Moderna Stooges Continue To Monitor and (Try to) Censor Critics

When The Media Says "Experts" They Mean Paid Corporate Shills (Part 26)

Even after the declared end of the pandemic in April 2023, Moderna and their various PR mouthpieces, most notably the Public Good Projects, have continued to monitor and attempt to censor content creators who they claim spread “misinformation”, a term they operationally define loosely to mean any content critical of their company and its one product line regardless of the veracity of the content. Much like CISA and the cabal of university NGOs it worked through during the height of the Virality Project, Moderna considers any information, regardless of veracity, that may lead anyone to second guess taking their latest booster as misinformation. As I mentioned in (Part 23), The Public Good Projects is an astroturfed health non-profit that initiated the Stronger campaign on Twitter 3 years ago, during the initial vaccine rollout, advised the “Misinformation, Disinformation and Malinformation” CISA task force at the center of the Virality Project on all matters of covid19 related content and works alongside Moderna’s global intelligence division to monitor critics and report them to the “Trust and Safety” teams of the respective social media companies. They were and still are financed through an intermediary lobbying group called the Biotechnology Innovation Organization that itself receives funding through Moderna and Pfizer and their censorship campaign continues to target the most popular critics of modRNA producers in particular and Covid19 policies in general including Alex Berenson, Michael Shellenberger, Jay Bhattacharya and even limited hangout gatekeepers like Russell Brand.

In August of last year, they flagged two Brand videos as “low risk” “misinformation” for pointing out the well documented revolving door between regulators and Big Pharma: in this particular instance a senior UK health official taking a position at Moderna right after his government stint, and CDC documents from early 2021 of infections in vaccinated patients. In September of last year, they flagged a Tweet from Alex Berenson as “misinformation” for sharing CDC data that showed 100,000-200,000 SAEs following the administration of 1 million modRNA shots to adolescent recipients that would theoretically only prevent a single death and 19 ICU admissions in the estimated NNV (number needed to vaccinate to prevent death/hospitalization). Without repudiating any of the data or claims in the Tweet, they noted that "Fears about side effects and long-term dangers are major reasons parents report not vaccinating their children,"and "resistance to COVID-19 vaccines for children can be a gateway to broader anti-vaccine beliefs." That same month they flagged one of Megyn Kelly’s podcasts as misinformation because she shared an anecdote about developing an autoimmune disorder after receiving one of their boosters. In case you forgot, anecdotes are another category of “misinformation” if they reflect negatively on modRNA products. In October of last year, they flagged a tweetfrom Dr. Bhattacharya as misinformation because it disseminated the results of an FDA preprint study that toddlers between 2–4 years given modRNA products suffered an elevated risk of seizures, at an astonishing rate of 1 seizure/convulsion for every 3,760 recipients while adolescents, particularly in the 12-17 years age range, developed an elevated risk of myocarditis. You’ll also do good to remember that sharing scientific literature that casts doubt on the safety profile of modRNA products is also “misinformation” because as Moderna and their outsourced PR mouthpiece put it “concerns about safety and side effects are among the main reasons parents are hesitant about or oppose COVID-19 vaccines for their children.” The insanely high risk of seizures and convulsions among recipients under 5 years of age was particularly damaging to their bottom line because they were about 98% of the Moderna shot recipients.

The Public Good Project does not limit the scope of their campaign to negative information about modRNA products but any information that contradicts the official narrative about COVID19 in general including its origins. Thus, last year they went after Michael Shellenberger for relaying allegations from a congressional whistleblower that the CIA had suppressed an assessment that found the origins in the Wuhan Institute itself.

You can read the original report on Lee Fang’s substack