@TheOtherMaven At least considering the disconnect between how it is written and practiced.

because it raises all kinds of questions about proper boundaries, personal liability, public safety, proportional response, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

And most of all about the role of MONEY.

We are fast - very, VERY fast - approaching the status of "Everything Not Explicitly Permitted Is Forbidden". Never mind the 9th and 10th Amendments - they're dead letters, like all the other Amendments except the 2nd, and like half the main body of the Constitution as well.

We have too much law, and only as much "justice" as you can buy.

@Nastarana @Nastarana

HUGE article,with a wealth of detail - would highly recommend reading in full at source, if at all possible.

The situation has, unsurprisingly, further deteriorated since among the powerful Big Pharmaceutical Mafia, only now, less of the evidence is officially even sought...

https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/articles/drugs-medical/fda_lawsuit...

FDA Used to Shield Big Pharma From Lawsuits
May 12, 2006

May 12, 2006, 12:00:00AM. By Evelyn Pringle
In January 2006, the FDA announced the Bush administration's latest gift to Big Pharma in a statement that said people who believe they have been injured by drugs approved by the FDA should not be allowed to sue drug companies in state courts.

"We think that if your company complies with the FDA processes, if you bring forward the benefits and risks of your drug, and let your information be judged through a process with highly trained scientists, you should not be second-guessed by state courts that don't have the same scientific knowledge," said Scott Gottlieb, the FDA's deputy commissioner for medical and scientific affairs. ...

... The ploy was also readily recognized by state lawmakers and trial lawyers as another attempt to reduce the public's ability to hold Big Pharma accountable. "Eliminating the rights of individuals to hold negligent drug companies accountable puts patients in even more danger than they already are in from drug company executives that put profits before safety," said Ken Suggs, president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America.

"The fact that the drug industry can get the FDA to rewrite the rules so that CEOs can escape accountability for putting dangerous and deadly drugs on the market is the scariest example yet of how much control these big corporations have over our political process," Mr Suggs told the Washington Post. ...

... Upon learning of the FDA's power grab, the National Conference of State Legislatures, a bipartisan group that represents state lawmakers, accused the FDA of trying to seize authority that it did not have. The organization bases its opposition, in part on the following:

"FDA has usurped the authority of Congress, state legislatures and state courts. There is no statutory authority in the FDCA for FDA to preempt state product liability laws as they relate to prescription drugs.

"Instead of seeking valid congressional authority, unelected agency officials are seeking to preempt state product liability laws by writing this preemption into a final rule, thereby undermining state policy and judicial decision made in this area.

"State tort laws and civil justice systems serve as an important check on federal standards. Our civil justice system establishes a duty of care that protects citizens when the federal government is too slow to act or when federal standards are insufficient. States have the ability to achieve greater protections for their citizens through successful product liability lawsuits."

In an earlier gift delivered to Big Pharma in December 2005, Republican leaders, and specifically Senator Bill Frist (R-TN), attached protective provisions to a Department of Defense appropriations report that gave the industry "unprecedented immunity," according to Democratic lawmakers who described the underhanded move as follows:

"Republican leaders added provisions to the conference report after cutting a back-room deal in the middle of the night. The conference report grants sweeping immunity to drug companies for injuries caused by vaccines and drugs and for the administration of those vaccines and drugs, even if they are made with flagrant disregard for basic safety precautions.

"Moreover, the compensation program is a sham, leaving people who become injured from a drug or vaccine without recourse." ...

... The latest revelation on this little stunt came on May 8, 2006 when the Tennessean reported that vaccine industry officials helped shape legislation behind the scenes that Frist secretly amended into a bill, according to e-mails obtained by Pubic Citizen, a public advocacy group.

The industry group, called the Biotechnology Industry Organization, wanted the vaccine liability language in the bill, the e-mails proves.

"At Senator Frist's staff's request, this morning, BIO (Tom and I) participated in a meeting with three other industry representatives (Sanofi and an outside counsel who works for both Pfizer and Roche, I believe), administration staff (HHS, DoJ and WH Leg Affairs), and Liz Hall to further discuss liability," BIO official Dave Boyer wrote in a November e-mail obtained by Public Citizen.

Other E-mails and documents show that BIO met privately with Frist's staff and the White House to figure out ways to give drug makers protection from people injured by vaccines.

"The lack of any restriction on jury trial is problematic," the BIO analysis said. "Where injured parties have no other avenue for relief, juries are likely to find ways to award damages."

In another e-mail, Boyer described a meeting in which Karl Rove said it was "important to the President that a bill move this year," and said "they had invited industry to discuss what they understood to be a few key remaining points" of contention.

Republicans members of Congress had tried on several occasions to enact similar legislation of its own, but with voters already so angry over soaring drug costs, they finally had to back off. ...

But all you hear about now is the knee-jerk 'anti-vaxxer' Monsanto/Bivings-style propaganda, no concerns about potentially unsafe vaccines and other pharma drugs in some cases becoming mandatory '... even if they are made with flagrant disregard for basic safety precautions. ...'

Citizens producing small quantities of balms or traditional herbs in competition with Big Pharma (having more wealth and power than small countries, in many cases due to their fostering at citizen expense by especially the US government, among others) are a whole 'nother story.

Edited to add a missing i and a missing t to two different words, as my keyboard sometimes sticks and I needz to press harder, drat it!

pproved pharmaceutical drugs kill 1 person every 19 minutes. Merck’s FDA-approved Vioxx killed over 68,000 people. Nobody in Big Pharma goes to jail. They pay out billions in fines (after making billions in profits.) No companies close, nobody goes to jail. Nobody. Even after killing and harming 100s of thousands of people.

4. Sam Girod and his products have hurt no one.

Those statistics come from the reporter, Ms. Ohl. As a reporter she can surely be considered A Professional, so I think her figures, result of her research, can be accepted. Just to repeat that, Vioxx killed 68,000 people. Perhaps some knowledgeable person can link to or describe the prosecution of the company which put Vioxx in the marketplace? How many convictions? What fines paid or jail time served?