Why a Covid-19 vaccine could soon cost as much as $150—even if you're insured
If you're planning on getting a Covid-19 booster this fall, you could be faced with a hefty bill — even if you have insurance.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced in May that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention no longer recommends a Covid-19 vaccine for healthy children and pregnant people.
Kennedy shared the announcement on the social media platform, X, in a video alongside Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health, and Dr. Marty Makary, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.
"Last year, the Biden administration urged healthy children to get yet another Covid shot, despite the lack of any clinical data to support the repeat booster strategy in children," Kennedy said in the video. He did not share scientific evidence to support the need for changes to Covid vaccine recommendations.
A representative from the CDC was noticeably missing from the announcement. The agency currently has no acting director, and late last week, RFK Jr. dismissed all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices.
Typically, changes to the federal immunization recommendations and schedule only occur after the CDC's vaccine advisory panel discusses and votes on them. The committee did not meet or vote on the changes announced by Kennedy last month.
For those who still want to get their Covid vaccines, these changes could affect how much insurance will cover — if anything at all.
The national Covid emergency ended in 2020, which meant Covid-19 vaccines and boosters were no longer free and the uninsured would have to pay out of pocket.
The CDC's vaccine guidance is what private insurers rely on to determine whether or not they will cover the costs of immunizations. Medicaid will only cover the full price of recommended vaccines, and children who are insured can receive free vaccinations through the Vaccines for Children Program only if those immunizations are recommended by the CDC.
Without insurance, Pfizer and Moderna shots for Covid-19 can cost as much as $150, according to the CDC's site.
This is troubling for health experts who see the positive effects of Covid vaccines on vulnerable populations up close.
"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 Fleischman, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said in a statement. Research supports Fleischman's claim.
"This decision could make it significantly harder for millions of Americans to access vaccines they want for themselves and their families," Tina Tan, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, said in a statement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How one state reduced its overdose death rate by 32% in a year
Overdose deaths in New York state declined 32% last year, a significant drop that officials and experts attribute to the state's efforts to expand harm reduction and addiction treatment services. An estimated 4,567 New Yorkers died of a drug overdose in 2024, compared to 6,688 in 2023, according to provisional data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About 77% of those deaths involved an opioid like fentanyl or heroin. Healthbeat dug into the measures the state took to help decrease its overdose death rate. The statewide decline mirrors a national trend, said Dr. Magdalena Cerdá, a professor and director of the Center for Opioid Epidemiology and Policy at the Department of Population Health at NYU Grossman School of Medicine. Last year, about 80,000 Americans died of a drug overdose, down from about 110,000 deaths in 2023, a reduction of almost 27%, according to the CDC. 'We're still definitely in the middle of an overdose crisis,' Cerdá said. 'But the substantial decline in the past year gives me a lot of hope.' The reduction in deaths is promising but tenuous, experts say. Although overdose deaths have declined overall, racial disparities in mortality have widened, and uncertainty around federal funding related to addiction services could imperil recent progress. The Trump administration's recently released budget plan calls for more than $1 billion in cuts to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the federal agency focused on addiction and mental health. In New York, the reduction in deaths reflects a combination of forces, including wider availability of the overdose-reversing medication naloxone, expanded access to medication for opioid use disorder, and deeper investments in harm reduction services, experts say. 'There's likely multiple reasons for this decline, but one of them is the substantial investment that states have done, and in particular, New York state has done, in terms of the provision of harm reduction services and services to treat substance use disorders,' Cerdá said. In an announcement, Gov. Kathy Hochul's administration linked the decline in deaths to the state's distribution of nearly $400 million in opioid settlement funds, which are funding efforts to expand access to medication for addiction, supportive services, and recovery programs. 'These numbers show that our hard work and innovative approaches to establishing services are making a difference across the state,' Dr. Chinazo Cunningham, the commissioner of the Office of Addiction Services and Supports, said in a statement. Through a new online portal, the state has distributed more than 13 million fentanyl test strips and 10 million xylazine test strips — used to test drug samples — and 296,000 naloxone kits to residents for free, according to Hochul's administration. Additionally, the state Health Department distributed more than 537,600 naloxone kits from January 2024 through April 2025. The declines in mortality have not been evenly distributed across demographic groups. In New York City, while overdose deaths in 2023 declined for the first time in four years, including among white New Yorkers, they were unchanged among Black New Yorkers and increased among Latino New Yorkers. Recent data from the city Department of Health and Mental Hygiene show that high rates of overdose mortality persist in parts of the Bronx, Upper Manhattan, and Central Brooklyn. Addressing those disparities will require deeper investments in the impacted communities, including by reducing barriers to care and services, Cerdá said. In its annual report released in November, New York's Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board — a committee tasked with making recommendations for the allocation of the funding — stressed the need for racial equity in the distribution of settlement funds, describing ongoing overdose deaths in Black and Latino communities as an 'overarching concern.' Dr. Silvia Martins, a professor of epidemiology and director of the Substance Use Epidemiology Unit in the Department of Epidemiology at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, raised concerns that cuts to federal programs related to addiction could slow or stop the recent overall reduction in overdose deaths. Reduced funding for SAMHSA and looming cuts to Medicaid could curtail many Americans' access to addiction prevention and treatment programs, she said. And if federal funding for addiction services dries up, opioid settlement funds won't be able to fully close the gaps, she cautioned. 'I truly hope that the federal government realizes now is not the time to stop these efforts, because it's trending, in most states, in the right direction,' she said. 'We see that these efforts are working.' This story was produced by Healthbeat and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Concerns raised over unintentional coverage losses at final Medicaid work requirements hearing
The Sioux Falls One Stop houses offices for several state departments, including Health, Social Services and Revenue. It hosted a hearing for proposed Medicaid expansion work requirements on June 12, 2025. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight) More than a dozen people raised concerns and questions about unintentionally separating patients from their health care and other aspects of South Dakota's proposed Medicaid expansion work requirements during the plan's final public hearing Thursday in Sioux Falls. Dana Bacon, state government affairs director at The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, told the state Department of Social Services his organization has 'pretty big concerns' due to the technical problems, costs and unintended loss of coverage that people encountered during attempted work requirements in other states. 'That's going to make individuals, families, systems and communities pay a price for the outcomes,' Bacon said. 'We have a good sense of where this waiver is going, but we still see these problems getting in the way of the stated goal of making sure people get the health care they need.' Written comments about South Dakota's Medicaid expansion work requirements proposal may be submitted by June 18 via email to MedicaidSPA@ with the subject line 'SDCareerLink Public Comment,' or mailed to the Division of Medical Services, Department of Social Services, 700 Governors Drive, Pierre, SD 57501-2291. Other people questioned the need to implement work requirements and expressed concern about a potentially disproportionate impact on tribal members, as well as the potential barrier the plan could create to health care for sick, homeless and older people. Medicaid is government-funded health insurance for people with low incomes. South Dakotans voted in 2022 to expand Medicaid to adults with incomes up to 138% of the poverty level, a decision that allowed the state to capitalize on a 90% federal funding match — funding that could be in jeopardy, pending the outcome of congressional action. Last year, voters passed another constitutional amendment to let the state seek approval from the federal government to impose work requirements on expansion enrollees. The state began drafting its proposal immediately following the end of the state legislative session in March, before debates about potential federally imposed work requirements heated up at the congressional level. Those debates are ongoing. The department only heard from one person at its first hearing in May. The state is also accepting written comments through Wednesday, which will be included in the state's application to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services later this summer. South Dakota's plan would require adult Medicaid recipients to work, train, attend school or serve as a caretaker for a child or elderly or disabled person in their home unless they qualify for an exception. Compliance with the state-level work rules would be reviewed on an annual basis, at the time of Medicaid renewal, rather than at the time of application. The state would not require a set number of hours of work or education time. South Dakota would allow exceptions for people who are: Pregnant or up to 12 months postpartum. Disabled, as determined by the Social Security Administration. Diagnosed with cancer or another serious or terminal medical condition by a physician. In an intensive behavioral health treatment program, hospitalized or living in a nursing home. In an area with unemployment 20% or more above the national average and are exempt from Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents. As of last month, 30,542 South Dakotans were covered by the Medicaid expansion. The state estimates 80% of them already work or qualify for an exception. The proposed state-level work requirement would reduce enrollment by an estimated 5-10% in the first year. That would save the Medicaid program between $48.9 million and $71 million in the first year, the department says. Federal action could make SD's Medicaid work requirements 'an exercise in futility,' official says Department officials explained that expansion enrollees would be sent three notices before being removed from Medicaid rolls. People could reapply later if they don't meet work requirements at their renewal time. Heather Petermann, Medicaid director at the department, said people who are seeking treatment for substance use disorder or other mental health disorders outside of intensive treatment programs could obtain an exemption if their physician or health care provider provided documentation that they can't work because of their condition. Department Secretary Matt Althoff said the state's proposal is meant to be administratively simple and to encourage work among Medicaid recipients rather than track hours. 'We are helping them, we believe, not only by providing a safety net, but a lift up. Isn't it true that personal industry is the antidote to poverty?' Althoff said. 'The more that we can do to discover fulfillment through serving others, the more that we can do to garner an income that we earn, the higher likelihood we will be able to escape the clutches of poverty.' Other suggestions made during public comment during the hearing included: Adding volunteer or community service time as an exemption, to benefit older adults who can't find employment because of their age. Exempting Indian Health Service beneficiaries, since they are eligible for Medicaid coverage at the federal level even if they do not meet other Medicaid requirements, such as income limits. Allowing more flexibility to exempt caregivers of older adults who don't share the same residence. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
After Purging Key Vaccine Panel, RFK Jr. Moves to Assert Control
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. took to Fox News to do what he does best: spread wildly incendiary misinformation about vaccines and public health. RFK Jr. was asked about his decision to fire the entire vaccine advisory committee of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a move that directly contradicted a confirmation process promise and set off alarms for experts. 'Ninety-seven percent of the people on the committee had conflicts of interest. This is a committee that has … we've gone up from 11 vaccines in 1986. Today, children get between 69 and 92 vaccines before they're 18. Not one of those vaccines—' 'That's really high,' Fox News's Martha McCallum said. 'Those are not all mandatory.' 'Those are all mandatory, and the reason there's 69 to 92 is some of the brands require three doses, some of them require four. But none of them have been safety tested. Except for the Covid vaccine, the only vaccine on the schedule that has gone through placebo-controlled trials prior to licensure was the Covid vaccine, so nobody has any idea what the risk profiles are on these products. And we don;t know whether they have anything to do with the epidemic of chronic disease, almost all the chronic disease … These are products designed to deregulate your immune system, change your immune system for like. And we are now having an epidemic of immune desregulation in our country and we don't have an idea … we're gonna investigate.' Kennedy Jr. is exaggerating about the number of vaccines before 18, which is closer to between 24 and 50. And many medical professionals have already stated their opposition to this placebo-controlled testing. 'The first vaccine for a disease is already proven safe through a placebo-controlled trial,' Senator Bill Cassidy—who was recently betrayed by Kennedy— told The Washington Post. 'Updating that vaccine does not require a new placebo-controlled trial to determine its safety. To require a placebo group would deny those patients access to the vaccine that has already been found safe.' There's also the fact that this kind of testing would be intentionally deceptive to patients. 'Ethics must be taken into account when you set up a study,' physician Stanley Plotkin said. 'Can I ethically agree to having people acquire the disease because they receive a placebo?' We should expect more delusional, crank-adjacent theories from perhaps our most important public sector.
