Trump’s New CDC Director Has Controversial History of AIDS Research

Dr. Robert Redfield has been linked with flawed research and views outside of the scientific mainstream.

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

On Wednesday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention got a new director: Robert Redfield, a prominent University of Maryland HIV researcher. Appointed to the role by Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, Redfield will replace former director Brenda Fitzgerald, who resigned in January over financial conflicts of interest. 

Redfield’s critics point to a track record mired in controversy. In the 1990s, he oversaw a trial of an AIDS vaccine at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research; that work was later found to be inaccurate. From Kaiser Health News’ reporting on the incident: 

“Either he was egregiously sloppy with data or it was fabricated,” said former Air Force Lt. Col. Craig Hendrix, a doctor who is now director of the division of clinical pharmacology at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. “It was somewhere on that spectrum, both of which were serious and raised questions about his trustworthiness.”

The Army investigated that work in 1994 and cleared Redfield of misconduct allegations. 

Earlier, in the 1980s, Redfield led an effort to screen all members of the military for HIV, and prohibit those who tested positive from serving. He also supported HIV testing of civilians during routine doctor visits and when applying for marriage licenses, a policies that most of the public health community strongly opposed.

In a March 19 letter (PDF) to President Trump, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) called Redfield’s record “ethically and morally questionable” and urged the president to “reconsider Dr. Redfield as a candidate for CDC director.” 

Redfield hasn’t commented publicly on his current stance on HIV policy. As Gregg Gonsalves, an AIDS researcher with the Yale School of Public Health told the New York Times, “We don’t have to be defined by our pasts, but Dr. Redfield has to clarify where he stands now on key issues and place himself firmly in the mainstream of evidence-based public health.”


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend