Polling Reveals A Profound Shift on Vaccines: We Can't Let Pharma Bury It

Relentless lobbying and erroneous data has begun sidelining vaccine safety. We are now the majority and need to come together to stop this.

Story at a Glance:

•Due to widespread media and scientific censorship, accurate information which challenges pharmaceutical interests is difficult to obtain. Polling offers a unique means to bypass this blockade.

•Extensive polling shows 9%–34% of COVID vaccine recipients developed side effects from the vaccine, 7-13% developed serious side effects, 7.5-22% know someone with a severe vaccine injury, 24-28% know someone who they believe died from the vaccine and 46-55% believe the COVID vaccines have killed a significant number of people.

•These results are profound and likely account for the unprecedented loss of trust in doctors and hospitals since COVID (from 71.5% to 40.1%) which is mirrored by a significant loss of trust in the pharmaceutical industry, government health authorities and support for childhood vaccinations (which, now, almost half of the population no longer fully trusts).

•MAHA’s policies and accomplishments, including those towards vaccines, are now some of the most popular issues with the electorate—but unfortunately are not being effectively promoted to the public due to media censorship.

•To prepare for the midterms, the Trump administration has pivoted away from vaccines due to (likely biased) polling data suggesting that vaccines are a toxic issue that must be avoided to have a chance of winning the election.

•I believe this pivot is a mistake as the polls (detailed in this article) show immense support for RFK’s actions on vaccines. Furthermore, this mistake is very similar to what happened in 2020 as the Trump administration struggled to address COVID and failed to secure the 2020 election.

Joe Rogan recently had RFK Jr. on his show, and there, RFK presented an excellent summary of the wide range of remarkable (and previously impossible) things he and his team have been able to pull off after a year due to them having the president’s complete support to challenge the vested interests that profit off of keeping us sick. As such, for those of you who want to know what MAHA is actually doing, I would highly recommend watching it.

Unfortunately, this segment also confirmed something I was quite worried about: RFK, someone I know sincerely cares about vaccine safety, did not once discuss vaccines with Rogan, even in numerous instances where it would have been the most expected subject to insert after related points were raised. Based on this (and many other shifts I’ve noticed recently), I am relatively certain the Trump administration received polling data that made them decide the vaccine subject needed to be avoided until after the midterms and that instead “safer” topics with a more widespread appeal needed to be focused on now. In this article, I will provide the data that shows why this is a mistake and the key steps we can take to correct it.

Note: much in the same way they are angling toward “safe” political health topics, within the integrative medicine field, one of my longstanding frustrations with the discipline has been that most practitioners prefer the “safe” remedies (e.g., supplements and herbs) that are relatively unlikely to generate controversy, but avoid the potent “controversial” therapies (e.g., the umbrella remedies) that get results but are less “safe” to prescribe to patients.

Doctored Data

For decades, a fairly simple formula has been used to control the populace:

•Enshrine chosen parties as credible sources.
•Buy out each credible source.
•Have each bought out credible source reinforce the credibility of the other co-opted sources until a monopoly is established.
•Have the credible sources work in unison to amplify chosen messages or psychological campaigns that supported vested interests.
•Prohibit credible sources from airing anything which threatens vested interests.
•Have all the smaller cogs in the system be pressured to conform to the chosen narratives, and ideally, to identify with them and attack anyone who challenges them so everyone stays in line.

Because of how vast and interwoven it is, I long thought this framework could never be broken, and that there hence would only be a small portion of the population that saw through it. However, the internet, by allowing the free diffusion of information, broke that monopoly on truth, particularly once Elon Musk bought Twitter, and provided a way to prevent that same formula being enacted online as the establishment sought to transform the internet into a landscape of gatekeepers (e.g., Google, Facebook and Wikipedia) that controlled most people’s access to online information and “curated” all of it so only approved messages were seen.

A lot of my life has hence revolved around observing how this cruel formula is implemented within the mainstream media and scientific press so that I can:

•Be more equipped to discern what is true and what is false.

•Predict the future, as the formulaic step-wise nature of how this propaganda is implemented often is a “tell” for what will be enacted in the future (e.g., this is how I correctly predicted most of what was going to happen with COVID-19 at the very end of 2019).

•Look for loopholes in the matrix where truth is able to leak out and seize them (e.g., the censorship within mainstream scientific literature was gradually phased in a few decades ago, and largely constrained to Western countries, so a large part of “The Forgotten Side of Medicine” is digging up research outside those bubbles).

COVID Vaccine Polling

Because so many of the social institutions conspire together to reinforce narratives which are at odds with reality, “gaslighting” (abusively altering someone’s environment so they start questioning what they are seeing with their own eyes) is commonly used to describe living through this.

Since the scientific literature effectively gaslights us by refusing to publish validated data which challenges pharmaceutical interest (while simultaneously allowing misinformation that promotes industry interests to proliferate throughout it), critical data, like information on COVID vaccine injuries, was largely absent from any credible academic sources. This in essence, is how they are able to convince people vaccine injuries are “rare” and greatly outweighed by the benefits of the vaccine despite injuries being frequent and sometimes quite severe.

Because of this, vaccine safety advocates got extremely frustrated, and eventually, Charlie Kirk figured out a way to bypass this blockade and show people they weren’t crazy for thinking COVID vaccine injuries were very real.

Following this, a few parties like Steve Kirsch and his vaccine safety research foundation hired polling firms to directly survey the public on vaccine injuries and provided quantitative data on what was happening. In 2022, of those vaccinated:

In 2023, Professor Mark Skidmore hired a reputable polling firm (Dynata), which surveyed 2,840 respondents and found 15% of those vaccinated had a vaccine injury, 13% of whom categorized it as severe (along with 22% of respondents saying they knew someone with a severe vaccine injury). Since you just can’t say that, his paper was retracted, and he was subject to an ethics investigation that eventually cleared him.
Note: Skidmore’s paper emphasized an important point for all of these polls—since those severely injured were much less likely to be able to respond to a poll, they were likely underestimated in polling.

Likewise, in 2024, a 1000 person poll Kirsch commissioned found that 12.5%-20.3% of vaccinated respondents were injured from the shots (along with 7.6-12.2% knowing someone who was injured), with roughly two-thirds of the injured categorizing their vaccine injury as “serious” or “very serious.” However, despite Democrat respondents reporting a higher rate of vaccine injury for themselves and those around them, they were much more likely to believe the vaccine was safe and effective (83.62% did) than Republicans (44.49%) or Independents (51.81%).

Note: in every poll I’ve seen, Democrats reported a somewhat higher rate of injury than Republicans (likely due to taking more vaccines) but simultaneously were much less likely to think the vaccine was unsafe or ineffective. Likewise, numerous polls consistently found those vaccinated were more likely to believe the vaccine was safe and effective. For brevity, I will omit that data (but for those interested it can be read here).

As no one wanted to touch this issue, only one polling organization independently investigated it, Rasmussen Reports (a conservative polling organization which has a reputation for getting accurate results due to them having listeners punch answers in response to an automated voice rather than directly talking to someone who may bias them). For American adults, they found:

•July of 2021: 32% believed public health officials were lying about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

•December 2022: 56% of 1000 respondents believed the vaccines were effective, 57% were concerned the vaccines had major side effects. Most importantly, 34% of those vaccinated reported minor side effects and 7% reported major side effects (e.g., those seriously impairing their quality of life).

•January 2023: 49% believed it is likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths and 28% personally knew someone whose death may have been caused by side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines.

•January 2023: 57% wanted Congress to investigate how the CDC handled assessing vaccine safety (presumably since many suspected the CDC had covered up the dangers of the COVID vaccination program).

•In March 2023, 11% of those surveyed reported that they believed a member of their household died from COVID-19, while 10% believed a member of their household died and that their death may have been due to a side effect of the vaccine.

•In September 2023, 47% of those surveyed stated they did not believe the vaccines were safe and 34% did not believe they were effective. As before, these results also politically stratified as Democrats were less likely to believe the vaccines were unsafe (14% D vs. 51% R) or ineffective (17% D vs. 57% R).

•November 2023: 24% personally knew someone they believe died from a COVID vaccine, and of those individuals, 69% would be likely to join a class action lawsuit against the pharmaceutical companies.

•In January 2024, 53% believe it is likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths and 24% personally knew someone whose death may have been caused by side effects of COVID-19 vaccines.

•In September 2024, 55% surveyed believe it is likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths – including 30% who say it’s very likely.

•In November 2025, 26% reported they had minor side effects from the vaccine and 10% reported major side effects. Additionally, 46% believed it is likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths - including 25% who say it’s very likely.

In short, the data shows you aren’t crazy, and while the news is not reporting it, the majority of people are seeing exactly the same thing you are. There is no getting around the fact a lot of people were harmed by these vaccines and one of the best data compilations I’ve seen that puts all of this into perspective was a March 2023 estimate Ed Dowd produced from data sources available at this time (e.g., these polls and disability data). This deliberately conservative estimate showed:

Note: one of the interesting discoveries in these polls (and many others) is that the rate of respondents who reported being vaccinated is much lower than the official figures suggested. I suspect a key motivation for this was that each increasingly authoritarian COVID vaccine mandate could only be enacted if a sufficient number of people were “vaccinated”. So in addition to pushing as many people as possible to vaccinate with the increasingly aggressive enticements we saw (scarcity sales, small payments, larger payments, prohibiting people from businesses, travel bans, and then mandates at school or work), they likely also directly inflated their figures.

Vaccine Polling

Typically, if a pharmaceutical injures people, propaganda can sweep it under the rug, and much of my life has revolved around advocating for those people. However there are limits to what propaganda can do, and once enough people are injured, it’s no longer possible to keep gaslighting people. As such, when I saw the early data on the COVID vaccines (much like what Charlie saw when he polled his crowd), I realized that this could not get swept under the rug, and that if we made the necessary commitments and sacrifices to keep going at it, the public would gradually awaken to.

This shift was reflected by a series of polls showing an unprecedented loss of trust in the medical industry:

•A JAMA survey of 443 455 American adults found in every sociodemographic group, trust in physicians and hospitals decreased substantially over the course of the pandemic, from 71.5% in April 2020 to 40.1% in January 2024.

•A recurring Gallup Poll found trust in the pharmaceutical industry has greatly declined:

In parallel, support for vaccine mandates (or vaccinating in general), which had been gradually declining, significantly decreased due to the COVID response:

Note: polling wording greatly affects outcomes. Jeffrey Tucker noted the wording of this question was designed to inflate “yes” responses. Likewise, he argued (and I agree) that one of the polls used to scare the Trump administration off challenging vaccines had similarly biased wording.

•This loss of trust, in November 2025, Pew again found was much more common in Republican voters:

Similar results were seen in a November 2025 Pew poll where 57% had high confidence in the effectiveness of childhood vaccines (45% R vs. 71% D), 44% were confident that their safety testing was adequate (29% R vs. 63% D) and only 41% fully trusted the CDC vaccine schedule (27% R vs. 58% D).

•Republican parents are far less likely than Democratic parents to have high confidence in childhood vaccine effectiveness (45% R vs. 71% D), safety testing (29% R vs. 63% D) and the vaccine schedule (27% R vs. 58% D).

Similar results were also found by a KFF tracking poll last year:

Along with one this year:

Note: this 2026 poll also found there has been a loss of trust in the MMR, COVID and Flu vaccines.

Real Voter Priorities

To prepare for the midterms, MAHA allies commissioned three polls to find out which issues had the broadest support in the public. The first, from John Zogby Strategies found that a supermajority of voters support health and medical freedom. With vaccines specifically:

The second, of 1000 likely voters by Rosetta Stone found similar results:

Of note, this poll found that support for the Make America Healthy Again agenda (59.1%) was higher than for the Make America Great Again agenda (45.8%) or America First Agenda (54.4%), but the approval of what President Trump and Secretary Kennedy’s are actually doing to make children healthy is much lower (44.1% jointly), along with 46.4% for Secretary Kennedy alone, and 48.1% for Trump overall (rather than just children’s health). What this indicates is either that:
•MAHA is the Republican party’s strongest issue for the midterms, but the specific popular things MAHA is doing are not being effectively communicated to the public (in part due to ineffective messaging, and in part due to a hostile media either not covering it or misportraying it).
•RFK’s MAHA base feels disappointed he has not accomplished more (particularly on vaccines) while the left-wing base has gradually succumbed to the negative messaging directed at RFK Jr. by the media (resulting in the amazing propaganda feat of them despising someone who is actively advocating for the issues they deeply care about).

•A February 2026 poll from FLA found that MAHA was the most effective issue to flip someone’s vote (e.g., a key voting bloc chose the generic Democrat by a 5:1 margin, but once given a Republican who “focused on things like removing harmful toxins from our food, limiting pesticides in agriculture, and making sure our kids are not overmedicated” they instead chose the Republican by nearly a 2:1 margin). Likewise, a large portion of voters were simply not motivated to turn out for the elections unless MAHA issues were championed by their candidate. Additionally, while not the most popular MAHA point, candidates championing reducing the vaccine schedule, at became much more favorable to voters.

On this 1-10 scale, 0=much less likely to vote for a candidate advocating for these policies, 10=much more likely to vote. Reducing the number of vaccines was a 6,7

Additionally, that poll again showed the majority of voters have significant concerns over the current vaccine program.

With the second question, 8% said vaccines are inherently dangerous and spacing them out (something the CDC prohibits) is not sufficient to prevent harm.

All of these polls (along with the far more extensive non-vaccine MAHA data I did not include here) touch upon a simple fact. People get that they are unhealthy and the system profits off their sickness. That’s why so many people are yearning for a change, and simultaneously why, until now, virtually no politician has been willing to threaten vested interests by stopping the mass poisoning of society. It’s absurd that’s been our status quo, but simultaneously, I am grateful that due to an unlikely alignment of fate, we finally had a political revolution that made politicians finally be interested in pursuing the issues we care about.

Lastly, it is important to note that many polls are not accurate, either due to poor methodology or because the individual conducting the poll has an agenda and the poll is structured so that it affirms their world view (e.g., certain politicians frequently complain polls are rigged to demoralize a candidate’s supporters and in both 2016 and 2024 Trump significantly outperformed what the polls forecast).

For example, consider this poll conducted at the end of December by FLA that found MAHA is popular, except for vaccines, and that pursuing that issue in the competitive districts will likely cost Congressional seats.

Unlike all the other (relatively unknown) polls which have shown strong support for vaccine safety, this outlier was promoted by the mainstream media (e.g., the New York Times published an article framed around just one in five Americans supporting rolling back the CDC vaccine schedule and that supporting vaccines would cost the midterms).

Smelling a rat, Jeffrey Tucker dissected the poll noting:
•The sponsor was never identified (this is a red flag).
•As the above questions show, the wording was very poor and designed to produce pro-vaccine answers rather than objective assessments of voter attitudes.
•These results wildly contradicted what every other poll showed in regards to public attitudes towards vaccines (which should be plain as day to you too as you review the actual data).

As such, Tucker concluded this poll was almost certainly sponsored (and then promoted) by the pharmaceutical industry in order to steer the Republican leadership away from touching the vaccine issue.

The COVID-19 Debacle

For all of human history, a common tactic in military campaigns (channelizing) has been to attack an enemy on one or more sides so they retreat to the side not being attacked and end up in a strategically disadvantageous position (e.g., they are corralled into an area where they are defenseless from an ambush).

Frequently when I observe propaganda campaigns being conducted by the mainstream media, it feels as though a very similar process occurs—that sadly is typically successful (and likewise, a major reason why I can “predict the future” is because I can see the lines of attack and hence the direction they are pushing things in).

My longstanding contention has been that the way Trump handled COVID-19 cost him the 2020 election, and I believe those lessons are a major reason why he’s had a much harsher stance on the pharmaceutical industry in his second term. It specifically cost him the election because:

•Immediately prior to COVID-19, the economy was in good shape, and per polling, Trump was favored to win the election. Likewise, once COVID started, the Democrat party coalesced around a marginal candidate (Biden) to keep Sanders from winning the primary, thereby alienating a major bloc of the party.

•COVID-19 destroyed the economy, thereby taking away Trump’s key edge. Likewise, it reframed Trump’s presidency to his gross failures to address COVID-19 (which the media promoted daily) and set the stage for pushing through mass mail-in voting (e.g., to protect people from getting COVID while voting) and all the electoral issues that entailed.

These failures to address COVID-19 were rooted in the COVID-19 policy as what was done (masking, social distancing, mass testing, widespread lockdowns and no treatments except remdesivir) was unproven, logically unsound, did not work, and arguably made things much worse. In contrast, a sensible policy was to prioritize developing effective treatments for COVID-19 that could address the illness early on before it became severe (rather than give them Tylenol), place cheap UV lights in buildings (as these sanitized the air and prevented indoor COVID transmission thereby eliminating any justification for lockdowns or masking), and restricting the extreme COVID transmission prevention measures to those at high risk of dying from COVID (e.g., nursing home patients) and ensuring they had enough supplies to implement all of this correctly..

Based on what I observed during COVID-19, Peter Navarro’s memoir, and Scott Atlas M.D.’s memoir (particularly Atlas’s), I believe the decision to follow these flawed policies was largely Trump’s fault as:

•Early on, Navarro warned the Trump administration that COVID-19 would turn into a disaster unless proactive measures were taken to counteract it, but his concerns were dismissed by senior White House officials (much in the same way mine were dismissed by my colleagues).

•Trump and Navarro recognized the importance of early COVID-19 treatment, and focused on using hydroxychloroquine. However, the federal health bureaucracy continually sabotaged their efforts (particularly FDA chief Stephen Hahn, who was then rewarded with a lucrative position from Moderna shortly after leaving the FDA).

•Each time Trump touched a treatment option for COVID besides Fauci’s baby (remdesivir), such as hydroxychloroquine, the media went hysterical and a massive amount of bad press followed (leading to the White House not wanting to touch other promising COVID-19 therapies despite knowing they had a realistic chance of ending the pandemic).

•The media (and H.H.S.) however was extremely supportive of a COVID vaccine. Because of this, the Trump administration was corralled into waiting for a COVID-19 vaccine to come out, and their efforts were redirected into doing everything they could at “Warp Speed” to get a vaccine ready before the election (likewise, many executive meetings on COVID-19 meeting revolved around eagerly awaiting each new detail on the vaccine’s trial progress).
Note: at the last minute, Pfizer delayed their vaccine so that it was not ready until after the election. I suspect this was done because Biden was preferable for the industry’s interests and partly accounts for Trump now being more hostile towards the pharmaceutical industry (as he learned it’s not a good idea to make deals with the devil).

Atlas specifically highlighted that:

•The absurd COVID-19 policies originated from the COVID-19 task force (specifically Fauci, Birx), but due to their prestige in the media and a general lack of medical or epidemiological knowledge in the White House, no one wanted to challenge them, leading to Atlas eventually being brought into the task force to provide a counterweight to the masks, testing and lockdowns dogma.

•From the start Atlas was attacked by the media. At the meetings, Atlas was aghast that Fauci and Birx lacked a basic grasp of medical knowledge (to the point they likely could not pass a medical residency) or critical thinking and appeared unable to understand why their policies were illogical and counterproductive regardless of how much he dumbed it down.

•While the task force (particularly its head, Mike Pence) would default to siding with Fauci and Birx, Atlas was periodically able to convince them to change the most absurd policies. However, each time Atlas got traction, he was relatively certain Fauci leaked it to the press, as the media would immediately drum up a hysteria about how Atlas’s rational and safe policies would actually cause mass deaths throughout America, leading to the White House bowing to the political pressure and retracting the policy.

•Despite the process being enough to drive anyone insane, for the country, Atlas persisted and did all he could to dislodge Birx’s influence on the task force. However, in most cases, he failed because Trump’s advisors “did not want to rock the boat” before the election. In contrast, Trump said his gut told him the current path (lockdowns etc) did not make any sense and was harming America, but due to the pressure of his advisors and the media, he did not fire Birx or change course.

Once Trump lost the election, to quote Atlas’s book:

When he resigned from the Task Force in a telephone call to Trump, Atlas writes, the president told him, “You were right about everything, all along the way. And you know what? You were also right about something else. Fauci wasn’t the biggest problem of all of them. It really wasn’t him.” Trump meant that it was Birx, and Atlas couldn’t resist a parting shot at the aides who had been so afraid of her. Knowing that they were listening on the speakerphone in the Oval Office, Atlas said, “Well, Mr. President, I will say this. You have balls. I have balls. But the closest people around you—they didn’t. They had no balls. They let you down.” They let down the rest of the country, too.

Note: one of the most remarkable facets of this story is that shortly after leaving the Coronavirus Task Force, Birx became chief medical and science advisor for a company which sold UV light air purifying devices that disinfect buildings from infectious illnesses such as COVID-19.

Lastly, it’s worth noting that because of his strong feelings on vaccines (Trump has spoken out on the issue for decades due to people he was close to having children who were permanently damaged by childhood vaccinations), immediately after winning the 2016 election, Trump contacted RFK Jr. and asked him to chair a presidential commission to assess the safety of the childhood vaccines. However, this never happened and Bill Gates eventually took credit for sabotaging it. While I cannot prove this, I believe that the decision to pull it came from his administration lobbying for it rather than Trump himself. Yet, had Trump implemented that commission, it is unlikely Trump would have later gone all in on the COVID-19 vaccines and subsequently lost the 2020 election.

Internal Polling

The current war in Iran has the potential to be one of the most impactful events in our lifetime, so over the last week, I have talked to a lot of people from many different backgrounds about what is occurring and found they have wildly varying perspectives on it. Given this variation, I am relatively certain this is not a “90-10” issue that virtually every American adult supports. Recent polls (and those preceding the war) likewise support my observation:

•CNN/SSRS (Feb 28-March 1): 41% approve, 59% disapprove.
•Reuters/Ipsos (Feb 28-March 1): 27% approve, 43% disapprove, 29% unsure.
•NPR/PBS/Marist (March 2-4): 44% approve, 56% oppose.
•YouGov (March 3) 36% approve, 49% disapprove, 15% not sure.

I mention this because Tucker Carlson (who has been vocally speaking out against the war) recently shared an diverging perspective over what is going on within the White House:

There, he stated that he had been repeatedly visiting Trump to convince him not to invade Iran, but most recently, when he wanted to try to convince Trump to call his initial results a win and withdraw, his contact told him not to bother because Trump is being shown polling that this is a “90-10 issue” and the mainstream news he’s watching is reinforcing that there is overwhelming support in the electorate for the war, leading to Tucker understandably questioning the accuracy of this internal polling which concluded 90% support the war.

I mention all of this because I believe something very similar has happened with the vaccine issue, and I am almost certain Trump (or his staffers), in addition to the December FLA, are being shown internal polling which demonstrates that vaccines (support for them) are close to a “90-10” issue and because of this concluded that the issue needed to be dropped until after the midterms, as pursuing any questions of vaccine safety will cause their part to lose the election. I feel this is a mistake as:

•Much in the same way Trump was channelized (corralled) by the media into adopting counterproductive approaches for COVID, he is also being pushed by a hysterical media and medical community to abandon the vaccine issue entirely (while simultaneously corralled to “safe” health topics that do not get acrimonious media pushback).

•As I’ve shown, all available data (which I have presented here) shows there is large support for reducing the CDC schedule, investigating vaccine safety and rescinding mandates. In contrast, I believe the polls Trump has received are erroneous, and were likely concocted to corral Trump into backing off the vaccine issue, especially once he shocked the medical industry by speaking out against childhood hepatitis B vaccination and then suddenly cutting the mandatory childhood vaccine schedule in half.

•Within the current ideological splits of the country, those who are firmly committed to vaccines are also typically firmly opposed to Trump’s presidency. As such, it is unlikely significant electoral benefits will be seen from crafting policies that demographic favors.

•Presently, there is significant division and dissatisfaction within the Republican party due to some of the core issues his base overwhelmingly supported and elected Trump for being dialed back due to media pushback and protests from the left (which polls show is costing him immense support). As Trump’s 2024 victory was largely due to MAHA coming out in droves to vote for him and tipping the election, neglecting this issue until after the midterms is likely to demoralize the voters within that constituency (many for whom vaccines are their #1 issue) and backfire.

•Because so much needs to be done on the vaccine issue, delaying it by 8 months greatly stifles what can ultimately be done by the end of Trump’s term (particularly since the tactic the pharmaceutical industry keeps using is to try and stall anything being done so nothing really shifts by the time 2028 comes and it can all be reversed). Likewise, decisions have a way of solidifying, so the longer this continues, the harder it will be to reverse.

In short, because of how much institutional resistance there is to questioning the religion of vaccines, it’s essentially impossible to change Federal policies on vaccines unless the president directly orders it and then resists all external pressure to dial it back. However, due to his own negative experiences with vaccines and his headstrong nature, Trump did just that, and he is probably the only president we will see in our lifetimes with that unique confluence of traits.

What Can We Do?

Because there are so many serious issues and irrational beliefs surrounding vaccination, the program cannot be maintained if it is subject to open debate. As such, the goal has always been to prohibit discussion of the topic and instill such a strong religious adherence to vaccines that only lone voices can occasionally break through, and once those few do, they will immediately be dismissed and ignored.

This has been a very depressing situation to navigate (e.g., discussions are largely prohibited in the medical field even once you are a doctor and I’ve had neighbors whose had successive vaccine injuries yet refused to listen to me despite me correctly pointing out the likely consequences of each new injury in the weeks, months and years to follow). As such, rather than be frustrated with the current situation, I am overjoyed, as for the first time, people are openly discussing the dangers of vaccination, and now when the topic is brought up in groups, rather than be a pariah, you will frequently encounter people who will support your position. It’s really hard to put into words how profound a shift that is, and it feels that as time goes on, it will become harder and harder to cover it up as a critical threshold has now been reached, and the momentum behind the people awakening to this issue will create an avalanche that will sweep the old dysfunctional paradigm away.

Given all of this, I feel that the most important thing we can do is simply to continue making those around us aware of the dangers of vaccination, as regardless of what policy the government chooses, if most of the electorate does not want to vaccinate, it ultimately has to abide by that. At the same time, in the immediate future, actionable steps also need to be taken to utilize the window we currently have. The most poignant ones I have identified are as follows:

•From observing the Trump administration’s conduct over the last year, it appears that they are responsive to public pressure if it gains sufficient traction. For this reason, once I finish the DMSO project (I am very close now—I just have to finish going through 2022-2025 on the final search and with a team use AI to pare down a 17,725 page document of Chinese studies), I am planning to start bringing a lot more attention to vaccine injuries on 𝕏. I can’t do this alone, so if you can do the same, this will help make our voices be heard. Likewise, others are also doing the same. For example, after Joe Rogan had RFK Jr. on (where vaccines were not discussed) he immediately had Aaron Siri on who poignantly highlighted why the current paradigm around them is so dysfunctional.

•A petition is being circulated which is demanding “COVID Justice” (that presently has 26,000 signatures). Many people I know were involved in it, and believe that with sufficient signatures can make a real impact to public policy, so if you can, please consider signing it. Presently, much of the political leadership recognizes that the handling of COVID-19—particularly the vaccine injuries—was a major mistake and is hoping the issue will simply fade away. We cannot allow that to happen, both for the sake of those who are still suffering and because COVID offers one of the clearest lessons of our lifetimes about the dangers of allowing the pharmaceutical industry’s profit motives to go unchecked. That lesson must remain part of America’s collective memory as we work to dismantle the industry’s most predatory practices and maintain the public support necessary to do so.

•As far more scientific evidence of widespread injuries from the COVID-19 vaccines is beginning to emerge, ACIP (the committee which decides vaccine policy in the USA) will be meeting on March 18-19, and specifically discussing COVID-19 vaccine injuries. Prior to that meeting occurring (until March 12) it is possible to leave public comments (here). Please consider doing so, especially if you or someone you know was injured by the COVID vaccines. ACIP broaching this subject puts them at odds with a lot of powerful forces, so it is vital they receive public support for what they are trying to do.

Most importantly, because the media’s entire attention is focused on Iran currently, there is a very unique window to bring attention to this matter without the typical coordinated blowback doing so typically elicits.

Conclusion

One of the things I never ceased to be amazed by is how deeply the medical community, media, and political class defends vaccines, and to be honest, I have no idea if it’s due to an irrational religious belief in them, the fact that that belief ties together so many other belief systems our society revolves around, or the fact that vaccination (due to its high rate of chronic injury) sets people up to be customers for life of the medical industry.

For instance, if we look at the campaign being waged by the media here, they’ve essentially decided to sacrifice every other health issue their sponsors have long used to poison us (and never were willing to question) to divert us away from focusing on vaccination. Likewise, consider that virtually every MAHA confirmation session has revolved around pressuring the nominee to assert their allegiance to vaccination rather than any of the pressing health issues our country faces (e.g., recently with Casey Means). This I find quite astounding, as all the senators openly admit loss of trust in medicine in vaccines is a major problem facing the country, yet, they believe the solution is to browbeat someone we trust into endorsing vaccines—demonstrating that they can’t comprehend our beliefs are being derived through critical thinking rather than following an authority figure.

Ultimately, I believe many of the problems with vaccines result from the widespread faith that exists in them, vaccines being mandated, and lack of legal liability for manufacturers. The fact that someone can be mandated to take something and then have no recourse for the injury which follows is grossly unjust—to the point most people can recognize that if it is pointed out to them—but don’t due to the religious shield vaccinations have long had from ever being scrutinized.

As such, I believe the ultimate solution is to somehow change that (e.g., remove liability protection from vaccines patients did not want to take, but did due to a mandate). If someone is forced to take a vaccine and then gets injured, the party who forced them to do it must be held responsible to deal with what they created and for centuries now, we’ve seen medicine play all sorts of games to get out of that responsiblity. I believe the members of ACIP see this too, and that is hence why their upcoming meeting will specifically focus on the COVID vaccine injuries every policymaker is trying to forget.

We have a great opportunity here if we seize it, and I thank each of you who has supported the newsletter and made endeavors like this possible.