WASHINGTON — After months of steering clear of public discussions about vaccine policy due to political concerns, the Trump administration is shifting its approach.
From the Oval Office on Monday, President Trump announced a new executive order. Alongside top health officials, he introduced a revised and skeptical stance on vaccines, making significant claims without presenting evidence to back this new federal strategy.
“That’s a big one in my book,” Trump remarked after signing the order.
The executive order outlines vaccines recommended for all children, those at high risk of infection, or in consultation with a clinician. This marks a departure from the typical public, scientist-driven process of setting federal immunization policies. The new “Gold Standard Childhood Vaccine Recommendations” were crafted with input from the president’s advisers, drawing comparisons with systems in other countries. (The White House did not respond to inquiries about this approach or who advised the president on the order.)
The order suggests reducing the number of vaccines for children from 18 to 11 and extending the schedule over a longer period. However, the administration has not provided any immunological evidence to justify this change.
Heidi Overton, a health policy adviser at the White House, indicated that the order was a response to a court halting previous vaccine policy changes.
A White House official stated in a call with reporters that the new policy adheres to previous court orders and is expected to withstand future challenges because the president is entitled to recommend what he views as the best scientific and vaccination standards.
The order also proposes separating the MMR vaccine, which protects against measles, mumps, and rubella, into three individual vaccines. Experts argue this change would require years of work and investment and is not supported by evidence.
Despite asserting without evidence that the combined MMR vaccine could be “quite lethal,” President Trump later retracted, acknowledging the lack of evidence but citing hearsay. Overton later clarified that the administration still recommends the shot for all children.
When asked about the president’s proposal to divide the MMR vaccine, a White House official referenced a review by two advisers chosen by Kennedy. However, this review endorses the vaccine and does not discuss splitting it into separate shots.
While Trump stated he does not know what causes the increase in autism rates, he linked the vaccine order to efforts to comprehend and halt the disorder’s rise.
Trump assured parents that they could still vaccinate their children if desired and that insurance would cover the shots.
Numerous health experts and at least one Republican lawmaker criticized the new order, citing a lack of evidence to support the amendments.
“This executive order is wrong,” stated Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), chair of the Senate’s health panel, in a social media post. “The President does not have the expertise to make these changes.”
Cassidy had previously indicated he could hold the administration accountable after confirming two new health officials.
The president has instructed the federal health department’s Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines to produce a report on the evidence behind the order’s assertions, such as the splitting of the MMR vaccine, and on implementing the White House directive.
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. noted that the agency had already embarked on “unprecedented” vaccine research efforts.
The order might not necessarily lead to changes in vaccination practices on a national scale. Hospitals and doctors have previously disregarded Trump administration vaccine recommendations, citing the lack of evidence behind policy changes.
This move is the latest in a series of actions by the administration to focus on concerns about current vaccination practices, even when they contradict established medical guidance.
Earlier this month, Kennedy publicly criticized vaccine and public health policies during a CNN interview. Shortly before this, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump was advocating for further actions on vaccines. In May, Trump signed an executive order urging federal health agencies to continue adjusting the nation’s vaccine framework.
Initially, the Trump administration was hesitant to publicly promote its vaccine policy changes. A Trump pollster had indicated that “vaccine skepticism is bad politics,” prompting the administration to focus on health care affordability over the extensive changes being made to federal vaccine regulations. At that time, a White House official claimed the administration was “done” with vaccine work.
Now, officials suggest that the situation is evolving.
Asked about the shift, Calley Means, a senior adviser at HHS, responded in a text message: “Gloves are off.”
If successful, this shift could significantly impact the health of Americans, especially children, by altering vaccination practices nationwide. The administration is considering policies that could disrupt the vaccine market, although the most extreme proposals have not yet been formalized into federal policy.
Kennedy has long been a critic of vaccinations, spreading debunked theories about vaccines and advising parents against vaccinating their children. Trump has also previously expressed doubts about vaccine safety. (Scientists and doctors consistently use extensive evidence to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of vaccines during their approval process.)
Kennedy spearheaded the Make America Healthy Again movement, partially composed of other vaccine skeptics, many of whom were worried about the administration’s public avoidance of the issue. This shift could be seen as a victory for MAHA leaders who have worked to garner support within the administration to address the issue directly. Trump specifically thanked “MAHA moms” when introducing the order on Monday.
This shift poses a potential challenge for Erica Schwartz, the incoming CDC director.
During her Senate confirmation hearing last month, Schwartz promised lawmakers she would “follow the science,” but did not directly address whether she would oppose administration leaders if necessary.
This story has been updated with additional information on the White House’s plans.
