New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Virologist Robert Redfield Named as Next CDC Director

The Maryland-based clinician will not require Senate confirmation

Honoree Dr. Robert Redfield, seen here with William Haseltine, speaks during the Aid for AIDS 'My Hero Gala' 2013 at Three Sixty on November 5, 2013 in New York City.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The Secretary of Health and Human Services on Wednesday named Robert Redfield as his choice for director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Redfield, a virologist and professor at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, will soon replace Brenda Fitzgerald—who resigned in January amid reports about her investments in tobacco and health care companies. The CDC director job does not require Senate confirmation.

Redfield is well known for his extensive AIDS research, and oversees clinical programs offering HIV care to thousands of patients around Baltimore and Washington, D.C. He also supervises international care and treatment programs under The U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), according to the University of Maryland’s Web site.

Redfield has a long history of publishing reports about his work: In 1988 he co-wrote a Scientific Americanfeature article about early HIV research  (available via subscription only), which emphasized the importance of studying the progression of HIV into AIDS, and of diagnosing the viral disease as early as possible.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Beyond his laboratory, Redfield advocated for mandatory HIV testing in the 1980s—a practice that was widely opposed then, as it is now. He also helped implement an HIV-screening program at the Department of Defense, requiring every recruit to be tested for the infectious disease and banning anyone who tested positive from entering military service.

Redfield does not have much experience in policy or public health, two areas typically considered essential for overseeing the CDC and promoting its priorities on Capitol Hill. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, wrote to the White House this week expressing concerns about Redfield’s lack of public health experience. She asked Trump to reconsider the selection, and wrote that some ethics and scientific practices in parts of Redfield’s research in the early 1990s were worrisome—although Redfield was never found guilty of scientific misconduct.

Some other reactions from the public health community were generally more favorable. “I think he’s a world-class researcher, and from my perspective he thoroughly understands the lab and lab system issues, so that’s a positive,” says Scott Becker, executive director of the Association of Public Health Laboratories. “I do think that there will be a steep learning curve, coming from an academic research organization into a very large public health practice organization.”

Immediate challenges ahead for Redfield will include navigating this season’s spike in influenza cases, and any related work on flu vaccine research—for which he may be relatively well suited because of his credentials as a virologist and immunologist. Financing public health work will be another of the agency’s most pressing issues—even as the Trump administration has proposed significantly slashing the CDC’s budget, including a 43 percent cut to its Public Health Emergency Preparedness program. Other key tasks will include implementing the White House’s new plan to combat the opioid crisis as well as staying ahead of emerging infectious diseases. HHS Secretary Alex Azar said in a statement that Redfield's background as a clinician running a treatment network for HIV and Hepatitis C patients in Baltimore will now allow him to "hit the ground running" with the opioid epidemic.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe