More stories

  • in

    A Second Child Dies of Measles in Texas

    It is the second confirmed measles death in the U.S. in a decade. If the outbreak continues at the current pace, the nation may lose its “elimination” status.The measles crisis in West Texas has claimed the life of another child, the second death in an outbreak that has burned through the region and infected dozens of residents in bordering states.The 8-year-old girl died early Thursday morning of “measles pulmonary failure” at a hospital in Lubbock, Texas, according to records obtained by The New York Times. It is the second confirmed measles death in a decade in the United States.The first was an unvaccinated child who died in West Texas in February. Another unvaccinated person died in New Mexico after testing positive for measles, though officials have not yet confirmed that measles was the cause of death.A Trump administration official said on Saturday night that the girl’s cause of death is “still being looked at.” Since late January, when the outbreak began, West Texas has reported 480 cases of measles and 56 hospitalizations. The outbreak has also spread to bordering states, sickening 54 people in New Mexico and 10 in Oklahoma.If the virus continues to spread at this pace, the country risks losing its measles elimination status, a hard-fought victory earned in 2000. Public health officials in West Texas have predicted the outbreak will continue for a year.Robert F. Kennedy, the nation’s health secretary, has faced intense criticism for his handling of the outbreak. A prominent vaccine skeptic, he has offered muted support for vaccination and has emphasized untested treatments for measles, like cod liver oil.According to doctors in Texas, Mr. Kennedy’s endorsement of alternative treatments has contributed to patients delaying critical care and ingesting toxic levels of vitamin A.Experts also fear that the Trump administration’s recent decisions to dismantle international public health safeguards and pull funding from local health departments have made large, multistate outbreaks more likely.Measles is one of the most contagious pathogens. The virus can linger in the air for up to two hours after an infected person has left the room and spreads when a sick person breathes, coughs or sneezes.Within a week or two of being exposed, those who are infected may develop a high fever, cough, runny nose and red, watery eyes. Within a few days, a telltale rash breaks out as flat, red spots on the face and then spreads down the neck and torso to the rest of the body.In most cases, these symptoms resolve in a few weeks. But in rare cases, the virus causes pneumonia, making it difficult for patients, but especially children, to get oxygen into their lungs.It may also cause brain swelling, which can leave lasting problems, like blindness, deafness and intellectual disabilities.For every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The virus also harms the body’s immune defenses, leaving it vulnerable to other pathogens.Christina Jewett More

  • in

    Trump Administration Demands Additional Cuts at C.D.C.

    In addition to reductions at agency personnel, federal regulators are demanding $2.9 billion in contract cancellations, The Times has learned.Alongside extensive reductions to the staff of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Trump administration has asked the agency to cut $2.9 billion of its spending on contracts, according to three federal officials with knowledge of the matter.The administration’s cost-cutting program, called the Department of Government Efficiency, asked the public health agency to sever roughly 35 percent of its spending on contracts about two weeks ago. The C.D.C. was told to comply by April 18, according to the officials.The cuts promise to further hamstring an agency already reeling from the loss of 2,400 employees, nearly one-fifth of its work force. On Tuesday, the administration fired C.D.C. scientists focused on environmental health and asthma, injuries, violence prevention, lead poisoning, smoking and climate change.Officials at the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Abruptly cutting 35 percent of contracts would be tough for any organization or business, said Tom Inglesby, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of Public Health, who advised the Biden administration during Covid.“Sure, any manager can find small savings and improvements, but these kinds of demands are of the size and speed that break down organizations,” he said. “This is not the way to do good for the public or for the public’s health.”The C.D.C.’s largest contract, about $7 billion per year, goes to the Vaccines for Children Program, which purchases vaccines for parents who may not be able to afford them. That program is mandated by law and will not be affected by the cuts, according to one senior official who spoke on condition of anonymity.But other C.D.C. contracts include spending on computers and other technology, security guards, cleaning services and facilities management. The agency also hires people to build and maintain data systems and for specific research projects. Over the past several years, contracts have also supported activities related to Covid-19, one official said.Separately, H.H.S. last week abruptly discontinued C.D.C. grants of about $11.4 billion to states that were using the funds to track infectious diseases and to support mental health services, addiction treatment and other urgent health issues.At least some of the contracts D.O.G.E. is now asking the agency to discontinue may no longer be implemented because the people overseeing them have been fired. This is not the first time D.O.G.E. asked the agency to cut funding. It previously asked the C.D.C. to cut grants to Columbia University and University of Pennsylvania, saying those institutions had failed to take action against antisemitism on campus. “Funding grants and contracts are the mechanism by which we get things done,” said one C.D.C. scientist who asked to remain anonymous because of a fear of retaliation. “They are cutting off our arms and legs.” More

  • in

    Shingles Vaccine Can Decrease Risk of Dementia, Study Finds

    A growing body of research suggests that preventing the viral infection can help stave off cognitive decline.Getting vaccinated against shingles can reduce the risk of developing dementia, a large new study finds.The results provide some of the strongest evidence yet that some viral infections can have effects on brain function years later and that preventing them can help stave off cognitive decline.The study, published on Wednesday in the journal Nature, found that people who received the shingles vaccine were 20 percent less likely to develop dementia in the seven years afterward than those who were not vaccinated.“If you’re reducing the risk of dementia by 20 percent, that’s quite important in a public health context, given that we don’t really have much else at the moment that slows down the onset of dementia,” said Dr. Paul Harrison, a professor of psychiatry at Oxford. Dr. Harrison was not involved in the new study, but has done other research indicating that shingles vaccines lower dementia risk.Whether the protection can last beyond seven years can only be determined with further research. But with few currently effective treatments or preventions, Dr. Harrison said, shingles vaccines appear to have “some of the strongest potential protective effects against dementia that we know of that are potentially usable in practice.”Shingles cases stem from the virus that causes childhood chickenpox, varicella-zoster, which typically remains dormant in nerve cells for decades. As people age and their immune systems weaken, the virus can reactivate and cause shingles, with symptoms like burning, tingling, painful blisters and numbness. The nerve pain can become chronic and disabling.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    How Covid Changed the Lives of These 29 Americans

    Five years ago, Covid took hold and the world transformed almost overnight. As routines and rituals evaporated, often replaced by grief, fear and isolation, many of us wondered: When will things go back to normal? Could they ever? Today, for many, the coronavirus pandemic seems far away and foggy, while for others it’s as visceral […] More

  • in

    30 Charts That Show How Everything Changed in March 2020

    We left a world we might not get back to. Many things that we took for granted never returned to their former levels, with no guarantee they ever will. The pandemic took a hammer to society and left us struggling to climb back from shutdowns, from fear and from illness. It can be easy, in […] More

  • in

    Trump’s Nominee for N.I.H. Chief Faces Questions From Senators

    Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford University health economist who came to prominence crusading against lockdowns during the coronavirus pandemic, faced questioning from the Senate health committee on Wednesday morning as President Trump’s nominee to direct the National Institutes of Health.The agency, the world’s largest funder of biomedical research, with a $48 billion budget and 27 separate institutes and centers, has been rocked lately by the Trump administration’s efforts to block government spending and shrink the federal work force. Hours before Wednesday’s hearing, the Department of Government Efficiency, the cost-cutting group led by Elon Musk, trumpeted the cancellation of N.I.H. grants.Dr. Bhattacharya, who has a medical degree and is a professor of medicine but has never practiced, has expressed an interest in restructuring the agency and reducing the power of “scientific bureaucrats” who he has said end up “dominating a field for a very long time.”His views on medicine and public health have at times put Dr. Bhattacharya at odds with many of the scientists whose research the N.I.H. oversees.While he has defended vaccines and has said he was dubious that they caused autism, Dr. Bhattacharya told an interviewer last year that he could not rule out a link. “I don’t know that for a fact,” he said. Extensive evidence shows no link between immunizations and autism.Dr. Bhattacharya became a go-to witness in court cases challenging Covid policies, including mask mandates. In several cases, judges said he was disregarding facts or was untrustworthy. His detractors note that while he has published studies on health policy issues — like drug prices and the link between different types of health insurance and H.I.V. deaths — he is not a scientist conducting biomedical research, the core mission of the agency.But supporters have said that Dr. Bhattacharya could bring needed reform to the N.I.H. and have defended some of his contrarian views on Covid.Dr. Bhattacharya burst into the news at the height of the pandemic in October 2020, when he co-wrote an anti-lockdown treatise, the Great Barrington Declaration, that argued for “focused protection” — a strategy that would focus on protecting the elderly and vulnerable while letting the virus spread among younger, healthier people.The nation’s medical leadership, including Dr. Francis S. Collins and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, then director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, denounced the plan. Referring to Dr. Bhattacharya and his co-authors as “fringe epidemiologists,” Dr. Collins wrote in an email that “there needs to be a quick and devastating takedown of its premises.”Dr. Collins, who later stepped down as the N.I.H. director to pursue his laboratory research, retired last week in anticipation of Dr. Bhattacharya’s arrival. More

  • in

    Scientists Describe Rare Syndrome Following Covid Vaccinations

    In a small study, patients with the syndrome were more likely to experience reactivation of Epstein-Barr virus and high levels of a coronavirus protein.The Covid-19 vaccines were powerfully protective, preventing millions of deaths. But in a small number of people, the shots may have led to a constellation of side effects that includes fatigue, exercise intolerance, brain fog, tinnitus and dizziness, together referred to as “post-vaccination syndrome,” according to a small new study.Some people with this syndrome appear to show distinct biological changes, the research found — among them differences in immune cells, reawakening of a dormant virus called Epstein-Barr, and the persistence of a coronavirus protein in their blood.The study was posted online Wednesday and has not yet been published in a scientific journal. “I want to emphasize that this is still a work in progress,” said Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at Yale University who led the work.“It’s not like this study determined what’s making people sick,” she said, “but it’s the first kind of glimpse at what may be going on within these people.”Independent experts noted that the findings were not conclusive on their own. Yet the results, from a scientific team known for rigorous work, suggest that post-vaccination syndrome deserves further scrutiny, they said.“One of the most important things is that we get some attention to really shine a light on this and try to understand exactly what it is,” said John Wherry, director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Pennsylvania. (Dr. Wherry has previously collaborated with Dr. Iwasaki’s team, but did not participate in this work.)We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Don’t Cut an Agency So Vital to Our Health

    More from our inbox:Needed: More Maternity WardsRacial Inequities in the Overdose CrisisVet the Presidential CandidatesTech Tycoons in ChargeA building on the N.I.H. campus in Bethesda, Md. The agency comprises 27 institutes and has a budget of $48 billion.Hailey Sadler for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Long Government’s ‘Crown Jewel,’ Health Institute Is Becoming a Target” (news article, Dec. 3):Your article describes the National Institutes of Health as a “crown jewel” of the federal government based on its track record of success in driving medical and health research and innovation. The article also captures the longstanding bipartisan support for the agency and its work.When asked in a national survey we commissioned this year, Americans of all political persuasions expressed their support for federally funded research:Eighty-eight percent of Americans agree that basic scientific research is necessary and should be supported by the federal government.Some 62 percent would be willing to pay $1 per week more in taxes to support additional medical and health research.And 89 percent say it is important that the U.S. is a global leader in research to improve health.Continuing to treat the N.I.H. as a top national priority is a strategy that will spur new treatments and cures for the health threats facing our population. It will also drive U.S. business and job growth across the life science, technology, manufacturing and service sectors that in the end will keep us globally competitive.Mary WoolleyNew YorkThe writer is the president and C.E.O. of Research!America.To the Editor:The suggestion to cut infectious disease funding displays dangerous historical amnesia. Just as the 1918-20 flu pandemic killed millions of people globally, Covid-19’s emergence in 2020 demonstrated how quickly a novel pathogen can upend society. While vaccines helped curb Covid-19’s impact, we face an equally urgent crisis: antibiotic resistance.Currently, drug-resistant bacteria infect over two million Americans annually, causing more than 20,000 deaths. Without sustained funding and research, projections show antimicrobial resistance could cause 10 million annual deaths globally by 2050.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More