Should immunity for pharmaceutical firms should be removed in cases where the companies’ vaccines cause injuries?

[Kelley1]

Do pharmaceutical companies have legal immunity?

Sixty percent of voters responding to the poll agreed that vaccine manufacturers should be stripped of immunity in such cases, including 33 percent who strongly backed withdrawing the immunity.

Majorities across all age groups, genders, and races also supported the immunity abolishment.

Just 27.5 percent of respondents did not think the immunity should end, while 12.6 percent of respondents said they were not sure.

The survey was carried out by Big Data Poll for the 1776 Law Center.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/most-voters-want-immunity-vaccine-companies-removed-poll

[loveslongnails]

All vaccines carry a risk factor. If the company puts out false data, altered data, incomplete or misleading data, and acts in bad faith, they must be held responsible. The problem now is that the fox is watching the hen house. The companies can't be trusted, the FDA can't be trusted, the CDC is in shambles, and worm-brained ex heroin addict is running Dept of God Help Us in the USA.

[Lliam]

No manufacturer of any product should be immune from liability if their product causes harm when used properly.

As things stand, vaccine manufacturers have a vested interest in marketing products that cause grievous harm to millions.

Pharma companies are liable, why not vaccine manufacturers?

[Lliam]

Thank you for the MHO, Kelley.

[OlderAndWiser]

The answer would depend on whether the government was pressuring companies to develop a vaccine and get it to the market as quickly as possible.

[madhatters4]

so one person has a reaction and another person has a different reaction to the same vaccine

why is that the fault of the pharmaceutical company?

[Kelley1]

For the same reason, food manufacturers are responsible when people get sick over contaminated food, even though not everyone gets sick.

[madhatters4]

what's the contamination in the vaccine that would be the fault of the pharmaceutical company?
sure if a batch of vaccines is contaminated then of course it would be the fault of the pharma company but they'd have to prove the contaminate that resulted in people's bad reactions

[abc3643]

Before commenting any opinions I may have on this subject, let's do some due diligence so we have proper context for this question...

The following comes from a Google Gemini "AI Overview":

===================

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA) established a federal, no-fault system to compensate vaccine-related injuries, protecting manufacturers from liability to ensure a stable vaccine supply. It created the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), funded by a 75-cent excise tax on vaccines, which handles claims through a specialized court.

Key aspects of the 1986 Act include:

• Liability Shield: Manufacturers and healthcare providers are largely immune from lawsuits for vaccine-related injuries or deaths.
• No-Fault Compensation: Injured parties can receive compensation without proving negligence or a manufacturing defect.
• Vaccine Injury Table: Defines specific injuries and timelines for which compensation is automatically considered if criteria are met.
• Legal Process: Claims are filed in the U. S. Court of Federal Claims, often referred to as "vaccine court," rather than through traditional civil litigation.
• Adverse Event Reporting: The Act helped establish the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

The legislation was passed in response to a surge in lawsuits against manufacturers of the DTP vaccine in the early 1980s, which threatened to halt the supply of vaccines.

===================

So, what this overview is telling us is that, from a legal perspective, the party injured by a vaccine still has "remedy" even if the pharmaceutical companies are largely immune in civil cases. (They would not be immune in criminal cases.)

For clarity, this is what "remedy" means in legal terms:
https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1784

=====
remedy
n. the means to achieve justice in any matter in which legal rights are involved. Remedies may be ordered by the court, granted by judgment after trial or hearing, by agreement (settlement) between the person claiming harm and the person he/she believes has caused it, and by the automatic operation of law. Some remedies require that certain acts be performed or prohibited (originally called "equity"); others involve payment of money to cover loss due to injury or breach of contract; and still others require a court's declaration of the rights of the parties and an order to honor them. An "extraordinary remedy" is a means employed by a judge to meet particular problems, such as appointment of a referee, master or receiver to investigate, report or take charge of property. A "provisional remedy" is a temporary solution to hold matters in status quo pending a final decision or an attempt to see if the remedy will work.
=====

Given that the injured party can apply for remedy and that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA) enables the pharmaceutical industry to not be hampered with making vaccines, I am fine with the status quo.

[abc3643]

*... (NCVIA) enables the pharmaceutical industry to not be bothered with lawsuits which might disrupt the vaccine production process. I am fine with the status quo. It's the greatest good for the greatest number.

[Chazmatazz269]

It has absolutely nothing to do with the “greatest good”. It’s about protecting their profit margins. And when democripps succeed in making all vaccines mandatory, the pharmaceutical companies no longer have ANY motivation to create safe and effective vaccines. They can sell you shots of pesticide and the taxpayers will pay off their hubris.
You’re pretty short sighted sometimes.

[abc3643]

@Chazmatazz269 Yeah, sure. You go with that.

[abc3643]

By the way, my comment about "the greatest good for the greatest number" is sort of what Congress had in mind while making this legislation... legislation passed in 1986 and signed by GOP god, Ronald Reagan.

[new-person]

Yes, 100%. If you tell people something is safe with little worry about anything happening, and something happens. The business should be held accountable no matter what kind of business it is.

Big pharma should be held accountable if you take a drug they approve, getting told "it will not harm you", or anything like that statement. Why let a business push out things that cause harm and not be responsible for their actions? If a drug harms you, causing illnesses or other health conditions from you taking the drug, the business that approved the drug should be held accountable. Someone should be, and it is not the Dr. s fault, because they was told it was safe. By who? Big pharma, that's who, so big pharma should be held accountable.

[jshm2]

No.

Like any "product" you are given risks and benefits, and you can read those, and agree to the terms of service before use.

It is fucking impossible to make something working for everyone. Even foods need to have allergy information on them and you get fuckwits who eat it and then complain about negative effects.

Personally, we SHOULD be eliminating people who are weak genetically and unable to handle vaccines. These are the fuckers who will spread the next pandemic.

[Kelley1]

That never happens. You are never informed, as the doctors will not take the time. They give the shots without ever explaining and/or giving you the risks and benefits. The government requires it, and citizens are allowed to decline.

[Kingofkings1992]

Fuckwits like you are the ones who should be exterminated

[WhiteBoyChill]

@Kingofkings1992 fr. This guy is fcking weird and toxic as all hell

[Kingofkings1992]

@WhiteBoyChill agreed

[Master_Debator]

yeah fuck them... They literally used force to make people get those shots for profit. Hold them accountable. Even for the people that wanted to get all the shots and did believe it was a cure to save us all from the world ending (retards).

That was a low blow to the retards... but seriously, they took the likes of CNN seriously even though every comercial break was sponsored by Phizer. I got the basic shots before they got exposed... my wife is military and it sort of was forced on me. I didn't go full retard and wanted boosters after it was pretty well known that the "Vaccine" didn't vacinate against shit. You still catch it... it's nothing more than a flu shot at best.

If they were serious about it, strictly reserved for old and fat people. Not forced on people that never get sick like me.

[WindAtMyBack]

Policy should not be determined by surveys such as this. People responding to a poll like this don't know enough about it, and not had time to think it through. It's simply a knee jerk reaction to something they know almost nothing about.

Drugs are very highly regulated, and are approved by a government agency after a tremendous amount of research and testing. There will always be negative side affects. That is taken into account during the approval process. Benefits vs risk.

If the proper testing is done, and there is no deception involved, I think they should have immunity. Without that, we may as well shut down all medical research. Because the extremely high risk involved will become even riskier.

If they use deception, cut corners, or hold back critical information, then throw the book at them.

[Chazmatazz269]

That last sentence is the only point at which you use any sense, and you still don’t get it. You CANNOT “throw the book at them”. They have absolute immunity!
The entire covid vaccine scam should have been enough to convince even the dimmest wits that all that “government regulation” that you claim is happening but know nothing about just like the assumption you made about poll respondents, it’s NOT happening. I worked at one of the biggest pharmaceutical companies on the planet for fifteen years, and i know for a fact that they can buy their way through any half-assed government intervention.
Once democripps successfully mandate all vaccines, those companies have absolutely NO motivation to produce safe and effective vaccines. They can force you to inject hydrochloric acid and IF your dumb*ss sues, the taxpayers pay the tab.
It’s 100% corruption for the sake of protecting profit margins. They absolutely do not give a sh*t who lives and who dies. There is something seriously wrong with you if you don’t understand that.

[WindAtMyBack]

@Chazmatazz269

You have no idea what the hell you are talking about. You are spouting pure bullshit. Get lost moron.

[NaultD]

What's the alternative?

Private pharmaceutical industry as a whole will never do jack shit as a global industry to do a common good ever again. businesses are legally obligated even punishable by law to give the highest return to shareholders at the expense of consumers.

[Chazmatazz269]

They haven’t done anything for “the common good” in the last seventy years. It’s all about profits. Why is it you lefties are all anti-capitalism until it’s Big Pharma calling the shots? Then corporations should be able to whatever they want with impunity?

[NaultD]

@Chazmatazz269 we could nationalized all medical issues.

seize the means of production so to say.

https://youtu.be/bIw3INYRNmY?si=Hoa0rGmGrdHR-5sc

[Twalli]

If the vaccine company has that lodtedcaa a side effect, thrn they're immune, because the risks were available. Still things like polio are probably worse than any side effect of the vaccine. It could explain why people were waiting in line for days to get it. It's risk versus reward. I really hope something would happen to me with the COVID-19 vaccine. Then I could believe it actually had an effect. Currently my bloodwork shows that the 10 doses of the vaccines didn't take, but most don't with me.

[Chazmatazz269]

It has been widely publicized that the vaccines were completely ineffective and relatively harmful to some. The harm to some is literally the only empirical evidence that Big Pharma wasn’t selling placebo shots.

[Twalli]

@Chazmatazz269 They were actually very effective. They reduced the chances of getting COVID-19 by 800% and reduced the chances of dying by 2,500%. That's a success. The difference between the COVID19 vaccine and many other vaccines is the endpoint they gave themselves. Death was the more immediate concern, so they sought to create a medicine to stop it for killing you. That's why it didn't help much with stopping people getting it, because they weren't focused on stopping that, just death from getting it. Making people 25 times less likely to die from it is a major victory.

[exitseven]

Jf a government forces people to take a vaccine they are the ones who should be held accountable.

[Kelley1]

That would be ideal, but it is not possible because the government rules and cannot be punished.

[Chazmatazz269]

Are you suggesting that people who willingly take vaccines don’t deserve recompense for the damages they incurred?

[Chazmatazz269]

100%, it never should have been codified.
The lunatic left doesn’t want to admit how completely corrupt it is to mandate vaccines where pharmaceutical companies can’t be held responsible for dangerous and ineffective products. They literally have NO incentive to make safe and effective products once they have that, and the majority of democrats are in favor of exactly that.

[Surely]

They should need to bear some responsibility for reactions to their pharmaceuticals.
On the flip side. Not everyone’s body reacts the same way to different things. For example. When babies are allergic to their own mother’s milk.

Plus it would drastically increase the amount of time it takes to develop new medicines. Even though I feel that Mother Earth provides natural cures for most conditions If only we only knew of them!

[Massageman]

Every treatment has risk factors, whether that treatment is a pill, surgery, infusion, injection, every treatment. Just because the companies put an encyclopedia of side effects- including death- on their commercials should get them off the hook.

[DryGermanGuy]

I’d say from a legal perspective, this is where the aspect of potential negligence comes in. 🧐

[lightbulb27]

not if they are required...

but that will clobber the vaccination rates as the lawsuits and costs mount...

a sticky wicket. what does china do? and russia?

[KostasKouvalis]

Absolutely! They should be held accountable like everyone else. So sick of these big companies getting away with hurting people

[Mike_Hum]

There should be zero immunity for any company for harm their products cause.

[FreyaRed]

They are billions with vaccines and want to earn more and you 'evil soul' want they are responsible for products they sell? It's antisemitic

[NathanDavis]

and what's next...

beer makers should go to jail or get sued if you get drunk and fucked up? lmao...

[Fireguy17]

Nope, they developed it, they tested it, they made it, they marketed it, they made money on it.

[msc545]

sure if you can actually conclusively prove that the vaccine caused a specific injury. I think 99.9% of the time you can't prove that.

[worldscolide]

I definitely agree, hold them to account.

[slatyb]

People don't even know what they are voting for.

[beefcakebradybatson]

YES !!!

[Cidknee]

Mo'natcha'!