The remarkable changes on the horizon and forces conspiring to stop them
By A Midwestern Doctor
The Forgotten Side of Medicine
December 9, 2025
At a young age, after becoming aware of many of the issues in the world, I gradually got pulled into an addictive sea of negativity and frustration over how things were and the fact they kept getting worse. As this was not healthy or productive, in time, I decided the best way to cope with this situation was to shift my focus on what I could do to make things better and be at peace with the fact I was doing something rather than torn apart over everything I wished was different but was powerless to change.
Because of this, my focus gradually shifted to seeing the existing trends in society (e.g., more medical corruption and increasingly dangerous pharmaceutical regimens being forced upon the public) and trying to identify any possible window to shift them. This perspective, for instance, both allowed me to avoid becoming completely distraught over what unfolded during COVID-19, and likewise to keep searching for a way to help avert the catastrophic course we were on, even though doing this seemed nearly impossible, given the monolithic forces we were against.
Likewise, I long ago accepted that the bulk of the medical system and leadership in the government will be incapable of deviating from the pharmaceutical industry's narrative, regardless of how much those beliefs are at odds with reality or what the public wants. As such, rather than become upset about the continual abhorrent revelations that come out (e.g., all the ways the FDA and CDC covered up COVID vaccines and injuries and death), I've simply been grateful we've entered a political climate where those revelations can come out.
Making America Healthy Again
Due to how much influence the pharmaceutical industry has over the government and media, until fairly recently, I never imagined a group that would directly oppose their interests could come into power. Yet, due to the public backlash against the egregious profiteering we saw throughout COVID-19, the convergence of a few longstanding political trends (e.g., the Tea Party moving vaccine skepticism into the Republican Party) and Trump requiring RFK Jr.'s political coalition to win the 2024 election-it did.
Because of this, we are now again in a situation of "glass half empty or half full" situation, as on one hand, it is beyond extraordinary RFK Jr. became the H.H.S. Secretary while on the other, it's disappointing that he has not yet enacted many of the policies we wanted done on day one.
Presently, I am in the former camp, in part because of how much opposition we've had to overcome to get things to where they are currently (which has taken a lot of work on our part) and because, knowing the forces he is up against, I feel that if I were the Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary, I would have gotten much less done at this point than RFK Jr. has.
Likewise, as hard as it is to get things done now (e.g., health bureaucrats throughout the HHS are continually trying to sabotage RFK Jr.'s efforts), I know things will become infinitely more challenging after the next election when there is no longer strong top down support to enact MAHA policies. So, were I in RFK Jr's position, my own focus would be directed towards using the once in a lifetime window we have right now to enact long term structural changes rather than focusing on short term gains that will be swept away by the next administration.
I mention all of this because currently, the playbook the pharmaceutical industry seems to be using to kill our window to change things is to stall and delay things as much as possible so that by the time RFK Jr.'s term ends, nothing will yet have gotten done to enact those critical long-term changes. As such, our focus has been on trying to counteract each approach being used to stall Making America Healthy Again (e.g., that's why we've put so much work into exposing the financial conflicts of interest Congressmen and Senators actively sabotaging MAHA have).
Presently, one of the primary tactics being used to obstruct MAHA has been to split the base so they fight against each other rather than uniting behind their shared goal (as this is one of the most reliable ways to fracture populist movements) by shifting our focus from what is getting done to what is not getting done as it is critical for the pharmaceutical industry that the MAHA support which won 2024 is not present for the 2026 midterms.
Note: a lot of influencers are trying to promote this black-pilled message about MAHA. Many believe this is being funded by the industry, but I feel it is equally plausible that those influencers are simply chasing clicks (as negativity and hysteria are the easiest forms of journalism to market).
Because of this, I firmly believe our focus at this point should be on what we can do to make things better and thankful for each previously impossible thing we enact.
The CDC Vaccine Schedule
I have long believed inertia, beyond being a physical principle, also applies to groups and bureaucratic structures. This is why, for example, as the years go by, more and more increasingly dangerous vaccinations get "recommended" (mandated) for all of our children, and why regardless of the evidence against them, virtually every vaccine will be added to the CDC vaccine schedule and none will ever be withdrawn from it.
I feel this was best highlighted by the COVID vaccines for children, as the risk of death from COVID in children was effectively zero (as the only known cases were in severely immunocompromised individuals), while conversely, there were many cases of healthy children dying suddenly in a similar manner after vaccination. Yet, despite the mortality benefit clearly favoring not vaccinating, and this specific "recommendation" provoking more public pushback than any other childhood vaccine policy in history, the entire medical apparatus continued to double-down on it.
As such, while many felt differently, I was pleasantly surprised that it only took RFK Jr. 15 weeks (from taking office) to lay the necessary groundwork to remove the COVID vaccine from the childhood vaccine schedule-particularly since the last time a vaccine was taken off the childhood CDC schedule (excluding occasional instances where one was replaced with a newer version) was the smallpox vaccine in 1972.
Note: RFK's decision to stop recommending the COVID vaccines to children and pregnant women (which had serious unresolved safety concerns) was met with widespread opposition, eventually resulting in numerous Democrat states breaking from the CDC to adopt their own (COVID including) vaccine schedules and Senate hearings against RFK Jr.
Despite this pushback, I was nonetheless hopeful MAHA would then turn their attention to the next most unjustifiable vaccine on the CDC schedule, newborn Hepatitis B vaccination (and possibly also consider questioning the other particularly egregious vaccination- the HPV vaccine Gardasil).
Because of this, once RFK replaced the membership of ACIP (the committee that crafts the CDC's vaccine schedule) with ACIP members not beholden to the pharmaceutical industry and I learned (in September) that the newborn hepatitis B was up for discussion, we began a large project to try and bring public awareness to the very real dangers of this vaccine and the fact there was no justifiable reason to give it to every newborn.
Remarkably, despite numerous attempts to delay and sabotage this (along with widespread hysteria from the medical field), on Friday, a vote was finally held and at long last-and thanks to a variety of things coming together (e.g., many of you hearing the call and making your voices heard on the issue), something many of us, for decades, never imagined could happen-the hepatitis B vaccine was removed from the newborn vaccine schedule.
Even more remarkably, immediately afterwards, President Trump, building on this momentum, made a rather extraordinary announcement that again illustrates we are in a historic window most of us previously never imagined would occur.
It's hard to put into words how much of a game changer this is for the entire vaccine paradigm (or how much it changes the trajectory of many of the things we've all been working on), but Robert Malone did a good job covering some of the key implications of Trump's statement here.
The Hepatitis B Hearing
Prior to the Hepatitis B hearing, our goal was to make a lot of people aware of the fact that:
• There was decades of evidence the vaccine (due to its design) frequently caused autoimmune disorders, brain inflammation and infant deaths.
• There was no possible justification to give it to children of hepatitis B negative mothers unless the goal was something else. For example, consider a statement Peter McCullough recently unearthed from the New York Times (which matches what a verified reader told me a member of the 1991 ACIP panel conveyed to him):
Frustrated by the widespread reluctance of adults to be vaccinated against hepatitis B, a leading cause of serious illness and death, a Federal panel has recommended that all children be vaccinated instead.
It is the first time that the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee of the Public Health Service has recommended vaccinating children for a disease whose victims are almost always adults.
"This approach to immunize children to prevent a serious chronic adult disease has never been tried before," said Dr. Harold Margolis, the chief of the hepatitis branch at the Federal Centers for Disease Control.
"If adults won't go for the shots, then give them to babies"
Public health experts have been concerned about how few Americans have been vaccinated. Dr. Margolis said, for example, that only 40 percent of health-care workers were vaccinated.
Dr. Robert Perillo, a hepatitis expert at the Veterans Affairs Hospital in St. Louis, said surveys of health-care workers showed that they underestimated their chances of getting hepatitis and rationalized not being vaccinated by saying they worried that the vaccine itself might be more risky than the chance they would get the disease.
Dr. Perillo, who said the vaccine was at least 90 percent effective, emphasized that this fear was unjustified because the vaccine appeared to be one of the safest known. Dr. Margolis said the vaccine had been given to millions of children in Asia without any adverse effects.
Dr. Perillo said that he and others had learned that "if you make this vaccine a volitional [optional] thing, it's not going to happen." So he favors requiring it for children.
• The benefit attributed to newborn vaccination preventing hepatitis B did not make sense, in part because you have to vaccinate roughly a million children to prevent one case of hepatitis B (and even more to prevent severe complications), and the because decline which had occurred did not match when vaccination had occurred (and was seen in hepatitis C, which was subject to similar control measures as hepatitis B but without a vaccine). Likewise, as ACIP member Retsef Levi highlighted, the "massive" decline in adult hepatitis B cases attributed to newborn vaccination occurred prior to those who had been vaccinated being old enough to be adults.
Note: it is extremely common for the vaccine industry to take credit for benefits created by other public health endeavors (e.g., improved sanitation).
• Despite decades of complaints about the vaccine (e.g., I shared numerous segments from a 1999 Congressional hearing), they were all dismissed by claiming there was "no evidence that harm existed" (as "well-controlled" studies to assess this had not been done). Instead, each time, promises to conduct those "well-controlled" safety studies were made in lieu of taking immediate action on the abundance of evidence suggesting harm was present (e.g., I compiled hundreds of publications here and likely missed many more). As you might imagine, those studies still have not been done, yet throughout the ACIP hearing, all of the vaccine defenders insisted it was vital we first conducted safety studies before considering removing the infant vaccine.
• That a religious belief (detailed here) exists around vaccines where no degree of evidence can prove they are unsafe or ineffective, whereas conversely, any and all evidence which proves they are safe or effective is valid.
Hence, while long, I feel watching the ACIP hearings is quite illuminating, as it directly exposes the mentality we are up against (e.g., almost every participant had the unshakable belief the vaccine was 100% safe, and many attributed benefits to it far beyond what it, even in an ideal scenario, could logically accomplish).
Note: many who watch this will understandably feel resentment towards Cody Meissner MD's fanatical defense of the hepatitis B vaccine. Given this, I feel it's important to note Meissner (who had previously held many important vaccine regulatory roles including being on ACIP for four years) was selected by RFK on the basis of him supporting the MAHA agenda (e.g., he broke from his peers to oppose masking children in 2021, opposed COVID vaccine mandates and supported ending COVID vaccination for children and pregnant women). As such, Meissner is actually much more supportive of challenging vaccine dogmas than most members of the medical community, which again illustrates how challenging of a position RFK Jr. is in as he confronts the healthcare bureaucracy.