CDC advisers vote that patients must consult a health care provider for Covid-19 vaccination, but no prescription required
Vaccine consultants to the US disease control and prevention centers unanimously voted on Friday to say that the COVID-19 vaccines should consult a healthcare provider, a process known as a common clinical decision making.
However, the vaccination applications Advisory Committee is divided on whether a prescription is required for a COVİD-19 vaccine. This vote was 6-6; President of the Committee Martin Kulldorff gave a vote that broke his tie.
The committee now says that people aged 65 and over should decide whether they will take Covid-19 vaccines with a doctor or another health care provider. Vaccine consultants voted for people from 6 months to 64 years of age, but the most suitable for individuals who are not at the lowest risk of the risk of severe COVID-19 disease risk, COVID-19 risk factors according to the CDC list ”.
Suggestions are not certain and may change anyway; They go to CDC Director Jim O’Neill for Signoff. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s assistant O’Neill, Dr. Susan Monarez led the agency since he suddenly dismissed last month.
Practically, the shared clinical decision makes two things, San San Francisco University, a professor of law at the University of California, who specializes in vaccines and vaccination policy. Dorit Reiss.
“This is a participation instead of disabling: the doctor should start and not all” Published on social media. “It usually leads to less, because in part, no one is sure of what it requires.
Reiss said to CNN, “It will create a significant confusion and reduce the purchase due to confusion.”
Other experts acknowledged that the movement would make Covid vaccines difficult.
He resigned as the head of the CDC’s National Vaccine and Respiratory Diseases Center. Demetre Daskalakis, “health and insurance assumes,” he said.
“We do not have universal health services in this country and we know that millions of people have lost insurance,” he added.
Increased approval
With a separate vote, the committee suggested that CDC replaces COVİD-19. Vaccine Information DeclarationsExplaining the risks and benefits of a vaccination.
The counselors requested additional language in the statements of “at least six new risks and uncertainty ılan discussed by the working group, many of which are based on front and refuted scientific findings.
Legal experts, as a different process through the CDC requires a different process, the change of the vaccine information table is beyond the opinion of Acıp, he said.
“Acıp does not have the authority to change the vaccine information declaration from the ground. There is a detailed process for this,” Reiss said. In a social media post.
Consultants also suggested that health care providers consider the risk factors for serious consequences, such as “Age, previous infections, immunosuppression, and some comorbidities defined by CDC, as part of the informed consent. “Especially in the vaccine information table.”
He is the President of the Covid-19 Working Group. Retsef Levi said that the group consulted with “appropriate people ve and felt that the suggestions about the informed consent were something they can weigh.
Nothing forbids Acıp from making such a suggestion, he said, and after the meeting and “I think if you read and interpret the role of Acıp as extensive suggestions on issues related to vaccination policies, it is essentially what we need to think about.” He said.
The US Food and Drug Administration has already made significant changes in the shooting of this season. Approval limit In addition to adults 65 years and older, young people with a higher risk of COVİD-19. People who do not enter these categories can still take a vaccine if they want to give a provider out of the label.
However, the vote of the CDC’s advisory committee closely complies with some states of states, and has additional effects on vaccination access. The result may be a patchwork of vaccination access from the situation to the state, depending on who can partially apply and which providers are willing to offer it.
In a statement, a US Department of Health and Human Services spokesman, joint clinical decision -making game “Children’s Health Insurance Program, Medicaid and Medicare’s authority programs and Federal Health Insurance Market, including all payment mechanisms, including insurance plans, said the scope of vaccination.
Ahip, who was formerly the US health insurance plans, said that more than 200 million Americans will continue to cover all the stages that ACIP proposed free of charge for the patient until the end of 2026 from September 1. This includes updated Covid-19 and influenza vaccines.
Vote for hepatitis B vaccine for postponed newborn
The CDC Advisory Committee’s COVID-19 votes watched a chaotic start to the meeting, where the consultants made a decision around the combined measles, mumps, measles and chicken pox vaccines, and then delayed the vote closely monitored in the Hepatitis B vaccine for newborn.
Vaccine consultants voted on Friday 11-1 and postponed a planned vote for changes in the suggestions around the Hepatitis B kick. On Thursday, there was a surprise bending that consultants thought of a suggestion to wait for the dose of hepatitis B vaccine until at least one month. Currently, babies are usually given this shot at birth before leaving the hospital.
On Friday morning, an ACIP member offered the committee to consider recommending it in 2 or 3 months. Committee Member Dr. Robert Malone then took action to postpone their votes indefinitely through “uncertainty” about “security, activity and timing”. Kulldorff, an epidemiologist and bioistatistist who leads to an ACIP working group only in the vaccine, voted against the hepatitis B vaccine vote on the table.
However, vaccine consultants have already made a move on Hepatitis B: a vote to advise pregnant women to be tested for the virus. ACIP typically does not play a role in determining the test, and the hepatitis test is part of the already recommended routine care during pregnancy.
HHS spokesman, “the aim of the vote, hepatitis B and newborn women to reduce the infection of the virus to reduce the infection of the child to encourage the providers and health systems to increase test rates in pregnancy,” he said.
Anti-peel activists have long questioned the need for the birth dose of the vaccine, because Hepatitis B is mainly transmitted by dirty needles or sexual activity. In June Municipal HallKennedy said, “Really a motive of profit” to give to newborns.
However, the data show that the vaccination campaign against Hepatitis B, whose babies have been proposed since 1991, is successful. After its application, hepatitis B infections in infants fell to 20 cases reported from 18,000 years to an average year.
Children who are infected with Hepatitis B develop long -term infections that can always damage the liver, increasing the risk of liver scar and cancer.
It is not clear how the committee will progress. ACIP contacts, which did not vote for a few votes, spoke to indicate why the next steps and why hepatitis B vaccine was re -evaluated despite the lack of new evidence.
New vote for MMRV shootings for some children
CDC’s vaccine consultants gave new votes in the combined measles, Kabakulak, Gelvest and Suiçceki vaccine in the Children for Children for Children program on Friday.
On Thursday, they recommended a combined vaccine for young children, but with the second vote, he introduced different standards for children receiving vaccines through the vaccines for children with low -income children.
On Friday, new voting brought vaccines for children in line with other recommendations. Nine of the members voted in favor and three abstained.
The President of the American Doctors College and the Acıp Contact Institution, who did not vote, said during the Friday meeting that he was concerned about the contradictory MMRV votes that will make different suggestions for people at different socioeconomic levels.
Goldman said that the votes of the children voted, “You don’t actually have data or evidence to challenge the current stance, and that there is no harmful harm”.
ACIP member, a psychiatrist. Joseph Hibbeln said that the statements of the first vaccines for children’s votes were “really confusing and not definite” and there was a new clarity in Friday morning statements.
Nevertheless, several medical groups expressed their concerns about MMRV changes.
The American Medical Association’s Acıp Liaison Sandra Adamson Fryhofer, said in a statement, “Vaccination Application (ACIP) Advisory Committee, new processes and suggestions, parents, how their children will protect the best and the united MMRV vaccine for children under the age of 4 leaves confused.
Create an account for more cnn news and newsletter Cnn.com
