Major Revamp Of US Childhood Vaccine Schedule Under RFK Jr.’s Leadership: Here’s What To Know

The presidential memo, issued December 5, 2025, cited countries like Denmark, Japan, and Germany as examples. All of these include fewer diseases in their childhood immunization schedules than the 18 that were previously covered in the US. 

“President Trump directed us to examine how other developed nations protect their children and to take action if they are doing better,” said Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in a statement.

An assessment was carried out, involving 20 “peer, developed nations”. The result is a new schedule for immunizations, which now only includes 11 diseases. It’s the biggest change to vaccine policy yet under Kennedy’s leadership of the department, and experts are warning that such a departure from the previous recommendations will heighten confusion and mistrust around vaccines.

Vaccine schedule changes explained

“The CDC will continue to recommend that all children are vaccinated against diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis (whooping cough), Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), Pneumococcal conjugate, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, and human papillomavirus (HPV), for which there is international consensus, as well as varicella (chickenpox),” reads an HHS fact sheet on the changes. 

While HPV vaccines are still recommended for all, the schedule has changed. Kids used to receive two doses of this vaccine, but this has been decreased to just one, around the age of 11. 

“Recent scientific studies have shown that one dose of the HPV vaccine is as effective as two doses. The CDC is following the lead of several peer nations by recommending one instead of two doses of this vaccine,” says HHS. An example of a “peer nation” is the UK, which moved to a single-dose schedule for under-25s in 2023. 

The following vaccines were previously recommended for all children, but no longer are:

• Hepatitis B – two doses
• Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)
• Rotavirus – two doses
• Hepatitis A – two doses
• Meningococcal disease – two doses
• Flu – two doses at 6 months, then annual

Earlier in 2025, changes were made to the recommendations around COVID-19 vaccines, so these are also no longer routinely recommended as annual vaccines for all children over 6 months of age. 

For RSV, hepatitis A and B, meningococcal disease, and also dengue, the CDC now says these are recommended for “certain high-risk groups or populations”, with further details on its website. 

“Shared clinical decision-making”: what does it mean?

There’s also a third category: “immunizations based on shared clinical decision-making”. This covers the rotavirus, COVID, and flu vaccines, as well as hepatitis A and B and meningococcal disease in children without other health concerns or risk factors.

What this means is that for otherwise healthy children, parents and health care providers may decide together whether getting these vaccines is right for them. In practice, though, this language and the broader policy changes are causing confusion.

Surveys in August and December 2025, from the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) at the University of Pennsylvania, asked representative samples of US adults about their understanding of the term “shared decision-making” and what constitutes a “health care provider” in this context.

The results showed that respondents had some misconceptions about the intention behind shared decision-making. More than one in 10 weren’t sure what it meant at all; around a quarter believed it involved discussing vaccination choices with family; and more than two in five said it was up to an individual whether or not to discuss vaccines with a health care provider.

The ACIP – the committee that advises the CDC on vaccines – actually states that shared decision-making should always be a conversation between patients and medical staff, but it’s clear from these surveys that that message is not always getting through.

There’s also some disagreement over what constitutes a health care worker, with only a third of respondents recognizing that a pharmacist can be an appropriate person to discuss vaccine decisions with.

“Expecting parents to engage in shared decision-making with health care providers about routine, thoroughly studied childhood vaccinations suggests that the public health community has doubts about the safety and efficacy of these vaccines when it does not,” commented Patrick E. Jamieson, director of the APPC Annenberg Health and Risk Communication Institute.

“These vaccines have been part of the recommended childhood schedule because the benefits of taking them substantially outweigh the risks.”

Sowing doubt

This sentiment has been echoed by other commentators giving their view on the vaccine schedule changes.

“Stealth announcements of seismic changes in vaccine policy should include experts in pediatrics, infectious diseases and immunology. These are lacking, as is scientific process and a review of the data,” Dr Demetre Daskalakis, one-time vaccine policy lead at the CDC, told the New York Times.

It’s not the first time that scientific experts feel they’ve been left out of the conversation on vaccine policy. Last year, the CDC quietly updated its website to state that “the claim ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim” – against all scientific consensus.

The removal of the recommendation for COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy actually sparked a lawsuit from leading medical organizations and an unnamed physician who called the decision “baseless and uninformed”.

Secretary Kennedy called last year for all new vaccines to be placebo tested, prompting an outcry from scientists explaining why this cannot – and should not – always be the case.

In fact, some experts felt the threat of vaccine misinformation from the federal government was sufficiently great that it prompted them to launch the Vaccine Integrity Project to fight back with evidence-based information.

Just days ago, Canadian officials spoke out publicly to warn that US health institutions are no longer a reliable source of information, amid fears of increasing vaccine hesitancy in the country. 

Kennedy has made no secret of his skepticism about vaccines. Other HHS appointees within this administration have expressed similar views – such as National Institutes of Health director Jay Bhattacharya, who has publicly denounced mRNA vaccines in particular.

The constant buzz around vaccine safety – often based on unfounded claims and misinformation – is leading in one direction, according to many scientists: more children catching preventable diseases.

“Already, parents are worried about what they are hearing in the news about safety of vaccines, and this will increase confusion and decrease vaccine uptake,” physician Dr Helen Chu, ousted member of the ACIP, told the New York Times.