The mRNA Flu Vaccine Is Here!

Forgive me if I can't even muster a polite golf clap.

One year ago this very week, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that his agency was pulling roughly half a billion dollars from 22 mRNA vaccine-development projects. At the time, he argued—convincingly, I might add—that the technology had failed spectacularly as a weapon against respiratory viruses. Sure, he forgot to mention the part about the myocarditis, blood clots, neurological and menstrual disorders, organ failure, autoimmune diseases, and terrifying numbers of excess deaths, but still, it was progress. There *might* still be scuff marks on my coffee table from the spontaneous one-woman dance party I threw that night.

Apparently, the federal government’s breakup with gene-editing technology was more of a Ross-and-Rachel situation.

On Friday, the FDA approved Moderna’s mFLUSIVA, America’s first mRNA flu vaccine, for adults 50 and older. The whippersnappers in that group—ages 50-64—got full-throated approval. The 65-plus crowd can still get jabbed under the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway, which is bureaucrat-speak for “we haven’t actually tested whether there’s any benefit at all for the most vulnerable segment of the population—or looked at possible side effects, TBH—but please ignore our historical record of fraud, deceit, and recklessness and get it anyway.”

I’m not saying Moderna is intentionally trying to cull the herd here. But if you were part of (or working for) a cold-blooded cabal looking to quietly reduce Earth’s occupancy rate, it would make sense to target the most expensive, resource-hogging slice of the population. They’re most likely to have existing complications that could interact with a novel gene-therapy injection—and less likely to trend on TikTok when a mob of them keel over after their mFLUSIVA shot.

Fun, totally unrelated fact: Shiva is the Hindu god of destruction. So.

The most maddening part of this train wreck—and trust me, the competitive field is fierce—is that Moderna didn’t test mFLUSIVA against a saline placebo in its pivotal efficacy trial. Roughly 20,000 guinea pigs got the new mRNA shot. The other 20,000—the supposed “control” group—got another flu vaccine. It wouldn’t be entirely indefensible if that metric were one of several studied; after all, you’d expect regulators might want to know whether a new vaccine can beat one we already have. But it was the only comparator. There was no unvaccinated control group to show how either group fared against receiving no poison at all.

Nevertheless, that didn’t stop Moderna from breathlessly announcing that mFLUSIVA was 26.6% more effective than the OG version (Glaxo’s Fluarix) that’s been around since 2005.

Not twenty-six times more effective, mind you. Twenty-six percent.

Let’s do the math they want us never, ever to do: Two percent of mFLUSIVA recipients developed PCR-confirmed “influenza-like illness” (and don’t get me started on the PCR fraud; it’s what they use, I’m just the reporter here) compared to 2.8 percent of those who got the standard vaccine. That’s an absolute difference of 0.8 percent. Meaning that out of every 100 people, 97.2 avoided the endpoint with the old shot and 98 sidestepped it with the new. Hardly résumé material. (“Increased corporate efficiency by a fraction of a percent!” Congratulations, Susan. Here’s your rake. The stalls are out back.)

But Moderna took the tiny difference between the two groups and divided it by the (roughly) 2.8 percent in the standard-vaccine group, and voila! In relative terms, you get a far more impressive double-digit “efficacy” figure. Same data, much sexier math.

Déjà vu, anyone?

So, fine, the shiny new poison dart flu vaccine is only a tiny bit more effective than the clunky old one. Something is better than nothing. And it’s got to be way safer, right? With far fewer adverse effects and maybe it destroys cellulite or helps bald men regrow their hair or reduces global carbon emissions or something? Otherwise why would they even bother? Right?

To anyone who is actually that aggressively unjaded, I say God bless you and your obvious lack of trauma. Stay gold.

It turns out, the new shot fared worse across every single “side-effect” category. In the large efficacy trial, injection-site pain occurred in 65.8 percent of mFLUSIVA recipients versus 29.8 percent with the conventional shot; fatigue was 48.1 versus 20.6 percent; headache 41.9 versus 20.1 percent; and muscle pain 40.6 versus 13 percent. Serious adverse events were reported in 2.2 percent versus 1.9 percent.

This year’s flu shot: now with more than twice the skull pain!

In the separate senior immunology study, the numbers were even worse: more than three-quarters (75.3%) of participants experienced an unfavorable reaction to the new shot versus less than half (49.3%) of those who received the original. And grade-3-or-worse systemic reactions—meaning bad enough to prevent normal daily activity—occurred in 6.9 percent of mFLUSIVA recipients versus 1.7 percent with the high-dose conventional vaccine.

If mFLUSIVA were a movie, it would have a Rotten Tomatoes score down in the Batman & Robin range.

Moderna made a big deal out of the fact that deaths were identical in both groups—I mean… congrats?—sitting at 0.3% through the six-month follow-up period. What they didn’t broadcast (but a handful of journalists—none in the U.S. that I could find—highlighted) were the 23 “sudden and unexpected” deaths in the mFLUSIVA group compared to just 9 in the other. Shockingly, autopsies were not performed. You know, because correlation does not equal causation.

My first reaction to the whole fustercluck was where is RFK Jr. in all of this? Surely he’s made a statement. Offered an explanation. Coughed up a maddening quasi-endorsement at apparent gunpoint. But no. Nada. Zip. Just complete subject-level silence. My disappointment needs its own therapist at this point.

Cardiologist Peter McCullough blasted the utter ridiculousness of it all. “BREAKING—FDA Approves Moderna’s mRNA Influenza Vaccine Despite 75.3% Rate of Adverse Reactions,” he shouted in headline type. “According to the FDA briefing document, severe systemic reactions were 4× MORE COMMON than with the traditional flu shot. Data consistent with mRNA being a more dangerous vaccine platform. Will it sell in a crowded flu shot market?”

“I literally cannot believe a mRNA flu vaccine was approved with the same side effects as the mRNA Covid vaccine and after all the vaccine injuries and even deaths from the mandated Covid vaccines,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene remarked. Structurally, her sentence is about as smooth as a cobblestone street littered with Legos, but she’s got a solid point.

Others were less restrained. “They can’t poison our soldiers fast enough,” wrote Health Ranger Mike Adams on X, sharing a Navy order detailing which groups are mandated to get a flu shot this year (essentially recruits, healthcare workers, deployed personnel, and some reservists). Under the cited regulations, “medical or administrative exemptions may be granted.” Then again, they may not! Thank you for your service.

“Cancer business is going to be booming for many, many years,” physician and oncology researcher William Makis added. “If you thought COVID-19 Vaccine-induced Turbo Cancer was bad, you haven’t seen anything yet. Stay far away from anyone who takes this new FDA-approved Moderna mRNA flu vaccine, they will shed for at least a month!”

“The Moderna mRNA flu shot is the next pandemic,” insisted the Brownstone Institute’s Toby Rogers. “Others have pointed out that one does not even need a virus, the toxic response itself can be a pandemic. Seniors, medical staff, and police/fire/military will get these shots and shed for months. Voilà, the next pandemic is here.”

From Moderna’s very own website.

Worse in every. Single. Metric.

Children’s Health Defense zeroed in on the part I find hardest to get past: The FDA initially rejected Moderna’s application. They refused to even review it, in fact, because their big trial compared mFLUSIVA with a standard-dose flu vaccine even for participants over 65, despite high-dose flu vaccines being the standard of care for that age group. You see the plan there, right? Compare their sparkly new mRNA juice with a deliberately weaker comparator to artificially boost that “relative” efficacy number.

The FDA saw through that—miraculously—and refused to file the application.

But Moderna objected. After an alleged “public outcry.” Mkay. But instead of holding the line (how hard would “fix your trial design and get back to us” have been?), the FDA caved, agreeing to separate the “full approval” and “accelerated approval” [i.e. also approval] groups.

“People need to understand that when Marty Makary, MD, MPH, Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH, and Tracy Beth Høeg, MD, PhD were at the FDA, they would not review the Moderna mRNA flu shot, and rightfully so,” Houston doc Mary Talley Bowden said on X. “It wasn’t a consideration. They subsequently were fired or forced to resign, without cause/reason. I’m pretty sure I know why!”

All of which leads any reasonable person to ask the same question: what in the actual pharma-funded hell is going on over there?

I’ll remind readers that this isn’t Joe Biden’s HHS. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—the OG vaccine skeptic, the guy who called the Covid jab “the deadliest vaccine ever made”—runs the department that oversees the FDA. I realize that even though he sits at the top of the regulatory food chain, he can’t simply storm into FDA headquarters, slap a REJECTED sticker on Moderna’s app, and go back to playing with falcons. Once a vaccine is approved, reversal requires a laborious bureaucratic process as well as a legally defensible basis. “I think mRNA is trash” won’t cut it.

But that’s not my question. What I want to know is, how did it get approved at all? Couldn’t Kennedy have intervened before approval? Couldn’t his department have demanded more evidence, pushed for additional safety studies, insisted on an improved trial design, or otherwise pumped the brakes on another mRNA clot shot nobody wanted or asked for? Is anybody, anywhere, working on a time machine? Because we could really use one of those right about now.

“We recognize the importance of protecting older Americans from influenza, but we are deeply concerned that the FDA has taken this risky step,” said Independent Medical Alliance (IMA) President and Chief Medical Officer Dr. Joseph Varon. “Frontline doctors are seeing a growing number of mRNA-induced health crises every day, including heart inflammation, autoimmune disorders, and aggressive resurgence of cancers.”

And yet—huge, exhausted sigh—here we are. Again. With a technology Kennedy’s own HHS publicly declared unfit for respiratory viruses just a year ago, now repackaged, reapproved, and hustled back onto the market. Only this time, with considerably worse side-effect numbers, microscopic alleged benefits, and all the bravado of a seven-year-old who just got his yellow belt in karate. And the public is getting the same spiel: roll up your sleeve, don’t ask questions, and for God’s sake, do not look at the data.

I have a God box. I make vision boards. I listen to manifestation tapes. I pray. So here’s what I’m putting out into the universe: this miserable thing dies a quiet death—unopened on a pharmacy shelf between the expired zinc gummies and the Sudafed locked up like your eighth-grade diary. RFK swoops in and blows it up before we’re subjected to a string of commercials starring a silver-haired couple frolicking through CGI wildflowers. And someone at HHS rediscovers the once-radical regulatory standard that “we have a product” is not, by itself, a compelling argument for injecting it into millions of people.

Who’s manifesting with me?