Martin Kulldorff and Robert Malone, both outspoken vaccine skeptics, have received compensation for their expert participation in various vaccine-related cases against Merck.
After purging the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel earlier this week in his quest toward “restoring public trust in vaccines,” Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. replaced them with eight new experts, including a few who have raised concern from scientists and analysts for their history of vaccine skepticism.
In addition, various media reports on Thursday reported that at least two of the new Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) members have previously served as paid expert witnesses in a high-profile vaccine case against pharma giant Merck.
According to Reuters, biostatistician and epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff, a highly visible critic of COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates, provided expert testimony against Merck in a massive case where dozens of plaintiffs claimed that the company’s HPV vaccine Gardasil caused cancer, and that the pharma had downplayed these risks. A North Carolina court ruled for Merck in March, noting that the pharma did not have enough evidence at the time to conclusively link cancer to Gardasil.
Kulldorff co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, a global manifesto against the restrictive public health measures during the pandemic, alongside current National Institutes of Health head Jay Bhattacharya.
Meanwhile, Endpoints News additionally reported that Robert Malone, a biochemist and early mRNA vaccine researcher, was separately paid to present a 2018 report for plaintiffs in a civil case against Merck over its mumps vaccine. It is unclear how much Malone earned during this stint, though Endpoints reported that he charged $350 per hour. The case was dismissed in 2023.
Like Kulldorff, Malone has a well-documented history of vaccine skepticism. In an interview with BioSpace on Thursday, former ACIP member Paul Offit said Malone “has testified in front of Congress that the mRNA vaccines cause cancer and heart disease and autoimmune disease, even though it doesn’t.”
According to the CDC’s guidelines, ACIP members are “required” to disclose any “potential or perceived conflicts of interest” during their tenure on the panel. Members should also declare any “relevant business interests, positions of authority or other connections with organizations relevant to the work of the ACIP.”
Panelists with conflicts of interest “must recuse” themselves from participating in the committee discussions and voting regarding products with which they have a conflict. These members also cannot vote on other products from that same manufacturer or from companies that directly compete with the product in question.
