
Should You Still Recommend COVID-19 Vaccines?
The Trump administration announced today that the CDC will no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for many children and pregnant people.
No details were immediately published on the CDC website, but Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a video on X that the recommendation for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women has been removed from the CDC recommended immunization schedule." He cited lack of clinical data to support "a repeat booster strategy in children."
Still, that may not affect the advice clinicians give their patients.
Should Pregnant People Get the COVID Shot?
Kennedy's announcement did not explain why the recommendation for pregnant women changed. Previously, the CDC advised pregnant people to get COVID vaccines every 6 months – just like others at high risk of severe illness.
There have been about 70 studies of COVID vaccination in pregnant people, and the evidence shows the shots are safe and provide important protection to both mother and baby during pregnancy and after birth, according to Kevin Ault, MD, a practicing OB/GYN and former CDC COVID vaccine adviser.
"I'm disappointed because there's no new data to support the change that I'm aware of, and if there is data, it should be discussed publicly," said Ault, a professor at the Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine in Kalamazoo.
He said he will continue to advise his pregnant patients to get vaccinated. During an interview with WebMD, he became notably emotional and said he worried for his patients on Medicaid if the program stops covering vaccination. Ault was a member of the CDC expert panel that initially crafted the nation's COVID vaccine recommendations.
"Most obstetricians in their lifetimes have had a bad experience with flu and now COVID," he said. "We don't want sick people in the ICU who are pregnant. And the best way to avoid that is having those vaccines that prevent severe maternal complications."
The recommendation for pregnant women is also at odds with a plan put forward by federal officials last week in The New England Journal of Medicine, which listed pregnancy among the conditions for which COVID vaccination would be recommended.
"As ob-gyns who treat patients every day, we have seen firsthand how dangerous COVID-19 infection can be during pregnancy and for newborns who depend on maternal antibodies from the vaccine for protection," Steven J. Fleischman, MD, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said in a statement. "We also understand that despite the change in recommendations from HHS, the science has not changed. It is very clear that COVID infection during pregnancy can be catastrophic and lead to major disability, and it can cause devastating consequences for families. The COVID vaccine is safe during pregnancy, and vaccination can protect our patients and their infants."
When a pregnant person gets vaccinated, antibodies travel through the placenta and are passed to the fetus, protecting the newborn during the first critical months of life. That's important because babies from newborn to 6 months old (who are not yet eligible for vaccination) are among those most often hospitalized for severe COVID. COVID vaccination during pregnancy cuts hospitalization risk by 52%.
What About Children?
Public health experts continue to emphasize that COVID-19 vaccines offer significant benefits for children. While severe illness is less common in kids than in adults, COVID-19 can still cause serious outcomes. About 1% of U.S. children – equivalent to roughly 1 million – have had long COVID, according to CDC data. Research also shows that vaccination may reduce the risk of long COVID in children.
Decisions about vaccinating healthy children have often been complex, in part because their risk of severe illness is lower than that of adults, making it harder to show clear benefits in large clinical trials. The relatively low uptake of pediatric COVID vaccines also means there's less real-world data compared to data for adults, which can complicate public messaging and policy. Experts say the decision often comes down to individual risk. For children with health conditions, vaccination is more strongly recommended due to a higher risk of complications. But for otherwise healthy kids – especially those who've already had COVID – the benefits can appear less clear-cut, even if vaccination remains safe and reasonable.
Pediatric infectious disease expert Sean O'Leary, MD, MPH, said in a statement that research has demonstrated that children, babies, and pregnant people are "at higher risk of hospitalization from COVID, and the safety of the COVID vaccine has been widely demonstrated."
Previously, the recommendation was for COVID vaccines to begin when a child turns 6 months old.
"By removing the recommendation, the decision could strip families of choice. Those who want to vaccinate may no longer be able to, as the implications for insurance coverage remain unclear," said O'Leary, on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics. "It's also unclear whether health care workers would be eligible to be vaccinated."
Just 13% of children ages 6 months old to 17 years old are up to date with COVID vaccination, and another 7% of parents said they definitely planned to get their child vaccinated. Just over 14% of pregnant women have received a COVID vaccine since the latest version came out last fall, according to CDC data.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Veterans protest over federal cuts in La Jolla
SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — Veterans gathered at the edge of the UC San Diego Campus on D-Day to call on the Trump administration to fully fund the Jennifer Moreno Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in La Jolla and all VAs across the nation. 'The Trump administration plans to fire 80,000 staff, further exacerbating a looming health care disaster,' said Karisa May, a former Marine reservist from the 4th Medical Battalion San Diego. Widow's of military vets are warning of the pending cuts to services. 'Those treatments that he received that extended his life may no longer be available to other vets at this facility and throughout the nation,' said Misty O'Healy, a surviving spouse of a Vietnam Vet. Veterans marched through the UC San Diego campus receiving support from drivers and calling on Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to leave the glorious military achievements of minorities untouched. Veterans also called on the administration to bring back veterans who have been detained by Immigration and Customs officials. 'When it comes to military naturalization, we all count. Whether you were born here or not, when you raised your hand, you count,' said James Smith, 2nd Former Marine. Veterans groups say their next protest, No Kings Day, will be scheduled for June 14 at 10 a.m. at Civic Center Plaza in downtown San Diego. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Dozens storm South Bay ICE office in defense of community migrants
The Brief The work week ended with demonstrators taking to the streets in protest after ICE agents detained several people for deportation. The removal of individuals and families has stoked a growing fear in the South Bay and beyond, according to advocates and community activists. San Jose District 5 Councilman Peter Ortiz introduced a memo requesting an additional $1 million in emergency funding be allocated to protect immigrant and undocumented communities. SAN JOSE, Calif. - The work week ended similar to how it began in the South Bay, with demonstrators taking to the streets protesting actions by ICE agents. The initial rally started outside the immigration office in the 400 block of Blossom Hill Road. Participants then marched east on Blossom Hill about a half mile and entered a building housing an ICE office. Anti-ICE chants of "shut ICE down!" echoed through the cramped hallways and stairways as the group made its way to an upper floor of the building in the 300 block of Blossom Hill. Dozens of community organizers and neighbors were determined to close a South San Jose Immigration and Customs Enforcement office. "There's 146 seniors that live here. We don't want them here. They just got here a couple of months ago," said neighbor Irene Madrid Morales, who lives in a senior center next door to the ICE office. Once the group reached its destination, to its surprise, the office was already closed. "We're still making a point to other neighboring offices, that we don't want them — ICE — to be present in the building, at all," said organizer Uriel Magdoleno. The loud vocal push back came after ICE agents had, during the week, detained several people for deportation. "We will defend our immigrant brothers and sisters. Our immigrant neighbors." – Joao Paulo Connolly, Silicon Valley Rising An emailed statement from the agency read, in part, "ICE has identified individuals with outstanding Final Orders of removal who may be removed from the United families came as a group illegally to the United States... Many of these same families have lost their case after being afforded due process. Accordingly, many are detained, pending removal." The removal of individuals and families has stoked a growing fear in the South Bay and beyond, according to advocates and community activists. "These raids are not about justice or security. They are about terrorizing our communities," said Leila, a member of the Silicon Valley Immigration Committee. Added San Jose District 2 Councilwoman Pamela Campos, "We know the Trump administration set out with the idea that immigrants in our community are criminals." San Jose District 5 Councilman Peter Ortiz on Friday introduced a memo requesting an additional $1 million in emergency funding be allocated to protect immigrant and undocumented communities. "It's the city's job to make sure that the people of the city of San Jose are safe, regardless of their citizenship," said Ortiz. Added Rapid Response Network founding member Richard Hobbs, "We are here today to build power, not panic, in the community." It was a patchwork of community groups, forged by the determination to protect their own, and push out an unwanted tenant — from the building in the 300 block of Blossom Hill Road and from the larger Bay Area. "We will defend our immigrant brothers and sisters. Our immigrant neighbors," said Joao Paulo Connolly of Silicon Valley Rising. Ortiz's office said the requested emergency funding would be added to Mayor Matt Mahan's overall budget. The mayor had already requested $500,000. A majority of the council members would need to approve the expenditure as early as June 10. Jesse Gary is a reporter based in the station's South Bay bureau. Follow him on the Instagram platform, @jessegontv and on Facebook, @JesseKTVU. The Source KTVU reporting
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump boasts of ‘big win' over AP as court allows WH to ban access after ‘Gulf of America' spat
President Trump celebrated a 'big win' Friday as a federal appeals court ruled that his administration can ban the Associated Press from entering the Oval Office and other restricted areas amid its ongoing legal spat with the outlet over the Gulf of America. The White House can now restrict the wire service from the Oval Office, Mar-a-Lago and Air Force One, per a split 2-1 ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. 'Big WIN over AP today,' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'They refused to state the facts or the Truth on the GULF OF AMERICA. FAKE NEWS!!!' The court ruled Friday that certain White House spaces aren't open to the public or large press pools – effectively giving officials the power to decide which journalists and outlets get access, CNN reported. The decision comes after a lower court judge blocked the administration from restricting the AP from privileged areas where the press is typically allowed. 'We are disappointed in the court's decision and are reviewing our options,' a spokesperson for the Associated Press told the outlet. The legal dispute erupted in February when the White House barred the outlet from the Oval Office in response to the agency's refusal to update its style guide to reflect Trump's executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. The AP, which manages the media's go-to style guide 'Associated Press Stylebook,' argued the large ocean basin has been called the Gulf of Mexico for 'more than 400 years' and other international groups have not acknowledged the change. 'VICTORY! As we've said all along, the Associated Press is not guaranteed special access to cover President Trump in the Oval Office, aboard Air Force One, and in other sensitive locations,' White House press secretary Karoline Levitt posted to X following the ruling. 'Thousands of other journalists have never been afforded the opportunity to cover the President in these privileged spaces. Moving forward, we will continue to expand access to new media so that more people can cover the most transparent President in American history rather than just the failing legacy media. 'And by the way @AP, it's still the Gulf of America.' Hundreds of reporters have a so-called 'hard pass' which allows access to the White House briefing room and press working area. A second, more limited group of journalists — referred to as the pool — is granted access to more intimate or restricted events with greater opportunity to ask the president face-to-face questions. The pool used to be decided by the White House Correspondents Association, until the Trump administration took it over to hand-pick which journalists they could add to — or remove from — the pool. The AP previously had access to the president's limited events every day alongside fellow wires Reuters and Bloomberg. Now only one wire service is allowed in the pool each day.