Health
Guarded N.I.H. Nominee Faces Sharp Questions on Vaccines and Research Cuts
Under hostile questioning from senators of both parties, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, President Trump’s nominee to lead the National Institutes of Health, said on Wednesday that he was “convinced” vaccines did not cause autism even as he urged more research on the question, which scientists say has long been settled.
The hearing became a battlefield for the Trump administration’s early actions on health, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s reluctance to explicitly recommend vaccinations in the midst of a deadly measles outbreak in West Texas.
“I fully support children being vaccinated for diseases like measles,” Dr. Bhattacharya, a health economist and professor of medicine at Stanford University, told the Senate Health Committee. But to assuage skeptical parents, he also said scientists should conduct more research on autism and vaccines — a position that senators from both parties noted was at odds with extensive evidence showing no association between them.
If confirmed, Dr. Bhattacharya would lead the world’s largest funder of biomedical research, a sprawling agency with a $48 billion budget and 27 separate institutes and centers that has long been praised by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
Recently, though, the N.I.H. has been rocked by Trump administration moves that blocked key parts of its grant-making apparatus and resulted in the firing of roughly 1,200 employees. Together with other lapses and proposed changes in N.I.H. funding, the administration’s actions have rattled the biomedical research industry, which is responsible for driving pharmaceutical advancements and generating tens of billions of dollars in economic activity each year.
Hours before Wednesday’s hearing, the Department of Government Efficiency, the cost-cutting group led by Elon Musk, trumpeted the cancellation of N.I.H. grants.
Asked about blockages to N.I.H. funding during the hearing, Dr. Bhattacharya repeatedly dodged, saying only that he would ensure scientists had the resources they needed. He vowed to direct funding toward the causes of chronic disease — a priority of Mr. Kennedy’s — and to create a “culture of dissent” that encourages the challenging of prevailing views.
He also promised to scrutinize research findings that were not borne out by subsequent studies and fund the most innovative research, producing “big advances” rather than “small, incremental progress.”
But it was Dr. Bhattacharya’s resistance to weigh in on N.I.H. funding stoppages and his equivocal answers on vaccines that drew the ire of Democrats and some Republicans.
In one contentious exchange, Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, the committee’s Republican chairman, lamented that Dr. Bhattacharya had stopped short of saying the question of whether vaccines cause autism had been resolved.
“It’s been exhaustively studied,” said Mr. Cassidy, a doctor and fierce supporter of vaccination. “The more we pretend like this is an issue, the more we will have children dying from vaccine-preventable diseases.”
Dr. Bhattacharya responded that more research was needed as long as American parents were concerned enough not to vaccinate their children. “My inclination is to give people good data,” he said.
To that, Mr. Cassidy suggested that there already was good data, and that “precious limited taxpayer dollars” could not be devoted to every last fringe theory.
“There’s people who disagree that the world is round,” he said. “People still think Elvis is alive.”
Dr. Bhattacharya would not say whether he supported the Trump administration’s changes to N.I.H. funding, telling senators he had nothing to do with them. That did not stop numerous Democrats and one Republican, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, from attacking the changes, including a proposal to cap overhead costs. A judge has temporarily blocked that proposal.
“To impose this arbitrary cap makes no sense at all,” Ms. Collins said. “This is against the law.”
Dr. Bhattacharya, who has a medical degree and is a professor of medicine but never practiced, burst into the spotlight in October 2020, when he co-wrote an anti-lockdown treatise, the Great Barrington Declaration. It argued for “focused protection” — a strategy to protect the elderly and vulnerable while letting the virus spread among younger, healthier people.
Many scientists countered that walling off at-risk populations from the rest of society was a pipe dream.
The nation’s medical leadership, including Dr. Francis S. Collins, who retired last week, and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, then director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, denounced the plan. Referring to Dr. Bhattacharya and his co-authors as “fringe epidemiologists,” Dr. Collins wrote in an email that “there needs to be a quick and devastating takedown of its premises.”
Dr. Bhattacharya told senators on Wednesday that he had been “subject to censorship by the actions of the Biden administration.” Past N.I.H. officials, he said, “oversaw a culture of cover-up, obfuscation and a lack of tolerance for ideas that differ from theirs.”
But Dr. Bhattacharya’s championing of “scientific dissent” has sometimes clashed with his own actions. Until resigning late last year, he sat on the board of Biosafety Now, a group that promoted prosecuting “those culpable for covering up” the cause of Covid. Supporters of the theory that Covid leaked from a lab have often used that designation to refer to scientists who took different views.
On Wednesday, Dr. Bhattacharya waded again into the question of a laboratory leak, and whether N.I.H.-funded research at a virology laboratory in China led to one.
There is no direct evidence of the coronavirus escaping from a lab. Much published scientific research points instead to the virus emerging at a market in Wuhan, China, where wild animals were being illegally sold.
But Dr. Bhattacharya said that N.I.H.-supported research “may have caused the pandemic.” (The C.I.A. also recently swung in favor of the lab leak theory, though there was no new intelligence behind its shift and the agency has produced no direct evidence.) And Dr. Bhattacharya cast doubt over the future of American research on dangerous viruses, saying that the N.I.H. should not be doing “any research that has the potential to cause a pandemic.”
There has long been spirited debate over what type of research constitutes such a risk, and whether limiting that research would reduce the likelihood of another pandemic or instead undercut preparations for one.
Several senators noted that Dr. Bhattacharya had in the past received N.I.H. funding for his work. Some of that work, researchers have noted, may very well have run afoul of the Trump administration’s recent crackdown on certain types of science. The administration has targeted research related to climate science, for example, as well as studies touching on diversity, equity and inclusion.
In one ongoing project, Dr. Bhattacharya and several collaborators proposed using data from the Mexican Health and Aging Study, a longitudinal study of older Mexicans, to look at how climate change and workplace environmental exposures were related to disparities in Alzheimer’s disease.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
This story discusses suicide. If you or someone you know is having thoughts of suicide, please contact the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline at 988 or 1-800-273-TALK (8255).
Artificial intelligence has been touted as a boon to healthcare, but a new study has revealed its potential shortcomings when it comes to giving medical advice.
In January, OpenAI launched ChatGPT Health, the medical-focused version of the popular chatbot tool.
The company introduced the tool as “a dedicated experience that securely brings your health information and ChatGPT’s intelligence together, to help you feel more informed, prepared and confident navigating your health.”
But researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai have found that the tool failed to recommend emergency care for a “significant number” of serious medical cases.
The study, published in the journal Nature Medicine on Feb. 23, aimed to explore how ChatGPT Health — which is reported to have about 40 million users daily — handles situations where people are asking whether to seek emergency care.
Artificial intelligence has been touted as a boon to healthcare, but a new study has revealed its potential shortcomings when it comes to giving medical advice. (iStock)
“Right now, no independent body evaluates these products before they reach the public,” lead author Ashwin Ramaswamy, M.D., instructor of urology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City, told Fox News Digital.
“We wouldn’t accept that for a medication or a medical device, and we shouldn’t accept it for a product that tens of millions of people are using to make health decisions.”
Emergency scenarios
The team created 60 clinical scenarios across 21 medical specialties, ranging from minor conditions to true medical emergencies.
Three independent physicians then assigned an appropriate level of urgency for each case, based on published clinical practice guidelines in 56 medical societies.
WOMAN SAYS CHATGPT SAVED HER LIFE BY HELPING DETECT CANCER, WHICH DOCTORS MISSED
The researchers conducted 960 interactions with ChatGPT Health to see how the tool responded, taking into account gender, race, barriers to care and “social dynamics.”
While “clear-cut emergencies” — such as stroke or severe allergy — were generally handled well, the researchers found that the tool “under-triaged” many urgent medical issues.
The team created 60 clinical scenarios across 21 medical specialties, ranging from minor conditions to true medical emergencies. (iStock)
For example, in one asthma scenario, the system acknowledged that the patient was showing early signs of respiratory failure — but still recommended waiting instead of seeking emergency care.
“ChatGPT Health performs well in medium-severity cases, but fails at both ends of the spectrum — the cases where getting it right matters most,” Ramaswamy told Fox News Digital. “It under-triaged over half of genuine emergencies and over-triaged roughly two-thirds of mild cases that clinical guidelines say should be managed at home.”
PARENTS FILE LAWSUIT ALLEGING CHATGPT HELPED THEIR TEENAGE SON PLAN SUICIDE
Under-triage can be life-threatening, the doctor noted, while over-triage can overwhelm emergency departments and delay care for those in real need.
Researchers also identified inconsistencies in suicide risk alerts. In some cases, it directed users to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline in lower-risk scenarios, and in others, it failed to offer that recommendation even when a person discussed suicidal ideations.
“ChatGPT Health performs well in medium-severity cases, but fails at both ends of the spectrum.”
“The suicide guardrail failure was the most alarming,” study co-author Girish N. Nadkarni, M.D., chief AI officer of the Mount Sinai Health System, told Fox News Digital.
ChatGPT Health is designed to show a crisis intervention banner when someone describes thoughts of self-harm, the researcher noted.
OpenAI launched ChatGPT Health, the medical-focused version of the popular chatbot tool, in January 2026. (Gabby Jones/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“We tested it with a 27-year-old patient who said he’d been thinking about taking a lot of pills,” Nadkarni said. “When he described his symptoms alone, the banner appeared 100% of the time. Then we added normal lab results — same patient, same words, same severity — and the banner vanished.”
“A safety feature that works perfectly in one context and completely fails in a nearly identical context … is a fundamental safety problem.”
CHATGPT HEALTH PROMISES PRIVACY FOR HEALTH CONVERSATIONS
The researchers were also surprised by the social influence aspect.
“When a family member in the scenario said ‘it’s nothing serious’ — which happens all the time in real life — the system became nearly 12 times more likely to downplay the patient’s symptoms,” Nadkarni said. “Everyone has a spouse or parent who tells them they’re overreacting. The AI shouldn’t be agreeing with them during a potential emergency.”
Fox News Digital reached out to Open AI, creator of ChatGPT, requesting comment.
Physicians react
Dr. Marc Siegel, Fox News senior medical analyst, called the new study “important.”
“It underlines the principle that while large language models can triage clear-cut emergencies, they have much more trouble with nuanced situations,” Siegel, who was not involved in the study, told Fox News Digital.
ChatGPT and other LLMs can be helpful tools, a doctor said, but they “should not be used to give medical direction.” (iStock)
“This is where doctors and clinical judgment come in — knowing the nuances of a patient’s history and how they report symptoms and their approach to health.”
ChatGPT and other LLMs can be helpful tools, Siegel said, but they “should not be used to give medical direction.”
“Machine learning and continued input of data can help, but will never compensate for the essential problem – human judgment is needed to decide whether something is a true emergency or not.”
BREAKTHROUGH BLOOD TEST COULD SPOT DOZENS OF CANCERS BEFORE SYMPTOMS APPEAR
Dr. Harvey Castro, an emergency physician and AI expert in Texas, echoed the importance of the study, calling it “exactly the kind of independent safety evaluation we need.”
“Innovation moves fast. Oversight has to move just as fast,” Castro, who also did not work on the study, told Fox News Digital. “In healthcare, the most dangerous mistakes happen at the extremes, when something looks mild but is actually catastrophic. That’s where clinical judgment matters most, and where AI must be stress-tested.”
Study limitations
The researchers acknowledged some potential limitations in the study design.
“We used physician-written clinical scenarios rather than real patient conversations, and we tested at a single point in time — these systems update frequently, so performance may change,” Ramaswamy told Fox News Digital.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
Additionally, most of the missed emergencies happened in situations where the danger depended on how the condition was changing over time. It’s not clear whether the same problem would happen with acute medical emergencies.
Because the system had to choose just one fixed urgency category, the test may not reflect the more nuanced advice it might give in a back-and-forth conversation, the researchers noted.
ChatGPT Health is designed to show a crisis intervention banner when someone describes thoughts of self-harm. (iStock)
Also, the study wasn’t large enough to confidently detect small differences in how recommendations might vary by race or gender.
“We need continuous auditing, not one-time studies,” Castro noted. “These systems update frequently, so evaluation must be ongoing.”
‘Don’t wait’
The researchers emphasized the importance of seeking immediate care for serious issues.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
“If something feels seriously wrong — chest pain, difficulty breathing, a severe allergic reaction, thoughts of self-harm — go to the emergency department or call 988,” Ramaswamy advised. “Don’t wait for an AI to tell you it’s OK.”
The researchers noted that they support the use of AI to improve healthcare access, and that they didn’t conduct the study to “tear down the technology.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“These tools can be genuinely useful for the right things — understanding a diagnosis you’ve already received, looking up what your medications do and their side effects, or getting answers to questions that didn’t get fully addressed in a short doctor’s visit,” Ramaswamy said.
“That’s a very different use case from deciding whether you need emergency care. Treat them as a complement to your doctor, not a replacement.”
“This study doesn’t mean we abandon AI in healthcare.”
Castro agreed that the benefits of AI health tools should be weighed against the risks.
“AI health tools can increase access, reduce unnecessary visits and empower patients with information,” he said. “They are not inherently unsafe, but they are not yet substitutes for clinical judgment.”
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
“This study doesn’t mean we abandon AI in healthcare,” he went on. “It means we mature it. Independent testing and stronger guardrails will determine whether AI becomes a safety net or a liability.”
Related Article
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Americans consume foods every day that are marketed as “healthy,” when they could be quietly destroying their health, one doctor warns.
Dr. Mark Hyman, physician and co-founder of Function Health in California, says that much of America’s daily diet is filled with unhealthy ingredients.
“The amount of refined starches and sugars that are everywhere is just staggering to me, given what we know about how harmful they are,” he shared in an interview with Fox News Digital. “I don’t think people really understand.”
Hyman, author of the new book “Food Fix Uncensored,” said he’s “astounded” by what people are eating, especially for breakfast.
“People just eat sugar for breakfast,” he said. “They have muffins, they have bagels, they have croissants, they have sugar-sweetened coffees and teas.”
Dr. Mark Hyman is the author of the new book “Food Fix Uncensored.” (Function Health; Little, Brown Spark)
In addition to the traditionally sweet options for breakfast, some cereal brands and breakfast staples have adopted new “protein-packed” menu items and products, following health trends that encourage eating more protein.
“Highly processed food is not food.”
“Now, we’re seeing this halo of protein in certain things,” Hyman said, mentioning that many protein smoothies are “full of sugar.”
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
The doctor also noted that some popular cereals are now marketed as having protein in them. “My joke is, if it has a health claim on the label, it’s definitely bad for you,” he said.
Instead of starting the day with a “quick fix” or processed food, Hyman suggests choosing whole sources of protein and fat for breakfast, adding that “if there’s a little carbohydrate in there, it’s fine.”
More products marketed as “high protein” have cropped up on supermarket shelves. (iStock)
For his own breakfast, Hyman said he has a protein shake with whey protein, avocado and frozen berries. Eggs and avocados are also a great protein-and-fat combo option, he added.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
“It’s not that complicated — people need to just think about their breakfast not being dessert,” he said. “No wonder we’re in this cycle of obesity and diabetes. One in three teenage kids now has type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes. That’s just criminal.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Instead of counting calories and being in a caloric deficit as a way to lose weight and stay healthy, Hyman instead suggests focusing on how certain foods make you feel and how they impact your health.
“When you look at the way in which different types of calories affect your biology, you can just choose what you’re eating, and then you don’t have to worry about how much,” he told Fox News Digital.
In addition to the traditionally sweet options for breakfast, some cereal brands and breakfast staples have adopted new “protein-packed” menu items and products. (iStock)
“For example, if you eat a diet that doesn’t cause your insulin to spike — which is low in starch and sugar, higher in protein and fat — you won’t develop those swings in blood sugar, you won’t develop the spikes in insulin, you won’t deposit hungry fat … You will break that cycle.”
People are more likely to “self-regulate when they eat real food” instead of processed foods, which “bypasses the normal mechanisms of satiety, fullness and brain chemistry,” according to Hyman.
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
“Ultraprocessed food and junk food or highly processed food is not food,” he said. “It doesn’t support the health and well-being of an organism. It doesn’t do that. It does the opposite.”
Related Article
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Small fragments of plastic were found in the tumors of most prostate cancer patients, according to a new study from NYU Langone Health.
In past studies, microplastics have been found in almost every human organ and in bodily fluids, but their impact on human health still isn’t fully understood.
The researchers analyzed tissue samples from 10 patients with prostate cancer who underwent surgery to remove the entire organ.
Using visuals of both benign samples and tumor samples, as well as specialized equipment, the scientists identified plastic particles in 90% of the tumor samples and 70% of benign tissue samples, according to the study press release.
In past studies, microplastics were found in almost every single human organ along with bodily fluids, even the placenta. (iStock)
The cancerous tissue contained on average more than double the amount of plastic as healthy prostate tissue samples, the study found. This equates to about 40 micrograms of plastic per gram of tissue compared to 16 micrograms.
Researchers avoided contaminating the samples with other plastics by substituting standard tools with those made of aluminum, cotton and other non-plastic material, the release noted.
NIGHTLY BATHROOM HABIT WAS MISSED SIGN OF COMMON MEN’S CANCER: ‘I DIDN’T KNOW’
The scientists say this is the first direct evidence linking microplastics to prostate cancer.
“By uncovering yet another potential health concern posed by plastic, our findings highlight the need for stricter regulatory measures to limit the public’s exposure to these substances, which are everywhere in the environment,” said senior study author Vittorio Albergamo, assistant professor in the department of pediatrics at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, in the release.
Using visuals of both benign samples and tumor samples, as well as specialized equipment, the scientists identified plastic particles in 90% of the tumor samples and 70% of benign tissue samples. (iStock)
The study findings were presented during the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s Genitourinary Cancers Symposium in San Francisco on Feb. 26.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
“What is most striking is not that microplastics were detected, but that they were found embedded within tumor tissue itself,” Dr. David Sidransky, oncologist and medical advisor at SpotitEarly, a startup that offers an at-home breath-based test to detect early-stage cancer, told Fox News Digital.
“While complete avoidance is unrealistic, people can take practical steps to reduce exposure.”
“We already know microplastics are present in water, air, blood and even placental tissue. Their detection in prostate tumors suggests systemic distribution and long-term bioaccumulation,” added Maryland-based Sidransky, who was not involved in the study.
Study limitations
Albergamo cautioned that a larger sample is needed to confirm the findings. Additionally, Sidransky noted that the presence of microplastics alone does not prove they cause cancer.
“Tumors can act as ‘biologic sinks,’ meaning they may accumulate circulating particles simply because of altered vasculature and permeability,” he said.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIES
A key unanswered question, according to the doctor, is whether microplastics are biologically active in ways that “promote DNA damage, immune modulation or chronic inflammation within the prostate.”
About one in eight men in the U.S. will be diagnosed with prostate cancer at some point in their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The most actionable step men can take is appropriate screening and early detection, according to doctors. (iStock)
For those concerned about microplastics, Sidransky offered some insights.
“I believe the appropriate response is curiosity, not panic, and a commitment to understand more,” he said.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“While complete avoidance is unrealistic, people can take practical steps to reduce exposure, such as minimizing heating food in plastic containers, reducing bottled water consumption when possible, and favoring glass or stainless steel alternatives.”
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
The most actionable step men can take, however, is getting appropriate screenings to help ensure early detection, according to the doctor. Screening discussions should be individualized based on age, family history and other risk factors.
Related Article
Rep. Kevin Kiley announces run in California’s redrawn 6th Congressional District
How the Colorado Rockies Are Actually Building Its Opening Day Roster
Lawmakers again push to restore Shore Line East service to 2019 levels
Delaware Supreme Court upholds reforms to curb ‘DExit’ concerns
Florida High School Boys Basketball 2026 Playoff Brackets, Schedule (FHSAA) – March 2, 2026
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Indiana Members Credit Union announced as new anchor tenant at Bottleworks District
Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California
Gas prices could jump as Middle East tensions threaten global oil supply
Pakistan calls troops, orders 3-day curfew as 24 killed in pro-Iran rallies
US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets
House Republicans push Johnson to go to war with Senate over SAVE Act
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts5 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO5 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
News1 week agoWorld reacts as US top court limits Trump’s tariff powers