\nHere’s a little piece about U.S. pharmaceutical legislation, from my own research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
First, an excerpt from the U.S: legal code governing vaccines (emphasis mine):<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
42 U.S. Code \u00a7\u202f300aa\u201322.Standards of responsibility<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(a) General rule<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nExcept as provided in subsections (b), (c), and (e) State law shall apply to a civil action brought for damages for a vaccine-related injury or death.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(b) Unavoidable adverse side effects; warnings<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(1) No 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<\/span><\/strong> 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.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n \n( full text: https:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/uscode\/text\/42\/300aa-22<\/a> )<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n \nIn other words, in the U.S, as long as you put a warning of possible side effects on the packet, you can’t be prosecuted for selling a dangerous vaccine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n \nThis legislation was passed following a “scare” about alleged side effects of whooping cough vaccine (DPT), which had resulted in big payouts from some vaccine manufacturers, and the consequent threatened withdrawal of all<\/em><\/strong> of them from the DPT vaccine market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n With this in place, is it possible that some pharmaceutical corporations (all of which have a legal requirement to direct their efforts to best serve the interests of their shareholders) might try to promote vaccines of dubious worth and\/or potentially suspect safety? I’d say it’s not just possible, it’s inevitable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n