A federal advisory panel appointed by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has urged parents to skip a routine newborn shot, sparking a national debate. The panel, known as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), recommended ending routine newborn vaccination against hepatitis B. The hepatitis B vaccine has saved lives, helped child infections plummet, and has been given safely to tens of millions of children in the U.S. This recommendation has prompted doctors across the country to respond.
The hepatitis B vaccine protects against a virus that can cause liver failure or cancer. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and other doctors groups vowed on Tuesday to keep recommending the vaccine. They emphasize that the vaccine is lifesaving. They also note its long record of safety.
Dr. Ronald Nahass, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told reporters, “We owe our patients a consistent message informed by evidence and lived experience, not messages biased by political imperative.” He also said, “Most Americans don’t have a Cousin Ronnie to call. They are left alone with fear and mistrust.” His remarks highlight the confusion parents face. He urges parents to talk with their doctors about vaccines.
ACIP’s shift also involved examining potential changes to the entire childhood vaccination schedule. The panel questioned certain ingredients and the number of doses children receive. Last week’s meeting excluded CDC specialists from presenting data on hepatitis B, the schedule, or vaccine ingredients. This departure from tradition has raised concerns among medical experts.
The panel includes vaccine skeptics and has few members with public health experience. Kennedy’s health department recently altered a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention webpage to contradict the long‑standing scientific conclusion that vaccines do not cause autism. Federal agencies also moved to restrict COVID‑19 vaccinations this fall. They are planning policy changes that could limit future flu and coronavirus shots.
The panel’s chairman questioned why a single dose of yellow fever vaccine protected him during a trip to Africa when U.S. children receive three doses of hepatitis B vaccine. The hepatitis B vaccine is designed to protect children for life from a virus they can encounter anywhere, not just on a trip abroad. Other scientists noted it was carefully studied for years to prove the three‑dose course offers decades of immunity. Evidence shows a single dose simply does not provide that protection.
Dr. Kelly Gebo, an infectious disease specialist and public health dean at George Washington University, said, “If they’ve got new data, I’m all for it — let’s see it and have a conversation,” but she added she saw no new data. She said she would not change her vaccine advice. She emphasized the importance of evidence. Her stance reflects the broader medical community’s caution.
Committee members argued that most babies’ risk of hepatitis B infection is very low. They also said earlier research on infant shot safety was inadequate. A doctor called in to say the panel misrepresented her study’s findings. The panel’s chairman wondered why a single dose of yellow fever vaccine protected him abroad.
Jason Schwartz, a vaccine policy expert at Yale University, noted, “I don’t think at any point in the committee’s history, there was a 90‑minute uninterrupted presentation by someone who wasn’t a physician, a scientist, or a public health expert on the topic — let alone someone who makes his living in vaccine litigation.” He criticized the inclusion of non‑experts. He highlighted the lack of scientific rigor. He called for more expert input.
Stanford’s Dr. Jake Scott said, “For decades, ACIP was the gold standard,” and warned that abandoning data and front‑line consensus is “actively burning down the credibility that made its recommendations so powerful.” He added that most parents will still follow their pediatricians. But mixed messages erode confidence over time. He emphasized the need for evidence‑based guidance.
Trump administration health officials argue restoring choice to parents and avoiding mandates is essential. They frame the hepatitis B recommendation as an option for those who truly want it. This approach emphasizes individual decision‑making. It contrasts with population‑wide recommendations.
Dr. Aaron Milstone of the AAP explained that the government makes population‑wide recommendations while families and doctors tailor choices to individual health needs. He said many doctors cannot conduct their own extensive scientific reviews. They rely on ACIP and CDC information. This reliance underscores the importance of trustworthy guidance.
Yale’s Schwartz noted that many doctors rely on ACIP and CDC because they cannot do their own lengthy scientific review of vaccines. He said these trusted expert voices help navigate a complicated landscape of vaccine evidence. He emphasized the role of pediatricians and other groups. They aim to fill the guidance gap.
Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., a liver disease doctor, supported the CDC guidance that infants should receive the hepatitis B vaccine. He raised concerns that ACIP might vote to change the recommendation. He highlighted the importance of early vaccination. He emphasized the potential risks of delaying the shot.
Other medical groups and some city and state public health departments have issued their own advice on certain vaccines. Their guidance largely mirrors pre‑2025 federal guidance. This consistency provides reassurance to many. It also reflects a coordinated effort among health professionals.
In closing, Dr. Sarah Nosal of the American Academy of Family Physicians urged anyone with vaccine questions to have an open conversation with their doctor. She said, “Ask your questions, bring your concerns and let us talk about them.” She emphasized the value of dialogue. She encouraged parents to seek personalized guidance.
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content. This statement clarifies funding sources. It is part of the article’s disclosure.
The controversy highlights the tension between federal health policy and medical professional standards. It underscores the importance of evidence‑based recommendations. It also illustrates the impact of political influence on public health. The debate continues as stakeholders weigh the risks and benefits.
Parents already have a choice, said Dr. Aaron Milstone. The government makes population‑wide recommendations while families and doctors tailor choices to each person’s health needs. Many doctors rely on trusted expert voices to help navigate the evidence. The guidance gap remains a significant challenge.
The conflict over hepatitis B vaccination reflects broader questions about vaccine policy in the United States. It brings to light the role of federal agencies, professional societies, and individual clinicians. The stakes involve child health and public trust. The outcome will shape future vaccination practices.
