Something is rotten in the state of Denmark...I mean Maryland.

Most by now have heard the State of Maryland has required children in Prince George's County be immunized or their parents will face a jail sentence and $50 fine every day they are out of compliance. The parents were directed to show up at the courthouse last Saturday and either have their child vaccinated on the spot or submit an exemption.

This has scared the you know what out of me! Not to mention enraged me and saddened me. But when I watched the State's Attorney talk about the situation, it became clear this was really a case of semantics. Unfortunately all the hoopla was really about making a decision and complying with the state law. It wasn't that the children weren't vaccinated per say but that they did not file the proper exemption forms if that was their choice.

I know many will think I am nuts for saying this but I can understand if that is really what it is about. They want to have their records straight - either the children are vaccinated or their parents have filed an exemption. With no exemption filed, these parents are not complying with state law. Believe me, I am the first one to advocate our rights to an exemption but to just not comply was the problem.

The enraging part is the forced compliance and the lack of informed consent regarding parents' legal rights. So basically the parents who were not in compliance were duped into vaccinating their children. But what would we expect? If the state law mandates all children be vaccinated for a specific disease, clearly they enacted this law because they believe it to be a good idea (or for more sinister reasons which are beyond my speculation). So, why would they then promote filing the exemptions? They wouldn't because this would go against their goal of having all children vaccinated. Come now - has *any* doctor, school nurse, or other "official" *ever* offered up - "oh by the way, you don't *have* to have these shots - you can file an exemption." Probably not! We, as parents, uncovered it on our own. I dare say the majority of doctors out there don't even know there are exemption laws!

However, the bottom line was - either have your child vaccinated or file your exemption - just don't not comply. No one was saying you can't file an exemption, your child has to be vaccinated. Just like they weren't saying you can. They just weren't saying it! That's the dubious part. Of course I do not agree with their scare tactic method. But I can understand them wanting to have compliance - whether it be to be vaccinated or to file your exemption. And according to the state attorney (who seemed completely baffled that this was truly a big deal! - Duh!) they had tried several times to send messages home for compliance to no avail.

The conspiracy part of me believes this was a test run to see how far parents could be pushed. I also question if the school district would be as concerned if they weren't in jeopardy of losing funding for reaching a certain vaccination compliance rate. And for those whose records were supposedly lost requiring they be revaccinated - that's tragic as they were backed into a corner. Unfortunately the onus is on the parents to provide the documentation from medical records, not for the school to maintain those records (that's a completely different discussion on its own because as I parent I would be furious if they lost the records). But as we all know with paperwork - keep your copies! Don't just have your child vaccinated again because the school lost the records. Obtain copies of your child's medical records! If you can't get those, then file an exemption. (This would truly be a case where the parent is forced to either comply with the vaccine or file an erroneous exemption.)

Additionally, for those of us that put our guts up and filed our exemptions (in almost every case going against the grain), it is a cop out for those that just don't vaccinate and don't claim exemption. In my eyes, the more parents that file exemptions, the more it reinforces a larger consensus that vaccinating for some is not the best choice.

Yes Virginia, those Christmas lights are toxic!

Yes, it's true. Even our Christmas lights are toxic. They contain lead. And sadly, so does every other appliance which uses a UL approved cord. Some lights actually contain lead in the solder (in addition to the cord) and therefore have lead on the bulb. These lights are manufactured in China and make up the majority of light sets you can buy for a few bucks at any chain store.

We've been using these holiday lights for years and yes, they've always contained lead. But today, our environment is overrun with toxic substances and heavy metals - in our food, air, pj's, vaccines, and sadly, even in our Christmas lights.

Additionally, some artificial Christmas trees also contain lead on their plastic (PVC) branches and the plastic, once heated with either lights or sunshine, will form a lead powder. This powder can sprinkle down and decorate our Christmas presents waiting under the tree for tiny tikes to get their hands (and even baby's mouths) on! Do not be misled (pun intended) - lead is toxic and can cause brain damage.

It seems crazy that in order to be made "safe", the cord must contain lead. But that is the current status quo. The lead is actually in the PVC of the cord. And you will find this in any corded product (at least those approved by UL) such as hairdryers, electronics equipment, lamps, etc. Some Christmas lights (manufactured outside of the US) also have lead from the solder used.

The Children's Health Environmental Coalition states:

"Wire coating and cords are usually made of PVC plastic that may contain lead. Lead is used in PVC for several reasons. For wires and cords, lead makes the plastic more flexible and reduces the risk of fire. Lead is also used in many PVC products to stabilize the color. Lead in PVC products can disintegrate into lead-laced dust.

The amount of lead in the lights and other consumer products with warning labels may vary considerably. It is not clear if the amount of lead that is released poses a risk to human health. Some tests show that lead could come off in the hands. Note that nearly all appliance cords are covered with PVC that contains lead."

See Arkansas based Walmart's response to the light/lead concern:

"It is our understanding that the manufacturers' use of lead in these products is to improve the safety of the lights. We are told that the use of lead is required by Underwriters Laboratory, an organization that certifies the safety of lighting products in the United States. The amount of lead used is a tiny amount and does not exceed any applicable federal guidelines. Our holiday lights meet industry standards and are compliant with state and federal regulations governing their sale.

However, the State of California requires a warning label on any product that contains lead in amounts that exceed California's very low threshold for warning of the presence of lead. The warning doesn't indicate that the product is illegal to sell. It only indicates that the product contains a substance, which California considers to be hazardous. At the present time, no other state requires a similar warning. To avoid separate packaging, many manufacturers place the Californian-required label on product they ship to other states."

So, unfortunately, there are no completely lead free lights. Even lights manufactured in the U.S. contain lead (in the cord). It is one more thing that can be added to our never ending list of things to worry about.

There is a safer alternative (although all lights contain lead in the cord in order to be UL approved). LED lights do not contain lead in the solder or on the bulb. And American made Christmas trees are lead free.

This site sells American made, lead free Christmas trees: http://ww1.christmasdepot.com/index.php

This site manufactures lights which are lead-free (except for the cord): http://www.holidaycreations.com/

sources: http://www.holidaycreations.com/wheretobuy.html Some Ace Hardware, COSTCO, Hobby Lobby, Kroger, Long's, and Lowes stores may carry them as well.

NOTE: I have not used these and cannot attest to their performance! I have no connection with the sites linked and accept no responsibility for them.

These lights are also very energy conscious. Instead of burning the typical 350 watts for a 70 light set, the 100 light set burns only 3.6 watts. That means if a traditional wattage set is used 8 hours per day, for 7 days a week, at an $.08 electricity rate, you will save $33 every month!

If you already own an artificial tree, you can have it tested for lead. You can order a test kit from the Environmental Quality Institute at the University of North Carolina. Mail a check for $15, made out to the University of North Carolina-Asheville, to:

Foundation Earth

UNC-A Environmental Quality Institute

CPO 2331

1 University Heights

Asheville, N.C., 28804

There are several things you can do to minimize the risk.

• Do not allow children to touch the branches.
• Do not allow children to touch or handle the lights.
• If you touch the tree, wash your hands thoroughly with soap.
• Do not vacuum dust from under the tree which could then spread lead dust throughout your home.
• Use a tree skirt which you can remove and wash weekly.
• Avoid lights made in China or other foreign countries which do not restrict the use of lead.
• Wearing gloves, gently wipe down all presents under the tree with a moist cloth on Christmas Eve.

While this is something to be considered seriously, for our family it falls under the "minimum exposure, minimum risk" category. We will still have Christmas lights at our home. But I'm on my way out to purchase a lead-free tree and LED lights.

However, if your child is seriously heavy metal toxic and/or has a known toxicity level of lead, you might think twice about using traditional Christmas lights. Wishing you a safe and happy holiday!