▼ Summary
– A panel of federal vaccine advisors selected by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. voted to remove the universal recommendation for a hepatitis B vaccine dose at birth.
– Public health experts warn this decision, made without evidence of harm from the birth dose, will lead to more infant infections and subsequent chronic liver disease and cancer.
– A pediatrician on the committee argued the change itself would cause harm by reversing a successful public health policy.
– The universal birth dose recommendation, established in 1991, was implemented after a targeted approach failed and led to a significant increase in infant infections.
– A committee member previously noted there was no supporting data comparing the risks and benefits of a birth dose versus a one-month delay when the change was first proposed.
A federal vaccine advisory panel has voted to remove the long-standing recommendation that all newborns receive their first hepatitis B vaccine dose on the day of birth. This decision, made without reviewing any new scientific data comparing the risks or benefits of a birth dose versus a delayed schedule, has drawn sharp criticism from public health leaders and medical experts who warn it will lead to increased infections and serious long-term health consequences. The universal birth dose policy, established in 1991, successfully reversed a troubling decade-long rise in infant hepatitis B infections.
The vote by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) marks the third attempt to withdraw this foundational public health guidance. The panel, whose members were appointed by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., voted 8–3 to eliminate the universal birth dose advice. Critics argue the move disregards decades of evidence showing the strategy’s effectiveness. Before the universal recommendation was implemented, efforts to vaccinate only infants deemed “high-risk” failed dramatically, resulting in a 37 percent surge in infected babies between 1979 and 1989. Following the policy’s adoption, infections occurring soon after birth were nearly eradicated.
Medical professionals on and off the committee expressed deep concern over the decision’s potential impact. Pediatrician Cody Meissner, a voting ACIP member who opposed the change, stated, “I will just say we have heard ‘do no harm’ is a moral imperative. We are doing harm by changing this.” Public health experts predict the policy shift will lead to more infant infections, which in turn increases the lifetime risk of chronic liver disease, liver cancer, and premature death.
The lack of supporting evidence for the change was a point of contention from the beginning. When the committee first attempted to alter the recommendation last September, panel member and psychiatrist Joseph Hibbeln raised a fundamental objection: the group had not examined any data comparing the outcomes of vaccination at birth versus at one month of age. Despite this lack of analysis, the committee proceeded to recommend delaying the vaccine until the first month of life. The final vote to eliminate the universal birth dose recommendation was conducted without any new evidence demonstrating harm from the existing schedule or proven benefit from a delay.
(Source: Ars Technica)
