Florida Surgeon General Faces Criticism Over mRNA Vaccines Survey Editing

The study focused on the risk of mRNA vaccines to young men

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo surrounded by reporters in the state Capitol, related to his confirmation hearing. (PhotoL Issac Morgan Jan 26, 2022).

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo is facing criticism after a public record request showed that he had edited a state-commissioned study (pdf) on messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccinations.

According to critics in the medical field, his edits suggest that he was trying to exaggerate the risk of cardiac death from mRNA vaccines in males 18 to 39.

Ladapo reported the data to show that there was a sharp increase in heart-related deaths among young men in that age range and recommended they not get the vaccine, which contradicted the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) stance on the vaccines.

Ladapo based this recommendation not only on the Florida study but also studies from Scandinavia, England, and the rest of the United States.

“There are a number of studies that are indicating that these vaccines, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular and cardiac events. And we just added to that with another one,” Ladapo said, adding that the Florida study was “not definitive,” but consistent with the other studies.

Since their rollout, Ladapo has questioned the safety and efficacy of the vaccines and has been critical of policies mandating them to the ire of federal public health agencies and media that promote the “safe and effective” narrative.

In Politico, Matt Hitchings, an assistant professor of biostatistics at the University of Florida, called his edits “a lie.”

“To say this — based on what we’ve seen, and how this analysis was made — it’s a lie,” Hitchings said.

Hitchings, who disagreed with the findings in the initial study, said there was political motivation behind his Ladapo’s changes.

“Key information was withheld from the public that would have allowed them or other experts to interpret this in context,” Hitchings said.

Daniel Salmon, director of the Institute for Vaccine Safety at the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said his edits were “troubling.”

“He took out stuff that didn’t support his position,” Salmon said. “That’s really a problem.”

Dr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, who’s sided with Ladapo on his assessment of the vaccines, disagreed with the criticism, calling Ladapo “an honest broker and thus trustworthy in his methods and conclusions.”

“I’m not seeing any issues of substance here,” Risch said.

Ladapo Responds to Criticism

Ladapo responded to the criticism on Twitter stating, “PhD-trained physician revises report based on his scientific expertise = ‘scandalous altering of results.’ Fauci enthusiasts are terrified and will do anything to divert attention from the risks of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines—especially cardiac deaths. Truth will prevail.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Health told The Epoch Times that, given the high level of immunity, there’s no reason to continue administering the COVID-19 vaccine to healthy people.

“Americans know this, and uptake has been abysmal, despite the harmful cajoling from the CDC, FDA, and public health officials over the past two years,” the spokesperson said. “The State Surgeon General stands by his guidance recommending against their use.”

Ladapo said in a statement to The Epoch Times, “Based on overwhelming studies of adverse side effects associated with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, from both international and domestic researchers, I determined that analyses of DOH [Department of Health] surveillance data would be worthwhile—especially since the federal government and Big Pharma continue to misrepresent risks associated with these vaccines. It is distinctly harmful to allow pharmaceutical companies and politics to dictate health guidance without concern for the negative impacts experienced firsthand in their communities.”

On the criticized changes to the study, Ladapo said it’s a normal part of the process to make “revisions and refinements.”

“I have the appropriate expertise and training to make these decisions, and all revisions were appropriate,” Ladapo said. “To say that I ‘removed an analysis’ for a particular outcome is an implicit denial of the fact that the public has been the recipient of biased data and interpretations since the beginning of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine campaign. I have never been afraid of disagreement with peers or media.”

Zachary Stieber and Mimi Nguyen Ly contributed to this report.