Federal job cuts hit NIOSH hard in Morgantown, leaving workers vulnerable — what to do if you're affected
'NIOSH began laying off hundreds of workers who are engaged in research and the improvement of products and practices that literally save the lives of coal miners every day.'
I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 5 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast)
Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10)
Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it
Roberts added that NIOSH announced 'significant downsizing' of offices in Morgantown, West Virginia and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
The layoffs come amid a sweeping federal reorganization effort led by Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as part of the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Workforce Optimization Initiative.
But what are the job cuts supposed to accomplish?
According to an HHS statement, the "Make America Healthy Again" plan aims to reduce the federal health workforce by 20,000 employees overall — shrinking HHS from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time staff. It will also consolidate 28 HHS divisions into 15 new ones, while regional offices will be reduced from 10 to just 5.
As part of the plan, NIOSH is being folded into a new agency called the Administration for a Healthy America (AHA), alongside the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and other offices. HHS says the changes will save taxpayers $1.8 billion per year and improve efficiency by reducing 'redundant units.'
However, critics argue that the cost savings come at the expense of public and workplace safety — especially in places like Morgantown, where NIOSH plays a key role in researching coal worker health, respiratory disease and workplace hazards.
'I do not think that these actions are being done in a coordinated way to hurt the American coal industry and those who work in it. But that is the effect,' Roberts said in the release. 'Miners have and can continue to produce the materials to power American homes, produce American steel and so many other products our society uses every day.'
Read more: The US stock market's 'fear gauge' has exploded — but this 1 'shockproof' asset is up 14% and helping American retirees stay calm. Here's how to own it ASAP
Layoffs at NIOSH threaten not only the job security of hundreds of employees, but also the health and safety of coal miners and other high-risk workers who rely on the agency's research.
Morgantown's facility employed around 500 workers, reported MetroNews. Its research informed safety regulations, protective equipment standards and disease prevention strategies across several industries.
Roberts believes the downsizing could cripple progress in mine safety as the coal industry "relies on the research done there to improve its safety practices.'
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito R-W.Va. told 12 News in a statement that the cuts would harm 'vital health programs,' adding that 'any cuts that impact [coal workers'] health monitoring need to be restored immediately.'
In addition to the safety concerns, the economic impact could be significant for Morgantown and surrounding areas. Losing hundreds of high-paying federal jobs affects not just those laid off, but also local businesses that depend on NIOSH employees as customers. From diners and daycare centers to home service providers, many small businesses could feel the ripple effects of the layoffs.
Here are a few ways locals can manage the disruption:
Know your rights. If you're injured or face exposure to hazardous conditions, report it immediately to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Employers must still comply with its standards.
Connect with state and nonprofit resources. West Virginia's Department of Health, WorkForce West Virginia, the PA Workforce Development Association and organizations like the Appalachian Citizens' Law Center may be able to offer guidance, legal help or job retraining opportunities.
Protect your health on the job. With fewer researchers to monitor workplace hazards, it's more important than ever to take precautions. Use proper PPE, attend all safety training and document any incidents or exposure you experience or witness.
Consider looking for new opportunities. Sen. Capito and West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey both say they're working to help affected workers find new employment. While these roles may take time to materialize, job retraining programs or federal grants may be offered soon. Pay attention to state announcements and job boards.
As Trump and DOGE aim to reshape federal agencies, communities like Morgantown are left to navigate the fallout and fight to protect the workers and industries who have long powered the country.
Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how
Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead
Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you?
This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Claiming to fight waste, Trump administration slashes potentially cost-saving research
Harvard researchers had spent five years and some $3.8 million from the National Institutes of Health trying to answer this question when Mueller heard that the study might never yield results. In May, amid a feud with the university, the Trump administration abruptly terminated the grant that was funding it with one year and some $734,000 still to go. Without that time and money, pulmonologist Mary Berlik Rice and her team couldn't collect the final bits of data or analyze what they'd found. The clinical trial needed outcomes from a minimum number of participants to be able to conclude anything with any statistical significance. Advertisement 'It's a waste,' said Mueller — of taxpayer money, of everyone's time, of blood and tissue samples. N. Mueller sat beside the air purifier he was loaned as part of the study, which may or may not be functional. Lucy Lu for STAT That alone might seem to conflict with President Trump's stated goal of fighting 'waste, fraud, and abuse.' But scientists and participants like Mueller see another irony. The entire premise of this sort of study is that it might curb future waste. Advertisement It's a pillar of public health: Healthier people cost less. Figure out what could keep them well, and the government money spent on the discovery may well be dwarfed by the amount saved in hospitalizations and prescriptions averted. One of the most famous examples involves central venous catheters, thin tubes that intensive care doctors put into a patient's neck, chest, or groin to give fluids and medications or to draw blood. Those lines allow access to the bloodstream — but also pose an infection risk, creating a conduit that bacteria can take from the outside world into the veins. Such complications were both scary and common. In the early 2000s, they killed some 28,000 American ICU patients and cost $2.3 billion dollars every year. But then in 2006, a paper came out showing that the infections were avoidable. Led by intensive care specialist Peter Pronovost, a team of researchers tried out a simple solution in Michigan hospitals, instituting a checklist of risk-reducing hacks. These included clinicians washing their hands before inserting central lines; cleaning the patient's skin with a disinfectant called chlorhexidine; wearing sterile hair-coverings, masks, gowns, and gloves; using blood vessels in the neck or chest rather than the groin; and taking out catheters when they were no longer needed. Duh, you might say. But the infection rate fell dramatically. Within 18 months, it was near zero, and the intervention was estimated to have saved $100 million and 1,500 lives. 'I don't know how to describe how jaw-dropping this was,' said Leora Horwitz, a hospitalist in New York who studies how health care can be improved. 'This was like a shockwave of a paper.' Advertisement Pronovost says none of that could have happened without a grant of $500,000 a year for two years from a federal bureau called the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which is dedicated to improving the delivery of medical care to patients and represents about 0.04 percent of the government's spending on health care. 'AHRQ pays for itself over and over again with studies like that,' said Horwitz. But the agency hasn't been spared in the Trump administration's slashing of federal research funding and the employees who administer it. Over a third of its employees were laid off in April, and the administration said it would be merged with another office within the Department of Health and Human Services. The effects of such cutbacks have been felt in the last few weeks. 'As a result of recent reduction in force at HHS, AHRQ's grants management staff were separated from Federal service on July 14, 2025,' one of the agency's directors wrote in an email to recipients of a grant for training new researchers, 'We are currently unable to process grant awards.' Signage for the Department of Health and Human Services headquarters was seen on April 2 in Washington, D.C. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Pronovost, now the chief quality and clinical transformation officer for the University Hospitals Cleveland, worries about the agency's decimation. His landmark 2006 paper can seem almost dull. It was partially about handwashing reminders and antiseptic usage. It was neither rocket science, nor a blockbuster drug. Nor, for that matter, does it sound like the 'edge science.' But it worked. When Pronovost sees package-delivery companies providing nearly flawless services, he knows that doesn't happen by accident; it happens through a management system. Every time there's a breakdown in what's supposed to happen — a box falling off a conveyor belt, say — there's a notification and an action taken, and if an action isn't taken, then there's an escalation. That was how he helped reduce his hospitals' Medicare expenditures by around 30 percent in 2023, a model that might save estimated $250 billion if applied nationwide. Advertisement Duke University hematologist Charity Oyedeji is pursuing research into measuring and hopefully preventing the functional impairment of adults with sickle cell disease. It started when she noticed just how dramatically her patients' biological ages outstripped their chronological ones. A 50-year-old reported difficulty getting on and off the toilet. A 20-something told her it was hard to reach up and get cups from the cupboard. She wondered whether tailored-to-your-ability exercise programs that have been shown to reduce frailty in older adults might help these people, too. It could improve quality of life and save money at the same time. 'We're trying to intervene early so we can improve their health span,' said Oyedeji, who was speaking in her personal capacity and not on behalf of her employer. 'We want to increase the number of good years that they have.' Oyedeji was in the second year of five — and had spent $300,000 of the $750,000 the NIH had allotted her — when her grant was terminated in June, years before she'd be able to reach any helpful conclusions. When asked about the cancellation of Oyedeji's grant, an HHS spokesperson wrote that the study has 'value,' but that 'it was funded under an inappropriate and ideologically driven — rather than scientifically driven — DEI program under the Biden administration.' Advertisement Researchers don't want to see their work — and participants' time — go to waste. Rice, the Harvard pulmonologist, has been able to scrape together enough money from the university to answer only a third of the questions that the NIH funded her to address. Spending $3.8 million to study how air purifiers could improve a specific type of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease might sound like a lot — and yet the illness itself costs some $24 billion a year in the US, which includes $11.9 billion in prescription drug expenses and $6.3 billion in hospital stays. 'We're throwing a lot of drugs at this,' said Rice, 'but I've found in my prior work that this group is especially susceptible to air pollution, and that led me to propose this trial to see if we could prevent some of the noxious exposures that trigger this severe disease.' To Mueller, 65, the idea made sense. Regular oil changes are ultimately cheaper than needing to get your engine replaced. He didn't want his breathing to worsen if he could help it, but that wasn't why he'd signed up for this trial. He hoped that by giving his time and nasal tissue, the benefits might be multiplied, spread out among others with the same disease, such that the scarring in their lungs could be held at bay. Of course, there might not be any benefit. That was the whole point, the reason for the trial, for the $3.8 million and five years of work. The researchers would only know at the end — if there was an end.
Axios
3 hours ago
- Axios
RFK Jr.'s vaccine pullback stokes fears of lost medical breakthroughs
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s decision to cut federal funding for mRNA vaccine research is the latest in a series of moves that have the potential to crush future medical breakthroughs and accelerate a brain drain. Why it matters: America has historically led the world in scientific innovation — driving economic growth, strengthening national security, and attracting global talent. But scientists, including some who served in Trump's first administration, warn that lead is slipping away. The mRNA divestment "risks stalling progress in some of the most promising areas of modern medicine," Jerome Adams, surgeon general during the first Trump administration and now a professor at Purdue University, told Axios. "Walking away from this technology now would be like pulling funding from antibiotics after penicillin or from computers after the microchip. It's short-sighted and puts us at a disadvantage globally." State of play: Kennedy said last week that HHS's Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority would pull nearly $500 million worth of contracts with universities, drug companies and other labs working on new mRNA vaccines. No new mRNA-based projects will be launched as the administration shifts to "safer, broader vaccine platforms," he added. Scientists refute the implication that mRNA vaccines are unsafe. The technology that brought mRNA COVID vaccines in Trump's first term has been in development for decades. Large scientific trials and real-world data have shown that the vaccines are safe and effective — and capable of training the body's immune system to create antibodies to fight a host of afflictions. HHS, when asked for the research on which Kennedy based this decision, sent Axios a link to a citation collection put together by anti-COVID vaccine advocates, including Steven Hatfill, who promoted the use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine to treat the virus before vaccines were available despite reports of safety issues. Friction point: mRNA technology is what allowed the most common COVID vaccines to be deployed so quickly, and it's essential to responding to new viral pandemic threats, said Cynthia Leifer, a professor of immunology at Cornell University's College of Veterinary Medicine. "When we have a pandemic, we need to act quickly. We don't have time to wait several years or decades to do testing of older platforms the way they were normally done in years past," she said. "The newer technology could allow us to move so much faster to develop and have these vaccines rolled out to protect people when a pandemic is ongoing," Leifer added. Researchers are also studying how mRNA technology could treat or prevent cancer, HIV, and other chronic diseases — and the science so far is promising. Now, they're worried that progress could be lost. "If we stop now, we could delay or even miss the next generation of cures entirely," said Adams, the former surgeon general. Zoom out: Scientists say some of Kennedy's other changes are stifling innovation, too. Kennedy is working to implement massive staff cuts at HHS, reduce funding for research labs' overhead costs and end National Institutes of Health grants for a wide swath of projects. The cuts, along with the broader Trump administration's immigration restrictions, has already started to steer promising international scientific talent away from the country. Kennedy also is reportedly considering overhauling the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, whose independent experts establish care and coverage guidelines to account for advances in medical treatments and new disease trends. Its past work included recommending beginning mammograms at 40, which has been credited with saving thousands of lives. The other side: HHS denies that its changes will stymie medical advances. "Those concerns are unfounded and not supported with facts," HHS Communications Director Andrew Nixon told Axios. Kennedy's decision to cut BARDA funding for mRNA work won't affect other government uses involving the technology, HHS said. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has endorsed mRNA COVID vaccines for most adults. Between the lines: An independent and bipartisan commission warned Congress in April that China has already pulled ahead of the U.S. in key life sciences areas. The U.S. can stay dominant, but it only has a few years to strengthen its position — and it needs to put significant resources into biotechnology resources, the commission's report said. Reality check: It's impossible to know whether breakthroughs actually won't happen as a result of these policy changes, or which advances we could miss out on. "That is a long-term impact that is hard to measure. What cure wasn't found? What question wasn't asked and investigated?" Richard Besser, CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, said. mRNA therapy start-ups are also still raising private investment, which could keep research moving.
Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Newsweek
Laura Loomer Blasts Return of FDA Vaccine Chief She Helped Force Out
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. Laura Loomer has reacted with anger after a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) vaccine chief she criticized returned to the agency. Writing on X, formerly Twitter, the conservative commentator slammed President Donald Trump's administration for rehiring Dr. Vinay Prasad two weeks after he resigned from his role leading the FDA's vaccines and gene therapy division. Why It Matters Loomer is an influential figure in right-wing circles. She was present alongside Trump on the 2024 campaign trail, and she has been tied to his decision to fire National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and other aides, although the president has denied that she was the reason for the sackings. Prasad used to work for the University of California, San Francisco. He has also previously worked at the National Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of Health. Laura Loomer outside the U.S. Capitol on June 12, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Laura Loomer outside the U.S. Capitol on June 12, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images What To Know Prasad, a physician who was first appointed to the role in May, left the FDA on July 30 following pressure from Loomer and other political influencers. Prasad had faced backlash over the agency's handling of a gene therapy linked to the deaths of two teenagers and his decision not to approve certain drugs. Loomer had also repeatedly claimed Prasad was liberal and said he was anti-Trump. "How did this Trump-hating Bernie [Sanders] Bro get into the Trump admin???" Loomer posted on X in July. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary had defended Prasad, who was a critic of vaccine and mask mandates, prior to his resignation. After it was reported he would return, writing on X, Loomer called the decision to rehire Prasad "egregious." She also indicated she would launch critiques of other figures, saying she "will be ramping up my exposés of officials within the HHS [Department of Health and Human Services] and FDA so the American people can see more of the pay for play rot themselves and how rabid Trump haters continue to be hired in the Trump administration." NEW: In another egregious personnel decision under the Trump administration, it is now being reported that longtime progressive Marxist Vinay Prasad who referred to President Trump's supporters as criminals and compared them to drug addicts after saying he stabbed a Trump voodoo… — Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) August 9, 2025 What People Are Saying Department Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon said in a statement to Reuters: "At the FDA's request, Dr. Vinay Prasad is resuming leadership of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research." When he resigned, Prasad said he "did not want to be a distraction to the great work of the FDA" and had "decided to return to California and spend more time with his family." What Happens Next As Trump's presidency continues, it is likely that there will be further personnel changes in government departments.
