Health

Subterms

    Latest story

    213 Shares39 Views

    Friday briefing: What will US funding cuts on mRNA vaccines mean for the health of the world?

    by

    Good morning. You may have heard a saying along the lines that “when the US sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold”. So when the US health department announced plans to cut half a billion dollars in vaccine research funding on Wednesday, the world took notice.The US is the world’s largest funder of biomedical research, but this position has become more precarious with the appointment of Robert F Kennedy Jr, a longtime vaccine sceptic, as US health secretary.This week, Kennedy has announced plans to terminate 22 federal contracts for mRNA-based vaccines, casting doubt on the safety of a technology widely credited with helping end the Covid-19 pandemic and saving millions of lives.In total the affected projects are worth nearly $500m (£376m), according to the health agency. As for Kennedy, he said: “We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted.”The only problem? The scientific community in the US and around the world has overwhelmingly condemned the decision. To understand why, for today’s newsletter I spoke to Michael Head, a global health researcher at the University of Southampton. That’s after the headlines.Five big stories

    Israel-Gaza war | Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said his security cabinet had approved a plan to take over Gaza City after the prime minister earlier said Israel planned to take full control of the Palestinian territory. The decision early on Friday marks another escalation of Israel’s offensive in Gaza. Follow developments live

    Ukraine | Volodymyr Zelenskyy said ahead of an expected meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin that Europe must participate in the peace process between Ukraine and Russia. As the Kremlin refused a three-way meeting with Zelenskyy and Trump, the Ukrainian president said: “Ukraine is not afraid of meetings and expects the same brave approach from the Russian side.”

    Economy | The chancellor and prime minister will begin to foreshadow tax rises and reforms from September to prepare the country for a difficult budget that could be held in November, the Guardian has been told. A rise in gambling levies – advocated by Gordon Brown – is thought to be near-guaranteed as part of the package of tax rises.

    UK news | Amnesty International has warned the Met police against arresting participants protesting this Saturday in London in support of Palestine Action.

    Labour | The UK homelessness minister, Rushanara Ali, resigned after it emerged she evicted tenants from her east London property before increasing the rent by almost £700 a month.
    In depth: ‘The mRNA vaccines saved about 20 million lives’View image in fullscreenThe first thing to understand is that mRNA vaccines work differently from traditional ones. The latter generally introduce a weakened or inactivated part of a virus to train the immune system to recognise and fight it in the future; whereas mRNA vaccines use a molecule that tells our cells how to make a viral protein, which triggers the body’s immune responses.This technology is a scientific gamechanger, to the extent the researchers behind it won the Nobel prize in 2023. But since rising to prominence during the Covid pandemic, mRNA vaccines have been dogged by misinformation (this analysis by my colleague Nicola Davis is well worth a read.)Michael Head tells me that mRNA technology offers a very effective and adaptable approach to developing vaccines. “It’s often described as plug-and-play because you can adapt constituents of the vaccine with, for example, the latest Covid variant.”For something like a flu vaccine, researchers need to incubate the virus and grow it, which takes weeks, Head explains. “That’s fine to an extent when it comes to producing an annual vaccine like we do for seasonal influenza, but the advantage to mRNA technology is that it can be updated so quickly that it allows us to produce new vaccines or update existing vaccines quicker, which can hopefully then reduce the threat of whatever infectious disease is present.”This is crucial during a pandemic such as Covid. “The mRNA vaccines saved about 20 million lives globally in the first year of their rollout,” Head says.Why is Kennedy doing this?Kennedy once described mRNA Covid vaccines as “the deadliest vaccine ever made”. On Wednesday, he justified the health agency’s decision to terminate research by claiming that data shows mRNA vaccines “fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like Covid and flu”.Kennedy offered no scientific evidence to support this – and Head said Kennedy has been spreading vaccine misinformation for years. “He has on at least one or two occasions compared vaccines to being like the Holocaust, a common anti-vaccine trope.”He has also recently falsely claimed vaccines such as the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) jab contain “aborted foetus debris”; ordered a sweeping new study on the long-debunked link between vaccines and autism; and dismissed a panel of government vaccine experts, replacing them with his own appointees – who then voted to ban a longstanding vaccine preservative that has been a frequent target of the anti-vaccine movement despite its strong safety record.Kennedy claims he is shutting down research on mRNA vaccines and instead shifting funding to “safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate”, and that mRNA vaccines “encourage new mutations and can actually prolong pandemics”.It’s just not true, though. Head says variants actually tend to emerge in the absence of vaccinations, and in people with long-term infections – often those who are immunocompromised and can’t get over the virus quickly. That gives the virus more chances to multiply and mutate.“Vaccines reduce the risk of transmission and infection,” Head says, which means fewer opportunities for the virus to mutate. “So vaccines will have a protective effect against new variants emerging, rather than as Kennedy suggests.”What impact will this have?The question of the next pandemic is not if, but when. History shows pandemics happen, Head says, pointing to the 1918 flu pandemic, swine flu, Sars, and of course Covid.Head says this is especially true in our era of globalisation and human encroachment into new environments. “If you create enough opportunities, a new virus will enter human beings. There might be a scenario where it runs out of control like we saw with Covid. Or, it might be a bit more like Sars, where we were able to get it under control within a couple of months.“But again, globalisation and the mixing of people and animals makes things more challenging. And so a pandemic will happen at some point. We just don’t know when.”Technologies like mRNA vaccines, then, are vital. Head added that the potential applications go far beyond infectious disease.“There’s quite promising research on skin cancer and the potential for this technology to be applied across different areas of health,” Head says. That is another reason Kennedy’s decision is so damaging, he adds.One of Head’s research areas focuses on how funding decisions impact science such as cancer research. “It’s very early days, but we are starting to see a slightly alarming picture. It’ll be very hard for the rest of the world to fill the cancer research gaps that the US is likely to leave.”Is this a worrying time for the scientific community?There is no way to sugarcoat it; this is a particularly alarming moment for scientists. The World Health Organization coined the term “infodemic” during the pandemic to describe the overwhelming amount of misinformation that spreads during a public health crisis, Head says. Even before Covid, in 2019 the WHO listed vaccine hesitancy as one of the top 10 global health threats.“I have huge concerns that if a pandemic happened again tomorrow, whether populations in the UK, US, and around the world would trust public health decision making that would be vital to mitigate the impacts of any new pandemic. So the role of misinformation is significant and it can be very severe,” Head warned.“It does not help that some of the most powerful people, like US president Donald Trump and Robert F Kennedy Jr, are making poor quality comments on vaccination because that does have an impact on population level decision making.”Some of Head’s research has looked into vaccine uptake in Ghana during the pandemic. The study found that political views played a big role in whether someone agreed to receive a Covid vaccine.“​​The government was saying, go and get vaccinated, please, but there was a fair amount of anti-government sentiment at the time. And hesitancy was greater if you voted for the opposition and therefore trusted the government messaging less. So there are lessons to be learned on who delivers the messaging to get your vaccine, and how to address that lack of trust in governance,” Head said.For now, the world holds its breath … and hopes no one sneezes.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhat else we’ve been readingView image in fullscreen

    Patrick Barkham’s piece about the recent hopeful surge of some wildlife is both a joyous celebration of animals’ resilience and a call for us to give them a helping hand. Lucinda Everett, newsletters

    I love this ranking of Daniel Day-Lewis films, and to learn that the triple Oscar winner has retired from acting, and returned twice. Aamna

    We asked our readers to share the strangest things they’ve found in a new home, and they didn’t disappoint. Forgotten placenta, anyone? Lucinda

    This story by my colleague Mark Townsend is extraordinary: it pieces together, using intelligence reports and witness testimony, how the RSF paramilitary began a massacre described as “genocidal” in Zamzam refugee camp. Aamna

    Daniel Boffey examines how David Lammy is wooing JD Vance, from inviting the US vice-president to pray with him, to shedding tears over his memoir. Lucinda
    SportView image in fullscreenTennis | Ahead of the Cincinnati Open, Emma Raducanu told Tumaini Carayol in an exclusive interview that she believes her new coaching partnership with Francisco Roig can help to take her game to the next level.Football | Liverpool have agreed a fee of £46.3m plus add-ons with Al-Hilal for Darwin Núñez. The Uruguay international is expected to complete a move to the Saudi Pro League once personal terms have been finalised.Cricket | The leader of the Tech Titans consortium that has bought 49% of London Spirit believes the Hundred will become a multibillion-dollar competition to rival the Indian Premier League.The front pagesView image in fullscreenThe Guardian print edition reports “Netanyahu defies warnings over taking military control of all Gaza”. “Minister resigns over rental ‘hypocrisy” – that’s the Telegraph while the i paper expands on that: “UK’s minister for homelessness quits after she’s caught ejecting tenants and hiking rent”. “Minister for hypocrisy is forced to quit” the Mail delights. “Single-sex spaces ‘off limits to trans women’” says the Times. “Weight loss pill ‘on NHS’” and “Pill for weight loss on NHS” – the Mirror and Express both says it’s a possibility. Deep breath needed before reading the FT’s headline aloud: “BoE lowers rates but tight vote forces investors to rein in bets on more cuts”. “He’s our brave little miracle” reports the Metro, about a lifesaving “world-first operation” on a little boy.Something for the weekendOur critics’ roundup of the best things to watch, read, play and listen to right nowView image in fullscreenMusicAmaarae: Black Star | ★★★★☆Weaving elements of house, trance and EDM into Afrobeats rhythms and spiky rap cadences, the Ghanaian-American singer’s slick take on a club record is deliriously in love with wealth, celebrity and all the power it affords. But there is a difference between Amaarae and the other stars fixated on such topics: for her, glamour is a side quest and love is the motive. Shaad D’SouzaTVLucy Letby: Beyond Reasonable Doubt? | ★★★★★
    Neonatal nurse Lucy Letby became, in tabloid parlance, “Britain’s worst child serial killer” when she was convicted in 2023 of seven murders and seven attempted murders of infants in her care. This brilliantly cogent documentary, which forces sentiment aside and unpacks the science and statistics around the most contested pieces of evidence, covers more ground more meticulously in an hour than any documentary I’ve seen in recent years, and perhaps ever. Lucy ManganFilmThe Kingdom | ★★★★☆
    Lesia, a moody 15-year-old, is sent to her mob boss father’s luxurious and fortified family compound , and she is thrilled when she quickly becomes lieutenant. There are fierce and overwhelmingly authentic performances from first-time actors in Julien Colonna’s intensely atmospheric, absorbing and exciting drama. Peter BradshawGamesTime Flies | ★★★★☆
    This perception-warping bug puzzler reimagines the inevitably short lifespan of a housefly as an absurd tragedy – by providing the soon-to-perish pest with a bucket list. Over the course of roughly a minute, players buzz around minimalist 2D environments trying to make those last wishes come true. By blending this thinky thesis with playful mechanics, it supplies a lighthearted canvas for players to engage with existentialism for an hour or two. Sarah ThwaitesToday in FocusView image in fullscreenInside China’s fast-fashion factories as a US trade war loomsThe Guardian’s senior China correspondent, Amy Hawkins, visits factories threatened by US tariffs in Guangzhou, south China, as the deadline for a US-China trade agreement approaches with no deal yet in sight.Cartoon of the day | Martin RowsonView image in fullscreenThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badView image in fullscreenLynx – shy wild cats no bigger than a Labrador – became extinct in Britain 1,300 years ago thanks to hunting and habitat loss. But a paper published in the Journal of Environmental Management says the animals could thrive in Northumberland’s Kielder Forest area. The paper found that releasing 20 lynx over several years would eventually create a healthy population of about 50 animals, bringing benefits like helping to curb the overpopulation of deer in woodlands. According to the researchers, Kielder Forest is the only area of England and Wales with enough woodland for lynx to thrive. But thankfully locals are keen on the plan, with 72% of people in the project area supporting reintroduction.Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.

    Quick crossword

    Cryptic crossword

    Wordiply More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares44 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump cuts shut down an LGBTQ+ youth suicide lifeline. What happens now?

      by

      Becca Nordeen had just left a town hall for the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline when she received some shocking news. As the senior vice-president of crisis intervention at the Trevor Project, a non-profit focused on suicide prevention for queer youth, Nordeen’s team had provided counseling to LGBTQ+ individuals through 988, a national suicide and crisis hotline, for nearly three years. But a few minutes after the meeting, Nordeen received an email notifying her that those services would be terminated in a month.“There’s an emotional hangover of dealing with the grief and the work of shutting down the program,” Nordeen said. “In the days and weeks that have followed, we have looked at, ‘well, there are still young people who need us, and in our remaining service, how can we be there to meet that need?’”From 988’s inception, trained counselors had answered 1.5m online chats, calls or texts from LGBTQ+ youth in crisis. The Trevor Project was one of several groups contracted by the federal agency the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (Samhsa) to field calls from LGBTQ+ people, nearly 10% of the lifeline’s overall contacts. Nordeen’s team had responded to about half of the requests for services from the high-risk population. Samhsa cited financial constraints as the reason for closing its line geared toward the LGBTQ+ community, though opponents of the closure say that it was politically motivated.The 988 general hotline still exists and specialized services for veterans remain. But free, 24/7 counseling is no longer available for LGBTQ+ youth through the “press 3” option. According to 2023 survey data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 20% of queer youth attempted suicide between 2022 and 2023. They are more than three times more likely to do so than their cisgender and heterosexual peers.Since the closure of 988’s LGBTQ+ services on 17 July, Nordeen said that the Trevor Project has been “picking up the pieces”. The closure of the 988 lifeline has also meant that the Trevor Project lost the $25m federal contract that allowed the non-profit to more than double its impact by reaching 270,000 people. More than 200 counselors from the Trevor Project were let go upon the national lifeline’s termination. But through donations from individuals and foundations, the non-profit retained 30 counselors who will join their privately funded 24/7 suicide prevention hotline that started in 1998.Now, the Trevor Project has 130 counselors to answer the 20% surge in calls over the past two months. It’s too early to predict how long the influx will last, said Nordeen, but in the meantime, she wants youth to know that the non-profit is still there to help them. Over the past couple of weeks, Nordeen’s team has monitored the volume of requests and reached out to off-duty counselors and their network of more than 400 volunteers to respond to calls and texts during influxes.More than 53,000 people signed the Trevor Project’s petition to protect the lifeline, some of whom shared their personal experiences using it. One signer from California wrote that it saved their child’s life during a mental health crisis last year, and another person from Pennsylvania wrote that they had used the service countless times and would not be here today without it.“These youth resources make us the adults we are today,” a signer from New York wrote in the petition. “They’re not extras or luxuries, they’re lifelines. They’re the affirming spaces, the trusted adults … the moments where we were told: ‘You belong.’ Without them, many of us wouldn’t have made it.”‘An erasure of a population’A Samhsa spokesperson told the Guardian in an email that the “press 3” option had run out of congressionally directed spending and that “continued funding of the Press 3 option threatened to put the entire 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline in danger of massive reductions in service”. Congress had appropriated about $519m for 988 in the 2025 federal fiscal year that began on 1 October 2024 and ends on 30 September 2025. The LGBTQ+ services were allotted $33m, which had been exhausted by June, Samhsa said in a statement. “The 988 Lifeline will continue to be a direct connection to immediate support for all Americans,” the spokesperson said, “regardless of their circumstances.”View image in fullscreenBut Dr Sunny Patel, a child psychiatrist and former senior adviser for children, youth and families at Samhsa, said that the agency was under pressure from the Trump administration to close 988’s “press 3” option to adhere to executive orders aimed at dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. “One of the things that I find very challenging to believe is that it’s related to a lack of funding,” Patel said.The National Suicide Hotline Designation Act of 2020, which created 988 and was signed into law by Donald Trump during his first term, specified that Samhsa must be prepared to provide specialized services for LGBTQ+ youth. But now, the Trump administration has taken a special interest in targeting the healthcare of transgender individuals, Patel said. “They don’t want anything to do with LGBTQ populations,” he added. “There is this air of, ‘Well, everything should be for everybody, and so why should we have any specialized services for anybody?’”Patel said that he believed that the agency was obliged to continue a lifesaving service, and that ending it would generate harm and confusion. “I fear for the direction that we’re going in,” Patel said, “where there’s an erasure of a population and its needs.”Mark Henson, the Trevor Project’s vice-president of government affairs and advocacy, is hopeful that the decision will be reversed, in light of support from members of Congress who are pushing the Trump administration to reinstate the 988 lifeline. In the meantime, the non-profit is fundraising to try to hire more counselors to handle the potential for a continued surge in calls. And in July, the office of California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, announced that California would partner with the Trevor Project to train 988 counselors in the state to better serve LGBTQ+ youth.“We’re trying to flood the zone in any way that we can, to the extent that resources allow us to keep these services going,” Henson said, and to ensure that “the LGBTQ+ youth know that there are services out there, that they belong, and that their life has value”.‘What happens if there’s only one?’When the announcement was made that the lifeline would be terminated, Henson heard from youth that they would use 988’s LGBTQ+ services as a backup if surges on the Trevor Project’s hotline prevented them from quickly accessing a counselor and vice versa. “If there was an increase in wait time on one line, they would go to the other. There was an equilibration there that enabled them to have these multiple options,” Henson said. Now, he said, youth are asking: “What happens if there’s only one?”Specialized services from trained counselors provided a safe and affirming space for LGBTQ+ youth, Nordeen said, so that they felt less alone even if they did not have community or local support. “When you take that network away,” Nordeen said, “you are essentially invalidating that young person and their experiences and the crisis that they might feel.”The specialized services were also effective because the counselors sometimes shared similar experiences to the callers and were better able to relate to those in crisis, said Hannah Wesolowski, chief advocacy officer at the National Alliance on Mental Illness (Nami), where she advocates for policies to help people affected by mental health conditions. Youth and LGBTQ+ people were the most aware of 988, she said, so she’s concerned that dropping services could lead to “tragic outcomes”.“I fear in this time of really heated political rhetoric and partisanship,” Wesolowski said, “that this is another message point that tells young people: ‘You’re not important, you’re not the priority.’”Nami, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) and other organizations are working with members of Congress to try to return funding to the hotline in the 2026 fiscal year, or to pass legislation that would require specialized services for LGBTQ+ people. And from a state level, Nami’s local chapters are brainstorming with politicians on potential crisis service options for queer youth in their nearby communities.For Bob Gebbia, the CEO of AFSP, an organization that researches suicide prevention and that advocated for the formation of 988, it is ironic that the specialized service that received widespread bipartisan support during its creation is now the subject of fierce debate. The argument for maintaining LGBTQ+ services is simple, he said: it’s based on need. “It isn’t a political issue,” he said, “it’s a public health issue.” More

    • 138 Shares50 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr’s health department to halt $500m in mRNA vaccine research

      by

      The US Department of Health and Human Services said on Tuesday it would terminate 22 federal contracts for mRNA-based vaccines, questioning the safety of a technology credited with helping end the Covid pandemic and saving millions of lives.The unit, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, helps companies develop medical supplies to address public health threats, and had provided billions of dollars for development of vaccines during the Covid-19 pandemic.HHS said the wind-down includes cancellation of a contract awarded to Moderna for the late-stage development of its bird flu vaccine for humans and the right to purchase the shots, as previously reported in May.The US health agency said it was also rejecting or canceling multiple pre-award solicitations, including proposals from Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur, CSL Seqirus, Gritstone and others.In total, the affected projects are worth “nearly $500 million”, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said. Certain late-stage projects were excluded from the move “to preserve prior taxpayer investment”.This is the latest development under US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, a longtime vaccine skeptic who has been making sweeping changes to reshape vaccines, food and medicine policies.“We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted,” Kennedy said in a statement.Kennedy said the HHS is terminating these programs because data show these vaccines “fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu”, but did not offer scientific evidence.“We’re shifting that funding toward safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate,” Kennedy said.HHS said the decision follows a comprehensive review of mRNA-related investments initiated during the Covid-19 public health emergency.Since taking office, Kennedy, who spent two decades sowing misinformation around immunization, has overseen a major overhaul of US health policy – firing, for example, a panel of vaccine experts that advise the government and replacing them with his own appointees.In its first meeting, the new panel promptly voted to ban a longstanding vaccine preservative targeted by the anti-vaccine movement, despite its strong safety record.He has also ordered a sweeping new study on the long-debunked link between vaccines and autism.Unlike traditional vaccines, which often use weakened or inactivated forms of the target virus or bacteria, mRNA shots deliver genetic instructions into the host’s cells, prompting them to produce a harmless decoy of the pathogen and train the immune system to fight the real thing.Though in development for decades, mRNA vaccines were propelled from lab benches to widespread use through Donald Trump’s Operation Warp Speed – a public-private partnership led by Barda that poured billions into companies to accelerate development.The technology’s pioneers, Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman, were awarded the 2023 Nobel prize in medicine for their work contributing “to the unprecedented rate of vaccine development during one of the greatest threats to human health in modern times”. More

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in UK Politics

      Voices: Nurses ‘essential’ but we ‘won’t miss’ GPs: readers react to NHS strikes

      by

      Reaction to the threat of new strike action by nurses and GPs has sparked passionate debate among Independent readers, with many expressing sympathy for NHS workers but differing on whether walkouts are the right approach.The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) has warned its members feel “deeply undervalued” and will ballot for industrial action after 91 per cent rejected the government’s 3.6 per cent pay offer.GPs have also told minister Stephen Kinnock that the government must act on their demands to “avoid a future dispute,” escalating tensions across the NHS.These fresh threats follow a five-day walkout by resident doctors over the government’s refusal to grant a 29 per cent pay rise. Several commenters said nurses are “doing the work of doctors” for far less pay, and pointed to years of below-inflation increases, rising living costs, and poor career progression as valid reasons for industrial action. Mental health professionals were singled out as particularly undervalued.Others criticised GPs for high salaries and part-time hours, arguing patient access has worsened even without strikes. Some readers said they “won’t miss” GPs if they walk out, though most agreed that nurses are essential.While a few readers questioned the effectiveness of striking, most called for urgent reform and investment to retain skilled staff and protect patient safety.Here’s what you had to say:I won’t miss them if they go on strikeIt’s almost impossible to get an appointment with a GP, so I for one won’t miss them if they go on strike. I accept I would miss nurses, as they are the medics I see if I ask for a GP appointment. My daughter is a mental health nurse — she has two degrees and is undervalued by the NHS and not valued by others in the medical profession. Pay is dreadful for nurses and even worse for mental health professionals. However, I don’t believe striking will solve the problems of pay and conditions. The way to make the point is to vote with their feet and move abroad, into the private sector, or out of the medical profession. Some will say there are too many vacancies already — agreed — but even more will put on permanent pressure, whereas a strike causes only temporary disruption.HOSSNurses doing the work of doctorsPay the nurses properly, as they now regularly carry out roles once in the purview of doctors. As has been said many times, it’s difficult to see your GP face-to-face. Seeing a nurse practitioner is now the norm, and only if necessary are you referred to the GP. So why do GPs expect higher pay when nurses or trained practitioners are doing more? How many GPs work full-time, compared with part-timers?ChuckiethebraveWe should all be out behind themI’m 100 per cent behind them. The money that’s been taken out of the economy and given to shareholders — and not a word is said. We should all be out behind them.It wasn’t long ago that people were banging pots and pans, supporting them — rightly so.The government is hell-bent on driving down wages and pensions. It’s about time we stood up to this lot.LesMisrablesThe NHS is pricelessIt is very clear that most workers in the NHS feel undervalued and underpaid. For 14 years, a cynical Tory government has undermined their standard of living for ideological reasons — i.e. full privatisation.Our NHS is priceless.The electorate should kick out every government that doesn’t fund it properly — because it’s our lives at stake.NomoneyinthebankAll workers will strike eventuallyAll workers will strike, eventually, if their salaries are reduced over a fifteen-year period and their standard of living is reduced.It is naïve to think otherwise.Cyclone8If the NHS fails, get ready to payI admit that it’s difficult to get a doctor’s appointment. We’re having to wait longer for an ambulance and within A&E, together with there still being quite a hefty backlog on the waiting list — but it is coming down, albeit slowly.Despite the access issues, once you get NHS treatment, it remains exceptional.Since 2010, our doctors and nurses have effectively had a pay freeze, and, with inflation booming in recent years, our energy bills doubling, our groceries virtually doubling, and many nurses resorting to food banks, it’s no wonder they’re leaving for Australia in droves.I understand the current government were handed a skeletal economy, fractured public services, the highest taxes since WW2 and almost tripled national debt — but like any business, if you don’t invest in your workers, they will leave.For those attacking unions, they are simply workers fighting for the equality, fair pay, working conditions and T&Cs that they deserve.Our NHS is a healthcare system to be proud of. It deserves proper investment — and that includes its workers.For the Brits who are against investing in our NHS workers — I hope you’re rich enough to afford private healthcare. If the NHS fails, you’ll need to start saving now for the hundreds of pounds it’ll cost you each month in insurance.AmyNothing for GPsI fully understand the nurses — they deserve better. My GP has notified me that they can’t tell me the results of a scan for four weeks. That is just a telephone call. They deserve nothing, as far as I’m concerned. They can’t handle what they have now, let alone more.MartynIs £150,000 not enough?My local health centre has four full-time GPs. They have an average salary of over £150,000.Is that not enough? And it is still almost impossible to get an appointment.PeterLoud1Shame on you NHS workersShame on you NHS workers. Just as Starmer and Streeting were starting to sort out the NHS — I can confirm this, as my doctors’ surgery appointments have got much, much better — and I’ve just had two cataract operations with a minimum wait of one week for the first eye and four weeks for the second.You got a good increase last year, and now you’re starting to destroy the NHS.Jol Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

    • 163 Shares82 Views

      in US Politics

      Why the US is burning $10m worth of birth control | Moira Donegan

      by

      There are few better metaphors for the receding status of American women than one offered up by the Trump administration at a medical waste disposal facility outside Paris this week: rather than distribute nearly $10m worth of birth control, which had been purchased by USAID and was destined to be given to women in low-income countries, primarily in Africa, the Americans decided to burn it.The incinerated contraceptives included 900,000 birth control implants, 2m doses of injectable long-acting birth control, 2m packs of contraceptive pills and 50,000 IUDs. The medicine is just the latest in the far-reaching fallout from cuts made by the so-called “department of government efficiency,” or Doge, a project in which Elon Musk and a group of his very young, overwhelmingly male acolytes unilaterally slashed congressionally appropriated funding to government programs they did not like. The cuts have been devastating for non-profits that work to improve women’s health and safety worldwide. Sarah Shaw, an associate director at the global family planning group MSI Reproductive Choices, says that the cuts will put women at risk as they strain their health with unplanned pregnancies and seek out illegal abortions; other women who are denied access to birth control will lose out on the opportunities for education, professional development or remunerative work that can help them escape abuse, rise out of poverty, pursue their talents and ambitions and better provide for the children they already have.When MSI attempted to buy the contraceptives, the administration would only accept full price, which the organization couldn’t afford, she said. Several non-profits, including MSI, had offered to pay to ship and repackage the supplies, according to another representative. But the Trump administration refused, partially due to federal rules the prohibit the US from providing such goods to groups that perform, provide referrals for or offer education about abortions. In addition to the cost of purchasing the contraceptives, American taxpayers will now be on the hook for about $167,000 for the cost of burning them.It’s just the latest in a series of signs that the Trump administration is turning against the provision of birth control, particularly the safe, effective and woman-controlled hormonal methods that have been a cornerstone of healthcare policy for decades and which were a precondition of women’s advancement in work and education over the past 60 years.In April, the Trump administration abruptly announced that it was suspending a large swath of the domestic service grants distributed under Title X, the program meant to help low-income Americans access birth control, STD treatment and other sexual and reproductive healthcare. Of the 86 Title X grants awarded for fiscal year 2024, nearly 25% were “temporarily withheld”, mostly based on highly suspect allegations that the grant-receiving institutions – including 13 Planned Parenthood affiliates – had failed to comply with Trump executive orders banning things like DEI programs. Eight states now receive zero Title X dollars: California, Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Tennessee and Utah. Alaska, Minnesota and Pennsylvania have also lost most of their contraception funding.The domestic cuts – along with the exclusion of Planned Parenthood clinics from Medicaid reimbursements – mean that American women, too, are now facing dramatically greater obstacles to accessing birth control. Clinics that relied on Title X funding are now set to close: 11 Planned Parenthood clinics already have, including in Democratically controlled states like California. Planned Parenthood says that cumulatively, the cuts could lead the organization to close about 200 of its 600 clinics nationwide – a devastating cut to abortion providers in particular that will make a wide range of reproductive services inaccessible to women regardless of where they live.But the Trump administration is not merely forcing these programs for women’s health and dignity go up in flames. They are redirecting them to better suit their preferred cultural outcome: one in which women’s lives, ambitions and talents are all subordinated to the task of childbearing. The New York Times reported last month that the White House is redirecting Title X funds that once went to birth control to instead fund an “infertility training center” and programs in something called “restorative reproductive medicine”. If Title X’s original aim was to help American women control their fertility so as to build healthier families and to enable them to pursue other aims – like learning or work – in the new administration’s version, the program exists mainly to encourage women to have more children. But the switch should not be seen as a genuine investment in infertility, an often devastating condition with which many Americans struggle. Because the new Title X priorities do not, by and large, direct more money to IVF. Trump promised, on the campaign trail, to make IVF free. But the procedure, which has opponents on the Christian right, is not included in the administration’s new priority of “restorative” reproductive medicine, a practice that avoids controversial fertility treatments; instead, doctors seek the “root cause” of a woman’s infertility, which may involve telling them they can conceive with proper diet and exercise.In government, money allocation is a statement of values. With its dramatic cuts to contraceptive funding at home and abroad, the Trump administration is making its values clear. It does not value women’s health; it does not value their dignity, their control over their own lives, their aspirations, their earning potential, their desire to be freed from ignorance, or poverty, or the abuse they suffer under the hands of husbands and fathers. It does not value their ability to control their own bodies, and by extension, it does not value their ability to enter the public sphere. It does not value their dreams, their gifts, their hard work or invention or aspiration to anything other than making babies. American women, like women everywhere, depend on birth control to live lives of freedom and to pursue their dreams. But because of the Trump administration, those dreams are going up in smoke.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 138 Shares124 Views

      in US Politics

      Judge orders Trump administration to continue Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood

      by

      The Trump administration must continue reimbursing Planned Parenthood clinics for Medicaid-funded services, a federal judge ruled on Monday, in an escalating legal war between the reproductive health giant and the White House over Republican efforts to “defund” Planned Parenthood.Days after Donald Trump signed his sweeping tax bill, Planned Parenthood sued over a provision in the bill that ended Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, such as Planned Parenthood. The new court order, from US district judge Indira Talwani in Boston, will protect Medicaid funding for all Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide while litigation in the case continues.The order also replaces and expands a previous edict handed down by Talwani, which initially granted a preliminary injunction specifically blocking the government from cutting Medicaid payments only to Planned Parenthood affiliates that did not provide abortions or did not receive at least $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in a given year.“Patients are likely to suffer adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable,” Talwani wrote in her Monday order.“In particular, restricting members’ ability to provide healthcare services threatens an increase in unintended pregnancies and attendant complications because of reduced access to effective contraceptives, and an increase in undiagnosed and untreated STIs.”More than 80 million people rely on Medicaid, the US government’s insurance program for low-income people.It is already illegal to use Medicaid to pay for most abortions, but Planned Parenthood clinics – which treat a disproportionate number of people who use Medicaid – rely on the program to reimburse it for services such as birth control, STI tests and cancer screenings.In its lawsuit, Planned Parenthood had argued that it would be at risk of closing nearly 200 clinics in 24 states if it is cut off from Medicaid funds. These closures would probably be felt most strongly in blue states, since they are home to larger numbers of people who use Medicaid. A Planned Parenthood affiliate in California has already been forced to close five clinics as a result of the “defunding” provision.Planned Parenthood estimated that, in all, more than 1 million patients could lose care.“We will keep fighting this cruel law so that everyone can get birth control, STI testing and treatment, cancer screenings and other critical healthcare, no matter their insurance,” the Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s president and CEO, Alexis McGill Johnson, said in a statement after the Monday ruling.Planned Parenthood is battling overwhelming political and economic headwinds. Even if it prevails against the Trump administration, its affiliates could still be removed from Medicaid in red states, thanks to a June decision by the US supreme court in favor of South Carolina in a case involving the state’s attempt to kick Planned Parenthood out of its Medicaid program.  On Monday, the state of Missouri also sued the Planned Parenthood Federation of America – the mothership organization that knits together Planned Parenthood’s network of regional affiliates – over accusations that the organization downplayed the medical risks of a common abortion pill, mifepristone, “to cut costs and boost revenue”. The lawsuit, which asks for more than $1m in damages, is part of an ongoing campaign by anti-abortion activists to cut off access to mifepristone.More than 100 studies, conducted across dozens of countries and over more than three decades, have concluded that mifepristone is a safe way to end a pregnancy.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 175 Shares145 Views

      in US Politics

      Top medical body concerned over RFK Jr’s reported plans to cut preventive health panel

      by

      A top US medical body has expressed “deep concern” to Robert F Kennedy Jr over news reports that the health secretary plans to overhaul a panel that determines which preventive health measures including cancer screenings should be covered by insurance companies.The letter from the the American Medical Association comes after the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that Kennedy plans to overhaul the 40-year old US Preventive Services Task Force because he regards them as too “woke”, according to sources familiar with the matter.During his second term, Donald Trump has frequently raged against organizations and government departments that he considers too liberal – often without any evidence. The US president, and his cabinet members such as Kennedy, have also overseen huge cuts and job losses across the US government.The taskforce is made up of a 16-member panel appointed by health and human services secretaries to serve four-year terms. In addition to cancer screenings, the taskforce issues recommendations for a variety of other screenings including osteoporosis, intimate partner violence, HIV prevention, as well as depression in children.Writing in its letter to Kennedy on Sunday, the AMA defended the panel, saying: “As you know, USPSTF plays a critical, non-partisan role in guiding physicians’ efforts to prevent disease and improve the health of patients by helping to ensure access to evidence-based clinical preventive services.”“As such, we urge you to retain the previously appointed members of the USPSTF and commit to the long-standing process of regular meetings to ensure their important work can be continued without disruption,” it added.Citing Kennedy’s own slogan of “Making America healthy again,” the AMA went on to say: “USPSTF members have been selected through an open, public nomination process and are nationally recognized experts in primary care, prevention and evidence-based medicine. They serve on a volunteer basis, dedicating their time to help reduce disease and improve the health of all Americans – a mission well-aligned with the Make America Healthy Again initiative.”According to the Affordable Care Act, public and private insurance companies must cover any services recommended by the Preventive Services Task Force without cost sharing.In a statement to MedPage Today, Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon did not confirm the reports, instead saying: “No final decision has been made on how the USPSTF can better support HHS’ mandate to Make America Healthy Again.”Reports of Kennedy’s alleged decision to overhaul the taskforce come after the American Conservative published an essay earlier this month that described the taskforce as advocating for “leftwing ideological orthodoxy”.It went on to accuse the panel of being “packed with Biden administration appointees devoted to the ideological capture of medicine”, warning that the “continued occupation of an important advisory body in HHS – one that has the capacity to force private health insurers to cover services and procedures – by leftwing activists would be a grave oversight by the Trump administration”.In response to the essay, 104 health organizations, including the American Medical Association, issued a separate letter to multiple congressional health committees in which they urged the committees to “protect the integrity” of the taskforce.“The loss of trustworthiness in the rigorous and nonpartisan work of the Task Force would devastate patients, hospital systems, and payers as misinformation creates barriers to accessing lifesaving and cost effective care,” the organizations said.In June, Kennedy removed all 17 members of a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention panel of vaccine experts. Writing in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, he accused the committee of having too many conflicts of interest.Kennedy’s decision to overhaul the immunization panel was met with widespread criticism from health experts, with the American Public Health Association executive director Georges Benjamin calling the ouster “a coup”.“It’s not how democracies work. It’s not good for the health of the nation,” Benjamin said. More

    • 188 Shares137 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats use new tactic to highlight Trump’s gutting of Medicaid: billboards in the rural US

      by

      The road to four struggling rural hospitals now hosts a political message: “If this hospital closes, blame Trump.”In a series of black-and-yellow billboards erected near the facilities, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) seeks to tell voters in deep red states “who is responsible for gutting rural healthcare”.“UNDER TRUMP’S WATCH, STILWELL GENERAL HOSPITAL IS CLOSING ITS DOORS,” one sign screams. The billboards are outside hospitals in Silex, Missouri; Columbus, Indiana; Stilwell, Oklahoma; and Missoula, Montana.The fate of rural hospitals has become a politically contentious issue for Republicans, as historic cuts pushed through by the GOP are expected to come into effect over the next decade. Donald Trump’s enormous One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) cut more than $1tn from Medicaid, the public health insurance program for low-income and disabled Americans, insuring more than 71 million adults.“Where the real impact is going to be is on the people who just won’t get care,” said Dave Kendall, a senior fellow for health and fiscal policy at Third Way, a center-left advocacy organization.“That’s what used to happen before we had rural hospitals – they just don’t get the care because they can’t afford it, and they can’t get to the hospital.”In response to criticism, Republicans added a $50bn “rural health transformation fund” just before passage of the OBBBA. The fund is expected to cover about one-third of the losses rural areas will face, and about 70% of the losses for the four hospitals where Democrats now have nearby billboards. The rural health fund provides money through 2030, while the Medicaid cuts are not time-bound.That is already becoming a political football, as Democrats argued in a letter that the money is a “slush fund” already promised to key Republican Congress members.“We are alarmed by reports suggesting these taxpayer funds are already promised to Republican members of Congress in exchange for their votes in support of the Big, Ugly Betrayal,” wrote 16 Democratic senators in a letter to Dr Mehmet Oz, Trump’s head of Medicare and Medicaid.View image in fullscreen“In addition, the vague legislative language creating this fund will seemingly function as your personal fund to be distributed according to your political whims.”Rural hospitals have been under financial strain for more than a decade. Since 2010, 153 rural hospitals have closed or lost the inpatient services which partly define a hospital, according to the University of North Carolina Sheps Center for Health Services Research.“In states across the country, hospitals are either closing their doors or cutting critical services, and it’s Trump’s own voters who will suffer the most,” said the DNC chair, Ken Martin, in a statement announcing the billboards.The OBBBA is expected to further exacerbate those financial strains. A recent analysis by the Urban Institute found rural hospitals are likely to see an $87bn loss in the next 10 years.“We’re expecting rural hospitals to close as a result – we’ve already started to see some hospitals like, ‘OK, how are we going to survive?’” said Third Way’s Kendall.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionA June analysis by the Sheps Center found that 338 rural hospitals, including dozens in states such as Louisiana, Kentucky and Oklahoma, could close as a result of the OBBBA. There are nearly 1,800 rural hospitals nationally, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF), a healthcare research non-profit.That perspective was buttressed by the CEO of the National Rural Health Association, Alan Morgan, who in a recent newsletter said 45% of rural hospitals are already operating at a loss.“When you remove $155bn over the next 10 years, it’s going to have an impact,” he said.In the fragmented US healthcare ecosystem, Medicaid is both the largest and poorest payer of healthcare providers. Patients benefit from largely no-cost care, but hospitals complain that Medicaid rates don’t pay for the cost of service, making institutions that disproportionately rely on Medicaid less financially stable. In rural areas, benefit-rich employer health insurance is harder to come by; therefore, more hospitals depend on Medicaid.But even though Medicaid pays less than other insurance programs, some payment is still better than none. Trump’s OBBBA cut of more than $1tn from the program over the coming decade is expected to result in nearly 12 million people losing coverage.When uninsured people get sick, they are more likely to delay care, more likely to use hospital emergency rooms and more likely to struggle to pay their bills. In turn, the institutions that serve them also suffer.“This is what Donald Trump does – screw over the people who are counting on him,” said Martin, the DNC chair. “These new DNC billboards plainly state exactly what is happening to rural hospitals under Donald Trump’s watch.” More

    • 188 Shares90 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr wants bright artificial dyes out of food. Are Americans ready to let go?

      by

      The Make America Healthy Again (Maha) movement celebrated this month after the US dairy industry voluntarily pledged to remove all artificial dyes from ice-cream by 2028. In April, US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr prevailed upon the food industry to stop using artificial dyes, and many of the nation’s largest food manufacturers, including Nestle, Kraft Heinz and PepsiCo, have already promised to comply. But the ice-cream pledge made Kennedy especially happy because, he said, ice-cream is his favorite food.Prepare to say goodbye to the brilliant pink (from red dye No 40) that signifies strawberry, the cool green (yellow 5 and blue 1) of mint chocolate chip, and the heroic combination of red 40, blue 1, and yellow 5 and 6 that makes up Superman.One of the goals of the Maha movement is to prevent childhood diseases, which Kennedy argues can be accomplished by, among other things, addressing the use of additives in ultra-processed foods. A recent study published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics calculated that, in 2020, 19% of food products contained artificial dyes – “the most egregious” additive, according to Kennedy. Those dyes, he claims, are responsible for a host of health issues, including cancer, hyperactivity and possibly autism.“The American people have made it clear – they want real food, not chemicals,” Kennedy said in a statement.View image in fullscreenAside from jokes on social media about Donald Trump’s skin tone and Kennedy’s alleged use of methylene blue (an artificial dye that some claim boosts “mitochondrial efficiency” and longevity), the initiative has faced little political opposition. In January, when Joe Biden was still president, the FDA announced a ban on red dye No 3 scheduled to go into effect in 2027. Red 3, the FDA explained, was shown to cause cancer in rats, and while it does not show up in food in large enough quantities to affect humans, it still violates a law forbidding additives that contain carcinogens.Meanwhile, states as politically varied as West Virginia, Texas and California have already established their own bans or requirements that foods containing artificial dyes carry warning labels, citing the need to protect kids. (In the UK and the EU, restrictions on artificial dyes have been in place for years.)Why the fuss over food coloring? Are natural dyes really that much better for our health?“They’re better for some people’s health,” says Jamie Alan, a professor of pharmacology and toxicology at Michigan State University. “There is a very small percentage of children who are very sensitive to these dyes. And when they eat these dyes, they display behaviors that we sometimes associate with ADHD.”Alan stresses that there is no evidence that those kids actually develop ADHD. But research has found that after eating foods containing certain dyes, children, including those diagnosed with ADHD or autism, can show signs of hyperactivity, moodiness and inattentiveness. However many of these foods, particularly candy and soda, also contain sugar, which has also been connected to hyperactive behavior.Alan recommends that parents talk to a pediatrician and try an elimination diet to make sure the dye and not another ingredient is to blame. But she largely supports phasing out artificial dyes; most public health advocates think this is a good idea. “In my opinion,” Alan says, “because we’re talking about children and because they are a vulnerable population, I do think this is a great thing to do. But I will recognize that it is not going to impact the vast majority of the population.”One group that the change in dyes will certainly affect is the food manufacturers themselves. Switching from artificial to natural dyes is a complex process, says Travis Zissu, the co-founder and innovation lead of Scale Food Labs in Golden, Colorado, which offers a program to help manufacturers with the dye conversion.View image in fullscreenUnlike artificial dyes, which are derived from petroleum, natural dyes come mostly from plants: turmeric, for example, is used for yellows; algae and butterfly pea flower for blues; lycopene from carrots and tomatoes for reds. These dyes can be less stable, so Scale’s program begins with finding natural pigments that will not be affected by heat and other chemicals, followed by tests to determine which combination of dyes will produce the most reliable color. Next, Scale helps companies lock in contracts that will not force them to raise their prices too much and secure light-sensitive packaging to protect the colors. Finally, there are nine to 12 months of product testing to make sure production runs smoothly and that there are no adverse effects for consumers, such as red-dyed feces (something that has been known to happen with beet powder and extract; Alan says it’s harmless, but admits it can be unnerving).But Zissu’s biggest concern is that there won’t be enough to go around. Natural color demand is already up between 30-50% across the industry since food companies began announcing their intentions to stop using artificial color, he says, and the earliest deadline – 2027 – is still years away.“There is simply not enough supply to replace every single item in the market,” he says. “You’ll see the largest companies locking down colors soon, but there will not be enough until 2030.”There is also the worry that American consumers will reject the new colors altogether. While their counterparts in Europe, Canada and Japan have peacefully accepted the duller hues of natural dyes, Americans remain stubbornly attached to neon-bright candy and cereal.Case in point: in 2015, General Mills pledged to remove all artificial colors and flavorings from its products. The following year, it rolled out a natural version of Trix, the kid-friendly fruity breakfast cereal. But the muted Trix, colored by radishes, purple carrots and turmeric, was a flop. Customers missed the vibrant colors and complained that the new version didn’t taste right. By 2017, “classic Trix” had returned to grocery stores.On the other hand, when Kraft reformulated the powder for its macaroni and cheese and quietly began selling the all-natural version in December 2015, there was much less protest. As an Eater headline at the time put it: “Kraft Changed Its Mac and Cheese and Nobody Noticed.” Perhaps it was the marketing strategy – Kraft did not bother to make a big announcement until after it had sold 50m boxes – or maybe it was because the natural dyes were just as orange as the original. (Alan recalls that her young nieces and nephews were slightly worried about the change but accepted the new mac and cheese without much fuss.)As the adage goes, we eat with our eyes. The appearance of food should not change our perceptions of how it tastes, but, as anyone who has ever bought produce knows, it definitely does. In nature, brighter colors indicate that foods are ripe and will taste good. This principle also applies to human-made food.As far back as the middle ages, according to Ai Hisano, a professor of business history at the University of Tokyo and author of Visualizing Taste: How Business Changed the Look of What You Eat, dairy farmers would mix carrot juice and annatto from achiote trees into their butter to make it a more appetizing yellow. When scientists discovered petroleum-based dyes in the mid-19th century, the dairy industry was one of the earliest adopters: the artificial dyes were cheaper, and they helped create uniform yellows for butter and cheese that appealed to shoppers.Other food producers quickly followed suit. Meat would be red! Sandwich bread would be white! Oranges – which sometimes stayed green, even when they were ripe – would be orange! By the early 20th century, the US government had started regulating food coloring to make sure it didn’t kill anyone.This was also the beginning of the golden age of industrial food such as candy, breakfast cereal and, most notoriously, Jell-O, which came in colors never seen in nature. Food dye became vital for branding, Hisano writes. Even if brighter color didn’t really affect flavor because the food was entirely manufactured, people perceived that it did, and that was what mattered. Would a beige Flamin’ Hot Cheeto taste as spicy?View image in fullscreen“I assume many consumers in the early 20th century were frightened by those bright-red foods,” Hisano told the Atlantic in 2017. “But one reason consumers liked them is because they were excited about these colors they had never seen before.” And the knowledge that they were regulated by the FDA made them feel they were safe to eat.Because the identity of their products depends on color, the most resistance to Kennedy’s initiative has come from America’s candy manufacturers. A spokesman for the National Confectioners Association said that candy makers will not adopt natural dyes until federal regulations compel them to. Of all the biggest US food companies, only Mars, maker of M&Ms, Skittles and Starburst (incidentally, Trump’s favorite candy), has not yet pledged to give up artificial dye, except for the already banned red 3. However, FDA commissioner Marty Makary told Fox News that he thinks Mars will come around sooner than later.Zissu, the food dye consultant, foresees “an R&D sprint” to develop natural dyes before the 2027 deadline. And indeed, since May, the FDA has approved four new natural colors – three blues and one white – for a wide range of food, including juices, milk-based meal replacements, cereal, chips, sugar and ready-to-eat chicken products.But Zissu does not think that a transition to natural dyes means that the color of food will revert to a pre-industrial dullness. “I believe we will always see the bright colors in candy and other items that consumers come to expect,” he says. “There will just be a lot more research dedicated to getting those colors if artificial [dye] is banned.”It may also help if America’s food manufacturers act en masse, as they appear to be doing: the change will be so overwhelming that, as Zissu puts it, “neon synthetics will look as dated as trans fats.” Perhaps in a few years, we will look back at green mint chip ice-cream in wonder. (Some people already do: many ice-cream producers, including Ben & Jerry’s and Häagen-Dazs, don’t use green as the signifier for mint.)It seems Maha is poised to help shake America of its affair with artificial colors. But it celebrates this victory at the same time as the Trump administration guts public health infrastructure.The ice-cream industry’s pledge came just 11 days after Congress passed a spending bill that will cut Medicaid spending, and therefore healthcare for millions of children, and slash Snap food assistance for US families. It came the same day that the Department of Health laid off thousands of employees. Under Trump, the government has also cut research grants to scientists studying, among other things, disease prevention and vaccines (of which Kennedy is a notorious skeptic). Underlying issues such as food and housing insecurity and child poverty that devastate children’s wellbeing are likely to worsen.Alan thinks that if Kennedy is serious about improving the health of America’s kids, there are much more pressing issues than food dye to work on. “I just can’t believe that someone would be given a chance to make such an impact,” she says, “and this is what they choose to do.” More