← Facts Matter
Facts Matter
RFK Jr.’s Panel Recommends Delaying First Vaccine; Trump Orders Vaccine Review; State Flip-Flopping on Religious Exemptions
00:19:40
Loading summary
Transcript3 lines
- [00:00]
A
There have been quite a few developments on the vaccine front coming out of the HHS. For instance, you had RFK Jr. S new vaccine advisory panel recommend delaying the first vaccine that most children get, the Hepatitis B vaccine that's given pretty much as soon as kids are born. You had Trump signing an executive memo starting the process of aligning the US Vaccine childhood schedule with that of other developed nations. And we'll discuss what the difference is between us and them. You had states flip flopping on the question of whether or not to allow religious exemptions for school vaccines. We'll discuss which states and why. Some schools, though, are allegedly going even further by administering shots to kids without parental consent. And then lastly, not exactly vaccine related, but the HHS recently changed the name under the official portrait of Rachel Levine. The transgender former Assistant Secretary of Health under Joe Biden would tell you what that name now actually says. And as a caveat, I will mention two things before we dive into everything. First of all, vaccines are very touchy on YouTube. I don't have an opinion on anything. I'm just presenting to you updates from the government, from the hhs, what they're up to, why they're doing it. I'll give you their official statements and nothing else. So don't cancel me. YouTube algorithm, please. Second of all, speaking of algorithm, please do smash those like and subscribe buttons so that this information can reach ever more people and subscribe. The algorithm suppresses us, but if we smash that like button and that subscribe button enough times, maybe we can actually use the algorithm, ride the algorithm to reach ever more people. So please help me out with that. And now with those caveats out of the way, let's jump in and talk about acip, otherwise known as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. It's basically the CDC's vaccine expert panel. And if you remember, on June 9th of this year, RFK Jr dismissed all 17 members of that panel. Basically, what happened was that on their way out, the Biden administration stacked this panel with members that each serve a four year term. And if RFK Jr didn't dismiss everybody, his agenda and his vision for the CDC would literally not be able to get implemented at all. That's because a CIP has a lot of responsibilities. They're the ones responsible for studying vaccine effects, including side effects. They're the ones that advise the CDC on which groups of people should be recommended which vaccines. And they are also the group that decides which which vaccines should be recommended for the childhood schedule. And although the CDC does have the final say, the recommendations that come out of this advisory panel out of ACIP are almost always followed in the vast majority of cases, something like 99% of the cases. Whatever this committee decides on ultimately gets implemented by the CDC as a whole. And so that takes us to this past Friday, December 5th, wherein this panel got together, discussed, and then they voted to delay the very first vaccine that's given to most chefs children. Quote A panel of experts selected by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. On December 5th voted to recommend federal officials stop directing parents to get their infants quickly vaccinated against hepatitis B unless the baby's mothers test positive for the virus. Now, if you've had a baby anytime recently, then you're likely well aware that within 24 hours of the kid getting born, a nurse comes to the room where you're staying, she has a syringe in her hand, she asks you for the nod of approval, and then if you give it to her, she will inject the kid with a vaccine for hepatitis B. This process has been in place since the year 1991, when the CDC started to recommend doing it this way. And According to the CDC, roughly 80% of parents wind up agreeing to that first shot. However, now moving forward, the CDC will likely adopt this new policy set forth by ACIP and therefore, quote, no longer recommend that infants born to women who test negative for hepatitis B receive a vaccine against the virus unless parents and healthcare providers decide to have the infants vaccinated following consideration of the risks and benefits of vaccination. Now, in terms of the reason for this decision, it is largely threefold. Firstly, the majority of babies in the US something like 99.5% of babies are born to mothers who don't have hepatitis B. And since hep B is transmitted mostly through either sex and or drug use, these babies don't really run the risk of getting it anytime soon. But having said that, the mothers who do test positive for hepatitis B, the recommendation for them is still to get a vaccine. Those kids will still be recommended to get the shot. It's only that the general population will not. And so that's the first reason. The second reason has to do with the fact that getting the shot so early in life, basically as soon as you're born, does not make sense for a disease that usually comes later in life since vaccine effectiveness might decline over time. Quote the level of antibodies, one measure of effectiveness in vaccinated people, drops over time and has been detected to be at low levels at older ages, particularly among children who receive the shot. Early in life. That quote, by the way, was from Cynthia Nevison. She is a CDC contractor who spoke during that latest ACEP meeting and she cited several papers during that meeting, including this one here, which was a 2016 study out of Alaska which compared the antibody levels in both adults as well as children. For their part though, on the flip side, the CDC does acknowledge this phenomena of the antibody level tapering off, but they say that immune memory still holds even 30 years removed. Here is what the CDC wrote on their official website. Quote, available data show that vaccine induced antibody levels decline with time. However, immune memory remains intact for more than 30 years following immunization and and both adults and children with declining antibody levels are still protected against significant HBV infection. Regardless, though, that was the second reason for ACIP's decision, basically that the antibodies wane over time and so it's not a good idea to give the vaccine to babies who are so far removed, decades removed from engaging in the activities that might transmit hepatitis B. The last reason then, the third reason is that the members of the panel who voted in favor of changing the schedule, they said that the safety and effectiveness data for the current recommendations as they're formulated were just inadequate. Quote, Dr. Tracy Beth Haig, the new acting director of the Food and Drug Administration's center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, during the meeting took aim at the clinical trials that underpinned approval of the hepatitis B vaccines, noting they had no control groups at all and followed infants for only up to seven days. She was also quoted as saying the following, quote, we would never approve a vaccine based on data like those today. Post licensure trials have also not used comparison groups that received a placebo, which means we have a very low level of confidence in saying that the benefits outweigh the risks with the amount of data that we have. Likewise, you had Dr. Retsev Levi, he's both a professor at MIT as well as a member of the ACA panel and he basically described the data available as being, in his words, outrageous. Quote, As a father and as a scientist, I don't know how we have the courage based on such slim evidence to come to parents and tell them that it's okay to give your zero day baby, especially when the risk is so low. What we are trying to do here is to go back to basic good public health policy that is based on risk, that is based on informed consent and individual decision making. When parents can think about the assessment of the risk and the benefits and make a decision. Now, I will mention that the decision to delay the shot was not universal and eight members of ACEP voted for it, while three voted against it. Now, the ones who voted against it making that change, they cited their worries of an uptick in hepatitis B across the whole country if this vaccine were delayed. Now, that position, it was actually summed up fairly well in an op ed that was written by the former CDC director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky. She's, by the way, not a member of acip, but she summed up the position rather well. She wrote this in the Journal of the American Medical association. Quote, Delaying the first hepatitis B vaccine dose beyond the newborn period introduces risks that have lifelong detrimental consequences and no measurable health benefit. However, this position of hers was in the minority and as such a SIP as a whole voted to delay Moving forward, if the CDC as a whole accepts the change Here will be what the new recommendations will be to babies born in the US Quote the current recommendation for infants to receive a dose of a hepatitis B vaccine will, within 24 hours of birth should remain in place for infants born to women who test positive for hepatitis B or whose hepatitis B status is unknown. For infants born to women who test negative, ACIP recommends individual based decision making or not proceeding with vaccination unless parents consult with healthcare providers and consider the risks and benefits of the vaccine and the risks of hepatitis B infection. If parents proceed, the panel suggests an initial dose no earlier than 2 months of age for children who have received at least one dose. Parents should talk with doctors about potentially testing their children for antibodies against hepatitis B before having them receive additional doses. Now, this alteration to the vaccine schedule was just the latest change that was pushed forward under the leadership of RFK Jr. Thus far, besides this hepatitis B change, you also had the CDC remove their universal recommendation for COVID 19 vaccines and as well as them endorsing a standalone chickenpox vaccine rather than have the chickenpox vaccine be part of the MMR combined shot. However, having said that, moving forward, a lot more changes might be coming down the pike. For one, this document here up on your screen, it was released by ACIP and it says that the committee will now be analyzing the safety of aluminum and other ingredients that are included in multiple different vaccines. So so we can look forward to that. And then secondly, on Friday, December 5th, you have President Trump signing this memo right here into effect, which seeks to align the US Childhood schedule with that of other developed countries. Quote in his memo, Trump stated that when he started his second term in January, the US recommended immunizing children against 18 diseases, including COVID 19, which is higher than those recommended in Denmark, which recommends against 10 diseases, Japan with 14 and Germany with 15. Trump directed the HHS and the CDC to review best practices in peer developed countries regarding core childhood vaccine recommendations and the scientific evidence behind those practices. Should the HHS and CDC determine that those practices from developed countries are better than US Recommendations, they will need to update the US Core childhood vaccine schedule to align with such scientific evidence and best practices while preserving access to existing vaccines for Americans. And so it wouldn't be a surprise if more changes to the childhood schedule come soon. If you want to read either the full memo or the accompanying White House fact sheet that came out, I'll throw the links to both. You can find them down in the description box below. Now a couple of other vaccine related updates. You have the State of West Virginia flip flopping on the question of religious exemptions from school vaccine requirements. Now this requires a little bit of backstory. In West Virginia, you have state law requiring all school students in the state to be vaccinated against the chickenpox, hepatitis B, measles, meningitis, mumps, the ferria, polio, rubella, tetanus and whooping cough. And in terms of exemptions, the law only outlines exemptions on medical grounds, including when students have a contraindication to a certain required vaccine. State lawmakers have attempted but failed to add religious exemptions to the law, although in 2023 they approved the Equal Protection of Religion act, which says that state actions may not generally substantially burden a person's exercise of religion. And so, with that new 2023 law in place, when the new West Virginia governor came into the office this past January, he issued an executive order. You can see it up on your screen. And that order, it stated that under the new law, state officials must approve religious exemptions to vaccines for school kids who request them. However, the West Virginia Board of Education, they fought back, saying that schools should basically continue to deny religious exemptions to everyone. This naturally prompted several lawsuits. Eventually, in late November, you had a circuit Court judge in West Virginia rule that it was wrong for the State Board of Education to categorically deny religious exemptions. Writing in his order, you had West Virginia Circuit Judge Michael I hope I'm pronouncing this name right, Michael Froebel say the following quote the judge wrote in a 74 page ruling that the Board of Education's previous choice to deny all requests for religious exemptions substantially burdened plaintiffs religious exercise by forcing them to choose between vaccination and public education. While state officials have a compelling interest in protecting health, that interest can still be achieved by allowing religious exemptions, citing how just 570 requests have been made. Those constitute a small fraction of the statewide student population and would not meaningfully reduce vaccination rates or increase health risks. The ruling applies to all people and families in the state who have sought or will seek religious exemptions. And so following this judicial order, you had the West Virginia Board of Education begin to allow students to opt out of vaccine requirements using religious exemptions. However, that lasted roughly less than a week because by Tuesday, December 2, the state Supreme Court of West Virginia, they paused the lower court ruling. Quote, the West Virginia Board of Education on December 2 reinstated its ban on religious exemptions to school vaccine requirements after the state Supreme Court paused a lower court's ruling that had permitted them. The board said in a statement that it was reimposing its order to county boards of education that not to accept religious exemptions to compulsory vaccination laws. The West Virginia Board of Education said that the reinstated ban will be in effect until the Supreme Court issues further guidance. And so essentially, until the appeal in this case plays itself out in the state Supreme Court, the parents in West Virginia basically have to comply with the school vaccine requirements. No vaccine religious exemptions will be granted, which is of course not great news for the parents wishing to get those exemptions. And however, I will mention it could be a lot worse. RFK Jr recently came out and he said that the HHS is investigating an incident at an unnamed school somewhere in the Midwest which allegedly vaccinated a child without parental consent. Take a listen.
- [14:30]
B
Hi, I'm Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Your HHS secretary. Today I'm announcing decisive steps that HHS is taking to defend something that is absolutely fundamental in this country, a parent's right to guide their child's health decisions. That right is not optional. It's non negotiable. And under the Trump administration, it will not be ignored. HHS has launched an investigation into a troubling incident in the Midwest. A school administered a federally funded vaccine to a child without the parent's consent and despite a legally recognized state exemption. When any institution, a school, a doctor's office, a clinic, disregards a religious exemption, it doesn't just break trust, it also breaks the law.
- [15:13]
A
Now, the name of the school, the state and or the city where it was located or the vaccine that was administered, all that has been withheld thus far. So we don't really know much other than the fact that an HHS investigation is ongoing. Whenever there are any updates, I'll let you know. And then lastly, the last story I wanted to discuss. It's not exactly vaccine related, but it is HHS related. You might remember how under the Biden administration you had a transgender pediatrician named Rachel Levine be made the Assistant Secretary of Health. Essentially, Levine served as a four star Admiral in the US Public Health Service Commission Corps. Now, with the changing of administrations, when the Trump administration came in, Levine left and was replaced by a urologist named Brian Christine. However, as standard protocol, Rachel Levine's portrait continued to hang in the HHS building as a historical relic alongside the portraits of all the other people who served in that position previously. However, if you walk down the hallway at HHS now, you might notice that the name under Levine's portrait has been changed. Quote the Department of Health and Human Services has altered the official portrait of a transgender former Biden administration official to display the individual's birth name rather than adopted name. The former official, who currently goes by Rachel Levine, was born a male and was the first transgender person to secure a Senate confirmation up until the government shutdown this year. Levine's portrait plaque in the HHS offices featured the name Rachel Levine, but it now displays the official's birth name, Richard Levine. When asked why exactly this change had to be made, you had a spokesperson for the HHS explain the decision as our priority is ensuring that the information presented internally and externally by HHS reflects gold standard science. We remain committed to reversing harmful policies enacted by Levine and ensuring that biological reality guides our approach to public health. Let me know in the comments section below if you agree with this changing of the names on the official HHS portrait. Otherwise, there you have it. If you'd like to go deeper into any one of the stories that we discussed in today's episode, I will throw my research links. You'll be able to find them down in the description box below, which is of course that description box right below those like and subscribe buttons. Both of which I'm sure you already smashed subscribe. But if you haven't, now is another great opportunity. And then lastly, if you are looking for a holiday gift for either yourself, a family member, a friend, a colleague, anyone in your life, a neighbor. Well, the Epoch Times is having a great holiday promotional sale right now. You can get a subscription to the Epic Times for basically just a few bucks. And what I like to call it is an asymmetric purchase because let's say you get it for a family member, you get a subscription to the Epic Times using this holiday sale for your family member. You pay just a few dollars, but what they get is basically 100 plus dollar subscription. So they're thrilled. They're like, wow, this is a phenomenal gift. I didn't think you cared about me that much that you gave me a several hundred dollar subscription. Well, you did, but of course you didn't pay that much because you got it through the holiday promotional sale. Now of course, I mean, you don't have to hide from that much how much you paid. But the point is, it's an asymmetrical purchase. You pay a fraction of the cost, but the recipient gets the full benefits. They get all the articles, the infographics, the documentaries, the videos. What else? The analysis pieces. Basically everything that we publish in the Epoch Times and everything that we have published at the Epoch times for over 20 years and everything moving forward, they'll get access to all that great content. And they can get it right now using the link down in the description box below. Just click on that link, it'll take you to the sale page where you can get it for yourself. You can get it for everyone in your life. You'll all be happy, you'll all be super thrilled. Because the Epoch Times is a phenomenal independent news source that is objectively becoming one of the largest news sources in the entire world. But also in America. It's probably, in my opinion, one of the best news sources. I don't want to say the best, but it's one of the best news sources. We really stick to the facts. We, we. We have such a good policy of separating facts from opinion. In theory, most news organizations have it, but in practice, I mean, you know what's been happening and so check it out. I mean, if you've been on the fence yourself, or if you are looking for a good gift, the link is right there in the description box below. And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epoch Times. Stay informed and most importantly, stay free.