Tag: vaccines

Pfizer’s Delayed Myocarditis Study

This headline has garnered so much attention on social media that I was asked to participate in an interview last night to discuss the topic. First, I had to clarify that I cannot be interviewed about ACIP issues without prior clearance from HHS Communications. Once that was understood, at 6:00 PM (dinner time!) I dialed in via Zoom, and we talked on the record. No, I do not know if or when the interview will be aired. Before the interview, as usual, I did the necessary diligence to avoid embarrassing myself due to ignorance, keeping in mind the first rule of social media.

It is often better to stay quiet and have people wonder if you are ignorant than to tweet and remove all doubt.

Let’s dive into the details. I think that this particular situation provides a great example of how bias, combined with insufficient background and subject matter experience, can lead to unjustified clickbait headlines. This is a chronic problem on both sides of the mRNA “vaccine” safety debate, one which makes it so, so much harder to get to the bottom of all of this.

I will try to explain so that most can understand, but it may get a little technical. The nuances of clinical research study design and implementation are complicated. Please try to stick it out, if for no other reason than it does lead back to some statements from CDC’s Captain Dr. Sarah Meyer (CDC/NCEZID) during her recent presentation titled “COVID-19 safety update” regarding long-term outcomes from COVID-19 mRNA product myocarditis. Consider that an embedded easter egg.

Keep reading

Moderna To Ask For Clearance For Combination COVID-Influenza Vaccine

Moderna is going to ask regulators to approve its combination vaccine against COVID-19 and influenza, the company said on June 30.

The company said a phase 3 study evaluating its influenza vaccine candidate, mRNA-1010—which utilizes the same messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) platform as its COVID-19 vaccine—showed positive effectiveness.

In the trial, which featured 40,805 participants and compared mRNA-1010 to an existing seasonal flu vaccine in adults aged 50 and up, the relative protection from the candidate was 26.6 percent better. In a subgroup analysis among participants aged at least 65, the relative efficacy was 27.4 percent.

“Today’s strong Phase 3 efficacy results are a significant milestone in our effort to reduce the burden of influenza in older adults,” Stéphane Bancel, Moderna’s CEO, said in a statement.

Several companies, including Moderna, have been planning to introduce combination shots against COVID-19 and influenza.

Moderna, however, in May withdrew its application for approval for its combination vaccine, a move the company said came after consulting with the Food and Drug Administration.

Moderna at the time said it planned to resubmit the application before the end of 2025 after it received efficacy data from the phase 3 trial for mRNA 1010.

“An mRNA-based flu vaccine has the potential advantage to more precisely match circulating strains, support rapid response in a future influenza pandemic, and pave the way for COVID-19 combination vaccines,” Bancel said on Monday.

The trial results have been fully published or peer reviewed. Moderna said it plans to submit the results to a peer-reviewed journal.

Keep reading

Judge Awards $4 Million to St. Louis Public School Employees Who Sued Over Vaccine Mandate

A jury ruled on Thursday in favor of 13 employees with the St. Louis Public Schools System who were forced to take the COVID vaccine despite religious objections.

The court awarded the 13 employees $4 million for the injustice.

According to Schrag on Law, the plaintiffs Wanda Brandon and over a dozen other current and former employees in the St. Louis Public Schools system,  sued the Board of Education of the City of St. Louis, Superintendent Kelvin Adams, and Chief Human Resources Officer Charles Burton in the Eastern District of Missouri raising claims of violations of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, Title VII religious discrimination, and the Missouri Human Rights Act.

In fall of 2021 during the height of the COVID pandemic, the St. Louis Board of Education adopted Policy 4624, requiring all employees to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by October 15, 2021, or obtain an approved exemption.

The sixteen original plaintiffs submitted religious exemption forms to their employer. The employees cited their Christian, Islamic and Pentacostal beliefs that conflicted with the vaccine that was developed from fetal cell lines.

The St. Louis Board denied all 189 of the religious exemption requests and forced the employees to take the experimental vaccine.

The Board then suspended or terminated the employees who refused to take the COVID vaccine.

Keep reading

VICTORY! After Four Years and Two Months British Nursing Council Drops Charges Against Dr. Niall McCrae for Publishing His Completely Factual Report on COVID Vaccine Risks on The Gateway Pundit in 2021

In the covid debacle, health professions played a major role in enforcing the official narrative. I can now reveal my experience with the UK Nursing & Midwifery Council (NMC), who charged me with contradicting government guidance on vaccination and risking patients’ lives, after writing an entirely factual article on Gateway Pundit.

As a senior lecturer in psychiatric nursing at King’s College London, the NMC was my professional regulator.

When covid vaccines were introduced, I feared that blind faith and propaganda about an oxymoronic ‘miracle of science’ would lead to less impressive and harmful outcomes.

On 4th March 2021, Gateway Pundit published my article ‘British government study confirms Covid-19 vaccine risk’.  The article is linked below. This related to a Public Health England report showing increased infections soon after vaccination, which I attributed to a known phenomenon of temporary depletion in immunity.

Although factually accurate, a fact-check website labeled my article as ‘misleading’. On 8th March I was notified by the NMC of a referral by a ‘Dr Byrne’, who had seen my writing and found me on the register. The NMC began an investigation of my fitness to practise, alleging ‘failure to uphold your position as a registered nurse – in that you promoted health advice contrary to official health advice in the context of a global pandemic’.

From the outset, I was confident that the NMC had no reasonable case against me. I submitted my statement, supported by three experts (physician Helen Westwood, biostatistician Paul Cuddin, and nursing professor Roger Watson.  Cuddin wrote: ‘on the basis that there is consistent, increasing real-world and clinical evidence of increased infections in the two weeks after vaccination, the points raised by Dr Niall McCrae need to be addressed as a matter of urgency.’

Keep reading

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Children’s Health Defense Case Alleging Meta-Government Collusion to Censor Vaccine Speech

The Supreme Court has turned down a petition from Children’s Health Defense (CHD), leaving unexamined the group’s challenge to what it describes as collusion between Meta and federal agencies aimed at suppressing constitutionally protected speech.

The case, which dates back to 2020, centered on CHD’s allegations that Facebook, under government influence, targeted and silenced its views on vaccines and COVID-19.

CHD filed its initial complaint against Meta in August 2020 and later amended it, arguing that government officials worked alongside the tech giant to stifle dissenting opinions that the public had every right to hear.

The removal of CHD’s Facebook and Instagram accounts in 2022 only fueled concerns about the growing threat of coordinated censorship in digital spaces.

Those accounts, once a major source of alternative information for millions, remain banned.

In a decision last year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Meta, holding that the company’s actions reflected private policy choices rather than government compulsion.

CHD hoped the Supreme Court would take up the case and examine whether that distinction truly shields Big Tech from accountability when it suppresses speech at the behest of public officials. But the justices declined, offering no explanation, as is typical in most of the thousands of petitions they review annually.

Keep reading

RFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets on Tucker—And Surprises Everyone on Trump

It’s not every day an active HHS Secretary sits down for 90 minutes straight with Tucker Carlson.

But that’s exactly what happened, and Kennedy instantly seized Carlson’s attention with a chilling story of CDC corruption.

He revealed that the health agency buried a 1999 internal study led by researcher Thomas Verstraten, which showed an alarming 1135% increase in autism risk from the hepatitis B vaccine.

Kennedy said the researchers were “shocked” by the findings.

So what did they do? They covered it up, according to Kennedy.

“They got rid of all the older children essentially and just had younger children who are too young to be diagnosed [with autism].”

RFK Jr. then explained the real reason why your pediatrician will kick you out of their practice for refusing vaccines.

“There’s a published article out there now that says that 50% of revenues to most pediatricians come from vaccines.”

It’s all about the money. The higher the vaccination rate, the bigger the bonus.

“And that’s why your pediatrician, if you say I want to go slow on the vaccines… will throw you out of his practice because you’re now jeopardizing that bonus structure.”

Keep reading

New CDC Vaccine Panel Recommends Merck’s RSV Shot for All Newborns

Advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) this morning voted to recommend all newborns receive Merck’s new monoclonal antibody shot, designed to protect against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

Two of the seven committee members, Retsef Levi, Ph.D., and Vicky Pebsworth, Ph.D., opposed the recommendation, citing safety concerns. The remaining five members supported it.

The vote marked the first — and closely watched — decision by the new members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), appointed early this month by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He replaced all 17 sitting members, citing long-standing conflicts of interest that he said had plagued the committee for years.

Kennedy’s decision outraged the mainstream public health industry, which feared the new committee would be more critical of vaccines. It even prompted a move by vaccine manufacturers, insurers and the professional medical organizations they support to bypass government health agencies’ recommendations by creating a nongovernmental system for recommending and purchasing vaccines.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration earlier this month approved Merck’s RSV shot, clesrovimab, which will be marketed as Enflonsia. It joins two other recently approved RSV drugs. One is Sanofi and AstraZeneca’s monoclonal antibody shot for infants, Beyfortus (nirsevimab). The other is Pfizer’s RSV vaccine, Abrysvo, for pregnant mothers.

Data presented by the CDC during Wednesday’s ACIP meeting reassured committee members that the recently approved RSV interventions were safe and effective.

However, an analysis of the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink for the 2023-2024 respiratory season revealed an association between Abrysvo and an increased risk for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, which include gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia and HELLP syndrome, a life-threatening pregnancy complication.

Presenters repeatedly emphasized that RSV — a common respiratory virus that usually causes mild cold-like symptoms but can be serious in infants — is the leading cause of hospitalization for infants in the U.S. There are fewer than 100 deaths per year from RSV in the U.S., according to data presented at the meeting.

Keep reading

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

CDC Advisers Vote To Recommend Removal Of Mercury From Influenza Vaccines

Advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on June 26 advised the agency to stop recommending influenza vaccines containing a mercury-based preservative.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in a series of votes reaffirmed the existing recommendation that virtually all individuals aged at least 6 months of age receive an annual influenza shot. The panel further advised, though, that individuals only receive thimerosal-free vaccines.

About 95 percent of influenza vaccines administered in the United States in late 2024 and early 2025 were free of thimerosal, according to the Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Tracy Hoeg, an FDA official, told the committee that there appear to be enough influenza vaccine doses without thimerosal for the upcoming virus season, which runs from the fall into the winter.

A spokesperson for Sanofi told The Epoch Times in an email: “We acknowledge the recommendation of the new ACIP. We now await the decision by the CDC on the path forward.

“We will have sufficient supply of Sanofi flu vaccine to support customer preference for this season.”

Seqirus, which also produces influenza vaccines with thimerosal, has not responded to requests for comment.

ACIP provides advice to the CDC’s director, who typically adopts the recommendations.

The CDC has no acting director listed on its website. President Donald Trump’s nominee for the post, Susan Monarez, is being considered by the Senate. The CDC and its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, did not respond to requests for comment.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. earlier in the year adopted some recommendations offered by ACIP.

Kennedy has long opposed vaccines with thimerosal, and the panel heard before the vote from Lyn Redwood, a past president of a nonprofit that Kennedy founded who is now listed as an employee of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Redwood said in her presentation that a number of studies have provided evidence against thimerosal, including a 2003 paper that found an association between thimerosal exposure and tics and a 2007 study that found links to several positive and several negative associations, including a lower measure of executive functioning.

“There have been studies that have found evidence of harm,” Redwood said.

Keep reading