Burcum: As RFK Jr. sows vaccine doubts, a Minnesota-led effort pushes back on YouTube

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of commentary online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who heads the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has fired vaccine experts, rolled back key immunization recommendations and axed $500 million in research for promising mRNA vaccine technology.

He’s vowed to put “gold standard” science at the heart of his agency’s influential decisions. But recent developments raise the question of whether its processes are actually fueled by the pyrite standard. That mineral, which also has a metallic gleam, is often known as “fool’s gold.”

Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” report, released by the White House earlier this year, relies on citations that are “rife with errors, from broken links to misstated conclusions. Seven of the cited sources don’t appear to exist at all,” according to a nonprofit organization’s analysis. Another review of the so-called science behind the mRNA research cancellation, released on Wednesday, had a similarly concerning sum-up: “RFK Jr.’s ‘evidence’ doesn’t support ending the research — it makes the case for expanding it."

Thankfully, doctors and scientists are not standing idly by. University of Minnesota infectious disease expert Mike Osterholm is spearheading some of the most vigorous and valuable pushback. He’s part of a commendable volunteer team of experts who are working urgently to counter the vaccine doubts by providing credible, up-to-date and accessible data to help the public make informed health decisions.

This welcome initiative launched in April and is known as the Vaccine Integrity Project (VIP). At 1 p.m. Tuesday, VIP will make its YouTube debut with a scientific session to transparently review the evidence behind COVID, RSV and influenza immunizations. The session is open to the public. To watch it, go to tinyurl.com/VaccineIntegritySession.

The event is likely the first of several to come, but the initial focus on COVID, influenza and RSV immunizations is logical.

All three cause respiratory illness, with the crowded indoor conditions that colder weather brings facilitating spread. Flu shots are also typically updated yearly to combat whatever viral strains are expected to make people sick, with fall and early winter a time when many people get this shot or the COVID booster.

The focus on COVID immunization is timely, too. Earlier this year, Kennedy released a video shared on social media that looks more like a late-night mattress factory commercial than serious policymaking. In the 58-second video, he says with bizarre good cheer that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will no longer recommend the COVID vaccine for healthy pregnant women and children.

The video offers generalities about the changed pediatric recommendation. It does not address the reasons behind the pregnancy change, which is at odds with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The group’s president has criticized the move. ACOG’s online information continues to recommend COVID vaccination during pregnancy.

HHS officials have also taken steps to narrow access for COVID boosters to adults age 65 and up or those with health conditions considered to be risk factors for severe COVID. The boosters were previously recommended for everyone over the age of six months.

Fortunately, doctors generally have discretion in their practice. Someone who wants an approved vaccine but is outside new recommendations should still be able to get it if their doctor approves. A statement from the health insurance trade group this summer also suggests there will be coverage for the upcoming respiratory season.

For example, I’m older but not in that 65-and-up category for the COVID shot. I’m still interested in getting vaccinated. I have a full-time job, live on a farm and remain concerned about unknown long-term COVID health risks.

For those who fall into this group, and for health professionals who will face questions from patients like me, the VIP forum will be timely. The scientific review will go over the evidence but stop short of making recommendations.

The decision on that will be left to medical professional groups, like ACOG, which have long issued their own vaccination recommendations. The evidence vetted and aired through the VIP review will further aid them in this. The YouTube event is also an opportunity for everyday people to see what credible experts have found.

To those planning on watching, I’d book up a chunk of your day. VIP’s scientific experts, who volunteered their time, “screened approximately 16,000 abstracts, reviewed 755 full-text articles‚ and selected 547 papers for detailed data extraction,” according to a VIP backgrounder.

To Osterholm’s credit, during our interview he lauded the volunteer experts who have been burning the midnight oil evaluating the evidence on a tight deadline.