Print
A Surge in Mysterious Pet Illnesses
Across the country, pet owners are reporting alarming changes in their animals’ health. Cancer diagnoses in cats and dogs are climbing. Autoimmune disorders are spreading. And perhaps most disturbing, there are rising cases of sudden, unexplained deaths in pets—leaving veterinarians baffled and families devastated.
Cats who typically retreat in silence during illness are now howling in pain, clawing at their own faces, and exhibiting erratic, terrifying behavior. For many, it’s a living nightmare—and one that’s becoming too common to dismiss as coincidence.
A Hidden Agenda Against Pet Ownership?
For years, influential voices in global policymaking circles have questioned the sustainability of traditional pet ownership. CNN, for example, recently ran a piece titled “Our Pets Are Part of the Climate Problem,” recommending that Americans ditch their furry companions for reptiles to reduce carbon emissions.
Bloomberg echoed similar sentiments, suggesting pet euthanasia as a way to fight inflation. Celebrities like Emma Thompson even proposed eating pets in the name of survival. While these proposals may have seemed absurd or satirical at first, they may point to something darker at work.
Buried Evidence in Veterinary Studies
What if there’s more to these messages than misguided climate activism? According to whistleblowers and concerned researchers, a growing body of veterinary studies reveals the introduction of experimental biotechnology into the pet vaccine system—without the informed consent of pet owners.
At the center of this storm is a familiar figure: Bill Gates. Through funding of Pfizer’s veterinary subsidiary Zoetis, Gates and his allies have allegedly enabled the stealth rollout of mRNA-based vaccines into wildlife and possibly domestic pets.
In a quiet but extensive study involving deer on Staten Island, 100 animals were captured, PCR-tested, and injected with an experimental mRNA vaccine—all funded by the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative and Zoetis. As hunters’ magazines reported on this, few in the mainstream media paid attention.
What the Science Says About mRNA Rabies Vaccines
Several “peer-reviewed” studies now confirm the development of mRNA vaccines for rabies. A 2024 paper by Chinese pharma researchers outlines the design of a novel rabies mRNA vaccine that they say demonstrated potential protection in mice and rhesus macaques.
Other findings, such as those published in PLOS and JAMA, report similar supposed breakthroughs.
A 2017 phase one trial in humans (with only a handful of participants) showed that mRNA vaccines administered with “needle-free” devices triggered immunogenicity in 71% of intradermal recipients and 46% of transmuscular recipients. Some adverse reactions were observed… Bell’s palsy, for example. But the details remain sketchy, and no long-term studies have been done.
Another 2022 animal study tested the efficacy of an mRNA rabies vaccine called LVRNA001 in both mice (post-exposure safety studied for only 14 days) and dogs (post-exposure safety studied for only 90 days). Big Veterinary Pharma claims the results were stunning. They claim LVRNA001 offered 100% protection to dogs post-exposure, whereas the traditional inactivated vaccine only protected 33%. But where are the long-term studies? Remember, long-term studies take years to determine safety. No such studies exist to my knowledge.
What Veterinarians Are Saying
Despite the short-term study data, a growing number of experienced veterinarians are speaking out—concerned that the same technology being praised for human and animal disease prevention may also carry unintended consequences.
Dr. Judy Jasek, a holistic vet, points out a link between the rise in younger pets developing cancer and the introduction of new vaccine technologies, including mRNA. She questions the lack of transparency around vaccine ingredients and the absence of long-term safety data.
Another outspoken voice is Dr. John Robb, a Connecticut veterinarian placed on probation for refusing to over-vaccinate animals according to state mandates. Robb argues that the one-size-fits-all approach—administering the same dose of rabies vaccine to a 150-pound Great Dane as to a 3-pound poodle—is not only illogical but dangerous. In his practice, he witnessed pets suffer tumors at injection sites, autoimmune disorders, and sudden deaths following routine shots.
Dr. Robb claims many of these protocols are driven not by animal welfare, but by pharmaceutical profit motives. His commitment to personalized dosing and reduced vaccine schedules has placed him at odds with regulators, but he continues to advocate for pet health over industry interests.
A Call to Question and Protect
The central concern isn’t that mRNA technology itself is inherently harmful, but that it’s being introduced without transparency, consent, or adequate long-term study—especially in veterinary medicine, where regulation and oversight are more lax than in human health.
As many point out, the protocols for vaccinating pets have grown bloated and unscientific, pushing more vaccines for more diseases more often, while ignoring the real-world outcomes being reported in clinics and homes across the country by experienced veterinarians.
If we value the lives and health of our pets, then it’s time to question the systems behind their medical care. Are these vaccines truly necessary? Are they properly tested? Are we being told the whole story? The emerging evidence suggests we may not be.
What began with whispered warnings and obscure studies is becoming a loud, urgent call for scrutiny. For those who believe our pets deserve the same dignity, protection, and freedom from coercion that we demand for ourselves, the time to act is now.
Ask your veterinarian if mRNA vaccines are right for your pet.
