South Carolina Bill Would Ban mRNA Vaccines Over Serious Safety Concerns

Lawmakers cite serious concerns about DNA contamination, shedding, and potential fetal harm.

This article originally appeared on Jon Fleetwood’s Substack and was republished with permission.

Guest post by Jon Fleetwood

South Carolina lawmakers have introduced a bill that would ban healthcare professionals from administering synthetic mRNA-based gene therapies, including COVID-19 vaccines, citing contamination, long-term safety concerns, and the risk of genetic damage to future generations.

If you want to ban mRNA- and DNA-based jabs in your state, you can send this bill template—backed by renowned health experts—to your legislators.

Find your legislators here.

State Representative Josiah Magnuson (R-38) announced the filing in a Thursday Twitter/X post, writing:

“This week I filed H4262 to take synthetic mRNA gene therapies such as the Covid-19 shot off the market in SC. The bill would not affect the development of mRNA treatments for noninfectious diseases such as cancer.”

Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, whose groundbreaking lawsuit forced the FDA to remove its anti-ivermectin social media posts in March 2024, celebrated the move.

“Add South Carolina to the list of states calling for an end to Covid mRNA shots,” she wrote in an X post.

HB 4262, introduced March 27, 2025, by Reps. Magnuson, Rankin, Edgerton, Duncan, Kilmartin, Cromer, and more than a dozen other co-sponsors, would amend the South Carolina Code to prohibit the use of certain mRNA products and impose strict penalties on violators.

“Synthetic messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA)-based gene therapies, such as the COVID-19 vaccine, have caused substantial numbers of deaths, disabilities, and a wide range of serious adverse events,” the bill states.

The bill affirms mRNA-based products are “contaminated with DNA fragments, metallic particles, and other undisclosed and/or otherwise poorly characterized adulterants.”

It warns that no long-term studies have been completed on shedding, fertility, teratogenicity, mutagenicity, or cancer risk.

“The risk of integration of synthetic mRNA-based gene therapies and/or associated DNA fragment adulterants into the human genome of either somatic or germ cells are uncharacterized,” the legislation explains, adding that any germline integration “creates risk of random human genomic modifications being passed on to the next generation of Americans.”

The measure blasts the lack of informed consent for recipients, pointing out that individuals are “not provided adequate information both as to the nature of the harm posed to them” and that they’re barred from seeking compensation under current federal law.

“Therefore,” the bill states, they “do not have the ability to give valid consent to have medical products employing this material or the delivery procedure administered.”

Significantly, lawmakers assert that the spike proteins in mRNA COVID shots may “be communicable to others (by a process known as ‘shedding’) and may cause side effects or harm even in individuals who are not the intended recipient.”

HB 4262 would strictly prohibit healthcare professionals from administering any “synthetic mRNA-based gene therapy product” within the state, unless used to treat noninfectious diseases such as cancer or rare genetic disorders.

It defines “synthetic mRNA-based gene therapy” as any product that introduces foreign genetic material into human cells to exert medical effects through transcription, translation, genomic integration, or genetic modification.

This includes:

• Standard synthetic mRNA

• Modified mRNA with pseudouridine

• Self-amplifying mRNA (saRNA)

• Any related biologic meant to prevent or mitigate communicable disease

Violating the proposed law would carry harsh penalties:

“Intentional or wilful violation… shall result in a suspension of the healthcare professional’s license… for no less than one year,” the bill states. Licensing boards could also apply additional penalties and fines at their discretion.

Licensing boards would be required to report any violations to the Director of the Department of Public Health, who must:

“Keep record of the violations for no less than seven years and… inform the General Assembly of the number and nature of violations no less than annually.”

The legislation was introduced and read for the first time in the South Carolina House on March 27 and was referred to the Committee on Medical, Military, Public and Municipal Affairs.

If passed and signed into law, the act would take effect immediately upon approval by the Governor.

The bill can be read in full here.

With South Carolina now taking the lead, HB 4262 marks a bold legislative stand against what lawmakers call an “inadequately characterized potential public health threat”—and it could become the blueprint for other states ready to draw the line.

Copyright 2025 Jon Fleetwood

---