- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Pfizer immunity legal research project - on how to avoid
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:18 pm
I’m having a late lunch bc I’m a little swamped but perhaps some of my PoliBarristers can assist.
My impression is that there is a statue somewhere drafted by congress that creates immunity to manufacturers of vaccines.
My further understanding would be that somewhere in the bowels of the FDA there is a regulation that classifies the Pfizer shot, as a vaccine.
Thus Pfizer MRNA shot only gets its immunity bc the FDA says it falls into this category.
Most legal immunities have exceptions- most common examples are fraud or intentional misconduct.
Further, most civil immunities I’ve ever litigated require the Defendant to prove its entitlement to said immunity. Meaning, if ever sued, Pfizer would have to prove the immunity applied to it.
In light of the above, and Veritas, a class action Plaintiff (and some of those class action lawyers are very sharp - some dumb as shite, but some very smart) could potentially prove a fraud exception to their liability.
Alternatively. The shot really doesn’t meet the definition of vaccine. It neither prevents transmission nor infection. Demonstrably. Thus, if it does not meet the criteria, then the FDA finding that it is one is meaningless. If it is Pfizer can’t prove the application of its immunity defense.
A civil plaintiff would have to attack the FDA regulation as inadequately supported / manifestly wrong. A very high hurdle, which has been somewhat given a shitty side eye by recent SCOTUS precedent.
It is an uphill battle of a long shot- but private suits on the scale of Tobacco need to happen.
The better alternative would be some kind of mass action by either the DOJ Or FDA need to happen. However. Nobody is holding their breath.
I’m literally spitballing but Does anyone know the actual legal basis for Pfizer’s immunity. Not in the FDA regs, but in the United States Code. I will research when I have more time. Or any of you Baws have experience in vax injury litigation - would probably know . . .
Look forward to your thoughts
My impression is that there is a statue somewhere drafted by congress that creates immunity to manufacturers of vaccines.
My further understanding would be that somewhere in the bowels of the FDA there is a regulation that classifies the Pfizer shot, as a vaccine.
Thus Pfizer MRNA shot only gets its immunity bc the FDA says it falls into this category.
Most legal immunities have exceptions- most common examples are fraud or intentional misconduct.
Further, most civil immunities I’ve ever litigated require the Defendant to prove its entitlement to said immunity. Meaning, if ever sued, Pfizer would have to prove the immunity applied to it.
In light of the above, and Veritas, a class action Plaintiff (and some of those class action lawyers are very sharp - some dumb as shite, but some very smart) could potentially prove a fraud exception to their liability.
Alternatively. The shot really doesn’t meet the definition of vaccine. It neither prevents transmission nor infection. Demonstrably. Thus, if it does not meet the criteria, then the FDA finding that it is one is meaningless. If it is Pfizer can’t prove the application of its immunity defense.
A civil plaintiff would have to attack the FDA regulation as inadequately supported / manifestly wrong. A very high hurdle, which has been somewhat given a shitty side eye by recent SCOTUS precedent.
It is an uphill battle of a long shot- but private suits on the scale of Tobacco need to happen.
The better alternative would be some kind of mass action by either the DOJ Or FDA need to happen. However. Nobody is holding their breath.
I’m literally spitballing but Does anyone know the actual legal basis for Pfizer’s immunity. Not in the FDA regs, but in the United States Code. I will research when I have more time. Or any of you Baws have experience in vax injury litigation - would probably know . . .
Look forward to your thoughts
7
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:32 pm to Wednesday
quote:
The shot really doesn’t meet the definition of vaccine. It neither prevents transmission nor infection. Demonstrably
You're going to hurt a lot of feelings with this. Prepare for a massive derail of your topic here.
I agree with what you said and that they should be financially liable for this.
This post was edited on 2/2/23 at 2:33 pm
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:43 pm to Wednesday
IIRC, the FDA changed the criteria defining a vaccine at some point during this multi-year debacle. Don't know if the date of the change would have any bearing, tho.
:not a lawyer:
This is a hit and run post. Gotta go help my mom.
:not a lawyer:
This is a hit and run post. Gotta go help my mom.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:49 pm to Wednesday
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (PDF - 312 KB), as amended, created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Vaccine manufacturers are immune from lawsuits for harm. There is a federal process to get compensated for harm done. Pharmaceutical companies are not liable. The goal of this legislation was to foster more robust development of vaccines for childhood diseases.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 2:51 pm to Wednesday
Under the PREP Act, vax companies have total immunity from liability if something unintentionally goes wrong with their vaccines.
Posted on 2/2/23 at 9:13 pm to Wednesday
The liability isn't absolute but rather the settlements have been handled in the following...LINK
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
However, your points are all valid and there are zero statutes of limitations on fraud and that is a good thing.
The entire reason I'm personally going after hospitals and the federal government is because it is actually easier than attacking the emergency use authorized vaccine manufacturers.
Adherence to the protocols resulting from the National Research Act (1974)
strictly requires the free will and voluntary consent of individuals agreeing to participate in the administration of drugs or biologics classified as IND.
To date, the FDA has assigned IND classification to each COVID-19 drug
under an EUA, namely:
a. Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine 19736
b. Janssen IND 22657
c. Moderna IND 19745
d. Novavax IND 22430
As such the government has knowingly conned the people through propaganda assisting these companies in creating the largest human experiment ever.
Individuals at all levels need to pay, from the tyrants threatening people's jobs, propaganda from news, officials in office, and medical industry who pushed the garbage.
I hope you figure it out.
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
However, your points are all valid and there are zero statutes of limitations on fraud and that is a good thing.
The entire reason I'm personally going after hospitals and the federal government is because it is actually easier than attacking the emergency use authorized vaccine manufacturers.
Adherence to the protocols resulting from the National Research Act (1974)
strictly requires the free will and voluntary consent of individuals agreeing to participate in the administration of drugs or biologics classified as IND.
To date, the FDA has assigned IND classification to each COVID-19 drug
under an EUA, namely:
a. Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine 19736
b. Janssen IND 22657
c. Moderna IND 19745
d. Novavax IND 22430
As such the government has knowingly conned the people through propaganda assisting these companies in creating the largest human experiment ever.
Individuals at all levels need to pay, from the tyrants threatening people's jobs, propaganda from news, officials in office, and medical industry who pushed the garbage.
I hope you figure it out.
This post was edited on 2/2/23 at 9:14 pm
Posted on 2/2/23 at 9:17 pm to Wednesday
quote:
Alternatively. The shot really doesn’t meet the definition of vaccine.
Didn't the FDA/NIH change the definition of what a vaccine is a while back?
Maybe this is the reason.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News