University of Maryland panel tackles confusion over shifting vaccine guidance

Maryland experts hold panel on vaccines Monday

Amidst confusion over federal vaccine recommendations, a panel of legal and medical experts in Maryland are meeting Monday to discuss COVID-19 shots and other vaccinations.

BALTIMORE, Md. - The University of Maryland, Baltimore convened a virtual panel of doctors, pharmacists, and legal experts Monday morning to help families make sense of shifting vaccine guidance. 

What we know:

The discussion focused on the outcomes of last week’s federal vaccine advisory meeting, rising hesitancy, and what current vaccination rules actually mean for children and adults.

"It’s an absolutely confusing time," said Dr. Jim Campbell, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at UMB reacting to the mix of federal recommendations and local requirements families now face.

The confusion stems from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which voted to scale back some long-standing recommendations. 

Instead of urging COVID-19 shots for everyone, the panel now says the decision should be made between patients and their doctors. 

ACIP also restricted the use of the combined measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox vaccine in young children, recommending separate doses instead. 

A decision on hepatitis B shots for newborns was delayed, though the panel did recommend universal hepatitis B testing for pregnant women.

What's next:

Health officials warn the changes could have serious ripple effects. 

Pediatricians and public health leaders say the softer stance risks deepening vaccine hesitancy at a time when immunization rates are already slipping. 

Parents are flooding pharmacies and pediatricians with questions about which vaccines are safe and which are required for school, and in some cases facing longer wait times as providers navigate the mixed guidance. 

Insurance coverage is another concern, with experts warning families may face higher out-of-pocket costs if certain vaccines are no longer considered universally recommended.

Critics argue the uncertainty is undermining trust in the very system designed to provide stability. 

Instead of clarity, they say, ACIP’s moves may unintentionally fuel more doubt.