Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made a bold move by reallocating nearly $500 million from mRNA vaccine development towards “safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate.” This decision caused quite a stir, not just among the public health establishment and mainstream media but also some traditional conservatives. While the National Review editors praised COVID-19 vaccines for their alleged reduction in severe outcomes, they also noted that the virus naturally became “less severe over time.”
The editors cited President Biden’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which claimed that vaccines reduced hospitalization and death by 70% among those vaccinated. Despite this, they acknowledged the virus’s natural evolution. Surprisingly, an intern at the publication labeled COVID vaccines as “the most phenomenal medical breakthrough of the 21st century,” even though their inability to stop infection and transmission was known early on.
Global research continues to show severe adverse events following mRNA vaccination in certain low-risk groups. A German-led study published in the International Union of Immunological Societies’ journal provides a causal explanation for these events. The study, conducted by researchers from Germany and Hungary, found that mRNA-based vaccines produce numerous off-target products, which may lead to both acute and long-term side effects.
This research has gained attention on social media, with Utah doctor Kirk Moore calling it a “BOMBSHELL STUDY.” Moore, who faced charges of disposing of COVID vaccine doses and distributing fake vaccination record cards, had his case dropped by Attorney General Pam Bondi. This decision came after the trial started last month, halting Moore’s plan to use jury-nullification to reveal hidden records about COVID vaccination and deaths.
Kennedy’s decision to redirect mRNA funding has been described as a “first real policy course correction” by Andrew Huff, a former Ecohealth Alliance Vice President. Huff suggests that future vaccine development should aim for “broad, long-lasting immunity” across virus families and focus on stopping transmission “at the point of entry – especially the respiratory mucosa.” This shift in strategy indicates a move away from speculative biotech and towards more scientifically grounded approaches.
The study in Frontiers follows earlier research that highlighted higher-than-expected pregnancy losses after early mRNA vaccination. This research was based on an analysis of Israeli medical records before and after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in China. Another study published in Cancers last month found a correlation between mRNA vaccination and poorer survival rates in pancreatic cancer patients.
Former FDA Commissioner Marty Makary and vaccine regulator Vinay Prasad coauthored a paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics. They estimated that for every hospitalization prevented by COVID boosters in previously uninfected 18-29 year-olds, 18-98 individuals might experience serious adverse events. This statistic raises concerns about the risk-benefit ratio of COVID boosters for young adults.
The Frontiers paper assumes that mRNA-based vaccines have been effective in reducing severe disease and mortality. However, the German and Hungarian researchers aimed to understand the molecular mechanisms that might be causing cardiac side effects. Their findings suggest that spike protein aggregates formed after vaccination could be responsible for these adverse effects.
TrialSiteNews translated the explanation of how Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines work. They found that the vaccines prompt cells to produce two versions of the spike protein monomer. However, inconsistencies in the production of S2 subunits, depending on the cell type and vaccine, were observed.
Just a few hours post-vaccination, spike proteins began to clump together into large, sticky aggregates. These aggregates formed unique patterns in different cell types and caused various adverse reactions, particularly in heart cells. The study raised questions about how the body handles these spike proteins after vaccination.
Boosters of the COVID vaccine are also being scrutinized in light of new research. A Danish study published in a Journal of the American Medical Association found an association between myocarditis and the JN.1 jab. However, the study lacked an unvaccinated control group and had other limitations.
Mainstream media have also highlighted a Danish study in the Annals of Internal Medicine. It found no connection between early childhood vaccines and various disorders, seemingly rebutting Kennedy’s criticisms. However, some skeptics argue that the study’s methodology was flawed.
Kennedy’s HHS has also made moves to appease vaccine skeptics. The FDA approved Moderna’s latest mRNA vaccine, but only recommended it for people 65 and up and those aged 12-64 with higher risk from underlying conditions. They also stated they won’t approve annual COVID boosters for healthy people under 65 without clinical trials.
The reconstituted Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices removed mercury-based thimerosal from flu vaccines. However, this decision came 24 years after it was largely phased out of childhood vaccines. Critics, including Kentucky GOP Rep. Thomas Massie, argue that these actions are insufficient.
