FDA and NYT Suppressed and Downplayed Internal Evidence That Covid mRNA Vaccines Killed Children
Source: Paul D. Thacker. "FDA, NYT Downplayed Evidence Covid Shots May Have Killed Kids." October 22, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author says FDA staff found that at least 10 kids likely or possibly died because of Covid vaccines, yet the agency never warned the public. He argues that politics, drug-industry money, and a New York Times that relied on conflicted sources all helped bury or downplay this evidence.
Conclusion
Government agencies (FDA under Biden and, to a degree, Trump-era political incentives), the pharmaceutical industry, and media outlets like the New York Times have downplayed or buried credible internal evidence that Covid mRNA vaccines killed children, and they have failed to warn the public, for reasons of politics, profit, and conflict of interest rather than science.
Premises
- FDA safety staff reviewed thousands of adverse event reports and autopsies and, according to emails, found 97 credible incidents in children, of which 10 were assessed as probable (3) or possible (7) vaccine-caused deaths, and recommended a label change for cardiac death risk.
- Independent peer-reviewed literature, including autopsy reports from U.S. pathologists and from Heidelberg University, documented deaths likely or possibly caused by mRNA vaccine-associated myocarditis.
- Despite this, the FDA under Biden-era leaders (Marks, Woodcock, Califf) denied a citizen's petition for label updates and dismissed VAERS-based concerns, and a House report found the FDA had removed safety researchers who were slowing the approval timeline and became an advocate for the vaccine.
- Ten months after the safety team's recommendation, the FDA has still not warned parents, which the author attributes to a convergence of political interests: Trump's attachment to the Warp Speed success narrative, the Biden administration's investment in mandates, and pharmaceutical industry profit motives.
- The New York Times framed the FDA findings as political 'antivaccine' escalation and relied on sources with undisclosed conflicts of interest (Peter Marks, who joined Eli Lilly; Paul Offit, with Merck-related financial ties; former FDA leaders and a Pfizer board member), while omitting the relevant context.
- Pharmaceutical advertising revenue and industry influence over medical institutions, journals, Congress, and media explain why the story receives little coverage (per Sen. Ron Johnson).
Assumptions
- The FDA staff's 'probable' and 'possible' classifications are sufficient evidence to conclude that vaccines killed children and warrant public warnings.
- Failure to act or to report prominently is best explained by political or financial motives rather than scientific disagreement or methodological caution.
- Undisclosed financial ties or institutional affiliations of quoted sources meaningfully undermine their credibility and show deliberate bias by the NYT.
- Internal leaks and emails accurately reflect the findings and have not been selectively presented.
- The absence of coverage in mainstream media is due to industry capture rather than editorial judgment about the evidence's quality.
- VAERS and autopsy case reports can establish causation at a level that matters for labeling decisions, despite the standard caveats.