RFK Jr.'s new vaccine panel is packed with vaccine skeptics
During his Senate confirmation hearings for health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. went to great lengths to downplay his previous anti-vaccine positions to try to assure the public that he wasn't as extreme as his record indicated. But now that he has unveiled new members of an important vaccine advisory committee, his long-held extremism is not only coming back into full view, it's also being operationalized.
On Monday, Kennedy removed all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, which is made up of medical and public health experts and advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As NBC News reports, this committee makes 'recommendations to the CDC about who should get certain vaccines, including the schedule for childhood vaccinations.' These recommendations are then adopted by medical professionals and insurers.
Kennedy justified the move by alleging that the experts on the panel were all compromised by financial conflicts of interest. But the claim looked like a dubious pretext for clearing the way for a new panel. As NBC News reports, 'Members of ACIP, who undergo an extensive vetting process before they are appointed, are required to disclose conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from voting on vaccines for which conflicts exist.' Sean O'Leary, chair of the infectious disease committee for the American Academy of Pediatrics, who serves as a liaison to the committee from the pediatric academy, told The New York Times that the idea that the old committee's decisions were influenced by financial conflicts of interest was 'factually incorrect, and you can look at the record to see that.' He called Kennedy's firings 'manufactured chaos.'
Kennedy's vision came into clearer view on Wednesday when he announced eight new people to serve on ACIP's board, including several experts with questionable or outright dangerous track records on vaccinations or public health recommendations. They include:
Robert Malone, a physician-scientist and biochemist whom The New York Times has described as a 'misinformation star,' in part because of his record of misleadingly questioning the dangers of Covid and the safety of Covid vaccines.
Vicky Pebsworth, the director of research and patient safety at the National Vaccine Information Center, which NBC News reports is 'considered a leading source of misinformation about vaccines.'
Cody Meissner, a Dartmouth pediatrics professor who was a signer of the Great Barrington Declaration, the statement that opposed lockdowns during the Covid pandemic.
Retsef Levi, a professor of operations management at the MIT Sloan School of Management. NBC News reports that he 'has called for an end to Covid vaccinations, claiming mRNA vaccines cause serious harm and death, especially among young people.'
Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist and biostatistician who was one of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration.
Kennedy didn't pick random people off the internet; they have credentials, often at highly esteemed institutions, although some of these academic backgrounds apparently deviate from the kind one typically expects for this panel. But many public health experts and those who keep a close eye on vaccine skeptics and anti-vaxxers note that Kennedy appears to be putting together a slate of experts who skew ideologically against consensus and near-consensus views on vaccine safety and efficacy.
'Kennedy did not pick people with strong, current expertise in vaccines,' Dorit Reiss, a professor at UC Law San Francisco who studies vaccine policy, told NPR. 'It tells me that Kennedy is setting up a committee that would be skeptical of vaccines, and possibly willing to implement an anti-vaccine agenda.'
David Mansdoerfer, who served as deputy assistant secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services in the first Trump administration, called Kennedy's announcement 'a huge win for the medical freedom movement.'
It's not yet clear how the advisory board will rule on vaccine recommendations in the future. But the real-world effects of this could be significant. As The New York Times notes, the panel's recommendations, which don't have to be adopted by the CDC but typically are, can affect how strongly doctors recommend vaccinations. If the panel's recommendations skew away from recommending vaccines, then it could mean that physicians might be more hesitant to counsel patients to take vaccines that have long been proved to be safe.
Furthermore, the panel's recommendations could affect how health insurance companies cover vaccines. 'Right now, insurance companies cover the four-dose polio series. But without an A.C.I.P. recommendation, the shots might cost you more than $300,' the Times reports.
We still don't know how this newly formed panel will play out. But contrary to Kennedy's 'Make America Healthy Again' mantra, all indications so far are that Kennedy is laser-focused on advancing activist goals that will make our society less healthy.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump quips 'they didn't die of COVID' when asked if Israel killed Iranian officials
President Donald Trump joked on Friday morning about the fate of Iranian officials in the wake of Israel's recent airstrike, according to CNN's Dana Bash. After months of negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, Israel attacked Iran's nuclear and missile infrastructure early Friday, taking out at least 20 senior Iranian commanders and inflicting a significant blow to Tehran's government. Two of the most prominent officials killed in the strikes were Gen. Hossein Salami, the leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Gen. Mohammad Bagheri, the chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces. Bash spoke on Friday about her phone call with Trump, where she asked him about Secretary of State Marco Rubio's initial statement about Israel's strikes, which did not explicitly say that the U.S. supported them. Trump Believes Israel's Strike On Iran Could Improve Chances For Nuclear Deal: Report "We, of course, support Israel, obviously, and supported it like nobody has ever supported it," Trump said, according to Bash. "It was a very successful attack. Iran should have listened to me when I said - you know, I gave them, I don't know if you know, but I gave them a 60-day warning. And today is day 61." "They should now come to the table to make a deal before it's too late. It will be too late for them. You know, the people I was dealing with are dead," he added, though he wouldn't give specific names, only that the "hardliners" were dead. Read On The Fox News App "This is as a result of the attack last night?" Bash asked him. "Yeah. They didn't die of the flu. They didn't die of COVID," Bash described him saying "quite sarcastically." Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture Trump also told Fox News' Bret Baier on Friday that "The Iranians were hit 10 times worse than they thought they would be." "They weren't ready to negotiate. I think they may be now. We'll see," Trump said regarding the future of Iran's nuclear program. Senior U.S. officials told Fox News that a long list of nuclear scientists and military leaders were targeted by Israel's surprise airstrikes Friday. The officials added that 90% of Iran's top nuclear scientists, as well as other senior military officers and other Iranian leaders, may have been targeted in the article source: Trump quips 'they didn't die of COVID' when asked if Israel killed Iranian officials
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Most Women Ignore This Symptom As A Subtle Sign Of A Heart Attack, But It Could Be A Matter Of Life And Death
In a recent segment on the 'Today' show, Chantrise Holliman, a mother, wife and heart health educator based in Georgia, shared the story of her heart attack and what seemed like the fairly benign symptoms that accompanied it. Holliman experienced nausea, vomiting and mild chest pressure. The first two symptoms ― which aren't commonly associated with heart attacks ― led her to believe the sensations had more to do with her dinner the night before than a serious medical concern. Like Holliman, many people don't know that stomach symptoms can, indeed, be signs of a heart attack. While not the most common warning sign (chest pain is most reported), nausea is also not uncommon during a cardiac event, according to Dr. Sean Heffron, a cardiologist at NYU Langone Health. It 'tends to depend somewhat on which blood vessel in the heart is affected,' Heffron explained. Additionally, nausea is more commonly seen in women, Heffron said, as is vomiting. Other heart attack signs in women include jaw pain, neck pain, a dull feeling of chest discomfort, upper abdomen pain, back pain and excessive tiredness, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 'It's so important to hear stories like this, because many women think it has to be like, 'I'm clutching my chest and falling to the ground like you see in the movies,' and it can be much more subtle,' Dr. Tara Narula, a cardiologist and NBC News medical contributor, told 'Today.' Heart attacks can look very different in women than in men, which means that sufferers and doctors alike sometimes dismiss them. But it's important to recognize the signs, especially since heart disease 'is the leading cause of death for women in this country,' Narula told 'Today.' 'One woman every 80 seconds dies of cardiovascular disease.' How to tell if your nausea is part of a heart attack Related: I Was Devastated When The Love Of My Life Died. Then I Started Seeing Signs I Couldn't Explain. Related: "I Can't Wait For This To Go Out Of Style": People Are Sharing Popular Modern Trends That Are Actually Pretty Toxic 'As far as we know, it's rare that [nausea is] the only symptom of a heart attack,' Heffron explained. In Holliman's case, for example, she also said she noticed pressure in her chest. 'And, certainly, a heart attack is far from the most common cause of nausea,' Heffron said. Food poisoning, stomach flu and motion sickness are much more common culprits. So, you don't have to panic the next time you feel nauseated. But if you notice additional heart attack symptoms along with nausea or vomiting — like chest pain, sweating, heart palpitations or dizziness — it could be cause for concern. This is doubly true for someone with risk factors of heart disease like high blood pressure, high cholesterol or diabetes, Heffron said. In the absence of those additional symptoms, nausea probably isn't a cause for extreme concern. 'On occasion, nausea's the only symptom, but I think that's somewhat of an exception,' Heffron said. 'It's not so common.' How to take care of your heart health It's easy to dismiss symptoms that you don't think are indicative of a heart attack, but it's important to understand the signs of a cardiac event and how they manifest for women. Beyond that, you should know what you can do to best take care of your heart. Heffron said you can use the American Heart Association's Life's Essential 8 checklist as a resource to maintain or improve your cardiovascular health. Best practices include eating a diet full of whole foods, fruit, vegetables and lean proteins; getting enough exercise; managing factors like your cholesterol, blood pressure and blood sugar; getting sufficient sleep; and refraining from smoking. All of these behaviors can help keep your heart healthy. 'Obtaining optimal cardiovascular health really includes focusing on these eight metrics,' Heffron noted. If you do feel unwell, you shouldn't discount your symptoms, no matter how small they seem. 'I don't want to overblow it and... freak people out [by saying] all nausea's a heart attack. By all means, it's not,' Heffron said. 'But by no means is chest pain the only symptom of a heart attack.' Other, less obvious signs could be your strongest symptoms, and it's critical you get checked out if you're at all suspicious. 'If you feel unwell and are concerned about what's going on, and in particular, if you have cardiovascular risk factors... then those should be reasons to be seen by a doctor,' Heffron said. 'Don't hesitate if there's any concern.'This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in Goodful: Medical Professionals Are Sharing "Mundane" Things That Actually Make So Many People Sick Also in Goodful: People Are Sharing Their Biggest "How Doesn't Everyone Know This?" Facts, And I'm Honestly Embarrassed I Never Realized Some Of These Also in Goodful: "It's Nice To Feel Wanted": Guys Are Sharing The Small Gestures Women Do That Make Them Weak At The Knees
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Kissler: Will Tariffs Continue to Drive Energy Markets?
In the past, the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftereffects were a major driver influencing global energy markets. However, this year, the tariffs implemented by the U.S. to try to balance global trade supplanted the post-COVID environment as a major influencer. That said, just how much tariffs will continue to impact energy markets depends on a number of variables, such as the tariffs' eventual size and scope. Moreover, in the case of natural gas, other factors—such as weather, travel and the immense power needs of artificial intelligence (AI)—may prove to be larger influencers. In fact, to some extent, the tariffs' impact on energy markets already seems to be dissipating. While sending energy and equity prices reeling the first month of implementation, the tariffs have had seemingly less of an effect on U.S. demand as we have entered middle of the year. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) reported a record number of travelers in the U.S. going into Memorial Day weekend. However, at the same time, these tariffs have been detrimental to oil demand in Asia, particularly in China, as that region bears most of the tariff burdens. The numbers say it all: Chinese refinery run rates moved well below their five-year averages as crude imports dropped substantially. Crude futures also touched the lowest levels since 2021. Another big factor has been anticipated production increases. OPEC+ has pledged to increase production over the next several months and is estimated to bring back most of the 2 MMbbl/d cuts from the previous years. At the same time, the Trump administration has promised to lower oil prices. Between the Saudi/OPEC production increases and the tariffs' impact on oil markets, that goal may be achieved. On the flip side, the only factors supporting higher oil prices have mostly been geopolitical in nature. These include: the harsh sanctions expected against Iran; the Russia/Ukraine peace talks stalling, which could lead to more sanctions on Russia; and the Israel/Hamas tensions maintaining unrest in the Middle East. Altogether, the real question going forward will be if the seasonal summer travel demand can take up the slack caused by tariffs and OPEC+. The current consensus is that it's not likely, and WTI prices are expected to remain in the $58-$65/bbl area. Of course, many 'what ifs' remain. Partly because of the shift in U.S. presidential administration, green energy is losing its luster. Wind and solar still will be contributing factors, but just not at the subsidized pace seen in the past. That said, there will likely be more solar power sources in the Sunbelt states, and more areas driven by wind-generated power, but now these power sources must be able to stand on their own economically, which should send more demand to the oil and gas sector in the longer term. Shifting focus to natural gas, the expansion of AI and greater demand for LNG will be the major drivers supporting prices. That's as AI expansion is set to double in the next three to five years. It currently pulls 4% of the U.S. power grid, but that figure could move to over 9%. If you add in the expansion of LNG from 11 Bcf/d to 12 Bcf/d of natural gas in the next four to five years, one must wonder where the supply will come from. However, in the near term, weather has been relatively mild so far in 2025, which is pulling less natural gas supplies. That's as current production is in the range of 105.2 to 106 Bcf/d, whereas in 2024, the midyear average production was near the 101 BCF/day. And so, we will need to see some above-average temperatures this summer if we are to see prices comfortably over the $4/MMBtu. While the distant horizon looks bright for natural gas—and likely will be—there is still a lot of time in between. Weather demand will still be a price-driver going forward. As of early June, 2025 has been a bit mild, but weather may change things very quickly.