UK-Muscle.co.uk Forum banner
81 - 100 of 134 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
173 Posts
Yes. The U.K government have agreed to indemnify. The plaintiff takes, say for example, Astra Zenica to court. The plaintiff wins their case and X in damages. The government have agreed to meet the cost. Same as car insurance. You hit someone in the rear. They claim off you for whiplash. Your insurance company steps into your shoes and deals with the claims.
I was aware there was some sort of Government involvement with potential damages but not entirely sure how that tied in with the manufacturers.

Although in theory that still waives the manufacturer of liability as the Government are prepared to take the hit for them.

The manufacturer has nothing to lose.

Would that be a fair assessment ??
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,628 Posts
I was aware there was some sort of Government involvement with potential damages but not entirely sure how that tied in with the manufacturers.

Although in theory that still waives the manufacturer of liability as the Government are prepared to take the hit for them.

The manufacturer has nothing to lose.

Would that be a fair assessment ??
In simple terms yes. It won’t be as straightforward as the media report suggests, however. We would need to see the document detailing exactly what has been agreed in contract. These contracts usually contain wordings like “reasonable foreseeability” and are notoriously hard to interpret to the point where it would probably end up in court with a court deciding who foots the bill.
 

·
Gym Addict
Joined
·
4,338 Posts
Does that still apply in US now Pfizer has full FDA approval for over 16's?
The Pfizer vaccine that they have been administering doesn’t have FDA approval.

They got approval for another vaccine that they claim is “basically” the same. The one everyone is getting injected with has no more approval than it did last week. They have approval for their “Comirnaty” vaccine which isn’t available to the public yet.

The data used to validate the approval is still banging on about 91% efficacy, which even the MSM has now acknowledged is bullshit.
 

·
Gym Addict
Joined
·
4,338 Posts
OK, so anti-vaxxers don't trust the government with the covid vaccine, but they do trust them when it comes to holding the flu vaccine manufacturers liable if the flu vaccine is harmful.
What happened with the Swine Flu vaccines after they got FDA approval?
 

·
Newbie Trainer
Joined
·
358 Posts
The Pfizer vaccine that they have been administering doesn’t have FDA approval.

They got approval for another vaccine that they claim is “basically” the same. The one everyone is getting injected with has no more approval than it did last week. They have approval for their “Comirnaty” vaccine which isn’t available to the public yet.

The data used to validate the approval is still banging on about 91% efficacy, which even the MSM has now acknowledged is bullshit.
Seems it is just a new brand name. Not seen anyone apart from you claim different.

As far as the 91% efficacy that is another story.
AFAIK the FDA have not made the data the approval was based on public.
Pfizer's own press releases maintain the claim of 91% efficacy even though one of them acknowledged a decrease in efficacy of around 6% every 2 months.
Even when they mentioned this the 91% claim remained and they continued to quote data up to only March this year.
I have seen articles where has been noted by members of the BMA here, and no doubt others.
It seemed questions are being asked regarding the validity of the 91% figure and transparency on the part of both Pfizer and the FDA.
Regardless, it does now appear to have FDA approval fir over 16's.

BTW this is from what I have read from FDA, BMA and Pfizer articles and just from memory so I may be a % or a month out here of there. You get the idea though.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,745 Posts
The courts find against the government quite frequently as I’ve told you before Mickey. The government draw up legislation which has to pass through the house to become law. Then if someone doesn’t agree with the law it’s for the courts (who are independent from the government) to decide as to whether the law is fair and can be enforced.
And as I've told you before I disagree with your analysis. As a long time business owner and private landlord I've had my fair share of dealings involving the UK legal system on a fair few different fronts.

The Government and their relevant appointed agencies are responsible for what drugs/medicines etc are approved for general consumption in this country. If a pharma company tells the gov/relevant agency that their product is not yet at a stage where they are prepared to take legal responsibility for it, and the government decides to roll it out anyway with the proviso that the pharma co are indemnified against any possible damages.

I don't believe any court in the land would rule against the pharma company in these circumstances. As I said, I believe you would stand far more chance taking the government to court for failing to make it clear that the vaccine you took was not legally endorsed by the manufacturers. As I'm pretty certain the government have failed to make this clear at all.

But again, good luck with taking the government to court over an issue like that. as independent as you believe the court system is from the government, they are both firmly part of the same establishment.

Anyway, me personally I'd just rather not put myself in that kind of precarious situation to start with. I'd prefer to just wait till medicines are fully approved and the manufacturers are bound by the usual legal obligations. Unless of course it is actually an emergency that I take said emergency medicine.

Each to their own though. If you're confident you will be able to successfully obtain appropriate compensation in the case of any mishaps, fair play.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,745 Posts
It's good to see that the 20 year war effort has not been in complete vain. At least terrorists no longer have a safe place to hide in Afghanistan, as witnessed by the US military getting their @rses blown off on the way out!

But rest assured the US are apparently sharing intel with the Taliban(the people we were at war with for harbouring terrorists) to ensure these "ISIS K" terrorists are brought to justice!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,511 Posts
The Pfizer vaccine that they have been administering doesn’t have FDA approval.

They got approval for another vaccine that they claim is “basically” the same. The one everyone is getting injected with has no more approval than it did last week. They have approval for their “Comirnaty” vaccine which isn’t available to the public yet.

The data used to validate the approval is still banging on about 91% efficacy, which even the MSM has now acknowledged is bullshit.
Mate you know I’m on the same page as you in regards to this whole scam but do you know why my “vax pass” says I had comirnaty?
210984
 

·
Gym Addict
Joined
·
4,338 Posts
Mate you know I’m on the same page as you in regards to this whole scam but do you know why my “vax pass” says I had comirnaty? View attachment 210984
Has it always said that?

From what I’ve seen the “Comiranaty” name just popped up when the FDA approval was given. However it’s possible what I’ve read is more skewed to what’s going on in the US.

It looks like the Pfizer vaccine has been marketed as Comiranaty for longer in Europe. In the US though they are 2 distinct different products, although they are apparently the same formula just with a different label only 1 has FDA approval.

Maybe it’s a moot point, but it’s just another question that the FDA and the media are avoiding regarding the approval process. The far bigger point is that it’s the first drug in history to been given approval without submitting full trial data. And they somehow have enough data on fertility and pregnancy even though stage 3 trials hadn’t even begun 9 months ago.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,511 Posts
Has it always said that?

From what I’ve seen the “Comiranaty” name just popped up when the FDA approval was given. However it’s possible what I’ve read is more skewed to what’s going on in the US.

It looks like the Pfizer vaccine has been marketed as Comiranaty for longer in Europe. In the US though they are 2 distinct different products, although they are apparently the same formula just with a different label only 1 has FDA approval.

Maybe it’s a moot point, but it’s just another question that the FDA and the media are avoiding regarding the approval process. The far bigger point is that it’s the first drug in history to been given approval without submitting full trial data. And they somehow have enough data on fertility and pregnancy even though stage 3 trials hadn’t even begun 9 months ago.
Denied blood clots, then added it to official sides
Denied heart inflammation, then added it
Denied nerve damage, then added it.

But they know what effect it will have in a couple years lol, I genuinely think people who’ve been jabbed will be in severe problems this winter, It’s literally designed to send your immune system into overdrive, add the booster which has no studies on 3 jabs in such a short space and I can see people dropping like flies

not sure if it was always like that or they’re changing the name now for some other dodgy reason, was just playing around with the app as I’m going on holiday in September and see the name and thought how can that be possible.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,511 Posts
These the same papers that denied all the sides originally only to report on them now the evidence is overwhelming?

yeah I’ll definitely trust what they say

So far I know 2 dead, 1 with clots in his lung and 1 numb on her whole left side from this moody jab

Don’t know a single person who even needed treatment for COVID

So safe they wouldn’t accept liability, That will always be the first point, no need to debate any further in my eyes.

Hope everyone gets it either way just so I can see what it does to everyone in winter 😂
 
81 - 100 of 134 Posts
Top