Tag: covid-19

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

Fauci: The Public Servant from Hell

If the allegations put forward by Tulsi Gabbard, former Director of National Intelligence, prove to be substantially true, Dr. Anthony Fauci’s legacy will be remembered as one of the greatest betrayals of the public trust in modern American history.

For four decades, Fauci occupied one of the most influential positions in the federal government. As Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), he controlled billions of taxpayer dollars, directed research priorities, advised presidents of both parties, and enjoyed a level of public credibility rarely afforded to unelected bureaucrats. Americans were encouraged to trust him — not because he was elected, but because he was presented as the embodiment of objective science.

That trust is precisely what makes the controversies surrounding his tenure so consequential. Fauci’s history in this position of power is one that should not be overlooked. That is why Senator Rand Paul, as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, issued a subpoena compelling Fauci to testify before Congress. Fauci had declined to appear voluntarily. 

Fauci is no stranger to controversy. As director of NIAID (1984–2022), he oversaw the institute that funded much of the nation’s HIV/AIDS research. For two decades, beginning in 1985, NIAID conducted research involving the treatment of society’s most vulnerable children during the AIDS epidemic. Investigative journalist Liam Scheff alleged that HIV-positive foster children and orphans were enrolled in experimental drug trials without adequate informed consent or independent advocacy. Official reviews raised legitimate ethical concerns about research involving vulnerable children.

Critics alleged that the treatment children received was brutal and unethical, with staff and doctors prioritizing trial compliance over the children’s well-being. Scheff reported that some children experienced significant side effects, and those who resisted the drugs were held down and force-fed. It is also on record that persistent refusers underwent surgical insertion of gastric (stomach) tubes for direct drug delivery. One reason this policy faced little resistance is that the foster children had no parents protecting their interests.

But this wasn’t the only experimentation under Fauci that exploited a vulnerable population.

Keep reading

Corrupt Illinois Democrat State Rep and County Clerk Husband INDICTED In Mass NGO Kickback and Fraud Scheme — Just Weeks After Daughter Busted For COVID Fraud

Another corrupt Illinois Democrat family caught with their hands in the till.

Urbana Democrat State Representative Carol Ammons and her husband, Champaign County Clerk Aaron Ammons, were indicted Tuesday by a federal grand jury on multiple felony counts including wire fraud, false statements, and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

The indictment lays out a brazen scheme where Ammons allegedly used her campaign committee, Friends of Carol Ammons, to issue overpayments and then took cash kickbacks disguised as “gifts.”

At the same time, she used her position as a state lawmaker to steer massive state grants to friendly nonprofits that then put her daughter Titianna Ammons on the payroll, WCIA reported.

According to the federal indictment:

  • Carol Ammons allegedly caused campaign funds to be paid to herself and family members through excess checks and then received cash kickbacks to hide the scheme. She also falsely reported expenditures to the Illinois State Board of Elections.
  • She helped secure over $1.6 million in state grants for nonprofits including:
    • Bridgewater Sullivan Community Life Center ($612,000 grant) — where daughter Titianna was paid more than $60,000 as Program Director (Ammons even helped draft her employment contract).
    • Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center (over $1 million in grants) — where Titianna was paid nearly $10,000 as a digital marketing coordinator.
    • Another grant to Hood Vote that also funneled money to the daughter.

Prosecutors say Ammons and her daughter received financial benefits in excess of $100,000 through this web of campaign misuse and grant steering between 2017 and roughly 2023.

Keep reading

Accountability for the Vaccine-Injured: A Senator Steps Up

Five years is a significant milestone in any chronic illness. People can endure extraordinary physical pain, financial hardship, and emotional suffering if they that believe recovery is just around the corner. Hope often carries them through.

But after five years, hope itself begins to erode.

Savings have been exhausted. Careers have been interrupted or lost. Retirement plans have disappeared. Marriages have been strained by the relentless burden of chronic illness and caregiving. Medical appointments that once promised answers begin to feel repetitive and futile.

Gradually, the realization sets in that life may never return to what it once was. Temporary hardship becomes permanent reality. When physical suffering is compounded by financial ruin, social isolation, and the loss of future expectations, despair can become overwhelming.

For thousands of Americans permanently harmed during the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, that five-year milestone is arriving now.

Over the past several months, a disturbing number of Covid-19 vaccine-injured individuals have either taken their own lives or survived suicide attempts. As a board member of React19, a nonprofit dedicated to supporting those injured by the Covid-19 vaccines, I have come to know many of these stories personally. These are not statistics. They are husbands, wives, mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters who believed that if they persevered long enough, help would eventually arrive.

For many, it never did.

What made their suffering especially devastating was not only the physical injury itself, but years spent feeling invisible. Many lost careers, homes, and financial security. Others depleted retirement savings or accumulated overwhelming medical debt. Almost all experienced some combination of disbelief, dismissal, and isolation. After years of being told their injuries were unlikely, unrelated, or simply impossible, many began to question whether anyone in authority would ever acknowledge what had happened.

Against that backdrop, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations’ recent interim report, Failure to Warn: How Federal Health Agencies Downplayed and Hid Myocarditis and Other Adverse Events Associated with the Covid-19 Vaccines, represents an important turning point.

Drawing on internal government records and documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the report concludes that federal health officials delayed acknowledging vaccine safety signals, withheld important information from the public, failed to respond fully to Congressional oversight, and repeatedly placed concerns about preserving public confidence above full transparency.

For the vaccine-injured community, that public acknowledgment matters. For the first time, many who were dismissed for years can point to official government findings confirming that safety concerns existed, were recognized internally, and were not fully communicated to the public.

Yet transparency alone is not enough.

Keep reading

Accountability for the Vaccine-Injured: A Senator Steps Up

Five years is a significant milestone in any chronic illness. People can endure extraordinary physical pain, financial hardship, and emotional suffering if they that believe recovery is just around the corner. Hope often carries them through.

But after five years, hope itself begins to erode.

Savings have been exhausted. Careers have been interrupted or lost. Retirement plans have disappeared. Marriages have been strained by the relentless burden of chronic illness and caregiving. Medical appointments that once promised answers begin to feel repetitive and futile.

Gradually, the realization sets in that life may never return to what it once was. Temporary hardship becomes permanent reality. When physical suffering is compounded by financial ruin, social isolation, and the loss of future expectations, despair can become overwhelming.

For thousands of Americans permanently harmed during the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, that five-year milestone is arriving now.

Over the past several months, a disturbing number of Covid-19 vaccine-injured individuals have either taken their own lives or survived suicide attempts. As a board member of React19, a nonprofit dedicated to supporting those injured by the Covid-19 vaccines, I have come to know many of these stories personally. These are not statistics. They are husbands, wives, mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters who believed that if they persevered long enough, help would eventually arrive.

For many, it never did.

What made their suffering especially devastating was not only the physical injury itself, but years spent feeling invisible. Many lost careers, homes, and financial security. Others depleted retirement savings or accumulated overwhelming medical debt. Almost all experienced some combination of disbelief, dismissal, and isolation. After years of being told their injuries were unlikely, unrelated, or simply impossible, many began to question whether anyone in authority would ever acknowledge what had happened.

Against that backdrop, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations’ recent interim report, Failure to Warn: How Federal Health Agencies Downplayed and Hid Myocarditis and Other Adverse Events Associated with the Covid-19 Vaccines, represents an important turning point.

Drawing on internal government records and documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the report concludes that federal health officials delayed acknowledging vaccine safety signals, withheld important information from the public, failed to respond fully to Congressional oversight, and repeatedly placed concerns about preserving public confidence above full transparency.

For the vaccine-injured community, that public acknowledgment matters. For the first time, many who were dismissed for years can point to official government findings confirming that safety concerns existed, were recognized internally, and were not fully communicated to the public.

Yet transparency alone is not enough.

A report that documents misconduct but produces no consequences may satisfy historians, but it offers little comfort to those whose lives were permanently altered by the conduct it describes. Facts matter. Investigations matter. But they matter most when they lead to accountability.

Fortunately, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), the chairman of the Subcommittee, has made clear that this report is not the end of his work—it is the beginning.

Throughout the pandemic and the years that followed, Senator Johnson has courageously pressed federal agencies for answers, demanded documents, convened hearings, and, perhaps most importantly, gave Covid-19 vaccine-injured Americans an opportunity to tell their stories publicly. His message has remained remarkably consistent: transparency is essential, but transparency must ultimately be followed by accountability.

That accountability cannot stop with institutions.

Keep reading

Kennedy Ends Covid EUA Declarations, but PREP Act Shield Remains

Seven years after Washington rushed poorly tested drugs, shots, and devices into the fight against a new coronavirus — spending billions and killing and injuring millions in the process — it has finally discovered that the emergency is over.

Well … mostly.

Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has now moved to terminate the Covid-19 emergency use authorization (EUA) declarations for drugs, biological products, and medical devices.

But as long as the PREP Act shield remains in place, the move looks less like accountability and more like a marketing exercise dressed up as a ceremonial retirement of paperwork.

Terminating EUAs

HHS described the move as a return to normal order.

The agency said the circumstances that justified those emergency authorities for Covid products “no longer exist.”

It also said the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved, cleared, and licensed products are now widely available through ordinary regulatory channels.

Kennedy stated:

By ending these COVID-19 emergency use authorization declarations, we’re reinforcing public confidence that emergency authorities are temporary and targeted.

That sounds like a clean break. It is not.

The termination does not take effect immediately. The declaration for drugs and biological products will terminate 12 months after Kennedy’s determination. The medical device declarations will terminate after 180 days. HHS said the delay will allow manufacturers, healthcare systems, distributors, and patients to move away from products authorized solely under Covid EUA declarations.

In other words, the emergency is over, but only after a courtesy period for the industries that built businesses around it.

The FDA, the agency within HHS responsible for reviewing and regulating drugs, vaccines, biological products, and medical devices, has long treated the Covid EUA structure as separate from the formal public health emergency. When the Covid public health emergency ended in May 2023, FDA said that step did not end existing EUAs. It also said the agency could continue issuing new EUAs if the legal criteria were met.

Kennedy’s action now starts the clock on that separate authority. To understand what that means, it helps to separate the headline from the legal machinery underneath it.

What HHS Actually Terminated

The key phrase is “EUA declarations.”

Kennedy did not simply revoke every Covid product authorization. He terminated the underlying emergency declarations that allowed FDA to issue and maintain EUAs for broad categories of Covid products.

Under federal law, HHS first makes an EUA declaration. FDA then uses that declaration to authorize specific products for emergency use. Those products can include unapproved drugs, biological products, devices, or unapproved uses of approved products. FDA describes EUA authority as a tool for making medical countermeasures available during “chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats including infectious diseases.”

Once the HHS secretary terminates the declaration, EUAs based on that declaration generally cease to be in effect. FDA also loses the ability to issue new EUAs under that terminated declaration. The law, however, allows transition periods and certain continued use of products already distributed.

That is the actual legal effect.

It winds down the emergency authorization lane. But it has limits. It does not automatically punish anyone for using that lane. It neither creates liability for injuries nor compensates the injured. And it does not remove products that already moved into traditional approval, clearance, or licensure.

Keep reading

The Last Nurse Standing

There are court cases that arrive dressed as employment disputes but carry the weight of an era. Adams et al. v. Mass General Brigham is one of them.

On paper, it is a federal discrimination case in Boston involving three remaining plaintiffs, Tyler Adams, Michelle Orfanos, and Jamie Steverman, against Mass General Brigham, the most powerful hospital system in Massachusetts. In reality, it is a post-pandemic reckoning over institutional power, religious liberty, scientific certainty, workplace coercion, and who gets to write the official history of the mandate years.

Mass General Brigham is not some minor regional employer. It is the largest private employer in Massachusetts, a Harvard-affiliated medical empire with tens of thousands of employees and annual revenue measured in the tens of billions. Its own public materials describe the system as having 82,000 employees and $23 billion in annual revenue, while its CEO profile states that Anne Klibanski leads an 85,000-employee system with $22 billion in revenue and $2.7 billion in annual research funding.

In June 2021, MGB announced that all 80,000 employees would be required to receive a COVID-19 vaccine once the FDA granted approval to one of the vaccines. “The evidence of COVID-19 vaccine safety and effectiveness is overwhelming,” Klibanski said in the announcement. Employees, MGB stated, would be able to request medical and religious exemptions.

That promise, that exemptions existed, is where the story begins.

More than 2,400 employees sought exemptions. MGB granted only 234. In a 2023 federal order, Judge F. Dennis Saylor wrote that MGB had “effectively made a determination that some level of risk, eventually involving 234 unvaccinated individuals out of approximately 93,600 employees… was tolerable.”

For the plaintiffs, that fact is not incidental. It is central. Their argument is not that MGB granted no exemptions. Their argument is that MGB granted some exemptions while allegedly denying others through a secretive, discriminatory, and uneven process that favored certain religions and disfavored others.

The most vivid remaining face of that fight is Michelle Orfanos, a registered nurse who had worked for MGB since 2012. According to her state-court complaint, Orfanos worked throughout the pandemic unvaccinated, including as a homecare nurse and as a volunteer in the Boston COVID field hospital. She says she had received religious exemptions to flu vaccines for years, only to have her COVID religious exemption denied in 2021, resulting in her termination.

Then came the second firing.

Keep reading

HHS Terminates the COVID-19 Emergency Use Authorization Declarations Covering mRNA Shots, Drugs, and Biologics

Today, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services finally moved to terminate the COVID-19 Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) declarations that have been in place since the early months of the pandemic.

The termination is not immediate. HHS has established a transition period of up to 12 months for EUA drugs and biologics and 180 days for EUA medical devices. According to the agency, the phased wind-down is intended to avoid disruptions and allow manufacturers and healthcare systems time to transition away from the emergency framework.

These declarations formed the legal foundation for the authorization of COVID-19 mRNA injections, monoclonal antibodies, antiviral drugs, diagnostic tests, ventilators, personal protective equipment, and numerous other medical products deployed during the pandemic response.

Unfortunately, the deadly Pfizer and Moderna mRNA injections are already fully FDA approved, meaning this action will have little practical effect on their continued use. The emergency framework that enabled their rapid rollout is finally being dismantled, but the products themselves have already moved beyond it.

While today’s announcement marks the formal beginning of the end of the COVID EUA era, it does not produce the outcome many of us had hoped for, including but not limited to the removal of mRNA products from the market.

Keep reading

Europe’s Highest Court Rules Against Military Member in COVID Vaccine Mandate Case

A military officer failed to convince Europe’s highest court that Italy’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for military members discriminated against military members because the mandate didn’t also apply to civilian employees.

The officer, identified by the initials B.G., served in Italy’s Army Engineer Corps. He was suspended without pay in January 2022 for refusing to comply with the mandate.

Earlier this month, the European Court of Justice ruled that opposition to vaccine mandates based on policy disagreement, rather than sincerely held belief, is not protected under European Union (EU) anti-discrimination law.

B.G. challenged his suspension, arguing that regular COVID-19 tests were an acceptable alternative to compulsory vaccination and that workers in other sectors were given this choice.

Italy’s Constitutional Court ruled against him, finding that the military vaccine mandate was an appropriate measure for military personnel.

On appeal, Italy’s Council of State, the country’s highest administrative appeals court, asked the European Court of Justice to clarify several legal questions.

The European Court of Justice found that B.G. did not demonstrate a sincerely held religious, spiritual or philosophical belief protected under EU law.

“Judges found BG was not expressing a protected religious, philosophical or spiritual belief but challenging Italy’s public health policy,” Courthouse News reported. His objections “focused on vaccine effectiveness, possible side effects, testing as an alternative and the way the mandate was implemented.”

In its ruling, the European Court of Justice wrote that B.G. “does not seek to oppose the compulsory vaccination at issue in the main proceedings on the basis of his own beliefs, but to challenge, as such, the choices made by the Italian authorities in the field of public health.”

Those objections “constitute opinions” on public health, and as such, are not protected. Aside from sincerely held beliefs, EU law also protects against discrimination based on age, disability or sexual orientation.

Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst called the ruling “unfortunate and disappointing,” as the legal protection of personal beliefs in the EU “appears to be an empty shell.”

Keep reading

New Zealand vaccination records show 50% higher-than-expected all-cause mortality after vaccination; Health New Zealand refuses to investigate

I just independently validated Barry Young’s standardized mortality rate (SMR) analysis in my github. I used independent methods and came out with an SMR of 1.5, slightly less than Barry’s numbers (1.65).

In short, people in New Zealand who were vaccinated should be dying at a lower rate than average (SMR <1) due to the healthy vaccinee effect, not at a rate >50% higher than normal.

The refusal to investigate

The fact they are dying at >50% higher than normal rates after their vaccine should trigger Health New Zealand to investigate what is causing the excess deaths.

They refuse to do so. They don’t even want to analyze their own data.

Instead, they are trying to throw their former database administrator, Barry Young, into jail for seven years for exposing the truth about the mortality in New Zealand for those who were vaccinated.

Easy to replicate

Anyone can replicate Barry’s results. It took me only about 15 minutes. All the data is in my github.

An SMR of 1.5 doesn’t mean that the COVID vaccine killed these people. But the health authority refuses to identify what caused the excess deaths. It can’t be COVID because the health authority says that if you get the shots, you can’t get COVID or die from COVID.

And it couldn’t be any of the mitigation measure is recommended by the health authority because we all know that those decrease deaths.

So the excess deaths Barry calculated were all in the vaccinated who were protected against the COVID death.

So why were they dying 50% higher than normal?

Silence from Health New Zealan

It appears that we’re never going to find out the answer to that question because the health authorities are keeping the records under wraps and they refuse to investigate to find the cause of the excess deaths.

Keep reading