RFK Jr. and Joseph Ladapo: Why the Media Fears Them

Who’s Really Spreading The Disinformation?

When Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo speaks, the establishment scrambles to discredit him. His latest public health guidance on COVID vaccines, which has earned him harsh criticism from mainstream outlets like the Genetic Literacy Project, only strengthens the divide between those who champion health freedom and those who enforce the pharmaceutical-driven status quo. The article takes aim at Ladapo’s participation in a health freedom conference with RFK Jr. and others, painting him as a purveyor of disinformation. But let’s be honest—what the establishment calls disinformation is often just inconvenient truth.

The attacks on Ladapo are not new, but they are becoming more aggressive as he challenges the conventional wisdom around mRNA vaccines. The Genetic Literacy Project accuses Ladapo of basing his recommendations on cherry-picked data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), dismissing his concerns as dangerous and misleading. However, it’s worth asking why VAERS exists in the first place if not to flag potential issues. The mainstream narrative ignores these warnings, and anyone who dares to speak out, like Ladapo, is quickly labeled a threat. But as history has shown us, it is often the dissenting voices that ultimately lead to progress.

The VAERS Dilemma - Truth or Misinformation?

The Genetic Literacy Project claims that Ladapo is guilty of misinterpreting data from VAERS. They argue that VAERS is an imperfect system that cannot definitively prove causation between vaccines and adverse events, and they are correct to some extent. VAERS is not designed to provide causal proof but to act as an early warning system. What they fail to mention is that the sheer volume of reports tied to the COVID vaccines should have prompted further investigation, not dismissal.

VAERS has documented thousands of adverse events related to the COVID vaccines, ranging from mild side effects to more serious issues like myocarditis, particularly in young men. The CDC has acknowledged these risks but insists that the benefits of vaccination outweigh them. This is a key point of contention for Ladapo, who argues that healthy adults under 65, especially young men, may not benefit from these vaccines in the same way that older, high-risk individuals might. His position is not "anti-science"; it’s about applying nuanced, personalized medicine rather than the one-size-fits-all approach favored by the CDC.

The article also calls Ladapo’s recommendations “medical malpractice,” accusing him of endangering lives by advising caution. But isn't the real malpractice ignoring potential risks for the sake of pushing a pharmaceutical agenda? We must remember that Ladapo’s warnings are rooted in growing concerns over the long-term effects of these vaccines—concerns that mainstream medicine seems eager to brush aside.

The Establishment's Inconvenient Truth

There’s a bigger issue at play here, one that goes beyond the specific debates around mRNA vaccines. The pharmaceutical industry, with the help of government agencies like the CDC and FDA, has built a powerful narrative around COVID vaccines. This narrative insists that the vaccines are safe, effective, and necessary for all, with little room for dissent or alternative perspectives.

Ladapo has been one of the few public health officials to challenge this narrative, calling attention to the financial incentives driving the vaccine rollout. He has questioned the speed at which these vaccines were developed and authorized under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). He’s also been vocal about how alternative treatments like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were vilified by the medical establishment—despite studies showing their potential efficacy early in the pandemic. It’s no wonder the establishment is desperate to discredit him.

The article goes to great lengths to frame Ladapo’s critiques as dangerous disinformation, but it conveniently ignores the role that Big Pharma has played in shaping public health policy. Let’s not forget that Pfizer, Moderna, and other pharmaceutical giants have made billions off these vaccines, all while having little accountability for adverse effects. The same pharmaceutical companies have a long history of suppressing natural remedies and pushing expensive drugs—often with the help of regulatory agencies that are supposed to protect public health.

The Genetic Literacy Project claims that Ladapo’s concerns about vaccine safety have no basis in science, but what they fail to mention is that science itself should be based on open inquiry and debate. Censoring voices like Ladapo’s, labeling them as "anti-science," is not only intellectually dishonest—it’s dangerous. In a world where pharmaceutical profits often dictate policy, we need more voices like Ladapo’s to ask the hard questions, not fewer.

RFK Jr., Ladapo, and the Health Freedom Movement

One of the most glaring aspects of the Genetic Literacy Project article is its attempt to discredit not only Ladapo but also those associated with him, particularly RFK Jr. By painting these figures as conspiracy theorists, the article avoids engaging with their actual arguments. RFK Jr. has long been a prominent voice in the health freedom movement, raising concerns about vaccine safety and advocating for informed consent. His positions are not “anti-vaccine” but rather pro-transparency and pro-choice.

The article’s guilt-by-association tactics are transparent. By lumping Ladapo in with "Nazi-promoting health specialists," the piece attempts to smear him by association rather than addressing his points on their merits. This is a common tactic used to discredit anyone who questions the mainstream narrative. But here’s the thing—Ladapo’s message isn’t about promoting fringe ideas; it’s about advocating for a more transparent, honest approach to public health.

The media loves to label anyone questioning vaccine safety as an “anti-vaxxer” or a “conspiracy theorist,” but that only works when you ignore the growing body of evidence supporting vaccine caution. We now know that COVID vaccines, while effective in reducing severe illness in high-risk populations, do carry risks—risks that are particularly pronounced in younger, healthier individuals. And yet, the establishment continues to push these vaccines on everyone, ignoring the science of personalized medicine and informed consent.

A Flawed Public Health System

The Genetic Literacy Project article is a prime example of how the media and the pharmaceutical industry work together to suppress dissenting voices. Rather than engaging in an open debate about the risks and benefits of COVID vaccines, the article resorts to fear-mongering, accusing Ladapo of endangering lives. But the real danger lies in the establishment’s refusal to acknowledge that not all individuals have the same level of risk, nor should they all be treated with the same medical interventions.

Ladapo has pointed out that public health officials have a duty to weigh both the risks and the benefits of any medical intervention. For the elderly or those with underlying conditions, the benefits of the COVID vaccines may well outweigh the risks. But for younger, healthier individuals, the risk of vaccine side effects—such as myocarditis—could outweigh the potential benefits, especially when other treatment options and natural immunity are taken into account.

It’s also worth noting that the article criticizes Ladapo for allegedly undermining vaccine efforts in Florida, where only 29% of seniors have received the latest bivalent vaccine, compared to a national average of 41%. But here’s the question: Are these numbers reflective of Ladapo’s influence, or do they suggest that Floridians are making informed choices based on their own risk assessments? The article assumes that low vaccination rates are inherently bad, but what if they are a sign that people are finally starting to think critically about their health and question the one-size-fits-all approach?

Health Freedom: A Civil Rights Issue

At the heart of this debate is the issue of health freedom. Ladapo’s message is not one of anti-vaccination, but one of choice. He advocates for the right of individuals to assess their own risk and make informed decisions about their health, free from government mandates or pharmaceutical pressure. This is a civil liberties issue as much as it is a public health one.

The establishment’s response to Ladapo’s stance reveals just how much power the pharmaceutical industry holds over public health policy. By controlling the narrative, they’ve managed to suppress any voices that question the safety and efficacy of their products. But as more people like Ladapo speak out, the cracks in that narrative are starting to show.

In the end, the attacks on Ladapo are not about protecting public health—they are about protecting profits. The pharmaceutical industry, with the help of government agencies, has built a multi-billion-dollar vaccine empire, and they are not going to let anyone tear it down without a fight. But as Ladapo and others continue to challenge the status quo, the truth will inevitably come to light.

Final Thought - The Fight for Truth and Health Freedom

Ladapo’s critics accuse him of spreading disinformation, but what they really fear is the spread of truth. His willingness to question the mainstream vaccine narrative, to advocate for informed consent, and to push back against pharmaceutical overreach is what makes him a target. But it’s also what makes him a hero for those of us who believe in health freedom.

The Genetic Literacy Project may attempt to discredit Ladapo by associating him with fringe figures and conspiracy theories, but that tactic won’t work for long. As more data emerges on the risks associated with COVID vaccines and the limitations of a one-size-fits-all approach, the public will start to see through the smokescreen. And when they do, they’ll realize that Ladapo was right all along.

The fight for health freedom is far from over, but as more voices like Ladapo’s rise up, we inch closer to a future where public health is about informed choice, not pharmaceutical mandates. And that’s a future worth fighting for.