We have entered an era where partisan politics and the quest for power have destroyed the credibility and reliability of many formerly well-respected institutions and well-credentialed individuals.

In essence, you are now playing a game called “You Bet Your Life” based on conflicting reports from institutions and individuals who speak with certainty and credentialed authority as they purport to understand “The Science” and make general recommendations that should be made on a case-by-case basis by a physician with knowledge of your family history, medical conditions, and allergies. And even your physician may be constrained by the practice or facility where they work.

In California, physicians may be forced to parrot the regime’s messaging – coerced by severe personal and professional consequences.

California Approves Bill to Punish Doctors Who Spread False Information

Trying to strike a balance between free speech and public health, California’s Legislature on Monday approved a bill that would allow regulators to punish doctors for spreading false information about Covid-19 vaccinations and treatments.

The legislation, if signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, would make the state the first to try to legislate a remedy to a problem that the American Medical Association, among other medical groups and experts, says has worsened the impact of the pandemic, resulting in thousands of unnecessary hospitalizations and deaths. <Source>

There are credible reports from well-credentialed, well-experienced physicians and researchers who have documented evidence of alternative (non-regime approved) treatment protocols that have proved efficacious and have kept individuals from being hospitalized. Unfortunately, the CDC and FDA refuse to review or debate such findings. So who is likely to determine the “correct” information – the corrupt CDC, Big Pharma, or politically compromised institutions?

We find the CDC at the forefront among the agencies severely compromised by partisan politics with their use of “hidden” data, cherry-picked reports, and refusal to hear and debate contradictory findings.

CDC advisers unanimously approve COVID-19 vaccines on childhood, adult immunization schedules

More than half the states refer to Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations in their immunization laws.

The CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices unanimously approved the addition of COVID-19 vaccines to the routine immunization schedules for children, adolescents and adults at its meeting Thursday.

The child and adolescent schedule recommends up to four doses of COVID vaccines, including those still under emergency use authorization, starting at 6 months old. It includes a two- or three-dose primary series and a booster. The adult schedule, starting at age 19, is the same.

Adding COVID vaccines to the routine schedules will trigger laws in some states that require school districts to enforce the schedule on schoolchildren. More than half the states referenced ACIP recommendations in their immunization laws as of January 2021.

Critics of the recommendations are pushing back on the data cited by the advisors to justify amending the schedule.<Source>

Even worse, mandates are being imposed by school districts that unquestioning follow the guidance of the CDC (Centers for Disease Control), believing this immunized (pun intended) them from legal claims of harm and make them susceptible to compensatory and punitive damages.

CDC VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Reporting System)…
As for reliability, VAERS, a program run by the CDC and FDA, is susceptible to unverified reports, misattribution, underreporting, and inconsistent data quality. <Source> As a voluntary program that the public and professionals may use, it is believed that underreporting only hints at potential trouble spots.

Where is the science?  One scientific paper suggests that the risk of schoolchildren hospitalized for COVID-19 may be less than the risk of severe side effects…

Age-stratified infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in the non-elderly informed from pre-vaccination national seroprevalence studies

Angelo Maria Pezzullo, Cathrine Axfors, Despina G. Contopoulos-Ioannidis, Alexandre Apostolatos, John P.A. Ioannidis



The infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID-19 among non-elderly people in the absence of vaccination or prior infection is important to estimate accurately, since 94% of the global population is younger than 70 years and 86% is younger than 60 years. In systematic searches in SeroTracker and PubMed (protocol:, we identified 40 eligible national seroprevalence studies covering 38 countries with pre-vaccination seroprevalence data. For 29 countries (24 high-income, 5 others), publicly available age-stratified COVID-19 death data and age-stratified seroprevalence information were available and were included in the primary analysis. The IFRs had a median of 0.035% (interquartile range (IQR) 0.013 - 0.056%) for the 0-59 years old population, and 0.095% (IQR 0.036 - 0.125%,) for the 0-69 years old. The median IFR was 0.0003% at 0-19 years, 0.003% at 20-29 years, 0.011% at 30-39 years, 0.035% at 40-49 years, 0.129% at 50-59 years, and 0.501% at 60-69 years. Including data from another 9 countries with imputed age distribution of COVID-19 deaths yielded median IFR of 0.025-0.032% for 0-59 years and 0.063-0.082% for 0-69 years. Meta-regression analyses also suggested global IFR of 0.03% and 0.07%, respectively in these age groups. The current analysis suggests a much lower pre-vaccination IFR in non-elderly populations than previously suggested. Large differences did exist between countries and may reflect differences in comorbidities and other factors. These estimates provide a baseline from which to fathom further IFR declines with the widespread use of vaccination, prior infections, and evolution of new variants.

Even if you could read this (as yet to be peer-reviewed) paper, you would struggle to understand the paper in the context of other published papers presenting confirmatory or conflicting findings.

Bottom line…

The threat of withholding your child's education in favor of putting their long-term health at risk is nothing short of playing Russian Roulette. 

The best advice I can suggest is to have your child evaluated by a competent medical professional and seek a medical or religious exemption if the vaccine is contraindicated or appears unnecessary. Children with severe comorbidities should be continually assessed individually.

It appears that this is also a ploy to transfer adverse event liability from the vaccine makers to the government.

Amazingly, it is the progressive communist democrats who scream "my body, my choice" the loudest when it comes to killing children in the womb but are strangely silent on the vaccine issue.

In any event, we are screwed when the institutions and individuals you would generally trust have been coerced by the regime or politically compromised by a toxic ideology.

-- Steve

P.S. Point of clarification -- WHO in the title does not refer to the corrupt and politically compromised World Health Organization.

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS