fda

senate-confirms-cdc-director-as-top-fda-official-resigns-under-political-pressure

Senate confirms CDC director as top FDA official resigns under political pressure

As of yesterday, Susan Monarez is in and Vinay Prasad is out among top federal health officials.

In a 51–47 vote along party lines, the Senate confirmed Monarez as the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. She is the first nominee for CDC director to be required to get Senate confirmation, following a 2022 law requiring it. She is also the first person to serve in the role without a medical degree since 1953.

Monarez has a PhD in microbiology and immunology and previously served as the deputy director for the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) under the Biden administration. Monarez quietly helmed the CDC as acting director from January to March of this year but stepped down as required when Donald Trump nominated her for the permanent role. Before that, Trump had nominated Dave Weldon, but the nomination was abandoned over concerns that his anti-vaccine views would torpedo his Senate confirmation.

In contrast, Monarez aligns with the evidence-based public health community and has support from health experts. Jennifer Nuzzo, director of the Pandemic Center at the Brown University School of Public Health, told NPR that she has known Monarez professionally for more than a decade. “She’s a loyal, hardworking civil servant who leads with evidence and pragmatism and has been dedicated to improving the health of Americans for the entirety of her career,” Nuzzo said of Monarez.

Similarly, Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, told the outlet that Monarez “values science, is a solid researcher, and has a history of being a good manager. We’re looking forward to working with her.”

It remains to be seen how Monarez will balance evidence-based public health guidance with the ideologically driven choices of health secretary and fervent anti-vaccine advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Senate confirms CDC director as top FDA official resigns under political pressure Read More »

all-17-fired-vaccine-advisors-unite-to-blast-rfk-jr.’s-“destabilizing-decisions”

All 17 fired vaccine advisors unite to blast RFK Jr.’s “destabilizing decisions”

The members highlighted their medical and scientific expertise, lengthy vetting, transparent processes, and evidence-based approach to helping set federal immunization programs, which affect insurance coverage. They also lamented the institutional knowledge lost by the removal of the entire committee and its executive secretary, as well as cuts to the CDC broadly. Together they “have left the US vaccine program critically weakened,” the experts write.

“In this age of government efficiency, the US public needs to know that the routine vaccination of approximately 117 million children from 1994–2023 likely prevented around 508 million lifetime cases of illness, 32 million hospitalizations, and 1,129,000 deaths, at a net savings of $540 billion in direct costs and $2.7 trillion in societal costs,” they write.

They also took direct aim at Kennedy, who unilaterally changed the COVID-19 vaccination policy, announcing the changes on social media. This “bypassed the standard, transparent, and evidence-based review process,” they write. “Such actions reflect a troubling disregard for the scientific integrity that has historically guided US immunization strategy.”

Since Kennedy has taken over the US health department, many other vaccine experts have been pushed out or left voluntarily. Peter Marks, the former top vaccine regulator at the Food and Drug Administration, was reportedly given the choice to resign or be fired. In his resignation letter, he wrote: “it has become clear that truth and transparency are not desired by the Secretary [Kennedy], but rather he wishes subservient confirmation of his misinformation and lies.”

All 17 fired vaccine advisors unite to blast RFK Jr.’s “destabilizing decisions” Read More »

false-claims-that-ivermectin-treats-cancer,-covid-lead-states-to-pass-otc-laws

False claims that ivermectin treats cancer, COVID lead states to pass OTC laws

Doctors told the Times that they have already seen some cases where patients with treatable, early-stage cancers have delayed effective treatments to try ivermectin, only to see no effect and return to their doctor’s office with cancers that have advanced.

Risky business

Nevertheless, the malignant misinformation on social media has made its way into state legislatures. According to an investigation by NBC News published Monday, 16 states have proposed or passed legislation that would make ivermectin available over the counter. The intention is to make it much easier for people to get ivermectin and use it for any ailment they believe it can cure.

Idaho, Arkansas, and Tennessee have passed laws to make ivermectin available over the counter. On Monday, Louisiana’s state legislature passed a bill to do the same, and it now awaits signing by the governor. The other states that have considered or are considering such bills include: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and West Virginia.

State laws don’t mean the dewormer would be readily available, however; ivermectin is still regulated by the Food and Drug Administration, and it has not been approved for over-the-counter use yet. NBC News called 15 independent pharmacies in the three states that have laws on the books allowing ivermectin to be sold over the counter (Idaho, Arkansas, and Tennessee) and couldn’t find a single pharmacist who would sell it without a prescription. Pharmacists pointed to the federal regulations.

Likewise, CVS Health said its pharmacies are not currently selling ivermectin over the counter in any state. Walgreens declined to comment.

Some states, such as Alabama, have considered legislation that would protect pharmacists from any possible disciplinary action for dispensing ivermectin without a prescription. However, one pharmacist in Idaho, who spoke with NBC News, said that such protection would still not be enough. As a prescription-only drug, ivermectin is not packaged for retail sale. If it were, it would include over-the-counter directions and safety statements written specifically for consumers.

“If you dispense something that doesn’t have directions or safety precautions on it, who’s ultimately liable if that causes harm?” the pharmacist said. “I don’t know that I would want to assume that risk.”

It’s a risk people on social media don’t seem to be concerned with.

False claims that ivermectin treats cancer, COVID lead states to pass OTC laws Read More »

fda-rushed-out-agency-wide-ai-tool—it’s-not-going-well

FDA rushed out agency-wide AI tool—it’s not going well

FDA staffers who spoke with Stat news, meanwhile, called the tool “rushed” and said its capabilities were overinflated by officials, including Makary and those at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which was headed by controversial billionaire Elon Musk. In its current form, it should only be used for administrative tasks, not scientific ones, the staffers said.

“Makary and DOGE think AI can replace staff and cut review times, but it decidedly cannot,” one employee said. The staffer also said that the FDA has failed to set up guardrails for the tool’s use. “I’m not sure in their rush to get it out that anyone is thinking through policy and use,” the FDA employee said.

According to Stat, Elsa is based on Anthropic’s Claude LLM and is being developed by consulting firm Deloitte. Since 2020, Deloitte has been paid $13.8 million to develop the original database of FDA documents that Elsa’s training data is derived from. In April, the firm was awarded a $14.7 million contract to scale the tech across the agency. The FDA said that Elsa was built within a high-security GovCloud environment and offers a “secure platform for FDA employees to access internal documents while ensuring all information remains within the agency.”

Previously, each center within the FDA was working on its own AI pilot. However, after cost-cutting in May, the AI pilot originally developed by the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, called CDER-GPT, was selected to be scaled up to an FDA-wide version and rebranded as Elsa.

FDA staffers in the Center for Devices and Radiological Health told NBC News that their AI pilot, CDRH-GPT, is buggy, isn’t connected to the Internet or the FDA’s internal system, and has problems uploading documents and allowing users to submit questions.

FDA rushed out agency-wide AI tool—it’s not going well Read More »

uncertainty-loomed-as-fda-advisors-met-to-discuss-this-year’s-covid-shot

Uncertainty loomed as FDA advisors met to discuss this year’s COVID shot

Calling it a “practical question,” he asked, “If we were to change strains, can we assume that age-specific licensure won’t change for any of these [vaccine] products?” Currently, COVID-19 boosters are accessible to those aged 6 months and up.

Weir reiterated that there was no answer. Another FDA official, David Kaslow, chimed in to say only, “Rest assured that we’re engaging with the manufacturers on this topic.”

As a follow-up to that exchange, VRBPAC member and infectious disease expert Eric Rubin of Harvard University shot down the FDA’s plan to use randomized placebo-controlled trials for licensure for healthy children and adults. The plethora of observational data—aka real-world data—on the boosters shows clear efficacy, Rubin pointed out. That suggests that requiring people in a trial to take placebos despite the availability of a clearly effective treatment could be unethical.

It suggests “that a randomized controlled trial (RCT) has no equipoise right now, and that you cannot do one,” Rubin said. “I don’t think the RCT is feasible,” he added.

The selection

While the pushback and the questions lingered, the committee still had to select a strain. For now, omicron still reigns, and variants in the JN.1 lineage are still dominant. That is largely unchanged from last year, when vaccine makers were advised to target their seasonal shots against the JN.1 lineage generally, or KP.2, the leading variant in the JN.1 lineage at the time, specifically.

This year, advisors unanimously voted to stick with vaccines that target the JN.1 lineage, in line with recommendations from the World Health Organization. The question of targeting the JN.1 lineage was the only voting question the FDA tasked them with. But there was open discussion on a more specific recommendation. Given the regulatory uncertainty, advisors were divided on whether to stick with the JN.1 and KP.2 formulations from last year or recommend switching to the latest leading variant in the JN.1 family, LP.8.1.

Shortly after the meeting, the FDA announced that it would essentially leave it up to manufacturers; they could stick with JN.1 or KP.2 but, if feasible, switch to LP.8.1.

“The COVID-19 vaccines for use in the United States beginning in fall 2025 should be monovalent JN.1-lineage-based COVID-19 vaccines (2025–2026 Formula), preferentially using the LP.8.1 strain,” it said.

Uncertainty loomed as FDA advisors met to discuss this year’s COVID shot Read More »

under-rfk-jr.,-covid-shots-will-only-be-available-to-people-65+,-high-risk-groups

Under RFK Jr., COVID shots will only be available to people 65+, high-risk groups


FDA will require big, pricy trials for approvals for healthy kids and adults

U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testifies before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on Capitol Hill on May 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. Credit: Getty | Tasos Katopodis

Under the control of anti-vaccine advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Food and Drug Administration is unilaterally terminating universal access to seasonal COVID-19 vaccines; instead, only people who are age 65 years and older and people with underlying conditions that put them at risk of severe COVID-19 will have access to seasonal boosters moving forward.

The move was laid out in a commentary article published today in the New England Journal of Medicine, written by Trump administration FDA Commissioner Martin Makary and the agency’s new top vaccine regulator, Vinay Prasad.

The article lays out a new framework for approving seasonal COVID-19 vaccines, as well as a rationale for the change—which was made without input from independent advisory committees for the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Normally, the FDA’s VRBPAC (Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee) and the CDC’s ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) would publicly review, evaluate, and discuss vaccine approvals and recommendations. Typically, the FDA’s scope focuses on licensure decisions, made with strong influence from VRBPAC, while the CDC’s ACIP is principally responsible for influencing the CDC’s more nuanced recommendations on usage, such as for specific age or risk groups. These recommendations shape clinical practice and, importantly, health insurance coverage.

Makary and Prasad appear to have foregone those norms, even though VRBPAC is set to meet this Thursday to discuss COVID-19 vaccines for the upcoming season.

Restrictions

In the commentary, Markary and Prasad puzzlingly argue that the previous universal access to COVID-19 vaccines was patronizing to Americans. They describe the country’s approach to COVID boosters as a “one-size-fits-all” and write that “the US policy has sometimes been justified by arguing that the American people are not sophisticated enough to understand age- and risk-based recommendations. We reject this view.”

Previously, the seasonally updated vaccines were available to anyone age 6 months and up. Further, people age 65 and older and those at high risk were able to get two or more shots, based on their risk. So, while Makary and Prasad ostensibly reject the view of Americans as being too unsophisticated to understand risk-based usage, the pair are installing restrictions to force their own idea of risk-based usage.

Even more puzzlingly, in an April meeting of ACIP, the expert advisors expressed clear support for shifting from universal recommendations for COVID-19 boosters to recommendations based on risk. Specifically, advisors were supportive of urging boosters for people age 65 and older and people who are at risk of severe COVID-19—the same restrictions that Makary and Prasad are forcing. The two regulators do not mention this in their NEJM commentary. ACIP would also likely recommend a primary series of seasonally matched COVID-19 vaccines for very young children who have not been previously exposed to the virus or vaccinated.

ACIP will meet again in June, but without a permissive license from the FDA, ACIP’s recommendations for risk-based usage of this season’s COVID-19 shots are virtually irrelevant. And they cannot recommend usage in groups that the FDA licensure does not cover. It’s unclear if a primary series for young children will be available and, if so, how that will be handled moving forward.

New vaccine framework

Under Makary and Prasad’s new framework, seasonally updated COVID-19 vaccines can continue to be approved annually using only immunology studies—but the approvals will only be for people age 65 and over and people who are at high risk. These immunology studies look at antibody responses to boosters, which offer a shorthand for efficacy in updated vaccines that have already been through rigorous safety and efficacy trials. This is how seasonal flu shots are approved each year and how COVID boosters have been approved for all people age 6 months and up—until now.

Moving forward, if a vaccine maker wants to have their COVID-19 vaccine also approved for use in healthy children and healthy adults under age 65, they will have to conduct large, randomized, placebo-controlled studies. These may need to include tens of thousands of participants, especially with high levels of immunity in the population now. These trials can easily cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and they can take many months to complete. The requirement for such trials will make it difficult, if not impossible, for drug makers to conduct them each year and within a timeframe that will allow for seasonal shots to complete the trial, get regulatory approval, and be produced at scale in time for the start of the respiratory virus season.

Makary and Prasad did not provide any data analysis or evidence-based reasoning for why additional trials would be needed to continue seasonal approvals. In fact, the commentary had a total of only eight references, including an opinion piece Makary published in Newsweek and a New York Times article.

“We simply don’t know whether a healthy 52-year-old woman with a normal BMI who has had COVID-19 three times and has received six previous doses of a COVID-19 vaccine will benefit from the seventh dose,” they argue in their commentary.

Their new framework does not make any mention of what will happen if a more dangerous SARS-CoV-2 variant emerges. It also made no mention of vaccine usage in people who are in close contact with high-risk groups, such as ICU nurses or family members of immunocompromised people.

Context

Another lingering question from the framework is how easy it will be for people deemed at high risk to get access to seasonal shots. Makary and Prasad lay out a long list of conditions that would put people at risk of severe COVID-19 and therefore make them eligible for a seasonal booster. The list includes: obesity; asthma; lung diseases; HIV; diabetes; pregnancy; gestational diabetes; heart conditions; use of corticosteroids; dementia; physical inactivity; mental health conditions, including depression; and smoking, current or former. The FDA leaders estimate that between 100 million and 200 million Americans will fit into the category of being at high risk. It’s unclear what such a large group of Americans will need to do to establish eligibility every year.

In all, the FDA’s move to restrict and hinder access to seasonal COVID-19 vaccines is in line with Kennedy’s influential anti-vaccine advocacy work. In 2021, prior to taking the role of the country’s top health official, Kennedy and the anti-vaccine organization he founded, Children’s Health Defense, petitioned the FDA to revoke authorizations for COVID-19 vaccines and refrain from issuing any approvals.

Ironically, Makary and Prasad blame the country’s COVID-19 policies for helping to erode Americans’ trust in vaccines broadly.

“There may even be a ripple effect: public trust in vaccination in general has declined, resulting in a reluctance to vaccinate that is affecting even vital immunization programs such as that for measles–mumps–rubella (MMR) vaccination, which has been clearly established as safe and highly effective,” the two write, including the most full-throated endorsement of the MMR vaccine the Trump administration has issued yet. Kennedy continues to spread misinformation about the vaccine, including the false and debunked idea that it causes autism.

“Against this context, the Food and Drug Administration seeks to provide guidance and foster evidence generation,” Makary and Prasad write.

Photo of Beth Mole

Beth is Ars Technica’s Senior Health Reporter. Beth has a Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and attended the Science Communication program at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She specializes in covering infectious diseases, public health, and microbes.

Under RFK Jr., COVID shots will only be available to people 65+, high-risk groups Read More »

from-birth-to-gene-edited-in-6-months:-custom-therapy-breaks-speed-limits

From birth to gene-edited in 6 months: Custom therapy breaks speed limits

In the boy’s fourth month, researchers were meeting with the Food and Drug Administration to discuss regulatory approval for a clinical trial—a trial where KJ would be the only participant. They were also working with the institutional review board (IRB) at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia to go over the clinical protocol, safety, and ethical aspects of the treatment. The researchers described the unprecedented speed of the oversight steps as being “through alternative procedures.”

In month five, they started toxicology testing in mice. In the mice, the experimental therapy corrected KJ’s mutation, replacing the errant A-T base pair with the correct G-C pair in the animals’ cells. The first dose provided a 42 percent whole-liver corrective rate in the animals. At the start of KJ’s sixth month, the researchers had results from safety testing in monkeys: Their customized base-editing therapy, delivered as mRNA via a lipid nanoparticle, did not produce any toxic effects in the monkeys.

A clinical-grade batch of the treatment was readied. In month seven, further testing of the treatment found acceptably low-levels of off-target genetic changes. The researchers submitted the FDA paperwork for approval of an “investigational new drug,” or IND, for KJ. The FDA approved it in a week. The researchers then started KJ on an immune-suppressing treatment to make sure his immune system wouldn’t react to the gene-editing therapy. Then, when KJ was still just 6 months old, he got a first low dose of his custom gene-editing therapy.

“Transformational”

After the treatment, he was able to start eating more protein, which would have otherwise caused his ammonia levels to skyrocket. But he couldn’t be weaned off of the drug treatment used to keep his ammonia levels down (nitrogen scavenging medication). With no safety concerns seen after the first dose, KJ has since gotten two more doses of the gene therapy and is now on reduced nitrogen scavenging medication. With more protein in his diet, he has moved from the 9th percentile in weight to 35th or 40th percentile. He’s now about 9 and a half months old, and his doctors are preparing to allow him to go home from the hospital for the first time. Though he will have to be closely monitored and may still at some point need a liver transplant, his family and doctors are celebrating the improvements so far.

From birth to gene-edited in 6 months: Custom therapy breaks speed limits Read More »

trump-admin-picks-covid-critic-to-be-top-fda-vaccine-regulator

Trump admin picks COVID critic to be top FDA vaccine regulator

Oncologist Vinay Prasad, a divisive critic of COVID-19 responses, will be the next top vaccine regulator at the Food and Drug Administration, agency Commissioner Martin Makary announced on social media Tuesday.

Prasad will head the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), which is in charge of approving and regulating vaccines and other biologics products, such as gene therapies and blood products.

“Dr. Prasad brings the kind of scientific rigor, independence, and transparency we need at CBER—a significant step forward,” Makary wrote on social media.

Prasad, a professor in the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco, is perhaps best known for his combative social media postings and criticism of the mainstream medical community. He gained notoriety amid the COVID-19 pandemic for assailing public health responses, such as masking and vaccine mandates.

In an October 2021 newsletter, titled “How Democracy Ends,” Prasad compared the country’s pandemic responses to the rise of Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich. The post led New York University bioethicist Arthur Caplan to rebuke Prasad, writing in The Cancer Letter that the comparison is “ludicrous, dangerous, and offensive,” before adding “imbecilic.”

Prasad has also criticized the FDA for approving COVID-19 booster vaccines. Last year, he accused his predecessor as the head of the CBER, Peter Marks, of being “either incompetent or corrupt” for allowing the approvals.

“Absurd”

More recently, Prasad has heaped praise on new FDA Commissioner Makary, while continuing to criticize Marks. In early March, Prasad called Makary “smart, thoughtful, and disciplined” and “exactly what we need at the FDA.” Later in the month, he continued to take shots at Marks, writing: “You could replace Peter Marks with a bobblehead doll that just stamps approval and you would have the same outcome at FDA with lower administrative fees. Maybe something DOGE should consider.”

Trump admin picks COVID critic to be top FDA vaccine regulator Read More »

seasonal-covid-shots-may-no-longer-be-possible-under-trump-admin

Seasonal COVID shots may no longer be possible under Trump admin

Under President Trump, the Food and Drug Administration may no longer approve seasonal COVID-19 vaccines updated for the virus variants circulating that year, according to recent statements by Trump administration officials.

Since the acute phase of the pandemic, vaccine manufacturers have been subtly updating COVID-19 shots annually to precisely target the molecular signatures of the newest virus variants, which continually evolve to evade our immune responses. So far, the FDA has treated these tweaked vaccines the same way it treats seasonal flu shots, which have long been updated annually to match currently circulating strains of flu viruses.

The FDA does not consider seasonal flu shots brand-new vaccines. Rather, they’re just slightly altered versions of the approved vaccines. As such, the regulator does not require companies to conduct lengthy, expensive vaccine trials to prove that each slightly changed version is safe and effective. If they did, generating annual vaccines would be virtually impossible. Each year, from late February to early March, the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization direct flu shot makers on what tweaks they should make to shots for the upcoming flu season. That gives manufacturers just enough time to develop tweaks and start manufacturing massive supplies of doses in time for the start of the flu season.

So far, COVID-19 vaccines have been treated the exact same way, save for the fact that the vaccines that use mRNA technology do not need as much lead time for manufacturing. In recent years, the FDA decided on formulations for annual COVID shots around June, with doses rolled out in the fall alongside flu shots.

However, this process is now in question based on statements from Trump administration officials. The statements come amid a delay in a decision on whether to approve the COVID-19 vaccine made by Novavax, which uses a protein-based technology, not mRNA. The FDA was supposed to decide whether to grant the vaccine full approval by April 1. To this point, the vaccine has been used under an emergency use authorization by the agency.

Seasonal COVID shots may no longer be possible under Trump admin Read More »

fda-backpedals-on-rto-to-stop-talent-hemorrhage-after-hhs-bloodbath

FDA backpedals on RTO to stop talent hemorrhage after HHS bloodbath

The Food and Drug Administration is reinstating telework for staff who review drugs, medical devices, and tobacco, according to reporting by the Associated Press. Review staff and supervisors are now allowed to resume telework at least two days a week, according to an internal email obtained by the AP.

The move reverses a jarring return-to-office decree by the Trump administration, which it used to spur resignations from federal employees. Now, after a wave of such resignations and a brutal round of layoffs that targeted about 3,500 staff, the move to restore some telework appears aimed at keeping the remaining talent amid fears that the agency’s review capabilities are at risk of collapse.

The cut of 3,500 staff is a loss of about 19 percent of the agency’s workforce, and staffers told the AP that lower-level employees are “pouring” out of the agency amid the Trump administration’s actions. Entire offices responsible for FDA policies and regulations have been shuttered. Most of the agency’s communication staff have been wiped out, as well as teams that support food inspectors and investigators, the AP reported.

Reviewers are critical staff with unique features. Staff who review new potential drugs, medical devices, and tobacco products are largely funded by user fees—fees that companies pay the FDA to review their products efficiently. Nearly half the FDA’s $7 billion budget comes from these fees, and 70 percent of the FDA’s drug program is funded by them.

FDA backpedals on RTO to stop talent hemorrhage after HHS bloodbath Read More »

rfk-jr.‘s-bloodbath-at-hhs:-blowback-grows-as-losses-become-clearer

RFK Jr.‘s bloodbath at HHS: Blowback grows as losses become clearer

Last week, Health Secretary and anti-vaccine advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the Trump administration would hack off nearly a quarter of employees at the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees critical agencies including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

The downsizing includes pushing out about 10,000 full-time employees through early retirements, deferred resignations, and other efforts. Another 10,000 will be laid off in a brutal restructuring, bringing the total HHS workforce from 82,000 to 62,000.

“This will be a painful period,” Kennedy said in a video announcement last week. Early yesterday morning, the pain began.

It begins

At the FDA—which will lose 3,500 employees, about 19 percent of staff—some employees learned they were being laid off from security guards after their badges no longer worked when they showed up to their offices, according to Stat. At CMS—which will lose 300 employees, about 4 percent—laid-off employees were instructed to file any discrimination complaints they may have with Anita Pinder, identified as the director of CMS’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights. However, Pinder died last year, The Washington Post noted.

At the NIH—which is set to lose 1,200 employees, about 6 percent—new director Jay Bhattacharya sent and email to staff saying he would implement new policies “humanely,” while calling the layoffs a “significant reduction.” Five NIH institute directors and at least two other senior leaders have been ousted, in addition to hundreds of lower-level employees. Bhattacharya wrote that the remaining staff will have to find new ways to carry out “key NIH administrative functions, including communications, legislative affairs, procurement, and human resources.”

At CDC—which will lose 2,400 employees, about 18 percent—the cuts slashed employees working in chronic disease prevention, sexually transmitted diseases, HIV, tuberculosis, global health, environmental health, occupational safety and health, maternal and child health, birth defects, violence prevention, health equity, communications, and science policy.

Some leaders and workers at the CDC and NIH were reportedly reassigned or offered transfers to work at the Indian Health Services (IHS), an HHS division that provides medical and health services to Native American tribes. The transfers, which could require employees to move to a remote branch, are seen as another way to force workers out.

RFK Jr.‘s bloodbath at HHS: Blowback grows as losses become clearer Read More »

“this-will-be-a-painful-period”:-rfk-jr-slashes-24%-of-us-health-dept.

“This will be a painful period”: RFK Jr. slashes 24% of US health dept.

Health Secretary and anti-vaccine advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is slashing a total of 20,000 jobs across the Department of Health and Human Services—or about 24 percent of the workforce—in a sweeping overhaul said to improve efficiency and save money, Kennedy and the HHS announced Thursday.

Combining workforce losses from early retirement, the “Fork in the Road” deferred resignation deal, and 10,000 positions axed in the reductions and restructuring announced today, HHS will shrink from 82,000 full-time employees to 62,000 under Kennedy and the Trump administration. The HHS’s 28 divisions will be cut down to 15, while five of the department’s 10 regional offices will close.

“This will be a painful period,” Kennedy said in a video announcement posted on social media. Calling the HHS a “sprawling bureaucracy,” Kennedy claimed that the cuts would be aimed at “excess administrators.”

“I want to promise you now that we are going to do more with less,” he said in the video.

Kennedy and HHS said the cuts will save $1.8 billion each year. That’s about 0.027 percent of total federal spending, based on the $6.75 trillion the government spent in 2024, and about 0.06 percent of the $2.8 trillion HHS budget for that year.

The downsizing announced today includes significant cuts to the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institutes of Health.

Cuts upon cuts

The FDA will lose 3,500 employees, which The Wall Street Journal reported was about 19 percent of its staff. HHS did not provide current staff levels at the agency level or percentage cuts. The CDC, which will absorb the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR), will lose 2,400 employees (1,400 from CDC and 1,000 from ASPR). The Journal reported that to be about 18 percent of the total workforce. NIH will lose 1,200 employees, about 6 percent of its workers.

“This will be a painful period”: RFK Jr. slashes 24% of US health dept. Read More »