Whine, whine whine....

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Mark Probert-Fe, Feb 27, 2004.

  1. http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2585977

    (My comment: Ain't that just too bad..tough..now the liars, oops, I mean lawuers, wil either have to
    spend their own pounds and put thei kids at risk, or just give it up.)

    MMR Campaigners Vow to Continue Compensation Fight

    By John Aston, Cathy Gordon and Louise Barnett, PA News

    The parents of children allegedly damaged by the MMR vaccine tonight vowed to continue campaigning
    for compensation despite losing a court battle for funding.

    Their legal bid today suffered another blow when a High Court judge rejected an application for a
    judicial review of a decision to withdraw public funding to fight test cases.

    The decision to withdraw funds was taken by the Legal Services Commission (LSC) and upheld by the
    Funding Review Committee.

    Richard Follis, partner in solicitors firm Alexander Harris, representing hundreds of parents
    and their children, said they would consider whether there were grounds to appeal to the Court
    of Appeal.

    Mr Harris added: "We will also be giving urgent consideration to how the very serious concerns that
    exist about the safety of MMR can now be addressed.

    "Since this litigation will no longer be funded, and there is no sign that the Government or
    pharmaceutical companies are taking up the very serious questions that research in the litigation
    has posed, we as a law firm representing many grievously injured children will now have to consider
    whether we press the Government to properly investigate matters the drug companies have attempted to
    sweep under the carpet."

    Comment: Of course he would say that. he i sadvocating for his clients, and for his enormous fee.

    The MMR litigation has so far cost £15 million and the LSC believes it would cost another £10
    million to bring to trial.

    Comment: How many austici children could have used those big pounds to help in their education,
    growth and development? What an incredible waste of resources.

    Today's judgment concerned the lead cases in a group action involving about 1,000 claimants.

    Isabella Thomas, spokeswoman for Justice Awareness and Basic Support (JABS), said: "We will fight on
    to the end. This doesn't stop us because we have to have justice.

    "Parents are willing to sell their homes. Our children's lives are at stake. To watch your child in
    such severe pain is dreadful.

    Comment: Pain is not a symptom of autism. However, the perception of disability in a child is often
    a reflection of what they see from their parents. Sadly, these parents are making their children
    more disabled.

    "We do believe the public are very strongly behind us and we are asking for a public inquiry into
    the whole issue."

    Comment: Believe what you want. Drop this wasted litigation and get on with being a parent.

    10, both had the MMR vaccine, said many of the claimants involved in the court battle were members
    of JABS, a support group set up for the carers of "vaccine damaged children".

    "These children have a life sentence and we need to find a way of protecting them against that awful
    vaccine strain that is in their systems," she said.
     
    Tags:


  2. Jg

    Jg Guest

    "Mark Probert-February 27, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
    wrote in message news:ZSP%[email protected]...
    > http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2585977

    > (My comment: Ain't that just too bad..tough..now the liars, oops, I
    mean
    > lawuers, wil either have to spend their own pounds and put thei kids
    at
    > risk, or just give it up.)

    Lawyers are liars? Hate to break it to you, Mark, but Glaxo-SmithKline (and anyone else targeted)
    uses attorneys , too. Are *they* liars? <g>

    > MMR Campaigners Vow to Continue Compensation Fight

    > By John Aston, Cathy Gordon and Louise Barnett, PA News

    > The parents of children allegedly damaged by the MMR vaccine tonight
    vowed
    > to continue campaigning for compensation despite losing a court battle
    for
    > funding.

    > Their legal bid today suffered another blow when a High Court judge
    rejected
    > an application for a judicial review of a decision to withdraw public funding to fight test cases.

    Huh? Gotta be a typo. Why would parents alleging MMR damage object to a decision not to allow public
    funds to be used to fight them? (Perhaps the author meant "to BRING [to trial] test cases.")

    > The decision to withdraw funds was taken by the Legal Services
    Commission
    > (LSC) and upheld by the Funding Review Committee.

    > Richard Follis, partner in solicitors firm Alexander Harris,
    representing
    > hundreds of parents and their children, said they would consider
    whether
    > there were grounds to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

    > Mr Harris added: "We will also be giving urgent consideration to how
    the
    > very serious concerns that exist about the safety of MMR can now be addressed.

    > "Since this litigation will no longer be funded, and there is no sign
    that
    > the Government or pharmaceutical companies are taking up the very
    serious
    > questions that research in the litigation has posed, we as a law firm representing many grievously
    > injured children will now have to
    consider
    > whether we press the Government to properly investigate matters the
    drug
    > companies have attempted to sweep under the carpet."

    > Comment: Of course he would say that. he i sadvocating for his
    clients, and
    > for his enormous fee.

    His "enormous fee"? I think his compensation would be rather paltry* if it came from public
    (tax) dollars.

    *You want to see paltry? Take a look at the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Awards for
    attorneys' fees are downright niggardly! (Only a "reasonable" fee, as determined by the Special
    Master assigned to the case, is awarded for attorneys' services; no portion of the amount awarded to
    the victim is taken by the attorney(s);
    i.e., there's no contingency fee arrangement.) I know of attorneys/law firms that wouldn't touch a
    vaccine-injury case, and others that have only taken on such cases as a personal favor to the
    victim's family.

    > The MMR litigation has so far cost £15 million and the LSC believes it
    would
    > cost another £10 million to bring to trial.

    Ah, so it is to bring them to trial, not to fight them. Guess the UK has its share of crappy
    reporters, too. <g>

    > Comment: How many austici children could have used those big pounds to
    help
    > in their education, growth and development?

    Undoubtedly none. The funds "belong" to the LSC and are to be used, presumably at its discretion, on
    *lawsuits*.

    What an incredible waste of
    > resources.

    IYO.

    > Today's judgment concerned the lead cases in a group action involving
    about
    > 1,000 claimants.

    > Isabella Thomas, spokeswoman for Justice Awareness and Basic Support
    (JABS),
    > said: "We will fight on to the end. This doesn't stop us because we
    have to
    > have justice.

    > "Parents are willing to sell their homes. Our children's lives are at
    stake.
    > To watch your child in such severe pain is dreadful.

    (1) So the parents ARE willing to use their own resources. (Nyah, nyah, nyah? <g>)

    > Comment: Pain is not a symptom of autism. However, the perception of disability in a child is
    > often a reflection of what they see from
    their
    > parents. Sadly, these parents are making their children more disabled.

    Uh, Mark, the article speaks of "allegedly damaged children"; the word "autism" isn't used. I'm sure
    you're aware of the allegation that MMR also induces (painful) bowel problems in some children.

    > "We do believe the public are very strongly behind us and we are
    asking for
    > a public inquiry into the whole issue."

    Maybe they'll get it. You may disagree with them, but can't really object if they're using *private*
    funding to bring pressure to bear on legislators/the courts.

    > Comment: Believe what you want. Drop this wasted litigation and get on
    with
    > being a parent.

    Any idea how much it costs to care for an autistic child?

    Terry,
    > 10, both had the MMR vaccine, said many of the claimants involved in
    the
    > court battle were members of JABS, a support group set up for the
    carers of
    > "vaccine damaged children".

    > "These children have a life sentence and we need to find a way of
    protecting
    > them against that awful vaccine strain that is in their systems," she
    said.
     
  3. "JG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "Mark Probert-February 27, 2004" <Mark [email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:ZSP%[email protected]...
    > > http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2585977
    >
    > > (My comment: Ain't that just too bad..tough..now the liars, oops, I
    > mean
    > > lawuers, wil either have to spend their own pounds and put thei kids
    > at
    > > risk, or just give it up.)
    >
    > Lawyers are liars? Hate to break it to you, Mark, but Glaxo-SmithKline (and anyone else targeted)
    > uses attorneys , too. Are *they* liars? <g>

    Vigorous advocates?

    > > MMR Campaigners Vow to Continue Compensation Fight
    >
    > > By John Aston, Cathy Gordon and Louise Barnett, PA News
    >
    > > The parents of children allegedly damaged by the MMR vaccine tonight
    > vowed
    > > to continue campaigning for compensation despite losing a court battle
    > for
    > > funding.
    >
    > > Their legal bid today suffered another blow when a High Court judge
    > rejected
    > > an application for a judicial review of a decision to withdraw public funding to fight test
    > > cases.
    >
    > Huh? Gotta be a typo. Why would parents alleging MMR damage object to a decision not to allow
    > public funds to be used to fight them? (Perhaps the author meant "to BRING [to trial] test
    > cases.")

    When written from the plaintiffs POV, they are *fighting* for truth, justrice and the Brittish
    Way....The government in England finances some litigation. IOW taxpayers money going into this....

    > > The decision to withdraw funds was taken by the Legal Services
    > Commission
    > > (LSC) and upheld by the Funding Review Committee.
    >
    > > Richard Follis, partner in solicitors firm Alexander Harris,
    > representing
    > > hundreds of parents and their children, said they would consider
    > whether
    > > there were grounds to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
    >
    > > Mr Harris added: "We will also be giving urgent consideration to how
    > the
    > > very serious concerns that exist about the safety of MMR can now be addressed.
    >
    > > "Since this litigation will no longer be funded, and there is no sign
    > that
    > > the Government or pharmaceutical companies are taking up the very
    > serious
    > > questions that research in the litigation has posed, we as a law firm representing many
    > > grievously injured children will now have to
    > consider
    > > whether we press the Government to properly investigate matters the
    > drug
    > > companies have attempted to sweep under the carpet."
    >
    > > Comment: Of course he would say that. he i sadvocating for his
    > clients, and
    > > for his enormous fee.
    >
    > His "enormous fee"? I think his compensation would be rather paltry* if it came from public (tax)
    > dollars.

    His fees would come from the success of the litigation...if it were successful. Ever see legal fees
    in large class actions?

    > *You want to see paltry? Take a look at the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Awards for
    > attorneys' fees are downright niggardly!

    Look at the fees allowed if an attorney helps a veteran before the DVA. It used to be $25.00 and is
    now 20% of retroactive benefits.

    (Only a "reasonable" fee, as determined by the Special
    > Master assigned to the case, is awarded for attorneys' services; no portion of the amount awarded
    > to the victim is taken by the attorney(s);
    > i.e., there's no contingency fee arrangement.) I know of attorneys/law firms that wouldn't touch a
    > vaccine-injury case, and others that have only taken on such cases as a personal favor to the
    > victim's family.

    Agreed. However, the article is about a UK case which is a class action, thus subject to a
    contingency fee arrangement.

    > > The MMR litigation has so far cost £15 million and the LSC believes it
    > would
    > > cost another £10 million to bring to trial.
    >
    > Ah, so it is to bring them to trial, not to fight them. Guess the UK has its share of crappy
    > reporters, too. <g>

    Yes, and, of course, it is taxpayers money.

    > > Comment: How many austici children could have used those big pounds to
    > help
    > > in their education, growth and development?
    >
    > Undoubtedly none. The funds "belong" to the LSC and are to be used, presumably at its discretion,
    > on *lawsuits*.

    Agreed. Sadly, a waste of money.

    > What an incredible waste of
    > > resources.
    >
    > IYO.

    Yes. But, using taxpayers funds for this purpose?

    > > Today's judgment concerned the lead cases in a group action involving
    > about
    > > 1,000 claimants.
    >
    > > Isabella Thomas, spokeswoman for Justice Awareness and Basic Support
    > (JABS),
    > > said: "We will fight on to the end. This doesn't stop us because we
    > have to
    > > have justice.
    >
    > > "Parents are willing to sell their homes. Our children's lives are at
    > stake.
    > > To watch your child in such severe pain is dreadful.
    >
    > (1) So the parents ARE willing to use their own resources. (Nyah, nyah, nyah? <g>)

    For invasive testing with a medical risk.

    > > Comment: Pain is not a symptom of autism. However, the perception of disability in a child is
    > > often a reflection of what they see from
    > their
    > > parents. Sadly, these parents are making their children more disabled.
    >
    > Uh, Mark, the article speaks of "allegedly damaged children"; the word "autism" isn't used. I'm
    > sure you're aware of the allegation that MMR also induces (painful) bowel problems in some
    > children.

    Agreed. However, I am familiar with this case and it is autism they are talking about. See below...

    > > "We do believe the public are very strongly behind us and we are
    > asking for
    > > a public inquiry into the whole issue."
    >
    > Maybe they'll get it. You may disagree with them, but can't really object if they're using
    > *private* funding to bring pressure to bear on legislators/the courts.

    They are using taxpayer funds.

    > > Comment: Believe what you want. Drop this wasted litigation and get on
    > with
    > > being a parent.
    >
    > Any idea how much it costs to care for an autistic child?

    Since I have a child with CP, I have a fairly good idea. His last custom wheelchair was $8000 and
    there is no motor...his school costs over $15K per year..and the house modifications we did a few
    years ago were over $60K.

    Making a van accessible for a wheelchair is $19K....

    I hope you agree that I have a fiar idea of what these things cost money wise.

    > Terry,
    > > 10, both had the MMR vaccine, said many of the claimants involved in
    > the
    > > court battle were members of JABS, a support group set up for the
    > carers of
    > > "vaccine damaged children".
    >
    > > "These children have a life sentence and we need to find a way of
    > protecting
    > > them against that awful vaccine strain that is in their systems," she
    > said.
     
  4. Jan

    Jan Guest

    >Subject: Re: Whine, whine whine....
    >From: "JG" [email protected]
    >Date: 2/27/2004 3:45 PM Pacific Standard Time
    >Message-id: <[email protected]>
    >
    >"Mark Probert-February 27, 2004" <Mark [email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:ZSP%[email protected]...
    >> http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2585977
    >
    >> (My comment: Ain't that just too bad..tough..now the liars, oops, I
    >mean
    >> lawuers, wil either have to spend their own pounds and put thei kids
    >at
    >> risk, or just give it up.)

    Pathetic. Mark has always called parents will damaged kids from vaccines *whiners*

    This is the results of organized medicine and EGO.

    Simply evil.

    Jan

    >Lawyers are liars? Hate to break it to you, Mark, but Glaxo-SmithKline (and anyone else targeted)
    >uses attorneys , too. Are *they* liars? <g>
    >
    >> MMR Campaigners Vow to Continue Compensation Fight
    >
    >> By John Aston, Cathy Gordon and Louise Barnett, PA News
    >
    >> The parents of children allegedly damaged by the MMR vaccine tonight
    >vowed
    >> to continue campaigning for compensation despite losing a court battle
    >for
    >> funding.
    >
    >> Their legal bid today suffered another blow when a High Court judge
    >rejected
    >> an application for a judicial review of a decision to withdraw public funding to fight
    >> test cases.
    >
    >Huh? Gotta be a typo. Why would parents alleging MMR damage object to a decision not to allow
    >public funds to be used to fight them? (Perhaps the author meant "to BRING [to trial] test cases.")
    >
    >> The decision to withdraw funds was taken by the Legal Services
    >Commission
    >> (LSC) and upheld by the Funding Review Committee.
    >
    >> Richard Follis, partner in solicitors firm Alexander Harris,
    >representing
    >> hundreds of parents and their children, said they would consider
    >whether
    >> there were grounds to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
    >
    >> Mr Harris added: "We will also be giving urgent consideration to how
    >the
    >> very serious concerns that exist about the safety of MMR can now be addressed.
    >
    >> "Since this litigation will no longer be funded, and there is no sign
    >that
    >> the Government or pharmaceutical companies are taking up the very
    >serious
    >> questions that research in the litigation has posed, we as a law firm representing many
    >> grievously injured children will now have to
    >consider
    >> whether we press the Government to properly investigate matters the
    >drug
    >> companies have attempted to sweep under the carpet."
    >
    >> Comment: Of course he would say that. he i sadvocating for his
    >clients, and
    >> for his enormous fee.
    >
    >His "enormous fee"? I think his compensation would be rather paltry* if it came from public
    >(tax) dollars.
    >
    >*You want to see paltry? Take a look at the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Awards for
    >attorneys' fees are downright niggardly! (Only a "reasonable" fee, as determined by the Special
    >Master assigned to the case, is awarded for attorneys' services; no portion of the amount awarded
    >to the victim is taken by the attorney(s);
    >i.e., there's no contingency fee arrangement.) I know of attorneys/law firms that wouldn't touch a
    > vaccine-injury case, and others that have only taken on such cases as a personal favor to the
    > victim's family.
    >
    >> The MMR litigation has so far cost £15 million and the LSC believes it
    >would
    >> cost another £10 million to bring to trial.
    >
    >Ah, so it is to bring them to trial, not to fight them. Guess the UK has its share of crappy
    >reporters, too. <g>
    >
    >> Comment: How many austici children could have used those big pounds to
    >help
    >> in their education, growth and development?
    >
    >Undoubtedly none. The funds "belong" to the LSC and are to be used, presumably at its discretion,
    >on *lawsuits*.
    >
    >What an incredible waste of
    >> resources.
    >
    >IYO.
    >
    >> Today's judgment concerned the lead cases in a group action involving
    >about
    >> 1,000 claimants.
    >
    >> Isabella Thomas, spokeswoman for Justice Awareness and Basic Support
    >(JABS),
    >> said: "We will fight on to the end. This doesn't stop us because we
    >have to
    >> have justice.
    >
    >> "Parents are willing to sell their homes. Our children's lives are at
    >stake.
    >> To watch your child in such severe pain is dreadful.
    >
    >(1) So the parents ARE willing to use their own resources. (Nyah, nyah, nyah? <g>)
    >
    >> Comment: Pain is not a symptom of autism. However, the perception of disability in a child is
    >> often a reflection of what they see from
    >their
    >> parents. Sadly, these parents are making their children more disabled.
    >
    >Uh, Mark, the article speaks of "allegedly damaged children"; the word "autism" isn't used. I'm
    >sure you're aware of the allegation that MMR also induces (painful) bowel problems in some
    >children.
    >
    >> "We do believe the public are very strongly behind us and we are
    >asking for
    >> a public inquiry into the whole issue."
    >
    >Maybe they'll get it. You may disagree with them, but can't really object if they're using
    >*private* funding to bring pressure to bear on legislators/the courts.
    >
    >> Comment: Believe what you want. Drop this wasted litigation and get on
    >with
    >> being a parent.
    >
    >Any idea how much it costs to care for an autistic child?
    >

    >Terry,
    >> 10, both had the MMR vaccine, said many of the claimants involved in
    >the
    >> court battle were members of JABS, a support group set up for the
    >carers of
    >> "vaccine damaged children".
    >
    >> "These children have a life sentence and we need to find a way of
    >protecting
    >> them against that awful vaccine strain that is in their systems," she
    >said.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  5. "Jan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > >Subject: Re: Whine, whine whine.... From: "JG" [email protected] Date: 2/27/2004 3:45 PM
    > >Pacific Standard Time Message-id: <[email protected]>
    > >
    > >"Mark Probert-February 27, 2004" <Mark [email protected]> wrote in message
    > >news:ZSP%[email protected]...
    > >> http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2585977
    > >
    > >> (My comment: Ain't that just too bad..tough..now the liars, oops, I
    > >mean
    > >> lawuers, wil either have to spend their own pounds and put thei kids
    > >at
    > >> risk, or just give it up.)
    >
    > Pathetic. Mark has always called parents will damaged kids from vaccines *whiners*
    >
    > This is the results of organized medicine and EGO.
    >
    > Simply evil.

    Yes, you are simply evil for taking my words and thoughts out of context. and, then you post your
    derogatory comments about me from behind your killfile so you cannot see my responses BECAUSE YOU
    CANNOT HANDLE THE TRUTH!

    When you develop a shred of intellectual honesty, I will let you know.

    Snip.
     
  6. "DEBBEE1023" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > << When you develop a shred of intellectual honesty, I will let you know.
    >>
    >
    >
    > Yes, Marla...you do just that.

    How pathetic.

    How typical of your braincleansed self.
     
  7. Carabelli

    Carabelli Guest

    "DEBBEE1023" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > << > Yes, Marla...you do just that.
    >
    > How pathetic.
    >
    > How typical of your braincleansed self. >>
    >
    >
    > Why are you pointing your fingers at me? ...............

    Aren't you accustomed to that by now?

    carabelli
     
  8. "DEBBEE1023" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > << > Yes, Marla...you do just that.
    >
    > How pathetic.
    >
    > How typical of your braincleansed self. >>
    >
    >
    > Why are you pointing your fingers at me? As I have understood "Marla
    Maples"
    > was you in drag, was it not that infilitrated a women's newsgroup....

    As Ihave said, I do not substatively discuss any allegations of that sick and deranged woman. By you
    and Jan posting any reference to her, you take advantage of my stated desire to totally disengage
    from her. Thus, you and Jan are pathetic.

    > Whomever "Marla Maples" is/was, is truly the pathetic party.

    See above.
     
  9. "DEBBEE1023" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > << > Yes, Marla...you do just that.
    >
    > How pathetic.
    >
    > How typical of your braincleansed self. >>
    >
    >
    > Why are you pointing your fingers at me? As I have understood "Marla
    Maples"
    > was you in drag, was it not that infilitrated a women's newsgroup....

    As Ihave said, I do not substatively discuss any allegations of that sick and deranged woman. By you
    and Jan posting any reference to her, you take advantage of my stated desire to totally disengage
    from her. Thus, you and Jan are pathetic.

    > Whomever "Marla Maples" is/was, is truly the pathetic party.

    See above.
     
Loading...