US healthcare

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats reject spending bill over healthcare cuts as shutdown looms

      by

      The US federal government drew closer to a shutdown on Friday, after Democrats made good on their vow not to support a Republican-backed measure that would extend funding for another two months because it did not include provisions to protect healthcare programs.The GOP-controlled House of Representatives had in the morning approved a bill to extend government funding through 21 November on a near party-line vote, but Democrats swiftly blocked it in the Senate, where most legislation must receive at least some bipartisan support. Republicans, in turn, rejected a Democratic proposal to extend funding through October while preventing cuts to healthcare programs, setting up a standoff that could see federal agencies shutter and workers sent home just nine months into Donald Trump’s term.“Senators will have to choose: to stand with Donald Trump and keep the same lousy status quo and cause the Trump healthcare shutdown, or stand with the American people, protect their healthcare, and keep the government functioning,” the top Senate Democrat, Chuck Schumer, said before the votes.Democrats have seized on the annual government funding negotiations to use as leverage against Trump’s policies and particularly cuts to Medicaid, the healthcare program for poor and disabled Americans, which Republicans approved in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act earlier this year. They are also demanding an extension of subsidies for Affordable Care Act (ACA) insurance plans that are set to expire at the end of 2025, after which healthcare costs for millions of Americans are expected to increase.“We don’t work for Donald Trump, we don’t work for JD Vance, we don’t work for Elon Musk, we work for the American people,” Hakeem Jeffries, the top House Democrat, said before the chamber voted. “And that is why we are a hard no on the partisan Republican spending bill because it continues to gut the healthcare of everyday Americans.”Republicans have backed a “clean” continuing resolution that extends funding without making significant changes to policies. Both parties’ proposals include millions of dollars in new security spending for judges, lawmakers and executive branch officials in response to the conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s killing.The stopgap measures are intended to give congressional appropriators more time to pass the 12 bills that authorize federal spending for the fiscal year.John Thune, the Republican Senate majority leader, called the Democratic proposal “fundamentally unserious” in a speech following the House vote.“Instead of working with Republicans to fund the government through a clean, nonpartisan continuing resolution, so that we can get back to bipartisan negotiations on appropriations, Democrats are yielding to the desires of their rabidly leftist base and are attempting to hold government funding hostage to a long list of partisan demands,” he said.Under pressure from their base to oppose Trump and still smarting from a disappointing performance in last year’s elections, the spending impasse will pose a major test of Democratic unity across Congress.Maine’s Jared Golden was the only Democrat to vote for the Republican spending bill in the House, while Washington’s Marie Gluesenkamp Perez missed the vote but said she supported it. In the Senate, only Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman voted for the Republican spending bill. All represent states or districts won by Trump last year.Of greater concern to Democrats is whether Schumer, the Senate minority leader, will be able to resist pressure not to allow a shutdown. A similar spending deadlock took place earlier in the year but ended on a sour note for Democrats after Schumer encouraged his colleagues to vote for a Republican bill to keep the government funded, arguing a shutdown would be “devastating”.House Democrats opposed that bill and felt burned by Schumer’s compromise, but are once again counting on the Senate minority leader not to back down.“I think Senator Schumer knows he’s got to hold the line there. We’ll see what this negotiation brings, but this is about fighting for healthcare. That’s an easy one for them to give us,” said the California congressman Ami Bera after the vote.Democrats writ large believe they have leverage they need against a president who opinion polls show is growing unpopular with many voters, even though government shutdowns can bring their own risks for the party that instigates them.“I don’t know how you could be in control of the House, the Senate, the executive, have more votes on the supreme court, and then blame the other party that’s completely not in power. That’ll be a new one,” said the Florida congressman Jared Moskowitz. Asked if he was concerned about Schumer’s resolve to oppose the Republican bill, he replied: “I’m Jewish, I have a lot of anxiety, all the time.”The appropriations process is historically bipartisan, but the progressive Washington congresswoman Pramila Jayapal warned that even if a spending deal is reached, Republicans have damaged their trust with Democrats by actions like cancelling funding Congress had approved for foreign aid and public media.“We need to make sure that once we approve a budget, that they don’t just go back and do a partisan vote to strip money away or close an agency. So, there’s got to be some provision in there about making and keeping a promise, versus getting us to vote for something, saying that they’re going to do something, and then changing their mind the very next day and passing a partisan rescission package,” she said.There is little time left for Congress to find a compromise. Both chambers are out of session next week for the Rosh Hashanah holiday, and on Friday afternoon, the House’s Republican leaders cancelled two days in session that had been scheduled for the end of September, denying the Democrats the opportunity for another vote on the issue before funding lapses. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr and red flags: key moments from ousted CDC director’s testimony

      by

      Two former Centers for Disease Control (CDC) leaders testified at a fiery congressional hearing on Wednesday – taking aim at Robert F Kennedy Jr’s sweeping changes to the agency and the country’s public health system.Susan Monarez, the CDC director who was fired after less than a month, and Debra Houry, the chief medical officer who resigned after a decade at the agency, faced lawmakers on the Senate health, education, labor and pensions (Help) committee.The hearing, chaired by Republican senator Bill Cassidy, saw senators from both sides of the aisle question the impact of RFK Jr’s dismantling of vaccine standards. Here are the main takeaways.1. Monarez said she was fired for not complying with RFK Jr’s vaccine agendaMonarez said Kennedy demanded “blanket approval” of “each and every one of the recommendations” in the upcoming vaccine advisory panel meeting. Monarez claimed Kennedy said if she could not do that she would need to resign.“I did not resign, and that is when he told me he had already spoken to the White House about having me removed,” Monarez said.When Bernie Sanders asked Monarez why she refused to rubber-stamp vaccine recommendations without seeing them or the evidence behind them, she explained it was not negotiable.“I refused to do it because I have built a career on scientific integrity, and my worst fear was that I would then be in a position of approving something that would reduce access of life-saving vaccines to children and others who need them,” she said.2. Monarez and Houry raised flags about the impact of Kennedy’s vaccine agendaAn Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meeting on Thursday loomed over the hearing. RFK Jr has replaced many members of the panel with other people who question the science of government recommended vaccines.“I know that the medical community has raised concerns about whether or not, again, they have the commensurate backgrounds to be able to understand the data and the evidence and to evaluate it appropriately,” Monarez said.Monarez also said there was a risk of vaccines being restricted without rigorous review. She continued: “The stakes are not theoretical. We already have seen the largest measles outbreak in more than 30 years, which claimed the lives of two children. If vaccine protections are weakened, preventable diseases will return.”Meanwhile Houry said she had “significant concerns” about the ACIP meeting as the public had not been able to weigh in.The pair said the prospect of future pandemics is what keeps them up at night. Answering a question by Democratic senator John Hickenlooper, Monarez and Houry expressed concern over how the US might respond to future pandemics.“I don’t believe that we’ll be prepared,” Monarez said. Houry echoed similar sentiments, saying: “I’m concerned about the future of [the] CDC and public health in our country.”3. Monarez said RFK Jr had expressed disdain for CDC employees“He called, in that context, [the] CDC the ‘most corrupt federal agency in the world’,” Monarez said. “He said that CDC employees were killing children and they don’t care. He said CDC employees were bought by the pharmaceutical industry. He said the CDC forced people to wear masks and social distance like a dictatorship.”Monarez said the health secretary did not express condolences for David Rose, the police officer who was killed during the recent shooting at the CDC headquarters in Atlanta. The perpetrator had blamed the Covid vaccine for making him depressed and suicidal.4. Monarez and Houry said politics is driving changes to vaccine recommendationsWhen asked about the public implications of health decisions made by political staff, Monarez expressed concern. She added: “These are important and highly technical discussions that have life-saving implications.”Similarly, Houry accused Kennedy of “politicizing” the CDC, saying that the secretary “censored CDC science, politicized its processes and stripped leaders of independence”.In response to a question about career scientists who have been excluded from the director’s office, Houry said that nearly everyone who left is political.“A level down we do have center directors, although 80% are now acting because they’ve been fired, resigned or retired,” Houry said.5. Monarez said that Kennedy deemed her untrustworthy for expressing her concernsMonarez laid out a timeline of events that resulted in her firing.In a meeting with Kennedy, Monarez claimed he was “very concerned” that she had spoken to members of the Help committee about what was being asked of her, with regard to approving vaccine recommendations and firing career officials.“He told me I was never to do it again,” Monarez said.When Republican senator Ashley Moody questioned whether Monarez’s decision to contact the committee chair was calculated, Senator Cassidy pushed back.“It is entirely appropriate for someone with oversight concerns to contact my office, or me, or, frankly, any of us,” he said. “Upon receiving outreach from Dr Monarez, I contacted both the secretary and the White House to inquire what was happening and to express concerns about what was alleged.” More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Americans should be alarmed’: Experts say loss of expertise at CDC will harm US health

      by

      After high-profile departures and sweeping layoffs, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) faces an unprecedented loss of expertise and a simultaneous erosion of trust as top health leaders undermine vaccines and other vital health tools.“Americans should be alarmed,” said Nirav Shah, former principal deputy director at CDC and now a visiting professor at Colby College. “All of these moves leave us less safe, and it comes at a time of rising public health threats.”Project 2025, the conservative blueprint for the second Trump administration, vowed to strip the CDC of its ability to issue guidance on vaccines and to end required testing for new pathogens.The changes to US health will be felt for decades, and the cutbacks and changes will erode the public’s already wavering trust in health officials, experts say.“Losing top, experienced experts managing crucial units in the CDC is going to put all of us at risk,” said Dorit Reiss, professor of law at UC Hastings College of Law.The departure of four senior officials – Debra Houry, Demetre Daskalakis, Daniel Jernigan and Jennifer Layden – dealt “a big blow to our nation’s health preparedness”, Shah said.They joined thousands of health agency employees who have been laid off or resigned, with entire departments gutted, since Donald Trump was re-elected.“Next time there’s a problem, we will not have qualified leadership for our response,” Reiss said.The loss of “experienced, world-class” experts at the CDC is “directly related to the failed leadership of extremists” in charge of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.The losses may continue under budget cuts, with proposed reductions of $5bn – a 42% decrease from 2024.Two of the recently ousted officials will testify before Congress on Wednesday. Susan Monarez, the most recent CDC director, who was fired after 28 days, criticized the administration’s “reckless” approach to science, including a request to “rubber-stamp” recommendations from the CDC’s independent advisers.The advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP) plans to meet on Thursday and Friday. Advisers have indicated the committee will re-examine recommendations on routine childhood vaccinations such as those against hepatitis B and HPV (human papillomavirus).The Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy released on Tuesday “reaffirms that Kennedy is gunning for childhood vaccines”, Reiss said.Emily Hilliard, an HHS spokesperson, said: “Secretary Kennedy has been clear: the CDC has been broken for a long time. Restoring it as the world’s most trusted guardian of public health will take sustained reform and more personnel changes.”When asked about Kennedy’s stance on childhood vaccines, Hilliard said that HHS is “reaffirming the importance of the doctor-patient relationship so people can make informed decisions about their health”, emphasizing the roles of “clear, honest information and personal choice”.Kennedy has also limited access to the Covid vaccines, restricting them only to people “at higher risk”, while also saying “anyone can get the booster”.“Kennedy’s claim that anyone can get them is deeply insincere,” Reiss said. He already removed, for example, the recommendation for pregnant people, making it harder for them to access the vaccine.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“While it’s legal to give vaccines off-label, not all doctors and pharmacists will, and depending what ACIP does, not all insurers will cover them”, including Medicaid, which is bound by ACIP recommendations, she said.Kennedy has repeatedly undermined the CDC and vaccines, calling the agency a “cesspool of corruption” and the Covid vaccine, for instance, the “deadliest vaccine ever made”. During the worst measles outbreak in decades, Kennedy framed vaccination as a personal choice. He has also cut millions of dollars for research on mRNA vaccines.Earlier this month, Trump defended the Covid and polio vaccines. But the president has given Kennedy sweeping control over the nation’s health and nutrition agenda.“In an era of rising threats to public health – whether it’s measles, whether it’s an Ebola outbreak, or whether it’s the continuing concern and threat from H5 [bird flu] – none of these things makes America healthy again,” Shah said.The acting director of the CDC, Jim O’Neill, has a background in biotechnology investing but he does not appear to have training in medicine or public health.“Based on what I understand, he does not have the requisite background to even be serving as acting director,” said Shah, who was acting director of the CDC while the Trump administration entered office.“Americans need to ask themselves: ‘Are we safe right now?’” Shah said. “‘Is there somebody who knows at the higher levels what should be done in the face of an emerging Ebola outbreak? Are they doing it? How do we know that?’”The news that top experts at the CDC haven’t briefed Kennedy is “alarming”, Shah said. ”If America’s top generals were planning a war and sketching out battlefield plans but had not talked to any of their lieutenants and colonels in the field, we would say that’s not leadership.”So far, many Americans have not yet felt the shock waves of Kennedy’s changes to public health, Shah said.For most people, “you don’t actually see the consequences of it until there’s an emergency”, Shah said. “And it’s way too late at that point.” More

    • 213 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr does not just reject vaccines. He rejects science and must step down | Bernie Sanders

      by

      Since taking office, Robert F Kennedy Jr, the secretary of the health and human services department (HHS), has undermined vaccines at every turn. He has dismissed the entire Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) vaccine advisory panel, narrowed access to life-saving Covid-19 vaccines, filled scientific advisory boards with conspiracy theorists and fired the newly appointed CDC director for refusing to rubber-stamp his actions.But his rejection of vaccines is only part of the problem. Secretary Kennedy is unfit to be our nation’s leading public health official because he rejects the fundamental principles of modern science.For generations, doctors have agreed that germs – like bacteria or viruses – cause infectious diseases.In the 1850s, John Snow, known as the father of epidemiology, traced a cholera outbreak in London to water contaminated with human waste – not the “bad air”, or so-called miasma, that many at that time believed to be the cause.In the 1880s, Louis Pasteur, the French chemist, in a controlled experiment, injected one group of sheep with an anthrax vaccine while another group went without it. Then he injected all of the sheep with anthrax bacteria. The vaccinated sheep survived, the unvaccinated did not.The germ theory led to a revolution in public health and medicine which, over the years, has saved tens of millions of lives.Just a few examples.At a time when many women were dying during childbirth at hospitals, Dr Ignaz Semmelweis found that handwashing by doctors saved lives.Joseph Lister showed that sterilizing medical equipment before surgery prevented needless deaths.Florence Nightingale, considered the mother of modern nursing, substantially improved hygiene at hospitals and made healthcare much safer for patients.Pasteur made the food we eat and the milk we drink safer through a process of heating called pasteurization.And these are just a few examples.Yet, incredibly, in the year 2025, we now have a secretary of HHS who has cast doubt and aspersions on the very concept of the germ theory – the very foundation of modern medicine for over a century.In his book The Real Anthony Fauci, Kennedy absurdly claims that the central tenet behind the germ theory “is simply untrue”. Vaccines are not, Kennedy falsely asserts, responsible for the massive decline in deaths from infectious diseases. Instead, Kennedy falsely proclaims that “science actually gives the honor of having vanquished disease mortalities to sanitation and nutrition”.Yes. No one disputes that proper sanitation, a nutritious diet and exercise can lead to healthier lives. But no credible scientist or doctor believes that alone makes a person immune from polio, measles, mumps, Covid, HIV/Aids and other infectious diseases. Otherwise healthy people can become sick, hospitalized or even die from these and other terrible diseases.Sadly, Kennedy’s dangerous rejection of well-established science is behind his wild conspiracy theories and misinformation campaigns.It’s what led to Kennedy’s false assertion that “there is no vaccine that is safe and effective” despite peer-reviewed scientific studies finding that vaccines have saved more than 150 million lives and reduced infant deaths by 40% in the past 50 years.It’s behind Kennedy’s bogus claim that the polio vaccine “killed many, many, many, many, many more people than polio ever did”, even though the scientific data has shown that the polio vaccine has saved 1.5 million lives and prevented about 20 million people from becoming paralyzed since 1988.It undergirds his history of promoting the ridiculous idea that HIV does not cause Aids, despite rigorous studies finding the exact opposite. This type of outrageous HIV/Aids denialism is widely believed to have caused the deaths of at least 330,000 people in South Africa who did not receive the life-saving medicine they needed.It’s what led him to say that the Covid vaccine was the “deadliest vaccine ever made”, that vaccines cause autism, and that the hepatitis B vaccine doesn’t work and should only be used for “prostitutes” and “promiscuous gay men” – lies that have been thoroughly debunked by scientific data and the medical community.Frighteningly, it’s what caused Kennedy to say: “I see somebody on a hiking trail carrying a little baby and I say to him, ‘Better not get him vaccinated.’ And he heard that from me. If he hears it from 10 other people, maybe he won’t do it.”As a private citizen, Kennedy is entitled to his views, no matter how misguided they may be.If Kennedy would like to swim in water contaminated by raw sewage and fecal matter, as he has done recently in Washington DC’s Rock Creek Park, he is free to do that.But as our nation’s top health official, Secretary Kennedy’s rejection of science and the actions he has taken as a result of his bizarre ideology is endangering the lives of millions of children in the United States and throughout the world.Today, Kennedy is making it harder for people to get vaccines. Tomorrow, what will it be? Will he tell doctors they don’t need to wash their hands before surgery? Will he tell hospitals that they don’t need to sterilize their scalpels and other medical equipment?The American people need a secretary of HHS who will listen to scientists and doctors, and not conspiracy theorists.We need a secretary of HHS who will listen to medical experts who may disagree with him, not fire them summarily.Bottom line: we need an HHS secretary who will not engage in a war on science and the truth itself.Secretary Kennedy must step down.

      Bernie Sanders is a US senator, and ranking member of the health, education, labor and pensions committee. He represents the state of Vermont and is the longest-serving independent in the history of Congress More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Rinse and repeat: US vaccine hearing on unpublished study debates same myths

      by

      A congressional hearing on Tuesday titled “How the Corruption of Science Has Impacted Public Perception and Policies Regarding Vaccines” largely consisted of a debate over an unpublished study comparing chronic illnesses in children who received vaccines with those who didn’t.The study was lead-authored by Marcus Zervos of Henry Ford Health, completed in 2020, and never submitted for publication, according to testimony during the hearing. Senator Ron Johnson, the chair of the subcommittee for the hearing, and the witness Aaron Siri, a lawyer who has represented RFK Jr and the anti-vaccination non-profit Informed Consent Action Network, both claimed the study was not submitted because the authors would lose their jobs were it to be published.Zervos and the other authors of the study were not present at the hearing. The study, which has never been peer-reviewed, is not currently available to the public as a pre-print or in any other form.Henry Ford Health’s communication office did not respond to a request for comment in time for publication.The only information that is currently publicly available about the study comes from the hearing itself, including witness testimony and a brief trailer for a documentary from the Informed Consent Action Network. The trailer says the study found that “amongst the unvaccinated group, there was zero brain dysfunction, zero diabetes, zero behavioral problems, zero learning disabilities, zero intellectual disabilities, zero tics and zero other psychological disabilities”.The trailer also includes a clip of Donald Trump saying: “A few decades ago, one in 10,000 children had autism. Today, it’s one in 31.”Witnesses on both sides of the debate during the hearing agreed that the study in question found no link between vaccines and autism.Jake Scott, a clinical associate professor of infectious diseases at Stanford – and the only physician who served as a witness during the hearing – had a different explanation as to why the study was not published.In his testimony, Scott said that the study is “fundamentally flawed”, adding that its core problem was that “vaccinated children had twice the follow up time and substantially more healthcare visits than unvaccinated children”. More healthcare visits mean more opportunities to be diagnosed with conditions like ADHD.Scott went on to explain that “the study reports zero ADHD cases among 1,000s of unvaccinated children. How is that possible with a national prevalence at 11%? That’s highly unlikely, unless conditions went undiagnosed.” Scott noted that the study also claimed a six to eightfold increase in ear infections among vaccinated children, but there is no plausible scientific explanation as to why vaccines would increase ear infections.This finding is consistent with past research showing that parents who do not vaccinate their children are also less likely to have their children treated for health conditions in the medical system. Conditions that were not diagnosed or treated would not have shown up in the study, which relied on medical records, according to hearing testimony.Siri claimed the authors of the study ran sensitivity analyses to account for the differences in medical care. These are not available to the public.As a point of comparison, Scott referenced a Danish study published this July in Annals of Internal Medicine which investigated whether childhood vaccines were linked to 50 different conditions, including many of the same conditions from the unpublished study, like ADHD, autism, asthma, food allergies and eczema. The Danish study looked at outcomes in over a million vaccinated children and 15,000 unvaccinated children, while the unpublished study looked at 18,500 vaccinated children and 2,000 unvaccinated children, according to hearing testimony.The Danish study found no statistically significant increase in risk for any of the conditions investigated, and that vaccinated children experienced lower rates of certain conditions, like ulcerative colitis.Johnson and Siri expressed skepticism over the Danish study, noting that the authors have not released the de-identified raw data they used for their conclusions. No data is available about the unpublished study.Later in the hearing, the conversation turned towards skepticism about vaccines in general and the Covid-19 vaccine specifically.Some graphics that Johnson shared left out critical information. For example, a line chart he introduced accurately showed that measles death rates had already begun to decline significantly before vaccines were introduced in the 1960s, due to other factors like improved sanitation, healthcare access and nutrition, but the chart stops in 1960. After vaccines were introduced and widely adopted, both measles cases and death rates declined to nearly zero.Measles was effectively eliminated in the US in 2000, but cases reemerged when vaccine adoption decreased. There have been 35 measles outbreaks in 2025, according to the CDC. At least two US children and one adult have died of measles this year.Scott, the Stanford witness, had trouble answering some questions based on spurious facts. He was silent for a moment when Johnson asked him “Did you believe when Fauci told us that the [Covid] mRNA shot would stay in the arm?” There is no credible evidence that Fauci ever said this.Toby Rogers, a fellow at the Brownstone institute whose study linking vaccines and autism was retracted said: “I believe we are in the midst of one of the greatest crimes in human history,” referring to vaccines. In now-deleted tweets, Rogers has called for hearings similar to the Nuremberg trials for public health officials who promote vaccines.When Senator Richard Blumenthal, the ranking member of the hearing subcommittee, asked if Rogers believes the Covid-19 vaccine is comparable to the Holocaust, several audience members applauded. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr’s anti-science agenda will be catastrophic for the United States | Moustafa Bayoumi

      by

      Things seem to be going well at the CDC, the federal agency charged with protecting US public health. By “well” I mean terrible, thanks to the leadership of the health and human services secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr. Not only is the agency in complete disarray under his leadership, but the secretary’s fringe agenda is now also putting the lives of everyone in the country at risk.Let me recount a few of Kennedy’s stellar accomplishments. He is, after all, a man labeled “a crown jewel of this administration” by Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff. In June, Kennedy fired all 17 members of the CDC’s advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP), a panel that has long developed scientifically based recommendations on the use of vaccines. Kennedy dropped them like a hot beaker and replaced them with new members, several of whom share his anti-vaccine views and half-baked skepticism of the most common mRNA Covid-19 vaccines.Covid is still with us, unfortunately, and the vaccines are helping us survive a dangerous reality. In fact, 14,660 people have died of Covid as an underlying or contributing cause so far this year alone. Yet, at his Senate hearing on Thursday, Kennedy was asked by Senator Jeff Merkley if he accepted the statistic that a million Americans had died of Covid since the outbreak began. “I don’t know how many died,” Kennedy responded. Meanwhile, the CDC’s own website, an agency he’s responsible for, tabulates the number of deaths as 1,234,371. At the same hearing, Kennedy also said he agreed with the statement made by one of his appointees to ACIP that “mRNA vaccines cause serious harm, including death, especially among young people”. Never mind that numerous studies have repeatedly shown the vaccines to be safe and effective.That’s not all. Getting that Covid booster shot will probably become significantly harder in the future. In late August, the Food and Drug Administration, also overseen by Kennedy, approved some updated Covid vaccines, but at the same time severely restricted who would be authorized to receive boosters. Last year, anyone over the age of six months was eligible. But this year, you must be over 65 years of age or have an underlying health condition that increases the risk of severe Covid-19 infection.We should have seen something like this coming. In May, Kennedy took the unprecedented unilateral move to remove Covid-19 booster shots from its recommended immunization schedule for pregnant women and healthy children. “Our healthcare system is now solidly anti-children and anti-science,” Fatima Khan, co-founder of the Protect Their Future group, which advocates for vaccine access for children, told CNN.Booster shots will still be available, Kennedy says. But what he’s not saying is that they will probably be a lot harder to find and afford. Private insurance companies generally base their decisions on covering the costs of vaccines by following government recommendations, and many states limit which vaccines pharmacists can administer based on those same recommendations. (California, Oregon and Washington recently announced an alliance to safeguard vaccine access.)The long and the short of it is that Kennedy is behind “a deliberate effort to weaken America’s public-health system and vaccine protections”. This is what Susan Monarez wrote in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. Monarez served as the director of the CDC for a whole 29 days before she was ousted from her position. (Jim O’Neil, Monarez’s replacement, is unsurprisingly a Trump loyalist with no medical or scientific background.) The ACIP is scheduled to meet later this month, and will discuss among other topics the Covid-19 vaccines. Monarez wrote that in August she was told to “preapprove the recommendations” to be made by ACIP. She refused. In another statement made through her lawyers, she said she would not “rubberstamp unscientific, reckless directives and fire dedicated health experts”.Kennedy, of course, has done all those things. He fired 2,400 workers (about 18% of the CDC workforce), later rehiring about 700 people. He has “severely weakened programs designed to protect Americans from cancer, heart attacks, strokes, lead poisoning, injury, violence and more”, according to nine previous directors of the CDC who sounded the alarm about Kennedy’s leadership in the New York Times. He downplayed the use of highly effective vaccines during the largest single measles epidemic in 25 years in this country while cheering on the use of home remedies such as cod liver oil or vitamins.It’s all so ideological and irresponsible, leading predictably to horrible consequences. There have been three confirmed deaths from the measles outbreak, but they are not the only victims. Our collective trust in the government is perhaps the main casualty. After Monarez was fired, four senior officials of the CDC resigned in protest at the politicization of the agency. More than 1,000 past and present workers of the Department of Health and Human Services signed a letter demanding his resignation and stating that “Secretary Kennedy’s actions are compromising the health of this nation”. We’re now living through a battle between sane scientists and zealous anti-vaxxers, and nobody knows who will win.What do anti-vaxxers and the rightwing get out of such politicization of public health? They live in the same country as the rest of us, after all. Do they feel somehow healthier knowing that Joseph Ladapo, Florida’s surgeon general, aims to end childhood vaccination against preventable diseases such as measles, mumps, chickenpox, polio and hepatitis? I certainly don’t. Routine childhood vaccinations prevented about 508m cases of illness in the US between 1994 and 2023. And he’s getting rid of them? Madness.Ladapo claims that “what you put into your body is because of your relationship with your body and your God”. OK. Fine. But none of us lives entirely alone, and your health affects my health, and vice versa. Living together means taking care of ourselves but also each other for our individual and collective wellbeing. It’s not rocket science. But it must be based on science.The right wing sees it otherwise. To them, the government response to Covid in particular and public health in general is leading us straight to “a regime of suppression, censorship, and coercion reminiscent of the power systems and governance that were previously condemned”. The result? “Human rights and individual freedom, as under previous fascist regimes, will lose,” according to David Bell of the Brownstone Institute, a thinktank established to oppose Covid-19 restrictions.But this seems a lot more like projection than any semblance to reality. Recent scholarship tends to point in the opposite direction, showing how social instability from the world’s last major pandemic before Covid, the 1918 global influenza pandemic, helped pave the way for the rise of the Nazi party in Germany and the Fascist party in Italy. One study found that “Mussolini’s newspaper tended to blame ‘others’ for the pandemic … and portrayed themselves as the voice of the common people against an out-of-touch ‘elite.’” Sounds familiar.Kennedy’s anti-science anti-vax agenda could have catastrophic health outcomes across the nation, helping fuel the rise of an even more extreme rightwing politics in the future. Could that result be what this government is even counting on? The idea sounds too far-fetched to be true, but I would also like to be alive when I’m proven wrong.

      Moustafa Bayoumi is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr accused of ‘reckless disregard for science and the truth’ in Senate hearing

      by

      The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, faced the Senate finance committee in a tense and combative hearing on Thursday, during which lawmakers questioned his remarks expressing vaccine skepticism, claims that the scientific community is deeply politicized and the ongoing turmoil plaguing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).In a hearing lasting more than three hours and ostensibly about the Trump administration’s healthcare agenda, Kennedy defended his leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), claiming that his time at the agency will be focused on “unbiased, politics-free, transparent, evidence-based science in the public interest”.Senate Democrats on the committee began the hearing calling for Kennedy’s resignation. “Robert Kennedy’s primary interest is taking vaccines away from Americans,” ranking member Ron Wyden, a Democratic senator from Oregon, said in his opening remarks. “People are hurt by his reckless disregard for science and the truth in this effort. I hope the very least, Robert Kennedy has the decency to tell the truth this morning.”Raphael Warnock, also a Democrat, called Kennedy a “hazard to the health of the American people”, repeating calls for him to step down or for Donald Trump to fire him.Last week, Kennedy fired the CDC director, Susan Monarez, less than a month after she was confirmed to her position. She is now mounting a legal case challenging her removal.Shortly after Monarez’s termination, several leading public health officials at the CDC resigned from their positions, citing frustration with Kennedy’s approach to vaccines and his management style.Kennedy said Monarez was “lying” about her claims that she was fired for refusing to sign off on the secretary’s new vaccine policies. Instead, Kennedy said that she was removed after admitting to being untrustworthy.The Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts, was unconvinced – citing Kennedy’s prior characterization of the former CDC director as “unimpeachable”.“You had full confidence in her and you had full confidence in her scientific credentials, and in a month she became a liar?” she asked. Thom Tillis, the outgoing Republican senator of North Carolina, asked about the same contradiction in his questioning.Monarez’s lawyers responded in a statement to Kennedy’s comments, calling them “false” and “at times, patently ridiculous”. They added that Monarez would repeat her published claims “under oath”.Kennedy also justified wider firings at the CDC , calling them “absolutely necessary”.“We are the sickest country in the world,” he said. “That’s why we need to fire people at CDC. They did not do their job. This was their job to keep us healthy.”In June, Kennedy fired all 17 members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee – a move that defied a promise he made during his confirmation hearing to Republican senator Bill Cassidy, a physician who chairs the Senate health committee. Many of Kennedy’s replacements for the advisory panel have a history of vaccine skepticism.When asked about the changes to the advisory committee, and how that will change vaccine recommendations and scheduling, Kennedy said he didn’t anticipate changes to the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine.In an exchange with Kennedy, Cassidy noted the possible conflict of interest with some of the panel’s new members who are involved in ongoing litigation with vaccine manufacturers.Cassidy cast a critical vote to confirm Kennedy earlier this year. He had previously expressed a number of concerns about the health secretary’s historic comments that undermined vaccine efficacy. The senator has since been critical of a number of Kennedy’s policies, including his decision to cut half a billion dollars worth of mRNA vaccine funding – calling the move “unfortunate”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLast month, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the new batch of Covid-19 vaccines, but placed restrictions on who would be able to access them. The agency has authorized shots for people 65 and older, who are known to be more at risk from serious illnesses from Covid infections. Younger people will only be eligible if they have an underlying medical condition that makes them vulnerable. Infectious disease experts say that this policy could prove extremely dangerous, particularly for young children.On Tuesday, Kennedy defended HHS’s handling of the measles outbreak that affected several states in an opinion piece. While the secretary branded his agency’s response as effective, public health experts said Kennedy’s own messaging around vaccines was muddied and confusing.Cassidy concluded his remarks at the hearing by telling Kennedy that his policies were “effectively denying people the vaccine”, sharing an email from a doctor friend who expressed confusion about Covid inoculation eligibility given the FDA’s new recommendation policies.Kennedy snapped back: “You’re wrong.”The Republican senator John Barrasso, of Wyoming, also a doctor, expressed similar concerns about Kennedy’s policies. “In your confirmation hearing you promised to uphold the highest standard for vaccines,” Barrasso said. “Since then, I’ve grown deeply concerned.”During a back and forth with the Virginia senator Mark Warner, a Democrat, Kennedy falsely claimed that there are “no cuts to Medicaid” under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act – Trump’s hallmark domestic policy legislation that was signed into law in July.The congressional budget office estimates that around 7.8 million people stand to lose their health insurance over a decade, due to Medicaid changes under the law.Multiple Democrats on the committee had heated exchanges with the health secretary. Many of them pointed out the inconsistency between Kennedy’s recent support for the president’s “Operation Warp Speed” and his disparagement of the Covid-19 shot. He has previously called it the “deadliest” vaccine ever manufactured.At the hearing, Kennedy refused to acknowledge the wealth of data that shows that the Covid-19 vaccine has saved lives.“Trump has said the vaccine works, and has saved millions of lives. Your own process, on the other hand, has not been transparent,” said the Democratic senator Maggie Hassan, of New Hampshire. “You repeatedly choose to ignore data because it doesn’t match your preconceived notions and lies.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas bill allowing residents to sue out-of-state abortion pill providers reaches governor

      by

      A measure that would allow Texas residents to sue out-of-state abortion pill providers advanced to the desk of the governor, Greg Abbott, on Wednesday, setting up the state to be the first to try to crack down on the most common abortion method.Supporters say it’s a key tool to enforce the state’s abortion ban, protecting women and fetuses.Opponents see it not only as another way to rein in abortion but as an effort to intimidate abortion providers outside Texas who are complying with the laws in their states – and to encourage a form of vigilantism.If the measure becomes law, it’s nearly certain to spark legal challenges from abortion rights supporters.Under the measure, Texas residents could sue those who manufacture, transport or provide abortion-inducing drugs to anyone in Texas for up to $100,000. Women who receive the pills for their own use would not be liable.Under the bill, providers could be ordered to pay $100,000. But only the pregnant woman, the man who impregnated her or other close relatives could collect the entire amount. Anyone else who sued could receive only $10,000, with the remaining $90,000 going to charity.Lawmakers also added language to address worries that women would be turned in for seeking to end pregnancies by men who raped them or abusive partners. For instance, a man who impregnated a woman through sexual assault would not be eligible.The measure has provisions that bar making public the identity or medical details about a woman who receives the pills.It wasn’t until those provisions were added, along with the limit of a $10,000 payment for people who aren’t themselves injured by the abortion, that several major Texas anti-abortion groups backed the bill.The idea of using citizens rather than government officials to enforce abortion bans is not new in Texas. It was at the heart of a 2021 law that curtailed abortion there months before the US supreme court cleared the way for other state bans to take effect.In the earlier law, citizens could collect $10,000 for bringing a successful lawsuit against a provider or anyone who helps someone obtain an abortion. But that measure didn’t explicitly seek to go after out-of-state providers.Pills are a tricky topic for abortion opponents. They were the most common abortion method in the US even before the 2022 supreme court ruling that overturned Roe v Wade and allowed states to enforce abortion bans.They’ve become even more widely used since then. Their availability is a key reason that the number of abortions has risen nationally, even though Texas and 11 other states are enforcing bans on abortion in all stages of pregnancy.The pills have continued to flow partly because at least eight Democratic-led states have enacted laws that seek to protect medical providers from legal consequences when they use telehealth to prescribe the pills to women who are in states where abortion is illegal.Anna Rupani, executive director of Fund Texas Choice, said the measure is intended to threaten those out-of-state providers and women in Texas.“This is about the chilling effect,” she said. “This is yet another abortion ban that is allowing the state to control people’s health care lives and reproductive decisions.”Earlier this year, a Texas judge ordered a New York doctor to pay more than $100,000 in penalties for providing abortion pills to a Dallas-area woman.The same provider, Dr Maggie Carpenter, faces criminal charges from a Louisiana prosecutor for similar allegations.New York officials are invoking their state’s shield laws to block extradition of Carpenter and to refuse to file the civil judgment.If higher courts side with Louisiana or Texas officials, it could damage the shield laws.Meanwhile, the attorneys general of Texas and Florida are seeking to join Idaho, Kansas and Missouri in an effort to get courts to roll back US Food and Drug Administration approvals for mifepristone, one of the drugs usually used in combination for medication abortions, contending that there are safety concerns. They say it needs tighter controls because of those concerns.If the states are successful, it’s possible the drug could be distributed only in person and not by telehealth.Major medical organizations including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists say the drug is safe. More