Texas lawmakers want to add warning label to social media platforms
The Brief
A House Committee on Public Health hearing was held Monday to discuss House Bill 499, authored by Texas Rep. Mary Gonzalez (D-Clint).
The bill would require users to click on a warning label, stating they understand the association between social media use and a minor's significant mental health issues.
Last summer, then-U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy made the same plea to Congress with a bill dubbed the Stop the Scroll Act. It was introduced in September but never made it out of committee.
Gonzalez said the bill would require the Health and Human Services Commission to write the warning with input from a panel of experts. The bill was left pending in the public health committee.
With growing data linking social media use to an increase in teen depression, eating disorders and suicides, Texas House lawmakers debated whether there should be warning labels placed on platforms.
The bill being debated would require platforms like Facebook, Instagram and TikTok to show a warning that there is a link between a teen's social media usage and significant mental health issues.
What we know
A House Committee on Public Health hearing was held Monday to discuss House Bill 499, authored by Texas Rep. Mary Gonzalez (D-Clint).
The bill would require users to click on a warning label, stating they understand the association between social media use and a minor's significant mental health issues.
Last summer, then-U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy made the same plea to Congress with a bill dubbed the Stop the Scroll Act. It was introduced in September, but it never made it out of committee.
Rep. James Frank (R-Wichita Falls) wants a warning to include the addictive nature of social media.
"They have the data that shows how addictive it is," he said. "They have hired child psychologists to make sure it is more addictive and then withheld that information from parents."
Lawmakers also debated if a warning label would actually have an impact.
Gonzalez said the label would educate both teens and their parents.
What they're saying
"We know adolescents who spend more than three hours a day on social media face risks of anxiety and depression," said Gonzalez. "We know when we added cigarette health warning labels, the understanding of consumption raised for the consumer."
Dr. Lauren Gambill, a pediatrician representing the Texas Medical Association and the Texas Pediatric Society, said she's seen the damage from social media on her patients firsthand.
"As a hospital-based pediatrician, I take care of kids in the hospital following suicide attempts at an alarming frequency," she told the committee.
Gambill said in her decade of practice, problems linked to social media are not only becoming more frequent, but the children impacted are becoming younger. Problems extend beyond depression and suicide attempts to eating disorders prompted by so-called health influencers.
"My patients tell me they follow 'what I eat daily' trends and go to social media for grueling workout routines," she said. "By the time they get to me, they are so nutritionally depleted that their heartrates slow down, and they can't maintain their blood pressures."
Dr. Gambill told the committee the warning label would be a step in the right direction to address the ongoing mental health crisis.
"Will it solve it? Will it reach every child? Absolutely not," she said. "But I think if we save even one life, I think it would be important."
What's next
Gonzalez said the bill would require the Health and Human Services Commission to write the warning with input from a panel of experts.
The bill was left pending in the public health committee.
The Source
Information in this article comes from Monday's Texas House Committee on Public Health hearing, State Rep. Mary Gonzalez (D-Clint) and previous news coverage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Bill enacting nation's strictest limits on corporate health care influence signed by Gov. Kotek
A doctor works at a pharmacy. Corporate investors eyeing local health care facilities in Oregon could soon face one of the hardest markets nationwide. () Corporate investors hoping to take over local health care facilities in Oregon could soon face one of the hardest markets nationwide. Senate Bill 951, which was quietly signed into law by Gov. Tina Kotek on Monday, sets the strongest regulations on private and corporate control of medical practices in the nation, according to industry lawyers. A similar effort failed in the Legislature last year amid pushback from Republicans that prevented the bill from meeting key legislative deadlines. The governor told reporters at a news conference Monday that the bill should be a model for other states and for Congress. 'We need to make sure that our health care providers and our delivery system stays local and is controlled locally,' she said. 'That's what that bill is trying to do.' The legislation was opposed by companies such as Amazon and the statewide nonprofit Oregon Ambulatory Surgery Center Association, an industry group, where executives see private investment as vital to their business strategy. 'We universally agree that the way to protect clinics from closure and maintain the broadest patient access to outpatient care is to keep the existing, and multi-ownership models alive and well,' wrote Ryan Grimm on behalf of the association and the Portland Clinic, a private multispecialty medical group, in a March letter to lawmakers. 'In some communities, there is no hospital to swoop in to the rescue, or no hospital in a financial position to save a clinic,' he wrote. The bill does not go into effect immediately and it contains a three-year adjustment period for clinics to comply with the restrictions. Institutions such as hospitals, tribal health facilities, behavioral health programs and crisis lines are exempted. 'We're at an inflection point in this country when it comes to the corporatization of healthcare,' wrote House Majority Leader Ben Bowman, D-Tigard, in a statement May 28 following the bill's passage in the Oregon House. 'With the passage of this bill, every Oregonian will know that decisions in exam rooms are being made by doctors, not corporate executives.' The signature from Kotek deals a major victory to local providers and doctors, who sought to wrest back control over their practices in key decisions such as spending, staffing levels, physician ownership stake, and the price of services. The legislation would close what supporters say is a loophole in state law, which mandates that doctors hold at least a 51% stake in most medical practices, but which companies have taken advantage of by employing their own doctors — sometimes from out of state — and putting them down on paper as clinic owners. Then the company itself, or a hired management service, is brought in to handle payroll, accounting and other services, shifting away control and revenues from the clinic to the company, and from what was once a locally operated business. The bill limits the control such companies can have in a clinic's operations and would ban noncompete agreements used by companies to prohibit doctors from taking a job at a different practice. Support for the bill coalesced around the takeover of the Eugene-based Oregon Medical Group by the health care giant Optum, one of the nation's largest employers of physicians. The surrounding area lost dozens of doctors, leaving over 10,000 people without care, according to a Frequently Asked Question's document from Sen. Deb Patterson, D-Salem, after Optum required its doctors to sign non-compete contracts. Optum reversed course after pressure from lawmakers in May 2024. 'This bill is about preventing the kind of takeover that happened at the Oregon Medical Group in Eugene,' wrote state Rep. Lisa Fragala, D-Eugene, in a May statement. 'When we see consolidation in the healthcare market, we see three things happen: higher prices, negative effects on the quality of care and decreased access to care.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Don't cut off Medicaid for people in jail awaiting trial
Every day across this country, thousands of people presumed innocent are locked up awaiting trial. For many of them — particularly those battling substance use disorders or mental illness — that jail cell is more than just a loss of freedom. It often comes with the loss of health care coverage. In many states, Medicaid and other health care benefits are suspended or terminated the moment the patient is booked into jail. This policy puts lives at risk and creates gaps in care. And for those of us who have lived through addiction or worked alongside people in recovery, we know just how dangerous that gap can be. Our prison and jail systems need the Due Process Continuity of Care Act, because it will help maintain Medicaid coverage during pretrial incarceration. It's up to Congress to follow through and pass this important piece of legislation, to shift from a model that prioritizes severe punishment to one that prioritizes care and continuity. People are struggling and deserve a chance to get better, not get worse, simply because they were arrested. The link between incarceration and behavioral health is no coincidence. So many people end up in jail not because they're dangerous, but because they're living with untreated mental health challenges or deep in addiction and haven't gotten the help they need. And the damage doesn't stop at the jail door. When people are released, often without any plan to restart their medical benefits or reconnect to care, they walk right back into the same instability, only now with deeper trauma and fewer resources. It's no surprise that the risk of overdose skyrockets after release. Studies show people are up to 129 times more likely to die of a drug overdose in the first two weeks after leaving jail or prison. I've seen firsthand the deadly consequences when someone is locked up pretrial and loses access to their medications, therapy or support systems. People are in withdrawal. They suffer in silence and spiral without the care they relied on outside those walls. Our jails, already under-resourced and overwhelmed, have become the frontlines of a behavioral health crisis they were never built to manage. They're acting as detox centers and psychiatric hospitals by default, and that's not just unsustainable, it's inhumane. Keeping health care coverage active during pretrial incarceration isn't just the right thing to do morally, it's smart policy. It prevents needless suffering, reduces recidivism, and eases the burden on emergency services and hospitals. It helps people transition from jail back into their communities with the support they need to stay healthy and free. And ultimately, it saves money by keeping people out of crisis and out of the revolving door of the criminal legal system. Let's be clear: taking health care away from someone who hasn't yet been convicted of a crime is not justice. It's a systemic failure. If we truly believe in second chances, if we believe in treating addiction and mental illness as health issues, not criminal ones, then we have to make sure that care doesn't stop at the jailhouse door. Health care is a lifeline. Let's stop cutting that lifeline when people need it most. John Bowman is Kentucky senior campaign organizer. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
TikTok Bans #SkinnyTok, But Experts Say More Is Needed
TikTok recently announced that it blocked search results for the hashtag #SkinnyTok due to its association with unhealthy weight loss content. The ban occurred after several European policymakers began investigating the app's impact on youth mental health. In the U.S., eating disorder experts say the ban is a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done to stop the glamorization of weight loss. "It will help by making a statement," says Stephanie Michele, an intuitive eating coach and co-host of the podcast Life After Diets. "When bigger systems call out a social trend as harmful, and change their rules around how that trend is available, it sends a message. It's a short-term win." The issue, says Michele, is that this type of content is likely to reappear under a different hashtag. "The root issues like systemic fatphobia, beauty privilege, and social media algorithms that reward thinness still need to be addressed," she says. Banning a hashtag seems like a step in the right direction, says Cynthia Vejar, PhD, the director and associate professor of Clinical Mental Health Counseling at Lebanon Valley College. "It shows that platforms are trying to take some responsibility for the kind of content they allow and promote. Removing this specific tag may minimize how easily users can engage with triggering or harmful content." Still, Vejar cautions that bans can backfire since there's a natural human tendency to be curious about what's off-limits. "Bans can unintentionally make something more appealing just because it's taboo. Especially online, internet users can code [their] language and create secret communities to sidestep bans.""A once-banned term gets replaced by another. It might be #fitspo this week and #almondmomcore the next. What [isn't changing] is the underlying value system—that thinness equals worth. Until that changes, the harmful messaging will keep popping up under different names."Even without #SkinnyTok, Vejar explains that they may use different spellings, new hashtags, or code words. Moreover, this ban scratches the surface of a much bigger issue: TikTok's algorithm doesn't rely on hashtags alone. According to Michele, if someone engages with body-centric content once, they're often fed more of it, whether the label is banned or not. So, teens may still be seeing harmful messaging about weight and body types. "Language evolves quickly in these online spaces," says Michele. "A once-banned term gets replaced by another. It might be #fitspo this week and #almondmomcore the next. What [isn't changing] is the underlying value system—that thinness equals worth. Until that changes, the harmful messaging will keep popping up under different names." Social media didn't invent body image issues, but it absolutely amplifies them, says Michele. "It can be especially dangerous when it reinforces a false sense of virtue, like when restrictive eating or compulsive exercise is framed as 'wellness' or 'discipline.' That kind of content is everywhere, and it gets disguised as empowerment." Disordered eating is also easy to disguise, says Alyson Curtis, LMHC, a licensed therapist specializing in eating disorders, binge eating, emotional eating, and body image concerns. "You've got young people, influencers, and [other people] promoting low-calorie 'WIEIAD' (what I eat in a day) videos, or boasting about losing X amount of weight in X amount of time, and the content all flies under the radar. " According to Curtis, this happens because the definition of disordered eating isn't widely established, creating an uphill battle for professionals to spread correct information. "We're up against industries that not only want, but need, a new generation of young [people] to become obsessed with how they look, with feeling inferior, so that they become lifetime buyers of their products." While most experts agree that the #SkinnyTok ban is a step in the right direction, they say much more needs to be done. To start, Michele says platforms like TikTok need to take more responsibility for the content their algorithms push. Once someone has viewed enough weight loss content, or #SkinnyTok posts, they will continue receiving those messages from similar content or hashtags. "We also need larger media and marketing to change," she says. "That includes more diverse body representation in movies and television and advertisements; better education on the biology of appetite and weight; and less emphasis on weight loss as the end-all-be-all overall." She also notes that eating disorders don't always look like extreme thinness. "Most disordered eating lives in people who appear normal or even healthy by societal standards, and they're often praised for it," she explains. Teachers and school administrators also need to have honest conversations about body image and mental health, and do more to educate young people about media literacy, says Vejar. "Media literacy should be included in the curriculum so kids can better understand how content is filtered and unrealistic." Curtis agrees. Children need to learn that some online content can be predatory, especially if it promotes thinness, disordered eating, and ultimately that they are not enough, she says. "If you're a young person and you have never been educated on the predatory nature of these practically immediately indoctrinated into a cultural value of—be pretty for us, be cool, be thin," she says. "Young people so badly want to be cool and to fit in. The initiation into this warped cultural value is essentially seamless." Vejar recommends having open, honest, judgment-free conversations with your kids. "Ask questions, but also listen, and be present and supportive." Focus on how your child feels, not how they look. Instead of saying, 'You look so skinny in that outfit,' try saying, 'You look happy,' or 'You seem confident today.' Here are some additional things you can do: Get professional help early if you suspect a problem. Therapists, dietitians, or healthcare providers who specialize in eating disorders can be crucial to your child's recovery, says Vejar. Model healthy behavior. Your kids notice if you obsess about weight or make negative body comments. "If they hear you criticizing your body or glorifying restraint, they're learning that message, too," says Michele. Educate yourself. Vejar suggests learning the warning signs and understanding the mental health side of disordered eating so you can get help and intervention when needed. Monitor social media. Be aware of what kind of content your child is exposed to online, suggests Vejar. Talk to them about what they are watching and how it makes them feel. Be curious but not controlling. According to Michele, eating behaviors are usually a symptom of something else, and the goal is to build trust so your child can let you in. Allow them to talk freely without judgment and help them find tools that will help them recover. Expose them to positive messages. Curtis says she recalls reading interviews with Kate Winslet when she was a teen battling an eating disorder. "Her sole voice, advocating for body diversity and acceptance, kept me from truly diving into an irrevocable descent with my eating."If you or a loved one are coping with an eating disorder, contact the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA) Helpline for support at 1-800-931-2237 or text NEDA to the original article on Parents
