Measles Vaccination Rates Are Plummeting Across the U.S.
A person walks past a sign at a health center where the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine is administered in Lubbock, Texas, on Feb. 27, 2025. Credit - Ronaldo Schemidt—AFP/Getty Images
Childhood vaccination rates against measles, mumps, and rubella have been declining in much of the U.S. since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, a new study has found.
The study, which was published in JAMA on June 2, analyzed measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination rates by county where data were available. Researchers at Johns Hopkins University collected county-level data on MMR vaccination rates for kindergarteners from each state's health department website for the school years before the pandemic (2017-2018) and after (2023-2024). In states where that data were not available, researchers analyzed the most comparable data instead.
Of the 2,066 counties in 33 states that researchers analyzed, 78% of them reported a decline in vaccination rates. Researchers found that the county-level mean vaccination rate decreased from almost 94% before the pandemic to about 91% after the pandemic—falling well below what public-health experts generally consider to be the threshold for herd immunity against measles of about 95%.
Read More: What to Know About the New COVID-19 Variant NB.1.8.1
Lauren Gardner, senior author of the study and director of Johns Hopkins University's Center for Systems Science and Engineering, says the goal of this research was to get a 'more comprehensive, higher resolution understanding of the vaccination landscape' in the country.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 'has national- and state-level data, but we know that vaccination patterns can vary significantly within a state and even at a higher resolution than that across communities, within even the county,' Gardner says. For places with a low vaccination rate, 'if measles gets introduced into these regions, there's more likely to be an outbreak. And that's what we're seeing.'
As of May 29, a total of 1,088 confirmed measles cases were reported by 33 jurisdictions in the U.S., according to the CDC. Of those cases, 96% were in people who were either unvaccinated or whose vaccination status was unknown. So far in 2025, there have been 14 reported outbreaks and three people confirmed to have died of measles-related complications, all of whom were unvaccinated. Before this year, the last confirmed measles-related death in the country occurred in 2015.
Getting vaccinated is the best way to be protected against measles. The MMR vaccine is both safe and effective, and the CDC has said that most people who get it will be protected against measles for life.
Read More: Do You Need a Measles Vaccine Booster?
The new study found that only four of the 33 states that researchers analyzed—California, Connecticut, Maine, and New York—reported a rise in the median county-level vaccination rates. Researchers didn't investigate the causes behind disparate rates, and Gardner says that many factors—including the pandemic's impact on access to health care, different populations, the quality of reported data, and vaccine hesitancy—play a role in a community's vaccination rates. But she also notes that the four states that reported an increase in the measles vaccination rate are among the few that don't allow non-medical exemptions for school immunization requirements, such as the MMR vaccine.
Gardner says that Hawaii stood out to her in the study because it experienced a significant drop in measles vaccine coverage; before the pandemic, its rate was around 95%, but after the pandemic, it plummeted to roughly 80%. Wisconsin had the lowest vaccination rate, on average, among the states studied; its most recent rate was in the 70s.
Gardner says that a state's average vaccination rate might be misleading because the rate can vary greatly within communities. It would be ideal, she says, if researchers could get even more granular with the data and analyze vaccination rates school by school.
'The higher granularity you get, the more you actually see problems—and then can also respond to them and figure out where it's actually important to go and target and try and help get vaccination rates up,' Gardner says.
Contact us at letters@time.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
More measles exposures are happening at airports and tourist destinations. Here's what travelers need to know
More than 1,100 measles cases have been reported in the United States this year, and the highly contagious virus has put people at risk while they wait in ERs and doctor's offices — but also at a Shakira concert in New Jersey, at a mall in Minnesota, at a Buc-ee's store in Texas and in airports and planes in several states. 'Travelers can catch measles in many travel settings including travel hubs like airports and train stations, on public transportation like airplanes and trains, at tourist attractions, and at large, crowded events,' the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a recently updated travel notice. 'Infected travelers can bring the disease back to their home communities where it can spread rapidly among people who are not immune.' It's a situation that may feel unfamiliar for US travelers. In 2000, measles was declared eliminated from the US due to highly effective and coordinated vaccination efforts. That year, only 85 cases were recorded, all of which were imported. But at least 1,157 measles cases have been reported this year, according to a CNN tally using data from state health departments. Only one other year since 2000 has had more cases: 2019, when there were 1,274. The vast majority of this year's cases have been part of an ongoing multistate outbreak centered in West Texas. The outbreak appears to be stabilizing, but there is growing concern around the risk of additional spread due to summer travel, said Lori Tremmel Freeman, chief executive officer for the National Association of County and City Health Officials. At the epicenter of the measles outbreak in Gaines County, 'that community has either become immune by contracting measles and developing immunity from the disease, or in some cases, they've gotten vaccinated,' Freeman said, but she added that 'there's a cautionary tale,' because of summer travel. 'Heavy travel is anticipated,' she warned. 'The travel spread could continue throughout the rest of the country as these groups become mobile and still carry the disease.' The CDC's health notice emphasizes that all international travelers should be fully vaccinated with the recommended two doses of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and that infants ages 6 months to 11 months who are traveling should receive an extra dose. Dr. Peter Hotez, co-director of the Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development, said this recommendation for infants was also given by the Texas Department of State Health Services in the 10 counties that have seen increased measles transmission during this year's outbreak. 'That means, then, that you're going to wind up giving three doses instead of two doses. Usually, you give one dose [to children between] 12 to 15 months, a second dose at 4 to 6 years [old]. Now, you're going to give three doses,' he said. But he emphasized that that this extra dose is still safe: 'The MMR vaccine is one of the safest vaccines we know.' Neither the Texas health department nor the CDC recommends the MMR vaccine for adults born before 1957, Hotez notes, riding on the assumption that measles exposure was common in the first half of the 20th century and that exposure would have led to enduring immunity. However, there are exceptions for health care workers serving a measles outbreak area, for whom two MMR doses are recommended regardless of birth year. Hotez highlights that vaccine recommendations may change as outbreaks continue, stressing the importance of staying aware of updates from local health officials. The MMR vaccine is not recommended for pregnant women, infants younger than 6 months and people who have severely weakened immune systems. Although the risk of exposure is generally low, people who can't be vaccinated should speak with their doctor about their individual risk tolerance, said Dr. Scott Roberts, associate medical director for infection prevention at the Yale School of Medicine. 'A lot of this depends on their access to therapeutics at their travel destination, like are they going to an area where immunoglobulins may be available?' Immunoglobulins, also known as antibodies, are naturally produced by the body as a part of immune responses. They play a crucial role in identifying and neutralizing foreign substances like bacteria and viruses and are specific to each pathogen. People who have a weakened immune system can get immunoglobulins, typically at a hospital or clinic, if they're exposed to measles. Historically, Roberts said, the most common source of US measles outbreaks has been non-immune US residents who traveled abroad, were exposed to the virus and then brought it back. Although some international travelers have brought measles into the US, this makes up a minority of cases. Although no country requires proof of MMR immunization for travel, Roberts advises travelers to 'double-check their immunity status before traveling internationally.' This immunity may involve a prior measles infection, birth before 1957, lab test results of measles immunity or written documentation of MMR immunization. Travelers should check their status at least 6 weeks before they leave, he said. Full immunity includes the two doses of MMR vaccine at least 28 days apart as well as the two weeks it takes to build up final immunity after the last dose. Two doses of the MMR vaccine are 97% effective against measles infection, so vaccinated travelers who suspect that they have been exposed to the virus shouldn't need to worry, Roberts said. Although that leaves a 3% chance of infection, symptoms are significantly lessened with the vaccine. If you are unvaccinated and suspect that you may have been exposed, Roberts says you should see a doctor as soon as possible. 'Depending on how soon you are after exposure, you can still do something,' he said. You may be able to get immunoglobulin or even the MMR vaccine to help lessen symptoms. Other than verifying immunity, Roberts advises typical travel guidance such as packing commonly used and prescribed medications, as well as keeping a list of hospitals or clinics at your destination and other first-aid supplies. When traveling internationally, Roberts recommends checking the country-specific travel health notices on the CDC website to stay aware of additional vaccinations and medications needed for certain destinations. Roberts advises travelers wash their hands frequently, avoid people who are sick when possible, stay in well-ventilated areas and wear masks if they are at high risk of severe illness, staying up to date with vaccinations, especially those who were unable to get vaccinated because of severe immunodeficiency. These practices don't just help prevent measles infection, they help curb infection from other circulating pathogens such as Covid-19 and the flu. Measles is one of the most contagious germs around. In one case 10 years ago, four travelers were infected by a person at the same airport gate. 'This highlights how contagious [measles] is,' Roberts said. 'Even airports and terminals are risky.' The ongoing measles outbreak is not to be taken lightly, Hotez said. 'In the 1980s, measles was the single leading killer of children globally. It [led to] 3 million deaths annually. Now, through the GAVI Vaccine Alliance and other programs, we've brought it down to around 100,000 deaths, but it's still a lot. And we're seeing what happens in West Texas. Ten percent, 20% of kids are being hospitalized, measles, pneumonia, neurologic injury. We've had over 90 hospitalizations so far in Texas and two measles deaths.'
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Analysis-US stocks heal from tariff pain but trade news to keep markets edgy
By Lewis Krauskopf NEW YORK (Reuters) -After months of Wall Street gyrations to the twists and turns of U.S. trade policy, signs suggest stock investors are becoming more resilient to developments and cautiously defaulting to optimism that they have weathered the worst of the tariff-related shocks. U.S. equities have edged higher over the past two weeks as they digest a sharp rally that has brought the benchmark S&P 500 within 3% of its February record high, fueled in part by easing fears about the economic fallout from tariffs. A case in point: stocks ended Monday's session higher even as markets had grappled with President Donald Trump's announcement of doubling steel tariffs to 50%. Trump's stunning "Liberation Day" tariff announcement on April 2 sent stocks plunging and set off some of the most extreme market swings since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic five years ago. Since then, volatility measures have moderated considerably, and, with the market's rebound, there are signs that technical damage from the slide has healed. Still, investors are mindful that markets remain susceptible to daily swings stemming from negotiations between the U.S. and trading partners as key deadlines near in coming weeks, with elevated valuations making stocks more vulnerable to disappointments. "What has allowed this almost full recovery in the stock market hinges on the negotiations that are now under way," said Angelo Kourkafas, senior investment strategist at Edward Jones. "Markets, consumers and businesses have vested interest that we get clarity sooner than later," Kourkafas said. "So potentially it's going to be a critical summer that is going to test the market's momentum." After falling to the brink of confirming a bear market on April 8, the S&P 500 has surged back nearly 20% and erased its losses for the year. Near the halfway mark of 2025, the index is now up 1.5%. While Trump's tariffs remain a risk, the market no longer is perceiving them as "this big outlier event," said Keith Lerner, co-chief investment officer at Truist Advisory Services. "We went through a period where the only thing that mattered for the markets was tariffs," Lerner said. "And now we are in a period where tariffs still matter, but they are not the only thing that matters." Truist is among the firms becoming more upbeat on the outlook for equities, with RBC Capital Markets and Barclays this week lifting their year-end targets for the S&P 500. Deutsche Bank strategists this week boosted their year-end target to 6,550, about 10% above current levels, as they cited a less severe expected tariffs hit to corporate profits. The strategists noted they expect the rally to be "punctuated by sharp pullbacks on repeated cycles of escalation and de-escalation on trade policy." Several investors and strategists pointed to a "base case" on Wall Street emerging for Trump's tariffs - 10% broadly, 30% on China along with some specific sectoral levies. The market "started saying the worst is behind us in terms of this whole tariff discussion," said King Lip, chief strategist at BakerAvenue Wealth Management. "The U.S. and China still have a lot of things to work out, but likely the worst is behind us." MODERATING VOLATILITY Volatility measures indicate calming fears about trade. The Cboe Volatility Index, an options-based measure of investor anxiety, reached 52.33 in early April, its highest closing level in five years, but has steadily receded and hovered at 17.6 on Wednesday, around its long-term median. In another sign, the average daily range of the S&P 500 has fallen to about 75 points, on a 10-session basis, about one-third the size from April during the height of post-Liberation Day volatility. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 has traded above its 200-day moving average - a closely watched trend-line - for about three weeks. The percentage of S&P 500 stocks trading in some form of an uptrend has jumped from 29.4% at the April 8 low to 60% as of last week, said Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist for LPL Financial. "There is a growing list of technical evidence that suggests this recovery is real," Turnquist said in a note this week. Options data also suggests growing bullishness. Over the last month, on average about 0.84 S&P 500 call options traded daily against every put contract traded, the most this measure of sentiment has favored call contracts in at least the last four years, according to a Reuters analysis of data from options analytics firm Trade Alert. Calls confer the right to buy stocks at a specific price and future date, while puts grant the right to sell shares. To be sure, some investors warn the threat of tariff disruptions is not going away anytime soon and are wary of market complacency. "There is still just so much uncertainty," said Matthew Miskin, co-chief investment strategist at John Hancock Investment Management. Indeed, talk of the acronym "TACO" - Trump Always Chickens Out - has spread on Wall Street as a rationale for why markets should not fear harsh tariffs because many believe they will likely be walked back. But some investors are worried about a backlash from the president. BCA Research strategists said they were wary of "relying on a TACO backstop." "Trade tensions may have peaked, but we are unwilling to assume they won't sporadically rise from current levels," BCA said in a note this week. Stock valuations also continue to swell, with the S&P 500's forward price-to-earnings ratio reaching 21.7, its highest level since late February and well above its long-term average of 15.8, according to LSEG Datastream. Stocks are at "a more vulnerable level," said Chuck Carlson, chief executive officer at Horizon Investment Services. "The market is probably going to be a little bit more sensitive to what it perceives as negative news."
Scientific American
an hour ago
- Scientific American
Inside the Collapse of the America's Overdose Prevention Program
At an addiction conference in Nashville, Tenn., in late April, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., spoke about his own experience with drug use. 'Addiction is a source of misery. It's also a symptom of misery,' he said. Kennedy's very personal speech, however, ignored recent federal budget cuts and staffing reductions that could undo national drug programs' recent progress in reversing overdoses and treating substance use. Several experts in the crowd, including Caleb Banta-Green, a research professor at the University of Washington, who studies addiction, furiously spoke up during Kennedy's speech. Banta-Green interrupted, shouting 'Believe science!' before being removed from the venue. (The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to a request for comment for this article.) 'I had to stand up and say something,' says Banta-Green, who has spent his career working with people who use drugs and was a senior science adviser at the Office of National Drug Control Policy during the Obama administration. 'The general public needs to understand what is being dismantled and the very real impact it's going to have on them and their loved ones.' On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. The Trump administration has defunded public health programs and made plans to consolidate or eliminate the systems that track their outcomes, making it difficult to monitor the deadly consequences of substance use, Banta-Green says. For instance, staff cuts to the Overdose Data to Action program and the Opioid Overdose Prevention and Surveillance program will hamper former tracking efforts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and at local and state health departments' prevention programs. A recently fired policy analyst at the overdose prevention division at the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control— who wishes to remain anonymous, citing fear of retaliation—tells Scientific American that she used to provide policy support to teams at health departments in 49 states and shared public overdose data and information to Congress. She is a veteran who should have had protected employment status, but she lost her job during federal cuts in February. 'No one else is doing surveillance and data collection and prevention like the CDC was,' she says. 'There's so much that's been cut.' (When approached for an interview by Scientific American, a CDC spokesperson said, 'Honestly, the new administration has changed how things normally work' and did not make anyone available for questions.) What Gets Measured Gets Managed Provisional data suggest that deaths from drug use declined by almost 25 percent in 2024, though overdoses remain the leading cause of death for Americans aged 18 to 44. Cuts to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health will make it difficult to measure similar statistics in the future. Because substance use is highly stigmatized, Banta-Green says it's important to have diverse, localized and timely data from multiple agencies to accurately capture the need for services—and the ways they're actually used. 'You can't design public health or policy responses if you don't know the scale of the need,' he says. Overdose trends vary by region—for example, usage of the synthetic opioid fentanyl appeared earlier on the East Coast than the West—so national averages can obscure critical local patterns. These regional differences can offer important insights into which interventions might be working, Banta-Green says. For instance, important medications such as naloxone rapidly reverse opioid overdoses in emergency situations. But getting people onto long-term medications, including methadone and buprenorphine, which reduce cravings and withdrawal symptoms, can more effectively prevent mortality in both the short and long term. Declining deaths may also mask tragic underlying dynamics. Successful interventions may not be the only cause of a drop in overdoses; it could also be that the people who are most vulnerable to overdose have recently perished and that there are simply fewer remaining at risk. 'It's like a forest fire burning itself out,' Banta-Green says. This underscores the need for the large-scale data collection threatened by the proposed budget and staff cuts at the CDC and National Institutes of Health, says Regina LaBelle, an addiction policy expert at Georgetown University. 'What [the administration is] doing is shortsighted' and doesn't appear to be based 'on the effectiveness or the outcomes of the programs that [it's] cutting,' she says. For example, despite promising to expand naloxone access, the Trump administration's latest budget proposal cuts funding for a critical program that distributes the lifesaving medication to first aid responders. 'A Chance at Redemption' When LaBelle was acting director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy during the Biden administration, she led efforts to expand evidence-based programs that provided clean syringes and tested users' drugs for harmful substances. These strategies are often referred to as 'harm reduction,' which LaBelle describes as 'a way you can meet people where they are and give them the services they need to keep them from dying.' José Martínez, a substance use counselor based in Buffalo, N.Y., says harm-reduction practices helped save his life. When Martínez got his first job as a peer advocate for people using drugs, he was still in a chaotic part of his own addiction and had been sleeping on the street and the subway—and regularly getting into fights—for a decade. The day after he was hired to help provide counseling on hepatitis C, he got into a New York City shelter. As his bruises healed, he learned life skills he was never taught at home. 'For a lot of people, drug use is a coping tool,' he says. 'The drug is rarely the problem. Drug use is really a symptom.' Working with others who understood that many people need help minimizing risks gave Martínez a chance to make progress toward recovery in a way that he says abstinence-only treatment programs couldn't. 'I don't agree that somebody should be sober in order for them to do things different,' he says. Over the past six years working for the National Harm Reduction Coalition, Martínez started a national support network for other peer program workers and community members—people who share their experiences and are a trusted source of education and support for others using drugs. 'There's never no time limit,' he says. 'Everybody works on their own pace.' Though Martínez's program doesn't take federal funding, the Trump administration is cutting similar kinds of peer programs. Martínez says doing this peer work gives many users a sense of purpose and stability—and helps them avoid previous behaviors. The proposed 2026 federal budget will slash the CDC's opioid surveillance programs by $30 million. It also creates a new subdivision called the Administration for a Healthy America that will consolidate the agency's prevention work, along with existing programs at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency (SAMHSA), which often coordinates grants for treatment programs. The programs formerly conducted through SAMHSA are also facing cuts of more than $1 billion. Advocates fear this will include a shift toward funding abstinence-only priorities, which, Martínez says, 'will definitely mean that we're going to have more overdoses.' (Some research suggests abstinence-based treatment actually puts people at a higher risk of fatal overdose than those who receive no treatment at all.) 'The general public needs to understand what is being dismantled and the very real impact it's going to have on them and their loved ones.' —Caleb Banta-Green, addiction research professor These cuts could disproportionately affect communities already facing higher overdose rates: Martínez, who is Puerto Rican, notes that U.S. Black, Latino and Indigenous communities have experienced drug overdose death increases in recent years. In many states, overdose deaths in Black and brown communities remain high while white overdose death rates are declining. Looming cuts to Medicaid programs, LaBelle warns, are likely to worsen inequalities in health care access, which tends to make communities of color more vulnerable. In Kentucky, where Governor Andy Beshear recently celebrated a 30 percent decline in overdose deaths, Shreeta Waldon, executive director of the Kentucky Harm Reduction Coalition, says the reality is more nuanced. While national overdose deaths declined in white populations from 2021 to 2023, for example, they continued to rise among people of color. Black and Latino communities often face barriers when accessing health services, many of which have been shaped by predominantly white institutions. Waldon says it's essential for people from diverse backgrounds to participate in policy decisions and necessary to ensure that opioid abatement funds —legal funds used toward treatment and prevention—are distributed fairly. Without adequate federal funding, Waldon predicts treatment programs in Kentucky will become backlogged—potentially pushing more people into crisis situations that lead to emergency services or incarceration rather than to recovery. These financial and political pressures are not only making it harder to find support for people in crisis; they also reduce opportunities to discuss community needs. Waldon says she knows some social workers who now avoid terms such as 'Black woman' or 'marginalized' in grants and public talks out of fear of losing funding. But people currently needing treatment for substance-use disorder are not necessarily aware of the federal funding news—or 'what's about to hit them when they try to go get treatment and they're hit with barriers,' Waldon says. 'That's way more important to me than trying to tailor the way I talk.' Funding and staffing cuts don't just limit resources for the people most in need. They limit the ability to understand where someone is coming from, which undermines efforts to provide meaningful care, Martínez says. Harm reduction is more than the services and physical tools given to community members, he says. It's about the approach. 'When you look at a whole person, you plant the seed of health and dignity,' he says. 'If everybody deserves a chance at redemption, then we've got to rethink how we're approaching things.'
