Latest news with #Redfield
Associated Press
01-07-2025
- Health
- Associated Press
7-HOPE Alliance Responds to Misinformation in Dr. Robert Redfields Recent Op-Ed on 7-Hydroxymitragynine (7-OH) in The Hill
Alliance Scientific Advisor Pens Letter Correcting Key Scientific Inaccuracies From Media Op/Ed LOS ANGELES, CA - July 1, 2025 ( NEWMEDIAWIRE ) - 7-HOPE Alliance ('7-HOPE'), a nonprofit public education and advocacy group dedicated to responsible access to 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), today issued the following letter from Scientific Advisor Dr. Michele Ross in response to former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield's recent opinion article published in The Hill. Dr. Redfield's op-ed unfoundedly equated 7-OH with synthetic opioids, alleged it poses 'legal morphine-level' risks, and called for immediate enforcement action by the FDA and HHS. While his concern for public safety is genuine, it is also clear that Dr. Redfield was misinformed, likely by commercial actors with a vested interest in removing 7-OH from the market. The following letter, written by Dr. Michele Ross and originally submitted as a Letter to the Editor with no response from the publication, directly addresses the scientific, regulatory, and policy inaccuracies in the op-ed. 'As a neuroscientist who has spent nearly two decades researching addiction and working with chronic pain patients, I share Dr. Redfield's concern about emerging drug trends. But his recent warning about 7-hydroxymitragynine, or 7-OH, paints an inaccurate and potentially harmful picture of a compound that many Americans are using to stay off far more dangerous substances. Most concerning is the claim that 7-OH is a 'synthetic opioid.' That label is scientifically inaccurate. 7-OH is a naturally occurring compound found in the kratom plant and is also produced in significant quantities inside the human body after consuming kratom leaf. When product manufacturers produce 7-OH outside the body, they are not creating a novel or lab-invented drug. They are mimicking the body's own metabolic process using heat and oxygen, a method no different from how other botanical extracts are refined or stabilized for dietary supplements. To call this synthetic is not only misleading, it falsely associates 7-OH with fentanyl-class opioids and risks misinforming both lawmakers and the public. Published studies show that 7-OH acts as a partial agonist at opioid receptors, unlike fentanyl, a full opioid agonist. 7-OH has a ceiling effect on euphoria which makes it more similar to the opioid use disorder treatment buprenorphine than fentanyl. Unlike traditional opioids, it does not activate the beta-arrestin 2 pathway strongly associated with respiration depression, overdose, and death. Multiple rodent studies have attempted to find a lethal dose for 7-OH and failed – that alone separates it from the synthetic opioids devastating our communities. Dr. Redfield suggests that 7-OH poses an 'unregulated pharmaceutical threat,' but this ignores the rigorous safety practices already in place among responsible manufacturers. 7-HOPE supports strict milligram-based serving limits and accurate labeling standards, not unlike those already applied to THC and CBD in regulated markets. Dr. Redfield also references an FDA clinical trial on natural kratom leaf to suggest 7-OH products represent a 'bait and switch.' But this misrepresents the research. That study evaluated natural kratom leaf in experienced users and found no serious adverse effects. What it also revealed is that kratom and its active metabolites, including 7-OH, show low abuse potential and may offer therapeutic benefits. Rather than contradict the utility of 7-OH, this research supports continued exploration of its properties, especially as a harm reduction tool. Further, the suggestion that federal agencies must act immediately to issue 'import alerts' and 'classify 7-OH as an unapproved drug' is premature and reckless. Research on 7-OH is ongoing, and early findings show promise. HHS has already rejected scheduling kratom and its components once, citing the risk of immediate harm to users if access is cut off. That decision still holds today. We do not ban nicotine or even alcohol because they carry risks. We regulate them. The same approach should be applied here. What Dr. Redfield's op-ed leaves out entirely is the human impact of a ban on 7-OH. Millions rely on 7-OH to manage pain, reduce alcohol use, or avoid relapse from other deadly synthetics. These are not hypothetical users. I have heard from consumers, veterans, and parents who credit this compound with helping them get their lives back. When people are desperate to avoid fentanyl or oxycodone but have few options, removing one of the few effective, low-toxicity alternatives is not harm reduction, it's cruelty. Yes, 7-OH should be researched further and regulated, but as we know from repeated history,bans or broad mischaracterizations will not make people safer. They will push individuals back toward illicit markets and high-risk alternatives. If we are serious about harm reduction, we must let science, not stigma, lead the way. Respectfully Submitted, Dr. Michele Ross, PhD, MBA Scientific Advisor, 7-HOPE Alliance Author of Kratom is Medicine 7-HOPE urges lawmakers, regulators, and the media to engage with the science and lived experiences of the people who use 7-OH safely every day. We remain committed to supporting ongoing research, promoting responsible regulation, and ensuring this compound remains accessible to those who rely on it for pain relief, recovery, and stability. For more information or to get involved, visit About 7-HOPE Alliance 7-HOPE Alliance (7-Hydroxy Outreach for Public Education) is a nonprofit organization (501(c)(3) pending) dedicated to advancing public education, user support, and policy advocacy around 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), a naturally occurring alkaloid in the kratom plant. Through a foundation of science, storytelling, and community, 7-HOPE empowers individuals, healthcare professionals, and policymakers with accurate, balanced information on 7-OH and its role in harm reduction, natural wellness, and safe, legal access to alternatives. The organization's mission centers on four pillars: science, education, advocacy, and user support. By confronting misinformation, promoting responsible use, and providing uplifting real-life testimonials, 7-HOPE aims to ensure 7-OH remains available to the many individuals who find it to be a safe and effective alternative to dangerous painkillers and illegal drugs. For more information or to get involved, visit Media Contact [email protected] View the original release on
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Redfield backs Kennedy's efforts on vaccines
Robert Redfield, who headed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention during the first Trump administration, supports Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s efforts on vaccines. Kennedy's nomination and eventual confirmation as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services was complicated by his decades-old vaccine skepticism. And he has alienated many public health officials who fear he could discourage the public from getting routine vaccinations long proven safe. But Redfield is fully supporting Kennedy — even after Kennedy refused to say vaccines do not cause autism during his confirmation hearing — and is now calling for more vaccine research, too. 'I'm in clinical practice two half days a week right now, and largely doing Covid and long Covid, and I have a number of patients that have very serious long term consequences from the mRNA vaccines,' Redfield said during POLITICO's First 100 Days: Health Care event Wednesday. 'Let's get that systematically reviewed by the experts.' Redfield supported Kennedy throughout his nomination and confirmation process, agreeing with Kennedy's points on a renewed effort to study and treat chronic disease and the impact of processed foods. At the same time, Redfield spoke about his long-time commitment to promoting vaccine uptake, arguing that Kennedy's approach will eventually encourage vaccine confidence once HHS lets the public 'see the information.' A wide variety of data on vaccine safety is already publicly available. — Avian flu: Redfield also spoke in dire terms about the possibility of an avian flu pandemic. 'The Covid pandemic was a real challenge. There's no question about that. But to me, it was a minor epidemic compared to the epidemic that's coming — which is a bird flu pandemic,' Redfield said. 'So this is not a time to cut our ability to have a rapid public health response agency.' But he doesn't think vaccines will be the solution, he said, because of the low efficacy of some flu vaccines. Instead, he said that the focus should instead be on developing effective antiviral drugs. — CDC terminations: Redfield demurred when asked about the Trump administration's move last week to terminate thousands of HHS employees. Instead, he emphasized that the CDC needs to be reformed. 'I don't know what the ultimate consequences are going to be — whether it's going to be good or not good — but I do think, though, that we could all try to focus this time to transform our health system and our health agencies so that they're focused on health,' Redfield said, arguing that CDC has moved away from its 'primary mission' as a 'public health response agency,' and become too much like an academic institution.
Politico
19-02-2025
- Health
- Politico
Redfield backs Kennedy's efforts on vaccines
Robert Redfield, who headed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention during the first Trump administration, supports Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s efforts on vaccines. Kennedy's nomination and eventual confirmation as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services was complicated by his decades-old vaccine skepticism. And he has alienated many public health officials who fear he could discourage the public from getting routine vaccinations long proven safe. But Redfield is fully supporting Kennedy — even after Kennedy refused to say vaccines do not cause autism during his confirmation hearing — and is now calling for more vaccine research, too. 'I'm in clinical practice two half days a week right now, and largely doing Covid and long Covid, and I have a number of patients that have very serious long term consequences from the mRNA vaccines,' Redfield said during POLITICO's First 100 Days: Health Care event Wednesday. 'Let's get that systematically reviewed by the experts.' Redfield supported Kennedy throughout his nomination and confirmation process, agreeing with Kennedy's points on a renewed effort to study and treat chronic disease and the impact of processed foods. At the same time, Redfield spoke about his long-time commitment to promoting vaccine uptake, arguing that Kennedy's approach will eventually encourage vaccine confidence once HHS lets the public 'see the information.' A wide variety of data on vaccine safety is already publicly available. — Avian flu: Redfield also spoke in dire terms about the possibility of an avian flu pandemic. 'The Covid pandemic was a real challenge. There's no question about that. But to me, it was a minor epidemic compared to the epidemic that's coming — which is a bird flu pandemic,' Redfield said. 'So this is not a time to cut our ability to have a rapid public health response agency.' But he doesn't think vaccines will be the solution, he said, because of the low efficacy of some flu vaccines. Instead, he said that the focus should instead be on developing effective antiviral drugs. — CDC terminations: Redfield demurred when asked about the Trump administration's move last week to terminate thousands of HHS employees. Instead, he emphasized that the CDC needs to be reformed. 'I don't know what the ultimate consequences are going to be — whether it's going to be good or not good — but I do think, though, that we could all try to focus this time to transform our health system and our health agencies so that they're focused on health,' Redfield said, arguing that CDC has moved away from its 'primary mission' as a 'public health response agency,' and become too much like an academic institution.
Yahoo
13-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Illinois bill looks to minimize private donors' influence on judicial elections
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WCIA) —Illinois judicial campaigns have become very expensive, with interest groups and wealthy donors throwing around lots of cash to get their favorite judge on the bench. This has raised questions about the fairness of the election and money's influence on the campaign. Sen. Rachel Ventura (D-Joliet) filed a bill looking to reduce the influence of private donors in Supreme Court and Appellate Court races. This will allow candidates to use public funds instead of interest group funds. She filed the bill in response to the record-breaking amount of money spent in the 2022 Illinois Supreme Court Elections. New Illinois law allows doctors to strengthen chronic pain treatments She said this legislation would keep judicial elections balanced and the candidates wouldn't feel like they are indebted to a single person or organization. 'The goal is to allow all judges to have the same opportunity, ' Ventura said. 'And to get rid of that kind of off-putting feeling that someone is donating to a judge who may then later be making decisions that harm or hurt them or help them.' The 2022 Illinois Supreme Court race spending surpassed $23 million across both sides. PACs, outside interest groups, and even Governor JB Pritzker poured money in campaigns leading up to the election. The bill proposes a public financing program for Supreme Court and Appellate Court candidates through the Judicial Election Democracy Trust Fund. The idea comes with a pretty big price tag. Under Ventura's proposal, the fund will contain an initial $40 million from the state's General Revenue Fund for candidate use if they choose to opt-in to the public fund for their campaign spending. DOJ sues Illinois, Chicago over 'sanctuary city' laws Kent Redfield, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Illinois Springfield, sees this bill as a well-meaning idea, but wouldn't be effective due to the voluntary option of it. 'The problem with public financing is that it only works if candidates actually use it.' Redfield said 'But if your opponent is getting millions from independent groups, you can't afford to just rely on public funds.' With Illinois's current law on expenditure campaigns, the 2010 Citizen United vs. FEC ruling allows unlimited independent expenditures for corporations or unions with an emphasis on free speech. Redfield, who has done extensive research on money in politics and campaign finance, said the ruling has changed how the judicial race is run. 'Ever since Citizens United, judicial elections have turned into high-stakes political battles, the idea that judges are above politics is just not reality anymore,' Redfield said. 'Now, outside groups can spend unlimited amounts, and that money isn't just coming from local donors—it's national, ideological, and often hidden.' Ethics advocate groups said public financing is one step in avoiding corruption in the court systems. Alisa Kaplan, executive director of Reform for Illinois, said this bill allows judges to be impartial compared to how the current law is written. Illinois lawmakers react to Madigan convictions in corruption trial 'The way judicial campaigns are currently funded it really allows for special interest groups to have potentially a lot of influence on who our judges are and how they make decisions, and that's just not how anybody wants courts to run,' Kaplan said. 'You want the decisions that they make to be based on the arguments that they see before the court. You don't want them thinking about who's funding their campaign.' Several states across the nation publicly finance political campaigns such as Arizona and Maine, and a few are considering it for judicial races. With fewer candidates on the ballot for Supreme Court and Appellate Court elections, many see public finance as the most suitable option. With $40 million coming from the General Revenue Fund, the proposal raised eyebrows given the state's budget problem. 'The public response to that generally is 'I don't want my tax dollars going to politicians to run campaigns,'' Redfield said 'The fact that we have a budget deficit, we're looking at a very tough fiscal year. The idea of taking $40 million out and not giving it to schools or universities or early childhood education, it's not a very attractive time.' But Kaplan said the amount is smaller compared to the state's overall budget. 'It's 0.08% of the budget, the way the bill is written right now. ' Kaplan said. ' So an extremely, extremely small part of the overall Illinois budget for something that could really have a huge impact on how cases are decided and how justice is distributed in the state of Illinois.' Ventura believed this bill will start a conversation on fairness in the Illinois judicial system. 'I think Illinois is well on its way to exploring this, but we need to hear from our residents. What would they prefer? Because, as I said, candidate campaigns are very expensive,' Ventura said. 'But we want to make sure that none of our candidates are bought and paid for.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
