NYC Parents Sue to Stop Required Flu Shots for Tots
The White Queen Awaits Her Breakfast – The Psychological and Legal Gymnastics of Autism Following Vaccine Induced Encephalopathy in the NVICP

The Canary Party Joins The National Vaccine Information Center in Calling for the Repeal of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act

Canary logo 4 22The 1986 law that prevented Americans from suing Pharmaceutical companies for vaccine injury and death, and established the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has been a failure.  It is time to repeal this legislation.

This law has allowed vaccine interest to abuse the public trust by pushing less safe and less effective vaccines, ignoring soaring reports of serious adverse vaccine reactions, and bloating the vaccine schedule from 24 doses in the 60's 70's and 80's, to a 69 dose schedule today that is not tested in combination for safety.  

Further, the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Program created to replace the tort system has been a failure, and has done more to protect vaccine profits than it has to care for victims of vaccine injury.  The US Government Accounting Office, Stanford Law, American University Law and The Associated Press/NYT have all issued their findings following in depth investigations into the program and agree that the VICP fails to properly compensate vaccine victims.  

Because the public accountability mechanism has ceased to function, vaccine interests, and even doctors in offices, are now making wildly false product safety claims to families, and the public has no way to stop this misinformation campaign by those profiting from the over use and inappropriate use of vaccinations.

This special liability protection given only to vaccine makers has turned the vaccine business from a 750 million dollar per year industry to a reported 27 billion dollar per year industry, while the the health of American children during that same time period has plummeted.

The Canary Party appreciates the leadership that NVIC has offered on vaccine safety issues since the act was passed and join them in their call for repeal.  Thirty years is long enough to see that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has corrupted the vaccine program and harmed the health of America's children.  We must repeal this bad law and begin to repair the damage that it has done.



Num Guy

Hello All

Please sign this petition that is trying to repeal the 1986 law.

Protect kids, not drug makers!The law is corrupt and immoral.

Kindly pass this on to everyone you know. Together, hopefully, we can make a difference! PLEASE sign and share!!

Wake up homeland security this is a terrifying possibility

The real threat to homeland security is so obvious. A foreign power or internal terrorist or even incompetent or VW-like greed infiltrates the production of a commonly mandated vaccine and contaminates iT. All the babies who get that shot at the same rough age get killed or some visible injury they can't deny . Because of vaccine injury denial the actual cause is not realized until thousands and thousands are harmed and other vaccines like flu vaccines have also been set up to contaminate or lethally poison adults as well . The whole country is in mourning and devastated. The enemy swoops in to the demoralized populace. The populace blames the CDC their govt and the medical profession for forcing the shots. And the media has lost all credibility. This to me is a much worse threat and sadly much more plausible. I can't believe how blind they are. Foreigners poisoned our dogs just due to lower standards. This is a forseeable disaster. And in so very many ways it has been happening since the first Mercury poisoned shot.


Our government has made vaccination a matter of homeland security. The Department of Homeland Security, the military and their defense contractors are all heavily involved and invested in carrying out the agenda of maximum vaccination of all Americans fetus to grave with whatever vaccines they can conjure up - at present about 300 of them in development. Refusers will be deemed a threat to national security. I was reading the abstract for one vaccine study and happened to look at the authors which included the usual types but then among them was Northrop Grumman. To say I did a double take is an understatement. Northrop Grumman is a major military defense contractor. Went to their site and sure enough, they are involved in producing technology that tracks health statistics and if I remember correctly, vaccination. You know, their health subsidiary is in addition to their manufacturing of bombs and other war machinery. That fits, right? This goes way beyond Pharma's freedom from liability, as disgusting and criminally enabling as that is.

Even Public Citizen, veteran Pharma watchdog who regularly reams the FDA and mainstream medicine for dishing out deadly snake oil and for relying on and conducting fraudulent research and who generally recommends that people do not consider taking a new drug until it has been on the market for at least 5 (they may have changed it to 7) years because so many drugs are found to be dangerous within that time and are pulled off the market (while drugs on the market longer than 5 years can not be assumed to be safe either). Public Citizen has for years published a newsletter, "Worst Pills, Best Pills News" "Your expert, independent second opinion for prescription drug information". Yet despite all the clear scientific evidence not only damning the flu vaccine's efficacy, especially for the elderly, but the growing body of research linking flu vaccination with more prevalent and severe illness, in the November 2015 issue, Public Citizen recommends for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after warning in the same article which COPD drugs to avoid: "You also should get the pneumococcal vaccine known as PPSV23 to prevent pneumonia and an annual influenza vaccine." The contrast between the detailed and thorough information given re the pros and cons of all drugs marketed for COPD and the complete lack of information about both vaccines is striking. I can almost hear Snyderman saying "Just get your damn flu shot."

I'm sure Sidney Wolfe, MD, founder of Public Citizen knows better. He can see the danger and flaws of all these other drugs, but not vaccines? Who or what got to him? The same entity that got to Elijah Cummings? I think it has to do with vaccines being considered a major strategy in homeland security, literally a military defense. But The Department of Homeland Security and military involvement in vaccination policy isn't to make Americans safe and secure and free of so-called vaccine preventable diseases. The government medical industrial complex, led by the CDC in bed with Pharma has literally cocooned itself in the military and The Department of Homeland Security, using these entities to shield themselves against being exposed as traitors and criminals who have committed unprecedented acts of treason. I think that the Department of Homeland Security and military are also being used as both policy enforcers and guards against unwanted intrusion into what the CDC sees as their affairs, giving them unlimited unchecked power, no matter who is in Congress or sitting on the bench of the Supreme Court, or in the oval office, because no one dares question lest they be accused of threatening homeland security. It's really all too much. This would make such a great novel if it wasn't really happening.

This horrific problem is so much larger than the 1986 bill and the kangaroo court it set up. I think repealing the bill will have the effect of removing a tumor, but the cancer will still be there and will still grow, probably at a greater rate.

Recently an organization called The Center for Public Integrity put out a report rating the states on integrity. The report was damning, with only 3 states having a passing grade (of C). State after state earned an F in "Public Access to Information". This is another indication of the depth of this country's problems. Massively corrupt federal, state, local governments are not working for the people.

I think the "Healthy People" goals, concepts, philosophies, methods, politics and agendas should be brought out of the darkness and into the public square, examined thoroughly and debated. Because as a free people we are supposed to be determining our individual and collective way in matters concerning our own destiny. Instead committees behind closed doors decide how we'll live and what is good for us, deals are made with industries where we and our interests are sold, while we are treated like children unable to make our own decisions, information is kept from us and we are distracted with a steady flow of nonsense. We have to raise the level of discourse, educate and get people involved in order to combat this beast. We have to discuss in the public square the unchecked power of public health agencies and the involvement of the military. We have to demand to be heard and to have a say in all these policies, on which ones we want, if any, and how we want them implemented. We currently have no say at all.


Ben Carson for president....

As long as he promises to separate the siamese twins of pharma and government!



If the VICP was abolished, then the liability to switch back to the pharmaceutical company. Not only would the mandates be repealed immediately, the lobbyists for Pharma would be the first in line to insist on it!

John Stone


I didn't quite say that but I think the position of mandates would be substantially weakened. As I understand it the present "compact" is based on the idea that there is a semi- obligation to be vaccinated but you get compensated (!!) if it goes wrong - if you take the NVICA away then that assumption would be much weakened at the very least. In the UK we don't have mandates (though we do have a lot of bullying) and insignificant state compensation. I think they prefer it if parents have the ultimate legal responsibility for taking the decision (albeit usually based on fraudulent claims about the safety and effectiveness of the products).

I agree with Linda that it won't necessarily be easy to sue the manufacturers - and never was - but what has been most cataclysmic is the freedom from liability (that is apart from the freedom from criminal prosecution).

Billie Joe

I've been saying it for years... The only way to stop all the nonsense is to get rid of the word autism. Doctors that label people with autism prior to appropriate tests should be sued for negligence. The kids need to be tested for GI, autoimmunie, metabolics, heavy metals, methylation... etc etc etc.. Only after all that is done, should a child receive a neurological label that prevents further medical assessment and treatment. Sue the doctors for negligence and use of a word that is preventing healing.

Laura Hayes

To concerned,

I do not understand the basis for your statement that if the law is repealed, it will automatically ban all vaccine mandates. That would not happen automatically, or necessarily at all, if the Act were repealed.

To Twyla,

Nowhere in the first 2 links you provided did I find anything by the NVIC mentioning, suggesting, or promoting the banning of vaccine mandates. The most I found was that there should be both religious and philosophical exemptions. In a free society, we should not have to secure and provide exemptions for medical treatments or procedures, our "no thank you" should be enough. Additionally, if we don't ban vaccine mandates, we will continue to have to fight exemption restriction and elimination battles...that is, until exemptions are completely eliminated.

In the CP paragraph you posted, it talks about freedom from mandates via exemptions. It does not state that we need to ban mandates completely. With this position, we will continue to face the same issues I just listed above if we don't achieve the complete banning of mandates.

To Lisa,

As parents and individuals, we will always have difficult decisions to make for which we will have to bear the responsibility. There is now information aplenty about the dangers, inefficacies, and lack of need for vaccines. I understand that at this point in time, not all are aware of and/or making use of that information, and that is, of course, extremely unfortunate.

However, those who aware of it and who are making use of it need to have the unfettered and unrestricted option to say NO to one, some, or all vaccines for themselves and their children, as they see fit, without government interference. They will also be the ones who will choose not to go to, or give business to, doctors who have a policy of kicking out patients who don't comply with the CDC's recommended vaccine schedule.

As with any new paradigm, the shift will take time. It will start with a few, not many or all. We need the few to have the freedom to shift the paradigm... and their healthy, typically-developing, thriving, unvaccinated children will be the proof in the pudding. As the new paradigm takes hold and grows in numbers, the doctors who continue to coerce and force their patients to do things they don't want to do will find themselves out of business.


I knew people that tried to sue pre 1986. They were raked over the coals by Pharma's gang of lawyers and lost, their kid institutionalized after the DPT, clear cut case, even their prominent pediatrician testified that the DPT was the cause. Also, pre 1986, there were mandates in some states and even at that time and decades earlier, considerable legal and social pressure to vaccinate. My childhood neighbor (50's-60's) forged her kids' school immunization records. If there were no mandates, she wouldn't have done that. She would have just said no to vaccinating her kids. So while the current kangaroo court is terrible and must be gotten rid of, it will not be a panacea.


"...I think what is needed globally is for the US to get back to the position in which citizens can sue the pants off the manufacturers."


Bob Moffitt

I think we all agree that "ending mandates" and "repealing the NVCIA" are primary goals .. indeed .. we could spend the rest of our lives trying to dismantle .. piece by piece .. the horror and corruption that has become "standard operating public health programs and policies".

My friends .. it will require DECADES to rip out the well established roots of that corruption and identify the damage done.

And so .. I believe our VERY FIRST PRIORITY should be .. to demand our local, state and federal representatives answer a basic question:

"Who should decide what vaccines our most precious resource .. our children .. receive?

Our child's elected (local, state and federal) representatives .. or .. our child's parents?

I want to see THAT question asked and answered .. by EVERY elected representative .. especially those candidates seeking our votes in upcoming elections .. in our country.

At the very least .. I want that question to achieve the SAME focus by our media as they give to a candidates opinion on .. "abortion, gun control, global warming, ISIS, fantasy football, on and on".

In my opinion .. THAT question is far more important than ANY other the media asks our candidates .. and .. IT IS NEVER ASKED.

We have to CHANGE that.

John Stone


It was I that mentioned the position in the UK. I am not sure it is an either/or, but I think if NVICA goes probably the mandates go too. In the UK the position is interestingly different. I don't think the British establishment want mandates. I think it would be politically unaccetable in the UK to discriminate on the basis of income, so it would probably have to be compulsory for everybody - so probably the rich and powerful are not that persuaded. Nor does the state want to take over major responsibility for compensation. The British Medical Association have been historically opposed because they don't want to enforce it. There are I think good features of the system.

Negative features of the system are the mass control over the information that people get, which is mostly misleading and wrong. The right to sue is theoretically present but effective access to the courts is politically blocked by the Legal Aid Agency and its historical predecessors. The state compensation scheme (limited to £120k/$190k) has fallen into complete disrepair and no payments have been made in over 5 years.

I think what is needed globally is for the US to get back to the position in which citizens can sue the pants off the manufacturers.


Congressman Henry Waxman (D-California), who spearheaded the NVICP disaster nearly 30 years ago, retired in early 2015 lauded and acclaimed and no doubt very rich. The word "vaccine" does not appear on his Wikipedia page.


"...So, with regard to the vaccine issue, I think getting the actual data on actual vaccine damage into the real court system, where real discovery is allowed, is really the only way forward at this point. It is the only way to challenge the ignorance not only of parents but also of doctors (and, of course, the media)..."

That's not going to happen. Courts in the U.S. have already decreed that they are not venues for determining TRUE SCIENCE behind vaccines. They have determined that the science upon which they base their decisions is based on mainstream opinion. What type lawsuit which could potentially challenge the courts' decree on this issue, is unclear.

As long as the courts believe in mainstream science and are swayed by biased articles such as the below, I don't see this issue being litigated in any courtroom in the very near future.

I could be wrong, but that's the way I see it at this time.


Once again I find myself in disagreement with Laura. As someone pointed out in her thread last week, England does not have mandates. It still has over 90 percent compliance with the childhood vaccination schedule. Stopping mandates by itself will not stop tens of thousands of trusting parents from simply doing whatever their doctor tells them to do. It is very hard to go against the advice of one's own doctor. I am reminded of that again myself, just this week, in having to refuse a medication prescribed to me by a doctor who I actually think is one of the good ones, because I feel he clearly has not considered the full risks. It is an extremely uncomfortable position to be in. I want to maintain a relationship with this doctor; I don't want to have to find another one now after already investing considerable time and money in giving him my complete medical history. But I don't know quite honestly whether he is going to become less enthused about working with me now that I have challenged his advice. Many doctors just simply do not like to be challenged. For one thing, they may disagree with you and feel that they know more on the subject. Secondly, they may think that when you question their judgment, it means you don't trust him, which they may find offensive. Going against a doctor's advice is often the first step to finding yourself once again without a doctor.

So, with regard to the vaccine issue, I think getting the actual data on actual vaccine damage into the real court system, where real discovery is allowed, is really the only way forward at this point. It is the only way to challenge the ignorance not only of parents but also of doctors (and, of course, the media).


Laura Hayes;
ban mandates and get rid of the VICP program.
I think they both have to and need to be done.
If the VICP program goes away, then suddenly people will be responsible for injuries they cause, which may lead anyway to more work to actually identify who is at risk of vaccine injury. Also continuing to inject children who react badly may become a thing of the past when doctors realize they may be personally liable for ignoring side effects.
You know without the VICP, the doctors will be likely thrown under the bus if they continue injections when the child already had a reaction.

I remember one poor child whose doctors, despite reactions bad enough to put him in the hospital, kept vaccinating because "vaccines are so important"

Vaccines =important. Individual childs' welfare, not so much.
Kid had blue collar poor parents who couldn't object and last I heard was in a hospital ,non responsive and non communicative.
And yes, if the only thing that would have made those doctors care about not destroying that child is the fact that they could be held liable and sued, then that is required.
But mandates need to be gone too. Like yesterday. I just keep praying it will all happen.


@ Laura

Done and done - and ongoing -

NVIC Calls for Vaccine Policy & Law Reform To Protect Human and Civil Rights

Reforming Vaccine Policy and Law - a Guide

Canary Party Principle #4 Choice -
"Health choices are a basic human right and must be the foundation of any system of medical care. Choice works at two levels; the freedom from mandates and coercive influences, and the right of all recipients of medical intervention to exercise informed consent in advance of any procedure. Freedom from mandates requires the right of citizens and parents to exempt themselves and family members from undesired procedures, including vaccination. Informed consent requires that unbiased information regarding potential risks and benefits of the procedure be provided to consumers. Society as a whole benefits from the cumulative impact of such free and informed healthcare choices. Anything less risks subjecting human populations to uncontrolled experimentation, financial self-dealing and the tyranny of medical bureaucracy all in the name of a poorly defined 'greater good.' The only legitimate locus for determination of what is good for individual health is the informed choice of individual citizens."

Both Barbara Loe Fisher and Ginger Taylor have worked tirelessly against vaccine mandates, and continue to do so.


"Canadian fisheries scientists celebrate being unmuzzled." What a joke. Compared to any scientists who dared to question vaccine science this is nothing. In the first place you would not even be allowed to question vaccination, would not get the green light to study it. Pharma would make sure. Unmuzzled? What about undead, for the brave few who question the holy vaccine agenda, like Dr. Bradstreet. The fisheries biologists have nothing to complain about compared to the brave few who try and speak out in research.



If the law is repealed, it will automatically ban all vaccine mandates because the pharmaceutical company will be liable for all damage again as we have a right to discovery of all the manufacturing errors, etc.

Laura Hayes

While I applaud any and all calls for repealing the 1986 NCVIA, an Act that never should have been initiated or passed into law, THE number one priority must be to ban vaccine mandates.

Even if success were to be had repealing the 1986 Act, parents, and increasingly people of all ages, would still be mandated to accept scores of unsafe, ineffective, unnecessary, always-harmful, potentially-fatal vaccines...with few to no viable exemptions left in a growing number of states.

Thus, I put forth the proposal to NVIC and CP, and to all wanting to end the ever-increasing medical tyranny and medical fascism, to demand a ban on vaccine conjunction with demanding the repeal of the 1986 Act...and in conjunction with demanding the full restoration of individual and parental rights to make any and all medical decisions without government interference, including vaccination decisions.

For more on this much-needed 3-pronged approach, please read an article I wrote last week, including the comments I posted in the comments section:

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)