Science and medicine have taken a backward step in the U.S. following Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Monday dismissing all 17 members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s independent vaccine advisory committee, saying a “clean sweep is necessary to reestablish public confidence in vaccine science.”
The danger is that Kennedy’s changes could “significantly alter — or even drop — the recommendations” for childhood vaccines and other immunizations.
“Today we are prioritizing the restoration of public trust above any specific pro- or anti-vaccine agenda,” Kennedy, who has a history of controversial views on vaccines, said on June 9 in announcing the overhaul. “The public must know that unbiased science – evaluated through a transparent process and insulated from conflicts of interest – guides the recommendations of our health agencies.”
In response, University of Michigan experts have weighed in on the decision by Kennedy to remove all members of the CDC’s 61-year-old Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
Loss of independence
Abram Wagner, assistant professor of epidemiology and global public health at the School of Public Health, investigates vaccination programs is concerned about the loss of independence:
“For decades, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices has served as an independent, evidence-based body guiding U.S. vaccine policy to protect children, the elderly and people with serious chronic diseases,” he said. “Vaccines have historically transcended political divisions because of their cost-effectiveness and lifesaving impact. Undermining ACIP not only politicizes public health but also erodes the institutional expertise that has safeguarded generations of Americans.”
Emily Martin, associate professor of epidemiology at the School of Public Health, co-directs the Michigan Center for Respiratory Virus Research and Response and the Michigan Public Health Integrated Center for Outbreak Analytics and Modeling thinks that finding suitable replacements will be challenging:
“Secretary Kennedy’s comments greatly underestimate the amount of skill, training and highly specialized knowledge in vaccinology and epidemiology that is required to be a member of ACIP,” she said. “The members of the disbanded committee were among the top experts in the field and brought decades of experience in caring for children, young adults, older adults, patients with cancer and pregnancies, among much else.”
Martin implored action from Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, who chairs the committee that oversees HHS and who voted to confirm Kennedy as secretary based on the promise that ACIP would be left intact and access to vaccines protected.
“(Cassidy) more than anyone should recognize the enormous challenge in reinstating this committee with new experts that are as qualified, and the damage to the nation’s public health that will result from the disruption to their work,” she said. “To do this now, when we are facing measles outbreaks at a level not seen in decades, is extremely concerning.
Factually incorrect
Martin is also concerned with the scientific accuracy (or inaccuracy) of Kennedy’s pronouncement: “The statements surrounding the HHS decision to remove the ACIP committee meetings contain a number of things that are factually incorrect. The meetings are posted online and anyone can listen to the discussions, held livestreamed in public view, where members openly debate all aspects of these vaccines. The care and rigor of these discussions and the reliance on scientific evidence is what has made the ACIP such a respected advisory body internationally. I am disheartened to see the work of the thousands of scientists that contribute to the evidence behind the recommendations disparaged in this way.”
Confusion ahead
Adam Lauring is professor and chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases at the Medical School. Since the beginning of the COVID pandemic, he is concerned about public mistrust and confusion:
“This move is something that will undoubtedly cause confusion and will ultimately be detrimental to public health,” he said. “The individuals who have served on ACIP are true experts in their field. They volunteer many hours to exhaustively review the available data and debate their recommendations.
“Contrary to Secretary Kennedy’s statements, rigorous conflict of interest rules have been applied to members. Physicians, pharmacists and other providers depend on the ACIP and its integrity for recommendations about how to best care for their patients. As insurers rely on ACIP recommendations to decide which vaccines will be covered, I am concerned that these changes may reduce access to vaccines across the board.”
