FDA's Surprising COVID Vaccine Change Impacts Millions—What You Need to Know
The FDA has updated COVID-19 vaccine regulations.
Only people aged 65 and up, along with certain groups, will be eligible to receive booster shots.
FDA officials are asking for more data around the vaccine's effectiveness for people who are otherwise healthy.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration made a surprising move last week, announcing that the agency will limit the use of the COVID-19 vaccine to certain groups. The changes are expected to go into effect in the fall. Just this week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will no longer recommend that pregnant people and healthy children get the COVID-19 vaccine (note: The CDC still lists pregnant people as high-risk for COVID-19 complications—more on this below).
The new regulations were laid out in an article published in The New England Journal of Medicine titled, 'An Evidence-Based Approach to Covid-19 Vaccination.' In the article, FDA vaccine division chief Vinay Prasad, M.D., and FDA commissioner Martin Makary, M.D., wrote that the American policy with COVID-19 booster shots is the 'most aggressive' compared with policies in European nations.
'The U.S. policy has sometimes been justified by arguing that the American people are not sophisticated enough to understand age- and risk-based recommendations,' the article reads. 'We reject this view.'
The FDA usually authorizes or approves vaccines for use, while the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) specifies recommendations on how they should be used under the guidance of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). The FDA dictating how vaccines should be used is a different approach, points out William Schaffner, M.D., an infectious disease specialist and professor at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.
Meet the experts: Thomas Russo, M.D., professor and chief of infectious disease at the University at Buffalo in New York, William Schaffner, M.D., an infectious disease specialist and professor at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine; infectious disease specialist Amesh Adalja, M.D., senior scholar at Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security
The change seems to be political, given that there is a new administration in place and no new data has been released on side effects, safety, or effectiveness of these vaccines.
But what are the new FDA COVID vaccine regulations, and what does this mean for the future of COVID care? Here's the deal.
Until now, government health agencies have recommended that everyone over the age of 6 months get an annual COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccine is tweaked each year to try to match up with circulating strains of the virus and to provide the most protection.
But the new regulations will limit the use of the vaccine to people aged 65 and up, along with people over the age of 6 months who have certain medical conditions. The list of qualifying medical conditions is long, and includes more obvious things like asthma, cancer, pregnancy, and chronic lung diseases. But it also includes things like physical inactivity and mood disorders, opening the vaccine up to a wide range of people.
The FDA may now require more studies before approving COVID-19 vaccines for healthy Americans under the age of 65, according to the paper.
The article makes the argument that these changes are more in line with what the rest of the world is doing. 'All other high-income nations confine vaccine recommendations to older adults (typically those older than 65 years of age), or those at high risk for severe COVID-19,' the FDA officials write. 'The United States has adopted a one-size-fits-all regulatory framework and has granted broad marketing authorization to all Americans over the age of 6 months.'
'The strategy in the paper aligns with what other countries have done with updated COVID vaccines in the current context of a heavily immune population,' says infectious disease specialist Amesh Adalja, M.D., senior scholar at Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security. 'It importantly demarcates high-risk from low-risk individuals when it comes to how to think about the value of COVID vaccines and what types of studies are most likely to answer questions about that value in these populations.'
Other than those over 65 years of age, the FDA specifically flagged these groups and conditions, among others not listed, as qualifying for the COVID-19 vaccine in the future:
Asthma
Cancer
Cerebrovascular disease
Chronic kidney disease
Chronic lung disease
Chronic liver disease
Cystic fibrosis
Diabetes (type 1 and type 2)
Gestational diabetes
Disabilities, including Down syndrome
Heart conditions
HIV
Mental health conditions
Dementia
Parkinson's disease
Obesity
Physical inactivity
Pregnancy and recent pregnancy
Primary immunodeficiency
Smoking, current and former
Solid organ or blood stem-cell transplantation
Tuberculosis
Use of corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive medications
Note: While the CDC still specifies pregnancy as a condition that puts people at high risk for COVID complications, the CDC will no longer recommend routine COVID shots for pregnant women and healthy children, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently announced on X.
Yes, the COVID vaccines are still considered safe. This paper did not conduct or call out any new research around these vaccines.
'This vaccine is extremely safe,' says Thomas Russo, M.D., professor and chief of infectious disease at the University at Buffalo in New York.
According to the CDC, the most common side effects of both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines include pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, muscle and joint pain, and fever. 'During the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 vaccines underwent the most intensive safety analysis in U.S. history,' the CDC's website reads. 'COVID-19 vaccines continue to be monitored for safety, even after FDA approval, to make sure they continue to meet FDA's standards for safety and effectiveness.'
There hasn't been recent data on the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines, but data from clinical trials when the vaccines were first released (which now dates back five years) showed that the Pfizer vaccine was 95% effective at preventing COVID-19, while the Moderna vaccine was 94.1% effective. Studies conducted on the Novavax vaccine found that it was 90% effective at preventing people from developing the virus and 100% effective at protecting people from severe disease.
There is a mixed reaction, although doctors as a whole don't seem shocked. 'We have to look at the reality: In 2024-2025, only a very small portion of the population availed themselves of the vaccine,' Dr. Schaffner says. As a result, he says that changing the requirements to get the vaccine is unlikely to have a big impact on the population.
'If the goal is to prevent severe disease, targeting vaccines to high-risk individuals is the optimal strategy,' Dr. Adalja says. 'For lower risk individuals, the goal has always been less clear as protection against infection is transient and as they don't have a risk for severe disease, the cost-effectiveness of a vaccine that, at this stage, chiefly protects against severe disease doesn't apply.'
But Dr. Adalja says that the initial COVID-19 vaccine series 'should be part of routine childhood immunization.' He also points out that it's 'unclear' if new clinical trials will be needed to show that there's value for young children to receive the vaccine.
Dr. Russo has concerns that the new regulations seem to have a 'double standard that's not based in science' for the COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, both of which target viruses that change seasonally. 'Interestingly, this does nothing for the influenza vaccination, and we get annual boosters for that to target the circulating strains,' he says. 'They seem to think it's fine for influenza but, when you compare it to influenza, COVID remains a more severe disease.'
It's not clear at this point if the FDA plans to alter regulations around other vaccines in the future.
If you want to get the COVID-19 vaccine in the future but you don't fall into a vulnerable group, doctors say you probably still can. 'It will likely be the case, as it is for other vaccines, that they can be administered off-label to those who want them—with an out-of-pocket charge,' Dr. Adalja says.
Dr. Russo points out that the criteria for getting the vaccine is 'fairly liberal,' though. 'The way this is phrased, most Americans can make claims to this vaccine if they really want it,' he says.
Again, this is an unusual approach to recommendations around vaccination in the U.S. But the next meeting of the ACIP is in late June, and will likely address next steps on how the COVID vaccine will be used. 'We just have to wait until June,' Dr. Schaffner says.
As of this second, though, the CDC still recommends that everyone over the age of 6 months get vaccinated against COVID-19.
This article is accurate as of press time. However, as guidelines evolve, some of the information may have changed since it was last updated. While we aim to keep all of our stories up to date, please visit online resources provided by the CDC, WHO, and your local public health department to stay informed. Always talk to your doctor for professional medical advice.
You Might Also Like
Can Apple Cider Vinegar Lead to Weight Loss?
Bobbi Brown Shares Her Top Face-Transforming Makeup Tips for Women Over 50
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
California Fourth Grader Detained By ICE Sparks Outrage
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. A 9-year-old boy in California was detained by federal immigration agents at an immigration hearing. Martir Garcia Lara, a fourth-grader at Torrance Elementary School, was taken into custody along with his father on May 29 after reporting to federal authorities in downtown Los Angeles. They were transferred the next day to an immigration facility in Texas, where they are currently held pending deportation to Honduras. A spokesperson for ICE told Newsweek they remain in federal custody pending deportation to Honduras. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers wait to detain a person, Jan. 27, 2025, in Silver Spring, Md. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers wait to detain a person, Jan. 27, 2025, in Silver Spring, Md. Alex Brandon/AP Why It Matters The arrest comes amid a hardline crackdown on immigration by President Donald Trump's administration, which has vowed to deport millions of migrants without legal status. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has maintained under the second Trump administration that ICE does not arrest children. What To Know "Martir Garcia-Banegas, 50, illegally entered the United States July 10, 2021 with a family member, Martir Isaac Garcia Lara, 9," a spokesperson for ICE told Newsweek. On September 1, 2022, an immigration judge issued an order for the family to be removed to Honduras. Garcia appealed this decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals; however, the appeal was dismissed on August 11, 2023, according to ICE. After being detained by officials in Los Angeles, the father and son were transferred to the Dilley Immigration Processing Center in Dilley, Texas. The administration has taken an estimated 500 children into government custody since Trump returned to power, according to CNN. Courthouses nationwide have recently become focal points in the Trump administration's immigration enforcement efforts. Federal agents have been stationed to arrest individuals immediately after they appear before immigration judges. Many of these individuals have been in the U.S. for less than two years, and attorneys from the Department of Homeland Security often request that their deportation cases be dismissed. When a judge approves such a request, immigrants leaving the courtroom are sometimes taken into custody by plainclothes federal agents for expedited removal. What People Are Saying A spokesperson for ICE told Newsweek: "Parents, who are here illegally, can take control of their departure with the CBP Home App. The United States is offering aliens $1,000 and a free flight to self-deport now. We encourage every person here illegally to take advantage of this offer and reserve the chance to come back to the U.S. the right, legal way to live the American dream. If not, you will be arrested and deported without a chance to return." A spokesperson with Torrance Unified School District said in a statement: "It is our responsibility as a District to support the families of every student and connect them to resources and assistance for their continued education and healthy wellbeing, if, and when, a family requests it." What Happens Next Martir and his father will remain detained at a facility in southern Texas pending removal.


New York Times
36 minutes ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: In Chaotic Economy, Hiring Remained Steady in May
Matt Minich, who was fired from his job with the Food and Drug Administration in February, was one of thousands swept up in the mass layoffs of probationary workers at the beginning of President Trump's second administration. After Matt Minich was fired from his job with the Food and Drug Administration in February, he did what many scientists have done for years after leaving public service. He looked for a position with a university. Mr. Minich, 38, was one of thousands swept up in the mass layoffs of probationary workers at the beginning of President Trump's second administration. The shock of those early moves heralded more upheaval to come as the Department of Government Efficiency, led by the tech billionaire Elon Musk, raced through agency after agency, slashing staff, freezing spending and ripping up government contracts. In March, about 45 minutes after Mr. Minich accepted a job as a scientist in the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, the program lost its federal grant funding. Mr. Minich, who had worked on reducing the negative health impacts of tobacco use, observed that he had the special honor of 'being DOGE-ed twice.' 'I'm doubly not needed by the federal government,' he said in an interview. He is still hunting for work. And like hundreds of thousands of other former civil servants forced into an increasingly crowded job market, he is finding that drastic cuts to grants and contracts in academia, consulting and direct services mean even fewer opportunities are available. Some states that were hiring, another avenue for former federal government employees, have pulled back. So, too, have the private contractors typically seen as a landing place. The situation is expected to worsen as more layoffs are announced, voluntary departures mount and workers who were placed on administrative leave see the clock run out. Image More than 700 people attended a recent resource fair in Arlington, Va., to receive free consultation, professional headshots and workshops. Credit... Maansi Srivastava for The New York Times With Mr. Musk's time in Washington now done, a fuller picture of just how completely he and Mr. Trump have upended the role of government is coming into view. Federal tax dollars underpin entire professions, directly and indirectly, and the cuts led by Mr. Musk's operation have left some workers with nowhere to go. In Washington, D.C., and the surrounding area, the disruption has the hallmarks of the collapse of an industrial cluster, not unlike the disappearance of manufacturing jobs in the upper Midwest during the 2000s. Except this time, it is moving at lightning speed. In January, just as Mr. Trump was taking office, the civilian federal work force across the country had reached a post-World War II peak of 2.3 million, not including the Postal Service. Few agencies have publicly stated how many people have been fired or voluntarily resigned, but a rough count shows that federal agencies have lost some 135,000 to firings and voluntary resignation, with another 150,000 in planned reductions. Contracted and grant-funded workers — which the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta estimated to be as many as 4.6 million people — are harder to track in official data. The first contractor layoffs began in February with organizations that received funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, like Chemonics and FHI360. As more grants and contracts that were under review across government are terminated, job cuts have gained steam. Booz Allen Hamilton, the sprawling consulting firm based in Northern Virginia that gets 98 percent of its revenue from the federal government, announced that it was cutting 7 percent of its 36,000-person staff. Even providers of Head Start, the low-income preschool program, have issued layoff notices because funding has been in doubt. While the national labor market remains stable, job loss is starting to become notable in the capital region. Unemployment rates in the District of Columbia and most of its surrounding counties have been on the rise since December. The number of people receiving unemployment insurance has been elevated in Virginia and D.C. over the past several months. Job postings in Washington have dropped across the board, according to the hiring platform Indeed, including in opportunities for administrative assistance, human resources and accounting. Local government agencies around Washington are hosting dozens of hiring events, and most of them are packed. Elaine Chalmers of Woodbridge, Va., was among 750 people who attended a recent resource fair in Arlington, Va., just outside Washington. The event offered free consultation for updating résumés, as well as professional headshots and workshops, including one on managing personal finances during a transition in employment. Image Elaine Chalmers of Woodbridge, Va., resigned from her role at the Agriculture Department to escape the stress and uncertainty created by new mandates. Credit... Maansi Srivastava for The New York Times It was the fourth one she attended in the month since she left the Agriculture Department, where she had worked for 20 years, most recently in the division that ensured equal access to grants for rural communities. She resigned to escape the stress and uncertainty created by new mandates, such as erasing words like 'equity' and 'diversity' from department communications. 'It just became almost a character question for myself,' said Ms. Chalmers, 53. 'I couldn't honorably stay.' Like many of the federal workers who chose to take a deferred resignation or early retirement, one of the tools the administration has used to shrink the work force, she is on leave and will be paid through September. It is a relief, she said, because she is the sole caregiver for her mother and 15-year-old son. But the prospects do not look good. Ms. Chalmers said she expected to have to take a pay cut. She said she applied for more than 100 jobs in the week before the job fair and received several automated emails informing her that she did not get the position. For many government workers, career transitions can be especially daunting because their jobs are often extremely specific, performing functions that do not exist in the private sector. 'For a lot of them, it's almost like starting from scratch,' said Laura Moreno-Davis, a spokeswoman for WorkSource Montgomery, the work force agency for Montgomery County, Md., just outside D.C. 'If they really have a wealth of experience and knowledge, how can we best use that?' A new group formed by two former federal employees is trying to help people do that. 'How do you translate these skills that you've learned in the federal government that are so complex and seem to be so unique into something that can be communicated easily outside of the federal government?' said Julie Cerqueira, co-founder of the group, FedsForward. Ms. Cerqueira's partner, Karen Lee, said that people who worked in federal disaster recovery and resilience jobs, for example, had expertise that could easily transfer to private-sector work in contingency planning and supply chains. But it is not so simple for everyone. Chelsea Van Thof, 33, is a public health veterinarian who focused on diseases that spread from animals to humans, and humans to animals — a niche job even in government. A few weeks after the inauguration, the contract she worked under at the State Department was placed on hold for a 90-day review and ultimately terminated. Dr. Van Thof immediately lost her health insurance and took on a housemate to cover her rent. Image Chelsea Van Thof, a public health veterinarian, saw the contract she worked under at the State Department be placed on hold for a 90-day review and ultimately terminated a few weeks after President Trump's inauguration. Credit... Maansi Srivastava for The New York Times Plans for the future changed, too, as she had been counting on public-sector loan forgiveness to pay off her $250,000 in veterinary school debt, a prospect that now seems increasingly remote. She sometimes feels as though she is sending résumés into a void. 'I was just thankful when I got a rejection because it meant they saw my application,' she said. Like others in the science field, including Mr. Minich, she is looking for jobs outside the country. And in the meantime, she helped form a support group of about 80 wildlife protection conservationists who are in similar predicaments. People working on government contracts are hit especially hard because they are not eligible for the deferred resignation plans available to federal employees, and cannot look forward to their pensions. Todd Frank, of Westminster, Md., was given just a few minutes' notice before he was laid off as a technical writer on a contract with the Department of Homeland Security's science and technology directorate, helping get the appropriate gear out to military personnel in the field. Mr. Frank, 54, is now wrestling with whether to uproot his family to find a new job, which would come with steep trade-offs. His wife runs her own business — a licensed day care out of their home. His teenage sons do not want to leave their high school, he said. Lately, he is looking at the family's budget for where to make cuts. 'Not being able to buy a suit for prom sounds like rich people problems, but you don't want to turn around and tell your kid, 'You can't do this' or 'You can't do that,'' Mr. Frank said. Several states had advertised their eagerness to hire people laid off by the federal government in the early days of federal cuts. In March, Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania said the state would give hiring preference to former federal workers. Since then, the state government has received more than 7,300 applications from people who said they had federal experience, his office said, and so far, state agencies have hired 120 of them. But state jobs have gotten a lot more popular in recent months. Since March, former and current federal employees have sent in nearly 700 applications, California's human resources office said. Some states are having their own budget problems, in part brought on by uncertainty around the continuation of federal funding. Alaska, Massachusetts, Indiana, Louisiana and New Hampshire have implemented hiring freezes. Public health agencies in Ohio and Alaska have laid people off as grants were canceled. And a broad swath of universities have also paused new hires, including the University of California system, the University of Pennsylvania, and Emory University in Georgia. With the Trump administration's firings of scientists and grant cancellations from agencies including the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, science and consulting have been hit especially hard, according to Indeed. Companies and nonprofits that helped evaluate whether federal programs were working, like American Institutes for Research, have let go up to a quarter of their payroll. Paro Sen, a research scientist in Cincinnati, was laid off in May along with most of the people in her office at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. She worked on industrial hygiene, studying worker exposures that cause chronic health problems, and visited Washington in May with her union to talk to members of Congress about the need to restore these jobs to the federal government. 'This was my dream job that I have been ripped from,' she said in an interview. Ms. Sen and her colleagues work in such a specialized field that they are competing for very few available jobs, especially if they want to stay where they are. 'The job market right now is not amazing,' said Ms. Sen, 29. 'Cincinnati is not a very big city, and you've got, suddenly, some of the smartest people in this field all applying and competing for the exact same jobs at the same time.'

Miami Herald
43 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Gucci, YSL owner sends blunt message about tariff threats
I bought my first pair of Saint Laurent (YSL) heels when I was 25. They were all black patent leather in the iconic Tribute style, with crisscross straps and a sky-high platform that made absolutely no sense and every kind of sense at the same time. I can't remember exactly why, but I had some reason to celebrate (or so I told myself), and I couldn't resist the rush of slipping those shoes on in the YSL store at Copley in Boston. They were bold. A little aggressive. And completely, unapologetically French. Related: Popular luxury brand takes a massive leap of faith in risky move That moment wasn't just about fashion - it was about owning something that felt like power. Putting them on was like flipping a switch: confidence, elegance, a little bit of edge. Luxury brands like YSL know exactly what they're selling. Sure, there's craftsmanship and quality, but really, it's culture. A story. An idea that something made in France or Italy is worth paying a premium. So when presidents start throwing around threats of tariffs and urging companies to move production closer to home, that idea gets tested. But Kering (PPRUY) , the company behind Gucci, YSL, and Bottega Veneta, just made it clear: it has no intention of budging. Image source: Sorbis/Shutterstock On the Q1 2025 earnings call, Kering CEO François-Henri Pinault made one thing clear: the company won't be moving its production out of Europe in response to U.S. tariffs. "Most of our brands we are producing in Italy and in France, and this is part of the promise that we bring through our products, through our heritage, to the consumer," he told investors. He went even further, adding, "We are selling part of our culture, being an Italian culture or a French culture. So we have no plan of producing to counter the tariff. It makes no sense." Related: Luxury outerwear brand avoids tariffs as rivals try to exit China His comments came just days after President Donald Trump signaled that sweeping new tariffs on goods from the European Union were imminent, calling the EU's trade actions "an atrocity." Pinault said the company already operates in large global markets (like China) where import duties are standard, and he emphasized that adjusting its entire supply chain would dilute the very value proposition luxury buyers are paying for. Still, Kering isn't ignoring the issue. Pinault acknowledged the company may have to rethink pricing strategy if the tariffs go into effect. Tariffs aren't the only problem on Kering's plate. In its latest results, the group reported a 14% drop in revenue for the first quarter of 2025, totaling €3.9 billion. Gucci continues to struggle. The brand brought in €1.6 billion in Q1 2025, down 24% year-over-year. Sales fell sharply across both its retail and wholesale channels. Meanwhile, YSL posted €679 million in Q1 revenue, down 8%, with some resilience in European and Middle Eastern markets. Kering closed 25 stores globally during the quarter, and although Bottega Veneta (up 4%) and its beauty and eyewear segments saw growth, the group's overall trajectory remains challenged. Pinault addressed the issue, stating, "We are increasing our vigilance to weather the macroeconomic headwinds our industry faces." The company also recently offloaded its stake in The Mall Luxury Outlets and entered a joint venture for three Parisian real estate assets, moves that signal a tighter focus on its core business and brand strategy. Kering's message - heritage over haste - is one not all luxury players may be able to afford. But if it pulls through, it'll be because it stood by elegance, even when tariffs made shortcuts tempting. Related: Versace, Michael Kors, Jimmy Choo stumble hard The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.