Ousted Experts Warn of Vaccine Panel Decline \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ Seventeen former vaccine advisors criticized Health Secretary RFK Jr.’s overhaul of the U.S. immunization panel. They warned that scientific rigor and public trust in vaccine policy are under threat. The experts proposed independent alternatives to ensure sound vaccine recommendations continue.
Quick Looks
- RFK Jr. fired all 17 members of the federal vaccine advisory committee
- Accusations included ties to vaccine manufacturers and lack of critical oversight
- New members include vaccine skeptics and anti-vaccine advocates
- Former members say science and transparency are being replaced by ideology
- June meeting highlighted by unchallenged claims about thimerosal, a vaccine preservative
- New panel recommended removing thimerosal despite lack of scientific evidence of harm
- Ousted experts call for independent, science-based alternative advisory structures
- Proposals include audits and collaboration with professional medical organizations
- Health insurers may decline to cover non-ACIP-endorsed vaccines
- HHS defends changes as enhancing diversity and restoring public trust
Deep Look
A month after being abruptly dismissed by U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., all 17 former members of the government’s top vaccine advisory committee are publicly sounding the alarm. In a strongly worded commentary published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Wednesday, they warn that America’s vaccine policymaking process is in jeopardy—and they’re proposing new structures to safeguard it.
Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist turned federal health leader, removed the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in its entirety, accusing the members of having too cozy a relationship with pharmaceutical companies and of blindly approving vaccines. He replaced them with individuals of his choosing, including well-known vaccine skeptics.
According to the ousted experts, Kennedy’s reformation of the ACIP marks a disturbing departure from science-based oversight. In their article, they claim the new panel is bypassing rigorous scientific review and meaningful debate, threatening decades of progress in public health immunization policy.
Their concerns were heightened during the first meeting of the new committee in June, which they say was marred by misinformation and political bias. The session included a presentation by a prominent anti-vaccine advocate who raised concerns about thimerosal, a preservative used in some flu vaccines. The presentation went unchallenged, even though Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) scientists had already concluded that thimerosal posed no developmental risk.
Despite acknowledging the lack of evidence, the new panel still voted to recommend removal of thimerosal—a move the former members described as scientifically unfounded. “That meeting was a travesty, honestly,” said Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, a pediatric infectious disease specialist from Stanford University and one of the dismissed members.
This week’s article expands on concerns first voiced last month in the Journal of the American Medical Association, where the same group criticized Kennedy’s “destabilizing decisions.” That piece focused on their removal and his controversial May decision to end COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for healthy children and pregnant women.
In their latest commentary, the experts go further, calling for immediate alternatives to the current ACIP model. “An alternative to the Committee should be established quickly and — if necessary — independently from the federal government,” they wrote.
They stress that no existing structure can fully replace ACIP’s former scientific integrity, but interim solutions are necessary to minimize long-term harm to U.S. vaccine policy. Among their proposals:
- Empowering professional medical organizations to coordinate vaccine guidance
- Creating external auditors to review ACIP decisions
- Developing parallel advisory systems with access to CDC-level data
However, they admit these proposals face steep challenges—not just in data access but also in payer support. If insurers don’t recognize non-ACIP recommendations, some critical vaccines may go uncovered.
Dr. Noel Brewer of the University of North Carolina, another former ACIP member, warned that health plans may only cover cost-saving immunizations, such as annual flu shots, while ignoring long-term benefit vaccines like HPV, which prevent cancers decades later. “They might pick and choose,” Brewer said.
While experts and critics fear a politicized, weakened vaccine oversight system, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) defended Kennedy’s leadership. In a statement, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said, “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.”
That defense hasn’t calmed fears in the scientific community. For many, Kennedy’s well-documented past as a leading anti-vaccine figure—before being appointed to lead U.S. health policy—signals a conflict between ideology and evidence.
At stake is more than just bureaucratic structure. The ACIP historically guided lifesaving vaccination efforts, setting national standards for preventing childhood illnesses, containing outbreaks, and responding to pandemic threats. Its recommendations shaped insurance coverage, school immunization requirements, and federal funding priorities.
Public health experts now fear that with Kennedy’s new appointments and ideological shift, the United States could face increased vaccine hesitancy, reduced immunization rates, and greater vulnerability to preventable disease outbreaks.
Though alternatives may provide a temporary lifeline, the former ACIP members argue that unless scientific independence is restored, the trust Americans place in vaccine policy could erode permanently.
Ousted Experts Warn Ousted Experts Warn
You must Register or Login to post a comment.