The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is recommending COVID-19 shots for infants, young children and children in "high-risk" groups -- diverging for the first time in 30 years from the CDC on childhood vaccine recommendations.
The AAP's new "evidence-based immunization schedule," published in the AAP Red Book Online, recommends COVID-19 vaccination for all children between 6 and 23 months of age "to help protect against serious illness." It also recommends a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine for all children and adolescents 2-18 years old who are in a high-risk group.
The AAP also "recommends the vaccine be available for children ages 2-18 who do not fall into these risk groups, but whose parent or guardian desires them to have the protection of the vaccine."
The groups' updated guidelines also include recommendations for annual flu shots for all children starting at 6 months old, and RSV vaccination for several categories of infants up to 19 months of age.
In May, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced changes to the COVID-19 vaccination recommendations for children and pregnant women. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now recommends "shared clinical decision-making" between parents and providers for healthy children ages 6 months to 17 years.
The agency also changed its guidance on COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women, from recommended to "no guidance."
Last month, the AAP and five other medical organizations sued Kennedy and other public health officials and agencies over this new guidance.
In an X post responding to today's announcement by the AAP, Kennedy called on the AAP to "disclose conflicts of interest, including its corporate entanglements and those of its journal -- Pediatrics -- so that Americans may ask whether the AAP's recommendations reflect public health interest, or are, perhaps, just a pay-to-play scheme to promote commercial ambitions of AAP's Big Pharma benefactors."
Experts: 'No legitimate scientific evidence' supports AAP recommendations
A statement issued today by the AAP included remarks from Dr. Sean O'Leary, chair of the group's Committee on Infectious Diseases, who said the recommendations are based on the latest evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines in kids.
"We extensively reviewed the most recently available data about COVID-19 risks in kids, as well as safety and effectiveness of available COVID-19 vaccines. It's clear they are very safe for all populations," O'Leary said.
Mary Holland, CEO of Children's Health Defense, disagreed. "Where are the inert placebo-controlled clinical trials? Where is the evidence that children are at risk from COVID? What are the real rates of injury and death from these injections? On these essential questions, the AAP is silent," Holland said.
Dr. Lawrence B. Palevsky said the term "evidence-based" is used to "lure the public into believing the AAP bases their recommendations on solid, rigorous scientific information. It's mere word play," Palevsky, a pediatrician, said. "The AAP has no legitimate scientific evidence to back up their claims."
Palevsky added:
"No one should be getting the COVID shot. No child. No adult. No living being. It's not safe. It's not tested. It doesn't prevent infection. There is no upside -- unless you're trying to profit from people's vulnerabilities. There is only downside to taking this shot."
AAP's president, Dr. Susan J. Kressly, told ABC News the group's recommendations are also a response to an "environment of misinformation" about vaccines. O'Leary told The Washington Post that Kennedy has led "a pretty clearly orchestrated strategy to sow distrust in vaccines."
In a statement provided to The Defender, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Press Secretary Emily G. Hilliard questioned the AAP's claims:
"The American people deserve confidence that medical recommendations are based solely on science and public health. Instead, the AAP is undermining national immunization policymaking with baseless political attacks. Secretary Kennedy has stood firm in his commitment to science, transparency, and restoring public trust."
Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, fired back at the AAP's claim that its recommendations are "evidence-based."
"There is and can be no evidence on long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccines on cancer or fertility because they haven't been used long enough," Orient said. "The evidence that AAP needs to show includes all-cause mortality rates in children who do versus those who do not follow their recommendations, as well as rates of allergy, autoimmunity, seizures and neurodevelopment disorders."
The AAP did not respond to a request by The Defender for comment by press time.
AAP 'putting commercial interests ahead of public health'
The AAP, which represents 67,000 pediatricians, is the recipient of substantial funding from Big Pharma, including vaccine makers, and the federal government. Holland said this funding structure represents a conflict of interest.
"With its new vaccine recommendations, the AAP shows its true colors -- to stand with Big Pharma against children," Holland said. "The AAP has become nothing more than the depraved long arm of Big Pharma to market to children."
The CDC's updated COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for children have implications for the availability and cost of the vaccines. According to ABC News, insurance companies and the federal Vaccines for Children Program may choose not to cover the cost of vaccines that the CDC doesn't recommend.
In the AAP's statement, Kressly urged insurers to continue covering all the vaccines included in the organization's updated immunization schedule.
According to HHS, "By bypassing the CDC's advisory process and freelancing its own recommendations, while smearing those who demand accountability, the AAP is putting commercial interests ahead of public health and politics above America's children."
Orient suggested that AAP "disclose all the funding it receives from vaccine makers -- and all the incentives and bonuses pediatric practices receive from insurers and others for having 'fully vaccinated' patients."
Profits -- not evidence -- behind AAP recommendations
Internal medicine physician Dr. Clayton J. Baker said several factors likely led the AAP to issue its new recommendations, "none of which are 'evidence-based' nor based on the best interests of children."
Baker said these factors include a desire to maintain control over pediatric practice, waning relevance in light of new leadership at federal public health agencies and AAP's business model, which "depends largely on government subsidy ... and Big Pharma payoffs."
"All AAP has left is to double down on past failed recommendations in return for Pharma support," Baker said.
After the AAP and five other medical groups sued Kennedy and other public health officials and agencies, the CDC booted the groups from the agency's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices workgroups on vaccine policy.
Last month, the AAP called for an end to religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions for children attending daycare and school in the U.S.
Washington Post acknowledges most children at low risk of COVID
According to the Post, the AAP's new recommendations come amid a decline in COVID-19 vaccine uptake among children.
Citing CDC figures, the Post reported that "3 percent of all eligible children are up-to-date on coronavirus vaccines, as well as 4.5 percent of children between the ages of 6 months and 23 months."
Most children are at low risk from COVID-19, the Post acknowledged.
Experts on all sides of the COVID-19 vaccine debate have questioned whether healthy children need the vaccines at all.
The Associated Press acknowledged the growing concerns about the efficacy and necessity of COVID-19 vaccination for children, reporting that "The idea that healthy older kids may be able to skip COVID-19 boosters has been brewing for some time among public health experts."
COVID-19 vaccine critics point to proven safety risks for children, including increased rates of autoimmune disease and altered immune system response, myocarditis and pericarditis, and inflammation. Several recent studies have questioned the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines for children and teens.
According to a peer-reviewed study published in Pediatric Rheumatology in May, children and adolescents who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine had a 23% higher risk of developing autoimmune disease compared to unvaccinated children.
A study published in the journal Immunity, Inflammation and Disease in April found that young adults who received a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine showed elevated spike protein production a year or more after vaccination -- significantly longer than the spike protein was expected to remain in the body.
Children ages 5-11 who received two doses of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine had heightened levels of a type of antibody suggestive of an altered immune system response one year after vaccination, according to a peer-reviewed study published last year in The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal.