Nearly 10,000 Claims Pending as COVID Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Faces Possible Budget Cut

A government-run COVID-19 vaccine injury compensation program with nearly 10,000 pending claims faces the threat of a budget cut for the 2026 fiscal year.

The Trump administration’s proposed budget would eliminate funding for the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), TrialSite News reported last week. If approved, the program would be forced to operate on “carryover funds” — or unspent funds from previous years.

According to TrialSite News:

“With no civil court recourse under the PREP Act, downgrading CICP funding leaves injured individuals with limited legal avenues and uncertain financial relief. This undermines public trust in vaccine policy, risks fueling hesitancy, and may deter future claim filings altogether.

“The decision to drop new CICP funding was hidden in budget pages — no public announcements or detailed breakdown of carryover metrics. How much carryover exists? How long will it last? What if claim volume increases?”

CICP was established under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) of 2005.

Under a PREP Act declaration, issued during an official public health emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic, manufacturers of vaccines and other countermeasures associated with a health emergency are exempt from liability for serious injuries or death caused by their products — except in cases of willful misconduct.

That means people who believe they were injured by one of these products can’t sue the manufacturer. Instead, they can apply to the CICP for compensation.

However, even if successful, claimants often receive limited compensation from CICP. By law, the program can reimburse only those medical expenses not compensated by insurance or other programs.

It can also reimburse for lost employment income (capped at $50,000 per year) and a one-time benefit of $370,000 for deaths.

The program does not reimburse legal fees or provide compensation for pain and suffering.

Keep reading

ACIP Members Push Back on CDC’s COVID Vaccine Safety Claims

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) COVID-19 vaccine work group today assured the agency’s new panel of vaccine advisers that the vaccines are necessary, effective and have no safety concerns beyond a small risk of myocarditis among an age-limited group of young men.

The new members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) pushed back on several claims made by the presenters, including the agency’s methods for assessing efficacy and safety.

They also questioned claims the group made about how dangerous the COVID-19 virus is, especially for children.

ACIP didn’t schedule a vote today on COVID-19 vaccines. The committee only heard data presentations by the work group and engaged in a question-and-answer session.

Today’s meeting was the first since U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired the previous 17 ACIP members and replaced them with eight (now seven) new members.

The work group members haven’t changed under the new administration.

Last month, Kennedy announced changes to the COVID-19 vaccination recommendations for children and pregnant women.

The CDC now recommends “shared clinical decision-making” between parents and providers for healthy children ages 6 months to 17 years who are not moderately immunocompromised. The agency changed its guidance on COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women from recommended to “no guidance.”

After several hours of presentations, the work group concluded that the 2024-2025 vaccines were effective in preventing hospitalizations and critical outcomes from COVID-19 in adults, that there is robust safety surveillance with no known risks beyond myocarditis.

The group also concluded that pregnant women are at greater risk from COVID-19, and that maternal vaccination has been shown to protect infants — a claim unsupported by any data from the presentations, said Dr. Meryl Nass, who live-blogged the meeting for CHD.TV.

Keep reading

Former NY DEI Director and Hochul Aide Linda Sun CHARGED in Multimillion-Dollar PPE Fraud and Kickback Scheme

While New Yorkers were gasping for N-95 masks and latex gloves in the dark spring of 2020, the woman once tasked with “diversity, equity & inclusion” inside the Hochul-Cuomo political machine was allegedly busy funneling state contracts to her own relatives—and pocketing the profits.

The Gateway Pundit reported last year that the FBI conducted a pre-dawn raid on the $3.5 million Long Island home.

The lavish five-bedroom home, located in a gated community called Stone Hill in Long Island, was searched thoroughly by agents, though it remains undisclosed whether any items were seized during the operation.

A federal grand jury has returned a second superseding indictment against Linda Sun, former Director of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion for New York and later Deputy Chief of Staff to Gov. Kathy Hochul, along with her husband Christopher “Chris” Hu.

Prosecutors say the pair raked in more than $8 million in kickbacks, bribes and laundered cash by steering COVID-19 personal-protective-equipment (PPE) contracts to companies run by Sun’s cousin and Hu’s business partner.

The new counts include honest-services wire fraud, conspiracy, bribery, money-laundering, and—just for good measure—tax evasion for Hu. Arraignment is set for Monday, June 30 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Keep reading

More Fetal Losses Than Expected After Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccination In Israel: Study

A higher-than-expected number of miscarriages and other forms of fetal loss were associated with COVID-19 vaccinations in Israel, a new study has revealed.

Researchers found 13 fetal losses—four more than the nine expected—for every 100 pregnant women who received a COVID-19 vaccine during weeks eight to 13 in pregnancy, according to the study, which was published as a preprint on the medRxiv server.

Most people in Israel, including pregnant women, received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

Pfizer did not respond by publication time to a request for comment.

The team behind the study includes Retsef Levi, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher who was recently named to the committee that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on vaccines, and Dr. Tracy Hoeg, who works for the Food and Drug Administration.

The researchers analyzed electronic health records from Maccabi Healthcare Services, one of four organizations that provide health care to Israelis. They looked at 226,395 pregnancies that occurred between March 1, 2016, and Feb. 28, 2022. The primary analysis looked at fetal loss for pregnant women after dose one or dose three of a COVID-19 vaccine, with fetal loss including miscarriage, abortion, and stillbirth.

The researchers came up with an expected number of fetal losses based on a model that drew from data before the COVID-19 pandemic, then compared the expected number of fetal losses with those that occurred from week eight of pregnancy onward.

They identified 13,214 fetal losses after the COVID-19 pandemic started, compared with 12,846 fetal losses in the reference period, finding that women who received a COVID-19 vaccine during weeks eight to 13 in pregnancy experienced a higher-than-expected number of fetal losses.

“If you believe this result … every 100 women that you would vaccinate during weeks eight to 13, you are going to see close to four additional fetal losses,” Levi told The Epoch Times.

Keep reading

Did AI Almost Start World War III?

Recall that the Covid fiasco went into overdrive when Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London generated a wildly incorrect estimate of the fatality rate of the virus from China. He had two forecasts, one without lockdowns (death everywhere) and one with (not terrible). The idea was to inspire the replication of the CCP’s extreme methods of people control in the West. 

That model, first shared in classified realms, flipped the narrative. Once select advisors – Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci among them – presented it to Trump, he went from opposing lockdowns to getting in front of the seemingly inevitable. 

Before long, every Gates-funded NGO was pushing more such models that proved the point. Masses of people observed the models as if they were an accurate reflection of reality. Major media reported on them daily. 

As the fiasco dragged on, so did data fakery. The PCR tests were generating false positives, giving the impression of an unfolding calamity even though medically significant infections were highly limited. Infections and even exposures were redefined as cases, for the first time in epidemiological history. Then came the subsidized “deaths from Covid” that clearly generated waves of misclassification that underscore the overestimation of the fatality rate.

Keep reading

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Oncogenesis

Cancer is a complex and dynamic disease. The “hallmarks of cancer” were proposed by Hanahan and Weinberg (2000) as a group of biological competencies that human cells attain as they progress from normalcy to neoplastic transformation. These competencies include self-sufficiency in proliferative signaling, insensitivity to growth-suppressive signals and immune surveillance, the ability to evade cell death, enabling replicative immortality, reprogramming energy metabolism, inducing angiogenesis, and activating tissue invasion and metastasis. Underlying these competencies are genome instability, which expedites their acquisition, and inflammation, which fosters their function(s). Additionally, cancer exhibits another dimension of complexity: a heterogeneous repertoire of infiltrating and resident host cells, secreted factors, and extracellular matrix, known as the tumor microenvironment, that through a dynamic and reciprocal relationship with cancer cells supports immortality, local invasion, and metastatic dissemination. This staggering intricacy calls for caution when advising all people with cancer (or a previous history of cancer) to receive the COVID-19 primary vaccine series plus additional booster doses. Moreover, because these patients were not included in the pivotal clinical trials, considerable uncertainty remains regarding vaccine efficacy, safety, and the risk of interactions with anticancer therapies, which could reduce the value and innocuity of either medical treatment.

After reviewing the available literature, we are particularly concerned that certain COVID-19 vaccines may generate a pro-tumorigenic milieu (i.e., a specific environment that could lead to neoplastic transformation) that predisposes some (stable) oncologic patients and survivors to cancer progression, recurrence, and/or metastasis. This hypothesis is based on biological plausibility and fulfillment of the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis (i.e., induction of lymphopenia and inflammation, downregulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression, activation of oncogenic cascades, sequestration of tumor suppressor proteins, dysregulation of the RNA-G quadruplex-protein binding system, alteration of type I interferon responses, unsilencing of retrotransposable elements, etc.) together with growing evidence and safety reports filed to Vaccine Adverse Effects Report System (VAERS) suggesting that some cancer patients experienced disease exacerbation or recurrence following COVID-19 vaccination. In light of the above and because some of these concerns (i.e., alteration of oncogenic pathways, promotion of inflammatory cascades, and dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system) also apply to cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, we encourage the scientific and medical community to urgently evaluate the impact of both COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination on cancer biology and tumor registries, adjusting public health recommendations accordingly.

Keep reading

Rates of successful conceptions according to COVID-19 vaccination status: Data from the Czech Republic

Abstract

Background

Adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccination on human menstrual cycle characteristics have been observed, but limited data are available on the relationship between COVID-19 vaccination status and birth rates.

Objectives

Therefore, we used nationwide data from the Czech Republic to examine rates of successful conceptions (SCs), that is, conceptions leading to live births 9 months later, for women who were either vaccinated or unvaccinated against COVID-19 before SC.

Methods

Summary monthly COVID-19 vaccination and birth data for women in the Czech Republic aged 18–39 years were retrieved for the period from January 2021 to December 2023. The numbers of SCs per month per 1000 women were calculated for preconception-vaccinated or unvaccinated women, respectively, as well as the number of SCs per month per 1000 women for all women aged 18–39 years.

Results

During the study period, there were approximately 1,300,000 women aged 18–39 years in the Czech Republic, and the proportion of COVID-19-vaccinated women increased from January 2021 until reaching a steady state of around 70% by the end of 2021. At least from June 2021, SCs per 1000 women were considerably lower for women who were vaccinated, compared to those that were unvaccinated, before SC. Furthermore, SC rates for the vaccinated group were much lower than expected based on their proportion of the total population.

Conclusions

In the Czech Republic, SC rates were substantially lower for women vaccinated against COVID-19 before SC than for those who were not vaccinated. These hypothesis-generating and preliminary results call for further studies of the potential influence of COVID-19 vaccination on human fecundability and fertility.

Keep reading

17 Ways mRNA Shots May Be Fueling Cancer, Backed by Over 100 Studies

A comprehensive literature review by Mathilde Debord titled “COVID-19 mRNA vaccines can induce cancer in 17 distinct ways, according to over 100 studies was just published in Le Point Critique.

Drawing from over 100 peer-reviewed studies, it outlines 17 distinct biological mechanisms by which the injections may initiate, accelerate, or reactivate malignant processes.

1. Genome Instability

mRNA may be reverse-transcribed and integrated into host DNA, triggering mutations that initiate cancer.

2. Immune Escape

The spike protein binds and inhibits tumor suppressor genes like p53 and BRCA1, shielding cancer cells from immune destruction.

3. Impaired DNA Repair Mechanism

The spike protein interferes with essential DNA repair enzymes, increasing the risk of unchecked mutations.

4. Chronic Inflammation

Lipid nanoparticles and spike protein cause long-lasting inflammation, a well-known driver of cancer.

5. Dysregulation of the Immune System

Suppression of T cells and type I interferon weakens cancer surveillance and promotes immune evasion.

6. RNA Disruption

Codon optimization disrupts microRNA networks, destabilizing cell growth regulation and apoptosis.

7. Activation of Oncogenic Pathways

The spike protein indirectly activates MAPK and PI3K/mTOR signaling, fueling tumor growth and metastasis.

8. Tumor Microenvironment Alteration

Lipid nanoparticles accumulate in tumors, enhancing permeability and potentially accelerating cancer spread.

9. Awakening Dormant Cancers

Post-vaccination inflammation and immune disruption may trigger recurrence in patients previously in remission.

10. Alteration of Immune Surveillance

Modified mRNA blocks toll-like receptors, making tumor cells “invisible” to the immune system.

Keep reading

FDA, CDC advisers say lost pregnancies higher than expected following early mRNA vaccination

President Trump’s second-term agenda has been careful not to cast doubt on his signature first-term achievement, the development of COVID-19 vaccines through Operation Warp Speed, which congressional Republicans continue to laud and even claim was sabotaged by Pfizer to deny Trump a consecutive term despite his base souring on the therapeutics.

A new preprint study on mRNA COVID vaccines in early pregnancy, coauthored by top advisers to Trump’s Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, may fuel the splintering of the Make America Healthy Again movement as the jabs’ opponents ramp up pressure on Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to ban them.

Not yet peer-reviewed, the study analyzed hundreds of thousands of Israeli medical records on pregnant women in the three years before and after SARS-CoV-2 emerged in China, finding 43% more “observed-to-expected” fetal losses per 100 pregnancies — 13 instead of nine — when the first mRNA dose is taken between 8-13 weeks’ pregnancy.

Pregnant women who took a booster between 8-13 weeks lost an additional two pregnancies per 100, a “potential dose-response relationship,” the study said.

By using pregnant women who got flu vaccines between 8-27 weeks and women who received either vaccine before their pregnancy as “comparative controls,” the authors said they were able to show the association is unique to COVID vaccines. 

The former had a “consistently lower-than-expected observed number of fetal losses, likely the result of healthy vaccinee bias” – in which people with overall better health tend to have higher vaccination rates – while the latter had “according-to-expected or lower-than-expected numbers of fetal losses,” the study found.

It said “almost all” mRNA doses were made by Pfizer, whose own 2021 report to the FDA – which the agency hid for 16 months until a court made it public – shows 44% of women in Pfizer’s clinical trial lost their pregnancies.

Keep reading

Vindication For The Unvaccinated?

At a recent family gathering, I sat at the dinner table with a group of loved ones for the first time since the Covid-19 fiasco. Most of the cheerful discussion focused on the spectacular event of the week: my mother’s 100th birthday. 

I was the only person at the table who hadn’t had any form of flu for many years, while all of the guests had been ill to one degree or another. Almost everyone had tested positive for Covid at least once over the last few years with accompanying flu symptoms. Although no one in my family was hospitalized or died during the so-called pandemic; they all had been vaccinated repeatedly. As far as I know, my wife and I were the only ones in our families who didn’t get any Covid shot, and I haven’t been inoculated for anything in the last seventy years. 

On this happy occasion, the fear, masks, lockdowns, and accusations of the recent past had been mostly forgotten. It was not because the signs and symptoms of the disease had ended, nor that the call for vaccination or testing had been silenced. No one understood why they were still occasionally feeling unwell, with some continuing to report they’d been diagnosed with Covid. 

My view of healthcare has always been outside of the box, having practiced Traditional Chinese Medicine for many decades. I’d worked closely with medical doctors in treating some of their patients and also served as the chief medical officer of a volunteer fire department, appreciating life-saving emergency procedures of modern biomedicine. Through a range of experiences, I gained some knowledge of the causes and cures for suffering and illness.

Before the Covid fiasco, my alternative approach to illness had been respected; I’d shared my knowledge with whoever might ask. My medical perspective was no secret from friends and family. When my daughters were young, they weren’t vaccinated as there were no threats of deadly or debilitating diseases. This was in a place and time when vaccination for infants could be considered and refused, not done by rote. There was reasonable dialogue about the topic — and non-compliance certainly did not elicit threats of excommunication. 

As the specter of a pandemic arose, my opinion about vaccination became dangerous and irrelevant. 

From the outset, it was apparent that the claimed benefits of the new vaccines did not outweigh their risks. I openly said and wrote that the technology remained untested — though never advised anyone to refrain from inoculation — only counseling those who listened to remain fully informed.

It wasn’t complicated. Using genetic-based technology in developing a new drug that attempted to manipulate the magnificent complexity of the human immune system was at a minimum, a gamble. As easily demonstrated, this new technology embraced the bold assumption that human design was flawed and could be improved. It was premature to declare that this experimental treatment was safe and effective. We still don’t know the actual long-term effects — particularly over generations.

This simple and logical evaluation was considered preposterous by those who responded to the seemingly new disease with unbridled fear. The danger of the Covid flu was deemed sufficient to quell all reasonable responses about the risks of the vaccines. Suddenly, there was an eclipse of medical autonomy, and debate was scorned. The actions and motives of corrupted government agencies and their profit-oriented allies in Big Pharma were blessed by devious leaders, who deemed them altruistic and unquestionable. 

This atmosphere, developed and enforced in a haze of authoritarian dictates, created an unprecedented climate of hostility that infected all relationships. Because of my views and unvaccinated status, I rapidly became a pariah to my family.

Early on, when the fear tactics were in high gear, my cousin, who is an attorney involved in healthcare issues, sent a blistering email, condemning one of my first articles skewering the pandemic response. He left no room for dialogue and writing, it is the height of irresponsibility to add to the disinformation that is everywhere about the Covid vaccine. He concluded…

I am really upset that you have chosen to use your talents and thoughtful manner to give credence to the kind of wrongheaded rhetoric and conspiracy theories that feed the mass hysteria over accepting the reality that if we are to beat this pandemic, we need to not just take the vaccine if we want to, but take it on a societal level whether certain individuals want to or not. Your call for “transparency” just further feeds a certain, huge segment of the populations’ belief that they know better than the experts on this issue. They do not. You do not. I do not. But every reputable researcher and medical professional who has reviewed this data agree – it is safe, it is effective, and it is critical.

The venom exuded in response to my unwillingness to join in the mass delusion supporting vaccination was palpable. My crime was unforgivable.

Although we had been very close, all contact ended. However, it was not his unconscious, misdirected anger that troubled me, rather that he shared his views and wrath with my daughters, supporting their inclination to distance themselves from me because of my independent views. This wound with my cousin may never heal.

My mother, who had cordially disagreed with me on vaccination, balanced his bias with sound advice to her granddaughters. She urged them not to be harsh, suggesting that whatever differences they see, these were not worthy of destroying their relationship with their father. Thanks to her wise counsel, the love my daughters and I share has survived.

This and similar events had been left smoldering. In the spring of 2025, at this happy gathering celebrating my mom’s longevity, to my surprise, the topic turned to Covid. (My cousin was not there.) Conversation comprised mostly of personal accounts of suffering and confessions of a lack of understanding of why the virus persisted. 

My sister said she’d attended a lecture at a local college on the history of the social response to mass infection. She described the common human responses and behaviors to past epidemics and pandemics, including how scapegoating was a dominant and destructive response. 

Managing to remain quiet until all had acknowledged these horrors of the past, I spoke up, voicing a simple question: Did the recent Covid pandemic fit this pattern?

Keep reading