Connect with us

Health

C.D.C. Cuts Threaten to Set Back the Nation’s Health, Critics Say

Published

on

C.D.C. Cuts Threaten to Set Back the Nation’s Health, Critics Say

The extensive layoffs of federal health workers that began on Tuesday will greatly curtail the scope and influence of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the world’s premier public health agency, an outcome long sought by conservatives critical of its handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The reorganization of the Department of Health and Human Services shrinks the C.D.C. by 2,400 employees, or roughly 18 percent of its work force, and strips away some of its core functions.

Some Democrats in Congress described the reorganization throughout H.H.S. as flatly illegal.

“You cannot decimate and restructure H.H.S. without Congress,” said Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, and a member of the Senate health committee.

“This is not only unlawful but seriously harmful — they are putting Americans’ health and well-being on the line,” she added.

Advertisement

Ms. Murray noted that the Trump administration had not detailed which units are being cut at the C.D.C. and other health agencies. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary, said last week the layoffs would affect primarily administrative functions.

But according to information gathered by The New York Times from dozens of workers, the reductions were more broadly targeted. Scientists focused on environmental health and asthma, injuries, lead poisoning, smoking and climate change were dismissed.

Researchers studying blood disorders, violence prevention and access to vaccines were let go. The agency’s center on H.I.V. and sexually transmitted diseases was among the hardest hit, losing about 27 percent of its staff.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which makes recommendations on how to keep workers safe, was all but dissolved.

What remains is a hobbled C.D.C., with a smaller global footprint, devoting fewer resources to environmental health, occupational health and disease prevention, public health experts said.

Advertisement

Instead, the agency will be trained more narrowly on domestic disease outbreaks. Communications will be centralized at H.H.S. in Washington.

The department intends “to ensure a more coordinated and effective response to public health challenges, ultimately benefiting the American taxpayer,” said Emily Hilliard, deputy press secretary at the department.

“C.D.C. scientists have conducted numerous interviews on a variety of topics and will continue to do so,” she added.

Critics predicted the move would prevent scientists from speaking frankly about public health.

“American taxpayers provide the resources for C.D.C.’s specialists and have the right to hear directly from them without interference by politicians,” said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, who led the agency from 2009 to 2017.

Advertisement

The sweeping reductions arrive as the nation confronts an outbreak of measles in Texas and elsewhere, a spreading bird flu epidemic on poultry and dairy farms, and a raft of new questions about public health measures like water fluoridation and school vaccine requirements.

“What we seem to be seeing is a dismantling rather than a restructuring” of the public health system, said Dr. Richard Besser, chief executive of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and a former acting director of the C.D.C.

On Capitol Hill, the Senate health committee, which recommended confirmation of Mr. Kennedy as secretary, scheduled a hearing on the reorganization of H.H.S., citing the possible impacts on public health.

Mr. Kennedy has described the reorganization as an effort to clean up waste and bureaucracy while promising that federal health agencies would do more to improve the health of Americans.

“We’re going to eliminate an entire alphabet soup of departments and agencies while preserving their core functions by merging them into a new organization called the Administration for a Healthy America,” the secretary said in a videotaped message announcing the layoffs.

Advertisement

The department did not respond to requests for more detailed information.

Society’s most vulnerable — the poor, Black, Latino and Native American people, rural Americans with less access to health care, the disabled and those at highest risk for illness — are likely to be hit hardest, experts said.

“These communities rely on public health to a larger extent than wealthy communities do,” Dr. Besser said.

For decades, public health and medical research drew support across the political spectrum.

But the C.D.C. has been in the political cross hairs since the first Trump administration, when the White House muzzled the agency’s communications, meddled with its publications and blamed its scientists for bungling the pandemic response.

Advertisement

In recent years, lawmakers have harshly criticized the agency’s advice on masks, lockdowns, social distancing, school closures and various other attempts to contain the pandemic, calling them economically and socially disastrous.

Project 2025, the conservative blueprint for reshaping the federal government, described the C.D.C. as “perhaps the most incompetent and arrogant” federal agency, and called on Congress to curb its powers.

Through staffing cuts, the administration reduced critical divisions of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, and employees studying how to prevent gun violence, child abuse and elder abuse were fired.

Injuries are the leading cause of death among Americans under 45. About 47,000 Americans are killed by firearms each year, more than half of them suicides.

But gun violence is a politically fraught topic. Pressure from the National Rifle Association and conservative politicians led to a ban on using federal funds to study gun violence for almost 25 years. Funding was restored in 2019.

Advertisement

The injury center studied ways to improve gun safety and promoted the use of gun locks, particularly in homes where children live.

“People think of gun violence as a question for law enforcement, but the public health approach has made a big difference,” said Dr. Mark Rosenberg, a former center director.

Most of the C.D.C.’s Division of Reproductive Health, which studies maternal health, was also shuttered. Whether some or all of its portfolio will be assumed by the new organization created by Mr. Kennedy was not clear.

Pregnant women and newborns die in the United States at a far higher rate than in other industrialized nations.

In recent years, the C.D.C. focused on stark racial health disparities that put Black American women at nearly three times the risk of dying of pregnancy complications than white women.

Advertisement

But the Trump administration has been defunding studies of health disparities in racial, ethnic and gender minorities, saying they do not align with the president’s executive orders ending diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

Mr. Kennedy said last week that the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which makes recommendations for preventing work-related injuries and illnesses, would be absorbed into the health department.

But on Tuesday, most of its divisions were eliminated, among them offices dedicated to protecting workers in various industries, including mine inspectors.

Even one of the agency’s most essential functions, infectious disease research, was affected.

The Trump administration had been weighing moving the H.I.V. prevention division to a different agency within the health department.

Advertisement

But on Tuesday, teams leading H.I.V. surveillance and research within that division were laid off. It was unclear whether some of those functions would be recreated elsewhere. (A team in the global health center working on preventing mother-to-child transmission of H.I.V. was also cut.)

Until now, the C.D.C. provided funds to states and territories for responding to and preventing H.I.V. outbreaks. Roughly one in four new diagnoses of H.I.V. is made with agency funds.

Some H.I.V. experts warned that the move could lead to a rise in H.I.V. infections among Americans.

“H.I.V. prevention is a lot more than just giving out condoms,” said Dr. John Brooks, who served as chief medical officer for the division of H.I.V. prevention until last year. “It saves lives, averts illness and produces enormous cost savings.”

Broadly, the reorganization aligns with Mr. Kennedy’s preferred emphasis on research into chronic diseases; federal research has been far too focused on infectious diseases, he has said.

Advertisement

But the line between them is not always clear, said Dr. Anne Schuchat, former principal deputy director of the C.D.C. Research that seems disconnected from outbreak response may also be a key for fighting pathogens.

“For Zika, we needed experts in birth defects, entomology and vector control, virologists and environmental health experts,” she said. “Emerging threats don’t respect borders of C.D.C. organizational units.”

The reorganization risks choking the talent pipeline for public health, said Ursula Bauer, former director of the agency’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

“Once you decimate an agency like C.D.C., which is full of high-caliber highly trained individuals, building back is going to be incredibly difficult,” she said.

“It will take two to three times as long to undo the damage as it took to inflict it.”

Advertisement

The cuts also will take a toll on the agency’s ability to gather and analyze data, which are keys to identifying trends and developing interventions, Dr. Phil Huang, director of Dallas County Health and Human Services, said at a news briefing.

“You take away those systems, and it takes away the ability to see the impact of all these cuts,” he added.

Health

Cancer risk linked to common blood-related condition, research reveals

Published

on

Cancer risk linked to common blood-related condition, research reveals

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Anemia, a common blood disorder, may be a major risk factor for developing cancer.

Advertisement

That’s according to new research from Sweden, which sought to discover whether newly developed anemia is an early warning sign of cancer or death from any cause.

The study, published in BMJ Journals, looked at registry data from more than 380,000 Swedish adults – half were people with new-onset anemia and the other half were the same age and gender, but did not have anemia.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

All participants were over 18 years old and cancer-free at the start of the study.

The results showed that people with incident anemia – new cases occurring over a specific period – had a significantly higher chance of being diagnosed with cancer, especially in the first three months, according to a press release. This included 6.2% of men and 2.8% of women.

Advertisement

Anemia, a common blood disorder, may be a major risk factor for developing cancer. (iStock)

Individuals with anemia also had a much higher chance of death during the 18-month follow-up.

Specific types of anemia were individually linked to disease progression and mortality, the researchers discovered.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES

Microcytic anemia – where the red blood cells are smaller than normal – was more frequently linked to cancer, especially types of disease that impact the digestive system and the blood.

Advertisement

Macrocytic anemia, a type of anemia where the red blood cells are larger than normal, was more strongly linked to overall mortality than cancer.

The researchers concluded in the study that new-onset anemia is a “strong and sustained risk marker” for both incident cancer and all-cause mortality. (iStock)

The researchers concluded in the study that new-onset anemia is a “strong and sustained risk marker” for both incident cancer and all-cause mortality.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER

Lead study author Elinor Nemlander, researcher at the Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society at the Karolinska Institutet, commented on the findings in a press release from the Swedish medical university.

Advertisement

“We found that both the risk of cancer and the risk of death are highest during the first months after anemia is detected, but that the increased risk persists later during follow-up as well,” she said. “Our findings suggest that anemia may be a sign of underlying disease rather than a condition in its own right.”

Specific types of anemia were individually linked to disease progression and mortality, the researchers discovered. (iStock)

Speaking with Fox News Digital, Nemlander noted that measures like red blood cell size are already “routinely available” in primary care, and that the study highlights how this existing data can be used to identify early risk.

“At the same time, the elevated risks persist over time, underscoring the need for structured follow-up and clear plans for continued evaluation, even when cancer is not initially identified,” she said.

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

Advertisement

As the study was observational, it shows an association, but does not prove that anemia causes cancer or death.

The research also did not measure for all causes of anemia, including alcohol use, malnutrition, chronic liver disease, inflammatory conditions and gynecological blood loss.

“Some of the results may also be influenced by who gets tested, underlying illnesses and differences in how anemia is evaluated in different healthcare settings,” Nemlander added.

Continue Reading

Health

More patients demand ‘unvaccinated’ blood, doctors warn of growing health risks

Published

on

More patients demand ‘unvaccinated’ blood, doctors warn of growing health risks

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

An increasing number of patients are requesting “unvaccinated” blood for transfusions, which can delay care and pose risks to patients’ health, experts warn.

There is no evidence that unvaccinated blood presents any safety benefit, according to a new study published in the journal Transfusion.

There is currently no process for checking whether donated blood comes from vaccinated or unvaccinated donors, experts say.

CANCER SURVIVAL APPEARS TO DOUBLE WITH COMMON VACCINE, RESEARCHERS SAY

Advertisement

Vanderbilt University in Tennessee, which conducted the research, received 15 requests for unvaccinated blood between Jan. 1, 2024, and Dec. 31, 2025. The median age of patients was 17 years old and more than half were children, the university reported.

An increasing number of patients are requesting “unvaccinated” blood for transfusions, which can delay care and pose risks to patients’ health, experts warn. (iStock)

Thirteen of the patients received blood donated specifically for them by family members, which is known as “direct donation.” This can be risky, because most direct donors are giving blood for the first time, and their donations are more likely to contain “potentially harmful pathogens,” the authors noted. 

“Despite being framed as ‘safer,’ directed donations may paradoxically increase risk.”

COVID VACCINE UNDER NEW SCRUTINY AFTER STUDIES REVEAL POSSIBLE HEALTH RISKS

Advertisement

Among the studied patient group, two became much sicker after refusing a standard blood transfusion. 

One patient developed anemia, a condition where the body lacks enough healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen. The other developed hemodynamic shock, a serious condition in which there is insufficient blood flow and oxygen to the body’s tissues, potentially leading to organ failure.

“Despite being framed as ‘safer,’ directed donations may paradoxically increase risk.”

Requests for unvaccinated blood spiked after the approval of COVID-19 vaccines, posing a “recurring challenge for transfusion services and clinicians,” the researchers stated.

“These requests were associated with care delays, escalation and inefficiencies,” they indicated.

Advertisement

FAMILY PLEADS FOR HELP AS TEEN FACES LIFE-THREATENING BONE MARROW FAILURE

The researchers recommend that health systems create standardized policies to handle these types of requests.

“Regulatory and professional organizations have opposed these non-evidence-based policies, emphasizing that blood centers do not record or convey donor COVID-19 vaccination status and that evidence demonstrates transfusion from vaccinated donors poses no unique risk.”

Requests for unvaccinated blood spiked after the approval of COVID-19 vaccines, posing a “recurring challenge for transfusion services and clinicians,” the researchers stated. (Reuters/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo)

The Vanderbilt study had some limitations, the researchers noted. It looked at a small number of cases and only included situations where special blood donations made it to the blood bank, so it doesn’t show how often people made this request overall. 

Advertisement

CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES

It also didn’t include cases where concerns were resolved through conversations with doctors or ethics teams, the team noted.

As this was an observational study and not a controlled experiment, it only showed an association and could not prove that refusing standard blood directly caused any specific patient outcomes.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER

Several states have introduced proposals aimed at allowing patients to receive blood specifically from donors who have not received COVID-19 vaccines.

Advertisement

In Oklahoma, one such proposal called for the creation of a state-run blood bank dedicated to collecting and distributing blood from unvaccinated donors. Despite these efforts, none of the measures have been enacted into law.

The notion that receiving blood from someone who had the vaccine would be harmful is not based on any scientific studies, doctors say. (iStock)

Dr. Marc Siegel, Fox News senior medical analyst, was not involved in the research, but said these types of requests are “part of an ongoing fear culture.”

“It is also very difficult to test for, because the antibodies may be positive from COVID itself as well as the vaccine, and it can be difficult to tell the difference,” he told Fox News Digital.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

The notion that receiving blood from someone who had the vaccine would be harmful is not based on any scientific studies, the doctor reiterated.

“If people want to group up to get blood from other unvaccinated people, I respect that choice, though it will be expensive and will limit options,” Siegel added.

“Requests for unvaccinated blood are something we’ve seen wax and wane since the introduction of the COVID vaccine,” an expert said. (iStock)

Diane Calmus, vice president of government affairs for America’s Blood Centers in Washington, D.C., said that requests for direct donations are “exceedingly rare” – representing about 0.06% of the U.S. blood supply.

“Requests for unvaccinated blood are something we’ve seen wax and wane since the introduction of the COVID vaccine,” Calmus, who also was not involved in the Vanderbilt study, told Fox News Digital. “The challenge is that there’s no way to tell whether someone’s blood has been vaccinated – there’s no test that exists.”

Advertisement

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

Any situation where someone requires a blood transfusion is most likely a “very scary time,” she noted.

“Family members want to be cautious, and this is why it’s so important that people talk to a transfusion medicine-trained doctor,” the expert advised. “These are physicians who have a specialty in blood transfusions … and who can answer those questions that any individual will have.”

“Blood has to be prescribed. You can’t just show up at the blood center and say, ‘I would like my sister to donate for me,’” an expert said. (iStock)

Calmus pointed out that it takes some time to facilitate a direct donation, and that there is a specific process in place. 

Advertisement

“Blood has to be prescribed. You can’t just show up at the blood center and say, ‘I would like my sister to donate for me,’” she said. “There needs to be a prescription. It needs to go through the hospital … they need to make sure it is the right blood for the right patient.”

“We need people – vaccinated or not vaccinated – to show up and donate blood, because it is the blood on the shelves that saves lives.”

Calmus emphasized that the U.S. blood supply is “meticulously tracked,” and that there have been no indications of a lack of safety. She also stressed the ongoing need for blood donors.

“We need people – vaccinated or not vaccinated – to show up and donate blood, because it is the blood on the shelves that saves lives.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the Vanderbilt researchers for comment.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Health

She Lost 101 Lbs by Flipping the Food Pyramid—Here’s How You Can Too

Published

on

She Lost 101 Lbs by Flipping the Food Pyramid—Here’s How You Can Too


Advertisement





New Food Pyramid for Weight Loss Helped Her Drop 101 Pounds




















Advertisement





Advertisement


Use left and right arrow keys to navigate between menu items.


Use escape to exit the menu.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending