Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
What is this?
Less
More

Memberships

Brummage's path

5 members • Free

DB
Discipline Brotherhood

6 members • Free

Coach4u

6 members • Free

The Hercules Method

6 members • Free

Music Money Mentality

106 members • Free

The Trades Business Mindset

14 members • Free

Vaccine Discussion Group

7 members • Free

SS
STORYTELLING SKOOL

2 members • Free

Storytime Skool

7 members • Free

1 contribution to Vaccine Discussion Group
Article from Public Health Policy Journal
30 Lawmakers Sponsor Bill to End Liability Protection for Vaccine Makers FEED By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. A bill introduced late last week in the U.S. House of Representatives would end the liability protections Congress gave vaccine makers under the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. Thirty Republican lawmakers signed on as co-sponsors to House Bill 9828, End the Vaccine Carveout Act. The proposed legislation would end the broad protection from liability for injuries resulting from vaccines listed on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Childhood Immunization Schedule. “The … vaccine makers are criminal enterprises that have paid tens of billions in criminal penalties over the past decade,” Children’s Health Defense (CHD) founder and chairman on leave Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a statement on the bill. Kennedy, who has long advocated for eliminating liability protection for vaccine manufacturers, added, “By freeing them from liability for negligence, the 1986 statute removed any incentive for these companies to make safe products. If we want safe and effective vaccines we need to end the liability shield.” CHD, React19 and The American Family Project also supported the development of the bill, the press release said. REACT19 founder Brianne Dressen, who experienced a debilitating COVID-19 vaccine injury as a volunteer in AstraZeneca’s clinical trial, announced the bill and its co-sponsors in a post on X, formerly Twitter.
1 like • Jun 8
It’s an important topic, and it helps when we separate emotion, policy, and evidence clearly. The 1986 Act and the VICP were created as a balance between ensuring vaccine access and providing a structured route for injury claims outside of traditional courts. Like any large public system, it has supporters who see it as necessary for public health stability, and critics who believe it needs reform to improve transparency and accessibility. What often gets lost in these discussions is nuance — especially around how claims are evaluated, what evidence is required, and how outcomes are interpreted by different stakeholders. If the goal is better trust in public health systems, then the focus has to stay on clear data, fair processes, and continuous review rather than broad characterisations of intent or blame.
1-1 of 1
Isabelle Galati
1
4points to level up
@pelumi-paul-1336
Community mentor and expert in building engaged, growth driven communities on Skool, Circle, Mighty Networks, and Discord and GHL integration expert.

Active 17h ago
Joined Jun 3, 2026
united kingdom