With the news of cuts to mRNA vaccine development in the US, Unit Director Anne Willis joined Marnie Chesterton on BBC Inside Science to discuss the evidence behind vaccines.

US Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr announced plans this week to cancel $500 million dollars of funding for mRNA vaccine development. The research was focusing on trying to counter viruses that cause diseases such as the flu and Covid-19.

As part of the latest episode of BBC Radio 4's Inside Science program Marnie Chesterton was joined by Unit Director Professor Anne Willis to explore the claims made by The US Department of Health and Human Services that the technology “poses more risks than benefits”, and to look at the evidence behind the vaccines. 

Listen to the episode via BBC Sounds here.

Anne and Dr James Thaventhiran also provided expert comment on claims about mRNA vaccines to the Science Media Centre that were featured in the Times and iPaper. See their answers to fact checking questions below:

What do we know about the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines?

• The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines highlighted the transformative potential of this technology. No new therapeutic modality has ever been so widely, cheaply and rapidly delivered. Yet despite the speed and breadth of this vaccine, no concerning safety signals were detected in the post-marketing surveillance. 

Do mRNA vaccines increase the mutation rate of viruses?

• No, there is no evidence for this as far as we are aware.  Viruses which carry RNA (rather than DNA) as their genetic material, like the one which caused the COVID19 pandemic, are known to have high mutation rates. But this is totally unrelated to the vaccine mRNAs used to prevent infection. The paper Why are RNA virus mutation rates so damn high? is a useful reference.

What are the impacts of this funding cut be on public health and health research in the US and globally?

• Damaging. There are indirect and direct affects that will be damaging. Vaccination is widely regarded as the single most effective public health intervention. A negative intervention like this will impact on the public’s perception of vaccine safety and this will likely affect uptake. Evidence has already accumulated that reduced vaccination rates lead to unnecessary illness and even death.
• Directly reducing scientific funding will dramatically impact on our ability to improve this technology to make it more effective and reliable both for existing indications and diseases not currently effectively treated. It will drive talented scientists working in this area towards other career options and risks damaging the US scientific infrastructure. 

If known, what data might he be referring to and how does it compare with other existing evidence?

• We are not aware of any data on this.