Tag: vaccines

Biden FDA Knew About COVID Vaccine Stroke Risk And Kept Americans In The Dark

Senate investigators spent months reviewing roughly 2,000 pages of federal records. What they found is damning. FDA and CDC officials under the Biden administration identified a significant stroke risk tied to Pfizer’s COVID-19 bivalent booster in seniors – and never breathed a word to the public.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), chairman of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, sent a formal letter to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. laying out the evidence. He wasn’t speculating. He was citing the government’s own files.

“HHS records show that as early as October 2022, federal health officials identified a potential connection between the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 bivalent booster and ischemic stroke for individuals over the age of 65,” Johnson wrote.

An ischemic stroke means a blockage of blood to the brain. Between November 2022 and March 2023, seven separate analyses of incoming data flagged the same stroke signal — specifically in adults over 65. CDC data cited by Johnson shows 226 stroke cases reported between August 2022 and February 2023, with additional cases surfacing throughout 2023 and 2024.

Despite the risk, the Biden administration issued no formal warnings. No Health Alert Network message. No changes to booster recommendations for seniors. Nothing.

Instead, in February 2023, HHS quietly hired a private contractor, Lukos LLC, to conduct a deeper internal investigation, dubbed “The Stroke Project.” Publicly, officials kept insisting the vaccines were safe.

“From the initial detection of the safety signal in late 2022 … health officials continued to say the vaccine was safe while simultaneously searching for evidence to support that assertion,” Johnson said.

It gets worse. Federal officials drafted a communications plan about the stroke risk that included a “Tough Questions and Answers” section prepared for President-ish Biden and his White House team. During final edits, the description of the stroke signal was quietly changed from “moderately elevated” to “slightly elevated.” Who made that change? Nobody knows. The language softened, the edit went unattributed, and the public remained in the dark.

The pattern is consistent. Senate investigators previously established that Biden officials also downplayed the risk of vaccine-induced myocarditis and kept that from the public. This wasn’t a one-time failure. It was a system.

Here’s what makes this cover-up even more infuriating. The Biden administration showed it was more than willing to pull the plug on a vaccine when it wanted to. 

Keep reading

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

A Critique of the “17 Million Deaths Caused by the Vaccines” Claim

I am a physician-epidemiologist who has consistently questioned the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines. In the summer of 2021, I was the lead author on the first major study pointing out the risks of post-Pfizer vaccination myocarditis in adolescents. We found that the potential benefits of full vaccination did not appear to outweigh the risks in healthy adolescent males just looking at post-vaccination myocarditis risks alone. Not long after, I was senior author of another analysis published in BMJ-Journal of Medical Ethics that found the harms of the booster dose in college age students likely outweighed potential benefits by at least 18-fold. What is more, I have written multiple times about the COVID-19 vaccines being implicated in numerous deaths and have a related peer-reviewed paper hopefully coming soon. Finally, I have most recently voiced my concern about the production process of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine and the potential risks of DNA plasmid contamination to the Public Health Integrity Committee.

But if you want to bring attention to safety issues with the mRNA vaccines or other pharmaceutical products, using biased publications or prematurely jumping to conclusions is not the way to do it. We can’t complain about the pharmaceutical industry publishing biased research if we turn around and promote equally, if not more biased research about vaccine side-effects. Not only do we need scientists who are not captured by pharma, we need scientists who are not captured in general – by any ideology. We need scientists who are critical thinkers and can acknowledge limitations in data and identify inappropriate methods and causal inference.

Furthermore, avoiding inappropriately scaring people – be it about Covid or the vaccines – is good public health.

17 million deaths due to the vaccines?

Bret Weinstein (in his fascinating interview) on Tucker Carlson said he “saw a credible estimate of 17 million [deaths] globally from this technology”, meaning the vaccines. Now, this was a bit confusing since they were discussing mRNA vaccines at this moment and it was unclear if he meant all types of Covid vaccines. But I immediately thought: 1) Woah… what percent of vaccinated people would have died and how many people would that mean would have died in little, highly-vaccinated Denmark? (For those who don’t know, I am a Danish citizen). Then I thought: 2) What confounded dataset did he use to get this estimate?

But I also want to point out I found it interesting Bret did not give any sort of range in terms of potential numbers of people killed, how this estimate was arrived at or what kind of residual uncertainty there was about the estimate. 

To answer the second question so you are not scrolling ahead, I quickly learned Bret was referring to this analysis by Rancourt, Baudin, Hickey and Mercier, J.: ‘COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere.’

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

End of Federal Childhood Vaccine Incentives

Doctors will no longer receive financial rewards tied to childhood vaccination rates under key government programs. The announcement, first detailed in a December 30 memo from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), states that the agency “does not tie payment to performance on immunization quality measures in Medicaid and CHIP [the Children’s Health Insurance Program] at the federal level.” CMS urged states to discontinue similar incentives and eliminated mandatory reporting of childhood immunization data, though voluntary reporting remains an option. The memo also signaled efforts to strengthen informed consent and accommodate religious exemptions.

U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. welcomed the directive, posting: “Government bureaucracies should never coerce doctors or families into accepting vaccines or penalize physicians for respecting patient choice. That practice ends now.” Advocates such as Children’s Health Defense CEO Mary Holland called it a welcome step toward treating vaccines like other medical interventions, free from metric-driven pressure. Pediatrician Dr. Michelle Perro noted that tying compensation to specific decisions can erode trust in care.

Promoting Preventive Care or Distorting Judgment?

This change comes after years of scrutiny over financial incentives in pediatric medicine. An October 2025 clip from Dr. Suzanne Humphries on The Joe Rogan Experience claimed some doctors could lose up to $250,000 annually by not meeting vaccination targets, including for Covid shots in infants. These incentives stemmed from value-based payment models under Medicaid, CHIP, and private insurers. Practices received bonuses or higher reimbursements for hitting coverage benchmarks (e.g., percentages of patients vaccinated). One analysis of an Oregon pediatric practice projected more than $1 million in annual losses for declining CDC-scheduled vaccines, largely from administrative fees. Roughly 40 percent of U.S. children are on Medicaid, amplifying the program’s reach. During Covid, specific per-dose payments (around $45 plus administration fees) added to the structure.

Proponents of the incentives argued they promoted preventive care and reduced disease outbreaks, with insurers — not pharmaceutical companies — providing payments to lower long-term costs. Critics, however, contended the metrics distorted clinical judgment and pressured families, contributing to eroded trust and reports of patients being dismissed for declining shots.

The CMS policy applies only at the federal level; some states or private insurers may retain incentives. It is telling that pediatric organizations are pushing back against broader vaccine-policy shifts under the current administration.

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

Norwegian study links mRNA COVID vaccines to heightened heart risks in teens

According to BrightU.AI‘s Enoch, myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle, while pericarditis is inflammation of the membrane surrounding the heart—both can be serious, particularly in physically active individuals and have been linked to sudden cardiac events.

Dr. Clayton J. Baker, an internal medicine physician, told the Epoch Times that the findings confirm mRNA vaccines “cause myocarditis in adolescents” and that the second dose “dramatically increases toxicity.”

Experts challenge study’s limitations

While the researchers concluded that the vaccines demonstrated overall safety, independent scientists criticized the study’s narrow risk windows—ranging from 14 to 56 days—arguing they likely undercounted long-term complications.

Brian Hooker, Chief Scientific Officer of Children’s Health Defense, warned that myocarditis cases “significantly increase long-term mortality,” with 25%-30% of patients suffering lasting damage. A separate Lancet study funded by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that 60% of young myocarditis patients still showed heart abnormalities six months post-vaccination.

Steve Kirsch, founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, accused the researchers of “deliberate narrative control,” noting that critical findings—such as post-window myocarditis cases—were buried in the data. “They know most readers never look past the first page,” he said.

Conflicts of interest and calls for accountability

Several study authors disclosed financial ties to pharmaceutical giants, including AstraZeneca and GSK, prompting concerns about bias. Critics argue that the study’s framing downplayed risks while emphasizing rare adverse events as statistically insignificant.

“The evidence is indisputable—these shots cause myocarditis in young people at unacceptable rates,” said Baker. “Given the minimal risk of severe COVID-19 in adolescents, these products should not remain on the market.”

The Norwegian study adds to growing evidence that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines carry disproportionate risks for teenagers, particularly after multiple doses. As governments and health agencies weigh booster recommendations, experts demand rigorous, long-term safety reviews—and honesty about potential harms. For families navigating vaccination decisions, the findings reinforce the importance of informed consent, natural immunity and alternative health strategies in an era of escalating medical skepticism.

Watch the video below that talks about underreported myocarditis as a COVID-19 vaccine injury.

Keep reading

Social Media Users Respond with Facts When Writer at The Atlantic Asks Why Trust in Public Health Institutions Decreased Significantly After Covid Scam

Conor Friedersdorf, a staff writer for the far-left outlet The Atlantic, took to X to ask why there has been a precipitous drop in the people’s trust in public health institutions following the endless gaslighting and lies during the Covid era, and we was on the receiving end of a litany of truth bombs.

Friedersdorf asked, “A question for everyone: survey data suggests that by the end of the Covid-19 emergency trust in public health institutions had decreased significantly.”

“If you are among the people who reacted that way, why specifically? I’m hoping for long, diverse, individualized answers.”

One person cited the ‘massive and inexplicable” CDC failures.

The Gateway Pundit reported that a peer-reviewed study exposed that the CDC inflated Covid deaths by 1600% throughout the 2020 election cycle.

Others noted the politically motivated rules surrounding public gatherings.

“When public health officials who were insisting on extraordinary measures of isolation to include the forbidding of outdoor church services and funerals unanimously announced in May 2020 that mass BLM protests were an acceptable COVID risk because racism was worse than COVID, I learned that public health was pseudoscientific activism.”

Keep reading

Rising number of Americans refusing life-saving blood transfusions because they come from vaccinated donors

Health researchers are sounding the alarm after noticing more people refusing life-saving blood transfusions because they come from vaccinated donors. 

In a study out of Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 15 patients or families of patients who needed blood transfusions rejected them because they requested blood from donors who were not vaccinated. 

The majority of patients were children or teenagers. 

The refusal led one patient to go into shock, another to develop anemia and others to have their surgeries delayed. 

Now, doctors involved say they fear more Americans, spurred by vaccine-suspicious health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, will follow.  

Over a two-year period, the researchers found requests for non-anonymous – meaning patients can choose specific donors for their transfusion – had increased because the patients specifically wanted blood from unvaccinated individuals. 

The patients had told doctors they wanted unvaccinated blood because they believed it was safer, but their exact safety concerns are unclear. 

Researchers noted that while the total number of these donations was small, the requests caused delayed care and could have contributed to complications of not receiving a timely blood transfusion, which can include organ failure, stroke and death. 

Keep reading