“If you talk about this kind of thing, you get censored on YouTube. You will not be allowed on the mainstream media to talk about these issues,” stated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in a recent interview with popular talk show host Dr. Phil McGraw. In the one-on one discussion, Kennedy highlighted the dangers of government agency capture, pinpointing how this capture allows profit to trump safety and transparency, while also contributing to rampant censorship across news and social media platforms.

“You say the government regulators have been bought off by Big Pharma…you said agency employees are actually getting royalties—getting payments on vaccines and drugs that they approve. Is that true?” asked Dr. Phil.

View Comments (3)

Kennedy answers, “Yes, there’s a couple of things happening. With FDA, about 50% of the FDA’s budget comes from regulated industries, and mainly the pharmaceutical industry. So, you have agency capture on steroids. The principal objective of FDA today is to serve the mercantile interests of pharmaceutical companies. And that’s why you see FDA not only approving all of these drugs that shouldn’t be approved, but they also are out to destroy things that are actually shown to be good for you that do not make profits for the pharmaceutical companies.”

Profit over Safety

Kennedy cites the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, also known as the Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act, which “enables universities, nonprofit research institutions and small businesses to own, patent and commercialize inventions developed under federally funded research programs within their organizations.” Kennedy specifies that for the first time, “This allowed the individual scientist and the National Institutes of Health as the agency, to collect royalties on drugs on which they had done research.” He adds, “That law really transformed NIH… after the Bayh-Dole Act, the NIH began slowly migrating from a scientific research agency to a drug development incubator.” The Children’s Health Defense website clarifies, “The NIH uses taxpayer money to fund research. When that research leads to something that can be sold, NIH patents it and then licenses the patent to pharmaceutical companies.”

Kennedy shares that many of the new drugs which are approved by the FDA have come out of NIH research. Demonstrating his point, he reveals that the NIH owns half of the Moderna vaccine. He specifies, “So, the billions of dollars that that vaccine makes, half of that goes to NIH, the agency. But there’s also individuals, at least four and maybe six individuals who work for NIH who are high-level deputies under Anthony Fauci, who get to collect $150,000 a year forever, not just for their lives but [also for] their children[‘s lives]—as long as that mRNA technology is on the market, they’re going to be making money from it. That is a conflict.”

Dr. Phil reacts to this information by stating— “So the National Institutes of Health is getting a kickback, a bribe, a royalty, a share…is this not a clear conflict of interest?”

Kennedy answers, “Yes, it is. People are shocked.”

Dr. Phil blatantly asks, “Why are you the only one talking about this?

Mr. Kennedy matter-of-factly explains that mainstream media and platforms like YouTube will censor this kind of content. In fact, one cannot talk about this kind of thing without repercussions.

YouTube: The Arbiter of Truth?

YouTube, is owned by tech giant Alphabet (the parent company of Google). Its current medical misinformation policy reads: “YouTube doesn’t allow content that poses a serious risk of egregious harm by spreading medical misinformation that contradicts local health authorities or the World Health Organization’s guidance about specific health conditions and substances. This policy includes the following categories: prevention misinformation, treatment misinformation, denial misinformation.”

YouTube adds, “Don’t post content on YouTube” if it contradicts health authorities or their guidance on the safety or efficacy of ingredients of currently approved or administered vaccines. It also states that it will not allow content that promotes information that contradicts health authority guidance on treatments for specific health conditions, which includes substances or practices that have not been approved by the World Health Organization as “safe and effective.”

Censorship, Rampant During Covid, Persists

During the Covid pandemic, many social media platforms such as YouTube censored users who tried to share information about vaccine injuries, or treatments for Covid-19, such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. Over time, it became clear that only one narrative was allowed to reign supreme and it was controlled by government and global agencies such as the CDC, NIH, FDA and the WHO.   

In response to Mr. Kennedy’s comment about YouTube and social media censorship, Dr. Phil pointed out that emergency approval for the vaccines could not happen if there was a viable, effective treatment already available.

Kennedy responds, “The whole approval of the Moderna vaccine and the Pfizer vaccines during Covid required them to suppress any other therapeutic drugs that may have been effective against Covid and a lot of people believe, including myself, that there were therapeutics that were very, very effective against Covid like Ivermectin, like Hydroxychloroquine and many others and that they were deliberately suppressed because the government wanted to issue these emergency use authorizations and it would have been illegal if they acknowledged that there was an existing drug that was approved for any purpose that was effective against Covid.”

Dr. Phil sums up the problem in one sentence: “It seems to me that that’s another conflict of interest that they have to suppress this to get their payday.”

IFA was censored by YouTube recently because a webcast guest said, “There is aborted fetal tissue in the chicken pox vaccine.” This true statement runs afoul of YouTube’s policy to promote vaccines. In this case, those in authority are the ones denying the truth and disseminating medical misinformation.

A Blatant Conflict of Interest

In the end, there’s a profit motive involved with this entire process. How can health agencies truly act as regulators of the public’s welfare if there are incentives attached to drug and vaccine approvals?

According to an investigative report titled FDA Repays Industry by Rushing Risky Drugs to Market, “In 2017, pharmaceutical companies paid 75% ($905 million) of the agency’s (FDA’s) scientific review budgets for branded and generic drugs.” Additionally, “many of the physicians, caregivers and other witnesses before FDA advisory panels that evaluate drugs receive consulting fees, expense payments and other renumeration from pharmaceutical companies.”

It’s important to note that the CDC both pays and receives money from vaccine makers. Under a 1980 law, the CDC “currently has 28 licensing agreements with companies and one university for vaccines and vaccine-related products. It also has eight ongoing projects to collaborate on new vaccines. Moreover, the CDC “holds patents on the vaccines that they approve and mandate that American children must take.”

The conflict of interest within government agencies is undeniable when one realizes that members of the FDA and CDC advisory committees who make decisions about drugs and vaccines can own stocks in the drug companies that make them, or they can generate money from vaccine patents. For example, Dr. Paul Offit, who was a member of the CDC’s advisory committee, has disclosed that he holds a patent on a rotavirus vaccine and also receives grant money from the pharmaceutical giant Merck to develop the vaccine. Other conflicts of interest can occur when regulatory agency employees leave their positions to work for pharmaceutical companies. Scott Gottlieb, who has served in many roles with the FDA, is now a member of Pfizer’s Board of Directors. During the pandemic, he consistently recommended the Covid vaccines.

Even though experts, health authorities and government agencies make money through the pharmaceutical industry, their views are often upheld as the only trustworthy source of information by mainstream and social media. The dissenting views of others, such as Robert Kennedy Jr., are labeled as harmful misinformation.

Open Dialogue and Debate is Key

The only way to propagate truth is to allow all the details of an issue to be fully disclosed. Information cannot be squashed simply because it contradicts government agencies and health authorities. Evidence must be presented from all angles and represent a variety of viewpoints. Then, people can examine the information and decide for themselves.

Intercessors, the Lord has given us a mind that can reason and understand. We don’t need to be told what to believe. It’s crucial that we look at all sides of an issue by comparing and contrasting information. Most importantly, we should pray for wisdom and discernment.

And so, from the day we heard, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding (Colossians 1:9).

Lord Jesus, we lift up leaders and truthtellers who want more than a one-sided narrative to be presented. Let their voices be heard. Give us minds that can see, understand, and discern. Above all, may the spirit of truth abound within us so we can discern fact from fiction and make informed choices.

How is regulatory capture harming our medical system? How can we pray about this important issue?

Angela Rodriguez is an author, blogger and homeschooling Mom who studies the historical and biblical connections between Israel and the United States. You can visit her blogs at 67owls.com and 100trumpets.com. She is also the author of Psalm 91: Under the Wings of Jesus, and her first children’s book, Hallelujah’s Great Ride, was just released in September 2023.