Public Health Archives - Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News /topics/public-health/ Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News produces in-depth journalism on health issues and is a core operating program of KFF. Wed, 24 Jun 2026 18:20:43 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.5 /wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=32 Public Health Archives - Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News /topics/public-health/ 32 32 161476233 Democrats Keep Healthcare at the Fore /podcast/what-the-health-451-democrats-obamacare-midterms-rfk-vaccines-june-18-2026/ Thu, 18 Jun 2026 19:13:26 +0000 /?p=2249718&post_type=podcast&preview_id=2249718 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.

Senate Democrats hope a little-used law from the 1990s will help draw attention to the healthcare cost issue by forcing a vote on the Trump administration’s recent changes to the Affordable Care Act.

Meanwhile, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is demanding information from a medical journal that retracted a study that backed Kennedy’s claims of vaccine harm.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, Anna Edney of Bloomberg News, Sheryl Gay Stolberg of The New York Times, and Lauren Weber of The Washington Post.

Panelists

Anna Edney photo
Anna Edney Bloomberg News
Sheryl Gay Stolberg photo
Sheryl Gay Stolberg The New York Times
Lauren Weber photo
Lauren Weber The Washington Post

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

  • As the midterm elections approach, congressional Democrats are pushing back on newly finalized guidelines from the Trump administration for ACA plans. The guidelines allow the sale of plans with fewer benefits and bigger deductibles next year, further eroding protections designed to keep healthcare affordable. With many voters concerned about the cost of care, Democrats’ push could prove a potent campaign message come November.
  • State officials in Texas and Alabama are continuing to crack down on abortion access. And new reporting reveals a trend of women going to great lengths to seek abortion care only to learn that their home pregnancy test results were false positives and they’re not pregnant.
  • Two medical journals recently retracted separate studies that linked vaccines to harmful health problems, with Kennedy pushing back. And legal action over Kennedy’s reconstituted vaccine panel and its decisions is leaving the nation without traditional outside expert input into seasonal vaccines as the flu season approaches — though the American Academy of Pediatrics has pointed out that Kennedy could resolve the legal issues by simply appointing experts to the panel with vaccine backgrounds, as statute dictates.

Also this week, Rovner interviews Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute and Liz Fowler of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health about their joint effort pushing for the elimination of the employer health insurance tax exclusion. You can read their .

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’ “Trump Bought Tobacco Stocks and Raked In Industry Donations as FDA Eased Standards,” by Darius Tahir.  

Sheryl Gay Stolberg: Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ “Tennessee Pharmacies Sell Potent Ivermectin, Led by Anti-Vaccine Doctor Who’s Taken ‘Bucketloads,’” by Brett Kelman and Rachana Pradhan. 

Anna Edney: Politico Magazine’s “,” by Alice Miranda Ollstein and Megan Messerly. 

Lauren Weber: The Atlantic’s “,” by Benjamin Mazer.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

  • Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ “Democrats Seek To Spotlight Rising Health Costs by Forcing Vote on Trump Regulation,” by Julie Appleby.
  • The New York Times’ “,” by Reed Abelson.
  • MedPage Today’s “,” by Jennifer Henderson.
  • The Alabama Reflector’s “,” by Anna Barrett.
  • HuffPost’s “,” by Alanna Vagianos.
  • The Daily Signal’s “,” by Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell.
  • The New York Times’ “,” by Sheryl Gay Stolberg.
  • The New York Times’ “,” by Kenneth P. Vogel and Christina Jewett.
Click to open the transcript Transcript: Democrats Keep Healthcare at the Fore

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

Julie Rovner: Julie, 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, June 18, at 10 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 videoconference by Lauren Weber of The Washington Post. 

Lauren Weber: Hello, hello. 

Rovner: Sheryl Gay Stolberg of The New York Times. 

Sheryl Gay Stolberg: Hi, Julie. 

Rovner: And Anna Edney of Bloomberg News. 

Anna Edney: Hello. 

Rovner: Later in this episode, we’ll have my interview with Michael Cannon of the libertarian Cato Institute and Liz Fowler of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Michael and Liz, who are on opposite sides of most things in the health debate, are jointly promoting the idea of eliminating, or at least scaling back, the employer health insurance tax exclusion that underpins much of the U.S. healthcare system but also drives up health spending. But first, this week’s news. 

Let’s start this week on Capitol Hill, where Democrats in the Senate say they plan to use the Congressional Review Act to force a vote to disapprove the Trump administration’s Affordable Care Act payment rule that was finalized in May. For those who haven’t been paying close attention, this is the rule for next year’s plans. It includes things like allowing non-network plans that could open policyholders to unlimited out-of-pocket spending, or else possibly no available providers of care in their area, as well as new catastrophic policies with lower premiums but deductibles well into the five figures. 

The CRA is a handy tool for Congress. It allows the minority to force a vote on the floor and only requires a simple majority of both houses to pass. Few rules are actually canceled using this procedure, but it does allow members of Congress to highlight an issue, in this case playing into Democrats’ desire to keep one of their best midterm electoral issues, healthcare, front and center. So, will this succeed at getting attention, even if it ultimately doesn’t cancel the rule? Or is there just too much else going on right now? I have to say, I haven’t seen a lot of coverage of this other than from my colleague Julie Appleby. Bless her heart for bringing this story to everybody’s attention. 

Stolberg: I think that by November this will resonate. We’re in a situation now where costs are rising, gas costs are going up, and they may go down if this Iran deal goes through, but healthcare and the cost of care is always an issue for Americans. It’s long been an issue that Democrats have led on. I actually find it interesting. What [President Donald] Trump is trying to do really kind of undercuts the very premise of Obamacare, which was to offer kind of a baseline level of care, to require that plans gave people a baseline level of care. You know, come November, it’s going to be just after the enrollment period of October, and I think Democrats are going to be talking about this. And then, it might not resonate or break through now, but they will point back to this vote in this moment. 

Edney: Yeah. I was going to say that I do think it’s possible by then. I think you were right to say that right now it’s hard for things to break through, but by the midterms we may see, as a direct result of this, people losing coverage. And I think that coverage losses â€” or deciding not to have coverage any longer, because it’s too expensive. So, I do think that coverage losses, whether it’s in the ACA marketplace or Medicaid, are going to be a big campaign issue. And if Democrats can point to this vote as a direct line to We support you having your coverage and Republicans don’t, that could be something that breaks through to those potentially millions of people who no longer have care. 

Rovner: Yeah, last week I described this as the drip, drip, drip of declining coverage, which is that we sort of keep seeing these things bit by bit. Rather than sort of one dramatic, Oh my goodness, I can’t afford my coverage and I’m going to drop it, we’re seeing people scrambling to try and keep coverage, or to buy down to have less expensive plans with bigger deductibles. And then, once they start to seek care, they’ll realize they can’t handle those deductibles. So it’s happening in pieces rather than all at once. 

Well, speaking of that Affordable Care Act rule, props to the eagle-eyed Reed Abelson, your colleague at The New York Times, Sheryl, for spotting a little-noticed piece of the rule that allows insurers to offer loans to patients who can’t immediately come up with those multi-thousand-dollar deductibles should they need medical care. Now, this is not a new idea. Overall, veterinarians have long offered payment plans to pet owners, as have health practitioners, whose services are often not covered by insurance, like cosmetic surgeons. But for necessary medical care, it seems like loading patients with still more medical debt seems like a less-than-popular solution to high healthcare costs. Or is that just me? Lauren. 

Weber: I mean,  was a blockbuster, and also just horrifying. And what kind of dystopian future are we all in? Instead of paying your premiums, you’re also paying your payment plan to the same people. It’s already been said enough that there’s some concern that health insurance plans are gobbling up so many parts of the healthcare market. You wonder what happens when they also become essentially your mortgage broker. And so I think the story deserves a lot more attention, because I think a lot of Americans would be quite terrified if they realized that is potentially the future. 

Edney: And it seems like the point should be to make coverage more affordable, not to find new ways for you to pay the same really high amounts. 

Stolberg: I just was going to say I thought it was interesting that Reed pointed out that roughly a third of Americans have some kind of medical debt, and she linked to an analysis, a  in HealthAffairs, about medical debt and collections being very common and large. 

Rovner: Yeah, I’m just noting the irony of Republicans deciding to come out against Big Insurance, and yet this â€” talk about own goals, going against exactly what you’re saying. Let’s make Big Insurance less popular by having people owe money on a payment plan, have a credit card to pay their insurance company back for things that their insurance company basically isn’t covering anymore. Yes, presumably with interest, so Big Insurance will make even more money. 

Well, moving on, it’s been a busy week on the reproductive health front. In Texas, the state’s Republican platform includes a plank calling for women who have abortions to be held criminally liable for murder after another Texas anti-abortion group fought unsuccessfully to have it removed. , the attorney general’s office is sending cease-and-desist letters to out-of-state organizations that offer abortion pills via telehealth. The letters say the companies, including some well-known ones like Plan C and Cambridge Reproductive Health Consultants, must stop all advertising, sale, and delivery of pills to Alabama residents or face potential legal action, including fines of $2,000 per violation. On the other hand, one former abortion provider in the state pointed out that the letters themselves act as an advertisement for the various services that otherwise people might not know anybody about, or where they are. Is this just performative? Or do we think there are going to be real efforts to reach distributors outside states with abortion bans, despite shield laws in the states where those distributors are actually located. 

Weber: It’s probably a mix of both, right? I think that some of it is for press coverage. I did find the former abortion provider saying this is a giant billboard for all these products to be somewhat quite the comment to be made. But it’s true. If you live in Alabama and you went to this woman who is an abortion advocate, she could not tell you where to look these things up online, and now there’s a plethora of media coverage and attorney general’s letters that lead you right to the source. 

Rovner: With their addresses. 

Weber: With their addresses. With their web addresses. And so— 

Rovner: That’s right. 

Weber: It’s an interesting move on all counts. I think it’s just a one and another. I think I don’t think we’re going to just see this from Alabama. 

Stolberg: Yeah, I was going to say this is part of a broader assault by the anti-abortion movement on abortion medication, and in particular mifepristone. And my colleague Pam Belluck and I  about this lawsuit that was brought by the state of Louisiana, which instead of targeting the manufacturers of the pill, they want courts to bar a policy allowing abortion providers to provide or prescribe mifepristone and send it through the mail. This was the policy of the Biden administration’s FDA [Food and Drug Administration]. The Trump administration has said, We’re studying this issue. That study seems to be going on a very long time. Some people suggest it will go on past the midterms, so— 

Rovner: That seems to be the strategy. 

Stolberg: Right. But nonetheless, now that Roe [v. Wade] is gone and states regulate abortion, we are seeing this kind of clash between states about what can happen from one state to another, and I think this is part of that. 

Rovner: Yeah, and as we’ve pointed out multiple times in multiple ways, anti-abortion groups are furious that the administration has not rolled back this ability to send these pills through the mail, because that is why I think we’re seeing less backlash to some of these bans than we would have otherwise, because a lot of these bans are fairly easily evadable by going, having a telehealth appointment with a doctor in another state and getting the pills in the mail. And there’s very little that the ban states, as we’ve discovered, can do to stop it. So they’re sort of trying everything, including these cease-and-desist letters. But this is clearly a fight that’s going to go on unless and until the administration steps in or the courts step in. And we’re, I guess, at this point waiting on both. 

Meanwhile, the Huffington Post has a truly  about women who get positive home pregnancy tests, arrange to travel or take time off from their jobs to get an abortion, only to discover once they get to the clinic that they weren’t actually pregnant at all. It seems most of the false positives are coming from the same brand, Clearblue. And it’s not that the tests are wrong as much as they appear to be too sensitive, likely picking up pregnancies that either end themselves before they’re fully established or picking up the hormone that the tests detect from sources other than an active pregnancy. The most chilling part of the story is at the very end, with one doctor wondering how many women are doing telehealth abortions with pills who were never actually pregnant to begin with. It seems that do-it-yourself healthcare maybe isn’t as foolproof as we’ve made it out to be? 

Weber: I think the story, just â€” first off, everyone should read it, because it’s an incredible deep dive. She managed to uncover multiple complaints that physicians who provide abortion had made to the FDA, which appear to have been undealt with, and it speaks to the tragedy of some of these people that take time out of their day, raise money, travel across state borders to potentially try to end their pregnancy, and realize they don’t have a pregnancy at all, and the emotional trauma of that. But more than anything it speaks to the fact that as abortion rules have become more restrictive, you need to know if you are pregnant earlier than ever, so that’s why a lot of these people are taking these pregnancy tests. And the fact that this is so sensitive, the article does posit that it could be picking up pregnancies that are called chemical pregnancies, which don’t end up becoming actual pregnancies. But the point is that usually if you wanted to go check that, you would go to a doctor and they would check your blood levels and see if they were rising. But a lot of women are afraid to do that in this current environment. And so I feel like it’s a big story of unintended consequences and horror that has unfolded as some of these pregnancy tests are not accurate. 

Rovner: Yeah, and in some cases there are multiple cases. Go ahead, Sheryl. 

Stolberg: Lauren’s words, “unintended consequences,” were just what I was about to say. This is part of a whole panoply of things that were not foreseen by anyone, really, when Roe was overturned. A couple years ago I went to Idaho  how OB-GYNs, especially those who dealt with complicated pregnancies, were fleeing the state because of the restrictive abortion rules. And that was leading family practice doctors, like one I featured, without help in caring for patients with complicated pregnancies. And that, too, is sort of an unintended consequence. And when we were talking before about the abortion pill being sent across state lines, yes, you can evade the bans that way, but it still leaves women without medical care, without follow-up care should something go awry. So a lot of things happened, have flowed from the Dobbs [v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization] case that we didn’t think about at the beginning. 

Rovner: Yeah, one of the things that I’ve written about is it’s not just OB-GYNs who are leaving states or not going to states in the first place, choosing not to do residencies there. 

Stolberg: Right. 

Rovner: But it’s other doctors who are not going to some of the states with bans, because doctors who finish their medical school and residencies tend to be of reproductive age. And they are women, or if they are men and have spouses and want to start families, they’re worried about being in states that don’t have enough doctors if there’s a difficult pregnancy. We’re talking about people who want to get pregnant being a little bit concerned about going to states with abortion bans, because so many of the doctors who would deal with difficult pregnancies have left. So it’s just, it spins out and out and out and out. 

Well, finally, in something from the Trump administration that will please anti-abortion forces, a new grant announcement for a George W. Bush-era program promoting the adoption of frozen embryos left over from IVF [in vitro fertilization] refers to them as, quote, “children who already exist and are in need of a family.” Is this formal announcement the quiet beginning of this administration’s effort to establish fetal personhood in federal law? Or is it just another way to pacify pro-lifers who are still angry over the other administration policies we were just talking about that they don’t like so much? 

Stolberg: Huh. That’s interesting. 

Rovner: Sheryl, you probably remember the “snowflake babies” from the Bush administration. 

Stolberg: OK, I’m actually the person who  on the front page of The New York Times, and then suddenly snowflake babies and their parents were appearing at the White House and on Capitol Hill, it was a group called— 

Rovner: Remind younger people who these snowflake babies are. 

Stolberg: So, there was a group called â€” this was at a time when we were talking about excess embryos left over from in vitro fertilization and what should happen with them, and— 

Rovner: And whether they should be allowed to be used for stem cell research. 

Stolberg: Right. That’s exactly right. And whether they should be allowed to be used for stem cell research. And there was a group called Nightlight Christian Adoptions. They’re a Christian adoption agency, and they had come up with another way, they said, in which infertile couples were literally adopting embryos that were left over from other people’s pregnancy effort attempts. And this was a solution for deeply religious people who did believe that life begins with the embryo and did not want to destroy their embryos and also did not want to have to pay in perpetuity for them to be housed in a lab somewhere. And they called them snowflake babies. And so this is something that George Bush talked about and became enshrined in, I guess, his administration. And, I don’t know. I guess Trump is looking back 20-some-odd years or so, reviving the past. 

Rovner: Well, there has been, there â€” it’s a program that has continued. 

Stolberg: Right. 

Rovner: And there were some adopted embryos even during the Biden administration. But I guess the question that sort of comes up now is, by describing them as already children— 

Stolberg: Yeah. Are they laying the groundwork for this? 

Rovner: â€”are they setting â€” yes, are they laying the legal groundwork? Lauren, you wanted to add something. 

Stolberg: Maybe. 

Weber: I was just curious. Does this lay the legal groundwork that any leftover embryo would then qualify for this program? What if you didn’t want your leftover embryo to go through this? I’m curious. The regulation seems a little unclear. 

Stolberg: I think parents retain the right. Parents retain the right to, they are in essence the property â€” I don’t like to use that word, but â€” 

Rovner: I think legally, though, that’s what they are. 

Stolberg: And legally, embryos created by an infertile couple belong to that couple. And in fact we’ve seen, and my colleague Caroline Kitchener  a lawsuit between a husband and wife who divorced and the woman wanted to implant the embryo and the man did not. And the question was, who quote-unquote “owned” the embryo. But I think that personhood question is really interesting, Julie, and maybe it does establish, in a way, a government recognition of embryos as people that is unprecedented. 

Rovner: Yeah, that’s certainly the concern, that it’s sort of taking it one step further. All right, we’re going to take a quick break. We will be right back. 

We are back. And speaking of issues the administration is trying to tiptoe around, let’s turn to vaccine policy. Last month, the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health announced it was retracting a 2010 study that linked the hepatitis B vaccine to an increased risk of autism, because, and I’m quoting here, “due to fundamental methodological flaws the study’s conclusions are unsound.” That was one of the studies cited by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s handpicked advisory committee to change the recommendations for the birth dose of the hep B vaccine. Separately, the journal Toxicology Reports retracted a 2021 study that claimed a link between vaccines and sudden infant death syndrome, also citing methodological errors â€” which is typical, by the way, for why studies are retracted. Yet that retraction led Secretary Kennedy to write a letter to the journal demanding to know why and giving the journal’s editor a deadline of June 26 to respond. What is Secretary Kennedy trying to accomplish here? And will it work or is it just coming off as bullying? 

Edney: I think certainly it’s coming off a little bit as bullying in the sense that this was a decision that the journal made about something that â€” clearly this happens, because it happened with this other study. I think that in Secretary Kennedy â€” and Sheryl, you’ve written about this, and others â€” he does still have a vaccine agenda, whether he’s allowed, or an anti-vaccine agenda, whether he’s allowed to talk— 

Rovner: We’ll get to that in a moment. 

Edney: â€”or not. So I think when he makes these requests, he’s kind of trying to sow doubt into what these other doubts the journal is bringing out. 

Rovner: Lauren, you want to say something. 

Weber: Yeah, I just, I think in general, this is a pattern of actions by Kennedy that several experts have described to me as somewhat hypocritical. He’s attempting to bully a medical journal. He had a big thing about all information should be free during covid, no one should be silenced. And here he is using his platform to potentially change things on that front. And then he also recently issued a quarantine order for someone with hantavirus to stay in Nebraska, which flies in the face of a lot of his “medical freedom” rhetoric during covid. And so I think some of these moves are really interesting because they seem to strike at a contradiction in a lot of the rhetoric he espoused before coming into office. And even on top of the vaccine of it all, I just, I think that’s important context to consider. 

Rovner: And Sheryl, we spent some time last week talking about  about the secretary. But anything you would like to add, please do. 

Stolberg: Yes. I think this is not at all out of character for the secretary. The secretary has long believed that the established medical journals are censoring what he views as legitimate research, i.e. research into the alleged harms of vaccines. And even before he became secretary, when he was running for president, he laid out a very clear agenda in which he said he was going to use government science to lay the groundwork for research that could be used in court against pharmaceutical makers, vaccine makers, and he was also going to take on the medical journals. And in the aftermath of covid, what we saw was also this sort of alternative ecosystem of medical journals growing up, published by these covid contrarian doctors, the Independent Medical Alliance, and other groups. So it wasn’t surprising to me at all that Kennedy went on the offensive against a journal that retracted a study, because he and his allies have long complained that these journals are censoring them. When journals find fault with research that Kennedy likes or supports his views, he doesn’t want to hear about that. 

Rovner: Well, separately, or perhaps not so separately, the Justice Department, on Kennedy’s behalf, is asking for an expedited appeal of a lower-court ruling that found his changes to the childhood vaccine schedule to be, quote, “arbitrary and capricious” and his handpicked vaccine advisory committee members unqualified for their posts. The administration is arguing that because the ACIP [Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] is currently frozen, the administration can’t act on new vaccines for this fall, including for things like flu, RSV [respiratory syncytial virus], and covid. The , meanwhile, which brought the lawsuit that got the changes stayed, argues that Kennedy can reconstitute ACIP anytime he wants, as long as he follows the federal advisory committee rules and appoints members with vaccine expertise. How might this standoff get resolved? Or does this standoff need to be resolved? There are arguments the FDA has already approved a vaccine for this fall. Insurers have already said they’re going to cover it. So is this, speaking of things that are performative, also performative? 

Stolberg: That’s â€” I think we’re in uncharted territory, Julie. In the past, the CDC’s [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s] vaccine advisory committee has met well in advance of every upcoming fall, the flu season, to discuss vaccines to protect the American public and kind of issue their recommendations, which guide what insurers cover. And as a result of this lawsuit, we’re in a place where kind of everything is going on without that central pillar that backs up these decisions. So insurance companies are saying, Yeah, we’ll cover, and the FDA is saying, Yeah, we’ll approve, but there are no experts, outside experts, really thinking through what the right policy is. So, I suppose— 

Rovner: Technically there’s not even an acting director of the CDC, right? Because it went on too long? 

Stolberg: That’s right. 

Rovner: Or is that — so Jay Bhattacharya— 

Stolberg: Well, Jay Bhattacharya is functioning as the acting director but technically he is not the acting director. He is acting in the capacity of director or something like that? 

Rovner: I believe that is the phrase. 

Weber: Who needs senior leadership? 

Rovner: Yeah. It’s all very weird, so— 

Weber: They’re all gone. 

Stolberg: I think it’s a question of, can the government function without this? Yes. Is the government doing the best work for the American people without this system in place? You know, probably not. 

Rovner: Well, meanwhile, more quietly, since the White House ordered Kennedy to back off his more public anti-vaccine efforts, it appears that things are still happening, just a bit more out of public view. Both  and now  are reporting new efforts to study possible ill effects of vaccines at the CDC, the NIH [National institutes of Health], and elsewhere in the department. Quoting from the Washington Post story, by Lena Sun and our podcast panelist Rachel Roubein: “Kennedy’s allies are embedding his agenda in institutions that decide what gets studied, who does vaccine research and how these findings are translated into policy. This could keep the Trump administration’s questioning of vaccines’ safety alive for years to come,” close quote. Could these changes have an even longer-term impact than some of RFK Jr.’s sort of splashier actions that we were just talking about, that could be more easily overturned by an incoming administration? 

Weber: I think absolutely, Julie. I think at the end of the day, too, some of what my colleagues Rachel and Lena found was that they are exploring adding new members to ACIP, that they’re also exploring adding a new Office of Science in the CDC. What does that mean? If is that an Office of Science that Kennedy agrees with? Or is that an Office of Science? These are the questions one has to ask. And then, what kind of long-term ramifications are there for that? Many public health experts say that this continued back-and-forth on vaccines just leaves a lot of people confused and will likely contribute to lower vaccination rates, which could contribute to the continuous rise of preventable, vaccine-preventable, disease. And so there’s a lot of concern that some of this groundwork that’s being laid to underpin some of Kennedy’s long-held beliefs could have a very, very long tail. 

Rovner: Yeah, and of course we’re already seeing cases, not just measles spreading but whooping cough and the kinds of diseases that are preventable with vaccines that people are now not getting for their kids. 

Well, finally this week, two amazing stories related to HHS but not of HHS. One is from The New York Times’ Christina Jewett and Kenneth Vogel, and it’s a  into how lobbying has helped keep the potentially dangerous supplement kratom, if not on pharmacy shelves everywhere, then at least in gas stations and convenience stores around the country. This story has lots of twists and turns over several presidential administrations, but it does seem that Trump 2.0 has been welcoming, shall we say, to the kratom industry, which has in turn given lots of campaign contributions to the administration and its allies. Anna, I see you nodding. 

Edney: Yeah, I loved the story. I thought it was really well done. And, like you said, lots of twists and turns. And there was a really great quote, and I’m not looking at it, but it was along the lines of this being kind of a coin-operated policymaking administration. So, like, you’re â€” if you give enough money. That’s why we’re seeing it’s not your typical, like, Big Pharma putting a lot of lobbying in, right? It’s kratom, it’s flavored vapes, things that kind of you might have considered on the fringes bubbling up to hit. Even the president’s talking about them, and at press conferences that are completely unrelated. So I think that it was a great look at how this industry really kind of got into the administration, and in their view, in the industry view, it’s like, Listen, we’re just paying to be at the table, and we’ve never really been at the table before. But pretty much anyone who can bend the presidency, or someone in his administration, seems to be able to make these inroads that we haven’t seen before, when the product is not proven safe and has been shown to harm people and cause, lead to death. 

Rovner: Yeah. Sheryl, you wanted to add something. 

Stolberg: Yeah. So I was going to say, I lived through this story by my colleagues Ken Vogel and Christina Jewett, and props to them. We’ve been talking about this for a while. I noticed a while back, when  the MAHA [Make America Health Again] movement and Trump, that this company called Botanic Tonics had kind of donated like a million dollars to the MAHA PAC: And I thought: “What is this? Why are these people donating a million dollars to this PAC? Who are they? What is kratom?” And it turned out that my colleague Ken Vogel and also Christina Jewett were kind of already onto this. And the thing that they found to me that was so amazing is that not only this company and the promoters of kratom, which is kind of like an addictive gas station drug â€” it supposedly boosts energy â€” not only were they cultivating Kennedy, but also Markwayne Mullin, who now leads the Homeland Security Department but formerly was a senator, had an investment worth as much as a million dollars in this company, the company of Botanic Tonics. The company’s founder was an energy executive in Mullin’s home state. He’s this odd guy who I think had some sort of brush with the law and changed his name, and it was just this kind of crazy story of influence, like Anna said, kind of, or maybe you said, Julie, on the fringes but coming to the fore. 

Rovner: Yeah, and the original sin here, I think, and someday we’ll go into a deep dive on this, was the 1994 fight in Congress about dietary supplements and— 

Stolberg: The DSHEA [the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act]. Yes. 

Rover: Right. 

Stolberg: And I’ve thought a lot about this. That has created kind of the, what critics call, the wellness industrial complex, which allows these companies to sell things that are supplements as food, which means they are not regulated as stringently as drugs, can only be regulated after they come to market. And a lot of shady stuff is sold as a result. 

Rovner: Yeah, as I say, it goes back a lot of administrations. All right. Well, finally this week, my other story, and this is my extra credit this week. It’s the second blockbuster in the last three weeks for my Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News colleague Darius Tahir about President Trump’s stock trading. The previous one was about the prescription drug industry. This one is about tobacco. It seems that the teetotaling commander in chief is fine with other legal vices, that he holds more than $1.6 million in stock in tobacco giant Philip Morris, as well as positions in Altria and other tobacco companies. The tobacco industry has been good to him, too, giving millions to Trump-affiliated super PACs. And what has the administration given back? Quoting from the story: “It’s FDA piloted a fast-track program to approve nicotine pouches. It unveiled a program to allow vapes on the market more rapidly, despite resistance from career civil servants and leadership, culminating this year in guidance waving through flavored electronic cigarettes. It cut public health employees focusing on anti-tobacco policy. And it broadened enforcement against illicit e-cigarette, competitors to the big industry players with a financial relationship to Trump,” close quote. This is a big difference from the first Trump administration when it comes to tobacco, isn’t it? My recollection is that they were not quite this welcoming to tobacco from 2017 to 2020. Anna, I see you nodding. 

Edney: Yeah. 

Rovner: You did some work on this. 

Edney: Yeah, well, this was when, the first Trump administration was when Scott Gottlieb was the FDA commissioner, and he was quite anti-tobacco. And we went through this whole scare about kids getting some strange lung disease from vaping. And there were a lot more restrictions that â€” and less approvals, or clearances, whatever you want to call the tobacco side of FDA. So, I think it’s been a complete turnaround, where this time around the Trump White House would prefer to run roughshod over the FDA and get what they want for the tobacco industry, because they’re getting a lot of money from them. 

Rovner: Yeah, and props to Darius for connecting all of the dots. Lauren, you want to add something? 

Weber: Yeah. Let’s go back to  about Trump meeting over cheeseburgers with the tobacco guys at the White House. I think Darius’ piece lays out the money that maybe is hanging out there. But props to Darius for having two of these quite good stories looking at these conflicts of interest. 

Stolberg: Yes, during the Trump administration, the first Trump administration, Alex Azar, his health secretary, pressed Trump to take some sort of action restricting vaping, and Trump got really mad at Azar about it, and he complained privately and yelled at Azar, saying to him, You’re costing me votes, because the MAGA crowd likes vaping. This was recounted in a book. I’m pretty sure it was Phil Rucker and Carol Leonnig’s book, the two Washington Post reporters. So, Trump was, maybe he wasn’t this aggressive in supporting the tobacco industry, but then there’s this added component to it, which is that he thinks MAGA [the Make America Great Again movement] likes vaping. And he was yelling at Azar, saying: You’re costing me votes. You’re going to cost me this election. I’m sorry I ever did this. 

Rovner: Oh, we will see how this one plays out. All right, that’s this week’s news. Now, we’ll play my interview with Michael Cannon and Liz Fowler, and then we’ll come back and do our extra credits. 

I am pleased to welcome to the podcast two people who have taught me a lot over my years covering health policy. And full disclosure, I consider both of them friends. Liz Fowler is a distinguished scholar at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. During the Biden administration, she ran the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, an agency created by the Affordable Care Act, which she helped write as the chief health counsel on the Senate Finance Committee and implement as a senior official in the Obama administration. Michael Cannon is the director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank here in Washington, D.C., and has spent most of the past 16 years trying to get the Affordable Care Act repealed after vehemently and almost successfully blocking its passage. Yet this unlikely pair is on a new mission, pointing out why the first step in the next round of health reform should be to get rid of something called the employer health insurance tax exclusion, which we will explain in a minute. Liz and Michael, welcome. Thanks for doing this. 

Liz Fowler: Thanks for having us. 

Michael Cannon: Thanks for having me. 

Rovner: So for most people this would be a hard question, but you guys have been on the circuit, so one of you give me the 30-second explanation of what the employer tax exclusion is and why it exists in the first place. 

Cannon: So when Congress passed the income tax in 1913, there was no such thing as health insurance, really. So they gave no thought to the question of if an employer provides health insurance to its employees, should that be subject to the tax. The Treasury bureaucrats, when someone presented that idea, said: This is really hard. We don’t know. We’ll just say we’ll exclude that from the tax base, so we won’t tax compensation in the form of employee health insurance. That was in the 1920s. In the 1940s â€” so that gave employer health insurance a boost. In the 1940s there were wage and price controls that gave it a further boost, because employer health insurance was exempt from those wage controls, so it gave employers a way to compete. But it’s really that tax exclusion that is responsible for the fact that more than half of U.S. residents have health insurance through an employer, because it works like this: If your employer gives you a dollar of cash, you have to pay federal income and payroll taxes on that, and you’re left with, on average, at the margin, 66 cents. The federal government takes a third of it. But if the employer gives you that same dollar as health insurance, then you get a dollar’s worth of health insurance. So you can see how this sort of distorts the prices, the after-tax prices that people face, when they’re choosing between more cash wages and spending that money on other things versus spending money on health insurance, employer-sponsored health insurance. And so people more often buy employer-sponsored health insurance, they demand more of it than they would otherwise, and this also lets employers end up controlling about, for the average family with employer coverage, $20,000 of the worker’s earnings. And all of these effects end up increasing spending on employer-sponsored insurance and increasing prices for health insurance, and the fact that it’s encouraging a form of insurance that disappears when you change jobs means it’s creating gaps in health insurance coverage. So, for decades, economists have said: Hey, this is a real problem. We need to solve this. And I would argue that it is really the reason that Congress wanted to enact the Affordable Care Act in the first place, to fill some of the gaps that this exclusion created. 

Rovner: So, Liz, originally this was considered a good idea. It’s like, Oh, we’re encouraging the creation of a new fringe benefit for workers: health insurance. When did it outlive its usefulness? 

Fowler: That’s a great question. I think our workforce is very different. Employment is very different than it was back in the 1940s and ’50s, when my parents or grandparents had the same job for decades and they all got health insurance through their workplace. That has eroded over time. I don’t know exactly, Michael probably knows exactly, what the trajectory has been. We’re now down to about 50% of employees receiving healthcare through their workplace. But people are employed in different ways than they used to. I’ve had several jobs throughout the course of my career. People don’t stay in the same job for decades anymore. And people piece together work in ways that they didn’t. Maybe they have more than one job. Maybe they have a part-time job over here and a part-time job over there. This tying health coverage to employment, I think, has become, is starting to become, anachronistic. And I think for me, in particular, watching the debate over HR1 [congressional Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act] and trying to tie Medicaid coverage to employment or community engagement brought up this whole question of: Why do we tie health benefits to work in 2026? 

And so that’s part of why I wanted to revisit this policy question, which we tried to tackle in the Affordable Care Act and didn’t get very far. And the sort of the distorted version that we included in the law, the “Cadillac tax,” was repealed with a bipartisan â€” what, almost unanimous â€” vote. So I think it’s time to sort of ask these questions again. It’s a very expensive part of the tax code. It’s one of the largest if not the largest tax expenditure in the U.S. tax code, to â€” what â€” close to upwards of $300 billion a year that this benefit provides to a group of workers who are more likely to get health coverage and more likely to get generous health coverage, and at the higher end of the income scale more likely to see a larger benefit. So all of these questions, I think, are ripe for revisiting. 

Rovner: So one of my most vivid memories from covering the Affordable Care Act was a roundtable hearing that the Senate Finance Committee had with all of these economists from across the spectrum talking about how to pay for the Affordable Care Act. And I remember â€” I actually went and looked this back up â€” one of the senators asked what would be the best way to pay for it And one by one by one, these witnesses, eminent health economists from literally every part of the political spectrum, says you need to do something about the employer tax exclusion, literally every one. And obviously, as you said, Liz, they tried. There was sort of the beginnings of this that we called the Cadillac tax, and it was ultimately repealed. Why is this so hard if it, as you guys point out, it doesn’t make very much sense anymore? 

Cannon: Well, it creates a lot of benefits for a lot of very powerful groups. It benefits the health industry because the government is effectively penalizing workers for every dollar of their earnings that they don’t spend on health insurance and medical care. It benefits large employers because they can spread the administrative costs of providing health insurance over a larger number of workers, which means they can take the savings and offer higher salaries than their smaller competitors do, which gives them an advantage in the labor market. So between those two groups right there, you have a very powerful coalition that has blocked, defanged, repealed every effort to try to limit or reform the exclusion, and there have been a lot. Presidents [Ronald] Reagan, [Bill] Clinton, Bush the younger, [Barack] Obama. Presidential candidate John McCain famously tried to reform the tax exclusion, and Barack Obama really, I would say, demagogued that that proposal. I didn’t favor that proposal either, but McCain’s policy director says he still has nightmares about the attack ads that Obama ran. And it’s because of the fear those â€” it’s not just that people have a financial interest in preserving this huge tax break for employer-sponsored insurance. It’s the fear that those special interest groups are able to demagogue, to play upon that people with employer-sponsored health insurance who have expensive medical conditions will lose their coverage and be left with nothing. 

Now I am not a fan of the Affordable Care Act, or what I now call Obamacare. We’ve discussed this. Liz and I do not see eye to eye on that one. I would repeal it tomorrow if I could. But if it is in place, then it actually helps with that problem. It helps with this fear that people would, if we reform the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance, that people will lose their coverage. There’s a lot of evidence to suggest that employer coverage will stick around for the vast majority of workers, but for those for whom it does not, the Obamacare exchanges are there as a sort of safety net, so that should make the politics a little bit easier. 

Rovner: So, obviously, the Cadillac tax didn’t work. What would be a step that would, that possibly could happen, that we could take to start to move away from this? 

Fowler: Well, one of the things that we initially tried to do in the Senate Finance Committee, in an early version of the Affordable Care Act, was to cap the exclusion. So you can say above the 80th percentile, or the 85th percentile, or something lower â€” below that will still exclude it from income. But if you get very generous coverage, very expensive coverage, we’ll start to— 

Rovner: Like Cadillac-type coverage? 

Fowler: Well, but the difference is we’ll include that as income for the worker. I think that’s where we ran into problems and political challenges. I think there was some reluctance to tax individuals, and Oh, that looks like a new tax increase. So the Cadillac tax was, OK, let’s instead put that tax on employers and insurers instead of the workers, and that became very unpopular with, as you can imagine, the employers and the insurers. So it makes sense why it’s been a tortured history and it’s been hard to get done. I think one of the reasons, and Michael talked about this, why it was a little bit scary to go down this road in the past, because you didn’t know where people would get their health coverage if you tried to change the employer structure we have now. But now there is a place. There are marketplaces. And the bigger that risk pool, and the more people are part of it, I think the more affordable and the more stable it becomes over the long run. 

Additionally, I’m not sure employers want to stay in this business. I think it’s becoming very unsustainable to continue to provide very costly insurance that, where the cost is rising at quite a rapid pace, certainly higher than wages, and is eating more and more of a household’s income over time. And so I think if we really lift up the hood and start looking at the potential impacts, the opportunities, the options, the policy options on the table, and have an honest debate about what this could look like, I think there would be more openness perhaps now than there was back in 2010. 

Rovner: Well, thank you both for kicking this off. Michael Cannon. Liz Fowler. This was great. 

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 the links in our show notes on your phone or other mobile device. I’ve already done mine this week. Anna, why don’t you go next? 

Edney: Sure. Mine is in Politico Magazine. One of the co-authors is our podcast colleague Alice Miranda Olstein. It’s “.” And I thought it was a really smart look at something Trump had said, again talking about things he did in his first administration, that we could end the HIV epidemic in the U.S. by 2030 and put policies in place to try to get there. And Alice and her colleague talked to a lot of top former administration people to look at what happened, and it seems to be not one single lightning bolt but sort of that there were all these other policies around Trump 2.0 that â€”DOGE [the Department of Government Efficiency] and other things that cut a lot of this type of funding â€” that created this situation we’re in now, where no one, except maybe Trump himself, thinks we’re going to meet that 2030 goal. 

Rovner: Yeah, a lot of differences between Trump 1.0 and Trump 2.0, as we’ve been discussing. Sheryl. 

Stolberg: So my extra credit is “Tennessee Pharmacies Sell Potent Ivermectin, Led by Anti-Vaccine Doctor Who’s Taken ‘Bucketloads.’” And this appears in Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. It’s by Brett Kelman and Rachana Pradhan. And what I love about this story is it talks about how ivermectin, this drug that actually is a Nobel Prize-winning, generally safe drug approved for treating parasitic diseases in humans, has become kind of this ideological touchstone in our society. And it started during the covid pandemic. And now we’re seeing where people on the right and other influencers were pushing it as a treatment for covid without evidence that it worked, and in fact despite FDA warnings that taking too much of it could cause harm. And now it’s sold over the counter in Tennessee, and Marjorie Taylor Greene was promoting it as a treatment for hantavirus, and— 

Rovner: Which it’s not. 

Stolberg: Which it’s not. Exactly. And it’s just sort of taken on this life in our culture, and I guess I just feel like this story sort of reflects something about this cultural moment and how we are addressing medicine and healthcare as a society, 

Rovner: Indeed. Lauren. 

Weber: So I chose a story titled “,” by Benjamin Mazer in The Atlantic. And it posits this basically interesting thesis, which is that a lot of these chatbots that people use, and even doctors use, are not really regulated by the FDA, and so you kind of are interacting with AI in any sort of healthcare setting, whether you know it or like it or not, and whether those tools are up to snuff or not. And the ending of the article is really the most alarming, because it basically is like: Is this like Uber and Lyft, where Uber and Lyft just disrupted the market so much that we all had to get on board without regulating it more, and that that’s what could happen to hospitals? And I think it’s a really interesting and fascinating question of: What is the role of government regulation when it comes to these AI tools being used in a hospital setting? And are they anywhere near equipped to catch up with what’s going on right now? 

Rovner: Yeah, it’s a really thoughtful piece. All right. That is this week’s show. Thanks to our editor, Emmarie Huetteman, and our producer-engineer, Francis Ying. We also had production help this week from Taylor Cook. A reminder: What the Health? is 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 questions or comments. We’re at whatthehealth@kff.org, or you can find me still on X, , and on Bluesky, . Sheryl, where are you on social media these days? 

Stolberg: I am @SherylNYT  and . 

Rovner: Anna. 

Edney: @annaedney  and . 

Rovner: Lauren. 

Weber: @LaurenWeberHP â€” the HP is for “health policy” —  and . 

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

Credits

Francis Ying Audio producer
Taylor Cook 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-451-democrats-obamacare-midterms-rfk-vaccines-june-18-2026/">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=2249718&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2249718
Arrests of Immigrant Parents Create Mental Health Crisis for Children /mental-health/immigrant-parents-ice-detention-deportation-children-mental-health-california/ Thu, 18 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2249688 LOS ANGELES — Damian Zermeño, 15, sensed something was wrong the moment he got home from school.

His aunt sat at the dining table, sobbing. His father, who’d walked him to the bus stop that morning and promised to take him to dinner when he got back, wasn’t there.

Saúl Zermeño, a 45-year-old single dad, had gone to a routine check-in appointment at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office that morning, a requirement he’d complied with for years. The father had deferred action that allowed him to stay and work in the U.S., according to his attorney. But that day, Oct. 3, officers deported him to Mexico, where he hadn’t lived since he was 9 years old. Zermeño had been Damian’s sole caregiver since he was a baby because his mother chose not to be involved in the boy’s life, the family said.

Suddenly, Damian, who was born in the U.S., found himself separated from his father by thousands of miles and a heavily guarded border. The previously cheerful 10th grader, who doesn’t have a driver’s license and can make a few basic dishes but isn’t used to cooking for himself, faced navigating his teenage years alone, his dad’s presence reduced to a two-dimensional image on his phone.

“I thought it wasn’t true,” Damian said. “I just went to my room. I didn’t want to leave. I didn’t even want to eat.”

Damian is among an estimated , most of them U.S. citizens, separated from a parent by the Trump administration’s deportation policies. Their mothers and fathers have been deported or locked for months inside detention centers, often from where their families live. These children are separated, , from the adults they depend on. Parents have been arrested while , , and at immigration check-ins with their children present. Most people detained have . (Being in the U.S. without authorization is typically a civil offense). With their parents gone, kids’ lives are plunged into fear and uncertainty.

As a result, a generation of children from immigrant families are exhibiting mental health problems that could .

Parents, therapists, and others who work with immigrant families said they’ve already encountered preschoolers with speech delays, elementary school children who talk of suicide, and teenagers too anxious to leave the house. Research has shown repeatedly that separating children from their parents . The stress of losing a primary caregiver creates havoc in a child’s brain and body, increasing their risk for mental and physical health problems, including depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, a weakened immune system, and developmental delays.

“You can just see it in their faces; it’s almost like the light has been dimmed in their eyes,” said the Rev. Tanya Lopez, a pastor at Downey Memorial Christian Church who regularly visits immigrant families as part of a made up of Los Angeles-area religious leaders.

The health risks from this stress response are long-term. People who experience parental separation and other traumatic events as children are heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and other chronic conditions as adults.

In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security said ICE does not separate families, and that parents are asked if they want to be removed from the country with their children or to designate a safe person for them to stay with in the U.S.

However, by the Women’s Refugee Commission and Physicians for Human Rights found that many parents aren’t given that choice, and that ICE often doesn’t ask detainees if they have children or take steps to ensure that children left behind are safe. Saúl Zermeño said ICE officers didn’t ask about his son or check on Damian’s well-being when he was deported.

Two men sit at a table in front of a birthday cake as they smile for a portrait
Damian Zermeño at a birthday celebration a few months before his dad, Saúl Zermeño (right), was deported to Mexico. Damian is one of an estimated hundreds of thousands of children separated from a parent by the Trump administration’s deportation policies. Many of these children suffer mental and emotional health problems as a result. (Claudia Zermeño)

For days after his father’s deportation, Damian didn’t want to leave his room, eat, or go to school. He stopped talking to his friends. He stopped playing his favorite video game, Fears To Fathom. When he returned to school a week later, the teenager would cry in class or walk out overwhelmed with sadness. Even his favorite subject — English — lost its appeal.

Damian and his father were inseparable; family members joked that they never saw one without the other. Zermeño took Damian, who has attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism, and other health conditions, to his medical appointments. He cooked for him and combed his hair. He loved to take Damian to his favorite Thai restaurant or to get boba drinks after school. As much as they joked around and played pranks on each other, Zermeño also taught Damian the importance of work by bringing him along to construction jobs and to find supplies at Home Depot.

Damian used to get annoyed with his father’s motivational chats about responsibility. Now they’re one of the things he misses most.

“I thank my dad every day for teaching me to be strong before he left,” Damian said.

A man holds a smartphone with an image of a video chat with another man
Damian talks to his father over video chat. Saúl, a single parent, was deported to Mexico in October after living 36 years in the United States. Now, the only way the two see each other is through a screen. (Karla Gachet for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Elsewhere in Los Angeles, Jacob, a shy 9-year-old with cropped, curly hair, skinny limbs, and a serious expression, was missing his mom. On a Saturday in May, he clung tightly to his father’s hand as they walked among homeless people, street peddlers, and the stench of urine that hangs in the air outside the building where they live in a cramped apartment. He hoped his mom would soon be released from immigration detention so that he could hug her again.

“If my mom was here, I’d be happy,” he said. “Right now, I’m not.”

Jacob is in some ways a typical 9-year-old. He likes playing Roblox and Street Fighter. He dreams of becoming a police officer and of owning a guard dog, “because you can train them and they defend you.”

But he also endured a harrowing journey, even before being separated from his mom in January. Jacob’s family fled their home country of Colombia in 2024 because members of a paramilitary group threatened to kill them, his father, Andreis, said. During their journey to the United States, Jacob saw dead bodies while trekking through the jungle, was kidnapped and robbed at gunpoint with his parents, witnessed a rape, and had to sell candy and beg for money, his dad said. Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is not using the father’s or son’s real name because the family fears it would jeopardize their asylum cases.

After the family arrived in Los Angeles, Jacob suffered from nightmares and an intense fear of being alone. He started to recover once he began attending school and got connected to therapy through the school district, his dad said. For a short while, the family felt they had found peace.

Then, immigration officers detained Jacob’s mother at a check-in appointment while he and Andreis sat in the waiting room. The mother has a pending asylum application and no criminal record, Andreis said. The father said he and his son broke down when officers informed them of his wife’s detention, handing them a bag with her wallet and cellphone. They returned home without her, leaving Jacob inconsolable.

“He was terrified,” the father said, fighting back tears, his voice growing quiet as he recounted that moment. “He was crying with rage.”

After that, Jacob didn’t want to eat or go to school. When he went to school at his dad’s insistence, his teacher called home to ask why he was crying in class. Jacob couldn’t sleep. He acted out. He blamed his dad.

“When will my mom come back?” he asked his dad. “Why do they have my mom? I miss my mom.”

At the same time, Andreis said, he was going through his own crisis, trying in vain to console his son while wrestling with grief, worry, and desperation over what happened to his wife. He stopped his work as a laborer for two weeks to take care of Jacob, but that created financial stress and meant he sometimes couldn’t afford to fund his wife’s commissary account so she could buy better food and make phone calls. Jacob lived for those phone calls.

Jacob listed all the things he missed about his mom, including her cooking (rice with meat, corn cakes with egg), visiting the park together, and her taking him to get his hair cut, treating him to McDonald’s on the weekend, and bringing him to church. Most of all, he missed being close to her.

“I would lie down with her, and I’d watch videos with her,” he said. “My mom would hug me and I’d hug her.”

Sometimes he sprayed her perfume on himself so he could smell her.

After almost five months at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, Jacob’s mother was released based on a habeas corpus petition in May. The family is still living in fear of detention or deportation. The father worries he too could be detained, and what that would mean for Jacob. Andreis is currently appealing a removal order for the two of them.

A published by the Brookings Institution estimates that over 200,000 children — including 145,000 U.S. citizen children — have likely had at least one parent detained since President Donald Trump returned to office. About a third of those children are under age 6. The number of children with detained parents is expected to grow as the federal government pours over $200 billion into immigration enforcement, including funding from the GOP’s and a appropriation Trump signed this month.

More than 4.6 million U.S. citizen children live with a parent at risk of deportation, according to the report.

Families Broken

Noemi, a Guatemalan mother and asylum seeker, stood in the parking lot at an ICE office north of Los Angeles, her three children wailing and clinging to her, glass from the family’s car scattered at their feet.

Moments earlier, immigration agents had smashed a window and forced her partner out of the car while he waited for Noemi and the kids to finish a check-in appointment. While they were inside, officers tried to separate Noemi from the couple’s children, ages 9, 7, and 1, but gave up after the kids started screaming, Noemi said. Meanwhile, her partner, a Mexican national who’s lived in the U.S. for almost 20 years, was sent to the ICE detention center in Adelanto.

“It was something tragic, something inexplicable that happened that day,” said Noemi, who asked to withhold her full name because she fears government retaliation for sharing her story. “It’s something that marks you for your whole life. My family was broken.”

Located in the Mojave Desert, the privately run Adelanto ICE Processing Center is the immigration detention center closest to Los Angeles and in the U.S. It held a daily average of as of April, and a facility next door called the Desert View Annex held an additional 426.

Since her partner’s detention in December, Noemi said, their children haven’t been the same.

Her 7-year-old daughter, till then usually happy and smiling, became depressed and refused to eat. Her once-high grades plummeted, and she forgot the names of letters and numbers in both English and Spanish. She and her 9-year-old brother struggled to sleep and asked constantly about their dad, wondering if he was taken because they’d done something wrong.

“Why is this happening to us?” they asked her. “We’re good. We’re studying.”

Noemi’s youngest daughter went back to crawling for three months, even though she’d already learned to walk before her father was taken. The little girl would cry out in her sleep, “Pa! Pa!”

Sofia Mendoza, a therapist who works with immigrant families at a community clinic in Los Angeles County, said separated children can experience a form of grief. It’s hard for them to come to terms with their parent’s absence because the parent is still alive, but not with them. This can disrupt the child’s bond with that parent and their ability to form trusting relationships in the future, she said.

Many children also become extremely anxious, angry, and fearful, Mendoza said. Young children often complain of physical symptoms such as stomachaches, develop separation anxiety, and regress to earlier behaviors like bed-wetting. Older children may have panic attacks, nightmares, and difficulty focusing, Mendoza said. Caregiver loss is also associated with and substance use in children.

Norma Gómez, a project manager for the Mixteco Indigena Community Organizing Project in Oxnard, said after immigration raids shook the community last summer, her 9-year-old daughter refused to go to school for a week and was afraid to leave her mom and dad, even though they’re legal U.S. residents. She’d seen other kids at school crying because family members had been detained. Gómez showed her daughter their U.S. residency documents to reassure her. The child asked to make copies for her classmates, hoping they would protect them too.

‘Time To Be an Adult’

Back in East Los Angeles, Damian is living with one of his aunts and struggling to adapt to not having his father around. He said his grades have dropped because he can’t focus in school. He no longer wants to do things he used to enjoy with his dad, such as going out to eat.

“Fun is over,” he said. “It’s time to be an adult right now.”

A man and woman embrace as they stand in front of a window and pose for a portrait
Damian embraces his aunt Claudia Zermeño, who has taken legal guardianship of him since his father was deported to Mexico. She’s caring for him, her two children, and her mother. (Karla Gachet for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
Two women stand in front of a sink and a window as they prepare food in a kitchen
Damian’s aunts prepare lunch at the home the 15-year-old shared with his dad. (Karla Gachet for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
A man and woman stand in front of a sink and an open window as they prepare food in a kitchen
The two women have stepped in to take care of Damian, who has numerous health issues, since their brother was deported. (Karla Gachet for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Being without his father has forced Damian to become more independent, he and his aunt Claudia Zermeño said. Before, his dad did almost everything for him. Now, Damian does his own laundry, helps with housework, and styles his own hair. He’s protective of his aunts, who are both devastated by their brother’s absence; he hugs them frequently and tells jokes to try to cheer them up. He doesn’t want to upset them more by showing his own sadness.

Damian receives therapy both in and outside of school. He said he’s learned breathing exercises that have helped, but he still feels sad and worried a lot of the time. Sometimes he feels angry.

“I try my hardest to think, to stay focused,” he said. “But with everything that’s going on, I can’t keep the facade of ‘everything’s normal’ when I feel heartbroken.”

Saúl Zermeño, now living in Guadalajara, said he’s worried about his son’s health. Damian has a genetic condition called , which causes tumors to grow on nerve tissue in his body, including one in his head that, if not checked regularly by a doctor and monitored by his family, could interfere with his brain. He also suffers from epilepsy and was born with only one kidney, which means he tires easily and doesn’t play sports. Saúl is afraid his son won’t get the care he needs without him there. As Damian’s legal guardian, Claudia Zermeño is doing everything she can for him, but she has two children of her own and is also caring for her mother, who has neurological problems from a stroke.

Damian talks with his dad as often as he can. He hopes to visit his father in Mexico, but he doesn’t have a passport and, as a minor under 16, there are more requirements to get one without his dad present. Saúl is working with an attorney to get permission to legally return to the U.S., but the process is complicated and uncertain.

So, for now, Damian’s hanging on to hope that his dad will be allowed to return and is trying to become the man he believes he should be. He’s making plans to get his driver’s license when he turns 16 this month. He’s given up his goal of going to college and instead wants to get a job right after high school to help his aunts and send money to his dad.

He still cries, but only when he’s alone in his room.

A person holds a smartphone as they sit on a bed
Damian talks to his father over video chat. (Karla Gachet for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
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/immigrant-parents-ice-detention-deportation-children-mental-health-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=2249688&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2249688
Tennessee Pharmacies Sell Potent Ivermectin, Led by Anti-Vaccine Doctor Who’s Taken ‘Bucketloads’ /health-industry/ivermectin-pharmacies-tennessee-anti-vaccine-doctor-denise-sibley/ Wed, 17 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2237252 NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Four years ago, Tennessee became the first state to allow adults to buy the antiparasitic drug ivermectin from a pharmacy without first seeing a doctor. Pharmacies can use a pre-written, blanket prescription to sell to just about anyone who walks through their doors.

The drug is now marketed and sold across the state in roadside shops and small-town strip malls with little oversight from health authorities. Highway billboards advertise ivermectin as “Available Without a Prescription in Tennessee!” while dozens of pharmacies offer highly concentrated pills, sometimes at 10 or 20 times the potency of a standard tablet.

Ivermectin is a approved by the FDA for treating , which can generally be done with a single dose of three or four prescription-strength tablets. It is also used as a dewormer for horses and other livestock.

Its popularity surged during the pandemic as fringe doctors and anti-vaccine activists promoted it as a treatment for covid. have shown that ivermectin is against covid.

Nonetheless, it has since become a symbol of resistance against the medical establishment among conservatives and followers of the Make America Healthy Again movement, championed by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Timothy Caulfield, a professor at the University of Alberta who studies health misinformation, said ivermectin became an “ideological flag” during the covid pandemic, opening the door for influencers to push the drug for other ailments to a “captured audience” even without proof it works for those conditions.

“This is really about profit. This is about political identity. This is about creating distrust in the existing biomedical community. This is about money,” Caulfield said in an interview with ABC News, which partnered with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News to report on ivermectin.

After a hantavirus outbreak on a cruise ship earlier this year, unproven claims that ivermectin is effective against the virus have been spread by some popular social media accounts and right-wing figures, including former congresswoman . The World Health Organization says it has seen that shows ivermectin is an effective hantavirus treatment.

Tennessee’s ivermectin bill was shepherded by a Republican supermajority in 2022. Its passage blindsided state medical officials and handed a victory to medical groups that spread covid misinformation.

Some pharmacy websites now offer the drug as a treatment for covid, “long haul vax symptoms,” diabetes, or cancer — despite no evidence of its effectiveness for those purposes — while the largely gives pharmacists immunity from lawsuits or professional sanctions related to ivermectin.

The law was also a harbinger of legislation to come: More than two dozen states have since considered look-alike bills that would make the politicized medication available without a requiring a doctor visit. 

John Mafi, a UCLA internal medicine physician who has studied the rise of ivermectin among cancer patients, worries it will lure people away from proven treatments. He co-authored a new study in prescribing rates for ivermectin and another antiparasitic drug, particularly in the South. The rise followed a January 2025 episode of the Joe Rogan Experience podcast in which actor Mel Gibson claimed ivermectin and other drugs cured three friends with stage 4 cancer.

“It’s going back to 19th-century quack science,” Mafi said about off-label use of ivermectin. “It is alarming that I’m seeing this really unproven therapy being touted to so many potentially vulnerable Americans.”

A photo of a pill bottle with a small pile of yellow pill capsules in front of it on a teal background.
Concentrated ivermectin pills like these are sold at compounding pharmacies across Tennessee. Under a 2022 law that made the drug available to people without requiring a doctor visit, some pharmacies offer pills that are 10 or 20 times the strength of standard ivermectin tablets. (Brett Kelman/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

The FDA says ivermectin can be . Tennessee has seen a small but concerning rise in signs of overuse. The Tennessee Poison Center, which fields calls from people exposed to drugs or toxic substances, received more than 60 calls for possible ivermectin poisoning in 2025, the most since 2021. They included reports of vomiting, blurred vision, neurological problems, and difficulty walking.

“People are taking this because they just feel unwell. It’s almost like a panacea now,” said Rebecca Bruccoleri, the poison center’s medical director. “I’ve heard rumblings on the internet of using ivermectin for an alternative cancer treatment, and we’re seeing it definitely in here.”

Pharmacist Paul Hughey has dispensed ivermectin under the new law at two Tennessee pharmacies: Mt. Juliet Pharmacy and Compound Rx. He estimated that “up to 20 people in a week” are buying ivermectin but that peak demand was double or triple that amount.

For years, Hughey said in an interview, customers have relayed emotional “testimonies” about the drug healing the sick, “especially with the cancer patients.”

“I’ll get a doctor call in and they say: ‘Guess what. So-and-so is cured.’ And it’s just amazing to hear that. So anybody who doubts that,” Hughey said, “I don’t really know that they’re practicing medicine. I think they’re just following the narrative.”

‘I’ve Taken Bucketloads of This Stuff’

The linchpin of Tennessee’s ivermectin market is , a conservative doctor to the creation of the 2022 ivermectin law. She has with pharmacies across the state empowering them to sell the drug.

Tennessee’s law to dispense ivermectin without a specific prescription for each patient, through a “collaborative pharmacy practice agreement” with a doctor who provides what is functionally a pre-written, nonspecific prescription for all potential customers.

In podcast interviews, Sibley has said she has made as many as 40 of these agreements with Tennessee pharmacies, which she said forward her the paperwork on each ivermectin customer. Before selling the drug, pharmacies are required to ask customers questions about medical conditions and medications that could cause complications if taken with ivermectin. Afterward, the collaborating physician also is expected to receive a record for each person who purchases ivermectin.

“We literally have folks coming from all over the world to get our ivermectin,” Sibley said on in February 2025. “As the collaborator for these pharmacies, I get every person’s sheet.”

“They’re from every state,” she said. “They’re from Canada. They’re from Europe.”

Sibley did not respond to requests for comment.

A woman wearing a white jacket sits at a courtroom table with two men in suit jackets beside her.
Denise Sibley, a doctor and vaccine opponent, testifies before Tennessee lawmakers in favor of the state’s 2022 bill allowing ivermectin to be offered without a specific prescription for each patient. Sibley has since signed agreements that empower numerous pharmacies to dispense ivermectin this way. (Tennessee General Assembly; screenshot by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News has independently confirmed that Sibley signed agreements with at least 10 pharmacies. The agreements say pharmacists shall dispense ivermectin only in Tennessee, where Sibley is licensed, although one of those pharmacies said friends and family in Tennessee can “.”

Hughey, the Tennessee pharmacist, said Sibley had prescribing agreements ready to go when the law was enacted. He credited her with advancing ivermectin sales throughout the state.

“Had Dr. Sibley not stepped in and really pushed forward, there’s no telling how hard it would have been,” Hughey said. “It would have been a lot less widespread.”

Sibley also works with Children’s Health Defense, the Kennedy-founded group that has become one of the nation’s most influential anti-vaccine organizations. In podcasts, Sibley has referred to the covid vaccine as a “” and “ that’s ever been produced.”

Separately, before Tennessee legislators in 2024 about an alleged plot to change the weather and block sunlight. The New York Times then included her .

Sibley has said in podcast interviews that she was told by God to treat covid patients. She said she has advocated for ivermectin ever since.

“God agrees with what I’m doing,” Sibley said in 2023 on the podcast , which is recorded in Nashville. “I wake up every day and I say: ‘Yes, sir. I’m reporting to duty.’”

In legislative and government hearings throughout 2022, Sibley testified that she had treated around 4,400 people with ivermectin, including some Tennessee lawmakers, all without taking payment. Sibley described ivermectin as “a wonder drug” and said making it more available “.”

“I’ve taken bucketloads of this stuff myself,” Sibley said . “I feel like I’ve been a good test subject.”

Sibley has said she dispenses ivermectin using treatment guidelines developed by Paul Marik, who in 2020 co-founded the Independent Medical Alliance, a medical group that has promoted ivermectin as an effective treatment for , , , and .

Some Tennessee pharmacies now follow those protocols, too. The protocols recommend patients take 1.5 to five times as much ivermectin as is normally prescribed to treat parasites, with the dose taken for days or weeks instead of just once.

Marik and other ivermectin proponents sued the FDA in 2022 after it discouraged the use of the drug for covid by tweeting: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.” The agency settled the lawsuit with no admission of wrongdoing and deleted the viral tweet in 2024.

The American Board of Internal Medicine has revoked Sibley’s and Marik’s board certifications but declined to explain why. Sibley still holds a Tennessee medical license; Marik is based in Virginia and is not licensed. Sibley and Marik the internal medicine board’s actions.

In response to questions from Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, Marik, through an Independent Medical Alliance spokesperson, said medical science benefits from “open discussion of ideas and treatments.”

“Many independent doctors have reported that treatments like Ivermectin, in conjunction with traditional treatments, are showing promise. These ideas should be explored,” alliance spokesperson Lynne Kristensen said in an emailed statement.

Marik testified in favor of Tennessee’s ivermectin legislation in 2022, telling lawmakers that it is necessary because people would otherwise buy animal-grade ivermectin in stronger dosages meant for livestock.

“They’re buying ivermectin from farm stores. We don’t know the quality,” Marik said at a March 2022 legislative hearing on the Tennessee bill. “So this would prevent that from happening.”

A close-up shot of ivermectin pill capsules. They are bright yellow, and an orange pill bottle is open, but blurred, in the background.
One study identified a sharp increase in prescribing rates for ivermectin after a January 2025 episode of the Joe Rogan Experience podcast in which actor Mel Gibson claimed ivermectin and other drugs cured three friends with stage 4 cancer. (Brett Kelman/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Tennessee Does Not Track Its Ivermectin Market

Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, and Texas enacted similar laws in 2025, and legislation that makes ivermectin available without the need for a doctor visit has been introduced or debated in at least 24 other states, according to a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News analysis. That means half the country could be following Tennessee down an unlit path, because no one knows the full scope of its ivermectin market.

Tennessee does not effectively track which pharmacies offer ivermectin this way, and the state government has been unable to produce some foundational documents that pharmacies are legally required to file before they sell the drug, according to a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News investigation.

Doctors and pharmacies are the Tennessee Department of Health when they sign agreements that allow ivermectin to be dispensed without patient-specific prescriptions, although it is not clear whether this consistently occurs.

In response to a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News public records request for those ivermectin notifications filed by pharmacies, the agency over three months produced records from only 12 pharmacies, half of which have agreements with Sibley. The agency said it did not locate records related to at least 13 others that Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News has identified as selling ivermectin without requiring individual prescriptions.

Department of Health spokesperson Dean Flener said the agency would not answer questions about whether or how it regulates ivermectin or the pharmacies that distribute it.

Tennessee has said it does not track how much of the drug is sold in the state, and the amount is not well captured by federal or insurance data sources. That’s because the drug is often sold at compounding pharmacies, which make customized medications that are not FDA-approved and rarely covered by insurance. Drugmakers and wholesalers did not respond to questions about how much ivermectin they supply to pharmacies in the state.

Even the Independent Medical Alliance, one of ivermectin’s , says it doesn’t know how much is flowing through Tennessee.

States are getting pressure from clinicians ”who have had success with the use of ivermectin,” said IMA President Joseph Varon, a physician based in Houston. “That’s what happened in Texas, and that’s what happened in Tennessee.”

‘An Unproven, Potentially Unsafe Drug’

Once signed by Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, the state’s ivermectin law took effect immediately — even before the state’s physician and pharmacy licensing boards created rules to guide the process, which Tennessee law also requires. 

Some board members were shocked.

“We’re talking about an unproven, potentially unsafe drug,” Shant Garabedian, a doctor on the state’s Board of Osteopathic Examination, said of off-label ivermectin use during a . “It’s already law. Somehow it passes without our sort of input.”

In meetings that followed, at least five members of Tennessee’s medical boards voiced concerns about the law beyond safety and efficacy. Some said pharmacists could overcharge for a drug that normally costs pennies per pill. Some worried that a loosely regulated, cash-based ivermectin market might attract shady characters, especially because the law also shields prescribers from ivermectin-related civil lawsuits.

“This involves no clinical engagement,” Melanie Blake, then-president of the Board of Medical Examiners, said during a . “If they’re exempt from liability as well, I hate to think of things that individuals could do just to make money, but this would be one.” 

A billboard against a blue sky reads, "Roman Pharmacy / Ivermectin / Available Without a Prescription in Tennessee."
Roman Pharmacy is one of the many compounding pharmacies in Tennessee that offer concentrated ivermectin pills. (Brett Kelman/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

The boards eventually enacted regulations affirming that ivermectin could be dispensed without any diagnosis. Board members said the law left them no choice.

“This is more of a situation where, legally, the legislature has decided for us,” John McGraw, another board member, said in a . “This has sort of tied our hands in a lot of ways.”

The first known sale under the new law occurred in Sibley’s home of Johnson City, a city of about 74,000 people in northeastern Tennessee. According to a , Sibley entered into a collaborative agreement with pharmacist Josh Harrison at The Compounding Lab, which dispenses drugs for people and animals. 

The first customer was Bernadette Pajer, an anti-vaccine activist who has worked with Children’s Health Defense. In a of the Nashville podcast Rebunked With Scott Armstrong, Pajer said Sibley was a medical adviser for the group and described the first ivermectin sale.

“On that day, she was the doctor, he was the pharmacist making the sale, and I was the first customer,” Pajer said. “So that was pretty cool.”

Ivermectin pharmacies have spread across the state. In the suburbs of Nashville, Roman Pharmacy advertises ivermectin on at least four billboards along Interstate 65, and is mostly focused on the drug. Outside Knoxville, allows customers to order ivermectin for multiple sclerosis and Parkinson’s disease, or “to use it to detoxify.”

Roman Pharmacy did not respond to interview requests. Fresh Pharmacy declined an interview.

In Chattanooga, the Medicine Counter pharmacy says on its website that ivermectin should be taken “only as prescribed by your healthcare provider.” And yet the pharmacy sells some of Tennessee’s available without a prescription from a doctor — up to 21 times as strong as a standard tablet, for nearly $19 per pill — according to the Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News analysis.

Himanshu Patel, Medicine Counter’s head pharmacist, declined to be interviewed. He said in an email that the pharmacy operates in a “very competitive market” and that its strongest pills were below the maximum dose for humans evaluated by the FDA for safety purposes.

And then there is Compound Rx, which, in addition to selling ivermectin in its store, has built a website in preparation to ship nationwide. The site, which is in “test mode,” cannot currently make any sales. It also asks customers how they heard about the pharmacy, with a dropdown menu of answers that features right-wing figures such as Donald Trump Jr., Steve Bannon, Laura Ingraham, and Kevin Sorbo.

Who is not listed as an option? Your doctor.

The exterior of a single-floor building. A banner on the side of it reads, "COMPOUND RX PHARMACY / OTC Ivermectin Available."
Compound Rx, in Cookeville, Tennessee, is one of dozens of pharmacies in the Volunteer State that offer ivermectin without patient-specific prescriptions. Some pharmacies advertise the drug as available over the counter, even though customers technically have to request it from a pharmacist. (Brett Kelman/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Hughey, the Compound Rx pharmacist, said he wasn’t involved with the website, which he said may never launch.

The highly concentrated pills are a concern for Tennessee state Sen. Richard Briggs, who worries lawmakers have created a “dangerous” ivermectin market rife with “misleading advertising” about what the drug can actually do.

Briggs, who is a surgeon and the only Republican who voted against the ivermectin bill in 2022, said he planned to introduce legislation to rein in the sale of ivermectin when lawmakers reconvene in 2027.

“But it may be a hard sell, because with the anti-vaxxers and some of these other folks,” Briggs said. “We don’t base a lot of things that we do on science, data, or facts. To a lot of folks in the legislature, the facts are just an inconvenience.”

‘Enough Trouble With Ivermectin’

Lawmakers in at least seven states have considered ivermectin legislation this year, including Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, and South Carolina. If enacted, these bills would allow people to obtain ivermectin without an individual prescription, like in Tennessee, or make it available over the counter.

Kennedy praised such legislation at an event in Texas last August.

“I think it’s a really good bill,” he said of Texas’ ivermectin legislation, according to . “I think Americans should have the choice.”

But proponents have hit roadblocks. A Utah bill failed to advance out of the state House this year. In Oklahoma, some lawmakers have put up a fight.

“I’m a scientific person. I need to see some research and some data that shows what we’re treating,” Oklahoma state Rep. Cynthia Roe, a Republican and nurse practitioner who opposes the state’s ivermectin bill, said in an interview. “And God forbid somebody start giving it to their kid.”

Back in Tennessee, one of the medical boards that was alarmed when the law was enacted in 2022 started to distance itself from ivermectin altogether.

In January, the Board of Medical Examiners grappled with how to punish Ricky Lee Jackson, a doctor who was licensed in Tennessee and had been sanctioned and fined by Washington state’s medical commission. The Tennessee board normally mirrors punishments from other states without hesitation. But the Washington case centered on Jackson prescribing ivermectin for covid, which in Tennessee no longer required a patient to see a doctor.

After a debate, the board voted to reprimand Jackson — but told its staff to ensure the public record made .

“This board has been in enough trouble with ivermectin,” member Keith Anderson said, according to a . “Maybe we ought to just leave that out.”

journalist Blake Farmer and reporter Adam Friedman 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/ivermectin-pharmacies-tennessee-anti-vaccine-doctor-denise-sibley/">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=2237252&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2237252
The Drip, Drip, Drip of Declining Coverage /podcast/what-the-health-450-aca-enrollment-drops-june-11-2026/ Thu, 11 Jun 2026 18:56:29 +0000 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.

When Congress failed to extend the covid-era enhanced subsidies for the Affordable Care Act, many experts predicted millions of people would lose coverage because they would be unable to make payments toward the higher premiums. It has taken a few months, but that prediction seems to be coming true.

Meanwhile, controversy in the medical community about how — or whether  â€” to work with the Trump administration burst into the open at the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association, as members who were handing out an editorial criticizing the administration’s cuts to biomedical research were evicted from the event, prompting a backlash.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, Lizzy Lawrence of Stat, Sandhya Raman of Bloomberg Law, and Lauren Weber of The Washington Post.

Panelists

Lizzy Lawrence photo
Lizzy Lawrence Stat
Sandhya Raman photo
Sandhya Raman Bloomberg Law
Lauren Weber photo
Lauren Weber The Washington Post

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

  • A from The Commonwealth Fund highlights enrollment declines in Affordable Care Act marketplaces, a trend experts predicted when Congress did not renew the enhanced ACA tax credits at the end of 2025. As consumers continue to struggle with rising costs for groceries, gas, and other expenses, individuals who lost that additional financial assistance to purchase health insurance may be facing higher premium costs and more out-of-pocket expenses.
  • Concerns over the difficulty of implementing the administration’s Medicaid work requirements, along with potential legal challenges, may mean the regulations could be delayed or even reversed. For example, doctor and patient groups contend that the requirement that physicians determine whether each individual can work the required 80 hours per month will create unintended consequences, such as paperwork and bureaucratic hassles, for patients and their doctors, rather than decrease fraud in the program.
  • On Capitol Hill, fewer days in session and more days on the midterm campaign trail, plus a lack of bipartisanship, likely mean that lawmakers may be less willing to find a path forward to strengthen the financial solvency of the Medicare and Social Security trust funds. The programs’ annual trustees’ report found that the two entitlement programs, which provide benefits to millions of people, will technically become insolvent in 2033. In recent years, lawmakers have been inclined to act only when facing an imminent deadline rather than taking action to avoid a future problem.
  • Leaders of the American Diabetes Association apologized for having security escort several doctors and researchers, including the editor-in-chief of the association’s flagship medical journal and a past president of the ADA, from the group’s annual research meeting for distributing a journal editorial criticizing the administration’s cuts to biomedical research. The incident highlighted how fearful some nonprofit leaders are of taking on the Trump administration.

Also this week, Rovner interviews KFF’s Tricia Neuman, who is retiring this month as a senior vice president and the executive director of the Program on Medicare Policy. 

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

Julie Rovner: Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ “Anguished Parents. Doctors in Tears. Utah’s Long Measles Outbreak Takes a Toll,” by Amy Maxmen.

Sandhya Raman: CIDRAP’s “,” by Liz Szabo.

Lizzy Lawrence: The Chicago Tribune’s “,” by Christy Gutowski and Gregory Royal Pratt.

Lauren Weber: ProPublica’s “,” by Annie Waldman.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

  • Politico’s “,” by Alice Miranda Ollstein and Robert King.
  • The New York Times’ “,” by Sheryl Gay Stolberg.
  • MedPage Today’s “,” by Kristina Fiore and Kristen Monaco.
  • Stat’s “,” by Anil Oza.
  • Fierce Healthcare’s “,” by Paige Minemyer.
  • Stat’s “, Federal Investigators Find,” by Casey Ross and Bob Herman.
Click to open the transcript Transcript: The Drip, Drip, Drip of Declining Coverage

[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, June 11, at 10 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 Lauren Weber of The Washington Post. 

Lauren Weber: Hello, hello. 

Rovner: Lizzy Lawrence of Stat News. 

Lizzy Lawrence: Hi there. 

Rovner: And Sandhya Raman of Bloomberg Law. 

Sandhya Raman: Hello, everyone. 

Rovner: Later in this episode, we’ll have my interview with my colleague Tricia Neuman, who’s stepping down from her post here as KFF senior vice president and executive director of the Program on Medicare Policy, after a long and distinguished career shaping and analyzing the nation’s most prominent health insurance program. But first, this week’s news. I want to start this week with kind of a slow-motion news story that I want to make sure doesn’t get overlooked. It’s the continuing signals of declining health insurance coverage in the U.S. The Commonwealth Fund reports this week that state Affordable Care Act marketplaces are seeing the predicted shedding of policies by consumers who can’t make their premium payments. In Maryland, for example, 13% of enrollees fell off their plans between open enrollment and April of this year. That’s compared to just 3% last year. At the same time, more people are becoming underinsured because they, quote, “bought down” coverage from gold- or silver-level policies to bronze, leaving them with lower premiums but often multi-thousand-dollar deductibles. Meanwhile, three Democrat-led cities and a Democrat-led county have sued the Department of Health and Human Services over the regulation governing sign-ups for next year’s Affordable Care Act plans, charging that changes like allowing non-network plans and still higher out-of-pocket caps violate the terms of the ACA itself. So what is the outlook for the ACA, now that it’s June and it seems pretty clear that Congress is not going to extend those additional subsidies that expired at the end of last year? 

Weber: I’d say it’s not looking good, Julie, the way you just laid it out. I mean, I think the bottom line is this is a train wreck we’ve been watching in slow motion for many, many months, in the sense that you’re going to see a lot of people lose coverage. This is not exactly happening during a booming economic time, so you’ve got people cutting back because of high grocery bills, high etc., and then they see their health care go up tremendously, and they can’t cut it. And then they end up in plans that could leave them with massive bills at the end of the day. I do think this will lead to more of a groundswell of outcry, because it’s hitting folks â€” most affected, as The Commonwealth Fund pointed out, are not those in the lowest category; it’s the folks â€¦ where the subsidies ran out kind of in the mid-tier. And so you’re getting some more middle-class or lower-middle-class folks that are seeing some very, very steep health care bills. 

Rovner: Yeah, and as you point out, at the same time they’re seeing their gas bills go up, and their grocery bill’s up and basically prices for everything else. But I mean, I think there was a lot of like real sticker shock with the insurance, because you know, well, you know, gas is up $1 a gallon, and it hurts to go from paying, you know, $25 or $30 to fill your tank to $45 or $50, it’s not like saying, Hey, you’re going to go from paying $300 a month to paying $1,300 a month, which is what we saw from a lot of people.  

Meanwhile, both doctor and patient groups are up in arms over the new Medicaid work rules issued by the Trump administration last week. Rather than allowing states to automatically exempt from the work requirement people with certain conditions that would qualify them as, quote, “medically frail,” the rules stipulate that beginning in 2028 Medicaid recipients will have to prove at least twice a year not just that they have a condition, but that that condition prevents them from working. Patient groups say that will result in people who most need health insurance losing it and possibly getting sicker. Doctors, including the American Medical Association, which was conveniently having one of its meetings this week, worry that the burden of making that determination is going to fall on them, and that doctors aren’t trained for these things. They also point out that many chronic conditions fluctuate, leaving people sometimes able to maintain daily activities, like working, and sometimes not. Might this get changed due to the outcry? I think the administration, so far, seems to be saying that not doing it this way lets too many people off the hook. 

Lawrence: Yeah, I mean, I think that this is one of those things â€” again, it’s starting in January 2028. There’s sort of a year tail. I’m curious â€¦ there’s enough time that this could keep getting pushed down the road and possibly reversed, and you know, there’s also legal challenges. I know that my colleagues wrote about the Legal Action Center saying that CMS [the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services] is exceeding its authority here, so definitely we should be watching to see what happens with that. 

Rovner: Like many people, I was surprised at the rules as they came out. But I’m also a little bit taken aback at how broad the backlash is, particularly to this part â€” to the really, you’re going to require people with cancer to prove that they can’t meet work requirements? And how are they going to do that? And are people on Medicaid really going to be able to get doctors to, like, write them notes to say this person should be exempted? I mean, it just, it seems like a huge bureaucratic morass. 

Lawrence: Absolutely. 

Raman: Oh, I was just gonna say, from all sides, you know, if you are on Medicaid, and maybe there’s the burden of just transportation to get to that appointment, and, you know, having the time and the energy if you have a chronic illness, but then also we’ve heard time and time again how workforce issues, doctors are already overworked and don’t have the time to do so many of the things they already have to do. This is another burden for them to be able to have to eventually do this with the limited time they do have. 

Rovner: Lauren. 

Weber: It also seems incredibly subjective. I mean, I know they said that they’re trying to get to it through the codes, but, as  [Miranda Ollstein], I mean, how does one even really evaluate that? And people can work in different stretches. Also, with the flexibility many people have now to work from home, there is an opportunity for some folks maybe to be able to work, depending on what their job is. It’s just a minefield of unintended consequences, probably. So we’ll see how that goes. 

Rovner: I’ll say, this has a long way to play out. Well, along similar lines, there are also concerns that the new crackdown on fraud that’s being spearheaded by the Trump administration is threatening people’s coverage as well. In Ohio, lawmakers rushing to address home healthcare fraud tried to speed through a bill that included a provision to ban family members from qualifying as care providers for people with disabilities. That was ultimately removed from the bill when it was pointed out that such a change could result in more people having to be institutionalized, costing the state far, far more than paying family members to help people. I’m sure we’re going to see similar efforts to crack down on fraud in more states, because the federal government is threatening to take away money. Although, as administration officials continue to claim widespread fraud throughout the home health and hospice care systems, I imagine that we’re going to see more give-and-take on this one too. 

Weber: It seems like another example of shoot first, look later. I mean, in general, that clearly would have been a very bad provision to keep in the bill. If you know anything about home healthcare, you know that most of the time it is a family member giving up much of their time and effort to keep a loved one in the home. And so wild that that was even in there to start with. I think in general this goes to this long-running conversation around fraud. Again, there is a lot of healthcare fraud. I think we should all be very clear. There’s a lot of fraud that needs to be addressed. But you can say a lot of things about fraud obliquely, but then when you get to the brass tacks, you got to be careful about what you’re doing. So this is just another example of that, and how we’ve seen the Trump administration move on this that may or may not end up in problematic outcomes. 

Rovner: Yeah, Dr. [Mehmet] Oz [the CMS administrator] keeps talking about, you know, family members who are helping carry in groceries or driving people to doctors’ appointments. That’s not what these paid caregivers are doing. These are people who are basically unable to work because they need to be with this person that they are caring for 24/7, 365. I mean, there’s a lot of work involved here that’s way more than I think a lot of people who are in Washington or, I guess in this case, in Baltimore writing these rules sometimes realize. And I think that was brought home rather vividly in Ohio when they tried to do this and then were suddenly given the facts on the ground and said, Oops, maybe we should try this another way. But Lauren, you’re right, it’s not to say that there isn’t plenty of fraud to be fought. 

Well, moving on, this week we also got the annual report from the trustees of Social Security and Medicare. Not much has changed from last year as far as when the trust funds that support the programs will technically become insolvent. For Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, it’s still 2033, but a quarter earlier â€” so three months’ difference. Still, that’s only seven years away. In earlier times, I’ve been doing this a long time, seven years to insolvency would set off alarm bells in Congress and the administration, and would prompt action, or at least attempted action. Are we yawning our way into a very large financial crisis impacting one of the most popular health programs in the country? 

Raman: I think it’s a combination of things. A) I feel like every year we are more loose with deadlines. We address them in Congress closer and closer to them. So something that several years ago would be a big conversation ahead of time, we push it closer. And I think also the appetite in Congress to get things done right now is low, to find bipartisan agreement. And so getting something done on this would be quite difficult right now with all the other competing priorities there. 

Rovner: I think they were floating the idea of another budget reconciliation bill â€” “Reconciliation 3.0,” I guess they were calling it. And my reading of the consensus is that it is not happening. Whether there’s not enough appetite or not enough votes, or combination of those two, it doesn’t look like Congress is ready to take on something as big as Let’s make sure that Social Security and Medicare are there for the retiring baby boomers and Gen Xers, who are going to shortly follow

Raman: Especially in a midterms year where they’re not in as much as they might be at other times. 

Rovner: Yes, that’s right. They are definitely in and out. All right. Well, we’re going to take a quick break. We’ll be right back. 

Meanwhile, over at the Department of Health and Human Services, our podcast colleague  of Secretary RFK Jr. over last weekend, saying he has, quote, “shown little interest in managing the details of work in his department,” and that he, quote, “is single-mindedly focused on his top priorities, including food recommendations and pesticide exposures, and hunting for evidence to support his long-held beliefs that vaccines are harmful.” And, indeed, the big press event Kennedy had this week was to tout his effort to get medical schools to teach their students more about nutrition, something most medical schools had already been doing, I hasten to add. And, of course, there are still no confirmed, and in some cases even nominated, heads for some major HHS agencies, including the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, which oversees things like the Ebola outbreaks. I would note that Kennedy responded to Sheryl’s story just Wednesday â€” so, like, five days after it appeared, basically saying he’s doing much more than she realizes. What are we to make of this whole thing? 

Weber: I would encourage everyone to read Kennedy’s response, and then I would also be curious if Kennedy would like to show me where his public calendars are that he talks about in his tweet, because I would love to look at them, and I’m sure Sheryl would too. But I thought Sheryl’s framing of the story was very clear-headed and accurate. I mean, look, the bottom line is the secretary has not been publicly engaged on the Ebola response at all, which is somewhat surprising. He does not have any of these people in place. I mean, take your pick. I mean, it’s all these agencies are rudderless currently, and he has very clearly expressed serious interest in his pet projects, but has not been as engaged, according to Sheryl and all of our reporting, in some of these other issues. And I think it’s a fair look at what that means for his legacy going forward, and what that will mean in the months to come. 

Rovner: Right. And you know what’s going on actually in health right now. Over at FDA, they’ve apparently begun the safety study of mifepristone, the abortion pill, that the administration has been promising anti-abortion groups for more than a year now. But it appears that study won’t be ready before the midterms, which is actually what Republican strategists had advised, so it wouldn’t further inflame the campaign season. This is up your alley. Is this FDA acting Commissioner Kyle Diamantas’ effort to win the permanent job, or is this the White House still trying to kind of placate both sides to the debate for as long as it can possibly get away with? 

Lawrence: Yeah, so Kyle Diamantas has said to many different people that he doesn’t want the job, including to me via an HHS media spokesperson, so I tend to believe him. Although it seems likely that he will be in this role for a while, because of how many leadership positions the HHS needs to fill, and how few days there are of Congress. With the mifepristone study, it seems like, yeah, I mean, I think the timing is not lost on anyone. This seems to have worked out politically pretty well for the Trump administration, where it’s a six-month study, they can kind of see what happens in the midterms, and see, because you know, [Sen. Bill] Cassidy, this is a huge issue for him. Any FDA commissioner they’re going to put in front of him, he’s going to be hammering on mifepristone, pro-life issues. So, as long as they can pursue the strategy that they have been pursuing, of sort of just waiting and seeing and saying that they’re working and pushing it out. I think that’s what they’re going to keep doing. 

Rovner: I guess there’s this continuing promise that the administration will try to sort of rein back in on the mail-order abortion drugs, which is, I guess, what’s really â€¦ I don’t think anybody thinks that they’re going to try to revoke the approval of mifepristone. I think what the anti-abortion folks are hoping now is that they’re going to revoke the mail-order ability of people to get mifepristone, which, of course, we’ve seen people using in abortion-ban states to basically evade those abortion bans. It’s obviously a big deal for both sides that the administration would like to keep under wraps as long as it possibly can. Is that a fair assessment? 

Lawrence: Absolutely. Yeah, and I mean, there’s no safety reason to do that, so â€¦ there will be huge blowback from pro-choice advocates, but also within the agency, I would imagine, this would be a huge turning point. 

Rovner: Well, that’s the FDA. Then there is the National Institutes of Health, which actually does have a Senate-confirmed leader, Jay Bhattacharya, although he’s currently doing double duty, also overseeing CDC. But apparently things aren’t so great over at NIH. Last June, 300 NIH staffers published something they called the “Bethesda Declaration,” named for the location of NIH’s main campus, in which they said that the new administration’s policies were undermining the agency’s mission, wasting public resources, and harming the health of Americans and people across the globe. Now, one year later, about 70 NIH’ers have , including one we talked about last week that would give political appointees far more say about who gets research grants and how those grantees can behave. And another policy that would strip civil service protections from many senior employees, so they could more easily be fired for not going along with the administration’s political priorities. I guess this is this week’s trend. What seemed kind of shocking last year is now kind of status quo, right? I saw very little attention to any of these stories that are enormous changes from how the nation’s science agencies have operated over Republican and Democratic administrations in the 40 years I’ve been doing this. 

Raman: I think that one thing we’ve really seen is just how much some of these science-oriented groups have mobilized over some of these issues, just, you know, kind of stating that researchers that have been doing this kind of work for 20, 30, 40 years, that this is so out of the realm of anything they’ve seen before. This would, you know, jeopardize their research and their stability and just the way that they have been doing work for so many years. And I think even with both of the rules that we, that you mentioned, that has been something that has been really amplified by them. But I think it has been, given the number of other things happening, this space not really trickled down to the broader set of folks to really, you know, tap into. We have Ebola, we have so many other things that people, I think, are a little bit more top of mind, even though this is a huge change that under normal circumstances would have more attention paid to it. 

Rovner: Yeah, I think that’s fair. This is sort of the continuing shock and awe that we see of the administration trying to make all of the changes that it wants at once, so nobody gets a chance to focus on any of them. In sort of what we would consider normal times, any one of these would be the overwhelming story of the day. 

Well, all of this brings us to what I consider the wildest story of the week. There was plenty of drama at, of all places, the annual research meeting of the American Diabetes Association in New Orleans. And props, by the way, to the website MedPage Today for breaking this within hours of its happening last Friday. I will just read the original headline: “.” So the keynote address to open the conference was supposed to be given by NIH Director Bhattacharya, but he dropped out at the last minute. While the audience was inside listening to a talk instead from NIH senior adviser Richard Wojcik, five doctors and researchers, including the editor-in-chief of the association’s flagship medical journal, as well as a past president of the ADA, were outside handing out a thousand copies of an editorial from the journal criticizing the administration’s cuts to biomedical research. At the direction of the organization, those protesters â€” can you even really call them protesters? â€” were escorted out by security and told they could not return to the conference. And from there the backlash began. Sixty-five hundred people signed a letter of complaint to the association. Two top officials resigned, and, finally, five days later, the CEO apologized to the “editorial hander-outers” via a video. But I want to pose a larger question. This was a real-world playing out of the tensions that we were just talking about are boiling within science. Should they try to work with this administration, or should they try to fight it? It would appear that the answer to that is kind of still up for grabs. Isn’t that what this demonstrates? 

Lawrence: Yeah, I mean, I think that it’s a clear tension between what the members of these major medical organizations want, which, like you said, 6,500 people signed that letter. There is a real appetite to try to fight back and push back, but there’s a real fear among leadership to do anything. â€¦ This was just mind-boggling, and my colleague Liz wrote about the backlash, and their decision to escalate the situation in this way brought so much more attention than, you know, five people handing out a journal editorial would initially. So fear can lead people to do things that ultimately don’t serve their purposes. 

Rovner: Yeah, I left out the part about the ADA leaders sort of over the weekend trying to justify the expulsion of the “editorial hander-outers,” as I will call them, by saying, Oh, it could affect our 501(c)(3) status, or they were violating the code of conduct, for, you know, for the meeting. But not only did those things not fly, they did seem to make things worse. Lauren, you wanted to add something. 

Weber: I just want to say that’s probably the most press an ADA meeting has ever gotten in its entire life. So, I mean, if they â€¦ 

Rovner: Absolutely. 

Weber: At the end of the day, I mean, these, as you point out, Lizzy, I mean, this editorial guy read a lot more and got a lot more attention because of it, so we’ll see what happens from here. 

Rovner: Yeah, but I think it’s sort of a cautionary tale for leaders of these organizations who â€” do we want to fight or do we want to try to get along, and maybe you ought to ask your members first? We’ll see if this sort of comes out at other meetings. Now it’s the beginning of the summer, it’s when a lot of these scientific meetings happen. I’ll be watching more of them a little more closely. 

Well, finally, this week, it’s June, and that means it’s the season for working on the spending bills on Capitol Hill. This week we actually got a lengthy public markup of the bill that funds the majority of the Department of Health and Human Services. A reminder: FDA is funded in the Agriculture bill because food. Sandhya, how is the Labor-HHS bill shaping up? It looks like Congress isn’t going to go along with the big cuts proposed by the Trump administration, but that’s not saying there won’t be fights about funding, right? 

Raman: Yeah, so I would say you’re right. The big takeaway from this House markup is that it kind of bucked some of the White House’s suggestions on, you know, what to do with funding for this. They funded $111 billion for HHS, if this is made into law â€” so a much smaller cut â€¦ of what the White House was proposing. That included things like $100 million more for NIH, which has been something in the past worried about cuts; and funded some things that I think we’re interesting, you know, CDC’s office for smoking [Office on Smoking and Health], something that had been subject to the DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency] cuts last year; , something else that â€¦  

Rovner: Yeah, I want to address that separate, I want to get to the amendments in a second. But I mean, just sort of in terms of funding, I mean, and we should point out that $100 million for NIH â€” NIH has a budget of like $40-some billion, so yeah, it’s not a big increase. It’s a rounding error increase, but it’s not a cut. 

Raman: Yes, not a cut. So the next step for this would be the House floor, but we might get kind of stalled there just because the issue on the Senate side is they’ve not agreed to top-line numbers for funding yet, and they need those in order to shape out the individual bills. So, without that, we’re kind of in a standstill, and it might be a little bit more like we’ve seen in some of the years past, where the House goes through, they make a bill, they vote on the bill, and then the Senate doesn’t publicly do theirs, but then we get to an agreement a little further down the line. But what Sen. Susan Collins, who heads the Senate Appropriations Committee, has been saying is that, you know, she wants more for NIH than what’s been presented here. But without those top lines, we don’t know. So, we’ll see, you know, in years past, we’ve really just, the funding year deadline has been pushed and pushed and pushed, so â€¦ 

Rovner: Into the next funding year. Often. 

Raman: Yes, and I think, especially like I said, when it’s a midterms year, they’re going to be in far less than normal. It’s not clear when there’s going to be the appetite to get all of that done. 

Rovner: So, often these spending bills, when they move â€” and of course they haven’t moved when they were supposed to for the last however many years â€” but it does sometimes give a chance for lawmakers to express frustration or doubt or simply disapproval with things that the administration is doing. And one of the things that they seem to be expressing disapproval is the administration’s plan to use prior authorization, which is very controversial, in Medicare, and AI â€” in fact, an AI prior authorization in Medicare, and on a bipartisan basis. They voted to tell the administration, No, please don’t do this. I’m wondering, you know, it may not become law on this bill, but this does suggest that there is bipartisan concern in Congress about these efforts on behalf of Medicare, right? 

Weber: Well, I think this goes back to our Medicare insolvency conversation earlier. Who votes? It’s the people that are on Medicare. So, and how unpopular would it be if they were to be limited in what they can access for their health care services? So, I think at the end of the day, the reason that’s bipartisan is these lawmakers know who’s keeping them in office, and prior authorization has a very bad name. I mean, it’s very interesting, because CMS has said that this will help cut down costs, but also has, out of the other side of its mouth, in hearings and so on, Oz has decried insurers using prior authorization. So there’s a lot of “for thee but not for me” vibes going on here. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t seem like this will advance because of the bipartisan opposition. 

Rovner: And of course, Lizzy, your colleagues at Stat have talked about, you know, private companies using enhanced prior authorization, which nobody seems to think is a great idea, and now we have Medicare proposing it. 

Lawrence: Yeah, I was going to say prior authorization, already unpopular, add AI to the mix. I mean, there’s not â€¦ yeah, Bob and Casey, my colleagues, , but just, in general, there is not a lot of goodwill for the AI industry with data centers and all kinds of unpopular initiatives. So, yeah, it makes sense we’re seeing strong bipartisan disapproval of this.  

Rovner: If it doesn’t show up in this bill, I wouldn’t be surprised to see it show up in some other bill that’s more likely to make it to the finish line. All right, that is this week’s news. Now we’ll play my interview with KFF’s Tricia Neuman, and then we’ll come back and do our extra credits. 

I am pleased to welcome back to the podcast my colleague and friend Tricia Neuman, who is retiring as KFF senior vice president and executive director of the Program on Medicare Policy, after a long and distinguished career here and on Capitol Hill, shaping, analyzing, and explaining Medicare policy to people like me, as well as to the nation’s decision-makers. Tricia, thanks for taking some time as you wrap things up. 

Tricia Neuman: Julie, thank you for having me. 

Rovner: So, let’s go back to the beginning, if you can remember that. What got you interested in pursuing Medicare as your health policy specialty? 

Neuman: You know, I didn’t think about it as Medicare, but I thought about it in the context of my family. I was â€¦ I remember watching my grandfather and seeing him struggle. He had Alzheimer’s, and he was trying to tie his shoe, and he couldn’t remember, and I somehow got interested in aging. And I was interested in government, and so I came to Washington ready to do policy, and I ended up at the Senate Aging Committee, which was perfect. And I got into Medicare because I had an older colleague who said, Look, you got to choose a specialty; you can do Social Security, pensions, retirement income, or you can do health and long-term care. Figure it out and go there. And so I did. 

Rovner: Yeah, and like me, you can stay forever if you want to. 

Neuman: And I seem to have stayed forever. 

Rovner: So, what’s the biggest misperception about Medicare as it exists today? People look at Medicare, and it’s like a chameleon. They see all these different things. 

Neuman: Boy, I could give you a few answers to that. I mean, one answer is people think Medicare is going broke. Medicare cannot go broke, but Medicare faces financing challenges. Interesting, you know, we talk about that today. Today’s the day that the “Medicare Trustees Report” came out, and actually, there wasn’t much of a change, a notable change. It was a slight tweak, but it’s still 2033 for the year that Medicare will be insolvent. What that means is that there won’t be enough money to pay all benefits, but it doesn’t mean the program is going broke. To me what it means is it’s time to think about how to finance care for an aging population, and what are the policy options that can do that. It’s generally reducing spending or finding new revenues, but it’s easier to do it in advance than â€¦ to wait until we’re at the precipice of a crisis. So that’s really what it signals to me. But it cannot go broke. 

Rovner: Over the years, Congress has dealt with these periodic, you know, predictions about Medicare insolvency in various ways that they have, you know, sometimes they’ve actually acted when insolvency has seemed relatively near, and sometimes they have acted to make insolvency closer. This Congress doesn’t seem to be as plugged into Medicare as many previous ones. Is that a fair way to put it? 

Neuman: I think it’s fair. Julie, when you and I were working on the Hill, as your beat at the time at the Ways and Means Committee, Medicare was front and center. Medicare was part of budget conversations. Medicare was part of legislation that we dealt with every year. And that meant every year members of Congress worked hard to tweak the program, achieve some savings, also make some improvements. But Medicare was the big story. Really, of late, really, since the ACA, the ACA has been the story, Medicaid has been the story, but Medicare, oddly, has been sort of a stepchild off to the side. 

Rovner: I like to describe Medicare as one of the biggest paradoxes in health policy. Simultaneously, it’s incredibly popular â€” I mean, one of the most popular programs ever created by the federal government â€” and yet it’s actually pretty lacking as a really comprehensive health coverage. I think if people actually had, quote-unquote, “Medicare for All” the way we have Medicare today, they wouldn’t be very happy with it. 

Neuman: I think that’s right. I mean, people I know on Medicare, and soon that will be me, are very happy with the program. They like the fact that â€¦ it’s reliable, they can count on it. There are some issues between people in traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage. But it’s, you know, people are pretty happy. At the same time, there’s relatively high cost sharing, premiums are going up, and Medicare doesn’t cover some of the most expensive things for people as they grow older, such as dental, which is a big one, hearing aids, vision, which is to a lesser extent not quite as expensive. And the big one that nobody really wants to address is long-term services and support, home care for people who need help at home, assisted living, nursing home coverage, all of that is super expensive, and Medicare really doesn’t cover it. And that is a big surprise to families when all of a sudden they have a family member who needs this help and Medicare won’t pay for it. 

Rovner: Yeah, I feel like about every five years, another generation of health reporters discovers, Hey, Medicare doesn’t cover long-term care. I never knew that

Neuman: And a lot of time they’re discovering it because a family member of theirs needs long-term care. 

Rovner: So, I know you’re retiring, but I also know that you’re going to continue to stay engaged, because I know you. What do you think is the biggest challenge that you hope that lawmakers will address in Medicare in the next five, 10 years? 

Neuman: Oh, I have a wish list. I do hope that they’ll continue to put affordability at the top of the list. That means looking at these expenses that are not covered by Medicare, keeping an eye on premiums. Right now, 7 million people on Medicare pay more than 10% of their income on Part B premiums. That’s a big deal. So, keeping an eye on affordability is really important. I also think there should be some attention to simplification. Medicare used to be this easy program, you turned 65, you got on Medicare. It’s not so easy anymore. The average Medicare beneficiary has a choice of dozens of plans, the Medicare Advantage, prescription drugs. It’s too complicated. And it’s not like it’s a one-and-done decision when you turn 65. You really need to think about this each year, and I think that’s a tall order. And simplifying the program would make it a lot easier for our aging population. 

Rovner: Well, you may be retiring, but I’m still going to call on you as my Medicare expert. 

Neuman: Always. 

Rovner: Tricia Neuman, thank you so much. 

Neuman: Thank you, Julie. 

Rovner: OK, we’re back. Now 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 the links in our show notes on your phone or other mobile device. Lauren, you snagged this week’s most popular story. Start us off. 

Weber: Hats off to Annie Waldman’s “,” which published in ProPublica. I was green with envy upon reading this story. It’s not only beautifully crafted, but it’s just an incredibly incisive takedown, really, of this raw milk farm and all of the people it’s harmed, and how the government has really not stepped in. It hits at so many themes in this MAHA [Make America Healthy Again] moment â€” of free speech and, you know, free medical access, but also the questions of: Do consumers know the amount of risks that they’re taking on? And what is regulators’ role when you have this farm led by this evangelist for raw milk that has been at least linked to over 220 people’s illnesses, some of which are very severe, and continues to produce not only raw milk but milk that it puts into raw cheese that makes people sick. And very sick. This is not just, like, slightly sick, I mean it’s likely that this has potentially sickened way more than the numbers that are captured. It’s a very well-done piece. I could not recommend reading it more. 

Rovner: Lizzy. 

Lawrence: My piece that I chose for this week was from the Chicago Tribune: “,” by Christy Gutowski and Gregory Royal Pratt. Kind of similar to what Lauren was talking about, this is a story about regulatory failure, but in this case with a plastic surgeon operating in Chicago who has killed at least eight women during procedures like tummy tucks and liposuction â€¦ all women of color. He’s operating in a predominantly Latino neighborhood. And Chicago authorities started looking into him to try to revoke his license in 2020, but more than five years later nothing has happened. This was a truly horrifying story, and just major kudos to the reporters, for really, you know, they tracked down all of these women’s families. And in one case there was a complaint that the surgeon, you know, not only allegations that he killed people, but that he had carved his initials into someone. So it’s a really insane piece that I think, yeah, everyone should read. 

Rovner: Yeah. Sandhya. 

Raman: So I picked the story “, and it’s in CIDRAP from Liz Szabo. And this piece is part of a larger series for the 20th anniversary of the HPV [human papillomavirus] vaccine. But Liz just does a beautiful job juxtaposing, you know, one sister who battles and eventually, you know, lost a heartbreaking battle with cervical cancer, and how her sister was in the first batch of folks to get the HPV vaccine 20 years ago. And then, you know, the sister is talking about the importance of wanting her sons to get it that are pretty young. And it just really does a good job of showing the trajectory of how effective the vaccine has been in reducing cervical cancer since its rollout. 

Rovner: Yeah, this is one of the great medical miracles that’s suddenly become controversial again. It’s really good. You should read the whole series. I will post links to it. My extra credit this week is from my Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News colleague Amy Maxman. It’s called “Anguished Parents. Doctors in Tears. Utah’s Long Measles Outbreak Takes a Toll.” Amy went to Utah and found that measles is taking a stronghold there for a whole variety of reasons, including the strength of the supplement industry that teaches residents to suspect mainstream medicine. It’s a really good read that shows the challenges public health still faces in things that we thought we had overcome years, if not decades, ago, like how to prevent childhood diseases like measles. 

All right, that is this week’s show. Thanks to our editor this week, Mary Agnes Carey, 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 , and on Bluesky . Where are you guys hanging these days? Sandhya? 

Raman: I’m at  and on  @SandhyaWrites. 

Rovner: Lauren. 

Weber: I’m on  and on  as @LaurenWeberHP. The HP is for health policy. 

Rovner: Lizzy. 

Lawrence: I’m on  as @LizzyLaw_ and on  and  (Lizzy Lawrence). 

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

Credits

Francis Ying Audio producer
Mary Agnes Carey 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-450-aca-enrollment-drops-june-11-2026/">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=2249320&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2249320
Trump Bought Tobacco Stocks and Raked In Industry Donations as FDA Eased Standards /courts/fda-tobacco-vape-vaping-ecigarette-smoking-trump-investments-maga-donations/ Thu, 11 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2249297 President Donald Trump, who once declared he had “saved” flavored vapes, grew his stock holdings this year to as much as $1.64 million in tobacco giant Philip Morris.

He also had holdings in Altria and a third leading tobacco company, though an apparent discrepancy in his disclosures clouds the extent of his investments. In 2025, tobacco interests donated $6 million to MAGA Inc., a super PAC that supports the president, and Trump’s inauguration. And, on April 30, a week before FDA guidance that provided a critical boost to the industry, Reynolds American dropped an additional $5 million into the super PAC’s coffers.

The stock trades and political contributions occurred as the Trump administration pursued a broadly pro-tobacco agenda: Its FDA piloted a fast-track program to approve nicotine pouches. It unveiled a program to allow vapes on the market more rapidly, despite resistance from career civil servants and leadership, culminating this year in guidance waving through flavored electronic cigarettes. It cut public health employees focusing on anti-tobacco policy. And it broadened enforcement against illicit e-cigarettes, competitors to the big industry players with a financial relationship to Trump.

It amounts to the most pro-tobacco, pro-nicotine presidency in some time — a remarkable policy given the tens of millions of deaths cigarettes caused during the 20th century. Even in recent years, anti-smoking groups say a half-million Americans a year die from cigarettes. Industry advocates say the toll helps justify a shift to e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches, which they say are less harmful. However, public health advocates say these products carry their own risks, such as addiction.

Lawmakers and public health leaders have criticized the recent FDA guidance and approvals as a “” that ignored scientific evidence to deliver what investment analysts have described as “very positive” steps for influential tobacco companies.

The scale of the money is “unprecedented and problematic,” said Brian King, who was pushed out of the FDA’s tobacco office last April and now works as an executive at the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. He fears that steering public policy toward tobacco — still addictive and harmful to health — puts Americans at risk.

“It’s a gift on a platter with a side of public health malpractice,” he said.

The White House did not comment on the president’s investments or industry donations to MAGA Inc. Spokesperson Kush Desai said, “The only guiding factor behind the Trump administration’s health policymaking is Gold Standard Science. FDA’s regulatory treatment of nicotine pouches and vapes is rooted in recent evidence that has found that these products can help adults quit smoking.”

Philip Morris disputed any connection. Company representatives “regularly attend events and forums where we share our commitment to improving public health in the United States,” spokesperson Samuel Dashiell said, “starting with providing better options to America’s 45 million legal-age nicotine consumers.”

“We do not comment on individual engagements or on the personal financial matters or disclosures of public officials,” he added.

Other tobacco companies whose stock Trump has bought and sold during his second term or that donated to groups aligned with Trump — Juul, Reynolds American, and Altria — did not respond to requests for comment.

The financial stakes are huge. Investment analysts at Goldman Sachs say the newer products, touted as safer, make more money per sale than traditional cigarettes. Philip Morris expects Zyn pouches, for example, to make eight times the gross profits of its cigarettes, Goldman Sachs analysts said in March 2025.

When he ran for his second term, Trump promoted himself as a pro-tobacco candidate, posting that he had and that President Joe Biden and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris “want everything banned.”

Since late 2023, MAGA Inc. has received over $20 million in funding from the industry, federal campaign records show. Trump’s inauguration garnered nearly $4 million more. His ballroom project donations of an unknown amount from Altria and Reynolds American.

Recent Trump administration actions show he’s followed through with his campaign rhetoric. In May, the FDA released that allows manufacturers to market their vapes and nicotine pouches while awaiting agency approval. It also approved several vaping products. The month before, the Vapor Technology Association, which donated $1.25 million to Trump’s inauguration, it had met with the White House to discuss its concerns.

By that point, Trump had gone on a stock-purchasing spree. In March he made eight separate purchases of Philip Morris or Altria stock, worth as much as $275,000, according to a disclosure form that bears Trump’s signature.

It is difficult to be precise about Trump’s tobacco investments, because the financial disclosures show only ranges of investment amounts. They also have an apparent discrepancy. In January, the president sold $500,000 to $1,000,000 in Altria stock. But that’s confusing because previous disclosures didn’t show Trump held that much equity in Altria. The White House declined to comment on the matter.

The FDA’s May guidance and approvals drew condemnation from public health leaders, who worry that the agency is allowing products with flavors especially appealing to young people. “After years of recognizing the dangers flavored e-cigarettes pose to youth, it is deeply troubling to see FDA ignore the scientific evidence and reverse course,” American Lung Association CEO Harold Wimmer said .

“I think it’s blatantly illegal, both on its merits and also procedurally, because it was issued as a final guidance without even giving the public an opportunity to comment on it,” said Mitch Zeller, a former head of the FDA’s tobacco center.

A group of Democratic senators called the decision a “a free pass to addictive and harmful vapes” in letters to Reynolds American and Altria. It would lead to “a lucrative payday after years of unsuccessful legislative and regulatory efforts to weaken federal tobacco oversight,” they concluded.

Members of Congress are barred from insider trading, and many legislators would like to see trading of individual company stocks banned for all members. In the wake of Trump’s most recent financial disclosures, with revelations that he often traded in companies manufacturing GLP-1 drugs before his administration steered policy in a favorable direction, some members are calling for the president, too, to be barred from stock trading.

Trump’s tobacco policies have garnered favorable grades from investors. At Goldman Sachs, bankers described the May FDA guidance as “very positive” for Philip Morris and “a significant step in the FDA’s positioning toward enforcement and acceptance of nic pouch (as well as e-vapor) innovation generally.”

And Barclays analysts said the FDA’s guidance was good news for Juul, a leading vape producer. (In November, the company contributed $1 million to MAGA Inc.)

FDA resistance to speeding up approvals for these products reportedly contributed to the ouster of agency commissioner Marty Makary, who did not respond to requests for comment. According to and , the White House repeatedly intervened in the approval process.

“I served during the entire first Trump administration as center director, and there was never any pressure from any political appointee at FDA, at HHS, or the White House when it came to application review,” Zeller said.

But recent changes in FDA policy can be traced to the access tobacco firms have had to the White House, he said.

By and large, the Trump administration has delivered on industry priorities. Soon after the inauguration — which tobacco companies had donated heavily to — the administration withdrew a Biden-era proposal to ban menthol cigarettes. The administration has eased the path for nicotine pouches like Zyn, which were first approved under Biden. Investment analysts viewed government crackdowns on illicit e-cigarettes positively: Barclays wrote in January that “company commentary on enforcement has also been upbeat, suggesting that the tide could begin to turn in favour of the legal players in the market.”

What’s more, the Trump administration’s government layoffs have decimated public health’s tobacco control offices. The work of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s office of smoking has been sharply curtailed; its flagship “Tips From Former Smokers” campaign, which seeks to persuade viewers not to smoke, has been off the air for months, King said.

“It’s not difficult to see that less dollars invested in prevention and control is going to lead to more tobacco product use and tobacco-related disease,” King said, especially given the government’s decades-long success in reducing cigarette usage.

The shift is particularly ironic given the administration’s focus — through its Make America Healthy Again slogan — on chronic disease. “Attempting to combat chronic disease without tobacco control is like attempting a triathlon without a bicycle: You are destined for failure before leaving the starting line,” King concluded.

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="/courts/fda-tobacco-vape-vaping-ecigarette-smoking-trump-investments-maga-donations/">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=2249297&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2249297
FDA’s Greenlight of Old Chemical Offers Chance To Restore Faith in Sunscreen /public-health/fda-approval-sunscreen-chemical-bemotrizinol-consumer-trust-maha/ Wed, 10 Jun 2026 17:02:49 +0000 /?p=2249263 Officials, environmental health advocates, and skin care industry groups are expressing hope that the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of a sunscreen ingredient on June 9 — after consideration for two decades, and global use for nearly as long — will help in sunscreen.

“Bemotrizinol has been used safely in Europe for decades,” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about the approval. “FDA’s action will increase competition and consumer confidence in sunscreen products.”

Nonprofits that advocate for health, such as the Environmental Working Group, and the skin care industry alike had lobbied for approval of the ingredient, which makes sunscreens sheerer and lighter on the skin than many available American options while blocking a wider spectrum of ultraviolet rays that can cause premature aging and skin cancer.

The newly approved sunscreen filter will allow companies to reformulate sunscreens to address consumers’ concerns, said Carl D’Ruiz, a senior manager at , a Swiss maker of sunscreen chemicals that applied for the FDA approval. In addition to allowing companies to offer what the FDA calls safe and effective formulations, he said, the approval will allow sunscreens that are more like sought-after South Korean brands to be sold in the U.S. by autumn.

Confidence in U.S. sunscreen has faltered on two fronts: among those concerned about what’s in the sunscreens they use and those who believe sun exposure is healthy. But will the new ingredient win the trust of Make America Healthy Again skeptics and Gen Zers intentionally tanning? RFK Jr., strikingly bronzed, has helped stoke this confusion by pledging in 2024 to fight what he called the FDA’s “war on public health” and . Under his leadership, the FDA from a plan in March to ban people under 18 from using tanning beds.

All this matters because by age 70 in the United States. It is the in the nation, where about 3.3 million people are diagnosed each year with basal and squamous cell carcinomas.

D’Ruiz said he thinks bemotrizinol, also known as BEMT, will change the dynamic. “People will talk more positively about sunscreens,” he said.

In the U.S., new sunscreen chemicals are regulated as over-the-counter drugs like aspirin or cough syrup rather than as cosmetics, as in Japan and the European Union. That means they face more elaborate testing and safety protocols, such as animal testing that runs afoul of EU laws, which is why the for bemotrizinol took nearly two decades, D’Ruiz said.

What’s “generally recognized as safe and effective,” otherwise known as “GRASE” in FDA-speak, is at the center of the American sunscreen debate. Bemotrizinol joins zinc oxide and titanium dioxide on the FDA’s .

That could help rebuild trust, said , an environmental epidemiologist at the , a nonprofit that researches the ingredients in consumer products.

“It has strong safety data,” Friedman said. “The documents submitted to the FDA to achieve ‘generally recognized as safe and effective’ include tests of irritation, sensitization to allergies, two-year animal studies for carcinogenicity, and reproductive health.”

The approval will also give consumers access to sunscreens that don’t leave as much of a white cast, she said, which makes some people hesitant to use mineral sunscreens such as zinc oxide and titanium dioxide.

Bemotrizinol’s approval won’t change the possibility of several chemicals with unclear safety profiles being added to sunscreens.

In 2019, the there was insufficient data to support a positive “generally recognized as safe and effective” determination for 12 commonly used sunscreen chemicals.

The concerns emerged after the that said some sunscreen ingredients had been found in humans’ bloodstreams. Though the industry has since phased out several of those chemicals lacking GRASE status, four are still widely used: avobenzone, homosalate, octisalate, and octinoxate.

“The European Union had that homosalate was not safe at concentrations that they were using and recommended a very low percentage — which was effectively a ban,” Friedman said. “The U.K. also issued a safety evaluation.”

Octisalate and octinoxate have been associated with disruption of the endocrine system, and octinoxate was due to concerns that it harms marine life and bleaches coral reefs.

Avobenzone breaks down when exposed to light, making it less effective, Friedman said, and has been associated with allergic reactions.

Mark Mitchnick, a pediatrician who , which is known under the brand Z-Cote, said bemotrizinol will give chemists a new tool to make sunscreens that people will want to wear.

“It’s a good UVA block,” he said. “It gives us good flexibility. In my mind, it allows you to make really good products without using avobenzone, which I think has a lot of baggage.”

Most of the UV rays people are exposed to are UVA rays that can penetrate the middle layer of the skin and cause up to 90% of skin aging, along with a smaller amount of UVB rays, which are . falls on the electromagnetic spectrum between X-rays and visible light.

Mitchnick said major companies have used chemical filters because they work better on a per-pound basis compared with mineral sunscreens made with zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. “That’s why hybrids are great — you get the best of both worlds.” He said he expects companies, including , to release hybrid products containing bemotrizinol and zinc oxide later this year.

J. Frank Nash, a senior director and research fellow at Procter & Gamble, said skepticism about sunscreen is unfortunate because properly formulated sunscreens do an excellent job blocking solar UV, “which we know is responsible for skin cancers and aging.”

He worries the industry has contributed to the trust gap by , called boosters, to mineral sunscreens, to raise sun protection factor ratings, or SPF. This leads consumers to wonder what’s in the products they’re buying.

Still, in Australia, where bemotrizinol has been used in sunscreens for years, a shows that even when regulators allow lauded UV filters, bad actors can taint a whole industry.

“People are not shunning sunscreen because they have stopped believing UV is dangerous,” said Joseph Mizikovsky, a director of the . “They are shunning it because they have lost trust in what is in the bottle.”

He applauds the FDA’s transparency with American consumers about the lack of safety data for filters without GRASE status, and FDA’s insistence on mandatory microbial testing of products.

But he said the FDA could do more to rebuild trust in sunscreens.

“My view is the FDA should move faster to ban filters that are missing safety data, and the public should focus on physical protection — shade, clothing, hats, sunglasses — with sunscreen as the last layer, not the first.”

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/fda-approval-sunscreen-chemical-bemotrizinol-consumer-trust-maha/">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=2249263&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2249263
Anguished Parents. Doctors in Tears. Utah’s Long Measles Outbreak Takes a Toll. /public-health/utah-measles-outbreak-vaccines-preventable-diseases-doctors-strained-new-normal/ Wed, 10 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2248142 SALT LAKE CITY — Ben Dowse hadn’t expected to treat measles when he became a doctor, but there he was, examining a newborn exposed to the virus in the womb. The infected mother had given birth just hours earlier. The hospital had alerted Dowse to the case before delivery, and he’d braced himself for the worst.

Dowse wore a full-body protective suit with a plastic face mask. As a pediatrician in southern Utah, he couldn’t risk getting even a mild infection, because many of his patients are babies too young for measles vaccines or children whose parents choose not to protect them with immunizations. “I went in looking like a scientist in E.T.,” he said.

Measles can cause brain damage, deafness, or death in newborns. If the baby entered the world with a measles rash and fever, Dowse was prepared to give the infant a spinal tap to assess the risk of neurological damage.

Luckily, flushed and crying, the baby looked healthy. To keep it that way, Dowse wanted to inject the baby with concentrated antibodies against the measles virus. To his surprise, the parents objected, promising to give their child “all kinds of vitamin A,” Dowse said. He begged them not to, saying, “You can’t see it on the surface, but the baby’s body is fighting the measles.” They were afraid of vaccines, so Dowse explained that antibodies were different and that they would stop measles from replicating in the infant.

“That shot is going to basically give the baby ammo to fight,” Dowse said.

The parents relented. A couple of days later, they left the hospital with a child who had narrowly skirted an infection that killed many thousands of babies a century ago. Nonetheless, Dowse said he doubted they would be returning for childhood vaccinations to protect their baby against a bevy of illnesses. Like more than a dozen Utah doctors and health officials who spoke with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, Dowse has adjusted his expectations.

He is part of a reluctant cohort of medical professionals now on the front line of America’s regressive next chapter in health history, one in which dangerous and preventable diseases return.

“I wish that people could see what I see,” said Nathan Money, a hospital pediatrician in Utah whose eyes welled up with tears as he described children he’s treated for measles struggling to breathe. “This train is going in the wrong direction, and it can feel like a helpless situation, because we’re just not seeing the public messaging and leadership that’s needed to turn this around.”

Since measles was deemed eliminated in the U.S. a quarter century ago, public health workers have extinguished sporadic outbreaks in close-knit, undervaccinated communities with targeted methods: Isolate people with measles and quarantine their contacts to contain the virus. But as vaccination rates , the virus is moving beyond insulated communities, overwhelming public health departments constrained by shoestring budgets. Larger outbreaks, the kind not seen for a generation, have forced health officials into a new paradigm: They have stopped racing to “contain” infections and shifted gears into what they call “mitigation.”

Utah made that transition early this year, once the outbreak hit “a point where you no longer have control over it,” said state epidemiologist Leisha Nolen. By March, measles had been detected in every health jurisdiction in the state and in northern Arizona. More than 950 people have tested positive in the two states since the outbreak began in August, but many people with measles haven’t been tested. A of measles viruses suggested that the true number of cases last year could have been 6.5 times what was known.

Last year under President Donald Trump, U.S. measles cases exceeded 2,000 for the first time since 1992. Six months into 2026, the U.S. has already surpassed that threshold. Prolonged outbreaks exact a toll on children, who have spent days in hospitals for severe infections and missed weeks of school for mild ones. Adults with measles miss work. Parents delay daycare to keep their babies safe. Doctors in Utah have enacted labor-intensive protocols to keep measles from spreading in clinics. Newborns and people with weakened immune systems who have been exposed to the virus receive infusions of concentrated antibodies costing $500 to $1,000. Medical visits for measles . Health departments spend millions trying to curb infections.

A woman sits at a table in front of a children's playground.
Emilie Morris, a hospital pediatrician in Utah, has cared for multiple unvaccinated children who were severely sick with measles. She’s learning how to communicate with parents who hadn’t expected the virus to cause so much harm. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

“This is like a snowball that gathers speed as it rolls downhill,” said Emilie Morris, a hospital pediatrician in Salt Lake County and Utah County. A full-throttle campaign to educate communities on the safety of vaccines and the diseases they prevent could turn the situation around, doctors and health officials said. It would require an effort similar to what the anti-vaccine movement has long done in videos, blogs, and podcasts. For example, the anti-vaccine organization that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. founded before taking the helm at the Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Health Defense, visits , , and has bought that downplay the threat of viruses while wildly exaggerating the risk of vaccine side effects. Kennedy’s and as health secretary are adding to parents’ doubt.

After the development of vaccines and antibiotics in the mid-1900s, virologist and Nobel laureate Frank Macfarlane Burnet wrote, “One can think of the middle of the twentieth century as the end of one of the most important social revolutions in history, the virtual elimination of the infectious diseases as a significant factor in social life.”

He couldn’t have imagined what was coming.

‘Year of Sickness’

A view of rocky formations along a road leading into a town in southwest Utah.
A view of St. George, a city in southwest Utah that’s been hit hard by an ongoing measles outbreak that started in August. Nearly 40% of the state’s cases have occurred in the region. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

In communities nestled among the red sandstone cliffs and riparian forests of southern Utah, measles took hold last summer. At the main school in Hildale, a town along the Arizona border, just 30% of kindergartners are considered adequately immunized by Utah’s health department, meaning they’ve gotten recommended vaccines against measles, tetanus, polio, and more. Exemptions from childhood vaccine requirements are easily acquired in the state: Parents need only claim personal, religious, or medical reasons.

Many people in Hildale and the surrounding towns are connected to the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, a sect that has been leery of the government since a police raid in 1953 separated polygamous parents from their children. Shirlee Draper, a southern Utah resident who grew up in the faith, said they became ever more isolated in the early 2000s under the leadership of Warren Jeffs. Before he was sentenced to life in prison for sexual assault against minors, Jeffs instructed his followers to withdraw from public schools and mainstream medicine.

“Growing up, we all got our vaccines,” said Draper, who left the group during Jeffs’ reign. “It wasn’t until Warren Jeffs came along that there started to be more and more resistance.”

After Jeffs went to prison, many people left the faith but remained concerned about vaccines because of online misinformation, such as claims that the shots are toxic. Today a small shop in Hildale sells mouth sprays and oral drops professing to detoxify vaccines. Water, glycerin, and “whole grain alcohol” are listed as ingredients in one called Vxx-Dtx.

A mother who Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News agreed not to name, because she fears stigmatization, said she considered getting her kids vaccinated when schools in southwest Utah started seeing measles cases last summer. She had split from the fundamentalist group but still worried about vaccines giving her children autism or other complications. in top-tier scientific journals have refuted a link between vaccines and autism, but the anti-vaccine movement has kept the notion alive.

Then the woman’s son told her that his classmate had a rash and spit on him, she said. A few days later, he fell ill with a fever, followed by vomiting, diarrhea, and a head-to-toe rash.

“He felt downright sick for 10 to 14 days,” the woman said. “It was hard to see the end of the tunnel.”

Then her daughters came down with measles. She had a fleeting case, too, even though she had been vaccinated as a child. Breakthrough infections and are relatively rare. Only 4% of reported this year and last have been among people who’ve had two doses of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine.

By the time the family recovered, the son had missed nearly three weeks of school, the daughters a month, and the mother had postponed an important family gathering because she didn’t want to spread infections. “I just got my youngest’s missed-school report and it’s super high,” she said. “This is the year of sickness.”

A photo of vaccines stored in a refrigerator.
The Southwest Utah Public Health Department stocks vaccines against measles, whooping cough, tetanus, hepatitis B, and other diseases. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

The woman said she regretted not getting her kids vaccinated when the outbreak started. She said she knows about 30 people who have fallen sick with the measles. Except for a few who needed medical care, they haven’t been tested. “I bet there’s been thousands of cases,” she said.

Measles doesn’t have a cure. She and others have tried to ease symptoms with cod liver oil, vitamin C, zinc, and “essential oils,” plant extracts long used in folk medicine that have become a lucrative industry in Utah. People in southwest Utah are trying a lot of things: One resident sells homemade lotion on Facebook, writing, “Breastmilk & Honey has been a life saver for the measles rash.”

Beyond Containment

The outbreak may have started among a fundamentalist community, but it’s spread far beyond because Utah’s vaccination rates have dropped steadily since the covid pandemic. Fewer than 80% of kindergartners in the 2024-25 school year in southwest Utah, with only 87% adequately immunized in the state as a whole — far below the 95% threshold required for herd immunity.

Several Utahns told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News that “alternative health” or “wellness” drives the trend, rather than religion. The state has a thriving supplement industry, , aided by deregulatory policies supported by the late Utah senator Orrin Hatch and a high concentration of people who earn income from multilevel marketing. These networks of people sell supplements, essential oils, peptides, and other alternative therapies on social media, YouTube, and podcasts, according to and .

Alternative health isn’t necessarily anti-vaccine, but many people who sell unconventional remedies online and in podcasts and mainstream medicine.

“People are suspicious, and it’s well founded,” Draper said. She described dismissive doctors, exorbitant medical bills, hospital systems that over care, and pharmaceutical companies that drove . Communities already wary of government authorities are poised to interpret failings in American healthcare as signs that medical authorities aren’t to be trusted, either, she said.

“Across America, we have entire populations who find safety in clinging to whatever confirms their deeply held beliefs,” she said.

A mistrustful disposition gave way to covid conspiracy theories in 2020 and 2021. In southwest Utah, for example, a tricked out with digital billboards showed up to covid vaccination sites to advertise Plandemic, a rife with , including that masks “activate” the coronavirus and that global elites planned covid-19 to control the population. Misinformation added fuel to anger about public health rules, and there was political backlash under the umbrella of a largely Republican “medical freedom” movement. Utah enacted laws reining in public health, including one that eases exemptions to childhood vaccinations and another that prohibits most employers from requiring vaccines.

In the wake of the covid backlash, health officials tread lightly. Rather than enforce containment measures, “we give our advice and focus on personal responsibility,” said David Heaton, public information officer at the Southwest Utah Public Health Department.

A woman stands outside a building. A sign next to her reads, "288 Department of Health and Human Services."
Utah state epidemiologist Leisha Nolen says that with a larger budget she would invest in connecting with communities. “We have a scientific solution,” she says about measles, “but we need a societal solution, too.” (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

One of the most contagious diseases in the world, measles spreads with astonishing speed among the unvaccinated. One of a New York school outbreak in 1974 found that a second-grader with measles infected 28 other students in 14 classrooms because measles can spread through ventilation systems.

As cases doubled then quadrupled in southern Utah, the regional health department couldn’t keep up with calling the contacts of everyone infected. It shifted its efforts to announcements guiding the public at large. For example, it asks people to call before showing up to clinics with measles symptoms. Still, patients in plenty of hospitals have been exposed. For example, when parents brought a sick, unvaccinated child to a large pediatric hospital in Utah in September, they shared the space with 11 infants too young to be vaccinated. Doctors rushed to give the babies infusions of antibodies and they remained healthy, according to a .

On the radio and in posts on social media, Heaton warns that measles is spreading and that vaccines are the best defense. “If you’re not immunized and you’re anywhere in public,” Heaton said, “you’re fair game for this virus.”

The department doesn’t have the capacity to talk with people directly in the five counties it serves. For a few years, it leaned on community health workers who went to churches, town halls, and other gathering places, listening to people’s concerns and telling them what the science said about covid, vaccines, and other matters of public health. But these workers were laid off early last year, after the Trump administration clawed back more than $12 billion in federal public health grants to states.

“We were starting to get a little bit of traction,” Heaton said of the community workers. “And then we lost all of our team.”

The department offers free measles vaccines to children, but uptake is slow. Nursing director Mindy Bundy said that when she started the job 20 years ago, demand was so high that she would give parents tickets while they waited, as if they were crowding around a deli counter.

“Now even in an outbreak,” she said, “we aren’t seeing a huge increase of people wanting vaccination.”

A photo of a nurse standing by a folding table inside of a school.
Anna Fajardo, a public health nurse, offers vaccines at a school registration event in Milford, in southwest Utah. A few mothers trickled in to get their children immunized or to find out their child’s vaccination status. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

As officials tried to do the best they could, the outbreak spread north, hopping from one undervaccinated community to the next. When health officials in Utah County spoke with people who had tested positive, they often had no connection to other known cases. “Pretty quickly, we started to lose the links,” said Michael Leman, the county health department’s nursing director. Contact tracing, the cornerstone of containment, was failing.

Every week, the state health department posted a growing list of locations on its website — a Trader Joe’s, a Mormon temple, an aquarium, preschools — that people had visited while contagious. But many people who tested positive hadn’t been to those places, Leman said. “They could have gotten it at Walmart. They could have gotten it walking through a mall,” he said. “I mean, just anywhere in the public they could have been exposed.”

In February, high school students throughout Utah tested positive after a state wrestling tournament at Utah Valley University in Orem. A dashboard monitoring measles viruses in wastewater lit up with notifications around the state. “Wrestling really feels like our turning point,” said Nicholas Rupp, communications director at the Salt Lake County Health Department.

A photo of an LDS temple: a large white church. People are gathered in front of it, some of them holding umbrellas to protect from the sun.
The new Lindon Utah Temple, belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, was one of many locations listed as a potential measles exposure site in April by the Utah Department of Health and Human Services. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
A photo of a Trader Joe's parking lot. Mountains are seen peaking out from behind the building.
A Trader Joe’s in Orem, Utah, was also listed as a potential measles exposure site that month. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
A photo of a university building with several electric scooters parked in front of it.
A science building at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City was also among the potential exposure sites listed in April. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)
An exterior shot of a Utah Valley University building with mountains seen behind it.
Many measles cases traced back to a high school wrestling tournament at Utah Valley University in Orem in February. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Salt Lake County’s shift from containment to mitigation meant prioritizing high-risk situations and relaxing control everywhere else. When a student has a confirmed case, for example, health officials meet with the school nurse to figure out which kids are most vulnerable. Unvaccinated children in the same classroom as someone infected are asked to stay home for 21 days, but those in other classrooms might not be, said Melanie Crossland, an epidemiologist at the Salt Lake health department. Some schools with high vaccination rates have opted to monitor student temperatures daily instead of requesting quarantines. One school created a separate space for the unvaccinated.

Crossland said such bespoke strategies entail a “huge” amount of effort but have staved off blowback that deflated her during covid.

“We give everything when we’re here,” she said, “but the days of killing ourselves, when legislatively no one is going to give us any help, are done.”

Daycare Dilemma

The outbreak has lasted so long that some children who have recovered from measles have since been hospitalized for what should be mild illnesses from common bugs, said Kerri Smith, a hospital pediatrician in southwest Utah. Measles can , impairing a body’s ability to fight other viruses. “It’s making children very susceptible to getting sick again,” Smith said.

Her eyes were bloodshot, and she looked drained from a week of long shifts. Since the outbreak began, she’s treated more than a dozen babies and children severely sick from measles.

“They’re usually admitted to the hospital with measles pneumonia, so they’re struggling to breathe, pulling for air below their ribs,” she said. “High fevers, 104 to 105, absolutely miserable, extremely fatigued, really dehydrated with sunken eyes.” Most children fully recover from measles, but a fraction develop permanent , a small percentage die, and in , measles kills a person years after the infection.

No one has died so far in Utah’s outbreak. And barring that tragic outcome, Smith and other doctors said, some parents fail to grasp the gravity of measles, even as their own children have tubes inserted into their small nostrils to deliver oxygen. Despite repeated warnings, doctors said, some unvaccinated family members of patients — who could be contagious — walk around the hospital while visiting their loved one. This means the waiting room, the elevator, the cafeteria, and other places need to be shut down for cleaning, and vulnerable people alerted.

“People don’t realize how easily this spreads,” Smith said.

Morris, the pediatrician working in two counties, recalled a conversation with a nonchalant father who didn’t seem to understand the need for quarantine. “I know this is an inconvenience to you,” she said. “It’s also a huge inconvenience to the parent who has an infant who could be severely impacted by this disease.”

On top of feeling depleted, doctors with young children said they are anxious. Emily Chin, a physician in Salt Lake County, worries she’ll bring measles home to her newborn. One evening, she sat in her garage after caring for a child with a rash. The patient’s measles test was still being processed, so Chin isolated herself in a room for the night, wearing an N95 mask instead of holding her infant.

A photo of a baby in a carrier sleeping. Next to it is a play mat and a chair.
Emily Chin’s 4-month-old, sleeping here at home, is too young to be vaccinated, and Chin, a doctor in Salt Lake County, Utah, worries that she might acquire measles at work and pass it to him. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Like many mothers in Utah, Chin plans to give her baby an early dose of the measles vaccine at 6 months old because of the outbreak, in addition to two doses at ages 1 and 4. Several mothers said they avoid travel and public places because they fear their babies could be infected. Some are delaying daycare. Others, like Kandace Hyland, a marketing director in Salt Lake County, don’t have that option.

Hyland was shocked when her daycare told her that it didn’t track the vaccine status of staff, even amid the outbreak. In March, she posted an calling for the state to require daycare staff to be vaccinated against the measles when the virus is spreading. Even if daycare staff file for vaccine exemptions, she said, parents could at least find out what portion of their babies’ caretakers pose a life-threatening risk.

Hyland sent her idea to the state health department. Nolen, the state epidemiologist, said she agreed with the concern, and was “talking with the division of licensing about the issue,” in an email shared with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. Hyland also wrote the Division of Licensing and Background Checks. In an email, its director, Shannon Thoman-Black, replied that the division does “not have the legislative authority to implement a mandate.”

“They always talk about parents’ choice,” Hyland said. “But I don’t feel like I have a really good ‘parents’ choice’ right now.”

Measles’ Comeback

The U.S. will almost certainly this year or next, but it could be regained if political leadership backed nationwide campaigns to boost confidence in vaccines, said Demetre Daskalakis, a former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s national immunization center and now the chief medical officer at the Callen-Lorde community health center in New York.

“Under Secretary Kennedy’s leadership, that’s unlikely to happen,” he said. “We’re going back to a pre-vaccine era.”

A sign in front of a hospital reads, "Please tell us immediately if you are not vaccinated against Measles and have the following symptoms: fever and two or more of the below — cough, rash, recently exposed to measles, runny nose, red and runny eyes, white spots in mouth."
A sign outside a hospital in southwest Utah warns people who haven’t been vaccinated against measles to wait outside if they have a fever and other symptoms, such as coughing or a runny nose. Vulnerable people, including infants too young for vaccination, have been exposed to measles at hospitals and clinics. (Amy Maxmen/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard defended the secretary and his agency in an email, writing that the CDC has “surged resources” to contain measles outbreaks. “The CDC, HHS principles and the Secretary have been vocal that the MMR vaccine is the best way to protect yourself against measles,” she said.

Kennedy’s words and actions suggest otherwise. He’s said that the measles vaccine leads to “deaths every year,” which is . He continues a potential link between autism and vaccines, no matter how many there is none. And he oversaw abrupt changes to the recommended childhood vaccine schedule, a move called dangerous and not backed by science. A federal judge blocked those changes in March, but Trump recently issued an executive order to reexamine the schedule.

“It’s been confusing for the public,” said Dorothy Adams, executive director of the Salt Lake County Health Department.

In May, Kennedy met with Republican Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, who has said little about the state’s ongoing outbreak. Kennedy praised Utah’s action on Make America Healthy Again priorities, such as banning fluoride in public drinking water and easing restrictions on raw milk sales, according to Salt Lake City’s . Cox declined to comment for this article.

Meanwhile, the U.S. public health system has been further weakened by the Trump administration’s cuts and delays to public health grants.

“If you’re in the thick of it and you don’t know if you will be reimbursed, you adjust your response,” said Angela Dunn, a doctor and former Utah state epidemiologist. “This outbreak is a perfect storm of disinformation, trauma from the covid pandemic, and the drop in funding.”

Measles isn’t the only preventable malady making a comeback. As children played nearby in a sun-speckled park in Salt Lake City, Morris talked about a baby in the intensive care unit who was bleeding uncontrollably after a fall. The baby’s parents had refused an injection of vitamin K that helps blood clot in newborns. As they fretted over their infant, Morris said, she felt awful for them and regretted not being able to overcome mistrust in basic, lifesaving interventions. She had the same swirl of emotions when an unvaccinated toddler in her care recently died of whooping cough.

“I was one of the only people in the room with the nurse when the child coded,” she said with tears in her eyes. “You think, ‘I wish this child was vaccinated,’ but it’s hard because I also see how much grief these parents are holding.”

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/utah-measles-outbreak-vaccines-preventable-diseases-doctors-strained-new-normal/">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=2248142&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2248142
Trivia Nights, Valentine’s Cards: Overlooked Social Connections Can Prevent Suicide /mental-health/suicide-prevention-loneliness-social-connection-mental-health-eleven-minutes/ Tue, 09 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000

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


Nearly every Tuesday for a decade, Steve Siple attended a bar trivia night with friends in Birmingham, Alabama. After moving to North Carolina, he developed a new ritual — on Saturdays to pick up trash along the city’s light rail.

These are more than fun outings to Siple. They help keep him alive.

Siple has battled suicidal thoughts in the past. He lost his father to suicide, and one of his sons has struggled with thoughts of hurting himself.

That’s made Siple vigilant about protecting himself and his family. In addition to seeing a counselor regularly and speaking openly about mental health, he prioritizes social connection.

“Loneliness was, over my lifetime, one of the greatest risk factors” for suicide, said Siple, a for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.

To some, this concept may seem obvious. Yet in the overall approach to suicide prevention, it’s often overlooked. Treatment of a serious mental illness that can lead to suicide, such as major depressive disorder, often centers on medication and talk therapy with little or no consideration of factors such as social isolation or financial duress. Now, there’s a growing movement to address loneliness not just through personal choices but also through public policy.

The research is clear: Among the various complex issues that contribute to suicide, is a . It’s a for older adults, who have and for youths, for whom .

Humans are social animals. When we feel cut off from one another, our , our , and ultimately we’re (by suicide or ). An concluded that being socially disconnected is as harmful to one’s health as smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day.

And it’s getting worse.

Mental health researchers and clinicians say a variety of factors are in America, including the , such as smartphones and ; increased ; the since the covid pandemic; and .

With suicide rates remaining stubbornly high — often ranking among the in America — some advocates and people who have lost loved ones to suicide say increasing pathways to social connection could be a new frontier.

In this ongoing series, Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is examining new approaches to suicide prevention that shift the focus from stopping harm in moments of crisis to efforts that give people reasons to live well before they make fateful choices.

“If we want to reduce suicide rates in our country, which is absolutely essential, then a key part of that has to be fostering social connection,” said who served as surgeon general under Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. “We have more than enough data to support this as being an important area of focus.”

In 2023, Murthy released the first on loneliness as a public health issue, with more than 300 supporting citations. He’s also on the topic and is touring the country discussing the value of social connection.

“To help someone else feel less alone, to help them feel seen and understood and valued,” he told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, “that can be one of the most powerful interventions that we make.”

Two hands hold a photo of an older man wearing a striped shirt and glasses who is being hugged and kissed on the cheek by a small boy
Steve Siple holds a photo of his father and his son. Siple’s father died by suicide in 2001. (A.M. Stewart for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

A Role for Elected Officials

Curing loneliness may seem like the responsibility of families and neighbors, people making one-to-one connections. But Murthy says elected officials have work to do, too.

They can use their bully pulpits to turn this into a mainstream issue, he said. They can create microgrants to support grassroots ideas from community entrepreneurs and invest in “social infrastructure,” he added.

That term refers to things in the community that support the development of social connection, from physical spaces, such as libraries and parks, to policies and programs, such as building public transportation and fostering volunteer groups.

“These all matter and impact whether people gather,” Murthy said.

However, investing in public institutions and infrastructure is a costly endeavor that can seem unreasonable when local officials are struggling to balance budgets without increasing tax burdens.

That’s where creativity can kick in.

A health system and a museum in Charlotte have teamed up to for people to attend art classes or live performances together. In Tennessee, the city of Chattanooga is funding community ideas to increase connection and time in nature, where people can speak with volunteer listeners. And across the country, have popped up as places where men can work on projects side by side and discuss their mental health.

Meal Deliveries and Valentines

Marcie O’Neal knew she wouldn’t have much money at her disposal. She was hired in 2024 to lead suicide prevention efforts in the rural of western Kentucky after local leaders saw a rise in suicides among the elderly. Her grant was about $280,000 — less than .

A woman wearing a pink v-neck shirt smiles and holds up a card that reads "you are kind" as she stands in front of a table
Denise Porter holds one of the cards that high school students send to older people in western Kentucky’s Pennyrile region as part of local suicide prevention efforts. Program leaders say the goal is to help these residents feel less isolated and empower youths to feel they can make a difference in their communities. (Marcie O’Neal)

But she knew the nine-county area had other strengths, such as dedicated meal delivery programs and high school clubs.

Drivers who drop off prepared meals to homebound residents “can be the only person that an older adult sees in the week,” O’Neal said.

The state had already been training some of those drivers to recognize warning signs of suicide among older people and alert county agencies to follow up with them. O’Neal thought there could be another component.

She reached out to high school , which focus on fostering leadership skills and volunteerism, across the nine counties and asked them to write cards that could be distributed to older residents along with meals. The response was swift, O’Neal said.

About 1,200 cards were delivered last May. They repeated the gesture in February for Valentine’s Day and again this May.

O’Neal said one of the older residents told her, “I don’t remember the last time I got a Valentine’s card.”

The students also enjoyed feeling as if they made a difference, O’Neal said. She’s helping one school set up an ongoing pen pal program with a nearby retirement community.

Locals affectionately call O’Neal “the suicide lady” — a term she considers “a badge of honor.”

Suicide prevention “doesn’t have to be sweeping huge things,” she said. “It’s a little thing you can do that can kind of snowball into more things.”

‘The Secret Sauce’

Siple, who has prioritized social connection through the trivia nights and volunteer clean-ups, felt most alone when he transitioned from a job at a commercial bank to working at home.

He spent most of his day analyzing Excel sheets, drafting grant proposals, and compiling recommendations for clients. The work felt important, but it was isolating, Siple said.

“If my wife or kids were around during the evening, I was safe,” he said. Holding meetings at coffee shops helped, too.

But when it was just him at his desk, “that’s where I got the darkest lonely feelings,” he said, including thoughts of suicide.

Breaking out of that required seeking new connections.

Siple said church was a great anchor for him and his wife — not just on Sundays but throughout the week at Bible studies and potlucks. They also go to see a variety of live music, including bluegrass and alternative rock.

“Being with folks that are into the same type of music that we’re into for a concert feels like connection,” he said.

A man wearing a navy baseball cap and glasses stands in front of a green bush and looks off to the side of the frame
“Loneliness was, over my lifetime, one of the greatest risk factors” for suicide, says Siple, a former board chair for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. (A.M. Stewart for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Research suggests sports can play a similar role in some instances. At least two studies have found are associated with . The authors posit it’s because people coming together to support their team or to enjoy the event creates a sense of belonging, which is protective.

That concept resonates with , who has worked on suicide prevention efforts at the state and and helps run Sources of Strength, an upstream prevention program. Fostering that sense of belonging has played a central role in each of those initiatives, she said.

“We can’t eliminate hard stuff in our lives,” said Brummett, who lost five friends to suicide, starting in middle school.

“Belonging is really the secret sauce,” she said, “for how we, as humans, can navigate really hard things.”

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/suicide-prevention-loneliness-social-connection-mental-health-eleven-minutes/">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=2245920&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2245920
‘We Live With Fear’: In Congo, Doctors Face Ebola With Little Protection /public-health/ebola-congo-virus-outbreak-drc-africa-health-workers-bundibugyo/ Fri, 05 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2246776 Harrowing scenes are unfolding at health facilities at the epicenter of an Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

A 25-year-old midwife and a doctor in his early 30s are sick with Ebola symptoms, including fevers and severe joint pain, said their colleague Elisabeth Furaha, the medical director at in the northeastern province of Ituri.

They had cared for patients with similar symptoms in early May, before the outbreak was detected. One of the patients is now dead, Furaha said, and none of them has been tested for Ebola, even though samples were taken. The hospital still lacks access to tests, and an adequate supply of protective gowns and plastic masks to keep doctors and nurses safe.

“We live with fear in our stomachs,” Furaha said, speaking in French. “Every day, there are healthcare providers and patients dying.”

The outbreak took the world by surprise, with nearly 250 suspected Ebola cases and 80 deaths by the time Ebola was confirmed in Congo. Disturbed by the extent of silent transmission, and by cases in neighboring Uganda, the head of the World Health Organization sounded the group’s highest alarm on May 17, declaring the outbreak a “public health emergency of international concern.” That triggered donations from around the globe, of more than $162 million from the U.S. State Department to “stop the outbreak at its source and ensure Ebola does not reach the United States.”

But despite international attention, doctors in northeastern Congo say that many clinics lack even rudimentary supplies: gloves, protective gowns, masks, Ebola tests, and even clean water. Without rapid action to bolster those on the front line, researchers say, the outbreak will grow exponentially, costing even more money and risking lives far beyond Congo.

“All signs point to this becoming the biggest outbreak we’ve ever seen in the DRC,” said Nahid Bhadelia, the director of Boston University’s Center on Emerging Infectious Diseases. “That could lead to regional instability, and that has repercussions for the world.”

Some supplies from the country’s Ministry of Health, the WHO, and other United Nations agencies have landed in northeastern Congo, but not nearly enough to stock hundreds of health facilities where Ebola patients may seek care. Furaha has spent her own money on gloves, masks, and a tarp to build a makeshift tent to isolate patients with Ebola symptoms from the rest of the hospital. But she said it’s “inhumane” to put patients there before she can afford a mattress for them to rest on, or reliable access to tests.

Without testing, patients who turn out to have Ebola can infect those who don’t. Malaria and other diseases have initial symptoms similar to Ebola, causing fevers, soreness, and gastrointestinal problems.

Aid workers say shipments of medical supplies have been delayed by logistical hurdles, such as suspended flights within Congo and between Congo and neighboring countries.

“We need flights to move a lot of things, so this is a big challenge,” said Chikwe Ihekweazu, executive director of the WHO Health Emergencies Program. Small planes used in humanitarian crises have been permitted to move, but Ihekweazu said those are insufficient, expensive, and unsustainable.

Moving between remote clinics can be an impossible task because roads are often badly eroded or blocked by armed groups, said Rafaramalala Volanarisoa, a doctor with Catholic Relief Services in Kinshasa, Congo’s capital. Conflict, combined with the Trump administration’s abrupt withdrawal of funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development, has made Congo’s already ailing health system dysfunctional, Volanarisoa said.

“It’s very dangerous,” she said. “There is no medicine, no equipment, no surveillance.”

Dilapidated Labs

Researchers at Congo’s National Institute of Biomedical Research had built a sophisticated molecular biology laboratory for surveillance in Goma, the country’s eastern economic hub. But the lab stopped functioning last year after the Rwandan-backed violently of Goma and , stunting the flow of international aid.

An armed guard stands in front of a building behind a barbed wire fence. A medical worker wearing a gauze cap, mask, and gown, looks at the building.
A soldier with the armed group M23 stands guard outside a molecular biology laboratory in Goma, in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The lab, built by Congo’s National Institute of Biomedical Research, stopped functioning after M23 seized the city last year, but the group is now cooperating with aid organizations to get the lab running and supply hospitals. (Jospin Mwisha/AFP via Getty Images)

Other cities in Congo lack well-stocked molecular biology labs, so they have instead relied on simple, automated tests that detect only one type of Ebola virus, said Eddy Kinganda-Lusamaki, a microbiologist at the biomedical institute. The shortcomings of these simple tests became obvious when the first samples tested in early May were negative for Ebola. Doctors were still worried, so they collected more samples, packed them in an icebox, and sent them to the institute’s main lab, in Kinshasa.

It took the samples six days to get there, traveling over bumpy roads and between storage facilities, Kinganda-Lusamaki said, and many were degraded by the time they reached the institute on May 14. Still, researchers identified an unusual variety of Ebola caused by the Bundibugyo virus, with a fatality rate of up to 50% and with no vaccines or drugs existing to treat it. They alerted authorities.

Later, investigators traced the first confirmed cases back to several deaths from unknown causes in a gold-mining town in Ituri. The Ebola was spreading there as early as March, with three of the group’s volunteers dying of unknown causes after burying bodies as part of their humanitarian work.

As of June 3, 363 Ebola cases and 62 deaths had been confirmed in the country, according to Congo’s . Tallies of suspected cases have fluctuated dramatically, a reflection of gaps in surveillance.

Researchers at the biomedical institute urgently want to improve labs in eastern Congo so they can test for Bundibugyo.

“We need support for local staff, training, equipment, consumables, and fuel,” for cars and backup generators, Kinganda-Lusamaki said. He also worries that expensive lab equipment could be stolen or destroyed by roving militias if war is permitted to continue in the east. “My brothers and sisters are perishing,” he said.

Conflict Aids Ebola’s Spread

Violence abets Ebola in other ways. As the outbreak was silently spreading in Ituri in late April, caught in the crossfire of armed groups fled, potentially carrying the virus with them. South of Ituri, Maurice Kakule Mutsunga, a doctor at a large general hospital, said he’s seen a surge of people by members of the Allied Democratic Forces, an linked to the Islamic State. “Every day this week we’ve received patients massacred by the ADF,” Kakule Mutsunga said in French, adding that bodies carried into the hospital have been decapitated by machetes.

Two people transport a body cradled in a cloth alongside a group of people walking.
A body is carried in Beni, a city in northeastern Congo, on May 31 after an attack attributed to the Allied Democratic Forces, an armed group linked to the Islamic State. (Seros Muyisa/AFP via Getty Images)

People displaced by attacks are living in dense quarters that provide perfect conditions for a virus that spreads through touch. A person sick with Ebola, or recently killed by it, excretes sweat, blood, and other liquids packed with viruses that cause the disease.

Unpredictable attacks have also prevented health workers from tracking down people who may be infected in remote villages, to offer them care and keep the virus from spreading to others, Kakule Mutsunga said. Less than a quarter of contacts that Ebola responders identified had been monitored for signs of infection, the WHO reported on May 21.

Contact tracing and isolation — the cornerstones of an Ebola response — are also fraught because of the slow turnaround time on tests. Kakule Mutsunga said samples from his hospital in the town of Oicha are shipped to Kinshasa on humanitarian flights that take off only once they are at capacity. Many patients can’t or won’t isolate themselves for a week while they wait on results, he said, so they may pass the deadly virus to those closest to them.

Congolese researcher Gang Karume said that scientific information about Ebola isn’t reaching many communities, partly because of the trauma of daily life. On top of years of conflict, more than 220,000 young children are in provinces where Ebola is spreading. He wasn’t surprised to learn that angry youths have set fire to Ebola treatment centers and stolen corpses from morgues.

“An empty stomach does not have ears to listen,” he said.

To reach people, the is relying on its network of some 250 priests in Ituri. “They’re deeply rooted,” said Volanarisoa, with Catholic Relief Services, which partners with Caritas. “They understand how to approach communities who refuse to seek treatment.”

Through this network, Volanarisoa and her colleagues have gotten in touch with health workers seeking medical advice and protective equipment. With private donations, the Catholic charities have transferred money to priests in the northeast who arrange for jeeps to carry cash and supplies to clinics.

“What we’ve provided will only last for a few weeks,” Volanarisoa said. “The need is really immense.”

Another crippling factor is that the United States is far less involved than in the past, aid workers said. The Trump administration left the WHO, dissolved USAID, and downsized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“The U.S. is just not the player it used to be,” said Jeremy Konyndyk, a former USAID official who led the agency’s response to the world’s largest Ebola outbreak, in West Africa from 2013 to 2016. “We used to have a stockpile of gear for an Ebola response that we could throw on an airplane and get it to where it needs to go,” he said.

The U.S. used to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the WHO and nongovernmental organizations with experience fighting outbreaks. Under President Donald Trump, the State Department has announced that it will give $350 million to a pooled fund maintained by the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which will then distribute funds to aid groups.

“This adds steps,” Konyndyk said. “The organizations that are ready to roll now are not confident that they will get money, so they’re kind of frozen.”

A woman walks out of a tent set up during the Ebola outbreak in Congo.
Déborah Nzale leaves her shelter on May 28 in a camp for people displaced by violence in Ituri province. (Glody Murhabazi/AFP via Getty Images)

Even then, aid can take weeks to materialize on the front line. During the West Africa outbreak, more than two months passed between the WHO’s declaration of an international emergency and significant help arriving. In the interim, the Ebola death count more than quadrupled. Nurses, doctors, and ambulance drivers .

Front-line workers in Congo face a similar fate if help doesn’t arrive soon. Furaha said her hospital is running out of clean water. “All of this accumulates,” she said. “Healthcare workers will reach a breaking point.” 

Chloé Fostier Hernández helped translate interviews for 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="/public-health/ebola-congo-virus-outbreak-drc-africa-health-workers-bundibugyo/">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=2246776&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2246776
RFK Jr. Seeks To Peek at Americans’ Medical Records for Clues on Autism and Vaccines /mental-health/sharing-patients-medical-records-access-rfk-jr-project-link-autism-vaccine-injuries/ Thu, 04 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000 U.S. health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is pursuing federal government access to most Americans’ medical records, in a quest to research a link between vaccines and autism — a connection the medical establishment studied for decades and flatly rejects.

The Department of Health and Human Services is seeking data from little-known state systems that allow hospitals and clinics to exchange detailed, identifiable patient information, Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News has learned.

In private meetings, some public health leaders have objected to giving Kennedy’s team access to such data, raising doubts that it’s legal or that the information would even be useful.

They have also expressed concerns about allowing the federal government to peer into the minutiae of Americans’ medical records, which could mean viewing anything from doctors’ notes to prescription history. HHS has offered no insight into how it will protect or handle the personal health information it obtains.

But Kennedy told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News that medical records are key to investigating the cause of autism, vaccine safety, and chronic diseases. And millions of dollars in grant money has poured into a Nebraska nonprofit that has assisted Kennedy’s effort, according to state records.

He and his advisers have been frustrated that federal access to Americans’ medical records has been limited.

“We need a good health record system, and one of the things that really surprised me most when I came into office is that there is — that the systems are broken,” Kennedy said in a May interview. “We’ve had to go to the states and, luckily, we’ve got a lot of cooperation from the states, but we now have databases together that we can actually do the studies on. Those studies are in motion.”

HHS has not publicly announced any new projects involving medical records and autism or vaccine research. Kennedy faced blowback last year when he proposed compiling the medical records of people with autism to create a federal disease registry — which health department officials .

But Kennedy said in May, “We have a whole pipeline of studies that will be done over the next year.”

Though the White House has steered Kennedy away from further changes to U.S. vaccine policy ahead of November’s crucial midterm elections, President Donald Trump has regularly echoed Kennedy’s doubts about vaccine safety and last week signed an executive order calling for the U.S. to reduce the number of vaccines recommended for children.

Kennedy’s political appointees and allies — including William “Reyn” Archer III, a former Texas health official and whom Kennedy hired as a senior adviser — have led the initiative for the health department to collect and examine medical records.

A man sits at a table with a placard with his name on it. Other faces are seen blurred in the foreground in front of him.
William “Reyn” Archer III, a former Texas health commissioner, attends the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices meeting at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters on Sept. 20. (Mary Conlon/AP)

Federal officials met with leaders of the state-run health information exchange systems several times over the past year and asked how the personal medical records they maintain could be used for vaccine research, according to seven people who participated in the discussions or were familiar with them.

Craig Behm, who runs the Maryland health information exchange, said Kennedy’s team asked about how the vast trove of medical records they store from hospitals and health systems could be used to study vaccines.

“If this administration wants to conduct research on the effectiveness of vaccines, are you saying you all can help us conduct that research?” Behm recalled being asked by a top official at HHS’ health information technology office.

Last June, Behm and leaders of other state exchanges met with Kennedy’s top advisers to discuss sharing more medical data with federal agencies. The state organizations followed up with a pitch in October for a new surveillance system that would give the federal health department “real-time, 24-hour data feeds on opioid and chronic disease trends” within a year, according to a presentation reviewed by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. Under the proposal, HHS would get data from 90% of the population’s medical records by 2028.

Administration officials regularly asked during the meetings how the records could be used to monitor vaccine safety. Kennedy has rejected the federal government’s current vaccine-monitoring systems; decades of research has shown immunizations are safe and effective for most people.

“Vaccine safety, or whatever words you want to use, has come up pretty consistently in those conversations,” said John Kansky, CEO of the Indiana Health Information Exchange.

Kansky sees the potential value of sharing information from the exchanges for public health but is worried about the focus on vaccines: “It’s like, oh man, I wish you would have picked something that pushed fewer buttons for people.”

A System To Monitor Chronic Disease

Nearly every state has at least one health information exchange — often regulated by state laws and run by private companies or nonprofits — that enables hospitals and health systems to immediately share patients’ medical records with one another. The systems allow doctors and nurses to quickly pull up nearly anyone’s medical history and records at emergency rooms or share after-visit summaries and notes with patients’ primary care providers, for example.

In certain circumstances — most often dealing with cases of infectious diseases such as measles or flu — the exchanges notify public health authorities, like the state health department or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Using the exchanges for broader public health purposes is not an unusual idea in itself. But it can present privacy, legal, and ethical complications, health officials say.

In the end, Behm said his organization in Maryland declined to share more data with the federal government for vaccine research, noting that sharing medical records for that purpose would require a rash of approvals from hospitals, state political leaders, and research boards. Any new data-sharing agreement should also have a clear, detailed framework outlining what would be shared and with whom, he added.

“A number of us said, ‘We can’t do anything our agreements don’t allow us to do, so no,’” Behm said. Indeed, most health information exchanges have contractual restrictions on who can access clinical data.

Kansky said Indiana is still weighing whether to provide additional data for Kennedy’s project, and that nothing has yet been shared.

HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard did not answer questions about how many states are participating in Kennedy’s project, what new data the agency is collecting, how much the federal government is spending on the initiative, how it is protecting patient privacy, or who has access to the data.

“HHS is strengthening public health surveillance and modernizing data systems to better understand and combat the childhood chronic disease epidemic as part of Secretary Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again agenda,” Hilliard said in an emailed statement. “Americans deserve robust systems to monitor the drivers of chronic illness.”

Kennedy has asserted, without evidence, that vaccines can cause chronic illness.

A Kennedy Partner in Nebraska

At least one state has been cooperative.

The former leader of Nebraska’s state health information exchange has led the effort to share data from medical records with the federal government.

Jaime Bland, former CEO of CyncHealth — the Nebraska health information exchange used by in the state — said several states are looking to “open up channels” to provide more analysis to Kennedy’s team.

“They’re looking at the data differently and providing some insights back to the CDC,” Bland told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

Bland was among a group who proposed that CyncHealth would help kick off the initiative, according to a 43-slide PowerPoint presented to federal officials during an October meeting.

CyncHealth and other state health information exchanges would “ingest data from hospitals, clinics, laboratories, pharmacies, payers, and social services agencies,” then “link claims and clinical records through a master patient index.”

Data from the exchanges “will be deidentified where appropriate,” according to one slide.

The federal government would pay the exchanges for furnishing the records, according to the proposal: $3 a person, annually.

Officials would “frame publicly that this is not a new database, but a federated trust model that delivers real-time data for all HHS missions,” the presentation reads.

After the meeting, Nebraska’s health department was awarded a large grant from the CDC, and CyncHealth in turn got millions of dollars from the state.

On Dec. 19, the CDC announced new funding under its , which sends money to state and local health departments for lab work, health information enhancements, and solutions for outbreaks.

Nebraska’s state health department was awarded $18.7 million — the most of any state last year, though Nebraska is the 38th most populous state. By comparison, Texas received $9.2 million, and California got $10.8 million.

CyncHealth was then awarded three contracts totaling $13.6 million from the state health department just weeks later, on Jan. 9 and Jan. 16, according to a publicly accessible database of state contracts.

Grace McNamara, a spokesperson for CyncHealth, said it retained $2.4 million of the funding for Kennedy’s project; the remaining money was distributed to “other participating states and various vendor organizations for implementation support.”

A former CDC official who was aware of the transaction, but not authorized to speak publicly about it, confirmed the money was intended for CyncHealth to supply data for Kennedy’s initiative to look at vaccines and autism. McNamara said that the “work is focused on improving outcomes related to acute and chronic illnesses.”

“The referenced project is not research, but rather a proof-of-concept project on how health information exchange and public health can work together to improve health outcomes and is not specific to autism,” she said in an emailed statement.

McNamara did not answer questions about what type of medical data is being provided to the federal health department or whether patients’ identifying information is removed.

Bland left her post at CyncHealth — where she was paid nearly — in December. She was named in April as the chief data strategist for the MAHA Institute — a think tank founded by allies of Kennedy and Trump to advance their Make America Healthy Again movement.

Bland agreed with Kennedy that data from state health information exchanges could provide more insight into autism’s causes or vaccine injuries.

“The data is so fragmented, so modeled when it comes to population health and public health, that we lose sight of the individual stories,” Bland said. She told a story she had heard about a woman who had a seizure after receiving the HPV vaccine.

“You know, the vaccine is safe — it absolutely is — but it wasn’t safe for her,” Bland said. “As public health officials, we say the vaccine is safe. But there are cases where it is not.”

Daniel Jernigan, a former top CDC official who left the agency last summer, said he tried to point Kennedy to data that would help the health secretary study vaccine safety and autism.

Dan Jernigan shakes the hand of a man off screen outside of the CDC headquarters.
Former CDC official Daniel Jernigan greets a supporter after resigning from the agency on Aug. 28. (Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)

After 31 years at the CDC overseeing public health surveillance, emerging infectious diseases, and the influenza divisions, Jernigan thought the solution was simple. The secretary could work with researchers to obtain huge databases pulled from health systems nationwide and maintained by major electronic health records companies.

Those databases are deidentified, meaning they don’t include patient names or other information that can identify individuals. Jernigan said Kennedy didn’t seem interested.

Instead, as The New York Times first reported, the health secretary dispatched two top advisers — Archer and Hannah Anderson, his former deputy chief of staff — to the CDC’s headquarters in Atlanta last July to download millions of identifiable patient records directly from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, the system the health agency uses to investigate complications from vaccines. The records, though, were decades old.

Jernigan said the federal government has limited legal authority to access medical records from state health information exchanges. In any case, examining those records may provide a view of a person’s medical history that will not necessarily produce answers to Kennedy’s questions about vaccines and autism.

“If they’re just using the electronic health record data, there are limits to that,” Jernigan said. “If they’re only looking at electronic health record data, all you’re going to get is what was captured in the encounter. It’s not going to be very satisfying.”

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News data reporter Maia Rosenfeld contributed to this article.

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/sharing-patients-medical-records-access-rfk-jr-project-link-autism-vaccine-injuries/">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=2245892&amp;ga4=G-J74WWTKFM0&quot; style="width:1px;height:1px;">]]>
2245892