Was reading this tonight and couldn’t help but chuckle over this remark:
Funny. I don’t think nearly half of the amount the fund has collected being disbursed is eligible for the word, ‘only.’ I know its relative, but I would think something like, say, $1 million, would be a fraction suitable for the word ‘only.’ I think a pay out of $2.7 billion represents a really sizable payout, and if this were a sane world, would be a cause for alarm. I felt the tug at my funny bone when I read the quote from Julia Lawless, GOP press secretary of U.S. Senate Finance Committee:
First off, the Joint Committee on Taxation is clear this bill is not a tax increase. Secondly, the legislation is about ensuring vaccine manufacturers produce vaccines for the next flu season – not past flu seasons. Thirdly, the threat of litigation has been so severe against these manufacturers that this compensation fund had to be created or they would not have produced these vaccines. That threat of litigation still exists and so does the need for vaccines. We need to be careful how that fund is financed, because having it run a deficit could be dangerous when our goal is to ensure the production of safe vaccines.
Let’s see if we can work this out in our heads. The fund was created because of the high threat of litigation, which evidently still exists. Presumably, then, if the system was fair, and run like other tort systems, the vaccine producers would have had their pants sued off of them repeatedly by now, the $2.7 billion a tiny fraction of what they probably deserved to pay.
I checked out the link they provided just for giggles, and the payout for fiscal year 2013 was a total of $172,313,339 paid out to 253 people. This is an average payout of $681,080 per person. These must have been some reactions, no??!?! And if the government hadn’t intervened, I bet this $681,080 each would have been significantly higher sums the pharma companies would have had to pay out.
But here is the kicker… the goal of this fund is to “ensure the production of safe vaccines.” Now, I ask you, why would there be a “threat of litigation” if the vaccines were safe?
This doesn’t pass the ‘smell’ test. Plain reason suggests that if the vaccines were safe, there wouldn’t be a ‘severe’ risk of litigation.
Methinks that if the vaccine companies, and the government itself, had to defend themselves in an actual court of law, we’d find out that the effectiveness of vaccines has been blown well out of proportion. I doubt very much that only 253 people would have been vindicated in a fair court of law where the government hasn’t rigged the system under the guise of it being a “extremely important public health matter.”
To what degree the system is rigged, we’ll never know, but every now and then we have people who accidentally let the cat out of the bag, as Julia Lawless did. They must think we’re too stupid to notice when they are talking out of both sides of their mouths.
There is a reason why so many people are fleeing the public school systems, holding the declarations of public health officials and elected nannies in contempt, and turning to ‘organic’ food, and this little story is just one little hint of it.