Compensation For Covid-19 Vaccine Injuries

Written by Phillip Altman on January 10, 2024. Posted in Current News

It is not surprising that various COVID-19 “vaccine” injury compensation schemes have arisen following the rollout of the jabs which have been reported to be associated with the highest rate and absolute number of serious adverse events worldwide compared to any “vaccine” product in history.

The Australian government has “implemented a claims scheme for people who suffer a moderate to severe impact following an adverse reaction to a TGA-approved COVID-19 vaccine”. CLICK HERE to view.

Share

While the government continues with the “safe and effective” narrative, good luck to all those who apply for compensation.  My guess is that very few applications will be successful despite any evidence provided.

Alternatively, given the reported incidence of serious adverse effects, a number of legal firms have jumped on the bandwagon in relation to compensation.

MARSDENS LAW GROUP

https://www.marsdens.net.au/services/injury-compensation-law/covid-19-vaccine-scheme/

GUARDIAN INJURY LAW

https://www.guardianinjurylaw.com.au/blog/2022/january/covid-vax-comp-payable/

MURPHY’S LAW

https://www.murphys-law.com.au/compensation/covid-vaccine-injury-compensation/

Thanks to my readers for the links.

TEXAS vs PFIZER LEGAL CASE – WHO IS THE REAL CRIMINAL HERE?

Sasha Latypova has been providing commentary of the legal background to the release of the COVID-19 “vaccines” for some time. Her latest Substack of 9 Jan. 2024 (CLICK HERE) provides some interesting background to the pursuit of Pfizer in Texas.

As Sasha points out, The COVID-19 “vaccines” are not really “vaccines”, they are not pharmaceuticals (they are classified as “countermeasures”, they were not “approved” by the US FDA. In the US the COVID-19 “vaccines” are exempt from all pharmaceutical regulations covering manufacturing, distribution and marketing.  The manufacturers are exempt from all legal liability.

The US government and the manufacturers are protected by a web of carefully erected authorisations and immunities.  Sasha makes the point that the FDA shots can never be considered “FDA approved” because the clinical trials were never done under officially required “investigational status” according to FDA operational guidelines.  Furthermore, it is not the FDA’s job to “approve” the shots or to ensure their quality because they are not pharmaceuticals – they are “countermeasures”.

I’m not a lawyer but I fear Attorney General Paxton’s lawsuit against Pfizer will meet an insurmountable wall of Emergency Use Authorisation Law specifically designed to deflect any challenge.  This is not to say it should not happen because any and all revelations into the unprecedented release and mandatory use of poorly tested and potentially dangerous biologicals on any population needs to be exposed.

The situation in Australia is very different in that the COVID-19 “vaccines” were released under “Provisional Approval” by our Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA).  These biological products did not meet the usual safety standards which should have applied to gene-based products much less the safety requirements for conventional vaccines.  The unprecedented rate of serious adverse reactions resulting from the use of COVID-19 “vaccines” should come as no surprise.

The Provisional Approval system introduced in Australia in 2018 is now being used broadly to skirt around the necessity to provide comprehensive quality, safety and efficacy data on a broad range of pharmaceuticals thus avoiding lengthy delays and R&D costs before marketing commences.  The public has no idea what “Provisional Approval” really means and the government has made no attempt to clarify that “Provisional Approval” is very different to “Approval”. In my view, this Provisional Approval system can be easily abused under the popular Public-Private-Partnerships which have provided rivers of gold to commercial enterprises.   Trust in our TGA and government is at an all-time low.   If COVID has taught us anything, it has taught us that drug regulation needs to be tightened up….not relaxed.

I tend to agree with Sasha…..the real criminals here are the government.

MORE ON AUSTRALIA’S GAIN-OF-FUNCTION RESEARCH

It is now well recognised that dangerous Gain-of-Function (GoF) research was responsible for the creation of SARS-CoV-2.  Despite this, GoF continues across the world.  Apparently, no lessons have been learnt.

Australia’s role in GoF research, which always aims to design pathogens with an increased risk to human life, has been described in much detail in the ExcessDeathsAU Substack of 9 January.   CLICK HERE to view.

Knowing what we now know, will there be a review of all GoF research in Australia?

MY SUBSTACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARE ENTIRELY FREE.  I ENDEAVOUR TO BRING YOU THE TRUTH.  PLEASE SHARE WITH FRIENDS AND FAMILY.  THAT IS ALL I ASK.

Source: Substack

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.