FEDERAL INJUNCTION Suspend Vaccine Licenses

Justification for a Federal Injunction to suspend all vaccine licenses based on unreasonable health risks and causal links to chronic disease pandemics

Since the 1970s the incidence rates for numerous chronic gastrointestinal, neurological, immune and autoimmune disorders have exploded into pandemics that now affect about one third of all school-aged children. [H.E. Buttram, Medical Veritas, 2008 5:1820-1827. (Ref. 1-2)]

Over the last twenty years, independent research scientists have massed a tsunami of good quality biological data and temporal data, which, if graded under QER (quality of evidence ratings) and EBM (evidence-based medicine) standards, would show the evidence of vaccine dangers far more sound than the evidence compiled by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (SHHS) to promote vaccine safety. [Ref. 5-7, 35]

Indeed, if assessed collectively, this independent research shows that these pandemic-inducing vaccine dangers from the National Vaccine Program (NVP) and indirectly the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) are "more likely than not" [in re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 371, 90 S.Ct. 1068 (1970) ("Simply requires the trier of fact to believe that the existence of a fact is more probable than its nonexistence")], the primary causes for the above pandemics. The NVP is an umbrella for the vaccination activities of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), National Institute of Health (NIH), Advisory Committee for Immunization Practice (ACIP) and the Food and Drug Agency (FDA) among others.

Horrified by the portion of the research that linked the current autism pandemic to the vaccines that contained mercury poisoning to increase pharmaceutical industry profits, suffering parents teamed up with heroic researchers such as Paul G. King, PhD (CoMeD, Inc., Lake Hiawatha, NJ) and numerous others, presented high quality biological data showing the harm mercury was causing to our children to members of Congress, the FDA, the CDC, and several IOM committees. [SEE: David Kirby’s Evidence of Harm. Published by St. Martins Press, New York, 2005. (Ref. 3)]
It was all to no avail. These government agencies rejected all the high quality data that linked mercury to autism in favor of poor quality data, which supported their hypothesis that mercury-poisoning vaccines were safe, even though the agencies knew their data was fraudulently based on altered data. [SEE: Kirby at p. 382, supra. (Ref. 3) and R.L. Blaylock, Medical Veritas, 2008 Apr.; 5(1):1714-1726. (Ref. 4).]

Recognizing all of these unsung heroes, the profound pain that millions of affected families suffer, the profound professional courage of the unnamed researchers, and the correctly petitioned Congressional Hearings (U.S. Congressional Hearings on Vaccine Safety, 1999-Dec., 2004),  that refused to take corrective action when presented with data that showed a clear and present danger (Ref. 3), this proposal touches upon the tsunami of independent research that has ensued following the U.S. Congressional Hearings, and in large measure because of the hearings, that indisputably link the NVP/NVICP to the current global pandemic crisis.
In addition, this proposal contrasts the higher quality of this new evidence with the statutory duties and obligations of the SHHS to be aware of such new evidence and to take it into account in their policies. (42 USC § 300aa-2 and § 300aa-26)

Next, the proposal outlines the SHHS’ Statutory Safety duties to assure that every aspect of vaccine research, development, testing, licensing, and warning processes assure a safe product, and that the licenses for vaccines that are subsequently proven to be unreasonably dangerous are suspended and revoked. These noble statutory duties are then contrasted with examples of reckless misconduct wherein the SHHS-managed agencies deliberately disregarded nearly all of these statutorily mandated protections and safeguards for seemingly nefarious reasons. (42 USC §§ 300aa–26 and 300aa–27)

Applying the principles of Ockham’s Razor through a legal lens, the proposal then advocates rejection of any and all of the potential solutions to the safety crisis proposed by the CDC, FDA, and IOM because these well-intended forums are overly complicated by politics and pharmaceutical industry financial interests, which have so infected these forums as to make them incapable of protecting the American public, or performing their statutory duties.

Since the current safety statutes governing both vaccine safety and the SHHS conduct are more than adequate to protect citizens from unsafe and unreasonably dangerous vaccines, this proposal suggests filing suit under 42 USC § 300aa–31 to enforce the statutorily mandated duties of 42 USC §§ 300aa–25 though 300aa–27, that have been knowingly disregarded for more than 20 years by the SHHS. Enforcing current laws under professional standards would protect all concerned individuals. Since all CDC schedule vaccines are unreasonably dangerous under independent professional standards, an injunction could be obtained to suspend all unsafe vaccine licenses since this is something the SHHS should have done but failed to do. Moreover, since all vaccines are known by the SHHS to be unreasonably dangerous to the public, this conduct is reckless, shocks the conscience and allows protective relief under due process protections of a 28 USC § 1331 "Bivens Action".

Unlike IOM forums, the federal judiciary court can act unilaterally to ban products based on flawed methodology and data; it should accept quality biological studies over scientifically unsound population surveys; should not be influenced by the pharmaceutical industry or politicians; routinely restrains government agencies, and should not hesitate to suspend the NVP if warranted by the evidence. In sum, the Federal District Court should protect the public from the SHHS.

FULL REPORT: Medical Veritas