Fact-checking RFK Jr.’s claim that ‘everybody can get’ the COVID-19 vaccine

Published

6 hours ago

September 5, 2025

This article originally appeared on PolitiFact.

When U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testified before the Senate Finance Committee on Sept. 4, several senators criticized him for restricting the COVID-19 vaccine after promising in November he wouldn’t “take away anybody’s vaccines.”

“Did you hold up a big sign saying that you were lying when you said that?” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., asked Kennedy.

On Aug. 27, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration updated its COVID-19 vaccine guidance, limiting the groups of people approved to get the updated shot to anyone age 65 and older and any person 6 months and older who has at least one underlying health condition that increases their risk of severe COVID-19 infection.

Kennedy pushed back, “Anybody can get the booster,” he said, later adding that “it’s not recommended for healthy people.”

Warren said, “If you don’t recommend, then the consequence of that in many states is that you can’t walk into a pharmacy and get one. It means insurance companies don’t have to cover the $200 or so cost.”

Warren and Kennedy continued to speak over each other debating the vaccine’s availability.

“It depends on the states,” Kennedy said. “But they can still get it. Everybody can get it. Everybody can get it, senator.”

Asked for evidence, the Health and Human Services Department pointed us to an Aug. 27 X post from Kennedy that said, “These vaccines are available for all patients who choose them after consulting with their doctors.”

Kennedy’s blanket statement to senators is misleading and premature.

Under current guidance, healthy people under 65 years old might need a doctor’s prescription to get the shot. If they successfully get a prescription, they may need to pay out of pocket.

WATCH: Epidemiologist breaks down new restrictions on COVID shots

Further, whether the vaccine is available at pharmacies and covered by insurance is largely dependent on a vaccine panel that has so far issued no recommendations.

What was the status quo for years — that the majority of Americans, regardless of age, could easily make an appointment at their local pharmacy for the vaccine at little to no out-of-pocket cost — is no longer guaranteed in the 2025-26 season.

FDA limited COVID-19 vaccine approval, CDC has yet to issue guidance

The FDA’s approval is not the only step in the process of making vaccines available to the public.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a panel of independent experts that guides vaccine policy, has not voted on or issued current guidance. Typically, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends vaccines based on the panel’s guidance.

WATCH: Inside the CDC turmoil as RFK Jr. eyes sweeping vaccine policy changes

And that guidance affects insurance coverage and vaccine access. Federal law requires that most health insurance plans fully cover vaccines recommended by the CDC. Some states also require these recommendations before they allow vaccines to be offered over-the-counter at pharmacies.

On June 9, Kennedy fired all 17 members of the CDC’s immunization advisory committee and replaced some with new members, many of whom have expressed antivaccine views. CDC Director Susan Monarez was fired Aug. 27 over what Monarez described as a dispute about vaccine policy.

According to the CDC’s website, the advisory panel is scheduled to meet Sept. 18 to 19.

Whether people in FDA-approved groups can get the vaccine over the counter depends on the state

People in the FDA-approved groups should be able to schedule vaccinations as soon as authorized health care providers receive it, likely in the next few weeks.

Even if you are in these approved groups, where you can get the COVID-19 vaccine varies by state. By law, pharmacies in certain states won’t be able to offer the vaccine or will only administer it with a doctor’s prescription until the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel issues its recommendations.

That means even though the FDA has issued its approval for some groups, in 18 states and Washington D.C., “pharmacists cannot administer it because it isn’t on the CDC immunization schedule yet,” Brigid Groves, American Pharmacists Association vice president of professional affairs, previously told PolitiFact.

As of Sept. 4, the scheduling apps for Walgreens and CVS notified patients in some locations that they could not schedule a COVID-19 vaccine appointment because of state restrictions, inventory or the need for a prescription.

People not in FDA-approved categories may require off-label prescriptions

People who are not in the FDA’s approved group are not banned from getting the COVID-19 vaccine, per se. But accessing the vaccine will likely require navigating some barriers.

Doctors can legally prescribe a COVID-19 vaccine for people who fall outside the FDA categories.

That’s true for adults and children — and the practice of prescribing medications and vaccines for “off-label” use is fairly common in pediatrics, Dr. William Schaffner, Vanderbilt University Medical Center professor of infectious diseases, previously told PolitiFact.

WATCH: Sen. Cassidy asks RFK Jr. how he can support Nobel for Trump COVID program but not back the vaccines

That requires making and paying for a doctor’s appointment, and finding a doctor willing to prescribe it off-label.

Depending on ACIP’s guidance, pharmacists might be able to vaccinate people not in an FDA-approved group through a process called “shared clinical decision making.”

That means, for example, “If you were 52 years old and otherwise healthy, but you nonetheless wanted to get the vaccine, you could discuss that with your doctor — shared clinical decision making — and you could receive the vaccine,” Schaffner said.

Pharmacists are considered clinicians who can conduct that shared decision making, Groves said.

But again, without CDC recommendations, “We don’t know if that provision is still there,” Schaffner said.

Vaccine insurance coverage is dependent on CDC guidance that is not yet available

Insurance coverage for the vaccine is still up in the air, too, and will largely depend on what the CDC recommends.

Insurance coverage is more probable for people in an FDA-approved category. But, if the CDC recommendations include giving vaccines to healthy people through the shared clinical decision making process, insurance companies will generally honor that, Schaffner said.

COVID-19 vaccines cost about $142, according to the CDC’s price lists. It’s unclear whether that would be the out-of-pocket cost for patients receiving a COVID-19 vaccine not covered by insurance.

Our ruling

Kennedy said “everybody can get” the COVID-19 vaccine.

The FDA limited the groups of people who are eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine, which has already diminished the shot’s drugstore availability in some states. People who are not in those groups aren’t banned from getting the shot, but are likely to face additional barriers. For example, people may need a doctor to prescribe the vaccine “off-label,” making the process more challenging and potentially more costly.

Kennedy’s blanket statement also is premature.

WATCH: How vaccine hesitancy is contributing to rising rates of measles and COVID

A CDC vaccine panel has not issued recommendations for the vaccine. The group’s guidance might affect insurance coverage and over-the-counter access.

The statement contains an element of truth — the vaccine has not been banned and some people are approved to get it. But it ignores critical facts about the barriers others could face accessing and paying for it. We rate it Mostly False.

PolitiFact Staff Writer Madison Czopek contributed to this report.

We’re not going anywhere.

Stand up for truly independent, trusted news that you can count on!

Source link

Source: Dak Prescott’s spitting won’t be viewed as taunting

Published

1 hour ago

September 5, 2025

Mike Florio

Common sense strongly suggests that Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott’s spit to the ground provoked Eagles defensive tackle Jalen Carter. While Prescott surely didn’t believe that it would result in Carter spitting on Dak’s shirt, it would be naive to think he wasn’t trying to press Carter’s buttons.

By the way, it worked.

Still, Prescott’s spit didn’t violate the rules. There’s no general rule against spitting on the ground. Some have suggested that Prescott’s spittle could be construed as taunting.

While, in theory, spitting on the ground as part of a post-play celebration could, when coupled with other actions, amount to taunting, a source with knowledge of the league’s thinking on the matter tells PFT that Prescott’s spitting will not be regarded as taunting.

Two years ago, the league started disclosing all fines levied in a given week on the following Saturday. If further examination and discussion regarding the situation results in a change in the current viewpoint, it will be known in eight days whether a fine was, or wasn’t, imposed on Prescott for taunting Carter.

Currently, a Prescott fine for taunting should be regarded as very highly unlikely.

Source link

Trump Summons Tech Execs to Dinner: Let’s Go Over Seating Chart

Published

2 hours ago

September 5, 2025

Brad Davis

Katie Notopoulos: Let’s talk about the seating arrangements of the Trump dinner with tech CEOs. The photos are causing me intense thirdhand discomfort.

The first thing that jumps out is who is seated closest to President Trump: Mark Zuckerberg on one side, then “crypto czar” David Sacks. On the other side of Melania Trump is Bill Gates. What does it all mean?

Peter Kafka: My operating theory for all of the seating decisions is that the people closest to Trump are both 1) the most powerful people in tech, but also 2) people Trump recognizes. Like, I’m pretty sure he couldn’t pick Alexandr Wang of Scale AI (now Meta) or Mark Pincus of Zynga out of any lineups. So to the end of the table they go!

Katie: That sounds about right. Technically, Bill Gates isn’t even a tech CEO anymore; he’s retired! The same (sort of) is true for Sergey Brin, who had a prime seat right across from Trump, next to Tim Cook. But Satya Nadella, the actual CEO of Microsoft, who is less recognizable than Gates, was way off at the end of the table.

Peter: Sergey, as you may recall, told Google employees in 2016 that he found Trump’s election victory “deeply offensive.” But who cares about the past! Donald Trump looks forward, not backward (except when he’s not).

Katie: They’ve all come around, right? To varying degrees? Trump wanted to throw Zuck in jail, and now he’s seated at his right hand! (On a side note, I expect to see this Getty photo of Zuck and Trump as the art for a lot of articles in the future!)

Mark Zuckerberg is getting a friendly pat from President Donald Trump at dinner.

SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

Peter: Zuck is Trump’s new BFF (say people who would like us to believe that). But sitting next to Donald Trump is a double-edged sword: If you’re at the edge of the table, he’s not going to bother you, but if you’re in the front of the class, you have to be prepared for a pop quiz.

Which Zuck apparently was not. The WSJ noted: “Zuckerberg, who seemed startled by a question directed at him, responded that he hadn’t been listening.” Which, honestly, is the most relatable thing about Mark Zuckerberg I’ve ever heard.

Katie: What did you think of Tim Cook and Sam Altman sitting next to each other?

Peter: Game recognize game, is what I think. Tim Cook was the master Trump tech-whisperer in the first go-round, and remains top of his game.

But Altman went from a guy who blogged about how terrible Trump was the first time around to a guy who managed to wedge his way into an AI deal that Elon Musk wanted — while Musk was still Shadow President.

Sam Atlman caught in a moment of deep reflection.

SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

Katie: Speaking of Musk — he wasn’t there, but it’s pretty easy to guess why (he and Trump are on the outs at the moment). But more notably absent was Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, who has also seemed to emerge as something of a Trump Whisperer. Lisa Su of AMD was there. Perhaps he was just busy?

Peter: Particularly interesting because Jensen made a point of being seen by Trump at other Big Tech goat rodeos. “I see my friend is here, Jensen,” Trump said when he made many of these people fly to Saudi Arabia to sit near him earlier this year. “Tim Cook isn’t here, but you are.”

Tech CEOs attended a dinner at the White House.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Katie: Let’s talk about some of the lesser-known attendees, people who aren’t so instantly recognizable, like:

Jason Chang of biotech company CSBio. John Hering of Lookout and a Musk ally. Jamie Siminoff, founder of Ring, and David Limp from Blue Origin (perhaps filling in for Andy Jassy or Jeff Bezos)? Sunny Madra of AI chip maker Groq. Vivek Ranadivé, tech veteran and current owner of the Sacramento Kings. Dylan Field of Figma. Sanjay Mehrotra of Micron. Shyam Sankar, CTO of Palantir (Alex Karp, the CEO, wasn’t there).

Peter: Katie, maybe you don’t know this feeling, but I do: Ever get an invite to a cool thing but it’s happening in, like, a day, which suggests that you’re a last-minute add because someone else dropped out/or they couldn’t fill the room?

Because some of these attendees are … surprising.

Peter: By far, my favorite low-profile attendee is Jared Isaacman. If that name is familiar, it’s because he reportedly played a key role in the Elon Musk/Trump breakup earlier this year.

Musk had put him forward as the head of NASA, and Trump agreed to it, but apparently changed his mind after he learned that Isaacman once said and did nice things for Democrats. This all led to a gnarly White House humiliation. I wonder if Trump remembers that. I’m sure Musk does.

Katie: So clearly there were some tensions here — both between the CEOs and Trump and also with each other. Who at the dinner, excluding Trump, has the biggest beef with each other at the moment?

Oracle CEO Safra Catz had a prime seat next to Bill Gates, near the Trumps.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Peter: Tim vs. Mark is an oldie but goodie.

Katie: Sam Altman and Mark Zuckberg seem to be trading little public barbs lately, and are fighting over poaching employees.

This all leaves me with one big question: Who do you think had the worst time?

Peter: I don’t know! I don’t know who would have a good time at a command performance like this. But I keep thinking about the 2016 version of this roundtable, when just about everyone assembled was profoundly uncomfortable (except maybe Peter Thiel, but it’s hard to figure out when that person is/isn’t comfortable).

I think this time around, some of the folks at the table, like Sacks and Chamath, are delighted about it. And for the rest, they certainly know what the score is.

Source link

Jason Kelce Under Scrutiny For Stance On Jalen Carter, Dak Prescott Incident

Published

3 hours ago

September 5, 2025

Chris Rosvoglou

Former Philadelphia Eagles star Jason Kelce didn’t hide his true feelings about Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott’s scuffle with Jalen Carter, even if it aggravated NFL fans around the country.

Before the first snap from scrimmage on Thursday night, Carter was ejected for spitting on Prescott. That certainly hurt the Eagles since he’s one of the best defensive players in the league. He owned up to his mistake during his postgame media availability.

“It was a mistake that happened on my side, and it just won’t happen again,” Carter said. “I feel bad for my teammates and the fans out there. I’m doing it for them. … It won’t happen again. I can make that promise.”

Even though Carter took accountability for his actions, Kelce defended him on social media. In fact, he suggested that Prescott was responsible for this absurd moment.

Late on Thursday night, NBC shared footage of Prescott spitting on the ground near Carter. That video was reposted by Kelce along with this message: “And the truth shall set you free.”

KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI – NOVEMBER 4: ESPN analyst Jason Kelce on set prior to the game between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers at GEHA Field at Arrowhead Stadium on November 4, 2024 in Kansas City, Missouri. (Photo by Aaron M. Sprecher/Getty Images)Aaron M&period; Sprecher/Getty Images

Kelce missed the mark.

Just about every reply to this post from Kelce points out how ridiculous his stance on this situation is. At the end of the day, Prescott didn’t actually spit on Carter. The All-Pro defensive lineman for the Eagles, on the other hand, legitimately crossed the line.

“Spitting on someone and spitting on the ground is 2 different things,” former NFL offensive lineman Jon Feliciano replied.

“This is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually limited. I don’t know which. Dak is spitting at the ground. Tyler Booker is between him and Jalen Carter. Carter was six inches away and spat on him. This is comparing coughing around someone and coughing on someone,” Cowboys reporter Bobby Belt said.

“Dak spit on the ground because he’s not an idiot,” one fan wrote. “Jalen Carter spit on Dak because he’s a complete idiot. Glad we can clear that truth up.”

“Crazy work to go to bat for your former teammate when they do something stupid right on front of the ref but here we are,” a second fan said.

“Jason always does some dumb stuff to defend these losers,” a Taylor Swift fan commented.

Prescott shares his side to the story.

Following the Cowboys’ 24-20 loss to the Eagles, Prescott spoke to the media about his altercation with Carter. He revealed what led to this absurd moment.

“He was trolling, I guess you could say, trying to mess with Tyler Booker. I was just looking at him,” Prescott said. “I was right here by the two linemen, and I guess I needed to spit, and I wasn’t going to spit on my lineman and I just spit ahead. … And he goes, ‘Are you trying to spit on me?’ At that point, I mean I felt like he was insulting me. I wouldn’t spit on somebody. ‘I’m damn sure I’m not trying to spit on you.’ We’re about to play a game. … ‘What would I need to spin on you for?’ He just spit on me in that moment, it was more of a surprise than anything.”

The NFL has not yet announced if it’ll discipline Carter for his behavior. Earlier this year though, the league said it will crack down on violent gestures. Spitting on an opponent should classify as one.

This story was originally reported by The Spun on Sep 5, 2025, where it first appeared in the NFL section. Add The Spun as a Preferred Source by clicking here.

Source link