Bobby Kennedy at HHS: A Personal Perspective
It has only been a few weeks since Robert F. Kennedy was confirmed as the new Secretary of the U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Agency. But already he is being characterized in corners of the media and public health establishment as a threat to the nation’s health, whose first actions as Secretary ignore settled-science and are outside the mainstream of the previous HHS secretaries.
It is time to take a step back and halt the rush to judgment. Contrary to media headlines, Kennedy is not ending vaccines, or ignoring expert opinion, or taking ADHD medicines away from children.
The autism community is one of the health communities Kennedy has been active in over the years. As a member of this community since 1991, when my son was diagnosed, I’d like to offer a brief personal perspective on Kennedy’s involvement with our community, his approach to settled science, and how he does represent a break from his predecessors at HHS.
NIH Nominee Is ‘Convinced’ Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism, but Won’t Rule out More Studies on the Issue
Jay Bhattacharya, President Trump’s nominee to lead the National Institutes of Health (NIH), stated during his confirmation hearing Wednesday that he’s “convinced” by the data showing there is no link between the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and autism, but nevertheless left the door open to funding further studies investigating the question, clearly frustrating a key Republican senator.
That the presumptive leader of the NIH would endorse that autism isn’t linked to vaccines would not normally be notable. But Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a longtime vaccine critic and now the country’s health secretary, refused to say as much during his own confirmation hearing in January. If Bhattacharya is confirmed, he would work under RFK, Jr.
The question about the measles vaccine and autism was the first one Bhattacharya faced from the Senate health committee, and it came from the chair, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a physician and strong supporter of vaccination. Cassidy noted that the U.S. is facing a large outbreak of measles now in Texas, and that one child has died.
Trump Picked a Health Economist to Lead the N.I.H. It’s Not a Bad Idea.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the U.S.’ primary medical research agency. It is renowned worldwide for funding and leading science that has transformed the understanding of disease and spurred lifesaving medical treatments. It has historically been overseen by medical scientists and clinicians.
President Trump’s nominee to direct the NIH, Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, is a physician, too, but he’s mostly known as a health economist. As he faces a Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday, his nomination invites the question: Can a sharper focus on costs, incentives and efficiency improve American medical research?
Dr. Bhattacharya’s work, in part funded by the NIH, has spanned important areas of public health, including the role of government in driving medical innovation and the role of foreign assistance in broadening HIV care globally. I’ve worked with him, and we have published multiple studies together.
He has received criticism from some for his COVID-19 views (and support from others), including those in the Great Barrington Declaration, which he wrote with two others. But he is very bright, thinks seriously about how the tools of economics can improve health and finds excitement in his research.
He Fought Claims of Harm From Infant Formula. Now He Regulates It.
The new head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) division that regulates infant formula was in recent months a corporate lawyer defending a top formula maker from claims that its product gave rise to debilitating harm to premature babies.
Kyle A. Diamantas joined the FDA last month to lead the food division, leaving the law firm Jones Day, which has served as a pipeline of talent to both Trump administrations.
As a partner in Jones Day’s Miami office, Mr. Diamantas’s recent work included defending Abbott Laboratories in a lawsuit accusing the company of failing to adequately warn parents that its specialized formula for premature infants was associated with an elevated risk of a deadly bowel condition.
FDA Scolds Drugmaker Over Promotion That Touts ‘Misleading’ Comparison With Generics
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) scolded a company for a promotional display that falsely claimed its brand-name medicine was more effective than generic versions, which is apparently the first time the agency office responsible for monitoring advertising has cited such an issue.
In a Feb. 3 letter posted on the FDA website this week, the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion wrote that Edenbridge Pharmaceuticals displayed a panel about its Hemady treatment for multiple myeloma in a conference exhibit booth. However, not only was there a lack of important risk information, but the promotional panel also maintained there was greater patient adherence to its drug compared with generics.
The agency pointed out that the study cited by the company did not support this conclusion because of problems with the study design and methodology. For instance, it was not clear whether the patients given a generic version were newly diagnosed or had relapsed multiple myeloma, which are distinct patient groups that require different treatment regimens.
