[nullc]

> a strong indicator that the U.S. will follow the same path. British Columbia's Dr. Bonnie Henry indicated yesterday [4] that

...an even stronger indicator is that the Biden administration seems to have asked two multi-decade long FDA vaccine approval experts to resign following them authoring this report saying that the evidence didn't support the widespread use of boosters as a public health measure.

[Someone1234]

> ...an even stronger indicator is that the Biden administration seems to have asked two multi-decade long FDA vaccine approval experts to resign following them authoring this report saying that the evidence didn't support the widespread use of boosters as a public health measure.

What you stated did not occur.

What did happen was that the FDA and CDC got into a procedural slap-fight, and because the CDC gave advice first and the White House signaled public acceptance of that advice before the FDA's panel had a chance to finish two people resigned in protest.

Let's break down why the post above is erroneous:

- "Biden administration seems to have asked" no factual basis.

- "authoring this report" they never authorized a report, that's what they were protesting.

- "report saying that the evidence didn't support the widespread use of boosters" since the FDA's Office of Vaccines Research and Review hasn't published a report you cannot state what is in the report.

What did occur is that the two resigning panelists published a review in The Lancet[0] where they essentially said they felt more data was needed to approve boosters and that the WH approval on the CDC's recommendation was premature (although they also said their view may not match the FDA's view as a whole so YMMV what the final FDA report says).

By the way I actually agree with the two FDA panelists on this one, and think the WH jumped the gun. But regardless of my feelings the "Biden had vaccine experts resign to push through the booster" comment above is problematic.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/13/health/fda-coronavirus-bo...

[nullc]

> - "authoring this report" they never authorized a report, that's what they were protesting.

You are commenting on a HN story which is literally linking directly to the document they authored.

I hope you will delete your misguided and grossly uncivil comment in the time that the site lets you do so, and consider offering another response when you've actually read the article that you're commenting on!

> the FDA and CDC got into a procedural slap-fight, and because the CDC gave advice first

The CDC statement is here: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0818-covid-19-boost... you can see that it is unambiguously conditional on FDA approval: "We have developed a plan to begin offering these booster shots this fall subject to FDA conducting an independent evaluation and determination of the safety and effectiveness of a third dose of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines".

> "Biden had vaccine experts resign to push through the booster" comment above is problematic.

This is a false and fabricated quotation, which I did not say at any point. Your inclusion of it makes it extremely hard to see your comment as a good faith attempt to communicate.

[Someone1234]

> You are commenting on a HN story which is literally linking directly to the document they authored.

You're conflating the timeline and facts a lot. Here is what you stated happened above:

- FDA panelist published a report -> Biden admin asked them to resign -> they resigned.

Here is what actually happened:

- CDC published a report -> WH accepted the CDC's report -> WH signaled moving forward with boosters -> FDA panelists who never got to publish resign -> FDA panelists author review paper in The Lancet critical of boosters (what this article is about) -> [Future] FDA publish their official recommendation

The timelines are completely different (e.g. resign before Vs. after publication), what we're talking about being published is different (e.g. FDA official report Vs. Lancet review), and the whole "asked to resign" is nowhere to be seen.

> This is a false and fabricated quotation, which I did not say at any point.

You said this verbatim:

> Biden administration seems to have asked two multi-decade long FDA vaccine approval experts to resign

You haven't defended or sourced that. Want to go ahead and do that rather than acting offended by my shorthand characterization of it?

[SamBam]

Link?

[nullc]

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/571022-to-boost-or-no...

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/31/biden-booster-plan-...

https://endpts.com/breaking-in-a-major-blow-to-vaccine-effor...

These are authors of this report.

[SamBam]

You said

> Biden administration seems to have asked

Nowhere is that reported, or even suggested, in the links you posted.

Two researchers resigning in disagreement is seriously, seriously different from the administration forcing people out.

One is researchers protesting decisions by their own senior leadership. The other is the administration censoring scientific disagreement.