TheChek News Flow

How US anti-vaxxers found they were not immune to pushback

Recent setbacks for the movement signal a potential turning point for the vaccine makers as the market picks up

At a recent conference at Washington’s Willard Hotel, allies of health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr had a goal in mind: to keep up the pressure against vaccination.

Perhaps they were rattled. A year after Kennedy and fellow vaccine sceptics descended on Washington, the movement has suffered a string of setbacks.

In March, a district court judge ruled against the US health secretary and halted changes to the childhood immunisation schedule that had been announced in January. These had cut US recommended childhood vaccines from 17 to 11.

The judge also blocked Kennedy’s 13 appointments to a key vaccine advisory committee, as well as any further action on votes taken by the committee in the past year.

Separately, Vinay Prasad, the US Food and Drug Administration’s chief medical and scientific officer, is leaving the agency for the second time in a year. This time, after the FDA reversed his unexpected decision to block a new flu vaccine made by Moderna.

Legislation in Congress that would remove legal protections for vaccine makers, adopted in 1986 to encourage the development of new immunisations, has also stalled.

For investors, the recent setbacks for vaccine sceptics mark a potential turning point for manufacturers, which have had to contend with falling demand, rising public hesitancy and a much more unpredictable environment in the US.

“We think there are some attractive opportunities where we are positive and it is safe for investors to wade back in,” said Kyle Rasbach, head of research at Bellevue Asset Management, a healthcare investment firm.

Jacob Glanville, founder of vaccine company Centivax, which recently raised $37mn from investors including Sam Altman and Stripe founders Patrick and John Collison, agreed the outlook had improved. “I don’t want to overly declare victory right now, but it already looks like the political pendulum is starting to [swing] in the other direction.”

There are signs of optimism in the market. Moderna, one of the world’s biggest vaccine makers, was among the most shorted companies in the S&P 500 last year. But so far this year, its shares are up 66 per cent and it is the eighth-best performer in the index.

Shares in Vaxcyte and Novavax, smaller US vaccine makers, are up 24 and 15 per cent respectively this year.

Moderna and Vaxcyte declined to comment. Novavax did not respond to a request for comment.

As well as Moderna, other major pharma groups in the US vaccine market include Pfizer, GSK, Merck and Sanofi. Australia’s CSL, which has a significant vaccines division, said in February its sales have fallen sharply partly because of lower vaccination rates in the US.

Two of Pfizer’s best-selling drugs are vaccines — against Covid and pneumococcal infections. Together, these two accounted for 17 per cent of its total revenue in 2025.

Although vaccines generally account for a relatively small share of sales for the pharmaceutical companies that make them, they are important cash generators.

Unlike complex biologics, cancer drugs and many other medicines, they are relatively inexpensive to produce and benefit from steady demand. They also have strong insurance coverage requirements, underpinning sales, said Jason Schwartz, a professor at the Yale School of Public Health.

However, support for vaccination has waned since the Covid-19 pandemic, which appears to have amplified existing hesitancy and scepticism.

In 2024, just 69 per cent of Americans said it was extremely or very important for parents to have their children vaccinated, according to polling from Gallup. Just half of Americans said the government should require vaccinations, down from 81 per cent in 1991.

A low point came earlier this year, when Prasad — who has previously claimed without evidence that Covid vaccines killed at least 10 children — refused to consider Moderna’s new flu vaccine for FDA approval, criticising the design of scientific trials that the agency had previously agreed.

But then days later, after Prasad’s boss FDA commissioner Marty Makary was summoned to the White House, the agency reversed its decision against Moderna.

The US Department of Health and Human Services said the FDA met Moderna after its flu vaccine application was initially rejected. “Discussions with the company led to a revised regulatory approach and an amended application, which [the] FDA accepted.”

One way pharmaceutical companies have responded to rising scepticism is through a familiar Washington strategy: hiring lobbyists with ties to the White House.

Vaxcyte last year hired external lobbyist Doug Davenport, a 2024 campaign manager for Donald Trump. Novavax last year hired Brian Ballard, another well-known Trump lobbyist. Alumni from Ballard’s firm include Trump cabinet members Susie Wiles and Pam Bondi.

Jeff Miller, another prominent pro-Trump figure, last year started lobbying against changes to vaccine liabilities for Pfizer. The company spent $12.7mn on lobbying last year. Pfizer declined to comment.

Still, some investors say uncertainty around vaccines persists, despite recent setbacks for sceptics.

“We’re still in an environment of rising hesitancy, where a non-trivial share of parents is delaying or skipping routine shots,” said Daniel Barasa, a portfolio manager at Gabelli Funds.

“Layer on to that a noisy backdrop at the FDA, which has been reassessing and, at times, walking back prior guidance in ways that make it very hard for companies and investors to anticipate the rules of the game.”

Glanville said Centivax was testing its vaccines in both the US and UK partly because of the regulatory uncertainty in America.

“We, as well as many other companies, are now having to create defensive strategies because of . . . inconsistency at the FDA,” he said.

“We’re an American company, we want to make universal vaccines available in the US,” he added. “But we have to make these secondary plans.”

Recently, the White House seems to have steered Kennedy away from vaccines and towards diet, another pillar of the “Make America Healthy Again” movement. HHS said that Kennedy “speaks about a broad range of issues”.

But Washington insiders have said that outbreaks of measles, which is highly contagious but preventable with a vaccine, in Republican-leaning states that Trump won in 2024 are partly responsible for the change in emphasis.

Hundreds of cases have been confirmed in Florida, South Carolina, Texas and Utah, government data show. According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2025 the US had 2,285 confirmed cases of measles. This is the highest figure since 1991. As of March 26 this year, 1,575 cases had been reported.

How Nelson Peltz chalked up another corporate break-up at Unilever

‘Unbelievably pushy’ activist investor backed $66bn carve-out of century-old food business

Unilever’s decision to combine its food business with US sauce and spice maker McCormick in a $66bn deal has gone down badly with plenty of shareholders. But one of them got just what he wanted.

Activist investor Nelson Peltz, who joined Unilever’s board in 2022, has spent years agitating for a break-up of the soap-to-sauces conglomerate.

With Peltz’s backing, Unilever chair Ian Meakins pushed the Hellmann’s mayonnaise maker towards a sale of its century-old food business, according to two people familiar with the boardroom dynamics.

Trian, Peltz’s investment fund, has been “unbelievably pushy on this, without a doubt”, said one of the people.

Despite a sale being widely expected — Unilever had already confirmed it was in advanced talks with McCormick — its announcement on Tuesday sparked a 7 per cent drop in the FTSE 100 company’s shares when investors saw the terms.

Unilever shareholders will own about 55 per cent of the new company — which will have net debt of about four times its ebitda — with McCormick owning a 35 per cent stake. The consumer goods group plans to begin selling down its 9.9 per cent stake a year after the deal has completed, creating the risk of an overhang on the shares.

“The feedback [from Unilever investors] is that it’s not very attractive,” said Jefferies analyst David Hayes. “They say: ‘Why would I want this food company? We are stuck with a food business now and we can’t even vote on it.’”

The McCormick deal was “a unanimous decision by the board, which firmly believes it is in the best interests of Unilever’s shareholders. It will enhance the group’s structural growth profile, simplify the portfolio and unlock long-term value,” Unilever said.

Unilever, formed in 1930 by the merger of Dutch margarine maker Unie with British soap business Lever Brothers, has become the latest in a series of consumer conglomerates that Peltz has helped prise apart.

The activist, whose investment fund Trian owns about 1 per cent of Unilever shares, spurred burger chain Wendy’s to sell coffee chain Tim Hortons in 2006.

The following year he lobbied Cadbury to sell off its drinks business and in 2011 successfully pushed Kraft, which had acquired Cadbury, to spin off its international snacks business. Trian declined to comment.

Another top Unilever shareholder said they had been calling for a carve-out of its food business for years but had been told repeatedly that a separation would be too costly and complex. Management stressed that mega brands Hellmann’s and Knorr were powerful cash generators.

But shareholders, most notably Peltz, intensified the pressure. And in Meakins, a steely boardroom veteran who was appointed chair in 2023, Unilever’s strategic direction was placed in the hands of somebody willing to make the bold decisions Peltz desired.

Meakins appointed current chief executive Fernando Fernández, a former president in Unilever’s beauty business and a willing collaborator in the mission to sell off its food business.

A person close to Unilever’s board said a separation of its food business had “been in the making for many years”.

Calls for Unilever to sell the division began after it rejected a $143bn hostile bid from Kraft Heinz in 2017. Paul Polman, Unilever’s boss at the time, appeased shareholders by selling its spreads business to private equity firm KKR for £6bn.

Successive Unilever CEOs have sliced off chunks of the food and drink portfolio since: Alan Jope, who ran the group between 2019 and 2023, sold Unilever’s tea business to CVC for €4.5bn.

During the tenure of his successor, Hein Schumacher, Unilever announced the spin-off of its ice cream division.

Schumacher’s dismissal in February last year was made in part because of his resistance to a full separation of the food division, according to two people familiar with the matter. The people added that the Dutchman was wary of pushing so much change through the organisation in a short period of time.

“After ice cream [the board] wanted a complete break-up of the company very quickly,” one of the people said. But the paucity of potential buyers complicated their efforts.

Unilever recently held talks with Kraft Heinz over a potential deal, but people familiar with the discussions said the US company’s weakened state would have made a combination unpalatable for Unilever shareholders.

“The only real option for separating foods in a strategic partnership was McCormick,” said the person close to Unilever’s board, adding that the cash-and-stock deal could not have been done earlier because of the relative valuations of the companies.

Before this week’s declines, McCormick shares had dropped by about 40 per cent over the past three years, whereas Unilever’s had risen by about 20 per cent.

“For the first time in years it was possible to strike a deal with a very attractive valuation,” the person said.

Another person close to the deal said Peltz was not the main driving force behind the transaction, although his broad desire for a split was clear.

McCormick’s leaders had long eyed a merger with Unilever’s food business and it was the US company’s “dream deal”, said one person familiar with the matter. After McCormick made its approach a few months ago, the deal came together at a “sprint”, according to a person close to the talks.

The deal unveiled this week will unite Unilever brands like Hellmann’s, Marmite and Maille mustard with McCormick’s red-topped spice brands and Cholula hot sauce in a single portfolio bringing in $20bn of annual revenue.

Its New York listing means a chunk of Unilever’s UK shareholders could be forced to sell their shares because of restrictions over their investment mandates.

The $15.7bn in cash that Unilever will receive from McCormick will be used to offset tax and separation costs, as well as to fund a €6bn share buyback over the next three years.

While McCormick said that the cash flow of the enlarged food business would help reduce net debt to three times earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation within two years, Barclays analyst Warren Ackerman said some investors remained wary over its finances.

He added that there was a risk that a decline in McCormick’s shares — which have fallen by about 9 per cent since the deal’s announcement —

will erode the new company’s value. A recent watering-down of UK listing rules means Unilever can push through the disposal without holding a shareholder vote.

Once the deal completes, Unilever will become a faster-growing beauty and personal care specialist with more cash to buy up brands in those higher-margin categories.

Analysts have long speculated that selling its food business would pave the way for a large acquisition in home and personal care. Proposed targets include Reckitt or Haleon, the consumer healthcare business that Unilever tried to buy in 2022.

Fernández moved to temper those expectations during a call with shareholders on Tuesday, saying that he intended to stick with previously announced plans to make about £1.5bn of bolt-on acquisitions a year.

Hayes at Jefferies said his comments failed to clarify how a slimmed-down Unilever would create value for shareholders.

While some investors may be unhappy about the terms of the break-up, others are relieved the issue has finally been put to bed.

David Samra, portfolio manager at Artisan Partners, a top-10 Unilever investor, hailed the deal as the “conclusion of a decades-long process” to normalise Unilever’s structure.

“Unilever is like the British empire,” said another major investor. “It’s so big, so complex . . . it had to break up.”

Credit investors flee to safety, pulling $11bn from junk bonds this year

AI disruption and war in the Middle East send market towards Treasuries and investment-grade debt

Credit investors have piled into defensive positions by shifting out of riskier areas of the debt markets over the past month, as worries over AI disruption and the war in the Middle East persist.

Investors pulled an average of $2bn a week from US junk bond funds over the past month, a more than 20-fold increase from the four weeks prior, according to data compiled by JPMorgan. The asset class lost nearly $11bn this year.

Leveraged loans, which are exposed to the beleaguered software sector, saw $887mn of weekly average outflows during the same period, compared to inflows of $247mn in the prior month, JPMorgan data shows.

“We’re being a little bit more cautious and risk-off in the current environment,” said Ali Hassan, portfolio manager at Thornburg Investment Management, which is reducing holdings of high-yield debt while buying more Treasuries and investment-grade debt. 

The flight to safety has contributed to more than $5.2bn of average weekly inflows for high-grade bonds during the period, according to JPMorgan.

Rising Treasury yields and widening credit spreads — the premium borrowers pay over US Treasuries — pushed total yields on investment-grade corporate bonds to 5.15 per cent by the end of March. That was up from 4.7 per cent from a month ago, according to Ice BofA data.

“The high-quality part of the corporate bond market has been very resilient despite all the volatility in other corners of the market,” said Matt Walker, senior portfolio manager at Income Research + Management. “People find the total returns very attractive.”

Some investors have also allocated more capital to cash and short-term securities to build up buffers. 

“It’s always good to add to the cash-allocation cushion in times of financial markets uncertainty,” said Sanjay Chawla, chief investment officer of insurance group FM.

“Given that we’re not in the zero per cent or low-rates environment, you’re better off having a higher cash allocation for a little bit longer until you have better visibility.”

The risk-off sentiment has put new deals in the junk-grade market under pressure. Customer service software group Qualtrics halted more than $5bn of debt sales in March as AI fears damped investor appetite.

This week, packaging company Sealed Air offered sweetened terms and pricing to get its $7.2bn debt offering across the finish line, partly due to concerns about rising business costs amid elevated oil prices.

Hamza Lemssouguer, founder of credit investment firm Arini Capital, said a number of fund managers had been sitting out new deals, complicating bankers’ efforts to finance leveraged buyouts.

Lemssouguer noted the advance of AI had cooled enthusiasm for new software debt and that the war in the Middle East would pressure margins for businesses that consume commodities in the chemicals and packaging space.

Despite the current volatility and heightened uncertainty, high-yield bonds are down just 0.6 per cent this year, according to the Ice BofA index. A subset of riskier debt rated single-B, a rating often targeted by private equity shops as they structure new buyouts, is off 0.4 per cent.

“I would not take comfort just because the market is not reflecting the pain,” Lemssouguer added. “Once liquidity is exhausted, prices will begin to drop.” 

Investors also are worried about the weakening US labour market and cracks in private lending.

“These issues have been somewhat covered up behind the fog of this war,” said George Catrambone, head of fixed income Americas at DWS Group, which favours sectors including energy and utilities. 

In a sign of investors demanding greater compensation for the risk of default on lower-quality debt, the average spread for US high-yield bonds grew to 3.46 percentage points on Monday, its widest level since May 2025. Total yield stood at more than 7.4 per cent at the end of March, Ice BofA data shows.

Still, some investors are unswayed, arguing the current yield on junk bonds is insufficient given ongoing risks, such as potential war-induced inflation, that could reverse the rate-cutting trajectory. If interest rates increase, debt issued at lower rates becomes less attractive.

“There’s a lot of uncertainty building out there that we don’t think we’re being compensated for,” said Dan Carter, senior portfolio manager at Fort Washington Investment Advisors. “We’ve moved up in quality in our portfolios.”

Carter said he had reduced high-yield bond holdings and added high-grade bonds, such as those issued by major US banks, particularly subordinated notes from highly rated companies that offer extra yields. 

“We like boring names in times of volatility,” Carter said.

Europe must prepare for ‘long-lasting’ energy shock, EU warns

Energy commissioner says bloc is assessing ‘all possibilities’ including fuel rationing and releasing more oil from strategic reserves

The EU is assessing “all possibilities” including fuel rationing and releasing more oil from emergency reserves as it braces for a “long-lasting” energy shock from the Middle East war, the bloc’s energy commissioner has said.

“This will be a long crisis . . . energy prices will be higher for a very long time,” Dan Jørgensen told the FT, warning that for some more “critical” products “we expect it to be even worse in the weeks to come”.

The near closure of the crucial Strait of Hormuz waterway and strikes on energy infrastructure in the Gulf have created chaos in global energy markets, sending prices soaring and prompting long-term supply fears. Airlines have raised particular concerns about jet fuel supplies.

“The rhetoric that we’re using and the words we’re using are more serious now than they were earlier in the crisis,” Jørgensen said. “It certainly is our analysis that this will be a prolonged situation and countries need to be sure that they . . . have what they need.”

He said that while the EU was “not in a security of supply crisis, yet”, Brussels was drawing up plans to tackle “structural, long-lasting effects” of the conflict.

This included “preparing for the worst scenarios” even if the bloc was “not there yet” on needing to impose rationing of critical products such as jet fuel or diesel. “I mean, better to be prepared than to be sorry,” Jørgensen said.

Asked about the possibility of weakening jet fuel regulations to permit more US imports, or allowing more ethanol blending for automotive fuel, Jørgensen said “we’re not there yet where we have remedied or changed any of our current rules”.

But he added: “We are looking at all possibilities and it’s clear the more serious the situation gets, the more of course we will also have to look into legislative tools.”

The EU and US have differing standards for jet fuel. Jet fuel in the EU has a freezing point of -47C, while in the US it is -40C. 

Jørgensen also said he “will not exclude” another release of strategic energy reserves “if the situation becomes more dire.” EU countries took part in the largest release of strategic oil reserves in history last month, in an attempt to tame soaring prices.

Jørgensen would not share the EU’s “exact analysis” on when a new release might be required but said “we are taking it very seriously and we are ready to do it when and if it becomes necessary”.

“We need to keep our possibilities open, and if this is indeed, as I project, a long-lasting crisis, then we need those tools also at a later stage,” he added. “It needs to be done at the exact right time, and it needs to be proportionate.”

Jørgensen also reiterated his position that there would be no change to EU legislation to end Russian liquefied natural gas imports this year. He said that relying instead on the US and other partners to provide additional supplies was acceptable as they operate in “the free market”.

Saudi TV drama about Iran hostages revived as war sours relations

Series based on 1987 crisis was filmed four years ago, then shelved as Riyadh and Tehran improved ties. Now viewers may finally see it

A long-delayed Saudi TV series about diplomats from the country who were held hostage in Tehran is being revived as ties between the two countries break down in the face of the US-Israeli war on Iran.

The series Embassy 87 is inspired by real events that followed the deaths of hundreds of people in clashes between Iranian pilgrims and Saudi police during the Hajj pilgrimage in 1987.

In response, Iranian protesters attacked the Saudi embassy in Tehran and several diplomats were held for 24 hours by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The series was originally shot more than four years ago, before Saudi Arabia and Iran signed a Chinese-brokered agreement in March 2023 to resume diplomatic relations, said three people familiar with the situation. One said it was shelved in light of the détente.

But as Iran responded to the US-Israeli attack last month by launching missiles and drones into the Gulf, Saudi broadcaster MBC Group released a trailer on March 3 announcing the series would soon come to its streaming platform Shahid, which competes with Netflix and Disney in the Middle East.

“Not all wars are fought on the battlefield” is the tagline with the trailer showing panicked Saudi embassy staff rushing to the basement as protesters climb metal gates to break into the building.

The show is directed by Colin Teague, a UK filmmaker who has previously worked on Dr Who.

It is unclear whether a final decision has been made to air Embassy 87. MBC initially announced that the first episode of the series would be released Friday, but a label on the show’s listing now only says “soon”.

Saudi Arabia has publicly opposed the war, with the kingdom’s de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman telling Iran’s president he would not allow the use of Saudi territory or airspace to attack the Islamic republic. But the kingdom has still been targeted by Iranian missiles and drones that have hit a US base and refineries inside the territory.

Sunni-led Saudi Arabia and Shia-led Iran have long been arch-rivals competing for power and influence in the Middle East. While relations improved after the Beijing accord, Saudi anger has mounted in recent weeks after Iranian attacks on the kingdom.

“What little trust there was before has completely been shattered,” Saudi foreign minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said last month.

Reda al-Nuzha, former Saudi consul general in Tehran, confirmed on social media site X that Embassy 87 is based on events in which he played a central role.

“With all humility, I say that I am that consul who was subjected to torture, kidnapping, arrest and imprisonment when I was Saudi Arabia’s consul in Iran in 1987,” he posted on X on Monday.

Founded in London in 1991 as the Arab world’s first private satellite channel, MBC was brought under government control in 2017 after its founder was among hundreds of royals, businessmen and former officials detained at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Riyadh as part of an anti-corruption crackdown.

The Public Investment Fund, the kingdom’s nearly $1tn sovereign wealth fund, took over the government’s stake in MBC last year in a private transaction worth around $2bn.

Despite strong ties to the government, MBC has sparked controversy over the years with content tackling topics including homosexuality, religion and contentious Arab history. A multimillion-dollar production portraying the life of an early Islamic ruler was last year banned by Iraq and Iran, with some clerics denouncing it as sinful.

Mazen Hayek, a former MBC executive, said that the ongoing war makes Embassy 87 “very compelling and relevant” as Gulf audiences follow a war in which their countries are squeezed between the US and Israel on one side and Iran on the other.

“MBC is also caught in the middle. On one hand, pushing the envelope creatively is about survival in the face of competition from the likes of Netflix and Disney,” said Hayek, who now works as a Dubai-based media consultant. “On the other hand, you have other social and geopolitical considerations to take care of.”

MBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In 2023, the group removed a series about the 1988 hijacking of a Kuwait Airways flight by Lebanese guerrillas from its streaming service after protests from the Kuwaiti government.

The first quarter of 2026 proved challenging for many prominent hedge funds including Balyasny Asset Management and ExodusPoint, as geopolitical tensions and market volatility weighed on performance, according to a report by Business Insider.

Dmitry Balyasny’s $33bn firm fell 4.3% in March, leaving it down 3.8% year-to-date, while Michael Gelband’s ExodusPoint, which focuses more on fixed-income strategies, declined 4.5% in March. London-based LMR Partners’ multi-strategy fund meanwhile, lost 2.4%.

Asia-based multi-strategy managers Dymon Asia and Pinpoint Asset Management fell 4.3% and 2.5% respectively for the month but remain positive for the year.

Some managers though mitigated losses: New York-based Schonfeld Strategic Advisors was flat in March and up 0.9% year-to-date.

Market headwinds included the ongoing Middle East tensions, which drove energy prices higher, and macro trades that backfired, such as bets on falling short-term interest rates in the UK and Europe. Earlier in Q1, software stocks sold off amid investor unease over AI developments from start-ups like Anthropic.

The S&P 500 posted its worst quarter since 2022, down 4.6%, reflecting a volatile environment that tested both macro and multi-strategy funds.

Dmitry Balyasny’s $33bn firm fell 4.3% in March, leaving it down 3.8% year-to-date, while Michael Gelband’s ExodusPoint, which focuses more on fixed-income strategies, declined 4.5% in March. London-based LMR Partners’ multi-strategy fund meanwhile, lost 2.4%.

Asia-based multi-strategy managers Dymon Asia and Pinpoint Asset Management fell 4.3% and 2.5% respectively for the month but remain positive for the year.

Some managers though mitigated losses: New York-based Schonfeld Strategic Advisors was flat in March and up 0.9% year-to-date.

Market headwinds included the ongoing Middle East tensions, which drove energy prices higher, and macro trades that backfired, such as bets on falling short-term interest rates in the UK and Europe. Earlier in Q1, software stocks sold off amid investor unease over AI developments from start-ups like Anthropic.

The S&P 500 posted its worst quarter since 2022, down 4.6%, reflecting a volatile environment that tested both macro and multi-strategy funds.