Looks like the Courts in the USA see things a bit differently to what you do as well
They must be wrong too - especially since 2016.
and these payments are only the ones that make it to court
The
Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, popularly known as "
vaccine court", administers a
no-fault system for litigating
vaccine injury claims. These claims against
vaccine manufacturers cannot normally be filed in state or federal civil courts, but instead must be heard in the
U.S. Court of Federal Claims, sitting without a jury.
The
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (
VICP or NVICP) was established by the 1986
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), passed by the
United States Congress in response to a threat to the vaccine supply due to a 1980s scare over the
DPT vaccine. Despite the belief of most public health officials that claims of side effects were unfounded, large jury awards had been given to some plaintiffs, most DPT vaccine makers had ceased production, and officials feared the loss of
herd immunity
- This covers the vaccinations known by the abbreviations DT, DTaP, DTaP-HIB, DTaP-IPV, DTap-IPV-HIB, Td, Tdap
| {caption}Annual awards{/caption} | | | | | Fiscal year | Number of awards | Petitioners’ award | Average amount |
| 2006 | 68 | $48,746,162.74 | $716,855.33 |
| 2007 | 82 | $91,449,433.89 | $1,115,237.00 |
| 2008 | 141 | $75,716,552.06 | $536,996.82 |
| 2009 | 131 | $74,142,490.58 | $565,973.21 |
| 2010 | 173 | $179,387,341.30 | $1,036,921.05 |
| 2011 | 251 | $216,319,428.47 | $861,830.39 |
| 2012 | 249 | $163,491,998.82 | $656,594.37 |
| 2013 | 375 | $254,666,326.70 | $679,110.20 |
| 2014 | 365 | $202,084,196.12 | $553,655.33 |
| 2015 | 508 | $204,137,880.22 | $401,846.22 |
| 2016 | 689 | $230,140,251.20 | $334,020.68 |
| Total | 3,032 | $1,740,282,062.10 | $573,971.66 |
As of October 2019, $4.2 Billion has been awarded.
In the vaccine court, as in civil tort cases, the burden of proof is a
preponderance of evidence, but while in tort cases, this is met by expert testimony establishing a rigorous scientific case, in the vaccine court, the burden is met with a three prong test: the petitioner must present a biological theory of harm, demonstrate a logical sequence of events connecting the vaccine to the injury, and establish an appropriate time frame in which injury occurred. The petitioner must also show that there is not another biologically plausible explanation for the injury.
So there must be some reason why they put warnings on the inserts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Injury_Compensation_Program
