Shingles Vaccine Class Action Lawsuits

The Vaccine Defective Products Class Action suit was filed by a group of mothers who suffered painful outbreaks of shingles following the administering of the shingles vaccine. Their attorney, Robert M. Lambros, made this statement in court: “Shingles appears to be a product that has caused great suffering and pain, as well as physical and emotional discomfort to thousands of women…Vaccine manufacturers and drug companies turned a blind eye to the risks inherent in their products, which led to dire consequences for countless women throughout the country…The manufacturers’ blind eye may be the reason that more women have become infected with this disease.” This is just one of the lawsuits in this shingles vaccine case which are currently pending in Federal Court in San Diego. The manufacturer of this vaccine, GlaxoSmithKline, is named in several lawsuits, as well as the drug company Merck. A class-action suit was filed against them, claiming they knew about the danger of this product, yet sold it to the public anyway.

This lawsuit revolves around two patents. One of the plaintiffs, identified as the plaintiffs’ third party, is seeking damages for her pain and suffering after becoming infected with the virus. The Pfizer product, examine, is also named in the suit. The Pfizer product contains a chemical compound called yapaline, which causes side effects in susceptible individuals. It is the chemical in the examined compound that causes the FDA to ban the use of shingles in immunocompromised patients, including pregnant women and those undergoing chemotherapy.

Other manufacturers and drug companies have been sued, as well. A class-action suit has been filed against GlaxoSmithKline, MS R, and Sanofi Aventis, claiming that they knew about the risk of vaccine injury, yet still produced the shingles vaccine in the US. Another class-action lawsuit against the Pfizer vaccine manufacturer was recently settled in favor of the plaintiffs. In that case, a jury awarded a sum of $2.75 million to a woman who lost her legs to the disease.

The lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline and other vaccine manufacturers is being overseen by the FDA, which is responsible for regulating pharmaceuticals. In general, the FDA is quite slow in responding to lawsuits, due to the legal complexity involved. The FDA generally grants class-action status to cases in which at least one plaintiff has met the basic requirements of establishing that he or she has been injured through the use of the recalled product. Proving that the recalled product caused the injury is a much more complex matter, however.

Plaintiffs in the shingles vaccine class action lawsuit will not be granted absolute protection from all side effects of the vaccines. For example, the FDA has approved a new injectable form of the shingles vaccine, known as the covid-19 vaccine, which may be less harmful than the older varicella-zoster version. Thus, plaintiffs in this lawsuit are likely to obtain relatively limited monetary damages, although the ultimate decision of the court is still subject to review by an administrative law judge.

A recent post by the Washington Post indicates that the FDA is planning to allow Merck and GlaxoSmithKline to use a new version of the shingles vaccine called rheumatoid encephalopathy vaccine (RENV). This vaccine will be injected directly into the brains of people who have had preherpetic neuralgia, a condition caused by the same virus that causes chicken pox. Plaintiffs in the shingles vaccine lawsuit will probably receive greater monetary benefits from this new vaccine, since it may prevent the recurrence of preherpetic neuralgia and other side effects associated with the original versions of the vaccines.

We will be happy to hear your thoughts

Leave a reply

Lawyd is for people actively seeking legal information or advice and connects them with qualified attorneys or law firms. Get the best Law, Lawyer and Legal Resource. doesn't offer any legal advice. The info PROVIDED ON THIS SITE is solely for individual education & understanding of the legal issues involved and shouldn't be considered as legal advise. Don't rely upon or act on the said info without taking pro legal advice relating to your own particular situation. You must consult with your own legal counsel for guidance on the application of this info to your own specific case. The site owner/content writers or anyone associated with this site isn't responsible for any errors or omissions in the contents.