logo
How UnitedHealthcare became the face of America's health insurance frustrations

How UnitedHealthcare became the face of America's health insurance frustrations

NBC News22-05-2025

It took six months, countless hours on hold and intervention from state regulators before Sue Cover says she finally resolved an over $1,000 billing dispute with UnitedHealthcare in 2023.
Cover, 46, said she was overbilled for emergency room visits for her and her son, along with a standard ultrasound. While Cover said her family would eventually have been able to pay the sum, she said it would have been a financial strain on them.
Cover, a San Diego benefits advocate, said she had conversations with UnitedHealthcare that 'felt like a circular dance.' Cover said she picked through dense policy language and fielded frequent calls from creditors. She said the experience felt designed to exhaust patients into submission.
'It sometimes took my entire day of just sitting on the phone, being on hold with the hospital or the insurance company,' Cover said.
Cover's experience is familiar to many Americans. And it embodies rising public furor toward insurers and in particular UnitedHealthcare, the largest private health insurer in the U.S., which has become the poster child for problems with the U.S. insurance industry and the nation's sprawling health-care system.
The company and other insurers have faced backlash from patients who say they were denied necessary care, providers who say they are buried in red tape and lawmakers who say they are alarmed by its vast influence.
UnitedHealthcare in a statement said it is working with Cover's provider to 'understand the facts of these claims.' The company said it is 'unfortunate that CNBC rushed to publish this story without allowing us and the provider adequate time to review.' CNBC provided the company several days to review Cover's situation before publication.
Andrew Witty, CEO of UnitedHealthcare's company, UnitedHealth Group, stepped down earlier this month for what the company called 'personal reasons.' Witty had led the company through the thick of public and investor blowback. The insurer also pulled its 2025 earnings guidance this month, partly due to rising medical costs, it said.
UnitedHealth Group is by far the biggest company in the insurance industry by market cap, worth nearly $275 billion. It controls an estimated 15% of the U.S. health insurance market, serving more than 29 million Americans, according to a 2024 report from the American Medical Association. Meanwhile, competitors Elevance Health and CVS Health control an estimated 12% of the market each.
It's no surprise that a company with such a wide reach faces public blowback. But the personal and financial sensitivity of health care makes the venom directed at UnitedHealth unique, some experts told CNBC.
Shares of UnitedHealth Group are down about 40% this year following a string of setbacks for the company, despite a temporary reprieve sparked in part by share purchases by company insiders. In the last month alone, UnitedHealth Group has lost nearly $300 billion of its $600 billion market cap following Witty's exit, the company's rough first-quarter earnings and a reported criminal probe into possible Medicare fraud.
In a statement about the investigation, UnitedHealth Group said, 'We stand by the integrity of our Medicare Advantage program.'
Over the years, UnitedHealthcare and other insurers have also faced numerous patient and shareholder lawsuits and several other government investigations.
UnitedHealth Group is also contending with the fallout from a February 2024 ransomware attack on Change Healthcare, a subsidiary that processes a significant portion of the country's medical claims.
More recently, UnitedHealthcare became a symbol for outrage toward insurers following the fatal shooting of its CEO, Brian Thompson, in December. Thompson's death reignited calls to reform what many advocates and lawmakers say is an opaque industry that puts profits above patients.
The problems go deeper than UnitedHealth Group: Insurers are just one piece of what some experts call a broken U.S. health-care system, where many stakeholders, including drugmakers and pharmacy benefit managers, are trying to balance patient care with making money. Still, experts emphasized that insurers' cost-cutting tactics — from denying claims to charging higher premiums — can delay or block crucial treatment, leave patients with unexpected bills, they say, or in some cases, even mean the difference between life and death.
In a statement, UnitedHealthcare said it is ″ unfortunate that CNBC appears to be drawing broad conclusions based on a small number of anecdotes.'
What's wrong with the health-care industry
Frustration with insurers is a symptom of a broader problem: a convoluted health-care system that costs the U.S. more than $4 trillion annually.
U.S. patients spend far more on health care than people anywhere else in the world, yet have the lowest life expectancy among large, wealthy countries, according to the Commonwealth Fund, an independent research group. Over the past five years, U.S. spending on insurance premiums, out-of-pocket co-payments, pharmaceuticals and hospital services has also increased, government data show.
While many developed countries have significant control over costs because they provide universal coverage, the U.S. relies on a patchwork of public and private insurance, often using profit-driven middlemen to manage care, said Howard Lapin, adjunct professor at the University of Illinois Chicago School of Law.
But the biggest driver of U.S. health spending isn't how much patients use care — it's prices, said Richard Hirth, professor of health management and policy at the University of Michigan.
There is 'unbelievable inflation of the prices that are being charged primarily by hospitals, but also drug companies and other providers in the system,' said Sabrina Corlette, co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University.
Lapin said factors such as overtreatment, fraud, health-care consolidation and administrative overhead raise costs for payers and providers, who then pass those on through higher prices. U.S. prescription drug prices are also two to three times higher than those in other developed countries, partly due to limited price regulation and pharmaceutical industry practices such as patent extensions.
While patients often blame insurers, the companies are only part of the problem. Some experts argue that eliminating their profits wouldn't drastically lower U.S. health-care costs.
Still, UnitedHealthcare and other insurers have become easy targets for patient frustration — and not without reason, according to industry experts.
Their for-profit business model centers on managing claims to limit payouts, while complying with regulations and keeping customers content. That often means denying services deemed medically unnecessary, experts said. But at times, insurers reject care that patients need, leaving them without vital treatment or saddled with hefty bills, they added.
Insurers use tools such as deductibles, co-pays, and prior authorization — or requiring approval before certain treatments — to control costs. Industry experts say companies are increasingly relying on artificial intelligence to review claims, and that can sometimes lead to inaccurate denials.
'It's all part of the same business model — to avoid paying as many claims as possible in a timely fashion,' said Dylan Roby, an affiliate at the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research.
How UnitedHealth Group got so powerful
While other private U.S. insurers employ many of the same tactics, UnitedHealth Group appears to have faced the most public backlash due to its size and visibility.
UnitedHealth Group's market value dwarfs the sub-$100 billion market caps of competitors such as CVS, Cigna and Elevance. UnitedHealth Group booked more than $400 billion in revenue in 2024 alone, up from roughly $100 billion in 2012.
It has expanded into many parts of the health-care system, sparking more criticism of other segments of its business — and the company's ability to use one unit to benefit another.
UnitedHealth Group grew by buying smaller companies and building them into its growing health-care business. The company now serves nearly 150 million people and controls everything from insurance and medical services to sensitive health-care data.
UnitedHealth Group owns a powerful pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM, called Optum Rx, which gives it even more sway over the market.
PBMs act as middlemen, negotiating drug rebates on behalf of insurers, managing lists of drugs covered by health plans and reimbursing pharmacies for prescriptions. But lawmakers and drugmakers accuse them of overcharging plans, underpaying pharmacies and failing to pass savings on to patients.
Owning a PBM gives UnitedHealth Group control over both supply and demand, Corlette said. Its insurance arm influences what care is covered, while Optum Rx determines what drugs are offered and at what price. UnitedHealth Group can maximize profits by steering patients to lower-cost or higher-margin treatments and keeping rebates, she said.
The company's reach goes even further, Corlette added: Optum Health now employs or affiliates with about 90,000 doctors — nearly 10% of U.S. physicians — allowing UnitedHealth Group to direct patients to its own providers and essentially pay itself for care.
A STAT investigation last year found that UnitedHealth uses its physicians to squeeze profits from patients. But the company in response said its 'providers and partners make independent clinical decisions, and we expect them to diagnose and document patient information completely and accurately in compliance with [federal] guidelines.'
Other insurers, such as CVS and Cigna, also own large PBMs and offer care services. But UnitedHealth Group has achieved greater scale and stronger financial returns.
'I think the company is certainly best in class when it comes to insurers, in terms of providing profits for shareholders,' said Roby. 'But people on the consumer side probably say otherwise when it comes to their experience.'
Backlash against UnitedHealth
No one knows exactly how often private insurers deny claims, since they aren't generally required to report that data. But some analyses suggest that UnitedHealthcare has rejected care at higher rates than its peers for certain types of plans.
A January report by nonprofit group KFF found that UnitedHealthcare denied 33% of in-network claims across Affordable Care Act plans in 20 states in 2023, one of the highest rates among major insurers. CVS denied 22% of claims across 11 states, and Cigna denied 21% in eight states.
UnitedHealth did not respond to a request for comment on that report. But in December, the company also pushed back on public criticism around its denial rates, saying it approves and pays about 90% of claims upon submission. UnitedHealthcare's website says the remaining 10% go through an additional review process. The company says its claims approval rate stands at 98% after that review.
In addition, UnitedHealth Group is facing lawsuits over denials. In November, families of two deceased Medicare Advantage patients sued the company and its subsidiary, alleging it used an AI model with a '90% error rate' to deny their claims. UnitedHealth Group has argued it should be dismissed from the case because the families didn't complete Medicare's appeals process.
A spokesperson for the company's subsidiary, NaviHealth, also previously told news outlets that the lawsuit 'has no merit' and that the AI tool is used to help providers understand what care a patient may need. It does not help make coverage decisions, which are ultimately based on the terms of a member's plan and criteria from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the spokesperson said.
Meanwhile, the reported Justice Department criminal probe outlined by the Wall Street Journal targets the company's Medicare Advantage business practices. In its statement, the company said the Justice Department has not notified it about the reported probe, and called the newspaper's reporting 'deeply irresponsible.'
Inside the company, employees say customers and workers alike face hurdles.
One worker, who requested anonymity for fear of retaliation, said UnitedHealthcare's provider website often includes doctors listed as in-network or accepting new patients when they're not, leading to frequent complaints. Management often replies that it's too difficult to keep provider statuses up to date, the person said.
UnitedHealthcare told CNBC it believes 'maintaining accurate provider directories is a shared responsibility among health plans and providers,' and that it 'proactively verifies provider data on a regular basis.' The vast majority of all inaccuracies are due to errors or lack of up-to-date information submitted by providers, the company added.
Emily Baack, a clinical administrative coordinator at UMR, a subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare, criticized the length of time it can take a provider to reach a real support worker over the phone who can help assess claims or prior authorization requests. She said the company's automated phone system can misroute people's calls or leave them waiting for a support person for over an hour.
But Baack emphasized that similar issues occur across all insurance companies.
She said providers feel compelled to submit unnecessary prior authorization requests out of fear that claims won't be paid on time. Baack said that leads to a massive backlog of paperwork on her end and delays care for patients.
UnitedHealthcare said prior authorization is 'an important checkpoint' that helps ensure members are receiving coverage for safe and effective care.
The company noted it is 'continually taking action to simplify and modernize the prior authorization process.' That includes reducing the number of services and procedures that require prior authorization and exempting qualified provider groups from needing to submit prior authorization requests for certain services.
An emerging startup ecosystem
While UnitedHealthcare is not the only insurer facing criticism from patients, Thompson's killing in December reinforced the company's unique position in the public eye. Thousands of people took to social media to express outrage toward the company, sharing examples of their own struggles.
The public's hostile reaction to Thompson's death did not surprise many industry insiders.
Alicia Graham, co-founder and chief operating officer of the startup Claimable, said Thompson's murder was 'a horrible crime.' She also acknowledged that anger has been bubbling up in various online health communities 'for years.'
Claimable is one of several startups trying to address pain points within insurance. It's not an easy corner of the market to enter, and many of these companies, including Claimable, have been using the AI boom to their advantage.
Claimable, founded in 2024, said it helps patients challenge denials by submitting customized, AI-generated appeal letters on their behalf. The company can submit appeals for conditions such as migraines and certain pediatric and autoimmune diseases, though Graham said it is expanding those offerings quickly.
Many patients aren't aware that they have a right to appeal, and those who do can spend hours combing through records to draft one, Graham said. If patients are eligible to submit an appeal letter through Claimable, she said they can often do so in minutes. Each appeal costs users $39.95 plus shipping, according to the company's website.
'A lot of patients are afraid, a lot of patients are frustrated, a lot of patients are confused about the process, so what we've tried to do is make it all as easy as possible,' Graham told CNBC.
Some experts have warned about the possibility of health-care 'bot wars,' where all parties are using AI to try to gain an edge.
Mike Desjadon, CEO of the startup Anomaly, said he's concerned about the potential for an AI arms race in the sector, but he remains optimistic. Anomaly, founded in 2020, uses AI to help providers determine what insurers are and aren't paying for in advance of care, he said.
'I run a technology company and I want to win, and I want our customers to win, and that's all very true, but at the same time, I'm a citizen and a patient and a husband and a father and a taxpayer, and I just want health care to be rational and be paid for appropriately,' Desjadon told CNBC.
Dr. Jeremy Friese, founder and CEO of the startup Humata Health, said patients tend to interact with insurers only once something goes wrong, which contributes to their frustrations. Requirements such as prior authorization can be a 'huge black box' for patients, but they're also cumbersome for doctors, he said.
Friese said his business was inspired by his work as an interventional radiologist. In 2017, he co-founded a prior-authorization company called Verata Health, which was acquired by the now-defunct health-care AI startup Olive. Friese bought back his technology and founded his latest venture, Humata, in 2023.
Humata uses AI to automate prior authorization for all specialties and payers, Friese said. The company primarily works with medium and large health systems, and it announced a $25 million funding round in June.
'There's just a lot of pent-up anger and angst, frankly, on all aspects of the health-care ecosystem,' Friese told CNBC.
The Change Healthcare cyberattack
UnitedHealth Group also set a grim record last year that did little to help public perception. The company's subsidiary Change Healthcare suffered a cyberattack that affected around 190 million Americans, the largest reported health-care data breach in U.S. history.
Change Healthcare offers payment and revenue cycle management tools, as well as other solutions, such as electronic prescription software. In 2022, it merged with UnitedHealth Group's Optum unit, which touches more than 100 million patients in the U.S.
In February 2024, a ransomware group called Blackcat breached part of Change Healthcare's information technology network. UnitedHealth Group isolated and disconnected the affected systems 'immediately upon detection' of the threat, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, but the ensuing disruption rocked the health-care sector.
Money stopped flowing while the company's systems were offline, so a major revenue source for thousands of providers across the U.S. screeched to a halt. Some doctors pulled thousands of dollars out of their personal savings to keep their practices afloat.
'It was and remains the largest and most consequential cyberattack against health care in history,' John Riggi, the national advisor for cybersecurity and risk at the American Hospital Association, told CNBC.
Ransomware is a type of malicious software that blocks victims from accessing their computer files, systems and networks, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Ransomware groups such as Blackcat, which are often based in countries such as Russia, China and North Korea, will deploy this software, steal sensitive data and then demand a payment for its return.
Ransomware attacks within the health-care sector have climbed in recent years, in part because patient data is valuable and relatively easy for cybercriminals to exploit, said Steve Cagle, CEO of the health-care cybersecurity and compliance firm Clearwater.
'It's been a very lucrative and successful business for them,' Cagle told CNBC. 'Unfortunately, we'll continue to see that type of activity until something changes.'
UnitedHealth Group paid the hackers a $22 million ransom to try to protect patients' data, then-CEO Witty said during a Senate hearing in May 2024.
In March 2024, UnitedHealth Group launched a temporary funding assistance program to help providers with short-term cash flow.
The program got off to a rocky start, several doctors told CNBC, and the initial deposits did not cover their mounting expenses.
UnitedHealth Group ultimately paid out more than $9 billion to providers in 2024, according to the company's fourth-quarter earnings report in January.
Witty said in his congressional testimony that providers would only be required to repay the loans when 'they, not me, but they confirm that their cash flow is normalized.'
Almost a year later, however, the company is aggressively going after borrowers, demanding they 'immediately repay' their outstanding balances, according to documents viewed by CNBC and providers who received funding. Some groups have been asked to repay hundreds of thousands of dollars in a matter of days, according to documents viewed by CNBC.
A spokesperson for Change Healthcare confirmed to CNBC in April that the company has started recouping the loans.
″ We continue to work with providers on repayment and other options, and continue to reach out to those providers that have not been responsive to previous calls or email requests for more information,' the spokesperson said.
The pressure for repayment drew more ire toward UnitedHealth Group on social media, and some providers told CNBC that dealing with the company was a 'very frustrating experience.'
The vast majority of Change Healthcare's services have been restored over the last year, but three products are still listed as 'partial service available,' according to UnitedHealth's cyberattack response website.
The road ahead
Witty's departure and the company's warning about elevated medical costs, combined with the fallout from Thompson's murder and the Change Healthcare cyberattack, could mean UnitedHealth faces an uphill battle.
UnitedHealth Group appears to be trying to regain the public's trust. For example, Optum Rx in March announced plans to eliminate prior authorizations on dozens of drugs, easing a pain point for physicians and patients.
But policy changes at UnitedHealth Group and other insurers may not drastically improve care for patients, health insurance industry experts previously told CNBC.
They said there will need to be structural changes to the entire insurance industry, which will require legislation that may not be high on the priority list for the closely divided Congress.
The spotlight on UnitedHealth Group may only grow brighter in the coming months. The trial date for Luigi Mangione, the man facing federal stalking and murder charges in connection with Thompson's shooting, is expected to be set in December. Mangione has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

D-Day landings boosted by import of ‘wonder drug' to Britain, archives reveal
D-Day landings boosted by import of ‘wonder drug' to Britain, archives reveal

Glasgow Times

timean hour ago

  • Glasgow Times

D-Day landings boosted by import of ‘wonder drug' to Britain, archives reveal

Production of the antibiotic penicillin had struggled to take hold at a large scale in Britain, despite being discovered in 1928 in London by Sir Alexander Fleming. Attempts to produce substantial quantities of medicine from the bacteria-killing mould had not been achieved by the start of the Second World War. Then prime minister Sir Winston Churchill became increasingly frustrated that Britain had not been able to produce enough penicillin in the preparations for the Normandy landings in 1944. Official papers released by the National Archive – containing handwritten notes by Sir Winston – highlight efforts to boost quantities of the antibiotic, with Britain eventually forced to import it from America. The documents were released ahead of the 81st anniversary of D-Day, the Allied invasion of Normandy on June 6, 1944. Official papers highlight the efforts to boost quantities of penicillin (The National Archives/PA) In one report on February 19, after the issue had been raised in the House of Commons, Sir Winston scrawled in red ink on a Ministry of Supply report noting the Americans were producing greater quantities: 'I am sorry we can't produce more.' On another paper, he complained: 'Your report on penicillin showing that we are only to get about one tenth of the expected output this year, is very disappointing.' Elsewhere in the same file he instructs: 'Let me have proposals for a more abundant supply from Great Britain.' With preparations for D-Day ramped up, efforts to deliver enough American-made penicillin for frontline military personnel soon became a matter of urgency. Decisions needed to be made on the quantities of antibiotic imported, how much to administer to individual patients, and how to get medical staff trained in time. Most British doctors did not know how to issue penicillin – until this point, doctors had nothing available to treat infections like pneumonia and many people died of blood poisoning after minor injuries because no drug existed that could cure them. Royal Navy D-Day veteran John Dennett, 101, at the British Normandy Memorial in Ver-sur-Mer to mark the 81st anniversary of the landings (Gareth Fuller/PA) Early in January 1944, Prof FR Fraser, the Ministry of Health's adviser on the organisation of wartime hospitals, wrote that 50,000-100,000 wounded could be expected from the Second Front. He proposed the Emergency Medical Services might need as many as five billion units of penicillin per month for this. Further documents show discussions on whether the antibiotic should be supplied as calcium or sodium salts, or in tablet form. Ultimately, it was agreed powdered calcium salts would be issued for superficial wounds and sodium salts for use in deep wounds. On May 24 1944, less than a fortnight before D-Day, Prof Fraser reported: 'Sufficient supplies of penicillin are now available for the treatment of battle casualties in EMS hospitals, but not for ordinary civilian patients.' Plans were made for casualties from the frontline in France to be brought back to coastal hospitals in Britain for treatment. A week before D-Day, on May 30 1944, hospitals were instructed to treat battlefield patients en route: 'In an endeavour to prevent the development of gas gangrene and sepsis in wounds the War Office have arranged for the treatment of selected cases by penicillin to be commenced as soon after injury as possible.' Military reenactors watch the sunrise over Gold Beach in Arromanches-les-Bains, Normandy, on the 81st anniversary of the D-Day landings (Gareth Fuller/PA) Injections of penicillin were to be given to them at intervals of not more than five hours and patients would be wearing a yellow label with the letters 'PEN'. The time and size of penicillin doses should be written on it, they were told. Dr Jessamy Carlson, modern records specialist at the National Archives, said: 'File MH 76/184 gives a glimpse into the extraordinary levels of preparation undertaken in advance of the D-Day landings. 'Only six weeks before, penicillin is just reaching our shores in quantities which will allow it to play a major role in improving the outcomes for service personnel wounded in action.' As Allied forces made inroads into Europe, restrictions on the use of penicillin for civilians began to relax, but only in special cases. In July 1944, Ronald Christie, professor of medicine, wrote to Prof Fraser to tell him: 'The War Office approves of American penicillin being used for medical conditions in service patients and for air raid casualties among civilians.' On the home front, demand for the new 'wonder' drug began to increase, according the National Archives. It was decided that penicillin for civilians should only be supplied to larger hospitals where the staff had been properly trained to administer it. Only in 1946 did it become fully available for the general public.

Hated Man Utd owners The Glazers cost Red Devils £1.2BILLION as club release latest finances
Hated Man Utd owners The Glazers cost Red Devils £1.2BILLION as club release latest finances

Scottish Sun

time4 hours ago

  • Scottish Sun

Hated Man Utd owners The Glazers cost Red Devils £1.2BILLION as club release latest finances

Club have given an update on plans to build a new stadium Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE GLAZERS have cost Manchester United £1.2billion in their nightmare 20-year reign. When the controversial Americans purchased the club in June 2005, they paid a whopping £790m. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 5 The Glazers have cost United £1.2bn Credit: AFP 5 Fans have protested against their owners Credit: Shutterstock Editorial 5 Sir Jim Ratcliffe has implemented brutal cost-cutting measures Credit: Getty But the deal was funded by borrowed cash and it dumped £604m in debt onto United, who had just £50m borrowed previously. As the Glazers reach the two decade mark in charge, over £1bn has been lost in debt interest, debt repayments, dividends and fees to the family. BBC claim £815m has gone towards debt interest repayments, £166m in dividends to shareholders and £10m in fees to Glazer family companies. And while things continue to get worse on the pitch, finally, things are at least looking up financially. READ MORE IN FOOTBALL 'MISSED BY ALL' Heartbreak for England legend as wife dies after months battling illness Brutal cost-cutting introduced by £1.3bn part owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe are beginning to pay dividends - even if 450 staff jobs were wiped out along with free lunches amidst a host of other spending slashes. In the club's accounts for the third quarter of this year, payments to employees by comparison to 12 months ago were down a huge £20m to £71.2m – a drop of almost 22 per cent. Going out of the 2023-24 Champions League and into the Europa League actually HELPED the figures in not paying extra player bonus costs as well as non-playing staff departures. Total operating expenses for the quarter were £162.1m, a decrease of £41.6m, or 20.4 per cent, over the prior year quarter. BEST ONLINE CASINOS - TOP SITES IN THE UK And operating profit was at £700,000, compared to an operating loss of £66.2m this time last year. Ratcliffe and his recently downgraded Ineos head honcho Sir Dave Brailsford can point to their financial re-structuring having a near-instant impact. But chief executive Omar Berrada pointed the finger at the side that finished a shocking 15th in the table – and will have no European football at all in the forthcoming campaign after losing to Tottenham in the last chance saloon Europa League final. He declared: "We were proud to reach the final of the Europa League but ultimately we were disappointed to finish as runner-up in Bilbao. 'We had a difficult season in the Premier League which we all know fell below our standards and we have a clear expectation of improvement next season.' Berrada and the rest of the Old Trafford hierarchy are working hard to back boss Ruben Amorim in this summer's transfer market having already forked out £62.5m – in what will be three instalments – for Matheus Cunha from Wolves. Despite Ratcliffe warning earlier this year that those sweeping cuts were necessary to stop the club going bust by last Christmas – and concerns over staying within profit and sustainability rules - a £55m bid for Bryan Mbuemo was registered this week. Brentford want at least £60m for the wide attacker and will almost certainly get their money although United, finances improving or not, will also have to sell. Alejandro Garnacho has been told he's going and is valued at £60m while Amorim wants to dump Jadon Sancho, Antony and Marcus Rashford along with Casemiro and Tyrell Malacia. Yet as United juggle their funds to aid the rebuild, the club point to improvements off the pitch. Plans for a new £200bn stadium are progressing, Berrada stressing: 'We remain focused on infrastructure, with the redevelopment of our Carrington Training Complex continuing and on track. 'It will be the heart of our club, providing world class facilities for all our teams and our staff. 'We have also announced our aspiration to pursue a new 100,000-seater stadium, sitting at the heart of the regeneration of the Old Trafford area, which would be a catalyst for growth and investment in our local community. 'We are continuing to work with all the relevant stakeholders, including central Government, to support their vision for growth.' Even the dropping value of the US dollar is working in United's favour. The club's American borrowings still stand at $650m – the same as last year at the same time but due to the USD/GBP exchange rate in GBP United now owe £500.9m compared to £511.3m. United are happy with what they say are 'strong revenues which increased by 17.4 per cent driven by additional matchday and broadcast money by thanks to going all the way to Bilbao as opposed to dropping out of last season's Champions League at the group stage." 5 United want to build a new 100,00-seater stadium Credit: AP

Trump's surgeon general pick criticizes others' conflicts but profits from wellness product sales
Trump's surgeon general pick criticizes others' conflicts but profits from wellness product sales

NBC News

time6 hours ago

  • NBC News

Trump's surgeon general pick criticizes others' conflicts but profits from wellness product sales

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — President Donald Trump's pick to be the next U.S. surgeon general has repeatedly said the nation's medical, health and food systems are corrupted by special interests and people out to make a profit at the expense of Americans' health. Yet as Dr. Casey Means has criticized scientists, medical schools and regulators for taking money from the food and pharmaceutical industries, she has promoted dozens of health and wellness products — including specialty basil seed supplements, a blood testing service and a prepared meal delivery service — in ways that put money in her own pocket. A review by The Associated Press found Means, who has carved out a niche in the wellness industry, set up deals with an array of businesses. In her newsletter, on her social media accounts, on her website, in her book and during podcast appearances, the entrepreneur and influencer has at times failed to disclose that she could profit or benefit in other ways from sales of products she recommends. In some cases, she promoted companies in which she was an investor or adviser without consistently disclosing the connection, the AP found. Means, 37, has said she recommends products that she has personally vetted and uses herself. She is far from the only online creator who doesn't always follow federal transparency rules that require influencers to disclose when they have a 'material connection' to a product they promote. Still, legal and ethics experts said those business entanglements raise concerns about conflicting interests for an aspiring surgeon general, a role responsible for giving Americans the best scientific information on how to improve their health. 'I fear that she will be cultivating her next employers and her next sponsors or business partners while in office,' said Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project, a progressive ethics watchdog monitoring executive branch appointees. The nomination, which comes amid a whirlwind of Trump administration actions to dismantle the government's public integrity guardrails, also has raised questions about whether Levels, a company Means co-founded that sells subscriptions for devices that continuously monitor users' glucose levels, could benefit from this administration's health guidance and policy. Though scientists debate whether continuous glucose monitors are beneficial for people without diabetes, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has promoted their use as a precursor to making certain weight-loss drugs available to patients. The aspiring presidential appointee has built her own brand in part by criticizing doctors, scientists and government officials for being 'bought off' or 'corrupt' because of ties to industry. Means' use of affiliate marketing and other methods of making money from her recommendations for supplements, medical tests and other health and dietary products raise questions about the extent to which she is influenced by a different set of special interests: those of the wellness industry. A compelling origin story Means earned her medical degree from Stanford University, but she dropped out of her residency program in Oregon in 2018, and her license to practice is inactive. She has grown her public profile in part with a compelling origin story that seeks to explain why she left her residency and conventional medicine. 'During my training as a surgeon, I saw how broken and exploitative the healthcare system is and left to focus on how to keep people out of the operating room,' she wrote on her website. Means turned to alternative approaches to address what she has described as widespread metabolic dysfunction driven largely by poor nutrition and an overabundance of ultra-processed foods. She co-founded Levels, a nutrition, sleep and exercise-tracking app that can also give users insights from blood tests and continuous glucose monitors. The company charges $199 per year for an app subscription and an additional $184 per month for glucose monitors. Means has argued that the medical system is incentivized not to look at the root causes of illness but instead to maintain profits by keeping patients sick and coming back for more prescription drugs and procedures. 'At the highest level of our medical institutions, there are conflicts of interest and corruption that are actually making the science that we're getting not as accurate and not as clean as we'd want it,' she said on Megyn Kelly's podcast last year. But even as Means decries the influence of money on science and medicine, she has made her own deals with business interests. During the same Megyn Kelly podcast, Means mentioned a frozen prepared food brand, Daily Harvest. She promoted that brand in a book she published last year. What she didn't mention in either instance: Means had a business relationship with Daily Harvest. Growing an audience, and selling products Influencer marketing has expanded beyond the beauty, fashion and travel sectors to 'encompass more and more of our lives,' said Emily Hund, author of 'The Influencer Industry: The Quest for Authenticity on Social Media.' With more than 825,000 followers on Instagram and a newsletter that she has said reached 200,000 subscribers, Means has a direct line into the social media feeds and inboxes of an audience interested in health, nutrition and wellness. Affiliate marketing, brand partnerships and similar business arrangements are growing more popular as social media becomes increasingly lucrative for influencers, especially among younger generations. Companies might provide a payment, free or discounted products or other benefits to the influencer in exchange for a post or a mention. But most consumers still don't realize that a personality recommending a product might make money if people click through and buy, said University of Minnesota professor Christopher Terry. 'A lot of people watch those influencers, and they take what those influencers say as gospel,' said Terry, who teaches media advertising and internet law. Even his own students don't understand that influencers might stand to benefit from sales of the products they endorse, he added. Many companies, including Amazon, have affiliate marketing programs in which people with substantial social media followings can sign up to receive a percentage of sales or some other benefit when someone clicks through and buys a product using a special individualized link or code shared by the influencer. Means has used such links to promote various products sold on Amazon. Among them are books, including the one she co-wrote, 'Good Energy'; a walking pad; soap; body oil; hair products; cardamom-flavored dental floss; organic jojoba oil; a razor set; reusable kitchen products; sunglasses; a sleep mask; a silk pillowcase; fitness and sleep trackers; protein powder and supplements. She also has shared links to products sold by other companies that included 'affiliate' or 'partner' coding, indicating she has a business relationship with the companies. The products include an AI-powered sleep system and Daily Harvest, for which she curated a 'metabolic health collection.' On a 'My Faves' page that was taken down from her website shortly after Trump picked her, Means wrote that some links 'are affiliate links and I make a small percentage if you buy something after clicking them.' It's not clear how much money Means has earned from her affiliate marketing, partnerships and other agreements. Daily Harvest did not return messages seeking comment, and Means said she could not comment on the record during the confirmation process. Disclosing conflicts Means has raised concerns that scientists, regulators and doctors are swayed by the influence of industry, oftentimes pointing to public disclosures of their connections. In January, she told the Kristin Cavallari podcast 'Let's Be Honest' that 'relationships are influential.' 'There's huge money, huge money going to fund scientists from industry,' Means said. 'We know that when industry funds papers, it does skew outcomes.' In November, on a podcast run by a beauty products brand, Primally Pure, she said it was 'insanity' to have people connected to the processed food industry involved in writing food guidelines, adding, 'We need unbiased people writing our guidelines that aren't getting their mortgage paid by a food company.' On the same podcast, she acknowledged supplement companies sponsor her newsletter, adding, 'I do understand how it's messy.' Influencers who endorse or promote products in exchange for payment or something else of value are required by the Federal Trade Commission to make a clear and conspicuous disclosure of any business, family or personal relationship. While Means did provide disclosures about newsletter sponsors, the AP found in other cases Means did not always tell her audience when she had a connection to the companies she promoted. For example, a 'Clean Personal & Home Care Product Recommendations' guide she links to from her website contains two dozen affiliate or partner links and no disclosure that she could profit from any sales. Means has said she invested in Function Health, which provides subscription-based lab testing for $500 annually. Of the more than a dozen online posts the AP found in which Means mentioned Function Health, more than half did not disclose she had any affiliation with the company. Means also listed the supplement company Zen Basil as a company for which she was an 'Investor and/or Advisor.' The AP found posts on Instagram, X and on Facebook where Means promoted its products without disclosing the relationship. Though the 'About' page on her website discloses an affiliation with both companies, that's not enough, experts said. She is required to disclose any material connection she has to a company anytime she promotes it. Representatives for Function Health did not return messages seeking comment through their website and executives' LinkedIn profiles. Zen Basil's founder, Shakira Niazi, did not answer questions about Means' business relationship with the company or her disclosures of it. She said the two had known each other for about four years and called Means' advice 'transformational,' saying her teachings reversed Niazi's prediabetes and other ailments. 'I am proud to sponsor her newsletter through my company,' Niazi said in an email. While the disclosure requirements are rarely enforced by the FTC, Means should have been informing her readers of any connections regardless of whether she was violating any laws, said Olivier Sylvain, a Fordham Law School professor who was previously a senior adviser to the FTC chair. 'What you want in a surgeon general, presumably, is someone who you trust to talk about tobacco, about social media, about caffeinated alcoholic beverages, things that present problems in public health,' Sylvain said, adding, 'Should there be any doubt about claims you make about products?' Potential conflicts pose new ethical questions Means isn't the first surgeon general nominee whose financial entanglements have raised eyebrows. Jerome Adams, who served as surgeon general from 2017 to 2021, filed federal disclosure forms that showed he invested in several health technology, insurance and pharmaceutical companies before taking the job — among them Pfizer, Mylan and UnitedHealth Group. He also invested in the food and drink giant Nestle. He divested those stocks when he was confirmed for the role and pledged that he and his immediate family would not acquire financial interest in certain industries regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Vivek Murthy, who served as surgeon general twice, under Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, made more than $2 million in COVID-19-related speaking and consulting fees from Carnival, Netflix, Estee Lauder and Airbnb between holding those positions. He pledged to recuse himself from matters involving those parties for a period of time. Means has not yet gone through a Senate confirmation hearing and has not yet announced the ethical commitments she will make for the role. Hund said that as influencer marketing becomes more common, it is raising more ethical questions, such as what past influencers who enter government should do to avoid the appearance of a conflict. Other administration officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz, have also promoted companies on social media without disclosing their financial ties. 'This is like a learning moment in the evolution of our democracy,' Hund said. 'Is this a runaway train that we just have to get on and ride, or is this something that we want to go differently?'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store