Stand for vaccine truth and help us keep winning with your tax-deductible gift of $20, $30, $50, $100, or more today! | |
|
WAS
THE MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH UNTRUTHFUL WITH THE
PUBLIC ABOUT WHY IT DROPPED ITS INFLUENZA VACCINE REQUIREMENT?! At
a time when trust in public health authorities is rapidly falling, did
the Massachusetts Department of Public Health choose to misrepresent to
the public the reason it eliminated its influenza vaccine requirement on
January 15, 2021? Last week, we reported to you about a lawsuit
funded by ICAN, brought against the Massachusetts Department of Public
Health (DPH), to challenge the legality of its influenza vaccine mandate
for childcare, schoolchildren, and college students. The DPH was required
to file its opposition by January 15, 2021 explaining why the Court
should not issue an injunction preventing the DPH from enforcing its
influenza vaccine mandate. On January 14, 2021, the attorneys for the
DPH called the attorneys for plaintiffs to inform them that the DPH
would be dropping the influenza vaccine requirement. On
January 15, 2021, the date that it was to file its opposition with the
Court, the DPH dropped the influenza vaccine requirement and released a
media narrative around the reason for dropping this requirement. It
claimed publicly that the mandate was withdrawn because “preliminary
data show that this has been a mild flu season to date” and to
“alleviate the burden to obtain flu vaccination.” If
a mild flu season is a reason to not require an influenza vaccine, then
why is Massachusetts the only state to drop its influenza vaccine
requirement? Also, it has been a very mild chicken pox season in
Massachusetts – how come they did not drop their chicken pox vaccine
requirement? As
for alleviating the burden, that is nonsensical. Massachusetts
influenza vaccine uptake, prior to any mandate in the 2019-20 flu
season, is 76.6% for minors, the third highest in the nation, and 56.8% for adults,
the highest in the nation. Again, why is no other state dropping its
influenza vaccine requirement and what burden are they talking about? While
it appears the DPH was comfortable with giving these reasons to the
public, it apparently did not have the gumption to repeat these reasons
in a sworn affidavit to the Court.
That affidavit explained to the Court that the requirement had been
dropped but did not swear to the purported reason it was dropped. Was
that because the DPH did not want to commit perjury? The
DOH should come clean about the reason that it really dropped the
requirement – but it won’t. It will defend its chosen position even
when the truth is obvious. The final court filing formally ending the
lawsuit is available here. Shame on the individuals running the DPH for further corrupting our health agencies. |
No comments:
Post a Comment