Americans are routinely told by traditional medical doctors, healthcare providers, government agencies and elected officials that “vaccines are safe,” and yet that doesn’t explain why billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent to compensate families whose little loved ones have been severely affected or killed by vaccines.
In all, according to official federal government figures, taxpayers are on the hook for more than $3.3 billion in compensation costs, as noted by the Health Resources and Services Administration, which tracks payouts made via the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
“Being awarded compensation for a petition does not necessarily mean that the vaccine caused the alleged injury. In fact: Over 80 percent of all compensation awarded by the VICP comes as result of a negotiated settlement between the parties in which HHS has not concluded, based upon review of the evidence, that the alleged vaccine(s) caused the alleged injury,” the HRSA noted in a recent report.
But then when has money ever been a consideration for the federal government? And in order to bolster the government’s own claims that “vaccines are safe,” why wouldn’t Uncle Sam litigate – if he’s right?
The fact is, even the government admits that vaccines are not 100 percent safe, even while attempting to downplay the dangers:
The United States has the safest, most effective vaccine supply in history. In the majority of cases, vaccines cause no side effects, however they can occur, as with any medication—but most are mild. Very rarely, people experience more serious side effects, like allergic reactions.
In those instances, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) allows individuals to file a petition for compensation.
Vaccine makers off the hook financially and otherwise
The compensation fund was begun in 1986 for the very reasons vaccine choice advocates routinely attempt to point out – because of bad vaccines.
As reported by Health Impact News:
In 1986 the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was established by Congress because the drug manufacturers threatened to stop manufacturing vaccines if they were not granted legal immunity from damages due to vaccines. It was no longer profitable for them to continue manufacturing vaccines in a free market, because of the large amount of lawsuits for injuries and deaths due to vaccines. So instead of requiring the drug companies to produce safer vaccines, Congress granted them total immunity from civil litigation due to injuries or deaths resulting from vaccines.
What’s more, as mentioned, taxpayers are on the hook for financing the compensation fund – not the vaccine makers.
Health Impact News reported further that, as of mid-March, the compensation program held more than $3.5 billion, a fund that is fed by a 75-cent tax on all vaccines administered.
And speaking of litigation, it turns out that the government isn’t nearly so charitable either. Health Impact News further notes that the government does indeed spend millions to fight some claims, postponing inevitable settlements as long as a decade and causing further (undue) pain to grieving families.
‘Modern scientific delusion’
According to HRSA report:
— Total number of vaccines distributed, 1/1/2006 – 12/31/2014 = 2,532,428,541
— Total number of vaccine injury awards, FY 2006 – FY 2014 = 2,146
— Total amount of vaccine injury awards, FY 2006 – FY 2014 = $1,306,003,930.68
And there is the autism–vaccine link, as Natural News editor Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, has often referenced.
“[T]he modern scientific delusion about vaccines has been predicated on the belief that vaccines only offer benefits while imposing zero risks. This is the anti-science quackery which is brazenly repeated by the CDC, vaccine manufacturers, doctors and health organizations,” Adams, director of the Consumer Wellness Center and author of the upcoming book Forensic Foods, wrote in August 2014, after a leading scientist revealed scientific fraud at the CDC.
“A more honest analysis of vaccines would have to conclude that vaccines come with some level of inherent risk of harm and death. Scientists can argue all day about the size of such risks, but no rational person can ever honestly say such risks are zero.”