children’s Health Defense, California Chapter. The legal team managing the case are Rick Jaffe, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Mary Holland.

The lawsuit argues that the State has weaponized the vague phrase “misinformation,” thereby unconstitutionally targeting physicians who publicly disagree with the government’s public health edicts on COVID-19.

Expert cardiologist and PIC member Sanjay Verma, M.D., has been tracking and cataloging CDC errors in real time. For the case, he has provided what he calls “a detailed declaration exposing the government’s scientific errors and the constitutional dangers of censoring dissent”:

“To demonstrate these points of vagueness and the general unsuitability of using ‘contemporary scientific consensus’ as a disciplinary criterion, I have prepared a detailed overview of public health response to the pandemic broken down into categories such as Masks and Vaccines (transmission, safety, efficacy of natural immunity). I have also included evidence of what [I testify] would be considered misinformation promulgated by the CDC as well as its withholding of information which led to the then ‘contemporary scientific consensus’ eventually being proven wrong.”

PIC President Shira Miller, M.D., was active in opposing AB 2098 while it was navigating the California legislative process, and has led the effort to bring the instant lawsuit. Opposing the bill, she wrote, “Public health is not achieved, and scientific knowledge does not progress, by censoring dissenting physicians and surgeons or anyone else. AB 2098 is anti-doctor, anti-public health, anti-science, and anti-free speech.”

The scheduled hearing on PIC’s motion for preliminary injunction is Jan. 17, 2023. PIC has requested the District Court issue a preliminary injunction that “AB 2098 is unconstitutional on its face.” The Complaint also requests the Court “issue a declaratory judgement that PIC and CHD patient members have a privacy right in their prescriptions for any off-label FDA approved medication” such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.

Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofit educational organization supported only by the generous contributions of our members and supporters. Click here to make a contribution.

Press Contact:
info@picphysicians.org
925-642-6651

###

CLICK HERE to view on Newswire.
CLICK HERE to share on Twitter.
CLICK HERE to share on Facebook.
CLICK HERE to share on Instagram.
CLICK HERE to share on LinkedIn.

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Challenges the Basis for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

According to Physicians for Informed Consent, new data raise serious concerns over the risks of hospitalization in people vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine.

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., November 11, 2022 (Newswire.com) – Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) has released an update to its educational document “COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates: 21 Scientific Facts That Challenge the Assumptions.” Developed from data compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Library of Medicine, and other established sources, the PIC document covers issues of critical importance to both the medical community and the public. Reflecting key scientific research, the document refutes the basis for COVID-19 vaccine mandates. For example, according to Physicians for Informed Consent, studies (referenced here) show:

  • COVID-19 vaccines may increase the risk of hospitalizations in vaccinated people.
    A study published in Vaccine found that the number of serious adverse events in people vaccinated with the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is higher than the number of COVID-19 hospitalizations prevented. For every two COVID-19 hospitalizations prevented in vaccinated people, there are 10 COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse events.
  • COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of myocarditis in young men.
    A study published in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety shows that in males aged 18 to 24 years, the risk of myocarditis is 1 in 1,862 after the second dose of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.
  • COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of cardiac-related deaths in men.
    A study by the Florida Department of Health found there is a 97% increased risk of cardiac-related deaths in males aged 18–39 within 28 days of being vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine.
  • COVID-19 vaccines increase the length of menstrual cycles in women.
    A study published in BMJ found that in women, vaccination with two doses within the same menstrual cycle leads to a 3.7-day increase in that cycle’s length. The consequences of this phenomenon are not known.

It can take months or even years for new data to reach the general medical community. As such, some healthcare providers may be unaware of COVID-19 vaccine facts and figures. In providing this document, PIC highlights important statistics to help medical professionals and their patients more easily assess the risks of the vaccine compared to the risks of COVID-19. In addition, as a nonprofit organization with headquarters in California — where AB 2098, a doctor-censorship bill, was recently signed into law — PIC asserts that it is now more important than ever for the general public to be able to access science-based COVID-19 analyses.

“AB 2098 is immoral and anti-science,” said Dr. Shira Miller, founder and president of Physicians for Informed Consent. “PIC as an organization will continue speaking out and educating the public about COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and the need to have doctors whose professional opinion hasn’t been censored — because without free speech informed consent is not possible.”

To read all 21 scientific facts in PIC’s newly released document, visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org/covid-19-vaccines.

Press Contact:
info@picphysicians.org
925-642-6651

###

CLICK HERE to view on Newswire
CLICK HERE to view on Instagram
CLICK HERE to view on Facebook
CLICK HERE to view on Twitter
CLICK HERE to view on LinkedIn

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes That Minors Obtain Vaccination Without Parental Knowledge or Consent

PIC Doctors Send Letter Opposing SB 866 to California Legislators

PIC Oppose SB 866 Letter

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., May 1, 2022 (Newswire.com) –

Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), an educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics, has submitted an opposition letter to California Senate Bill 866 (SB 866).

SB 866 proposes allowing children 12 years of age and older to, without parental consent or knowledge, become injected with any vaccines that meet “federal agency criteria.” Physicians for Informed Consent, representing hundreds of its physician and surgeon members, opposes the bill and asserts that SB 866 is immoral, potentially medically dangerous, and potentially illegal. PIC asserts that SB 866 would violate parental rights and thwart children’s ability to obtain compensation in the case of a vaccine injury.

Per Dr. Shira Miller, PIC founder and president, “physicians experienced in obtaining informed consent know that it is not possible for 12-year-old children as a group to understand the risks and benefits of vaccination, and California’s health education curriculum for public schools does not even mention vaccination until high school.”

SB 866 will be heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, May 5, 2022. If you or someone you know lives in California, PIC urges you to read the Physicians for Informed Consent SB 866 opposition letter and request your representatives to oppose SB 866 as soon as possible, and call in or show up to the public hearing in Sacramento on May 5, 2022.

About Physicians for Informed Consent

Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics. PIC delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination. In addition, the PIC Coalition for Informed Consent consists of over 300 U.S. and international organizations. To learn more or to become a member, please visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org.

Physicians for Informed Consent
Press Contact:
info@picphysicians.org
(925) 642-6651

###

CLICK HERE to view on Newswire
CLICK HERE to view on Facebook
CLICK HERE to view on Instagram
CLICK HERE to view on Twitter
CLICK HERE to view on LinkedIn
CLICK HERE to view on Telegram

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Private and Public Employees and Independent Contractors in California

PIC Doctors Send AB 1993 Opposition Letter to California Legislators

 

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF., March 29, 2022 (Newswire.com) – 

Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), an educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics, has submitted an opposition letter to California Assembly Bill 1993 (AB 1993).

AB 1993 proposes a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all private and public employees and independent contractors in California. Physicians for Informed Consent, representing hundreds of its physician and surgeon members, opposes the bill and asserts that AB 1993 is both unscientific and would legalize medical bullying in the workplace. Per Dr. Shira Miller, PIC founder and president, “…the clinical trials have been the only settings in which the vaccination status of subjects/patients was closely monitored, and those trials did not detect enough COVID-19 deaths to measure a significant difference in mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients despite observing tens of thousands of subjects.”

AB 1993 will be heard by the Committee on Labor & Employment members this Wednesday, March 30, 2022, at 1:30 pm. If you or someone you know lives in California, PIC urges you to read the Physicians for Informed Consent AB 1993 opposition letter, including its accompanying educational document “COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates: 20 Scientific Facts That Challenge the Assumptions” and request of your assembly members and representatives to oppose AB 1993 as soon as possible.

About Physicians for Informed Consent

Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics. PIC delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination. In addition, the PIC Coalition for Informed Consent consists of over 300 U.S. and international organizations. To learn more or to become a member, please visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org.

Physicians for Informed Consent
Press Contact:
info@picphysicians.org
(925) 642-6651

###

CLICK HERE to view on Newswire.com
CLICK HERE to view on Facebook
CLICK HERE to view on Instagram
CLICK HERE to view on Twitter
CLICK HERE to view on LinkedIn

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes AB 1993


DOWNLOAD PDF

March 25, 2022

Re: AB 1993 (COVID-19 vaccine and booster requirement for all CA employees and independent contractors)
Position: Oppose

Dear California Legislators,

On behalf of hundreds of physician and surgeon members of Physicians for Informed Consent and thousands of our health-freedom members, we oppose AB 1993.

AB 19931 is both immoral and unscientific. It is immoral because it proposes to legalize medical bullying in the workplace and unscientific because the COVID-19 vaccines have not been proven safer than COVID-19 infection and natural immunity in employees of all age groups and all workplaces.

Furthermore, the clinical trials have been the only settings in which the vaccination status of subjects/patients was closely monitored, and those trials did not detect enough COVID-19 deaths to measure a significant difference in mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients despite observing tens of thousands of subjects. In addition, CDC data show that the COVID-19 mass vaccination program has had no measurable impact on COVID-19 mortality—see PIC’s attached educational document COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates: 20 Scientific Facts That Challenge the Assumptions.

We urge you to oppose AB 1993 as it is immoral, unscientific, unnecessary, and divisive.

Respectfully,

Shira Miller, M.D.
Founder and President
Physicians for Informed Consent

  1. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1993

 DOWNLOAD PDF

About Physicians for Informed Consent

Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics. PIC delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination. In addition, the PIC Coalition for Informed Consent consists of over 300 U.S. and international organizations that represent millions of people. To learn more, please visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org

AB 1993 was placed on hold on March 29, 2022, and the committee meeting cancelled. The legislative analysis showed that no individuals and four organizations supported AB 1993, while 1,178 individuals and 86 California businesses and associations opposed COVID-19 vaccine mandates in the workplace.

TAKE ACTION AND OPPOSE OTHER MANDATORY VACCINATION BILLS IN CALIFORNIA! 
Contact your legislators through tools offered by PIC’s Coalition for Informed Consent Members:

A Voice For Choice Advocacy

California Health Coalition Advocacy

Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids

National Vaccine Information Center Advocacy

Children’s Health Defense, California Chapter

Or use the California Legislature’s Position Letter Portal:

Position Letter Portal

STAY CONNECTED!
Join Physicians for Informed Consent to receive our latest updates.

JOIN NOW

Posted on by adminLast updated

Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes SB 920


DOWNLOAD PDF

March 25, 2022

Re: SB 920 (Medical Board of California to easily inspect medical and pharmacy records, including vaccination records, of all patients in California without their consent)
Position: Oppose

Dear California Legislators,

On behalf of hundreds of physician and surgeon members of Physicians for Informed Consent and thousands of patients and families who are our members, we oppose SB 920.

SB 9201 proposes to shortcut current medical records privacy laws, which protect all patients, in order to make it easier to bypass the administrative procedures safeguarding current California law for obtaining the medical records of deceased or injured patients.2

We can appreciate that there are situations when a family has lost a loved one or a person has become medically injured and thus is not able to consent to the release of medical records.3 However, there is already existing law3 which grants a patient’s representative the right to access the deceased’s medical records. Thus, there is no need for SB 920, and passing it would jeopardize the privacy of millions of Californians who are alive and well and capable of consenting (or refusing) for the inspection of their personal medical records.

SB 920 would legalize easy access to the medical records of all people in California, including vaccination status and other highly sensitive information, and we urge you to oppose such a divisive bill.

Respectfully,

Shira Miller, M.D.
Founder and President
Physicians for Informed Consent

  1. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB920
  2. https://www.findlaw.com/state/california-law/california-medical-records-laws.html; see especially Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §1985.3; Cal. Civ. Code §56.11; Cal. Civ. Code. § 1798 et seq.; Cal. Health & Safety Code §123105.
  3. https://sd14.senate.ca.gov/news/press-release/hurtado-introduces-legislation-increase-transparency-medical-board-california

DOWNLOAD PDF

About Physicians for Informed Consent

Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics. PIC delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination. In addition, the PIC Coalition for Informed Consent consists of over 300 U.S. and international organizations that represent millions of people. To learn more, please visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org.

SB 920 was pulled on April 1, 2022, and the committee meeting cancelled.

TAKE ACTION AND OPPOSE MANDATORY VACCINATION BILLS IN CALIFORNIA!

Contact your legislators through tools offered by PIC’s Coalition for Informed Consent Members:

A Voice For Choice Advocacy

California Health Coalition Advocacy

Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids

National Vaccine Information Center Advocacy

Children’s Health Defense, California Chapter

Or use the California Legislature’s Position Letter Portal:

Position Letter Portal

STAY CONNECTED!
Join Physicians for Informed Consent to receive our latest updates.

JOIN NOW