Incriminating data could be deleted but I bet there is a way to restore it. When it comes to digital tech forensic analysis is a field that only gets better with every passing year. If you want to get away with something including a digital device in the mix is a fatal error to make.

Covid-19 Vaccine Reform Is Moving Slower Than Many Had Hoped

By Maryanne Demasi

Just three weeks after Dr Vinay Prasad assumed oversight of vaccines at the FDA, Moderna’s latest Covid-19 vaccine, mNEXSPIKE®, received full approval.

For those who had hoped the mRNA platform would be shelved, the decision landed like a gut punch.

Approved on 31 May 2025, the next-generation shot is intended for adults over 65, as well as individuals aged 12 to 64 with at least one risk factor for severe illness.

And it came under the watch of a man who had spent years demanding greater scientific rigour from the agency.

Prasad had been among the FDA’s most outspoken critics during the pandemic, repeatedly condemning its reliance on surrogate endpoints—such as antibody levels—rather than hard clinical outcomes like reduced hospitalisation or death.

And he didn’t just say it once. He drove the point home, over and over.

“Showing boosters improve neutralizing antibodies or other laboratory measures is not what we need,” he posted on X in July 2022. “We need randomized control trials powered for clinical endpoints showing boosters improve outcomes that people care about.”

In January 2023, he co-signed a formal Citizen Petition to the FDA stating, “This immunobridging surrogate endpoint has not been validated to predict clinical efficacy.”

Then in March 2023, he made his position even clearer on Substack. “I don’t care about transient antibody titer levels,” he wrote.

But mNEXSPIKE® appears to have been approved primarily using exactly those kinds of data—measures of immune response, not measures of meaningful outcomes.

So, how do we square that?

Technically, the approval aligns with the policy Prasad outlined in a recent New England Journal of Medicine article.

There, he proposed a two-track system—no further vaccine approvals for healthy adults without RCTs showing clinical benefit—but for older adults and at-risk individuals, immunobridging data could still be acceptable.

So yes, by that standard, mNEXSPIKE® fits the rules.

But it doesn’t erase the discomfort. Because for years, Prasad insisted those very shortcuts—approving Covid vaccines based on antibody levels instead of clinical outcomes—were scientifically flimsy.

Now, under his watch, those same shortcuts are back in play.

When Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. was appointed HHS Secretary, reform didn’t just seem likely—it felt imminent.

Many expected the mRNA shots would be pulled from the market, or at the very least, that new approvals would be frozen until stronger evidence emerged.

Instead, we’ve seen a flood of high-production videos and polished slogans about “restoring public trust.”

To many observers, it looks like transparency on the surface, but business as usual underneath.

Of course, no one said this would be easy.

Having worked in government as a political adviser, I know how hard it is to shift systems that are not only slow and bureaucratic but deeply enmeshed with commercial interests. And no sector is more heavily invested in mRNA than biotech.

This isn’t just about Covid anymore. The pharmaceutical industry has poured billions into mRNA vaccines for RSV, flu, HIV, cancer, and more. Entire product pipelines are now staked on the assumption that the technology is here to stay.

Pulling the plug wouldn’t just alter public health policy—it would tank portfolios, gut R&D budgets, and unleash a political and financial firestorm from some of the most powerful corporate interests on earth.

That’s the kind of pressure Prasad is under now. That’s the reality Kennedy’s team has stepped into.

This is no longer science versus ideology. It’s science versus entrenched industry power.

And many are beginning to worry we’re watching the same playbook unfold—just with better branding.

That’s not what MAHA supporters or vaccine-injured families were hoping for. They’re not asking for tweaks. They want the shots gone. Not revised. Not updated—just gone.

But political reality rarely keeps pace with public demand. Even the most determined reformers can’t move faster than the machinery they’re trying to dismantle.

So where does that leave us?

Facing the hardest task of all—staying in the fight.

Progress may feel glacial, but it is underway.

The CDC has removed routine Covid-19 vaccine recommendations for healthy children and pregnant women. Prasad’s new framework has halted low-risk approvals unless backed by RCTs.

Yes, the mRNA platform is still alive—and still fiercely protected—but reform was never going to be easy. And it was never going to come all at once.

https://brownstone.org/article...than-many-had-hoped/

In this video, Dr. Doug Ethell presents groundbreaking research on a new approach to tackling brain aging and Alzheimer's disease. Discover how restoring cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) flow could be key to preventing and potentially reversing cognitive decline. Learn about the crucial role of the cribriform plate and a novel implantable device in this cutting-edge research.

At 17 minutes, he discussed people that had long infection with COVID. It is a good possibility they will see Alzheimer's within five years.



A NOVEL Approach To REVERSE Brain Aging & Alzheimer’s

California, Oregon, and Washington state ...


Three More States Diverge From CDC On COVID-19 Vaccine Recommendations

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

Officials from three states said on June 12 that pregnant women should still be able to receive COVID-19 vaccines, diverging from updated guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Health officials with California, Oregon, and Washington state said in a joint statement that they “continue to recommend all individuals age 6 months and older should have access and the choice to receive currently authorized COVID-19 vaccines, with an emphasis on protecting higher risk individuals, such as infants and toddlers, pregnant individuals, and others with risks for serious disease.”

The CDC in May updated its immunization schedule for adults, removing a COVID-19 vaccine recommendation for pregnant women. Insurers typically only cover vaccines that are on immunization schedules, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians and other organizations.

The CDC also removed a recommendation for healthy children to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, although the childhood immunization schedule states that “where the parent presents with a desire for their child to be vaccinated, children 6 months and older may receive COVID-19 vaccination, informed by the clinical judgment of a healthcare provider and personal preference and circumstances.”

Officials have for several years been directing vaccine manufacturers to update their formulations on an annual basis. The CDC had been advising people to receive a shot each year, regardless of prior vaccination and infection.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the changes were made because there is no clinical data to support a “repeat booster strategy.”

In the new statement, California, Oregon, and Washington state officials said that they “are committed to continuing to work with medical experts, professional organizations, and public health partners to ensure our recommendations reflect the best available science and safeguard the health of all of our residents.”

The officials noted that some medical groups, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, recently expressed concern over the CDC’s removal of the COVID-19 vaccine recommendation for pregnant women.

“The COVID-19 vaccine is safe during pregnancy, and vaccination can protect our patients and their infants after birth,” Dr. Steven Fleischman, president of the college, said in a statement.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which clears vaccines, says in package inserts for the three available COVID-19 vaccines that available data on the shots administered to pregnant women “are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy.” Known side effects of the vaccines include heart inflammation and severe allergic shock.

Apart from differing over the updated advice for pregnant women, the state officials said they are advising people to follow the CDC immunization schedules.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covi...cine-recommendations

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,
.
.
.
Insurers typically only cover vaccines that are on immunization schedules, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians and other organizations.

One of the best thing people can do for their health is erase from their brain the concept of whether insurance covers something. That goes for dental, medical, vision, and psych health. What is right for the patient has nothing to do with what coverage one has.

Health insurance through employment is the main, and usually most affordable, situation. We got off of that with dental many years ago, and since retirement we've been on a Christian reimbursement plan. The cost actually is less than the coverage I had with work, and is better. Nevertheless, for those who realistically must be on an employer's plan, talk to your provider about what is the right choice regardless of insurance.

Epidemiologist Ousted by Harvard for Refusing Vaccine Joins RFK’s CDC Vaccine Panel.

https://thenationalpulse.com/2...s-cdc-vaccine-panel/

World-renowned infectious-disease epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff, who was fired from Harvard Medical School last year for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine, has been appointed to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP). Previously, the entire advisory committee’s membership had been dismissed.

Kulldorff, who cited infection-acquired immunity as the reason for declining the vaccine, lost his position at a Harvard-affiliated hospital during the early days of the COVID pandemic and was officially terminated as a faculty member in March 2024. He co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated for sensible pandemic response measures and has garnered nearly one million signatures from scientists worldwide.

Announcing the new ACIP members, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. described his selections as a “major step towards restoring public trust in vaccines.” He stated, “They have each committed to demanding definitive safety and efficacy data before making any new vaccine recommendations. The committee will review safety and efficacy data for the current schedule as well.

”In 2021, Kulldorff posted on X (formerly Twitter) that “thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should.” He added, “COVID vaccines are important for older high-risk people and their care-takers. Those with prior natural infection do not need it. Nor children.

”Kulldorff has been critical of Harvard’s handling of the pandemic, writing in City Journal last year that the institution had abandoned open debate and medical freedom. He wrote, “The beauty of our immune system is that those who recover from an infection are protected if and when they are re-exposed. This has been known since the Athenian Plague of 430 BC—but it is no longer known at Harvard.”