I tried a bit to look things up. The code you cited was about liability.
The NCVIA, despite it's title, seems to do anything but protect the children. All it protects is the manufacturers. Got to downplay the negative and keep that cash cow producing!
The VICP (vaccine injury compensation program) was established after lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers and healthcare providers threatened to cause vaccine shortages and reduce vaccination rates.
It does seem they have to comply with some regulations:
(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), a vaccine shall be presumed to be accompanied by proper directions and warnings if the vaccine manufacturer shows that it complied in all material respects with all requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.] and section 262 of this title
I looked up 'NCVIA vaccine definition' and got next to nothing. This blurb is from Wikipedia:
The NCVIA requires that all health care providers who administer vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b and varicella must provide a Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) to the vaccine recipient, their parent or legal guardian prior to ...
This is from the CDC:
The vaccines and toxoids to which these requirements apply follow: diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine (DTP); pertussis vaccine (P); measles, mumps, and rubella single-antigen vaccines and combination vaccines (MMR, MR); diphtheria and tetanus toxoids (DT); tetanus and diphtheria toxoids (Td); ...
So I was unsuccessful in finding a vaccine definition in the Act, not that there isn't one, mind you. I did come across a few pdf's that I didn't download or read.
From what I did see, it looks like they were pretty specific in naming diseases/vaccines. If they need Congress to add covid, will they? Or will they just try to reinterpret the words already there?
Either way, it's the people who are going to get the short end of the stick!
All Statutes/Codes/Laws have a 'glossary' for definitions. Because you didn't find it does not mean it's not there. If words were not encoded in law, the Statutes/Codes/Laws would be meaningless. Believe me, the definition of 'vaccine' is there and cannot cannot be changed willy-nilly. There has to be checks and balances. Otherwise, the word 'up' would mean 'down', etc.
"From what I did see, it looks like they were pretty specific in naming diseases/vaccines. If they need Congress to add covid, will they? Or will they just try to reinterpret the words already there?"
A very good question. I tend to believe, it would have to go through a registrar of Congress to change it. It would make sense to me that both parties would have to agree on the change and a vote would ensue. Furthermore, it would need to be approved by the Senate as well.
Because you didn't find it does not mean it's not there.
I did admit that.
I was unsuccessful in finding a vaccine definition in the Act, not that there isn't one, mind you.
I found some pdf's and I think one was of the Act itself. It probably was in there, but could not readily find quotes of it online. I'm technologically-challenged, on a dumb little tablet and can't download much.
the definition of 'vaccine' is there and cannot cannot be changed willy-nilly
I'm glad to hear that. If it does have to be bipartisan and go through both houses, how fast or how slow that happens will say something in and of itself. I guess we'll have to wait and see.....
Your welcome. This is my interpretation after looking into it. Please, look this up for yourself. Prove me wrong. Vet everything.
I tried a bit to look things up. The code you cited was about liability.
The NCVIA, despite it's title, seems to do anything but protect the children. All it protects is the manufacturers. Got to downplay the negative and keep that cash cow producing!
It does seem they have to comply with some regulations:
I looked up 'NCVIA vaccine definition' and got next to nothing. This blurb is from Wikipedia:
This is from the CDC:
So I was unsuccessful in finding a vaccine definition in the Act, not that there isn't one, mind you. I did come across a few pdf's that I didn't download or read.
From what I did see, it looks like they were pretty specific in naming diseases/vaccines. If they need Congress to add covid, will they? Or will they just try to reinterpret the words already there?
Either way, it's the people who are going to get the short end of the stick!
Thanks for your research and efforts here.
All Statutes/Codes/Laws have a 'glossary' for definitions. Because you didn't find it does not mean it's not there. If words were not encoded in law, the Statutes/Codes/Laws would be meaningless. Believe me, the definition of 'vaccine' is there and cannot cannot be changed willy-nilly. There has to be checks and balances. Otherwise, the word 'up' would mean 'down', etc.
A very good question. I tend to believe, it would have to go through a registrar of Congress to change it. It would make sense to me that both parties would have to agree on the change and a vote would ensue. Furthermore, it would need to be approved by the Senate as well.
I did admit that.
I found some pdf's and I think one was of the Act itself. It probably was in there, but could not readily find quotes of it online. I'm technologically-challenged, on a dumb little tablet and can't download much.
I'm glad to hear that. If it does have to be bipartisan and go through both houses, how fast or how slow that happens will say something in and of itself. I guess we'll have to wait and see.....