It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rulings on autism-vaccination connection expected

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   
A Department of Justice special court will hand down rulings Thursday in cases asking whether certain vaccines cause autism, the lead plaintiffs' attorney told CNN Wednesday.


A group of parents are seeking compensation saying early childhood vaccinations triggered their children's autism.

A panel of "special masters" will issue decisions on three test cases heard in 2007 involving children with autism that their parents contend was triggered by early childhood vaccination, said attorney Thomas Powers.

The parents seek compensation, saying the "combined" exposure to thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative, in some vaccines and the MMR vaccine led to autism, he said.

www.cnn.com...




posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Looks like the court ruled against compensation compensation in three cases where parents contended vaccines caused autism in their children.

I'm just glad CNN has some information about this on their web site.

it's about time something like this has some light shed on it in the MSM.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
I remember when they "kind of" make the connection in a court ruling back in March '08:

Vaccine case draw new attention to autism debate


The parents of a 9-year-old girl with autism said Thursday that their assertion that her illness was caused by childhood vaccines has been vindicated by the federal government's decision to compensate them.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


This is very important, in my opinion, even with the report coming to light of the "falsified" MMR data. Being a mother myself, I do get my daughter vaccinated but there is still no doubt in my mind after talking to so many parents who have gone through this that there is some connection, whether it is a direct result of an aggrevating factor.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
sorry, direct result OR aggrevating factor (just having my coffee)



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Source

Here's an update on this.....


A special court ruled Thursday that parents of autistic children are not entitled to compensation in their contention that certain vaccines caused autism in their children.

"I must decide this case not on sentiment, but by analyzing the evidence," one of the "special masters" hearing the case said in denying the families' claims, ruling that the families had not presented sufficient evidence to prove their allegations.




posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Link

Here is another link to this topic.



The evidence “is weak, contradictory and unpersuasive,” concluded Special Master Denise Vowell. “Sadly, the petitioners in this litigation have been the victims of bad science conducted to support litigation rather than to advance medical and scientific understanding” of autism.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Some interesting facts about "Vaccine Court" from The New England Medical Journal:


This program provides compensation to children who have serious adverse effects from any childhood vaccine. The compensation covers medical and related expenses, lost future income, and up to $250,000 for pain and suffering. The funding for paying successful claims regarding vaccines administered before 1988 came from the U.S. Treasury. For claims regarding later vaccinations, funding comes from a patient fee of 75 cents per vaccination. The VICP trust fund currently contains more than $2 billion. About 7000 claims have been filed for adverse effects other than autism, and so far about 2000 have resulted in compensation, in amounts averaging about $850,000. Approximately 700 claims remain unresolved, since the VICP frequently takes more than 2 years to process a petition.

To win a VICP award, the claimant does not need to prove everything that is required to hold a vaccine maker liable in a product liability lawsuit. But a causal connection must be shown. If medical records show that a child had one of several listed adverse effects within a short period after vaccination, the VICP presumes that it was caused by the vaccine (although the government can seek to prove otherwise). An advisory committee helps to amend the list of adverse effects as the consensus view changes with the availability of new studies. If families claim that a vaccine caused an adverse effect that is not on the list, the burden of proof rests with them. Autism is not on the list for any vaccine, and the VICP has rejected about 300 such claims outright.

But thousands of autism claims are pending. In 2002, to resolve such claims more expeditiously, the VICP announced that some test cases would examine the general causation question, putting aside the question of harm to any particular child. Although this process was supposed to take only 2 years, the first of nine test cases was heard just this past summer, with many witnesses testifying for each side. A special section of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims administers the VICP, and judges running this so-called Vaccine Court are not expected to begin to decide these cases until 2008. Department of Justice lawyers appear in opposition to the claimants.

OK, so instead of a regular court of law, judge and jury, you get a hearing by a troika of sages appointed by who-knows-who, a limited settlement paid from funds provided either by citizens via the U.S. Treasury or by citizens via a 75 cent vaccine tax. No individual injury determinations are possible, only general causation factors and only IF they're on the official list of adverse effects, which autism is not.

Who says Big Pharma doesn't own this country?!



[edit on 13-2-2009 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by awake_awoke
I remember when they "kind of" make the connection in a court ruling back in March '08:

Vaccine case draw new attention to autism debate


The parents of a 9-year-old girl with autism said Thursday that their assertion that her illness was caused by childhood vaccines has been vindicated by the federal government's decision to compensate them.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


This is actually a different issue. In the Hannah Poling case it was found that the vaccines had worsened an underlying mitochondrial disorder which causes autism-like symptoms.

In the test cases that the new story is about, there is no underlying mitochondrial disorder and no evidence to link the vaccines to the autism. Here's some more from the link about Hannah Poling that was given earlier:


A federal program intended to compensate victims of injuries caused by vaccines concluded last November that Hannah Poling's underlying illness that had predisposed her to symptoms of autism was "significantly aggravated" by the vaccinations she received as a toddler and that her family should therefore be compensated.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Vaccine case draw new attention to autism debate

[edit on 2/14/09 by americandingbat]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join