Dr. Marty Makary

You know, I think a lot of people are appropriately asking that question. And a lot of people are saying no hepatitis B shot at birth in the delivery, you know, on the day of delivery for my child. Because it is, it's spread by a sexually transmitted or a bloodborne occupational hazard. I mean, what's the baby going to do, like step on a hepatitis B needle while they're in the hospital?

You know, I think a lot of people are appropriately asking that question. And a lot of people are saying no hepatitis B shot at birth in the delivery, you know, on the day of delivery for my child. Because it is, it's spread by a sexually transmitted or a bloodborne occupational hazard. I mean, what's the baby going to do, like step on a hepatitis B needle while they're in the hospital?

You know, I think a lot of people are appropriately asking that question. And a lot of people are saying no hepatitis B shot at birth in the delivery, you know, on the day of delivery for my child. Because it is, it's spread by a sexually transmitted or a bloodborne occupational hazard. I mean, what's the baby going to do, like step on a hepatitis B needle while they're in the hospital?

So a lot of people appropriately say this doesn't make sense. And so, you know, I think the CDC is taking a look at all of that. I think you have to respect the questions people are asking. You can't blow them off. The most dangerous thing you can do in medicine is to put out something with such absolutism when the data is very flimsy to support it.

So a lot of people appropriately say this doesn't make sense. And so, you know, I think the CDC is taking a look at all of that. I think you have to respect the questions people are asking. You can't blow them off. The most dangerous thing you can do in medicine is to put out something with such absolutism when the data is very flimsy to support it.

So a lot of people appropriately say this doesn't make sense. And so, you know, I think the CDC is taking a look at all of that. I think you have to respect the questions people are asking. You can't blow them off. The most dangerous thing you can do in medicine is to put out something with such absolutism when the data is very flimsy to support it.

Now, they might say, we're never going to see the kid again, so this is our chance to get them immunized. Well, these are human beings. They're not aliens or wild animals that you've captured and you get to poke and prod them. We have to do things based on good evidence, and the evidence to support doing it at birth is really not there. Other countries don't do it at birth.

Now, they might say, we're never going to see the kid again, so this is our chance to get them immunized. Well, these are human beings. They're not aliens or wild animals that you've captured and you get to poke and prod them. We have to do things based on good evidence, and the evidence to support doing it at birth is really not there. Other countries don't do it at birth.

Now, they might say, we're never going to see the kid again, so this is our chance to get them immunized. Well, these are human beings. They're not aliens or wild animals that you've captured and you get to poke and prod them. We have to do things based on good evidence, and the evidence to support doing it at birth is really not there. Other countries don't do it at birth.

85% of healthcare workers did not get the COVID booster last season. Yes. What does that tell you?

85% of healthcare workers did not get the COVID booster last season. Yes. What does that tell you?

85% of healthcare workers did not get the COVID booster last season. Yes. What does that tell you?

That's what they're saying. It's always the same couple doctors that these news outlets are citing. It's their go-to people. These are the same folks that misled us during COVID. And so – No, look, I think we've got to rebuild public trust. The way you do that is being incredibly honest. We're being very transparent with everything we're doing at the FDA.

That's what they're saying. It's always the same couple doctors that these news outlets are citing. It's their go-to people. These are the same folks that misled us during COVID. And so – No, look, I think we've got to rebuild public trust. The way you do that is being incredibly honest. We're being very transparent with everything we're doing at the FDA.

That's what they're saying. It's always the same couple doctors that these news outlets are citing. It's their go-to people. These are the same folks that misled us during COVID. And so – No, look, I think we've got to rebuild public trust. The way you do that is being incredibly honest. We're being very transparent with everything we're doing at the FDA.

Dr. Vinay Prasad and I just published in the New England Journal of Medicine last week our framework of how we see COVID vaccine regulation, basically saying we've got to get back to both gold standard science and common sense. We've got to be practical. It's been four years since we've had randomized trials in humans that showed an efficacy. It was a very different virus then. It was

Dr. Vinay Prasad and I just published in the New England Journal of Medicine last week our framework of how we see COVID vaccine regulation, basically saying we've got to get back to both gold standard science and common sense. We've got to be practical. It's been four years since we've had randomized trials in humans that showed an efficacy. It was a very different virus then. It was

Dr. Vinay Prasad and I just published in the New England Journal of Medicine last week our framework of how we see COVID vaccine regulation, basically saying we've got to get back to both gold standard science and common sense. We've got to be practical. It's been four years since we've had randomized trials in humans that showed an efficacy. It was a very different virus then. It was

a better match with the circulating virus. There was low natural immunity in the population. And we learned that some of that effect was transient. That is, your baseline risk came back to almost the baseline level after a transient period. We cannot be blind. We have to use a scientific approach. And we do that for every other drug at the FDA, right?

a better match with the circulating virus. There was low natural immunity in the population. And we learned that some of that effect was transient. That is, your baseline risk came back to almost the baseline level after a transient period. We cannot be blind. We have to use a scientific approach. And we do that for every other drug at the FDA, right?