The independent vaccine advisory group of the CDC recently decided to add COVID-19 vaccinations for kids 6 months old to the revised adolescent and child Immunization Schedule, which will be pushed out in February 2023. The decision was unanimous (15-0).
Today, the advisory committee of the (CDC) unanimously voted (15-0) to endorse COVID-19 immunizations for kids as young as 6 months to a new Vaccination Schedule, that will be rolled out in February 2023. This change will take effect in the United States.
The committee adopted the updated recommendations today, which include the use of the COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech for infants as young as 6 months and the use of the COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by Novavax for infants as young as 12 months old.
Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) goods make up the whole of the COVID-19 vaccine supply that is being distributed to individuals under the age of 18 in the United States. The FDA of the United States did bestow full approval to Pfizer’s Comirnaty COVID-19 jabs for those 12 and older; nevertheless, this Comirnaty vaccine is also not available in the United States, which means that all young kids who receive the Pfizer vaccine are receiving a EUA product. This is the case because the Comirnaty vaccine is still not commercially available in the United States.
When a member of the CDC’s Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (ACIP) named Dr. A. Patricia Wodi was asked if a EUA item could be introduced to the schedule, she responded by stating that the Office of Advisory Board for the United States Department of Justice confirmed for CDC that EUA product lines can be added.
Dr. Meryl Nass made the following observation in response to Dr. Wodi’s statement: “And that was it. There is no basis in the law for this. There is no justification on a moral or ethical level. And in no way does the medical or scientific community support this.”
According to Nass, to the best of her knowledge, no EUA product has ever been included in the timetable before today.
The decision that took place today, according to members of the committee, will not change the vaccinations that are needed to attend school; rather, the CDC will only be codifying its current advice. According to the committee’s findings, decisions about mandatory school attendance are decided at the state, county, and municipal levels. One of the committee members said that “this conversation does not alter that.”
However, as pointed out by Dr. Robert Malone, doctors and state authorities in charge of public health utilize the CDC timetable.
Doctor Malone replied:
“State public health systems refer to the schedule to decide whether vaccinations should be compulsory for students before they are allowed to attend school. There is some truth to the notion that certain states have stricter regulations than others. Even while some states have “opt-out” provisions, the vast majority of states adhere to the CDC’s recommendations. The ACIP is responsible for the operational establishment of the “standard of care” in this field.
R. F. Kennedy, Jr., the board’s chairman and principal legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), offered the following statement in response to the vote that took place today:
“This dangerous conduct is the ultimate confirmation of the cynicism, corruption, and capture that has taken place inside a public health service that was previously excellent. The members of ACIP have once again shown that their allegiance to their pharma masters takes precedence above whatever lingering worries they may have for the well-being of children or the general public’s health.
“This is a serious case of mistreating children on a vast scale.”
Vaccine manufacturers may be held accountable for injury sustained by a fully approved vaccine, but they are never liable for fatalities or injury related to EUA vaccines. This is the case even if the fully licensed vaccine is included in the CDC’s recommended immunization schedule for children.