Maps Show States With Highest—and Lowest—Kindergarten Vaccination Rates
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has revealed the states with the highest and lowest rates of vaccination coverage for multiple vaccines among kindergartners.
Mississippi, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island had the highest rates of vaccination among kindergartners across the board for the four vaccines: DTP/DTaP/DT, hepatitis B, MMR and polio, while Florida, Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Minnesota and Wisconsin had some of the lowest rates.
The DTP/DTaP/DT vaccine protects against diphtheria, a dangerous bacterial infection, while the hepatitis B vaccine protects against the liver infection.
The MMR vaccine protects against measles, mumps and rubella—infections that can lead to serious complications—while the polio vaccine protects against the infection that can cause paralysis in severe cases.
Newsweek has contacted the CDC via email for comment.
Why It Matters
Vaccine rates have been declining across the country, with all kindergartner coverage for the four vaccines, as well as the Varicella vaccine, having dropped since 2021.
The shifting views on vaccines in recent years, which has gathered momentum after the appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Health and Human Services secretary, has sparked concern among health care professionals.
Kennedy Jr., who has been vocal in his vaccination stance, has recently been directing the CDC to change its guidance, from no longer recommending certain vaccines to encouraging patient choice.
A measles outbreak in Texas earlier this year drew particular attention to the issue. After being declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000, experts pointed to the decrease in MMR vaccine coverage as the reason, with more than 700 cases reported since January.
What To Know
Nationwide, vaccination coverage declined among kindergartners in the 2024-25 school year across all vaccines, while exemptions from one or more vaccines among kindergartners increased.
Exemptions increased across 36 states as well as Washington, D.C., with 17 states reporting exemptions exceeding 5 percent. The national average also increased to 3.6 percent from 3.3 percent the year before.
The findings coincide with measles cases hitting a 33-year high last month, as reported by the CDC, with total cases this year at 1,333. Ninety-two percent of the cases were among unvaccinated people and those whose vaccine status was unknown.
The states with the highest rates of MMR vaccine coverage were Mississippi, New York, California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island—all of which had vaccine coverage higher than 95 percent among kindergartners.
Idaho had the lowest MMR vaccine coverage at 78.5 percent. It was the only state to have a coverage lower than 80 percent. Alaska, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kentucky and Georgia were also among the lowest.
For the DTP/DTaP/DT vaccine, rates of coverage among kindergartners were highest in Mississippi, Louisiana, Virginia, Maryland, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island—each with coverage rates over 95 percent.
A map showing the DTP/DTaP/DT vaccine coverage among kindergartners in each state.
A map showing the DTP/DTaP/DT vaccine coverage among kindergartners in each state.
CDC
Once again, Idaho had the lowest coverage rate—below 80 percent—with Indiana, Georgia, Kentucky and Wisconsin also at bottom end of the ranking.
One state that was not previously in high rankings for vaccine coverage, but was for the hepatitis B vaccine, was Kansas, which showed a significant variation in the coverage between vaccines.
A lot of the same states that had high rates of vaccine coverage for the DTP/DTaP/DT vaccine had high rates of coverage for the hepatitis B vaccine, and the situation was the same for the states with low levels of coverage.
A map showing the Hepatitis B vaccine coverage among kindergartners in each state.
A map showing the Hepatitis B vaccine coverage among kindergartners in each state.
CDC
For the polio vaccine, the rankings were similar to that for the DTP/DTaP/DT vaccine.
There are many reasons for variations between vaccine coverage in states, one being that states that have only medical exemptions for vaccines tend to have higher rates of vaccine coverage, Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and an attending physician in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, told Newsweek.
Meanwhile, states that also allow for "philosophical exemptions or religious exemptions" as well as medical exemptions have lower rates of vaccine coverage, enabling more constituents to opt not to have a given vaccine.
Also, states have different rules on which vaccines they mandate. While the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licenses a vaccine and the CDC recommends it, it's up to the state to decide to mandate it, Offit said.
"So that's why there would be differences, so some states may mandate the DTAP vaccine and other states not," he said.
A map showing the Polio vaccine coverage among kindergartners in each state.
A map showing the Polio vaccine coverage among kindergartners in each state.
CDC
Addressing why vaccine coverage has been going down in recent years, Offit said that there are many factors at play.
One is that "there is much more misinformation and disinformation that is readily available," he said, pointing to various anti-vaccine advocacy groups and social media.
"It's just very easy to get bad information out there and it's much harder to get good information," he said.
Another factor is that vaccines may not only eliminate diseases, like measles, but also the "memory" of them, Offit said.
"While we eliminated measles from this country by the year 2000, I also think we eliminated the memory of measles. I think people don't remember how sick, or dead, that virus can make you," he said.
He added that for as long as people are "not scared of those diseases," they are not going to feel "compelled" to get the vaccines.
Offit also said that "the pushback is understandable," given that parents are asked to get their children multiple vaccines throughout the first few years of their lives, with "as many as five shots at one time to prevent a disease most people don't see using biological fluids most people don't understand."
What People Are Saying
Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and an attending physician in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, told Newsweek: "Already, you can see the decline in child health in the present. We have a measles outbreak that's bigger than anything we've had in 33 years. We've had three measles deaths in this country. That equals the total number of measles deaths in this county over the last 25 years. We've a healthy little 6-year-old girl and a healthy 8-year-old girl dying in West Texas. That's the first child death in the country since 2003, and that was an immuno-compromised child back then. We've had about 260 pediatric deaths from influenza. The last time we've seen a number that large was in 2009."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
11 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Florida Issues Raw Milk Warning After 7 People Hospitalized
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Florida Department of Health issued a public warning this week after 21 people, including six children under the age of 10, fell ill and seven were hospitalized due to multiple illnesses linked to drinking raw milk. Campylobacter and Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) infections were both linked to the consumption of raw milk from a single farm in Northeast and Central Florida. At least two patients have experienced severe complications, prompting state officials to intensify alerts about the health risks of unpasteurized dairy products. Newsweek reached out to the Florida Department of Health outside of regular working hours via email for comment. Why It Matters The state health alert highlights the potentially serious risks of consuming raw, or unpasteurized, milk, which can contain harmful bacteria. Pasteurization, a heat-treating process required for most dairy sales nationally, kills these germs. However, raw milk remains available in Florida solely for animal or pet consumption, which complicates oversight and regulation. According to the Florida Department of Health, vulnerable groups, including children, older adults, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems, face a heightened risk of developing a severe illness. STEC bacteria can, in severe cases, result in complications like hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a type of kidney failure, which especially endangers children's health. File photo: bottles of raw milk. File photo: bottles of raw milk. JoNel Aleccia/AP What To Know Health officials reported that the current outbreak originated from a single farm, though the farm's name has not yet been released. The infections have been traced directly to the consumption of raw milk products from this farm, prompting concern over its sanitation protocols. Federal agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), strongly advise against consuming raw milk due to the risk of serious illness. Between 1998 and 2018, at least 202 outbreaks linked to raw milk were reported in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, resulting in 2,645 illnesses and 228 hospitalizations. However, some believe that drinking raw milk is healthy, a stance supported by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Some people believe raw milk is "more nutritious, with higher levels of enzymes, beneficial bacteria, and vitamins that may be reduced during pasteurization," Darin Detwiler, a food safety adviser and professor at Northeastern University's College of Professional Studies, told Newsweek. "Others say it tastes better or supports local farming practices. There's also a cultural or nostalgic appeal for those who grew up drinking milk straight from the source," he said. Kathryn J. Boor, a professor of food science at Cornell University, told Newsweek that "some people claim that they feel better after drinking raw milk relative to after consuming pasteurized milk." Raw milk may also be considered by some to be "more natural than pasteurized milk, which is appealing to some consumers," she said. However, "to say that raw milk is more nutritious than pasteurized milk is a fallacy," Detwiler said. "Pasteurization only slightly reduces some heat-sensitive vitamins, like B12, but overall nutrient loss is minimal," he said, adding that the "core nutritional value of milk remains intact." "While raw milk may contain probiotics, these are unpredictable and unregulated. The risk of harmful bacteria often outweighs any potential probiotic benefit," Detwiler added. On farms, "milking areas are never sterile, which is how milk can become contaminated," Boor said. The problem is that "milk that has become contaminated with soil of some nature, for example any material that may be on the cow's body, generally does not look, taste, or smell different from milk that is not contaminated," she said. This means that "raw milk may become contaminated with bacteria from an unclean environment," Boor said, adding that in some cases, the bacteria can make people sick. "Those who choose to consume raw milk are at greater risk of exposure to such microbes than those who choose to consume pasteurized milk," she said. What People Are Saying Kathryn J. Boor, a professor of food science at Cornell University, told Newsweek: "Pasteurization was developed scientifically with one goal: to ensure milk's safety while simultaneously minimizing changes in flavor, nutrition, and functional characteristics. I grew up on a dairy farm and have focused much of my career on dairy science. Just as I don't choose to drive my car without wearing my seatbelt, I also don't choose to drink milk that has not been pasteurized. At this time, there is no substitute for pasteurization in terms of risk reduction." Darin Detwiler, a food safety adviser and professor at Northeastern University's College of Professional Studies, told Newsweek: "Raw milk can carry harmful bacteria like E. coli, Listeria, Salmonella, and Campylobacter, which can cause severe illness or even death. Raw milk has a troubling history of outbreaks of these pathogens, resulting in life-threatening illnesses, especially for vulnerable populations—children, pregnant women, older adults, and people with weakened immune systems. Even healthy adults can experience serious complications from contaminated raw milk." He added: "Hospitalization rate is significantly higher for raw milk outbreaks than for pasteurized milk. Fatal cases have occurred, especially in young children and immunocompromised individuals. Listeria is a primary concern due to its high fatality rate. While raw milk accounts for a small percentage of total milk consumed, it causes a disproportionately high number of outbreaks." He also said: "There are steps that can reduce—but not eliminate—risk, such as sourcing raw milk from farms with excellent hygiene practices, regularly tested animals, and chilled transportation. However, even with best practices, raw milk remains inherently risky because harmful pathogens can exist even in seemingly healthy herds. Pasteurization is still the most reliable way to kill those pathogens without significantly impacting nutrition." Kalmia (Kali) E. Kniel, a professor and associate chair in the Department of Animal and Food Sciences at the University of Delaware, told Newsweek: "I believe that people want to consume raw milk based on the perceived benefits. In reality, the only benefits that have been identified in the published literature are those from children who grew up on small farms in Europe and were exposed to microorganisms on the farm. I believe this is more related to the hygiene hypothesis and stimulation of the immune system. There was some reduction in allergies shown in these children, which was likely based on exposure to the dust and soil on a farm. "Again, these were very small farms in Europe, and these were not random clinical trials or complete scientific studies, so we should be cautious with interpretation. There is no scientific study to support the consumption of raw milk by children or adults that shows a lifelong benefit." She added: "Milk has been historically pasteurized to reduce risk of illness and to increase the shelf-life of the product. Issues surrounding raw milk sales and consumption are not limited to those of food safety and public health, but also include issues of burden and capacity of state inspections, investigations, and potential for impact on the health care system." "Following good hygiene practices on the farm and during milking can reduce the chance of milk contamination, but not eliminate it." What Happens Next State health officials are continuing to investigate the issue, and the Florida Department of Health said in its warning that those in the state are "encouraged to use this information to make informed decisions about their health and sources of raw milk should they choose to consume it."
Newsweek
11 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Death of 5 Billion Starfish Baffled Scientists—Until Now
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Researchers have traced the devastating loss of more than 5 billion sea stars—known colloquially as starfish—along the Pacific coast of North America over the past decade to a bacterial culprit. The findings, published in Nature Ecology and Evolution, help explain an ecological crisis that saw sunflower sea star populations plunge by up to 90 percent from Alaska to Mexico since 2013, reshaping vital marine ecosystems in the U.S. and Canada. Why It Matters The mass die-off, driven by "sea star wasting disease," has had devastating ripple effects across Pacific coastal ecosystems, including those off the U.S. These predators, especially the sunflower sea star, help regulate sea urchin populations. Their disappearance led to unchecked sea urchin growth, which in turn destroyed extensive kelp forests—habitats called the "rainforests of the ocean" due to their biodiversity and importance for marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates. In Northern California alone, kelp coverage dropped by 95 percent within a decade as a result. FILE - Starfish on the coast of Acadia National Park. FILE - Starfish on the coast of Acadia National Park. Edwin Remsberg/VWPics via AP Images What To Know In 2013, sea stars from Alaska to Mexico started exhibiting symptoms of "wasting syndrome"—including twisted limbs, lesions, and disintegration—that gradually devastated more than 20 species, with the sunflower sea star most affected. "It's really quite gruesome," said marine disease ecologist Alyssa Gehman from the Hakai Institute in British Columbia, Canada. The disease was so severe it often caused the sea stars' arms to detach entirely, added Gehman, who helped pinpoint its cause. Scientists had previously suspected a virus, but years of research showed that the densovirus found in dying sea stars was not the cause. Focus shifted after researchers analyzed the sea stars' coelomic fluid—their internal body fluid—and identified Vibrio pectenicida, a bacteria also known to infect shellfish, as the real culprit. In the lab, fluid from sick sea stars was injected into healthy counterparts, causing the wasting symptoms to recur. When the team heat-treated this fluid, killing the microbes, healthy sea stars did not develop disease—definitively pointing to a microbial origin. The bacteria was isolated and pure cultures were shown to cause the illness. The findings, achieved after more than a decade of setbacks, open the door for targeted conservation strategies. Marine microbiologist Rebecca Vega Thurber of UC Santa Barbara, who was not involved in the study, called it the solution to a "long-standing question about a very serious disease in the ocean." What People Are Saying Blake Ushijima, a microbiologist at University of North Carolina, Wilmington, praised the team's detective work, saying: "It's incredibly difficult to trace the source of so many environmental diseases, especially underwater." Drew Harvell, a researcher at Cornell University and University of Washington and study co-author, told The Washington Post: "It's personally incredibly fulfilling to me to have such a solid answer after all this time." Jason Hodin, a senior research scientist at the University of Washington and study co-author, said: "The lack of understanding what the disease is has really been a pretty major impediment to being able to move forward with all the kinds of restoration strategies that we'd like to be able to do." What Happens Next Scientists still aim to clarify how the bacterium spreads in the wild, whether it is native or introduced, and what influences—such as warming ocean temperatures—might fuel future outbreaks. This article contains reporting by The Associated Press
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Flesh-eating' bacteria cases are popping up along the Gulf Coast. What you need to know.
As temperatures continue to swelter and people flock to the Gulf Coast to enjoy its warm, salty waters, health officials are warning swimmers about a "flesh-eating" bacteria that has killed at least eight people this summer. The bacterium, Vibrio vulnificus, is commonly associated with the "flesh-eating" moniker thanks to its ability to cause infections that damage or "eat away" at skin and tissue. This year, Louisiana is reporting an abnormally high rate of infection. "Amid increasing water temperatures and extreme weather events (e.g., heat waves, flooding, and severe storms), people who are at increased risk for V. vulnificus infection (those with weakened immune systems and conditions like liver disease, diabetes and kidney failure) ... should exercise caution when engaging in coastal water activities," said a Louisiana Department of Health warning issued July 30. Despite the increase in cases, Vibrio vulnificus infections are still rare. Even so, experts have advised that people in coastal areas exercise extra caution while enjoying the waning days of summer. Here's what to know. Dangerous waters: What to know about the flesh-eating bacteria and brain-eating amoebas Where are flesh-eating bacteria cases in the US? How common is it? Louisiana has reported the highest number of Vibrio vulnificus infections in a decade, with 17 reported cases and hospitalizations, including four deaths, as of July 30. This is compared to the 10 years prior, which saw an average of only seven cases and one death a year during the same time period. Florida has likewise reported four deaths caused by Vibrio vulnificus infections as of July 24. The state has counted 13 total cases, a rate that isn't necessarily abnormal at this point in the year, according to Florida health data. An average of 150 to 200 cases are reported each year, with most of them in Gulf Coast states, according to CDC data. USA TODAY has reached out to health departments in other coastal states regarding possible cases. What is Vibrio vulnificus? Vibrio vulnificus is a bacterium that causes a serious infection called vibriosis. Different types of Vibrio bacteria cause different infections, with Vibrio vulnificus causing the "most serious forms of vibriosis," according to the Cleveland Clinic. The potentially fatal infection can quickly result in tissue damage and spreading blisters, low blood pressure, fever, organ damage, sepsis and death. Vibrio vulnificus is often referred to as "flesh-eating" because it can also cause necrotizing fasciitis, a bacterial infection that destroys muscle and skin tissue, causing flesh around wounds to die, according to the CDC. Vibrio vulnificus is not considered the most common cause of necrotizing fasciitis in the United States, however. The bacteria and resulting infections are rare but can be life-threatening. Without treatment, patients can die in just a few days. How does 'flesh-eating' bacteria enter the body? Vibrio vulnificus requires salt water for survival and thrives in warm, brackish water where a stream or river meets seawater, according to the CDC. Most infections occur when contaminated water is swallowed or gets into an open wound, such as a cut or scrape. It can enter through broken skin but cannot penetrate unharmed skin. Vibrio vulnificus can also enter your body when you eat uncooked or undercooked shellfish, especially oysters. In fact, raw oysters and other seafood, along with seawater exposure, are the most common sources of Vibrio outbreaks tracked by the CDC. Once inside the body, the infection can spread to the blood and organs, usually within a matter of hours. Symptoms of Vibrio vulnificus infection Symptoms of a Vibrio vulnificus infection begin suddenly and quickly, usually less than 24 hours after exposure, according to the CDC and the Cleveland Clinic. Common symptoms include: Fever and chills A red, warm or swollen patch of skin or rash that spreads quickly and causes pain Fluid-filled blisters and skin discoloration Nausea, vomiting and diarrhea Low blood pressure (often indicated by weakness, dizziness, fatigue and fainting) Confusion or altered mental state Rapid heartbeat How to protect yourself against Vibrio vulnificus When consuming seafood, the CDC advises, you should: Cook seafood, including oysters, before consuming. Thoroughly clean surfaces that may have come in contact with raw seafood and its drippings. Thoroughly wash your hands after handling raw seafood. If you are at high risk, wear gloves. When swimming, you should: Avoid entering salt water or brackish water if you have any open wounds. That includes recent surgical sites, fresh tattoos and piercings, and even minor cuts or scrapes. Cover any open wounds if you may come into contact with coastal waters or raw seafood, even if you don't plan to be directly exposed to either. Exposure also can occur during flooding caused by storms. Immediately wash any area of open skin with soap and running water after contact with coastal water or raw seafood. If you are at increased risk (people with weakened immune systems and conditions like liver disease, diabetes and kidney failure), wear protective shoes and clothes when in or near coastal waters. Contributing: Janet Loehrke This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: 'Flesh-eating' bacteria cases are on the rise in U.S. What to know.
