Proof that the CDC, FDA, and NIH are corrupt and/or incompetent

From Steve Kirsch: Proof that the CDC, FDA, and NIH are corrupt and/or incompetent (

I wanted to start a placeholder article of examples of corruption and/or incompetence at our favorite 3-letter agencies. The lists will likely grow much longer over time. Sadly, AFAIK, nobody in Congress is interested in looking at this. They all would rather look the other way and pretend there is no problem here. They refuse to discuss any of these points…These are just to get you started. Hyperlinks will be added shortly.


  1. Janet Woodcock, interim head of the FDA, promised to look into the Maddie de Garay paralysis (12-year old paralyzed in Pfizer 12-15 year old trial). Nothing happened.
  2. We tried to get Steven A. Anderson, the top FDA official in charge of safety monitoring for the vaccines, to meet with any of my team members to go over the safety signals in VAERS. Dr. Anderson ignored all attempts.
  3. The FDA claimed my VAERS death analysis was incorrect but could cite no specific error in the methodology or the data (since it used the CDC methodology it would be hard and they supplied the data). They won’t talk on the record about it.
  4. The FDA rejected our Fluvoxamine EUA saying we lacked enough data. Funny how the workers at Golden Gates Fields racetrack could plainly see the drug worked and most of them lack a college education. Maybe the FDA should hire them instead? The FDA couldn’t cite a confounder or bias that could possibly change the result. If they aren’t corrupt, they are incompetent. This cost thousands of lives and we wasted a year to complete a clinical trial to prove we were right. Obvious to normal people. Not obvious to the experts at the FDA.
  5. The FDA has claimed we are spreading misinformation, yet refuses to provide anyone to have a recorded discussion with us to set us on the right path.
  6. They approved that Alzheimer’s drug that was so bad they stopped the clinical trials.
  7. I’m sure the FDA will soon approve molnupiravir despite the fact that the clinical trial showed it didn’t work. How can they approve molnupiravir but reject fluvoxamine (which is now on the John Hopkins practice guidelines and will soon be on many others). Intentionally introducing mutations into viral RNA might create a more dangerous version of SARS-CoV-2, critics say. But most damaging was that “in the second group, there was almost no difference in outcome for those on the antiviral compared with those on the placebo.” See this Nature article on molnupiravir for more details.
  8. You gotta love the horse picture for ivermectin and making it look like ivermectin isn’t safe. Gotta admire the creativity here.
  9. Threatening to take NAC off the market after 60 years with no safety problems and making it available prescription only. Are you kidding me? They are taking a super safe supplement and making it prescription only while pushing a deadly vaccine and that’s available without a prescription. If that isn’t corruption, I don’t know what is. They only did this after it was discovered NAC treats COVID and makes it relatively harmless.


  1. They are supposed to evaluate the childhood vaccine safety schedule every 2 years. They didn’t do this. Even after they lost in court.
  2. They claim nobody has died from the COVID mRNA vaccines. Seriously? Then how can they explain Peter Schirmacher’s study which was confirmed by other German pathologists.
  3. They claim that masks work citing a poorly done study and ignoring the only two randomized trials, both of which showed masks make no difference whatsoever.
  4. The CDC experts cannot find a safety signal in VAERS to save their lives. They admitted it was the DoD that found the myocarditis safety signal for the vaccine. They’ve ignored the other 9,000 elevated symptoms caused by the COVID vaccines. How about death? Cardiac arrest? Intracranial hemorrhage? Pulmonary embolism? Paralysis? Menstrual problems?
  5. Refuse to compute VAERS URF for these vaccines. They won’t reveal the URF to anyone. They pretend URF=1 in their presentation even though they know for sure this is false.
  6. Cannot explain with evidence the elevation in death count in VAERS this year.
  7. Refuse to debate us.
  8. Never did a risk benefit calculation of the vaccines showing the “society benefit.” How many excess lives do you save per year by getting vaccinated and where is the proof of that?
  9. Toby Rogers’ risk benefit analysis for ages 5 to 11 show the vaccines kill 117 kids for every life saved. Where is the equivalent risk-benefit analysis from the CDC? Where’s Dr. Roger’s mistake? Nobody could find it.
  10. Continue to misrepresent the myocarditis risk. I know a doctor with 1,200 patients who has 5 myocarditis cases in men and women 30 to 50 years old after vaccination. If myocarditis is as rare as the CDC claims, how do they explain this? This isn’t cherry picked data. These rates align with the rates in VAERS once you apply a reasonable URF (more than 41) to the reports.
  11. What happened at Simpsonwood.
  12. The CDC says “Unvaccinated people are 14 times more likely to die of COVID-19 than those who get the shot.” But wait a second. Pfizer’s own randomized controlled trial (Phase 3 6 month report) showed it was only a 2X death benefit, not 14X. So we aren’t supposed to believe the randomized trial from Pfizer?!?!
  13. Tells people on their website that the spike protein is harmless which is not what the medical journal papers say.
  14. We had some people in the CDC willing to talk, but as of December 2021, they are scared to speak out. CDC has done a fantastic job of intimidation!
  15. Here’s the most recent review showing 22 studies that mercury accumulates in your brain. Here’s the lie on the CDC website today:


  1. Fluvoxamine was proven in Phase 2 trials (Lenze study published in JAMA) and then a real-world trial at Golden Gate Fields (Seftel trial). It is impossible to explain the outcomes if the drug didn’t work. I offered anyone $1M for a bias or confounder that could explain the result if the drug didn’t work. No takers. The precautionay principle of says they should have recommended it.
  2. Even after fluvoxamine passed the Phase 3 Together trial showing a 12X reduction in death, the NIH refused to adjust their recommendation. Johns Hopkins however defied the NIH and added fluvoxamine to their treatment guidelines. Someone isn’t telling the truth and it isn’t Johns Hopkins. I tried to get the top fluvoxamine researchers to comment publicly on the NIH’s recommendation and they refused. That tells you all you need to know, doesn’t it?
  3. Refused to fund any early treatment studies. They wouldn’t even fund the fluvoxamine phase 3 trial after the phase 2 trial was 100% success. There is something seriously corrupt here.
  4. Any Democratic committee chairman can request Fauci’s unredacted emails. If the NIH were truly acting in the public interest, they would urge Congress to do that to show the corruption. Those emails are guaranteed to show the corruption but the Democrats REFUSE to request them.
  5. The NIH nixed ivermectin as well. But ivermectin has multiple published meta-analysis and systematic reviews for use with COVID. Precautionary principle requires the NIH to recommend ivermectin unless they have proof the risks outweigh the benefits. They don’t.
  6. Fareed and Tyson reached out to the NIH in March 2020 to tell them about their amazing early treatment protocol which was keeping everyone out of the hospital. The NIH ignored them. Today, they’ve now treated 7,000 patients, have had only 4 hospitalizations (people who got there late), and no deaths for anyone who got treated early. NIH still ignores them. This is impossible to explain if the treatment protocol didn’t work. But the NIH won’t even return their calls.

Published by markskidmore

Mark Skidmore is Professor of Economics at Michigan State University where he holds the Morris Chair in State and Local Government Finance and Policy. His research focuses on topics in public finance, regional economics, and the economics of natural disasters. Mark created the Lighthouse Economics website and blog to share economic research and information relevant for navigating tumultuous times.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: