Substack: A Forum for Both Sides of the Vaccine Debate

Nature Magazine Piece Poised to Trash Authors Concerned About Vaccines

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

I was contacted by Jack Leeming an editor for Nature magazine, who is working on a story about “how Substack has become a popular place for those involved in the anti-vaccine movement and other areas generally considered to be outside of the scientific consensus.”

“The general thrust of the piece is that Substack has become immensely popular in this area because it lacks content moderation and allows relatively easy monetisation (as well as of course providing a robust newsletter platform). Could you speak to that?”

Nature magazine, as a leading scientific journal, through September 30, 2025, has published extensively on COVID-19 vaccines, with a focus on evidence-based research, reviews, editorials, and analyses. All of their articles have promoted vaccination by downplaying safety, overestimating efficacy, overstating benefits, and extolling the public health value of COVID-19 vaccines, effectively pushing their use. In contrast, NONE of Nature magazine articles have concluded risks outweigh benefits for the general population, advising avoidance, or finding vaccines as harmful or dangerous to the public. Instead, Nature magazine articles propose ways to increase vaccine uptake. This aligns with Nature’s role in supporting vaccines as the principal tool to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

Given extreme vaccine bias by his publisher, I expect Leeming will slant his piece towards discrediting authors publishing on failed efficacy and safety issues with vaccines. He may even try to tarnish all of Substack, so it is important for our readership to understand that Substack has both those who are vaccine-risk-aware and those promoting vaccination as authors on the platform.

More than 50,000 publishers are earning money through paid subscriptions, representing the monetized segment of authors on Substack. For context on the broader ecosystem, Substack reports over 50 million active subscriptions (including free and paid) across all publications, with more than 5 million paid subscriptions as of mid-2025. Tens of millions of readers engage with content weekly.

Substack has writers who are posting studies on vaccine safety as well as those who are vaccine promoters. Vaccine-promotional newsletters often overlap in themes like vaccine equity, outbreak tracking, and countering hesitancy. For instance, many have covered fall vaccine guides or studies showing no links between vaccines and chronic diseases. Substack’s discover sections for “Science” and “Health” may yield more, but they require browsing directly on the platform for real-time recommendations.

Here are some examples of vaccine-promotional substacks that Google brings up first on searches:

Your Local Epidemiologist by Dr. Katelyn Jetelina: Focuses on translating public health science, including vaccine updates, efficacy data, and recommendations for seasonal shots like COVID-19, flu, and RSV. Has many fear-provoking posts about infectious disease outbreaks using them to encourage more vaccination. Publishes twice weekly.

Unbiased Science (theunbiasedscipod.substack.com): Provides independent science communication on vaccines, infectious diseases, and health topics, while mocking the new ACIP panel and republishing worrying posts about vaccine access.

Beyond the Noise by Dr. Paul Offit: Explores vaccine history, policy, and science, often with video discussions; who addresses anti-vaccine claims directly and in doing so mocks Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Sheena’s Substack (sheenacruickshankimmunology.substack.com) by Prof. Sheena Cruickshank: Discusses immunology, vaccine policy changes, and the rationale for vaccination in preventing diseases like measles.

You Can Know Things by Jessica Hockett: Analyzes vaccine communication strategies and why shaming anti-vaxxers backfires, promoting evidence-based approaches to encourage uptake

Miss Trust (misstrustreview.substack.com): Examines health and social issues through critical thinking, including vaccine-related topics, as part of efforts to build trust in science.

Let’s Be Clear (joomi.substack.com) by Joomi Kim: Explains COVID-19 and vaccine topics accessibly for lay audiences, emphasizing scientific facts. A recent post mocked Christianity and the late Charlie Kirk.

Noahpinion by Noah Smith: Covers economics and policy, including analyses of vaccination efforts and their global impacts, supporting widespread immunization.

So you can see that Substack unlike so many other forms of media, allows both sides of issues to be published and this accounts for its popularity. Hopefully Leeming can learn from his assignment about bias, the value of scientific discourse, and why it draws large audiences.

Here are my specific point-by-point responses to Leeming:

Leeming

“The general thrust of the piece is that Substack has become immensely popular in this area because it lacks content moderation and allows relatively easy monetisation (as well as of course providing a robust newsletter platform). Could you speak to that?”

McCullough Response

Content moderation means censorship particularly on the pandemic and childhood vaccine schedule. Substack writers and audiences want uncensored work. Because Substack is very competitive, monetization cannot be considered “relatively easy.”

Leeming

“More specifically those we spoke to allege:

Substack writers including yourself endanger public health through the promotion of anti-vaccine information that isn’t rooted in accepted, peer-reviewed science.”

McCullough Response

FOCAL POINTS substack has published over 2800 works and each one that reviews the peer-reviewed literature cites the exact source. Because the risks of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh theoretical benefits, public health is enhanced not endangered by papers that conclude COVID-19 vaccination should be halted. Below are cited, accepted in peer-reviewed science that have come to that conclusion.

Mead, M. N., Seneff, S., Wolfinger, R., Rose, J., Denhaerynck, K., Kirsch, S., & McCullough, P. A. (2024). COVID-19 Modified mRNA “Vaccines” Part 1: Lessons Learned from Clinical Trials, Mass Vaccination, and the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research, 3(2), 1112–1178.

Mead, M. N., Seneff, S., Rose, J., Wolfinger, R., Hulscher, N., & McCullough, P. A. (2024). COVID-19 Modified mRNA “Vaccines”: Lessons Learned from Clinical Trials, Mass Vaccination, and the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex, Part 2. International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research, 3(2), 1246–1315.

M. Nathaniel Mead, Jessica Rose, William Makis, Kirk Milhoan, Nicolas Hulscher and Peter A. McCullough. Myocarditis after SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination: Epidemiology, outcomes, and new perspectives. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH & INNOVATION. Jan-Mar 2025, VOL. 3, ISSUE 1, pp. 1-43, DOI 10.61577 ijcri.2025.100001 https://reseaprojournals.com/journals/cardiovascular-research/Articles/myocarditis-after-sars-cov-2-infection-and-covid-19-vaccination-epidemiology-outcomes-and-new-perspectives

Hulscher N, Bowden M T., McCullough P A. Review of Calls for Market Removal of COVID-19 Vaccines Intensify: Risks Far Outweigh Theoretical Benefits. Science, Public Health Policy and the Law. 2025 Jan 28; v6.2019-2025

Leeming

“You and other Substackers are profiting from disseminating this information through Substack’s monetisation mechanisms.’

McCullough Response

Followers can receive a free subscription or voluntarily agree to pay monthly or yearly in support of our work. Over 95% of our posts are free of charge. Unlike Nature magazine and its parent company, Springer Nature, that accept pharmaceutical and vaccine advertising, FOCAL POINTS is unbiased and does not accept these sources of revenue that are a source of influence over content.

Leeming

In general, anti-vaccine stances are supported by a small body of evidence compared to the larger weight of evidence for vaccination.

McCullough Response

The manuscripts cited above have over 500 references and conclude the body of evidence weighs against COVID-19 vaccination.

Leeming

“You’re a cardiologist by training but your certification was reportedly revoked by the American Board of Internal Medicine for controversial COVID claims, such as promotion of ivermectin for treating viral infection.”

McCullough Response

My American Board of Internal Medicine certifications are listed on my curriculum vitae as follows

1) Diplomate, American Board of Internal Medicine, Candidate #136084, September, 25, 1991, recertified May 1, 2001, recertified June 10, 2011, recertified April 6, 2021, valid through November 11, 2024, 510 Walnut Street, Suite 1700, Philadelphia, PA 19106-3699

2) Diplomate, American Board of Internal Medicine, Cardiovascular Diseases Subspecialty, Candidate #136084, November, 1997, valid through 2007, recertified October 1, 2007, valid through 2017, recertified September 28, 2017, valid through November 11, 2024, 510 Walnut Street, Suite 1700, Philadelphia, PA 19106-3699

On November 11, 2024 I resigned with rights reserved from ABIM after an over two year dispute concerning ABIM’s COVID-19 misinformation policy. ABIM did not dispute my resignation. I am currently certified by the National Board of Physicians and Surgeons, Certification in Internal Medicine and Cardiovascular Diseases, March 1, 2024 valid through March 31, 2026.

Leeming

“We also describe you as the chief scientific officer for The Wellness Company, a Florida-based dietary supplement and telehealth company.”

McCullough Response

Below is a more comprehensive description

Dr. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, www.peteramcculloughmd.com

President, McCullough Foundation, www.mcculloughfnd.org

Chief Scientific Officer, The Wellness Company, www.twc.health/courage

Author, FOCAL POINTS, https://www.thefocalpoints.com/

The McCullough Report, https://www.americaoutloud.news/author/dr-peter-mccullough/

Author, Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex and NYT Best Seller Vaccines: Mythology, Ideology, and Reality

Dr. McCullough is an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist holding degrees from Baylor University, University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, University of Michigan, and Southern Methodist University. Dr. McCullough has broadly published on a range of topics in medicine with > 1000 publications and > 700 citations in the National Library of Medicine. Dr. McCullough is a well-known public figure in medicine and is a frequent contributor on numerous mainstream and independent media platforms. He has testified multiple times in the US Senate, US House of Representatives, European Parliament, and many state capitals concerning public health policy.

Please subscribe to FOCAL POINTS as a paying ($5 monthly) or founder member so we can continue to bring you the truth.

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

FOCAL POINTS has partnered with Patriot Mobile to defend your medical freedom. Join Patriot Mobile today!