Dr. Campbell didn't "shy away from the logical conclusions." (At least not by my definition of the phrase.) He would have been deplatformed if he had uttered the logical conclusions. He spoke elliptically, and even put up signs on his walls, to lead people to arrive at those conclusions without himself speaking them out loud. Intellectuals have always had to do such things to pursue truth under censorship regimes, and those who would learn from them have always had to learn to read between the lines. But westerners haven't had to do it for a lifetime, because we've had mostly-free speech. I thought Campbell did a fine job of dissenting as best he could and deserved major credit for it.

It indeed shouldn't be difficult, scientifically, to determine whether mRNA vaxxes could cause fast-growing or aggressive cancers. The obvious starting point would be animal studies. As you say, Pfizer and Moderna's animal studies can't be trusted to be done right or reported accurately. But, not all nations profited from mRNA shots or widely adopted them. One of those that didn't, and that is now getting screwed over by the U.S., might just think about putting some funding into this. Almost any results, publicly released, could increase anger or divisiveness in the U.S., which is bad for us of course, but good for them.