RFK Jr. demands journal explain removal of vaccine study used to support his childhood immunization changes
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is demanding answers from a science journal about why a study on vaccines and sudden infant death was suppressed.
Inside A letter dated June 11Kennedy told Toxicology Reports Editor-in-Chief Lawrence H. Lash about the 2021 publication “Vaccinations and sudden infant death: Analysis of the VAERS database 1990–2019 and review of the medical literature.”
The study in question was written solely by Neil Z. Miller and was among those cited in a presentation by Kennedy’s former personal attorney, Aaron Siri, before a federal vaccine panel in support of changing the childhood vaccination schedule. Those changes to the vaccine program and the panel that approved them have since been blocked by a federal judge.
Miller, who describes himself as a “medical research journalist” in his author bio, is a leading vaccine skeptic and has published several books questioning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.
“As you know, research integrity and academic freedom have been important issues to me for decades in my private career and continue to be important to me in government service,” Kennedy wrote to Lash.
“Retraction or even removal of seriously flawed publications is appropriate in some cases,” he added. “But this must be accompanied by a transparent and full explanation of why such an action was taken.”
The Secretary asked Lash to explain how this decision was reached, what experts were consulted as part of Toxicology Reports’ investigation into the investigation, and the criteria used to discredit Miller’s work. Kennedy requested that the information be sent by June 25.
Elsevier, publisher of Toxicology Reports, stated in its takedown notice: “Given the inherent limitations of passive reporting systems, including the expected temporal clustering of events regardless of causality, the conclusions presented in the article are not supported by the methodology used.”
“In light of these concerns and given its possible impact on medical practice, the Editor-in-Chief has decided to remove the article. The author disagrees with this decision and disputes the grounds for removal,” the publisher added.
Hill reached out to Lash and Elsevier to respond to Kennedy’s letter.
Miller’s study analyzed data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and concluded that the rate of sudden infant deaths occurring after vaccinations was “statistically significant”; This determined that there was less than a 1 in 100,000 chance that the findings were not associated with a true effect.
But the article also concluded that Miller’s research “does not prove a relationship between infant vaccines and sudden infant death.”
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Head to The Hill for the latest news, weather, sports and streaming video.
