Biden's pandemic playbook failed. Trump just offered a smarter path forward
Print Close
By Dr. Tom Price
Published May 15, 2025
On May 5, President Donald Trump signed an executive order outlawing future federal funds going to gain-of-function research. This move comes as the nation begins to reckon with the broader failures of its pandemic response – failures that extended far beyond the lab and into every aspect of public health policy.
As the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic fades into the rearview mirror, the United States finds itself engaged in postmortems: on lockdowns, vaccines, school closures and public trust. But there's one glaring lesson the U.S. has yet to fully absorb – its health strategy during crises can't rely on just one type of tool. A narrow, binary response to COVID-19 cost lives. The country must do better next time.
During the pandemic, the public was often presented with a simple directive: get vaccinated or take your chances. While most Americans indeed should have gotten vaccinated, policymakers should have provided more room for nuance and variation. They ignored a core truth of medicine – no single solution fits every individual. The virus evolved. Patient responses varied. But the official toolkit did not adapt.
What the U.S. needed (and still needs) is a robust, flexible public health approach that supports a range of modalities: vaccines, yes, but also antivirals, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and emerging biologics.
TRUMP'S HEALTHCARE ORDER WILL HELP FIX HEALTHCARE FOR EVERYONE
A resilient system is one that can pivot quickly, match patients with the right intervention and adapt as science advances.
Monoclonal antibodies offer a clear example of what went wrong. These therapies, proven to reduce hospitalizations and deaths among high-risk patients, were widely distributed early in the pandemic and used successfully by top federal officials, including the president. But in late 2021 and early 2022, federal authorities stopped distributing them, citing reduced efficacy against new variants.
This was a mistake. mAbs are a platform technology. They can be tailored to variants and deployed quickly. They are especially important for those who don't respond well to vaccines. But nearly five years after the start of the pandemic, no mAb has received full FDA approval for respiratory virus prevention despite meeting the same safety and efficacy benchmarks used to fast-track other medical countermeasures.
Meanwhile, the public was encouraged to rely on booster shots which, while still additive, lost efficacy as the pandemic continued. CDC data show that the bivalent booster provided only 37% protection against hospitalization for adults over 65 after several months. For the immunocompromised, protection was even lower. Yet, therapies that could have closed that gap were taken off the table.
TRUMP IS RIGHT TO BLOCK 'DANGEROUS' GAIN-OF-FUNCTION RESEARCH
The U.S. should have maintained an all-of-the-above approach to treatment so its health professionals could make patient recommendations on a case-by-case basis, ensuring the most vulnerable Americans receive adequate protection.
More broadly, five years later, the U.S. still lacks a proactive framework for deploying flexible, evidence-driven therapeutics in a public health emergency. The U.S. needs a system that doesn't just rely on whatever is first to market; it needs one that actively supports a diversified portfolio of tools.
That means empowering agencies like the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and the National Institutes of Health to invest in adaptable countermeasures – antibody platforms, broad-spectrum antivirals, rapid diagnostics and therapeutic RNA technologies. It also means modernizing the FDA's approval pathways to reflect the pace of innovation. When real-world evidence shows that a therapy is saving lives, regulators should have the flexibility to act.
Congress can help by authorizing funding streams that reward versatility, creating incentives for companies to maintain and adapt an all-of-the-above treatment approach, and ensuring public-private partnerships are built for speed and scale. Legislation could also establish a standing procurement mechanism for variant-specific updates, not just vaccines.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
All of this will help to mitigate the damage of one of the greatest casualties of the pandemic – the decline of public trust in America's health institutions. This erosion stemmed from the sense that key decisions lacked transparency or failed to account for patients' diverse needs.
According to a 2022 Pew Research Center survey, only 29% of U.S. adults said they had a great deal of confidence in medical scientists, down from 40% at the beginning of the pandemic. Trust in public health officials followed a similar decline.
A more transparent, inclusive approach, where policymakers communicate the rationale behind treatment shifts and openly assess real-world outcomes, can help rebuild that trust. A better system would emphasize data-sharing, clear communication, and respect for physician judgment in tailoring care to patient needs.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
COVID-19 exposed the limits of the U.S.' current playbook. A more effective future demands flexibility, pluralism and the humility to admit health policymakers don't always know right away what will work best, or for whom.
But if regulators build the right system – one that encourages innovation, evaluates outcomes in real time, and keeps every safe and effective tool on the table – they won't have to learn this lesson again the hard way.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DR. TOM PRICE Print Close
URL
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/bidens-pandemic-playbook-failed-trump-just-offered-smarter-path-forward
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
WebMD
35 minutes ago
- WebMD
FDA OKs New Next-Gen Pill for Rare Lung Cancer
approved a first-of-its-kind oral pill to treat a rare type of advanced lung cancer that often spreads to the brain. The new drug, known as taletrectinib but sold as Ibtrozi, is meant for adults with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that has spread or worsened and is linked to a faulty ROS1 gene. This targeted therapy offers new hope to about 3,000 people in the U.S. and over 1 million globally who are diagnosed each year with advanced ROS1-positive NSCLC. NSCLC is the most common form of lung cancer – a leading cause of cancer-related deaths. About 2% of advanced cases are ROS1-positive, which grow faster and are harder to treat. Most patients are diagnosed in their 50s, often without a history of smoking. The cancer often spreads to the brain, seen in 35% at diagnosis and nearly 50% after treatment. This makes treatment especially challenging and highlights the need for better options. The FDA's decision was based on two clinical studies of people with ROS1-positive NSCLC. One trial involved 113 people who had previously been treated with a drug similar to Ibtrozi, while the other included 157 who had not. About 85% to 90% of those new to treatment responded to Ibtrozi, and at least 63% continued to see benefits for over a year. Among those previously treated, about 52% to 62% improved, with most (up to 83%) continuing to respond for at least six months. Ibtrozi also helped shrink brain tumors in 73% of people who were new to similar treatments, and in 63% of those who had tried one before, according to a news release by Nuvation Bio, the drug's maker. "Ibtrozi's durability of response and ability to effectively penetrate the brain, coupled with a well-characterized and manageable safety profile, further addresses these critical needs for patients," said Nathan Pennell, MD, PhD, a professor of medicine at the Cleveland Clinic and an investigator of the clinical trials. Ibtrozi belongs to a class of medicines called tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). It blocks the faulty ROS1 protein, helping slow cancer growth and spread. Ibtrozi is designed to reach the brain and keep the disease under control for longer. The FDA recommends 600 mg oral Ibtrozi pills once a day on an empty stomach, with no food two hours before or after taking it. Treatment continues until the cancer worsens or side effects become too serious. The most common side effects include things like nausea, diarrhea, tiredness, and dizziness. The FDA also warns about more serious risks, like liver and lung problems, heart rhythm issues, muscle pain, and possible harm to an unborn baby. People who use the drug should tell their doctor about all medications they're taking, including over-the-counter ones – especially anything for acid reflux. Women are advised not to breastfeed during treatment and for three weeks afterward. It's also important to protect your skin from the sun while taking the drug and for at least five days after stopping it.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is A Spray Tan Really That Much Safer Than A Suntan?
A bronzy glow may be the look you want for summer, but you likely know that sunbathing or using tanning beds could expose you to ultraviolet rays, which raise your risk for skin cancer. A spray tan may seem like a safer option for sun-kissed skin — but is it? In reality, 'the safest option is no tan via sun, tanning bed, spray or lotion,' Dr. Allison Larson, the physician executive director of dermatology at MedStar Health in Washington, D.C., told HuffPost. 'Love the skin you have.' Still, doctors recognize that you may want a tan. And spray tans are 'definitely safer from a skin cancer perspective,' said Dr. Kenneth Mark, a cosmetic dermatologist in New York City. 'We know that sun exposure and its ultraviolet rays damage our skin cells' DNA and predispose us to skin cancer and skin aging, in general, including sun spots, wrinkles, thinning of skin and collagen breakdown.' While spray tans are safer than lying out in the sun or using a tanning bed, they're not risk-free. Here's what medical experts want you to know about them. Spray tans are made of a sugar compound called dihydroxyacetone (DHA) that reacts to the proteins in the outer layer of your skin, giving you a bronzed color, said Marc Hurlbert, a pharmacologist and CEO of the Melanoma Research Alliance. DHA is a colorless compound that's applied as a fine mist by a trained technician. 'It doesn't involve melanin or UV exposure, just a surface-level chemical reaction,' Dr. Asmi Berry, a dermatologist in Los Angeles, told HuffPost. That reaction produces a temporary tan that fades over several days as your skin cells turn over and naturally exfoliate, she said. The biggest benefit is that you get a tan without exposing yourself to UV rays, Hurlbert said. This is important, as skin cancer is the most common cancer in the U.S., and 1 in 5 Americans will develop it in their lifetimes, according to the American Academy of Dermatology. Spray tans also often produce quick results, Larson said. And if you struggle to apply self-tanners evenly, spray tans can provide 'streak-free color,' Berry added. 'Spray tans are ideal if you want fast, all-over results and don't want to risk sun exposure,' Berry said. 'Compared to self-tanning lotions or mousses, spray tans can be more even and less messy, but they require a trip to the salon.' The Food and Drug Administration has approved DHA for use in sunless tanners but not in spray tans. The agency says, 'the use of DHA in 'tanning' booths as an all-over spray has not been approved by the FDA.' The reason is that there's a lack of safety data on the effects of inhaling the DHA mist. This is notable, Larson said. 'Based on animal and cell culture studies, we have reasons to be concerned about a negative impact on the lungs when DHA is inhaled. It is not yet known the degree of impact a spray tan would have, if inhaled, or how long this might last.' Inhaling particles from a chemical that's not tested for use as a spray tan could pose an 'unknown risk' for anyone, but especially those with asthma or pregnant women, Hurlbert said. The impact of getting DHA in your eyes, mouth or nose is also unknown. 'So, ultimate all-around safety cannot be confirmed,' he noted. Experts also aren't sure how much DHA is absorbed into the body from the skin or what impact that will have, Larson said. There's the potential for DHA to irritate your skin or cause an allergic reaction, Berry said. If you have a history of eczema or sensitive skin, she recommended doing a test patch or checking with your dermatologist first. Spray tans may also contain fragrances, which some people find irritating, Hurlbert said. Getting spray tans too often could lead to a buildup of DHA on your skin, which might cause dryness, Berry said. Keep in mind, too, that spray tans don't protect your skin from UV rays — so you still need to wear sunscreen and take steps to reduce your risk for skin cancer, Larson said. However, not everyone does that. A 2018 study published in JAMA Dermatology found that people who use sunless tanners often engaged in risky skin cancer-related behaviors, such as not seeking shade or wearing protective clothing outdoors. They were also more likely to report a recent sunburn. Research also suggests that DHA application followed by sunlight exposure can lead to damaging free radical formation in the skin, which could possibly lead to skin cancer, Larson said. That's why wearing sunscreen after a spray tan is crucial. Other studies have shown that DHA could damage the DNA of skin cells, Mark said. DNA damage is linked to skin cancer and may hinder new cell growth. Since we don't know the full risk of inhaling DHA, Mark recommended covering your eyes, nose, lips and mouth during a spray tan to avoid exposure. However, he acknowledged, 'That could prove challenging to also tan your face.' And make sure the room is ventilated, Hurlbert added. When you get a spray tan, they'll tell you how long to leave it on before showering. Follow those directions to ensure the tan sets properly, and then moisturize daily to keep your skin barrier healthy and to maintain the tan, Berry said. And don't forget to wear sunscreen before going outside, Larson emphasized. The bottom line is spray tans are safer for skin than suntanning or using a tanning bed when it comes to skin cancer risk, Mark said. But they could still bring some safety concerns. 'The aerosolized 'spray' form has not necessarily been studied enough or proven to be safe,' he said. The Important Body Part You're Probably Missing When You Apply Sunscreen These Skin Care-Quality Sunscreens Are Worth Every Penny The Best Sunscreen Is On Amazon, And It's Not What You Think
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How one state reduced its overdose death rate by 32% in a year
Overdose deaths in New York state declined 32% last year, a significant drop that officials and experts attribute to the state's efforts to expand harm reduction and addiction treatment services. An estimated 4,567 New Yorkers died of a drug overdose in 2024, compared to 6,688 in 2023, according to provisional data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About 77% of those deaths involved an opioid like fentanyl or heroin. Healthbeat dug into the measures the state took to help decrease its overdose death rate. The statewide decline mirrors a national trend, said Dr. Magdalena Cerdá, a professor and director of the Center for Opioid Epidemiology and Policy at the Department of Population Health at NYU Grossman School of Medicine. Last year, about 80,000 Americans died of a drug overdose, down from about 110,000 deaths in 2023, a reduction of almost 27%, according to the CDC. 'We're still definitely in the middle of an overdose crisis,' Cerdá said. 'But the substantial decline in the past year gives me a lot of hope.' The reduction in deaths is promising but tenuous, experts say. Although overdose deaths have declined overall, racial disparities in mortality have widened, and uncertainty around federal funding related to addiction services could imperil recent progress. The Trump administration's recently released budget plan calls for more than $1 billion in cuts to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the federal agency focused on addiction and mental health. In New York, the reduction in deaths reflects a combination of forces, including wider availability of the overdose-reversing medication naloxone, expanded access to medication for opioid use disorder, and deeper investments in harm reduction services, experts say. 'There's likely multiple reasons for this decline, but one of them is the substantial investment that states have done, and in particular, New York state has done, in terms of the provision of harm reduction services and services to treat substance use disorders,' Cerdá said. In an announcement, Gov. Kathy Hochul's administration linked the decline in deaths to the state's distribution of nearly $400 million in opioid settlement funds, which are funding efforts to expand access to medication for addiction, supportive services, and recovery programs. 'These numbers show that our hard work and innovative approaches to establishing services are making a difference across the state,' Dr. Chinazo Cunningham, the commissioner of the Office of Addiction Services and Supports, said in a statement. Through a new online portal, the state has distributed more than 13 million fentanyl test strips and 10 million xylazine test strips — used to test drug samples — and 296,000 naloxone kits to residents for free, according to Hochul's administration. Additionally, the state Health Department distributed more than 537,600 naloxone kits from January 2024 through April 2025. The declines in mortality have not been evenly distributed across demographic groups. In New York City, while overdose deaths in 2023 declined for the first time in four years, including among white New Yorkers, they were unchanged among Black New Yorkers and increased among Latino New Yorkers. Recent data from the city Department of Health and Mental Hygiene show that high rates of overdose mortality persist in parts of the Bronx, Upper Manhattan, and Central Brooklyn. Addressing those disparities will require deeper investments in the impacted communities, including by reducing barriers to care and services, Cerdá said. In its annual report released in November, New York's Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board — a committee tasked with making recommendations for the allocation of the funding — stressed the need for racial equity in the distribution of settlement funds, describing ongoing overdose deaths in Black and Latino communities as an 'overarching concern.' Dr. Silvia Martins, a professor of epidemiology and director of the Substance Use Epidemiology Unit in the Department of Epidemiology at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, raised concerns that cuts to federal programs related to addiction could slow or stop the recent overall reduction in overdose deaths. Reduced funding for SAMHSA and looming cuts to Medicaid could curtail many Americans' access to addiction prevention and treatment programs, she said. And if federal funding for addiction services dries up, opioid settlement funds won't be able to fully close the gaps, she cautioned. 'I truly hope that the federal government realizes now is not the time to stop these efforts, because it's trending, in most states, in the right direction,' she said. 'We see that these efforts are working.' This story was produced by Healthbeat and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
