Former presidential candidate and collector of animal carcasses, RFK Jr., is spreading the rumor that COVID vaccination is unsafe, ineffective, and unnecessary for infants.

COVID vaccines are approved for children aged 6 months to 12 years under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). This does not mean these vaccines are untested or unsafe; they are. The EUA process allows for vaccines to be used in emergencies, like the COVID pandemic, after rigorous testing and ongoing monitoring.

These vaccines have been shown to reduce the risk of severe illness, hospitalization, and death from COVID, even in younger populations, and the benefits of these vaccines far outweigh the risks.

The idea that there’s no licensed vaccine for kids under 12 is misleading because EUA vaccines are carefully monitored, and ongoing data collection lets us know that they are safe. The difference between EUA and full licensure is mainly the length of time the data has been available, not the rigor of safety testing.

The supposed evidence that these vaccines are unsafe comes from VAERS. What is VAERS? The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) analyzes unverified reports of adverse events that happen after vaccination. Anyone can submit a report to VAERS, and submissions do not mean that a vaccine caused the event.

One doctor famously submitted a report that the flu shot turned him into the Incredible Hulk. VAERS is helpful for keeping track of vaccine safety, but just because something is reported doesn’t mean the vaccine caused it. Even if they’re not sure, doctors should report any important health problems that happen after vaccination.

The most pertinent warning on the website helps put the above claims into context: “VAERS reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Reports to VAERS can also be biased. As a result, there are limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.”

Using an unsourced graph as evidence, technology millionaire Steve Kirsch claims that a rise in cataract and other vision problems can only be caused by COVID vaccination.

This claim is based on bath-faith debate techniques, such as cherry-picking, to try to make correlations between vaccines and bad outcomes. In this case, Kirsch notices a jump in the very uncommonly used medical billing code H28 while ignoring other codes between H00 and H59, which have remained relatively stable.

Kirsch asks the question “What is the more likely explanation if it wasn’t the shots?” One breakdown (along with sources) shows all the data that Kirsch ignores. A very plausible explanation that those outside the UK NHS might not think about is that the increase may be due to more people seeking diagnosis for cataract surgeries rather than a real increase in prevalence.

When anti-vaxxers see a data point about anything, they immediately tie it to vaccines without testing out other hypotheses. Scientists see an anomaly like this and test out many hypotheses. Be a scientist!

In an interview with Joe Rogan, AIDS denialist Bret Weinstein promoted the myth that children are given too many vaccines by people who are evil and wish to do them harm.

Studies show that belief in one conspiracy theory often leads to belief in others. Because many conspiracy theories share similar underlying themes, such as distrust in authorities or the idea of hidden, powerful groups controlling events, once someone accepts one conspiracy theory, they become more receptive to others that fit within this worldview. They become trapped in a self-reinforcing cycle of conspiratorial thinking.

Babies are subjected to more challenges to their immune system at birth than they will be in the entire immunization schedule. Keep in mind that the amount of any ingredient in vaccines is very small–smaller than what a child will encounter naturally through living and breathing and eating, and as this study of aluminum in vaccines shows, they do not accumulate in a child’s body to toxic levels.

Because millions and millions of children have followed the vaccine schedule, scientists have been able to conduct studies showing that the schedule is safe.

In the U.S., a special program called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) helps people who vaccines may have harmed. This program exists because vaccines protect public health, and very rare adverse reactions can occur. However, vaccine makers are not free from responsibility—this system ensures claims can be handled fairly without discouraging companies from developing vaccines that save lives.

But are vaccines unavoidably harmful? In 2011, the Supreme Court decided a case called Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. This case started when the parents of a girl who was thought to have serious side effects from a vaccine sued the company that made the vaccine. Her parents believed that the vaccine was poorly designed, and that’s what caused her problems.

However, the Supreme Court agreed with the vaccine manufacturer. They said that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act protects vaccine makers from being sued if a vaccine causes injuries or death *as long as the side effects are unavoidable and the vaccine is made and labeled correctly.* They explained that the law stops any lawsuits that claim a vaccine’s design is defective.

The court didn’t say that all vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” The ruling was just about whether the parents could sue under this specific law. The phrase “unavoidably unsafe” was mentioned in the court’s discussion, but it relates to the terms set by the law, not a general statement about vaccines.