Connect with us

COVID-19

FDA Hid COVID Shot Side Effects—Congressional Report

Published

10 months ago

10 minute read

From Heartland Daily News

By Bonner R Cohen

The Biden administration “pressured the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to go beyond its regulatory authority to change its procedures, cut corners, and lower agency standards to approve the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination and authorize boosters”

A congressional investigation has found evidence the Biden administration pressured drug regulators to cut corners in authorizing COVID-19 shots and boosters.

An interim staff report by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust concluded the Biden administration “pressured the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to go beyond its regulatory authority to change its procedures, cut corners, and lower agency standards to approve the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination and authorize boosters,” states the subcommittee’s press release on the publication of the report, on June 24.

“This approval enabled the Biden administration to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine, despite concerns that the same vaccine was causing injury among otherwise healthy young Americans.”

KIN, JAPAN – APRIL 28: United States Marines queue to receive the Moderna coronavirus vaccine at Camp Hansen on April 28, 2021 in Kin, Japan. A United States military vaccination program aiming to inoculate all service personnel and their families against Covid-19 coronavirus is under way on Japans southernmost island of Okinawa, home to around 30,000 US troops and one of the largest US Marine contingents outside of mainland USA. (Photo by Carl Court/Getty Images)

‘Politics Overruled Science’

“In August 2021, when the Pfizer shots received FDA licensure, and just before the booster received EUA [Emergency Use Authorization], FDA vaccine reviewers with decades of experience announced they were leaving the agency,” said subcommittee Chairman Thomas Massie (R-KY), in a statement. “During the pandemic, politics overruled science at the government institutions entrusted with protecting public health.”

The 29-page report, “Politics, Private Interests, and the Biden Administration’s Deviation from Agency Regulations in the COVID-19 Pandemic,” traces the FDA’s approval process for COVID-19 vaccines and boosters from the last year of the Trump administration, 2020, through the Biden administration’s implementation of its own policies in 2021-22. Development of COVID-19 vaccines began in April 2020 under the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed (OWS), which followed the FDA’s standard EUA process.

Emergency Factor

The report says the FDA and manufacturers are supposed to monitor and communicate findings on effects related to a lower standard under an emergency declaration.

“The Biden administration, however, pivoted away from this important requirement and sought to ensure the EUA vaccine received full licensure as a way to support vaccine mandates,” states the report. “While the vaccine approval process can be robust and lengthy, the Biden administration through Acting Commissioner Janet Woodcock sought to move on an arbitrary political timeline and pressed the FDA to ignore its regulations in the approval process.”

“During this time,” the report states, “the administration ignored or silenced voices that questioned the merits of universal vaccination and downplayed the serious injuries from the EUA vaccine.”

BRENTWOOD, NEW YORK – APRIL 12: Gov. Andrew Cuomo speaks with students from Suffolk County Community College after getting vaccinated during a press conference on coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination at Suffolk County Community College on April 12, 2021 in Brentwood, New York. Gov. Andrew Cuomo held a press conference at Suffolk County Community College, a mass vaccination site, announcing that the state will be sending the coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine to colleges and universities across New York to encourage college students to get vaccinated before heading home for the summer. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Dissent from Within

Subcommittee investigators also examined how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) characterized the efficacy of the vaccine, the FDA’s active promotion of the vaccine in 2021 and 2022, and the CDC’s conduct related to reporting on the safety and efficacy of the vaccine.

“The transcribed interviews and internal FDA documents revealed that, despite evidence of harms from the EUA vaccine, the Biden administration sought to fully approve the Pfizer vaccine through the Biologics Licensing Application (BLA) process,” the report said. “The BLA approval occurred despite the objections of the FDA’s experts in vaccine development who were concerned about risks for healthy young people caused by the Pfizer vaccine, particularly the risk of myocarditis.”

Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., head of the FDA’s Center for Biological Evaluation and Research, testified to the subcommittee that, in rushing approval of the Pfizer vaccine, “he was seeking to appease outsiders who wanted to have an approved vaccine that gave them ‘more confidence’ in a vaccine, even though it was the exact same vaccine already on the market under the EUA.”

“Unless changes are made to improve the FDA’s once-robust vaccine approval process,” the report states, “future vaccines approved by the FDA may be met by an American public with increased skepticism and elevate the potential for higher vaccine hesitancy.”

Opened Pandora’s Box

The report’s findings were bolstered by pharmaceutical toxicologist Helmut Sterz, Ph.D., who served for eight years as CEO of global research and development at Pfizer’s lab in Amboise, France. In a July 8 post on Substack by Peter McCullough, M.D., and John Leake, Leake recounted a recent conversation with Sterz.

“Dr. Sterz confirmed that Pfizer-BioNTech did not perform proper toxicology studies on its COVID-19 mRNA ‘vaccine’ prior to its injection into hundreds of millions of people,” wrote Leake. “Those responsible for this undertaking created the Pharma Lab equivalent of a Pandora’s Box that has released a host of sickness and death on mankind.”

SEATTLE, WA – JUNE 21: A two-year-old wears a bandage after receiving her first dose of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccination at UW Medical Center – Roosevelt on June 21, 2022 in Seattle, Washington. Covid-19 vaccinations for children younger than 5 began today across the U.S. (Photo by David Ryder/Getty Images)

Rush to Mandate

Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, says she is not surprised by the report’s findings.

“The FDA’s regulatory process was clearly short-circuited. Americans have cause to seriously distrust the agency,” said Orient. “Many products, including vaccines, have been pulled from the market because of serious adverse responses, while reports of thousands of adverse effects associated with COVID injections are downplayed or suppressed.”

Orient added, “The people in charge of the rushed approval, such as Janet Woodcock, were also responsible for suppressing early treatment with hydroxychloroquine, as shown in AAPS v. FDA. The FDA failed to note a change in the manufacturing process that introduced DNA contaminants, which remained in impermissible quantities. Long-term effects such as cancer, birth defects, and infertility cannot yet be known.”

Joel Zinberg, M.D., senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and director of the Public Health and American Well-Being Initiative at the Paragon Health Institute, also points to the harm resulting from the FDA’s actions.

“The rush to approve the vaccine and mandate its use put otherwise healthy young people who have a virtually non-existent risk of severe COVID-19 illness at risk for little benefit,” said Zinberg. “However, it is in stark contrast to what then-candidates Biden and Harris said in 2020 when they discouraged people from taking ‘Trump’s vaccines.’”

Bonner Russell Cohen, Ph.D. ([email protected]) is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research.

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 / 9 hours ago

Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband

Canadian Energy Centre / 9 hours ago

Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

Alberta / 9 hours ago

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

International

Pentagon agency to simulate lockdowns, mass vaccinations, public compliance messaging

Published on June 12, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Tim Hinchliffe

With lockdowns, mass vaccination campaigns, and social distancing still on the table from the last around, it appears that AI and Machine Learning will play a much bigger role in the next.

DARPA is getting into the business of simulating disease outbreaks, including modeling interventions such as mass vaccination campaigns, lockdowns, and communication strategies.

At the end of May, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) put out a Request for Information (RFI) seeking information regarding “state-of-the-art capabilities in the simulation of disease outbreaks.”

The Pentagon’s research and development funding arm wants to hear from academic, industry, commercial, and startup communities on how to develop “advanced capabilities that drive technical innovation and identify critical gaps in bio-surveillance, diagnostics, and medical countermeasures” in order to “improve preparedness for future public health emergencies.”

As if masks, social distancing, lockdowns, and vaccination mandates under the unscientific guise of slowing the spread and preventing the transmission of COVID weren’t harmful enough, the U.S. military wants to model the effects of these exact same countermeasures for future outbreaks.

The RFI also asks participants “Fatality Rate & Immune Status: How are fatality rates and varying levels of population immunity (natural or vaccine-induced) incorporated into your simulations?“

Does “natural or vaccine-induced” relate to “population immunity” or “fatality rates” or both?

Moving on, the RFI gets into modeling lockdowns, social distancing, and mass vaccination campaigns, along with communication strategies:

Intervention Strategies: Detail the range of intervention strategies that can be modeled, including (but not limited to) vaccination campaigns, social distancing measures, quarantine protocols, treatments, and public health communication strategies. Specifically, describe the ability to model early intervention and its impact on outbreak trajectory.

The fact that DARPA wants to model these so-called intervention strategies just after the entire world experienced them suggests that these exact same measures will most likely be used again in the future:

“We are committed to developing advanced modeling capabilities to optimize response strategies and inform the next generation of (bio)technology innovations to protect the population from biological threats. We are particularly focused on understanding the complex interplay of factors that drive outbreak spread and evaluating the effectiveness of potential interventions.” — DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

“Identification of optimal timelines and capabilities to detect, identify, attribute, and respond to disease outbreaks, including but not limited to biosensor density deployment achieving optimal detection timelines, are of interest.” ­— DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

With lockdowns, mass vaccination campaigns, and social distancing still on the table from the last around, it appears that AI and Machine Learning will play a much bigger role in the next.

For future innovation, the DARPA RFI asks applicants to: “Please describe any novel technical approaches – or applications of diverse technical fields (e.g., machine learning, artificial intelligence, complex systems theory, behavioral science) – that you believe would significantly enhance the state-of-the-art capabilities in this field or simulation of biological systems wholistically.”

Instead of putting a Dr. Fauci, a Dr. Birx, a replaceable CDC director, a TV doctor, a big pharma CEO, or a Cuomo brother out there to lie to your face about how they were all just following The ScienceTM, why not use AI and ML and combine them with behavioral sciences in order to concoct your “public health communications strategies?”

When you look at recently announced DARPA programs like Kallisti and MAGICS, which are aimed at creating an algorithmic Theory of Mind to model, predict, and influence collective human behavior, you start to get a sense of how all these programs can interweave:

“The MAGICS ARC calls for paradigm-shifting approaches for modeling complex, dynamic systems for predicting collective human behaviour.” — DARPA, MAGICS ARC, April 2025

On April 8, DARPA issued an Advanced Research Concepts (ARC) opportunity for a new program called “Methodological Advancements for Generalizable Insights into Complex Systems (MAGICS)” that seeks “new methods and paradigms for modeling collective human behavior.”

Nowhere in the MAGICS description does it mention modeling or predicting the behavior of “adversaries,” as is DARPA’s custom.

Instead, it talks at length about “modeling human systems,” along with anticipating, predicting, understanding, and forecasting “collective human behavior” and “complex social phenomena” derived from “sociotechnical data sets.”

Could DARPA’s MAGICS program be applied to simulating collective human behavior when it comes to the next public health emergency, be it real or perceived?

“The goal of an upcoming program will be to develop an algorithmic theory of mind to model adversaries’ situational awareness and predict future behaviour.” — DARPA, Theory of Mind Special Notice, December 2024.

In December 2024, DARPA launched a similar program called Theory of Mind, which was renamed Kallisti a month later.

The goal of Theory of Mind is to develop “new capabilities to enable national security decisionmakers to optimize strategies for deterring or incentivizing actions by adversaries,” according to a very brief special announcement.

DARPA never mentions who those “adversaries” are. In the case of a public health emergency, an adversary could be anyone who questions authoritative messaging.

The Theory of Mind program will also:

… seek to combine algorithms with human expertise to explore, in a modeling and simulation environment, potential courses of action in national security scenarios with far greater breadth and efficiency than is currently possible.

This would provide decisionmakers with more options for incentive frameworks while preventing unwanted escalation.

We are interested in a comprehensive overview of current and emerging technologies for disease outbreak simulation, how simulation approaches could be extended beyond standard modeling methods, and to understand how diseases spread within and between individuals including population level dynamics.

They say that all the modeling and simulating across programs is for “national security,” but that is a very broad term.

DARPA is in the business of research and development for national security purposes, so why is the Pentagon modeling disease outbreaks and intervention strategies while simultaneously looking to predict and manipulate collective human behavior?

If and when the next outbreak occurs, the same draconian and Orwellian measures that governments and corporations deployed in the name of combating COVID are still on the table.

And AI, Machine Learning, and the military will play an even bigger role than the last time around.

From analyzing wastewater to learning about disease spread; from developing pharmaceuticals to measuring the effects of lockdowns and vaccine passports, from modeling and predicting human behavior to coming up with messaging strategies to keep everyone in compliance – “improving preparedness for future public health emergencies” is becoming more militaristically algorithmic by the day.

“We are exploring innovative solutions to enhance our understanding of outbreak dynamics and to improve preparedness for future public health emergencies.” — DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

Reprinted with permission from The Sociable.

Continue Reading

Business

Audit report reveals Canada’s controversial COVID travel app violated multiple rules

Published on June 11, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Canada’s Auditor General found that government procurement rules were not followed in creating the ArriveCAN app.

Canada’s Auditor General revealed that the former Liberal government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau failed multiple times by violating contract procurement rules to create ArriveCAN, its controversial COVID travel app.

In a report released Tuesday, Auditor General Karen Hogan noted that between April 2015 to March 2024, the Trudeau government gave out 106 professional service contracts to GC Strategies Inc. This is the same company that made the ArriveCAN app.

The contracts were worth $92.7 million, with $64.5 million being paid out.

According to Hogan, Canada’s Border Services Agency gave four contracts to GC Strategies valued at $49.9 million. She noted that only 54 percent of the contracts delivered any goods.

“We concluded that professional services contracts awarded and payments made by federal organizations to GC Strategies and other companies incorporated by its co-founders were not in accordance with applicable policy instruments and that value for money for these contracts was not obtained,” Hogan said.

She continued, “Despite this, federal government officials consistently authorized payments.”

The report concluded that “Federal organizations need to ensure that public funds are spent with due regard for value for money, including in decisions about the procurement of professional services contracts.”

Hogan announced an investigation of ArriveCAN in November 2022 after the House of Commons voted 173-149 for a full audit of the controversial app.

Last year, Hogan published an audit of ArriveCAN and on Tuesday published a larger audit of the 106 contracts awarded to GC Strategies by 31 federal organizations under Trudeau’s watch.

‘Massive scandal,’ says Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre

Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre said Hogan’s report on the audit exposed multiple improprieties.

“This is a massive scandal,” he told reporters Tuesday.

“The facts are extraordinary. There was no evidence of added value. In a case where you see no added value, why are you paying the bill?”

ArriveCAN was introduced in April 2020 by the Trudeau government and made mandatory in November 2020. The app was used by the federal government to track the COVID jab status of those entering the country and enforce quarantines when deemed necessary.

ArriveCAN was supposed to have cost $80,000, but the number quickly ballooned to $54 million, with the latest figures showing it cost $59.5 million.

As for the app itself, it was riddled with technical glitches along with privacy concerns from users.

LifeSiteNews has published a wide variety of reports related to the ArriveCAN travel app.

Continue Reading

Trending

X