Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where is this bill at in the legislature? Me and my wife are considering NC as one of the states we may want to move to but if this passes that will narrow our list quickly.
SB 346 is at the very early stage and has been referred to the Senate Committee on Healthcare:
Where is this bill at in the legislature? Me and my wife are considering NC as one of the states we may want to move to but if this passes that will narrow our list quickly.
Write the local senators that are proposing the bill and let them know that. I've already done so, and others I know that live here have as well.
We were in the same position as you and we chose this place based on several criteria and vaccine laws were up at the top. But do understand finding a pediatrician here that will see an unvaccinated or not up to date on vaccines child will be quite difficult no matter what the reason (even medical) even if this doesn't pass. Even dentists have turned him away, its ridiculous considering half of the adults in the waiting room aren't up to date either. If you read my previous posts, it took several pediatricians and a referral from a friend to find one that would even see my child. Feel free to PM.
Where is this bill at in the legislature? Me and my wife are considering NC as one of the states we may want to move to but if this passes that will narrow our list quickly.
The two sides in this story are: overwhelming, scientific and medical evidence & opinions.
All "excepted" studies paid for by the people that make the product and the country that pays the claims. But I'm sure they are completely fair and honest without conflict of interest. Its a denial of science to refuse any studies "not" funded by big pharma, but I guess anyone thats not on their billion dollar payroll is a quack and will lose their license soon enough.
All "excepted" studies paid for by the people that make the product and the country that pays the claims. But I'm sure they are completely fair and honest without conflict of interest. Its a denial of science to refuse any studies "not" funded by big pharma, but I guess anyone thats not on their billion dollar payroll is a quack and will lose their license soon enough.
So, are your opinions on medical / pharmaceutical research based on your own experiences working in that field, or based on what you may have read on websites like Natural News?
So, are your opinions on medical / pharmaceutical research based on your own experiences working in that field, or based on what you may have read on websites like Natural News?
The only two countries that allow pharmaceutical advertising are the US and new Zealand. Among the top 10 television advertisers in the US are pharmaceutical companies, Proctor and Gamble ranks number one. You would have to pretty naive to not think that effects what the news and media conveys to the public out of fear of upsetting their biggest advertisers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its a denial of science to refuse any studies "not" funded by big pharma, but I guess anyone thats not on their billion dollar payroll is a quack and will lose their license soon enough.
