Connect with us

Business

RFK Jr.’s vaccine panel postpones vote on whether to delay babies’ first hepatitis B shot

Published

on

RFK Jr.’s vaccine panel postpones vote on whether to delay babies’ first hepatitis B shot


Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s hand-picked vaccine panel on Friday postponed a vote on whether to delay the first dose of the hepatitis B shot from birth to at least one month for most babies born in the U.S.

The decision means that the committee’s current recommendation – that all infants receive a hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth – will stay in place until the group meets again at a later date. It’s unclear when the panel, called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, will convene again to discuss the hepatitis B shot.

ACIP was considering whether to delay the first dose of the vaccine until at least one month of age for babies of women who test negative for hepatitis B. That would change a safe and highly effective birth dose recommendation that was introduced in 1991 and is credited with virtually eliminating the disease in young kids. 

Some advisors defended the birth dose recommendation during the meeting, saying that delaying it could introduce potential risks to babies, including more infections. But others, particularly those who are known vaccine critics, cast doubt on the safety of administering the vaccine to babies so soon.

Dr. Robert Malone, who gained notoriety for promoting Covid misinformation, brought the motion to postpone the vote.

“I believe that there’s enough ambiguity here and enough remaining discussion about safety, effectiveness and timing that I believe that a vote today would be premature,” Malone said.

All 12 members supported the motion. Dr. Cody Meissner, a professor of pediatrics at the Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, said, “I don’t think there’s any question whatsoever that the benefit [of the birth dose] far outweighs any adverse side effects.”

The postponed vote only affects the timing of the first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine series. The second would still be given one-to-two months after birth, with a third dose between six and 18 months of age. 

Also on Friday, the group voted to recommend hepatitis B testing for all pregnant women. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, whose most recent director was ousted by the Trump administration, has to sign off on the committee’s new and future recommendations.

The panel’s closely watched two-day meeting in Atlanta comes after Kennedy gutted the committee and appointed 12 new members, including some well-known vaccine critics. ACIP sets recommendations on who should receive certain shots and which vaccines insurers must cover at no cost, raising concerns among health experts that Kennedy’s reshaped panel could curb access to safe and effective immunizations.

The hepatitis B shot has been a life-saving public health intervention against the disease, which can lead to severe health problems, including liver cancer and failure, and death. Acute hepatitis B infections reported among children and teens dropped by 99% between 1990 and 2019, some studies said. The American Academy of Pediatrics says that the so-called birth dose is critical to reduce chronic hepatitis B later in life. 

On Thursday, advisors and other scientific experts clashed over the safety of the birth dose.

“I believe that this vaccine is absolutely critical for babies that are treated,” said member Retsef Levi, who has been vocal about his opposition to RNA vaccines. “But this notion that we sit here with very lousy evidence and argue there is no problem whatsoever [with administering the shot at birth] is not building trust, and it’s not scientific and it’s not what the public here should expect from us.”

But Meissner said that changing the recommendation will “increase the risk of harm based on no evidence of benefit.” He said there will be fewer children who get the full hepatitis B vaccine series, adding that administering the shot at birth in the hospital ensures that babies at least receive their first dose.

“As people have asked, why would we pick one month? Why two? There’s no evidence that it’s safer at a later time,” Meissner said. “It’s an extremely safe vaccine, a very pure vaccine. So I think we will be creating new doubts in the minds of the public that are not justified.”

Ahead of the vote, the American Medical Association strongly urged the panel to keep the birth dose recommendation in place. Other experts outside of the panel also expressed concern about changing the guidance.

“I have not seen any data that says that there is benefit to the infant of waiting a month but there are a number of potential harms to the incident of waiting a month,” said Dr. Adam Langer, a CDC epidemiologist who gave a presentation on the hepatitis B birth dose, ahead of the vote.

During his presentation, Langer said, “the sooner that the hepatitis B vaccine is provided after birth, the greater its effectiveness in preventing perinatal transmission.” That refers to when an infant becomes infected from its mother during birth.

Merck, which manufactures one of the vaccines used starting at birth, pushed back on the proposed recommendation ahead of the panel’s official vote on Thursday. 

“The reconsideration of the newborn Hepatitis B vaccination on the established schedule poses a grave risk to the health of children and to the public, which could lead to a resurgence of preventable infectious diseases,” Dr. Richard Haupt, Merck’s head of global medical and scientific affairs for vaccines and infectious diseases, said during the meeting. 

GSK manufactures another hepatitis B shot starting at birth.



Source link

Business

Piyush Goyal Dismisses Rahul Gandhi’s Farmer Meet Video, Rebuts ‘Fake Narrative’ On India-US Trade Deal

Published

on

Piyush Goyal Dismisses Rahul Gandhi’s Farmer Meet Video, Rebuts ‘Fake Narrative’ On India-US Trade Deal


Last Updated:

The minister offered a detailed reality check to counter what he termed ‘Rahul ji’s fakery’

Goyal reiterated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s policies are intrinsically linked to farmer welfare. (File Photo: PTI)

Goyal reiterated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s policies are intrinsically linked to farmer welfare. (File Photo: PTI)

Union Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal has accused Congress leader Rahul Gandhi of orchestrating a “fake narrative” aimed at provoking India’s farming community. Responding to a video released on social media by the Leader of the Opposition on Friday, Goyal dismissed the interaction as a stage-managed performance featuring Congress activists masquerading as genuine farmer leaders. He asserted that the dialogue followed a predetermined script designed to mislead the public regarding the safeguards in the recent India-US trade deal.

Rahul Gandhi has alleged that “any trade deal that takes away the livelihood of farmers or weakens the food security of the country is anti-farmer”. He was pointing to the recently concluded India-US framework agreement for bilateral trade, which is expected to be signed after tweaks by the end of March.

Piyush Goyal offered a detailed reality check to counter what he termed “Rahul ji’s fakery”, placing on record that the Narendra Modi government has fully protected the interests of annadatas, fishermen, MSMEs, and artisans. The minister categorically clarified that sensitive crops like soyameal and maize have been granted no concessions whatsoever in the agreement, ensuring that domestic farmers remain shielded from competitive pressure. He criticised the opposition for repeating “baseless allegations” in an attempt to instill unnecessary fear among the rural population.

Addressing specific claims regarding apple and walnut imports, the minister provided a technical breakdown of the protectionist measures in place. He noted that while India already imports approximately 550,000 tonnes of apples annually due to high domestic demand, the new US deal does not allow unlimited entry. Instead, a strict quota has been established, far below current import levels, and subject to a Minimum Import Price (MIP) of Rs 80 per kg. With an additional duty of Rs 25, the landed cost of US apples will be roughly Rs 105 per kg—significantly higher than the current average landed cost of Rs 75 per kg from other nations—thereby ensuring Indian growers are not undercut. Similarly, for walnuts, the US has been offered a modest quota of 13,000 metric tonnes against India’s total annual import requirement of 60,000 metric tonnes, making it impossible for the deal to harm local producers.

Goyal also took a swipe at the historical record of the Congress party, pointing out the irony of its current stance. He reminded the public that during the Congress-led UPA era, India imported nearly $20 billion worth of agricultural products, including dairy items, which the current administration has strictly excluded from the US pact. He challenged Rahul Gandhi to explain his “betrayal of farmers” and questioned how much longer the opposition intended to peddle fabricated stories.

Concluding with the slogan “Kisan Surakshit Desh Viksit”, Goyal reiterated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s policies are intrinsically linked to farmer welfare. He maintained that the India-US agreement is a balanced framework that opens new markets for Indian exports like basmati rice and spices while keeping the nation’s agricultural backbone secure.

News politics Piyush Goyal Dismisses Rahul Gandhi’s Farmer Meet Video, Rebuts ‘Fake Narrative’ On India-US Trade Deal
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users’ views, not News18’s. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Read More



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

AI disruption could spark a ‘shock to the system’ in credit markets, UBS analyst says

Published

on

AI disruption could spark a ‘shock to the system’ in credit markets, UBS analyst says


Mesh Cube | Istock | Getty Images

The stock market has been quick to punish software firms and other perceived losers from the artificial intelligence boom in recent weeks, but credit markets are likely to be the next place where AI disruption risk shows up, according to UBS analyst Matthew Mish.

Tens of billions of dollars in corporate loans are likely to default over the next year as companies, especially software and data services firms owned by private equity, get squeezed by the AI threat, Mish said in a Wednesday research note.

“We’re pricing in part of what we call a rapid, aggressive disruption scenario,” Mish, UBS head of credit strategy, told CNBC in an interview.

The UBS analyst said he and his colleagues have rushed to update their forecasts for this year and beyond because the latest models from Anthropic and OpenAI have sped up expectations of the arrival of AI disruption.

“The market has been slow to react because they didn’t really think it was going to happen this fast,” Mish said. “People are having to recalibrate the whole way that they look at evaluating credit for this disruption risk, because it’s not a ’27 or ’28 issue.”

Investor concerns around AI boiled over this month as the market shifted from viewing the technology as a rising tide story for technology companies to more of a winner-take-all dynamic where Anthropic, OpenAI and others threaten incumbents. Software firms were hit first and hardest, but a rolling series of sell-offs hit sectors as disparate as finance, real estate and trucking.

In his note, Mish and other UBS analysts lay out a baseline scenario in which borrowers of leveraged loans and private credit see a combined $75 billion to $120 billion in fresh defaults by the end of this year.

CNBC calculated those figures by using Mish’s estimates for increases of up to 2.5% and up to 4% in defaults for leveraged loans and private credit, respectively, by late 2026. Those are markets which he estimates to be $1.5 trillion and $2 trillion in size.

‘Credit crunch’?

But Mish also highlighted the possibility of a more sudden, painful AI transition in which defaults jump by twice the estimates for his base assumption, cutting off funding for many companies, he said. The scenario is what’s known in Wall Street jargon as a “tail risk.”

“The knock-on effect will be that you will have a credit crunch in loan markets,” he said. “You will have a broad repricing of leveraged credit, and you will have a shock to the system coming from credit.”

While the risks are rising, they will be governed by the timing of AI adoption by large corporations, the pace of AI model improvements and other uncertain factors, according to the UBS analyst.

“We’re not yet calling for that tail-risk scenario, but we are moving in that direction,” he said.

Leveraged loans and private credit are generally considered among the riskier corners of corporate credit, since they often finance below-investment-grade companies, many of them backed by private equity and carrying higher levels of debt.

When it comes to the AI trade, companies can be placed into three broad categories, according to Mish: The first are creators of the foundational large language models such as Anthropic and OpenAI, which are startups but could soon be large, publicly traded companies.

The second are investment-grade software firms like Salesforce and Adobe that have robust balance sheets and can implement AI to fend off challengers.

The last category is the cohort of private equity-owned software and data services companies with relatively high levels of debt.

“The winners of this entire transformation — if it really becomes, as we’re increasingly believing, a rapid and very disruptive or severe [change] — the winners are least likely to come from that third bucket,” Mish said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Without Rera data, real estate reform risks losing credibility: Homebuyers’ body – The Times of India

Published

on

Without Rera data, real estate reform risks losing credibility: Homebuyers’ body – The Times of India


New Delhi: More than 75% of state real estate regulators, Reras, have either never published annual reports, discontinued their publication or not updated them despite statutory obligation and directions from the housing and urban affairs ministry, claimed homebuyers’ body FPCE on Friday. It released status report of 21 Reras as of Feb 13.The availability of updated annual reports is crucial as these contain details of data on performance of Reras, including project completion status categorised by timely completion, completion with extensions, and incomplete projects. The ministry’s format for publishing these reports also specifies providing details such as actual execution status of refund, possession and compensation orders as well as recovery warrant execution details with values and list of defaulting builders.FPCE said annual report data is not only vital for homebuyers to assess system credibility, but is equally necessary for both state and central govts to frame effective policies, design incentivisation schemes, and develop tax policy frameworks.“Unless we have credible data proving that after Rera the real estate sector has improved in terms of delivery, fairness, and keeping its promises, we are merely firing in the air,” said FPCE president Abhay Upadhyay, who is also a member of the govt’s Central Advisory Council on Rera.As per details shared by the entity, seven states — Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Goa — have never published a single annual report since Rera’s implementation, and nine states, including Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Telangana, which initially published reports, have discontinued the practice.Upadhyay said when regulators themselves don’t follow the law, they lose the legal right to demand compliance from other stakeholders. “Their failure emboldens builders and weakens the very system they are meant to safeguard,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending