The decision affects the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), an independent panel of public health and medical experts that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on vaccine use. ACIP recommendations influence who receives vaccines, which are covered by insurance, and how national vaccination schedules are set.
Health policy specialists have warned that removing the entire committee could disrupt a long-standing regulatory process and erode confidence in vaccines at a time when immunisation rates in the US are already in decline.
Rather than restoring public trust, his actions are simply politicising science and vaccine policy,” said Lawrence Gostin, professor of public health law at Georgetown University. “I don’t know how it is possible to trust HHS anymore.”
Kennedy said on Monday the decision was intended to “re-establish public confidence” in vaccination. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which he leads, confirmed ACIP would still meet from 25–27 June, but with new members. A source familiar with the matter told CNBC the meeting would be run by an entirely reappointed panel.
The dismissal is the latest in a series of actions Kennedy has taken to revise US vaccination policy. One of his first decisions was to drop CDC recommendations for routine Covid-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women—moves that drew criticism from much of the scientific and medical community.
It remains unclear who will replace the panel, but public health academics have expressed concern that Kennedy could appoint individuals with anti-vaccine views. This could result in recommendations that focus on potential vaccine risks, or make vaccinations more optional, potentially reducing uptake.
“It’s really important that we recognise that these actions impact everyone,” said Dr Neil Maniar, public health professor at Northeastern University. “This is not just a committee that was retired. It is a committee whose work has broad implications.”
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Monday, Kennedy claimed the former ACIP panel was “plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine.”
Tina Tan, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, described Kennedy’s allegations as “completely unfounded” in an emailed statement. She said ACIP “has always operated with transparency and a commitment to protecting the public’s health.”
HHS advisory panels follow strict disclosure rules around potential conflicts of interest. Committee members must recuse themselves from decisions if any conflicts are identified.
“The secretary is using conflicts of interest as a ruse to ignore or cherry pick scientific evidence,” said Gostin. “ACIP members fully disclose all potential conflicts and excuse themselves from voting if there are any perceived conflicts.”
Kennedy’s action also appears to contradict a promise he made during his Senate confirmation hearing to Senator Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana and chair of the Senate health committee. Kennedy had assured Cassidy—who provided the crucial vote to advance his nomination—that he would not alter ACIP.
On Monday, Cassidy wrote on X that the concern now is “ACIP will be filled up with people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion,” though he said he would continue talks with Kennedy to “ensure this is not the case.”
The decision comes amid a sharp rise in measles cases across the US and ahead of the busy summer travel season. Experts say ACIP’s next recommendations will be particularly important in shaping school-entry vaccination rules before the autumn term begins.
Some Wall Street analysts warned the move could pose risks to vaccine manufacturers including Moderna, Merck, Pfizer and BioNTech, which rely on CDC recommendations to help sustain uptake.
“At worst, the committee could upend current recommendations for [new] and existing vaccines,” said Daina Graybosch, analyst at Leerink Partners. She added that the full impact of the move could not yet be assessed without knowing who will join the new panel.
BMO Capital Markets analyst Evan Seigerman said Kennedy’s decision is “a negative headwind” for the sector, noting that future appointees may be more sceptical of new vaccine guidance.
Even so, Seigerman said the broader impact may be limited. He pointed to Kennedy’s previous selections to lead the Food and Drug Administration and its biologics division—the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)—saying they had been “less negative for the sector than initially feared.”
“While RFK Jr.’s commentary surrounding vaccines has been consistently critical, we believe this has been well established with realistic headwinds largely priced in by the market,” Seigerman said.
In a statement on Tuesday, the American Academy of Physician Associates said it was “imperative that the administration acts promptly to reconstruct the committee through an open and transparent process that includes diverse provider voices,” including physician associates.
Other Aspect Publishing Titles
Copyright © 2024 Aspect Publishing Ltd