Smoke and Mirrors: The Lawsuit Against the CDC’s Vaccine Schedule

If you’ve been scrolling headlines lately, you may have seen something about a lawsuit against the CDC’s vaccine schedule. Maybe it made your stomach flip. Headlines pairing the CDC and vaccines with the word ‘lawsuit’ are designed to sound alarming. The case is being framed as a challenge to the “safety” of vaccines, with anti-vaccine groups celebrating it on social media like a breakthrough moment.

But here’s the truth: this lawsuit is less about science and more about creating doubt. And while lawsuits can make headlines, they don’t rewrite decades of research or change what we already know about how vaccines protect children.

That’s why I want to get ahead of it here, not because the lawsuit changes anything, but to offer clarity and reassurance in the middle of the noise.

So let’s look at who’s behind this case, what they’re actually claiming, and why, when the smoke clears, your child’s safety is still backed by decades of evidence.

Who’s behind it

The lawsuit was filed by Dr. Paul Thomas and Dr. Kenneth Stoller, alongside an advocacy group called Stand for Health Freedom.

At first glance, these names might not mean much, but here’s the backstory:

• Dr. Thomas was a pediatrician who lost his medical license after developing individualized vaccine protocols. He published a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated kids that was later retracted. Days after publication, his license was suspended.

• Dr. Stoller lost his license after issuing medical exemptions that didn’t align with CDC or state criteria.

• Stand for Health Freedom is an advocacy group focused on “medical freedom,” often opposing public health measures like vaccines or mandates.

In other words, this case isn’t being led by neutral experts or respected researchers in pediatrics. It’s being brought forward by individuals and groups already known for promoting vaccine misinformation. They frame themselves as whistleblowers, but their professional history paints a different picture.

What they’re claiming

The lawsuit’s main argument is that the CDC has never studied the entire childhood vaccine schedule as one big package. They call it a “72+ dose regimen,” a number that includes every shot, every booster, from birth through adolescence. That number is repeated in anti-vaccine spaces because it sounds overwhelming.

But here’s the missing context:

• Kids don’t get 72 shots at once. The schedule is spread out over years, timed for when protection matters most. Watch my video on TikTok for more. 

• Many vaccines are combined into a single shot to reduce pokes.

• And compared to older vaccines, today’s versions often contain fewer immune-stimulating components (antigens).

So while “72 doses” is technically true if you add up every booster and give them individually, it’s misleading without context. It is NOT 72 needles.

Why this lawsuit is smoke and mirrors

Lawsuits can make headlines, but that doesn’t mean they hold water in court.

The complaint leans on a familiar line: that the Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) has called for more study of the full vaccine schedule. What it leaves out is just as important: those same reports have affirmed that vaccines are safe, effective, and closely monitored.

Here’s what the IOM report actually said: that studies repeatedly show the health benefits of the recommended schedule, including fewer illnesses, deaths, and hospital stays. Every new vaccine is tested for safety and evaluated in the context of the existing schedule before it’s added. Systems like VAERS and the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) are designed to detect potential safety concerns, and they’ve worked: for example, identifying a rare intestinal disorder linked to an early rotavirus vaccine that was later pulled from use.

So when the IOM flagged gaps, like better defining the number, frequency, or order of vaccines, it wasn’t declaring the schedule unsafe. This happens in nearly every scientific report: pointing out areas for future research is part of good science. The committee even emphasized that the VSD, which tracks over 9 million people, is already a powerful tool to explore schedule-related questions when needed.

Calls for a single, randomized placebo trial of the entire schedule sound simple, but in reality they aren’t possible. It would mean deliberately withholding proven protection from children, which is not ethical. We don’t test car seats by leaving half of babies unbuckled, and we don’t need to test vaccines by denying them to kids when we already know what happens without protection.

Even if, hypothetically, such a trial were run, would those promoting this lawsuit accept the results? History tells us probably not. When studies show vaccines are safe, groups promoting misinformation often move the goalposts rather than accept the findings.

That’s because this case isn’t really about uncovering new science. It’s about fueling doubt. The lawsuit creates the appearance of a controversy where there isn’t one, and that’s enough to get traction on social media.

Parents deserve to know: the courtroom drama doesn’t change the underlying reality. Lawsuits don’t decide scientific truth. Judges don’t determine vaccine safety. Vaccines are among the most studied medical interventions in history.

The goalpost shift

This isn’t the first time critics have changed the rules:

• At first, the claim was: “Vaccines haven’t been studied at all.”

• When that was disproven, it became: “They haven’t been studied enough.”

• Now it’s: “They haven’t been studied in this exact way.”

It’s a moving target.

Here’s the reality: to do the kind of trial they’re asking for, you’d have to deliberately leave children unvaccinated and then wait to see who gets sick…and how badly. No ethical review board would approve that kind of study. And honestly, would you sign your child up for that? Neither would I.

The question isn’t just impractical, it’s unnecessary when we already have decades of real-world evidence from millions of vaccinated children across the world.

What we already know

Here’s what decades of science, experience, and monitoring show:

• Rigorous testing before approval: Every vaccine goes through large trials for safety, immune response, and effectiveness.

• Studied together: Many vaccines are tested in combination, and millions of children safely get multiple shots at the same visit.

• Ongoing monitoring: Systems like VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) and VSD (Vaccine Safety Datalink) track safety after approval, catching ever rare side effects.

• COVID context: During the pandemic, the FDA issued Emergency Use Authorizations for COVID vaccines because of the urgent public health threat. This didn’t skip safety testing-it sped up the administrative process. The clinical trials were still large, rigorous, and peer-reviewed, and post-authorization monitoring was even more intense than usual. That urgency and level of surveillance showed the system working under crisis, not lowering the bar.

Critics often note that vaccines aren’t tested against saline placebos anymore. That’s true, and it’s intentional. Once a vaccine is proven to work, withholding it from children just for a trial would be unethical. Again, like unbuckling half of the kids in car seats “for science.”

And remember: vaccines today often expose children to fewer immune-stimulating antigens than in the past. Kids are not being “overloaded.”

The evidence is clear. There’s no sign of cumulative “hidden dangers” lurking in the schedule. What we do see, over and over again, is vaccines preventing serious illness, hospitalization, and death. I clinically see no issue with the combined schedule being given not only for my own children but also for the thousands of patients I’ve cared for over the last decade. 

If you have more questions or want a reliable, evidence-based resource, check out the free PedsDocTalk Vaccine Guide. It includes every vaccine from birth through adolescence, seasonal vaccines, and common FAQs, all in one place. And a new update is coming soon!

Why this matters for parents

When you see lawsuits like this in the news or on social media, remember: lawsuit headlines aren’t scientific breakthroughs.

What matters is the evidence, and that evidence has been consistent for decades:

• Vaccines are safe in that the benefits outweigh the risk 

• Vaccines are effective in that they reduce the risk of either contracting the illness or severe complications depending on the vaccines. 

• Vaccines protect children from diseases that once devastated families.

It’s natural to feel rattled when you see bold claims spreading online. But the real-world data, the millions of children safely vaccinated every year, is the stronger, clearer story.

Closing thoughts

This lawsuit is noise, not science.

The real story hasn’t changed: vaccines work.

And here’s something I want parents to hear directly: if pediatricians ever saw evidence that vaccines were harming children, we would speak up. Loudly. Not just on social media, but in our clinics, our hospitals, and our professional organizations. Our first priority will always be children’s safety.

That’s why the pediatric community continues to stand behind vaccines. Not out of habit, not out of blind trust, but because the data and decades of real-world protection show us that vaccines save lives and the benefit outweighs the risk. 

So when you come across headlines or posts celebrating lawsuits like this, take a step back. Remember the bigger picture. The science hasn’t shifted. The protections haven’t changed. And your child’s health remains as important as ever.

On The Podcast

Anxiety in kids doesn’t always look like worry. Sometimes it shows up as stomachaches, sleep struggles, irritability, or even constant visits to the school nurse. As pediatricians, we know this is one of the most common challenges families face today and parents are often left wondering: Is this normal? Do I need to be worried? What do I do next?

In this episode, I’m joined by pediatrician and author Dr. Natasha Burgert, who just released Managing Childhood Anxiety For Dummies. We talk about how anxiety can look different in kids, when parents should reach out for help, and the many supportive steps families can take before medication is even on the table.

In this week’s Follow Up, Dr. Mona revisits one of her earliest and most popular episodes: 15 Things We Need to Stop Doing as Parents. This quick-hit version pulls out 5 powerful reminders that every parent needs to hear.

From the viral Instagram post that sparked thousands of saves and shares, Dr. Mona brings back the tough love truths that free parents from comparison, guilt, and perfection obsession.

Ask Dr. Mona

An opportunity for YOU to ask Dr. Mona your parenting questions!

Dr. Mona will answer these questions in a future Sunday Morning Q&A email. Chances are if you have a parenting concern or question, another parent can relate. So let's figure this out together!