Vaccines are safe, effective, have few risks, and are obviously necessary.
They aren’t perfect though, which is why “the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) may provide financial compensation to individuals who file a petition and are found to have been injured by a VICP-covered vaccine.”
But the NVICP is only in the United States.
Which Countries Have a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program?
What do other countries do?
You will likely be surprised to know that many have their own vaccine injury compensation programs, including:
- Germany ( year of introduction – 1961)
- France (1963)
- Japan (1970)
- Switzerland (1970)
- Denmark (1972)
- Austria (1973)
- New Zealand (1974)
- Sweden (1978)
- UK Vaccine Damage Payments Unit (1979)
- Finland (1984)
- Government of Québec Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (1985)
- United States NVICP (1988)
- Taiwan (1988)
- Italy (1992)
- Korea National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (1994)
- Norway (1995)
- Iceland (2001)
- Slovenia (2004)
- Hungary (2005)
Does this prove that vaccines are dangerous?
“Vaccines are extremely safe and harm is rare. World-wide, more than 30,000 vaccine doses are delivered per second through routine immunization programs, which,in turn, prevent an estimated 2 million to 3 million deaths annually. The occurrence of serious adverse events, such as those that result in death, threaten life, require inpatient hospitalization, or result in significant disability, are rare (eg, <1 adverse event occurs per 10 million doses for tetanus toxoid vaccines, 1-2 adverse events per 1 million doses for inactivated influenza vaccine, and none for hepatitis A).”
Halabi et al on A Global Vaccine Injury Compensation System
Of course not!
Remember, payouts from these programs, compared to the number of doses of vaccines given, are rare.
Should all countries have a compensation program?
“The most important justification, however, is an ethical argument from justice and equity: introduction of a vaccine injury compensation scheme acknowledges the unique situation that routine childhood immunization is a public health measure, given and accepted in good faith, that may occasionally damage the recipient.”
David Isaacs on Should Australia introduce a vaccine injury compensation scheme?
Sure.
People shouldn’t have to fight for compensation for the rare circumstance for when a true vaccine injury does occur.
More on International Vaccine Injury Compensation Programs
- Diagnosing Vaccine Injuries
- About Those Lawsuits That Almost Put Vaccine Manufacturers out of Business
- Is Ocular Palsy a Vaccine Injury?
- Can Parents Still Sue Vaccine Manufacturers?
- Has the Vaccine Court Compensated over 70 Families for Autism?
- Is a Crooked Face a Sign of a Vaccine Injury?
- If vaccines are safe, why has the US gov. paid out $3 BILLION to vaccine-injured families?
- Debunking anti-vaccine arguments: VAERS, package inserts, and the VICP do not prove that vaccines are dangerous
- Vaccine injury payouts – another trope that abuses NVICP statistics
- Vaccine Injury Compensation Programs
- WHO – No-fault compensation following adverse events attributed to vaccination: a review of international programmes
- Study – Vaccine injury compensation programs worldwide.
- Study – Mandatory vaccination and no fault vaccine injury compensation schemes: An identification of country-level policies
- Appendix E – Vaccine-Injury Compensation in Other Countries
- A Global Vaccine Injury Compensation System
- Management of vaccine safety in Korea
- Rationalizing vaccine injury compensation.
- The Case for a VICP for Canada
- Should Australia introduce a vaccine injury compensation scheme?
- Routine vaccination leaves man quadriplegic? Open Letter to Channel Nine
- The Hammond Dilemma – adverse events and anti-vaccination activism