Ousted vaccine panel members say rigorous science is being abandoned
U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. abruptly fired the entire Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, accusing them of being too closely aligned with manufacturers and of rubber-stamping vaccines. He handpicked replacements that include several vaccine skeptics.
In a commentary published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, the former panel members wrote that Kennedy — a leading voice in the anti-vaccine movement before becoming the U.S. government's top health official — and his new panel are abandoning rigorous scientific review and open deliberation.
That was clear, they said, during the new panel's first meeting, in June. It featured a presentation by an anti-vaccine advocate that warned of dangers about a preservative used in a few flu vaccines, but the committee members didn't hear from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention staffers about an analysis that concluded there was no link between the preservative and neurodevelopmental disorders.
The new panel recommended that the preservative, thimerosal, be removed even as some members acknowledged there was no proof it was causing harm.
'That meeting was a travesty, honestly,' said former ACIP member Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, a pediatric infectious diseases expert at Stanford University.
The 17 discharged experts last month published a shorter essay in the Journal of the American Medical Association that decried Kennedy's 'destabilizing decisions." The focus was largely on their termination and on Kennedy's decision in May to stop recommending COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women.
'An alternative to the Committee should be established quickly and — if necessary — independently from the federal government," they wrote. 'No viable pathway exists to fully replace the prior trusted and unbiased ACIP structure and process. Instead, the alternatives must focus on limiting the damage to vaccination policy in the United States.'
Options included having professional organizations working together to harmonize vaccine recommendations or establishing an external auditor of ACIP recommendations. There are huge challenges to the ideas, including having access to the best data, the authors acknowledged.
There's also the question of whether health insurers would pay for vaccinations that are recommended by alternative groups but not ACIP.
They might pick and choose which vaccines to cover, said the University of North Carolina's Noel Brewer, another former ACIP member.
For example, they might pay for vaccines that offer more immediate cost savings for health care, like the flu vaccine.
'But maybe not ones that have a longer-term benefit like HPV vaccine,' which is designed to prevent futures cancers, Brewer said.
A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services argued that Kennedy is restoring public trust in federal vaccine policy by replacing the ACIP roster.
'By replacing vaccine groupthink with a diversity of perspectives, Secretary Kennedy is strengthening the integrity of the advisory process guiding immunization policy in this country,' spokesman Andrew Nixon said in a statement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
NIH cancels mRNA vaccine contracts, citing lack of public trust
National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya claims the federal government recently cancelled millions of dollars' worth of mRNA research contracts because the general public does not trust the technology. Bhattacharya explained the reason behind the abrupt contract cancellations, first, during an episode of Republican political strategist Steve Bannon's podcast 'War Room' last week and again in an opinion piece recently published in The Washington Post. In the article, Bhattacharya called the mRNA platform a 'promising technology' and acknowledged that it may lead to breakthroughs in treatment for diseases like cancer. 'But as a vaccine intended for broad public use, especially during a public health emergency, the platform has failed a crucial test: earning public trust,' he wrote. 'No matter how elegant the science, a platform that lacks credibility among the people it seeks to protect cannot fulfill its public health mission.' Bhattacharya's explanation for the administration's pivot away from mRNA technology differs from that of his boss, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kennedy announced last week the agency would wind down its mRNA vaccine development activities under the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and cancel $500 million worth of contracts related to the technology. He said that mRNA technologies funded during the pandemic failed to meet current scientific standards and that the federal government would shift its focus to whole-virus vaccines and novel platforms. Bhattacharya expressed concern in the article about mRNA vaccines' ability to direct human cells to produce spike proteins to trigger an immune response. He argues the scientific community does not have a clear understanding of where mRNA product stays in the body, for how long, and whether other proteins are created in the process. Scott Hensley, a microbiology professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine, told STAT that these are also issues with vaccines that use live but weakened viruses like the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, which federal health agencies have deemed safe and effective. 'This is why we complete human clinical studies before vaccines are widely used in humans,' he told the outlet. 'The mRNA and live attenuated vaccine platforms have both proven to be safe and effective in clinical trials.' He blamed public distrust in mRNA on the Biden administration's COVID-19 vaccine mandates during the pandemic. Bhattacharya expressed concern in the article about mRNA vaccines' ability to direct human cells to produce spike proteins to trigger an immune response. He argues the scientific community does not have a clear understanding of where the mRNA product stays in the body, for how long, and whether other proteins are created in the process. 'Science isn't propaganda,' he wrote. 'It's humility. And when public health officials stopped communicating with humility, we lost much of the public, an absolute necessity for any vaccine platform.'
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
FDA considers revoking Pfizer COVID vaccine for children under 5
The Food and Drug Administration is considering revoking the authorization of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine for healthy children under 5 years old, a move that would add another barrier for parents who want to vaccinate healthy children ahead of the respiratory virus season. Pfizer's three-dose shot for children between 6 months and 5 years old has long been available under an emergency use authorization (EUA). But according to the company, the FDA is weighing ending that authorization. 'We are currently in discussions with the agency on potential paths forward and have requested that the EUA for this age group remain in place for the 2025-2026 season,' Pfizer told The Hill. 'It is important to note that these deliberations are not related to the safety and efficacy of the vaccine which continues to demonstrate a favorable profile,' the company added. Pfizer expects the FDA to approve its vaccine for children ages 5 to 11 with the same limitations as Moderna and Novavax. The FDA in July approved Moderna's shot for children 6 months and older, but only if they have a health condition that puts them at increased risk for severe COVID-19. Novavax has never been approved for children under 12. Pfizer has had full FDA approval for its COVID-19 vaccine for individuals age 12 and older since 2022. It's not unusual for the FDA to revoke emergency authorization on a product if a competitor gains approval for an alternative, and Pfizer has not yet applied for full approval of its COVID-19 vaccine for the youngest age group. All COVID-19 vaccines were initially available only under emergency use authorizations— effectively special permissions given during an emergency if there are no FDA-approved alternatives available. But given the limitation on the Moderna shots, if Pfizer's authorization is pulled, healthy children under 5 years old will have no official options if their parents want to get them vaccinated. 'Parents already were struggling. We had parents, even last year, they had to drive two to three hours to get [COVID] vaccines for their kids. So already, access was an issue. Now it's just going to be abysmal,' said Fatima Khan, co-founder of the group Protect Their Future, which advocates for vaccine access for children. 'You're abandoning children right now … this is something that's so safe and so easy for them to just administer to our kids. Why can we not get it?' Khan said. In a statement to The Hill, the Department of Health and Human Services said it wouldn't comment on potential changes. 'The COVID-19 pandemic ended with the expiration of the federal public health emergency in May 2023. We do not comment on potential, future regulatory changes. Unless officially announced by HHS, discussion about future agency action should be regarded as pure speculation,' HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon said. In May, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children or pregnant women. The CDC then updated its immunization schedule to reflect that children with no underlying health condition 'may receive' COVID-19 vaccines after consulting with a health care provider. Kennedy has expressed personal antipathy towards the Moderna and Pfizer shots, calling them dangerous and unreliable. HHS also just announced it was pulling back on funding research involving the mRNA technology that was used to develop the vaccines in record time. State health officials said they have been told Moderna is ramping up supplies of its vaccine for the fall and will be able to meet demand if Pfizer's vaccine is no longer available for the youngest children. Providers who already pre-ordered Pfizer shots for the coming season will likely be able to switch to Moderna. But since the Moderna vaccine is only licensed for kids at risk of severe infection, pediatricians will have to offer them 'off label' for healthy kids with no guarantee it will be covered by insurance. 'We're hopeful that the clinical decision making allows them to request the vaccine and get it and have it covered by insurance. But it's just complicated,' said Claire Hannan, executive director of the Association of Immunization Managers, which represents state and local officials. 'The FDA just sort of went outside of the recommendation process in the way that it licensed the Moderna vaccine, and so there's a lot of confusion, and we're just sort of waiting for guidance from CDC on the ordering,' Hannan said. Infectious disease experts have said, and CDC data show, children under age 2 are at risk for severe COVID-19 infection even if they are otherwise healthy. Ayanna Bennett, director of the District of Columbia's Department of Health, said healthy kids should be able to live their best lives. If vaccination will keep them from getting seriously ill, it shouldn't be a question, she said. 'I want kids to not miss two weeks of school. I want kids not to be hospitalized, or in urgent care and miserable. We want them to be able to live their lives when there's no reason why they shouldn't,' Bennett told reporters during a briefing Wednesday. 'If I can prevent something, I should do it, and this is something where we absolutely have prevention available.'
Associated Press
23 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Rabbits with 'horns' in Colorado are being called 'Frankenstein bunnies.' Here's why
DENVER (AP) — A group of rabbits in Colorado with grotesque, horn-like growths may seem straight out of a low-budget horror film, but scientists say there's no reason to be spooked — the furry creatures merely have a relatively common virus. The cottontails recently spotted in Fort Collins are infected with the mostly harmless Shope papillomavirus, which causes wart-like growths that protrude from their faces like metastasizing horns. Viral photos have inspired a fluffle of unflattering nicknames, including 'Frankenstein bunnies,' 'demon rabbits' and 'zombie rabbis.' But their affliction is nothing new, with the virus inspiring ancient folklore and fueling scientific research nearly 100 years ago. The virus likely influenced the centuries-old jackalope myth in North America, which told of a rabbit with antlers or horns, among other animal variations. The disease in rabbits also contributed to scientists' knowledge about the connection between viruses and cancer, such as the human papillomavirus that causes cervical cancer. The virus in rabbits was named after Dr. Richard E Shope, a professor at The Rockefeller University who discovered the disease in cottontails in the 1930s. News about the rabbit sightings in Fort Collins, 65 miles (105 kilometers) north of Denver, started getting attention after residents started spotting them around town and posting pictures. Kara Van Hoose, a spokesperson for Colorado Parks and Wildlife, told The Associated Press on Wednesday that the agency has been getting calls about the rabbits seen in Fort Collins. But she said that it's not uncommon to see infected rabbits, especially in the summer, when the fleas and ticks that spread the virus are most active. The virus can spread from rabbit to rabbit but not to other species, including humans and pets, she said. The growths resemble warts but can look like horns if they grow longer, Van Hoose said. The growths don't harm rabbits unless they grow on their eyes or mouths and interfere with eating. Rabbits' immune systems are able to fight the virus and, once they do, the growths will disappear, she said. ___ Finley reported from Norfolk, Virginia.
