Latest news with #AmericanChildren
Washington Post
6 days ago
- Health
- Washington Post
Why Trump's push for ‘gold-standard science' has researchers alarmed
A new term keeps popping up in messages from Trump administration scientific agencies — a pledge to restore 'gold-standard science.' Many scientists say the opposite is happening. The administration's 'MAHA Report,' intended to diagnose the root cause of poor health in American children, was written by Cabinet officials and political appointees, most of whom lack scientific and medical expertise. It included numerous errors, such as garbled references and invented studies. Thousands of grants that went through expert peer review have been terminated because they conflict with political priorities. The administration is proposing to reclassify government officials involved in grantmaking to 'increase career employee accountability,' which critics see as a way to inject politics into science.
BBC News
7 days ago
- Health
- BBC News
US government report cited non-existent sources, academics say
A US government report on children's health cited studies that were "totally fabricated" to back up its findings, authors of the studies referenced have told news released on 22 May, the report detailed causes of a "chronic disease crisis" among children in the US. An amended version was issued on 29 May after digital outlet NOTUS found it had used seven non-existent House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said there were "formatting issues" and the report would be updated, but it did "not negate the substance of the report".US Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, who has promoted debunked claims that vaccines cause autism, leads the department behind the report. It comes on the back of one of US President Donald Trump's sweeping executive orders earlier this year, specifically to "study the scope of the childhood chronic disease crisis and any potential contributing causes".Issued by the Make America Healthy Again Commission, the report concluded that poor diet, environmental toxins, stress, insufficient physical activity and "overmedicalisation" may contribute to chronic illness among American the authors of several studies cited in the report told news outlets they did not write them, and that the studies never Li, a Columbia University professor who was named as an author of a report on the mental health of children in the pandemic, told Agence France-Presse that the reference was "totally fabricated" and that he does not even know the listed was listed as an author alongside Noah Kreski, a researcher at Columbia University, who also denied writing it, telling AFP it "doesn't appear to be a study that exists at all."Katherine Keyes, an epidemiology professor who told news agency Reuters she was also wrongly named as an author, said: "It does make me concerned given that citation practices are an important part of conducting and reporting rigorous science."Another study cited about the advertising of psychotropic medications for youth was not written by the listed author, the university that employs him told AFP and Democratic National Committee accused RFK Jr.'s Department of Health and Human Services of "justifying its policy priorities with sources that do not exist" and using citations that "are rife with errors, from broken links to misstated conclusions".RFK Jr was sworn in as US Health Secretary in February. Since taking office he has cut thousands of jobs in the health department and made plans to introduce placebo trials for all new vaccines.
CBS News
27-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Children of divorce face increased chance of teen pregnancy and jail, University of Maryland study finds
U.S. children whose parents divorce when they are age 5 or younger have reduced earnings as adults and increased chances by young adulthood of teen pregnancy, incarceration and death, according to a study conducted in part by economists at the University of Maryland. After a divorce, a household's income typically is halved as a family splits into two households, and it struggles to recover that lost income over the ensuing decade. Families after divorce also tend to move to neighborhoods with lower incomes that offer reduced economic opportunities, and children are farther away from their non-custodial parent, according to the working paper by economists at the University of California, Merced; the U.S. Census Bureau; and the University of Maryland. The three events — loss of financial resources, a decline in neighborhood quality and missing parental involvement because of distance or an increased workload required to make up for lost income — accounted for 25% to 60% of the impact divorce has on children's outcomes, the study said. "These changes in family life reveal that, rather than an isolated legal shock, divorce represents a bundle of treatments — including income loss, neighborhood changes, and family restructuring — each of which might affect children's outcomes," the economists wrote. Almost a third of American children live through their parents' divorce before reaching adulthood, according to the study. Many children of divorce have reached the heights of professional success, including former President Barack Obama and Vice President JD Vance, who lamented that divorce was too easily accessible during a 2021 speech at a Christian high school in California. The U.S. divorce rate has been on a decline for the past decade and a half, going from over 10% in 2008 to about 7% in 2022, according to the Census Bureau. The economists' study can't show the emotional impact of divorce, but some children of divorce said it resonated through adulthood, no matter what age they were when it happened. Brandon Hellan, 54, said it took him until his mid-30s before he felt like he could commit to getting married and having children. He thinks his parents' divorce when he was in his early 20s played a role since it felt at the time like an immense betrayal. "I really think my parents' divorce made me put up these walls and treat relationships like they were rentals, temporary," said Hellan, who lives in the St. Louis area and wasn't connected to the study. While the study shows the negative impacts of divorce, it can't show what families' lives would have been like if parents had stayed together, said Philip Cohen, a University of Maryland sociologist with no ties to the study. "Probably nobody can tell better than the parents facing the conditions of the marriage and the opportunity for divorce," Cohen said. "I believe parents are aware divorce may have harmful consequences for their children, and make difficult judgments about what is in their own best interest, as well as the interest of their children." Previous academic studies reached different conclusions about the impact of divorce on children. Some argued that unhappy marriages harm children by exposing them to conflict between their parents and that, generally, divorce is a better option for both parents and children. Other studies said divorce leads to reductions in financial resources, the time parents have to spend with their children and the emotional stability of their offspring. Yet other studies concluded that divorce has a minimal impact, one way or another. A big shortfall in reaching any conclusions has been a lack of data. But the authors of the new study said they overcame that limitation by linking data from federal tax records, the Social Security Administration and the Census Bureau for all children born in the U.S. between 1988 and 1993. The tax data traced marital histories and income of the parents and the census data provided information about households and outcomes from childhood to adulthood. The study compared outcomes among siblings by the amount of time a childhood was spent with divorced parents. It found that children whose parents divorced when they were age 5 or younger had a 13% smaller income by age 27, but there was little or no impact if the child was older than 18 when their parents divorced. A parental divorce increased the chances of teen pregnancy if it took place before the child was age 15. But that effect disappeared by age 20, as did the impact of any divorce on the chances of incarceration. There was also no noticeable effect on a child of divorce getting married by age 25, according to the study. The impact of divorce was similar across demographic groups, the study found.
The Independent
25-05-2025
- Health
- The Independent
Trump's FDA chief suggests diabetics should take cooking classes under MAHA agenda
Donald Trump's Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary has suggested it would be more effective to 'treat more diabetes with cooking classes' instead of 'just throwing insulin at people' under the president's 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda. 'We've got to stop and ask ourselves, should we be focusing more on school lunch programs, not just putting every kid on Ozempic? We've got to talk about food as medicine and gut health and the microbiome,' Makary said. 'We've got to talk about environmental toxins that cause cancer, not just the chemo to treat it, and maybe we need to treat more diabetes with cooking classes, not just throwing insulin at people,' he continued. People with type 1 diabetes require regular insulin injections to survive, according to the World Health Organization. Similarly, those with type 2 diabetes must take medications like insulin or sulfonylureas to control their blood sugar levels, the agency says. The 'Making Our Children Healthy Again' report, released Thursday, declares that 'today's children are the sickest generation in American history in terms of chronic disease.' 'These preventable trends continue to worsen each year, posing a threat to our nation's health, economy, and military readiness,' the report adds. The report highlighted rising rates of conditions like obesity and diabetes in children. Much of the report focused on ultra-processed foods, claiming that 'the food American children are eating' harms their health. The report did 'a phenomenal job' highlighting how harmful processed foods are, Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, told The New York Times. Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, the director of the Food Is Medicine Institute at Tufts University, similarly praised the report's focus on unhealthy foods. 'It's terrific to see such a clear, direct admission from the government that we are failing our children's health — and that our food is one dominant driver,' Mozaffarian told the Times. But other parts of the report were more concerning, and public health experts are raising alarms about the administration's claims. The report suggests the growing number of recommended childhood vaccines harms kids. But experts have long rejected this claim and say it's based on an incorrect understanding of how vaccines work. 'The growth of the vaccination schedule does reflect the fact that we can prevent a lot more suffering and death in children than we could generations ago,' Jason Schwartz, a professor of health policy at the Yale School of Public Health, told the Times. The report also echoes Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s false claim that childhood vaccines aren't tested in clinical trials that involve placebos. New vaccines are tested against placebos whenever it's necessary and feasible to do so. Kennedy has long been an anti-vaccine advocate. At a rally against COVID-19 vaccine mandates in January 2022, Kennedy also compared U.S. vaccine policies to the actions of an authoritarian state, suggesting that Anne Frank was in a better situation while hiding from the Nazis.
CBS News
22-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
What to know about $1,000 "Trump accounts" for newborns included in House bill
The Trump administration wants to kickstart wealth creation for American children by creating $1,000 "Trump accounts" for babies born during President Trump's second term in office. Originally called "money account for growth and advancement," or "MAGA" savings accounts, the renamed accounts would be managed by banks or investment firms, and operate like traditional investment accounts. Here's what to know about the proposed "Trump accounts" for newborns. What are they called? House Republicans on Wednesday submitted an amendment to Mr. Trump's domestic policy bill to ditch the original "Maga" acronym and rename the accounts "Trump accounts," after the president himself. Who would get one? Every child born in the U.S. between Jan. 1, 2025 and Jan. 1, 2029 with a Social Security number, and whose parents have Social Security numbers, would be automatically enrolled in the program. The U.S. Treasury would set up and fund the accounts. Madeline Brown, senior policy associate at the Urban Institute, said automatic enrollment is a key component of the proposed pilot program, given some adults' unfamiliarity with such investment vehicles. Some of the lowest-income families, who could most benefit from the boost, "often don't know about these kinds of programs. There's a huge awareness gap," she told CBS MoneyWatch. "Automatic enrollment is fundamental to improving the likelihood that it reaches the lowest-income families," she added. What would be in a "Trump account"? The government would contribute $1,000 to every eligible child's account, which would be invested in the stock market on their behalf. Families and third parties could also contribute up to $5,000 a year to a child's account. Sam Taube, investment expert at personal finance site Nerdwallet, said the proposed "Trump accounts" are similar to programs currently offered by a number of states, but the contributions aren't as generous. For instance Colorado's First Step program awards every newborn $100 in a 529 college savings account, plus a match of $500 a year for the first five years of savings, totaling up to $2,500 in gift contributions. What could the money be spent on? Accountholders would only be approved to be spend investment funds on prescribed costs, such as a down payment on a home, education-related expenses, or starting a small business. Use of the funds to pay for unapproved expenses would subject accountholders to penalties. But broadening the scope of approved expenditures would be even more beneficial to many families, Brown noted. "When it comes to wealth building, we have to make sure the target sums that kids end up with at 18 are in line with the things we're saying you can use the money for," Brown explained. If lower-income accountholders' families can't contribute the additional $5,000 per year, the sum they would end up with as adults might not cover a down payment, for example. "There are lots of different projections around what $1,000 can grow to with different interest rates, but it's not a down payment," she said. "So unless additional contributions come from the community, the federal government or state governments, we're not likely to see these accounts grow to the sums that we're saying are qualified uses. When could the funds be withdrawn? Half of the funds could be withdrawn when a child turns 18, at which point the account's gains would be taxed at the long-term capital gains tax rate, so long as the money were spent as directed. If the funds were used for other purposes, withdrawals would be taxed as income. A 10% penalty for misspending the money could also apply. Accountholders would have access to their full balances between the ages of 25-30 for approved purposes, and after 30, would be able to withdraw the funds for any purpose. Brown said she thinks improvements could be made to the way the program is structured, particularly around how account withdrawals are taxed. She noted that the lowest-income families would be the most likely to spend the funds on unapproved expenses, and face tax penalties. Most Americans can't afford a $1,000 emergency expense, according to a January report from Bankrate, making low-earners more likely to need to tap into the funds for surprise costs. "They are the most likely to have to withdraw dollars for nonqualified expenses, and in doing so, they [would] receive a tax penalty. So there are ways to exempt emergency expenses, and that would be a fix," Brown said. Otherwise, she said, the upsides to the accounts are limited. "There are other places you can save money where you won't have that tax penalty if you withdraw the funds early," Brown said. Taube of Nerdwallet noted that the proposed accounts' tax benefits are also questionable. "Although they are advertised as tax-advantaged accounts, the way they work does not seem to be that different from how a taxable brokerage account would work," he told CBS MoneyWatch. That said, "given the state of saving for children's future expenses in this country, the accounts do seem like they could help at least somewhat," Taube said.
