In response to, "One in four Americans has trouble paying their medical bills, which leads to delayed care until many conditions become emergencies, increasing costs and resulting in poorer health": Or resulting in death. I just had a friend die because she was afraid to go to the hospital due to a prior hospital bill she was unable to pay. She had contracted COVID and had underlying congestive heart failure and diabetes, as well as being 71 years old. I noticed her having trouble breathing and checked her oxygen saturation with a pulse oximeter. It was at 85, and I told her she needed to go to the hospital. She might well have lived if she hadn't been afraid to go due to trouble paying her medical bills.
As a clinical social worker living in rural Maine and in my personal life, I have a fair amount of contact with people who have very little trust in the Medical/pharmaceutical/governmental complex Parentheses sometimes of good reason). I struggle with feeling helpless in this crazy, fractured time, but try to arm myself with accurate, unbiased information presented in a thoughtful way that stays clear of judgment and/or the culture wars. This is where YLE comes in. What you write about and how you present it helps me to become more informed and to stay sane. I especially appreciate it when you take on currently popular beliefs head on, as you did in this article, one idea at a time. Thank you for being a fount of knowledge and a voice of reason in a time when neither knowledge or reason is especially popular. It matters, and I am very grateful.
This is one of the most kindest notes I've received. I'm *so* glad it's helpful and it matters. This is very hard for me to "see" so I often question whether it's worth it. Thanks for your comment; we'll keep marching onward.
I firmly believe that explaining vaccines in the setting of public health is critical in gaining trust. Explaining what I consider three layers: how does this help “me”, “my family and friends” and “my community”. Influenza is a great example. Healthy school age children form a reservoir in the community and vaccinations in that group help all three differently: parents hate having their kids miss anything- that helps reduce duration of illness; grandparents and very young relatives get needed protection; prevent spread to others, decrease health care costs etc.,.
Honestly regarding the benefits often help understanding which increases uptake.
Organic food? Organic candy? Take the time to explain nutrition, processed foods, and the importance of sleep.
And. Pay primary care doctors enough to spend this time for allll the counseling we are tasked with performing. It takes time. Make it a desirable specialty. We can move the health needle. But we cannot do it alone. It starts with us. Keeping emergency room visits down, improving education about nutrition, health, physical activity, sleep, vaccines, mental health, disease management…
What about changing the way the government subsidizes agriculture? Forget organic, just remove the incentives to put high fructose corn syrup in everything. How about policies that work toward making communities more walkable and less car-reliant, and allow people to have better work-life balance? A gym membership will go unused if you're working two jobs and raising a family.
Excellent and data/fact driven, politically inconvenient as that might be. I’m working on a post about what a Trump 2.0 administration would do to vaccination in the US. Here’s the gist of it (future post will be referenced and linked but this doesn’t copy and paste into comment section):
Many prominent Republicans are endorsing the other party’s presidential candidate. I think people like Congresswoman Liz and Vice President Dick Cheney don’t want to see Project 2025 steamroll our democracy and health institutions either.
From the actual news:
On at least 17 occasions this year, Trump has promised to cut funding to schools that mandate vaccines.
A second Trump administration could effect significant change just by making tweaks to two top vaccine advisory committees — the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. It could either appoint vaccine-skeptical individuals to the bodies or scrap them entirely.
And even without future policy changes, Trump has already presided over a landslide shift in his party’s views on vaccines, reflected this campaign season in false claims by Republican candidates during the primaries and puzzling conspiracies from prominent conservative voices. Republicans increasingly express worry about the risks of vaccines. A September 2023 poll from Politico and Morning Consult showed a majority of those voters cared more about the risks than the benefits of getting inoculated.
Trump should receive major credit for helping Project Warp Speed get a Covid vaccine across the finish line in record time, saving tens of millions of lives worldwide, maybe more. Trump said during a speech on December 20th, 2020:
“I’m honored to welcome doctors, scientists, industry executives, and state and local leaders to our historic Operation Warp Speed Vaccine Summit. It’s been some journey for all of us. It’s been an incredible success.
We’re grateful to be joined by Vice President Mike Pence, who has done an absolutely incredible job on the Coronavirus Task Force. Mike, thank you. Stand up, Mike. (Applause.) Great job.”
Then he distanced himself from Project Warp Speed as a self-serving political maneuver, and you’ll never hear him bring it up at rallies. Quite the contrary. He made the highly esteemed Anthony Fauci a fall guy, and didn’t care if his Republican VP Pence was literally hung by a violent insurrectionist mob. Great job.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate put out a report stating that “just 12 anti-vaxxers are responsible for almost two-thirds of anti‑vaccine content circulating on social media platforms” and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is one of the ‘Disinformation Dozen.’
Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo may be rewarded with a promotion to national leadership as part of a calculated anti-vaccination movement. He has already shown a proclivity to warp facts and undermine vaccination, especially for the most vulnerable in Florida.
Project 2025 outlines changes to Medicaid aimed at serving “the health and well-being of all Americans at all stages of life.” But in fact, Project 2025’s radical revamps would rob millions of children of adequate health care, eliminating crucial childhood screenings, vaccinations, and early interventions, subjecting children with chronic conditions such as cancer or special needs to arbitrary coverage limits, and significantly increasing the cost of health care for low-income families.
And even for the older generations who can actually vote, Project 2025’s plan to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act and eliminate no-cost vaccine coverage for Medicare beneficiaries would increase costs for Medicare enrollees and reverse gains in vaccine uptake.
I agree that JFK's plan is political nonsense. But I also disagree with some of Dr Jetelina's remarks. The reason organic produce and regenerative farming is not widely promoted is big business's financial interest in our food. Always, always, follow the money. I'm no scientist but it doesn't sound right to me that crops, that grow by absorping nutrients from the soil, would not also absorp the artificial chemicals put into that soil. The regenerative farmer that spends his day rotating his animals, putting up mobile fences and feeding them on healthy soil has no time or money to devote to the politicians who make policy.
I also disagree about alternative treatments. Again, there are no long term studies because this group lacks the political clout that the pharmateucials have politically. But I have seen it improve people's lives when all the pharmateucials have failed to do so. And maybe, if we let physicians practice good medicine instead of having the insurance and the pharmateucial reps standing over their shoulder in the exam room, more people would go into general medicine. I think it is less about the money and more about the inability to practice patient centered medicine. My primary mostly refers me on to another physician, when I know she has the skill to treat me, but Medicare won't let her. And Medicare, and other insurance plans won't pay for alternative treatments because there have been no long terme studies. I have no idea how to break this cycle, but giving a gym membership to someone who works three jobs or who has no transportation and has to purchase his food at the gas station is silly.
There are several things wrong with this post, and again the local epidemiologist shows a lack of broad knowledge, and that she obviously doesn't read the scientific studies her opinions are based on (are the opinions of the guest writers). 1) healthy food, exercise and stress are FOUNDATIONAL to health. A majority of chronic disease occurs from people eating chemically laden, unnatural processed foods-like substances, and there are areas in our country where people don't have access to healthy food. Is this a coincidence? No. Our country subsidizes non healthy food. We have a culture of stress and inactivity, and our citizens are paying dearly for it. It is correct that organic food can be unhealthy, and the focus should be on nutrient dense food. At least RFKJ is talking about food! And he's not just talking about organic food -that is a lie- he is promoting healthy food that doesn't have toxins sprayed on it. He's not promoting giving people drugs for "health" as our health system does. 2) There are many toxins in our environment, glysophate, lead in our water, etc. The EPA, like other agencies - the CDC included - has been overly influenced by industry. We don't outlaw toxins in of our food and food processing like other countries do. The fact that glyphosate is sprayed on wheat after it's cut from the field is a crime. Now "Apeel" is being sprayed on our fruits and vegetables so they don't go bad as quickly. Have you noticed it? Appeal contains formaldehyde amongst other chemicals. We ingest those chemicals and toxins. 3) pharmaceutical drugs labeled as vaccines are never tested against placebos, so we don't know if they're benefit outweighs their risk. Many more people know others who have been injured by these liability free products. Routine vaccinations like the flu have zero evidence behind them - and this is where it's obvious the local epidemiologist does not read the studies that vaccine drugs are based on. What passed for a study to give the covid vaccine injection to children was outright criminal; only 2,000 children in that study. This is outright corruption that our CDC and FDA has allowed, probably because. Pharmaceutical companies share patents with government employees at the CDC, and contribute to almost half their budget. 4) health insurance costs are out of a lot of people's reach, while the CEOs of these companies make tens of millions of dollars a year. Some of these insurance companies employ people whose job it is to find ways to deny people healthcare when they have a life-threatening illness. Again, pure corruption.
The results of healthcare that promotes the pharmaceutical industries drugs is right there at the top of this article. The United States has horrendous health outcomes for a developed country. And yet the writer promotes the same things we've been doing all along -greater access to a healthcare system that is an outright arm of pharmaceutical companies, because what they primarily do is give people pharmaceutical drugs after Americans have been sickened by our food system and our culture of stress and inactivity. At least RFK Jr is promoting fundamental changes in a system that has contributed to chronic disease and shortened lifespans of Americans.
That first sentence wins the Unintentional Irony Award for today, I think. Especially when it's followed by an evidence-free rant that (surprise) mixes reasonable questions with paranoid rubbish.
I'm not surprised, I guess, that people who believe that rubbish would trust a guy with brain worms who eats roadkill over actual medical professionals who have invested their lives in helping get and stay healthy.
Kennedy is a shameless shill for quacks and Big Supplement.
Anyone can look up how health, inactivity and stress affect health and chronic disease. Do you really need a link for this one? These links will get you started, but a simple search will educate you more.
This post has links to Pfizer and Modernas vaccine studies, and what was discussed at the VRBPAC meeting (Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee):
Since this epidemiologist substacker will encourage you to get a flu injection, let's take a closer look at one of them. ALWAYS KNOW WHAT IS BEING INJECTED INTO YOUR BODY, AND ASK YOUR DOCTOR DIRECTLY ABOUT HOW RISK BENEFIT IS BEING DETERMINED. Afluria® Quad vaccine made by CSL Seqirus has two studies on their insert. Neither are placebo studies: “active controlled” study and “comparator controlled” studies use another drug in the control group. Each study as an inadequate number of subjects considering the low percentage of people who get severe flu’s (at least this was the case before the COVID mRNA injections, which has a known side effect risk of impairing the immune system, seen in the repeated COVID infections of those who have taken this drug). Afluria® Quad vaccine studies: 1) QIV-01 (NCT02214225, see http://clinicaltrials.gov) was a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial conducted in the US in 3449 subjects aged ≥ 18 years. Subjects in the safety population received one dose of either Afluria® Quad vaccine (N=1721) or one of two formulations of comparator trivalent influenza vaccine. 2) QIV-02 (NCT02545543, see http://clinicaltrials.gov) was a randomised, observer-blind, comparator-controlled trial that evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of Afluria® Quad vaccine in subjects aged 5 to < 18 years with a 2015-2016 comparator quadrivalent influenza vaccine. Study subjects were scheduled to receive either a single vaccination or two-vaccination regimen as clinically indicated.
This used to be the page at the CDC where they list all the studies they have done on the flu vaccine injection. Some of these are done by our government, some are done by the pharmaceutical industry. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/effectivenessqa.htm#ref2 If you press on this link, it will say the information has been moved. And now it looks like the CDC no longer lists the individual studies that have been done on flu vaccine injections. If you'd like I can list the breakdown of all the studies that have been done, and it will be obvious why these have been taken down off the CDC’s website. But the vaccine effectiveness chart shows flu vaccine effectiveness is below 50% 15 out of the past 19 years: https://www.cdc.gov/flu-vaccines-work/php/effectiveness-studies/index.html.
Kirsten, you clearly demonstrate your own ignorance in your description of influenza vaccine trials as being inadequate because they don’t include a non-intervention arm! The first trials of influenza vaccines did exactly that, established benefits, and became the basic ethical choice. Subsequent trials cannot and aren’t ethically allowed to include a “no treatment” arm because there is an existing proven method, so “comparator and active controlled” trials are the norm, and not only for influenza vaccines, but for many medications too! Generics must prove they are at least non-inferior to the original product - this is no different.
Almost totally agree-- except; does washing with water really remove pesticide residue? I mean, aren't they mostly hydrophobic? Also, I get the blaming of RFK-- he has done everything possible to be a jerk on many subjects (not just vaccine hesitancy) but... and this hearkens back to things you've written many times in the past... isn't the real problem that there's a huge swath of the population that are willing to buy into his lies?
-As you noted, some pesticides are hydrophobic but studies show that washing produce with water can reduce pesticide residue levels by about 40-77%. (varies depending on the type of produce). This is because not all pesticides are fully hydrophobic, and even those that are can still be partially removed from the surface by water.
-Pesticides that remain on the outer surface of fruits and vegetables, particularly those that are water-soluble or weakly hydrophobic, are susceptible to being rinsed off with plain water. Washing under running water is particularly effective for fruits and vegetables with smoother skins, like apples and tomatoes.
-Even for hydrophobic pesticides, rubbing or scrubbing the produce under running water helps physically dislodge and reduce pesticide residues on the surface (which is why gentle scrubbing is recommended for produce with tougher skins-- or peeling, of course)
It works with some pesticides, but (according to a several studies, including a recent Consumer Reports article, summarized here: https://www.foodandwine.com/washing-produce-doesnt-remove-pesticides-8693866 ), not all. It also doesn't address the very real issues of the insect apocalypse (of which pesticides play a key role) and the dumping of large amounts of chemicals into the environment (crops that are sprayed for 'pests'...aka "insects"....are also often sprayed with herbicides).
However, I don't mean to distract from the bigger topic Dr J is addressing here, which brings me to your last point about the real problem, and the answer is "yes".
I fully support what Dr J & crew are attempting to do (rebuild public trust in public health) but I fear it is too late. There are too many powerful forces who only want to tear things apart in this country, whether that be our election system, the education system, or the public health system. These forces are completely naive, believing that tearing apart existing structures will allow them to quickly remake those structures into something more palatable (to them), not understanding that it takes *decades* of careful and thoughtful building to create working systems for a complex society.
Good information, but I do find the economic conflict of interest to be a HUGE American problem. When FDA or department of agriculture or all of our congressman take money in donations or to PACs that support them, then the consumer is at risk of being defrauded. The lack of labeling of foods that are sent to China for processing for example, prevent the consumer to making good decisions because we just don't have all the facts available. That was congress that allowed that bad change.
The opening, “This post is based on data and our personal values system that highly prioritizes public health,” offers a brilliant model of the previous post in action. We are treated like adults by being dealt with honestly about what the perspective is and how it might inform the discussion of the facts presented. This, on its own, builds trust. Really well done!
I want to pull up and underscore this point as a great big YES, with applause for all our primary doctors here, who deserve so much more, both in $$$$ and support: “Instead, addressing our primary care crisis would have a much bigger impact on our nation’s health. Primary care matters — it’s associated with decreased mortality and chronic diseases, like cardiovascular disease.” I would welcome a post discussing what stands in the way of proper support for primary care and what needs to be done to correct that.
I would also enjoy a post with further discussion on this point: “The power of public health is already given to the States, which makes sense since public health is local.” If I recall correctly (?), during the pandemic, collection of data was made extremely difficult by our current, localized structure. For one, again, if I recall correctly—and I may not!—the CDC was severely handicapped in collecting data because it had to enter into agreements with local public health departments to collect nationwide data, which led us to have to look to other nations, like the UK, where data is collected centrally through the NHS. What I gleaned from this is that, in part because of our data-collecting structure, we risk flying blind, particularly in the case of a national public health emergency. I would be very interested in learning more about these issues.
Thank you for this detailed article looking at the big picture and how that would translate to personal damages if these changes were made. There is so much misinformation about vaccine and our food safety - I’m so glad you addressed them. I think even people who are educated on vaccines and understand their importance are still often misinformed on agriculture (organic vs conventional, misplaced worries about HFCS, etc). I think you could do a whole series about agriculture and food myths and safety with the data to show the realities of efficient and safe farming practices. Thanks for all you all do!
Thank you your wisdom and evidence based insights. They are always so helpful. As a person who remains quite curious about health and all the aspects of it. This is a great explanation of some of the misinformation I’m hearing. I appreciate you and I trust you!
Thank you for a timely and very important newsletter. I will be sharing it with people I know. Having worked in health care for over 40 years (I'm a dietitian) I appreciate your letting people know how important nutrition is to overall health. Organic or conventional - it is not as important as just getting nutritious food to everyone. I try and meet my clients where they are and then assist them in moving forward to develop a more healthful lifestyle, not to achieve perfection by anyone's definition. I encourage vaccinations as well when appropriate. I love your holistic approach to public health. Thanks for all the work you do and a very interesting and useful newsletter.
While washing pesticides off produce may possibly be enough to keep me safe from the poison, my concern is not with my individual consumption. I buy organic bananas not because I am worried about the pesticide use for me but it is harmful to the farmers who spray the pesticides. Our farm workers are being harmed by the pesticides they have to spray on the produce that is shipped all over the country and world. It is not fair to them.
While I agree with most of what you say here, I do think that you are under-estimating the role of pesticides and herbicides in our food. Although much of the surface residue can be washed off, not only do many people ignore that, but in addition, some pesticides/herbicides can be absorbed in the food crops - most especially glyphosate, which is readily absorbed in the GMO crops that were designed to accommodate it (and in wheat which is non-GMO, for which glyphosate is sometimes used as a pre-harvest dessicant) . Please read the review article by Semsel and Seneff publlished in 2013 in Entropy: https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416
In response to, "One in four Americans has trouble paying their medical bills, which leads to delayed care until many conditions become emergencies, increasing costs and resulting in poorer health": Or resulting in death. I just had a friend die because she was afraid to go to the hospital due to a prior hospital bill she was unable to pay. She had contracted COVID and had underlying congestive heart failure and diabetes, as well as being 71 years old. I noticed her having trouble breathing and checked her oxygen saturation with a pulse oximeter. It was at 85, and I told her she needed to go to the hospital. She might well have lived if she hadn't been afraid to go due to trouble paying her medical bills.
As a clinical social worker living in rural Maine and in my personal life, I have a fair amount of contact with people who have very little trust in the Medical/pharmaceutical/governmental complex Parentheses sometimes of good reason). I struggle with feeling helpless in this crazy, fractured time, but try to arm myself with accurate, unbiased information presented in a thoughtful way that stays clear of judgment and/or the culture wars. This is where YLE comes in. What you write about and how you present it helps me to become more informed and to stay sane. I especially appreciate it when you take on currently popular beliefs head on, as you did in this article, one idea at a time. Thank you for being a fount of knowledge and a voice of reason in a time when neither knowledge or reason is especially popular. It matters, and I am very grateful.
This is one of the most kindest notes I've received. I'm *so* glad it's helpful and it matters. This is very hard for me to "see" so I often question whether it's worth it. Thanks for your comment; we'll keep marching onward.
I firmly believe that explaining vaccines in the setting of public health is critical in gaining trust. Explaining what I consider three layers: how does this help “me”, “my family and friends” and “my community”. Influenza is a great example. Healthy school age children form a reservoir in the community and vaccinations in that group help all three differently: parents hate having their kids miss anything- that helps reduce duration of illness; grandparents and very young relatives get needed protection; prevent spread to others, decrease health care costs etc.,.
Honestly regarding the benefits often help understanding which increases uptake.
Organic food? Organic candy? Take the time to explain nutrition, processed foods, and the importance of sleep.
And. Pay primary care doctors enough to spend this time for allll the counseling we are tasked with performing. It takes time. Make it a desirable specialty. We can move the health needle. But we cannot do it alone. It starts with us. Keeping emergency room visits down, improving education about nutrition, health, physical activity, sleep, vaccines, mental health, disease management…
What about changing the way the government subsidizes agriculture? Forget organic, just remove the incentives to put high fructose corn syrup in everything. How about policies that work toward making communities more walkable and less car-reliant, and allow people to have better work-life balance? A gym membership will go unused if you're working two jobs and raising a family.
Excellent and data/fact driven, politically inconvenient as that might be. I’m working on a post about what a Trump 2.0 administration would do to vaccination in the US. Here’s the gist of it (future post will be referenced and linked but this doesn’t copy and paste into comment section):
Many prominent Republicans are endorsing the other party’s presidential candidate. I think people like Congresswoman Liz and Vice President Dick Cheney don’t want to see Project 2025 steamroll our democracy and health institutions either.
From the actual news:
On at least 17 occasions this year, Trump has promised to cut funding to schools that mandate vaccines.
A second Trump administration could effect significant change just by making tweaks to two top vaccine advisory committees — the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. It could either appoint vaccine-skeptical individuals to the bodies or scrap them entirely.
And even without future policy changes, Trump has already presided over a landslide shift in his party’s views on vaccines, reflected this campaign season in false claims by Republican candidates during the primaries and puzzling conspiracies from prominent conservative voices. Republicans increasingly express worry about the risks of vaccines. A September 2023 poll from Politico and Morning Consult showed a majority of those voters cared more about the risks than the benefits of getting inoculated.
Trump should receive major credit for helping Project Warp Speed get a Covid vaccine across the finish line in record time, saving tens of millions of lives worldwide, maybe more. Trump said during a speech on December 20th, 2020:
“I’m honored to welcome doctors, scientists, industry executives, and state and local leaders to our historic Operation Warp Speed Vaccine Summit. It’s been some journey for all of us. It’s been an incredible success.
We’re grateful to be joined by Vice President Mike Pence, who has done an absolutely incredible job on the Coronavirus Task Force. Mike, thank you. Stand up, Mike. (Applause.) Great job.”
Then he distanced himself from Project Warp Speed as a self-serving political maneuver, and you’ll never hear him bring it up at rallies. Quite the contrary. He made the highly esteemed Anthony Fauci a fall guy, and didn’t care if his Republican VP Pence was literally hung by a violent insurrectionist mob. Great job.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate put out a report stating that “just 12 anti-vaxxers are responsible for almost two-thirds of anti‑vaccine content circulating on social media platforms” and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is one of the ‘Disinformation Dozen.’
Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo may be rewarded with a promotion to national leadership as part of a calculated anti-vaccination movement. He has already shown a proclivity to warp facts and undermine vaccination, especially for the most vulnerable in Florida.
Project 2025 outlines changes to Medicaid aimed at serving “the health and well-being of all Americans at all stages of life.” But in fact, Project 2025’s radical revamps would rob millions of children of adequate health care, eliminating crucial childhood screenings, vaccinations, and early interventions, subjecting children with chronic conditions such as cancer or special needs to arbitrary coverage limits, and significantly increasing the cost of health care for low-income families.
And even for the older generations who can actually vote, Project 2025’s plan to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act and eliminate no-cost vaccine coverage for Medicare beneficiaries would increase costs for Medicare enrollees and reverse gains in vaccine uptake.
Voters beware.
We get what we vote for.
(Full post coming soon ;)
And thank you for the primary care nod!
I agree that JFK's plan is political nonsense. But I also disagree with some of Dr Jetelina's remarks. The reason organic produce and regenerative farming is not widely promoted is big business's financial interest in our food. Always, always, follow the money. I'm no scientist but it doesn't sound right to me that crops, that grow by absorping nutrients from the soil, would not also absorp the artificial chemicals put into that soil. The regenerative farmer that spends his day rotating his animals, putting up mobile fences and feeding them on healthy soil has no time or money to devote to the politicians who make policy.
I also disagree about alternative treatments. Again, there are no long term studies because this group lacks the political clout that the pharmateucials have politically. But I have seen it improve people's lives when all the pharmateucials have failed to do so. And maybe, if we let physicians practice good medicine instead of having the insurance and the pharmateucial reps standing over their shoulder in the exam room, more people would go into general medicine. I think it is less about the money and more about the inability to practice patient centered medicine. My primary mostly refers me on to another physician, when I know she has the skill to treat me, but Medicare won't let her. And Medicare, and other insurance plans won't pay for alternative treatments because there have been no long terme studies. I have no idea how to break this cycle, but giving a gym membership to someone who works three jobs or who has no transportation and has to purchase his food at the gas station is silly.
There are several things wrong with this post, and again the local epidemiologist shows a lack of broad knowledge, and that she obviously doesn't read the scientific studies her opinions are based on (are the opinions of the guest writers). 1) healthy food, exercise and stress are FOUNDATIONAL to health. A majority of chronic disease occurs from people eating chemically laden, unnatural processed foods-like substances, and there are areas in our country where people don't have access to healthy food. Is this a coincidence? No. Our country subsidizes non healthy food. We have a culture of stress and inactivity, and our citizens are paying dearly for it. It is correct that organic food can be unhealthy, and the focus should be on nutrient dense food. At least RFKJ is talking about food! And he's not just talking about organic food -that is a lie- he is promoting healthy food that doesn't have toxins sprayed on it. He's not promoting giving people drugs for "health" as our health system does. 2) There are many toxins in our environment, glysophate, lead in our water, etc. The EPA, like other agencies - the CDC included - has been overly influenced by industry. We don't outlaw toxins in of our food and food processing like other countries do. The fact that glyphosate is sprayed on wheat after it's cut from the field is a crime. Now "Apeel" is being sprayed on our fruits and vegetables so they don't go bad as quickly. Have you noticed it? Appeal contains formaldehyde amongst other chemicals. We ingest those chemicals and toxins. 3) pharmaceutical drugs labeled as vaccines are never tested against placebos, so we don't know if they're benefit outweighs their risk. Many more people know others who have been injured by these liability free products. Routine vaccinations like the flu have zero evidence behind them - and this is where it's obvious the local epidemiologist does not read the studies that vaccine drugs are based on. What passed for a study to give the covid vaccine injection to children was outright criminal; only 2,000 children in that study. This is outright corruption that our CDC and FDA has allowed, probably because. Pharmaceutical companies share patents with government employees at the CDC, and contribute to almost half their budget. 4) health insurance costs are out of a lot of people's reach, while the CEOs of these companies make tens of millions of dollars a year. Some of these insurance companies employ people whose job it is to find ways to deny people healthcare when they have a life-threatening illness. Again, pure corruption.
The results of healthcare that promotes the pharmaceutical industries drugs is right there at the top of this article. The United States has horrendous health outcomes for a developed country. And yet the writer promotes the same things we've been doing all along -greater access to a healthcare system that is an outright arm of pharmaceutical companies, because what they primarily do is give people pharmaceutical drugs after Americans have been sickened by our food system and our culture of stress and inactivity. At least RFK Jr is promoting fundamental changes in a system that has contributed to chronic disease and shortened lifespans of Americans.
That first sentence wins the Unintentional Irony Award for today, I think. Especially when it's followed by an evidence-free rant that (surprise) mixes reasonable questions with paranoid rubbish.
I'm not surprised, I guess, that people who believe that rubbish would trust a guy with brain worms who eats roadkill over actual medical professionals who have invested their lives in helping get and stay healthy.
Kennedy is a shameless shill for quacks and Big Supplement.
Anyone can look up how health, inactivity and stress affect health and chronic disease. Do you really need a link for this one? These links will get you started, but a simple search will educate you more.
Glycophate on wheat: https://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/pre-harvest-roundup-crops-not-just-wheat/
Lead in the water and health effects of lead:
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/04/01/1241470280/lead-pipes-plumbing-water-contamination#:~:text=Lead%20in%20the%20drinking%20water,the%20year%20they%20were%20banned
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/lead-poisoning-and-health#:~:text=Lead%20exposure%20causes%20a%20significant,DALYs)%20worldwide%20in%202021%20(2)
US subsidizes unhealthy food:
https://archive.nytimes.com/well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/how-the-government-supports-your-junk-food-habit/
EPA influenced by corporate interests:
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/01/24/corporate-interests-helm-epa-polluter-fines-down-85-hitting-lowest-level-25-years
https://usrtk.org/pesticides/epa-exposed-for-hiding-chemical-risks-favoring-corporate-interests/
CDC influenced by pharmaceutical companies:
https://circleofdocs.com/is-the-cdc-is-sleeping-with-drug-companies-you-decide/
Pharma partially funds CDC:
https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h2362
Government employees at CDC share patents with pharmaceutical companies:
https://brownstone.org/articles/patents-pharma-government-the-unholy-alliance/
Harmful ingredients in Apeel:
https://thenutrition.academy/apeel/
“Denying Your Health Care Is Big Business in America | NYT Opinion. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9s3CN5EafNs
CEOWORLD magazine - Latest - Money and Wealth - Here are the highest-paid CEOs in the healthcare industry in the United States. https://ceoworld.biz/2023/05/21/here-are-the-highest-paid-ceos-in-the-healthcare-industry-in-the-united-states/#google_vignette
This post has links to Pfizer and Modernas vaccine studies, and what was discussed at the VRBPAC meeting (Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee):
https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/fda-caught-creating-and-using-unreliable?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=posts-open-in-app&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
Since this epidemiologist substacker will encourage you to get a flu injection, let's take a closer look at one of them. ALWAYS KNOW WHAT IS BEING INJECTED INTO YOUR BODY, AND ASK YOUR DOCTOR DIRECTLY ABOUT HOW RISK BENEFIT IS BEING DETERMINED. Afluria® Quad vaccine made by CSL Seqirus has two studies on their insert. Neither are placebo studies: “active controlled” study and “comparator controlled” studies use another drug in the control group. Each study as an inadequate number of subjects considering the low percentage of people who get severe flu’s (at least this was the case before the COVID mRNA injections, which has a known side effect risk of impairing the immune system, seen in the repeated COVID infections of those who have taken this drug). Afluria® Quad vaccine studies: 1) QIV-01 (NCT02214225, see http://clinicaltrials.gov) was a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial conducted in the US in 3449 subjects aged ≥ 18 years. Subjects in the safety population received one dose of either Afluria® Quad vaccine (N=1721) or one of two formulations of comparator trivalent influenza vaccine. 2) QIV-02 (NCT02545543, see http://clinicaltrials.gov) was a randomised, observer-blind, comparator-controlled trial that evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of Afluria® Quad vaccine in subjects aged 5 to < 18 years with a 2015-2016 comparator quadrivalent influenza vaccine. Study subjects were scheduled to receive either a single vaccination or two-vaccination regimen as clinically indicated.
This used to be the page at the CDC where they list all the studies they have done on the flu vaccine injection. Some of these are done by our government, some are done by the pharmaceutical industry. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/effectivenessqa.htm#ref2 If you press on this link, it will say the information has been moved. And now it looks like the CDC no longer lists the individual studies that have been done on flu vaccine injections. If you'd like I can list the breakdown of all the studies that have been done, and it will be obvious why these have been taken down off the CDC’s website. But the vaccine effectiveness chart shows flu vaccine effectiveness is below 50% 15 out of the past 19 years: https://www.cdc.gov/flu-vaccines-work/php/effectiveness-studies/index.html.
Kirsten, you clearly demonstrate your own ignorance in your description of influenza vaccine trials as being inadequate because they don’t include a non-intervention arm! The first trials of influenza vaccines did exactly that, established benefits, and became the basic ethical choice. Subsequent trials cannot and aren’t ethically allowed to include a “no treatment” arm because there is an existing proven method, so “comparator and active controlled” trials are the norm, and not only for influenza vaccines, but for many medications too! Generics must prove they are at least non-inferior to the original product - this is no different.
Almost totally agree-- except; does washing with water really remove pesticide residue? I mean, aren't they mostly hydrophobic? Also, I get the blaming of RFK-- he has done everything possible to be a jerk on many subjects (not just vaccine hesitancy) but... and this hearkens back to things you've written many times in the past... isn't the real problem that there's a huge swath of the population that are willing to buy into his lies?
A great question!
-As you noted, some pesticides are hydrophobic but studies show that washing produce with water can reduce pesticide residue levels by about 40-77%. (varies depending on the type of produce). This is because not all pesticides are fully hydrophobic, and even those that are can still be partially removed from the surface by water.
-Pesticides that remain on the outer surface of fruits and vegetables, particularly those that are water-soluble or weakly hydrophobic, are susceptible to being rinsed off with plain water. Washing under running water is particularly effective for fruits and vegetables with smoother skins, like apples and tomatoes.
-Even for hydrophobic pesticides, rubbing or scrubbing the produce under running water helps physically dislodge and reduce pesticide residues on the surface (which is why gentle scrubbing is recommended for produce with tougher skins-- or peeling, of course)
It works with some pesticides, but (according to a several studies, including a recent Consumer Reports article, summarized here: https://www.foodandwine.com/washing-produce-doesnt-remove-pesticides-8693866 ), not all. It also doesn't address the very real issues of the insect apocalypse (of which pesticides play a key role) and the dumping of large amounts of chemicals into the environment (crops that are sprayed for 'pests'...aka "insects"....are also often sprayed with herbicides).
However, I don't mean to distract from the bigger topic Dr J is addressing here, which brings me to your last point about the real problem, and the answer is "yes".
I fully support what Dr J & crew are attempting to do (rebuild public trust in public health) but I fear it is too late. There are too many powerful forces who only want to tear things apart in this country, whether that be our election system, the education system, or the public health system. These forces are completely naive, believing that tearing apart existing structures will allow them to quickly remake those structures into something more palatable (to them), not understanding that it takes *decades* of careful and thoughtful building to create working systems for a complex society.
Good information, but I do find the economic conflict of interest to be a HUGE American problem. When FDA or department of agriculture or all of our congressman take money in donations or to PACs that support them, then the consumer is at risk of being defrauded. The lack of labeling of foods that are sent to China for processing for example, prevent the consumer to making good decisions because we just don't have all the facts available. That was congress that allowed that bad change.
Can you explain pesticides/chemicals used in organic farming that you mention in this article?
The opening, “This post is based on data and our personal values system that highly prioritizes public health,” offers a brilliant model of the previous post in action. We are treated like adults by being dealt with honestly about what the perspective is and how it might inform the discussion of the facts presented. This, on its own, builds trust. Really well done!
I want to pull up and underscore this point as a great big YES, with applause for all our primary doctors here, who deserve so much more, both in $$$$ and support: “Instead, addressing our primary care crisis would have a much bigger impact on our nation’s health. Primary care matters — it’s associated with decreased mortality and chronic diseases, like cardiovascular disease.” I would welcome a post discussing what stands in the way of proper support for primary care and what needs to be done to correct that.
I would also enjoy a post with further discussion on this point: “The power of public health is already given to the States, which makes sense since public health is local.” If I recall correctly (?), during the pandemic, collection of data was made extremely difficult by our current, localized structure. For one, again, if I recall correctly—and I may not!—the CDC was severely handicapped in collecting data because it had to enter into agreements with local public health departments to collect nationwide data, which led us to have to look to other nations, like the UK, where data is collected centrally through the NHS. What I gleaned from this is that, in part because of our data-collecting structure, we risk flying blind, particularly in the case of a national public health emergency. I would be very interested in learning more about these issues.
Thank you for this detailed article looking at the big picture and how that would translate to personal damages if these changes were made. There is so much misinformation about vaccine and our food safety - I’m so glad you addressed them. I think even people who are educated on vaccines and understand their importance are still often misinformed on agriculture (organic vs conventional, misplaced worries about HFCS, etc). I think you could do a whole series about agriculture and food myths and safety with the data to show the realities of efficient and safe farming practices. Thanks for all you all do!
I second the request for a series on agriculture and food myths! Would love YLE’s insights. I suspect our diet has a lot to do with our public health?
Thank you your wisdom and evidence based insights. They are always so helpful. As a person who remains quite curious about health and all the aspects of it. This is a great explanation of some of the misinformation I’m hearing. I appreciate you and I trust you!
Thank you for a timely and very important newsletter. I will be sharing it with people I know. Having worked in health care for over 40 years (I'm a dietitian) I appreciate your letting people know how important nutrition is to overall health. Organic or conventional - it is not as important as just getting nutritious food to everyone. I try and meet my clients where they are and then assist them in moving forward to develop a more healthful lifestyle, not to achieve perfection by anyone's definition. I encourage vaccinations as well when appropriate. I love your holistic approach to public health. Thanks for all the work you do and a very interesting and useful newsletter.
While washing pesticides off produce may possibly be enough to keep me safe from the poison, my concern is not with my individual consumption. I buy organic bananas not because I am worried about the pesticide use for me but it is harmful to the farmers who spray the pesticides. Our farm workers are being harmed by the pesticides they have to spray on the produce that is shipped all over the country and world. It is not fair to them.
While I agree with most of what you say here, I do think that you are under-estimating the role of pesticides and herbicides in our food. Although much of the surface residue can be washed off, not only do many people ignore that, but in addition, some pesticides/herbicides can be absorbed in the food crops - most especially glyphosate, which is readily absorbed in the GMO crops that were designed to accommodate it (and in wheat which is non-GMO, for which glyphosate is sometimes used as a pre-harvest dessicant) . Please read the review article by Semsel and Seneff publlished in 2013 in Entropy: https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416