Latest news with #NationalInstitutesofHealth
4 hours ago
- Health
NIH cuts spotlight a hidden crisis facing patients with experimental brain implants
Carol Seeger finally escaped her debilitating depression with an experimental treatment that placed electrodes in her brain and a pacemaker-like device in her chest. But when its batteries stopped working, insurance wouldn't pay to fix the problem and she sank back into a dangerous darkness. She worried for her life, asking herself: 'Why am I putting myself through this?' Seeger's predicament highlights a growing problem for hundreds of people with experimental neural implants, including those for depression, quadriplegia and other conditions. Although these patients take big risks to advance science, there's no guarantee that their devices will be maintained — particularly after they finish participating in clinical trials — and no mechanism requiring companies or insurers to do so. A research project led by Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz, a Harvard University scientist, aimed to change that by creating partnerships between players in the burgeoning implant field to overcome barriers to device access and follow-up care. But the cancellation of hundreds of National Institutes of Health grants by the Trump administration this year left the project in limbo, dimming hope for Seeger and others like her who wonder what will happen to their health and progress. Unlike medications, implanted devices often require parts, maintenance, batteries and surgeries when changes are needed. Insurance typically covers such expenses for federally approved devices considered medically necessary, but not experimental ones. A procedure to replace a battery alone can cost more than $15,000 without insurance, Lázaro-Muñoz said. While companies stand to profit from research, 'there's really nothing that helps ensure that device manufacturers have to provide any of these parts or cover any kind of maintenance,' said Lázaro-Muñoz. Some companies also move on to newer versions of devices or abandon the research altogether, which can leave patients in an uncertain place. Medtronic, the company that made the deep brain stimulation, or DBS, technology Seeger used, said in a statement that every study is different and that the company puts patient safety first when considering care after studies end. People consider various possibilities when they join a clinical trial. The Food and Drug Administration requires the informed consent process to include a description of 'reasonably foreseeable risks and discomforts to the participant,' a spokesperson said. However, the FDA doesn't require trial plans to include procedures for long-term device follow-up and maintenance, although the spokesperson stated that the agency has requested those in the past. While some informed consent forms say devices will be removed at a study's end, Lázaro-Muñoz said removal is ethically problematic when a device is helping a patient. Plus, he said, some trial participants told him and his colleagues that they didn't remember everything discussed during the consent process, partly because they were so focused on getting better. Brandy Ellis, a 49-year-old in Boynton Beach, Florida, said she was desperate for healing when she joined a trial testing the same treatment Seeger got, which delivers an electrical current into the brain to treat severe depression. She was willing to sign whatever forms were necessary to get help after nothing else had worked. 'I was facing death,' she said. 'So it was most definitely consent at the barrel of a gun, which is true for a lot of people who are in a terminal condition.' Ellis and Seeger, 64, both turned to DBS as a last resort after trying many approved medications and treatments. 'I got in the trial fully expecting it not to work because nothing else had. So I was kind of surprised when it did,' said Ellis, whose device was implanted in 2011 at Emory University in Atlanta. 'I am celebrating every single milestone because I'm like: This is all bonus life for me.' She's now on her third battery. She needed surgery to replace two single-use ones, and the one she has now is rechargeable. She's lucky her insurance has covered the procedures, she said, but she worries it may not in the future. 'I can't count on any coverage because there's nothing that says even though I've had this and it works, that it has to be covered under my commercial or any other insurance,' said Ellis, who advocates for other former trial participants. Even if companies still make replacement parts for older devices, she added, 'availability and accessibility are entirely different things,' given most people can't afford continued care without insurance coverage. Seeger, whose device was implanted in 2012 at Emory, said she went without a working device for around four months when the insurance coverage her wife's job at Emory provided wouldn't pay for battery replacement surgery. Neither would Medicare, which generally only covers DBS for FDA-approved uses. With her research team at Emory advocating for her, Seeger ultimately got financial help from the hospital's indigent care program and paid a few thousand dollars out of pocket. She now has a rechargeable battery, and the device has been working well. But at any point, she said, that could change. Lázaro-Muñoz hoped his work would protect people like Seeger and Ellis. 'We should do whatever we can as a society to be able to help them maintain their health,' he said. Lázaro-Muñoz's project received about $987,800 from the National Institute of Mental Health in the 2023 and 2024 fiscal years and was already underway when he was notified of the NIH funding cut in May. He declined to answer questions about it. Ellis said any delay in addressing the thorny issues around experimental brain devices hurts patients. Planning at the beginning of a clinical trial about how to continue treatment and maintain devices, she said, would be much better than depending on the kindness of researchers and the whims of insurers. 'If this turns off, I get sick again. Like, I'm not cured,' she said. 'This is a treatment that absolutely works, but only as long as I've got a working device.' ____
USA Today
6 hours ago
- Health
- USA Today
Do you know the signs of a tick bite? What to look for
This year's tick season has been extremely active, leading to a surge in ER visits because of tick bites, particularly in the Northeast. This year's figures are the highest since 2019, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Of the nearly 900 species of ticks in the world, the United States is home to nearly 50 species, according to the National Institutes of Health. Although only a few kinds of ticks can transmit disease to people, those species are growing in numbers and reach. Tiny yet dangerous ticks can spread a number of diseases to humans and animals. But don't panic if you discover a tick on you or a family member. Just because a tick lands on you or bites you doesn't guarantee that you will contract Lyme disease or any of the other diseases they spread. Here are some tips to help you identify and remove a tick: How to recognize a tick Ticks use your body heat, breath, movement and smell to find you. They also employ a variety of methods to locate their victims. Some prefer to wait in leaf litter or dead logs, and others like to scale tall grass or other vegetation, according to the Mayo Clinic. More: Tick bites sending more people to ER than years past, CDC data shows Unable to view our graphics? Click here to see them. Where to look for ticks If you are returning indoors after being outside, it's a good idea to check your clothes and body for ticks. Ticks can be as small as a poppy seed. For a disease to be transmitted, a tick must stay connected to its host for 24 to 36 hours. By removing the tick promptly, you can reduce the chance of becoming infected. Here are some tips on how to deal with a tick: What do tick bites look like? Found a tick? Don't panic Here's the proper way to remove a tick: What happens if you don't remove a tick? According to the CDC, specific tick species can spread diseases like Lyme disease, southern-tick associated rash sickness (STARI) and Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF) in certain regions of the nation. Not all ticks carry infections, but waiting too long to remove one from your skin can raise the risk of transmission. CONTRIBUTING Mary Walrath-Holdridge/USA TODAY
Wall Street Journal
17 hours ago
- Health
- Wall Street Journal
Trump Administration Puts New Chokehold on Billions in Health-Research Funding
The Trump administration is blocking all funding that flows to outside health researchers—billions of dollars in funding that would have gone to study diabetes, cancer and more. The pause came in the form of a footnote from the Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought's office, in a document that doles out federal funds to the National Institutes of Health. The footnote stipulated that the agency's funding for the remainder of the fiscal year could only go to staff salaries and expenses, not to new grants or certain grants that are up for renewal. Most NIH-funded research is done by outside scientists at labs across the country.
Axios
19 hours ago
- Health
- Axios
New brain implant could rewire stroke rehab
In a medical first, UW Medicine neurosurgeons have implanted a brain device to restore movement in stroke survivors. Why it matters: If this works, it could reshape rehabilitation for the 800,000 Americans who have a stroke each year — and the millions already disabled by one. State of play: The device, developed by German neurotech company CorTec GmbH, was implanted last week in a 52-year-old man whose strokes have severely limited his mobility, according to UW Medicine. Doctors hope electrical pulses delivered to his brain during rehab will rewire neural circuits and improve function. The five-year study is funded by the National Institutes of Health's National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. How it works: The device consists of two soft, flexible sheets embedded with tiny electrodes that are placed on the surface of the brain's motor cortex, the area responsible for movement, per UW Medicine. During rehab, the electrodes deliver precisely timed electrical pulses to stimulate brain activity when the patient attempts to move. This stimulation is designed to strengthen surviving neural pathways and help the brain form new connections to restore lost function. What they're saying: Stroke patients often recover some, but not all, function, said Jeffrey Ojemann, study co-lead and vice chair of neurological surgery at the UW School of Medicine. "We want to see whether by stimulating the brain during rehabilitation sessions we can help them regain more function," Ojemann said.
Medscape
a day ago
- Health
- Medscape
How Cuts to Research Funding Could Affect Medical Students
Joseph Alisch took a gap year after his third year of medical school to do research on clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats gene editing at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as part of the Medical Research Scholars Program. In early 2025, he began to experience some of the research cuts at the NIH. While he got to do research in his area of interest, pediatric neurology, some of the cuts and other policy changes dampened his experience. The first was a travel ban, which prevented him from attending the conference where he had planned to present his research findings. He was ultimately able to present virtually, 'though it was never quite the same experience, because you like to go there and interact with all the people,' he said. Next was a pause on purchasing laboratory products, which was problematic for him because his research required a variety of reagents. 'And so, for a while we kind of had to ration things,' he said. Then things became even more difficult. 'So, there were moments we're like, 'Okay, we can purchase things.' And then that policy was pulled back, saying, 'Actually, we can't purchase things right now.'' He recalls thinking, 'I just don't know what's going to happen, but I hope for the best and that we can continue working on these projects with minimal disruptions.' But the shifting policies and delays ultimately interfered with his research. 'I was able to come out with something towards the end, but not the end product that I had envisioned when I did, when I started that gap year,' he told Medscape Medical News . Many premed and medical students pursue research opportunities to bolster their applications to medical school or residency. However, based on the current national landscape, these opportunities are now more limited. This year, the Trump administration made policy changes that limited federal research funding. For example, NIH capped reimbursement for indirect research expenses such as lab maintenance and operations at 15% for current and new grants. Comparatively, average indirect funding reported by NIH generally ranged between 27% and 28%. In announcing the cap in February, NIH said in a statement on its website that, 'Although cognizant that grant recipients, particularly 'new or inexperienced organizations,' use grant funds to cover indirect costs like overhead, NIH is obligated to carefully steward grant awards to ensure taxpayer dollars are used in ways that benefit the American people and improve their quality of life.' The statement went on to say that many private foundations that fund academic research provide substantially lower funding for indirect expenses, yet 'universities readily accept grants from these foundations.' The idea, the statement said, is 'the United States should have the best medical research in the world. It is accordingly vital to ensure that as many funds as possible go towards direct scientific research costs rather than administrative overhead.' Medscape Medical News reached out to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy for comment on how the Trump administration's policy changes and federal funding cuts may affect medical trainees. The office did not respond. Several state attorneys general, higher education associations, and research universities have filed lawsuits in protest. A US district judge blocked the 15% cap. However, the Trump administration appealed, and the fate of the policy remains in flux. Some Physician Researchers Are Nervous 'NIH has been very steady and very reliable, in fact much more reliable than industry funding…,' said Srihari S. Naidu, MD, an interventional cardiologist and professor of medicine at New York Medical College in Valhalla, New York. 'This is the first time where…we're all on edge that money may not come through.' Srihari S. Naidu, MD Overall, 'this is the kind of thing that will have…downstream consequences that affect the health of our country because these new discoveries and the research are what have evolved health care,' said Bobby Mukkamala, MD, president of the American Medical Association. The government is probably trying to save money, but how they're doing it is 'very drastic,' Naidu said. And in his view, the consequences may be chilling for students interested in doing research. 'We know that a lot of graduate programs, as well as programs that fund research opportunities for medical students, have had delays in or cuts in funding,' added Kenira Thompson, PhD, MBA, director of research at Ponce Research Institute in Ponce, Puerto Rico. 'And that's resulted in, particularly in graduate programs, either delayed or limited new admissions because there are reduced funding pipelines.' Students will still get into medical school, Naidu said, but there'll just be fewer research opportunities. 'And if you have less research opportunities for them, you have a workforce that is less savvy about research and…with less abilities towards research, which ultimately limits…their options as a career,' Naidu said. '…And then you'll also have less innovation in that field because there's less minds, less brainpower in that field doing research,' he said. And there are probably more cuts to come. In President Trump's proposed 2026 budget, NIH faces a budget cut of almost $18 billion, or about a 40% cut in funding. According to reporting by The New York Times , a new analysis by the American Association for the Advancement of Science found that President Trump's budget proposals for fiscal year 2026 include a 34% drop in basic science research from $45 billion to $30 billion and a 22% drop for overall science funding from $198 billion to $154 billion. 'The bottom line is that yes, everything is trickling down to impact students,' Thompson said. Implications for Medical Trainees 'The students are going to see either reduced [research] slots or an increase in the competition for the slots that are available,' Thompson said. 'Certainly, if the students don't have sufficient research under their belt, then potentially it will limit their possibility of getting into a medical program.' Naidu is also worried that the quality of research opportunities will suffer. What are the other options? There are registries that students can learn to use for research, but this is not going to be on the same magnitude or caliber as basic science research or clinical research, he said. 'It won't be clearly as innovative because the innovative thing takes a lot of money.' Research Options in New Reality A research vacuum could form where philanthropy, private equity, and industry players may 'pour more money to make up the difference.' However, this increase in profit-driven research would create its own set of problems, Naidu said. One is that this type of research has a bias in favor of trying to prove something. 'And number two, all the money goes towards things that can be commercialized rather than things that might be important,' he said. For example, in his field of interventional cardiology, 'if you have a new stent, industry just wants to prove that the new stent is better than the old stent. But we might want to know if no stents are better than having a stent altogether… And an industry that makes stents is not going to do a trial about whether it's better to not have stents at all.' 'NIH is where you go when you need money to [address] the real important questions that society needs to know,' Naidu said. For example, interventional cardiologists may want to know which is better: stents vs bypass surgery, and stents vs medical therapy. 'Most of those big trials are done through NIH funding.' Given the new research realities, medical students and residents may have to consider research that is industry- or private-equity-sponsored, if those options are even available to them, Naidu said. Most of the industry research doesn't usually use medical students, residents, or fellows 'because they're tightly controlled,' he said. Kenira Thompson, PhD, MBA If the research you do is private sector-driven — based on the research agenda of a particular company that needs to focus on getting a particular medication out the door to the market as opposed to you being in a research setting where there's more independence, where you can do a deep dive into new discoveries and new ideas and sort of build on innovation — then certainly there will be an impact down the line,' Thompson said. Naidu and Thompson also envision some premed and medical students seeking research opportunities abroad. 'The greatest concern is that…there will be great inequity in terms of the opportunities available to students and that some really great students may be sort of left behind,' Thompson said. Bobby Mukkamala, MD Naturally, some students will pursue a research opportunity in other countries, Mukkamala said, but 'there's a huge expense to that as a medical student as if medical school isn't expensive enough….' 'But then, trying to figure out how am I going to get to Germany, as in this example, to collaborate with people whose funding isn't threatened on the exact same topic that I could have done here in my backyard.' Advice to Medical Students Naidu wants medical students to know that research is still a very valuable pursuit, 'both in terms of helping you get to the next stage of your career, but also in and of itself, because it might stimulate you to go into a field of research, (in) a fabulous field that can allow you to be part of scientific progress in the world.' But with decreasing funding opportunities, students may need to 'cast their net wider,' he said, and be open to different topics than they might not have considered. Naidu is trying to do his part to help with providing research opportunities. He created the Medical Research Fund at Brown University School of Medicine, his alma mater in Providence, Rhode Island, to support summer research opportunities for three medical students per year. Students may also want to ask at interviews about the status of grant funding in a given lab they're interested in working in, Mukkamala said. 'There's less opportunities, but the best and the brightest will be able to find opportunities to still do research and…learn about the process and be competitive to move on in their careers,' he said. 'But it's going to be a little harder because overall there'll be less opportunities in total.' '…This is a time in history we're making major cuts to something that has been sustainable for a long time, Naidu said, adding later, 'We would be basically going back 30 years in terms of research funding.' Alisch, now a fourth-year medical student at Brown University School of Medicine, is taking a wait-and-see approach. Despite the delays he experienced as a researcher at NIH during his gap year, Alisch said he was still quite hopeful about his future as a medical science researcher. We are only about 6-7 months into this, he said. 'We have a lot more time to go through before we can see how this is actually going to play out.'
