Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pat_k

(13,392 posts)
2. Screw "preserving all its coalition"! What about actually PROTECTING the public health??
Wed Apr 1, 2026, 08:37 PM
21 hrs ago

What "public interest" is being served by this meta, inside the beltway bullshit? I am so sick of it all! I know all this political gamesmanship bullshit is so much easier -- and doesn't "ruffle" feathers -- but maybe try to throw some actual substance into the mix?

It might have been nice draw a comparison between "weighing" votes potentially lost or gained by fighting to implement changes that have no basis in science, with what we EXPECT of our public servants. That is, "weighing" the lives to be lost if they prevail in a fight to implement the blocked changes vs. lives saved by abandoning it.

At a minimum, it might have been nice if the article bothered to describe what the "vaccine overhaul" is and what the implications are. Then at least they would be providing information that actually matters to the public.

Substantive FACTS:

With no scientific basis, RFK, Jr's DHS changed vaccination against COVID-19, Influenza, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Meningitis, Rotavirus from universally recommended/routine to "shared clinical decision-making" (SCDM), which means they are ONLY recommended for specific high-risk groups or after consultation between parents and their healthcare provider.

Just three of the six immunizations the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said it would no longer routinely recommend — against hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and rotavirus — have prevented nearly 2 million hospitalizations and more than 90,000 deaths in the past 30 years, according to the CDC's own publications. (NPR). That amounts to something like 70,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths annually.

Under the SSDM guideline, the percentage of children who receive these vaccines will be smaller than it currently is. That is the intent of the change. And a corresponding portion of the 70,000 hospitalizations and 3000 deaths prevented by routine vaccination will NOT be prevented.

With regard to flu, from the 2004-2005 season to the 2022-2023 season (excluding 2020-2021), flu-related deaths in children reported to CDC during regular flu seasons have ranged from 37 to 199 deaths. Importantly, among reported flu-related deaths in children, about 80% occurred in children who were not fully vaccinated. Also of note, even though each flu death in a child is supposed to be reported to CDC, it is likely that not all flu-related deaths in children are captured and that the actual number of deaths is higher. CDC has developed statistical models that account for the underreporting of flu-related deaths in children to estimate the actual number of deaths. During 2019-2020, for example, 199 flu-related deaths in children were reported to CDC, but statistical modeling suggests approximately 434 deaths may have occurred. (CDC)

And these numbers are with FLU vaccination being universally recommended. We may not know exactly how much higher the death toll would be if the number of children who get the flu vaccine is reduced, but we do know this: If the recommendation is changed to SSDM, It Will Be Higher.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»As Trump weighs appeal of...»Reply #2