Most Important Message I've Ever Sent - I Cry

In California, an aggressive slate of COVID-19-related bills remain under consideration by the California state assembly. One of them is egregious and quite personal to me in that AB 2098 proposes to also censor physicians in California from expressing their professional medical opinion, to any person and in any format, about COVID-19 infection or vaccine information—unless their opinion conforms to the current "consensus."  This will effectively make it impossible for me to send these types of emails to you.  Done.  Gone.  Read and download PDFs of the Physicians for Informed Consent letters and discuss them with your legislators.  Please do this ASAP!

Letter Opposing AB 2098 (bill proposes censorship of California doctors): https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/oppose-ab2098/

Please watch my video to you, and then read the email below that I am forwarding from AVFVA (A Voice For Choice Advocacy) that they sent out on March 3rd titled "Action Alert: 2022 CA Legislation Predictions vs Reality - the Good, the bad and the ugly" and please pay special attention to the portion highlighted in yellow:

AVFCA Predictions are pretty close to reality

when it comes to 2022 Legislation and

COVID Protocols

Don't get sidetracked or put your guard down
Stopping CA's BAD Bills has to be the focus! 

People ask if I have a sixth sense or can look into the future.  Unfortunately, I can't, but I do have eyes and ears in lots of places and I often put myself in other people's shoes and asking "What would I do?" if I were them.  That allows me to make pretty solid predictions.  For the past couple of months I have predicted that COVID-19 restrictions in California would be all but gone by March 31st.  How?  Because that is the new narrative that came out of the World Economic Forum and has been parroted by all the leaders that moved forward with lockdowns, "Build Back Better" and the Great Reset.  It was only a matter of time before Governor Newsom followed his European peers, and he had to do it pretty soon because there is an election campaign that needs the "CA is back to Normal" narrative.  While we can celebrate, know there is more around the corner, and it's coming down fast and furious.  Don't get distracted from the work that needs to be done NOW - Stopping the BAD bills moving through the CA legislature.

AVFCA predicted there would be six ✘BAD✘ vaccine related bills introduced in the 2022 legislative session in California, and we have landed with 5 of those, plus one more.  Below AVFCA gives you a detailed description of all the bills we are Opposing, Supporting and Actively Watching, so that you may do the same.  Note:  NONE of these bills will be heard in committee before March 14, and most likely before March 22.  That leaves 2 weeks to TAKE ACTION!!

If you wish to share this information, please share this link: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/action-alert-2022-ca-legislation-predictions-vs-reality-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/

Take Action TODAY:  Take the first steps right now - don't wait for tomorrow...It won't take more than 5 minutes:

1) Make an appointment TODAY to meet with your CA Senator and CA Assembly member, or their staff, to discuss these bills.  Your voice as a constituent is critical for them to hear, and will help A Voice for Choice Advocacy's efforts in the Capitol. 
- Not sure who that is, enter your address here: https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/
- Not sure how to set up a meeting and build a trusted relationship with your legislators, watch this webinar: https://youtu.be/NGwnwAcJJZ4
- Not sure what to say: Choose 2-3 bills you support and 2-3 you oppose and focus on those as you will likely only have 15-30 minutes.  A crib sheet on the bills can be found here: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/AVFCA-2022-Bills-Support-Oppose.pdf. AVFCA recommended talking points and positions are below.

2) Submit a position letter to the CA Legislative Portal
- Write a brief letter in your own words summarizing your position on each bill.  This does not need to be more than a few sentences stating "I oppose XXX bill because ....".  Make sure your letter is polite, to the point, and sounds convincing.  Remember you are trying to sway the legislators to vote the way you want them to, not alienate them.
- Create an account or sign in at https://calegislation.lc.ca.gov/Advocates/
- Click "Submit a letter" and enter the bill number, and follow the instructions to upload your letter to the appropriate committees, repeating for each bill.

3) Contact leaders of businesses, organizations, unions, school boards, Chambers of Commerce, City Councils, etc. who should be on our side, because they will be affected by one or more of these bills, and ask them to submit a position letter to the legislature.

✘ 2022 CA BAD Bills ✘

A Voice for Choice Advocacy Opposes the following bills:

✘ SB 871 Public health: immunizations (Pan) - Keep Schools Open and Safe Act (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB871): Would require the COVID-19 vaccine to attend in-person daycare and K-12 public or private school, starting January 1 2023.  It would also remove the personal belief exemption from future CDPH added vaccines and removes the 7th grade exemption for Hepatitis B.
Recommended Position: Oppose unless Amended
Talking Points in AVFCA's Letter of Opposition: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/AVFCA-SB871-Letter-of-Opposition-unless-Amended-Pan.pdf
Status: Referred to Senate Health and Education Committees (also referred to Senate Judiciary Committee but then rescinded).  Will be heard in Senate Health Committee either Wednesday March 16, 23 or 30.  Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

✘ SB 866 Minors: vaccine consent (Wiener) - Teens Choose Vaccines Act (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB866): Would remove parental consent and "authorize a minor 12 years of age or older to consent to vaccines that meet specified federal agency criteria. The bill would authorize a vaccine provider, as defined, to administer a vaccine pursuant to the bill, but would not authorize the vaccine provider to provide any service that is otherwise outside the vaccine provider's scope of practice."
Recommended Position: Oppose unless Amended
Talking Points in AVFCA's Letter of Opposition: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/AVFCA-SB866-Letter-of-Oppose-unless-Amended-Wiener-Pan.pdf
Status: Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.  Will be heard either Tuesday March 22 or 29.  Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

✘ AB 1993 Employment: COVID-19 vaccination requirements (Wicks) - Keep Workplaces Open and Safe (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1993): Would require both private and public employers to require all employees or independent contractors to show proof of full vaccination against COVID-19, until the CDC determines that COVID-19 vaccinations are no longer necessary for the health and safety of individuals.  Financial penalties would be imposed on employers who fail to comply.  The requirement would not apply to a person who is ineligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine due to a medical condition or disability or because of a sincerely held religious belief.
Recommended Position: Oppose
Talking Points in AVFCA's Action Alert: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/action-alert-bill-to-require-covid-19-vaccine-for-all-employees/
Status: To be referred to Committee after March 13. 

✘ AB 1797 Immunization registry (Weber) - Modernize California's Immunization Registry (Spot Bill with no language currently https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1797): Would merge the three CA Immunization Registry tracking systems to create one statewide system and all vaccines will be required to be entered into the CA Immunization Registry (CAIR).  Schools and other entities would have access to all vaccine records, rather than just those of their students/patients or the particular vaccines required for school.
Recommended Position: Oppose unless Amended
Talking Points: AVFCA does not have a formal document because the bill currently is only conceptual.
Status: To be referred to Committee after March 10. 

✘AB 2098 Physicians and surgeons: unprofessional conduct (Low) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2098): Would designate the dissemination or promotion of misinformation or disinformation related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, or "COVID-19," by a physician or surgeon as unprofessional conduct, allowing the Medical Board to take action against such physician or surgeon.  Board will base their consideration on "applicable standard of care" and "contemporary scientific consensus" neither of which currently exist for COVID-19.
Recommended Position: Oppose
Talking Points in AVFCA's Action Alert: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/action-alert-2022-bills-relating-to-ca-medical-board/
Status: Referred to Assembly Business and Professions Committee. Will be heard either Tuesday March 22, 29 or April 5.  Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

✘ SB 920 Medical Board of California: investigations: record requests (Hurtado) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB920): Would authorize a Medical board investigator and a medical consultant, at the discretion of the board, to inspect the business location and records of a physician or surgeon, including patient and client records, without patient's consent.  Also allows complainants the opportunity to provide a statement to be considered after final adjudication for purposes of setting generally applicable policies and standards.
Recommended Position: Oppose
Talking Points in AVFCA's Action Alert: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/action-alert-2022-bills-relating-to-ca-medical-board/
Status: Referred to Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee and Judiciary Committee.  Will be heard in Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee either Monday March 21 or 28. Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

Thankfully, no bill was introduced to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine to enter certain establishments and the HPV and Meningitis vaccine mandate to attend high school was changed to require the HPV vaccine to be covered by insurance policies.
 

 2022 CA GOOD Bills 

A Voice for Choice Advocacy Supports the following bils, which can be used in meetings as positive openers.

 AB 1809 Nursing Facility Resident Informed Consent Protection Act of 2022 (Aguilar-Curry) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1809): Would add the right of every nursing home resident to receive all information that is material to an individual's decision concerning whether to accept or refuse any proposed treatment or procedure.
Recommended Position: Support
Talking Points: Allows informed choice for medical treatment, although it is unclear how this would pertain to those patients with conservators.
Status: Referred to Assembly Health and Judiciary Committees.  Will be heard in Assembly Health Committee Tuesday, March 22 at 1:30.  Position letters are due Monday, March 14.

 AB-2146 Pesticides: midacloprid, clothianidin, thiamethoxam, dinotefuran, and acetamiprid: prohibited nonagricultural use (Bauer-Kahan) - Banning Non-Agricultural Neonicotinoids (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2146): Would designate, by regulation, pesticides containing midacloprid, clothianidin, thiamethoxam, dinotefuran, or acetamiprid as restricted materials, and would prohibit, beginning January 1, 2024, the sale, possession, or use of these pesticides, except for use on an agricultural plant.
Recommended Position: Support
Talking Points: Helps protect bees and other pollinators, clean water, people, and the future of our food supply by banning five key neonicotinoid (neonic) pesticides from use in most non-agricultural settings.
Status: Referred to Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee.  Will be heard either Wednesday March 23 or 30.  Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

 AB 1817 Product safety: textile articles: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) (Ting) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1817): Would prohibit any person from distributing, selling, or offering for sale in the state any textile articles that contain regulated PFAS, and requires a manufacturer to use the least toxic alternative when replacing regulated PFAS in textile articles to comply with these provisions.
Recommended Position: Support
Talking Points: There are thousands of PFAS chemicals used in manufacturing to make things water and stain-resistant.  PFAS are called "forever chemicals" because they break down very slowly over time. Scientific studies have shown that exposure to some PFAS in the environment may be linked to harmful health effects in humans and animals.
Status: Referred to Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee.  Will be heard either Wednesday March 23 or 30.  Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

 AB 1785 California Parents' Bill of Rights Act (Davies) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1785): Would require a charter school, school district, or county office of education to provide parents and guardians with opportunities to participate in schools to improve parent and teacher cooperation, as well as post information for parents or guardians on its internet website regarding a variety of topics.
Recommended Position: Support
Talking Points: Parents have the right to know what their children are learning and be able to have opportunities to participate in their children's educational experience.
Status: Referred to Assembly Education and Judiciary Committees.  Will be heard in Assembly Education Committee either Wednesday March 23 or April 6.  Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

 AB 2060 Medical Board of CA (Quirk) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2060):  Would increase the number of public members of the California Medical Board from 7 to 8.
Recommended Position: Support
Talking Points: The CA Medical Board is there to protect consumers.  By adding more public members it is less dominated by people in the professions they regulate
Status: Referred to Assembly Business and Professions Committee. Will be heard either Tuesday March 22, 29 or April 5.  Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.

 SB 994 Vocational nursing: direction of naturopathic doctor (Jones) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB994): Would allow Naturopathic Doctors to employ Licensed Vocational Nurses, while practicing within their existing scope of practice.
Recommended Position: Support
Talking Points: Currently, NDs can hire Naturopathic Assistants (analogous to Medical Assistants) who can only perform limited tasks in the office and only with the ND present. As a result, there are many tasks that the ND must perform themselves, lowering their efficiency and increasing wait times for patients. It also means that there are limited support staff with medical training in the office for patient support.  SB 994 would allow NDs to hire LVNs and allow both providers to work within their existing scope of practice. This would increase LVNs exposure to the primary care setting and allow them to work more closely with doctors and patients than they might in other settings, including participation in care plan development.
Status: Referred to Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee.  Will be heard in either Monday March 21 or 28. Notice of the hearing is given at least 72 hours in advance.
 

⇄ 2022 CA Bills To Watch ⇄

A Voice for Choice Advocacy is Actively Watching the following bills.  These bills either fall within our mission and currently do not contain language that we support or oppose, but may become an issue if amended, or are bills which are outside of our mission but are of interest because they may affect our advocacy efforts in the future.  These may be issues you want to take a stand on personally.

⇄ SB 1018 Misinformation and Disinformation on Online Platforms (Pan) (Spot Bill with no language currently https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1018): Would require social platforms to publicly disclose how their algorithms work and to share the data for research purposes.

⇄ AB 2516 Health care coverage: HPV (Aguiar-Curry) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2516): Would require a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy to cover the cost of HPV vaccination.

⇄ SB 1479 COVID-19 testing in schools: COVID-19 testing plans (Pan) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1479): Would require each school district, county office of education, and charter school to create a COVID-19 testing plan.

⇄ SB 1296 Viral surveillance program (Pan) (Spot Bill with no language currently https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1479)

⇄ AB 2539     Public Health: Covid vaccination: proof of status (Choi) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2539): Would require a public or private entity that requires a member of the public to provide documentation regarding the individual's vaccination status for any COVID-19 vaccine to accept a written medical record or government-issued digital medical record.

⇄ AB1687 California Emergency Services Act: Governor's powers: suspension of statutes and regulations (Seyarto) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1687): Would require the Governor to only temporarily suspend those statutes, ordinances, regulations, or rules in connection with the specific conditions of emergency proclaimed by the Governor.

⇄ SB 1100 Open meetings: orderly conduct (Cortese) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1100):  Would create a warning system and define "willfully interruption of a meeting" to determine when members of the legislative body conducting a meeting could authorize the removal of an individual.

⇄ AB 1795 Open meetings: remote participation (Fong) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1795): Would require state bodies, subject to existing exceptions, to provide all persons the ability to participate both in-person and remotely, as defined, in any meeting and to address the body remotely.

⇄ SB 1464 Law enforcement: public health orders (Pan) (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1464): Would require sheriffs and peace officers to enforce all orders of the State Department of Public Health or of the local health officer issued for the purpose of preventing the spread of any contagious, infectious, or communicable disease.

If you found this information helpful and appreciate the work A Voice for Choice Advocacy is doing, please support us by making a donation today.

Together we can make change happen!

C

Christina Hildebrand
President/Founder
A Voice for Choice Advocacy, Inc.
christina@avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org
www.AVoiceForChoiceAdvocacy.org

Have a great week, and feel free to pass this along!

Medical Disclaimer: Information provided in this article is for informational purposes only. The information is a result of years of practice and experience by Yoshi Rahm, DO. However, this information is NOT intended as a substitute for the advice provided by your physician or another healthcare professional, or any information contained on or in any product label or packaging.

Do not use the information provided in this article for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, or prescribing medication or other treatment. Always speak with your physician or another healthcare professional before taking any medication or nutritional, herbal or homeopathic supplement, or using any treatment for a health problem. If you have or suspect that you have a medical problem, contact your health care provider promptly. Do not disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking professional advice because of something you have read in this email.

Information provided in this article and the use of any products or services related to this article by you DOES NOT create a doctor-patient relationship between you and Yoshi Rahm, DO. or any other physician featured in this article. Information and statements regarding dietary supplements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Red Pill or Blue Pill? -- compelling studies

What's with the title?  The terms "red pill" and "blue pill" refer to a choice between the willingness to learn a potentially unsettling or life-changing truth, by taking the red pill, or remaining in contented ignorance with the blue pill. The terms refer to a scene in the 1999 film The Matrix.  That explanation is straight from Wikipedia.  Anyway, how about health freedom these days?  Below are some interesting and compelling studies (in my humble opinion). 

On the subject of Natural Immunity versus Vaccinated Immunity, look at this Israel study "Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections".  Study preprint: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.  And here's some nice commentary: https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/ends-debate-israeli-study-shows-natural-immunity-13x-more-effective-vaccines-stopping.  This sentence sums it up: "This analysis demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer lasting and stronger protection [13x] against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the delta variant."  In the results section it can be noted that this is a HUGE study in terms of participants as "overall, 673,676 MHS members 16 years and older were eligible for the study group of fully vaccinated SARS-CoV-2-naïve individuals; 62,883 were eligible for the study group of unvaccinated previously infected individuals and 42,099 individuals were eligible for the study group of previously infected and single-dose vaccinees."  Significant? Um, ya! So, tell me how anyone can mandate these injections?!  Especially for those who have already gone through the process of healing from COVID.

Here is a great recent article "US COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good Based on Pivotal Clinical Trial Data Analyzed Using the Proper Scientific Endpoint, “All Cause Severe Morbidity” https://www.scivisionpub.com/pdfs/us-covid19-vaccines-proven-to-cause-more-harm-than-good-based-on-pivotal-clinical-trial-data-analyzed-using-the-proper-scientific--1811.pdf At least read the abstract then look at Table 1 and tell me how anyone can mandate these injections?!

In other big news an August 27th article discusses that "COVID Vaccine Injury Reports Jump by 27,000 in One Week, FDA Pulls ‘Bait and Switch’ With Pfizer Vaccine Approval".  Link here: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/vaers-cdc-covid-vaccine-injury-reports-jump-27000-one-week/?itm_term=home.  The article has the link to the official FDA Approval as well (https://www.fda.gov/media/150386/download).  Why the bait and switch?  And, again, based on the VAERS data, tell me how anyone can mandate these injections?! ...even if it were legal (which it's still not).

And now, finally, the following is taken directly from an email from Christina Hildebrand who is President/Founder of A Voice for Choice Advocacy, Inc. (www.AVoiceForChoiceAdvocacy.org).  Personally and professionally I feel like these COVID injections should be a complete choice.  Those who want them should have access but those who do not should not ever be forced, especially since they are not all the have been cracked up to be.  Read Christina Hildebrand's email below and please sign the petition if you feel inclined to do so.

Have a great week, and as always, please feel free to pass this along!

Another Potential Vaccine Mandate Bill in CA
and Independent Contractors added to yesterday's bill!
Sign the Petition and
Make plans to come to Sacramento September 8th

Yesterday, A Voice for Choice Advocacy notified you about a potential bill being brought forward by Assembly members Wicks, Low and Weber, as well as Senators Pan, Newman and Wiener that would require ALL employers in California to require all their employees to be full vaccinated, and would require everyone 12 years and older to be fully vaccinated to enter any inn, hotel, motel, or lodging establishment, any restaurant, bar, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facilities engaged in selling food or beverages for consumption on the premises, and any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium, gym, spa, or other place of exhibition or entertainment.  The only exemptions will be medical and disability exemptions, with the slight possibility of a religious exemption.

The potential bill language (AB455) has now been expanded to require all Independent Contractors to be fully vaccinated.  And another potential bill (AB1102) has been added by Assembly member Low that amends current state discrimination statute (Section 12940 of the Government Code) by specifying that the law does not prevent an employer from requiring a COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of employment for all employees, interns, apprentices or those seeking unpaid work experience.  More detail on both bills below.

Please take Action TODAY!

Please sign and share this petition to show your opposition to this bill and to mandating vaccines in California.

Sign Petition Now
https://tinyurl.com/CAVaxMandatePetition

(Please share this link far and wide)

Make plans to be in Sacramento September 8 for a rally and demonstration organized by V is for Vaccine and AVFCA.

FAQ on these two potential bills:  

If I search AB455 and AB1102 why do a transportation bill and a telephone medical advice services bill show up? Neither of the bills have been introduced (yet).  The language shared with AVFCA is draft language, and therefore subject to change or not be introduced at all.  There is a chance that these bills do not get introduced this year, but if that is the case, they are likely to be introduced next year.

How does A Voice for Choice Advocacy have access to this draft language?  For the past six years, I and our two lobbyists have been working tirelessly to nurture relationships with people in and around the Capitol, so that we are considered the professional go-to organization on these issues. It is these contacts that allow us to get information before it becomes available to the public.  The draft language of the two bills can be read here: 

Potential AB455 language: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/AB455-Draft-RN-2118069-Completed-082621.pdf

Potential AB1102 language: https://avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/AB1102-Draft-RN-2118081-Completed-082621.pdf

How can a bill be introduced and turned around with only 10 days of the legislative session left?  It is possible to get this bill on the governor's desk before the September 10th, 2021 deadline.  However, it will require all the rules to be waived so it can be expedited.  Both of these bills will have to be heard in a Senate Committee, likely the Senate Health Committee of which Senator Pan is the chair, then be voted on the Senate Floor, voted on the Assembly Floor, before going to the Governor's desk.  Both bills are "urgency" bills which means they require a 2/3 majority vote and would go into effect as soon as they are signed by the Governor.

What is the likelihood of these bills being introduced this session?  The answer to this question really depends on whether Governor Newsom is in favor of having them introduced.  If he thinks that voters in favor of vaccine mandates will come out to support him in his efforts from being recalled, he will push them to go through.  He may also feel that he wants them to be pushed through because if he is recalled then these laws would be in place with little ability to remove them by a new Governor.  Strategically, AVFCA believes these bills will do the opposite and drive small and large business owners, as well as concerned citizens, healthcare workers, first responders to the polls to vote YES on the Recall.

Other than not wanting vaccine mandates, what are the specific issues A Voice for Choice Advocacy has with these bills? 

- There is no definition of "fully vaccinated."  It will likely be up to the California Department of Public Health to define that.  You may be fully vaccinated today with two vaccines, but tomorrow when CDPH decides you need a booster or three, you will be prevented from entering these establishments or keeping your job.  Your 11 year old will be able to come to restaurants with you but when they turn 12 years old, they will have to take however many doses of the vaccine to comply.

- Those who are not currently vaccinated in California are disproportionately Black, Hispanic and Native American.  This bill will discriminate against these minority groups and will exacerbate already existing health inequities given minorities lesser access to the healthcare system. (https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-race-ethnicity/)

- Those who have had COVID-19 and therefore have natural immunity, but would be considered unvaccinated, even though they are less likely to transmit COVID-19 than the vaccinated.

- Small businesses, which have already been hit hardest by COVID restrictions, will again be impacted.  45% of Californians will not be able to patronize these establishments.

- The already hard hit, California lodging facilities will lose business, with the unvaccinated forced to stay at Airbnb type vacation rentals when traveling.

- Employers, already struggling to find staff, will have to fire those who refuse to get vaccinated, leaving them even more short-handed. (https://www.wsj.com/articles/millions-are-unemployed-why-cant-companies-find-workers-11620302440)

- California will be left without enough first responders and people will die.  Half of the major CA fire departments, thousands of nurses, hundreds of police officers have all said they will not get the vaccine.  (https://calmatters.org/newsletters/whatmatters/2021/08/california-vaccine-mandates-workplaces/)

- Employers will take on the burden of liability, opening themselves up to Civil Rights and vaccine injury liability lawsuits - this would not be the case if AB1102 also passes.

- Employers will see workers compensation and insurance costs skyrocket - this would also not be the case if AB1102 also passes.

If this bill passes, the real question is where does it end? The removal of your driver's license, throttled internet access, flight bans?  A social credit score system that monitors everything you do?  If you think this could never be a reality in California, take a look at China (https://www.businessinsider.com/china-social-credit-system-punishments-and-rewards-explained-2018-4?op=1), and consider the billion dollar deals Governor Newsom has made with China over the past 18 months.   

Please take Action TODAY!

Please sign and share this petition to show your opposition to this bill and to mandating vaccines in California.

Sign Petition Now
https://tinyurl.com/CAVaxMandatePetition

(Please share this link far and wide)
 
If you found this information helpful and appreciate the work A Voice for Choice Advocacy is doing, please support us by making a donation today.
 

Together we can make change happen!
C

Christina Hildebrand
President/Founder
A Voice for Choice Advocacy, Inc.
christina@avoiceforchoiceadvocacy.org
www.AVoiceForChoiceAdvocacy.org

Medical Disclaimer: Information provided in this article is for informational purposes only. The information is a result of years of practice and experience by Yoshi Rahm, DO. However, this information is NOT intended as a substitute for the advice provided by your physician or another healthcare professional, or any information contained on or in any product label or packaging.

Do not use the information provided in this article for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, or prescribing medication or other treatment. Always speak with your physician or another healthcare professional before taking any medication or nutritional, herbal or homeopathic supplement, or using any treatment for a health problem. If you have or suspect that you have a medical problem, contact your health care provider promptly. Do not disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking professional advice because of something you have read in this email.

Information provided in this article and the use of any products or services related to this article by you DOES NOT create a doctor-patient relationship between you and Yoshi Rahm, DO. or any other physician featured in this article. Information and statements regarding dietary supplements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.