Medical organizations sue RFK Jr., HHS over vaccine policies
The lawsuit was filed in Massachusetts and alleges the removal of healthy children and pregnant women from the recommendation to receive COVID-19 vaccines is part of Kennedy's demonstrated 'pattern of hostility toward established scientific processes.'
Kennedy announced in May that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would no longer be recommending COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women. The agency later updated its guidance to say that healthy children 'may receive' the vaccine, while providing 'no guidance' for pregnant women.
Plaintiffs include the American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, American Public Health Association, Infectious Diseases Society of America, Massachusetts Public Health Association, Massachusetts Public Health Alliance and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.
An unnamed female physician in Massachusetts who is currently pregnant and is seeking a COVID-19 vaccine on the guidance of her doctors, referred to as 'Jane Doe' in the suit, is also suing over the directive.
Along with Kennedy, the lawsuit is also suing Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary, National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya and acting CDC Director Matthew Buzzelli.
The plaintiffs allege that Kennedy's directive to remove children and pregnant women from the COVID-19 vaccine schedule violated the Administrative Procedure Act. They argued his decision was rife with 'arbitrariness and capriciousness,' pointing to his admission that his opinions on vaccines are 'irrelevant' and his belief that people should not be 'taking medical advice' from him.
They pointed to Kennedy's firing and remaking of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices as evidence of his agenda to undermine trust in vaccines.
'This administration is an existential threat to vaccination in America, and those in charge are only just getting started. If left unchecked, Secretary Kennedy will accomplish his goal of ridding the United States of vaccines, which would unleash a wave of preventable harm on our nation's children,' said Richard Hughes, partner at Epstein Becker Green and lead counsel for plaintiffs.
'I will say this is unprecedented. Our clients are not litigious organizations. They don't want to be in court, and certainly we do not like that we're in the position of having to sue the Secretary of Health and Human Services, our nation's chief health officer,' Hughes said. 'So this is a position that I don't think they want to be in, but it's necessary.'
The suit asks that Kennedy's directive be declared unlawful, that COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for pregnant women be restored, and that Kennedy announce the reinstated guidance on the social media platform X.
They also ask that the defendants be blocked from enforcing, publicizing or encouraging Kennedy's directive.
Georges Benjamin, president of the APHA, said the goal of this lawsuit is to 'establish a rational scientific process to get into decision making, to recognizing that the system has worked for many, many, many years in an effective manner. And if you use the evidence and get the guidance of these experts, you'll get a good outcome.'
When reached for comment, an HHS spokesperson said, 'The Secretary stands by his CDC reforms.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Medical Groups Sue RFK Jr. For Assault On Science Over Unlawful COVID-19 Vaccine Rollbacks
In a significant legal challenge that could reshape the future of public health policy in the United States, a powerful alliance of leading medical and public health organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American College of Physicians (ACP), and the American Public Health Association (APHA), filed a lawsuit on Monday against Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The plaintiffs contend that Secretary Kennedy has launched an 'assault on science, public health, and evidence-based medicine' through unilateral and arbitrary changes to COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for children and pregnant individuals. This unprecedented legal action seeks to halt what the coalition describes as an 'existential threat to vaccination in America,' arguing that Kennedy's directives, including the controversial dismissal of expert advisors from the CDC's immunization committee, are endangering the nation's long-standing, science-based vaccine infrastructure and, critically, the health of its most vulnerable populations. Trending: Tired of Grid Failures and Charging Deserts? This Startup Has a Solar Fix and $25M+ in Sales — The comprehensive lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, names the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as defendants. The plaintiffs, which also include the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Massachusetts Public Health Alliance (MPHA), the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), and a pregnant physician, assert that Kennedy acted 'arbitrarily and capriciously' by altering COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for children and pregnant people without scientific basis. This follows Secretary Kennedy's public statement in May, where he expressed pleasure at the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine for healthy children and pregnant women from CDC recommended immunization schedules. A critical aspect of the lawsuit's complaint is Secretary Kennedy's alleged unjust dismissal of 17 members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). These experts were reportedly replaced with individuals known for espousing anti-vaccine viewpoints. Dr. Susan J. Kressly, President of the AAP, underscored the gravity of these actions, stating, 'This wasn't just sidelining science. It's an attack on the very foundation of how we protect families and children's health. And the consequences could be dangerous.' The lawsuit further details a pattern of interference, including blocked CDC communications, delayed or canceled meetings of CDC and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) vaccine advisers, and the announcement of studies to investigate non-existent links between vaccines and plaintiffs are seeking both preliminary and permanent injunctions to reverse Secretary Kennedy's rescissions of COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. They also request a declaratory judgment to legally pronounce these changes as unlawful. Richard H. Hughes IV, lead counsel for the plaintiffs and partner at Epstein Becker Green, voiced grave concerns, asserting, 'This administration is an existential threat to vaccination in America, and those in charge are only just getting started. If left unchecked, Secretary Kennedy will accomplish his goal of ridding the United States of vaccines, which would unleash a wave of preventable harm on our nation's children.' The lawsuit alleges that the Directive is but one example of the Secretary's agenda to dismantle the long-standing, Congressionally-authorized, science- and evidence-based vaccine infrastructure that has prevented the deaths of untold millions of Americans. The filing highlights that the Secretary's dismantling of the vaccine infrastructure must end, and halting this effort begins with vacating the Directive. Per a recent media report, Dr. Vinay Prasad, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) top vaccine official, overruled agency scientists to limit approval of two COVID-19 vaccines, despite internal recommendations to clear them for broader use. FDA scientists had recommended full approval for updated COVID vaccines from Novavax Inc. (NASDAQ:NVAX) and Moderna Inc. (NASDAQ:MRNA) for individuals aged 12 and older, citing favorable risk-benefit analyses. But Prasad restricted the shots to those at higher risk, seniors and people with underlying health conditions, arguing that declining hospitalization and death rates from COVID-19 shifted the balance of risks and benefits. While distinct from the HHS lawsuit, this report underscores a broader climate of scrutiny and debate surrounding vaccine policy. The AAP has a history of pursuing legal action against the federal government, regardless of political affiliation. Past instances include a 1983 lawsuit against HHS regarding life-sustaining treatment for infants and separate lawsuits against the FDA in 2016 and 2018 concerning graphic warnings on cigarettes and e-cigarette regulation, respectively. Read Next: Named a TIME Best Invention and Backed by 5,000+ Users, Kara's Air-to-Water Pod Cuts Plastic and Costs — And You Can Invest At Just $6.37/Share Bezos' Favorite Real Estate Platform Launches A Way To Ride The Ongoing Private Credit Boom Photo by lev radin via Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? This article Medical Groups Sue RFK Jr. For Assault On Science Over Unlawful COVID-19 Vaccine Rollbacks originally appeared on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Los Angeles Times
3 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Life expectancy in California still hasn't rebounded since the pandemic
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the virus caused life expectancy in California to drop significantly. It's now been over two years since officials declared the pandemic-related public health emergency to be over. And yet, life expectancy for Californians has not fully recovered. Today, however, the virus has been replaced by drug overdoses and cardiovascular disease as the main causes driving down average lifespans. A new study published in JAMA by researchers from UCLA, Northwestern, Princeton and Virginia Commonwealth University finds that Californians lived, on average, nearly a year less in 2024 than they did in 2019. The shortfall of 0.86 years signals that only about two-thirds of the state's pandemic-era losses of 2.92 years have been reversed. Using mortality data from the California Comprehensive Death Files and population estimates from the American Community Survey, the researchers calculated annual life expectancy from 2019 to 2024, breaking the figures down by race, ethnicity, income and cause of death. While the COVID-19 virus was the primary factor in life expectancy declines during the pandemic's peak, accounting for 61.6% of the life expectancy gap, its impact has significantly lessened. In 2024, COVID-19 accounted for only 12.8% of the life expectancy gap compared to 2019, while drug overdoses and cardiovascular disease contributed more — 19.8% and 16.3%, respectively. For Black and Hispanic Californians, recovery has been even slower. Life expectancy for Black residents in 2024 remained 1.48 years below 2019 levels, while for Hispanic residents it was 1.44 years lower. In contrast, the gap for white residents was 0.63 years, and for Asian residents, who have the highest life expectancy in the state at 85.51 years, it was 1.06 years. Overall, the life expectancy for Black Californians in 2024 was under 73.5 years, more than a dozen years lower than that of Asian Californians. Janet Currie, a co-author of the study and professor at Princeton University, noted that these disparities are especially striking. 'You saw the very big hit that Hispanic people and Black people took during the pandemic,' she said, 'but you also see that Black people in particular are still not caught up.' She added that while Hispanic populations saw a faster rebound, they too remain behind. Income-based disparities in life expectancy persist in stark form. Californians living in the lowest-income census tracts (the bottom quartile) experienced a 0.99-year gap in 2024 compared to 2019, while those in the highest-income quartile had a slightly smaller 0.85-year gap. However, the overall life expectancy difference between these groups, 5.77 years, was nearly identical to the pre-pandemic gap of 5.63 years, suggesting that income-based health disparities persist even as pandemic impacts recede. The study highlights drug overdoses as a primary post-pandemic driver of reduced life expectancy. Black Californians and residents of low-income areas were especially affected. In 2023, drug overdoses contributed nearly a full year (0.99 years) to the life expectancy deficit for Black Californians and over half a year (0.52) for residents of low-income areas. That said, there are signs that state and national efforts to address the overdose crisis may be yielding early results. The number for Black Californians declined to 0.55 years in 2024 while it declined to 0.26 years for residents in low income areas; in the same time frame, the statewide number dropped from 0.4 years to 0.17 years. Currie attributed the initial surge in overdose deaths in part to the pandemic itself — there were disruptions in access to treatment, and many Californians suffered greater isolation. While she welcomed the recent progress, she cautioned that the share of deaths attributable to overdoses remains high and emphasized that this was 'one of the real bad consequences of the pandemic.' Meanwhile, cardiovascular disease is now the leading contributor to life expectancy loss among high-income Californians. In 2024, it accounted for 0.22 years of the gap for the wealthiest quartile, more than COVID-19 did at 0.10 years. The authors note this is consistent with statewide rising rates of obesity, which may be playing a role. Tyler Evans, chief medical officer and CEO of Wellness Equity Alliance as well as the author of the book 'Pandemics, Poverty, and Politics: Decoding the Social and Political Drivers of Pandemics from Plague to COVID-19,' emphasized how the pandemic exacerbated long-standing health inequities. 'These chronic health inequities were further amplified as the result of the pandemic,' he said. While investments in social determinants of health initially helped mitigate some of the worst outcomes, he added, 'the funding dried up,' making recovery harder for communities already at greater risk of poor outcomes. Evans also pointed to a broader pattern of overlapping health crises that he described as a 'syndemic,' a convergence of epidemics like addiction, chronic disease and poor access to care that interact to worsen outcomes for historically marginalized populations. 'Until we invest in that sort of foundation long term, the numbers will continue to decline,' he said. 'California should be a leader in health improvement outcomes in the country, not a state that continues to have our survival decline.' Although the findings are limited to California and based on preliminary 2024 data, the study provides an early glimpse into post-pandemic mortality trends ahead of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's national life expectancy dataset, expected to be published later this year. California, home to one-eighth of the U.S. population, provides valuable insight into how racial, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities continue to shape public health. Ultimately, the study highlights how although the most visible impacts of COVID-19 may have faded, their ripple effects, compounded by ongoing structural inequities, continue to shape life and death in California. The pandemic may have accelerated long-standing public health challenges, and post-pandemic recovery, the study makes clear, has been uneven and incomplete. Currie warned that further cuts to Medicaid and public hospitals could make these gaps even worse. 'We know what to do. We just don't do it,' she said.
Time Magazine
4 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Measles Cases Hit a 33-Year High. Will Other Diseases Follow?
The number of measles cases in the U.S. has reached a 33-year record high, years after it was officially eliminated in the country, prompting public health experts to sound the alarm that other diseases could experience a similar resurgence. There have been 1,288 confirmed measles cases in the U.S. this year as of Tuesday, according to the latest data released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). That's the largest number of cases reported in the country since 1992—eight years before the disease was declared eliminated from the U.S. Measles is a highly contagious disease that can lead to serious health complications, including death, but is vaccine preventable through the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Public health experts have largely credited its official elimination from the U.S. to a successful vaccination program. Over the past few years, however, vaccination rates have decreased, and the number of measles cases has soared. In 92% of the cases confirmed in the country so far this year, CDC data show, the person who got measles was unvaccinated or their vaccination status was unknown. Read More: Do You Need a Measles Vaccine Booster? The alarming new case milestone didn't come as a surprise to many public health experts. 'I was expecting us to hit this record this year,' says Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist and founder of the newsletter Your Local Epidemiologist. 'But it was more of the reality hitting that this has finally happened—that we are really here in this moment in 2025. And I'm very concerned about what it means for the future.' Experts warn that the rise in measles cases could be a harbinger for an increase in the prevalence of other diseases too. 'Measles is the most contagious virus on Earth, so it's often the first to resurge when vaccination coverage declines,' Jetelina says. 'We've managed to keep measles at bay for decades thanks to high vaccination rates, but those rates are slipping.' Experts have pointed to a variety of reasons for falling vaccination rates, including an increase in vaccine hesitancy amid the COVID-19 pandemic and as vaccine skeptics like Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have gained prominence. Kennedy, who has long spread disinformation about vaccines, last month removed all 17 members from a CDC vaccine advisory committee and appointed in their place several members who have previously expressed vaccine skeptic views. The new committee met for the first time weeks later, voting to stop recommending flu shots that contain thimerosal, an additive that the anti-vaccine movement has attacked for years despite numerous scientific studies finding no evidence that the trace amounts contained in some vaccines are harmful. The committee also indicated that it will review some childhood immunizations, leaving the door open for possible changes in the schedule of childhood vaccinations. The threshold for herd immunity against measles is generally considered to be 95%, meaning that 95% of people need to be vaccinated against the disease to prevent it from spreading. Data indicate that the U.S. has now dipped below that threshold: In the 2023-2024 school year, vaccination coverage among kindergartners was just 92.7%, according to the CDC. If this trend continues for other immunizations, experts say, it's possible other diseases could resurge. Which diseases those could be, though, 'depends on how bad this is going to get,' Jetelina says. Many diseases have a lower herd immunity threshold than measles—polio's, for instance, is around 80%—so 'it's going to take a lot more' for vaccination rates to drop that drastically, she adds. Michael Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota, says he fears that the U.S. could face increasing cases of mumps and rubella, since the MMR vaccine protects against those diseases, too. The U.S. has already experienced a rise in whooping cough cases, due in part to declining vaccination rates, as well as the introduction of a new type of vaccine for the disease in the 1990s to replace one that was more effective but also had more side effects. 'I think right now, all vaccine preventable diseases are, in one way or another, at risk of experiencing major increases in illness,' Osterholm says. 'I think you're going to begin to see over time more of these vaccine preventable diseases coming back, and we're going to start seeing kids seriously ill and dying.' Public health experts describe feeling like America has suffered from a kind of amnesia over how serious many of these diseases are and why officials have encouraged getting vaccinated against them. Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, says he wishes that more people understood how dangerous measles can be. 'Those two little girls—that six-year-old and eight-year-old that died in west Texas—were perfectly healthy children,' Offit says. 'The reason they died is because measles can kill anybody, and I think we live in this sort of state of blissful ignorance, and you never think it's going to happen to you until it happens to you.' Thirteen percent of the confirmed measles cases in the U.S. this year have resulted in hospitalization, according to the CDC, including 21% of cases in children five or younger. Three people are confirmed to have died. At the same time, experts stress that this issue goes beyond measles. 'I want people to realize that this is not just about measles,' Jetelina says. 'It's far more than an infectious disease flare-up; it's a symbol of broken trust, eroded progress, rise of individualism replacing collective good, this system that's cracking under the weight of disinvestment and distrust.' 'Measles is a canary in the coal mine, and it signals something that has gone seriously wrong,' she continues. 'It's an unraveling of decades of progress, and there's a lot that needs to be done so we don't keep going backwards.'
