CMDA's The Point

CMDA Should (Re)-Assert Support for Childhood Vaccination

March 27, 2025
pexels-cdc-library-3992931

by John Holmlund, MD, MA

The current measles outbreak in Texas, the ascension of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to the post of Secretary of Health and Human Services and broad societal trends have prompted widespread debate over the wisdom and future of vaccinating children for preventable infectious diseases with meaningful, even major, morbidity and mortality.

 

Against this background, I believe CMDA’s 2021 Position Paper on Vaccines and Immunizations (accessible here), though nuanced in some ways, is a strong endorsement of vaccinating children, which deserves affirmation with considerable vigor by CMDA as an organization and by its members.

 

The current outbreak is not historic—yet. The New York City outbreak in 2019 was greater, and it was eventually controlled. Still, the nationwide trend is clearly up from a low of 85 cases in 2000, which in turn represented a nadir from the large number of cases last seen in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The nationwide vaccination rate for measles has declined from 95.2 percent in 2019-2020 to 92.7 percent in 2023-2024, with 13 states showing rates lower than 90 percent, down to Idaho at 79.6 percent. The lowest rates appear to fall below the herd immunity threshold for measles, potentially auguring a resurgence of the disease in the U.S. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) further reports that reduced rates similar to those for MMR have been seen for DTaP, polio and varicella vaccines.

 

Because policy often begins with leadership, it is vital to examine the past vaccination views of Secretary Kennedy, a historic skeptic of vaccination. While he recently expressed “support” for the measles vaccine, he stopped short of urging parents to have their children vaccinated, saying only that parents “should consult with their healthcare providers to understand their options to get the MMR vaccine.” He also touted Vitamin A to reduce measles mortality, citing a report that also affirms the efficacy of vaccination consistent with the currently recommended schedule. The Wall Street Journal commented (subscription required) that in 2019, Mr. Kennedy claimed that “the cure for most infectious measles…is Vitamin A.” The Journal added, “In [a recent] interview, [Mr. Kennedy] promoted treatment [with] steroids and cod-liver oil as producing ‘almost instant and miraculous recovery [from measles].’” It is concerning that Secretary Kennedy appears to be overstating Vitamin A’s efficacy while understating the measles vaccine’s efficacy in preventing measles.

 

Arguments for challenging childhood vaccinations include personal choice and parental rights, the concern that at least some vaccines were developed using fetal cells derived from aborted babies and the notion the current vaccines are ineffective. Then there is what we might call the “pincushion argument,” that the current recommended vaccine schedule goes beyond the “core 7” of polio, MMR, DTaP, pneumococcal conjugate (PCV15, PCV20), H. flu type b (Hib), Hepatitis B and varicella. Of course, vaccination is medically contraindicated in some cases. Arguments can be made for the benefit/risk ratio of specific individual vaccines when not contraindicated. I do not intend to take those up here, but would note I would be reluctant to argue against recommendations for rotavirus or meningococcus, for example. Some vaccines (Mpox, Dengue) clearly apply to specific situations. Recently, a Christian nursing PhD/bioethicist told me she is convinced that heavy vaccination induced severe eczema in her daughter. Perhaps data exists for such an “immune overstimulation” model; if so, I confess I don’t know the data.

 

Particularly pernicious, in my opinion, is the persistent canard that measles vaccine, or vaccination in general, causes autism. I still occasionally encounter people who believe the thoroughly-discredited Wakefield report from The Lancet in 1998. The claim is refuted by substantial information; an extensive review discussion is available here (subscription required, however), and I believe the burden of proof lies with anyone asserting an association of vaccines and autism. CDC is reportedly planning a new large study of the potential link. We should monitor the design of that study carefully. If it is of the quality of the WordPress blog report Secretary Kennedy advanced in his confirmation hearings—a report based on billing codes that appears to suffer from, to name a few issues, selection bias, poor case definition and failure to account for confounders—I would worry the CDC study would be more designed to support future tort claims than medical/scientific recommendations.

 

CMDA’s 2021 Position Statement:

  • Affirms the Christian’s duty to care for children, selves, our neighbors and the vulnerable;
  • Cites the safety and efficacy of vaccination for preventable diseases such as smallpox, polio, measels, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, pneumococcal disease, influenza, hepatitis A and B and rotavirus;
  • Warns that healthcare professionals should be alert for, and counter, “misinformation” and “encourage vaccine usage within their communities and churches:”
  • Says that “healthcare professionals should not recommend an alternative vaccine schedule;”
  • States that vaccination rates greater than 90 percent support herd immunity and are important to support community health;
  • Says that “No credible scientific study has proved causation of developmental disorders, such as autism, by an immunization product;” and,
  • Recommends a replacement rubella vaccine be developed that does not use fetal cells.

 

Separately, CMDA has addressed questions of moral complicity with evil (relevant to vaccines developed from fetal cells), parental choice and its limits and shared decision-making.

 

Finally, we might consider that HPV vaccination is a special case, and much current vaccine hesitancy may have arisen out of concerns—that I share—about how the COVID pandemic was handled.

 

Still, I urge robust re-assertion of the 2021 CMDA Position Paper on Vaccines and Immunizations.

 

Full-disclosure: I am not an epidemiologist, pediatrician or infectious disease expert. In fact, I’m not even a practicing physician. I am a medical oncologist by training, retired from a career in industry drug development, who also has an master of arts in bioethics from Trinity International University. I am on the review board for Dignitas, a publication of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity (CBHD). I was an online, general-public signatory to the Great Barrington Designation.

DISCLAIMER:

The purpose of this blog is to stimulate thought and discussion about important issues in healthcare. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily express the views of CMDA. We encourage you to join the conversation on our website and share your experience, insight and expertise. CMDA has a rigorous and representative process in formulating official positions, which are largely limited to bioethical areas.

About John Holmlund, MD, MA

Jon Holmlund, MD, MA, is a follower of Jesus Christ, worshipping in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). He is a native of Western New York State who earned a BA, majoring in philosophy, from Amherst College and an MD from SUNY-Buffalo. After postgraduate medical training in internal medicine and medical oncology, Dr. Holmlund pursued a career in oncology drug development, first in the National Cancer Institute, then as an employee of and consultant to private biopharmaceutical companies, retiring from that work at the end of 2022. During part of that time, he also served as Medical Director for Aspire Independent Review Board (now a subsidiary of WIRB Copernicus Group). In 2015, he received a master of arts in bioethics from Trinity International University (TIU) and was a regular contributor to the TIU bioethics blog from 2011 to 2020. His principal areas of interest and concern within bioethics are assisted suicide, heritable human genome editing and the ethics of pursuing “gender-affirming” treatment of minors, in addition to an enduring interest in the ethics of human subject research. Dr. Holmlund and his wife have two adult, married sons, and, as of the end of 2023, two grandchildren. He is an avid golfer who considers himself a charter member of the Bad Golf Association (BGA).

7 Comments

  1. Amy Givler on March 27, 2025 at 4:44 pm

    Excellent reminder to us all, especially to those of us who value human life in CMDA, to promote vaccines for the life-saving interventions that they are. Early in your article you say “influenza” when I think you mean “measles”. Could you correct that?

    • Kenton Pate on April 7, 2025 at 12:59 pm

      I would like to just reinforce Ms. Givler’s observation that the article talks about “influenza” when we think it should say “measles “. Is this a mistake? If so, please correct it. It reflects poorly on CMDA to let mistakes like this go uncorrected.

    • Jon Holmlund on April 7, 2025 at 2:24 pm

      Oh my goodness! Not only did I miss that error, but so did the folks at CMDA who reviewed and edited my post before releasing. Of course I meant measles, not the flu. I regret the error and will ask CMDA to post a corrected version–JTH

  2. Steven Willing on March 28, 2025 at 6:32 pm

    Excellent discussion.

    Kennedy is an extremely unfortunate choice for that position.

    We are in for a bumpy ride.

  3. Joe Weidner, Jr. MD on April 6, 2025 at 7:57 pm

    Very important. Nothing makes me lose sleep more than parents who want to no vaccinate or delay vaccinating their children. Also noting increased hospitalizations of those with vitamin A toxicity due to RFK’s misinformation.

  4. John Christian Umhau MD MPH CPE FASAM CDR(ret) on April 8, 2025 at 1:17 pm

    Physicians have a duty to be honest with their patients about what they know – and what they don’t know. As a retired US Public Health Service physician and FDA scientist, at one time I was confident that I knew about vaccines. Now I am confident that I don’t really know about vaccines – nor does any honest scientist either. “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue,” writes Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet[1]. “Journals have devolved into information laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry [2].”

    Top journals typically receive most of their revenue from pharmaceutical companies [3]; this industry pays journals millions each year for the privilege of distributing article reprints, which, as noted by Lundh, Hróbjartsson, and Gøtzsche, creates an inherent conflict of interest [4]. Unfortunately, the National Library of Medicine ignores its own policies which require journals to disclose their editors’ conflicts of interest – and be transparent about their business model and funding [5]. When we seek wisdom from “respected” journals, how can we know if the information we receive is tainted by pharmaceutical marketing interests? Considering that the pharmaceutical industry has extensive financial relationships with the leaders of professional medical associations, how can we be sure that the opinions our trusted organizations promote are free of commercial bias[3].?

    Providing excellent care for patients requires us to be honest about what we know and what don’t know about medical science, including vaccines.

    References:
    [1] Horton, Richard. “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma.” The Lancet 385.9976 (2015): 1380.
    [2] Moynihan, Ray, et al. “Financial ties between leaders of influential US professional medical associations and industry: cross sectional study.” BMJ 369 (2020).
    [3] Smith, Richard. “Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies.” PLOS medicine 2.5 (2005): e138.
    [4] Lundh, Andreas, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, and Peter C. Gøtzsche. “Income from reprints creates a conflict of interests.” BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online) 345 (2012).
    [5] Dal-Ré, Rafael, et al. “Mandatory disclosure of financial interests of journals and editors.” BMJ 370 (2020).

  5. Michael J McLaughlin on April 8, 2025 at 2:15 pm

    Well-written article, John. At the end of your piece, you did acknowledge vaccine hesitancy stemming from the gross mishandling and aggressive pushing of the COVID vaccines (“much current vaccine hesitancy may have arisen out of concerns—that I share—about how the COVID pandemic was handled”). However, until trust is genuinely restored, I predict this trend will continue, if not worsen.
    The newly Trump-appointed Director of the NIH, Jay Bhattacharya, emphasized this point in a recent interview with Bari Weiss, founder of The Free Press, on the 4/1/25 episode of the Honestly podcast. He stressed that restoring public trust is critical to convince more people to increase vaccination rates.
    Also, thank you for signing the Great Barrington Declaration. Just a heads-up, in your article, it’s currently written as “Designation,” so that could use an easy
    correction.

Leave a Comment