You need to redo the Title. It reads like broken english.

Title doesn't need capitalized, but English does

https://www.biblehub.com/matthew/7-5.htm

Vaccine manufactures have total immunity from liability in the instance their product injures of kills you. But from what I understand, if the actual vaccine lot was bad (as apposed to the vaccine just being dangerous anyway), you can actually take it to federal court. But good luck proving this if they deliberately mix the vaccine lots up.

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has a caveat that prevents pharma companies from being held liable for any successful claims.

Furthermore; after the creation of the VICP in 1986, congress made the US Department of Health and Human Services responsible for submitting biannual reports on safety studies being carried out to quality check the vaccines which NEVER ONCE HAPPENED. Not a single report was filed.

Every time I see a meme casually deriding 'anti-vaxxers' (or how about that joke about killing them that made it to front page the other day) it just reinforces the feeling this is a completely fucked state of affairs.

Is there any source for that document?

I'd like to share it, put I try to do my best to not distribute false or fake information.

It seems that SIDS is a convenient catch all term that gives medical practitioners an excuse to not identify a cause of death.

They also use it as a term to lessen the blow on negligent parents, forgot to check if your baby was sleeping on it's stomach and it suffocated as a result, they would call that sids as well.

Bullshit.

No. You're wrong unfortunately.

Vaccines are the only thing that causes SIDS

as a matter of fact, I can't find any "syndrome" that is not caused by vaccines

because you don't know what you're doing

Let's play a game. You cite a series of Syndromes, and I'll try to link them to vaccines.

You aren't chicken, are you?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/13q_deletion_syndrome

Babies have been successfully sleeping on their belly for thousands of years.

It was only after the widespread vaccine quackery that SIDS emerged

Well seeing as infant mortality rates we're astronomically higher 1000s of years ago your argument doesn't really work

Infant mortality is not sids...

The U.S. has the highest rate of SIDS death and 1 day olds deaths on the planet and are the most vaccinated at birth.

The belly issue is due to overly fluffy bedding that smothers them.

So when my boy was about 2 months I had him on his back laying on thin receiving blanket on the living room floor I went to the kitchen to grab something, came back and he had rolled himself over was face down and struggling to move his face from that position to the side so he could breath. They don’t have the strength to move their neck and head like a toddler and child would hence why they should not sleep on their belly. If I hadn’t made it a quick trip my son could have suffocated himself. So I can see where SIDS comes in when sleeping on stomach.

But heres the thing, suffocating is not SIDS. We have the ability to know if a baby died of suffocation, SIDS is just the baby stops breathing. This makes it incredibly strange how we have an increasing number in the rates of SIDS but with no known cause, we have some theories like babies being shaken or lying down, but people haven't changed how they take care of babies that much in the past hundred years, so why now are we only seeing this phenomenon?

Historically the childhood mortality rate was massive. Things like germ theory and antibiotics are still relatively recent developments. We're only seeing this phenomenon now because it was significantly overshadowed by babies dying of infection, flu, pneumonia, smallpox, etc.

Except those haven't been significant in the past 50 years yet we are still to this day seeing an increase in the rate of sids.

And babies have been even more successful sleeping on their backs for thousands of years.

See also "Shaken Baby Syndrome" and "Rare Genetic Disease".

Following

According to this document (from march 30 1979) the company voluntarily withdrew one suspected vaccine lot as a precautionary measure:

These actions were taken out of an abundance of caution because it is far from clear the analysis of available data by CDC and FDA that there is any cause-and-effect relationship between this lot of DTP vaccine and the cluster of sudden infant deaths in Tennessee.

Is there any actual evidence to support "bad vaccine was killing children" or that "they decided to conceal the deaths"?

Would it not be more likely that the company decided to redistribute to prevent shortage at a single location in case of a future recall?

And just to be clear, this incident occured almost 40 years ago. Currently the American Academy of Pediatrics states " Evidence suggests that immunization reduces the risk of SIDS by 50 percent . ".
"Immunisations should be part of the SIDS prevention campaigns." ( Vennemann et al. 2007 )

Yeah that part about vaccines preventing SIDS is propaganda to coverup the fact that vaccines are the only thing that causes SIDS

do you really believe a vaccine will magically save your baby from the ravages of sleeping on his belly?

Not very likely

I don't believe in magic.

As it stands there is no evidence that routine immunizations increase SIDS risk and some evidence indicates immunizations can help prevent SIDS.

See: IMMUNIZATIONS AND SIDS
(References are at the bottom of the document)

the risk of SIDS was halved by immunisation. There are a number of possible explanations for this find- ing. The seasonal distribution in the occurrence of SIDS [25] and the high prevalence of respiratory tract symptoms suggests infection is a factor in SIDS [26]. A number of different viruses and bacteria have been implicated [27]. Bordetella pertussis may be especially important as an asso- ciation between epidemic pertussis and sudden unexpected death in infants has been observed [28] and B. pertussis infec- tion in infants frequently causes apnoea [29]. If apnoea leads to the death of the infant the cause of death may inappropri- ately be labelled as SIDS. The immunisation schedules in the studies reported here all included immunisation with B. per- tussis. Immunisation may reduce the incidence of reported SIDS by reducing unrecognised B. pertussis infection. Staphylococcus aureus strains producing enterotoxins have been implicated in SIDS [30]. Immunisation may induce antibodies that cross react with pyrogenic staphylococcal tox- ins, thus protecting the infant from such infections [31,32]. Immunisation may also cause non-specific enhancement of immunological activity and reduce infection from other viruses and bacteria not directly covered by the vaccines given [33,34]. The immediate effect of immunisation is similar to that of a mild infection. In view of the often reported association of SIDS with minor infection the ECAS study specifically examined whether risk of SIDS was associated
with immunisation in the last 7 days. They reported that univariatly the OR was quite insignificant (OR = 1.27 with 95% CI = 0.89–1.81). After the multivariate adjustment the OR remained insignificant. Immunisations may be indirectly associated with a reduc- tion in SIDS. Vaccination may be avoided during illness and infections, the so-called healthy vaccinee effect [35]. Thus the reduction in SIDS with immunisations may be a marker of the well being of the infant, and not directly related to the immunisation. Children born into poor socio-economic circumstances are less likely to be immunized [36,37]. In one study risk factors for lack of immunisation include low socio-economic status, maternal smoking and intention not to breastfeed [37], all of which are known risk factors for SIDS. This illustrates the importance of confounding [38]. However, in the multivari- ate analysis the studies controlled for these factors and the apparent protective effect remained (Fig. 2). What should be advised? Certainly the data are in the opposite direct to the assertion that immunisation causes SIDS [1,2]. Parents can be reassured that immunisation with vaccines on the current schedule, particularly DTP vaccine, does not cause SIDS. The benefits of immunisation are well established [39]. If a country changes their immunisation schedule to a different age, this provides an opportunity to examine changes in the SIDS mortality rate for the age group covered by the change in immunisation. If there is a causal relationship between immunisation and reduction in SIDS, then SIDS mortality may be reduced further by achieving high immunisation rates at the scheduled times in early infancy.

Vennemann et al., 2007

It's not plausible that a vaccine that was intended to prevent a communicable disease would protect a baby from the ravages of sleeping on his belly

Pseudoscience: claims of wideapread usefulness

Try to use your brain next time ok

When you say "no evidence", are you choosing to exclude all the babies who died after a vaccine whose death was called "SIDS"

https://i.redd.it/wt9168djwivy.jpg

The U.S. is the most vaccinated country from birth to legal age and have the highest mortality rate in newborns and SIDS deaths. Could it be vaccines are the cause, let our common sense make the call.

they found other documents along with this one, where they estimated how much one dead baby would cost them in lawsuit

Link?

The incidence of SIDS peaks at a time when infants are receiving numerous immunizations. Case reports of a cluster of deaths shortly after immunization with diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis in the late 1970s created concern of a possible causal relationship between vaccinations and SIDS.312–315 Case control studies were performed to evaluate this temporal association. Four of the 6 studies found no relationship between diphtheria-tetanuspertussis vaccination and subsequent SIDS,316–319 and results of the other 2 studies suggested a temporal relationship but only in specific subgroup analysis.320,321 In 2003, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences reviewed available data and concluded that “[t]he evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between exposure to multiple vaccinations and SIDS.”322 Additional subsequent large population case-control trials consistently have found vaccines to be protective against SIDS323–325; however, confounding factors (social, maternal, birth, and infant medical history) might account for this protective effect.326 It also has been theorized that the decreased SIDS rate immediately after vaccination was attributable to infants being healthier at time of immunization, or “the healthy vaccinee effect.”327 Recent illness would both place infants at higher risk of SIDS and make them more likely to have immunizations deferred.328 Recent studies have attempted to control for confounding by social, maternal, birth, and infant medical history.323,325,328 In a meta-analysis, Vennemann et al328 found a multivariate summary OR for immunizations and SIDS to be 0.54 (95% CI: 0.39 – 0.76), which indicates that the risk of SIDS is halved by immunization. The evidence continues to show no causal relationship between immunizations and SIDS and suggests that vaccination may have a protective effect against SIDS.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2011/10/12/peds.2011-2285.full.pdf

documents where they estimated how much one dead baby would cost them in lawsuit and they used this to set the market price for the vaccine.

Show me, please.

The studies are not reliable.

An organization of 67​,000 pediatricians apparently disagrees.

So you can't actually back up that claim.
As I suspected.
("Accusing another user of being a shill can be viewed as an attack")

I was asking for the documents. Where are they?

Your link claims they are "out in the open". So, show me.
Perhaps then you can actually support the "bad vaccine was killing children" or "they decided to conceal the deaths" claims with actual evidence, right?

facts

You're confusing unfounded hyperbole and insults with "facts".
So, nothing to support your bold claims then. Glad we settled that.

And not a single reliable source was posted

https://i.redd.it/x0e7kksc3ri11.png

The media barely covered that at all, and it was probably one of the largest health stories of that year. The fact they fudged the data on the study that resulted in the CDC saying, the case is settled no one should look at this anymore, should be alarming to anyone with a brain.

And not a single reliable source was posted

The government should turn companies that do this shit into craters...but they don't for some reason. Guess it will just keep happening.

Vaccines are the government, you want them to shoot themselves in the foot? Good luck with that.

So all vaccines are bad? I don’t get it

Thats never the answer, though the more deeper you get the more you feel that way. It's the fact that so much of the adverse reactions are hidden that we cant get more safety research done to improve vaccines, rather we attack anyone who dares state that a vaccine is anything less than perfect.

I understand if you like vaccines, but to say 50+doses of vaccines has absolutely no detrimental effect on the population is just idiotic, prople are upset we cant talk about this to prptect "herd immunity" because god forbid anyone makes people legitimately concerned about vaccines

This came up on suggested vids through your Y tube link. This is what we are in need of knowing and exposing. Psychopaths. 9 mins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgGyvxqYSbE

Vaccines are the government so, you want them to shoot themselves in the foot? Good luck with that one.

Wait, legitimate question here. And I could be missing something.

But those documents don't state anything about bad batches.

They indicate having to send different size batches based on the amount in a geographical area based on regulatory and federal requirements????

I am confused.

I was under the impression that SIDS isn't actually a real thing. Doctors just tell parents that to minimize their anguish at losing their babies and the thinking that the baby could still be alive of they did something different.

For example, SIDS is unpreventable, but optimal parenting practices like breastfeeding, not cosleeping, sleeping on the back, etc, reduces the risks of SIDS happening significantly.

It's not just SIDS but the so-called "Shaken Baby Syndrome" that may also be caused by vaccine reactions in many instances. Instances where a parent, family member or caregiver usually winds-up being criminally charged for the baby's death of injuries.

The complete lack of any adequate and appropriate testing, reporting, and controlled studies and comparisons with unvaccinated groups of children to actually justify rather than merely assume that vaccines are completely safe is the biggest indication that they aren't safe at all.