The new party which promises to abolish the obligation of vaccination
The next regional elections in Emilia Romagna, on the 26th of January, we will present a new political party, the M3V (Movement of 3 V, the Vaccines we Want the Truth). Even if this is not a blog about politics, I spend willingly a post to the new training that promises to abolish the obligation of the vaccines.
However, in respect of the par condicio, I will leave space to the candidates of the upcoming (and future) elections that they want to clarify to voters how they will behave on topics dear to my readers: vaccinations from taxes, to 5G, to agriculture without pesticides, medicine called “alternative”.
The Movement 3V was born a year ago, when the parties that won the elections, 5stars and the League, “set aside” the question of the obligation of vaccination in the decree of a Thousand Extensions. In summary: did not keep the promise of releasing the vaccinations from the enrolment to the nursery and to the nursery school.
Formed by groups of parents and local associations, about the long wave of disappointment, the M3V has got 6 thousand signatures and will be presented in all nine provinces of the Region with the list of the president and in eight provinces with the list of advisers. Since this is a party that “runs by itself”, the representatives will be elected if it will exceed the 3% threshold (as with alliances of political parties more enough to half).
Movement is a self that is sinking roots in other regions. Here you will find the program. That speaks not only of vaccinations; it aims to return to the doctor’s own role (“the freedom of art and speech”); to re-evaluate the hospitals as places of care and not only as companies; to promote any Medicine (homeopathy and acupuncture including) and prevention. Without neglecting the Environment, Agriculture, Infrastructure, the Family, the School.
The candidate for the presidency of Emilia-Romagna is Domenico Battle. By profession a surgeon, urologist and expert in nutrition, exercises in Ferrara.
As he decided to dedicate himself to politics?
“I accepted the candidacy that was proposed to me, because the purpose of the movement represent my feelings and my style of life”.
In summary what do you like.
“The fact that a growing group of citizens – not professional politicians – has decided to commit (instead of complaining) trying to fill in the gaps left by this and previous governments. And the fact that the mission relates to the freedom of treatment”.
What is the freedom to care?
“The freedom to care is the soul of the profession. The doctor promises to himself and to the patients not to harm and to do all they can to alleviate the sufferings of the sick in the respect of the scientific evidence. Today, doctors apply rules decided at the table (protocols) for each disease. A standard workflow that like medicine, the legal limit causes) and that can also work but not for all. But I am the doctor of the patient who did not benefit from the protocol. And my duty is to take care of him.”
All protocols should be customized?
“Of course. We are different. And there are various ways to achieve health, my task is to direct the patient toward the best treatment for him.” (Points 6,7 and 8 of the Health programme).
What are suffering from the hospitals?
“Do not invest more in the staff. Doctors and nurses are subjected to exhausting shifts; not leave the time to update individual and lose sight of the new scientific evidence”.
Example?
“It is recommended that even eat cheese to those who suffer from osteoporosis. These are the scientific evidence of thirty years ago…”.
How to find money? Since hospitals are businesses can’t afford the budgets at a loss.
“The problem is how to do business. If an institution works to educate and another to heal, the first goal, for both, may not be the revenue. The money would have to be recovered by reducing the huge pharmaceutical expenditure” (that is, the point 10 of the Health programme).
If you were to become president, as will the obligation of vaccination?
“I ratify the regional resolution which provides for the obligation of 10 vaccinations for entrance into kindergarten. And I would eliminate the fines.Emilia was a forerunner of the law Lorenzin (imposed before the entry of the vaccinations for access to schools), now might be the first region to remove it”.
It is contrary to the vaccinations?
“Have not been prejudicially opposed to nothing. Each medication should be administered in the safest conditions for each patient. In the case of vaccines must be evaluated in the context: which diseases are likely the babies of 2020? Certainly not hepatitis B. there Are critical towards the actions of the mass because there are differences between a child and the other. Offer it to all and sundry how to deliver an antibiotic to the rain to avoid cystitis or pneumonia”.
It should be the pediatrician to evaluate the rose of the vaccines with the parents?
“Certainly, in the respect of the individuality of the small and of the context”.
How do you know if a vaccine could harm a baby of the 60 days?
“You can’t know it. The immune system of the child has not yet formed. In front of the do not know a doctor should invoke the precautionary principle. If you decide to vaccinate it is good to do so after a thorough medical history, also family. In addition, availing of the genetics. A screening of the mutations, today, can tell us a lot.”
She was among the 120 doctors signatories of the letter addressed in the year 2015 at the higher Institute of Health. Click here. You asked to launch a study among children vaccinated and children not vaccinated because by your clinical observation have shown that there are more healthy non-vaccinated. The national Institute of Health has never responded to the solicitation. In your election program appears in the project a similar study.
“As I said, without data it is difficult to suggest what is best for each patient. To the point 2 of the program explain that avvieremmo a comparison study between the children and the elderly vaccinated and not. We know that the epidemiological work makes sense you could realize by immediately making a retrospective study, that is, looking back over the years, the health of those who have been vaccinated and those who are not subjected to vaccination”.
You are opposed to the requirement, but propose the pharmacovigilance active.
“Certainly. Is the best way to learn about the effects of a drug and a vaccine: actively involve the interested and invite them to observe and report everything that happens in the time after the administration of the drug or the vaccine.”
Someone can argue that before the outbreaks of the deadly the obligation of vaccination is essential.
“Our auditors can implement extraordinary measures in case of epidemics. They never did because there was no need. Our laws and the Constitution protect us”.
He thinks that the law Lorenzin not have sense?
“Exactly. We had, and we already have the tools to intervene quickly in the event of epidemics. None of the 10 diseases included in the vaccination Plan with the obligatory vaccination has these features, not even the measles. The fact of tying up the vaccination at school entry, excluding the rest of the population, has made the parents dramatically skeptical of the whole practice of vaccinations. The obligation of the 10 vaccines for the enjoyment of a right, the asylum, is seen as a blackmail. The expulsions of those children whose parents have made a choice of health, not vaccinandoli, as an act of retribution and incomprehensible.”
And the need to protect others?
“Until 2017 no one had this problem and have never been proven to be the infections matter from 2017 onwards (not to be vaccinated immunosuppressed). Rather, if we want to protect seriously the most fragile people should avoid entering in small groups, as classes, those who has just made vaccines such as anti chicken pox and the trivalent or quadrivalente, without the period of quarantine expected. In these cases the risk of disease transmission is real.”
What would like to add?
“We need to give families the opportunity to ask for really, is about the benefits of vaccinations is that the risks. Only with informed consent accurate you can make decisions.
And the State?
“It’s always on. Comes after the parents and after the individual. For this reason no politician can make decisions of health in our place”.
Original source: http://blog.ilgiornale.it/locati/2020/01/05/il-nuovo-partito-che-promette-di-abolire-lobbligo-vaccinale/
