24-Hour Update: New Analysis Shows 0 Deaths Classified as “Definite” in FDA Memo; June ACIP Meeting Still on CDC Website Despite Court Stay
Published: May 29, 2026
By: Zeeshan Khan
Reading time: 16 minutes
Category: Public Health / Government Policy / Vaccines
Note: May 29, 2026 – This is an update to the May 28, 2026 article: The Vaccine Data Blackout: ACIP Charter Error Confirmed as Procedural Violation – No Progress on Membership or Blocked Studies
WASHINGTON, D.C. – May 29, 2026 – One day after independent reporting confirmed the procedural violation behind the ACIP charter withdrawal, new analysis has clarified what the internal FDA memorandum on pediatric deaths actually found. According to a detailed examination of the 73-page Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance (OBPV) consensus review, zero deaths were classified as “definitely” caused by COVID-19 vaccination, with two classified as “likely” and five as “possibly” related.
This 24-hour update covers the specific findings of the pediatric death review, the distinction between classification and causation, the unchanged status of ACIP membership and blocked studies, the continued paralysis of the USPSTF, and the notable fact that the June 24-26, 2026 ACIP meeting remains listed on the CDC website despite a court stay.
The Essentials: Who, What, When, Where, Why, How (Last 24 Hours)
- Who: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA); the Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance (OBPV); the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP); HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.; the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS); and independent experts including law professor Dorit Reiss.
- What: New analysis of the internal FDA pediatric death memorandum clarifies that 0 deaths were classified as “definite,” 2 as “likely,” and 5 as “possible.” The June 24-26, 2026 ACIP meeting remains listed on the CDC website despite the court stay that currently prohibits the committee from taking action. All previously blocked vaccine studies remain unpublished.
- When: The FDA OBPV review was completed prior to May 2026. The analysis of the review was published on May 28, 2026. The June 24-26, 2026 ACIP meeting is still listed on the CDC website as of May 29, 2026.
- Where: These developments apply to federal vaccine safety surveillance and advisory committees operating out of FDA, CDC, and HHS in Washington, D.C., affecting national vaccine policy for all 50 states.
- Why (Immediate Cause): The pediatric death review has been referenced in a letter from Senator Ron Johnson to Secretary Kennedy. New analysis seeks to clarify what the review actually found, distinguishing between honest safety surveillance and manufactured controversy.
- How (Mechanism): The FDA OBPV conducted a consensus review of 96 pediatric deaths reported to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccination. Using the WHO-UMC causality framework, cases were classified into categories ranging from “definite” to “unable to be assessed.” The WHO-UMC framework explicitly states that “likely” and “possible” classifications cannot definitely prove a link between a drug or vaccine and a particular adverse event.
Specific Updates in the Last 24 Hours (May 28–29, 2026)
1. FDA Pediatric Death Review: Detailed Findings Clarified
The internal FDA memorandum reviewing 96 pediatric deaths following COVID-19 vaccination—referenced in the May 28 article—has now been publicly analyzed by CIDRAP (the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota). The analysis, published May 28, 2026, provides specific clarification of what the 73-page OBPV consensus review actually found.
Confirmed Classification of the 96 Pediatric Deaths:
| Classification | Number of Deaths |
|---|---|
| Definitely related to vaccination | 0 |
| Likely related to vaccination | 2 |
| Possibly related to vaccination | 5 |
| Unlikely related to vaccination | 62 |
| Unable to be assessed | 27 |
Demographics of the Seven Cases Classified as “Likely” or “Possible”:
- Age range: 7 to 16 years (median age 13)
- Time to symptom onset: Median of 3 days post-vaccination
- Vaccine type: All cases followed Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination
- Clinical presentation: All seven cases involved cardiac events
- Four cases involved myocarditis
- One case involved myocarditis with stress cardiomyopathy
- One case involved cardiomyopathy without myocarditis
- One case involved arrhythmia
2. Important Distinction: Classification Does Not Establish Causality
The CIDRAP analysis emphasizes a critical distinction that has been overlooked in some reporting: the WHO-UMC causality framework explicitly states that “likely” and “possible” classifications cannot definitely prove a link between a drug or vaccine and a particular adverse event.
What the FDA Report Does Not Say: The report explicitly states that it “does not constitute a benefit-risk analysis” and does not recommend changing who should receive vaccination. The review did recommend a class safety labeling change—adding warnings about rare fatal myocarditis cases—which the analysis notes “truthfully reflects the situation.”
Expert Conclusion: The CIDRAP analysis concludes that the report has been used to “manufacture a controversy” by misrepresenting the findings, stating that the “distinction between honest safety surveillance and manufactured controversy is the difference” between what the report actually says and how it has been characterized.
3. June 2026 ACIP Meeting Still Listed on CDC Website
Despite the court stay that prohibits the ACIP from taking action, the June 24-26, 2026 ACIP meeting is still listed on the CDC website as of May 29, 2026.
Significance: Experts are “keeping a close eye on this to see whether the meeting will still happen and, if it does, what it would and could look like.” The meeting cannot issue recommendations while the court stay remains in effect.
Current ACIP Status (Unchanged from May 28):
| Metric | Status as of May 29, 2026 |
|---|---|
| Charter status | VALID – Re-established May 19, 2026, for two years |
| Committee members | NONE – Membership to be determined |
| March court ruling | IN EFFECT – Blocks previous Kennedy appointees |
| Administration appeal | PENDING – Appeal of March ruling continues |
| Next meeting | LISTED AS JUNE 24-26, 2026 on CDC website – But cannot act under court stay |
4. Revised Charter Language: Concerns About “Flexibility”
A comprehensive analysis published by CIDRAP on May 28, 2026 (in partnership with the University of Minnesota) provides new clarity on the ACIP charter situation.
Changes from April to May 19 Charter:
| Element | April Charter | May 19 Charter |
|---|---|---|
| Explicit mention of mRNA vaccines for safety reviews | PRESENT | REMOVED |
| Specific requirements for toxicologist, data scientist | PRESENT | REMOVED |
| Language on expertise requirements | Specific disciplines | “Balanced range of scientific, clinical, and public health expertise” |
Expert Concern: As law professor Dorit Reiss (who has closely tracked the litigation) notes, the new language acknowledges the court’s injunction. However, she observes that the language remains “vague enough that it doesn’t explicitly prevent Kennedy from trying again with new appointments.”
Key Issue: Under the newest charter language, Secretary Kennedy retains ultimate authority over ACIP membership, and there is no language specifying how often the committee should convene.
5. ACIP Has a Valid Charter – But No Members (Unchanged)
The ACIP charter was re‑established effective May 19, 2026, for a two‑year period. However, as of May 29, 2026, the committee has no appointed members.
Implication of March Court Ruling: A federal judge’s March 2026 ruling questioned the qualifications of Secretary Kennedy’s previous ACIP appointees (whom he appointed after ousting all 17 members in June 2025). The ruling remains in effect. Secretary Kennedy cannot simply reappoint the same individuals. The membership process is ongoing with no announced timeline.
6. USPSTF Remains Paralyzed – No Appointments Announced (Unchanged)
The USPSTF nomination period closed on May 23, 2026. As of May 29, 2026, no new appointments have been announced.
Current USPSTF Status:
| Metric | Status as of May 29, 2026 |
|---|---|
| Nomination period | CLOSED (as of May 23, 2026) |
| Total positions | 16 |
| Current vacancies | 8 (half of all positions) |
| Last meeting | Over one year ago |
| Fired vice‑chairs | 2 (Dr. John Wong and Dr. Esa Davis) |
| Reapplication status | Both reapplied for non‑leadership positions |
| New appointments announced | NONE |
| Next meeting scheduled | NONE |
7. Blocked Vaccine Studies Remain Unpublished (Unchanged)
All vaccine safety and effectiveness studies previously reported as blocked remain unpublished as of May 29, 2026.
Status of Blocked Studies:
| Study | Status as of May 29, 2026 |
|---|---|
| COVID‑19 vaccine safety study (4.2 million patients) | NOT PUBLISHED |
| Shingles vaccine (Shingrix) safety abstracts | NOT SUBMITTED to conference |
| CDC MMWR COVID‑19 effectiveness report | NOT PUBLISHED |
Harvard Expert Response (Unchanged): Dr. Aaron S. Kesselheim, Harvard University medical professor, called the FDA’s request to pull the COVID vaccine safety study an act of “censorship” and added: “At any other time in history, this would be a major scandal that would lead to congressional hearings and resignations of leadership, and I hope that’s what happens next.”
8. CMS Data Reporting Change Remains in Effect (Unchanged)
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data reporting change described in previous articles remains in effect as of May 29, 2026. States are still not required to report childhood immunization status for the nearly 40% of American children covered by Medicaid and CHIP.
Comparison: Before (May 28 Article) and After (May 29 – Current)
| Issue | As of May 28, 2026 (Article) | As of May 29, 2026 (Current) |
|---|---|---|
| Pediatric death review classification | Reported as “7 cases possibly or probably related” | CLARIFIED – 0 definite, 2 likely, 5 possible; classifications do NOT establish causality |
| ACIP June meeting status | Not specified | STILL LISTED on CDC website for June 24-26, 2026 |
| Revised charter language details | Not specified | CONFIRMED – mRNA mention removed; specific expertise requirements removed |
| ACIP charter status | VALID – Re-established May 19 | VALID – Unchanged |
| ACIP members | NONE – To be determined | NONE – No appointments announced |
| USPSTF appointments | NONE announced as of May 28 | NONE – No appointments announced |
| USPSTF vacancies | 8 of 16 | 8 of 16 – Unchanged |
| Blocked vaccine studies | BLOCKED – Unpublished | BLOCKED – Unpublished |
| CMS data reporting | Voluntary – Unchanged | VOLUNTARY – Unchanged |
| March court ruling | IN EFFECT | IN EFFECT – Unchanged |
Timeline of Key Events (Updated Through May 29, 2026)
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| June 2025 | Kennedy ousts all 17 ACIP members |
| December 2025 | FACA amended – new public notification requirements |
| March 2026 | Federal judge blocks Kennedy’s ACIP appointments; ruling questioned qualifications |
| April 6, 2026 | Initial charter renewal notice filed |
| May 11, 2026 | FDA blocks vaccine safety studies |
| May 14, 2026 | Kennedy signs new charter (scales back expertise requirements) |
| May 18, 2026 | New charter notice filed in Federal Register (re‑establishes ACIP) |
| May 19, 2026 | New charter becomes effective |
| May 19, 2026 | Kennedy fires USPSTF vice‑chairs (Drs. Wong and Davis) |
| May 21, 2026 | HHS withdraws May 14 charter citing “administrative error” |
| May 23, 2026 | USPSTF nomination period closes |
| May 26, 2026 | Federal Register notice publicly accessible; May 26 article published |
| May 27, 2026 | Professor Reiss confirms withdrawal was a procedural violation, not a policy shift |
| May 28, 2026 | CIDRAP publishes analysis of FDA pediatric death review; ACIP charter analysis published |
| May 29, 2026 | Current update: 0 definite deaths confirmed; June ACIP meeting still listed |
Why This Matters to the Average Person (Updated for May 29)
These developments affect every American who relies on vaccines, preventive health screenings, or the integrity of federal scientific advisory committees.
The Pediatric Death Review – What It Actually Shows: The FDA reviewed 96 pediatric deaths following COVID-19 vaccination. Zero were classified as “definitely” caused by the vaccine. Two were classified as “likely” and five as “possibly.” The WHO-UMC framework explicitly states that these classifications cannot prove causation. The report does not recommend changing who should receive vaccination. However, the report has been cited by critics of the administration’s vaccine policies as evidence of withheld safety information.
ACIP Has a Charter – But Cannot Function: The committee that determines which vaccines are recommended for children and adults has a valid charter. However, it cannot meet or issue guidance until members are appointed in compliance with the March court ruling. As of May 29, no members have been appointed. The June 24-26 meeting remains listed on the CDC website, but the court stay prohibits action.
USPSTF Remains Paralyzed – No End in Sight: The task force that determines which preventive services must be covered with no out‑of‑pocket costs under the Affordable Care Act remains unable to function. With no meetings in over a year, half the positions vacant, and no appointments announced one week after the nomination period closed, no new recommendations are being developed.
Blocked Studies Leave the Public in the Dark: The 4.2 million‑patient COVID‑19 safety study, the Shingrix safety abstracts, and the CDC MMWR effectiveness report remain unpublished. The public cannot make fully informed decisions about vaccination without access to these studies.
Arguments In Favor of the Administration’s Actions (Updated)
Supporters of the administration’s approach argue that the pediatric death review demonstrates ongoing safety surveillance and that the ACIP charter has been corrected.
- Safety Surveillance Is Working: The FDA OBPV conducted a thorough review of pediatric deaths and found zero classified as “definite.” The review recommended a class safety labeling change, which truthfully reflects the situation.
- Error Identified and Corrected: The administration identified a procedural deficiency, withdrew the non‑compliant charter, and filed a compliant notice on May 18. This demonstrates a willingness to follow the law.
- ACIP Has Been Re‑Established: Contrary to concerns that the committee would remain defunct, the administration has re‑established the ACIP with a two‑year charter.
Arguments Against the Administration’s Actions (Updated)
Critics argue that the correction does not resolve the underlying concerns about political control of science, and that the pediatric death review has been used to manufacture controversy.
- The Pediatric Death Review Has Been Misrepresented: The report has been cited as evidence of withheld safety information, but the classifications do not establish causation. The distinction between honest safety surveillance and manufactured controversy is critical.
- The Violation Was Substantive, Not a Minor Timing Error: The administration failed to provide a required written statement on public interest and failed to publish proper public notice. This was not a simple administrative oversight but a failure to follow core FACA requirements.
- ACIP Has No Members and a Court Stay Remains in Effect: While the charter is now valid, the committee has no members. The June meeting is listed but cannot act. Secretary Kennedy must appoint members in compliance with the March court ruling.
- USPSTF Remains Paralyzed – One Week After Nomination Period Closed: The nomination period closed on May 23. As of May 29, no new appointments have been announced. The task force has not met in over a year.
- Blocked Studies Remain Suppressed: The FDA and CDC have not released the blocked vaccine safety and effectiveness studies. HHS’s position has not been independently verified.
Current Status Summary (As of May 29, 2026, 14:00 EST)
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| How many pediatric deaths were classified as “definite” in the FDA review? | 0 – Zero deaths classified as definitely caused by vaccination |
| How many were classified as “likely” or “possible”? | 7 total (2 likely, 5 possible) |
| Do “likely” or “possible” classifications establish causation? | NO – WHO-UMC framework explicitly states they cannot definitely prove a link |
| Does the FDA report recommend changing vaccination policy? | NO – Report states it “does not constitute a benefit-risk analysis” |
| Is the June 24-26, 2026 ACIP meeting still listed on the CDC website? | YES – Remains listed despite court stay |
| Has the CMS data reporting requirement been restored? | NO – Remains voluntary |
| Has ACIP been formally re‑established? | YES – Charter effective May 19, 2026 |
| What was the specific procedural violation? | CONFIRMED – Failed to provide public interest statement and proper notice under FACA |
| Does ACIP have members? | NO – Membership to be determined; no appointments announced |
| Is the March court ruling still in effect? | YES – Remains in effect; administration has appealed |
| Is the USPSTF nomination period open? | NO – Closed May 23, 2026 |
| How many USPSTF positions are vacant? | 8 of 16 |
| Have new USPSTF appointments been announced? | NO – None as of May 29 |
| Did FDA block vaccine studies? | YES – COVID and shingles vaccine safety studies remain unpublished |
| What did Harvard’s Kesselheim call the FDA action? | “Censorship” and a potential “major scandal” |
What Happens Next (Updated for May 29)
Immediate term (hours to days):
- The status of the June 24-26, 2026 ACIP meeting may be clarified—whether it will proceed and what it could look like under the court stay
- Secretary Kennedy may announce USPSTF appointments—no announcements made one week after nomination period closed
- Further analysis of the FDA pediatric death review will likely continue
Short term (weeks):
- The court’s stay on ACIP action remains in effect; ACIP cannot issue recommendations unless the stay is lifted
- The administration’s appeal of the March court ruling continues
- ACIP membership must be finalized in compliance with the March court ruling—but no timeline has been announced
Long term (months):
- If the June ACIP meeting proceeds despite the stay, legal questions will arise
- The cumulative effect of CMS data removal, delayed ACIP meetings, USPSTF vacancies, and blocked studies could accelerate declines in vaccination rates and preventive care utilization
- Congressional oversight hearings may be requested
Sources
- CIDRAP (May 28, 2026) – “Manufacturing a scandal: What the FDA’s COVID vaccine pediatric death review actually says” – Detailed analysis of 73-page OBPV report, 0 definite deaths, 2 likely, 5 possible, WHO-UMC framework explanation, ages 7-16, Pfizer-BioNTech only, report does not constitute benefit-risk analysis
- CIDRAP (May 28, 2026) – “The State of US Vaccine Policy — May 28, 2026” – ACIP charter analysis, June meeting still listed, Professor Dorit Reiss comments, charter language changes from April to May 19
- Family Doctor (May 28, 2026) – “HHS memo flags seven child deaths after COVID shots, triggers DC” – Case details, VAERS limitations
- Federal Register (May 18, 2026) – “Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP): Charter Re‑establishment Notice” – Official filing, effective date May 19, 2026, two‑year duration
- Reiss, Dorit (May 27, 2026) – Analysis via legal blog/Substack – Confirmation that withdrawal was a procedural violation, not a policy shift
- Techdirt (May 22, 2026) – “FDA Blocks Publication of Vaccine Safety Studies” – Kesselheim “censorship” and “scandal” comments, 4.2 million patient study details
- Arkansas Democrat Gazette (May 7, 2026) – “FDA blocks publication of vaccine safety studies” – Blocked study details, HHS spokesman statement, MMWR report
- Previous article: The Vaccine Data Blackout: ACIP Charter Error Confirmed as Procedural Violation – No Progress on Membership or Blocked Studies (The 5 Ws, May 28, 2026) – Baseline ACIP and USPSTF information
The 5 W's 
Leave a comment