Flu deaths rise as disinformation takes root
Tim Henderson,
Tribune News Service
Americans are facing the highest death toll from influenza since 2018, just as more people become vulnerable because of growing vaccine scepticism taking hold in statehouses and the Trump administration. Flu-related deaths hit a seven-year high in January and February, the two months that usually account for the height of flu season, according to a Stateline analysis of preliminary federal statistics. There were about 9,800 deaths across the country, up from 5,000 in the same period last year and the most since 2018, when there were about 10,800.
Despite that, the US Department of Health and Human Services has canceled or postponed meetings to prepare for next fall's flu vaccine, when experts talk about what influenza strains they expect they'll be battling.
The cancellations raised protests from medical professionals and state and federal officials. US Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a New York Democrat, said in a statement that her state is having its worst flu season in at least 15 years, with more deaths from flu and other causes as the state's health care system struggles under the strain of flu patients.
Some experts say putting off vaccine planning will only feed false narratives that discourage lifesaving vaccinations. 'These delays not only weaken pandemic preparedness but also undermine public confidence in vaccination efforts,' said Dr. Akram Khan, an Oregon pulmonologist and associate professor at Oregon Health & Science University who has studied attitudes toward vaccines. US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. has expressed doubt about the need for vaccines, including flu vaccines, despite evidence that they reduce deaths and hospitalisations. Deaths fluctuate naturally from year to year depending on the severity of current flu strains and the effectiveness of that year's vaccines. But some see a hesitancy to use any vaccine, fed by misinformation and political mistrust of government, already taking a toll on lives.
'It's been a bad winter for viral respiratory infections, not just in the United States but across the Northern Hemisphere,' said Mark Doherty, a vaccine scholar and former manager for GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, a vaccine manufacturer.
'The US does appear to be hit a bit harder, and it's possible lower vaccination coverage is contributing to that,' Doherty said. Flu vaccine distribution in the United States has been declining in recent years, and as of the first week of 2025 was down 16% from 2022, according to federal statistics. The flu was a factor in 9,800 deaths in January and February, according to the analysis, using provisional data collected by states and compiled by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The highest death rates were in Oklahoma, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota and Kentucky, all at about four deaths per 100,000 population so far this year. Some counties in Florida, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, as well as Oklahoma and Kentucky, were even higher — at about six deaths per 100,000. The highest rates have been among older people. Statistics show the deaths hit white people and American Indians especially hard.
Tragedies are happening across the country to people of all ages and races, however. A 43-year-old Indiana father died after a brief bout of the flu, according to family members. After two 10-year-olds died in Prince George's County, Maryland, area schools drew crowds to vaccine clinics. Doug Sides, a pastor at Yulee Baptist Church in northern Florida, has held funerals for three congregation members who died from flu — all within one month, all of them over 70 years old. That compares with only one victim of COVID-19 from his congregation during the pandemic, he said. 'Flu death is a reality,' Sides told Stateline on a phone call from a Jacksonville hospital, where he was visiting another 84-year-old congregation member who was rescued from her home with severe pneumonia from an unknown cause.
'I encourage my church members to keep their hands clean, use hand sanitizer and to stay home if they're feeling sick,' he said. He said he hasn't personally gotten a flu vaccine recently because he gets conflicting advice about it — some doctors tell him to avoid them because he and some family members have cancer, while another 'rides me all the time about getting a flu shot.'
'We're all getting conflicting advice. We're living in strange-o times,' he said. (The American Cancer Society says vaccination for people with cancer may or may not be recommended depending on individual circumstances.) Many states are relaxing vaccine requirements as public skepticism rises. But many are taking action to warn residents and reassure them that vaccinations are safe and can help prevent deaths, despite misinformation to the contrary. Burlington County, New Jersey, has had the highest flu-associated death rate of any county this year, according to the analysis, with 31 deaths among fewer than 500,000 people. The county held 30 free vaccine clinics from September to January, then extended them into February because of the severity of the flu season, said Dave Levinsky, a spokesperson for the county health department.
In Oklahoma, death rates are highest in the eastern part of the state where the Cherokee Nation is centered. A state publicity campaign stresses that flu shots are safe, effective and free at many community health centers. However, vaccination rates in the state are low compared with other states as of December, according to federal statistics: Only about 16% of Oklahoma residents had gotten flu vaccinations by then. Rates were even lower in Louisiana (just under 16%), Mississippi (12%) and Texas (10%). States with the highest flu vaccination rates by December were Maine (37%), Connecticut and Vermont (33%), and Wisconsin and Minnesota (31%). But even those were down since 2022. People have become less likely to get vaccinated in recent years, a phenomenon researchers call 'vaccine hesitancy.' A report published last year in the medical journal Cureus found three-quarters of patients in a rural New York state community refused flu vaccine with comments such as 'I do not trust vaccines' or 'I do not believe in vaccines.' The most common reasons cited were that earlier vaccinations made them feel sick, that they got the flu anyway, or that they thought they shouldn't need a new shot every year. (Doctors recommend flu vaccinations annually and note that even vaccinated patients who get the flu usually face less severe forms.)
And in a paper published in February in the journal Vaccine, researchers found that people refuse flu vaccinations for many of the same reasons they refused COVID-19 shots: a feeling of 'social vulnerability' that leads to distrust of government and medical guidance. One hopeful sign, the report noted, is that vaccine recommendations from trusted health care professionals can turn around such attitudes. 'Unfortunately, vaccine hesitancy is deeply entangled with misinformation, political rhetoric and public distrust,' said Khan, the Oregon pulmonologist and the study's author. 'Scientific data alone may not be enough to shift public perceptions, as many vaccine decisions are driven by gut feelings and external influences rather than evidence.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
8 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Social media, self esteem: What's the connection?
Megan Moreno, Tribune News Service Ever since social media burst on the scene in the early 2000s, parents and health experts have worried about the potential impact on kids, particularly those in their early teens. Now researchers are asking how the curated content that kids see online makes them feel about themselves. Newer studies show that picture-perfect selfies and videos on Instagram, TikTok and other social media platforms can shake a young person's confidence. Kids who compare their authentic lives to these unreal images may find themselves feeling anxiety, envy and sometimes obsessive thoughts that can harm their health. Celebrities and influencers work hard to attract social followers — usually with an army of stylists, makeup artists, trainers and videographers helping them. But thanks to filters and photo editing tools like Facetune and others, kids may feel they can make themselves look perfect too. More than 70% of social media users refuse to post pictures online before Photoshopping them, one study shows. This desire to erase all flaws can be especially harmful for kids of colour. Research shows that photo editing apps often use beauty standards modelled on white people, reinforcing racist views of what's attractive and what's not. Setting goals and striving to meet them can be good for kids. But extreme content on social media can push them toward unrealistic standards that encourage dangerous habits. Some trends fueled by social media reflect unhealthy body images. This includes trends such as bigorexia, which drives young people to spend countless hours in the gym and eat a protein-heavy diet to build a 'jacked' body, or ultra-low-calorie eating plans displayed in 'what I eat in a day' videos posted by celebrities and influencers. Social platforms are designed to keep kids scrolling by serving up the content they like best. Most social media platforms use an algorithm to track what users view and watch to deliver similar content. This means that a teen who views unhealthy content out of curiosity may be shown more and more content of that type. It can become nearly impossible for them to outrun the images and stories that can drive compulsive behaviours. Social media's overall impact on an individual child is fueled by several factors. This includes their temperament, personality, health status, peer group and the content they view. However, it is also important to keep an eye on ways that social media can crowd out healthy behaviours that are also critical to mental health and self-esteem. For example, social media can contribute to reduced quality and quantity of sleep. It can also crowd out other important responsibilities such as schoolwork and time with family and friends. Even kids who don't fall into harmful eating or workout regimes may experience this crowding out of healthy behaviors and habits. Here are some suggestions from the American Academy of Pediatrics Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health that can help your child use social media in positive ways to learn, connect and grow. The first step is to engage in open communication. Kids often resist any move adults make to curb their freedom, so aim for a nonjudgmental approach. Ask your child to guide you by asking questions like what types of media they have been enjoying lately or simply asking if any content they've come across worries them or makes them uncomfortable. As your child opens up, try to listen more than talk. Make this a learning session that will help you uncover possible concerns and topics for future conversations. You don't have to 'solve' everything about social media in one conversation; the goal is to keep the lines of communication open over time. You may find your child knows a lot about the inner workings of the digital world. Still, they may not think too deeply about the content 'bubble' that algorithms create. If they're willing, try this experiment: Open your own social platform and search for something new. For example, if your feed focuses on sports or fashion, search for 'home improvement' or 'coin collecting.' Within a few clicks, you'll start to see new content on those topics. If your child is showing signs they have been comparing themselves to the unattainable content they see online, it may help to acknowledge that comparing ourselves to others is natural, but perfectionism can harm us. Pointing to examples from your own life may be helpful. For example: 'I used to watch hours of videos showing how to improve my tennis swing. But in the end, it just made me feel nervous about my game. Going out and practicing worked a lot better.'
Gulf Today
3 days ago
- Gulf Today
MAHA report's errors are just start of its problems
Lisa Jarvis and Michael Hiltzik, Tribune News Service Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s new Make America Healthy Again report offers a road to wellness for the nation's children paved not with the gold-standard science he promised, but with pyrite. The report, created by a MAHA commission that includes all of President Donald Trump's cabinet members, mixes nuggets of truth — like the idea that it's important to focus on kids' health — with gross misrepresentations of scientific research. Some of the studies are even made up. The nonprofit news organisation Notus first reported that some of the commission's findings relied on research that doesn't exist. The document, released last week, includes seven fabricated studies related to kids' mental health and the overprescribing of medications for ADHD, depression and asthma. The New York Times later identified several other fake citations. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt attributed the inclusion of phony publications to 'formatting issues' that would be corrected. An updated report that omits those studies and cleans up bizarre errors in several others has since been uploaded to the White House website. That version contained fresh errors, Notus reported. Many suspect that the fake citations are the product of AI. That alone should be disqualifying. Rather than the thoughtful, evidence-based assessment our kids deserve, the first major report on Kennedy's cornerstone initiative was a slapped-together treatise. But there's a bigger problem. If the MAHA team did rely on AI to generate supporting data — and it seems likely it did — it wasn't just cutting corners. It confirms this project was never a good faith effort to begin with. The team was assembling evidence to reinforce conclusions that supported Kennedy's well-known narrative. That pattern is bolstered by the report's interpretation of the real studies it cites. Data is conveniently twisted to fit Kennedy's personal beliefs. A recurring tendency is to exaggerate the size of the current problem by minimising the significance of those in the past. For example, the report points to a fivefold rise in the rates of celiac disease since the 1980s but fails to acknowledge a dramatic increase in diagnosis and awareness of the autoimmune disorder. The same is true for the report's discussions of inflammatory bowel disease, childhood cancer and autism. None of this should be surprising. In nearly every interview he gives, Kennedy repeats the same inflated statistics to drive home the terrible state of our kids' health. His goal seems to be to scare the public into acquiescence. If the problem is this bad, if our kids are this sick, if health agencies have failed them this profoundly, why not blindly follow his ideas for fixing it? Something more insidious is at play with all of the half-baked or made-up statistics. He is using them to undermine the real experts, making it increasingly hard for Americans to understand whose advice to trust. And ultimately, his willfully misleading analysis provides cover while he dismantles longstanding norms for scientific research and health policy. In just a few short months, the secretary has wielded his authority in unprecedented and dangerous ways. For example, amid the largest measles outbreak in 30 years, instead of emphasising vaccines — which can prevent the disease — he asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to develop guidelines for treatments. There are no proven treatments for measles. At least three people have died, and nearly 1,100 cases of the disease have been reported. In another disturbing move, Kennedy said he would unilaterally change the CDC's COVID vaccine guidelines to preclude pregnant women and children from receiving shots. That upended the longstanding process that relies on outside experts' careful analysis and open debate before making such decisions. Days later, the CDC amended its regulations to incorporate some, but not all of Kennedy's proposed changes, leaving many confused not only about the actual policy but who sets it. We should worry that his approach to measles and COVID is a preview of how he will treat the value of other routine shots. One of the most alarming sections of the report questions the evidence behind and safety of the childhood vaccine schedule and — without evidence — suggests it could be linked to chronic disease. Kennedy has also used his platform to push policy changes on the use of fluoride in drinking water, which he has repeatedly linked to lower IQs (a tenuous claim that experts say is based on fluoride levels not used in the US). Fluoridation is regulated by state and local municipalities, but Kennedy said he would direct the CDC to stop recommending the practice and the Food and Drug Administration — also under his purview — later banned fluoride supplements based on unsubstantiated claims that they harm gut health. His rhetoric on the topic appears to have emboldened the first two state bans on fluoride in public water. The MAHA report's agenda suggests more changes are to come. Meanwhile, new research in JAMA found that removing fluoride from drinking water would result in 25 million more cavities in children at a cost of $9.8 billion to the US healthcare system over five years. Kennedy's next move appears to be wresting control of health and science research altogether. 'We're probably going to stop publishing in the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and those other journals because they're all corrupt,' he said on a recent podcast with wellness influencer Gary Brecka. Unless those top-tier journals 'change dramatically,' health agencies will 'create our own journals in-house,' he added. In other words, he'll have a ready-made platform to showcase data that justifies whatever policy he wants to roll out next. In another troubling sign of how data could be warped to fit a political agenda, President Donald Trump signed an executive order after the report was released directing a restoration of 'gold standard science.' The goal sounds reasonable enough: to ensure research is reproducible and reverse a decline in public trust in science and health agencies. But the language of the directive is concerning. It not only challenges the credibility of several agencies — including the CDC — but suggests someone like Kennedy could exploit the language of research integrity to crack down on findings that don't fit his personal agenda. Kennedy has called the MAHA report 'the diagnosis' and says he will 'deliver the prescription' in the next 60 days. Given what we've seen over the last few months, we should worry what form that takes — and the far reaching consequences it could have on both American kids and the health infrastructure designed to protect them. Earlier, serious followers of healthcare policy in the US didn't expect much good to emerge from its takeover by President Donald Trump and his secretary of Health and Human Services, the anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. But the agency and its leadership managed to live down to the worst expectations May 27, when HHS released a 73-page 'assessment' of the health of America's children titled 'The MAHA Report' (for 'Make America Healthy Again'). A sloppier, more disingenuous government report would be hard to imagine. Whatever credibility the report might have had as a product of a federal agency was shattered by its obvious errors, misrepresentations and outright fabrications of source materials, some of it plainly the product of the authors' reliance on AI bots. At least seven sources cited in the report do not exist, as Emily Kennard and Margaret Manto of the journalism organisation NOTUS uncovered. HHS hastily reissued the report with some of those citations removed, but without disclosing the changes — an extremely unkosher action in the research community.
Gulf Today
5 days ago
- Gulf Today
GOP states embrace paid parental leave for teachers
Anna Claire Vollers, Tribune News Service More Republican-led states are giving paid parental leave to public school teachers and other state employees, signaling a broader acceptance of family-friendly workplace policies once championed primarily by Democrats. 'All of these red states, I think we're late to the party,' said South Carolina state Rep. Beth Bernstein, a Democrat who sponsored a bill this year to increase state employees' paid parental leave from six to 12 weeks. It passed the majority-Republican South Carolina House in April with strong bipartisan support. This year, Alabama, Iowa and Mississippi joined 37 other states in granting paid parental leave to thousands of state workers. The trend has gathered steam in recent years. Some experts link it to the cascade of state abortion bans that followed the US Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs decision, which dismantled the federal right to abortion. Under fire from critics to do more to care for babies once they're born, at least a dozen conservative-led states with abortion bans have since granted or expanded paid parental leave for their state employees. But others say the increasing bipartisan support for measures that help working parents is also a reaction to economic realities. 'What we've seen, especially in more conservative states, is the public sector has experienced a lot of turnover,' said Kameron Dawson, legal director of the Southern Office of A Better Balance, a legal organization focused on workplace rights. 'They're looking for tools to recruit younger employees.' Paid parental leave is the time off granted to workers for the birth or adoption of a baby, to care for a child, or to recover from a stillbirth or miscarriage. Without it, employees are left to cobble together their sick leave and vacation leave — or go unpaid — to stay home with a child and heal. Alabama Republican state Rep. Ginny Shaver watched her daughter, a public school teacher, struggle to get the leave she needed after the births of her children in recent years. 'With her second, she had complications in her pregnancy and used up her [paid vacation and sick] leave before she even had the baby,' Shaver told Stateline. Her daughter contracted COVID-19, and the baby had to spend time in neonatal intensive care. 'It was a very difficult time, and she had to take unpaid leave.' Last year, Shaver and Democratic state Sen. Vivian Figures worked to win approval of a paid parental leave bill for state employees. It failed. But they tried again this year. With the support of Republican Gov. Kay Ivey, the state legislature — which has a Republican supermajority — passed it nearly unanimously. The new law gives female state employees, including teachers, eight weeks of paid parental leave in connection with birth, stillbirth or miscarriage, and gives male employees two weeks. Adoptive parents get eight weeks for one parent and two for the other. Shaver said she thinks the law passed thanks to vocal support from the governor and increased awareness of the issue due to the work she and Figures did in previous sessions. 'And the fact that all of the southeast states around us offered it,' Shaver said. 'We're trying to attract and retain state employees and teachers, and we're in competition with everyone around us, and the private sector as well.' For many Republicans, the workforce development argument for paid leave is a persuasive one. For states such as Alabama and South Carolina that have some of the lowest workforce participation rates in the nation, paid leave can be a tool to keep more people — particularly women — working. And it can be a way to retain educators as many states struggle with teacher shortages in K-12 schools. 'For several years we've seen state legislatures acknowledging the importance of child care to businesses and the economy,' said Feroza Freeland, policy director at the Southern Office of A Better Balance. 'But in the last few years, we've seen a growing recognition that paid leave is another piece of that puzzle.' States have taken up the issue because the federal government has not. The United States is a global outlier; among 38 peer nations, it's the only one that doesn't mandate paid parental leave, according to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. The group comprises 38 democracies with market-based economies. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act, passed in 1993 and extended in 2020, only requires public agencies and companies with at least 50 employees to give up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for parents of newborns or newly adopted children, or caregivers of sick family members. During his first term, President Donald Trump publicly supported some forms of paid family leave and signed a defense bill that gives 12 weeks of paid parental leave to most federal employees. Paid family leave was a signature issue for his daughter Ivanka Trump, at the time a senior adviser to the president. She even held a paid leave and child care summit at the White House in late 2019. That set the stage for other Republicans to take up the issue more publicly. And after the Dobbs decision, family-friendly policies have increasingly become conservative talking points in states with restrictive abortion laws. After the Mississippi House unanimously passed a paid parental leave bill earlier this year, Republican House Speaker Jason White celebrated the bill as a reflection of Mississippi's status as a ' pro-life state.' In a recent post on X announcing her signing of a new paid parental leave law, Iowa Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds called Iowa 'a pro-family state.' North Carolina was one of the first Southern states to grant paid parental leave to state workers in 2019 when then-Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, signed an executive order. In 2023, several months after the Dobbs decision, the state's majority-Republican legislature extended paid parental leave to public school employees by tacking it onto a law banning most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy. Meanwhile, Indiana Republican Gov. Mike Braun signed an executive order in March to add up to eight additional weeks of paid leave for 'childbirth recovery' to the state's existing four weeks of paid parental leave. The new laws won't apply to most residents, because they only cover state employees. But they could have a downstream effect. Shaver, the Alabama lawmaker, said she hopes her state's new law will not only help the state be competitive with the private sector, but also set a precedent for other employers to follow. 'I hope they will see it's in their benefit to offer what they can,' she said. 'It may not be eight or 12 weeks, but even offering a reduced or flexible work schedule can help families.' Just over a quarter of private-sector workers have access to paid family leave through their employer as of March 2023, according the most recent data from the US Department of Labor. Among the lowest-wage earners, that share drops to 6%. State paid leave programs run the gamut in terms of what they offer. While Alabama's new law offers up to eight weeks of leave for all state employees, including teachers, Mississippi's offers six and does not require public schools to offer paid parental leave to their employees.
