re: EO coming today requiring all Federal employees to get the "vaccine"

quote:

---

Just stay the frick away from people if they're so terrified of life.

---

Therein lies the rub.

These new trend of "you need to do this for me" has permeated our culture whether it be the vaccine or preferred pronouns or safe spaces or what professors are teaching.

Went have to give up everything if one person demands that they be made to feel comfortable. The level of narcissism it takes to live in their suspended reality is staggering.

quote:

---

RogertheShrubber

---

quote:

---

upgrayedd

---

quote:

---

Did you read this on Facebook? COMIRNATY is the branded name of the "generic" Pfizer vaccine.

---

He has explained it a number of times. Formula is the same but legally they are different (or at least subject to different rules).

quote:

---

If you don't eat your vegetables, mom won't give us dessert! You need to do this for ME!

---

If you don't eat yer meat, you can't have any pudding. How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?

I appreciate the appeal to authority but the veracity of his documents and videos can be distilled down to this very sentence:

quote:

---

Along with the license comes liability for the manufacturer

---

This is 100% false and has been that way since Ronald Reagan signed the NCVIA into law in 1986. The EUA did not provide immunity that did not exist for vaccine manufactures. It just extended the same immunity they had under a full BL to use under EUA, it did establish the CICP which handles claims for vaccine injuries similar to but different from the VICP used for vaccines with full BL approval.

When one's authority contains a very simple but 100% false declarative statement the rest of their tome should be called into serious question. There are one of two possibilities here, either Malone understands the legal liability and is lying it he doesn't understand it and should not be considered an authority on the area of vaccine law.

Liability protections did not change. The EUA protections were modelled on the protections already provided by NCVIA and extended them to EUA use. If this were not the case Pfizer et al would have simply slow-rolled their BL applications and continued to produce and have them administered under EUA.

This is a legal issue, not a medical one and it is not convoluted nor is it confusing which just a modicum of information about how the process of BLA and their approval works, BUT there are few people outside Pharma or involved in litigation in the Pharma sector that would have any reason to understand the process prior to COVID.

Again, there are plenty of salient issues to discuss regarding the vaccines and especially any mandates but you are getting wound around an issue that is at best pedantic and really just a non-issue.

As for my appeal to authority just look at the legal immunity vaccine manufacturers had for decades prior to this. Only read what was written prior to COVID to ensure no bias. You will quickly see that Dr. Malone's statement is incorrect then you can use this to reconsider his veracity and decide how much if any weight you want to apply to it. Just keep in mind the law that contradicts his statement is extremely easy to find and I chose not to include links simply to not appear to be guiding you to biased information.

quote:

---

big ol' puddin

---

quote:

---

Question

If I’m mandated to take vaccine and I have an adverse reaction, can a person sue their employer(in this case feds) for damages??

---

If you are asking if you can sue in tort then no. If you are asking if you can get a claim paid by DFEC under FECA (Fed's version of Workers Comp) then probably.

If the vaccine is a condition of employment you can file a FECA claim and they may be paid but there isn't good law on this yet. This is true with state Comp claims as well. Of note, any FECA or Comp claim paid would then give the payor a subrogation interest in any award made by the CICP/VICP for a vaccine injury. Normally carriers don't require a dollar for dollar repayment of that interest so it could definitely increase your overall award and the Comp claim will provide more timely reimbursement of lost wages assuming the claim is not disputed but still could produce quicker payments depending on the litigation timeline. How federal or state comp will handle these rare claims is unknown at the time.

Maybe this will be one way to thin out the bloated fedgov

quote:

---

Only after listing possible known side effects. This hasn’t happened for this vaccine.

---

Are you just making things up? The adverse reactions are listed in section 6 of the FDA approved package insert for patients 16 and older.


Package inserts are a major part of the approval process and they will always include an adverse reaction section.

quote:

---

At this point, I figure anyone who's not vaccinated is just a big ol' puddin who's afraid of needles.

---

And you're scared of the sniffles