NIH Board Chair Says Kennedy's Vaccine Clinic Adds No New Money

The board overseeing the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center Research Hospital faces a new internal challenge regarding its public image. Jack Leslie, the board chair, warned that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s recent vaccine injury clinic could damage the institution's standing. He delivered this message during a regularly scheduled meeting, stepping away from the standard agenda to address the issue directly.

Leslie spent approximately six minutes criticizing Kennedy's surprise appearance at a ribbon-cutting ceremony for the new clinic. The event featured a panel of individuals who reported vaccine injuries. They sat behind placards reading "vaccine injured" and spoke with Kennedy and other senior Trump administration officials. Leslie noted that the hospital is often called the "house of hope" because it treats patients with rare conditions who have exhausted other options. He argued that remaining silent on the matter would be a failure of the board's advisory duty.

The chair clarified that his objection targets the public spectacle rather than the science itself. Leslie stated he has no concerns about studying potential vaccine harms. He emphasized that serious reactions are rare but real. He added that patients who believe they have been injured should be taken seriously. This distinction separates the board's view of the research from their view of the promotional event.

Jonathan Green, the hospital CEO, supported Leslie's account of the clinic's structure. Green sat next to Leslie during the meeting and confirmed that the new facility comes with no additional funding. He also stated that the clinic requires no extra physical space. Green described the addition as just one more individual protocol within the hospital's existing operations. He noted that the NIH has researched vaccine safety and efficacy for decades and that this work continues.

The remarks from both leaders outline the practical reality of the new clinic. Leslie framed the issue as a reputational risk for an institution that serves vulnerable patients. Green presented the clinic as a modest addition to research the NIH already conducts. The two accounts suggest a gap between the high-profile ceremony and the clinic's actual operational footprint.