BRUSSELS — An adviser to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lauded Europe’s data on Covid-19 vaccines in front of European Parliament lawmakers on Wednesday. Robert W. Malone, one of RFK Jr.’s newly selected vaccine advisers to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said the United States can’t gather and analyze data as well as Europe does it, name-checking the Nordics and the U.K. especially for their systems. “One of the consequences is we can’t do, frankly, as good a job as you can do in epidemiology, which may be part of the reason why in some nation states, we’re getting better data on the Covid harms from Europe, the U.K., than we’re getting from the United States,” Malone said. That’s because, among other things, “we don’t have socialized medicine the same way you do, and we have barriers to ensure patient confidentiality,” he told right-wing MEPs gathered in the Parliament to launch the Make Europe Healthy Again (MEHA) movement with the Patriots for Europe group. Under RFK Jr., the U.S. has tried to reign in who can receive Covid-19 shots, which until recently were offered to everyone over 6 months of age at least once a year.   Europe diverged from American Covid-19 shot recommendations during the pandemic, restricting eligibility to those who would be at greatest risk from catching the virus as well as weighing the possible side effects. Younger men and teenagers, for example, appeared more susceptible to a rare heart condition after vaccination. RFK Jr., who has campaigned against the use of certain vaccines, has cited Europe’s approach to Covid-19 vaccination in his attempts to restrict who in the U.S. should receive it. He has also pushed for pregnant women to avoid using paracetamol (Tylenol), linking its use to increasing rates of autism in the U.S., under his Make America Health Again (MAHA) campaign.

BRUSSELS ― The deadline has passed for the European Commission to appeal an EU court judgment over President Ursula von der Leyen’s text message exchange with a vaccine-maker at the height of the Covid pandemic. It means the EU’s General Court finding in May will stand. The court ruled that the Commission failed to explain why messages shared between von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla didn’t contain important information that would have required retention. In a case that became known as “Pfizergate,” reporters asked to see the messages after it was revealed in a 2021 New York Times interview with von der Leyen that she had exchanged texts with Bourla ahead of a multibillion-euro vaccine deal agreed between Pfizer and the EU. The case became a flashpoint for transparency activists who said it demonstrated the lack of accountability in von der Leyen’s Commission ― and for people who opposed the use of the vaccine in the first place. NO-CONFIDENCE VOTE The deadline for the EU executive to contest the decision in the EU’s top-tier Court of Justice passed earlier this month without the Commission appealing, a spokesperson for the EU courts confirmed. At the beginning of July, von der Leyen faced a no-confidence vote in the European Parliament over the case, triggered by right-wing Romanian MEP Gheorghe Piperea. While the Commission president easily survived the vote after the majority of MEPs backed her leadership, the debate became the first time she has publicly defended herself over the case. She told lawmakers in Strasbourg that some accusations leveled against her were “simply a lie.” Whether the Commission’s non-appeal means that the messages will be released is another matter. The court ruling conceded that retrieving the texts will be difficult, and a spokesperson for the Commission said that in line with the ruling it would provide “a more detailed explanation as to why it does not hold the requested documents.” The court “did not put into question the Commission’s registration policy regarding access to documents,” the spokesperson said, adding that the EU executive “remains fully committed to maintaining openness, accountability, and clear communication with all stakeholders, including EU institutions, civil society, and interest representatives.”