The story is distributed that in France a man died of the consequences of vaccination, having previously insured his life. At the same time, the court sided with an insurance company that refuses to pay relatives to compensation and justifying his position by the use of an experimental vaccine, in fact, equal to suicide. We decided to find out what really happened.

This story distributes in many Russian -speaking Media, about her also They tell Users social networks. She appeared Even on some specialized resources dedicated to insurance business. Bring Also, a quote from a court decision: "Side effects of an experimental vaccine indulge in publicity, and the deceased could not not know about existing risks when he voluntarily agreed to the vaccine." Many resources indicate source of information material Unser Mitteleuropa German -language publication, as well as refer to words Family lawyer. At the same time, there is no information about the name of the deceased or what was the name of the judge who made this decision in the text.

The official website of the administration of the French Republic gives Explanationsunder what circumstances the death of the insured does not become an insured event and does not entail the payment of compensation to the beneficiary. There are only two such conditions: if the insured during the first year of insurance commits suicide or if the beneficiary is found guilty of the murder of the insured person. In clarification also Given Link to the regulatory framework, in particular, articles L132-7 and L132-24 of section I of the French insurance code. There is no information that vaccination or use of experimental therapy will also cancel the insurance policy on the official website of the republic. That is, the replicated media history already contradicts the legislation of the country. However, the French factor from the "20 minutes" additionally Turned In the French Federation of insurers (FFA). There the information also refuted: “Such a item does not exist. The board of trustees regrets this attempt to misinform citizens regarding such an important topic of public healthcare as vaccination, and recalls that insurance contracts do not provide for exceptions related to the consequences of vaccination. ”

It is interesting that the media, replicating this, as we have already found out, does not correspond to reality, refer to the family lawyer Carlo Alberto Brusu. Separately Approvedthat he "published the case file in social networks and expressed his indignation with such a decision." A lawyer with that name really exists And holds a position president CAB ASSOCIS lawyer. At the same time, according to information on the official website, the company does not deal with insurance law. On the site also indicated link to the company's Facebook page, and in the first The post of the page noted And the personal page of Carlo Alberto Broes. It was not possible to find any comments regarding the described story on the page. However, judging by the materials of Facebook pages, he could well be the acting person in this story: he supports anti-Vaccinator rhetoric, in particular repostating famous Conspirologist Luke Montagnewhose statements more than once They sorted it out us and ours colleagues-factory.

The story with the site - the primary source of information about the trial. The Unser Mitteleuropa portal actively spreads others fakes, for example, we have examined earlier myth The fact that the vaccine can cause outdoor diseases. Also at his Facebook page Blocked The ability to place advertising due to violation of the community rules. At the same time, the site mimifies under a fabula resource, as it states that it adheres to the principles of facts and the openness of sources.

Interestingly, the Unser Mitteleuropa resource, judging by Whois, registered In Russia in March 2016, through Reg.ru service, and is located in Poland.

Thus, the story of the death of a man from a vaccine recognized by the court of suicide is a fake, widespread by an unauthorized conspiracyological resource. In other open sources there are no confirming details, the name of the deceased is unknown, there is no mention in which court the meeting took place when and who was the judge. Moreover, the official bodies of France completely refute the incident itself.