NIH board chair says vaccine clinic threatens hospital's reputation

A warning from the top of the National Institutes of Health's Clinical Center Research Hospital has put the new vaccine injury clinic in the spotlight. Jack Leslie, the chair of the hospital's board, told colleagues at a recent meeting that the clinic could damage the institution's long-held reputation. He called the hospital a "house of hope" for patients with rare conditions who have used up every other medical option.

Leslie's comments came after a surprise ribbon-cutting event hosted by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The ceremony featured a panel of individuals who said they were harmed by vaccines. They sat behind placards that read "vaccine injured" and spoke with Kennedy and other senior officials in the Trump administration.

At the board meeting, Leslie set the standard agenda aside to deliver a six-minute critique of Kennedy. He argued that remaining silent would be a failure of duty for the advisory group. "But I think that that would be a failing as an advisory board if we were silent," Leslie said. He noted that while some might prefer he avoid criticizing the secretary, the board had a responsibility to speak up.

Leslie clarified that his objection was not to the science of studying vaccine harms. He stated that serious reactions are rare but real and that people who believe they have been injured should be taken seriously. He said he has no concerns about the research itself, only the manner in which the clinic is being presented to the public.

Jonathan Green, the hospital's chief executive officer, sat beside Leslie during the meeting and supported the board chair's account. Green explained that the NIH has researched vaccine safety and efficacy for decades. He described the new clinic as just one more individual protocol within the hospital's existing research framework.

The clinic does not come with additional funding or extra space. The NIH already maintains a center that studies vaccine injuries. Green's description frames the new addition as a modest expansion of work the institute already does.

Leslie and Green presented two different views of the same event. Leslie focused on the risk to the hospital's reputation among its most vulnerable patients. Green emphasized the continuity of the research program. The board's meeting ended with these remarks on the record.