The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act started the process to fully absolve pharmaceutical companies from liability for the injuries and deaths their vaccine products cause. In addition, the 1986 Act also removed the normal market forces and legal repercussions which exist to ensure safer vaccine products. By giving economic immunity to Big Pharma, it removed any incentive for those companies to maintain, improve on and guarantee the safety of their vaccines.
Instead, the 1986 Act put the US Health and Human Services (HHS) in charge of doing continued safety and quality monitoring of the vaccines comprising America’s recommended vaccine schedule. HHS was tasked with two jobs: to end infectious disease and to reduce the risk of vaccine injury. Specifically, the 1986 Act states in subsection a, that HHS shall:
“promote the development of childhood vaccines that result in fewer and less serious adverse reactions than those vaccines on the market…” and to “make or assure improvements in…the manufacturing, testing, warning, field surveillance, adverse reaction reporting and researching on vaccines in order to reduce the risk of adverse reactions to vaccines.”
There was also a deadline for HHS to adhere to when applying the above mandated criteria. The 1986 Act states:
“Within 2 years after December 22, 1987, and periodically thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare and transmit…a report describing the actions taken pursuant to subsection a…”
Last year, Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to HHS asking for any documents related to the work done by HHS pursuant to the mandate laid out in the 1986 Act. In short, the FOIA request asked for any reports HHS has given the US Congress over the last 32 years that show they are making vaccines safer. After HHS was unable to produce the requested documents, ICAN, along with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., filed a lawsuit. The lawsuit gave HHS three options:
In the end, HHS recently settled with what is called a court ordered stipulation, admitting the following:
Instead, the 1986 Act put the US Health and Human Services (HHS) in charge of doing continued safety and quality monitoring of the vaccines comprising America’s recommended vaccine schedule. HHS was tasked with two jobs: to end infectious disease and to reduce the risk of vaccine injury. Specifically, the 1986 Act states in subsection a, that HHS shall:
“promote the development of childhood vaccines that result in fewer and less serious adverse reactions than those vaccines on the market…” and to “make or assure improvements in…the manufacturing, testing, warning, field surveillance, adverse reaction reporting and researching on vaccines in order to reduce the risk of adverse reactions to vaccines.”
There was also a deadline for HHS to adhere to when applying the above mandated criteria. The 1986 Act states:
“Within 2 years after December 22, 1987, and periodically thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare and transmit…a report describing the actions taken pursuant to subsection a…”
Last year, Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to HHS asking for any documents related to the work done by HHS pursuant to the mandate laid out in the 1986 Act. In short, the FOIA request asked for any reports HHS has given the US Congress over the last 32 years that show they are making vaccines safer. After HHS was unable to produce the requested documents, ICAN, along with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., filed a lawsuit. The lawsuit gave HHS three options:
- To give all the information as requested in the original FOIA request
- To give a credible explanation why HHS can’t disclose the information; or
- To admit HHS doesn't have any documents which would show they have done what they were tasked to do
In the end, HHS recently settled with what is called a court ordered stipulation, admitting the following:
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has been one of America’s most well known environmental attorneys, in addition to chairing the board of World Mercury Project. However, for parts of mainstream America Kennedy's name became connected with vaccine debate after he was seen leaving Trump Towers in the beginning of 2017. Reporting on his 2017 meeting with then President-elect Donald Trump the NY Times wrote, “President-elect Donald J. Trump had asked him to lead a new government commission on vaccine safety and scientific integrity.”
Since his meeting with Kennedy, and despite him previously critizing the US vaccine schedule and its safety on the presidential campaign trail, little follow-through has been signaled by President Trump and the White House on the subject. In a recent interview with Del Bigtree, Kennedy was asked if he was still working with President Trump and what was the status of the rumored Vaccine Safety Commission. Kennedy stated:
“The White House, almost a year ago, cut off all communication with me and with our community.”
Kennedy believes that after he was asked to run the Vaccine Safety Commission, President Trump received blowback from the pharmaceutical industry. Speaking on the recent HHS notice, Kennedy stated:
“This is the first of a barrage of legal approaches that we’ve devised. A legal strategy that we believe will ultimately bring support to the parents, protect these children finally and bring justice to the families that have been injured.”
The recent HHS admission has added yet another major data point showing that regulatory agencies tasked with vaccine safety oversight are asleep at the wheel and have been for some time. Perhaps moving forward, a larger conversation encompassing the inconvenient fact about lack of vaccine safety oversight by HHS can take root in the mainstream. Attempts to neutralize a growing population of vaccine critics, from diverse segments of society, with overly simplistic public relations slogans like ‘safe and effective’ or ‘anti-vax’ only serve to decrease faith and trust in regulatory agencies and the media outlets that perpetuate the one-sided narrative. A wider discussion is taking place, with sound science, legal fortitude, and expansive mobilization throughout American communities. History is showing that the methods and theories of the proponents of the one-size-fits-all-mandatory vaccine are often rooted in persecution and unsettled science rather than in open discussion, truth and justice.
Since his meeting with Kennedy, and despite him previously critizing the US vaccine schedule and its safety on the presidential campaign trail, little follow-through has been signaled by President Trump and the White House on the subject. In a recent interview with Del Bigtree, Kennedy was asked if he was still working with President Trump and what was the status of the rumored Vaccine Safety Commission. Kennedy stated:
“The White House, almost a year ago, cut off all communication with me and with our community.”
Kennedy believes that after he was asked to run the Vaccine Safety Commission, President Trump received blowback from the pharmaceutical industry. Speaking on the recent HHS notice, Kennedy stated:
“This is the first of a barrage of legal approaches that we’ve devised. A legal strategy that we believe will ultimately bring support to the parents, protect these children finally and bring justice to the families that have been injured.”
The recent HHS admission has added yet another major data point showing that regulatory agencies tasked with vaccine safety oversight are asleep at the wheel and have been for some time. Perhaps moving forward, a larger conversation encompassing the inconvenient fact about lack of vaccine safety oversight by HHS can take root in the mainstream. Attempts to neutralize a growing population of vaccine critics, from diverse segments of society, with overly simplistic public relations slogans like ‘safe and effective’ or ‘anti-vax’ only serve to decrease faith and trust in regulatory agencies and the media outlets that perpetuate the one-sided narrative. A wider discussion is taking place, with sound science, legal fortitude, and expansive mobilization throughout American communities. History is showing that the methods and theories of the proponents of the one-size-fits-all-mandatory vaccine are often rooted in persecution and unsettled science rather than in open discussion, truth and justice.
RSS Feed