CDC Meeting Today: Shocking Changes to Childhood Vaccine Schedule Could Impact Millions! Are Your Kids at Risk?

In a significant and controversial presentation during a recent meeting of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in Atlanta, Dr. Cynthia Nevison, an atmospheric scientist from the University of Colorado at Boulder, argued against the necessity of the hepatitis B vaccine for infants. This marked a notable departure from typical practices, as her background in atmospheric science raised eyebrows regarding her qualifications to address such a critical public health issue.

Dr. Nevison co-authored a research study titled “Autism Tsunami” with Dr. Mark Blaxill, another presenter at the meeting who described himself as a critic of the CDC but is currently working with the agency. This study was retracted by the journal that published it after editors found that the authors had misrepresented and selectively cited data, failing to provide valid justifications for their proposed prevention mechanisms. Dr. Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California at San Francisco and a vaccine policy expert, expressed skepticism on social media, stating, “This is someone with no hepatitis B expertise and a well-documented anti-vaccine bias. They could not find an expert to present on this?”

During her presentation, Dr. Nevison suggested that hepatitis B infections posed little real threat to infants. She challenged recent modeling evidence that indicated eliminating the birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine would lead to an increase in preventable cases and deaths among children. “There’s very little evidence that horizontal transmission has ever been a significant threat to the average American child, and the risk probably has been overstated,” she claimed.

Moreover, Dr. Nevison pointed out that the most significant declines in hepatitis B cases occurred among younger adults aged 20 to 39, the demographic born after the universal birth dose was first recommended in 1991. She argued that the decrease in cases could be attributed to “other measures,” such as improved screening of blood products, safer dialysis practices, and more responsible sexual behaviors due to the AIDS epidemic. However, she failed to acknowledge the incremental advancements in vaccination and screening recommendations aimed at protecting infants from hepatitis B infection.

The CDC's vaccination recommendations have evolved over the years. In 1984, the CDC first advised vaccination for infants born to hepatitis B-positive mothers. By 1988, the suggestion would extend to screening all pregnant women for the virus, and in 1991, the CDC recommended universal vaccination of infants. The guidelines were further refined in 2005 and 2018 to ensure that babies receive their first dose before leaving the hospital or within 24 hours of birth, respectively. This historical context highlights the systematic approach taken to reduce hepatitis B transmission, particularly to infants.

Dr. Cody Meissner, a professor of pediatrics at Dartmouth and a current ACIP member, voiced strong opposition to the presentations given at the meeting, including Dr. Nevison’s. He stated, “This disease has gone down in the United States thanks to the effectiveness of our current immunization program.” He characterized the neonatal birth dose as a “safety net,” underscoring its importance in protecting vulnerable infants from a potentially life-threatening infection.

The debate surrounding the hepatitis B vaccine is reflective of broader tensions in public health discussions, particularly those related to vaccination. As misinformation continues to circulate, especially concerning vaccine safety and efficacy, it's crucial for public health experts and authorities to provide clear, evidence-based guidance to counteract these narratives. The unfolding conversation at the ACIP meeting presents a challenge not just for the CDC, but for the entire public health community as they strive to uphold vaccination standards amid growing skepticism.