The first meeting of the new CDC vaccine panel reveals that political chaos sown by RFK JR | US News

The first meeting of a critical federal panel of vaccines was a very publicized exposure of the way in which the Secretary in the United States of Health and Skeptical of Vaccines Robert F Kennedy Jr injected chaos into the vaccine policy infrastructure.

Wednesday’s meeting took place in the midst of the controversy, not only concerning new members unilaterally appointed by Kennedy, but also the questions they consider, their conflicts of interest, opinions on vaccines and planned speakers.

The new chairman of the committee, a former professor of medicine at Harvard University, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, who was dismissed for refusing to be vaccinated against COVID-19, started the meeting by criticizing both his former employer and the media.

“Some media have been very hard for the new members of this committee,” said Kulldorff, who, according to him, was put: “Either a pro or anti-vaccine box”.

“Such labels undermine a critical scientific investigation and it feeds the flames of the hesitation of vaccines more. As Secretary Kennedy has praised it, the opposition to Mercury in fish does not make you anti-fish, and the opposition to Mercury in vaccines does not make you anti-vaccine,” continued Kulldorff, referring to one of the problems that the panel

Kulldorff quickly announced the training of two new working groups, in addition to the 11 which already serve the panel. We would study the interaction of vaccines and the cumulative calendar of infant vaccines – problems that have been speaking for anti -vaccin defenders for years, especially Kennedy – and another to reassess vaccines that have not been examined for more than seven years. The latter would offer new members of the Committee the opportunity to modify the recommendations for long -term vaccines.

The panel, the Consultative Committee for Vaccination Practices (ACIP) at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), draws up recommendations on how to administer vaccines to the American public.

The ACIP meeting is with high issues and will be widely monitored within the scientific community, while former members maintain that the systems of approval, research and distribution of the country’s vaccines are dismantled.

Panel decisions are very influential in which vaccines recommend by the CDC for children and adults. In turn, these recommendations constitute the basis of how health insurers decide vaccines to be covered and therefore have a direct impact on the price and availability of vaccines to the American public.

Experts consider the current situation so disastrous that external groups try to develop a system to provide vaccines to Americans despite Kennedy’s attempts to disrupt the system.

“What we see today, and if that were to continue, professionals in medical public health and the whole country will no longer trust the ACIP,” said Dr. Sean O’Leary, of the American Academy of Pediatrics Council on School Health. “It’s very clear.”

The panel met despite the lack of clarity on an apparently fundamental question: conflicts of interest. Kennedy dismissed the 17 previous members of the panel after arguing that they had: “was in the grip of conflicts of persistent interests”.

Before the presentations of the meeting were seriously starting, the new members were invited to present themselves and to verbally describe any conflict of interest.

It is not known whether the new members have published disclosure of conflict of interest published before the meeting. The new members did not appear on the TRACK of interest conflict developed by the TRUMP administration specifically for members of the ACIP on Wednesday morning.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Health and Social Services (HHS) told the Guardian that the new members had undergone an ethics review but had not responded to requests on the moment and where these disclosure would be published. The spokesman also said that one of the eight members appointed by Kennedy had abandoned Tuesday evening following a financial examination of the government.

A spokesperson told The Guardian last week: “Before starting their work on the AICI, the new members’ ethics agreements will be made public.”

A few The members have not addressed any conflict of interest, seeming to focus solely on their introduction. Others, like Kulldorff, have not disclosed past participation in disputes against vaccines. Likewise, Dr. Robert Malone does not seem to disclose his work in the dispute against the Merck vaccine.

Instead, Malone said: “Any potential conflict of interest has been analyzed and verified and declared missing both internally by HHS and specifically by CDC.”

Vicky Pebsworth, a nurse who holds a doctorate and worked for decades as director of volunteer research for one of the oldest high-level anti-vaccine groups in the country, said: “Disclosure I hold actions in the health care sector, including vaccine manufacturers, I understand that I can therefore be entirely in participation.

The panel agenda was also redone before the committee met. Previously, panel experts had to consider a recommendation for COVID-19 boosters.

This vote was withdrawn from the agenda – leaving the experts hearing planned presentations on COVID -19, but not the vote – because the CDC could not hold a call for the final working group. We do not know why the call was not selected.

CDC scientists explained how COVVI-19, “remains a substantial burden among the youngest and oldest age groups”. After the presentations, the members of the ACIP asked whether the low absorption of the vaccine – some of which had actively sowed a doubt – should be considered as a reason not to recommend it.

“The fact [uptake is] If weak is a reflection of the lack of confidence that many parents have with the vaccination recommendation coded that the AIPI has given, “said Kulldorff. Who called the commentary, “a very important question”.

In another exchange, Pebsworth suggested that the CDC should examine “animal studies” and “reproductive toxicity” compared to COVVI-19 vaccines, arguing that only “10% of adverse events are reported”.

Dr. Sarah Meyer, researcher of the CDC immunization services division who presented on the subject, said that the figures referenced by Pebsworth were misleading because they even understood the most minor “adverse events”, such as painful weapons. “For serious reports, we are convinced that we get the majority of those who have been reported to” surveillance systems such as the vaccine adverse event report system (VAERS).

Instead, members had to vote solely on the opportunity to recommend a second monoclonal antibody, called Clesrovimab, for the syncytial respiratory virus (RSV) for all infants under eight months born during the respiratory virus season. The vote was postponed because the meeting took place late. The committee is expected to meet again on Thursday.

Other advisers who join the meeting reflect the way Kennedy has redone the Federal Health Department. Tracy Beth Høeg, doctor and epidemiologist who called for a more in -depth examination of vaccines. According to Politico, one of the experts scheduled for the panel is the nurse Lyn Redwood, the former president of the health defense of the Kennedy anti-vaccine group.

The key republican, Dr. Bill Cassidy, whose vote has helped to ensure Kennedy’s confirmation in HHS, called for the panel meeting, citing the “lack of experience” of the new members with vaccines and, in some cases, “preconceived of the parties against them”, according to Stat News.

In addition, the new agenda of the panel cited a study according to which the author cited said that he had not conducted or published, according to Reuters, continuing a model of the Kennedy health department producing references to blurred or non -existent studies, even though Kennedy on several occasions “standard” science.