The Highly Protected Right of Choice

This is not legal advice or medical advice, simply just what I have been prompted to learn over the last year.

It’s up to you to do your own research as well on these matters, especially considering “alternative” viewpoints on these topics are suppressed.

Now, isn’t it interesting that there is still public debate that V’s do in fact pose risks, very serious risk. Scientists, truthful ones, and the government know this is the case.

In fact, they are prevalent enough to be included in the CFR of the United States (Code of Federal Regulations). There is a thorough chart showcasing possible adverse reactions and the definitions of such possible events. Those can be briefly seen below.

Several reactions are noted including anaphylaxis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, seizures, encephalopathy and even death. Let’s take just one of these governmentally recognized reactions – anaphylaxis. What does Moderna and the CDC say about this type of reaction?

They write:

“Contraindications to vaccination with Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine include:

— Severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) after a previous dose or to a component of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech)

— Immediate allergic reaction of any severity to a previous dose or known (diagnosed) allergy to a component of the vaccine.

Do not vaccinate people with a contraindication.” (2)

Certainly this type of reaction in people is extremely rare? Well it is definitely not clear on how often this is occurring after vaccines, including the most current one, but we do know that anaphylaxis in general is not only relatively common, it’s on the rise.

“An AAFA study was printed in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (JACI). It found that anaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction, is common in the U.S. It occurs in about one in 50 Americans. Many believe the rate is higher than that. It is probably closer to one in 20.” (3)

If this many people are having allergic reactions to medicine, food and possibly other injectables, maybe that’s cause for pause for some when it comes to injecting some of these substances.

British regulators recommend against vaccination for people who have experienced anaphylaxis due to allergies to food or medicine. However, the US is only recommending against vaccination for people with an allergy to a specific component of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

Keep in mind those with a history of anaphylaxis were EXCLUDED from the initial trials of this injectable treatment.

Also take note that Moderna’s clinical trial states, “Severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, have been reported following administration of the Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine during mass vaccination outside of clinical trials.” (4)

So that brings me to my ultimate thought here. If there is risk for these adverse reactions in this and all V’s, if the government not only documents them but has regulations regarding them, then how is it even a consideration that a school, an employer, an airline, or a business could even discriminate against those who choose to forgo this risk?


Here in the U.S. we have several pretty fundamentally protected rights. One of which is the Civil Rights Act which is outlined in federal law. States also have civil rights outlined.

Another federal act is the ADA. Both of these alone protect those who do not want to partake in these interventions from being discriminated against or denied services from businesses.

In the US Code (federal statute) 42 U.S.C. §2000a (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

Further The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in several areas, including employment, transportation, public accommodations, communications and access to state and local government’ programs and services. (5)

Prohibition of discrimination. No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any private entity who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.” (6)

Note that a “place of public accommodation means any inn, restaurant, eating house, barbershop, public conveyance by air, land, or water, theater, store, other place for the sale of merchandise, or any other place of public accommodation or amusement of which the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges are available to the public.” (7)

Where there is risk, one that has been established repeatedly by the government, there must be no coercion, harassment or force to take a medical intervention that one chooses to forgo.



Share this article

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *