CDC Changed Its Rules on Quarantine & Isolation 1-19-17

3
384

horizontal background woman in isolation at home for virus outbreak or hypochondria .

The CDC changed its rules for quarantine and isolation on the last day of Barack Obama’s presidency (1/19/17) – pre-pandemic. The rules went into effect the next month. How prescient of them.

Infowars made the original report insofar as we know and it is stunning.

People in the public comments expressed concerns that updated regulations sought to compel medical treatment or vaccination without patient consent. The CDC insisted it would not.

The CDC left the compulsory part up to businesses, Democrat politicians, and the military.

Under these new rules, the CDC warrants quarantine and isolation for diseases like SARS, influenza viruses, viral hemorrhagic fever viruses, but again emphasizes that forced vaccination won’t be implemented:

These quarantinable communicable diseases are currently limited to cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis (TB), plague, smallpox, yellow fever, and viral hemorrhagic fevers (such as Marburg, Ebola, Lassa fever, and Crimean-Congo), severe acute respiratory syndromes, and influenza caused by novel or re-emergent influenza viruses that are causing or have the potential to cause a pandemic. See Executive Order 13295 (April 4, 2003), as amended by Executive Order 13375 (April 1, 2005) and Executive Order 13674 (July 31, 2014). Changes to the list of quarantinable communicable diseases are beyond the scope of this regulation. And again, we reemphasize that HHS/CDC does not intend, through these regulations, to mandate vaccination or compulsory medical treatment of individuals. 

The CDC reserved the right to quarantine or detain travelers.

And alarmingly, the rules claim that vaccination may be a “conditional” prerequisite for release from quarantine:

HHS/CDC clarifies that when medically appropriate, vaccination or treatment, may be “conditions” of an individual’s release from quarantine or isolation. Individuals consent to these conditions.

They also dismissed concerns that The WHO would chip away at national sovereignty. As you probably know by now, The WHO is looking to do exactly that.

Read the document:


Subscribe to the Daily Newsletter

PowerInbox
5 1 vote
Article Rating
3 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments