In a recent Senate hearing, former CDC Director Robert Redfield didn’t hold back, calling mRNA COVID-19 vaccines “toxic” and criticizing their mandatory rollout. He also advocated for a halt to gain-of-function research.
mRNA Vaccines: A Toxic Mandate
Robert Redfield, who helmed the CDC from 2018 to 2021, made a bold statement during a Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing, describing mRNA COVID-19 vaccines as “toxic” and insisting they should never have been mandated. This declaration came during a session focused on government oversight of high-risk virus research funded by taxpayers.
Redfield’s comments highlighted a significant failure by public health agencies to provide informed consent to billions of vaccine recipients worldwide. “It’s important that he is telling the truth now,” vaccine researcher Jessica Rose, Ph.D., told The Defender. “Adverse events were hidden and still are being hidden to prevent injection hesitancy.”
Related: Are COVID-19 Vaccines Really Sabotaging Our Immune Systems
The Biosecurity Threat and Gain-of-Function Research
Redfield’s concerns didn’t stop at vaccines. He labeled biosecurity as “our nation’s greatest national security threat,” calling for a pause on gain-of-function research. This type of research, which involves making pathogens more infectious or deadly, has been a hot topic, especially concerning the COVID-19 origins lab-leak theory.
The hearing, marked by heated exchanges, touched on various controversial topics, including the suppression of data by health agencies. Redfield’s testimony underscored the urgent need for a thorough debate on the benefits and risks of gain-of-function research.
mRNA Vaccines: A Matter of Personal Choice
Redfield emphasized that mandating mRNA vaccines was a grave error. “They should have never been mandated. It should have been open to personal choice,” he said. He criticized the spike protein produced by these vaccines as “toxic to the body,” triggering a strong pro-inflammatory response.
In his medical practice, Redfield opts for “killed protein vaccines” over mRNA vaccines. His statements starkly contrast the CDC’s stance during his tenure, which promoted mRNA vaccines as safe and effective.
Lack of Transparency in Vaccine Safety Data
Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) challenged Redfield with data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), showing over 37,000 deaths reported following COVID-19 vaccinations. Redfield acknowledged the lack of transparency from the start about potential side effects, criticizing efforts to underreport these to avoid vaccine hesitancy.
Redfield also criticized the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for withholding vaccine safety data. “The FDA should release all of the safety data they have,” he said, expressing disappointment that this information is slated for release only by 2026, which erodes public trust in health agencies.
Gain-of-Function Research: Benefits in Question
Redfield called for a halt to gain-of-function research, questioning its benefits. “I’m not aware of any advanced therapeutic or vaccine that has come to pass because of gain-of-function research,” he said. His stance was supported by MIT’s Kevin Esvelt, Ph.D., who highlighted gaps in oversight and the potential for misuse of such research.
Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced the Risky Research Review Act, aiming to establish an independent board to oversee federal funding for high-risk life sciences research. Paul argued that such oversight might have prevented the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Lab-Leak Theory Revisited
The hearing reignited the debate over COVID-19’s origins. Redfield reaffirmed his belief in the lab-leak theory, suggesting that the virus resulted from a biomedical research experiment and subsequent lab leak. This view sparked a contentious exchange with Carrie Wolinetz, Ph.D., former chief of staff to the NIH director, who defended the agency’s handling of the virus’s origins.
The Need for Biosecurity Measures
Redfield stressed the critical importance of biosecurity, suggesting the creation of a dedicated agency within the U.S. Department of Energy to address these concerns. “In 2024, 2025, biosecurity is our nation’s greatest national security threat,” he stated, drawing parallels to the nuclear threat of the mid-20th century.
Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the need for an organized response to biosecurity threats. Gerald Parker, DVM, Ph.D., from Texas A&M University, supported enhanced oversight, recommending an independent authority to consolidate secure functions in a single entity with a dedicated mission.
Looking Ahead: Accountability and Transparency
As the hearing concluded, senators from both parties expressed concern over the lack of transparency and oversight in high-risk research. Senator Paul summed up the sentiment: “We cannot stand idly by. We must demand accountability, strive for transparency, and ensure the safety of our citizens is never again compromised by negligence or deceit.”
In summary, the hearing underscored significant issues in vaccine safety transparency, the risks of gain-of-function research, and the need for robust biosecurity measures. Redfield’s candid admissions and calls for accountability mark a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over public health and safety.
If you’ve enjoyed this article, please consider donating! I’m saving up to buy a used car to keep my travels (and stories) rolling. Every little bit helps — and is deeply appreciated. Thank you for your support! GoGetFunding
[…] as an industry whose business model is built on fraud. The rollout of the mRNA product during the COVID pandemic, he claims, has contributed to deaths and serious harm to millions globally. Now is the time, he […]