Dear Wayne - thanks for covering this case. I only became attuned to the vaccine issue after the global debacle that is the covid vaccine. However, I think your post also suggests a wider issue. Now probably all of the judges are going to be vaccinated with the covid vaccine, and tending to be on the older side as a profession, maybe even boostered (so at their 3rd, 4th, etc. vaccine). What will this mean going forward for any cases they have to adjudicate for mandates/covid vaccine injuries? Will they be so Blithe like the judge in this merck/shingles case? We know the sunken cost fallacy is so powerful. I can't imagine how difficult it will be for the judges who already have inflated egos to objectively analyze the flaws behind these dangerous products.
John, thank you for your comments. The shingles vaccine by Merck is not part of the NVICP, thus Merck does face liability for injuries from Zostavax. The problem with the first set, Group A, it is extreme difficulty of proving the plaintiffs contracted shingles from the wild virus, the varicella virus, or from Zostavax. However, Merck does face some big problems moving forward with the autoimmune disorders and diseases Group B and the last group, C, dealing with hearing and some vision injuries. These are substantial and Merck will probably settle before allowing this to get to a jury. The reason for the article is this. There are lot of people in the vax injury community that want to abolish the NVICP. That would be a very big mistake in my opinion. Adults who get injured from severe shoulder injuries and GBS (autoimmune) are receiving compensation as designed. The problem is the program has turned their back on the children. My solution would be to have Congress amend the Act to allow petitioners to exit the program and seek civil tort cases in the states. Most will not be successful, but the threat might pull PHarma back into the discussion.
I wish I had the guts to send it to a friend who just went for her mouse booster/flu jab, and is going to have her second Shingles vaxx in January.
I hope she will cotinue to be okay....but i am extremely apprehensive.
Can Group A appeal the dismissal? Of course if one wants to get HZV just get the gene therapy. Over 7,000 Americans report their experiences here: https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=AGE&GRAPH=ON&GROUP6=AGE&EVENTS=ON&PERPAGE=100&ESORT=AGE&SYMPTOMS=Herpes+zoster+%2810019974%29&VAX[]=COVID19&VAX[]=COVID19-2&STATE=JUSTUS
Yes they can. The appellate court has a fondness for challenging judge's decisions to dismiss without proper hearings.
Let’s hope sanity prevails and they make this federal judge do their job.
Dear Wayne - thanks for covering this case. I only became attuned to the vaccine issue after the global debacle that is the covid vaccine. However, I think your post also suggests a wider issue. Now probably all of the judges are going to be vaccinated with the covid vaccine, and tending to be on the older side as a profession, maybe even boostered (so at their 3rd, 4th, etc. vaccine). What will this mean going forward for any cases they have to adjudicate for mandates/covid vaccine injuries? Will they be so Blithe like the judge in this merck/shingles case? We know the sunken cost fallacy is so powerful. I can't imagine how difficult it will be for the judges who already have inflated egos to objectively analyze the flaws behind these dangerous products.
John, thank you for your comments. The shingles vaccine by Merck is not part of the NVICP, thus Merck does face liability for injuries from Zostavax. The problem with the first set, Group A, it is extreme difficulty of proving the plaintiffs contracted shingles from the wild virus, the varicella virus, or from Zostavax. However, Merck does face some big problems moving forward with the autoimmune disorders and diseases Group B and the last group, C, dealing with hearing and some vision injuries. These are substantial and Merck will probably settle before allowing this to get to a jury. The reason for the article is this. There are lot of people in the vax injury community that want to abolish the NVICP. That would be a very big mistake in my opinion. Adults who get injured from severe shoulder injuries and GBS (autoimmune) are receiving compensation as designed. The problem is the program has turned their back on the children. My solution would be to have Congress amend the Act to allow petitioners to exit the program and seek civil tort cases in the states. Most will not be successful, but the threat might pull PHarma back into the discussion.
Thanks, Wayne, for clarifying. I only recently learned about the NVICP so I appreciate the additional info about the different legal approaches.
https://stopworldcontrol.com/mark/?inf_contact_key=86e0bb5addd040d63a4342c7d9d62100842e902fbefb79ab9abae13bfcb46658
***
I would reason that the three following 2022 authors will do the job... of what to do to stop the awful mess we're in:
The New Abnormal: The Rise of the Biomedical Security State
Aaron Kheriaty (from page 199)
Dying to be Free How America's Ruling Class Is Killing and Bankrupting Americans, and What to Do About It
Leland Stillman (Chap. 10, Liberty or Death, p. 196)
Lies My Gov't Told Me: And the Better Future Coming (Children's Health Defense)
Robert W Malone MD MS (from page 1 to the last)
May God bless you!