Meeting Public Comments

Tonya Lawrence []

As a registered nurse as well as a concerned citizen, I am in support of bill SF 193. Please protect our freedom of choice & rights.

Tiffany DeBow []

SF 193 should not be allowed to make it even out of subcommittee. We are trying to survive a pandemic & rebuild our economy. Now is not the time to let antiscience conspiracy theorists who get their information from grifters on YouTube videos & social media echo chambers weaken our chances. The fewer people who vaccinate, means the more people that this virus can spread through & every time it does it has a chance to mutate. Those mutations could leave the vaccines & treatments we do have useless. We already have more contagious & more deadly mutations (the South Africa & UK variants) in less than a year. If people want to be members of a society & community then they need to do their part to contribute to the well being of that society & community. If you don't want to do that then you should not be afforded the benefits of a society & community. We don't get rewards without responsibility. Vaccines are one of the most important & safest medical advancements out there. The virus is MUCH more dangerous than anything the vaccine can do. The vaccine works by generating the virus' spike protein in our cells. It performs just like the virus, except it can't replicate & run rampant in our bodies. If they are worried about the vaccines, then the better be really worried about the virus. What these people want is to be of the consequences of their choices. None of us get this option in life so they should not either. Lastly, if we look at this from an economic standpoint, employers should 100% have the right to require vaccines for employment. How much does it hurt businesses bottom lines to have employees out sick & unable to produce? They should not have to suffer that because of others choices. Insurance should not have to cover people who refuse to follow medical best practices and then have to pay medical bills that are thousands, maybe even millions of dollars if someone is harmed for life because someone trusted randos on the internet more than their doctor. Your job is to protect the interests of ALL Iowans. This bill does not do that & in fact harms their interests. Small businesses are closing, people are losing jobs & homes, kids are falling behind in school because of this pandemic. And if people have no consequences for refusing vaccines, it will continue. People who got bad information & crazy ideas from the internet should not be able to ride on the coattails of those of us who do our part to protect everyone.

Jeff Cox []

I support this bill I believe it should be up to the individual if they want receive the vaccine. The individual should not be discriminated against based on the limited testing of the experimental vaccine.

Sharon Davis []

I'm struck by the contradictions in this bill, which protects people who refuse to be vaccinated against COVID, measles, meningitis, and other possibly deadly diseases by the same party that wants to exert minutebyminute control over other health care, namely, women's health care.There's an amendment, sponsored by REPUBLICANS ONLY, ""To defend and protect unborn children, we the people of the state of Iowa declare that this Constitution does not recognize, grant or secure a right to abortion or require the public funding of abortion." Just for your information, if a woman delivers a stillborn, Medicaid does not cover any costs attributable to the dead fetus. I know this for a fact. If a delivered fetus does not take a breath, it is not considered a 'child' under Medicaid.SF 193 puts everyone else around a person who refuses COVID vaccination in danger of possibly contracting this deadly disease. Essentially, it exposes everyone around an unvaccinated person to potential danger.Until Iowa's legislative Republicans apply their peculiar rules of health care to EVERY Iowan, and in an equal way, I'm opposed to this bill.Had all Iowans adopted widely reported safety protocols, such as wearing masks, social distancing, washing hands, and other recommendations, Iowa wouldn't have more COVID cases and deaths than Oregon, a state with a million more people in it than Iowa has.People who refuse to wear masks and keep their distance from others in places like grocery stores are a danger to those of us who actually follow the rules.This bill is a baldfaced disgrace.

Rachel Strang []

Vaccination is necessary for ensuring the health of our state. If someone doesn't want to get a vaccine, there are medical exemptions available to them. If anything, the government should make healthcare more accessible and encouraged. Good healthcare (including vaccines) are crucial to supporting Iowa's economy and the health of its citizens. For those of our community who are immunocompromised or suffer from any disease, an unvaccinated community is deadly and dangerous.This bill doesn't protect us, it puts us at risk. The healthcare system would suffer with the enactment of this bill.

Jeremy Whitaker []

As an issue of public safety we need to maintain a high vaccination rate in the state of Iowa. The largest burden of new disease if this law were passed would be on children in the form of whooping cough, rubella, mumps, and other easily preventable diseases. While measles sounds benign, it was responsible for half of all childhood deaths in the prevaccination era and is among the easiest diseases to spread. Mumps, when not fatal, can lead deafness and sterility. Whooping cough (pertussis) is most common among children in the first year of life; the coughing is severe enough to break ribs, with a case fatality rate of 1%.We need the legislature to protect children. Every medical organization opposes this bill. Please reject SF193.

Lori Martin []

Please support SF193 and any and all legislation that ensures medical freedom of choice. Vaccines, especially these experimental biologics currently being used to "combat" Covid19 do carry risks. Iowans have the right to determine our own risks/benefits for any medical procedure. Government need not be involved in a personal medical choice. Employers should have no rights to mandate vaccines for their employees.

Molly Schultz []

Nobody should be forced to get an experimental vaccine! I oppose this vaccine esp. Since covid has a 99.9% recovery rate. I WILL NOT BE TAKEN THIS VACCINE, I WILL NOT NE FORCED TO TAKE THIS VACCINE, I WILL SUE WHOMEVER FORCES THIS! TY

Joshua Carlson []

As an issue of public safety we need to maintain a high vaccination rate in the state of Iowa. The largest burden of new disease if this law were passed would be on children in the form of whooping cough, rubella, mumps, and other easily preventable diseases. While measles sounds benign, it was was responsible for half of all childhood deaths in the prevaccination era and is among the easiest diseases to spread. Mumps, when not fatal, can lead deafness and sterility. Whooping cough (pertussis) is most common among children in the first year of life; the coughing is severe enough to break ribs, with a case fatality rate of 1%.We need the legislature to protect children. Every medical organization opposes this bill. Please reject SF193.

Mike Lawrence []

I echo the following statement, " I am in support of this bill as I believe it is each individuals choice as to which medical treatment or intervention they choose in relation to their personal health, religious, or cultural beliefs. A person should not be discriminated against from a decision that they feel is best for them, especially with experimental vaccines that are still technically in the investigational stage by the FDA. Additionally, these vaccines have had side effects and over 500 related deaths according to the CDC, and that is just within a few months of these injections being given. Until more is known about such vaccines, it is imperative that individuals continue to have a right to make decisions on what they feel is best for them. "

paul stover []

I for one do not want the shots there have been to many people dye from it and I do not want to take a chance on it for me it should be our choice to take it or not I do not like the side affects it has

Josh Peterson []

I support this bill, it should not be a requirement for anyone to get this vaccine.

Lorraine Bjornson []

No we do not need the government to tell us when to get a shot. Leave it like the flu shot. If you want it go get it.

Ashley Lynn []

As a healthcare worker I support SF193! People in opposition to this bill act like they care more about and my family's health more than me. They seem to enjoy controlling and making decisions for everyone around them. Medical decisions that pose a risk, no matter how small, with a liability free product NEED choice. People who hold strong nonreligious beliefs such as veganism & abortion should not be forced to use a religious exemption to opt out of vaccines "required" for work or school. We are all humans and can make our own decisions for our own health without coercian or mandates. Discrimination against vaccination status seems to be the one type of discrimination people are okay with. What we need are nondiscriminatory laws such as this one!

Sarah Stream []

The provision around the SF193 bill concerning adding a philosophical exemption to Iowas vaccine requirements should be removed. This allows for more misinformation surrounding vaccines to be supported, and opens the door for more illness in our state. Vaccines save lives and should be promoted as a part of a healthy state initiative. The immunity they provide to our communities helps to keep those that are most vulnerable from contracting terrible diseases. Please reconsider this bill and keep our state vaccinated.

Jennifer Erwin []

I support SF193. It is absolutely criminal for anyone to mandate what is put into my body. Especially, a vaccine that is experimental and pushed through extremely fast. This is unconstitutional and our rights are being taken away each day. This past year, with all the mandates and restrictions is posing a HUGE problem far worse than any virus!

Mark Sandersfeld [Retired ]

2020 we all witnessed the largest orchestrated hoax by our medical community in the Federal Gov't. They not only missed this Covid out break they are solely responsible for most of the deaths for limiting therapeutics that doctors were allowed to give off schedule to save lives or risk their license. On top of that they mandated illegal lockdowns on fear saying there were no therapeutics to combat the virus. They were 450,000 dead wrong. So now wr are told to trust them with an experimental vaccine that has already over 500 deaths associated with it on the CDC VAERS system. Check the CDC facts. Our health is one of our freedoms. No way will I ever get any vaccine since big pharma has ZERO liability to their producta. Yes you read that correctly. Sine 1996 big pharma has ZERO liability for any of their vaccines. That is an injustice in a free America. So I support this protection from my corrupt Gov't and their bed fellows at Big Pharms

Nathan Boonstra []

As a Des Moines pediatrician, I am disheartened that a bill such as SF193 is being considered. The pandemic has already brought childhood immunization rates to concerning lows, and Iowas healthcare workers are doing all they can to restore them before we experience outbreaks of diseases that we rarely see in the state. Simply put, passing SF193 would be an invitation for diseases like measles, whooping cough, and meningitis to come to our state. Some school children are more vulnerable to preventable diseases than others, and some have conditions that prevent vaccines from working as effectively. They still have the right to attend school in the safest environment possible. Introducing a personal belief school exemption and allowing parents to refuse vaccines for nonmedical reasons not only endangers their own children, but other, more vulnerable children in the school. Similarly, hospital patients should not have to worry about catching these diseases from staff because the government prohibits a hospital from requiring essential vaccines for their workers. Employers, especially those in healthcare, have the responsibility to ensure a safe workplace, and should not be prohibited from requiring wellestablished disease prevention measures like immunizations, when the situation is appropriate. Of course, medical exemptions are available when vaccines are truly contraindicated. But refusing basic public health standards for any other reason is a choice, and choices are not without consequences when they endanger other people and infringe upon their right to safety. If SF193 would pass, it would put students, patients, and everybody at increased risk of dangerous disease.

Peter Wallace [Johnson County Board of Health]

I am a pediatrician and have spent 45 years of my professional life advocating for children's health and wellbeing. I was part of the small group who persuaded our legislature to pass the mandatory schoolentry immunization bill 40 years ago. I also worked two years with Senator Grassley to pass the vaccine protection bill and the Vaccine Injury Compensation Commission of 1986. There are very few things more protective of our children than childhood immunizations, This bill has several elements (most significant the personal exemption which many states having it in their laws have removed it to permit more children to be protected). I cannot urge more fervently to vote against this bill and protect Iowa children. The bill does not. It is dangerous to the health and welfare of all of us.

Mac Dhooge []

I support SF 193. SF 193 supports the rights of an individual to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa."

Jennessa Einwalter []

I support SF 193. SF 193 supports the rights of an individual to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa.

Rosann Sandersfeld []

I support SF 193 and the rights of an individual to make ones own medical decisions. No government can dictate vaccines. Please pass this bill to protect our right to choose to vaccinate or not!

T. Nichols []

Please prevent the creation of medical and employment subclasses/ghettos of people who morally or medically choose to exercise a right to choice over their short and long term health. Don't make iowans choose between employment and their medical freedom.

Heather Derr []

Please protect the rights of individuals to decide what they will or will not have injected into their bodies, and their right to not be discriminated against because of their decision. No person should be denied entry or the right to work based on their vaccine status. No person should be discriminated against for rejecting a vaccine based on religious beliefs, medical conditions, or the violation of conscience. Where there is risk, there must be choice! Please uphold the rights of Iowans and reject discrimination. Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain.

Scott Beckwith []

My name is Scott Beckwith and I live in Ames. I am asking you to support S.F. 193 (or H.F. 330), which would create a conscientious belief vaccine exemption for school children and prohibit vaccine mandates and discrimination, including for employees.The bill allow parents to make the decisions that are best for their children based on their unique situations. Forcing parents to choose medical decisions they do not agree with for their children.I am particularly concerned about upcoming COVID19 restrictions and mandates. Manufactures have been shielded from liability for any harm they may cause. People should not be forced to be injected with a substance that could cause serious side effects, the scope of which will be largely unknown because of how quickly the vaccines have been rushed to market. I urge you to do everything in your power to protect peoples right to choose what medical procedures they should undergo.Thank you for your attention to this comment!Scott Beckwith

Emily Dunbar []

As public health departments across the county are working tirelessly to roll out vaccines, this bill is sending the wrong message. Right now, immnuzation rates are EXTRMEEMLY LOW for children, and majority of adults. We rely on each other to keep all children and our neighbors safe. For example, look at the measles outbreak. That could have been prevented with vaccinations... Immunizations are the greatest public health story. Please stand with science and many Iowans who support vaccinations.

Marti Dvorsky []

I am writing today to register that I am IN FAVOR of SF 193.It is ridiculous that someone would be REQUIRED to submit their body to a vaccine for a virus with a recovery rate of 95+%. The cure should not be worse than the disease! The vaccine has had many side effects and deaths that I'm not willing to subject my body to. Link https://www.openvaers.com/openvaers There are countless doctors, nurses and scientists that are against the new vaccine. It's not safe and we don't know the long term effects of a vaccine that is in a trial period. We have the right to take our chances with the virus as we have been doing for decades. The CDD has reported record low cases of seasonal flu this year. Why? Because C19 IS the flu! https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htmI urge you to approve the SF 193.

Megan Brendeland []

Please support SF193.

Melanie Wellington [University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics]

As the Associate Hospital Epidemiologist for the UI Children's Hospital and a Pediatric Infectious Diseases specialist, I urge the members of the SF 193 Subcommittee to vote against SF193.In order to keep Iowan safe, we need to immunize our citizens.Before our current vaccines were developed, every year over 5 million people in the US suffered from a vaccine preventable disease and over 18,000 people died in the US every year from a vaccine preventable illness.Even though we have highly effective, very safe vaccines, we aren't using them often enough. Every year, I care for children who are hospitalized or who die from vaccine preventable diseases.Vaccination rates in Iowa have been declining for some time now and we are at a critical point. If vaccination rates decrease further, our state will be inundated with outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases. One critical example of this is measles. Measles is over FIVE TIMES AS CONTAGIOUS as COVID. One or two out of every thousand people infected with measles dies. Unfortunately, many children are medically unable to receive the vaccine. The only way to protect these vulnerable children, our elderly, and our communities is to vaccinate as many people as possible. The government should not stand in the way of medical care that serves to protect all Iowans.In order to protect Iowans, we do not need SF193, we need vaccines.

Sky S []

Vaccines save lives. This bill is not supported by those who are educated in the science and benefits of vaccines. It is up to us to learn from the past and ensure that our future is not full of things like polio, tetanus, influenza, chicken pox, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, rubella, Hib, measles, whooping cough, pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, mumps and diphtheria. Many of these are known as some weird disease from long ago, that's all thanks to vaccines. If there is anything we have learned from this pandemic, it's that vaccines are essential.VACCINE MYTHS DEBUNKEDU.S. public health officials and physicians have been combating misconceptions about vaccine safety for over twenty years. They've had mixed success. Despite the fact that numerous studies have found no evidence to support the notion that vaccines cause autism and other chronic illnesses, a growing number of parents are refusing to vaccinate their children.Researchers now link falling immunization rates to recent resurgences of vaccinepreventable diseases. In 2010, California saw 9,120 cases of whooping cough, more than any year since the whooping cough vaccine was introduced in the 1940s. Ten infants too young to be vaccinated died of whooping cough during the outbreak. The CDC warns that events like these will become more frequent and harder to control if vaccination rates continue to fall.Fears over the safety of vaccines are understandable. The CDC vaccination schedule calls for children to receive up to 14 inoculations by the age of six many of them vaccines developed within the last twenty years. Many parents distrust these vaccines; worried about the potential for risks and longterm side effects. Research, however, shows that most of our biggest fears about vaccinations are unfounded. These eight major vaccine myths that research has shown to be baseless:Myth #1: Vaccines cause autism.The widespread fear that vaccines increase risk of autism originated with a 1997 study published by Andrew Wakefield, a British surgeon. The article was published in The Lancet, a prestigious medical journal, suggesting that the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine was increasing autism in British children.The paper has since been completely discredited due to serious procedural errors, undisclosed financial conflicts of interest, and ethical violations. Andrew Wakefield lost his medical license and the paper was retracted from The Lancet.Nonetheless, the hypothesis was taken seriously, and several other major studies were conducted. None of them found a link between any vaccine and the likelihood of developing autism.Featured Online MPH ProgramsInterested in a career in public health? Take the first step and learn more about online MPH programs today.ADWalden UniversityWalden UniversityPROGRAM: MASTER OF PUBLIC HEALTH (MPH)Walden University's CEPHaccredited online Master of Public Health (MPH) program includes foundation courses that provide a global perspective on rapidly changing public health issues and breakthroughs.VISIT SITEGeorge Washington UniversityGeorge Washington UniversityPROGRAM: MPH MASTER'S IN PUBLIC HEALTHGW's top12 public health school is offering a $10k scholarship for all admitted students. With no GRE required, this CEPHaccredited program can be completed online in as few as 12 months. Join our community of policy shapers and advocates.VISIT SITEToday, the true causes of autism remain a mystery, but to the discredit of the autismvaccination link theory, several studies have now identified symptoms of autism in children well before they receive the MMR vaccine. And even more recent research provides evidence that autism develops in utero, well before a baby is born or receives vaccinations.Myth #2: Infant immune systems can't handle so many vaccines.Infant immune systems are stronger than you might think. Based on the number of antibodies present in the blood, a baby would theoretically have the ability to respond to around 10,000 vaccines at one time. Even if all 14 scheduled vaccines were given at once, it would only use up slightly more than 0.1% of a baby's immune capacity. And scientists believe this capacity is purely theoretical. The immune system could never truly be overwhelmed because the cells in the system are constantly being replenished. In reality, babies are exposed to countless bacteria and viruses every day, and immunizations are negligible in comparison.Though there are more vaccinations than ever before, today's vaccines are far more efficient. Small children are actually exposed to fewer immunologic components overall than children in past decades.Myth #3: Natural immunity is better than vaccineacquired immunity.In some cases, natural immunity meaning actually catching a disease and getting sick results in a stronger immunity to the disease than a vaccination. However, the dangers of this approach far outweigh the relative benefits. If you wanted to gain immunity to measles, for example, by contracting the disease, you would face a 1 in 500 chance of death from your symptoms. In contrast, the number of people who have had severe allergic reactions from an MMR vaccine, is less than oneinone million.Myth #4: Vaccines contain unsafe toxins.People have concerns over the use of formaldehyde, mercury or aluminum in vaccines. It's true that these chemicals are toxic to the human body in certain levels, but only trace amounts of these chemicals are used in FDA approved vaccines. In fact, according to the FDA and the CDC, formaldehyde is produced at higher rates by our own metabolic systems and there is no scientific evidence that the low levels of this chemical, mercury or aluminum in vaccines can be harmful. See section III of this guide to review safety information about these chemicals and how they are used in vaccines.Myth #5: Better hygiene and sanitation are actually responsible for decreased infections, not vaccines.Vaccines don't deserve all the credit for reducing or eliminating rates of infectious disease. Better sanitation, nutrition, and the development of antibiotics helped a lot too. But when these factors are isolated and rates of infectious disease are scrutinized, the role of vaccines cannot be denied.One example is measles in the United States. When the first measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, rates of infection had been holding steady at around 400,000 cases a year. And while hygienic habits and sanitation didn't change much over the following decade, the rate of measles infections dropped precipitously following the introduction of the vaccine, with only around 25,000 cases by 1970. Another example is Hib disease. According to CDC data, the incidence rate for this malady plummeted from 20,000 in 1990 to around 1,500 in 1993, following the introduction of the vaccine.Myth #6: Vaccines aren't worth the risk.Despite parent concerns, children have been successfully vaccinated for decades. In fact, there has never been a single credible study linking vaccines to long term health conditions.As for immediate danger from vaccines, in the form of allergic reactions or severe side effects, the incidence of death are so rare they can't even truly be calculated. For example, only one death was reported to the CDC between 1990 and 1992 that was attributable to a vaccine. The overall incidence rate of severe allergic reaction to vaccines is usually placed around one case for every one or two million injections.Myth #7: Vaccines can infect my child with the disease it's trying to prevent.Vaccines can cause mild symptoms resembling those of the disease they are protecting against. A common misconception is that these symptoms signal infection. In fact, in the small percentage (less than 1 in one million cases) where symptoms do occur, the vaccine recipients are experiencing a body's immune response to the vaccine, not the disease itself. There is only one recorded instance in which a vaccine was shown to cause disease. This was the Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) which is no longer used in the U.S. Since then, vaccines have been in safe use for decades and follow strict Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations.Myth #8: We don't need to vaccinate because infection rates are already so low in the United States.Thanks to "herd immunity," so long as a large majority of people are immunized in any population, even the unimmunized minority will be protected. With so many people resistant, an infectious disease will never get a chance to establish itself and spread. This is important because there will always be a portion of the population infants, pregnant women, elderly, and those with weakened immune systems that can't receive vaccines.But if too many people don't vaccinate themselves or their children, they contribute to a collective danger, opening up opportunities for viruses and bacteria to establish themselves and spread.Not to mention, as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) warn, international travel is growing quickly, so even if a disease is not a threat in your country, it may be common elsewhere. If someone were to carry in a disease from abroad, an unvaccinated individual will be at far greater risk of getting sick if he or she is exposed.Vaccines are one of the great pillars of modern medicine. Life used to be especially brutal for children before vaccines, with huge portions being felled by diseases like measles, smallpox, whooping cough, or rubella, to name just a few. Today these ailments can be completely prevented with a simple injection.So as science continues to advance and tackle new challenges, people should not forget how many deaths and illnesses vaccines have prevented, and how they continue to protect us from potentially devastating forms of infectious disease.https://www.publichealth.org/publicawareness/understandingvaccines/vaccinemythsdebunked/

Katie Struckman []

Please support SF 193. This is important legislation needed to protect our liberties and freedom.

Damian Krysan []

Vaccinations are the most important and cost effective health care developments of our age. They help us protect each other in the same way that traffic signals help us to prevent traffic accidents. No one is philosophically exempt from stopping at red lights.

Stacy Karam []

SF 193 seems rooted in logic. Of course, citizens must have choices regarding their own bodies and health care decisions must be left up to the individual. Citizens should not fear losing their employment over a health care decision, nor should citizens be asked to reveal personal health information to their employers.

Sharon Guthrie [Iowa School Nurse Organization & Mount Mercy University]

SF193 is not in the best interest of Iowans for several reasons. If care providers are not required to be immunized against preventable illnesses = the care providers jeopardize the health of patients just think if healthcare providers created outbreaks of COVID, measles, or pertussis. Schools require immunizations to prevent illnesses that are preventable. Schools provide free and appropriate public education (FAPE) for all students. If a student is immunocompromised due to cancer (something the parents or student opt to get) and more and more students come to school without immunizations, the immunocompromised student is at greater risk. There are already a processes (religious and medical exemption) for the parents that opt to not immunize their children. Look at the number of lobbyists for this legislation versus all others who registered for SF193. The voice of those against far out weighs those in favor of this bill. Healthcare providers are expected to practice with science based/evidence based practices. Public policy should also require the use of science based/evidence based practices. Please do not put the health of Iowans in jeopardy. Please vote against SF193.

Ellie Washington []

I am in support of this bill. Everyone should have the right to choose their medical decisions. If they want to get some vaccines but skip others they should have they choice! Informed consent is where it's at. I really hope y'all read these comments with an open heart.

Andrew Bates []

I think it is in everyones best interest to let people make their own choices about what goes into their bodies. Please do not mandate either option.

Emily Cole []

I believe we should have a choice to put a vaccine in our body or not. I support this bill.

Nancy Hines [St. Ambrose University]

Good Morning,I am a member of the health care profession for 45 years. Please understand that medical exemptions are in place specifically for individuals medically unable to receive a vaccination (i.e., allergies, immunocompromised condition). Those individuals rely on high community vaccination rates to protect them from infectious disease.Nonmedical exemptions put individuals and communities at risk, particularly vulnerable children and adults. It is because of our long history of safe and effective vaccines that we don't have polio or smallpox and it's vital to preserve this service to prevent the resurgence of measles, mumps, and other childhood diseases that can result in disability or death. Thank you for your consideration.Respectfully,Nancy Hines, MS, BSN, RN Director, Health Services St. Ambrose University

Susan Hyland []

I oppose SF 193. I am an Iowan who recognizes the need for vaccines and immunizations to protect us from diseases that can cause illness, disabilities and death to our citizens. I am concerned for my grandchildren if immunizations are not required. The science supports these practices and the current pandemic shows the need for good public policy that is supported by SCIENCE.

Karl Jaeger []

Oppose this bill.This is a critical public health issue. Freedom of the individual does not include freedom to put others at risk. The choice to not wear masks nor social distance nor follow recommended public health measures in Iowa has led to appalling and embarrassing CoVID results (all info from Feb 5):IA Cases: 323,936 (101 cases per 1,000 residents)IA Deaths: 5,108 (1.6 deaths per 1,000 residents)IA % of population that has tested positive: 10.2%IA Population: 3.2 millionCompare that to South Korea, one of the first countries hit by CoVID:SK Cases: 80,524 (1.6 cases per 1,000 residents)SK Deaths: 1,464 (0.03 deaths per 1,000 residents)SK % population positive: 0.16%SK Population: 51.6 millionCompared to Canada:CAN Cases: 797,756 (20.9 cases per 1,000 residents)CAN Deaths: 20,609 (0.5 deaths per 1,000 residents)CAN % population positive: 2.1%CAN Population: 38.2 million

Julie Hyland []

And so it goes... I leave my comment to let you know, it's: MY BODY MY CHOICEAgainst my religious doctrine to have human tissue consumed (injected) into my body.If the FDA can force food companies to follow strict regulations/guidelines for the items it's population will consume, shouldn't the vaccine companies be held to at least the same standards and be held liable if they botch the job???

Chris and Shanon Epley []

We support

Christine Huff []

I support this bill. It is not the government's decision as to what vaccines or any medical interventions are necessary or required. ALL vaccines carry risk and SHOULD NOT be reuired.

Julie Powell-Mohr []

I have chosen to get vaccinatedfor youfor the healthcare professionals who have been overwhelmed with caring for those who have contracted Covid19, for the elderly who are most vulnerable, for every single one of you who supports this bill, for those who have had businesses close, for our children and all those who are impacted with every new case. Masks and social distancing and being vaccinated are the least I can do for you. For me, living in community is a gift, and with that gift comes a responsibility to care for all of you. You can already refuse to be vaccinated. But those of you who choose that are relying on high community vaccination rates to protect you. Imagine the very real results if there had been no research, no development of vaccines or no one willing to be vaccinated. Yes, there are risks, but the greatest risk is fear; and I refuse to be ruled by fear. Thats the ultimate freedom. You matter to methe health of all of you.

Natalie Gravel []

I FULLY support SF 193! The government does not have a say of what goes into our bodies and cannot mandate it! Living in America we have a full free opinion on what we choose to put in our bodies...especially when it is not FDA approved yet!!

Melissa Kuefler []

Please support SF193. We should all have the right to choose if we want a vaccine injected into our bodies. Everyone should have the right to work without being forced to take a vaccine, especially one that is still experimental.

Connie Christy []

I have Rheumatoid Arthritis so I have an autoimmune system. Some would say then I need the flu shots. No, the three times I've had it I got sick. It is not up to the government to tell me I HAVE to have the Covid vaccine. It is my choice and I WILL NOT take the shot because I'm concerned of the side affects for me because of the affects other vaccines have had on me. Will the government be liable if I die if they make me take the shot? Of course they won't. Your liable if such a thing happens.

Danielle ten Hoeve []

I support this bill SF193"My body, my choice" should also be applied in this case

Stephanie Weaver [$comment.company]

I support SF 193. SF 193 supports the rights of an individual to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa.

Samantha Anderson []

I SUPPORT THIS BILL!!!!!!

Margaret Nixon []

I would also add to my comments above that the bill include language prohibiting employers to punitive measures if an employee does not vaccinate. Such as continued mask wearing, excessive isolation or restrictions of any kind.

Amy M []

I fully support SF 193. It is our right to consent or not.

Teri Schloss [Mother, Registered Nurse, and Public Health Advocate]

As a nurse and more importantly as a mother, I am strongly opposed to SF193 and ask that you DO NOT advance this bill. This is not about the Covid19 vaccine. This is about all vaccines. This bill will not protect Iowans, but rather contribute to vaccine hesitancy and decreasing immunization rates that will put our communities at risk for diseases such as pertussis, mumps, and chicken pox. Disease outbreaks cause dire consequences for our economy as well. To maintain herd immunity for vaccine preventable diseases, we need immunization rates to stay high. This bill will erode Iowas immunization rates leaving vulnerable adults and children at risk. As a school nurse, I have seen Iowas immunization rates get lower and religious exemptions increase every year. Adding a philosophical exemption would further lower these rates. I have watched children suffer with pertussis and chicken pox. I have watched my grandfather nearly die from tetanus. Vaccines are one of the greatest public health achievements of our time. As a healthcare worker, it is my job to protect my patients and my community One of the ways that I do this is to stay vaccinated. This is not the time to create further vaccine hesitancy which is not based on science but rather based on fear. This bill is harmful to Iowans and should not be allowed to advance. The number of medical groups that do not support this bill far outweighs the one group that does. Do what is right for the good of all Iowans, not just a select few.

Kim Rasler []

I support SF193. Along with many others, I believe that individuals should have the right to informed consent, and not be coerced by government entities, unelected officials, or businesses. There are too many nuances to personal health that are between an individual and their health care provider. As an advocate for scientific and data driven decisions, this past year has been less than that; it has shown us that uniformed or misinformed government or business decisions can occur, leaving citizens fighting for their basic rights for a virus, SARSCOV2, that has a 99.5% recovery rate (per CDCs data). In addition, the COVID19 vaccines being promoted, aka mRNA injections, are not FDA approved, and are only authorized for emergency use. The COVID19 vaccines make no claim of providing immunity nor do they inhibit the transmissibility of the disease. They are only designed to lessen symptoms if and when you get infected and this is from an illness that a person already has a 99.5% chance of recovery, and that percentage doesnt take into account the prescribed medications that can reduce or eliminate symptoms and assist with the recovery. Weve already seen discrimination and liberties violated due to requirements against this low infection fatality rate illness; whats around the corner if we dont provide legal guidelines now?In the short time that the COVID19 injections have occurred, as of February 5, 2021, 12,697 adverse reactions to the injections have been reported to VAERS with 653 of those as deaths along with 2792 urgent care visits. Although VAERS is an important tool in understanding vaccine adverse reactions, only a small percent of reactions are reported. If Iowas Director of Public Health, as recent as January, can promote incentivizing this type of experimental vaccinations to individuals hesitant to participate, what is to stop my employer, insurer, or medical provider, from also doing so? What incentive will they offer? Take it to keep my job, be insured, or receive medical care? Glimpses of this are already occurring.The natural immune system response that creates herd immunity for viral infections and often times to their viral counterparts, is being twisted to shame and pressure people into vaccinations when data has not shown that vaccinations have made a significant impact on herd immunity. In the 1980s, the CDC recommended about 24 vaccine doses up until age 18, but now the CDCs schedule contains 69 vaccines for birth to 18 years with almost half given before age 1, and still outbreaks occur in these vaccinated children. Are we seeing public health being impacted negatively by vaccines with autism, autoimmune reactions, and other diseases increasing? On the flip side, the positive impact weve seen with vaccines is the billions of dollars that are to be made in pharmaceuticals and the medical field from manufacturing to distribution, all at the expense of the citizen, financially and healthwise.Also, its hard to believe, with all the data we have, that there is a push for children to have an experimental vaccine injected into them. It has been proven children do not transmit this illness and close to 100% (99.997%) of them recover or do not show any symptoms at all. My heart is also broken for our senior citizens gripped by fear of COVID19 and anxious for the experimental injection, even if they had already recovered from COVID19, because all they had for information was from the mainstream media. Most have no idea about the high rate of recovery, the available medicines to assist with recovery, or understand that the mRNA injection will not protect them from getting COVID19. Both issues regarding the young and old are heartbreaking. We need to be allowed to be medically informed, not only media informed.Thank you for drafting this bill. I am also someone who advocates for smaller and smarter government, so for me to advocate for legislation, it is a big deal, and this one is worth it. This past year has shown it has become apparent that citizens need to be protected from many forms of discrimination and that health related choices should be between an individual and their health care provider, not government or unelected officials. This bill is not against vaccinations, but provides citizens the ability to make informed decisions without fear of coercion or discrimination. When vaccinations are proven to work, there should be no need for forcing their implementation or holding lives and livelihoods hostage until they comply.

Lisa Turner []

I support S.F. 193 and the rights of individuals to make their own medical decision. Our Liberties we Prize and our Rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing the liberties of the citizens of Iowa.

Michael Murphy []

Given that an experimental therapy that is not fully tested or approved is being given to millions of people, I think it is important to strength individual protections as much as possible. This bill will be a big step in doing so. Please support it.

Amy Kimball []

As a rural pediatrician, I urge you to oppose SF193 and am saddened that this is even being considered. Vaccines are an incredible public health accomplishment and essential to the health of all Iowans. Passing SF193 would be an invitation for outbreaks from vaccine preventable diseases like meningitis, whooping cough, and measles to impact Iowans. Underlying immune disorders and childhood diseases like cancer make some children more vulnerable to vaccine preventable illnesses. This should not take away their ability to safely attend school or seek treatment at a clinic or hospital if vaccines are no longer required for school entry or for health care providers. Allowing an exemption for nonmedical refusal of vaccines endangers the safety of all children. As a health care provider, I have a responsibility to provide a safe environment for my patients to seek care. If staff at my clinic and hospital are not vaccinated against vaccine preventable diseases, the safety of our patients (young and old) is compromised. Vaccines are studied with more scrutiny than any other medications and held to a higher standard of evidence. Vaccines are a well established public health measure and disease prevention tool. Individual choice should not compromise public health and safety. The consequences of passing SF193 for our State and citizens would mean increased exposure and an overwhelming medical burden of diseases. As an individual who lost family members to measles and had others permanently impacted by polio, I urge you to oppose SF193.

Sarah Masengarb []

Good afternoon,I am writing to let my voice be heard that I am fully in support of SF 193. Sars Cov2 has a roughly 99.97% survival rate, for those over 75 it drops to around 95%. It is ridiculous and completely criminal to require citizens to be inoculated with a new gene therapy, especially if it's against their will. I encourage you to listen to your hearts and choose in good conscience to support SF 193.Thank you for your time and consideration,Sarah Masengarb

Frank Chirico []

I am in 100% favor of bill SF193. Anything I put into my body is my choice, and should not be the choice of anyone else including government, employment, social, or otherwise. My healthcare regarding anything that goes into and on my body is my choice. I do not, not will not consent to vaccines, especially the COVID19 experimental vaccine. Not shall the government, employer, or otherwise request I do so, or be tracked, contact traced, or monitored in any way. Please support freedom, and support this bill.

Mallory Johnson []

I believe this bill is important for the adults and children of Iowa! It is no one else's job to tell us when and what to put into our bodies! We can make decisions of our own without government interference, and no one should be discriminated against for said decisions! Where there is RISK, there must be a choice!!

Jeneane Moody []

Opposed to SF 193Many times over the years I have provided testimony in subcommittee hearings and via email to members of the Iowa legislature urging support for the evidencebased practice of immunizations. I often referenced my belief that we collectively had the privilege of generational amnesia; in other words many of us do not remember the days when ours or our children's lives were threatened by vaccinepreventable diseases. I believed that if we ever had to face the harsh realities of generations before us (i.e., deal with a lifealtering communicable disease for which we had no immunization), then surely the public opinion that opposed immunizations and the public health authority to require them would shift out of appreciation that we had such tools in our toolkit. However, here we are in 2021 with an overwhelmed, underresourced, fragmented public health infrastructure struggling to get much desired and needed shots in the arms of Iowans while simultaneously contending with a bill that would further cut short our capacity to prevent disease in our communities. As Iowa works to recover from this pandemic, we can ill afford the shared burden of increased prevalence of vaccinepreventable communicable diseases inevitably coming our way if SF 193 advances. I have no appetite for othering or belittling people who have concerns about immunizations. I oppose labels like 'antivaxxers' because they are delegitimizing. I believe that every Iowa parent wants what is best for their families, and if people have fear or concerns about immunizations, then it is our professional responsibility to listen and discuss those issues. However, I also know that we practice public health in that shared commons of society where the rights of individuals intersect. We must constantly negotiate that space and balance the health of the public with individual liberties. As public health practitioners, we have the professional and ethical responsibility to apply our best evidencebased tools. Public policy that requires immunization as an ethic of caring for and protecting the health of ourselves and our neighbors is one of the most effective tools we have.I respectfully request that the subcommittee not advance this bill.

Maurine Davis []

As a mother and concerned citizen, I fully support this bill. This bill is not a debate about vaccines, it's about bodily autonomy. Giving employers or the government the power to disrupt your livelihood by forcing and coercing you to submit to putting an untested substance into your body sets an extremely dangerous precedent. This bill does not stop anyone from getting any or all vaccines if they so choose, it simply doesn't force those that don't want them. The choice to not vaccinate does not affect those that are vaccinated. If someone is vaccinated, they're protected. If there is concern over giving more choice to individuals, thus leading to lower vaccination rates, then that is an issue with the vaccine, not the people that choose not to take them. A scientifically based full proof product should not need to be forced or coerced onto people. Further, it should not be immune from liability by the manufacturer, but it is, and they are. Please protect Iowans against corruption, coercion and experimental substances by supporting this bill. Thank you.

Amanda McFarland []

I support this bill. We should not be mandated to take any medical treatments we do not choose to take. This vaccine has not been tested to see what the longterm effects may be.

Coreena Kinney []

It is very important to me and my extended family that Iowa protect our 1st Amendment right to religious freedoms and our Godgiven right to bodily automony. No medical treatment should ever be mandated, especially not one that is liabilityfree, as all childhood vaccines and any emergencyuse vaccines are. Even those that manufacturers can be liable for (like the shingles vaccine), should not be mandated. "Mandated" does not just mean that a law is passed requiring it. Allowing any sort of restriction or discrimination based on vaccination status has the same effect as a mandate. That is why I support all parts of SF193. Thank you for your time and attention.Coreena Kinney

Tanya Humphrey []

I support this bill! I know my body and health better then the government, so I should be able to choose which vaccines (if any) is in the best interest for myself.

Julie Powell-Mohr []

I have chosen to get vaccinated for you,for the healthcare professionals who have been overwhelmed with caring for those who have contracted Covid19, for the elderly who are most vulnerable, for every single one of you who supports this bill, for those who have had businesses close, for our children and all those who are impacted with every new case. Masks and social distancing and being vaccinated are the least I can do for you. For me, living in community is a gift, and with that gift comes a responsibility to care for all of you. You can already refuse to be vaccinated. But those of you who choose that are relying on high community vaccination rates to protect you. Imagine the very real results if there had been no research, no development of vaccines or no one willing to be vaccinated. Yes, there are risks, but the greatest risk is fear; and we can refuse to be ruled by fear. That is the ultimate freedom.

Vivian LeHew [Retired]

It seems the majority of folks supporting this bill argue they have the right to choose what they put in their bodies or have done to them. Absolutely! As we all know actions have consequences! The food we eat, the substances we ingest may help us, harm us, or have no impact. I may choose to get a vaccine and be prevented from acquiring a fatal infectious disease, even if I suffer from a sore arm afterward. I may choose to be a beekeeper yet discover I am allergic to bee stings, so I have to keep an epi pen handy at all times. I may choose to try a medication my health care provider prescribes for me, and then develop an adverse reaction. Life is not simple, nor is it black and white. This bill would reverse decades of public health success eradicating fatal infectious diseases, all for the argument that it is my body, my right. Legislators are tasked with shaping laws that are meant for the common good. At times, they must weigh the balance between individual rights and necessary restrictions. This is one of those bills that would have far graver consequences for the health of our communities than the inconvenience of restricting individual rights. Many of those opposing this bill have provided strong arguments about this. I also urge you to oppose SF193.

Candace Chihak [Nursing/INA]

The pandemic has made it very clear how important immunization to vaccine preventable disease is to society. There are currently religious and medical vaccinations that allow freedoms to individual. However, the health of the community as a whole needs to be considered. There are many individuals who cannot be vaccinated for health reasons, these individuals are at great risk for complications from these vaccine preventable diseases. The vaccines are very safe, have been thoroughly tested and provide safety for the health of the whole community.

George Ensley []

Science saves lives ... ignorance and sciencedenying kills people.For people who claim "freedom", this bill ONLY opens up the FREEDOM TO DIE.Just as seatbelts have saved MANY thousands of lives, sometimes against the will of those wearing them, it has a far greater positive effect on our families and society as a whole.Vaccinations made polio a thing of the past. With a bill like this polio would still be a thing of the present. Time to quit being "Iowa Stupid".

Dani Collins []

I absolutely do NOT support this bill. Employers SHOULD have the right to deny or terminate employment for people who are eligible for and medically able to receive the Covid19 vaccine but refuse to get it. Healthcare and long term care facilities, schools and daycares, in particular, must be allowed to require vaccines in order to protect the vulnerable populations they care for, to stop mass community spread, and to allow life to go back to normal. It is the only way we can ensure that our elderly and young loved ones are protected. Right now, because of the incredibly slow vaccine rollout in thus state, I am responsible for working from home, caring for a toddler. (pulled from preschool because it isnt safe without a vaccine), protecting my mother who is immunocompromised from Stage IV cancer by going nowhere, and caring for my extremely elderly grandparents (pulled from their long term care facility because of Covid19 outbreaks brought in by STAFF). The burden is immense, but could easily be relieved if we knew my grandparents would not be at risk in their long term care facility because all staff members were inoculated. If we knew my son, too young to be vaccinated himself yet, was unlikely to bring Covid19 home to my immunocompromised mother because all staff members at his preschool were vaccinated. Without these guarantees you are asking countless families like ours, generations of Iowans, to bear undue risk. And risking what is lost precious, their lives. Schools should be allowed to require the vaccine both in employees and students. It is typical for businesses and institutions such as these to require other vaccines and Covid19 should be no different. There is a large and ever growing body of evidence showing the vaccine to be both extremely safe and extremely effective. If businesses and institutions whose job it is to care for others cannot ensure that their staff is vaccinated, then we are no better off than we were before the vaccine.

Deanna Buchanan []

It is not the governments job to dictate what I can and cant do to my body. This is communism and tyranny. I have God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Governments can be bought, paid off, for the purpose of population control. With this, the peoples best interest is not at the heart of their decision making. It is God who has the authority to give and take life. Not government. I should be allowed to make informed decisions and to care for myself and my family as I see best. My decisions would be out of loving care. Not based on whatever whim and agenda people will come up with next. That vaccines are even being considered to be forced on the population is unconstitutional and unamerican. It certainly isnt for the sake of the people. Look at the people whos the dying and who have gross movement disorders just in the last few weeks from this vaccine. And thats just the first dose. There is an evil agenda behind this. Civid 1 vaccine didnt pass inspection because animals were dying at that phase of the study. They had to stop it and wouldnt administer it to humans. This has been pushed through without animal studies which means people will die. Its just the nature of this type of vaccine. It can cause autoimmune issues, neurological issues, infertility and so on. These types of vaccines have been studied by excellent doctors. Also. It is a fact that this isnt even a vaccine. No live Covid cells. No dead Covid cells This is an experiment on the human race. It is a choice and you should make sure that all the information from both sides of the fence is available so that people can make a well educated decision. You are not going to gamble with my life. And you shouldnt with anyones elses. Go to Americas Frontline doctors and search Simone Gold. She graduated from Harvard law and Stanford at the top of her class. Yes. She is a lawyer and a doctor. And well respected. She documents and sources everything. Listen to her warning. She is backed by thousands of drs all over the US.

Aubrey Kruse []

It is not to be in the interest of the government or any business, or clinic or hospital, nor insurance, to have say whether a person needs to have been vaccinated to obtain a job or keep a job, or thrive in this state. It is our civil right to chose what is put in our bodys.

Shannon Schlichte []

It is not the governments job to dictate or be in control of my own health. That responsibility lies within the individual. We are at a very crucial point right now with everything going on that if we dont start standing up we will slowly lose more and more rights and ability to choose. The government should be protecting our rights not limiting them.

Keith L []

SUPPORT SF 193 Please vote yes to pass this bill which supports the right of individuals to make their our own medical decisions. According to Article 1, Section 6(3) of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights, "... In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual's informed consent."Personal autonomy and responsibility needs to be respected as ultimately, each individual is accountable to his or her actions. This bill is a step in the right direction, especially when we consider liability free industry, and rushed experimental injections.

Sara Cohen []

Hello,I strongly support this Bill because the greatest freedom we have is governance over our own bodies and the freedom to make medical choices for ourselves and our families after weighing the risk vs benefit for each pharmaceutical product and medical procedure. I was recently kicked out of my pediatrician's practice last year for declining vaccination even though I had been taking my daughter there since birth for 10 years and was grandfathered in 3 years prior when they stopped accepting new patients who either didn't vaccinate or preferred to delay and space them out. I feel that denying care to a patient because they refuse a product which may be harmful to them goes against the hippocratic oath as well as Human Rights Laws. I feel that vaccination should be a personal choice and no person should be forced or coerced into taking a pharamceutical or biologic against their will. I feel that every single person should enjoy their freedoms and not be treated as a second class citizen for making personal medical choices for themselves or their families. Please, do the right thing and support this Bill.Thank you.

Glenda Huusman []

I am IN FAVOR OF SF 193. Please protect OUR rights!

Anne Haring []

I support SF 193 and the rights of an individual to make ones own medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. Vaccination status is an individuals private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa.

Chris Haring []

I support SF 193. SF 193 supports the rights of an individual to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa.

Melanie Froyen []

SUPPORT SF 193. Full bodily autonomy is the most precious right we have. We shouldn't be coerced to make certain health decisions in order to keep our jobs, go to school, or participate in society. Iowans deserve to make their own decisions related to their health, vaccines, and immunizations.

Kinda Ford []

I support Sf 193 Where there is risk, there must be choice. Iowans should be free to base their decision off of their own risk benefit analysis.Any product that is liability free should be left to individual choice.Personal liberties matter most during times of emergency, including religious. Some vaccinations are created with aborted fetal cell lines.

Laurie Mohr []

It is not the right of the government to force the vaccination on the American people. Theyre are too many unanswered questions and concerns as to why the front line doctors were censored by big tech. I have seen the results of some of the side effects.

Laura Norcross []

. I support SF 193. SF 193 supports the rights of an individual to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa."

Lindy Ilg []

I SUPPORT SF 193. It is not for employers or ANYONE to require what biological agents I put into my body as a term of employment or any business or government dealings. Please protect my RIGHTS as a free individual in the state of Iowa! Thank you!

Nancy Lincoln []

I support SF 193. SF 193 supports the rights of an individual to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa."Thanks.

Jaime Griffis []

I am in SUPPORT of SF 193. There are several sections and each is as equally as important as the next. Iowa citizens deserve medical privacy, along with medical autonomy! Making medical decisions should not be limited to one section or sector of people. And, the people should not be fearful that their medical decision will hinder their career, education, or other avenues of their lives.

Justin Block []

I support SF 193. SF 193 supports the rights of an individual to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa.

Nancy Witt []

I SUPPORT SF 193. A person's decision to be vaccinated is a private matter in a free society. I support the right to keep that status private and not be used as a qualification for employment or any business or government dealings. I trust you will prioritize this right in the state of Iowa! "

Susan Keegan []

I support SF193. The rights of individuals to make their own personal medical decisions without fear of discrimination. The vaccine industry is not liable for injuries that may be caused by their products. Where there is risk there must be choice. A person's vaccination status is their private information and not a matter of public record. Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain. Thank you for prioritizing our rights in the state of Iowa.

Kimberly Pinegar []

It is more critical than ever that individuals are allowed to make medical decisions for themselves based on their own health history, risk factors and personal beliefs. To think there is a "one size fits all" medicine, vaccine, or treatment plan for any number of illnesses is dangerous and quite frankly, arrogant. Each Division of this bill is vital to protecting every Iowan's Constitutional rights regarding their privacy and health, without being discriminated against.

Brian Bailey []

A perpetual emergency is NO emergency at all. The governors emergency powers must be addressed. This curtailment of liberties is unprecedented and CANNOT be allowed to stand. Real time data has proven this virus to be nothing of what it was reported to be at the beginning. This all should have ended after the two weeks fiasco last spring. Fix this... NOW!

Lindsay Maher []

Support! We shouldnt even need this bill as we live in the land of the free where we protect our unalienable rights given to us from our creator by a representative government. But here we are. Our government and its unelected agencies have gotten out of control with their power. It is time to allow people to make their own decisions. We are in the Information Age, if the information would be allowed to be shared with we the people then they can make their own decisions as to what is best for their own bodies and circumstances. We do not need businesses or schools being forced to take on the roll of public health police. We are tired of the discrimination and medical negligence happening when patients are dismissed from a clinic due to their unwillingness to comply with EVERY immunization on the CDC schedule. We value our right to privacy and our decisions should remain between a parent/child and their doctor, not the school, not the public places they visit, not their employer, not their drivers license, and not in an online registry tracked by the department of public health unless consent is expressly given.

Amanda Drost []

I support SF 193! No government entity, nor business, nor public health official should have any say in medical procedures. We value our right to privacy and these decisions need to remain between the individual and their care provider. My health is my responsibility and it should not be dictated by any business or government entity.

Kerry Crouch []

RIGHT TO PRIVACY by the 4th AMENDMENTTHANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING Bill SF 193!The following is all Common Sense. You and I may not be able to take the same medications for a multitude of reasons. One person may be able to take aspirin, another cannot. This is common knowledge. Vaccines are treated like medications. So why do people erroneously believe one vaccine fits all? And why do people think it's ok to enforce vaccines that are not a "one vaccine fits all" mentality? This thinking totally goes against what science has taught the medical world about human individuality. SCIENTISTS and DOCTORS ARGUE THIS FACT BECAUSE SOME STAND IN BELIEF OF THE TRUTH THEY HAVE FOUND AND HAVE BEEN TAUGHT, AND SOME REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT. WHY IS THIS ALLOWED?We live in this country because SOMEBODY in our past history believed in and sought after the Spirit of Freedom this country was built on and offers to others. Immigrants helped establish this country with their work status and ethics because we are based on Freedom. They didn't come to this country because entities were discriminatory and clamping down on the masses. So, why are we now losing our freedoms this country was built on? Allowing employers to mandate and discriminate according to vaccine status puts stronger governing tools where it doesn't belong. Employers should not be allowed to take away our country's Foundational Freedoms.Please, do not allow insurance companies the privilege of raising rates based on vaccine status. Insurance companies are businesses. Yes, tax monies are sent to the government, but everyone knows the insurance companies benefit the most and elevated insurance rates create discrimination against hardworking citizens. I can't count the times over the years my insurance deduction increased on my paystub coupled with higher deductibles, or the times my employers changed insurance companies to find a better deal because of raising rates. Employees ended up with higher insurance premiums deducted from wages, higher deductibles, and less coverage. Allowing insurance companies to "govern" humanity in this country by vaccine status will create insurmountable problems in the future. Some people cannot receive vaccines because of illness and desperately need their insurance that may already be placing a suffocating burden on their lives. The CDC schedule . . . .is anyone bold enough to consider why the schedule has never been tested for safety on the whole of society? It's common knowledge you and I may not be able to take the same medication, eat the same food, tolerate the same amount of sunshine. It's common knowledge vaccines are created with ingredients that are harmful to the human body. If we can spend the money to land men on the moon, they why can't we spend the money to study and create what is really helpful to the individual human? But instead, the requirement of injected harmful ingredients is increasing and the vaccine schedule is becoming increasingly strict. If you and I possibly cannot take the same meds, same vaccines, WHY WOULD ANYONE THINK EVERYONE CAN TOLERATE THE SAME AMOUNT OF VACCINES ON A SET SCHEDULE??? We are discriminated against when the "schedule" is not followed. WHY is this allowed?Health care organizations are refusing to offer care to honest, innocent, hardworking people because of vaccine status. That's discrimination. Brand new doctors graduate from prestigious colleges because they accept the responsibility of governing their medical practice according to the order of "Do No Harm." Vaccines can cause harm because they are not physically tolerable by every individual. Good, caring doctors are being forced by government to "crack down" on individuals who decline vaccinations. The way the doctors are accomplishing this is to send letters of discharge, stating medical services will no longer be provided. Government control like this is Communism. Not Americanism. Controlling who gets to be in public places according to the vaccination status listed on the driver's license or identification card is discriminatory and an invasion of privacy. It's also NOT THE AMERICAN WAY. It's Communism. Many people do not want others knowing their personal medical history because they know it's used against them. We have laws to protect people from disability discrimination because of this. Since we have laws protecting against discriminations of all kinds, the laws should also include protections from discriminations in regards to vaccinations as well.THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING SF 193.

Jennifer Otto []

Please support SF 193. It often baffles me that an issue like this is even debated upon. People need go be able to control what goes in their bodies. I am 100% for bodily freedom. I never want to live in a society where a medical procedure is forced on me or my child. Please stand up for what is right. Thank you.

Jasanna Czellar [Boundless Joy Studios]

For something called a 'vaccine' that does not behave the way any other vaccine does, and is completely experimental, with as many critics as it does, this is definitely not something that needs mandated or coerced by any employer, business or school. I have worked hard on my health to get it better from not being very good, and do not want popular mob opinion to force me and my family to get something very unproven to truly help us. We have had Covid, it was incredibly mild for us. This shot has criticism from many highprofile doctors on the dangers it may give toward placenta development and interaction with a wild covid virus when encountered again. The studies in animals for this were deadly. We are not guinea pigs. If someone chooses to do this to their body that is their choice, but we all need informed consent and not coercion in order to enter back into daily life, for a shot that only potentially decreases symptoms but does not decrease transmission. My family's symptoms were already incredibly mild, for a virus that for us has a 99% survival rate. Please support this bill and the freedoms it is protecting.

Greg Hoke [Biotechnology Innovation Organization - Washington, DC]

Attached, please find the Biotechnology Innovation Organization's opposition letter to HF 193