COVID-19
Florida COVID grand jury finds ‘profound and serious issues’ in vaccine regulation, oversight

From LifeSiteNews
The grand jury commissioned by Gov. DeSantis has released its long-awaited final report on the manufacture and rollout of the COVID shots, finding no actionable crimes under current law but still identifying ‘profound and serious issues involving the process of vaccine development and safety surveillance in the United States.’
A Florida grand jury has released its final report on the manufacture and rollout of the COVID-19 shots, finding no actionable crimes under current law but still identifying “profound and serious issues involving the process of vaccine development and safety surveillance in the United States” for policymakers to resolve.
In December 2022, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis petitioned the Florida Supreme Court to approve a grand jury to determine whether pharmaceutical companies and other medical organizations “engaged in criminal activity or wrongdoing” pertaining to the controversial and harmful shots.
In February 2024, it released its first interim report, which decided that before assessing the shots it first had to understand the risk posed by COVID itself, and so concluded that the 2020 lockdowns did more harm than good, masks were ineffective at stopping the virus, COVID was “statistically almost harmless” to children and most adults, and it was “highly likely” that COVID hospitalization numbers were inflated.
On Tuesday, the grand jury released its final 144-page report. It opens with the somewhat surprising declaration that two conflicting statements – “COVID-19 vaccines were a triumph of science, technology and public health that saved countless lives”; and “COVID-19 vaccines were heedlessly licensed, excessively recommended, and even mandated to broad swathes of people that did not need them, placing their health-and sometimes their lives-at unnecessary risk” – are “both true.”
READ: Peer-reviewed study finds over 1,000% rise in cardiac deaths after COVID-19 shots
The grand jury maintains that the first Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed initiative “produced an effective vaccine in early 2021 that dramatically reduced many of the risks associated with SARS-CoV-2,” but “all the goodwill generated by that amazing achievement was squandered in the following years, as sponsors and federal regulators collaborated to push out booster after booster based on shallow, inaccurate safety and efficacy data, sidelining their own ombudsmen to get doses of these vaccines into the arms of every American, regardless of their underlying risk from the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”
“Our investigative efforts in both of those categories were directed in large part towards Pfizer and Modema, whose rnRNA-based vaccines were the primary focus of our investigation,” the report adds. “Suffice it to say that while we are certain we have not seen everything these companies created with respect to these products (Pfizer essentially admitted this fact), we did receive a lot of relevant information from them, more than we could ever hope to meaningfully review in our limited term. Many of our conclusions are informed by documents we received or on testimony given by their representatives.”
The report condemns Big Pharma’s reluctance to shed light on the full extent of the problem, and the lack of recourse when the worst does happen.
“It is frustrating to this Grand Jury, as it should be frustrating to everyone who reads this report, to know that these sponsors have taken in billions of taxpayer dollars for creating and selling their vaccines; they cannot be sued if something goes wrong with them; they have access to critical information about deaths related to a side effect of their products; and the public does not have access to that information,” it says. “Instead, we are left to speculate, and the research community is left to draw inferences as one-off or two-off histopathological reports detailing the events of this death or that death that trickle into scientific journals slowly, year after year. Somehow, withholding this valuable safety information is not a crime. It certainly should be.”
While its conclusions will be thoroughly dissected by many experts and activists in the days to come, the report’s most immediate takeaway is that current law is inadequate to cure the problems investigators uncovered.
“While we did not find criminal activity, we did find a pattern of deceptive and obfuscatory behavior on the part of sponsors and regulators that often straddled the line between ethical and unethical conduct,” the report says. “More importantly, however, not finding any indictable criminal activity does not mean we did not find any problems. On the contrary, there are profound and serious issues involving the process of vaccine development and safety surveillance in the United States. Some of those are acute, COVID-19-era problems that are unlikely to occur outside the context of another once-in-a-hundred-year pandemic. Others, however, are systemic; they will occur over and over until someone fixes them.”
The report says “it was genuinely striking to us just how many of the problems we found occurred at either the direction or acquiescence of the FDA [U.S. Food & Drug Administration], CDC [Centers for Disease Control & Prevention] and other federal regulators. Nearly every time we found an issue with MRNA-1273 [the Moderna shot] or BNT162b2 [the Pfizer shot], the fingerprints of these agencies were all over the scene, advising that the flagship and surrogate clinical trials be performed in specific ways, authorizing dose after dose and formulation after formulation based on out-of-date immunogenicity comparisons and observational results, and even running interference for sponsors by misleading the American public about validated safety signals.”
To the federal government, the grand jury recommends new clinical trials of both mRNA-based COVID shots, reinstatement of the FDA’s old ban on direct-to-consumer advertising of therapeutics, new controls on the hiring of medical industry insiders and lobbyists for health regulatory positions, restructuring the Vaccines & Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) for greater accountability, mandatory disclosure of anonymized individual patient data as a condition of FDA licensure, and making safety data transparency a condition of liability protection. To the state of Florida, it recommends a series of changes to strengthen grand juries’ ability to obtain the information they seek, as well as more widespread monitoring of wastewater for pathogens.
DeSantis said Tuesday that while his office was still reviewing the report’s details, it was clear that “Big Pharma brought in billions of dollars in profit, and the federal government amplified bogus ‘studies,’ all while suppressing any opposition that went against their preferred narrative. Instead of federal agencies acting as a backstop to bad incentives, they worked closely with Big Pharma as they cut corners, even becoming unpaid advertisers on their behalf.”
“The Grand Jury has made a number of recommendations that should be followed,” the governor declared. “The status quo cannot continue. The American people deserve transparency on how Big Pharma is using their federal tax dollars, and they deserve regulating entities that operate as watchdogs, not cheerleaders.”
The report follows a large body of evidence that identifies significant risks to the COVID shots, which were developed and reviewed in a fraction of the time vaccines usually take under the first Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed initiative.
The federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 38,190 deaths, 219,170 hospitalizations, 22,082 heart attacks, and 28,769 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of November 29, among other ailments. CDC researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than over-reporting.
An analysis of 99 million people across eight countries published February in the journal Vaccine “observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses” of mRNA-based COVID injections, as well as signs of increased risk of “pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis,” and other “potential safety signals that require further investigation.” In April, the CDC was forced to release by court order 780,000 previously undisclosed reports of serious adverse reactions, and a study out of Japan found “statistically significant increases” in cancer deaths after third doses of mRNA-based COVID-19 shots and offered several theories for a causal link.
All eyes are currently on returning President Donald Trump and his health team, which will be helmed by prominent vaccine critic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as his nominee for Secretary of Health & Human Services. Trump has given mixed signals as to the prospects of reconsidering the shots for which he has long taken credit and has nominated both critics and defenders of establishment COVID measures for a number of administration roles.
COVID-19
Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’

From LifeSiteNews
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).
COVID-19
Study finds Pfizer COVID vaccine poses 37% greater mortality risk than Moderna

From LifeSiteNews
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.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal accounton X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.
-
Agriculture2 days ago
Liberal win puts Canada’s farmers and food supply at risk
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta’s future in Canada depends on Carney’s greatest fear: Trump or Climate Change
-
Alberta2 days ago
It’s On! Alberta Challenging Liberals Unconstitutional and Destructive Net-Zero Legislation
-
International2 days ago
Nigeria, 3 other African countries are deadliest for Christians: report
-
Business1 day ago
Canada urgently needs a watchdog for government waste
-
Business1 day ago
Trump says he expects ‘great relationship’ with Carney, who ‘hated’ him less than Poilievre
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
The Liberals torched their own agenda just to cling to power
-
2025 Federal Election22 hours ago
The Last Of Us: Canada’s Chaos Election