Iowa bill that bans administrating mRNA vaccines advances out of subcommittee
DES MOINES, Iowa — Iowa Senate Republicans advanced legislation at the beginning of the first funnel week that would prohibit a person from administering a gene-based vaccine to another in the state.
Gene-based vaccine is defined in the bill as 'a vaccine developed using messenger ribonucleic acid technology, modified messenger ribonucleic acid technology, self-amplifying messenger ribonucleic acid technology or deoxyribonucleic acid technology.' To simplify, this definition means mRNA vaccines, like those developed for COVID-19.
A lot of people commented on the public forum of the bill, expressing their concern with it moving forward. The bill advanced by a vote of 2 to 1, with both Republican Senators voting for it: Sen. Campbell and Sen. Guth.
The bill would not allow a person to administer a gene-based vaccine to another, while classifying the penalty as a simple misdemeanor and a $500 fine per incident.
Lots of medical professionals and people lobbying for organizations and associations in the medical field were very frustrated with the legislation.
'Legislation has no right to take away patients' individual choice, to be vaccinated or not,' said Dr. Patrick Keating, MD a child and adolescent psychiatrist.
ISU student accused of sexually exploiting minors on social media
'Our students want no part of practicing here with bills like this on the table,' said Dr. Johnathan Crosbie, a physician and assistant professor at Des Moines University. 'You are chasing them off. So you go ahead, pass it, chase off the best and brightest, by all means go ahead.'
'I think that these tools need to be in the toolbox for innovation, to fight different diseases,' said Jessica Hyland, the Executive Director for the Iowa Biotechnology Association.
'Criminalizing the practice of medicine and the practice of pharmacy on a vaccine that is voluntarily received and sought after by a patient,' Kate Walton, a lobbyist for the Iowa Pharmacy Association.
Even some people that spoke in favor for the bill were not fans of the penalty mechanism that the bill outlined.
'These are gene therapy products, intent on altering a person's body. With that being said we do not like the mechanism of enforcement for this bill, or an outright ban,' said Lindsey Maher with Informed Choice Iowa.
Some for the bill shared anecdotal stories about their injuries or illnesses after taking some variant of the COVID-19 vaccine.
'This is a non issue, the issue at hand is what is being injected into humanity and nobody in Washington, D.C. is going to do anything, nobody in the FDA,' said Dan Twelmeyer, from Des Moines.
Sen. Campbell said at the end of the subcommittee that he would be filing an amendment to the bill, which may end up changing it in its entirety. He briefly mentioned to members of the media that he would look at companies manufacturing the vaccine to drop liability protections in order to sell the vaccine in the state. That amendment is not filed yet so the details around what changes could come are not clear.
Iowa News:
Iowa House lawmakers unanimously advance bill requiring feminine hygiene products in public schools
Iowa bill that bans administrating mRNA vaccines advances out of subcommittee
ISU student accused of sexually exploiting minors on social media
Highlights from day 1 of Iowa high school girls state basketball tournament
WHO 13 Farm Report: Monday, March 3rd
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ari Aster's ‘Eddington' Sharply Divides Cannes: Star Pedro Pascal Defends a Western About ‘Our Worst Fears' Amid Lockdown
When writer/director Ari Aster stood up for the ovation after the Cannes premiere of his divisive 2020-set Western 'Eddington' (July 16, A24), he said, 'I feel very privileged to be here. This is a dream come true. Thank you so much for having me. And, I don't know, sorry?' Indeed, festival attendees have been fiercely divided by his 145-minute portrait of a fictional New Mexico town wracked by COVID, BLM, ACAB, you-name-it-2020-buzz-concept during the darkest season of American lives in recent memory. Joaquin Phoenix (Aster's 'Beau Is Afraid') plays a conservative sheriff who decides to run against his Gavin Newsom-esque, pro-masks-and-testing adversary, Ted Garcia (Pedro Pascal), in the local mayoral election. More from IndieWire The Cannes 2025 Films So Far Most Likely to End Up in the Oscar Race 'Imago' Review: Chechen Documentary Explores a Filmmaker's Conflicted Return to His Roots Meanwhile, at home, Phoenix's character Joe Cross is in a quarantine bubble with his hysteria-addled wife Louise (Emma Stone) and her far-right conspiracy-obsessed mother Dawn (Deirdre O'Connell), the type for whom hydroxychloroquine was presumably a panacea. But Joe's campaign is all anti-masks, anti-vax, with the threat of cult leader Vernon Jefferson Peak (Austin Butler) also posing a challenge to his political and personal life. The film has sparked massive debates up and down the Croisette since premiering Friday night, with the starriest red carpet thus far and a press conference Saturday afternoon featuring Aster with his actors Phoenix, Pascal (in a sleeveless top), Stone (in a pixie haircut, her hair growing back presumably after shaving it off for Yorgos Lanthimos' upcoming 'Bugonia'), and Michael Ward, who plays Phoenix's next-in-command. IndieWire has talked to people who loved or hated the film, with rarely any opinion in between and certainly never without a strong response of some kind from anyone — whether out of boredom or raptures over Aster's in-your-face replay of our worst COVID-times memories. 'Eddington' could be a tough sell for audiences unwilling to be submersed again in summer 2020 and all the chaos and anxieties it erupted. Other pundits I've spoken to defend 'Eddington' as a necessary social satire that mocks and derides the panic of that year, while encapsulating it all into one movie as never before. IndieWire critic David Ehrlich wrote in his rave review that 'few other filmmakers would have the chutzpah required' to pull this movie off, 'and we should probably all be grateful that none of them have tried.' 'It's very scary to participate in a movie that speaks to issues like this,' Pascal said at the press conference. 'It's far too intimidating a question for me to address. I'm not informed enough. I want people to be safe and protective. I want very much to be on the right side of history.' 'Eddington' indeed takes shots at both sides of the aisle, roasting liberal posturing in the form of social justice youth like Sarah (Amélie Hoeferle), who posts TikToks about James Baldwin and rants about having any position at all on 'stolen land.' Phoenix's sheriff character, meanwhile, could only be wrought from the era of Trump, as he rails against mask mandates and is suspicious of the George Floyd-inspired protests shaking up his community. At one point, he swaggers into a grocery store with the pompousness of Western's most classic, gun-on-the-hip cowboys. Pascal added, 'I felt like [Aster] wrote something that was all our worst fears as that lockdown experience was already a fracturing society. This was building toward an untethered sense of reality. There is a point of not going back. I was overwhelmed by that fear, and it's wonderful that it was confirmed by Ari.' Aster, whose latest feature is a hairpin departure from the genre thrills and chills of films like 'Hereditary' and 'Midsommar' and is far from the spirit of intrusive-thought-induced weirdness of 'Beau Is Afraid,' added, 'I wrote this movie in a state of fear and anxiety. I wanted to try and pull back and show what it feels like to live in a world where nobody can agree on what is real anymore.' 'Eddington' is his first feature to premiere at Cannes. 'I feel like we're on a dangerous road, and we're living in an experiment that hasn't gone well,' Aster said (via Deadline) about his MAGA- and liberal-skewering Western. 'I feel there is no way out of it… Mass liberal democracies always had this fundamental agreement we agree what we're arguing about, that system was coming from power. So it's not like suddenly there's this bad power out there. It's always been there, but right now it's chaos.' Stone, who connected with Aster amid his 2024 'Beau Is Afraid,' said that her research into the conspiracy theories that turn her character against her husband even ended up modifying her personal social media algorithms (via Variety). 'The only additional thing that scared me a little bit in the algorithm system was looking into some of the things that are in this film that haven't been in my algorithm, unfortunately, added them to my algorithm,' she said. 'Because once you start Googling it, you start seeing more and more things. So it's a real rabbit hole, very quickly. Unfortunately, I'm still getting fed some crazy shit.' 'Eddington' is still the most conversation-starting Competition premiere at Cannes, with critics split over its social message and pacing (it's currently at 63 on Metacritic, where you can find reviews all over the map). How A24 will market this movie — only one teaser has been released so far, showing Phoenix doom-scrolling through familiar images of the deepest COVID era — is an intriguing question in the lead-up to its July theatrical release. Alex Garland's 'Civil War,' another post-COVID story of national conflict, did well for A24 last year, grossing more than $127 million by tapping into a fascination factor over a divided United States. Who will 'Eddington' appeal to? Either way, it's pitting Cannes audiences against each other — Screen Daily called it a 'wan satire,' while Variety deemed it 'brazenly provocative' — and will no doubt continue to stoke debate into the summer. Best of IndieWire Guillermo del Toro's Favorite Movies: 56 Films the Director Wants You to See 'Song of the South': 14 Things to Know About Disney's Most Controversial Movie The 55 Best LGBTQ Movies and TV Shows Streaming on Netflix Right Now
Politico
38 minutes ago
- Politico
HHS justifies decision to stop recommending Covid shots during pregnancy with studies supporting the shots' safety
The Department of Health and Human Services is circulating a document on Capitol Hill to explain its decision to remove the Covid-19 vaccine recommendation for pregnant women — citing studies that largely found the shot is safe. The document, which HHS sent to lawmakers days before Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced his plan to fire the panel that advises the CDC on immunizations, says that studies have shown that women who got the vaccine during pregnancy had higher rates of various complications. And it claims that 'a number of studies in pregnant women showed higher rates of fetal loss if vaccination was received before 20 weeks of pregnancy,' footnoting a research paper on vaccination during pregnancy. But Dr. Maria P. Velez of McGill University, the lead author of one of the studies, told POLITICO in an email that 'the results of our manuscript were misinterpreted.' The 2023 study shows a slightly higher rate of miscarriages among women who were immunized against Covid-19 during their pregnancies. But, Velez said, that after adjusting for 'variables that can confound a crude association,' like 'age, rurality, neighbourhood income quintile, immigration status, comorbidity' and other factors that could affect the outcome, Canadian researchers found 'no association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and an increased risk of miscarriage.' Raw numbers don't account for significant differences among the groups being compared — such as underlying conditions and when during pregnancy the people were vaccinated, said Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist who's consulted for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Scientists, including the Canadian researchers, use statistical methods to adjust for those factors, she said, which is how they determined the vaccine wasn't associated with miscarriage. In a statement, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon pointed to the raw study data, which showed a slightly higher rate of miscarriage in the first half of pregnancy for women who were vaccinated against Covid compared with those who weren't. 'The underlying data speaks for itself — and it raises legitimate safety concerns,' he said. 'HHS will not ignore that evidence or downplay early pregnancy loss.' Nixon added that HHS and the CDC encourage people to talk to their providers 'about any personal medical decision.' Vaccine researchers and obstetricians criticized the decision to remove the recommendation for pregnant women, and researchers cited in the HHS document largely dismissed any connection between Covid vaccination and miscarriages. 'Given that COVID-19 infection during pregnancy is associated with serious maternal and neonatal morbidity, the current study can inform healthcare providers, pregnant women and those considering a pregnancy about the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in relation to miscarriage risk,' Velez and her co-authors wrote in the study. That research was based on health-system data from Ontario, Canada, and aligned with similar population studies in the U.S., Scotland and Norway. Similarly, HHS cited an April 2022 study in its document concerning mRNA vaccination in people undergoing in-vitro fertilization, which also found no adverse effects on conception rates or on early pregnancy outcomes. 'Administration of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was not associated with an adverse effect on stimulation or early pregnancy outcomes after IVF,' the New York City-based researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Mount Sinai West hospital wrote in the study. 'Our findings contribute to the growing body of evidence regarding the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in women who are trying to conceive.' The HHS document also includes an incorrect link for that study, instead leading to a different study — also cited in HHS' document — by Israeli researchers that found the vaccine 'appears to be safe during pregnancy,' with no increase in preterm labor or in newborns with low birth weight. That February 2022 study did note a possible increase in preterm birth rates for women vaccinated during the second trimester, and the authors suggested future investigations of outcomes based on the timing of immunization. HHS' assertion about significant risks to pregnant women 'contradicts the bulk of published studies,' said Dr. Paul Offit, an expert who has served as an outside adviser on vaccines to the FDA and the CDC. HHS deviated from past practice when it changed the Covid vaccine guidance last month, announcing the decision without the endorsement of an existing outside panel of expert advisers. Dr. Steven Fleischman, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, told POLITICO at the time that he was disappointed by HHS' decision, and pointed to data showing that newborns can benefit from maternal antibodies from the vaccine for protection from Covid. 'In fact, growing evidence shows just how much vaccination during pregnancy protects the infant after birth, with the vast majority of hospitalized infants less than 6 months of age — those who are not yet eligible for vaccination — born to unvaccinated mothers,' Fleischman said.
Newsweek
43 minutes ago
- Newsweek
2024 Election Results Under Scrutiny as Lawsuit Advances
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A legal case questioning the accuracy of the 2024 election is moving forward. The lawsuit, brought by SMART Legislation, the action arm of SMART Elections, a nonpartisan watchdog group, filed the lawsuit over voting discrepancies in Rockland County, New York. Judge Rachel Tanguay of the New York Supreme Court ruled in open court in May that the allegations were serious enough for discovery to proceed. Newsweek has contacted SMART Elections for comment via email. People cast their ballots on the last day of early voting for the general election in Michigan at the Livingston Educational Service Agency in Howell on November 3, 2024. People cast their ballots on the last day of early voting for the general election in Michigan at the Livingston Educational Service Agency in Howell on November 3, 2024. Jeff Kowalsky/AFP via Getty Images Why It Matters The lawsuit could renew debate about the 2024 election, though it won't change the outcome since Congress has certified the results declaring President Donald Trump the winner. It comes amid unconfirmed reports that voting machines were secretly altered before ballots were cast in November's election. The federally accredited testing lab, Pro V&V, that signed off on "significant" changes to ES&S voting machines—which are used in over 40 percent of U.S. counties—"vanished from public view" after the election, according to the Dissent in Bloom Substack. What To Know According to the complaint, more voters have sworn in legal affidavits that they voted for independent U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare than the Rockland County Board of Elections counted and certified, contradicting those results. The complaint also cited numerous statistical anomalies in the presidential election results. They include multiple districts where hundreds of voters chose the Democratic candidate Kirsten Gillibrand for Senate, but none voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate for president. Max Bonamente, a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the author of the Statistics and Analysis of Scientific Data, said in a paper that the 2024 presidential election results were statistically highly unlikely in four of the five towns in Rockland County when compared with 2020 results. What People Are Saying Lulu Friesdat, the founder and executive director of SMART Legislation, said in a statement: "There is clear evidence that the Senate results are incorrect, and there are statistical indications that the presidential results are highly unlikely. "If the results are incorrect, it is a violation of the constitutional rights of each person who voted in the 2024 Rockland County general election. The best way to determine if the results are correct is to examine the paper ballots in a full public, transparent hand recount of all presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County. We believe it's vitally important, especially in the current environment, to be absolutely confident about the results of the election." Max Bonamente said in a paper on the voting data from Rockland County: "These data would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation, and would benefit from further assurances as to their fidelity." Costas Panagopoulos, a professor of political science at Northeastern University, told Newsweek: "Statistical irregularities in elections should always be investigated, but the sources of such inconsistencies, which can include error or miscalculation, are not always nefarious. Still, scrutinizing election results can strengthen confidence in elections. Mistakes can happen. "In this case, the drop-off inconsistencies could reflect the idiosyncratic nature of the 2024 presidential election cycle. Alone, statistical comparisons to previous cycles cannot provide definitive proof of wrongdoing. "In any case, it does not appear that any of these inconsistencies would be sufficient to change the outcomes of any of the elections in question in New York state. That does not mean they should not be scrutinized, and any errors, if verified, should be corrected for the historical record. But there is not necessarily any need to invalidate any of these elections in these jurisdictions." What's Next The lawsuit is seeking a full, hand recount of ballots cast in the presidential and U.S. Senate races in Rockland County. A hearing has been scheduled for September 22.
