The U.K. and China will be the biggest beneficiaries of the U.S. health secretary’s “own goal” of pulling funding for mRNA vaccines, according to experts.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a controversial member of Donald Trump’s cabinet who claims he wants to “make America healthy again,” is scrapping $500 million in funding for the technology—which was used to combat COVID-19.

Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia, said other countries with active biotechnology industries will benefit, but the decision will still delay the development of new vaccines worldwide.

“Progress will continue but not as quickly as otherwise. Lives will be lost that could have been saved had there been a vaccine,” he told Times Higher Education.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said 22 projects by major pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer and Moderna, will be affected. The projects were working on vaccines against bird flu and other viruses.

“It will certainly make the U.S. poorer for not having a biotechnology industry that is not as competitive as it could be,” added Hunter. “The U.S. will certainly lose out to China and Europe, and when its researchers move overseas, it may not be easy to get them to return later.”

He said the migration of talent to the U.K. is already under way—with his department recently shortlisting a research assistant who had been working in the U.S.

Kennedy said mRNA technology “poses more risks than benefits” for respiratory viruses and announced a shift toward “safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate.”

“I would certainly say it’s an own goal for the U.S. and something they are likely to regret,” said Robin Shattock, professor of mucosal infection and immunity at Imperial College London.

Shattock said innovation would continue at pace in the U.K., mainland Europe and Asia. While China pushes ahead with RNA technologies, the U.S. appears to be looking to shift to older technology used by Chinese companies.

“This current retrograde step by the U.S. will allow others to catch up and likely pull ahead in the context of vaccines,” he added. “It will only take another pandemic for them to rapidly see their mistake.”

Charles Bangham, professor emeritus of immunology also at Imperial, said the cuts to U.S. aid and higher education funding have already been seriously damaging for research, but this latest “antiscience” decision will be harmful to both manufacturing and health.

“The disinvestment in mRNA vaccine development and production is, in my view, a serious error.”

“It is a blow to the U.S.’ own interests—they’re shooting themselves in the foot.”

In the absence of any strong evidence that COVID-19 vaccines caused adverse reactions, Bangham said it was hard to rationalize why the U.S. was acting so decisively on “the basis of a few anecdotes.”

“It’s more than a lack of competency. I think it’s active and explicit, and often voiced, opposition and denigration and disavowal of the value of scientific evidence, which I think is extremely damaging.”

Along with the U.K., Europe and China, there are now “huge opportunities” for research development in Southeast Asia, he added.