In late January, 2021, almost 24,000 Americans died from Covid in a single week. Less than five years later, the pandemic somehow appears to be part of the distant past.

Over the last 28 days, 22 people have been killed in mass shootings across America.

During the same period, there have been 672 deaths from Covid — almost three quarters of the number of Covid deaths recorded globally.

For the 2024–2025 season, the CDC reported that less than 25% of all Americans received the updated Covid vaccine.

If nothing else can be inferred from the data, Covid has clearly become an issue that does not concern the majority of Americans.

This lack of concern most likely reflects public ignorance more than informed choice, underlining the fact that public health relies both on education and access to care.

That’s the context in which RFK Jr., acting with the regal authority granted by his king, has decided to cut off access to the Covid vaccine for the majority of Americans.

Opposition to vaccination has in large part been opposition to coercion. Depriving people of the opportunity to get vaccinated appears to me to be no less coercive.

Following the firing of CDC Director Susan Monarez, Dr. Deb Houry, deputy director and chief medical officer, Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Dr. Jen Layden, director of the Office of Public Health Data, Surveillance and Technology, and Dr. Daniel Jernigan, director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, resigned within minutes of each other.

Dr. Deb Houry, Deputy Director for Program and Science/Chief Medical Officer wrote:

For the good of the nation and the world, the science at CDC should never be censored or subject to political pauses or interpretations. Vaccines save lives—this is an indisputable, well-established, scientific fact. Informed consent and shared decision-making must focus not only on the risks but also on the true, life-saving benefits that vaccines provide to individuals and communities. It is, of course, important to question, analyze, and review research and surveillance, but this must be done by experts with the right skills and experience, without bias, and considering the full weight of scientific evidence. Recently, the overstating of risks and the rise of misinformation have cost lives, as demonstrated by the highest number of U.S. measles cases in 30 years and the violent attack on our agency.

CDC must continue its work on all diseases, including noncommunicable health conditions, which include many of the leading causes of death in the US. I have seen the value of integrating these efforts with those of other CDC programs, as we did with the Zika virus. Integrating expertise from across the agency is critical to our effectiveness in addressing novel and emerging diseases. CDC has proven its value in addressing conditions like hypertension, diabetes, cancer, overdose, and mental health issues, as evidenced by the progress in reducing overdose deaths this year. However, proposed budget cuts and reorganization plans will negatively impact CDC’s ability to address these conditions, worsening the nation’s health. [Continue reading…]

Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, Director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases wrote:

I am unable to serve in an environment that treats CDC as a tool to generate policies and materials that do not reflect scientific reality and are designed to hurt rather than to improve the public’s health. The recent change in the adult and children’s immunization schedule threaten the lives of the youngest Americans and pregnant people. The data analyses that supported this decision have never been shared with CDC despite my respectful requests to HHS and other leadership. This lack of meaningful engagement was further compounded by a “frequently asked questions” document written to support the Secretary’s directive that was circulated by HHS without input from CDC subject matter experts and that cited studies that did not support the conclusions that were attributed to these authors. Having worked in local and national public health for years, I have never experienced such radical non-transparency, nor have I seen such unskilled manipulation of data to achieve a political end rather than the good of the American people. It is untenable to serve in an organization that is not afforded the opportunity to discuss decisions of scientific and public health importance released under the moniker of CDC. The lack of communication by HHS and other CDC political leadership that culminates in social media posts announcing major policy changes without prior notice demonstrate a disregard of normal communication channels and common sense. Having to retrofit analyses and policy actions to match inadequately thought-out announcements in poorly scripted videos or page long X posts should not be how organizations responsible for the health of people should function. [Continue reading…]