***The Iowa Standard is an independent media voice. We rely on the financial support of our readers to exist. Please consider a one-time sign of support or becoming a monthly supporter at $5, $10/month - whatever you think we're worth! If you’ve ever used the phrase “Fake News” — now YOU can actually DO something about it! You can also support us on PayPal at [email protected] or Venmo at Iowa-Standard-2018 or through the mail at: PO Box 112 Sioux Center, IA 51250

Every Iowa Senate Democrat on the Human Resources Committee voted against a bill that would provide valuable information and data when it comes to deaths among children 0-3 years old.

The committee debated a bill that would require the medical examiner’s investigation form to include one additional question about vaccinations. The question would simply be date of the last immunization and what type of vaccination(s) was given.

It would be the second vaccine-related question on the form. There are eight questions on the form about the last thing the child ate, according to testimony provided in subcommittee meetings.


One of the criticisms of the bill from Democrat State Sen. Joe Bolkcom was the timing of the legislation. He said the timing is “cynical” because we’re in the midst of a global pandemic.

Well, the bill was debated in subcommittee last year before Iowa went into 15 days to flatten the curve over the next 300-some days.

So, no, this bill wasn’t filed in an effort to increase vaccine hesitancy during a “global pandemic.”

The bill was filed for a simple reason — to provide moms and dads with valuable information that can only be provided through relevant data.

Why does the idea of this information being included on a medical examiner’s investigation form scare the medical community and, in this case, Iowa Senate Democrats?

There are two potential answers:

  1. They don’t think Iowa moms and dads can handle whatever the information reveals.
  2. They know what the information might show and don’t want it to exist.

Public health and healthcare providers have a pretty considerable interest when it comes to protecting vaccinations.

Not including this information can only be viewed as an effort to provide protection and cover for what might be more frequent than we know — that maybe, just maybe there is a correlation between SIDS and vaccinations.

But here is the thing — maybe the information won’t reveal that.

Maybe the information will reveal that there is no correlation — none at all.

If it is at best a 50-50 proposition — and if someone truly believes vaccines are “safe and effective,” you’d have to think it’s more like 80-20 — that the data might show no correlation between vaccinations and SIDS, wouldn’t you want that data available to prove to everyone that you are right? That vaccines are safe and effective. That they do save lives.

If you know that you know that you know vaccines have zero correlation with SIDS, wouldn’t you want the relevant data to show and convince others?

This bill is asking for one more additional question to be asked on a medical examiner’s investigation form when it comes to children 0-3 years old.

Even if you don’t think moms and dads deserve that information to be listed, don’t the children who will be vaccinated in the future?

Isn’t it worth it for those little boys and little girls?

Shouldn’t we do all we can to be sure that the vaccines are not causing harm — other than the more than $4 billion in the harm they’ve done since 1986 (the government has paid out more than $4 billion to families due to vaccine injuries and deaths since 1986)?

We either want parents to have information or we don’t. We either believe “knowledge is power” or we don’t.

On Tuesday, Iowa Democrats didn’t want moms and dads to have the information. They didn’t vote in a way that suggests they believe knowledge is power.

That should be unacceptable to Iowans.