Facts are facts. Only when we have the facts can we have a discussion or utter meaningful opinions. I have repeatedly been told that RFK, Jr. is wrong to claim that that numerous vaccines recommended by the CDC have not been properly tested. What's the truth? What follows are two images summarizing undeniable facts: the vaccine schedule and the vaccines that have been tested compared to control groups. First of all, Attorney Aaron Siri's chart of the 1986 vs. 2025 vaccine schedules:
CDC just published its 2025 vaccine schedules. We have now gone from 7 routine vaccine injections in 1986 to over 200 routine vaccine injections in 2025.Next, here is a chart posted by Mary Talley Bowden, MD., indicating the vaccines that have been tested against control groups:In 1986, before vaccine makers had broad immunity to liability for injuries, CDC's schedule had 7 routine childhood injections and none for adults or pregnant women.
CDC's 2025 schedule has 5 routine injections during pregnancy, over 70 routine childhood injections (birth to age 18), and over 130 routine adult injections (up to age 79). Counting non-routine injections, there are even more.
Here is an image comparing injections up to only 1 year of age between 1986 and 2024 (updated chart for 2025 and tweets about each of these vaccines to follow...):
Bowden states: "97% of childhood vaccines on the CDC schedule were not licensed by the FDA based on a placebo controlled clinical trial."
And consider that in the Gardasil study (the only vaccine indicated above as having a post vaccine placebo-controlled study), only 300 out of 18,000 in the placebo group were on a saline-based placebo. According to Brandy Vaughan, most of the control group was given a toxic adjuvant aluminum shot (see min 9 here). She explains that following the 1986 Vaccine Act, vaccines became quite profitable (in large part due the immunity granted to manufacturers). Vaughan is from an organization called Learn the Risk.
Anybody who is not beholden to corporate media knows that Jay Bhattacharya is an excellent pick for NIH. He rigorously followed the evidence throughout COVID, yet was unfairly disparaged as a "fringe epidemiologist" by Fauci's team, who were Big Pharma toadies who were wrong about almost everything they proclaimed, causing great damage to millions of Americans in the process. We need a fresh start like never before. No better place to root out industry corruption than Jay Bhattacharya as head of NIH.
JB: I don't know the specific number, but the magnitude of the protective effect of the lockdowns, if it's not zero, it's very, very close to zero. And for a very simple reason, you can see why it's right. The lockdowns, if they were to benefit anybody, it benefited members of the laptop class who actually had the wherewithal to stay home, stay safe while the rest of the population served them. Our societies are deeply unequal. It's a very small fraction of the world population that actually could stay home and stay safe. And so, when the lockdowns happened, a very large number of people essentially were left on the outside. They had to work to feed their families, to take care of their elderly parents or whatnot, and that meant that the lockdowns had no chance of actually working. The people that conceived the lockdowns have an extent of naivety about how societies work that it just boggles the mind. And then, you asked me, again, about the harms from the lockdowns." ...They're tremendous, and we're still just beginning to count them, right? So domestically, for instance, I think there's now a broad consensus that the lockdowns harmed our children. In many places, including California, children did not see the inside of a physical classroom for nearly a full year and a half. The consequences of that play themselves out with deep learning losses. By the way, it's concentrated on minorities and poor populations who didn't have the wherewithal to replace the lost in-classroom learning, but it plays itself out over a long period of time. The social science literature from before the pandemic documented in detail about how valuable investments in education are for the health of children. If you deprive children of education for even short periods of time, it turns out it leads to a lifetime of lower income, worse health, even shorter lifespans. One estimate from early in the pandemic, published by the editor of "JAMA Pediatrics," found that just the spring lockdowns in the United States alone cost our children 5 1/2 million life years in expectation. That's yet to come, but it's coming. The toll on skipped cancer screenings, again, starting to see it, but the full extent of it is yet to come. In the poorer parts of the world, the consequences have been absolutely devastating, something like 100 million people thrown into dire poverty, $2 or less of income. ...
The estimates from the World Food Program is that 100 million people were put into dire food insecurity, near starvation. We haven't yet begun to count the deaths from that yet, but it's gonna be in the millions. And the children in poor countries... I'll just take Uganda as a good example of this. They don't have Zoom schools. They just had no school for two years, unless, again, if they were in the laptop class, a relatively small number. 4 1/2 million Ugandan kids never came back to school after two years out of school, and it turns out many of them, especially the little girls, were sold into sexual slavery or are married off as child brides. Many little boys were put into child labor. Their families were so poor that they faced this terrible choice between starving their kids or prostituting them. We're in a situation where the harms of the lockdowns have become and are becoming clearer and clearer every day, and the benefits, in terms of protecting people from COVID, it's becoming clearer that they did none of that.
Ed Dowd, former analyst with BlackRock, testifies before Congress about his findings of excess deaths and disabilities since the introduction of the COVID vax. In addition to vaccine safety, he raises urgent questions about U.S. nonchalance in light or this data:
The solution had never undergone human trials prior to 2020, and it was approved under an EUA in late 2020 within record time for a vaccine and a noticeably short trial period. The government deemed these products safe and effective and told the nation they would prevent you from getting and transmitting COVID-19. These statements have since been proven false. It has become clear that the U.S. government, along with the health regulators, do not desire an honest accounting of these policies that were imposed mostly under federal mandates. I will predominantly focus on the human and economic costs since the beginning of 2021, which if they were favorable to the current regime, you would be hearing them scream these results from the rooftops.
When analyzing the excess death human costs, it's interesting to note that in 2020, there were approximately 458,000 excess deaths, of which 73% were age 65 and older, and 15 to 64 comprising just 27%. Note, we were told in 2020 that the COVID-19 risk of death was primarily in the older populations. However, in 2021, with the rollout of the, quote unquote, safe and effective vaccine, there were approximately another 500,000 excess deaths but a mixed shift had occurred from older to younger. In 2021, the 65 plus age category was 57%. Remember it was 73% in 2020 of the total, while the 15 to 64 cohort increased to 43%. The absolute excess death increased from 20 to 21 for the productive working age 15 to 64 was 73%. So in 2020, 124,000 people perished excessively. and then in 2021 it rose to 215,000, 73%. For a virus that kills old people, this makeshift is an epic failure for the so-called vaccine solution. The total excess deaths since the rollout of the vaccine in the US, including 21, 22, and 23, is approximately 1.1 million. ...
The blame of the vaccine could be put to rest if studies were conducted of vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals. Independently of whether it's the vaccine or not, as a nation we should all collectively want to know what is actually causing these tragic health results. However, the silence by the health authorities and the U.S. government strongly suggest they know the answer to that question.
See this additional article regarding Dowd's findings regarding worldwide excess deaths.
Hepatitis B can only be transmitted sexually or by needles, yet the CDC insists that it is needed by newborn babies. What safety tests were run on the Hepatitis B vaccine by the manufacturer before it was released for children (including infants)? Only 147 children were injected and they were followed for only 5 days. There are so very many problems with this "testing," as explained by attorney Aaron Siri and Del Bigtree. Here is an excerpt:
Aaron Siri and Del Bigtree about hepatitis B vaccine: "Let's say you have a 1 in 200 issue, right? Let's say a 1 in 200, which would be very high. If we talk about like vaccine injury, they'll say, oh, it's 1 in a million. Well, let's just say it's like 1 in 200. If you only have 150 children in a study, you may not even see that issue, right?
Isn't that sort of like? Yeah, that's ridiculous. No clinical trial would ever have 150 children. Right, I mean. That's, you know what that sounds like, Del? That sounds like an anti-vaccine conspiracy theory. You're right, you're right. That's what it sounds like. We don't wanna do that. Yep. So how many people were in this study? Oh, it was 147. Yeah.
Let's go through it. It's one of my favorite things to do in depositions when I depose pediatricians, I'll ask. So tell me some of the false things you've heard about vaccines. What are those folks, got issued vaccines, saying? I just let them go and it's amazing how many times, many things they say are true. Right. And, you know, and that's... So they'll say that we haven't done proper safety studies.
Really, they've said that, huh? Like, how long would be a proper safety study, right? I could tell you some very interesting ones, but I don't want to digress. In three clinical studies, and here it is, here's the sentence summarizing by the FDA, you know, it's written by the company, approved by the FDA, summarized in clinical trial, relied upon to license for Comvax HB before it was injected into millions of babies. Here it is.
In three clinical studies, 434 doses of RecomVax HP5 micrograms were administered to 147 healthy infants and children up to 10 years of age who were monitored for five days after each dose. If I would have told anybody that, they would have said I'm crazy. There's no way. They tell us that they properly study these vaccines before they go on the market. They are robustly, the most thoroughly and robust study products ever.
But there it was, black and white, on the FDA website. So let's go through the three variables. First, what was the control? None listed. Meaning, what was the group that didn't get it that you compared them to track them for the same four days five days five days and said well look you had more fevers or more headaches or how much you'd see in five days you know but did the group that didn't get it got the placebo did they have the same amount of any those things obviously five days.
The Washington Post is concerned that the new public health officials are untested, failing to mention that the Biden public health officials got almost everything wrong about COVID, often lying to us and covering up their lies and missteps ever since. Excerpt:
Some health experts worry that those poised to assume prominent positions have gone too far in criticizing the pandemic response. “When we get into another firefight with a microbe, we need all hands on deck, and we need the best science and the best public health practice to come forward,” said Michael T. Osterholm, a University of Minnesota infectious-disease expert who advised President Joe Biden’s transition team. “I’m not confident at this point that this administration can do that.”