Latest news with #MakeAmericaHealthyAgain
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Health
- Yahoo
RFK Jr.'s Disastrous MAHA Report Seems to Have Been Written Using AI
A report on children's health from Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s 'Make America Healthy Again' commission referenced fake research and misinterpreted studies to support their agenda. It also included citation errors, like crediting the wrong author on a study. To make things worse, the report appears to have been written using artificial intelligence, according to The Washington Post. The revelation comes just weeks after Kennedy, the Secretary of the Health and Human Services Department, touted the department's commitment to using AI liberally. 'The AI revolution has arrived,' Kennedy told lawmakers earlier this month. He said, 'We are very, very aggressively implementing AI,' adding: 'We brought very, very high-quality, caliber people from Silicon Valley.' Kennedy pledged to use AI to speed up clinical trials for drug testing and offering it as a way for people to avoid going to the emergency rooms in rural areas with shortages of doctors. The 'MAHA Report: Make Our Children Healthy Again,' looks at diet, technology usage, medication usage, and other factors that contribute to children's health. A key consequence of children's health issues, the report argues, is the majority would not be able to serve in the military, 'primarily due to obesity, poor physical fitness, and/or mental health challenges.' The report also argues that children are on too many medications, which aligns with RFK Jr.'s longtime diatribes against vaccines and drugmakers. The shoddy 'research' calls into question the report's validity. NOTUS first pointed out the study's many issues on Thursday, showing that seven cited studies don't exist. NOTUS also found issues with how the report interpreted its sources. 'The paper cited is not a real paper that I or my colleagues were involved with,' epidemiologist Katherine Keyes told NOTUS of a reference that named her. 'We've certainly done research on this topic, but did not publish a paper in JAMA Pediatrics on this topic with that co-author group, or with that title.' Citations in particular show hallmark signs of AI usage, the Post found. These issues go beyond typical user error in writing somewhat annoying APA citations. For example, URLs in two citations include the term 'oaicite,' referencing OpenAI, which the Post calls a 'definitive sign' that the authors used AI. The report also cites articles that do not exist. For example, 'Direct-to-consumer advertising and the rise in ADHD medication use among children' sounds like it could be a real article, but it was fabricated. The report cited an article from psychiatry professor Robert Findling on a topic that he writes about, but the article does not exist. This is a sign of AI usage, because chatbots 'hallucinate,' as the Post says, cite studies that could be real but are not. Two citations for an article from U.S. News and World Report titled 'How much recess should kids get?' each credit a different author. But neither author is the one who actually wrote the article. Two citations for another article on recess do the same. AI chatbots are known to mix real references with false information, often described as hallucinations. For a statistic about overprescription for children with asthma, the report cites an article that does seem to exist, but that does not include the statistic. The lead author for the article in the citation is correct, but the co-authors are not — another error. The Post also identified a URL that no longer works. If AI is trained on older material, it can include outdated links. Another citation includes a quotation from the reference material, an error only someone who does not conceptually grasp citations — or a bot — would make. Rolling Stone also noticed that some citations are missing italicization and others are missing capitalization, which at the very least suggests an author without an academic background, a lazy author, or perhaps a bot. On Friday, NOTUS found that the report had been updated, adding in entire new errors. In the hours since the Post's story came out Friday night, the White House appears to have edited the report again to remove some of the evidence the article referenced. For example, 'oaicite' no longer appears anywhere in the HHS spokesman told the Post that 'minor citation and formatting errors have been corrected, but the substance of the MAHA report remains the same — a historic and transformative assessment by the federal government to understand the chronic disease epidemic afflicting our nation's children.' More from Rolling Stone John Oliver Slams RFK Jr.: 'Clearly in Way Over His Worm-Riddled Head' RFK Jr. Made Promising Statements on Long Covid. Too Bad the Rest of His Plans Undercut Them GOP Senator Blames Americans for Most of Their Health Problems Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- General
- Yahoo
Public health expert: RFK Jr.'s MAHA report is "unconscionable"
Public health expert and Columbia University senior research scholar, Dr. Irwin Redlener, joined @ chris jansing to discuss the scrutiny surrounding the scientific rigor of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s 'Make America Healthy Again' report. "If he was working as an academic researcher at any kind of medical school, for example, and put this out, he would've been fired," Redlener said
The Hill
5 hours ago
- Health
- The Hill
Which states are looking to ban soda, snack purchases for SNAP recipients?
(NEXSTAR) – On May 19, Nebraska became the first state in the country to obtain a waiver from the USDA to ban residents from purchasing sugary drinks with benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). By the end of the week, the USDA had granted similar exemptions for Iowa and Indiana. Not all waivers were seeking the same restrictions, however. Nebraska's waiver will effectively prohibit the purchases of soda and energy drinks with SNAP benefits. Iowa's will ban nearly all 'taxable' food items, as defined by Iowa law. And in Illinois, SNAP recipients won't be able to buy soda or candy under the new restrictions. The benefits or consequences of such restrictions have yet to be seen, as they won't go into effect until Jan. 1, 2026. But governors in a handful of other states have already submitted requests for their own SNAP waivers, with the intention of restricting certain foods or drinks — or, in a few cases, easing restrictions — within their own food-assistance programs. In April, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) submitted a waiver seeking permission to exclude 'soft drinks and candy' from permitted SNAP purchases. Idaho Gov. Brad Little (R) and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) also filed for waivers in May, requesting exemptions to ban 'soft drinks and candy' and 'sweetened drinks and candy,' respectively. And making its way through the Utah state legislature is a bill seeking to restrict soft drink purchases under SNAP. West Virginia Gov. Patrick West Morrisey, meanwhile, has submitted a waiver to request that soda is 'no longer an entitlement' to those receiving assistance. But he also indicated that he was asking to expand access to hot foods — which are generally not permitted to be purchased with SNAP benefits. Joining him in these efforts is Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D), whose waiver seeks to make sweetened beverages unavailable for purchase with food stamps, but 'permit SNAP participants to buy a full range of hot prepared foods from grocery stores, including rotisserie chickens,' a representative for the Colorado Department of Human Services confirmed to Nexstar. It's likely that many of these requests will ultimately be approved (in their current form or otherwise) by USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins, who approved Nebraska, Iowa, and Indiana's requests. Rollins, like many of the Republican governors who supported the idea of these waivers, credited President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy (and his 'Make America Healthy Again' initiative) with her decisions. 'President Trump has given our nation a once in a generation opportunity to change the health trajectory for our entire country,' Rollins, who was sworn in this past February, was quoted as saying in a press release last Friday. 'I look forward to signing even more waivers in the days ahead as we continue to restore the health of America,' she said. In her statement, Rollins had also included Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (D) among a list of governors who 'stepped up' to request a waiver. But Kelly, who was initially supportive of a waiver, has since retracted her support for any state-mandated restrictions to SNAP purchases. Kelly ultimately vetoed a bill approving a waiver request, claiming the SNAP restrictions would hurt businesses. She also said the definition of allowable foods was 'nonsensical,' as it allegedly allowed the purchases of candy bars but not protein bars or trail mix. 'I support the idea that Kansans should eat healthier. However, changes to the SNAP food assistance program should be made at the federal level, not on a patchwork, state-by-state basis,' Kelly said. Anti-hunger advocates have criticized the waivers, too, saying they add costs, boost administrative burdens, and increase stigma for people already facing food insecurity. Gina Plata-Nino, a deputy director at the nonprofit advocacy group Food Research & Action Center, had argued that Nebraska's waiver 'ignores decades of evidence showing that incentive-based approaches — not punitive restrictions — are the most effective, dignified path to improving nutrition and reducing hunger.' Until this month, the USDA had also rejected the waivers, saying there were no clear standards to define certain foods as good or bad. In addition, the agency had said restrictions would be difficult to implement, complicated and costly, and would not necessarily change recipients' food purchases or reduce health problems such as obesity. Under Rollins, though, the USDA's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) now appears much more willing to approve — and even refine — the waivers. 'FNS continues to collaborate extensively with each state on their proposals, which includes holding near daily technical assistance calls with each submitting state,' a spokesperson for the USDA told Nexstar. 'There is no perfect timeline as each State is approaching this differently.' The Associated Press contributed to this report.
CNN
5 hours ago
- Health
- CNN
MAHA doc ‘Toxic Nation' says 4 things are sickening us
Movies Food & health Agriculture Chronic diseasesFacebookTweetLink Follow Ultraprocessed foods, seed oils, pesticides and fluoride: They're all targets of the 'Make America Healthy Again' movement, whose chief proponent is US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Now, MAHA Films, a production company dedicated to promoting the movement's values, has released its first documentary. 'Toxic Nation: From Fluoride to Seed Oils — How We Got Here, Who Profits, and What You Can Do' highlights those four food- and environmental-related issues that Kennedy's nonprofit MAHA Action, an advocacy partner for the film, says 'silently endanger millions of Americans every day.' Released online Tuesday, the film is the first in a planned four-part series. 'If we can love our children more than we hate each other, we can solve the chronic disease epidemic affecting them,' producer and director Jeff Hays said in a news release, quoting Kennedy's ethos. ''Toxic Nation' is our love letter to that vision, a call to create an America where families can finally thrive in true health.' The documentary's release follows the May 22 publication of the first MAHA Commission report, which lays the groundwork for an overhaul of federal policy to reduce the burden of chronic disease on American children. Still, Kennedy's agenda to overhaul food systems, pharmaceuticals and environmental toxins may run into roadblocks due to significant budget and staffing cuts at HHS and the US Environmental Protection Agency. 'The Trump Administration can't have it both ways,' Scott Faber, senior vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit environmental health organization, wrote in an email. (Although there is substantial overlap with some issues that have become Kennedy's focus at HHS, the documentary was not released by the federal government.) 'On the one hand, they're sounding the alarm about diet-related disease and the illnesses caused by dangerous chemicals,' Faber added. 'On the other hand, they're making it harder for people to build healthy diets and eliminating the safeguards that protect us from toxins like PFAS and pathogens.' Although some experts have long talked about the effects of what we consume on our risk of disease, when it comes to specifics, there is some controversy around the potential dangers, benefits or neutrality, if any. Here's what recent research says about the four targets of 'Toxic Nation.' The claim: The documentary calls out ultraprocessed foods as one of the roots of chronic disease. The background: Composing up to 70% of the US food supply, ultraprocessed foods are made with industrial techniques and ingredients 'never or rarely used in kitchens, or classes of additives whose function is to make the final product palatable or more appealing,' according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Ultraprocessed foods are typically low in fiber; are high in calories, added sugar, refined grains and fats, and sodium; and include additives such as preservatives, flavor enhancers or dyes. The research: Numerous studies over decades have linked consumption of ultraprocessed foods to diseases or health issues including type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity, premature death, cancer, depression, cognitive decline, stroke and sleep disorders. The harms could be partly due to ultraprocessed foods' effects on metabolism, experts have said — since without fiber, for example, refined carbohydrates can raise triglycerides and spike blood glucose levels. QUIZ: How much ultraprocessed food are you eating? What you can do: Limit your intake of ultraprocessed foods by increasing your consumption of whole fruits, veggies, grains, nuts and seeds, and legumes. Read ingredient labels and be aware of how much sodium you're eating and how certain foods make you feel; ultraprocessed foods can keep you wanting more, whereas whole foods are more satiating. Read more on ultraprocessed food: Eating more ultraprocessed food ups the risk of premature death, study finds The claim: The documentary challenges the long-held guidance that for heart health, cooks should replace saturated fats from animal products such as beef tallow, pig lard and butter with seed oils. (Kennedy applauded Steak 'n Shake's switchover from seed oils to beef tallow for frying its french fries, calling it a healthier choice.) The background: Vegetable and seed oils became popular in the mid-20th century, when scientists began looking into animal fat as the culprit behind the uptick in cardiovascular issues and promoted oils as heart-healthy alternatives. Some experts' concerns about seed oils are based on their chemistry, the industrial production involving various chemicals and the behavior of seed oils when they're exposed to heat, air and light. The oils are extracted from the seeds of plants, like canola oil from canola — or rapeseed — plant seeds. The other seed oils of concern are corn, cottonseed, grapeseed, sunflower, safflower and rice bran oils. Seed oils are primarily polyunsaturated fats, which are less chemically stable than saturated fats, the main lipid in animal fats. Polyunsaturated fats are thus prone to faster peroxidation when exposed to oxygen or cooked, which can produce molecules linked to cellular damage and oxidative stress, Dr. Daisy Zamora, an associate professor at the University of North Carolina's School of Medicine, told CNN in March. The research: Over the past few decades and continuing today, scientists have published copious data showing that diets higher in plant fats result in better health outcomes than diets higher in animal fats, Dr. Alice H. Lichtenstein, the Stanley N. Gershoff Professor of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University in Boston, told CNN in March. The research on seed oils has picked up over the past decade , including Zamora's clinical trials that found limiting seed oils improved participants' chronic pain. Other studies have linked seed oil intake with atherosclerosis or biomarkers of fat buildup in arteries. The risk of harmful degradation products may not come into play unless the oils are cooked too hot, used repeatedly or kept for too long, and it's possible that some food companies, restaurants and individuals may be doing those things, Dr. Eric Decker, a professor of food science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, told CNN in a previous story. What you can do: If you're concerned about seed oils, you can try substituting extra virgin olive oil or avocado oil, experts said. Experts also recommend that any fat you consume should be in moderation. Read more on seed oils: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says beef tallow is healthier than seed oils. Is he right? The claim: The film raises concerns about the herbicide glyphosate, citing previously documented links to cancer. Sources also said glyphosate may cause endocrine disruption and damaged gut microbiomes, with the latter potentially increasing risk for irritable bowel diseases and celiac disease. The background: Glyphosate is commonly used for killing weeds in human and animal food crops, forestry and gardens. The research: Research on the effects of glyphosate on the human gut microbiome is in the early stages, although harm in rats has been found. A 2019 analysis of studies on thousands of people and animals found that exposure to glyphosate was associated with a 41% higher risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a cancer of the immune system. The US Food and Drug Administration's role is to ensure that pesticide or herbicide residues on or in domestic and imported foods don't exceed limits set by the EPA, at levels the EPA determines to 'provide a reasonable certainty of no harm,' according to the FDA. The EPA has said that glyphosate isn't likely to be carcinogenic for humans and that it continues to find 'no risks to public health when glyphosate is used in accordance with its current label.' The EPA's conclusion contradicts the World Health Organization's stance, although the latter has been controversial among both industry and some health experts. The decision was followed by thousands of lawsuits — against the leading producer of glyphosate-based weed killers — claiming that glyphosate exposure caused plaintiffs' cancer. Some have been successful to varying degrees, including a high-profile case partly argued by Kennedy when he was an environmental lawyer. What you can do: You can limit your consumption of herbicides (as well as pesticides) by eating mostly or only organic foods. Since that's not feasible for many people, you can still make an impact by reducing your intake of the foods on the Environmental Working Group's 'Dirty Dozen' list and increasing your intake of its 'Clean Fifteen' foods. The lists refer to conventionally grown fruits and vegetables with the most or least amount of pesticide residues, respectively. Still, the EWG also says the health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables outweigh the risks of pesticide exposure, so don't let perfection be the enemy of the good. Read more on pesticides: Many breakfast cereals still contaminated by weed killer, environmental group says The claim: Documentary sources claimed that the type of fluoride predominantly used in drinking water for most of the US population differs from dental sodium fluoride. That's a problem, they say, because it's hydrofluorosilicic acid, a chemical byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry, and contains heavy metals such as arsenic. It's true that hydrofluorosilicic acid is the fluoridation agent of choice for many municipalities . That hydrofluorosilicic acid also contains more arsenic than sodium fluoride is also true, according to the EPA, which has also said it limits the amount of arsenic allowed in water. 'Toxic Nation' sources added that fluoride can block thyroid receptors and cause dental fluorosis. This is a cosmetic change in children's tooth enamel caused by ingesting excessive fluoride while their permanent teeth are still forming underneath their gums, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The background: Medical organizations or institutions such as the American Dental Association and the CDC continue to support water fluoridation and use of fluoride toothpaste. Most of the documentary sources acknowledged that sodium fluoride can strengthen enamel. The research: Studies prove that 'water fluoridation continues to be effective in reducing dental decay by at least 25% in children and adults, even in the of era widespread availability of fluoride from other sources, such as fluoride toothpaste,' according to the American Dental Association. A new study published in the journal JAMA affirms this. It estimated that eliminating fluoride from public water systems would be associated with a 7.5% increase in tooth decay, according to data on 8,484 children with an average age of 9. But a few studies, including a federal review published in August, have supported concerns about higher levels of fluoride in water affecting children's intellectual development. Some have also found only slight dental benefits of fluoridating water. But the federal review noted that associations between normal levels of fluoride and children's IQ are less consistent. And research on adults is scarce. What you can do: If you want to avoid fluoride intake, you can buy water filters that filter out fluoride. They should be independently certified, such as by the National Sanitation Foundation or another official lab. Also ensure your kids don't swallow toothpaste that contains fluoride. To help prevent cavities, brush and floss your teeth daily and nightly, and limit your intake of sugary foods and beverages, the American Dental Association recommends. If you do eat them, do so at mealtimes. You should also visit your dentist regularly. Read more on fluoride: What to know about fluoride in drinking water CNN's Andrea Kane, Sandee LaMotte, Nadia Kounang, Carma Hassan and Deidre McPhillips contributed to this report.
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
HHS budget proposal details significant cuts to National Institutes of Health, other agencies
A budget proposal for the US Department of Health and Human Services details extensive cuts to funding for the National Institutes of Health, part of an effort to consolidate the work of its 27 institutes into just eight while reducing the agency's budget nearly 40%. The proposed cuts to federal health agencies were first revealed in a preliminary memo from White House budget officials in April. A newly released Budget in Brief document for fiscal year 2026 lays out HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s plan to prioritize his Make America Healthy Again initiative with a $94.7 billion discretionary budget. The budget for the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would be slashed from more than $9 billion to just over $4 billion and funding for the US Food and Drug Administration cut from about $7 billion to just over $6.5 billion. However, some of the biggest changes will be felt at the NIH, where the budget document lists 2026 funding at $27.5 billion, down from nearly $48.5 billion in 2025. In the reorganized HHS, only three areas of the NIH – the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the National Institute on Aging – are set to be preserved. Institutes researching childhood illnesses, mental health, chronic disease, disabilities and substance abuse would be shuffled into five new entities: the National Institute on Body Systems, National Institute on Neuroscience and Brain Research, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, the National Institute of Disability Related Research and National Institute of Behavioral Health. But even the surviving institutes won't be spared cuts: The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases had a budget of more than $6.5 billion in 2025 but will receive just over $4 billion in 2026. The National Cancer Institute, which received more than $7 billion for 2025, will get about $4.5 billion next year. And the National Institute on Aging will see its budget cut from $4.4 billion to less than $2.7 billion in 2026. The proposed NIH budget assumes a 15% cap on indirect costs that research institutions can charge the government, itself a highly controversial change that has been blocked in the courts. The new document also details plans for the Administration for Healthy America, a new agency created under Kennedy that will consolidate divisions such as the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the Health Resources and Services Administration and several parts of the CDC. The new AHA is set to receive $14 billion in the 2026 budget. The 2026 HHS budget 'reflects the President's vision of making Americans the healthiest in the world while achieving his goal of transforming the bureaucracy,' the document says. At the NIH, restructuring 'will create efficiencies … that will allow the agency to focus on true science, and coordinate research to make the best use of federal funds.' But expert groups were more critical of the proposal. The NIH cuts 'would have far-reaching and irreversible consequences not only to the entire biomedical research enterprise, but also to the millions of Americans who rely on advances in biomedical research to safeguard and improve their health and their very lives,' Dr. Stephen Jameson, president of the American Association of Immunologists, said in a statement Friday. The agency supported hundreds of thousands of jobs in 2024 and contributed nearly $100 billion in economic activity across the US, Jameson said. 'Undermining NIH support threatens both local economies and our national competitiveness on the global scale.' Research!America, a nonprofit that advocates for science and innovation, said it was 'alarmed' by the budget proposal. 'If the proposal is enacted, Americans today and tomorrow will be sicker, poorer, and die younger,' President and CEO Mary Woolley said in a statement. 'American research has a proven track record of increasing survival, reducing the burden of illness, and creating jobs. Cutting research funding helps no one; instead, it hurts everyone.'
