View Single Post
Old 01-06-2011, 09:37 AM   #50
fredr123
Franchise Player
 
fredr123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403 View Post
Now I'm not a MedMal or Tort attorney, but I'm pretty sure that the "federal vaccine court" is only accesible by passing through a wardrobe of some sort. It's also interesting to note that the linked article has 3 sources, none of which are related to the claimed award of damages based on a vaccine causing autism like symptoms. Good stuff Mikey.
I LOLed at the wardrobe comment.

I'm sure Mikey and the author of the article were referring to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP): http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/

Quote:
The VICP is a no-fault alternative to the traditional tort system for resolving vaccine injury claims that provides compensation to people found to be injured by certain vaccines. The U. S. Court of Federal Claims decides who will be paid.
There's more information about the VICP and the omnibus autism proceedings here: http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensat...proceeding.htm

Long story short, the US Federal Court (and Federal Court of Appeal in some cases) has consistently found no causal link between MMR vaccines and autism in any of various test cases heard to date based on any of the three theories of causation alleged.

Also, based on what I pieced together from that article, it seems that "Hannah" settled out of court and was not awarded damages of any sort. As valo and others can attest, out of court settlements rarely mean that a party is admitting liability in any way. There are plenty of valid reasons for settling a claim even if you ultimately may be vindicated.
fredr123 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to fredr123 For This Useful Post: