3 ms·
i.e. there is no liability for either of them? The point of granting full approval was so the government could claim that it is no longer be considered 'experim
by native_samples 5y ago
i.e. there is no liability for either of them? The point of granting full approval was so the government could claim that it is no longer be considered 'experimental'. Normally that means the usual liability rules kick in. If not because the usual rules are overridden by other rules elsewhere it would appear the approval was pointless and changed nothing.
- ceejayoz 5y agoWhether it's covered under CICP or VICP, we made a national security decision in the 1980s that having companies willing to make vaccines was a net positive, and thus set up a no-fault system funded by a tax on every vaccine dose administered. Approval was never going to change the liability status. That's not the point of FDA approval.