Federal Agencies

Articles / Federal Agencies / Government ‘Rubber stamp’ vaccine advisory board fired by RFK Jr. for conflicts of interest has revealing past CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices once recommended vaccine after official admitted it had no data on simultaneous inoculation, but “our general approach” is to give vaccines at “same time in different limbs.” By: Afederal public health advisory panel long dominated by pharmaceutical influence, whose expressed reservations about particular inoculations never stopped it from recommending them, is getting a fresh start under the drug industry’s most powerful critic. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced Monday the removal of all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, citing “persistent conflicts of interest” that made it “little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine.” Some of the current members were “last-minute appointees of the Biden administration” whose presence would have kept President Trump from appointing new members until his last year in office, Kennedy wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. “It has never recommended against a vaccine – even those later withdrawn for safety reasons,” like the rotavirus vaccine it greenlit despite half of ACIP members having financial ties to other rotavirus vaccine makers, he said. “It has failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women” and meets behind closed doors with other groups. ACIP unanimously approved adding COVID vaccines to child and adolescent schedules in fall 2022, months after the CDC ignored it when approving a fourth mRNA shot for older people. The sudden move came a day after medical freedom activist and physician Mary Bowden, who forced the Food and Drug Administration in court to stop demonizing ivermectin for COVID treatment, noted that 11 of the 15 members who put COVID-19 vaccines on the pediatric schedule two years ago were still on the committee as of Sunday. FDA Commissioner Marty Makary told a reporter Tuesday the “clean sweep” of ACIP, as Kennedy called it, did not involve him and that Makary would defer to FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Vinay Prasad on the composition of its own Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC.) While Kennedy’s move furthers a mainstream media and medicine caricature of the vaccine skeptic – he had already created a page with ACIP’s alleged conflicts of interest in March – it doesn’t neatly fit with his early months as HHS secretary. In quick succession last month, Kennedy removed COVID vaccines from the CDC’s immunization schedule for healthy children and pregnant women, cancelled a $700 million Moderna bird flu vaccine contract and approved Moderna’s new COVID vaccine but only for ages 65 and up and those at risk for “severe” COVID outcomes. Moderna must complete a randomized controlled trial in healthy Americans ages 50-64 if it wants vaccine approval in that demographic, Prasad said at the time, though COVID vaccine trial victim and activist Brianne Dressen faulted the study design for “heavily limiting patient reported data,” which she said means it won’t capture severe adverse events. Recommended a vaccine with ‘no data’ on interactions with others Kennedy’s op-ed said the CDC “took no significant action” after an HHS inspector general report from 2009 found that 97% of ACIP members had “omissions” on their conflict-of-interest forms. That was nine years after a House investigation found ACIP and VRBPAC had “weak to nonexistent” enforcement of conflict-of-interest rules, he said. “Committee members regularly participated in deliberations and advocated products in which they had a financial stake” and the CDC gave everyone waivers. The ACIP clipping drew cheers from some vaccine skeptics, drug industry watchdogs and a veteran chronicler of ACIP and VRBPAC, while horrifying mainstream medical organizations including the vaccine maker-funded American Academy of Pediatrics, which said it will “further endanger the health of the American public, especially children.” Brownstone Institute President Jeffrey Tucker circulated a condensed clip from ACIP’s February 21, 2018 meeting that shows advisers unanimously approving a recommendation for an adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine — containing an ingredient that enhances immune response — despite agency officials being unable to answer some questions. One official admitted they have “no data” on using that vaccine “with other adjuvanted vaccines” such as for flu and shingles, and another said the agency was unaware of any other market using “multiple adjuvanted vaccines.” “Whilst pre-clinical studies were not done using these vaccines simultaneously, our general approach to immunizations is they should be given, they can be given at the same time in different limbs,” another official said. After approval, an adviser said he had a “slight reservation” about his vote due to the “myocardial infarction [heart attack] signal” from the use of the new adjuvant in the vaccine and said they needed to look at “post-marketing data carefully.” The CDC likely wouldn’t have that data for more than two years, an official responded. “All but one ACIP member voted for universal [COVID-19] boosting even for young men with the highest myocarditis risk as late in the pandemic as fall 2023,” Emily Kopp, former investigator for nonprofit public health research group U.S. Right to Know, wrote on X. “If you were evaluating on performance, you’d fire them.” That member was Pablo Sanchez, who warned colleagues their recommendation rested on “extremely limited data on children and infants and other individuals” that was also hidden from parents, and they should be more concerned about “potential side effects, especially in young adults and in young adult males.” Former FDA regulatory review officer Jessica Adams, who has long chronicled its advisory committees and criticized the Biden administration’s FDA for sidelining its own vaccine leaders and advisers on COVID boosters, recommended Sanchez and other lone voices for ACIP. She praised former VRBPAC members Cory Meissner, who early warned of vaccine-induced myocarditis in young people, for saying the advisers need to convey to parents COVID’s miniscule risk to children, and Michael Kurilla for abstaining from a pediatric authorization vote on the basis that even a successful vaccine would quickly wane for the low-risk group. ‘Get over this political statement’ ACIP and VRBPAC gave a patina of independent review to the genetic-code delivery systems for SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins that officials deemed vaccines, and skeptics became unrelenting targets of ridicule, contempt and punishment

Articles / Federal Agencies / Government Weaponized sugar pill? Homeland ends controversial and costly Quiet Skies domestic spying program After 15 years, Noem’s action puts an end to a program that cost an estimated $3 billion to taxpayers while potentially violating their privacy. By: On Thursday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced via social media that the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) is ending the pricey and oft-politicized Quiet Skies program. “Today, I’m announcing TSA is ending the Quiet Skies Program, which since its existence has failed to stop a SINGLE terrorist attack while costing US taxpayers roughly $200 million a year,” she wrote in a press release. The Quiet Skies program, an initiative that began in 2010 and was officially launched in 2012 by the TSA, has sparked debate over its secretive monitoring of domestic air travelers deemed to be potential security risks. Originally intended to identify and track individuals who may pose threats to aviation, the program relied on behavioral analysis and data collection, often without passengers’ knowledge. Critics have long argued it raised privacy concerns and lacked transparency, while supporters have claimed it was a vital tool for ensuring safety in an era of evolving security challenges. Agency used program as political tool Noem went on to say, “DHS and TSA have uncovered documents, correspondence, and timelines that clearly highlight the inconsistent application of Quiet Skies. The program, under the guise of “national security,” was used to target political opponents and benefit political allies of the Biden Administration.” Noem also said that she is calling for a full Congressional investigation to examine corruption within the program. Perhaps the most well-known case is that of Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard, a decorated Army Reserve veteran who served in Iraq and Kuwait, and was later elected to the House of Representatives from Hawaii, was placed on the program’s watchlist in July 2024, prompting widespread controversy over allegations of political retaliation. Gabbard said on X that “I was put on a secret terror watch list after I publicly criticized [Kamala Harris]. No one will be safe from political retaliation under a Harris administration. I put my life on the line for this country. Now the government calls me a terror threat.” Both she and her husband, Abraham Williams, faced extensive screenings, with boarding passes marked “SSSS” for Secondary Security Screening Selection, which lasted up to 45 minutes per flight. Gabbard publicly condemned the surveillance, stating it caused her to “always be looking over my shoulder,” and described it as a betrayal of her 21-year military service. The TSA told Newsweek that the Quiet Skies program “is not a terrorist watchlist, [it] uses a risk-based approach to identify passengers and apply enhanced security measures on some domestic and outbound international flights.” Gabbard had been a frequent and vocal critic of the Biden administration and former Vice President Kamala Harris, and claimed her inclusion was a direct response to a July 22, 2024, Fox News interview during which she warned against Harris’ leadership, labeling it an act of “political retaliation.” Whistleblowers from the Federal Air Marshal Service confirmed her placement on the list, sparking outrage among Republican lawmakers and raising concerns about the program’s misuse to target individuals based on political views rather than legitimate security threats. Following Noem’s announcement, DNI Gabbard added in another ‘X’ post: “The Quiet Skies program has been used for nearly two decades to target and surveil everyday Americans, violating our constitutional rights and civil liberties, targeting political opponents, and costing taxpayers approximately $200 million per year, all while failing to stop a single terrorist.” Program used for political favors as well While many are aware of the program being used as a weapon, a June 4 press release from the DHS discloses how the program was abused in the other direction, namely, as a political favor: “Discovered documents, correspondence, and timelines clearly highlight the Biden’s inconsistent application of Silent Partners Quiet Skies and watchlisting programs, circumventing security policies to benefit politically aligned friends and family at the expense of the American people.” According to the timeline laid out by the DHS, in 2023, William “Billy” Shaheen, the husband of Senator Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., was flagged twice as a “Co-Traveler with a Known or Suspected Terrorist” (KST) on flights between Boston and D.C. According to the DHS, after Shaheen was flagged the second time, his wife, Senator Shaheen, met with then-Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) top officer David Pekoske about her husband being on a watchlist. Within several days of the meeting, Shaheen was then approved by TSA to be added to the Secure Flight Exclusion List. The DHS explained that “This means that Shaheen was excluded from any future TSA Random Selectee designation, and Rules-based Selectee designation, such as Quiet Skies, Association Based Rule Selectee designation, or Silent Partner Selectee designation.” Criticism of the Quiet Skies program also came from the Air Marshalls themselves, who were integral to the program’s operations. In messages communicated to the Boston Globe in 2018, they expressed misgivings, arguing that the program wasted resources and distracted from legitimate airborne threats. The lack of oversight and reliance on subjective criteria, like behavioral checklists, further undermined its credibility. Air Marshals reportedly told The Globe that the program has them tasked with shadowing travelers who appear to pose no real threat — a businesswoman who happened to have traveled through a Mideast hot spot; a Southwest Airlines flight attendant, and ironically, a fellow federal law enforcement officer. TOP STORIES Weaponized sugar pill? Homeland ends controversial and costly Quiet Skies domestic spying program Trump moves on from Musk rift, touts agenda victories Culture, sports and business worlds all dialing back support of ‘Pride Month’ Amanda Head presses White House on antisemitic terrorism, vaccine religious exemptions in ‘new media’ seat White House to Jewish Americans: ‘This president has your back’ LATEST EPISODES Mom-Turned-Activist takes on California’s vaccine laws in explosive court battle Tariffs, Treachery & the CCP: Rep. Moore puts his foot down to loosen China’s strategic grip on America Phil Kerpen on the clash up on Capitol Hill: Will