The Golden Age of MAHA is Here! Childhood Vaccine Schedule Reduced From 72 to 11 in Historic Shift

dpic73

Heisman
Jul 27, 2005
33,960
30,188
113


The idea that healthy kids ever needed 72 shots is laughable at face value.


The "72" number is real, but the word people attach to it — "injections" or "shots" — is where it goes wrong.

Doses vs. injections — the key distinction

Seventy-two is roughly the number of routinely recommended vaccine doses — not injections — that could be given over 18 years, starting in infancy, and about half of those doses come from the annual flu and COVID-19 vaccines given every year. "Doses" isn't the same as needle sticks in the arm, because: Poynter
  • Many childhood vaccines are combined into a single syringe (a combination vaccine covering several diseases at once). Poynter
  • Some are given orally (like the rotavirus vaccine) or as a nasal spray (like FluMist), not by injection at all. Poynter
  • For example, under the 2024 schedule a baby's two-month visit involved six recommended vaccine doses but only two actual injections plus one oral dose. Poynter
Under the old (pre-2025) schedule specifically, children could get 12–30 shots by age 2 depending on how many combination vaccines and optional COVID/flu shots were used, and 30–52 doses by age 10 — deliverable in as few as 14–28 injections. Poynter

So is "72" accurate at all?

Yes, as a dose count, if you include every annual flu shot and every annual COVID shot from birth through age 18. A Yale vaccine-policy professor noted that getting to an exact number is hard given the flexibility in how doses are administered, but any total in the 50s, 60s, or 70s necessarily includes those annual flu and COVID shots stacked up over 18 years — not one-time childhood doses. That also assumes COVID vaccines were recommended annually for the entire childhood, when in practice the universal recommendation for kids only lasted a few years before shifting to a risk-based approach.

Bottom line
  • "72 doses by 18" ≈ roughly accurate as an upper-bound dose count, but it's inflated by counting 18 years of annual flu/COVID shots individually.
  • "72 injections" / "72 shots" is the misleading version — PolitiFact rated a graphic claiming babies get "72 injections" as False, since the real injection count is much lower due to combination vaccines and non-injection routes. PolitiFact
  • There's also a real, ongoing lawsuit (Stand for Health Freedom and others) using the 72-dose figure to challenge the CDC's schedule and argue there's been no cumulative-effect safety study of the full schedule — that's a live policy/legal dispute, separate from the raw arithmetic question you asked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374

TigerGrowls

Heisman
Dec 21, 2001
48,045
37,110
113


For too long, America recommended more childhood vaccines than any peer nation. No longer.

President Trump recognizes the Gold Standard Childhood Vaccine Recommendations, maximizing parental choice & aligning immunizations with science & best practices from peer, developed nations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scrubby

yoshi121374

Heisman
Jan 26, 2006
13,194
22,932
113
Thank you President Trump and RFK!!!

Putting the welfare of American children over big pharma profits.

I voted for this. Promises kept.

Dumbass. All this does is raise the costs on parents by making them have more doctor visits and paying additional copays.

Once again,MAGA means higher costs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigres88

baltimorened

All-American
May 29, 2001
7,978
5,975
113
I haven’t reviewed the actual changes, but not sure why people are worried about flu, covid and hepatitis B. My kids never have had flu or Covid shots. My wife and I haven’t had covid shots and don’t get flu shots. Totally healthy. No issues with covid and we never get the flu.

Hep B is for druggies, needle sharers, gays and the promiscuous running in rough circles. My kids probably didn’t need that one at 24 hours old.
I didn't read the order, but just for clarification, does the order say you CAN'T get all the shots at one time or the recommendation is that you shouldn't?
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatpiggy

baltimorened

All-American
May 29, 2001
7,978
5,975
113
Why this is contested, not settled

This isn't a new dispute — it's been argued back and forth since 2021/2022, and it hinges on how the original study's denominator worked. The standard rebuttal (which several outlets note today) is that the 82% figure is likely an artifact of incomplete follow-up: many of the women vaccinated in the third trimester simply hadn't been pregnant long enough yet, at the time of data cutoff, to have reached the first/second trimester risk window, so they were never at risk of an early loss and were correctly excluded from that specific rate — not because their pregnancies were "successful," but because the study design tracked ongoing pregnancies prospectively and reported the loss rate only among the sub-cohort whose pregnancies had progressed far enough to be evaluable. This is a known statistical concept in pregnancy registries called "left truncation" — it's genuinely confusing and it's fair to demand the CDC explain it clearly, but it is a different claim from "82% of pregnant women miscarried." The Conservative Treehouse

What later data show

Several peer-reviewed studies published after Fauci left office, including US-based research as recent as 2025, have found no evidence that vaccination directly increased miscarriage risk, and no comprehensive national database shows a documented spike in first-trimester losses correlating with the vaccine rollout. CDC's public guidance by August 2021 stated preliminary v-safe findings suggested mRNA vaccination in early pregnancy did not increase miscarriage risk. Town Hall + 2

Bottom line

The texts themselves (Fauci privately flagging a theoretical miscarriage risk tied to cytokine reactions) are authentic and newsworthy — that's a real story about what officials were privately weighing. But the "82% miscarriage rate" framing in the tweet is a contested statistical reinterpretation of a four-year-old study, not a new data point Fauci "hid," and mainstream epidemiologists dispute that it reflects the true risk. I'd treat the tweet's framing ("this is a crime of historic proportions") as one side's characterization rather than an established fact, and the "12.6% vs 82%" comparison as something to read with real skepticism until you see the CDC's or independent statisticians' response to Thorp's methodology.

you know dpic, just as an aside, what you're posting here is a back and forth between people who are discussing "both sides" or "all sides" of an important issue. Don't you find that just a tad different than when you criticise me for doing exactly the same thing?

Seems as if you might be jumping on the bandwagon of seeing that there is more than a single viewpoint on issues.
Welcome to my world
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnHughsPartner

jimneffer

All-American
Jan 27, 2026
2,010
5,991
113
The "72" number is real, but the word people attach to it — "injections" or "shots" — is where it goes wrong.

Doses vs. injections — the key distinction

Seventy-two is roughly the number of routinely recommended vaccine doses — not injections — that could be given over 18 years, starting in infancy, and about half of those doses come from the annual flu and COVID-19 vaccines given every year. "Doses" isn't the same as needle sticks in the arm, because: Poynter
  • Many childhood vaccines are combined into a single syringe (a combination vaccine covering several diseases at once). Poynter
  • Some are given orally (like the rotavirus vaccine) or as a nasal spray (like FluMist), not by injection at all. Poynter
  • For example, under the 2024 schedule a baby's two-month visit involved six recommended vaccine doses but only two actual injections plus one oral dose. Poynter
Under the old (pre-2025) schedule specifically, children could get 12–30 shots by age 2 depending on how many combination vaccines and optional COVID/flu shots were used, and 30–52 doses by age 10 — deliverable in as few as 14–28 injections. Poynter

So is "72" accurate at all?

Yes, as a dose count, if you include every annual flu shot and every annual COVID shot from birth through age 18. A Yale vaccine-policy professor noted that getting to an exact number is hard given the flexibility in how doses are administered, but any total in the 50s, 60s, or 70s necessarily includes those annual flu and COVID shots stacked up over 18 years — not one-time childhood doses. That also assumes COVID vaccines were recommended annually for the entire childhood, when in practice the universal recommendation for kids only lasted a few years before shifting to a risk-based approach.

Bottom line
  • "72 doses by 18" ≈ roughly accurate as an upper-bound dose count, but it's inflated by counting 18 years of annual flu/COVID shots individually.
  • "72 injections" / "72 shots" is the misleading version — PolitiFact rated a graphic claiming babies get "72 injections" as False, since the real injection count is much lower due to combination vaccines and non-injection routes. PolitiFact
  • There's also a real, ongoing lawsuit (Stand for Health Freedom and others) using the 72-dose figure to challenge the CDC's schedule and argue there's been no cumulative-effect safety study of the full schedule — that's a live policy/legal dispute, separate from the raw arithmetic question you asked.
this is great information, but it's nothing but words and it's really long

do you have all of this in the form of a tweet, maybe with some misleading, sensational pictures...and hopefully from an account that I agree with every tweet posted by default without any consideration or thought of my own?
 

PapaGanoush

Senior
Dec 7, 2025
376
503
93
I haven’t reviewed the actual changes, but not sure why people are worried about flu, covid and hepatitis B. My kids never have had flu or Covid shots. My wife and I haven’t had covid shots and don’t get flu shots. Totally healthy. No issues with covid and we never get the flu.

Hep B is for druggies, needle sharers, gays and the promiscuous running in rough circles. My kids probably didn’t need that one at 24 hours old.
Your family is a higher caliber & class than these libs, so while yours & mine may not need these shots, they might.

Fortunately, they can choose to vaxx/boost their children for as many of these as they’d like. Most of them however, don’t even have children. There’s obvious reasons for that.
 

JohnHughsPartner

All-American
Nov 19, 2016
6,918
9,231
113
Your family is a higher caliber & class than these libs, so while yours & mine may not need these shots, they might.

Fortunately, they can choose to vaxx/boost their children for as many of these as they’d like. Most of them however, don’t even have children. There’s obvious reasons for that.
What are the obvious reasons you speak of? lol
 

IA2OH

All-American
Jan 4, 2023
3,188
6,748
113
Now watch Autism rates drop.

What will the vaccine pushers do then?
Pretty sure autism is much more likely from all the herbicide and pesticide that we ingest everyday from big ag poisoning us, not vaccines which cause an immune reaction. You see herbicides and pesticides are everywhere now, our water, wheat is sprayed directly, corn is sprayed directly. It destroys gut lining and the gut-brain axis is cut. Like Smithfield down in Carolinas, spray the fields to the feed the fat piggy’s owned by China, destroying our land and health. There ya go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigres88

fatpiggy

Heisman
Aug 18, 2002
26,495
25,491
113
Pretty sure autism is much more likely from all the herbicide and pesticide that we ingest everyday from big ag poisoning us, not vaccines which cause an immune reaction. You see herbicides and pesticides are everywhere now, our water, wheat is sprayed directly, corn is sprayed directly. It destroys gut lining and the gut-brain axis is cut. Like Smithfield down in Carolinas, spray the fields to the feed the fat piggy’s owned by China, destroying our land and health. There ya go.
Anything is possible, because right now we don’t have a clue.
 

Scrubby

Heisman
Jul 2, 2025
10,683
14,208
113

They support and celebrate murdering children while we support getting them back to being healthy. We are not the same.
Now watch Autism rates drop.

What will the vaccine pushers do then?
They will cry about all the poor, out of work autism therapists. "Trump is killing jobs!!!!"

They're not smart people.
Pretty sure autism is much more likely from all the herbicide and pesticide that we ingest everyday from big ag poisoning us, not vaccines which cause an immune reaction. You see herbicides and pesticides are everywhere now, our water, wheat is sprayed directly, corn is sprayed directly. It destroys gut lining and the gut-brain axis is cut. Like Smithfield down in Carolinas, spray the fields to the feed the fat piggy’s owned by China, destroying our land and health. There ya go.
What you mention is also a major health concern that needs to be addressed. Big AG (Monsanto and Bayer) are just as evil and profit driven as big pharma and have lobbied the slugs in our government to turn a blind eye to the dangers of their products. These corporations would gladly climb over mountains of dead bodies to meet their quarterly earnings quotas and wouldn't think twice about the damage they caused.

Glyphosates, artificial food dyes, microplastics, vaccines, acetaminophen, etc.. it is all poison and I really do believe our healthcare problems are multi-faceted and they all play some part in this growing problem. That is why I appreciate seeing MAHA going after all of these areas even if it does feel like a slow process.
 

Jfcarter3

All-Conference
Aug 26, 2004
2,786
4,198
93
I think the EPA, FDA, and USDA were/are responsible, collectively, for tracking and monitoring such things. Perhaps if this administration could see past its nose, it could have repurposed the cumulative head count reduction by DOGE and cancellation of grants over to the MAHA concept monitoring big Ag. But why do that when that money can bedazzle part of the White House?

Someone get trump another Big Mac.
 

tigres88

All-American
Aug 7, 2022
3,174
8,375
113
you mean...believes doctors and medical research over what you've read on twitter?

i guess i'm lucky to have found one such woman
There are millions and millions of educated, strong, women in America that appreciates a real man rather than these trad wives with 4 teeth left that these maga dudes like.

You just know the wives of the maga dudes on here are absolutely fat and nasty
 

jimneffer

All-American
Jan 27, 2026
2,010
5,991
113
Pretty sure autism is much more likely from all the herbicide and pesticide that we ingest everyday from big ag poisoning us, not vaccines which cause an immune reaction. You see herbicides and pesticides are everywhere now, our water, wheat is sprayed directly, corn is sprayed directly. It destroys gut lining and the gut-brain axis is cut. Like Smithfield down in Carolinas, spray the fields to the feed the fat piggy’s owned by China, destroying our land and health. There ya go.
the funny thing is...this is stuff that RFK Jr - as an experienced environmental lawyer - would have (at least theoretically) some knowledge and authority about

but who does the trump admin put in charge of the epa? a guy with ZERO experience with environmental regulation or science
 

tigres88

All-American
Aug 7, 2022
3,174
8,375
113
the funny thing is...this is stuff that RFK Jr - as an experienced environmental lawyer - would have (at least theoretically) some knowledge and authority about

but who does the trump admin put in charge of the epa? a guy with ZERO experience with environmental regulation or science
And yet, he supported the Administration when Trump signed an Executive Order invoking the Defense Production Act to boost the domestic production of glyphosate and its precursor materials (elemental phosphorus).

 

jimneffer

All-American
Jan 27, 2026
2,010
5,991
113
And yet, he supported the Administration when Trump signed an Executive Order invoking the Defense Production Act to boost the domestic production of glyphosate and its precursor materials (elemental phosphorus).

make america healthy again - less vaccines, more roundup
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigres88

scotchtiger

Heisman
Dec 15, 2005
135,044
23,018
113
The "72" number is real, but the word people attach to it — "injections" or "shots" — is where it goes wrong.

Doses vs. injections — the key distinction

Seventy-two is roughly the number of routinely recommended vaccine doses — not injections — that could be given over 18 years, starting in infancy, and about half of those doses come from the annual flu and COVID-19 vaccines given every year. "Doses" isn't the same as needle sticks in the arm, because: Poynter
  • Many childhood vaccines are combined into a single syringe (a combination vaccine covering several diseases at once). Poynter
  • Some are given orally (like the rotavirus vaccine) or as a nasal spray (like FluMist), not by injection at all. Poynter
  • For example, under the 2024 schedule a baby's two-month visit involved six recommended vaccine doses but only two actual injections plus one oral dose. Poynter
Under the old (pre-2025) schedule specifically, children could get 12–30 shots by age 2 depending on how many combination vaccines and optional COVID/flu shots were used, and 30–52 doses by age 10 — deliverable in as few as 14–28 injections. Poynter

So is "72" accurate at all?

Yes, as a dose count, if you include every annual flu shot and every annual COVID shot from birth through age 18. A Yale vaccine-policy professor noted that getting to an exact number is hard given the flexibility in how doses are administered, but any total in the 50s, 60s, or 70s necessarily includes those annual flu and COVID shots stacked up over 18 years — not one-time childhood doses. That also assumes COVID vaccines were recommended annually for the entire childhood, when in practice the universal recommendation for kids only lasted a few years before shifting to a risk-based approach.

Bottom line
  • "72 doses by 18" ≈ roughly accurate as an upper-bound dose count, but it's inflated by counting 18 years of annual flu/COVID shots individually.
  • "72 injections" / "72 shots" is the misleading version — PolitiFact rated a graphic claiming babies get "72 injections" as False, since the real injection count is much lower due to combination vaccines and non-injection routes. PolitiFact
  • There's also a real, ongoing lawsuit (Stand for Health Freedom and others) using the 72-dose figure to challenge the CDC's schedule and argue there's been no cumulative-effect safety study of the full schedule — that's a live policy/legal dispute, separate from the raw arithmetic question you asked.

Honest question, who cares if it’s 72 needles or 72 doses? That’s still 72 doses of medicine, many of which are unnecessary.

Can you explain why my child needs a shot of Hep B vaccine at 24 hours old? My wife, the mother, has already been tested at that point. We don’t do hard drugs, share needles, have sex with strangers, have gay sex or any other risk factor for hep B.

These recommendations were developed for the herd. In some cases, developed with the lowest common denominator in mind. That’s not my kid. I’m going to do what’s best for him.

And I won’t rehash flu and Covid, but those are colds. We’re perfectly fine without the annual shots. Those weren’t and shouldn’t be required immunizations.
 

Scrubby

Heisman
Jul 2, 2025
10,683
14,208
113
you mean...believes doctors and medical research over what you've read on twitter?

i guess i'm lucky to have found one such woman
I asked my child's first pediatrician why they needed a hep b vaccine. They couldn't even answer the question lol they are compensated by big insurance for keeping their clinics fully up to the date with the vaccine schedule they lobbied the government to put together so the doctors don't even question it. Incentives dictate behavior, and the big healthcare pediatrics groups no longer look at patients as their customers, but their products.

We ended up being told by that pediatric clinic that if our child didn't take 100% of the vaccines on the schedule that we'd be removed from the clinic as a result. We found another (much better) doctor on our own and kicked the previous group to the curb ourselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

ClemsonInAtlanta

All-Conference
Jan 20, 2019
920
1,436
93
I asked my child's first pediatrician why they needed a hep b vaccine. They couldn't even answer the question lol they are compensated by big insurance for keeping their clinics fully up to the date with the vaccine schedule they lobbied the government to put together so the doctors don't even question it. Incentives dictate behavior, and the big healthcare pediatrics groups no longer look at patients as their customers, but their products.

We ended up being told by that pediatric clinic that if our child didn't take 100% of the vaccines on the schedule that we'd be removed from the clinic as a result. We found another (much better) doctor on our own and kicked the previous group to the curb ourselves.
Pediatrician’s offices that don’t take kids whose parents will not vaccinate is not because of money. As my pediatrics preceptor told me when I asked her why they don’t see unvaccinated kids, “if the parents are going to argue with us over something as simple and effective as vaccines, then it’s going to be nothing but arguments over anything else the entire time. It’s simply not worth the trouble to argue with these people who cannot accept basic reality”

Nothing to do with money. I would often explain to many of the kids who were scared of the tetanus shot what happens when you get tetanus, and every single one of them felt much better about getting vaccinated.

Vaccines’ biggest opponent is their own success. They’ve been so incredibly effective at eliminating (or nearly eliminating) so many deadly and brutal diseases that the average person has no concept of what these diseases even look like.
 
Tiger Illustrated

Latest

  1. 01 Tiger Illustrated The most important thing we've learned in Clemson this month
  2. 02 Tiger Illustrated Inside the contrast in styles between how Clemson and LSU are handling practices this month
  3. 03 Tiger Illustrated Friday Clemson Football & Recruiting Nuggets
  4. 04 Rivals Clemson, Oklahoma, Georgia three to watch as touted LB Jay Schell's junior visits take shape
  5. 05 Tiger Illustrated What Clemson's real depth chart looks like on the offensive line following scrimmage No. 2