SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " vaccine " 1,115 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
KFF Tracking Poll on Health Information and Trust: Update on Common Vaccine Myths
This poll looks at exposure to and belief in several vaccine myths and finds that people without a trusted health care provider, and those who regularly use social media or AI for health information, are generally more likely than others to belief the false claims. It also analyzes belief across vaccine myths, showing the share of the public that are consistent myth believers, consistent myth deniers, and those who land in the "mixed middle."
Poll: People Without a Trusted Health Care Provider Are More Likely to Endorse Vaccine Myths, As Are Those Who Often Use Social Media or AI for Health Information
People who don’t have a trusted health care provider are more likely than people with one to believe or lean toward believing several common myths about vaccines, a new KFF Tracking Poll on Health Information and Trust reveals.
Vaccine Confidence Strategies and Emerging Vaccinology Science
With vaccine confidence top of mind for many infectious disease experts, the 2026 Annual Conference on Vaccinology Research covered communication challenges as well as the latest in vaccine science.
Supreme Court rejects legal battle over New York's COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers
The dispute arose after New York's Department of Health issued an emergency rule that required healthcare workers to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
Your menstrual cycle may affect how well vaccines work
Women who were vaccinated against covid-19 in the luteal phase of their menstrual cycle reported having a breakthrough infection sooner than those vaccinated during their follicular phase
KATALIN KARIKÓ
She was met with resistance, got demoted and eventually forced to leave academia – but Katalin Karikó never lost focus, doubling-down on her work to harness mRNA for new vaccines and therapies. Karikó’s Nobel Prize-awarded discovery enabled the development of effective vaccines against COVID-19, offering protection to millions of people.
America's lifespan has doubled since 1776
U.S. life expectancy has doubled since 1776 thanks to vaccines, antibiotics, sanitation and clean water that reduced infectious disease deaths.
Lingering distrust, low vaccine rates threaten containment of Lancaster measles outbreak
LANCASTER, Pa. — A growing distrust of health professionals seems to be undermining their efforts in central and southeastern Pennsylvania to stop...
Free health clinic aims to expand care access on city's West Side
Free preventive care is coming to San Antonio’s West Side Saturday. The Health Collaborative’s Neighborhood Clinic offers 3D mammograms, screenings, vaccines, dental checks, food and help connecting to ongoing care.
If a Lyme disease vaccine gets approved, how would it go over? We asked hunters
Drugmakers are working on a potential new shot to prevent the tick-borne illness. How might it fare in the era of vaccine skepticism?
Making Our Own Luck
We are cross-posting a piece that former NIH official Kris Willis wrote for Macroscience. Kris is now the President and Founder of the Woodley Park Institute, for which I’m a board member. Picking winners or hedging bets? Federal science agencies have long wrestled with the question of how to ensure their billions of dollars of grants and contracts result in maximum benefits for Americans. On the surface, it might seem that a goal-oriented, interventionist style of management would be the best policy: prioritize our most pressing problems and distribute funding accordingly.This top-down strategy creates a unique hazard, though: bad choices can send resources in the wrong direction, resulting in slow progress that impedes the delivery of tangible benefits to citizens. Moreover, if decision makers pursue an applied advance when the underlying scientific principles remain poorly understood, they risk costly failures and a loss of support for the research enterprise at large. Examples include Nixon’s 1971 War on Cancer, undertaken on the premise that a cure could be achieved in less than a decade, the drive to build an operational commercial fusion plant by the mid-1990s, and the National Plan to Address Alzheimer’s Disease, which failed to produce the effective treatments and prevention strategies promised by 2025. The contrasting laissez-faire approach is to hedge your bets. If the path to an advance is impossible to predict, then the wisest choice might be to distribute funding to as widely as possible. The main risk of this strategy is that spreading funding thinly may limit the resources available to the most promising research, resulting in the same negative outcomes as the interventionist approach: limited support for the most promising topics, slow progress, and delayed returns. In reality, at science agencies like the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health, program managers navigate between these two extremes, setting some funds aside to target high-priority areas and using the rest to cover the widest possible range of meritorious proposals. This middle path seems like the most rational way to proceed, but it still requires making choices. How much should be set aside for high priority topics? What should those topics be? How should we define merit? Expert opinion can provide a helpful guide, but leading experts can have remarkably different opinions about what matters and what should be prioritized. Moreover, experts and administrators alike can be risk averse, giving an edge to high-profile, well-established concepts. What’s really needed is a data-driven framework to help guide decision-making, one that doesn’t simply repackage prestige or incumbency. Recognizing breakthroughs years in advance Many breakthroughs fail to attract funding or recognition at the earliest stages of development. Katalin Karikó, for example, spent years struggling to win grants for work on mRNA that would eventually win her and Drew Weissman a Nobel Prize. Similar stories can be told about Jim Allison’s groundbreaking studies leading to the development of cancer immunotherapy, Stan Pruisner’s demonstration that prions can self-replicate without DNA, or Robin Warren and Barry Marshall’s proof that Helicobacter pylori, not stress, causes ulcers. Yet at some point, the scientific community recognizes and responds to transformative breakthroughs like these. How does that change happen? And what if science funders could identify the areas that are on the cusp of a breakthrough? Those questions led my collaborators and me to study how scientists responded to past breakthroughs. Based on patterns in that data, we developed a means of predicting future breakthroughs, using biomedicine as a proof of concept. It’s worth taking a moment to describe how our approach works. Briefly, our prediction process begins by grouping the 18 million or so peer-reviewed papers in PubMed, the authoritative database of biomedical research, into roughly 50,000 unique topics. A small subset of these topics are so widely acclaimed as breakthroughs that they have been recognized with a major prize like a Nobel or a Lasker Award. We theorized that studying the development of these outliers over time, especially before they gained acclaim, was the key to identifying future instances of them. After defining topics, we chose 21 representative breakthroughs and asked what they looked like before they won prestigious prizes. To answer that question, we re-ran our topic-mapping algorithm repeatedly, winding back the clock one year each time, stringing together the years to follow the progress of each field as it grew and advanced. We found that in each case, the years leading up to a discovery followed a pattern: a burst of papers on a new, rapidly evolving topic, many of which quickly became influential. These characteristics—the percent of papers that are new, the percentage of papers that are brought in from other topics, and the influence of each individual paper—can all be measured separately for any given topic. Together, they act as a predictive signal that is detectable an average of five years before a transformative discovery is made, and up to thirty years before the discovery receives a major prize. Scanning the current research landscape for topics that display this signal allows us to predict what work will likely produce a future breakthrough. Each year we analyzed includes four or five signals, a number that appears to have remained constant across a twenty year time frame. In their classic work on the sociology of science, Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar established that the desire to participate in a major discovery is an important motivator for scientists as they consider whether they should take up (or abandon) a research problem. Although further work is needed, the simplest explanation for our results is that this behavior is widespread enough to detect at scale. A foundational advance, or something like it, draws the attention of scientists and causes them to change the direction of their research. They vote with their feet, staking their own reputation and careers by publishing on and citing the new idea. That upswell of interest is the foundation of our breakthrough signal. What kind of research does our model identify as a breakthrough? After building a model based on the patterns in our 21 preselected breakthroughs, we tested it by identifying all early signals of discovery from 1994 through 1997. Of the 18 signals we found in that time period, 17 can be traced forward in time to a breakthrough. Examples include super-resolution fluorescence microscopy (see the image above), the directed evolution of proteins and enzymes (Chemistry Nobel, 2018), and sequencing the human genome (National Medal of Science, 2008). The discovery of the role of leptin signaling in obesity is a particularly interesting case study. Around 1950, scientists noticed the existence of a type of lab mouse that suffered from a unique inherited form of obesity. When given the freedom to choose their own diet, these mice ate more than normal and preferred food that was high in fat. Researchers had few clues as to why the animals overate; early experiments pointed to the existence of a soluble ob factor found circulating in the bloodstream that regulated appetite, but its identity was unknown. In 1994, Jeffrey Friedman and colleagues identified and sequenced the ob gene, noting that the protein it encoded appeared to fit the profile of a circulating factor. A year later, a trio of high-profile publications demonstrated that ob was a hormone that regulated body weight and fat deposition by regulating appetite. One of these was co-authored by Friedman, who christened it leptin from the ancient Greek word for thin. Using our model, the data from 1996 make it clear this advance would become a breakthrough. Scientists had flocked to study the biology of the new hormone, generating the flurry of new papers and citations required to produce a signal. One of these demonstrated that serum leptin concentrations reflected the amount of adipose tissue in the human body, providing clinical validation of the earlier mouse studies. Before the identification of leptin, scientists were unable to point to a specific molecule that controlled appetite and adiposity, so that it was impossible to rule out non-physiological causes of obesity; its characterization fundamentally changed our concept of weight gain. In 2010, Friedman and fellow pioneer Douglas Coleman were awarded a Lasker for the discovery. Our work also identifies breakthroughs in clinical practice and behavioral and social sciences, even though these areas are less likely to draw the attention of major prize committees. One example that falls into this category is the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair, a minimally invasive surgical procedure for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm, a leading cause of death among Americans over the age of 65. Relative to the previous standard of care, it reduces in-hospital mortality by almost four-fold. In 2017, Timothy Chuter received the American College of Surgeons’ prestigious Jacobsen Innovation award for his multiple refinements to the technique. Another under-recognized breakthrough identified by our model is the development of standardized survey instruments to assess the quality of life for HIV+ patients. The antiretroviral cocktails introduced in the mid-1990s reduced AIDS mortality, but treatment came with serious side effects. The new evaluations showed that patients whose disease progressed had worse physical functioning than Americans with other chronic diseases, while those who were asymptomatic maintained a health-related quality of life on par with the overall US population. This evidence made it possible for patients and activists to argue that even in the absence of a total cure, and in spite of the side effects, alleviation of symptoms was a worthwhile priority for clinicians. My colleagues and I have failed to identify any significant recognition for the physicians and health policy experts who pioneered this advance, although in 2016, researchers called for the World Health Organization to set targets for good health-related quality of life as part of its framework to end the AIDS pandemic. From forecasting to funding How should science funders use our predictions? Any serious discussion of what we should do with this new capability needs to begin with an understanding of its limitations. We can’t (and shouldn’t) invest all of our resources in the small number of topics predicted to produce breakthroughs. Innovative new fields are born from existing ones; they rarely arise de novo. If funders don’t maintain a diverse portfolio, the breakthroughs of tomorrow will have no antecedents. Think of this as eating the seed corn, or killing the goose that lays the golden egg. There are also multiple goals of funding beyond basic scientific discovery, including translating discoveries into clinical practice, developing new technologies, supporting economic development, and training new scientists. The investments needed to accomplish these goals are likely different from those required to support emerging breakthroughs. Finally, we must be aware that we may not capture every instance of a breakthrough. The concept is fuzzy, and not every significant discovery is recognized with a major award. Further, breakthroughs are rare, meaning that our dataset is, by necessity, small. This makes formal estimates of accuracy challenging. Although our overall success rate appears to be high, any one signal may turn out to be a false positive. We found one apparent example: the development of the third generation COX-2 inhibitors, Vioxx and Celebrex, which were much celebrated in the early 2000s as effective but non-addictive pain relievers, meets all the algorithmic criteria of a breakthrough. Five years after it received FDA approval, researchers demonstrated that Vioxx was associated with serious cardiovascular complications, and the manufacturer voluntarily pulled the drug from the market. Celebrex remains available, although like other NSAIDs, it carries an FDA warning for increased cardiovascular risk. Decision makers who were overly focused on the breakthrough potential of this research might have wasted substantial resources nurturing an area that ultimately proved to be a failure—but so would those who relied on expert opinion at the time. That said, the potential benefits of funding the next mRNA vaccine or cancer immunotherapy years earlier than we might have are large. When we can’t assume the outcome of an action, it’s worth conducting an experiment. Can targeted support for areas that are poised to produce a breakthrough increase the return on scientific investment without cannibalizing future advances? With the necessary administrative infrastructure in place, conducting this experiment would be straightforward. First, identify all the breakthrough signals between 2018 and 2023, select half at random, and commit to a decade of investment. For biomedicine, a six year window should yield about 30 topics with the potential to produce a breakthrough. Providing strong support to half of these might be accomplished for $300 million a year. That’s roughly half of the recent annual budget of the NIH Common Fund or around 20% of the fiscal year 2025 budget for ARPA-H. After five years, then again at ten, compare to see which group — the one that was actively managed, or the control — produced more breakthroughs, and on what timescale. Although we used biomedicine as an example, the same experiment could just as well be run for physics, materials science, or any other discipline. Any attempt to undertake such an experiment should keep three points top of mind. First, we can predict the topic of future breakthroughs, but the people and vision for how to move the work forward are still important. In practice, this means success requires active program managers with the expertise to develop the science and the authority to do so, including by recruiting investigators. Second, we would be wise to learn from the failures of past attempts to fund transformative research. High among these are funding modestly repackaged work, confusing the genuinely novel with the merely unfamiliar, and relying too much on incumbent investigators. All of these risks can be mitigated by thoroughly and intelligently integrating high quality data into portfolio management. Finally, we need to have patience. Even with strong funding support, producing a breakthrough takes time. If supporting breakthroughs is the best way to nurture the birth of new fields, we also need to accurately describe and properly manage the other two stages, so that we invest wisely throughout the productive lifetime of ideas and divest once they reach the point of diminishing returns. We would benefit from more study of all of these phases, especially the transition from one to another. More research could answer questions like: When does a breakthrough become an established field? How do the availability of funding, the size and characteristics of the available workforce, and the accumulation of evidence that disagrees with prevailing models affect a field’s decline? Exactly how do old ideas give birth to new ones, and can we speed up the process? The more we understand about the dynamics of scientific progress, the better we can maximize the odds that our curiosity leads to results. I’d call that finding a way to make our own luck.
Ebola response highlights value of African science
With African scientists leading the way in the latest Ebola response, Catherine Kyobutungi makes the case for long-term investment.
Bacteria-killing viruses redirect vaccine immunity to destroy cancer
Phages, viruses that infect bacteria, could be genetically manipulated to destroy cancerous cells using the immunity we have acquired from vaccines
Latest COVID booster may offer bonus health benefit, study suggests
The latest COVID-19 vaccine (2024-2025) has been linked to fewer serious heart-related events among U.S. veterans. New research confirmed a small reduction in COVID-related cardiovascular events, or COVID-19-associated MACE, due to the vaccine.
Covid vaccine study the acting CDC director blocked is published in an outside journal
The findings suggest that Covid vaccines reduced the likelihood of severe illness last fall and winter.
CDC’s chief blocked a covid vaccine study. Now it’s in a top medical journal.
The study found that the vaccine reduced the risk of emergency department visits and hospitalizations among healthy adults by about half last winter.
New Vaccine Clinics - Cabell-Huntington Health Department
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 23, 2026 Cabell-Huntington Health Department Continues After-Hours Vaccine Clinics through Summer Months Huntington, WV – The Cabell-Huntington Health Department (CHHD) will offer two evening vaccine clinics […]
Air Force base hit with flu outbreak sickening over 160
Presented by Philip Morris International{beacon} Health Care Health Care PRESENTED BY The Big Story Air Force base hit with flu outbreak sickening over 160 More than 160 troo…
New First-of-Its-Kind Flu Vaccine Approved by FDA Expert Panel
This could prevent thousands of hospitalizations.
The Healthcare Leaders Shaping Tomorrow – and the Challenges Facing Them
Healthcare innovation is advancing at a pace few could have imagined decades ago, from gene-editing therapies and lifesaving vaccines to artificial intelligence systems that could transform how doctors diagnose and treat disease. But at a time of unprecedented scientific progress, industry leaders ...
In DRC, fighting Ebola means fighting misinformation
The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention warns this strain of the Ebola virus may be the worst on record. There is no vaccine, and misinformation is rampant, as many people simply do not believe Ebola is real.
FDA panel considers first-of-its-kind flu vaccine using mRNA technology
The FDA advisory panel is meeting Thursday to consider it
FDA panel considers first-of-its-kind flu vaccine using mRNA technology
The FDA advisory panel is meeting Thursday to consider it
Science, Public Health, and the Politics of Truth
Presented as part of the McCloskey Speaker Series.Peter Hotez, M.D., Ph.D., professor and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, joins the Aspen Institute for a keynote lecture on the intersection of science, medicine, and public trust. A leading authority on vaccines and neglected tropical diseases, Hotez reflects on the challenges facing public health today, the growing politicization of science, and what it will take to rebuild trust in scientific institutions in the years ahead.Paepcke Auditorium, doors at 5:00 pmRegistrationThis event is free and open to the public, but registration is required, and capacity is established on a first-come, first-served basis. Once an event is at capacity, we will have an in-person waitlist at the door.Public registration is now open for summer 2026. Please click here to register.ParkingParking is very limited. Please carpool, walk, bike, or ride RFTA.Book signing will immediately follow the event. To learn more about his book or to order a copy, please click here.
Science, Public Health, and the Politics of Truth
Presented as part of the McCloskey Speaker Series.Peter Hotez, M.D., Ph.D., professor and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, joins the Aspen Institute for a keynote lecture on the intersection of science, medicine, and public trust. A leading authority on vaccines and neglected tropical diseases, Hotez reflects on the challenges facing public health today, the growing politicization of science, and what it will take to rebuild trust in scientific institutions in the years ahead.Paepcke Auditorium, doors at 5:00 pmRegistrationThis event is free and open to the public, but registration is required, and capacity is established on a first-come, first-served basis. Once an event is at capacity, we will have an in-person waitlist at the door.Public registration is now open for summer 2026. Please click here to register.ParkingParking is very limited. Please carpool, walk, bike, or ride RFTA.Book signing will immediately follow the event. To learn more about his book or to order a copy, please click here.
EU supports ebola response with €493 million in vaccines, treatment and health aid
The European Commission said on Wednesday it will fund the response to the ebola outbreak in Central Africa with a €493 million ($572 million) financial aid package.
Summer Travel Health Checklist
Planning a summer trip? Learn 7 expert tips to help stay healthy while traveling, including measles prevention, travel vaccines, food safety, and more.
Health 'War Room,' Digital Tools Are Tracking Disease Risks During World Cup
Public health experts address the logistical challenge of tracking the health and location of players and fans across 16 World Cup host cities.
Covid vaccine linked to broad protections against heart conditions, study finds
The vaccine modestly reduced cardiovascular conditions, hospitalizations and deaths of all causes, including those not linked to covid, researchers said.
RFK Jr under fire for ‘bullying’ letter to scientific journal
Health advocates criticized Kennedy’s move demanding answers from journal that removed ‘flawed’ vaccine study
RFK Jr. demands journal explain removal of vaccine study used to support his childhood immunization changes
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is demanding answers from a science journal on why a study regarding vaccination and sudden infant death was removed from the publication. …
Two Women, One Mission: Closing the Gap Between Cancer Science and Survival
A journalist-turned-advocate and a physician-scientist unite at the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy to accelerate cancer vaccines from lab discovery to lifesaving treatment.
Kennedy Seeks to Expedite Appeal of Ruling That Blocked His Vaccine Policies
The health secretary is trying to restart the work of a panel that advises the government on vaccines, after a judge froze its decisions and prevented it from meeting.
What Will It Take to Get a Bundibugyo Vaccine? | Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Decades of research and billions of dollars went into licensing a vaccine for Zaire ebolavirus. What will it take to get one for Bundibugyo?
What COVID is teaching doctors about the relationship between viruses and cancer
The pandemic has left some evidence that viral infection may play a role in reawakening dormant cancer cells already present in a patient’s body before infection.
Rare or Unverified Outcomes Shape Vaccine Safety and Gender Care Debates
Two recent federal actions, including a memo about alleged COVID-19 vaccine deaths and settlements creating a “detransition clinic,” show how official actions can present uncertain or uncommon outcomes as representative and lend credibility to narratives that go beyond what evidence supports.
Split verdict on California health taxes as cost-of-living anxiety takes its toll
LA County's Measure ER clung to a narrow lead while Contra Costa's similar measure went down in defeat — a divide experts attribute to growing anxiety over the cost of living.
World's First AI‑Designed Vaccine Tested in Humans For The First Time
Protection from threats that haven't even emerged.
15 technologies that seemed impossible 20 years ago
Smartphones, mRNA vaccines, reusable rockets, language models — the past 20 years produced technologies that experts said were decades away or simply impossible
4 World Cup Health Tips For 2026: An ER Doc’s Guide To Staying Healthy
An ER doc's guide to the biggest health risks at the 2026 FIFA World Cup. 4 tips on heat, alcohol, vaccines, and how to stay safe across 16 cities this summer.
The First AI-Designed Vaccine Was Just Tested on Humans. It Could Change How We Fight Pandemics
An early human trial suggests a new vaccine strategy is safe, but still not proven effective.
Testing AI against public health's existing tools shows mixed results
A new Penn-led randomized controlled trial has found that AI-powered chatbots can make vaccine-hesitant parents more likely to say they will immunize their children against human papillomavirus (HPV), ...
Alzheimer's Awareness Month: The Science Is Moving Fast
Explore the latest Alzheimer's research on the APOE e4 gene variant, new FDA-approved antiamyloid drugs, and how routine vaccines help reduce risk.
The Flu-Vaccine Routine Is Breaking
Normally, the CDC's vaccine advisors weigh in on flu vaccines in June. This year, the panel is in disarray.
Opinion/Guest column: Vaccines a safeguard for all children's health
The reason we don’t see thousands of children dying from measles, whooping cough and other diseases is because vaccines work.
RFK Jr. Appears Disengaged on Many Health Department Matters Beyond Vaccines
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has demonstrated little interest in managing his sprawling department as he focuses on food and vaccine policies, according to colleagues.
How the Amish think about vaccines, health care costs, and much more
There may be nearly 2 million Amish Americans by 2075. That has large public health implications.
E-bike safety; lung cancer treatment and prevention; keeping CMA Festival attendees safe; plus other stories with Vanderbilt Health sources
WKRN News 2 interviewed Jeffrey Upperman, MD, FACS, Professor and Chair of the Department of Pediatric Surgery and Surgeon-in-Chief of Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt, about e-bike related injuries following the recent death of a Brentwood High student and a proposal to require safety training before students could ride a bike on a school campus in Williamson County. Fabien Maldonado, MD, MSc,Professor of Medicine and Thoracic Surgery, was on WTVF News Channel 5‘s live studio show, “Openline,” with host Ben Hall, to discuss lung cancer, treatment and prevention. WSMV’s “Today In Nashville” program hosted Vanderbilt LifeFlight paramedic/flight nurse practitioner Tony Smith to talk about safety for the CMA Festival. The New York Times reporter Carl Zimmer interviewed James Crowe, MD, Director of the Vanderbilt Center for Antibody Therapeutics, for a story about the race to find vaccines and treatments as Ebola spreads. The Vanderbilt Health News release about the pilot clinical trial conducted by Vanderbilt Health and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., that confirms the safety of ifetroban and supports the further development of the drug to prevent cancer metastasis, was picked up by Reuters, Stock Titan,and others. Women We Admire has named Lee Ann Liska, President and Chief Operating Officer, to its list of top women leaders of Nashville for 2026. Radiology Business, Aunt Minnie, Bioengineer, and Imaging Technology News covered the study from Consuelo Wilkins, MD, MSCI, the Mildred Thornton Stahlman Professor in Rural Health and professor of Medicine in the Division of Geriatric Medicine, that found Black and Hispanic people, while known to be far more apt to have dementia, are significantly less apt than other racial and ethnic groups to show Alzheimer’s pathology on brain scans. STAT News interviewed Deva Sharma, MD, Transfusion Medicine & Hematology-Oncology, for a story about more patients requesting unvaccinated blood and what it means for the medical system at large. Yahoo! Health reporter Korin Miller interviewed Gitanjali Srivastava, MD, Director of Obesity Medicine, for a story about how semaglutide and tirzepatide compare. William Schaffner, MD, Professor of Preventive Medicine, was quoted by several news outlets about public health issues, including: NBC News (new COVID vaccinations); Medscape (pneumonia and sepsis); and CNN (protection from contagious viruses). Shelbyville Times-Gazette is repurposing Jessica Pasley’s July 2025 Vanderbilt Health News story on tick-borne illnesses as a front-page story.
AI-designed universal coronavirus vaccine passes first human trial
Scientists have successfully tested an AI-designed universal coronavirus vaccine in humans for the first time, finding it to be safe and well tolerated. The vaccine generated immune responses against multiple coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, SARS, and related bat viruses with pandemic potential. By targeting features shared across an entire virus family, it aims to provide protection even as viruses evolve.
Weakened public health powers raise outbreak risks
Some jurisdictions have weakened their public health authorities in response to criticism of lockdowns, school closures, mask mandates, vaccine requirements and other COVID-era restrictions.
RFK Jr.'s health department is seeking Americans' medical records. Here's what's going on
The Health and Human Services Department wants to access medical records, but it's not tied to reports of autism research, the department says.
RFK Jr.’s second year: Vacancies, not vaccines
Assessing the health secretary's biggest challenges, and a look at new rules that inject politics into the NIH.
MAHA moms test their influence in US glyphosate fight
'Make America Healthy Again' activists see legislative wins, White House disappointments and questions for the midterms.
How Funding Cuts Left the World Vulnerable to Ebola
A strain with no known treatment or vaccine is spreading fast, and the international system built to contain outbreaks is in crisis.
What will it take to get a vaccine for the Ebola strain driving the current outbreak?
There is an effective vaccine for Ebola — but not for the variety spreading rapidly in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Trials are going on for several candidates. How long will it take?
Three studies used by RFK Jr and allies to justify controversial vaccine policies changes facing new scrutiny
Scientists praise moves to investigate, retract or remove controversial studies. The authors stand by their work
RFK Jr. seeks to peek at Americans’ medical records for clues on autism and vaccines
U.S. health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is pursuing federal government access to most Americans’ medical records, in a quest to research a link between vaccines and autism — a connection the medical establishment studied for decades and flatly rejects.
RFK Jr. Seeks To Peek at Americans’ Medical Records for Clues on Autism and Vaccines
To collect and scrutinize millions of Americans’ health data, U.S. health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. aims to work with state organizations that help health systems share medical records. In Nebraska, millions in federal dollars has flowed into one nonprofit cooperating with Kennedy’s project.
What are the Ebola vaccines under research, and when will they be ready?
At least three vaccines are being funded, research being fast-tracked as the outbreak spreads faster than the response.
How Science Works
The 2nd Weather and Climate Livestream is now underway. It is organized by a group of early-career researchers concerned about declining funding for the field and eager to demonstrate how weather and climate research makes a difference in our lives. Last year’s event was a great success, drawing terrific press coverage including a piece in the NY Times. This year features a strong lineup of talks aimed at a general audience — I highly recommend tuning in. Share I gave a talk yesterday about How Science Works in Three Steps. You can see the short presentation here (I’ve appended a transcript below): And please tune into the livestream here. It runs through tomorrow at 6 pm ET. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe Cleaned up transcript: Thank you, and thanks to everyone tuning in. I want to talk about something I think a lot of people don’t really understand: how science actually works. Arguments over any scientific topic — climate change, vaccines, you name it — revolve around competing claims. For climate change, the claims are: Is the Earth warming? Are humans to blame? What will the impacts be? Over the last 150 years, the scientific community has developed a remarkably robust method for sorting out which claims are true and which aren’t. That method is what I want to walk through. So how does science generate knowledge? If you ask a high schooler, they’ll give you the version they learned in ninth grade: an individual scientist forms a hypothesis, runs an experiment, and draws a conclusion. That’s more or less what happens at the individual level, though in practice it’s more iterative — you design, test, and refine all at once, landing on a slightly different idea each time until you reach a conclusion about whatever hypothesis you’ve ended up with. But this isn’t science. It’s only step one. Any individual scientist can make mistakes — scientists are human. Maybe there’s a bug in the code, maybe there’s an error in the experiment. Just because someone ran an experiment and reached a conclusion doesn’t mean it’s right, and scientists don’t treat a single result as settled truth. Step two is peer review, the first layer of quality control. The scientist writes up what they did and submits it to a journal, which sends the paper to other experts in the field. Those experts judge whether the methods are sound, whether it properly references prior work, and whether the conclusions actually follow from the data. Ask any scientist and they’ll tell you peer review is miserable — the comments come back brutal, often harsh, and you have to revise and resubmit, sometimes multiple times, before an editor finally accepts the paper. Peer review catches an immense amount of bad science, but it can’t catch all of it. Reviewers get sloppy or overworked, they miss obvious mistakes, and they can’t catch hidden errors — a bug in the code, a misread instrument. So a peer-reviewed paper making it into a journal doesn’t mean the paper is right. Nobody treats a single paper as the final word. That’s where step three comes in: the crucible of science. Important results get retested by the broader community. If you publish something interesting, it gets dissected. Sometimes people try to reproduce your work directly but more often they test its implications. If someone claims X is true, and that implies that Y is also true, then scientists will go check Y. If a claim survives this gauntlet long enough, it becomes accepted. That’s how we generate knowledge. Let me give an example: the ozone hole. In 1985 — and I doubt many people watching were around then, but I remember it well — Joe Farman and his colleagues published observations from Antarctica showing that a huge chunk of ozone was disappearing every year. This was shocking because most atmospheric chemists had expected ozone loss to occur at mid-latitudes and high altitudes, not over the South Pole. When scientists see something they don’t understand, they rush to explain it, and several competing hypotheses quickly appeared in the peer-reviewed literature. One pointed to chlorine chemistry from chlorofluorocarbons. A second blamed nitrogen chemistry, possibly driven by solar proton events — meaning the sun was responsible. A third argued it wasn’t chemistry at all but dynamics: winds were carrying naturally low-ozone air from the lower atmosphere up into the stratosphere. Then the community went to work testing which theory could survive the crucible. Aircraft flew into the ozone hole and found no nitrogen, ruling out the nitrogen theory. Measurements showed the air in the polar vortex was descending, not rising — which would bring high-ozone air down, eliminating the dynamics theory. Meanwhile, those same flights measured enormous amounts of chlorine, strongly correlated with exactly the regions where ozone was being destroyed. That became known as the “smoking gun” paper, and it established that chlorine chemistry was the cause. Through this process, a consensus emerged. And it’s worth being clear that this consensus is organic. There’s no vote, no poll, no meeting where it gets decided. Scientists go to conferences, talk to one another, and independently arrived at the same answer. It’s the ultimate free market of ideas. After the consensus was established, the peer-reviewed literature doesn’t even mention the rival theories — it simply takes chlorine chemistry as given. That’s what a consensus looks like. It doesn’t mean every single scientist agrees, but it does mean there’s no longer any legitimate debate. So where can you see what scientists actually think? It’s all in the peer-reviewed literature, which contains the entire historical record of the argument: the discovery, the competing theories, the debate, the testing, and finally the community coalescing around one answer. But there’s a lot of room for misrepresentation. You can dig up an old paper claiming the ozone hole was caused by dynamics and wave it around as if there still was a debate about the cause of the ozone hole — without mentioning that the idea was disproven long ago and that even its own authors no longer believe it. There’s a bigger problem, though: the peer-reviewed literature is written in a language I call “nerd.” It’s extremely hard to read — honestly, some of it is hard for me to follow. It takes graduate students years to work through the literature in a single field, so we can’t expect policymakers or ordinary people to do it. This is where scientific assessments come in. The most famous is the IPCC — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The job of an assessment is to read and summarize the peer-reviewed literature, synthesizing what’s settled, what’s been disproven, and what remains genuinely debated. To ensure the assessments accurately summarize the peer-reviewed literature, assessments are written by large teams, which are far less prone to bias than individuals and which dilute the influence of any one scientist with an axe to grind. The teams are deliberately assembled to avoid stacking the deck, and the reports themselves go through multiple rounds of peer review. That rigorous process is exactly why you can trust them and why people consider the IPCC to be the gold standard of what we know about the climate system. An assessment produced through a different process may well not be credible. You can even watch the consensus evolve across assessments. Take the attribution of warming. The 1990 IPCC report said the observed warming was broadly consistent with model predictions but also comparable to natural variability — in other words, we don’t know whether humans are responsible. By 1995, it concluded that the balance of evidence suggested a discernible human influence — a sentence only a committee could write, and one that barely commits to anything. By 2001, most of the warming over the previous 50 years was judged “likely” due to greenhouse gases; by 2007, “very likely”; by 2013, “extremely likely.” The 2023 report says essentially the same as 2013 — there’s not much stronger language available. So, to wrap up: science is our ultimate tool for deciphering the universe — the most successful method we’ve ever developed for determining what’s true and what isn’t. Our understanding is written into the peer-reviewed literature, so if you want to know what scientists think, that’s where to look. And for those of us who don’t speak nerd, scientific assessments are the Rosetta Stone — they translate nerd into English. Let me open the floor to questions. Thank you.
More Optimal Cardiovascular Health Linked to Lower Risk for Severe COVID-19
Researchers examined whether the American Heart Association's Life's Essential 8 metric and its components were associated with severe COVID-19.
‘A rude awakening’: more doctors running for office in rebuke to Trump’s health policies
Medical professionals are entering the political arena as funding cuts, layoffs and RFK Jr’s vaccine skepticism spur them to action
How one state’s medical meal program lowered health care costs
Medicaid work requirements, fast-tracked funding for experimental Ebola vaccines, and more health news from Morning Rounds
Hospitals See Diseases Resurge as Vaccinations Decline
Doctors nationwide are encountering more children with whooping cough, bacterial infections and other serious illnesses, as well as more adults refusing tetanus shots.
The anti-vaccine movement’s best shot at victory may be the Supreme Court
Despite recent setbacks for the anti-vaccine movement, years-long legal investments may pay off with a Supreme Court victory.
Why is Michigan loosening its rules for parents wanting to exempt kids from vaccines?
A decade ago, Michigan had high rates of parents not vaccinating their children, so it required them to attend an in-person education class to get an exemption. It worked — until things got ugly.
As Ebola Spreads, Scientists Race to Find Vaccines and Treatments
The Bundibugyo virus, a little known type, previously had caused just two small outbreaks. Now it’s at the center of a rapidly widening epidemic in Africa.
Towards a responsive health system and equitable access to quality RMNCAH services
Indonesia’s vast geography and sociocultural diversity shape the delivery of reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (RMNCAH) services in ways that are both enabling and challenging. Across provinces, significant variation has been observed in how services are planned, resourced, and delivered. These variations in service standards and quality are felt daily in the lives of women, newborns and adolescents. Despite these challenges, progress is visible. National estimates show a drop in maternal mortality ratio, from 331 to 140 per 100 000 live births since 2000, signaling improvements in care quality and access. Fertility has stabilised and contraceptive use has grown, yet unmet reproductive health needs persist, and adolescent pregnancies continue to reflect early marriage and limited access to youth-friendly services.To better understand how Indonesia’s health system has evolved under decentralisation, the Ministry of Health, supported by World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), IPAS and the Asian Development Bank (ADB), conducted a joint external review of RMNCAH programmes. This review draws on multiple sources of evidence, including existing literature, policy documents, national health system data, as well as field visits to six selected provinces to represent Indonesia’s geographic and administrative diversity. During the field visits, review teams observed service delivery in health facilities, spoke with health workers and local leaders and met mothers and families to understand how RMNCAH policies are operationalised. One of the challenges identified was the management of low birthweight (LBW) infants, a major contributor to neonatal deaths, under resource constraints. One midwife described a severe case of extremely LBW twins, one stillborn and the other died after three days of care. She recalled how the surviving infant struggled to swallow and may not have received breast milk, while simultaneous emergencies required the team’s attention, affecting the care provided to the infant.A subsequent review of the case by the district health office revealed insufficient antenatal care, fragmented maternal medical history due to population mobility, referral delays, limited provider capacity in neonatal intravenous access and a heavy workload that constrained proper newborn monitoring. These insights informed recommendations to strengthen both system-wide and service-level responses. Since the early 2000s, Indonesia’s decentralisation initiative has given much of the responsibility for funding, staffing and managing health services to regional governments. While the Ministry of Health sets national clinical standards, daily management of public health facilities falls under regional authorities through the Ministry of Internal Affairs. While this arrangement allows services to be tailored to local needs, it also depends heavily on local capacity for planning, budgeting and management. Health facilities and district health offices are better positioned to translate national priorities into local action when they have access to consistent technical support, helping health workers manage resource constraints and infrastructure gaps.The complexity of Indonesia’s health system governance is no easy feat to navigate. Understanding these dynamics is essential to strengthening policy, improving coordination and ensuring more equitable access to services across Indonesia. Under the leadership of Ministry of Health, recommendations from this exercise will be key in guiding the nation’s roadmap to an equitable and quality health system for RMNCAH.Written by Edit Oktavia Manuama, National Professional Officer (Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health), and Jessie Yunus, National Professional Officer (Gender, Rights, Equity, and Disability Inclusion)
CDC says containing the spread of Ebola is top priority
The Trump administration disregards infectious disease playbook, CEPI offers vaccine funding, and other health news from Morning Rounds
Health body fast-tracks three Ebola vaccines as virus continues spread
Global health body CEPI is fast-tracking three experimental vaccines against the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola as the outbreak in Central Africa continues to spread.
Confirmed Ebola cases in Congo reach 282 as survivors describe their recoveries
The outbreak remains focused in Congo's eastern Ituri province. Congo has reported over 1,000 suspected cases with the Bundibugyo virus, which has no approved treatment or vaccine.
Scientists are racing to stop a type of Ebola we have no vaccine for
A deadly Ebola outbreak is spreading fast—and U.S. cuts to foreign aid are making it worse
Moderna partners with global health coalition to develop Bundibugyo Ebola vaccine
Moderna said on Monday it has partnered with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations to develop a potential vaccine against Bundibugyo ebolavirus, the strain linked to the ongoing Ebola outbreak in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
Trump tells agencies to align with study calling for narrower childhood vaccine recommendations
President Trump is giving his endorsement to a January study by the Department of Health and Human Services that calls for cutting the number of vaccines recommended for every American child.
Trump tells agencies to align with study calling for narrower childhood vaccine recommendations
President Donald Trump on Friday gave his endorsement to a January study by the Department of Health and Human Services that calls for cutting the number of vaccines recommended for every American child.
What to know about the Bundibugyo virus, form of Ebola causing an outbreak in Congo
The virus causing an outbreak in Congo suspected of killing more than 200 people is less common than others that cause Ebola disease, which is complicating the response because there are no specific treatments or vaccines.
Boston health officials to offer residents mpox vaccines at Pride event, amid uptick in cases
State and local officials are encouraging potentially at-risk individuals to take the mpox vaccine amid an uptick in cases nationwide and in Boston. The city will hold a vaccine clinic on June 1 during its Pride flag-raising event.
Republican mistrust in healthcare widens US health gap, study finds
Republicans increasingly avoid doctors and vaccines, widening health gaps with Democrats, researchers say
Which vaccines will curb the Ebola outbreak? WHO debates
The growing Ebola outbreak, the unknowns of microdosing GLP-1s, and more health news from Morning Rounds
Health worker training program to improve vaccine communication leads to spinout social enterprise
A training initiative to improve UK health workers' vaccine conversations is proving so successful that a University of Bristol-led spinout has been created to continue the important work. Generating ...
The best way to celebrate Hepatitis Awareness Month is to protect yourself
The best way to celebrate Hepatitis Awareness Month is to protect yourself
Vanderbilt Health researchers call for pandemic prevention
Government grants and contracts have supported the discovery of human antiviral antibodies; corporate partners are needed to develop them.
Curing MAHA: How to Protect Public Health After Kennedy
INTRODUCTION When President Trump nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to become his secretary of health and human services, it was possible to conjure a few faint reasons for optimism. Yes, his well-known rejection of mainstream vaccine science and general penchant for medical quackery were frightening. But Kennedy also offered one fundamentally correct critique of America’s […]
Uganda closes its border with Congo, where suspected cases of rare Ebola type are surging
The measure, which goes against the guidance by the World Health Organization, underscores growing fears of contagion in East Africa from Bundibugyo, a rare type of the Ebola virus that is behind this outbreak and that has no approved medicines or vaccines.
Essentia Health to host pediatrics open house in Bismarck
Essentia Health will host a Pediatrics Open House on Tuesday, June 2, to help new and expecting families learn more about Essentia’s pediatrics team and available services.
Healthy Returns: Eli Lilly makes a new push into vaccines – here’s what to know
The drugmaker announced it will buy three privately held vaccine makers in deals worth almost $4 billion combined.
Eli Lilly to acquire Seattle-area vaccine maker for $1.5 billion
The acquisition of Curevo Vaccine, which develops vaccines for shingles and chickenpox, was announced Tuesday.
Ebola, chemical plants and health, hantavirus, common colds, heat and more
As they say, bugs have ears. Public health has had a relentless May. Chemical plant (near) explosions, Ebola, hantavirus, and that's before you even get to the usual suspects: common colds, heat, and ticks. Here’s an attempt to keep you up to speed and, more importantly, what it means for you and your community. But first, an announcement: World Cup The World Cup starts in 15 days (not like anyone is counting down), and we are hanging TVs in the Health Security Operations Center. It’s going to be a gorgeous, chaotic celebration of basically every culture on earth. And it’s going to take a team effort—from communities to individuals, from public health to health care—to keep people healthy. That’s where you come in. If you’re going to the games or live within 30 miles of a stadium, we would love to hear from you. Sign up for a weekly survey here. Thanks to the more than 1,280 people who have already signed up…you will be hearing from us soon!! Global disease “weather report” Hantavirus: Two more cases The global count of cruise ship passengers with hantavirus has now increased to 13 cases (11 confirmed), with three deaths. The two new cases are overseas and among people who were already quarantining: A crew member in the Netherlands. A Spanish national passenger who was quarantining at home tested positive through daily monitoring. They are now in a biocontainment unit. In the U.S., everyone remains negative. There may be more cases, given that the incubation period of hantavirus (the time from exposure to infection) is 45 days. But this week, we will reach a major milestone: the median incubation window is 18 days, and that will pass on May 29. What this means for you: Your risk from this cruise ship outbreak remains essentially nil at this point. Ebola rages on in Central Africa Big thanks to Dr. Craig Spencer, a humanitarian physician who has treated and survived Ebola, for jumping in to provide the YLE community with an update. Craig, take it from here… The combined confirmed and suspected Ebola cases in DRC are now more than 1,000. All signs are pointing to a very long and catastrophic outbreak in Central Africa: This is a vast undercount. We know this because the test positivity rate is hovering around 50%, only 20% of contacts are being traced (and in some areas, no contacts at all), and more cases keep popping up with no known connection. This all points to widespread and undetected community transmission. This is in only a week of detection. Compared to previous outbreaks, the growth is very fast, as the huge West Africa outbreak in 2016 was first detected at 49 cases and rose to 208 cases a month later. It took four months for that outbreak to reach the size of the current one in the DR Congo. The cases are spread out across 16 health zones. There are now multiple epicenters, making containment very difficult. Next door in Uganda, the case count is seven. While this number is low compared to DRC, a concerning development is that two health care workers recently tested positive with uncertain exposure histories. If they weren’t treating known Ebola cases, this means it’s spreading undetected in Uganda as well. On the ground, backlash, including the burning of health centers, has emerged, a pattern seen in nearly every outbreak and rooted in deep community distrust. It often stems from outside actors working in communities without fully understanding or addressing local priorities. Affected populations may recognize the severity of Ebola while still holding other concerns as more pressing, such as where their loved ones are buried. Community trust is essential to an effective response, but difficult to build during an active emergency. It is best established long before a crisis begins. U.S. priorities are made clear, and may backfire. The U.S. Administration has shown that its first priority is keeping Ebola out, with helping end the outbreak in the DRC a secondary concern. That's meant travel restrictions broader than anything we've imposed before — covering travelers from across the region, and reportedly some green card holders and permanent residents as well. For example, just these past two days, news broke that high-risk American travelers will be subject to a mandatory quarantine in Kenya before they are allowed to return. If an American is infected, the U.S. government plans to send them to a hospital it is standing up from scratch in Kenya. (Currently, Americans who were in the area are allowed to return but are diverted to three airports—Houston, Atlanta, and DC—for further screening.) Past administrations have used travel notices and stepped-up screening; this goes much further. At first blush, these strict precautions may sound prudent. But this approach could backfire in three ways: Restrictions this blunt give people every reason to hide where they’ve been and whom they’ve been near — making the people we most need to find harder to track, not easier. They also breed a false sense that this is someone else’s problem. But diseases are humbling. They find the small cracks in even the most impenetrable-seeming defenses. Lives lost. There is no treatment for this Ebola strain, which means survival depends heavily on the quality of the health system. We have that system in the States, but we are choosing not to use it for infected Americans. This is unbelievable and infuriating. (See a deeper dive from me here.) The only real way to lower the risk to Americans — and everyone else — is to end the outbreak in the DRC and across the region. What this means for you: If you have travel plans to this region, it’s time to cancel them. This is a high-risk situation in Central Africa, and CDC released a Level 4 Travel Advisory. There is also great uncertainty if and when the Administration will let you back in. To the general public in the U.S., your risk remains very, very low right now. U.S. disease “weather report” Ticks: past peak season? Good news, especially for people in the Northeast and Midwest: tick numbers continue to decline. Though we are at the peak of the season, this unusually early year is trending favorably. Heat-related illnesses in the North Heat risk is certainly not blanketing the entire country yet, but this week it will be moderate in the Midwest and the Southeast. What this means for you: Be sure to check the CDC HeatRisk tool. A red day isn’t the best day for that soccer game for a kid with asthma, and a stretch of orange days is a great time to check on your elderly neighbor. Common colds surging As far as respiratory viruses go, the only thing really going around right now is the common cold. It is higher this year than last year, but should peak very soon before returning this fall. Spotlight: Chemical plants Over the weekend, YLE California covered the serious situation that unfolded around a chemical plant in Orange County, California. Thankfully, the worst-case scenario (a chemical explosion) was mitigated, but only through luck. The health implications in a densely populated area could have been catastrophic. As the situation was winding down, another chemical explosion struck Washington State. This one was fatal. Health officials say the risk to surrounding residents from chemicals in the air and ground remains low, though the community deserves far greater clarity. Clean air and clean water consistently rank as Americans’ top public health concerns — yet when chemical disasters strike, communities are too often met with reassurances rather than transparency and accountability. Residents near the 2023 East Palestine, Ohio train derailment, for example, are still waiting to understand the long-term impact on their health, with few clear answers. What this means for you: Many are wondering if facilities processing potentially dangerous materials are in their neighborhoods. This interactive map allows you to enter your ZIP code and see all facilities monitored by the EPA, including any violations. Good news Ebola vaccines and treatment for the Bundibugyo species are in development. Two vaccine platforms are being explored, at least one of which may be deployable in as little as 2 months. One vaccine is being developed by Oxford, and the other uses the same biotechnology as the FDA-approved Zaire species of Ebola. (It may provide cross-protection, but it’s unclear at this point.) On the treatment side, two promising monoclonal antibody cocktails are likely to be deployed, though doses are limited and logistical hurdles remain significant challenges. Anni over at The Biotech Tea had a great explainer about the Ebola vaccine gap, if you want to read more. [ The Biotech Tea The Ebola vaccine gap, reading vessel damage, & the Makary exit 🗝️ Paid subscribers get the Biotech Term of the Week at $30/year (~$2.50/month). I try to keep it intentionally accessible, but if cost is ever a barrier, send me a message. A few people asked about expensing your subscription, so I put together a short email template… Read more 6 days ago · 10 likes · Annicka Evans, PhD ](https://www.thebiotechtea.com/p/the-ebola-vaccine-gap-reading-vessel?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web) Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) has been officially renamed polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS), following more than a decade of debate and input from roughly 22,000 clinicians, researchers, and patients worldwide. This is good because the old name was medically misleading, leading to patients without visible cysts being dismissed or overlooked entirely. The WHO estimates that 70% of people with the condition remain undiagnosed. A more accurate name should improve recognition, reduce stigma, and ultimately help the millions of people living with this condition get diagnosed and treated sooner. Poll Loading... Bottom line Public health situations are everywhere right now. Staying healthy takes public health professionals and systems working tirelessly behind the scenes and each of us showing up for our neighbors and communities. Love, YLE Big thanks to Ed Nirenberg for staying on top of the Ebola vaccines, Hannah Totte for all the figures, Dr. Craig Spencer for the Ebola insight, and Dr. Matt Willis for covering the chemical situation in CA. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “Translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
New Ebola Vaccine Reportedly Nearing Clinical Trials (Live Updates)
The vaccine, which hasn’t been tested on humans, would be the first capable of treating the deadly Bundibugyo strain of Ebola.
Watch Lilly Gets Back Into the Vaccine Business With New Deals
Eli Lilly & Co. is buying three clinical-stage vaccine developers for as much as $3.8 billion as it looks to become a leader in infectious diseases. The drugmaker has been using cash from its obesity drugs to expand into other disease areas. Bloomberg's Gerry Smith reports.
DRC is no stranger to Ebola outbreaks. Why isn’t there a vaccine or treatment to help now?
The fast-growing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo came to the world’s attention only a little more than a week ago and is already the third-largest on record. But it’s the 17th outbreak the country has dealt with since the virus was discovered there in 1976.
Global health leaders reaffirm commitment to Immunization Agenda 2030
During the Seventy-ninth World Health Assembly (WHA), held from 18 to 23 May 2026, Member States and global health partners reaffirmed commitment to the Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030), recognizing vaccines as one of the most powerful, cost-effective and equitable public health interventions.
Federal health department withdraws controversial vaccine panel changes
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services quietly withdrew revisions to a key vaccine advisory panel after a federal judge ruled officials exceeded their authority in a seeking vaccine changes.
Rush for new Ebola vaccine as outbreak grows in Africa
US health authorities have warned that 10 African countries are at risk in the Ebola epidemic. There may be hope on the horizon: British scientists say a vaccine for this Ebola variant could soon be ready for testing.
Bond breakout? Big effects of bad data. Immigration and thermostatic politics & dad-chat is coming for dad-books.
Thank you for opening your Chartbook email. Anna Airy, A Shell Forge at a National Projectile Factory, Hackney Marshes, London, 1918 Bond breakout - John Authers Across the developed markets, bond markets are staging a slow-motion car wreck. Looking at the drastic moves in the US, Japan, the UK and France, Barclays’ Ajay Rajadhyaksha commented: “Last week, long bonds broke. Not in one country. In all of them. Simultaneously. Four countries. Four different political systems. Four different central banks. But the same trade — “get me out of duration!”” Each country has its own contributing political problems, but the uniformity of the shift out of long-term bonds with high duration makes clear that something broader is afoot. For Rajadhyaksha, it is “simple and uncomfortable.” The developed world “has too much debt, too little fiscal discipline, and no political appetite for fixing either.” If there’s a trigger, it has been the Iran war and the resulting shock to oil supply. Source: Bloomberg G7 countries are now borrowing at rates that were enjoyed by EM in the early 2020s For contributing subscribers only. Subscribe Trade between China and Russia has grown in recent years For contributing subscribers only. Subscribe Big effects of bad data A decade ago nearly nine in ten Americans, when approached, agreed to fill out the Current Population Survey, which is administered to about 60,000 households each month and asks about, among other things, employment. Fewer than seven in ten do so now (see chart 1). For the Consumer Expenditure Survey, which tries to capture 3,700 households monthly, the response rate is down from 68% to 40%. … When the information becomes less reliable, investment decisions get more difficult to make. Some may be delayed, creating a potential drag on the economy. A new working paper by Nicholas Bloom of Stanford University, Erica Groshen, former head of the Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) now at Cornell University, and Duncan Hobbs and Michael Strain of the American Enterprise Institute, a think-tank, hazards an estimate. Preserving trust in “the integrity and quality of official statistics”, the authors claim, generates economic benefits of about $25 for every $1 spent on the BLS, the agency with an annual budget of $700m that is responsible for many of these data. To arrive at their conclusion the quartet analysed an ignoble episode in the BLS’s recent history. On August 1st 2025 Donald Trump sacked Erika McEntarfer, appointed as the agency’s commissioner by his predecessor, Joe Biden. The president alleged, without evidence, that the BLS’s steep downward revision to recent jobs numbers had been “RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad”. In fact, it was the wanton dismissal that looked bad in the eyes of many observers. In the following seven days there was a 50% leap, relative to the week before, in the average value of the index of Economic Policy Uncertainty (EPU), which tracks the number of articles mentioning such uncertainty that are published daily in American newspapers. This was a discernible jump even when compared to the chaos caused by Mr Trump’s trade war in April 2025 and his real one in Iran in the past two months (see chart 2). Based on Mr Bloom’s earlier study with other colleagues of the EPU’s impact on business investment, industrial production and employment, the authors estimate that the jump reduced American GDP by over $100bn (0.3%) and non-farm payrolls by 168,000 (0.1%). Source: The Economist Immigration and thermostatic politics (Sarah O’Connor in the FT) A strange thing happened a year and a half ago. No sooner had Americans elected Donald Trump as president on an explicitly anti-immigration platform than US public opinion began to swing much more favourably towards immigration. … to political scientists who study “thermostatic” politics, this development is no surprise at all. Public opinion often moves against the prevailing party, especially if they are perceived to have gone “too far” in one direction. The phenomenon was first explored in the 1990s with reference to fiscal policy, but in recent years it has been particularly evident in the realm of immigration policy. While these swings in opinion polls can make it seem as if people don’t know their own minds, they can be a useful democratic check on governments by sending bright flashing warning lights when policies stray too far from the public’s comfort zone. The problem comes when politicians misinterpret those signals. When people tell pollsters they want less immigration, or think it is bad for the country overall (or the converse), they are often expressing an opinion about how things appear to be going in that moment relative to their preferences, rather than a deep shift in their underlying views. According to Alexander Kustov, a political scientist, most Americans’ views are quite stable and moderate: they support immigration that is controlled and in the national interest, and oppose flows that are disorderly or under-enforced. In the US, he argues the Trump administration over-interpreted dissatisfaction with high immigration under Joe Biden, and implemented policies that went too far for many voters. “People don’t necessarily change their idea about their ideal immigration policy, but they can react to what the government is currently doing,” he told me. “A lot of people are not happy with what the Trump administration are doing — right now we’re not talking about border enforcement, we’re talking about people not just getting harassed, but killed.” But similarly, he added, pro-immigration advocates would be making a mistake to interpret the recent, more favourable swing towards immigration as a deep-seated ideological shift in attitudes. The recent history of UK immigration policy offers another cautionary tale. After the 2016 Brexit referendum, public concern about immigration fell. This was partly because net migration statistics declined, but also because people felt a sense of catharsis and control, says Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, a think-tank. By 2019, the public ranked immigration as only the ninth biggest issue of concern, according to Ipsos polling. But when the Conservative government liberalised visa routes for students and care workers between 2019 and 2022, that helped net migration to surge. And so, too, did public concern. Today’s Labour government has implemented another sharply restrictive turn in immigration policy. As Kustov and researcher Caitlyn Yates argue, thermostatic public opinion should be a useful check on politicians. Instead it seems to have helped to magnify the pendulum swing in the UK. The government over-interprets and overreacts to a change in public opinion, which reacts in turn, prompting a sudden swing the other way. Source: Financial Times HEY READERS, THANK YOU for opening the Chartbook email. I hope it brightens your day. I enjoy putting out the newsletter, but tbh, what keeps this flow going is the generosity of those readers who clicked the subscription button. If you are persuaded to click, please consider the annual subscription of $50. It is both better value for you and a much better deal for me, as it involves only one credit card charge. Why feed the payments companies if we don’t have to. Subscribe Anna Airy, Shop for Machining 15-Inch Shells: Singer Manufacturing Company, Clydebank, Glasgow, 1918 Racing for a vaccine … we have been here before! The deadly Ebola outbreak in two African countries driven by a virus species with no vaccine has triggered an urgent search for a potential jab, in a test of troubled global efforts to avert threats posed by emerging diseases. A World Health Organization advisory group is due to would meet on Tuesday to recommend candidate jabs to prioritise for clinical trials, the global health body said. It will assess data including an analysis by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (Cepi), which was set up after failures in the international response to a previous Ebola crisis. The latest Ebola outbreak in Democratic Republic of Congo and Uganda has infected hundreds of people and killed more than 80, health authorities say. Cepi’s reaction will be a crucial indicator of its progress towards its wider goal of producing vaccines for pandemic threats in just 100 days, despite steep cuts to international health funding. “If there was ever a time that we could show the world why Cepi is needed and show the world why the 100-day mission is needed, it’s now,” Nicole Lurie, the organisation’s executive director for preparedness and response, told the FT. “We’re happy to accept that responsibility, but obviously we need help from partners — particularly financial help in the long run.” DR Congo and Uganda would make the final decision on whether to press ahead with any vaccine candidates endorsed for clinical trials by the WHO experts, the global health body said. “Other ethical and community acceptability issues will be considered,” said the WHO, which declared the latest outbreak a public health emergency of international concern on Sunday. “This will be important to make sure that the trial, if it happens, will be adequately communicated to the population.” Lurie said Cepi had provided information from a survey of research teams and companies working on drugs that might be effective against the Bundibugyo virus behind the outbreak. The organisation hoped soon to announce partners in the quest for a jab, she added, although she declined to give a timescale for when one might be developed. Cepi’s Nicole Laurie said global health bodies were ‘getting some live-fire drills’ with hantavirus and the latest Ebola outbreak. The hunt for a vaccine should be helped by scientific advances including the use of artificial intelligence to find drugs active against viruses, Lurie said. Existing jabs against the Zaire Ebola virus responsible for many previous outbreaks might provide a basis for tackling the Bundibugyo species, she added. “We’ll see how far and how fast we can get,” Lurie said, adding that Cepi had done preliminary work recently on a possible jab for the rat-borne hantavirus responsible for a recent fatal outbreak on a cruise ship. “Both with hantavirus and now with Ebola, [we] are getting some live-fire drills.” Source: Michael Peel in the Financial Times Dad-chat is coming for dad-books. (By Pamela Paul and Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg in the WSJ) They were the go-to gifts for Father’s Day: a book about some little-known chapter of World War II, the sweeping narrative of a shipwreck, perhaps the latest presidential biography. These days, dad books are a dying breed. Nonfiction book sales have been in decline for the past four years, and are now the most challenged segment of the print book market. Publishers say certain types of books still fare well—including celebrity memoirs and religious titles. But in recent years, print sales in such categories as biography, current affairs and business and economics—what publishers refer to as “serious nonfiction” and which tend to resonate especially with men—have fallen considerably. Sales of nonfiction print titles were down nearly 8% through May 9 this year, and sales of books about politics and current affairs were down 19%, according to book tracker Circana BookScan. Publishing has long been subject to cyclical changes, with trends in format and genre taking over bookshelves in grand sweeps. (Remember the adult coloring-book craze? Or the stratospheric rise of romantasy?) But many in publishing believe the decline in serious nonfiction is more existential. “The trend couldn’t be clearer,” said Jonathan Karp, the former chief executive of Simon & Schuster and publisher of the new Simon Six imprint. “This is a sea change and people should wake up and realize we’re living in a new world.” One culprit for the shift: a new media diet for fans of more serious nonfiction. … Sixty-two percent of men and 54% of women consumed a podcast in the prior month, according to a recent survey by Edison Research at SSRS, up from 46% and 39%, respectively, in 2023. “When we have internal meetings to talk about this problem, it always comes around to podcasts,” said Jonathan Burnham, president and publisher of the Harper Group at HarperCollins Publishers. “The man who wants to read American history is now tuning into one of the many good podcasts about history that lends the quiet attention to a serious subject he’s looking for. It makes the idea of sitting down with a 700-page Ron Chernow book less appealing. You’ve scratched that itch.” Source: Wall Street Journal Remarkable report by Novara from the nationalist rally in London in mid May. Anna Airy, Leopard Moth and Plums, 1915 If you’ve scrolled this far, you know you want to click: Subscribe
Experimental mRNA vaccine may protect against multiple Ebola viruses
Tests with rodents suggest an mRNA vaccine in development offers protection against three strains of Ebola virus, including the one behind the current crisis
Preserving the future of vaccine science in the USA
Nature Microbiology - Vaccines have saved an estimated 154 million lives in 50 years, yet that infrastructure is under threat. We highlight the global impact of vaccine scientists who trained in...
The Science That Saves Lives
As vaccine hesitancy and misinformation grows, Kris Ehresmann ’84 is using her decades of experience as a public health leader to teach new generations of Oles why following the science matte…
The U.S. Is Holding Global Vaccination Efforts Hostage
Halting the distribution of vaccines that the U.S. objects to will mean depriving kids of protection against dangerous diseases.
Colorado Charts Its Own Course on Vaccines Amid Federal Pullback
Doctors, lawmakers, and other advocates are joining forces to promote recommended childhood vaccines.