What's making New Brunswickers sick? Premier Susan Holt intends to find out
Premier Susan Holt says it's critical the province push ahead with its investigation into what's making some New Brunswickers sick, despite a new scientific study that found no evidence of a mystery brain disease.
"There's too many unanswered questions for us to stop the work that Public Health is doing to be able to provide patients — and potentially future patients — with the information they need about what's causing these illnesses," Holt told reporters Thursday in Fredericton during her weekly update on U.S. tariffs.
She was responding to questions about a report, published Wednesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, known as JAMA.
Thirteen Canadian doctors and researchers reassessed 25 of the 222 patients diagnosed by Moncton neurologist Dr. Alier Marrero as having a "neurological syndrome of unknown cause."
They concluded all of the cases — 14 living and 11 who have died — were attributable to well-known conditions, such as Alzheimer's traumatic brain injury and cancer.
WATCH | 'There might not be one answer, there might be multiple things at play here,' Holt says:
Their analysis of the patients also provides "strong evidence against a common cause of the patients' conditions, such as exposure to an environmental toxin," because of the wide range of problems, they wrote.
The work the province is doing "remains critical," Holt said.
"We need to work with the patients and the population of New Brunswick to answer the question about what is making New Brunswickers sick," she said.
"The study didn't answer that question."
In March, the New Brunswick government launched the "data analysis phase" of its investigation into undiagnosed neurological symptoms that Marrero says are now affecting some 500 people in seven provinces. The investigation will consider whether environmental substances, such as the herbicide glyphosate or heavy metals, are a factor.
"It is anticipated the results of the analysis will soon be shared with the Public Health Agency of Canada," Dr. Yves Léger, New Brunswick's chief medical officer of health, said in an email.
A public report with recommendations is expected this summer.
"I think that the work that Public Health is doing and the support we're getting from the Public Health Agency of Canada is critical for us to continue to try to answer those questions for New Brunswickers, knowing that there might not be one answer," Holt said.
"There may be multiple things that are at play here in different areas of the province and in different situations."
The premier did not say whether the province will help Marrero's hundreds of other patients to get a second opinion, as the study urges.
In an emailed statement, New Brunswick Medical Society president Dr. Lise Babin said, "We trust that the process that has recently been put in place by Public Health New Brunswick will consider all relevant research and data related to this ongoing issue."
Babin said she could not comment on the "details or merits of specific medical or scientific articles."
Holt pledged last summer to launch a transparent scientific investigation if elected in the October provincial election.
New Brunswickers suffering from unexplained symptoms and the doctors trying to help them had "been ignored" by the Blaine Higgs government "for far too long," she said in a statement at the time.
"New Brunswickers deserve answers."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
3 hours ago
- Medscape
Fast Five Quiz: Opioid Use Disorder
Opioid use disorder (OUD) currently impacts approximately 16 million people worldwide. It is considered a significant public health issue, with experts noting a 'burden that is increasing' globally. As research into optimal management of OUD evolves, updates to clinical guidelines emphasize a more individualized approach to pharmacologic treatment, psychosocial support, and special considerations for specific patient populations, such as pregnant individuals. However, OUD remains a complex disease that comes with many serious health and legal concerns for both patients and clinicians. What do you know about OUD? Check your knowledge with this quick quiz. Despite pharmacologic treatment being known to be highly effective for treating OUD, a CDC report states that 30% of patients with OUD who require OUD treatment received only nonpharmacologic treatment. Further, 43% of patients did not perceive a need for OUD treatment at all. In this significant report, males aged 35-49 years were most likely to receive OUD treatment with medications, while females and younger and older adults had lower rates of access to pharmacologic interventions. The CDC concluded that engaging patients needing OUD treatment with pharmacologic interventions is 'essential.' Learn more about essential statistics for OUD. Data from a predictive-model study indicate that service setting was the strongest predictor for premature discontinuation of OUD treatment. The strength of this predictor declined with length of stay, becoming negligent after 365 days. Other system-level factors such as geographic region, primary source of payment for treatment, and referral source were also strong predictors of early discontinuation; individual factors such as age of first use, sex, and race were less predictive. Previous research cited by the study has also stressed the importance of reducing system-level barriers to care, and the updated federal guidance for opioid treatment programs have expanded access in several ways. Learn more about OUD guidance. Precipitated withdrawal can occur when transferring a patient from methadone to buprenorphine due to buprenorphine being only a partial opioid agonist; as such, the traditional method of transfer involves putting the patient in a controlled, moderate withdrawal state before initiating buprenorphine therapy. However, a novel dosing strategy called microinduction, which involves starting buprenorphine at submilligram doses (or 'low-dose induction'), and cross-tapering with methadone can prevent precipitated withdrawal. Additionally, this method is ideal for patients who want to switch from methadone to buprenorphine and those with chronic use of intravenous or intranasal fentanyl. A recent systematic review found that microinduction and traditional transfer methods had similar rates of successful induction of buprenorphine at 95.6%. Learn more about safe withdrawal practices for OUD. Both the CDC and the latest American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) guidelines specifically state that pharmacotherapy for OUD should be offered as early as possible in pregnancy to prevent harms to both the patient and the fetus, noting that pharmacotherapy for OUD has been associated with improved maternal outcomes. ASAM specifically states, 'increasing the dose or split dosing is often required, especially in the third trimester.' Federal guidelines emphasize that pregnant individuals seeking treatment for OUD are considered a priority for enrollment in opioid treatment programs. Once receiving treatment, they do not generally recommended medically supervised withdrawal from pharmacotherapy for pregnant patients as it might harm the fetus and patient; further, ASAM guidelines state that patients who undergo medically supervised withdrawal are at an increased risk for 'return to opioid use.' However, if a patient decides to proceed with medically supervised withdrawal, ASAM guidelines suggest physicians provide education and resources regarding associated risks. The CDC also specifically recommends against abruptly discontinuing opioids during pregnancy, citing data and resources from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Learn more about OUD. Federal guidelines specify that opioid treatment programs must conduct at least eight random drug tests per year on their patients. These tests must use FDA approved products that test for commonly abused substances that might affect patient safety, recovery, or adherence to OUD treatment. ASAM affirms this requirement, noting that many patients might need more frequent testing and that eight tests per year 'should be viewed as a minimum.' Learn more about drug testing in OUD. Editor's Note: This article was created using several editorial tools, including generative AI models, as part of the process. Human review and editing of this content were performed prior to publication.
CBS News
7 hours ago
- CBS News
RFK Jr. taps allies and COVID vaccine critics among picks for CDC advisory panel. Here's who's on the list.
Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced Wednesday he's naming eight new advisers to serve on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's vaccine recommendations committee, after firing the committee's entire previous roster of 17 advisers. "All of these individuals are committed to evidence-based medicine, gold-standard science, and common sense. They have each committed to demanding definitive safety and efficacy data before making any new vaccine recommendations," Kennedy said Wednesday in a post on X. Kennedy's picks circumvented the usual CDC process for selecting members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. In previous administrations, career agency officials — not political leaders — vetted potential experts before forwarding them to the department for the secretary's approval. The panel's influential recommendations are closely watched because they are directly tied to federal policies, like which vaccines insurers are required to cover. The picks announced by Kennedy include some close allies of the secretary and his inner circle. One of them, Dr. Robert Malone, worked on early research related to mRNA vaccine technology but was accused during the COVID-19 pandemic of spreading misinformation about the mRNA vaccines. He was with Kennedy and President Trump at the Trump election night celebration in Florida. "On the basis of data from all over the world, approximately three years ago it was my impression that the risk/benefit ratio of these products did not merit continued use in any cohort," Malone posted last month on his Substack about the mRNA COVID vaccines. Like Kennedy, Malone has questioned the benefits of measles vaccines during the recent record outbreak in Texas, which killed two children, and he has promoted unproven treatments for the virus. Another member picked by Kennedy is Dr. Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist who co-authored the pandemic-era Great Barrington Declaration criticizing COVID-19 restrictions, along with now-NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. Bhattacharya has described Kulldorff as a close friend. Kulldorff previously worked with the CDC's outside vaccine advisers, before authoring an opinion piece in 2021 criticizing the agency's decision to pause use of Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine over safety concerns. He claimed he was fired from working with the committee over the opinion piece. Kulldorff later claimed he was fired from Harvard University for criticizing COVID-19 vaccine requirements. Dr. Cody Meissner, a pediatrics professor who previously served as a member of the Food and Drug Administration's own vaccines panel — the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee – was also named to the committee. Meissner opposed COVID-19 vaccine requirements for children. He also co-authored an opinion piece with now-FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary speaking out against masking of children during the pandemic. Another former member of the FDA vaccines panel who was picked by Kennedy is Vicky Pebsworth, a regional director of the National Association of Catholic Nurses. Pebsworth spoke at a 2020 meeting of the FDA vaccines committee, where she identified herself as the research director for the National Vaccine Information Center and "mother of a child injured by his 15-month well-baby shots in 1998." She said the center's position was that any "coercion and sanctions to persuade adults to take an experimental vaccine, or give it to their children, is unethical and unlawful." Kennedy also praised another pick, MIT professor Retsef Levi, saying: "Dr. Levi has collaborated with public health agencies to evaluate vaccine safety, including co-authoring studies on mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and their association with cardiovascular risks." Levi previously called for more detailed data from the COVID-19 vaccine trials, suggesting that changes to how Pfizer's shot was produced may have caused side effects. But Levi faced criticism for a paper co-authored with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo, which was cited in the state's move to recommend that young men not get mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Experts condemned the paper for misleading methods that could inflate the risk. The views on vaccines of several of Kennedy's other picks are less clear. Kennedy said Dr. Michael A. Ross "contributed to national strategies for cancer prevention and early detection, including those involving HPV immunization," working with the CDC's breast and cervical cancer committee. Ross is described by Kennedy as an obstetrics and gynecology professor at George Washington University and Virginia Commonwealth University, though his name does not appear on directories for either university. Spokespeople for the two institutions did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Dr. James Pagano, described by Kennedy as a "strong advocate for evidence-based medicine," appears to have published little about vaccines or medicine. Records from the Medical Board of California list Pagano as being retired. Another Kennedy pick, Dr. Joseph Hibbeln, retired from the National Institutes of Health in 2020. His research portfolio previously covered nutritional intake of fatty acids like omega-3. Kennedy described him as bringing "expertise in immune-related outcomes, psychiatric conditions, and evidence-based public health strategies."
New York Times
8 hours ago
- New York Times
Kennedy Announces Eight New Members of C.D.C. Vaccine Advisory Panel
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Wednesday named eight doctors and researchers, including two prominent critics of federal scientists and the Biden administration's Covid vaccine policies, to replace roughly half the members he fired from an expert panel that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Mr. Kennedy made the announcement Wednesday on the social media platform X, two days after he fired all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. 'The slate includes highly credentialed scientists, leading public-health experts, and some of America's most accomplished physicians,' he wrote. In a post on X late Tuesday night, Mr. Kennedy promised he would not appoint 'ideological anti-vaxxers.' But the appointments of at least two of the new members — Martin Kulldorff and Dr. Robert Malone — are likely to draw an uproar from pro-vaccine groups. Both were highly critical of President Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s coronavirus vaccine policies during the pandemic. Dr. Kulldorff, a Swedish biostatistician and former Harvard professor who in the past advised the C.D.C. on vaccine safety, opposed vaccine mandates. He came to prominence in 2020 as a co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, a document that opposed lockdowns and drew intense backlash from Dr. Anthony S. Fauci and other public health leaders, who branded it dangerous. Dr. Malone, who played an early role in mRNA research and has claimed to be the inventor of the technology, became a right-wing star after a 2021 appearance on 'The Joe Rogan Experience' that exposed both him and Mr. Rogan to criticism that they had spread misinformation. This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
