logo
Michael Bloomberg urges Republicans to oust RFK Jr, ‘peddler of junk science'

Michael Bloomberg urges Republicans to oust RFK Jr, ‘peddler of junk science'

Yahoo5 days ago
Billionaire, former New York City mayor and philanthropist Michael Bloomberg is calling on Senate Republicans to oust Robert F Kennedy Jr from his post as Trump's health secretary.
Kennedy was arguably the nation's most prominent conspiracy theorist and vaccine skeptic when he was confirmed by the Senate, and he has spent much of his tenure throwing vaccine policy into upheaval amid an historic measles outbreak.
'Kennedy, who has no training in medicine or health, has long been the nation's foremost peddler of junk science and the crackpot conspiracy theories that flow from it,' wrote Bloomberg in an opinion piece for his eponymous news outlet.
Kennedy became health secretary after joining the Trump campaign in August 2024, and helping coin the term 'make America healthy again'. Although Kennedy has spent most of his public appearances campaigning for healthier foods, often with a flimsy basis in nutrition science, most of his policy changes have focused on vaccines.
He fired all 17 members of a key vaccine advisory panel to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and reformulated the panel with ideological allies – including advocates directly from the anti-vaccine movement.
He also made Covid-19 shots more difficult to access; oversaw the cancellation of research into vaccines and vaccine hesitancy; spread inflammatory information about vaccines and equivocated about their benefits.
'The greatest danger in elevating him to [Health and Human Services] (HHS) secretary was always that he would use his position to undermine public confidence in vaccines, which would lead to needless suffering and even death,' Bloomberg argued. 'And so it has come to pass.'
Bloomberg said that Kennedy's actions were predictable, but that Senate Republicans either 'deceived themselves' or 'buckled to political pressure' to confirm Kennedy. He urged Republicans to pressure the White House to constrain Kennedy 'or fire him'. If Americans die unnecessarily, Bloomberg said, Senate Republicans will pay at the ballot box.
The upheaval in vaccine policy comes as the CDC is tracking an historic measles outbreak that began in an under-vaccinated community in Texas. More than 1,300 confirmed measles cases have been reported since mid-July – though experts believe the true tally is far higher. That is the worst case count since 1992 at only halfway through the year.
Measles is one of the most contagious diseases known to medicine. A supremely effective vaccine, preventing 97% of cases with two doses, meant it was nevertheless eliminated in 2000. Experts now believe the US may be entering a 'post-herd immunity' era.
Three people have died in the 2025 outbreak, including two healthy children and an adult. All were unvaccinated. Measles kills between one-three children per 1,000 due to respiratory or neurological complications, according to the CDC. The disease can also cause permanent disability due to brain swelling, and weaken the immune system against future infections.
'In the aftermath of the deaths, he did not use his position to urge parents to vaccinate their children, or warn of the dangers of failing to do so, or declare vaccines safe, or allay misplaced concerns about them,' wrote Bloomberg.
'Instead, he did what he has been doing for decades: He presented the safety and efficacy of vaccines as an open question for individuals to decide. Not surprisingly, the outbreak continued – and has worsened,' he wrote.
The Guardian has contacted HHS for comment.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, but the left will never admit it
Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, but the left will never admit it

The Hill

time27 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, but the left will never admit it

There is seemingly no worthwhile accomplishment or good deed authored by President Trump that the left will give him credit for achieving. That in and of itself speaks to the bottomless pits of partisanship and rhetorical poison some have eagerly embraced in the 'Age of Trump.' Unfortunately for the Democratic Party as a whole, such anger-fueled denial has a spillover effect that hurts the party's electoral chances. In speaking with former high-level Democrats, I am told that one of the main reasons Trump sailed to victory last November was because almost the entirety of the Democratic and far-left echo chamber mortgaged its energy and treasure seeking to demonize Trump rather than addressing the solvable real-world problems plaguing their constituents and fellow Americans. But at what cost is this coming to the Democratic Party or, more importantly, Americans looking to it for desperately needed help? Don't take my word for it. Billionaire businessman Mark Cuban recently laid into Democrats for having no policy or strategy beyond 'Trump sucks.' 'We picked the wrong pressure points,' said Cuban on 'Pod Save America.' 'It's just 'Trump sucks.' That's the underlying thought of everything the Democrats do. 'Trump sucks.' Trump says the sky is blue. 'Trump sucks.' That's not the way to win! It's just not! Because it's not about Trump — it's about the people of the United States of America — and what's good for them! And how do you get them to a place where they're in a better position, and it's less stressful for them.' Cuban — who a growing number of Democrats believe might make a credible presidential candidate in 2028 — is correct. When will it be peak 'theater of the absurd' for that echo chamber? When do working-class and disenfranchised Americans once again matter to it? When does national security once again matter to it? When does the performance art — aimed at literally just a few thousand entrenched elites living in bubbles — stop? If you only got yours information from that echo chamber, you would believe that Trump never accomplished anything; never built anything; was never successful; never made a correct decision; and never had a worthwhile instinct. Ever. And that was before he became president. Since Trump became president, inhabitants of that echo chamber have seemingly been in a constant state of rage. One of the issues that has most made them apoplectic is Trump being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Over the last three decades or longer, the Nobel Prize Committee has become for many the poster child for a 'woke,' in-the-tank for the left organization. Especially when it comes to the Peace Prize. On the surface, there is nothing wrong with that, if the committee members admit that they have morphed into a propaganda arm for the far left and its causes. But they won't. Instead, they — like the Pulitzer Prize Committee — proclaim their nonpartisanship while actively discriminating against conservatives or those they perceive to be on the right. In 2015, one of its members, Geir Lundestad — possibly suffering a pang of guilt — had the good grace to admit to a mistake. That mistake being the laughable and sycophantic decision to award President Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for literally doing nothing. Obama had been in office for less than nine months when he got the award. Liberal New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof called it 'premature.' Obama himself felt so self-conscious about getting the award that he gave serious thought to skipping the ceremony. Years later, while giving that 2015 interview, Lundestad said, 'Even many of Obama's supporters believed that the prize was a mistake. In that sense, the committee didn't achieve what it had hoped for.' Well, the committee did achieve what it set out to do, which was to fawn over a far-left president by giving him an award he never earned. It just didn't anticipate the immense blowback and ridicule. Again, it seems that, for the left, Trump should never be given any credit for anything. No matter how patently obvious that he deserves it. Even about keeping the peace and saving lives. For years prior to him becoming president — when many powerful Democrats courted his friendship and money — Trump spoke out against the war in Iraq and the needless waste of lives, something he continued to do as president. Just as he has done about the war in Ukraine. Did those calls against war and to save hundreds of thousands of lives ever register with the Nobel Committee? What about in 2020 when Trump created the Abraham Accords, an agreement that normalized relations between Israel and Arab countries? Again, in 2009, the committee awarded Obama the award for 'his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.' Except, that is not what he did — and yet, he still got the award. Trump established the Abraham Accords — and was ignored by the committee. In 1998, the committee awarded the Peace Prize to John Hume and David Trimble for 'their efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland.' Okay, let's compare. Just recently, Trump was instrumental in preventing all-out war between India and Pakistan. Two nuclear-armed nations. Is that more valuable to the world than finding a 'peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland?' Apparently not to the committee. In 2019, the committee awarded the Peace Prize to Abiy Ahmed 'for his efforts to achieve peace and international cooperation, and in particular for his decisive initiative to resolve the border conflict with neighboring Eritrea.' Again, earlier this year, Trump brokered a peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda. While much of the mainstream media sought to bury the accomplishment, surely the committee knew of it. Mark Cuban was correct to call out the Democrats for only having one failed campaign policy. Trump is correct to call out the Nobel Prize Committee for its obvious and shameful bias. Brokering peace and saving lives should always be recognized — no matter if you are a Democrat or a Republican.

Democrats' approval rating craters to 35-year low: WSJ poll
Democrats' approval rating craters to 35-year low: WSJ poll

New York Post

time27 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Democrats' approval rating craters to 35-year low: WSJ poll

Democrats' approval rating with registered voters has plunged to a 35-year low, while Republicans maintain an edge on most of the top issues Americans care about, a new poll found. A whopping 63% of registered voters view Democrats unfavorably, dramatically eclipsing the 33% who had a positive impression, marking the lowest rating they scored since 1990, according to a Wall Street Journal survey. That abysmal rating for Democrats comes against the backdrop of lackluster figures for President Trump and Republicans. Trump's approval rating sits at 46%, with 52% who disapprove of the commander in chief. The figure is higher than this point during his first term, which was 40%. Republicans' approval rating clocked in at a net seven points unfavorable. If congressional elections were held today, 46% of voters indicated they'd back a Democrat, compared to 43% who would support a Republican. 3 The poll suggests that House Democrats have their work cut out for them to ensure they can flip control of the lower chamber. AP 3 Democrats are also carefully eyeing pickup opportunities in Senate races. AP A majority, 51%, also said the change Trump is bringing has resulted in dysfunction and chaos, compared to 45% who agreed the president was making positive adjustments. Still, across the board, voters preferred the GOP approach over the Dem position on a range of key issues. Voters trusted Republicans over Democrats on inflation by about 10 points; on immigration by 17 points; and handling illegal immigrants by 17 points, the survey found. In one unique finding, respondents disapproved of Trump's tariffs by 17 points and Republicans still scored 7 points higher than Democrats on that issue. 'The Democratic brand is so bad that they don't have the credibility to be a critic of Trump or the Republican Party,' John Anzalone, a Democratic pollster who helped conduct the survey, told the outlet. 'Until they reconnect with real voters and working people on who they're for and what their economic message is, they're going to have problems.' Anzalone teamed up with Republican Tony Fabrizio, Trump's trusted pollster during the 2024 campaign cycle, to conduct the survey for the Wall Street Journal. 3 President Trump's approval rating was underwater but higher than at this point during his first term, the poll showed. REUTERS One area where congressional Democrats topped Republicans was vaccine policy and healthcare, per the poll. Democrats are still reeling from their 2024 election loss, and key figures within the party have openly vented that the party doesn't have a strong message or sense of direction. Typically, the party out of power in the White House is favored to have a strong performance in the midterm elections, which is why many observers believe the Democrats are well-positioned heading into 2026. However, the Wall Street Journal poll shows Democrats are still remarkably anemic as the party struggles to find its footing. Around this time in 2017, voters called themselves Democrats over Republicans by 6 percentage points, per the poll. Democrats later went on to flip 40 House seats in the 2018 midterm elections. This go-around, Republicans have a 1-point edge in party identification over Democrats. Republicans have a threadbare 219 to 212 House majority and are scrambling to defy history by retaining control during the 2026 midterms. The Wall Street Journal poll sampled 1,500 registered voters between July 16–20 with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.

Are 2 to 3 cups of coffee a day too much? It's complicated, experts say: 'It's different for each person'
Are 2 to 3 cups of coffee a day too much? It's complicated, experts say: 'It's different for each person'

CNBC

time28 minutes ago

  • CNBC

Are 2 to 3 cups of coffee a day too much? It's complicated, experts say: 'It's different for each person'

Two-thirds of Americans drink coffee every single day, according to data collected by the National Coffee Association in 2022, and the debate about how much is too much and whether or not any amount of caffeine is safe persists. But recent research shows that the answer is more complicated than you'd think. A Harvard study, that followed nearly 50,000 women over the course of 30 years and published in June, found that drinking coffee every day may lead to healthy aging in women. One to three cups a day was also linked to heart health benefits and lower mortality rates. But research also shows that high coffee consumption can increase your likelihood of dementia. And a 2022 paper published in the Journal of the American Heart Association found a link between heavy coffee consumption and an increased risk of dying from cardiovascular disease in people with hypertension. Benefits, drawbacks, and the right amount all depend on your individual lifestyle and overall health. And health experts consistently advise that, like with most things, moderation is key for your daily coffee. Deepak Chopra, author, speaker and proponent of alternative medicine, told CNBC Make It in 2023 that he drinks two to three cups of coffee each day before noon. While that may sound like too much caffeine for the average person, it's actually within a healthy range. "Drinking two to three cups before noon is safe to do," registered dietitian Roxana Ehsani said in an interview with CNBC Make It last year. "As long as they don't greatly surpass 400 milligrams of caffeine." Ehsani's suggestion follows the Food and Drug Administration's recommendation of consuming no more than 400 milligrams of caffeine a day, which can include the caffeine found in teas, energy drinks, sodas and chocolate. Certain people may benefit from consuming much less caffeine than is recommended by the FDA. Caffeine tolerance varies from person to person, with some people feeling anxious or jittery after just one or two cups of coffee. "Within those milligram or cup of coffee recommendations, if you start feeling overly tired and the caffeine is not helping, then you've got to stop [drinking it]," dietitian Jessica Sylvester told NBC News. "If your heart starts beating incredibly fast, you've got to stop. It's different for each person." Pregnant people should consider cutting back on caffeine. And people who have diabetes or cardiovascular disease should be mindful of their sugar intake when having coffee, Nikki Cota, a dietitian at the Mayo Clinic, told NBC News. Expert opinion also varies on if teens should drink coffee, but "avoiding caffeine is the best choice for all kids," according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. But for everyone else, if you're having two to three cups, or more, "be mindful of what you're experiencing," registered dietitian Maddie Pasquariello says. And make sure you're not replacing meals with caffeine. Ehsani recommends drinking water or having a meal before reaching for coffee since caffeine suppresses appetite. And if you notice your sleep is affected when you have a coffee in the afternoon, experts suggest a mornings-only rule for your daily latte or macchiato.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store