A federal advisory committee postponed Friday’s planned vote on whether to delay some newborns’ first hepatitis B vaccine, disrupting the second day of a closely watched meeting on updates to the childhood immunization schedule.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) panel, recently reshaped by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., raised questions about the safety and necessity of the hepatitis B vaccine during Thursday’s discussions. With the vote now postponed, parents may be wondering what this means for their child’s vaccination schedule. Below, we make it easy for you.

CDC Advisers Postpone Vote On Newborn Hepatitis B ShotHealth experts welcomed the news as the vaccine panel under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. voted to maintain current guidance on a vaccine that has protected children for decades.

For nearly 35 years, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended that newborns receive their first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth.

On September 19, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) postponed a vote that would have delayed the first dose until at least one month after birth for babies born to mothers who test negative for hepatitis B. This comes after the panel’s September 18 meeting, where members voted to no longer recommend the combined MMRV vaccine for children under 4 years old.

ALSO READ: As CDC Advisers Vote Against MMRV Vaccine For Kids Under 4, Here's What Parents Should Know

Initially, the panel had voted to continue covering these vaccines for children under 4 through the Vaccines for Children programme, which ensures access for families who may not afford them. However, they later voted to remove that coverage. While most adults recover fully from hepatitis B, about 90% of infected infants and 30% of children infected between ages 1 and 5 develop lifelong infections, which can lead to severe liver damage, liver cancer, or even death, according to the CDC.

What This Decision Means for Your Child’s Health

For now, newborns will continue to receive the hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth, keeping the long-standing protection policy in place. Experts say this early dose is crucial because infants are far more likely than older children or adults to develop chronic hepatitis B if infected.

The panel had been considering a delay for babies born to mothers who test negative for hepatitis B, but keeping the current schedule ensures that children remain safeguarded against a serious liver infection from day one.

Safety and Effectiveness of the Hepatitis B Birth Dose

The hepatitis B vaccine given within 24 hours of birth is considered both safe and highly effective. Decades of research and real-world use have shown that newborns tolerate the vaccine well, with only minor side effects such as mild soreness at the injection site or a low-grade fever in rare cases.

Giving the first dose at birth is particularly important because infants are far more vulnerable to developing chronic hepatitis B if infected. Around 90% of infants who contract the virus go on to develop lifelong infections, which can lead to severe liver problems, liver cancer, or even premature death.

ALSO READ: WHO Guidelines On Weight Loss Drugs For Obesity

Early vaccination helps the immune system recognise and fight the virus, providing protection from the very first hours of life. The birth dose, followed by subsequent doses as part of the recommended schedule, has been credited with dramatically reducing hepatitis B infections in young children and protecting millions of babies worldwide.

U.S. vaccine advisers on Thursday, September 18, 2025, moved to change how one of the country’s key childhood vaccines is used, marking another step in Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy’s broader push to reshape national immunization policy.

The advisory panel to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended that parents should not have the option of giving children under 4 the combined measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) shot. A separate vote on hepatitis B vaccines for newborns, which was expected the same day, has been pushed to Friday. That decision could alter decades of U.S. vaccine policy that has successfully kept annual hepatitis B cases in babies down to only a few dozen.

With these shifts under way, here’s what parents should know about their children’s vaccinations.

Kennedy Advisers Vote Against MMRV Shot for Children Under 4

An influential panel advising the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) voted Thursday, September 18, 2025, to scale back recommendations for the combined MMRV vaccine, which protects against measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox.

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted 8–3 in favour of narrowing its use, with one member abstaining due to a conflict of interest.

ALSO READ: Hepatitis B Vaccination Timeline For Children Under Review Without Scientific Data, Says Former CDC Director Susan Monarez

The decision means the combined MMRV shot will no longer be recommended as the first dose for children around 12 months of age. Instead, children should receive two separate shots: one for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), and another for varicella (chickenpox). The combined MMRV vaccine will still be offered for the second dose, given between ages 4 and 6.

A separate vote on whether to end the long-standing recommendation that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine at birth was postponed until Friday, September 19, 2025. The outcome could reshape decades of U.S. vaccine policy.

Separate Shots vs. Combined Shot: What’s the Difference?

The MMRV vaccine is a single shot that protects children against measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox. It was developed to make the vaccination process easier by reducing the number of injections a child needs.

But research has found that when toddlers receive this combined vaccine as their first dose, they face a slightly higher chance of developing febrile seizures which are brief convulsions linked to fever. Because of that risk, CDC advisers have recommended giving two separate shots instead: one for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) and another for chickenpox (varicella).

For the second dose, usually given between ages four and six, the combined vaccine will still be available since the seizure risk is far lower in older children.

ALSO READ: WHO Guidelines On Weight Loss Drugs For Obesity

Hepatitis B Decision Still Pending

Hepatitis B is a virus that can quietly remain in the body for years while damaging the liver. Most adults who contract it recover fully, but the risks are much higher for infants. Around 9 in 10 babies infected go on to develop chronic hepatitis B, which greatly increases the chance of liver damage, cancer, or the need for a transplant later in life. Studies show that about one in four infected children die prematurely from the disease.

To prevent this, the CDC has advised since 1991 that babies receive their first hepatitis B shot within hours of birth. That recommendation has been highly effective, cutting annual infections in newborns from an estimated 18,000 to only about 20 cases today.

Still, the birth dose has been criticised by anti-vaccine groups, who argue it is unnecessary because hepatitis B is most often spread through contaminated needles or sexual contact.

What Parents Should Ask Their Paediatrician

With new vaccine recommendations being discussed, parents may want to talk through a few key points with their child’s doctor.

• Vaccine schedule: Should your child get the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and chickenpox shots separately, or is the combined MMRV vaccine a better choice later on?
• Health risks: If your child has a history of seizures or certain medical conditions, would separate shots be safer?
• Second dose: When is the right time for the booster between ages 4 and 6, and is the combined vaccine suitable at that stage?
• Hepatitis B: What is the current guidance on the birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine, and why is it important?
• Side effects: What mild reactions should you expect after vaccination, and how can they be managed at home?

The World Health Organization (WHO) is moving toward a major policy shift. It is recommending the use of weight-loss drugs to treat obesity in adults. According to its newly released draft guidance, the agency emphasized that obesity should no longer be seen as a mere lifestyle issue but as a “chronic, progressive, and relapsing disease.” This recognition is key, as more than 1 billion people worldwide are affected by obesity, with the condition contributing to millions of preventable deaths each year.

The WHO noted that outdated attitudes have often shaped the response to obesity, leading to stigma and under-treatment. By framing obesity as a chronic disease, the draft guidelines aim to ensure that patients receive proper medical attention rather than being told to simply “eat less and exercise more.”

GLP-1 Drugs Enter the Spotlight

Central to the draft recommendations are the now widely discussed GLP-1 drugs. Originally developed for type 2 diabetes, medications from Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly have shown strong results in supporting long-term weight loss. The WHO’s expert committee concluded that these drugs can be part of the solution, especially for patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or above.

The guidance stresses that the drugs are not meant to replace lifestyle interventions but rather to be used alongside counselling on diet, exercise, and behavior modification. This combination, the agency says, offers the best chance for sustainable weight management.

A First Step Toward Global Standards

For the first time, WHO is recommending these medications specifically for obesity treatment, describing it as a critical step toward building a global standard of care. The draft is open for consultation until September 27, allowing experts and the public to weigh in before final approval.

It also makes clear that further work is underway. Separate guidelines for children and adolescents are being developed, reflecting growing concern over rising obesity rates among younger populations.

Varying Thresholds Across Countries

While WHO’s draft guidance sets the BMI threshold at 30 for treatment, policies in other countries sometimes differ. In the United States, for instance, GLP-1 drugs may be prescribed to patients with a BMI between 27 and 30 if they also suffer from at least one weight-related health condition, such as hypertension or sleep apnea. This variation highlights the ongoing debate over who should qualify for these expensive treatments and at what stage of the disease.

Essential Medicines List: A Missed Inclusion

Earlier this year, WHO stopped short of adding these drugs to its essential medicines list for obesity treatment, which would have signalled their importance as universally accessible therapies. Instead, the organization included them only for type 2 diabetes patients with additional health conditions.

The decision reflects a careful balance: while the drugs are promising, their high cost remains a major barrier. In low- and middle-income countries, access is limited, raising concerns about global equity. WHO acknowledged that pricing remains a significant hurdle and stressed the need for broader affordability if the treatments are to make a real difference worldwide.

If finalized, the guidelines could reshape how obesity is addressed in healthcare systems globally. By formally recommending drug therapy alongside lifestyle interventions, WHO is pushing governments to rethink policies, insurance coverage, and patient access.

The move also signals a broader cultural change, recognizing obesity not as a personal failing but as a complex disease that requires medical solutions. For millions struggling with obesity, this shift could mean new hope, better treatment options, and a future where their condition is taken seriously at every level of care.

Despite affecting 6 million people globally, this disease is considered to be a neglected tropical disease by the World Health Organization. This disease is the Chagas disease, more popularly known as the ‘kissing bug’ disease.

However, health experts have noted that people who contracted the Chagas disease are not getting the help they need. The September report published by the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that although Chagas is considered an endemic in 21 countries of the Americas except United States. However, what does this mean?

The CDC September report explains that US not naming Chagas an endemic, means it's a constant, local issue. This official label is misleading because there's a lot of evidence that the disease is right here in the U.S., too.

The reason why this is a big cause of worry for people is because of how dangerous the disease actually is. A report published in the 2019 Current Tropical Medicine Reports, showed that Chagas disease (CD) is a serious, often overlooked health condition caused by the parasite Trypanosoma cruzi. They explained how it is more disabling than other parasitic infections like malaria and Zika.

The report also detailed how it was considered a leading cause of heart disease in the Americas and affects over 6 million people globally, with more than 90% of cases in Latin America. The disease leads to over 7,500 premature deaths and an annual global economic cost of $8 billion.

How Many States Are Affected With Chagas Disease?

The CDC report explains that the disease is spread by blood-sucking "kissing bugs" which are found in 32 states across the southern U.S. While we don't know for sure if the number of bugs is increasing, we do know that people are encountering them more often.

• 9 out of 11 types of kissing bugs in the U.S. are naturally infected with the parasite that causes Chagas disease.
• Four of these species are commonly found in and around homes, which increases the chance of them spreading the disease to humans.
• Studies show that 30% to over 50% of kissing bugs in the U.S. carry the parasite.

Can Animals Have Chagas Disease?

The parasite isn't just in bugs; it's also common in animals across the southern U.S. Wild animals like raccoons, opossums, and armadillos carry the parasite and can pass it on to kissing bugs. This creates a cycle where the parasite can continue to spread. Dogs are also a major concern.

They've been found with the infection in 23 states, and in Texas, where animal cases were once tracked, hundreds of cases were reported in just a few years. Even zoo animals and research primates have been found to be infected. This shows that the parasite is widespread and well-established in the environment here.

How Many States Have Been Affected By Chagas Disease?

It’s clear that people are getting Chagas disease from local sources in the U.S. The disease has been found in humans in at least 8 states, with the most cases documented in Texas. Since 2013, Texas has reported 50 cases that were likely acquired within the state, not from travel.

The actual number of human cases is probably much higher because Chagas disease is not officially tracked nationwide. Only a handful of states require doctors to report cases, so many go unnoticed and uncounted. The CDC report explains why calling the US "non-endemic" for Chagas disease creates major problems.

• Doctors don't think to test for it. They are often unaware that people can get the disease locally, which leads to missed diagnoses.
• Public awareness is low. People don't know to look out for kissing bugs or the symptoms of the disease.
• It limits funding and research. By not recognizing the problem, the U.S. can't fully work on a national strategy to fight it.

How Does Naming Chagas ‘Endemic’ Help US?

The report says that officially classifying Chagas disease as endemic in the U.S. will help, but it should be specifically labeled as a "hypoendemic" problem, which means it's present at low but consistent levels. This new label would:

• Help doctors better understand the risk and diagnose the disease.
• Increase funding for research and public health programs.
• Allow us to create a plan to track cases and prevent new infections.