Latest news with #vulnerablePopulations
Bloomberg
08-07-2025
- Climate
- Bloomberg
New York Faces Dual Threats of Flash Floods and Extreme Heat
New Yorkers will struggle through intense heat throughout the day Tuesday, along with thunderstorms in the afternoon that pose the risk of dangerous flash flooding. A heat advisory is in effect for New York City and much of the surrounding area from 10 a.m. until 8 p.m., bringing an increased risk of heat-related illnesses for vulnerable people, according to the National Weather Service.
Al Arabiya
01-07-2025
- Health
- Al Arabiya
More than 14 million people could die from US foreign aid cuts: Study
More than 14 million of the world's most vulnerable people — a third of them small children — could die because of the Trump administration's dismantling of US foreign aid, research projected on Tuesday. The study in the prestigious Lancet journal was published as world and business leaders gather for a UN conference in Spain this week hoping to bolster the reeling aid sector. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) had provided over 40 percent of global humanitarian funding until Donald Trump returned to the White House in January. Two weeks later, Trump's then–close adviser — and world's richest man — Elon Musk boasted of having put the agency 'through the woodchipper.' The funding cuts 'risk abruptly halting — and even reversing — two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations,' warned study co-author Davide Rasella, a researcher at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal). 'For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict,' he said in a statement. Looking back over data from 133 nations, the international team of researchers estimated that USAID funding had prevented 91 million deaths in developing countries between 2001 and 2021. They also used modeling to project how funding being slashed by 83 percent — the figure announced by the US government earlier this year — could affect death rates. The cuts could lead to more than 14 million avoidable deaths by 2030, the projections found. That number included over 4.5 million children under the age of five — or around 700,000 child deaths a year. For comparison, around 10 million soldiers are estimated to have been killed during World War I. Programs supported by USAID were linked to a 15 percent decrease in deaths from all causes, the researchers found. For children under five, the drop in deaths was twice as steep at 32 percent. USAID funding was found to be particularly effective at staving off preventable deaths from disease. There were 65 percent fewer deaths from HIV/AIDS in countries receiving a high level of support compared to those with little or no USAID funding, the study found. Deaths from malaria and neglected tropical diseases were similarly cut in half. After USAID was gutted, several other major donors — including Germany, the UK, and France — followed suit in announcing plans to slash their foreign aid budgets. These aid reductions, particularly in the European Union, could lead to 'even more additional deaths in the coming years,' study co-author Caterina Monti of ISGlobal said. But the grim projections for deaths were based on the current amount of pledged aid, so could rapidly come down if the situation changes, the researchers emphasized. Dozens of world leaders are meeting in the Spanish city of Seville this week for the biggest aid conference in a decade. The US, however, will not attend. 'Now is the time to scale up, not scale back,' Rasella said. Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 percent of all US federal spending. 'US citizens contribute about 17 cents per day to USAID, around $64 per year,' said study co-author James Macinko of the University of California, Los Angeles. 'I think most people would support continued USAID funding if they knew just how effective such a small contribution can be to saving millions of lives.'
News.com.au
30-06-2025
- Health
- News.com.au
Over 14 million people could die from US foreign aid cuts: study
More than 14 million of the world's most vulnerable people, a third of them small children, could die because of the Trump administration's dismantling of US foreign aid, research projected on Tuesday. The study in the prestigious Lancet journal was published as world and business leaders gather for a UN conference in Spain this week hoping to bolster the reeling aid sector. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) had provided over 40 percent of global humanitarian funding until Donald Trump returned to the White House in January. Two weeks later, Trump's then-close advisor -- and world's richest man -- Elon Musk boasted of having put the agency "through the woodchipper". The funding cuts "risk abruptly halting -- and even reversing -- two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations," warned study co-author Davide Rasella, a researcher at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal). "For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," he said in a statement. Looking back over data from 133 nations, the international team of researchers estimated that USAID funding had prevented 91 million deaths in developing countries between 2001 and 2021. They also used modelling to project how funding being slashed by 83 percent -- the figure announced by the US government earlier this year -- could affect death rates. The cuts could lead to more than 14 million avoidable deaths by 2030, the projections found. That number included over 4.5 million children under the age of five -- or around 700,000 child deaths a year. For comparison, around 10 million soldiers are estimated to have been killed during World War I. Programmes supported by USAID were linked to a 15-percent decrease in deaths from all causes, the researchers found. For children under five, the drop in deaths was twice as steep at 32 percent. USAID funding was found to be particularly effective at staving off preventable deaths from disease. There were 65 percent fewer deaths from HIV/AIDS in countries receiving a high level of support compared to those with little or no USAID funding, the study found. Deaths from malaria and neglected tropical diseases were similarly cut in half. - 'Time to scale up' - After USAID was gutted, several other major donors including Germany, the UK and France followed suit in announcing plans to slash their foreign aid budgets. These aid reductions, particularly in the European Union, could lead to "even more additional deaths in the coming years," study co-author Caterina Monti of ISGlobal said. But the grim projections for deaths were based on the current amount of pledged aid, so could rapidly come down if the situation changes, the researchers emphasised. Dozens of world leaders are meeting in the Spanish city of Seville this week for the biggest aid conference in a decade. The US, however, will not attend. "Now is the time to scale up, not scale back," Rasella said. Before its funding was slashed, USAID represented 0.3 percent of all US federal spending. "US citizens contribute about 17 cents per day to USAID, around $64 per year," said study co-author James Macinko of the University of California, Los Angeles.
CBC
11-06-2025
- Health
- CBC
All aboard: Health P.E.I.'s newest dental clinic is coming to you this summer
Health P.E.I. is rolling out a new mobile dental clinic. The large RV-style clinic has two treatment rooms and an X-ray machine. Officials say it could be a gamechanger for getting dental care to vulnerable people. CBC's Connor Lamont has the story.
CNN
21-05-2025
- Business
- CNN
House GOP lawmakers are proposing $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid and food stamps. Here's who could be impacted
House Republicans are pushing to slash nearly $1 trillion from two of the nation's bedrock safety net programs, Medicaid and food stamps, as part of their sweeping package aimed at enacting President Donald Trump's agenda. If the legislation is approved, millions of Americans could lose access to these benefits as a result of a historic pullback in federal support. Trump has repeatedly vowed not to touch Medicaid, while GOP lawmakers insist that their proposals would largely affect adults who could – and should, in their view – be employed. But the actual impact would likely hit a far broader range of Americans, including some of the most vulnerable people the GOP has promised repeatedly to protect, experts say. They include children, people with disabilities and senior citizens. A sizeable share of the US population depends on these programs. More than 71 million people are enrolled in Medicaid, and roughly 42 million Americans receive food stamps, according to the federal agencies that oversee them. Hospitals would also feel the financial fallout of the Medicaid cutbacks, which could prompt some to raise their rates for those with job-based insurance and others to close their doors. States would have to shoulder more of the costs of operating these programs, which could force them to make some tough decisions. Among their options could be slashing enrollment, benefits and provider rates in Medicaid or pulling back on residents' access to food stamps. They might also shift spending from other state-supported programs such as education and infrastructure or hike taxes. In addition, grocery store owners are warning that cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, as food stamps are formally known, could harm local economies and cost jobs. 'We've never in history experienced coverage cuts of this size, and that makes it really difficult to predict how states, providers and patients will respond,' said Alice Burns, an associate director of Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured at KFF, a nonpartisan health policy think tank. 'For the past 50 years, there have been these incremental increases in the availability and access to health care and health insurance coverage. So moving backwards and taking coverage away … This isn't something we've seen before.' What proposals actually make it to the House floor for a vote remain to be seen since conservative and moderate factions of the caucus are currently battling to make changes to the provisions – and more alterations are expected in the Senate before a final bill is enacted into law. The House GOP package would reduce federal support for Medicaid by nearly $700 billion over a decade, according to an updated Congressional Budget Office analysis released on Tuesday. (CBO has yet to release a final analysis of the full legislation.) The proposals would strip Medicaid coverage from more than 10 million people over 10 years, though some are expected to find health insurance elsewhere, such as through their jobs or the Affordable Care Act exchanges, according to an earlier CBO analysis released last week. Overall, an additional 7.6 million Americans are projected to be uninsured in 2034 because of the Medicaid provisions. (Democrats have released a CBO analysis showing even greater potential coverage losses, but that also takes into account the Affordable Care Act provisions in the package and the expiration of the enhanced Obamacare premium subsidies at the end of this lawmakers did not extend those more generous subsidies in this legislation.) The package's most consequential provision is instituting work requirements in Medicaid, a longtime GOP goal. For the first time in Medicaid's 60-year history, certain recipients ages 19 to 64 would be required to work at least 80 hours a month to retain their benefits. They could also meet the mandate by engaging in community service, attending school or participating in a work program. The requirement would not apply to parents, pregnant women, medically frail individuals and those with substance-abuse disorders, among others. It would take effect in 2029, though conservative lawmakers are hoping to push up the start date. However, many people who already are working or who qualify for exemptions could wind up losing their coverage, experts say. That's because they may get caught up in the red tape of regularly reporting their work hours or applying for an exemption. For instance, the mandate could affect low-income people with chronic conditions that make it hard to work if they are enrolled through Medicaid expansion, not the disability pathway. These folks would have to apply for an exemption and prove they are too frail to hold a job. Caregivers and students could also get bogged down in the procedural requirements and wind up kicked out of the program. 'We expect that millions of adults will lose coverage under work requirements, including many who are working, who are looking for a job, who are unable to work because of a health condition or disability or who are meeting some other qualifying activity, but just don't successfully report it because they just have difficulty dealing with the bureaucracy of the new work reporting system,' said Michael Karpman, a principal research associate at the Urban Institute, a think tank. Hospitals and nursing homes could also take a financial hit because the legislation would limit states' ability to levy taxes on health care providers. States often use this revenue to boost provider rates and fund health-related initiatives, among other but one state levy at least one type of provider tax, which some Republicans claim is a scheme by states to get more federal matching funds. Also, with more people expected to be uninsured, hospitals could see their uncompensated care costs rise. While states have typically helped cover the added expense, they may not be in a position to do so if they are receiving less federal funding for Medicaid, Burns said. These budget strains could prompt some hospitals and nursing homes to curtail services, increase rates for other patients or, in the worst case scenario, shut down. The impact may fall even more heavily on providers in rural areas and low-income communities. 'These hospitals, which already operate on thin margins, cannot absorb such losses without reducing services or closing their doors altogether,' Bruce Siegel, CEO of America's Essential Hospitals, a trade group for hospitals that treat many uninsured or lower-income patients, said in a statement. The bill could also hurt those who qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid, the latter of which helps cover their Medicare premiums and out-of-pocket costs, as well as pay for long-term care. One of the provisions would postpone the implementation of a Biden administration rule aimed at streamlining Medicaid eligibility and enrollment until 2035. Such a delay could make it harder for people to enroll in the program and renew their coverage. Some 2.3 million people could lose their Medicaid coverage from this provision, according to a CBO estimate sent to Democratic leaders. They would include senior citizens, people with disabilities and children, in addition to adults, Burns said. More broadly, states would have to decide how to cope with the loss of hundreds of billions of federal dollars. Medicaid is the largest single source of federal funding for state budgets, and the second largest expenditure for states, behind K-12 a reduction in federal support will be felt, especially in states that are already facing budget shortfalls. (Unlike the federal government, nearly all states must approve balanced budgets.) How state lawmakers handle the loss will vary. They might pull back on optional benefits, such as dental care, physical therapy and home and community-based services, which help keep senior citizens and people with disabilities out of nursing homes. One unpalatable option: If states decide to fill the gap by raising taxes, they would need to hike state levies by 4% overall, with the increases ranging from 1% in Kansas and Wyoming to 11% in Louisiana, according to KFF. Under the GOP package, more food stamp recipients would have to work to qualify for benefits. Currently, adults ages 18 to 54 without dependent children can only receive food stamps for three months over a 36-month period unless they work 20 hours a week or are eligible for an exemption. The legislation would extend the work requirement to those ages 55 to 64, as well as to parents of children between the ages of 7 and 18. Plus it would curtail states' ability to receive work requirement waivers in difficult economic times, limiting them only to counties with unemployment rates above 10%. The bill would also require states to pay for a portion of the benefit costs – at least 5% – for the first time, starting in fiscal year 2028. States with higher payment error rates would have to shoulder more of the burden – as much as 25% of the costs for those with error rates of at least 10%. Plus, states would have to pick up 75% of the administrative costs, rather than 50%. The work requirements could put 11 million people at risk of losing their nutrition assistance, said Ty Jones Cox, vice president for food assistance for the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. That includes 4 million children who live in families that could see reduced aid if their parents no longer qualify. And as with Medicaid, states will have to decide how to handle the federal funding loss. Some may try to limit enrollment or even exit the program since it's not mandatory that states participate in food stamps. 'They have more incentive to want to make it harder for people to get food assistance because they're on the hook to pay for the benefit and they're worried about their error rate,' Cox said. Grocery store owners are also sounding the alarm, highlighting that food stamp recipients plow their benefits back into the local economy. Food stamps funding supports about 388,000 jobs and more than $20 billion in wages, and results in more than $4.5 billion in state and federal tax revenue, according to the National Grocers Association, which represents independent grocers. 'SNAP is not just food assistance for families — it's an economic engine that bolsters jobs on Main Street,' Stephanie Johnson, the association's group vice president for government relations, said in a statement. 'This data confirms what independent grocers see every day: SNAP dollars circulate directly through local businesses, helping to pay local wages, keep shelves stocked, and support essential services in communities nationwide.'
