A key vaccine advisory committee in the United States, now dominated by figures skeptical of mainstream science, has begun a controversial review of the long-standing practice of vaccinating newborns against hepatitis B. This move, led by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has triggered alarm among medical professionals who fear a dangerous drop in immunization rates and a resurgence of preventable diseases.
A Controversial Committee's New Direction
The reorganized Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) met in Atlanta, Georgia, on Thursday, 4 December 2025. This gathering followed a September meeting where the panel issued new recommendations for Covid-19 and measles vaccines. Under the leadership of Health Secretary Kennedy, a longtime critic of vaccines despite lacking medical credentials, the committee's composition has shifted dramatically. It now includes many individuals criticized by the scientific community for promoting anti-vaccine theories or lacking relevant expertise.
This newly configured ACIP has launched a broad safety review of several vaccines, some used safely for decades. The shift in policy direction is causing significant concern, with experts warning it could lead to lower vaccination rates and the return of deadly contagious illnesses. Measles, for instance, caused several deaths in the US in 2025.
The Debate Over Timing: Birth vs. Two Months
Since 1991, US health guidelines, in line with recommendations from the World Health Organization and practices in countries like China and Australia, have called for the hepatitis B vaccine to be given to newborns. This strategy has been highly successful, virtually eradicating hepatitis B infections among American youth. The viral liver disease significantly raises the risk of death from cirrhosis or liver cancer.
However, a proposal presented at Thursday's meeting suggests a major change. It recommends limiting the birth dose to babies whose mothers are known carriers of the disease. All other children would receive their first dose at two months of age. Some ACIP members argue this would align the US schedule with countries like France and Britain.
Medical experts strongly oppose this delay. They point to flaws in maternal screening in the US and warn that postponing the first dose will likely cause a drop in vaccination rates, especially in a nation with complex healthcare access. "Ninety percent of babies infected with hepatitis B will go on to have chronic liver disease. Of those, a quarter will die from their hepatitis B infection. These are entirely preventable deaths," said Sean O'Leary, a pediatric infectious disease specialist critical of the new ACIP's qualifications.
Political Pressure and Medical Reality
The debate has become highly politicized. Former President Donald Trump has insisted children should not get the hepatitis B vaccine until age 12, falsely claiming, "Hepatitis B is sexually transmitted. There’s no reason to give a baby that’s almost just born hepatitis B." Medical experts have condemned this assertion, noting that newborns can be infected by their mothers during pregnancy or childbirth, not just through sexual activity.
An analysis by University of Minnesota researchers, reviewing over 400 studies, found no benefit to delaying the hepatitis B vaccine but identified "critical risks" in changing the current US policy. Flor Munoz of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases called delaying the vaccine "irresponsible, disrespectful and very damaging" to vulnerable patients.
Broader Implications and Eroding Trust
The ACIP's recommendations carry heavy weight because federal guidelines often determine whether health insurers will cover vaccines, which can cost hundreds of dollars per dose. However, the committee's influence is diminishing amid fierce criticism. Several Democratic-led states have already announced they will no longer follow its guidance, signaling a potential breakdown in national public health consensus.
This situation highlights a growing crisis of trust in scientific institutions. As political appointees challenge established medical protocols, the direct consequence could be a rise in preventable illnesses and deaths, reversing decades of public health progress not only in the US but with potential ripple effects on global immunization confidence.
