Washington, D.C. — On Wednesday, June 3, 2026, Sen. Ron Johnson chaired a Senate subcommittee hearing focused on whether COVID-19 mRNA injections could contribute to cancer and the reported attacks on researchers raising those concerns.
The session brought together oncologists, scientists, and a cervical cancer survivor. Johnson opened by recounting how he first connected with witnesses like Dr. Sabine Hazen during the pandemic, when she described FDA-supported research being undermined. He criticized pharmaceutical industry influence over media, regulators, medical organizations, and journals, and pointed to safety studies on genotoxicity and carcinogenicity that were never completed before the shots received emergency authorization.
Ranking Member Sen. Richard Blumenthal pushed back, quoting the National Cancer Institute’s conclusion that there is no evidence the vaccines cause cancer, lead to recurrence, or speed up disease progression. He stressed the importance of cancer research funding and warned that questioning vaccines could harm public trust and immunization rates.
Witness Accounts
Dr. Angus Dalglish, a veteran oncologist known for immunotherapy work, described seeing long-stable melanoma patients relapse weeks after receiving boosters. He observed similar patterns in other cancers, including aggressive colorectal cases in younger adults. Dalglish pointed to T-cell exhaustion, immune tolerance, and multiple ways mRNA might interfere with tumor suppressor systems.
Dr. Wafik El-Deiry, a p53 tumor suppressor expert, explained how spike protein from the virus or vaccine may impair the body’s key cancer defense mechanisms. He compiled reports of over 300 post-vaccination cancer cases from 27 countries, some showing spike protein inside tumors.
Dr. Saskia Mostert presented findings from her team’s analysis of excess deaths across Western countries. Their BMJ Public Health paper documented more than 3 million excess deaths between 2020 and 2022. She faced professional repercussions, including an institutional investigation and eventual resignation.
Dr. Sabine Hazen, a gastroenterologist and microbiome researcher, detailed several retracted studies on COVID in patient stool samples, early treatment protocols, and vaccine effects on beneficial gut bacteria like bifidobacteria.
Dr. Asim Malhotra, a British cardiologist, recounted his healthy father’s death from cardiac arrest shortly after Pfizer vaccination. He called for halting the shots.
Defense of Current Position
Dr. Julie Gralow, Chief Medical Officer of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, maintained there is no solid clinical evidence linking mRNA COVID vaccines to new or faster-growing cancers. She highlighted benefits for cancer patients facing COVID risks and the potential of mRNA platforms for future cancer therapies.
During questioning, Johnson exposed gaps in Gralow’s understanding of the specific mRNA technology used. She initially stated that the mRNA degrades rapidly and believed the injection largely stayed in the arm. Johnson pressed her on the modified pseudouridine that prevents rapid degradation, lipid nanoparticle biodistribution throughout the body (including organs), persistent circulation of spike protein and mRNA, and DNA contamination concerns. Gralow acknowledged the need for more research on several points.
Tamika Felder, a 25-year cervical cancer survivor and advocate, shared her personal story and emphasized the success of HPV vaccines in preventing certain cancers. She agreed with Johnson that cancer patients would want to know if any environmental factor, drug, or vaccine could increase their cancer risk.
Lively Exchanges and Challenges to the Narrative
The later portion of the hearing turned into a pointed back-and-forth. Johnson challenged Gralow on the modified pseudouridine in the mRNA, its persistence in the body far beyond initial claims, biodistribution beyond the injection site (citing rat studies showing accumulation in organs), and reports of DNA contamination in the vials. Gralow acknowledged the need for further research but maintained that large population data showed no overall cancer increase.
Witnesses described clinical observations of hyperprogressive cancers and spike protein appearing in tumor tissue — something El-Deiry called completely unexpected and worthy of urgent study. Dalglish noted coroners refused to test tumors for spike despite requests.
Multiple witnesses detailed sustained attacks on their work. El-Deiry described how his publications faced relentless campaigns on PubPeer, a platform originally meant for spotting fraud but now often used anonymously to harass researchers challenging mainstream views. He said the attacks intensified after his HHS service and publication of cancer case reports, with no findings of misconduct yet ongoing reputational damage. Johnson referred to the site as “Pub Smear” and entered a detailed blog post documenting El-Deiry’s experience into the record.
Hazen recounted papers passing rigorous peer review only to be retracted later over minor issues, sometimes by critics with competing patents. Mostert and Malhotra echoed the pattern of institutional retaliation, leaked investigations, and career threats. Dalglish highlighted rejected papers on virus origins with the exact same phrasing from multiple journals: “not in the public interest.”
Johnson also questioned reliance on modeling studies claiming millions of lives saved, presenting actual U.S. death data that contradicted them, and criticized FDA’s VAERS algorithm that senior officials were warned would hide safety signals like sudden deaths. He contrasted this with the retracted Surgisphere study that undermined early treatments like hydroxychloroquine.
The discussion touched on informed consent failures, the first-time use of pseudouridine-modified mRNA in humans, barriers to autopsies and tumor testing, and the need for merged registries. Witnesses called for open scientific debate without fear of professional destruction.
Closing Thoughts
Johnson described the hearing as part of a larger effort to confront how science and policy operated during the pandemic and restore public trust. He kept the record open for additional submissions through June 18, 2026.
The full transcript and video are available through Senate records and BrokenTruthTV coverage.
