Why Did The Media Stop Covering Vaccine Adverse Events?

Written by A Midwestern Doctor on October 16, 2025. Posted in Current News

A key theme I’ve tried to highlight in this publication is that the same medical catastrophes keep repeating (because those responsible are never held accountable), so by understanding what happened in the past, you can see and understand what is happening now and what will likely happen in the future

For example, because vaccines are “risky but necessary,” the medical profession and government, again and again, concluded that they needed to tell the public all vaccines were “safe and effective” as the potential injuries a mass vaccination campaign would cause were outweighed by “necessary” benefit the vaccines could offer.

As such, examples can be found again and again of severe injuries being systematically covered up for the “greater good” (e.g., the earliest documented example I know of this happened in 1874 with the smallpox vaccine) and health authorities concocting the same set of excuses we’ve seen since smallpox as to why those vaccines failed to prevent the diseases they were supposed to.

Since the risks outweigh the benefits for most vaccines (detailed here), a mass vaccination paradigm can only be sustained by censoring all evidence of harm, and then using that absence of evidence as proof the vaccines are safe.

As such, over the decades, we’ve seen more and more be done to conceal those harms.

For example, as I showed here, for almost a century, severe neurological injuries following vaccination were routinely reported in the medical literature. Now however, vaccine injuries are censored, and it is virtually impossible to get anything critical of vaccines published in a “reputable” academic journal.

Likewise, despite the “science” saying vaccines are safe, it’s nearly impossible to get ahold of any raw dataset which could objectively answer that question—which Steve Kirsch awoke the public to throughout COVID-19 by publicizing the endless stonewalling he ran into during his relentless quest to get that data.

Note: VAERS, a publicly available injury database the public could submit to, was originally created as part of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act to address an unwillingness by both doctors and vaccine makers to ever report injuries (and hence claim the absence of them was evidence they didn’t happen). Once the act was enacted, the media, government, and medical industry has done all they could to sabotage and disparage it (as they never wanted an open reporting system).

Oddly enough, one of the few datasets we got access to on the dangers of the COVID vaccines originated from South Korea, where electronic medical records from the national health insurance service (totaling roughly half of Seoul’s population) were analyzed, which revealed a large increase in many common disorders.

Following this, another study was published, which revealed the COVID vaccines caused a 68 percent increase in depression, a 44 percent increase in anxiety and dissociative, stress-related, and somatoform disorders, and a 93.4 percent increase in sleep disorders.

I mention this, both because it’s unconscionable no one else was ever given access to databases which could have shown these serious issues, and because recently, they completed a study everyone who’s seen a rapid cancer following COVID vaccination has waited years for.

Assessing the link between COVID vaccines and cancer, it found six were significantly elevated in vaccine recipients one year after receiving the vaccine:

Thyroid (+35.1 percent), Stomach (+33.5 percent), Colorectal (+28.3 percent), Lung (+53.3 percent), Breast (+19.7 percent), Prostate (+68.7 percent).

Additionally, they found many cancers were increased by boosting:

Pancreas (+125 percent) Stomach (+23 percent) Brain (+24 percent) Esophagus (+21 percent) Liver (+17 percent) Bile Ducts (+55 percent) Bladder (+21 percent) Cervical (+27 percent), Prostate (+26 percent), Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (+201 percent)

Note: the increase in Pancreatic and Stomach cancer was statistically significant.

If you take a step back, and consider how many people received the vaccines, the social costs of cancer spikes like these are staggering and the decision to withhold data like this from the public to “avoid creating vaccine hesitancy” was one of the greatest crimes of the COVID catastrophe.

Note: in this article, I have attempted to compile every media appearance where vaccine safety was debated. What you will notice throughout the clips here is that the same lines were used to protect the vaccine schedule (e.g., we just need to do more research before changing anything and will soon conduct the research…..but decades later, we still “need more research”) and that many of the things the vaccine safety advocates warned against and were vehemently denounced for suggesting later came to pass.

Mass Media Censorship

Actions like this were only possible due to the corporate media suppressing all dissent against the vaccines—even when large numbers of Americans felt the mandatory vaccines were severely injuring or killing their recipients and the press hence had a foundational duty to cover.

In response to a FOIA request filed by TheBlaze, [Biden’s] HHS revealed that it purchased advertising from major news networks including ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as cable TV news stations Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, legacy media publications including the New York Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post, digital media companies like BuzzFeed News and Newsmax, and hundreds of local newspapers and TV stations.

These outlets were collectively responsible for publishing countless articles and video segments regarding the vaccine that were nearly uniformly positive about the vaccine in terms of both its efficacy and safety.

Note: the amount spent per network is unknown, but likely totaled a billion. Additionally, in 2009, the H.H.S. Secretary testified to congress about similar partnerships (e.g., with Seasame Street) to promote the H1N1 vaccine.

Because of this, many people in the media wanted to speak out against the vaccines, but effectively could not, and to my knowledge, other than a few Fox hosts lightly criticizing them, only two did.

One, a recently hired reporter at a local station, on live television announced Fox was muzzling stories the public wanted to hear (and was promptly fired) after which she provided secret recordings to Project Veritas corroborating this censorship.

The other was Tucker Carlson, who was able to leverage both being the most popular news host in America and having a show which did not rely upon pharmaceutical funding to speak out against the vaccines without being fired.

Nonetheless, this was still a huge risk for him and eventually, after airing this remarkable 4-19-23 segment (which took a lot of courage), at immense cost to Fox News, was immediately fired.

After leaving Fox News, Tucker began speaking openly about how much pharmaceutical money prevented stories highlighting their dangers from ever being aired. Likewise, other former news hosts have corroborated his accounts.

For example:

When I was on Fox News [circa 2007] and we talked about the possibility of vaccine injuries … They would RUN out to the set to tell you to shut that down.—Megyn Kelley

Likewise, Sharyl Attkisson (an acclaimed CBS investigative journalist) has extensively chronicled (e.g., in her 2020 book and even more so in her 2025 book) how in the early 2000s, the pharmaceutical industry, feeling the pressure from negative coverage of disastrous vaccination programs was creating for them, lobbied to prevent future negative coverage.

Once this happened, it became impossible for her to air well produced segments which were critical of any vaccine initiative, and likewise, that in the post-2000s, stories on vaccine risks “disappeared” due to advertiser pressure.

However, things were not always this way. Rather, major networks used to air numerous scathing stories about vaccine disasters—and in many cases, the dangers they covered were so explicit by current journalistic standards that I frequently find sharing those (previously inconceivable) segments with people on the fence about vaccination opens their minds to the entire mess.

Conclusion

One of the key points RFK has repeatedly emphasized is how much power the pharmaceutical industry has over the press. In turn, he often shares the story of how his close friend (Roger Ailes) was also the chairman and CEO of Fox News and supportive of RFK’s attempt to come on air to discuss his documentary critical of vaccination.

However, despite all of that, Ailes could not as about 70-75 percent of Fox’s advertising came from pharmaceutical companies so Fox could not afford to lose that revenue by offending their sponsors.

Much of this ultimately originates from a 1997 FDA decision to legalize pharmaceutical advertising directly to consumers (making America the only country besides New Zealand to do this).

In turn, two solutions are emerging. First, RFK’s team is making a historic attempt to pull back and restrict pharmaceutical advertising (which has been needed to be done for decades).

Second, most large media businesses are ultimately a balance between not offending your sponsors and not offending (but rather growing) your audience.

However, due to the monopoly the mass media has had, it’s been possible for them to air inane and frequently false content which serves their sponsors without losing viewership, and as such, there has been no incentive to air the truth viewers crave.

Fortunately, the recent rise in independent media platforms (that frequently outpace conventional counterparts) has broken that monopoly.

For example, with Sharyl Attkisson, Megyn Kelly, and Tucker Carlson, all three had to leave their pivotal positions with the mainstream media to become independent journalists—yet now, they arguably have more influence than they did back then, but also have the freedom to discuss what they wish to (e.g., what the audience actually cares about), and as such, previously never mentioned topics like the dangers of vaccination are getting widespread exposure.

Likewise, more independent productions have been produced on the dangers of the COVID vaccines than virtually every vaccine before them combined.

Likewise, if you watched all of the above segments, you will notice the primary party who advocated on national television over the decades for the vaccine injured was Barbara Lou Fisher.

This was in part because of her unwavering dedication, but also because there was never a physician available to do the same besides Robert S. Mendelsohn (who was an incredibly articulate media presence and featured in the 1983 Donahue debate—but regrettably passed away in 1988).

However, due to COVID that suddenly shifted, and for the first time, there is now a contingent of highly persuasive physicians being given regular media airtime to awaken the public.

Even ten years ago, most of the people in the vaccine safety movement never imagined a shift like this could happen, and much of this shift is thanks to readers and viewers like you who provide the support making the rise of independent media possible.

I am truly grateful to each of you who has supported the work I and many others are able to do now.

See more here midwesterndoctor.com

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.