Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Easy Day 1 victory for Trump: Take COVID shots off schedule for kids

Published

6 months ago

6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Matt Lamb

While Americans may be divided on a variety of issues, including abortion, guns, and parts of the LGBT agenda, a topic they seem to unite around is not injecting six-month-olds with the COVID shot.

President Donald Trump has the opportunity for an easy Day 1 in office victory — remove the COVID jabs from the childhood schedule.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention added the shots to the recommended pediatric schedule despite children, especially babies, never being at any real danger of dying from COVID. The shots have been on the recommended schedule for almost two years now – but the widespread push has been a massive failure for the pharmaceutical industry.

Despite the medical establishment getting behind the push for pediatric COVID shots, and millions of taxpayer dollars spent on boosting them, a vast majority of parents are rejecting them. In fact, while Americans may be divided on a variety of issues, including abortion, guns, and parts of the LGBT agenda, a topic they seem to unite around is not injecting six-month-olds with the COVID shot.

According to the pro-vaccine Kaiser Family Foundation, only “15% of eligible children in the U.S. got a shot.”

This means that removing the shots from the recommended schedule would generate minimal pushback from parents.

While public health “experts” would likely complain, the parents have already spoken – they don’t want two or three more jabs for their six-month-old. The CDC currently recommends around 28 different jabs in the first two years of life.

Removal of the shots would be a way for Trump to show he is serious about taking on Big Pharma while also acknowledging the problems with the jabs he pushed through with Operation Warp Speed. It would also fit in with his pledge along with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to “Make America Healthy Again,” since the COVID jabs are linked to numerous problems, including serious heart problems and death.

“That will be one of my priorities, to make sure that Americans – of course, we’re not going to take vaccines away from anybody,” RFK Jr. told National Public Radio recently. “We are going to make sure that Americans have good information right now. The science on vaccine safety particularly has huge deficits, and we’re going to make sure those scientific studies are done and that people can make informed choices about their vaccinations and their children’s vaccinations.”

Evidence also supports removing the shots from the recommended schedule. Presumably, removal would discourage more parents from injecting their kids, as the shots would no longer have the CDC’s stamp of approval.

 

Medical experts have warned against the COVID shots for kids, as documented by LifeSiteNews.

“The Florida Department of Health is going to be the first state to officially recommend against the COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children,” Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo announced in 2022. “We’re kind of scraping at the bottom of the barrel, particularly with healthy kids, in terms of actually being able to quantify with any accuracy and any confidence the even potential of benefit,” Ladapo, a Harvard University-trained doctor, said in 2022.

READ: COVID vaccine-related death estimates suggest millions could have died from the shots

Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough also called on Trump last week to pull all COVID shots from the market.

“They have not had the safety track record America wanted to see,” he said recently.

“The viral infection [from COVID itself] is like the common cold now,” he said, as reported by Just the News. “So they’re not clinically indicated. They’re not medically necessary. They should be removed from the market.”

President Trump pledged to take on the Deep State. He also wants to make America healthy again and restore actual science to federal policy and not let big corporations write our regulations. He can do so by ensuring that the CDC does not needlessly push injections for a disease that does not really affect children.

Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices are appointed by the Department of Health and Human Services, so Trump’s HHS secretary could appoint vaccine science realists to the committee.

 

He could find ways to withhold funding until the shots are removed, or he could issue executive orders formally opposing the shots. He has some shrewd entrepreneurs like Elon Musk around him. Plus, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is an experienced litigator – someone can figure it out if they have the will. It is an easy Day 1 victory, and he should take the opportunity.

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
Crime / 3 mins ago

Mexican Cartels smuggling crude oil in Texas, Southwest border

International / 57 mins ago

Pentagon Salivates Over ‘Expensive’ Weapons While China Races Into Future With Iron Grip Over Cheap Drone Tech

Energy / 1 hour ago

European Outage Shows Weakness Of ‘Renewable’ Energy

COVID-19

Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’

Published on May 3, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Conservative Treehouse

The director of National Intelligence revealed gain-of-function ties to US funding, which could indicate that the US helped bankroll the supposed COVID lab leak.

In this segment of a remarkable interview by Megyn Kelly, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard discusses the current Intelligence Community (IC) research into the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (aka, COVID-19).

Gabbard talks about the U.S. government funding of “gain-of-function” research, which is a soft sounding phrase to describe the weaponization of biological agents.

Gabbard notes the gain-of-function research taking place in the Wuhan lab was coordinated and funded by the United States government, and the IC is close to making a direct link between the research and the release of the COVID-19 virus.

Additionally, Gabbard explains the concern of other biolabs around the world and then gets very close to the line of admitting the IC itself is politically weaponized (which it is but would be stunning to admit).

 

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Study finds Pfizer COVID vaccine poses 37% greater mortality risk than Moderna

Published on May 1, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

A study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause mortality after Pfizer vaccination compared to Moderna

A new study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, and COVID-19 mortality after Pfizer vaccination.

The study titled “Twelve-Month All-Cause Mortality after Initial COVID-19 Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273 among Adults Living in Florida” was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server. This study was headed by MIT Professor Retsef Levi, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo serving as senior author:

Study Overview

  • Population: 1,470,100 noninstitutionalized Florida adults (735,050 Pfizer recipients and 735,050 Moderna recipients).
  • Intervention: Two doses of either:
    • BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)
    • mRNA-1273 (Moderna)
  • Follow-up Duration: 12 months after second dose.
  • Comparison: Head-to-head between Pfizer vs. Moderna recipients.
  • Main Outcomes:
    • All-cause mortality
    • Cardiovascular mortality
    • COVID-19 mortality
    • Non-COVID-19 mortality

All-cause mortality

Pfizer recipients had a significantly higher 12-month all-cause death rate than Moderna recipients — about 37% higher risk.

  • Pfizer Risk: 847.2 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 617.9 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +229.2 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.37 (i.e., 37% higher mortality risk with Pfizer)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.384 (95% CI: 1.331–1.439)

Cardiovascular mortality

Pfizer recipients had a 53% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular causes compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 248.7 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 162.4 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +86.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.53 (i.e., 53% higher cardiovascular mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.540 (95% CI: 1.431–1.657)

COVID-19 mortality

Pfizer recipients had nearly double the risk of COVID-19 death compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 55.5 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 29.5 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +26.0 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.88 (i.e., 88% higher COVID-19 mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.882 (95% CI: 1.596–2.220)

Non-COVID-19 mortality

Pfizer recipients faced a 35% higher risk of dying from non-COVID causes compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 791.6 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 588.4 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +203.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.35 (i.e., 35% higher non-COVID mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.356 (95% CI: 1.303–1.412)

Biological explanations

The findings of this study are surprising, given that Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine contains approximately three times more mRNA (100 µg) than Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine (30 µg). This suggests that the higher mortality observed among Pfizer recipients could potentially be related to higher levels of DNA contamination — an issue that has been consistently reported worldwide:

The paper hypothesizes differences between Pfizer and Moderna may be due to:

  • Different lipid nanoparticle compositions
  • Differences in manufacturing, biodistribution, or storage conditions

Final conclusion

Florida adults who received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine had higher 12-month risks of all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality compared to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients.

Unfortunately, without an unvaccinated group, the study cannot determine the absolute increase in mortality risk attributable to mRNA vaccination itself. However, based on the mountain of existing evidence, it is likely that an unvaccinated cohort would have experienced much lower mortality risks. It’s also important to remember that Moderna mRNA injections are still dangerous.

As the authors conclude:

These findings are suggestive of differential non-specific effects of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines, and potential concerning adverse effects on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. They underscore the need to evaluate vaccines using clinical endpoints that extend beyond their targeted diseases.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal accounton X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.

Continue Reading

Trending

X