Supreme Court Protects Vaccine Manufacturers, Not Injured Children there from Bruesewitz vs Wyeth
OCTOBER TERM, 2010
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as isbeing done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
BRUESEWITZ ET AL. v. WYETH LLC, FKA WYETH, INC., ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 09–152. Argued October 12, 2010—Decided February 22, 2011
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA or Act) created a no-fault compensation program to stabilize a vaccine market adversely affected by an increase in vaccine-related tort litigation and to facilitate compensation to claimants who found pursuing legitimate vaccine-inflicted injuries too costly and difficult. The Act provides that a party alleging a vaccine-related injury may file a petition for compensation in the Court of Federal Claims, naming the Health and Human Services Secretary as the respondent; that the court must resolve the case by a specified deadline; and that the claimant can then decide whether to accept the court’s judgment or reject it and seek tort relief from the vaccine manufacturer. Awards are paid out of a fund created by an excise tax on each vaccine dose. As a quid pro quo, manufacturers enjoy significant tort-liability protections. Most importantly, the Act eliminates manufacturer liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects. Hannah Bruesewitz’s parents filed a vaccine-injury petition in the Court of Federal Claims, claiming that Hannah became disabled after receiving a diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine manufactured by Lederle Laboratories (now owned by respondent Wyeth). After that court denied their claim, they elected to reject the unfavorable judgment and filed suit in Pennsylvania state court, alleging, inter alia, that the defective design of Lederle’s DTP vaccine caused Hannah’s disabilities, and that Lederle was subject to strictliability and liability for negligent design under Pennsylvania common law. Wyeth removed the suit to the Federal District Court. It granted Wyeth summary judgment, holding that the relevant Pennsylvania law was preempted by 42 U. S. C. §300aa–22(b)(1), which 2 BRUESEWITZ v. WYETH LLC
Syllabus
provides that "[n]o vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side-effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings." The Third Circuit affirmed.
Held: The NCVIA preempts all design-defect claims against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for injury or death caused by a vaccine’s side effects. Pp. 7–19.
(a) Section 300aa–22(b)(1)’s text suggests that a vaccine’s design is not open to question in a tort action. If a manufacturer could be held liable for failure to use a different design, the "even though" clause would do no work. A vaccine side effect could always have been avoidable by use of a different vaccine not containing the harmful element. The language of the provision thus suggests the design is not subject to question in a tort action. What the statute establishes as a complete defense must be unavoidability (given safe manufacture and warning) with respect to the particular design. This conclusion is supported by the fact that, although products-liability law establishes three grounds for liability—defective manufacture, inadequate directions or warnings, and defective design—the Act mentions only manufacture and warnings. It thus seems that the Act’s failure to mention design-defect liability is "by deliberate choice, not in advertence." Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co., 537 U. S. 149, 168. Pp. 7–8.
(b) Contrary to petitioners’ argument, there is no reason to believe that §300aa–22(b)(1)’s term "unavoidable" is a term of art incorporating Restatement (Second) of Torts §402A, Comment k, which exempts from strict liability rules "unavoidably unsafe products." "Unavoidable" is hardly a rarely used word, and cases interpreting comment k attach special significance only to the term "unavoidably unsafeproducts," not the word "unavoidable" standing alone. Moreover, reading the phrase "side effects that were unavoidable" to exempt injuries caused by flawed design would require treating "even though"as a coordinating conjunction linking independent ideas when it is a concessive, subordinating conjunction conveying that one clause weakens or qualifies the other. The canon against superfluity does not undermine this Court’s interpretation because petitioners’ competing interpretation has superfluity problems of its own. Pp. 8–12.
(c) The structure of the NCVIA and of vaccine regulation in general reinforces what §300aa–22(b)(1)’s text suggests. Design defects do not merit a single mention in the Act or in Food and Drug Administration regulations that pervasively regulate the drug manufacturing process. This lack of guidance for design defects, combined with
3 Cite as: 562 U. S. ____ (2011) Syllabus
the extensive guidance for the two liability grounds specifically mentioned in the Act, strongly suggests that design defects were not mentioned because they are not a basis for liability. The Act’s mandates lead to the same conclusion. It provides for federal agency improvement of vaccine design and for federally prescribed compensation,which are other means for achieving the two beneficial effects of design-defect torts—prompting the development of improved designs, and providing compensation for inflicted injuries. The Act’s structural quid pro quo also leads to the same conclusion. The vaccine manufacturers fund an informal, efficient compensation program for vaccine injuries in exchange for avoiding costly tort litigation and the occasional disproportionate jury verdict. Taxing their product to fund the compensation program, while leaving their liability for design defect virtually unaltered, would hardly coax them back into the market. Pp. 13–16.
561 F. 3d 233, affirmed.
SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a concurring opinion. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, J., joined. KAGAN, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. _________________ _________________ 1 Cite as: 562 U. S. ____ (2011)
Opinion of the Court
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in thepreliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested tonotify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in orderthat corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 09–152
RUSSELL BRUESEWITZ, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. WYETH LLC, FKA WYETH, INC., FKA WYETHLABORATORIES, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
[February 22, 2011]
JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court.
We consider whether a preemption provision enacted inthe National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986(NCVIA)1 bars state-law design-defect claims againstvaccine manufacturers. .....
snip...please see full text ;
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf
Is polio still a disease seen in the United States? The last cases of naturally occurring paralytic polio in the United States were in 1979, when an outbreak occurred among the Amish in several Midwestern states. From 1980 through 1999, there were 152 confirmed cases of paralytic polio cases reported. Of the 152 cases, eight cases were acquired outside the United States and imported. The last imported case caused by wild poliovirus into the United States was reported in 1993.
The remaining 144 cases were vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) caused by live oral polio vaccine (OPV).
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/polio/dis-faqs.htm
How do Democrats and Republicans stand on tort reform issues?
"Tort Reform" is a very partisan issue. At both the state and national levels, Republicans overwhelmingly support tort reform and Democrats oppose it. The trial lawyer associations which represent plaintiff lawyers are major contributors to the Democrats. Insurance and medical interests contribute heavily to Republicans. In fact, the tort reform debate can be considered as an aspect of the overall political dynamic involving distribution of the nation's wealth. The most contentious issues involve medical malpractice and product liability. The result of settlements and verdicts of these cases is a transfer of wealth from groups which tend to be wealthy to victims and their lawyers. Virtually all the reform proposals ultimately attempt to limit the amount of funds which are distributed in this fashion.
http://www.newsbatch.com/tort.htm
February 18, 2011 It’s Time to Call Tort Reform What it Really Is Standing Up Against Corporate Tyranny
Jacob Diesselhorst, Nix Law Group, PLLC, Edmond, Oklahoma
I love Oklahoma. I love the people of Oklahoma, all of them. The hard-working men and woman, the elderly-who have paved the way for us and the children-who we are grooming to carry on the legacy for our state’s future.
I love the idea of democracy and freedom. This great country of ours’ was founded based on principles…certain unalienable rights that are bestowed upon all of us– The principle that us all, whether white or black, rich or poor, republican or democrat, should be treated equally and be allowed to play on a level playing field. In turn, our political system, the 3 branches of government, should continue to exemplify this ideal and support our efforts to uphold it. Unfortunately, politics in Oklahoma has deteriorated into a power struggle for control of money and resources as opposed to an effort to embody the principles of freedom, equality and justice.
Like many of us, I am disgusted by the ugly politics and lack of civility that has invaded government. Party lines are now clearly drawn, as both sides teeter for control of a system that is now broken due to the power of special interests. Special interests have infested our politics to the point now there is no way to differentiate between two. Oklahoma politics are no different. Money talks.
The Chamber, big business, big insurance and big oil have a tight grip on this State and the brass of the current leadership of the Oklahoma Republican party. Don’t take my word for it? Let the evidence speak for itself. Look at the campaign finance reports for Oklahoma’s current GOP leadership, they read like a who’s who of Oklahoma’s business community, the super-rich and the PACS (Political Action Committees) formed by the special interests that now dictate Oklahoma politics.
Unfortunately, this influence of the money and power of big business and corporations has infected Republican leadership and convinced them to pursue policy changes that do nothing to protect or assist the general public, but act only to further enrich and empower the voracious and self-serving interests of Corporations and Insurance Companies. One disturbing example of special interests’ invasion into democracy is taking place in Oklahoma right now—with the efforts of a chosen few to force more so-called “tort reform” on the people of Oklahoma.
Tort Reform (as it is called) is the effort by the Big Business wing of the Republican party (at the direction of the corporations who fund their political campaigns and reelections) to invade the sanctity of the judicial branch and legislate in the court room by taking away the autonomy of the civil jury and dictating how juries must decide cases and what evidence is and is not allowed to come in to evidence at trial.
•Politicans want to place an arbitrary, one-size-fits all hard cap of $250k on the amount of damages a civil jury can award a catstrophically injured Oklahoman for the rest of his or her lifetime no matter how severe the injuries and no matter how disgusting, reckless and wanton the conduct of the negligent Defendant.
•GOP Idealogs claim hard caps “deter frivolous lawsuits.” This is a BLATANT LIE. Frivolous lawsuits never see the light of day in Oklahoma. Numerous laws already in place require Expert Reports before lawsuits can be filed. Moreover, Hard Caps do nothing to prevent minor injury lawsuits from being filed. What arbitratry hard caps do cause—is for people with legitimate, long term catstrophic injuries (a brain injured child or a blinded teenager or a badly burned stay-at-home mom or a nursing home resident who is beaten to death and raped in his nursing home by a bad employee) from obtaining full and fair compensation for their injuries.
•Non-economic damages are meant to serve as a deterence to Corporations and individual and ensure that our highways, schools, airports, public transportaion, workplaces, products, etc.) are SAFE. CAPS ELIMINATE THIS DETERENCE and actually give corporations, bad doctors, bad nurses, truck drivers, etc. a free license to run amuck in our state with no fear of every being punished above 250k. (which is like a parking ticket to many multi-million dollar businesses, corporations and insurance companies)
•Further, Policitians want to tip the scales of justice in favor of negligent defendants by giving a negligent tortfeasor’s insurance company and CREDIT for any collateral source of insurance an injured Oklahoman has in awarding damages.
•In other words, if you are horribly injured in a trucking accident and have $150k in medical bills–the jury gets to know your health insurance company paid part of the bills, that part was written off and that part came out of your pocket. Meanwhile, the fact that the negligent trucking company, hospital, oil and gas company etc. has millions of dollars in liability insurance will remain hidden from the jury.
•Even more disturbing, if you had the forsight to purcahse disability insurance or life insurance (in the case of a wrongful death case)–the negligent corporation’s liability insurance company will also get a credit for that insurance money (even though it is from another seperate insurance company). In other words, everyone benefits in this equation (the insurance companies and negligent defendants) EXCEPT THE ONE WHO SHOULD—THE CATASTROPHICALY INJURED OKLAHOMAN.
Our civil justice system is built on a principle of a balance of power and a weighing of the evidence to determine fault, liability and damages. The scales of justice illustrate this ideal. Our court system has successfully existed for hundreds of years built around the JURY. The Jury being a group of citizens like you and me who are entrusted to hear the evidence of a particular case and work together to render a fair and reasoned verdict. Now, however, politicians, not jurors, will decide the amount of damages to award in civil cases involving human injury and death by forcing upon a one-size fits all law that caps the maximum damages at $250,000.00 and decreases any economic damages awarded (medical bills, future medical bills, disability, loss of earnings, etc.) by the amounts of any collateral source of compensation that exists to pay part of them.
In other words, “tort reform” serves to cripple the very purpose of the jury system—to leave it to the people to decide the damages to render against a defendant who has been found to be negligent, reckless or wanton in its conduct and, as a result, caused harm to another person—by taking away the right of jurors (OKLAHOMA CITIZENS) to fairly decide legal disputes.
I for one stand with the people of Oklahoma and their constitutional right to a fair jury trial by the people…not politicians. With “tort reform”—Special Interests are completing the trifecta of infecting all 3 branches of government with their greed and self-serving influence. Meanwhile, the citizens of Oklahoma stand by, unknowlingly, while their rights are taken away by corrupt politicans whose only motivation is to satisfy their biggest campaign donors (i.e., BIG BUSINESS/BIG INSURANCE) so they can hope to get relected.
Sad but true.
Politics as usual in this State cannot be allowed to continue. The very rights to which each of us is entitled now hang in the balance.
David Farnbauch at 7:55 am. (General)
http://www.sweeneylawfirm.com/blog/its-time-to-call-tort-reform-what-it-really-is.htm
Wisconsin May Cap Punitive Damages At $200000 | Tort Reform ...Jan 14, 2011 ... GOP caps punitive damages in tort reform bill - WBAY-TV Green Bay-Fox ... Whenever the Republican party issues their issues platform, they're always for the death ... 2011 Looking Like A Bad Year For Civil Justice (JL) ...
www.tortdeform.com/.../2011/.../wisconsin_may_cap_punitive_dam.html
Justinian Lane Wisconsin May Cap Punitive Damages At $200,000 Continuing the “2011 will be a bad year for civil justice” theme:
The Senate judiciary committee voted 3-2 on Friday to cap punitive damages at $200,000 or twice the amount of compensatory damages, whichever is greater. Current state law does not lay out any caps on punitive damages.
Source: Wis. GOP caps punitive damages in tort reform bill - WBAY-TV Green Bay-Fox Cities-Northeast Wisconsin News
Capping punitive damages at $200k will only encourage corporations to sell profitable but defective products. If it weren’t for punitive damage awards well in excess of $200k, Johns Manville might still be pumping out asbestos products.
I don’t understand Republican ideology. On one hand, most of them support the death penalty. But on the other hand, they don’t like punitive damages. How can you rationalize putting a man to death for committing a crime, but not allowing the family of his victims to take more than $200k?
http://www.tortdeform.com/archives/2011/01/wisconsin_may_cap_punitive_dam.html
http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=News&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=99772
Archives for February 2011 >
Arbitrary Damage Caps Reward Negligent and Wrongful Actors and Punish the Innocent Citizens of Oklahoma
Posted by Jacob Diesselhorst on February 17, 2011
In 2009 (less than 2 years ago), Oklahoma passed what the then-newly-annointed Republican Majority Senate and House Leadership coined "Landmark Comprehensive Lawsuit Reform."
Per the Oklahoma GOP's own Press Release of May 11, 2009--
“ The agreement is multi-faceted, including several key components of reform which will improve health care access to all Oklahomans, as well as assuring small business’ health and viability in the state.
”“I’m very pleased with the agreement,” said Glen Coffee (the then Republican Senate Majority Leader and now, somehow, Secretary of State (We will save that for another day). In May 2009, Coffee proclaimed “Republicans have promised reform of the legal system, the people expect us to deliver, and we have in fact delivered. The spirit of cooperation exhibited by all parties in this negotiation was gratifying, and is indicative of what can be done when people negotiate in good faith toward a mutually beneficial goal,” Coffee continued. “We look forward to sending this historic reform to Governor Henry to ratify the hard work all the parties have accomplished for the state.”
Current House Speaker Benge (who is now acting like 2009 never happened in pushing the GOP's new Corporate Welfare and Lawsuit Immunity laws) said back in 2009 about the then passed broadsweeping lawsuit reform:
“We have said since the beginning of session that lawsuit reform was one of our top priorities, and this agreement represents a huge victory for the people of Oklahoma today. All interested parties have worked together to make this deal a reality and I am proud of the collaboration that has occurred. This legislation will ensure access to the courts for all who have legitimate claims, but will also bring some certainty to a system that has recently become a hindrance to economic development in our state. I look forward to Gov. Henry signing this bill.”
”Dan Sullivan, a prominent lawyer for insurance companies and large corporations in Oklahoma and GOP Representative from Tulsa, also said in 2009:
“This agreement provides additional protections to the medical and business community from frivolous suits while protecting the right to a trial by a jury of their peers for those that are truly injured.
”HOW SOON WE FORGET. Now, the Oklahoma GOP Big Business Republicans, drunk with power in Oklahoma, having swept their way into the Governor's office and total, unfettered control of Oklahoma, plans to tip the scales of justice completely over in favor of negligent and reckless defendant tort feasors by passing the most broadsweeping and unconstitional civil justice changes in modern US History. These laws should not and in fact do not appeal to social minded and reasonable Conservative Oklahomans. See Example 1 and Example 2.
The Oklahoma GOP is slithering these bills through at the Capital with very little fanfare and Oklahoma is just sitting back while the bandits are making away with the take. In fact, Most Oklahomans do not know about these additional draconian changes and clearly do not know that not a single one of the "reforms" the GOP are now proposing favor individual Oklahomans- they all favor negligent and reckless civil defendants.
ARBITRARY $250K DAMAGE CAPS THAT RESTRICT JURY AWARDS NO MATTER HOW BAD A DEFENDANT ACTS AND HOW HORRIBLY AND PERMANENTLY AN INNOCENT OKLAHOMAN IS INJURED OR MAIMED = NO ACCOUNTABILITY.
And who bears the burden of this Corporate Bailout/Corporate Welfare?---regular Oklahomans- You, me, our kids, our parents, especially the must vulnerable of all:
•children •the elderly •stay at home moms ' •lower wage earners like pastors, fireman, police officers, teachers, etc. According to the Oklahoma GOP, The most damages a jury can ever award these type of Oklahomans, no matter how catastrophic and long-term their injuries may be, is only 250k. 90% of Oklahomans would never support this type of law--yet it will likely sail through the on the backs of the politicians the Chamber put in place, right onto the desk of Mary Failing who will not even read it before she signs it.
After these horrific and unconstitutional bills become law, Oklahomans who have LEGITIMATE CIVIL CASES and whose only avenue for justice is the COURTHOUSE, will be the one's left out in the cold with no way to get JUSTICE for their loss of quality of life---pain and suffering, disability, inability to earn a living, etc.
The Oklahoma GOP's new, so-called "Tort Reform" rewards negligent corporations cutting corners for profits, bad nursing homes, foreign produce manufacturers like drug companies and medical device companies, bad doctors, unsafe truck drivers, drunk drivers, texting drivers etc. and their multi-billion dollar Insurance Company allies. All this at the expense of your constitutional right to a non-biased and fair trial by jury of your peers- Oklahoma citizens.
How about we let Oklahoma juries sort out legitimate civil disputes and not well-greased and bought-and-paid-for politicians (who talk out of both sides of their mouths depending on what year it is) and whose only interests they apparently protect are those of the corporate donors who got them elected and will keep them in office.
Tags:anthony sykes, lawsuit reform, mary fallin, nix law group, oklahoma law, rob johnson, tort reform
http://www.oklahomainjurylawadvocate.com/2011/02/
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Vaccines and Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy the Prion Disease, what if ?
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/vaccines-and-transmissible-spongiform.html
http://www.whale.to/v/singeltary.html
http://bseinquiry.blogspot.com/2008/05/mad-cow-disease-bse-cjd-children.html
please note ;
PPo2-26:
Transmission of Classical and Atypical (L-type) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Prions to Cynomolgus macaques
Fumiko Ono,1 Yoshio Yamakawa,2 Minoru Tobiume,3 Yuko Sato,3 Harutaka Katano,3 Kenichi Hagiwara,2 Iori Itagaki,1 Akio Hiyaoka,1 Katuhiko Komatuzaki,1 Yasunori Emoto,1 Hiroaki Shibata,4 Yuichi Murayama,5 Keiji Terao,4 Yasuhiro Yasutomi4 and Tetsutaro Sata3
1The Corporation for Production and Research of Laboratory Primates; Tsukuba City, Japan; 2Departments of Cell Biology and Biochemistry; and 3Pathology; National Institute of Infectious Diseases; Tokyo, Japan; 4Tsukuba Primate Research Center; National Institute of Biomedical Innovation; Tsukuba City, Japan; 5Prion Disease Research Team; National Institute of Animal Health; Tsukuba City, Japan
Key words: L-type BSE, cBSE, cynomolgus macaques, transmission
BSE prion derived from classical BSE (cBSE) or L-type BSE was characterized by inoculation into the brain of cynomolgus macaques. The neurologic manifestation was developed in all cynomolgus macaques at 27–43 months after intracerebral inoculation of brain homogenate from cBSE-affected cattle (BSE JP/6). Second transmission of cBSE from macaque to macaque shortened incubation period to 13–18 months. cBSE-affected macaques showed the similar clinical signs including hyperekplexia, tremor and paralysis in both primary and second transmission.
Two macaques were intracerebrally inoculated brain homogenate from the L-type BSE-affected cattle (BSE JP/24). The incubation periods were 19–20 months in primary transmission.
The clinical course of the L-type BSE-affected macaques differed from that in cBSE-affected macaques in the points of severe myoclonus without hyperekplexia. The glycoform profile of PrPSc detected in macaque CNS was consistent with original pattern of either cBSE or L-typeBSE PrPSc, respectively. Although severe spongiform change in the brain was remarkable in all BSE-affected macaques, severe spongiform spread widely in cerebral cortex in L-type BSE-affected macaques. Heavy accumulation of PrPSc surrounded by vacuola formed florid plaques in cerebral cortex of cBSE-affected macaques. Deposit of PrPSc in L-type BSE-affected macaque was weak and diffuse synaptic pattern in cerebrum, but large PrPSc plaques were evident at cerebellum. MRI analysis, T2, T1, DW and flair sequences, at the time of autopsy revealed that brain atrophy and dilatation of cerebral ventricles were significantly severe in L-type BSE-affected macaques. These results suggest that L-type BSE is more virulent strain to primates comparing to cBSE.
http://www.prion2010.org/bilder/prion_2010_program_latest_w_posters_4_.pdf?139&PHPSESSID=a30a38202cfec579000b77af81be3099
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Atypical L-Type Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (L-BSE) Transmission to Cynomolgus Macaques, a Non-Human Primate
Jpn. J. Infect. Dis., 64 (1), 81-84, 2011
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/atypical-l-type-bovine-spongiform.html
Wednesday, February 16, 2011 IN CONFIDENCE SCRAPIE TRANSMISSION TO CHIMPANZEES
IN CONFIDENCE
http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2011/02/in-confidence-scrapie-transmission-to.html
Vaccines and Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy the Prion Disease, what if ?
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
3.2 Minute 5.3 - 5.4 Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
It was reported that some replies had been received from Companies using pituitary glands in their products. Copies of the BSE document had also been sent to DHSS and NIBSC.
and then another 3 + pages of blank space. ...TSS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102164813/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/09/06005001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
BSE - CURRENT POSITION WITH VETERINARY LICENCED PRODUCTS (MA.1968)
There are three areas of particular concern, vaccines (including emergency vaccines), pharmaceuticals which are covered by MA licences and unlicenses hormonal products produced under exemptions claimed under (Section 9(2) Medicines Act).
1) Vaccines
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103033809/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/10/06005001.pdf
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
another 6 pages of blank space. ...TSS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103032658/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/11/01012001.pdf
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103032631/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/11/04003001.pdf
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103033926/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/04/00007001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103034137/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/07/00007001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
Medicines Act - Veterinary Products Committee
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103034140/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/09/00004001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
COMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF MEDICINES
another 6 pages or so that are blank. ...TSS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102185137/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/01/26007001.pdf
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102184613/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/01/30001001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
COMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF MEDICINES
WORKING PARTY ON BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY
7.2.1. Products with bovine brain/lymphoid tissue as ingredients and administered by injection...[111]
7.2.2 Products with bovine ingredients (other than brain/lymphoid tissue) and administered by injection...[135]
7.2.3 Tissue implants, open wound dressings, surgical materials, dental and opthalmic products with bovine ingredients...[27]
7.2.4. Products with bovine ingredients and administered topically...[5]
7.2.5 Products with bovine ingredients and administered orally...[9]
7.2.6 Products with other animal/insect/bird ingredients and administered:
a. by injection a: 117
b. by topically b: 6
c. orally c: 8
7.2.7 Products with materials produced from animal material by chemical processes, eg stearic acid, gelatin and lanolin...[156]
With two exceptions, the replies to date have not given any immediate cause for concern, although 176 products do not conform to the CSM/VPC guidelines.
8. The first exception was from which gave very limited information about a very large number of homoepathic medicines with material obtained from cattle and a number with material from the brain. Of these, 53 were injectable products of which 20 were derived from cattle brain. A list of these products is attached as Appendix 1 to Annex D. The second exception relates to the product, 'Surgical Catgut', which is sourced from UK bovine intestines and will contain lymphoid material...
see full text ;
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102164420/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/09/06011001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102164744/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/10/00003001.pdf
MANAGEMENT IN CONFIDENCE
CERTIFIED BSE-FREE HERDS FOR SOURCE OF MATERIAL FOR BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102184729/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/01/04001001.pdf
Subject: BSE--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:49:00 -0800
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
To: BSE-L@uni-karlsruhe.de
[host Richard Barns] and now a question from Terry S. Singeltary of CJD Watch.
[TSS] yes, thank you, U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?
[no answer, you could hear in the back ground, mumbling and 'we can't. have him ask the question again.]
[host Richard] could you repeat the question?
[TSS] U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?
[not sure whom ask this] what group are you with?
[TSS] CJD Watch, my Mom died from hvCJD and we are tracking CJD world-wide.
[not sure who is speaking] could you please disconnect Mr. Singeltary
[TSS] you are not going to answer my question?
[not sure whom speaking] NO
from this point, i was still connected, got to listen and tape the whole conference. at one point someone came on, a woman, and ask again;
[unknown woman] what group are you with?
[TSS] CJD Watch and my Mom died from hvCJD we are trying to tract down CJD and other human TSE's world wide. i was invited to sit in on this from someone inside the USDA/APHIS and that is why i am here. do you intend on banning me from this conference now?
at this point the conference was turned back up, and i got to finish listening. They never answered or even addressed my one question, or even addressed the issue. BUT, i will try and give you a run-down for now, of the conference.
snip...full text ;
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/01/14th-international-congress-on.html
The documents below were provided by Terry S. Singeltary Sr on 8 May 2000.
They are optically character read (scanned into computer) and so may contain typos and unreadable parts.
TIP740203/l 0424 CONFIDENTIAL
snip...
The responses by the companies were presented by Ms Turner and were categorised by MCA standards, the products that were discussed were all low volume usage products eg sutures, heart valves.
8. As the responses included some materials of human origin it was decided that more information should be sought about CJD. There had been 2 recent deaths reported associated with human growth hormone. These were being investigated.
snip...
http://www.mad-cow.org/00/may00_news.html#aaa
5.3.3 The greatest risk, in theory, would be from parenteral injection of material derived from bovine brain or lymphoid tissue. Medicinal products for injection or surgical implantation which are prepared from bovine tissues, or which utilise bovine serum albumin or similar agents in their manufacture, might also be capable of transmitting infectious agents. All medicinal products are licensed under the Medicines Act by the Licensing Authority following guidance, for example from the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM), the Committee on Dental and Surgical Materials (CDSM) and their subcommittees. The Licensing Authority have been alerted to potential concern about BSE in medicinal products and will ensure that scrutiny of source materials and manufacturing processes now takes account of BSE agent.
see all 76 pages ;
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102132706/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ib/ibd1/tab02.pdf
EXPORT OF BRITISH BIOLOGICAL PHARMACEUTICALS...
snip...please see full text ;
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Vaccines and Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy the Prion Disease, what if ?
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/vaccines-and-transmissible-spongiform.html
TSS
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Supreme Court Protects Vaccine Manufacturers, Not Injured Children there from Bruesewitz vs Wyeth
http://vcjdtransfusion.blogspot.com/2011/02/supreme-court-protects-vaccine.html
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as isbeing done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
BRUESEWITZ ET AL. v. WYETH LLC, FKA WYETH, INC., ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 09–152. Argued October 12, 2010—Decided February 22, 2011
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA or Act) created a no-fault compensation program to stabilize a vaccine market adversely affected by an increase in vaccine-related tort litigation and to facilitate compensation to claimants who found pursuing legitimate vaccine-inflicted injuries too costly and difficult. The Act provides that a party alleging a vaccine-related injury may file a petition for compensation in the Court of Federal Claims, naming the Health and Human Services Secretary as the respondent; that the court must resolve the case by a specified deadline; and that the claimant can then decide whether to accept the court’s judgment or reject it and seek tort relief from the vaccine manufacturer. Awards are paid out of a fund created by an excise tax on each vaccine dose. As a quid pro quo, manufacturers enjoy significant tort-liability protections. Most importantly, the Act eliminates manufacturer liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects. Hannah Bruesewitz’s parents filed a vaccine-injury petition in the Court of Federal Claims, claiming that Hannah became disabled after receiving a diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine manufactured by Lederle Laboratories (now owned by respondent Wyeth). After that court denied their claim, they elected to reject the unfavorable judgment and filed suit in Pennsylvania state court, alleging, inter alia, that the defective design of Lederle’s DTP vaccine caused Hannah’s disabilities, and that Lederle was subject to strictliability and liability for negligent design under Pennsylvania common law. Wyeth removed the suit to the Federal District Court. It granted Wyeth summary judgment, holding that the relevant Pennsylvania law was preempted by 42 U. S. C. §300aa–22(b)(1), which 2 BRUESEWITZ v. WYETH LLC
Syllabus
provides that "[n]o vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side-effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings." The Third Circuit affirmed.
Held: The NCVIA preempts all design-defect claims against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for injury or death caused by a vaccine’s side effects. Pp. 7–19.
(a) Section 300aa–22(b)(1)’s text suggests that a vaccine’s design is not open to question in a tort action. If a manufacturer could be held liable for failure to use a different design, the "even though" clause would do no work. A vaccine side effect could always have been avoidable by use of a different vaccine not containing the harmful element. The language of the provision thus suggests the design is not subject to question in a tort action. What the statute establishes as a complete defense must be unavoidability (given safe manufacture and warning) with respect to the particular design. This conclusion is supported by the fact that, although products-liability law establishes three grounds for liability—defective manufacture, inadequate directions or warnings, and defective design—the Act mentions only manufacture and warnings. It thus seems that the Act’s failure to mention design-defect liability is "by deliberate choice, not in advertence." Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co., 537 U. S. 149, 168. Pp. 7–8.
(b) Contrary to petitioners’ argument, there is no reason to believe that §300aa–22(b)(1)’s term "unavoidable" is a term of art incorporating Restatement (Second) of Torts §402A, Comment k, which exempts from strict liability rules "unavoidably unsafe products." "Unavoidable" is hardly a rarely used word, and cases interpreting comment k attach special significance only to the term "unavoidably unsafeproducts," not the word "unavoidable" standing alone. Moreover, reading the phrase "side effects that were unavoidable" to exempt injuries caused by flawed design would require treating "even though"as a coordinating conjunction linking independent ideas when it is a concessive, subordinating conjunction conveying that one clause weakens or qualifies the other. The canon against superfluity does not undermine this Court’s interpretation because petitioners’ competing interpretation has superfluity problems of its own. Pp. 8–12.
(c) The structure of the NCVIA and of vaccine regulation in general reinforces what §300aa–22(b)(1)’s text suggests. Design defects do not merit a single mention in the Act or in Food and Drug Administration regulations that pervasively regulate the drug manufacturing process. This lack of guidance for design defects, combined with
3 Cite as: 562 U. S. ____ (2011) Syllabus
the extensive guidance for the two liability grounds specifically mentioned in the Act, strongly suggests that design defects were not mentioned because they are not a basis for liability. The Act’s mandates lead to the same conclusion. It provides for federal agency improvement of vaccine design and for federally prescribed compensation,which are other means for achieving the two beneficial effects of design-defect torts—prompting the development of improved designs, and providing compensation for inflicted injuries. The Act’s structural quid pro quo also leads to the same conclusion. The vaccine manufacturers fund an informal, efficient compensation program for vaccine injuries in exchange for avoiding costly tort litigation and the occasional disproportionate jury verdict. Taxing their product to fund the compensation program, while leaving their liability for design defect virtually unaltered, would hardly coax them back into the market. Pp. 13–16.
561 F. 3d 233, affirmed.
SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a concurring opinion. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, J., joined. KAGAN, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. _________________ _________________ 1 Cite as: 562 U. S. ____ (2011)
Opinion of the Court
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in thepreliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested tonotify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in orderthat corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 09–152
RUSSELL BRUESEWITZ, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. WYETH LLC, FKA WYETH, INC., FKA WYETHLABORATORIES, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
[February 22, 2011]
JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court.
We consider whether a preemption provision enacted inthe National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986(NCVIA)1 bars state-law design-defect claims againstvaccine manufacturers. .....
snip...please see full text ;
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf
Is polio still a disease seen in the United States? The last cases of naturally occurring paralytic polio in the United States were in 1979, when an outbreak occurred among the Amish in several Midwestern states. From 1980 through 1999, there were 152 confirmed cases of paralytic polio cases reported. Of the 152 cases, eight cases were acquired outside the United States and imported. The last imported case caused by wild poliovirus into the United States was reported in 1993.
The remaining 144 cases were vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) caused by live oral polio vaccine (OPV).
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/polio/dis-faqs.htm
How do Democrats and Republicans stand on tort reform issues?
"Tort Reform" is a very partisan issue. At both the state and national levels, Republicans overwhelmingly support tort reform and Democrats oppose it. The trial lawyer associations which represent plaintiff lawyers are major contributors to the Democrats. Insurance and medical interests contribute heavily to Republicans. In fact, the tort reform debate can be considered as an aspect of the overall political dynamic involving distribution of the nation's wealth. The most contentious issues involve medical malpractice and product liability. The result of settlements and verdicts of these cases is a transfer of wealth from groups which tend to be wealthy to victims and their lawyers. Virtually all the reform proposals ultimately attempt to limit the amount of funds which are distributed in this fashion.
http://www.newsbatch.com/tort.htm
February 18, 2011 It’s Time to Call Tort Reform What it Really Is Standing Up Against Corporate Tyranny
Jacob Diesselhorst, Nix Law Group, PLLC, Edmond, Oklahoma
I love Oklahoma. I love the people of Oklahoma, all of them. The hard-working men and woman, the elderly-who have paved the way for us and the children-who we are grooming to carry on the legacy for our state’s future.
I love the idea of democracy and freedom. This great country of ours’ was founded based on principles…certain unalienable rights that are bestowed upon all of us– The principle that us all, whether white or black, rich or poor, republican or democrat, should be treated equally and be allowed to play on a level playing field. In turn, our political system, the 3 branches of government, should continue to exemplify this ideal and support our efforts to uphold it. Unfortunately, politics in Oklahoma has deteriorated into a power struggle for control of money and resources as opposed to an effort to embody the principles of freedom, equality and justice.
Like many of us, I am disgusted by the ugly politics and lack of civility that has invaded government. Party lines are now clearly drawn, as both sides teeter for control of a system that is now broken due to the power of special interests. Special interests have infested our politics to the point now there is no way to differentiate between two. Oklahoma politics are no different. Money talks.
The Chamber, big business, big insurance and big oil have a tight grip on this State and the brass of the current leadership of the Oklahoma Republican party. Don’t take my word for it? Let the evidence speak for itself. Look at the campaign finance reports for Oklahoma’s current GOP leadership, they read like a who’s who of Oklahoma’s business community, the super-rich and the PACS (Political Action Committees) formed by the special interests that now dictate Oklahoma politics.
Unfortunately, this influence of the money and power of big business and corporations has infected Republican leadership and convinced them to pursue policy changes that do nothing to protect or assist the general public, but act only to further enrich and empower the voracious and self-serving interests of Corporations and Insurance Companies. One disturbing example of special interests’ invasion into democracy is taking place in Oklahoma right now—with the efforts of a chosen few to force more so-called “tort reform” on the people of Oklahoma.
Tort Reform (as it is called) is the effort by the Big Business wing of the Republican party (at the direction of the corporations who fund their political campaigns and reelections) to invade the sanctity of the judicial branch and legislate in the court room by taking away the autonomy of the civil jury and dictating how juries must decide cases and what evidence is and is not allowed to come in to evidence at trial.
•Politicans want to place an arbitrary, one-size-fits all hard cap of $250k on the amount of damages a civil jury can award a catstrophically injured Oklahoman for the rest of his or her lifetime no matter how severe the injuries and no matter how disgusting, reckless and wanton the conduct of the negligent Defendant.
•GOP Idealogs claim hard caps “deter frivolous lawsuits.” This is a BLATANT LIE. Frivolous lawsuits never see the light of day in Oklahoma. Numerous laws already in place require Expert Reports before lawsuits can be filed. Moreover, Hard Caps do nothing to prevent minor injury lawsuits from being filed. What arbitratry hard caps do cause—is for people with legitimate, long term catstrophic injuries (a brain injured child or a blinded teenager or a badly burned stay-at-home mom or a nursing home resident who is beaten to death and raped in his nursing home by a bad employee) from obtaining full and fair compensation for their injuries.
•Non-economic damages are meant to serve as a deterence to Corporations and individual and ensure that our highways, schools, airports, public transportaion, workplaces, products, etc.) are SAFE. CAPS ELIMINATE THIS DETERENCE and actually give corporations, bad doctors, bad nurses, truck drivers, etc. a free license to run amuck in our state with no fear of every being punished above 250k. (which is like a parking ticket to many multi-million dollar businesses, corporations and insurance companies)
•Further, Policitians want to tip the scales of justice in favor of negligent defendants by giving a negligent tortfeasor’s insurance company and CREDIT for any collateral source of insurance an injured Oklahoman has in awarding damages.
•In other words, if you are horribly injured in a trucking accident and have $150k in medical bills–the jury gets to know your health insurance company paid part of the bills, that part was written off and that part came out of your pocket. Meanwhile, the fact that the negligent trucking company, hospital, oil and gas company etc. has millions of dollars in liability insurance will remain hidden from the jury.
•Even more disturbing, if you had the forsight to purcahse disability insurance or life insurance (in the case of a wrongful death case)–the negligent corporation’s liability insurance company will also get a credit for that insurance money (even though it is from another seperate insurance company). In other words, everyone benefits in this equation (the insurance companies and negligent defendants) EXCEPT THE ONE WHO SHOULD—THE CATASTROPHICALY INJURED OKLAHOMAN.
Our civil justice system is built on a principle of a balance of power and a weighing of the evidence to determine fault, liability and damages. The scales of justice illustrate this ideal. Our court system has successfully existed for hundreds of years built around the JURY. The Jury being a group of citizens like you and me who are entrusted to hear the evidence of a particular case and work together to render a fair and reasoned verdict. Now, however, politicians, not jurors, will decide the amount of damages to award in civil cases involving human injury and death by forcing upon a one-size fits all law that caps the maximum damages at $250,000.00 and decreases any economic damages awarded (medical bills, future medical bills, disability, loss of earnings, etc.) by the amounts of any collateral source of compensation that exists to pay part of them.
In other words, “tort reform” serves to cripple the very purpose of the jury system—to leave it to the people to decide the damages to render against a defendant who has been found to be negligent, reckless or wanton in its conduct and, as a result, caused harm to another person—by taking away the right of jurors (OKLAHOMA CITIZENS) to fairly decide legal disputes.
I for one stand with the people of Oklahoma and their constitutional right to a fair jury trial by the people…not politicians. With “tort reform”—Special Interests are completing the trifecta of infecting all 3 branches of government with their greed and self-serving influence. Meanwhile, the citizens of Oklahoma stand by, unknowlingly, while their rights are taken away by corrupt politicans whose only motivation is to satisfy their biggest campaign donors (i.e., BIG BUSINESS/BIG INSURANCE) so they can hope to get relected.
Sad but true.
Politics as usual in this State cannot be allowed to continue. The very rights to which each of us is entitled now hang in the balance.
David Farnbauch at 7:55 am. (General)
http://www.sweeneylawfirm.com/blog/its-time-to-call-tort-reform-what-it-really-is.htm
Wisconsin May Cap Punitive Damages At $200000 | Tort Reform ...Jan 14, 2011 ... GOP caps punitive damages in tort reform bill - WBAY-TV Green Bay-Fox ... Whenever the Republican party issues their issues platform, they're always for the death ... 2011 Looking Like A Bad Year For Civil Justice (JL) ...
www.tortdeform.com/.../2011/.../wisconsin_may_cap_punitive_dam.html
Justinian Lane Wisconsin May Cap Punitive Damages At $200,000 Continuing the “2011 will be a bad year for civil justice” theme:
The Senate judiciary committee voted 3-2 on Friday to cap punitive damages at $200,000 or twice the amount of compensatory damages, whichever is greater. Current state law does not lay out any caps on punitive damages.
Source: Wis. GOP caps punitive damages in tort reform bill - WBAY-TV Green Bay-Fox Cities-Northeast Wisconsin News
Capping punitive damages at $200k will only encourage corporations to sell profitable but defective products. If it weren’t for punitive damage awards well in excess of $200k, Johns Manville might still be pumping out asbestos products.
I don’t understand Republican ideology. On one hand, most of them support the death penalty. But on the other hand, they don’t like punitive damages. How can you rationalize putting a man to death for committing a crime, but not allowing the family of his victims to take more than $200k?
http://www.tortdeform.com/archives/2011/01/wisconsin_may_cap_punitive_dam.html
http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=News&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=99772
Archives for February 2011 >
Arbitrary Damage Caps Reward Negligent and Wrongful Actors and Punish the Innocent Citizens of Oklahoma
Posted by Jacob Diesselhorst on February 17, 2011
In 2009 (less than 2 years ago), Oklahoma passed what the then-newly-annointed Republican Majority Senate and House Leadership coined "Landmark Comprehensive Lawsuit Reform."
Per the Oklahoma GOP's own Press Release of May 11, 2009--
“ The agreement is multi-faceted, including several key components of reform which will improve health care access to all Oklahomans, as well as assuring small business’ health and viability in the state.
”“I’m very pleased with the agreement,” said Glen Coffee (the then Republican Senate Majority Leader and now, somehow, Secretary of State (We will save that for another day). In May 2009, Coffee proclaimed “Republicans have promised reform of the legal system, the people expect us to deliver, and we have in fact delivered. The spirit of cooperation exhibited by all parties in this negotiation was gratifying, and is indicative of what can be done when people negotiate in good faith toward a mutually beneficial goal,” Coffee continued. “We look forward to sending this historic reform to Governor Henry to ratify the hard work all the parties have accomplished for the state.”
Current House Speaker Benge (who is now acting like 2009 never happened in pushing the GOP's new Corporate Welfare and Lawsuit Immunity laws) said back in 2009 about the then passed broadsweeping lawsuit reform:
“We have said since the beginning of session that lawsuit reform was one of our top priorities, and this agreement represents a huge victory for the people of Oklahoma today. All interested parties have worked together to make this deal a reality and I am proud of the collaboration that has occurred. This legislation will ensure access to the courts for all who have legitimate claims, but will also bring some certainty to a system that has recently become a hindrance to economic development in our state. I look forward to Gov. Henry signing this bill.”
”Dan Sullivan, a prominent lawyer for insurance companies and large corporations in Oklahoma and GOP Representative from Tulsa, also said in 2009:
“This agreement provides additional protections to the medical and business community from frivolous suits while protecting the right to a trial by a jury of their peers for those that are truly injured.
”HOW SOON WE FORGET. Now, the Oklahoma GOP Big Business Republicans, drunk with power in Oklahoma, having swept their way into the Governor's office and total, unfettered control of Oklahoma, plans to tip the scales of justice completely over in favor of negligent and reckless defendant tort feasors by passing the most broadsweeping and unconstitional civil justice changes in modern US History. These laws should not and in fact do not appeal to social minded and reasonable Conservative Oklahomans. See Example 1 and Example 2.
The Oklahoma GOP is slithering these bills through at the Capital with very little fanfare and Oklahoma is just sitting back while the bandits are making away with the take. In fact, Most Oklahomans do not know about these additional draconian changes and clearly do not know that not a single one of the "reforms" the GOP are now proposing favor individual Oklahomans- they all favor negligent and reckless civil defendants.
ARBITRARY $250K DAMAGE CAPS THAT RESTRICT JURY AWARDS NO MATTER HOW BAD A DEFENDANT ACTS AND HOW HORRIBLY AND PERMANENTLY AN INNOCENT OKLAHOMAN IS INJURED OR MAIMED = NO ACCOUNTABILITY.
And who bears the burden of this Corporate Bailout/Corporate Welfare?---regular Oklahomans- You, me, our kids, our parents, especially the must vulnerable of all:
•children •the elderly •stay at home moms ' •lower wage earners like pastors, fireman, police officers, teachers, etc. According to the Oklahoma GOP, The most damages a jury can ever award these type of Oklahomans, no matter how catastrophic and long-term their injuries may be, is only 250k. 90% of Oklahomans would never support this type of law--yet it will likely sail through the on the backs of the politicians the Chamber put in place, right onto the desk of Mary Failing who will not even read it before she signs it.
After these horrific and unconstitutional bills become law, Oklahomans who have LEGITIMATE CIVIL CASES and whose only avenue for justice is the COURTHOUSE, will be the one's left out in the cold with no way to get JUSTICE for their loss of quality of life---pain and suffering, disability, inability to earn a living, etc.
The Oklahoma GOP's new, so-called "Tort Reform" rewards negligent corporations cutting corners for profits, bad nursing homes, foreign produce manufacturers like drug companies and medical device companies, bad doctors, unsafe truck drivers, drunk drivers, texting drivers etc. and their multi-billion dollar Insurance Company allies. All this at the expense of your constitutional right to a non-biased and fair trial by jury of your peers- Oklahoma citizens.
How about we let Oklahoma juries sort out legitimate civil disputes and not well-greased and bought-and-paid-for politicians (who talk out of both sides of their mouths depending on what year it is) and whose only interests they apparently protect are those of the corporate donors who got them elected and will keep them in office.
Tags:anthony sykes, lawsuit reform, mary fallin, nix law group, oklahoma law, rob johnson, tort reform
http://www.oklahomainjurylawadvocate.com/2011/02/
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Vaccines and Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy the Prion Disease, what if ?
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/vaccines-and-transmissible-spongiform.html
http://www.whale.to/v/singeltary.html
http://bseinquiry.blogspot.com/2008/05/mad-cow-disease-bse-cjd-children.html
please note ;
PPo2-26:
Transmission of Classical and Atypical (L-type) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Prions to Cynomolgus macaques
Fumiko Ono,1 Yoshio Yamakawa,2 Minoru Tobiume,3 Yuko Sato,3 Harutaka Katano,3 Kenichi Hagiwara,2 Iori Itagaki,1 Akio Hiyaoka,1 Katuhiko Komatuzaki,1 Yasunori Emoto,1 Hiroaki Shibata,4 Yuichi Murayama,5 Keiji Terao,4 Yasuhiro Yasutomi4 and Tetsutaro Sata3
1The Corporation for Production and Research of Laboratory Primates; Tsukuba City, Japan; 2Departments of Cell Biology and Biochemistry; and 3Pathology; National Institute of Infectious Diseases; Tokyo, Japan; 4Tsukuba Primate Research Center; National Institute of Biomedical Innovation; Tsukuba City, Japan; 5Prion Disease Research Team; National Institute of Animal Health; Tsukuba City, Japan
Key words: L-type BSE, cBSE, cynomolgus macaques, transmission
BSE prion derived from classical BSE (cBSE) or L-type BSE was characterized by inoculation into the brain of cynomolgus macaques. The neurologic manifestation was developed in all cynomolgus macaques at 27–43 months after intracerebral inoculation of brain homogenate from cBSE-affected cattle (BSE JP/6). Second transmission of cBSE from macaque to macaque shortened incubation period to 13–18 months. cBSE-affected macaques showed the similar clinical signs including hyperekplexia, tremor and paralysis in both primary and second transmission.
Two macaques were intracerebrally inoculated brain homogenate from the L-type BSE-affected cattle (BSE JP/24). The incubation periods were 19–20 months in primary transmission.
The clinical course of the L-type BSE-affected macaques differed from that in cBSE-affected macaques in the points of severe myoclonus without hyperekplexia. The glycoform profile of PrPSc detected in macaque CNS was consistent with original pattern of either cBSE or L-typeBSE PrPSc, respectively. Although severe spongiform change in the brain was remarkable in all BSE-affected macaques, severe spongiform spread widely in cerebral cortex in L-type BSE-affected macaques. Heavy accumulation of PrPSc surrounded by vacuola formed florid plaques in cerebral cortex of cBSE-affected macaques. Deposit of PrPSc in L-type BSE-affected macaque was weak and diffuse synaptic pattern in cerebrum, but large PrPSc plaques were evident at cerebellum. MRI analysis, T2, T1, DW and flair sequences, at the time of autopsy revealed that brain atrophy and dilatation of cerebral ventricles were significantly severe in L-type BSE-affected macaques. These results suggest that L-type BSE is more virulent strain to primates comparing to cBSE.
http://www.prion2010.org/bilder/prion_2010_program_latest_w_posters_4_.pdf?139&PHPSESSID=a30a38202cfec579000b77af81be3099
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Atypical L-Type Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (L-BSE) Transmission to Cynomolgus Macaques, a Non-Human Primate
Jpn. J. Infect. Dis., 64 (1), 81-84, 2011
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/atypical-l-type-bovine-spongiform.html
Wednesday, February 16, 2011 IN CONFIDENCE SCRAPIE TRANSMISSION TO CHIMPANZEES
IN CONFIDENCE
http://scrapie-usa.blogspot.com/2011/02/in-confidence-scrapie-transmission-to.html
Vaccines and Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy the Prion Disease, what if ?
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
3.2 Minute 5.3 - 5.4 Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
It was reported that some replies had been received from Companies using pituitary glands in their products. Copies of the BSE document had also been sent to DHSS and NIBSC.
and then another 3 + pages of blank space. ...TSS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102164813/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/09/06005001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
BSE - CURRENT POSITION WITH VETERINARY LICENCED PRODUCTS (MA.1968)
There are three areas of particular concern, vaccines (including emergency vaccines), pharmaceuticals which are covered by MA licences and unlicenses hormonal products produced under exemptions claimed under (Section 9(2) Medicines Act).
1) Vaccines
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103033809/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/10/06005001.pdf
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
another 6 pages of blank space. ...TSS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103032658/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/11/01012001.pdf
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103032631/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/11/04003001.pdf
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103033926/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/04/00007001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103034137/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/07/00007001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
Medicines Act - Veterinary Products Committee
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080103034140/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/09/00004001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
COMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF MEDICINES
another 6 pages or so that are blank. ...TSS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102185137/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/01/26007001.pdf
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102184613/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/01/30001001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
COMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF MEDICINES
WORKING PARTY ON BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY
7.2.1. Products with bovine brain/lymphoid tissue as ingredients and administered by injection...[111]
7.2.2 Products with bovine ingredients (other than brain/lymphoid tissue) and administered by injection...[135]
7.2.3 Tissue implants, open wound dressings, surgical materials, dental and opthalmic products with bovine ingredients...[27]
7.2.4. Products with bovine ingredients and administered topically...[5]
7.2.5 Products with bovine ingredients and administered orally...[9]
7.2.6 Products with other animal/insect/bird ingredients and administered:
a. by injection a: 117
b. by topically b: 6
c. orally c: 8
7.2.7 Products with materials produced from animal material by chemical processes, eg stearic acid, gelatin and lanolin...[156]
With two exceptions, the replies to date have not given any immediate cause for concern, although 176 products do not conform to the CSM/VPC guidelines.
8. The first exception was from which gave very limited information about a very large number of homoepathic medicines with material obtained from cattle and a number with material from the brain. Of these, 53 were injectable products of which 20 were derived from cattle brain. A list of these products is attached as Appendix 1 to Annex D. The second exception relates to the product, 'Surgical Catgut', which is sourced from UK bovine intestines and will contain lymphoid material...
see full text ;
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102164420/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/09/06011001.pdf
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102164744/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1988/10/00003001.pdf
MANAGEMENT IN CONFIDENCE
CERTIFIED BSE-FREE HERDS FOR SOURCE OF MATERIAL FOR BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102184729/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1989/01/04001001.pdf
Subject: BSE--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:49:00 -0800
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
To: BSE-L@uni-karlsruhe.de
[host Richard Barns] and now a question from Terry S. Singeltary of CJD Watch.
[TSS] yes, thank you, U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?
[no answer, you could hear in the back ground, mumbling and 'we can't. have him ask the question again.]
[host Richard] could you repeat the question?
[TSS] U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds?
[not sure whom ask this] what group are you with?
[TSS] CJD Watch, my Mom died from hvCJD and we are tracking CJD world-wide.
[not sure who is speaking] could you please disconnect Mr. Singeltary
[TSS] you are not going to answer my question?
[not sure whom speaking] NO
from this point, i was still connected, got to listen and tape the whole conference. at one point someone came on, a woman, and ask again;
[unknown woman] what group are you with?
[TSS] CJD Watch and my Mom died from hvCJD we are trying to tract down CJD and other human TSE's world wide. i was invited to sit in on this from someone inside the USDA/APHIS and that is why i am here. do you intend on banning me from this conference now?
at this point the conference was turned back up, and i got to finish listening. They never answered or even addressed my one question, or even addressed the issue. BUT, i will try and give you a run-down for now, of the conference.
snip...full text ;
http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2010/01/14th-international-congress-on.html
The documents below were provided by Terry S. Singeltary Sr on 8 May 2000.
They are optically character read (scanned into computer) and so may contain typos and unreadable parts.
TIP740203/l 0424 CONFIDENTIAL
snip...
The responses by the companies were presented by Ms Turner and were categorised by MCA standards, the products that were discussed were all low volume usage products eg sutures, heart valves.
8. As the responses included some materials of human origin it was decided that more information should be sought about CJD. There had been 2 recent deaths reported associated with human growth hormone. These were being investigated.
snip...
http://www.mad-cow.org/00/may00_news.html#aaa
5.3.3 The greatest risk, in theory, would be from parenteral injection of material derived from bovine brain or lymphoid tissue. Medicinal products for injection or surgical implantation which are prepared from bovine tissues, or which utilise bovine serum albumin or similar agents in their manufacture, might also be capable of transmitting infectious agents. All medicinal products are licensed under the Medicines Act by the Licensing Authority following guidance, for example from the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM), the Committee on Dental and Surgical Materials (CDSM) and their subcommittees. The Licensing Authority have been alerted to potential concern about BSE in medicinal products and will ensure that scrutiny of source materials and manufacturing processes now takes account of BSE agent.
see all 76 pages ;
http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080102132706/http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ib/ibd1/tab02.pdf
EXPORT OF BRITISH BIOLOGICAL PHARMACEUTICALS...
snip...please see full text ;
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Vaccines and Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy the Prion Disease, what if ?
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
http://transmissiblespongiformencephalopathy.blogspot.com/2011/01/vaccines-and-transmissible-spongiform.html
TSS
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Supreme Court Protects Vaccine Manufacturers, Not Injured Children there from Bruesewitz vs Wyeth
http://vcjdtransfusion.blogspot.com/2011/02/supreme-court-protects-vaccine.html
Labels: vaccine manufactures supreme court children Bruesewitz vs Wyeth
posted by Terry S. Singeltary Sr. | 8:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home