Louisiana confirms 191 cases of norovirus after oyster recall
The Louisiana Department of Health said two people were hospitalized and eight visited emergency departments and all patients have been discharged. Health officials said some cases were reported from Florida, Mississippi and Alabama.
Harvesting Area 3 was closed on Jan. 10 after the state got reports of illnesses. According to LDH, there is no reason to suspect an outbreak outside of this area or issues with any other Louisiana seafood.
A sanitarian team is working with restaurants and businesses to make sure recalled oysters are discarded. The state health department is also working with the state wildlife and fisheries agency to make sure no oysters are harvested from Area 3.
Norovirus symptoms include vomiting, diarrhea, nausea and stomach cramps.
If you think you got sick from contaminated oysters, report it to LDH. You can also submit a report online at LDH's website.
Gerber recalls all batches of Soothe N Chew Teething Sticks nationwide
PBS closes DEI office to comply with executive order
Baton Rouge mayor to talk about crime initiatives
House Budget chair floats framework for advancing Trump agenda in closed-door meeting
Southern University men's basketball team falls to Alabama State on the road
Pope criticizes Trump administration's immigration policies
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
10 minutes ago
- CNN
Kennedy's anti-vaccine strategy risks forcing shots off market, manufacturers warn
Vaccines Disability issues Federal agencies Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink Follow Dining under palm trees on a patio at Mar-a-Lago in December, President-elect Donald Trump reassured chief executives at pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly and Pfizer that anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wouldn't be a radical choice to head the Department of Health and Human Services. 'I think he's going to be much less radical than you would think,' Trump said later that month during a news conference at his Palm Beach, Florida, resort. Eight months have passed, and Kennedy is intensifying his attacks on the vaccine system. High on his list of targets: a federal vaccine compensation program that settles injury claims. His strategy could bankrupt or diminish the fund, some legal scholars and public health leaders say, saddling pharmaceutical companies with liability risks and costs that would compel them to stop making vaccines altogether. 'It's a radical agenda,' said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada. 'He's using a bunch of different mechanisms and there really are no guardrails. People are going to catch on but it's not going to be enough to stop the waves of deaths, and deaths of children.' Kennedy has said changes to the U.S. vaccine system are needed because, he asserts without evidence, immunizations are linked to autism, neurotoxicity, allergies, and death. He is a leader of the 'Make America Healthy Again' movement, an informal campaign that eschews traditional medicine and espouses 'medical freedom.' Many adherents oppose vaccines and believe they are unsafe despite scientific evidence to the contrary. Kennedy has acknowledged he wants to reform the vaccine fund, known as the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, writing July 28 on the social platform X that 'the VICP is broken, and I intend to fix it.' HHS is working with the Department of Justice to revamp the program, which shields drugmakers from most liability over injuries. HHS didn't respond to a request to speak with Kennedy, but agency officials said he isn't opposed to immunizations. 'Secretary Kennedy is not anti-vaccine — he is pro-safety, pro-transparency, and pro-accountability,' HHS spokesperson Vianca Rodriguez Feliciano said in an email. Yet behind the scenes, Kennedy has been laying the groundwork to restrict the availability of widely used immunizations, according to people familiar with internal discussions who asked not to be identified because they're not authorized to speak on the topic. The strategy began taking shape in the spring. The first step: Raise unfounded questions about the safety of vaccines. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Kennedy told Trump that HHS was undertaking a massive study that would identify the cause of rising autism diagnoses by September. Kennedy tasked David Geier, a researcher who's repeated the debunked claim that vaccines cause autism, to oversee the work, according to media reports. Kennedy then doubled down by questioning the use of aluminum, which is added to many vaccines to help boost the immune response. He linked it to allergies at a July meeting of governors, even though a recent study in the Annals of Internal Medicine found no connection. He's widely expected to ask a federal vaccine advisory committee to conduct a review. The autism research and concerns about aluminum were early salvos in the push to go after the compensation fund, according to two of the people. That fund provides money to people for injuries from vaccines and has paid out more than $5 billion since it was established in 1988, according to the Health Resources and Services Administration. Before filing a lawsuit in court, injured individuals bring their claims to the program's nonjury vaccine court, which reviews evidence. The fund provides compensation from a small excise tax on vaccines. Compensation is determined in part by a table maintained by HRSA and overseen by the HHS secretary. It lists each vaccine and associated injuries and encompasses routine vaccinations recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that are subject to the excise tax. The injuries include anaphylaxis and encephalitis. People who experience such injuries within a certain time after getting a specific vaccine can get money. Kennedy wants to get autism or allergies added to that document, according to two people familiar with internal discussions and concerns raised publicly by some vaccine developers and former regulators. He could accomplish the goal if HHS-led research blames vaccines for autism, for example, or if a federal vaccine advisory panel recommends against aluminum in vaccines, according to some legal scholars. 'Given the rate of autism, if a lot of cases are brought, that could bankrupt the program,' said Dorit Reiss, a professor at University of California Law San Francisco. If that were to happen, pharmaceutical companies could stop producing the immunizations, which don't tend to be very profitable, rather than get entangled in drawn-out, expensive lawsuits from claimants who can't get money because the federal vaccine injury fund has run dry, some legal experts and vaccine developers said. 'The compensation fund, if it's gone, would impact decisions to proceed or not to proceed,' said David Dodd, president and CEO of GeoVax Labs, a biotechnology company developing vaccines and immunotherapies. A federal vaccine advisory panel could also recommend against aluminum in shots, forcing drugmakers to make costly reformulations or exit the market. Kennedy has placed people around him to execute the strategy. He's pushed to get vaccine skeptics in decision-making positions at the CDC, which recommends vaccines, and the Food and Drug Administration, which approves them. He also tapped leaders in the anti-vaccine movement to vet candidates for him. The outcome has been regulatory and policy decisions that have winnowed vaccine access and development. HHS this month said it was halting $500 million in grants and contracts for the development of mRNA vaccines, including an improved, more durable covid mRNA vaccine. The federal government stopped recommending covid shots for healthy pregnant women and children, bypassing input from a vaccine advisory committee that traditionally would have weighed in. And Kennedy reconstituted that committee with his own handpicked members, including vaccine skeptics, and removed the American Medical Association, American Nurses Association, and other industry groups that served as committee liaisons. The modified panel recommended against flu vaccines containing a preservative erroneously linked to autism. Kennedy's determination to keep vaccine skeptics in oversight positions played out in a deal he recently made with Trump and his staff, according to two people familiar with the situation. The arrangement came together on a Sunday night in July when Kennedy got a call from the White House. The subject was Vinay Prasad, a top vaccine regulator at the FDA. He had recently touched off a wave of industry criticism for playing a role in the agency's decision to ask biotech company Sarepta Therapeutics to halt shipments of a gene therapy over safety concerns. Social media posts and conservative commentators whipped up a furor. Laura Loomer, a far-right provocateur, said July 21 on X that Prasad should be fired and called him 'a self-proclaimed progressive liberal and Bernie Sanders fanboy,' referring to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Congressional lawmakers began peppering the White House with questions. The furor reached Trump, who wanted Prasad out, according to the people. But Kennedy was concerned about losing Prasad. He felt he needed a critic of immunizations overseeing vaccines at the agency. So Kennedy struck a deal. Prasad would be asked to resign as head of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which regulates vaccine products and biologics such as gene therapies. And the center would be divided into two operations, with Kennedy empowered to select the person overseeing vaccines. Some public health leaders publicly shared details of the arrangement and raised concerns about its potential impact. Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said in an Aug. 1 interview on CNBC that he thought it 'would be very destructive to the agency.' After leaving the agency in July, Prasad is now returning, though it is unclear if his role has changed. Recently, Kennedy was sued by Ray Flores, senior outside council for the Children's Health Defense. The Children's Health Defense, an anti-vaccine group founded by Kennedy, is funding the suit, which claims Kennedy failed to launch a task force to study vaccine safety that it says is required to report findings to Congress. But Kennedy and his allies view the lawsuit as friendly, according to one person familiar with the matter, because it is seeking an outcome that he wants. HHS on Aug. 14 announced it was reviving a federal panel, disbanded in 1998, to provide oversight of pediatric vaccines. Kennedy's work against vaccines has triggered unfriendly lawsuits too, including one brought by the American Academy of Pediatrics and other public health groups. His recent decision to halt funds for mRNA vaccine development yielded a swell of social media criticism. 'This is reckless. This is dangerous. This will cost lives. We must fight back,' Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said Aug. 5 on X. 'I've tried to be objective & non-alarmist in response to current HHS actions – but quite frankly this move is going to cost lives,' Jerome Adams, who was U.S. surgeon general during the previous Trump administration, said Aug. 5 on the same platform. Kennedy and his backers remain undeterred. In a counterpunch, his supporters are launching an unprecedented public relations campaign to promote the HHS secretary, spurring speculation that he may be mulling a 2028 presidential run. The nonprofit MAHA Action held a call in July to energize Kennedy supporters and initiated a six-figure ad campaign extolling Kennedy and Trump administration health initiatives. 'Make no mistake, this is a revolution that will change the face of public health policy,' Tony Lyons, president of MAHA Action, said in a statement. 'Americans are demanding radical transparency and gold standard science.' KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.
CNN
22 minutes ago
- CNN
Kennedy's anti-vaccine strategy risks forcing shots off market, manufacturers warn
Dining under palm trees on a patio at Mar-a-Lago in December, President-elect Donald Trump reassured chief executives at pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly and Pfizer that anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wouldn't be a radical choice to head the Department of Health and Human Services. 'I think he's going to be much less radical than you would think,' Trump said later that month during a news conference at his Palm Beach, Florida, resort. Eight months have passed, and Kennedy is intensifying his attacks on the vaccine system. High on his list of targets: a federal vaccine compensation program that settles injury claims. His strategy could bankrupt or diminish the fund, some legal scholars and public health leaders say, saddling pharmaceutical companies with liability risks and costs that would compel them to stop making vaccines altogether. 'It's a radical agenda,' said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada. 'He's using a bunch of different mechanisms and there really are no guardrails. People are going to catch on but it's not going to be enough to stop the waves of deaths, and deaths of children.' Kennedy has said changes to the U.S. vaccine system are needed because, he asserts without evidence, immunizations are linked to autism, neurotoxicity, allergies, and death. He is a leader of the 'Make America Healthy Again' movement, an informal campaign that eschews traditional medicine and espouses 'medical freedom.' Many adherents oppose vaccines and believe they are unsafe despite scientific evidence to the contrary. Kennedy has acknowledged he wants to reform the vaccine fund, known as the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, writing July 28 on the social platform X that 'the VICP is broken, and I intend to fix it.' HHS is working with the Department of Justice to revamp the program, which shields drugmakers from most liability over injuries. HHS didn't respond to a request to speak with Kennedy, but agency officials said he isn't opposed to immunizations. 'Secretary Kennedy is not anti-vaccine — he is pro-safety, pro-transparency, and pro-accountability,' HHS spokesperson Vianca Rodriguez Feliciano said in an email. Yet behind the scenes, Kennedy has been laying the groundwork to restrict the availability of widely used immunizations, according to people familiar with internal discussions who asked not to be identified because they're not authorized to speak on the topic. The strategy began taking shape in the spring. The first step: Raise unfounded questions about the safety of vaccines. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Kennedy told Trump that HHS was undertaking a massive study that would identify the cause of rising autism diagnoses by September. Kennedy tasked David Geier, a researcher who's repeated the debunked claim that vaccines cause autism, to oversee the work, according to media reports. Kennedy then doubled down by questioning the use of aluminum, which is added to many vaccines to help boost the immune response. He linked it to allergies at a July meeting of governors, even though a recent study in the Annals of Internal Medicine found no connection. He's widely expected to ask a federal vaccine advisory committee to conduct a review. The autism research and concerns about aluminum were early salvos in the push to go after the compensation fund, according to two of the people. That fund provides money to people for injuries from vaccines and has paid out more than $5 billion since it was established in 1988, according to the Health Resources and Services Administration. Before filing a lawsuit in court, injured individuals bring their claims to the program's nonjury vaccine court, which reviews evidence. The fund provides compensation from a small excise tax on vaccines. Compensation is determined in part by a table maintained by HRSA and overseen by the HHS secretary. It lists each vaccine and associated injuries and encompasses routine vaccinations recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that are subject to the excise tax. The injuries include anaphylaxis and encephalitis. People who experience such injuries within a certain time after getting a specific vaccine can get money. Kennedy wants to get autism or allergies added to that document, according to two people familiar with internal discussions and concerns raised publicly by some vaccine developers and former regulators. He could accomplish the goal if HHS-led research blames vaccines for autism, for example, or if a federal vaccine advisory panel recommends against aluminum in vaccines, according to some legal scholars. 'Given the rate of autism, if a lot of cases are brought, that could bankrupt the program,' said Dorit Reiss, a professor at University of California Law San Francisco. If that were to happen, pharmaceutical companies could stop producing the immunizations, which don't tend to be very profitable, rather than get entangled in drawn-out, expensive lawsuits from claimants who can't get money because the federal vaccine injury fund has run dry, some legal experts and vaccine developers said. 'The compensation fund, if it's gone, would impact decisions to proceed or not to proceed,' said David Dodd, president and CEO of GeoVax Labs, a biotechnology company developing vaccines and immunotherapies. A federal vaccine advisory panel could also recommend against aluminum in shots, forcing drugmakers to make costly reformulations or exit the market. Kennedy has placed people around him to execute the strategy. He's pushed to get vaccine skeptics in decision-making positions at the CDC, which recommends vaccines, and the Food and Drug Administration, which approves them. He also tapped leaders in the anti-vaccine movement to vet candidates for him. The outcome has been regulatory and policy decisions that have winnowed vaccine access and development. HHS this month said it was halting $500 million in grants and contracts for the development of mRNA vaccines, including an improved, more durable covid mRNA vaccine. The federal government stopped recommending covid shots for healthy pregnant women and children, bypassing input from a vaccine advisory committee that traditionally would have weighed in. And Kennedy reconstituted that committee with his own handpicked members, including vaccine skeptics, and removed the American Medical Association, American Nurses Association, and other industry groups that served as committee liaisons. The modified panel recommended against flu vaccines containing a preservative erroneously linked to autism. Kennedy's determination to keep vaccine skeptics in oversight positions played out in a deal he recently made with Trump and his staff, according to two people familiar with the situation. The arrangement came together on a Sunday night in July when Kennedy got a call from the White House. The subject was Vinay Prasad, a top vaccine regulator at the FDA. He had recently touched off a wave of industry criticism for playing a role in the agency's decision to ask biotech company Sarepta Therapeutics to halt shipments of a gene therapy over safety concerns. Social media posts and conservative commentators whipped up a furor. Laura Loomer, a far-right provocateur, said July 21 on X that Prasad should be fired and called him 'a self-proclaimed progressive liberal and Bernie Sanders fanboy,' referring to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Congressional lawmakers began peppering the White House with questions. The furor reached Trump, who wanted Prasad out, according to the people. But Kennedy was concerned about losing Prasad. He felt he needed a critic of immunizations overseeing vaccines at the agency. So Kennedy struck a deal. Prasad would be asked to resign as head of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which regulates vaccine products and biologics such as gene therapies. And the center would be divided into two operations, with Kennedy empowered to select the person overseeing vaccines. Some public health leaders publicly shared details of the arrangement and raised concerns about its potential impact. Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said in an Aug. 1 interview on CNBC that he thought it 'would be very destructive to the agency.' After leaving the agency in July, Prasad is now returning, though it is unclear if his role has changed. Recently, Kennedy was sued by Ray Flores, senior outside council for the Children's Health Defense. The Children's Health Defense, an anti-vaccine group founded by Kennedy, is funding the suit, which claims Kennedy failed to launch a task force to study vaccine safety that it says is required to report findings to Congress. But Kennedy and his allies view the lawsuit as friendly, according to one person familiar with the matter, because it is seeking an outcome that he wants. HHS on Aug. 14 announced it was reviving a federal panel, disbanded in 1998, to provide oversight of pediatric vaccines. Kennedy's work against vaccines has triggered unfriendly lawsuits too, including one brought by the American Academy of Pediatrics and other public health groups. His recent decision to halt funds for mRNA vaccine development yielded a swell of social media criticism. 'This is reckless. This is dangerous. This will cost lives. We must fight back,' Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said Aug. 5 on X. 'I've tried to be objective & non-alarmist in response to current HHS actions – but quite frankly this move is going to cost lives,' Jerome Adams, who was U.S. surgeon general during the previous Trump administration, said Aug. 5 on the same platform. Kennedy and his backers remain undeterred. In a counterpunch, his supporters are launching an unprecedented public relations campaign to promote the HHS secretary, spurring speculation that he may be mulling a 2028 presidential run. The nonprofit MAHA Action held a call in July to energize Kennedy supporters and initiated a six-figure ad campaign extolling Kennedy and Trump administration health initiatives. 'Make no mistake, this is a revolution that will change the face of public health policy,' Tony Lyons, president of MAHA Action, said in a statement. 'Americans are demanding radical transparency and gold standard science.' KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
Chatbots Can Trigger a Mental Health Crisis. What to Know About 'AI Psychosis'
The Brief August 6, 2025 Trump threatens to federalize D.C., New York's Legionnaires' disease outbreak, and more Length: Long Speed: 1.0x AI chatbots have become a ubiquitous part of life. People turn to tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Copilot not just for help with emails, work, or code, but for relationship advice, emotional support, and even friendship or love. But for a minority of users, these conversations appear to have disturbing effects. A growing number of reports suggest that extended chatbot use may trigger or amplify psychotic symptoms in some people. The fallout can be devastating and potentially lethal. Users have linked their breakdowns to lost jobs, fractured relationships, involuntary psychiatric holds, and even arrests and jail time. At least one support group has emerged for people who say their lives began to spiral after interacting with AI. The phenomenon—sometimes colloquially called 'ChatGPT psychosis' or 'AI psychosis'—isn't well understood. There's no formal diagnosis, data are scarce, and no clear protocols for treatment exist. Psychiatrists and researchers say they're flying blind as the medical world scrambles to catch up. What is 'ChatGPT psychosis' or 'AI psychosis'? The terms aren't formal ones, but they have emerged as shorthand for a concerning pattern: people developing delusions or distorted beliefs that appear to be triggered or reinforced by conversations with AI systems. Psychosis may actually be a misnomer, says Dr. James MacCabe, a professor in the department of psychosis studies at King's College London. The term usually refers to a cluster of symptoms—disordered thinking, hallucinations, and delusions—often seen in conditions like bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. But in these cases, 'we're talking about predominantly delusions, not the full gamut of psychosis.' Read More: How to Deal With a Narcissist The phenomenon seems to reflect familiar vulnerabilities in new contexts, not a new disorder, psychiatrists say. It's closely tied to how chatbots communicate; by design, they mirror users' language and validate their assumptions. This sycophancy is a known issue in the industry. While many people find it irritating, experts warn it can reinforce distorted thinking in people who are more vulnerable. Who's most at risk? While most people can use chatbots without issue, experts say a small group of users may be especially vulnerable to delusional thinking after extended use. Some media reports of AI psychosis note that individuals had no prior mental health diagnoses, but clinicians caution that undetected or latent risk factors may still have been present. 'I don't think using a chatbot itself is likely to induce psychosis if there's no other genetic, social, or other risk factors at play,' says Dr. John Torous, a psychiatrist at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. 'But people may not know they have this kind of risk.' The clearest risks include a personal or family history of psychosis, or conditions like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Read More: ChatGPT May Be Eroding Critical Thinking Skills, According to a New MIT Study Those with personality traits that make them susceptible to fringe beliefs may also be at risk, says Dr. Ragy Girgis, a professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University. Such individuals may be socially awkward, struggle with emotional regulation, and have an overactive fantasy life, Girgis says. Immersion matters, too. 'Time seems to be the single biggest factor,' says Stanford psychiatrist Dr. Nina Vasan, who specializes in digital mental health. 'It's people spending hours every day talking to their chatbots.' What people can do to stay safe Chatbots aren't inherently dangerous, but for some people, caution is warranted. First, it's important to understand what large language models (LLMs) are and what they're not. 'It sounds silly, but remember that LLMs are tools, not friends, no matter how good they may be at mimicking your tone and remembering your preferences,' says Hamilton Morrin, a neuropsychiatrist at King's College London. He advises users to avoid oversharing or relying on them for emotional support. Psychiatrists say the clearest advice during moments of crisis or emotional strain is simple: stop using the chatbot. Ending that bond can be surprisingly painful, like a breakup or even a bereavement, says Vasan. But stepping away can bring significant improvement, especially when users reconnect with real-world relationships and seek professional help. Recognizing when use has become problematic isn't always easy. 'When people develop delusions, they don't realize they're delusions. They think it's reality,' says MacCabe. Read More: Are Personality Tests Actually Useful? Friends and family also play a role. Loved ones should watch for changes in mood, sleep, or social behavior, including signs of detachment or withdrawal. 'Increased obsessiveness with fringe ideologies' or 'excessive time spent using any AI system' are red flags, Girgis says. Dr. Thomas Pollak, a psychiatrist at King's College London, says clinicians should be asking patients with a history of psychosis or related conditions about their use of AI tools, as part of relapse prevention. But those conversations are still rare. Some people in the field still dismiss the idea of AI psychosis as scaremongering, he says. What AI companies should be doing So far, the burden of caution has mostly fallen on users. Experts say that needs to change. One key issue is the lack of formal data. Much of what we know about ChatGPT psychosis comes from anecdotal reports or media coverage. Experts widely agree that the scope, causes, and risk factors are still unclear. Without better data, it's hard to measure the problem or design meaningful safeguards. Many argue that waiting for perfect evidence is the wrong approach. 'We know that AI companies are already working with bioethicists and cyber-security experts to minimize potential future risks,' says Morrin. 'They should also be working with mental-health professionals and individuals with lived experience of mental illness.' At a minimum, companies could simulate conversations with vulnerable users and flag responses that might validate delusions, Morrin says. Some companies are beginning to respond. In July, OpenAI said it has hired a clinical psychiatrist to help assess the mental-health impact of its tools, which include ChatGPT. The following month, the company acknowledged times its 'model fell short in recognizing signs of delusion or emotional dependency.' It said it would start prompting users to take breaks during long sessions, develop tools to detect signs of distress, and tweak ChatGPT's responses in 'high-stakes personal decisions.' Others argue that deeper changes are needed. Ricardo Twumasi, a lecturer in psychosis studies at King's College London, suggests building safeguards directly into AI models before release. That could include real-time monitoring for distress or a 'digital advance directive' allowing users to pre-set boundaries when they're well. Read More: How to Find a Therapist Who's Right for You Dr. Joe Pierre, a psychiatrist at the University of California, San Francisco, says companies should study who is being harmed and in what ways, and then design protections accordingly. That might mean nudging troubling conversations in a different direction or issuing something akin to a warning label. Vasan adds that companies should routinely probe their systems for a wide range of mental-health risks, a process known as red-teaming. That means going beyond tests for self-harm and deliberately simulating interactions involving conditions like mania, psychosis, and OCD to assess how the models respond. Formal regulation may be premature, experts say. But they stress that companies should still hold themselves to a higher standard. Chatbots can reduce loneliness, support learning, and aid mental health. The potential is vast. But if harms aren't taken as seriously as hopes, experts say, that potential could be lost. 'We learned from social media that ignoring mental-health harm leads to devastating public-health consequences,' Vasan says. 'Society cannot repeat that mistake.'
