Experts sound alarm on fast-moving threat that could affect millions of Americans if unchecked: 'We won't be prepared'
This uptick is occurring during a time when the Trump administration has drastically cut back on climate and health research. According to Yale Climate Connections, this unfortunate pairing could present serious risks to countless Americans.
The Centers for Disease Control reported that around 3,500 American travelers contracted dengue fever in 2024, an 84% spike from the previous year. Dengue outbreaks were also declared in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands last year and have continued into 2025. In the United Kingdom, there was a 50% increase in travel-related dengue, per Yale.
This outbreak is directly connected with our planet's rising temperatures and increased flooding, both of which allow dengue-carrying mosquitoes to thrive. Research into this connection is crucial for understanding how to stem the tide of the virus, but that research just became far more challenging to conduct.
The Trump administration recently slashed the budget at the National Institutes of Health by $18 billion. It also announced that the CDC's budget would be nearly halved and 10,000 members of its workforce would be laid off. These institutions are vital for health and climate research, not only in America but around the world.
The NIH is the single largest source of medical research funding on the planet. The organization's Climate Change and Health Initiative conducted crucial research about the health effects of a changing climate until its funding was cut early this year.
The CDC's Climate and Health Program helps public health agencies of all sizes prepare for the health impacts of rising global temperatures, like dengue fever. The agency's funding is being cut by billions, and its workforce is expected to be reduced by 20%.
These cuts, paired with a surge in dengue fever, could result in a significant outbreak of the virus.
"Disease doesn't have national borders," an American vector biologist who wishes to remain anonymous said, per Yale. "I'm worried that if we're not studying it, we're just going to watch it continue to happen and we won't be prepared."
There is no treatment for dengue, which means prevention is key. The CDC recommends being mindful of the health risks associated with vacation destinations. The agency also recommends using bug spray, wearing loose-fitting clothes, and taking steps to control mosquitoes around your home, like removing standing water where they'd lay their eggs.
Do you worry about air pollution in and around your home?
Yes — always
Yes — often
Yes — sometimes
No — never
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump slams Elon Musk as megabill drops AI protections and hits snags in Senate
President Trump slammed Elon Musk's subsidies, and Republican senators struck down a plan to shield artificial intelligence from state regulations. These two middle-of-the-night developments on Tuesday reinforced a growing schism between Trump and Silicon Valley supporters over his "big, beautiful bill." The first development came at 12:44 a.m. ET, when Trump responded to Tesla (TSLA) CEO Musk's ongoing critiques of the package, focusing on the government grants that Musk's companies receive. "Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa," wrote the president in a Truth Social post, adding, "perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this?" The president was referring to the government efficiency group that Musk ran until recently. The president's missive came after Trump's signature legislation underwent key changes in recent days that set off many in the tech industry, Musk most of all, with new measures to tax green energy companies and further support for fossil fuels, as well as a growing price tag. The divide between many in Silicon Valley and the "big, beautiful bill" has been evident for over a month. It appeared set to deepen further when, a few hours later, a closely watched artificial intelligence provision was stripped from the bill itself. This plan, which had many Silicon Valley supporters, was meant to shield the quickly growing AI industry from state and local regulations. But the idea now appears to be dead after Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee turned against a compromise plan Monday evening and stripped it from the bill. It wasn't close in the end, with the Senate voting 99-1 to adopt Blackburn's subsequent amendment in a count that wrapped up a little after 4:00 a.m. ET. Trump's overall package also appears to be teetering Tuesday morning after a series of overnight developments saw two key Republican senators — Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine — uncommitted to vote yes. Those two senators could join two Republicans already committed to voting no, which would be enough to sink the package. The drama between the president and the world's richest man has been up and down for weeks, but it escalated Monday afternoon when Musk offered new electoral threats against Republicans. Musk had already amplified Democrats' critiques and talked about the need for a new political party. He offered a striking promise Monday afternoon that lawmakers who vote for the bill "will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth." Musk, of course, was the biggest donor during the 2024 campaign, spending at least $288 million, most of which was offered in support of Trump. Trump reiterated his critiques of Musk Tuesday morning, speaking to reporters and saying of Musk's objection to losing EV subsidies, "Elon can lose a lot more than that." The president also called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) a "monster that might have to go back and eat Elon." And when asked by a reporter if he would consider deporting Musk, he demurred: "We'll have to take a look." What is unclear for the days ahead is how much the Trump-Musk fight will impact the actual chances of the bill's passage, with Senate amendment votes ongoing. Musk is clearly focused on a debate likely coming later this week, when the House is set to take up the amended measure if it passes. The House is where a vocal bloc of fiscal conservatives — who often vote as part of the "Freedom Caucus" — warily supported a previous version of the bill, saying a previous smaller price tag was too big. Musk even tagged some of these House Republican lawmakers in some of his latest posts, which continued throughout the night with dozens of messages. Musk also responded to Trump's comments about his subsidies by saying his companies like Tesla and SpaceX ( would be fine and that oil and gas subsidies should be removed as well. The back-and-forth over AI also came to a head overnight after the House passed a plan in May that included a complete ban on state regulations of AI for a decade. The little-noticed measure gained wider attention in the weeks that followed, with many of Trump's most loyal supporters opposing it. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene even admitted that she hadn't been aware of the provision when she voted yes. The Georgia lawmaker then announced her opposition and plans to vote no if this "violation of state rights" stayed in the bill. Trump himself doesn't appear to have taken a position on the measure, but it had the backing of his Silicon Valley-aligned aides, most notably the vocal support of AI and crypto czar (and longtime venture capitalist) David Sacks. But Republican opposition grew, and Sen. Blackburn of Tennessee became a leading voice of opposition in the Senate. She entered into negotiations over the issue and appeared to have found a compromise in recent days around the idea that instead of a decade-long ban, the provision would be amended to be a "temporary pause" of five years. States would be strongly discouraged from regulating AI, as lawmakers linked it to access to millions of dollars in AI infrastructure and deployment funding. But even that wasn't enough. Blackburn renounced the compromise, said a moratorium "could allow Big Tech to continue to exploit kids, creators, and conservatives," and teamed with a top Democrat to strike the provision entirely. Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (a former Trump press secretary) congratulated Blackburn on the move in a post the senator quickly reposted. "This is how you take on big tech!" Sanders wrote. This story has been updated with additional developments. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If Thimerosal Is Safe, Why Is It Being Removed From Vaccines?
Credit - Getty Images There's a newly appointed panel of experts at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), freshly chosen by U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, it sets the immunization schedule for Americans. And some of the new members have histories of vaccine-skepticism. On June 26, this panel voted to remove thimerosal from flu vaccines. The ingredient has long been the target of anti-vaccine activists, despite numerous studies showing it's safe in small amounts. The committee's recommendation now goes to the CDC's acting director to become a formal recommendation. (Susan Monarez, President Trump's selection to head the agency, is currently undergoing confirmation hearings). Here's how thimerosal got into vaccines, why it's being taken out, and what the latest recommendation could mean for next season's flu shots. Thimerosal, which contains a form of mercury called ethylmercury, has been used in vaccines as a preservative since the 1930s to prevent growth of fungi and bacteria. At the time, most vaccines came in larger vials that contained multiple doses, and while the vaccine makers produced a sterile and safe product, 'each time you pierce a needle [into the vial] you are potentially introducing contaminants that can lead to infection,' says Dr. Jason Goldman, president of the American College of Physicians. 'While the vaccine itself was safe, the vials got contaminated, and there were deaths from infection. So the decision was made to put a preservative in it.' That preservative—thimerosal—was used routinely in vaccines until 2001, when federal health officials decided to remove it from the majority of childhood vaccines. It is currently only used in flu vaccines that come in multi-dose vials. (Most of the flu vaccines in the U.S. come in single-dose syringes that do not contain thimerosal.) Ethylmercury is cleared from the body more quickly than methylmercury, which is primarily found in deep-sea fish like tuna. Both types of mercury can be toxic to cells, particularly in the brain, but the more quickly-cleared ethylmercury has less time to cause such harm, according to the CDC. Read More: FDA Approves a Twice-Yearly Shot to Prevent HIV 'Data from many studies show no evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines,' the CDC's website says. That includes studies that looked at a variety of neurological and psychological outcomes, as well as autism. However, researchers say longer term data on the health effects of exposure to both types of mercury isn't completely clear yet. In 2001, federal health officials decided to remove thimerosal from most childhood vaccines, which at the time included shots for influenza, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and hepatitis B. Thimerosal remained in trace amounts in larger vials of the annual flu vaccine to protect against contamination. Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices at the time, says there were a number of reasons for the decision back then—most of which had more to do with policy pressures and optics than with concerns over health harms. In early 1998, Andrew Wakefield, a gastroenterologist in the U.K., had published a paper in which he linked the MMR vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella to an increased risk of autism. His paper has since been debunked and his medical license has been revoked, but his findings sparked the anti-vaccine movement that continues today, despite evidence that vaccines have saved lives and provide more benefit than harm. After Wakefield's paper gained notoriety, a U.S. Congressman asked the CDC's vaccine experts to review the data and vote whether, as Wakefield suggested, the vaccines for the three diseases should be separated and given individually to reduce any potential harm to infants. It wasn't based in science, and 'around the table we voted 'no,'' says Offit, who was part the committee. Read More: A Study Retracted 15 Years Ago Continues to Threaten Childhood Vaccines A few months later, vaccine maker Wyeth decided to remove RotaShield, the first vaccine to protect against rotavirus, from the market—just 10 months after it was approved. The vaccine was linked to rare bowel obstruction in some babies who had received it in their first six months. The withdrawal understandably added to the public's concerns about the safety of vaccines. So when issues about the potential risks of mercury in thimerosal emerged, in part due to Wakefield's paper, Offit says the committee was faced with addressing Americans' growing concern that federal health agencies were not adequately ensuring vaccine safety. 'We had a vaccine that had been approved and then taken off the market; we did not buy Andrew Wakefield's notion to separate the MMR vaccine into three component parts. And now we had thimerosal,' says Offit. The committee's leader, as well as the members, 'were cognizant of the fact that it looked like were weren't paying attention to vaccine safety, or that we didn't care. Because we approved RotaShield, and we didn't listen to Andrew Wakefield.' 'My understanding was that at the time, there was essentially no evidence of any harm from thimerosal,' says Dr. Sean O'Leary, chair of the committee on infectious diseases at the American Academy of Pediatrics. 'But the concern was that it probably hasn't been studied as well as perhaps we'd like. And since we have the technology to remove it from the childhood vaccine schedule, we should go ahead and do that. But many, many people questioned that decision.' One of them was Offit, who can't recall if there was an actual vote, but says he would have voted against removing thimerosal had there been one. Nothing about the makeup of the vaccines changed—only the formulation to package it into sterile, single-use syringes. 'It was an anti-science move,' he says. 'It did nothing to make vaccines safer—all we did was make them more expensive. We didn't explain ourselves. We didn't trust the American public to understand the nuance.' Read More: Measles Is Now Showing Up in Wastewater As a result, the decision to remove thimerosal was interpreted by many in the public, including anti-vaccine activists, as acknowledgement that thimerosal was unsafe and harmful. That decision, says Offit, 'gave birth to two anti vaccine groups—Moms Against Mercury and Generation Rescue. Any reasonable person would have thought, 'Why take it out so precipitously unless there was a problem?'' Because of that decision, currently only about 3% to 4% of flu vaccines in the U.S. that come in multi-dose vials contain thimerosal. And these larger vials are mostly used in rural and low-resource settings since they are less expensive than single-dose syringes. Most children who have received their immunizations at pediatrician offices for decades now have not been exposed to thimerosal. 'I don't know of any pediatric practices that use the multi-dose vials,' says O'Leary. 'It's pretty uncommon. Even if pediatricians did use the multi-dose vials, it's a non-issue because it's safe. This is a very clear effort to shine a light on this anti-vaccine trope that thimerosal is somehow dangerous.' What concerns health experts about the new recommendation is that normal protocols governing the CDC panel's agenda and presentations weren't followed. Kennedy, a long-time vaccine skeptic, oversees the CDC and in June replaced all 17 previous members of the immunization committee with eight new members, many of whom lack expertise in vaccines and immunology. Dr. Cody Meissner, a faculty member at Dartmouth College Geisel School of Medicine, is the only pediatrician on the committee and also served on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's expert vaccine committee. He was the only committee member to vote against the proposal to remove thimerosal from flu vaccines, telling other members that 'of all the issues that ACIP needs to focus on, this is not a big issue.' 'The real question is, why was this even brought up?' says Goldman. 'The thimerosal question has been asked and answered multiple times. We are not only re-litigating the issue, but now, instead of a fringe group refusing to accept evidence, they are now the decision makers.' Read More: Still Not Feeling the Same After COVID-19? You're Not Alone The CDC committee includes liaison members of experts from professional organizations who add expertise and perspective to the discussions, but aren't voting members. Many such groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, decided not to attend the latest committee meeting in protest over the firing of the previous members. "We made the decision that this was an illegitimate meeting because of the way the Secretary dismissed all 17 members who were highly qualified, and hand-picked people who are a mix of COVID-19 contrarians and outright anti-vaccine folks," says O'Leary. "We decided not to legitimize the process with our presence." The experts TIME spoke to about the latest decision say that the CDC posted a description and references for studies that have supported the safety of thimerosal in vaccines, but that it was removed from the agency's website before the committee meeting. 'I am very concerned that this committee will do everything it can to undermine the vaccine schedule and the public's trust in science and data,' says Goldman. 'If that happens, and vaccines are no longer appropriately recommended, it will lead to an increase in infections and deaths and put the entire public health system at risk.' The recommendation is 'unprecedented,' says O'Leary, and therefore it's not clear how long manufacturers will have to comply, or what happens to existing vials that are already purchased and stored for the upcoming flu season, since they are legally approved. It's also unclear how insurers will address the change, and whether they will continue to cover flu shots from multi-dose vials containing thimerosal, which are mostly used in lower-resource settings. A spokesperson for Sanofi Pasteur, one of the larger flu vaccine makers in the U.S., said 'a very small number of our doses supplied in the U.S. contain thimerosal. We now await the decision by the CDC on the path forward.' It's not clear yet what impact the recommendation, if adopted, will have on vaccine supply, although since the bulk of flu shots currently do not contain thimerosal, the number of available doses shouldn't be affected. Sanofi's spokesperson anticipated that 'we will have sufficient supply of Sanofi flu vaccine to support customer preference for this season.' Still, since lower-resource and rural settings may rely on the less expensive multi-dose vials, in these areas, supply of the vaccines could dwindle if clinics can't afford to purchase as many of the single-dose syringes. 'The big concern from my perspective is that vaccinating the entire population for influenza every year is a herculean task,' says O'Leary. 'And there have been issues over the years because of shortages for one reason or another. To eliminate roughly 5% of the flu shot supply all of a sudden shortly before flu season to me means that fewer people may get vaccinated—and more hospitalizations and deaths.' Contact us at letters@
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Democratic states sue Trump administration over school mental health funding cuts
Sixteen Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Monday challenging the Department of Education's cuts to mental health funding for schools. In April, the Education Department announced the $1 billion cut to mental health funding, citing concerns with diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives embedded in the contracts. The states allege the contracts were unlawfully terminated under the Administrative Procedure Act and that the cancellation goes against congressional mandates. The lawsuit says the cuts would cause 'immediate and devastating harm' to schools. 'By cutting funding for these lifesaving youth mental health programs, the Department of Education is abandoning our children when they need us most,' said New York Attorney General Letitia James. 'These grants have helped thousands of students access critical mental health services at a time when young people are facing record levels of depression, trauma, and anxiety.' 'To eliminate these grants now would be a grave disservice to children and families in New York and nationwide, and my office is fighting back to preserve these much-needed programs,' James added. The lawsuit was filed by New York, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin. The Hill has reached out to the Department of Education for comment. In its initial announcement of the cut, the department argued the grants designed to help children were making the situation the worse. 'These grants are intended to improve American students' mental health by funding additional mental health professionals in schools and on campuses. Instead, under the deeply flawed priorities of the Biden Administration, grant recipients used the funding to implement race-based actions like recruiting quotas in ways that have nothing to do with mental health and could hurt the very students the grants are supposed to help,' said Madi Biedermann, deputy assistant secretary for communications at the Education Department. 'We owe it to American families to ensure that tax-payer dollars are supporting evidence-based practices that are truly focused on improving students' mental health,' she added.
