- Vaccine damage: those affected are often abandoned
- What is a vaccine damage?
- Vaccine damage: The Lübeck Death Dance
- Approval: How safe are vaccines today?
- No vaccination is risk-free
- Vaccine damage: the WHO criteria
- Vaccine damage: The fight for the law
- The judgment of the European Court of Justice
- Vaccination: critics disapprove of the judgment of the European Court of Justice
- Vaccine complications: How serious is the obligation to register?
- Vaccine damage is rarely recognized
- Scandinavian countries lead by example
- The vaccine damage as an annoying incident
- Here you can report vaccination complications
- Vaccine damage: request for compensation
- Vaccine damage: action before the Social Court
- Your training as a holistic nutritionist
If symptoms appear after a vaccination, it is difficult to interpret them correctly. They could have been created by accident. But it could also be related to the vaccine. Doctors are obliged to report to the health authorities even if they even suspect a vaccine complication. Often, however, this obligation is not met. Also, it is difficult to provide the necessary evidence so that vaccine victims often fall by the wayside. A ruling by the European Court of Justice should now strengthen the position of those affected.
Vaccine damage: those affected are often abandoned
There is hardly any other medical topic that is discussed as hotly as the subject of "vaccination". While vaccinationists consider vaccinations to be one of the most essential achievements in the history of medicine and unwilling to vaccinate - eg. For example, by introducing the obligation to vaccinate - would like to criminalize, vaccine opponents doubt the usefulness of vaccinations in principle.
Right in the middle are the so-called vaccination critics who plead for an individual vaccination decision and are therefore particularly unpleasant, because they want to be fully informed and simply ask too many questions - among them often questions that overwhelm even doctors.
But anyone who thinks that this is a phenomenon of our time is mistaken, because it is just as old as the vaccine itself. The vaccination skepticism was particularly driven by the fact that again and again vaccinated among the victims found and various vaccines themselves demonstrably to the disease and led to the death of countless people. Although we have arrived in the 21st century, there are still indications that doubt the efficacy and safety of vaccines, which mainly include the recurring side effects and vaccine damage.
Particularly problematic in this context seems that vaccine victims and those affected mostly not only left alone, but also anything but taken seriously. Because if vaccines cause damage, pharmaceutical companies, doctors, experts and courts are seldom willing to recognize them and at least compensate them financially.
Grapefruit seed extract nuclear power
Vitamins⟩ Vitamin C
Simple Clean +
Digestion⟩ intestinal cleansing
What is a vaccine damage?
Before we delve into the topic just mentioned, related terms should be precisely defined:
1st vaccination reaction:
These are short term (few days) and transient local and general reactions. These include lighter side effects such. For example, pain, swelling and tension at the injection site, mild fever, fatigue, gastrointestinal discomfort, head and body aches.
2. Vaccination disease:
If, after vaccination, a mild form of that infectious disease has been vaccinated, it is referred to as a vaccine disease, e.g. For example, vaccines. It can also occur only weeks after vaccination.
3. Vaccination complication:
If a vaccination reaction goes beyond the usual level, it is called a vaccine complication, which may be more or less pronounced. It can be caused by the vaccine itself, it can be triggered by it, it can be temporary or lead to lasting damage as well as death. A vaccine complication requires at least transient therapy, which is not the case with the vaccine response.
4-week detox treatment
Chlorella algae tablets
4. Vaccine damage:
The term "vaccine damage" is not a medical term, but a legal term used for the first time in the Federal Epidemic Act (BSeuchG) was defined by 1961. According to § 2 Infection Protection Act (IfSG) is "the health and economic consequence of a health beyond the usual extent of a vaccine response by the vaccination..." From a vaccine damage is only mentioned if a vaccine complication was recognized as such. Only with this recognition is a financial compensation possible. However, this only applies to state-recommended vaccinations.
For example, childhood complications may include psychomotor developmental delay, as well as type 1 diabetes, autism or death. If you are interested in the previously reported suspected cases of vaccination complications and would like to get an overview, we recommend the following links:
- UAW Database / Serious Adverse Events (SAE) Database
- European database of reported suspected adverse drug reactions
Vaccine damage: The Lübeck Death Dance
How many people have fallen ill and died through vaccinations throughout history can not be reconstructed today. The so-called Lübeck vaccination disaster - also known as Lübecker Totentanz - is one of the first relevant cases, which were held in court in the context of the so-called Calmette process.
In 1930, 256 babies (about 84 percent of all newborns) were vaccinated orally against tuberculosis in Lübeck. This mass vaccination was preceded by major publicity campaigns to convince the parents of the children that they would act negligently if they chose not to.
The consequences of the vaccination campaign were devastating: 131 vaccinees suffered and suffered partly throughout their lives from chronic sequelae (eg severe deafness) and 77 babies were killed. The litigation proved to be particularly difficult, as lawyers had to decide on a matter that even the medical experts were not in agreement on.
In the end, only five of the defendants sentenced Georg Deycke, the manufacturer and tuberculosis researcher, to two years in prison for negligent assault and negligent homicide. On the other hand, internist Ernst Altstaedt, who was also involved, was only sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment for the same offenses. He was released after just seven months and was allowed to continue his profession as a doctor. The guilty verdict was based on the fact that the vaccine had been cultivated in an unsuitable laboratory and animal experiments had been abandoned.
It should be said that the then District Court Council Wibel sympathized with the socially well-off and socially recognized defendants and it would have come without the pressure of the outraged public never to a trial or a conviction. Wibel began suicide in 1932.
Approval: How safe are vaccines today?
On the part of the vaccination supporters, events like these are of course dismissed as isolated cases, and it is also pointed out that the vaccine is no longer used anyway and that vaccinations generally save more lives than destroy them. It may be true that the Lübeck immunocompromise occurred almost 100 years ago, but at the time of administration no one had any idea what the consequences would be.
In the meantime, new vaccines are constantly coming onto the market and, of course, the question arises as to whether these have really been adequately checked and how safe they are, as proclaimed by the vaccination supporters. Because it is a fact that in the clinical tests that are necessary for the approval of a new drug or vaccine, according to the Drug Commission of the German medical profession On average, only 1,500 subjects participate.
In addition, children, the sick and even the elderly are generally excluded from the studies, so there are no data on these groups at the time of admission. There are plenty of examples that clearly show that despite the allegedly so high scientific standards, vaccines lead to complications again and again.
No vaccination is risk-free
For example, studies have shown that influenza vaccination can lead to Guillain-Barré syndrome and that rotavirus vaccination increases the risk of intestinal invaginations in infants. a. have already reported for you: more vaccine damage due to multiple vaccines.
In addition, research also questions the effectiveness of vaccines. A Danish study published in 2017, carried out by the Research Center for Vitamins and Vaccines, has shown that the DPT vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough) in children in Guinea-Bissau (Africa) in the 1980s did anything but achieve the desired outcome. In the vaccinee group mortality was 5 to 10 times higher than in the unvaccinated children group.
Another indication that vaccines often fail to deliver what is initially promised is that many of them are no longer recommended or even banned after a while, so they lose their approval. So in the US z. For example, a previously recommended rotavirus vaccine (Rotashield) is being withdrawn after extensive use due to its many complications - including baby deaths - or the Hexavac six-fold vaccine - allegedly due to lack of vaccine protection.
What about if you or your family members are affected by vaccine damage, so you get sick after a vaccination and possibly suffer permanent damage?
Vaccine damage: the WHO criteria
For a vaccine damage to be recognized, various criteria must be met, eg. B. those from the World Health Organization (WHO) were given. These include:
- the temporal context
- the absence of other triggers
- the typical symptoms of each vaccine
- the pathophysiological explanations for the respective vaccine
At least now it is clear that the recognition of a vaccine damage is similar to a lottery game. Because if the symptoms do not occur immediately after the vaccination, which is quite possible, other circumstances are blamed by experts or the symptoms are classified as atypical or in connection with the vaccination as unexplainable, the chances for the recognition of a vaccine damage bad.
When laboratory methods and equipment reach their limits, also because physicians do not even know what to look for, and consequently no measurable data can be collected that can reveal the connection between the vaccine and the damage, the arbitrariness becomes a thing of the past Gate opened. Righteous judgments - and the affected family - usually fall by the wayside.
Vaccine damage: The fight for the law
Of the European Court (ECJ) has now passed a judgment in June 2017 that has caused a lot of displeasure, incomprehension and protest in medical circles. According to him, serious evidence is sufficient to reverse the burden of proof in favor of a person suffering from vaccination. This means that the above-mentioned criteria by no means - at least not all - have to come to fruition, so that a vaccine damage can be recognized by the court.
But let us briefly open the case for a better understanding: A Frenchman was left at the end of 1998, in January 1999 and in July 1999 - three times - with a company vaccine Sanofi Pasteur MSD vaccinate against hepatitis B He developed symptoms in August 1999 and was diagnosed in November 2000 with multiple sclerosis.
In 2006, the patient, along with three family members, sued the manufacturer for damages. The patient unfortunately was not allowed to witness the verdict: He died on October 30, 2011. However, his relatives did not allow themselves to be fooled and continued to fight for the right of the deceased. The complaint was initially dismissed by the French courts as there was no scientific proof of multiple sclerosis as a consequence of a hepatitis B vaccine.
The judgment of the European Court of Justice
The lawsuit was brought before the Court of Cassation in Paris. The relatives insisted that the vaccine should be recognized as a cause of harm, firstly because there was a close temporal relationship and secondly because a family bias could be ruled out. The case was finally referred to the Court of Cassation in November 2015 European Court of Justice passed on.
The verdict of European Court of Justice was that product defects can be proven by clear and consistent evidence even in the absence of scientific consensus. Therefore, no causal relationship between a vaccine and the symptoms of a disease has to be proven. In addition, it was pointed out that studies have already indicated an increased risk of multiple sclerosis due to hepatitis B vaccination.
This ruling could lead to a reduction in the burden of proof for those affected in the future. This is especially true when victims claim damages in a civil court. So far, the person affected not only had to prove that he suffered damage that had not previously shown himself, but also prove the causality between the vaccination and the damage occurred. A single missing link in the chain of evidence sufficed to nip the lawsuit in the bud.
Furthermore, European courts could be given more responsibility in deciding whether the connection between a vaccine and a disease can be considered and plausible, even if this assessment does not conform to the state of medical research.
Vaccination: critics disapprove of the judgment of the European Court of Justice
Short time after the verdict of the European Court of Justice of course it hailed harsh criticism. Is it surprising that this was superficially pronounced by medical doctors, although in this case neither a doctor nor an authority, but a vaccine manufacturer had been sued?
For example, it is alleged that, in the case of a mere presumption of vaccine damage, the burden of proof is reduced on the part of the claimants. In this way, the public is unsettled, as the judgment despite all research findings suggests that such vaccine damage is likely to be classified.
Of course, this completely ignores the fact that the public has long been unsettled and that the likelihood of vaccine damage is indeed present.
Thomas Mertens, Director of the Institute of Virology at University Hospital Ulm and chairman of Permanent Vaccination Commission, commented on the Science Media Center in Germany as follows:
Such a practice is blatantly contrary to good scientific practice and, in the specific case, damages the acceptance of an exceptionally beneficial vaccine, which would have the potential to eradicate hepatitis B, even with appropriate global use. "
Firstly, there is no question of the vaccine's potential in relation to the trial, secondly, there are already studies that have shown that the hepatitis B vaccine can lead to complications and third, it is simply ignored that the vaccine is not must be beneficial for every vaccinated person.
The researcher Cornelia Betsch of the University of Erfurt On the other hand, they said that vaccine opponents could use this case as a precedent and claim that it does not require evidence to proclaim a case of vaccine damage. To this questionable insinuation is only said that all the arguments for the evidence represent a vicious circle, which serves here only to discredit those affected.
Vaccine complications: How serious is the obligation to register?
First of all, it is extremely difficult to get an overview of reported vaccine complications, recognized vaccine damage and any compensation and their amount. This is also due to the fact that the number of unreported cases in terms of vaccine complications is very high, especially as consequential damages on the part of physicians are often not associated with the vaccine.
Although in Germany for doctors since 2001 the in IfSG (Infection Protection Act) - "the same applies to Austria and Switzerland - this is in many cases not complied with at all.
Actually, the health department should be informed immediately if symptoms could be causally related to the vaccine and go beyond a vaccine response. But the line between vaccination and vaccination complication is smooth, so that the classification often depends on the attitude of the respective doctor.
According to Dr. Johann Loibner, himself a general practitioner and a court sworn expert, it is very common that vaccine complications are trivialized by doctors in order to leave the principle of vaccination no doubt. He also criticizes the fact that the vaccine industry is putting pressure on the physicians' chambers for such doctors who publicly criticize vaccination.
Vaccine damage is rarely recognized
At the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI), the Federal Institute for Vaccines and Biomedical Drugs, from 2005 to 2009, received over 10,600 indications of possible side effects of vaccines. These included vaccination reactions such as fever, headache and body aches, nausea or redness at the puncture.
213 of those affected suffered demonstrable permanent damage and 183 cases were fatal. 1,036 patients or their relatives requested recognition as vaccine damage. Of these, however, only 169 were approved.
Vaccination advocates are keen to point out that more than 211 million doses of vaccine have been administered during this period to underline the safety of vaccines and to put the damage that has occurred into the background. In truth, this number does not diminish the suffering of the victims and their relatives, for this is in no way mitigated by this remark.
The figures for the year 2015 show that even more vaccine complications were reported compared to the previous years: the PEI A total of 11,779 adverse reactions were reported, but only 3,919 were classified as suspected. Almost 35 percent were serious cases. Fifty-eight people sustained permanent damage, 18 reported fatalities. Apart from 6 cases of an abscess, it is loud PEI to establish no causal relationship between the vaccine and the damage.
In Austria, only 15 vaccine damages were officially recognized in the years 2005 to 2009. Four of them were triggered by the now no longer recommended BCG vaccine (tuberculosis) and one by a smallpox vaccine. Bear in mind that many years can pass from the time of the announcement to the rejection or recognition.
Incidentally, in Switzerland there is no recognized vaccine damage to this day.
Scandinavian countries lead by example
The vaccine Pandemrix, which was used against the swine flu, according to the EudraVigilance database of the European Medicines Agency Between 2009 and 2015, more than 1,300 people had narcolepsy (sleeping sickness).
Two Scandinavian countries made their heads nails: Sweden awarded the more than 300 recognized victims compensation of up to one million euros, while Finland compensated the victims with a total of 22 million euros. They thus supported the inner conviction that a state urging its citizens to vaccinate should also be responsible for the negative consequences of this recommendation.
In Germany, on the other hand, they were more than reluctant to acknowledge vaccine damage. So z. For example, in Hesse 15 applications were filed, 11 of which were rejected immediately.About the remaining four applications and many more from the other federal states should only after a nationwide study of the PEI be decided.
Said study found that the narcolepsy rate in under-18s has risen since 2009, but even before the vaccinations began. Thus, it was not considered appropriate to recognize a link. In this sense, however, the question of why the vaccine Pandemrix since then in the EU is no longer used, especially since it is denied that this had anything to do with the reported narcolepsy cases.
You can find further information under: Million compensation for vaccine victims of swine flu.
The vaccine damage as an annoying incident
The fact that the lives of so many people - as in the case of the Lübeck babies - is destroyed at one go, is quite rare. But what about all the vaccine victims of our time? After all, if vaccine complications do not occur frequently in terms of time and place and affect individuals who do not know each other, it is much harder to find hearing and attention.
And so sufferers fall silently through the grid of benefit-risk balance and are perceived as unpleasant incidents that are best swept under the carpet and hushed up. It seems particularly bad that since the Lübeck vaccination disaster many things have not changed to this day.
For suspected vaccine damage, it is still virtually impossible to prove it, to find a responsible person, to rebel against the lobbyists and to claim in court a claim for compensation.
Nonetheless, the verdict of the European Court of Justice It has been shown that courage and perseverance can lead to the desired goal - namely the recognition of a vaccine damage - even if the situation with regard to the seemingly overpowering opponent may seem hopeless for a long time.
Here you can report vaccination complications
So if there is even the slightest suspicion that you or your children or other family members have suffered a vaccine damage, report this to the responsible doctor, who has the obligation under law to forward this to the health department.
If your doctor fails to do so, he would (usually in theory) face a fine of up to 25,000 euros. Do not allow yourself to be weaned or consoled with words that the vaccine certainly has nothing to do with it.
The health department then informs that PEI and in a row is by the experts of the Department of Drug Safety checked with regard to the reported and possibly researched information as to whether a causal relationship with the vaccine is classified as certain, probable, possible or unlikely or even impossible to assess due to a lack of data.
You also have the opportunity to become active and to turn to the respective responsible office. The forms and further instructions can be found at the following links:
- Paul Ehrlich Institute: Registration forms vaccine damage
- Robert Koch Institute: Vaccine safety
- Federal Office for Safety in Health Care (BASG): Reporting forms vaccine damage
- Federal Office of Public Health (BAG): Vaccination Report Switzerland
Vaccine damage: request for compensation
If the vaccine damage is reported, you can apply for vaccination compensation. In this case, contact the relevant Provident Office (Federal Social Welfare Office), which will send you the official application form.
When completing the form, you should definitely consult with experts, eg. For example, you can get help from a lawyer specialized in vaccination law or from the German Association of Vaccine Degradation.
The completed application will then be sent to the pension office by registered letter. The application automatically initiates proceedings. The Providence Office will provide one or more reviewers to investigate the case. As a rule, you have no influence on the choice of the appraiser, but you can try to suggest one. A very expensive, privately commissioned report is only recommended if the application was rejected.
If the vaccine damage is recognized, you or the relatives are entitled to compensation. These include z. For example, the treatment and / or a disability pension to the survivor's pension. However, if the report leads to the fact that no compensation is granted to you, which is unfortunately usually the case, you can appeal against the decision. An opinion will be prepared again, although a causal link with the vaccine is likely to be contested again.
So far, your application for compensation will not cost you anything, unless you have a lawyer on the form.
Sango sea coral
Combi Flora SymBIO
Digestion⟩ Probiotics & Cures
Vaccine damage: action before the Social Court
Now you are free, whether you submit to the rejection or by private means by action before the Social Court to enforce your right. However, it should be said that you have to pay for the costs yourself. Here, too, be sure to contact a specialist lawyer specializing in vaccination law.
First of all, it must be clarified against whom you, as the injured party, are entitled to compensation for the damage suffered. Is it - as in the case already described - a pharmaceutical company or is it the vaccinating doctor and / or