Similar Posts
Judge Keeps Anthrax Suit Alive
By PETE YOST – MARCH 14, 2008 WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge Friday kept alive a lawsuit in which two Connecticut Air National Guard pilots said they were forced to resign nine years ago for refusing to be vaccinated against anthrax. An Air Force panel must spell out the reasons for denying the two…
The hybrid scenario: kids return to school several days per week: Are You Kidding Me?
Covid has brought out the finest in government mismanagement. Now it is being applied to schools.Does anyone believe the notion that students will be safer attending school two and a half days a week, instead of five? Who dreamed this up? Do they think if your child inhales 1/2 as much virus, or uses the…
England drowning in swine flu vaccine; Poland has none and explains why/ BBC
From Fergus Walsh, BBC Medical correspondent: By my reckoning (and this is an estimate only) around 5.25 million people have been vaccinated in Britain. That means there is an awful lot of vaccine – tens of millions of doses – going spare. I’m told an announcement is likely in around 10 days regarding what will…
The Children’s Health Defense letter to FDA debunking all justifications for 5-11 vaccines (the “science” section) is now posted WITH graphics, links and footnores
https://merylnass.com/2021/10/someone-asked-for-references-for-letter.html
2 Comments
Comments are closed.
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.
My favorite phrase from this:
"protect the public from the harmful acts of health professionals"
Not something you expect to read, and agree with.