smokey
Mummy to a monkey
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 11,075
- Reaction score
- 1
A lot of vaccinations in the uk are administered incorrectly, the label and guidelines have clear rules that suggest they should not be given when a child has had an adverse reaction like a rash or a temperature and we give them anyway.
Regardless however, of research or no, if a company is not liable for the drugs they produce, what is put in place to ensure they are making safe, well tested drugs?
So many of you appear to have pulled up my views on the matter (which is, and always will be that mothers in the uk are co-erced into having vaccinations without need for proper research) but none of you have been able to answer that simple observation.
This is correct in my experience and that of others I know, and there is clearly contradictory safety info in the NHS booklet on vaccinations and the leaflets/box inserts of the manufacturers themselves which are often withheld from parents. I know cases as well where the insert has been given to a parent; they have raised worries due to their child clearly meeting the criteria of those for whom the vaccine should either be administered with caution or not at all and the nurse or GP has said 'oh thats not important' or 'oh that doesn't apply'. People do trust medical professionals and they do trust NHS information booklets so I don't think a parent is liable if they are given this incorrect info by such seemingly credible sources. I am not anti-vaccination but it is irresponsible IMHO for the NHS and their staff to go against the safety advice of a manufacturer about their own product xx
Then that is a case to sue the medical staff not the vaccine company