# DDL770 - Damaged

# DDL770 - Damaged

Regret Lorenzin?

The aim is to oblige everyone, doctors and teachers



Art. 5. (Interventions in case of health emergencies or compromise of group immunity)

"paragraph 1. If, as part of the monitoring of vaccination coverage carried out on a half-yearly basis by the Ministry of Health, there are significant deviations from the objectives set by the PNPV such as to generate the risk of compromising group immunity, on proposal of the Minister of Health after deliberation by the Council of Ministers, after hearing the Higher Institute of Health and the Permanent Conference for relations between the State, the regions and the autonomous provinces of Trento and Bolzano, by decree of the President of the Republic, are adopted extraordinary intervention plans, which include, where necessary, the obligation to carry out one or more vaccinations for certain birth cohorts or for health professionals, in order to achieve and maintain vaccination safety coverage. "


This you read is the first paragraph of Article 5 of bill no. 770, co-signed by the group leaders Stefano Patuanelli (M5S) and Massimiliano Romeo (Lega) and by members of the Senate Hygiene and Health Commission Pierpaolo Sileri (M5S), Maria Domenica Castellone (M5S) and Sonia Fregolent (Lega) bearing "Vaccination prevention provisions".
Il text, presented on August 7, is assigned to the 12th Standing Commission (Hygiene and Healthcare) of the Senate.

There are several considerations that can be made regarding this article of the bill.

That health professionals must be obliged to carry out vaccines, which are made mandatory from time to time, is a contradiction. The same medical class that wants to seem so cohesive and unanimous in indicating vaccines as safe and effective, has coverage so low as to justify the inclusion of any obligation within the DDL.

In this regard, we recall that already in Law 119/2017 (Lorenzin), the vaccination obligation for health and school staff had been included in the decree: the measure was canceled in the final text as rejected by the Senate budget commission (not in short, there was sufficient economic coverage to provide for mandatory and therefore free vaccinations for such a large section of the population). The vaccination coverage among health professionals, however, is among the lowest ever: around 15%.

Why don't doctors, nurses and colleagues get vaccinated? Does it seem logical to you?

  1. www.focus.it
  2. www.quotidianosanita.it
  3. www.corrieredelveneto.corriere.it

Are we really sure that instead of going to the bottom of these reasons, the answer is the obligation? Why not try to understand if, for example, this distrust of vaccines depends on personal experience regarding the possible negative consequences of mass vaccinations? Why don't they consider it necessary, given their high-risk profession, to protect themselves as well as patients?

If they were free to respond, without paying the price of a nipped career, would they say that the vaccines are not safe or not effective? Over the past year and a half, dozens of doctors have been barred or recalled or suspended from orders for voicing doubts about mass vaccination practice.

  1. www.quotidianosanita.it
  2. www.ilmessaggero.it
  3. www.terranuova.it

How can we trust a medical or scientific class that, under blackmail, tells us that vaccines are perfect, but in fact proves to think otherwise? What value would we give to the opinion of a surgeon who reassures us about the success of an operation, if we knew for sure that by saying the opposite he would lose his job? Would you trust it?

Inserting a vaccination obligation as a clause to access a profession is a precedent that opens the door to any other type of taxation. In other contexts, it has opened up to the use of microchips instead of the classic "stamp to be stamped", to monitor access to work. If that became mandatory, would it be acceptable? If in the name of public security the whole population was forced to give up all aspects related to privacy and self-determination, would it be acceptable? Why then should we accept that one's freedom of action and thought is limited in the name of a non-existent public interest? There are no scientific reasons that make vaccinations an essential means of protecting public health: those who are vaccinated are in any case vehicles for the circulation of most of the viruses or bacteria against which they are vaccinated. Even the measles vaccine does not prevent the infection, indeed several studies show that the vaccinated becomes contagious (https://goo.gl/4BzEMg).

With these assumptions, of an inconsistent public protection, we want to force a large slice of the population to medical treatment that is not free from risks. Tomorrow any other procedure (medical or otherwise) could become mandatory on the basis of fake public protection. 

Do you feel it?

In fact, this text of the law opens up to the vaccination obligation for all age groups, and makes the right to school and work (for now in the health profession) subject to the carrying out of one or more vaccines at a time, in the face of a fake protection of public health, based on bogus concepts such as group immunity, without scientific basis. 

What risks are you willing to take to pretend to protect the public interest?

Here are the top 25 causes of death in Italy (Istat):

  1. 69.653 deaths from ischemic heart disease
  2. 57.230 deaths from cerebrovascular diseases
  3. 49.554 deaths from Other heart diseases
  4. 33.386 deaths from malignant tumors of the trachea, bronchi and lungs
  5. 30.690 deaths from hypertensive diseases
  6. 26.600 deaths from dementia and Alzheimer's disease
  7. 20.234 deaths from chronic lower respiratory diseases
  8. 20.183 deaths from diabetes mellitus
  9. 18.671 deaths from malignant colon, rectum and anus tumors
  10. 12.330 deaths from malignant breast tumors
  11. 11.186 deaths from malignant tumors of the pancreas
  12. 10.043 deaths from diseases of the kidney and ureter
  13. 9.915 deaths from malignant liver tumors
  14. 9.557 deaths from malignant tumors of the stomach
  15. 9.413 deaths from flu and pneumonia
  16. 8.204 deaths from non-malignant tumors
  17. 7.636 deaths from septicemia
  18. 7.174 deaths from malignant prostate tumors
  19. 6.049 deaths from Leukemia
  20. 6.035 deaths from Cirrhosis, fibrosis and chronic hepatitis
  21. 5.610 deaths from malignant bladder tumors
  22. 5.175 deaths from Hodgkin's disease and lymphomas
  23. 5.110 deaths from Parkinson's disease
  24. 4.237 deaths from malignant tumors of the brain and CNS
  25. 4.147 deaths from suicide and intentional self-harm


What place do vaccinable diseases occupy on this list? For example, what place does measles occupy with 4 deaths in the past year? Will you force us to maintain healthy lifestyles? Will you, as Paraguay recently did, put mandatory mammograms for women at the expense of work? Don't you want to protect the 4,147 annual suicides by forcing the entire Italian population to use psychotropic drugs? Diabetes kills more than the flu, we expect closely and in a preventive manner the obligation to consume balanced meals compulsory physical activity for the entire population, and how will we blackmail work?

Do we realize that the concept of prevention is being destroyed and the fundamental right to self-determination is being undermined? 

Are you willing to risk your health?

We take only a few ideas from a recent publication by Prof. Bellavite (link: https://goo.gl/QX1nqk chapter 5) which reviews the scientific evidence available on vaccinations.

"... If we talk about adverse effects, we cannot say that vaccines are safe. They are not" safe "as not all drugs are, that is to say that in particular conditions of use (and not only of overdose) in some subjects may cause adverse reactions. Unfortunately misinformation is often played on the public about the equivocal safety versus harmlessness. "


"If by the definition of" safe vaccine "we mean a product that is totally free of side effects, then no vaccine is 100% safe"


"Ischemic heart disease and cerebrovascular diseases, largely due to atherosclerosis and atherothrombosis, are the main causes of death on all continents except Africa, where infectious diseases are still the leading cause"


"Recent experimental evidence is providing increasingly convincing evidence that immune system imbalances are involved in this type of so frequent disease"


"That there is a small, but not negligible, risk of adverse reactions is therefore undoubted. But there is another problem of difficult solution that should make us think: the adverse reactions that are reported as possibly due to vaccination are only those of acute diseases that they follow the vaccination itself in a relatively short period of time (hours or days), while adverse reactions in the form of chronic diseases are highly likely to go unnoticed. For example, it has only recently been found that an influenza vaccine that is widespread in timing of the (alleged and touted) swine flu epidemic (Pandemrix) caused a significant increase in type 1 diabetes cases "


"Today the major diseases are chronic-degenerative ones ... It is clear that vaccines trigger a local and systemic inflammatory reaction"


A committee of experts established to investigate these problems has admitted that it is difficult to confirm or exclude this type of risk:

"The Committee has been unable to respond to the concern of some that repeated exposure of a sensitive or fragile child to multiple vaccines during the development period may also produce atypical immune or nervous system injury or non-specific, which could lead to serious disability or death. Such negative health outcomes may not be "classic" diseases, but variants of disease. The variants would not necessarily be identified in epidemiological or clinical investigations using rigorous diagnostic criteria. There are no epidemiological studies that address this, either in terms of exposure or outcome. That is, there is no study comparing an unvaccinated control group with exposed children to the full immunization program, there are no studies that have examined health parameters other than classically defined ones, such as infections, allergies or diabetes. So the Committee acknowledges with some discomfort that this report addresses only part of the overall set of concerns of those who are most cautious about the safety of childhood vaccines. " Book cited: Immunization Safety Review. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK220493/

This is medical "science" and should not be scandalized, rather it should lead to realistic and prudent considerations.




Publish the Menu module to "offcanvas" position. Here you can publish other modules as well.
Learn more.