Archive for the ‘research’ Category

Lyme Vaccine Clinical Trials: History Repeating?

https://connecticutcentinal.com/health/2026/06/01/lyme-vaccine-clinical-trials-history-repeating/

Lyme Vaccine Clinical Trials: History Repeating?

By CT Centinal Staff

June 1, 2026

Public Domain.

By Laura Hovind, CEO, TruthCures

Why is there so much controversy surrounding Lyme disease? Why does it seem you can’t get an accurate Lyme disease test?

Article Excerpts:

Lyme disease researcher and renowned expert Dr. Gary Wormser disclosed in a recent publication that he received a research grant “from Pfizer, Inc. for developing Lyme diagnostics for a Lyme vaccine trial.” Evidently the two-tier method that was developed on behalf of a pivotal efficacy trial still isn’t good enough for the latest pivotal efficacy trial.

In the absence of public disclosures or a transparent process, it looks as if Pfizer paid someone to create or validate a test that will make their vaccine appear effective. In light of Pfizer’s recent withdrawal of numerous trial sites affecting nearly half of their U.S. enrollees, this opaque move does not inspire much-needed trust in a next-generation Lyme vaccine. It only raises more questions about the apparent need to customize a diagnostic test for clinical trials, and the expert contracted to carry out the necessary laboratory work.

Why must a new diagnostic standard be developed every time a vaccine enters phase III trials? Why aren’t diagnostics developed, first, to be most accurate for diagnosing real-world patients, then applied to clinical trials? What behind-the-scenes LYMErix history has Pfizer been made privy to, that led them to conclude they needed a new test? And if, in fact, they have developed their own test, why is such a test allowed to be developed in a vacuum, without any oversight, transparency, or adherence to administrative processes and regulations?

The gap between reported Lyme disease cases and estimated actual cases represents more than 90% of the total. Ninety percent or more of the total cases are unable to test positive and receive proper care. So, it seems obvious that the controversy lies not in the over-diagnosis of Lyme, but in the staggering rate of under-diagnosis.

There is no ethical reality in which Pfizer and Valneva can be permitted to continue their trials. The existing, manipulated diagnostic standard misses 90% of cases. An individual and institution paid by Pfizer to develop “Lyme diagnostics for a Lyme vaccine trial” have helped perpetuate the manipulated standard over three decades. Trial subjects are unwittingly facing harm on multiple fronts—from the vaccine formulation itself, to a potential false sense of security, to a complete inability to be accurately diagnosed if symptoms develop.

We’ve been here before. We’ve seen the damage inflicted by the fiasco surrounding LYMErix. We have witnessed widespread medical abuse over the engineered inaccuracy of the tests developed for previous Lyme vaccine trials but foisted on the public. Yet, history is already in the process of repeating—unlikely to be stopped, with only the prior victims speaking up: “We told you.” (See link for entire chronology)

_________________

**Comment**

Hovind does a superb job detailing the long and sordid history.

What’s hard for folks to grasp is that everything is truly build on false premises – testing, diagnosis, and therefore treatment is fundamentally and fraudulently wrong. If you are new to Lymeland I suggest reading: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/09/25/why-should-we-care-about-lyme-disease-a-colorful-tale-of-government-conflicts-of-interest-probable-bioweaponization-and-pathogen-complexity/ and then https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2026/03/17/why-we-should-care-if-lyme-disease-was-bioengineered/.

For more:

More on the Lyme vaccine:

One of the best articles on the Lyme vaccine was written in 2001 but remains pertinent today: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/02/10/the-bitter-feud-over-lymerix/

Category:

Activism, Lyme, research, Testing, vaccines

Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in COVID Jabbed Children

Please remember, the COVID injections are NOT vaccines. They are a gene therapy developed by the military that have never protected against infection or transmission. They weren’t even tested for reduction in hospitalization, death, or transmission. They were tested for reduction in severe symptoms – which is not the proper endpoint for “vaccine” efficacy. The public, which has served as subjects in an ongoing clinical trial for an experimental mRNA platform never before used in humans, that scientists have admitted have toxicity risks, is suffering from catastrophic injuries and death, but ‘the powers that be’ simply target those for speaking the truth: the COVID shots are killing people.

https://zenodo.org/records/23165256

Published October 5, 2026 | Version v1

Preprint Open

Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in COVID-19-Vaccinated Versus Unvaccinated U.S. Children: Analysis of the National Health Interview Survey, 2022–2024

Authors/Creators
Description
Abstract

Background: Autism spectrum disorder now affects 1 in 31 U.S. 8-year-olds and continues to rise at an alarming rate. COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were first authorized for U.S. children aged 12–15 in May 2021, 5–11 in October 2021, and 6 months–4 years in June 2022. No pediatric trial or post-marketing surveillance study was designed or powered to detect neurodevelopmental or mental-health outcomes after childhood COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Vaccine-derived spike protein circulates systemically after vaccination and has been detected in blood, monocytes, cerebral arteries, and peripheral tissue months to years later, the S1 subunit disrupts blood–brain-barrier integrity in vitro, and prenatal spike-protein exposure induces autism-like behavior, neuroinflammation, and reduced BDNF in male rats. A population-level signal-detection analysis is warranted.

Methods: We pooled the 2022–2024 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) Sample Child files (n = 21,990 children aged 0–17 with COVID-19 vaccination status; n = 19,882 aged 2–17 for autism, ADHD, and learning-disability items; 844 lifetime and 779 current ASD cases), with the 2021 (ages 12–17) and 2025 (current-season dose) files as supplementary samples. The primary comparison was COVID-19-vaccinated versus COVID-19-unvaccinated children (parental report of ever receiving a COVID-19 vaccine; “unvaccinated” denotes no COVID-19 vaccine, not absence of routine childhood immunization), with number of doses and years since first dose as secondary exposures. Outcomes were parent-reported lifetime and current autism spectrum disorder (ASD), ADHD, learning disability, intellectual disability, developmental delay, special-education use, asthma, diabetes, anxiety and depression frequency, mental-health treatment, general health, and acute-care use. Influenza and HPV vaccination served as negative-control exposures. Survey-weighted logistic regression with stratum/PSU Taylor-linearized variance estimated odds ratios (ORs) across five adjustment tiers.

Results: Compared with unvaccinated children, COVID-19-vaccinated children had higher adjusted odds of lifetime ASD (aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.04–1.52), current ASD (1.32, 1.08–1.60), ADHD (1.33, 1.18–1.49), any neurodevelopmental diagnosis (1.23, 1.12–1.35), special-education use (1.19, 1.08–1.31), asthma (1.24, 1.11–1.37), daily/weekly anxiety (1.27, 1.15–1.42), and mental-health medication (1.57, 1.38–1.77) and therapy (1.60, 1.43–1.79); the E-value for current ASD was 1.97, and no measured covariate was associated with both vaccination and autism in the same direction at this magnitude. Adjusted odds rose monotonically with dose count (current ASD 1.03, 1.25, 1.40 for 1, 2, ≥3 doses vs 0). The association (current ASD) was largest in the youngest exposed cohort: ≥3 doses vs 0 at ages 5–7, aOR 2.54 (1.33–4.84); ages 2–7, 2.37 (1.38–4.10); and among children first vaccinated at age ≤5 at least one year before interview, 2.46 (1.08–5.62; 9 exposed cases). Under propensity-score overlap weighting, which eliminated all measured covariate imbalance, the autism association was unchanged and remained significant (lifetime 1.23, 1.01–1.50; current 1.26, 1.03–1.56), while the negative-control outcomes of emergency-department visits and hospitalization were close to the null (0.95 and 1.02). Estimates were unchanged after restriction to children without asthma, diabetes, or fair/poor health (n = 16,803; both vaccines vs neither, 1.51, 1.17–1.95), and persisted after additional adjustment for emergency-department use, hospitalization, and prescription use (1.31, 1.04–1.66). In direct comparison, COVID-19-vaccine-only children (n = 3,205) had higher odds of ASD than influenza-vaccine-only children (n = 3,763; 1.45, 1.03–2.05) despite lower odds of asthma (0.73) and emergency-department visits (0.77). Anxiety showed partial specificity (COVID-19 vaccine 1.34 vs influenza vaccine 1.07 at ages 5–11). Against the unvaccinated reference; however, influenza-vaccine-only and COVID-19-vaccine-only, point estimates were similar and modest (1.11 and 1.12) for ASD. Likewise, HPV vaccination was modestly associated with ASD 1.17 (0.74–1.85). The ASD association was amplified among children receiving both (influenza and COVID-19) vaccines (1.42–1.51). Associations for current ASD weakened with time since first dose, and the COVID-19 vaccine association was confined to girls (1.60 vs boys 1.08; interaction p = 0.02).

Conclusions: In a direct comparison of COVID-19-vaccinated with unvaccinated children in a nationally representative U.S. sample, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with higher adjusted odds of autism, ADHD, anxiety, special-education use, and mental-health treatment. The autism association persisted across every adjustment tier; was unchanged under propensity-score balancing that removed all measured covariate imbalance and nullified the acute-care negative controls; was robust to restriction to physically healthy children; increased monotonically with dose count; was largest in the youngest exposed cohorts, including children vaccinated before the school-entry diagnostic window; and exceeded that of influenza vaccination in direct comparison. These properties satisfy the strength, consistency, biological gradient, plausibility, and coherence considerations for causal inference, and no measured confounder explains them. Because the cross-sectional design cannot order exposure and diagnosis, a global scheduled combination childhood vaccine effect on neurodevelopment cannot be evaluated. A linked birth-cohort study of toddlers before age 3 capturing co-administered vaccines, incident diagnoses, and pre-specified negative controls would be the next step in evaluating this concerning association. (See link for full study)

__________________

**Comment**

For more:

Category:

Activism, research, vaccines, Viruses

USDA Ordered 6 M Doses of ‘Experimental’ Plague Vaccine & Russia Plague Mystery: Separating Fact From Hype

**UPDATE**

I encourage you to read Sayer Ji’s article: The Plague Panic & Vaccines Were Ready Before the Diagnosis. In it you will learn that within 72 hours of a Siberian lab worker dying without a plague diagnosis, vaccine stocks shot up 20%, proving a fear narrative and countermeasure economy are fully built and waiting to be set in motion at any time by an unresolved death, long before any evidence. This is what should frighten you.

https://imahealth.substack.com/p/russia-plague-mystery-separating?

Russia Plague Mystery: Separating Fact From Social Media Hype

IMA’s Dr. Ryan Cole says Russia’s suspected plague death is unconfirmed and not an outbreak. After COVID, Americans should demand evidence before fear.

Independent Medical Alliance

October 8, 2026

IMA Head of Medical and Scientific Affairs Dr. Ryan Cole joined The National News Desk to separate fact from fiction in reports of a suspected plague death in Russia. A young woman who worked at a plague research laboratory in Siberia died after developing severe pneumonia, but testing has not confirmed plague. Dr. Cole explains that the story first spread through a Telegram channel, and that 90% of the roughly 200 people placed under observation have already been released. One death, he notes, does not make an outbreak.

Dr. Cole also takes on social media posts linking the case to an experimental mRNA plague vaccine, which he points out has only been studied in animal models. He explains that pneumonic plague rarely spreads from person to person, is treatable with antibiotics when caught early, and circulates on every continent except Australia among rodents and fleas most people rarely encounter. Looking back at COVID, when conclusions were drawn before the evidence was in, he urges Americans to demand evidence before believing a viral headline.

Check out these related resources from IMA below, followed by the full segment transcript.

(See link for interview and transcript)

_________________

https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/usda-ordered-6-million-doses-of-experimental?

USDA Ordered 6 Million Doses of ‘Experimental’ Plague Vaccine the Same Month DEFUSE Proposed Spraying Its Carrier on Bats

The order was six times existing demand and equal to nearly 28 years of later annual bait sales, while DEFUSE-linked spray technology identified applications for “animals/humans.”

Jon Fleetwood

Oct. 8, 2026

USDA-APHIS procurement memorandum dated March 6, 2018, specifying 6 million doses of experimental recombinant raccoonpox vaccine (RCN-F1-V307), valued at $1.3 million, for manufacture into plague-vaccine bait for prairie dogs at the USDA Pocatello Supply Depot in Idaho. The document predates the April contract award and was prepared the same month Project DEFUSE was submitted to DARPA.

According to a March 2018 U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS) contract award to Colorado Serum Company, the federal government contracted for an estimated 6 million doses of recombinant raccoonpox plague vaccine, using the same vaccine-carrier platform Project DEFUSE proposed that month for spraying vaccine material onto bats.

The plague-vaccine order was six times the doses USDA said it needed for existing customers and equivalent to nearly 28 years of the depot’s subsequently reported annual vaccine-bait sales.

Meanwhile, DEFUSE’s proposed delivery partner, PARC, described aerosol technology for biological applications involving “animals/humans.”

DEFUSE is the project submitted the year before the COVID-19 pandemic to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) that characterized a pandemic response to a future SARS-CoV-2-like outbreak.

  • Why was the government contracting for millions of doses of a plague-vaccine platform while developing automated biological spraying?
  • What would be sprayed, and what informed consent protections would exist for potentially exposed people?

You can contact USDA here. (See link for article)

Category:

Activism, research, Transmission, Treatment, vaccines

Exec Order to Plan and Release GMO Mosquito & Tick Tech into Environment

https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/trump-orders-epa-framework-to-release?

Trump Orders EPA Framework to ‘Release Into the Environment’ Modified, Bacteria-Based Mosquito and Tick Technologies Without Informed Consent

New executive order involves what it calls “genetic modification” and “beneficial bacteria,” without identifying what will actually be released and without informed consent from citizens.

Jon Fleetwood

Oct. 1, 2026

President Donald Trump speaks alongside EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin in the Roosevelt Room on Feb. 12, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

President Donald Trump ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create a regulatory framework for the “planned development and release into the environment” of mosquito- and tick-control technologies, according to a September 29 executive order published by the White House.

The executive order says that framework must consider “sterilization techniques, safe genetic modification, and use of safe, beneficial bacteria.”

  • Where is the informed consent?
  • What exactly will be released?
  • What has been modified?
  • Which bacteria will be used?
  • What else will the resulting products contain or carry?
  • How far can they travel?
  • Who monitors unintended exposure?
  • Who is liable if something goes wrong?
  • And how does an American who does not consent keep a released organism off their body and off their property?

The executive order does not say.

I do not consent.

(See link for article)

________________

**Comment**

Here we go again.

A lot of our taxes are flying out the door with such projects, including $125 Million to scale automated RNA-LNP factories with one-day lot release despite unknown endotoxin levels. Using tax payer dollars to fund dangerous technologies is not new. PARC, a Silicon Valley R&D lab best known for pioneering Ethernet and laser printing, was funded by the U.S. government to create an automatic biological spray technique. Then, it started the DEFUSE project a year before the COVID ‘pandemic’ that characterized a pandemic response to a future SARS-CoV-2-like outbreak.

In DEFUSE, PARC described its technology as capable of “large area and high throughput aerosol delivery” of fluids including “bioactive formulations,” and identified “large area inoculation of animals/humans with bioengineered formulations” as a potential application. Source

The catch is, we don’t know what was sprayed, where, or who was exposed.

(See link for article)

________________

For more:

Category:

Activism, Climate, mosquitoes, research, Ticks

The Smear That Buried BITTEN

https://krisnewby.substack.com/p/the-smear-that-buried-bitten?

The Smear that Buried BITTEN

Reframe the claim. Call it a conspiracy. Never release the files.

Kris Newby

Sept. 29, 2026

I spent five years researching Bitten, my book about the U.S. military’s Cold War bug-borne weapons program and the unresolved questions surrounding the first investigation into Lyme disease.

At the center of the story is Willy Burgdorfer, the NIH scientist celebrated for identifying the bacterium that causes Lyme disease. Before the book came out, few people knew that Burgdorfer also spent part of his career working with Fort Detrick’s entomological warfare division. Researchers there studied how fleas, mosquitoes, and ticks could be infected with pathogens and used as weapons.

Late in life, Burgdorfer told me he had found a second unusual microbe during the Lyme investigation—one he believed deserved far more scrutiny. He suggested it may have been connected to earlier weapons research and said he had been ordered to set it aside. Letters and laboratory notes I later found supported that account.

To be clear, Bitten did not prove that Lyme disease was a bioweapon. It asked a narrower and more urgent question: whether another potentially disease-causing microbe found in Lyme-area ticks and humans had been ignored, hidden, or never fully investigated.

That distinction matters. When Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) called for a congressional inquiry in 2019 into whether the military had used ticks in biological-weapons research, the public deserved a careful examination of the records. Instead, the debate was quickly reframed around a claim I never made.

Tick researcher Sam Telford III published a Washington Post op-ed titled, “No, Lyme disease is not an escaped military bioweapon, despite what conspiracy theorists say.” A link in the article pointed readers to a review of my book.

I saw this as a classic disinformation move—reframe the argument to include something false, then attribute it to the reporter and brand the person as a conspiracy theorist. Casual readers never get past the headline and a false narrative is burned into memory.

The stakes are not academic. The release of engineered or unnatural biological agents can have long-term effects on people and the environment. Continued secrecy around the tick-borne weapons program still obstructs a timely response to a growing public-health crisis.

A conversation with the author

I called Telford after reading the piece to discuss statements I considered false or misleading. When I asked whether he had read Bitten, he said, “No. I don’t have time to read books.” I offered to send him a copy. “You can, but I’ll probably shred it,” he replied. That exchange stayed with me: an op-ed designed to dismiss my book was written by someone who told me he had not read it.

(See link for article)

_________________

**Comment**

Sadly, we go onto learn that publications would not fact-check the errors in Telford’s op-ed.

Newby kept digging and points out that Telford, a tick researcher at Tufts University didn’t disclose that he was the director of Tuft’s New England Regional Biosafety Laboratory, located in a semi-rural New England town about 40 miles west of Boston. This biolevel-3 lab works on biodefense, dangerous pathogens, and high-containment laboratory operations, including anthrax and tick-borne diseases.

COVID exposed a much bigger reason for the lack of disclosure.

The ‘powers that be’ do not want the eye of Mordor swinging onto tick weaponization because it would draw attention to dangerous work at the Rocky Mountain Laboratories, including the importing of foreign pathogens exposed a couple of months ago in the Munster affair, described here and here, not to mention the fact everyone’s dog knows now that COVID was created in a lab and either escaped or was intentionally released.

The questions raised decades ago continue to remain unresolved thanks to Telford and others’ deflection.

For more:

Category:

Activism, Lyme, research, Testing, Ticks, Tularemia