Post here for exciting advancements in mRNA technology!
64,712 Views |
719 Replies |
Last: 11 days ago by Tempus Edax Rerum
Heads must roll…
— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) May 20, 2026
🚨 Sen. Ron Johnson says there is a total Media BLACKOUT on the new COVID Vax Child Death count study— 24% of 39,000 Victims Died the SAME DAY or Within 48 Hours! “They KNEW and Did NOTHING!”
Sen. Johnson is discussing a new FDA analysis/report he released… pic.twitter.com/RYaKf7vg8l
Johnson is a whack job.
That post is garbage, and specifically it's garbage in a way worth unpacking because it mashes together two different numbers from two different things to make a third claim that nobody actually made.
Here's what's underneath it. In late November 2025, FDA vaccine chief Dr. Vinay Prasad wrote a memo claiming that "no fewer than 10" of 96 child deaths reported to VAERS between 2021 and 2024 were "related" to COVID vaccination. A subsequent FDA analysis dated December 5, 2025 reviewed those 96 pediatric VAERS death reports through Aug. 14, 2025, and found no child deaths definitively linked to COVID vaccines. "No cases were classified as certain in relation to COVID-19 vaccination," and seven deaths were classified as "possibly" related, with the report noting "possible cases could also be explained by alternative etiology." Five of the seven possibly/probably cases involved myocarditis.
Johnson released that memo as part of his letter to RFK Jr. earlier this month. NBC News + 3
So the actual pediatric review is: 96 cases reviewed, 0 certain, 7 possibly or probably related. Not 39,000. Not a "study" of 39,000 child deaths.
Where does the 39,000 come from? Johnson's letter separately pointed out that there were 1,675,590 total VAERS adverse event reports following COVID vaccines, including 39,077 deaths, of which 9,329 occurred "within 2 days of vaccination." That's all ages, not children 9,329 of 39,077 is roughly 24%, so the viral post grabbed that ratio, slapped the word "Child" on it, and pretended it was a finding from a "study." It isn't. The 39,077 is total VAERS death reports across the entire vaccinated U.S. population, hundreds of millions of people. WorldNetDaily
And that brings up the deeper problem the viral post is built on: VAERS is a passive, open-submission system. Anyone patient, doctor, family member, random person can submit a report, and the CDC/FDA disclaim on every page that a report does not mean the vaccine caused the event. With hundreds of millions of doses administered, you would expect tens of thousands of deaths within 48 hours of vaccination by pure base rate alone heart attacks, strokes, car accidents, cancer progression, late-stage illness in the elderly. The "within 48 hours" framing only sounds damning if you don't know how many people die in any random 48-hour window in a population that large. That's why VAERS is described as hypothesis-generating, not causation-establishing and it's why the FDA's actual case-by-case medical review of the 96 pediatric files came back with 0 certain and 7 possibly, not "24% killed."
The "media BLACKOUT" line is also just false on its face. NBC News, BioSpace, Endpoints News, and NBC New York all ran stories on it in the past week. They just didn't run the story the post wanted, because the FDA's own conclusion no child deaths definitively caused by COVID vaccination undercuts the headline. BioSpace
If you want the steelman of Johnson's actual position (rather than the viral garbled version), it's narrower and more defensible: the December FDA memo classified some pediatric myocarditis deaths as "new safety information" under federal law, and that label arguably should have triggered a labeling update or public communication that didn't happen at the time. That's a legitimate transparency-and-process question. But it is a very different argument from "24% of 39,000 children died within 48 hours," which is what the post you got is claiming. The post took a real underlying document, ripped two unrelated numbers out of two different contexts, fused them, mislabeled the population, and added an all-caps conspiracy frame.
So yeah garbage, but in a specific and diagnosable way that's worth being able to point to line-by-line if you end up debating it.
That post is garbage, and specifically it's garbage in a way worth unpacking because it mashes together two different numbers from two different things to make a third claim that nobody actually made.
Here's what's underneath it. In late November 2025, FDA vaccine chief Dr. Vinay Prasad wrote a memo claiming that "no fewer than 10" of 96 child deaths reported to VAERS between 2021 and 2024 were "related" to COVID vaccination. A subsequent FDA analysis dated December 5, 2025 reviewed those 96 pediatric VAERS death reports through Aug. 14, 2025, and found no child deaths definitively linked to COVID vaccines. "No cases were classified as certain in relation to COVID-19 vaccination," and seven deaths were classified as "possibly" related, with the report noting "possible cases could also be explained by alternative etiology." Five of the seven possibly/probably cases involved myocarditis.
Johnson released that memo as part of his letter to RFK Jr. earlier this month. NBC News + 3
So the actual pediatric review is: 96 cases reviewed, 0 certain, 7 possibly or probably related. Not 39,000. Not a "study" of 39,000 child deaths.
Where does the 39,000 come from? Johnson's letter separately pointed out that there were 1,675,590 total VAERS adverse event reports following COVID vaccines, including 39,077 deaths, of which 9,329 occurred "within 2 days of vaccination." That's all ages, not children 9,329 of 39,077 is roughly 24%, so the viral post grabbed that ratio, slapped the word "Child" on it, and pretended it was a finding from a "study." It isn't. The 39,077 is total VAERS death reports across the entire vaccinated U.S. population, hundreds of millions of people. WorldNetDaily
And that brings up the deeper problem the viral post is built on: VAERS is a passive, open-submission system. Anyone patient, doctor, family member, random person can submit a report, and the CDC/FDA disclaim on every page that a report does not mean the vaccine caused the event. With hundreds of millions of doses administered, you would expect tens of thousands of deaths within 48 hours of vaccination by pure base rate alone heart attacks, strokes, car accidents, cancer progression, late-stage illness in the elderly. The "within 48 hours" framing only sounds damning if you don't know how many people die in any random 48-hour window in a population that large. That's why VAERS is described as hypothesis-generating, not causation-establishing and it's why the FDA's actual case-by-case medical review of the 96 pediatric files came back with 0 certain and 7 possibly, not "24% killed."
The "media BLACKOUT" line is also just false on its face. NBC News, BioSpace, Endpoints News, and NBC New York all ran stories on it in the past week. They just didn't run the story the post wanted, because the FDA's own conclusion no child deaths definitively caused by COVID vaccination undercuts the headline. BioSpace
If you want the steelman of Johnson's actual position (rather than the viral garbled version), it's narrower and more defensible: the December FDA memo classified some pediatric myocarditis deaths as "new safety information" under federal law, and that label arguably should have triggered a labeling update or public communication that didn't happen at the time. That's a legitimate transparency-and-process question. But it is a very different argument from "24% of 39,000 children died within 48 hours," which is what the post you got is claiming. The post took a real underlying document, ripped two unrelated numbers out of two different contexts, fused them, mislabeled the population, and added an all-caps conspiracy frame.
So yeah garbage, but in a specific and diagnosable way that's worth being able to point to line-by-line if you end up debating it.
Tempus Edax Rerum said:
https://www.tipranks.com/news/company-announcements/moderna-advances-mrna-lyme-disease-vaccine-into-phase-2-what-investors-should-watch
It's amazing that a Lyme disease vaccine gets advanced just as all these ticks are being found.
Amazing
LIB,MR BEARS said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:
https://www.tipranks.com/news/company-announcements/moderna-advances-mrna-lyme-disease-vaccine-into-phase-2-what-investors-should-watch
It's amazing that a Lyme disease vaccine gets advanced just as all these ticks are being found.
Amazing
You know just when I think a Baylor education turns out some smart people, you come along and prove me wrong.
Lyme disease vaccine development has been underway for decades there was actually an approved vaccine (LYMErix) back in 1998 that was pulled from the market in 2002, not due to safety issues but because of poor sales driven partly by anti-vaccine pressure. The current leading candidate (VLA15/Lyme rVax, developed by Pfizer/Valneva) has been in clinical trials since around 2017.
As for tick populations they've been expanding for years due to well-documented factors: milder winters from climate change, deer population growth, reforestation of former farmland in the Northeast, and suburban sprawl pushing humans into tick habitat. Lyme disease cases have roughly doubled over the past 20 years. This isn't new or sudden.
So the "amazing timing" framing has it backwards. The vaccine was developed because ticks and Lyme cases have been increasing for years that's exactly what drives pharmaceutical investment. A growing disease burden is what gets a vaccine funded and prioritized. It would actually be more suspicious if no one was working on a vaccine given the trends.
The post pattern "X happened just as Y happened, amazing" is a classic way to imply conspiracy without making an actual argument. It sounds profound but doesn't assert anything falsifiable. The question worth asking is: what's the alternative explanation being implied, and does it make more sense than the straightforward one?
Tempus Edax Rerum said:
Towards mRNA therapeutics 2.0
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41573-026-01459-7
Covid vaccine worked well
CDC's chief blocked a covid vaccine study. Now it's in a top medical journal.
The study found that the vaccine reduced the risk of emergency department visits and hospitalizations among healthy adults by about half last winter.
LIB,MR BEARS said:WOW: A study involving 1.7 million children has found that myocarditis and pericarditis only appeared in children who had received Covid mRNA vaccines.
— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) October 8, 2024
Not a single unvaccinated child in the group suffered from these heart-related problems.
This is absolutely shocking. pic.twitter.com/aI6Vs5XeC0
You really are a special kind of stupid.
The rates are per million 27/million is ~0.003%, extremely rare in absolute terms. mRNA-vaccine myocarditis in adolescents is a well-established, product-labeled adverse event, not a hidden or novel discovery; a study trying to bury harms wouldn't put it in its own abstract. And the abstract makes no comparison to myocarditis risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection itself, which is the comparison that actually determines net risk-benefit. So the sentence is true but incomplete, and it's exactly the kind of line that gets clipped and circulated to imply something the study doesn't establish.
Tempus Edax Rerum said:LIB,MR BEARS said:WOW: A study involving 1.7 million children has found that myocarditis and pericarditis only appeared in children who had received Covid mRNA vaccines.
— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) October 8, 2024
Not a single unvaccinated child in the group suffered from these heart-related problems.
This is absolutely shocking. pic.twitter.com/aI6Vs5XeC0
You really are a special kind of stupid.
The rates are per million 27/million is ~0.003%, extremely rare in absolute terms. mRNA-vaccine myocarditis in adolescents is a well-established, product-labeled adverse event, not a hidden or novel discovery; a study trying to bury harms wouldn't put it in its own abstract. And the abstract makes no comparison to myocarditis risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection itself, which is the comparison that actually determines net risk-benefit. So the sentence is true but incomplete, and it's exactly the kind of line that gets clipped and circulated to imply something the study doesn't establish.
Tempus,
Good posts. Please keep posting
Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:LIB,MR BEARS said:WOW: A study involving 1.7 million children has found that myocarditis and pericarditis only appeared in children who had received Covid mRNA vaccines.
— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) October 8, 2024
Not a single unvaccinated child in the group suffered from these heart-related problems.
This is absolutely shocking. pic.twitter.com/aI6Vs5XeC0
You really are a special kind of stupid.
The rates are per million 27/million is ~0.003%, extremely rare in absolute terms. mRNA-vaccine myocarditis in adolescents is a well-established, product-labeled adverse event, not a hidden or novel discovery; a study trying to bury harms wouldn't put it in its own abstract. And the abstract makes no comparison to myocarditis risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection itself, which is the comparison that actually determines net risk-benefit. So the sentence is true but incomplete, and it's exactly the kind of line that gets clipped and circulated to imply something the study doesn't establish.
Tempus,
Good posts. Please keep posting
I have no plans to stop!
Tempus Edax Rerum said:
https://www.wsj.com/health/pharma/moderna-merck-vaccine-succeeds-in-preventing-melanoma-from-returning-540e9e18
What a marvelous development