Quote:
Originally Posted by [MERIT]
Ah, so it's semantics. Thanks for clearing that up.
No one said that no safety reports exist on vaccines, just that reporting regulations weren't being properly followed.
And where were you in the Vaccine Safety thread?
|
Well again, it's not that they weren't followed. The NCVIA's wording is pretty clear that they needed to issue a report by 1988, but was unclear on if/when they need to provide reports past that [so if these reports don't exist it is not against proper protocol]. The other part that is unclear is if these reports would be subject to public view or not (ie can be summoned via FOIA) [so if the reports do in fact exist, they do not necessarily need to be handed over to the plaintiff at request]. I'm also no professional in medicinal case law, so other provisions or acts could have been enacted since 1986 that supersede precedence here.
Either way, it looks to me like the plaintiff was going for a "gotcha" kind of result. They had to know the FOIA wouldn't go through (again the subpart they specifically cite is clearly not what they purport it to be), and if they made a complaint they can quietly dismiss their own claim while simultaneously claiming the DHHS didn't provide the documents. The existence (or submittal) of these documents doesn't prove or disprove anything, but these articles are making it out to be a smoking gun for vaccine dismissal. Which is not only disingenuous, but dangerously so.