
An Anti-Science MAHA Extremist Is Playing a Major Role at the FDA
Upon first glance, Prasad seems far more qualified than many other Trump appointees. He is a hematologist-oncologist and University of California at San Francisco professor who has amassed an unbelievable number of publications. But a quick visit to his now inactive Twitter/X page or his YouTube channel, which has almost 200,000 followers—quickly disproves that notion.
Though he's always been somewhat iconoclastic, since the beginning of the pandemic, Prasad has become a radical Covid contrarian, amassing a following for his rampant tell-it-like-it-isn't views. Like a schoolyard bully, Prasad scuttles around the right-wing libertarian techbro corners of the internet, gleefully spreading misinformation in the basest terms possible, blocking many who disagree.
A few examples:
On public health leadership: 'These pieces of shit are still lying…. They're still fucking lying.'
On the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics: 'The CDC lied repeatedly, and all the employees at CDC and AAP who told us to cloth mask 2 year olds should be fired for stupidity.' (AAP did not respond to my request for comment on Prasad's appointment to CBER.)
On people who wear masks to protect themselves from smoke inhalation during fires: 'Masking without evidence is an untreated mental illness plaguing public health.'
On long Covid: He has repeatedly downplayed it and called it 'overblown.' He claimed that Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Ed Yong 'did invent long Covid.'
On people with long Covid trying to avoid reinfection: 'Haha double long covid. Just like double IPA!'
On Covid testing, in June 2022: 'Break every home test…. The testing profiteers are killing us.'
On his online critics: 'When you're dead, no one will ever think about you ever again.'
On Covid restrictions: He says they are akin to a path to Naziism.
And on the FDA, where he will hold a top role, just last year: '[we'd] probably be better off as a result of not having the FDA.'
'I am very disappointed with this appointment,' a prominent physician and researcher, who did not give his name for fear of retribution, told me. 'Prasad demonstrably got it repeatedly wrong during the pandemic. He is known for his contrarian views–which is not a bad thing if he got it right every once in a while; but he has a perfect record of striking out. What also worries me a great deal is his attitude toward patients and vulnerable populations; he has made multiple disparaging remarks toward patients with chronic illness.'
Prasad has advocated for more trials and testing of new medical treatments before approval, reversing approval for the pediatric Covid vaccination, and a let-it-rip mentality when it comes to kids getting repeatedly infected. As early as 2021, he advocated that kids knowingly get each other sick and that Covid testing be banned. In 2023, he wrote a post entitled, 'Do not report COVID cases to schools & do not test yourself if you feel ill: Only non-violent resistance can halt irrational public health actors.' He has repeatedly said masks were ineffective, contrary to mountains of evidence.
Though our public health institutions and the pharmaceutical industry certainly do deserve criticism, Prasad's way of doing business actually undercuts the efforts of legitimate reformers to bring the industry's bad actors to heel and unwind their worst policies. In this way, people like Prasad actually serve as the brilliant ally of these corporate interests, in that he helps to undermine the credibility of good-faith critics of the industry. More to the point, however, Prasad's behavior reveals a psychopathic lack of empathy, and his conclusions are almost always shockingly wrong. As he wrote in January 2023:
It's important to remember that it was likely a lab leak, masks don't work, mandates didn't work, vaccines were not needed in people who had COVID, nor children, closing school was a human rights violation, masking kids didn't work, vaccine mandates were unethical, vaccine passports were useless, boosters don't have good data, paxlovid doesn't have good data, long COVID is overblown, et cetera. These are obvious things to those of us who can read.
Many of Prasad's views that were seen as fringe in the earlier years of the pandemic, particularly around reopening schools, were slowly normalized during the Biden administration and have already informed policy, rather than science. Under the MAHA agenda, that will now go to extremes.
'A lot of the anti-vax folks use specious arguments to push disinformation,' said Dr. Michael Hoerger, a PhD researcher and top expert in tracking Covid data. 'That works well on social media, but they are going to be under much more scrutiny in government positions.'
The fact that biotech stocks fell five percent within hours of the announcement of his appointment to CBER is telling. As virologist Angela Rasmussen put it in a tweet, he is 'seen as a menace to an entire industry.'
Nicole Paulk, a biotech company CEO, elaborated in Citeline, a trade publication: 'Based on [Prasad's] books that he's written and the tweets that he has shared, and podcast that he has been on and all of these various public forums, it would seem to be that his position, kind of broadly regardless of modality is pretty anti-FDA, fairly anti-innovation, fairly anti-accelerated anything.'
Case in point: Prasad has come out against the use of experimental treatments like Elevidys, a gene therapy that could help patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, a fatal muscle-wasting disease, despite the fact that patient advocates favor its approval.
Prasad's appointment arrives in the context of an unprecedented dismantling of public health and research in this country, under the guise of 'Make America Healthy Again.'
With Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the head of the Department of Health & Human Services, responsible public health policies as we know them are effectively dead. Elon Musk's so-called 'Department of Government Efficiency' has gutted the National Institutes of Health, leaving it unable to carry out even its most basic duties and cutting off critical, life-saving research.
Anti-vaccine rhetoric is, of course, central to Kennedy's MAHA agenda, and future vaccine research and availability is already under threat as kids are already dying of measles, completely unnecessarily. Experts have been pushed out of their posts, and a culture of fear is already pervading health institutions.
'It is obvious that many doctors and scientists are self-censoring,' said Dr. Jonathan Howard, a neurologist at NYU Langone and author of the book, We Want Them Infected, which chronicles how certain doctors came to embrace the anti-vaccine movement. 'Given the purges at these agencies and vast canceling of grants, this is no surprise.' Indeed, a number of doctors to whom I reached out about Prasad's appointment to head CBER either declined to comment or wished to remain anonymous. I did not receive responses from major medical associations I contacted, either.
Health initiatives related to the distinct outcomes for certain groups caught up in Trump's war against 'woke'—such as women—have been axed. Without research and data on future public health risks, such as bird flu, or current and ongoing ones like Covid-19, more people will get sick and die—and there's only so long that the Trump administration can pretend it isn't happening. That doesn't mean they won't try to hide such outcomes from the public view. Here, Prasad has signaled a willingness to participate in the cover-up: He seems to support the dangerous idea of blacking out critical data on Covid and other diseases. At their core, these policies constitute a basic disregard for human life.
The Food and Drug Administration is being dealt a similar fate. Critical programs ensuring food safety, as well as vaccine research, have been unceremoniously cut. Prasad replaces the former head of CBER at the FDA, Peter Marks, who resigned in March due to RFK Jr.'s spreading of 'misinformation and lies.' Prasad, in his signature flippant tone, has compared Marks to 'a bobblehead doll that just stamps approval.' Now, Prasad serves under FDA director Martin Makary, a Trump lackey, while Jay Bhattacharya, another vociferous Covid critic, heads up NIH. All are part of the same contrarian clown show of dangerous anti-vax, anti-health MAGA bros loudly proclaiming their messages to audiences on X and YouTube—and now, the broader American public.
Though in his initial remarks to the FDA, Prasad took on a more measured tone, FDA employees are panicking. STAT News reported that staff 'were alarmed by the decision to hire Prasad, who lacks regulatory experience and has more explicitly political views than center directors in the past. 'It's very bad,' one employee said. 'Another completely unqualified person who has no idea what regulation is running an important center.''
Under this leadership, Covid booster availability will likely be restricted, and approval for vaccines tackling future variants could be limited or halted entirely. Though uptake for boosters was already low, hovering around 23 percent for the 2024-2025 vaccine, it is clear that making it less available and discouraging it will only cause harm to the population. 'If boosters are not approved for next year, it's hard to imagine that COVID's impact would not disproportionately affect sick, vulnerable populations,' said Howard.
'Given prior comments downplaying the importance of vaccines, I am concerned about delays in vaccine approval,' added Hoerger. 'Delays in vaccine approvals will cost lives.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
US pediatricians' new COVID-19 shot recommendations differ from CDC advice
NEW YORK (AP) — For the first time in 30 years, the American Academy of Pediatrics is substantially diverging from U.S. government vaccine recommendations. The group's new COVID-19 recommendations — released Tuesday — come amid a tumultuous year for public health, as vaccine skeptics have come into power in the new Trump administration and government guidance has become increasingly confusing. This isn't going to help, acknowledged Dr. James Campbell, vice chair of the AAP infectious disease committee. 'It is going to be somewhat confusing. But our opinion is we need to make the right choices for children to protect them,' he added. The AAP is strongly recommending COVID-19 shots for children ages 6 months to 2 years. Shots also are advised for older children if parents want their kids vaccinated, the AAP said. That differs from guidance established under U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which doesn't recommend the shots for healthy children of any age but says kids may get the shots in consultation with physicians. Children ages 6 months to 2 years are at high risk for severe illness from COVID-19, and it was important that recommendations continue to emphasize the need for them to get vaccinated, said Campbell, a University of Maryland infectious diseases expert. Vaccinations also are recommended for older children who have chronic lung diseases or other conditions that put them at higher risk for severe disease, the AAP said. The 95-year-old Itasca, Illinois-based organization has issued vaccination recommendations for children since the 1930s. In 1995, it synced its advice with recommendations made by the federal government's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. There have been a few small differences between AAP and CDC recommendations since then. For example, the AAP has advised that children get HPV vaccinations starting at age 9; the CDC says that's OK but has emphasized vaccinations at ages 11 and 12. But in 30 years, this is the first time the recommendations have differed 'in a significant or substantial way,' Campbell said. Until recently, the CDC — following recommendations by infectious disease experts — has been urging annual COVID-19 boosters for all Americans ages 6 months and older. But in May, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that COVID-19 vaccines are no longer recommended for healthy children and pregnant women. A few days later, the CDC issued language that healthy children may get the shots, but that there was no longer a 'should' recommendation. The idea that healthy older kids may be able to skip COVID-19 boosters has been brewing for some time among public health experts. As the COVID-19 pandemic has waned, experts have increasingly discussed the possibility of focusing vaccination efforts on people 65 and older — who are among those most as risk for death and hospitalization. A CDC expert panel in June was set to make recommendations about the fall shots. Among the options the panel was considering was whether suggest shots for high-risk groups but still giving lower-risk people the choice to get vaccinated. But Kennedy bypassed the group, and also decided to dismiss the 17-member panel and appoint his own, smaller panel, that included vaccine skeptics. Kennedy also later excluded the AAP, the American Medical Association and other top medical organizations from working with the advisers to establish vaccination recommendations. Kennedy's new vaccine panel has yet to vote on COVID-19 shot recommendations. The panel did endorse continuing to recommend fall flu vaccinations, but also made a decision that led to another notable difference with the AAP. The new advisory panel voted that people should only get flu vaccines that are packaged as single doses and do not contain the preservative thimerosal. The AAP said there is no evidence of harm from the preservative, and recommended doctors use any licensed flu vaccine product that's appropriate for the patient. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

4 hours ago
Leading pediatrician group recommends COVID vaccine for infants, toddlers in contrast with RFK Jr.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) said on Tuesday that children ages 6 months to 23 months should receive a COVID-19 vaccine, in contrast with federal health officials. The recommendations are part of the AAP's annual childhood immunization schedule, which includes guidance for COVID, flu and RSV vaccines for those aged 18 and younger. The AAP has been releasing its own recommendations since the 1930s, but in a rare occurrence, the recommendations differ from those put out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The group also recommended Americans age 18 and under receive a COVID vaccine if they are at high risk of severe COVID, live in a long-term care facility or congregate setting, if they have never been vaccinated against COVID or if they live with someone at high risk for severe COVID. It comes after Health and Human Services secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced in late May that the CDC would no longer recommend the COVID vaccine for healthy children. The CDC, which is under Kennedy's purview, later updated the guidance to a " shared clinical decision making" model -- leaving the decision to vaccinate children to parents alongside advice from a doctor. The prior recommendations were that everyone aged 6 months and older get vaccinated against COVID with the most up-to-date shot. The contrasting vaccine recommendations highlight the growing rift between federal health officials and medical organizations on vaccine policy. "The academy has been making pediatric immunization recommendations since the 1930s, that has not changed," Dr. Susan J. Kressly, president of the AAP, told ABC News. "But what has changed is that this year, we're doing it in the environment of misinformation, which makes it more important than ever that we provide clear and confident guidance, because the majority of American families really depend on us for this guidance." Children between 6 months old and 23 months old are at the highest risk of severe COVID-19, and the vaccine can protect against serious illness, according to the AAP. "We know that this age group, that's the highest risk for severe disease," Kressly said. "And so we want to make sure that those children who are at highest risk and did not live through the pandemic -- they were not exposed to COVID viruses during the pandemic -- we want to make sure that they are protected as best as possible." Although medical organizations may differ in their vaccine recommendations, insurers often rely on the CDC's vaccine panel, known as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), recommendations to determine what they will and won't cover. If certain vaccines aren't recommended by the ACIP, it may lead to parents or guardians facing out-of-pocket costs if their children receive the shot. It could also mean the shots aren't covered by the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program, a federally funded program that provides no-cost vaccines to eligible children. "We need to work with our like-minded policy makers who understand the importance of keeping VFC vaccines available in every community for those children who depend on them," Kressly said. "At the same time, there are children in this country whose vaccines are paid for through commercial insurance, and we are having continuing conversations with major payers to make sure that those can be vaccines are available as well. Vaccination is part of high-quality preventive care, and we are confident that we can work with the payers to make sure that translated into policy."

Associated Press
4 hours ago
- Associated Press
US pediatricians' new COVID-19 shot recommendations differ from CDC advice
NEW YORK (AP) — For the first time in 30 years, the American Academy of Pediatrics is substantially diverging from U.S. government vaccine recommendations. The group's new COVID-19 recommendations — released Tuesday — come amid a tumultuous year for public health, as vaccine skeptics have come into power in the new Trump administration and government guidance has become increasingly confusing. This isn't going to help, acknowledged Dr. James Campbell, vice chair of the AAP infectious disease committee. 'It is going to be somewhat confusing. But our opinion is we need to make the right choices for children to protect them,' he added. The AAP is strongly recommending COVID-19 shots for children ages 6 months to 2 years. Shots also are advised for older children if parents want their kids vaccinated, the AAP said. That differs from guidance established under U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which doesn't recommend the shots for healthy children of any age but says kids may get the shots in consultation with physicians. Children ages 6 months to 2 years are at high risk for severe illness from COVID-19, and it was important that recommendations continue to emphasize the need for them to get vaccinated, said Campbell, a University of Maryland infectious diseases expert. Vaccinations also are recommended for older children who have chronic lung diseases or other conditions that put them at higher risk for severe disease, the AAP said. The 95-year-old Itasca, Illinois-based organization has issued vaccination recommendations for children since the 1930s. In 1995, it synced its advice with recommendations made by the federal government's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. There have been a few small differences between AAP and CDC recommendations since then. For example, the AAP has advised that children get HPV vaccinations starting at age 9; the CDC says that's OK but has emphasized vaccinations at ages 11 and 12. But in 30 years, this is the first time the recommendations have differed 'in a significant or substantial way,' Campbell said. Until recently, the CDC — following recommendations by infectious disease experts — has been urging annual COVID-19 boosters for all Americans ages 6 months and older. But in May, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that COVID-19 vaccines are no longer recommended for healthy children and pregnant women. A few days later, the CDC issued language that healthy children may get the shots, but that there was no longer a 'should' recommendation. The idea that healthy older kids may be able to skip COVID-19 boosters has been brewing for some time among public health experts. As the COVID-19 pandemic has waned, experts have increasingly discussed the possibility of focusing vaccination efforts on people 65 and older — who are among those most as risk for death and hospitalization. A CDC expert panel in June was set to make recommendations about the fall shots. Among the options the panel was considering was whether suggest shots for high-risk groups but still giving lower-risk people the choice to get vaccinated. But Kennedy bypassed the group, and also decided to dismiss the 17-member panel and appoint his own, smaller panel, that included vaccine skeptics. Kennedy also later excluded the AAP, the American Medical Association and other top medical organizations from working with the advisers to establish vaccination recommendations. Kennedy's new vaccine panel has yet to vote on COVID-19 shot recommendations. The panel did endorse continuing to recommend fall flu vaccinations, but also made a decision that led to another notable difference with the AAP. The new advisory panel voted that people should only get flu vaccines that are packaged as single doses and do not contain the preservative thimerosal. The AAP said there is no evidence of harm from the preservative, and recommended doctors use any licensed flu vaccine product that's appropriate for the patient. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.