We’re hearing a lot about Denmark these days, because the country vaccinates its children against fewer disease threats. And for the political appointees currently running our federal health agencies, that’s an attractive proposal and a way to achieve a longtime, ideological goal—fewer vaccinations. 

Unfortunately for Americans, this drive has nothing to do with decades of scientific evidence, which indicates that our schedule leads to better health outcomes. It has everything to do with our current leadership’s anti-vaccine dogma.

Denmark as a model for the US?

Multiple media outlets reported that the US Department of Health and Human Services planned to announce on December 19 its intent to bring the US vaccine policy in line with “peer countries” early next year, with Denmark invoked as the model—a declaration that was called off at the last minute. 

There are a few problems with this proposal: First, and most important, US officials should make vaccine recommendations based on the circumstances in our country, not somewhere in Europe. Second, we are already in line with our peer nations (See the figure at right). Finally, there has been no transparent examination of data or discussion of the risks and benefits of such a change—i.e., the way vaccine decisions have typically been made in the United States. 

The truth is that, across wealthy countries with advanced health systems, childhood immunization schedules show a striking consistency. As illustrated in the figure, by early childhood most high-income nations vaccinate against roughly a dozen to fifteen serious pathogens. The United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Israel, Japan, and Nordic neighbors such as Sweden, Finland, and Norway all fall squarely within this range. Denmark represents the low-water mark.

Denmark’s schedule reflects a set of choices made in a small, highly homogeneous country with a centralized health care system that guarantees universal access to care, low baseline disease prevalence, and strong social infrastructure. Those conditions do not apply to the United States, not even close. And they do not apply to most of our peer countries, either. Even the Danes are puzzled by the notion that we would try to mirror their schedule. 

It’s true that the United States vaccinates against more pathogens than other countries—decisions reached after extensive debate and examination of evidence – but the claim that our country is uniquely aggressive in childhood vaccination collapses under even cursory international comparison.

What is unique is Denmark’s approach. Aligning US vaccine policy with Denmark would not move America toward international consensus. But it would put American children at risk.

What happens when we don’t vaccinate

The decision to exclude vaccines is not neutral. It carries predictable health consequences—particularly for diseases that disproportionately affect young children. Copying Denmark’s childhood vaccine schedule would mean not vaccinating American kids against serious illnesses, including rotavirus, influenza, hepatitis A and B, chickenpox (varicella) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), the leading cause of US infant hospitalizations. 

Hepatitis A is often dismissed as mild in childhood, but that characterization obscures its public health impact. In the pre-vaccine era, hepatitis A caused tens of thousands of US infections annually. Universal childhood vaccination has driven incidence down by more than 90%. 

Pediatric influenza leads to tens of thousands of US hospitalizations each year and dozens to hundreds of child deaths, even in non-pandemic seasons. During the 2024-25 season, the US officials confirmed more pediatric flu deaths—288—than in any year since we began counting them. Annual vaccination of children not only protects them directly but reduces transmission to infants, pregnant women, and older adults. Countries that do not routinely vaccinate children against influenza accept higher hospitalization rates as an unavoidable seasonal cost.

Denmark’s childhood vaccine schedule is not a gold standard. It is a policy choice shaped by unique national circumstances for Denmark, not the United States

Rotavirus, meanwhile, is a leading cause of severe gastroenteritis in infants and toddlers. Before rotavirus vaccination was introduced in the United States, the virus caused roughly 55,000 to 70,000 hospitalizations and 20 to 60 deaths among young children every year. Since routine vaccination began, hospitalizations have fallen by more than 80%. Countries that do not routinely vaccinate co8ntinue to see predictable seasonal surges, with infants requiring intravenous fluids, intensive care, and prolonged and costly hospitalization. These outcomes are preventable.

In each case, the evidence is consistent: Vaccination reduces illness, hospital strain, and death. The benefits are not theoretical; they are measured in emergency rooms that are quieter and pediatric wards that remain open for children who cannot be protected any other way.

Policy should reflect evidence, not ideology

Denmark’s childhood vaccine schedule is not a gold standard. It is a policy choice shaped by unique national circumstances for Denmark, not the United States. Most industrialized nations have chosen differently, and for good reason. They recognize that protecting children against a broader set of serious infectious diseases is both medically sound and socially responsible for their countries.

The real lesson from global comparisons is not that the United States vaccinates too much, but that industrialized countries overwhelmingly agree on which infectious diseases children should be protected against. Denmark represents the lower bound, the United States, Israel, France, and Germany the upper bound. 

There are no data that guarantee vaccinating less delivers better overall health outcomes, but there is an abundance of evidence that demonstrates lives saved and hospitalizations avoided because of childhood immunizations—ie, the data that supported our vaccine recommendation in the first place and have been continuously reevaluated over the years.

Public health policy—including vaccines—should be grounded in evidence. No data suggest that moving to Denmark’s childhood schedule will make US kids healthier. The only thing it would do is accomplish the number one objective of the ideologues running our federal health agencies: driving down vaccinations proven to protect our children.

Vaccine Integrity Project Viewpoints are authored by project staff and advisers. They are intended to address timely issues regarding vaccines with straight talk and clarity by presenting facts to counter falsehoods.