Speaking at the Reform UK party conference in Birmingham, the distinguished cardiologist Aseem Malhotra said that it was “high likely” that the cancers of King Charles and princess Catherine had been caused by Covid-19 mRNA injections.
Despite the fact that he had attributed his remarks to information given to him by one of the UK’s most eminent oncologists, Professor Angus Dalgleish, his remarks provoked furious reactions from health officials and the mainstream media.
Perhaps he should have chosen his words more carefully, since one cannot draw firm conclusions about individuals from population data. Had he said that we “cannot exclude the possibility” that Charles’ and Catherine’s cancers had been caused by the Covid mRNA injection, he would have been on firmer ground; it might have created opportunities for evidence-based debate.
But in the real world, such open debate was always hypothetical. I shall show later that the health industry is controlled by pharma in a global web of criminality and corruption with tentacles permeating such seemingly respectable institutions as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the World Health Organisation (WHO) and, of even greater concern, the media.
By its control of the media, it should come as no surprise that Malhotra would be headlined by some media as a ‘quack’.
The Scottish Herald even asked rhetorically When does free speech turn into medical malpractice?
And the Sunday Times stated that
“Malhotra’s claims are not supported by mainstream clinicians or experts. Cancer Research UK has previously said there is no evidence to suggest that any of the Covid-19 vaccines cause cancer.
Malhotra has been repeatedly criticised by other doctors and vaccine experts for making unproven claims about the Covid-19 vaccines. There have been calls for the General Medical Council to investigate him but so far it has not taken action.”
Writing in the British Medical Journal, Gareth Iacobucci stated that
Doctors have demanded that the General Medical Council (GMC) take action against the controversial cardiologist Aseem Malhotra after he linked Covid mRNA injections to cancers in the royal family.
Iacobucci thus creates the impression that Aseem Malhotra is completely at odds with mainstream medical opinion.
So, is Dr. Malhotra such a lone voice as the media would have us believe?
Far from it. Before the hoo-ha about cancer, DPUK (Doctors for Patients UK) had issued the following press release, which I reproduce in full (signatories in bold emphasis):
Statement of Support for Dr. Aseem Malhotra – challenging the Good Law Project attempt to pressure the GMC to censure him for raising patient safety concerns
We, the undersigned doctors, and the campaign groups Doctors for Patients U.K., U.K. Medical Freedom Alliance and HART, wish to publicly state our support for Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a well-published academic and cardiologist who has been a popular commentator on medical and public health matters in the U.K. media for many years. We condemn the actions of a group of (mostly anonymous) doctors, supported by the Good Law Project (GLP), in seeking to silence and punish Dr. Malhotra for speaking out about his concerns about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. This is a serious and chilling attack on the freedom of speech of a senior doctor.
Dr. Malhotra is the son of the late BMA stalwart and NHS campaigner Dr. Kailash Chand. Following the unexpected death of his father from previously undetectable heart disease, Dr. Malhotra made public statements highlighting his concerns that his father’s COVID-19 vaccinations were a causal factor in his death.
Despite initially endorsing and promoting the COVID-19 vaccines on ITV’s Good Morning Britain on February 5th 2021, he is now calling for an immediate suspension of the novel mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and a full investigation into their adverse effects, for reasons detailed in the two-part, peer-reviewed paper he wrote, published in September 2022 in the Journal of Insulin Resistance. This is entirely in line with his duty as a responsible doctor to protect the British public from the harm which he believes his family has suffered and to uphold the fundamental principle of medical ethics to ‘first do no harm‘.
Dr. Malhotra presented his concerns to the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Vaccine Damage, on October 20th 2022 at Portcullis House, Westminster. His impassioned call to prioritise patient safety resulted in a group of anonymous doctors reporting him to the General Medical Council (GMC) for “high-profile promotion of misinformation about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines”, demanding it investigates his fitness to practise. When the GMC refused to carry out a Fitness to Practise (FtP) investigation, Dr. Matt Kneale, a junior doctor in the group, instructed the Good Law Project (GLP) to begin crowdfunding for a legal action against the GMC’s decision and launched a judicial review against the GMC in the High Court.
Dr. Malhotra is a senior cardiologist, a well-established commentator and campaigner on public health issues and a long-standing advocate for patient safety. His previous campaigns have raised awareness about heart disease, obesity, the harms of sugar and corruption within the pharmaceutical industry. As an ambassador for the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, he was the lead author in a joint initiative with the BMJ to tackle the harms of overprescribing and unnecessary medical interventions. It is a mark of Dr. Malhotra’s high regard for medical ethics that he felt compelled to speak publicly about his new and growing concerns of a link between COVID-19 vaccines and heart damage, despite initially endorsing the mRNA jabs.
It is deeply unsettling that the GLP, an entity funded primarily by the public, would turn its legal machinery toward silencing an ethical doctor. This is especially troubling given the organisation’s stated commitment to transparency and a better world. Rather than exerting legal force to silence professionals, should it not focus instead on compelling the full release of the COVID-19 vaccine trial data? The absence of such vital information from public and medical scrutiny is not just a lapse; it’s a serious breach of trust and a blow to patient safety.
By contesting the GMC’s decision to support Dr. Malhotra’s right to free speech and not to carry out a formal FtP investigation (on the grounds that his statements were not sufficiently egregious to merit action), the legal action supported by the GLP risks undermining the resolve of medical professionals to speak candidly on serious health issues, a move that would have profound consequences for patient safety and the ethical practice of medicine.
The GLP challenge against the GMC decision is misconceived, misguided and threatens doctors’ individual right to free speech and proper scientific debate on matters relating to protecting the public from dangerous products. It is deeply regrettable in a democratic society that instead of being applauded for his courage in raising the alarm, Dr. Malhotra is being persecuted in this way.
Thousands of doctors worldwide and in the United Kingdom share Dr. Malhotra’s reasonable concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety. Many have spoken out on this issue, including the eminent U.S. cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, who called for an immediate withdrawal of these products in a speech made in the EU Parliament on September 13th 2023. The undersigned doctors and organisations are aware of multiple harms associated with the COVID-19 vaccines; among these medics are frontline doctors who have reported vaccine-associated injuries and deaths in their own patients.
- Dr. Ayiesha Malik MBChB, MRCGP (2014) – Director, Doctors for Patients U.K.
- Dr. Clare Craig BM BCh, FRCPath – Co-Chair, HART
- Dr. Elizabeth Evans MA, MBBS, DRCOG – CEO U.K. Medical Freedom Alliance
Among the fifty Co-signatories were
- Lord Moonie, MBChB, MRCPsych, MFCM, MSc, House of Lords, former Parliamentary UnderSecretary of State 2001-2003, former Consultant in Public Health Medicine
- Professor Angus Dalgleish, MD, FRCP, FRACP, FRCPath, FMedSci, Professor of Oncology, University of London; Principal, Institute for Cancer Vaccines & Immunotherapy
- Professor John A Fairclough, BM BS, BMed Sci, FRCS, FFSEM(UK), Professor Emeritus, Honorary Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
- And sixteen consultants
The press release remained invisible to the mainstream media (MSM), so the general public would be under the impression that Dr. Malhotra is an outsider, whose unorthodox views are detached from medical opinion and could therefore safely be disregarded.
So, what is the evidence to support Malhotra’s assertions?
First indications of a possible connection between cancer and Covid mRNA injections came with an analysis by Edward Dowd of readily available government statistics from the U.K.’s Office for National Statistics that showed an unprecedented increase in cancer deaths among young people following the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.
Dowd, a data analyst from Wall Street, first came to attention as the author of ‘Cause Unknown’. His book drew attention to the sudden rise in deaths in young people from cardiac arrest following the rollout of the mRNA Covid mRNA injection.
Dowd’s analysis raised the possibility that the effects of the Covid mRNA injection extended beyond cardiovascular events to cancer. His March 2023 45-page report of his analysis of UK data showed that teenagers and young adults had been dying at an unprecedented rate from rapidly metastasizing and terminal cancers since mass COVID-19 vaccination began.
A more detailed summary of Dowd’s report can be found here.
Meanwhile in the U.S., an analysis of data from the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) by Carlos Alegria, David Wiseman, Yuri Nunes, showed a statistically significant excess death rate from cancers in people aged 15-44, starting in 2020 and increasing further in 2021 and 2022, correlating with the roll-out of the Covid-19 vaccine.
But of course, correlation does not mean causation. What is needed is direct evidence for the involvement of the Covid mRNA injection in causing cancer.
To explain how this might be the case, a biological digression might clarify, but as it’s unavoidably a bit technical, readers might prefer to skip it.
Cancers, or ‘neoplasms’ develop when the genes that control cell division mutate (change), causing cell division to ‘run amok’. Agents causing mutation are called mutagens, and many are carcinogens (cause cancer).
A gene consists of DeoxyriboNucleic Acid (DNA) and takes the form of two polynucleotide chains held together like the two sides of a spiral staircase (the famous ‘double helix’). Each strand consists of a chain containing bases of four kinds – adenine (A), guanine (G), thymine (T), and cytosine (C), in a particular sequence. The bases in each strand are linked to the bases in the other strand, in a highly specific manner, A being paired with T, and G with C. As a result of this complementary base pairing, the base sequence in one strand determines the base sequence in the other strand. Thus if one strand has a sequence of AGGTTCA, the other has TCCAAGT. Of the two strands, one represents coded information for making a protein.
A protein consists of a chain of amino acids strung together like a string of beads, in a particular sequence, specified by the base sequence in one of the two DNA strands of the gene. Each amino acid is represented by a sequence of three DNA bases.
A mutation is a change in the base sequence in DNA, causing the amino acids in the protein product to be joined in an incorrect sequence, resulting in a non-functional protein.
Proteins are made in the the part of the cell outside the nucleus, the cytoplasm. The DNA however, remains in the nucleus, so in order to use the information, an RNA (RiboNucleic Acid) copy of one of the DNA strands is produced using the enzyme RNA polymerase. The copying of DNA into RNA is called transcription The RNA transcript is similar to DNA except that it is single- rather than double-stranded, and one of its constituent bases is different, uracil (U) replacing thymine. The RNA is then transported into the cytoplasm, where its encoded information is ‘translated’ to make a protein.
Because RNA carries information from nucleus to cytoplasm, it is called messenger RNA (mRNA). Normally, it is rapidly destroyed, so continued copying of the gene is necessary for it to remain active.
The virus
The virus responsible for the outbreak of Covid-19 is Sars-CoV-2. All viruses consist of genetic information needed for their reproduction, surrounded by a protein envelope. It is the protein envelope that enables the virus to gain entry into the host cell, after which it ‘hijacks’ the cell’s metabolism to produce and spew out more virus particles.
The genetic information of Sars-CoV-2 is RNA (in many other viruses it is DNA). Among the envelope proteins are the so-called ‘spike’ proteins which enable the virus to enter the cells lining the respiratory passages. On entering such a cell, the RNA acts as mRNA, instructing the cell to produce more virus particles.
The Covid mRNA injection.
Whereas traditional vaccines contain a weakened or inert form of the pathogen, the active ingredient of the Pfizer Covid mRNA injection is a synthetically modified part of the viral RNA encoding just the spike protein. The mRNA is packaged in lipid ‘nanoparticles’ (LNPs). The chemical composition of LNPs is sufficiently similar to the surface membrane of the target cell to enable it and its cargo of mRNA to enter the cell. The mRNA is then used by the cell to produce and secrete spike protein, which then stimulates the production of defensive antibodies and giving protection against the virus, should infection occur.
Mass production
Injection of global populations with the Covid mRNA injection necessitates its industrial scale production. mRNA can’t be produced on this scale, but DNA can, using bacteria as biological ‘factories’.
First, the enzyme reverse transcriptase is used to make a complementary (cDNA) version of the viral rRNA. Next, the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is used to make millions of copies of the cDNA. The cDNA is then inserted into pieces of bacterial DNA called plasmids. The bacteria are then grown in industrial vats and the plasmid DNA, along with its viral cDNA insert, extracted. Finally, in the same way as in cells, the enzyme RNA polymerase is used to make the viral mRNA. The mRNA molecules are then ‘packaged’ in LNPs that facilitate the uptake of the mRNA into cells.
That’s what we are told.
DNA contamination
If the Covid mRNA injection contains mRNA only, it should not contain any of the plasmid DNA used in its production, but numerous reports, for example here, here, and here, indicate that this is not the case. And even more worryingly, scientists have found DNA of a virus that can cause cancer – SV40.
SV40: promoter and enhancer
SV40 is a virus that infects monkeys and can cause cancer in humans. Whereas Sars-CoV-2 is an RNA virus, SV40 is a DNA virus.
SV40 has been extensively used in investigations into how genes work. All the cells of a multicellular organism contain the same genes. But different cells are specialised for making different proteins, so in any given cell, only genes coding for those proteins are expressed (used to make proteins).
Only some of an organism’s DNA codes for proteins; some DNA is concerned with the control of the expression of those genes. Among these types of DNA are ‘promoters’ and ‘enhancers’.
A promoter is a section of DNA immediately adjacent to the a gene to be copied into RNA. When RNA polymerase copies a gene, it first binds to its promoter, initiating transcription.
An enhancer is a short section of DNA that can bind to a protein called a transcription factor, increase the rate at which a gene will be transcribed.
To enable and facilitate the replication of its DNA, the SV40 virus contains both promoter and enhancer in its DNA.
When drug companies use bacteria as factories for making a protein, they use a SV40 promoter. They grow bacteria that have been genetically engineered to have the gene coding for that protein inserted into their bacterial DNA. To increase productivity the scientists insert an SV40 promoter next to the gene that they want to activate.
Alarm bells began to ring in early 2023, when scientist Kevin McKernan discovered that vials of Pfizer and Moderna Covid mRNA injections were contaminated with fragments of plasmid DNA. McKernan has over 25 years’ experience in the field of genomics (a field of molecular biology concerned with all aspects of an organism’s DNA). He found that the vials contained up to 18-70 times more DNA contamination than the legal limits permitted by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). He was particularly alarmed to find the presence of promoter DNA from SV40 which, as previously mentioned, can cause cancer in humans.
His findings were soon confirmed by other scientists, including cancer genomics expert Dr Phillip Buckhaults, who has himself received the Pfizer Covid mRNA injection and is an enthusiastic supporter of the mRNA Covid mRNA injection. In September 2023, he testified before the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Ad-Hoc Committee, urging the need for thorough investigations.
McKernan’s findings have been reported in detail by NZDSOS (New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science), a group of independent medical doctors campaigning for transparency and truth in New Zealand medicine, particularly with regard to Covid-19.
So why did Pfizer keep quiet?
A senior Health Canada official says pharma giant Pfizer made a conscious decision not to advise regulators that its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine contained a DNA sequence from the Simian Virus 40 (SV40).
In view of the potential seriousness of the discovery of SV40 DNA in the Covid shots, it might have been expected that Pfizer would notify the FDA to that effect.
But for reasons best known to themselves, they didn’t.
Integration into the human genome
There have been a number of published indications that SARS-Cov-2 RNA can be reverse-transcribed into DNA and integrated into the human genome, e.g. “Eminent MIT Scientists Defend Controversial SARS-CoV-2 Genome Integration Results”
and
Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line by Markus Aldén, Francisko Olofsson Falla, Daowei Yang, Mohammad Barghouth, Cheng Luan, Magnus Rasmussen and Yang De Marinis
Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, 20502 Malmö, Sweden,
Infection Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Sweden
Needless to say, such findings were disputed by Pharma’s media ‘fact checkers’, e.g Reuters. I shall have more to say about the independence and integrity of the media in pharmaceutical matters later, but for the moment it will suffice to mention that the former CEO of Reuters has also been a board member of COVID-19 vaccine maker Pfizer since 2014.
Though worrying, the above findings are not in themselves evidence that the Covid mRNA injection are responsible for the increase in cancer.
But in October 2025, Dr. Shigetoshi Sano, professor of dermatology at the Kochi University Medical School in Japan, reported a case in which a woman’s cancer cells tested positive for the spike protein in Pfizer’s Covid booster, and published as a letter in the Journal of Dermatological Science.
The case was an 85-year-old woman whose breast cancer was in remission, but developed aggressive metastatic cancer one month after receiving her sixth mRNA Covid-19 vaccine dose. A peer-reviewed study concluded the cancer cells contained the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein from the vaccine, but not the protein envelope of the virus that would have resulted from natural infection.
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher commented that the study “provides direct biological evidence linking mRNA injections to cancer progression and metastasis”, and that the study’s findings are “striking … strongly suggesting the spike originated from the mRNA injection, not viral infection.”
The media have been reticent about such findings, so it’s safe to assume that they cannot easily be debunked.
So, if the Covid mRNA injection can cause cancer, what about the possible mechanism?
Effects on the Immune system – ‘turbo’ cancer
The significant surge in cancer in young people has already been mentioned. But this evidence is statistical, based on populations.
Evidence of an altogether different kind comes from the first-hand experience of oncologists working at the coal face.
Angus Dalgleish is professor of oncology at St George’s, University of London. With 495 scientific publications, 21,234 citations, and 541 “highly influential citations”, he is justifiably regarded as a world expert on cancer.
In a video presentation to the council of Port Hedland, Australia, professor Dalgleish informed Port Hedland Council of alarming ramifications of synthetic DNA contamination of COVID-19 “vaccines”, he pulled no punches. The first few minutes of his presentation were part of “Turbo cancer after covid injections”, a large compendium of evidence by doctors and distinguished medical academics, compiled by New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science (NZDSOS):
Synthetic DNA contamination as detected in Australian vials of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines by David Speicher presents risks of genomic instability, which can manifest as cancers, immune disorders, and hereditary diseases. The vaccines contain lipid nanoparticles, which encapsulate synthetic DNA fragments.
These nanoparticles deliver this DNA into various organs throughout the body, where the DNA has the potential to integrate into our own genetic material. As such these vaccines are not ‘vaccines,’ they are, in fact, gene therapy based.
This genomic integration, as the scientific literature makes clear, can lead to cancer development, immune system disruption, and more. The sheer levels of contamination detected…in some cases are extraordinary, and far beyond what should be allowed in any medicinal product.
While this may sound like a remote possibility…we are already seeing evidence of these effects in real patients. In my work as an oncologist in the U.K., I started to see a disturbing trend as early as February 2022. Patients who had been cancer free for many years were suddenly relapsing with aggressive, explosive cancers shortly after receiving booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine.
I personally counted six cases in as many weeks in patients who developed a rapid progression, having been completely stable, with zero disease, having been on an immunotherapy I had given them 5, 8, 10, 15, 18 years ago. All these patients only had one thing in common, and that was they had all been forced to have a [COVID-injection] booster by their GPs on the grounds they were at risk [emphasis added].
One of the most unsettling aspects of the nature of these cancers is that they are not slow progressing…they are aggressive, often presenting at advanced stages, affecting multiple organs by the time they are diagnosed. Colorectal cancer has specifically shown explosive growth—something we’ve never seen before.
These cancers are emerging faster and more virulent than we would expect in patients who otherwise have been stable. [Dalgleish also notes that] a rise in blood cancers, such as leukemias and lymphomas, which have “appeared shortly after vaccinations.”
I have had many colleagues and patients express concerns about the timing of these cancers following what I believe are totally unnecessary boosters, which is not an isolated issue.
My own research has shown that the boosters suppress the T cell response and switch[es] the antibody response to tolerizing. That means this is the perfect example where you have switched off the policing of foreign invaders, viruses, etc. and cancer, allowing it to grow uncontrolled.
Professor Dalgleish’s presentation to Port Hedland Council followed the finding by Canadian virologist David Speicher that the Australian Covid mRNA doses were contaminated by plasmid DNA at concentrations up to 145 times the maximum regulatory safety limit.
This led to MP Russell Broadbent writing to Prime Minister Albanese urging the withdrawal of all mRNA vaccines, in which he wrote:
I refer to my letter of 20 September 2024 calling on the government to immediately suspend the use of Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 products due to the evidence of significant synthetic DNA contamination, as detailed in Dr. David Speicher’s report.
Unlike the Thalidomide tragedy, which resulted in over 10,000 victims globally, the Covid-19 vaccines have been administered to more than 20 million Australians, totalling over 63 million doses. The contamination detected in these vaccines, if not addressed, presents a substantial risk, with the potential for these dangers – such as genomic integration and potential long-term health impacts – to multiply with each additional dose administered. Immediate action through a suspension of these products is critical to mitigate further risk.
To assist in adopting a precautionary approach and minimizing further harm, I enclose a Science Summary created and endorsed by eminent Australian and international scientists and medical experts. The summary reinforces the known and potential dangers of DNA contamination and highlights the need for an urgent and independent investigation. As advised by the co-signatories, the Department of Health and Aged Care has produced no evidence to demonstrate why the detected DNA contamination will not produce the dire adverse health outcomes detailed in the Science Summary.
Additionally, I have reason to believe that multiple attempts by prominent scientists to warn the TGA of these risks have been disregarded since early 2021, raising serious questions about the agency’s ability to protect the health and well-being of Australians.
Finally, I draw your attention to the Biosecurity Act 2015, which may now be relevant. Given the contamination evidence, I recommend the Minister for Agriculture initiate a Biosecurity Import Risk Analysis of these products, potentially leading to the suspension of these products due to the risks they pose to human health.
I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the 52 co-signatories below in the preparation of this letter and reiterate my call seeking your urgent action to ensure the safety of all Australians.
The 52 co-signatories included many distinguished medical academics, as can be seen below the letter. The letter also included the detailed Science Summary that had been written by multidisciplinary team of scientists.
This was not the first letter that Broadbent had sent to Albanese, an earlier letter on September 20 and endorsed by 26 co-signatories, had received no reply.
So why had Albanese not replied?
The reason may have something to do with the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). This is a government department, which states on its website that it regulates “medicines, medical devices, and biologicals to help Australians stay healthy and safe”.
Some might wonder how helping Australians to “stay healthy and safe” is compatible with the fact that the TGA receives 96% of its funding from the pharma industry they exist to regulate (and its New Zealand counterpart Medsafe receive 84% of funding from pharma). So it could not have been surprising that, following Dr David Speicher’s findings of DNA contamination in Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vials, the TGA dismissed the findings as “misinformation”.
No explanation as to why it was misinformation, as might be expected if there were valid reasons why it was wrong. Just “misinformation”.
It could hardly have been otherwise, in view of the detailed response written by health practitioners in Port Hedland published by independent journalist Rebekah Barnett.
I could also add that in Dec 2023 the TGA had previously stated that it “rigorously assesses any COVID-19 vaccine for safety, quality and effectiveness”, and that “the TGA’s decision to approve a new vaccine is always made on the basis that the benefits outweigh the risks for the intended population”.
Big Pharma as organised crime
‘Organised crime’ brings to mind gambling, prostitution, hard drugs and, in the 1920s and 1930s in America, alcohol and Prohibition. What these all have in common is things that are in public demand but legally restricted or downright illegal.
On the surface, the pharmaceutical industry could not be more different. By selling potions claimed to protect us from disease, disability, or death, bolstered by white coats and stethoscopes, they are projected as the ‘good guys’.
But in “Fascism comes to New Zealand”, I showed how the pharmaceutical industry (“pharma”) is a global web of criminality and corruption that controls the ‘health industry’, involving such institutions such as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the World Health Organisation (WHO) and, of even greater concern, the media.
Control of the media amounts to control of thought, so it’s not been too difficult to publicly label Aseem Malhotra as an outlier who could safely be ignored. That seems to have worked, but even bigger cheeses have been expressing concern about the Covid injections.
Among these is Peter McCulloch MD, MPH, a leading cardiologist and one of the most respected doctors in the world. Author of 677 peer-reviewed articles published in scientific journals, he was selected as Top Internist and Cardiologist of the Year for 2023 by the International Association of Top Professionals (IAOTP).
But The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) has revoked his board certification.
His crime? He publicly challenged the official Covid-19 narrative. Early in the pandemic, he advocated the use of hydroxyquinone and criticised the Covid injections, saying that there is no scientific justification for healthy people under 50 and those who have recovered from Covid to take the shots, and that tens of thousands of Americans have died as a result of taking them.
In an email to Steve Kirsch, a fellow Covid campaigner, he had said:
“I was terminated as the Editor-In-Chief of Cardiorenal Medicine and Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine after years of service and rising impact factors. There was no phone call, no board meeting, no due process. Just e-mails or certified letters. Powerful dark forces are working in academic medicine to expunge any resistance to the vax.”
Questioning the official narrative – Florida
In marked contrast to the federal government narrative, Florida has taken an independent line on Covid. In November 2021 Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill banning vaccine mandates in relation to employers, and prohibiting school districts from enforcing face masks, calling these measures “unscientific” and “unnecessary”.
DeSantos has been supported by Florida’s Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo. Since his appointment in September 2021, he has been accused of spreading misinformation on COVID-19 and promoting vaccine hesitancy.
In March 2022, Ladapo recommended that healthy children in Florida should not receive the COVID-19 vaccine, in contradiction to the guidelines of the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics. And in January 2023, he called for a “halt in the use of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines” over concerns about the mRNA technology and DNA contamination, and was roundly condemned by the media. The New York Times accused him of ‘misinformation’, without giving evidence for why he was ‘misinformed’. The article simply quoted statements by medical ‘experts’ that he was wrong. Dr. John Wherry, director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Pennsylvania said that Dr. Ladapo’s contention was “very irresponsible”, and that he had “demonstrated a tenuous grasp of science and medicine in general over the course of the pandemic” (emphasis added).
It’s safe to say that John Wherry, and indeed most readers of the New York Times, would have been unfamiliar with one of the philosophical pillars of science: Nullius in verba or “take nobody’s word for it”. This is the motto of the Royal Society, the oldest science society in the world, founded in 1660 in the reign of Charles II.
So by quoting others as ‘authorities’ rather than the only thing that counts – evidence, Wherry, and by implication the New York Times, had bolstered Labado’s statements by showing that they were unable to rebut them.
Ron Johnson and the Senate hearings
Florida is not the only state where public figures have challenged the mainstream Covid narrative. Another, potentially more powerful dissenter is Senator Ron Johnson, (Rep. Wisconsin).
- As early as May 2021 he was expressing opposition to the shaming, pressuring or mandating people to get the Covid jab.
- And in June 2021, he and Senator Lee sent a joint letter to CDC Director Walensky and FDA Acting Commissioner Woodcock regarding vaccine injuries.
- On November 2, 2021 he held a panel discussion with doctors and medical researchers who are researching the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, and who have treated COVID-19 vaccine injuries.
- On Dec. 7, 2022, he hosted a roundtable discussion titled: COVID-19 Vaccines: What they Are, How They Work, and Possible Causes of Injuries
Senator Johnson’s Covid awareness was evidently accelerating; the above are but some of the dozens of public expressions of dissent he expressed. Such public expressions of dissent were a threat to the multi-billion dollar profits of Big Pharma, which responded via the media, for example:
“Senator Johnson Promotes Vaccine Misinformation During Senate Hearing”
The article refers to a July 16 Senate hearing presided over by Senator Ron Johnson, titled “Voices of the Vaccine Injured”. During the hearing, people who had suffered serious side effects of the Covid injection described their experiences, which the article described as ‘’anti-vaccine conspiracies and misinformation”:
“MSNBC senior reporter Brandy Zadrozny, who attended the hearing, characterized the event as a disturbing example of fringe anti-vaccine beliefs infiltrating mainstream political discourse. The hearing featured testimony from individuals claiming to have suffered adverse effects from vaccines, often lacking credible scientific evidence. Critics argue that Johnson provided a veneer of legitimacy to these claims, potentially undermining public trust in vaccines and jeopardizing public health initiatives.”
To anyone who saw the 2+ hour presentation, this was a travesty of witness testimony. I have covered the control of the media in “The Control of Thought” and of American television specifically, in “Fascism comes to New Zealand”, but for the moment it is sufficient to quote Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC who, in an unguarded moment, said that (and I’m paraphrasing) It’s our job to control exactly what people think . . . .
Robert Kennedy Jr.
On February 13, 2025, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was confirmed as Donald Trump’s secretary of Health and Human Services, after a 52-48 vote in the US Senate. Kennedy had a long and distinguished track record as an environmental lawyer before switching his attention to vaccines. He founded Children’s Health Defense, a group campaigning against the corruption and abuse of monopoly power in the pharmaceutical industry, before resigning in anticipation of his appointment as Health Secretary. He pledged to “clean up corruption, stop the revolving door between industry and government”, and to “provide Americans with transparency and access to all the data so they can make informed choices for themselves and their families.”
Who could argue with that?
The vote went along party lines, all democrats voting against him, with Mitch McConnell the lone Republican to vote against Kennedy. McConnell, it should be noted, was reported to have received $50,000 from the pharmaceutical industry after blocking bill to lower drug prices.
But McConnell is hardly alone in having financial interests in Big Pharma. Some of RFK Jr.’s loudest critics in the US Senate have reportedly had their snouts in pharma’s trough.
After Kennedy’s confirmation, the media went into overdrive. On October 7, 2025, The Washington Post published an article titled “Six surgeons general: It’s our duty to warn the nation about RFK Jr.” The authors, all former U.S. surgeons general, begin by saying:
“We took an oath to declare dangers when we found them. We’re doing that again today. As former U.S. surgeons general appointed by every Republican and Democratic president since George H.W. Bush, we have collectively spent decades in service as the Nation’s Doctor. We took two sacred oaths in our lifetimes: first, as physicians who swore to care for our patients and, second, as public servants who committed to protecting the health of all Americans.
Today, in keeping with those oaths, we are compelled to speak with one voice to say that the actions of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are endangering the health of the nation. Never before have we issued a joint public warning like this. But the profound, immediate and unprecedented threat that Kennedy’s policies and positions pose to the nation’s health cannot be ignored.”
Impressive?
Or maybe not. In “Behind the White Coats: Six Surgeons General’s $Millions in Pharma Conflicts Exposed”, journalist Sayer Ji shows that these Surgeons General – who present themselves as “Americas doctors” – are actually more like “the voice of Big Pharma speaking through white coats. Each of these officials has profited from the very industries most threatened by Kennedy’s reforms. Their warning isn’t just medical—it’s monetary. And the story of how we got here reveals a revolving door between public service and corporate greed that’s finally spinning out of control.”
Kennedy has set the stage for an almighty struggle between Big Pharma and us, the people. Pharma will use every trick to prevent us from thinking for ourselves, but cracks in the control of information are beginning to emerge. Two recently published books, and one documentary video are undermining pharma’s criminal empire:
Enter Aaron Siri
Aaron Siri is a distinguished lawyer with a successful career acting for those who have suffered under Big Pharma’s oppression. In January 2018, Plotkin, co-developer of the rubella vaccine and widely regarded as the ‘godfather of vaccines’, was acting as an expert witness in a custody dispute in which divorced parents disagreed over whether their daughter should be vaccinated.
Plotkin was testifying in support of vaccination on behalf of the father. Siri’s deposition has been described as “a masterclass in extracting uncomfortable truths” in which, during nine hours of testimony, Plotkin revealed “ethical blind spots, scientific hubris and a troubling indifference to vaccine safety data”.
A detailed account of Plotkin’s ‘performance’ is given in “What the ‘Godfather of Vaccines’ Said Under Oath — and Why It Matters Even More Today”, but the following brief selection of revelations are particularly noteworthy:
Conflicts of interest
Plotkin admitted to receiving financial largesse from the very manufacturers of the vaccines he promoted – Merck, Sanofi, GSK, and Pfizer – over a long period. He appeared affronted when Siri questioned about this, and expressed surprise at Siri’s “tone”, and did not think it relevant to his opinion as to whether a child should receive vaccines
Safety of vaccines assumed, but not proven
When Siri asked Plotkin if he was aware of any study comparing vaccinated children to completely unvaccinated children, he replied that he was not aware of well-controlled studies. Siri then asked Plotkin why no placebo-controlled trials had been conducted on routine childhood vaccines such as hepatitis B, Plotkin said such trials would be “ethically difficult.”
So, if the only trials that could yield reliable safety data deemed “too unethical to conduct”, by implication he was admitting that there were no ‘gold-standard’ safety data for the full childhood vaccine schedule.
Siri pointed to Merck’s hepatitis B vaccine, given to newborns. Plotkin didn’t dispute that Merck had only monitored the babies for adverse events for five days after injection. He admitted that five days is certainly short for follow-up, but claimed that most serious events would occur within that period. Siri challenged this, pointing out that autoimmune or neurodevelopmental effects could take months to emerge.
As the vaccine industry’s ‘godfather’, Plotkin’s loss of moral credibility on that day in court should would have been headline news if the media had been free of corporate control.
But that’s not how the real world works. Parents remained in the dark about threats to their children’s health, until September 2025, when Aaron Siri published his book “Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines”.
The blurb on the back sums up Siri’s case:
Ever hear “I believe in cars” or “I believe in tools”? Probably not. But people routinely say, “I believe in vaccines.” This saying carries a truism because claims about vaccines often require faith. Belief. It is why challenging these claims often results in an emotional, not logical, reaction. . . . . There is what medical and health authorities tell the world, and then there is what they admit under oath in a lawsuit.
Siri likened the unquestioning acceptance of what we are told by Big Pharma, public health officials and media to religion because it demands a faith-like belief.
Think about that for a moment. A good definition of ‘faith’ is ‘belief without evidence’. Richard Dawkins had something to say on that, in a speech accepting the 1996 Humanist of the Year Award from the American Humanist Association:
“Science is based upon verifiable evidence. Religious faith not only lacks evidence, its independence from evidence is its pride and joy, shouted from the rooftops. Why else would Christians wax critical of doubting Thomas? The other apostles are held up to us as exemplars of virtue because faith was enough for them. Doubting Thomas, on the other hand, required evidence. Perhaps he should be the patron saint of scientists.”
The culture of ‘belief in vaccines’ can be compared to the almost universal belief in Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, in an Earth that is thousands, rather than millions, of years old. The great majority believed it because they had not been exposed to any evidence to the contrary.
Then came Charles Darwin, and the publication in 1859 of ”The Origin of Species”. For many, it resulted in a complete destruction of their previous worldview’, and for some, its reconstruction was an exciting experience.
I’m not saying that Siri is a modern Darwin, but I’d like to think that “Vaccines, Amen” will play a similar role in ending what amounts to the quasi-theocratic thought control by Big Pharma. While Kennedy and others have planted the seeds of enlightenment, Siri’s book promises to help them to germinate and grow in to a rejection of corporate and media control.
Del Bigtree and An Inconvenient Study
On September 9, 2025, Senator Ron Johnson held a Senate Subcommittee hearing on how corrupted science influences vaccine policy. At the hearing, Aaron Siri revealed the results of an unpublished study from Michigan’s Henry Ford Health System.
Earlier, on September 5, Siri had made a written statement to Senator Johnson. At 12 pages, it’s a bit long, so I’ll paraphrase those parts most relevant to the present context:
In early 2017, the Informed Consent Action Network (“ICAN”) was searching for a scientist who could conduct a vaccinated versus unvaccinated study. ICAN’s CEO had previously met Dr. Marcus Zervos, who is the head of infectious disease at one of the country’s premier medical institutions, and thought he would be open to conducting such a study.
We met with Dr. Zervos in his office in early 2017 to urge him to conduct a vaccinated versus unvaccinated study so that he could, from his perspective, prove wrong those claiming vaccines cause harm. He was receptive to the idea.
Dr. Zervos involved his colleagues in conducting this study using the health data already in the possession of Henry Ford Health, which interacts with millions of patients annually.
From what I know, they set off and conducted this study when time permitted without any specific funding for this project, instead utilizing resources already available to them as part of Henry Ford Health, including its existing health data. Despite its basic design, given that this was a side project apparently conducted during spare time, it was not completed until more than two years after our initial meeting with Dr. Zervos.
In early 2020, I received a copy of the study. It showed the results of the analysis comparing children within Henry Ford Health from birth onward who had no exposure (no vaccines) with those who were exposed (one or more vaccines). The results were similar to the findings in the handful of other vaccinated versus unvaccinated studies discussed in my Prior Submission.
The Henry Ford study found that vaccinated children had a statistically significant increased rate of various serious chronic diseases. For example, vaccinated children had 3.03 times the rate of atopic disease (a group of allergic conditions); 4.29 times the rate of asthma; 5.53 times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorder, which included 3.28 times the rate of developmental delay and 4.47 times the rate of speech disorder; and 5.96 times the rate of autoimmune disease. All of these findings were statistically significant.
There were other conditions for which a rate could not be calculated because, while many cases existed among the vaccinated children, there were no cases among the unvaccinated children. For example, while there were many cases of ADHD, learning disability, and tics in the vaccinated group, there were none in the unvaccinated group.
The foregoing is obviously extremely troubling, especially because almost all these chronic diseases that showed an increased risk result from some form of immune system dysregulation. Many of them also already have some basis in the existing scientific literature linking them to vaccination, but the studies necessary to ascertain the rate and frequency of these harms had not been conducted. This study at Henry Ford finally provided hard figures on the rates at which childhood vaccines may be causing these harms.
Unfortunately, while Dr. Zervos and Dr. Lamerato affirmed the study was well designed, executed, and worthy of publication, they would not submit it for publication because, among other reasons, Dr. Lamerato said she did not want to make doctors uncomfortable, and Dr. Zervos said he did not want to lose his job at Henry Ford.
Had this study showed that vaccinated children were healthier, I have no doubt it would have quickly and easily been published. It was not submitted for publication precisely because it found the opposite result.
It’s worth noting that Siri recalls that at the original meeting at which Dr Zervos agreed to undertake the study, Zervos had assured them that he would publish the results, whatever the finding.
Senator Johnson’s Senate Subcommittee hearing was on “how corrupted science influences vaccine policy”. One could not ask for a clearer illustration of corruption than the refusal to publish these results. So it was left to Del Bigtree to bring the study to the wider public, with his documentary “An inconvenient study”, reviewed here.
We have come a long way since the days of the Spanish Inquisition, when disagreeing with the orthodoxy – ostensibly religious belief, but in reality threatening the power structure – could lead to torture and death. In these more enlightened times it risks nothing more serious than obloquy and possible loss of employment – as Zervos and his colleagues was all too plainly aware.
For those who have watched “An inconvenient study” yet still can’t accept Aaron Siri’s comparison of the belief in vaccines to religion, there is nothing more to be said, except Vaccines, Amen.
I will leave the final word to Aseem Malhotra. In his open letter to the UK General Medical Council he concluded his remarks with the following statement (bolding added):
“The issues discussed in this letter merely scratch the surface of the complex and intertwined dynamics that maintain corrupt and colluded practices. The conditions that yielded disastrous health policy that killed millions are deeply rooted. In my opinion, the root cause is simple: Collusion and corruption of governmental bodies by psychopathic corporations that prioritise profits over the health of the people.”
Postscript
There are signs that cracks are beginning to develop in the vaccine doctrine. After decades of stating that there is no link between vaccines and autism, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has updated its webpage on vaccines and autism with a double-negative statement that “there is no evidence supporting the claim that vaccines don’t cause autism” because “the claim ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.”
In Greek mythology, Nemesis was the goddess of retribution. Big Pharma’s executives, and many others in the cesspool of corruption, have every reason to be feeling fearful.
