Thank you for this clear and cogent summary of the consequences of pulling childhood vaccines from GAVI. As a scientist who devoted my career to vaccines and antibody-based therapies, I am so appalled and ashamed that the government leaders responsible for this decision, as well as the shuttering of USAID, do not seem to understand the inhumanity of their decisions. We can be so much better as a country. Public health is under attack and I can no longer remain silent.
I shared the below content with my colleagues permission and would be very grateful for any response. Maybe you could use it in one of your upcoming newsletters? If she has these concerns, others must as well, and I'd love to know how to thoroughly respond to her.
Hopefully, you'll see this as this newsletter is already a couple months old. I am in discussion with a former work colleague about the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines and she sent me the following (which I know is long, but if you can't respond to me with what your take on it is, I hope it will give you more insight into what some highly educated and previously on board people are thinking these days) :
"Note: the “context” below got extremely long! Here’s the TLDR: our government approved novel experimental covid vaccines based on very limited data and no (zero!) information about long-term effects, while concurrently withholding life-saving treatment whose existence if acknowledged would have prohibited those vaccine approvals, thus lining the already-full pockets of big Pharma at the expense of American lives.
*****and here’s the long version*****
Over the last four years or so, my fundamental assumptions about the trustworthiness of the federal government have changed dramatically.
Optimally, so that we were at least both exposed to similar information, I would encourage you to read the Pfizer papers and/or other sources of information not promoted, and often subject to severe ad hominem attacks, by federal officials and their stenographers in corporate media. Another example: https://a.co/d/iOxYAZX
Unfortunately, those coordinated smear campaigns have been so successful that few people are open to consuming such sources, and I’ll understand if you are not interested.
Anyway, my loss of trust in the federal government mirrored the disillusionment I wound up feeling about state service, but was even more profound and disheartening. Your MDE experience was definitely an important factor contributing to that disillusionment.
I got a graduate degree in environmental policy and went into public service entirely motivated to make the world better. I didn’t care about prestige or compensation or job security. I didn’t even care about benefits or a pension, though of course now I’m very grateful to have both. I very naïvely assumed that everyone at MDE had more or less the same motivation.
Over time, I slowly came to conclude that, especially as people rose through the MDE ranks, a great many of them became mostly motivated by a desire to keep their jobs, not work too hard, and advance their careers and/or cash in by moving to a private-sector job. Of course that’s a gross generalization and I welcome your feedback on it, but I suspect it may resonate at least a bit with you. I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts. To me, similar phenomena appear at the federal level, often turbocharged by the *huge* piles of dollars involved.
Many things contributed to my loss of trust in the federal government and its vaccine-approval process, but for the purposes of this discussion, I’ll stick with the Covid vaccines and ivermectin. More context:
You’re probably aware that off-label use of drugs is extremely common and not generally regarded as problematic.
You may recall that early in the pandemic, experimentation with the off-label use of ivermectin for Covid quickly resulted in a massive govt/media campaign against its off-label use, from CNN inaccurately labeling it “horse paste” to medical boards around the country taking action to pull doctors’ licenses just for prescribing it. Personally I do not ever recall such a coordinated smear campaign against off-label use of a particular medication, especially one with a very long track record of safety, as is the case with ivermectin. None of my physician friends recall other examples where writing harmless off-label prescriptions threatened their medical license. In fact, as you may be aware, medical boards are notoriously very, very slow to take any action against their fellow doctors, even in cases of actual harm. Like bad-apple police officers, they often protect one another. So the campaign against the use of ivermectin for Covid was striking and unprecedented.
At the time I was fully bought in; I knew Trump was a foolish moron and trusted Sanjay Gupta et al when they told me that ivermectin was crazy and dangerous, and that the vaccines were safe and effective.
But here’s where things get dicey: I’ve since learned that ivermectin is used in many countries around the world to successfully treat Covid, and that many studies have proven its effectiveness. I have taken it myself for Covid several times.
So why then the massive, unprecedented smear campaign against ivermectin? Why are some doctors still fighting medical boards because they prescribed it?
Ivermectin is long off patent and no one makes much money on it. By contrast, vaccines that are recommended or mandated by our government are cash cows for big Pharma.
Pharmaceutical companies successfully offloaded any liability risk from vaccines onto the taxpayers in 1986.
Big Pharma is among the biggest funders of corporate news. Worse, pharmaceutical companies have many ways of influencing/compromising federal health officials, as a number of authors have documented. We all know how loudly money talks in Washington, and that influence goes far beyond Congress and campaign donations.
The EUAs required to get approval for the Covid vaccines - despite extremely-minimal testing and no clue about long-term effects - could only be issued if there was no effective treatment. That’s the deal with EUAs.
Ivermectin’s effectiveness was an inherent threat to the Pharma agenda. So in this country, rather than immediately start testing ivermectin for Covid as was done in many other locations, its use was effectively prohibited in favor of novel experimental vaccines.
Those vaccines have already proven to be less effective than initially promised. Due to the significant limitations of the VAERS reporting system, and perhaps to the insidious influence of Pharma throughout multiple federal agencies, the full extent of risks from these experimental vaccines will not be known for years to come, if ever. We do know that credible-but-suppressed analyses suggest that excess mortality has increased since 2021 amongst the vaccinated population, Eg -https://theethicalskeptic.com/2025/08/28/the-state-of-things-pandemic/
Ivermectin’s effectiveness against Covid is now clear, but I’m still waiting for Sanjay to apologize, for CNN to retract, for my own doctor to be able to prescribe it.
I am horrified and extremely angry that I was conned into getting an experimental vaccine whose efficacy was oversold, and into supporting my young-adult children as they got those experimental vaccines, while my government conspired with pharmaceutical companies and medical boards to withhold cheap effective treatment. This cost many lives.
That is the biggest cause of my own extreme skepticism about our vaccine-approval process, but books and articles by numerous other authors have lent significant support to that skepticism. Regrettably, as they continue to fail us, our corporate media outlets rarely tackle the actual substance of those publications, but instead engage in ad hominem attacks aimed at discrediting their authors.
A final note: RFK‘s book on Fauci was a NYT bestseller and included a number of *incendiary* allegations against Anthony Fauci, generally made by credentialed doctors and scientists and simply compiled by Kennedy. Yet despite the huge amount of attention this book garnered, and despite the significant damage it did to public trust in vaccine recommendations, Fauci has never brought a libel suit. Assuming he cares about his reputation, or at least cares about public trust in health recommendations, why not?
I and many others believe the reason lies in the general accuracy of the shocking information in the book, but as with all of this, I’m very open to hearing other arguments.
I meant what I said before: I would love to be wrong about any of this. But I fear that Truman and Eisenhower were right about the military-industrial complex, and that today, my bumper sticker is sadly accurate:
I look forward to reading and listening to this report. I know people that chose to not be vaccinated. One follows this person, Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt. I no nothing about him. This same friend had to be on a ventilator when she had covid recently. I am so devestated by what is going on all around.
Thank you for this clear and cogent summary of the consequences of pulling childhood vaccines from GAVI. As a scientist who devoted my career to vaccines and antibody-based therapies, I am so appalled and ashamed that the government leaders responsible for this decision, as well as the shuttering of USAID, do not seem to understand the inhumanity of their decisions. We can be so much better as a country. Public health is under attack and I can no longer remain silent.
Shared with interested lead educators. Thanks so much for what you are doing.
I shared the below content with my colleagues permission and would be very grateful for any response. Maybe you could use it in one of your upcoming newsletters? If she has these concerns, others must as well, and I'd love to know how to thoroughly respond to her.
Hopefully, you'll see this as this newsletter is already a couple months old. I am in discussion with a former work colleague about the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines and she sent me the following (which I know is long, but if you can't respond to me with what your take on it is, I hope it will give you more insight into what some highly educated and previously on board people are thinking these days) :
"Note: the “context” below got extremely long! Here’s the TLDR: our government approved novel experimental covid vaccines based on very limited data and no (zero!) information about long-term effects, while concurrently withholding life-saving treatment whose existence if acknowledged would have prohibited those vaccine approvals, thus lining the already-full pockets of big Pharma at the expense of American lives.
*****and here’s the long version*****
Over the last four years or so, my fundamental assumptions about the trustworthiness of the federal government have changed dramatically.
Optimally, so that we were at least both exposed to similar information, I would encourage you to read the Pfizer papers and/or other sources of information not promoted, and often subject to severe ad hominem attacks, by federal officials and their stenographers in corporate media. Another example: https://a.co/d/iOxYAZX
Unfortunately, those coordinated smear campaigns have been so successful that few people are open to consuming such sources, and I’ll understand if you are not interested.
Anyway, my loss of trust in the federal government mirrored the disillusionment I wound up feeling about state service, but was even more profound and disheartening. Your MDE experience was definitely an important factor contributing to that disillusionment.
I got a graduate degree in environmental policy and went into public service entirely motivated to make the world better. I didn’t care about prestige or compensation or job security. I didn’t even care about benefits or a pension, though of course now I’m very grateful to have both. I very naïvely assumed that everyone at MDE had more or less the same motivation.
Over time, I slowly came to conclude that, especially as people rose through the MDE ranks, a great many of them became mostly motivated by a desire to keep their jobs, not work too hard, and advance their careers and/or cash in by moving to a private-sector job. Of course that’s a gross generalization and I welcome your feedback on it, but I suspect it may resonate at least a bit with you. I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts. To me, similar phenomena appear at the federal level, often turbocharged by the *huge* piles of dollars involved.
Many things contributed to my loss of trust in the federal government and its vaccine-approval process, but for the purposes of this discussion, I’ll stick with the Covid vaccines and ivermectin. More context:
You’re probably aware that off-label use of drugs is extremely common and not generally regarded as problematic.
You may recall that early in the pandemic, experimentation with the off-label use of ivermectin for Covid quickly resulted in a massive govt/media campaign against its off-label use, from CNN inaccurately labeling it “horse paste” to medical boards around the country taking action to pull doctors’ licenses just for prescribing it. Personally I do not ever recall such a coordinated smear campaign against off-label use of a particular medication, especially one with a very long track record of safety, as is the case with ivermectin. None of my physician friends recall other examples where writing harmless off-label prescriptions threatened their medical license. In fact, as you may be aware, medical boards are notoriously very, very slow to take any action against their fellow doctors, even in cases of actual harm. Like bad-apple police officers, they often protect one another. So the campaign against the use of ivermectin for Covid was striking and unprecedented.
At the time I was fully bought in; I knew Trump was a foolish moron and trusted Sanjay Gupta et al when they told me that ivermectin was crazy and dangerous, and that the vaccines were safe and effective.
But here’s where things get dicey: I’ve since learned that ivermectin is used in many countries around the world to successfully treat Covid, and that many studies have proven its effectiveness. I have taken it myself for Covid several times.
https://c19early.org/i
So why then the massive, unprecedented smear campaign against ivermectin? Why are some doctors still fighting medical boards because they prescribed it?
Ivermectin is long off patent and no one makes much money on it. By contrast, vaccines that are recommended or mandated by our government are cash cows for big Pharma.
Pharmaceutical companies successfully offloaded any liability risk from vaccines onto the taxpayers in 1986.
Big Pharma is among the biggest funders of corporate news. Worse, pharmaceutical companies have many ways of influencing/compromising federal health officials, as a number of authors have documented. We all know how loudly money talks in Washington, and that influence goes far beyond Congress and campaign donations.
The EUAs required to get approval for the Covid vaccines - despite extremely-minimal testing and no clue about long-term effects - could only be issued if there was no effective treatment. That’s the deal with EUAs.
Ivermectin’s effectiveness was an inherent threat to the Pharma agenda. So in this country, rather than immediately start testing ivermectin for Covid as was done in many other locations, its use was effectively prohibited in favor of novel experimental vaccines.
Those vaccines have already proven to be less effective than initially promised. Due to the significant limitations of the VAERS reporting system, and perhaps to the insidious influence of Pharma throughout multiple federal agencies, the full extent of risks from these experimental vaccines will not be known for years to come, if ever. We do know that credible-but-suppressed analyses suggest that excess mortality has increased since 2021 amongst the vaccinated population, Eg -https://theethicalskeptic.com/2025/08/28/the-state-of-things-pandemic/
Ivermectin’s effectiveness against Covid is now clear, but I’m still waiting for Sanjay to apologize, for CNN to retract, for my own doctor to be able to prescribe it.
I am horrified and extremely angry that I was conned into getting an experimental vaccine whose efficacy was oversold, and into supporting my young-adult children as they got those experimental vaccines, while my government conspired with pharmaceutical companies and medical boards to withhold cheap effective treatment. This cost many lives.
That is the biggest cause of my own extreme skepticism about our vaccine-approval process, but books and articles by numerous other authors have lent significant support to that skepticism. Regrettably, as they continue to fail us, our corporate media outlets rarely tackle the actual substance of those publications, but instead engage in ad hominem attacks aimed at discrediting their authors.
A final note: RFK‘s book on Fauci was a NYT bestseller and included a number of *incendiary* allegations against Anthony Fauci, generally made by credentialed doctors and scientists and simply compiled by Kennedy. Yet despite the huge amount of attention this book garnered, and despite the significant damage it did to public trust in vaccine recommendations, Fauci has never brought a libel suit. Assuming he cares about his reputation, or at least cares about public trust in health recommendations, why not?
I and many others believe the reason lies in the general accuracy of the shocking information in the book, but as with all of this, I’m very open to hearing other arguments.
I meant what I said before: I would love to be wrong about any of this. But I fear that Truman and Eisenhower were right about the military-industrial complex, and that today, my bumper sticker is sadly accurate:
I look forward to reading and listening to this report. I know people that chose to not be vaccinated. One follows this person, Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt. I no nothing about him. This same friend had to be on a ventilator when she had covid recently. I am so devestated by what is going on all around.