The F.D.A. introduced new rules. Here’s what to know.

 

Aug. 27, 2025

 

"The threat of Covid infections has not gone away, but the vaccines that help protect against them will be harder to come by this season.

 

Under President Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., federal health officials have limited who qualifies for Covid shots. On Wednesday, the Food and Drug Administration approved updated versions only for people who are 65 or older and people who have a medical condition that puts them at higher risk.

 

The F.D.A. decision creates a fractured and confusing landscape. Healthy people under 65 may face significant obstacles to getting a shot. Medical experts emphasize that, while hospitalizations and deaths have greatly decreased from earlier in the pandemic, Covid is still spreading — and while some groups are at higher risk, no one is guaranteed to have a mild infection. Many disagree with the F.D.A.’s limits and support Americans at large doing their best to get a vaccine, even if it means jumping through new hoops."

 

(more)

 

New York Times

https://archive.ph/D2edK

 

It's worth noting, as the NYT goes on to explain, that for those under age 65 and not automatically eligible, the FDA did not specify in its decision what medical conditions would be deemed to put people at high risk for bad COVID outcomes, and thus make them eligible for the vaccine this fall.

 

However, The NYT noted that when two FDA leaders suggested last May that they were likely to limit eligibility, they cited a long list of medical conditions on a list maintained by the CDC. The NYT noted that that list includes such conditions as asthma, cancer, obesity and being immunocompromised, as well as less obvious things like physical inactivity (having sedentary lifestyle).  The FDA has estimated that 30 to 60 percent of Americans have at least one such condition.

 

Another wildcard in the desk is what will happen with the upcoming scheduled mid-September meeting of the CDC's key vaccines advisory committee, which Kennedy purged earlier this year and had its members replaced with a hastily vetted group of anti-vax or vaccine skeptic members, along with several others with little to no professional experience with vaccines.

 

If that advisory group narrows or further restricts the recommendations on who's eligible to receive COVID vaccines, and any such recommendations are accepted by the acting CDC director at the time, that could further muddy the waters and potentially lessen the availability of vaccines at pharmacies and the extent that U.S. health insurers are willing to pay for the vaccines.

 

In the wake of CDC director Susan Monarez' ouster earlier this week by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the Trump White House, the Republican chair of the Senate health committee, Sen. Bill Cassidy, called for the advisory group's meeting to be postponed, and he issued a public statement saying any recommendations the group might make before the Senate conducts a review of the recent CDC developments "should be rejected as lacking legitimacy given the seriousness of the allegations and the current turmoil in CDC leadership."

 

08.28.2025

Cassidy Calls for Vaccine Committee Meeting to be Postponed Following CDC Departures

---

 

"WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, called for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to indefinitely postpone their September 18^th meeting.

 

“Serious allegations have been made about the meeting agenda, membership, and lack of scientific process being followed for the now announced September ACIP meeting. These decisions directly impact children’s health and the meeting should not occur until significant oversight has been conducted. If the meeting proceeds, any recommendations made should be rejected as lacking legitimacy given the seriousness of the allegations and the current turmoil in CDC leadership,” said Dr. Cassidy." 

 

https://www.help.senate.gov/rep/newsroom/press/cassidy-calls-for-vaccine-committee-meeting-to-be-postponed-following-cdc-departures

 

31 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The F.D.A. introduced new rules. Here’s what to know.

 

Aug. 27, 2025

 

"The threat of Covid infections has not gone away, but the vaccines that help protect against them will be harder to come by this season.

 

Under President Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., federal health officials have limited who qualifies for Covid shots. On Wednesday, the Food and Drug Administration approved updated versions only for people who are 65 or older and people who have a medical condition that puts them at higher risk.

 

The F.D.A. decision creates a fractured and confusing landscape. Healthy people under 65 may face significant obstacles to getting a shot. Medical experts emphasize that, while hospitalizations and deaths have greatly decreased from earlier in the pandemic, Covid is still spreading — and while some groups are at higher risk, no one is guaranteed to have a mild infection. Many disagree with the F.D.A.’s limits and support Americans at large doing their best to get a vaccine, even if it means jumping through new hoops."

 

(more)

 

New York Times

https://archive.ph/D2edK

 

If you ask for it, I'm sure you can get it.  There are plenty of doctors who are pro-mRNA-Covid shots.  Just consider the shot to be "off-label" - available but not recommended by the FDA.

Wave these under a doctor's nose and I'm sure that he'll be happy to oblige. 

17 minutes ago, connda said:

If you ask for it, I'm sure you can get it.  There are plenty of doctors who are pro-mRNA-Covid shots.  Just consider the shot to be "off-label" - available but not recommended by the FDA.

 

The off-label route is indeed a potential route to go... assuming the person can find a cooperating doctor. Lots of medications and prescriptions in the U.S. are done off-label, and there's nothing illegal or inproper about it....  But, off-label very likely means a person's health insurance isn't going to cover it.

 

One other complication about that is, according to the latest reports I've seen, most Americans have been getting their COVID vaccines from private pharmacies, not from their doctor's offices. And for legal reasons, a lot of private pharmacies apparently would be unlikely to administer COVID vaccines off-label.  So it could mean a lot more MD office visits for COVID vaccines...if things remain the way they are now.

 

But then again, the whole reason behind the anti-vax movement headed by RFK Jr. and Co. is to make vaccines as difficult and complicated and expensive to get as possible, effectively driving Americans away from vaccine protections. And seemingly, to go beyond just COVID vaccines and start attacking the whole longstanding program for various childhood vaccinations in the U.S. for things like polio, measles, whooping cough, hepatitis A & B, chickenpox, etc.

 

Kennedy also seems to be pursuing another broader general anti-vaccines route to potentially force vaccine manufacturers out of the U.S. market:

 

 

 

C.D.C. Uncertainty Upends Covid Vaccine Access at CVS and Walgreens

State laws and regulatory chaos are driving the country’s largest pharmacy chains to require prescriptions or hold back altogether unless a C.D.C. panel acts.

 

CVS and Walgreens, the country’s two largest pharmacy chains, are for now clamping down on offering Covid vaccines in more than a dozen states, even to people who meet newly restricted criteria from the Food and Drug Administration.

On Thursday, Amy Thibault, a spokeswoman for CVS, said the vaccine was not available at pharmacies in 16 states, citing “the current regulatory environment” and emphasizing that the list could change.  On Friday, CVS issued an update: It could administer vaccines in 13 of the 16 states, and in the District of Columbia, to people who had obtained a prescription from a doctor or other medical provider. ...  In Massachusetts, Nevada and New Mexico, CVS still cannot offer the shots at all, Ms. Thibault said.
...

Walgreens said in a statement that it was “prepared to offer the vaccine in states where we are able to do so” to people who met the F.D.A. criteria. When a New York Times reporter tried to schedule vaccine appointments in all 50 states, the Walgreens website said patients would need a prescription in 16 of them. Though there is some overlap, it’s not the same set of 16 as CVS, underscoring the level of confusion."

...

The fact that pharmacies are limiting access to vaccines when Covid infections are rising, as they do every summer, is “really unconscionable,” said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California, San Francisco."

 

(more)

 

New York Times

https://archive.ph/wjjhc

 

The issue, as I understand it, has to do with different states having different laws and regulations about how pharmacies in their jurisdictions are regulated and can operate.

 

Also, while the NYT article above focuses on potential pharmacy restrictions in about 16 different states, that still means that the vaccines should be readily available from pharmacies in the other two-thirds of the U.S. states.

 

 

Per the Washington Post, as of Aug. 28:

 

 

https://archive.ph/w82xM

 

If you're a senior citizen you can. You still can if you're an adult but it's not as easy. I wentbefore the rule change  to the place I'd gone before & it was fine.  If the rules say they cant they'll look up your records etc.& IMO you'll get it. 

TIME also did a broad overview article covering many of the different topics and issues related to COVID vaccine availability in the U.S. this fall:

What to Know About Getting the COVID-19 Vaccine Right Now

Aug 29, 2025

 

"As COVID-19 continues to circulate, questions remain about how to protect yourself in 2025. Should you get the COVID-19 vaccine? Will the shots be available at your local pharmacy? Will insurance cover it? The answers are complicated.

 

The confusion stems from shifting federal vaccine recommendations, clashing guidance from medical groups, and the uncertainty of how doctors, pharmacies, insurance companies, and everyday people will navigate it all. 

...

Here’s what you need to know about getting the COVID-19 vaccine. 

 

(more)

 

https://time.com/7313128/covid-19-vaccine-recommendations-cdc-fda/

 

 

11 hours ago, connda said:

If you ask for it, I'm sure you can get it.  There are plenty of doctors who are pro-mRNA-Covid shots.  Just consider the shot to be "off-label" - available but not recommended by the FDA.

Wave these under a doctor's nose and I'm sure that he'll be happy to oblige. 
 

 

The ignorance and simplemindedness would be laughable if not so tragic.

A physician who administers the vaccination now under the conditions you are citing opens themselves up to personal bankruptcy. Every nutcase will sue for any imagined adverse reaction, claiming the physician did not act appropriately by not following CDC  recommendations.