RFK Jr.'s mRNA decision may be his worst yet

Japan Times

2 days ago

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s decision to cancel $500 million in grants and contracts for mRNA vaccine development jeopardizes the health and safety of Americans — both now and for years to come.
The Nobel Prize-winning technology enabled the first COVID-19 vaccines to be developed with breathtaking speed during the first year of the pandemic, ultimately saving millions of lives. Yet Kennedy spent years undermining confidence in mRNA, a misinformation campaign that he continued after he took office. Now, he's systematically dismantling the very infrastructure we need to respond to a future pandemic.
The secretary justified the decision to abandon mRNA in a video full of falsehoods that was posted on his social media. He opened by claiming that the vaccines "don't perform well against viruses that infect the upper respiratory tract.'
In fact, we have plenty of evidence, both from randomized controlled clinical trials and real-world studies, that COVID-19 shots save lives and reduce hospitalizations. And although we need to see more data, early signs suggest that Moderna's flu vaccine is comparable to — or even more effective than — existing flu vaccines based on older technologies.
Of course, we'd love to have vaccines that work better — longer-lasting protection would be nice, as would the complete prevention of infections. But pulling funding for a proven technology like mRNA isn't the way to achieve those goals.
Kennedy also claims that the design of mRNA vaccines — which expose the immune system to proteins the virus uses to infect us — is rendered useless by single mutations and that they encourage new mutations that can prolong pandemics. Both claims are false. All viruses accumulate tiny genetic changes over time, regardless of whether a vaccine exists.
He ends by saying that scientific "experts' within the Department of Health and Human Services have determined that mRNA technology poses more risks than benefits for respiratory viruses — another claim that public health experts strongly dispute.
"I've been in the business for 50 years, and I've never seen a more dangerous decision made by a government agency related to public health,' says Michael Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. Says Osterholm, who has advised several administrations on pandemic preparedness, "There's no factual basis for what he's said.'
Kennedy's hostility toward mRNA technology is no surprise. During the pandemic, he was cited by the Center for Countering Digital Hate as one of the "Disinformation Dozen,' a group of influencers responsible for the majority of the anti-vaccine content on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter — where he spread false claims about the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccine.
Under his leadership, health agencies have already terminated a $766 million contract with Moderna to use mRNA technology to develop vaccines against flu viruses, including H5N1. He also unilaterally changed the recommendations for who should receive COVID-19 shots.
This latest move has far-reaching implications for public health. First, he has enormous influence over a segment of the public: a recent poll by KFF found that 70% of Republicans trusted Kennedy to provide reliable information about vaccines. In other words, his misinformation-laden social media posts could meaningfully shape public attitudes about mRNA vaccines.
More troubling, though, is how Kennedy is undermining the country's ability to address current and future pathogens. Abandoning mRNA vaccines will put Americans at a disadvantage if another pandemic occurs. "In a biological emergency, time is our greatest weapon,' says Jennifer Nuzzo, director of the Pandemic Center at the Brown University School of Public Health. The faster we respond, the fewer the harms - whether in terms of people dying or damage to economic prosperity and national security, Nuzzo says.
The technology offers exceptional speed compared to conventional vaccine manufacturing methods such as whole-virus vaccines, which Kennedy says will be the focus of future development. Whole-virus vaccines are typically produced by growing the virus in chicken eggs, then extracting, inactivating and purifying it — a process that can take up to six months to complete.
And the world also lacks sufficient egg-based manufacturing capacity. According to Osterholm, we can produce only about 2 billion shots in the first 18 months of a pandemic. In contrast, mRNA vaccines can go from concept to mass production in just a few months — and we've already seen that it's possible to produce enough to serve the global population within a year, he adds.
To be clear, other countries are continuing to invest in mRNA, which means those vaccines will still be developed if another scary virus emerges. The next time around, however, Americans could be last in line to receive them.
"Preparedness is a deterrent,' Nuzzo says. Walking away from an investment in mRNA also "sends a message to our adversaries that the United States is uncommitted to preparing for future health emergencies — that the United States is now more vulnerable than it has ever been because we are systematically taking off the table multiple approaches to protect ourselves.'
What a terrifying thought.
Lisa Jarvis is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering biotech, health care and the pharmaceutical industry.