This article was originally published by Lance D. Johnson at Natural News.
For years, the public has been sold a seasonal bill of goods wrapped in a white coat and labeled “public health.” The narrative was simple, repeated like a mantra: the flu is a deadly threat, and the flu shot is your only shield. But what if the shield was made of tissue paper, and the threat was wildly exaggerated by the very institutions tasked with protecting us? A damning confluence of historical deception and alarming new data is pulling back the curtain, revealing a legacy of scientific fraud that now threatens to usher in an even more dangerous era of mRNA-based flu vaccines. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, long a rubber stamp for the pharmaceutical industry, is showing rare signs of resistance to the vaccine industry, because the evidence of flu vaccine failure has become too blatant to ignore.
Key points:
-
- FDA Commissioner Marty Makary indicated the agency will not automatically approve Pfizer’s new mRNA flu vaccine due to concerning safety data, particularly for seniors.
-
- This stance marks a potential departure from the FDA’s historical pattern of approving vaccines with questionable efficacy and safety profiles.
-
- Historical data reveal that traditional flu shots have been vastly oversold in effectiveness and under-reported in danger, with studies showing minimal protection and significant risks.
-
- A 2006 Cochrane review found no evidence that the flu vaccine was more effective than a placebo in young children, and similar reviews found little benefit for the elderly.
-
- The CDC’s often-cited figure of 36,000 annual flu deaths has been internally walked back, with the agency now admitting it does not know the true number.
-
- Flu vaccine death statistics disappeared during the rollout of COVID-19 propaganda and vaccine programs in 2021, providing more evidence of statistical fraud in the reporting of respiratory viral infections.
-
- Vaccine injury reporting systems have logged tens of thousands of adverse events from flu shots, including deaths and serious conditions like Guillain-Barré Syndrome.
Flu vaccine program built on statistical manipulation
For decades, the flu vaccine program has been built on a foundation of statistical manipulation and ignored casualties. The oft-repeated claim of 36,000 annual flu deaths, a ghost number conjured by CDC modelers in 2003, has been quietly dismantled by the agency’s own experts. They now admit that only a tiny fraction of respiratory and circulatory deaths are directly linked to influenza, with actual flu deaths numbering in the hundreds or low thousands in recent years. This manufactured crisis paved the way for a cradle-to-grave vaccination schedule. Yet, the science never supported the hype. A large-scale 2006 Cochrane review of over 260,000 children found the flu shot no better than a placebo for infants. For the elderly in nursing homes, another Cochrane analysis concluded the shots provided “little or no effectiveness.”
The real-world effectiveness is a far cry from the 60% figures sometimes touted. As health researcher Mike Adams has pointed out, when you examine the actual numbers from a key 2012 study in The Lancet, the picture is bleak. With only about 2.7% of unvaccinated adults getting the flu in the first place, the vaunted “60% effectiveness” translates to preventing illness in just 1.5 out of every 100 people vaccinated. This marginal benefit, akin to the power of a superstition, is then weighed against a ledger of harm that officials consistently downplay.
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has cataloged over 84,000 reports of injuries following flu vaccination, including more than 1,000 deaths. These are not just statistics; they are stories like seven-year-old Kaylynne Matten, who died four days after a routine flu shot during a check-up. The response from officials like Dr. Harry Chen, a state health commissioner, is a textbook example of the circular logic protecting the program: vaccines are assumed safe, therefore any death following them must be a coincidence, and the public must not be “alarmist” by asking questions.
A reluctant regulator confronts a new monster
This history of overstated benefit and understated risk sets the stage for the current showdown over mRNA flu vaccines. FDA Commissioner Marty Makary’s recent comments to Fox News are less a bold stand for science and more a reluctant admission that Pfizer’s new product is so problematic it cannot be waved through under the usual terms.
The Phase 3 trial data showed the mRNA shot “failed in seniors,” offering “zero benefit” while increasing the risk of serious adverse events like kidney failure and acute respiratory failure. Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., of Children’s Health Defense, noted this represents a moment where “Makary’s FDA threw out the rubber stamp.” The data was so concerning that Pfizer published results for adults under 65 in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, while hiding the damning senior data on a government clinical trials website. This two-tiered publication strategy itself reveals a consciousness of guilt.
Dr. Meryl Nass of Door to Freedom framed Makary’s stance not as revolutionary, but as a belated adherence to a 70-year-old legal mandate that drugs must be proven safe and effective. “The FDA has chosen to ignore that mandate due to politics,” Nass said. Makary himself criticized the “eternal COVID booster approvals for young healthy kids” under the previous administration, calling a lifetime schedule of mRNA shots for a child “not based on science.” His comments align with a leaked memo from within the FDA’s vaccine division that called the annual flu vaccine framework an “evidence-based catastrophe” built on low-quality evidence and poor methods, promising a major re-appraisal.
The inherent peril of a platform built on deceit
The push back against the mRNA flu shot is happening as confidence in the entire flu vaccine enterprise crumbles. A Cleveland Clinic study found vaccinated individuals were 27% more likely to get the flu. Other research has linked the shots to disrupted menstrual cycles. Public demand is stalling, and nearly half a billion dollars in U.S. funding for mRNA research was recently canceled. The core problem, as Nass explains, may be unfixable: “With regard to mRNA injections, no one has figured out how to make them safe.” She highlights the fundamental flaw that the FDA has inexplicably overlooked for years: these products deliver an unknown, uncontrollable dose, as the body’s machinery is hijacked to produce a foreign protein with no off-switch. “The mRNA platform is irrevocably flawed,” she concluded.
The FDA’s hesitant pause is not a victory for health freedom, but a testament to the overwhelming weight of failed science and human suffering that has finally slowed the approval juggernaut. It is a fleeting opportunity to re-examine not just a dangerous new platform, but the decades of fraud that made its introduction possible. The question is whether this moment of clarity will lead to a genuine purge of corrupt science, or if, as Jablonowski fears, “a future administration may resurrect the rubber stamp.” For the sake of countless future Kaylynnes, the public must demand that the facade stay cracked, and that the entire corrupt edifice of vaccine policy, built on exaggerated threats, diagnostic manipulation, iatrogenic errors in disease treatment, and minimized vaccine injuries, be brought down for good.
Read the full article here
