Introduction to RFK Jr.’s Stance on Vaccines
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime anti-vaccine activist, has promised not to “take away anybody’s vaccines.” However, experts say Kennedy can take steps that could drive drug companies to stop making vaccines entirely. Beyond restricting who is eligible for certain shots — as he’s already done for this year’s Covid vaccines — Kennedy’s actions could have far-reaching consequences.
Historical Context of Vaccine Production
In the 1980s, lawsuits fueled by the nascent anti-vaccine movement led more than a dozen manufacturers to stop producing vaccines, creating shortages, according to Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Domestic vaccine production survived only because Congress stepped in to create a no-fault alternative to the traditional legal system, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, or VICP, which protected vaccine makers from liability and created a special vaccine court to award financial damages to people harmed by vaccines, said Dr. Walter Orenstein, an infectious disease expert and emeritus professor of medicine at the Emory University School of Medicine.
The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
The program’s legal protections for plaintiffs and drugmakers have helped ensure the United States has a reliable supply of vaccines ever since, Orenstein said. As health secretary, Kennedy has that program in his sights. Kennedy — who has long cast vaccine manufacturers as the enemy and has been involved in litigation against them — has amped up his attacks on the VICP, criticizing the program on social media and TV.
In a July post on X, Kennedy disparaged the VICP as corrupt and “broken” and vowed to “fix it.” “The VICP routinely dismisses meritorious cases outright or drags them out for years,” Kennedy wrote. “Instead of ‘quickly and fairly’ awarding compensation, Special Masters dismiss over half of the cases.”
Safety and Efficacy of Vaccines
Vaccines are overwhelmingly safe and have saved 154 million lives over the past five decades, according to the World Health Organization. But about 1 in 1 million vaccinations causes a serious injury, such as a life-threatening allergic reaction or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which can cause monthslong paralysis, Offit said. The Pharmaceutical Manufacturers of America, an industry group, said that the VICP doesn’t shield drug companies from all liability. People whose claims are denied by the VICP can still sue in a traditional court, said Andrew Powaleny, a PhRMA spokesperson.
Potential Consequences of Undermining VICP
The program, which is funded through a 75-cent surcharge on vaccines, has helped thousands of people, Powaleny said, awarding $5.4 billion to plaintiffs since its founding. Offit said that eliminating or undermining the VICP could lead history to repeat itself. “If you want to destroy vaccines in this country, if your goal is to eliminate vaccine manufacturing in this country, the best way to do that is through attacking the VICP,” Offit said.
Opening the Floodgates
The VICP is not without its limitations, said Dorit Reiss, a professor and vaccine policy expert at the University of California, San Francisco School of Law. The program desperately needs more resources to address the backlog of cases, Reiss said. The program also allows families only three years to make a claim, even though some potentially serious injuries might not become apparent for four or five years. Although members of Congress have tried to pass legislation several times to give the VICP more resources — including the ability to hire more special masters, who act as judges — the efforts have never succeeded.
Changing Vaccine Recommendations
In order for vaccines to be included in the VICP, they must be recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Reiss said. If a vaccine is removed from the agency’s recommendations, people who believe they have been injured by that vaccine could no longer bring claims to the vaccine court and instead would have to go through the legal system, she said. An onslaught of lawsuits in traditional courts could prompt drug companies to conclude that making vaccines costs them too much money, leading them to leave the market, experts say.
Conclusion
RFK Jr.’s actions as health secretary could have significant consequences for vaccine production and public health. By undermining the VICP or changing vaccine recommendations, Kennedy could drive drug companies to stop making vaccines, leading to shortages and decreased immunity. It is essential to consider the potential consequences of these actions and to prioritize the safety and efficacy of vaccines.
FAQs
Q: What is the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP)?
A: The VICP is a no-fault alternative to the traditional legal system that protects vaccine makers from liability and creates a special vaccine court to award financial damages to people harmed by vaccines.
Q: What are the potential consequences of undermining the VICP?
A: Undermining the VICP could lead to a decrease in vaccine production, shortages, and decreased immunity.
Q: Can vaccine manufacturers be held liable for injuries caused by their vaccines?
A: Yes, people whose claims are denied by the VICP can still sue in a traditional court.
Q: What is the role of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in vaccine recommendations?
A: The CDC recommends vaccines that are included in the VICP.
Q: What are the potential consequences of changing vaccine recommendations?
A: Changing vaccine recommendations could lead to an onslaught of lawsuits in traditional courts, prompting drug companies to conclude that making vaccines costs them too much money, leading them to leave the market.
