The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has altered its website on autism and vaccines, removing unequivocal statements that immunizations don’t cause the neurodevelopmental disorder and replacing them with inaccurate and misleading information about the links between the shots and autism.

Until Wednesday, the CDC page, “Autism and Vaccines,” began: “Studies have shown that there is no link between receiving vaccines and developing autism spectrum disorder (ASD).”

This was followed, in large font, by the blunt statement: “Vaccines do not cause autism.”

The rest of the page summarized some of the CDC’s own studies into autism and vaccine ingredients, none of which found any causal links between the two.

On Wednesday, the page was altered so that it now begins: “The claim ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.”

The words “Vaccines do not cause autism” still appear near the top, but with an asterisk that leads to a note at the bottom.

“The header ‘Vaccines do not cause autism’ has not been removed due to an agreement with the chair of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee that it would remain on the CDC website,” the site states.

The chair of that committee, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), cast the deciding vote to advance Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s appointment as Health and Human Services secretary, in exchange for Kennedy’s promise that he wouldn’t erode public confidence in vaccines.

“What parents need to hear right now is vaccines for measles, polio, hepatitis B and other childhood diseases are safe and effective and will not cause autism. Any statement to the contrary is wrong, irresponsible, and actively makes Americans sicker,” Cassidy said in a post on X on Thursday afternoon. “Families are getting sick and people are dying from vaccine-preventable deaths, and that tragedy needs to stop.” Cassidy’s office did not immediately respond to further requests for comment Thursday.

“Studies supporting a link have been ignored by health authorities,” HHS spokesman Andrew Dixon said in an email. “We are updating the CDC’s website to reflect gold standard, evidence-based science.”

The news was met with outrage and alarm by scientists and advocates.

“Can we trust what’s coming from CDC anymore? I don’t know the answer to that question,” said Dr. Sean O’Leary, chair of the infectious disease committee at the American Academy of Pediatrics, adding that the website change reflects a “tragic moment” for U.S. public health.

“We are appalled to find that the content on the CDC webpage ‘Autism and Vaccines’ has been changed and distorted, and is now filled with anti-vaccine rhetoric and outright lies about vaccines and autism,” the nonprofit Autism Science Foundation said in a statement. “The CDC’s previous science- and evidence-based website has been replaced with misinformation and now actually contradicts the best available science.”

Alison Singer, the organization’s co-founder and president, expressed further frustration.

“Just like we no longer study whether the Earth is flat, at some point with regard to autism and vaccines, you have to call it and say ‘enough is enough,’” Singer said. “We don’t have an unlimited amount of money with which to study autism, and if we keep asking the same questions, we will never find the true causes of autism.”

The current CDC page now says the rise in autism diagnoses correlates with an increase in the number of vaccines given to infants. Multiple researchers have argued that the rise in autism spectrum disorder diagnoses is better explained by an expanding diagnostic definition of the disorder, along with better monitoring and diagnosis for more children.

“This issue has been studied exhaustively, and it has been shown over and over again that vaccines do not cause autism,” said Colin Killick, executive director of the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network. “This administration continues to lie about autism in ways that endanger both our community and the broader population.”

In one of the most important state environmental decisions this year, California air regulators adopted new rules designed to reduce methane leaks and better respond to disastrous underground fires at landfills statewide.

California Air Resources Board members voted 12-0 on Thursday to approve a batch of new regulations for the state’s nearly 200 large landfills, designed to minimize the release of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas produced by decomposing organic waste. Landfills are California’s second-largest source of methane emissions, following only the state’s large dairy cow and livestock herds.

The new requirements will force landfill operators to install additional pollution controls; more comprehensively investigate methane leaks on parts of landfills that are inaccessible with on-the-ground monitoring using new technology like drones and satellites; and fix equipment breakdowns much faster. Landfill operators also will be required to repair leaks identified through California’s new satellite-detection program.

The regulation is expected to prevent the release of 17,000 metric tons of methane annually — an amount capable of warming the atmosphere as much as 110,000 gas-fired cars driven for a year.

It also will curtail other harmful landfill pollution, such as lung-aggravating sulfur and cancer-causing benzene. Landfill operators will be required to keep better track of high temperatures and take steps to minimize the fire risks that heat could create.

There are underground fires burning in at least two landfills in Southern California — smoldering chemical reactions that are incinerating buried garbage, releasing toxic fumes and spewing liquid waste. Regulators found explosive levels of methane emanating from many other landfills across the state.

During the three-hour Air Resources Board hearing preceding the vote, several Californians who live near Chiquita Canyon Landfill — one of the known sites where garbage is burning deep underground — implored the board to act to prevent disasters in other communities across the state.

“If these rules were already updated, maybe my family wouldn’t be sick,” said Steven Howse, a 27-year resident of Val Verde. “My house wouldn’t be for sale. My close friend and neighbor would still live next door to me. And I wouldn’t be pleading with you right now. You have the power to change this.”

Landfill operators, including companies and local governments, voiced their concern about the costs and labor needed to comply with the regulation.

“We want to make sure that the rule is implementable for our communities, not unnecessarily burdensome,” said John Kennedy, a senior policy advocate for Rural County Representatives of California, a nonprofit organization representing 40 of the state’s 58 counties, many of which own and operate landfills. “While we support the overarching goals of the rule, we remain deeply concerned about specific measures including in the regulation.”

Lauren Sanchez, who was appointed chair of the California Air Resources Board in October, recently attended the United Nations’ COP30 climate conference in Brazil with Gov. Gavin Newsom. What she learned at the summit, she said, made clear to her that California’s methane emissions have international consequences, and that the state has an imperative to reduce them.

“The science is clear, acting now to reduce emissions of methane and other short-lived climate pollutants is the best way to immediately slow the pace of climate change,” Sanchez said.

Insurance premiums are rising fast in the parts of the United States most exposed to climate-related disasters like wildfires and hurricanes.

New research shows that, as insurance has sharply pushed up the cost of owning a home, the price shock is starting to reverberate through the broader real estate market.

Rising insurance costs are eating into household budgets.

In some areas of the country that are exposed to disasters, homes are not selling because prospective buyers can’t afford both the mortgage and the insurance.

In parts of the hail-prone Midwestern states, insurance now eats up more than one-fifth of the average homeowner’s total housing payments, including mortgage costs and property taxes. In Orleans Parish, La., that number is nearly 30 percent.

Home insurance costs have soared where climate hazards are highest.

Nationally, insurance rates have risen by an average of 58 percent since 2018, outpacing inflation by a substantial margin. But that growth has been highly uneven across the United States.

Places that are most vulnerable to climate-related disasters like hurricanes, fires and hail are seeing some of the largest premium increases. It’s not always the case that the highest climate risk translates into the highest insurance costs. Local policies and regulations have helped keep prices lower in high-risk places, like parts of California. Other factors, like a homeowner’s credit score, can affect premiums, too.

What’s driving up insurance prices?

Since 2017, an obscure part of the insurance market, known as reinsurance, has helped push up premiums. Insurance companies buy reinsurance to help limit their exposure when a catastrophe hits. Over the past several years, reinsurance companies have experienced what Benjamin Keys and Philip Mulder, the researchers who led the new study, call a “climate epiphany.” As a result, the rates they charge to protect home insurance companies against catastrophic losses have roughly doubled.

Insurance providers have, in turn, passed these costs on to homeowners. The rapid repricing of climate risk is responsible for about 20 percent of home insurance premium increases since 2017, according to Dr. Keys and Dr. Mulder.

What else is contributing to high rates? Rebuilding costs are responsible for about 35 percent of the recent changes, the research found. Population shifts and inflation are factors, too.

High insurance prices are weighing down home values.

Since 2018, a financial shock in the home insurance market has meant that homes in the ZIP codes most exposed to hurricanes and wildfires sell for an average of $43,900 less than they otherwise would have, the research found.

In many places, insurance has been a relatively small part of the homebuying equation. Now, for many, it’s a major consideration.

For several homeowners we interviewed in Louisiana, monthly insurance costs are now higher than their home loan payments.

The research shows buyers may be factoring rising insurance costs into the prices they’re willing to pay for homes. As a result, homes in some areas are selling for less.