Anita Donnelly That is very interesting family history.
Your doctor knew his biz.. I have heard that a lot of family practice doctors even modern day - knows too, but not the pediatricians. Sure wish I knew that bit of information as I was raising my kids.

Parents need to be protecting their kids. As a parent we owe it to our children to protect them from preying Pharma no less than a preying animal which has a lesser chance of a kill or a maim than Pharma with a needle.

Pharma For Prison

MMR RIP.

My sister in the 1960's was incubating chicken pox, when she got the MMR. She was very sick and almost hospitalized. Our doctor (an Irish Catholic father of 10 fully vaxxed kids ) said "Your family should avoid vaccinations." He did not give us anything except approved polio I did not get small pox, because he saw that I had terrible eczema (otherwise known as evidence of a metal allergy--we were in a steel town). Fast forward 30 years. My child reacts so badly to the hep-B as a newborn he ends up in the ICU. What a mystery. Then, he gets the varicella and MMR and immediately reacts like my sister did long ago. Only she recovered right away. For him with his toxic load of the normal vaccine schedule, he only recovered because I finally learned from my mother about our family history and stopped his remaining shots immediately. And because we were very very lucky that biomedical approaches worked for him.

Emma, I don't know whether CICP is the only way to get paid (LOL) if one of these experimental shots is given off-label. If an adult gets an MMR booster that is beyond the ACIP schedule and has an adverse event, is that person limited to VICP, or can he sue the doctor? I wonder if a lawyer would care to weigh in.

During the meeting, Dr. Hayley Gans of Stanford U noted that in the FDA's own briefing document (downloadable here) in section 4.5, 205,046 kids under 12 had already received one dose of Pfizer, and 125,656 had received two doses. She asked in the context of whether data had been gathered on safety and efficacy in this population. (Of course it hadn't! A big part of saying, "Known benefits outweigh known risks" is deliberately not gathering any data.) That is a big enough number to make it clear that parents who really want to give this thing to their young children can do it.

Of course, that doesn't answer Peter Marks's accusation of racism. (Only rich white parents can get it off-label; poor, non-white people have to rely on free school clinics, which necessitates FDA authorization.)

@TOB
"kids 5 through 11 can get it off-label."

I had also heard that. And of course, the VAERS reports are proof.
This begs the question, "Who is liable for these children's injuries? Does using it off label put liability on the doctor?"

TOB Thanks for watching it and telling us what went down at the meeting.

It was a very weird meeting. Most of the questions made me think a lot of "no" votes were coming. But then Peter Marks swooped in at the end, along with Arnold Monto (chairman of the committee), and told them that (1) if they voted "no," then no kid 5-11 could get it, (2) they should ignore the likelihood that states and other entities will mandate the shots, and (3) if they narrowed the authorization (like maybe only for kids with serious risk factors) then only rich white kids could get it. Every time I hear "equity," I cringe. I'm not black, but I'm willing to bet that black Americans have 1,000 things higher on their lists of unfairness than access to experimental vaccines.

Kim Witczak of Woody Matters (non-profit raising awareness of pharma injuries) noted that because the product is approved, kids 5 through 11 can get it off-label. Indeed, there are almost 1,000 VAERS reports from kids 11 and under, so obviously they have been. Monto and Marks did not explicitly contradict this fact, but they acted as if it didn't exist.