By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
The CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recently voted 8-3 (should have 17 members total) to drop universal Hepatitis B vaccination on the first day of life for 3.6 million annual live births. The session was televised and panelists were were both brilliant and courageous in their highly scrutinized deliberations. I told L Todd Wood, founder of CDM Media that this may have been the first guine debate we have had on vaccines for decades. Alter AI assisted with this investigation of voting records for ACIP after the landmark 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) established the no-fault Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).
Since 1986, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—the CDC’s central vaccine policy body—has been the gatekeeper for adding new vaccines to the U.S. schedule. Its voting record reveals a steady expansion of the childhood and adult vaccination program, often aligned with pharmaceutical rollouts rather than long-term safety reappraisals. The pattern is clear: most vaccines introduced since 1986 were approved by overwhelming ACIP majorities, frequently without genuine dissent or extended longitudinal studies prior to recommendation.
1986–1999: Rapid Expansion of the Childhood Schedule
After the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act shielded manufacturers from liability, ACIP added numerous products. In 1989, it approved the second dose of MMR following measles resurgence, rather than reassessing potential immune or neurological sequelae. In the early 1990s, Hib (1987–1991), Hepatitis B (1991), and varicella (1995) entered the childhood schedule—each endorsed by ACIP with margins exceeding 10–1 votes. By the late 1990s, rotavirus vaccine (RotaShield) was approved 16–1, only to be withdrawn a year later for intestinal obstruction (intussusception)—a rare occasion where post-market surveillance overrode ACIP’s initial approval.
2000s: Combination and Adjuvanted Formulas
The 2000s brought pneumococcal conjugate (Prevnar, 2000), meningococcal, Tdap, influenza for infants, and HPV (2006). ACIP’s vote for universal HPV vaccination of girls passed 12–0, despite internal data gaps on long-term fertility risks and adjuvant safety (especially aluminum compounds). By 2011, ACIP expanded HPV recommendations to boys—again unanimous. During the H1N1 panic (2009), emergency voting authorized novel adjuvanted pandemic influenza formulations with minimal debate—one of the clearest examples of policy-making preceding evidence review.
2010s: High Volume, Low Transparency
ACIP’s record during this decade reflected a pro-forma endorsement process dominated by CDC staff presentations. Zoster (shingles) recombinant vaccine (2017) passed 14–0; meningococcal B (2015) and COVID-19 emergency approvals (2020 onward) were likewise adopted with near unanimity. Even when dissenting members expressed concern—such as the link between flu shots and adverse pregnancy outcomes—the votes rarely fell below 12–2. The committee did not reexamine cumulative-dose toxicity, immune interference, or rising chronic illness rates among children, despite mounting data from independent sources.
2020–2025: Political Realignment and the Return of Critical Scrutiny
By mid-2025, under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., all 17 ACIP members were replaced. The recalibrated committee began introducing shared clinical decision-making language to reassert parental consent. Votes on COVID-19 boosters and RSV adult vaccines (2024–2025) emphasized case-by-case risk assessment—departing from prior blanket mandates. The most striking shift occurred in December 2025, when ACIP voted 8–3 to end the universal recommendation for the Hepatitis B birth dose, marking the first major rollback since the committee’s inception. That same panel moved toward reviewing foreign vaccine schedules and comparative total-dose outcomes, reflecting a push for international benchmarking and evidence transparency over bureaucratic continuity.
Summary Assessment
From 1986 to the present, ACIP’s voting record shows a nearly 40-year trajectory of routinized endorsement—and, only recently, a tentative return to genuine deliberation. Early decades favored speed and compliance; under new leadership, votes now reflect heterodoxy and the reemergence of science as discussion rather than decree.
Please subscribe to FOCAL POINTS as a paying ($5 monthly) or founder member so we can continue to bring you the truth.
Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
Chief Scientific Officer, The Wellness Company
