(Robert Malone) – I often hear complaints about how few physicians and medical care providers have spoken out regarding the toxicities and risks associated with the COVID-19 genetic vaccines.
In my experience, one of the most remarkable medical doctors that I have encountered during the last three years has been Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo, who currently serves as Surgeon General of the State of Florida. To those who are lately finding it fashionable to criticize physicians who did not immediately recognize and call out the risks associated with these hastily “Emergency Use Authorized” products, it will be hard to find fault with Ladapo, who was an early member of Americas Frontline Doctors.
Even though Wikipedia has put its spin on his bio, his integrity and bravery over the last three years shines through in remarkable contrast to the vast majority of academic physicians.
From Wikipedia:
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ladapo had promoted unproven treatments – hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin –, questioned the safety of vaccines, opposed lockdown mandates, and associated with America’s Frontline Doctors, a far-right group known for promoting falsehoods about the pandemic. In a March 24, 2020, opinion column in USA Today, Ladapo argued against lockdowns deriving from his experience in treating COVID-19 patients at UCLA, an assertion he repeated in a later column published by the Wall Street Journal.
With passage of time, he became a vocal supporter of Governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis’ COVID-19 policies that ran against mainstream medical consensus. On September 21, 2021, he was appointed to be the Surgeon General of the state….
On appointment, Ladapo critiqued the ‘senseless’ fear-driven cult of vaccination – characterizing vaccines as one of the many equally preventative arms of pandemic management – and would repeal quarantine rules for schoolchildren exposed to COVID-19 as his first executive action. The next month, Ladapo courted controversy after refusing to wear a mask while in a meeting with State Senator Tina Polsky, who had been diagnosed with breast cancer and was set to undergo radiation therapy; he defended his actions on the ground that masking hindered effective communication. Ladapo was confirmed by the Senate on February 23, 2022; during background checks, his former UCLA supervisor refused a positive recommendation, noting that Ladapo’s ‘hands-off’ approach towards tackling COVID-19 had violated the Hippocratic oath and had distressed colleagues.
In March, Ladapo recommended that healthy children in Florida not be vaccinated against COVID-19; thus, Florida became the first state to contradict relevant guidelines by CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics. All of the ‘experts’ who were cited by Ladapo were not consulted in the process; they disagree with the recommendation and accuse him of de-contextualizing their arguments. Since then, Ladapo has shifted focus to transgender healthcare – holding professional organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Endocrine Society as politically motivated, he has restricted gender-affirming counseling, hormonal therapies, and related medications for transgender and nonbinary children.
To my mind, every one of these “controversial” positions demonstrate that Ladapo is precisely the type of medical leader that we so desperately need in these times. But based on my personal experience, what is most remarkable about Ladapo is his calm, unflappable demeanor and impeccable moral compass in the face of the hurricane of criticism which he has withstood. The contrast with the US Department of Health Human Services and various global “leaders” is profound. This is the type of leader that I can follow.
As we see other physicians who seek to be identified as central leaders suffering from the effects of egotism and a desire to commercialize newfound fame, Ladapo has maintained an even keel and steady eye on the horizon, and has continued to maintain a calm and steady hand at the tiller. Keep that in mind as you read the press announcement and associated epidemiological analysis which he has recently announced to the world.
This man is the polar opposite of Drs. Anthony Fauci, Deborah Birx, and Rochelle Walensky. No grandstanding, no self-aggrandizement. Refreshingly not narcissistic.
I was asked by One America News to comment on the new study which Ladapo and his colleagues released on October 7, 2022. Here are the key findings, according to the press release:
Today, State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo has announced new guidance regarding mRNA vaccines. The Florida Department of Health (Department) conducted an analysis through a self-controlled case series, which is a technique originally developed to evaluate vaccine safety.
This analysis found that there is an 84% increase in the relative incidence of cardiac-related death among males 18–39 years old within 28 days following mRNA vaccination. With a high level of global immunity to COVID-19, the benefit of vaccination is likely outweighed by this abnormally high risk of cardiac-related death among men in this age group. Non-mRNA vaccines were not found to have these increased risks.
As such, the State Surgeon General recommends against males aged 18 to 39 from receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Those with pre-existing cardiac conditions, such as myocarditis and pericarditis, should take particular caution when making this decision.
‘Studying the safety and efficacy of any medications, including vaccines, is an important component of public health,’ said Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo. ‘Far less attention has been paid to safety and the concerns of many individuals have been dismissed – these are important findings that should be communicated to Floridians.’
When the press release and associated study results were released, there were the usual attacks. Charlie Crist, running for governor in opposition to sitting Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, stated: “Our quack Surgeon General Ladapo is back with more misinformation. When I’m governor, I’ll appoint a surgeon general who isn’t a partisan ideologue and who will provide sound medical advice.”
In response, current governor’s spokesperson Christina Pushaw replied, “Billboard lawyer who failed the bar twice thinks he knows more about science than a Harvard MD/PhD who was previously a professor at UCLA Medical School.” The ball is in your court, Mr. Crist. Thank you for your coverage of this dustup, Newsweek.
Billboard lawyer who failed the bar twice thinks he knows more about science than a Harvard MD/PhD who was previously a professor at UCLA Medical School. https://t.co/SQ6SrkcPna
— Christina Pushaw 🐊 🇺🇸 (@ChristinaPushaw) October 9, 2022
And then we have Twitter, the censors of which promptly shot themselves in the foot, twice, by first deleting Ladapo’s accurate summary of the study results:
“Today, we released an analysis on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines the public needs to be aware of. This analysis showed an increased risk of cardiac-related death among men 18-39. FL will not be silent on the truth,” Ladapo tweeted, citing an analysis conducted by Florida’s health department that stated that the vaccine poses a “high risk” of death.
And then, for some strange reason, someone apparently rethought the atmospherics of this, and Twitter later confirmed that the tweet has been restored.
On the other side, there was much joy in Mudville as instead of striking out, Ladapo appeared to have hit a grand slam.
So, in preparing for recording the One America News broadcast, I wanted to avoid the risk of just gushing about the analysis because it confirmed my own bias. I took the time to carefully review the paper, read the references, and consider the long list of limitations which the authors carefully noted and disclosed.
After assembling my own opinion I called up Ladapo, who kindly took my call and for forty-five minutes we discussed the various nits and concerns which I had, based on both the listed limitations as well as my own observations.
As usual, there was no hyperbole from Ladapo, just his usual calm, collected demeanor. The (non-peer reviewed) manuscript “Risk of death following SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination in young people in England: a self-controlled case series study,” which was cited in the Florida summary, and which contradicted the findings of the current study (claiming no adverse cardiac effects), was for a different age cohort (12–29 years old) and blended the two (yes, only two) genders – which will quench the observed cardiotoxicity most strikingly observed in males aged 18–39. That study also selected a different (shifted later) timeframe. Of the two, the Florida study appears more rigorous and much better designed to get at the underlying truth of the question.
As our discussion proceeded, what I found most compelling is that the current Florida study is consistent with the “preponderance of evidence.” In study after study, including even from the CDC and FDA, it has been clear that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine products which use non-viral gene therapy methods to express spike protein in the cells of the recipient, are associated with cardiac damage, including disease and death from that damage.
The aspect of the study which I find most troubling is that it essentially focused on the second received inoculation for the analysis. The data employed were from fairly early in the course of “vaccine” deployment, and did not cover what happens after inoculations three, four, five, or six. When asked about this, Ladapo agreed that this was a limitation, and indicated that he hopes to address these effects in future studies of the Florida data. I hypothesize that when data concerning these additional doses are analyzed, one is likely to observe an even more striking incidence of adverse effects and death.
The other observation which Florida and Ladapo has chosen to not highlight is that “non-mRNA vaccines were not found to have these increased risks.”
Badda boom.
Now, I have not reviewed the primary data, but it could well be that the relatively low numbers of patients in the study meeting the criteria of “not mRNA\unknown” resulted in significantly lower statistical power for analysis of these groups, and that this observation could be an artifact of the statistical analysis due to this.
However, this issue certainly merits a deeper dive and more comprehensive analysis (perhaps of the court ordered, newly disclosed CDC V-Safe data?), as if this observation withstands more rigorous testing, then one would have to hypothesize that the spike protein is not the main cause of the cardiac toxicity, and then we are left with the possibility that the mRNA delivery platform is the problem.
This may seem an “inside baseball” nuance (notice I am staying with Casey at bat?), but as we previously discussed in this essay, the FDA is using the COVID-19 vaccines as a “platform technology” for mRNA vaccine trials. Which would mean that every male patient aged 18–39 enrolled or about to be enrolled in those trials could be at risk of an 84 percent increase in the relative incidence of cardiac-related death.
I just hope that these subjects are being provided with a balanced and accurate disclosure of risk as they are presented with their “informed consent” paperwork.
In sum, well done, Dr. Ladapo. Keep on doing what you do. We need more grand slams.
Reprinted with permission from Robert W. Malone.