News
Featured Image
U.S. Service personnel receiving a COVID injectionU.S. Army

WASHINGTON, D.C (LifeSiteNews) – A senior U.S. army doctor said that COVID vaccines are more dangerous to the health of American soldiers than COVID itself after she had ground “three out of three soldiers” in only one morning due to adverse reactions to the vaccine.

Lt. Col. Theresa Long is a senior U.S. army aerospace medicine specialist who testified at an expert panel on vaccine injuries organized by U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin on November 2 in Washington, D.C.

Dr. Long has repeatedly warned against the risks of adverse events posed by the mRNA vaccines and in September filed an affidavit against the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for service members.

Long gave a 15-minute testimony about COVID vaccines adverse events experienced by soldiers and denounced the efforts of the U.S. army to conceal them.

“I believe the COVID vaccine is a greater threat to soldier’s health and military readiness than the virus itself,” she told the panel.

US soldiers used as ‘lab rats’ and asked to get the jab or leave – impact on combat readiness

Long began by denouncing the treatment of American soldiers who were pressured into taking the COVID vaccine or face being taken out of uniform.

She condemned the practice and explained that, in terms of combat readiness, taking soldiers out of uniform is equivalent to losing them on the battlefield.

“Over 200,000 U.S. members have rejected the vaccine, yet the military is pressing forward without regard to damage to the moral and [military] readiness. We have never lost 200,000 soldiers on the battlefield in a few months,” she said.

“Taking soldiers out of uniforms has the same impact on readiness as losing them on the battlefield,” she stressed.

In May, Long attended the U.S. Army’s Senior Preventive Medicine Leadership Course, where she expressed her concerns to senior leaders about the rushed manner in which the vaccines were trialed and then imposed on U.S. soldiers.

“We skipped two years of phase two trials and three years of phase three trials, we only lost 12 active-duty soldiers to COVID, and yet we’re going to risk the health of the entire fighting force on a vaccine we only had two months of safety data on?” she asked.

The response from the leadership was “you’re damn right, Colonel, and you’re going to get every soldier you can to take the vaccine so I can get enough data points to determine if the vaccine is safe.”

Long was shocked that service members who give their life to their country were being used as guinea pigs.

“Our service members are national treasures,” she said.

“They have stared down bullets, been blown up by IEDs and bombs, they have endured thankless and protracted wars, missing the birth of their children. They bore the burden no matter the cost. They did so without respect to political party or narrative. These are warriors, not lab rats!” she added.

Long’s first encounter with an adverse event and VAERS data

Long then recalled her first encounter with a vaccine adverse advent, which took place right from the onset of the vaccine rollout, when one of her colleagues, desirous to protect her elderly parents from COVID, took the vaccine and soon experienced fever, acute pain, and a complete loss of motion in her arm for more than a week.

“That was the first time I looked in the vaccine adverse event reporting system to see if her symptoms were common,” Long recalled.

“What I found horrified me,” she said.

“I found that the VAERS, in only a few months into the vaccination campaign, already had more deaths than in any year for all vaccines combined in each of the 10 years previously.”

Coercion of soldiers and violation of medical ethics

Long subsequently went to Fort Benning, a U.S. army base located at the border of Alabama and Georgia. There, she received testimonies from soldiers who told her how they had been pressured to take the vaccine.

I encountered numerous soldiers who told me of threats, coercion and intimidation to get the vaccine that were at that time still under EUA (Emergency Use Authorization),” she recalled, and explained that “this violated medical ethics, specifically the Nuremberg code.”

Long later inquired about adverse events and was shocked to learn that no monitoring of adverse events was occurring at the time.

When I emailed Army Public Health Command and asked about adverse events, the epidemiologist emailed me back and told me that they were not tracking, tracing or monitoring adverse events,” she said.

A marketing campaign in violation of DoD regulations

The U.S. Army doctor then alluded to the marketing and propaganda-style campaign that took place to encourage military healthcare professionals to get vaccinated.

“I received an email encouraging military healthcare providers and professionals to get vaccinated: ‘put a sticker on your uniform posted to social media with the hashtag ‘the vaccine is safe,’ or hashtag ‘get vaccinated!’ she recalled.

“This disturbed me because it seemed as though health care professionals were being used as the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies,” she added, arguing that this type of marketing campaign is a violation of DoD regulations.

“Many would say this is just good public health messaging, but I would say this is a violation of DOD I that prohibits endorsement of a civilian product,” she said.

She also pointed out that the main goal of pharmaceutical companies is to make a profit.

“Yes, these vaccines are a product! The pharmaceutical companies are not benevolent charities, they are there to make a profit, and they are,” she said.

Women are exposed to unique risks

Long came across a second case of adverse reaction to the COVID vaccine in May, when she met a young woman who was training for ranger school.

“She was everything we wanted in a female warrior,” Long recalled.

The young woman confided in Long that she was the only female in her class who was not vaccinated, as she was concerned about the effects that the vaccine might have on her fertility.

Long told the young woman that she had “everything to lose and nothing to gain” from the vaccine, after examining the potential risks and benefits for her age, physical condition, and fitness.

The young woman told Long about the harassment and intimidation soldiers were facing for not getting vaccinated. She eventually caved to the pressure and took the vaccine.

She later reached out to Long to tell her than she developed adverse events that forced her to drop the course.

“One of the things that this female’s story highlighted the most for me was that women had unique considerations, [different] than men and postmenopausal women,” Long said.

“Women who are in their childbearing potential have all the eggs they’ll ever have from conception until menopause. Their exposure to various chemicals, toxins, drugs and x-rays can not only affect their health, but that of their children and their ability to have children, she explained.

After doing some research, Long found that eight out of 10 drugs pulled off the market “disproportionately harmed females.” She gave the example of DES (Diethylstilbestrol), which after 40 years became associated with infertility and cancers.

“And this was a drug that went through standard clinical trials,” she said.

Myocarditis, informed consent and censorship

At the end of her testimony, Long discussed the case of three pilots she had to ground due to vaccine injuries. Two of them suffered from pericarditis and myocarditis, and the third showed symptoms similar to that of agricultural pilot Cody Flint, who also testified that day.

Long first denounced the fact that the vaccination campaign was not paused despite concerns raised about risks of myocarditis in young people.

“In June of 2021, the CDC announced that they were holding an emergency meeting to discuss higher than expected myocarditis in 16-to-24-year-olds. Despite this announcement, the military did not even pause their vaccination efforts. Why?” she asked.

She recalled that her appeals to give soldiers informed consent were ignored.

I made numerous efforts to get senior medical leaders to, at the very least, inform soldiers of the risk. Leadership ignored my concerns,” she said.

She described the experience as “troubling” and explained that “you can’t have informed consent if you don’t tell your patients of the risks and benefits of a treatment or procedure.”

Long was also a victim of censorship when she informed her command that she had grounded the three pilots who presented themselves to her with serious vaccine injuries.

“After I reported to my command, my concerns that in one morning, I had to ground three out of three pilots due to vaccine injuries, the next day my patients were cancelled, my charts were pulled for review and I was told that I would not be seeing acute patients anymore, just healthy pilots there for their flight physical,” she recalled.

Long concluded her testimony by stressing the importance of the “loyal dissenter,” that is, the person selected to be the dissenting opinion “in order to prevent group think.”

“Patients are entitled to a second opinion on their medical care. What happens when bureaucrats mandate that there is no dissenting opinion?” she asked.

She then compared pharmaceutical companies with pilots unfit to fly, and the American people to their passengers.

“Medical errors kill the equivalent of three Boeing 747s packed full of patients every day. Medicine is not perfect. Doctors are not perfect. This vaccine is not perfect; and yet we are mandating every single American to get on board a single aircraft piloted by bureaucrats and administrators who are unfit to fly the aircraft,” she said.

“They need to be grounded,” she concluded.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.