Opinion | The disbelief and alarm of being a doctor watching Trump's plans to destroy public health

Dr. Kavita Patel
Fri, November 1, 2024 

Howard Lutnick arrives at a campaign event for former President Donald Trump at Madison Square Garden in New York on Oct. 27, 2024.

As a physician on the front lines of public health, I find myself in a state of constant disbelief and growing alarm, watching the level of disinformation and dangerous false rhetoric around public health emanating from Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. A recent CNN interview with Howard Lutnick, co-chair of the Trump-Vance transition team, has sent shockwaves through the medical community. Lutnick’s casual endorsement of long-debunked vaccine conspiracy theories wasn’t just a momentary lapse in judgment — it was akin to tossing a lit match into a powder keg of public health concerns.

But the true bombshell came when Lutnick suggested that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a notorious anti-vaccine activist, might be granted access to federal vaccine data in a potential Trump administration. This isn’t just alarming. It’s a potential catastrophe waiting to unfold. Imagine, if you will, giving the keys to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s data vaults to someone who has spent years spreading misinformation about vaccines. It’s like asking a flat-earther to pilot our next mission to space.

The implications are staggering and, frankly, terrifying for those of us dedicated to protecting public health. We are not just talking about a difference of opinion here. This is about the potential undermining of decades of rigorous scientific research and life-saving public health initiatives. It’s about potentially reversing the hard-won victories against diseases that once ravaged populations.



During his interview, Lutnick made several troubling claims. He reiterated debunked conspiracy theories linking vaccines to autism in children. He questioned vaccine safety, asking, “Why do you believe vaccines are safe? There’s no product liability anymore.” And he expressed enthusiasm about potentially giving Kennedy access to vaccine safety data, stating, “Let’s give him the data. I think it’ll be pretty cool to give him the data. Let’s see what he comes up with. I think it’s pretty fun.”

These statements demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of vaccine science and the rigorous safety protocols in place. Lutnick’s comments are particularly concerning given his position as co-chair of a potential presidential transition team. His willingness to entertain and propagate discredited theories about vaccine safety could have far-reaching consequences if such views were to influence public health policy.

It’s crucial to reiterate that vaccines currently authorized for use in the United States have been proven to be safe and effective, with ongoing monitoring for any risks or side effects. The 1986 legislation that Lutnick referenced, which established a federal program to compensate individuals for rare adverse effects, did not alter the stringent safety and approval standards for vaccines.

Lutnick’s suggestion that Kennedy might be given access to vaccine safety data in a Trump administration is deeply troubling. Kennedy has a history of promoting anti-vaccine rhetoric, and giving him a platform to further these views could seriously undermine public trust in vaccines.



The scientific consensus on vaccine safety and their lack of connection to autism is overwhelming and based on extensive research spanning decades. Numerous large-scale, well-designed studies involving hundreds of thousands of children have consistently found no link between vaccines and autism. A 2019 study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine examined over 650,000 children born in Denmark between 1999 and 2010. The researchers found no increased risk of autism in children who received the MMR vaccine compared to those who did not. A 2015 study in JAMA involving nearly 100,000 children found no link between the MMR vaccine and autism, even in children with older siblings who had autism. Finally, a comprehensive review by the Institute of Medicine in 2004 examined hundreds of studies and concluded that the evidence “favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.”

These studies, along with many others, form the basis of the scientific consensus. Major health organizations worldwide, including the World Health Organization, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Academy of Pediatrics, all affirm the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

By promoting discredited theories, individuals like Lutnick are not just contradicting established science; they are potentially endangering public health. Vaccines have been instrumental in reducing infant mortality by 40% globally and by more than 50% in Africa over the past five decades. They have saved an estimated 154 million lives since 1974, including 146 million children under 5 years old.

As medical professionals and public health advocates, we must stand firm against the spread of misinformation. The health and safety of our communities depend on it. Vaccines save lives, and we cannot allow discredited theories to undermine this crucial tool in public health.

This article was originally published on MSNBC.com

Opinion
One More Damned Time: Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism 

Ronald Bailey
Fri, November 1, 2024 

Jen Golbeck / SOPA Images/Sipa USA/Newscom

Yesterday, Howard Lutnick, co-chair of the Trump-Vance transition team, revived the myth that vaccines cause autism spectrum disorders (ASD). During an interview with CNN's Kaitlan Collins about what role Robert F. Kennedy Jr. might play in a future Trump administration, Lutnick took a strange detour into the bogus claims that childhood vaccinations cause autism:

I spent two and a half hours this week with Bobby Kennedy and it was the most extraordinary thing because, let's face it, we've all heard on the news all sorts of snarky comments about him. I said, "So tell me how's it going to go?" And he said, "Why don't you just listen to me?" And what he explained was that when he was born, we had three vaccines and autism was one in ten thousand. Now a baby is born with 76 vaccines because in 1986, they waived product liability for vaccines. And here's the best one, they started paying people at the [National Institutes of Health], right? They pay them a piece of the money from the vaccine companies. Wait a minute, let me finish. And so all of these vaccines came out without product liability. So what happened now is that autism is now 1 in 34. Amazing.

During a Fox News interview in 2023, Kennedy reiterated, "I do believe that autism comes from vaccines." Despite the claims by Kennedy, now being echoed by Lutnick, years of research have turned up no evidence that childhood vaccinations cause autism spectrum disorders. Of course, nearly any medical treatment will have some adverse side effects in some people. However, a 2021 comprehensive analysis of vaccine safety by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality found "no new evidence of increased risk for key adverse events following administration of vaccines that are routinely recommended for adults, children, and pregnant women."

Lutnick is right that autism diagnoses have risen substantially. If not childhood vaccinations, what accounts for this increase? First, greater awareness means that many people with autism spectrum disorder who in the past would have been missed by clinicians are now being identified. However, a 2020 review article in Molecular Psychiatry reports that changes in diagnostic criteria "has been accompanied by a 20-fold increase in the reported prevalence of ASD over the last 30 years, reaching a current prevalence of more than 2% in the United States." This contributes to the likelihood of over-diagnosis and a shift toward autism diagnoses in place of other mental health conditions.

Piling on the anti-vaccine bandwagon, in his interview this week with podcaster Joe Rogan, Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance said that he had gotten "red pilled on the whole vax thing" when he felt ill for two days after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine shot. While his side effects were certainly no fun, research shows that such a strong reaction correlates with a robust immune response that produces greater quantities of longer-lasting protective antibodies.

What about Lutnick's point concerning waived liability? In his 1985 article, "Vaccines and Product Liability: A Case of Contagious Litigation" in the Cato Institute's Regulation magazine, University of Virginia law professor Edmund Kitch explained how the liability system was unable to properly balance the public benefits of vaccines against their private harms. The result of this imbalance was killing off vaccine innovation and production. So Congress a year later chose to change the liability system with respect to vaccines in 1986 with the adoption of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 established the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which provides compensation to people who are injured by certain vaccines.

And the benefits of vaccines are enormous. A 2024 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention review finds that "among children born during 1994–2023, routine childhood vaccinations will have prevented approximately 508 million cases of illness, 32 million hospitalizations, and 1,129,000 deaths, resulting in direct savings of $540 billion and societal savings of $2.7 trillion."

At his Madison Square Garden campaign rally, former President Donald Trump said he is going to let Kennedy "go wild on health. I'm going to let him go wild on the food. I'm going to let him go wild on the medicines."

Alarmingly, the Trump campaign appears to be all in on Kennedy's debunked anti-vax crusade.

The post One More Damned Time: Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism appeared first on Reason.com.


An Idaho health department isn't allowed to give COVID-19 vaccines anymore. Experts say it's a first

DEVI SHASTRI
Updated Fri, November 1, 2024

FILE - A syringe lies next to vials of COVID-19 booster vaccines at an inoculation station in Jackson, Miss., Friday, Nov. 18, 2022. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis, File)
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways


A regional public health department in Idaho is no longer providing COVID-19 vaccines to residents in six counties after a narrow decision by its board.

Southwest District Health appears to be the first in the nation to be restricted from giving COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccinations are an essential function of a public health department.

While policymakers in Texas banned health departments from promoting COVID vaccines and Florida's surgeon general bucked medical consensus to recommend against the vaccine, governmental bodies across the country haven't blocked the vaccines outright.

“I'm not aware of anything else like this,” said Adriane Casalotti, chief of government and public affairs for the National Association of County and City Health Officials. She said health departments have stopped offering the vaccine because of cost or low demand, but not based on “a judgment of the medical product itself.”

The six-county district along the Idaho-Oregon border includes three counties in the Boise metropolitan area. Demand for COVID vaccines in the health district has declined — with 1,601 given in 2021 to 64 so far in 2024. The same is true for other vaccines: Idaho has the highest childhood vaccination exemption rate in the nation, and last year, the Southwest District Health Department rushed to contain a rare measles outbreak that sickened 10.

On Oct. 22, the health department’s board voted 4-3 in favor of the ban — despite Southwest's medical director testifying to the vaccine's necessity.

“Our request of the board is that we would be able to carry and offer those (vaccines), recognizing that we always have these discussions of risks and benefits,” Dr. Perry Jansen said at the meeting. “This is not a blind, everybody-gets-a-shot approach. This is a thoughtful approach.”

Opposite Jansen's plea were more than 290 public comments, many of which called for an end to vaccine mandates or taxpayer funding of the vaccines, neither of which are happening in the district. At the meeting, many people who spoke are nationally known for making the rounds to testify against COVID vaccines, including Dr. Peter McCullough, a Texas cardiologist who sells “contagion emergency kits” that include ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine — drugs that have not been approved to treat COVID-19 and can have dangerous side effects.

Board Chairman Kelly Aberasturi was familiar with many of the voices who wanted the ban, especially from earlier local protests of pandemic measures.

Aberasturi, who told The Associated Press that he's skeptical of COVID-19 vaccines and national public health leaders, said in the meeting and in an interview with the AP that he was supportive of but “disappointed” in the board's decision.

He said the board had overstepped the relationship between patients and their doctors — and possibly opened a door to blocking other vaccines or treatments.

Board members in favor of the decision argued people can get vaccinated elsewhere, and that providing the shots was equivalent to signing off on their safety. (Some people may be reluctant to get vaccinated or boosted because of misinformation about the shots despite evidence that they’re safe and have saved millions of lives.)

The people getting vaccinated at the health department — including people without housing, people who are homebound and those in long-term care facilities or in the immigration process — had no other options, Jansen and Aberasturi said.

“I’ve been homeless in my lifetime, so I understand how difficult it can be when you’re ... trying to get by and get ahead,” Aberasturi said. “This is where we should be stepping in and helping.

"But we have some board members who have never been there, so they don’t understand what it’s like.”

State health officials have said that they “recommend that people consider the COVID-19 vaccine.” Idaho health department spokesperson AJ McWhorter declined to comment on “public health district business,” but noted that COVID-19 vaccines are still available at community health centers for people who are uninsured.

Aberasturi said he plans to ask at the next board meeting if the health department can at least be allowed to vaccinate older patients and residents of long-term care facilities, adding that the board is supposed to be caring for the “health and well-being” of the district's residents. "But I believe the way we went about this thing is we didn't do that due diligence.”

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.