A vaccine committee advisory to scrap routine hepatitis B shots for all newborns has sparked controversy among health experts, despite nearly eliminating early childhood infections in the US over the past three decades.
Before 1991, nearly 18,000 American children would contract hepatitis B every year, with half of them infected at birth. The vaccine's introduction drastically reduced this number, with fewer than 20 babies per year now reported to be infected at birth. However, experts are now being advised to consult their healthcare provider if a child is not born to an infected mother.
Pediatricians and health advocates argue that vaccinating newborns against hepatitis B remains one of the most evidence-based ways to protect children from this lifelong and deadly infection. The US adopted universal vaccination in 1991 due to the relatively high prevalence of hepatitis B infections and the fact that many mothers do not receive prenatal care, making screenings less effective.
The hepatitis B vaccine has an outstanding safety record, with only a rare allergic reaction reported in doses administered to billions of infants at birth. Extensive studies have shown no link between the vaccine and other serious conditions.
However, the new recommendation introduces uncertainty into a previously clear guideline, leading to concerns that parents may be misled and delay vaccination. The US has one of the highest rates of hepatitis B-related liver cancer and death among children in the world.
Experts warn that if only newborns born to infected mothers receive the vaccine, hundreds more cases would occur each year. The full three-dose vaccine series is essential for protection against hepatitis B, which can be transmitted through household contacts or child care settings via ordinary exposures such as shared toothbrushes or a bite that breaks the skin.
The change in recommendation has sparked debate over whether it's based on new evidence or introduces unnecessary uncertainty into a clear guideline. As one doctor noted, she is already seeing parents asking to postpone vaccination due to misinformation about transmission risks.
Before 1991, nearly 18,000 American children would contract hepatitis B every year, with half of them infected at birth. The vaccine's introduction drastically reduced this number, with fewer than 20 babies per year now reported to be infected at birth. However, experts are now being advised to consult their healthcare provider if a child is not born to an infected mother.
Pediatricians and health advocates argue that vaccinating newborns against hepatitis B remains one of the most evidence-based ways to protect children from this lifelong and deadly infection. The US adopted universal vaccination in 1991 due to the relatively high prevalence of hepatitis B infections and the fact that many mothers do not receive prenatal care, making screenings less effective.
The hepatitis B vaccine has an outstanding safety record, with only a rare allergic reaction reported in doses administered to billions of infants at birth. Extensive studies have shown no link between the vaccine and other serious conditions.
However, the new recommendation introduces uncertainty into a previously clear guideline, leading to concerns that parents may be misled and delay vaccination. The US has one of the highest rates of hepatitis B-related liver cancer and death among children in the world.
Experts warn that if only newborns born to infected mothers receive the vaccine, hundreds more cases would occur each year. The full three-dose vaccine series is essential for protection against hepatitis B, which can be transmitted through household contacts or child care settings via ordinary exposures such as shared toothbrushes or a bite that breaks the skin.
The change in recommendation has sparked debate over whether it's based on new evidence or introduces unnecessary uncertainty into a clear guideline. As one doctor noted, she is already seeing parents asking to postpone vaccination due to misinformation about transmission risks.
I mean come on, whats goin on here? So we got these health experts just throwin out some wild idea that we gotta start scrapin the routine hepatitis B shots for all newborns? Like what, are they expectin us to just sit around and wait for these kids to get infected? Newsflash: hepatitis B is still a big deal, like, super deadly, you know?
this new rec just gonna be another way for ppl 2 get scared & skip the vaccine lol 18k kids infected w/ hepatitis B in 91 was crazy low numbr but now its like "oh no whats gonna happen if i dont vaccinate my lil one" 
meanwhile hundreds more cases r still gonna happen cuz parents dont wanna listen 2 common sense 
the vaccine is safe & effective ppl r just tryna make money off a lil bit of fear 
So yeah, let's all just take a collective deep breath and pretend that this new "uncertainty" isn't gonna lead to more cases and deaths from hepatitis B in the future 
. I've seen too many cases where people were infected as kids and had a hard time dealing with the aftermath later on 
. Newborns are already so vulnerable, and taking away this protection just doesn't sit right with me 
. We've worked so hard to reduce hepatitis B infections in this country, and it feels like we're taking two steps back 
️. As a parent myself, I'd want to know that my kid is protected, no matter what 
.
THIS IS CRAZY! I cant believe the advisory committee is saying we can scrap routine hepatitis B shots for all newborns now that its almost eliminated in the US. 
I mean, sure, 20 cases a year is better than 18k, but thats not the point! The whole reason we got vaccinated in the first place was to PROTECT THOSE KINDS OF CASES FROM HAPPENING IN THE FIRST PLACE! 
I get that some experts are saying we should just consult our healthcare provider, but thats just a bunch of mumbo jumbo. If there is new evidence, lets see it! 
.
. What's behind this new advice? Are there new studies showing something we didn't know before? 
.
, but for now, I'm staying on high alert about this one 
... what if they're right and we've been vaccinating newborns for nothing all these years? 
And honestly, I think this new recommendation is just gonna lead to more confusion and misinformation out there. Like, parents are already being weird about it... 
we shouldnt be introducing uncertainty into something thats supposed to protect our kids from a deadly disease 
. Plus, think about all those parents who'll be worried sick about their little ones getting infected just because they got vaccinated 
.
instead of just vaccinating everyone 
. I mean, what's next? Are we gonna start letting people guess if their kid is infected or not based on a random test result? 
. Can't we just stick with the tried and true methods that have worked for decades? 
It's like they're saying it's not worth it anymore... what if a kid gets bitten and then becomes infected?!