Over the past few years, Americans had their lives upended by a variety of medical mandates and recommendations.
Though the majority of the restrictions and rules have since been lifted, there are still groups looking for accountability.
Now one watchdog is calling on the Biden administration for evidence to support these inconsistent recommendations.
Biden administration presents conflicting recommendation of vaccine schedules
The Biden administration has spent a lot of time lamenting the various types of bad information since the beginning of his term.
But government officials can’t get one of the more important COVID guidelines straight.
How long the vaccine allegedly protects you and when you should get boosted.
Biden officials have been on an “annual COVID shot” plan for quite a while now.
It started in September when his COVID-19 response coordinator said that “for the majority of people” one shot per year “should be all they need.”
Despite the White House’s official stance, the Health Secretary Xavier Becerra tells a different story in his Twitter feed.
He’s shared multiple posts saying that people should get the booster “if it’s been over two months since your last dose.”
Government watchdog is suing for evidence supporting Becerra’s idea of bi-monthly vaccines
Now The Functional Government Initiative (TFGI) is stepping in.
They are a watchdog group that focuses on inflation, infrastructure, COVID, among other potential areas of government abuse.
They are asking for evidence to support Becerra’s comments.
They say that “the recommended timing for COVID boosters has changed many times and is now changing again.”
The group is concerned that Biden’s health officials used to “provide permanent protection” and now “our nation’s top-ranking health official is recommending vaccine doses every two months.”
TFGI is looking for any evidence that Becerra may have used to provide the recommendation of a shot every two months.
They want not only evidence to show the waning period of the vaccine but also studies regarding bi-monthly vaccines and possible adverse effects.
Peter McGinnis says the government isn’t helping the people to “trust the science” any better
Spokesman for the initiative, Peter McGinnis blasts the federal government as unreliable.
He said “while Americans are consistently told to ‘trust the science’ when it comes to matters of public health, they are rarely being shown the science underpinning these decisions.”
He went on to explain that Americans are being left “confused and concerned” about how the government has responded to the COVID crisis.
He says it doesn’t help “going from one shot a year to six shots a year in less than 24 hours without any justifying data . . .”
McGinnis is also concerned that pushing a bi-monthly vaccine could have detrimental consequences on the health of the population.
He said it could expose “millions of healthy young Americans” to an unnecessary bout of myocarditis with “little to show for it outside boosted vaccine count.”
McGinnis says that “the public deserves to know” how Becerra came to his two month recommendation
TFGI is pursuing these legal actions to expose what evidence might justify a shot every “two months.”
McGinnis says, “the public deserves to know what scientific evidence – if any – Secretary Becerra reviewed before his recommendation for bi-monthly booster shots was issued.”
Americans certainly should know how officials were coming to these conclusions and if there was evidence – then who funded it.
US Political Daily will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.
