**The AI Vaccine Safety Device: Double-Edged Sword or Double Standard for HHS?**
The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has been quietly working on an AI-powered vaccine safety device, using machine learning to analyze patterns in vaccine adverse event reports. While this innovative technology has the potential to revolutionize vaccine safety monitoring, it also raises some serious eyebrows. The project has been in the works since 2023, and its development has sparked controversy, mainly due to the involvement of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a well-known vaccine skeptic.
On the one hand, this AI device could be a game-changer in vaccine safety monitoring. Large language models (LLMs) are experts at detecting patterns and generating hypotheses. However, they can also produce “hallucinations” – or, in simpler terms, make things up that aren’t entirely accurate. This means that any findings generated by the device need to be thoroughly reviewed and validated by actual humans.
One of the biggest concerns is that HHS Secretary Kennedy, who has been vocal about his anti-vaccine stance, might use the device to further his agenda. He’s already made waves by removing numerous vaccines from the recommended childhood immunization schedule, including shots for COVID-19, flu, hepatitis A and B, meningococcal disease, rotavirus, and RSV.
VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) has been around since 1990, serving as a way to identify potential safety concerns with vaccines post-approval. However, it’s not without its limitations. Anyone can submit a report, and these reports can be unverified, making it difficult to determine if a vaccine was actually the cause of an adverse event. Moreover, the lack of data on the number of people vaccinated skews the numbers, making events appear more common than they are.
Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician and director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, points out that VAERS is essentially a “hypothesis-generating mechanism” rather than a definitive way to assess vaccine safety. He notes that the system only shows adverse events that occur after immunization, not that a vaccine actually caused them.
Leslie Lenert, the founding director of the CDC’s National Center for Public Health Informatics, agrees that VAERS has its limitations, but believes that combining it with other data sources can help us better understand the true risk of an event. However, she also acknowledges the potential for LLMs to generate convincing but untruths, reiterating the importance of human oversight.
This raises some serious concerns about the potential misuse of VAERS data by anti-vaccine activists, who have historically manipulated the system to argue that vaccines aren’t safe. It’s crucial that HHS and all stakeholders ensure that this new AI device is used responsibly and that any hypotheses generated are thoroughly reviewed and validated.
Read more about this story on Wired.
**Update:** A revised version of this article has been rewritten to maintain a natural tone and ensure SEO readability. Minor changes have been made to improve clarity and flow.
