CDC Vaccine Panel in Confusion Over Hepatitis B Vote
Members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices appeared perplexed by the proposed recommendation regarding the birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine.
Robert Malone, committee member and vice chairman of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, during a committee meeting on December 4, 2025. An influential group of US vaccine advisers is expected to reverse a long-standing recommendation that infants receive a hepatitis B vaccine within hours of birth. The change will almost certainly put children at risk, public health experts say.
Megan Warner/Bloomberg via Getty Images
An influential vaccine panel that was scheduled to vote on changing recommendations on hepatitis B vaccines for infants delayed its vote after Thursday afternoon's deliberations descended into confusion and disarray.
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) was set to rule on hepatitis B vaccine recommendations for newborns, but several panel members seemed confused about what they were voting on. Voting is now due to take place on Friday.
“Once again, there was general confusion and confusion, as well as a clear lack of experience among both presenters and ACIP members,” says Helen Chu, an immunologist and physician at the University of Washington. ACIP initially discussed hepatitis B vaccines at its September meeting, but members put to a vote the question of changing the recommendations.
About supporting science journalism
If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting our award-winning journalism. subscription. By purchasing a subscription, you help ensure a future of influential stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Current recommendations require all babies to receive the first of three doses of hepatitis B vaccine within a few hours of birth. The policy, introduced in 1991, The number of cases among children in the United States has dropped sharply.
ACIP appears to be considering three possible votesincluding making the birth dose optional for infants born to pregnant women who test negative for the hepatitis B virus. This proposal, which would require parents to discuss newborn vaccinations with a health professional, has caused significant confusion among members.
“I apologize that it took me a while to fully read this,” ACIP member Joseph R. Hibbeln, a psychiatrist and neuroscientist, said at the meeting, adding that he had not had a chance to review the proposals. “This is the third version of the questions that we at most ACIP received in 72 hours.”
“I’m having a hard time, too,” said ACIP member Cody Meissner, a pediatric infectious disease epidemiologist.
The presentation of voting information at Thursday's meeting was different from previous ACIP meetings, says Chu, a former ACIP member who was fired Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. renowned vaccine skepticin June.
Voting language “is typically decided in advance in working groups and circulated in advance, allowing for both public comment and review by ACIP members so they can prepare to vote,” she says.
During today's meeting, “there was a lot of back and forth between ACIP members. It was downright embarrassing,” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan. “At the last ACIP meeting they were unable to develop [hepatitis B] recommendations on which they could vote. It seems this problem has not been resolved.”
Editor's Note (12/4/25): This article has been updated to include additional clarification on suggested votes.
It's time to stand up for science
If you liked this article, I would like to ask for your support. Scientific American has been a champion of science and industry for 180 years, and now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I was Scientific American I have been a subscriber since I was 12, and it has helped shape my view of the world. science always educates and delights me, instills a sense of awe in front of our vast and beautiful universe. I hope it does the same for you.
If you subscribe to Scientific Americanyou help ensure our coverage focuses on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on decisions that threaten laboratories across the US; and that we support both aspiring and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return you receive important news, fascinating podcastsbrilliant infographics, newsletters you can't missvideos worth watching challenging gamesand the world's best scientific articles and reporting. You can even give someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you will support us in this mission.
