Watch: ‘They Want to Scare Us Into Silence’

M. Nathaniel Mead joined “The Defender In-Depth” to discuss the findings of his peer-reviewed paper…

Children's Health Defense

When M. Nathaniel Mead submitted an article that questioned COVID-19 vaccine safety to a leading and influential medical journal, he knew it was “very likely to ignite a firestorm in the media and within the scientific community.”

Mead, an epidemiologist, public health research scientist and lead author of “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” said the journal Cureus had been “very brave” in publishing papers that were critical of COVID-19 vaccines.

So he believed Cureus “would be more open-minded” than other journals that had rejected his paper.

Cureus did indeed publish the paper — which was read more than 370,000 times in the month after it was posted. That’s compared to most Cureus articles, which on average garner only about 2,700 views per year.

But last month, Cureus retracted the paper — an unusual move, as papers are rarely retracted after peer review and subsequent publication.

Mead joined “The Defender In-Depth” this week to discuss the paper’s findings, the peer-review process the paper underwent, the subsequent retraction, the dominance of Springer Nature — publisher of Cureus — in the scientific publishing industry, and issues regarding censorship and financial interests plaguing scientific publishing.

‘The biggest case of public health malpractice we’ve ever seen’

Mead’s paper analyzed COVID-19 mRNA vaccine trial data and post-injection injuries, detailed the vaccines’ potential serious harms to humans, the mechanisms behind adverse events, the immunological reasons for vaccine inefficacy and the mortality data from the clinical trials.

It also called for a global moratorium on the vaccines.

“I wanted to help make sense, from a scientific perspective, of the last few years since the trials, to make sense of how there could be such contradictory narratives … with the government and the industry saying one thing, and then a number of scientists, including myself … saying something very different,” Mead said.

According to Mead, the “lessons learned” from the research presented in the paper were that “there were definitely serious safety issues” with the COVID-19 vaccines.

“Very, very conservatively, I think you could say five to six times as many deaths can be attributed to the mRNA vaccines compared to the coronavirus,” he said…