Tag: vaccines

Trump Signs Executive Order Backing HHS On Childhood Vaccine Reform — Will It Matter?

An executive order President Donald Trump signed late last Friday has reignited the national debate on the childhood immunization schedule.

The order directs public health agencies to align the schedule with a federal assessment published in January that calls for fewer recommended childhood vaccines and reflects the “scientific evidence and best practices from peer, developed countries while preserving access to vaccines currently available to Americans.”

The order states:

“The scientific assessment found that the United States currently recommends more childhood vaccines than any peer nation, including more than twice as many vaccine doses as some European nations, and identified a set of consensus vaccines that are consistently recommended in all peer countries.”

In a Substack post, Sayer Ji, chairman of the Global Wellness Forum and founder of GreenMedInfo, wrote, “After decades in which the schedule only ratcheted in one direction — more products, more doses, earlier and earlier — this is a top-down instruction to reconsider that trajectory.”

The executive order comes amid recent suggestions that the Trump administration has strategically pivoted away from vaccine policy in the lead-up to this year’s midterm elections.

But for Michael Kane, director of advocacy for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), the order “is a sign that examining the childhood vaccination schedule is a true priority.”

“The U.S. gives more vaccines to children before the age of 2 than nearly all other developed peer nations. In addition, we have the highest levels of chronic illness in children in the developed world. Lowering the number of recommended vaccines would allow us to see what role vaccination plays in the chronic illness epidemic we have in our nation,” Kane said.

Medical researcher Neil Z. Miller, who in 2023 co-authored a study finding a positive statistical correlation between infant mortality rates and the number of vaccine doses received by babies, agreed. “Many developed countries recommend a smaller set of vaccines universally while reserving others for specific risk groups. … The executive order establishes a clearer distinction between ‘core’ and ‘optional’ vaccines.”

The executive order also suggests guidance on how the federal government makes such vaccine recommendations and signals support for parental choice and the right to religious exemptions to vaccinations.

“This executive order is about far more than vaccines,” said Daniel O’Connor, founder and CEO of TrialSite News. “It’s about who gets to decide acceptable medical risk for America’s children.”

Keep reading

Lyme Vaccine Clinical Trials: History Repeating?

Why is there so much controversy surrounding Lyme disease? Why does it seem you can’t get an accurate Lyme disease test?

The State of Lyme

The incidence of Lyme disease is approaching half a million cases per year in the United States, according to a 2021 Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) report based on data from commercial insurance claims. Yet fewer than 40,000 cases are reported to the CDC in any given year, exposing a massive discrepancy between the actual prevalence of the disease and the few cases that meet the CDC’s surveillance reporting definition.

Despite its alarming incidence rate and often catastrophic effects on human health, there has been little advancement in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for Lyme in the last 40 years. The CDC and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) continually support only the use of outdated serological techniques that are known to be inadequate, while simultaneously acknowledging that better tests are needed. The reasons for such double-speak and neglect are inextricably intertwined with the sordid history of Lyme disease vaccines.

Lyme vaccine development has continued for the last three decades despite evidence that the causative organism—the spirochetal bacteria Borrelia burgdorferi—evades immunity in multiple ways that may make it impossible for a vaccine to prevent infection. The most recent effort, a candidate known as VLA-15 from Pfizer and French biotech Valneva, is now in phase III trials. Last February it was revealed that due to alleged violations of good clinical practice, Pfizer had shut down all trial sites run by contractor Care Access, eliminating roughly half of the enrolled participants.

Pfizer’s record of “engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results” may alone warrant suspicion about their recent actions. But in the context of a Lyme vaccine, suspicion should be heightened. The last Lyme vaccine on the market, SmithKline Beecham’s LYMErix, was withdrawn in 2002 amid numerous injury claims, federal agency hearings, and class action lawsuits. Which begs the question, is history repeating?

Stepping back three decades

In June 1994, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) devoted a lengthy meeting to the three companies that had Lyme vaccines in development. According to the official meeting transcript, the primary order of business was to answer the question, “Is the CDC case definition for Lyme disease appropriate for a pivotal efficacy trial?”

Why would this even be a question? The standard diagnostics at the time—mainly the ELISA, a serologic assay that measures antibodies produced against the bacteria—were known to produce a large proportion of false negatives. When the CDC discontinued routine testing of samples in its labs in 1988, it stated in a letter to the Oregon Public Health Laboratory that the sensitivity of the ELISA ranged from 13% to 27% in clinically recognized cases. Obviously, this would hamper any trial operator’s ability to assess possible Lyme infection and the vaccine’s overall effectiveness. If you can’t diagnose cases, how can you determine whether your vaccine works?

Keep reading

Secret Trial of Pfizer RSV Vaccine Killed Two Infants in the 1960s — Their Families Just Sued the U.S. Government

The families of two Black infants who died during a 1960s experimental RSV vaccine trial have filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S., alleging government researchers enrolled the babies in a dangerous medical experiment without their parents’ knowledge or consent, The New York Times reported.

The lawsuit, filed May 22 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other researchers, in 1965 and 1966, subjected dozens of infants — most or all of them from low-income Black families — to testing of Pfizer’s Lot 100 experimental vaccine for respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV.

Two infants, Victor Marcellus King and Ross Otto Hambrick, later died after developing vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD), a severe respiratory illness caused by the vaccine.

VAERD occurs when a vaccinated child who never had RSV is exposed to the virus and develops a more severe case of RSV than they would have if they hadn’t received the vaccine.

The suit was filed by Sharlette Hambrick and Darius King, acting as representatives of the estates of their deceased brothers. They allege federal researchers failed to obtain informed consent from the children’s parents, withheld critical information about prior vaccine failures, and continued the study despite mounting evidence that the vaccine was causing severe reactions in participants.

The complaint also alleges that the tissue samples from the babies who died were later used to develop the RSV vaccines and monoclonal antibody shots that have been approved in the last several years — providing a financial boon for drugmakers.

“Medical research in the United States has a long, troubled racial history,” the complaint states, comparing the alleged conduct to other notorious examples of unethical experimentation involving Black Americans, including the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and the exploitation of Henrietta Lacks.

The infants’ families were unaware the babies had been subjected to the experiment until a reporter from Undark magazine contacted them while investigating the story in 2023.

The reporter found the babies’ names in a doctor’s government-issued laboratory notebook and other paperwork from the clinical trial, the Times reported.

Parents not told infants were being enrolled in trial for experimental vaccine

Keep reading

Study Finds Pediatric Flu Shots are a COMPLETE FAILURE

A new peer-reviewed study evaluating the rollout of mass pediatric flu vaccination across an entire Spanish health region (~400,000 people) found NO statistically significant reduction in flu cases or hospitalizations after authorities expanded flu shots to children 6 months to 5 years old.

Researchers analyzed 6,804 primary care influenza diagnoses and 3,252 influenza-related hospitalizations between 2018 and 2025, comparing seasons before and after the pediatric flu shot program began in 2023.

Despite the rollout, the study’s more rigorous interrupted time series analysis found no measurable reduction in influenza diagnoses or hospital admissions among the target age groups (0–2 and 2–4 years).

In plain English: the flu shots did not meaningfully lower flu rates in young children. Kids under 5 were no less likely to show up at the doctor with the flu or end up hospitalized than expected after the rollout. In other words, the program failed to produce a measurable real-world benefit in the exact age group it was designed to protect.

Notably, researchers also looked across all age groups in the region to see whether vaccinating young children indirectly protected the broader community. Again, they found no statistically significant reduction in flu-related hospitalizations or meaningful population-level benefit following rollout.

The study ultimately concluded that routine pediatric influenza vaccination “has not been associated with a reduction in influenza cases in primary care or hospital settings.”

These results are not surprising given that the Cleveland Clinic recently found that flu shots were associated with a 27% higher risk of flu among healthcare workers during the 2024–2025 season.

Keep reading

‘Reckless’: Virginia Recommends MMR Vaccine for Infants as Young as 6 Months

Virginia’s Department of Health is recommending infants ages 6 to 11 months receive a MMR vaccine — earlier than the age recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

Doctors and other vaccine experts told The Defender that Virginia’s guidance is “reckless” and “not grounded in science.”

The state’s recommendations also include an accelerated measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination schedule, advising that infants get the second dose in the two-dose MMR series 28 days after the first.

Virginia’s recommendation comes in response to a recent measles outbreak in Buckingham County, which as of Tuesday had reached 54 cases.

The state’s MMR vaccine guidance was included in a May 13 letter from Virginia State Health Commissioner Cameron Webb. The recommendations call for infants ages 6 to 11 months to “get an early dose of the MMR vaccine,” and two more doses at the AAP’s recommended ages, at least 28 days apart.

The CDC and AAP recommend a minimum age of 12 months for MMR vaccination, except in “special situations,” such as international travel.

Keep reading

Consultants Push HPV Vaccines for Infants, as Merck Tests Gardasil in Kids as Young as 4

Consultants paid by Merck and the Gates Foundation are publicly advocating to administer HPV vaccines to children as young as 12-24 months — an age group in which the vaccine has never been tested and for which no safety data exist.

Mark Kane and Eduardo Franco laid out the campaign to extend HPV vaccination to toddlers in an opinion piece published in Clinical Infectious Diseases — an official journal of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA).

Merck, a “Silver” level industry partner, donates tens of thousands of dollars annually to the IDSA foundation.

The push to vaccinate younger children comes as Merck — maker of Gardasil, the only HPV vaccine marketed in the U.S. — partners with major universities to run clinical trials of its HPV vaccine in children ages 4-8 in the U.S. and Gambia.

Merck’s Gardasil vaccine is designed to protect against human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted disease. In the U.S., the drug is approved for children starting at age 9 — well before children are sexually active.

Conflicts of interest ‘so thick’ they obscure the science

In the conflict-of-interest statement at the end of the IDSA op-ed, Franco disclosed that he is a vaccine consultant who also holds a patent on a cervical cancer test.

Kane reported no conflicts of interest. However, that claim omits these significant financial and professional credentials:

“The conflicts are so thick it’s impossible to tell if this is a serious immunization policy suggestion, or a fact-pattern of Merck publishing Merck recommendations to use more Merck products,” said Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist for Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

Keep reading

RFK Jr. Faces Backlash After Hantavirus PREP Act Declaration

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is facing backlash from some in the medical freedom movement after he announced last week that he signed a “targeted PREP Act” declaration to develop and deploy medical countermeasures for hantavirus.

In a post on X, Kennedy said the declaration “helps remove barriers to research and response efforts” for the recent outbreak that has garnered significant media attention during recent weeks.

“HHS is taking this situation seriously and will continue working to protect public health and support the safe development of potential treatments and countermeasures,” he said.

Critics accused Kennedy of contradicting his previous strong stance against the use of the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, or PREP Act, during the COVID-19 pandemic, and betraying the values of the medical freedom movement.

Defenders argued that the declaration is narrow in scope and timing — it covers only one generic drug, favipiravir, and lasts only until July 18, 2026.

The PREP Act authorizes the health secretary to issue a declaration that exempts manufacturers and distributors of a vaccine or treatment that addresses a public health emergency from legal liability for injuries caused by those products.

The PREP Act became extremely controversial during the COVID-19 pandemic, because it granted blanket liability protection to COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers — including Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax — for nearly every type of injury caused by the vaccines.

As a result, vaccine-injured people have struggled to be recognized, cared for and compensated for their injuries. Vaccine-injured people and the groups representing them have challenged the act’s constitutionality in multiple lawsuits, but have failed to get it overturned.

The Biden administration extended the COVID-19 countermeasures PREP Act declaration through the end of 2029, even though the administration declared the pandemic over.

Kennedy has not rescinded that declaration, despite calls for him to do so.

Keep reading

Inside The FDA’s “Cover-Up” Of Child Deaths Linked To Covid Vaccines

In September 2025, then-US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr Marty Makary publicly acknowledged that the agency was investigating reports of child deaths following Covid-19 vaccination.

“We do know at the FDA…that there had been children who have died from the COVID vaccine,” Makary said during a CNN interview.

By that stage, however, a fierce internal dispute had already emerged inside the FDA over what investigators believed the evidence showed – and whether the public should ever see the full findings.

“It really did feel like there was some sort of cover-up going on about the Covid-19 vaccines,” said one individual familiar with the discussions.

MD Reports spoke with several current/former agency officials, advisers, and individuals briefed on the discussions, all of whom requested anonymity because they were not authorised to publicly discuss internal FDA deliberations.

At the centre of the controversy was an internal FDA review led by Dr Tracy Beth Høeg, a physician-scientist who was working as a senior scientist inside the FDA’s vaccine division at the time.

FDA officials examined roughly 96 paediatric death reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the government database used to detect potential vaccine-related adverse events.

The review included medical records, autopsy reports, pathology findings, and follow-up investigations conducted by agency staff.

About 25 deaths following Covid vaccination were ultimately considered serious enough for high-level internal discussion inside the agency.

The findings were expected to be presented at a September 2025 meeting of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices (ACIP), the federal panel that shapes US vaccine recommendations.

But before that could happen, details of the review leaked to the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Høeg quickly became the focus of intense media scrutiny and criticism from vaccine advocates and unnamed FDA officials who argued she was relying too heavily on VAERS reports and overstating preliminary findings.

People familiar with the fallout said some FDA staff strongly objected to Høeg’s methods and conclusions and allegedly sought to undermine her credibility by leaking details of the review.

The leak effectively ended plans for a public ACIP discussion and deepened divisions within the FDA over how the findings should be handled.

Some officials believed the findings warranted stronger warnings and greater transparency. Others feared public acknowledgement of vaccine-linked child deaths would damage confidence in the Covid vaccines.

“We know that there are these deaths that are due to the vaccine,” said one source, referring to myocarditis cases and published reports from countries including Korea and Israel.

The controversy intensified after then-FDA vaccine chief Dr Vinay Prasad ordered additional investigation into the deaths identified in Høeg’s review.

Months later, another leak brought the issue back into public view.

In November 2025, an internal memo circulated by Prasad became public. In it, Prasad acknowledged that “at least 10” children had died “after and because of receiving Covid-19 vaccination.”

He described the findings as “a profound revelation.”

“COVID-19 vaccines did result in the death of children,” Prasad wrote. “Dr. Hoeg was correct in her assessment.”

The memo triggered another round of backlash from media outlets and vaccine advocates, many of whom accused Prasad of overstating the evidence before the agency’s analysis had been finalised.

Inside Medicine reported on a Dec 5 memo about a subsequent FDA analysis using a World Health Organization causality framework, which classified zero deaths as “certain,” two as “probable/likely,” and five as “possible.”

But individuals involved in the discussions said pressure steadily mounted inside the agency to “downgrade” the findings with each successive review.

“It seemed like there was a lot of pressure to keep decreasing the number of deaths,” said one source.

Keep reading

New website unmasks the VAERS safety data exposed by Senator Johnson

There are only two things you need to know about the documents released by Senator Johnson relating to the VAERS safety signals:

  1. The safety signals were real and serious
  2. The people at the FDA and CDC ignored them

You have to realize that on all these emails, they ALL knew it would be subject to FOIA. So they can’t write “she’s right, but we need to silence her.” They all are aware that the conversations are being recorded.

There is now a new website that organizes all the data.

This took just 4 days to create by one person, Marjorie Roswell. It is absolutely amazing.

Keep reading

Metallic nanoparticles in vaccines can be activated by frequencies, and then they could say there is an Ebola outbreak

In June 2025, Dolores Cahill, formerly Professor of Translational Science at the University College Dublin School of Medicine, Principal Investigator at the Conway Institute of Biomolecular & Biomedical Research and vice chair of the Scientific Committee of the Innovative Medicines Initiative, and founding member of World Doctors Alliance, participated in the ‘Medical Doctors for Covid Ethics International’ webinar moderated by Charles Kovess.

Medical Doctors for Covid Ethics International (“MD4CE International”), founded by UK medical whistle-blower Dr. Stephen Frost, is a global organisation composed of doctors, scientists, lawyers, journalists, economists, historians, politicians, philosophers, data analysts, bankers, military/intelligence experts and other professionals from across the world who advocate for medical ethics, patient safety and human rights in the context of the covid pandemic.

“[There are] … titanium, steel, barium nanoparticles [in vaccines]. And … those nanoparticles get into our organs [and] can be affected by radiation … they can modulate the frequency … [to cause] nosebleeds …[and] say there is an Ebola outbreak,” Prof. Cahill said.

You can watch the full webinar on Rumble HERE.

Note: We can’t be certain of the specific 2017 Italian study Prof. Cahill was referring to in the video clip (also see below), but there is THIS one, which is relevant.  Read: All tested vaccines reveal toxic substances linked to autoimmune disease, Natural Health 365, 6 April 2018

In the clip above, Prof. Cahill said:

Because the nanoparticle and the radiation. I did publications on nanoparticles when I was researching. And there’s a publication from 2017, with an Italian professor showing that there were, she tested 40 different vaccines, 39 vaccines for human babies, adults and one for cats. And she showed all these metal or titanium, steel, barium nanoparticles. And it is those nanoparticles that get into our organs that can be affected by radiation.  Exactly what you’re saying. 

Now, when I gave evidence after 9-11 [in] 2001, right. I ran one of the so-called biosafety labs deliberately to get access to the information. And I gave evidence about the threats to people in Congress in October 2001. I was going through what was going to happen in the injections with fertility, with the peptides. And then I mentioned the nanoparticles, and the military said shut up and sit down. Right. Because obviously they didn’t want to. So, I was saying the threat isn’t these things flying into, it’s what’s going to be in the food and the vaccine, but particularly the nanoparticles.

I’m only mentioning that because within the system, everybody knew. But one of the major detoxes is it is possible to detox from the nano. It’s, you know, mainly not all of them, but what I was studying 20 years ago is that they can just modulate the frequency and that say if 40-year-olds or 20-year-olds have a specific metal in their organ, that can be, you know, in a university campus or it can be in a school, and there could be like where people have nosebleeds. Right? Because that’s why they rolled out the injections in different batches and different age groups.

And literally they could do that all across one or two countries and then wake up in the morning, you could have nosebleeds or serious deaths of teenagers. But then they could say there is an Ebola outbreak. Do you get it? Because there are different nanoparticles that resonate. So, it’s very specific. And I think some of the people that are being targeted to be seriously ill can be easily targeted so that they just die. You know, we die in our sleep or we drop dead or whatever. And I think it’s that kind of technology. So, it is a huge threat.

This is reminiscent of what American attorney Todd Callender and the late Dr. Rashid Buttar had previously warned about nanoparticles in vaccines, once inside the body, causing harm at a time that they will determine.

Keep reading