RFK Jr. fires all 17 members of CDC vaccine advisory panel
"Today we are prioritizing the restoration of public trust above any specific pro- or anti-vaccine agenda," said Kennedy Jr., who has a history of controversial views on vaccines. "The public must know that unbiased science--evaluated through a transparent process and insulated from conflicts of interest--guides the recommendations of our health agencies."
Kennedy Jr.'s decision marks a reversal from what a key Republican senator said the Trump Cabinet member had promised during his confirmation hearings earlier this year. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, the chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, said Kennedy had promised to maintain the committee's current composition.
"If confirmed, he will maintain the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices without changes," Cassidy said.
The Biden administration appointed all 17 sitting committee members, with 13 of them taking their seats in 2024. According to Trump's HHS, those appointments would have prevented the current administration from choosing a majority of the committee until 2028.
"A clean sweep is necessary to reestablish public confidence in vaccine science," said Kennedy, adding that the new members "will prioritize public health and evidence-based medicine". and "no longer function as a rubber stamp for industry profit-taking agendas."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump wants to rip $800bn out of Medicaid. It will punish Maga's poorest
Teresa Mcnab had just come back from taking their 11-year-old daughter to school when she heard her husband fall. She found him seizing on the floor. Jackie had been suffering from blood clots, and despite Mcnab's attempts to resuscitate him while waiting for the ambulance, he was later confirmed dead. He was just 45. 'We had been together for 20 years,' she says. Mcnab and her daughter Faye had to raise funds in order to pay for his burial, at one point selling lemonade to help cover the costs of his gravestone. But one small solace came from Jackie's hospital bills being covered by America's public health insurance programme for people on low incomes, otherwise known as Medicaid. For people like Trump supporter Mcnab in Knox County, Kentucky, this kind of support is vital to keep the threat of financial ruin at bay. It also demonstrates the importance of Medicaid in the poorest parts of rural America. However, that lifeboat may be about to be pulled away as part of Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'. Under the president's proposal, which he wants lawmakers to pass by Friday, July 4, up to $800bn (£600bn) will be cut from the Medicaid budget to help fund $3.7 trillion in tax cuts. Crucially, this will mean that 16m people will lose health insurance by 2034 compared with current projections, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). And while the bill has been hailed by many on the Right as a tool to boost household income, there are growing fears that Trump's healthcare cuts will target the low-income families who helped to propel him back into the White House. Of the 200 counties with the highest proportion of voters reliant on public health insurance, a staggering 84pc voted for Trump in last year's election. Nowhere exemplifies this contradiction more than Knox County, where 72pc of people backed the Republican presidential candidate. Here, 68pc of the population use some form of public health insurance, and of the 3,142 counties in America, it is one of the top 20 poorest. 'Voters would be mad' These sorts of figures highlight the political risks posed to Trump if he succeeds in passing his healthcare cuts, which edged one step closer on Saturday as Senate Republicans voted narrowly to advance the bill. Steve Bannon, Trump's former chief strategist, has already sounded the alarm by claiming the bill won't succeed 'because Maga is on Medicaid'. However, veteran pollster Frank Luntz says hardcore Trump supporters will back him regardless. 'They'll support whatever he says or does, even cutting their benefits, if they think it will help make America great again,' says Luntz. Though he admits the same may not be true for wavering working-class voters who voted for Trump. 'If there are actual, real, meaningful cuts to Medicaid that voters could see and feel, these voters would be mad,' Luntz adds. 'The Democrats have zero credibility claiming Trump is destroying the economy. But if voters can see and feel the Medicaid cuts, that changes the political calculus completely.' Public health insurance began in America in 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson launched the Medicaid and Medicare programmes. Medicare is a programme for over-65s that is federally funded, whereas Medicaid is an initiative for low-income individuals funded jointly by states and the federal government. Until Barack Obama passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, however, most low-income, non-disabled adults were not eligible for Medicaid unless they had children. Even then, the median income eligibility for parents was just 64pc of the federal poverty line, which as of last year represented an annual income of $15,060. The ACA later allowed states to expand Medicaid provision to adults whose incomes were less than 138pc of the federal poverty line. Since these measures were rolled out, the number of uninsured Americans has plunged from 44m to 25m, expanding healthcare coverage significantly across the country. Trump's bill could change all of that. The president is planning to cut $793bn from Medicaid's budget over 10 years, delivering a hammer blow to states such as Kentucky. According to research firm KFF, the state will miss out on $21bn in federal funding as a result of the bill, while 277,000 people will lose access to health insurance. The bill's largest cost-saving measure is the introduction of a new 80-hours-per-month work requirement for adults who receive Medicaid under the ACA expansion. This will claw back $344bn, it is estimated, while the bill will also save $64bn by requiring these adults to redetermine their eligibility every six months instead of every 12. Darren Bullock, 40, is a Trump voter who switched from the Democrats in 2016. He is likely to lose Medicaid coverage because of the new requirements, although he is not hopeful of finding adequate employment. 'If they want people to work 80 hours a month, they'd need to bring in a lot more jobs,' he says. In rural areas like Knox County, a key barrier for people to finding work is logistics. Bullock might be able to find a job, but he will struggle to get there. He does not own a mobile phone or a car, and there is no public transport. Jennifer Tolbert, the director of state health reform at KFF and deputy director of the firm's Medicaid programme, warns that people aged 55 to 64 who have taken early retirement from physical jobs are the most vulnerable. 'They probably just can't work those jobs any more,' says Tolbert, who adds that they are also in an age bracket that means they are more likely to need healthcare. Tolbert also warns that many people who can meet the work requirements will lose Medicaid simply because of the new burden of paperwork. This includes Mcnab, now 42 and widowed for four years, who gets up at 4.30am every day to work as a full-time cook. She will have no problem meeting the 80-hour work requirement, but she has little time to spare for extra paperwork. 'I take care of my daughter, I take care of my 78-year-old mom, I take care of our home, and half the time I don't even have time for myself,' she says. Another major question is the impact of Medicaid cuts on drug rehabilitation programmes. Chris Ross, 39, is a former drug addict whose life was brought to a 'screeching halt' by substance abuse, as he fell victim to Kentucky's opioid crisis and became homeless. He was just one of many. 'We are plagued with substance abuse,' says Daniel Phipps, the secretary of the Appalachian Restoration Project, which runs drug rehab programmes and helps recovering addicts back into work. It was one of Phipps's programmes that helped to get Ross clean six years ago. He is now married, has custody of his children and works as the project's court liaison. Like the vast majority of the project's patients, his care was funded by Medicaid. 'If I hadn't had Medicaid, I would probably still be homeless,' he says. The public health insurance programme is the bedrock of the project's business, Phipps adds. The Republican bill does exempt people who have a substance use disorder or are participating in rehabilitation programmes from the new work requirements. But the cuts could hit rehab programmes in other ways, says Tolbert. For example, drug addicts may lose their coverage because they cannot meet the reporting requirements, or federal funding cuts will lead to states cutting back on payments for rehab providers. Overall, Tolbert says regional hospitals that cater to low-income communities will be hit hard financially as more people become uninsured, with many set to cut back on staff or services. The political consequences of such changes could be far-reaching. In Knox County, voting Republican is entrenched in the local culture, although such drastic healthcare cuts will no doubt force some people to think again.
New Statesman
27 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Is Donald Trump your 'Daddy'?
Photo byMaga Republicans have major daddy issues, and some world leaders seem to be taking note. Last week, after Donald Trump dropped an f-bomb when comparing Israel and Iran to children fighting in the schoolyard, Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte added that 'Daddy has to sometimes use strong language.' Later, Trump told reporters that Rutte meant it as a sign of affection, characterising his comments as, 'Hey Daddy. You're my Daddy.' The Trump White House was so tickled that they put out a slick video of the Nato summit – mostly featuring various white men gesticulating – with the Usher song 'Hey Daddy' as the soundtrack. The video, titled DADDY'S HOME, was not the first time that the Trump fandom had gone full Freudian and made the president into a bizarre icon of sexualised authority. Back in October, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson told a crowd full of Trump rally-goers that that the then-candidate would come in and restore order. 'Dad is pissed,' Carlson said. 'And when dad gets home, you know what he says? 'You've been a bad girl. You've been a bad little girl, and you're getting a vigorous spanking right now.'' Instead of recoiling in horror, the crowd loved it, chanting 'Daddy's Home' as Trump took the stage. Days after the Nato summit, the Trump team began selling $35 DADDY t-shirts emblazoned with Trump's mugshot. There is much to say about the psychosexual issues at play here, as the self-styled masculine Real Men of Maga collectively whimper for a bigger, stronger, older man to punish them like naughty little boys they are. The sexual connotations of 'daddy' are clear, and somehow even more disturbing than other widely disseminated Trump memes, including those of the president as Jesus Christ. And the 'daddy' moniker is clearly also about the fear that has always animated conservative politics: Maga voters want Trumpian authoritarianism because they hope a Big Daddy will make the big, scary world a little less frightening. Daddy may punish his naughty but beloved children, but he'll blow away anyone who threatens them. The 'daddy' turn from foreign leaders, though, is a different animal. 'The wording appears to have been stolen from the adult entertainment industry,' Gabrielius Landsbergis, the former foreign minister of Lithuania, observed on X. 'It reduces Europe to the state of a beggar – pitiful before our Transatlantic friends and Eastern opponents alike.' He's right about the 'adult entertainment industry' connotations of the word. But to be a bit more explicit about it: if Trump is Daddy, doesn't that mean Europe is getting screwed? Maybe Mark Rutte has his own daddy issues that he let slip in front of the press, and perhaps that's a big topic of conversation with his therapist this week. I suspect, though, that he called Trump Daddy as a way of cosying up to the president by using the submissive language of Trump's Maga followers – the verbal equivalent of bending the knee. Trump's first term was a disaster for the world, and his second one has somehow managed to be far, far worse despite only being a few months old. But instead of standing strong against the strongman, many of the world's leaders – and not just the other authoritarians, but self-styled small-d democrats – have become obsequious and servile. This mass submission is unbecoming and at times humiliating. But it's also revealing of the weaknesses of all the men (and they are mostly men) involved here. The world's most powerful people falling all over themselves to flatter Trump isn't just a bad look; it should also worry Americans (and the world) to know that our president is such an easily manipulated egomaniac that everyone around him seems to have concluded lavishing praise on him is the best way to get him to act in their interests. That's not the sign of a wise leader; it's indicative of just how little he knows, how few positions he sincerely holds and much of a liability he is. After all, while the Nato head using 'daddy' to nudge Trump toward a sensible policy on the alliance will hopefully result in an outcome that makes the world safer and more stable, Rutte is far from the only person to play the flattery game. What happens if Trump likes someone else's overtures more – and that someone is, say, a Vladimir Putin or a Benjamin Netanyahu or a similarly malevolent character? Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Some leaders have managed to butter Trump up without degrading themselves, mostly by being willing to also criticise him when he acts badly. French president Emmanuel Macron has made his American counterpart a guest of honour at a Bastille Day celebration and never misses an opportunity to praise him when he believes Trump is doing the right thing. But he rarely crosses the line into the kind of 'daddy' debasement on display at Nato. Foreign leaders, like Democratic politicians at home, are caught in an unenviable bind. The US is a fantastically wealthy country that has historically used some of its resources for the greater good, whether that was through supporting Nato or funding health and development around the globe. Now, we are pulling back from that. Trump employed the world's richest man to clean up alleged government waste, and Elon Musk decided that the most wasteful thing America was doing was saving the lives of people with HIV and the world's poorest children, and so he and his Doge team hit delete on USAID. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just announced that the US will no longer fund GAVI, a groundbreaking global vaccination program that researchers estimate has saved the lives of some 17 million children in just 20 years. The idea of sucking up to an administration that is so enthusiastically wrecking the world is nauseating. But also: if flattering a man who deserves nothing but scorn means he does less damage, might it be worth the humiliation? Trump departed the Nato summit early. Nato, though, still exists with the US as a member, despite Trump's repeated threats to pull America out of it. He even deemed the alliance 'not a rip-off,' a real pivot from his previous statements. Daddy diplomacy seems to have worked. In this particular scenario, that's a relief. But it raises the question: who else might to fawning over Trump, and what might their obsequiousness get them in return? [See also: Why do right-wing 'transvestigators' believe Michelle Obama is a man?] Related
BBC News
36 minutes ago
- BBC News
Devon developer discusses new tool to help screen for dyslexia
A Devon equipment developer says he hopes a new digital tool will help transform how schools identify dyslexia in a child for dyslexia is traditionally done on a one-to-one basis and can cost up to £800 per Wace said the Talamo system, which he co-founded, allowed teachers to screen large groups of children in one short session, and costs about £10 per school in Cornwall said the system had potential in helping develop strategies for children with the condition. Talamo works by setting children a series of questions and puzzles covering areas such as reading, spelling, memory, and problem solving. The software then produced a report on each child and the teachers could see where a little extra help might be needed, its creators Wace, 25, who was diagnosed with the condition aged 13 after years of thinking he was "stupid", said the speed and cost of the system had been a factor in it being rolled out to 300 schools across the said: "We know that schools don't have many resources, we know that the number of teaching assistants is going down, not up. "Within that environment we hope that this gives schools the ability to do the screening because, if it's not accessible, and it's not cost efficient, then it won't happen." Mawnan Primary School, near Falmouth in Cornwall, has taken part in piloting the system, using it since February. Assistant head teacher Catherine Prosser said it had huge said: "The reports it produces are visual, very accessible for children and parents. "We can talk to the children one-to-one, looking at areas of strength and areas they might struggle with. We can then coach them and develop strategies to help with their learning journey. "I think that's really powerful to help them be able to move forward to secondary school with those strategies in place and understanding how their brains work."The British Dyslexia Association said it was not able to endorse one specific screening system over another, but said identifying dyslexia early was vital to a child's educational Department for Education said: "Dyslexia should never be a barrier to a brilliant education, or to what children can go on to achieve."It added it was investing £1bn more into Send [special educational needs and disabilities] schools this year as part of work to "further improve experiences for neurodivergent children, including those with dyslexia".
