Covid jabs ‘might raise the risk of cancer’, contentious study claims
A bombshell study published in Biomarker Research, a journal under Springer Nature, has reignited the heated debate over Covid-19 vaccines. Korean researchers, analyzing health records from more than 8.4 million adults between 2021 and 2023, claim that Covid jabs may increase the risk of six types of cancer—including lung, breast, prostate, gastric, thyroid, and colorectal cancers.
According to their findings, vaccinated individuals over 65 faced the highest risks. The study reported a 35% higher chance of thyroid cancer, 34% higher for gastric cancer, 53% higher for lung cancer, and an alarming 68% higher risk for prostate cancer. Breast and colorectal cancers saw risk increases of 20% and 28% respectively.
The authors concluded that cDNA and mRNA vaccines were “associated with increased cancer risks”, noting gender-specific vulnerabilities: vaccinated men appeared more vulnerable to gastric and lung cancers, while women were more susceptible to thyroid and colorectal cancers.
Why This Study Matters
Unlike anonymous claims or fringe sources, this research was published under the umbrella of one of the world’s largest scientific publishers. That fact alone has given it more visibility—and controversy—than many previous claims about vaccine side effects.
The authors stopped short of identifying a biological mechanism behind their conclusions. Critics argue this is a major flaw, while supporters say the absence of explanation doesn’t erase the statistical correlations the study highlighted.
Fierce Backlash From Experts
Mainstream experts wasted no time slamming the findings. Dr. Benjamin Mazer of Johns Hopkins University called the study “superficially alarming” and “hugely overblown,” noting that no carcinogen can trigger detectable cancer growth so quickly.
Other academics pointed to Korean cancer data from 2022, which showed no rise in the very cancers flagged in the study despite widespread vaccination. Cancer Research UK also dismissed the study, stating there is “no good evidence” linking Covid jabs to cancer, and emphasized that mRNA technology is being tested to prevent cancers, not cause them.
Political and Public Fallout
The study landed in the middle of a firestorm over Covid vaccine safety and political speech. Reform UK recently distanced itself from cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra after he suggested Covid jabs were linked to the King and Princess of Wales’s cancers. His comments, branded “shockingly irresponsible” by UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting, reflect a growing divide between those who defend the vaccine program and those who question its long-term safety.
Malhotra has previously claimed mRNA shots can alter genes and that their harms may outweigh their benefits—a position echoed by some but ridiculed by many in the scientific establishment.
A History of Contentious Studies
This isn’t the first time Springer Nature has been caught in controversy over vaccine research. In 2023, it was forced to retract a paper that wrongly claimed Covid vaccines killed 280,000 Americans. That study was quickly seized on by anti-vaccine activists worldwide.
The Korean cancer study may face the same fate—or it may become a touchstone for those insisting that the risks of Covid jabs remain underexplored.
Why This Story Can’t Be Ignored
Whether dismissed as pseudoscience or hailed as overdue research, the Korean study underscores one reality: the debate over vaccine safety is far from over. The medical establishment insists the benefits of Covid vaccination—an estimated 20 million lives saved in the first year alone—far outweigh the risks. But studies like this keep fueling public skepticism, especially among those who’ve witnessed firsthand the severe side effects already acknowledged, such as myocarditis and blood clotting disorders.
The unanswered question is whether governments, health institutions, and publishers will allow such research to remain in public view—or move quickly to discredit and bury it.
Key Takeaway
The Korean study’s findings may be controversial, and its critics are loud, but it has opened another front in the battle over vaccine transparency. With millions of people still affected by mandates, booster campaigns, and long-term health concerns, the call for honest, open research into all risks and side effects has never been louder.