Shot in the dark I'm not sure I trust any treatment that has to have a fund set up to pay damages to people who have been harmed by it. But then again, I didn't trust vaccines even before I learned of the $2.5 billion in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. That's right -- there's $2.5 billion set aside for people who have been injured by vaccines. And that money comes from a 75 cent tax placed on each and every injection given. But here's my question: If there is enough evidence that vaccines cause injury to warrant a tax on every single dose to establish an enormous compensation fund, why on earth do the "experts" keep on arguing that these injections are safe and don't cause problems like autism? As proof of their stance, they cite two studies done by the Institute of Medicine that apparently "reviewed the evidence and determined there was no link between vaccines and autism." That's two studies versus over 4,800 cases filed by parents who believe vaccines played a role in their children's autism. The first of these cases was scheduled to go before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims earlier this summer. Of course, according to the article I read, this is just a "test case." I'm not entirely sure what that means, but if I had to guess, I'd say the Feds are testing the waters to see if they're too hot to handle. And you can b et that if things start to look bad for the enormously profitable vaccine industry this "test" will come to a hasty conclusion with most of those nearly 5,000 cases left sadly unheard. Source:
"Washington court will hear autism vaccine suits," Reuters Health news, 6/11/07 | 
