Health Industry Archives - Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News /topics/health-industry/ Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News produces in-depth journalism on health issues and is a core operating program of KFF. Wed, 13 May 2026 21:45:58 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.5 /wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=32 Health Industry Archives - Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News /topics/health-industry/ 32 32 161476233 Trump and Kennedy Seek To Relax Safeguards for AI Healthcare Tools /health-industry/ai-artificial-intelligence-ambient-scribes-ehr-electronic-health-records-hhs-deregulation/ Wed, 13 May 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2234764 Paul Boyer, a psychotherapist for Kaiser Permanente in Oakland, California, is experiencing the AI revolution firsthand. He’s a little underwhelmed.

The health giant has rolled out a new suite of note-taking software, made by healthcare AI pioneer Abridge, intended to summarize a patient’s visit at supersonic speed. For many clinicians, the technology soothes one of the persistent headaches of their lives — administration and paperwork.

But the AI scribe caused another headache for Boyer and his colleagues: It is “not super useful.” They end up correcting the computer-written notes.

Abridge is “not good at picking up on clinical nuance, at picking up on the emotional tone” that can be critical in the mental health field, Boyer said. For example, for manic patients, what’s said is less important than how it’s said, Boyer said, and the software struggles with picking up on those cues.

Note-taking software isn’t the wave of the future; it’s the wave of the present. Hospitals nationwide are implementing it. And researchers are finding some benefits. A year after installation, doctors who used these products the most saved more than half an hour of work daily, according to published in April in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Many doctors love the products where they’re deployed — several to the scribes.

Nevertheless, as Boyer’s example shows, there are persistent questions about the systems’ quality. While Boyer and his colleagues spend time correcting notes, safety researchers worry clinicians might not be diligent about catching errors. That might mean future doctors rely on bad information.

Abridge says it evaluates its scribes at every stage of deployment, including with head-to-head tests against previous versions of the software.

“Following deployment of a model, we monitor clinician edits, star ratings, and free-text feedback from clinician users about note quality,” the company’s director of applied science, Davis Liang, told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News in a statement.

Artificially intelligent scribe software is part of a swarm of AI-powered tools coming to healthcare. Clinicians and patient-safety advocates say government regulations are not well constructed to guard against the threat that the new technology will miss or obscure important details of patients’ conditions, potentially harming them.

“There is currently no safeguard in place” to vet scribe software at the federal level, said Raj Ratwani, a researcher specializing in human factors — that is, how people interact with technology — at MedStar Health, a large hospital system based in Columbia, Maryland.

Ratwani worries that safeguards on health software will relax even further. from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT — the body that regulates electronic health records, the central chronicle of care for patients — could weaken requirements to make medical records understandable, easy to use, and transparent about the use of AI, Ratwani said. And an incomprehensible record could confuse clinicians and lead to errors.

Beginning in the Obama administration, the Health and Human Services Department’s IT office , in which developers try their products on doctors and nurses. Regulators also sought to require more transparency from companies in the surging market in AI tools.

Both of those requirements are axed in the proposed rules from HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s health IT office.

Doctors and other health practitioners consult records for clinical information, such as scribe notes summarizing the history of patient care and lists of drugs and therapies their patients have used. Doctors also input orders for care.

Poor or cluttered design of a records system “might make the list of medications so complicated and confusing that the ordering provider selects the wrong medication,” Ratwani said.

Abridge’s general counsel, Tim Hwang, said the company “broadly supports” the government’s rules as a “necessary modernization” that “accommodates the speed at which AI is evolving.”

The old rules “put way too much burden” on electronic health record systems, said Ryan Howells, a principal at Leavitt Partners, which consults for digital health companies. Leavitt supports the proposals.

Dropping requirements, the administration argues, will result in more innovation and competition. The electronic health record market has steadily consolidated, with hospitals and other clinicians choosing from fewer vendors.

A 2022 study found the top two vendors, Epic and Oracle Health, of the hospital market. And Howells argued too many rules burdened providers looking for good record systems. Federal regulations, Howells said, are “the single biggest inhibitor to true clinical innovation.”

The Trump administration proposal to remove requirements governing records is overbroad, some critics say. It removes regulations intended to keep records secure. It also eliminates privacy protections for sensitive medical data they safeguard, overhauls standards governing the formats data is sent in, and more. The rule may give clinicians “more health IT choices to meet their needs through increased competition,” the government wrote in its proposal.

HHS’ health IT office declined comment, noting the proposal is still winding through the regulatory process. Public comment closed in February.

But most concerning to some — even in the hospital and developer sectors — are proposals to scotch prerequisites to ensure new products are tested on actual users, and to ensure AI tech’s decisions are transparent to doctors and nurses.

“Historically, hospitals and health systems have been challenged by the black box nature of certain AI tools and how the algorithms are developed,” the American Hospital Association’s Jennifer Holloman said. And with more AI tools flooding the market, the association , transparency is even more critical.

Complaints about the safety of electronic health records are long-standing, even for seemingly straightforward tasks. Ratwani likes the example of ordering medication for a given condition.

“The physician is trying to order Tylenol, and the medication list can be so confusing that there’s 30 different versions of Tylenol all at a different dose and for different purposes, when in reality that could be designed much more simply and make it easier for the physician to actually pick the right type of Tylenol that they’re ordering,” he said.

Real-world user testing was intended to simplify record design for doctors. But the administration is ending that requirement in a confusing way, said Leigh Burchell, vice president for policy and public affairs at Altera Digital Health, an EHR developer.

In Burchell’s interpretation of the rules, which refer to “enforcement discretion,” a principle in which the government can opt not to enforce certain rules, companies are still required to do the testing — the part that takes work — but are not mandated to report their results to the feds.

The administration is also ending a Biden-era idea to create AI transparency “model cards.” The concept was that clinicians could explore the data used to train AI tools that advise clinicians with a simple mouse click. But few took advantage of the year-old tool, Trump’s regulators say.

Still, hospitals and doctors are wary of removing it. The tool “provides information on how a predictive or generative AI application was designed, developed, tested, evaluated and should be used. These data are critical to foster trust in AI tools and ensure patient safety,” the AHA wrote in a comment letter to the HHS IT office. The American College of Physicians , saying a “lack of clarity could undermine clinician trust, increase liability expense, and erode the patient-physician relationship.”

Even developers aren’t totally sure about the idea. Burchell said the electronic health records trade group she’s part of had “a lot of different perspectives” on the issue. “Normally, we tend to be a bit more aligned on our responses.”

Still, Burchell’s group thought companies should be transparent about the data AI relies on to make decisions and how it comes up with recommendations.

Evidence for AI tools’ effectiveness or contradictory.

A comparing 11 AI scribes for potential use as a pilot in the Veterans Health Administration found the software performed worse than humans across five simulated scenarios. “Although ambient AI scribes can generate complete notes, the overall quality remains broadly below that of human-authored documentation,” the authors noted, with the omission of information being particularly concerning, given the potential to affect follow-up care.

The vendors in the VA study weren’t identified, for what the authors called “contractual reasons.”

And that’s just one type of AI tool. A wave of them is coming, each needing its own evaluation, to say nothing of tools that have already been installed.

Boyer said he can mostly ignore his AI scribe, for the moment. But he worries that management will design his job around the expected time savings and schedule more patients — meaning he’d need to spend more time both with patients and correcting the software’s errors.

A KP spokesperson, Vincent Staupe, said the company does not require its clinicians to use AI.

“When I am correcting that note, I feel like this is too much work,” Boyer said. “This is definitely making this worse, and this is taking up time that I need to not be spending on correcting an AI tool.”

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/ai-artificial-intelligence-ambient-scribes-ehr-electronic-health-records-hhs-deregulation/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2234764&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2234764
RFK Jr. Swaps Vaccine Talk for Healthy Foods and Reading to Tots in Push To Woo Voters /public-health/rfk-make-america-healthy-again-tour-midterms-ohio-food-head-start-vaccines/ Wed, 13 May 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2237219 TOLEDO, Ohio — The little boy, dressed in a Toy Story sweatshirt, wrapped himself around the nation’s health secretary.

“What do you guys want to be when you grow up?” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. asked a carpet full of preschoolers.

“A dinosaur!” the boy replied, squeezing tighter.

Just weeks ago, Kennedy sat before lawmakers on Capitol Hill and about a dangerous uptick in infectious diseases among American children.

Now, with midterm primaries underway, Kennedy was seated in a toddler-sized chair in Ohio, on a mission to change the subject.

Advised to stay away from the anti-vaccine rhetoric that rocketed him to political stardom, Kennedy has been dispatched by the White House to evangelize about the least controversial — and most popular — parts of his agenda. Republicans hope Kennedy’s “Take Back Your Health” tour will help them hang on to voters, many of whom are deeply .

So there Kennedy was in early May, crisscrossing a strip of northern Ohio that includes one of the few congressional districts that Republicans are confident they can flip in November, rotating through a wardrobe of blue suits and blue jeans.

He inspected the kitchen of a Toledo daycare center, where hundreds of the city’s tiniest residents learn and play through the federally funded Head Start program. Under the careful watch of a surgeon,Ìýand with the machine disconnected,ÌýKennedy brieflyÌýtestedÌýtheÌýteaching consoleÌýof the renowned Cleveland Clinic’s robotic handsÌýwithÌýa live patient splayed open for heart surgery in the room.ÌýAnd he munched on pesticide-free squash blossoms from a 400-acre farm.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. takes a bite of microgreens at a facility indoors.
Kennedy samples microgreens at a Huron, Ohio, farm that rejects chemical use in growing its produce. Reducing the use of chemicals in food production is a goal of many supporters of the Make America Healthy Again movement. (Amanda Seitz/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

“I am dismantling a corrupt system and replacing it with something better, replacing it with something that actually addresses the declining healthy American population,” Kennedy said from the dining room table of a farmhouse during an exclusive interview with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. He pointed to what he views as his biggest accomplishments over the past year: pressuring some companies to remove dyes from certain foods, updating nutritional guidance, and defining ultraprocessed foods.

“People are paying attention to what they eat, and the industry is listening; the industry is changing.”

But hundreds of miles from Washington’s partisan interrogations, Kennedy couldn’t escape the uncomfortable contradictions and consequences of the Trump administration’s policies.

Taboo Budget Cuts

The classrooms of the Clever Bee Academy displayed freshly printed posters featuring Kennedy’s “Eat Real Food” slogan and the redesigned food pyramid.

Kennedy came with an offering, a $30,000 federal grant to help the center upgrade its kitchen and community garden.

Perched in front of staff and parents, he distanced himself from a last year that could have been devastating to many of Clever Bee’s young students, most of whom live in poverty: the proposal to eliminate the $12 billion Head Start program.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reads from a story book to children.
Most of the students at the Toledo childcare center Kennedy visited live in poverty and rely on the federally funded Head Start program, which the Trump administration proposed eliminating last year. (Amanda Seitz/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
A wall of posters. One of the posters says "Eat real food" and shows the redesigned food pyramid.
Classrooms at the childcare center displayed posters featuring the “Eat Real Food” slogan and the redesigned food pyramid. (Amanda Seitz/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

“We were asked to cut our agencies substantially,” Kennedy said. “The two programs that I went to the wall to protect, and find the money somewhere else, was the Indian Health Services, which is always starved for funding, and Head Start.”

The next day, Kennedy stood before goats on a farm in Medina, Ohio, cared for by people sobering up from drug or alcohol misuse at the Hope Recovery Community.

He was there to promise more investments from an administration that has steeply cut staff and budgets over the past year.

Kennedy, who still attends daily Alcoholics Anonymous meetings to cope with a heroin addiction that gripped him for 14 years, said he hopes to replicate the recovery center’s model nationwide, describing it as an “essential role of government to make sure those services are there.”

Broader access to addiction treatment is part of the Trump administration’s newly released . But recovery advocates are skeptical more people will get help, with millions expected to lose health insurance under Trump’s watch because of rising Affordable Care Act premiums and the nearly $900 billion in Medicaid cuts under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Kennedy dismissed those challenges, pointing to a $100 million investment in addiction treatment services, including sober housing, announced this year.

“We’re trying to make it more accessible,” Kennedy told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

Trouble in MAHA Paradise

Rows of beds featuring green and purple microgreens awaited Kennedy at The Chef’s Garden, a Huron, Ohio, farm that rejects chemical use in growing its produce.

The health secretary plucked handfuls and tossed them into his mouth, quickly chewing before a new sample was brought before him.

“We are absolutely thrilled that someone at this level of government cares about how food is grown and where it is coming from,” said Bob Jones Jr., a co-owner of The Chef’s Garden.

Seeing more farmers produce chemical-free leafy greens has topped the wish list of those who support Kennedy and the Make America Healthy Again movement, and many who backed Trump in 2024. But in a move that’s threatening to fracture that constituency, Trump has pushed to protect the production of glyphosate, a weed-killing, potentially cancer-causing chemical commonly sprayed on crops and lawns.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stands next to a woman, as he grabs the stem of microgreens.
Kennedy with his principal deputy chief of staff, Stefanie Spear, as he munches on pesticide-free produce at The Chef’s Garden in Huron, Ohio. (Amanda Seitz/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Though the group MAHA Ohio extols Kennedy’s agenda and endorses candidates aligned with his movement, director Elizabeth Frost acknowledged tensions between MAHA and conservative policies.

The glyphosate issue is an example “where you have the conservative interests to look out for the interests of the industry, and you have your MAHA interest to be cognizant of the downstream health impacts,” said Frost, who volunteered on Kennedy’s presidential campaign.

Some prominent MAHA influencers have suggested that Trump’s White House staffers are stopping Kennedy from implementing more aggressive policies on certain issues, including further limiting vaccine use, a notion he dismissed.

“To say the White House has tied my hands — the only people who could say that are people who haven’t been paying attention for a year,” Kennedy said. “President Trump has let me do more than any HHS secretary in history.”

He added: “The only thing that people in the MAHA movement complain about is the president’s glyphosate order.”

Staying on Message

Republicans consider Kennedy an asset in the recently redrawn northern Ohio congressional district that Democrat Marcy Kaptur has represented for more than 40 years, and which as one of the most competitive in the nation.

Fresh off winning the Republican primary for the district last week, Derek Merrin smiled as he shook hands with Kennedy.

“We discussed protecting Lake Erie, strengthening rural hospitals, and our shared vision to improve food quality,” Merrin later posted on Facebook. “Let’s Make America Healthy Again!”

Still, even with Kennedy under advisement to avoid anti-vaccine rhetoric, the issue found him in Ohio. At a forum in Cleveland, family doctor Patricia Kellner said the best way to prevent hepatitis B is by vaccinating newborns — a recommendation that under Kennedy. She told Kennedy about treating patients with the disease.

“Some of them didn’t know because it can be asymptomatic. Some of them found out when they got liver cancer,” Kellner said. “So why are you opposed to a birth dose of hepatitis B?”

Kennedy responded by suggesting that the hepatitis B vaccine was not safe for babies and was necessary only for certain people.

“Hepatitis B is for high-risk groups like drug addicts or prostitutes, or for promiscuous homosexuals,” he added, eliciting gasps from the crowd.

While the risk of contracting hepatitis B is higher for those who inject drugs or men who have sex with men, the disease can be transmitted in other ways, including through contact with contaminated surfaces or childbirth.

Public health researchers that dropping the universal hepatitis B recommendation will result in hundreds of new infections in children, costing millions of dollars in additional health care costs.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/public-health/rfk-make-america-healthy-again-tour-midterms-ohio-food-head-start-vaccines/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2237219&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2237219
As Ranks of Uninsured Grow, Minnesota’s Hospitals Are Among Least Charitable in Nation /health-care-costs/medical-debt-uninsured-minnesota-hospitals-among-least-charitable/ Mon, 11 May 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2235347 ST. CLOUD, Minn. — Cori Roberts was living in a rented basement four years ago when she was diagnosed with early-stage cervical cancer.

Recently divorced, the former stay-at-home mother had started working again in her mid-40s, taking a human resources job that paid $41,000 a year. Then, despite having insurance, she was hit with more than $8,000 in medical bills.

“I had my car and a basket of clothes,” Roberts recalled. “Medical bills were not something I could have afforded.”

Roberts sought financial assistance from CentraCare, the St. Cloud-based health system that treated her. It’s a nonprofit charity that receives millions of dollars in federal, state, and local tax breaks. In exchange, it’s obliged to offer charity care to patients who can’t afford their medical bills. But Roberts said CentraCare told her she made too much to qualify.

Roberts instead scrimped on groceries and Christmas gifts for her kids and paid off more than $6,000 over two years. Then CentraCare sued her last year because she hadn’t paid off all the debt.

“They’re supposed to be a nonprofit,” Roberts said. “It’s like, ‘Come on!’”

CentraCare earmarks a tiny fraction of its budget for helping patients with medical bills they can’t pay, but it’s not alone, a Minnesota Star Tribune-Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News investigation found.

Minnesota’s hospitals and health systems are among the least charitable in the country, the investigation found, providing less financial aid as a percentage of their operating budgets on average than hospitals in almost every other state, including Illinois, Iowa, Nevada, and Texas.

The investigation drew on a detailed review of every hospital charity care program in the state, an analysis of five years of hospital financial data, and dozens of interviews with patients, hospital executives, and state officials.

Nationally, hospitals spend an average of about 2.4% of their operating budgets on charity care, according to federal hospital data compiled by Hossein Zare, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University. Minnesota hospitals spend about a third of that, on average.

Charity care remains minimal at most Minnesota hospitals (Column Chart)

Some spend considerably less. Of Minnesota’s 123 general hospitals, 62 devoted less than 0.5% of their operating budgets to charity care from 2020 through 2024, the Star Tribune-Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News investigation found.

“The system is not working,” said Erin Hartung, director of legal services at Cancer Legal Care, a Minnesota nonprofit that helps patients with medical debt and other financial challenges. “And the burden is falling hardest on the people who are least able to bear it.”

CentraCare’s flagship St. Cloud Hospital spent less than 0.25%, according to the analysis. That works out to $25 in patient aid for every $10,000 spent on hospital operations.

Charity care will become even more vital in coming years as Minnesotans lose health coverage or can’t afford rising copays and deductibles. The state’s uninsured rate rose sharply last year, since 2017, and it’s expected to increase further as budget cuts pushed by President Donald Trump force states to pare Medicaid and other safety net programs. Charity care is also critical to many people with health insurance who can’t afford their bills.

Hospital officials say it’s unfair to expect them to solve this affordability problem when many of their facilities are financially strained. “No amount of charity care from hospitals will ever fully meet the needs of uninsured or underinsured Minnesotans. The need is simply too great,” Minnesota Hospital Association spokesperson Tim Nelson said in a statement.

But state Attorney General Keith Ellison said hospitals have a duty to boost charitable help for all needy patients in exchange for the tax breaks they receive.

“There is a benefit you get from being a nonprofit hospital in the state of Minnesota,” he said. “But do the people get the benefit?”

Several small Minnesota hospitals give financial aid to fewer than two dozen patients a year. Mahnomen Health Center, which recently converted to a rural emergency center, didn’t provide any charity care in eight years, despite serving one of Minnesota’s . Other hospitals serving large low-income populations were among those providing the least charity care, the analysis found.

Several factors help explain why Minnesota hospitals provide so little financial aid. For one, job-based insurance and an expanded Medicaid program offer broad coverage. Hospitals in states with less government assistance and more uninsured people typically spend more on charity care.

But Minnesota patients also face significant barriers accessing financial aid at many hospitals, including inconsistent eligibility standards and extensive applications, the Star Tribune-Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News investigation found.

To qualify at many hospitals, patients must submit detailed personal information, including bank statements, retirement accounts, mortgage documents, and estimates of other assets such as cars, homes, or livestock.

And because Minnesota has not standardized the criteria for charity care, patients might receive aid at one hospital but not another. The investigation found that some hospitals give free care to patients with an annual household income of $47,000, while others cap it at about $15,000.

Had Roberts driven 30 miles east to Princeton or 35 miles north to Little Falls, she would have found medical providers with more generous financial aid policies than CentraCare. But she didn’t know to look.

Roberts, now 49, has remarried and lives in a split-level home in St. Cloud decorated with inspirational plaques such as “Faith, Family, Friends.” CentraCare recently dropped the lawsuit against her, but only after she took out a loan against her retirement plan to pay off the medical debt. “It just feels very unfair,” she said.

A hand holds at least four sheets of paper printed with the date and amounts of payments. There are 10 payments listed on the clearest page.
Roberts thumbs through copies of her payment records at home. (Anthony Soufflé/The Minnesota Star Tribune)
The Emergency Department entrance to a hospital.
CentraCare’s flagship hospital in St. Cloud earmarks only a fraction of its budget for helping patients who can’t pay their medical bills. (Anthony Soufflé/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

‘We Have To Defend Being Paid’

CentraCare spokesperson Karna Fronden said medical privacy laws prevented her from discussing Roberts’ case. She also declined interview requests about the health system’s charity care spending.

In a statement, Fronden said CentraCare provides assistance in addition to charity care, such as helping enroll patients in insurance. “This helps provide broader, longer-term protection for patients,” she said.

Other hospital leaders said they serve their communities in ways besides forgiving medical bills, including training doctors and nurses and preserving money-losing services such as obstetrics and mental health care.

“Rural hospitals like ours are often portrayed as though we are sitting on piles of cash and simply choosing not to spend it on charity care. That is far from the reality,” said Robert Pastor, chief executive of Rainy Lake Medical Center in International Falls.

“We are the second- or third-largest employer in town, running on razor-thin margins while navigating escalating labor and supply costs and routine underpayment by public programs,” Pastor said. “Meanwhile, many health insurers post billions in profits.”

Hospitals typically are paid less for care provided to Medicare and Medicaid patients. More than 80% of Rainy Lake’s patients are on one of those government programs.

Minnesota hospitals collectively write off about $200 million of what’s deemed bad debt every year after trying unsuccessfully to collect unpaid bills from patients through calls, letters, and even lawsuits. By comparison, they devote about $163 million annually to charity care, state figures show. In 2024, hospitals collectively posted $2.4 billion in net income.

“I feel like I’m put in the position, being the hospital, where we have to defend being paid,” said Patti Banks, the head of Ely-Bloomenson Community Hospital and a senior Minnesota Hospital Association board member.

Some hospitals face intense financial pressures. Thirty-one have lost money on operations in four of the past eight years. HCMC in Minneapolis — the state’s largest safety net hospital, which provides the most charity care — is losing so much money that, without additional taxpayer support, .

But larger health systems such as Mayo Clinic, Essentia Health, and Sanford Health have remained financially sound. And the operating margins at most CentraCare hospitals exceeded 10% in 2024, state data shows.

Medical Debt’s High Toll

Abby Kelley-Hands is a special education coordinator in St. Paul with a rare immune condition that causes frequent, severe allergic reactions. She says that after she lost health coverage for a month because of an insurance snafu a few years ago, she was hit with more than $20,000 in bills from Mayo Clinic and denied financial aid. (Jeff Wheeler/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

Nationwide, health care debt — much of it from hospitals — burdens an estimated 100 million people, increasing their stress and even leading to premature deaths, .

Abby Kelley-Hands, a special education coordinator in St. Paul, has a rare immune condition that causes frequent, severe allergic reactions. Her illness can be controlled only with a costly drug, which a Mayo Clinic doctor prescribed.

When Kelley-Hands briefly lost health coverage in 2021 in an insurance mix-up, she was hit with more than $20,000 in bills. And although she and her husband earned less than $100,000 a year, Kelley-Hands said Mayo denied her financial assistance because she earned too much.

“I was in tears,” Kelley-Hands said. “It was so scary and so hard. And it causes all of this additional stress, which then makes you sicker and less able to even figure things out.”

Kelley-Hands and her husband sold a car and agreed to a payment plan before Mayo would resume her treatment, she said. Her husband now bikes 5 miles to work. They have no dishwasher. And she and her husband took a honeymoon only last fall, seven years after their wedding. “We live very simply,” she said.

Mayo spokesperson Kristyn Jacobson declined to discuss Kelley-Hands’ case.

In 2024, state lawmakers from denying care to patients with outstanding debt. And in 2025, Attorney General Ellison reached an agreement with Mayo to overhaul its charity care program after an investigation found the multibillion-dollar institution was systematically discouraging patients from applying.

After the state began investigating Mayo, the system’s , topping 1.5% of operating expenses in 2024.

‘Optimized To Get Payment’

Complying with a 2023 , Minnesota hospitals now post their financial aid policies online, although several, including CCM Health in Montevideo and Northfield Hospital, did so only after being contacted by the Star Tribune or Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

But many hospitals make financial aid more difficult to find than information about paying bills, said Jared Walker, founder of Dollar For, a nonprofit that helps patients nationally apply for charity care.

“Hospitals have optimized to get payment,” he said. “If you want to get on a payment plan, if you want to get on a credit card, it’s so easy.”

Glacial Ridge Health System in Glenwood posts a “Bill Pay” tab at the . But it takes several clicks to find the hospital’s financial assistance plan. The information couldn’t be found on the site searching for “charity care” or “financial assistance.” The public hospital 130 miles northwest of Minneapolis devoted less than 0.7% of its operating budget to charity care from 2019 to 2024.

Patients in interviews frequently said they weren’t told about charity care.

Joe Robling, 29, was treated at St. Francis Regional Medical Center in Shakopee for a broken pelvis and fractured spine after a 2024 motorcycle accident. His mother, Janet, who helped him navigate the bills, said the hospital never informed him about financial aid.

“They didn’t offer any of that,” she said.

Robling, a construction worker in Henderson, was between jobs and uninsured. “He had zippo,” Janet Robling said. “What he had in reserves were all depleted.”

The Allina Health-affiliated hospital billed him more than $19,000, the Roblings said.

An internet ad connected the family to Dollar For, which helped Robling qualify for charity care five months after his accident.

Allina spokesperson Jennifer Steingas declined to comment on the case, citing medical privacy restrictions, but said the health system has since reached out to the family.

In another case, M Health Fairview’s University of Minnesota Medical Center didn’t offer financial aid to an unemployed and uninsured man from Idaho while he was hospitalized for two months for psychiatric care and amassed $150,000 in bills.

Attorney Margaret Henehan, who represented the man, said the hospital instead offered him a two-year payment plan at $6,500 a month. “He had no income, which he told Fairview,” Henehan said.

The man, who is not identified because of his mental health condition, eventually received charity care after his sister, a doctor, reached out to Henehan for help.

Aimee Jordan, a Fairview spokesperson, said she couldn’t comment on the case because of patient privacy laws, but she said patients who are offered payment plans can always apply for charity care, even after a hospitalization.

A large brick building with large white letters at its top reading "University of Minnesota Medical Center Fairview"
M Health Fairview University of Minnesota Medical Center in Minneapolis, pictured in March 2013. (Joel Koyama/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

A Maze of Standards

State law prohibits hospitals from making “unreasonable” demands of patients when they apply for charity care. But the law sets few specific standards.

The result is a dizzying array of policies, including 11 income thresholds used by Minnesota hospitals to determine whether patients qualify for free care, the Minnesota Star-Tribune-Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News review found.

HCMC parent company in Minneapolis and Olmsted Medical Center in Rochester offer the highest threshold for free care, at — almost $48,000 a year for an individual.

Sometimes standards vary even between neighboring hospitals. Madelia Health in south-central Minnesota to patients who make less than twice the federal poverty level. About 13 miles away at Mayo’s hospital in St. James, can qualify for aid.

Most hospitals limit charity care to those in poverty (Bar Chart)

To determine eligibility, some Minnesota hospitals consider only income, but most demand information about patients’ bank accounts as well. More than two-thirds require even more information, including the value of retirement accounts, life insurance policies, property, and vehicles. Madelia’s “may be required to sell recreational vehicles.”

Stringent requirements ensure that limited resources go to patients who need them, said Travis Olsen, chief executive of Hendricks Community Hospital, near the South Dakota border. “We don’t feel it’s fair for someone with lower annual income but yet owns numerous acres of land, debt-free, to be able to qualify for charity care.”

In addition to copies of tax returns, W-2 forms, pay stubs, and bank statements, 53 questions about their finances. These include questions about the make, model, and value of vehicles; the current market value of farm equipment, livestock, and land; and the purchase price and square footage of homes.

Other hospital applications ask patients to detail their monthly spending on food, utilities, and other medical bills.

Olsen said community pressure is more of a deterrent to applying for aid than the application: “People are too proud to pick up an application. We all know each other.”

But Walker at Dollar For said the biggest barrier is complexity. “The drop-off rates are much higher the more questions you ask and the more documentation you have to provide,” he said.

Arleen Mullenax had a cancerous tumor removed from her neck at Mayo in Rochester. Assembling her aid application and following up with the hospital billing department amid her “cancer fog” was almost more than she could take, she said.

“I knew as a former office manager I had to stay on top of it,” she said. “But it was the most daunting thing I had to do as a patient.”

The Mayo Clinic campus in Rochester, Minnesota. Last year, the multibillion-dollar institution overhauled its charity care program after an investigation found it was systematically discouraging patients from applying. (Aaron Lavinsky/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

Fixing the System

Ellison and several state lawmakers say Minnesota’s hospitals should make it simpler for patients to access charity care.

They’ve called for, among other things, common eligibility standards and a standard application across hospitals. New York and Maryland already have both.

“Eliminating as many barriers as possible for people is really important,” said state Sen. Liz Boldon, who also said she hopes lawmakers can enact these standards next session.

The Minnesota Hospital Association has opposed standardizing financial assistance, saying hospital boards are in the best position to assess the need for charity care in their communities. “Adding mandates for providers across the state will not close that gap, and will only increase bureaucratic and procedural barriers to patient care,” spokesperson Nelson said.

Ellison also has pushed to require hospitals to use a process that automatically screens and qualifies low-income patients for financial aid without requiring an application.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison says Minnesota hospitals should provide more financial assistance to patients to justify their tax-exempt status. (Alex Kormann/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

Some hospital systems, including South Dakota-based Sanford Health, already use software that checks patients’ eligibility based on information such as their credit history, said Nick Olson, the system’s chief financial officer. At Sanford Health’s 10 hospitals in Minnesota, about a quarter of the patients who receive financial aid get it this way, he said.

Nearly all Sanford hospitals devote more than 1% of their operating expenditures to charity care — higher than most hospitals in the state.

Screening software can be costly. Several executives at small Minnesota hospitals said they can’t afford it. But there are other options. In California, Los Angeles County is developing a public system to allow hospitals to quickly assess patients’ eligibility so they don’t have to buy a system themselves.

Other states — including Texas and Nevada — have laws requiring hospitals to provide minimum amounts of charity care.

Back in St. Cloud, Roberts said that when she drives past CentraCare’s $200 million expansion at its Plaza campus in St. Cloud, she wonders why Minnesota hospitals don’t live up to higher standards themselves.

“They have all the money,” she said. “But they can’t grant a good person some grace?”

Minnesota Star Tribune staff writers Bill Lukitsch and Victor Stefanescu contributed to this report.

Roberts incurred more than $8,000 in medical bills after she was diagnosed at CentraCare with early-stage cervical cancer. She says the health system told her she made too much — about $41,000 a year — to qualify for financial aid. (Anthony Soufflé/The Minnesota Star Tribune)
Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/medical-debt-uninsured-minnesota-hospitals-among-least-charitable/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2235347&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2235347
The Make America Healthy Again Movement Comes for Hospital Food /health-industry/the-week-in-brief-maha-movement-hospital-food/ Fri, 08 May 2026 18:30:00 +0000 /?p=2235872&preview=true&preview_id=2235872 Hospital food rarely draws rave reviews. But efforts by the Trump administration to get hospitals to ditch unhealthy fare are facing criticism for going too far.Ìý

The Department of Health and Human Services to hospitals asking them to align their food purchases with the administration’s 2025-30 dietary guidelines to ensure continued eligibility for Medicaid and Medicare payments. “We commend the many hospitals who have made commitments to improve their food offerings, and expect every hospital system to do so,” HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said.Ìý

Top Kennedy adviser Calley Means took to social media to explain the initiative, urging the public to report hospitals that don’t comply with the guidance. The comment included a link to an HHS webpage with a toll-free number for reporting complaints typically used for medical bills.

The warnings drew sharp rebukes from critics who said the directive fails to consider that the specific dietary needs of patients are often different from those of the rest of the population.Ìý

“It’s always a struggle to get people to eat. Losing weight in the hospital raises the risk of mortality,” said Mary Talley Bowden, a sleep medicine specialist, who has with Make America Healthy Again causes but on X, posting: “Give me a break Calley. A hospital snitch line for soda?”Ìý

“It’s a little tyrannical,” she said in an interview.

HHS can withhold or threaten federal funding if hospitals violate mandatory minimum health and safety standards set by the agency. The standards stipulate that hospitals must protect patient privacy, for example, and uphold infection control. 

The standards do address hospital food, but they don’t explicitly refer to the 2025-30 established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.Ìý

Rather, the standards require that “individual patient nutritional needs must be met in accordance with recognized dietary practices,” and list other requirements for hospitals, such as having access to a qualified dietitian.Ìý

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “doesn’t have a legal basis to do this, but hospitals and nursing homes can’t afford to ignore it altogether because of what it signals about potential enforcement action,” said Nicholas Bagley, a University of Michigan law professor.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/the-week-in-brief-maha-movement-hospital-food/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2235872&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2235872
Listen: A Federal Agency Is After Workers’ Health Data, and Critics Are Alarmed /health-industry/wamu-health-hub-opm-federal-worker-unredacted-medical-records-hipaa-audio/ Fri, 08 May 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2232956&preview=true&preview_id=2232956

Privacy between doctors and patients is . But the Trump administration is, in effect, trying to peek into the exam room. The Office of Personnel Management is seeking unredacted federal worker health data from insurers. The unusual request, which would give the government detailed personal and health information, alarmed health policy and legal experts, lawmakers, and insurance executives.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News Washington health policy reporter Amanda Seitz appeared on WAMU’s Health Hub on April 29 to discuss why the government’s request has many worried about how this personal information would be handled.


Maia Rosenfeld contributed to this report.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/wamu-health-hub-opm-federal-worker-unredacted-medical-records-hipaa-audio/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2232956&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2232956
Abortion Pill Politics /podcast/what-the-health-445-abortion-pill-mifepristone-makary-may-7-2026/ Thu, 07 May 2026 18:29:22 +0000 /?p=2235382&post_type=podcast&preview_id=2235382 The Host
Julie Rovner photo
Julie Rovner Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News Read Julie's stories. Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ weekly health policy news podcast, "What the Health?" A noted expert on health policy issues, Julie is the author of the critically praised reference book "Health Care Politics and Policy A to Z," now in its third edition.

A decision Friday night by a federal appeals court not only has raised new questions about the continued availability of the abortion pill mifepristone but has also thrust the abortion issue back into the spotlight. That’s something the Trump administration had hoped to avoid during the midterm elections.

Meanwhile, this week Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary, the agency’s scientists, and President Donald Trump tussled over whether to approve fruit-flavored vapes, which might help adults quit smoking but also might attract youths to vaping.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, Jessie Hellmann of CQ Roll Call, Shefali Luthra of The 19th, and Sandhya Raman of Bloomberg Law.

Panelists

Jessie Hellmann photo
Jessie Hellmann CQ Roll Call
Shefali Luthra photo
Shefali Luthra The 19th
Sandhya Raman photo
Sandhya Raman Bloomberg Law

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

  • It is unclear whether the abortion pill mifepristone will continue to be available through telehealth prescribing — currently the way more than a quarter of all abortions in the U.S. are obtained. The Supreme Court this week temporarily restored access after a lower court blocked it, but it remains to be seen what the high court will do next. The justices could decide to hear the case, potentially reviving abortion as a campaign issue in the midterm elections. Regardless, the case has the power to undermine not only abortion access, even in states where it is legal, but also the pharmaceutical industry’s ability to develop new drugs.
  • Makary’s job as FDA commissioner is reportedly in limbo, now over flavored vape products, after Trump reportedly pressured Makary to clear them through agency approval. Trump talked on the campaign trail about preserving the vapes — considered by some a useful smoking cessation tool — yet that perspective runs afoul of public health concerns about the risk to children of keeping fruit-flavored tobacco products on the market.
  • Also, the White House pulled Casey Means’ nomination to become U.S. surgeon general, replacing her with Nicole Saphier, a radiologist and commentator who has criticized Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s policies. Saphier is Trump’s third nominee for the post.
  • And the United States, having pulled out of the World Health Organization under Trump’s leadership, finds itself sidelined as the global body responds to a cruise ship with a deadly hantavirus outbreak, with potentially serious ramifications for public health.

Also this week, Rovner interviews Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ Andrew Jones, who wrote the latest “Bill of the Month” feature, about an emergency room bill for a visit that wasn’t an emergency — but could have been.

Plus, for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too: 

Julie Rovner: Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ “HHS’ Healthy Food Agenda Puts Hospitals on Notice About Patients’ Meals,” by Stephanie Armour.

Shefali Luthra: ProPublica’s “,” by Duaa Eldeib.

Sandhya Raman: The Cut’s “,” by Juno DeMelo.

Jessie Hellmann: Nature’s “,” by Max Kozlov, Alexandra Witze, and Dan Garisto.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

  • The Wall Street Journal’s “,” by Philip Wegmann, Liz Essley Whyte, and Jennifer Calfas.
  • The New York Times’ “,” by Christina Jewett.
  • The New York Times’ “,” by Reed Abelson and Margot Sanger-Katz.
  • CNN’s “,” by Andrew Kaczynski and Meg Tirrell.
click to open the transcript Transcript: Abortion Pill Politics

[Editor’s note: This transcript was generated using both transcription software and a human’s light touch. It has been edited for style and clarity.] 

Julie Rovner: Hello, from Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and WAMU Public Radio in Washington, D.C. Welcome to What the Health? I’m Julie Rovner, chief Washington correspondent for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, and, as always, I’m joined by some of the best and smartest health reporters covering Washington. We’re taping this week on Thursday, May 7, at 10:30 a.m. As always, news happens fast, and things might have changed by the time you hear this. So here we go. 

Today, we are joined via video conference by Shefali Luthra of The 19th. 

Shefali Luthra: Hello. 

Rovner: Sandhya Raman of Bloomberg Law. 

Sandhya Raman: Good morning, everyone. 

Rovner: And Jessie Hellmann of CQ Roll Call. 

Jessie Hellmann: Thanks for having me. 

Rovner: Later in this episode, we’ll have my interview with Andrew Jones, who reported and wrote the latest KFF Health News “Bill of the Month,” about an emergency room bill for what turned out not to be an emergency but could have been. But first, as always, this week’s news. 

Let’s start this week with the continuing fight over the abortion pill mifepristone. Last month, it appeared that the court fight over the pill was put on the back burner. That was after the Trump administration, to the consternation of abortion opponents, asked a federal district court judge to postpone proceedings while it finished a new safety review of the pill by the Food and Drug Administration. Well, the state of Louisiana, which had brought the suit to roll back the pill’s availability, wasn’t satisfied with that, and appealed the delay to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Last Friday, right before dinner, a three-judge appeals court panel ruled in favor of Louisiana and basically ordered a rollback of abortion pill availability to the rules that were in place before 2021. That’s when doctors had to literally hand the pill to patients, meaning no telehealth and no pharmacy distribution. Shefali, you’re one of our abortion experts. Pick up the story from there. What happened over the weekend, and where are we now? 

Luthra: Over the weekend, there was a lot of confusion. I spent a lot of time talking to abortion providers and people who track abortion law quite closely. And providers were prepared to switch regimens, if they had to, to change to what’s misoprostol-only â€” using larger doses of the other drug in medication abortions, which is safe, is effective â€” is less safe, less effective? â€” but still good, though not gold standard. Meanwhile, we saw an appeal from the manufacturers of medication abortion to the Supreme Court. They also saw a stay from the 5th Circuit. While they might get some more time to figure things out, they never heard from the 5th Circuit. But then, on Monday, the Supreme Court weighed in and said, We are blocking this 5th Circuit ruling for a week. You have a few days â€” so, until Thursday, today actually â€” to submit arguments from both sides. And then, by the end of the day Monday, they are supposed to say whether this stay will be extended, whether they will be ruling, whether they might take up this case. And there’s a lot that could happen, right? They could try and make a ruling now, they could send this back to the lower courts. They could say, We want to hear arguments before this term ends, which would be at the end of June. They could say, We want to hear arguments on this in the fall, right before the midterm elections. But what they do could have real significance for whether mifepristone is available by telehealth, and, as a result, how people in states with abortion bans â€” but also where abortion is legal â€” get abortions. Because telehealth abortion is increasingly popular. One in 4 abortions are done by telehealth. About half of those are for people in states with bans, but half of them are for people in states where abortion is legal and protected. But going to a clinic and getting a pill handed to you is simply much more inconvenient and often impractical or not really possible, compared to having it mailed to you â€” if you have child care, if you can’t get off work, if you live really far from a clinic. And so access to this gold-standard regimen of abortion care is now possibly going to be very much in limbo for all these people across the country. 

I don’t know if we have seen much to indicate that this is going to be a campaign issue. We haven’t really heard as much chatter from Democrats as one might expect. But it is possible that if this becomes more of a live issue, if the Supreme Court makes those restrictions more permanent, or if they, in fact, do take this case up in a manner of timing that would be very influential, that this could, in fact, become a meaningful campaign issue, because most voters don’t like abortion restrictions, especially national ones. 

Rovner: Yeah, among the people who are sort of put in a difficult situation here is the Trump administration. The anti-abortion movement clearly wants more action on this issue. Trump was pretty clear, even on the campaign trail in 2024, that he doesn’t want to further restrict abortion; he’s already getting hammered for not following through on his promise to make in vitro fertilization more available. And now anti-abortion groups are planning to put not just money but their large volunteer power up against those candidates who won’t vow to take more aggressive federal action. How angry are they? And what impact could that have on the midterms, where Republicans are already on defense? 

Luthra: They are furious with the Trump administration. I mean, you have the head of SBA Pro-Life America : Trump is the problem. That’s quite blatant for what is ostensibly a close ally to the White House, an organization that has tried to influence policy, that has hoped for those influences to be translated into actual policy. It’s clear that they’ve given up on that. And many of them were very, very frustrated that the administration took on this purported review of mifepristone and kept saying, We will have more information for you later, probably after the elections. And that they, in fact, argued against Louisiana in the courts, and they defended their policy of having mifepristone available for now. And so I think what you’re seeing politically is this real possibility of schisms in the conservative movement. The people who oppose abortion and, right, are an important part of that base, but also, Trump may be unpopular nationally, but he still carries a lot of influence in a large part of the Republican Party. We just saw that in the primaries in Indiana this week. And so I think we really don’t know who wins. Do anti-abortion voters simply stay home? Do they say, Well, this is still our best option. It’s the Republican Party. And also, in the meantime, how much does the movement start thinking instead about trying to pick a possible successor to Trump? And a lot of them really are focusing now on the midterms, but also on 2028. And so do they just say, Well, we’re done with thisWe’re not going to win and move on. Or is there something that they might be able to get if they keep threatening to withhold money and voter influence? Open question. I think we’ll see. 

Rovner: Jessie, Sandhya, you guys are on the Hill. I mean, you know, there’s been a lot written this week: Oh, Democrats haven’t said anything about this. I think this came as a bit of a surprise. I think we, most of us, thought that this was going to be kind of back-burnered until after the election. Do you see Democrats picking this up and running with it at some point? It has, it has been, it’s been an effective political issue, but maybe not so much in terms of votes, right?  

Hellmann: I don’t know if Democrats really saw much gain from focusing on abortion in the last round of elections, which feels like such a weird way to talk about it. But they might think that other campaign issues, like the affordability issue, healthcare costs, more generally, might be more of an issue that they want to hit on â€¦ especially after the ACA tax credits expired. But we might see more from them as this issue continues to play out in the courts. 

Rovner: And I’m just wondering if, you know, if Republicans start â€¦ I mean, we’ve seen people like Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the HELP [Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions] Committee, who’s been very outspoken, you know, and has long anti-abortion bona fides, I mean, going back pretty much his whole career. But it’s interesting that he’s been hammering on this. I’ve seen Republicans on the Hill hammering on this in a way that separates them from the president, which is a little bit surprising. It makes me wonder if Democrats are going to try to exploit that difference or not, or if they can figure out how, or if just, as you say, affordability is so much a bigger issue right now. 

Hellmann: I think the Bill Cassidy race is really interesting. He’s in a heated primary against Julia Letlow, and he seems to think that this mifepristone issue is going to be, like, a wedge issue in that race. He’s the chairman of the HELP Committee, so he spends so much time talking about this. Even when HHS [Department of Health and Human Services] Secretary RFK [Robert F. Kennedy] Jr. was on the Hill a few weeks ago, this is one of the first things that he asked him about, and he didn’t even get to the vaccine issue until later. But I think that maybe in those more conservative primaries, it could be an issue. But then it’ll be interesting to see how he’ll talk about it later on, if he does win that primary. 

Luthra: I think one thing to note about the Cassidy primary that I’m really surprised by â€” and I think speaks to the complicated state of things, and maybe the fact that people thought this was a resolved issue â€” is he talks about it a lot on the Hill. If you go through his TV ads that he is running in this very close primary, they’re not about abortion. He has not had a single TV ad about abortion, and it is largely instead about trying to assert his bona fides as a true partner to Donald Trump. And I think that’s really interesting because, again, as we’ve discussed, Trump is not really interested in this issue, and Louisiana primary voters certainly are. But there’s a calculation, right? Do you want to situate yourself as the partner to the president, or do you want to talk about abortion? And maybe you can do both, but maybe it’s actually really difficult to do both of those things. 

Rovner: Well, one thing I haven’t seen mentioned in this latest round of debate over abortion is the potential impact on the rest of the drug industry. Once again, justices are being asked to step in and override the presumably evidence-based findings of the Food and Drug Administration. The last time we got this close to a Supreme Court ruling on an FDA approval of mifepristone was in 2024, when the justices were able to punt by pointing out that the doctors group that brought the suit didn’t have standing. But it doesn’t look like that’s as viable an out this time, because it’s the state that’s suing. Why haven’t we heard more from drugmakers, who we know are freaking out about not being able to rely on FDA decisions to make, you know, business plans worth billions of dollars? 

Raman: I think we will. I think it really depends on what we see in the next week, in terms of is this getting escalated, that the Supreme Court would hold arguments, or where we are? If I think back to 2024, I feel like a lot of more of the involvement from the pharmaceutical industry â€” when they were speaking out more, holding briefings, maybe submitting those briefs â€” was when we got to the Supreme Court stage. So I think it’s a matter of time. And right now it’s, you know, kind of figuring out their options and what they’re going to do. But a ruling could have a huge impact on so many other drugs. So I doubt that they’d be quiet as we get further along. 

Rovner: Yes, I would expect, I mean, we’re going to see a flurry of briefs by the end of the day today, and I would expect that the drug industry would be among those who are going to be filing those briefs. So we will know more. 

Luthra: In fact, we actually already have a brief from PhRMA [. 

Rovner: Oh good. 

Luthra: It came in either last night or this morning, and it says exactly what you’d say, that they are concerned that pharmaceutical development will suffer if Louisiana wins, that this is really problematic for drug research and development. And we are seeing some op-eds from biotech CEOs, etc., in places like Stat just highlighting that they are very concerned about the ramifications for the industry. So I think so I’m just totally right, like, as this case picks up steam, that chorus will get louder and louder, because this is just too consequential for the industry to not talk about. 

Rovner: Right, this is about much, much more than abortion. All right. Well, speaking of the FDA, Commissioner Marty Makary’s job is, quote, “on thin ice” — that was, were the exact words used in stories from Bloomberg, NOTUS, and The Wall Street Journal, all in the past few days. On the one hand, we’ve heard these rumors before, as things at FDA have been chaotic, to say the least, but this week’s flurry of rumors appears to be over Makary’s overruling of FDA scientists who recommended approval of mango- and blueberry-flavored vapes. Makary was reportedly concerned about attracting children to vaping by approving fruit flavors. This has been a long-standing argument. While the scientists who recommended approval wanted to help adults actually quit smoking, which is demonstrably worse for their health than vaping. As it turns out, the flavored vapes were approved on Tuesday, apparently after President Trump intervened personally by calling Makary. So this raises two questions. First, is this more politicization of FDA policy? It certainly looks like it, even if the ultimate decision here was what the FDA scientists actually wanted. 

Raman: I mean, if you look back to when President Trump was on the campaign trail, he did talk about wanting to save vaping and how that was a big issue for certain voters and stuff. So it has been something that’s been in the back burner. These kind of approvals and authorizations take a very long time. And they’ve, you know, a lot of folks have been complaining for a long time about how long some of these things take. They can be backlogged for years. And we had very different opinions with some of the appointees during the Biden administration about how to handle flavored nicotine and tobacco products. I do think that the short turnaround between some of those conversations over the weekend and then suddenly this getting authorized is a little unusual, but it’s kind of hard to say where they were in the process before that, if they were dotting the i’s, crossing the t’s, or if this shoved things forward a lot more. So it’s hard to tell, but I think it really does build into your earlier point about how folks are just not sure for how long that he remains as FDA commissioner. I mean, there have been things building for months, but it really has heated up in the last couple weeks or so. And I think something that raises for me there is just if he does get out at some point soon, that would make another thing that the Senate has to get through and, you know, find agreement on which could get even more complicated if, depending on what happens with â€¦ 

Rovner: â€¦ with the abortion case. 

Raman: Yeah, and Cassidy’s race! 

Rovner: Oh, Cassidy’s primary! That’s right. Yes. 

Raman: Yeah. So I think there’s a lot of interconnected things that will be really interesting to watch here as this plays out. 

Rovner: Well, there’s also, before we get off of this, there’s a broader question here about harm reduction. Sandhya, we just talked about this a few weeks ago, after the federal government said it would stop paying for test strips to detect fentanyl and other potentially fatal substances added to illicit drugs. So harm reduction is bad when it comes to fentanyl strips, but good for flavored vapes? 

Raman: I think we’ve had a lot of conflicting messaging on this. Flavored vapes, I guess, are a little bit more complicated, because you could be an adult and just go straight into flavored vapes, and it is a little bit more complicated than that. 

Rovner: And it is a legal product. 

Raman: Yes, it is a legal product. You know, it’s regulated very differently. But I think, since you did bring up harm reduction, the interesting thing there that has been happening is just that there’s been so much differences of opinion, despite that guidance. You know, we had the Office of National Drug Control Policy this week put out their drug control strategy plan for the year, and that had language in favor of the testing strip. So we’ve had a lot of conflicting messages between different parts of the administration over the same issue, which is really confusing folks on the ground. 

Rovner: It is. Well, in other news from the FDA this week,  that the agency blocked the publication of several studies that found very few serious side effects from vaccines for covid-19 and shingles. This included top FDA officials ordering the withdrawal of studies that had already been accepted by medical journals. This is far from the first that we’ve heard of this sort of thing from the FDA and from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But it does increase the doubts that this administration is, quote, “following the science,” does it not? 

Raman: I mean, we saw the same kind of reaction in terms of why this happened from HHS, you know, saying that the studies were making really broad claims, and they were not supported by whatever the underlying data that they had was. I think that this and the CDC vaccine study getting pulled are both highly unusual, but the fact that they’re both happening in a short period of time, you know, kind of increases that. I think it’ll be interesting, you know, we saw with the CDC study that it ended up getting leaked, and then people were able to look at it and make their own conclusions. What happens with this? But having these studies about vaccine efficacy being pulled when the administration is trying to pull back on their vaccine messaging is, like, a less salient issue for the midterms is interesting. So I’m curious what happens next there. 

Rovner: Yeah, me too. OK, we’re going to take a quick break. We will be right back. 

OK, we’re back, and of course, we have more personnel news. Last Thursday, just after we taped, thank you very much, President Trump pulled the nomination of Casey Means to become the next surgeon general after it had become clear she did not have the votes to even move out of committee. In her place, the president nominated Dr. Nicole Saphier, a Fox News contributor who did finish her medical residency and is a practicing radiologist specializing in breast imaging, and â€” apparently this is now a requirement for a high job at the Department of Health and Human Services â€” she’s a podcast host. Just this week, there’s been a  that were critical of some of the health stances taken by President Trump and HHS Secretary RFK Jr. But I imagine that might actually help her nomination, which has generally been pretty well received, by making her look like she’s at least as interested in accurate medical advice as she is in currying favor. Or am I misreading this? 

Raman: I don’t know that the tweets are going to have a huge effect either way, when there’s so many other things going on. And I feel like it’s so interesting that her book from, you know, long before this administration, was called Make America Healthy Again. So it seems like if anyone is committed to this movement, it would be someone with a book titled that six years ago. 

Rovner: Although she’s not really a MAHA person, right? 

Raman: Yeah, yeah. But it just is such a funny coincidence. But I think that right after they pulled the Means nomination, it was interesting â€” kind of goes back to what Jessie said was that â€” we had the president; we had her brother, Calley Means; and then we had Secretary Kennedy as well digging in on Cassidy and blaming him for that nomination falling through. But they did back the new nominee. So it’s interesting what is going to happen there. But just how political just getting this across is, even though there weren’t other votes in the Senate to get Casey across the finish line. 

Rovner: Yeah. Shefali, you were going to add something? 

Luthra: Oh, I just think that the tweets, I mean, they are really striking, and I think you’ve hit on something that is a fascinating tension. This is someone who has criticized the president’s talking points around Tylenol in pregnancy; who has said that, you know, maybe there is not a link between Tylenol and pregnancy and autism. Maybe I don’t want to be told just tough it out when I am in pain. She also, fascinatingly, is quite anti-abortion, and has talked about that a lot as well. And I think there’s just a lot of really complicated worldviews that she brings. And on the one hand, like, maybe some of that ends up being appealing to lawmakers because, as we’ve discussed many times on this podcast, the stances that are more anti-vax, anti-medicine, anti-science are not necessarily that popular with voters, and lawmakers are reacting to that. That’s why it’s been so difficult to confirm a surgeon general nominee. And maybe this finally changes that. Maybe deleting those tweets does suggest that someone would rather remain in good standing with the president. I don’t think we really know until â€¦ if she gets the job and then see what happens. But it is really fascinating to see the third person picked, where there’s still an unfilled position, possibly being someone a bit more aligned with some things that are, in fact, conventionally accepted medicine. 

Rovner: Well, we will see. And of course, this is â€¦ yet another nomination that has to go through Bill Cassidy’s HELP Committee. And regardless of what happens in his primary, even if he loses his primary, he’s going to be the chairman of that committee until the end of this year. So we will have to see. 

All right. Moving on to the Affordable Care Act, we have more evidence this week about the impact of last year’s big budget bill and the expiration of those covid-era additional premium subsidies that they’re having on enrollment.  that analysts and state officials are expecting a drop of about 20%, dropping from 24 million in 2025 to about 19 million. Insurance company Cigna announced last week that it’s dropping out of the ACA marketplace. It currently sells in 11 states. And hospitals are reporting their first-quarter results that are already experiencing the fallout â€” from lower admissions to more uncompensated care. That includes not just people who’ve dropped insurance, but people who had to buy insurance with higher deductibles that they may not be able to pay. Republicans in the Trump administration have tried to downplay the reductions, but as the year wears on and the results get more obvious, aren’t they going to have to have some counterargument to this? 

Hellmann: A 20% decrease in enrollment could be really bad for the marketplaces, especially if the people who are leaving are healthy. It’s going to lead to a sicker risk pool, which is going to possibly lead to higher premiums in the future. So you would think that the administration would have to respond to that. But they have also showed that they’re not really a friend to the ACA, and the first Trump administration also did a lot of things to undermine it. So I’m not sure that they’re going to try to find a way to fix these problems. And they also had a recent marketplace rule that some experts actually think could weaken the health of the marketplaces even more.  

Rovner: Yeah â€¦ I know the Republicans â€¦ one of the big Republican talking points is that a lot of these people were what they call phantom enrollees. They didn’t even know they were enrolled. They didn’t file any claims. But, as you point out, a lot of people have insurance and don’t file any claims because they are healthy. Those are kind of the people that the insurers want. Obviously, not phantom people who don’t know they’re enrolled. That’s fraud. But people who â€¦ have insurance and don’t use it are a good thing for the insurance industry. Shefali, you’re nodding. 

Luthra: No, I was just thinking about all the years I’ve had health insurance and didn’t file a claim. Like, of course you would want that. That’s awesome. It doesn’t mean I wasn’t covered. It meant that I relied on the peace of mind of having health insurance. And I would be very sad if I started filing claims for insurance and suddenly all the healthy people were gone. That would be terrible. 

Rovner: Yeah, we will â€¦ again, I think we’re going to get more evidence as the year wears on, and this is going to become a big, I think, campaign issue, obviously. 

Well, I want to talk about global health, at least briefly. A lot of people are watching that Dutch-flagged cruise ship with passengers sickened and some dying of hantavirus. Now, hantavirus is not normally spread person-to-person, but it is fairly clear that that’s what’s happening in this case, and it appears the outbreak is being fairly effectively handled by the World Health Organization. But of course, the U.S. left the WHO when Trump returned to office, so the U.S. is not only not helping with this, it’s out of the loop, even though there are more than a dozen Americans who’ve been on board, and reportedly seven who could have been exposed to this who have disembarked and already returned to the U.S. This is kind of why the U.S. was part of the WHO, right? When you have an international incident like this? 

Raman: Yeah, and I was just listening in to [an] infectious disease briefing this morning, where they were detailing how this situation is unusual. Usually, at this point in a crisis like this, we would have had more communication from the CDC, from the NIH [National Institutes of Health], just about the state of play, different briefings, or just going and helping with the situation. And we haven’t seen that, and just how striking that is right now. 

Rovner: And of course, I mean, so many people are having PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder] from covid, and remembering, you know, cruise ships with people with covid. Public health experts say that’s not going to happen here with hantavirus. It’s just this one strain of hantavirus that spreads person to person. It’s hard to spread it. But with so little trust in science and so much misinformation, you got to wonder whether even this incident that shouldn’t cause a panic might anyway. 

Raman: Yeah, I think that has been kind of the concern is that this is something that the experts are worried about, and they’d like to learn more about, because there is a new case that they can learn from, to provide more public health information. But to not panic over this, just because the things that you said: This is not likely to cause another major pandemic in the same way as covid. 

Rovner: Well. Finally, this week, HHS Secretary RFK Jr. has struck out on another cause. Now he wants to get people off of their antidepressants. At a MAHA meeting on Monday, he unveiled a series of steps for doing that, from encouraging non-drug interventions for mental health conditions, to paying doctors to counsel patients for how to taper off the medications. He says he doesn’t want to tell people to stop taking their drugs, which can be lifesaving in many cases, although he’s also said he doesn’t want people not to be allowed to take vaccines, too. So where is this headed? Is this â€¦ this is a big, I guess, some MAHA people think people are overmedicated with antidepressants and ADHD [] drugs. 

Raman: I think it has a lot of the same playbook that we’ve seen with vaccines. He’s talked about over-medicalization as an issue for a while now. It was in the last MAHA report about a year ago, and even before that, he’s brought it up. My sense from attending that event this week was not that they were really looking at changing prescription guidelines, but I guess it’s hard to tell where we’ll see further along down the line. But it was more of just like an exploratory stage, you know, training physicians about different things related to tapering and things like that. But sometimes that’s the start of things changing down the line, and it is interest[ing], that kind of brings back his focus to very much the psychiatric drugs, the ADHD, depression, anxiety, and just wanting to lessen the medications there. So. 

Rovner: I can’t help but wonder if, because he’s been told to back off of the vaccine issue, because it doesn’t play that well with the public, that he’s going to pick this up as his next crusade.  

Raman: There was a huge emphasis on informed consent, which is, I feel, another big talking point with vaccine. So there is a lot of similarities in how it’s approached. So, I would look for more of those kind of clues there. 

Luthra: I think it’s also worth noting, even if this is early rhetoric that we know from research that rhetoric does influence prescribing behavior. We saw that study that showed after the “don’t take Tylenol when you’re pregnant” kerfluffle, prescriptions of Tylenol went down for people who are pregnant. And this is not really the first time RFK has talked about SSRIs, specifically. He’s talked about them with regard to pregnancy, in particular, and that’s already a very stigmatized, very fraught time for people, even though the consensus is, if you are depressed, stay on your medications. And I think this is something absolutely worth keeping an eye on, even if this is largely rhetorical, discouraging use of medications. Does that translate into changes, especially around something that is fraught and is often stigmatized and misunderstood, like antidepressants, which, as you mentioned, Julie, are lifesaving and very important for people with severe depression. 

Rovner: Indeed, and for people with severe anxiety. All right, that’s this week’s news. Now we’ll play my “Bill of the Month” interview with Andrew Jones, and then we’ll come back with our extra credits. 

I am pleased to welcome to the podcast KFF Health News’ Andrew Jones, who reported and wrote the latest “Bill of the Month.” Andrew, welcome. 

Andrew Jones: Thank you so much for having me. 

Rovner: So tell us about this month’s patient â€” who she is, where she’s from, and what happened that landed her in the emergency room. 

Jones: Silvana Toska. She’s from Davidson, North Carolina. It’s just north of Charlotte. She’s a professor of political science there, and a mom of two. And while she was outdoor at an event last fall, she got bit by an insect, and she ended up with such a bad systemic allergic reaction that she got anaphylaxis. What anaphylaxis means is that her lungs began to be difficult to breathe. And so she broke out in hives, and she immediately decides, with her husband, to go to an urgent care, where she gets treated with two doses of epinephrine. And then the doctor says you need to be under watch for a couple of hours, so you need to go to the ER, which is kind of where our story starts. 

Rovner: So she doesn’t drive off to the ER, she goes in an ambulance to the ER, right? 

Jones: That’s correct. Yeah. They put her in the back of an ambulance, and they ship her off to the ER. Her husband and her two kids follow. 

Rovner: So by the time she got to the ER, she was already feeling better from the medication that they gave her at the urgent care. That’s what’s in an EpiPen, right? 

Jones: That’s correct, yeah. 

Rovner: The epinephrine. So what happened when she got to the ER? 

Jones: So, not a whole lot, actually. Like you said, she’s feeling fine at that point. A doctor comes in. The doctor sees her for less than five minutes, asks her about her condition, does a quick checkup, doesn’t actually make physical contact with her, which I thought was very interesting. And then the doctor steps out. And she basically spends an hour and a half doing nothing, trying to keep her kids entertained. And she gets a dose of Pepcid to keep the allergic reaction at bay. But after the doctor came in again, just to say that she could leave, she left, and it was an incredibly uneventful ER visit. 

Rovner: And then, as we say, the bill came. So how much is the ER charge for her couple of hours of follow-up â€¦ at which not very much happened? 

Jones: Yeah. So that empty hour and a half, essentially, for that time, she was charged $6,746.50. And at the end of the day, she was responsible for a $150 copay and $3,100.24 â€” a bill that she got on Christmas Day that year. 

Rovner: Awesome. So what was the justification for such a big bill for such â€” I won’t say “little care,” but what seemed to be little care? 

Jones: Yeah, well, she was actually charged for something that wasn’t little. It was called “critical care.” She was coded for critical care, her time there was. And the experts that I spoke to said that while Toska had every right to think that it was an outrageous price to charge, it was probably an appropriate charge for the situation, those codes were. And that’s partly because of a coding system that really isn’t hyper-specific to individual cases. Toska needed to be in the ER setting because of the anaphylaxis. It can return and cause a critical situation. And while she was coded based on what might have happened, rather than what did happen, it ended up not working in her favor as far as the bill went. And so people all over the U.S. experience this. Another expert I spoke to said that people are brought on that train of care when they arrive to the ER. There’s really no way to get off once it starts moving. And you don’t know what it’s going â€¦ what the dreaded bill is going to be once it stops. And there definitely could be reform in the way that U.S. healthcare system does ER coding, although there would have to be some, you know, pretty titanic changes for that to happen. But I’ll say that if listeners ever find themselves concerned about a bill, they should definitely call their insurance company, ask if there was an attempt to negotiate, and they should call the hospital to check the accuracy of the coding. Toska did do both of those things and, unfortunately, nothing changed. But I can say that that was the right thing to do. There was some great back-and-forth. There was a letter that explained why they did that and, ultimately, what happened to her comes down to a coding system that did not work in her favor. And she told me that recently she experienced another allergic reaction, but instead of going to the ER, she just took some Benadryl instead. 

Rovner: And you know, I guess the takeaway here is that when a medical professional tells you to go to the ER, it’s not usually because they’re going to make money from sending you to the ER. It’s because something could happen that you should be in the ER for it. I guess that’s sort of why we have medical insurance, right? 

Jones: Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah. I mean, she really had no other choice. It was the right thing for her to do. But again, because of a coding system that wasn’t specific to her situation, it ended up â€” I see, you know, testimonies all the time from people who see this very outrageous bill for a little care. Toska is the first time I’ve seen a bill where there was essentially no care that she could see. And so I think it’s fair for her to have this discussion in her mind and with her family, and here in this article about: Is our coding system fair? But ultimately, when a provider says you need to go to the ER to make sure that you know your situation is taken care of, that’s what you have to do. 

Rovner: Andrew Jones, thank you very much. 

Jones: Julie, thank you. 

Rovner: OK, we’re back. It’s time for our extra-credit segment. That’s where we each recognize a story we read this week we think you should read too. Don’t worry if you miss it. We will post links in our show notes on your phone or other mobile device. Jessie, why don’t you go first this week? 

Hellmann: My extra credit is from Nature. It’s titled “.” They [Max Kozlov, Alexandra Witze, and Dan Garisto] did an analysis showing that more than 100 independent advisory panels have been terminated. These are panels that advise agencies on biomedical environmental policy and other types of health policy. They’re typically staffed by researchers and other experts from outside of the government. And now so many of these groups are being canceled, there’s concern that this could result in less transparency and more of agencies making decisions within their own ranks. And then they also found that groups that are still in existence are meeting less and less. They’re not issuing public reports. An example of this that we all know about is the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which is tied up in a big legal dispute right now. And the White House defended all of this, is saying that these panels are a waste of taxpayer dollars that don’t meaningfully inform policymaking. So I thought that was a good read on something that doesn’t get a ton of attention. 

Rovner: Yeah. Well â€¦ of course, these panels are intended to bring in the public to make public policy. That’s kind of why they’re there. They’ve always been sort of a bipartisan thing. Anyway, really interesting story. Sandhya. 

Raman: So my extra credit is from The Cut, and it’s called “,” and it’s by Juno DeMelo. And this was a story that, you know, they talked to a lot of pediatricians about how their jobs have changed given the increasing vaccine skepticism. And some of these pediatricians are talking about having to really sell to their patients and their families why pediatric vaccines are necessary, or just devoting a lot more time, having a longer appointment just to explain why this is necessary. Sometimes it takes multiple appointments, which is just different with what they’ve had to do from the past. And, you know, the fatigue from having to go into all the science, instead of just presuming the child will get the vaccine and being able to discuss other things â€” safety and signs to watch and growth, and all of that. And so I think it was a good look at some of the things that drilled down on that. 

Rovner: Yeah, it was. These policy changes have impacts way down the line. Shefali. 

Luthra: My story is from ProPublica. It is by Duaa Eldeib. The headline is “.” It’s about families opting out of vitamin K shots, which are useful for blood clotting for newborns, and babies dying. And I think the story is remarkable for several reasons. It’s really got remarkable examples, and we see who these children are who are dying. We know how old they are, we know the color of their hair. We know what their symptoms were and what happened to them. There isn’t government data tracking vitamin K shots and whether they are rejected, but the story does a really good job painting a picture anyway. It has interviews with hospitals who have seen more and more parents saying we don’t want this because we are concerned. And it contextualizes this within the rising anti-establishment approach to medicine, more skepticism around well-researched and appropriate interventions. There is data showing how many children die from this spontaneous bleeding that can often happen if you’re deficient in vitamin K. And together, it uses those different points to create a picture of a troubling and avoidable public health trend that’s resulting in kids dying. 

Rovner: Yeah, more fallout from the anti-vax movement. My extra credit this week is from my KFF Health News colleague Stephanie Armour, and it’s called “HHS’ Healthy Food Agenda Puts Hospitals on Notice About Patients’ Meals.” It’s a story about something that we’ve talked about before in the podcast, the new HHS policy that threatens hospitals’ Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement for facilities that don’t conform to last year’s new dietary guidelines. But there’s some pretty vivid detail here about how those guidelines actually fail to address the needs of many hospitalized patients who may be limited in their ability to eat or drink and might actually need Jell-O or ginger ale or Ensure, all of which are now at least theoretically banned. And the administration is also asking patients to report hospitals that are violating the new rules. Again, another thing that was not on my 2026 bingo card. 

All right, that’s this week’s show. As always, thanks to our editor, Emmarie Huetteman, and our producer-engineer, Francis Ying. A reminder: What the Health? is now available on WAMU platforms, the NPR app, and wherever you get your podcasts — as well as, of course, kffhealthnews.org. Also, as always, you can email us your comments or questions. We’re at whatthehealth@kff.org. Or you can still find me on X , or on Bluesky . Sandhya, where are you hanging these days? 

Raman: I’m on  and on  @SandhyaWrites. 

Rovner: Jessie. 

Hellmann:  on  and  and also on . 

Rovner: Shefali. 

Luthra: On Bluesky . 

Rovner: We’ll be back in your feed next week. Until then, be healthy. 

Credits

Francis Ying Audio producer
Emmarie Huetteman Editor

Click here to find all our podcasts.

And subscribe to “What the Health? From Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News” on , , , , , or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/podcast/what-the-health-445-abortion-pill-mifepristone-makary-may-7-2026/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2235382&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2235382
That Discount at the Pharmacy Counter May Pack Hidden Costs /health-care-costs/pharmacy-discount-coupons-hidden-costs/ Thu, 07 May 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2230769 Next time you go to the pharmacy, you might be offered a coupon on your prescription drugs. While it may sound like a great deal — with the prospect of saving hundreds of dollars — the decision to accept it is complicated, especially for people with insurance.

Even as prescription drug costs rise, patients with commercial insurance have slowed their use of manufacturer-sponsored drug coupons in recent years, according to April 6 by the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Manufacturers are offering just as many of them, “but still, we see a lot of affordability issues among this commercially insured population,” said So-Yeon Kang, the study’s main author, who is an assistant professor of health management and policy at Georgetown University.

“Patients are at the intersection and battle place between these payers and manufacturers,” she said.

Drug manufacturers distribute copay coupon cards to consumers online or in person at the pharmacy counter. These manufacturer-sponsored coupons are not the same as discount card services from companies like GoodRx, which negotiate lower bulk pricing for prescription drugs, then pass those savings along to the consumer.

Manufacturers issue the coupons to keep their drugs competitive by offering patients short-term savings. Consumers pay less out-of-pocket, often for brand-name drugs. This encourages patients to use the brand-name version of the drug, even when a cheaper, generic version might be available.

Some insurers say this unfairly puts them on the hook for pricier drugs. They say monthly premiums are higher as a result, punishing consumers and patients, not the manufacturers.

So, should you use manufacturer-sponsored prescription drug coupons when they are offered?

The short answer: It depends.

Here are five things to consider:

1. What if you do not have insurance?

If you are uninsured, using a coupon can be a great way to save money, especially if there is no generic version of the drug.

TrumpRx is a new federally funded initiative that acts as a prescription drug coupon dashboard for patients. Some of the coupons come from manufacturers, while others do not. Not every drug has a coupon offer, but the portal will save consumers money on drugs for those that do, especially in the short term.

Michelle Long, a senior policy manager at KFF who studies patient and consumer protections, said people without insurance can save money by using TrumpRx or manufacturer coupons. (KFF is the health policy research, polling, and news organization that includes Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.)

“I wouldn’t brush it off entirely because it’s got Trump’s name on it,” Long said. “For a lot of people who take certain medications, there really could be some real savings.”

Still, Long said, TrumpRx lists only about 85 drugs, among thousands approved by the FDA. It is important to note that drug coupons have limitations and guidelines. They do not last forever. When they are exhausted, uninsured consumers may have to pay full price for the drug.

2. What if you have commercial health insurance?

For people with insurance, the answer is a little more complicated.

If the drug isn’t covered by your insurance plan or if you intend to pay cash, then the coupon may be the way to go. If not, be wary.

Insurance coverage varies for certain kinds of drugs, such as GLP-1 obesity drugs. Kang’s study found that coupon use by commercial insurance holders on obesity drugs dropped from 54.6% of prescriptions in 2017 to only 2.5% in 2024, even though use of the drugs has been rising in the United States.

She said this reflects the growing number of patients paying cash for the drugs as prices decline, along with insurers’ reluctance to cover them and manufacturers’ shifting focus from coupon distribution to marketing campaigns.

3. What should you do if you expect high medical costs this year?

If you have insurance and anticipate meeting your deductible for the year through health care visits and treatments, consider using the coupons.

Coupons let you pay less out-of-pocket when you visit the pharmacy, but your insurer likely won’t count the value of the coupon toward your deductible. Only use a coupon if there is no generic option available and if you know you’d otherwise hit your deductible.

4. What if you have insurance but low overall medical costs?

The answer will almost always be: Don’t use the coupon.

Unless the drug you are looking for is not covered by your insurance plan, using coupons will put you at risk for higher indirect costs. It’s also often more advantageous to spend toward your deductible.

Watch out for copay adjustment programs that insurers use to discourage the use of drug coupons. They come in two common forms, Long said.

“” allow the use of drug coupons up to their full value, but the amount of the coupon won’t count toward patients’ deductibles or out-of-pocket maximums. That makes it harder for them to reach the threshold at which insurers will pitch in on prescriptions and other medical care. It can also mean a patient will eventually start paying the full cost of the drug because they haven’t yet met their annual deductible.

“Copay maximizers” use a similar technique that also prevents the coupon value from counting toward deductibles. Maximizer programs use a third party to over the course of a year to match the amount of the manufacturers’ coupons.

Insurers sometimes offer the programs to consumers under euphemistic names like “Employee Savings Program” that sound good in theory, but, in reality, take away some of the value of the coupons, Long said.

Initially, consumers will see savings at the pharmacy counter, but they may end up paying more in the long run.

5. What if you’re on Medicaid or Medicare?

Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries are prohibited from using manufacturer-sponsored coupons.

A federal anti-kickback law makes it illegal to give someone anything of value to influence their decision to purchase something that will ultimately be paid for by a federal health care program. The law also prevents remuneration, which includes waiving copays and charging less than fair-market value for a product.

Manufacturer drug coupons categories.

Some states, notably California and Massachusetts, prohibit or limit the use of manufacturer drug coupons when a generic version of the drug is available — highlighting the tension among manufacturers, health plans, and the government.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/pharmacy-discount-coupons-hidden-costs/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2230769&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2230769
States Eye Aid To Prop Up Distressed Hospitals Amid Federal Medicaid Cuts /health-care-costs/medicaid-cuts-distressed-hospitals-aid-california/ Tue, 05 May 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2231578 LOS ANGELES — At Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital, patients on gurneys line the hallways of the emergency department waiting for care, and overflow mental health patients are consigned to outdoor tents.

The 152-bed hospital, which sits on a sprawling medical campus close to the predominantly Latino and Black neighborhood of Watts, is struggling for financial stability. Its patients are poorer and sicker than average, many of them are uninsured, and three-quarters of MLK’s patient care revenue comes from Medi-Cal, the state’s version of the Medicaid program, which pays low rates. For hospitals statewide, by comparison, less than one-third of patient revenue comes from Medi-Cal.

And MLK Community Healthcare, which comprises the hospital and two nearby clinics, is independent, so it cannot fall back on a larger chain to absorb some of the financial pressure.  

Similar problems plague hospitals around the country, in rural and urban areas. And their financial woes are about to get worse.

The Republican budget measure known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump last July, is expected to cut federal Medicaid spending by $911 billion over 10 years. And it could contribute to an increase of in the number of uninsured people, many of whom will go to already crowded emergency rooms to get care they can’t pay for.

The law does include a special fund to boost rural healthcare, totaling $50 billion over five years. But that’s far less than it is expected to cut from rural health spending over the next decade. And the rural health fund does little or nothing to help the numerous that also face serious financial troubles.

MLK, like many other hospitals, is scrambling to secure outside financing to avert serious disruptions of medical services when the brunt of the policies contained in the federal law begins to hit early next year. The hospital’s leadership team projects a revenue hole of $80 million to $100 million annually for the foreseeable future. It would be MLK’s largest budget gap since it opened in 2015.

“Even if we cut services that our community needs — maternity care, behavioral healthcare, diabetes management — it wouldn’t make a significant dent in the gap we’re facing,” said Elaine Batchlor, the CEO of MLK Community Healthcare. ”Many of those same people would still come to us through our emergency department, only they’d be in worse shape and might need more expensive care.”

A woman in business formal attire stands beside an entrance to an emergency room check-in.
MLK Community Healthcare CEO Elaine Batchlor stands outside the check-in area for Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital’s emergency department, a long tent outside the main building in Los Angeles. (Bernard J. Wolfson/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Across the U.S., hospitals and patient advocates are looking to state lawmakers and local officials to help shore up shaky finances. In California, Assembly member Esmeralda Soria, a Democrat representing Fresno, is to expand a 2023 “distressed hospital loan fund” that allocated nearly $300 million in zero-interest loans to in the state, including $14 million to MLK. The state would pony up another $300 million under Soria’s bill.

At least two other states are weighing similar programs. A would create a $100 million “distressed hospital grant” program. And a funding bill for the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services contains a provision to create for troubled hospitals.

Carmela Coyle, the CEO of the California Hospital Association, said the original $300 million disbursed by the state legislature helped but was not enough.

“This program is focused on those who are standing on the edge of that financial cliff, and it’s intended to give them a little space, brush them a little bit back from the edge,” Coyle said. “But we’ve got many more hospitals that are taking giant leaps toward the edge of that cliff every day.”

Despite the association’s influence, an expansion of the loan program is far from certain, given fiscal constraints that have already induced state leaders to roll back California’s ambitious healthcare agenda, with restrictions on coverage for immigrants and funding cuts for community clinics. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom recently warned lawmakers to expect more cuts in his revised May budget — and that’s before the main federal spending reductions kick in.

“This is a very difficult budget environment,” said Kristof Stremikis, director of market analysis and insight at the California Health Care Foundation, a nonprofit that advocates for healthcare improvement. “It is hard to come up with funding for new programs and even existing programs right now.”

The front entrance of Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital.
MLK Community Hospital is a 152-bed facility in Los Angeles near the predominantly Latino and Black neighborhood of Watts. The hospital’s leadership team projects a revenue hole of $80 million to $100 million annually for the foreseeable future. (Bernard J. Wolfson/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Some lawmakers noted skeptically that the initial loans are now on their way to at which is allowed under existing law. Soria’s bill spells out a clearer path to loan forgiveness.

“Are these loans or are these grants? Because they seem to be turning, really, into grants,” Assembly member Pilar Schiavo, a Democrat in Santa Clarita, said during an April 21 hearing on the bill.

Ultimately, it might not be desirable to save struggling institutions by pouring dollars into them, because care is increasingly offered outside of hospitals, Stremikis said.

In the short term, though, the financial health of hospitals that received loans appears to have improved, according to a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News analysis of state data. The average operating margin of the 15 loan recipients for which comparable data is available shifted from a loss of 15.4% the year before the program to a gain of 2.3% after the money was disbursed.

It is unclear how much of the improvement can be attributed to the loans. Hospitals also secured other sources of funding, and they adopted efficiencies as a condition for the interest-free money.

MLK reduced the use of high-cost temporary labor by hiring more permanent staff, cut the average length of patient hospital stays to decrease staffing hours, streamlined billing, and negotiated more-favorable contracts with insurers, said Atul Nakhasi, a practicing physician who is also MLK’s vice president of government affairs and community relations. Batchlor said that the loan helped MLK get through a cash flow crunch and that a second loan, if it became available, would be used for the same purpose.

This summer, MLK expects to open a psychiatric assessment unit, where patients in mental distress can be stabilized in an environment replete with plush reclining chairs and “calming” rooms. Hospital executives hope the new unit will provide a significant new source of revenue, while taking pressure off the emergency department.

A woman in business-formal attire sits on a blue beanbag chair.
Batchlor sits on a beanbag chair in one of the “calming” rooms in MLK Community Hospital’s new emergency psychiatric assessment, treatment, and healing unit. (Bernard J. Wolfson/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
Rows of large blue reclining chairs are in a clean, empty medical room.
The main EmPATH patient area contains large reclining chairs for people who need to be evaluated and stabilized. Hospital officials say the unit will be a welcome new revenue source and help take pressure off MLK’s perennially crowded emergency room. (Bernard J. Wolfson/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

in Visalia, California, suspended some services, temporarily stopped contributing to employees’ retirement, and briefly froze wages in exchange for a loan of just under $21 million, said the organization’s CEO, Marc Mertz.

Madera Community Hospital got a $57 million loan — the largest disbursement from the state fund — to reopen after being shuttered for more than two years. The hospital reopened early last year, but it has not yet stabilized financially, said Matthew Beehler, the chief strategy officer at American Advanced Management, a privately held company that bought Madera out of bankruptcy.

“You can definitely say the hospital would not have been opened without the distressed hospital loan,” though the company has also invested more than $50 million, Beehler said. He said Madera would hope for another loan if the program were extended.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/medicaid-cuts-distressed-hospitals-aid-california/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2231578&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2231578
HHS’ Healthy Food Agenda Puts Hospitals on Notice About Patients’ Meals /health-industry/hhs-healthy-hospital-food-patient-dietary-guidelines-backlash/ Mon, 04 May 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2232433 Complaints about hospital food are certainly not new, and Jell-O and fruit juice are often the butt of related jokes. But the Trump administration has recently upped the ante.

It is urging the public to report hospitals and nursing homes that serve sugary drinks, nutrition shakes, or meals that it says don’t meet dietary guidelines established last year by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, with officials vowing to withhold millions of dollars in federal funding if violations occur.

The initiative from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is spurring backlash from some doctors and medical providers who say it fails to account for patients’ unique dietary needs and is anathema to Republicans who have long embraced an anti-regulatory stance.

It’s also not clear that HHS has the regulatory authority to enforce its threat without going through a formal rulemaking process, lawyers and dietitians say.

“Most of this is political theater. HHS doesn’t have the power to do much,” said , a dietitian and research scientist who is an assistant professor at the University of Toronto. “Also, if it’s to the point that you’re trying to control people’s choices, well, you look a little fascist.”

The agency to hospitals asking them to align their food purchases with the administration’s 2025-30 dietary guidelines to ensure continued eligibility for Medicaid and Medicare payments, Kennedy said at a March 30 press event.

“We are going to bring all the hospitals in the country in line with good food,” he said, describing the instructions as “essentially a .”

“If a hospital is serving patients sugary drinks, they are out of compliance with government standards and are putting their reimbursements in jeopardy,” top Kennedy adviser Calley Means “If you see patients being served sugary drinks, please post information below or let CMS know.”

The comment included a link to an HHS webpage with a toll-free number for reporting complaints typically used for medical bills. Withholding federal funding from hospitals is one of the most extreme enforcement tools available to regulators, one the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has seldom deployed.

Even serving liquid nutrition products like Ensure to patients could put hospitals in jeopardy, Means warned. “They need to change or lose reimbursement. Please report them if you see it,” he told an X user.

Medicare and Medicaid, combined, are the of hospital expenditures.

The notice came in the form of a “Conditions of Participation” update released by CMS to ensure hospital patients’ food adheres to the dietary guidelines, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said. “We commend the many hospitals who have made commitments to improve their food offerings, and expect every hospital system to do so,” he said.

Means did not respond directly to requests for comment from Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, instead posting on X shortly after he was contacted: “‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ has led Democrats to defend the medical importance of mass-serving soda and junk food to American patients.” In a text with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, he said, “That’s to cite if you want. I don’t have a comment.”

Still, some administration officials have made it clear they will not shy away from halting federal funding, a rarely taken step that can imperil the ability of a hospital to remain open.

A Carrot and a Stick

HHS can withhold or threaten federal funding if hospitals violate mandatory minimum health and safety standards set by the agency. The standards stipulate that hospitals must protect patient privacy, for example, and uphold infection control.

The standards do address hospital food, but they don’t explicitly refer to the 2025-30 established by the USDA.

Rather, the standards require that “individual patient nutritional needs must be met in accordance with recognized dietary practices,” and list other requirements for hospitals, such as having access to a qualified dietitian.

“CMS has never before interpreted this requirement as mandating adherence to any set of dietary guidelines,” according to an from law firm .

The CMS memo shows the agency is taking the “notable step” to incorporate the dietary guidelines “into the hospital regulatory framework without new rulemaking,” according to the brief.

Hospitals are likely to comply because they are loath to cross the federal government and want to avoid a legal tussle or enforcement action by Kennedy, some lawyers say.

“He doesn’t have a legal basis to do this, but hospitals and nursing homes can’t afford to ignore it altogether because of what it signals about potential enforcement action,” said , a University of Michigan law professor.

If federal funding were withheld, hospitals could always sue to try and challenge HHS’ authority.

“When the agency goes to the hospital and says, We’re going to take away your money for this, the hospital can sue and say, Look, nothing requires us to fry our fries in beef tallow or whatever,” Bagley said.

For hospitals looking to comply, the agency’s memo provides examples of what should and shouldn’t be served to patients.

Food as Medicine

What the guidance calls “don’ts”: sugar-sweetened beverages or juice. And “do’s”: water, unsweetened tea, milk, or coffee. Meals suggested in the memo include grilled salmon with quinoa or bean-based entrees with leafy greens.

Some nutritionists welcomed the focus on hospital food for patients. Marion Nestle, a public health advocate and molecular biologist, lauded the initiative, saying, “These sound terrific!” in an on her blog, .

Other health leaders and doctors pushed back, noting hospitalized patients often have more individualized nutrition needs that may not conform to federal dietary recommendations.

For “a patient struggling to swallow from just having a stroke, salmon and quinoa is the worst thing for them. They’re going to risk aspirating on it,” said Klatt, the University of Toronto dietitian.

Hospitals that neglect to provide certain standards of care, such as protein shakes to treat malnutrition or an unhealthy weight loss, could open themselves up to possible legal liability. Eighty percent of malnourished elderly patients gained weight and improved muscle mass on nutritional supplements such as Ensure, according to the published in Nutrición Hospitalaria, a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

Abbott, which , makes a range of products including shakes for people who “could be malnourished due to medical treatments, such as chemotherapy, and not be getting the calories they need because they don’t have much of an appetite,” company spokesperson John Koval said in a statement.

“It’s always a struggle to get people to eat. Losing weight in the hospital raises the risk of mortality,” said Mary Talley Bowden, a , who has with Make America Healthy Again causes but on X, posting: “Give me a break Calley. A hospital snitch line for soda?”

“It’s a little tyrannical,” she said in an interview.

The focus on hospital food came in late March as part of Kennedy’s MAHA initiative, in which he has touted changes to federal dietary guidelines that emphasize protein and healthy fats while eschewing processed foods.

Kennedy has leaned heavily into his work on changing eating habits, which fits into the MAHA gestalt and polls well with both Democratic and Republican voters. Eighty-six percent of registered voters surveyed said it should be easier for every American family to access fresh fruits and vegetables, released in September by Navigator Research.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/hhs-healthy-hospital-food-patient-dietary-guidelines-backlash/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2232433&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2232433
Prevention Efforts Increasingly See Suicide Through a Broader Lens /mental-health/the-week-in-brief-suicide-prevention-efforts-broader-approach/ Fri, 01 May 2026 18:30:00 +0000 /?p=2233444&preview=true&preview_id=2233444

If you or someone you know may be experiencing a mental health crisis, contact the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline by dialing or texting “988.”


Someone in America dies by suicide every 11 minutes. It’s that common. But that doesn’t make it normal.

Humans have evolved over centuries to survive. So when people try to kill themselves, something has gone wrong. Typically, the assumption is that something happened in the person’s mind — a mental illness.

That’s led prevention efforts to typically focus on connecting people with treatment in moments of crisis.

But that’s changing. There’s a growing movement asking a different question: What went wrong in the world around that person?

During the covid pandemic, rates of anxiety and depression spiked — not because everyone’s brain chemistry suddenly changed but because the world changed. People were out of work, isolated, struggling to make ends meet.

That led many people in the mental health advocacy world to call for a broader approach. Treatments and crisis care are vital, they say, but the goal of suicide prevention needs to expand beyond stopping people from dying to alsoÌýgivingÌýthem reasons to live.

Decades of researchÌýsupportsÌýthis idea. Interventions that improve people’s lives and prospects, such as running food banks to ensure familiesÌýdon’tÌýgo hungry or hosting weekly book clubs for homebound seniors to make friends, can reduce suicide.

I spoke with Chris Pawelski, a fourth-generation farmer in Orange County, New York, for this story. He told me how his dad’s passing, caring for his mom with dementia, and the struggling finances of his family’s onion farm brought him to consider suicide.

“It’s all stuff collapsing down upon you,” he said. “It’s weeks, months, years of dealing with all sorts of pressures that you can’t alleviate.”

What helped him through that time was not just family support and therapy. It was also an economic plan. He worked with an organization called NYÌýFarmNet, which provided a free financial consultant who helped Pawelski transition from farming onions for wholesale to a new model, growing varied produce to sell directly to consumers.

Today, Pawelski’s business has stabilized, and he and his wife areÌýpaying downÌýdebt. HeÌýadvocates forÌýprograms to help others in similar situations.

That can mean crisis hotlines and access to affordable therapy, Pawelski said. But what he really wants are policy changes that help people address underlying hardships before a crisis strikes.

“We need to think broader and longer-term than a helpline,” he said. That’s “a band-aid on a gunshot wound.”

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl 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 .

This <a target="_blank" href="/mental-health/the-week-in-brief-suicide-prevention-efforts-broader-approach/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">KFF Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

<img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="/?republication-pixel=true&post=2233444&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2233444