WSJ asks Kennedy to cast aside ‘antivax hooey' amid Texas measles outbreak
'We are on record as skeptical of RFK Jr.'s nomination. The Senate confirmed him. Now the best-case scenario would be for Mr. Kennedy to internalize that he is no longer an activist outsider who needs to take provocative potshots to get attention,' wrote the Journal's editorial board.
As of last week, 48 children in the South Plains region of Texas have been confirmed to have measles and 13 have been hospitalized. The disease is so transmissible that up to nine out of 10 people who come into contact someone with measles can be infected, according to the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases.
According to the Texas Department of State Health Services, all the children who have been infected are either unvaccinated or have unconfirmed vaccination statuses. The department has stated 'additional cases are likely' due to how contagious measles is.
'The tragedy is that this doesn't have to keep happening. In 2000 measles was declared eliminated from the U.S., meaning 12 months with no continuous spread,' the Journal's op-ed read.
'Yet for some people, the reality of measles feels like a sepia-toned history lesson, whereas the antivax hooey featured on podcasts these days sounds current,' the Journal added. 'RFK Jr., an environmental lawyer by trade, has long been part of the problem, and at his Senate confirmation hearings he presented himself as just asking questions, man. That undersells his role in spreading doubt and confusion.'
The op-ed additionally noted the falling vaccination rates among kindergarteners in recent years. All states and D.C. require vaccinations for school attendance, but exceptions are often permitted. During the 2023-2024 school year, vaccination coverage among U.S. kindergarteners fell to 92.7 percent when it came to the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine.
Federal health authorities have long maintained a 'Healthy People 2030' target of achieving 95 percent MMR immunization coverage. This level of coverage is considered ideal for maintaining herd immunity in a population.
Whether this aim for vaccine coverage will continue now remains unclear as Kennedy, a longtime vaccine skeptic, has signaled that he will be prioritizing work on chronic illnesses as opposed to infectious disease.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
20 hours ago
- Atlantic
Americans Are Tanning Like It's 1999
The early aughts were the worst possible kind of golden age. Tans were inescapable—on Britney Spears's midriff, on the flexing biceps outside of Abercrombie & Fitch stores. The Jersey Shore ethos of 'gym, tan, laundry' infamously encapsulated an era in which tanning salons were after-school hangouts, and tanning stencils in the shape of the Playboy bunny were considered stylish. Self-tanning lotions, spray tans, and bronzers proliferated, but people still sought the real thing. By the end of the decade, tanning's appeal had faded. Americans became more aware of the health risks, and the recession shrank their indoor-tanning budgets. But now America glows once again. The president and many of his acolytes verge on orange, and parties thrown by the MAGA youth are blurs of bronze. Celebrity tans are approaching early-aughts amber, and if dermatologists' observations and social media are any indication, teens are flocking to the beach in pursuit of scorching burns. Tanning is back. Only this time, it's not just about looking good—it's about embracing an entire ideology. Another apparent fan of tanning is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., America's perpetually bronzed health secretary, who was spotted visiting a tanning salon last month. What tanning methods he might employ are unknown, but the secretary's glow is undeniable. (The Department of Health and Human Services didn't respond to a request for comment about the administration's views on tanning or Kennedy's own habits.) On its face, the idea that any health secretary would embrace tanning is odd. The Obama administration levied an excise tax on tanning beds and squashed ads that marketed tanning as healthy. The Biden administration, by contrast, made sunscreen use and reducing sun exposure central to its Cancer Moonshot plan. The stated mission of Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again movement is to end chronic diseases, such as cancer, by addressing their root causes. Yet the Trump administration's MAHA report, released in May, doesn't once mention skin cancer, which is the most common type as well as the most easily preventable. It mentions the sun only to note its connection with circadian rhythm: 'Morning sun synchronizes the body's internal clock, boosting mood and metabolism.' In fact, there's good reason to suspect that Kennedy and others in his orbit will encourage Americans to get even more sun. Last October, in a post on X, Kennedy warned that the FDA's 'aggressive suppression' of sunlight, among other supposedly healthy interventions, was 'about to end.' Casey Means, a doctor and wellness influencer whom President Donald Trump has nominated for surgeon general, is also a sun apologist. In her best-selling book, Good Energy (which she published with her brother, Calley Means, an adviser to Kennedy), she argues that America's many ailments are symptoms of a 'larger spiritual crisis' caused by separation from basic biological needs, including sunlight. 'Shockingly, we rarely ever hear about how getting direct sunlight into our eyes at the right times is profoundly important for metabolic and overall health,' she writes. An earlier version of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill tried to repeal the excise tax on tanning beds. (The provision was cut in the final version.) The alternative-health circles that tend to attract the MAHA crowd are likewise skeptical of sun avoidance. 'They don't want you to know this. But your body was made for the sun,' says a 'somatic energy healer' with 600,000 followers who promotes staring directly into the sun to boost mood and regulate the body's circadian rhythm. (Please, don't do this.) On social media, some influencers tout the sun's supposedly uncelebrated power to increase serotonin and vitamin D, the latter of which some erroneously view as a cure-all. Some promote tanning-bed use as a way to relieve stress; others, such as the alternative-health influencer Carnivore Aurelius, promote genital tanning to boost testosterone. Another popular conspiracy theory is that sunscreen causes cancer and is promoted by Big Pharma to keep people sick; a 2024 survey found that 14 percent of young adults think using sunscreen every day is worse for the skin than going without it. These claims range from partly true to patently false. The sun can boost serotonin and vitamin D, plus regulate circadian rhythm—but these facts have long been a part of public-health messaging, and there's no evidence that these benefits require eschewing sunscreen or staring directly at our star. Tanning beds emit little of the UVB necessary to produce vitamin D. Some research suggests that the chemicals in sunscreen can enter the bloodstream, but only if it's applied to most of the body multiple times a day; plus, the effects of those chemicals in the body haven't been established to be harmful, whereas skin cancer has. And, if I really have to say it: No solid research supports testicle tanning. Nor does any of this negate the sun's less salutary effects: premature aging, eye damage, and greatly increased risk of skin cancer, including potentially fatal melanomas. The specific questions raised in alternative-health spaces matter less than the conspiracist spirit in which they are asked: What haven't the American people been told about the sun? What lies have we been fed? Their inherent skepticism aligns with Kennedy's reflexive mistrust of the health establishment. In the MAHA world, milk is better when it's raw, beef fat is healthier than processed oils, and the immune system is strongest when unvaccinated. This philosophy, however flawed, appeals to the many Americans who feel that they've been failed by the institutions meant to protect them. It offers the possibility that regaining one's health can be as simple as rejecting science and returning to nature. And what is more natural than the sun? Now is an apt moment for American politics to become more sun-friendly. Tanning is making a comeback across pop culture, even as 'anti-aging' skin care and cosmetic procedures boom. Young people are lying outside when the sun is at its peak—new apps such as Sunglow and Rayz AI Tanning tell them when UV rays are strongest—to achieve social-media-ready tan lines. Last year, Kim Kardashian showed off a tanning bed in her office (in response to backlash, she claimed that it treated her psoriasis). Deep tans are glorified in ads for luxury goods, and makeup is used in fashion shows to mimic painful-looking burns. Off the runway, ' sunburned makeup,' inspired by the perpetually red-cheeked pop star Sabrina Carpenter, is trending. Veena Vanchinathan, a board-certified dermatologist in the Bay Area, told me that she's noticed more patients seeking out self-tanning products and tanning, whether in beds or outdoors. Angela Lamb, a board-certified dermatologist who practices on New York's well-to-do Upper West Side, told me her patients are curious about tanning too. 'It's actually quite scary,' she said. A recent survey by the American Academy of Dermatology found that a quarter of Americans, and an even greater proportion of adults ages 18 to 26, are unaware of the risks of tanning, and many believe in tanning myths, such as the idea that a base tan protects against a burn, or that tanning with protection is safe. ('There is no such thing as a safe tan,' Deborah S. Sarnoff, the president of the Skin Cancer Foundation, told me.) Recently, some experts have called for a more moderate approach to sun safety, one that takes into account the benefits of some sun exposure and the harms of too much shade. 'I actually think we do ourselves a bit of a disservice and open ourselves up to criticism if the advice of someone for skin-cancer prevention is 'Don't go outside,'' Jerod Stapleton, a professor at the University of Kentucky who studies tanning behaviors, told me. But the popular rejection of sun safety goes much further. Advances in skin-cancer treatment, for example, may have lulled some Americans into thinking that melanoma just isn't that serious, Carolyn Heckman, a medical professor at Rutgers University's Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, told me. Skin-cancer treatment and mortality rates have indeed improved, but melanomas that metastasize widely are still fatal most of the time. From the June 2024 issue: Against sunscreen absolutism In previous decades, tans were popular because they conveyed youth, vitality, and wealth. They still do. (At least among the fairer-skinned; their connotations among people of color can be less positive.) But the difference now is that tanning persists in spite of the known consequences. Lamb likened tanning to smoking: At this point, most people who take it up are actively looking past the well-established risks. (Indeed, smoking is also making a pop-culture comeback.) A tan has become a symbol of defiance—of health guidance, of the scientific establishment, of aging itself.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Parents urged to get kids vaccinated after Liverpool death
Parents in Wiltshire are being urged to ensure their children's vaccinations are up to date after a child in Liverpool died from measles. Measles is highly contagious and the effects can be fatal, medics warn. Measles, Mumps, and Rubella vaccinations are offered to children in two stages. The first dose, MMR1, is typically given around 12 months of age, while the second dose, MMR2, is usually administered around three years of age. Both doses are necessary for optimal protection against these three viral diseases. The World Health Organisation says at least 95 per cent of children in a community should be vaccinated to ensure herd immunity because measles is so contagious. In Wiltshire, vaccination rates are well above the South West and UK averages, but still dip below the 95 per cent target for the MMR2 jab. In the year 2023-24, 96.3 per cent of children in the county had received their MMR1 jab by the age of five, while 92 per cent had received the MMR2 vaccination. In Wiltshire, vaccination rates climbed to an all-time high in 2020-21 and 2021-22 before declining slightly. MMR 1 vaccination rates increased marginally between 2022-23 and 2023-24 but MMR 2 vaccination rates declined slightly. In the South West, there were 112 laboratory confirmed measles cases in 2024, with 40 of those cases being reported in children aged five and under. In 2025 so far, there have been 58 laboratory confirmed measles cases, with children under five accounting for 29 cases. Fewer than 10 cases were reported in Wiltshire, so the county does not feature individually in health statistics. The UK Health Security Agency is responsible for monitoring the disease, promoting vaccination, and responding to outbreaks. In a statement, the UKHSA South West said: 'Measles is highly contagious and can cause serious complications. 'It is preventable with the MMR vaccine, so parents should make sure their children are up to date and catch up on any missed doses.' Symptoms to look out for include cold-like symptoms, followed by a rash a few days later. Some people may also get small spots in their mouth. This progresses with a distinctive rash that starts on the face or behind the ears and then spreads to the rest of the body. Measles can leave people seriously ill and even be fatal. While the incident in Liverpool is only the second reported death of a child from measles in the past five years, health authorities are concerned about the UK's low vaccination rate. In Liverpool, only 73 per cent of children aged five have received the necessary two shots, while in parts of London – where over 1,300 cases of measles were reported last year – vaccine uptake is below 65 per cent.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
US rejects amendments to WHO international health regulations
Trump administration officials rejected a series of rules Friday to help the international community prevent and respond to public health risks. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a joint statement formally rejecting the 2024 International Health Regulations (IHR) Amendments by the World Health Organization (WHO). 'The proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations open the door to the kind of narrative management, propaganda, and censorship that we saw during the COVID pandemic,' Kennedy said in a video message posted on social platform X. 'The United States can cooperate with other nations without jeopardizing our civil liberties, without undermining our Constitution, and without ceding away America's treasured sovereignty,' he added. The IHR is an international legal agreement that has been adopted by all 194 WHO member states and includes an outline to 'rights and responsibilities' of the organization and governments in handling global health emergencies like pandemics. Both the IHR amendments and the pandemic agreement leave health policy up to national governments. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the WHO, said in a post on X that the organization has never had the power to mandate lockdowns, travel restrictions or any other similar measures. 'Member States have the power to do so if they see the need,' he wrote. Member states decided to review and potentially amend the IHR in 2022 in light of the challenges that arose among the international community in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, according to health nonprofit KFF. The WHO formally approved a of number revisions to the IHR last year but did not come to a consensus on a pandemic agreement until earlier this year. Kennedy said in the video message that WHO member states have until next week to reject the amendments. He added the U.S. is choosing to reject the amended regulations, in part, for reasons related to 'national sovereignty.' 'Nations who accept the new regulations are signing over their power in health emergencies to an unelected, international organization that could order lockdowns, travel restrictions or any other measures it sees fit,' the HHS chief said. 'If we are going to give the WHO that much power we should at least invite a thorough public debate.' He noted that the U.S.'s decision to reject the amendments was sparked by concerns over a regulation regarding 'risk communications' systems. The amended requirements, Kennedy continued, require countries to establish systems of risk communication that he believes opens the door to 'narrative management, propaganda and censorship' that the world saw during the COVID-19 pandemic. 'We don't want to see that kind of system institutionalized even further,' he said. There is also concern over a provision in the amendments related 'global systems of health IDs and vaccine passports' which Kennedy thinks will pave the way for global medical surveillance. The move is the latest in the Trump administration's efforts to try to distance the U.S. from the WHO. In January, President Trump issued an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the organization and stated the country would pause the future transfer of funding. The president tried to withdraw the country from the international organization during his first term. The withdrawal never happened — it takes a year for a member state to fully withdraw from the WHO — and former President Biden reversed the decision once he took office. Public health experts decried Trump's move, warning that it would severely weaken domestic and global public health. The U.S. was a founding member of the WHO in 1948 and is the largest financial donor of the organization. —Updated at 6:08 p.m. EDT Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
