CDC Advisory Panel Narrowly Votes to Restrict Hepatitis B vaccine for Newborns, Reversing Decades of Protocol
ATLANTA – In a contentious decision, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted Thursday to limit hepatitis B vaccinations for newborns, a reversal of longstanding policy that has protected infants from the perhaps fatal virus for decades. The 11-3 vote followed days of heated debate and multiple delays, with panel members expressing concerns about the timing of the vaccine and the lack of data supporting proposed changes.
The decision impacts all newborns in the United States, potentially increasing rates of hepatitis B infection, liver cancer, and related deaths. The move comes amid growing scrutiny of vaccine schedules and reflects a broader debate about the balance between preventative medicine and individual risk assessment. the updated recommendations are not binding, but typically followed by state public health departments and insurers.
The core of the dispute centered on proposals to delay the first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine from birth to two months, and to require a blood test to determine maternal status before vaccination. the panel rejected a proposal requiring insurers to cover the blood test, stating it was outside the scope of their advisory role. Opponents of the current schedule argued for a more targeted approach,while proponents warned of notable public health consequences.
According to a recent model cited during the meeting, delaying the shot would lead to at least 1,400 infections, 300 cases of liver cancer, and 480 deaths annually. Liver cancer has an 18% five-year survival rate in the United States.
The second day of the ACIP meeting began early and quickly became fraught with disagreement. One member characterized holding a vote without further information as “unconscionable,” and the vote was delayed three times previously as advisors sought more data and refined the proposed wording.
“In addition to this not being discussed, there has been no data presented that this plan would actually work,” said Joseph Hibbeln, an advisor and neurologist formerly at the National Institutes of Health.
another advisor, Dr. Pablo Sanchez, stated one of the proposed votes was “kind of making things up,” adding, “It’s like Never Never land.”
The debate also touched on the rationale for vaccination. Retsef Levi, an advisor and professor at the MIT Sloan school of Management, suggested the vaccine was intended to compensate for “adults’ mistakes and flaws in our healthcare system.” Dr.Meissner countered, “We’re giving it to protect the infant against a potentially fatal disease. We know it’s safe and we know it’s very effective, and to make the changes that are being proposed, we will see more children and adolescents and adults infected with hepatitis B.”
