S.3 - Legislation Protecting Pharma from Liability Under the Guise of Protecting Americans

For Release On: Contact: Stephanie Morris February 8, 2005 202-628-7772 smorris@venturecommunications.com Legislation Protecting Vaccine Manufacturers from Liability Under the Guise of Protecting Americans from Terror Introduced by Senator Gregg SafeMinds Urges Opposition to Senate Bill Denying Compensation to Victims of Mercury Related Neurological Problems Resulting from FDA Approved Medications Washington, DC —Once again, Senators Gregg (R-NH) and Frist (R-TN) have introduced legislation to shield the pharmaceutical industry from responsibility for exposing American children to harmful levels of mercury from thimerosal, a mercury containing preservative widely used in infant vaccines. The bill, S. 3, “Protecting America in the War on Terror Act of 2005” introduced on January 24th includes language that protects vaccine producers from product liability under the guise of shielding the nation from biological terrorism and increasing the death benefit paid to US soldiers. SafeMinds, an advocacy group committed to raising awareness about causal links between the mercury and neurodevelopmental disorders like ADD/ADHD and autism, strongly opposes this effort. As this bill is at the top of the legislative docket it has the full support of Senator Frist. This legislation marks the fourth occasion the Senator has attempted to insulate the vaccine industry from product liability by legally blocking civil claims for injuries caused by the mercury based vaccine ingredient. Three prior attempts to provide similar unprecedented protections for pharmaceutical companies have failed due to opposition by parents of mercury-injured children. “This is possibly the most egregious bill introduced yet as it inappropriately ties the provision to legislation designed to compensate the families of US Soldiers killed in action and overrides state laws where legislators have had full and open discussions about the issue…something the authors of S. 3 have failed to undertake.” stated Lyn Redwood, president of SafeMinds. “Not since the previous late night addition of similar language in the Homeland Security Bill in 2002 have we seen such blatant disregard for civil justice.” An article in the LA Times on February 8th, 2005 uncovers evidence that the harmful effects of thimerosal were known to vaccine makers as early as 1991 but that neither the pharmaceutical industry nor the government took appropriate steps to prohibit mercury-based preservatives. The article, titled ’91 Memo Warned of Mercury in Shots, states that: “A memo from Merck & Co. shows that, nearly a decade before the first public disclosure, senior executives were concerned that infants were getting an elevated does of mercury in vaccinations containing a widely used sterilizing agent…6-month-old children who received their shots on time would get a mercury does up to 87 times higher than the guidelines for the maximum daily consumption of mercury from fish.” The provision in this particular piece of legislation, which has no relation to the war on terror, smacks of payback. The pharmaceutical industry is at the top of the donors lists for both Senators Gregg and Frist. Internal documents reviewed as a result of discovery in current litigation filed against the pharmaceutical giant reveal that Eli Lilly was aware of concerns resulting from thimerosal exposure since the early 1940's and was advised by its Medical Science Department in 1967 that the claim "Non-toxic" be removed from its thimerosal labels. Lilly's own materials safety data sheet acknowledges that exposure in children may cause mild to severe mental retardation and that mercury poisoning may occur. S. 3 contains provisions that will: · Preclude lawsuits against vaccine makers · Override state legislation that protects its citizen from dangerous vaccine components · Eliminates a state legislature’s power to warn its citizens of the dangers of vaccine additives (such as thimerosal) making recent legislation banning the use of the mercury containing vaccines in California and Iowa void. · Allow the Department of Justice to design more restrictions on access to the vaccine court and to prevent public access to information on vaccine safety · Provide unprecedented tax breaks and patent protection to large pharmaceutical corporations More information about neurodevelopmental disorders, autism and mercury exposure may be found at www.safeminds.org or by calling Stephanie Morris at 202-628-7772.

"they no longer use mercury in vaccines"
It's a common misconception that mercury was removed in 1999. It was only recommended then, not mandated. Here is a link to vaccines still containing thimerosal: http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm

"all the legislation against pharmaceutical companies is going to make it cost-prohibitive for them to make vaccines any longer."
This is simply not true. Do you know how much it costs to raise an autistic child? Most services are not covered by insurance. Thousands of parents are going broke trying to help their children and many of these marriages are sadly ending in divorce. Providing blanket protection to an entire industry is just sickening. The drug companies knew that mercury was a neurotoxin and they knew that our children were being exposed to it 87X the safety limit. But they did nothing about it. See my prior post for evidence that thimerosal caused autism: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1349360/posts?page=10

This is simply not true. Do you know how much it costs to raise an autistic child?

I don't. But to clarify my point, the companies will just discontinue the development and production of the vaccines for fear of lawsuits. Look at what is happening with the flu vaccine...that is what we can expect with all childhood illness vaccines in the future.

I agree that this is something we need out in the open for a free and fair discussion, but it does seem, from your link, that there is some conflicting evidence about the link betwwen vaccines and autism, and almost none of the vaccines given on the list contain mercury or thimerosal any longer.

"But to clarify my point, the companies will just discontinue the development and production of the vaccines for fear of lawsuits."

What are you basing that information on? So are you saying that we shouldn't hold vaccine makers to high levels of safety standards? If they are not held responsible for the adverse effects of their products that is exactly what will happen. How would you feel if it was your son that was mercury poisoned from a mandated vaccine and you were told that you had no recourse because we're worried that the drug companies might stop producing vaccines?

"Look at what is happening with the flu vaccine..."

What is happening with the flu vaccine? Are you referring to the dwindling number of drug companies producing the flu vaccine? The reason for this is not lawsuits. Flu vaccines simply aren't generating enough revenue. That's why some companies have stopped producing it. Why doesn't it generate enough revenue? Maybe because it doesn't even work. Check out this article questioning the effectiveness of the flu vaccine on children under two: http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/InfluenzaVaxInfants.pdf and this one that states flu vaccines aren't reducing flu-related deaths among Americans over 65: http://www.cleveland.com/flu/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/isflu/110847070887750.xml

"I agree that this is something we need out in the open for a free and fair discussion"

I'm glad to hear you say that. The S.3 bill will prevent a free & fair discussion on this topic.

"but it does seem, from your link, that there is some conflicting evidence about the link betwwen vaccines and autism"

There is absolutely conflicting evidence about the link. The drug companies fund many studies to prove their point and that is mostly what you hear about on the news.

"and almost none of the vaccines given on the list contain mercury or thimerosal any longer"

When you're talking about a neurotoxin like mercury, the 2nd most toxic substance on the planet, "almost none" is not nearly good enough. There is absolutely no good reason why anyone should be in favor of keeping mercury in medicine. The S.3 bill will overturn two state laws (California & Iowa) that ban mercury.

Listen to this segment Don Imus did on Friday. It's very informative and relevant to this specific topic. Go to www.wfan.com and click on the Imus link from March 4 on mercury/vaccines. You need RealPlayer to listen to it.

Even though thimerosal is removed from many vaccines as an ingredient, did you know that the drug companies still use it during the production process so that they don't need to work in a sterile environment? They attempt to remove the mercury later on in the process but as the report below indicates that may not be good enough.

VACCINATION - Mercury, Thimerosal
An investigation by the Health Advocacy in the Public Interest (HAPI)
found
that vaccines marketed as "mercury-free" still contain mercury. Earlier
this
year, HAPI arranged to have 4 vials of vaccine tested by Doctor's Data,
an
independent laboratory specializing in heavy metal testing. The
manufacturers of 2 of the vials stated that the vaccine contained only
trace
amounts of mercury, while the other 2 vials stated they were completely
mercury free.

All 4 vaccine vials tested contained mercury. All 4 vials also
contained
aluminum, one 9 times more than the other 3, which significantly
enhances
the toxicity of mercury, which may cause neuronal death in the brain.
It is
noted that manufacturers voluntarily began producing mercury-free
vaccines
in 1999. HAPI has asked the Food and Drug Administration to take
actions
against this mislabeling and misrepresentation of ingredients in
FDA-licensed vaccines. Officials from this group state that their
investigation has revealed that thimerosal, which is a preservative
that has
approximately 50% mercury, is still being used to produce most
vaccines, and
is simply filtered out afterwards. Some researchers state that mercury
binds
to the antigenic protein in vaccines and cannot be completely removed.
"HAPI: "Mercury-Free" Vaccines Still Contain Mercury," Autism Res Rev
Int,
2004;18(3):2. (Address: www.AutismResearchInstitute.com)/Health
Advocacy in
the Public Interest,

August 2004. 42505

The reason for this is not lawsuits.

Actually, from some friends at Big Pharma, that is a MAIN concern.

Flu vaccines simply aren't generating enough revenue. That's why some companies have stopped producing it. Why doesn't it generate enough revenue? Maybe because it doesn't even work.

Whether they work or not doesn't seem to stop people from buying them out of pocket, but they COULD generate positive PR about pharmaceutical companies, which they sorely need. However, enough people have attempted to sue flu vaccine manufacturers because they get sick or die from the flu even though they were vaccinated against it that it makes it a lose-lose situation.

So are you saying that we shouldn't hold vaccine makers to high levels of safety standards? If they are not held responsible for the adverse effects of their products that is exactly what will happen. How would you feel if it was your son that was mercury poisoned from a mandated vaccine and you were told that you had no recourse because we're worried that the drug companies might stop producing vaccines?

Let's go back a sec. I never said that we should lower our standards so they keep making vaccine. In fact, giving your child, or yourself, anything foreign to the body has risks, and I do believe that pharmaceutical companies, like all other parts of the healthcare industry, have to weigh the risk/benefit potential with EVERY product they manufacture. However, there is no easy answer, because there is no vaccine that is 100% safe. You have to choose between your kid possibly contracting a preventable illness that used to kill or cripple thousands of children every year, or that your kid might be in the 1% of the population that has an adverse reaction to the vaccine itself.

I know it must be extremely difficult to feel like you have no recourse, but you do. You can love your son the way he is, and not worry if he would have been autistic whether or not you had him vaccinated.

And as far as the research...you and I both know that the truth always comes out, regardless of research done by the pharmaceutical companies...look at Crestor and Vioxx. And these are blockbuster drugs that these companies have their stock price based upon. If there is any truth to the link between autism and vaccines, we'll know. I know lots of doc who wouldn't prescribe any Cox II inhibitors to their family members, but they all get their kids vaccinated.

That's good enough for me, because in my risk/benefit profile, I see the benefits far outweigh the risks. But I do know that there are risks.

"but they COULD generate positive PR about pharmaceutical companies, which they sorely need"

Since when is the responsiblity of people like you and I to worry about the PR of the pharma industry, or any industry for that matter? If they want better PR they can get it by being honest about their products. Did you know that Merck knew in 1991 that our children were getting 87X the "safe" limit of mercury through vaccines? 87 TIMES! http://www.sfexaminer.com/articles/2005/02/10/news/20050210_ne04_vaccine.txt

But they decided to keep their mouth shut because they didn't want to have to spend more money to produce vaccines that didn't contain neurotoxins. Nice, isn't it. Do you have any idea how many children were poisoned since 1991?

"You have to choose between your kid possibly contracting a preventable illness that used to kill or cripple thousands of children every year, or that your kid might be in the 1% of the population that has an adverse reaction to the vaccine itself."

Like the Hep B vaccine given at birth. Do you know how this disease is spread? Through needle sharing and through unprotected sex. That's one vaccine I think we could have waited on.

"I know it must be extremely difficult to feel like you have no recourse, but you do. You can love your son the way he is, and not worry if he would have been autistic whether or not you had him vaccinated."

What a ridiculous statement that is. Who are you to judge the love I, or any other parent of autistic child, gives to their autistic child? My wife and I love our son, the way he is, more than anything in the world. I love him so much that I'm not willing to write him off the way you seem to be doing. I'll do everything I can to help him recover and reach his god given potential. Would you accept anything less for your child? You make it sound like I had a choice whether or not to vaccinate my son based on risk/reward. You cannot compare childhood immunizations to Vioxx (which by the way was put back onto the market by a team of people that included 10 individuals with ties to the drug industry).

Am I on the wrong site? For some reason I thought it was the conservatives that valued life. I didn't realize that was a secondary goal after pharma profits.

"If there is any truth to the link between autism and vaccines, we'll know."
It's not as easy as you imply. The drug companies are not solely to blame. The FDA failed to do 9th grade algebra and calculate the amount of mercury our children were being exposed to with the new vaccine schedule starting in the early 90's (Merck was smart enough to do this but didn't say anythig). The CDC found a correlation in 1999 but rather than issue a mandate forcing the removal of thimerosal (which would have been very suspicious) they simply recommended it be removed. So millions of vials on the shelves with mercury were still used. Here's a link to a SafeMinds report exposing information obtained on unpublished information from the CDC report in 1999 that shows a clear correlation. Of course the published report, 4 years later in 2003, showed no link at all and declared they would no longer be investigating thimerosal. http://www.safeminds.org/Generation%20Zero%20Pres.pdf

"I think some of your statements are right out of Sydney Wolfe's playbook, and he is no friend to conservatives."

What statements are you referring to? This is a non partisan issue. Did you know that Dan Burton & Dave Weldon are up in arms over the S.3 bill? More than any liberal leader these two Congressman have been fighting for the rights of autistic children and against the pharma/FDA/CDC coverup. Dan Burton's grandson became autistic a few days after receiving vaccines. Listen to what he had to say: http://CongressmanBurton20050209.notlong.com
http://reform.house.gov/WHR/Hearings/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=1311

"That said, I will pray for you and your family."
Thank you.

"I don't mean you any harm - I just want to offer some insight into the other side of the story than the one you posted."
I know you don't mean any harm but your comments seem to be saying that autism is an acceptable risk of vaccines that I should just deal with. I would choose any of the diseases the vaccines try to prevent over autism.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.