Tag: cdc

New York Times does it again, pushing pro-vaccine narrative over journalism

A recent New York Times article examining Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and developments at the CDC is drawing criticism over what some describe as one-sided vaccine coverage.

The article, published March 23, relied heavily on interviews with former CDC officials and presented commonly cited claims that vaccines are safe and effective, while offering little perspective from those who question that view.

It also highlighted Kennedy’s work and advocacy, including claims that he has spread misinformation about vaccines.

The coverage pointed to a 2025 measles outbreak in a Texas community with low vaccination rates, attributing reported deaths to measles. Other accounts cited by Children’s Health Defense have raised questions about those conclusions.

The article also addressed statements about vaccine ingredients, including the use of fetal cell lines in some vaccines. Kennedy has raised concerns about the presence of human DNA fragments, which some individuals cite as a religious or ethical issue.

On autism, the article echoed the widely held view that rising diagnosis rates are largely due to expanded screening and reporting. Critics argue that explanation does not fully account for the increase.

The article further referenced concerns about what it described as “spurious harms” linked to vaccines. However, federal data show billions of dollars have been awarded through the vaccine injury compensation program.

It also cited public health positions on issues such as fluoridated drinking water and routine vaccination schedules recommended by major medical organizations.

The broader debate over vaccine mandates and informed consent was also raised, including whether individuals should have the right to decline vaccines for religious or personal reasons.

The discussion comes as vaccination rates for some vaccines have declined, religious exemptions have increased, and lawmakers consider changes to vaccine policy, including liability protections and exemption laws.

Keep reading

The CDC Was Ordered to Prove the DTaP Vaccine Didn’t Cause Autism… but Their Only Study Showed it Did

For decades, the question of whether vaccines are linked to autism has remained one of the most contentious and widely debated issues in public health.

While major health agencies have maintained that vaccines are safe, critics have continued to scrutinize the data, pointing to gaps, unanswered questions, and the historical record of how these concerns were first investigated.

A video circulating online features attorney Aaron Siri discussing the historical roots of vaccine-related debates, focusing specifically on the pertussis vaccine rather than the more commonly cited MMR vaccine.

According to the caption, Siri traces the issue back to the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which directed the Secretary of Health and Human Services to study a list of injuries that had been frequently reported in connection with the pertussis vaccine. Among those listed for investigation was autism.

In the clip, Siri describes how the Institute of Medicine (IOM) was tasked with reviewing available research on the topic. He notes that in 1991, the IOM concluded it could not determine whether the pertussis vaccine caused or did not cause autism due to a lack of sufficient studies.

He then points to a later review commissioned by the CDC and HRSA in 2012, stating that the IOM reached a similar conclusion after examining the broader body of scientific literature.

According to Siri, the IOM reported that it could not find studies demonstrating that the pertussis vaccine does not cause autism, and that the only study identified showing an association was ultimately excluded because it did not include an unvaccinated comparison group.

Keep reading

RFK Jr. Updates Guidelines for CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel to Include Risk Assessment

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on April 9 issued a revised charter for a key vaccine advisory panel, expanding its role to emphasize vaccine safety risks and widening the criteria for membership selection.

The new charter came after a judge ruled last month that previous votes from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) were invalid and blocked its new vaccine schedule for children.

The ACIP is a federal advisory committee that provides recommendations to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the use of vaccines to control diseases and helps establish immunization schedules for children and adults in the United States.

In the updated charter, signed by Kennedy on March 31 and published on April 9, the panel’s tasks now include advising the CDC on “gaps in vaccine safety research including adverse effects following vaccination.”

The charter says the ACIP will consider the “cumulative effects of vaccines and their constituent components” and engage in “re-analysis of vaccine safety and efficacy” as gaps are identified.

The new charter broadens the membership criteria of potential panelists beyond those with expertise in the use and research of vaccines and immunization practices, specifically adding toxicology and data science.

It states that members “shall be selected from authorities who are knowledgeable in the fields of medicine, vaccines, immunization practices, immunology, toxicology, pediatric neurodevelopment, epidemiology, data science, statistical analysis, health economics, recovery from serious vaccine injuries, or public health; have expertise in the use of vaccines or other immunobiologic agents in clinical practice or preventive medicine, have expertise with clinical or laboratory vaccine research, or have expertise in assessment of vaccine safety and efficacy.”

Ronald G. Nahass, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, said the revised charter appears to shift ACIP’s focus toward vaccine safety and adverse events, rather than maintaining its traditional approach that considered “the full scope of vaccine data.”

“These changes suggest that routine immunization is unsafe — adding to confusion and increasing vaccine hesitancy,” Nahass said in a statement, warning that the updated charter could lead to lower vaccine uptake.

In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services said, “The ACIP charter renewal and its publication are routine statutory requirements and do not signal any broader policy shift.”

Keep reading

HHS Expands Criteria for Embattled CDC Vaccine Panel — What Does It Mean?

Federal health officials have expanded the criteria for eligibility to serve on the panel that advised the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on vaccines, according to a notice about the committee’s renewed charter published today in the Federal Register.

The move fueled speculation that U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. may soon reconstitute the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) with members of his choosing, The New York Times reported.

Last month, a federal judge froze ACIP and disbanded its members. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy wrote that some ACIP members chosen by Kennedy last year lacked the legally required expertise in vaccines.

CHD appealed the ruling and asked the court for an emergency order to stay, or freeze, Murphy’s order.

CHD also appealed Murphy’s denial of the nonprofit’s motion to intervene in the case brought by the American Academy of Pediatrics against Kennedy and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The court has yet to rule on CHD’s request.

Now that HHS has changed the expertise criteria, Kennedy could rebuild the committee by bringing back some of the disbanded members — even without appealing the judge’s ruling, according to the Times.

Keep reading

Dr. Malone warns there’s a dangerous ‘mole’ working inside the CDC…

Could the CDC be one of the most mistrusted government institutions? Sure, that’s a bold statement, since so many of our institutions are wrought with fraud, but after all the lies and propaganda that went down with COVID, the CDC took a huge hit.

The CDC was founded in 1946. It started to control malaria during WWII, and was supposed to protect public health from infectious disease. That was the original mission. Very straightforward, practical, and easy for ordinary people to understand and support.

Those were the good ol’ days. Now look at it.

That’s why for millions of Americans, the CDC isn’t some trusted public health group. It now just another bloated political institution that allowed the COVID fiasco to destroy its last bit of credibility. These were the people who lectured the country about (useless) masks and a sketchy vaccine. They silenced dissent like medical gestapos, buried facts that didn’t mesh with their political agenda, changed the rules as they went, and acted like anyone who asked questions was some kind of dangerous Q-kook. They exposed themselves, and once that happened, a lot of Americans stopped seeing “experts” and started seeing activists in lab coats.

Trust is dropping like a sack of hammers.

The Hill:

A poll published Thursday found that Americans have lost trust in federal health institutions and are more likely to say they trust independent, professional medical organizations when it comes to advice on topics like vaccination.

The February survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania found that public trust in agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had fallen by 5 to 7 percentage points in the past year.

Public trust in these institutions had been declining prior to 2025, however, having fallen from around 75 percent to 67 percent during the final year of the Biden administration.

Keep reading

Government Agencies BANNED From Pressuring Big Tech to Censor Americans for 10 Years

In a historic win for free speech, the U.S. Surgeon General, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have been legally restricted from pressuring social media companies to silence Americans for the next decade. This comes from a formal Consent Decree in Missouri v. Biden, one of the most consequential First Amendment cases in modern history.

The agreement itself is striking. It acknowledges that, in recent years, federal officials “exerted substantial coercive pressure” on social media companies to suppress speech they did not approve of. This case began after physicians, journalists, and everyday Americans—especially those dissenting on COVID and elections—were systematically censored online. This was confirmed through discovery: a coordinated, government-backed effort to pressure Big Tech into silencing alternative viewpoints.

Now, under this decree, these entities are prohibited from threatening, coercing, or directing platforms like Facebook, X, YouTube, and others to remove or suppress lawful speech—including through algorithmic means. These restrictions will remain in place for 10 years.

Perhaps most important, the agreement explicitly states that labeling speech as “misinformation,” “disinformation,” or “malinformation” does not strip it of First Amendment protection.

This is one of the most significant blows yet to the censorship regime.

Keep reading

CDC Buried COVID Vaccine Death Data In Lancet Study, Internal Documents Reveal

Researchers with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) altered their own study on COVID-19 vaccine adverse events to downplay deaths linked to the shots, according to documents obtained by Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

CHD sued the CDC in 2023 to obtain the documents after the agency failed to respond to CHD’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The 100-page document tranche included an earlier draft of the CDC study that differed significantly from the version the authors published in June 2022 in The Lancet Infectious Diseases.

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., CHD senior research scientist, who analyzed the FOIA documents, said the CDC “severely edited” the study “to promote safety and to de-emphasize death.”

The first four words of the draft’s title were “Reactogenicity and Adverse Events.” However, the published version’s title began with “Safety of mRNA vaccines.”

Reactogenicity refers to the side effects or adverse events someone experiences after taking a vaccine or medication.

The study authors, members of the CDC’s COVID-19 Response Team, analyzed reports of adverse events following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination during the first 6 months of the vaccine rollout in the U.S.

The researchers pulled the reports from two federal vaccine safety monitoring systems — the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and V-safe.

Although there were 4,496 deaths reported to VAERS during that time frame, the study authors stripped details about the deaths from the article’s abstract.

The lead study author, Dr. Hannah Rosenblum, wrote in a comment on the draft, “Note all death results/interpretation has been removed from abstract.”

That’s a big deal, Jablonowski said — because the abstract, which appears at the top of a study and summarizes it, is typically read much more than the full body of an article.

Keep reading

The “Conspiracy Theory” That Was Too Big for the CDC to Cover Up

Remember Pfizer executive Jordan Trishton Walker?

He said, “There is something IRREGULAR about [vaccinated women’s] menstrual cycles,” adding, “people will have to investigate that.”

“Conspiracy theorists” like Naomi Wolf were called “batshit crazy” for noticing what women were screaming from the rooftops.

But the data proves they were right all along:

• 42% of women with regular cycles reported heavier bleeding than usual after vaccination

• 71% of women on birth control experienced breakthrough bleeding

• 66% of menopausal women (who should NEVER bleed) started bleeding again

• And in one major study, 78% of vaccinated women reported some form of menstrual disorder.

What did Rochelle Walensky’s CDC do? They tried to COVER IT UP.

This report reveals how far they went to silence women, bury the evidence, and who profited from it all.

Keep reading

Judge Weighs Whether To Block Vaccines Changes From CDC, RFK Jr.

A federal judge weighing whether to block changes to U.S. vaccine guidance and an advisory panel did not immediately rule Feb. 13 after hearing from attorneys representing medical groups and the government.

Lawyers for the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine and other groups told U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy during a hearing at the federal courthouse in Boston that recent changes to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine schedule and the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel violate federal law and will reduce vaccination rates.

“This is a clear and present danger to public health,” said James Oh, a lawyer for the groups.

Oh said the schedule update, which removed the broad recommendation for six childhood vaccines for diseases including rotavirus, influenza and hepatitis A, “set off alarms” in the medical community and occurred without any rational explanation from the agency.

The CDC on Jan. 5, with backing from Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., narrowed the number of vaccines routinely recommended by the childhood schedule.

Government officials said in filings that the the reasoning behind the change was in part due to an assessment carried out by senior health officials that analyzed the U.S. childhood schedule against schedules from other countries.

“The U.S. is a global outlier among peer nations in the number of target diseases included in its childhood vaccination schedule and in the total number of recommended vaccine doses,” the officials, Drs. Tracy Beth Hoeg and Martin Kulldorff, concluded.

The plaintiffs, which also include several women who say changes under Kennedy have prevented them from receiving vaccines, are challenging a series of actions. They focused on arguments for and against imposing an injunction blocking that update and the health secretary’s remaking of the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee.

Oh said that the committee is not fairly balanced because it is dominated by people who oppose vaccines, in violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and urged Murphy to block the committee’s upcoming Feb. 26–27 meeting.

Government lawyers said in a recent brief that the advisory committee members have a variety of employment histories and that the accusation they are anti-vaccine “does not accurately represent the members’ complex and nuanced perspectives and their committee voting records.”

Murphy asked during the hearing whether he could consider the “broader public health impacts” of the changes in vaccine recommendations while weighing the case.

Department of Justice lawyer Isaac Belfer told him health officials were not pursuing an anti-vaccine agenda and welcomed “spirited debate about vaccine policy.”

But he said the Department of Health and Human Services had broad authority to change policy to address a decline in public trust in vaccines following the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The court cannot substitute its judgment in place of the agency,” Belfer said.

Murphy did not immediately rule.

With the meeting upcoming, he said he “must make a decision in this case on an uncomfortably tight timeline.”

Keep reading

Powdered whole milk may be culprit in botulism outbreak that sickened dozens of babies

Powdered whole milk used to make ByHeart infant formula could be the source of contamination that led to an outbreak of botulism that sickened dozens of babies.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported the details on Friday.

Powdered whole milk may be culprit in botulism outbreak

What we know:

Testing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that bacteria in an unopened can of formula matched a sample from a sick baby — and it also matched contamination detected in samples of organic whole milk powder used to make ByHeart formula and collected and tested by the company, officials said. 

FDA testing also found contamination in a sample of whole milk powder supplied to ByHeart — and it matched the germ in a finished sample of the company’s formula.

What they’re saying:

A ByHeart official said the finding helps shed light on what has become a “watershed moment” for the company.

“We are focused on the root cause and our responsibility to act on what we’ve learned to help create a safer future for ByHeart and infant formula,” said Dr. Devon Kuehn, ByHeart’s chief scientific and medical officer.

What we don’t know:

While these results advance the agency’s understanding of the outbreak, the FDA said the findings are not conclusive, and the investigation continues “to determine the source of the contamination.”

Keep reading