Senator Marshall Defends Call for Personalized Vaccine Schedules, Cites Evolving Covid Immunity

September 7, 2025

Wichita, Kansas – Senator Roger Marshall, a Republican representing Kansas, articulated a nuanced position on vaccine policy and trust in teh Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) during a recent interview on “Face the Nation.” His remarks come amid heightened scrutiny of the agency and a broader discussion about individual liberties concerning public health measures.

CDC Transparency and Public Trust

Senator Marshall acknowledged President Trump’s decision to appoint Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to challenge the CDC, viewing it as a deliberate attempt to increase transparency and restore public confidence. He stated that current levels of trust in the CDC are critically low, necessitating a comprehensive overhaul of its operations and communication strategies. This comes as a recent shooting incident at the CDC Atlanta campus has also brought the agency’s security and public perception into sharp focus.

Navigating vaccine recommendations

The Senator expressed his belief that a blanket approach to vaccination is not always appropriate, emphasizing that “not every person needs every vaccine.” He pointed to the historically triumphant MMR vaccine and polio vaccinations as examples of impactful public health interventions, but cautioned against a one-size-fits-all approach, suggesting that parents and physicians should have the autonomy to make informed decisions tailored to individual needs. According to the CDC, as of August 2024, vaccination coverage rates for MMR among kindergarteners stood at 93%, while polio vaccination rates were at 92%.

Contrasting Views on Covid-19 Vaccination

Addressing the evolving context of Covid-19, Senator Marshall differentiated between the initial stages of the pandemic and the present day. He noted that widespread prior infection has created a level of natural immunity within the population, potentially reducing the necessity for universal vaccination. He lauded Operation Warp Speed, initiated under the Trump governance, as a monumental success, even suggesting it warranted a Nobel Prize, while simultaneously acknowledging the importance of adapting vaccination strategies to the present immunological landscape.

Prescription Requirements and Accessibility

The Senator addressed concerns regarding recent changes in vaccine access, where some states now require prescriptions for certain vaccines, potentially hindering access. He likened this to the process of obtaining prescriptions for other medications, advocating for a more standardized and medically-guided approach. However, he acknowledged that these changes, stemming from Kennedy’s policies, have created practical difficulties for some individuals seeking vaccination.

Hepatitis B vaccination Debate

A critically important part of the discussion centered on the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns. Senator Marshall, drawing on his decades of experience as an OB-GYN, argued that routine vaccination may not be necessary in all cases, notably for infants born to mothers who have tested negative for the virus and are in stable monogamous relationships. He emphasized the importance of assessing individual risk factors. This stance contrasts with that of Senator Bill Cassidy, a liver doctor, who highlighted the potential severity of Hepatitis B and the benefits of universal vaccination.

Here’s a comparison of perspectives on hepatitis B vaccination:

Did You Know? According to the World Health Organization, Hepatitis B affects approximately 296 million people worldwide, and is a major global health concern?

Pro Tip: Always consult with your healthcare provider to determine the most appropriate vaccination schedule for you and your family based on your individual health status and risk factors.

Looking Ahead

senator Marshall concluded by stressing the importance of addressing broader health concerns, such as chronic diseases, adolescent obesity, and mental health issues, alongside ongoing discussions about vaccination policies. He advocated for a return to common sense and a greater emphasis on empowering individuals and their physicians to make informed healthcare choices.

What are your thoughts on individualized vaccine schedules? Share your opinions in the comments below.

Putin Doubts Value of Talks with Zelenskyy, Insists on moscow as Venue

Moscow – Russian President vladimir Putin has publicly questioned the point of a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to discuss a potential end to the ongoing conflict, stating he perceives little benefit in such a discussion given substantial obstacles to reaching an agreement. The statement, delivered at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, underscores the deep chasm separating the two leaders’ positions.

Core Disagreements Remain

putin maintained that achieving a consensus with the Ukrainian side on crucial matters is “practically impossible,” even assuming a willingness to negotiate – a willingness he cast doubt upon. He specifically referenced intractable legal and technical hurdles surrounding the status of territories claimed by Russia.Moscow demands that Ukraine formally acknowledge its annexation of Crimea, alongside the self-proclaimed republics in Donetsk, lugansk, Zaporozha, and Kherson regions.

These demands stand in stark contrast to Ukraine’s firm stance, where recognition of russia’s territorial gains is considered a non-starter. President Zelenskyy has repeatedly affirmed Ukraine’s commitment to its territorial integrity, as enshrined in its constitution, which explicitly states that Ukraine’s territory is “indivisible and inviolable.”

Meeting Conditions and Foreign Involvement

The Russian leader stipulated that any potential meeting with Zelenskyy would only occur in Moscow. Conversely, Zelenskyy, speaking after a Coalition meeting in Paris, indicated that while a meeting offer is noted, it lacks demonstration of Russia’s genuine intention to de-escalate and conclude the war.He emphasized that any such meeting must yield concrete results, ideally a path toward ending the hostilities.

Putin also issued a warning regarding the presence of foreign troops on Ukrainian soil, characterizing them as legitimate military targets. He suggested this threat would become irrelevant if a peace agreement were reached. This statement echoes concerns raised by Moscow regarding the increasing military aid and training provided to Ukraine by western nations. According to a recent report by the Institute for the Study of War, Western aid has been critical in bolstering Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.

Key Facts at a Glance

Did You Know? The conflict in Ukraine has resulted in one of the largest refugee crises in Europe since World War II, with millions displaced both internally and across borders, according to UNHCR data.

Pro Tip: Staying informed about geopolitical events requires consulting multiple sources to gain a comprehensive understanding of the situation and avoid bias.

As the conflict continues, the prospects for a swift resolution remain uncertain, with both sides seemingly entrenched in their positions. Whether diplomatic channels can overcome these hurdles remains to be seen. What role can international mediators play in bridging the gap between Moscow and Kyiv? what concessions, if any, might each side be willing to make to achieve a lasting peace?

Share yoru thoughts on this developing story in the comments below. What do you believe is the path toward a peaceful resolution?