Latest news with #PeterLurie
Evening Standard
6 days ago
- Health
- Evening Standard
What is the mRNA vaccine and why is the US withdrawing funding?
mRNA vaccines were used during the Covid-19 pandemic. Peter Lurie, a former US Food and Drug Administration official, told the BBC told that the cancellation of the vaccine funding signified the US "turning its back on one of the most promising tools to fight the next pandemic".
Boston Globe
05-08-2025
- Health
- Boston Globe
The FDA is targeting orange juice. Here's why, and what the science says.
Orange juice contains nutrients including calcium and Vitamin C. But some nutritionists argue that's not enough to make up for the unnecessary calories and natural sugars. 'Juices are a dilemma,' said Peter Lurie, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which advocates for a healthy and safe food supply. Get Winter Soup Club A six-week series featuring soup recipes and cozy vibes, plus side dishes and toppings, to get us all through the winter. Enter Email Sign Up The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends instead eating real fruit, which contains more fiber than juice. The association advises against giving fruit juice to infants except to manage constipation. It also advises limiting how much juice parents should give older children, such as no more than 4 ounces per day for kids 1 to 3 years old. Advertisement 'If you're going to have a small amount of juice, it's not going to be anything that anybody's going to worry about,' said Marion Nestle, a retired professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University who called fruit juices 'delicious.' 'When you worry about juice is when it's in large amounts,' she added. Advertisement Even though leading orange juice brands do not contain added sugars, high levels of natural sugars can still be harmful, some experts said. 'Orange juice is sugar water,' said Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina. 'Every juice is essentially sugar water.' Once touted as part of a balanced breakfast, Americans are souring on orange juice. Consumers have gravitated toward other beverage options seen as healthier. Prices have risen. Production has stalled. And this has become a problem for Florida's orange producers. The sugar content of the fruit grown in the state has been steadily dropping due to a bacterial disease afflicting the crop, exacerbated after Hurricane Irma struck in 2017. In 2022, Florida trade groups representing the state's citrus growers and citrus juice industry petitioned the FDA to lower the minimum fruit sugar levels for pasteurized orange juice. The FDA sets a minimum standard for the sugar content in order to call a drink 'pasteurized orange juice,' the kind commonly sold at grocery stores without added sugars. If manufacturers fall below that threshold, they are essentially no longer allowed to call their products 'pasteurized orange juice." Florida orange industry groups said lowering that threshold would protect their business and reduce orange imports from other countries while going unnoticed by consumers. Sugar per serving would lower from 18 grams to 17 grams, according to nutritional label samples provided to the FDA by the industry. Other nutrients would be largely unaffected to the change. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary both pledged to examine this proposal during congressional hearings when pressed by Sen. Ashley Moody (R-Florida). Advertisement Some nutrition experts said if Kennedy wanted to advance his 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda, which included pledges to improve the diets of children, he should champion more sweeping regulations broadly targeting sugars and sodium. 'If one is serious about sugar in the American diet, we need an across the board approach,' Lurie said.
CBS News
17-06-2025
- Health
- CBS News
Federal judge strikes down Trump cuts to NIH medical research grants linked to diversity, gender
The firings and billion-dollar research grant cuts at NIH in Trump's first 100 days back in office Washington — A federal judge struck down sweeping Trump administration orders that resulted in the cancellation of hundreds of National Institutes of Health research grants because they were linked to topics like diversity, gender identity and vaccine hesitancy. "The ideologically motivated directives to terminate grants alleged to constitute DEI, 'gender ideology,' or other forbidden topics were, in fact, arbitrary and capricious, and have now been ruled unlawful," Dr. Peter Lurie, head of the Center for Science in the Public Interest said in a statement Tuesday. Lurie's group was among those that filed the lawsuit. Judge William Young of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts capped a trial Monday for multiple lawsuits that were filed against the Trump administration: one by a coalition of public health groups and another by several Democratic state attorneys general. It is possible that the Trump administration could seek to block the ruling by Young, who was nominated to the court by President Reagan in 1985. "HHS is exploring all legal options, including filing an appeal and moving to stay the order," Andrew Nixon, communications director for the Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement. Nixon said the department "stands by its decision to end funding for research that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor and meaningful outcomes for the American people," saying the department wanted taxpayer dollars to support "gold standard science" and not "divisive DEI mandates or gender ideology." The court has not yet published Young's order in the case, but notes from the clerk announced that the challenged directives have been vacated and that the Trump administration was ordered to "promptly comply." Separate court cases are underway for other cuts to medical research funding sought by the Trump administration, like the terminations of funding to universities like Harvard and Columbia that have disrupted studies for cancer and diseases. Another federal judge in Massachusetts earlier this year blocked the NIH from implementing a policy change that would have cut funding for research overhead costs, which is now being appealed by the Trump administration. "Today's court ruling halted the cancellation of millions of dollars that have already been awarded to address important public health needs and will allow funding for life-saving medical research to continue," the Massachusetts attorney general's office said Monday in a statement. They said that the judge had "denounced these actions" at the trial, saying he had "never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable" and would "be blind not to call it out." Young's ruling came after opponents challenged the process used by the Trump administration to come up with and implement its steep cuts to grants, saying the law requires federal agencies changing their policies to "supply a reasoned analysis for the change." Flaws cited by a trial brief brought by the groups included the lack of a definition for what qualified as banned "DEI studies" and NIH Acting Director Dr. Matthew Memoli having spent only minutes deciding which grants and funding opportunities to cut. "Defendants do not explain how lightning speed implementation of the Directives could possibly reflect reasoned decisionmaking," they wrote.
Time Magazine
08-05-2025
- Health
- Time Magazine
Peter Lurie
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned Red Dye #3 in January 2025—an act that was a long time coming for the federal government, the American public, and Dr. Peter Lurie. Back in 1984, during a gap year from medical school, Lurie helped a public interest group called Public Citizen advocate against harmful synthetic chemicals in food, including Red Dye #3. Research has linked Red Dye #3 to cancer and ADHD-like symptoms in children. Since then, whether as a physician, academic researcher, or federal official, his work has often focused on ridding the food supply of toxic chemicals. As the president and executive director of Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), he directed his organization in 2022 to petition the FDA to ban Red Dye #3. But from previously working at the FDA, Lurie knew that their best shot was to pressure the agency—through the states. In California, CSPI helped develop legislation that led to a state-level ban and the removal of certain food dyes from the school meal program in 2024. After four decades, Lurie was 'thrilled' when the FDA finally passed a federal ban. Just weeks later, his team successfully helped pressure the agency to define 'healthy' food labels, so that they better align with nutrition science. 'Most people believe the government is protecting them, but it often isn't,' Lurie says. 'That's where we step in.'
Global News
02-05-2025
- Health
- Global News
RFK Jr. wants placebo testing for ‘new' vaccines, experts say it's unethical
The U.S. health department, under the guidance of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., says it intends to add the requirement of a placebo testing phase in vaccine trials to provide more transparency about medical products, but experts warn the process could threaten immunization access and create public mistrust in the efficacy and validity of inoculations. In a statement to the Washington Post this week, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said, 'All new vaccines will undergo safety testing in placebo-controlled trials prior to licensure — a radical departure from past practices.' If implemented, the new regulations would require some test subjects to receive vaccine doses, while others would be injected with a non-reactive substance. Story continues below advertisement Vaccines that target new infectious agents are often tested using the placebo method, but for well-known and researched diseases, health experts say using a placebo poses ethical issues because the group receiving it will not know if they are actually protected against the illness. Get weekly health news Receive the latest medical news and health information delivered to you every Sunday. Sign up for weekly health newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy The health department did not provide details on how the proposed changes will be enforced or to which vaccine trials they will apply. It also did not define what it meant by 'new vaccine,' though it said the policy would not include the flu shot, which is updated yearly. Health experts have argued that updated COVID-19 vaccines may be included, which they say could delay access. Peter Lurie, a former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official, told the BBC, 'It's hard to tell exactly what is being proposed.' 'But, broadly, if they mean that every modification to an existing vaccine would require a new placebo-controlled trial, they are treading in ethically dubious territory and likely to deny Americans life-saving vaccines at some point.' An HHS spokesperson also told the BBC that Kennedy's goal is to achieve 'radical transparency,' which means 'being honest and straightforward about what we know—and what we don't know—about medical products, including vaccines.' The statement went on to claim that none of the vaccines recommended for children in the U.S., except the COVID-19 shot, had gone through placebo testing, which the health department says leaves it knowing 'very little about the actual risk profiles of these products.' Story continues below advertisement However, health experts warn that the statement is misleading because vaccines administered to children, including for hepatitis A and B, polio, and mumps, were all tested against a placebo during their development stages. The BBC adds that all new immunizations go through a type of random testing where one test group receives the vaccine and the other is given a placebo. But in the new system proposed by HHS, experts say vaccines under testing may not undergo the same randomized process, because it is unethical to withhold an injection that is known to be safe from a particular group, and because shots that are updated yearly go through minimal alterations. For example, the COVID-19 vaccine has endured scrupulous testing for years, and all of that is necessary to update it for a different Omicron variant than the one used the year prior, Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, told the BBC. Story continues below advertisement Nevertheless, an HHS spokesperson said that 'significant updates to existing vaccines' could be seen as 'new products,' which could necessitate additional trials. 'A four-year-old trial is also not a blank cheque for new vaccines each year without clinical trial data, unlike the flu shot, which has been tried and tested for more than 80 years,' the spokesperson told the BBC. Meanwhile, Lurie says requiring placebo tests for basic updates to existing vaccines that are proven to work would be expensive and could lead to drug companies opting not to upgrade them altogether.
