Viewpoint: RFK, Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense botches the science on mRNA vaccines. No, they don’t cause cancer

068a6116-febf-486c-bb70-6b6507afaf38

Last month, researchers published an important study about how mRNA COVID-19 vaccines affect our immune system. The findings are fascinating and highlight a beneficial aspect of these vaccines that extends beyond their targeted protection against COVID-19.

Unfortunately, this research has been dramatically mischaracterized by certain groups, including an article from Children’s Health Defense (CHD) claiming the study shows “mRNA vaccines are linked to genetic changes that can cause cancer and autoimmune disorders.”

This is categorically false.

(A bit more backstory: The claims originated from a Substack post published last month by Alex Berenson, a former New York Times reporter who has become influential in vaccine discourse. According to Science Feedback, “Berenson became a notable source of health misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic” despite “lacking the relevant qualifications (Berenson has no scientific or medical training).” His Substack has drawn more than 240,000 subscribers. Children’s Health Defense later amplified the post in their publication The Defender.)

We reached out directly to the study’s authors, who confirmed this interpretation is “complete nonsense.” Let’s discuss…

What the Study Actually Found

The researchers discovered that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines not only generate antibodies (which we already knew), but also create what scientists call “epigenetic changes” in certain immune cells called macrophages.

In simple terms, the vaccines help train our innate immune system (the body’s first line of defense that fights off infections in a general way) to become better at responding to future threats, even ones unrelated to COVID-19. This phenomenon is called “trained innate immunity” and has been observed with other vaccines like BCG (for tuberculosis).

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

What Are Epigenetic Changes?

Let’s break this down:
  • The ‘genetic changes’ that the CHD article is referring to are in fact epigenetic changes. Epigenetic changes are NOT genetic mutations. They don’t alter your DNA sequence. It is genetic mutations that contribute to cancer development and not epigenetic changes.
  • You can think of epigenetic changes as adjustments to how your genetic instruction manual is read or expressed – like turning the volume up or down on certain genes – rather than changes to the instructions themselves. The specific modifications observed in the study help “bookmark” certain pages in our immune cells’ instruction manual, making them easier to access when needed for fighting infections.
  • They happen constantly in our bodies in response to everyday influences – diet, exercise, stress, aging, and immune challenges such as infections.
  • The specific change found (H3K27ac) is associated with “turning on” genes that help immune cells fight infections more effectively.

As the study author, Dr. Jan Rybniker, explained: “Epigenetic changes occur in human cells every day in response to environmental influences. By [CHD’s] logic, one could just as easily claim that an influenza infection causes cancer.”

For more on epigenetics and how they work, the National Human Genome Research Institute offers an excellent explanation.

The Cancer Claim: A Bridge Too Far

The CHD article makes an enormous leap by connecting these immune system changes to cancer. Here’s why that’s wrong:
  1. Cancer requires genetic mutations – actual changes to DNA sequences – that the mRNA vaccines do not cause.
  2. While cancer cells can have epigenetic changes, these occur alongside genetic mutations in cells that are already cancerous.
  3. The specific epigenetic changes observed in the study primarily affected genes involved in immune function (70% according to gene analysis), not cancer pathways.
  4. The affected cells (macrophages) have a short lifespan of about 3 days, making persistent problematic changes unlikely.

The cancer claims make a fundamental logical error. They note that certain epigenetic changes can be found in some cancers, then jump to the conclusion that finding similar changes after vaccination must mean vaccines cause cancer. This is like claiming that because firefighters are present at fires, firefighters must cause fires. Context matters tremendously when interpreting biological changes. The same type of cellular changes can have completely different effects depending on which cells they occur in and what triggered them. In fact, research published in Cell found that similar epigenetic changes in certain immune cells can actually help fight cancer (see below), highlighting just how context-dependent these processes are.

A Feature, Not a Bug

Far from finding concerning changes, the researchers discovered a mechanism that helps explain how vaccines can provide broader protection than just against their target disease – a phenomenon scientists call “trained innate immunity.” This can actually be considered a beneficial “side effect” of mRNA vaccination. Trained innate immunity:

  • Has previously been documented with other vaccines
  • Helps the immune system respond better to a range of threats
  • May explain why some vaccines provide broader protection than just against their target disease

The study actually suggests this mechanism could lead to improvements in future vaccine designs and might help us better understand how vaccines protect against unrelated infections. This represents an exciting advance in our understanding of how vaccines work, not a safety concern.

Why This Matters

Science communication is challenging. Complex findings can be misinterpreted innocently or deliberately twisted to promote existing narratives. As Dr. Rybniker noted in our correspondence, “It is complete nonsense to link these findings to cancer or any other disease.”

When evaluating scientific claims, especially those that seem alarming:

  1. Consider the source and their expertise.
  2. Look for statements from the original researchers.
  3. Check whether mainstream scientific organizations support the interpretation.
  4. Remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

In a striking contrast to claims that mRNA vaccines cause cancer, researchers are actively exploring how this technology can help fight cancer. A 2023 study published in Nature showed promising results using personalized mRNA vaccines to treat pancreatic cancer, with half of the participants responding positively to the treatment. Similar approaches are being investigated for other difficult-to-treat cancers, highlighting how mRNA technology’s ability to train the immune system represents a breakthrough with life-saving potential rather than a health risk. (Note: mRNA technology is also showing promise for infectious disease prevention against flu, HIV, Zika, Ebola, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, Lyme disease, and other diseases. The potential is truly incredible.)

A Note From the Researchers Who Led The Study

In our correspondence with the study’s authors, they expressed concern about how their work was being misrepresented. They emphasized that epigenetic changes are normal, temporary regulatory processes that don’t permanently alter DNA.

As scientists continue exploring how vaccines enhance our immune protection, let’s appreciate the remarkable ways our bodies learn to defend us, and be wary of those who twist these discoveries to promote fear rather than understanding.

Stay Curious,

Unbiased Science

P.S. Want to support our work? The best way is to subscribe to our Substack and share our content. While all our articles are always completely free to read, paid subscriptions help sustain our in-depth reporting on public health and science topics. Thank you for considering it!

Jess Steier is a public health scientist dedicated to bridging the gap between complex scientific evidence and public understanding. Jess is the Founder of Unbiased Science, CEO of Vital Statistics Consulting, and Executive Director of The Science Literacy Lab (a 501c3 non-profit organization), she has built her career on translating complex scientific concepts into accessible language while maintaining unwavering commitment to scientific integrity.

Elana Pearl BenJoseph is a physician with focus on pediatrics, health communication, and public health. Follow Elana on LinkedIn

Aimee Pugh Bernard, PhD is an immunologist, educator, science communicator, and science advocate. Follow Aimee on TikTok @funsizeimmuninja

A version of this article was originally posted at Unbiased Science and has been reposted here with permission. Any reposting should credit the original author and provide links to both the GLP and the original article. Find Unbiased Science on X @unbiasedscipod
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-12_16_37-PM-2
Viewpoint: Are cancer rates ‘skyrocketing’ as RFK, Jr. and MAHA claims? The evidence says mostly the opposite
ChatGPT-Image-May-13-2026-11_56_08-AM
After slashing global health aid by $19 Billion, Trump moves to tap $2.1 billion more—to cover shutdown costs
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-10.46.29-AM
Viewpoint: How to counter science disinformation? Science journalist offers 12 practical tips
png-pill-omega-Supp-fish-oil
Millions take omega-3 fish oil for brain health. New research suggests it may do the opposite.
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-08_39_41-PM
GLP podcast: Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Food—health harming industries or life-saving innovators?
Screenshot-2026-04-23-at-11.00.36-AM
Regulators' dilemma: Thalidomide, Metformin, and the cost of getting drug approvals wrong
Screenshot-2026-02-20-at-10.48.04-AM
Deepfakes raise profound ethical questions in science
Picture1-1
Cooling the planet with balloons: Could a geoengineering gamble slow global warming?
Picture1-5
Science Disinformation Gap: The transatlantic battle over social media and censorship
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-01_41_42-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Measles is a canary in the healthcare coal mine’: Challenging RFK, Jr.’s scare campaign
Screenshot-2026-05-08-at-3.40.33-PM
Seeds of power: China turns to genetic engineering to become global superpower
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.