Content Detail

• Content META

  Title	Medical marketers, pharma industry experts react to RFK Jr. as HHS pick
  ID	4184465
  External ID	7306205919
  Author	Lecia Bushak
  Published Date	Nov. 15, 2024, 7 p.m.
  Summary	RFK Jr.'s anti-industry and anti-vaccine rhetoric has been strong, but experts wonder whether those words will turn into tangible policy at HHS. November 15, 2024 4:35 pm Throughout the 2024 elec
  Tags	None
  URL	https://www.mmm-online.com/home/channel/medical-marketers-pharma-industry-experts-react-to-rfk-jr-as-hhs-pick/
  Sentiment	Negative: 0.34801    Neutral: 0.60760    Positive: 0.04439
  Relevance	0.00000

• Content Details

  Content ID	2461945
  Key	91b5667b-c23c-41c5-b271-72a4e1f3cd1f
  Content	RFK Jr.'s anti-industry and anti-vaccine rhetoric has been strong, but experts wonder whether those words will turn into tangible policy at HHS. November 15, 2024 4:35 pm Throughout the 2024 election cycle, Robert F. Kennedy (RFK) Jr. had been somewhat of a background figure in the main presidential candidates' stage – running his own unsuccessful independent campaign before removing himself from the campaign trail and endorsing President-elect Donald Trump. Now, Kennedy has catapulted to holding possibly the most important federal position in public health. Trump sent shockwaves through the industry on Thursday when he announced the nomination of Kennedy as the next Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary. As head of HHS, Kennedy's focus would be leading the “Make America Healthy Again” movement — an agenda the environmental and anti-vaccine activist has created that seeks to challenge aspects of public health, from Big Pharma to food additives. Kennedy posted on X shortly after Trump's announcement, noting that as HHS Secretary he planned to “free the agencies from the smothering cloud of corporate capture so they can pursue their mission to make Americans once again the healthiest people on Earth.” He added that his goals are to “clean up corruption, stop the revolving door between industry and government, and return our health agencies to their rich tradition of gold-standard, evidence-based science.” Following the announcement, Kennedy supporters shared their own thoughts on X, posting memes about the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) potentially being dismantled. Others called on Kennedy to prosecute former chief medical advisor Anthony Fauci, as well as go after Pfizer and “all those companies that poison us.” Kennedy has been vocal about severing ties between the federal government and industry players as head of HHS, and has threatened to clean out the FDA's current employees who he claims have ties to industry. In a post on X in October, Kennedy wrote that the “FDA's war on public health is about to end.” He added: “If you work for the FDA and are part of this corrupt system, I have two messages for you: 1. Preserve your records, and 2. Pack your bags.” Where does the rhetoric end and policy begin? Much of Kennedy's rhetoric has been sweeping and, in some cases, contradictory to Republicans' traditional pro-industry stances. In the past, Kennedy has called on the federal government to take on such projects like restricting direct-to-consumer (DTC) drug advertising and readjusting government-funded research on new drugs. But he's perhaps most well-known for his anti-vaccine stance and calling for a review of the scientific literature on vaccines that define current public health guidelines. The HHS is a wide-ranging department that plays numerous roles in public health — from drug research and development funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to the approvals of new therapies under the FDA. With Kennedy at the helm, he could potentially hold a significant amount of sway over all of the agencies' operations, according to Mariana Socal, an associate professor of health policy and management at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “There are so many different ways that this appointment can touch people's lives,” Socal said. “Leadership is important in giving a sense of direction and shaping policy.” The FDA's operations, for example, are defined by a statutory structure that requires all approved drugs to be safe and effective. But the agency also has authority to interpret and implement that statutory mandate in different ways. “The lines of where [the statute] ends and the [implementation of the statute] starts” can get blurry, Socal continued. “I wouldn't be surprised if, under this new leadership, we see a challenge of these rules.” For the pharma industry, uncertainty at the FDA and its regulatory processes is typically not welcome news given the high-risk environment of drug development, Socal said. There can be an adverse, trickle-down effect on government-funded research and development, as well as new drug approvals. Kennedy has “voiced a certain lack of commitment to — and even questioning the validity of — scientific evidence as the guiding light for the [FDA] and its policies,” Socal said. “That opens the door for a lot of uncertainty in the future operations of the agency.” Still, some experts urged caution in speculating about the potential consequences before any real policy is implemented. Kennedy, after all, will have to first go through a confirmation process in Congress before being appointed – which holds no guarantees of turning out in his favor. Steven Grossman, executive director of the Alliance for a Stronger FDA, noted in a statement that what comes next for the FDA is largely unknown as it's still early in the transition process. “Undoubtedly, some of what is being said will prove true,” Grossman said. “But what we are hearing now are commentators and analysts engaging in speculation.” Grossman expects that the FDA's work and policies might be under “intense scrutiny” if Kennedy is confirmed as HHS Secretary, a situation that has “created quite a bit of angst among FDA employees looking for some indication of whether their work will be appreciated and valued.” But “in practice, we have no idea what any of that means, now or in the future,” he added. “There can be a big difference between being the outsider speaking publicly about their point of view and being the leader on the inside who can decide next steps within a wide (but not unlimited) scope of possible actions.” The unique position of pharma in an RFK, Jr. world As the policy implications shake out, a Kennedy-run HHS alongside a GOP-majority Congress could lead to an interesting “confluence” of contradicting interests, according to Sarah Alwardt , president of healthcare consulting firm Avalere Health. Traditionally, Republicans have tended to side with industry on issues like drug pricing and regulation, a stance reflected by Trump's Department of Government Efficiency co-lead Vivek Ramaswamy. Ramaswamy, a pharma entrepreneur who founded Roivant Sciences, noted in an X post the day after Kennedy's HHS announcement that he would like to see the FDA's “barriers to innovation” removed. “This stops patients from accessing promising therapies and raises prescription drug costs by impeding competition,” Ramaswamy wrote. Without mentioning Kennedy, he added that “that's the actual problem with the FDA and it's the one we should be talking more about.” Some Republican lawmakers have also called on restricting the Inflation Reduction Act's new Medicare negotiating power, or at the very least not expanding it as Vice President Kamala Harris had called for. But Kennedy presents a totally different wild card approach to the HHS and the pharma industry as a whole, with his anti-Big Pharma position clashing with a Republican administration that may be more lenient on industry. “It's creating a unique tension and butting of heads [when it comes to] pharma manufacturers,” Alwardt said. “On one hand, pharma is the bad guy and on the other hand, they're getting a reprieve because a Harris administration was poised to expand the negotiation of the Inflation Reduction Act. There's an interesting confluence there, and that's making [the potential impact] hard to read.” So far, Alwardt said the general sentiment coming from pharma clients is a “softening of the shoulders” around further expansion of the IRA and a belief that overall, a Trump administration will be “pharma-friendly.” But “I don't believe anybody saw RFK, Jr. coming at them,” she added. “This is brand new news and it's probably still sinking in – and there are a lot of questions on whether or not it will actually happen.” Following Trump's announcement, lobbying group PhRMA released a statement noting that “we want to work with the Trump administration to further strengthen our innovation ecosystem and improve healthcare for patients.” PhRMA did not reference Kennedy's comments specifically, but it stressed that “biopharmaceutical innovation has made tremendous progress in the fight against disease,” including cancer, hepatitis C and polio. Ryan Kuresman, executive vice president, global public affairs and health policy lead at GCI Health, believes that pharma companies will have to brace for potential changes in their relationship with the federal government if Kennedy is confirmed by the Senate. “Now more than ever, companies need to work closely with their government affairs, policy and communications teams to effectively navigate this transition of government and find ways to continue contributing to HHS' mission of protecting and advancing public health,” Kuresman said. Medical marketers' messaging Even if Kennedy's anti-vaccine and anti-science stance might be alarming for healthcare experts, Socal pointed out that it represents a shift in how many Americans view public health – one that medical marketers will have to pay attention to. “One important point is that some of his skepticism and questions [around public health] resonate with a lot of Americans,” she said. For Alwardt, medical marketers will have to think about how to counter those anti-science messages with stronger pro-science ones to the public in general. Importantly, the approach will have to be different than before to reach the Americans who share Kennedy's distrust of public health institutions and industry players alike. “I don't want to suggest that there's been passiveness on a pro-science messaging front, but it might be time to put a little more energy behind it,” Alwardt said.
  Content Reference URL	None

• Publisher

  Publisher Name	Medical Marketing and Media (#3617)
  Publisher URL	https://www.mmm-online.com/
  Description	None
  Trust Flow Score	25
  Citation Flow Score	36

• Data Source

  Data Source Name	Quantexa News (#5)
  Data Source Type	news
  Data Source URL	https://app.aylien.com/dashboard
  Description	Welcome to Quantexa News API — the most powerful way to aggregate, filter, and integrate global news data into your apps and models.
  Weight	10