Big Pharma is making billions off modern RSV vaccines, but a devastating new lawsuit alleges the foundation for that success was built on two Black babies who were treated like lab rats.
Enrolled in a deadly 1960s test trial without their families’ knowledge, they died before seeing their second birthdays—and their families are finally taking the U.S. government to court over the evil history.
According to The New York Times, Ross Otto Hambrick and Victor Marcellus King were just infants when they unexpectedly became part of a medical trial for a respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine at a children’s clinic in Washington, D.C., between 1965 and 1966.
Their families were neither informed nor given consent for this procedure, a violation that has led to a lawsuit filed last month for wrongful death, lack of informed consent and civil battery.
Tragically, both boys succumbed to RSV complicated by bacterial pneumonia just a year later—Ross at 14 months and Victor at 16 months.
The families are also seeking an undisclosed amount of financial support because they’ve now learned that tissue samples taken during the autopsies played a major role in the development of the RSV vaccine that’s now being used worldwide.
The lawsuit stems from a stunning revelation uncovered in a 2023 investigation by Undark Magazine, a nonprofit digital publication affiliated with M.I.T. The probe exposed that Ross and Victor’s names were documented in a government-issued lab notebook belonging to a doctor, alongside a trove of related records detailing their involvement in a controversial study. The families were completely unaware of this connection until a reporter from Undark reached out to them, igniting a firestorm of questions about consent and ethical oversight.
Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who is representing the families, voiced their outrage at a recent news conference, asserting, “It was never about the health and safety of these babies,” he stated. “It was all about the ruthless pursuit of getting the vaccine to get to market, to turn it into profit.”
RSV is a dominant contributor to infant mortality globally, especially impacting premature babies, according to the CDC. It often begins with mild symptoms that resemble a common cold – think runny nose and cough – but can quickly escalate into severe respiratory issues, making it a formidable foe for vulnerable newborns.
The process of developing a vaccine for RSV has been a long and challenging one, as noted by The Times, taking many years to bring a solution to the public. In the early 1960s, a medical research team at the National Institutes of Health, spearheaded by Dr. Robert Chanock—it was his notebook which was cited in the investigation—set out to develop a vaccine. By 1965, the team had begun testing a version of it, dubbed Lot 100, on children at health clinics in Washington. Among those involved were Victor Marcellus King, born in August and Ross Otto Hambrick, born just two months later in October. The baby boys quickly captivated those around them: Victor had walked and talked early, while Ross was affectionately noted for his chubby cheeks and thick hair.
Victor and Ross were part of a group of at least 31 children, predominantly from Black, low-income families, who received three doses of the vaccine despite rising hospitalizations linked to the study.
In November 1966, the director of the children’s hospital responsible for the clinics cautioned researchers at a conference that Lot 100 might be making some children gravely sick when they contracted RSV instead of aiding them in fighting the virus, as described in the lawsuit. A month later, a significant outbreak of RSV occurred in Washington. And on December 30th, Victor was admitted to the hospital due to breathing difficulties. That same day, Ross experienced a worsening cough and had trouble breathing, which resulted in his hospitalization that afternoon. Victor sadly passed away on January 1, 1967, and Ross followed on January 2.
The lawsuit alleges that the hospital director decided to halt the trial on December 29th.
After both babies died, researchers collected samples of their lung tissue, which turned out to be crucial for years of research that ultimately led to the development of the RSV vaccine, as underscored in the lawsuit. Fast forward to 2023 and the Food and Drug Administration gave the green light to the first RSV vaccine, marking a significant milestone in public health.
The situation raises important ethical questions, especially since the families never consented to the use of these samples, per the lawsuit. In a recent interview, Harriet Washington, a well-known bioethicist and author of Medical Apartheid, called out the importance of ethical guidelines for obtaining consent from families in such sensitive circumstances.
“The rich matrix of laws that protect human research subjects, as outlined in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, did not exist in the 1950s and 1960s,” Ms. Washington explained. “However ethical codes and U.S. laws that require informed consent did exist as early as the 1940s.”
She also explained how certain groups of people were often overlooked.
“If you were a wealthy white man, you could be pretty sure of people being careful to ask your permission before enrolling you in research, of people of being careful to tell you what they were doing, why they thought it would work,” she said. “But if you were a Black child in an institution, you were not afforded that.”
The families, now grappling with the implications of their unknowing participation, are fighting for accountability. And they are shedding light on the darker side of medical research, where informed consent can take a backseat, especially when disenfranchised groups are involved.
As the lawsuit unfolds, it’s also important to note that these families aren’t merely fighting for culpability, however. As the details unfold, they also bring to the forefront the troubling legacy of centuries-old pharmaceutical practices that have often prioritized profit margins over the well-being of Black people.
Their fight goes beyond their own interests. It represents countless others who have been unknowingly impacted by these circumstances.
