New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

CDC Will Continue a Controversial Vaccine Study in Africa

This clinical trial in Guinea-Bissau would withhold vaccination from some babies, sparking ethical concerns

A glass-walled building entrance fronted by CDC signs

The Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) global headquarters during a meeting of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on December 4, 2025, in Atlanta, Ga.

Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A controversial hepatitis B vaccine safety trial will go on as planned in Africa, amid concerns over its ethics and design from medical experts. That’s despite news reports of its cancellation, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

In December 2025 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced the award of a $1.6-million grant to conduct the five-year HBV0-NSE trial to test the health effects of the long-used, effective hepatitis B vaccine on 14,000 newborns in Guinea-Bissau. Awarded without competition to controversial Danish researchers championed by antivaccine activists and HHS chief Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the announcement attracted criticism over the study’s design. Hepatitis B is widespread in Guinea-Bissau, with prevalance of about 18.7 percent, and shortens lives—it’s linked to long-term liver cancer and cirrhosis. The trial would randomize half of the newborns to either receive the hepatitis B vaccine at birth or get no vaccine in a bid to look at its short-term health effects.

On Thursday the Guardian reported that an Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) official had announced a halt to the trial, citing ethical concerns. Speaking on background, however, an HHS official told Scientific American on Thursday that the trial will proceed as planned.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“This research aims to fill existing evidence gaps to help inform global hepatitis B vaccine policy and we will ensure the highest scientific and ethical standards are met,” said an HHS spokesperson in a statement. The statement confirmed that half the babies in the study would not receive a vaccine and argued this was acceptable because the current policy in the African nation is not to provide a shot to newborns until 2027. (The U.S. started recommending the vaccine for all newborns in 1991, although the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel recently voted to change that.) “The planned study represents the world’s first and perhaps only opportunity to test the overall health effects of [hepatitis B vaccine],” according to the statement.

HHS officials would not confirm that a study protocol leaked on Thursday by Inside Medicine represented the study design. That protocol drew comparisons to the infamous Tuskegee study of syphilis because it failed to include testing for hepatitis B among most mothers in the trial and would thus effectively ensure that the life-shortening disease would be transmitted to unvaccinated babies.

“The protocol provides no ethical justification to withhold from vulnerable infants a lifesaving vaccine,” says Wilbur H. Chen of the University of Maryland School of Medicine, a former member of the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel.

On Friday Africa CDC forwarded an undated letter that its representative suggested was a “cancellation of the trial” from Guinea-Bissau’s health ministry and that appeared to describe the country moving its nationwide vaccination program to 2028.

In response to a query about this letter, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon wrote, “To be clear, the trial will proceed as planned. Africa CDC, an organization with no affiliation to the U.S. CDC, shared weeks-old communications unrelated to the trial as part of a public-relations campaign aimed to shape public perception rather than engaging with the scientific facts.”

Editor’s Note (1/16/26): This story has been updated with responses from the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Dan Vergano was formerly senior editor, Washington, D.C., at Scientific American. He has previously written for Grid News, BuzzFeed News, National Geographic and USA Today. He is chair of the New Horizons committee for the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing and a journalism award judge for both the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

More by Dan Vergano

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe