USAID cuts shutter India's first clinic for transgender people
India's first medical clinic for transgender people has shut operations in three cities after US President Donald Trump stopped foreign aid to it.
Mitr (friend) Clinic, which was started in 2021 in the southern city of Hyderabad, offered HIV treatment, gender affirming support and counselling services to thousands of transgender people.
Two more Mitr Clinics in Thane and Pune cities in western India, which were established the same year, have also shut down due to the aid cut.
In January, Trump signed an executive order pausing all foreign aid for 90 days, pending a review.
Trump has said he wants overseas spending to be closely aligned with his "America First" approach.
His crackdown on USAID, the US agency overseeing humanitarian aid to foreign countries since the 1960s, has been seen as a step to this end.
The pausing of USAID funds has affected dozens of development programmes all around the world, especially in poor and developing countries.
In India, the shutting down of the Mitr Clinics has impacted the transgender community's access to crucial medical support.
The project came into existence under the US President's agency for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in 2003 when George Bush was president. John Hopkins University worked in collaboration with USAID and the Indian government to set it up.
A staff member who spoke on condition of anonymity to BBC Hindi said the three clinics catered to some 6,000 people and about 6% to 8% of the patients were being treated for HIV.
"All these cases were below 30 years of age. And 75% to 80% of this population was accessing health services for the first time," this staff member said.
In Hyderabad, the Mitr Clinic offered care to 150 to 200 transgender patients each month, many of whom suffered from HIV. The clinic had a small team of doctors, psychologists and technical staff.
"We were receiving 250,000 rupees ($2900; £2300) every month to provide services," Rachana Mudraboyina, a transwoman who was in-charge of the clinic, told BBC Hindi.
The news of the clinic's closure has come as a blow to the community.
Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli, a transwoman who has visited the clinic, told The Indian Express newspaper that she was "devastated" by the news as the clinic used to offer treatment at subsidised rates.
Another transwoman, who was hoping to avail of the clinic's gender affirming services, told the Express that she was sad that she would no longer be able to do this.
India is estimated to have around two million transgender people, though activists say the number is higher. Despite a 2014 Supreme Court ruling that gives them the same rights as people of other genders, many still struggle to access education and healthcare due to stigma and discrimination.
There are state-run and private hospitals that offer medical help to the community, but many say they prefer going to Mitr Clinics because they find it more affordable and inclusive.
"Transgender people are not treated properly in general hospitals," Rachana says, explaining why the Mitr Clinics were so important for the community.
Trump's order freezing foreign aid has been criticised by many.
"USAID has made significant contributions in health and education and shutting it down is bound to have an impact on developing countries," Bubberjung Venkatesh, a lawyer, told BBC Hindi.
"It's a big blow. Its support for HIV prevention was significant," he added.
Last Thursday, the Trump administration said it was going to eliminate more than 90% of USAID's foreign aid contracts. This means that very few projects will survive and the Mitr Clinics are unlikely to be among them.
Elon Musk, a close aide of Trump who also heads a government department in charge of slashing federal spending and jobs, has criticised funding projects for transgender people.
"That's what American tax dollars were funding," Musk said in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Friday in response to a post about the closure of the Mitr Clinics.
Meanwhile, staff at the clinic say they are looking for funding from other sources and hope that the state government will step in to help.
"We did a lot more than just provide medical help. The clinic also provided us a space to interact with the community, to share advice about various government schemes and health facilities," Rachana says.
"We want to continue [running the clinic] and are trying our best to find donors," she adds.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
18 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Doctors, health experts call on N.S. to cover birth control and HIV-prevention drug
HALIFAX - Nova Scotia physicians and other sexual health experts are calling on the provincial government to fund birth control and increase access to a medication used to prevent HIV. Four doctors, the head of the Halifax Sexual Health Centre, and a pharmacy professor made the comments today at a legislature committee hearing in Halifax. Abbey Ferguson with the Halifax Sexual Health Centre says PrEP — an antiviral medication that prevents HIV transmission — is so expensive that many people who would benefit from the drug are not able to take it. The drug is estimated to cost between $200 and $250 per month. Dr. Melissa Brooks, the medical co-director of the Reproductive Options and Services Clinic, says the province's pharmacare plan is so restrictive that it often doesn't help those who cannot afford their preferred birth control option. Kari Ellen Graham, with Access Now Nova Scotia, urged the provincial government to sign on to the federal government's pharmacare program, which helps fund birth control. So far only P.E.I., Manitoba, British Columbia, and the Yukon have signed up to the federal pharmacare program. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 10, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Time Magazine
25 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Trump's First Surgeon General: RFK Jr. Purging the CDC Advisory Committee Will Put Lives at Risk
When Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. began his tenure as Health and Human Services Secretary, he pledged, 'We won't take away anyone's vaccines.' However, recent policy changes under his leadership—coupled with the unprecedented dismissal of all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on June 9—have proven that statement false, raising grave concerns for our nation's COVID-19 response and broader vaccine policies. These shifts not only jeopardize public health but also threaten to erode trust in our health institutions at a critical time. In May 2025, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) introduced a new COVID-19 vaccine framework, limiting access to updated vaccines for Americans aged 65 and older or those with specific risk factors. Furthermore, Secretary Kennedy announced that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for 'healthy' children or pregnant women—bypassing the standard ACIP review process. Compounding these changes, the abrupt removal of ACIP's entire panel of independent experts, who have guided evidence-based vaccine policy for decades, risks destabilizing a cornerstone of public health. These actions collectively restrict access to a vital tool for saving lives and undermine confidence in our health systems. During my tenure as Surgeon General under the first Trump administration, we faced significant public health challenges, from addressing the opioid epidemic by increasing access to Naloxone to launching Operation Warp Speed for the COVID-19 vaccine development effort. The vaccines developed under Trump's first term have proven to be one of our most effective defenses against COVID-19; yet, the current administration's new policies limit their availability, potentially leaving millions vulnerable. The dismissal of ACIP's experts—without a clear plan for replacing them with qualified scientists—further jeopardizes trust in the institutions tasked with protecting Americans. The major flaw in the new vaccine framework is its narrow assessment of risk. Although the immediate dangers of COVID-19 have lessened, it remains a leading cause of death and hospitalization, claiming nearly 50,000 lives in the U.S. in 2024—more than breast cancer or car accidents. The fact is, 75% of Americans have risk factors, such as obesity or diabetes, that increase their vulnerability to severe COVID outcomes. However, the burden is now placed on individuals to self-identify as high risk, creating confusion and inconsistency in access. Unlike other countries with centralized systems for identifying at-risk individuals, the U.S. expects patients—many of whom lack easy access to healthcare—to navigate eligibility alone. Risk assessment should also consider individual circumstances beyond underlying health conditions. A 58-year-old bus driver or healthcare worker faces significantly greater exposure than someone working remotely. By limiting vaccines to specific groups based solely on preexisting health status, the policy overlooks these critical contextual differences. Secretary Kennedy's team argues that there is insufficient evidence to support updated COVID-19 vaccines for healthy Americans under 65, but this claim is flatly unfounded. Years of real-world data demonstrate that vaccines save lives and reduce hospitalizations across all age groups. During the 2023 to 2024 fall and winter season, 95% of those hospitalized for COVID had not received an updated vaccine. While the administration cites other countries' more restrictive vaccine policies, such comparisons ignore the unique health landscape in the U.S., which includes higher obesity rates, worse maternal health outcomes, and uneven healthcare access. The policy also neglects the issue of Long COVID, which affects millions with debilitating symptoms lasting months or years. Though older adults are at higher risk for severe acute infections, Long COVID disproportionately impacts adults aged 35 to 49—and children are also affected. Vaccination reduces the risk of developing Long COVID, an essential reason many healthy individuals choose to stay up-to-date with their vaccines. Particularly concerning is the decision to end COVID vaccine recommendations for 'healthy' pregnant women, which contradicts the FDA's own guidance. Pregnant women face heightened risks of severe COVID outcomes, including death, pre-eclampsia, and miscarriage. Vaccination during pregnancy is crucial—not just for maternal health but also for protecting infants under six months, who cannot be vaccinated and rely on maternal antibodies for protection. Decades of research confirm that vaccines, including COVID vaccines, safely transfer antibodies to newborns, lowering their risk of severe illness. The dismissal of ACIP's members amplifies these concerns. ACIP has been a trusted, science-driven body that ensures vaccines are safe and effective, saving countless lives through its transparent recommendations. Its members, rigorously vetted for expertise and conflicts of interest, provide independent guidance critical to public health. Removing them without clear evidence of misconduct risks replacing qualified scientists with less experienced voices. This move fuels vaccine hesitancy and skepticism about public health decisions, particularly when paired with the bypassing of ACIP's review process for the new COVID vaccine policies. These changes create uncertainty about who can access vaccines. Without clear CDC recommendations, insurance companies may impose their own coverage criteria, potentially increasing costs for a vaccine that was previously free for most Americans. Healthcare providers, lacking federal guidance and ACIP's expertise, may struggle to advise patients, leading to a confusing and inequitable system that limits choice—hardly the 'medical freedom' Secretary Kennedy claims to champion. Ultimately, these actions threaten to erode trust in public health. FDA officials argue the new framework enhances transparency, yet bypassing ACIP's review and dismissing its members undermines that aim. Extensive data demonstrate that updated vaccines lower hospitalization and death rates, yet this evidence was sidelined. Such actions breed skepticism, making it harder to unite Americans around shared health goals. The stakes are high, but a better path is possible. Restoring trust requires transparent, evidence-based policymaking that prioritizes access to life-saving tools. I urge Secretary Kennedy and the administration to reconsider this framework, reinstate ACIP's role in vaccine policy, and ensure any new appointees are qualified, independent experts. If concerns about ACIP exist, they should be addressed through reform, not dissolution. Healthcare providers and community leaders must also educate patients about vaccination benefits, particularly for vulnerable groups like pregnant women and those with high exposure. Individuals can take action by staying informed, discussing vaccination with their doctors, and advocating for clear, equitable access to vaccines. By working together—government, providers, and citizens—we can protect lives, reduce the burden of Long COVID, and rebuild confidence in our public health system. We must seize this opportunity to unite around science and ensure a healthier, safer, and prosperous future for all Americans.
Politico
30 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump's research budget plan hits the ringer
WASHINGTON WATCH NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya offered a lukewarm defense of the 40 percent cut the Trump administration has proposed for his agency during testimony before a Senate Appropriations panel Tuesday. Asked to defend the administration's fiscal 2026 budget plan, which also calls for a major agency reorganization, Bhattacharya repeatedly demurred, saying 'the budget is a collaboration between Congress and the administration.' Bhattcharya also distanced himself from President Donald Trump's fight with universities and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, which led a cost-cutting campaign before Bhattacharya's March confirmation. Bhattacharya called that period — when the NIH proposed to cap the rates it pays university grantees to cover their administrative costs, laid off hundreds of probationary workers, and began an assault on universities Trump accuses of anti-semitism — 'a very bumpy time.' His testimony annoyed Democrats. In one representative exchange, Illinois' Dick Durbin asked Bhattacharya to take responsibility for Trump's move to freeze funding for Northwestern University, based in a Chicago suburb, leading to a tense back-and-forth. 'The buck stops in your office,' Durbin said. 'I know it does,' Bhattacharya responded. Why it matters: Bhattacharya is under fire from Democrats and many of his own employees for the cuts the administration has already made, which include about 2,500 jobs, and slowed grant funding that's reduced awards given out by $1.6 billion compared to last year. He's sought to reassure them that now that he's in charge further agency moves will be more carefully considered and that funding will again flow, though some of the grantees will be different. WELCOME TO FUTURE PULSE This is where we explore the ideas and innovators shaping health care. Doctors and their spouses go to the emergency room 20 percent less often than others, a Harvard study found. Why? Doctors can write their own prescriptions. Share any thoughts, news, tips and feedback with Danny Nguyen at dnguyen@ Carmen Paun at cpaun@ Ruth Reader at rreader@ or Erin Schumaker at eschumaker@ Want to share a tip securely? Message us on Signal: Dannyn516.70, CarmenP.82, RuthReader.02 or ErinSchumaker.01. WORLDVIEW GOP lawmakers are pushing back on President Donald Trump's proposed cuts to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, our Meredith Lee Hill reports. It's one of the first signals that the Republicans who control Congress aren't happy with everything Trump's Department of Government Efficiency did and aren't likely to rubber stamp Trump's fiscal 2026 budget proposal. State of play: The disagreement over PEPFAR stems from Trump's request that Congress rescind $400 million in money it has already asked the administration to spend on global health programs. That includes some funding for the HIV and AIDS relief program. Then-President George W. Bush created PEPFAR in 2003 and it's since been credited with saving 25 million lives, mostly in Africa. In order to shore up support for the rescission package, White House officials have conveyed to GOP leaders that they will not only maintain life-saving treatments under PEPFAR but will also — in response to concerns from more than a dozen House Republicans — preserve some prevention programs as well, according to three people granted anonymity to discuss the private assurances. Speaker Mike Johnson's whip team conveyed the altered plans in conversations and text messages with lawmakers, our Meredith Lee Hill reports. Even so: White House budget director Russ Vought told appropriators last week that the Trump administration wants to take 'an analytical look' at 'the prevention itself' and instead fund 'life-saving treatment' for people with AIDS. But Vought said the White House is still planning to scale down PEPFAR and other programs. 'It is something that our budget will be very trim on,' Vought said of funding AIDS prevention work, 'because we believe that many of these nonprofits are not geared towards the viewpoints of the administration. And we're $37 trillion in debt. So at some point, the continent of Africa needs to absorb more of the burden of providing this health care.'
