In a story today from STAT’s Anil Oza, I learned that researcher and physician Alex Keuroghlian recently wrote the first editorial on transgender health research in the entire 150-year history of the journal Science. And the backstory is almost as cool: Keuroghlian first met Science editor-in-chief Holden Thorp this spring at a dinner celebrating the 2024 STATUS List.
JD Vance tries to clarify Trump’s ‘concept of a plan’ for health insurance
Former president Trump memorably said that he had a “concept of a plan” to replace the Affordable Care Act in the recent presidential debate with Vice President Harris. Trump’s running mate JD Vance attempted to elaborate on that in a recent NBC interview, saying, “You want to make sure that pre-existing coverage — conditions — are covered.” Then he said people should be sorted into risk pools, instead of a “one-size-fits-all approach that puts a lot of people into the same insurance pools.”
It’s unclear what kind of system Vance was envisioning, and Trump’s platform doesn’t actually mention the ACA at all. The confusion has provided Democrats with a new line of attack, STAT’s John Wilkerson and Sarah Owermohle report.
“Here’s what it means,” said Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden on Tuesday. “The concepts proposed by JD Vance are a prescription for discriminating against those with pre-existing conditions.”
Read more from John and Sarah on the back-and-forth. And for more D.C. news, read another story from Sarah on yesterday’s failed vote on IVF protections in the Senate.
Should near-sightedness be an official diagnosis?
It’s hard to pinpoint exactly how many people are near-sighted today, but the number is increasing. Yet clinicians don’t have a clear consensus on diagnostic criteria for myopia (the more romantic name for near-sightedness), and data collection isn’t standardized. A new, hefty report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommends that CDC and WHO coordinate to streamline medical understanding of the condition. The authors also recommend that Medicare and Medicaid classify myopia as a disease that requires an official diagnosis so that health agencies and other stakeholders invest more in prevention and treatment.
In the meantime, the authors pointed to the importance of time spent outside for children (at least 1 hour per day!) to strengthen vision. Kids use electronic devices like smartphones earlier and more frequently than ever before, and research shows that screen time and time spent outdoors are negatively correlated. But the evidence is complex when it comes to how much of a problem the screens themselves pose. “Near work” at white-collar desk jobs has long been correlated with near-sightedness. More research is needed to better understand the impact of all types of screens on myopia in youth, the report concluded.
The study was retracted last year. We’re still seeing the fallout.
A Springer Nature journal published an online survey of 1,700 parents whose children had gender dysphoria in late March last year. By mid-June, the piece had been retracted. Outside researchers had quickly pointed out that the study authors didn’t obtain proper consent from the parents. On top of that, it was a self-selecting group of people, who had all reached out to a website that clearly expresses biased opinions on gender-affirming care.
“Yeah, there are certain things that could have been done better,” Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University who co-authored the retracted study, told STAT’s Anil Oza. “[But], all research is imperfect.”
The story gets more complicated from there, culminating in the resignation of an editor at a different Nature journal. Experts say that the saga exemplifies an important shift in how academics consider research on trans people and other marginalized communities. It’s the idea of “nothing about us without us,” which aims to ensure that the subjects of scientific research play a central role in shaping it. Read more.
Former CDC director Walensky on how to end HIV drug experimentation in Africa
The latest wonder drug in HIV prevention received a standing ovation at this year’s International AIDS Conference. Gildead’s injectable drug Lenacapavir was 100% successful in preventing the virus in adolescent girls and young women in two African countries. But it’s unclear whether this vulnerable population — African women have extremely high rates of HIV infection — will benefit from the treatment.
“And if history is any guide, this could be a nightmare,” write former CDC director Rochelle Walensky and physician Mark Siedner in a new First Opinion essay. Drug companies will often test HIV drugs among young women in Africa because the higher rates of infection make it faster and cheaper to do so. But they rarely make those treatments quickly and affordably accessible in African countries. “Tested in Africa, used in America,” the First Opinion headline says. So what can be done? Read more from Walensky and Siedner on how to break the pattern.
Is Tupperware plastic leaking into your food? (It’s complicated)
Food contact materials like waxed paper, cardboard, and plastic containers contain chemicals that keep them waterproof, greaseproof, or structurally sound. Most studies examining whether those chemicals get into food use unrealistic conditions like soaking those materials in liquids similar to vodka — which is not exactly similar to canned soup, salad dressing, or a glazed donut.
A new study took a different approach for estimating human exposure to these compounds: digging through biomonitoring programs and databases to see which chemicals have been detected in humans, and comparing that to lists of food packaging chemicals. The study found that 25% of 14,000 known food contact chemicals have been found in humans.
Though the study suggests the U.S. needs stricter regulations on these chemicals, it also reveals gaps in our knowledge. The evidence that food packaging alone was responsible for that 25% is slim for some of the compounds — some of them are rarely found in packaging and may have gotten into people through other exposures. And only about 40% of the detected chemicals were of high or medium concern, but that’s partially because we haven’t done enough research to determine whether the other ones are harmful, the authors noted.
— Brittany Trang
What we’re reading
-
Doctors cured her sickle-cell disease. So why is she still in pain? Nature
- 12 people shaping psychedelics drug development, STAT
-
Decades of national suicide prevention policies haven’t slowed the deaths, KFF Health News
- The U.S. should follow California’s lead on banning toxic chemicals in IV bags and tubes, STAT
- Most Latinx immigrants said they didn’t know abortion was legal in New Jersey. Meet the group helping the state understand why, Next City
- From Epic to FDA, all the leaders presenting at HHS’ invite-only AI in health care event, STAT