Why would the FDA appoint a known anti-vaxxer to their committee?
[T]he Food and Drug Administration has seen fit to appoint an anti-vaccine advocate, Dr. Stephanie Christner, as the Consumer Representative for the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC).
Dr. Christner may appear to have the qualifications (described further below) for membership on VRBPAC, as she is a D.O. However, there are other issues that may outweigh her ability to objectively review and evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and appropriate use of vaccinations. As covered by Orac in the past, Dr. Christner tragically lost her infant daughter in 2008. As also covered by Orac, Dr. Christner blames the death of her daughter on vaccines. I have a great deal of empathy for Dr. Christner, as losing a child is simply matchless in terms of devastation. However, I do have some concerns in that she appears to be unmovable in her view that her daughter died as a result of vaccinations, despite a dearth any supporting data for this belief.
Stephanie Christner, DO, has been appointed to a four year term as the voting consumer representative on the Vaccines & Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) of the Food & Drug Administration (FDA). On Nov. 13, 2013, she will participate in her first meeting as a member of VRBPAC, a 12-member FDA committee that reviews and evaluates vaccine safety, effectiveness and appropriate use of vaccines and biological products intended for public use, including clinical trial and other data submitted by drug companies seeking licensure of new vaccines.
Is this a way to insure openness by the FDA? Will she have a say against the science? Does the FDA believe that allowing a representative of its major critic will be a positive step towards resolving issues with them? It COULD be but I’m not hopeful. The NVIC is too ideologically warped to come to a compromise over vaccinations. There foundation is wrong. Is this a good idea?