Connect with us

COVID-19

COVID vaccine science catching up with ‘conspiracy theorists’

Published

9 months ago

10 minute read

Robert W Malone MD, MS · Who is Robert Malone
Dr. Raphael Lataster provides an update on the emerging peer-reviewed literature that continues to expand the data, analysis, and confirmation that the EUA/OWS mRNA vaccines were neither safe nor effective. Drs. Peter Marks, Robert Kadlec, NIH/NIAID VRC, Pfizer and Moderna were wrong to rush these products out while bypassing the accumulated regulatory and bioethics wisdom developed over decades. They must be held accountable.

Raphael Lataster, PhD

@okaythennews
Academic specializing in misinformation. Ex healthcare. Runs Okay Then News, a curated news aggregator highlighting media/government contradictions, hypocrisies, and outright lies. Big focus on COVID at the moment.

Two new peer-reviewed medical journal articles indicate that the science is starting to catch up with the ‘conspiracy theorists’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’ such as myself, also known as people that rationally asked questions of novel products that were rushed out the door, to help stem a pandemic that was far less deadly than all other causes, including cardiovascular disease, cancer, and even tobacco use (and note that COVID-19 deaths tend to be inflated). Publishing in the Polish Annals of Medicine, Thoene conducts a limited literature review on the reporting of COVID-19 vaccine severe adverse events in scientific journals, finding:

“From 2020 to 2024, the literature has gone from claiming there are absolutely no SAEs from mRNA based vaccines (2020/2021) to an acknowledgment of a significant number of various SAEs (2023/2024); including but not limited to neurological complications, myocarditis, pericarditis and thrombosis. … The early scientific literature was biased, so as not to report SAEs, due to social and political concerns and overwhelming corporate greed. Only in the last year have scientists been able to publish articles that acknow- ledge a high number of SAEs linked to mRNA based vaccines. This should act as a warning that science should be completely objective when evaluating health risks, but can often be influenced by social and economic considerations.” Source.

Proving once again that Eastern Europeans are based (the Hungarians stand up to the EU on immigration [source], and the Bulgarians published my little study on the correlation between COVID-19 vaccination and European excess mortality), the Polish journal kindly accepted my brief response, entitled ‘Scientific views around mRNA based covid vaccines are changing, but to what end?’, praising them and Thoene for this important paper, and noting that this is only the tip of the iceberg. Source. There is so much more in the published science that most people are unaware of, such as:

  • Thacker, on “issues such as data falsification and patient unblinding concerning Pfizer’s vaccine trial”.
  • Fraiman et al., on the “excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest with the mRNA vaccines”.
  • Benn et al., on there being “no statistically significant decrease in COVID-19 deaths in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials, while there was an increase (also not statistically significant) in total deaths”.
  • The JECP4 articles by Doshi’s team and Lataster’s team (of one, because nobody likes me…) on “counting window issues (such as counting window delays, counting window biases, and counting window misclassifications), likely leading to exaggerated effectiveness and safety estimates” in the clinical trials and major observational studies, with one of the major problems being “when COVID-19 infections are being overlooked in the ‘partially vaccinated,’ and in some cases were even ascribed to unvaccinated groups”. Note that Mead et al. discussed some similar issues and yet was astonishingly retracted.
  • Faksova et al., which Thoene barely mentioned, and which demonstrated that the vaccines are associated with several concerning adverse effects, despite employing a counting window endpoint of only 42 days following vaccination.
  • Raethke et al., “which noted a rate of serious adverse drug reactions of approximately 1 per 400 people”, which I note compares “very unfavourably with UK government estimates on the numbers needed to vaccinate in young and healthy people to prevent a severe COVID-19 hospitalisation being in the hundreds of thousands”.
  • Mostert et al., on the “mysterious problem of excess mortality post-pandemic, which they hint could be related to the COVID-19 vaccines”, and my aforementioned Bulgarian Medicine article demonstrating that there are indeed correlations between COVID-19 vaccination and European excess deaths.
  • Of course, my ‘favourite’ topic, COVID-19 vaccine negative effectiveness, where “the vaccines increase the chance of COVID-19 infection, and even COVID-19 death, a ‘benefit’ which is of course a poor trade-off for the risk of (other) adverse effects”. This “led to some discussion in major medical journals such as the BMJ [and also AJGP], with the most common excuse for this phenomenon being that there must be some confounding variable at play”, an “excuse that somehow does not apply before vaccine effectiveness crosses the x-axis, indicating a clear double standard (one of many) in how the vaccines are evaluated”.
  • Fürst et al. (those Eastern Europeans again!), on evidence “that a healthy vaccinee bias is at play”, which “would further imply that the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines is being exaggerated, beyond the effects of counting window issues and other data manipulations, even when declining to zero and beyond”.
  • The “substantive critiques appearing in influential medical journals of major observational studies purporting the benefits of the vaccines (with more on the way)”. These include my BMJ rapid response on the WHO’s jab study and the little academic debate between myself and a team from Johns Hopkins. Much more coming soon…

Still wondering how I managed to get this published, I end with a stark warning for those who partook in the deadly con:

“There is clearly much research on the COVID-19 vaccines, published in the biggest medical journals, which greatly contradict the mainstream and early, as well as ongoing, claims concerning their safety and effectiveness, and even necessity, for all. There is much more not mentioned in this brief article, and there is no doubt more to come. It seems obvious to me, that at least for the young and healthy, COVID-19 vaccines are most certainly not worth the risk, even when considering just a single adverse effect (myocarditis), no matter how rare it is purported to be – serious COVID-19 in the young and healthy is rarer still, and the same is even more true when considering the little to no benefits offered by what increasingly appears to be a feckless vaccine.

There have already been many legal actions, including victories (as with myself), initiated on behalf of the (somehow still alive) unvaccinated who were persecuted over a pharmaceutical product that they clearly did not need, and the vaccinated who have died and otherwise been injured as a result of vaccination. I anticipate that many more lawsuits are on the horizon, involving – amongst others – the vaccine manufacturers; the government officials that approved, encouraged, and even mandated the vaccines; and the many doctors and scientists who effectively betrayed their professions and public trust in encouraging the use of these flawed products based on very limited and even manipulated scientific evidence.”

Of course, while the science is starting to catch up, and the lawsuits are continuing apace (source), we’re still being told by our governments and mainstream media to roll up our sleeves, even those of us as young as 6 months. Source and source.

Okay then.

Share

Okay Then News (and the associated forum at CovidSkeptics.com) is my personal collection of evidences against mainstream narratives, made freely available to the public. Subscribe for free email updates, here.

If you wish to donate or support me, as I fight for our rights, including doing the necessary research, and attempt to pick up the pieces after they took everything from me (and continue to), you can sign up for a voluntary paid subscription, here.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 26 mins ago

Biden autopen scandal: Did unelected aides commit fraud during his final days in office?

Business / 2 hours ago

Conservatives demand probe into Liberal vaccine injury program’s $50m mismanagement

Business / 4 hours ago

Canada must address its birth tourism problem

Business

Conservatives demand probe into Liberal vaccine injury program’s $50m mismanagement

Published on July 15, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The Liberals’ Vaccine Injury Support Program is accused of mismanaging a $50-million contract with Oxaro Inc. and failing to resolve claims for thousands of vaccine-injured Canadians.

Conservatives are calling for an official investigation into the Liberal-run vaccine injury program, which has cost Canadians millions but has little to show for it.

On July 14th, four Conservative Members of Parliament (MPs) signed a letter demanding answers after an explosive Global News report found the Liberals’ Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) misallocated taxpayer funds and disregarded many vaccine-injured Canadians.

“The federal government awarded a $50 million taxpayer-funded contract to Oxaro Inc. (formerly Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton Consulting Inc.). The purpose of this contract was to administer the VISP,” the letter wrote.

“However, there was no clear indication that Oxaro had credible experience in healthcare or in the administration of health-related claims raising valid questions about how and why this firm was selected,” it continued.

Canada’s VISP was launched in December 2020 after the Canadian government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries.

However, mismanagement within the program has led to many injured Canadians still waiting to receive compensation, while government contractors grow richer.

“Despite the $50 million contract, over 1,700 of the 3,100 claims remain unresolved,” the Conservatives continued. “Families dealing with life-altering injuries have been left waiting years for answers and support they were promised.”

Furthermore, the claims do not represent the total number of Canadians injured by the allegedly “safe and effective” COVID shots, as inside memos have revealed that the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) officials neglected to report all adverse effects from COVID shots and even went as far as telling staff not to report all events.

The PHAC’s downplaying of vaccine injuries is of little surprise to Canadians, as a 2023 secret memo revealed that the federal government purposefully hid adverse effect so as not to alarm Canadians.

The letter further revealed that former VISP employees have revealed that the program lacked professionalism, describing what Conservatives described as “a fraternity house rather than a professional organization responsible for administering health-related claims.”

“Reports of constant workplace drinking, ping pong, and Netflix are a slap in the face to taxpayers and the thousands of Canadians waiting for support for life altering injuries,” the letter continued.

Regardless of this, the Liberal government, under Prime Minister Mark Carney, is considering renewing its contract with Oxaro Inc.

Indeed, this would hardly be the first time that Liberals throw taxpayer dollars at a COVID program that is later exposed as ineffective and mismanaged.

Canada’s infamous ArriveCan app, which was mandated for all travelers in and out of Canada in 2020, has cost Canadians $54 million, despite the Public Health Agency of Canada admitting that they have no evidence that the program saved lives.

Details regarding the app and the government contracts surrounding it have been hidden from Canadians, as Liberals were exposed in 2023 for hiding a RCMP investigation into the app from auditors.

An investigation of the ArriveCan app began in 2022 after the House of Commons voted 173-149 for a full audit of the controversial app.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Trump DOJ dismisses charges against doctor who issued fake COVID passports

Published on July 14, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Attorney General Pam Bondi has ended the federal prosecution of Dr. Michael Kirk Moore for giving ‘patients a choice when the federal government refused to do so.’

The Utah plastic surgeon who issued fake COVID-19 vaccine passports to help patients get around COVID vaccine mandates will no longer be prosecuted, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced Saturday.

During the COVID pandemic, Dr. Michael Kirk Moore Jr. and employees at his Salt Lake private practice developed a plan to provide patients who objected to being forced to take the vaccine with ineffectual, harmless saline injections instead and give them COVID vaccination cards that would satisfy (since rescinded) mandates to take the shot as a condition of employment, public facilities, mass gatherings, and more.

For his efforts, he was indicted for allegedly “endanger[ing] the health and well-being of a vulnerable population” and “undermin[ing] public trust and the integrity of federal health care programs.” The government also accused him of doing so for profit, but several sources attested off the record that Moore not only issued the cards for free but actually refused offers of compensation.

“They broke no laws and harmed no person,” the defendants’ legal team said in 2023. “Dr. Moore, specifically, abided by his long held Hippocratic oath to First Do No Harm. We believe he and his co-defendants will be found innocent of all charges.”

Last month, LifeSiteNews reported that Moore’s trial was set to begin on July 7, which could have potentially ended with him facing 35 years in jail and a $125,000 penalty. Supporters of the doctor had expressed worry that the change in presidential administration had not yet halted the prosecution.

Over the weekend, however, Bondi announced that at her direction it has now done exactly that.

“Dr. Moore gave his patients a choice when the federal government refused to do so,” she said. “He did not deserve the years in prison he was facing. It ends today.”

 

The federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 38,709 deaths, 221,030 hospitalizations, 22,331 heart attacks, and 28,966 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of June 27, among other ailments. U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than over-reporting.

An analysis of 99 million people across eight countries published in the journal Vaccine “observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses” of mRNA-based COVID vaccines, as well as signs of increased risk of “pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis,” and other “potential safety signals that require further investigation.”

In April 2024, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) was forced to release by court order 780,000 previously undisclosed reports of serious adverse reactions, and a study out of Japan found “statistically significant increases” in cancer deaths after third doses of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, and offered several theories for a causal link.

In January, a long-awaited Florida grand jury report on the COVID vaccine manufacturers found that while only a miniscule percentage of the millions of vaccinations resulted in serious harm based on the data it had access to, such events do occur, and there are “profound and serious issues” in pharmaceutical companies’ review process, including reluctance to share what evidence of adverse events they did find.

In May, Trump administration U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary and vaccine chief Dr. Vinay Prasad announced that there would no longer be blanket recommendations for all Americans to receive the shot, but the “risk factors” it would still be recommended for include asthma, cancer, cerebrovascular disease, chronic kidney diseases, a handful of chronic liver and lung diseases, diabetes, disabilities such as Down’s syndrome, heart conditions, HIV, dementia, Parkinson’s, obesity, smoking, tuberculosis, and more. Health & Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. subsequently announced COVID vaccines will not be recommended to healthy children or pregnant women.

The Trump administration has approved a new mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine from Moderna, suggesting the federal government’s overall view of the shots will remain favorable, albeit without mandates of any kind. At the same time, it does require mRNA COVID shots to carry a new warning about the danger of heart damage in young men.

Continue Reading

Trending

X