I really appreciate the opportunity to dig a little deeper into the concerns raised in the My View piece from Geri Procaccini. We represent different opinions and have different experience and training, but we each have valid concerns.
The first two questions have a similar answer, so I will combine them. Geri asked why our vaccine schedule is different from other developed, relatively wealthy countries, and why iour infant mortality rate higher than those countries. Although the question specifically asked about the hepatitis vaccine, that is not really the issue, according the many experts I have read. The issue is that those countries all have universal healthcare and a much more robust public health system. Patients are tracked much more closely, and there are fewer barriers to care. They also have a much smaller population (the population of Denmark is less than 2% of that of the US). It’s comparing apples and oranges.
These different social and public health aspects of countries underlie the differences in infant mortality. Infant mortality is defined as the death of an infant before the age of 12 months. The rate of infant deaths has been substantially higher in the US than in these other countries (the rate in the US is three times higher than in Japan), but for many reasons other than the use of the hepatitis vaccine. The most important contributor is poor prenatal care, with the result being babies born early or with problems. And poor prenatal care is largely a result of poverty, something rarely seen in those other countries with a much more inclusive social safety net and universal healthcare. Poor people typically have a much more difficult time accessing care. The rates amongst racial and ethnic groups also vary significantly, with the highest rate in the US being among Black Americans (twice as high as Whites).
Regarding the safety of the HBV vaccine. The FDA has the bare bones research. A recent review (Pediatrics, May 2026) of about 17 studies comprising just under one million patients, using varied statistical approaches, showed no significant complications of the vaccine. The same paper shows the dramatic decline in hepatitis B infections with the routine administration of the birth dose with subsequent reduction of liver cancer and deaths. These studies follow patients 12-24 months, and then the Federal Vaccine Adverse Event Recording System (VAERS) takes all reports of suspected adverse events for a much longer time. Not all reported events are a result of the vaccine and there are experts who review reports, looking for events that may result from the vaccine.
Another question was asked about studies comparing vaccinated and non-vaccinated children. To compare two populations for differences based on a particular event (such as a single shot), the populations must be identical in all other characteristics (age, demographics, income, other illnesses, etc.). At this stage, where the benefits of the vaccine have been clearly demonstrated, it would be unethical to withhold the vaccine from someone just to do a study, so other statistical methods have been used that show the benefits.
Tiny amounts of aluminum have been added to vaccines for years to enhance the immune response. In very large amounts, aluminum may be toxic. You reference Chris Exley. His work linking aluminum with autism has been soundly refuted; it has never been reproduced, it was funded by an anti-vaccine organization, and the journal that published his study withdrew it. Since then, there have been large studies, such as the one from Denmark (Annals of Internal Medicine, July 2025), which looked at 1.2 million children and found no increased risk of about 50 different diseases in those children who received aluminum in the vaccine. For example, babies get about 7-120 mg of aluminum in the first six months from breast milk or formula, but only four milligrams from all their vaccines. Over a lifetime, a person will take in thousands of milligrams of aluminum in their diet, but only about 15 milligrams in vaccines.
It is important that we ask questions of our medical providers and of the healthcare system. It is also important that we inform ourselves with high-quality information so we can make wise decisions for ourselves and our community.
Consenstein lives in Fayston.
