BY VEENA RAO
Atlanta, GA, May 2, 2026: In a strongly worded podcast discussion on the future of vaccine policy in the United States, two leading physicians affiliated with the American Thoracic Society warned that recent federal changes to childhood vaccine recommendations could undermine public trust in immunization and put vulnerable patients at greater risk.
Speaking with host Patti Tripathi on the ATS Breathe Easy podcast, Dr. Tina Hartert, co-chair of the American Thoracic Society’s vaccine initiative, and Dr. Ryan Maves, an infectious disease and critical care physician, discussed a recent federal court ruling that temporarily blocked changes to the nation’s vaccine recommendations for children.
Tripathi opened the conversation by asking Hartert to explain what she described as “a big victory” in a lawsuit brought by medical groups seeking to preserve a science-based vaccine schedule.
Hartert, a professor of medicine and pediatrics at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, said the American Academy of Pediatrics brought the lawsuit against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over the replacement of members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, known as ACIP, and subsequent changes to vaccine recommendations.
“The AAP brought a lawsuit against RFK Jr. for a number of reasons,” Hartert said, citing the replacement of ACIP members and “subsequent changes made by the committee not based on a transparent process or based on data.”
She said the lawsuit alleges that federal health agencies “failed to observe what are required procedures” and acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” in making the new recommendations. Those recommendations were blocked by a federal court, she said.
Tripathi then asked Hartert to expand on a quote she had given to The New York Times, comparing the process to “letting a group of amateur pilots dictate how our airplanes should fly,” with life-and-death stakes.
Hartert said the concern centers on transparency.
“There’s a lack of transparency around selection of individuals who are making these recommendations and a lack of transparency in operations as well as public involvement in making the new vaccine guidelines,” she said.
Tripathi asked Maves whether vaccines affected by the proposed changes remain important for critical care medicine. Maves, a professor of medicine and anesthesiology at Wake Forest University and an attending physician in transplant infectious diseases and critical care, said some of the vaccines under discussion have had a major public health impact.
“One of the big ones are the changes to the hepatitis B vaccine,” he said, noting that hepatitis B among U.S.-born infants has effectively become “a non-existent disease” because of vaccination.
He said comparing U.S. policy with other wealthy countries can be misleading because those countries may have stronger prenatal care and higher rates of hepatitis screening during pregnancy.
“Our national response to this was, let’s just vaccinate all children against hepatitis B, an extraordinarily safe and effective vaccine,” Maves said. “And it’s worked.”
Hartert said the broader concern is that the changes are “chipping away at trust in vaccines overall” and reducing public understanding of why immunization matters.
“When we vaccinate, we’re protecting individuals and we’re protecting populations of patients as well,” she said, adding that the United States cannot simply compare itself with other high-income countries because access to healthcare is uneven.
Maves said the issue is especially urgent for immunocompromised patients, including organ transplant recipients and people with leukemia or lymphoma.
“These are people who depend on those around them to be protected,” he said. “Their response to vaccines are diminished. In some cases, they cannot receive certain vaccines, particularly live virus vaccines. And so they really depend on a highly vaccinated population to keep them safe.”
He cited rubella vaccination as an example of community protection.
“I am vaccinated against rubella so that I do not give a pregnant woman rubella,” he said, noting that congenital rubella can have devastating consequences for newborns. “This is a well-established concept in public health.”
Tripathi also raised concerns about claims linking vaccines to autism, saying some argue that autism “has ballooned” because of an increase in the number of vaccines.
Maves rejected that claim.
“An absurd and unsupported claim,” he said. “And to the extent that there is data, that data is negative.”
He said measles is a reminder of why vaccines matter, noting that after a measles infection, children and adults can suffer a loss of immune memory that leaves them more vulnerable to future infections.
“People forget what measles can do because we haven’t seen them for years,” he said. “Unfortunately, now we’re relearning.”
Maves also reflected on his ICU experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“What I did not have was an ICU full of vaccinated patients on the ventilator,” he said. “I had an ICU full of unvaccinated patients who were critically ill and in very many cases died.”
Tripathi later asked where confused parents should turn, saying many may not know what vaccines their children need for school or what insurance will cover.
Hartert said that confusion is precisely why the American Academy of Pediatrics issued its own vaccine recommendations.
“The new ACIP released were confusing,” she said. “They were confusing to parents, to clinicians, pediatricians, the general public. And second, they were not based on or driven by any new available data.”
She said the AAP guidelines largely mirror prior ACIP recommendations and are meant to provide trusted, data-driven guidance for families and physicians.
Hartert also said the ATS signed an amicus brief in the AAP lawsuit, offering the court specialized expertise on the broader health and social impacts of vaccine-preventable diseases on patients treated by ATS healthcare providers.
Maves said ATS is also part of a broader multi-society effort involving respiratory and critical care organizations, including the American College of Chest Physicians and the Society of Critical Care Medicine, to support science-based vaccine guidance.
Hartert said it is “really unfortunate” that such an effort is necessary, adding that the new ACIP is no longer viewed by ATS and many other professional societies as a trusted body that follows a transparent process.
Both physicians acknowledged declining trust in public health agencies, but Hartert said patients still trust their own doctors and specialists.
“Healthcare providers and particularly specialists are often patients’ most trusted source of information,” she said.
The court ruling is expected to be appealed, and Hartert said she assumes the government plans to appeal the decision.
