(LAS VEGAS) — A 6-year-old boy whose mom told him to keep his face mask on at school is now going viral for following his mom’s instructions exactly.
Mason Peoples, a first-grade student in Las Vegas, Nevada, wore his face mask for his school photo.
The photo was shared on Facebook by his mom, Nicole Peoples, who wrote that her son had the option to take his mask off.
Peoples said her son declined and told the photographer, “No Thank you, I always listen to my mom!”
“I’m so proud of him for sticking to his word, but I should have been more clear about my rules on this day,” Peoples wrote on Facebook.
While Peoples’ photo of her son quickly went viral, Mason is not the only student who chose to keep a mask on for school photos this year, according to Matthew Comfort, an account manager for Dorian Studio, the photography studio that took Mason’s school photo.
“We’ve taken hundreds and hundreds of students this fall wearing their masks,” Comfort told “Good Morning America.” “It’s not an isolated incident.”
Comfort said that Dorian Studio first asks schools if they want to give students the option to remove their mask for their school photo. If the school allows masks to be removed for the photo, then the photographer gives each student the option.
The photographer who took Mason’s school photo on Sept. 7th, followed the guidelines correctly in giving Mason the option to take off his mask and then in following his request to leave it on, according to Comfort.
“If students don’t want to [remove their mask] because of safety concerns, we don’t push them,” she said. “[The photographer] did exactly what she was supposed to do.”
Mason’s now-viral school photo with his mask on is a sign of the times, as it is now the third school year in a row upended by the coronavirus pandemic.
Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend that face masks be worn at schools by both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge approved a plan Monday to unconditionally release John Hinckley Jr., who had shot and wounded former President Ronald Reagan in 1981, from all remaining court-ordered restrictions, if he continues to follow rules and agrees to undergo regular mental health examinations.
U.S. District Court Judge Paul L. Friedman said he plans on issuing his ruling on the plan later this week, the Associated Press reported.
Hinckley, who was previously granted conditional release in 2016, was allowed to stay at his mother’s home in Williamsburg, Virginia. Since then, he has been kept under regular court-ordered supervision and mandated therapy.
Hinckley, now 66, is not allowed to own a gun, contact Raegan’s children, other victims or their families, or actress Jodie Foster – who he was obsessed with at the time of the 1981 shooting.
Friedman said Hinckley could be released from all court supervision by June 2022, if he continues to follow those rules.
According to the Associated Press, Hinckley has displayed no symptoms of active mental illness, no violent behavior and no interest in weapons since 1983, said Friedman.
(NEW YORK) — Facebook announced Monday that it was pausing development of its controversial “Instagram Kids” platform meant for children under the age of 13.
“While we stand by the need to develop this experience, we’ve decided to pause this project,” Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, said in company blog post Monday. “This will give us time to work with parents, experts, policymakers and regulators, to listen to their concerns, and to demonstrate the value and importance of this project for younger teens online today.”
“Critics of ‘Instagram Kids’ will see this as an acknowledgement that the project is a bad idea,” Mosseri added. “That’s not the case. The reality is that kids are already online, and we believe that developing age-appropriate experiences designed specifically for them is far better for parents than where we are today.”
He noted how YouTube and TikTok have already created versions of their apps for those under 13. Instagram’s goal was to allow parents to supervise and control their tweens’ experience on a version built for users ages 10 to 12, he said.
“We firmly believe that it’s better for parents to have the option to give their children access to a version of Instagram that is designed for them — where parents can supervise and control their experience — than relying on an app’s ability to verify the age of kids who are too young to have an ID,” Mosseri wrote.
While Instagram Kids has been paused, Mosseri said the company will continue to build opt-in parental supervision tools for teens and expects to have more to share on this in the coming months.
The “Instagram Kids” proposal has faced pushback for months. In May, a bipartisan coalition of 44 state and territory attorneys general sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerburg urging the company to abandon the project, citing the potential for harm to children.
Lawmakers also pressed Zuckerberg over the project during a March hearing, when he argued that there is “a large number of people under the age of 13 who would want to use a service like Instagram” and that it could provide “broadly positive” benefits such as helping young people stay connected with friends and learn about content online.
Monday’s announcement also comes in the wake of a Wall Street Journal investigation that alleged Facebook’s own internal research found Instagram harmful for young users, especially teenage girls. Facebook and Instagram have argued the reporting mischaracterizes what they are trying to do and that research also shows positive benefits.
“Recent reporting from the WSJ on our research into teen’s experiences on Instagram has raised a lot of questions for people,” Mosseri wrote Monday. “To be clear, I don’t agree with how the Journal has reported on our research.”
“We do research like this so we can make Instagram better,” he added. “That means our insights often shed light on problems, but they inspire new ideas and changes to Instagram.”
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle did not seem appeased by Facebook’s announcement.
“Pausing Instagram kids is not enough,” Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colorado, wrote on Twitter Monday. “They need to abolish the program completely.”
Another vocal critic of the project, Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said on Twitter, “Facebook is heeding our calls to stop plowing ahead with plans to launch a version of Instagram for kids. But a ‘pause’ is insufficient.”
“Facebook must completely abandon this project,” Markey added
(EVANSTON, Ill.) — Northwestern University says it is investigating two fraternity houses after students say they were non-consensually drugged during gatherings at the Evanston, Illinois, campus locations. There is also now a criminal investigation into the incidents by local police.
The university has yet to determine how many students were allegedly involved.
On Saturday, school officials halted social events and chapter-sponsored recruitment activities at some campus fraternities. The suspension will last until Oct. 17, at the earliest.
The university is encouraging students to seek on-campus counseling and other health services as needed as student protests erupt at the two locations where the incidents allegedly took place.
“I am here because multiple survivors have come forward stating the harm that they experienced in this frat and others,” one student told the ABC Chicago station. “This is not a unique instance.”
School officials said in a statement that they have been in communication with the Interfraternity Council, the governing body of many fraternities, and it “understand[s] the seriousness of these reports and the importance of the investigations.”
The IFC also passed a resolution to institute a ban on all social activities inclusive of recruitment events during this time frame.
“This decision was made to help ensure the safety of our students,” a university representative told ABC News. “As we said in our message to the Northwestern community, the health, safety and well-being of our students is our top priority.”
The university has since reminded students of the policy against alcohol in on-campus fraternity and sorority houses.
Northwestern University Police is urging people with information on these reports to call 847-491-3456.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden publicly received his COVID-19 booster shot on Monday afternoon as his administration promotes new booster guidance that has spurred some confusion among Americans on when to get a third dose.
“Like I did with my first and second COVID-19 vaccination shot, I’m about to get my booster shot and do it publicly. That’s because the Food and Drug Administration, the FDA, the Center for Diseases Control and Prevention, the CDC, looked at all the data, completed their review, and determined the boosters for the Pfizer vaccine — others will come later, maybe, I assume — but the Pfizer vaccine are safe and effective,” Biden began.
Delivering remarks ahead of receiving a third dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in the South Court Auditorium, provided Biden the opportunity to address some of that confusion.
He joked, “Now I know it doesn’t look like it, but I am over 65 — I wish — I’m way over. And that’s why I’m getting my booster shot today.”
The president already received his first dose of the vaccine on Dec. 21, 2020, and his second dose on Jan. 11, 2021. At age 78, Biden qualifies for a third shot under the new CDC guidance issued last week recommending booster shots to older Americans at least six months after their first series of shots.
Additionally, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky overruled her agency’s independent advisory panel last Friday by also adding a recommendation for a third dose for Americans ages 18 to 64 considered high risk to COVID-19 due to where they work.
Biden repeated the administration’s messaging that while booster shots are rolling out, baseline vaccinations are the priority.
“The bottom line is that you’re fully vaccinated, and you’re highly protected now from severe illness, even if you get COVID-19. You’re safe and we’re going to do everything we can to keep it that way, with the boosters. But let me be clear, boosters are important, but the most important thing we need to do is get more people vaccinated,” he said.
“The vast majority of Americans are doing the right thing. Over 77% of adults have gotten at least one shot. About 23% haven’t gotten any shots. And that, that distinct minority is causing an awful lot of us, a lot of damage for the rest of the country,” he added.
“This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. That’s why I’m moving forward with vaccination requirements wherever I can,” Biden said.
As Biden walked over to receive his shot, he did a double-take back to the podium to put his mask back on, in apparent modeling of CDC recommendations.
He said first lady Jill Biden, at age 70 and working in a school, considered a high-risk environment for COVID-19, would receive her shot booster soon too.
On ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Monday, Walensky acknowledged the confusion around the decision and the categories of people it applies to as the administration promotes the rollout of booster shots.
Asked also on CBS about Biden’s comment last week that boosters could be offered to the general population anyway, despite the more narrow recommendations from the Food and Drug Administration and CDC, Walensky said, “I recognize that confusion.”
“Right now, our recommendation is for these limited people in the population, over 65, high-risk workers, high-risk community occupations, as well as high-risk by comorbidities,” she said.
On when the general population will be eligible, Walensky said it’s being looked at every few weeks but did not offer the same optimism as the president had last week.
“We are evaluating this science in real-time. We are meeting every several weeks now to evaluate the science. The science may very well show that the rest of the population needs to be boosted. And we will provide those guidances as soon as we have the science to inform them,” she said.
The new CDC current policy does not apply for boosters to be given to people initially vaccinated with the Moderna or Johnson & Johnson shots.
(NEW YORK) — In 2009, when Dashauna Priest was just 9 years old, her third grade class project was to write letters of gratitude to military veterans. Priest’s letter was sent to Frank Grasberger, a World War II veteran, and he’s kept it ever since.
“It meant so much to me and touched my heart so much,” Grasberger told “Good Morning America.” “Keeping it with me made me feel like I was with her, protecting her.”
In addition to the note of thanks, Priest drew a helmet with flowers coming out of it and an American flag on the letter, which Grasberger said “really touched” him.
“I felt like how could such a young girl understand what war was and how could she be so kind writing to someone she didn’t even know?” he said.
Grasberger knew he wanted to meet Priest immediately after reading the letter but was unable to find her, he said. Jill Pawloski, an employee at VITALIA Senior Residences in Strongsville, Ohio, where Grasberger lives, stepped in and tracked Priest down on social media.
“I reached out and sent her a private message explaining the situation,” Pawloski told “GMA,” adding that Grasberger was unaware that she was searching for Priest on his behalf. “I then asked her if she’d be interested in coming to our community to surprise Frank and without hesitation she said yes. I was thrilled and so full of joy that I could do this for Frank. He has such a huge heart and I knew this would fill his heart up.”
Priest, now 21, told “GMA ” that Pawloski’s message went to the requests folder on Instagram, which she “usually doesn’t open” but for some reason did that day.
“It’s so ironic because two weeks before I had opened up my memory box and went through it and I actually picked up [Grasberger’s] letter and read it,” Priest said. “So when she had messaged me, I had opened it around 12 at night and I actually cried because it was like, ‘Wow, this is crazy I just read the letter.'”
In response to Priest’s original letter, Grasberger wrote her a letter back in 2009, but he said he “never knew if she ever received it.”
After 12 years, the pair were able to finally meet on July 23 of this year. With the help of Grasberger’s family, Pawloski was able to keep the meeting a secret from Frank so that it could be a surprise.
“We told him that someone was coming in to interview him about his story,” Pawloski said. “We were all in tears watching [them] meet for the first time. It was beautiful and heartwarming and showed what a little act of kindness can do for two strangers.”
“Oh God, I was in shock like it couldn’t be the girl,” Grasberger said. “I never thought I’d find her let alone see or meet her. It was amazing. I went through a box of Kleenex.”
Priest said of the meeting: “It was amazing. He’s a very amazing person. He has a great personality. I was really thrilled to meet him. He was just full of life.”
Grasberger, along with his family and Pawloski, had another surprise waiting for them. In a full-circle moment, Priest arrived wearing her National Guard uniform as she herself has joined the military.
“No one had known I was in the military so when I showed up in my uniform it sparked something in everyone to start crying and it made me cry,” Priest said, adding that she’s not typically a crier.
“I’m so proud of her,” Grasberger said. “She’s like a third daughter to me. She has become such a wonderful nice girl. I hope her son knows one day what a difference she made in my life.”
(WASHINGTON) — When Anita Hill accused then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of unwanted advances and lewd comments when she worked for him, she says it changed “just about every aspect” of her life.
Thirty years after Hill delivered testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee about Thomas, she is still a “crusader” — not just on the topic of sexual harassment but also on the larger issue of gender violence.
“I started out with sexual harassment and I thought that was the issue that I would deal with but I started hearing from people who had told me about intimate partner violence and then there are people who wrote me, [who] spoke about their experience with sexual assault and rape,” Hill told “Good Morning America” co-anchor Robin Roberts. “And what I started to understand was that there was this connection and that you couldn’t really separate them, because at the heart of it was the same problem.”
Hill’s testimony in 1991 before a panel of 14 male senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee gripped the nation. The senator who led the hearing was President Joe Biden, who, in recent years, has publicly apologized for the treatment Hill received while publicly testifying against Thomas.
Hill told Roberts she feels that Biden’s personal apology to her “wasn’t enough.”
“I’m not sure that he quite understood how much harm the Senate hearings and his control, or lack of control, of those hearings did to all of us,” she said of Biden. “I think, unfortunately, the personal apology wasn’t enough. What I really wanted was somebody who was going to commit to doing something about this massive problem of gender violence that we have in this country that’s hurting everyone.”
Thomas would go on to be confirmed as a Supreme Court justice, a position he continues to hold.
Hill writes in her new book, “Believing: Our 30-Year Journey to End Gender Violence,” that her testimony against Thomas not only changed her own life but sparked a national conversation on gender violence.
The conversation has been propelled over the past decades by actions like the Me Too movement, founded by Tarana Burke in 2006, and Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony in 2018 against then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, but much is left to be done, according to Hill.
“We can, first of all, change the narrative culturally and stop telling people, telling children, that what’s happening to them is ‘not so bad’ because that keeps people from coming forward,” said Hill, adding that more needs to be done to fix what happens once people come forward with allegations.
“I still am not at the point where I can say I advise everyone to come forward. I don’t,” she said. “What I advise people to do is understand the process that you’re coming forward into, because we still have processes that are not necessarily meant to solve the problem of sexual harassment, or rape or sexual assault. We’ve got to change the processes if we in fact want people to feel confident and trust that they are going to be treated fairly when they go into them.”
In the United States, 81% of women and 43% of men report experiencing some form of sexual harassment and/or assault in their lifetime, according to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.
When it comes to domestic violence, nearly 20 people per minute are physically abused by an intimate partner, according to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
Hill, whose book goes on sale Tuesday, said she still believes “change is possible” 30 years later.
“I’m believing that change is possible. I’m believing that we deserve better,” she said. “We deserve better systems. We deserve better attention. We deserve leadership that will call out and acknowledge this problem for the public crisis that it is.”
“I’m talking about the president, as well as the president and CEO of every company and university,” Hill said. “Make that commitment to use your resources to stop this problem, and I believe that we can do it.”
There are three mammoth bills, two enormous deadlines and one big collective legacy to be defined – by a pair of veteran Democrats who need each other to make it happen.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is framing the high-stakes action coming to the House floor as an opportunity to enact “the vision of Joe Biden,” as he told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” Sunday.
That and more is at stake this week, in what could be the biggest votes in the long careers of both the House speaker and the president. Pelosi and Biden need a nearly unanimous Democratic Party to cast risky votes that carry uncertain payoffs, with failure on all or part bringing potential calamity.
Already, the timeline and price tag of key components are slipping, as was inevitable, and the president said Sunday that action should “take the better part of the week.”
The long-promised Monday vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill is most likely getting pushed back, and a Senate vote to keep government funding flowing will almost certainly fail on Monday given complete GOP opposition.
Biden’s sliding approval rating and spotty direct involvement continue to be a factor. So does the mistrust between the moderate and progressive wings that Pelosi is struggling to unite.
There’s a lot of truth here: “Overwhelmingly, the entirety of our caucus – except for a few whose judgment I respect – support the vision of Joe Biden,” Pelosi said on “This Week.”
Biden and Pelosi have both been in a position where they need to respect all Democrats’ judgment, because the obvious alternative if failure. Their most potent argument from here is that failure is possible – one of the few things all Democrats definitely agree on at the moment.
The RUNDOWN with Averi Harper
An investigation of border patrol agents on horses appearing to whip migrants is ongoing, but Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is making his support for those agents clear.
“If [Biden] takes any action against them whatsoever, I have worked side-by-side with those border patrol agents, I want them to know something. If they are at risk of losing their job at a president who is abandoning his duty to secure the border, you have a job in the state of Texas,” said Abbott on Fox News Sunday. “I will hire you to help Texas secure our border.”
Abbott’s declaration comes after Biden denounced the actions taken by those border patrol agents.
“It’s outrageous, I promise you, those people will pay,” Biden told ABC News’ congressional correspondent, Rachel Scott.
If an investigation determines that the law enforcement officers in those controversial images acted inappropriately, Abbott’s commitment to employ them despite potential misconduct would undermine Biden’s attempt at holding them accountable.
The idea also highlights an aspect of police reform that Democrats hoped to address in the now-dead George Floyd Justice in Policing Act: handling law enforcement officers who are reprimanded or terminated by one agency only to be employed by another. The legislation aimed to create a national police misconduct registry.
The issue, along with so many other aspects of police reform, remains unaddressed after the breakdown of Senate negotiations.
The TIP with Alisa Wiersema
After Arizona’s so-called “audit” results only added votes to Biden’s 2020 winning margin, former President Donald Trump rallied supporters on Saturday by continuing to cling false allegations that Georgia’s elections also suffered from mass voter fraud.
The validity of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia has been backed by several investigations, a statewide hand recount, a statewide voting machine recount and a voter signature review in one of the state’s most populous counties. Still, former Trump continues to deny the evidence to the extent of endorsing Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s Republican primary opponent, Rep. Jody Hice, who challenged November’s election results in Congress.
Trump’s adamance to oppose history also includes targeting Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, of Georgia, who refused to get involved in overturning the outcome of the election despite being pressured to do so by the former president last year. Trump’s apparent fixation on Kemp even caused him to go off-message at Saturday’s rally, which was meant to support pro-Trump Republican candidates in upcoming elections.
Instead, Trump said voting rights advocate and possible Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams would make a better executive than Kemp. “Having her, I think, might be better than having your existing governor. It might very well be better,” Trump said of his fellow Republican. Abrams is popularly credited with successfully mobilizing voters and turning Georgia blue.
THE PLAYLIST
ABC News’ “Start Here” Podcast. Monday morning’s episode features a breakdown of this week’s key reconciliation and infrastructure votes for Democrats with ABC News White House Correspondent MaryAlice Parks. Then, a Florida school board member talks about spending a weekend knocking on hundreds of doors to find students still missing from school. And, ABC’s Britt Clennett tells us why world leaders are paying close attention to who will replace German Chancellor Angela Merkel. http://apple.co/2HPocUL
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW THIS WEEKEND
President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris will receive the president’s daily brief in the Oval Office.
Former President Barack Obama hosts a discussion with campaign alums ahead of the Obama Presidential Library groundbreaking on Tuesday.
Virtual groundbreaking celebrations begin for the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago.
The House of Representatives, which convenes at noon for morning hour and at 2 p.m. for legislative business, will begin a floor debate on the bipartisan infrastructure framework.
The Senate convenes at 3 p.m. and resumes consideration of the Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act.
The Note is a daily ABC News feature that highlights the day’s top stories in politics. Please check back Monday for the latest.
(NEW YORK) — If you’re concerned about travel plans changing during the holidays, experts say it’s important to take stock of any vouchers you may be sitting on and utilize the lack of change fees.
1. Take Advantage of No Change Fees
Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, major U.S. airlines have done away with change fees, allowing travelers to be more flexible with their plans and giving them the option to switch travel dates and flights.
Scott Keyes, founder of Scott’s Cheap Flights, said it’s crucial to take advantage of this policy when booking holiday trips.
“During the pandemic, the airlines got rid of those change fees for most flights, so now when you book a flight, as long as it’s not in Basic Economy, you automatically have flexibility so that you can change your flight later on without having to pay any penalty to do so,” Keyes said in an interview with ABC News. “If the new flights you switch to are more expensive, you do have to cover that fare difference, but if the new dates are cheaper, you’ll actually get the difference back in the form of a travel credit.”
While carriers are being more accommodating, Keyes said it’s important to not think of this policy as “free cash.”
“What folks have now when they travel is that they have the flexibility to be able to change their travel dates or get a voucher from the airline for future travel, but again not conflating that with getting a cash refund.”
However, if you want to be certain that you will get your money back, be sure to book a “refundable” fare.
“To be able to get your money back for a flight that you no longer want to take, you had to have booked a much more expensive refundable ticket,” Keyes said. “Those are the only ones that allow you to fully get your money back if you decide later to cancel.”
2. Check to see if you have any vouchers, and if they’re still valid
If you didn’t book that refundable fare, you’re next best bet is contacting your airline and obtaining a travel voucher — this will allow you to use that money with the airline and rebook at a later date.
However, those vouchers don’t last forever, Keyes said.
“Vouchers in general have a use it or lose it component,” Keyes said. “You want to find out what the expiration date is so it doesn’t accidentally expire without your even realizing it.”
At the beginning of the pandemic, airlines began offering customers travel vouchers for trips already booked. Policies vary from carrier to carrier, so it’s important to read the fine print.
“You want to find out what is the expiration date refer to — does this refer to the date I have to travel by or just the date I have to book my flight by,” Keyes said.
If your voucher has expired, Keyes said not to lose hope.
“Give the airline a call and see if they’re willing to extend the deadline,” Keyes said. “The number of people traveling is still down significantly from where it was pre-pandemic and airlines are trying to engender not only goodwill among travelers, but also trying to make sure that folks fill up those planes.”
“It never hurts to ask.”
3. Treat it like a game of chicken
If your trip is already booked but you think you might have to make changes, Keyes said it might be worth waiting until the last minute to cancel or tweak your trip.
“My best piece of advice in that scenario is to treat it like a game of chicken,” Keyes said. “It’s either you cancel the flight, and you’re going to get a travel voucher from the airline, or maybe they cancel the flight, in which case you would be entitled to a cash refund — so it’s whoever blinks first.”
Last year, the Department of Transportation (DOT) cracked down on airlines, pushing them to be more transparent with their refund policies if a flight is cancelled or significantly delayed by the carrier.
The move came amid thousands of complaints from customers, many of which concerned refunds. At the time, DOT asked airlines, “to revisit their customer service policies and ensure they are as flexible and considerate as possible to the needs of passengers who face financial hardship during this time.”
“The one loophole here, which I think is really important for folks to know, is if the airline cancels or significantly changes your flight, under federal law you are entitled to a full cash refund if you want one,” Keyes said.
(NEW YORK) — The United States has been facing a COVID-19 surge as the more contagious delta variant continues to spread.
More than 686,000 Americans have died from COVID-19 while over 4.7 million people have died from the disease worldwide, according to real-time data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University.
The U.S. is continuing to sink on the list of global vaccination rates, currently ranking No. 46, according to data compiled by The Financial Times. Just 64.7% of Americans ages 12 and up are fully vaccinated against COVID-19, according to data from the CDC.
Here’s how the news is developing. All times Eastern:
Sep 27, 9:07 am
CDC ‘enthusiastically awaiting’ Pfizer vaccine data on ages 5 to 11
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said her agency is “enthusiastically awaiting” data from Pfizer on the use of its COVID-19 vaccine in children ages 5 to 11.
On Sunday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on This Week that he expects the company to submit the data to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration within the coming days.
“As soon as they get submitted to the FDA, I know the FDA is urgently planing to review this data,” Walensky told ABC News’ Whit Johnson in an interview Monday on Good Morning America.
“It will go from the FDA to the CDC and we will review it with similar urgency,” she added, “and I’m hoping in the order of weeks.”
Sep 27, 8:49 am
CDC director stands by decision to overrule panel on Pfizer boosters
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said she stands by her decision to overrule her agency’s independent advisory panel by adding a recommendation for people considered high risk due to where they work to get a third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.
“This scientific process goes from an advisory committee at the FDA, to the authorization of the FDA, to an advisory committee at the CDC and then recommendations from the CDC. It’s a very transparent, scientific, public process and I listened intently,” Walensky told ABC News’ Whit Johnson in an interview Monday on Good Morning America.
“I fully endorsed the recommendations from the CDC advisory committee for boosters for those over the age of 65, as well as for those with underlying conditions,” she continued. “And then I also endorsed — in full alignment with the FDA and many people at the CDC — for boosters for people with high risk exposures, like those who work in occupational settings or in group settings or live in group settings, and I felt after listening to all of the science that that was actually the best move for public health.”
On Thursday night, the panel voted unanimously to recommend Pfizer boosters for seniors and other medically vulnerable Americans, six months after their second dose. People younger than 49, however, should only get a third dose if the benefits outweigh the risks, the panel said — a personal consideration to discuss with their doctor. Some panelists said that without further data, they weren’t comfortable with automatically including younger people because of their jobs.
