The Reform UK party found itself at the center of a heated controversy this weekend after vaccine-skeptic cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra took the stage at its annual conference in Birmingham, making the explosive claim that COVID-19 vaccines may have contributed to the cancers diagnosed in King Charles III and the Princess of Wales. The remarks, delivered during a 15-minute speech on September 6 at an event titled “Make Britain Healthy Again,” have drawn swift and forceful condemnation from leading medical experts, politicians, and even members of Reform UK’s own leadership, who scrambled to distance the party from the speaker’s views.
Dr. Malhotra, who described himself as a friend of U.S. health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., told the audience of thousands that “hundreds of studies showed the harms of mRNA vaccines,” and went as far as to say, “It’s highly likely that the COVID vaccines have been a factor, a significant factor, in the cancer of members of the royal family.” According to Sky News, Malhotra cited the opinion of Professor Angus Dalgleish, a British oncologist, to bolster his assertion, telling attendees, “One of Britain’s most eminent oncologists Professor Angus Dalgleish said to me to share with you today that he thinks it’s highly likely that the Covid vaccines have been a significant factor in the cancers in the royal family.”
These claims were met with silence in the room, but outside the conference hall, the backlash was immediate and fierce. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, a Labour MP, wasted no time in denouncing both the speaker and the platform given to him. “When we are seeing falling numbers of parents getting their children vaccinated, and a resurgence of disease we had previously eradicated, it is shockingly irresponsible for Nigel Farage to give a platform to these poisonous lies,” Streeting said, as reported by The Independent. “Farage should apologise and sever all ties with this dangerous extremism.”
Malhotra’s presentation did not stop at linking vaccines to cancer in the royal family. He went on to claim that mRNA vaccines could alter genes and that taking the COVID vaccine was “more likely to cause harm than the virus itself.” At one point, he declared, “It is highly likely that not a single person should have been injected with this,” and further accused the World Health Organization (WHO) of being “captured” by Microsoft founder Bill Gates, urging for the organization to be replaced. According to BBC News, Malhotra stated, “What does that mean? It is highly likely that not a single person should have been injected with this. Nobody is immune to medical misinformation.”
Medical professionals and scientific experts were quick to refute Malhotra’s assertions. Blood Cancer UK’s healthcare professional advisory panel, comprising specialists from across the UK, issued a statement: “There are no controlled, large-scale studies (studies with the most robust scientific evidence) that demonstrate an increased cancer risk following COVID-19 vaccination.”
Professor Brian Ferguson, a viral immunologist at the University of Cambridge, was particularly scathing in his assessment. “There is no credible evidence that these vaccines disrupt tumour suppressors or drive any kind of process – biochemical or otherwise – that results in cancer,” Ferguson told The Independent. “It is particularly crass to try to link this pseudoscience to the unfortunate incidents of cancer in the royal family and is reminiscent of the ‘died suddenly’ trope which attempted and ultimately failed to link the death of any young person to their vaccination status. This kind of outlandish conspiracy theory only serves to undermine the credibility of those spreading it.”
Ferguson further stated, “There are repetitions of often-used anti-vax tropes that have been extensively disproven. There are numerous, high-quality studies that prove the Covid vaccines, including mRNA vaccines, saved millions of lives. Evidence that mRNA vaccines have done more harm than good just does not exist and claims that they did do not stand up to scrutiny.”
Penny Ward, visiting professor in pharmaceutical medicine at King’s College London, added her voice to the chorus of criticism, telling The Independent, “Dr Malhotra has provided his own interpretation of scientific evidence on Covid vaccines, but his view is not shared by the majority of medical practitioners.” She went on to defend the WHO, stating the organization is staffed by “clinical and scientific experts who take very seriously their responsibilities to ensure the quality of information reviewed and advice given meets the highest ethical and scientific standards.”
The NHS has also reiterated its stance, maintaining that COVID vaccines meet all strict safety standards and that there is no evidence to support claims of increased cancer risk or gene alteration as a result of vaccination.
The controversy comes at a delicate time for the royal family. King Charles III’s cancer diagnosis was first announced in February 2024, with Buckingham Palace stating only that he was receiving treatment, without specifying the type of cancer. The Princess of Wales revealed her own diagnosis in March 2024 and entered remission in January 2025, also choosing not to disclose further details. According to BBC News, previous attempts to link COVID vaccines to so-called “turbo cancers” have been dismissed by academics and oncologists as lacking any credible scientific basis.
Reform UK, for its part, has attempted to walk a fine line between defending free speech and distancing itself from Malhotra’s claims. A party spokesperson told both Sky News and BBC News, “Dr Aseem Malhotra is a guest speaker with his own opinions who has an advisory role in the US government. Reform UK does not endorse what he said but does believe in free speech.”
Lord Bethell, a Conservative peer and former health minister, was blunt in his assessment: “This [is] bad science, bad royal-watching and bad politics – the British public strongly support vaccines and resent people who try to hijack our much-loved royal family for promoting loopy ideas. Might work well with American donors, but this is a clanger for Reform UK’s credibility. I hope they give up this rubbish.”
For his part, Dr. Malhotra pushed back against accusations of being an “anti-vax conspiracy theorist,” asking the audience, “Have you heard anything anti-vax or conspiracy theory so far here?” and decrying what he described as undue influence from the pharmaceutical industry and global health organizations. He reiterated his belief that “many other doctors feel the same way” about the risks of mRNA vaccines, although, as Penny Ward and others pointed out, this view is not shared by the majority of the medical community.
As the dust settles from a turbulent conference weekend, the incident has reignited debate over the boundaries of free speech, the responsibilities of political parties in platforming controversial views, and the ongoing challenge of combating medical misinformation in the public sphere. With vaccination rates already under pressure and the specter of resurgent diseases looming, the stakes for public health—and public trust—have rarely felt higher.
