CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel votes to stop recommending routine hepatitis B shot at birth: ‘Individual-based decision making’0%
By OAN Staff0% Cory Hawkins0%
12/5/2025, 2:41:24 PM
BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Appeal to Emotion, and Slippery Slope, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 28.9% saturation with 158 hits. Analysis detected 952 faulty-reasoning hits from 546 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 16,813 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA – DECEMBER 5: Members of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) are seen during a meeting on December 5, 2025 in Atlanta, Georgia.
(Photo by Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) — a panel of experts that advises on vaccine recommendations — voted 8-3 to end the universal recommendation for administering the first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth.
On Friday, the panel instead recommended "individual-based decision making" for parents of babies who test negative for hepatitis B.
Committee members in support of the change also emphasized that the panel still recommends that newborns get vaccinated at birth when born to a mother with hepatitis B.
The change was driven by the panel's new composition, appointed by Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has long criticized certain aspects of the childhood vaccine schedule.
However, the vote does not immediately alter policy, as it requires approval from CDC Acting Director Jim O'Neill or HHS leadership to take effect.
Insurance coverage for the vaccine remains unchanged.
The panel recommended that parents who decline the birth dose should delay vaccination until no earlier than two months of age.
It also urged parents to discuss antibody testing with their doctor during the three-dose series.
The proposal, however, revealed a sharp divide on the committee, with some members strongly opposing the change, arguing that it may be harmful.
"The language offers flexibility, access, and coverage at any time. I vote yes," panel member Hillary Blackburn said in her vote.
"We've heard 'do no harm' is a moral imperative. We are doing harm by changing this wording. And I vote no," said another panel member, Cody Meissner, who strongly disagreed with altering the guidance.
Meissner further argued that hepatitis B cases are declining, but only due to the "effectiveness of the vaccine."
He stated that since adopting the three dose regimen in 1991, hepatitis B infections among children and teens have dropped significantly.
"This has a great potential to cause and I simply hope that the committee will accept its responsibility when this harm is caused and I vote no," panel member Joe Hibbeln stated as he gave the final vote.
"It's a mistake to say, because we're not seeing so much disease, we can alter the … frequency or the schedule for administration, because we will see hepatitis B infections come back," Meissner informed.
The panel's final decision even prompted criticism from some Republicans.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R- La.), a hepatologist, stated in a social media post that the panel's recommendation was a mistake — publicly calling for the CDC acting director to reject it.
As a liver doctor who has treated patients with hepatitis B for decades, this change to the vaccine schedule is a mistake.
The hepatitis B vaccine is safe and effective.
The birth dose is a recommendation, NOT a mandate.
Before the birth dose was recommended, 20,000 newborns a…
The current hepatitis B vaccines used in the United States (Engerix-B, Recombivax HB, Heplisav-B, and the pediatric formulations) are recombinant protein subunit vaccines — considered traditional/non-live vaccines.
None of them use mRNA technology, the way the COVID-19 Pfizer and Moderna vaccines do.
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.