The Trump administration's ‘MAHA Report' cites nonexistent scientific studies
After Donald Trump and his White House team unveiled 'The MAHA Report: Making Our Children Healthy Again' last week, The New York Times noted, 'The document echoes talking points Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has championed for decades.'
That was among the obvious red flags surrounding the report. Kennedy is, after all, notorious for pushing unscientific conspiracy theories and claiming, among other things, that Wi-Fi causes 'leaky brain.' Any document reflecting his ideas related to health care policy should reflexively be treated with skepticism.
With this in mind, no one was especially surprised when the White House report started crumbling under scrutiny. The Washington Post reported, 'Some of the report's suggestions ... stretched the limits of science, medical experts said. Several sections of the report offer misleading representations of findings in scientific papers.'
That was last week. This week, NOTUS advanced these concerns, reporting that the administration's 'Make America Healthy Again' report 'misinterprets some studies and cites others that don't exist, according to the listed authors.'
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says his 'Make America Healthy Again' Commission report harnesses 'gold-standard' science, citing more than 500 studies and other sources to back up its claims. Those citations, though, are rife with errors, from broken links to misstated conclusions. Seven of the cited sources don't appear to exist at all. ... NOTUS also found serious issues with how the report interpreted some of the existing studies it cites.
For example, the administration's document listed epidemiologist Katherine Keyes as the first author of a study on anxiety in adolescents — except she didn't write it.
'The paper cited is not a real paper that I or my colleagues were involved with,' Keyes told NOTUS. 'We've certainly done research on this topic, but did not publish a paper in JAMA Pediatrics on this topic with that co-author group, or with that title.'
NOTUS' report, which has not been independently verified by MSNBC or NBC News, added, 'As the Trump administration cuts research funding for federal health agencies and academic institutions and rejects the scientific consensus on issues like vaccines and gender-affirming care, the issues with its much-heralded MAHA report could indicate lessening concern for scientific accuracy at the highest levels of the federal government.'
Yes. Yes, it could.
I would gladly make note of the defense of the MAHA document from Kennedy and the Department of Health and Human Services, but at least so far, neither the controversial secretary nor the Cabinet agency he ostensibly leads has commented on these new allegations. HHS did not respond to NOTUS' request for comment on the citation inconsistencies, the outlet reported.
Of course, given Kennedy's recent track record, there's no reason to assume he'd be able to answer questions about the document anyway.
To be sure, the traditional norms surrounding American politics have been largely shattered, but in a situation like this one, it's worth emphasizing that in a normal and healthy political system, if officials released a much-hyped report on public health policy, and scrutiny found that the document relied on scientific sources that didn't exist, those officials would be expected to resign — quickly.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
California acts to eliminate ‘harmful' ultraprocessed foods in schools, beating MAHA to the punch
Move over, MAHA. California has just overtaken President Donald Trump's 'Make America Healthy Again' Commission in the quest to identify which ultraprocessed foods are the most harmful for human health. Numerous studies have linked an additional serving a day of ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs, to a greater risk of developing or dying from dozens of adverse health outcomes, including cancer, heart disease, obesity, type 2 diabetes and various mental health conditions. Which of the thousands of ultraprocessed foods on grocery shelves could be most responsible for such ill health? To date, answers are elusive. Research is in its infancy. Expert advocates and food manufacturers disagree on harms and definitions, while lobbyists battle behind the scenes. California, however, intends to offer a solution in just over a year. On Tuesday, a bipartisan coalition of the California State Assembly voted to pass AB 1264, which lays out a plan to remove 'particularly harmful' ultraprocessed foods from the state's school meals. The bill's passage is expected to be finalized Tuesday night. The legislation requires that the first step, defining which ultraprocessed foods are most detrimental to human health, be completed by July 1, 2026. Once passed by the California Senate and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom, AB 1264 would be the first such legislation in the nation, said Jesse Gabriel, the Democratic California assemblymember who introduced the bill. 'Our understanding is that this would actually be the first statutory definition in the world, not just in the United States,' said Gabriel, who represents California's 46th Assembly District. Focusing on school lunches will have a significant impact on children's health, he said. 'The busiest restaurant in California is our school cafeterias,' Gabriel said. 'We'll serve over a billion school breakfasts, lunches and dinners in 2025 alone. If you want to improve the nutritional health of young people, starting with school lunches is a really powerful way to do it.' The MAHA Commission, led by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is also trying to address children's nutrition. In mid-May, the commission released a Trump-mandated report recommending federal agencies reassess the impact of ultraprocessed foods (as well as vaccines, lifestyle, pollutants and the overprescribing of drugs) on the 'childhood chronic disease crisis.' The document was quickly criticized for errors and citing studies that don't exist, as first reported by NOTUS, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news site. The administration discounted the errors as 'formatting issues,' but some experts who previously spoke with CNN said the mistakes suggest the report was likely created using artificial intelligence. Regardless, the MAHA Commission is expected to identify more specific actions on ultraprocessed foods and its additional concerns by August 12. By then, AB 1264 should be close to a signature if all goes well, Gabriel said. 'We hope to have this bill on the Governor's desk for a signature in late August or early September,' Gabriel said. 'We are really targeting the worst of the worst UPFs, where there is really strong science and research and data. If federal regulators were doing their job as intended, there wouldn't be a need for states to do this.' In response, the Consumer Brands Association, a national advocacy group that represents food and beverage manufacturers, told CNN the new California bill would create an unnecessary duplicate regulatory framework. 'AB1264's attempt to classify certain proven-safe ingredients as unhealthy is so broad that it could limit access to certain nutrient-dense foods, such as fruits, salads and soups, cause consumer confusion, and lead to higher prices for Californians,' said John Hewitt, CBA's senior vice president of state affairs, in an email. In response, Gabriel told CNN that suggesting AB 1264 would ban healthy foods or drive up prices is 'ridiculous.' 'On the contrary, the bill would phase out foods with dangerous chemical additives linked to cancer, reproductive harm, and other serious diseases from our schools,' Gabriel said via email. 'That's why AB 1264 has received broad bipartisan support.' If passed, AB 1264 will go in effect on January 1, 2026. Then the clock starts ticking. By July 1, a mere six months later, experts from the University of California and the state's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment must establish a subcategory of 'particularly harmful' ultraprocessed foods. Because research on UPFs is exploding, the bill requires that definition to be updated every two years. Experts deciding how to identify an ultraprocessed food as 'particularly harmful' should use the following criteria, according to the bill: • Are any of the ingredients linked by established science to cancer, obesity, metabolic or cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, or developmental or reproductive harm? • Does the food contain additives that have been banned, restricted or required to carry a warning by other local, state, federal or international jurisdictions? (The European Union has banned various UPF additives over health concerns.) • Has the food been modified to include high levels of sugar, salt or fat? (That's a key way manufacturers design ultraprocessed foods to meet the 'bliss point' human taste buds yearn for.) • Can any ingredient contribute to food addiction by being hyperpalatable, or extremely difficult to resist? (The Bert Lahr potato chip commercial from the 1960s said it all: 'Betcha can't eat just one.') Foods may also be considered ultraprocessed, the bill says, if they contain additives such as emulsifiers, stabilizers and thickeners, flavor enhancers and non-nutritive sweeteners that aren't on the US Food and Drug Administration's radar. (Manufacturers are constantly inventing new ways to make food delicious, and not all of those are reported to the FDA.) Once the 'harmful' ultraprocessed food definition is established, the bill moves on to implementation. Beginning on February 1, 2027, vendors selling food to California schools will be required to submit an annual report listing any UPFs that fall under the new definition. Because school districts often create menus up to three years in advance, the bill gives school nutritionists a bit of breathing room — using the information provided by vendors, they must begin phasing out all particularly harmful ultraprocessed foods by January 1, 2028. The bill's momentum then slows. Six years after the bill goes into effect, by January 1, 2032, vendors may no longer offer harmful ultraprocessed foods to school district nutritionists to be included in their menus. Three years later, by January 1, 2035, school districts will no longer be able to provide children any meals containing particularly harmful UPFs. (That restriction, however, does not apply to school fundraising events.) 'While the timeline may appear long, we think that change is going to happen right away. We're already seeing schools take action, and this bill is going to help put pedal to the metal on getting schools to make that shift way ahead of 2032,' said Bernadette Del Chiaro, the senior vice president for California at the Environmental Working Group, or EWG, a health advocacy organization based in Washington, DC, that cosponsored AB 1264. 'I can tell you that farmers are really excited about it — nothing would please them more than to be able to deliver food directly to California's kids and schools,' Del Chiaro said. 'And we have strong bipartisan support — a left and right grassroots movement of people saying, 'Let's correct this. Let's get our schools to be healthy.' So there's all of these really great win-win-win elements to this bill.' Success stories already exist. One school district in Santa Clara County, California, is now feeding over 8,000 students with grass-fed beef, organic milk, and antibiotic-free chicken and pork from local farmers and ranchers. However, what the Morgan Hill United School District did to remove added sugars was truly startling, said Nora LaTorre, CEO of Eat Real, a national nonprofit that provides K-12 schools around the country with free tools to transform their menus. 'Morgan Hill removed 34 pounds of sugar per student per year by removing foods with hidden added sugar, such as sauces, dressings and condiments,' said LaTorre, who gave the school district an Eat Real certification in 2024. 'Now the children are served items with less than 6 grams of added sugar.' Replacing ultraprocessed foods with real food is not only possible, but easy, said LaTorre, who has testified in support of AB 1264. One example: a makeover of a school-purchased high-sugar yogurt cup with 13 grams of added sugar and flavors. 'The children are now served parfaits out of plain Greek yogurt, which can be purchased through USDA commodities,' she said. 'The parfaits are topped with fresh fruit or house-made fruit compote with zero added sugar. 'It really doesn't take that long to make a significant change in children's school nutrition,' LaTorre said. 'Eat Real is on track to reach 1 million kids in schools across some 20 states. Our average time from initial assessment of a school to certification is about 23 months.' Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN's Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being.
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
A DNA technique is finding women who left their babies for dead
Advertisement Then, one day in 2023, his phone blew up. Former colleagues at the sheriff's department were calling to say that a 45-year-old woman, Maricela Frausto, had been identified as the baby's mother. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Frausto, a mother of two who owned a restaurant in nearby Hondo, Texas, with her family, had been identified using a relatively new technique known as forensic genetic genealogy. Using DNA data from thousands of volunteer donors, investigators can create family trees and use them to match DNA found at crime scenes. Frausto was arrested and charged with murder. Law enforcement investigators have been flummoxed for years by cases of newborn babies who were abandoned and apparently left to die. They are known as Baby Does: unidentified infants whose remains were discovered in wooded areas, garbage cans, or roadside ditches. Such cases historically have been hard to solve. Advertisement That changed around 2019, when police first used the enormous public DNA databases that have been created for amateur genealogists to trace their lineages as a resource to solve these crimes. Since then, law enforcement investigators have used the technique to identify nearly 40 women as the mothers of newborn infants who were found dead around the country, most of them decades ago. 'In the past, these cases were unlikely to be solved, and now it's very likely that they will be solved, and that's because of investigative genetic genealogy,' said Christi Guerrini, a professor of medical ethics at Baylor University. For police officers, these identifications help close cases that may have gone years without a resolution. But for the women being identified, many of whom have married, pursued careers, and given birth to other children, the new technology has brought the unearthing of long-hidden tragedies and the upending of their lives. At least two women among the dozens of cases reviewed by The New York Times took their own lives after being approached by investigators armed with DNA evidence. Others have been sentenced to years in prison. The circumstances that could have led a woman to abandon her newborn many years ago can be far more complicated than a simple DNA match can reveal, according to civil rights advocates, doctors, and defense lawyers. They say the new technique is raising questions that the courts are not yet prepared to answer. Some of the women who have been identified in these Baby Doe cases say they did not know they were pregnant until they went into labor. Some of the women who have been charged told police their baby was stillborn. Determining the truth of the matter can be difficult. Advertisement In the case of Frausto, who insisted that she had never heard her baby cry or take a breath, the medical examiner concluded that the baby was born alive on the basis of a lung test that has been widely criticized as unreliable. 'These women have been lumped in with other kinds of criminal cases, as though they're all the same,' said Diana Barnes, a psychotherapist who specializes in issues surrounding women's reproductive health. 'And I guess what I would say is that no, they're not all the same.' In the past, law enforcement officers working on Baby Doe cases relied on CODIS, the national DNA database run by the FBI, but that generally includes samples only from people who have been charged with crimes. Mothers of abandoned newborns typically have little, if any, criminal history, and thus are unlikely to appear in CODIS. Genetic genealogy now makes it possible to find them anyway. The breakthrough came in 2018 when police used the technique and the public DNA databases to identify a serial murderer known as the Golden State Killer. Less than a year later, police in Sioux Falls, S.D., announced that they had used genetic genealogy in a Baby Doe case, connecting a woman named Theresa Bentaas to the death of her newborn son in 1981. Frausto was 25 years old in September 2004, living in Hondo and married to an older man after growing up in an abusive household. According to what she later told her lawyers and an investigator who worked for them, she did not know she was pregnant. Advertisement One afternoon, she went to the bathroom and fainted, she told the lawyers. When she woke up in pain, she realized she was in labor. She gave birth, but never heard the baby make a sound. Confused and overwhelmed, she put the baby in a closet, her lawyers said. Two days later, she left the baby by the side of the road. After she was arrested nearly two decades later, she was adamant with her legal team: She did not kill her baby. But from the beginning, sheriff's deputies believed they were investigating a murder: The medical examiner had concluded that the baby was born alive. By the time genetic genealogy became a law enforcement tool, Springer had left the local sheriff's office, but other detectives had stayed on the case. In October 2022, working with a private forensic genetic genealogy company, Identifinders International, the detectives uploaded a DNA profile of the baby to two public genealogy databases. After a DNA analysis confirmed that Frausto was the baby's mother, she was arrested and charged with capital murder on Nov. 20, 2023. Frausto insisted that she had not killed her baby. Anthony Welch, one of the public defenders who represented Frausto, said that there was a strong case to be made that the baby had been stillborn, meaning that Frausto could not have been guilty of killing her. And the statute of limitations had long passed for any charges involving mishandling of human remains.
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Phew — this much simpler habit is better at fixing your gut health than a poop transplant, say scientists
Turns out that fecal transplants are No. 2. It's hard to imagine, but these transplants are really hot right now. Clinical trials have shown promising results for treating cancer, reversing the effects of aging and healing the gut. Luckily, a new study suggests there's a much simpler and more appetizing way to optimize gut health. Advertisement 3 A new study suggests there's a much simpler and more appetizing way to optimize gut health than fecal transplants. Vadym – The research — recently published in the journal Nature — found that a healthy diet does a better job of restoring gut health than transferring someone else's poop into your body. 'There's a big emphasis on treating a depleted microbiome with things like fecal transplants right now, but our study shows that this will not be successful without a healthy diet, and in fact, a healthy diet alone still outperforms it,' Joy Bergelson, executive vice president of the Simons Foundation's Life Sciences division, said in a statement. Advertisement An international team of researchers set out to investigate how diet influences gut recovery after a round of antibiotics, which often nuke the good bacteria along with the bad. They hopped up some mice on a model of the Western diet — which tends to be high in fat and low in fiber — while the rest of the mice were bequeathed the joys of clean eating. The results were stark. 3 Eating a diet rich in fiber is better for your gut health than a poop transplant, according to science. aamulya – Advertisement 'In the mice that were on the healthy diet, within a week after antibiotic treatment, they recovered to almost their normal state,' said study co-author Megan Kennedy of the University of Chicago. 'By comparison, the microbiomes of the mice on the Western diet remained completely obliterated. They only had one type of bacteria left, and it dominated for weeks. They never really got back to the place they began.' Attempts to fix things with fecal microbiota transplants (FMTs) didn't help much unless the recipient mice were already eating well. 3 Meanwhile, ultra-processed food is likely to wreck your gut microbiome. Drobot Dean – Advertisement 'The idea of an FMT is that you can take the good microbes from somebody who is healthy, plop them in, and that will fix them,' said Kennedy. 'It has gotten a lot of enthusiasm, but we weren't sure how it would interact with a Western-style diet.' Turns out — not great. Without the right fuel — like dietary fiber — good bacteria simply couldn't flourish. 'It totally doesn't stick,' Kennedy said. 'On a healthy diet, the transplant works, but on the unhealthy one, the mice show basically no signs of recovery.' The researchers believe their discovery could shed some light on why some fecal transplants work better than others. And, for the rest of us, it's a good reminder that eating foods rich in fiber — such as berries, beans, nuts, seeds, oatmeal, lentils and avocado — will keep your gut happy.
