Table of Contents
- 1 The Inventor of mRNA vaccines opposes them?
- 2 The Joe Rogan Experience:
- 2.1 Is Dr. Malone “The” Inventor of the mRNA Vaccines?
- 2.2 Are there real risks to the mRNA vaccines?
- 2.3 Do the mRNA vaccines increase cancer and infertility?
- 2.4 Do the spike proteins build up in the brain, nervous system, and reproductive organs?
- 2.5 The Spike Proteins have never been tested for safety in humans?
- 2.6 Natural immunity not getting any respect?
- 2.7 Mass Formation Psycosis?
- 2.8 Governments striving to maintain fear?
- 2.9 Hospitals don’t want people to get better at home?
- 2.10 What about Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin?
- 2.11 Vaccines create an evolutionary arms race?
- 2.12 mRNA Vaccines will produce Antibody-Dependent Enhancement?
- 2.13 Vaccines not working anyway? – and they aren’t safe?
- 3 Bio of Dr. Sean Pitman
The Inventor of mRNA vaccines opposes them?
If the mRNA vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna are so helpful in the fight against COVID-19, as I personally believe that they are and as I’ve personally been claiming for quite some time now, then how on Earth can the very inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology itself be so opposed to these vaccines? – claiming that they are far more toxic and dangerous than the virus itself? Yet, this is exactly what Dr. Robert Malone claims.
The Joe Rogan Experience:
Dr. Robert Malone has been strongly opposed to the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 practically since they first came on the scene in early 2021. Yet, it was a recent interview with the very popular podcaster Joe Rogan (“The Joe Rogan Experience” Dec. 31 podcast) that really went “viral”, if you will, for Dr. Malone (Transcript). It was so controversial that both Twitter and YouTube removed the interview from their platforms. Yet, it seems to me that if someone like Dr. Malone can get so confused, if he is indeed confused at all, that it is both important and instructive to carefully listen to and consider his concerns and then respond, point-by-point, to these concerns – if reasonable responses are actually available. Simply blocking him or completely censoring what a scientist like Dr. Malone has to say is very counterproductive and, at some level, just not the American way of doing things. Censoring someone like Dr. Malone, even if he is wrong and even if his claims would cause harm if followed, only makes him that much more attractive to conspiracy theorists and increases the overall harm that is caused. It’s best, then, to let him speak and to simply respond, carefully and thoughtfully, to what he has to say.
So, here’s the interview in full:
Review of Joe Rogan’s interview with Dr. Peter McCullough:
See also a good review of the Joe Rogan interview with Dr. Peter McCullough by Dr.Zubin Damania (see video below). Note the very similar arguments made by both Drs. McCullough and Malone. This is another very good discussion with great insights into the minds of well-educated well-spoken doctors and scientists who, none-the-less end up falling for and promoting wild-eyed conspiracy theories as the Gospel Truth.
Here’s a key portion of this discussion where McCullough, like Malone, presents his grand worldwide government conspiracy theory where McCullough claims that this entire pandemic was deliberately planned and executed:
I can tell you that if you want to find the evidence that Moderna was working on the vaccine before the virus ever emanated out of the lab, if you wanted to find the collusions and the operations between the Gates Foundation and Gavby and Sepi and Pfizer and Maderna and the vaccine manufacturers and the Wuhan lab and the National Institutes of Health and Ralph Barrack and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and how all this was organized. If you want to see the Johns Hopkins planning seminar called the Spars Pandemic in 2017, where they had a symposium, people showed up. They wrote up their symposium findings. They published this.
It says it’s going to be a coronavirus. It’s going to be related to MERS and SARS. It’s going to come over here to the United States. It’s going to shut down cities and frighten people. There’s going to be confusion regarding the drug hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin. And we’re going to utilize all that in order to railroad the population into mass vaccination. It’s laid out in the Johns Hopkins sparse pandemic training seminar. The only thing that got wrong was the year they said it was going to be 2025. Instead, it landed a few years early.
Joe Rogan: How did they organize something like this? And how do you get so many doctors to go along with this? How do you get so many doctors to not speak out against the lack of pre hospitalization care, the lack of early treatment.
We think there’s about 500 doctors who knows what’s going on in the United States.
Joe Rogan: 500?
500. We got a million doctors in the United States. We got half a million nurse practitioners and physician assistants. I can tell you the nurses are more awake than the doctors.
Joe Rogan: Why is that?
The doctors appear to be like many of our leaders. By the way, all the leaders of the major churches, every single one of them, the major religious branches, are under the spell. Every major global international leader is under the spell. We’re in what’s called a mass formation psychosis. This is very important.
I give credit to Dr. Mattias Desmet in the University again in Belgium. And recently, Dr. Mark McDonald, psychiatrist from L.A. Mark McDonald’s, got a new book out the United States of Fear, describing how the mass psychosis developed. What your listeners need to know is a mass psychosis is when there is a groupthink that develops that’s so strong that it leads to something horrific. And the examples are these mass suicides that occur in these religious cults.
The example is Nazi Germany. When people walk into gas Chambers and we guess these horrific things in four elements here. It’s very important, Joe. First, there must be a period of prolonged isolation. Lockdowns. Number two, there must be a withdrawal of things taken away from people that they used to enjoy. That’s happened. Number three, there must be constant, incessant, free floating anxiety, all this new cycle, all the deaths and the hospitalizations, more variant mutant strains, everything, people becoming scared over and over again. The last thing, number four, the capper is there must be a single solution offered by an entity in authority, and in this case, is clear. Worldwide. The solution was vaccination. Everybody must take the vaccination. It’s not a US program. It’s not a European court. It’s everywhere. And you know what Joe, it doesn’t matter what vaccine it is. It could be China vac, Corona Vac. It could be Novavax. It could be Pfizer, Moderna, J and J. It’s interesting that it doesn’t even matter what vaccine it is. It’s just take a vaccine, take any vaccine. And so what mass psychosis says is number four, the solution. There’s no limit to the absurdity of the solution.
This is just amazing to me, that such outlandish government conspiracy theories could be accepted, hook, line, and sinker, by those who are otherwise intelligent and successful. But, it happens all the time. Evidently, just because someone is a successful doctor or a famous scientist, even a Nobel Prize winner, this doesn’t necessarily completely immunize a person from this sort of thinking.
It reminds me of the story of John Nash, a mathematician and Nobel Prize winner who inspired the movie, “A Beautiful Mind“. Nash started believing that he could see hidden patterns and messages that no one else could see, hidden messages in newspapers or behind why someone was wearing a red tie that were all part of government conspiracies and plots or even messages from God. While not everyone who subscribes to this kind of thinking ends up with paranoid schizophrenia, the idea that one can see hidden messages or hidden plots that few if any others can see is very attractive to many people – to include very intelligent people.
And, Christians are not immune from this problem either – not even Seventh-day Adventists. In fact, if anything, I would say that there is a tendency in conservative Christian denominations that emphasize End-Time prophecies (Danial and Revelation), to include SDAs with our emphasis on Last-day Events, toward government conspiracy theories. This tendency reminds me of a form of early church Gnosticism – or the effort to attain “secret knowledge”, or “gnosis” – and that by accessing and activating this secret knowledge, we will have as much power as Jesus had (Link). However, according to the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, the events during the last days of Earth’s history will not be the result of hidden government conspiracies, but will all be out in the open for everyone to see.
In any case, here’s a good review of the Rogan/McCullough interview by Dr.Zubin Damania.
See also the following references regarding McCulloughs claims on the Joe Rogan Show:
Claim 2 sources: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama…
Claim 3 sources: https://japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/02…
Claim 5 sources: https://yalemedicine.org/news/covid-1…
Claim 6 sources: https://uchicagomedicine.org/forefron…
Claim 7 sources: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-…
Claim 8 sources: Search “McCullough Fort Worth study Covid 19” and you will see the results.
Claim 9 sources: https://contagionlive.com/view/two-do…
Claim 11 sources: https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2…
Claim 16 sources: https://usatoday.com/story/news/factc…
Claim 17 sources: https://www.reuters.com/article/factc…
Claim 19 sources: https://newsroom.heart.org/news/young…
Claim 20 sources: https:// cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/omicron-variant.html https://thelancet.com/journals/laninf…
Claim 22 sources: https://fda.gov/consumers/consumer-up…
Claim 23 sources: https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJ…
Time.com: Pfizer is 22.5% effective against symptomatic infection with Omicron (can still thwart severe disease). The vaccine did not generate an adequate immune response from children under 2.
Is Dr. Malone “The” Inventor of the mRNA Vaccines?
Well, not quite. As with most great inventions and discoveries, many were involved. Dr. Paul Offit (co-developer of the rotavirus vaccine and pediatrician), breaks down the claim that Dr. Robert Malone “invented” the technology used in our current mRNA vaccines. In short, what Dr. Malone did was (some 30+ years ago around 1990) to take mRNA molecules and put them in lipid droplets, which he then put into a cellular culture of mouse cells, which took up the mRNA and expressed the protein coded by the mRNA sequence – the luciferase enzyme in this case (since it glows once it is produced by the cells in the presence of the proper substrate). That’s what he did in a nutshell.
However, when it comes to turning this observation into an actual vaccine, well, that’s a lot more complicated and Dr. Malone had nothing to do with solving these numerous complicated steps – to include the research that was required to discover the type of lipid necessary to get the mRNA into human muscle cells, the re-modulation of the mRNA sequence so that it wouldn’t act as an adjuvant to enhance the innate immune system (which would undermine the effectiveness of any mRNA vaccine), and the modification of the COVID-19 spike protein so that it would remain in the prefusion state (Link). All of these vital steps required the integrated work of many scientists. Yet, Malone hasn’t been involved in any of these steps or discoveries over the last 30+ years. He’s just been completely out of the picture for all of this time. Yet, he’s apparently upset that he hasn’t been given the credit that he thinks he deserves for his contribution to the modern mRNA vaccine technology.
Are there real risks to the mRNA vaccines?
I’m going to refer here to a very good discussion of Rogan’s interview with Dr. Malone:
So, yes. As with pretty much everything, there are real risks to taking the mRNA vaccines.
For example, the mRNA vaccines have demonstrated an increased risk of myocarditis in boys and young men between the ages of 12 and 30. The increased risk seems to be between 1-3/6000 – particularly following the second dose and with a higher risk for Moderna as compared to Pfizer (since Moderna has about three times the dose). So, the risk here does seem to be somewhat dose dependent. So, while the overall risk for young men is higher for a COVID-19 infection (Link), and while the myocarditis cases are generally mild with a low hospitalization rate and a very low death rate, still, this is a risk one should consider before taking the vaccine, for young men in particular, especially if a particular individual has already been infected by COVID-19 and has “natural immunity” (Link).
The J&J vaccine also showed an increased risk of thrombosis and thrombocytopenia in younger women (under the age of 50).
Still, overall, serious risks are far far higher when it comes to getting infected with COVID-19 compared to getting vaccinated (Link).
Compare this with the claims of Dr. Malone.
On The Joe Rogan Experience, Malone talked about “a recent paper out of Hong Kong – comprehensive analysis [of] myocarditis in boys… saying the myocarditis was so bad after vaccination, and these are all verified post-vaccination — myocarditis was so bad that you went to the hospital.” He also tried to counter people who try to point out that “myocarditis is mild and they recover from it, OK. Those statements aren’t, let’s say gently, based in fact.”
The problem here is that Malone simultaneously quotes a paper regarding the rate of myocarditis and then dismisses the conclusions of the authors of this very same paper – specifically where the authors note that the myocarditis risk was relatively rare and that, “All cases are mild and required only conservative management” (Link). Consider what Dr. Mike Kwan, an author of that paper, had to say in response to Malone’s claims:
“Those patients, they recover completely,” Dr. Kwan said. He monitored 178,000 teens who received COVID-19 vaccines, and of those cases, 33 teens got myocarditis. Notably, they didn’t call an ambulance or hospital and admit themselves, but instead reported chest discomfort to Dr. Kwan. He then invited them into the hospital in order to perform tests. “All the cases were hospitalized because we wanted to perform a detailed workup for them,” he explained.
Some of their symptoms cleared up with ibuprofen, and “some of them even not require medications, and they just take a rest, and eventually they recover by themselves, and none of them got severe complications, and no cases of mortality, most importantly. And all of them recover and went back home. And so far, some patients are being followed up around seven months and they’re very good, no problem, so this is very good news.”
Malone’s attempt to prove that the vaccines lead to dangerous myocarditis left out almost all of the key context: The boys were hospitalized as part of the study, none of them required major medical interventions, and nobody died. According to host Zukerman, “It felt like he trusted and focused on the negative things in this study but then didn’t trust all the positive stuff.”
Besides that, Malone neglected more recent studies that showed an even smaller risk of myocarditis, as well as the overwhelming evidence that myocarditis is much more prevalent in unvaccinated people who catch COVID-19 than in people who receive the vaccine (Link).
Do the mRNA vaccines increase cancer and infertility?
Dr. Malone cited a number of other risks that he believes are increased by the mRNA vaccines – to include increased risks for infertility in women and cancer generally. The problem here is that there just isn’t any scientific evidence to support such claims. Despite billions of doses of the mRNA vaccines now having been given out, there has been no increase in the rates of any types of cancer nor have there been any increased infertility problems in women. Also, there is no reasonable mechanism known whereby this might be a risk any more than a risk of having one’s hair turn green or purple. It’s just a red herring without any actual scientific evidence or reasonable plausibility at this point.
However, it has been shown that fertility does decrease, at least temporarily, among men who were infected with the coronavirus. Couples were 18% less likely to conceive if the male partner had contracted the coronavirus within 60 days before a menstrual cycle. (Link)
Dr. Victoria Male, a reproductive immunologist at Imperial College London, found that COVID-19 vaccinations actually do have a measurable impact on menstruation, but “it’s really small.” On average, women’s periods were off by less than a day, and “they went back to normal within two cycles,” or two months. Malone’s hints that vaccines would lead to infertility are totally bogus. According to Male, “Pregnancies happened equally in the vaccinated and in the unvaccinated arms of the trials.”
In contrast, Dr. Male found that vaccination protects fertility. “Catching COVID, that made no difference if it was the female partner that caught COVID, but if the male partner caught COVID – for two months, there was a decreased chance that the couple would conceive. So that tells us that in males, COVID is actually reducing fertility, luckily temporarily, but it is.”
Do the spike proteins build up in the brain, nervous system, and reproductive organs?
Dr. Malone claims that the “spike proteins” produced by the mRNA vaccines will “build up in the brain, the nervous system, and reproductive organs”, especially of children, and cause “irreversible damage”. The problem here, again, is that this just isn’t backed up by any kind of scientific evidence whatsoever. This is all based on a mistaken understanding of a Japanese “Biodistribution Study” on vaccine lipid nanoparticles (Link).
See also: Link
The Spike Proteins have never been tested for safety in humans?
Dr. Malone makes the claim that the spike proteins produced by the mRNA vaccines were never tested for safety in humans. The problem here, of course, is that they were tested in both animals and humans in randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trials (~70,000 people total) – with great success.
Natural immunity not getting any respect?
Dr. Malone noted that natural immunity isn’t getting the respect it deserved in the US vaccine policy – which is actually a valid point. After all, it has been shown, even by the CDC’s own data, that naturally-derived immunity is at least as good as vaccine-based immunity for most people who have experienced previous infections with COVID-19 (Link). Why this has yet to be taken into account, I’m just not sure? Still, it is clearly better to get vaccinated prior to exposing one’s self, if possible, to the live COVID-19 virus. The risks for getting vaccinated first are far far less.
Mass Formation Psycosis?
Dr. Malone began this part of the conversation by asking Rogan, “What the heck happened to Germany in the 20s and 30s? Very intelligent, highly educated population, and they went barking mad. And how did that happen?”
Since this wasn’t an episode of the TV show Jeopardy, Malone quickly answered his own question with, “The answer is mass formation psychosis.” Malone continued with “When you have a society that has become decoupled from each other and has free-floating anxiety in a sense that things don’t make sense, we can’t understand it, and then their attention gets focused by a leader or series of events on one small point just like hypnosis, they literally become hypnotized and can be led anywhere.”
Malone claimed, “Our government is out of control on this and they are lawless. They completely disregard bioethics, they completely disregard the federal common rule, they have broken all the rules that I know of that I’ve been trained on for years and years, these mandates of an experimental vaccine are explicitly illegal.”… Malone asserted that Covid-19 vaccination requirements “are explicitly inconsistent with the Nuremberg code, they’re explicitly inconsistent with the Belmont report,” yet, did not elaborate specifically how or why. He also used the word “experimental” when describing the vaccine rather than making it clear that these Covid-19 vaccines did first receive emergency use authorization (EUA) then approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)…
Other social media posts presented “mass formation psychosis” as the reason why people have been listening to certain politicians, TV/radio personalities, or self-proclaimed experts who continue to spout off conspiracy theories and claims about Covid-19, Covid-19 vaccines, and other Covid-19 precautions such as face mask-wearing that aren’t backed by science. These include those who have been trying to equate face mask and Covid-19 vaccination requirements to what happened in Nazi Germany.
It’s a bit outrageous to suggest that people are maintaining Covid-19 precautions such as getting vaccinated and wearing face masks simply because of some type of “psychosis.” The reality is that the SARS-CoV-2 has been killing people and leaving many with persistent problems. Numerous real scientific studies have supported use of the vaccine and other precautions. Not understanding these facts would indeed be losing touch with reality.
Governments striving to maintain fear?
Malone floated yet another conspiracy theory to Joe Rogan, suggesting that governments actually are working to maintain a state of fear, a state of emergency, in order to maintain their “emergency use authorization” protocols:
“The perverse incentive here to amplify the fear porn and to amplify—if you buy into the hypothesis that for some reason there are incentives for the government to maintain the state of emergency, that is one explanation, given that those declarations are expiring and will have to be reimplemented. Because if they’re not, then all of this emergency use authorization vanishes like dust.”
Rogan then asked, “So are you saying, are you implying, that perhaps one of the reasons why they’re removing monoclonal antibodies is to enhance the amount of people that are sick?”
“I’m saying it is in the spectrum of the range of possible, just the same as the withholding of early treatments [the Bright-Woodcock hydroxychloroquine initiative] is inexplicable.”
– Robert Malone with Joe Rogan
Now, even if you don’t like President Biden, and even if you think he’s not doing that great of a job (most people would agree with you), it’s very hard to believe that Biden is actually trying to make the pandemic worse in order to maintain emergency use authorizations. Malone is basically pulling stuff out of his tin hat randomly here…
Hospitals don’t want people to get better at home?
Dr. Malone claimed that hospitals are financially incentivized to keep people in the hospital, rather than getting better at home. Again, coming from someone who really never worked in a hospital directly taking care of sick patients, this comes across as very much misinformed. Hospitals make more money, based on the way health insurances work in this country, if they are able to get people well enough to leave the hospital sooner rather than later. In other words, since hospitals are only paid for a flat rate based on the diagnosis, they don’t get paid extra when patients have special circumstances or need extra inpatient days (Link). This is the result of the evolution of payment schemes that reward shorter stays within specific diagnoses and may even penalize the hospital for lengths of stay over the guideline for a particular diagnosis. The term for this is “denied days” (Link).
The fact is that hospitals have lost money during the pandemic. This pandemic simply hasn’t been the windfall for hospitals that those like Dr. Malone imagine. During the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic in California, for example, hospitals lost as much as $3.2 billion a month – from a loss of patients in ER (Link). Medical bills for uninsured COVID-19 patients are covered by the federal government, but the rules are complex, and hospitals must apply for the money. And, even many of those who are insured cannot pay the amounts they owe the hospital, their “deductible” for COVID-19 treatment – so the hospital eats these costs as well.
It’s for good reason, then, that hospitals are the ones promoting and giving people vaccines in an effort to keep them well enough so that they do not need to be hospitalized in the first place – which seems counterproductive given the truth of the claims of Dr. Malone.
Follow the money?
Dr. Malone, and other conspiracy theorists like him, suggest that the reason why drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin aren’t being promoted by government agencies is not that they haven’t demonstrated useful effectiveness, but that there’s just too much money to be made from the vaccines – that “Big Pharma” money has corrupted mainstream scientists, doctors, and government agencies like the CDC and FDA.
So what is the motivation?… None of this makes sense… And, you know, the classic guidance is follow the money.
– Robert Malone with Joe Rogan
Such persistent accusations against scientists and doctors who support the vaccines, that they are being motivated only by personal financial gain, is not only false, it’s hurtful. Again, I’m personally not making a dime promoting these vaccines, and neither are ICU doctors like well-known pulmonologist Dr. Roger Seheult who runs a busy ICU in S. California. There’s a reason why the significant majority of doctors and medical scientists support the mRNA vaccines – and it’s not because they’re getting rich off of these vaccines. It’s because they truly want to save as many lives as possible. They are tired of seeing their ICUs filled with the unvaccinated who are extremely sick and dying right in front of them day after day.
Now, prominent anti-vaxxers, on the other hand, are indeed getting rich off of their conspiracy theories. That’s right. It’s not like the well-known anti-vaxxers aren’t making money here either. Prominent anti-vaxxers like Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, RFK Jr., Dr. Joseph Mercola, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Robert Malone, etc… make lots of money promoting their antivaccine and other conspiracy theories. It’s not like they’re not making a tidy profit here – especially given the relatively recent Substack platform (Link). Since the content on Substack is not moderated, many people who have been kicked off Twitter or Facebook have moved to Substack. Dr. Malone and Alex Berenson are a couple examples – they are making millions of dollars a year by selling their thoughts to subscribers on Substack. Being a physician who spreads disinformation about COVID-19 is very profitable.
Outlandish statements and preposterous claims drive subscriptions. If subscribers pay $5 a month and a physician has 100,000 subscribers, that generates $6 million annually. Even with the platform taking 10% of subscriber fees, the writer still walks away with $5.4 million per year.
According to The Guardian, they do make that much, and they can make more than that. As Elise Thomas writes, on the list of the most popular Substack subscribers, Mercola is number 13. Another controversial figure in COVID-19 messaging is Berenson, who is listed as number 6. In fact, many of those who have the largest subscriber base on Substack are embroiled in COVID-19 controversy or disinformation. The Center for Countering Digital Hate estimates that certain physicians and individuals routinely publishing false or misleading information about COVID-19 pull in at least $2.5 million a year, but the figure could be as high as $12.5 million a year.
What about Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin?
Dr. Malone continues to promote drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as being effective treatments of COVID-19 – despite the negative results from the largest and best randomized control trials that are currently available (Link). These include the Oxford trial known as PRINCIPLE, another at McMaster University in Canada called TOGETHER and one at the US National Institutes of Health known as Activ-6. The PRINCIPLE trial has shown that budesonide shortens recovery time by three days in some patients. And, preliminary results from the TOGETHER trial showed that fluvoxamine was mildly effective, reducing the relative risk of getting worse by 30%. However, in August (2021) the TOGETHER trial showed Ivermectin had no statistically significant effect.
Initially, there was some hope that these drugs might be beneficial in the fight against COVID-19, based on promising results from in-vitro studies. Unfortunately, however, when it came to real-life usage in real human beings, the benefits just weren’t there. This is why places like India and Brazil, countries that heavily promoted the use of ivermectin, in particular, to treat COVID-19, have now removed ivermectin from their treatment protocols – because it just hasn’t been detectably beneficial. In June of 2020 Brazilians purchase 12 million packets of Ivermectin – a year’s worth of the drug in a single month. It didn’t seem to affect the death rate. One Brazilian scientist observed, “The shape of COVID curves did not exhibit any modification when comparing groups of treated and untreated people from the same area.”
Malone’s claim that Japan had good success with ivermectin simply isn’t true – and neither is his claim that Uttar Pradesh, in India, had good success. The fact is that India stopped recommending the use of ivermectin for the management of COVID-19 in September 2021 – citing a lack of scientific evidence of its benefits. When asked about claims that Uttar Pradesh’s low case numbers were due to ivermectin, Dr. Lee Riley, a professor of infectious diseases at the University of California Berkeley, said that there would be no biological reason why the drug would be effective at preventing the disease, but not in treating it, as studies have shown. No other place in the world has shown that ivermectin is effective at preventing COVID-19. Also, different countries and even different regions within countries are not testing or collecting data in the same way. How then can there be any reasonable scientific comparison? Malone, if anyone, should know this – which makes his claims along these lines particularly disingenuous.
Beyond this, what is also concerning here is Malone’s efforts to promote yet another hidden government conspiracy theory to suppress vital information that would otherwise quell the pandemic:
“There was a specific visit of Biden to [Indian Prime Minister] Modi, and a decision was made in the Indian government not to disclose the contents of those packages that were being deployed in Uttar Pradesh.”
Rogan then asked, “So they were visited by someone in the Biden administration, is that what you’re saying?”
” I just know there’s a meeting between Joe Biden and Modi.”
Rogan: “And you believe that out of that meeting…”
“I don’t know what they said. I wasn’t invited. All I know is that immediately afterwards there was a decision not to disclose the contents of what was being deployed in Uttar Pradesh.”
Rogan: It’s so crazy to imagine that in the middle of a pandemic, there’s one place, one area of India that’s extremely successful in combating the virus, and they’re not going to say how they did it. That’s nuts.
“That’s where my stance in all of this is to say, here are the facts, here are the verifiable data. Draw your own conclusion.”
Again, do such high-level government conspiracies actually make any rational sense here?
The best explanation I can find for Malone’s dark world view is that it’s rooted in a powerfully felt grievance—a grievance about credit that seems to have warped his assessment of both scientific data and human motivation. And sometimes the most powerfully felt grievances are the most valid ones—the ones most firmly rooted in reality. Maybe, in a certain sense, the stronger the evidence for Malone’s claim to be the inventor of the mRNA vaccine, the more suspicious we should be of the things he’s saying about it.
What’s also interesting here about Malone’s promotion of drugs like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine is that he’s inconsistent with the data he cites to make his point. On the one hand, Maline claimed, on the Joe Rogan show, that the CDC is artificially inflating the number of COVID-19 deaths:
The CDC made the determination that they were going to make a core assumption: If PCR positive [if you test positive for Covid using a PCR test] and you die, that is death due to Covid. If a patient comes in with a bullet hole to the head and they do a nose swab, and they come up PCR positive, they’re determined to have died from Covid… that is by definition from the CDC.
Yet, during the very same interview, Malone turned around and claimed that the use of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine would have saved ~500,000 lives:
There’s good modeling studies that probably half a million excess deaths have happened in the United States through the intentional blockade of early treatment by the US government… That is a well documented number. And it’s a combination of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
Ok, just a minute here. On the one hand, Malone believes that the “850,000” number for people who have died of Covid is way, way too high. Yet, on the other hand, he claims that ~500,000 people who have died of Covid would be alive if only they’d been given ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine. It only follows then that just about all Covid deaths could have been prevented if only we’d administered ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. And yet, even the claims made for the efficacy of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, by their most prominent supporters, don’t suggest a combined efficacy of anywhere near 100%. In other words: If these “good modeling studies” (which I haven’t been able to locate) indeed found that 500,000 Covid deaths could have been prevented, they must rest on the assumption that the total number of Covid deaths is roughly what the government says it is. You see, he’s just speaking out of both sides of his mouth hoping no one will notice…
All-Cause Excess Death Rate:
This isn’t even taking into account that the all-cause excess death rate, since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, is actually higher, not lower, than the number of deaths that have been attributed to COVID-19 itself. For example, the US suffered roughly 470,000 excess deaths in 2020, compared to 352,000 confirmed COVID-19 deaths during that year. So, the number of people estimated to have died from COVID-19 is actually an underestimate, not an overestimate – contrary to the claims of Dr. Malone.
Vaccines create an evolutionary arms race?
Then you have the claim of Dr. Malone that the mRNA vaccines would create an evolutionary “arms race”, leading to the accelerated generation of vaccine-resistant COVID-19 variants. Well, this claim is based on a mistaken assumption that vaccines work in the same way antibiotics work against bacteria. This assumption simply isn’t true. Unlike the imprudent use of antibiotics, which act in a very targeted way against very specific antigens so that resistance can be gained via very minor antigen modifications, vaccines don’t enhance the production of resistant viral strains since vaccines educate the human immune system to attack a broader range of foreign antigens. The resulting effect is just the opposite of what Dr. Malone has claimed. Resistant COVID-19 strains arise at a much greater rate in areas where there is little immune resistance to the virus. Indeed, of the four existing variants of concern to date, all four emerged in 2020, long before the start of public vaccination campaigns. In particular, the Delta variant, which has been making headlines around the world, was first detected in October 2020. This observation demonstrates that halting vaccination efforts won’t stop the emergence of virus variants—after all, variants are entirely capable of emerging in the absence of vaccination. Natural immunity following infection would simply offer no significant advantage in this regard. Again, Dr. Malone got it wrong. What then, of any real concern, did he get right?
mRNA Vaccines will produce Antibody-Dependent Enhancement?
Although he hasn’t made this claim in a while now, Dr. Malone has previously forwarded the argument that COVID-19 vaccines will make SARS-CoV-2 more dangerous due to a mechanism called antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). The problem here is that this claim isn’t backed up by any evidence. The question of ADE was forefront in the minds of those working on the mRNA vaccines and the spike protein was modified specifically to avoid this risk (Link). And, there simply hasn’t been any evidence of ADE since the vaccine has been given to hundreds of millions of people. Clearly, Dr. Malone was mistaken here.
Vaccines not working anyway? – and they aren’t safe?
While I’m not in favor of general government vaccine mandates either, Dr. Malone used part of his 14-minute speech at a Jan. 23 (2022) rally against COVID-19 vaccine mandates to cast doubt on the effectiveness and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines (Link) – claims which are opposed to the strong weight of scientific evidence that is currently in hand.
“Regarding the genetic COVID vaccines, the science is settled,” said Malone. “They’re not working. They are not completely safe.”
Drinking water isn’t “completely safe” either… But sure, the mRNA vaccines are, indeed, less effective at preventing a COVID-19 infection – especially since the emergence of the Delta and Omicron variants, both of which have spread more easily than prior coronavirus variants. However, this doesn’t mean that the vaccines are “not working”. And, with regard to relative risks, clearly, the mRNA vaccines are far far “safer” compared to getting COVID-19.
Misunderstanding VAERS and V-Safe Databases:
Yet, Dr. Malone claimed that the mRNA vaccines have significant risks that are not being properly highlighted by government health agencies, like the CDC and the FDA, particularly for children. He said:
“On average, between 1 in 2,000 and 1 in 3,000 children that receive these vaccines will be hospitalized in the short term with vaccine-caused damage.” Later he added that, “These genetic vaccines can damage your children. They may damage their brains, their heart, their immune system and their ability to have children in the future. Many of these damages cannot be repaired.”
As previously noted (Link), Malone’s claim that the spike proteins build up within and damage various organs of the human body is based on a misinterpretation of scientific studies where even the authors of these studies claim that Dr. Malone, and others making similar claims with regard to their research, are mischaracterizing the meaning of their research.
As far as Malone’s claim that “between 1 in 2,000 and 1 in 3,000 children that receive these vaccines will be hospitalized in the short term with vaccine caused damage” this may have been based on data on vaccine safety in children ages 5 to 11 that was published in the CDC’s MMWR on Dec. 31, 2021. In short, Malone misinterprets this data the very same way that he and others who are strongly opposed to the mRNA vaccines have misinterpreted the VAERS database (Link, Link). In short, the VAERS database, and the v-safe database, both maintained by the CDC (and FDA) by the way, do not establish causation over correlation, but are used to detect potential patterns that go above and beyond expected background levels for further investigation. Those who cite these databases as evidence for the lack of relative vaccine safety simply don’t understand what the data in these databases means or how to properly use it.
The paper’s authors reviewed data on 42,504 children who were enrolled in v-safe, a smartphone-based safety surveillance system, and were vaccinated in 2021, between Nov. 3 and Dec. 19. The authors found that 14, or 0.02%, of the children reportedly required care at a hospital following a COVID-19 vaccination.
But, as the paper said, “Whether hospitalization was the result of vaccination could not be determined.”
The “information regarding reason for hospitalization” was only available for five of the children “and included appendicitis (two), vomiting and dehydration (one), respiratory infection (one),” and one case of an infection known as retropharyngeal cellulitis, the paper said. The authors also later discovered that one of the hospitalizations was reported in error, after the parents or guardians of all hospitalized children were contacted.
Furthermore, in its limitations section, the paper also noted that enrollment in v-safe is voluntary and so the reported “data might not be representative of the vaccinated population.”
As we mentioned, Malone also speculated that the COVID-19 vaccines could cause a host of other health problems for children.
“These genetic vaccines can damage your children,” he said. “They may damage their brains, their heart, their immune system and their ability to have children in the future. Many of these damages cannot be repaired.”
To be clear, none of the COVID-19 vaccines are capable of changing someone’s DNA, as Malone’s use of the phrase “genetic vaccines” could lead some to believe. The CDC has explained on its website that neither the mRNA vaccines, nor viral vector vaccines, such as the one made by Johnson & Johnson, “change or interact with your DNA in any way.”
Experts also have said that infertility has not been shown to be a side effect of vaccination.
“There is no evidence that the vaccine can lead to loss of fertility,” the American Academy of Pediatrics says on its FAQ page about COVID-19 vaccination. “While fertility was not specifically studied in the clinical trials of the vaccine, no loss of fertility has been reported among trial participants or among the millions who have received the vaccines since their authorization, and no signs of infertility appeared in animal studies. Similarly, there is no evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine affects puberty.”
As for possible brain damage, vaccination against COVID-19 actually may offer some protection from brain inflammation caused by an infection with SARS-CoV-2.
A CDC study first published in the MMWR on Jan. 7 estimated that, for those 12 to 18 years old, two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was 91% effective against multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, or MIS-C, a condition the CDC says can cause inflammation in the brain, heart, lungs, kidneys, skin, eyes or gastrointestinal organs. While the CDC says the exact cause of MIS-C is unknown, the condition has been observed in children who had COVID-19.
In the study, which looked at cases from July to December 2021, when delta was predominant, 95% of patients hospitalized with MIS-C were unvaccinated. The authors said the findings, in addition to an earlier analysis estimating 93% vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19–related hospitalizations, “contribute to the growing body of evidence that vaccination is likely effective in preventing severe COVID-19–related complications in children, including MIS-C.”
It’s true that some children may experience a condition known as myocarditis, or an inflammation of the heart muscle, after vaccination. However, research suggests that cases are rare and that patients recover quickly after treatment – although the CDC is investigating the long-term effects.
A study published in the journal Circulation in early December reported on 140 episodes of confirmed or suspected myocarditis in 139 adolescents and young adults ages 12 to 20. The authors found that more than 90% of patients were male, the median patient age was 15.8 years and the most common symptom, chest pain, was experienced by over 99% of patients. Also, nearly 19% of patients were admitted to the ICU; the median hospital stay was two days. There were no reported deaths.
The authors said that “most cases of suspected COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis” in that age group “have a mild clinical course with rapid resolution of symptoms.”
“We feel that it is very important to have children vaccinated for COVID-19,” one of the study’s lead authors, Dr. Jane Newburger, a pediatric cardiology specialist at Boston Children’s Hospital, said in a video about the research. “That’s because myocarditis from the vaccination, and other vaccine-related complications, are really rare, and much more rare than the more serious kinds of complications that can happen after infection with COVID-19 itself.”
For those younger than 12, the CDC’s Dec. 31 study on vaccine safety said “myocarditis among children aged 5–11 years appears rare,” as there were only 11 verified reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, after administration of approximately 8 million vaccine doses. In addition, “in an active vaccine safety surveillance system, no chart-confirmed reports of myocarditis were observed during the 1–21 days or 1–42 days after 333,000 vaccine doses were administered to children of the same age,” the paper said.
No vaccine, including the ones for COVID-19, are “completely safe,” or come without at least some risk, as Malone said. But the CDC and other organizations have determined that, for adults and children, the benefits of vaccination against COVID-19 outweigh any known or potential risk.
Those who are vaccinated are 97 times less likely to die of COVID-19:
Americans who have received a COVID-19 booster shot are 97 times less likely to die from the coronavirus than those who aren’t vaccinated (according to a new update from the CDC). In addition, fully vaccinated Americans — meaning those with up to two doses, but no booster — are 14 times less likely to die from COVID-19 than unvaccinated people.
“These data confirm that vaccination and boosting continues to protect against severe illness and hospitalization, even during the Omicron surge,” Rochelle Walensky, MD, director of the CDC, said during a briefing by the White House COVID-19 Response Team.
Walensky presented the latest numbers on Wednesday based on reports from 25 jurisdictions in early December. The number of average weekly deaths for those who were unvaccinated was 9.7 per 100,000 people, as compared with 0.7 of those who were vaccinated and 0.1 of those who had received a booster.
Also, contrary to Malone’s claim here, vaccinated individuals are still less likely to become infected with COVID-19, to begin with, compared to those who are not vaccinated. That means that those who are vaccinated are less likely to transmit the virus to others.
And again, the mRNA vaccines, particularly after a booster dose, are still very effective at preventing hospitalizations and deaths due to severe disease. A paper published on Jan. 21 (2022), in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, looked at COVID-19 incidence rates among unvaccinated and fully vaccinated adults with and without booster doses. Using data from 25 state and local health departments, the authors concluded that the vaccines reduced the risk for infection during periods when delta was predominant and when omicron was emerging.
Throughout October and November, when delta was dominant, unvaccinated individuals had 13.9 times the risk for infection compared with fully vaccinated people who received a booster and four times the risk compared with fully vaccinated people without booster doses. Then, during the rise of omicron in December, the unvaccinated still had 4.9 times the risk for infection compared with those who received a booster shot and 2.8 times the risk compared with individuals who only received the primary vaccination series.
The authors said the figures suggested that vaccine effectiveness against infection in December, when compared with the period from October to November, had declined from 93% to 80% for fully vaccinated people with a booster dose and from 75% to 64% for fully vaccinated people without a booster.
Meanwhile, another CDC study, which was published in JAMA on Jan. 21 (2022) looked at the effectiveness of the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines – the two mRNA vaccines – against symptomatic infection. The authors reviewed over 70,000 tests from symptomatic adults and found that individuals who had received three mRNA vaccine doses were less likely to test positive for delta and omicron than both unvaccinated individuals and people who received only two vaccine doses. However, the authors said the higher odds ratios for symptomatic infection with omicron suggest that boosted individuals had less protection against that variant than for delta. But even when vaccinated individuals contract the virus, studies also show they are largely protected from severe illness requiring hospitalization — a key goal of the vaccines.
A third CDC study released Jan. 21 (2022), and based on thousands of cases in 10 states, found that mRNA vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations during omicron predominance increased to 90% at least 14 days after a third shot — up from 57% at 180 days or more after a second dose. When delta was the dominant variant, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization was 81% six months or more after a second dose and 94% at or past 14 days after a third dose.
The authors said the results “underscore the importance of receiving a third dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to prevent both moderately severe and severe COVID-19, especially while the Omicron variant is the predominant circulating variant and when the effectiveness of 2 doses of mRNA vaccines is significantly reduced against this variant.”
Clearly, Dr. Malone is mistaken here yet again. The vaccines offer a very clear benefit with regard to severe illness. When it comes to severe disease and the risk of death, the differences between the vaccinated and unvaccinated are stark. Truly, at this point, at least with regard to severe disease and death rates, this is now a pandemic of the unvaccinated.
Dr. Sean Pitman is a pathologist, with subspecialties in anatomic, clinical, and hematopathology, currently working in N. California. He’s also a life-long Seventh-day Adventist, the son of a retired SDA minister, and is very active in his local church.