AHRP reports that history is about to repeat itself:
In the 1976 swine flu vaccine program, 40 million people were vaccinated with an inadequately tested vaccine. The government gave the vaccine manufacturers immunity from liability, but created an alternative compensation program. Five thousand people sought benefits for vaccine injuries.
Today, as in 1976, official concern has focused on flu vaccine availability without regard for the safety of an H1N1 vaccine. Many national regulatory agencies have set-up fast-track approval processes for the H1N1 vaccine, which means that a vaccine might be licensed without the usual safety and efficacy data requirements. Vaccine safety will therefore have to be monitored through post-marketing surveillance.
But there is reason for concern that we will repeat the debacle of the 1976 H1N1 outbreak in the USA, where mass vaccination was associated with complications, which stopped the campaign and led to the withdrawal of the vaccine.
What’s more, today, the government has NOT established an ALTERNATIVE COMPENSATION PROGRAM – as it had in 1976. The existing vaccine compensation program covers only designated vaccines and does NOT cover most adult vaccines.
The U.S. government has adopted (what critics regard) a reckless policy encouraging (if not mandating) the use of untested controversial vaccines with novel adjuvants likely to be used to strengthen vaccines and stretch the supply–they are named MF59 (Novartis) and ASO3 (Glaxo Smith-Kline). Only 3 vaccines using these adjuvants have been licensed in Europe, and none have been given a license in the US.
It is likely that these adjuvants will cause far more damage and autoimmune illness than the swine vaccine used in 1976.
Indeed, manufacturers have been given immunity from liability, as have the government program planners. But no compensation mechanism has been created for citizens who are likely to suffer harm. This is but a tacit acknowledgement that the vaccines are likely to produce harm.