Despite Kennedy's claims, vaccines have been tested in placebo-controlled studies – nearly 260 of them
US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has repeatedly claimed in public statements that most vaccines recommended for children in the US have not been tested against placebos, and particularly inert placebos such as saline solution or water.
'The only vaccine that has been tested in a full-blown placebo trial against an inert placebo was the Covid vaccine,' Kennedy said May 14 in testimony before the US Senate's Health, Labor, Education and Pensions Committee.
'The other 76 shots that children in this country received between birth and 18 years old, none of them have been safety tested in prelicensing studies against the placebo, which means we don't understand the risk profile for those products, and that's something I intend to remedy,' he told Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut.
In 2023, Kennedy told Fox News host Jesse Watters: 'Vaccines are exempt from prelicensing placebo-controlled trials, so that there's no way that anybody can tell the risk profile of those products or even the relative benefits of those products before they're mandated. And we should have that kind of testing.'
HHS is acting on Kennedy's claims, too. The department recently announced it will require all new vaccines be tested in placebo-controlled trials before they're licensed for use, a change it called 'a radical departure from past practices.'
These claims made Dr. Jake Scott's ears perk up. Scott, an infectious disease specialist at Stanford University, knew that the assertions couldn't be true, and now he says he has the proof.
Scott launched a project in April to round up every randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of vaccines in the medical literature, including studies run in other countries, since some vaccines used in the US are tested overseas.
It took five weeks to arrive at a number: There have been 258 placebo-controlled clinical trials of vaccines, according to Scott and a team of volunteers who scoured databases of medical literature. More than half of those studies tested vaccines against inert placebos.
Based on Scott's research, at least nine of the 16 vaccines that are routinely recommended by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for children have been tested against inert placebos, while several more have been tested against active placebos.
In scientific research, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials are considered to generate the highest-quality evidence. That's because they split their study participants into equal groups; some get the study intervention or treatment, while others get a placebo or dummy remedy.
Placebos are often carefully designed to look, taste or even smell like the intervention that's being tested. The idea is to keep both the participants and the researchers themselves in the dark about who's getting the real thing until the end of the study, when the results are analyzed and reported, to prevent any potential bias.
HHS did not respond to CNN's request for comment on the new project's findings or clarification on Kennedy's statements.
On April 22, Scott posted a link to a shared Google spreadsheet online, along with some ground rules about which trials could and couldn't be included. The studies had to be in humans; no animal studies or lab-only investigations allowed. The researchers also used a particular set of search terms, with no limits on dates, languages or pathogens. The team then read each study that was found to make sure it met the specified criteria for inclusion in the review.
'It took off,' Scott said. He estimates that the project had five or six core contributors, but they had help from around the world.
Together, they scoured PubMed, the database of medical research maintained by the National Library of Medicine, as well as reference lists from Cochrane, the World Health Organization and the CDC.
Dr. Isaac Bogoch, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Toronto, said he was blown away when he saw the final list of studies, which included about 2.5 million participants in total.
'The body of evidence for many of the vaccines that we use is very impressive, and the data is robust,' said Bogoch, who didn't contribute to the project. 'This type of work is extremely important in era of unprecedented vaccine hesitancy.'
Scott said the research proves that Kennedy's statements are 'demonstrably false.'
To understand why, it's useful to break down the parts of Kennedy's argument, which he has repeated in different iterations for years.
Kennedy has shifted the goalposts, but there are a few things he has said would make a clinical trial meet his requirements: First, an inert placebo, meaning a placebo control that didn't have any biological effects on the body, like water or saline solution. Kennedy has said that without comparison to an inert placebo, the true side effects of vaccines can't be fully understood.
He also uses the term 'prelicensing,' meaning the research is conducted before the US Food and Drug Administration has approved the vaccines. The FDA sometimes accepts enough evidence to approve a vaccine but then will require more safety studies and monitoring after approval. Kennedy and other critics argue that more safety testing should be done before the vaccines are approved in the first place.
In some instances, Kennedy has also said that these studies should be large, including many participants, and long-running. In general, larger studies have greater statistical power to show subtle differences between groups. And the longer a trial follows its participants, the more confident researchers can be in the durability of their results.
Although scientists agree that larger and longer clinical trials are the most reliable, these studies are expensive to conduct. They can take years to run, which delays the possibility of getting an effective intervention to people. It can also be difficult to find participants who can stick with the monitoring requirements of a study for longer periods of time.
In recent testimony, however, even Kennedy seemed to be softening his stance on this particular stipulation, agreeing that other types of studies can provide solid evidence, too.
'You know that the Cochrane Collaboration in 2016 published a study that showed that the predictive capacity of placebo-controlled trials, which are the gold standard, is actually not any better than good observational trials in retrospective trials. So we can do those kind of studies without subjecting people to an unethical experiment,' Kennedy said during a May 20 Senate budget hearing when asked about the need to test established vaccines in large, lengthy placebo-controlled trials.
In his 2021 book, 'The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health,' Kennedy repeats the claim that vaccines for children haven't been tested against inert placebos, saying that he and groups he's affiliated with have explicitly asked to be shown such studies. He cites two letters between the Informed Consent Action Network or ICAN, a group run by his close associate Del Bigtree, and HHS.
The letter from ICAN asserts that in contrast to most other FDA-approved medications, 'vaccines are not required to undergo long-term double-blind inert-placebo controlled trials to assess safety. In fact, not a single one of the clinical trials for vaccines given to babies and toddlers had a control group receiving an inert placebo.'
The HHS letter refutes this claim: 'Contrary to statements made on page two of your letter, many pediatric vaccines have been investigated in clinical trials that included a placebo.' The letter goes on to say inert placebos are not necessary to understand the safety of a new vaccine, and so they haven't been required.
Still, Scott says the evidence is clear: Of the 258 placebo-controlled vaccine studies he and his colleagues found, about half – 128 – included inert placebos.
When it comes to vaccines routinely recommended for children, specifically, Scott found that at least nine of the 16 on the CDC's regular schedule have been tested against inert placebos: These are the vaccines against Covid-19; rotavirus; polio; influenza; measles, mumps and rubella; human papillomavirus; varicella, or chickenpox; pneumococcal; and H-flu, or Haemophilus influenzae.
One of the largest of these trials was on the polio vaccine. The placebo-controlled part of the study included more than 400,000 grade-schoolers. Half got the inactivated polio vaccine created by Dr. Jonas Salk, and the other half were given injections of an inert placebo, which was saline solution.
The trial was conducted in 1954, and the results were announced in April 1955. So great was the urgency to get the vaccine to kids that the FDA licensed it the same day.
'It's frankly astounding that someone who made such easily disprovable claims is now heading HHS and continues to promote similar misinformation,' Scott said of Kennedy in an email to CNN. 'We compiled this evidence specifically to counter these false narratives with hard data.'
Scott says he and his colleagues hope to have their project published in peer-reviewed medical journal soon. For now, it's available in a publicly posted spreadsheet.
Vaccine trials that don't use inert placebos will sometimes use what are known as active placebos. These comparison shots have some biological effect but don't interfere with scientists' ability to interpret the results of their study.
Active placebos are used for a variety of reasons. In some parts of the world, for example, where it might be difficult to recruit participants, researchers might give the control group an unrelated vaccine to make sure they're getting some benefit by enrolling in the study.
One study published last year in the Lancet, testing a vaccine against malaria, gave participants in the control group a vaccine against rabies instead. Rabies vaccines don't protect against malaria, so they wouldn't interfere with researchers' ability to tell whether the malaria shot actually worked.
Other active placebos in the studies in Scott's project included shots that contained only an adjuvant, an ingredient that's added to vaccines to trigger a stronger immune response.
Dr. Greg Poland, who studies how adults and children respond to vaccines at the Mayo Clinic, said it would be a mistake to assume that active placebos can't be valid and rigorous ways to test vaccines.
Adjuvants, such as aluminum, are often the reason people get soreness around an injection site. Giving just the adjuvant can guard against even psychological bias in control participants who might guess that they didn't get a real vaccine if they didn't feel anything after their shots. It also allows researchers to isolate the benefits and side effects of the vaccine proteins, since everyone got the adjuvant.
'You're literally saying, 'OK, we're testing a vaccine that has ingredient A plus B against a non-vaccine placebo that has ingredient B.' So the only thing different between the two of them is the actual vaccine,' Poland said.
An active comparator might also be used rather than an inert placebo because of ethics. When there's already a vaccine that's considered to be safe and effective against an infection, it's considered unethical to deny study participants the chance to get it. In that case, companies that want to test a new and improved version of a vaccine against an older one would normally have to offer participants in their control group the older vaccine. Many modern vaccines have been compared against older versions of the same vaccine.
Flu vaccines are a good example, Poland says. If you were testing an improved type of flu vaccine, chances are that the board that oversees your clinical trial wouldn't approve a study that used an inert placebo – especially if you were testing it in a vulnerable group, like people over 65, for whom an infection is more likely to be dangerous.
'It's unethical because the recommendation is that everyone, each flu season, receive an influenza vaccine. So it'd be unethical to enroll people in a study where they may just get placebo and not get any benefit of protection,' Poland said.
Poland said he's been puzzled by Kennedy's statements, too. He's concerned that they are getting traction with the public now that Kennedy is the head of the nation's health agencies.
'This notion that there are no placebo-controlled vaccine trials is patently false, but it's a really interesting phenomenon that I have a hard time understanding,' he said.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal cuts ripple through bioscience hub in Hamilton
Protesters march in downtown Hamilton. (Photo by Kathryn Houghton for KFF Health News). HAMILTON — Scientists are often careful to take off their work badges when they leave the campus of one of the nation's top research facilities, here in southwestern Montana's Bitterroot Valley. It's a reflection of the long-standing tension caused by Rocky Mountain Laboratories' improbable location in this conservative, blue-collar town of 5,000 that was built on logging. Many residents are proud of the internationally recognized research unfolding at the National Institutes of Health facility and acknowledge that Rocky Mountain Labs has become an economic driver for Hamilton. But a few locals resent what they consider the elitist scientists at the facility, which has employed about 500 people in recent years. Or they fear the contagious pathogens studied there could escape the labs' well-protected walls. That split widened with the COVID-19 pandemic and the divisions that emerged from mask mandates and vaccine development. In 2023, Matt Rosendale, a Republican who was then a U.S. representative from Montana, falsely tied the lab to the origins of covid in an attempt to cut its funding. Now, Hamilton is a prime example of how the Trump administration's mass federal layoffs and cancellation of research grants are having ripple effects in communities far from Washington, D.C. On an April afternoon, hundreds of people filled the sidewalks at an intersection of Hamilton's usually quiet downtown, waving signs that read 'Hands Off Federal Workers' and 'Stop Strangling Science.' Some driving by honked in support, rolled their windows down, and cheered. Others flipped off the rallygoers and cast insults at them. A passing bicyclist taunted protesters with chants of 'DOGE' — short for the Department of Government Efficiency, the federal initiative led by billionaire Elon Musk to cut costs that has driven mass layoffs and slashed programs. Kim Hasenkrug, a former Rocky Mountain Labs researcher of 31 years, who retired in 2022, joined the crowd. He slammed President Donald Trump's promise to let Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 'go wild' on health issues. 'We're beginning to see what 'going wild' looks like,' Hasenkrug said. 'These cuts will not streamline research. They will throttle it.' As of early May, 41 Rocky Mountain Labs workers had been let go or told their contracts would end this summer, and nine more had retired early, according to researchers employed by the facility. KFF Health News spoke with 10 current or former Rocky Mountain Labs workers who requested anonymity to speak about information that has not been publicly released. The federal government has also slashed billions of dollars for research, including at least $29 million in grants to Montana recipients, ranging from university scientists to the state health department. That's according to HHS data confirmed by KFF Health News. Scientists who remain in Hamilton said research has slowed. They've struggled to buy basic gear amid federal directives that changed how orders are placed. Now, more cuts are planned for workers who buy and deliver critical, niche supplies, such as antibodies, according to researchers at the labs. The Department of Health and Human Services didn't respond to repeated requests for more information on the government's cuts to research, including questions about the changes in Hamilton. Deputy press secretary Emily Hilliard said the department is committed to the 'continuity of essential research.' Some within the lab feel as if they've become public enemies or outcasts, unable to defend themselves without risking their jobs. Postdoctoral scientists just starting their careers are seeing options dwindle. Some workers whose employment contracts expire within days or weeks have been in the dark about whether they'll be renewed. At least one Rocky Mountain Labs scientist moved to another country to research infectious disease, citing 'current turmoil,' according to an email sent from the scientist to co-workers that was reviewed by KFF Health News. 'The remaining staff has been discredited, disrespected, and discouraged from remaining in public service,' Hasenkrug said. The National Institutes of Health is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world. It has 27 institutes and centers focused on understanding illness and disabilities and improving health. The agency's research has helped lead to vaccines against major diseases — from smallpox to COVID — and has been behind the majority of medicines approved for the U.S. market. That research also generated more than $94.5 billion in new economic activity nationwide, according to United for Medical Research, a coalition of research groups and advocates. The Trump administration aims to eliminate roughly 1,200 jobs at the NIH and shrink its budget by 40%. The administration's budget proposal to cut NIH funding calls the agency's spending 'wasteful,' deems its research 'risky,' and accuses it of promoting 'dangerous ideologies.' It's a dramatic political turnabout for the NIH, which for decades enjoyed bipartisan support in Washington. From 2015 to 2023, its annual budget grew by more than $17 billion. As of 2023, Rocky Mountain Labs was one of only 51 facilities in the world with the highest level of biosafety precautions, according to the Global BioLabs mapping project. In April, HHS indefinitely stalled work at another of those labs, the Integrated Research Facility in Frederick, Maryland, Wired reported. Kennedy has said the nation should pause funding infectious disease research, and the White House has said it plans to intensify scrutiny of gain-of-function research, which involves altering a pathogen to study its spread. Hamilton, in Ravalli County, is a place of scientists, ranchers, and outdoor recreationists. Here, 1 in 8 people live below the federal poverty line. Nearly 70% of county residents who participated in the 2024 presidential election voted for Trump, and Trump signs still dot U.S. Highway 93 leading to town. In the thick of the COVID pandemic, the sheriff and county commissioners refused to enforce a statewide mandate to mask in public spaces while Rocky Mountain Labs researchers worked to understand the virus. The lab's work dates to 1900, and even early on it was controversial. Rocky Mountain spotted fever was killing people in the valley. Researchers found the cause — ticks — and worked to eradicate the disease-carrying bugs by requiring ranchers to treat their cattle. That created resentment among locals who 'already harbored a healthy distrust of government-imposed programs,' according to an NIH account. The tension came to a head in 1913 when a 'dipping vat' used to chemically treat cattle was blown up with dynamite and another damaged with sledgehammers. Now, some residents and local leaders are worried about the economic consequences of an exodus of federal workers and their salaries. Most of the county is government-managed public land, and the first wave of federal cuts hit U.S. Forest Service workers who do everything from clear trails to fight wildfires. Rocky Mountain Labs generates hundreds of millions of dollars for the local economy by creating more work for industries including construction and bringing more people into the city's shops, a 2023 University of Montana study found. The rural community is also a base for international vaccine developer GSK due to the lab's presence. Kathleen Quinn, a vice president of communications for the company, said GSK's business with government agencies 'continues as usual' for now amid federal changes and that it's 'too early to say what any longer-term impact could be.' 'Our community is impacted more than most,' said City Councilor Darwin Ernst. He spoke during an overflowing March town hall to discuss the federal government cuts. Hundreds of people turned out on the weeknight asking city councilors to do something. Ernst, a former researcher at the lab who now works as a real estate broker and appraiser, said in an interview he's starting to see more homes enter the market, which he attributed to the atmosphere of uncertainty and former federal workers' having to find jobs elsewhere. 'Someone recently left with her entire family. Because of the layoffs, they can't afford to live here,' he said. 'Some people retire here but that's not everyone.' Jane Shigley said she's been a Hamilton resident for more than 30 years and initially thought the government would find 'some inefficiencies, no big deal.' But now she's worried about her hometown's future. 'Something's going on that we can't control,' Shigley said. 'And the people that it's happening to aren't allowed to talk to us about it.' The City Council sent a letter to federal officials in April asking for formal consultation prior to any significant changes, given Hamilton's 'interdependence' with Rocky Mountain Labs and the federally controlled lands surrounding Hamilton. As of May, city leaders hadn't received a response. People in town are split on how badly the federal cuts will affect Hamilton. Julie Foster, executive director of the Ravalli County Economic Development Authority, said the community survived the decline of logging, and she thinks Rocky Mountain Labs will survive, too. 'It will be here. There may be bumps in the road, but this is a resilient place,' Foster said. Even amid the cuts, Rocky Mountain Labs is in the process of a building expansion that, so far, hasn't stopped. And researchers' work continues. This spring, scientists there helped make the first identification in Montana of a species of tick known to carry Lyme disease. KFF Health News correspondent Rae Ellen Bichell contributed to this report. KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A ‘detox' after Covid vaccination? Experts say it's nonsense
Podcast host Meghan McCain, the former co-host of 'The View,' made headlines when she posted to social media recently in support of a 'detox' supplement to be taken after Covid-19 vaccination or infection. The 'detox' supplement McCain touted costs $89.99 and is one of several versions sold online. It make claims about its ability to 'break down spike protein and disrupt its function' and provide 'your body with unparalleled support for cellular defense and detoxification.' Vaccine experts say such claims are nonsense. 'There's nothing to detox from, because the vaccines themselves are not toxins,' said Dr. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization at the University of Saskatchewan. 'They're not toxic and they're not harmful.' McCain's X post about the supplement has been deleted, but McCain's personalized discount code continued to work on the website of the supplement maker, The Wellness Company. Neither McCain's representatives nor The Wellness Company responded to a request for comment. McCain also posted this week about 'concerning data' about mRNA vaccines and said friends had experienced health problems after getting the Covid-19 shot. As part of the post, she shared a video that suggested material in the vaccines could stick around long-term and change a person's genome. Vaccine experts say that just isn't true. The messenger RNA in Covid-19 vaccines instructs cells in the body to make a certain piece of the virus' spike protein — the structure on the surface of the coronavirus. The mRNA vaccine is like a blueprint that the body uses to train the immune system to recognize the virus that causes Covid and protect against it, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. 'MRNA is only in there in minute amounts,' Schaffner said. 'The spike protein is metabolized. It's broken up by our own body very, very quickly. So it's not in a position to disseminate or be distributed throughout the body requiring some sort of 'detoxification.' 'It's simply not scientifically a valid concept.' Since mRNA is so short-lived, vaccine makers do make a modification that allows it to stick around a little longer than it would otherwise, Rasmussen said. 'But mRNA, even modified mRNA like in these vaccines, does not stay around forever,' Rasmussen said. 'It's still not a very stable molecule.' Rasmussen said she has also read that some believe the lipid nanoparticle used to get the mRNA into the cells lingers and is toxic. The lipid nanoparticle, Rasmussen said, 'also don't stick around forever.' She said they get broken down at about the same rate the mRNA does, 'or even maybe a little before.' Schaffner believes maybe some of the language scientists use to describe how mRNA vaccines work may be unhelpful. 'I wonder if the very name of the protein, this 'spike protein' just makes people uneasy,' Schaffner said. If scientists called it something like the 'key protein' — since it's like a key that goes into a lock in the cell, which enables the protein to get inside 'and then do its good work' — that 'might not have evoked quite as much anxiety,' Schaffner suggested. Rasmussen believes people would still misconstrue the science regardless, particularly with leaders in the Trump administration who have spent years undermining the safety of vaccines or have a history of promoting dubious supplements. 'A lot of this isn't misinformation, it's really disinformation because people who start this stuff know what they're doing,' Rasmussen said. Dr. Pieter Cohen, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, says the availability of vaccine 'detox' products speaks to a bigger problem with the way the United States manages dietary supplements. Unlike pharmaceuticals, which must be tested and approved before they go to market and then comply with strict regulations about how they can be marketed, the US Food and Drug Administration doesn't have the authority to approve dietary supplements before they are marketed. Fear or distrust of Covid-19 vaccines is an easy target for supplement makers, Cohen said. 'This is a perfect scenario for supplements to jump in to the rescue,' Cohen said. 'You manufacture a false health concern, and then you have the solution that you can settle with a supplement. It's really a perfect opportunity for supplement manufacturers to profit from. From something that doesn't even exist.' It's hard, he said, to even define what 'detoxing' from a Covid-19 vaccine would mean. 'Are you trying to wash away the effects that boosted immunity against Covid? Is that the goal? I think it's a very vague, moving sort of target,' Cohen said. 'Or is it more that there's some fear that the Covid vaccine causes more harm than the government's letting on. Then the idea is that you sell these supplements to prevent that mystery harm.' 'I think it's a health fear mongering approach and profiting by the fear,' Cohen added. No vaccine is perfect, the experts said, but the risk with the Covid vaccine is extremely small and the problems like a sore arm or a low-grade fever that some of his patients have experienced resolved quickly. 'That's not something that any supplement will help resolve faster,' Cohen said. Research has consistently shown that the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective, and millions of people have gotten them without serious incident. As of May, the FDA required Covid-19 vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna to use expanded warning labels with more information about the risk of a rare heart condition after vaccination. Some studies have found that Covid-19 infection itself carries a higher risk of myocarditis or pericarditis than vaccination. Schaffner said if there were true problems with any of the Covid vaccines, the country's surveillance system would have caught it by now. That's what happened with the Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine: Surveillance identified a rare risk of a severe blood clotting syndrome, particularly among some women. The vaccine is no longer in use. 'The system works,' Schaffner said. 'These mRNA vaccines are safe, and that's been seen in millions and millions of patients.' What may be even more dangerous, experts say, is the disinformation surrounding vaccines that drives people to want to take a supplement to detox from them in the first place. 'This is a much bigger problem,' Rasmussen said. 'It's important to smack this disinformation down where we can. It's morally wrong and reprehensible.'


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Hundreds of pharmacies are set to close: How it could impact you
(NEXSTAR) — Several retail pharmacy chains have shuttered some of their stores this year, with more on the way for others, like Rite Aid, which filed for bankruptcy in May. It could create what some refer to as 'pharmacy deserts,' areas in which drugstores and the additional services they provide may not be available for miles. And in areas where other pharmacies are picking up the slack, it could have an impact on current customers. 'Closures of major chain pharmacies often create ripple effects across the community,' E. Michael Murphy, an assistant professor of clinical pharmacy at The Ohio State University, told Nexstar via email. Nearby pharmacies, independent or part of a chain, can see 'a sudden increase in patients,' he explained, which could 'lead to longer lines, and increase strain on the health care team.' It could also disrupt your medical care. Shuttering pharmacies in larger cities, like New York City and Philadelphia, may have limited impacts. Take, for example, a Rite Aid located in Philadelphia that has been designated for closure. A three-minute walk down the road will take you to a Walgreens and a local pharmacy. Within smaller communities, that may not be the case. Customers may need to drive to a nearby town to pick up their prescriptions, which 'could have some negative consequences on their adherence to their medication,' Lucas A. Berenbrok, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy, explained to Nexstar. 'For those without reliable transportation, especially older adults or people with disabilities, traveling even a few extra miles can be a serious barrier,' Murphy said. That could lead to delayed access to prescriptions and missed dosages. Closing pharmacies also reduces health access points for people. In addition to filling prescriptions, pharmacies are able to provide vaccines, chronic disease management, urgent consultations, over-the-counter treatments, and certain health tests. 'There's a lot more going on at the pharmacy now than ever before,' Berenbrok explained, outlining how pharmacists helped to administer the COVID vaccine during the pandemic, for example, and the additional services they can provide in some states. He went on to explain that while online pharmacies can help fill the void of shuttered drugstores, they're largely unable to accommodate the additional services pharmacies provide. 'They also assume reliable internet access, digital literacy, and stable housing, which are barriers for many vulnerable patients,' Murphy said. 'For communities losing local pharmacies, online options may fill part of the gap but cannot replace the full range of services a community pharmacist provides.' Berenbrok agreed that mail-order pharmacies have 'a time and place' because of their convenience, but they require planning ahead, which may not be useful for certain medications like antibiotics. If your pharmacy is closing soon, Murphy recommended being proactive and asking your pharmacist where your prescriptions are being sent and whether that pharmacy has your insurance and medication history. He also encouraged asking for a 90-day supply or mail-order option for prescriptions if transportation is a concern. Chains poised to take on former Rite Aid clients, like CVS and Walgreens, say they're prepared to welcome new customers. Even if your prescriptions are not moving to a new pharmacy, you may want to make sure your prescription is being filled a day or two before you need it rather than the same day that your current supply runs out, Berenbrok said. Then, if you're short on time and facing a long line, you won't miss a dose. Murphy also suggested contacting elected officials and urging them to take action. 'While pharmacists are committed to stepping up to meet the need, without adequate state and federal policy changes to address the broken business model that caused the pharmacy to close in the first place, we will continue to see pharmacies close and patients having to navigate the loss of their trusted health care professional.'