
Can Trump Tackle US 'Chronic Disease Crisis'? Experts Weigh In
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s vow to "Make America Healthy Again" could fall short when it comes to chronic disease, experts have warned.
When the MAHA Commission report on chronic disease came out in May, President Donald Trump made it clear his administration was committed to tackling the epidemic
"We will not stop until we defeat the chronic disease epidemic in America, we're going to get it done for the first time ever," said Trump during a MAHA event at the White House on May .
In a statement included in the press release accompanying the report, Kennedy Jr. said: "We will end the childhood chronic disease crisis by attacking its root causes head-on—not just managing its symptoms."
Nearly 130 million Americans are estimated to have at least one form of chronic disease, which could be heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity or hypertension, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Experts told Newsweek that, while the Trump administration's ambition to "defeat" the "epidemic" is clear, whether its policies will help or hinder chronic-disease patients remains to be seen.
On one hand, Kennedy Jr.'s recent MAHA report, which detailed what the administration believed to be the leading causes of chronic disease in children, indicated the aim was to reduce the prevalence of chronic conditions through public education and research.
On the other hand, the proposed cuts to Medicaid funding and work requirements for eligibility to the benefits, which are set to come as part of the broader GOP budget bill, could leave many with chronic disease without access to vital care.
As many as three in four adults enrolled in Medicaid report having one or more chronic conditions, and many are unable to work the hours needed to meet the new eligibility requirements, according to nonprofit health policy research and news organization, KFF.
So, while some may be medically exempt, others will lose their health coverage, meaning their conditions could worsen without access to care.
Newsweek has contacted the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) via email on Tuesday.
Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva
Tackling Chronic Disease
Since he became health secretary, Kennedy Jr. has promised to increase research in the root causes of illness and ensure the American diet is full of high-quality foods, while limiting access to ultra-processed food and certain chemicals, which he believes are contributors to chronic disease.
The report states that consumption of ultra-processed foods "has gone up at an exponential rate as share of the American diet." Earlier in the year, Kennedy, had described products from companies like Kellogg's and McDonald's as "mass poison to children."
Prioritizing research on the issue is crucial, Kenneth E. Thorpe, a professor of health policy at Emory University, Georgia, and honorary chair of the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD), told Newsweek.
"Renewed focus on chronic disease and the impact that the U.S. diet has on it—focusing on artificial or chemical ingredients in food, particularly the impact of ultra processed foods—is important," he said.
He added that this was because of the fact diet has "a direct impact on the growing rates of chronic conditions like obesity and obesity-related comorbidities such diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancers and many more."
"I applaud the Trump administration's focus on addressing the number one cause of death and disability in the U.S.—chronic, non-communicable disease," said Thorpe, who has been an advocate of chronic disease prevention in the U.S. for over 30 years. "We have more people with more chronic diseases, with just 5 percent of the population accounting for 50 percent of the costs in health care."
He added that it is estimated that from 2016 to 2030 the cost of chronic disease will be in excess of $42 trillion.
"The time is now to focus on the prevention and better management of chronic disease," Thorpe added.
What Should the Trump Administration Do
While it's too early to tell if the Trump administration is heading down the right path to lower chronic disease prevalence, Dr. Adrian Hernandez, director of the Duke Clinical Research Institute at the Duke University School of Medicine, told Newsweek that "leading indicators appear to be going the wrong way."
He said this was partly because of the changes being proposed to the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
A proposal for the HHS, most of which was reported on in April, reduces by almost 40 percent its budget for 2026 and reveals major funding cuts for the NIH, according to CNN.
Newsweek has contacted the NIH via email on Tuesday.
Hernandez added that changes, such as the proposed cuts in federal funding, to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) were also going down the wrong path.
Rather than cuts to these federal health agencies, Hernandez said tackling chronic disease will require "an investment" in science and health.
He said that the same was needed for health care delivery models like Medicaid and Medicare—rather than making cuts to the programs, the administration should "invest in preventative health."
The GOP budget bill, which is progressing through the legislative ranks, instructs the committee to reduce the Department of Health and Human Services budget by $880 billion over 10 years, which would include cuts to Medicaid alongside other measures such as implementing work requirements.
Ross Brownson, director of the Prevention Research Center at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, told Newsweek that Medicaid cuts would "likely have a detrimental effect on chronic disease risk among the most vulnerable populations," adding Medicaid-enrolled adults have significantly higher rates of chronic disease than individuals privately insured.
"The drive to defeat chronic disease stalls if Medicaid patients are placed in the backseat," Thorpe said.
"Today, the federal program is far from perfect, but it is a lifeline for those who need it," Thorpe added, saying it was "often the only pathway to care" for many with chronic disease.
'A Long-Term Challenge'
Experts insist that chronic disease is a deeply complex issue that requires long-term solutions and attention.
Brownson noted that there has been "sparse attention to physical inactivity and tobacco use," as major risk factors for chronic disease.
"This is a two-edged sword," Brownson told Newsweek. He said that while "on one hand, labeling this issue a crisis implies a sense of urgency and may mobilize action." Ultimately "the jury is still out on whether they will solve the chronic disease crisis."
"We often have a short attention span and with this crisis label, policy makers may think the problem can be solved quickly and then move on to a new issue. We need to think of this as a long-term challenge in need of attention," he added.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk's business empire was built on government help. How badly could Donald Trump hurt him?
Even for Elon Musk, this is — to use the precise technical term — bonkers. Barely one week after leaving the Trump administration with every semblance of amity, the world's richest person is going scorched earth against the leader of the world's richest nation. Insults and threats. Calls for impeachment. Sinister references to Jeffrey Epstein. Somehow, Kanye West is also involved. It's like the messiest online influencer drama you've ever seen, except the parties are two of the most powerful people on Earth. But when it comes down to brass tacks, what exactly does Musk stand to lose in this titanic celebrity divorce? If Trump were to follow through on all his threats, and use every available weapon against Musk's business empire, how badly could it hurt him? The short answer is: pretty badly. In fact, with some admittedly quick and dirty math, we can put a price tag on some of it. Elon Musk's estimated $388bn fortune — already $26.6bn smaller than it was before this frank exchange of thermonuclear warheads — depends on the success of two companies which are both intertwined with the U.S. political system. One is Tesla, which makes electric vehicles; the other is SpaceX, which builds rockets, spacecraft, and satellites. X, formerly Twitter, can be left aside for now; having bought the social network 2022 for $44bn, Musk is still struggling to recoup his investment and has almost certainly lost money overall. Let's start with Space Exploration Technologies Corp., aka SpaceX. Not many people can afford to rent a rocket, so a lot of its business comes from government contracts, and U.S. government contracts most of all. As of writing, according to federal data, the Texas-based company has been paid or promised just under $21bn by Uncle Sam since 2008. The total potential value of all SpaceX's existing contracts, however, is much higher: $89.2bn. If Trump cancelled every contract tomorrow, that would mean a theoretical maximum of $68bn in lost potential income. For context, that's more than four times SpaceX's entire forecasted revenue for 2025, and nearly 15 times its revenue from 2022. Of course, there's no way to know if those maximum payments would ever actually have been made. So we could also get a rough sense of what SpaceX stands to lose by looking at the actual cash it received from federal coffers every year. In 2022 that was $2.8bn; in 2023, $3.1bn; and in 2024, $3.8bn. On the plus side for Musk, the U.S. government is so dependent on SpaceX that some critics have called it a monopoly in the making. SpaceX ferries our astronauts to and from the International Space Station, is heavily involved in Nasa's moon landing program, and manages an increasing share of government satellite communications as well. Still, that does not guarantee safety. Would you really, in all soberness, bet against Donald Trump doing something that hurts the country merely to punish his personal enemies? In fact, as Talking Points Memo editor-in-chief Josh Marshall argues, SpaceX's critical role might actually put it in greater danger, because it leaves the feds with few options except "expropriation or nationalization". Like SpaceX, Tesla has benefited greatly from taxpayer money, mostly in the form of emission trading payments from non-electric carmakers and tax credits or consumers buying electric vehicles. An analysis by The Washington Post put Tesla's total income from emission credits since 2007 at $11.4bn as of this February. Its gain from tax credits, which allow more people to buy its cars at higher prices, has been estimated at $3.4bn. Those emission credit schemes are run by U.S. states, not by the federal government. Nevertheless, Trump and the Republican Party have tried to undermine such schemes by contesting states' ability to set their own emissions rules. The wider impact is difficult to calculate. In contrast to SpaceX, Tesla sells to ordinary people, who tend to have their own opinions independent of government. In reputational terms, splitting noisily with Trump could reverse some of its recent sales losses; on the other hand, it might just make Tesla hated on both sides of politics. The biggest risk may be regulatory. At the time of Trump's second inauguration, Tesla was being investigated by numerous federal agencies including the Justice Department, the National Labor Relations Board, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration — which by itself had six pending probes. During his time at DOGE, Democrats feared Musk could use his power to influence or cancel these cases. But Trump's unabashed willingness to wield state power to punish those who displease him while rewarding loyalists cuts both ways. Live by the chainsaw, die by the chainsaw. How much that costs Tesla would depend on how far Trump is willing to go, and on the outcome of any ensuing court battle. But when U.S. stock exchanges closed on Thursday its share price had crashed by nearly 12 percent, wiping $122bn off its market value. So far we've only addressed Elon Musk's finances. Yet there are other, more personal ways that Trump could hurt him if the former reality TV star truly isn't here to make friends. For example, Trump's old advisor Stephen Bannon — who has previously branded Musk a "parasitic illegal immigrant" — urged the administration to investigate Musk's immigration history, and potentially deport him. Unlike some of the feverish allegations that emanate from the extended Trump-o-sphere, this one actually has some substance. An investigation by The Washington Post last year alleged that Musk had worked illegally in the U.S. while launching his Silicon Valley career in the mid-90s. Musk has denied this, and in any case he has been a U.S. citizen since 2002. Still, legal experts have said his citizenship could technically be revoked if he were proven to have lied to immigration authorities. And while those laws have only rarely been enforced in the past 25 years, some Trump aides and allies have said they want that to change. Nor is that anywhere close to the only alleged skeleton in Musk's closet. What is his relationship with ecstasy, Adderall, ketamine, or magic mushrooms? Has he ever been in regular contact with Vladimir Putin? Did his colleagues at DOGE rigorously follow information security laws when extracting sensitive data from federal systems? What happened to all that data after it was obtained? At least we can probably can rule out plain old assassination by government special forces. Although, to be fair, that is literally something that Trump and his lawyers have argued should be protected by presidential immunity. 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

USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
President Trump set to attend UFC 316 in New Jersey this weekend
President Trump set to attend UFC 316 in New Jersey this weekend Show Caption Hide Caption Donald Trump attends UFC 309 at Madison Square Garden President-elect Donald Trump walked into Madison Square Garden alongside UFC CEO Dana White, Elon Musk and Kid Rock for UFC 309. As his feud with tech billionaire and former MAGA darling Elon Musk exploded into public view this week, the White House says President Donald Trump is planning to attend a UFC event in New Jersey this weekend. The event, UFC 316, is slated for Saturday, June 7 at the Prudential Center in Newark, New Jersey. The president is scheduled to depart the White House for his golf club in New Jersey Friday afternoon, according to his official schedule, and return to the White House Sunday night. Musk has been high-profile guest for some of Trump's previous visits to the octagon, but the pair had a public falling-out this week after Musk's departure from the Trump administration. 'Siri, play Bad Blood': Internet reacts to Elon Musk and Trump 'breakup' The Trump-Musk fight took off this week when Musk called for Republicans to kill the House-passed tax bill that is a signature part of the second-term president's legislative agenda, calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' Two days later, Trump told reporters at the Oval Office on June 5 that he was 'very disappointed' with Musk and suggested their 'great relationship' was over. In response, Musk took to social media shortly afterward to blast the president, saying Trump wouldn't have won a second term and Republicans would have fared worse in elections in both chambers of the U.S. Congress were it not for his efforts on the 2024 campaign trail, where he poured a quarter of a million dollars into Trump's campaign. The tussle escalated in a back-and-forth between the two men, with Trump suggested going after Musk's companies and their federal contracts, and Musk alleging that Trump's name was in the Justice Department's files related to the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The pair's most recent fight appearance was in April, when Trump and Musk sat ringside at UFC 314 in Miami. The president has long attended UFC events, as CEO Dana White was a prominent supporter of Trump during his 2024 presidential campaign. When is UFC 316? UFC 316, which is headlined by Sean O'Malley vs. Merab Dvalishvili, is set to take place at 10 p.m. ET/7 p.m. PT at the Prudential Center in Newark, New Jersey. The main card is available for pay-per-view on ESPN. More: Sean O'Malley vs. Merab Dvalishvili 2 predictions; full card, odds, picks for UFC 316 Contributing: Riley Beggin, Sudiksha Kochi and Cydney Henderson, USA TODAY. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk lost $34 billion in net worth as Tesla stock tanked amid Trump online war
Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, lost $34 billion in net worth on Thursday after his company's stock plummeted in response to the online fight he got in with President Donald Trump. Over the last week, some Tesla stock investors had begun pulling their investments as Musk insulted Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' and made a swift exit from his 'special government employee' position. But, investors acted much more quickly while witnessing the two men engage in a back-and-forth on their respective social media platforms. Trump claimed he asked 'crazy' Musk to leave his administration. Musk took credit for Trump's election win. Trump threatened to pull Musk's government contracts. Musk accused Trump of being named in the 'Epstein files.' Down the stock went, ending the day at a 14 percent loss – equating to a $34 billion valuation for Musk. While many claim to have anticipated the online feud, it's a long way away from Musk jumping for joy onstage at Trump's rallies or the duo's Oval Office press conferences. The cracks started to appear in their relationship after the tech mogul refused to stand by and praise Trump's spending bill, which he has characterized as disastrous for the government. Musk's Thursday loss is part of the 33 percent decline Tesla's stock has seen since Inauguration Day. Although the stock had significant gains after the election, much of that has been wiped out by growing criticisms of Musk's role in the government, DOGE, and now his exit. Musk is still the world's richest man, but a $34 billion drop in net worth is still notable given it's the second-largest loss of the 500 wealthiest people on the planet recorded by the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. 'The only bigger one: his own wipeout in November 2021,' Bloomberg reported. But the tech entrepreneur still has plenty of other endeavors to drive his wealth, including SpaceX, one of the world's most valuable private startups, according to Bloomberg, Neuralink and xAI. As the dust settles from the powerful individuals' fight, it's still unclear what path forward Musk and his subsidiaries will take now that Trump has bashed Tesla's climate-conscious mission and threatened to revoke Musk's critical government contracts. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data