New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Health Experts Slam Possible FDA ‘Black Box’ Warning for COVID Vaccines

The FDA is reportedly considering the addition of high-level warning labels to COVID vaccines, a move that some experts say may cause unfounded concerns over safety

Gloved hands holding a COVID vaccine

PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is reportedly weighing whether it will place a “black box” warning label on COVID vaccines, according to CNN, despite research and real-world data demonstrating their safety.

Black box warnings are the FDA’s highest health warning for drugs and medical devices. Adding them to COVID vaccines “would be an unprecedented action by the FDA and would likely result in significant reduction in use of the product,” says physician Robert Hopkins, medical director of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases.

It’s unclear whether the warning, if applied, would be put on some or all the available COVID vaccines produced by Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax or if it would affect specific groups, such as pregnant people or children.


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.


The report comes a week after a leaked memo, allegedly written by the FDA’s chief medical and scientific officer Vinay Prasad, detailed plans to change COVID vaccine approvals and linked the deaths of 10 children to the vaccines, without evidence.

In response to Scientific American, Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon dismissed the claims as “pure speculation” and said that “the FDA takes very seriously any death that is attributed to a regulated medical product.”

Black box warnings, also called boxed warnings, are designed to inform people of major health risks associated with a drug, treatment or other medical intervention, including a vaccine, and generally indicate a risk of serious injury or life-threatening harm. Opioid painkillers carry such a warning, for example. The FDA has the power to add these labels, update them or remove them at any point as data becomes available to the agency.

More than 400 medications approved for use in the U.S. have a black box warning label. Vaccines with black box warnings “are exceedingly rare,” says Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease physician and a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, because vaccines undergo rigorous trials and safety and efficacy assessments before the FDA authorizes them for use.

And while some vaccines, such as the live ACAM2000 vaccine for smallpox and mpox, carry health risk warnings, these examples are “certainly nothing [as] big” as the FDA’s potential decision to put a black box warning on COVID vaccines, says Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist and founder of the newsletter Your Local Epidemiologist.

“The science is clear: the benefits continue to outweigh the risks by a wide margin,” Jetelina says. “If FDA disagrees, transparency about their data and reasoning is essential. Closed-door analyses won’t cut it. Americans deserves better.”

The COVID vaccines have been safely administered to billions of people worldwide and have been shown to have prevented millions of deaths from the virus that causes the disease. Initial and ongoing safety monitoring continues to show the benefits of these vaccines outweigh the risk for most populations, Hopkins says.

He and other experts have expressed concern that a severe safety warning may ultimately impede access to the vaccines. A black box label may cause clinicians to be more cautious in recommending the shots to groups who are at high risk of severe COVID, such as children and pregnant people, Chin-Hong says.

If the black box label is added, “vaccine hesitancy will increase in the groups who need it the most,” he says. “But most of all, a continued erosion of trust in the proven power of vaccines in general will lead to more illness and deaths—and more suffering in Americans.”

Lauren J. Young is a science journalist and multimedia producer based in New York City. She was formerly associate editor for health and medicine at Scientific American and has edited and written stories that tackle a wide range of subjects, including the COVID pandemic, emerging diseases, evolutionary biology and health inequities. Young has nearly a decade of newsroom and science journalism experience. Before joining Scientific American in 2023, she was an associate editor at Popular Science and a digital producer at public radio’s Science Friday. She has appeared as a guest on radio shows, podcasts and stage events. Young has also spoken on panels for the Asian American Journalists Association, American Library Association, NOVA Science Studio and the New York Botanical Garden. Her work has appeared in Scholastic MATH, School Library Journal, IEEE Spectrum, Atlas Obscura and Smithsonian Magazine. Young studied biology at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, before pursuing a master’s at New York University’s Science, Health & Environmental Reporting Program.

More by Lauren J. Young

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