David 
by Linda Boyle
Get your score cards out! We are looking at the courts making decisions that used to be made by the Federal government through Health and Human Services (HHS). Let’s start with the Cliff Notes summary:
- In August 2025, two Children’s Health Defense (CHD.org) doctors sued the CDC for its robust vaccine schedule due to the lack of gold standard testing. Remember, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now Secretary HHS, was once the CEO of CHD.
- The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) broke with the CDC over Covid jab recommendations—it wanted the schedule to return to the recommendation that everyone should get the Covid-19 jab. Five other medical groups joined AAP in its lawsuit.
- In November 2025, the same medical groups (AAP et al) amended the above lawsuit to include a complaint that current members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) should all be replaced as these members “lack the credentials and experience required of their role and that the group’s votes should be declared null and void”. https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/33682/Updated-AAP-lawsuit-seeks-to-replace-ACIP-members?autologincheck=redirected. Not only do they want the ACIP members replaced, but these groups want the ACIP to be reformulated under court supervision.
- The government sought to have the case dismissed, but on January 6th a federal judge allowed the case to proceed.
- Twenty other medical organizations also filed a court brief supporting the AAP-led lawsuit. These included the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).
- Just recently, the AAP along with five other medical groups are asking the court to block the new childhood vaccination schedule. Again, citing the reason that the current ACIP members aren’t experts in infectious disease, and they are ignoring what AAP considers to be evidenced-based medicine.
- Additionally, these medical groups also asked the court to prevent the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel from holding its February 2026 meeting.
- Since the CDC’s January 5, 2026 announcement, 19 states have said they won’t follow the new CDC schedule and will follow AAP’s recommendations: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin with current legislation being proposed in Alaska (HB238).
You may ask, “Why is this important and what impact will it have on my children?”. It’s because states have the power to decide which shots children must have to enter public school. If your child doesn’t have the mandated shots, they may not go to school unless they have a documented medical or religious exemption.
Yes, the lawsuits are flying. Somehow the groups who previously found the CDC to be the Holy Grail for immunizations have turned against its recent decisions. Many states have followed suit with their public health departments continuing to recommend the old schedule supported by the AAP.
In Alaska, House Bill 238 introduced by Representative Andrew Gray (D, Anchorage) and supported by Senator Cathy Geisel (Rino, Anchorage), would do away with following CDC guidance and defer instead to the AAP to make decisions for Alaskans as to which shots your child should get. https://thealaskastory.com/democrat-bill-would-lock-alaskas-child-immunization-policy-to-pediatric-lobby-bypassing-federal-guidance/
Additionally, Senator Murkowski pushed back against changes to the CDC hepatitis B recommendations citing the high incidence of hepatitis B in the Alaska Native population. https://thealaskastory.com/murkowski-pushes-back-against-cdcs-end-of-hepatitis-b-vaccine-mandate-for-infants/
Just what did the current members of the ACIP decide about jabs that is causing such angst?
CDC still recommends Covid jab for those over 65 and those of high risk. It then recommends others make the decision to get the jab based on shared decision making where the provider and the individual have a discussion, discuss the pros and cons, and then make a decision based on that discussion. This is especially important for parents of children 6 months to 17 years old who have no significant risk.
For the hepatitis B jab, the CDC does not recommend that the shot should be given if the mother is hepatitis B negative before delivery. However, if the mother is in a high-risk group, it is then recommended. Senator Murkowski’s concern for the Native population which has a higher incidence of hepatitis would fit the high-risk group for the shot.
But giving the hepatitis B shot to every Alaskan infant when the mother is not in a high-risk group seems to be overkill. Let’s protect those infants that are in that high-risk group—in families where there is IV drug use or multiple sex partners. It is a contagious disease passed to others through infected blood or semen.
After reviewing fellow Western countries immunization policies, the CDC concurred with the Denmark’s decreased childhood immunizations and now recommends 11 vaccines instead of 17 which is 22-23 actual shots instead of the former 74 shots by the age 18.
Big Pharma surely will not like this recommendation. But parents should.
Once the “leader” of the number of immunizations our children had to endure, the U.S. is now on the lower end of number of shots required.
If you want your child to get more than 72 shots by age 18, can you still get them? Yes, through shared decision making with your doctor. You have a choice.
Will insurance still pay for all these shots? Yes, insurance companies will pay for all these shots with one possible exception. HPV (human papilloma virus) was previously recommended for two to three shots and is now only recommended for one.
As the court battle continues with each side stating they are following the science, parents are caught in the middle. Steve Kirsch, who has a Master’s degree in electrical engineering and computer science, just sent a proposal (attached) to the AAP CEO inviting that organization to jointly fund an independent analysis of existing public record vaccine data using transparent methods. Kirsch proposes groups from both sides be involved in the research so that the conclusions, whatever they are, could put this issue to rest. https://kirschsubstack.com/p/an-open-proposal-to-the-ceo-of-the?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=548354&post_id=184819917&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=adsuh&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
How wonderful that would be for our children if that could happen. However, I am skeptical that it will. There is too much money invested by Big Pharma and these medical groups to maintain their cash flow and keep the status quo.
Could it be these medical associations are in bed with Big Pharma? Mary Holland, the CEO of CHD, stated these groups “feed at Big Pharma‘s trough” and “understandably oppose the change that will dismantle it.” That could be the reason AAP is also pro gender ID and gender transition via puberty blockers for our vulnerable children.
Apparently, these medical associations believe the decision on childhood vaccines should be left to the courts and state legislatures and not to parents and their doctors.
