Western States reassert vaccine Review Amidโ CDC Concerns
California, Oregon, and Washington are reviving a collaborative scientific review process for COVID-19 vaccines, mirroring an initiative frist launched in 2020. This moveโฃ comes amidst growing concerns about the direction of the Centers for disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under its current director, andโ a broader national debate over vaccine policy.
The original effortโค began during President Trump’sโ first term, fueled by anxieties โthat the White House, through Operation Warp Speed, โmight expedite vaccineโ approvals without sufficient independent scrutiny. Scientists โfrom the California Department of Public Health, along with colleagues in the other states, independently reviewed data for newlyโฃ FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines. The group, initially known as California’s โฃscientific safety review, later expanded and was renamed the Western statesโค Scientific Safety Review โขWorkgroup.Their collective assessment ultimatelyโฃ affirmed the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines.
Now, with over 1,000 current and former U.S. Health and Human Services officials publicly calling for the current CDC director’s resignation,the three states are โreactivating the workgroup to provide what they deem a โคcredible source of information regarding โคvaccineโค safety and efficacy.
The situation is unfolding as the CDC director โis scheduled to testify before the Senate Finance Committee on Thursday, facing anticipated bipartisan questioning โคregarding his approach to vaccine policy. Senator Bill cassidy (R-Louisiana), a committeeโฃ member, has pledged increased oversight of the agency.
While currently largely symbolic – offering an alternative โviewpoint to the CDC – the โalliance risks โexacerbating existing polarizationโ within healthcare, according to Dr. โคPeter chin-Hong, โan infectious disease expert at UC San Francisco. He emphasized the importance of collaboration across the political spectrum among healthcare professionals. โ Similar state โคalliancesโ are also emerging, includingโ one in the Northeast encompassing eight states, and another comprised โฃof healthcare systemsโข in the upper Midwest. Chin-Hong characterized the movement asโ “peopleโข standing up for science”โข and providing a counter-narrative to theโข CDC’s messaging.
Though,theโ revival of independent review raises questions โฃabout funding for vaccination programs. Insurance coverage typically aligns with CDC recommendations, and aโ lack of federal endorsement could create uncertainty regarding vaccine accessibility. the move also occurs against a backdrop of increasing resistance to immunizations, exemplified โby Florida’s recentโ decision to eliminate vaccine mandates in public schools.
Dr. Jake Scott,โข an infectiousโฃ disease physician and clinical associate professor at Stanfordโ School of medicine, cautioned โthat the allianceโค could invite repercussions from โฃthe current management and its supporters, perhaps including reduced federal funding or increased regulatory scrutiny. Despite these risks,Scott argued that โthe potentialโ consequences of inactionโฃ – allowing preventableโข diseases to spread,eroding public โtrust in vaccines,and disregarding decades โฃof medical evidence – are far moreโฃ severe. “these states really don’t have a choice here, regardless of the political fallout,” he stated.
(Rong-Gong โLin of the Los Angeles Times contributed to this report.)