"Safe and Effective" COVID-19 Vaccine Narrative Unraveling

Data Manipulation at the CDC and Defense Department Being Investigated -

The “safe and effective” narrative about the COVID-19 vaccines is unraveling and civil and criminal cases are being pursued, aided by several whistleblowers and new audits that have been conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the President Donald J. Trump administration.  The COVID-19 vaccines bypassed normal long-term safety testing and were recommended to the American people in late 2020 through emergency authorizations, marking the first widespread use of mRNA vaccine technology for any human disease.  Military members were forced to receive the vaccines or face disciplinary action or discharge starting in August of 2021, leading to over 8,000 service members being discharged.  Healthcare workers, college students, government personnel, and other members of the public were mandated to receive the vaccines to continue their employment or contracts.

Dr. Robert W. Malone, a prominent physician and biochemist who is known for his contributions to mRNA technology in the late 1980s and who currently serves on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), is now reporting on the allegedly fraudulent activity that went on at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Defense's Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED).

Dr. Malone’s article "DMED and CDC COVID Data Scandals: Inconvenient Truths? Just change the data. That's the way you do it," published on his Substack account and emailed to his subscribers on January 3, 2026, presents a detailed critique of alleged systemic data manipulation within U.S. federal health and military institutions during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Malone frames these events as part of a broader pattern of institutional deception and argues that both the Department of Defense's Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data practices were deliberately altered to sustain official narratives of vaccine safety and efficacy. He describes this as a self-reinforcing "fraud engine" driven by institutional pressure, opportunity for manipulation, and rationalization under the guise of protecting public trust.

The DMED, managed by the Defense Health Agency (DHA), serves as the U.S. military's central repository for anonymized medical records of active-duty personnel. Its strength lies in regular medical exams, yielding cleaner epidemiological data than civilian sources.

In 2021–2022, whistleblowers—including Army Lt. Col. (Dr.) Theresa Long, Dr. Samuel Sigoloff, and Dr. Peter Chambers—accessed DMED extracts showing dramatic spikes in diagnoses starting in 2021, aligning with the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines to troops. Compared to 2016–2020 baselines, increases included:

• Neurological disorders: over 1000%

• Myocarditis/pericarditis: 300–500%

• Cancers: over 300%

• Female infertility/menstrual issues: around 400%

• Guillain-Barré and demyelinating disorders: around 600%

  
  

These findings, publicized via attorney Thomas Renz in a Senate hearing on January 24, 2022, gained traction in independent media due to DMED's reputation for reliability.

The DoD responded by attributing the anomalies to a "data corruption issue." Historical baselines (2016–2020) were retroactively inflated, making 2021 spikes appear normal. Dr. Malone alleges that:

• No verifiable proof of the database error's origin.

• Original exports from credentialed physicians remained consistent pre-"correction."

• The database went offline in late January 2022 for weeks before relaunching with altered data.

  
  

Dr. Malone calls this not an error, but deliberate rewriting of medical reality to maintain narrative stability in a young, healthy population. He notes corroborating trends in non-DoD datasets (e.g., insurance records), suggesting the original safety signals (adverse events related to a medicine that requires further investigation) were valid. The episode eroded trust in DHA transparency and prompted congressional scrutiny, mirroring civilian issues like Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) underreporting.

CDC Audits and Data Integrity Failures

Malone discusses two major 2025 audits under the "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) initiative, associated with HHS (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) leadership changes post-the 2024 election with the appointment of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.:

1.     HHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) Audit (mid-2025): Reviewed grant spending ($87 billion, 2019–2023), transparency, and systems like VAERS. Findings included misuse of funds, duplicative grants, opacity in metadata, pattern of post-criticism adjustments, VAERS underreporting (20–50x in some categories), contractor conflicts with manufacturers, and algorithmic suppression via deduplication.

Outcomes: "High-Risk" designation for CDC data integrity; recommendations for separating analytics from communications.

2.     CDC Data Integrity & Safety Audit (October 2025): Broader review of internal handling. It found retroactive revisions to historical tables, metadata gaps (38% of tables lacking version control), correlations between signal suppression and criticism timing, unpublished adverse categories (over 490), downgrading of safety signals by non-clinical staff, and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) delays.

The audit’s recommendations included the creation of an independent governance board, quarterly raw data publication, and blockchain versioning to prevent data manipulation.

Both audits concluded the CDC could not separate objective science from public-relations narratives, admitting designed manipulation rather than accidents.

Consequences and Ongoing Developments

Dr. Malone Reports that:

After the CDC data integrity and safety audit (Oct 2025) and the HHS OIG audit (mid‑2025), there was immediate political and legal fallout. Both Congress and the DOJ had to respond, since these weren’t speculative leaks but official government audits confirming structural data corruption. 

At least five felony categories now hang over current and former CDC/HHS officials, and for the first time, the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section is treating data falsification as a criminal, not merely administrative, matter.

At least half a dozen senior and mid‑level officials are now under criminal review by DOJ, and if the referrals proceed, they would represent the most significant corruption prosecution in the history of the U.S. public‑health bureaucracy. 

Dr. Malone also states that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is conducting a technical audit of the CDC’s Information Technology systems and contracting architecture and has found that contractors employed by the CDC may have conflicts of interest in that they are also servicing major pharmaceutical clients. 

In addition to the criminal referrals to the DOJ and the active GAO technical audit, a civil lawsuit is being pursued against CDC-connected contractors who allegedly defrauded the government by misreporting safety metrics.  The civil suit is being led by attorney Thomas Renz and is being filed in federal court under the False Claims Act.

A “MAHA Oversight Working Group”, chaired jointly by RFK Jr. and HHS Watchdog officials has recently been created and is operating independently within HHS and reports directly to the White House.  The goal of the group is to monitor implementation of audit-recommended reforms, data transparency reforms and whistleblower protection. 

Conclusion:

Dr. Malone views this as a symbolic shift:  data manipulation treated as fraud against the public, not mere spin.  The tide is turning and heading now towards revelations of truth with significant evidence of data manipulation found in 2025 audits.  The hope is that evidence will continue to be revealed in 2026. Criminal referrals to the DOJ will lead to more investigations, exposing data manipulation by government agencies that have been more interested in self-preservation than truth-telling. The public deserves to know the truth and the data manipulators and liars need to be held accountable.

Background on Dr. Robert W. Malone:

Dr. Robert W. Malone is an American physician and biochemist, best known for his early contributions to mRNA technology in the late 1980s while at the Salk Institute and later at Vical, where he conducted landmark experiments demonstrating that mRNA could be transfected into cells using liposomes to produce proteins—a foundational step toward mRNA vaccines.  Malone currently serves on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a federal advisory committee to the CDC that provides recommendations on vaccine use and immunization schedules in the United States. He was appointed to this role in June 2025 by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.  Dr. Robert W. Malone began publicly raising concerns about the safety and deployment of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in mid-to-late 2021

He appeared in interviews and social media posts questioning aspects like spike protein toxicity, potential risks of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), and the rapid rollout without full long-term data, though earlier private or less prominent expressions of concern may date back to 2020 (when he was involved in famotidine research for COVID treatment). His profile rose sharply with a viral appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast in December 2021, where he elaborated on these issues, leading to widespread attention and subsequent deplatforming on platforms like LinkedIn and Twitter for alleged misinformation.

His primary book on the topic is "Lies My Gov't Told Me: And the Better Future Coming" (published in 2022 by Skyhorse Publishing/Children's Health Defense imprint, with a foreword by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.). It is a critique of the official COVID-19 response, framing it as a series of government and institutional deceptions. Malone argues that authorities promoted falsehoods about vaccine safety, efficacy, early treatments (e.g., ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine), lockdowns, masks, and natural immunity to sustain a narrative favoring mass vaccination and control measures. He draws on his background in mRNA technology (claiming foundational contributions from the late 1980s) to assert that the vaccines were rushed, inadequately tested, and potentially harmful—citing risks like spike protein toxicity, reproductive issues, and immune system effects—while accusing Big Pharma, government agencies (e.g., CDC, FDA), and media of collusion, censorship, and propaganda.

Background on the U.S. Military COVID-19 Vaccination Mandates:

The U.S. military enforced the COVID-19 vaccination requirement for service members through a formal mandate issued by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on August 24, 2021. This directed the Secretaries of the Military Departments (Army, Navy, Air Force, and Space Force) to immediately implement full vaccination for all active-duty members, as well as those in the National Guard and Ready Reserve under Department of Defense (DoD) authority. The policy was framed as necessary to protect force health, readiness, and mission accomplishment, aligning with long-standing DoD immunization programs (per DoD Instruction 6205.02).

Enforcement was handled primarily through the military's standard chain-of-command disciplinary processes:

• Initial steps: Service members were counseled on the requirement, offered the vaccine (with ample supply available at military treatment facilities, clinics, or external providers), and given deadlines for compliance. The mandate applied to vaccines that were FDA-authorized or approved (initially under Emergency Use Authorization, with Pfizer's full approval on August 23, 2021, facilitating the rollout).

• Accommodations: Exemptions were available for medical contraindications (e.g., allergies), administrative reasons (e.g., pending separation), or religious beliefs. However, many requests—particularly religious ones—were denied at high rates, leading to criticism that exemptions were not granted liberally.

• Consequences for refusal: Non-compliance was treated as a failure to obey a lawful order. This could result in progressive disciplinary actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), including:

  • Counseling and additional training.

  • Administrative restrictions (e.g., limited duties, no promotions, or deployment ineligibility).

  • Non-judicial punishment (Article 15).

  • In severe or persistent cases, court-martial proceedings.

  • Most commonly, involuntary administrative separation (discharge) from service, often with a general discharge under honorable conditions (or honorable in some cases). This affected benefits like retirement eligibility, GI Bill access, and veteran status.

    
    

From late 2021 through early 2023, the services discharged approximately 8,000–8,400 active-duty and reserve members solely for refusing the vaccine (figures vary slightly by branch and reporting). Recruits who refused were typically not enlisted or were separated early. The policy was strictly enforced for over a year, despite legal challenges and congressional scrutiny.

The mandate was rescinded on January 10, 2023, following a provision in the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), signed into law by President Biden in December 2022, which required the DoD to drop the requirement. Post-rescission, no further separations occurred solely for vaccine refusal, and adverse notations related to it were to be removed from records for those still serving. Later developments (as of 2025–2026) included efforts to reinstate discharged members, correct records, and offer return opportunities without back pay in most cases, though only a small fraction have rejoined.

This enforcement approach mirrored how the military handles other mandatory vaccinations (e.g., anthrax, smallpox historically), prioritizing operational readiness in a deployable force where individual choice is subordinate to mission needs.

Background on Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS):

VAERS stands for Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.  It is a national early warning system in the United States that collects and analyzes reports of possible adverse events (side effects or health problems) following vaccination. VAERS is co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and it has been in operation since 1990.

The system relies on voluntary reports from healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, patients, parents, and others. Anyone can submit a report, and it serves primarily to detect potential safety signals that may require further investigation (e.g., via more rigorous systems like the Vaccine Safety Datalink). Importantly, a report to VAERS does not prove that a vaccine caused the reported event—reports can include coincidental occurrences, and causation is not determined by VAERS data alone.

The Harvard Pilgrim Health Care ESP:VAERS study (Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) from 2006 to 2010 and led by Ross Lazarus, developed an automated system to detect and facilitate reporting of potential vaccine adverse events using electronic health records (EHRs) from a large ambulatory care practice. Analyzing data from 715,000 patients who received about 1.4 million vaccine doses, the project identified 35,570 possible adverse reactions (approximately 2.6% of vaccinations). The study's final report highlighted that adverse events from vaccines are common but significantly underreported, concluding that fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported to the passive VAERS system.