Gov. Jeff Landry names new head of Louisiana health department
BATON ROUGE, La. (Louisiana First) — Gov. Jeff Landry named Bruce Greenstein as the new secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health.
Greenstein was the health secretary during former Gov. Bobby Jindal's administration. He said he is 'more committed than ever to building on the progress we've made and driving meaningful change' as he steps into the role again in 2025.
His professional experience includes working in the public and private sectors in health care for the last 30 years. Most recently, he has worked for the LHC Group, a national provider for in-home health care services.
'With his deep understanding of healthcare systems, from Medicaid to post-acute care, Bruce Greenstein's appointment as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health marks a new era for Louisiana's healthcare. There is no one more qualified than Bruce. I look forward to the great work he, Doctor Abraham, and the entire LDH team will do for the State of Louisiana,' said Landry.
Surgeon General Ralph Abraham called Greenstein's appointment a 'critical addition' as the department works to bring change to health care in the state.
'We will be a unified front that takes a creative approach to improving health outcomes and providing better services to Louisiana residents,' Abraham said.
Gov. Jeff Landry names new Louisiana OMV commissioner
White House responds to Supreme Court ruling on mistaken deportation
U.S. and China locked in trade war
Black Power Ranger actor disagrees with writer on his casting
'Focal point of the draft': Construction crews raise NFL Draft Stage roof
Witkoff meets Putin as Trump tells Russia 'to get moving'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
33 minutes ago
- Axios
Vaccine board purge stokes talk of CDC alternatives
By gutting the expert panel that's advised the government on vaccine policy for more than 60 years, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. earned the condemnation of virtually every medical society, as well as former public health officials and local practitioners. What became immediately clear is that no outside group can immediately step in and fill the vacuum if the public won't trust the reconstituted Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The big picture: The distress and lack of organization apparent in health circles on Tuesday was a sign that a new independent body that could act as a "shadow CDC" to truth-squad the Trump administration isn't close to materializing. "We are clearly working on it and we think it's very important, but I don't think anyone has an answer yet," said Michael Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, who's behind one ad hoc effort. "Right now, we're in such uncharted territory." The medical establishment has floated ideas such as state-appointed boards or medical specialty associations serving as clearinghouses for information on vaccine safety and efficacy for clinicians. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) during the pandemic created a state entity to review the safety of federally approved COVID-19 vaccines before distributing them to the public. But it would be difficult to replicate the professional clout of ACIP, whose recommendations can influence whether insurers cover vaccines. That would leave Kennedy's handpicked successors controlling the narrative — a prospect many researchers and physicians think will bring a radical departure from ACIP's evidence-based deliberations on safety and efficacy. Friction point: Kennedy and other Trump health officials' assertions that ACIP has been a rubber stamp for vaccines have infuriated public health officials, who say the physicians, infectious disease experts and researchers constituted a vital body of nongovernmental health leaders who took their jobs seriously. Panel members were carefully vetted for conflicts and had their professional credentials scrutinized. Discussions took place in a high-profile public forum that would be difficult, if not impossible, to replicate. "Many of us can provide a read of the science, and we can convene formally or informally to create consensus around vaccine recommendations," said Megan Ranney, dean of the Yale School of Public Health. "But I suspect that it won't be sufficient for insurers, for Medicaid, for the Vaccines for Children program, and it's unclear how pediatricians and primary care physicians and pharmacies across the country are going to be able to respond," she said. The other side: Kennedy wrote on X Tuesday night that he would announce new ACIP members in the coming days. "None of these individuals will be ideological anti-vaxxers. They will be highly credentialed physicians and scientists," Kennedy wrote. He added he would detail instances of "historical corruption at ACIP to help the public understand why this clean sweep was necessary. "Kennedy cited the panel's "stubborn unwillingness to demand adequate safety trials before recommending new vaccines for our children" as the most "outrageous example." What to watch: All eyes are on the new appointees for the board, including their scientific backgrounds, track records when it comes to defending vaccines and any potential conflicts of interest. HHS has indicated it has every intention of moving forward with ACIP's next meeting, scheduled for June 25-27. The agenda includes recommendation votes for COVID–19, HPV, influenza, meningococcal and RSV vaccines. "If nothing else, I think [the committee] may have trouble functioning because you've just lost a whole lot of institutional memory," said Adam Ratner, a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics' Committee on Infectious Diseases. "That agenda has the committee voting on real things that matter to real people, and I don't know how they're possibly going to do that in any kind of way that is based on science or evidence," he said.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Research cuts pose ‘existential threat' to academic medicine and put nation's health at risk, new report says
Federal research funding cuts pose an 'existential threat' to academic medicine that will have repercussions for patient care in the US, according to a new report from the Association of American Medical Colleges, highlighting what it calls significant damage already done to the nation. The association, which represents 172 MD-granting US and Canadian medical schools and more than 490 teaching hospitals and health systems, noted in Wednesday's report that proposals in the House GOP tax and spending cuts bill could lead to a loss of health insurance for 11 million people enrolled in Medicaid or Affordable Care Act coverage and jeopardize loans for half of medical students. This is the first time in recent history when all three missions of academic medicine – research, education and patient care – are threatened, said Heather Pierce, the association's senior director for science policy. Typically, she said, when one is under fire, the others can compensate to ensure that health care is not compromised. 'This is the first time that all the missions of academic medicine simultaneously face these threats from our federal partners,' Pierce said. Should this trend continue, Pierce said, the United States will probably face a physician shortage, stagnation in scientific progress and a decline in the quality of medical care. Academic health systems, which include medical schools and teaching hospitals, educate future physicians and investigate complex medical cases, treating the sickest patients. The new report says these institutions are also twice as likely as other hospitals to provide clinical services such as trauma centers, organ transplant centers, birthing rooms and substance use disorder care. The report says patients treated at major teaching hospitals – where future health care professionals receive practical hands-on training – have up to 20% higher odds of survival than those treated at non-teaching hospitals. Funding cuts to these institutions have effects that trickle down to patients nationwide. The report noted that academic health systems conduct the majority of research funded by the US National Institutes of Health, and complex patient care is made possible only through extensive medical research. As of June, more than 1,100 NIH grants have been terminated since the beginning of the second Trump administration, according to the report. These include at least 160 clinical trials to study HIV/AIDS, cancer, mental health conditions, substance abuse and chronic disease. Although not all clinical trials involve life-saving treatments, for some people who have diseases that have no established therapies, trials may be their only option. 'We've made terrific progress in many diseases, but there are many diseases where we have a long way to go to be able to offer a newly developed treatment that we know can improve or lengthen their lives,' Pierce said. 'With those diseases, in many cases, the only way to try to move forward is with what scientists think are the very best potential treatments for those diseases.' Some of the clinical trials were terminated before their conclusion, which is unethical, she said. 'Halting a clinical trial before it ends at any point, even if all of the patients who are in the clinical trial finish their treatment, before data analysis has been done, before the results are released, renders that clinical trial less useful and less ethical,' she said. Patients take on the risk of uncertainty when they join clinical trials, not knowing whether the treatment will be effective. 'If we never know the outcome, all of that time, all those patients launching everything that they did to bring science forward has been wasted. In some cases, it could be years of progress.' The report notes that research funding has made crucial contributions to life-saving care. For example, the NIH funded the development of the first artificial heart valve with the first successful replacement at the NIH Clinical Center in 1960. Today, more than 100,000 heart valve replacements are performed each year. And a study also found that NIH funding contributed to research associated with every new drug approved from 2010 to 2019. Each year, medical schools and teaching hospitals that are members of the Association of American Medical Colleges train about 77,000 residents nationwide, making these institutions the primary producers of primary care and specialty physicians. Medicare offsets a portion of the costs for the majority of trainees, and teaching hospitals fully cover the cost of training for the rest of the residents. The proposed elimination of federal student aid programs and changing eligibility requirements for loan forgiveness would affect nearly half of all medical students, the new report says. Should investment not increase, the association predicts that the nation will face a shortage of up to 86,000 physicians by 2036. As federal partnerships with research institutions continue to falter and immigration restrictions become more strict, the United States is becoming a less attractive place for students to pursue science, Pierce said. The nation has benefited from their longstanding global medical and scientific approach, she said. 'There is information being shared between countries, people being trained all over the world,' Pierce said. 'The United States has always been the place where people want to come, trained to be scientists and trained to be physicians, and we have benefited from that.' Nearly half of US graduate students in STEM fields are from other countries. If the United States is not seen as a place that will collaborate with and welcome international scholars, students and researchers will leave, Pierce said. She emphasizes that what makes US innovation unique is that research comes 'with not the support but the full partnership of the federal government.' A weakening of this partnership will make it 'harder for the United States to stay as the driver of innovation and science progress,' Pierce said. A physician shortage coupled with declining research investment leads to the suffering of patient care, she said. 'When the research stops, progress stops,' Pierce said. 'Scientific progress toward more treatment, towards more cures, towards a better quality of life, is all dependent on this ecosystem [of academic medicine] that is more intertwined than I think anyone realized.'
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Panel held to discuss possible cuts to Medicaid
(COLORADO SPRINGS) — Local health care workers and Democrats held a panel on Tuesday, June 10 discussing how Medicaid budget cuts could impact Colorado Springs. Data shows 19% of the 5th Congressional District, which covers most of El Paso County, are enrolled in Medicaid. Organizers of the panel said that number could drop if President Donald Trump signs his so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill.' The bill adds restrictions to who would be eligible for Medicaid, which Republicans argue would cut down on fraud. However, those at the panel on Tuesday disagree, arguing these cuts will impact services across the board. They said the only way to make sure your voice is heard is to speak up to the lawmakers who represent you. 'Call your representatives. There is somebody, they ain't going to answer the phone, but there is somebody who can answer the phone. Get out. Speak your mind. Talk to your neighbor. Find out what goes on,' said Leeann Webster with CA Home Health Care. The senate is currently debating the controversial bill. Both Colorado Senators John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennett both indicated they will not vote in favor of the measure. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
