ReportWire

Tag: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

  • What changed about the CDC’s childhood vaccine recommendations?

    [ad_1]

    Parents looking to get their children vaccinated are navigating confusing times. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently announced new guidelines on the shots it recommends for kids. But the Minnesota Department of Health disagrees with the changes.

    For decades, the MDH was in line with the CDC’s childhood vaccination recommendations.

    That started to change last year. But this month, MDH is officially breaking away and siding with organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics.

    The federal versus state clash is creating mixed messaging for families. What changed about the CDC’s childhood vaccine recommendations? Good Question.

    Initially, all children were recommended to get vaccines for 17 diseases. Now, the CDC scaled it back to the following 11 diseases: measles, mumps and rubella; whooping cough, tetanus and diphtheria; the bacterial disease known as Hib; pneumonia; polio; chickenpox; and human papillomavirus, or HPV.

    The remaining diseases were split among two new categories. The first is “immunizations recommended for high-risk groups,” which now includes RSV, hepatitis B and hepatitis A, dengue and two vaccines for bacterial meningitis.

    The last category is “immunizations based on shared clinical decision making,” which means parents consulting with a doctor. That’s where the flu, rotavirus and COVID-19 vaccines are now listed, among others.

    The next question: why did the CDC make changes? According to U.S. Health and Human Services, it was after reviewing underlying science and trying to better line up with peer nations.

    “The president asked us to change, to look at what the European countries were doing, which have much less chronic disease than we do, and to find out what the best practices were there and to implement them,” HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy told CBS News.

    Medical professionals, like those at MDH, said there’s no new evidence warranting a change to the childhood vaccine schedule.

    “The vaccines that had been routinely recommended and are on the AAP schedule are safe, they’re effective,” said Dr. Ruth Lynfield, state epidemiologist and medical director at MDH. “The goal is not to have fewer vaccines, the goal is to have fewer deaths, to have fewer hospitalizations, to have fewer illnesses.”

    One last thing to clarify is the flu vaccine. It’s in the category under shared clinical decision-making, meaning parents would need to talk with a doctor first. Kennedy told CBS News that it may lead to fewer kids getting a flu shot. In Minnesota, there’s a way for parents to skip the extra step of talking with a doctor if their child is at least 3 years old.

    “A pharmacist is someone who can provide the shared clinical decision making, and a pharmacist in Minnesota can vaccinate down to age 3,” said Lynfield.

    Despite the CDC’s changes, federal and private insurance will still cover vaccines for diseases that the CDC no longer recommends, according to HHS.

    CBS News dug deeper into the diseases no longer on the CDC’s recommended vaccination list. To read it, click here.

    To see the American Academy of Pediatrics’ vaccine recommendation schedule, click here.

    To see the CDC’s vaccine recommendation schedule, click here.

    [ad_2]

    Jeff Wagner

    Source link

  • Chicken sold in 7 states recalled for potential listeria contamination

    [ad_1]

    A Georgia-based food company has recalled thousands of pounds of ready-to-eat chicken products, which were sold in seven different states, after determining the products may have been contaminated with listeria, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced.

    Suzanna’s Kitchen, headquartered in Norcross, Georgia, recalled roughly 13,720 pounds of its ready-to-eat grilled chicken breast fillet products, according to the Food Safety and Inspection Service, a branch of the Department of Agriculture.

    The recalled products were produced on Oct. 14, 2025, and sold in 10-pound cases containing two 5-pound bags of cooked grilled chicken breast fillets with rib meat, health officials said. They were sent to distribution centers for food service sales in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Ohio.

    There have been no confirmed reports of illness linked to the consumption of the recalled products. Officials said the problem was discovered by a third-party laboratory, which tested the chicken fillets and reported a positive result for Listeria monocytogenes, a type of disease-causing bacteria that can infect people when they eat food that has been contaminated with it. 

    The bacteria can be found in a number of places, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, including soil, water, sewage, vegetation and animals. It can survive and grow even when products it contaminates are refrigerated, and is generally transmitted when food is “harvested, processed, prepared, packed, transported, or stored in manufacturing or production environments contaminated with L. monocytogenes,” the FDA says.

    Listeria infections are the third-leading cause of death from foodborne illness in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which estimates that 1,250 people contract the infection each year and 172 people die from it. 

    Although no illnesses have been reported in connection with the recalled products from Suzanna’s Kitchen, officials have encouraged anyone with concerns to contact a healthcare provider.

    Cases and packaging of potentially contaminated meat have the establishment number P-1382 inside the USDA mark of inspection. They also have the lot code 60104 P1382 287 5 J14.

    CBS News has reached out to Suzanna’s Kitchen for comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Doctor breaks down changes to CDC vaccine guidelines

    [ad_1]


    Doctor breaks down changes to CDC vaccine guidelines – CBS News









































    Watch CBS News



    The Centers For Disease Control and Prevention on Monday announced updated recommendations for childhood vaccines with some significant changes. Dr. Jon LaPook joins to break them down.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • CDC announces new childhood vaccine recommendations, suggesting fewer shots

    [ad_1]

    Washington — The Centers For Disease Control and Prevention on Monday announced updated recommendations for childhood vaccines with some significant changes. The new guidelines recommend fewer shots and are likely to face pushback from many doctors and public health experts. 

    Under the new guidelines, the CDC recommends all children be vaccinated against 11 diseases, a decrease from the 17 immunizations previously recommended.

    The vaccines recommended under the new guidelines include diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis (whooping cough), Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), Pneumococcal conjugate, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, and human papillomavirus (HPV), as well as varicella (chickenpox). (Some vaccines, such as the MMR shot for measles, mumps and rubella, protect against multiple diseases.)

    Under the new guidelines, it’s recommended that only children in high-risk categories receive immunizations for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), hepatitis A, hepatitis B, dengue, meningococcal ACWY and meningococcal B. 

    For children not in high-risk groups, the determination on whether to receive certain vaccines should be based on “shared clinical decision-making” between physicians and parents, according to the CDC. Those immunizations include COVID-19, influenza, meningococcal disease, hepatitis A, and hepatitis B. 

    The changes follow a controversial December recommendation on when children should receive their first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine. For more than 30 years, the CDC advised that the first dose be given within 24 hours of birth. The CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, which has been hand-picked by Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr., voted to recommend delaying the shot until a child is 2 months old for those born to mothers who test negative for the virus. 

    Kennedy, a longtime vaccine critic, said in a statement that Monday’s announcement “protects children, respects families, and rebuilds trust in public health.” 

    “After an exhaustive review of the evidence, we are aligning the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule with international consensus while strengthening transparency and informed consent,” he said. 

    The assessment compared the U.S. vaccine schedule to those of 20 other developed nations and found that the U.S. is a “global outlier” in both the number of diseases addressed and total number of recommended doses, according to the Health and Human Services Department. 

    The American Academy of Pediatrics has disputed that, saying the longstanding U.S. recommendations were based on “robust evidence” and are “largely similar across developed countries,” with some variance due to factors like disease threats, demographics and health care systems.

    Dr. Michael Osterholm of the Vaccine Integrity Project, based at the University of Minnesota, warned that the change will put children at risk.

    “Abandoning recommendations for vaccines that prevent influenza, hepatitis and rotavirus, and changing the recommendation for HPV without a public process to weigh the risks and benefits, will lead to more hospitalizations and preventable deaths among American children,” Osterholm told The Associated Press.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Botulism outbreak tied to ByHeart formula sickens more than 50 babies in 19 states, FDA says

    [ad_1]

    Federal health officials on Wednesday said an outbreak of infant botulism tied to recalled ByHeart baby formula has expanded to include all illnesses reported since the company began production in March 2022.

    Investigations by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and ByHeart are still ongoing to determine what originally caused the outbreak, but health officials warned that all ByHeart formula ever produced could have been contaminated.

    In an update shared Wednesday, the FDA said it “cannot rule out the possibility that contamination might have affected all ByHeart formula products.” Because of that, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which is also investigating the outbreak, has expanded the scope of their probe to include any infant infected with botulism who was exposed to ByHeart formula since it came on the market more than three years ago.

    The outbreak’s official tally now includes at least 51 infants in 19 states, the FDA said, adding that those infants have had either suspected or confirmed botulism in addition to confirmed exposure to ByHeart formula. The most recent illness was reported on Dec. 1.

    No deaths have been reported in the outbreak, which was first announced Nov. 8.

    To date, cases have been reported in Arizona, California, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, according to the FDA. California has the highest number of cases so far, with at lease nine, and Texas has the second highest, with at least seven or eight, the agency said.

    Previously, health officials had said the outbreak included 39 suspected or confirmed cases of infant botulism reported in 18 states since August. That’s when officials at California’s Infant Botulism Treatment and Prevention Program reported a rise in treatment of infants who had consumed ByHeart formula. Another 12 cases were identified with the expanded definition, including two that occurred in the original timeline and 10 that occurred from December 2023 through July 2025.

    “They need to be held accountable”

    ByHeart, a New York-based manufacturer of organic infant formula founded in 2016, recalled all its products sold in the U.S. on Nov. 11. The company, which accounts for about 1% of the U.S. infant formula market, had been selling about 200,000 cans of the product each month.

    News that ByHeart products could have been contaminated for years was distressing to Andi Galindo, whose 5-week-old daughter, Rowan, was hospitalized in December 2023 with infant botulism after drinking the formula. Galindo, 36, of Redondo Beach, California, said she insisted on using ByHeart formula to supplement a low supply of breast milk because it was recommended by a lactation consultant as “very natural, very gentle, very good for the babies.”

    “That’s a hard one,” Galindo said. “If there is proof that there were issues with their manufacturing and their plant all the way back from the beginning, that is a problem and they really need to be held accountable.”

    Amy Mazziotti, 43, of Burbank, California, said her then-5-month-old son, Hank, fell ill and was treated for botulism in March, weeks after he began drinking ByHeart. Being included in the investigation of the outbreak “feels like a win for all of us,” she said Wednesday.

    “I’ve known in my gut from the beginning that ByHeart was the reason Hank got sick, and to see that these cases are now part of the investigation brings me to tears — a mix of relief, gratitude and hope that the truth is finally being recognized,” she said.

    In a statement late Wednesday, ByHeart officials said the company is cooperating with federal officials “to understand the full scope of related cases.”

    “The new cases reported by CDC and FDA will help inform ByHeart’s investigation as we continue to seek the root cause of the contamination,” the statement said.

    The FDA sent inspectors last month to ByHeart plants in Allerton, Iowa, and Portland, Oregon, where the formula is produced and packaged. The agency has released no results from those inspections.

    The company previously reported that tests by an independent laboratory showed that 36 samples from three different lots contained the type of bacteria that can cause infant botulism.

    “We cannot rule out the risk that all ByHeart formula across all product lots may have been contaminated,” the company wrote on its website last month.

    Those results and discussions with the FDA led CDC officials to expand the outbreak, according to Dr. Jennifer Cope, a CDC scientist leading the investigation.

    “It looks like the contamination appeared to persist across all production runs, different lots, different raw material lots,” Cope said. “They couldn’t isolate it to specific lots from a certain time period.”

    A contaminated record

    Inspection documents showed that ByHeart had a history of problems with contamination.

    In 2022, the year ByHeart started making formula, the company recalled five batches of infant formula after a sample at a packaging plant tested positive for a different germ, cronobacter sakazakii. In 2023, the FDA sent a warning letter to the company detailing “areas that still require corrective actions.”

    A ByHeart plant in Reading, Pennsylvania, was shut down in 2023 just before FDA inspectors found problems with mold, water leaks and insects, documents show.

    Infant botulism is a rare disease that affects fewer than 200 babies in the U.S. each year. It’s caused when infants ingest botulism bacteria that produce spores that germinate in the intestines, creating a toxin that affects the nervous system. Babies are vulnerable until about age 1 because their gut microbiomes are not mature enough to fight the toxin.

    Baby formula has previously been linked to sporadic cases of illness, but no known outbreaks of infant botulism tied to powdered formula have previously been confirmed, according to research studies.

    Symptoms can take up to 30 days to develop and can include constipation, poor feeding, loss of head control, drooping eyelids and a flat facial expression. Babies may feel “floppy” and can have problems swallowing or breathing.

    The sole treatment for infant botulism is known as BabyBIG, an IV medication made from the pooled blood plasma of adults immunized against botulism. California’s infant botulism program developed the product and is the sole source worldwide.

    The antibodies provided by BabyBIG are likely most effective for about a month, although they may continue circulating in the child’s system for several months, said Dr. Sharon Nachman, an expert in pediatric infectious disease at Stony Brook Children’s Hospital.

    “The risk to the infant is ongoing and the family should not be using this formula after it was recalled,” Nachman said in an email.

    Families of several babies treated for botulism after drinking ByHeart formula have sued the company. Lawsuits filed in federal courts allege that the formula they fed their children was defective and ByHeart was negligent in selling it. They seek financial payment for medical bills, emotional distress and other harm.

    [ad_2]

    CBS Bay Area

    Source link

  • What are parents to do as doctors clash with Trump administration over vaccines?

    [ad_1]

    It’s normal for parents, or anyone, to have questions about vaccinations — but what happens if your pediatrician urges a shot that’s under attack by the Trump administration?

    That’s getting more likely: The nation’s leading doctors groups are in an unprecedented standoff with federal health officials who have attacked long-used, lifesaving vaccines.

    The revolt by pediatricians, obstetricians, family physicians, infectious disease experts and internists came to a head when an advisory panel handpicked by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. urged an end to routine newborn vaccination against hepatitis B, a virus that can cause liver failure or liver cancer.

    That vaccine saves lives, helped child infections plummet and has been given safely to tens of millions of children in the U.S. alone, say the American Academy of Pediatrics and other doctors groups that vowed Tuesday to keep recommending it.

    But that’s not the only difference. That Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices now is examining possible changes to the entire childhood vaccination schedule, questioning certain ingredients and how many doses youngsters receive.

    Pushing back, the American Academy of Pediatrics has issued its own recommendations for youngsters. Other medical groups — plus some city and state public health departments that have banded together — also are issuing their own advice on certain vaccines, which largely mirrors pre-2025 federal guidance.

    This article is part of AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health. Read more Be Well.

    “We owe our patients a consistent message informed by evidence and lived experience, not messages biased by political imperative,” Dr. Ronald Nahass, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told reporters Tuesday.

    But Nahass acknowledged the inevitable consumer confusion, recounting a relative calling him last weekend for advice about hepatitis B vaccination for her new grandbaby.

    “Most Americans don’t have a Cousin Ronnie to call. They are left alone with fear and mistrust,” he said, urging parents to talk with their doctors about vaccines.

    New guidelines without new data concern doctors

    Hepatitis B isn’t the only vaccine challenge. Kennedy’s health department recently changed a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention webpage to contradict the longtime scientific conclusion that vaccines don’t cause autism. Federal agencies also moved to restrict COVID-19 vaccinations this fall, and are planning policy changes that could restrict future flu and coronavirus shots.

    But when it comes to vaccine advice, “for decades, ACIP was the gold standard,” said Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious disease physician and Stanford University researcher.

    The panel once routinely enlisted specialists in specific diseases for long deliberations of the latest science and safety data, resulting in recommendations typically adopted not only by the CDC but by the medical field at large, he said.

    Last week’s meeting of Kennedy’s panel, which includes vaccine skeptics, marked a radical departure. CDC specialists weren’t allowed to present data on hepatitis B, the childhood vaccine schedule or questions about vaccine ingredients. Few of the committee members have public health experience, and some expressed confusion about the panel’s proposals.

    At one point, a doctor called in to say the panel was misrepresenting her study’s findings. And the panel’s chairman wondered why one dose of yellow fever vaccine protected him during a trip to Africa when U.S. children get three doses of hepatitis B vaccine. The hepatitis B vaccine is designed to protect children for life from a virus they can encounter anywhere, not just on a trip abroad. And other scientists noted it was carefully studied for years to prove the three-dose course offers decades of immunity — evidence that a single dose simply doesn’t have.

    “If they’ve got new data, I’m all for it — let’s see it and have a conversation,” said Dr. Kelly Gebo, an infectious disease specialist and public health dean at George Washington University, who watched for that. “I did not see any new data,” so she’s not changing her vaccine advice.

    Committee members argued that most babies’ risk of hepatitis B infection is very low and that earlier research on infant shot safety was inadequate.

    Especially unusual was a presentation from a lawyer who voiced doubt about studies that proved benefits of multiple childhood vaccines and promoted discredited research pointing to harms.

    “I don’t think at any point in the committee’s history, there was a 90-minute uninterrupted presentation by someone who wasn’t a physician, a scientist, or a public health expert on the topic — let alone someone who, who makes his living in vaccine litigation,” said Jason Schwartz, a vaccine policy expert at Yale University.

    By abandoning data and the consensus of front-line doctors, the ACIP is “actively burning down the credibility that made its recommendations so powerful,” added Stanford’s Scott. “Most parents will still follow their pediatricians, and AAP is holding the line here. But the mixed messages are precisely what erode confidence over time.”

    Parents already have a choice — they need solid guidance

    Trump administration health officials say it’s important to restore choice to parents and to avoid mandates. That’s how the panel’s hepatitis B recommendation was framed — that parents who really want it could get their children vaccinated later.

    Parents already have a choice, said Dr. Aaron Milstone of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The government makes population-wide recommendations while families and their doctors tailor choices to each person’s health needs.

    But many doctors don’t — or can’t — do their own lengthy scientific review of vaccines and thus had relied on the ACIP and CDC information, Yale’s Schwartz noted.

    They “rely on trusted expert voices to help navigate what is, even in the best of times, a complicated landscape regarding the evidence for vaccines and how best to use them,” he said.

    That’s a role that the pediatricians and other doctors groups, plus those multistate collaborations, aim to fill with their own guidelines — while acknowledging it will be a huge task.

    For now, “ask your questions, bring your concerns and let us talk about them,” said Dr. Sarah Nosal, of the American Academy of Family Physicians, urging anyone with vaccine questions to have an open conversation with their doctor.

    ___

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • RFK Jr. says he’s following ‘gold standard’ science. Here’s what to know

    [ad_1]

    The message is hammered over and over, in news conferences, hearings and executive orders: President Donald Trump and his health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., say they want the government to follow “gold standard” science.

    Scientists say the problem is that they are often doing just the opposite by relying on preliminary studies, fringe science or just hunches to make claims, cast doubt on proven treatments or even set policy.

    This week, the nation’s top public health agency changed its website to contradict the scientific conclusion that vaccines do not cause autism. The move shocked health experts nationwide.

    Dr. Daniel Jernigan, who resigned from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in August, told reporters Wednesday that Kennedy seems to be “going from evidence-based decision making to decision-based evidence making.”

    It was the latest example of the Trump administration’s challenge to established science.

    In September, the Republican president gave out medical advice based on weak or no evidence. Speaking directly to pregnant women and to parents, he told them not to take acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol. He repeatedly made the fraudulent and long-disproven link between autism and vaccines, saying his assessment was based on a hunch.

    “I have always had very strong feelings about autism and how it happened and where it came from,” he said.

    At a two-day meeting this fall, Kennedy’s handpicked vaccine advisers to the CDC raised questions about vaccinating babies against hepatitis B, an inoculation long shown to reduce disease and death drastically.

    “The discussion that has been brought up regarding safety is not based on evidence other than case reports and anecdotes,” said Dr. Flor Munoz, a pediatric infectious disease expert at Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children’s Hospital.

    During the country’s worst year for measles in more than three decades, Kennedy cast doubt on the measles vaccine while championing unproven treatments and alleging that the unvaccinated children who died were “already sick.”

    Scientists say the process of getting medicines and vaccines to market and recommended in the United States has, until now, typically relied on gold standard science. The process is so rigorous and transparent that much of the rest of the world follows the lead of American regulators, giving the OK to treatments only after U.S. approval.

    Gold standard science

    The gold standard can differ because science and medicine is complicated and everything cannot be tested the same way. That term simply refers to the best possible evidence that can be gathered.

    “It completely depends on what question you’re trying to answer,” said Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious disease physician and Stanford University researcher.

    What produces the best possible evidence?

    There are many different types of studies. The most rigorous is the randomized clinical trial.

    It randomly creates two groups of subjects that are identical in every way except for the drug, treatment or other question being tested. Many are “blinded studies,” meaning neither the subjects nor the researchers know who is in which group. This helps eliminate bias.

    It is not always possible or ethical to conduct these tests. This is sometimes the case with vaccine trials, “because we have so much data showing how safe and effective they are, it would be unethical to withhold vaccines from a particular group,” said Jessica Steier, a public health scientist and founder of the Unbiased Science podcast.

    Studying the long-term effect of a behavior can be impossible. For example, scientists could not possibly study the long-term benefit of exercise by having one group not exercise for years.

    Instead, researchers must conduct observational studies, where they follow participants and track their health and behavior without manipulating any variables. Such studies helped scientists discover that fluoride reduces cavities, and later lab studies showed how fluoride strengthens tooth enamel.

    But the studies have limitations because they can often only prove correlation, not causation. For example, some observational studies have raised the possibility of a link between autism risk and using acetaminophen during pregnancy, but more have not found a connection. The big problem is that those kinds of studies cannot determine if the painkiller really made any difference or if it was the fever or other health problem that prompted the need for the pill.

    Real world evidence can be especially powerful

    Scientists can learn even more when they see how something affects a large number of people in their daily lives.

    That real-world evidence can be valuable to prove how well something works — and when there are rare side effects that could never be detected in trials.

    Such evidence on vaccines has proved useful in both ways. Scientists now know there can be rare side effects with some vaccines and can alert doctors to be on the lookout. The data has proved that vaccines provide extraordinary protection from disease. For example, measles was eliminated in the U.S. but it still pops up among unvaccinated groups.

    That same data proves vaccines are safe.

    “If vaccines caused a wave of chronic disease, our safety systems — which can detect 1-in-a-million events — would have seen it. They haven’t,” Scott told a U.S. Senate subcommittee in September.

    The best science is open and transparent

    Simply publishing a paper online is not enough to call it open and transparent. Specific things to look for include:

    — Researchers set their hypothesis before they start the study and do not change it.

    — The authors disclose their conflicts of interest and their funding sources.

    — The research has gone through peer review by subject-matter experts who have nothing to do with that particular study.

    — The authors show their work, publishing and explaining the data underlying their analyses.

    — They cite reliable sources.

    This transparency allows science to check itself. Dr. Steven Woloshin, a Dartmouth College professor, has spent much of his career challenging scientific conclusions underlying health policy.

    “I’m only able to do that because they’re transparent about what they did, what the underlying source resources were, so that you can come to your own conclusion,” he said. “That’s how science works.”

    Know the limits of anecdotes and single studies

    Anecdotes may be powerful. They are not data.

    Case studies might even be published in top journals, to help doctors or other professionals learn from a particular situation. But they are not used to making decisions about how to treat large numbers of patients because every situation is unique.

    Even single studies should be considered in the context of previous research. A new one-off blockbuster study that seems to answer every question definitively or reaches a conclusion that runs counter to other well-conducted studies needs a very careful look.

    Uncertainty is baked into science.

    “Science isn’t about reaching certainty,” Woloshin said. “It’s about trying to reduce uncertainty to the point where you can say, ‘I have good confidence that if we do X, we’ll see result Y.’ But there’s no guarantee.”

    Doing your own research? Questions to ask

    If you come across a research paper online, in a news story or cited by officials to change your mind about something, here are some questions to ask:

    — Who did the research? What is their expertise? Do they disclose conflicts of interest?

    — Who paid for this research? Who might benefit from it?

    — Is it published in a reputable journal? Did it go through peer review?

    — What question are the researchers asking? Who or what are they studying? Are they making even comparisons between groups?

    — Is there a “limitations” section where the authors point out what their research cannot prove, other factors that could influence their results, or other potential blind spots? What does it say?

    — Does it make bold, definitive claims? Does it fit into the scientific consensus or challenge it? Is it too good or bad to be true?

    ___

    AP Medical Writers Lauran Neergaard in Washington and Mike Stobbe in New York contributed to this report.

    ___

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kennedy sharpens vaccine attacks, without scientific backing

    [ad_1]

    As the federal government prepares for the next meeting of its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has intensified his attacks on aluminum vaccine components used in many shots to boost the body’s immune response.

    Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist before seeking public office, claims that aluminum adjuvants are neurotoxic and tied to autism, asthma, autoimmune disease, and food allergies.

    But science and medicine advances a different view. Strong recommendations that parents introduce peanut-containing foods to infants early, for instance, have led to a drop in the incidence rate of peanut allergies.

    Since taking office, Kennedy has ordered reviews of vaccine ingredients, citing aluminum as a top concern. A discussion of “adjuvants and contaminants” is on the vaccine advisory panel’s draft agenda.

    A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention webpage that for years has assured the public vaccines do not cause autism was updated Nov. 19 with new language stating that studies have not definitively ruled out a link between vaccines and autism.

    He has also targeted scientists who have published studies showing aluminum adjuvants are safe. In August, Kennedy denounced a large Danish study finding no link between aluminum in vaccines and childhood disease, calling it a “deceitful propaganda stunt” and demanding its retraction. The Annals of Internal Medicine rejected the claim and refused to retract the study.

    And, regarding the upcoming advisory panel meeting, HHS spokesperson Emily HIlliard said ACIP “is independently reviewing the full body of evidence on adjuvants and other vaccine components to ensure the highest safety standards.”

    The stakes are high because Kennedy’s push to cast doubt on aluminum isn’t just about the ingredient itself. It’s part of a broader strategy to foster uncertainty about vaccine safety and lay the groundwork to challenge the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which drug manufacturers say is essential to ensure a stable market for shots.

    But researchers across infectious diseases, immunology, pediatrics, and epidemiology say the data is clear: Aluminum adjuvants are safe.

    “Aluminum is the third most common element on the Earth’s surface,” said Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician and director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “So we’re all exposed to aluminum all the time. The water that we drink has aluminum in it. The food that we eat has aluminum in it.”

    Vaccines add only a tiny amount of aluminum to the body — a combined total of about 8 milligrams — after the schedule of childhood vaccines is complete. Offit said that over the first 18 years of life, people naturally take in about 400 milligrams of aluminum from everyday sources.

    “I don’t know why there is so much concern,” said Dr. Rajesh Gupta, a former FDA vaccine scientist. “Aluminum gets distributed in the body everywhere. It is ultimately excreted by the kidneys in the urine. So, it is not that aluminum stays in the body.”

    How they work

    The aluminum in vaccines isn’t foil or metal. It’s a compound of aluminum salts, such as aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate, that help the vaccine work better.

    It’s a bit like zinc in cold tablets: Patients don’t swallow chunks of metal, instead ingesting a zinc salt that dissolves safely in the body.

    In vaccines, these aluminum salts give the immune system an extra nudge so it learns to recognize the target germ more effectively.

    When injected, the vaccine stays near the injection site and causes mild, short-lived inflammation that summons immune cells. Those cells pick up the vaccine antigen, a harmless piece of a virus or bacterium, and carry it to nearby lymph nodes. There, the adjuvants show it around like a wanted poster so the body can identify and destroy the germ quickly.

    Dr. Harm HogenEsch, a professor of immunopathology at the Purdue University College of Veterinary Medicine, said that aluminum adjuvants work only when they’re injected in the same spot as the vaccine ingredient they’re meant to boost, to help nearby immune cells learn to recognize the germ. If the two shots are given in different places, he said, “you don’t see that effect.”

    In response to Kennedy’s claims, scientists say that anything that acts as an adjuvant can, in principle, also boost an allergic response. But that doesn’t mean aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines are turning children into food-allergic time bombs. Antigens in vaccines such as the hepatitis B surface antigen or HPV proteins are not allergens, and no food proteins are put into vaccines.

    Animal experiments

    Animal studies form the basis of Kennedy’s claim that aluminum adjuvants in vaccines can create allergies. In these experiments, scientists deliberately sensitize rats or mice by injecting them with a food protein mixed with aluminum. The aluminum strengthens the immune response, but it does not cause an allergy by itself.

    “That’s the basis for a lot of the experimental mouse models, where you inject a food allergen with an aluminum adjuvant to sensitize the mice,” HogenEsch said. “I’m not aware of any food antigen being included in vaccines, and so I don’t really see a way by which this could happen.”

    Dr. Ross Kedl, a professor of immunology and microbiology at the University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, went further, noting that there is no plausible route for vaccines to create a peanut allergy out of thin air. “Someone would have had to mix peanut proteins in with the actual vaccine prior to injection.”

    Dr. Stefan H. E. Kaufmann, director emeritus at the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology in Berlin, said results from mice often don’t match what happens in people, because “mice are much easier to push into allergic reactions than humans.” In other words, what looks dramatic in a rodent study doesn’t automatically apply to human immune systems.

    And in this case, it’s “important to distinguish between how aluminum behaves in lab animals versus people,” Kaufmann said.

    Human studies

    Beyond animal models and theoretical scenarios, scientists have looked hard for signals of harm in large human datasets.

    In 2023, a study by the Vaccine Safety Datalink, a collaboration coordinated by the CDC, reported a slight increase in asthma among children with higher aluminum exposure before age 2, but the association disappeared in further analyses.

    “That paper was roundly criticized,” Offit said. “When they controlled for breastfeeding, the association between asthma and receipt of aluminum-adjuvant-containing vaccines disappeared.”

    “It should have never been published,” he said.

    Dr. Kathy Edwards, professor emerita of pediatrics at Vanderbilt University, said that false signals are common when large databases are mined for dozens of outcomes.

    “When you look at a hundred different things, just by the law of percentages, some of those may look like there is a signal,” she said. “The whole RFK Jr. assessment is really prone to cherry-picking,” she said, adding that “there does need to be some kind of basic understanding of statistics for people to interpret this.”

    Soon after the 2023 U.S. findings drew attention, scientists at the CDC contacted Dr. Anders Hviid, head of epidemiology research at the Statens Serum Institut in Copenhagen, Denmark, to see whether his team could replicate the work.

    “It makes perfect sense to try to replicate findings of any kind in different data sources,” Hviid said.

    Hviid’s nationwide Danish study followed 1.2 million children over two decades, using linked national health registries that record every vaccination and diagnosis.

    “Our health care system is quite egalitarian. It’s free, and there’s universal access. And everyone is in these nationwide registers,” he said. Their findings: no increased risk of these conditions associated with increasing amounts of aluminum received through the vaccines.

    Rare bumps

    Doctors have documented one genuine reaction to aluminum adjuvants: itchy nodules at the injection site, called “pruritic granulomas.” These small bumps are so rare that most allergists and pediatricians will never see a single case.

    This reaction “doesn’t lead to something bad, and it really isn’t associated with anything other than that local irritation,” Edwards said.

    Researchers believe these bumps represent a localized immune response — meaning only in the area of the injection, not a body-wide allergy — that is very different from the kind of immediate allergic reaction people treat with antihistamines. These include the reactions driven by food or beestings, when histamine, the body’s own alarm signal, floods the system within minutes and causes hives, swelling, or breathing trouble. Kedl said that distinction often gets lost in public debate.

    Eliminating aluminum adjuvants

    For many experts, the real issue is not just whether aluminum is safe but what happens to the entire vaccine program if aluminum adjuvants are stripped out. For many modern vaccines that rely on a single purified protein — such as those for diphtheria and tetanus toxoids, hepatitis B, and HPV — adjuvants are crucial.

    Edwards said that simply swapping in a different adjuvant isn’t realistic.

    “They’re kind of all built on one another,” she said. Once a vaccine has been proved to work and become the standard of care, new or updated versions are generally no longer tested against a placebo in people who should be getting that vaccine. Instead, they’re tested against the existing product, which means each approval rests on the one before it.

    Core childhood vaccines would probably have to be reformulated, and large clinical trials would have to be repeated to prove the new products are safe and effective. Meanwhile, production gaps and shortages would have to be managed, potentially for years, while manufacturers and regulators start over — all while diseases such as whooping cough, hepatitis B, and HPV-related cancers gain more room to spread.

    “The aluminum adjuvants have sort of hit the sweet spot in terms of being effective at inducing a robust antibody response that is protective for those vaccines in which they’re being used and being very safe,” HogenEsch said. “It would be quite frankly foolish to try to eliminate them.”

    A century of safe use

    The DTaP, hepatitis B, and HPV vaccines all contain aluminum adjuvants and have been in use for nearly a century. Large-scale studies show no link between aluminum and systemic allergic disease.

    “We have had aluminum adjuvants in vaccines for decades,” Edwards said. “I have grandchildren. My grandchildren have received all of their vaccines. And I do not worry about the safety of them.”

    If aluminum is falsely cast as the villain and vaccine uptake falls, experts warn, the consequences will not be theoretical: more measles in schools, more meningitis in college dorms, and more young adults dying of cancers that HPV shots could have prevented.

    In their view, the real danger isn’t the trace amounts of a metal that children already encounter every day. It’s rolling back the protection aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines have provided for generations.

    That’s the trade-off Offit hopes parents will see. “A choice not to get a vaccine is not a risk-free choice,” he said. “It’s just a choice to take a different risk.”

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FACT FOCUS: There’s no proof each strike on alleged drug boats saves 25,000 lives, as Trump claims

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that military strikes on suspected drug boats his administration has been carrying out for more than two months in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean are saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S.

    He most recently cited these numbers on Monday while answering questions from reporters after announcing a new initiative that will allow foreigners traveling to the U.S. for the World Cup next year to get interviews for visas more quickly.

    But experts say that this is a grossly simplistic interpretation of the situation.

    Here’s a closer look at the facts.

    TRUMP: “Every boat we knock out, we save 25,000 American lives.”

    THE FACTS: The numbers to support Trump’s claim don’t add up, and sometimes don’t exist. For example, people in the U.S. who die from drug overdoses each year are far fewer than the amount Trump suggests have been saved by the boat strikes his administration has carried out since September.

    “The statement that each of the administration’s strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats saves 25,000 lives is absurd,” said Carl Latkin, a professor of public health at Johns Hopkins University who studies substance use. “The evidence is similar to that of the moon being made of blue cheese. If you look carefully, you will see a resemblance. However, a close analysis of this claim suggests that it lacks all credibility.”

    According to the latest preliminary data from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, there were about 97,000 drug overdose deaths in the U.S. during the 12-month period that ended June 30. That’s down 14% from the estimated 113,000 for the previous 12-month period.

    Final CDC data reports 53,336 overdose deaths in 2024 and 75,118 in 2023.

    The U.S. military has attacked 21 boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean since strikes began on Sept. 2, most recently on Nov. 15. Using Trump’s numbers, that would mean the strikes have prevented 525,000 fatal drug overdoses in the U.S — far more than the number of overdose deaths that have occurred in recent two-month periods. This essentially implies that the administration is saving more lives than would have ever been lost.

    Lori Ann Post, the director of the Institute for Public Health and Medicine at Northwestern University, explained that “there’s no empirically sound way to say a single strike ‘saves 25,000 lives,’” even if the statement is interpreted more broadly to mean preventing substance use disorders and resulting ripple effects. Among the issues she pointed to are a lack of verifiable cargo data or published models linking such boat strikes to changes in drug use, as well as markets that will adapt to isolated supply losses.

    “The math and the data are not there,” said Post, who studies drug overdose deaths and economic drivers of the opioid crisis.

    Latkin added that claiming one lethal dose of a drug automatically translates to one death is a “very simple way of looking at it,” as different people have different tolerances.

    Trump has justified the attacks by saying the U.S. is in “armed conflict” with drug cartels and claiming the boats are operated by foreign terror organizations that are flooding America’s cities with drugs. Neither Trump nor his administration have publicly confirmed the amount of drugs allegedly destroyed in the strikes.

    White House spokesperson Anna Kelly reiterated Trump’s numbers when asked for evidence to support his claims about how many lives are being saved. She wrote in an email: “President Trump is right — any boat bringing deadly poison to our shores has the potential to kill 25,000 Americans or more. The President is prepared to use every element of American power to stop drugs from flooding in to our country and to bring those responsible for justice.”

    Latkin noted that this estimate also ignores the reality that even if the Trump administration manages to shut off one source of illegal drugs with its boat strikes, there will still be others. He offered a comparison to the fast food industry, explaining that getting rid of a couple of restaurants would not greatly improve Americans’ health since there are so many other sources where consumers could get the same or similar products.

    “It’s incredibly naive to think that reducing the supply in one place will eradicate the problem because it’s such a massive business,” he said.

    Opioids accounted for 73.4% of drug overdose deaths in 2024, according to the CDC. That includes 65.1% from illegally made fentanyls. But while the boat strikes have targeted vessels largely in the Caribbean Sea, fentanyl is typically trafficked to the U.S. overland from Mexico, where it is produced with chemicals imported from China and India.

    Overdose death rates began steadily climbing in the 1990s because of opioid painkillers, followed by waves of deaths led by other opioids like heroin and — more recently — illicit fentanyl. New numbers from the CDC show that a decline that began in 2023 has continued. Experts aren’t certain about the reasons for the decline, but they cite a combination of possible factors. Among them are the end of the COVID-19 pandemic; years of efforts to increase the availability of the overdose-reversing drug naloxone and addiction treatments; and changes to the drugs themselves.

    ___

    Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Washington state resident dies after contracting a bird flu strain never before detected in humans, officials say

    [ad_1]

    A Washington state man is believed to be the first person to die from a rare strain of bird flu, but state health officials said Friday the risk to the public is low.

    The man, an older adult with underlying health conditions, was being treated for a bird flu called H5N5 after becoming seemingly the first known human infected by the strain, according to a statement from the Washington State Department of Health. 

    It was the nation’s first human case of bird flu since February.

    The man from Grays Harbor County, about 78 miles southwest of Seattle, had a backyard flock of domestic poultry that had been exposed to wild birds, health officials said.

    “The risk to the public remains low,” the statement from state health officials said. “No other people involved have tested positive for avian influenza.”

    Health officials said they will monitor anyone who came in close contact with the man, but “there is no evidence of transmission of this virus between people.”

    Earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a statement about the infection that said no information would suggest “the risk to public health has increased as a result of this case.”

    H5N5 is not believed to be a greater threat to human health than the H5N1 virus behind a wave of 70 reported human infections in the U.S. in 2024 and 2025. Most of those have been mild illnesses in workers on dairy and poultry farms.

    The distinction between H5N5 and H5N1 lies in a protein involved in releasing the virus from an infected cell and promoting spread to surrounding cells.

    Bird flu has been detected in a variety of bird populations since January 2022, and in March of last year, it was found in dairy cows for the first time. 

    Bird flu can infect birds as well as mammals, including pigs, cattle and cats. People can also get infected when they come into close contact with infected animals, which is why farm workers are at high risk for infection. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • CDC website is changed to include false claim about autism and vaccines

    [ad_1]

    A page of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s website was changed to include a false claim about autism and vaccines. Multiple CDC officials familiar with the situation said the change was made by political appointees inside the Department of Health and Human Services without input from relevant agency staffers. 

    The page about vaccines and autism formerly said that “no links have been found between any vaccine ingredients and Autism spectrum disorder.” The website has now been changed to say, “‘Vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim” — a statement the Autism Science Foundation calls “misinformation” that “actually contradicts the best available science.” The CDC page also falsely claims that studies supporting a link between vaccines and autism have “been ignored by health authorities.”

    Previously, changes have only occurred in consultation with subject matter experts at the agency’s National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities and its National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. The CDC sources told CBS News political appointees at HHS devised the change and instructed an employee inside the office of acting CDC Director Jim O’Neil to make it. 

    Autism is a developmental disability caused by differences in the brain. It presents with a wide range of symptoms that can include delays in language, learning, and social or emotional skills. The National Institutes of Health has committed hundreds of millions of dollars a year to studying the condition and trying to understand how and why it develops.

    The debunked theory that the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine causes autism has its roots in a 1998 study that was found to be fraudulent and has been retracted. Since then, “independent researchers across seven countries have conducted more than 40 high-quality studies involving over 5.6 million people,” said American Academy of Pediatrics president Susan Kressly in a statement decrying the website change. 

    “We are at a very dangerous moment for the health of America’s children,” said Dr. Sean O’Leary, chair of the AAP’s Committee on Infectious Diseases, in a news briefing on Thursday.  

    Research has found no evidence of increased rates of autism among those who are vaccinated compared to those who are not. Vaccines also undergo intensive safety testing. Research shows that genetics play a role in autism diagnoses. The NIH says some possible risk factors for autism include prenatal exposure to pesticides or air pollution, extreme prematurity or low birth weight, certain maternal health conditions, or parents conceiving at an older age.  

    “There is overwhelming evidence that vaccines do not cause autism,” said Dr. Mandy Cohen, a former CDC director. “This change to CDC language undermines the agency’s scientific integrity, damaging its credibility on vaccines and other health recommendations. Most concerning, it risks endangering children by driving down vaccination rates and leaving kids vulnerable to preventable diseases like measles and whooping cough.”

    In a statement, HHS communications director Andrew Nixon said, “This is a common-sense update that brings CDC’s website in line with our commitment to transparency and gold standard science.

    “As the updated page explains, the claim that ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not supported by comprehensive evidence, as studies to date have not definitively ruled out potential associations. Some research suggesting possible biologic mechanisms has been ignored or dismissed by public health agencies, and HHS is committed to finding a definitive answer,” Nixon said.

    Leading autism advocacy groups dispute that. 

    The Autism Science Foundation said in a statement it was “appalled” by the change to the CDC’s website, and highlighted the decades of research into the topic. Alison Singer, the co-founder and president of the ASF, said that while researchers “can’t do a scientific study to show that something does not cause something else,” there are a “mountain of studies that we have exonerating vaccines as a cause of autism.”

    “I think the question of whether vaccines causes autism is one that science can answer, and science has answered it,” Singer said in Thursday’s news briefing.

    A subhead saying that “Vaccines do not cause autism” remains on the CDC website with an asterisk next to it. The bottom of the page explains that the header remains in place because of an agreement with Louisiana Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, a physician who is the chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee and backed HHS Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during his confirmation hearings. Cassidy said Sunday on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” that he supported Kennedy in part because of “serious commitments” from the Trump administration, but did not specify what those were. 

    “I’m a doctor who has seen people die from vaccine-preventable diseases,” Cassidy wrote on social media on Thursday afternoon. “What parents need to hear right now is vaccines for measles, polio, hepatitis B and other childhood diseases are safe and effective and will not cause autism. Any statement to the contrary is wrong, irresponsible, and actively makes Americans sicker.” 

    Cassidy highlighted recent outbreaks of whooping cough and measles. He also called for more research into “the real causes of autism,” and criticized HHS funding cuts. 

    “Redirecting attention to factors we definitely know DO NOT cause autism denies families the answers they deserve,” Cassidy wrote.

    Other health agency pages with information about autism and vaccines had not been changed as of early Thursday afternoon.

    Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 

    CBS News


    Kennedy has previously pushed the discredited claim that routine childhood shots cause autism. President Trump has also falsely suggested vaccines could be to blame for autism rates. Both expressed concern about rising rates of autism diagnoses, which appear to be driven by a variety of factors including increased awareness and changes in how the condition is diagnosed. 

    O’Leary said he feared the website changes would “scare parents and further stigmatize” people with autism. 

    “We have been dealing with these falsehoods for many years. They are not new. We have been promoting the science, and we’re going to continue to do that, as are the other professional societies,” he said. “The problem is now it’s coming from, these falsehoods are coming for our federal government.” 

    Experts have previously raised concerns about Kennedy reviving debunked theories about the cause of autism. In April, Kennedy announced the CDC would conduct a “massive testing and research effort” to find out what causes the disorder, and hired David Geier, a man who repeatedly claimed a link between vaccines and autism, to lead the effort. Kennedy said the work would be completed by September, though other health officials later pushed the timeline

    Dr. Fiona Havers, an infectious disease physician and former CDC official, said that the website change showed scientists “who in the past carefully vetted scientific information have been pushed aside.” 

    The “CDC should be a data-driven agency based on science and not ideology, but when you take the scientists out of the process you get rhetoric that can harm families,” said former CDC chief science and medical officer Dr. Debra Houry, who lresigned from the agency earlier this year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • CDC website changed to include false claim about autism and vaccines

    [ad_1]

    A page of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s website was changed to include a false claim about autism and vaccines. Multiple CDC officials familiar with the situation said the change was made by political appointees inside the Department of Health and Human Services without input from relevant agency staffers. Dr. Jon LaPook has details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Washington resident infected with different strain of bird flu, health officials say

    [ad_1]

    A Washington resident has been hospitalized with a different strain of bird flu than those seen in past cases, state health officials announced Friday.

    The person was infected with a bird flu called H5N5. State and federal health officials say it appears to be the first known human infection with the H5N5 bird flu virus.

    The individual has a mixed backyard flock that was exposed to wild birds, making either the domestic birds or the wild ones the most likely source of infection, the Washington State Department of Health said. Public health officials are continuing to investigate. 

    It is the nation’s first human case of bird flu since February. The older adult with underlying health conditions remains hospitalized. State health officials had announced the preliminary bird flu diagnosis on Thursday. On Friday, they said it had been confirmed. 

    The H5N5 version is not believed to be a greater threat to human health than the H5N1 virus behind a wave of 70 reported human infections in the U.S. in 2024 and 2025. Most of those have been mild illnesses in workers on dairy and poultry farms.

    “These viruses behave similarly,” said Richard Webby, a prominent flu researcher at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee. “My gut instinct is to consider it the same as H5N1 from a human health perspective.”

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday issued a similar statement that said no information would suggest “the risk to public health has increased as a result of this case.”

    The agency is awaiting a specimen from Washington to conduct additional testing.

    The distinction between H5N5 and H5N1 lies in a protein involved in releasing the virus from an infected cell and promoting spread to surrounding cells.

    “Think along the lines of different brands of car tires. They both do the same job, it’s just each is better tuned for specific conditions, which we don’t fully understand,” Webby wrote in an email to The Associated Press.

    H5N5 may have a different preference for which kind of birds it most readily infects, he added.

    Bird flu has been detected in a variety of bird populations since January 2022, and in March of last year, it was found in dairy cows for the first time. 

    Bird flu can infect birds as well as mammals, including pigs, cattle and cats. People can also get infected when they come into close contact with infected animals, which is why farm workers are at high risk for infection. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Baby formula recalled after reports of infant botulism in 10 U.S. states

    [ad_1]

    Federal and state health officials are investigating 13 cases in 10 states of infant botulism linked to baby formula that was being recalled, authorities said Saturday.

    ByHeart Inc. agreed to begin recalling two lots of the company’s Whole Nutrition Infant Formula, the Food and Drug Administration said in a statement.

    All 13 infants were hospitalized after consuming formula from two lots: 206VABP/251261P2 and 206VABP/251131P2.

    The cases occurred in Arizona, California, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas and Washington.

    No deaths were reported. The FDA said it was investigating how the contamination happened and whether it affected any other products.

    A container of ByHeart Whole Nutrition Infant Formula. 

    Business Wire via AP


    “The safety and well-being of every infant who uses our formula is our absolute highest priority,” Mia Funt, ByHeart’s co-founder and president, said in a statement. “We take any potential safety concern extremely seriously, and act quickly to protect families. As parents ourselves, we understand the concern this news may raise. This voluntary recall is out of an abundance of caution and comes from our ongoing commitment to transparency and safety for babies and their parents.” 

    Available online and through major retailers, the product accounted for an estimated 1% of national formula sales, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    People who bought the recalled formula should record the lot number if possible before throwing it out or returning it to where it was purchased, the CDC said in a statement.

    They should use a dishwasher or hot, soapy water to clean items and surfaces that touched the formula. And they should seek medical care right away if an infant has consumed recalled formula and then had poor feeding, loss of head control, difficulty swallowing or decreased facial expression.

    Infant botulism is caused by a bacterium that produces toxins in the large intestine.

    Symptoms can take weeks to develop, so parents should keep vigilant, the CDC said. According to the CDC, symptoms of infant botulism can include constipation, poor feeding, ptosis or drooping eyelid, sluggish pupils, a flattened facial expression, diminished suck and gag reflexes, a weak and altered cry, respiratory difficulty and possible respiratory arrest.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supplements sold at Sam’s Club linked to salmonella outbreak

    [ad_1]

    Powder supplements sold at Sam’s Club stores are linked to at least 11 cases of Salmonella in seven states, federal health authorities said Friday.  

    Member’s Mark Super Greens Powder Supplements, which were sold at the discount chain’s stores nationwide and online, have been pulled from store shelves because they contain moringa leaf powder that may be contaminated with Salmonella bacteria, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in an alert posted on its website. 

    “If you have any of the products listed below in your home, throw them out or return them to the store,” the agency said, while noting that the product has not been recalled.  

    Three of the people who contracted Salmonella were hospitalized, according to the agency. Illnesses, which were reported between May and September, were confirmed in Florida, Kansas, Michigan, North Carolina, New York, South Carolina and Virginia. 

    The source of the Salmonella was traced to a single lot of organic moringa leaf powder imported from Vallon Farm Direct in Jodhpur, India, according to an investigation by the Food and Drug Administration. State health officials in Virginia and Michigan collected and tested samples of the product from the homes of people who fell ill.

    The CDC said it may add other Vallon Farm products with moringa leaf powder to avoid as the agency’s investigation continues. 

    Moringa is a plant native to India and other countries prized for essential nutrients including protein, amino acids, vitamins and minerals, according to research published by the National Institutes of Health. Its leaves can be dried and powdered.

    People infected with the Salmonella bacteria can experience symptoms including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, bloody diarrhea, abdominal cramping and fever. Rarely, Salmonella can result in more serious ailments, including arterial infections, endocarditis, arthritis, muscle pain, eye irritation and urinary tract symptoms. 

    Infections can be severe in young children, older adults and people with weakened immune systems, who may require hospitalization.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • CDC scientist let go during shutdown says “it’s truly like an episode of ‘Squid Games’”

    [ad_1]

    Washington — A scientist laid off by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said “the everyday American should be very concerned” by reductions in force amid the government shutdown.

    The scientist, one of hundreds of CDC employees terminated by the Trump administration last week, asked that her identity be concealed for fear of retribution. 

    “It’s going to mean more deaths, more preventable deaths,” she told CBS News on Wednesday of the layoffs. “People will absolutely die from the impact of this administration.”

    The scientist worked at the CDC for the past decade, studying chronic diseases like diabetes and heart disease. 

    She spoke out the same day a federal judge in Northern California issued a verbal order temporarily halting all the government layoffs that were issued since the shutdown began. This was in response to a lawsuit brought by federal employees’ unions.

    “They went in and fired entire programs, even statutorily mandated by law programs, they cut entirely,” she said. “So there is no staff to do this work anymore.”

    She said everything she was working on has come to a complete stop. 

    “It’s truly like an episode of ‘Squid Games,’ because we don’t know what’s going to happen next,” she said.

    The Trump administration has used the government shutdown, now in its third week, to lay off more than 4,000 federal workers, and plans to go further, according to Russell Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.

    “I think we’ll probably end up being north of 10,000,” Vought said Wednesday during an appearance on “The Charlie Kirk Show.” 

    Since last week, the Trump administration has informed approximately 600 CDC employees they have been laid off. 

    On Tuesday, internal CDC officials not authorized to speak to the media told CBS News that on Oct. 10, about 1,000 CDC employees were initially given reduction-in-force notices, a government term for layoffs.

    However, within about 24 hours, hundreds of those notices were rescinded, reducing the total number of layoffs in the agency since Oct. 10 to about 600, the officials said.

    The judge’s ruling Wednesday would put the layoffs of those 600 employees on hold, leaving them in limbo while the case plays out. 

    According to numbers provided by a congressional source familiar with the cuts, the 600 CDC layoffs impacted all staff in the CDC’s offices in Washington, D.C., all staff for the office of the director for the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, all staff for the National Center for State, Tribal, Local, and Territorial Public Health Infrastructure and Workforce, and all policy and communications staff for the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

    The CDC agencies that saw their layoffs rescinded, according to the source, were the Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Center, the Global Health Center, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report team, the Epidemic Intelligence Service, and scientists working on responses to outbreaks of measles in the U.S. and Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

    So far this year, the CDC has lost about 3,000 employees to resignations and layoffs, or just under a quarter of its staff, according to AFGE Local 2883, the union that represents CDC employees. That number was confirmed by the CDC officials who spoke to CBS News. 

    The CDC has been beset by changes since Robert F. Kennedy Jr. took the reins of the Department of Health and Human Services earlier this year. A vaccine skeptic, Kennedy controversially replaced all 17 members of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices, a panel that makes vaccine recommendations.

    And in August, less than a month after being confirmed by the Senate as CDC director, Susan Monarez was fired from her post over what she said was pressure from Kennedy to rubber-stamp his vaccine directives, later testifying before the Senate that Kennedy’s demands were “inconsistent with my oath of office and the ethics required of a public official.” Her firing also prompted several top CDC officials to resign in protest. 

    Kennedy, in his own Senate testimony last month, denied that he pressured Monarez to preapprove vaccination recommendations. He told senators that when he asked Monarez if she was “a trustworthy person,” she responded, “no.”

    The congressional source also confirmed that among the permanent layoffs in HHS last week were 41 people in the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, an agency under the U.S. Public Health Service whose staff works in biodefense, as well as monitors data on natural disasters, infectious disease outbreaks and cyberattacks on hospitals.

    An HHS spokesperson told CBS News on Wednesday that the department’s layoffs are part of an effort to cut a “bloated bureaucracy,” and that the positions were deemed “non-essential by their respective divisions.” 

    HHS continues to close wasteful and duplicative entities, including those that are at odds with the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again agenda,” the spokesperson said in a statement. 

    But the scientist who spoke to CBS News said the turmoil inside the CDC will impact responses to disease outbreaks, like the measles outbreak in South Carolina, where five new cases were reported Tuesday, bringing the total to 16 since July, and forcing 139 students into quarantine, according to health officials.

    “The surge capacity of the CDC is going to be significantly hampered with these cuts,” the scientist told CBS News. “It’s going to impede our ability to respond to public health outbreaks, just when all of these threats are on the rise.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How to get a COVID-19 shot and ensure it’s covered by your insurance

    [ad_1]

    Drugstores are ready to deliver updated COVID-19 vaccines this fall and insurers plan to pay for them, even though the shots no longer come recommended by an important government committee.

    On Friday, vaccine advisers picked by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declined to specifically recommend the shots but said people could make individual decisions on whether to get them.

    The recommendations from the advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention require sign-off by the agency’s director, but they are almost always adopted.

    Those recommendations normally trigger several layers of insurance coverage and allow drugstores in many states to deliver the shots. But insurers and government officials have said coverage will continue, and several states have allowed for vaccine access through pharmacies, the most common place to get shots.

    Many people start seeking vaccinations in the late summer or early fall to get protection against any winter surges in cases.

    Here’s a closer look at the issue.

    Will insurers cover these shots?

    Many are expected to do so, but you still may want to check with yours.

    The Department of Health and Human Services said Friday that the committee vote “provides for immunization coverage through all payment mechanisms.” An HHS spokesperson said that includes Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, commercial coverage sold through health insurance marketplaces and the federal Vaccines for Children program, which pays for roughly half of childhood vaccinations in the U.S. each year.

    The VFC program normally automatically covers any vaccines recommended by the CDC committee.

    The trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans said earlier this week that its members will continue to cover the shots at no cost to patients through 2026.

    That group includes every major insurer except UnitedHealthcare. And that insurer has said it will continue covering the vaccine at no cost for its standard commercial coverage, which includes plans offered for individuals and through small businesses.

    One caveat: Large employers that offer coverage will make their own decisions on the vaccines.

    They may be motivated to continue coverage: The vaccines can help ward off expensive hospital bills from people who develop a bad case of COVID-19.

    Where people can get vaccinations

    About two-thirds of adults get COVID-19 shots at pharmacies, and around 30% receive them at doctors’ offices, according to CDC data.

    Access to the shots has grown after a clunky start to vaccine season that saw some people travel to nearby states when they couldn’t make appointments at pharmacies closer to home.

    Drugstore chains like CVS say their locations are stocked with the latest vaccines, and they now are able to deliver vaccinations in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. Prescriptions are required in D.C. and a handful of states, including Florida and Georgia, CVS Health spokeswoman Amy Thibault said.

    Walgreens also requires prescriptions in a few states, a company spokesperson said.

    Who can get the shot?

    Until now, the U.S. has recommended yearly COVID-19 shots for everyone age 6 months and older.

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently approved the shots for all people age 65 and older, and for younger adults and children with conditions that put them at high risk for catching a bad case of COVID-19.

    The CDC maintains a long list of conditions that would put someone at high risk, including asthma, cancer, heart or lung problems, obesity, depression and a history of smoking. It also includes those who are physically inactive, and the agency notes that this list is not conclusive.

    Patients can consult with their doctor or care provider to decide whether they are high risk if they don’t have a condition on that list.

    Both CVS and Walgreens representatives say their companies will ask patients under age 65 if they have any of these factors. They won’t require proof.

    “In simplest terms, if a patient says they’re eligible, they will get the vaccine,” said Thibault, the CVS Health spokeswoman.

    ___

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Tom Murphy | The Associated Press

    Source link

  • How to get a COVID-19 shot and ensure it’s covered by your insurance

    [ad_1]

    Drugstores are ready to deliver updated COVID-19 vaccines this fall and insurers plan to pay for them, even though the shots no longer come recommended by an important government committee.

    On Friday, vaccine advisers picked by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. declined to specifically recommend the shots but said people could make individual decisions on whether to get them.

    The recommendations from the advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention require sign-off by the agency’s director, but they are almost always adopted.

    Those recommendations normally trigger several layers of insurance coverage and allow drugstores in many states to deliver the shots. But insurers and government officials have said coverage will continue, and several states have allowed for vaccine access through pharmacies, the most common place to get shots.

    Many people start seeking vaccinations in the late summer or early fall to get protection against any winter surges in cases.

    Here’s a closer look at the issue.

    Will insurers cover these shots?

    Many are expected to do so, but you still may want to check with yours.

    The Department of Health and Human Services said Friday that the committee vote “provides for immunization coverage through all payment mechanisms.” An HHS spokesperson said that includes Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, commercial coverage sold through health insurance marketplaces and the federal Vaccines for Children program, which pays for roughly half of childhood vaccinations in the U.S. each year.

    The VFC program normally automatically covers any vaccines recommended by the CDC committee.

    The trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans said earlier this week that its members will continue to cover the shots at no cost to patients through 2026.

    That group includes every major insurer except UnitedHealthcare. And that insurer has said it will continue covering the vaccine at no cost for its standard commercial coverage, which includes plans offered for individuals and through small businesses.

    One caveat: Large employers that offer coverage will make their own decisions on the vaccines.

    They may be motivated to continue coverage: The vaccines can help ward off expensive hospital bills from people who develop a bad case of COVID-19.

    Where people can get vaccinations

    About two-thirds of adults get COVID-19 shots at pharmacies, and around 30% receive them at doctors’ offices, according to CDC data.

    Access to the shots has grown after a clunky start to vaccine season that saw some people travel to nearby states when they couldn’t make appointments at pharmacies closer to home.

    Drugstore chains like CVS say their locations are stocked with the latest vaccines, and they now are able to deliver vaccinations in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. Prescriptions are required in D.C. and a handful of states, including Florida and Georgia, CVS Health spokeswoman Amy Thibault said.

    Walgreens also requires prescriptions in a few states, a company spokesperson said.

    Who can get the shot?

    Until now, the U.S. has recommended yearly COVID-19 shots for everyone age 6 months and older.

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently approved the shots for all people age 65 and older, and for younger adults and children with conditions that put them at high risk for catching a bad case of COVID-19.

    The CDC maintains a long list of conditions that would put someone at high risk, including asthma, cancer, heart or lung problems, obesity, depression and a history of smoking. It also includes those who are physically inactive, and the agency notes that this list is not conclusive.

    Patients can consult with their doctor or care provider to decide whether they are high risk if they don’t have a condition on that list.

    Both CVS and Walgreens representatives say their companies will ask patients under age 65 if they have any of these factors. They won’t require proof.

    “In simplest terms, if a patient says they’re eligible, they will get the vaccine,” said Thibault, the CVS Health spokeswoman.

    ___

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Tom Murphy | The Associated Press

    Source link

  • CDC vaccine panel says COVID-19 shots are an individual choice

    [ad_1]

    The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices concluded its two-day meeting on Friday, with significant updates to vaccine recommendations. Dr. Amesh Adalja, senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, joins CBS News to discuss.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Watch Live: CDC advisory panel discusses COVID-19 vaccine risks, spars with outside experts over process

    [ad_1]

    After the tabled hep B vote, some liaison members from top medical organizations shared their agreement for holding off on making changes to the current recommendations. Some also urged more transparency in how decisions will be made on future potential recommendation changes.

    “I would urge the committee to use the methodical scientific method to weigh the risks and benefits appropriately,” said Dr. Amy Middleman, a liaison for the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. She added, “This is important for all vaccine decisions, and this is what I think some of us are really concerned about in terms of the absence of it.”

    ACIP member Retsef Levi said he appreciated the desire to keep scientific methods but took issue with the liaison member’s comments.

    “I have to say that one thing that puzzles me is that many of the speakers that push for the scientific approach are speaking very confidently in the absence of the gold standard evidence of robust long-term clinical trials against placebo,” Levi added, who has been pushing for more research beyond what the CDC has presented during the meetings. 

    When ACIP chair Kulldorff began to move on from the hep B discussion, Dr. Jason Goldman, president of the American College of Physicians, chimed in asking for more explanation and to call out the committee for muting him.

    “That is disrespectful. You want debate and discussion, but you’re muting people and silencing them,” Goldman said. “Please provide to the public so they can have trust, faith and confidence in vaccination as to what process we are going to be using to properly vet and discuss all future vaccines. … Tell the public how you are going to be analyzing all of these vaccine decisions so we can have confidence in this committee.”

    Kulldorff responded that he previously responded to that comment already before moving on to the next agenda matter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link