ReportWire

Tag: health news

  • A Long-Acting HIV Drug Arrives in Zimbabwe for Some at Highest Risk

    [ad_1]

    HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP) — Young women, mothers holding babies and some men lined up in a dusty field on the outskirts of Zimbabwe’s capital, Harare. They came for injections of a new HIV prevention drug launched in the country on Thursday, one that only needs to be administered twice a year.

    Zimbabwe, where HIV has led to tens of thousands of deaths over the past two decades, is one of the first countries to roll out lenacapavir, a long-acting drug that authorities hope will slow new infections.

    With clinical studies demonstrating near-total protection, the drug has been described by some health officials as a turning point for high-risk groups. Others warn that turning scientific promise into broad impact will require overcoming funding constraints, infrastructure gaps and the challenge of keeping patients engaged.

    At the Zimbabwe launch, Constance Mukoloka stepped out of a mobile clinic, beaming with relief after receiving one of the first doses.

    “I am safe, I can work with confidence now,” said the 27-year-old sex worker, describing how daily preventive preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, pills often created tension with clients and proved difficult to take consistently — putting her and others at risk.


    Could reshape HIV prevention strategies

    Mukoloka is among the first beneficiaries of a donor-supported rollout of lenacapavir across 10 African countries. Health officials and advocates say the drug could reshape HIV prevention strategies if governments can navigate barriers of cost and fragile health systems.

    Developed by California-based Gilead Sciences, lenacapavir’s introduction in selected high-risk countries is being supported through the United States President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, in partnership with the Global Fund.

    The injection is offered for free in Zimbabwe to high-risk people such as sex workers, adolescent girls and young women, gay men and pregnant and breastfeeding women.

    For Mukoloka, the drug represents more than convenience.

    “When I took tablets, customers would see a container of pills and leave. They would never return due to fear,” she said. “They couldn’t tell the difference between PrEP and treatment drugs. With the work we do, that stigma costs you money.”

    Daily oral PrEP has long been available in Zimbabwe alongside condoms, vaginal rings and shorter-acting injectables. Yet adherence has remained a challenge, particularly for people facing stigma or unpredictable schedules.

    “I work in beer halls looking for clients. Sometimes I would get drunk and forget to take my drugs,” Mukoloka said. “Sometimes I would work all night and not have time. Some clients refuse protection. They say … ‘Why should I use protection when I have paid?’”


    Extended duration an advantage

    Health authorities see lenacapavir’s discreetness and extended duration as a critical advantage for key populations such as sex workers and therefore a boost in fighting the spread of HIV.

    “Prevention must fit into real life. If a health solution is too complicated, too demanding, or too visible, people simply won’t use it,” Douglas Mombeshora, Zimbabwe’s health minister, said at Thursday’s launch. “Lenacapavir represents a new way of doing things.”

    The drug has been rolled out in other southern African nations like Zambia and Eswatini.

    Zimbabwe, Eswatini and Zambia, once global HIV epicenters, have emerged in recent years as among the world’s most successful models in controlling the epidemic, achieving World Health Organization testing, treatment and viral suppression targets.

    Yet despite these gains, new infections remain a concern, particularly among adolescent girls and young women.

    According to the United Nations children’s agency, HIV prevalence among adolescent girls and young women aged 10-24 is “persistently” triple that of their male counterparts in sub-Saharan Africa, driven by gender inequality, poverty and uneven access to health services.

    In sub-Saharan Africa, women and girls of all ages accounted for 63% of all new HIV infections in 2024, according to UNAIDS. In all other geographical regions, about 73% of new infections in 2024 occurred among men and boys.

    In Zimbabwe, authorities say about 46,000 people across 24 sites are expected to benefit in the early phase of the lenacapavir rollout, a fraction of potential demand in a country of roughly 15 million.


    High cost of mass rollouts

    Details for the next phase are not clear. The government says it hopes the number of beneficiaries will increase as more donor-funded doses arrive. It also hopes to acquire its own doses for a mass rollout but, like many other African governments, lacks enough money.

    Health officials, experts and activists warn that practical realities could tamper the drug’s early promise in Africa, a continent of over 1.5 billion people, not least due to the high cost of mass rollouts for governments.

    In Kenya, which received its first 21,000 lenacapavir doses this week, the government said the injectable would be offered at a negotiated price of about $54 per person per year, still a heavy cost for many.

    Bellinda Thibela, who works on health justice and access at Health GAP, an international advocacy organization, described the move as “a bit comforting” but hardly enough on its own on a continent where health systems have heavily relied on external funding that is diminishing, particularly after U.S. President Donald Trump’s foreign aid cuts.

    Challenges will remain in countries that were “80% to 90% dependent on U.S. funding,” Thibela said. “What’s the point of having a reduced price if there is no staff and equipment in clinics?”

    While many clinicians describe lenacapavir as a significant advance, they stress it must complement, not replace, prevention tools.

    “Condoms remain key. They are cheap and they also prevent other sexually transmitted infections,” said Enerst Chikwati, Zimbabwe program director at AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

    But for early recipients such as Mukoloka, the drug’s impact already feels profound.

    “I am elated. I can go for a whole six months feeling safe,” she said.

    Associated Press writer Evelyne Musambi contributed to this report from Nairobi, Kenya.

    The Associated Press receives financial support for global health and development coverage in Africa from the Gates Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Feb. 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Smartwatches May Soon Predict a Depression Relapse

    [ad_1]

    By Deanna Neff HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Feb. 12, 2026 (HealthDay News) — Your smartwatch might soon do more than just count your steps or check your heart rate: It could serve as a literal early-warning system for your mental health.

    New research from McMaster University suggests that wearable trackers can detect the subtle signs of a depression relapse weeks or even months before an actual episode.

    The study — published Feb. 11 in JAMA Psychiatry, — followed 93 Canadian adults for up to two years. All had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder and had previously recovered from a depression episode. 

    Patients wore a research-grade device similar to a Fitbit or Apple Watch around the clock and had regular in-person visits for depression assessment and data download. 

    By analyzing more than 32,000 days of their data, scientists found that a person’s daily rhythms tell a story.

    Specifically, people with irregular sleep schedules had nearly double the risk of falling back into a depressive episode.

    The most telling sign wasn’t just how long someone slept, but how different their day was from their night. 

    When the data showed less of a difference between daytime movement and nighttime rest, a relapse was often right around the corner.

    “Imagine a future where a smartwatch can warn people with depression: ‘A new episode of depression is very likely coming within the next four weeks. How about seeing your health-care provider?’ ” said Dr. Benicio Frey, a professor of psychiatry at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

    By collecting data passively, digital health wearables allow for continuous monitoring between doctor’s appointments. This “always-on” approach could revolutionize how mental health is managed, moving from reactive treatments to proactive prevention, researchers noted.

    “While it has been long recognized that abnormal sleep and activity patterns are associated with greater risk of depression relapse, the ability to passively detect these abnormal patterns using smart sensors opens an exciting new window of opportunity for personalizing the care of conditions that may reoccur, like depression,” the researchers noted. 

    Major depressive disorder is a recurring challenge for many, with about 60% of patients experiencing a relapse within five years of recovery, researchers said in background notes. Roughly 16% of U.S. adults are faced with it in a given year. 

    Traditionally, doctors have had to wait for patients to report symptoms — like low mood or loss of interest — which often appear only after the depression relapse is already in full swing.

    The foresight from digital health tools may give patients and clinicians a chance to adjust treatments or lifestyle changes before quality of life takes a turn.

    SOURCES: McMaster University, news release, Feb. 11, 2026; JAMA Psychiatry, Feb. 11, 2026

    Copyright © 2026 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    HealthDay

    Source link

  • Doctors increasingly see AI scribes in a positive light. But hiccups persist

    [ad_1]

    When Jeannine Urban went in for a checkup in November, she had her doctor’s full attention.

    Instead of typing on her computer keyboard during the exam, Urban’s primary care physician at the Penn Internal Medicine practice in Media, Pennsylvania, had an ambient artificial intelligence scribe take notes. At the end of the 30-minute visit, Urban’s doctor showed her the AI summary of the appointment, neatly organized into sections for her medical history, the physical exam findings, and an assessment and treatment plan for her rheumatoid arthritis and hot flashes, among other details.

    MORE: Colorectal cancer is now the top cause of cancer death among young adults

    The clinical note, which Urban could also review on the patient portal at home, was incredibly thorough, she said. It summarized all of her questions and concerns and the doctor’s responses. The scribe “made sure we didn’t miss anything,” Urban said.

    Ambient AI scribes are being hailed by physicians as a game changer that helps free them to focus on their patients rather than their computer keyboard. By releasing doctors from the onerous and time-consuming task of documenting what happens during every patient encounter, early studies show, AI scribes may help reduce physician burnout and after-hours “pajama time” catching up on work in the evening.

    The potential of AI to transform every aspect of the health care system — from patient care to clinical efficiency to medical innovation — is an area of intense focus, including by the Trump administration.

    Last January, President Donald Trump issued an executive order to remove barriers to American leadership in AI. Later in the year, a press release from the federal Department of Health and Human Services invited stakeholders to weigh in on how the department can accelerate the adoption of AI in health care.

    Several startup vendors in recent years have introduced ambient AI scribe products that can be integrated into electronic health records. EHR market leader Epic is piloting its own AI scribe technology, which it expects to release widely early this year, according to Jackie Gerhart, a family medicine physician who is chief medical officer and vice president of clinical informatics at Epic.

    Health tech experts estimate that a third of providers have access to ambient AI scribe technology. As adoption looks likely to grow rapidly over the next few years, many expect it to become more of a recruiting tool, a minimum requirement for incoming clinicians, who reports indicate are increasingly prioritizing work-life balance.

    “It’s part of keeping doctors happy,” said Robert Wachter, a professor and the chair of the Department of Medicine at the University of California-San Francisco, whose forthcoming book, A Giant Leap, explores how AI is transforming health care. “Health systems that initially might have done a hard-nosed return-on-investment calculation — many are softening on that and realizing that the cost of recruiting and retaining doctors is pretty high.”

    But many questions remain. Does the use of ambient AI scribes improve patient care and health outcomes? Will doctors use time they gain by employing an AI scribe to improve the quality of the time they spend with their patients or just boost the number of patients they see? To what extent will expanding the amount of detail available from a patient visit lead to bigger bills if the AI scribe is integrated with a coding app that optimizes provider charges?

    For now, these questions remain mostly unanswered.

    Urban said that the AI scribe didn’t change her experience as a patient very much. Typically, after a patient gives verbal permission, the AI scribe records the visit on a phone and organizes the conversation into the structure of a clinical note, filtering out small talk that isn’t pertinent to the medical visit but incorporating relevant details about a family member’s recent cancer diagnosis, for example. The scribe’s note is often then integrated into the provider’s EHR. The doctor later reviews the note and signs off on it.

    Even though the visit may not feel very different to patients, some clinicians report that ambient AI scribes are changing patient encounters in unanticipated ways.

    “Now, when I’m doing a physical exam, I have to say what I’m doing and what I’m finding out loud in order for the AI scribe to document it,” said Dina Capalongo, Urban’s primary care doctor. “People find that very interesting,” she said.

    When Capalongo places her stethoscope over the carotid artery under a patient’s jaw, for example, she might say that she doesn’t hear a “bruit,” or vascular murmur, whose presence could indicate atherosclerosis. Patients have told her, “I never knew why a doctor would listen there,” she said.

    Saying things out loud for the AI scribe that would typically appear only in a clinical note can create its own set of challenges, particularly during sensitive physical exams. Doctors may feel it’s important to adjust their conversation accordingly.

    “Sometimes patients are anxious and scared and my saying things that they don’t understand or they may worry about during an uncomfortable examination does not help the situation and honestly is insensitive to what the patient is going through,” said Genevieve Melton-Meaux, a professor in the Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery at the University of Minnesota, who is also chief health informatics and AI officer at Fairview Health Services in Minneapolis. “I’ll keep that top of mind and make sure I record it” after the visit.

    “How we have conversations with patients about these tools is really important, in particular for maintaining trust and ensuring accurate information,” Melton-Meaux said.

    Studies have found that, across a range of measures such as completeness, timeliness, and coherence, the notes created by ambient AI scribes are generally at least as good as, and sometimes better than, traditional documentation, said Kevin Johnson, a pediatrician who is vice president for applied informatics at the University of Pennsylvania Health System.

    An ongoing concern is around AI “hallucinations,” in which false, sometimes fabricated information appears in an AI output.

    Kaiser Permanente, an early adopter of ambient AI scribe technology, provides it to more than 25,000 doctors, advanced practice providers, and pharmacists systemwide. It has found hallucinations to be “quite rare,” said Daniel Yang, an internist who is vice president of AI and emerging technologies at KP.

    But they happen. An AI-scribe-generated note, for instance, might say that the doctor planned to refer someone to a neurologist or to follow up in two weeks. The problem? The doctor might not have said that.

    “The technology is not perfect, and that’s why physicians are reviewing it,” Yang said. It’s learning from regular physician visits as it goes, he said. That’s why having a person check the work product is critical.

    Still, even such a “human-in-the loop” system is fraught, Wachter said. “Humans stink at maintaining vigilance over time,” he said.

    As the use of ambient AI scribes becomes routine, some clinicians worry that the technology will widen the divide between health care haves and have-nots.

    Large health systems are able to move forward with the technology, Melton-Meaux said. But what about critical access hospitals or small private practices? “There need to be more resources,” she said.

    Physicians’ enthusiasm for ambient AI scribes stands in sharp contrast to their negative reaction to electronic health record systems that have become widely adopted in recent years to replace paper charts.

    “During the last 10 years, when EHRs became a thing, we all became very grumpy, overworked data scribes,” Wachter said.

    The introduction of AI scribes makes physicians feel like technology is working for them rather than the other way around, health care AI experts said.

    And AI scribes are “training wheels” for more consequential adoption of AI in health care, Wachter said.

    To improve health care value and save costs, Wachter said, we need a system that makes it more likely that physicians will practice evidence-based medicine to order the right tests and prescribe the right medications.

    “It’s a few years away, but it’s all AI-dependent,” he said.

    Epic has introduced roughly 60 AI use cases for patients, clinicians, and administration, with over 100 more in the works.

    “It’s so much bigger than a scribe,” said Epic’s Gerhart. “It’s literally listening and acting in a way that tees things up for me so that I can take action.”

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

    This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

    [ad_2]

    Michelle Andrews, KFF Health News

    Source link

  • Poison Control Centers Save America Billions Of Dollars Every Year, Report Finds

    [ad_1]

    By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Jan. 26, 2026 (HealthDay News) — U.S. poison centers are an amazing investment, according to a new study, saving the nation $3.1 billion every year in medical costs and lost productivity.

    For every dollar invested in poison centers, communities receive $16.77 in benefits, according to the report by the RAND think-tank on behalf of the organization America’s Poison Centers.

    These benefits include reduced ER use, shorter hospital stays, lower risk of premature death, better public health tracking and improved patient outcomes, RAND researchers wrote.

    “Our findings demonstrate that the economic and societal value of poison centers is significant,” lead researcher David Metz, a senior analyst at RAND, said in a news release. “Poison centers take strain off an already-burdened emergency health system, while saving lives and money.”

    The U.S. Poison Center Network is made up of 53 regional poison centers and their national accrediting organization, America’s Poison Centers.

    These centers serve every U.S. state and territory and provide free, confidential advice on managing poison exposures 24/7, researchers said in background notes.

    However, overall funding for the centers decreased by 8% between 2011 and 2024, leading America’s Poison Centers to commission the RAND study into the true value they provide.

    Besides the money saved, poison centers also offer harder-to-quantify benefits like poison prevention efforts, emergency preparedness, disaster response, and better peace of mind for communities and health care providers, the report said.

    “Behind every number in this report is a real person who got immediate, expert help when they felt most vulnerable,” Richard Fogelson, CEO of America’s Poison Centers, said in a news release.

    “It was inspiring for us to see RAND measure the widespread impact of our network and how it dramatically reduces health care costs for the nation,” Fogelson added. “The report also reinforces the crucial role poison centers have in detecting and responding to the growing number of public health threats and disasters, enabling rapid and often life-saving coordination with federal, state and local agencies and first responders.”

    Based on the report’s findings, America’s Poison Centers estimates that federal funding for the centers save $450 million a year in health care costs. However, that funding has been affected by changes to federal programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

    Despite the reduction in funding, poison centers have continued to modernize and now offer service through text and live chat services as well as the national hotline phone number.

    “Poison centers have been serving and protecting our communities for more than 70 years,” said Dr. Chris Holstege, director of the Blue Ridge Poison Center in Charlottesville, Virginia.

    “While we continue to evolve with technology and the changing health care landscape, the reliability, expertise and trustworthiness of poison centers have not changed,” Holstege said in a news release. “Today, many poison centers are also doing more with less, responding to natural disasters, providing education to families and health care providers, and monitoring trends and emerging threats.”

    For help with a suspected poisoning, call 800-222-1222 or visit PoisonHelp.org.

    SOURCES: America’s Poison Centers, news release, Jan. 21, 2026; Poison Prevention, Treatment, and Detection as Public Health Investments, Jan. 21, 2026

    Copyright © 2026 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    HealthDay

    Source link

  • Calling the Shots: Tracking RFK Jr. on Vaccines

    [ad_1]

    It was one of President Donald Trump’s more audacious picks for his Cabinet: anti-vaccine activist and alternative health advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to helm the nation’s health department.

    Kennedy, however, won over the senators needed to confirm him to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, promising not to remove government website statements pointing out that vaccines do not cause autism and to keep current vaccine approval and safety monitoring systems intact. Ahead of being tapped by Trump for the role, he said he wouldn’t take vaccines away from those who wanted them while stressing a desire for individual choice.

    Since his confirmation, Kennedy has toed the line between backing vaccination as a preventive public health tool and making statements or overseeing developments that threaten to undermine that tool. His moves have played out against the backdrop of an explosion in vaccine-preventable measles cases in West Texas and an intense flu season that resulted in high rates of hospitalization, along with bird flu outbreaks that have raised the specter of another pandemic.

    Here’s a look at notable vaccine-related moves and remarks made by Kennedy or under his authority since he was sworn in as head of HHS on Feb. 13:

    Sign Up for U.S. News Healthcare of Tomorrow Bulletin

    Your trusted source for critical insights and solutions-focused analysis.

    Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S. News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy.

    • Dec. 16, 2025 – The CDC ended the long-standing recommendation for all newborns to receive the hepatitis B vaccine at birth after its revamped committee of outside vaccine experts voted 8-3 to scrap it. The agency now recommends parents consult with a healthcare provider to decide whether infants born to hepatitis B-negative mothers should get the vaccine. “We are restoring the balance of informed consent to parents whose newborns face little risk of contracting hepatitis B,” CDC acting Director Jim O’Neill said in a statement.
    • Nov. 28, 2025 – Dr. Vinay Prasad, the director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in a memo to agency staff that a review “found that at least 10 children have died after and because of receiving COVID-19 vaccination.” In the memo, which was first reported by The New York Times, Prasad said the true number could be higher and accused the agency of ignoring safety concerns. He did not include information like the ages of the kids, whether they had health problems or how the agency staff determined the vaccine-death link. Prasad said he would propose new oversight and review of vaccines.

    • Sept. 18-19, 2025 – The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices held a chaotic meeting where it voted to weaken COVID-19 shot recommendations, saying that individuals should consult with their healthcare provider about whether they should get the shot. They decided against a prescription requirement for the shot in a narrow vote. The panel also voted against recommending a combination jab against measles, mumps, rubella and chickenpox, or MMRV, for children under the age of 4 and postponed a vote on the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns.

    • July 7, 2025 – Several medical groups sued Kennedy and HHS over his changes to federal vaccine policies, including his decision to remove healthy children and pregnant women from the COVID-19 vaccine schedule, which the plaintiffs asked the court to vacate. The lawsuit accuses Kennedy of working “to dismantle the longstanding, Congressionally-authorized, science- and evidence-based vaccine infrastructure that has prevented the deaths of untold millions of Americans.”

    • Aug. 27, 2025 – Kennedy announced that emergency use authorizations for COVID-19 shots were rescinded, instead issuing full marketing authorization for the shots – but only for those who are at “higher risk” of severe COVID-19. The FDA authorization is for adults 65 and older as well as for children and adults with at least one medical condition that puts them at risk of severe illness.

    • July 22, 2025 – Kennedy accepted a recommendation from the CDC’s ACIP to remove the mercury-based preservative thimerosal from all influenza vaccines distributed in the U.S. “Injecting any amount of mercury into children when safe, mercury-free alternatives exist defies common sense and public health responsibility,” Kennedy posted on social media. However, many studies have shown that the small amount of thimerosal used in vaccines is harmless. The move is not expected to impact many Americans, as the vast majority of flu vaccines distributed in the U.S. do not contain the preservative.  

    • May 27, 2025 – Kennedy announced via social media that the CDC was no longer recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for healthy pregnant women and children, citing a “lack of clinical data” to support administering repeat shots for those populations. The move came despite the agency listing pregnancy as a health risk factor for developing complications from COVID-19.

    • July 29, 2025 – Democrats on the Senate Health Committee announced that they would investigate Kennedy’s overhaul of the CDC’s ACIP, which makes vaccine recommendations for Americans. “By removing all 17 of ACIP’s members and replacing them with eight individuals handpicked to advance your anti-vaccine agenda, you have put decades of non-partisan, science-backed work – and, as a result, Americans’ lives – at risk,” the Democrats wrote in a letter to Kennedy. 

    • June 25, 2025 – HHS officials missed a self-set deadline to release ethics forms for new members of the committee before a June meeting. Eventually, Kennedy’s conflict-of-interest database was updated with significantly less information on the new members than prior members. 

    • June 11, 2025 – Kennedy announced eight new ACIP members. At least half of the picks had spoken out against vaccination in some way, according to The New York Times. Infectious disease experts accused Kennedy of breaking his pledge not to appoint “ideological anti-vaxxers” to the panel.

    • June 9, 2025 – Kennedy announced that he was removing all 17 members of the CDC’s ACIP, which makes vaccine recommendations for Americans. “A clean sweep is necessary to reestablish public confidence in vaccine science,” Kennedy said in a statement. The removal went against a promise Kennedy made to GOP Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana to gain the senator’s vote for Kennedy’s confirmation. 

    • Nov. 19, 2025 – The CDC revised its long-held stance that vaccines don’t cause autism, now saying on its website that the consensus is “not an evidence-based claim.” It continues: “Studies supporting a link have been ignored by health authorities.” The change sparked outcry from public health groups as well as Cassidy, who voted for Kennedy’s confirmation after gaining several commitments from him, including one to not remove language on the CDC website pointing out that vaccines do not cause autism. “What parents need to hear right now is vaccines for measles, polio, hepatitis B and other childhood diseases are safe and effective and will not cause autism,” Cassidy posted on social media after the website was updated. 

    • Sept. 22, 2025 – Kennedy joined Trump at a White House event where the president claimed that vaccines should “be taken separately” rather than as a combined shot and that “it seems when you mix them, there could be a problem.” Trump also promoted claims about vaccines and autism, saying, “I think I can say that there are certain groups of people that don’t take vaccines and don’t take any pills that have no autism.” Kennedy added that the Trump administration will be “closely examining” vaccines as it seeks to find the cause of autism, which the HHS secretary had previously promised would come by September. 

    • March 25, 2025 – The Washington Post reported that HHS had hired David Geier to study potential connections between vaccines and autism – a debunked theory he has previously promoted that again drew the spotlight after Kennedy refused to reject the claim during his confirmation hearings. Geier faced disciplinary action from state regulators more than a decade ago for practicing medicine without a license and was listed as a data analyst in the HHS employee directory, according to the Post. 

    • Jan. 5, 2026 – The CDC announced a revamped childhood vaccine schedule that decreased the number of vaccines recommended for children, nixing shots for flu, rotavirus, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, some forms of meningitis and RSV. Vaccines for those diseases are only recommended now for certain groups deemed high risk. The Trump administration said that all shots would continue to be covered by insurance companies. “This decision protects children, respects families and rebuilds trust in public health,” Kennedy said in a statement. The American Academy of Pediatrics and other public health organizations sued over the move, calling it “harmful and unlawful.”
    • Sept. 9, 2025 – A new MAHA strategy report said that HHS and the White House Domestic Policy Council will develop a framework focused on “ensuring America has the best childhood vaccine schedule.”

    • Feb. 18, 2025 – In his first address to agency staff after taking over as HHS secretary, Kennedy said a commission would investigate the childhood vaccination schedule, questioning whether it was among “possible factors” tied to poor health in the U.S. Kennedy said the Make America Healthy Again commission – created by a Trump order – would convene “representatives of all viewpoints” to examine potential causes behind a “drastic rise in chronic disease,” including some issues that “were formerly taboo and insufficiently scrutinized.” 

    • Aug. 27, 2025 – The White House fired CDC Director Susan Monarez less than a month into her new role after she clashed with Kennedy over vaccine policies. Kennedy reportedly asked Monarez to fire career agency officials and commit to backing his own advisers, which she refused to do. Four high-ranking officials resigned in support of the former director. 

    • July 2025 – Prasad, the FDA’s top vaccine official and Trump’s replacement for Dr. Peter Marks, left the post after less than three months on the job. Prasad “did not want to be a distraction,” an HHS spokesperson said in a statement, adding that he was leaving the role to “spend more time with his family.” But less than two weeks after his ouster, Prasad was rehired to the same role. “At the FDA’s request, Dr. Vinay Prasad is resuming leadership of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research,” HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said.

    • March 28, 2025 – The Wall Street Journal reported that Marks – the FDA’s former top vaccine official and head of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research – submitted his resignation after being forced to either resign or be fired. In a resignation letter, Marks said he’d been “willing to work to address (Kennedy’s) concerns regarding vaccine safety and transparency,” but accused the HHS chief of merely wishing for “subservient confirmation of his misinformation and lies.”

    • May 14, 2025 – Kennedy, in his testimony to lawmakers on Trump’s budget proposal that would slash the HHS budget by more than a quarter, said that his “opinions about vaccines are irrelevant.” He added that he doesn’t think “people should be taking medical advice from me.” When Kennedy was questioned about whether he would hypothetically vaccinate a child of his for measles, he said, “probably, for measles.” He wouldn’t answer the same question about vaccines for chicken pox or polio. 

    • April 2025 – Kennedy told CBS News after the second measles death in an unvaccinated child in the U.S. that people should get the measles vaccine but that the “government should not be mandating those.” Despite his endorsement of the vaccine, Kennedy said in the same interview that “we’re always going to have measles, no matter what happens, as the vaccine wanes very quickly.” However, according to the CDC, most people who are vaccinated against measles “will be protected for life.”

    • March 11, 2025 – In an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Kennedy said the measles vaccine “does cause deaths every year … so people ought to be able to make that choice for themselves.” According to the Infectious Diseases Society of America, no deaths have been found to be related to the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine among healthy people, while “there have been rare cases of deaths from vaccine side effects among children who are immune compromised.” The CDC recommends such individuals not get the MMR vaccine or wait to get it.

    • March 4, 2025 – In an interview with Fox News, Kennedy stressed nutrition and exercise as ways to avoid being severely impacted by measles: “It’s very, very difficult for measles to kill a healthy person.” He said the area in West Texas undergoing a measles outbreak is “kind of a food desert” and that malnutrition “may have been an issue” for a child who died of measles in that outbreak. State health officials said the child, who was not vaccinated, “had no known underlying conditions.”

    • March 2, 2025 – Kennedy wrote in a Fox News op-ed that “studies have found that vitamin A can dramatically reduce measles mortality.” He pointed to a CDC recommendation, updated after he took office, supporting the use of vitamin A to treat measles infections. While health experts acknowledge that vitamin A can be beneficial for patients with a measles infection, they’ve also emphasized it is not a replacement for vaccination and warned that it can cause dangerous health complications when given in excess.

    • December 2025 – HHS terminated millions in grant money for the American Academy of Pediatrics because the initiatives “no longer align with the Department’s mission or priorities,” according to an HHS spokesman. The group has criticized the changes Kennedy has made to federal vaccine policies. “The sudden withdrawal of these funds will directly impact and potentially harm infants, children, youth and their families in communities across the United States,” said Mark Del Monte, the academy’s chief executive and executive vice president.
    • Aug. 5, 2025 – HHS announced it will pull contracts and cut funding for 22 vaccine development projects totaling nearly $500 million. “After reviewing the science and consulting top experts at NIH and FDA, HHS has determined that mRNA technology poses more risks than benefits for these respiratory viruses,” Kennedy said in a video announcement on social media, referring to the vaccine technology used in COVID-19 and flu shots. But infectious disease experts argued the decision puts the U.S. at risk for future pandemics, crediting mRNA technology for the fast turnaround of the COVID-19 vaccines. 

    • March 2025 – The Trump administration targeted NIH grants aimed at studying vaccine hesitancy and how to improve immunization levels. According to NPR, more than 40 grants related to vaccine hesitancy were canceled. 

    • January 2026 – Kennedy removed at least four members of the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccinations, which reviews issues relating to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The committee suggests which vaccines and what conditions should be covered by the program, which Kennedy plans to revamp.
    • Sept. 9, 2025 – In its MAHA strategy report, the Trump administration said that HHS and NIH will “investigate vaccine injuries with improved data collection and analysis, including through a new vaccine injury research program at the NIH Clinical Center that may expand to centers around the country.”

    • July 28, 2025 – Kennedy posted on social media his plan to revamp the federal system to compensate people harmed by vaccines. Kennedy said that the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program “is broken, and I intend to fix it.” According to Kennedy, the program has paid out $5.4 billion to 12,000 petitioners since its inception in 1986. He accused the program of dismissing cases that have merit and slow-walking others. “I will not allow the VICP to continue to ignore its mandate and fail its mission of quickly and fairly compensating vaccine-injured individuals,” Kennedy said. The program “is a no-fault alternative to the traditional legal system for resolving vaccine injury petitions,” according to the Health Resources and Services Administration. 

    • Aug. 14, 2025 – HHS announced it is reinstating the Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines – a panel created by Congress to improve safety and oversight – in a move requested by Children’s Health Defense, the anti-vaccine advocacy group Kennedy previously led. The task force, which was disbanded in 1988, will now work with the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines to produce regular recommendations. The move comes after Children’s Health Defense sued Kennedy in July for failing to establish the task force. 

    – Former U.S. News writer Steven Ross Johnson contributed to this report

    [ad_2]

    Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder

    Source link

  • HHS Announces New Study of Cellphone Radiation and Health

    [ad_1]

    TUESDAY, Jan. 20, 2026 (HealthDay News) — U.S. health officials plan a new study investigating whether radiation from cellphones may affect human health.

    A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said the research will examine electromagnetic radiation and possible gaps in current science. 

    The initiative stems from numerous concerns raised by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has linked cellphone use to neurological damage and cancer.

    “The [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] removed webpages with old conclusions about cell phone radiation while HHS undertakes a study on electromagnetic radiation and health research to identify gaps in knowledge, including on new technologies, to ensure safety and efficacy,” HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon said.

    He added that the study was directed in a strategy report from the president’s Make America Healthy Again Commission.

    Many states already have partial or complete bans on wireless communication devices, including cellphones and tablets, during the school day — a move aimed at improving kids’ mental and physical health.

    At the same time, health officials say existing evidence has not changed. 

    The National Cancer Institute, which is part of the National Institutes of Health, says that “evidence to date suggests that cellphone use does not cause brain or other kinds of cancer in humans.”

    SOURCE: NBC News, Jan. 16, 2026

    Copyright © 2026 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    HealthDay

    Source link

  • CDC Studies Show Value of Nationwide Wastewater Disease Surveillance, as Potential Funding Cut Looms

    [ad_1]

    Wastewater testing can alert public health officials to measles infections days to months before cases are confirmed by doctors, researchers said in two studies published Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Colorado health officials were able to get ahead of the highly contagious virus by tracking its presence in sewer systems, researchers wrote. And Oregon researchers found wastewater could have warned them of an outbreak more than two months before the first person tested positive.

    The findings add to evidence that wastewater testing is a valuable weapon in tracking disease, including COVID-19, polio, mpox and bird flu.

    Peggy Honein, director of the CDC’s division of infectious disease readiness and innovation, said the proposed funding level would “sustain some of the most critical activities” but “it would likely require some prioritization.”

    The national system covers more than 1,300 wastewater treatment sites serving 147 million people. It includes six “centers for excellence” — Colorado among them — that innovate and support other states in expanding their testing.

    The funding cut is still a proposal, and Congress has started pushing back against cuts to health care in general.

    But state health departments say they are preparing for a potential loss of federal support regardless. Most state programs are entirely federally funded, Honein said.

    Colorado started its wastewater surveillance program in 2020 with 68 utilities participating voluntarily. The program has since narrowed in its focus even as it grew to include more diseases, because it is 100% federally funded, said Allison Wheeler, manager of the Colorado’s wastewater surveillance unit.

    The work is funded through 2029, Wheeler said, and the department is talking to state leaders about what to do after that.

    “I know that there are other states that haven’t been as fortunate as us,” Wheeler said. “They need this funding in order to sustain their program for the next year.”


    Measles found in wastewater before patients are diagnosed

    In the Colorado study, which Wheeler co-authored, officials started testing wastewater for measles in May, as outbreaks in Texas, New Mexico and Utah were growing and five cases had been confirmed in Colorado.

    In August, wastewater in Mesa County tested positive about a week before two measles cases were confirmed by a doctor. Neither patient knew that they had been exposed to measles. As they traced 225 household and health care contacts of the first two patients, health officials found five more cases.

    In Oregon, researchers used preserved sewage samples from late 2024 to determine if sewage testing could have discovered a burgeoning outbreak.

    The 30-case outbreak spanned two counties and hit a close-knit community that does not readily seek health care, the study’s authors wrote. The first case was confirmed on July 11 and it ultimately took health officials 15 weeks to stop the outbreak.

    The researchers found that wastewater samples from the area were positive for measles about 10 weeks before the first cases were reported. The virus concentration in the wastewater over the weeks also matched the known peak of the outbreak.

    “We knew that we were missing cases, and I think that’s always the case in measles outbreaks,” said Dr. Melissa Sutton, of the Oregon Health Authority. “But this gave us an insight into how much silent transmission was occurring without us knowing about it and without our health care system knowing about it.”


    State see value in sewage tracking

    Other states, such as Utah, have integrated wastewater data into their public-facing measles dashboards, allowing anyone to track outbreaks in real time.

    And in New Mexico, where 100 people got measles last year and one died, the testing helped state health officials shrink a vast rural expanse. The state’s system flagged cases in northwestern Sandoval County while officials were focused on a massive outbreak 300 miles (483 kilometers) away in the southeast, said Kelley Plymesser, of the state health department.

    The early warning allowed the department to alert doctors and the public, lower thresholds for testing and refocus their resources. The outbreak ended in September. But because measles continues to spread across the Southwest, the state is still using the system to look for new cases.

    Sutton, of Oregon, said she’s hopeful federal leaders will see the power of the system, its adaptability, affordability and reach.

    “The widespread use of wastewater surveillance in the United States is one of the greatest advancements in communicable disease surveillance in a generation,” she said.

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

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • EPA Says It Will Stop Calculating the Economic Savings to Health in Key Air Pollution Rules

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency says it will stop calculating how much money is saved in health care costs and preventable deaths avoided from air pollution rules that curb two deadly pollutants.

    The change means the EPA will focus rules for fine particulate matter and ozone only on the cost to industry, part of a broader realignment under President Donald Trump toward a business-friendly approach that has included the rollback of multiple policies meant to safeguard human health and the environment and slow climate change.

    The agency said in a statement late Monday that it “absolutely remains committed to our core mission of protecting human health and the environment” but “will not be monetizing the impacts at this time.” The EPA will continue to estimate costs to businesses to comply with the rules and will continue “ongoing work to refine its economic methodologies” of pollution rules, spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch said.

    Environmental and public health advocates called the agency’s action a dangerous abdication of one of its core missions.

    “The EPA’s mandate is to protect public health, not to ignore the science in order to eliminate clean air safeguards that save lives,” said John Walke, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

    He called the change in how public health benefits are calculated “reckless, dangerous, and illegal,” adding: “By pretending real health benefits do not count, EPA wants to open the door for industry to foul the air, while communities and families pay the price in asthma attacks, heart disease and premature deaths.”

    The change in how the EPA calculates health benefits was first reported by The New York Times.


    The move is part of the EPA’s broader change in approach

    The move comes as the Trump administration is seeking to abandon a rule that sets tough standards for deadly soot pollution, arguing that the Biden administration did not have authority to set the tighter standard on pollution from tailpipes, smokestacks and other industrial sources.

    In a court filing in November, the EPA said the Biden-era rule was done “without the rigorous, stepwise process that Congress required” and was therefore unlawful.

    The EPA said it continues to recognize the “clear and well-documented benefits” of reducing fine particulate matter, also known as PM2.5, and ozone.

    “Not monetizing DOES NOT equal not considering or not valuing the human health impact,” Hirsch said in an emailed statement, saying the agency remains committee to human health.

    Since the EPA’s creation more than 50 years ago, Republican and Democratic administrations have used different estimates to assign monetary value to a human life in cost-benefit analyses.

    Under former President Joe Biden, the EPA estimated that its proposed rule on PM2.5 would prevent up to 4,500 premature deaths and 290,000 lost workdays by 2032. For every $1 spent on reducing PM2.5, the agency said, there could be as much as $77 in health benefits.

    But the Trump administration contends that these estimates are misleading. By failing to include ranges or other qualifying statements, EPA’s use of specific estimate “leads the public to believe the Agency has a better understanding of the monetized impacts of exposure to PM2.5 and ozone than in reality,” the agency said in an economic impact analysis for the new NOx rule.

    “Therefore, to rectify this error, the EPA is no longer monetizing benefits from PM2.5 and ozone but will continue to quantify the emissions until the Agency is confident enough in the modeling to properly monetize those impacts.”

    The United States has made substantial progress in reducing PM2.5 and ozone concentrations since 2000, the agency said.


    Critics warn the change poses risks to human health

    But critics said a new EPA rule that revises emission limits for dangerous nitrogen oxide pollution from new gas-burning turbines used in power plants demonstrates the risks of the new approach.

    Emissions of nitrogen oxide, also known as NOx, form smog and soot that is harmful to human health and linked to serious heart and lung diseases. EPA’s final NOx rule, issued Monday, is substantially less restrictive than a proposal under the Biden administration. For some gas plants, the rule weakens protections in place for two decades.

    The new rule does not estimate the economic value of health benefits from reducing NOx and other types of air pollution under the Clean Air Act. Critics said the change means EPA will ignore the economic value of lives saved, hospital visits avoided and lost work and school days prevented.

    Under Trump, the EPA “recklessly refuses to place any value on protecting the health of millions of Americans from nitrogen oxides pollution in the face of mountains of medical science finding that this pollution contributes to asthma attacks, heart disease and other serious health problems.” said Noha Haggag, a lawyer for the Environmental Defense Fund, another environmental group.

    “EPA is leaving millions of people in harm’s way when common sense solutions are at hand for modern national limits on nitrogen oxides pollution,” Haggag said.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Fire That Killed 10 at an Assisted Living Facility Prompts Massachusetts to Enact Safety Reforms

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON (AP) — Massachusetts is enacting a series of safety reforms at assisted living facilities including increased inspections and better access to records following a fire last year that killed 10 residents, the governor announced Monday.

    The recommendations, detailed in a report from the Assisted Living Residents or ARL commission tasked with reviewing the sector, call for annual inspection signed off by the local fire department, board of health and building inspector. It also calls for annual update and review of emergency plans and quarterly emergency exercises with all staff and annual evacuation drills.

    Other recommendations include a task force to study affordability of assisted living facilities, over concerns they are out of reach for many low-income residents. The report also calls for creating a statewide online database to provide families with better access to compliance records, ownership information, and corrective action plans. It also calls for standardizing information on services, costs, staffing, and resident rights so families can easier compare different facilities.

    “Every older adult deserves a safe home and peace of mind, and every family deserves transparency and accountability,” Democratic Gov. Maura Healey said in a statement. “The heartbreaking tragedy at Gabriel House showed us that we cannot wait to strengthen protections for assisted living residents. We are taking immediate action on these recommendations so we can better protect residents, support families and ensure our assisted living system continues to serve people well into the future.”

    Aging & Independence Secretary and ALR Commission Chair Robin Lipson said the the state has a responsibility to protect residents living at these facilities.

    “These changes will strengthen fire safety, clarify standards and practices that impact resident well-being, and make critical information more accessible so families can make informed decisions,” Lipson said. “We have already begun putting stronger protections in place and will work to ensure that residents across the Commonwealth are safer, better supported, and treated with the dignity they deserve.”

    Brian Doherty, president and CEO of the Massachusetts Assisted Living Association, said his nonprofit association welcome the report, especially the recommendations to develop a standardized resident assessment, integrate Certified Medication Aides into assisted living, and establish an affordability task force.

    “Assisted living blends social activity with personal care, and we will continue to champion a model of diverse community options over restrictive, institutionalized settings to ensure residents maintain their independence and dignity,” Doherty said in a statement.

    The commission was already studying the sector when a fire broke out last summer at Gabriel House in Fall River. It was the state’s deadliest in more than 40 years and raised questions about a lack of regulations around the sector in Massachusetts.

    Investigators said that the Gabriel House fire began unintentionally by either someone smoking or an electrical issue with an oxygen machine. The blaze left some residents of the three-story building hanging out of windows and screaming for help.

    Documents from the state Executive Office of Aging & Independence showed Gabriel House had lost its certification nearly a decade ago due to resident mistreatment. The facility in Fall River was barred from accepting new residents until it took corrective action.

    The documents add to a list of issues raised with the Gabriel House facility over the years. A resident filed a lawsuit alleging the facility was not properly managed, staffed or maintained and that “emergency response procedures were not put in place.” The son of another resident said an elevator had been out for as long as nine months at one point.

    State records include about two dozen complaints about the facility during the last decade, including several related to “abuse, neglect or financial exploitation” but details are redacted. Other complaints involved a resident getting stuck for hours in an elevator that was then out of service for months, and staff members who threatened residents and withheld medication.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • House Takes Step Toward Extending Affordable Care Act Subsidies, Overpowering GOP Leadership

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Overpowering Speaker Mike Johnson, a bipartisan coalition in the House voted Wednesday to push forward a measure that would revive an enhanced pandemic-era subsidy that lowered health insurance costs for roughly 22 million people, but that had expired last month.

    The tally of 221-205 was a key test before passage of the bill, which is expected Thursday. And it came about because four GOP centrist lawmakers joined with Democrats in signing a so-called discharge petition to force the vote. After last year’s government shutdown failed to resolve the issue, they said doing nothing was not an option as many of their constituents faced soaring health insurance premiums beginning this month.

    Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, one of the Republicans who crossed party lines to back the Democratic proposal, portrayed it as a vehicle senators could use to reach a compromise.

    “No matter the issue, if the House puts forward relatively strong, bipartisan support, it makes it easier for the senators to get there,” Lawler said.


    Republicans go around their leaders

    If ultimately successful in the House this week, the voting would show there is bipartisan support for a proposed three-year extension of the tax credits that are available for those who buy insurance through the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The action forcing a vote has been an affront to Johnson and GOP leaders who essentially lost control of their House majority as the renegade lawmakers joined Democrats for the workaround.

    But the Senate is under no requirement to take up the bill.

    Instead, a small group of members from both parties are working on an alternative plan that could find support in both chambers and become law. One proposal would be to shorten the extension of the subsidy to two years and make changes to the program.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said any plan passing muster in the Senate will need to have income limits to ensure that it’s focused on those who most need the help and that beneficiaries would have to at least pay a nominal amount for their coverage.

    That way, he said, “insurance companies can’t game the system and auto-enroll people.” Finally, Thune said there would need to be some expansion of health savings accounts, which allow people to save money and withdraw it tax-free as long as the money is spent on qualified medical expenses.


    Democrats are pressing the issue

    It’s unclear the negotiations will yield a bill that the Senate will take up. Democrats are making clear that the higher health insurance costs many Americans are facing will be a political centerpiece of their efforts to retake the majority in the House and Senate in the fall elections.

    Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who led his party’s effort to push the health care issue forward, particularly challenged Republicans in competitive congressional districts to join if they really wanted to prevent steep premium increases for their constituents. Before Wednesday’s vote, he called on colleagues to “address the health care crisis in this country and make sure that tens of millions of people have the ability to go see a doctor when they need one.”

    Republican Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Robert Bresnahan and Ryan Mackenzie, all from Pennsylvania, and Lawler signed the Democrats’ petition, pushing it to the magic number of 218 needed to force a House vote. All four represent key swing districts whose races will help determine which party takes charge of the House next year.

    Johnson, R-La., had discussed allowing more politically vulnerable GOP lawmakers a chance to vote on bills that would temporarily extend the subsidies while also adding changes such as income caps for beneficiaries. But after days of discussions, the leadership sided with the more conservative wing of the party’s conference, which has assailed the subsidies as propping up a failed program.

    Lawmakers turn to discharge petitions to show support for an action and potentially force a vote on the House floor, but they are rarely successful. This session of Congress has proven an exception.

    A vote requiring the Department of Justice to release the Jeffrey Epstein files, for instance, occurred after Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., introduced a petition on the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The signature effort was backed by all House Democrats and four Republicans.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Trump Tells Republicans to Be ‘Flexible’ on Abortion Restrictions to Get a Health Care Deal

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump said Tuesday he wants Republicans to reach a deal on health care insurance assistance by being willing to bend on a 50-year-old amendment that bars federal money from being spent on abortion services.

    “You have to be a little flexible” on the Hyde Amendment, Trump told House Republicans as they gathered in Washington for a caucus retreat to open the midterm election year. “You gotta be a little flexible. You gotta work something. You gotta use ingenuity.”

    With his suggestion, Trump, who supported abortion rights before he entered politics in 2015, is asking conservatives to abandon or at least ease up on decades of Republican orthodoxy on abortion and spending policy. At the same time, he is demonstrating his long-standing malleability on abortion and acknowledging that Democrats have the political upper hand on health care after Republicans, who control the White House, the Senate and the House, allowed the expiration of premium subsidies for people buying Affordable Care Act insurance policies.

    As negotiations on Capitol Hill continue, some Democrats are pushing to end the Hyde restrictions as part of any new agreements on health care subsidies.

    Trump’s road map on the Hyde Amendment came more than an hour into a stem-winding speech intended as a part strategy session and part cheerleading as Republicans attempt to maintain their threadbare House majority in the November midterms.

    The president touted the House GOP proposal to replace ACA subsidies — which taxpayers typically steer directly to insurance companies after selecting their policies — into direct payments that taxpayers could use for a range of health care expenses, including insurance. The expanded ACA subsidies expired on Dec. 31, 2025, hitting millions of policy holders with steep premium increases.

    “Let the money go directly to the people,” Trump said, before casually slipping in a reference to the Hyde Amendment.

    “We’re all big fans of everything,” he said. “But you have to have flexibility.”

    Turning directly to GOP leaders, Trump added, “If you can do that, you’re going to have — this is going to be your issue.”

    But the GOP faces considerable pressure from parts of its coalition that want absolute opposition to any policy that might ease abortion restrictions.

    At Americans United for Life, a leading advocacy group that opposes abortion rights, Gavin Oxley penned an op-ed this week for “The Hill” titled, “Republicans must hold the line: No Hyde Amendment, no deal on health care.”

    “If they play their cards right,” Oxley wrote, “Republicans just might earn back enough of their base’s trust to sustain them through the 2026 midterms.”

    The Hyde Amendment, named for the late Rep. Henry Hyde, originally applied to Medicaid, the joint federal-state insurance program for poor and disabled Americans, and barred it from paying for abortions unless the woman’s life is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. Hyde first introduced it in 1976, shortly after the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion nationwide.

    Over the years, Congress reauthorized Hyde policy as part of spending bills that fund the government. Democrats who support abortion access often joined Republicans who opposed abortion rights as a bipartisan compromise to pass larger spending deals. But as the two parties hardened their respective positions on abortion, Democrats became more uniform opponents of the ban, most famously when presidential candidate Joe Biden reversed his long-standing support for Hyde on his way to winning the 2020 Democratic nomination and general election.

    Republicans, meanwhile, have maintained their near absolute support for the amendment.

    The anti-abortion movement was initially skeptical of Trump as a presidential candidate in 2015 and 2016. But he has mostly aligned with the key faction of the Republican coalition, especially on Supreme Court appointments that led to the 2022 decision overturning Roe.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Young Adults With IBD Face Insurance, Cost Barriers To Care, Survey Finds

    [ad_1]

    By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterTUESDAY, Jan. 6, 2026 (HealthDay News) — Young adults are having a tough time accessing treatment for their inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), a new study says.

    They are more likely to face insurance barriers and financial strain to get proper care for their IBD, researchers reported today in the journal Crohn’s & Colitis 360.

    “These numbers demonstrate a clear gap in support and guidance for young adults as they transition from pediatric care and begin managing their own health insurance,” said Laura Wingate, chief education, support and advocacy officer at the Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation.

    “The data show that not only are younger patients at greater risk of having to jump through insurance hoops to access essential medications, they also face substantial financial pressure — often working extra jobs just to afford care,” she said in a news release.

    For the study, the Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation surveyed nearly 1,800 people with IBD, of whom 13% were young adults 18 to 25. IBD includes Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.

    Results showed that young adults were significantly more likely to experience insurance-mandated step therapy, in which patients are required to try a lower-cost medication first before they can get coverage for the drug their doctor prefers.

    About 35% of young adults had to go through step therapy to get their meds covered, compared with 27% of adults 26 and older and 20% of pediatric patients under 18.

    Young adults also were less sure about how to manage coverage issues with their insurer.

    More than one-third (35%) reported low confidence in knowing which questions to ask their insurance company, compared to 25% of caregivers of pediatric patients.

    Young adults were also more likely to need to hustle for cash to cover their IBD care expenses, the survey found.

    About 18% of young adults took on extra jobs or more work hours to cover health care or insurance costs for their IBD, compared with 11% of adults and caregivers of pediatric patients, the study found.

    “The research highlights a need for targeted educational resources, improved insurance navigation assistance and policy attention to mitigate the unique challenges faced by young adults with IBD,” lead researcher Dr. Ross Maltz said in a news release. He’s a pediatric gastroenterologist at Nationwide Children’s Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.

    SOURCES: Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation of America, news release, Jan. 6, 2026; Crohn’s & Colitis 360, Jan. 6, 2026

    Copyright © 2026 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    HealthDay

    Source link

  • How to actually make getting fit a successful New Year’s resolution

    [ad_1]

    FROM TOWSON. A NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION IS I HAVE A TWIN SISTER, SO OUR GOAL IS TO ACCOMPLISH ALL OUR FITNESS GOALS, BE DISCIPLINED AND THAT’S WHY KARISMA GREEN IS UP EARLY AT PLANET FITNESS IN TOWSON. FOR TYRA WHEELER. CONSISTENCY HERE HASN’T JUST HELPED HIM CHANGE HIS BODY, IT’S CHANGED HIS LIFE. WITH MY CAREER, MY SCHOOLING, MY FAMILY, IT JUST MAKES ME WANT TO GO HARDER IN EVERY ASPECT OF MY LIFE. REALLY. ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO, ON NEW YEAR’S DAY, IN FACT, TYRELL SET OUT TO GO FROM FROM EXTREME BEING TO, YOU KNOW, A MEAN GREEN. AND BY NOT GIVING UP, HE’S GONE FROM THIS TO THIS. PUTTING ON NEARLY 30 POUNDS OF MUSCLE. AND ONCE YOU START TO SEE A CHANGE IN YOUR BODY, IT’S NO STOPPING THERE. PLANET FITNESS GENERAL MANAGER QUINTIN DAILEY SAYS THE KEY TO MAKING SURE YOU DON’T GIVE UP WITHIN THE FIRST MONTH, LIKE SO MANY PEOPLE DO, IS IT’S FINDING YOUR WHY, FINDING WHY YOU WANT TO DO THIS. IT MIGHT BE FOR HEALTH, IT MIGHT BE FOR YOUR MENTAL HEALTH. IT MIGHT BE FOR TO YOUR FAMILY CAN SEE YOU A LITTLE LONGER SO YOU CAN MOVE A LITTLE BIT BETTER SO YOU CAN GET A LITTLE STRONGER. ONCE YOU FIND YOUR WHY IT BECOMES A LOT EASIER. GETTING FIT IS A NUMBER ONE RESOLUTION ACCORDING TO YOUGOV.COM. ALSO ON THE LIST. BEING HAPPY, EATING HEALTHIER AND SAVING MORE MONEY. ADULTS UNDER 45 ARE ALSO ABOUT TWICE AS LIKELY AS OLDER AMERICANS TO SAY THEY WILL MAKE A NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION. DO YOU HAVE A NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION? NO, I DON’T HAVE A NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION. I BELIEVE IN MAKING PLANS EVERY DAY AND CARRYING THEM OUT EVERY DAY, INSTEAD OF JUST SAVING THEM UP FOR ONE DAY A YEAR. IF YOU KNOW SOMETHING IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO IT, DO TODAY. MY NEW YEAR RESOLUTION IS TO BE AT THE BE AT PEACE WITH THE WORLD. THE FIRST ONE IS FINISH COLLEGE. THAT’S THAT’S LIKE BOTTOM LINE, WORK IN THE FIELD WOULD BE THE SECOND GOAL AND JUST KEEP GROWING. IF YOU HAVE RESOLVED TO GET OUTDOORS MORE, WHY NOT JUST TAKE A HIKE? FIRST DAY HIKES IS A NATIONWIDE INITIATIVE THAT THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES IS TAKING PART IN. SO YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND GO ONLINE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN DO A SELF-GUIDED TOUR OR A RANGER LED TOUR. AND IT RUNS THROUGH JANUARY THE 2ND H

    Getting fit, healthy is a common New Year’s resolution. Here’s how to actually find success

    Updated: 10:38 AM EST Jan 4, 2026

    Editorial Standards ⓘ

    People typically consider setting goals at the new year, so how does one find success?When it comes to New Year’s resolutions, many people got up early Thursday morning with a goal of getting fit in 2026.At Planet Fitness in Towson, Maryland, Tyrell Wheeler said consistency helped him change more than his body — it changed his life.”With my career, with my schooling, with my family, it just makes me want to go harder in every aspect of my life,” Wheeler said.On New Year’s Day about three years ago, Wheeler set out to “(go) from a string bean to a mean green.” And, by not giving up, he put on almost 30 pounds of muscle.Quintin Dailey, the gym’s general manager, said the key to making sure you don’t give up within the first month, as he sees most people do, is to find your why.”Once you start to see a change in your body, there’s no stopping there,” Dailey said. “(Find) the why you want to do this: It might be for health, it might be for your mental health, it might be so your family could see you longer, move a little bit better, so you can get stronger. Once you find your why, it becomes a lot easier.” Getting fit is the No. 1 resolution, according to a YouGov survey. Also on the list: Being happy (23%), eating healthier (22%) and saving more money (21%).The survey found adults under 45 are about twice as likely as older Americans to say they will make a New Year’s resolution (43% vs. 21%).”I don’t have a New Year’s resolution. I believe in making plans every day, carrying them out every day, (not) just saving them up for one day a year. If it’s the right thing to do, do it today,” said Bernie Simon, a gym patron.”The first one is finish college, bottom line. Second would be to work in the field. And then, just keep growing,” said Dylan Johnson, a gym patron.

    TOWSON, Md. —

    People typically consider setting goals at the new year, so how does one find success?

    When it comes to New Year’s resolutions, many people got up early Thursday morning with a goal of getting fit in 2026.

    At Planet Fitness in Towson, Maryland, Tyrell Wheeler said consistency helped him change more than his body — it changed his life.

    “With my career, with my schooling, with my family, it just makes me want to go harder in every aspect of my life,” Wheeler said.

    On New Year’s Day about three years ago, Wheeler set out to “(go) from a string bean to a mean green.” And, by not giving up, he put on almost 30 pounds of muscle.

    Quintin Dailey, the gym’s general manager, said the key to making sure you don’t give up within the first month, as he sees most people do, is to find your why.

    “Once you start to see a change in your body, there’s no stopping there,” Dailey said. “(Find) the why you want to do this: It might be for health, it might be for your mental health, it might be so your family could see you longer, move a little bit better, so you can get stronger. Once you find your why, it becomes a lot easier.”

    Getting fit is the No. 1 resolution, according to a YouGov survey. Also on the list: Being happy (23%), eating healthier (22%) and saving more money (21%).

    The survey found adults under 45 are about twice as likely as older Americans to say they will make a New Year’s resolution (43% vs. 21%).

    “I don’t have a New Year’s resolution. I believe in making plans every day, carrying them out every day, (not) just saving them up for one day a year. If it’s the right thing to do, do it today,” said Bernie Simon, a gym patron.

    “The first one is finish college, bottom line. Second would be to work in the field. And then, just keep growing,” said Dylan Johnson, a gym patron.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • AI Could Help Make Liposuction Safer, Experts Say

    [ad_1]

    By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Jan. 2, 2026 (HealthDay News) — Considering some plastic surgery as part of a New Year’s makeover?

    A newly developed AI model is promising to make liposuction a safer procedure by accurately predicting blood loss among patients.

    Overall, the AI was 94% accurate in predicting the amount of blood a person would lose during high-volume liposuction, researchers report in the January 2026 issue of the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

    “Developing and implementing our AI model for predicting blood loss in liposuction is a groundbreaking advancement that promises to improve patient safety and surgical outcomes,” concluded the research team led by Dr. Mauricio Pérez Pachon, a research fellow at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

    “By harnessing the evolving nature of AI, we may move toward a future where operations are smarter, safer and more tailored to the individual needs of each patient,” the team wrote.

    Liposuction is the most frequent cosmetic surgery procedure performed worldwide, with more than 2.3 million patients receiving the treatment each year.

    Although liposuction is generally safe, excessive blood loss is a potentially serious problem, especially when higher volumes of fat are being removed from a person’s body, researchers said.

    For the new study, researchers trained an AI device on data from 621 patients who underwent large-volume liposuction at two clinics, one in Colombia and one in Ecuador.

    The team then tested the AI’s accuracy among another 100 liposuction patients from the two clinics.

    Results showed “excellent agreement” between predicted blood loss volumes and the actual amount of blood lost, researchers said. The standard deviation was 26 milliliters, or less than nine-tenths of an ounce.

    “Such accuracy reinforces the model’s potential as a decision-support tool in body contouring procedures, where anticipating intraoperative blood loss is crucial for patient safety and operative planning,” the researchers wrote.

    “Surgeons can use the predicted blood loss estimates to make informed decisions about perioperative management, such as the need for blood transfusions, fluid management and other critical care measures,” the team added.

    The research team plans to conduct additional studies to further refine the AI model, including training with data provided by surgeons around the world.

    “We believe that future research into AI technology has limitless potential to enhance patient safety, and we look forward to continued development in this area,” Pérez Pachon said.

    The American Society of Plastic Surgeons has more on liposuction.

    SOURCES: Wolters Kluwer Health, news release, Dec. 24, 2025; Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, January 2026

    Copyright © 2026 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    HealthDay

    Source link

  • 6 Changes to National Health Policy to Watch in 2026

    [ad_1]

    From the passage of a massive bill that reduced federal funds for Medicaid to a comprehensive overhaul of a federal vaccine advisory panel, Congress and the Trump administration delivered major changes to America’s public health system in 2025.

    Many of those changes are poised to reshape coverage, care delivery and public health policy in the new year as provisions take effect, healthcare premiums more than double, and new requirements begin to kick in.

    Here’s a look at the biggest policy shifts set in motion last year that should be felt in the new year:

    ACA Subsidies Will Sunset 

    Premium tax credits meant to further reduce the price of healthcare plans bought on the Affordable Care Act marketplace expired on Dec. 31 after Congress declined to address a looming “subsidy cliff.”

    The credits increased financial assistance and expanded it to those with incomes above 400% of the federal poverty lines. Since the credits were first introduced in 2021, enrollment in the ACA marketplace increased to more than 24 million.

    The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities projected that almost 22 million people would see their healthcare costs “dramatically rise” or would lose their coverage altogether without the extension. The Urban Institute estimated that 7.3 million fewer Americans would receive subsidized coverage in 2026 and that 4.8 million more would be uninsured in 2026.

    State Medicaid Expansion Incentives to End

    The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 offered a temporary financial incentive to encourage states to expand Medicaid coverage to more low-income Americans. The act used the 138% poverty level listed in the Affordable Care Act to offer states a two-year, 5% match to the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, the amount the federal government shoulders, for Medicaid expansion expenditures.

    But the incentive will largely end as it currently exists due to the legislation known as the “big, beautiful bill.” States wishing to qualify for the enhanced funding must have completely expanded their Medicaid programs by Jan. 1. States that have already expanded their programs will retain their existing FMAP levels, and those receiving the two-year bonus will continue to receive it until the period ends.

    Removal of Tax Liability Caps 

    For ACA marketplace enrollees, their premium tax credits are determined based on what they estimate their income will be at the beginning of the year. If the prediction is incorrect and the income is higher than expected, they are expected to repay. The process of repayment to the IRS is known as reconciliation and was expected to be undertaken when enrollees filed their federal income tax returns.

    Now, under a provision of the “big, beautiful bill,” marketplace enrollees will be expected to repay the full amount they owe. Also, the continuous special enrollment period for people whose incomes are below 150% of the federal poverty line will end. In addition, those enrolling in coverage during a special enrollment period based on their income and not tied to a qualifying life event will not be eligible for the credits beginning this year.

    Change in Tax Credit Eligibility for Noncitizens 

    The “big, beautiful bill” also included changes to the eligibility requirements for people who are not citizens who wish to receive ACA marketplace premium credits.

    Credits will be limited to green-card holders, Cuban or Haitian entrants, or Compact of Free Association migrants or citizens of the Marshall Islands, Palau or Micronesia. Previously eligible categories, like refugees, asylum-seekers and those granted temporary protected status, will no longer qualify.

    The bill also ends a special rule known as the Medicaid waiting list loophole. The rule allowed people who are not citizens whose incomes are below 100% of the federal poverty line and who are ineligible for Medicaid coverage due to their status to receive the premium credits.

    The changes are expected to take effect Jan. 1.

    Caps on Federal Loans for Medical Students 

    The “big, beautiful bill” also caps the amount medical students can receive in Federal Direct Stafford Loans and Federal Direct PLUS Loans.

    The changes will take effect on July 1.

    Sign Up for U.S. News Healthcare of Tomorrow Bulletin

    Your trusted source for critical insights and solutions-focused analysis.

    Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S. News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy.

    More Vaccine Reviews 

    The Department of Health and Human Services is expected to continue its overhaul of vaccine recommendations in the new year, starting with the schedule of recommended vaccines for children. The proposed new schedule will recommend fewer shots to mimic those from other developed countries, specifically Denmark. CNN reported that the plan has not been finalized but was expected in late December before it was pushed to 2026.In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory panel is set to meet three times in the new year: Feb. 25-26, June 24-25 and Oct. 21-22.

    [ad_2]

    Aneeta Mathur-Ashton

    Source link

  • Flu Is Rising Rapidly, Driven by a New Variant. Here’s What to Know

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Flu is rising rapidly across the U.S., driven by a new variant of the virus — and cases are expected to keep growing with holiday travel.

    That variant, known as “subclade K,” led to early outbreaks in the United Kingdom, Japan and Canada. In the U.S., flu typically begins its winter march in December. On Tuesday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported high or very high levels of illness in more than half the states.

    The CDC estimated there have been at least 7.5 million illnesses, 81,000 hospitalizations and 3,100 deaths from flu so far this season. That includes at least eight child deaths — and is based on data as of Dec. 20, before major holiday gatherings.

    Some states are particularly hard-hit. New York’s health department said the week ending Dec. 20 marked the most flu cases the state had recorded in a single week since 2004: 71,000.

    It’s far too soon to know if this flu season will be as severe as last winter’s.

    But it’s not too late to get a flu shot, which health experts say can still prevent severe illness even if someone gets infected. While this year’s vaccine isn’t a perfect match to the subclade K strain, a preliminary analysis from the U.K. found it offered at least partial protection, lowering people’s risk of hospitalization.

    According to the CDC, only about 42% of adults and children have gotten a flu vaccination so far this year.

    The flu virus is a shape-shifter, constantly mutating, and it comes in multiple forms. There are two subtypes of Type A flu, and subclade K is a mutated version of one of them, named H3N2. That H3N2 strain is always harsh, especially for older adults.

    Subclade K’s mutations aren’t enough of a change to be considered an entirely new kind of flu.

    But they’re different enough to evade some of the protection from this year’s vaccine, said Andrew Pekosz, a virus expert at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.


    Will subclade K make people sicker?

    The CDC said it’s too soon to know how severe this season will be.

    Flu seasons dominated by any version of H3N2 tend to be bad, with more infections overall and more people becoming seriously ill. But Hopkins’ Pekosz cautioned it will take time to tease apart whether this subclade K version simply spreads more easily or also is more dangerous.

    That question aside, the CDC notes there are some prescription medicines to treat flu — usually recommended for people at high risk of complications. But they generally need to be started a day or two after symptoms begin.

    The CDC and major medical societies all recommend a flu vaccine for just about everyone age 6 months and older. Despite lots of recent misinformation and confusion about vaccines, the flu recommendations haven’t changed.

    Flu is particularly dangerous for people 65 and older, pregnant women, young children and people of any age who have chronic health problems, including asthma, diabetes, heart disease and weak immune systems.

    The vaccines are brewed to protect against three influenza strains. Despite concern over that new H3N2 variant, they appear to be a good match against H1N1 and Type B flu that may also circulate this year, Pekosz said.

    There are shots for all ages, as well as the nasal spray FluMist for ages 2 to 49. For the first time this year, some people may be eligible to vaccinate themselves with FluMist at home.

    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.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Money Worries Speed Up Heart Aging, Increase Risk Of Death

    [ad_1]

    By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Dec. 29, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Fretting over making ends meet ages your heart just as much as classic risk factors for heart disease, a new Mayo Clinic study says.

    Financial strain and food insecurity are the strongest drivers of accelerated heart aging, researchers reported in the journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings.

    The heart aging associated with money and food worries is similar to that caused by conventional risk factors like diabetes, high blood pressure and prior heart attack, researchers concluded.

    This aging increases people’s risk for heart disease and heart-related death, researchers said.

    “Our study highlights the critical role of social determinants of health in cardiac aging and mortality,” senior researcher Dr. Amir Lerman said in a news release. He’s director of the Cardiovascular Research Center at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

    For the study, researchers estimated the heart aging of more than 280,000 people treated by the Mayo Clinic between 2018 and 2023, using an AI-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) to track the wear-and-tear age of each person’s heart compared to their birth age.

    The team compared that data against a questionnaire that assessed the patients’ social determinants of health — factors like stress, exercise, social connection, housing, financial strain, food insecurity, transportation needs, nutrition and education.

    These non-medical factors can have a significant impact on a person’s health and risk of death, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    “Our current research was motivated by the observation that traditional risk factors do not explain and contribute equally to cardiovascular disease,” Lerman said. “There are social factors that we do not identify or inquire about from our patients that may potentially reverse biological aging.”

    Overall, social determinants of health most influenced a person’s cardiac aging, compared to traditional risk factors, results showed.

    And among those social determinants of health, financial strain and food insecurity were the most impactful when it came to accelerated aging of a person’s heart.

    Researchers concluded that social factors like financial strain, housing and lack of exercise can be used to predict a person’s risk of heart-related death, matching or surpassing conventional risk factors.

    For example, financial strain increased risk of premature death by 60% and housing instability by 18%, compared to 10% for a previous history of heart attack and 27% for smoking, the study said.

    “Identifying the most important risk factors for cardiac aging allows for targeted preventive intervention in the community and empowers physicians to engage in patient-centered care, addressing the social context that contributes to heart disease,” Lerman said.

    SOURCE: Mayo Clinic, news release, Dec. 18, 2025

    Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    HealthDay

    Source link

  • Out With the Old: With 2026 Nigh, Here’s Some Wide-Ranging Intel on Managing Transitions

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK (AP) — It’s that time — December’s waning days, when we prepare to turn the calendar page. Many Americans take stock, review goals accomplished and unmet, ponder hopes and plans. How’s our health? What’s up with our money? What about the country? Will the coming year look like the departing one year, or be something entirely different?

    It can be an overwhelming period. So The Associated Press reached out to professionals with varying expertises — home organization, risk management, personal training, personal finance, and political science — to talk about their perspectives on changes and transitions.

    And for something a little different, we gave each interviewee a chance to ask a question of one of the others.

    So let’s talk endings and beginnings.


    The change expert: Milestones stir emotions

    Transitions are professional organizer Laura Olivares’ working life. As co-founder of Silver Solutions, she works with senior adults and their families to help make sure they’re in safe environments, whether that means decluttering a lifetime of possessions, downsizing to another home, or helping families clear a house after a loved one’s passing.

    She offers this: Changes, even exciting ones, can unearth sadness or grief over places, things and people left behind. Acknowledging those feelings can help smooth the move from one chapter to another.

    “When you let go of something that was meaningful to you, it deserves a moment,” she says. “Whatever that moment is, could be a second, could just be an acknowledgement of it. Or maybe you set it on the on the mantle and you think about it for a while and when you’re ready to let it go, you let it go.”

    NEXT QUESTION: Certified personal trainer Keri Harvey asked: “What small weekly habits can I build that will help me stay organized during the year?” Olivares’ tips: In December, do a brain dump of thoughts, ideas, and goals. Then, before Jan. 1, schedule out tasks that move those priorities forward over the course of 2026. Olivares suggests three tasks on each of three days, so nine tasks per week.


    The actuary: Planning is important — but sometimes fickle

    Probably no group of people think more about the future than actuaries. Using data, statistics and probabilities, they devise models on how probable it is that certain events happen, and what it could cost to recover from them. Their work is vital to organizations like insurance companies.

    Listen to R. Dale Hall talk, though, and he sounds almost … philosophical. He’s managing director of research at the Society of Actuaries. Asked how the general public could think about a new year, he readily brings up strategies like mapping out risk scenarios and how to respond.

    There’s a balance to be struck, he says: We can’t control or predict everything and must accept the possibility of something unexpected. And the past isn’t always a perfect guide; just because something happened doesn’t mean it must again.

    “It’s the nature of taking risk, right? That yeah, there are going to be uncontrollable things,” Hall says. “There are ways to maybe diversify those risks or mitigate those risks, but no one has that perfect crystal ball that’s going to see three, six, nine, 12 months into the future.”

    NEXT QUESTION: From personal finance educator Dana Miranda: “Thinking about the variables we consider when making decisions or plans, how might the juxtaposition of the holiday season with the new year affect the way people are evaluating their finances and setting goals at the beginning of each year? … What do you recommend they do to ensure the holiday experience doesn’t skew financial goal-setting?”

    Hall’s advice: Keep ’em separate. He recommends people enjoy the holidays and hold off on financial goals until January.


    The personal finance authority: Be intentional about money

    In her work as a financial writer and a personal finance educator, Miranda encourages people to make conscious choices around their spending and saving, and understand that there’s no absolute rule.

    Miranda, author of “You Don’t Need a Budget,” says details are key. What works for one person may not work for another. And it’s something Americans should consider as another year of goals and resolutions approaches. Insisting that the same technique works for everybody can leave people feeling stuck, Miranda says.

    “We tend to be not good at talking about the nuances and that leaves people with, ‘Here’s the one right rule. It’s not possible for me to achieve that perfection, so I’m just going to feel ashamed of every move that I make that is not moving toward that perfect goal.’”

    NEXT QUESTION: From Jeanne Theoharis, a political science professor, who asked how Miranda gets people to look beyond the micro and consider the larger system of capitalism. “How does she also get people to think about more collective solutions—like union organizing, pressing City Council or Congress for changes?”

    Miranda is quick to make it clear she’s not an organizer but says she tries to evoke larger systemic issues when discussing personal finance. “The way that I try to move that needle just a little bit is to always bring in that political aspect to whatever conversation we’re having … to make the systemic and the cultural impact visible.”


    The trainer: Make goals attainable

    When it comes to changes and new years, one of the most popular areas is fitness, the subject of many a (failed) resolution. Personal trainer Harvey, of Form Fitness Brooklyn, says you can make positive, lasting change in fitness (and generally) with one philosophy: Start small and build.

    “We want to be mindful of making sure that we’re not asking too much or trying to overcompensate for what we feel like we left behind this past year or what we feel like we left on the table this past year,” she says. “It’s very reasonable to try and have the goal of getting to the gym twice a week, maybe three times a week, and then building from there instead of saying ‘Jan. 1, I’m starting, I’m gonna be at the gym five days a week, two hours a day.’ That’s not realistic and it’s not kind to ourselves.”

    NEXT QUESTION: From Hall: “What advice do you have for me to transition to an even more robust workout schedule in 2026 without falling into the risk of injuring myself by doing too much too soon?”

    Harvey emphasized warming up and having a mobility routine, and making the goal attainable by making it fun. “Find things that you actually enjoy doing and try and fit those in as well so that the idea of starting something new or adding to it isn’t one that comes with a negative like, ‘Oh, I don’t want to have to do this,’ where you’re dragging yourself into it.”


    The historian: Learn from your past

    It’s not just as individuals that we think about transitions. Nations and cultures have them, too.

    We can learn from them if we look at our history honestly and not through the guise of trying to hide the ugly parts, says Theoharis, professor of political science and history at Brooklyn College and the City University of New York Graduate Center.

    She points to the story of Rosa Parks, remembered as the catalyst of the Montgomery bus boycotts 70 years ago. But when Parks chose to resist, she didn’t know what her arrest would mean or what the outcome would be. Theoharis sees a lesson there for people looking to make change in today’s world and even individuals wanting to evolve.

    “A number of us would be willing to do something brave if we knew that it would work,” Theoharis says. “And we might even be willing to have some consequences. But part of what looking at the actual history of Rosa Parks or the actual history of the Montgomery bus boycott is in fact you have to make these stands with no sense that they will work.”

    NEXT (AND LAST) QUESTION: From Olivares, who wanted Theoharis’ thoughts on today’s civil rights battles. Theoharis referenced voting rights, which have been eroded in recent years. At the same time, remembrances of the turmoil during the Civil Rights years have become glossed over by a mythology of America overcoming its injustices.

    There’s a lesson there about what it takes to make real change for individuals, too, Theoharis says: It’s difficult to move forward if you’re not honestly addressing what’s come before. “Part of how we’ve gotten here is by that … lack of reckoning with ourselves, lack of reckoning with where we are, lack of reckoning with history.”

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • States Try to Snuff Out Lab-Grown Meat Before It Really Starts

    [ad_1]

    Lab-grown meat could be widely available in supermarkets across the U.S. in 10-15 years.

    Advocates say the product offers consumers more choices, boosts food security for a country with growing demand and increases sustainability for a world with already stressed resources.

    However, some states have already answered this question – with a hard “no.”

    Seven states have banned the manufacturing, sale or distribution of lab-grown meat, and more have taken steps to restrict its labeling. Many of these steps happened in 2025, and the Department of Health and Human Services lists them on its website as examples of Secretary Robert F. Kennedy’s movement to “Make America Healthy Again.”

    The latest ban in Texas started in September and lasts two years, though lawmakers can choose to extend it. Violators could face civil and criminal penalties.

    “This ban is a massive win for Texas ranchers, producers and consumers,” Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said in a statement. “Texans have a God-given right to know what’s on their plate, and for millions of Texans, it better come from a pasture, not a lab. It’s plain cowboy logic that we must safeguard our real, authentic meat industry from synthetic alternatives.”

    But supporters of lab-grown meat are not going down without a fight. Lawsuits challenging bans have been filed in both Texas and Florida.

    In its lawsuit against Texas, the Institute for Justice and cultivated food producers Wildtype and UPSIDE Foods argued the ban is “nothing more than unconstitutional economic protectionism.”

    “This ban slams the door on choice, when all we’re asking is the freedom for Texans to decide for themselves,” Wildtype co-founder Aryé Elfenbein said in a statement.

    State and federal action over the next several years could determine much about the future of the budding industry. And despite the pushback in recent months, some see reason for optimism about its future.

    What Is Lab-Grown Meat – and Is It Safe?

    The Good Food Institute, a think tank working in “alternative protein innovation,” says that “cultivated meat is identical to conventional meat at the cellular level.”

    Lab-grown meat comes from animal cells, so it’s not vegetarian like the “Impossible Burger” and similar products derived from plants.

    Animal stem cells are placed in bioreactors and mixed with a blend of water, sugar, fats and vitamins to grow more cells and build the muscle and fat otherwise grown inside an animal. Growth factors and other proteins are typically added as well. The cells are then harvested and shaped into final products like a chicken fillet.

    The product is completely safe, says David Kaplan, a professor of biomedical engineering at Tufts University, and approvals from the Food and Drug Administration underscore that. The agency has approved five companies’ cultivated meat products, ranging from chicken to salmon to pork fat.

    “All their data is publicly available through their filings, and there’s nothing in there that says it’s anything but at least as good, if not better, than what consumers eat today,” Kaplan says.

    But consumers won’t be seeing it on the shelves anytime soon. David Block, a professor at the University of California, said it will be at least 10 to 15 years before lab-grown meat could be widely available in supermarkets.

    The timeframe depends on everything going right for building a big manufacturing facility from scratch.

    “I would argue that nobody has done this at a really large scale yet, so nobody knows exactly what they want to see in a very large-scale facility,” Block says.

    Where Lab-Grown Meat Restrictions Stand Across the U.S.

    Access to lab-grown meat thus far in the U.S. has been extremely limited, consisting of brief appearances in select restaurants like Bar Crenn in San Francisco and China Chilcano, in Washington, D.C.

    But that hasn’t stopped states from banning the product.

    Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska and Texas have passed bans (some of them temporary) on the manufacturing, sale or distribution of cell-cultured meat. Additional states have taken steps to regulate labeling of the product.

    embed:

    The related debate has been both heated and highly politicized.

    When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the ban in Florida, he described it as “fighting back against the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals.” He added that his administration “will save our beef.”

    But the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association isn’t worried about competition.

    Sigrid Johannes, the association’s senior director of government affairs, described the bans as state legislators “responding to their own constituents, it’s as simple as that” in a statement to U.S. News.

    “Plenty of Americans from both sides of the aisle have serious concerns about yet another ultra-processed, artificial food landing on grocery store shelves, masquerading as whole-ingredient beef,” Johannes said. “NCBA has never pushed for a federal ban because we’re not afraid of competing with these products in the free market, but we will continue advocating for appropriate labeling rules so consumers know exactly what they’re eating.”

    Though Kennedy and the Trump administration have cheered these states on, they haven’t proposed any similar federal action on the subject.

    A Fight for the Future

    Of course, the nature of the product means the lab-grown meat industry faces more challenges than just government bans.

    “There’s still issues, probably most notably the cost of those products,” says Block, who serves as director of the Integrative Center for Alternative Meat and Protein.

    Production is expensive and has only been done in small quantities thus far. But Block says there is potential to bring the price down.

    “If you were to produce these materials at really huge scale, then the cost would come down,” he says. “But that’s not really happening on any of these products yet.”

    Whether the demand is there for such a scale-up is unknown, but there are some signs of interest. A 2024 survey from Purdue University found that 60% of consumers are willing to try cultivated beef, chicken and pig, with chicken garnering the most interest.

    While most headlines will refer to the product as lab-grown meat, researchers prefer to call it cultivated meat.

    “In terms of the way it would be perceived by consumers, if you say lab-grown, it has a very different connotation,” says Kaplan.

    Experts say they are optimistic about the industry’s future, but they are worried about investing during the Trump administration.

    “I’m very bullish about what we’ve gotten to and where things stand,” Kaplan says. “I’m just very uncertain on how quick the next step will be, and I’m very worried that we will be left behind by other countries because we’re not doing the investments.”

    Sign Up for U.S. News Healthcare of Tomorrow Bulletin

    Your trusted source for critical insights and solutions-focused analysis.

    Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S. News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy.

    [ad_2]

    Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder

    Source link

  • Metal Shards Spark Nationwide Recall of Ready-to-Eat Holiday Kielbasa

    [ad_1]

    By Deanna Neff HealthDay ReporterTUESDAY, Dec. 23, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Olympia Provisions has recalled about 1,930 pounds of ready-to-eat holiday sausage.

    The recalled meat is wrapped and vacuum-sealed in 16-ounce clear pouches and labeled “OLYMPIA PROVISIONS UNCURED HOLIDAY KIELBASA.”

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced the Class I recall on Dec. 19 due to possible metal or other fragments in the meat. 

    Consuming the recalled kielbasa may pose serious health risks to consumers.

    The ready-to-eat sausages were manufactured on Oct. 14, 2025, and carry a “BEST IF USED BY” date of 02/19/26 printed on the side of the label.

    Packages have the establishment number — “EST. 39928” — inside the USDA mark of inspection.

    The contamination came to light through after a consumer reached out to the Portland, Ore., company, which then notified FSIS. To date, there have been no confirmed reports of medical emergencies or injuries.

    The recalled meat was distributed to retail shops in California, Oregon and Washington. 

    However, because the company sells its artisanal products through its website, the sausages were also shipped to online customers nationwide. This makes it crucial for anyone who purchased holiday meat through the internet to see whether it’s part of the recall.

    Safety inspectors are particularly worried about the product’s long shelf life. Because the kielbasa is fully cooked and vacuum-sealed, it can be stored for months. 

    Federal officials expressed concern that many consumers might have the product sitting in their refrigerators or freezers, unaware of the potential hazard.

    If you find one of these packages in your home, discard the sausage immediately or return it to the place of purchase for a full refund.

    Health officials urge anyone who believes they may have suffered an injury from consuming the meat to contact a health care provider.

    Consumers with food safety questions can call the toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at 888-674-6854 or send a question via email to MPHotline@usda.gov. 

    SOURCE: U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service, recall announcement, Dec. 19, 2025

    Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    HealthDay

    Source link