COVID-19 Vaccine Recommendations Spark Confusion and Trust Concerns, Experts Warn

This interview was recorded on June 4, 2025, at 11:00 am.

Lauren Angelo, PharmD, MBA, associate dean of academic affairs at Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, highlights significant concerns about the evolving landscape of COVID-19 vaccine policy, particularly focusing on the complex challenges surrounding vaccine access, recommendations, and public perception. Insurance coverage and vaccine recommendations have become increasingly complicated, with potential misalignments between CDC immunization schedules, media messaging, and actual health care guidelines. She emphasizes that health care disparities remain a critical issue, noting that even during the pandemic, when vaccines were free and government-supported, under-resourced communities struggled with vaccine access. Particularly for high-risk groups like pregnant individuals, vaccination remains crucial for protecting against severe disease and hospitalization.

The potential consequences of recent policy changes are particularly worrying. Angelo predicts a possible increase in vaccine hesitancy, driven by 3 key factors: convenience, complacency, and confidence. The rapid and seemingly arbitrary changes in recommendations could undermine public trust in the health care system. Vaccine hesitancy may be further exacerbated by confusion around who should receive vaccines and inconsistent messaging from various sources.

Looking forward, She recommends attending or following the upcoming Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meeting from June 25 to 27, 2025, which will discuss COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. This meeting represents an opportunity to gain clarity on future vaccination strategies and respiratory season preparedness. She also expresses a deep concern about deviating from the previously established, evidence-based approach to vaccine recommendations. The traditional process, which involved careful review by the FDA, ACP, and CDC director, ensured safety and cost-effectiveness. Recent recommendations made by a few appointed individuals appear to break from this scientific methodology, potentially setting a dangerous precedent for future vaccine policy decisions.

"Prior to these changes announced over the past couple of weeks, we've had a fairly good system complete with checks and balances for vaccine recommendations in the United States. Recommendations have been evidence-based with a great deal of focus on safety and cost-effectiveness," Angelo said. "The recent COVID-19 vaccine recommendations made by a few appointed individuals were a complete deviation from the science-based approach. I am concerned that a potentially unsafe and irresponsible precedent may have been set."