Story at a Glance:

• Before COVID, mRNA had failed for decades and both companies developing it were in financial trouble. However, an emergency framework built years in advance made it possible to rush their vaccines to market. Now there is a major push to replace much of the vaccine schedule with lucrative mRNA vaccines, despite the platform being immensely problematic and still poorly understood.

• The mRNA platform's acceptance rests on the claim that its trials proved it "safe and effective," yet the same tactics routinely used to rig clinical trials were used throughout them, from the misleading "95% effective" figure to injured participants having their injuries recoded as unrelated conditions.

• Using trial data released by court order, a team of independent researchers and whistleblowers spent years auditing Pfizer's trial. Within the limited records procured, extensive irregularities were documented throughout the trials including 1,203 participants vanishing from the records, 1,209 adverse events re-filed as COVID symptoms, undisclosed deaths in the vaccine group, unequal COVID testing between the groups, and the public receiving a more dangerous formulation of the vaccine which was never tested prior to being released.

• Newly released documents from Argentina's FDA show the trial's largest site had twenty violations, including 52 participants given nearly double the planned dose, which finally resolves one of the trial's longstanding mysteries.

• Fortunately, the tide has turned. Federal health officials are now acknowledging vaccine injuries, investigators have gained the power to obtain the evidence long kept hidden, and public opinion has shifted to the point that it is finally possible to openly discuss what was done.

In a recent article, I highlighted the "law of displacement" which encapsulates my belief that a harmful lucrative technology, regardless of the evidence against it, will almost only be removed from the market once either a more profitable alternative emerges, or a less harmful but equally profitable one does (as in all other cases, the profit the technology makes outweighs the cost of silencing critics of its toxicity). In some cases, this works in a positive manner and finally expels bad things from the market (e.g., lead in gasoline), but in other cases, it results in something worse entering the market.