COVID-19 vaccine-cancer link suppressed for years, Senate hearing reveals

• U.S. Senate hearing presented scientific evidence linking COVID-19 mRNA vaccines to increased cancer risk
• Multiple oncologists testified that stable cancer patients experienced aggressive relapses after booster shots
• Researchers reported attacks on their reputations and publications after publishing vaccine-cancer findings
• Senator Ron Johnson highlighted omitted pre-market safety studies including carcinogenicity testing
• National Cancer Institute’s denial of vaccine-cancer link faces contradiction from peer-reviewed studies

Why scientists are now speaking out about vaccine-cancer connections

A U.S. Senate hearing yesterday revealed that published scientific evidence linking COVID-19 mRNA vaccines to cancer has been systematically suppressed for years, with researchers facing professional retaliation for publishing findings that contradicted official narratives. Senator Ron Johnson chaired the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations hearing titled “Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications,” which featured testimony from five oncologists and researchers who documented troubling patterns of aggressive cancer development following vaccination.

The evidence that was dismissed

Dr. Angus Dalgleish, professor emeritus of oncology at City St. George’s, University of London, testified that beginning in 2021, he observed a disturbing pattern among his melanoma patients: individuals whose conditions had been stable for years experienced aggressive relapses after receiving a third COVID-19 shot. His observation expanded to include unexpected cancers among boosted patients—breast, prostate, pancreatic, lymphoma and gall bladder cancers, among others.

Dr. Wafik El-Deiry, director of the Legorreta Cancer Center at Brown University, reported that by April 2024, his research demonstrated that the COVID-19 spike protein—produced by both infection and vaccination—could reduce the activation of p53, a critical tumor suppressor protein. When he raised these concerns through normal scientific channels, he faced “escalating attacks” rather than open scientific engagement.

The mechanism: How vaccines may trigger cancer

The hearing explored multiple biological pathways through which mRNA vaccines might increase cancer risk. Dr. Sabine Hazan, CEO of ProgenaBiome, testified that COVID-19 vaccines killed bifidobacteria, a probiotic gut microbe essential for immune regulation and cancer prevention. Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a British cardiologist, testified that after receiving two vaccine doses, he was diagnosed with an autoimmune condition related to bifidobacteria loss, and advanced blood tests suggested increased short-term cancer risk.

Dalgleish explained that repeated COVID-19 vaccination can exhaust T-cell responses and dysregulate the immune system through immunoglobulin class switching—a process where the immune system shifts from fighting cancer cells to tolerating them. He noted that most scientists avoided investigating these mechanisms, becoming “increasingly hesitant to openly question or investigate these potential safety signals at all.”

What has changed in vaccine journalism

Johnson opened the hearing by reminding the audience that COVID-19 vaccines never underwent standard pre-market safety testing, including tests for:

• Drug-drug interactions
• Cardiovascular toxicity
• Central nervous system toxicity
• Organ toxicity
• Blood toxicity
• Genotoxicity
• Carcinogenicity

He cited a historical precedent: When “60 Minutes” covered deaths and injuries following the swine flu vaccine, those shots were pulled from the market. Johnson argued that serious vaccine injury journalism disappeared after pharmaceutical direct-to-consumer advertising became legal in the United States.

The suppression campaign

The hearing revealed that scientists who published vaccine-cancer findings faced immediate retaliation. El-Deiry said his research and reputation were attacked despite no evidence of wrongdoing. Dalgleish noted that when he tried to publish observations about cancer patterns among his patients, “there was little willingness to openly investigate these potential safety signals.”

Senator Richard Blumenthal, the subcommittee’s ranking Democrat, cited the National Cancer Institute’s official position that “there is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer, lead to recurrence, or lead to disease progression.” However, Dr. Julie Gralow, chief medical officer for the American Society of Clinical Oncology, testified as a minority witness that “currently, there is no clinical evidence proving that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer”—a carefully worded statement that acknowledges the absence of clinical trials specifically designed to test this hypothesis.

A reckoning decades in the making

The hearing represents what Johnson called the beginning of “a COVID reckoning” for the American public. Unlike the 1976 swine flu vaccine, which was pulled from the market after media coverage of injuries and deaths, COVID-19 vaccines remain widely recommended despite accumulating evidence of serious adverse effects. The scientific witnesses emphasized that open inquiry and transparent debate remain the foundation of good science. As one researcher wrote in her testimony, the paper documenting vaccine-cancer connections was not intended to skew opinions, but to ensure people have all information needed to make informed health decisions. Whether federal health agencies will now investigate these safety signals—or continue to dismiss them—remains the central question for a public health establishment facing its most serious credibility crisis in modern history.

Sources for this article include:

ChildrensHealthDefense.org

Cancer.gov

WCYB.com