Oak Park OKs Vaccine Ingredient Referendum
Disclosure measure wins two-thirds of voters' approval.
Photos
Oak Park voters were asked if they would like to require those who administer vaccines to provide literature listing a medicine manufacturer's vaccine ingredients.
The referendum's answer was a resounding "yes."
With 43 of 45 precincts reporting, 11, 403 voters approved the ballot question and 5,511 voted against it. Update: the final tallies are available in the chart below the story.
Barbara Mullarkey, an Oak Park resident and member of the Illinois Vaccine Awareness Coalition group that was instrumental in getting the question placed on the ballot, said late Tuesday the referendum approval was a victory for transparency.
"It's all about transparency and full disclosure of ingredients," she said. "It's freedom of information that people want."
Asked about the oppositional comments made on Patch's story last month — which explained the Oak Park Department of Public Health's opposition to the referendum and prompted reaction from commentators who called the measure "unnecessary and potentially harmful" and "scaremongering" — Mullarkey said she simply didn't understand their rationale.
"All we want is information," she said. "How can that be scaremongering?"
| Yes votes | 11,938 (67.36%) |
| No votes | 5,785 (32.64%) |
David Gulbransen
11:13 pm on Tuesday, November 2, 2010
It's scaremongering because of the language that reads, "may contain 3 1/2 times the daily toxic dose of mercury exposure for an 148-pound adult".
If all Ms. Mullarkey wanted was transparency, the referendum could have stopped after requiring that health care providers give patients the package insert. Adding the language about "toxic dose" and "148-pound adult" isn't about transparency, it's about frightening people with a statement that isn't even true.
Bob Calin-Jageman
1:59 pm on Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Agreed, David! This isn't about information, but *mis*information. It's an attempt to mandate doctors to provide a warning that is inaccurate and based on a complete misunderstanding of chemistry. Please check the FDA website to see that Thimerisol-free formulations are available for all vaccines, including the ones erroneously listed in the referendum (http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/safetyavailability/vaccinesafety/ucm096228.htm)
What a shame this passed. And what a shame that none of the print media sources in Oak Park bothered to even alert readers about this referendum, let along fact-check the erroneous claims it makes.
Does anyone know if this 'advisory referendum' carries any legal weight?
Casey Cora
3:34 pm on Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Thanks for the comments. We're working on a follow-up story now.
While I can't say if advisory referenda are binding or not — predictably, there's much legalese to wade through — I can say that Oak Park's public health officials are treating it as non-binding.
Please stay tuned to the site for updates.
Marty Stempniak
3:53 pm on Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Bob,
Wednesday Journal wrote about the referendum a month ago. It's advisory and nonbinding, so, no, it doesn't carry any legal weight.
http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/10-05-2010/Oak_Park_referendum_pushes_for_vaccination_transparency
Bob Calin-Jageman
7:31 pm on Wednesday, November 3, 2010
I stand corrected--thanks for the link. Somehow I hadn't found it in previous searches.
Joan C. Levy
3:56 pm on Saturday, December 18, 2010
Information, any kind is not detrimental unless there is some thing to hide. Barbara has always been for the truth and has never backed down. She is a fighter for action and if more people were like her our world would be in a better place. She has no conflicting investments or financial interest so she is unbiased. She has always fought for the truth to try to help the consumer to be better informed. Bless her…..always…. help her always.