Kennedy appoints controversial anti-vax lawyer to lead CDC vaccine study

In a recent decision, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services, appointed David Geier to oversee a new study commissioned by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which aims to investigate the possible connection between vaccines and autism. This announcement, made public in early April 2025, drew immediate criticism from various health professionals and media outlets. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board condemned the decision, highlighting Geier's controversial position as an anti-vaccine advocate who has previously faced disciplinary action for practicing medicine without a license. Geier’s appointment follows allegations that he has consistently propagated debunked theories tying vaccines to autism and other neurological damages in children. These claims have been largely discredited within the mainstream scientific community, which raises concerns about the objectivity and integrity of the CDC’s forthcoming study. The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal expressed serious doubts about the independence of the study's outcomes, arguing that appointing Geier undermines any hope for an impartial review of vaccine data. The rampant skepticism surrounding Kennedy's leadership continued to grow as he also pressured other health officials, such as FDA representative Peter Marks, to resign or be removed from their positions. Marks, who had played a significant role in the expedited approval of the COVID-19 vaccine, indicated his willingness to work with Kennedy but lamented the lack of a desire for transparency from the Secretary. This growing tension reflects deeper concerns about the potential impacts of Kennedy's appointment on public perceptions of vaccine safety and efficacy. Kennedy's actions, including his attempts to downplay public health threats like the measles outbreak in Texas and his directive to the National Institutes of Health regarding grants associated with mRNA technology, illustrate a broader agenda that some critics argue may further erode trust in public health agencies. Critics note that this trend of skepticism towards vaccines presents a significant challenge, especially as health officials aim to maintain confidence among the public, particularly given past critiques regarding the Biden Administration's pandemic policies. The Journal cautioned that if Kennedy continues to emphasize skepticism regarding vaccines that have historically saved many lives, it could further harm public trust in health guidance during a pivotal time for vaccine acceptance. Moreover, the CDC continues to face backlash over multiple issues, including the poor quality of research it has put forth during the COVID-19 pandemic. While addressing long COVID in children, several studies lack methodological rigor, relying on surveys rather than scientifically-backed measurements, which risks producing misleading conclusions. Past communications from the agency, which involved ambiguous language about childbirth and breastfeeding, were criticized for lacking clarity and objectivity. Even after the pandemic has ostensibly ended, the CDC's reputation remains in question as it grapples with the ramifications of previous missteps. Calls for scientific integrity and evidence-based conclusions resonate strongly among those tracking the agency’s development as Kennedy leads it in a new direction marked by controversy and division.