Trump Diagnosed With Vein Condition Causing Leg Swelling: White House
U.S. President Donald Trump has been diagnosed with a "common" vein condition after being evaluated by his doctor over swelling in his lower legs, the White House said on Thursday.
Reading a letter from Trump's physician, Leavitt said at a press briefing that an ultrasound on the president's legs "revealed chronic venous insufficiency ... a common condition, particularly in individuals over the age of 70."
Leavitt said there was "no evidence" of more serious conditions such as deep vein thrombosis or arterial disease. Additional exams identified "no signs of heart failure, renal impairment or systemic illness," Leavitt said.
Leavitt said Trump was not experiencing discomfort due to the condition.
According to the National Library of Health's MedlinePlus website, "Venous insufficiency is a condition in which the veins have problems sending blood from the legs back to the heart."
The condition "tends to get worse over time" but "can be managed if treatment is started in the early stated stages," the website says.
Leavitt also said that Trump had experienced bruising on the back of his hand.
She described this as "consistent with minor soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking and the use of aspirin, which is taken as part of a standard cardiovascular prevention regimen."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
US-funded contraceptives for poor nations to be burned in France, sources say
U.S.-funded contraceptives worth nearly $10 million are being sent to France from Belgium to be incinerated, after Washington rejected offers from the United Nations and family planning organisations to buy or ship the supplies to poor nations, two sources told Reuters. A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department confirmed to Reuters on Wednesday that a decision had been taken to destroy the stock. The supplies have been stuck for months in a warehouse in Geel, a city in the Belgian province of Antwerp, following President Donald Trump's decision to freeze U.S. foreign aid in January. They comprise contraceptive implants and pills as well as intrauterine devices to help prevent unwanted pregnancies, according to seven sources and a screengrab shared by an eighth source confirming the planned destruction. The U.S. government will spend $167,000 to incinerate the stocks at a facility in France that handles medical waste, the U.S. State Department confirmed. The spokesperson said that a preliminary decision had been made to destroy certain products from terminated U.S. Agency for International Development contracts. "Only a limited number of commodities have been approved for disposal," the spokesperson said via email, adding that no condoms or HIV medications would be destroyed. U.S. lawmakers have introduced two bills this month to prevent the destruction of the supplies following Trump's decision to shut down USAID, but aid groups say the bills are unlikely to be passed in time to stop the incineration. The Belgian foreign ministry said Brussels had held talks with U.S. authorities and "explored all possible options to prevent the destruction, including temporary relocation." "Despite these efforts, and with full respect for our partners, no viable alternative could be secured. Nevertheless, Belgium continues to actively seek solutions to avoid this regrettable outcome," it said in a statement shared with Reuters on Tuesday. "Sexual and reproductive health must not be subject to ideological constraints," it added. The supplies, worth $9.7 million, are due to expire between April 2027 and September 2031, according to an internal document listing the warehouse stocks and verified by three sources. Sarah Shaw, Associate Director of Advocacy at MSI Reproductive Choices, told Reuters the non-profit organisation had volunteered to pay for the supplies to be repackaged without USAID branding and shipped to countries in need, but the offer was declined by the U.S. government. "MSI offered to pay for repackaging, shipping and import duties but they were not open to that... We were told that the U.S. government would only sell the supplies at the full market value," said Shaw. She did not elaborate on how much the NGO was prepared to pay, but said she felt the rejection was based on the Trump's administration's more restrictive stance on abortion and family planning. "This is clearly not about saving money. It feels more like an ideological assault on reproductive rights, and one that is already harming women." She added that many countries in sub-Saharan Africa had relied on USAID for access to contraception and that the aid cuts would lead to a rise in unsafe abortions. The United Nations' sexual and reproductive health agency, UNFPA, also offered to buy the contraceptives outright, three sources told Reuters, without disclosing the financial terms of the proposal. 'DOZENS OF TRUCKLOADS' However, negotiations broke down, a source with knowledge of the talks said, in part due to a lack of response from the U.S. government. UNFPA declined to comment. One of the sources with knowledge of the issue said that the Trump administration was acting in accordance with the Mexico City policy, an anti-abortion pact in which Trump reinstated U.S. participation in January. The pact forbids the U.S. government from contributing to or working with organisations providing funding or supplies that offer access to abortions. The source said there was no way for the U.S. government to ensure that UNFPA would not share the contraceptives with groups offering abortions, violating the Mexico City policy. The State Department also told Reuters these were factors in their decision on Wednesday, and added that it had avoided $34.1 million in costs by cancelling other orders placed under the Biden administration. The source also said the matter was complicated by the fact that the contraceptives in Belgium were embossed with the USAID trademark and Washington did not want any USAID-branded supplies to be rerouted elsewhere. UNFPA did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the concerns raised by the source. One of the two sources who told Reuters the stocks of contraceptives were being trucked to France said it would likely take dozens of truckloads and at least two weeks to move the supplies out of the Geel warehouse, with a third source also confirming the scale of the operation. The French government did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Trump administration asks US Supreme Court to allow NIH diversity-related cuts
New York: Donald Trump's administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday to allow the government to proceed with sweeping cuts to National Institutes of Health grants as part of the Republican president's crackdown on diversity initiatives. The Justice Department asked the justices to lift Boston-based U.S. District Judge William Young's June ruling that halted the plan as a violation of federal law and required the government to reinstate access to the grant funds. The judge acted in a legal challenge by researchers and 16 U.S. states, led by Democratic-governed Massachusetts. The NIH is the world's largest funder of biomedical research. The cuts are part of Trump's wide-ranging actions to reshape the U.S. government, slash federal spending and end government support for diversity, equity and inclusion programs and transgender healthcare. The administration repeatedly has sought the Supreme Court's intervention to allow implementation of Trump policies impeded by lower courts. The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has sided with the administration in almost every case that it has been called upon to review since Trump returned to the presidency in January. In June, dozens of scientists, researchers and other NIH employees signed an open letter criticizing the agency's actions and spending cuts under Trump that they said politicize research and "harm the health of Americans and people across the globe." Young's ruling came in two lawsuits challenging the cuts. One was filed by the American Public Health Association, individual researchers and other plaintiffs who called the cuts an "ongoing ideological purge" of projects with a purported connection to gender identity, DEI "or other vague, now-forbidden language." The other was filed by the states, most of them Democratic-led. Young, an appointee of Republican former President Ronald Reagan, invalidated the grant terminations in June. The judge wrote that every new administration is entitled to make policy changes but that these must be reasonable and reasonably explained. Instead, according to the judge, the steps taken by Trump administration officials were "breathtakingly arbitrary and capricious," violating a federal law governing the actions of agencies. Young criticized administration officials for not offering any definition of DEI while disparaging studies they deemed low-value and unscientific that the officials claimed were used to unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race and other protected characteristics. "There is not a shred of evidence supporting any of these statements in the record," Young wrote. Many U.S. conservatives contend that DEI policies discriminate against white people. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on July 18 denied the administration's request to put Young's decision on hold. The administration has argued that the litigation should have been brought in a different judicial body, the Washington-based Court of Federal Claims, which specializes in money damages claims against the U.S. government. That reasoning was also the basis for the Supreme Court's decision in April that let Trump's administration proceed with millions of dollars of cuts to teacher training grants also targeted under the DEI crackdown.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
US fertility rate reached new low in 2024, CDC data shows
New York: The fertility rate in the US dropped to an all-time low in 2024 with less than 1.6 kids per woman, new federal data released Thursday shows. The US was once among only a few developed countries with a rate that ensured each generation had enough children to replace itself - about 2.1 kids per woman. But it has been sliding in America for close to two decades as more women are waiting longer to have children or never taking that step at all. The new statistic is on par with fertility rates in western European countries, according to World Bank data. Alarmed by recent drops, the Trump administration has taken steps to increase falling birth rates, like issuing an executive order meant to expand access to and reduce costs of in vitro fertilisation and backing the idea of "baby bonuses" that might encourage more couples to have kids. But there's no reason to be alarmed, according to Leslie Root, a University of Colorado Boulder researcher focused on fertility and population policy. "We're seeing this as part of an ongoing process of fertility delay. We know that the US population is still growing, and we still have a natural increase - more births than deaths," she said. The US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention released the statistic for the total fertility rate with updated birth data for 2024. In the early 1960s, the US total fertility rate was around 3.5, but plummeted to 1.7 by 1976 after the Baby Boom ended. It gradually rose to 2.1 in 2007 before falling again, aside from a 2014 uptick. The rate in 2023 was 1.621, and inched down in 2024 to 1.599, according to the CDC's National Centre for Health Statistics. Birth rates are generally declining for women in most age groups - and that doesn't seem likely to change in the near future, said Karen Guzzo, director of the Carolina Population Centre at the University of North Carolina. People are marrying later and also worried about their ability to have the money, health insurance and other resources needed to raise children in a stable environment. "Worry is not a good moment to have kids," and that's why birth rates in most age groups are not improving, she said. Asked about birth-promoting measures outlined by the Trump administration, Guzzo said they don't tackle larger needs like parental leave and affordable child care. "The things that they are doing are really symbolic and not likely to budge things for real Americans," she said. Increase in births in new data The CDC's new report, which is based on a more complete review of birth certificates than provisional data released earlier this year, also showed a 1 per cent increase in births - about 33,000 more - last year compared to the prior year. That brought the yearly national total to just over 3.6 million babies born. But this is different: The provisional data indicated birth rate increases last year for women in their late 20s and 30s. However, the new report found birth rate declines for women in their 20s and early 30s, and no change for women in their late 30s. What happened? CDC officials said it was due to recalculations stemming from a change in the US Census population estimates used to compute the birth rate. That's plausible, Root said. As the total population of women of childbearing age grew due to immigration, it offset small increases in births to women in those age groups, she said.>
