T4K3.news
AAP backs COVID vaccine for infants amid clash with Kennedy and CDC
The AAP recommends COVID vaccination for children 6 months to 23 months, diverging from CDC guidance amid policy tensions.
The American Academy of Pediatrics issues new guidance for children 6 months to 23 months, diverging from federal recommendations amid political tension.
AAP backs COVID vaccine for infants amid clash with Kennedy and CDC
The American Academy of Pediatrics released its annual immunization schedule and recommends that children aged 6 months to 23 months receive a COVID-19 vaccine. This marks a rare divergence from guidance previously issued by federal health officials and comes as the CDC has moved to a shared decision making model for some COVID vaccination choices. The AAP also reaffirmed guidance for older children and for vaccines against flu and RSV, and noted that vaccination decisions should consider risk factors such as living environments and exposure to high-risk individuals.
The disagreement follows statements by RFK Jr. that the CDC would not recommend COVID shots for healthy kids. Health officials say the mix of science, policy and politics is influencing how families hear about vaccines. Insurers often rely on the CDC’s recommendations for coverage decisions, including programs like Vaccines for Children. The AAP argues for consistent, evidence based guidance to protect the youngest and most vulnerable children, while acknowledging the practical realities of insurance and access. In response, national health authorities defend the science behind vaccine recommendations and stress the importance of clear messaging for families.
Key Takeaways
"The academy has been making pediatric immunization recommendations since the 1930s"
Kressly on the long standing role of the AAP in vaccine guidance
"Vaccination is part of high quality preventive care and we are confident we can work with payers to translate policy"
Kressly on translating guidance into coverage
"The American people deserve confidence that medical recommendations are based solely on science and public health"
Nixon defending federal science based standards
"We are doing this in the environment of misinformation which makes clear guidance more important than ever"
Kressly on the misinformation challenge
The rift between a major medical association and federal agencies illustrates how health policy can be pressed into the political arena. Even when the science supports vaccination for a high risk group, mixed signals can erode public trust and complicate coverage decisions. The clash also highlights how insurers and care providers translate policy into access, potentially widening gaps for families who already struggle with healthcare costs. In a landscape crowded with misinformation, clear, consistent guidance from reliable medical bodies remains essential to keep vaccination rates stable and protect vulnerable children.
Highlights
- Vaccines are pediatric care not politics in disguise
- Trust grows when science leads and voices listen
- Public health needs clear evidence based messaging
- Clear guidance matters more than political agendas
Policy clash risks public confusion and access gaps
Diverging guidance from a major medical body and federal agencies risks mixed messages for families, potential gaps in vaccine coverage for low income children, and heightened political controversy around child health policy.
The path forward will test how medical authority navigates politics without losing the public’s trust.
Enjoyed this? Let your friends know!
Related News
AAP updates vaccine guidance for toddlers
AAP breaks with federal Covid guidance for babies
AAP challenges Kennedy on COVID vaccines
Massachusetts weighs independent vaccine policy amid Kennedy reforms
Idaho Implements New Vaccine Policies Amid Trust Crisis
AAP Diverges from CDC on Covid Shots for Children
AAP updates vaccine guidance for young children
Vaccine guidance unsettled
