We are witnessing a poisonous effort to destroy what the vast majority of Americans know is a key pillar of public health.

Vaccines are responsible for 40% of the reduction in child mortality achieved in the last half century.

And here's a YouTube link. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj0P...

See the film and my update on the ongoing, pointless, man-made loss of life here: bsky.app/profile/agaw...

Which is why we have made “Rovina’s Choice.” We cannot let the people affected – the health workers like those at Clinic 7 and the families like Rovina Naboi’s — go unseen. And we cannot let the consequences go unaccounted for.

YouTube link: 🎥 6/
youtu.be/Oj0PsaP2ZqQ?...

We are experiencing what historian Richard Rhodes called “public man-made death.”

But the deaths will be harder to see than in war. They are scattered & unfold slowly. We have estimates, but official statistics will not come until 2027. 5/

But now the gains are being reversed. In Kakuma Refugee Camp in Kenya, our team visited Clinic 7, where the sickest children come. After US aid ended, food supply fell to 40% of minimum needs, 2/3 of health workers were laid off, & sever malnutrition surged. 4/
www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?vi...

Consider malnutrition. USAID helped countries shift care from hospitals to nearer home. Health workers with a scale & tape measure detect bad cases earlier. A peanut-paste therapy reversed starvation. Deaths fell from 20% to as little as 1%. It saved 1.2M lives in 2023. 3/

My companion piece explains the film’s context: USAID’s dismantling is estimated to have already killed 600,000 people, ⅔ of them children. Officials simply deny any harm, while halting data monitoring and firing inspectors general who’d have documented it. 2/
www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?vi...

You could see where this was going before they even started. 7/

It’s like seeing a surgeon about a curable cancer and focusing entirely on the potential harms of the surgery option without evaluating the potential harms of the no-surgery option. 6/

Meanwhile they jettisoned CDC’s usual, careful process for grappling with risks of changes they’re voting for. ACIP did zero evaluation of harm, costs, or problems in implementation, while asking for an impossible standard for current vaccination practice. 5/

Discussion went round in circles on CDC’s review of the strong evidence supporting current vaccine administration. Prompting this from member Retsef Levi: “I’m hearing a lot of ‘there’s no evidence of harm.’... I think the question is ‘Is there evidence of no harm?’” 4/

Finally, an answer came back: we must make changes because trust in vaccines has decreased. “The signal that is prompting this is not one of safety, but one of trust,” said member Robert Malone. 3/

Liaison members from medical societies asked repeatedly: what is the reason for the votes to now change routine children’s vaccine schedules when there’s been no signal of harm and clear evidence of great benefit? 2/