Controversy Surrounds Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s Appointment of Retsef Levi to Review Covid-19 Vaccine Safety

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has appointed Retsef Levi, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), to review the safety of Covid-19 vaccines. Levi, who is also a member of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), has faced significant criticism from scientists and public health experts regarding the validity of his research. Critics argue that his work does not adhere to basic scientific standards and could undermine public trust in vaccines.

The Guardian

Levi has made controversial claims about Covid-19 vaccines, labeling them as the “most failing medical product in the history of medical products.” This assertion contradicts extensive research, including a study published in The Lancet, which estimated that Covid-19 vaccines saved nearly 20 million lives in their first year. Experts have pointed out that Levi's research often lacks rigorous peer review and has been criticized for misleading interpretations. For instance, a paper he authored suggested a correlation between Israel's vaccination rate and emergency calls related to cardiac arrest, which was met with skepticism from health officials in Israel.

The Guardian

Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, former head of Israel’s public health services, noted that during a review meeting, Levi appeared unfamiliar with data collection methods and was resistant to professional critique. Nadav Davidovitch, an epidemiologist, described Levi as increasingly radicalized during the pandemic, particularly regarding child vaccinations.

The Guardian

Levi's research has sparked calls for retraction from other scientists, who argue that his findings do not withstand basic statistical scrutiny. Despite this, one of his papers became widely cited, contributing to vaccine hesitancy. Critics, including Jess Steier from the Center for Unbiased Science & Health, have expressed concern that Levi's work is being used to support unfounded claims about vaccine harm.

The Guardian

In response to the backlash, Levi has defended his credentials and the integrity of his research, asserting that his findings have been subjected to peer review. However, he has also acknowledged that his work often presents correlations rather than causations.

The Guardian

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services defended Levi's appointment, stating that he is qualified to serve on ACIP and that his inclusion aims to restore public trust through rigorous inquiry. The upcoming ACIP meeting on March 18-19, 2026, will focus on Covid-19 vaccine injuries and potential changes to vaccine recommendation methodologies.

The Guardian

Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious diseases specialist, has raised concerns that ACIP may rely on unverified data to justify restrictions on vaccine recommendations. He emphasized the importance of genuine scientific inquiry, particularly given the high stakes involved in public health decisions.

The Guardian

• “My papers are factual, balanced, rigorous and accurately contextualize their findings,” — Retsef Levi, Professor at MIT

The Guardian

• “The pattern across Levi’s work is using study designs that can generate associations but cannot establish causation, then having those findings amplified as evidence of vaccine harm, sometimes even when he acknowledges the limitations himself,” — Jess Steier, Executive Director, Center for Unbiased Science & Health

The Guardian

There is a notable discrepancy between Levi's claims regarding vaccine safety and the consensus among public health experts, who assert that Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective. Additionally, the lack of peer-reviewed support for some of Levi's findings raises questions about their validity and the potential impact on public health policy.

The Guardian