Trump Budget Cuts Funding for Chronic Disease Prevention
On Friday, President Trump released a proposed budget that called for cutting the funding of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by almost half. Its chronic disease center was slated for elimination entirely, a proposal that came as a shock to many state and city health officials.
'Most Americans have some sort of ailment that could be considered chronic,' said Dr. Matifadza Hlatshwayo Davis, health director for the city of St. Louis.
Of the proposed cuts, she said, 'How do you reconcile that with trying to make America healthy again?'
The federal health department last month cut 2,400 jobs from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, whose National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion runs on the largest budget within the agency.
Programs on lead poisoning, smoking cessation and reproductive health were jettisoned in a reorganization last month.
Overall, the proposed budget would cut the C.D.C.'s budget to about $4 billion, compared with $9.2 billion in 2024. The budget blueprint makes no mention of the Prevention and Public Health Fund, a $1.2 billion program.
If that figure is taken into account, the cut may be even larger than Mr. Trump's proposal indicates.
The agency would also lose a center focused on preventing injuries, including those caused by firearms, as well as programs for H.I.V. surveillance and prevention, and grants to help states prepare for public health emergencies.
According to the proposed budget, the cuts are needed to eliminate 'duplicative, D.E.I., or simply unnecessary programs.' Congress draws up the U.S. budget, but given the Republican majority and its fealty to Mr. Trump, it is unclear how much the proposal will change.
C.D.C. officials had been told that the functions of the chronic disease center would be moved to a new agency within the health department called the Administration for a Healthy America.
And the proposal released on Friday appears to allocate $500 million to the health secretary in part 'to tackle nutrition, physical activity, healthy lifestyles, overreliance on medication and treatments.'
But at the C.D.C., the chronic disease center's budget was nearly three times as large. And even if part of the chronic disease center is resuscitated in the A.H.A., it's unlikely that its new iteration would involve C.D.C. scientists relocated from Atlanta.
'The actual subject-matter experts, who administer the programs, might not be there at C.D.C. anymore,' said Dr. Scott Harris, state health officer at the Alabama Department of Public Health. 'We certainly don't have the same level of expertise in my state.'
The department of Health and Human Services did not respond to a request for comment.
The C.D.C.'s chronic disease center ran programs aimed at preventing cancer, heart disease, diabetes, epilepsy and Alzheimer's disease.
But the center has also seeded initiatives farther afield, ranging from creating rural and urban hiking trails to ensuring that healthy options like salads are offered in airports. It also promoted wellness programs in marginalized communities.
Dr. Davis, the health director in St. Louis, said her department was already reeling from cuts to programs to curb smoking and reduce lead poisoning and health disparities, as well as the rescinding of more than $11 billion that the C.D.C. had been providing to state health departments.
'I would take back Covid-19 in a heartbeat over what's happening right now,' Dr. Davis said.
In the proposed budget, the administration suggested that the eliminated programs would be better managed by states.
But state health departments already manage most chronic disease programs, and three-quarters of the C.D.C. center's funding goes to support them.
Loss of those funds 'would be devastating for us,' said Dr. Harris, the health officer in Alabama.
The state has one of the highest rates of chronic diseases in the country, and about 84 percent of the public health department's budget comes from the C.D.C., Dr. Harris said. About $6 million goes to chronic disease programs, including blood pressure screening, nutrition education for diabetes and promotion of physical activity.
If those funds are cut, 'I am at a loss right now to tell you where that would come from,' he added. 'It just seems that no one really knows what to expect, and we're not really being asked for any input on that.'
Minnesota's vaunted health department has already laid off 140 employees, and hundreds more may be affected if more C.D.C. funding is lost. Cuts to chronic disease prevention will affect nursing homes, vaccine clinics and public health initiatives for Native Americans in the state.
'The actions of the federal government have left us out on a flimsy limb with no safety net below us,' said Dr. Brooke Cunningham, the state's health commissioner.
Until recently, 'there seemed to be a shared understanding at the local, state and federal level that health was important to invest in,' Dr. Cunningham said.
The chronic disease center's work touches American lives in many unexpected ways.
In Prairie Village, Kan., Stephanie Barr learned about the center 15 years ago when, working as a waitress with no health insurance, she discovered a lump in her breast the size of a lemon.
Through the C.D.C.'s National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, she was able to get a mammogram and an ultrasound, and staff members helped her enroll in Medicaid for treatment after a biopsy determined the lump was malignant, Ms. Barr said.
'It was caught in the nick of time,' said Ms. Barr, now 45 and cancer free.
Since that program began in 1991, it has provided more than 16.3 million screening exams to more than 6.3 million people with no other affordable access, said Lisa Lacasse, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.
The organization is one of 530 health associations that have signed a petition asking lawmakers to reject the proposed H.H.S. budget, which cuts the department's discretionary spending by about one-third. The signatories said the cuts would 'effectively devastate' the nation's research and public health infrastructure.
The budget also proposes dismantling disease registries and surveillance systems. 'If you don't collect the information or keep these surveillance systems going, you don't know what's happening, you don't know what the trends are,' said Dr. Philip Huang, director of Dallas County Health and Human Services.
'You're losing all of that history,' he said.
In a previous position as director of chronic diseases for Texas, Dr. Huang said he worked closely with C.D.C. experts who successfully reduced tobacco use among Americans. 'Eliminating the Office on Smoking and Health is just craziness if you're still wanting to address chronic diseases,' he said.
Smoking is still the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, causing more than 480,000 deaths each year, according to the C.D.C.
More than one in 10 American adults still smoke cigarettes regularly, but rates vary drastically by region, and C.D.C. surveillance helps target cessation programs to areas where they are needed most.
'Smoking rates have come down, but if the federal government takes its foot off the gas, the tobacco companies are ready to pop back up again,' said Erika Sward, assistant vice president for advocacy for the American Lung Association.
She warned that tobacco companies are constantly developing new products like nicotine pouches, whose use by teenagers doubled last year. 'It will take a lot more money to put the genie back in the bottle,' she said.
The C.D.C.'s chronic disease center works with communities and academic centers to promote effective programs, from creating quitting hotlines to reach young Iowans in rural areas to training members of Black churches in Columbia, S.C., to lead exercise and nutrition classes for their congregations.
In rural Missouri, dozens of walking trails have been developed in the 'boot heel' in the southeastern part of the state, an area with high rates of obesity and diabetes, said Ross Brownson, a public health researcher at Washington University in St. Louis who directs the Prevention Research Center in collaboration with the C.D.C.
'There's strong evidence now that if you change the walkability of a community, people will get more physical activity,' Dr. Brownson said. 'There aren't going to be health clubs in rural communities, but there is nature and the ability to have walking trails, and land is relatively cheap.'
With C.D.C. support, in Rochester, N.Y., people who are deaf and hard-of-hearing are being trained to lead exercise and wellness programs for other hearing-impaired people who can't easily participate in other gym classes.
In San Diego, researchers are testing ways to protect farm workers from exposure to ultraviolet rays and heat-related illnesses.
'Once they are up and started, they are community-driven and don't depend on the government,' said Allison Bay, who recently lost her job managing such projects at the C.D.C.
The C.D.C.'s reorganization also eliminated lead poisoning programs. Lead poisoning is also 'one of our greatest public health threats in the city of Cleveland,' said Dr. David Margolius, director of public health for the city.
The C.D.C. does not directly fund Cleveland's lead programs — the funding comes from the state. 'But just having the federal expertise to call on to help lead us toward a lead-free future, I mean, yeah, that has a big impact on us,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
I'm a neurologist — don't ignore these 10 signs that may mean your brain is in trouble
Wise up! Dementia — which gradually erodes memory, concentration and judgment — affects over 6 million Americans and accounts for more than 100,000 deaths annually. Symptoms tend to be relatively mild at first and worsen over time. Though there's no cure for dementia, it's important to recognize the potential signs because early diagnosis can improve treatment outcomes. Other life-threatening brain conditions, like stroke and a ruptured aneurysm, have symptoms that appear more abruptly. 6 Dr. Joshua Nass, a board-certified neurologist in Michigan, reveals 10 symptoms that shouldn't be shrugged off. Courtesy of the Michigan Institute for Neurological Disorders It's important to pay attention to brain health because it significantly influences our ability to think, learn, communicate and make decisions. 'As a neurologist at MIND and the medical director of the stroke program at Henry Ford St John Hospital, I see patients all the time who brush off symptoms,' Dr. Joshua Nass, of the Michigan Institute for Neurological Disorders (MIND), told The Post. 'Many times, it is the families who notice first,' he added. 'Unfortunately, sometimes it is too late.' Here are 10 neurological signs that Nass says shouldn't be dismissed. Sudden, severe headache 'If you are not a headache person and this is the worst headache of your life, this could be a sign of an aneurysm or bleed, and this should be assessed emergently at the ER,' Nass said. Some 6.7 million Americans — or 1 in 50 people — are believed to have an unruptured brain aneurysm. 6 An extremely intense headache could be a sign of an aneurysm or bleeding in the brain. goodluz – High blood pressure can put stress on blood vessel walls, causing them to thin. A bulge can develop in the weakened part of the wall. That's known as an aneurysm. It can burst if the wall gets stretched too much. Small, unruptured aneurysms typically don't cause noticeable symptoms, but larger ones can press on nerves or brain tissue, causing headaches, vision problems or other neurological issues. Weakness or numbness on one side 'Call 911,' Nass said. 'Even if it goes away in a few minutes, this may represent a warning sign for a stroke.' 6 Strokes can lead to permanent brain damage, disability or even death. utah51 – A stroke occurs when blood flow to the brain is disrupted or severely reduced. Brain tissue is deprived of oxygen and nutrients, potentially causing damage or long-term disability. Weakness or numbness can happen when blood flow to areas of the brain responsible for motor control is compromised. Slurred speech or trouble speaking This could also indicate a stroke that damaged areas controlling speech and language. Abrupt vision changes 'Loss of vision or double vision could range from optic neuritis, stroke or a retinal problem,' Nass said. 6 Sudden vision changes may indicate a serious medical condition and require immediate attention. Crystal – Optic neuritis is inflammation of the optic nerve, which carries messages from the eyes to the brain so you can see. Memory changes or confusion Memory problems and confusion can stem from a range of issues, including metabolic imbalances, infections and dementia. 'With new technology, we can detect dementia earlier, and newer treatment options are available to help prevent or slow down decline,' Nass said. Persistent dizziness or an off-balance sensation Talk with a doctor if you experience relentless, room-spinning dizziness that leads to unsteadiness or falls. 6 Dizziness can come from issues in the inner ear or the brain. Prostock-studio – 'If persistent, this may represent more than an inner ear problem, and brain imaging may be warranted,' Nass advised. Seizure-like activity 'These are not always full-body convulsions but may be staring spells or muscle jerks,' Nass shared. 'Especially if it's happening for the first time, a full workup to exclude a brain problem (including a tumor) should be completed.' Loss of consciousness, like by fainting 'Although this typically may represent a cardiovascular issue, a brain etiology must be excluded,' Nass said. 6 Fainting is caused by a sudden reduction in blood flow to the brain. madrolly – Some neurological conditions — like a transient ischemic attack or 'mini-stroke' — can cause fainting or fainting-like symptoms. Numbness and tingling in hands or feet 'More commonly, this may represent a neuropathy from vitamin deficiencies or diabetes, although alternative causes such as multiple sclerosis or other spinal cord pathology should be excluded,' Nass said. Tremors/uncontrollable movements 'Many times we see tremor in the office and it is a benign essential tremor, which can run in families,' Nass said, 'but Parkinson's should be excluded, including other movement disorders.' Parkinson's disease patients — there are about a million in the US — tend to experience slow movement, tremors, stiffness and difficulty walking.
Los Angeles Times
a few seconds ago
- Los Angeles Times
FDA panel on the use of antidepressants during pregnancy is alarming experts
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is turning its attention to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, a class of antidepressant drugs long criticized by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. On Monday morning, the FDA hosted a 10-person expert panel on the use during pregnancy of SSRIs, which include medications like fluoxetine (Prozac), sertraline (Zoloft) and citalopram (Celexa), among others. Nine of the panel's 10 members were researchers, doctors or psychologists who have previously questioned the safety of SSRIs publicly or spoken out against antidepressant use in general. Over the course of the discussion, several panel members cited studies that lacked appropriate controls, physicians not involved with the panel said. In other words, there was no way to be certain on the basis of the studies whether the observed health problems were caused by SSRIs, the underlying mood disorder or some other factor. Other participants described study findings inaccurately or incompletely, said outside experts. For example, few panelists considered the risks of SSRI use relative to the risks associated with untreated depression, which also contributes to poor outcomes for children and mothers. In the U.S., suicide is a leading cause of maternal death in the first year of a baby's life. An FDA spokesperson said the panel was part of the agency's 'broader efforts to apply rigorous, evidence-based standards to ingredient safety and modernize regulatory oversight' and did not respond to further queries about the agency's potential next steps. But healthcare professionals expressed concern that the panel could ultimately prevent women from getting the care they need. 'I was surprised and disappointed by the amount of misinformation that was presented,' said Dr. Katie Unverferth, a reproductive psychiatrist and medical director of UCLA's Maternal Mental Health Program. 'When we look at the body of data ... we find that there are no consistent associations [of] SSRIs with cardiac defects, pulmonary hypertension or neurodevelopmental issues in offspring,' she said, naming some of the harms panelists attributed to the drugs. 'This misinformation just creates intrusive thoughts. It's not helpful.' The panel included just one specialist in maternal mood disorders — Dr. Kay Roussos-Ross, an obstetrician-gynecologist and director of the Perinatal Mood Disorders Program at the University of Florida College of Medicine — who argued that SSRIs are for most patients a safe treatment option for serious mental health disorders in pregnancy. 'Mental health disorders are no different than medical disorders,' said Roussos-Ross. 'I want to stress that treating mental illness in pregnancy is not a luxury. It's a necessity,' she said. 'We're not asking [pregnant] women to not take their anti-hypertensives and risk death to them or their baby. We're not asking women to stop their diabetes medications. We should not be withholding SSRIs as a possible treatment for women who need it.' The FDA did not respond to questions about how experts were selected for the panel. Participant Dr. Josef Witt-Doerring runs a private clinic that helps patients wean off psychiatric medication. Another panelist, Dr. Roger McFillin, is a prolific podcaster and a skeptic of germ theory, the belief — widely held as a fundamental truth in medicine since the 19th century — that infectious diseases are caused by microorganisms. Panelist Dr. David Healy, a psychiatrist from Wales, made a number of confounding and misleading statements, insisting that 'mothers who are taking SSRIs in pregnancy have a 10-fold greater risk of having a baby with fetal alcohol syndrome' (that figure describes the subject population of a single 2011 study, not the general public). Healy also stated that 'any drug that causes birth defects will cause autism spectrum disorder also,' a claim that has no basis in any scientific research. Dr. David Urato, chief of maternal and fetal medicine at MetroWest Medical Center in Framingham, Mass., was the only panelist besides Roussos-Ross who cares directly for pregnant patients. He spoke forcefully on the potential harms the drugs pose to developing babies. 'Never before in human history have we chemically altered babies like this,' he said during the discussion. 'There is now more than enough evidence to support strong warnings from the FDA about how drugs disrupt fetal development and impact the moms.' Roussos-Ross argued that the increased risk of birth defects for babies exposed to SSRIs in pregnancy was statistically insignificant, and that children of mothers with untreated depression were more likely to have later behavioral problems than those of mothers who took medication for the disease. 'Having that [medication] not be available to women who need it would really be detrimental,' she said. At this, panel moderator Tracy Beth Høeg — a sports medicine doctor who is now a senior advisor for clinical sciences at the FDA — said, 'I'm going to do something unconventional. I'm sorry to play favorites, but Dr. Urato, I want you to weigh in now.' In response, Urato questioned the idea that depression can be alleviated with antidepressant medication at all. 'This idea about depression — [that it] can cause harm and therefore we treat [it] with these chemicals, and by getting the treatment we see improved outcomes — this is something we all would want. It's wishful thinking,' he said. 'But it's not actually what the data shows.' It was not clear to which data he was referring. In 2019, the most recent year for which data are available, one in every eight U.S. adults had a prescription for antidepressant medication. While the drugs don't work for all people with major depression, analyses of multiple studies have consistently found them to be significantly better than placebos at alleviating illness symptoms. The drugs have been a target of Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again movement, along with vaccines and food dyes. In his confirmation hearings and on podcast appearances, Kennedy has claimed — inaccurately — that the drugs are both linked to school shootings and harder to quit than heroin. There is no evidence for either claim. In February, President Trump placed Kennedy at the helm of the Make America Healthy Again Commission, a group tasked with, among other things, evaluating 'the prevalence of and threat posed by the prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, stimulants, and weight-loss drugs.' Healthcare professionals expressed frustration with the FDA's approach. 'There is already so much shame and stigma that surrounds these illnesses. There is also a lot of shame and stigma around taking medication during pregnancy or the postpartum period,' said Paige Bellenbaum, a perinatal mental health therapist and adjunct professor of social work at Hunter College. 'We are taking a giant step backwards in so many ways. This will reinstill the fear that was there to begin with [and] will ultimately result in the loss of life.' Alexandre Bonnin, an associate professor of pathology at USC, has studied the effects of prenatal SSRI exposure on the developing fetal brain for years. The most recent large studies in the field haven't found a statistically significant association between SSRIs and fetal harm, he said. 'Our finding, at least at the basic science level, suggests that the use of SSRIs in pregnancy can be beneficial if the mom is under major stress, anxiety or depression, because the maternal stress actually itself has many negative effects on fetal brain development,' he said.
Medscape
a few seconds ago
- Medscape
PEPFAR Spared, but Concerns About Global HIV Response Remain
Experts are expressing relief that the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a $7.5 billion program credited with saving 26 million lives around the world from HIV, was spared millions of dollars in spending cuts. Last week, the US Senate removed a proposed $400 million reduction in PEPFAR funding from the $9 billion rescission package put forward by President Donald Trump after objections from Democrats and a handful of Republicans. The PEPFAR program, which was set up by President George W. Bush in 2003, provides treatment to two thirds of all patients with HIV across more than 50 countries and has allowed almost 8 million babies to be born healthy to mothers with HIV. 'This isn't a full reset, but it's meaningful,' Jirair Ratevosian, DrPH, a former senior advisor to PEPFAR, told Medscape Medical News. Members of both parties in Congress have found the administration's justifications for the cuts to be deceptive, he added. The blocking of the cuts is 'also a sign that Congress is willing to exert oversight and send a clear message globally: The US is not walking away from the HIV fight.' Ratevosian is an associate research scientist at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, with a primary focus on HIV prevention. 'It gives PEPFAR breathing room to continue planning country transitions — something the Trump administration claims to prioritize — and to support innovative programming, including HIV prevention using AI [artificial intelligence],' Ratevosian said. PEPFAR's Future Uncertain But while activists and experts welcomed the news, the future of the program remains uncertain. It is now administered by the US State Department, with little detail about how and where services will be delivered. 'The decision is a testament to the power of global health activism, but it is important to realize that all this does is ensure that $400 million that had already been allocated to be spent on fighting HIV doesn't get spent by Trump,' Asia Russell, executive director of Health GAP, an international organization focused on access to HIV medicines, told Medscape Medical News. Some organizations that are implementing PEPFAR have taken Trump's budget cuts to indicate that they should stop intervening among priority populations like trans patients, gay men, and sex workers. 'Any effective infectious disease response must focus on communities who have an elevated risk of HIV acquisition or poor clinical outcomes.' In a recent report, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS) said that the weakening aid consensus and significant and abrupt funding shortfalls in the HIV response had triggered widespread disruption across health systems, halting HIV prevention programs and jeopardizing treatment services. UNAIDS predicted an additional 6 million new HIV infections and 4 million additional AIDS-related deaths worldwide between 2025 and 2029 resulting from the collapse of US funding. Ukraine has an estimated 245,000 patients with HIV, which is the second highest prevalence in Europe after Russia. Dmytro Sherembey, head of Ukraine's largest patient-led HIV organization, 100% Life, told Medscape Medical News that his organization had been forced to cut its expenses by 30%. He credits his own survival of HIV to US aid. 'These past few months have been incredibly difficult. Amid the war in Ukraine, we faced the terrifying risk of losing essential funding from PEPFAR. Prevention, awareness, advocacy, and community support programs — key drivers in the HIV response — were hit the hardest,' he said. 'The decision [not to cut funding] brings hope and stability. It means children won't lose parents, parents will have healthy babies, and people in Ukraine will keep accessing life-saving care.' Additional Threats Remain In April, UNAIDS said that Ukraine's national preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) program was at high risk because of halted procurement. Its current supply is expected to be exhausted by mid-August 2025. 'In Ukraine, we count on the US decision that PEPFAR will continue to fund PrEP,' Andriy Klepikov, PhD, executive director of the Alliance for Public Health, told Medscape Medical News. The Alliance for Public Health is one of the largest HIV-focused nongovernmental organizations in Ukraine and the wider region. Andriy Klepikov, PhD 'We hope that PEPFAR will continue PrEP for key populations (not only for pregnant and breastfeeding women), but there is no confirmation yet,' he added. But while PEPFAR has been spared, additional threats to the global HIV response remain. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been dismantled, the administration has cut nearly $1 billion in HIV funding at the National Institutes of Health, and the CDC's Division of HIV Prevention has been cut significantly. 'There's no sign that the funding of USAID will be restored. Much of the local support for HIV was funded by USAID, such as HIV testing, outreach workers, and support for key populations,' said Andrew Hill, MD, PhD, senior visiting research fellow in the Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics at the University of Liverpool, Liverpool, England. Andrew Hill, MD, PhD He cited a recent The Lancet paper that suggested that ongoing deep funding cuts could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030. 'If 14 million people do indeed die early as a result of US cuts, this would be the greatest loss of life from any US presidency since World War II.'
