People will believe a big lie sooner than a little one, and if you repeat it frequently enough, people will sooner or later believe it.
On November 19, 2025, the New England Journal of Medicine published an article entitled “Efficacy, Immunogenicity, and Safety of Modified mRNA Influenza Vaccine.” This article purportedly reviewed the results of Pfizer’s Phase 3 clinical trials testing its experimental, mRNA-based, gene therapy injections for Influenza, which Pfizer presents as an alternative to traditional Influenza vaccines.
Two weeks later, on December 5, 2025, the Centers for Disease Control’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted 8-3 to end the recommendation in the CDC’s pediatric vaccine schedule that all American children receive the Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) vaccine at birth. This recommendation would bring the CDC’s HBV vaccine recommendations closer to those in numerous other developed nations, countries that have both better overall pediatric health than the United States and no surplus pediatric HBV deaths.
To the casual observer, neither of these events may seem very noteworthy. However, in the post-Covid world of medicine, vaccinology, and politics, both fueled controversy that shows no sign of ending soon. Why?
The New England Journal of Medicine article of Pfizer’s self-conducted study of its own product has been extensively analyzed by independent reviewers. It has been identified as an object lesson in the scientific fraud that is endemic in vaccine research, development, and marketing. Detailed review of the study has revealed multiple systematic techniques of deceptive research methods, omission and concealment of unfavorable data, and outright misrepresentation of results.
The ACIP panel’s decision, which represents a minor change in the previously sacrosanct – if ever-expanding – CDC pediatric vaccine schedule, has been met with an onslaught of hair-on-fire, alarmist proclamations by the vaccine industry and its minions of impending disease and death in American children. These claims are unsupported by the existing scientific data and bear little relationship to objective reality as a whole.
The reasons these two events have sparked such controversy are:
- The New England Journal of Medicine article – now thoroughly deconstructed – exposes the brazen, systematic dishonesty of both vaccine development and the clinical trial process as a whole.
- Meanwhile, the results of the study, once fully uncovered and comprehensively reviewed, shatter the viability of the mRNA gene therapy platform as a substitute for conventional vaccines.
- The unhinged response to the ACIP decision reveals the entire pediatric vaccine schedule to be a house of cards, built on falsehoods, that cannot withstand any criticism, reform, or revision whatsoever.
The awful truth (and it is both awful and the truth) is that vaccinology is overwhelmingly a façade, constructed on a shaky foundation of lies. In the wake of these two recent controversies, it is instructive to enumerate the five great lies propping up vaccinology (plus two Honorable Mentions). I shall outline them here, and provide a more detailed discussion of each in forthcoming essays.
The Five Big Lies of Vaccinology
Big Lie #1: Equating Antibody Production with Immunity to Disease
Big Lie #2: Using Fake Placebos
Big Lie #3: Insisting My Immunity is Dependent on Your Vaccination
Big Lie #4: Declaring Multiple Simultaneous Injections to be Safe
Big Lie #5: Declaring Vaccines Fundamentally “Safe and Effective” as a Class
Honorable Mention 1: Declaring mRNA Gene Therapies to be “Vaccines”
Honorable Mention 2: Allowing Criminal Corporations to Conduct their own Clinical Studies
In upcoming essays, we will analyze each of these Big Lies of Vaccinology. In the process, we shall see how each Big Lie is interdependent upon others, and how the entire vaccine narrative depends upon this web of falsehoods. We shall see why vaccine zealots such as Peter Hotez and Paul Offit would refuse to attend the ACIP meeting – which they were invited to do – and in fact why they refuse to debate these points.
The reckoning that is taking place regarding the vaccine industry is overdue, but it is hardly unique.
There was a time within living memory when pre-frontal lobotomy was considered cutting edge medicine (pun intended). Its founder won the Nobel Prize for Medicine.
There was a time within living memory when physicians accepted corporate payment to convince the public that cigarette smoking was safe.
There was a time – very recently – when mainstream medicine actively promoted OxyContin and other deadly narcotics as safe and minimally addictive. Hundreds of thousands died as a result.
The bloom is off the rose for the vaccine industry. It is long past time for its accounting. May we all open our minds, use our heads, and face the reality of this subject.
Join the conversation:
Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.
