Fired Harvard Epidemiologist Named to CDC Vaccine Panel
Kulldorff has been named a member of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices.
Kulldorff, who had refused the COVID vaccine because of his infection-acquired immunity, lost his appointment at a Harvard-affiliated hospital in the early days of the COVID era, and in March of 2024 was officially terminated as a med school faculty member.
Since the COVID lockdowns began five years ago this month, Kulldorff argued that tactics such as social distancing, masking children, vaccines after infections, and other extreme measures were not the best course of action to fight the virus.
He co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which called for sensible tactics that would allow the globe to reach 'herd immunity' and has been signed by nearly 1 million scientists worldwide.
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in announcing the new members of the panel last week on X, wrote that his selections signify a 'major step towards restoring public trust in vaccines.'
Kennedy wrote he retired the 17 current members of the committee and is repopulating ACIP with eight new members 'committed to evidence-based medicine, gold-standard science, and common sense.'
'They have each committed to demanding definitive safety and efficacy data before making any new vaccine recommendations. The committee will review safety and efficacy data for the current schedule as well,' Kennedy stated.
MassLive reported that in 2021, 'Kulldorff posted on X that 'thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should.''
'COVID vaccines are important for older high-risk people and their care-takers,' he wrote. 'Those with prior natural infection do not need it. Nor children.'
According to the New York Times , after Kennedy's announcement, some infectious disease and vaccine experts accused the health secretary of going back on his pledge not to pick so-called anti-vaxxers.
'When Mr. Kennedy fired the entire committee, known as the A.C.I.P., he cited financial conflicts of interest and said a clean sweep was necessary to restore public trust in vaccination,' the Times reported.
As for Harvard's role in the controversy, writing in City Journal last year, Kulldorff argued that Harvard turned its back on him, open debate, and medical freedom.
'The beauty of our immune system is that those who recover from an infection are protected if and when they are re-exposed. This has been known since the Athenian Plague of 430 BC—but it is no longer known at Harvard,' he wrote.
'Three prominent Harvard faculty coauthored the now infamous 'consensus' memorandum in The Lancet, questioning the existence of Covid-acquired immunity. By continuing to mandate the vaccine for students with a prior Covid infection, Harvard is de facto denying 2,500 years of science.'
Kennedy, in announcing Kulldorff, noted he is a biostatistician and 'a leading expert in vaccine safety and infectious disease surveillance.'
'… Dr. Kulldorff developed widely used tools such as SaTScan and TreeScan for detecting disease outbreaks and vaccine adverse events. His expertise includes statistical methods for public health surveillance, immunization safety, and infectious disease epidemiology. He has also been an influential voice in public health policy, advocating for evidence-based approaches to pandemic response.'
Also read: Early COVID-19 Vaccine Patent In China Raises New Questions For U.S. Investigators
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Insider
09-08-2025
- Gulf Insider
Most COVID Lung Abnormalities Heal Over Time, New Guidelines Confirm
Up to half of hospitalized COVID-19 patients show lung abnormalities on chest CT scans long after the acute infection is over. Many fear these changes mean lasting damage or worsening lung disease. However, new guidelines on treating long COVID confirm that lung abnormalities usually stabilize or even improve over time. 'The lungs are an organ, like skin, that are in constant contact with the environment. Because of that, they have a significant amount of stem cells in reserve and cells ready for healing,' Dr. Panagis Galiatsatos, a pulmonary and critical care medicine physician and an associate professor at Johns Hopkins Medicine, told The Epoch Times. Researchers found that in patients with lung damage following a COVID-19 infection, around 90 percent who continued to show lung abnormalities at the time of hospital discharge began to see improvements one to three years after infection. After a COVID-19 infection, roughly six in 100 people are estimated to develop persistent symptoms that can last for months to years—a condition known as long COVID. Common complaints include fatigue, joint and muscle aches, breathlessness, headaches, and difficulty concentrating, often called 'brain fog.' Symptoms typically improve over time—usually within four to nine months. Lung recovery tends to follow a similar trajectory. After infection, the lungs can show changes that resemble scarring—such as inflammation, collapsed air sacs, or temporary thickening of lung tissue—but these often heal on their own, Dr. Joseph Varon, president and chief medical officer of Independent Medical Alliance, who is not one of the authors of the treatment guideline, told The Epoch Times. Based on Varon's clinical experience, most patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-related lung issues show improvement on scans and of symptoms within three to six months. However, he noted that some people, especially older adults or those who had severe illness, can have lingering lung changes or symptoms for a year or more. In COVID-19, the early lung damage is mostly due to inflammation, not permanent destruction, he said. Once the infection clears and inflammation goes down, the lungs can start to heal, absorbing fluid and repairing tissue, a process that can take several months. 'The body has the capacity to heal,' Dr. Pierre Kory, founder of Leading Edge Clinic, which treats long COVID patients, told The Epoch Times. COVID is typically an acute illness that heals over time rather than a chronic inflammatory condition—though in some cases, lingering lung inflammation or fibrosis can persist, he said. Many post-COVID lung changes seen in scans are not signs of permanent damage. They often reflect the lung's natural healing process after inflammation, similar to what's seen in other viral pneumonias or recovery from acute respiratory distress syndrome. Over time, these abnormalities often fade as the tissue repairs itself. Unlike chronic conditions such as interstitial lung disease, which involve ongoing triggers and progressive scarring, post-COVID changes are typically non-progressive. However, older patients who had been on mechanical ventilation or had severe or critical initial infection were more likely to have persistent lung changes, possibly due to the extent of initial lung injury. Chest CT scans often reveal lung changes long after COVID-19 infection that may look severe on imaging. These include ground glass opacities, which are hazy areas suggesting inflammation, or fibrous strands, thin bands of tissue left over from healing. However, many of these findings are residual effects from the infection, not signs of irreversible damage. 'Radiologic findings often lag behind clinical recovery and must be interpreted within a broader clinical framework,' said Varon, 'I have seen patients that have 'white lungs' for months and are doing well.' The disconnect between imaging and the actual patient condition may lead to confusion, unnecessary follow-up, or even overtreatment of long COVID. 'Some patients report persistent symptoms despite near-normal imaging,' Varon said, likely due to lingering viral effects or nervous system issues rather than actual lung damage. 'The key takeaway is that both lung damage and symptoms often improve—but not always in synchrony, and not always completely,' he said. That's why an individualized, symptom-based follow-up approach remains essential in managing long COVID patients. The new guidelines specifically address the tendency to over-interpret nonspecific findings as signs of progressive lung disease. The new consensus advises using CT only when clinically indicated, such as in patients with persistent or worsening respiratory symptoms. Mislabeling can also lead to costly treatments, repeated imaging, and even affect life insurance or disability claims. 'These medications can cost up to $60,000 per year—and patients may not really need them,' Varon said. The new guidelines suggest providers request follow-up chest CT only in patients whose respiratory symptoms persist or worsen three months after infection, with those symptoms lasting at least two months and with no other identifiable cause. They also recommend low-dose protocols for follow-up imaging to reduce radiation exposure. CT was invaluable early in the pandemic, especially when RT-PCR testing was unreliable, Varon said, but its continued use in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic long COVID patients is often unnecessary. The guidelines also urge radiologists to avoid using terms such as 'fibrosis' or 'interstitial lung disease,' which often imply progressive or permanent scarring, when describing nonspecific residual findings. The bigger concern, Kory said, is the tendency to over-label nonspecific findings, like ground-glass opacities or mild fibrotic changes, as definitive signs of fibrotic interstitial lung disease. 'I see this in my practice every single day,' he said. 'These interpretations can trigger unnecessary anxiety, inappropriate referrals, and misguided treatment plans.' Kory takes a symptom-focused approach, monitoring patients clinically and repeating imaging only if conditions worsen. 'My experience in general is that yes, most things in medicine are overused, including imaging,' he said.
Gulf Insider
08-08-2025
- Gulf Insider
CDC Reveals Children Have Highest Intake Of Ultra-Processed Foods
'Make America Healthy Again' (MAHA) coverage in the corporate media has spiked in recent days, marking one of the highest story counts in months. The timing isn't a coincidence, given that the 'back to school' season is fast approaching and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is preparing to roll out new national dietary guidelines next month. On Thursday, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a new nutrition survey showing that Americans receive more than half of their daily calories from ultra-processed foods, with salty and sugary items making up an even larger share of children's diets. This heavily processed diet is fueling America's health crisis. Here are the highlights from the CDC's new report titled 'Ultra-processed Food Consumption in Youth and Adults: United States, August 2021–August 2023' : Overall: Americans aged 1+ consumed 55% of their daily calories from ultra-processed foods. Youth (ages 1–18): Averaged 61.9%, with the highest intake in children aged 6–11 (64.8%). Adults (19+): Averaged 53%, with intake decreasing as age increases (down to 51.7% for those 60+). Top sources: Sandwiches (incl. burgers), sweet bakery goods, savory snacks, sweetened beverages, pizza (for youth), and breads/tortillas (for adults). CDC explained, 'Ultra-processed foods tend to be hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fiber, and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners, and unhealthy fats. Ultra-processed food consumption has been associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality.' Here are the ultra-processed food groups that were top sources of calories among youth and adults… The findings support Secretary Kennedy's move to revise U.S. dietary guidelines and reduce reliance on the processed foods industrial complex. On Monday, Secretary Kennedy and others celebrated 'MAHA Monday' with the announcement that six more states have agreed to remove junk food from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Speaking at the press conference earlier this week at the White House, Secretary Kennedy said, 'Taxpayer dollars shouldn't go to junk food that makes our kids sick. We're fixing that—state by state, step by step—to Make America Healthy Again.'
Gulf Insider
08-08-2025
- Gulf Insider
Americans Reject Fall COVID Shot, Don't Trust CDC Or FDA
A new KFF (formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation) poll reveals that the majority of Americans do not intend to get the COVID-19 vaccine this fall, and less than half trust the CDC or FDA to ensure vaccine safety. The nationwide erosion of confidence in federal health agencies and their pharmaceutical partnerships is welcomed by those who have long called for accountability, transparency, and the restoration of informed consent in American Say 'No' to COVID Vaccine According to the KFF Health Tracking Poll on Health Information and Trust, conducted July 8–14, 2025: 59% of U.S. adults say they will either 'definitely not' or 'probably not' receive a COVID-19 vaccine this fall. Only 21% say they will 'definitely get' the shot. Republicans are the least likely to receive the vaccine, with 59% stating they will 'definitely not' take it. Among White adults, 42% say they will 'definitely not' get the shot. These findings follow a growing body of evidence discrediting the effectiveness and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines. 📊 Americans Say 'No' to COVID Shot as Trust in CDC, FDA Crumbles🚨 59% of Americans refuse the fall COVID jab📉 Fewer than half trust CDC/FDA on vaccine safety🧠 Even The Hill is admitting it—kind ofIn this report, I break down the KFF poll, the media spin, RFK Jr.'s… — Jon Fleetwood (@JonMFleetwood) August 5, 2025 A recent JAMA Health Forum study admitted that the shots 'saved far fewer lives than first thought,' especially in younger shots have been linked to 38,709 deaths, 221,030 hospitalizations, and a total of 1,665,264 injuries—though these numbers represent less than 1% of actual adverse events, according to a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-commissioned report by Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare. These staggering figures may help explain why a clear majority of Americans are now refusing the shot. Just 49% of U.S. adults say they have confidence in federal health agencies like the CDC and FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of vaccines approved for use in the U.S. Only 42% believe these agencies make decisions based on science rather than the personal views of agency officials. Just 37% believe the CDC and FDA act independently, without influence from outside interests. These numbers reflect the ongoing fallout from the COVID-19 response, which congressional investigators recently confirmed involved the CDC and White House using 'deeply flawed' messaging and 'overpromising' vaccine safety 'without evidence.' This collapse in public trust is unsurprising given the government's admitted reliance on arbitrary '6-feet' distancing rules, unproven mask mandates, and harmful lockdowns—none of which were grounded in transparent science, but all of which inflicted lasting damage on public health, the economy, and institutional credibility, according to a two-year investigation by the Congressional Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. Public awareness of recent changes to U.S. vaccine policy remains limited, despite multiple headlines since the appointment of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—likely due to mainstream media blackout, institutional resistance, and a legacy press unwilling to cover reforms that threaten the pharmaceutical establishment. (This is why independent media is so important.) 52% say RFK Jr. has made changes to U.S. vaccine policy. Only 26% describe those changes as 'major.' 40% say they don't know enough to characterize the changes. Among parents, confusion is also evident: In fact, the CDC's updated guidance does not formally recommend the shot for healthy children, stating the decision should be made between the provider and the family. 48% are unsure whether federal agencies are currently recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for healthy children this fall. When asked whether RFK Jr.'s changes will make Americans safer: 36% said the changes will make people less safe. 20% said they will make people safer. 31% said they don't know enough to say. 13% believe the changes will not make a difference. The response is largely partisan: 62% of Democrats say RFK Jr.'s changes make people less safe. 41% of Republicans say the changes will make people safer. This split comes despite Kennedy's sweeping reforms—including pulling the CDC's COVID shot recommendation for children and pregnant women, banning mercury in flu vaccines, blocking the WHO's pandemic treaty, defunding Gates-linked GAVI, ending coercive hospital vaccine incentives, and firing all 17 members of the CDC's vaccine advisory panel—each a bold move to restore public health integrity and medical freedom. However, health realists are still waiting for Kennedy to pull the deadly COVID shots from the market. The most trusted source for vaccine information remains personal healthcare providers: 83% of Americans say they trust their doctor 'a great deal' or 'a fair amount.' Trust in government entities is notably lower: CDC: 57% Local public health departments: 62% State government officials: 43% HHS Secretary RFK Jr.: 37% However, RFK Jr. holds strong support among Republicans: 70% of Republicans trust RFK Jr. for vaccine information. Among MAGA-aligned Republicans, that figure rises to 77%. By contrast, only 11% of Democrats say they trust RFK Jr. Among adults who do plan to get the COVID-19 vaccine this fall, concerns about access are more common. But for the general population: Only 33% are concerned the vaccine might not be available. Only 34% of insured adults are concerned their insurance might not cover it. Among those unlikely to get the shot, concerns about access are negligible: Just 11% worry about vaccine availability. Only 14% are concerned about insurance coverage. This poll comes as the FDA expands its fast-track drug approval pipeline, clearing drugs for use in as little as 30 days. The agency has also confirmed plans to bypass normal clinical trial requirements for a new bird flu vaccine, using the same Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) pathway as it did with the COVID shots. In this regulatory environment, the KFF data reflects what many have long warned: Americans are rejecting medical coercion, questioning agency integrity, and demanding informed consent. The message from the American people is clear: we're done being lied to, we're done being experimented on, and we're done trusting captured agencies to protect us—this is the beginning of a public health reckoning, and it's long overdue. Also read: Kremlin Confirms Trump-Putin Meeting 'In Coming Days', Possibly In UAE
