National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Jayanta Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D., spent much of a Senate committee hearing dancing around direct answers—except when it came to vaccines, a topic in which he finally delivered a clear view on the technology’s lack of ties to autism.
Feb. 3, members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee met to hear from Bhattacharya about his efforts to modernize the biomedical research agency. The lawmakers grilled the NIH director over vaccine mistrust, sweeping disruptions to research funding and trials, and reshaping the agency’s leadership team.
Referencing extensive studies from the American Medical Association that found “an abundance of evidence from decades of scientific studies shows no link between vaccines and autism,” Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders asked the NIH leader what steps the agency was taking to ensure that health policy “is guided by scientists and not conspiracy theorists.”
In response, Stanford economist Bhattacharya said he was “absolutely convinced” that “the measles epidemic that we’re seeing currently is best solved by parents vaccinating their children.”
The NIH leader pointed instead toward “the deep distrust that has developed over the last several years by the public” for vaccines—an argument he has used repeatedly to explain the federal government’s varying stances on the technology.
Previously, he blamed the government’s discontinuation of mRNA vaccine development on public distrust, an explanation that differed from the justification given by Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) head Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who said “the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu.”
“You’re right. There is deep mistrust,” Sanders said in response to Bhattacharya during the committee hearing. “Do you think that deep mistrust now has something to do when you have an organization like the American Medical Association telling us that vaccines do not cause autism, but you have a secretary of HHS who says the very opposite?”
Bhattacharya didn’t directly respond, instead referring to a stat from the Journal of the American Medical Association that only about 40% of patients said they still trust physicians or hospitals in 2024, emphasizing that the findings occurred a year before RFK Jr. took office.
For decades, RFK Jr. has been known to promote anti-vaccine conspiracy theories. Since the lawyer stepped into his federal health leadership role, he’s ousted all 17 sitting members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which helps the CDC make vaccine recommendations. He then swiftly restaffed the panel with controversial new members, some of whom are skeptical of vaccine safety and efficacy.
“Let me ask you a simple question,” Sanders said to Bhattacharya. “Do vaccines cause autism? Tell that to the American people, yes [or] no.”
“I do not believe that the measles vaccine causes autism,” the NIH director said.
“I didn’t ask measles—do vaccines cause autism?” Sanders asked again.
“I have not seen a study that suggests any single vaccine causes autism,” Bhattacharya answered.
Disruptions at the NIH—and beyond
The hearing also centered around the last year of disruptions at the agency, which have included mass layoffs and research grant terminations.
“Recent actions at NIH have created uncertainty within the American research enterprise and potentially undermine the agency’s ability to serve,” said Louisiana Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, M.D., who chairs the HELP committee.
“Last year, NIH terminated more than 1,000 awards amounting to $721 million, among them were 58 projects on Alzheimer’s, 99 on HIV/AIDS and 97 related to lifesaving vaccines,” Cassidy explained.
Under President Donald Trump, federal health agencies have started to pull funding for science that doesn’t align with his executive orders, which declare that the U.S. government only recognizes two sexes and demand that diversity efforts are dismantled.
“It even appears to have canceled six projects examining biological differences between women and men, which I thought was a priority for President Trump,” Cassidy continued.
“I say this as a strong conservative: We need taxpayer dollars to research, to help families, not to have it subject to political ideology which masquerades as science,” the Republican senator said, adding that this would include “correcting progressive Biden-era actions that coerced scientists into including DEI language.”
“But we can get rid of DEI without upending lifesaving research in America’s biomedical leadership,” Cassidy said a bit later. “Canceling critical investments that have long enjoyed bipartisan support erodes trust and make substantive reforms less likely.”
Vermont’s Sanders built off comments Cassidy made about American patients, saying that the committee’s chair “talked about how, all over this country, people with serious illness are looking for hope.”
“They want breakthroughs. They want to know if they will survive cancer,” Sanders said.
“The NIH has terminated or frozen $273 million in cancer research since Trump was inaugurated,” Sanders continued, citing a new report his office released Feb. 3.
“In total, the NIH has terminated or frozen at least $561 million in research and defunded more than 300 clinical trials dealing with heart disease, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, dementia and pediatric brain tumors,” Sanders said.
Democratic Washington Sen. Patricia Murray had an exact number—in less than six months, the Trump administration terminated 383 active NIH clinical trials, including 118 cancer studies, she said.
“Those patients are in a race for time,” Murray said, turning to Bhattacharya. “Can you guarantee to us today that NIH will not terminate grants in this wide-ranging, haphazard way again this year?”
Bhattacharya did not provide confirmation, instead responding that “… it’s hard to predict the future.”
“The researchers in New Hampshire whose patients have suffered would like to know, have you studied the impact of your funding disruptions … Have you studied the impact on actual cancer patients who were mid-trial?” Senator Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., asked.
Bhattacharya didn’t respond about a disruption analysis, but said the agency made sure that researchers “had the resources they needed” so patients would be able to continue care, adding that the NIH’s commitment “to funding cancer research is undiminished.”
When Hassan asked again whether an impact study of the disruption was being conducted, Bhattacharya said he didn’t believe that patients’ care was disrupted.
The federal agency leader then added that even if there was a disruption to trials, “It is the responsibility of the researchers that were managing the patients, not the NIH.”
“That is really an unacceptable and outrageous response,” Hassan replied.
“I know that [in] my state there were disruptions in these studies that have really put patients at risk,” she said a moment later. “And you all should be interested in that data, and you should be working to find out whether it happened.”
Meanwhile, Washington’s Murray took issue with the leadership turnover and shake-ups occurring at the agency, particularly for advisory councils, which are a necessary step in awarding research grants.
“This time last year, all of NIH institutes and centers were prohibited from holding advisory council meetings,” Murray said.
“Under your leadership, advisory council members have not been replaced at the end of their terms, and for the first time in NIH’s 139-year history, you completely disbanded the advisory committee to the director,” Murray continued. “It has not met in more than a year.”
“More than half of NIH institutes are set to lose all of their voting advisory committee members by the end of 2026. In fact, one of the institute’s councils is going to have no members by the end of this month since grants cannot be funded without council approval,” Murray explained. “This poses a very serious threat to NIH’s ability to fund research. How many—tell us—how many institute advisory councils and other review panels have been disbanded under your leadership and tell us how you’re going to fix this.”
Bhattacharya didn’t respond with specific numbers but said he has “ordered the institutes to nominate new members.
“We’re working as fast as we can,” he said.
Later, Alaska’s Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski asked for clarity around a timeline on filling some of the vacant leadership roles in the agency.
“I’m concerned that 15 of NIH’s 27 institutes and centers are under some form of interim leadership,” she said. “At least one institute, the National Human Genome Research Institute, has been operating without a director for 10 months now.”
“I’ve established a process to make sure that there’s excellent scientific input as the primary driver for who I suggest take control of those agencies,” the NIH leader said, reiterating that the agency is “moving as fast as we possibly can.”
“Just this week, I made recommendations for two of those institutes,” Bhattacharya continued. “The [HHS] secretary, of course, has the primary, the final say, but he’s listening to my scientific judgment.”
Publisher: Source link
