On Friday, advisers of vaccination and prevention centers in the US were unanimously voted for to vote unanimously to alienate the extensive recommendations for Covid-19 vaccines to say that people wish to consult a healthcare provider-proc.
However, an advisory committee of immunization practice was divided whether to recommend that the Covidid-19 vaccine prescription should be needed. That vote was 6-6; Chairman of the Committee dr. Martin Kuldorf voted no, who broke the tie.
The committee now says that people aged 65 and older should make a decision on whether to get a Covidid-19 vaccine with a doctor or other health care provider. It should be the same people between the ages of 6 and 64, voted on vaccine advisers, but “emphasizing that the risk of vaccination is the most favorable for individuals with a higher risk due to serious Covid-19 diseases and the lowest risk of CDC list Covid-19 risk factors.”
Recommendations are not final and can still change; They go to sign Jim O’Neill, Director of CDC. O’Neill, HHS Secretary Roberto F. Kennedy Jr.
In practice, the general making of clinical decisions means two things, said dr. Dorit Liaiss, a professor of law at San Francisco of San Francisco of California, who specializes in vaccine and vaccine policy.
“This is a choice, not a refusal: the doctor should initiate, not everyone,” the lies announced in social media. “Usually this results in less uptake, partly because no one is sure what it takes.
“This will cause great confusion and the confusion will reduce uptake,” CNN also said.
Other experts agreed that this step would complicate Covid vaccines.
Demanding clinical decision-making “assumes health care and insurance,” said dr. Demetre Daskalakis, who recently resigned from the head of the CDC National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases.
“We do not have general health care in this country and we know that millions of people are losing insurance,” he added.
Improve the informed consent
In a separate vote, the Committee recommended that the CDC change its Covid-19 vaccine information statements stating the risk and benefit of vaccination.
Advisers wanted additional language statements, “at least six new risks and uncertainties”, which were discussed by the working group, many of which were based on preliminary and denied scientific findings.
Legal experts noted that changing the vaccine information report has exceeded ACIP’s competence because CDC requires a different process.
“ACIP has no authority to replace the vaccine information report from the floor. There is a comprehensive process for this,” said the LISS social media record.
Advisers also voted in favor of the recommendation that health care providers would consider the well-known Covidid-19 risk factors, “such as age, previous infections, immunosuppression and certain CDC-identified co-morbidities,” as part of the informed consent. “Especially those who are outlined about the vaccine report.”
Rezef Levi, a professor of MIT Operations Management, who is chairman of the Covid-19 working group, said the group had consulted with “the right people” and thought that the recommendations of the informed consent were what they could weigh.
He said that after the meeting, no one prohibits ACIP to make such recommendations, and “I think if you read and explain the role of ACIP as broad recommendations on vaccination policy, the most important thing we think is.”
The US Food and Drug Administration has already made significant changes in this season, restricting the risk of 65 years and older people, as well as at a higher risk of heavy Covid-19. People who do not fall into these categories can still get a vaccine if the provider wants to give it outside the label.
However, the CDC Advisory Committee voting has additional consequences for vaccine access, as some states carefully follow its recommendations. The result can be access to vaccines from the state to the state, partly depending on who can administer the vaccines and what the providers want to offer them.
In his report, a spokesman for the US Department of Health and Human Services said that the vote on joint clinical decision -making “provides immunization insurance through all payment mechanisms, including rights programs such as Children’s Health Insurance Program, Medicaid and Medicare, as well as insurance plans through the federal health insurance market”.
Earlier, American health insurance plans AHIP said its members, who provide more than 200 million Americans, said they would continue to cover all the vaccinations that ACIP recommended from September 1. By 2026 The end of the end. These include updated Covid-19 and flu vaccines.
Vote on hepatitis B vaccine for newborn babies delayed
The CDC Covid-19 advisory committee took place after the chaotic meeting began, when advisers received a previous decision on the remodeling of combined measles, mumps, rubber and chicken pox vaccines and then closely monitored the vote on the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns.
Vaccine Advisers voted 11-1 on Friday to postpone the scheduled voting for recommendations for hepatitis B shot changes. It was a surprise turn after a long discussion on Thursday, when advisers considered the recommendation to wait for newborns to give a dose of hepatitis B vaccine until they were at least a month old. Currently, babies are given birth to the birth, usually before leaving the hospital.
On Friday morning, one ACIP member suggested that the committee be considered to recommend a vaccine even later, after 2 or 3 months. Then a member of the committee dr. Robert Malé went to postpone voting indefinitely due to “ambiguity” for “safety, efficiency and time of shots.” Only the epidemiologist and biostatistist Kulldorff, who led the vaccine Acip working group, voted against the voting of hepatitis B vaccine.
However, advisers have already taken a one -time hepatitis B in the vaccines: voting to recommend pregnant women to check the virus. Usually, Acip plays a role in detecting research, and hepatitis testing is already recommended by normal care during pregnancy.
“The purpose of the vote is to encourage providers and health systems to increase pregnancy test percentages to ensure that women with hepatitis B and their newborns may be properly maintained to reduce the transmission of the virus from the mother to child,” HHS said in a statement after the vote.
Anti -accin activists have long doubted whether a vaccine is born dose, as hepatitis B is mainly transmitted by dirty needles or sexual activity. June At the Town Hall, Kennedy said “this is a really profit motive” – to give it newborns.
However, the data show that a campaign to vaccinate infants against hepatitis B, which has been recommended since 1991, has been successful. After it was implemented, infant hepatitis B infections decreased from 18,000 per year to about 20 cases per year.
Children infected with H hepatitis B are almost always ill with long -term infections that can damage the liver by increasing the risk of liver scar and cancer or the need for transplantation.
It is unclear how the committee will continue. During the meeting, several, not published ACIP connections to ask for clarity on other steps and why hepatitis B vaccine was now revised, despite the lack of new evidence.
New voting on some children’s MMRV shots
CDC advisers also gave new votes on combined measles, mumps, rubber and chicken pox vaccine on Friday.
On Thursday, they voted to recommend using a combined vaccine for young children, but the second vote set different standards for children receiving vaccines through the “Children” program, which provides shots for low -income children.
The new vote on Friday brought the Wilding for Children program according to another recommendation. Nine members voted in favor and three abstained.
Jason Goldman, president of the American College of Physicians, and a non -checked ACIP communication support said at a Friday meeting that he was concerned with controversial MMRV votes that would have created different recommendations for people at different social and economic levels.
Goldman says children’s vaccines vote “actually revealed the truth that you have no data or evidence of how to challenge the current situation and that there is no related damage.”
ACIP member dr. Dr. Joseph Hibbeln, a psychiatrist, replied that the wording of the first children’s vaccines to vote “was actually confusing and not accurate,” and by Friday morning there was a new clarity around the wording.
However, several medical groups expressed concern about MMRV changes.
“A new process and recommendation advisory committee (ACIP) allows parents to confuse how best to protect their children and not be able to choose a combined MMRV vaccine for children under 4,” said Dr. Sandra Adamson Fryhofer, ACIP of the American Medical Association. “AMA is worried that this change not only reduces the choice of parents, but also reflects Acip’s confidence in selective data in the formation of his instructions.”
To get more CNN news and newsletters, create an account on cnn.com