Upcoming ACIP Meeting to Focus on COVID-19 Shot Injuries

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) are scheduled to meet on Mar. 18-19, 2026 to discuss the injuries to people who received COVID-19 shots and the matter of safety monitoring related to the shots, particularly with regard to the development of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis (inflammation of the membrane surrounding the heart).^{1 2 3}

Additionally, the panel may vote on recommendations related to these injuries as well as health problems related to the syndrome known as Long COVID. In a recent article for Forbes magazine, Omer Awan writes, “At this time, it is unclear exactly what will be discussed with respect to Long COVID.” But he adds that understanding how vaccination affects the risk of Long COVID has become “an increasingly important research question,” suggesting that this could be a topic ACIP may bring up.^{1 2 3}

The ACIP meeting was originally scheduled for Feb. 25-27, but it was postponed after several major medical and public health groups in the United States filed a preliminary injunction in January 2026 with a federal district court in Massachusetts seeking a ruling to block the CDC from holding the meeting. The legal motion was filed by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Public Health Association (APHA), the American College of Physicians (ACP), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Massachusetts Public Health Alliance (MPHA), the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), and the Massachusetts chapter of the AAP.^{4 5 6 7}

The legal motion also sought to block changes to the childhood vaccine schedule made by the CDC on Jan. 6, 2026. The changes had to do with how vaccines are categorized and recommended. No vaccines were removed from the market but, as noted in an article last month in The Vaccine Reaction:

[T]he revised framework marked a significant departure from the CDC’s long-standing approach to “one-size-fits-all” universal use recommendations.⁸

Vaccine Recommendations Based on Best Scientific Evidence

The motion alleged that the childhood vaccine schedule was overhauled “without following the evidentiary-driven, and legally required processes for issuing recommended vaccine schedules in the United States.” But as the TVR article point out:

According to the CDC, the revised schedule reflects a review of scientific evidence and international practices, with the goal of improving clarity and public confidence by aligning U.S. guidance more closely with peer nations that recommend fewer vaccines universally.”⁸

Awan speculates that the ACIP might also discuss changes to its “recommendation framework.” In other words, how “evidence is weighed and translated into national vaccine guidance.” He said that the committee has long followed a process referred to as the Evidence to Recommendations framework to ensure that any recommendations regarding vaccines are consistent with the best available scientific evidence. The framework is based on a standardized methodology called Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), which is supposed to enhance transparency, consistency, and communication.^{1 9}

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.