
Mass General Brigham doctors press hospital leaders to stand up to Trump's Harvard threats
This is the first time that MGB, the state's largest health system, has gotten public pressure from its own employees to resist federal funding threats.
'Appeasement has never been a successful strategy, and it is not one now,' the employees said in the letter, which organizers began circulating via e-mail on Friday. 'Institutions that comply with these demands are not spared — they are only asked to give up more. What does our mission mean — what do our values truly mean — if we comply instead of standing up for what is right?'
Dr. Marjorie Curran, a pediatrician at Mass General for Children who helped write the letter, said she has no doubt that leaders of the state's biggest health system want to preserve its mission. But she feels they have been conspicuously silent in the two weeks since the Trump administration announced it was reviewing $9 billion in federal funding to Harvard and then issued a list of demands.
Advertisement
'The stuff that [the Trump administration is] doing is directly threatening public health and is going to be causing death,' Curran said in an interview. 'We need to be yelling from the rooftops that this needs to stop.'
Advertisement
MGB is the largest private employer in the state, with about 82,000 workers. Its flagship hospitals, Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital, last year together
Curran said the letter went to Dr. Anne Klibanski, chief executive of MGB; Dr. David Brown, president of MGB's academic medical centers; Dr. Marcela del Carmen, president of MGH; Dr. William Curry, chief medical officer of the academic medical centers; and Dr. O'Neil A. Britton, chief integration officer of MGB.
MGB didn't have an immediate response to the letter, according to Jessica Pastore, a spokesperson for the health system.
Related
:
The Trump administration said on March 31 it was reviewing
in an effort to 'root out antisemitism,' according to the government's antisemitism task force.
The task force issued a list of demands three days later, including ending diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, implementing 'merit-based' admissions and hiring practices, cooperating with federal immigration authorities, and changing student disciplinary procedures. The task force didn't give Harvard a deadline.
Trump and his allies contend the measures will help combat antisemitism on campus. They allege that Harvard failed to protect Jewish students from harassment during pro-Palestinian protests.
The Trump administration said on March 31 it was reviewing federal funding for Harvard and its affiliates in an effort to 'root out antisemitism,' according to the government's antisemitism task force.
Uncredited/Associated Press
However, the letter, titled an 'MGB Call to Action,' said the demands are antithetical to the four stated pillars of the health system: patient care, cutting-edge research, education of the next generation of health care providers, and advocating for the communities MGB serves.
Advertisement
'Rather than preemptively concede to executive orders that threaten our mission, we must mount a coordinated and courageous opposition,' the letter said. 'If we stand together — with our clinical and academic colleagues across the country — we can withstand this existential threat.'
The letter said MGB must make it clear that it welcomes all patients and employees, regardless of race, gender, gender identity, religion, country of origin, sexual orientation, or economic status.
Related
:
That flies in the face of
The letter sent Monday also said MGB should defend the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Without naming anyone, the letter referred to past public statements by the nation's health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., that measles shots could cause autism and that vitamins might protect people from the virus.
'An administration that promotes vaccine skepticism, revives debunked claims linking vaccines to autism, and recommends vitamin A for a disease declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000 must be called to account, and all clinicians should be free to do so,' the letter said.
The vast majority of employees who signed the letter were physicians, but signatories also included nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses, and social workers.
Related
:
Dr. Scott Hadland, chief of adolescent medicine at Mass General for Children and an expert on the treatment of addiction, said he signed it because he wants his patients and their families to know what MGB's values are.
Advertisement
'I especially want the communities we serve here in Boston and New England to know that we are committed to eliminating health disparities, whether they're related to race, ethnicity, nationality, LGBTQ+ community membership, or socioeconomic status,' he said in a text message.
In addition to urging MGB to enlist other teaching hospitals in a fight against the Trump administration, the letter called on leaders to 'file any needed legal challenges.'
On Friday, two groups representing Harvard professors sued the administration in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, saying the threat to cut billions in federal funding for the university violates free speech and other First Amendment rights. The suit was filed by the American Association of University Professors and the Harvard faculty chapter of the group.
Related
:
The letter sent to MGB leaders quoted Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel's 1986 Nobel Prize acceptance speech in which he said, 'There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.'
Also on Monday, lawyers for Harvard said the school
Read the full letter from MGB employees below:
Jonathan Saltzman can be reached at

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NHS faces paying more for US drugs to avoid future Trump tariffs
Britain faces paying more for US drugs as part of a deal to avoid future tariffs from Donald Trump. The NHS will review drug pricing to take into account the 'concerns of the president', according to documents released after a trade agreement was signed earlier this year. White House sources said it expected the NHS to pay higher prices for American drugs in an attempt to boost the interests of corporate America. A Westminster source said: 'There's an understanding that we would look at the drug pricing issue in the concerns of the president.' The disclosure is likely to increase concerns about American interference in the British health service, which has long been regarded as a flashpoint in trade talks. It comes after Rachel Reeves announced a record £29 billion investment in the NHS in last week's spending review. The Chancellor's plans will drive spending on the health service up towards 50 per cent of all taxpayer expenditure by the mid-2030s, according to economists at the Resolution Foundation. The Telegraph has also learnt that under the terms of the trade deal with America, the UK has agreed to take fewer Chinese drugs, in a clause similar to the 'veto' given to Mr Trump over Chinese investment in Britain. The White House has asked the UK for assurances that steel and pharmaceutical products exported to the US do not originate in China, amid fears the deal could be used to 'circumvent' Mr Trump's punishing tariffs on Beijing. Mr Trump is enraged by how much more America pays for drugs compared with other countries and considers it to be the same issue as he has raised on defence spending. Just as the US president has heaped pressure on European nations to increase the GDP share they allocate to defence, he thinks they should spend more on drug development. An industry source said: 'The way we've been thinking about it and many in the administration have been thinking about it, it's more like the model in Nato, where countries contribute some share of their GDP.' Britain and the US 'intend to promptly negotiate significantly preferential treatment outcomes on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients', the trade deal reads. Pharmaceutical companies are also pushing for reductions in the revenue sales rebates they pay to the NHS under the voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing, access and growth (VPAG) – a mechanism that the UK uses to make sure the NHS does not overpay. Last week, Albert Bourla, Pfizer's chief executive, said non-US countries were 'free-riding' and called for a US government-led push to make other nations increase their proportionate spend on innovative medicines. He said White House officials were discussing drug prices in trade negotiations with other countries. 'We represent in UK 0.3pc of their GDP per capita. That's how much they spend on medicine. So yes, they can increase prices,' Mr Bourla said. Industry sources said there was no indication yet on what the White House would consider to be a fair level of spending. Whatever the benchmark, Britain will face one of the biggest step-ups. UK expenditure on new innovative medicines is just 0.28pc of its GDP, roughly a third of America's proportionate spending of 0.78pc of its GDP. Even among other G7 nations, the UK is an anomaly. Germany spends 0.4pc of its GDP while Italy spends 0.5pc. Most large pharmaceutical companies generate between half and three quarters of their profits in the US, despite the fact that America typically makes up less than a fifth of their sales. This is because drug prices outside of the US can cost as little as 30pc of what Americans pay. Yet, pharmaceutical companies rely on higher US prices to fund drug research and development, which the rest of the world benefits from. A month ago, Mr Trump signed an executive order titled 'Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients', which hit out at 'global freeloading' on drug pricing. It stated that 'Americans should not be forced to subsidise low-cost prescription drugs and biologics in other developed countries, and face overcharges for the same products in the United States' and ordered his commerce secretary to 'consider all necessary action regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or precursor material that may be fuelling the global price discrimination'. Trung Huynh, the head of pharma analysis at UBS, said: 'The crux of this issue is Trump thinks that the US is subsidising the rest of the world with drug prices. 'The president has said he wants to equalise pricing between the US and ex-US. And the way he wants to do it is not necessarily to bring down US prices all the way to where ex-US prices are, but he wants to use trade and tariffs as a pressure point to get countries to increase their prices. 'If he can offset some of the price by increasing prices higher ex-US, then the prices in America don't have to go down so much.' Mr Huynh added: 'It's going to be very hard for him to do. Because [in the UK deal] it hinges on the NHS, which we know has got zero money.' Under VPAG, pharmaceutical companies hand back at least 23pc of their revenue from sales of branded medicines back to the NHS, worth £3bn in the past financial year. The industry is pushing for this clawback to be cut to 10pc, which would mean the NHS would have to spend around 1.54bn more on the same medicines on an annual basis. The Government has already committed to reviewing the scheme, a decision which is understood to pre-date US trade negotiations. A government spokesman said: 'This Government is clear that we will only ever sign trade agreements that align with the UK's national interests and to suggest otherwise would be misleading. 'The UK has well-established and effective mechanisms for managing the costs of medicines and has clear processes in place to mitigate risks to supply.'


Axios
20 minutes ago
- Axios
Exclusive: Zorro clinches $20M Series A for ICHRA health plans
Health benefits provider Zorro raised $20 million in Series A funding led by Entrée Capital, CEO Guy Ezekiel tells Axios exclusively. Why it matters: As employers wrestle with rising health plan costs, individual coverage health reimbursement arrangements (ICHRAs) are gaining steam. Driving the news: Launched in 2020, ICHRAs were enabled by a Trump-era rule letting employers reimburse employees tax-free for individual health insurance instead of offering group plans. After a slow start, rule clarifications and compliance tools made them more accessible to midsized employers. Follow the money: Existing backers Pitango and 10D joined the round, which will be used to scale operations and improve support for employers. The Series A brings Zorro to $31.5 million total raised. The company is not yet profitable. How it works: New York City-based Zorro replaces traditional group plans with defined-contribution models. Employers set a budget; employees use Zorro's AI engine to select personalized plans, and brokers get real-time tools to compare group plans versus ICHRA-based options. When it onboards an employer, Zorro asks them to send their benefits roster from the previous year, asks about quality and budget priorities for the upcoming year, and helps predict what benefits employees might want next. Zorro has "several thousand" lives on the platform, per Ezekiel. Between the lines: Zorro's pitch hinges not just on cost control but on its ability to shift complex decision-making from HR to software — claiming that 75% of users enroll without human help. What they're saying: "We're giving the employer a line of sight to how his upcoming year is going to look," says Ezekiel. Reality check: While ICHRAs are gaining traction, they remain a small fraction of the employer market. Zorro's long-term success depends on widespread broker adoption and employee trust in AI-led benefit decisions. State of play: A February Bailey's report predicted the debut of several new ICHRA startups in 2025. Several others have secured recent funding. In April, Thatch raised $40 million in Series B funding led by Index Ventures and Venteur Health Insurance raised a $20 million Series A led by Informed Ventures and American Family Ventures. Remodel Health last December collected more than $100 million in a round led by Oak HC/FT and Hercules Capital.


Boston Globe
5 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Eight killed in latest shooting near Israeli and US-supported aid site in Gaza
The shooting happened hundreds of meters (yards) away from the sites, which are operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a group that Israel and the United States hope will replace the U.N.-run system of aid distribution. The United Nations has rejected the new system, saying it violates humanitarian principles. There have been near-daily shootings near the sites since they opened last month. Witnesses say Israeli forces have repeatedly fired on the crowds and health officials say scores have been killed. The military has acknowledged firing warning shots at what it says were suspects approaching its forces. Advertisement 'There were wounded, dead, and martyrs,' Ahmed al-Masri told The Associated Press on Sunday as he returned from one of the sites empty-handed. 'It's a trap.' Umm Hosni al-Najjar said she joined the crowd heading to the aid point in Rafah's Tal al-Sultan neighborhood around 4:30 a.m. She said the shooting began as people were advancing to the site a few minutes after her arrival. Advertisement 'There were many wounded and martyrs,' she said. 'No one was able to evacuate them.' The Nasser Hospital in the nearby city of Khan Younis said it received eight bodies after the shooting. The aid system rolled out last month has been marred by chaos and violence, while the U.N. system has struggled to deliver food because of Israeli restrictions and a breakdown of law and order, despite Israel loosening a total blockade it imposed from early March to mid-May. Israel and the U.S. say Hamas has siphoned aid off of the U.N.-run system, while U.N. officials say there is no evidence of systematic diversion. The U.N. says the new system does not meet Gaza's needs, allows Israel to control who gets aid and risks further mass displacement as people move closer to the sites. Two are in the southernmost city of Rafah — now mostly inhabited — and all three are in Israeli military zones that are off limits to independent media. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation says there has been no violence in or around the distribution points. It has warned people to stay on the designated routes and recently paused delivery to discuss safety measures with the military. Hamas started the war with its attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, when Palestinian militants killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and took another 251 hostage. The Israel's military campaign has killed Advertisement The war __ Magdy reported from Cairo. ___ Follow AP's war coverage at