Spreading like herpes simplex 2 in the love island villa

If you’re in Austin it’s *the* antivax groups conference

No downside to giving the vaccines separately (more shots, more doctors visits, less uptake).

Hep B is sexually transmitted so babies don’t need the vaccine (not true).

No harm in not taking Tylenol in pregnancy (fever can cause stillbirth)

Plenty of money in research (lol)

No Tylenol for kids either! (Not part of the research)

Stop giving all 80 vaccines in one visit (that doesn’t happen)

No Amish are autistic (untrue)

This is a very good lesson on the importance of a nationalized vaccine recommendation system

Meissner specifically asked if this vote means adults over 65 don’t need a script and the chair responded this vote was about insurance coverages. He might be mistaken but that’s where my confusion comes from.

It DOES seem like VFC coverage for Covid is protected. The chair explicitly said the vote was about keeping things available on VFC

The CDC scientists who did these meetings are saints so I’m confident they will write more coherent summaries of what’s going on.

Like, do those states have to make new rules to allow FDA eligible groups to get it without a rx? Will they keep that requirement? Do people outside the FDA groups who use “shared decision making” still need a script in those states? It’s very confusing!!!

I really don’t know. My interpretation of the situation is “if people get it, it’s covered by insurance, but we’re not making recommendations about if you should get it.” So I don’t know what this means for states that have been requiring an rx for the FDA approved groups because ACIP hadn’t met yet

My understanding is vote 4 was about keeping it on the schedule which equates to Public/private insurance coverage. They didn’t make any recommendations about which groups should get it. So I’m v confused about what happens now in states that tie vax access to ACIP rules.

Good god

Step 1) Pounding the drum of "This vaccine isn't necessary"

Step 2) Vaccination rates drop

Step 3) "should we give this vaccine if so few people take it?"

Kind of feels like that’s the point

I could be misinterpreting it’s (maybe this was a review of what the WG did leading up to the ACIP meeting, but this is the slide that was presented. But if this was about what the WG did no language was presented so….

Absolutely.

From the opening g it sounded like their plan is to craft the language live.