{"id":58961,"date":"2021-06-21T11:12:00","date_gmt":"2021-06-21T09:12:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/?p=58961"},"modified":"2021-06-21T19:23:51","modified_gmt":"2021-06-21T17:23:51","slug":"codacons-i-vaccinati-astrazeneca-possono-chiedere-un-risarcimento-fino-a-10-000-euro","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/codacons-i-vaccinati-astrazeneca-possono-chiedere-un-risarcimento-fino-a-10-000-euro\/","title":{"rendered":"Codacons: "AstraZeneca vaccinated can ask for compensation of up to 10,000 euros""},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Codacons, an association in defense of consumers, has announced that it will launch a class action lawsuit against AstraZeneca for all the problems that have arisen regarding the anti Covid-19 vaccine. All citizens under 60 can join, who, having received the first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, will be forced into the vaccination mix. According to the association, there are conditions for those in this condition to obtain up to 10,000 euros in compensation.<\/p>\n

We report\u00a0The Codacons press release<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

ASTRAZENECA VACCINE, STOP THE UNDER-60s: DOWNLOAD THE DIFFICULTY AND ASK FOR COMPENSATION!<\/span><\/a><\/em><\/h3>\n
Alarming news even in the middle of the vaccination campaign: updates on the health damage reported by many users of the Astrazeneca vaccination follow one another in the newspapers. Codacons intervenes and makes a formal notice available to the under-60s concerned to ask for compensation!<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

THE FACTS<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n

Aifa's indications on the use of Astrazeneca vaccine<\/a> over time they are changed several times<\/a>: initially it was authorized only for users up to 55 years of age, then suspended pending the opinion of the EMA - European Medicines Agency - after a few episodes of thrombosis, then recommended for those over 60. AIFA itself has come to indicate\/advise the drug for the young considering "a preferential use of RNA vaccines (Pfizer or Moderna) in older and\/or more fragile subjects" and "a preferential use of the AstraZeneca vaccine, pending further data acquisition, in subjects among the 18 and 55 years old, for which more solid evidence is available\u201d. Subsequently the route changes: Astrazeneca is recommended for people over 60 by the Ministry of Health deeming "on the basis of current evidence, taking into account the low risk of adverse reactions of the thromboembolic type in the face of the high mortality in the more advanced age groups, represents that its preferential use in people over 60 is recommended. Those who have already received a first dose of Vaxzevria can complete the cycle with the same vaccine". In May 2021 we witness yet another trend reversal by Aifa which believes "the safety of the administration of Astrazeneca in subjects under the age of 60 remains an open topic and on which there is margin of uncertainty".<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Unfortunately, to date there are numerous adverse events, even lethal, reported by users of the Astrazeneca vaccine, especially when it comes to people under the age of 60. AND many illustrious luminaries<\/a> have questioned, even publicly, the choices of the health authorities regarding vaccination for the under-60s.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

THE CODACONS INITIATIVE<\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n

The Association, while obviously in favor of the vaccination campaign to reduce the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, has decided to intervene to protect Italian citizens. For this reason, it has decided to proceed on two distinct levels.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

1) In the case of the death of Camilla Canepa, who died after receiving the first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, we filed a complaint with the Public Prosecutor of Genoa asking for the Minister of Health Roberto Speranza, Commissioner Francesco Paolo Figliuolo to be entered in the register of suspects and the competent Asl.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

2) Furthermore, we make available to the citizens concerned a formal notice to request compensation for damages, which contemplates three different cases:<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

A) Compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by the fear of falling ill for having received the administration of the Astrazeneca vaccine authorized by the competent Italian authorities: this is damage that has now been recognized by the jurisprudence for several years, in particular following the well-known "Seveso case" of 1976 ( where the moral damage complained of by subjects who concretely prove, through adequate specialist medical certification with repeated health checks over time, that they have suffered a psychic disturbance of a transitory nature due to exposure to polluting substances has been recognized as independently compensable, even in the absence of a injury to ascertained psycho-physical integrity or other event producing pecuniary damage - Cassation n. 2515 of 21 February 2002). This damage may be quantified on a flat-rate basis in the amount of Euro 10,000.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

B) Compensation for non-patrimonial-biological damage, permanent or temporary damage, also in terms of differential damage, reported for having been subjected to the Astrazeneca vaccination, subject to specific indication and quantification.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

C) The compensation provided for by Law 201\/92 to be paid by the State for having been subjected to vaccination from which the permanent psychophysical impairment derives, to be evaluated and quantified below (to be indicated if existing).<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

TO JOIN<\/em><\/span><\/h3>\n

If you have been vaccinated with Astrazeneca and you belong to the under-60 category, you can join the initiative and download the notice by clicking here<\/a><\/strong>!<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

\n<\/article>\n

NOT ONLY CODACONS<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Retrieved from Trend online \u2013 April 21, 2021<\/a><\/p>\n

In reality, this one from Codacons is not the only one class action lawsuit<\/strong> that the pharmaceutical company faces in this period. Over United States<\/strong> another class action lawsuit was filed by investors,<\/strong> who they accused AstraZeneca<\/strong> to have kept silent about any problems related to the vaccine, of which the company would have been perfectly aware.<\/p>\n

Let's see the details of both lawsuits.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

According to Codacons there are all the conditions for a legal action and for the request of the compensation for damages<\/strong>, primarily<\/em> because of all contradictory information<\/strong> which have been disseminated in this regard, both by AIFA and by the Ministry of Health.<\/p>\n

In particular, from a technical-legal point of view they are requested, as expressed in the press release\u00a0three different \"\"case of compensation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The lawsuit, as he pointed out Rienzi,<\/strong> focuses on potential harm from health risk<\/strong> to which the interested parties have been exposed. Reference is made to a legal precedent<\/strong> and that is what was deliberated by the Court of Assizes of Taranto regarding Ilva<\/strong>, when 50 citizens represented by Codacons were compensated for 5,000 euros<\/strong> each, only for potential damage and health risk, even if they suffered no physical damage.<\/p>\n

In America, investors sue AstraZeneca<\/h2>\n

Instead, the legal action is taken by the investors<\/strong> that they bought between 21 May 2020 and 20 November 2020<\/strong> vaccine actions AstraZeneca.<\/strong> At the moment, memberships are also open for this collective action, because the document will be filed on July 26, 2021<\/strong> and also in this case the object of the accusations is the well-known Vaccine<\/strong> to counter the epidemic COVID-19.<\/strong><\/p>\n

AstraZeneca<\/strong> is accused here of having hidden<\/strong> voluntarily to investors i problems<\/strong> related to the vaccine, including dosing errors in the trial phase and side effects, of which he was fully aware.<\/p>\n

What does the American class action consist of from a legal point of view?<\/h2>\n

As everyone knows AstraZeneca<\/strong> collaborated with the University of Oxford<\/strong> to develop an adenovirus vaccine against Covid-19 (AZD1222).<\/strong><\/p>\n

The November 23, 2020<\/strong>, the pharmaceutical company released a statement announcing the results of an analysis on the experimentation<\/strong> in progress of Vaccine.<\/strong> The news caused quite a stir since AstraZeneca<\/strong>I reveal that in the experimentation, which took place in two different locations (Brazil and United Kingdom) they had been used two different dosages.<\/strong> <\/a>For which some patients had received only half dose<\/strong> and then a full booster dose.<\/p>\n

To defend yourself against accusations AstraZeneca<\/strong> stated that the administration of half the dosage<\/strong> indicated had proved to be more effective by arriving at a hedge against the Covid-19 of 90%<\/strong>, where instead with the two complete doses they had only reached the 62%.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The discussion went on and the company disclosed that the cause of the difference in dosages<\/strong>i resided in a protocol and procedure error e it was not voluntary.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Again, it was found that the half dose<\/strong> it had never been tested on patients over 55 years old<\/strong> of age and that the times had also been changed, i.e. many patients had had their second dose after the window from \"\"protocol.<\/p>\n

It was at this point that the American authorities chose, as they still do today, not to authorize the use of AstraZeneca<\/strong> in USA,<\/strong> and therefore in America this vaccine it was never approved.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Returning to the financial and legal aspects<\/strong>, as a result of this the shares of AstraZeneca had a collapse of 5%\u00a0<\/strong>in just three days already in 2020.<\/p>\n

There class action<\/strong> it is therefore addressed to all shareholders<\/strong> who have undergone losses<\/strong> and that they can contact the law firm from anywhere in the world to participate in the legal action.<\/p>\n

This is not the place to judge the risks and merits of a particular vaccine from a medical point of view:\u00a0medicine is something that must remain the competence of doctors!<\/strong><\/p>\n

However, since it is a item<\/strong> of an informative nature legal,<\/strong> to be honest we will say that all the largest pharmaceutical companies have one or more class actions behind them in their history, including AstraZeneca's competitors.<\/p>\n

_______________________________<\/p>\n

Ed<\/strong>: In this, as in other events, caution in expressing judgments is never too much. Suffice it to recall the case of the false correlation between the administration of the trivalent MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella) and the onset of pathologies such as autism and intestinal diseases supported by Andrew Wakefield who it was discovered that he had been paid to alter the results of the research order to create a scientific basis that would support a series of lawsuits brought by a lawyer against the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture vaccines to obtain generous compensation. Furthermore, it was discovered that Wakefield himself had also patented a system of individual vaccines precisely to replace the trivalent preparation which, in that research, he had singled out as the cause of autism.<\/em><\/p>\n

Furthermore, Codacons is not new in leveraging easy sensationalism, alleged scandalism and the bad reputation of pharmaceutical companies to promote itself.<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Il Codacons, associazione a difesa dei consumatori, ha annunciato che avvier\u00e0 un\u2019azione legale collettiva contro AstraZeneca per tutti i problemi sorti in merito al vaccino anti Covid-19. Possono aderire tutti i cittadini under 60, che avendo ricevuto la prima dose del vaccino AstraZeneca saranno costretti al mix vaccinale. Secondo l’associazione ci sono i presupposti perch\u00e9 …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":58965,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[41,39],"class_list":["post-58961","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-notizie","tag-leggisentenze","tag-vaccini"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58961","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=58961"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58961\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/58965"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58961"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58961"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58961"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}

And if the\u00a0Codacons<\/strong> try a collective action from the point of view of consumers, another class action<\/strong> was brought against\u00a0AstraZeneca<\/strong> from a well-known law firm in USA, Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC<\/a><\/strong>, to defend the pharmaceutical company's shareholders. Responsible for the class action is the Southern District Court of New York.<\/strong><\/p>\n