| Hey Allisson, you silly caaah, eat your words! |
www.usenetposts.com |
| Uncle Davey (noway@jose.com) |
2004/12/26 09:27 |
What was all that two years ago pooh poohing my views about the MMR?
I was right all along.
Look at today's headlines in the UK observer
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1379771,00.html?79%3A+Uk+latest
MMR parents win legal victory
Jamie Doward, Social Affairs Editor
Sunday December 26, 2004
The Observer
Up to 100 families who allege that their children were damaged by the MMR
vaccine are to receive legal aid to sue the drugs companies behind the
controversial inoculation.
Following an intervention last week by Mr Justice Keith, the High Court
judge presiding over the multi-million pound lawsuit launched against the
manufacturers of the triple vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella, The
Observer has learnt that the families are set to be granted aid to pursue
their claims against the vaccine's manufacturers. Without the money, the
families would not be able to continue their legal fight.
The families allege the vaccine was responsible for their children
developing a range of conditions, including Crohn's disease, arthritis,
epilepsy and encephalitis - an inflammation of the brain.
The news will alarm the government, which has recently been waging a
hard-hitting PR campaign designed to deflect negative publicity surrounding
the triple jab.
Health officials are worried that concerns about the safety of MMR have
caused vaccination rates to plunge among children, sparking fears of a
measles epidemic.
It is not expected that legal aid will be granted to parents who allege a
link between the vaccine and regressive, atypical autism, a claim first
aired by the controversial scientist, Dr Andrew Wakefield, and subsequently
rejected by most medical experts.
The decision to grant legal aid would represent a significant U-turn on the
part of the Legal Services Commission (LSC), which earlier this year pulled
funding for some 1,300 families who were attempting to sue the MMR
manufacturers, GlaxoSmithKline, Aventis Pasteur and Merck.
Advertiser links
Hotel Reservations
Bmibaby, the award-winning airline with tiny fares offers...
bmibaby.com
Global Hotel Deals
Book online with Midas hotels and save up to 70% off the...
midashotels.com
Save up to 50% on New York Hotels
Discounted hotel rates in New York City. Book online and get...
hotelconxions.com
In March, the LSC ruled there was insufficient evidence for the families to
have a reasonable prospect of success in court. Following the ruling, the
drug companies' legal teams indicated they would press for costs if the
parents continued with their claims. The majority of the parents dropped
their legal challenge out of fear of bankrupting themselves.
At the time, the decision to pull legal aid was described by Keith as
'hardly an advertisement for access to justice'. He subsequently introduced
a 'costs amnesty', which temporarily barred the drugs companies from seeking
money from the parents and gave them until 22 October to decide on whether
to pursue their claims. The deadline was later extended until 21 December.
Now The Observer has learned that, last Monday, Keith wrote to the families'
legal teams, extending the deadline again, until 28 February. As a result of
the extension, it is expected the LSC will be writing to up to 100 families
notifying them of its plans to reinstate their legal aid certificates within
the next couple of months.
Families who claim their children have been damaged by the vaccine are
likely to view the decision to reinstate their legal aid as a watershed in
their ongoing battle against the drug companies, who vehemently deny their
claims.
But the families believe their case has been bolstered by events in Japan,
where a number of children have been awarded compensation after suffering
severe neurological damage that the Japan courts said was a result of them
receiving the MMR jab.
The prospect of further legal action against the drug companies in the UK
next year looks likely. Some of the parents whose children have atypical
autism and severe bowel problems, and who have lost their legal aid appeals,
are now taking their cases to judicial review. They have pledged to pursue
their claims in the European Court of Human Rights if the review finds
against them.
Neither the LSC or the Department of Health was available for comment.
Let's hope you listened to my advice back then and didn't give the single
vaccine to your queed.
And don't you accuse me of whining, this time, Mr "Netiquette" Cranstonthal,
let's face it, it's 100% your queed too, in all probability.
I know what 'pro boner' means up your neck of the woods, monkey cuddler.
Best,
Uncle.
|
|
|