Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines – she’s been very clear about it

Senator Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines, one of the few politicians who makes her point of view very clear. Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts is currently either leading or close to leading the field to become the Democratic Party nominee for President in 2020. Her support of vaccines should be an important consideration for those who want politicians who are pro-science.

This article isn’t going to be about Senator Warren’s progressive bonafides, because, I don’t usually blog about politics, except in the context of science support or denialism. Vaccine denialism is the bailiwick of the left, right, libertarians, and various other nutjobs and crackpots. These people want to go back to the time of dirt roads, children working when they’re eight, no rules, no regulations, and other such 1700s thinking.

For those of us who care about vaccines, the fact that Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines is important. So, let’s take a quick look.

Rand Paul says dumb things about vaccines

Rand Paul, Senator Warren’s colleague in the US Senate, babbled about mandatory vaccinations, saying it was an issue of freedom, despite the fact that the kids, who are usually the victims of vaccine-preventable diseases, have no choice in the matter and lose their freedom to live healthy lives as a result of their ignorant parents.

Then, Senator Paul doubled-down on his lunacy by stating that vaccines cause “profound mental disorders.” Of course, real science says that they don’t. Once again, just because one has an MD (or whatever degree), doesn’t prevent them from evolving into a science denier. On the other hand, Senator Paul has no clue about the age of the earth.

On the contrary, Senator Warren is a firm, solid advocate and supporter of the need, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines. And Warren is not some recent convert to the vaccine debate (it’s not a debate) just to make a vaccine denying physician Senator look bad. Back in 2013, Warren was pushing for increased research funding into new and better vaccines.

During her career, she has argued that the government shutdown would affect the quick development of Ebola vaccines. So, she’s no johnny-come-lately to the issue of vaccines.

Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines

As the biggest piece of evidence that Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines is that during a Senate hearing in 2015, she questioned one of the leading experts on vaccines and immunization at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Anne Schuchat, MD (RADM, USPHS). Dr. Schuchat, at the time, was the assistant Surgeon General, who has spent her whole career after her medical residency advocating for public health and studying immunization, infectious diseases, and respiratory diseases.

According to Dr. Schuchat, “Public service is a privilege. For me, it has also been a joy.”

She has given up huge salaries and glory by helping save humans from dangerous, vaccine-preventable diseases. Her expertise in vaccines intimidates me because I couldn’t hope to know what she does in a thousand years of studying. Her knowledge far exceeds the fallacious authority figures offered up by the vaccine deniers as “proof” of whatever delusion they’re pushing this week.

schuchat-CDC-vaccines-senate-hearing

But there was a moment at that Senate committee, where the entire conversation about health risks and vaccines was laid open to the essential truth. Sen. Elizabeth Warren asked Dr. Schuchat whether vaccines are safe – nine different ways:

WARREN: Is there any scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism?

SCHUCHAT: No.

WARREN: Is there any scientific evidence that vaccines cause profound mental disorders? (Note–did she just troll Rand Paul? I just spit up my coffee.)

SCHUCHAT: No, but some of the diseases we vaccinate against can.

WARREN: The diseases can, but not the vaccines. Is there any scientific evidence that vaccines have contributed to the rise in allergies or autoimmune disorders among kids?

SCHUCHAT: No.

WARREN: Are there additives or preservatives in vaccines that can be toxic to kids?

SCHUCHAT: Not in the amounts that they’re in in vaccines.

WARREN: Is there any scientific evidence that giving kids their vaccines further apart or spacing them differently is healthier for kids?

SCHUCHAT: No, it actually increases the risk period for children.

WARREN: So it adds to the danger?

SCHUCHAT: Right.

WARREN: Is there any scientific evidence that kids can develop immunity to these diseases on their own, simply by eating nutritious foods or being active?

SCHUCHAT: No.

WARREN: How do the risks of a child responding negatively to a vaccination compare with the risks of skipping vaccinations and risking exposure to a deadly disease?

SCHUCHAT: Vaccines are safe and highly effective, and it’s important for parents to know that they’re the best way to protect their kids.

WARREN: So I think every parent wants to protect their children, and parents should know that all of the credible scientific evidence suggests that modern vaccines are safe, modern vaccines are effective, and modern vaccines are our best chance of protecting our children from diseases that can kill them. Is that right?

SCHUCHAT: That’s right.

WARREN: Thank you.

No thank you. It is clear that Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines and all of the science around it.

The CDC cares about science and health

Every statement made by Dr. Schuchat was and is supported by a mountain of evidence. Of course, our friends at the Age of Not Caring about Autism have decided to publish their own questions using ignorance, lies, science denialism, cherry-picking, appeals to authority, and general gibberish to mock Senator Warren. Compared to the questions of one of our best Senators, and the answers from one of the leading authorities, experts, and leaders in public health–both agreeing that vaccines are critical human health.

I know that this doesn’t shut the door on this fake debate. But as I list out the pros and cons of presidential candidates, the fact that Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines will be up there in importance (like all of the other science that she supports).

Let me try to make this as clear as I can. Dr. Schuchat is a brilliant public health specialist. Her job, her life, and her noble calling are to protect everyone in the world, including children, adults, whatever nationality, whatever class from diseases. She is a rear admiral in the US Public Health Service, a group whose whole purpose is to serve the health of the nation (with military officer salaries, not exactly a way to buy a new Ferrari).

The CDC and US Public Health Service are independent of the politics of the USA and are considered to be the finest public health agencies in the world. If they thought that vaccines harmed anyone in the world, they would be the first to say “let’s look at this and see if there’s something that should be done.”

The CDC (which has a lot of US Public Health Service officers) takes years to add vaccines to the schedule. Why? Because they demand outstanding research. So the vaccine schedule authorized by the CDC is not a statement issued by a bunch of bureaucrats but is a living document that evolves with new data.

Their knowledge of science and the evidence behind vaccines is beyond reproach. When one of their officers or leaders says “vaccines are safe and highly effective,” then to contradict that, you need to bring real evidence with real science published in real journals. Inventing strawman arguments like “Big Pharma pays off the CDC” is inane and absurd. It shows ignorance of the highest level.

Back to Elizabeth Warren

It’s clear that science deniers, and pals, Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr love to lie about vaccines. It’s good that we have one candidate for President who has offered full-throated support of vaccines and the scientists who study them. 

Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines and science. Remember that when it comes time to consider where to place your vote.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published in February 2015. It has been completely revised and updated to include more comprehensive information, to improve readability and to add current research.



Please help me out by sharing this article. Also, please comment below, whether it's positive or negative. Of course, if you find spelling errors, tell me!

There are two ways you can help support this blog. First, you can use Patreon by clicking on the link below. It allows you to set up a monthly donation, which will go a long way to supporting the Skeptical Raptor
Become a Patron!


Finally, you can also purchase anything on Amazon, and a small portion of each purchase goes to this website. Just click below, and shop for everything.




The Original Skeptical Raptor
Chief Executive Officer at SkepticalRaptor
Lifetime lover of science, especially biomedical research. Spent years in academics, business development, research, and traveling the world shilling for Big Pharma. I love sports, mostly college basketball and football, hockey, and baseball. I enjoy great food and intelligent conversation. And a delicious morning coffee!

15 Replies to “Elizabeth Warren supports vaccines – she’s been very clear about it”

  1. I have to agree with Ben. Being pro-vaccine at the moment is an extremely easy position to take, especially for a Democrat. She will not have any support from me as long as her anti-science GMO position stays as it is.

    1. I don’t think she’s running for anything except Massachusetts Senator.

      And long ago, I have figured out that the Nirvana fallacy never works with politicians. You take the best you can get. I’ve voted for anti-abortion liberals before. Or fiscally conservative, pro-war, but social liberals. There are no perfect candidates, and for me, pro-vaccine is much much much much more important than GMOs. Not even close.

      1. “for me, pro-vaccine is much much much much more important than GMOs. Not even close.”
        It’s an interesting thought. Whose anti-science bs is more reprehensible? Whose is more consequential? Does the anti-vax movement have more blood on its hands than does the anti-GMO movement (because they both have heaps)? Anti-GMO sentiment has led to preventable deaths perhaps most obviously by delaying introduction of golden rice, but also by denying developing countries access to more efficient agricultural resources generally and thus leading to malnutrition and starvation. Anti-vaccination sentiment has hit developing countries especially hard as well, but I wouldn’t be confident in saying that the death toll of that particular brand of pseudoscience is higher than for anti-GMO and so I really couldn’t say which brand of anti-science is worse, in my book. I’d love to see someone run the numbers, but I’ve got to get back in the lab.
        Some good reads:

        Greenpeace destroys golden rice test fields:

        http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/08/26/golden_rice_attack_in_philippines_anti_gmo_activists_lie_about_protest_and.html

        Anti-vaccine sentiment spreads to developing countries:

        http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/07/25/138672535/vaccine-mistrust-spreading-to-the-developing-world

  2. That’s considered schooling? They basically ran down the list of core tenets of the pro-vaccine movement. Doesn’t take much to get you kids excited.

    1. The truth has a sublime beauty. Saving lives is a high calling. We do appreciate such things.

      Sadly, being an ignorant smug douchbag is the best you can do.

      1. Touchy, Kell Bell! Did I have to find that Must See TV? I just didn’t. Sorry. Call it like I see it. Sublime beauty? Raise your bar!

          1. Wow, Mr. Mod. I thank you for adding to this discussion. It was a post about nothing and this whole comment chain has been about nothing. This is like the Seinfeld of blogs. You are deceived, my friend. In the face of recent reversals by the scientific community on several nutrition “truths” that were settled (but, oh whoops, now aren’t), I fully believe you will be on the wrong side of history. Not that vaccines are bad in total, but they are a nuclear bomb when we need surgical strikes. They are not all necessary but you make the false assumption they have been thoroughly studied and monitored. I have objectively looked at this history of disease and current efficacy of vaccines and, sorry to to break the news, you are not serving a public good. Go ahead and delete this. I know that’s one of the tools in your toolbox.

  3. An outstanding interaction between two brilliant women. Note that the politician deferred to the medical expert. Enjoy that feeling — doesn’t happen that often.

  4. I give SR credit and thanks for bipartisanship, whether he likes it or not. 😛
    So tired of the vomiting of the “Republicans hate science” trope and then unloading a steaming pile of anti-vaxx or “Weed cures everything from Apnea to Zoophobia ” crap.

    Still can’t trust Fauxcahontas.

  5. She’s still anti-GMO. Good on her as far as vaccines go, but being pro-vaccine is a low bar. Warren is not a friend of science.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.