>> From WXXI News.

This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection this hour was made with another major move from the Trump administration.

When it comes to childhood vaccination schedules.

The headline from The Hill this week is jarring.

American Academy of Pediatrics departs from CDC with childhood vaccine revisions.

Here's they're reporting yesterday, quote, the American Academy of Pediatrics, or AAP, has diverged from recent federal vaccine guidance, publishing its own childhood immunization schedule for 2026.

That recommends vaccinating against illnesses that the centers for Disease Control and Prevention dropped earlier this month.

The AAP on Monday published its 2026 recommended Child and Adolescent Immunization schedule, which recommends that children be vaccinated against hepatitis A and B meningococcal disease.

Rotavirus, the flu and RSV.

These were all diseases the CDC dropped from its immunization schedule for all children this month.

In its announcement, the AAP linked back to the CDC's current Child and adolescent immunization schedule, but noted it does not endorse this schedule.

When the new schedule was released, the AAP blasted it as dangerous and unnecessary.

End quote.

And here's AAP President Andrew Racine, quote, at a time when parents, pediatricians and the public are looking for clear guidance and accurate information, this ill considered decision will sow further chaos and confusion and erode confidence in immunizations.

End quote.

As the Hill notes, the AAP has repeatedly found itself at odds with the Department of Health and Human Services under the leadership of Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr., the HHS put out their own statement on childhood vaccination.

It reads, quote, the updated CDC schedule childhood schedule continues to protect children against serious diseases while aligning U.S.

guidance with international norms.

Many peer nations achieve high vaccination rates without mandates by relying on trust, education, and strong doctor patient relationships, and HHS will work with states and clinicians to ensure families have clear, accurate information to make their own informed decisions, end quote.

And now RFK Jr.

is saying that he thinks a lot of the criticism is just because he's in charge and he is personally being blamed for all this.

We'll talk about that coming up.

Now, according to the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Health, childhood vaccine rates in the United States are falling, marking a consistent multiyear decline that has dropped coverage below recommended levels for school aged children.

And data from the 2024 2025 school year show continued decreases in MMR, DTaP and polio coverage among kindergartners, with exemption rates hitting record highs.

Here, to help us sort all of this out, Dr.

Elizabeth Murray, pediatrician at Golisano Children's Hospital at the University of Rochester Medical Center.

Welcome back to the show.

>> Thank you for having me.

>> Dr.. Jeffrey Weinberg is a pediatric infectious disease specialist with E.R., medicine.

Dr.

Weinberg, welcome back to you.

>> Thanks, Evan.

>> I know, Dr.

Murray, let me start with you.

I know it feels like we were just here, and audience might be thinking, is this like a re-aired broadcast?

This is not this is new.

This is I mean, if you're listening on the 27th of January, it's live.

And the reason is because of this, I mean, it looks to me like a step, step, step escalation.

So what's the newest what's the big headline you want people to understand?

>> Nothing has changed with regards to vaccination.

The AAP schedule AAP puts out a schedule every year.

I think that's important for people to know.

It's just historically, the AAP schedule and the CDC schedule lined up.

It was the same thing.

And so people didn't really notice that they were both there.

But that's because they always used to work together to create the schedule.

And so now the schedule that the AAP has just released and endorsed, which has also been endorsed by 12 other medical societies.

So it's not just the pediatricians, it's obstetricians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, infectious disease doctors, all sorts of different groups saying this is the right schedule to use.

So but it goes back to the kind of doubt and chaos that's been induced by the current CDC and the vaccine advisory Committee by saying all these things need to change, when in reality there is no new data to support a change in vaccine schedule.

And that's why the AAP has gone back to basically the way it used to be.

>> Have you ever seen Racine or others in the AAP this blunt in their public comments?

>> And he's a pretty mellow, quiet guy.

He's an economist as well, you know, he's one of those kind of deep, deep thinkers which is great.

Who was the president before is also a great mind.

But just a different personality.

And to see them both, need to come out.

I'm not surprised.

You know, we get the president that we need at the time.

And I think both have done a great job of really stepping up, stepping up for children, which is what their job is to do.

>> Dr.

Weinberg, you've done this for a number of years now, and I want to stress the point that Dr.

Murray is making, which is that the AAP is not changing its recommended schedule.

So for parents, when you see your pediatrician, the likelihood the high likelihood is they're going to tell you nothing's changed.

However, from the federal government, you know, from Kennedy and others, they're saying, yes, things are changing and there's a reason.

So do you ever recall in your career, Dr.

Weinberg, seeing this level of dissonance between the AAP and the feds?

>> No, unfortunately not.

And I've had a pretty long career, so my institutional memory goes back a while now, as you've seen my gray hair.

So in the old days when I first trained, decades ago the we all looked towards the CDC schedule because we knew that the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices was going through the science very carefully and the recommendations very carefully, with an eye towards scientific data safety, efficacy.

That is how well the vaccines worked.

And equity in terms of trying to get them to all the children in the community, no matter who they were or whether they went to public clinics, private doctors or hospital clinics.

There was a time when AAP had very mildly different, recommendations.

But for the last 20 years or so, they've been identically aligned.

And as well, the internists and obstetricians, all three professional bodies were aligned with CDC.

As Dr.

Murray said, the change now is really the headlines have it backwards.

It's not that the AAP has a new schedule, it's that the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice was emasculated by political picks who don't understand vaccine science.

And CDC has is the one that is changing.

Unfortunately, AAP is exactly the same.

And Dr.

Murray is also correct in pointing out that the schedule that was printed this week from the the AAP for the 2026 schedule looks identical to the 2025 schedule, which in fact was the same as the 2024 AAP and CDC schedule.

Before CDC Advisory Committee was politically changed.

The only difference with the 2026 AAP schedule and the 2025 AAP schedule is that now there's an actual page that lists the 12 other professional bodies, as mentioned by Dr.

Murray.

the American College of Obstetricians Gynecology.

Pediatric pharmacist.

Adolescent health care.

Infectious Disease Society of America, of which I'm a fellow.

Pediatric Infectious disease society, which I'm a fellow.

And all of these things and other the Nurse Practitioners Association, the American College of Nurse-midwives, the American Academy of Family Practice, the National Medical Association, all of these advisory bodies have now linked themselves to the AAP schedule because they realized that the current CDC schedule, as pushed by the Health and Human Services Department, is incorrect for the American public.

>> Well, let me real quick get an email out of the way and then encourage listeners as we talk about these various issues this hour.

I am curious to know, has has anybody changed your own vaccination schedule?

Have you changed your kids, your thoughts on how you're handling your kids vaccinations, either because of this or for other reasons, or are you keeping that ship moving in the same direction?

844295 talk.

If you want to call the program toll free.

Comments.

Questions as we talk childhood vaccines, vaccines in general.

8442958255263 WXXI.

If you call from Rochester 2639994, email the program Connections at wxxi.org.

If you're watching on the WXXI News YouTube channel, you can join the chat there.

Mike in Penfield emailed to say, if this is such a big deal, why wasn't this brought up in the first Trump administration?

And let me just say, my analysis here, Mike, is in the last year, we have seen that it was wrong to simply look at 2017 through 2020 and say that, well, we've already seen one Trump administration.

We know what it would be like.

We can vote for it again.

It'll be a reasonable facsimile.

It's just not the case.

There's certainly parts that are exactly the same, including the person who's the president.

But in terms of everybody else around him, the people he appoints, the people he's listening to, the people who get their hands on power from the director of the FBI to the director of Homeland Security, to chief of staff, deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller.

On and on it goes.

It is not the same.

It is not the same, and it is not the same when it comes to a and the recommendations for vaccine schedules.

The director, the director of HHS and more.

So it's so Mike and Banfield, this isn't like a case of people just saying, well, they're tired of Trump and they just want to pick on him.

This is as much as if you liked or didn't like the Trump administration.

The last year has shown you that this is much different.

And so where we are is dealing with this question of who's right now?

Do you trust AAP or do you want to trust RFK Jr.. I want to listen to some sound from RFK, CBS News Nancy Cordes was talking to RFK on his promise to Congress that he would support the CDC vaccine schedule.

I want to say that again, RFK told Congress during confirmation hearings.

And at various points that he wasn't going to diverge from, you know, he wasn't going to be a radicalist on vaccines.

He wanted to be a realist.

And I want to listen to some of this interaction.

>> Here's the promise that you made to Congress when you were going through your confirmation process.

You said, I will support the CDC vaccine schedule when I get in there.

Isn't this a violation of your promise?

>> No.

We are.

This is the CDC vaccine schedule.

And I am supporting it.

>> So I don't think that that's what senators took you to mean, that you would go ahead and change it.

>> Well, of course I'm going to change it.

If the president asked us to change to look at what the European countries were doing, which have much less chronic disease than we do, and to find out what the best practices were there and to implement them.

>> But CDC.

officials who focus on immunizations say they were cut out of the process.

>> Well, that's not true, CDC.

CDC scientists who contributed to the report, who read the report, their contributions were part of the report.

So CDC was part of the process of developing this report, which is based upon the best science.

And again, it doesn't take anybody's vaccine away from them.

Every vaccine will be ensured.

Every vaccine will be part of the vaccine for children program.

They will be paid for.

I promise.

I would not take vaccines away from people, and I've kept that promise.

>> Okay, so there's different components here.

And I'm going to ask both of our guests to talk about each of the components I hear.

I want to start with this.

Both the HHS statement and what you heard, Secretary Kennedy say.

There is all we're really trying to do is get in line with what Europe is doing with what other countries are doing.

We've been the most aggressive in the vaccine schedules, and it's not that we don't want people to be vaccinated, it's that we want to be more in line with what the rest of the world is doing.

Start there.

True or false, Dr.

Murray?

I mean, he says, we've been more aggressive and we're just peeling back to what other countries.

>> Are doing.

I would love to have some of the things that other European countries have.

Let's bring let's bring that universal health care.

Let's bring.

>> But that's.

>> Not what he's talking about.

Paid time off.

Let's let's bring all of those things he's talking about.

>> Recommended schedule.

>> Yeah.

And so I think anybody who's ever traveled internationally has probably taken a moment to say, do I need to get any special vaccines because I'm going to a different country?

Do I need to take any different medicines?

And the answer, a lot of times, depending on where you're going is, yeah, because you're going to a different place that has different experiences, that has different risk factors.

You know, if you're saying, would you rather have protection against 18 really bad germs or just 11 really bad germs?

I personally would take the 18 because I know that that's what people in this country are at risk for.

People in Denmark have a different risk structure, and that's why each country looks at their own vaccine schedule.

I will say that if you look at Denmark versus the other European countries, Denmark is actually the outlier.

So the United States and Denmark are now the outliers compared to other, more peer nations.

You know, comparing us to a a country that is smaller than New York City population wise and again has very different infrastructure is not really a fair comparison.

It's choosing the data that we want to support our predetermined conclusion.

>> Dr.

Weinberg, when Kennedy says we just want to be like peer nations and their schedules are less aggressive, well, that's what we're doing.

We're not taking choice away.

What do you say?

>> Well, I say that all of these changes were made out of politics, not out of science.

First of all, every country is Dr.

Murray implied.

Every country makes recommendations based on their population exposure risks, but also based on their national program for vaccines, on the economy, on what they can afford, on the diseases that circulate in this, in that particular country and on their health care systems.

That is, do they have a national system?

Does everybody get free care?

All the parents, all 100% already immunized because of their national system and so many countries have differences in their immune immunization schedules because of that, when you get into each country in Europe, there are differences in vaccines that are available and diseases that are at risk.

Many countries, in fact, have traditionally looked to the United States for CDC guidance as to how to do best practices.

So I want to make it clear that we're not bashing the CDC as a whole.

I still work with the CDC in my vaccine research, the and and I support many of the scientists there.

The problem is that the changes that have come down politically through HHS, through their through their discharging of the 17 members of the ACIp and filling them up with people who are not vaccine scientists, that political process has not yielded any change in the science, in the safety of vaccines, in the usefulness of vaccines in this country.

What they've and in fact, Kennedy is right.

They still the insurance companies, at least through the end of 2026, are committed to still paying for vaccines.

The problem is, there was no reason to move the vaccines.

They moved off rotavirus meningitis, viruses to move them off a routine schedule, except that they decided that, oh, we don't need to use them like other countries because Denmark or other countries aren't using them.

Well, some other countries don't have the same price structure or vaccine availability.

The difference in this country is we have a price structure and we have vaccine availability.

We had 50,000 children a year getting rotavirus disease before we instituted normal routine rotavirus immunization.

We have meningitis vaccines, which are protective against fatal diseases that I think most parents would not want their child to have a fatal disease or a disease that causes hospitalization.

So I think there's some subtleness here that's that's lost in these big shifts of who do you believe AAP or ACIp?

Granted, I believe AAP, but the problem is they're injecting uncertainty.

The HHS statement that you read said HHS wanted to go with education with a better doctor relationship and better communication.

And by by changing things that had no scientific or medical reason to change.

In my view, they're interrupting doctor patient relationships.

They're sowing confusion, not better communication among the public.

And they're not.

And and the people they have in charge are not either educated themselves, and nor are they educating the public as to why they're making any changes.

So to me, the AAP is is holding the line with the previous and current science and medicine recommendations for the best care of children in this country.

>> Dr.

Weinberg, are you concerned that after 2026, we could see insurers decide they are not going to cover some vaccines?

>> Deep in my heart, I am, I have I have no basis to say that I have not talked to any insurance companies.

It's I, I will admit it may be a somewhat irrational fear, but the statement when I see statements like no, no, insurance companies are committed through the end of this year to pay for vaccines as opposed to a statement like, no, of course we're going to pay.

We're committed to using the current American Academy of Pediatrics schedule.

That's a subtle difference.

That does make me worry about pay.

At the moment, the vaccines for children program is still in existence, but again, the people who are on the ACIp now barely understand it.

And and you can tell that because in these are publicly available meetings and in their meetings and in their comments, they kept asking questions about what is VFC?

Why do we have to vote for that?

They don't understand the way things have gone.

>> you're hearing Dr.

Jeffrey Weinberg, who is a professor of pediatrics and clinical director of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases and Pediatric HIV program at E.R.

medicine, Golisano Children's Hospital, and Dr.

Elizabeth Murray, a pediatrician, pediatrician at Golisano.

With us here, doctor Murray multiple times has sent journalists me included producer Megan Mack included links to say, are you watching the you know, the the these meetings now because to you they look like SNL sketches.

>> Some of them sometimes.

Yeah.

I mean, it's it's.

>> Unprofessional.

>> It's it's just so sad because again, there's this trope that everything was all hidden before and it's not you can go back and watch all the old meetings, which are profoundly dry, but also unbelievably amazing to see those scientific minds work and the level of discussion and the care and the making sure all the voices were heard because they want to make sure they got it right.

And now, just to hear the shenanigans and then the not even they had to redo votes multiple times because they can't even get to figure out how to hold a vote.

I mean, it's like Robert's Rules of Order.

I learned that in student council.

>> It's it's a little bit of the reality TV ification, 100%.

>> It does very much feel.

>> Like of at least this administration's government.

>> Yes.

It does very much feel like what's the what's the soundbite that we're going to get out of this so we can have our tune in for the next exciting installment of ACIp.

>> Or what goes viral.

>> Right now?

>> Interesting word in this context.

Go ahead.

Dr.

Weinberg.

>> Well, I will say that, you know, it's not a contest as to whether the UK or Denmark or the U.S.

is right.

there are many ways in medicine we find as doctors that sometimes two doctors disagree.

Three doctors may disagree, and all of them can simultaneously be right.

So when and how does that work for a person?

Well, it's because sometimes there are you have to go on your experience and what's been learned scientifically from investigations of of patients.

For me, it'd be children who are like the child that I'm treating at the moment.

So the the UK schedule is or the Danish schedule are slightly different than the U.S.

schedule.

And the point is that's fine for Denmark or that's fine for the UK.

But the American, the AAP schedule.

Previously the old, if I might say the old CDC schedule had been tested and field tested and proven protective for American children.

And so this is an area where there's there's no reason to go to say, oh, we're doing something in America that nobody else is doing.

Well, nobody else has American children in front of them.

It just it just the whole the whole impetus for the CDC's supposed readjustment is, is just not scientifically tenable.

>> Let me ask Dr.

Murray, are you also concerned about future insurance coverage?

And when the Secretary Kennedy says, look, it's covered, we know, at least through this year, we're not asking insurers not to cover.

In fact, we're not asking people not to vaccinate.

We're asking people to take stock of their choices and embrace having more choice.

What do you think?

>> Well, so I, I think that they're very, very, very careful.

And every phrase is chosen on purpose.

And so I agree with Dr.

Weinberg that the way he phrased that the through 2026 does make me nervous.

Now, having said that, insurance companies so far have been very, very clear that we know that keeping kids out of the hospital saves us a ton of money.

So they've always looked at vaccines as a way for them to save money, and that's not going to change.

Vaccines are still going to work and be preventative against a bunch of terrible things.

So I do have that hope, but I think the bigger issue is since the mark, the the cost reimbursement structure for vaccine to actually administer a vaccine is basically non-existent.

It's a money losing thing for doctor's offices.

That's where I get more concerned because right now, even a couple of a couple of years ago, you know, they were always working to order just the exact right amount of vaccine that they need because it is such an expensive proposition to have those vaccines in their office.

So if fewer and fewer people are interested in them and they start having stock that they're not using and goes to waste, they're going to lose even more money.

So I'm concerned that some pediatric offices or family practice offices are not going to be able to afford to carry the vaccines anymore.

And so that is that will limit access and make it harder on health departments or other clinics to do the vaccines.

And so that makes me very nervous moving forward.

>> Yeah.

Listener named Kalshi emailed to ask, do you see a scenario in which we'll have limited to no access to vaccines we need?

In other words, would we have to go to Canada to get our vaccines?

>> Well, I think also we have to remember that our experience in New York State is very different than the experience in Mississippi versus Colorado.

You know, every state is going to have different experiences.

And quite honestly, within states it's going to vary too.

So at the end of the day, unless things change dramatically, we'll probably still have robust access to vaccines throughout most of this state.

I think my prediction.

>> Okay.

well, Dr.

Weinberg, New York.

>> Excuse me for interrupting.

I will say that I should give a plug to the New York State Health Department, who's been very avid in, in and the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, working together with New York State, has communicated with all practitioners, stating that they stand by the New York the AAP schedule, which is the same as the New York schedule, and and reminding us that in this state these are the rules that we have for vaccines.

I think I'm a little less worried that we'll I also think that the pharmaceutical companies will try and continue as best they can.

I'd say excel us, our local Excel is they're often differences of opinion between me and Excellus about various things.

But they were very supportive when the ACIp first was fired and reconstituted and excellus, as well as the state health departments were were calming influences saying, no, they weren't changing their policies.

So I'd like to just make a shout out to them, and I hope they continue to to follow the science and medicine rather than the politics.

>> Well, one other note on the politics.

We did here.

RFK Jr.

is now saying that take measles as an example.

And Dr.

Murray and I were talking about this before the program.

RFK Jr.

looks at measles and says, when you look at outbreaks of measles, the United States, despite having its worst year with measles in a long, long time, we still were less of an outbreak country than others.

So RFK Jr.

's conclusion is when people complain about things like measles and say that he is leading us to some dangerous direction, they're number one, ignoring the fact that we're still better than most.

And he thinks it's personal.

He thinks that he's just become a lightning rod.

He's easy to attack.

It's just an RFK issue.

He's the crazy guy, and he says, they're just coming after me.

Let them come after me.

We're still doing better than most, doctor Murray, what do you say to that?

>> We were doing even better before when we didn't have these terrible measles outbreaks, when we had higher vaccination rates.

The the doubts in vaccination have been created by his organization.

And and a lot of the things he said before he took office and now some of the things he said after taking office.

So yeah, we might be better off than some other countries, but we're far worse off than we were a few years ago.

>> Dr.

Weinberg, what would you say when RFK says we're doing better than most countries with outbreaks?

And he thinks people are just making it personal.

>> The reason we're doing better than most countries is because we had a high immunization rate for all these years.

This is the same as I saw a quote from one of the the appointees on the ACIp saying it should be your own choice whether you should get polio vaccine and measles vaccine or not.

The problem with these people are they don't realize that the that the viruses are still out there.

Yes.

None of us who are my age or younger have been unfortunate enough to take care of any children with polio.

That's because we have good polio vaccination in this country.

But all we have to do is import it from the rest of the world.

We're not going to be non-traveling.

We're not going to have people not passing through.

We're not going to be having even things like influenza, which can come in on on migrating birds into the country.

And so what's going to happen is someday, yes, someday, Mr.

Kennedy and these others will be out of office.

But the, the, the unfortunate problem is, as they sow confusion among the public, if vaccination rates indeed go down, this will be a problem five, ten years from now.

No, we're not seeing measles epidemics right now just because Kennedy's in charge.

But they are they are leaving the country in worse shape than they found it.

The reason we're in such good shape is because vaccines have been so tremendously successful over the years.

But if the pathogens, the viruses, the bacteria are still in the world, those diseases will come back.

If you're not protected against them.

>> Dana writes in to say she's keeping her kids on the same vaccine schedule, but she's worried that other kids in her kids school will not be vaccinated.

And what effect that will have.

We're going to take a break.

We're going to come back.

We'll talk about Dana's question, and Dana's also wondering what, you know.

Are we seeing actual declines in vaccination rates?

Again, I've got some of the data from Johns Hopkins on that.

And, you know, it varies by vaccine, but it's interesting to look at.

And this is a snapshot for now of of a situation where we've seen declining vaccines in steps over the last few years.

So we'll take a look at that data.

We'll answer Dana's question.

We've got space for more of your questions.

If you have them at Connections at wxxi.org.

And we will close the hour, making sure you when we talk about some of this alphabet soup, it's AAP, it's CDC, it's ACIp it's important to know, as Dr.

Murray said, that there are people in charge who are making sober, careful, sometimes wonky.

Sometimes these meetings are dry and long and highly professional and filled with jargon.

Or now they look more like a reality show.

And it's a very different scenario and you're going to hear some of that.

So we've got some more to share with you on the other side, and we'll come right back on Connections.

Coming up in our second hour, we're joined by L.A.

times columnist Matt Lewis.

He's the author of the book Too Dumb to Fail How the GOP Went from the Party of Reagan to the Party of Trump.

And as you can guess from that book's title, he is not a fan of President Trump.

He has been steadfast in his opposition to Trump, but also his desire to see our politics move back in what he would call a more sane direction.

So how do we do that?

He's got ideas.

Next hour.

>> Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Mary Cariola center, supporting residents to become active members of the community, from developing life skills to gaining independence.

Mary Cariola center Transforming lives of people with disabilities.

More online at.

Mary Cariola I.

>> Before we get back to the really important questions I've got, I have a question for Dr.

Weinberg.

And maybe for those watching on YouTube, if you can bring up the split screen so we can see Dr.

Weinberg Dr.

Weinberg, did you have to clean up your office for this program?

Because that's one of the most remarkably clean offices of a scientist.

And doctor Murray was mentioning during break here how impressive it is.

This looks like an absolute researcher scientist lab, but it looks clean.

I mean, it's clean, Dr.

Weinberg.

>> That's because of the view of the.

I hesitate to change my monitor camera.

I've got junk all over the floor, all over the walls.

You've got you've got the best view of this office.

I see anybody around will tell.

>> You you're the kid who was told to clean the room, and he just shoved everything in the closet.

I see it's all going to come spilling out eventually.

Dr.

Weinberg, of course, is one of the really, really highly regarded voices in this community and has been for a long time.

Dr.

Murray with us in studio, Dr.

Weinberg in his office.

And so Dana writes in and I'll start with Dr.

Murray.

We'll ask both of you about this.

So she says she's continuing with her kids as normal on a vaccine schedule, which is what the AAP wants.

But she's worried that her kids are going to go to school.

With a declining population of vaccinated kids and what that might mean.

So let's start with that, Dr.

Murray.

>> So totally understandable concern, but it's really, really important to remember.

And again, none of this stuff is being told to the American public by the by HHS and the CDC right now.

And that is that what is on the vaccine schedule can be different than what is required for school attendance.

So in New York State, the rules for vaccines for school attendance has not changed.

So the children participating in school will still have to have all of their vaccines, just like they had to have a year ago.

So you don't have to worry about that.

that's different in different states.

States make the rules with regards to school requirements.

And so there's not a necessarily a federal standard.

What comes into play is what vaccines are covered by the vaccine for children program.

And so you can have some some difficulties with coverage there.

that might come down the road.

I think when you look at coverage, we do need to remember, though, that the full vaccination has to happen when the child is 4 or 5 years old.

So that potentially means that you have children who are undervaccinated for a number of years, and therefore they are at risk of contracting the disease, but also spreading and infection.

If for whatever reason, the child is not vaccinated until they are 4 or 5 so that they can enter school, then they've had all those years of not being protected.

So there are definitely gaps that exist.

>> Okay.

Dr.

Weinberg, do you want to add to that?

>> Yeah, I think Dana has an excellent question.

thank you for continuing to vaccinate your child.

You know, when people ask me about all these herd immunity questions and, you know, gee, we need the whole community.

immunized so that so that my child doesn't catch something from somebody else.

Those those questions are real.

But when I talk to parents, I honestly, I say the best reason to get for these the best reason of immunization is to protect your child.

Don't worry about everybody else's child.

Worry about your child.

And so Dana has done exactly the right thing by being concerned for her child.

their child and and and, and getting the immunizations.

Herd immunity is important for many of these things.

It's mostly important for it is the most important for those children and adults who have problems with their immune system and may not be able to be fully immunized themselves, then that's when we talk about, gee, if everybody else is immunized, they'll be protected, too.

But I think often the debate goes to why should I vaccinate my kid just because somebody, you know, made a rule that or what?

What?

Why do I care about the rest of the community if I'm in, you know, caring for my child and my my first agreement with that is, yes, we should care and protect your child.

And vaccines are the excellent way to protect your child against many, many, many dangerous infections that still exist in our world.

>> All right, so let me look at some of the data I have from Johns Hopkins, because Dan is also wondering, you know, what the actual numbers are.

And listeners may be wondering if we're actually seeing declines in vaccination rates in recent years.

So the latest data that they have is from 2024 2025 school year.

So the school year that ends this past June.

And, you know, we don't have full current school year data yet that I know of.

But here it is on the very latest that they have coverage for MMR.

That's measles, mumps, rubella and DTaP, diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis.

polio and varicella vaccines.

All of those across the country decreased among kindergartners.

MMR vaccination coverage was just 92.5%.

That is well below the 95% threshold needed to prevent transmission of measles and state level coverage of MMR vaccines varied.

The lowest was 78% in Idaho, 98% has a high 98.2.

In Connecticut, only ten states out of 50 had coverage above that 95% threshold.

So 80% of American states now are below the recommended threshold on this.

And these immunization gaps have led to, as we've been talking about, measles outbreaks in multiple states, the highest number of measles cases since measles was declared eliminated in this country 26 years ago.

Now, national diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis DTaP coverage among kindergartners also declined.

That's down to 92.1%.

Idaho again has the lowest DTaP coverage, 78%, Connecticut and Virginia the highest, 98.2%.

With more young children left unprotected, Johns Hopkins says we could see a rise in pertussis, also known as whooping cough, and additionally, polio vaccination coverage has dropped to 92.5%.

Dr.

Murray, you first here.

What do you see in those numbers?

>> It's just it just makes me sad.

I mean, you know, I don't I'm busy enough.

We're busy enough.

We got enough to do with all sorts of things going on and kids get injured and accidents happen, all that kind of stuff.

We don't need more business.

And just to be able to get some of those things to go away has been wonderful.

I mean, when I was in training, we still had rotavirus and a large percentage of my time as a trainee was doing admissions for kids who were profoundly dehydrated.

And so when that vaccine came out, it was amazing.

And when the RSV vaccines and immunoglobulins have just come out in the past few years, it's also felt kind of like it did when the rotavirus vaccine came out.

That dramatically decreased the numbers.

And it's been so great.

And it's interesting too, because so far, uptake for RSV has been really, really, really good.

And I think that's because people know how bad that disease is.

It's very front of mind for a lot of people.

And you know, the diseases will teach us when they when they come back.

>> Hard lessons to learn.

Dr.

Weinberg, what do you see in those numbers?

>> Well, I see the result of this, this befuddling of the public because of these changes that are that are, you know, I think it's hard for the public to decide who are they supposed to listen to.

And there's so many other things that are that are going on in the government that that I think are not communicated well or are communicated wrongly.

I'm not going to get into politics in this show, but I think there's enough confusion that people are throwing up their hands and saying, well, we haven't seen measles for a while and I haven't heard my parents never talked about these diseases.

I guess we don't need them.

And the trouble is that's that's not correct.

The diseases will come back and I'm afraid they're going to come back after the current administration is long gone and will have been set back a long ways.

And so the the importance of getting these numbers back up is, is to protect your own child as your child grows and with the beneficial added effect of having enough people around who are immunized to keep these, keep these infections at bay when they travel into the country or when they're when they're found in, in the in the world.

You know, tetanus is part of the DTaP vaccine.

Tetanus is not a communicable disease, but tetanus, the bacterium for tetanus is all over the world, all over the soil.

We're not going to get rid of the tetanus vaccine.

The only reason we don't see medically that we don't see people dying or getting paralyzed with tetanus right now, is because we keep immunizing the kids and adults for tetanus, and that's the same as for polio, measles, whooping cough.

I mean, if you don't keep the vaccine in your child or in your young adults or even older adults those those infections can come back.

>> Well, let me read an email from Rachel in Canandaigua.

Although, Rachel, I've got to edit this on the fly in certain certain comments you've made about the Secretary of HHS, because I don't want to lose our broadcast license.

So let me try it here.

Rachel says he is absolutely horrible in his position as HHS head, and our current leader has pulled us out of the W.H.O., which means less access to current information that will affect future flu vaccines and reduced information about potential pandemics.

California just signed up to join the W.H.O.

New York State has the most medical schools of any state, and I suggested to our governor that this would be a good move for us.

Could other organizations in the health field, like AAP, do the same?

Can you bypass the current leadership?

So Rachel, suggesting joining the W.H.O.

or other options there?

Dr.

Murray.

>> I don't know the.

technicalities behind that.

I mean, I think having California do it, if it's something they can do, I would be shocked if they hold the knowledge to themselves.

My guess is they would be willing to share whatever they learn and have other people participate, but I really don't know the technicalities behind it.

I certainly am concerned.

I think the damage of leaving the the W.H.O.

again is going to have downstream effects.

It's not going to affect us tomorrow, but in future years.

>> Okay.

And and and maybe related to that.

Thank you.

Rachel is, I was reading recently that the Trump administration tried to cancel funding for the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Trump administration in December canceled $12 million in grants to the AAP in what the organization argued was retaliatory, retaliatory for being outspoken against Kennedy's ideas.

A federal judge earlier this month ordered the Trump administration to restore full funding to the AAP, so if that cut had held up, I mean, was that something that you were following?

Was that a big deal?

>> Oh, yeah.

I mean, because a big part of it was safe sleep data and safe sleep stuff.

So SIDs prevention and all of the funding for that, I mean, it wasn't out there, crazy research.

It was very much, how do we keep kids safe from all different things?

That very little of it, I think, actually had to do with any kind of infectious disease stuff.

It was.

Yeah, it was it was SIDs.

It was mother baby stuff.

It was perinatal mortality, infant deaths of all types.

I mean, stuff that people want to figure out and stop.

>> Did that look retaliatory to you?

>> It was awfully coincidental.

But I mean, a judge.

A judge agreed that.

And so the funding is back.

>> Okay.

So so let me.

I'll get one more in here.

from Dell, who says what is most pernicious about this is how it takes hold in parents who are legitimately just trying to be cautious and conscientious guardians.

It's not wrong to be skeptical about what gets put in your child's body.

Misinformation has become so rampant and amplified by this administration.

None of the statistics RFK Jr.

spouts are even remotely accurate, but they can sound official.

The playbook seems to be to take advantage of legitimate fears and sow doubt in expertise.

It is profoundly scary.

That's from Dell and Dr.

Weinberg.

You were just kind of touching on this, the question of who do you trust?

I think Dell is showing a lot of grace here.

You know, I know we're a divided, polarized country, but I think we can agree that I don't know any parent who's like, I want to do what's worst for my child as long as I can score political points.

Every parent I know is like, just tell me what the right thing to do for my kids is.

But Dell's concern is that what he hears out of this administration has, like, this veneer of sounding official, but when you actually dig into it, you see that there's not a there there.

Do you agree with that?

Dr.

Weinberg?

>> I do, and that's what I try and make that that those points are what I try and make when I talk to parents who have legitimate who all concerns about what your child gets are legitimate.

I mean, that's that's the whole point is the and it goes back to that HHS statement which says the right things, but it's not the things they're doing.

It's letting the doctor patient relationship, letting education and letting us conversation and good communication go on.

And it seems like they're they're interrupting all of those.

So I always start from the point of view that I know parents want to do right for their child.

I've never met a parent who said they didn't want the best for their child, and and yet, in today's world, it's very difficult to cut through what's what's been scientifically and medically proven and what somebody has just read on the internet or in a social media or in their own research that may not be as it, as it purports to be.

So I think part of this is the, the instantaneousness of the internet and social media has made it much more difficult for all of us, not just doctors and scientists, but parents and and educated people all over the place to know what they're looking at and know that it's coming from a good source.

And, I mean, I grew up traditionally thinking the government was for the people, by the people and of the people, and was a good source of information.

And I'm afraid that in this particular vein, right now, HHS is not not really giving us a good source of information.

I'm not sure the Department of Homeland Security is giving us a good source of information about about current events going on in in the state of Minnesota.

And so these types of miscommunications or, or shaded communications really make people wonder.

And I think your callers are being very perceptive in, in asking, how do we cut through this.

And that's where I go back to telling people, well, I firmly believe that the American Academy of Pediatrics has children's interests at the forefront.

there are sites called the Immunize.org, which are educational sites that have children's interests at the forefront.

And I still think some of the basic scientists and clinical epidemiologists at CDC have our interest in the forefront.

But we have to be careful that they're not being adversely controlled.

>> Okay.

Well let me try to squeeze in a little bit more here before the hour is up on YouTube.

A listener says, I'm going to start suing parents if my kid gets sick from an unvaxxed kiddo.

I am not a lawyer.

I don't know if that's going to work, and I don't know if everybody would think that that's the best route to go.

But I mean, I understand some of the frustration and I want to listen to Dr.

Robert Malone on conflicts of interest.

So this is again, ACIp stands for what Dr.

Murray?

>> the Advisory Council on Immune Practices.

>> Advisory Council on Immune Practices.

They're supposed to be guiding our immunization efforts as a country doctor, Robert Malone has become an kind of held up as the person who is telling the truth about mRNA, although almost everything he has said about mRNA has mRNA has been wrong.

Well, here he is at ACIp saying he doesn't have a conflict of interest.

He should be okay to offer his ideas.

But listen here.

>> I have no conflicts of interest.

I, think the CDC and HHS for the opportunity to serve.

Yeah, I just I'd have a blanket statement regarding this topic area because of my prior work as an expert witness.

In the case of Krahling versus Merck having to do with mumps vaccines because I signed an agreement to allow me to view extensive internal communications within two vaccine manufacturers, I am legally bound to not do any research or have opinions relating to these products because they include the Mumps component.

So I just wanted to make that clear.

I won't be voting and I have no opinion on this consequent to preexisting legal agreement.

from my years ago, service as an expert witness in the case of Krahling versus Merck over.

>> That's Dr.

Robert Malone saying, hey, I have no conflicts of interest.

I'm good to join you.

And then a few minutes later, as it turns out, I have a huge conflict of interest, and I may not be able to weigh in on certain things here.

That's kind of what you're talking about, Dr.

Murray.

When it feels like like, what are we watching here?

>> Right?

And one of the original tropes they tried to put out about the old ASAP committee was that there was no transparency.

And there was all these conflicts.

But again, if you go back and watch the old recordings of the meetings they go through, and some people do have various conflicts because of prior research, and those are put out there and they're mitigated, you know, do you not participate in this one discussion?

These meetings are a couple days long usually, and they talk about all sorts of different things.

And so, you know, perhaps parts of the discussions you don't get to participate in, that's fine.

Those were always very transparent.

In the past, it wasn't usually because you were a paid witness in a trial.

Usually it's because you were a grant recipient for the research you did.

>> It's a different era.

But as we wrap, I just want to say again to listeners that I hope this hour has demonstrated to you that when you see the headlines out of Washington, when you see the Secretary of HHS, when you see others say we're changing the vaccine schedule, it hasn't actually changed the vaccine recommended schedule for children.

It has not under AAP, which has been sort of the lighthouse on this AAP the American Academy of Pediatrics is not changing the recommended vaccination schedule.

Now, you know why.

Thanks to Dr.

Elizabeth Murray, pediatrician at Golisano Children's Hospital at the University of Rochester Medical Center.

Thank you for being here anytime.

And thank you to Dr.

Jeffrey Weinberg.

Dr.

Weinberg, thank you for making time for the program on short notice.

It's always a pleasure to have your expertise.

We'll talk to you again soon.

>> Yeah.

If it wasn't a big snowstorm, I would have tried to come down there.

>> No problem at all.

Dr.

Weinberg, who is clinical director of the pediatric Infectious Diseases and Pediatric HIV program at E.R.

medicine Golisano Children''s Hospital more Connections coming up in a moment.

>> This program is a production of WXXI Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station.

Its staff, management or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience.

Any rebroadcast or use in another medium without express written consent of WXXI is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the Connections link at wxxinews.org.

>> Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from the Prospect Fund.

Announcing the film.

All That's Left of You, a multi-generational drama that traces the hopes and heartaches of an uprooted Palestinian family.

Screenings at the Little Theater January 23rd through 29th.

Showtimes and tickets at the little.org.