Project Veritas: Pfizer Exec Admits Plans to Possibly Mutate COVID for More $$$$


Pfizer Director Assaults James O'Keefe & Veritas Staff; Destroys iPad Showing Undercover Recordings

Pfizer Exposed For Exploring "Mutating" COVID-19 Virus For New Vaccines Via 'Directed Evolution'

KIM IVERSEN: Who Is The Project Veritas Pfizer Exec and What Is Directed Evolution?

FOX NEWS: Tucker Carlson Gives Incredible Breakdown of #DirectedEvolution Investigation



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Project Veritas strikes again!Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations, and mRNA Scientific Planning Jordon Trishton Walker smilingly spilled his guts to an undercover Project Veritas (PV) agent, and it’s worse than we thought.The video appears to involve two meetings with Walker, who is as giddy as a schoolgirl and happy to reveal Pfizer’s wicked plans.According to Walker, Pfizer is considering mutating the COVID-19 virus itself and preemptively creating vaccines to fight it.The PV agent asked Walker, “What is Pfizer doing, I guess, to optimize, you know, the vaccines now?” referring to the fact that the vaccines don’t do what we were told they’d do.

“Oh, we actually had a meeting about that today,” Walker responds. “So, there’s a lot. We’re doing, uh, I don’t know if I should say this,” as he looks around the room.

Here are some highlights Walker revealed during the conversation:

You know how the virus keeps mutating? Well one of the things we’re exploring is like, why don’t we just mutate it ourselves so we could, we could create, preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So we have to do that. If we’re gonna do that though, there’s a risk of like, as you could imagine, no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f***ing viruses.

So we’re like, do we want to do this? So that’s like, one of the things we are considering.

For like, the future, like, maybe we can like, create new versions of the vaccines and things like that.

“Ok, so Pfizer is ultimately thinking about mutating COVID?” the PV agent asks.

“Well, that is not what want we say to the public, no. That’s why it was, it was a thought that came up in a meeting,” Walker responds. “And we were like, ‘Why do we not?’ It was like, ‘We’re going to consider that with more discussions.'”

“Okay,” the PV agent responds.

“That exactly, actually. We’re like, ‘Wait a minute, like, people won’t like that.'”

Walker isn’t done spewing Pfizer’s evil secrets.

At one point, Walker says, “Don’t tell anyone this by the way. You have to promise you won’t tell anyone,” Walker continues as he fist-bumps the PV agent.

He then regurgitates how Pfizer would conduct the research on monkeys and then adds:

You have to be like, very controlled to make sure that this virus that you mutate doesn’t create something that like, you know, goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. Like, it makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bull****.

When asked whether Pfizer is conducting gain-of-function research, Walk has this to say:

Well, you’re not supposed to do gain-of-function research with the viruses. They’d rather we not, but we do these selected structure mutations to try to see if we can make them more potent. So there is research ongoing about that. I don’t know how that’s going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because, like, Jesus Christ.

Walker goes on to reveal that drug regulators go easy on Pfizer because so many want to eventually work there.

“It’s pretty good for the industry to be honest, bad for everyone else, in America,” Walker admits.

“Why is it bad?” the PV agent asks.

“Because of the regulators, who review our drugs, you know that once they stop being a regulator, they want to go work for the company, they are not going to be as harsh on the company where they’re getting their job.”

Related: Pfizer Launches mRNA Flu Vaccine Study Even Though COVID Vaccine Study Still Isn’t Finished

You can watch the Project Veritas video here, including Dr. Robert Malone, who helped develop mRNA, chiming in hilariously.


Dr. Peter McCullough: Exposing the Truth Behind Mass Deaths from COVID Vaccines~Pfizer Documents Prove “Mass Murder,” Says Naomi Wolf

The infamous Pfizer documents released under court order prove that the company and the FDA knew about the disastrous consequences of the Covid injections, making this campaign a case of "mass murder", explained Daily Clout chief Naomi Wolf in this interview on Conversations That Matter with The New American magazine's Alex Newman. Both the FDA and the pharmaceutical giant knew these injections were associated with strokes, fertility problems, harm to unborn babies, heart problems, and countless other horrors, said Wolf, a former advisor to top Democrats who is now leading a team of thousands of doctors and scientists in searching through all these documents. The CCP was also involved in this operation in multiple ways, including in the manufacturing process, she said. "This is a blueprint for prosecution," Wolf explained, calling the "attack on humanity" a fraud, mass murder, and much more—even suggesting some of these crimes were capital offenses. She said numerous people in government and the corporate world were involved and as such, needed to be held accountable by the justice system at every level. Wolf and her team are already asking prosecutors and state attorneys general to prosecute, building on Florida's grand jury investigation.

New York’s COVID Vaccine Mandate for Health Care Workers Struck Down~Pfizer CEO Asked in Davos When He Knew COVID-19 Vax Wouldn’t ‘Stop the Spread’

Pfizer CEO Asked in Davos When He Knew COVID-19 Vax Wouldn’t ‘Stop the Spread’

Mr. Bourla, can I ask you when did you know that the vaccines didn’t stop transmission? How long did you know that without saying it publicly? Why won’t you answer that question? I mean we now know that the vaccines didn’t stop transmission… but why did you keep it secret? You said it was 100 percent effective, then 90 percent, then 80 percent and 70 percent. But we now know that the vaccines do not stop transmission. Why did you keep that secret? (Bourla says) Have a nice day. I won’t have a nice day until I know the answer. Why did you keep it a secret if your vaccine did not stop transmission?

New York’s COVID Vaccine Mandate for Health Care Workers Struck Down



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers in New York has been overturned by the New York Supreme Court, which found that Governor Kathy Hochul and the New York Department of Health exceeded their authority when implementing the vaccine mandate. Siding with the plaintiffs, Medical Professionals for Informed Consent, Judge Gerard Neri ruled that the vaccine mandate was “null void, and of no effect.”1 2

 The COVID vaccine mandate in New York was implemented at the start of the COVID pandemic by Governor Andrew Cuomo when the New York Legislature granted him the power on an emergency basis. On June 24, 2021, the emergency orders were rescinded by the governor, but the vaccine mandate was made a permanent regulation.3

The court found that New York public health law specifically prohibits the Commissioner from mandating vaccination for adults and children with the exception of school requirements from preschool through high school. For school-aged children, the public health law only permits mandates for vaccines related to poliomyelitis, mumps, measles, diphtheria, rubella, varicella, Hib, pertussis, tetanus, pneumococcal, and Hepatitis B.

Accordingly, the COVID vaccine mandate exceeds the authority granted to the Commissioner by Public Health law. The court concluded:

The mandate §2.61 is beyond the scope of Respondents’ authority and is therefore null, void and of no effect, and Respondents, their agents, officers and employees are prohibited from implementing or enforcing the Mandate… DOH blatantly violated the boundaries of its authority as set forth by Legislature.4

The court determined that the COVID vaccine mandate was “arbitrary and capricious” and the changing definition of “fully vaccinated” in the mandate “contains all the hallmarks of “absurdity” and is no definition at all.”

Plaintiff attorney Sujata Gibson said:

This is a huge win for New York healthcare workers, who have been deprived of their livelihoods for more than a year. This is also a huge win for all New Yorkers, who are facing dangerous and unprecedented healthcare worker shortages throughout New York State.5

New York State Health Department officials strongly disagreed with the ruling stating that the mandate was “a critical public health tool” and that they were exploring their options.6

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Stimson B. NY department of health ‘exploring options’ after judge strikes down COVID vaccine mandate for health workers. Fox News Jan. 14, 2023.
2 Associated Press. Judge strikes down NY State COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. News 10 Jan. 16, 2023.
3 Medical Professionals For Informed Consent et al. v. Mary T. Basset et al. NYSCEF Doc. 86 Index No. 008575/2022.
4 Ibid.
Breaking: CHD Defeats NY State Healthcare Mandate Dropped. Children’s Health Defense. Jan. 13, 2023.

6 NY vaccine mandate for health care workers struck down. MSN Jan. 15, 2023.

Big Pharma’s Influence in Shaping the U.S. Medical Model



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The United States is the most medicated country in the world, with 70 percent of Americans using at least one prescription drug daily. The U.S. also has the highest rates of obesity, heart disease, childhood illness, and autoimmune disease, yet it often touts its health care and medical research as the best in the world.1

The medical model in the U.S. focuses on addressing the symptoms of disease and illness through the widespread use of pharmaceutical products rather than dealing with the root causes of disease. Lifestyle choices are rarely addressed and alternative forms of medicine are often mocked, despite most of them being around for decades to centuries longer than western medicine. Although diet has long been known to play a significant role in maintaining good health, medical doctors receive relatively little training on the topic of nutrition—on average only 19.6 hours throughout their entire 15,000 hours of education.2

To understand how the “pill for every ill” approach became the underpinning of the U.S. medical model, it is important to understand two factors—the history of how allopathic medicine practiced by medical doctors came to dominate health care in the U.S., and the fact that pharmaceutical companies provide a significant source of funding for medical school education and textbooks.

Rockefeller Capitalized on Oil Industry by Creating Pharmaceuticals

During the first half of the 19th century in the U.S., much of the model for health care was based on natural and holistic approaches such as herbs, homeopathy, and chiropractic care.3 In the early part of the 20th century, European pharmaceutical companies in the U.K., Germany, Switzerland, and the U.S. were expanding their product lines.

The oil industry was booming and German pharmaceutical companies had begun developing synthetic vitamins out of petroleum byproducts known as petrochemicals. Billionaire John D. Rockefeller, who founded Standard Oil, recognized the opportunity to further expand markets for the oil industry by using petrochemicals to make pharmaceutical drugs and synthetic vitamins and purchased German pharmaceutical company Farben, now known as Bayer.4

The Flexner Report Eliminates Majority of Natural Healing Doctors and Education

In partnership with Andrew Carnegie, Rockefeller hired Abraham Flexner, who released the “Flexner Report” in 1910, which reshaped the practice of medicine in America forever. Flexner himself had attended Johns Hopkins University and had developed a distaste for “nonconformist” approaches to health and healing, which he deemed as “quackery.”5 His report concluded that there were too many doctors and medical schools in the U.S. and that natural healing modalities were unscientific and he advocated for their closure.6

The Flexner Report was then submitted to Congress and later adopted as law. Any medical school that agreed to adopt the scientific paradigm-focused recommendations outlined in the Flexner Report received large grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. Through this funding, virtually all other traditional healing arts were eliminated, and, by 1930, only 76 percent of the 168 existing schools educating physicians remained.5

Boundaries Between Big Pharma and Medical Field “Hard to Disentangle”

Fast forward to the present and it is obvious that there are many blurred lines between medical care and the pharmaceutical industry. Not only do pharmaceutical companies continue to provide outsized funding of medical schools, medical textbooks, and medical associations, but the pharmaceutical industry also spends a lot of money funding the legacy and online digital media, as well as U.S. lawmakers at the state and federal level.

“The truth is, it’s hard to disentangle medical education from whatever the prevailing culture is in medicine, including ways of thinking or beliefs of the day about diagnosis or treatment,” said Elia Ai Jaoude, MD, a psychiatrist who also went through medical school “And currently, the pharmaceutical and medical device industries continue to have much influence over the shaping of beliefs.”7

Opioid Crisis is Prime Example of Pharmaceutical Industry Influence

A recent example of how the pharmaceutical industry influences the practice of medicine is the opioid crisis, which has resulted in thousands of deaths and even more lives impacted by addiction. For years, representatives of the pharmaceutical industry set out to wage an aggressive marketing campaign in which they intentionally lied to and misled physicians about the safety of opioids and the potential for addiction. Harvard Professor and former editor-in-chief for the New England Journal of Medicine Marcia Angell, MD said in 2009:

Drug manufacturers paid doctors and movie stars to promote more aggressive pain treatment. The companies also created campaigns for their sales forces, tying bonuses to opioid sales and holding contests to reward top earners.8

Johnson & Johnson Reps Gave Prizes to Doctors Prescribing High Numbers of Opioids

One pharmaceutical company that promoted aggressive pain treatment using opioids was Johnson & Johnson, which courts of law found created PowerPoint presentations promising prizes for physicians who sold the highest amounts of their extended-release opioid Nucynta (tapentadol). Prizes included Caribbean Cruises and Sony home theater systems.8

Courts Deem Pharmaceutical Company Marketing as “False, Misleading, and Dangerous”

Federal judges throughout the country have ruled against various pharmaceutical companies for their aggressive and misleading marketing, including an Oklahoma judge who stated that Johnson & Johnson had engaged in “false, misleading, and dangerous marketing campaigns” causing “exponentially increasing rates of addiction, overdose deaths” and opioid-addicted babies.8

Throughout the pharmaceutical industry’s marketing campaigns, from 1997 to 2002, pain relief prescriptions in the U.S. increased from roughly 670,000 prescriptions to 6.2 million prescriptions.8 Attorney John Brownlee pointed out that Oxycontin was mostly about making money for pharmaceutical companies:

The genesis of OxyContin was not the result of good science or laboratory experiment. OxyContin was the child of marketeers and bottom line financial decision making.8

Physician’s Trust in Drug Companies Begins in Medical School

According to Joel Lexchin, MD, who was once an emergency room physician and now teaches health policy, the issue of physician trust in the pharmaceutical industry stems back to medical school. Dr. Lexchin wrote a book on the topic entitled Doctors in Denial: Why Big Pharma and the Canadian Medical Profession Are Too Close For Comfort.7

In his book, Dr. Lexchin outlined the many ethical dilemmas that arise from the entanglement between medical school students and the drug industry, including the companies paying university educators and the development of relationships with students early—which has been shown to impact the doctors' prescribing habits, the co-authoring of biased textbooks, and research funding and findings that may be skewed in a drug company’s favor.

Medical  School Research Funded by Big Pharma

Dr. Lexchin said that even when funding seems charitable, it is not uncommon for drug companies to benefit because they are promoting research in particular areas with a particular slant to them. He gave the example of a pharmaceutical company interested in developing a product to treat sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The funding would likely not go toward researching the sexual practices of teenagers, but rather toward researching STI antibiotics, which would help sell treatment drugs. Dr. Lexchin added:

The pharmaceutical industry level of resources means that other voices and other kinds of research may be drowned out.7

While medical schools maintain that drug industry funding helps to promote quality education, Dr. Lexchin believes that drug companies should not play any role in shaping what and how future physicians learn and says that medical schools are environments ripe for influence.6

Harvard Professor Says Relationship Between Big Pharma and Medical Schools is Increasingly Entangled

In 2000, Dr. Angell, in her position as a senior lecturer in Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, asked, Is Academic Medicine for Sale?8 Dr. Angell described the evolution of the relationship between medical schools and the pharmaceutical industry,  a relationship she said has only grown to be increasingly entangled and too intimate since the late 20th century. She cited a poll in which 94 percent of physicians surveyed acknowledged receiving financial compensation of some form from pharmaceutical companies.

Dr. Angell also cited the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 in which Congress voted to allow universities to patent discoveries that stem from federally funded research and then license those discoveries exclusively to companies in return for royalties. This 1980 Act created a financial incentive for universities to aim for discoveries that were likely to benefit the pharmaceutical industry, rather than the public at large. In her address, Dr. Angell stated:

Drug companies [do not] aim to educate doctors, except as a means to the primary end of selling drugs. Drug companies don’t have education budgets; they have marketing budgets from which their ostensibly educational activities are funded.8

She went on to outline reform steps that would need to be taken in order to restore integrity to the profession and stated the need for the profession to wean itself from industry money. Dr. Angell concluded:

You are not entitled to anything you want just because you’re very smart. Conflicts of interest in academic medicine have serious consequences, and it is time to stop making excuses for them.8

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Gallant A. A growing number of Americans report taking prescription medications daily. Civic Science Jan. 11, 2023.
2 Colino S. How much do doctors learn about nutrition? U.S. News and World Report Dec. 7, 2016.
3 Pharmaphorum. A history of the pharmaceutical industry. Sept. 1, 2020.
4 Schmidt E. How Rockefeller created the business of western medicine. Meridian Health Clinic Dec. 27, 2019.
Simpson JK. The five eras of Chiropractic & the future of chiropractic as seen through the eyes of a participant observer. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies Jan. 19, 2012.

6 Stahnisch F, Verhoef M. The Flexner Report of 1910 and Its Impact on Complementary and Alternative Medicine and Psychiatry in North America in the 20th Century. Evidence-Based Complementary Alternative Medicine Dec. 26, 2012.
7 Hensley L. Big pharma pours millions into medical schools—here’s how it can impact education. Global News Aug. 12, 2019.
8 Angell M. Is academic medicine for sale? Boston Review June 26, 2012.


Moderna CEO at Davos: Moderna Was Working on COVID Vaccine in Jan. 2020, Before COVID-19 Was Named



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

When did Moderna start developing its COVID-19 vaccine? Moderna’s CEO Stephane Bancel already made headlines at World Economic Forum’s (WEF) elitist Davos 2023 conference by saying he wants an mRNA vaccine factory on every continent and by confirming his negotiations with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to bring Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines to China. But there’s more: Bancel admitted on CNBC at Davos that Moderna was already working on a COVID-19 vaccine in January 2020 before the virus had reached most countries and before it even had a specific name.

Bancel went on CNBC at Davos to discuss a new Moderna RSV vaccine. But something far more interesting slipped out. “I’d like to go back,” the CNBC host said excitedly. “‘Cause the last time we were here in Davos in the winter, it was January 2020, and I saw you at that point, and we were at a breakfast.”

Bancel smiled. “I remember.”

The CNBC host continued enthusiastically, “You came up to me in this small room and you were talking about how you had actually the — you were working on a vaccine for — for COVID. And at that point, COVID-19 didn’t even really exist in our minds.”

Related: Moderna CEO at Davos: mRNA Vaccine Factories on Every Continent and Making a Deal With CCP

Bancel, still smiling, tacitly confirmed the story by agreeing, “I think there was no name at that time.” So Moderna was somehow developing a vaccine for an unnamed virus before it reached most countries outside China?

According to the CDC, COVID-19 first surfaced in December 2019 but was not even identified officially as a potential SARS virus until Jan. 1, 2020. So how was Moderna making a vaccine for that still unidentified virus that same month? I know very little about how vaccines targeting viruses are developed, but I’m pretty sure viral sequencing is required. In fact, viral sequencing is how a new virus is identified. WebMD explained in a medically-reviewed piece:

Genome sequencing is how scientists found this new human coronavirus [COVID-19] soon after it popped up in people. At first, what they knew was that people in China were suddenly getting sick with respiratory symptoms. So scientists sequenced the genome of a viral sample from a person who worked at a market where they thought it might have come from. By comparing the RNA sequence to other viral genome sequences they had from earlier studies, they could tell right away that it was a coronavirus they hadn’t seen in people before.

If WedMD is right, Moderna had already sequenced and identified COVID-19 or received that sequencing from someone else and begun its vaccine production before the virus had an official name. Add to that the question — where did Moderna get the virus samples or sequencing from? From the CCP? And did Moderna start working on the vaccine in January, or had it already started in late 2019 before the world supposedly knew anything definite about the virus? Something about this vague timeline is awfully fishy.

I’m no scientist, but Bancel and CNBC seem to have accidentally raised a lot of important questions that need answering.

Video: Rebel Media Reporters DESTROY CEO of Pfizer at World Economic Forum in Davos~The Big Pharma profiteer’s walk of shame.


Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

At the gathering of globalist elites for the World Economic Forum this week, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla was confronted by Rebel Media reporters including Rebel Media chief Ezra Levant on the sidewalks of Davos, Switzerland. The Big Pharma profiteer clearly was unaccustomed to the kinds of persistent, pointed questioning Rebel Media lobbed at him about his central role in the COVID vaccine debacle.

Don’t miss this blistering video below:

Evidence Show US Planned Covid-Style Crisis “For Decades:” Journalist Janet Phelan



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

There is a lot of evidence that forces within the U.S. government have been planning for a Covid-style pandemic “for decades,” explained investigative journalist Janet Phelan on this episode of Conversations That Matter with The New American magazine’s Alex Newman. She also said the entire Covid scenario is being used to radically empower the United Nations and the World Health Organization, which would take charge of future pandemics. This means an end to national sovereignty. The two also discuss abuses of elder Americans and conservatorship laws, particularly in California, an area where Phelan has exposed critical information.

Moderna Withheld Data From FDA Regulators to Get Bivalent Booster Approved

Moderna Withheld Data From FDA Regulators to Get Bivalent Booster Approved



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

How many times have we been treated, in the era of the New Normal, to exasperated corporate media hacks complaining about “misinformation” pushed by “conspiracy theorists” regarding the COVID-19 mRNA gene therapies deceptively marketed as “vaccines”?

As it turns out, the biggest purveyor of misinformation is the pharmaceutical industry, followed closely by the government and corporate media.

Via CNN:

The pharmaceutical company Moderna didn’t present a set of infection data on the company’s new Covid-19 booster during meetings last year when [FDA] advisers discussed whether the shot should be authorized and made available to the public…
That data suggested the possibility that the updated booster might not be any more effective at preventing Covid-19 infections than the original shots.

Specifically, Moderna hid data on actual infection rates among patients who were administered the original booster and those who got the bivalent “vaccine.” The reason is obvious: The data showed that the original booster resulted in fewer infections than the bivalent version, which clearly wouldn’t be good news for sales.

Related: Judicial Watch Releases Damning New Information on the Moderna Vaccine

1.9% of the study participants who received the original booster became infected. Among those who got the updated bivalent vaccine – the one that scientists hoped would work better – a higher percentage, 3.2%, became infected.

Research released by the New England Journal of Medicine found that “boosting with new bivalent mRNA vaccines targeting both the BA.4–BA.5 variant and the D614G strain did not elicit a discernibly superior virus-neutralizing peak antibody response as compared with boosting with the original monovalent vaccines.”

In English, that means they don’t work as promised.


When will Moderna get its Twitter account suspended for promulgating dangerous misinformation?

When will the White House collude to censor Moderna’s free speech?

When will Moderna’s licenses to create drugs get suspended, the way doctors were threatened with having their medical licenses suspended for spreading COVID “misinformation”?

When will CNN begin conducting ambush interviews of Moderna executives, as they do with defenseless independent practitioners like Dr. Mercola who challenge big pharma orthodoxy?

FDA approves OMICRON booster shots for babies, children



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

In early December 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) amended the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna/NIAID mRNA Covid-19 shots to include administration of the Omicron Covid booster shots to children as young as six months old. The action allows everyone over the age of six months to get the newest booster shot.1

The FDA made the decision to authorize the vaccination of infants and very young children just three days after Pfizer submitted an application to the regulatory agency for the Omicron BA.4/BA.5-Adapted Bivalent Covid vaccine.2

The bivalent Covid booster, which contains the original strain of the SARS-COV-2 virus along with spike proteins from the BA.4 and BA.5 variants of the Omicron strain, was approved for children five years of age and older on Oct. 12, 2022.3 FDA commissioner Robert Califf, MD said:

More children now have the opportunity to update their protection against Covid-19 with a bivalent Covid-19 vaccine, and we encourage parents and caregivers of those eligible to consider doing so–especially as we head into the holidays and winter months where more time will be spent indoors.4>

COVID Vaccination Uptake Has Been Slow Among Babies and Young Children

Omicron Covid booster shot uptake is limited because it is only available to infants and children who have received both doses of the original Covid shots developed by Pfizer and Moderna. Children who have already received three doses of the original Pfizer Covid shot are not eligible for the booster.

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials have reported that less than five percent of children aged two to four and only three percent of children and babies under the age of two have received the original Covid shots.5 Therefore, there is not much demand for Omicron booster shots among very young children. Meanwhile, 32 percent of children aged five to 11 years are fully vaccinated against Covid.6

Yale School of Medicine pediatrician Leslie Sude, MD said:

While a significant proportion of the population was not eligible for vaccination, there was still the opportunity for widespread circulation of COVID among children, who could then keep transmitting it to older people. And as long as the virus spreads from person to person, the virus can keep changing and evolving into new variants.7

However, Dr. Sude’s comment conflicts with CDC director Rochelle Walensky’s acknowledgment that getting a Covid shot does not prevent infection with and transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus to others. Dr. Walensky stated:

 Our vaccines are working exceptionally well … but what they can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.8

Covid Shot Study Data Not Peer Reviewed or Published

The FDA and a committee of independent vaccine experts relied on data provided by the vaccine manufacturers when extending the EUA for the bivalent Omicron Covid booster shot to infants and very young children. The data presented by vaccine manufacturers have not been peer-reviewed or published.9

When extending the EUA status of the Moderna Covid booster shot to babies and young children, the FDA relied on a clinical study looking at the immune response of adults to the Moderna product.  The FDA also compared a clinical study looking at the immune response of 56 children aged 17 months through five years after getting the full dose series of the original Covid shots plus the booster dose to a study examining the immune response of 300 young adult participants, who received the two-dose original Moderna Covid shot. The FDA concluded that the immune response of infants and very young children were comparable to the immune response in young adults.10

The FDA also looked at a clinical study examining the safety of a single dose Moderna Covid booster shot in 145 children aged six months through five years old. The study showed the common side effects in babies 17 through 36 months old were irritability/crying, sleepiness, and loss of appetite. Previous clinical trials showed the common side effects in this age group to also include fatigue, muscle pain, headache, joint pain, nausea/vomiting, and chills.11

The third dose of the monovalent Pfizer Covid shot will no longer be used in very young children and will, instead, be replaced with the booster dose. The FDA relied on efficacy data previously submitted by the drug manufacturer in individuals aged six months through four years old, 16 years and older, and adults aged 55 years and up who received the original two-dose series of shots, the monovalent booster as well as the bivalent booster dose.12

The safety of the Pfizer Covid booster shot for children aged six months through five years old was determined by looking at safety data from a clinical study of the bivalent booster shot in participants aged 55 years and older; clinical trials looking at the safety of the primary vaccine series in children six months and older with the monovalent booster, as well as safety data from clinical trials and post-marketing safety data of the booster shot in participants five years and older.

Even though the safety data presented did not include the bivalent Covid booster shot, the FDA concluded the previous trials and studies on the monovalent booster were relevant to the approval process of the bivalent Omicron version due to the fact the same manufacturing process was used to make both versions of the shot.13

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Gumbrect J. Children as young as 8 months can now receive an updated COVID-19 vaccine. CNN Dec. 9, 2022.
2 Pandolfo C. FDA authorizes bivalent COVID-19 booster shots for children under 5. Fox News Dec. 8, 2022.
3 Cáceres M, Fisher BL. FDA Authorizes COVID Bivalent Shots for Children as Young as Five Years Old. The Vaccine Reaction Oct. 17, 2022.
4 Gumbrect J. Children as young as 8 months can now receive an updated COVID-19 vaccine. CNN Dec. 9, 2022.
Pandolfo C. FDA authorizes bivalent COVID-19 booster shots for children under 5. Fox News Dec. 8, 2022.

6 MacMillan C. COVID-19 Vaccines for Kids Under 5; What Parents Need To Know. Yale Medicine Dec. 12, 2022.
7 Ibid.
8 Stykes E. CDC Director: Covid vaccines can’t prevent transmission anymore. MSN Jan 10, 2022.
9 MacMillan C. COVID-19 Vaccines for Kids Under 5; What Parents Need To Know. Yale Medicine Dec. 12, 2022.
10 News Release. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Authorizes Updated (Bivalent) COVID-19 Vaccines for Children Down to 6 Months of Age. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Dec. 8, 2022.
11 Ibid.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.

Mother Reverses Son’s Autism: Government & Elites Are Not Telling Public The Truth About MMR Shots



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Sixteen years ago, Tracy Slepcevic’s son Noah received the MMR vaccine. Noah followed the same exact pattern that so many other parents have seen happen after that injection. He was able to crawl, gesture and speak his first few words on a normal timescale, but after that Noah declined rapidly. He lost his ability to speak altogether, to make baby signs, to engage in basic motor functions… and Tracy’s doctors were telling her, all the while, no, this is all normal… Sometimes children just regress into autism, there’s nothing that you can do about it.

Are we in an autism epidemic?

Tracy 'Mrs.' Slepcevic joins to detail how she reversed the affects of her son Noah's vaccine injury!

She discovered real treatments and therapies that the government want's hidden!

Visit: to find more on Tracy and her work!

Watch this new segment NOW at!

Shingles May Be Triggered by COVID Shots

Shingles May Be Triggered by COVID Shots

BY Carolyn Hendler, JD


Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

A large retrospective cohort study conducted by researchers in Germany and the University of Virginia compared the incidence of shingles among individuals who did and did not get a COVID-19 shot and found a statistically significant difference providing evidence for an association between COVID vaccinations and increased risk for developing shingles or herpes zoster (HZ). The authors pointed out that “an association of HZ with COVID vaccination has been reported worldwide” and concluded that “the eruption of HZ may be a rare adverse reaction to COVID shots,” noting that varicella zoster (VZ), or chickenpox, reactivation is a well-established phenomenon both with infections and with other vaccines.”

Shingles is caused by the HZ virus and appears as a blistering, painful rash that occurs when VZ, the virus that causes chickenpox, is reactivated and moves to the nerves of the skin, where it produces the painful shingles rash. Like other herpes viruses, VZ lays dormant in the nervous system until it is reactivated.1 Elderly persons 60 years and older are more likely to develop shingles, especially if they are not asymptomatically boosted throughout life by coming in close contact with children recovering from chicken pox infections.2 3 About 20 percent of those who recover from shingles suffer from post-herpetic neuroglia lasting from months to years.4

Certain events can trigger the onset of shingles, including the natural decline of immunity that comes with age, stress, drugs, and vaccines.5 Recently, there have been widespread reports of the VZ virus reactivating after receiving a COVID shot, especially with messenger RNA (mRNA) technology such as Pfizer/BioNTech’s Comirnaty and Moderna/NIAID’s Spikevax biologics.6

Some experts have speculated that the link between the reactivation of varicella zoster and COVID shots could be due to the changes in immune system function after vaccination.  Risk factors for getting shingles include being older, undergoing severe stress, and having a weakened immune system.

Study Included Millions of People Who Did and Did Not Get COVID Shots

The study looked at real-world data of 1,095,086 people, who received a COVID shot compared to 16,966,018 people who did not get the shot and visited a clinic within the TriNetX Global Health Research Network database. The Network database aggregates data from multiple healthcare centers across 19 countries and the subjects were matched for age and gender. The vaccinated group visited the clinic for the purpose of being vaccinated, while the unvaccinated group went to the clinic for another reason.

Study results revealed that the vaccinated group had a 20 percent chance of coming down with shingles post-COVID vaccination while the unvaccinated group had 11 percent odds of developing the painful virus within 60 days of visiting the clinic. The study authors concluded that the difference was statistically highly significant.7

The authors wrote:

Consistent with the hypothesis, a higher incidence of HZ was statistically detectable post-COVID-19 vaccine. Accordingly, the eruption of HZ may be a rare adverse drug reaction to COVID-19 vaccines.8

SARS-CoV-2 Infection Can Also Trigger Shingles

The SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is known to cause lung and heart problems, has also been found to cause shingles. Numerous case reports indicated that SARS-CoV-2 infections could trigger reactivation of the VZ virus and researchers have hypothesized that it is linked to the physical and psychological stress of the body trying to deal with the SARS-CoV-2 infection.9

The journal Open Forum Infectious Diseases published a large study in 2022 comparing 400,000 people who had SARS-CoV-2 to 1.6 million people who have not had the viral infection. Adults over the age of 50 who had been infected with SARS-CoV2 had a 15 percent higher chance of coming down with shingles within the next six months. Patients who had severe cases of COVID requiring hospitalization had a 21 percent risk of developing shingles.10

Another Study Indicates Shingles May be a Side Effect of COVID Shots

A study published by Israeli researchers in 2021 in the British Society of Rheumatology showed that shingles could be a side effect of COVID shots. The observational study evaluated adverse events following COVID vaccination in subjects suffering from an autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease  (AIIRD) and compared 491 patients with AIIRD to 99 control subjects, all of whom received a COVID shot in two rheumatology departments in Israel.11 12

In the AIIRS group, six female subjects developed shingles post-vaccination (1.2 percent) compared to zero subjects developing shingles in the control group. Five of the six women came down with shingles after the first COVID shot and one after the second dose. All shingles cases were mild and resolved within six weeks.13

Patients Who Received Three Different COVID Shots Developed Shingles

This year, the journal Family Practice also published a report of three case studies of patients (one male, and two females), who came down with shingles three to 13 days after receiving three different types of COVID shots.14 All three patients were between 67-79 years old, were overweight or obese and had hypertension and dyslipidemia (abnormal amount of lipids in the blood) in their medical history. One patient had recovered from a SARS-CoV-2 infection a year before receiving a COVID shot and did not develop shingles following that COVID infection. All patients received different COVID shots, including Comirnaty, Spikevax, and AstraZeneca/Oxford University’s Vaxzevria, and all three completed the series of three doses despite developing shingles after the first dose.15

Study authors hypothesized surmise that “an altered immune landscape involving cellular immunity might be implicated in this phenomenon.”16

Immune System Depression Post Vaccination May Set Stage for Reactivation of Varicella Virus

A May 2022 study looked at 10 case studies of shingles that occurred one to three weeks after COVID vaccination. The authors speculated that similar to COVID infections, transient immunomodulation following vaccination could result in the reactivation of the HZ virus. More specifically, they proposed that lowered counts of CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, and natural killer cells could set the stage for the reactivation of HZ and the development of shingles.17

Complications from shingles include postherpetic neuralgia; ophthalmicus (painful rash in the fifth cranial nerve shared by the eye); acute retinal necrosis (death of eye tissue); Ramsay Hunt syndrome (facial paralysis near the ear and hearing loss); Bell’s palsy and Guillain-Barré syndrome, which involve paralysis of the face or limbs); encephalitis (brain inflammation), aseptic meningitis (inflammation of the lining of the brain) and myelitis (inflammation of the spinal cord); peripheral motor neuropathy (damage to nerves that control muscles), and bacterial skin infection.18

The study authors noted that reactivation of the herpes virus is a rare complication of other vaccines, most notably influenza, hepatitis A, rabies, Japanese encephalitis, and yellow fever vaccines and that, while research is limited so far, the COVID shots can likely be added to this list. They warned:

Vaccination initiatives for COVID-19 are in full swing. Given the large number of people who will be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, a possible causal link could result in a large number of cases among the elderly, with devastating consequences. Post-marketing surveillance procedures must be in place, and ongoing vaccination safety assessments are critical for detecting any occurrence that could reduce the projected benefits and, as a result, taking obligatory action to reduce hazards amongst vaccinated people…Our findings necessitate a further investigation of the possible relationship between COVID-19 and herpes zoster in the context of vaccinating elderly and/or immunocompromised people.19

A Decrease in Lymphocytes May Play Role in Shingles Post Vaccination

COVID is known to cause lymphopenia, a condition whereby blood doesn’t have a sufficient number of lymphocytes (white blood cells) to help the immune system protect the body from infection.20 21 Symptoms of lymphopenia may include swollen lymph nodes, spleen, and joints;  fever; skin rash; frequent infections or inability to heal from an infection. All types of white blood cells decrease but CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocytes tend to decrease the most and this T-lymphocyte impairment could lead to shingles.

The Pfizer/BioNTech COVID mRNA shot trials showed that there was a dose-dependent decrease in lymphocytes in the first few days after receiving the shot. At the currently used dose, up to 46 percent of the trial study participants had a transient decrease in lymphocyte count to below 1×10.9 The trial authors speculated that it is during this window of time when lymphocyte counts are lowered that the VZ virus can reactivate in the body.22

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Seladi-Shulman J, Goodwin M. Can a COVID-19 Vaccine Increase Your Risk of Shingles? Healthline Oct. 14, 2022.
2 Raines K, Fisher BL. CDC Accused of Manipulating Shingles Data. The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 19, 2019.
3 Forbes H, Douglas I, Finn et al. Risk of herpes zoster after exposure to varicella to explore the exogenous boosting hypothesis: self controlled case series study using UK electronic healthcare data. BMJ 2020; 368: 16987.
4 Agrawal S, Verma K, Verma I et al. Reactivation of Herpes Zoster Virus After COVID-19 Vaccination: Is There Any Association? Cureus May 2022; 14(5): e2519.
5 Ibid.
6 Seladi-Shulman J, Goodwin M. Can a COVID-19 Vaccine Increase Your Risk of Shingles? Healthline Oct. 14, 2022.
7 Hertel M, Heiland M, Nahles S et al. Real-world evidence from over one million COVID-19 vaccinations is consistent with reactivation of the varicella-zoster virus. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Apr. 26, 2022; 36; Iss. 8.
8 Ibid.
9 van Dam CS, Schaar J, Al-Dulaimy M et al. Herpes zoster after COVID vaccination. Int J Infect Dis October 2021 169-171.
10 DeLaire M. Risk of shingles rises after COVID-19 infection: study. CTV June 28, 2022.
O’Laughlin F. Study: Shingles may be side effect of COVID-19 vaccine. WHDH Apr. 20, 2021.

12 Furer V, Zisman D., Kibari, A. et al. Herpes zoster following BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a case series. Rheumatology, Vo. 60, Issue SI, October 2021.
13 Ibid.
14 Saraiva A, Viera AR, Marinho MC et al. Varicella zoster virus reactivation following COVID-19 vaccination: a report of 3 cases. Family Practice October 2022; 39(5).
15 Ibid.
16 Ibid.
17 Agrawal S, Verma K, Verma I et al. Reactivation of Herpes Zoster Virus After COVID-19 Vaccination: Is There Any Association? Cureus May 2022; 14(5): e2519.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
20 What is Lymphopenia? National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute May 31, 2022.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid.

Life-Saving Organ Transplants Denied to Unvaccinated People



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The idea that a person in need of a life-saving surgery would be denied that procedure by a doctor or a hospital administrator simply because the individual opted out of getting a COVID-19 shot seems surreal. It sounds unethical at the very least, criminal at worst, and certainly not something that one would imagine could happen in America. Yet, hard as it is to believe, this medieval-sounding scenario distinguished by callous disregard for human life has been played out on numerous occasions in the United States during the past two years.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

In one highly publicized case, Leilani Lutali of Colorado Springs was denied a kidney transplant by the University of Colorado Hospital in Aurora until she and her donor agreed to be injected with COVID shots. In North Carolina, Chad Carswell of Burke County was also denied a kidney transplant by Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Hospital in Winston-Salem until both he and his donor agreed to get COVID shots.1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10

In Ohio, unvaccinated Michelle Vitullo was denied a liver transplant by the Cleveland Clinic. In Washington, unvaccinated Derek Kovick was also denied a liver transplant by the University of Washington Medical Center in Seattle. In Massachusetts, unvaccinated DJ Ferguson was denied a heart transplant by Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.4 7 9 11

In a more recent case, 14-year-old unvaccinated Yulia Hicks was denied a kidney transplant by Duke University Hospital in Durham, North Carolina. The young girl, who is originally from Ukraine, suffers from a rare degenerative kidney condition known as Senior Loken Syndrome.12 13

Yulia’s mother reportedly asked a hospital employee, “So basically you’re telling us if she does not get the vaccine, then she’s not getting a transplant?” and the employee responded, “Yes, that is the one thing that is holding us up.”12 13 Mrs. Hicks said:

They said the CDC recommendation had been updated at the end of October, and they had to go by the recommendation, and if she didn’t get the vaccine she wouldn’t be getting a transplant at Duke.12

Yulia’s father added:

We’ve been up front the entire time we’ve been seen at Duke, for the last two years, that we were not comfortable with the vaccine, with the COVID-19 vaccine. And so they knew all along that we were not comfortable with this. And it wasn’t a requirement. It was… a recommendation, according to [the doctors] at first, until the very end.13

The father said that his daughter underwent a “nine-hour [medical] workup” in October and that that was when the doctors and hospital officials “decided or told us that this was going to be a highly recommended-slash-requirement for her to get a vaccine before she would get the transplant.”13

“There’s no sympathy whatsoever from any of them,” said Yulia’s mother. “It’s just strong-arming us: give her the vaccine, and you’ll get the transplant.”12

Some Organ Transplant Candidates Refuse COVID Shots Afraid of Life-Threatening Adverse Reactions

One of the concerns about the COVID vaccines (notably the mRNA shots) expressed by transplant candidates has to do with the risk of developing life-threatening inflammatory heart conditions known as myocarditis and pericarditis.14

The ethics of denying organ transplant candidates life-saving transplant surgery because they do not want to take the risk with potentially life-threatening medical interventions, such as vaccination, is the subject of heated debates. Which side you come down on may depend on your view of the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine being required as a condition of getting an organ transplant.

Yet, it is hard not to see at least some degree of cruelty and grim irony in condemning someone to death simply because they do not wish to be injected with a biological product like the COVID shot, which is known to cause severe adverse reactions, including fatal ones. It places people in desperate need between a rock and a hard place. It just seems wrong.

Some Surgeries Rejected for Fear of Transfusions With Blood ‘Tainted’ by Vaccination

Interestingly, while there are some unvaccinated (for COVID) people in need of an organ transplant who are being rejected for the surgery, there are also some unvaccinated people needing surgery who may be reluctant to have the operation for fear of receiving a blood transfusion that could contain blood donated by people who have gotten COVID mRNA shots.15 16

“The problem is right now we have no choice,” said Swiss naturopath George Della Pietra, founder of the nonprofit SafeBlood Donation, which matches unvaccinated blood recipients with donors in countries around the world. “I get hundreds of emails asking me, ‘Do you have blood [available], because I have surgery coming up in three weeks,’” Della Pietra said.15

According to an article in the Independent Sentinel, Della Pietra and other unvaccinated people believe that the COVID mRNA shots “contaminate” the blood and cause the “eventual destruction of the immune system.” In short, they believe that blood may be harmful if received from vaccinated people.15

A good example of this occurred recently in New Zealand when the parents of a four-month-old boy refused an operation requiring a blood transfusion for their baby using blood from the New Zealand Blood Service (NZBS) because the blood supply would include blood from donors who had received COVID shots.16 An article published by The Vaccine Reaction last week noted:

The parents expressed grave concerns about using blood from donors who had received the COVID shots and said they had more than 20 unvaccinated people who agreed to donate blood to their son for the operation. However, the hospital where the operation would be performed insisted on using donor blood provided by NZBS, which does not separate blood taken from vaccinated and unvaccinated donors.16

“We don’t want blood that is tainted by vaccination. That’s the end of the deal,” said the child’s father. “We are fine with anything else these doctors want to do.”16

While donated blood and plasma must go through a cleansing process before all transfusions, SafeBlood Donation does not believe that the process removes all mRNA ingredients. “I’m talking about graphene oxide and nondeclared inorganic components in the vaccine, which we can see in the blood,” Della Pietra said. “When I see them, I have no idea how we can get rid of them again.”16

Della Pietra thinks that unvaccinated people are getting vaccinated “more or less through the back door… You cannot avoid it anymore.”16

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

Note: This commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers.  The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking.

Millions Harmed by Medical Misdiagnosis in U.S. Hospital Emergency Rooms



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

A new study published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) on Dec. 15, 2022, estimates that about six percent of the approximately 130 million people (about one in 18 individuals) who seek medical care in emergency departments (ED) in the United States each year are misdiagnosed. This translates into about 7.4 million misdiagnosis errors that cause unnecessary harm to some 2.6 million patients and leave an additional 370,000 patients permanently disabled or dead.1 2 3 4 5

The study researchers from Johns Hopkins University, which reviewed 279 studies published between January 2000 and September 2021 to analyze the frequency and impact of diagnostic errors, found the rates of emergency department misdiagnosis to be similar to those observed in primary care and hospital inpatient care settings.2 3 5 They also found that…

Put in terms of an average ED with 25,000 visits annually and average diagnostic performance, each year this would be over 1,400 diagnostic errors, 500 diagnostic adverse events, and 75 serious harms, including 50 deaths per ED.3 5

Stroke is the Most Misdiagnosed Condition

The following five conditions account for 39 percent of misdiagnosis-related harms: stroke, myocardial infarction, aortic aneurysm/dissection, spinal cord compression/injury, and venous thromboembolism. Stroke, which involves a blockage that stops the blood supply to the brain or when a blood vessel in the brain bursts, is the condition that causes the most harm and is misdiagnosed about 17 percent of the time.1 2 3 4 5

According to the study, the main causes of diagnostic errors in emergency departments are mostly “cognitive errors linked to the process of bedside diagnosis.”3 Additionally…

Malpractice claims associated with serious misdiagnosis-related harms involved failures of clinical assessment, reasoning, or decision making in about 90 percent of cases. Similar findings were seen in incident report data. These issues are not unique to the ED—they are seen across clinical settings, regardless of study method.3

“Not all diagnostic errors or harms are preventable, but wide variability in diagnostic error rates across diseases, symptoms, and hospitals suggests improvement is possible,” the study noted. “Scalable solutions to enhance bedside diagnostic processes are needed, and these should target the most commonly misdiagnosed clinical presentations of key diseases causing serious harms.”3 4

Misdiagnosis: The ‘Elephant in the Room’

The problem of emergency department misdiagnosis was described as “the elephant in the room no one is paying attention to” by professor of neurology David Newman-Toker, MD, Ph.D., director of Johns Hopkins’ Armstrong Institute Center for Diagnostic Excellence and one of the study’s researchers. It is part of a broader problem of medical errors involving the U.S. healthcare system, which account for 10 percent of deaths in the U.S. annually and some $20 billion in costs to the country.2 6 7 8 

In 2020, a white paper released by the Foundation for the Innovation and Development of Health Safety found that 20-25 percent of patients are harmed by medical errors in primary and outpatient care in the U.S. and Europe, as well as in many developing countries. The report found that 25 percent of preventable harm done to patients was caused by mismanagement in the way drugs were administered and that, in the U.S. alone, adverse reactions to drugs were responsible for nearly 700,000 emergency room visits and over 100,000 hospitalizations every year.9

The problem of medical errors leading to millions of deaths over the past decades is a long-standing problem in U.S. healthcare. In 2000, the Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, published a report To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System, which revealed that medical errors in U.S. hospitals were a leading cause of death. Authors of the report said:

Experts estimate that as many as 98,000 people die in any given year from medical errors that occur in hospitals That’s more than die from motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS–three causes that receive far more public attention. Indeed, more people die annually from medication errors than from workplace injuries. Add the financial cost to the human tragedy, and medical error easily rises to the top ranks of urgent, widespread public problems.10

By 2016, Johns Hopkins University patient safety researchers reported that more than 250,000 deaths per year in the U.S. can be attributed to medical errors.7 11

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Abelson R. E.R. Doctors Misdiagnose Patients With Unusual Symptoms. The New York Times Dec. 15, 2022.
2 Advisory Board. Are 7M people misdiagnosed in EDs each year? A new study raises controversy. Dec. 19, 2022.
3 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review. Dec. 15, 2022.
4 Boggs J. Government data: 5.7% of ER visits misdiagnosed. Denver7 ABC Dec. 16, 2022.
5 Kounang N. More than 7 million incorrect diagnoses made in US emergency rooms every year, government report finds. CNN Dec. 16, 2022.
6 Al-Maskari K. 7 ways EHRs can reduce medical errors. Medical Economics Sept. 6, 2022.
7 Cáceres M. Study: Medical Error is the Third Leading Cause of Death in the U.S. The Vaccine Reaction May 6, 2016.
8 Johns Hopkins Medicine. Study Suggests Medical Errors Now Third Leading Cause of Death in the U.S. May 3, 2016.
9 TVR Staff. Medical Errors Harm Up to 25 Percent of Patients in Outpatient Care. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 27, 2020.
10 Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America: National Academies Press (US); 2000.
11 Johns Hopkins Medicine. Study Suggests Medical Errors Now Third Leading Cause of Death in the U.S. May 3, 2016.

Biomedical Terrorist Organization WHO Accuses Anti-Vaxxers of ‘Anti-Science Aggression,’ Calls Them ‘Killing Force’



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The Bill Gates-funded World Health Organization (WHO) is on the rhetorical warpath against “anti-vaxxers” who won’t submit to the mRNA injections, launching a new social media campaign to demonize their opponents.

Via ThinkCivics:

The World Health Organization (WHO) has labeled unvaccinated people a “major killing force globally” in a new campaign being promoted on social media.

The WHO is promoting a new video that targets “anti-vaccine activism” by blasting those who choose not to be vaccinated for supporting “anti-science aggression.”

The video features pediatrician and vaccine advocate Dr. Peter Hotez who laments the “devastating impact of misinformation and disinformation” regarding Big Pharma’s Covid shots.

Virologist Peter Hotez, the useful vector that the WHO uses to launch its attack, is a fat slob from whom no sane person would take medical advice. He admitted to Joe Rogan that he consumes fast food as the staple of his diet, with no regard for nutrition at all.

Here’s a challenge: find a single interview or publication from Public Health™ authority Peter Hotez discussing the negative public health impacts of unchecked obesity and the degradation of the American food supply.

Why would he concern himself with healthy food? Where’s the social control/profit angle for that? Where’s the career advancement angle?

Hotez, whose lab receives Gates Foundation money, has shilled for the vaccine passport/mandatory vaxx/lockdown agenda since the beginning of the pandemic because he knows where his bread gets buttered.

In 2021, Hotez published a “research” paper ostensibly calling for a government crackdown on “anti-science aggression”:

The acceleration of anti-science activities demands not only new responses and approaches but also international coordination. Vaccines and other biomedical advances will not be sufficient to halt COVID-19 or future potentially catastrophic illnesses unless we simultaneously counter anti-science aggression… solutions through biomedicine won’t be sufficient to halt the spread of COVID-19. We must simultaneously dismantle anti-science.

What does “dismantling anti-science” look like, and who’s going to be doing the dismantling? Which entity enjoys a monopoly on violence? Let your imagination run wild.


Judicial Watch Releases Damning New Information on the Moderna Vaccine



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

News has come out regarding the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, courtesy of Judicial Watch. The watchdog group announced yesterday that it had obtained records from a FOIA lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease. The entities had failed to respond to a FOIA request filed in June of 2021 regarding “the biodistribution studies and related data for the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson& Johnson COVID vaccines.”

Judicial Watch said that the records contained information…

…regarding data Moderna submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicate a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also reveal Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.

Moderna submitted a Nonclinical Overview to the FDA to have its vaccine approved. Included in that overview was information that rats born to mothers that had been given the mRNA vaccine had skeletal abnormalities that included conditions such as “rib nodules” and “wavy ribs.” Moderna said the conditions were not considered “adverse.”

Whether or not this is significant for pregnant mothers who took the jab more than likely remains to be seen. In October of this year, the CDC said that COVID-19 vaccines were recommended for people six months and older, including pregnant and nursing mothers and women who are trying to become pregnant. According to the agency, getting COVID-19 could result in complications that could affect pregnancy and a baby’s development.

The point is that Moderna should have told us about the issue with the bone problems in the rats, and the FDA and CDC certainly should have told us. I believe that is called allowing people to make informed decisions about their bodies. And last I checked, that was a very important issue for many.

During the pandemic, the public was urged again and again to get their vaccines, boosters, and third boosters. Even today, we are still being told to get yet another booster. It has even been billed as an important part of our holiday preparations. As I mentioned in another piece, my wife is still being asked how soon the next generation of jabs will be released.

Fortune recently featured an article that talked about a study in the American Journal of Medicine. The upshot of the Canadian study is this: people who opted out of the jab were 72% more likely to get into an auto accident. The theory is that such people distrust their governments. This, in turn, might also mean that they will ignore basic traffic safety rules. The authors of the paper went so far as to suggest that doctors talk with unvaccinated patients about safe driving and that insurance companies take vaccination status into account when it comes to issuing or renewing policies.

Earlier in December, the website News@Northeasten ran a piece highlighting a study by Northeastern physics professor Mauricio Santillana. Santillana, who specializes in epidemiology, worked with a team of researchers who tracked deaths from COVID-19 during the initial year of the pandemic. In a nutshell, the group found…

…that deaths spiked in well-connected, Democrat-heavy cities early in 2020, but that by the first pandemic winter, deaths were about three times higher in Republican-leaning—and specifically Trump-leaning—areas of the country.

So, as Gavin Newsom’s administration once said, “Vax for The Win.” Maybe. On the other hand, you could vax for myocarditis and children with bone deformities. But those details aren’t important. Line up, citizen. Get your shot, preserve your credit score, and keep your insurance rates low. Never mind those pesky rats. It’ll all work out. You have Biden’s and Fauci’s word on it.

DeSantis Unveils the First Steps in His COVID-19 Accountability Plan

Gov. DeSantis drops BOMBSHELL mRNA Pfizer vaccine news



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

In a private meeting with the Republican Party of Florida earlier this month, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) indicated that his administration would look for ways to hold COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers responsible for false claims about their products. Specifically, he referenced cardiac side effects from the vaccine and said that Florida would lead in addressing the issue. On Tuesday, DeSantis chaired a COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Accountability Roundtable and previewed the actions Florida will take.

DeSantis and the panel noted that the behavior of medical boards, federal government mandates, and a legacy media funded by Big Pharma allowed the vaccine makers to profit off mRNA technology. The governor then added that several false statements were made about the vaccines during the rollout. DeSantis referenced the claims that widespread vaccination would end COVID, that the vaccinated would not get infected, and that vaccines prevented transmission. “I think people want the truth, and they want accountability, so you need to have a thorough investigation into what’s happened with these shots,” he said.

“We also need ways to get more data so that we can better evaluate what actually happened. And the fact of the matter is we lack comprehensive patient-level data from the pharmaceutical industry, and that makes it very difficult for independent researchers to check the integrity of these shots that have been so pushed on Americans,” DeSantis pointed out.

Florida Public Health Integrity Committee member Dr. Joseph Fraiman interrupted and shared that he personally had trouble accessing patient-level data about the vaccines from the clinical trials to review. He added that there had been an open letter to the British Medical Journal (BMJ) asking Pfizer and Moderna to release it. “Well, maybe with what we are doing today, we’ll be able to get the data whether they want to give it or not,” DeSantis answered.

He continued, “In Florida, it is against the law to mislead and misrepresent, particularly when you are talking about the efficacy of a drug. We’ve seen just recently, Florida got $3.2 billion through legal action against those responsible for the opioid crisis. So, it’s not like this is something that is unprecedented.”

DeSantis announced a petition to be submitted to the Florida Supreme Court to impanel a statewide grand jury to investigate any and all wrongdoing in Florida concerning COVID-19 vaccines. The governor expressed confidence that the petition would be approved. He added that it would provide legal tools to get the additional information and open the door for legal accountability for any identified misconduct.

Related: Did Florida’s Surgeon General Just Preview the Next Explosive COVID Vaccine Study?

Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo made the second announcement, citing a German study that conducted autopsies on individuals who died suddenly in a specified time period after receiving the vaccine. Some of the individuals suffered from atypical or subclinical myocarditis. The researchers attributed the illness to the vaccine. Because these individuals died at home without being diagnosed, they are not included in the data on myocarditis. Florida will initiate a surveillance study to identify and document individuals who suffered from this vaccine side effect.

Finally, DeSantis announced how Florida would keep the public health establishment honest. DeSantis cited the public health response to the George Floyd riots as evidence of corruption in the system. While open states like Florida faced criticism for having beaches open, over 1,000 public health “experts” said that gathering for the protests was more important than locking down for COVID. No other type of protest or activity was permitted — just those surrounding Floyd’s death. If you went to play golf, you were trying to kill grandma. It was the height of absurdity.

“And our CDC, at this point, anything they put out, you just assume at this point it is not worth the paper it is printed on,” Desantis asserted. “And so it’s not serving a useful function. It’s really serving to advance narratives rather than do evidence-based medicine.” To combat the politicization of public health, Ladapo will convene a panel of independent experts to review public health guidance on various issues.

The Public Health Integrity Committee in Florida will assess recommendations and guidance related to public health and healthcare and offer critical assessments of the information the CDC and FDA provide. DeSantis discussed his plan to create this panel with other governors and alluded that other states may follow suit.

His plan is one of the many things that Congress should look at to devise systems to bring the NIH, CDC, and FDA under control. COVID brought to light the politicization of and conflicts of interest throughout the nation’s healthcare establishment. These agencies squandered their credibility, and it must be repaired before the next public health emergency.

WATCH the entire roundtable:


Bill Gates' unsettling accuracy in predicting future pandemics is cause for alarm. He not only anticipated the Covid-19 pandemic by participating in "Event 201" -- a global health exercise -- but also conducted a "monkeypox preparedness exercise" that forecasted its emergence to the exact month.


U.S. House Repeals Military COVID Vaccine Mandate



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

In a Dec. 6, 2022 proposed compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year (FY) 2023, the U.S. House of Representatives authorized $857.9 billion in spending for the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and included a provision repealing a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all military personnel instituted by the Biden administration last year. The repeal would take effect 30 days after the DoD funding authorization bill becomes law. To become law, the bill still needs to be passed by the U.S. Senate and signed by President Biden.1 2 3 4 5

Congress May Seek Help for Terminated U.S. Military Personnel

“I’m very grateful that we were able to build bipartisan, bicameral support and get this into the body of the bill,” said U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee. “Getting this issue off the table and bringing some common sense to bear around the vaccine mandate was a very important thing to do.”2

Additional congressional action, including reinstatement and providing back pay, is expected next year to assist U.S. military personnel, who were terminated for not complying with the federal government’s forced vaccination policy.2

Sen. Blackburn added:

There are many that have been removed. And some of those had already had COVID. Some of those had medical exemptions that were denied. And we are continuing to work through this issue, and to be certain that people are made whole will be important. But right now it is getting this lifted, and once we have done that, we will be able to move forward.2

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California said, “These heroes deserve justice now that the mandate is no more. The Biden administration must correct service records and not stand in the way of re-enlisting any service member discharged simply for not taking the COVID vaccine. Make no mistake: this is a win for our military. But in 28 days the real work begins. The new House Republican majority will work to finally hold the Biden administration accountable and assist the men and women in uniform who were unfairly targeted by this administration.”2

Federal Vaccine Mandate Has Hurt Military Recruitment

Among the principal concerns of members of Congress who have opposed the vaccine mandate for the military is that it has hurt recruiting efforts by the Pentagon. This was recently confirmed by Marine Corps Commandant General David Berger. “Where it is having an impact for sure is on recruiting,” said Gen. Berger, who admitted that the mandate was a “nonstarter” for many who are interested in enlisting in the military.6

“Small areas, big factor,” Gen. Berger said. “You talk to me in the cafeteria, and one of my first questions is, ‘Do I have to get that vaccine?’ And you go, ‘Yeah, you do.’ Ok, I’ll talk to you later. It’s that fast.”6

All branches of the military have been negatively affected by the COVID vaccine mandate, particularly the U.S. Army, which fell 25 percent (more than 10,000 soldiers) short of its recruiting target in FY2022. According to data released on Dec. 2, the Army has discharged 1,841 active-duty soldiers for refusing to get a COVID shot. While the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps have either stopped discharging personnel or been barred from continuing to do so by the courts, as of this past summer these branches had expelled 800 airmen, 1,000 sailors, and 2,000 Marines for opting to exercise their informed consent rights and not get vaccinated for COVID.6 7 8

“By the end of 2022, the active U.S. military will be at its smallest size since the creation of the all-volunteer force,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York. “There is no sunlight on the horizon,” said Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina. “It’s becoming clear the all-volunteer force that has served our country well over the last 50 years is at an inflection point.”9 10

If you would like to receive an e-mail notification of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Klein B. White House calls removing Covid-19 vaccine mandate a ‘mistake’ but won’t say if Biden will sign NDAA. CNN Dec. 7, 2022.
2 Laco K. Republicans cheer military vaccine mandate rollback, but stress service members must be ‘made whole’ again. Fox News Dec. 7, 2022.
3 O’Brien C. Defense bill rolls back Pentagon’s Covid vaccine mandate. Politico Dec. 6 2022.
4 Hobley N. Naval Commander Warns that Military Vaccine Mandate Poses Threat to National Security. The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 29, 2021.
5 Edmondson C. House Passes $858 Billion Defense Bill Repealing Vaccine Mandate for TroopsThe New York Times Dec. 9, 2022.
6 Lee M. Top Marine general says COVID vaccine mandate is hurting military recruiting efforts. Fox News Dec. 5, 2022.
7 Beynon S. The Army Keeps Booting COVID Vaccine Refusers as Shot Requirement May Be Dropped. Dec. 6, 2022.
8 Weekly Report. Military Loses Thousands Of Service Members Over Vaccine Mandate. U.S. Senator Roger Wicker July 25, 2022.
9 Schanz J. Military recruitment down as fewer young Americans enlist, are qualified to serve. WXYZ Detroit Nov. 11, 2022.
10 Tiron R. US Military Faces Biggest Recruiting Hurdles in 50 Years (1). Bloomberg Government Sept. 21, 2022.

WATCH: New Zealand Government Rips Baby From Mother’s Arms, Kidnaps Him for Forced Infusion of Vaccinated Blood



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

We previously reported on the ongoing legal struggle between Kiwi parents and the state over the medical fate of their baby, named Will — a story with important implications for medical freedom and parental authority throughout the West.

The parents believe they have the moral authority to direct their child’s medical care. The state believes differently.

Via CNN:

A critically-ill six-month-old baby will be placed under the temporary guardianship of New Zealand’s High Court after his parents refused to allow him to undergo lifesaving heart surgery using blood from people vaccinated against Covid-19.

Handing down the judgment on Wednesday, Justice Ian Gault ruled that the boy, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, would remain under the court’s guardianship until he had recovered from the surgery.

The court also appointed two doctors as its agents to oversee issues around the operation and the administration of blood, according to court documents.

Watch the heartbreaking video as government agents rip the baby from his mother’s arms.

The state always requires a brigade of soulless police willing to go to bat for it — the “just following orders” people. Some of these cops enjoy power trips, some are just in it for a paycheck, and others tell pretty little lies to themselves when their conscience pangs them. Others are simply too cowardly to ever stand up for what’s right. These are not respectable law enforcement servants; these are footsoldiers of totalitarianism, and they are sowing karma for themselves.

The parents had lined up unvaxxed donors and identified them to the court, which still rejected their pleas. Making appropriate arrangements with the hospital would have been imminently doable.

Research shows, and even the corporate media has been forced to admit recently, that young males are at elevated risk of heart inflammation (myocarditis) compared to the rest of the population.

Several Western countries, in fact, due to sober risk assessments, have banned the shots for children under 12. The potential costs far outweigh the potential benefits.

The New Zealand government, headed by WEF cut-out Jacinda Ardern, has embarked on a decidedly different trajectory, kidnapping children to infuse them with blood even in the face of viable alternatives that would respect parents’ sacred right to determine their own children’s destinies.

This is criminal. Every agent of the state — from the prime minister down to the cops — involved in this travesty of justice should be treated as enemy combatants and fully prosecuted as war criminals under Nuremberg II.

The Medical Community’s Reprehensible March Toward Segregated Medicine

Should black people be treated only by black doctors?



Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The need for someone who “looks like me” has become part of the American psyche. There are tens of thousands of articles about how people of color need someone who “looks like them” if they are to be inspired – or even able to achieve. A lack of “people who look like me” is also used to explain why people of color may receive inferior medical treatment.

This perspective is now found throughout the medical establishment. St. George’s University sums up the belief of many medical schools today. The Medical School states: “When a patient cannot find providers that resemble them, their beliefs, their culture, or other facets of their life, they run the risk of not being understood or being able to receive the appropriate treatment.”

Or as the University of Michigan Health Lab claimed: “Minority Patients Benefit From Having Minority Doctors.”

The National Library of Medicine lists dozens of articles claiming that healthcare outcomes are significantly impacted by discordant patients and medical providers. All of these claims are made in an effort to justify the need for more “people of color” in the medical field.

Yet, few ask how such a medical system would work. Would such a system mean that white patients would not be treated by Indian or Asian doctors? Should Blacks only be treated by Black doctors?

Currently, Asians comprise 17% of America’s doctors while only being 7% of the population – should they be limited to only treating 7% of all Americans?

Moreover, one has to ask how such a system could ever play out. According to one medical school, there are over 135 medical specialties and subspecialties. That includes everything from allergies to ophthalmic surgery to urology. Is it even possible that there can be the right ratio of doctors of all races and nationalities in every specialty?

There is no scientific basis for patients requesting that their doctor reflects their racial makeup. In fact, false claims that people differ biologically by race are exactly what has led to racism. Yet the American Medical Association continues to tout the political line that “diversity” in medicine leads to better health outcomes.

There is a constant flow of articles claiming that “racial discrimination permeates the healthcare systems” in the United States. But all accusations of racism are generalized. None of the articles ever discuss any specific doctors – nor any specific allegations.

If these associations learn that any doctors are indeed providing inferior care due to racism, those doctors should be disciplined. But no such charges have ever been made – despite the medical establishments’ ubiquitous charges of racism in the healthcare system.

If anything, the medical community has gone above and beyond to specifically protect black patients.

During the early days of the pandemic, many public health authorities gave black Americans priority access to vaccines – even before elderly white patients. The federal government and many local governments invested significant money in marketing the vaccine to black patients specifically. Now, white Americans are more likely to die of covid than black Americans, according to Harvard’s School of Public Health.

Prior to the vaccine, black Americans were dying at higher rates due to increased levels of comorbidities – including diabetes and heart disease. At the time, the racial disparity in death rates was a top conversation sparking questions about racism in the medical profession. But even after the disparity is reversed, the media continues to smear the American healthcare system as racist.

In the very article that described the white death rate surpassing the black death rate, the Washington Post wrote: “When it comes to racism, most people think of something that occurs between individuals. But it’s as much about who has access to power, wealth, and rights as it is about insults, suspicion, and disrespect. Prejudice and discrimination, even if unconscious, can be deadly — and not just for the intended targets.”

The Harvard professor interviewed for the report claimed that the American healthcare system needed to further address “the cumulative impact of injustice” in the same article, too.

Even when the medical community moves mountains to protect non-white patients, it is accused of harboring unconscious bias and constructing a system of injustice.

Rather than promoting scaremongers – that somehow white doctors are callous to the concerns of non-whites – the medical association and the media should be promoting a rational message based on science. After all, our bodies are essentially the same. The heart functions no differently in a black person than it does in a white person.

Constant claims that America’s healthcare system is racist will only lead to distrust. People may avoid treatment. Or people may equate vital medical advice like “stop smoking” or “improve your diet” to racism rather than science.

Yes, cultural differences can impact our health. Yes, some diseases tend to be more prominent in some races than others. However, white doctors are quite capable of understanding those variations. Just as Asian doctors are capable of treating a Jew who suffers from Tay-Sachs Disease more often than other nationalities.

Nothing is to be gained – and much is to be lost by racializing our healthcare system. Yet, in the name of supposed racial equity, our medical system seems to be moving toward a system based on race rather than science.

1 2 3 7