ReportWire

Tag: COVID-19

  • Court sides with voodoo worshiper over religious exemption

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A state appeals court has sided with a medical worker and voodoo worshipper who was fired by University of Massachusetts Medical Health Care after her request for a religious exemption to the COVID-19 vaccine was rejected.

    The ruling, issued Monday by the state Court of Appeals, overturns a Superior Court ruling that rejected a lawsuit filed by Rachelle Jeune against UMass Medical over its denial of a religious exemption in October 2021 as part of her employment as a surgical technician.


    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm“(6 4@?4=F56 E92E E96 A=2:?E:77’D DE2E65 36=:67D E92E 96C 3@5J 😀 2 E6>A=6 @7 v@5 2?5 E92E D96 AC2J65 E@ v@5 2?5 C646:G65 2 >6DD286 ?@E E@ C646:G6 E96 r~’xs`h G244:?2E:@? H6C6 36=:67D E92E 2 EC:6C @7 724E 4@F=5 56E6C>:?6 H6C6 C6=:8:@FD 😕 ?2EFC6[” E96 7@FC;F586 A2?6= HC@E6 😕 E96 a`A286 CF=:?8]k^Am

    kAmy6F?6[ H9@ 😀 @C:8:?2==J 7C@> w2:E:[ D2:5 😕 4@FCE 7:=:?8D E92E D96 😀 2 56G@FE r9C:DE:2? 2?5 G@@5@@ AC24E:E:@?6C H9@ 92D “D:?46C6” C6=:8:@FD @3;64E:@?D E@ E96 r~’xs`h G244:?6] $96 2=D@ D2:5 D96 H2D 4@?46C?65 E96 G244:?6 H@F=5 “2=E6C” 96C 86?6E:4D]k^Am

    kAm“x ?6G6C 5:5 ?@C x H:== EFC? >J 324< @? >@56C? >65:4:?6D 2?5 :ED AC24E:46D] w@H6G6C[ x 92G6 2=H2JD 4@?DF=E H:E9 >J q:3=6 7:CDE[ AC2J E@ >J v@5 7@C 8F:52?46 2?5 C6=J @? 9:D 962=:?8 A@H6C] |J 7:?2= 564:D:@? H:== 2596C6 E@ H92E 96 8F:56D >6 E@ 5@[” D96 DE2E65] “!C@4665:?8 H:E9 r~’xs`h H@F=5 36 2 D:? 282:?DE >J 4@?D4:6?46]”k^Am

    kAmqFE &|2DD |6>@C:2=’D C6=:8:@FD 6I6>AE:@? 4@>>:EE66 56?:65 96C C6BF6DE65 6I6>AE:@?[ D2J:?8 :E H2D 32D65 @? 72=D6 4=2:>D 23@FE E96 r~’xs`h G244:?6] y6F?6 H2D 7:C65 😕 s646>36C a_a` 7@C C67FD:?8 E@ 86E E96 G244:?6[ 244@C5:?8 E@ 4@FCE 5@4F>6?ED]k^Am

    kAm“%9:D C6BF6DE6C 2DD6CED E96J 42??@E C646:G6 E96 r~’xs`h G244:?6D 32D65 @? E96:C r9C:DE:2? 72:E9 3642FD6 E96J H:== ‘86?6E:42==J 2=E6C’ E96:C 3@5J[” E96 4@>>:EE66 HC@E6 😕 C6;64E:?8 96C C6BF6DE] “%9:D 😀 A2E6?E=J 72=D6 — ?@?6 @7 E96 r~’xs`h G244:?6D 86?6E:42==J 2=E6C E96 3@5J @C 492?86 2 A6CD@?’D s}p]”k^Am

    kAm“#6=:2?46 @? 56>@?DEC23=J 72=D6 :?7@C>2E:@? 42??@E 36 2 32D:D 7@C 2 C6=:8:@FD 244@>>@52E:@?[” E96 A2?6= D2:5]k^Am

    kAm$9@CE=J 27E6C[ y6F?6 7:=65 2 =2HDF:E 282:?DE &|2DD 4:E:?8 5:D4C:>:?2E:@?[ 3FE 2 $FA6C:@C r@FCE ;F586 :DDF65 2 DF>>2CJ ;F58>6?E C6;64E:?8 :E] %96 4@FCE CF=65 E92E D96 925 “72:=65 E@ 2CE:4F=2E6 2 D:?46C6=J 96=5 C6=:8:@FD 36=:67 E92E AC64=F565 96C 7C@> 86EE:?8 G244:?2E65” 2>@?8 @E96C C62D@?D 7@C E@DD:?8 @FE E96 =2HDF:E] w6C =2HJ6CD 2AA62=65]k^Am

    kAm%96 2AA62=D 4@FCE C6G6CD65 E96 =@H6C 4@FCE’D 564:D:@? 😕 |@?52J’D CF=:?8[ D2J:?8 &|2DD |6>@C:2= “72:=65” E@ >66E E96 4C:E6C:2 7@C 56?J:?8 y6F?6’D C6BF6DE 7@C 2 C6=:8:@FD 6I6>AE:@? 3J 56>@?DEC2E:?8 “2? F?5F6 3FC56? 2D 2 >2EE6C @7 =2H]”k^Am

    kAm&|2DD |6>@C:2= 564=:?65 E96 4@>>6?E @? E96 A6?5:?8 =:E:82E:@?[ 3FE :DDF65 2 DE2E6>6?E D2J:?8 E96 @C82?:K2E:@? 😀 “AC@F5 @7 E96 96C@:4 677@CED 3J @FC 42C68:G6CD H9@ H@C<65 E:C6=6DD=J E9C@F89 E96 r~’xs`h A2?56>:4 F?56C E96 >@DE ECJ:?8 2?5 F?46CE2:? @7 E:>6D]”k^Am

    kAm%96 DE2E6>6?E D2:5 &|2DD |6>@C:2= :>A=6>6?E65 2 r~’xs`h G244:?6 >2?52E6 7@C 2== 6>A=@J66D “:? 244@C52?46 H:E9 7656C2= =2H 2?5 E@ AC@G:56 2 D276 6?G:C@?>6?E 7@C 2== >6>36CD @7 @FC 4@>>F?:EJ — :?4=F5:?8 E96 :>>F?@4@>AC@>:D65]” #6=:8:@FD 6I6>AE:@?D 7C@> E96 G244:?6 >2?52E6 H6C6 C6G:6H65 2?5 2AAC@G65 “H96? 2AAC@AC:2E6[” E96 DE2E6>6?E D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx? a_a`[ E96?v@G] r92C=:6 q2<6C :DDF65 2 >2?52E6 C6BF:C:?8 DE2E6 H@C<6CD E@ 2EE6DE E92E E96J 2C6 G244:?2E65 282:?DE r~’xs`h @C C6BF6DE 2 >65:42= @C C6=:8:@FD 6I6>AE:@? E@ AC6G6?E 7FCE96C :?764E:@?D] (@C<6CD 72465 5:D4:A=:?6[ :?4=F5:?8 E6C>:?2E:@?[ 7@C ?@E AC@G:5:?8 AC@@7 @7 G244:?2E:@?]k^Am

    kAm}62C=J 2== @7 E96 DE2E6’D 9@DA:E2=D :DDF65 D:>:=2C G244:?2E:@? C6BF:C6>6?ED[ 2D H6== 2D AC:G2E6 2?5 AF3=:4 4@==686D[ :?4=F5:?8 2== &?:G6CD:EJ @7 |2DD249FD6EED 42>AFD6D]k^Am

    kAm(9:=6 q2<6C’D G244:?6 >2?52E6 DFCG:G65 D6G6C2= =682= 492==6?86D[ 5@K6?D @7 DE2E6 H@C<6CD 7:=65 =2HDF:ED @G6C 36:?8 C6;64E65 7@C C6=:8:@FD @C >65:42= 6I6>AE:@?D] $@>6 @7 E96 =682= 492==6?86D[ :?4=F5:?8 @?6 7:=65 3J 2 8C@FA @7 DE2E6 EC@@A6CD[ H6C6 DF446DD7F=]k^Am

    kAmv@G] |2FC2 w62=6J @77:4:2==J 6?565 E96 DE2E6’D 6>6C86?4J 564=2C2E:@? 😕 |2J a_ab — :?4=F5:?8 E96 r~’xs`h G244:?6 >2?52E6 7@C DE2E6 6>A=@J66D] qFE >2?J @7 E96 =2HDF:ED DE6>>:?8 7C@> 56?:2=D @7 C6=:8:@FD 6I6>AE:@?D 92G6 =F>36C65 @? E96 4@FCED]k^Am

    kAm~? q624@? w:==[ DE2E6 =2H>2<6CD 2C6 4@?D:56C:?8 2 AC@A@D2= E@ 6=:>:?2E6 2 D64E:@? @7 E96 DE2E6’D G244:?6 =2H E92E 2==@HD A2C6?ED H:E9 “D:?46C6 C6=:8:@FD 36=:67D” E@ 36 6I6>AE65 7C@> 2 C6BF:C6>6?E E@ DF3>:E AC@@7 @7 G244:?2E:@? E@ 6?C@== E96:C 49:=5C6? 😕 AF3=:4 D49@@=D]k^Am

    kAmq24<6CD @7 E96 A=2? 2C8F6 E92E D@>6 A2C6?ED 2C6 >:DFD:?8 C6=:8:@FD 6I6>AE:@?D 3642FD6 E96J 2C6 F?23=6 E@ 86E 2 >65:42= 6I6>AE:@?] %96 DE2E6 5@6D?’E 2==@H A6CD@?2= 6I6>AE:@?D E@ D49@@=C6BF:C65 :>>F?:K2E:@?D[ H9:49 5@?’E :?4=F56 E96 r~’xs`h G244:?6]k^Am

    kAmrC:E:4D @7 E96 AC@A@D2=[ :?4=F5:?8 E96 r2E9@=:4 r9FC49[ 2C8F6 E92E 6=:>:?2E:?8 E96 6I6>AE:@? H@F=5 36 5:D4C:>:?2E@CJ 2?5 G:@=2E6 :?5:G:5F2=D’ C6=:8:@FD 36=:67D]k^Am

    kAmr9C:DE:2? |] (256 4@G6CD E96 |2DD249FD6EED $E2E69@FD6 7@C }@CE9 @7 q@DE@? |65:2 vC@FAUCDBF@jD ?6HDA2A6CD 2?5 H63D:E6D] t>2:= 9:> 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>Qm4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>k^2m]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • We’re Even Less Prepared For the Next Pandemic After COVID-19, Expert Warns

    [ad_1]

    As a leading expert on the viruses, bacteria, fungi, and parasites that make us sick, Michael Osterholm knows what happens when humans underestimate infectious diseases. Osterholm, who is director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota, was a leading voice during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Now, he’s watching the dismantling of the U.S.’s public-health infrastructure with a sense of informed alarm. Osterholm’s new book, The Big One, assesses the response to COVID-19 and highlights the urgent lessons we need to, but haven’t, learned to better handle the next inevitable pandemic.

    He talks to TIME about why the world, and the U.S. in particular, may be even less prepared for a pandemic now than we were before COVID-19.

    This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.

    You’ve written other books about the dangers of infectious diseases. Why did you feel the need to write this one about COVID-19?

    We have never done a hotwash of any kind on what happened with COVID-19, and to me we’re missing an incredible opportunity to learn what went right and what went wrong, in a nonpartisan, no-finger-pointing way. What could we do better for the next pandemic? 

    Right now everything is about finger pointing. We’re hung up on the issue of what was the source of COVID-19—a lab leak or a spillover? We will never know the answer. We are never going to know that.

    Read More: A Brief History of Donald Trump’s False and Questionable Claims About Health and Science

    Since I’ve had the opportunity to be very involved in the COVID-19 response—I wasn’t just a distant bystander—I tried to summarize lessons we should have learned and haven’t.

    What are some of the lessons we have not learned?

    Given what is happening in the current Administration with vaccines, I think we are in free fall. We are in worse shape now than we were literally before the COVID pandemic. No one in the White House is in charge of leading the country through the potential next hit from an infectious agent, which could be more deadly than if somebody launched a physical war against us on our own shores.

    You have some specific proposals for how we might avoid things like universal lockdowns, border closings, and mask mandates—which, in retrospect, turned out not to be very effective in controlling COVID-19. What are some of those strategies?

    The No. 1 way to save lives if we don’t have a vaccine is to ensure that our health care system is not overrun. When hospitals are operating at 130% capacity, some people won’t get care, and those who do won’t get care that is sufficient to save their lives.

    Read More: The Big Budget Bill Could Make Your ER a Mess

    That’s where snow days come in. Imagine if we set up a system where every day, you knew the hospital census for the hospitals in your community. Once that capacity reached, let’s say, 85% or 95%, then the community could take action and say we need to shut down for a couple of days here and change what we’re doing to reduce the number of infections, and the number of people likely to need hospital care. This is all knowing that people will still get infected, but some will get infected in the first six months, others in the second six months, and others in the third six months. If the infections are spaced out enough, you can basically keep the health care system operational.

    Communities would have to make a decision that their hospitals are overrun right now, so they need to back off. During such snow days, you don’t shut the entire system down, but some people may take a few extra days off work, or work from home, or schools may be canceled for a few days. These are all things that could beat down the virus and put the health care system in the best place to help people.

    You also propose a more comprehensive monitoring system, including medical IDs, to keep track of infectious diseases.

    It would take a federal effort. The idea of a medical ID is to help track your information so health officials can tell where and which populations are hard hit by an infectious disease. That would be helpful to know, so officials would know that they need to scale back on what people are doing every day to lessen the number of new infections and therefore give hospitals an opportunity to catch up.

    There is a lot of opposition from people who automatically say they don’t want the government to have more information on them, but they don’t realize that the government already has a great deal of information on us, including through our Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid numbers.

    Government health agencies now have differing vaccine recommendations from some professional medical groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). How should the public make sense of the conflicting advice?

    I’ve been asked how to interpret the AAP not following the recommendations of the ACIP [the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which makes recommendations to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)]. I say you are asking the wrong question. The question is, how did the ACIP get to the point where it is scientifically inconsistent with all the rest of the scientific world? The question should be, ‘What happened to the ACIP?’ Not ‘what happened to the AAP?’

    Who can the public trust when it comes to health information now?

    The bottom line is that we cannot trust the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and CDC right now. It’s a terribly hard thing for me to say. The CDC is such a very important voice. There are still very talented and highly trained professionals at the CDC, but what is happening to the leadership—specifically, Secretary Kennedy and his colleagues—has brought it to the point where it can’t be trusted.

    What does that mean for the health of Americans?

    I have never seen [so many] dangerous and potentially catastrophic decisions being made by HHS as I have in the last 10 weeks. We need mRNA technology for our influenza vaccines to have any hope of having enough vaccines available for the first year to year and half of the next possible flu pandemic. Now, we can make enough vaccine for a quarter of the world’s population during the first 15-18 months of a pandemic, with the chicken-egg culture we use today. That is an example of a very dangerous situation that we could basically take off the table if we have research and development invested in mRNA technology.

    My point is that we can’t stop a pandemic. Once a virus takes off, nothing really can be done. When a spillover happens from animals to humans in any part of the world, when people travel, that virus can quickly spread. That’s why we have to prepare for that and minimize the impact of that spread with vaccines that we develop as quickly as possible to that specific virus. We need to make lots of it and to get it out, and mRNA is an important part of being able to do that.

    During and after the pandemic, there was a lot of criticism of the World Health Organization (WHO) and how it responded. How can the response of organizations like WHO be improved?

    The WHO is absolutely important, and it’s absolutely critical that we have a strong WHO for these kinds of events. The challenge is that during COVID-19, the WHO was one of the real obstacles to getting good recommendations to the public about respiratory protection. To me, that says that just because there are official government health bodies, it doesn’t mean they get it right.

    To address that, we need to have discussions about the response. The WHO used to do a hotwash of its response. Why did it take almost two months to declare a pandemic? I put out a document through CIDRAP on Jan. 20 saying that this is a pandemic situation, and the world needs to deal with it. Why were they so slow off the block?

    We all did good things, and we all did some challenging things. What’s important now is to ask, ‘What happened?’ and use that information to improve in the future.

    What are some of the biggest lessons learned from COVID-19 and actions that shouldn’t be repeated in the next pandemic?

    We need to come together and not finger-point. We don’t have to agree about what happened in Wuhan…but what we need to do is prevent something similar from happening in the future. If it does happen, how do we respond? In answering these questions, none of it should be partisan. It should all just be about what science tells us.

    And we need to stop doing border closings. They are useless. We have no evidence that border closing materially affects any emerging pathogen that shows up, but it’s often politically what people think should be done. And to oppose them makes it look like we don’t care, which is not true at all.

    What we have to do [a better job of] in public health is understand that we are not the only answer that will be on the table. There will also be social and political issues to consider.  

    Are we now in a better position to meet the next “big one”?

    No. I would have to say that we are in worse shape. We don’t have the opportunity now to use tools like mRNA in a meaningful way. If a pandemic begins to emerge, we will divide up into camps to go at each other. We would right now have major challenges bringing people together, and if there were ever a time when we needed to bring people together against a common enemy—i.e. a virus—it’s during a pandemic. 

    We need to do that. But we have nothing at this point to support that. We should deal with all of this now, game the situation, and work out what we would do.

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • A Functional Eye Doctor’s Tip To Test Your Blue Light Glasses

    [ad_1]

    It’s no secret screen time has soared during the pandemic1. Especially for those able to work from home, you might oscillate from virtual meetings to online happy hours to a feel-good TV series on Netflix. And repeat. With all this skyrocketed screen time, the thought might have crossed your mind once or twice: Should I invest in a pair of blue-light-blocking glasses? These lenses, meant to filter out the blue light in your surroundings, are practically exploding in popularity as we continue to bombard our retinas with LED-backlit screens—you can snag a pair for anywhere from $12 to $95. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Should kids get flu and COVID shots this fall? Here’s what to know as some vaccine guidance shifts.

    [ad_1]

    As the fall respiratory season approaches and differing recommendations for children’s COVID-19 and flu shots cause confusion, who should be getting vaccinated to protect against illness?

    Earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory committee, known as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, voted to change recommendations for the COVID-19 vaccine. 

    The ACIP’s recommendations are not the final say — they must be reviewed and approved by the CDC director to become official guidance. But CDC directors have almost always accepted the recommendations.

    Here’s where recommendations currently stand.  

    Flu shots

    Guidance on the flu shot for kids is consistent across top medical groups: Children 6 months and older are generally advised to get the shot. 

    The CDC recommends that everyone 6 months and older get a flu vaccine every season, with rare exceptions.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) also recommends that everyone 6 months and older without medical contradictions get vaccinated. 

    For pregnant women, flu shots — specifically the injection, not the nasal spray — are also recommended by both the CDC and AAP.

    Protecting kids from the flu is important because infections can lead to hospitalizations and sometimes be deadly, the CDC says. During the 2023-24 flu season, for example, the CDC reported nearly 200 flu-related deaths among children in the U.S. Most of them were eligible for a vaccine but were not fully vaccinated, the CDC said.

    Flu season typically starts in December and peaks in February, so the optimal time to get vaccinated is heading into the season, 
    doctors say. It takes about 2 weeks for protection to develop after vaccination.

    COVID vaccine

    For the COVID-19 vaccine, advice currently varies. 

    The CDC says parents of healthy children ages 6 months to 17 years old should discuss the benefits with a health care provider and “may receive” it, but the agency stops short of recommending the shot. The agency broadly recommends COVID-19 vaccines for moderately or severely immunocompromised children.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics, however, recently shared vaccine recommendations that, for the first time in three decades, differ from U.S. government advice. In the guidance, the AAP is “strongly recommending” COVID-19 shots for children ages 6 months to 2 years old. For older children, shots are also advised but it’s up to parents’ discretion, the AAP said.

    Other top medical groups have also shared recommendations differing from the CDC’s advice. 

    For example, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, a medical association representing physicians and scientists who specialize in infectious diseases, recommends the COVID-19 vaccine for everyone ages 6 months and older.

    And a group of four West Coast states has joined together to issue recommendations on COVID-19 shots and other vaccines that differ from CDC guidance. The West Coast Health Alliance recommends the COVID vaccine for all children 6 months to 23 months old and those 2 to 18 years old with risk factors or who have never been vaccinated.

    The announcement was made last week in a joint statement from Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Hawaii Gov. Josh Green, all Democrats, saying they were putting safety before politics.

    In the Northeast, New York and its neighbors created the Northeast Public Health Collaborative, with Gov. Kathy Hochul calling it a rebuke to Washington’s retreat from science. The voluntary coalition includes New York state, New York City, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.

    “Every resident will have access to the COVID vaccine, no exceptions,” Hochul said in a statement, which advises vaccinations for children 6 months to 18 years old.

    CDC advisory panel’s proposed COVID changes

    The CDC’s advisory committee, the ACIP, has undergone changes in recent months, with all new members picked by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is known for raising doubts about vaccines.

    In their latest meeting, the ACIP voted for people to make individual, informed decisions about COVID vaccination, and it declined to specifically recommend COVID vaccination. This is a change from current guidance, since it drops recommendations for even children at high risk.

    The updated recommendations, which are not yet considered official but are expected to be soon, would include the following for children:

    • Individuals 6 months to 64 years: Vaccination based on individual-based decision-making — with an emphasis that the risk-benefit of vaccination is most favorable for individuals who are at an increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease and lowest for individuals who are not at an increased risk, according to the CDC list of COVID-19 risk factors.

    Dr. Paul Offit — a vaccine researcher at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and a former government adviser who has sparred with Kennedy for years — said that with this proposed change, “the good news is anyone can get the vaccine.” But “the bad news is that no one is encouraged to get it even if you’re in a high-risk group,” he recently told The Associated Press.

    Varying advice has already caused confusion for parents.

    Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said he expects confusion around the COVID vaccine due to the panel’s recent vote. 

    “What I think it means is that people are going to be uncertain whether or not the COVID-19 vaccine is a benefit to them,” he told CBS News on Friday. 

    Dr. Céline Gounder, CBS News medical contributor and editor-at-large for public health at KFF Health News, says there’s “a lot of noise out there” when it comes to vaccines, but advises parents to “stick the course” and talk to your doctor about making sure children get all their necessary vaccinations.

    Sara Moniuszko

    Sara Moniuszko is a health and lifestyle reporter at CBSNews.com. Previously, she wrote for USA Today, where she was selected to help launch the newspaper’s wellness vertical. She now covers breaking and trending news for CBS News’ HealthWatch.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Minnesota COVID-19 vaccine recommendations differ from federal direction

    [ad_1]

    In an unprecedented move, Minnesota is straying from federal COVID-19 vaccine guidance.

    The move comes after an executive order by Governor Walz to maintain vaccine access.    

    “The recommendations are that every adult should also be vaccinated,” said Dr. Ruth Lynfied, medical director and state epidemiologist with the Minnesota Department of Health.

    On Monday, MDH announced a standing order empowering pharmacists to give COVID-19 vaccinations to those who want them.

    The state agency recommends the vaccine for those six months and older, while strongly recommending it for people with underlying conditions. It comes amid drastic changes to vaccine guidance under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a known vaccine skeptic.

    Most recently, the CDC voted to drop the recommendation for most adults to get vaccinated. In August, the FDA limited COVID-19 vaccines for most age groups.

    “Vaccines can prevent severe disease, and we want people to use the tools that we have available,” said Lynfield.

    The state said it followed guidance from the American Academy of Pediatrics and American Academy of Family Physicians, among others. Those associations recommend the vaccine for kids under the age of 2, pregnant women and anyone at high risk for severe illness.

    Lynfield said allowing widespread access, despite the new federal restrictions, is key.

    “We wanted to ensure that anyone in Minnesota who wanted protection against severe disease from COVID-19 should be able to receive the vaccine,” said Lynfield.

    When asked if insurance will cover the COVID-19 vaccine, Lynfield said, “We are optimistic that there will be coverage.”

    Lynfeld said she hopes to learn more in the coming days, but Walz’s executive order started the conversations between MDH and insurance providers.

    “We just need to wait a little while for the insurance companies and the health plans to catch up with everything that’s been happening,” said Lynfield.

    Last season, Lynfield reported that 5,914 people in the state were hospitalized for COVID, with most being 65 or older.

    As for how bad COVID will be this year, Lynfield said that’s just too hard to predict.

    Jason Rantala

    Jason Rantala joined WCCO as a reporter in June 2023. He’s a Minnesota native and is thrilled to be telling the stories of those in his hometown.

    [ad_2]

    Jason Rantala

    Source link

  • Macau Economy Flourishing, as Visitation Hits Record

    [ad_1]

    Posted on: September 21, 2025, 09:40h. 

    Last updated on: September 21, 2025, 09:40h.

    • Macau’s economy, unlike China’s, is thriving
    • Gaming is rebounding, and visitation is at record levels
    • Unemployment is low, and GDP is high

    The economy in Macau is booming, with gross domestic product climbing more than 5% in the second quarter of 2025. Visitation is at an all-time high, and casino gaming revenue, the heartbeat of the Chinese Special Administrative Region (SAR), is nearing its return to pre-COVID-19 conditions.

    Macau economy gaming GGR
    Throngs of Chinese mainlanders await entry into Macau at the border checkpoint. Macau’s economy is on a comeback, with gaming nearing pre-COVID-19 conditions and visitor numbers already at record highs. (Image: Shutterstock)

    July and August set new gross gaming revenue (GGR) post-COVID highs. Casino gamblers generated net win for the six gaming operators of $2.76 billion in July and $2.77 billion in August.

    Year to date, Macau casino revenue is up 7.2% on the prior year to $20.36 billion. That is more than 82% of the amount of gaming money the six casinos won in 2019 through August.

    Gaming analysts and brokerages are amending their full-year GGR outlook positively, as the city’s casinos have successfully managed to turn their attention away from the VIP high roller to the mass and premium mass markets, as well as the leisure and business travel sectors.

    Visitation Hits Record 

    Macau casinos can no longer rely on high rollers to keep their properties afloat. VIP junket groups are largely no more, with the travel organizers seeking Asian gaming markets not under China’s control.

    Macau, which remains the world’s richest gaming market in terms of casino revenue, has invested many billions of dollars in nongaming amenities. Most notable has been the region’s quick embrace of K-pop, with its resorts’ many large theaters hosting prominent acts and events, including this weekend’s Fact Music Awards at the government’s newly opened Outdoor Performance Venue.

    The Macau Statistics and Census Bureau reports that August visitation reached a record 4,219,034 people. An 18.4% year-over-year rise, last month brought year-to-date visitation to almost 26.7 million visitors, a 15% surge from 2024. 

    Economic Data Points 

    By most critical data points, Macau’s economy is strong. Inflation in July was just 0.12%, and the city’s unemployment rate for its nearly 686K residents stands at just 2.6%.

    The median monthly income is up to $2,222, almost $100 higher than in December 2019. Hotel occupancy rate in July was 91%, on par with pre-COVID levels.

    While China’s economy has failed to stimulate a sustained post-pandemic recovery, with factory and mining output decelerating in August, it’s a different story in Macau.

    Amid the global health scare, Macau announced a diversification plan to reduce its reliance on casino gambling, which had accounted for more than 80 cents of every tax dollar the local SAR government had received. Macau has invested in integrated tourism, or special events, including large-scale business gatherings and conventions, plus so-called “health tourism.”

    Macau has also successfully integrated its economy with the Greater Bay Area, with the government investing in initiatives to attract companies invested in the technology and trade industries. Macau has also established a free trade zone with neighboring Hengqin Island, where land is more available for the city’s ongoing economic ambitions.

    Macau is more accessible than ever before, too. A record number of Chinese mainland cities are eligible for Individual Visit Scheme visas, which allow people to travel in and out of Hong Kong and/or Macau not in a group. Macau and Hong Kong, since 2018, have also been connected by the 34-mile Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge.

    [ad_2]

    Devin O’Connor

    Source link

  • CDC vaccine advisory panel changes guidance for COVID-19 shots

    [ad_1]

    DENVER — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices declined to recommend the COVID-19 vaccine to anyone, even those at high risk, leaving people to choose for themselves whether to get it.

    Until now, COVID-19 vaccinations had been recommended as a routine shot each fall, like a flu vaccine.

    The advisors also urged the CDC to adopt stronger language around claims of vaccine risks, despite pushback from outside medical groups that say the shots have a proven safety record from billions of doses administered worldwide.

    The Associated Press reports that among many unproven questions about risks that the panel raised Friday was one rare side effect that people already are warned about: a kind of heart inflammation called myocarditis, mostly in young men, that was discovered in the early days of vaccination in 2021. A scientist studying whether people with certain genes are uniquely susceptible to that risk told the panel the Trump administration had canceled his grant before the research could be finished.

    The divided panel narrowly avoided urging states to require a prescription for the COVID-19 shot.

    What is the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel and why is it so influential?

    On Thursday, the panel voted to change its age recommendations for the measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (MMRV) vaccine.

    In an 8-3 vote, the panel decided to change the recommended minimum age for receiving the MMRV vaccine, which combines the MMR vaccine and the chickenpox vaccine, to 4 years old, and that children in this age group instead get separate vaccines — one against MMR and another for varicella, or chickenpox.

    Since 2009, the CDC has said it prefers separate shots for initial doses of those vaccines, and 85% of toddlers already do.

    In a move that surprised some medical groups, the panel delayed recommending whether to end the longstanding CDC recommendation that all newborns be vaccinated at birth against the liver virus, hepatitis B.

    The Associated Press reports that the panel had been considering whether to recommend delaying that initial vaccination — something doctors and parents already can choose to do. However, amid criticism from independent pediatric and infectious disease specialists who say the vaccine is safe and has helped infant infections drop sharply, the advisers decided Friday to postpone that decision.

    Scripps News Group and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

    Denver7

    Denver7 | Your Voice: Get in touch with Shannon Ogden

    Denver7 evening anchor Shannon Ogden reports on issues impacting all of Colorado’s communities, but specializes in covering local government and politics. If you’d like to get in touch with Shannon, fill out the form below to send him an email.

    [ad_2]

    Shannon Ogden

    Source link

  • RFK Jr.’s Vaccine Panel Votes Down Its Own Proposal to Require Prescriptions for Covid-19 Shots

    [ad_1]

    In another vote, advisers recommended adding language on the shot’s risks to the vaccine’s information sheet, which is already required by law.

    The committee’s focus on Covid-19 vaccines reflects Kennedy’s long-held suspicion of them. Since taking office in February, Kennedy has canceled a half-billion dollars in mRNA vaccine research and separately ended a major contract with Moderna, one of the Covid vaccine manufactures, for work on a pandemic bird flu vaccine.

    During Friday’s meeting, CDC scientists presented extensive data on the safety and efficacy of the Covid vaccines. They also explained in detail how the agency tracks Covid hospitalizations and said the agency has a “rigorous and standardized process” to determine whether hospitalizations are classified as being due to Covid-19.

    During the discussion portion of the meeting, committee members made several unfounded claims. Robert Malone, a former mRNA researcher who has spread vaccine misinformation, questioned whether there is actually evidence of disease protection from the Covid shots. “Are there any well-defined, characterized correlates of protection for Covid, yes or no?” he demanded.

    Cody Meissner, a pediatrician at Dartmouth College, responded that there is “a reasonable measurement of neutralizing or binding antibodies that correlate with protection against symptomatic infection in the first few months” after vaccination.

    At one point, Hillary Blackburn, a pharmacist on the committee, questioned whether the Covid vaccine could be connected to her mother’s lung cancer diagnosis, which occurred two years after receiving a Covid vaccine. She said she is aware of four other individuals in her small hometown diagnosed with the same kind of cancer. “Is it related to the vaccine?” she asked.

    In a tense exchange about potential birth defects associated with the Covid vaccines, some ACIP members pressed manufacturer Pfizer about eight birth defects that occurred in a group of pregnant women who received the company’s vaccine and two birth defects that occurred in an unvaccinated group. Alejandra Gurtman, who heads vaccine clinical research and development at Pfizer, replied that those rates are comparable to rates of congenital abnormalities seen in the general population.

    Carol Hayes, a liaison with the American College of Nurse-Midwives who was present during the meeting, clarified that most birth defects arise during the first trimester of pregnancy, and in the cited study, mothers received the vaccine at 12 to 24 weeks of pregnancy.

    At Friday’s meeting, the committee also reversed a decision it made just a day before. On Thursday, advisers voted to no longer recommend the combined measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccine to children under age 4. Yet puzzlingly, it voted to maintain coverage of that vaccine through the federal Vaccines for Children program, which provides free vaccines to low-income children and those without insurance. On Friday, they voted that the program should not, in fact, cover it.

    On Friday, advisers also voted 11 to one in favor of tabling a decision on whether to delay the birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine until one month of age. The committee had discussed that vaccine extensively on Thursday, though it’s unclear why the committee was asked to look into the potential change at all, as the hepatitis B vaccine has been given to newborns in the US since 1991.

    Infants get the vaccine before leaving the hospital because the virus can be passed from an infected mother to the baby during birth. Hepatitis B is a serious liver infection that can lead to cirrhosis and cancer. The vaccine is highly effective at preventing infection in newborns.

    Chari Cohen, president of the Hepatitis B Foundation, tells WIRED there is no scientific rationale for delaying the hepatitis B vaccine until one month after birth, and she worries about an increase in hepatitis B infections if the panel eventually recommends delaying the immunization.

    “We will likely see more babies and young children who become infected,” Cohen says. “From a public health infrastructure perspective, we are concerned that this risk-based approach will miss preventing infection to babies born to infected moms.”

    Up to 16 percent of HBV-positive pregnant women don’t get tested for hepatitis B, so screening doesn’t capture all infected mothers.

    “We do not understand the motivation or rationale for this debate,” Cohen says.

    [ad_2]

    Emily Mullin

    Source link

  • Vaccine Advisers Change COVID Shot Guidance – KXL

    [ad_1]


    In this March 2, 2021, file photo, Hollie Maloney, a pharmacy technician, loads a syringe with Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine at the Portland Expo in Portland, Maine. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty, File)

    ATLANTA (AP) — Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s new vaccine advisers added confusion Friday to this fall’s COVID-19 vaccinations.

    For the first time since the shots were developed, the group has declined to recommend their use — instead leaving the choice up to those who want them.

    The Food and Drug Administration recently put new restrictions on this year’s shots from Pfizer, Moderna, and Novavax, reserving them for people over 65 or younger ones at higher risk.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisers declined to recommend that those people seek a shot but narrowly avoided urging states to require a prescription for those who want one.

    More about:


    [ad_2]

    Grant McHill

    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

  • Vaccine Panel Stacked by RFK Jr. Recommends Delaying MMRV Immunization

    [ad_1]

    A federal vaccine advisory committee made up of members hand-picked by Health and Human Services secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recommended in an 8-3 vote on Thursday that the combined measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccine should not be given before age 4, citing long-known evidence that shows a slightly increased risk for febrile seizures in that age group.

    Experts say that while frightening, febrile seizures—which are uncommon after vaccination—are usually short-lived and harmless, and removing the option for parents could cause a decline in immunization rates against measles, mumps, and rubella, some of the most dangerous childhood diseases.

    Known as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, the group provides recommendations to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on vaccine usage. These recommendations are typically adopted by CDC and have an impact on state vaccine requirements for school, insurance coverage of vaccines, and pharmacy access—something at least one member of the panel seemed to be unaware of.

    Thursday’s vote is part of a new shift in vaccine policy being spearheaded by Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist. In his short time as HHS secretary, Kennedy has implemented restrictions on who can receive Covid-19 vaccines and dismissed all 17 sitting members of ACIP, replacing them with 12 new members—some of whom were installed just this week. Several of the new advisers have a history of criticizing vaccines or denouncing public health measures taken during the Covid-19 pandemic. Kennedy said a “clean sweep” of ACIP was necessary to build back public confidence in vaccine science.

    On Thursday, committee members were asked to evaluate whether to recommend against the combined MMRV vaccine before age 4, as well as whether to delay the first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine until the child is at least one month old.

    Currently, parents have two options for vaccinating their children against measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella, also known as chickenpox. They can choose the combined shot, known as MMRV, or two separate shots—one for MMR and another for chickenpox. About 85 percent of children get separate shots.

    In the US, the hepatitis B vaccine is given in the hospital shortly after birth, because the virus can be transmitted to children during delivery. A serious liver infection, hepatitis B can lead to cirrhosis and cancer. Each year in the US, an estimated 25,000 infants are born to women diagnosed with the hepatitis B virus. Without vaccination, up to 90 percent of them would develop chronic infections. The World Health Organization advises a universal birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine.

    The topics of discussion at Tuesday’s meeting were not based on new data or evidence, and in fact, two ACIP members, Joseph Hibbeln and Cody Meissner, as well as several representatives from professional medical organizations who were in attendance, questioned why these changes were up for consideration.

    Robert Malone, one of the more controversial new ACIP members, offered an explanation: “It’s clear that a significant population of the United States has significant concerns about vaccine policy and about vaccine mandates.” Malone is a former mRNA researcher who rose to prominence during the Covid-19 pandemic by spreading falsehoods about the disease and the vaccines; he abstained from Thursday’s vote because he previously served as an expert witness in a lawsuit over the mumps vaccine.

    [ad_2]

    Emily Mullin

    Source link

  • Fired CDC Director Says RFK Jr. Pressured Her to Blindly Approve Vaccine Changes

    [ad_1]

    Debra Houry, former chief medical officer and deputy director for program and science at CDC, who was one of several agency officials to resign in the wake of Monarez’s firing, also testified during Wednesday’s hearing.

    “I resigned because CDC leaders were reduced to rubber stamps, supporting policies not based in science, and putting American lives at risk. Secretary Kennedy censored CDC’s science, politicized its processes, and stripped leaders of independence. I could not and in good conscience, remain under those conditions,” Houry said.

    She also accused Kennedy of halting flu campaigns despite the severity of the 2024-2025 flu season, as well as spreading misinformation and promoting unproven treatments for measles.

    Houry said she learned that Kennedy had changed the CDC’s Covid-19 vaccine guidance from a social media post on X. “CDC scientists have still not seen the scientific data or justification for this change. That is not gold-standard science,” Houry said, referring to a statement in May that HHS will no longer recommend the vaccine for healthy children and pregnant women

    Monarez said Secretary Kennedy had not communicated his plans to change the childhood vaccination schedule to her until their meeting on August 25. Monarez said she told Kennedy that she would be open to changing the childhood vaccine schedule if the evidence or science supported those changes. Kennedy responded that there was no existing science or evidence and elaborated that CDC had never collected that data, according to Monarez.

    Monarez said she could not agree to approving ACIP recommendations before knowing what they were. “I have built a career on scientific integrity, and my worst fear was that I would then be in a position of approving something that would reduce access to life-saving vaccines to children and others who need them,” she said.

    This Thursday, ACIP is set to discuss the hepatitis B vaccine, which has been recommended for newborns within 24 hours of birth since 1991. But the committee is expected to vote on removing that recommendation and delaying the birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine until age 4.

    Each year in the US, an estimated 25,000 infants are born to women diagnosed with the hepatitis B virus, or HBV, a serious liver infection that can lead to cirrhosis and cancer. Before the vaccine was introduced, nearly 20,000 babies and children were infected with HBV each year in the US. Now, fewer than 20 get the disease from their mothers.

    “Now that we’ve controlled it, do we let the genie out of the bottle? If the recommendation goes away, and a parent does want the vaccine, insurance will no longer cover it free of charge. She’ll be forced to pay out of pocket,” Senator Cassidy said at the conclusion of the hearing. Vaccine coverage is typically tied to ACIP recommendations.

    Cassidy was initially hesitant about Kennedy’s nomination as HHS secretary, given his prior statements about vaccines, but he supported him after, he has said, Kennedy promised to maintain vaccine availability and not undermine public trust in them.

    ACIP is slated to discuss Covid-19 vaccines on Friday.

    [ad_2]

    Emily Mullin

    Source link

  • LIVE: Former CDC chief Susan Monarez testifies RFK Jr. fired her over vaccine science

    [ad_1]

    Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Susan Monarez testified before senators on Wednesday that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired her after she refused to endorse forthcoming vaccine recommendations without reviewing scientific evidence to support the guidance.Watch a livestream of the hearing in the video player above.Monarez was ousted just 29 days into the job, over disagreement with her boss on vaccine policies.Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, who chairs the powerful health committee Monarez is appearing before, expressed skepticism over the explanations Kennedy has given over her firing. He carefully praised President Donald Trump for his commitment to promoting health among Americans but made it clear he was befuddled by Monarez’s removal. He noted that senators had just approved Monarez’s confirmation with Kennedy praising her “unimpeachable scientific credentials.”“Like, what happened?” Cassidy said. “Did we fail? Was there something we should have done differently?”Monarez said in her testimony that Kennedy gave her an ultimatum: “Preapprove” new vaccine recommendations from an advisory CDC panel that Kennedy has stocked with some medical experts who doubt vaccine safety or be fired. That panel is expected to vote on new vaccine recommendations later this week. He also demanded Monarez fire high-ranking, career CDC officials without cause, she said.“He said if I was unwilling to do both, I should resign. I responded that I could not preapprove recommendations without reviewing the evidence, and I had no basis for firing,” Monarez told senators. “He said he had already spoken with the White House several times.”The senate hearing will focus on the impact the turmoil at the nation’s leading public health agency, which is responsible for making vaccine recommendations to the public, will have on children’s health. It will also undoubtedly serve as an opportunity for Monarez and former Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry, who was also testifying before the committee, to respond to a number of Kennedy’s contentious claims about their final days at the agency.Kennedy has denied Monarez’s accusations that he ordered “rubber-stamped” vaccine recommendations.He has described Monarez as admitting to him that she is “untrustworthy,” a claim Monarez has denied through her attorney. He did, however, acknowledge during a testy Senate hearing earlier this month that he ordered Monarez to fire several top officials at the CDC.The Senate hearing is taking place just a day before the vaccine panel starts its two-day session in Atlanta to discuss shots against COVID-19, hepatitis B and chickenpox. It’s unclear how the panel might vote on the recommendations, though members have raised doubts about whether hepatitis B shots administered to newborns are necessary and have suggested COVID-19 recommendations should be more restricted.The CDC director must endorse those recommendations before they become official. Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill, now serving as the CDC’s acting director, will be responsible for that.Monarez and Houry are expected to face tense questions from Republicans over the CDC’s vaccine recommendations and COVID-19 policies. Democrats, meanwhile, are likely to seek more information on Kennedy’s approach to vaccines.The health committee’s hearing will be overseen by Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, a physician who cast a key vote for Kennedy’s confirmation. He has expressed concern about “serious allegations” at the CDC and has called for oversight, without blaming Kennedy.

    WASHINGTON —

    Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Susan Monarez testified before senators on Wednesday that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired her after she refused to endorse forthcoming vaccine recommendations without reviewing scientific evidence to support the guidance.

    Watch a livestream of the hearing in the video player above.

    Monarez was ousted just 29 days into the job, over disagreement with her boss on vaccine policies.

    Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, who chairs the powerful health committee Monarez is appearing before, expressed skepticism over the explanations Kennedy has given over her firing. He carefully praised President Donald Trump for his commitment to promoting health among Americans but made it clear he was befuddled by Monarez’s removal. He noted that senators had just approved Monarez’s confirmation with Kennedy praising her “unimpeachable scientific credentials.”

    “Like, what happened?” Cassidy said. “Did we fail? Was there something we should have done differently?”

    Monarez said in her testimony that Kennedy gave her an ultimatum: “Preapprove” new vaccine recommendations from an advisory CDC panel that Kennedy has stocked with some medical experts who doubt vaccine safety or be fired. That panel is expected to vote on new vaccine recommendations later this week. He also demanded Monarez fire high-ranking, career CDC officials without cause, she said.

    “He said if I was unwilling to do both, I should resign. I responded that I could not preapprove recommendations without reviewing the evidence, and I had no basis for firing,” Monarez told senators. “He said he had already spoken with the White House several times.”

    The senate hearing will focus on the impact the turmoil at the nation’s leading public health agency, which is responsible for making vaccine recommendations to the public, will have on children’s health. It will also undoubtedly serve as an opportunity for Monarez and former Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry, who was also testifying before the committee, to respond to a number of Kennedy’s contentious claims about their final days at the agency.

    Kennedy has denied Monarez’s accusations that he ordered “rubber-stamped” vaccine recommendations.

    He has described Monarez as admitting to him that she is “untrustworthy,” a claim Monarez has denied through her attorney. He did, however, acknowledge during a testy Senate hearing earlier this month that he ordered Monarez to fire several top officials at the CDC.

    The Senate hearing is taking place just a day before the vaccine panel starts its two-day session in Atlanta to discuss shots against COVID-19, hepatitis B and chickenpox. It’s unclear how the panel might vote on the recommendations, though members have raised doubts about whether hepatitis B shots administered to newborns are necessary and have suggested COVID-19 recommendations should be more restricted.

    The CDC director must endorse those recommendations before they become official. Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill, now serving as the CDC’s acting director, will be responsible for that.

    Monarez and Houry are expected to face tense questions from Republicans over the CDC’s vaccine recommendations and COVID-19 policies. Democrats, meanwhile, are likely to seek more information on Kennedy’s approach to vaccines.

    The health committee’s hearing will be overseen by Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, a physician who cast a key vote for Kennedy’s confirmation. He has expressed concern about “serious allegations” at the CDC and has called for oversight, without blaming Kennedy.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New CDC advisory panel members include more COVID vaccine critics

    [ad_1]

    Some of the newest members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine recommendations committee have questioned established medical research on immunizations and the COVID-19 pandemic.

    In a press release shared Monday, the CDC and Department of Health and Human Services said five new members were appointed to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP — just days ahead of a scheduled meeting that is likely to discuss the fall season’s COVID vaccines and more.  

    “These appointments reflect the commitment of Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to transparency, evidence-based science, and diverse expertise in guiding the nation’s immunization policies,” the release stated. But a look at the records of those selected shows some have voiced skepticism about vaccines and questioned evidence of their effectiveness.

    This isn’t the first time Kennedy, known for raising doubts about vaccines, has appointed people aligned with his views since taking over as HHS secretary. In June, he named eight new advisers after firing all 17 of the committee’s previous members. His appointments include several allies he has worked with closely over the years and some members with a history as vaccine critics. 

    Kennedy appointed the new members directly, breaking with the past practice of agency officials vetting potential experts before sending them to the secretary for approval.

    Here’s a look at the newest committee members:

    Catherine M. Stein

    Catherine M. Stein is an epidemiologist and professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. She received her doctorate in epidemiology and biostatistics from the same university in 2004 and has a focus on tuberculosis, according to her faculty page on the school’s website.

    Stein has been openly critical of the U.S. response to COVID-19 and has downplayed the severity of the pandemic. According to Ohio Capital Journal, Stein told Ohio lawmakers that health officials were inflating COVID-19 death and hospitalization numbers. The journal also tied her to Health Freedom Ohio, which is affiliated with Children’s Health Defense, an anti-vaccine nonprofit founded by Kennedy as well as Ohio Advocates for Medical Freedom, which the journal describes as an anti-vaccine advocacy group.

    Dr. Evelyn Griffin

    Dr. Evelyn Griffin is an obstetrician and gynecologist based in Louisiana, according to Baton Rouge General’s website. According to local reports, she has spoken against adding COVID-19 vaccines to the school immunization schedule as well as testified about adverse reactions of vaccines. 

    Hillary Blackburn

    Hillary Blackburn, a clinically trained pharmacist, is also the daughter-in-law of Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee, according to Politico. 

    She is currently the director of medication access and affordability at online pharmacy company AscensionRx and hosts the podcast “Talk to Your Pharmacist,” the HHS release added. Her views on vaccines are unclear. 

    Dr. Kirk Milhoan

    Dr. Kirk Milhoan, a pediatric cardiologist based in Hawaii, is a senior fellow at Independent Medical Alliance, a group that showed support for Kennedy’s nomination, and the founder of For Hearts and Souls, a Christian medical missions organization.

    At a 2024 panel discussion on vaccine injuries convened by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican and vocal COVID vaccine skeptic, Milhoan claimed COVID shots pose more harm than good. 

    According to local news reports, he was also investigated by the Hawaii Medical Board in 2022 for disseminating medical misinformation but charges were eventually dropped. 

    Dr. Raymond Pollak

    Dr. Raymond Pollak is a transplant surgeon and hospital whistleblower. In 1999 he reported the University of Illinois at Chicago’s hospital was diagnosing patients as sicker than they were to boost the number of transplants performed there, according to court documents.

    Pollak’s views on vaccines are unclear.

    Sara Moniuszko

    Sara Moniuszko is a health and lifestyle reporter at CBSNews.com. Previously, she wrote for USA Today, where she was selected to help launch the newspaper’s wellness vertical. She now covers breaking and trending news for CBS News’ HealthWatch.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. death rate drops to lowest level since 2020 with COVID no longer a leading cause

    [ad_1]

    The mortality rate in the United States declined by 3.8% in 2024, and COVID-19 was no longer among the 10 leading causes of death, according to a federal report released Wednesday.

    Using provisional death certificate data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics estimates there were 3,072,039 deaths last year, which equates to about 722 deaths per 100,000 people compared to 750.5 per 100,000 in 2023. This is the lowest death rate since 2020, the authors of the report note.

    And for the first time since 2020, COVID-19 was not one of the 10 leading causes of death. 

    The top three causes of death were heart disease with 683,037 deaths, cancer with 619,812 and unintentional injury with 196,488. The other leading causes were stroke, chronic lower respiratory disease, Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, kidney disease, chronic liver disease and cirrhosis, and suicide.

    Despite the overall death rate decline, deaths for both heart disease and cancer, the two leading causes, increased from 2023. 

    Broken down by demographics, death rates were highest for males, older adults and Black people, the data shows.

    The findings are limited due to the use of provisional data, but the estimates still give “researchers and policymakers an early signal about shifts in mortality trends,” the authors said.

    While heart disease is the leading cause of death in the U.S., a survey from the Cleveland Clinic earlier this year found many Americans are unaware of the risk factors, including things like tobacco use and air pollution. And the risk doesn’t appear to be slowing anytime soon — a 2024 report from the American Heart Association projected more than six in 10 U.S. adults, about 61%, will have some type of cardiovascular disease by 2050.

    Sara Moniuszko

    Sara Moniuszko is a health and lifestyle reporter at CBSNews.com. Previously, she wrote for USA Today, where she was selected to help launch the newspaper’s wellness vertical. She now covers breaking and trending news for CBS News’ HealthWatch.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Moderna CEO Responds to RFK Jr.’s Crusade Against the Covid-19 Vaccine

    [ad_1]

    At the WIRED Health summit on Tuesday, Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said the recent changes to Covid-19 vaccine policy made by Health and Human Services secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. are a “step backward.”

    Moderna is one of the manufacturers of mRNA-based Covid-19 vaccines, and last month the company received approval from the Food and Drug Administration for an updated version of the shot. But as part of that approval, the FDA imposed new restrictions on who can receive the vaccine. Previously, Covid vaccines were recommended for anyone 6 months or older. Now, the FDA says they should only be given to individuals at high risk of serious disease, either because they are 65 and older or have other health problems.

    “I think it complicates things for people,” Bancel said. “You might have somebody in your household—a parent, a spouse, a kid—who is at high risk” that you want to protect, he said. Before, healthy individuals could just go to a pharmacy to receive a Covid shot. Now, several states require a prescription to get a Covid shot because of the FDA’s changes.

    Kennedy has been on a crusade against vaccines since he stepped into the role of HHS secretary in February; earlier this week, the Senate Finance Committee grilled him about his actions in office so far.

    In May, Kennedy terminated a $590 million contract with Moderna for the development of an mRNA-based bird flu vaccine candidate. The contract was awarded during the final days of the Biden administration in January, just before President Donald Trump’s second term began. Bird flu is widespread in wild birds and has been causing outbreaks in poultry and US dairy cows since March 2024. It has caused sporadic cases in people, most of them farm workers, but poses a pandemic potential if it develops the ability to spread from person to person.

    That same month, Kennedy announced that HHS would no longer recommend mRNA Covid-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women. In June, the FDA said it would require new labels on mRNA vaccines to include safety information about the risks of myocarditis and pericarditis, rare side effects observed mostly in young men following administration of the shots.

    In August, as a part of a “coordinated wind-down” of mRNA vaccine research, HHS canceled 22 related contracts and investments worth nearly $500 million. Kennedy incorrectly said in a statement these vaccines “fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like Covid and flu.” HHS is instead shifting funding to an older vaccine platform known as “whole-virus” vaccines.

    Despite the administration’s backlash against mRNA vaccines, Bancel said he is “encouraged by the dialog” that the company has had with the FDA. In addition to getting updated Covid shots, albeit with limitations, Moderna also received expanded approval this year for its respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV, vaccine to include adults ages 18 to 59 who are at increased risk of disease. The vaccine was initially approved in May 2024 for adults aged 60 years and older.

    “I think a lot of people back in January, including my own team, were quite worried that we might not get those approvals,” Bancel said.

    The administration’s crackdown on mRNA research so far has not extended to the cancer space, and Moderna is developing several mRNA therapies against cancer, including personalized cancer vaccines. The company has 45 cancer-related programs in the pipeline and has said it expects 10 FDA approvals in the next three years. “We are using exactly the same technology to go from infectious disease to cancer,” Bancel said.

    He also addressed accusations that the Covid vaccines have not been well tested. “I don’t think there’s been a vaccine more studied for efficacy and safety in the history of vaccines,” he said. “In terms of vaccine efficacy and safety, there’s been studies done in literally millions of people in the real world.”

    [ad_2]

    Emily Mullin

    Source link

  • Vaccine chaos: Even some vulnerable seniors can’t get COVID shots amid spiking cases

    [ad_1]

    Seniors in some parts of the country say they are being denied COVID-19 vaccinations amid an ongoing spike in cases, leading to rising frustration over new Trump administration policies that are making it harder to get the shots.

    Matthew D’Amico, 67, of New York City, said a Walgreens declined to administer COVID-19 vaccines to him and his 75-year-old wife on Friday because they didn’t have a prescription. They’re trying to get vaccinated ahead of a trip.

    “I can’t believe we can’t get” the vaccine, D’Amico said in an interview. “I’ve been inoculated a number of times and never had to get a prescription. And it’s just very frustrating that this is where we are.”

    He’s not alone in his exasperation. Under the leadership of the vaccine skeptic Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., federal agencies have effectively made it more difficult to get vaccinated against COVID-19 this year. The Food and Drug Administration has only “approved” COVID-19 vaccines for those age 65 and up, as well as younger people with underlying health conditions.

    That means across the country, people younger than 65 interested in getting the COVID-19 vaccine must now either consult with a healthcare provider or “attest” to a pharmacy that they have an underlying health condition. It’s a potential hurdle that can make getting the vaccine more difficult and, some health experts worry, prompt even more Americans to eschew getting vaccinated.

    As D’Amico can attest, though, being part of a group for whom the COVID vaccine is “approved” doesn’t necessarily guarantee easy access.

    “For me to go to my primary [healthcare provider] now and get a prescription, it’s just kind of ridiculous,” D’Amico said.

    At least some people younger than 65 are encountering pharmacy staff asking probing questions about their medical conditions.

    That happened Friday at a CVS in Orange County, according to 34-year-old Alex Benson, who takes medication that can suppress his immune system.

    Besides just protecting himself, he wanted to get vaccinated as he has family members who are at high risk should they get COVID — his mother is immunocompromised, and his mother-in-law had open-heart surgery on Thursday night.

    Benson said an employee asked why he thought he was eligible for the vaccine.

    “They asked me for either a prescription or they wanted to know … why I felt I needed the vaccination,” Benson said. At one point, a staffer offered to call his doctor to get an authorization for the vaccine.

    Benson said he was alarmed by the questions, and started to “feel kind of some desperation to plead my case to the pharmacist.” Another CVS staffer later came over and said further answers weren’t necessary and simply attesting he was eligible was good enough. He eventually got the vaccine.

    Still, he felt the experience was dismaying.

    “I think easy access should be the policy,” Benson said. “I tend not to get too political, but it seems just rather juxtaposed to me that an anti-regulation administration is using regulation in this way. They’re supposed to be removing barriers to healthcare.”

    The vaccine chaos comes as COVID-19 is either increasing or starting to hit its late summer peak. According to data released Friday, there are now 14 states with “very high” levels of coronavirus detected in their wastewater — California, Texas, Florida, North Carolina, Indiana, South Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, Connecticut, Utah, Nevada, Idaho, Hawaii and Alaska, as well as the District of Columbia.

    Dr. Elizabeth Hudson, the regional physician chief of infectious diseases for Kaiser Permanente Southern California, said data continue to show an increase in coronavirus cases.

    “Over this past week, we’ve seen an increase in the number of outpatient COVID cases, and even a smattering of inpatient cases,” Hudson said. “It appears that we may be nearing the top of the wave, but it may be another two weeks or so until we truly know if we’re there.”

    The rate at which coronavirus lab tests are confirming infection also continues to rise statewide and in the Los Angeles area. For the week ending Aug. 30, California’s COVID test positivity rate was 12.83%, up from 7.05% for the week ending Aug. 2. In L.A. County, the positive test rate was 14.83%, up from 9.33%.

    Other data, however, suggest some areas may have reached their summer COVID peak.

    In Orange County, the COVID positive test rate was 13.1%. That’s below the prior week’s rate of 18%, but still higher than the rate for the week that ended Aug. 2, which was 10.8%.

    In San Francisco, the test positivity rate has been hovering around 9% for the last week of reliable data available. It’s up from 7% a month earlier.

    In addition, wastewater data in L.A. County show coronavirus levels declined slightly from the prior week.

    “It’s too early to know if this decrease in wastewater viral concentrations is the first sign that COVID-19 activity is peaking or is regular variation typical of this data source,” the L.A. County Department of Public Health said.

    COVID hospital admissions in California are increasing — with the latest rate of 3.93 admissions per 100,000 residents, up from 2.38.

    But they remain relatively low statewide and in L.A. County. The number of L.A. County residents seeking care for COVID-related illness, or who have been hospitalized, “is quite a bit lower than during summer surges in 2023 and 2024,” the public health department said.

    A relatively mild summer wave, however, could mean that the annual fall-and-winter COVID wave might be stronger. In July, the state Department of Public Health said that scientists anticipate California would see either a stronger summer COVID wave or a more significant winter wave.

    The current confusion over federal COVID vaccine policy has been exacerbated by the chaos at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where Kennedy earlier this year fired everyone on the influential Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and orchestrated the firing of CDC Director Susan Monarez just 29 days after she was confirmed to the post by the Senate.

    Some of Kennedy’s handpicked replacements on the ACIP have criticized vaccines and spread misinformation, according to the Associated Press. And the new interim CDC director — Jim O’Neill, a Kennedy deputy — is a critic of health regulations and has no training in medicine or healthcare, the AP reported.

    The CDC hasn’t issued its own recommendations on who should get vaccinated, and that inaction has resulted in residents of a number of states needing to get prescriptions from a healthcare provider for at least the next couple of weeks. In some cases, that’s true even for seniors, as D’Amico found out.

    As of Friday, CVS said people need a prescription to get a COVID-19 vaccine, sometimes depending on their age, in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, North Carolina, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia and West Virginia, as well as the District of Columbia.

    CVS couldn’t even offer the COVID-19 at its pharmacies in Nevada as of Friday; they were only available at the company’s MinuteClinic sites, according to spokesperson Amy Thibault.

    CVS said it expects to offer COVID-19 vaccines without prescriptions at its pharmacies in New Mexico, Nevada, New York and Pennsylvania “soon,” due to recent regulatory changes in each state.

    “Right now, all patients in all states need to attest to being eligible for the vaccine in order to schedule an appointment online,” Thibault said. If an adult says they have no underlying health conditions, but do have a prescription from a healthcare provider for “off-label” use of the vaccine, they can get the shot, Thibault confirmed.

    On Thursday, Hawaii joined California, Washington and Oregon in launching the West Coast Health Alliance: an interstate compact meant to provide science-based immunization guidance as an alternative to the CDC.

    “Together, these states will provide evidence-based immunization guidance rooted in safety, efficacy, and transparency — ensuring residents receive credible information free from political interference,” according to a statement from Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office.

    The statement suggested that the Trump administration was essentially “dismantling” the CDC.

    “The absence of consistent, science-based federal leadership poses a direct threat to our nation’s health security,” the statement said. “To protect the health of our communities, the West Coast Health Alliance will continue to ensure that our public health strategies are based on best available science.”

    It was not immediately clear, however, whether the formation of the West Coast Health Alliance would make it easier for people to get COVID-19 vaccines at the nation’s largest pharmacy retailers, where many people get their shots.

    Mainstream medical groups, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, are also offering their own recommendations to advise individuals and families on what vaccines they should get.

    [ad_2]

    Rong-Gong Lin II

    Source link

  • Washington State Issues Standing Order For COVID-19 Vaccine – KXL

    [ad_1]


    A medical staff member prepares the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at Tudor Ranch in Mecca, Calif. on Jan. 21, 2021. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)

    OLYMPIA, Wash. – The Washington State Department of Health has issued a new Standing Order for the COVID-19 vaccine. The state says it’s aimed at expanding access and reaffirming the state’s recommendation that everyone 6 months and older stay up to date on their vaccinations.

    The order allows most residents to receive the COVID-19 vaccine at pharmacies or clinics without needing an individual prescription. The vaccine remains covered by most private insurance plans, Apple Health, and through Washington’s Adult and Childhood Vaccine Programs.

    The DOH’s guidance echoes recommendations from major medical organizations including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Academy of Family Physicians. It also reaffirms the vaccine’s safety and importance, particularly for pregnant people and young children.

    The state’s move follows the formation of the West Coast Health Alliance, a multistate coalition announced earlier this week. Washington joined Oregon and California on Sept. 3, with Hawaii joining a day later. The alliance aims to ensure public health decisions are grounded in science and shielded from political interference.

    Some health care providers have already received doses of the 2025–26 COVID-19 vaccine. However, availability remains limited in many areas as additional supplies are expected to arrive later in September or October. The DOH encourages residents to contact their health care provider or local pharmacy to confirm availability and make appointments.

    More about:


    [ad_2]

    Grant McHill

    Source link

  • RFK Jr. said all can get the COVID-19 vaccine. Is that true?

    [ad_1]

    When U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testified before the Senate Finance Committee on Sept. 4, several senators criticized him for restricting the COVID-19 vaccine after promising in November he wouldn’t “take away anybody’s vaccines.” 

    “Did you hold up a big sign saying that you were lying when you said that?” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., asked Kennedy. 

    On Aug. 27, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration updated its COVID-19 vaccine guidance, limiting the groups of people approved to get the updated shot to anyone age 65 and older and any person 6 months and older who has at least one underlying health condition that increases their risk of severe COVID-19 infection.

    Kennedy pushed back, “Anybody can get the booster,” he said, later adding that “it’s not recommended for healthy people.”

    Warren said, “If you don’t recommend, then the consequence of that in many states is that you can’t walk into a pharmacy and get one. It means insurance companies don’t have to cover the $200 or so cost.” 

    Sign up for PolitiFact texts

    Warren and Kennedy continued to speak over each other debating the vaccine’s availability. 

    “It depends on the states,” Kennedy said. “But they can still get it. Everybody can get it. Everybody can get it, senator.”

    Asked for evidence, the Health and Human Services Department pointed us to an Aug. 27 X post from Kennedy that said, “These vaccines are available for all patients who choose them after consulting with their doctors.” 

    Kennedy’s blanket statement to senators is misleading and premature.

    Under current guidance, healthy people under 65 years old might need a doctor’s prescription to get the shot. If they successfully get a prescription, they may need to pay out of pocket. 

    Further, whether the vaccine is available at pharmacies and covered by insurance is largely dependent on a vaccine panel that has so far issued no recommendations.

    What was the status quo for years — that the majority of Americans, regardless of age, could easily make an appointment at their local pharmacy for the vaccine at little to no out-of-pocket cost — is no longer guaranteed in the 2025-26 season.  

    FDA limited COVID-19 vaccine approval, CDC has yet to issue guidance

    The FDA’s approval is not the only step in the process of making vaccines available to the public.

    The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a panel of independent experts that guides vaccine policy, has not voted on or issued current guidance. Typically, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends vaccines based on the panel’s guidance.  

    And that guidance affects insurance coverage and vaccine access. Federal law requires that most health insurance plans fully cover vaccines recommended by the CDC. Some states also require these recommendations before they allow vaccines to be offered over-the-counter at pharmacies. 

    On June 9, Kennedy fired all 17 members of the CDC’s immunization advisory committee and replaced some with new members, many of whom have expressed antivaccine views. CDC Director Susan Monarez was fired Aug. 27 over what Monarez described as a dispute about vaccine policy. 

    According to the CDC’s website, the advisory panel is scheduled to meet Sept. 18 to 19. 

    Whether people in FDA-approved groups can get the vaccine over the counter depends on the state 

    People in the FDA-approved groups should be able to schedule vaccinations as soon as authorized health care providers receive it, likely in the next few weeks.

    Even if you are in these approved groups, where you can get the COVID-19 vaccine varies by state. By law, pharmacies in certain states won’t be able to offer the vaccine or will only administer it with a doctor’s prescription until the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel issues its recommendations.

    That means even though the FDA has issued its approval for some groups, in 18 states and Washington D.C., “pharmacists cannot administer it because it isn’t on the CDC immunization schedule yet,” Brigid Groves, American Pharmacists Association vice president of professional affairs, previously told PolitiFact.

    As of Sept. 4, the scheduling apps for Walgreens and CVS notified patients in some locations that they could not schedule a COVID-19 vaccine appointment because of state restrictions, inventory or the need for a prescription. 

    People not in FDA-approved categories may require off-label prescriptions

    People who are not in the FDA’s approved group are not banned from getting the COVID-19 vaccine, per se. But accessing the vaccine will likely require navigating some barriers. 

    Doctors can legally prescribe a COVID-19 vaccine for people who fall outside the FDA categories.

    That’s true for adults and children — and the practice of prescribing medications and vaccines for “off-label” use is fairly common in pediatrics, Dr. William Schaffner, Vanderbilt University Medical Center professor of infectious diseases, previously told PolitiFact.

    That requires making and paying for a doctor’s appointment, and finding a doctor willing to prescribe it off-label. 

    Depending on ACIP’s guidance, pharmacists might be able to vaccinate people not in an FDA-approved group through a process called “shared clinical decision making.” 

    That means, for example, “If you were 52 years old and otherwise healthy, but you nonetheless wanted to get the vaccine, you could discuss that with your doctor — shared clinical decision making — and you could receive the vaccine,” Schaffner said. 

    Pharmacists are considered clinicians who can conduct that shared decision making, Groves said. 

    But again, without CDC recommendations, “We don’t know if that provision is still there,” Schaffner said. 

    Vaccine insurance coverage is dependent on CDC guidance that is not yet available

    Insurance coverage for the vaccine is still up in the air, too, and will largely depend on what the CDC recommends. 

    Insurance coverage is more probable for people in an FDA-approved category. But, if the CDC recommendations include giving vaccines to healthy people through the shared clinical decision making process, insurance companies will generally honor that, Schaffner said.

    COVID-19 vaccines cost about $142, according to the CDC’s price lists. It’s unclear whether that would be the out-of-pocket cost for patients receiving a COVID-19 vaccine not covered by insurance. 

    Our ruling

    Kennedy said “everybody can get” the COVID-19 vaccine. 

    The FDA limited the groups of people who are eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine, which has already diminished the shot’s drugstore availability in some states. People who are not in those groups aren’t banned from getting the shot, but are likely to face additional barriers. For example, people may need a doctor to prescribe the vaccine “off-label,” making the process more challenging and potentially more costly. 

    Kennedy’s blanket statement also is premature.

    A CDC vaccine panel has not issued recommendations for the vaccine. The group’s guidance might affect insurance coverage and over-the-counter access.

    The statement contains an element of truth — the vaccine has not been banned and some people are approved to get it. But it ignores critical facts about the barriers others could face accessing and paying for it. We rate it Mostly False.

    PolitiFact Staff Writer Madison Czopek contributed to this report.

    RELATED: Can I get an updated COVID-19 vaccine this year? Is it available yet? Will insurance cover it?

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • CDC’s new acting director Jim O’Neill faces looming decisions on vaccines

    [ad_1]

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is at a crossroads. Last week, CDC Director Susan Monarez was ousted less than a month into her tenure after resisting Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s push to align with his vaccine policy agenda. Within hours, three senior leaders — including the chief medical officer and the heads of vaccine safety and respiratory infections — resigned in protest. Their exits capped weeks of mounting tension: biased scientific reviews, the withdrawal of key documents, and a shooting at CDC headquarters tied to COVID misinformation. Hundreds of staff publicly applauded the departing scientists in a rare “clap-out.” 

    Into that vacuum stepped Jim O’Neill, deputy secretary of Health and Human Services, now installed as acting CDC director.

    O’Neill’s résumé breaks sharply with CDC tradition. A Bush-era HHS official turned Silicon Valley investor, he is neither a physician nor a scientist — an unusual profile for the agency’s top post. He is expected to retain his deputy role at HHS while leading the CDC. After his early government service, O’Neill spent nearly two decades in close partnership with billionaire Peter Thiel, managing his funds, directing the Thiel Foundation, and co-founding the Thiel Fellowship. He also led the SENS Research Foundation, a nonprofit focused on anti-aging science. In June, he returned to Washington as deputy secretary; he now holds that position alongside his role as CDC director.

    Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., right, conducts the swearing-in ceremony of Jim O’Neill as deputy secretary on June 9, 2025, in Washington, D.C. 

    Department of Health and Human Services via AP


    Former colleagues on both sides of the aisle describe him as smart and diligent, with a deep knowledge of HHS mechanics. They also note his libertarian streak, which could align him well with Secretary Kennedy but set him at odds with school vaccination requirements. His most controversial stance, voiced in 2014, was that the FDA should approve drugs once proven safe, leaving effectiveness to be determined in the marketplace — a proposal widely criticized by public health experts as dangerous.

    O’Neill insists he is “very strongly pro-vaccine,” but his recent post on social media — asking if “omicron is the best vaccine” and suggesting CDC could “redefine the word vaccine at will” — sparked new concerns about his grasp of vaccine science. Experts counter that infection is not the same as vaccination, which confers protection without the risks of acute illness or long COVID.

    He could wear both hats for some time. The White House and Kennedy appear eager to avoid a bruising Senate confirmation fight. Until COVID, the CDC director was not a Senate-confirmed position; Republicans changed that in the pandemic’s aftermath. Leaving O’Neill in an “acting” role could paralyze major decision-making at the agency for the foreseeable future.

    Meanwhile, the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee — made up of all new Kennedy appointees — is preparing for a pivotal September meeting. On the agenda: the newborn hepatitis B dose, infant RSV protection, COVID vaccination for healthy children and young adults, and the combined measles-mumps-rubella-varicella shot. Revisiting so many long-standing childhood immunizations at once would be unprecedented. If recommendations are weakened, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program and the Vaccines for Children program could restrict coverage, creating new barriers for families.

    The stakes for CDC are profound. O’Neill has promised to “refocus CDC on infectious disease” and “restore trust,” yet staff and state partners say politicized decisions and budget cuts are already eroding core work. 

    The September vaccine advisory meeting will be the first real test for O’Neill. If he restores scientific processes, including transparent reviews, expert briefings, and evidence being vetted and posted before votes, CDC insiders say he could stabilize morale at the agency and preserve the credibility of its scientifically-based recommendations. If not, the resignations of senior scientists may prove the start of a broader exodus, leaving states and families without clear guidance just as flu, RSV and COVID converge this fall.

    Dr. Céline Gounder

    Dr. Céline Gounder, an internist, epidemiologist and infectious disease specialist, is a CBS News medical contributor as well as senior fellow and editor-at-large for public health at KFF Health News.

    [ad_2]

    Source link