Dr. David Tayloe
(2007-2008 President-Elect American Academy of
Pediatrics)
[back] Experts
[back] American Academy of Pediatrics
Talk about a conflict of interest with Dr. Tayloe on Larry
King................. his father with same name had a judgement against
him for $3.5 million in 1985 (vaccines)
Kevin Barry sent this to the list with comments by Barbara Loe Fisher of NVIC
Dr. Tayloe who was on Larry King with Jenny McCarthy & David Kirby ---- his
father with same name had a judgement against him for $3.5 million in 1985
(vaccines)
(And Dr. David Tayloe is president-elect of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
He also does not believe of the scientific evidence between vaccines and autism.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/02/lkl.01.html )
Dr. Tayloe stated on Larry King “I, in my practice have not referred a child
to the compensation program for a vaccine-related injury...and our practice has
seen over a hundred thousand kids a year.”
and more from Dr. Tayloe's son who was on Larry King
http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2008/03/aap-president-tells-giant-easily.html
"the jury handed down what was at that time the largest jury verdict in a
medical malpractice case in the State of North Carolina, in the sum of 3.5
million dollars."
http://www.karneylaw.com/CM/VerdictsSettlements/top_5_verdicts_settlements.asp
Medical Malpractice/Negligent Administration of the DPT Vaccine $3,500,000
Jury Verdict, May 1, 1985
The Minor Plaintiff, Bernard Forehand, Jr., was seriously injured when the
Defendant Pediatrician's Nurse failed to communicate to the Defendant
Pediatrician, David Tayloe that the Minor Plaintiff had an adverse
reaction to the first vaccination shot. The administration of the second shot
left the Minor Plaintiff with a significant brain injury. The Defendant
Pediatrician, David Tayloe, who at that time was the President of the National
Pediatric Association, strenuously fought this case all the way to a jury
verdict. On May 1, 1985, the jury handed down what was at that time the
largest jury verdict in a medical malpractice case in the State of North
Carolina, in the sum of 3.5 million dollars.
Following is a newsletter article that I (Barbara Loe Fisher) wrote in the
summer of 1985 on the Forehand lawsuit:
"In May, a North Carolina jury in the Wilmington U.S. District Court decided
that David Tayloe, M.D. and T. Frank Stallings, M.D., of Washington Pediatrics,
P.A., were guilty of medical malpractice in the pertussis vaccine-induced brain
damage suffered by Beau Forehand, Jr. The child was awarded $3.5 million in
compensatory damages by the jury but the judge overturned the verdict and it was
appealed.
It was the highest medical malpractice award in North Carolina history. Beau was
represented by attorneys Anne Werum Lambright and Richard Polling of the
Charleston West Virginia firm of Preiser and Wilson. The defense claimed that
the two doctors were following the vaccination guidelines contained in the
American Academy of Pediatrics 1970's "Red Book" which was in effect at the time
Beau Forehand received his first DPT shot in January of 1974.
Beau reacted to his first short with a 103 degree fever and unconsolable crying,
which his mother reported to the doctors. Six weeks later, Beau had a febrile
seizure and was hospitalized. However, despite the reaction to his first shot
and the subsequent seizure, he was given another DPT shot even though he had a
cold and a slight fever at the time of the second vaccination. Within three
hours of his second DPT shot he went into a major seizure and has had an
uncontrolled seizure disorder ever since. He was left with severe mental
retardation.
The 1970 RedBook did not list unconsolable crying, a fever of 103 degrees, a
history of convulsions or a cold at the time of vaccination as contraindications
to the pertussis vaccine. Attorney Lambright stated that the jury's verdict in
the case sent a clear message to physicians that "The American Academy of
Pediatrics Red Book should not be used as the sole guide to contraindications or
adverse reactions to vaccines. The basic premise in the Forehand case is that
doctors have to use their common sense, medical training, skill, knowledge and
experience to make appropriate determinations for vaccination on a case by case
basis."
If the jury's verdict is upheld on appeal, the Forehand case will be an
important precedent-setting case. It would mean that individual physicians are
responsible for obtaining knowledge and making decisions about the advisability
of vaccination in individual cases which go beyond automatic reliance on the
recommendations listed by the AAP or the CDC's Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP). Examples of additional information available to
physicians are the vaccine manufacturer's product inserts included in vaccine
packages. which historically have listed more contraindications than those
listed by either the AAP or ACIP, and the more than 40 years of scientific
literature on the subject."
In a Winter 1986 newsletter, I wrote:
"On September 18, 1986, Forehand V. Tayloe and Stallings was settled for $1.1
million in North Carolina. A North Carolina jury had concluded that two
pediatricians were negligent in the pertussis vaccine induced brain damage of
Beau Forehand, Jr. and had awarded the boy and his parents $3.3 million. The
judge overturned the verdict and the case was appealed on behalf of Beau by the
law firm of Preiser and Wilson, of Charleston, West Virginia, before the Sept.
18 settlement ended the lawsuit."
BRIEF VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION SYSTEM (VICP) BACKGROUND:
The Forehand settlement was one of a series of DPT vaccine malpractice cases
against negligent physicians, as well as a few high profile punitive damage
awards for DPT vaccine brain damage that went against vaccine manufacturers
between 1981-1985 which persuaded Congress that both drug companies making
vaccines and doctors giving vaccines should be protected from liability for
vaccine injuries and deaths. The vaccine manufacturers threatened to leave the
country with no vaccine if they did not get protection. Doctors threatened to
stop giving vaccines if they weren't protected. Both doctors and the companies
wanted a federal compensation system that banned all vaccine injury lawsuits for
all time. We fought for protection of the right to access the civil justice
system to sue companies or doctors if the child was turned down for federal
compensation or offered too little or if it could be proved the vaccine
manufacturer engaged in criminal fraud or gross negligence in the manufacture
the vaccine or the doctor did the same in administering the vaccine.
I hope this is helpful.
Best, Barbara