FDA finally admits COVID-19 vaccine killed kids: 'This is a profound revelation'



Millions of Americans across the country were told during the pandemic to offer up their arms for the COVID-19 vaccines — the first-ever mRNA vaccines approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration — if they wanted to keep their jobs, eat in public, stay in school, or visit their loved ones.

Government officials, the establishment media, and pharmaceutical representatives claimed that the vaccines were "safe and effective." Those who dared to suggest otherwise about the experimental drugs that were making liability-shielded vaccine manufacturers record profits were often attacked and censored.

Months after the Department of Health and Human Services concluded that "mRNA technology poses more risks than benefits for these respiratory viruses," the Food and Drug Administration admitted in an internal letter that the COVID-19 vaccines killed numerous children.

'Healthy young children who faced tremendously low risk of death were coerced.'

Dr. Vinay Prasad, chief medical officer at the FDA and director at the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, noted in an email to staff on Friday that FDA Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance career staff "have found that at least 10 children have died after and because of receiving COVID-19 vaccination."

In the email, which was reviewed by multiple publications and shared online by the Washington Post, Prasad indicated that the OBPV performed an analysis of 96 deaths between 2021 and 2024 and concluded "that no fewer than 10 are related. If anything, this represents conservative coding, where vaccines are exculpated rather than indicated in cases of ambiguity. The real number is higher."

"These deaths are related to vaccination (likely/probable/possible attribution made by staff). That number is certainly an underestimate due to underreporting, and inherent bias in attribution," wrote Prasad. "This safety signal has far-reaching implications for Americans, the U.S. pandemic response, and the agency itself."

RELATED: Pfizer COVID shot sales plummet after Trump administration ends universal recommendations

Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

Despite the strong improbability of a healthy child getting seriously ill from COVID, former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci, former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Walensky, and other health officials championed injecting kids with the novel vaccines.

On Nov. 2, 2021, then-President Joe Biden's health officials gave final approval to Pfizer's COVID-19 shot for kids ages 5 to 11. Biden said at the time, "It is a major step forward for our nation in our fight to defeat the virus."

COVID-19 vaccination for children younger than 5 began across the U.S. in June 2022.

"These vaccines are safe, highly effective, and will give parents the peace of mind of knowing their child is protected from the worst outcomes of COVID-19," said Biden.

Prasad noted in his Friday letter that despite evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine put boys and young men at great risk of myocarditis, Biden health officials "did not quickly attempt mitigation strategies such as spacing doses apart, lowering doses, omitting doses among those with prior COVID-19."

Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle that can manifest as various symptoms, including heart palpitations, chest pain, fainting, and weakness, and can also cause fatal cardiac arrest.

"Worse, the FDA delayed acknowledgement of the safety signal until after it could extend marketing authorization to younger boys 12-15," continued Prasad. "Had the acknowledgement come early, these younger boys, who likely did not require COVID-19 vaccination, may have chosen to avoid the products."

The FDA's chief medical officer stressed that the OBPV's finding that the COVID vaccine contributed to the deaths of children amounted to "a profound revelation."

"For the first time, the U.S. FDA will acknowledge that COVID-19 vaccines have killed American children," continued Prasad, whose agency revoked emergency-use authorization for COVID vaccines earlier this year. "Healthy young children who faced tremendously low risk of death were coerced, at the behest of the Biden administration, via school and work mandates, to receive a vaccine that could result in death. In many cases, such mandates were harmful."

Peter Marks, Prasad's predecessor, complained to the New York Times about the "political tone" of Prasad's letter and noted, "I would not be surprised if the attributions turn out to be debatable, as these cases are often quite complex."

FDA commissioner Dr. Marty Makary said in a "Fox & Friends" interview on Saturday that his agency would no longer "rubber-stamp things with no data," adding that such a "mockery of science" was alternatively "the M.O. in the Biden administration with the eternal COVID booster approvals for young, healthy kids."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump strikes major deal with pharma giants Lilly and Novo over obesity drugs, Medicare



Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is working on identifying and tackling the root causes of America's obesity epidemic. In the meantime, the Trump administration wants to make sure that Americans have access to affordable diabetes and weight-loss drugs, specifically glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, better known as GLP-1 drugs.

To this end and as part of his months-long campaign to bring most-favored-nation prescription drug pricing to Americans, President Donald Trump has struck a deal with pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, the manufacturer of Ozempic, to cut prices on their weight-loss drugs in exchange for Medicare coverage.

A senior administration official indicated on Thursday that since Trump issued his most-favored-nation pricing executive order in May, GLP-1 drugs "have been top of mind" — not just because of the pharmaceuticals' apparent cardiometabolic benefits "but also because this is, again, an issue of fairness."

RELATED: How MAHA can really save American lives

IM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

Per the terms of Trump's deal with the two companies, "starting oral doses of GLP-1s will cost just $149 for everyone on Medicare, Medicaid, or Trump Rx," said an official. "That's roughly 1/9th of today's list price."

For Medicare, the manufacturers have reportedly agreed to reduce prices on GLP-1 drugs that are currently used for diabetes and other covered conditions to $245 per month across all other doses, added the official.

Savings generated by these price reductions will apparently be used to provide new coverage for GLP-1 drugs to patients struggling with obesity who face high metabolic or cardiovascular risk at the same monthly cost of $245.

As of 2020, over 100 million American adults were obese, and more than 22 million adults suffered from severe obesity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

While the adult obesity rate reportedly declined from 39.9% in 2022 to 37% this year — representing roughly 7.6 million fewer obese adults — Gallup recently indicated that diagnoses of diabetes have reached an all-time high of 13.8%.

Amid the glut of diabetes cases, there has been a significant increase in the number of U.S. adults who report taking GLP-1 drugs — from 5.8% in February 2024 to 12.4% in the latest quarter of 2025. The three-year decline in obesity among most age groups appears to correspond with the embrace of the weight-loss drugs.

When asked roughly how many patients on Medicare and Medicaid would be impacted by these changes, another administration official noted that in Medicare, around 10% of the population will be eligible for the standard access. While the drugs are approved for a much broader population, access has been constrained for "patients that will benefit clinically from it."

There will reportedly be three tiers of patients in Medicare who will have access to these drugs for the purposes of addressing obesity and driving "cardiometabolic improvement": those with a body mass index greater than 27 kg/m² suffering from pre-diabetes or established cardiovascular disease; patients with a BMI greater than 30 who have uncontrolled hypertension, kidney disease, and/or heart failure; and individuals with a BMI exceeding 35.

'We do not believe that GLP-1s or drugs alone are somehow some silver bullet.'

"This is about making America healthy again," said the second official. "This is about preventing strokes, this is about preventing heart attacks, and this is about preventing end-stage renal disease."

The officials acknowledged, however, that cheaper drugs do not amount to a long-term solution to the problem of obesity.

"Make no mistake: We're in a war against obesity. We do not believe that GLP-1s or drugs alone are somehow some silver bullet to make the ... country healthy again," said one official. "They are an important jump-start."

In exchange for their cooperation, the pharma giants are gaining additional access to beneficiaries who wouldn't otherwise be covered by Medicare for obesity indications, certainty from the Trump administration on its approach to drug pricing moving forward, and a commitment to invest in American manufacturing.

One Trump administration official told reporters that this initiative is expected to ultimately be cost neutral, stating, "This is really a win-win on all sides — for taxpayers, for Medicare beneficiaries, as well as for the companies."

Last month, Trump announced an agreement with AstraZeneca that would guarantee every state Medicaid program across the country most-favored-nation drug prices on the pharma giant's products. The previous month, he announced a similar deal with Pfizer.

"In case after case, our citizens pay massively higher prices than other nations pay for the same exact pill, from the same factory, effectively subsidizing socialism [abroad] with skyrocketing prices at home," Trump said in a statement. "So we would spend tremendous amounts of money in order to provide inexpensive drugs to another country. And when I say the price is different, you can see some examples where the price is beyond anything — four times, five times different."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Pandemic fallout: Study finds parents are increasingly taking a stand on vaccines



Experimental vaccines were rushed to market during the pandemic, then advertised as "safe and effective" by government officials, the establishment media, and pharmaceutical representatives. Those who said otherwise or asked too many inconvenient questions were attacked and censored. Meanwhile, affordable alternative treatments were suppressed and/or characterized by supposed experts as dangerous quackery.

This profitable private-public campaign to impose novel vaccines on the American population was not advanced merely through propaganda, the silencing of dissenting voices, and through uncompetitive practices; it also depended upon straightforward coercion.

Only 40% of parents said they plan to load their child up with all of the recommended vaccines.

For instance, the Biden administration mandated that federal employees and even military service members get the jab. Millions of other Americans across the country were also told to offer up their arms if they wanted to keep their jobs, eat in public, stay in school, or visit their loved ones.

Adding injury to insult, it was later revealed that the vaccines were not as safe or as effective as advertised.

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-backed study published this month in the JAMA Network revealed that a great many American parents are no longer willing to blindly trust the medical establishment, at least not when it comes to the vaccination of their children.

According to the study, titled "Vaccination Intentions During Pregnancy and Among Parents of Young Children," 33% of parents surveyed who have children under age 5 indicated that they intend to delay or refuse some or all government-recommended vaccines for their child.

RELATED: Smug Obama speechwriter provides damning reminder of Democrats' intolerance for conservatives, vax-refusers

Photo by JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images

Only 40% of parents said they plan to load their child up with all of the recommended vaccines; 20% said they plan to delay some vaccines.

While only 4% of first-time pregnant mothers said they intend to delay or refuse all recommended vaccines, 48% expressed uncertainty about childhood vaccination.

Children's Health Defense, which was chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from 2015 to 2023, noted, "Only 37% of young and expecting parents now plan to fully vaccinate their children — a seismic shift. Why? Because when parents ask real questions about the vaccine schedule to their pediatricians, they’re met with silence or deflection."

'If you dig into the hepatitis B stuff that they try to give to your child when they're born, you realize it's to inoculate a future population of drug addicts and prostitutes, not to protect your child.'

"No answers. No informed consent. Just blind trust demanded," continued CHD. "Parents aren't buying it anymore."

The study's authors, researchers from Emory University, suggested that the remedy for this uncertainty might be interventions during pregnancy.

"Given the high decisional uncertainty during pregnancy about vaccinating children after birth, there may be value in intervening during pregnancy to proactively support families with childhood vaccination decisions," wrote the authors.

Blaze News senior politics editor Christopher Bedford said, "I get text message requests every week on different threads — neighborhood threads, church threads, Knights of Columbus threads, political threads — from people asking, 'Hey, where can we find a doctor who's not going to force us to keep to the CDC regime, who's going to let us take it at our own pace, informed as parents?' And it's extremely difficult."

Bedford noted that in Northern Virginia and elsewhere, parents have taken to scouring the pages of pediatricians for signs of politicization in an effort to determine whether the doctors will "talk to you like a human being; whether they'll let you make your decision and space it out the way that you want."

"People are asking for what they can read, where they can learn more, because they just don't trust the experts any more," continued Bedford. "We've been lied to. The COVID vaccine, we now know, was a lie. If you dig into the hepatitis B stuff that they try to give to your child when they're born, you realize it's to inoculate a future population of drug addicts and prostitutes, not to protect your child. ... Parents just want a practice that will listen to them, take them seriously, and not be political — and it's wild how political it's gotten."

RELATED: Jab first, ask questions never: Vaccine truths your doctor won't tell you

EKIN KIZILKAYA/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Jake Scott, a clinical associate professor of infectious diseases at Stanford University, indicated that whereas the childhood vaccine schedule contained around 11 doses protecting against seven diseases in 1986, the schedule now includes roughly 50 injections covering 16 diseases. Between 30 and 32 shots are typically required for kids to attend state schools.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who indicated during a recent congressional hearing that kids "get 69 to 92 jabs of vaccines between conception and when they are 18 years old" — a figure apparently higher than the one cited by Scott on account of certain brands requiring multiple doses — recently told Fox News host Martha MacCallum that none of the vaccines on the schedule have been safety-tested except for the COVID-19 vaccine.

"Nobody has an idea what the risk profiles are on these products, and we don't know whether they have anything to do with the epidemic of chronic disease," added Kennedy.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

US Representatives Join RFK’s Crusade Against Big Pharma

'Patients should trust their doctor for medical guidance, not 30-second TV ads'

After long suggesting ADHD has biological basis, scientists now make stunning admission



The medical establishment has a troubling track record of confidently stating things that just aren't so — as became clear to Americans who suffered injuries from supposedly safe and effective vaccines during the pandemic.

There was a damning admission in New York Times Magazine over the weekend that may inspire new doubts about the credibility of the so-called experts advising the masses on matters of health, namely that attention deficit hyperactivity disorder may not have a basis in biology after all.

That admission was not volunteered from some activist or critic but rather by the Dutch neuroscientist who apparently misled the world into thinking "A.D.H.D. is a disorder of the brain."

'No one knew exactly how the medication worked.'

In a piece titled "Have we been thinking about A.D.H.D. all wrong?" Paul Tough discussed the correlated explosion of ADHD diagnoses and Ritalin prescriptions in the 1990s — a trend, he noted, that was accompanied by criticism from parents and others concerned about the apparent campaign to load kids with methylphenidate and amphetamines.

"You didn't have to be a Scientologist to acknowledge that there were some legitimate questions about A.D.H.D.," wrote Tough. "Despite Ritalin's rapid growth, no one knew exactly how the medication worked or whether it really was the best way to treat children's attention issues."

Parents were right to be concerned.

Ritalin, Adderall, and the other highly addictive stimulants foisted upon hard-to-control American youths have a variety of undesirable side effects, both immediate and long-term.

In the short term, they can cause side effects such as bladder pain, bloody urine, an irregular heartbeat and palpitations, diarrhea, headaches, joint pain, trouble sleeping, confusion, agitation, seizures, and vomiting. In the long term, these drugs can apparently impact growth, dopamine regulation, and memory formation and retention and cause elevated blood pressure, psychosis, and mood disorders.

Over the past decade, prescriptions for stimulants to remedy imagined ADHD have skyrocketed — by 58% between 2012 and 2022. Most of the drugs dished out have been amphetamines, according to a 2023 document prepared for the Drug Enforcement Administration.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an estimated 7.1 million American children (approximately 1 in 9) aged 3-17 had ADHD diagnoses as of 2022. That's up from two million in the mid-1990s. Over half of the children currently diagnosed with ADHD receive at least one ADHD medication.

Tough noted that the medical establishment, already bullish on the ADHD craze, seized upon the initial results of the Multimodal Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Study. The study, published in 1999, suggested that Ritalin was effective.

After the Ritalin train left the station at full speed, James Swanson — who subsequently went to consult for drug companies, including the manufacturer of Adderall — and his colleagues realized that their study championing stimulant use had aged poorly.

While the children in their MTA study reported improvements after 14 months of choking down stimulants, after 36 months, their advantage had effectively disappeared such that they were expressing the same supposed symptoms as the comparison group. Years later, the same test subjects turned out to be an inch shorter than their peers.

In other words, the medical establishment was hyping and pushing addictive drugs largely on the basis of perceived short-term gains that, unlike drug dependency, faded in under two years.

"There are things about the way we do this work," Swanson, now in his 80s, told Tough, "that just are definitely wrong."

"I don't agree with people who say that stimulant treatment is good," Swanson said, after spending three decades studying the drugs. "It's not good."

Swanson is apparently not the only supposed ADHD expert now having significant doubts.

Edmund Sonuga-Barke, a researcher in psychiatry and neuroscience at King's College London, told Tough, "I've invested 35 years of my life trying to identify the causes of A.D.H.D., and somehow we seem to be farther away from our goal than we were when we started."

'We're terrified of what will happen to the kids who can't get the meds.'

"We have a clinical definition of A.D.H.D. that is increasingly unanchored from what we're finding in our science," added Sonuga-Barke.

Sonuga-Barke suggested further that ADHD is not a static, easily definable, or objectively measurable condition.

That's not what Martine Hoogman, the chair of the Enigma ADHD working group, and her team suggested in a 2017 paper funded by the National Institutes of Health and published in the Lancet Psychiatry, a peer-reviewed Elsevier journal.

After years of academic chatter about potential physical differences in the brains of people with ADHD diagnoses, Hoogman and her team compared the cortical volumes of ADHD-diagnosed subjects with those of a control group.

While Tough indicated their data showed the opposite to be true, Hoogman and her team originally stated:

We confirm, with high powered analysis, that ADHD patients truly have altered brains, i.e. that ADHD is a disorder of the brain. This is a clear message for clinicians to convey to parents and patients, which can help to reduce the stigma of ADHD and get a better understanding of ADHD. This way, it will become just as apparent as for major depressive disorder, for example, that we label ADHD as a brain disorder. Also, finding the most pronounced effects in childhood provides a relevant model of ADHD as a disorder of brain maturation delay.

Hoogman did a complete about-face when recently pressed about her statement, telling Tough, "Back then, we emphasized the differences that we found (although small), but you can also conclude that the subcortical and cortical volumes of people with A.D.H.D. and those without A.D.H.D. are almost identical."

"The A.D.H.D. neurobiology is so much more complex than that," added Hoogman.

Sonuga-Barke indicated that there is a desperation among some scientists to find evidence pointing to the biological nature of ADHD.

"In the field, we're so frightened that people will say it doesn't exist," said Sonuga-Barke. "That this is just bad parenting, from the right, or this is just a product of our postindustrial society, from the left. We have to double down because we're terrified of what will happen to the kids who can't get the meds. We've seen the impact they can have on people's lives."

'It's infuriating.'

The well-documented overdiagnosis and overtreatment of ADHD in children and adults is troubling on its face but far worse when considered in light of Sonuga-Barke's understanding that ADHD diagnoses are purely subjective and effectively unfalsifiable; Swanson's admission that ADHD treatment doesn't help in the long-run; and Hoogman's admission that there is not a biological signature for the supposed disorder.

Blaze News previously noted that the Trump administration's plan to assess the prevalence and impact of pharmaceuticals on children has some childhood psychiatrists and other prongs of the pharmaceutical industry panicking. After all, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. might cost them a source of revenue by taking a closer look at ADHD.

Kennedy noted during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee that "15% of American youth are now on Adderall or some other [attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder] medication."

"We are not just overmedicating our children, we are overmedicating our entire population," said Kennedy. "Half the pharmaceutical drugs on earth are now sold here."

Conservative commentator Matt Walsh noted in response to the New York Times Magazine article, "ADHD is one of the greatest scams in modern history. Millions of kids have been given mind-altering drugs on the basis of a lie. Now after decades — and after shouting down and defaming those of us who knew better — they're finally starting to admit it. It's infuriating."

Author and journalist Alex Berenson tweeted, "It's unbelievable that drug companies and shrinks ('telehealth' in particular) have pushed this junk for so long."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Scuttled CDC Pick Slams Big Pharma And Senators On Its Payroll

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Screenshot-2025-03-14-at-4.23.03 PM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Screenshot-2025-03-14-at-4.23.03%5Cu202fPM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]Dr. Dave Weldon said concerns that Big Pharma was behind the fight against his nomination for CDC director were 'probably true.'

Criticism Of ‘Big Pharma’ Is An Attack On America’s ‘Sick Care’ System, Not Modern Medicine

Kennedy railing against 'Big Pharma' in this week's Senate hearings wasn't as much an effort to 'scapegoat' the industry as much as it was a rallying cry to pressure the health care system into offering true "health care."

Dem Senators Side With Big Pharma Over Kennedy’s Bipartisan MAHA Message

Democrats greeted President Donald Trump's pick to lead HHS with hostile interrogations over abortion and vaccines.

Senators Who’ve Raked In Millions From Big Pharma To Question RFK Jr. In Double Hearings

In a make-or-break moment to 'make America healthy again,' Trump's pick to lead the crusade at HHS will be questioned Thursday and Friday.