ReportWire

Tag: Covid-19 vaccines

  • 3 things to know about COVID-19, vaccines and kids

    [ad_1]

    U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials said COVID-19 vaccines killed at least 10 children, providing no evidence for the statement. Citing these deaths, the agency said it plans to make existing vaccine regulations more strict.

    In an email to FDA staff, Dr. Vinay Prasad, the director of the agency’s vaccine division, said ​​”at least 10 children have died after and because of receiving COVID-19 vaccination.”

    FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary made a similar statement during an appearance on “Fox and Friends Weekend.” 

    Neither Prasad nor Makary provided details or data about the 10 children they said the vaccines killed or the circumstances surrounding those deaths. The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the FDA, did not respond to our request for more information. 

    In his six-page email, Prasad mentioned myocarditis, a rare side effect of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Since researchers first documented that relationship, doctors and public health experts have assured people that vaccination’s benefits outweigh its risks. That’s partly because COVID-19 infection carries a greater risk of myocarditis than the COVID-19 vaccines. Prasad argued otherwise in the email. 

    Here are three things to know about children and COVID-19 infection, vaccines and myocarditis. 

    More than 2,000 children in the U.S. have died from COVID-19 infections 

    COVID-19 infections are less risky for healthy children compared with babies and people age 65 and older. But COVID-19 can be dangerous — and sometimes deadly — for children. 

    Babies younger than 6 months have a higher than average risk of severe infection and are one of the age groups with the highest risk of COVID-19 hospitalization, Mayo Clinic said.

    U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data shows that since the start of the pandemic, more than 2,000 children age 18 and younger in the U.S. have died from COVID-19. Nearly 700, or about 33%, were less than 1 year old. 

    One Pediatrics study found that 68% of children ages 1 to 17 who died from COVID-19 from 2020 to 2022 had one or more other medical conditions, including nervous system disorders, congenital disorders, obesity, neurodevelopmental disorders and respiratory disorders including asthma. 

    A 2023 study found that from April 1, 2020, to Aug. 31, 2022, COVID-19 was the nation’s fifth highest disease-related cause of death for people from birth to age 19. 

    Heart inflammation is a rare adverse effect of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines

    In rare cases, people who receive mRNA COVID-19 vaccines experience heart muscle inflammation, also known as myocarditis, or inflammation of the lining surrounding the heart, called pericarditis. 

    Research shows boys and men ages 12 to 30 have the highest risk of experiencing COVID-19 vaccine-related myocarditis and pericarditis. Some studies show these patients are most vulnerable within the first 14 days of the second vaccine dose, while the CDC says the risk window is seven days. 

    A 2022 Lancet study found that 81% of patients who developed vaccine-related myocarditis recovered after 90 days, although some had been prescribed daily medication related to myocarditis. 

    Kids who get vaccine-induced myocarditis have a good outlook for complete recovery, said Dr. Mark Schleiss, a University of Minnesota pediatric infectious diseases professor. “No deaths, no debilitating illnesses and no heart transplants have been observed.”

    COVID-19 infection poses a higher risk of myocarditis than vaccines

    A 2022 study found myocarditis’ risk was seven times higher for people with the COVID-19 virus compared with those who received an mRNA vaccine. 

    Doctors and public health officials repeatedly told PolitiFact during the pandemic that the risks of COVID-19 infection — including its potential to cause myocarditis — are greater than the vaccine’s risks. 

    The message remains unchanged now. “Without question, the risk of myocarditis is vastly greater after infection than after vaccination,” Schleiss said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • With CDC signoff, CVS says Covid-19 vaccines will be available nationwide without a prescription

    [ad_1]

    (CNN) — The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention signed off on a recommendation that patients must consult a health care provider to get a Covid-19 vaccine, although they don’t necessarily need a prescription.

    The updated CDC recommendation — made by a new panel of vaccine advisers chosen by US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — shifted away from a broader push in past years for most people to get an updated Covid-19 vaccine. It became final with signoff from Acting CDC Director Jim O’Neill.

    The new recommendations mean people ages 6 months and older can get Covid-19 vaccines after consulting with a qualified health care provider, which keeps the shots available but may also create more barriers to access than in past years.

    Before the finalized recommendation this year, access to Covid-19 shots has differed from state to state as pharmacies and providers navigated new federal vaccine policies. CVS, which had previously limited access to Covid-19 shots in some places, said Monday that it was “updating our systems to be able to offer the updated COVID-19 vaccines to patients nationwide” and that “prescriptions from outside prescribers will no longer be required in any states.”

    The signoff is also coming later than usual for the fall respiratory virus season. With the recommendation, the government can finally distribute Covid-19 vaccines through its Vaccines for Children program, which provides free inoculations to about half of US children.

    The CDC’s independent vaccine advisers, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, voted unanimously last month that people who want a Covid-19 vaccine should consult with a health care provider, a process called shared clinical decision-making. However, they narrowly voted down a recommendation that a prescription should be required to get the shot.

    In August, the US Food and Drug Administration moved to limit approval of Covid-19 vaccines to adults 65 and older as well as younger people who are at higher risk of severe illness because of other health conditions.

    A study published last month in the journal JAMA Network Open found that a universal Covid-19 vaccine recommendation — as had been in place for the US in recent years — could save thousands more lives than limiting the recommendation to high-risk groups.

    Experts said that even requiring shared clinical decision-making could make Covid-19 shots harder to get.

    The recommendation “assumes health care and insurance,” said Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, who recently resigned as head of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “We do not have universal health care in this country, and we know millions of people are losing insurance.”

    HHS said it was bringing back “informed consent” ahead of vaccination.

    “CDC’s 2022 blanket recommendation for perpetual COVID-19 boosters deterred health care providers from talking about the risks and benefits of vaccination for the individual patient or parent. That changes today,” O’Neill, who is also the deputy secretary of HHS, said in a statement.

    Another new recommendation will mean toddlers get their first vaccines against measles and chickenpox separately, around their first birthdays. In this case, the ACIP guidance formalizes an existing recommendation, which is designed to reduce a very rare, slightly elevated risk of seizures when the two shots are combined into a single injection.

    The CDC advisers said that the single-dose measles, mumps, rubella and varicella vaccine was not recommended before age 4 and that younger kids should get the varicella vaccine, which protects against chickenpox, separately from the shot that protects against measles, mumps and rubella.

    [ad_2]

    Brenda Goodman, Katherine Dillinger and CNN

    Source link

  • Starbucks chases Gen Z nostalgia, betting $1 billion on plan to bring back the ‘third place’ | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    On Thursday, the coffee giant unveiled a $1 billion restructuring plan that will shutter more than 100 North American cafes, cut 900 non-retail jobs, and remodel over 1,000 locations. 

    The reset, CEO Brian Niccol said, is about restoring warmth and comfort — an effort to recreate the “third place” he has championed since taking the helm last year, the hangout between home and work that first made Starbucks a global brand in the 1990s.

    At the same time, Starbucks appears to be losing ground with Gen Z, something it tacitly admitted in its latest earnings, when it moved to shutter mobile-only “pickup” stores built for speed and “frictionless” transactions that it assumed would be catnip for a digital-native generation. Its market share among the cohort has slipped from 67% to 61% over the past two years, marking four consecutive quarters of declines, according to Consumer Edge.

    Like many restaurant chains, Starbucks misread the generation. Seeing their social awkwardness and preference for digital ordering, the company wrongly assumed it should structure its stores around those behaviors. But Niccol told analysts in July that the mobile-only format was “overly transactional and lacking the warmth and human connection that defines our brand.”

    But Gen Z, Niccol is betting, craves that old Starbucks feeling the same way it pines for a “90s kid summer.”

    Dubbed by some as the loneliest generation, they’re gravitating instead toward quirky, local coffee shops that double as community hubs and cultural signifiers – the kind you would see on ‘90s shows like Friends or How I Met Your Mother, Consumer Edge data show. 

    Niccol thinks the answer is in the original Starbucks innovation of the “third place.”

    Bringing back that Central Perk feeling

    The idea of the “third place” comes from urban sociologist Ray Oldenburg’s 1989 book The Great Good Place, which argued that society needs gathering spots beyond home and work. Cafes, pubs, gyms, the nail salon — all counted.

    Starbucks worked hard to claim that term; the CEO at the time of Oldenburg’s book, Howard Schultz, used it so often on radio shows and in interviews that people assumed he invented it.

    “Starbucks was notable for spacious, comfortable seating in the early days,” Karen Christensen, an author and collaborator of Oldenburg’s, told coffee newsletter The Pourover. “It was the usual place to find a seat and Wi-Fi and electricity in a strange city, and a common place to meet friends.”

    However, that vibe has been harder to find in recent years. Drive-throughs and mobile pickup now outnumber long sit-down visits, and six straight quarters of falling same-store sales suggest that customers aren’t sticking around. Niccol said in his note the goal now is to bring people back. 

    “Our goal is for every coffeehouse to deliver a warm and welcoming space with a great atmosphere and a seat for every occasion,” he told employees.

    The company says the new investment will prioritize stores that can be remodeled into “lingering spaces.” 

    Expect more ceramic mugs, softer seating, outlets and layouts designed to slow customers down rather than speed them out the door. Starbucks ended its fiscal year with roughly 18,300 locations across North America, but store growth won’t resume until 2026.

    The once and future third place

    The price tag is steep: Starbucks expects $150 million in severance costs and $850 million tied to closures and remodeling. The announcement follows an earlier $500 million investment in barista hours through its “Green Apron Service.”

    But labor tensions loom. Starbucks Workers United, which represents more than 12,000 baristas, said it would demand bargaining over the closures. Union leaders warned the cuts risk undercutting the very community vibe Starbucks says it wants to restore.

    Beyond finances, the stakes are cultural. As Oldenburg argued, third places are vital to social cohesion — spaces where people of all kinds can rub shoulders. In recent years, many third places have vanished, a trend accelerated by the pandemic. 

    “Public leisure space is critical for society,” Notre Dame professor Gwendolyn Purifoye told The New York Times. “If you don’t build places to gather, it makes us more strange, and strangeness creates anxiety.”

    Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.

    [ad_2]

    Eva Roytburg

    Source link

  • RFK Jr.’s vaccine advisers declined to recommend COVID-19 shots, but here’s how you can still get them and not pay | Fortune

    [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.

    Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.

    [ad_2]

    Tom Murphy, The Associated Press

    Source link

  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr. faces congressional grilling amid CDC turmoil

    [ad_1]

    U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., facing pointed bipartisan questioning at a rancorous three-hour Senate committee hearing on Thursday, tried to defend his efforts to pull back COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and explain the turmoil he has created at federal health agencies.Kennedy said the fired CDC director was untrustworthy, stood by his past anti-vaccine rhetoric, and disputed reports of people saying they have had difficulty getting COVID-19 shots.A longtime leader in the anti-vaccine movement, Kennedy has made sweeping changes to agencies tasked with public health policy and scientific research by laying off thousands of workers, firing science advisers and remaking vaccine guidelines. The moves — some of which contradict assurances he made during his confirmation hearings — have rattled medical groups and officials in several Democratic-led states, which have responded with their own vaccine advice.Medical groups and several Democrats in Congress have called for Kennedy to be fired, and his exchanges with Democratic senators on the panel repeatedly devolved into shouting, from both sides.But some Republican senators also expressed unease with his changes to COVID-19 policies.The GOP senators noted that Kennedy said President Donald Trump deserved a Nobel Prize for the 2020 Operation Warp Speed initiative to quickly develop mRNA COVID-19 vaccines — and that he also had attacked the safety and continued use of those very shots.”I can’t tell where you are on Operation Warp Speed,” said Republican North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis.Tillis and others asked him why the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was fired last week, less than a month into her tenure.Kennedy said she was dishonest, and that CDC leaders who left the agency last week in support of her deserved to be fired.He also criticized CDC recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic tied to lockdowns and masking policies, and claimed — wrongly — that they “failed to do anything about the disease itself.””The people at CDC who oversaw that process, who put masks on our children, who closed our schools, are the people who will be leaving,” Kennedy said. He later said they deserved to be fired for not doing enough to control chronic disease.Democrats express hostility from the startThe Senate Finance Committee had called Kennedy to a hearing about his plans to “Make America Healthy Again,” but Democratic senators pressed Kennedy on his actions around vaccines.At the start of the hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon tried to have Kennedy formally sworn in as a witness, saying the HHS secretary has a history of lying to the committee. The committee’s chair, Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, denied the Democrat’s request, saying “the bottom line is we will let the secretary make his own case.”Wyden went on to attack Kennedy, saying he had “stacked the deck” of a vaccines advisory committee by replacing scientists with “skeptics and conspiracy theorists.”Last week, the Trump administration fired the CDC’s director — a Trump appointee who was confirmed by the Senate — less than a month into her tenure. Several top CDC leaders resigned in protest, leaving the agency in turmoil.The ousted director, Susan Monarez, wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that Kennedy was trying to weaken public health protections.”I was told to preapprove the recommendations of a vaccine advisory panel newly filled with people who have publicly expressed antivaccine rhetoric,” Monarez wrote. “It is imperative that the panel’s recommendations aren’t rubber-stamped but instead are rigorously and scientifically reviewed before being accepted or rejected.”Kennedy told senators he didn’t make such an ultimatum, though he did concede that he had ordered Monarez to fire career CDC scientists. Monarez’s attorneys later responded that she stood by the op-ed and “would repeat it all under oath.”Kennedy pushed back on concerns raised by multiple Republican senators, including Tillis and Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. Both Barrasso and Cassidy are physicians.Shouting matches and hot comebacksThe health secretary had animated comebacks as Democratic senators pressed him on the effects of his words and actions.When Sen. Raphael Warnock, of Georgia, questioned Kennedy about his disparaging rhetoric about CDC employees before a deadly shooting at the agency this summer, Kennedy shot back: “Are you complicit in the assassination attempts on President Trump?”Kennedy called Sen. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico “ridiculous,” said he was “talking gibberish” and accused him of “not understanding how the world works” when Lujan asked Kennedy to pledge to share protocols of any research Kennedy was commissioning into autism and vaccines.He also engaged in a heated, loud exchanges with Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Tina Smith of Minnesota.”I didn’t even hear your question,” Kennedy replied to Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto as the Nevada Democrat repeatedly asked what the agency was doing to lower drug costs for seniors.He also told Sen. Bernie Sanders that the Vermont independent was not “making any sense.”Some senators had their own choice words.”You’re interrupting me, and sir, you’re a charlatan. That’s what you are, ” said Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Washington Democrat. “The history on vaccines is very clear.”As the hearing neared its end, Kennedy pulled his cellphone from his pocket and then tapped and scrolled as Wyden asked about mifepristone, a drug used for medication abortion.Kennedy disputes COVID-19 dataIn May, Kennedy announced COVID-19 vaccines would no longer be recommended for healthy children and pregnant women, a move opposed by medical and public health groups.In June, he abruptly fired a panel of experts that had been advising the government on vaccine policy. He replaced them with a handpicked group that included several vaccine skeptics, and then shut the door to several doctors groups that had long helped form the committee’s recommendations.Kennedy has voiced distrust of research that showed the COVID-19 vaccines saved lives, and at Thursday’s hearing even cast doubt on statistics about how people died during the pandemic and on estimates about how many deaths were averted — statistics produced by the agencies he oversees.He said federal health policy would be based on gold standard science, but confessed that he wouldn’t necessarily wait for studies to be completed before taking action against, for example, potential causes of chronic illness.”We are not waiting for everything to come in. We are starting now,” he said.A number of medical groups say Kennedy can’t be counted on to make decisions based on robust medical evidence. In a statement Wednesday, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and 20 other medical and public health organizations issued a joint statement calling on him to resign.”Our country needs leadership that will promote open, honest dialogue, not disregard decades of lifesaving science, spread misinformation, reverse medical progress and decimate programs that keep us safe,” the statement said.Many of the nation’s leading public health and medical societies, including the American Medical Association, American Public Health Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have decried Kennedy’s policies and warn they will drive up rates of vaccine-preventable diseases.___Stobbe reported from New York. Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick 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.

    WASHINGTON —

    U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., facing pointed bipartisan questioning at a rancorous three-hour Senate committee hearing on Thursday, tried to defend his efforts to pull back COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and explain the turmoil he has created at federal health agencies.

    Kennedy said the fired CDC director was untrustworthy, stood by his past anti-vaccine rhetoric, and disputed reports of people saying they have had difficulty getting COVID-19 shots.

    A longtime leader in the anti-vaccine movement, Kennedy has made sweeping changes to agencies tasked with public health policy and scientific research by laying off thousands of workers, firing science advisers and remaking vaccine guidelines. The moves — some of which contradict assurances he made during his confirmation hearings — have rattled medical groups and officials in several Democratic-led states, which have responded with their own vaccine advice.

    Medical groups and several Democrats in Congress have called for Kennedy to be fired, and his exchanges with Democratic senators on the panel repeatedly devolved into shouting, from both sides.

    But some Republican senators also expressed unease with his changes to COVID-19 policies.

    The GOP senators noted that Kennedy said President Donald Trump deserved a Nobel Prize for the 2020 Operation Warp Speed initiative to quickly develop mRNA COVID-19 vaccines — and that he also had attacked the safety and continued use of those very shots.

    “I can’t tell where you are on Operation Warp Speed,” said Republican North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis.

    Tillis and others asked him why the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was fired last week, less than a month into her tenure.

    Kennedy said she was dishonest, and that CDC leaders who left the agency last week in support of her deserved to be fired.

    He also criticized CDC recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic tied to lockdowns and masking policies, and claimed — wrongly — that they “failed to do anything about the disease itself.”

    “The people at CDC who oversaw that process, who put masks on our children, who closed our schools, are the people who will be leaving,” Kennedy said. He later said they deserved to be fired for not doing enough to control chronic disease.

    Democrats express hostility from the start

    The Senate Finance Committee had called Kennedy to a hearing about his plans to “Make America Healthy Again,” but Democratic senators pressed Kennedy on his actions around vaccines.

    At the start of the hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon tried to have Kennedy formally sworn in as a witness, saying the HHS secretary has a history of lying to the committee. The committee’s chair, Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, denied the Democrat’s request, saying “the bottom line is we will let the secretary make his own case.”

    Wyden went on to attack Kennedy, saying he had “stacked the deck” of a vaccines advisory committee by replacing scientists with “skeptics and conspiracy theorists.”

    Last week, the Trump administration fired the CDC’s director — a Trump appointee who was confirmed by the Senate — less than a month into her tenure. Several top CDC leaders resigned in protest, leaving the agency in turmoil.

    The ousted director, Susan Monarez, wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that Kennedy was trying to weaken public health protections.

    “I was told to preapprove the recommendations of a vaccine advisory panel newly filled with people who have publicly expressed antivaccine rhetoric,” Monarez wrote. “It is imperative that the panel’s recommendations aren’t rubber-stamped but instead are rigorously and scientifically reviewed before being accepted or rejected.”

    Kennedy told senators he didn’t make such an ultimatum, though he did concede that he had ordered Monarez to fire career CDC scientists. Monarez’s attorneys later responded that she stood by the op-ed and “would repeat it all under oath.”

    Kennedy pushed back on concerns raised by multiple Republican senators, including Tillis and Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. Both Barrasso and Cassidy are physicians.

    Shouting matches and hot comebacks

    The health secretary had animated comebacks as Democratic senators pressed him on the effects of his words and actions.

    When Sen. Raphael Warnock, of Georgia, questioned Kennedy about his disparaging rhetoric about CDC employees before a deadly shooting at the agency this summer, Kennedy shot back: “Are you complicit in the assassination attempts on President Trump?”

    Kennedy called Sen. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico “ridiculous,” said he was “talking gibberish” and accused him of “not understanding how the world works” when Lujan asked Kennedy to pledge to share protocols of any research Kennedy was commissioning into autism and vaccines.

    He also engaged in a heated, loud exchanges with Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Tina Smith of Minnesota.

    “I didn’t even hear your question,” Kennedy replied to Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto as the Nevada Democrat repeatedly asked what the agency was doing to lower drug costs for seniors.

    He also told Sen. Bernie Sanders that the Vermont independent was not “making any sense.”

    Some senators had their own choice words.

    “You’re interrupting me, and sir, you’re a charlatan. That’s what you are, ” said Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Washington Democrat. “The history on vaccines is very clear.”

    As the hearing neared its end, Kennedy pulled his cellphone from his pocket and then tapped and scrolled as Wyden asked about mifepristone, a drug used for medication abortion.

    Kennedy disputes COVID-19 data

    In May, Kennedy announced COVID-19 vaccines would no longer be recommended for healthy children and pregnant women, a move opposed by medical and public health groups.

    In June, he abruptly fired a panel of experts that had been advising the government on vaccine policy. He replaced them with a handpicked group that included several vaccine skeptics, and then shut the door to several doctors groups that had long helped form the committee’s recommendations.

    Kennedy has voiced distrust of research that showed the COVID-19 vaccines saved lives, and at Thursday’s hearing even cast doubt on statistics about how people died during the pandemic and on estimates about how many deaths were averted — statistics produced by the agencies he oversees.

    He said federal health policy would be based on gold standard science, but confessed that he wouldn’t necessarily wait for studies to be completed before taking action against, for example, potential causes of chronic illness.

    “We are not waiting for everything to come in. We are starting now,” he said.

    A number of medical groups say Kennedy can’t be counted on to make decisions based on robust medical evidence. In a statement Wednesday, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and 20 other medical and public health organizations issued a joint statement calling on him to resign.

    “Our country needs leadership that will promote open, honest dialogue, not disregard decades of lifesaving science, spread misinformation, reverse medical progress and decimate programs that keep us safe,” the statement said.

    Many of the nation’s leading public health and medical societies, including the American Medical Association, American Public Health Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have decried Kennedy’s policies and warn they will drive up rates of vaccine-preventable diseases.

    ___

    Stobbe reported from New York. Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick 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

  • Key Republican Almost Annoyed Enough at RFK Jr. to Act

    [ad_1]

    Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call/Getty Images

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is in turmoil after Susan Monarez, the newly confirmed director of the public-health agency, was abruptly fired on Wednesday night following a reported behind-the-scenes clash with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over vaccine policy. Monarez’s ouster was followed by other top CDC officials resigning due to the agency’s direction under the Trump administration.

    With the nation’s top public-health agency appearing to spiral out of control, many Democrats called for an investigation into Monarez’s ouster, and some demanded Kennedy’s resignation. But Bill Cassidy, the Louisiana senator and licensed physician, whose key vote ensured Kennedy’s confirmation to lead HHS, was a bit less forceful.

    In the immediate aftermath of Monarez’s firing, Cassidy wrote on social media that “These high profile departures will require oversight by the HELP Committee,” referring to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, which he is the chairman of. But Cassidy notably gave no indication of what that oversight might look like in practice.

    On Thursday, Cassidy issued a call for the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the CDC panel that determines vaccine recommendations, to postpone its upcoming meeting in September, saying in a statement that “serious allegations” have been made about the committee membership as well as the “lack of scientific process being followed” for the scheduled gathering. Back in June, Kennedy fired all 17 members of ACIP, writing in a Wall Street Journal editorial that the panel “has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine.”

    But Cassidy previously called for the ACIP to postpone an upcoming meeting back in June, citing the lack of scientific experience of some of the newest appointees as well as the lack of a CDC director at the time. The panel simply rebuffed Cassidy’s call and went ahead anyway.

    According to the Washington Post, Monarez contacted Cassidy after Kennedy handed her an ultimatum to either resign or support changes to the nation’s COVID-19 vaccines policies. Sources tell the outlet that Cassidy contacted Kennedy to push back against his demands of Monarez, which further angered the HHS secretary. When Cassidy first announced his plans to support Kennedy’s confirmation, he said the two would work closely together and that he would use his role as HELP chairman to act as a check on the agency. However, Kennedy has continue to reshape the country’s public-health landscape to his making with seemingly little impact from Cassidy’s voiced concerns.

    Monarez, who was nominated by President Donald Trump earlier this year, had held the role of CDC director for a little less than a month after being confirmed by the Senate in late July. Kennedy had said in March that he had “handpicked” Monarez, calling her a “longtime champion of MAHA values.

    Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, the independent ranking member on the HELP committee, issued a letter calling for a bipartisan investigation into Monarez’s firing and the resignation of top CDC officials, urging Cassidy to convene a hearing on the matter. “Yesterday, you called for oversight of the firings and resignations at the agency. I agree. As a start, the American people should hear directly from Secretary Kennedy and Dr. Monarez, and every member of our committee should be able to ask questions and get honest answers from them. I urge you to call a hearing immediately on these actions,” he wrote.

    Some of the remaining employees of the CDC voiced their support of Monarez and the other outgoing officials on Thursday by staging a “clap out” at the agency’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. for their departing colleagues.


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Nia Prater

    Source link

  • What women should know about Medicare coverage for health screenings and exams

    What women should know about Medicare coverage for health screenings and exams

    [ad_1]

    As women get older, our risk for certain chronic diseases increase. We can thank the aging process itself, and the loss of estrogen’s protective effects after menopause. Older women are more prone to conditions like osteoporosis, which can cause brittle bones. The chance of heart disease rises, as do the odds of developing dementia, in part because women tend to live longer than men, and risk increases with age.

    Diagnosing some conditions is more challenging, since the frequency, appearance and long term effects of many diseases often appear differently in women than in men. It’s a key reason not to neglect regular health screenings and wellness visits, since staying healthier through preventive care and screenings can make the health challenges of aging easier.

    Wellness exams are critical for older women

    Medicare pays for annual preventive care with no co-pay. That’s especially relevant for women, who made up more than half (55%) of all Medicare beneficiaries in 2021. Nearly 1 in 8 (12%) were 85 or older; many had functional difficulties, an analysis from KFF found. That included difficulty walking, bathing, vision loss, or other issues that significantly impacted their quality of life. People age 85 and older tend to have five or more chronic conditions, which can become more complicated to manage with age.

    Women know they should focus on their health, says Alina Salganicoff, director of women’s health policy at KFF. But, “sometimes the system is not set up for women to take care of themselves, because they have competing demands, like work, or family caregiving responsibilities.” This often creates limited windows of time for women to prioritize themselves.

    And, if women don’t have access to a primary care provider or don’t receive regular care, they could skip important preventive measures like mammograms, she says.

    “Having coverage is the first step, but many other factors affect whether women get the services they need,” Salganicoff says. That includes their relationships with their clinicians, their own prior experiences, access to care, fears about conditions like dementia or cancer, or social supports like transportation, mobility or cognitive issues, or having someone to accompany them.

    That first wellness visit is probably key to everything else in managing an older patient, according to Segen Chase, an internal medicine physician in private practice in Manhattan, Kansas. About 35% of her clinic’s patients are Medicare beneficiaries, including many who live at a nearby retirement community.

    “It’s so important that we will do anything we can to have them visit and work with the practice’s wellness coordinator to go through all of the needed assessments,” said Chase, who is part of the American Medical Women’s WEL leadership training program.

    Wellness exams include annual tracking of numerous behavioral and physical markers like vision, hearing, fall risk, sexual health, nutrition, alcohol and tobacco use, as well as psychosocial risks like depression, stress, loneliness or social isolation, pain, and fatigue. Patients also undergo cognitive screening, which can reveal subtle changes in brain health.

    Wellness screenings may also include questions about someone’s living situation, because it helps us to determine whether they might need additional help at home, Chase says. “That also gives us an opportunity to discuss advance care planning, when they’re not in a crisis situation.” Medicare pays for this as part of the Part B annual wellness visit.

    Women with Medicare overall experience higher rates of certain health conditions compared to men, according to the KFF analysis. Urinary incontinence (37% vs. 18%), depression (31% vs. 21%), osteoporosis (29% vs. 7%), and pulmonary disease (20% vs. 16%) were more common among women than men. Women are also more likely than men to live alone. More than one-third of all women with Medicare (36%) live by themselves and more than half of those 85 and older live solo. This can increase the odds of  loneliness and social isolation, which are connected to increased risk of depression, dementia and stroke, according to the American Medical Association.

    The wellness visit can help uncover some of the hidden issues, and together, the physician and patient can create a care plan to manage these and other chronic conditions, Chase says.

    Which preventive women’s health services does Medicare cover?

    Medicare Part B covers a range of preventive services that benefit women’s health, including:

    There are no copays, deductibles or coinsurance charges for these and other covered screenings, although certain other criteria may apply, according to the Medicare Rights Center. Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) and Medicare Part B (medical insurance) will even help pay for an osteoporosis injectable drug and visits by a home health nurse to inject the drug if you are eligible.

    This partial list of Medicare-covered screenings may seem daunting, which is why it’s so important for women to speak with their clinicians and discuss their health history, risk factors, and priorities, according to Salganicoff. “It’s a complicated program and can be difficult for people to navigate,” she says.

    These shouldn’t be one-off conversations, either, Chase says. As we age, priorities and what is realistic for a person to achieve may shift. So ongoing dialogue is a key to maintaining health.

    We know certain conditions show up differently in women, so “a lot of medicine comes back to communication, keeping the sanctity of the relationship while honoring their independence and finding out what’s most important to that person,” she says. Chase finds these discussions help women open up more about both their physical and emotional challenges, especially those who are caregivers. “They’re often exhausted but don’t want to admit it.”

    Providing women with clear, simple information so they can learn about all of their Medicare benefits and receive the necessary support to get the preventive care and other needed services, can go a long way towards keeping women healthy well into older age.

    [ad_2]

    Liz Seegert

    Source link

  • Supreme Court takes up dispute over how far government can go to combat controversial social media posts on topics like COVID-19 and election security

    Supreme Court takes up dispute over how far government can go to combat controversial social media posts on topics like COVID-19 and election security

    [ad_1]

    The justices are hearing arguments in a lawsuit filed by Louisiana, Missouri and other parties accusing administration officials of leaning on the social media platforms to unconstitutionally squelch conservative points of view. Lower courts have sided with the states, but the Supreme Court blocked those rulings while it considers the issue.

    The high court is in the midst of a term heavy with social media issues. On Friday, the court laid out standards for when public officials can block their social media followers. Less than a month ago, the court heard arguments over Republican-passed laws in Florida and Texas that prohibit large social media companies from taking down posts because of the views they express.

    The cases over state laws and the one being argued Monday are variations on the same theme, complaints that the platforms are censoring conservative viewpoints.

    The states argue that White House communications staffers, the surgeon general, the FBI and the U.S. cybersecurity agency are among those who coerced changes in online content on Facebook, X (formerly Twitter) and other media platforms.

    “It’s a very, very threatening thing when the federal government uses the power and authority of the government to block people from exercising their freedom of speech,” Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a video her office posted online.

    The administration responds that none of the actions the states complain about come close to problematic coercion. The states “still have not identified any instance in which any government official sought to coerce a platform’s editorial decisions with a threat of adverse government action,” wrote Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer. Prelogar wrote that states also can’t “point to any evidence that the government ever imposed any sanction when the platforms declined to moderate content the government had flagged — as routinely occurred.”

    The companies themselves are not involved in the case.

    Free speech advocates say the court should use the case to draw an appropriate line between the government’s acceptable use of the bully pulpit and coercive threats to free speech.

    “The government has no authority to threaten platforms into censoring protected speech, but it must have the ability to participate in public discourse so that it can effectively govern and inform the public of its views,” Alex Abdo, litigation director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said in a statement.

    A panel of three judges on the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled earlier that the administration had probably brought unconstitutional pressure on the media platforms. The appellate panel said officials cannot attempt to “coerce or significantly encourage” changes in online content. The panel had previously narrowed a more sweeping order from a federal judge, who wanted to include even more government officials and prohibit mere encouragement of content changes.

    A divided Supreme Court put the 5th circuit ruling on hold in October, when it agreed to take up the case.

    Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas would have rejected the emergency appeal from the Biden administration.

    Alito wrote in dissent in October: “At this time in the history of our country, what the Court has done, I fear, will be seen by some as giving the Government a green light to use heavy-handed tactics to skew the presentation of views on the medium that increasingly dominates the dissemination of news. That is most unfortunate.”

    A decision in Murthy v. Missouri, 23-411, is expected by early summer.

    Subscribe to the new Fortune CEO Weekly Europe newsletter to get corner office insights on the biggest business stories in Europe. Sign up for free.

    [ad_2]

    Mark Sherman, The Associated Press

    Source link

  • Biden to End COVID Emergencies in May

    Biden to End COVID Emergencies in May

    [ad_1]

    Jan. 30, 2023 – The two national emergency declarations dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic will end May 11, President Joe Biden said Monday. 

    Doing so will have many effects, including the end of free vaccines and health services to fight the pandemic. The public health emergency has been renewed every 90 days since first being declared by the Trump administration in January 2020.

    The declaration allowed major changes throughout the health care system to deal with the pandemic, including the free distribution of vaccines, testing and treatments. In addition, telehealth services were expanded, and Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) were extended to millions more Americans.

    Biden said the COVID-19 national emergency is set to expire March 1 while the declared public health emergency would currently expire on April 11. The president said both will be extended to end May 11. 

    There were nearly 300,00 newly reported COVID-19 cases in the United States for the week ending Jan. 25, according to CDC data, as well as more than 3,750 deaths. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • COVID Vaccines Saved More Than 3 Million U.S. Lives Since 2020

    COVID Vaccines Saved More Than 3 Million U.S. Lives Since 2020

    [ad_1]

    Dec. 13, 2022 – COVID-19 vaccinations prevented 3.2 million deaths and 18.5 million hospitalizations in the United States from December 2020 through November 2022, according to a new report Tuesday from the Commonwealth Fund and Yale School of Public Health.

    The report, developed from computer modeling, comes as the U.S. approaches the second anniversary of the administration of the first COVID vaccine in the country to nurse Sandra Lindsay on Dec. 14, 2020.

    Cost savings from those averted medical expenses add up to $1.15 trillion in savings to the U.S. health system, according to the report by a team led by Meagan C. Fitzpatrick, PhD, with the Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health at University of Maryland in Baltimore.

    “Without vaccination, there would have been nearly 120 million more COVID-19 infections,” the authors write.

    In the 2 years, the U.S. has administered more than 655 million doses, and 80% of the population has received at least one dose, according to the report.

    Fewer Cases, Hospitalizations, and Deaths

    Since Dec. 12, 2020, 82 million infections, 4.8 million hospitalizations, and 798,000 deaths from COVID-19 have been reported in the U.S., according to study data.

    Without vaccination, the U.S. would have had 1.5 times more infections, 3.8 times more hospitalizations, and 4.1 times more deaths, the modeling indicates.

     

    All Variants Accounted For

    The research took into account patterns of five variants, each of which have accounted for at least 3% of cases in the U.S., including Iota, Alpha, Gamma, Delta, and Omicron, in addition to the original SARS-CoV-2 strain.

    “We evaluated the impact of vaccine rollout by simulating the pandemic trajectory under the counterfactual scenario without vaccination,” the authors write. 

    “This report highlights the basic and important fact that vaccines save lives,” says Syra Madad, DHSc, senior director of the System-wide Special Pathogens Program at NYC Health and Hospitals.

    She says this study, and a study last month in JAMANetwork Open looking at New York City’s COVID-19 vaccine campaign and its return on investment, show the campaigns “reduce the number of infections and death rates, decrease hospitalization rates, avert health care costs, and provide broader economic benefit such as maintaining a healthier and more productive workforce.” 

    The New York report last month found that every $1 invested in vaccination yielded estimated savings of $10.19 in direct and indirect costs that would have been incurred without the vaccine.

    Timothy Brewer, MD, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at UCLA, says the ranges for the estimates of savings are fairly tight, which makes them more reliable. 

    He says the projections are in line with recent findings of second boosters’ continued high protection against hospitalizations and deaths (compared with first boosters) in a CDC study of more than 9,500 nursing home residents.

    “I think they are likely to be very reasonable numbers,” Brewer says.

    He says it’s important to keep the vaccines’ measure of success focused on how many hospitalizations and deaths they prevent, the main goal of vaccines, and not on breakthrough infections.

    Numbers May Underestimate Savings

    Co-author Alison Galvani, PhD, founding director of the Yale Center for Infectious Disease Modeling and Analysis, says the model looks only at acute infection and may underestimate the total benefit.

    Fewer infections, she noted, also mean fewer cases and accompanying costs of long COVID, for instance.

    Galvani said though this study was done in the U.S., the savings and prevention of infections may inspire other countries struggling with vaccine coverage efforts and to organizations that distribute vaccines to less-resourced countries.

    William Schaffner, MD, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, says “the numbers are impressive in their size.”

    “This is a report back to the American people,” he says, “saying, ‘We asked you to invest in this, and you did through your tax money. You know, the vaccines really work. Many of your family members, your neighbors, your friends are with you today, able to celebrate the holidays, because they were vaccinated.’”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fauci Urges Americans ‘One Last Time’ to Get COVID Shots

    Fauci Urges Americans ‘One Last Time’ to Get COVID Shots

    [ad_1]

    Nov. 22, 2022 – White House officials on Friday urged Americans – again – to get their COVID-19 vaccines and boosters, as the latest booster shot has a better immune response to the evolving COVID-19 variants BA.4 and BA.5.

    “Recent data that has come out indicate that, in fact, if you are vaccinated and boosted, compared to an unvaccinated person, there is a 14 times lower risk of dying in the most recent BA.4-5 era, compared to unvaccinated, and at least a three times lower risk of testing positive, compared to unvaccinated individuals,” said Anthony Fauci, MD, who stood at the White House press briefing podium “one last time” as he bid farewell to reporters on Tuesday. 

    The physician-scientist will be stepping down from his position as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden next month. 

    Fauci has made it clear that he is not retiring, but rather,      pursuing “the next chapter” of his career.      During his more than 5      decades of service to the federal government, he       has spearheaded the fights      against HIV and AIDS, Ebola, and COVID-19, among other health crises. 

    White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Ashish Jha, MD, joined Fauci on the podium and highlighted the latest developments in COVID-19 vaccinations and disease prevention. 

    On Monday, 12 of America’s top medical and clinical societies, including the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians, released a statement with a clear message: Go get your updated COVID-19 vaccine and annual flu shot, which is the best way to save lives this holiday season – particularly the lives of older Americans. 

    Other announcements included a “6-week sprint” to help Americans get their updated COVID shot by the end of December. Three hundred and fifty million dollars in funding will go toward      community health centers, mobile vaccine clinics, and religious organizations to assist in vaccine education and distribution. There will also be $125 million      in funding for      aging and disability networks to get more vulnerable and      disabled Americans vaccinated.

    Jha also said that most Americans will need one shot each year to stay safe, similar to the flu shot.

    “We need to make protecting our loved ones an important part of the conversation we have around the      Thanksgiving table and an important part of the conversation that we have in the days and weeks ahead,” he said. 

    “If folks get their updated vaccines, and they get treated if they have a breakthrough infection, we can prevent essentially every COVID death in America.”

    For more information on COVID-19 vaccines, click here.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Physicians for Informed Consent Challenges the Basis for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

    Physicians for Informed Consent Challenges the Basis for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates

    [ad_1]

    According to Physicians for Informed Consent, new data raise serious concerns over the risks of hospitalization in people vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine.

    Press Release
    –

    Nov 11, 2022 14:01 PST


    NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., November 11, 2022 (Newswire.com)
    –
    Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) has released an update to its educational document “COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates: 21 Scientific Facts That Challenge the Assumptions.” Developed from data compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Library of Medicine, and other established sources, the PIC document covers issues of critical importance to both the medical community and the public. Reflecting key scientific research, the document refutes the basis for COVID-19 vaccine mandates. For example, according to Physicians for Informed Consent, studies (referenced here) show: 

    • COVID-19 vaccines may increase the risk of hospitalizations in vaccinated people.

    A study published in Vaccine found that the number of serious adverse events in people vaccinated with the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is higher than the number of COVID-19 hospitalizations prevented. For every two COVID-19 hospitalizations prevented in vaccinated people, there are 10 COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse events.

    • COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of myocarditis in young men.

    A study published in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety shows that in males aged 18 to 24 years, the risk of myocarditis is 1 in 1,862 after the second dose of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

    • COVID-19 vaccines increase the risk of cardiac-related deaths in men.

    A study by the Florida Department of Health found there is a 97% increased risk of cardiac-related deaths in males aged 18-39 within 28 days of being vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine.

    • COVID-19 vaccines increase the length of menstrual cycles in women.

    A study published in BMJ found that in women, vaccination with two doses within the same menstrual cycle leads to a 3.7-day increase in that cycle’s length. The consequences of this phenomenon are not known.

    It can take months or even years for new data to reach the general medical community. As such, some healthcare providers may be unaware of COVID-19 vaccine facts and figures. In providing this document, PIC highlights important statistics to help medical professionals and their patients more easily assess the risks of the vaccine compared to the risks of COVID-19. In addition, as a nonprofit organization with headquarters in California — where AB 2098, a doctor-censorship bill, was recently signed into law — PIC asserts that it is now more important than ever for the general public to be able to access science-based COVID-19 analyses. 

    “AB 2098 is immoral and anti-science,” said Dr. Shira Miller, founder and president of Physicians for Informed Consent. “PIC as an organization will continue speaking out and educating the public about COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and the need to have doctors whose professional opinion hasn’t been censored — because without free speech informed consent is not possible.”

    To read all 21 scientific facts in PIC’s newly released document, visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org/covid-19-vaccines. 

    Source: Physicians for Informed Consent

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pfizer Plans to Charge Over $100 Per COVID Shot in 2023

    Pfizer Plans to Charge Over $100 Per COVID Shot in 2023

    [ad_1]

    By Cara Murez 

    HealthDay Reporter

    MONDAY, Oct. 24, 2022 (HealthDay News) — Some Americans could pay up to $130 to get a COVID-19 vaccine made by Pfizer starting in 2023, but most will still get it for free.

    A Pfizer executive noted that people who would get its vaccine for free would likely include those on public health insurance programs such as Medicare or Medicaid and those with private health insurance, the Associated Press reported.

    Recommended vaccines must be covered by insurers as part of the Affordable Care Act. Pfizer also has an income-based assistance program for eligible U.S. residents.

    The U.S. government is expected to stop buying and distributing the shots sometime next year, the AP said.

    While Pfizer said last year it was charging $19.50 per dose to the U.S. government, that increased to about $30 per shot in June. The company has said it had three tiers of pricing globally, depending on a country’s financial situation, the AP reported.

    The newest price reflects both commercial distribution costs and switching to single-dose vials, Pfizer executive Angela Lukin said last week, the AP reported.

    That is well below expected limits “for what would be considered a highly effective vaccine,” Lukin added.

    By comparison, annual flu shots range from $50 to $95, depending on the specific type, according to CVS Health, the AP said.

    Pfizer’s vaccine, which starts with two initial doses, is the most commonly used shot to prevent COVID-19 in the United States.

    Americans have been vaccinated with 375 million doses of the original Pfizer vaccine since late 2020, plus 41 million doses of an updated booster shot, CDC data shows.

    The company’s revenue for the shots was $36.8 billion last year and is expected to be $32 billion this year, according to FactSet. Sales are expected to fall after that, the AP said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tucker Carlson Incorrectly Claims CDC Mandating Kids Get Covid-19 Vaccine For School

    Tucker Carlson Incorrectly Claims CDC Mandating Kids Get Covid-19 Vaccine For School

    [ad_1]

    Before you make a claim about what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is going to do, maybe, just maybe, you should look at what the CDC can and can’t actually do. On October 18, FOX News host Tucker Carlson claimed on a tweet that “The CDC is about to add the Covid vaccine to the childhood immunization schedule, which would make the vax mandatory for kids to attend school.” Yet, the CDC clearly states on its website that “State laws establish vaccination requirements for school children.” And the CDC, by the way, ain’t one of the 50 states in the U.S.

    On the tweet, Carlson included a video of himself from his FOX News show named after himself “Tucker Carlson Tonight” essentially making the same claim:

    As you can see in the video, Carlson began the segment with, “So here’s an amazing story that’s been effectively buried.” Whoa. Buried? By whom and for what reason? And buried in what? In cheese? Carlson did not really specify any of these but went on to say, “This week the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices is expected to add the Covid-19 vax to the list of required childhood vaccines. If this happens, your children will not be able to attend school without taking the Covid shot.” The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is indeed meeting on October 18 and 19 in a virtual meeting that can be viewed on a webcast. The agenda does include a discussion about “Covid-19 vaccines in children.” The ACIP develops recommendations on the use vaccines that in turn are forwarded to CDC’s Director and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for approval. Once approved, these recommendations will be published in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). The ACIP consists of public health, medical, and scientific experts external to the CDC.

    While Carlson may be a number of things, he is neither a medical, public health, or scientific expert nor a lawyer. A number of real medical doctors, scientists, and other relevant experts pointed out the clear problems with Carlson’s statement. For example, Peter Hotez, MD, PhD, Dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine, wrote, “Actually, the CDC clearly says that ‘state laws establish vaccination requirements’ and Fox News knows this. Guessing just another antivaccine dog whistle for their ratings,” in the following tweet:

    In his tweet, Hotez thanked @doritmi, who is Dorit Reiss, LLB, PhD, a Professor of Law at the University Of California (UC) Hastings School of Law and expert in these law-ish kind of things, for alerting him to Carlson’s claim.

    Later in his tweet thread, Hotez offered something that Carlson didn’t include in his tweet, verifiable official sources supporting what he was saying: links to CDC websites. Once of these websites clearly indicates that, “State laws establish vaccination requirements for school children. These laws often apply not only to children attending public schools but also to those attending private schools and day care facilities.”

    So does that make what Carlson tweeted a “swing and a mis,” as in misinformation? Well, Tara C. Smith, PhD, a Professor of Epidemiology at the Kent State University College of Public Health, used the word “misinformation” in the following tweet about Carlson’s tweet:

    So with a number of real experts out there who have had many research publications on vaccines and infectious diseases, whom did Carlson bring on as a guest? Well, he gave some air time to Martin Makary, M.D., M.P.H., a Professor of Surgery at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and whose stated areas of expertise on the Johns Hopkins website are things like abdominal Surgery, advanced laparoscopy, bile duct surgery, pancreatic surgery, and various other pancreas and gall bladder related procedures.

    So did this air time turn out to be hot air time? Well, in the video, Makary made some pretty strong statements without providing much evidence to support them. For example, he asserted that “the CDC’s committee that’s voting, I mean, that it is essentially a kangaroo court, you have to be an official ‘card-carrying vaccine fanatic’ to be on that committee. If you are not then they are basically not going to accept that some vaccines are important and others lack the evidence to support broad distribution.”

    Wow. Presumably by “kangaroo court,” Makary didn’t mean a court of actual kangaroos, which would be weird and fascinating at the same time. Dictionary.com defines a “kangaroo court” as a “self-appointed or mob-operated tribunal that disregards or parodies existing principles of law or human rights, especially one in a frontier area or among criminals in prison.” Hmm, isn’t calling the ACIP a “kangaroo court” jumping like a kangaroo to conclusions about the ACIP without providing real supporting evidence? Makary also mentioned a German study without clearly describing the study, pointing out its strengths and limitations, or providing enough information so that viewers could find the study themselves.

    There certainly have been plenty of problems with the Covid-19 response from the CDC, the Biden Administration, and the Trump Administration. Throughout the pandemic, communications and policies have often been very inconsistent. For example, the CDC relaxed their face mask recommendations in the Spring of 2021 and then again in the Spring of 2022 despite scientific studies showing the value of face masks in preventing transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other countries like Japan maintaining greater face mask use. In both cases, Covid-19 surges in the U.S. soon followed. Plus, in a number of situations, the Biden and Trump Administrations could have done more to push Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna to publicly release more of their Covid-19 vaccine data earlier.

    But suggesting that the CDC will be somehow making the Covid-19 vaccine mandatory for all kids to attend school around the U.S. and calling the ACIP a “kangaroo court” would be leaping way too far in a way that may court even more problems for our society. It could leave the very wrong impression that the CDC is somehow a dictatorial organization when the opposite may have been the case during the pandemic. Public health experts and scientists have raised concerns that the CDC has continued to bend to political pressure and prematurely relax Covid-19 precautions. mandating alling the

    If Carlson is really interested in seeing real science drive pubic health decision making then why not have a panel of real relevant scientists on his show. Such a panel could then provide real scientific facts that discount what Carlson has asserted. They could even say things like, “by the way, did you actually look at the CDC web site that says what the CDC can and can’t do. It’s on something called the Internet.”

    [ad_2]

    Bruce Y. Lee, Senior Contributor

    Source link

  • Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes That Minors Obtain Vaccination Without Parental Knowledge or Consent

    Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes That Minors Obtain Vaccination Without Parental Knowledge or Consent

    [ad_1]

    Press Release
    –

    May 1, 2022


    NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., May 1, 2022 (Newswire.com)
    –
    Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), an educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics, has submitted an opposition letter to California Senate Bill 866 (SB 866).

    SB 866 proposes allowing children 12 years of age and older to, without parental consent or knowledge, become injected with any vaccines that meet “federal agency criteria.” Physicians for Informed Consent, representing hundreds of its physician and surgeon members, opposes the bill and asserts that SB 866 is immoral, potentially medically dangerous, and potentially illegal. PIC asserts that SB 866 would violate parental rights and thwart children’s ability to obtain compensation in the case of a vaccine injury.

    Per Dr. Shira Miller, PIC founder and president, “Physicians experienced in obtaining informed consent know that it is not possible for 12-year-old children as a group to understand the risks and benefits of vaccination, and California’s health education curriculum for public schools does not even mention vaccination until high school.”

    SB 866 will be heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, May 5, 2022. If you or someone you know lives in California, PIC urges you to read the Physicians for Informed Consent SB 866 opposition letter and request your representatives to oppose SB 866 as soon as possible, and call in or show up to the public hearing in Sacramento on May 5, 2022.

    Letter Opposing SB 866 (minors obtain vaccination without parental knowledge or consent): physiciansforinformedconsent.org/oppose-sb866

    About Physicians for Informed Consent
    Physicians for Informed Consent is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics. PIC delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination. In addition, the PIC Coalition for Informed Consent consists of over 300 U.S. and international organizations. To learn more or to become a member, please visit physiciansforinformedconsent.org.

    Physicians for Informed Consent
    Press Contact:
    info@picphysicians.org
    (925) 642-6651

    ###

    Source: Physicians for Informed Consent

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Private and Public Employees and Independent Contractors in California

    Physicians for Informed Consent Opposes COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Private and Public Employees and Independent Contractors in California

    [ad_1]

    Press Release
    –


    updated: Mar 29, 2022


    NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., March 29, 2022 (Newswire.com)
    –
    Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), an educational nonprofit organization focused on science and statistics, has submitted an opposition letter to California Assembly Bill 1993 (AB 1993).

    AB 1993 proposes a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all private and public employees and independent contractors in California. Physicians for Informed Consent, representing hundreds of its physician and surgeon members, opposes the bill and asserts that AB 1993 is both unscientific and would legalize medical bullying in the workplace. Per Dr. Shira Miller, PIC founder and president, “…the clinical trials have been the only settings in which the vaccination status of subjects/patients was closely monitored, and those trials did not detect enough COVID-19 deaths to measure a significant difference in mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients despite observing tens of thousands of subjects.”

    AB 1993 will be heard by the Committee on Labor & Employment members this Wednesday, March 30, 2022, at 1:30 pm. If you or someone you know lives in California, PIC urges you to read the Physicians for Informed Consent AB 1993 opposition letter, including its accompanying educational document “COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates: 20 Scientific Facts That Challenge the Assumptions” and request of your assembly members and representatives to oppose AB 1993 as soon as possible.

    Physicians for Informed Consent 
    Press Contact:
    info@picphysicians.org
    (925) 642-6651

    Source: Physicians for Informed Consent

    [ad_2]

    Source link