Cardiologist sparks fresh debate over mandatory vaccines
When Kirk Milhoan, MD, PhD, a veteran pediatric cardiologist known to be outspoken about certain vaccine policies, was named the chair of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on Dec. 1, it sparked a firestorm of controversy that has yet to be extinguished. Milhoan’s placement at the head of the ACIP was cheered by some, but jeered by others.
In fact, debates about the ACIP—and U.S. vaccine policies in general—have only intensified in the two months since Milhoan first got the job. ACIP is an influential panel, one that will help guide the Trump administration for years to come, and the country is closely watching anything he or anyone else on the panel may say publicly.
Milhoan even reportedly lost his job as a practicing cardiologist as a result of the controversy—but that decision was ultimately reversed and he returned to practice.
Cardiologist’s views make The New York Times
The next chapter of this ongoing saga kicked off on Jan. 23, when The New York Times published an in-depth look at Milhoan’s thoughts on vaccines.
The article, “Rejecting Decades of Science, Vaccine Panel Chair Says Polio and Other Shots Should Be Optional,” detailed some of the cardiologist’s views on vaccines and then included quotes from multiple vaccine experts who disagree with Milhoan.
For example, as the Times article points out, Milhoan has said that shots protecting people against polio and measles should be optional and not mandatory. Making these shots mandatory, he said, means you are removing the patient’s freedom of choice.
“If there is no choice, then informed consent is an illusion,” he said, as quoted by the Times. “Without consent it is medical battery.”
Helen Chu, MD, MPH, a professor of epidemiology with the University of Washington School of Public Health and former ACIP member, was one of the vaccine experts included in the Times report. Chu emphasized that current policies requiring vaccinations are designed to save lives. Where Milhoan sees these requirements as “authoritarian,” Chu sees them as way to help people protect themselves from potentially fatal diseases.
Sean O'Leary MD, MPH, an associate professor with the University of Colorado and chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Infectious Diseases, is also quoted in the Times article. He made his thoughts on this topic rather clear.
“He has no idea what he’s talking about,” O’Leary said. “These vaccines protect children and save lives.”
Click here to read the full Times article.
Image courtesy of the Independent Medical Alliance.
Independent Medical Alliance defends cardiologist
The Independent Medical Alliance (IMA), a nonprofit group of healthcare providers focused on “empowering patients to take control of their health,” has shared a series of statements in support of Milhoan, who is a senior fellow with the organization.
Joseph Varon, MD, IMA’s president and CEO, described the Times article as a “hit piece” and expressed frustration with the criticisms directed toward Milhoan.
“It is worth noting that Big Pharma spent an estimated $16 to $20 billion on advertising in 2025 alone, much of it across legacy media outlets including the New York Times, where full-coverage pharmaceutical ads routinely splashed across its pages,” he wrote online. “One imagines this context might be relevant when the paper expresses outrage at the suggestion that medical decisions belong in the exam room rather than the federal lobbyist register.”
Varon went on to say the 2024 election seems to suggest many people throughout the United States agree with the idea that vaccinations should not be mandatory.
“What America needs now are doctors, not bureaucrats,” he added.
Read Varon’s full statement here.
Michael has more than 19 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.