Tag: covid-19

COVID Vaccine in Early Pregnancy Led to Higher Rates of Two Birth Defects

A new study from Iran found that two rare birth defects — atrioventricular septal defects and cleft palate — occurred more often in infants whose mothers received an aluminum-containing COVID-19 vaccine during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy compared with mothers who received the vaccine later or not at all.

A new study from Iran found that two rare birth defects — atrioventricular septal defects (AVSD) and cleft palate — occurred more often in infants whose mothers received a COVID-19 vaccine during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy compared with mothers who received the vaccine later or not at all.

Unlike studies conducted in the U.S. and Europe, none of the women in the Iranian study received mRNA vaccines — however, all of the COVID-19 vaccines available in Iran contain 0.25-0.50 milligrams of aluminum adjuvant, Children’s Health Defense Senior Research Scientist Karl Jablonowski told The Defender.

Shots containing aluminum are not typically recommended for pregnant women in their first trimester, Jablonowski said.

Participants in the new study received either inactivated-virus or viral-vector COVID-19 vaccines. Researchers anonymized the specific vaccine brands “due to ethical and regulatory constraints.”

Other Iranian studies indicate that China’s Covilo, also known as Sinopharm, is the most commonly administered COVID-19 vaccine in Iran. That shot, Coviran Barkat, and the India-produced Covaxin were available in Iran at the time of the study.

The study, published last month in Sage Open Medicine, analyzed 1,352 pregnancies from two Iranian cities between 2022 and 2023.

Researchers compared three groups: 303 women who received no COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy, 262 women who received at least one dose between conception and 11 weeks, 6 days of gestation — the window when fetal organs form — and 787 women vaccinated after the first trimester.

The authors said they were motivated by a gap in the research: COVID-19 vaccination is widely recommended for pregnant women worldwide, yet few studies have examined the link between early-pregnancy vaccination and birth defects.

“Research assessing whether these vaccines could influence embryonic development is crucial,” they wrote.

The authors cautioned that their findings are preliminary, based on small numbers of cases, and do not establish that vaccination caused the birth defects.

Jablonowski agreed that the study can’t establish causation but said it offers a starting point.

“It can generate hypotheses, and with this study, we’ve been handed a really good argument to start generating hypotheses,” particularly about vaccines that contain aluminum adjuvants.

Birth defects rare, but more common among women vaccinated in first trimester

Researchers evaluated birth defects detected during routine prenatal ultrasound examinations performed between 18 and 20 weeks of pregnancy between 2022 and 2023 among women in two major Iranian cities.

Demographic and pregnancy characteristics were relatively balanced across the groups, as were previous COVID-19 infection rates.

Although birth defects were uncommon overall, the researchers found that women vaccinated during the first trimester had babies who had them at higher rates.

Among the findings:

  • Six cases of AVSD, a congenital heart defect, occurred in the first trimester, compared with none in the unvaccinated group and one in the group of women who received the vaccine after the first trimester.
  • Two cases of cleft palate occurred among women vaccinated before 12 weeks, compared with no cases in either comparison group.

The study did not capture spontaneous abortions occurring before routine ultrasound screening, or pregnancies terminated before anomaly scans, the authors said.

Keep reading

Days after Biden inauguration, FBI shielded Wuhan lab collaborator from investigation after China trip

Joe Biden’s presidency began and ended with the shielding of individuals linked to decades’ worth of dangerous gain-of-function experiments.

Biden concluded his presidency by issuing former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci a blanket pardon, going back all the way to Jan. 1, 2014 — around the time the Obama administration supposedly halted funding for gain-of-function research that makes pathogens more deadly and/or more transmissible.

Years earlier — days after the geriatric Democrat was sworn in as president and at the height of the COVID pandemic — the Biden FBI requested special treatment for Peter Daszak, the disgraced British zoologist who funneled American funds to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

According to documents released on Monday by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the National Targeting Center — a division of U.S. Customs and Border Protection responsible for catching travelers and detecting cargo that threaten American security — alerted other groups within the Department of Homeland Security to Daszak’s planned trip from Qatar to New York on Feb. 5, 2021.

Keep reading

UK Covid Inquiry blatantly discounted evidence that didn’t fit their narrative

Four dissenting groups, including HART, requested core participant status for the ‘UK Covid-19 Inquiry Module 4’ on vaccines and therapeutics. This was refused but each group was asked to submit a Witness Statement under Rule 9 which we all duly did.

Each one of us was initially asked not to publish our statements, as the Inquiry team wished to publish statements contemporaneously as the hearing progressed. We were assured that our statements would be used to inform lines of questioning. However, when the inquiry hearings were postponed from July 2024 to January 2025, we set up the People’s Vaccine Inquiry and published our statements, as we were unwilling to further delay placing all this information in the public domain.

In the event, none of the authors of these statements were called to give oral evidence but even then, it was suggested that they might be published at the end of the hearings or at the time of publication of the Module 4 Report.

The Module 4 Report was published in April 2026 and our witness statements have still not appeared on the Inquiry website. We enquired as to why they had not been published and were told, “The Inquiry only publishes witness statements and documents on its website if they are formally adduced during the hearings and/or when the Chair is preparing her report.” 

In response to further questions from Dr. Ros Jones, the legal team graciously replied, “While CCVAC’s [Children’s Covid Vaccines Advisory Council] witness statement was not formally adduced, we are grateful to you for taking the time to provide it. The Inquiry does not object to CCVAC sharing its witness statement publicly, should it wish to do so.”

Hence, we are reposting all four statements here on the HART website as a public record of those who spoke out to raise multiple concerns about the safety and efficacy of these products, and the regulatory and ethical failures.

In addition, on the People’s Vaccine Inquiry website is a long and detailed multi-authored statement from Doctors for Patients UK. All the co-authors of this document are clinicians working in front-line services throughout 2020-2025, with hugely concerning testimony about the changes they were seeing in their day-to-day work from 2021 onwards. Speaking out on this subject has been at great personal risk to their careers.

The failure to publish these and other statements was covered recently in The Telegraph. Camilla Turner elicited the following from an Inquiry team spokesperson: “The inquiry publishes witness statements that are entered into evidence during or after the inquiry’s hearings. The inquiry publishes evidence that the chair considers sufficiently relevant to its hearings and reports. It does not comment on material which is not sufficiently relevant to be published.”

Please do go to the People’s Vaccine Inquiry website, where you will find other witness statements not submitted to the UK Inquiry, and also links to conferences and presentations which we held to ensure the public could access all the information which Baroness Hallett has deemed irrelevant.

We invite our readers to judge for themselves whether our evidence is irrelevant. For example, is it irrelevant that the vaccines rolled out were different products from those tested in the clinical trials, or that southern hemisphere deaths started with vaccine roll-out, not covid, or that covid infection rates and cardiovascular problems were higher in the vaccinated, or that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) missed safety signals?

Keep reading

Bipartisan Bill Would Move COVID Vaccine Injury Claims Into VICP in Biggest Reform Push in Decades

U.S. House of Representatives lawmakers on Tuesday introduced bipartisan legislation to overhaul the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), proposing to move pending COVID-19 vaccine injury claims into the program.

The Vaccine Injury Compensation Modernization Act would transfer covered COVID-19 vaccine injury claims from the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) into the VICP.

The bill would also update compensation limits, expand vaccine coverage and increase the number of officials who decide claims.

React19, a nonprofit that advocates for people injured by COVID-19 vaccines, called the proposal the “most significant effort in decades to restore fairness to America’s vaccine injury compensation system.”

“For React19’s community, the bill represents far more than a policy proposal,” the organization said. “It represents hope.”

React19 co-founder Brianne Dressen said the legislation reflects years of advocacy by people who felt they had been forgotten.

“Today is the culmination of years of relentless advocacy by people who refused to let their injuries be ignored,” Dressen said. “This legislation sends an important message: every American deserves to be heard.”

House Ways and Means Committee members Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) and Lloyd Smucker (R-Penn.) introduced the bill.

‘Everybody knows someone who has been injured now’

Wayne Rohde, a longtime vaccine injury compensation advocate and author who has written extensively about the VICP, said the bill addresses an issue lawmakers can no longer ignore.

“We need to address the injuries caused by the COVID vaccine,” Rohde told The Defender. “If we’re going to have a viable vaccine policy in the U.S., if we do not compensate those who have been injured, [then in] the next pandemic, you will see a complete withdrawal from the public to accept any countermeasures because everybody knows someone who has been injured now.”

At the same time, Rohde said he has reservations about moving COVID-19 vaccines into the VICP because the legislation could bring additional vaccines developed with similar mRNA technology into the program.

“I have concerns about the technology used to develop it, and that it will allow traditional vaccine manufacturers to use that same technology for other vaccines covered in the program,” he said.

He also noted that the bill would expand VICP coverage to additional adult vaccines.

“If they add RSV, shingles and dengue, what that tells me is that the next vaccine down the pike will be swept into program, too,” Rohde said.

The VICP currently covers only those vaccines the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends for routine administration to children and pregnant women.

Keep reading

What are these ‘calamari-like’ clots that embalmers keep finding?

Retired Air Force Major Thomas Haviland’s peer-reviewed research exposes a persistent phenomenon that the mainstream medical establishment continues to ignore.

A new peer-reviewed paper published July 1 in the International Journal of Innovative Research and Medical Science breaks down what embalmers across English-speaking countries have discovered in recent years: tough, rubbery, white fibrous clots appearing in a significant percentage of bodies long after the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccine rollout.

Thomas Haviland, a retired U.S. Air Force Major, began investigating this phenomenon after watching the 2022 documentary Died Suddenly. He has since conducted annual surveys of embalmers in the United States, Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand. His latest analysis of 808 responses from 2022 through 2025 found that 75% of embalmers reported seeing the unusual clots.

“The embalmers are seeing these white fibrous clots in an average of 23% of their corpses,” Haviland stated.

A separate, more recent, 2026 survey of Tennessee embalmers showed roughly 70% still observing the clots in 18% of cases, according to Haviland.

Notably, these structures differ sharply from clots seen before 2020. “Many of these embalmers have 20 or 30 years of experience, never saw this phenomenon before,” Haviland explained.

“Prior to COVID, they would see two types of clots. What’s called grape jelly clots… And they also see what’s called chicken fat clots… Much, much different than these large white fibrous clots, which are really tough and rubbery and hard to break.”

Haviland also shared the account of an endovascular specialist and cardiologist in Jacksonville, Florida, who contacted him about removing similar clots from living patients at his lab. “He actually refers to the clots as devious clots,” Haviland said. After sharing images and angiograms, the doctor emailed in March 2024 to tell Tom that he had been instructed to terminate communication immediately.

“Somebody, his hospital administrator probably got to him, right? Told him to shut up, stop talking about this, or else we’ll go after your medical license,” Haviland observed. “So it’s a shame. That’s what’s happening. People are staying silent about this when they should be speaking out.”

Laboratory tests on the clots, including Raman spectroscopy and others, point to the spike protein — whether from the virus, modified RNA injections, or both — sticking to a blood protein called fibrinogen and creating unusual structures. “It makes that fibrinogen all misfolded and twisted… So then it becomes almost impossible to break down the clot. It becomes this rubbery polymer instead,” Haviland said.

Despite repeated submissions of survey results to the FDA, CDC, and NIH, and the publication of supporting papers, major health agencies and institutions including the Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Johns Hopkins, and Stanford have shown no interest in obtaining samples for further study.

Although Haviland’s initial preprint was rejected by one platform as “not novel enough,” four years later, embalmers continue to report the never-before-seen clots into 2026.

Haviland and others behind his research are calling for forensic pathologists and independent researchers to examine the structures directly and for congressional hearings to investigate what embalmers have been documenting for years.

Keep reading

Here’s why Fauci can’t chicken out and plead the ‘Fifth’ during upcoming hearing…

Anthony Fauci thinks Biden’s last-minute “autopen” pardon is his golden parachute.

But he could be very, very wrong.

In reality, that so-called pardon might turn out to be a pair of golden handcuffs instead.

Americans have sat back and watched Fauci play a lot of games. He’s dodged, danced, redefined words, split a lot of hairs, and acted like the rest of the country (and the world) was way too stupid to understand what really went down during the COVID circus. He became the face of the “pandemic” response, and according to the media and liberals, he was the patron saint of “trust the science.”

Who can forget these absurd candles?

As you likely know by now, Senator Rand Paul says Fauci will testify publicly before his committee on July 29th, and this time, the “fifth” escape hatch might not be so easy to open…

That’s because Biden gave Fauci that sweeping preemptive “autopen” pardon before leaving office. The pardon was supposed to protect him. But legally, it screws up Fauci’s ability to sit there, twiddle his thumbs, and plead the Fifth when the questions get uncomfortable.

A lot of Americans believe Fauci should’ve faced real legal consequences a long time ago for what he did to humanity. They look at COVID, the lockdowns, deaths, mandates, ruined businesses, lost years, and all the sketchy questions about Wuhan and the endless array of smug lectures from “experts,” and they don’t see a humble public servant who deserves yet another theatrical political hearing… they see a criminal.

A criminal who got protected.

And let’s be honest here, a blanket pardon doesn’t exactly scream “innocence,” does it? Normal people see something like that and ask the obvious question: if nobody did anything wrong, why did Biden’s autopen feel the need to pardon him before anyone was even charged with anything?

And again, that’s what makes this hearing interesting.

Because if Fauci can’t hide behind the Fifth, then he may be forced into a very ugly corner. He can tell the truth or risk lying to Congress (again). And if Republicans actually have the balls to press hard, follow up, and refuse to let him bluster his way through the hearing, this could become more than another useless Swamp show.

Keep reading

The Lockdown Disaster Must Not Be Forgiven: Massive European Study Vindicates Sweden’s Common-Sense Pandemic Response

We’re now rapidly approaching the six-year anniversary of “15 Days to Slow the Spread.”

That policy has to have been one of the most disastrous in world history, created by “experts” who took all established pre-pandemic planning documents and tossed them out the window at the first opportunity.

It was a policy based on inaccurate reports out of China, which claimed that their lockdowns effectively stamped out transmission of covid-19 within a matter of days.

It was a policy that ignored solid research – from established epidemiologists like Dr. Jay Bhattacharya – which found that the coronavirus had already spread much more widely than previously realised.

It must be noted forever that lockdowns and the associated mask mandates, vaccine passports and school closures continued in some places for several years. The ramifications of those wretched policies will be quite literally endless. It’s not an exaggeration to say that lockdowns, our policies and responses have quite literally changed the course of world history.

One would think that there would definitely be a concerted effort to understand whether such policies were effective or not. Whether approaching respiratory viruses with authoritarian crackdowns on businesses and schools was necessary to save lives.

Yet six years later, there’s unfortunately very little interest in examining those questions. And when you understand the data from Sweden, you will see exactly why.

Study on Swedish Approach to Covid Shows Lockdowns Didn’t Work

A study published in PubMed examined the Swedish approach to covid policy, relative to its European counterparts, primarily because Sweden did not rely on lockdowns in response to the pandemic, but instead used “voluntary and sustainable mitigation recommendations,” the study says.

Despite a “majority of Swedes” supporting those policies, “this approach faced rapid and continuous criticism.”

That criticism came primarily from public health figures such as, surprise, surprise, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who criticised Sweden repeatedly for going against the herd.

“You’ve compared us to Sweden, and there are a lot of differences,” he said during a Senate Committee hearing in September 2020. “But compare Sweden’s death rate to other comparable Scandinavian countries. It’s worse. So, I don’t think it’s appropriate to compare Sweden with us.”

“If you look at Sweden, they are in some trouble,” Fauci claimed on Good Morning America in late 2020. “They are starting to see that their death rate is much higher than the surrounding countries of Norway, Denmark, and Finland … They’re starting to see now that they’re having to rethink some of the things they did.”

This was, of course, not true. They did not “rethink” their strategy of light-touch recommendations over lockdowns. And comparing Sweden exclusively to its neighbours is an absurd misdirection that no other country was subjected to. But Fauci, obviously never one for honesty or intellectual integrity, represented many public health figures who were anxious to see Sweden fail.

Yet as this research shows, reality was precisely the opposite.

The study explains that Sweden received criticism for “not legally enforcing mask-wearing in public spaces,” as well as keeping schools open and “being too permissive” with its policies. All the things that we were told were necessary to stop covid and save lives. The researchers tested these statements using excess mortality data and stringency indices to compare Sweden across the whole of Europe, not just its neighbours.

They chose excess mortality because, unlike covid-specific measurements, it’s less subject to bias, differences in testing, and counting, and individual definitions of covid-caused outcomes. It also accounts for deaths that “could potentially be indirectly attributed to the negative effects of strict lockdown measures and the overall strain on healthcare systems, leading to reduced access to healthcare for other diseases, among other factors.”

Turns out that what they discovered was that Sweden vastly outperformed the rest of Europe from 2020-2022, with outcomes that were remarkably similar to the other Nordic countries.

“Among 42 European countries, the cumulative excess all-cause mortality from January 2020 to December 2022 ranged from 46 (Luxembourg) to 1,080 (Bulgaria) deaths per 100,000 inhabitants, with a median of 351/100,000,” they write. “In Sweden, the excess mortality rate of 158/100,000 was among the lowest, ranked 37th among 42 countries, and not very different from other Nordic countries: Norway (129), Denmark (97), and Finland (228).”Björkman A, Gisslén M, Gullberg M, Ludvigsson J. The Swedish COVID-19 approach: a scientific dialogue on mitigation policies. Front Public Health. 2023 Jul 20;11:1206732. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1206732. PMID: 37546333; PMCID: PMC10399217.

So why did Sweden underperform in 2020 relative to its neighbours? Likely due, as the study explains, to “mortality displacement due to low all-cause mortality in 2019,” as well as “poorly organised older adult care structures.”

What does this mean? Essentially, there were significantly fewer deaths from all causes in Sweden in 2019, meaning there were more extremely elderly people alive in 2020 who were susceptible to severe outcomes from covid. This is reflected in the massive age gradient with covid-associated deaths. In Sweden, “~40% of the covid-19-associated deaths were among patients in nursing homes,” the study says, “and 67% of all covid-19 deaths were among individuals above 80 years of age, representing 10% of all deaths in that age group.”

For younger age groups, covid was mostly a non-issue. “covid-19 deaths below 50 years of age represented only 1.2% of all covid deaths, including 21 individuals below 20 years of age, mostly with underlying co-morbidities, representing 1% of all deaths in that age group.”

Effectively, covid ravaged extremely elderly people, while those under 50, despite the lack of mask mandates and lockdowns, saw very limited impact.

Keep reading

The COVID Reckoning That Never Came

The COVID Reckoning That Never Came… And the Silence That Proves the Psyop

Over the last several years I have been posting nonstop on X about the same nightmares we’ve been living through…the COVID psyop, the experimental mRNA shots, the mandates that destroyed lives, the injuries, the excess deaths, and the relentless propaganda machine that tried to silence anyone who noticed the bodies piling up. I have watched it all in real time: the fear porn, the goalpost moving, the “safe and effective” lies repeated like gospel while real-world data told a different story.

Now we have fresh, documented revelations that should have blown the lid off of everything. Instead? Crickets from the media and, more disappointingly, from the current administration that promised accountability.

Senator Ron Johnson dropped another devastating report and hearing in late April 2026: “Unmasked: How Biden Health Officials Purposely Turned a Blind Eye Toward COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals.” Internal records show FDA officials knew their VAERS monitoring was inadequate to say least. They had better data-mining tools ready to flag clear safety signals: cardiac deaths, strokes, pulmonary issues, Bell’s palsy but they chose not to use them. Why? To avoid “vaccine hesitancy.”

This was not screw-up territory. It was deliberate. Vaccine-injured people sat across from Peter Marks and other top FDA brass begging for acknowledgment. They got stonewalled. Johnson rightly calls this one of the biggest scandals in his decades in public service. Then in early June he held another hearing exposing potential cancer links to the mRNA shots and the systematic suppression of critical studies. Same playbook: inconvenient science gets buried or attacked.

Around the same time, Tulsi Gabbard, in one of her final moves as DNI, declassified documents laying out Fauci’s role in funding gain-of-function research at Wuhan, the lab-leak cover-up, the intelligence manipulation, and the retaliation against truth-tellers. Millions of taxpayer dollars funneled into risky biolabs, followed by the full narrative-control machine kicking in to blame nature instead of the obvious.

These are not anonymous X threads. This is a sitting Senator with subpoena power and the former Director of National Intelligence dropping official records.

So where is the firestorm? Where are the front-page exposés, the prime-time specials, the demands for real hearings and prosecutions? In 1976 the swine flu vaccine was pulled after 25 deaths and 500 cases of Guillain Barre Syndrome. In the covid shot era we have approximately 39,000 deaths reported to VAERS following the shot. Apparently lives got cheaper over the last 50 years. The legacy media has mostly ignored it, downplayed it, or run the usual “right-wing conspiracy” dismissals. Paid to lie… and crickets on recent FDA COVID vax revelations. Their complicity is not an understatement, rather it was essential to the entire psyop.

Even more frustrating is the relative silence from the current Trump administration. After years of vowing to expose the lies and drain the swamp on the pandemic response, these revelations land and… not much follow-through. No aggressive push for accountability. No sustained public reckoning for the officials who covered up safety signals or manipulated the origins story. That silence hits hard. Additionally the vaccines are still on the market and this administration is now complicit. What an epic failure!

Keep reading

Court rules Ontario violated Charter by censoring Covid criticism on billboard

The Ontario government tried to silence a citizen for criticizing its Covid-19 response. Now a court has ruled it broke the Constitution.

The Ontario Divisional Court has found the Ontario Ministry of Transportation violated the Charter rights of George Katerberg by preventing him from displaying a political billboard criticizing public officials over their handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Katerberg was represented by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), whose constitutional lawyer Chris Fleury successfully argued that the Ministry’s actions violated section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which protects freedom of expression.

Katerberg’s billboard, erected along Highway 17 near Thessalon, featured photographs of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Premier Doug Ford, former Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam and other officials above the messages, “They knowingly lied about safety and stopping transmission” and “Canadians demand accountability.”

The Ministry first demanded the sign be removed after claiming one image on the billboard was linked to white supremacy. Katerberg immediately removed the disputed image, explaining it was inspired by Pink Floyd’s The Wall, and submitted a revised version. The Ministry then shifted its reasoning, claiming the billboard promoted hatred.

When that justification failed, the government changed the rules instead.

After Katerberg launched his Charter challenge, the Ministry amended its Highway Corridor Management Manual in 2025 to broadly prohibit political messaging on billboards along certain northern Ontario highways. It then relied on that newly created policy to reject the sign once again.

The Divisional Court wasn’t persuaded.

Justice Schreck found there was “no rational connection” between prohibiting political speech while allowing commercial advertising on the very same highways. The Court declared the Ministry’s policy unconstitutional, quashed its decision, and ordered the application to be reconsidered.

The Court also criticized the Ministry’s “shifting justifications” throughout the dispute, making clear the case was never about whether Katerberg’s views on Covid-19 were right or wrong. It was about whether the government could censor political speech because it disliked the message.

Following the ruling, JCCF lawyer Chris Fleury called the decision “a welcome affirmation of the importance of political expression,” saying governments cannot ban political speech while allowing businesses to advertise beside the same roads.

Keep reading

RFK Jr. Plans To Create A List Of Injuries Caused By COVID-19 Vaccines

Health officials are proposing a plan to clarify which COVID-19 vaccine side effects would be eligible for government financial compensation, according to a new notice.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and one of its divisions said in a description of a proposed rule released on July 1 that they plan to establish an injury table for COVID-19 vaccines through the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).

“The Table will list and explain injuries that, based on compelling, reliable, valid, medical, and scientific evidence, are presumed to be caused by covered COVID-19 countermeasures, and set forth the time periods in which the onset of these injuries must occur after the administration or use of these covered COVID-19 countermeasures,” a summary of the rule, which has not been made public, stated.

COVID-19 vaccines fall under the CICP because previous health secretaries declared and extended emergency declarations for COVID-19, which opened up the option of emergency clearance of vaccines and other countermeasures under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who just announced that he was ending the emergency declaration, is authorized under the declarations to provide benefits to people injured by the vaccines under the act, HHS officials noted in the proposal summary.

“Under the leadership of Secretary Kennedy, HHS is restoring transparency and accountability because the American people deserve clear, evidence-based information about both the benefits and the known risks associated with medical countermeasures,” an HHS spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email.

The spokesperson said that more information will be available when the notice is published in the Federal Register.

Aaron Siri, Kennedy’s former lawyer, wrote to Kennedy in 2025, urging him to create a COVID-19 vaccine-injury table. He pointed to the readiness and preparedness law, which states that the health secretary “shall by regulation establish a table identifying covered injuries that shall be presumed to be directly caused by the administration or use of a covered countermeasure.”

An injury table would help people injured by vaccines apply successfully to the congressionally created program, which requires “compelling, reliable, valid, medical, and scientific evidence” that an injury was a direct result of a countermeasure, Siri wrote on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network, which advocates for government transparency and change.

“A well-constructed injury table is needed for the CICP,” Richard Hughes IV, a former Moderna executive who is representing health groups in litigation against the administration that has halted some of its changes to vaccine guidance, told The Epoch Times in an email. “The real question is whether this administration would promulgate such a table or weaponize it to further platform misinformation.“

Dr. Joel Wallskog, who suffered the neurological disorder transverse myelitis and other issues from COVID-19 vaccination and has sued the government over the CICP, told The Epoch Times in an email that the HHS proposal “is more appearance than substance.”

“It appears to do little more than streamline the process for the relatively small number of individuals whose injuries – primarily anaphylaxis and myocarditis/pericarditis – are already recognized under the current system,” added Wallskog, also the co-chair of the React19 nonprofit, which offers support to people injured by COVID-19 vaccines. “For everyone else who has been denied, nothing changes.”

Keep reading