Kristen Chevrier Kristen Chevrier

Utah SB2004 and Employer Obligation to Pay for Testing

Many Utah employers are requiring testing for employees who have requested religious accommodation for the vaccine requirement.

Under SB2004, employers are required to PAY for testing.

Many Utah employers are requiring testing for employees who have requested religious accommodation for the vaccine requirement.

Under SB2004, employers are required to PAY for testing.

I know many of you have been waiting in long lines for hours and hours each week, to fulfill this workplace requirement. This is a huge waste of resources–and a means of coercion.

Here is a letter to send to employers to inform them of the law:

Dear [Employer],

It is impractical for me to continue to wait in long lines, for hours each week, to receive free county-provided testing. It is a waste of my resources and yours.

If you insist on continuing with the testing requirement, I will need to opt for in-home testing, or another testing mechanism that requires less time to complete.

Per SB2004, 2nd Session, 2021, employers are required to pay for any Covid-19 associated testing that is done as a requirement to be in the workplace.

Please inform me how you would like to proceed.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

Read More
Kristen Chevrier Kristen Chevrier

IV Vitamin C and Covid 19

Yesterday morning, I literally heard two medical doctors and a nurse confirm that, in their opinions, it is more ethical to allow a patient to die than to “experiment” on them with high dose intravenous vitamin C. They said this with straight faces, while telling us that we should have allowed them to experiment on the patient with Remdesivir and Baricitinib, and shrugging off the actual, visible, measurable, damage they caused with both an anxiety medication and a diuretic. The potentially deadly risks of these medications are acceptable, in their eyes. The risk of a possible kidney stone from too much vitamin C is not.

Yesterday morning, I literally heard two medical doctors and a nurse confirm that, in their opinions, it is more ethical to allow a patient to die than to “experiment” on them with high dose intravenous vitamin C. They said this with straight faces, while telling us that we should have allowed them to experiment on the patient with Remdesivir and Baricitinib, and shrugging off the actual, visible, measurable, damage they caused with both an anxiety medication and a diuretic. The potentially deadly risks of these medications are acceptable, in their eyes. The risk of a possible kidney stone from too much vitamin C is not.

There are three big problems I’m seeing here:

  1. Incentivization of hospitals to use particular meds and protocols undermines the purpose of medicine, which should be to save and improve lives.

  2. Penalizing individual practitioners and hospitals for using non-EUA or FDA approved and non-incentivized protocols–protocols that are saving lives–violates the sanctity of the doctor/patient relationship and endangers lives.

  3. Condescending, cavalier attitudes, fostered by lack of desire on the part of individual practitioners and hospital management to be open to and educated on life saving protocols, create an adversarial relationship between doctors, patients, and family members, negatively impacting the health of patients.

“Standard of Care,” and FDA approval–EUA or otherwise–have become roadblocks to better health, and vehicles for price gouging and denial of life-saving treatment. Patients have become commodities, rather than individuals. The motto “First do no harm” has been twisted to mean “don’t use anything that is not FDA approved and/or incentivized.”

Here is a sampling of the volumes of evidence of the benefit of applying high dose IV vitamin C therapy to life-threatening health conditions associated with COVID-19, including sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

Articles and Studies on IV Vitamin C

Vitamin C as a Possible Therapy for COVID-19

https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/317374/ic_52_222.pdf?sequence=1

Overview of the Possible Role of Vitamin C in Management of Covid-19

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43440-020-00176-1

The Emerging Role of Vitamin C the Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19

(Specific references to ARDS)

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/11/3286/htm

The Effect of Vitamin C on Pathological Parameters and Survival Duration of Critically Ill Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34975830/

Intravenous Vitamin C as Adjunctive Therapy for Enterovirus/Rhinovirus Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28224112/

Video Overview of One Study on Vitamin C and Sepsis Induced ARDS

Vitamin C and Sepsis Induced ARDS (5 minutes)

https://edhub.ama-assn.org/jn-learning/video-player/17998543

Full Video Presentation on the Study

https://edhub.ama-assn.org/jn-learning/video-player/17998541?widget=personalizedcontent&previousarticle=17998543

The Study

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31573637/

It’s time we remove all financial incentives to doctors and hospitals for the use of specific interventions. It is time we pass legislation to protect the doctor/patient relationship and protect the ability of doctors to inform patients of all options and protect the right of patients to choose–from among all options.

What can you do right now?

Inform every medical professional you work with of the value of IV vitamin C–even over oral vitamin C–using the studies above.

Insist, professionally, but firmly, that your friends and family members be given access to and complete information on all potentially life-saving options, regardless of “Standard of Care,” FDA approval (EUA or otherwise), or other financial or philosophical or political prejudice.

Medical professionals must come to understand that there are things they could and should be doing to save lives, and that refusing patients the option to choose potentially life-saving treatments can be the worst harm of all.

Contact your legislators right now: le.utah.gov > My Legislators! The Utah 2022 Legislative session begins on January 18.

Let them know that you are deeply concerned about the sanctity of the doctor/patient relationship and that you support legislation protecting the privacy of that relationship and the ability of doctors to offer options to their patients, without penalty. Let them know that it is critical that each of us have full information on any medical intervention and all possible options made available to us, so that we can make the best decisions for our individual bodies.

Let’s open this conversation. The more people talk about it, the more likely it is that we can change the medical climate organically or pass legislation that forces much needed change.

Read More
Kristen Chevrier Kristen Chevrier

How to Respond to Employer or School Mandates

Information on NEW UTAH COVID VACCINE EXEMPTION LAW

(This post is to inform you of the facts surrounding employer mandates and COVID “vaccines.” And it informs you of your rights under both state and federal law. It does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.)

Information on NEW UTAH COVID VACCINE EXEMPTION LAW

You have no obligation to submit to medical experimentation. If your employer or school is mandating a vaccine for employment or education, please read the following information, carefully, and then decide what the best course of action is, in your case.

QUICK TIPS:

Keep a paper trail. This will be useful if you have to defend your record, or need to file a lawsuit. It also puts the employer or school staff on notice that you are tracking details that could be used in a lawsuit. (That alone causes some to back off.)

Be very careful what you say about why you object to the vaccine, what you’ve done in the past, and what you will do in exchange for employer accommodation.

Avoid phone or in person conversations. If you have a conversation, send a follow up email as soon as you return to your desk, stating what you understood from the conversation and asking for confirmation that you understood correctly.

If there is time, and you feel it would be beneficial, prior to sending a religious exemption letter, send a polite and informative letter, documenting applicable statute (below) and requesting reasonable accommodation. (If you have natural immunity, or you are working from home anyway, there is little need for you do to anything to further accommodate the employer. Use both of these to your advantage.)

If an educational conversation won’t resolve the problem, write and submit a religious exemption letter, using the information found here. (Religious exemptions should NOT include scientific research, safety data, or references to your organized religion.)

If the letter invoking your right to religious exemption is denied, file a lawsuit for a declaratory judgement (in advance of action, rather than after being fired).

DON’T QUIT! You want them to have to fire you. If they threaten your unemployment, remember that unemployment checks come from the state and the employer would have to show cause, in order to have it withheld.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Educate yourself before you approach your employer.

Start by viewing these slides presented by Dr. Paul Thomas at the 2021 Your Health Freedom Symposium.

I would use this information to educate, and persuade, not in a threatening manner, and certainly NOT as part of a religious exemption letter. DO NOT make concessions or agreements to get the vaccine.

__________

Under Federal law, religious beliefs are not limited to the doctrines of any organized religion. They are personal.

The Supreme Court has interpreted religion to mean a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons. The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.

In 1964, Congress passed Public Law 88-352 (78 Stat. 241). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

Religious beliefs, are not tied to the stated beliefs of an organized or officially recognized faith, don’t let anyone trap you into giving them information about your organized/recognized faith that contradicts your deeply held, personal beliefs.

__________

There is no approved Pfizer (or other) COVID vaccine in the United States. If your employer or school is trying to mandate the Emergency Use Authorized injections, please provide your employer or school with the following information, and take additional action, if needed.

From a letter to Rutgers, by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.:

Though many university vaccination requirements for licensed and approved vaccines have been upheld in court, no court has ever upheld a mandate for an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) vaccine, which all COVID vaccines are at present. In fact, a federal court has held that EUA vaccines cannot be mandated to soldiers in the U.S. military, who enjoy far fewer rights than civilians, Doe #1 v. Rumsfeld, 297 F.Supp.2d 119 (2003). That court remarkably held “….the United States cannot demand that members of the armed forces also serve as guinea pigs for experimental drugs.” Id. at 135.

Federal law 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) requires that the person to whom an EUA vaccine is administered be advised, “of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.” The reason for the right of refusal stems from the fact that EUA products are by definition experimental. Under the Nuremberg Code, no one may be coerced to participate in a medical experiment. Consent of the individual is “absolutely essential.” The liability for forced participation in a medical experiment, not to mention injury from such coerced medical intervention, may be incalculable.

The consequences described in the statute mean medical consequences, not termination of employment or denial of in-person learning, as Rutgers contemplates.*
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/Letter-to-Rutgers-President-3.26.21.pdf

Regarding the Pfizer vaccine: “It is an investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication.” See FDA letter to Pfizer, Inc., 2/25/2021, p. 2, ¶ 1 (“Pfizer letter”).  It is an “unapproved product[.]” See, Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine (Vaccination Providers) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the Pfizer-BioNtech Covid-19 Vaccine to Prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), p. 1, ¶ 1 (parentheses in original). “On December 11, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for emergency use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine…pursuant to” 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3. See Pfizer letter, p. 1, ¶¶ 1-2.

Regarding the Moderna vaccine: “It is an investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication.” See FDA letter to ModernaTX, Inc., 12/18/2020, p. 2, ¶ 3 (“Moderna letter”). “The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is an unapproved product that may prevent COVID-19. There is no vaccine to prevent COVID-19.” See Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine to Prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Individuals 18 Years of Age and Older, p. 1, ¶ 8 (parentheses in original). “…I am authorizing the emergency use of Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine….” See Moderna letter, p. 2. ¶ 4.

Regarding the J&J vaccine: “It is an investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication.” See FDA letter to Janssen Biotech, Inc., 2/27/2021, p. 1, ¶ 3 (“J&J letter”). “I am authorizing the emergency use of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine….” Id. at p. 2, ¶ 2.

In addition, if you are in Utah, HB308 from the 2021 General Legislative Session, prohibits any government entity from requiring an EUA injection. Although the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine is approved, the Pfizer vaccine that is available in the United States, the one we’ve been using for months, is NOT approved. There is no approved vaccine available in the United States.

STUDENTS

If you are a student at a Utah school, HB233, passed in the General Session in 2021, allows all, except medical students, access to personal, religious, and medical exemptions. Medical students are eligible for a Title VII religious exemption.

Get the exemption. Please insist that your K-12 public school follow state and federal law (detailed above) and that administrators notify students of their legal option to get exemptions.

On the higher education level, let the university know that you are taking a religious exemption.

If you are at a private university, submit a Title VII religious exemption letter.

If that is denied, organize and let the administration you are organized and willing to both walk, and sue, if vaccination becomes required. Print and deliver a copy of the Notice of Medical Fraud to your school administrators.

NOTE: Federal law on EUA applies even to medical students.

EMPLOYEES

Follow the Quick Tips listed above. See information on how to write a religious exemption here.

Organize with other employees. Let employers know that you are not willing to be part of this experiment. Print and deliver a copy of the Notice of Medical Fraud to your employer.

As a final resort, file a lawsuit for a declaratory judgement (in advance of action, rather than after being fired).

______________

Additional Resources

Legal opinion on religious exemption for Emergency Use Authorizations:

Letter-in-Response-to-DOJ-Slip-Opinion-Released-on-July-26-2021-SiriDownload

UPDATE: The replacement for the Pfizer vaccine has been FDA approved for those 16 and older. At this point, our best defense is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on religion.

The Pfizer vaccine, itself, was not approved. It was announced as approved, setting of a cascade of mandates. But it is not the approved vaccine, and the approved vaccine is not available in the United States.

Also see:

The Belmont Report, and the Code of Federal Regulations (codification of the Belmont Report findings).

(This is not legal advice. I am not an attorney, but multiple attorneys contributed to this list of recommendations.)

_________

*EUA language secures a “right to refuse,” which would be inconsistent with “getting fired if you refuse.” If you can be fired for refusing, you don’t have a right to refuse.

Read More
Kristen Chevrier Kristen Chevrier

Writing a Religious Exemption for an Employer

BE CONSISTENT. GUARD YOUR TONGUE. KEEP A PAPER TRAIL.

BE CONSISTENT. GUARD YOUR TONGUE. KEEP A PAPER TRAIL.

Information on NEW UTAH COVID EXEMPTION LAW

If you’re going to submit a religious exemption, do your research, and do it right. There are things you should say and things you shouldn’t.

Under Federal law, religious beliefs are not limited to the doctrines of any organized religion. They are personal.

The Supreme Court has interpreted religion to mean a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons. The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.

In 1964, Congress passed Public Law 88-352 (78 Stat. 241). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

Religious beliefs are not tied to the stated beliefs of an organized or officially recognized faith.

QUICK TIPS

Keep a paper trail. This will be useful if you have to defend your record, or need to file a lawsuit. It also puts the employer or school staff on notice that you are tracking details that could be used in a lawsuit. (That alone causes some to back off.)

Be very careful what you say about why you object to the vaccinewhat you’ve done in the past, and what you will do in exchange for employer accommodation.

Avoid phone or in person conversations. If you have a conversation, send a follow up email as soon as you return to your desk, stating what you understood from the conversation and asking for confirmation that you understood correctly.

DON’T QUIT! You want them to have to fire you. If they threaten your unemployment, remember that unemployment checks come from the state and the employer would have to show cause, in order to have it withheld.

__________

THINK: Why are you submitting a religious exemption?

  • If you’ve used vaccines before, why are you not opting not to use one, or all, right now? You learned what’s in them (mRNA)? You’ve learned where the vaccines come from (cell lines derived from aborted fetuses)? Have your beliefs changed? You object to a particular vaccine, based on one of the points above?

  • Which specific beliefs require you to step back from this vaccine? You believe that you have a God-given stewardship over your body? You believe in personal agency? You believe that injecting substances into your body is counter to the wishes of your creator?

  • How would receipt of this injection impede your ability to practice your religion? Would it cause you to feel guilt that would distance you from your creator? Do you believe that your natural immune system functions best when unimpeded by chemical drugs? (If so, do you use other pharmaceutical drugs, recreational drugs, or substances that are potentially harmful to your body?). Be consistent.

  • If you say that you will not defile your body, they will ask you if you have piercings or tatoos or use injections or interventions of other kinds? Think through your responses.

  • Don’t say anything you can’t solidly defend.

  • Don’t argue science, safety, or refer to your organized religion–unless you can defend your choice, using doctrine and policies from your organized religion.

  • In response to direct questions about your organized religion, use the Supreme Court definition of religion and the text from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. (Both below.) Remember that the teachings of your organized religion are irrelevant here. This is personal.

  • Some questions are clearly not the business of the entity asking. Think about how you can respond without giving information you don’t want to give, using some of the material in this post.

RELIGIOUS BELIEF

  • A religious objection can be based on your personal religious beliefs–even if your organized religion teaches differently. (It is helpful if your state’s K-12 exemption is based on individual religious beliefs, rather than tied to the teachings of your denomination. This is true in Utah.)

  • Know what your religion teaches, because you may be able to apply it, but do not apply it if it could jeopardize your own claim to deeply held personal belief. (I would stick to Bible references if you belong to a church that specifically promotes vaccination.)

  • Include in your letter the Supreme Court Definition of Religious Belief: “The Supreme Court has interpreted religion to mean a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons. The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.”

  • If you can tie your objection to scripture and/or doctrine, it’s helpful. But this is not a treatise.

  • Once you’ve claimed “religious exemption,” it does not need to be justified.

  • The Constitution says all religions are exempt, or no religion is exempt, but the state cannot pick and choose religions.

Analysis on the definition of “religious belief.”

“In addition, a belief does not need to be stated in traditional terms to fall within First Amendment protection. The Supreme Court has deliberately avoided establishing an exact or a narrow definition of religion because freedom of religion is a dynamic guarantee that was written in a manner to ensure flexibility and responsiveness to the passage of time and the development of the United States. Thus, religion is not limited to traditional denominations.”

“The First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion has deeply rooted historical significance. Many of the colonists who founded the United States came to this continent to escape religious persecution and government oppression. This country’s founders advocated religious freedom and sought to prevent any one religion or group of religious organizations from dominating the government or imposing its will or beliefs on society as a whole. The revolutionary philosophy encompassed the principle that the interests of society are best served if individuals are free to form their own opinions and beliefs.”

“The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from interfering with individual religious beliefs. The government cannot enact laws aiding any religion or establishing an official state religion. The courts have interpreted the Establishment Clause to accomplish the separation of church and state on both the national and state levels of government.”(Religion legal definition of religion)

“Justice Brennan has observed: The constitutional mandate expresses a deliberate and considered judgment that [religious] matters are to be left to the conscience of the citizen and declares as a basic postulate of the relation between the citizen and his government that “the rights of conscience are, in their nature, of peculiar delicacy, and will little bear the gentlest touch of governmental hand… . Once we recognize that the concept of religious liberty entails protecting matters of conscience from government interference, it becomes clear that a constitutional definition of religion cannot be limited to the theistic religions recognized by the Framers, or even to a broader class of traditional religions. Such a rigid definition of religion would be inconsistent with the very concept of religious liberty.’ 5 Accordingly, any proposed constitutional definition should be broad and flexible enough to include changing concepts of religion, thereby protecting new and unorthodox religious beliefs.” (Defining Religion in the First Amendment: A Functional Approach)

“The Court departed from its earlier ideas of religion, centered around the orthodox belief in a Christian God, and instead held that the First Amendment: embraces the right to maintain theories of life and of death and of the hereafter which are rank heresy to followers of the orthodox faiths. Heresy trials are foreign to our Constitution. Men may believe what they cannot prove. They may not be put to the proof of their religious doctrines or beliefs. Religious experiences which are as real as life to some may be incomprehensible to others. Yet the fact that they may be beyond the ken of mortals does not mean that they can be made suspect before the law.

In effect, the Court conceded that a person can hold a sincere religious belief, deserving of the protections of the Religion Clauses, even if that belief is outside generally accepted orthodox ideas of religion. The Court formally abandoned its earlier explanations of religion which centered on Christian ideas of a “Maker” or “Creator,” and instead showed a new openness to religious ideas which seemed “incomprehensible” or outside the generally accepted norm. In addition, the Court recognized in its opinion that a person cannot be forced to prove their beliefs in a court because what may be unquestionably real to one person may be “incomprehensible” to another. In other words, the Court accepted that a person may hold valid religious ideas even without a basis other than personal conviction.”(DEFINING RELIGION UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT: AN ARGUMENT FOR ANCHORING A DEFINITION IN INJURY)Sample statement of personal belief: My deeply and sincerely held religious belief is that the injection of foreign substances into my body, the stewardship for which was granted to me by God, would violate my God-given stewardship. Knowing that I have violated this trust would jeopardize my connection with and ability to serve God.

__________

ABORTED HUMAN FETAL TISSUE

Do NOT put this link in your exemption letter. But DO use the information there to help you properly state your objection. If your employer requests further information, I suggest you go to the article’s sources for each of the three U.S. shots. MORE INFO

Read More
Kristen Chevrier Kristen Chevrier

ACTION: Latter-day Saint Missionary Covid mRNA Injections

The issue of missionary vaccinations is becoming more urgent.

The issue of missionary vaccinations is becoming more urgent. Many mission presidents are reporting to the missionaries that Salt Lake is requiring missionaries to submit to a Covid 19 injection or stay sequestered and only interact with people online. They are also telling them that the shot is “safe,” which has not been determined. Missionaries have no access to research on either side of the question and are not being given informed consent.

ACTION #1: Please send this information to your missionaries and/or family and friends who have missionaries. Missionaries cannot use links, so we have created and attached pdfs of the critical information, so they can be informed. Download the pdfs to send to your missionaries.

  • A summary of reasons not to get Covid injections directed more at missionaries (“18 Reasons”)

  • A summary of reasons not to get Covid injections directed more at parents (“Considerations”) 

  • An excerpt from an analysis of human fetal cell line use in the two mRNA injections

  • A document for mission presidents to sign, prior to a missionary getting the injection, if a missionary decides to get it

18 Reasons Covid Vaccine Download

Covid Vaccine Considerations Download

Pfizer Moderna Human Fetal Cell Lines Download

Vaccine Questions Letter

NOTE: The shots should not qualify for EUA approval, at all, because we do have alternative treatments. (You may want to copy and paste some of this for your missionaries.)

  • Studies on Ivermectin for Covid Treatment (https://c19ivermectin.com/)

  • Studies on HCQ for Covid Treatment (https://c19hcq.com/)

  • Emergency Use Authorization “Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. Taking into consideration input from the FDA, manufacturers decide whether and when to submit an EUA request to FDA.” (Emphasis mine. Link.)

  • Human Fetal Cell Lines Used in Covid Injections (link to complete document; missionary excerpt attached) (http://nodeception.org/aborted-fetal-cell-use-in-covid-19-vaccines/)

ACTION #2: Contact your mission president (email or call; don’t be afraid to call; they are there to take your calls)

ACTION #3: Contact the Missionary Department (801-240-1000). Ask for the Missionary Department and diplomatically, but candidly express your concerns.

Engage in conversation.

  • Ask for a review of the church’s vaccine policy.

  • Ask if the church is willing to meet with vaccine injured members, so that the church can better understand our concerns.

  • Ask for the church to refrain from dictating to families how to handle the personal health situations of our missionaries.

  • Ask for the church to allow for medical exemptions and still allow missionaries to serve as regular missionaries. (Not put them into quarantine for refusing to vaccinate).

  • Point out that having different health philosophies does not make you a disobedient or dangerous missionary. Health philosophies and conditions are highly personal and individual.

  • Ask them to remove the pressure and requirements for non-government required vaccines for foreign missionaries. (A very small number of vaccines are required by countries. Most of the vaccines required by Missionary Medical are simply travel recommendations from the CDC. Missionaries from other churches serve for years at a time with no vaccines at all.)

  • Ask them to inform stake and ward leaders that they may not require vaccinations as a prerequisite for participation in activities.

  • Ask them to help restore and protect religious freedoms that are being lost all over the nation on this very issue–opening the door for loss of religious freedom on other critical issues.

Please be sure missionaries know that there is no dishonor in returning home, if the only other option is to be sequestered for the duration. They should know that their health, safety, and emotional well being is more important than being “in the mission field,” marking time. Thank you, so much!

Read More
Kristen Chevrier Kristen Chevrier

Banner Campaign

On October 8 & 9, 2020, Your Health Freedom coordinated with V is for Vaccine to host a major banner campaign over Utah Highways

On October 8 & 9, 2020Your Health Freedom coordinated with V is for Vaccine to host a major banner campaign over Utah Highways.

The objective? Give the public informed consent!

Although newspapers reported that UDOT forced the removal of the banners, the reality is that we showed UDOT the law and then continued on our original time-line for posting and removing the banners. They were never intended to stay up past rush hour. Leaving them up would have been counter-productive–and illegal.

Special thanks to all of our amazing volunteers!

Look for more educational events, coming soon!

Read More
Kristen Chevrier Kristen Chevrier

The Fast Track

We have the following specific concerns with fast-tracking vaccines.

(In response to press inquiries on the COVID 19 rush to vaccine.)

Your Health Freedom is mainly concerned with freedom of choice. We oppose any mandated health intervention.

  • No medical intervention should ever be mandated. For every medical procedure there should be informed consent. “Informed” meaning that the patient must be provided with all information on possible benefits and drawbacks of the intervention, and “consent” meaning that the patient has the option to decline to participate, without any form of penalty or retribution.

  • All medical interventions, by definition, involve risk. That is why there must be consent

We have the following specific concerns with fast-tracking vaccines. 

_______________________

*A sampling of statements on the dangers of rushing vaccines.

  • “All previous attempts at creating a Corona Virus vaccine have failed.  They resulted in the recipient of the vaccine getting sicker when exposed to the wild virus, vs the control group.  They are fast-tracking the Corona Virus vaccine, and the makers of the vaccine have no liability if you get injured from it.” –Chris Ruttan (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22536382/)

  • “I understand the importance of accelerating timelines for vaccines in general, but from everything I know, this is not the vaccine to be doing it with,” Dr Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, told Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccines-insight-idUSKBN20Y1GZ

  • “We have never in the history of humanity, created a successful vaccine against ANY Corona virus. The original SARS vaccine trial from after the 2002-2003 Asia outbreak was unsuccessful because it killed too many people to be acceptable in a vaccine trial.” — Dr. Ryan Cole, M.D., FCAP, Board Certified Anatomic/Clinical Pathologist, Mayo Clinic Trained

  • Dr. Emily Erbelding, an infectious disease expert at NIAID — which is part of the National Institutes of Health — said the typical vaccine takes between eight and 10 years to develop. While she is careful not to contradict her boss’s timeline — although she did say “18 months would be about as fast as I think we can go” — she acknowledged that the accelerated pace will involve “not looking at all the data.”

  • “Remember: You’re giving this vaccine, likely, to healthy people — who are not the people typically who are dying from this infection,” he said. “So you better make sure that you are holding it to a high standard of safety.” -Paul Offit https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/us/coronavirus-vaccine-timetable-concerns-experts-invs/index.html

  • Dr. Anthony Fauci, in the COVID 19 U.S. Senate hearing on Wednesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci said, quote, “we will be producing vaccine at risk, which means we will be investigating [his word] considerable resources in developing doses, even before we know any given candidate or candidates will work.” He goes on, “I must warn that there is also the possibility of negative consequences, where certain vaccines can actually enhance the negative effect of the infection. The big unknown is efficacy. Will it be present or absent, and how durable will it be?”

Read More