Pfizer vs. Moderna: A 37% Higher Mortality Risk? Let’s Talk About It.

We need more long-term studies on vaccines. This should not be political!

A new preprint study out of Florida just dropped a data bomb—and it’s one parents, physicians, and policymakers can’t ignore.

Researchers led by MIT’s Retsef Levi, in collaboration with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo, reviewed over 1.4 million adults who received either the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. Their findings? The Pfizer shot was associated with a 37% higher risk of all-cause mortality compared to Moderna.

That’s not a typo.

Let’s break it down:

• All-cause mortality was 847.2 deaths per 100,000 in Pfizer recipients, compared to 617.9 with Moderna.

• Cardiovascular deaths? 53% higher with Pfizer.

• COVID-related deaths? 88% higher with Pfizer.

• Non-COVID mortality? Still 35% higher.

And remember—this is a head-to-head comparison between two approved mRNA vaccines, not vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals.

Wait—Pfizer Has Less mRNA. Shouldn’t That Mean It’s Safer?

That’s part of what makes this data so startling. Moderna’s vaccine contains roughly three times more mRNA than Pfizer’s, yet Pfizer recipients had higher death rates across the board. Why? The authors suggest it could be related to lipid nanoparticle composition, manufacturing differences, or even DNA contamination—a topic gaining international attention.

But here’s where we hit a frustrating wall: we still don’t have the robust placebo-controlled trials many of us have been asking for since 2020. Without a true unvaccinated comparison group, we can’t draw absolute conclusions about baseline risk.

Still, these numbers should be more than enough to pause and reassess.

Let’s Pause Right Here

The key takeaway isn’t to panic or to argue over which shot is “better.” The real issue is that we still do not understand everything vaccines do in the body—especially when it comes to non-specific effects (things that happen beyond the immune protection a vaccine is designed to offer). These include things like inflammation, cardiovascular strain, and long-term immune system modulation—both beneficial and harmful.

And we certainly don’t have enough long-term, placebo-controlled studies tracking real-world health outcomes over months or years.

Why Aren’t We Demanding This For Every Vaccine?

The idea that we should rigorously study vaccines over the long term shouldn’t be controversial. And yet somehow, it still is.

If we truly want the safest vaccines products, we need more studies like this—across all vaccine products, not just COVID. We need:

• Transparent reporting on long-term health outcomes

• A better understanding of how different vaccine platforms affect the body

• And a willingness to ask tough questions without fear of backlash or cancellation

The Bigger Picture

This study adds to a growing body of literature calling for more transparency, better long-term safety monitoring, and individualized risk assessment—especially when it comes to young, low-risk populations.

This isn’t about “anti-vax” versus “pro-vax.” This is about informed consent. About being honest that not all vaccines—or vaccine outcomes—are the same. .

Final Thought

If you’re feeling exhausted trying to make sense of the ever-changing vaccine landscape—you’re not alone. But this study is exactly why we need to keep looking at the data, asking tough questions, and refusing to accept that skepticism equals extremism.

More nuance. Less noise.

Let’s keep the conversation honest, open, and science-forward.

—
Dr. Joel “Gator” Warsh, Integrative Pediatrician

Author of Between a Shot and a Hard Place

---

Source: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.04.25.25326460v1