CNN Anchor Stunned as CDC Vaccine Advisor Warns Newborn Jabs Rollback ‘Wasn’t Based on Data’

CNN anchor Pamela Brown was left asking how Americans could “trust” the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) after a sitting vaccine advisor’s stunning revelation Monday that the vote to rollback hepatitis B shots for newborns “wasn’t based on data” but “speculation.”

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voted 8–3 on Friday to advise that babies receive the vaccine at birth only if their mothers test positive for the virus, or if their status is unknown. For infants born to hepatitis B-negative mothers, the panel said vaccination should be discussed with a physician rather than automatically administered.

If endorsed by the CDC’s acting director, the move would mark a significant shift away from a 30-year universal birth-dose policy, which has bee credited with sharply reducing liver disease linked to the virus.

Dr. Joe Hibbeln, who sits on the advisory committee, appeared on CNN’s The Situation Room on Monday where he was asked about the vote by Brown.

After a lengthy preamble in which he credited Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other panelists for fostering a space where advisors could freely share their opinions, and adding that these opinions were his own, he offered the stunning revelation that despite his repeated demands no data was presented to qualify the hepatitis B jab policy change.

Hibbeln explained that the committee agreed to make “decisions by data” and a three month delay to the vote was to allow a working group to find data that illustrated the “harms of the vaccines” before any move to change policy.

“We took three months for the committee, the working group, to find data, and none was found and none was expressed,” he said.

He continued: “Right before the committee meeting, I sent out one final note to everyone asking, ‘Well, where’s the data of harm?’ And no one presented any data of harm, and I asked for data of harm repeatedly through the committee. And if we’re going to make our decisions based on data, I want to see the data. And I repeatedly asked for it. And no data of harm was presented.”

“There were speculations: ‘Oh, we need to have future studies of hundreds of thousands of people, and we have to examine the possibility of an unknown.’ Well, to me, that’s speculation. And that’s not data,” he added.

Stunned, Brown pressed: “So, do you think the decision was based on speculation then?”

“Well, it certainly wasn’t based on data which I repeatedly asked for,” Hibbeln replied.

The anchor asked whether the doctor was “concerned” and feared losing his job, which he said he didn’t, before she rounded on whether Americans could “trust” the committee given what he’d just revealed.

“But how should the American people trust the committee and its decisions? If, as you say, the decisions aren’t being made on data and I know that’s your own independent opinion, as you made very clear, but how are Americans supposed to trust these recommendations?” Brown asked.

Hibbeln replied saying that moving forward the committee must “explicitly embrace” a common internationally used scientific framework but did not address Brown’s question.

Watch above via CNN.