Vaccine Injury – A rare glimpse of the tip of the iceberg

I have published twice with respect to vaccines, and with one post going viral after 30,000 people read my call for Pro-Truth in place of the war between Pro-Vax and Anti-Vax positions: A Call for Pro-Truth

I feel called to publish a third time after Viewing a very compelling two year old Congressional Briefing about issues with the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) in the US by Professor Mary Holland of the NYU Law School and Rolf Hazelhurst a State Assistant District Attorney General who appears as a father and a lawyer with experience of the Claim System.

The frequent denial of any material risks from vaccines by those who are Pro-Vax is not borne out in reality. If you read the package insert of any vaccine or indeed any medicine there are always many side effects and risks listed.

The Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System in every country exists because populations are diverse and a certain percentage of people do get reactions to vaccines and sometimes severe reactions or death.

The Congressional Briefing is herewith: Congressional Briefing Video

  
 
The briefing is conducted by two very credible people, and Professor Holland is clear that she understands the importance of Vaccines, but is damning in her description of the path that has been taken by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program versus the undertakings given when it was created in 1986 replacing conventional legal rights to damages.

As I have outlined in my previous blogs, vaccination is a massive global business. You have to understand the interaction of that business, it’s vested interests, and the objectives of Public Health Officials and Epidemiologists whose priorities are control of disease over side effects and the numbers of lives lost to vaccines.

US Congress committed in 1986 to focus investment into better vaccines with reduced side effects and injuries, and far from that focus the industry funds spin machines that deny any negative effects. Denial of a problem makes a focus on solutions nigh on impossible.

The attached 2012 article published by the National Vaccine Information Centre challenges the accuracy, relevance and unsurprisingly the degree of participation by Doctors in Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting, which it estimates at between 1% and 10% :NVIC Article on VAERS Limitations

The Congressional Briefing makes it clear that the VICP has adopted a culture of limiting admission of vaccine injury, restricting access to information, and making it very difficult to make claims and navigate their process. The interests served by this culture are Government Costs, Public Support for Vaccination, and the commercial interests of the vaccine manufacturers. Those not served by this culture are the people, who the government is supposed to exist to serve. if this culture is necessary to balance the budget that speaks to the need to improve vaccine safety to reduce injuries and hence payouts.

I reiterate my position, I am in favour of good vaccines when risks of disease are high. I have chosen to be vaccinated several times in my adult life when travelling and in conjunction with working as a Senior Executive in a medical manufacturing laboratory environment for seven years. I have also refused vaccines where the risk and consequence did not justify having the vaccine. It is not black and white and when it comes to infants, the Congressional Briefing makes it clear there are not just risks, but severe consequences for a percentage of those vaccinated.

So I turn my attention to Australia and the effective mandating of the entire Vaccine Schedule for every child by the adoption of the Murdoch Press lead campaigns turned government policies ‘No Jab No Play’ and ‘No Jab No Pay’.

I draw your attention to the fact that James Murdoch was a director for vaccine manufacturer GSK prior to the point where it suited them better for him to distance himself from them as the public influencing campaigns began rolling out through his family’s empire.

That commercial interests have been successful in moving very close to eliminating choice for families reliant on social support payments and who wish to enrol their children in daycare or schooling is abhorrent on any level. With the very real risks and severity of consequences outlined in the Congressional Briefing it is gross negligence and abuse of power.

To my writing on this subject I bring 12 years as a commercial executive in Medical Diagnostics and Medical Devices, experience with regulators like the FDA and TGA, and an intimate knowledge of the impact of business drivers on science, markets, policy, and outcomes. My passion is business that honours the community it exists to serve. It is my contention that the vaccine industry is directed in a way that they are nowhere close to that and serve the dollar first and foremost.
Ura P Auckland

Writer and Sustainable Value Creation Adviser

One comment on “Vaccine Injury – A rare glimpse of the tip of the iceberg

  1. I am Australian, and I believe what our Government is doing is not only unjust, it takes away our Freedom to chose. Our freedom to live our lives with the best interest of our Children at heart. I wrote a passionate blog post because I won’t be made to do anything that goes against my research, my knowledge and my Mothers instinct to protect my children no matter what.
    Its not that I am against immunization – what I am against is that the fact we are no longer allowed to chose. If it is okay I can leave my blog link here to see what your thoughts are on the matter?
    Cheers
    Lisa from “new life on the road”

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s