Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. may be preparing to remove members of the committee that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on vaccine policy, two anonymous sources told Politico.
The report followed the postponement of the regular meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, originally scheduled for Feb. 26-28.
ACIP is described as an independent, nonfederal expert body of professionals with clinical, scientific and public health expertise. The committee meets three times a year, typically in February, June and October to decide which vaccines should be recommended to the public, who should take them and how often — recommendations the CDC typically rubber stamps.
Next week’s meeting was to be the first since Kennedy was confirmed as HHS secretary. A CDC spokesperson would only confirm that the ACIP meeting will be “postponed to accommodate public comment in advance of the meeting,” and that ACIP workgroups met and will present as scheduled at the next meeting.
In addition to issuing general recommendations for shots like COVID-19, RSV, flu and others, the committee is responsible for adding vaccines to the CDC’s childhood immunization schedule. Currently, the CDC recommends that by age 18 a child receive at least 76 doses of 18 different vaccines — including the COVID-19 vaccine.
Once a vaccine is included on the childhood schedule, the drugmaker is protected from liability for any injuries associated with the shot. The combination of school vaccine mandates and no liability guarantees a steady revenue stream for vaccine makers.
“Most ACIP members have a financial conflict of interest with the pharmaceutical companies,” Dr. Meryl Nass, internist, biological warfare expert and long-time ACIP watchdog, said.
“Their decisions almost always appear to reflect pro-industry bias,” she said. “Although they are there to protect the public, few decisions seem to take the public interest into account as the primary concern.”
Kennedy, who has long raised concerns about public health regulators being captured by industry, made eliminating conflicts of interest a key pillar of his platform as HHS secretary. That process may have already begun, although Politico reported the review of committee members has just started and there is no firm timeline for removals.
When HHS postponed the ACIP meeting, mainstream media immediately raised concerns that the postponement signaled a coming shift in national vaccination policies, especially given Kennedy’s criticism of ACIP during his confirmation process.
Politico reported that Kennedy plans to replace members of HHS advisory committees who have conflicts of interest as part of his broader effort to intervene in Big Pharma’s undue influence over regulatory agencies. That effort is “likely to target” ACIP members.
Critics of ACIP told The Defender they were optimistic that the postponement, along with other actions already taken by the CDC such as ending its “Wild to Mild” flu shot campaign, might signal an important shift in vaccine policy and public messaging.
“This postponement raises questions about whether there are internal conflicts or strategic recalibrations underway at the CDC,” said Sayer Ji, founder and editor of GreenMedInfo.
“Given that the outgoing administration stacked ACIP with staunchly pro-vaccine appointees, one could speculate that the postponement is a stalling tactic to ensure continuity of their agenda. Alternatively, it could reflect an effort to re-evaluate and possibly restructure ACIP under new leadership.”
In its final days, the Biden administration quietly stacked ACIP with several new pro-vaccine members, a move intended to “insulate the scientific integrity of the panel from the incoming administration,” STAT News reported.
The outlet said these appointments were a direct response to President Donald Trump’s nomination of Kennedy to head HHS. However, Kennedy could override or otherwise bypass these selections.
Pediatrician Dr. Michelle Perro, founder of GMOScience, said she thought postponing the ACIP meeting was “a great idea,” because it opens the possibility “that vaccine policy decisions are made with greater transparency and scientific integrity, which has been lacking under the previous leadership.”
“There are concerns regarding conflicts of interest and the members of ACIP, lack of rigorous safety discussions, and rushed recommendations without sufficient long-term data review,” she said.
Drug safety advocate Kim Witczak, a member of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee, also celebrated the postponement, which she said is “not only acceptable, but necessary.”
She said the move “provides an opportunity to stop, reflect, and critically evaluate how the system is structured.”
Witczak added:
“We need to address conflicts of interest and bring in more safety-minded members, along with real-world consumers who understand the lived impacts of public health policies.
“Too often, panels like ACIP operate in a bubble, making decisions influenced by members’ self-interest and conflicts, rather than focusing on the people they’re meant to serve. This pause is a crucial chance to course-correct.”
Witczak said she would like to see the same level of scrutiny applied across all FDA advisory committees.
The postponement prompted a letter to Kennedy, CDC Acting Director Susan Monarez and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), chair of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee who voted to confirm Kennedy, but had raised concerns about his position on vaccines.
The letter, urging them to reschedule the meeting, was signed by the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other Big Pharma-aligned medical groups.
This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.
The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.
Kennedy: 97% of ACIP members have conflicts of interest
In his testimony before the Senate Finance Committee during his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said 97% of ACIP members have conflicts of interest.
“I don’t believe that that’s right. I think we need to end those conflicts and make sure that scientists are doing unobstructed science,” Kennedy said.
In the past, ACIP included a chair, an executive secretary and 15 voting members — 14 medical experts and a lay member representing consumers. However, Kennedy’s predecessor, former HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, made four new appointments. They are scheduled to join the committee on July 1, increasing ACIP’s roster to 19 members.
In recent years HHS has struggled to fill vacancies on the committee. When the committee met in February 2024 to make its spring recommendations, it lacked enough voting members to form a quorum. Vacant committee spaces on the “independent” committee had to be temporarily filled by government employees — ex officio members can be sworn in as temporary voting members.
In March 2024, HHS appointed nine new members to the committee to bring the membership up to 15. According to the journal Vaccine, “Stringent measures and rigorous screening” have been used to avoid the committee members having “real and apparent” conflicts of interest.
However, an investigation by The Defender revealed that all of those appointees except for the public member had received grant funding or consulting fees from major pharmaceutical companies, including vaccine makers like Pfizer, Moderna and Merck, or have worked for HHS or on recent HHS grants developing or testing vaccines or investigating how to improve vaccine uptake.
Many of them had been key public advocates for the COVID-19, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, crafting and promoting the CDC’s vaccine messaging in the media and in the clinic.
They joined an existing group of sitting ACIP members with similar conflicts of interest.
Ji said that to take control of ACIP out of the hands of the pharmaceutical industry:
“ACIP must undergo a fundamental shift toward transparency, accountability and scientific integrity. The revolving door between ACIP and pharmaceutical interests must be shut, and the committee should include independent scientists, clinicians, and patient advocates — not just industry-aligned experts.”
He called for changes within the committee, such as strengthening the conflict-of-interest policies and subjecting decision-making processes to more rigorous external review.
“If the public is to trust vaccine recommendations, they must be based on truly independent science rather than captured regulatory agencies,” he said.
Children’s Health Defense Senior Research Scientist Karl Jablonowski said the committee needs more diverse viewpoints unless the CDC wants it to continue to be a rubber stamp for industry.
“It would behoove the CDC for ACIP to include members with diverse science backgrounds able to ask the hard questions from a multitude of perspectives,” he said.
Nass said that finding unconflicted members “who see the public interest as their sole concern would be a great improvement.”
Related stories in The Defender
