top of page

A Mother’s Prayer

Updated: Nov 6, 2021

When my first child was born, the protective instinct I felt toward her quickly and unexpectedly extended to all children. From that point forward, I saw not just my own biological children, but all children as vulnerable and deserving of love and protection. It is motherly love and a profound sense of responsibility that compel me to speak up as our nation prepares to inject children with a new and experimental pharmaceutical product.

Many so-called leaders assure us these experimental products are “safe and effective” before there has been sufficient time or evidence to understand their implications in the short term, let alone long term. The mind-blowing testimonies during Senator Johnson’s expert panel on November 1, 2021 demonstrated there are also many leaders among us warning they are NOT safe and effective [1] [1]. The pivotal testimony of Dr. Peter Doshi, faculty at University of Maryland and editor of the prestigious British Medical Journal was particularly outstanding. He presented evidence that “the mRNA products do not prevent infection, nor do they stop viral transmission." He challenged the notion that we are in a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Finally, he warned: “these mRNA products which everyone calls vaccines are qualitatively different from standard vaccines. Merriam Webster changed its definition of vaccine earlier this year; mRNA products did not meet the definition of vaccine, but the definition was expanded such that mRNA products are now vaccines.” [2]

At the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting on October 27, Dr. Eric Rubin said to fellow members about Covid-19 injections for children: “We’re never going to learn how safe the vaccine is unless we start giving it, and that’s just the way it goes.” [3] [3] The CDC’s Advisory Committee met on November 2 to discuss Emergency Use Authorization for Pfizer in the 5-11 age group. A speaker, after delivering scripted sound bites, reassured members that there would be safety monitoring systems in place for our guinea pig children after receiving Covid-19 injections. That very same day, the British Medical Journal called into question the integrity of data on Covid-19 injections, revealing that Pfizer has falsified data [4]. When such blatantly unethical parties with conflict of interest are tasked with approving biologics to be injected into our children [5], we are obligated to do our own homework.

I do not intend to offend those who only consider solutions peddled by the medical industrial complex; I do, however, have a moral obligation to share the dissenting scientific perspectives I have gathered as a researcher, many of which are being censored. I taught university students the importance of critical thinking for a decade; it is devastating to see irrational fear replace critical thinking as a virtue. What has happened to intellectual curiosity and engagement with opposing views? Why has discussion of science become taboo in our society? If the health and well-being of your child is a priority, I ask you to consider the points here with a soft heart and open mind rather than from a place of reactivity and dismissal.

Today, a large proportion of our society seems to believe there is scientific consensus on the issue of mass injection of children against Covid-19. Let me be clear: there is no consensus [6] [6]. There is only consensus among bureaucrats and industry scientists. The reality is that the pharmaceutical industry gives significant sums to the media and law-makers. In 2018, pharmaceutical companies spent more than 283 million in lobbying dollars [7]. According to a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association, from 1997 to 2016, pharmaceutical spending in the media increased from $17.7 to $29.9 billion per year [8]. This may explain, at least in part, why voices against the pharmaceutical agenda are not given airtime [9].

I invite and implore all parents to consider the perspectives of highly credentialed scientists and doctors without conflict of interest who object to mass injection of our children. These include Dr. Tess Lawry, science researcher and consultant to WHO; Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA vaccine technology; Dr Peter McCullough, epidemiologist, editor of multiple medical journals; Dr. Zach Bush, triple board certified endocrinologist, cancer researcher, microbiome specialist; Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Harvard biostatistician and epidemiologist; Dr. Jessica Rose, expert in immunology and computational biology. The voices of these doctors, along with many, many others who oppose mass injection of children, are ignored or silenced. Instead of engaging in vigorous scientific debate, industry scientists and career bureaucrats marginalize and dismiss those with legitimate objections. Our public health czar has stated whoever questions him is questioning science itself [10]. In contrast, Albert Einstein asserted decades earlier: science can only flourish in an atmosphere of free speech.

Let us not forget that scientists determined DDT (a carcinogenic insecticide [11]), Thalidomide (a drug given in pregnancy that caused birth defects in at least 10,000 babies [12]), cigarettes [13], Roundup/glyphosate (a carcinogenic herbicide [14] recently banned in parts of Europe, Asia, and Mexico [15], not yet in the U.S.), to all be perfectly safe. It is naive to think that the same causes for scientific misjudgment in decades past--greed, corruption, hubris, manipulation of data, premature assumptions--are not at play today.

If these examples seem like isolated mistakes from the distant past, think again. In 1999, the FDA approved the painkiller Vioxx as “safe and effective.” After an estimated 20 million Americans took this medication, it was taken off the market in 2004 due to deadly risks. Though we can never know the actual number of lives affected, estimates indicate 88,000 Americans had heart attacks from taking Vioxx, and 38,000 died [16].

A French pharmaceutical company spent 20 years developing a vaccine for Dengue fever and tested it in several large trials with more than 30,000 children globally, publishing the results in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine [17]. A massive vaccination campaign was launched in the Philippines in 2016. About 800,000 children were vaccinated before a serious problem with the vaccine came to light. In 2019, an investigation linked the deaths of at least 600 children to the Dengue vaccine [18].

In 2009 Anthony Fauci appeared on screens across the world, reassuring viewers that that year’s swine flu vaccine was perfectly safe, despite early warning signs. A year later, over 1300 reports of narcolepsy, predominantly among children and adolescents, were tied to the vaccine [19].

The list of FDA approved and yet deadly products is too long to detail here. At least a quarter of the drugs approved by the FDA are later taken off the market due to serious safety issues. The FDA was taxpayer funded until the 1990s; today 75% of the FDA’s budget comes directly from the drug companies it is supposed to regulate [20]. Could there be significant conflict of interest when a regulatory agency is funded by the very industry it is meant to regulate [21]? Simply, definitely: yes.

Award-winning investigative journalist Robert Whittaker exposed the deceit underpinning the use of psychiatric drugs in