Robert F Kennedy Jr, the US health secretary, is facing sharp criticism after sending a letter to a medical journal that recently retracted a paper suggesting a link between vaccines and infant death. Public health advocates accused him of attempting to intimidate and influence the journal's editorial process.
Kennedy Demands Answers from Toxicology Reports
Kennedy posted the letter on X, demanding the journal editor answer several questions about the decision to remove the paper by June 25. The paper, which suggested a link between vaccines and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), was retracted by Toxicology Reports after editors determined it was seriously flawed and could harm patients.
Criticism from Legal and Medical Experts
Dorit Reiss, a vaccine law expert at UC Law San Francisco, wrote on X that Kennedy's actions could violate the journal's First Amendment rights. Dr David Gorski, a surgical oncologist, noted that Kennedy, who portrays himself as pro-free speech, was using his position to pressure a private publisher.
“To antivaxxers, it’s free speech for me, but not for thee,” Gorski said.
HHS Defends Kennedy’s Actions
An HHS official defended Kennedy, stating that asking questions is not censorship and seeking an explanation is not coercion. The official said HHS is working to restore trust in public health through accountability and open scientific inquiry.
Journal’s Decision and Background
The journal’s editor, Lawrence Lash, and publisher, Elsevier, did not comment. Elsevier previously said the paper was removed after careful review because its conclusions could pose risks to public health. The paper, published in 2021 by Neil Z Miller, used VAERS data to suggest a causal relationship between vaccines and SIDS, but critics pointed out numerous methodological flaws.
Magdalen Wind-Mozley, a forensic scientist, called the paper “utter garbage” and said Kennedy’s attempts to bully the journal were inappropriate. Miller defended his work and expressed gratitude for Kennedy’s inquiry, hoping it would prevent retractions based solely on controversial findings.
