RFKjr Removes all 17 of the CDC Vaccine Advisor Board

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

The Old Order Amish have a life expectancy of 71 while the greater US population has a life expectancy of 79. What conclusions can be drawn from those numbers?

I'm seeing 75 for Amish. So that's what, 4 years on average for doing everything with "science" in its totality. How much of that 4 years can we attribute to vaccines?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the article from WSJ, and Kennedy Jr. isn't wrong that this was a group of people who may not have had the American people as their main concern:

That is why, under my direction, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is putting the restoration of public trust above any pro- or antivaccine agenda. The public must know that unbiased science guides the recommendations from our health agencies. This will ensure the American people receive the safest vaccines possible.

Today, we are taking a bold step in restoring public trust by totally reconstituting the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP). We are retiring the 17 current members of the committee, some of whom were last-minute appointees of the Biden administration. Without removing the current members, the current Trump administration would not have been able to appoint a majority of new members until 2028.

ACIP evaluates the safety, efficacy and clinical need of the nation’s vaccines and passes its findings on to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The committee has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine. It has never recommended against a vaccine—even those later withdrawn for safety reasons. It has failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women. To make matters worse, the groups that inform ACIP meet behind closed doors, violating the legal and ethical principle of transparency crucial to maintaining public trust.

In 2000 the House issued the results of an investigation of ACIP and another vaccine advisory committee under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. It found that enforcement of its conflict-of-interest rules was weak to nonexistent. Committee members regularly participated in deliberations and advocated products in which they had a financial stake. The CDC issued conflict-of-interest waivers to every committee member. Four out of eight ACIP members who voted in 1997 on guidelines for the Rotashield vaccine, subsequently withdrawn because of severe adverse events, had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies developing other rotavirus vaccines. A 2009 HHS inspector-general report echoed these findings. Few committee members completed full conflict-of-interest forms—97% of them had omissions. The CDC took no significant action to remedy the omissions.

These conflicts of interest persist. Most of ACIP’s members have received substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies, including those marketing vaccines. The problem isn’t necessarily that ACIP members are corrupt. Most likely aim to serve the public interest as they understand it. The problem is their immersion in a system of industry-aligned incentives and paradigms that enforce a narrow pro-industry orthodoxy. The new members won’t directly work for the vaccine industry. They will exercise independent judgment, refuse to serve as a rubber stamp, and foster a culture of critical inquiry—unafraid to ask hard questions.

A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science. In the 1960s, the world sought guidance from America’s health regulators, who had a reputation for integrity, scientific impartiality and zealous defense of patient welfare. Public trust has since collapsed, but we will earn it back.

Make a solid argument why this shouldn't happen. I am all ears.

Presumably, Paul Offit will soon be on TV explaining how so very dangerous this is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

The Old Order Amish have a life expectancy of 71 while the greater US population has a life expectancy of 79. What conclusions can be drawn from those numbers?

I'm seeing 75 for Amish. So that's what, 4 years on average for doing everything with "science" in its totality. How much of that 4 years can we attribute to vaccines?

You are missing a pretty big part of the equation with your example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

The Old Order Amish have a life expectancy of 71 while the greater US population has a life expectancy of 79. What conclusions can be drawn from those numbers?

I'm seeing 75 for Amish. So that's what, 4 years on average for doing everything with "science" in its totality. How much of that 4 years can we attribute to vaccines?

You are missing a pretty big part of the equation with your example.

You're right, the Amish population is actually increasing while the non-Amish population shrinks every year and has to be replaced with immigrants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

Studies show majority of the Amish vaccinate their children: https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-amish-covid-vaccines-cancer-diabetes-autism-356029928165

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

The Old Order Amish have a life expectancy of 71 while the greater US population has a life expectancy of 79. What conclusions can be drawn from those numbers?

Don’t bother with the flat earthers. They’ll all be dead soon. Darwin foretold all of this. Hopefully they don’t take too many of us down with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the article from WSJ, and Kennedy Jr. isn't wrong that this was a group of people who may not have had the American people as their main concern:

That is why, under my direction, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is putting the restoration of public trust above any pro- or antivaccine agenda. The public must know that unbiased science guides the recommendations from our health agencies. This will ensure the American people receive the safest vaccines possible.

Today, we are taking a bold step in restoring public trust by totally reconstituting the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP). We are retiring the 17 current members of the committee, some of whom were last-minute appointees of the Biden administration. Without removing the current members, the current Trump administration would not have been able to appoint a majority of new members until 2028.

ACIP evaluates the safety, efficacy and clinical need of the nation’s vaccines and passes its findings on to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The committee has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine. It has never recommended against a vaccine—even those later withdrawn for safety reasons. It has failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women. To make matters worse, the groups that inform ACIP meet behind closed doors, violating the legal and ethical principle of transparency crucial to maintaining public trust.

In 2000 the House issued the results of an investigation of ACIP and another vaccine advisory committee under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. It found that enforcement of its conflict-of-interest rules was weak to nonexistent. Committee members regularly participated in deliberations and advocated products in which they had a financial stake. The CDC issued conflict-of-interest waivers to every committee member. Four out of eight ACIP members who voted in 1997 on guidelines for the Rotashield vaccine, subsequently withdrawn because of severe adverse events, had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies developing other rotavirus vaccines. A 2009 HHS inspector-general report echoed these findings. Few committee members completed full conflict-of-interest forms—97% of them had omissions. The CDC took no significant action to remedy the omissions.

These conflicts of interest persist. Most of ACIP’s members have received substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies, including those marketing vaccines. The problem isn’t necessarily that ACIP members are corrupt. Most likely aim to serve the public interest as they understand it. The problem is their immersion in a system of industry-aligned incentives and paradigms that enforce a narrow pro-industry orthodoxy. The new members won’t directly work for the vaccine industry. They will exercise independent judgment, refuse to serve as a rubber stamp, and foster a culture of critical inquiry—unafraid to ask hard questions.

A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science. In the 1960s, the world sought guidance from America’s health regulators, who had a reputation for integrity, scientific impartiality and zealous defense of patient welfare. Public trust has since collapsed, but we will earn it back.

Make a solid argument why this shouldn't happen. I am all ears.

Not good reporting from the WSJ:

The statistic comes from an inspector general’s report in 2009, which found that 97 percent of the forms had errors, such as missing dates or information in the wrong section, not significant financial conflicts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

Studies show majority of the Amish vaccinate their children: https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-amish-covid-vaccines-cancer-diabetes-autism-356029928165

According one study in one county with a super low response rate:

January 2007, questionnaires for assessing attitudes regarding immunizations were mailed to a random sampling of 1000 Amish parents in Holmes County.

RESULTS:
Thirty-seven percent of the parents responded. Among the 359 respondents, 68% stated that all of their children had received at least 1 immunization, and 17% reported that some of their children had received at least 1 immunization. Only 14% of the parents reported that none of their children had received immunizations.

[Anonymous]

When will HHS admit the covid vaccine weren't safe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

The Old Order Amish have a life expectancy of 71 while the greater US population has a life expectancy of 79. What conclusions can be drawn from those numbers?

I'm seeing 75 for Amish. So that's what, 4 years on average for doing everything with "science" in its totality. How much of that 4 years can we attribute to vaccines?

You are missing a pretty big part of the equation with your example.

You're right, the Amish population is actually increasing while the non-Amish population shrinks every year and has to be replaced with immigrants.

The Amish are immigrants who never assimilated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

The Old Order Amish have a life expectancy of 71 while the greater US population has a life expectancy of 79. What conclusions can be drawn from those numbers?

I'm seeing 75 for Amish. So that's what, 4 years on average for doing everything with "science" in its totality. How much of that 4 years can we attribute to vaccines?

You are missing a pretty big part of the equation with your example.

You're right, the Amish population is actually increasing while the non-Amish population shrinks every year and has to be replaced with immigrants.

The Amish are immigrants who never assimilated.

Seriously. So odd the MAGAs apparently love these people who insist on speaking their native language and living as they did in their home country hundreds of years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Soon Americans will die as often as the Amish. Wait, how long do they live again?

As soon as vaccine rates fall below a certain rate, lots of people are going to get sick again, not just the Amish. Herd immunity can only protect the Anti-Vaxx free loaders up to a point.

[Anonymous]

RFK is trying to eliminate mRna from vaccines, personally which I agree. I'm not vaccinated for covid, however participated in two NIH vaccine studies in 2018 and 2019 and now have myocarditis. This morning's BP was 160/95.

The cure is worse than the disease.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the article from WSJ, and Kennedy Jr. isn't wrong that this was a group of people who may not have had the American people as their main concern:

That is why, under my direction, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is putting the restoration of public trust above any pro- or antivaccine agenda. The public must know that unbiased science guides the recommendations from our health agencies. This will ensure the American people receive the safest vaccines possible.

Today, we are taking a bold step in restoring public trust by totally reconstituting the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP). We are retiring the 17 current members of the committee, some of whom were last-minute appointees of the Biden administration. Without removing the current members, the current Trump administration would not have been able to appoint a majority of new members until 2028.

ACIP evaluates the safety, efficacy and clinical need of the nation’s vaccines and passes its findings on to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The committee has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine. It has never recommended against a vaccine—even those later withdrawn for safety reasons. It has failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women. To make matters worse, the groups that inform ACIP meet behind closed doors, violating the legal and ethical principle of transparency crucial to maintaining public trust.

In 2000 the House issued the results of an investigation of ACIP and another vaccine advisory committee under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. It found that enforcement of its conflict-of-interest rules was weak to nonexistent. Committee members regularly participated in deliberations and advocated products in which they had a financial stake. The CDC issued conflict-of-interest waivers to every committee member. Four out of eight ACIP members who voted in 1997 on guidelines for the Rotashield vaccine, subsequently withdrawn because of severe adverse events, had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies developing other rotavirus vaccines. A 2009 HHS inspector-general report echoed these findings. Few committee members completed full conflict-of-interest forms—97% of them had omissions. The CDC took no significant action to remedy the omissions.

These conflicts of interest persist. Most of ACIP’s members have received substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies, including those marketing vaccines. The problem isn’t necessarily that ACIP members are corrupt. Most likely aim to serve the public interest as they understand it. The problem is their immersion in a system of industry-aligned incentives and paradigms that enforce a narrow pro-industry orthodoxy. The new members won’t directly work for the vaccine industry. They will exercise independent judgment, refuse to serve as a rubber stamp, and foster a culture of critical inquiry—unafraid to ask hard questions.

A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science. In the 1960s, the world sought guidance from America’s health regulators, who had a reputation for integrity, scientific impartiality and zealous defense of patient welfare. Public trust has since collapsed, but we will earn it back.

Make a solid argument why this shouldn't happen. I am all ears.

Really horrific, unbalanced reporting by WSJ, not only including the misreporting of the 97% statistic, but also:

No, ACIP doesn’t have undisclosed conflicts of interest. RFK Jr. reaffirmed this process himself after he called for a full review of the current committee’s disclosures. Nothing was found. https://www.cdc.gov/acip/disclosures/by-member.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

No, ACIP isn’t paid by big pharma. An investigation in March 2025 found no systemic evidence of undue pharmaceutical company influence on the members. https://www.science.org/content/article/rfk-jr-says-federal-vaccine-advisers-are-beholden-industry-evidence-does-not-support?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Yes, ACIP has voted against a vaccine. Some examples include RotaShield (1999), nasal influenza vaccines (2016-2017), Johnson and Johnson Covid-19 vaccine (2021).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RFK is trying to eliminate mRna from vaccines, personally which I agree. I'm not vaccinated for covid, however participated in two NIH vaccine studies in 2018 and 2019 and now have myocarditis. This morning's BP was 160/95.

The cure is worse than the disease.

I had to go to multiple family zoom funerals for covid deaths and my kid has long covid so the disease is very very very bad.