Similar Posts

2 Comments

  1. It is interesting that the vaccine they approved yesterday for children (ages 5 to 11 years old) has never been used in a clinical trial. The version that was used in clinical trial required extremely cold storage refrigeration. This new non refrigeration version of the vaccine does not require that refrigeration and it's never been validated in a clinical trial. Who in their right mind, does science this way. Correct me if I am wrong, I am aware that manufacturers of vaccines on the infant schedule do not have any liability for death or injuries that their vaccine cause. And I believe there is similar waiver of liability for EUA / Emergency Use Authorization vaccines under some other act (Prep At?).

    However, in both situations aren't the manufactures liable for damages if their products cause damages due to a manufacturing error?? Said another way, manufacturers always have to make a product correctly.

    Do you see where I am going with this?

    The manufacturing requirements that need to be met are established by the original validated product that was used in the initial clinical trial – aka the extreme refrigeration clinical trial. To jab a patient with a non refrigerated product that does not meet the manufacturing requirements of the initial product is to jab them with a product that was fundamentally not made correctly. Thus the manufacturer is liable for any injury resulting from the non refrigerated vaccine injected into a child.

  2. My favorite phrase from this:

    "protect the public from the harmful acts of health professionals"

    Not something you expect to read, and agree with.

Comments are closed.