The claims made by President Trump, and supported by others in government, linking Tylenol use during pregnancy to autism are based on a review co-authored by Dr. Andrea Baccarelli. However, Baccarelli served as an expert witness in a lawsuit against Tylenol’s manufacturer, for which he received $150,000, a fact that was not highlighted. A federal judge dismissed the expert testimonies in that case, including Baccarelli’s, as unreliable. Other scientists also expressed criticism of Baccarelli’s methods and the inconclusive nature of the current research.
Read More
The CDC is currently experiencing significant turmoil as its director, Susan Monarez, was reportedly fired by the Trump administration after refusing to resign due to political pressure. This event followed the resignations of multiple high-ranking CDC officials, including key figures in immunization and disease control, with some citing the appointment of vaccine skeptics to influential committees and the prioritization of political agendas over scientific integrity as contributing factors. These changes have led to internal conflict and concerns about the agency’s ability to function effectively. Senator Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the Senate health committee, has indicated that his panel will provide oversight.
Read More
According to a departing CDC official, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has not been briefed by CDC experts before making key public health decisions, despite multiple requests. This claim was made by Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, who resigned in protest of the firing of CDC Director Susan Monarez and cited concerns that the agency was being used to promote policies lacking scientific basis. Daskalakis further revealed that the health secretary’s office had declined offers for briefings from CDC experts, which he found highly atypical. These revelations have led to calls for investigations and criticism of Kennedy’s actions.
Read More
The central drama unfolding at the C.D.C. right now, involves its new director, who seems to be digging in her heels and resisting calls for her to step down. It’s a situation that’s become increasingly fraught, especially when we consider the context of recent events. Alongside this resistance, a disturbing trend has emerged: multiple high-ranking C.D.C. officials have resigned en masse. The reasons? Well, frustration over vaccine policies and, most significantly, a leadership that seems to be guided by a different set of priorities. It’s clear something is deeply amiss when your top talent starts fleeing the scene.
This isn’t just some isolated incident.… Continue reading
On Wednesday, Susan Monarez, the newly appointed CDC Director, was removed from her position by the Trump administration with no explanation given. According to reports, Monarez’s ousting may be due to her pro-science stance and refusal to support changes to US vaccine policies. Following the announcement, at least three other CDC leaders resigned, citing concerns about the “weaponizing of public health” and the censorship of scientific findings. This occurred shortly after the revoking of the emergency use authorization for Covid-19 vaccines, a move that was praised by the Health Secretary, who has reshaped advisory panels to include vaccine opponents.
Read More
US to rewrite its past national climate reports: Well, this is a real kick in the teeth, isn’t it? The idea of the US rewriting its past national climate reports… it’s a thought that just hangs in the air, heavy with implications. It feels like a direct challenge to everything we understand about science, historical accuracy, and, frankly, the future. The core concern seems to be about the integrity of information itself, the fear that factual data is being twisted to serve a specific agenda. This isn’t just about numbers and graphs; it’s about trust, about the very foundation upon which we build our understanding of the world and, more importantly, how we plan to preserve it.… Continue reading
Ninety-two NIH researchers, along with 250 anonymous colleagues, publicly challenged the Trump administration’s policies in the “Bethesda Declaration,” citing grant terminations exceeding $12 billion, jeopardizing ongoing research and patient safety. The letter, addressed to NIH director Jay Bhattacharya and other officials, alleges a “culture of fear” hindering scientific integrity and prioritizing political agendas over public health. Bhattacharya acknowledged the dissent while defending the NIH’s direction, highlighting the conflict between his stated commitment to open discourse and the administration’s actions. The declaration highlights the halting of numerous clinical trials, resulting in wasted funds and compromised patient care.
Read More
Rep. Stephen Lynch’s letter to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. demands answers regarding the “Make America Healthy Again” report, citing concerns about fabricated citations, misrepresented studies, and potential use of AI to generate false conclusions. News outlets, including NOTUS and The Washington Post, revealed evidence suggesting the report’s citations were manipulated, with some initially linking to nonexistent studies and others exhibiting hallmarks of AI-generated content. Lynch’s letter emphasizes the report’s apparent attempt to cover up these errors after their initial exposure, raising serious questions about the Trump administration’s commitment to scientific integrity. The letter formally requests information on the report’s drafting, review, publication, and subsequent amendments by June 16th.
Read More
RFK Jr.’s threat to bar government scientists from publishing in leading medical journals represents a deeply troubling development. It signals a potential chilling effect on scientific discourse and a concerning disregard for established norms within the scientific community. The very notion of preventing qualified researchers from disseminating their findings in reputable journals undermines the principles of open inquiry and peer review that are foundational to scientific progress.
This action, if carried out, would severely restrict the flow of vital information and impede crucial advancements in medical research. The potential consequences extend far beyond individual scientists, affecting public health and the global scientific landscape.… Continue reading
In a recent Canadian election, a leading Conservative candidate pledged to eliminate what he termed “woke ideology” from science funding. This promise has sparked significant debate, with many questioning the candidate’s understanding of scientific research and the implications of such a policy. The very notion of “woke ideology” in science seems to be a contentious point, with critics suggesting it’s a poorly defined and potentially harmful concept.
The candidate’s statement raises concerns about the potential for political interference in scientific research. Accusations of silencing scientists based on their findings or perspectives have been leveled, drawing parallels to past instances of governments suppressing scientific voices that contradict their agendas.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood