Dr. Paul Offit caught lying, playing victim about being excluded from ACIP meeting, even though records show he was invited – NaturalNews.com

For years, the public has been told to “trust the experts” – to follow the science as dictated by a select few voices amplified through mainstream channels. What happens when one of those “trusted” voices is caught in a contradiction – a lie so stark it calls their entire credibility into question?

Dr. Paul Offit, a perennial media favorite on vaccination, said he was left out of the recent ACIP meeting that advised the CDC to no longer recommend the Hepatitis B vaccine for newborns. But according to records, he was actually invited. It turns out he is lying about all this, inciting hysteria across the media, while playing victim, as if “experts” like him are being excluded from scientific discourse.

This couldn’t be further from the truth. Offit’s 100%-safe-and-effective-vaccine opinion – now under scrutiny by a growing scientific body of literature and dissenting medical opinion – has commanded the debate for decades, excluding parents of vaccine-injured children from having a voice. Today, he still calls for Hep B vaccines to be given on day one of a child’s life, with repeated follow-up boosters in the early months of a child’s life, as part of a rigorous childhood vaccine schedule.

Today, Offit and other pro-vaccine media darlings play the victim, but the real victims are the parents of vaccine injured kids who have been silenced for decades!

Key points:

• Dr. Paul Offit publicly claimed on CNN he was not invited to speak at a key CDC advisory committee meeting on hepatitis B vaccines.
• Documentary evidence reveals multiple invitations were sent to Offit via email, phone, and his employer’s official portal.
• This incident raises serious concerns about Dr. Paul Offit’s willingness to engage in open scientific debate.
• By lying and playing victim on the matter, Offit’s disingenuous motivations are put on full display.
• How can the public trust Offit’s advice going forward?
• Offit’s deceptive stance calls into question all the vaccines advice Offit promoted for years through ACIP.

A public statement meets private evidence

In a December 5 CNN interview. Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and a director at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s Vaccine Education Center, was discussing a contentious ACIP meeting happening that same day regarding hepatitis B vaccines for infants. The CNN anchor noted Offit had been invited to present but declined. Offit’s response was direct: “I actually wasn’t invited to present at today’s meeting.” He elaborated, calling an earlier communication a “vague recommendation” and insisting the framing that he was asked to speak on that day’s subject was untrue.

Offit’s claim has now collided with documented reality. According to emails obtained and reported by Children’s Health Defense, the CDC actively sought Offit’s participation. On October 23, a CDC official sent an email with the clear subject line “Speaker Invitation – ACIP meeting,” stating, “I am reaching out to invite you as a speaker to an upcoming ACIP meeting.”

When that email bounced, the agency sent it to his University of Pennsylvania address, made phone calls, and even submitted a formal speaker-request form through the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s own booking system, which generated an automatic confirmation. The pathway of communication is not a hidden trail but a well-lit road, directly contradicting the victim-hood narrative that Offit presented to the public.

The microcosm and the macro problem

This is about more than a scheduling confusion. For observers who have long questioned the rigid orthodoxy surrounding vaccine discourse, Offit’s televised statement is a potent symbol. Here is a figure who has spent years in a position of immense influence at the ACIP, helping to shape national vaccine policy, promoting vaccines as universally safe and effective with an air of absolute certainty. Yet, when presented with an opportunity to defend these positions in a formal setting on a specific topic, the record suggests he avoided it. Then, when asked about it, he provided an account that the available evidence does not support.

What does it say about the strength of one’s convictions if you will not step into the arena to defend them? If the science is as settled as we are so often told, why would a leading proponent of vaccine safety and necessity not seize every platform? This incident feeds a growing public suspicion that certain dialogues are being managed, not explored. The refusal to engage, followed by a misleading explanation, does not build trust; it dismantles it brick by brick. It transforms an expert into a mere propagandist, someone who controls a message rather than honestly interrogating it.

Who controls the conversation?

The aftermath of this revelation is perhaps most telling. There has been no major mainstream reckoning with these contradictory facts. The CNN segment aired without challenge. This highlights a protected ecosystem where favored voices face little scrutiny from the networks that platform them. Meanwhile, alternative and independent media outlets, like those run by commentators such as Mary Holland and Polly Tommey of the “Mary & Polly” podcast, have been the ones dissecting the evidence and asking the uncomfortable questions that larger networks will not touch.

This dynamic is the heart of the issue. For decades, figures like Offit have represented a majority view that brooked little public dissent. But the landscape is shifting. A growing community of researchers, physicians, and concerned citizens is actively investigating vaccine effectiveness and safety profiles, often finding the official guarantees lacking.

Offit’s current predicament is a sign that this controlled narrative is slipping. He no longer commands unchallenged authority. The public, armed with information and a healthy skepticism forged through experience, is increasingly driving the conversation, demanding transparency and honesty over polished talking points. The story is no longer Offit’s to dictate; it is being written by the very people who were once told just to listen and obey.

Sources include:

ArmageddonProse.substack.com

X.com

Enoch, Brighteon.ai