RFK Jr. Adds Allies to FDA Panel Reviewing Unproven Peptide Drugs
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. adds allies to FDA panel reviewing unproven peptide drugs despite FDA scientists' concerns.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., anti-vaccine Health Secretary, has added nine new members to a federal advisory panel reviewing a dozen popular but unproven injectable peptide drugs. The FDA scientists had determined in 2023 that these drugs lack evidence of benefits and may pose safety risks.
Kennedy, a self-professed 'big fan' of the dubious drugs, has vowed to 'end' FDA's 'aggressive suppression' of them. The new members, added to the FDA's list of advisors on Monday, almost all personally promote peptide use and/or have financial ties to wellness clinics that offer peptide treatments. This brings the total number of advisors to 13, making it easy for the new members to determine the outcome of upcoming meetings.
The FDA panel review comes as Kennedy continues to push for the FDA to reverse its stance on the unproven peptide drugs. The additions to the panel have raised concerns about the potential influence of the new members on the review process. Kennedy's efforts to stack the panel with allies who promote peptide use have sparked concerns about the integrity of the review process.
Why this matters: The stacking of the FDA panel with allies who promote peptide use raises serious concerns about the integrity of the review process and the potential for biased decision-making. This development has significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry, as it could pave the way for the approval of unproven and potentially unsafe treatments. For developers and businesses, this could mean a more favorable regulatory environment for peptide-based treatments, but at the risk of compromising safety and efficacy standards.
For consumers, this could result in access to unproven treatments that may not be effective or safe. Ultimately, this raises questions about the role of ideology in shaping regulatory policy and the need for transparency and accountability in the review process.
Source: Ars Technica