RFK removes all members of CDC panel (ACIP) advising on vaccines

px_eliezer_ · 2025-06-09T21:55:01+00:00

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Monday said he is “retiring” all 17 members of a crucial government panel of vaccine advisors, a shocking step that could help to sow doubts about immunizations in the U.S. Kennedy claimed that the panel has been “plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine.” But all HHS agencies and their advisory panels have had rigorous policies for conflicts of interest, and there have been no related issues for years. All members of federal vaccine advisory committees are already required to comply with regulations around disclosing potential conflicts of interest. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/09/rfk-jr-cdc-panel-vaccines.html The ACIP truly has been the premier group, this is very unfortunate. All the ACIP member info is now GONE from the HHS site. Have to go to the WAYBACK MACHINE. https://web.archive.org/web/20250529042518/https://www.cdc.gov/acip/membership/index.html

egeezer

ugly95
The decision regarding thimerasol was made in direct conflict with the Secretary’s own mandate that vaccine and other decisions and recommendations be made based on large scale years long unbiased studies. There were none presented that supports their decision.

Based on this, and comparing the qualifications and experience of the fired members versus the new appointees, I have far less confidence in their ability to provide reliable recommendations.

GrumpyCanadian

Dks01 Someone is decimating public trust in health institutions, but it is not GAVI, nor is it GAVI that needs to “re-earn public trust”. The fact that the people actually responsible for that loss of trust are too blinded by their own ideology and lack of actual qualifications to see the truth is troubling.

robxr4ti

ugly95 You mean they believe in the fact that it WAS a lab leak. That’s much better than insisting a biological natural virus that no one can figure out where it came from.

robxr4ti

real_aurgathor we had to change the definition of “vaccination” to yours to explain why the Covid shot didn’t do jack.

robxr4ti

GrumpyCanadian the response to Covid is pretty much responsible for most of that distrust. We locked down the world, had governors send sick people into elder care facilities and then prevent people from going to the funerals for the dead relatives that the government caused. All this due to very disputable “science”. That’s why no one trusts the “experts” anymore.

real_aurgathor

robxr4ti we had to change the definition of “vaccination” to yours to explain why the Covid shot didn’t do jack.

Really?!? Can you quote both “old” and “new” definitions?

As for “didn’t do jack” – do you have any *evidence* to back up that flimflam, or you’re just blowing a blatherskite?

real_aurgathor

robxr4ti You mean they believe in the fact that it WAS a lab leak. That’s much better than insisting a biological natural virus that no one can figure out where it came from.

Only *some* people believe it was a lab leak. As for its origin, scientist in general agree that it came from bats, most likely from SE China, though the area of assumed origin is close to Laos and Vietnam.

Dks01

robxr4ti the response to Covid is pretty much responsible for most of that distrust

Total codswallop. Vaccination resistance dates back to the earliest smallpox vaccinations in 1803. The arguments have not changed.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9519518/

For some parents, the smallpox vaccination itself induced fear and protest. It included scoring the flesh on a child’s arm, and inserting lymph from the blister of a person vaccinated about a week earlier. Some objectors, including the local clergy, believed the vaccine was “unchristian” because it came from an animal.[3] For other anti-vaccinators, their discontent with the smallpox vaccine reflected their general distrust in medicine and in Jenner’s ideas about disease spread. Suspicious of the vaccine’s efficacy, some skeptics alleged that smallpox resulted from decaying matter in the atmosphere.[4] Lastly, many people objected to vaccination because they believed it violated their personal liberty, a tension that worsened as the government developed mandatory vaccine policies.

https://historyofvaccines.org/vaccines-101/misconceptions-about-vaccines/history-anti-vaccination-movements

JRB-Ware

real_aurgathor Really?!? Can you quote both “old” and “new” definitions?

We’ve been thru this over and over again. In 2021 the CDC inexplicably changed the definitions and deleted specific references to “producing immunity”. The definition was watered down.

How it was for decades just prior to the change.

https://web.archive.org/web/20210428085413/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm

The 2021 change.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220901034842/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm

Now it’s been fixed, and is back to being correct again. Induces immunity.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/glossary

ugly95

egeezer The decision regarding thimerasol was made in direct conflict with the Secretary’s own mandate that vaccine and other decisions and recommendations be made based on large scale years long unbiased studies. There were none presented that supports their decision.

I think the more concerning thing was that they relied on, almost completely uncritically, a presentation by a long-time friend of RFK Jr., and former head of RFK Jr.'s Children’s Health Defence. A presentation that was filled with inaccuracies (and AI fabricated citations). And then dismissed the presentation from CDC scientists because it was not authorized, as if evidence needs to be pre-approved by the ACIP members before presentation.

ugly95

robxr4ti You mean they believe in the fact that it WAS a lab leak. That’s much better than insisting a biological natural virus that no one can figure out where it came from.

That wasn’t even the point. The point was that the very people that insisted it was a lab leak (or a bioweapon) caused by dangerous research, also believed that the virus was so harmless that the best way to deal with it was to let everyone get infected. They were outraged at the research that produced the first infection from a lab, but were completely unconcerned with every infection afterwards.

But, believe is the key word here. Because the lab leak is purely a belief. It’s an entirely evidence-free and political position.

ugly95

JRB-Ware We’ve been thru this over and over again. In 2021 the CDC inexplicably changed the definitions and deleted specific references to “producing immunity”. The definition was watered down.

How it was for decades just prior to the change.

Yes, we have gone over endlessly how this was one of the dumber conspiracy theories out there. It was not inexplicably changed. It’s just that you don’t understand, and are unwilling to bother to understand the reason for the change.

So it doesn’t need to be brought up again, in a thread that’s about the ACIP members, and not about re-litigating COVID. Threads which have already been locked multiple times on these forums.

px_eliezer_

ugly95 I think the more concerning thing was that they relied on, almost completely uncritically, a presentation by a long-time friend of RFK Jr., and former head of RFK Jr.'s Children’s Health Defence. A presentation that was filled with inaccuracies (and AI fabricated citations). And then dismissed the presentation from CDC scientists because it was not authorized, as if evidence needs to be pre-approved by the ACIP members before presentation.

The “fix” was in, it could not have been any more obvious.

(At least they could TRY to pretend).

egeezer

robxr4ti All this due to very disputable “science”. That’s why no one trusts the “experts” anymore.

Now we are being told by the new bunch to rely instead on evidence free “science”, gut feelings, YouTube videos and unfounded opinions by snake oil salesmen and TV talking heads.

GrumpyCanadian

robxr4ti Others have already done a better job at debunking this, but I also have to point out that this bunch has been promoting this and a great deal more quackery since long before the pandemic. They come up with so much of it, that they don’t agree with each other, and sometimes with things they have previously said themselves. The fact that the confirmation process didn’t launch them out on their arses is irrefutable proof that those who should have objected have betrayed their oaths of office.

px_eliezer_

GrumpyCanadian

Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb on CBS Face The Nation this morning…

….it did lead to some awkward moments at that meeting. For example, you know, one member had to have explained to him the difference between an antibody prophylaxis and a vaccine. So there were evidence in that discussion where the CDC directors had to provide some, quite frankly, remedial assistance to help brief these (new ACIP) members on the basis of vaccine science….

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/scott-gottlieb-face-the-nation-transcript-06-29-2025/

robxr4ti

real_aurgathor tell us any time vaccinations were described by the “reduce the symptoms” before Covid. Never heard it used until the shot that gave you progressively worse side effects with each shot came into being. I stopped taking the shot because of the increasing side effects. If it was supposed to build up my immune system it did a horrid job of it.

robxr4ti

real_aurgathor only the ones applying logic and reason believe in the lab leak. If the bat nonsense is true, show us the infection trail. There is none and we’ve had plenty of time to establish that.

robxr4ti

Dks01 what you replied with had nothing to do with what I said. Did anyone ever describe the smallpox vaccine as it reduces the severity of smallpox when you get it?

robxr4ti

JRB-Ware and they still insist their revised definition is true even after it’s been switched back.

« Previous Page Next Page »