This is a bit of vaccine history that most people do not know, including our health authorities, or more likely, they do not care. At the time of the DTP vaccine, Wyeth, now Pfizer visited the Reagan White House, to lobby for liability protections for the vaccines. President Reagan asked the logical question of why they could not instead make safer vaccines. The reply was that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” If that is so, and it came straight from the horse’s mouth, then how can the narrative pushed by the Australian health authorities, who still want the population to receive endless vaccines, of “safe and effective,” be maintained? The likes of critics such as presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr, believe, that it cannot be, not just for the Covid vax, but the whole kitchen sink of them.
https://vigilantfox.substack.com/p/unavoidably-unsafe-rfk-jr-reveals
“After getting sued heavily for the DTP vaccine, Wyeth (now Pfizer) went to the Reagan White House and demanded liability protections with the threat of getting out of the vaccine business.
President Reagan asked Wyeth why they couldn’t make safer vaccines.
And Wyeth answered that they couldn’t because vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” And that phrase, “unavoidably unsafe,” is in the preamble of the VICP statute.
“And so, anybody who tells you vaccines are safe and effective, the industry itself got immunity from liability by convincing the President and Congress that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe,” stated Robert Kennedy Jr.
Here’s the full transcript for those who want to read more:
None of the vaccines are ever subjected to true placebo-controlled trials. It's the only medical product that is exempt from that prior to license. Anyway, what happened in the DTP vaccine when it was pulled in this country was pulled because so many people were suing the drug companies.
Wyeth, which is now Pfizer, was the primary manufacturer. They went to the Reagan administration in 1986, and they said, you need to give us full immunity from liability for all vaccines, or we're going to get out of the business. And Reagan actually said to them, why don't — they [Wyeth] said, we're losing $20 in downstream liability for every dollar we're making in profits. And Reagan said to them, well, why don't you make the vaccine safe? And they said, Because vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe."
That's the phrase they use. And that phrase is in the statute. And it's also in the Bruesewitz case, which is the Supreme Court decision upholding that statute. And so anybody who tells you vaccines are safe and effective, the industry itself got immunity from liability by convincing the President and Congress that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruesewitz_v._Wyeth
Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 562 U.S. 223 (2011), is a United States Supreme Court case that decided whether a section of the Vaccine Act of 1986 preempts all vaccine design defect claims against vaccine manufacturers.
Background
Hannah Bruesewitz, the daughter of the main petitioners in the case, received Wyeth's Tri-Immunol DTP vaccine as part of childhood immunizations. The Bruesewitzes claimed that Hannah's seizures and later developmental problems came from the vaccine. They filed suit in the "Vaccine Court", a special court within the United States Court of Federal Claims. Their petition was dismissed for failure to prove a link between the vaccine and Hannah's health problems.
They proceeded to sue in Pennsylvania state court. The case was removed to the local federal court, which held that the claim was preempted by a section of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.[1] A petition for a writ of certiorari was granted on March 8, 2010, bringing the case to the Supreme Court.
In briefings before the Court, both sides argued over the specific language of the statutory provision.
Decision
The case was decided on February 22, 2011. The Court, in a 6-2 opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia, held that the "plaintiffs design defect claims [were] expressly preempted by the Vaccine Act." Thus, the court affirmed laws that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for vaccine-induced injury or death if they are "accompanied by proper directions and warnings."[2]
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented.’