A company of most wanted white collar medical executives lined up in a line up.

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

If you are getting a flu shot this season, chances are that those who are providing the vaccine to you are breaking federal laws – and they don’t care.

The reason they don’t care is because in 1986 Congress passed a law that then President Ronald Reagan signed which gave pharmaceutical companies that manufacture vaccines and medical personnel who administer those vaccines total legal immunity for injuries or deaths related to vaccines.

As a result, federal guidelines for administering vaccines that are designed to protect patients are routinely ignored, especially when it comes to the annual flu shot that almost anyone can purchase in a pharmacy just as easily as they can purchase a candy bar or can of soda.

If you have a severe reaction, injury, or are killed by the flu shot, you or your family have no legal recourse to sue the manufacturer or those who gave you the vaccine, even if they broke federal laws in administering the vaccine (as most do). You must hire an attorney and sue the Federal Government in vaccine court, where attorneys working for the Department of Justice (DOJ) will fight you to try and prevent you from being compensated for your injury or death.

Health Impact News is probably the only media organization that publishes the quarterly reports from the DOJ listing settlements in the vaccine court for vaccine injuries and deaths, and each report clearly shows that the annual flu vaccine is the most dangerous vaccine in the U.S., causing severe injuries and deaths each year.

The most recent report from September 2017 listed 275 injuries and four deaths from the flu vaccine. But the manufacturers of the flu vaccines and those who administer them take no responsibility and suffer no consequences, even if they broke the law.

Justice for criminal medical murders and injuries largely does not exist in the United States.

Information About the Flu Vaccine that is Required by Federal Law

You Must Receive a Vaccine Information Statement Prior to Receiving a Flu Shot

When someone injects you with the flu vaccine (as well as most other vaccines), federal law requires that they first give to you a Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) before injecting you.

Federal law (under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act) requires a health care provider to give a copy of the current VIS to an adult patient or to a child’s parent/legal representative before vaccinating an adult or child with a dose of the following vaccines: diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), influenza, pneumococcal conjugate, meningococcal, rotavirus, human papillomavirus (HPV), or varicella (chickenpox). Source.

In addition to the requirement to give you this VIS about the vaccine you are receiving (and if it is a multi-dose vaccine they are required to provide a VIS for each dose), whomever is administering the vaccine is also required by federal law to:

record in the patient’s medical record (or permanent office log or file) the following information:

  • The edition date of the VIS (found on the back) (i.e., the date of the visit, right bottom corner)
  • The date the VIS is provided (i.e., the date of the visit when the vaccine is administered)

In addition, providers must record:

  • The office address and name and title of the person who administers the vaccine
  • The date the vaccine is administered
  • The vaccine manufacturer and lot number


What are the Warnings About the Flu Shot Given in the VIS?

There are currently two Vaccine Information Statements related to the flu vaccine, one for flu vaccines that are “Live, Intranasal” and one for all flu vaccines that are “Inactivated or Recombinant.”

Here is what these Statements say about who should not receive flu vaccines:

Inactivated or Recombinant flu shot:

Tell the person who is giving you the vaccine:

If you have any severe, life-threatening allergies.
If you ever had a life-threatening allergic reaction
after a dose of flu vaccine, or have a severe allergy to
any part of this vaccine, you may be advised not to
get vaccinated. Most, but not all, types of flu vaccine
contain a small amount of egg protein.

If you ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also
called GBS).
Some people with a history of GBS should not get this
vaccine. This should be discussed with your doctor.

If you are not feeling well.
It is usually okay to get the flu vaccine when you have
a mild illness, but you might be asked to come back
when you feel better.

Live, Intranasal flu shot:

Some people should not get LAIV because of age, health
conditions, or other reasons. Most of these people should
get an injected flu vaccine instead. Your healthcare
provider can help you decide.

Tell the provider if you or the person being vaccinated:
• have any allergies, including an allergy to eggs, or
have ever had an allergic reaction to an influenza
• have ever had Guillain-Barré Syndrome (also called
• have any long-term heart, breathing, kidney, liver, or
nervous system problems.
• have asthma or breathing problems, or are a child who
has had wheezing episodes.
• are pregnant.
• are a child or adolescent who is receiving aspirin or
aspirin-containing products.
• have a weakened immune system.
will be visiting or taking care of someone, within the
next 7 days, who requires a protected environment (for
example, following a bone marrow transplant)

Sometimes LAIV should be delayed. Tell the provider if
you or the person being vaccinated:

• are not feeling well. The vaccine could be delayed
until you feel better.
• have gotten any other vaccines in the past 4 weeks.
Live vaccines given too close together might not work
as well.
• have taken influenza antiviral medication in the past
48 hours.
• have a very stuffy nose.

Please note that with the Live, attenuated flu vaccine, administered as a nasal spray, that the CDC and flu manufacturers are admitting that the person receiving the vaccine is carrying around the live virus and is in danger of infecting others for 7 days!

Think about the hypocrisy about influenza outbreaks currently practiced in public places. If there is an influenza outbreak in a school, for example, who is encouraged to stay home because they are perceived as a risk to the rest of the population? Those who have received the Live, attenuated flu vaccine?

No! The unvaccinated are deemed to be at risk for spreading the influenza, and are ordered to stay home.

In a hospital setting who among the medical staff is required to stay home or wear a mask because they are perceived to be a threat to the patient population? Those who have received the Live, attenuated flu vaccine?

No! The unvaccinated nurses and other hospital staff are perceived to be a threat to the patient population, and either are required to wear a mask or often they are fired from their positions for refusing the flu vaccine.

Do These VIS Sheets Meet Federal Requirements for Flu Shot Warnings?

Part of the information that is required by federal law to be given to everyone prior to receiving the flu vaccine is given in this statement from the VIS:

If you have any severe, life-threatening allergies.

If you ever had a life-threatening allergic reaction after a dose of flu vaccine, or have a severe allergy to any part of this vaccine, you may be advised not to get vaccinated. Most, but not all, types of flu vaccine contain a small amount of egg protein.

Notice that the only potential allergen given in this warning is to “egg protein,” yet the warning is for “any part of this vaccine.”

How would you know if you are allergic to any of the ingredients in a flu shot if you are not provided with a list of ingredients of that particular flu vaccine (there are several different flu vaccines on the market, each with different lists of ingredients).

For example, did you know that one of the new flu vaccines on the market contains armyworms and insects?

The VAXXED team recently went into a pharmacy and asked some basic questions about the flu shot. When they asked “Is there anything I should worry about in getting the flu shot?” the response given was: “The only contra-indication is if you are allergic to eggs.”

When asked if they had the product insert for the vaccine from the manufacturer, the person replied: “When we open the box we just throw it away.”

With No Legal Consequences for Injuries and Deaths due to the Flu Vaccine, Big Pharma is Pushing to Get More People Vaccinated


It is easy to see what the agenda is for the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture flu shots. It is a multi-billion dollar a year industry, but a large segment of the adult population remains unvaccinated.

One flu manufacturer has sponsored a website to promote ways to get more adults vaccinated:

Using Standing Orders to Vaccinate Adults

“Standing Orders” are a way to get more adults vaccinated by loosening the restrictions in place that were originally intended to protect patients and their right to consult with their physicians about medical decisions.

From the website, which is sponsored by Pfizer:

Standing orders authorize nurses and other appropriately trained health care personnel, where allowed by state law, to assess a patient’s immunization status and administer vaccinations according to a protocol approved by an institution, physician, or other authorized practitioner. Immunization standing orders work by enabling assessment and vaccination of the patient without the need for clinician examination or direct order from the attending provider at the time of the interaction. (emphasis added.)

These “Standing Orders” apparently authorize a broader range of personnel who can administer vaccines. Studies done in the past on the impact of Standing Orders, such as with the HPV vaccine Gardasil, show that the use of these Standing Orders does increase vaccination rates.

The Immunization Action Coalition, which works with Pfizer to educate medical professionals about Standing Orders, hosts conferences around the country on how to increase the use of these Standing Orders.

One of the things they teach is that one of the “barriers” to using Standing Orders is the fear of being sued for malpractice. Here is a slide from their presentation:

In order to overcome this barrier to the “fear of malpractice,” they educate personnel on the National Vaccine Compensation Program, which was the result of the 1986 law giving legal immunity to the medical community for injuries and deaths resulting from vaccines.

Here is a slide from their presentation:

Are Medical Personnel Administering Vaccines without Patient Consent or Knowledge?

According to medical personnel whistleblowers who do not approve of forced vaccinations and mourn the loss of patient rights, yes, some adults are being vaccinated in hospitals without their knowledge or consent. This is especially true with the flu vaccine.

Health Impact News published an interview from a nurse last year who reported that this is indeed happening in hospitals:

This policy is apparently a result of these “Standing Orders.”

The nurse in this interview gives the following advice if you find yourself in a hospital needing surgery:

When you sign consent for surgery, you can specifically say ‘no vaccines, I don’t want this.’ You can write an initial after what you say you do not want and they have to honor that. And if they don’t honor that, they can be sued.

Vaccine Manufacturers Constitute the Largest Criminal Organization in the World


It has been well documented that pharmaceutical companies comprise the largest group of illegal criminal activities of any other group in the world.

Richard Smith, editor of the British Medical Journal until 2004, wrote an opinion piece in 2013 about a book published by Peter Gøtzsche, the head of the Nordic Cochrane Centre, entitled “Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare.”

The characteristics of organised crime, racketeering, is defined in US law as the act of engaging repeatedly in certain types of offence, including extortion, fraud, federal drug offences, bribery, embezzlement, obstruction of justice, obstruction of law enforcement, tampering with witnesses, and political corruption. Peter produces evidence, most of it detailed, to support his case that pharmaceutical companies are guilty of most of these offences. (Source.)

The “largest fraud settlement in U.S. history” was against a pharmaceutical company:

On July 2, 2012 the British drug maker GlaxoSmithKline plead guilty to three counts of criminal misdemeanor and other civil liabilities relating to the prescription drugs Paxil, Wellbutrin and Avandia, and agreed to pay a total of $3 billion in fines–$1 billion to settle criminal charges, and $2 billion to cover civil liabilities.

The payment is the largest fraud settlement in U.S. history, and the largest fine ever paid by a drug company. (Source.)

In 2010 a panel of doctors with the Public Citizen’s Health Research Group produced a study showing that while the defense industry used to be the biggest defrauder of the federal government under the False Claims Act, the pharmaceutical industry has now overtaken them. The study found that:

U.S. spending on prescription drugs has increased from $40 billion in 1990 to $234 billion in 2008. In this era of rapidly rising drug costs, the illegal pharmaceutical company activities that have contributed to such inflated spending have garnered a significant amount of media attention.

Recent billion dollar settlements with two of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, Eli Lilly and Pfizer, provide evidence of the enormous scale of this wrongdoing.

Now, keep in mind that all of these illegal criminal settlements were for drugs that did NOT include vaccines. You cannot sue a drug company for illegal activities regarding the manufacture, sale, and distribution of vaccines, thanks to an act of Congress in 1986 and the full support of then President Ronald Reagan.

So given the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is the largest class of criminals in the world for products that do not include vaccines, how much worse are they since no one can sue them for crimes committed in regards to vaccines?

It is almost more than the mind can imagine or believe.

Isn’t it time to repeal the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act?

Leaving a lucrative career as a nephrologist (kidney doctor), Dr. Suzanne Humphries is now free to actually help cure people.

In this autobiography she explains why good doctors are constrained within the current corrupt medical system from practicing real, ethical medicine.

One of the sane voices when it comes to examining the science behind modern-day vaccines, no pro-vaccine extremist doctors have ever dared to debate her in public.

Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?


One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”

However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.

The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.

Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.

In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.

Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.

These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.

In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.