With Flu Shot Vote, Kennedy's Vaccine Skepticism Comes Full Circle
A decade before he became President Trump's health secretary, the environmental lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared on a talk show hosted by Dr. Mehmet Oz to promote his latest book, 'Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak.'
The book, published in 2014, explored an obscure mercury-based preservative, thimerosal, that was removed from most vaccines, but not flu vaccines, more than two decades ago. Dr. Oz noted that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had deemed the vaccines that still contained thimerosal 'safe and effective' and said they did 'not present a public health risk.'
Mr. Kennedy did not buy it. 'We found 500 peer-reviewed studies,' he insisted. 'Virtually every one of them said that thimerosal is a potent neurotoxin that should not be in vaccines.'
On Thursday, the new members of the C.D.C.'s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, hand-selected by Mr. Kennedy after he fired all 17 members of the previous panel, decided it would longer recommend annual flu shots that contain it. Thimerosal's appearance on the committee's agenda in the first place shocked public health leaders, who have long considered the matter settled.
But it was not a surprise to people who have followed Mr. Kennedy closely. Thimerosal started Mr. Kennedy down a path of questioning vaccine safety, and Thursday's vote was the culmination of a long personal journey. It offers a window into how, as secretary, he is pursuing his own passions and installing old allies in positions of influence.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
National Research Solidifies Dividend Amid Insider Buying and Contract Growth
National Research Corporation (NASDAQ:NRC) is one of the 10 low risk dividend paying stocks for June 2025. The company has reported a sequential increase in total recurring contract value, which is followed by a notable change in insider activity. A healthcare professional using a digital device to provide a health risk assessment to a patient. National Research Corporation (NASDAQ:NRC), carrying on business operations as NRC Health, is a healthcare organization based in Nebraska. With their subscription-based solutions, the company offers analytics and insights that enable healthcare organizations to improve patient and employee experience. The focus of the solutions is aimed at various aspects of the company's operations, including patient satisfaction, staff retention, and brand perception. National Research Corporation (NASDAQ:NRC) reported its Q1 results for 2025, earlier this May, in which it reported a sequential increase in total recurring contract value. With this growth, the company recorded a notable milestone in its revenue growth strategy. Following the announcement, on May 12, 2025, Patrick Beans, a significant shareholder, acquired an additional 2,500 shares of the company's common stock in a transaction valued at $33,973. The company offers a dividend yield of 2.90%, with a beta of 0.39, signaling its limited volatility to the market changes. The ex-dividend date is June 27, 2025, and investors seeking to benefit from the next payout should purchase the stock before the date. While we acknowledge the potential of NRC as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: and . Disclosure. None. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Birthright Citizenship: Supreme Court To Decide Trump Executive Order Today—What To Know
The Supreme Court is set to decide the fate of President Donald Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship on Friday, a decision that marks the first major Supreme Court ruling of the president's second term—and one that could impact litigation against him going forward, as justices could restrict lower courts from banning his policies nationwide. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters on the South Lawn at the White House on June 15. Getty Images The Supreme Court is set to issue its ruling Friday in Trump v. CASA Inc., a case consolidating several lawsuits against Trump's executive order, which reverses longstanding Constitutional precedent to bar children born in the U.S. from automatically getting citizenship at birth if their parents aren't U.S. citizens or permanent residents. Trump asked the Supreme Court to take up the legality of his executive order after lower courts unanimously blocked it, and the policy has not yet taken effect. The president also asked justices to rule on whether federal judges representing a single state or region can impose injunctions that block a policy nationwide, meaning courts would not be able to unilaterally block his agenda going forward unless the Supreme Court rules. Trump's request to the court on nationwide injunctions comes as administration officials and allies have repeatedly complained about federal judges blocking the president's policies, claiming judges are abusing their power and are biased against him politically. The court's decision will come out when it releases opinions in the case at 10 a.m. EDT. The decision will the first major ruling by the Supreme Court on Trump's second-term policies. While justices have now issued a number of rulings regarding Trump policies on its 'shadow docket'—meaning it issues quicker rulings on issues without taking them up for oral argument first—the birthright citizenship dispute will mark the first time since Inauguration Day that justices held arguments regarding a Trump policy and then issued an opinion. But it's unlikely to be the last: hundreds of lawsuits have been brought against the Trump administration in the months since Trump took office, and the court is expected to make the final call in a number of major disputes on everything from immigration to the economy. A group of small businesses asked the court in mid-June to take up Trump's sweeping 'Liberation Day' tariffs and whether they're lawful, after lower courts blocked the tariffs but appeals courts then put them back into effect while the litigation moves forward. Plaintiffs have asked the Supreme Court to hold oral arguments over Trump tariffs right after its next term starts in the fall, and while the court rejected that request to expedite the case, it still could take up the dispute. Big Number More than 90. That's the approximate number of preliminary injunctions that have been issued against the Trump administration since Inauguration Day, including the ones on Trump's birthright citizenship order that prompted the dispute at the Supreme Court. That number only includes injunctions, which keep a policy on hold while a case moves forward, and does not include quicker temporary restraining orders, which judges use to immediately block a policy while they deliberate on whether to issue a more lasting order. Judges have also issued numerous temporary restraining orders against the Trump administration, which have similarly applied nationwide. While the Supreme Court has only issued one ruling on the Trump administration's policies after hearing oral arguments, the court's quicker 'shadow docket' rulings have largely come out in favor of the president. The court has so far ruled 14 times on Trump administration policies, not including the birthright citizenship case. Of those, the 6-3 conservative court has ruled in the Trump administration's favor nine times, while only three cases have come out against him. Another two rulings have been mixed, with aspects of it both for and against Trump. That being said, Trump has still stewed over the Supreme Court justices he appointed in his first term not being as favorable to him as he hoped, CNN reported in early June, with anonymous sources saying the president has expressed 'particular ire' at Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Trump's birthright citizenship order was one of the first the president issued after his inauguration, after Trump long suggested he could take aim at the policy as part of his wider immigration crackdown. The executive order sparked a number of lawsuits and the first district and appeals court rulings of Trump's second terms, with judges broadly decrying Trump's effort to change the longstanding Constitutional protection. 'The president cannot change, limit, or qualify this Constitutional right via an executive order,' Judge John Coughenour wrote in his ruling blocking the policy. As more court rulings against the president followed, with judges blocking other policies nationwide, the Trump administration and its allies increasingly started taking aim at judges, claiming they were abusing their authority to usurp the president's agenda and claiming judges have been harsher on Trump than courts were on other previous presidents. They also started specifically complaining about judges imposing orders that went beyond their districts: White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt decried Judge James Boasberg for blocking the Trump administration from halting deportation flights to El Salvador, for instance, claiming, 'A single judge in a single city cannot direct the movements of an aircraft carrier full of foreign alien terrorists who were physically expelled from U.S. soil.' In addition to the Trump administration taking the issue to the Supreme Court, Trump's allies in Congress have also sought to solve the issue of lower courts issuing nationwide injunctions, introducing legislation that would prohibit judges' ability to issue orders beyond the region their court covers. That bill is unlikely to become law, however, given it would need 60 votes in the narrowly divided Senate. Further Reading: Forbes Supreme Court Suggests It Won't Allow Trump's Birthright Citizenship Ban—But Could Limit How Other Policies Can Be Blocked By Alison Durkee Forbes Can Trump End Birthright Citizenship? What To Know After Judge Blocks Executive Order By Alison Durkee
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Is Georgia unsafe for LGBTQ community? State gets F on report card, ranks in bottom 10
It's Pride Month, when LGBTQ issues are discussed and communities are celebrated. But should Georgia be a bit more proud all year round? On Tuesday, SafeHome released its latest state report cards for LGBTQ safety. The grades were based on a composite safety score including a law score (based on pro- and anti-equality legislation) and a hate crime score (based on the incidence of hate crimes against people due to their sexual orientation or gender identity). Georgia ranked the 10th worst state in this study with a failing grade of an F (58%). When asked for further data they collected, the research team said Georgia had 14 laws that advanced LGBTQ equality, and six laws that detract from equality. However the state had a relatively low number of pro-equality laws in the area of non-discrimination, which carried a higher weight in our scoring system due to their importance to LGBTQ survey respondents. By comparison the top states had closer to 50 pro-equality laws and 0 "anti-equality" laws. "According to the latest FBI data we analyzed, Georgia had 31 reported hate crimes related to sexual orientation or gender identity. Some states had well over 100 reported hate crimes, but only 56% of Georgia law enforcement agencies reported hate crime data to the FBI, which docked its score." They went on to report that, according to the ACLU, 14 laws were defeated in the Georgia legislature that would have impacted LGBTQ rights. This year, however, three detrimental laws have been passed related to school facilities and sports bans, prison health restrictions, and religious exemption laws. Ten additional laws are advancing now though the legislative session is adjourned. Here are the top 10 safest states ranked from best to worst: Rhode Island California Delaware Connecticut Nevada New Hampshire Minnesota Virginia Maine Colorado Here are the bottom 10, least-safe states ranked from worst to best: Florida Louisiana Mississippi Tennessee Utah South Dakota Alabama Kansas Nebraska Georgia Miguel Legoas is a Deep South Connect Team Reporter for Gannett/USA Today. Find him on Instagram @miguelegoas and email at mlegoas@ This article originally appeared on Savannah Morning News: Georgia gets failing grade on LGBTQ state safety report card 2025
