The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a powerful body advising the CDC on vaccine policy, voted against requiring prescriptions for Covid-19 vaccines, leaving healthcare professionals and experts bewildered. This decision, reached after a tumultuous meeting marked by heated debate and apparent animosity, follows a series of controversial votes that have cast doubt on the committee's competency and impartiality.
The vote itself was a narrow one, with a tie broken by ACIP chair Martin Kulldorff. While rejecting the prescription mandate, the committee simultaneously recommended individuals consult clinicians before vaccination and emphasized "individual-based decision making" – a vaguely defined concept that seemingly varies for different age groups. This lack of clarity, coupled with the committee's recommendation to promote "consistent and comprehensive informed consent processes," including highlighting potential vaccine risks, raises concerns about future vaccine accessibility.
The ACIP's recommendations carry significant weight, influencing government vaccine provision, state and local regulations, and health insurance coverage. The committee's actions are likely to exacerbate the already fragmented landscape of vaccine availability, particularly given the recent FDA approval of updated Covid-19 vaccines for specific populations only.
The current state of affairs is inextricably linked to the appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as head of the US Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy, a known vaccine skeptic, replaced the previous ACIP with appointees lacking documented vaccine expertise or openly critical of vaccination. This lack of experience was glaringly apparent during the two-day meeting, which witnessed several questionable votes, including an initial approval of the MMRV vaccine followed by a reversal of this decision. Furthermore, the committee tabled a vote on the hepatitis B vaccine due to concerns about inconsistencies in the proposed wording.
The meeting was punctuated by tense exchanges, with one member reportedly calling another "an idiot." Concerns were raised by experts who testified before the committee, highlighting a troubling tendency among members to prioritize hypothetical scenarios, anecdotal evidence, and opinions over robust scientific data demonstrating the safety and efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines. Grant Paulsen of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society urged the committee to base its decisions on data, not theoretical concerns, emphasizing that while monitoring and research are crucial, they shouldn't impede access to life-saving vaccines.
The lack of transparency and the apparent disregard for scientific consensus exhibited by the ACIP during this meeting raises serious questions about the future of vaccine policy in the United States and the potential implications for public health.
---
Originally published at: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/19/acip-vote-no-prescription-covid-vaccine
