Kennedy Jr.’s Vaccine Panel Raises Doubts, Shifts Policy in First Meetings
Table of Contents
ATLANTA – Health adn Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has stated his intention to restore public trust in vaccines through a handpicked panel of advisors. What that approach looks like was on full display Thursday and Friday,as the 12-person committee – comprised of several scientists and researchers who have questioned or spread misinformation about vaccines – raised doubts about vaccine safety and effectiveness data presented by CDC experts. Members floated theoretical or unsupported concerns and revisited decades-old vaccine policy based on claims of concerns from parents and patients, rather than public health need or fresh data.
By the end of the two-day meeting, the groupS actions appeared modest, but they added to the moves Kennedy, a longtime vaccine skeptic, and his subordinates have made to limit access to proven shots as taking office. They also underscored a shift in how the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) weighs the risks and benefits of vaccines, moving away from the science-based framework it has used for over a decade.
The panel voted to restrict a combined measles, mumps, rubella and varicella shot (MMRV) to children over age 4, citing a heightened risk of febrile seizures, and pulled back its previous backing of broad administration of Covid shots (though preserving insurance coverage for them). After extensive debate,members also tabled a vote on delaying hepatitis B shots currently given at birth. ACIP’s recommendations require approval by the acting director of the Centers for Disease control and Prevention, Jim O’Neill, to become final.
“I commend the committee for bringing overdue scientific debate on vaccination to the American people,” O’Neill said in a statement.
CDC vaccine panel’s unorthodox meeting raises questions about trust and expertise
The recent meeting of the Centers for Disease control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) deviated significantly from established protocols, sparking concerns among public health experts and raising questions about the panel’s direction. The meeting, focused on vaccine recommendations, was marked by a lack of transparency, exclusion of key stakeholders, and a perceived inexperience with health care policy.
The ACIP meeting broke protocol in other ways: Former CDC Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry testified at the same Senate hearing that she had “significant concerns” about the meeting given that proposed recommendations and other materials weren’t posted publicly ahead of the meeting.
Leading medical groups that would usually offer insight and outlook have been cut out,even as the panel’s chair opened the meeting by calling for more public debate on vaccines and at times during public comment periods,panel members milled about,out of their seats.
Additionally, employees of the CDC’s vaccine center were completely shut out of readiness for the meeting, two CDC employees with knowledge of the situation told STAT, though CDC experts did present data and take questions from members. In the past, the center’s leadership has presented at the meetings, but this time they did not.
Combined with the deviation from norms was a sense of the panel’s inexperience with health care policy. Members repeatedly asked for more information about the effects of their votes before casting them. At one point, the committee voted to maintain broad coverage of the combination MMRV shot in a program that offers free vaccines, and then reversed itself a day later. The panel’s chair, Martin Kulldorff, said members didn’t understand the question being asked during the initial vote.
At another point, members debated whether or not to reccommend that states require prescriptions for Covid-19 vaccines, an area the committee doesn’t typically weigh in on. They narrowly voted not to.
Advisers, outside experts weigh trust in shots
One member, Robert Malone, a researcher who has both claimed to have invented part of mRNA technology and denounced it, gave the clearest distillation of the panel’s thinking on revisiting the hepatitis B vaccine, a shot that’s been recommended for all newborns in the U.S. for decades.
“The signal that is prompting this is not one of safety, it’s one of trust,” Malone said. “And it’s one of parents uncomfortable with this medical procedure being performed at birth in a rather unilateral fashion without significant informed consent at a time in particular when there has been a loss of trust in the public health enterprise and in vaccines in general.”
Concerns raised at CDC Advisory Panel Meetings Cast Doubt on Vaccine Safety and Efficacy
Recent meetings of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) advisory committees have been marked by skepticism and questioning of established vaccine protocols, with panelists raising concerns about data reliability, potential side effects, and long-term consequences.
During a discussion regarding the maternal RSV vaccine,Senator Bill Cassidy questioned the necessity of vaccinating all infants,regardless of their mother’s vaccination status,stating he wasn’t sure he “see[s] the case” for universal vaccination based on the presented data.
Further fueling concerns, a panelist, Vicky Pebsworth, a nurse with a nonprofit questioning vaccine safety, highlighted increased irritability and fussiness in babies following vaccination, suggesting thes could be “early symptoms of neurologic problems” lacking long-term follow-up data.
Similar doubts emerged during a discussion on Covid-19 vaccines. Panelists, including Robert Malone and pediatrician Cody Meissner, challenged the accuracy of CDC hospitalization data. The discussion devolved into a cross-examination of CDC and vaccine manufacturer representatives (Pfizer and Moderna), with panelists questioning the safety and effectiveness of the Covid-19 vaccines. Following the meeting, panelist Dr. Levi reported a lack of “satisfactory answers” from the CDC and manufacturers.
Presentations focused on theoretical risks, such as the potential for Covid vaccines to linger in the body and cause issues, were also given.One presenter acknowledged a lack of evidence linking the vaccines to cancer, despite presenting case reports of individuals diagnosed with cancer post-vaccination.
## CDC Advisory Panel Faces Scrutiny as it Re-examines Vaccine Schedules
The centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is under increased scrutiny as it re-examines the U.S. vaccine schedule,including perhaps revisiting recommendations for vaccines like hepatitis B and COVID-19. This comes amid growing influence from vaccine skeptics, raising concerns among public health experts about the potential for politically motivated decisions impacting public health. The panel’s recent deliberations, particularly regarding COVID-19 vaccination for pregnant people and infants, have highlighted internal disagreements and a commitment to reviewing all approved vaccines.### Internal Debate Over COVID-19 Vaccination
Recent meetings of the ACIP working group revealed internal debate regarding COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for pregnant individuals and children under two years old.According to reporting by STAT News, a majority of the working group initially leaned *against* recommending the vaccine for these groups, ultimately deciding not to vote on the matter.
This decision prompted dissenting members to present data supporting vaccination for these vulnerable populations, emphasizing the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines.Pediatrician Henry Bernstein, a member of the working group, stated, “Covid-19 vaccines are highly safe and effective. Or if we don’t want to say safe and effective, they work.” STAT News
### Broader Vaccine schedule Review
The ACIP’s review extends beyond COVID-19. The committee is prepared to “review every vaccine” periodically, according to ACIP liaison Dr. Amanda Levi. STAT News The hepatitis B vaccine is also under consideration for potential schedule adjustments, sparking debate about the optimal timing for administration.
This broader review is occurring against a backdrop of increasing influence from vaccine skeptics within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).STAT News Public health experts have expressed alarm over the hiring of individuals skeptical of vaccines by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., raising concerns about potential bias in policy decisions.
### Addressing Concerns and Maintaining a Science-Driven Approach
Dr. levi acknowledged the “drama” surrounding the group’s actions but asserted that the ACIP is adhering to its mission and operating in a “science-driven way.” STAT News The panel is scheduled to meet again next month, and while the specific agenda remains unclear, revisiting the hepatitis B debate and further discussion of vaccines for pregnant people are possibilities.
### Key Takeaways:
* The CDC’s ACIP is reviewing the U.S. vaccine schedule, including COVID-19 and hepatitis B vaccines.* Internal disagreements exist within the ACIP regarding COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for pregnant people and infants.
* Public health experts are concerned about the growing influence of vaccine skeptics within HHS.
* the ACIP maintains it is committed to a science-driven approach to vaccine policy.
### Understanding the ACIP and Vaccine Recommendations
The ACIP is a group of medical and public health experts that advises the CDC on which vaccines should be used in the United States. Their recommendations are not legally binding, but they are generally adopted by the CDC and influence vaccination policies nationwide.the ACIP reviews data on vaccine safety,effectiveness,and cost-effectiveness to develop its recommendations. CDC – ACIP
The current U.S. vaccine schedule is designed to provide protection against a range of infectious diseases, starting in infancy and continuing throughout life. Vaccines are considered one of the most prosperous public health interventions in history,preventing millions of cases of disease and saving countless lives. CDC – Why vaccinate?
The ongoing review by the ACIP underscores the importance of continuous evaluation of vaccine policies to ensure they remain aligned with the latest scientific evidence and public health needs.
*Matthew Herper and Anil Oza contributed reporting.*