They worried about them in 2005, and in 2009, and they’re worrying now. That’s because millions of fertilized hen eggs are still the main ingredient in making vaccines that, hopefully, will protect people against the outbreak of a new flu strain.

“It’s almost comical to be using a 1940s technology for a 21st-century pandemic,” said Rick Bright, who led the Health and Human Services Department’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) during the Trump administration.

It’s not so funny, he said, when the currently stockpiled formulation against the H5N1 bird flu virus requires two shots and a whopping 90 micrograms of antigen, yet provides just middling immunity. “For the U.S. alone, it would take hens laying 900,000 eggs every single day for nine months,” Bright said.

And that’s only if the chickens don’t get infected.

The spread of an avian flu virus has decimated flocks of birds (and killed barn cats and other mammals). Cattle in at least nine states and at least three people in the U.S. have been infected, enough to bring public health attention once again to the potential for a global pandemic.

As of May 30, the only confirmed human cases of infection were dairy workers in Texas and Michigan, who experienced eye irritation. Two quickly recovered, while the third developed and was being treated with an antiviral drug at home. The virus’s spread into multiple species over a vast geographic area, however, raises the threat that further mutations could create a virus that spreads from human to human through airborne transmission.

If they do, prevention starts with the egg.

To make raw material for an influenza vaccine, virus is grown in millions of fertilized eggs. Sometimes it doesn’t grow well, or it mutates to a degree that the vaccine product stimulates antibodies that don’t neutralize the virus — or the wild virus mutates to an extent that the vaccine doesn’t work against it. And there’s always the frightening prospect that wild birds could carry the virus into the henhouses needed in vaccine production.

“Once those roosters and hens go down, you have no vaccine,” Bright said.

Since 2009, when an H1N1 swine flu pandemic swept around the world before vaccine production could get off the ground, researchers and governments have been looking for alternatives. Billions of dollars have been invested into vaccines produced in mammalian and insect cell lines that don’t pose the same risks as egg-based shots.

“Everyone knows the cell-based vaccines are better, more immunogenic, and offer better production,” said Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease specialist at Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Health Security. “But they are handicapped because of the clout of egg-based manufacturing.”

The companies that make the cell-based influenza vaccines, CSL Seqirus and Sanofi, also have billions invested in egg-based production lines that they aren’t eager to replace. And it’s hard to blame them, said Nicole Lurie, HHS’ assistant secretary for preparedness and response under President Barack Obama who is now an executive director of CEPI, the global epidemic-fighting nonprofit.

“Most vaccine companies that responded to an epidemic — Ebola, Zika, covid — ended up losing a lot of money on it,” Lurie said.

Exceptions were the mRNA vaccines created for covid, although even Pfizer and Moderna have had to destroy hundreds of millions of doses of unwanted vaccine as public interest waned.

Pfizer and Moderna are testing seasonal influenza vaccines made with mRNA, and the government is soliciting bids for mRNA pandemic flu vaccines, said David Boucher, director of infectious disease preparedness at HHS’ Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response.

Bright, whose agency invested a billion dollars in a cell-based flu vaccine factory in Holly Springs, North Carolina, said there’s “no way in hell we can fight an H5N1 pandemic with an egg-based vaccine.” But for now, there’s little choice.

BARDA has stockpiled hundreds of thousands of doses of an H5N1-strain vaccine that stimulates the creation of antibodies that appear to neutralize the virus now circulating. It could produce millions more doses of the vaccine within weeks and up to 100 million doses in five months, Boucher told Ģ��ӰԺ Health News.

But the vaccines currently in the national stockpile are not a perfect match for the strain in question. Even with two shots containing six times as much vaccine substance as typical flu shots, the stockpiled vaccines were only partly effective against strains of the virus that circulated when those vaccines were made, Adalja said.

However, BARDA is currently supporting two clinical trials with a candidate vaccine virus that “is a good match for what we’ve found in cows,” Boucher said.

Flu vaccine makers are just starting to prepare this fall’s shots but, eventually, the federal government could request production be switched to a pandemic-targeted strain.

“We don’t have the capacity to do both,” Adalja said.

For now, ASPR has a stockpile of bulk pandemic vaccine and has identified manufacturing sites where 4.8 million doses could be bottled and finished without stopping production of seasonal flu vaccine, ASPR on May 22. U.S. officials began trying to diversify away from egg-based vaccines in 2005, when avian flu first gripped the world, and with added vigor after the 2009 fiasco. But “with the resources we have available, we get the best bang for our buck and best value to U.S. taxpayers when we leverage the seasonal infrastructure, and that’s still mostly egg-based,” Boucher said.

Flu vaccine companies “have a system that works well right now to accomplish their objectives in manufacturing the seasonal vaccine,” he said. And without a financial incentive, “we are going to be here with eggs for a while, I think.”

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Se preocuparon por ellos en 2005, y en 2009, y están preocupados ahora. Es porque millones de huevos de gallina fertilizados siguen siendo el ingrediente principal para fabricar vacunas que, con suerte, protegerán a las personas contra el brote de una nueva cepa de gripe.

“Es casi cómico usar una tecnología de los años 40 para una pandemia del siglo XXI”, dijo Rick Bright, quien dirigió la Autoridad de Investigación y Desarrollo Biomédico Avanzado (BARDA) del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos (HHS) durante la administración Trump.

Pero agregó que no es tan gracioso cuando la formulación actualmente almacenada contra el virus de la gripe aviar H5N1 requiere dos dosis y una cantidad asombrosa, 90 microgramos de antígeno, pero proporciona solo una inmunidad media. “Solo para Estados Unidos, se necesitarían gallinas poniendo 900,000 huevos cada día durante nueve meses”, explicó Bright.

Y eso si las gallinas no se infectan.

Un virus de la gripe aviar que se está propagando rápido ya ha diezmado a bandadas completas de aves, gatos de granero y a otros mamíferos. También se han registrado vacas infectadas en nueve estados, y al menos tres personas en Estados Unidos se infectaron, lo suficiente como para atraer la atención de la salud pública una vez más sobre el potencial de una pandemia global.

Al 30 de mayo, los únicos casos confirmados de infección humana fueron trabajadores de tambos en Texas y Michigan, quienes experimentaron irritación ocular. Dos se recuperaron rápidamente, mientras que el tercero desarrolló y estaba siendo tratado con un medicamento antiviral en su casa.

Sin embargo, la propagación del virus entre múltiples especies en un área geográfica amplia eleva la amenaza de que más mutaciones puedan producir un virus que se propague de humano a humano a través de la transmisión aérea.

Si esto ocurre, la prevención comienza con el huevo.

Para hacer materia prima para una vacuna contra la gripe, el virus se cultiva en millones de huevos fertilizados. A veces no se desarrolla bien, o muta hasta el punto que el producto de la vacuna estimula anticuerpos que no neutralizan el virus, o el virus salvaje muta y la vacuna no puede luchar contra él.

Y siempre existe la aterradora perspectiva de que las aves salvajes puedan llevar el virus a los gallineros necesarios para la producción de vacunas.

“Una vez que esos gallos y gallinas caen, no tienes vacuna”, dijo Bright.

Desde 2009, cuando una pandemia de gripe porcina H1N1 se propagó por el mundo antes que la producción de vacunas pudiera comenzar, los investigadores y los gobiernos han estado buscando alternativas. Se han invertido miles de millones de dólares en vacunas producidas en células de mamíferos e insectos que no presentan los mismos riesgos que las vacunas que se basan en huevos.

“Todos saben que las vacunas basadas en células son mejores, más inmunogénicas y ofrecen mejor producción”, dijo Amesh Adalja, especialista en enfermedades infecciosas del Centro de Seguridad de la Salud de la Universidad Johns Hopkins. “Pero están en desventaja debido a la fuerza de la fabricación basada en huevos”.

Las empresas que fabrican las vacunas contra la gripe basadas en células, CSL Seqirus y Sanofi, también tienen miles de millones invertidos en líneas de producción basadas en huevos que no están ansiosas por reemplazar. Y es difícil culparlos, dijo Nicole Lurie, subsecretaria asistente de preparación y respuesta del HHS bajo el presidente Barack Obama, quien ahora es directora ejecutiva de CEPI, la organización global, sin fines de lucro, de lucha contra epidemias.

“La mayoría de las empresas de vacunas que respondieron a una epidemia —Ébola, Zika, covid— terminaron perdiendo mucho dinero”, dijo Lurie.

Las excepciones fueron las vacunas de ARNm creadas para el covid, aunque incluso Pfizer y Moderna han tenido que destruir cientos de millones de dosis de vacunas no deseadas a medida que disminuyó el interés público.

Pfizer y Moderna están probando vacunas contra la gripe estacional hechas con ARNm, y el gobierno está solicitando ofertas para vacunas de ARNm contra la gripe pandémica, dijo David Boucher, director de preparación para enfermedades infecciosas en la Administración para la Preparación y Respuesta Estratégica del HHS.

Bright, cuya agencia invirtió $1,000 millones en una fábrica de vacunas contra la gripe basadas en células en Holly Springs, Carolina del Norte, dijo que “de ninguna manera podemos luchar contra una pandemia de H5N1 con una vacuna basada en huevos”. Pero por ahora, hay poca opción.

BARDA ha almacenado cientos de miles de dosis de una vacuna contra una cepa del H5N1 que estimula la creación de anticuerpos que parecen neutralizar el virus que circula actualmente. Podría producir millones de dosis más de la vacuna en cuestión de semanas y hasta 100 millones de dosis en cinco meses, dijo Boucher a Ģ��ӰԺ Health News.

Pero las vacunas actualmente en la reserva nacional no coinciden perfectamente con la cepa en cuestión. Incluso con dos dosis que contienen seis veces más sustancia que las vacunas contra la gripe típicas, las vacunas almacenadas solo fueron parcialmente efectivas contra las cepas del virus que circulaban cuando se fabricaron, dijo Adalja.

Sin embargo, BARDA actualmente está apoyando dos ensayos clínicos con un virus candidato para la vacuna que “coincide bien con el que hemos encontrado en las vacas”, dijo Boucher.

Los fabricantes de vacunas contra la gripe están empezando a preparar las vacunas de este otoño, pero eventualmente el gobierno federal podría solicitar que la producción se cambie a una cepa dirigida a la pandemia.

“No tenemos la capacidad para hacer ambas cosas”, dijo Adalja.

Por ahora, la Administración para una Respuesta y Preparación Estratégica (ASPR) tiene una reserva de vacunas pandémicas a granel y ha identificado sitios de fabricación donde se podrían completar 4.8 millones de dosis sin detener la producción de la vacuna contra la gripe estacional, dijo la jefa de ASPR, , el 22 de mayo.

En 2005, funcionarios intentaron diversificarse, alejándose de las vacunas basadas en huevos, cuando la gripe aviar afectó al mundo por primera vez, y con mayor vigor después del fiasco de 2009.

Pero “con los recursos que tenemos disponibles, obtenemos el mayor rendimiento de nuestra inversión y el mejor valor para los contribuyentes estadounidenses cuando aprovechamos la infraestructura estacional, y eso todavía se basa principalmente en huevos”, dijo Boucher.

Las empresas de vacunas contra la gripe “tienen un sistema que funciona bien en este momento para lograr sus objetivos con la fabricación de la vacuna estacional”, dijo. Y sin un incentivo financiero, “creo que estaremos aquí con huevos por un buen tiempo”.

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Cox, 40, qualified for an Affordable Care Act marketplace plan with no monthly premium due to her relatively low income. And after she cut her hand severely, the 35 stitches she received in the ER led to an out-of-pocket expense of about $300, she said.

“I can’t imagine what the ER visit would have cost if I was uninsured,” she said.

Cox is among 1.3 million people enrolled in health coverage this year through the ACA marketplace in Georgia, which has seen a 181% increase in enrollment since 2020.

Many people with low incomes have been drawn to plans offering $0 premiums and low out-of-pocket costs, which have become increasingly common because of the enhanced federal subsidies introduced by President Joe Biden.

Southern states have seen the biggest enrollment bump of any region. Ten of the 15 states that more than doubled their marketplace numbers from 2020 to 2024 are in the South, according to a . And the five states with the largest increases in enrollment — Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, Tennessee, and South Carolina, all in the South — have yet to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, driving many residents to the premium-free health plans.

But with the federal incentives introduced by the Biden administration set to expire at the end of 2025, and the possibility of a second Donald Trump presidency, the South could be on track to see a significant dip in ACA enrollment, policy analysts say.

“Georgia and the Southern states generally have lower per-capita income and higher uninsured rates,” said Gideon Lukens, a senior fellow and the director of research and data analysis for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan, Washington, D.C.-based research organization. If the enhanced subsidies go away, he said, the South, especially states that haven’t expanded Medicaid, will likely feel a bigger effect than other states. “There’s no other safety net” for many people losing coverage in non-expansion states, Lukens said.

When Cox was enrolling in Obamacare last fall, she qualified for premium tax credits that were added to two major congressional legislative packages: the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021, and the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. Those incentives — which gave rise to many plans with no premiums and low out-of-pocket costs — have helped power this year’s record . The extra subsidies were added to the already existing subsidies for marketplace coverage.

The states that didn’t expand Medicaid and have high uninsured rates “got most of the free plans,” said Cynthia Cox, a Ģ��ӰԺ vice president who directs the health policy nonprofit’s program on the ACA. Zero-premium plans existed before the new subsidies, she added, but they generally came with high deductibles that potentially would lead to higher costs for consumers.

A Trump presidency could jeopardize those extra subsidies. Brian Blase, a former Trump administration official who advised him on health care policy, said that eliminating the extra subsidies would bring the marketplace back to the ACA’s original intent.

“It’s not sustainable or wise to have fully taxpayer-subsidized coverage,” said Blase, who is now president of the Paragon Health Institute, a health policy research firm. People would still qualify for discounts, he said, but they wouldn’t be as generous.

Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for Trump, did not answer a reporter’s questions on the future of the enhanced subsidies under a new Trump administration. Despite his comments at the end of last year that he is “” to Obamacare, Leavitt said Trump is not campaigning to terminate the Affordable Care Act.

“He is running to make health care actually affordable, in addition to bringing down inflation, cutting taxes, and reducing regulations to put more money back in the pockets of all Americans,” she said.

While views on Obamacare may be divided, the wide support for subsidies crosses political lines, according to a released in May.

About 7 in 10 voters support the extension of enhanced federal financial assistance for people who purchase ACA marketplace coverage, the poll found. That support included 90% of Democrats, 73% of independents, and 57% of Republicans surveyed.

The enhanced assistance also allowed many people with incomes higher than 400% of the poverty level, or $58,320 for an individual in 2023, to get tax credits for coverage for the first time.

Besides the financial incentives, other reasons cited for the explosion in ACA enrollment include the end of continuous Medicaid coverage protections related to the covid public health emergency. About a year ago, states started redetermining eligibility, known as the “unwinding.”

of those who lost Medicaid coverage moved to the ACA marketplace, said Edwin Park, a research professor at the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families.

In Georgia, Republican political leaders haven’t talked much about the effect of the Biden administration’s premium incentives on enrollment increases.

Instead, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, among others, has , an online portal that links consumers directly to the ACA marketplace’s website or to an agent or broker. That agent link can create a more personal connection, said Bryce Rawson, a spokesperson for the state’s insurance department, which runs the portal. Employees from the agency and from consulting firms helped market the no-premium plans throughout the state, he said.

Yet Georgia Access didn’t become fully operational until last fall, during open enrollment for the marketplace. Republicans also credit a reinsurance waiver that, according to Rawson, increased the number of health insurers offering marketplace coverage in the state, leading to more competition.

Reinsurance is likely not a major reason for a state’s increased Obamacare enrollment, said Georgetown’s Park. And a found that Georgia’s reinsurance program had the unintended consequences of increasing the minimum cost of subsidized ACA coverage and reducing enrollment among individuals at a certain income level, .

The state’s insurance department said the study “does not accurately reflect the overall benefits the reinsurance program has brought to Georgia consumers.”

When asked whether the governor would support renewal of the enhanced subsidies, Garrison Douglas, Kemp’s spokesperson, said the matter is up to Congress to decide.

Another reason for the soaring ACA enrollment is the 2023 fix to the “family glitch” that had prevented dependents of workers who were offered unaffordable family coverage by employers from getting marketplace subsidies.

States that have run their own marketplaces, though, generally have not seen the same level of enrollment increases. Those 18 states, plus the District of Columbia, have expanded Medicaid. Georgia will join the list of states running their own exchanges this fall, making it the only state to operate one that has not expanded Medicaid.

The federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services credits a national marketing campaign and more federal funding for navigators, the insurance counselors who provide education about marketplace health coverage and free help with enrollment.

That level of financial support for navigators may be in jeopardy if Trump returns to the White House.

The Biden administration injected nearly $100 million in funding for navigators in the enrollment period for coverage this year. The Trump administration, on the other hand, for navigators from 2018 to 2020.

The marketplace is usually “a transitional place” for people coming in and out of coverage, Ģ��ӰԺ’s Cox said. “That marketing and outreach is pretty essential to help people literally navigate the process.”

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

As of May 30, only three people in the United States had tested positive after being exposed to a wave of bird flu spreading among cows. Those people, dairy farm workers in Texas and Michigan, experienced eye irritation. One of them also had a cough and sore throat.

Scientists warn the virus could mutate to spread from person to person like the seasonal flu, which could spark a pandemic. By keeping tabs on farmworkers, researchers could track infections, learn how dangerous they are, and be alerted if the virus becomes more infectious.

But people generally get tested when they seek treatment for illnesses. Farmworkers rarely do that, because many lack health insurance and paid sick leave, said Elizabeth Strater, director of strategic campaigns for the national group United Farm Workers. They are unlikely to go to a doctor unless they become very ill.

Strater said about 150,000 people work in U.S. dairies. She said many worker advocates believe the virus has spread to more people than tests are showing. “The method being used to surveil at-risk workers has been very passive,” she said.

Federal officials told reporters May 22 that just 40 people connected to U.S. dairy farms had been tested for the virus, although others are being “actively monitored” for symptoms.

Federal authorities they would pay farmworkers $75 each to be tested for the virus, as part of a new program that also offers incentives for farm owners to allow testing of their dairy herds.

Officials of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said they recognize the importance of gaining cooperation and trust from front-line dairy employees.

CDC spokesperson Rosa Norman said in an email that the incentive payment compensates workers for their time contributing to the monitoring of how many people are infected, how sick they become, and whether humans are spreading the virus to each other.

She noted the CDC believes the virus currently poses a .

But Strater is skeptical of the incentive for farmworkers to be checked for the virus. If a worker tests positive, they’d likely be instructed to go to a clinic then stay home from work. She said they couldn’t afford to do either.

“That starts to sound like a really bad deal for 75 bucks, because at the end of the week, they’re supposed to feed their families,” she said.

Katherine Wells, director of public health in Lubbock, Texas, said that in her state, health officials would provide short-term medical care, such as giving farmworkers the flu treatment Tamiflu. Those arrangements wouldn’t necessarily cover hospitalization if it were needed, she said.

She said the workers’ bigger concern appears to be that they would have to stay home from work or might even lose their jobs if they tested positive.

Many farmworkers , and they often labor in grueling conditions for little pay.

They may fear attention to cases among them will inflame anti-immigrant fervor, said Monica Schoch-Spana, a medical anthropologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

Societies have a long marginalized communities for the spread of contagious diseases. Latino immigrants were verbally attacked during the H1N1 “swine flu” pandemic in 2009, for example, and some media personalities used the outbreak to push for a crackdown on immigration.

Bethany Boggess Alcauter, director of research and public health programs at the National Center for Farmworker Health, said many workers on dairy farms have been told very little about this new disease spreading in the cows they handle. “Education needs to be a part of testing efforts, with time for workers to ask questions,” she said.

These conversations should be conducted in the farmworkers’ language, with people they are likely to trust, she said.

Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, said public health officials must make clear that workers’ immigration status will not be reported as part of the investigation into the new flu virus. “We’re not going to be the police,” he said.

Dawn O’Connell, an administrator at the Department of Health and Human Services, said in a press conference May 22 that nearly 5 million doses of a vaccine against H5N1, the bird flu virus circulating in cattle, are being prepared, but that officials have not decided whether the shots will be offered to farmworkers when they’re ready later this year.

The CDC asked states in early May to share personal protective equipment with farm owners, to help them shield workers from the bird flu virus. State health departments in California, Texas, and Wisconsin, which have large dairy industries, all said they have offered to distribute such equipment.

Chris Van Deusen, a Texas health department spokesperson, said four dairy farms had requested protective equipment from the state stockpile. He said other farms may already have had what they needed. Spokespeople for the California and Wisconsin health departments said they did not immediately receive requests from farm owners for the extra equipment.

Strater, the United Farm Workers official, said protective equipment offerings need to be practical.

Most dairy workers already wear waterproof aprons, boots, and gloves, she said. It wouldn’t be realistic to expect them to also wear N95 face masks in the wet, hot conditions of a milking operation, she said. Plastic face shields seem like a better option for that environment, especially to prevent milk from spraying into workers’ eyes, where it could cause infection, she said.

Other types of agricultural workers, including those who work with chickens, also face potential infection. But scientists say the version of the virus spreading in cows could be particularly dangerous, because it has adapted to live in mammals.

Strater said she’s most worried about dairy workers, who spend 10 to 12 hours a day in enclosed spaces with cows.

“Their faces are approximately 5 inches away from the milk and the udders all day long,” she said. “The intimacy of it, where their face is so very close to the infectious material, is different.”

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Hasta ahora, solo dos personas en Estados Unidos han dado positivo después de estar expuestas a una ola de gripe aviar que se está propagando entre vacas. Estas personas, trabajadores de granjas lecheras , experimentaron irritación en los ojos.

Los científicos advierten que el virus podría mutar para propagarse de persona a persona como la gripe estacional, lo que podría desencadenar una pandemia. Monitoreando a los trabajadores agrícolas, los investigadores podrían rastrear infecciones, aprender cuán peligrosas son y estar alertas si el virus se vuelve más contagioso.

Pero las personas generalmente se hacen pruebas cuando buscan tratamiento para enfermedades. Y los trabajadores agrícolas rara vez lo hacen, porque muchos no tienen seguro médico ni licencia por enfermedad remunerada, dijo Elizabeth Strater, directora de campañas estratégicas del grupo nacional United Farm Workers.

Es poco probable que vayan al médico a menos que se enfermen mucho.

Strater dijo que aproximadamente 150,000 personas trabajan en tambos en el país. Agregó que muchos defensores de estos trabajadores creen que el virus se ha propagado a más personas de las que muestran las pruebas. “El método que se está utilizando para vigilar a los trabajadores en riesgo ha sido muy pasivo”, dijo.

El 22 de mayo, funcionarios federales dijeron a periodistas que solo 40 personas relacionadas con tambos habían sido evaluadas para el virus, aunque otras están siendo “monitoreadas activamente” para detectar síntomas.

Las autoridades federales que pagarían $75 a cada trabajador agrícola para que se hiciera la prueba para detectar la gripe aviar, como parte de un nuevo programa que también ofrece incentivos para que los propietarios de granjas permitan la prueba en sus rebaños lecheros.

Oficiales de los Centros para el Control y Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC) dijeron que reconocen la importancia de obtener cooperación y confianza de los empleados lecheros de primera línea.

Rosa Norman, vocera de los CDC, dijo en un correo electrónico que el pago es un incentivo que compensa a los trabajadores por su tiempo contribuyendo al monitoreo de cuántas personas están infectadas, cuánto se enferman y si el virus se está propagando entre humanos.

Señaló que los CDC creen que el virus actualmente representa .

Pero Strater es escéptica respecto al incentivo para que los trabajadores agrícolas se hagan la prueba para detectar el virus. Si un trabajador da positivo, probablemente se le indicaría que vaya a una clínica, y luego que se quedara en casa. Asegura que no podrían permitirse ninguna de las dos cosas.

“Eso empieza a sonar como un trato muy malo por $75, porque al final de la semana, se supone que deben alimentar a sus familias”, dijo.

Katherine Wells, directora de salud pública en Lubbock, Texas, dijo que en su estado, los funcionarios de salud ofrecerían atención médica de corto plazo, como dar a los trabajadores agrícolas el tratamiento con el antigripal Tamiflu. Este acuerdo no necesariamente cubriría la hospitalización si fuera necesaria, agregó.

Expresó que la mayor preocupación de los trabajadores parece ser que tendrían que quedarse en casa o podrían incluso perder sus trabajos si dan positivo.

Muchos trabajadores agrícolas y a menudo trabajan en condiciones agotadoras, por muy poco dinero.

También pueden temer que el foco de atención en ellos reavive el fervor anti-inmigrante, dijo Monica Schoch-Spana, antropóloga médica del Centro de Seguridad Sanitaria de Johns Hopkins.

Las sociedades tienen de culpar a las comunidades marginadas por la propagación de enfermedades contagiosas. Por ejemplo, los inmigrantes latinos fueron insultados durante la pandemia de gripe H1N1, la gripe porcina, en 2009, y algunas personalidades de los medios usaron el brote para presionar por una campaña anti inmigrante.

Bethany Boggess Alcauter, directora de programas de investigación y salud pública en el Centro Nacional de Salud para Trabajadores Agrícolas, dijo que muchos trabajadores en tambos han recibido muy poca información sobre esta nueva enfermedad que se está propagando entre las vacas que manejan. “La educación necesita ser parte de los esfuerzos por las pruebas, con tiempo para que los trabajadores hagan preguntas”, dijo.

Estas conversaciones deben ser en el idioma de los trabajadores agrícolas, con personas en las que sea más probable que confíen, dijo.

Georges Benjamin, director ejecutivo de la Asociación Americana de Salud Pública, dijo que los funcionarios deben dejar claro que el estatus migratorio de los trabajadores no será reportado como parte de la investigación sobre el nuevo virus de la gripe. “No vamos a ser la policía”, dijo.

Dawn O’Connell, administradora en el Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos, dijo en una conferencia de prensa el 22 de mayo que se están preparando casi 5 millones de dosis de una vacuna contra el H5N1, el virus de la gripe aviar que circula entre el ganado, pero que los funcionarios no han decidido si las inyecciones se ofrecerán a los trabajadores agrícolas cuando estén listas más adelante este año.

A principios de mayo, los CDC pidieron a los estados que compartieran equipo de protección personal con los propietarios de granjas, para ayudarlos a proteger a los trabajadores del virus de la gripe aviar. Los departamentos de salud estatales en California, Texas y Wisconsin, que tienen grandes industrias lecheras, dijeron que han ofrecido distribuir estos equipos.

Chris Van Deusen, vocero del Departamento de Salud de Texas, dijo que cuatro granjas lecheras habían solicitado equipo de protección del stock estatal. Dijo que otras granjas tal vez ya tienen lo que necesitan. Los voceros de los departamentos de salud de California y Wisconsin dijeron que no recibieron pedidos inmediatos de los propietarios de granjas para obtener equipo adicional.

Strater, la funcionaria de United Farm Workers, dijo que las ofertas de equipo de protección deben ser prácticas.

La mayoría de los trabajadores de la industria lechera ya usan delantales impermeables, botas y guantes, dijo. No sería realista esperar que también usen mascarillas N95 en las condiciones húmedas y calurosas de una operación de ordeñe, dijo. Los protectores faciales de plástico parecen una mejor opción para ese entorno, especialmente para evitar que la leche salpique en los ojos de los trabajadores, donde podría causar una infección, dijo.

Otros tipos de trabajadores agrícolas, incluidos aquellos que trabajan con pollos, también enfrentan posibles infecciones. Pero los científicos dicen que la versión del virus que se está propagando en el ganado podría ser particularmente peligrosa, porque ya se ha adaptado para vivir en mamíferos.

Strater dijo que le preocupa más los trabajadores en tambos, que pasan de 10 a 12 horas al día en espacios cerrados con vacas.

“Sus caras están aproximadamente a 5 pulgadas de la leche y las ubres durante todo el día”, dijo. “La cercanía, en donde sus caras están tan cerca del material infeccioso, es diferente”.

¿Trabajas en un tambo? ¿Te preocupa la exposición a la gripe aviar en el trabajo? Ģ��ӰԺ Health News quiere saber sobre tí. Cuéntanos tus experiencias , para nuestras historias.

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

With abortion shaping up as a key issue for the November elections, the movement that united to overturn Roe v. Wade is divided over going further, faster — including by punishing those who have abortions and banning contraception or IVF. Politicians who oppose abortion are already experiencing backlash in some states.

Meanwhile, bad actors are bilking the health system in various new ways, from switching people’s insurance plans without their consent to pocket additional commissions, to hacking the records of major health systems and demanding millions of dollars in ransom.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of Ģ��ӰԺ Health News, Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico, Rachel Roubein of The Washington Post, and Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins schools of public health and nursing and Politico Magazine.

Panelists

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

• It appears that abortion opponents are learning it’s a lot easier to agree on what you’re against than for. Now that the constitutional right to an abortion has been overturned, political leaders are contending with vocal groups that want to push further — such as by banning access to IVF or contraception.
• A Louisiana bill designating abortion pills as controlled substances targets people in the state, where abortion is banned, who are finding ways to get the drug. And abortion providers in Kansas are suing over a new law that requires patients to report their reasons for having an abortion. Such state laws have a cumulative chilling effect on abortion access.
• Some Republican lawmakers seem to be trying to dodge voter dissatisfaction with abortion restrictions in this election year. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama introduced legislation to protect IVF by pulling Medicaid funding from states that ban the fertility procedure — but it has holes. And Gov. Larry Hogan of Maryland declared he is pro-choice, even though he mostly dodged the issue during his eight years as governor.
• Former President Donald Trump is in the news again for comments that seemed to leave the door open to restrictions on contraception — which may be the case, though he is known to make such vague policy suggestions. Trump’s policies as president did restrict access to contraception, and his allies have proposed going further.

Also this week, Rovner interviews Shefali Luthra of The 19th about her new book on abortion in post-Roe America, “Undue Burden.”

Plus, for “extra credit,” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:��

Julie Rovner: The 19th’s “,” by Shefali Luthra and Chabeli Carrazana.��

Alice Miranda Ollstein: Stat’s “,” by Eric Boodman.����

Rachel Roubein: The Washington Post’s “,” by Joel Achenbach and Mark Johnson.����

Joanne Kenen: ProPublica’s “,” by Sharon Lerner; and The Guardian’s “,” by Damian Carrington.��

Also mentioned on this week’s podcast:

• NPR’s “,” by Sarah McCammon.
• Ģ��ӰԺ Health News’ “Biden Leans Into Health Care, Asking Voters To Trust Him Over Trump,” by Phil Galewitz.
• Ģ��ӰԺ Health News’ “Exclusive: Senator Urges Biden Administration To Thwart Fraudulent Obamacare Enrollments,” by Julie Appleby.
• Ģ��ӰԺ Health News’ “KHN’s ‘What the Health?’: Un-Trumping the ACA,” featuring an interview with journalist Marshall Allen.

[Editor’s note: This transcript was generated using both transcription software and a human’s light touch. It has been edited for style and clarity.]��

Mila Atmos: The future of America is in your hands. This is not a movie trailer, and it’s not a political ad, but it is a call to action. I’m Mila Atmos, and I’m passionate about unlocking the power of everyday citizens. On our podcast Future Hindsight, we take big ideas about civic life and democracy and turn them into action items for you and me. Every Thursday, we talk to bold activists and civic innovators to help you understand your power and your power to change the status quo. Find us at futurehindsight.com or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Julie Rovner: Hello, and welcome back to “What the Health?” I’m Julie Rovner, chief Washington correspondent for Ģ��ӰԺ Health News, and I’m joined by some of the best and smartest health reporters in Washington. We’re taping this week on Thursday, May 23, at 10 a.m. As always, news happens fast and things might’ve changed by the time you hear this. So, here we go. We are joined today via a video conference by Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico.

Alice Miranda Ollstein: Hello.

Rovner: Rachel Roubein of The Washington Post.

Rachel Roubein: Hi, thanks for having me.

Rovner: And Joanne Kenen of the Johns Hopkins schools of public health and nursing and Politico Magazine.

Joanne Kenen: Hi, everybody.

Rovner: Later in this episode, we’ll have my interview with podcast panelist Shefali Luthra of The 19th. Shefali’s new book about abortion in the post-Roe [v. Wade] world, called “Undue Burden,” is out this week. But first, this week’s news. We’re going to start with abortion this week with a topic I’m calling “Abolitionists in Ascendance,” and a shoutout here to NPR’s on this that we will link to in the show notes. It seems that while Republican politicians, at least at the federal level, are kind of going to ground on this issue, and we’ll talk more about that in a bit, those who would take the ban to the furthest by prosecuting women, and/or banning IVF and contraception, are raising their voices. How much of a split does this portend for what, until the overturn of Roe, had been a pretty unified movement? I mean they were all unified in “Let’s overturn Roe,” and now that Roe has gone, boy are they dividing.

Ollstein: Yeah, it’s a lot easier to agree on what you’re against than on what you’re for. We wrote about the split on IVF specifically a bit ago, and it is really interesting. A lot of anti-abortion advocates are disappointed in the Republican response and the Republican rush to say, “No, let’s leave IVF totally alone” because these groups think, some think it some should be banned, some think that there should be a lot of restrictions on the way it’s currently practiced. So not a total ban, but things like you can only produce a certain number of embryos, you can only implant a certain number of embryos, you can only create the ones you intend to implant, and so that would completely upend the way IVF is currently practiced in the U.S.

So, we know the anti-abortion movement is good at playing the long game, and so some of them have told me that they see this kind of like the campaign to overturn Roe v. Wade. They understand that Republicans are reacting for political reasons right now, and they are confident in winning them over for restrictions in the long term.

Rovner: I’ve been fascinated by, I would say, by things like Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life [of America] who’s been sort of the far-right fringe of the anti-abortion movement looking like she’s the moderate now with some of these people, and their discussions of “We should charge women with murder and have the death penalty if necessary.” Sorry, Rachel, you want to say something?

Roubein: This is something that Republicans, they don’t want to be asked about this on the campaign. The more hard-line abolitionist movement is something more mainstream groups have been taking a lot of pains to distance themselves and say that we don’t prosecute women, and essentially nobody wants to talk about this ahead of 2024. GOP doesn’t want to be seen as that party that’s going after that.

Kenen: And the divisions existed when Roe was still the law of the land, and we would all write about the divisions and what they were pushing for, and it was partly strategic. How far do you push? Do you push for legislation? Do you push for the courts? Do you push for 20 weeks for fetal pain? But it was like rape exceptions and under what terms and things like that. So it was sort of much later in pregnancy, and with more restrictions, and the fight was about exactly where do you draw that line. This abolition of all abortion under all circumstances, or personhood, only a couple of years ago, were the fringe. Personhood was sort of like, “Oh, they’re out there, no one will go for that.” And now I don’t think it’s the dominant voice. I don’t think we yet know what their dominant voice is, but it’s a player in this conversation.

At the same time, on the other side, the pro-abortion rights people, there’s polls showing us this many Americans support abortion, but it’s subtler too. Even if people support abortion rights, it doesn’t mean that they’re not, some subset are in favor of some restrictions, or where that’s going to settle. Right now, a 15-week ban, which would’ve seemed draconian a year or two ago, now seems like the moderate position. It has not shaken out, and …

Rovner: Well, let’s talk …

Kenen: It’s not going to shake out for some time.

Rovner: Let’s talk about a few specifics. The Louisiana State Legislature on Tuesday approved a bill that would put the drugs used in medication abortion, mifepristone and misoprostol, on the state’s list of controlled substances. This has gotten a lot of publicity. I’m wondering what the actual effect might be here though since abortion is already banned in Louisiana. Obviously, these drugs are used for other things, but they wouldn’t be unavailable. They would just be put in this category of dangerous drugs.

Ollstein: So, officials know that people in banned states, including Louisiana, are obtaining abortion pills from out of state, whether through telehealth from states with shield laws or through these gray-area groups overseas that are mailing pills to anyone no matter what state they live in or what restrictions are in place. So I think because it would be very difficult to actually enforce this law, short of going through people’s homes and their mail, this is just one more layer of a chilling effect and making people afraid to seek out those mail order services.

Rovner: So it’s more, again, for the appearance of it than the actuality of it.

Ollstein: It also sets up another state versus federal law clash, potentially. We’ve seen this playing out in courts in West Virginia and in North Carolina, basically. Can states restrict or even completely ban a medication that the FDA says is safe and effective? And that question is percolating in a few different courts right now.

Rovner: Including sort of the Supreme Court. We’re still waiting for their abortion pill decision that we expect now next month. Meanwhile, in Kansas, where voters approved a big abortion rights referendum in 2022 — remember, it was the first one of those — abortion providers are suing to stop a new state law enacted over the governor’s veto that would require them to report to the state women’s reasons for having an abortion. Now it’s not that hard to see how that information could be misused by people with other kinds of intents, right?

Ollstein: Well, it also brings up right to free speech issues, compelled speech. I think I’ve seen this pop up in abortion lawsuits even before Dobbs [v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization], this very issue because there have been instances where either doctors are required to give information that they say that they believe is medically inaccurate. That’s an issue in several states right now. And then this demanding information from patients. A lot of clinics that I’ve spoken to are so afraid of subpoenas from officials in-state, from out of state, that they intentionally don’t ask patients for certain kinds of data even though it would really help medically or organizationally for them to have that data. But they’re so afraid of it being seized, they figure well, they can’t seize it if they’re … doesn’t exist in the first place. And so I think this kind of law is in direct conflict with that.

Roubein: It also gets at the question of medical privacy that we’ve been seeing in the Biden administration’s efforts over HIPAA and protecting patients’ records and making it harder for state officials to attempt to seize.

Rovner: Yeah, this is clearly going to be a struggle in a lot of states where voters versus Republican legislatures, and we will sort of see how that all plays out. So even while this is going on in a bunch of the states, a lot of Republicans, including some who have been and remain strongly anti-abortion, are doing what I’m calling ducking-and-covering on a lot of these issues. Case in point, Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz and Alabama Republican Sen. Katie Britt this week introduced a bill they say would protect IVF, which is kind of ironic given that both of them voted against a bill to protect IVF back in, checking notes, February. What’s the difference here? What are these guys trying to do?

Kenen: Theirs is narrower. They say that the original bill, which was a Democratic bill, was larded with abortion rights kinds of things. I have not read the entire bill, I just read the summary of it. And in this one, if a state restricts someone who had — someone feel free to correct me if I am missing something here because I don’t have deep knowledge of this bill — but if a state does not protect IVF, they would lose their Medicaid payment. And I was not clear whether that meant every penny of Medicaid, including nursing homes, or if it’s a subsection of Medicaid, because it seems like a big can of worms.

Ollstein: Yeah, so the key difference in these bills is the word ban. The Republican bill says that if states ban IVF, then these penalties kick in for Medicaid, but they say that there can be “health and safety regulations,” and so that is very open to interpretation. That can include the things we talked about before about you can only produce a certain number of embryos, you can only implant a certain number of embryos, and you can’t discard them. And so even what Alabama did was not an outright ban. So even something like that that cut off services for lots of people wouldn’t be considered a ban under this Republican bill. So I think there’s sort of a semantic game going on here where restrictions would still be allowed if they were short of a blanket ban, whereas the democratic bill would also prevent restrictions.

Rovner: Well, and along those exact same lines, in Maryland, former two-term Republican governor Larry Hogan, who’s managed to dodge the abortion issue in his primary run to become the Senate nominee, now that he is the Republican candidate for the open Senate seat, has declared himself, his words, “pro-choice,” and says he would vote to restore Roe in the Senate if given the opportunity. But as I recall, and I live in Maryland, he vetoed a couple of bills to expand abortion rights in very blue Maryland. Is he going to be able to have this both ways? He seems to be doing the [Sen.] Susan Collins script where he gets to say he’s pro-choice, but he doesn’t necessarily have to vote for abortion rights bills.

Kenen: Hogan is a very popular moderate Republican governor in a Democratic state. He is a strong Senate candidate. His opponent, a Democrat, Angela Alsobrooks, has a stronger abortion rights record. I don’t think that’s going to be the decisive issue in Maryland. I think it may help him a little bit, but I think in Maryland, if the Senate was 55-45, a lot of Democrats like Hogan and might want another moderate Republican in the Senate. But given that this is going to be about control of the Senate, abortion will be a factor, I don’t think abortion is going to be the dominant factor in this particular race.

If she were to win and there’s two black women, I mean that would be the first time that two black women ever served in the Senate at once, and I think they would only be number three and number four in history. So race and Affirmative Action will be factors, but I think that Democrats who might otherwise lean toward him, because he was considered a good governor. He was well-liked. This is a 50-50ish Senate, and that’s the deciding thing for anyone who pays attention, which of course is a whole other can of worms because nobody really pays attention. They just do things.

Roubein: I think it’s also worth noting this tact to the left comes as Maryland voters will be voting on an abortion rights ballot measure in 2024. So that all sort of in context, we’ve seen what’s happened with the other abortion measures, abortion rights have won, so.

Rovner: And Maryland is a really blue state, so one would expect it …

Kenen: There’s no question that the Maryland …

Rovner: Yeah.

Kenen: I mean, and all of us would fall flat on our faces if the abortion measure fails in Maryland. But I believe this is the first one on the ballot alongside a presidential election, and some of them have been in special elections. It’s unclear the correlation between, you can vote for a Republican candidate and still vote for a pro-abortion rights initiative. We will learn a lot more about how that split happens in November. I mean, is Kansas going to go for Biden? Unlikely. But Kansas went really strong for abortion rights. If you’re not a single-issue voter, you can, in fact, have it both ways.

Rovner: Yes, and we are already seeing that in the polls. Well, of course then there is the king of trying to have it both ways: former President Trump. He is either considering restrictions on contraception, as he told an interviewer earlier this week, promising a proposal soon, or he will, all caps, as he put on Truth Social, never advocate imposing restrictions on birth control. So which is it?

Ollstein: So this came out of Trump’s verbal tick of saying “We’ll have a plan in a few weeks,” which he says about everything. But in this context it made it sound like he was leaving the door open to restrictions on contraception, which very well might be the case. So what my colleague and I wrote about is he says he would never restrict contraception. A lot of things he did in his first administration did restrict access to contraception. It was not a ban. Again, we’re getting back into the semantics of ban. It was not a ban, but his Title X rule led to a drop in hundreds of thousands of people accessing contraception. He allowed more kinds of employers to refuse to cover their employees’ contraception on their health plans, and the plans his allies are creating in this Project 2025 blueprint would reimpose those restrictions and go even further in different ways that would have the effect of restricting access to contraception. And so I think this is a good instance of look at what people do, not what they say.

Rovner: So now that we’re on the subject of campaign 2024, President Biden’s campaign launched a $14 million ad buy this week that includes the warning that if Trump becomes president again he’ll try to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Maybe health care will be an issue in this election after all? I don’t have a rooting interest one way or the other. I’m just curious to see how much of an issue health will be beyond reproductive rights.

Kenen: Well, as Alice just pointed out, Trump’s promised plans often do not materialize, and we are still waiting to see his replacement plan eight years later. I think he’s being told to sort of go slow on this. I mean, not that you can control what Trump says, but he didn’t run on health care until the end, in 2016. It was a close race, and he ran against Hillary Clinton, and it was the last 10 or so days that he really came down hard because it was right when ACA enrollment was about to begin and premiums came in and they were high. He pivoted. So is this going to be a health care election from day one? And I’m putting abortion aside for one second in terms of my definition of health care for this particular segment. Is it going to be a health care election in terms of ACA, Medicare, Medicaid? At this point, probably not. But is it going to emerge at various times by one or the other side in politically opportune ways? I would be surprised if Biden’s not raising it. The ACA is thriving under Biden.

Rovner: Well, he is. That’s the whole point. He just took out a $14 million ad buy.

Kenen: Right. But again, we don’t know. Is it a health care election or is it a couple ads? We don’t know. So yes, it’s going to be a health care election because all elections are health care elections. How much it’s defined by health care compared to immigration? No, at this point, that’s not what we’re expecting. Compared to the economy? No, at this point. But is it an issue for some voters? Yes. Is it going to be an issue more prominently depending on how other things play out? It’ll have its peaks. We just don’t know how consistent it’ll be.

Roubein: Biden would love to run on the Inflation Reduction Act and politically popular policies like allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. One of the problems of that is polls, including from Ģ��ӰԺ, has shown that the majority of voters don’t know about that. And some of these policies, the big ones, have not even gone into effect. CMS [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services] is going through the negotiation process, but that’s not going to hit people’s pocketbooks until after the election.

Kenen: The cliff for the ACA subsidies, which is in 2025, I mean I would imagine Democrats will be campaigning on, “We will extend the subsidies,” and again, in some places more than others, but that’s a time-sensitive big thing happening next year.

Rovner: But talk about an issue that people have no idea that’s coming. Well, meanwhile, for Trump, reproductive health isn’t the only issue where he’s doing a not-so-delicate dance. Apparently worried about Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stealing anti-vax [vaccine] votes from him, Trump is now calling RFK Jr. a fake anti-vaxxer. Except I’m old enough to remember when Trump bragged repeatedly about how fast his administration developed and brought the covid vaccine to market. That used to be one of his big selling points. Now he’s trying to be anti-vax, too?

Kenen: Not only did he brag about bringing it to the market. The way he used to talk about it, it was like he was there in his lab coat inventing it. Operation Warp Speed was a success. It got vaccines out in record time, way beyond what many people expected. Democrats gave him credit for that one policy in health care. He got a vaccine out and available in less than a year, and he got vaccinated and boasted about being vaccinated. He was open about it. Now we don’t know if he’s been boosted. He really backed off. As soon as somebody booed him, and it wasn’t a lot of boos, at one rally when he talked about vaccination and he got pushed back, that was the end.

Rovner: So, yeah, so I expect that to sort of continue on this election season, too.

Kenen: But we don’t expect RFK to flip.

Rovner: No, we do not. Right. Well, moving on to this weekend’s “Cyber Hacks,” a new feature, the fallout continues from the hack of Ascension [health care company]. That’s the Catholic hospital system with facilities in 19 states. In Michigan, patients have been unable to use hospital pharmacies and their doctors have been unable to send electronic prescriptions, so they’re having to write them out by hand. And in Indiana orders for tests and test results are being delayed by as much as a day for hospital patients. Not a great thing.

And just in time, or maybe a little late, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, through the newly created ARPA-H [Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health] that we have talked about, this week announced the launch of a new program to help hospitals make security patches and updates to their systems without taking them offline, which is obviously a major reason so many of these systems are so vulnerable to cyberhacking.

Of course, this announcement from HHS is just to solicit ideas for grants to help make that happen. So it’s going to be a while before we get any of these security changes. I’m wondering, how many systems are going to try to build a lot more redundancy into them? In the meantime, are we hearing anything about what they can do in the short term? It feels like the entire health care system is kind of a sitting duck for this group of cyberhackers who think they can get in easily and get ransom.

Kenen: There’s a reason they think that.

Rovner: They can.

Roubein: Thinking about hospitals and doctors using this manually, paper-based system and how that’s delaying getting your results and just there’s been these stories about patients. Like the anxiety that that’s understandably causing patients, and we’ll see sort of whether Congress can grapple with this, and there’s not really much legislation that’s going to move, so …

Kenen: But I was surprised that they were calling on ARPA-H. I mean, that’s supposed to be a biotech- curing-diseases thing, and none of the four of us are cybersecurity experts, and none of us really specialize in covering the electronic side of the digital side of health, but it just seems to me, I just thought that was an odd thing. First of all, some of these are just systems that haven’t been upgraded or individual clinicians who don’t upgrade or don’t do their double authorization. Some of it’s sort of cyberhygiene, and some of it’s obviously like the change thing. They’re really sophisticated criminals, but it’s not something that one would think you can’t get ahead of, right? They’re smart, good-guy technology people. It’s not like the bad guys are the only ones who understand technology. So why are the smart good guys not doing their job? And also, probably, health care systems have to have some kind of security checks on their own members to make sure they are following all the safety rules and some kind of consequences if you’re not, other than being embarrassed.

Rovner: I’ve just been sort of bemused by all of this, how both patients and providers complain loudly and frequently about the frustrations of some of these electronic record systems. And of course, in the places that they’re going down and they’ve had to go back to paper, people are like, “Please give us our electronic systems back.” So it doesn’t take long to get used to some of these things and be sorry when they’re gone, even if it’s only temporarily. It’s obviously been …

Kenen: But like what Rachel said, if you’re in the hospital, you’re sick, and do your clinicians need your lab results? Yes. I mean some of them are more important than others, and I would hope that hospitals are figuring out how to prioritize. But yeah, this is a crisis. If you’re in the hospital and they don’t know what’s wrong with you and they’re trying to figure out do you have X, Y, or Z, waiting until next week is not really a great idea.

Rovner: But it wasn’t that many years ago that their existence …

Kenen: Right, no, no, no.

Rovner: … did not involve …

Kenen: [inaudible 00:21:28].

Rovner: … electronic medical record.

Kenen: Right. Right.

Rovner: They knew how to get test results back and forth even if it was sending an intern to go fetch them. Finally, this week, we have some updates on some stories that we’ve talked about in earlier episodes. First, thanks in part to the excellent reporting of my colleague and sometime-pod-panelist Julie Appleby, the Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden is demanding that HHS [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services] officials do more to rein in rogue insurance brokers who are reaping extra commissions by switching patients’ Affordable Care Act plans without their knowledge, often subjecting them to higher out-of-pocket costs and separating them from the providers that they’ve chosen. Sen. Wyden said he would introduce legislation to make such schemes a crime, but in the meantime he wants Biden officials to do more, given that they have received more than 90,000 complaints in the first quarter of 2024 alone about unauthorized switches and enrollments. Criminals go where the money is, right? You can either cyberhack or you can become a broker and switch people to ACA plans so you can get more commissions.

Kenen: I would think there could be a bipartisan, I mean it’s hard to get anything done in Congress. There’s no must-pass bills in the immediate future that are relevant. And the idea that a broker is secretly doing something that you don’t want them to do and that’s costing you money and making them money. I could see, those 90,000 people are from red and blue states and they vote, it’s going to affect constituents nationwide. Maybe they’ll do something. Maybe the industry can also… There is the National Association … I forgot the acronym, but there’s a broker’s organization, that there are probably things that they can also do to sanction. States can also do some things to brokers, but whether there’s a national solution or piecemeal, I don’t know, but it’s so outrageous that it’s not a right-left issue.

Rovner: Yes, one would think that there’ll be at least some kind of congressional action built into something …

Kenen: Something or other, right.

Rovner: … Congress that manages to do before the end of the year. Well, and in one of those seemingly rare cases where legislation actually does what it was intended to do, the White House this week announced that it has approved more than a million claims under the 2022 PACT Act, which made veterans injured as a result of exposure to burn pits and other toxic substances eligible for VA [Veterans Affairs] disability benefits. On the other hand, the VA is still working its way through another 3 million claims that have been submitted. I feel like even if it’s not very often, sometimes it’s worth noting that there are bipartisan things from Washington, D.C., that actually get passed and actually help the people that they’re supposed to help. It’s kind of sad that this is notable as an exception of something that happened and is working.

Roubein: In sort of the, I guess, Department of Unintended Side Effects here, my colleague Lisa Rein had a really interesting story out this morning that talked about the PACT Act, but basically that despite a federal law that prohibits charging veterans for help in applying for disability benefits, for-profit companies are making millions. She did a review of up to like a hundred unaccredited for-profit companies who have been charging veterans anywhere from like $5,000 to $20,000 for helping file disability claims because …

Rovner: That’s the theme of this week. Anyplace that there’s a lot of money in health care, there were people who will want to come in and take what’s not theirs. That’s where we will leave the news this week. Now we will play my interview with Shefali Luthra, then we’ll come back with our extra credits.

I am so pleased to welcome back to the podcast my former colleague and current “What The Health?” panelist Shefali Luthra. You haven’t heard from her in a while because she’s been working on her first book, called “Undue Burden,” that’s out this week. Shefali, great to see you.

Luthra: Thank you so much for having me Julie.

Rovner: So as the title suggests, “Undue Burden” is about the difficulties for both patients and providers in the wake of the overturn of Roe v. Wade. We talk so much about the politics of this issue, and so little about the real people who are affected. Why did you want to take this particular angle?

Luthra: To me, this is what makes this topic so important. Health care and abortion are really critical political issues. They sway elections. They are likely to be very consequential in this coming presidential election. But this matters to us as reporters and to us as people because of the life-or-death stakes and even beyond the life-or-death stakes, the stakes of how you choose to live your life and what it means to be pregnant and to be a parent. These are really difficult stories to tell because of the resources involved. And I wanted to write a book that just got at all of the different reasons why people pursue abortion and why they provide abortion and how that’s changed in the past two years. Because it felt to me like one of the few ways we could really understand just how seismic the implications of overturning Roe has been.

Rovner: And unlike those of us who talk to politicians all the time, you were really on the ground talking to patients and doctors, right?

Luthra: That was really, really important to the book. I spent a lot of time traveling the country, in clinics talking to people who were able to get abortions, who were unable to get abortions, and it was just really compelling for me to see how much access to care had the capacity to change their lives.

Rovner: So what kind of barriers then are we talking about that cropped up? And I guess it wasn’t even just the wake of the overturn of Roe. In Texas we had sort of a yearlong dry run.

Luthra: Exactly, and the book starts before Roe is overturned in Texas when the state enacted SB 8, the six-week abortion ban that effectively cut off access. And the first main character readers meet is this young girl named Tiffany, and she’s a teenager when she becomes pregnant, and she would love to get an abortion. But she is a minor. She lives very far from any abortion provider. She does not know how to self-manage an abortion. She does not know where to find pills. She has no connections into the health care system. She has no independent income. And she absolutely cannot travel anywhere for care. As a result, she has a child before she turns 18. And what this story highlights is that there are just so many barriers to getting an abortion. Many already existed: The incredible cost for procedure not covered by health insurance, the geographic distance, people already had to travel, the extra restrictions on minors.

But the overturning of Roe has amplified these, it is so expensive to get an abortion. It can be difficult to know you’re pregnant, especially if you are not trying to become pregnant. You have a very short time window. You may need to find childcare. You may need to find a car, get time off work, and bring all of these different forces together so that you are able to make a journey that can be days and pay for a trip that can cost thousands of dollars.

Rovner: One of the things that I think surprised me was that states that proclaimed themselves abortion “havens” actually did so little to help their clinics that predictably got swamped by out-of-state patients. Why do you think that was the case, and is it any better now?

Luthra: I think things have certainly changed. We have seen much more action in states, such as Illinois, where we see more people traveling there for care than anywhere else in the country. But it is worth going back to the summer that Roe was overturned. The governor promised to call a special session and put all these resources into making sure that Illinois could be a sanctuary. He never called that special session. And clinics felt like they were hanging out to dry, just waiting to get some support, and in the meanwhile, doing the absolute best they could.

One thing that I think this book really gets at is we are starting to see more efforts from these bluer states, the Illinois, the Californias, the New Yorks, and they talk a lot about wanting to be abortion havens, in part because it’s great politics if you’re a Democrat, but there’s only so much you can do. California has seen also quite a large increase in out-of-state patients. But I’ve spoken to so many people who just cannot conceivably go to California. They can barely go to Illinois. Making that journey when you are young, if you don’t have a lot of money, if you live in South Texas, if you live in Louisiana, it’s just not really feasible. And the places that are set up as these access points just can’t really fill in the gaps that they say they will.

Rovner: As you point out in the book, a lot of this was completely predictable. Was there something in your reporting that actually did surprise you?

Luthra: That’s a great question, and what did surprise me was in part something that we’ve begun to see borne out in the reporting, is there are very effective telemedicine strategies. We have begun to see physicians living in blue states, the New Yorks, Massachusetts, Californias, prescribing and mailing abortion pills to people in states with bans. This is pretty powerful. It has expanded access to a lot of people. What was really striking to me, though, even as I reported about the experiences of patients seeking care, is that while that has done so much to expand access in the face of abortion bans, it isn’t a solution that everyone can use. There were lots of people I met who did not want a medication abortion, who did not feel safe having pills mailed into their homes, or whose pregnancy complications and questions were just too complex to be solved by a virtual consult and then pills being mailed to them to take in the comfort of their house.

Rovner: Aren’t these difficulties exactly what the anti-abortion movement wanted? Didn’t they want clinics so swamped they couldn’t serve everybody who wanted to come, and abortion to be so difficult to get that women would end up carrying their pregnancies to term instead?

Luthra: Yes and no, I would argue. I think you are absolutely right that one of the primary goals of the anti-abortion movement was to make abortion unavailable, to make it harder to acquire, to have more people not get abortions and instead have children. But when I speak to folks in the anti-abortion movement, they are very troubled by how many people are traveling out of state to get care. They see those really long wait times in Kansas, in, until recently, Florida, in Illinois, in New Mexico, as a symptom of something that they need to address, which is that so many people are still finding a way to fight incredible odds to access abortion.

Rovner: Is there one thing that you hope people take away after they’re finished reading this?

Luthra: There are two things that I have spent a lot of time thinking about as I’ve reported this book. The first is just who gets abortions and under what circumstances. And so often in the national press, in national politics, we talk about these really extreme life-or-death cases. We talk about people who became septic and needed an abortion because their water broke early, or we talk about children who have been sexually assaulted and become pregnant. But we don’t talk about most people who get abortions; who are usually mothers, who are usually people of color, who are in their 20s and just know that they can’t be pregnant. I think those are really important stories to tell because they’re the true face of who is most affected by this, and it was important to me that this book include that.

The other thing that I have thought about so often in reporting this and writing this is abortion demands have an unequal impact. That is true if you are poor, if you are a person of color, if you live in a rural area, et cetera. You will in all likelihood see a greater effect. That said, the overturning of Roe v. Wade is so tremendous that it has affected people in every state. It affects you if you can get pregnant. It affects you if you want birth control. It affects you if you require reproductive health care in some form. This is just such a seismic change to our health care system that I really hope people who read this book understand that this is not a niche issue. This is something worthy of our collective attention and concern as journalists and as people.

Rovner: Shefali Luthra, thank you so much for this, and we will see you soon on the panel, right?

Luthra: Absolutely. Thank you, Julie. I’m so glad we got to do this.

Rovner: OK, we are back. It’s time for our extra-credit segment. That’s when we each recommend a story we read this week we think you should read, too. As always, don’t worry if you miss it. We will post the links on the podcast page at kffhealthnews.org and in our show notes on your phone or other mobile device.��Joanne, why don’t you go first this week?

Kenen: This was a pair of articles, a long one and a shorter, related one. There’s an amazingly wonderful piece in ProPublica by Sharon Lerner, and it’s called “.” I’m going to come back and talk about it briefly in a second, but the related story was in The Guardian by Damian Carrington: “.” Now, that was a small study, but there may be a link to the declining sperm count because of these forever chemicals.

The ProPublica story, it was a young woman scientist. She worked for 3M. They kept telling her her results was wrong, her machinery was dirty, over and over and over again until she questioned herself and her findings. She was supposed to be looking at the blood of 3M workers who were, it turned out, the company knew all this already and they were hiding it, and she compared the blood of the 3M workers to non-3M workers, and she found these plastic chemicals in everybody’s blood everywhere, and she was basically gaslit out of her job. She continued to work for 3M, but in a different capacity.

The article’s really scary about the impact for human health. It also has wonderfully interesting little nuggets throughout about how various 3M products were developed, some by accident. Something spilled on somebody’s sneaker and it didn’t stain it, and that’s how we got those sprays for our upholstery. Or somebody needed something to find the pages in their church hymnal, and that’s how we got Post-it notes. It’s a devastating but very readable, and it makes you angry.

Rovner: Yeah, I feel like there’s a lot more we’re going to have to say about forever chemicals going forward. Alice.

Ollstein: So I have a pretty depressing story from Stats. It’s called “,” by Eric Boodman. And it is about people with sickle cell, and that is overwhelmingly black women, and they felt pressured to agree to be permanently sterilized when they were going to give birth because of the higher risks. And the doctors said, because we’re already doing a C-section and we’re already doing surgery on you, to not have to do an additional surgery with additional risks, they felt pressured to just sign that they could be sterilized right then and there and came to regret it later and really wanted more children. And so, this is an instance of people feeling coerced, and when people think about pro-choice or the choice debate about reproduction they mostly think about the right to an abortion. But I think that the right to have more children, if you want to, is the other side of that coin.

Rovner: It is. Rachel.

Roubein: My extra credit, it’s called “,” by Joel Achenbach and Mark Johnson from The Washington Post. And basically, they kind of took a very science-based look at the 2024 election. They basically called it a crash course in gerontology because former President Donald Trump will be 78 years old. President Biden will be a couple weeks away from turning 82. And obviously that is getting a lot of attention on the campaign trail. They talked to medical and scientific experts who were essentially warning that news reports, political punditry about the candidates’ mental fitness, has essentially been marred by misinformation here about the aging process. One of the things they dived into was these gaffes or what the public sees as senior moments and what experts had told them is, that’s not necessarily a sign of dementia or predictive of cognitive decline. There need to be kind of further clinical evaluation for that. But there have been some calls for just how to kind of standardize and require a certain level of transparency for candidates in terms of disclosing their health information.

Rovner: Yes, which we’ve been talking about for a while, and will continue to. My extra credit this week is from our guest, Shefali Luthra, and her colleague at The 19th Chabeli Carrazana, and it’s called “.” And for all the talk about doctors and other staffers either moving out of or not moving into states with abortion bans, I think less has been written about entire enterprises that often provide far more than just abortion services having to shut down as well. We saw this in Texas in the mid-2010s, when a law that shut down many of the clinics there was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2016. But many of those clinics were unable to reopen. They just could not reassemble, basically, their leases and equipment and staff. The same could well happen in states that this November vote to reverse some of those bans. And it’s not just abortion, as we’ve discussed. When these clinics close, it often means less family planning, less STI [sexually transmitted infection] screening and other preventive services as well, so it’s definitely something to continue to watch.

Before we go this week, I want to note the passing of a health policy journalism giant with the death of Marshall Allen. Marshall, who worked tirelessly, first in Las Vegas and more recently at ProPublica, to expose some of the most unfair and infuriating parts of the U.S. health care system, was on the podcast in 2021 to talk about his book, “Never Pay the First Bill, and Other Ways to Fight the Health Care System and Win.” I will post a link to the interview in this week’s show notes. Condolences to Marshall’s friends and family.

OK, that is our show. As always, if you enjoy the podcast, you can subscribe wherever you get your podcast. We’d appreciate it if you left us a review. That helps other people find us too. Special thanks as always to our technical guru, Francis Ying, and our editor, Emmarie Huetteman. As always, you can email us your comments or questions. We’re at whatthehealth@kff.org, or you can still find me at X, . Joanne, where are you?

Kenen: We’re at Threads .

Rovner: Alice.

Ollstein: Still on X .

Rovner: Rachel.

Roubein: On X, .

Rovner: We will be back in your feed next week. Until then, be healthy.

Credits

To hear all our podcasts,��click here.

And subscribe to Ģ��ӰԺ Health News’ “What the Health?” on��,��,��, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Nearly 60 days passed before veterinarians identified the culprit: a highly pathogenic strain of the bird flu virus, H5N1. Had it been detected sooner, the outbreak might have been swiftly contained. Now it has spread to at least eight other states, and it will be hard to eliminate.

At the moment, the bird flu hasn’t adapted to spread from person to person through the air like the seasonal flu. That’s what it would take to give liftoff to another pandemic. This lucky fact could change, however, as the virus mutates within each cow it infects. Those mutations are random, but more cows provide more chances of stumbling on ones that pose a grave risk to humans.

Why did it take so long to recognize the virus on high-tech farms in the world’s richest country? Because even though H5N1 has circulated for nearly three decades, its arrival in dairy cattle was most unexpected. “People tend to think that an outbreak starts at Monday at 9 a.m. with a sign saying, ‘Outbreak has started,’” said Jeremy Farrar, chief scientist at the World Health Organization. “It’s rarely like that.”

By investigating the origins of outbreaks, researchers garner clues about how they start and spread. That information can curb the toll of an epidemic and, ideally, stop the next one. On-the-ground observations and genomic analyses point to Texas as ground zero for this outbreak in cattle. To backtrack events in Texas, Ģ��ӰԺ Health News spoke with more than a dozen people, including veterinarians, farmers, and state officials.

An early indication that something had gone awry on farms in northwestern Texas came from devices hitched to collars on dairy cows. Turley describes them as “an advanced fitness tracker.” They collect a stream of data, such as a cow’s temperature, its milk quality, and the progress of its digestion — or, rather, rumination — within its four-chambered stomach.

What farmers saw when they downloaded the data in February stopped them in their tracks. One moment a cow seemed perfectly fine, and then four hours later, rumination had halted. “Shortly after the stomach stops, you’d see a huge falloff in milk,” Turley said. “That is not normal.”

Tests for contagious diseases known to whip through herds came up negative. Some farmers wondered if the illness was related to ash from wildfires devastating land to the east.

In hindsight, Turley wished he had made more of the migrating geese that congregate in the panhandle each winter and spring. Geese and other waterfowl have carried H5N1 around the globe. They withstand enormous loads of the virus without getting sick, passing it on to local species, like blackbirds, cowbirds, and grackles, that mix with migrating flocks.

But with so many other issues facing dairy farmers, geese didn’t register. “One thing you learn in agriculture is that Mother Nature is unpredictable and can be devastating,” Turley said. “Just when you think you have figured it out, Mother Nature tells you you do not.”

Cat Clues

One dairy tried to wall itself off, careful not to share equipment with or employ the same workers as other farms, Turley recalled. Its cattle still became ill. Turley noted that the farm was downwind of another with an outbreak, “so you almost think it has to have an airborne factor.”

On March 7, Turley called the Texas Animal Health Commission. They convened a with experts in animal health, human health, and agriculture to ponder what they called the “mystery syndrome.” State veterinarians probed cow tissue for parasites, examined the animals’ blood, and tested for viruses and bacteria. But nothing explained the sickness.

They didn’t probe for H5N1. While it has jumped into mammals dozens of times, it rarely has spread between species. Most cases have been in carnivores, which likely ate infected birds. Cows are mainly vegetarian.

“If someone told me about a milk drop in cows, I wouldn’t think to test for H5N1 because, no, cattle don’t get that,” said Thomas Peacock, a virologist at the Pirbright Institute of England who studies avian influenza.

Postmortem tests of grackles, blackbirds, and other on dairy farms detected H5N1, but that didn’t turn the tide. “We didn’t think much of it since we have seen H5N1-positive birds everywhere in the country,” said Amy Swinford, director of the Texas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory.

In the meantime, rumors swirled about a rash of illness among workers at dairy farms in the panhandle. It was flu season, however, and hospitals weren’t reporting anything out of the ordinary.

Bethany Boggess Alcauter, director of research at the National Center for Farmworker Health, has worked in the panhandle and suspected farmworkers were unlikely to see a doctor even if they needed one. Clinics are far from where they live, she said, and many don’t speak English or Spanish — for instance, they may speak Indigenous languages such as Mixtec, which is common in parts of Mexico. The cost of medical care is another deterrent, along with losing pay by missing work — or losing their jobs — if they don’t show up. “Even when medical care is there,” she said, “it’s a challenge.”

What finally tipped off veterinarians? A few farm cats died suddenly and tested positive for H5N1. Swinford’s group — collaborating with veterinary labs at Iowa State and Cornell universities — searched for the virus in samples drawn from sick cows.

“On a Friday night at 9 p.m., March 22, I got a call from Iowa State,” Swinford said. Researchers had discovered antibodies against H5N1 in a slice of a mammary gland. By Monday, her team and Cornell researchers identified genetic fragments of the virus. They alerted authorities. With that, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced that H5N1 had hit dairy cattle.

Recalling rumors of sick farmworkers, Texas health officials asked farmers, veterinarians, and local health departments to encourage testing. About 20 people with coughs, aches, irritated eyes, or other flu-like symptoms stepped forward to be swabbed. Those samples were shipped to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. All but one were negative for H5N1. On April 1, the CDC announced this year’s first case: a farmworker with an inflamed eye that cleared up within days.

Thirteen dairy farms in the panhandle had been affected, said Brian Bohl, director of field operations at the Texas Animal Health Commission. Farmers report that outbreaks among the herds last 30 to 45 days and most cows return to milking at their usual pace.

The observation hints that herds gain immunity, if temporarily. Indeed, early evidence shows that H5N1 triggers a protective antibody response in cattle, said Marie Culhane, a professor of veterinary population medicine at the University of Minnesota. Nonetheless, she and others remain uneasy because no one knows how the virus spreads, or what risk it poses to people working with cattle.

Although most cows recover, farmers said the outbreaks have disrupted their careful timing around when cattle milk, breed, and birth calves.

Farmers want answers that would come with further research, but the spirit of collaboration that existed in the first months of the Texas outbreak has fractured. have triggered a backlash from farmers who find them unduly punishing, given that pasteurized milk and cooked beef from dairy cattle appear to pose no risk to consumers.

The rules, such as prohibiting infected cattle from interstate travel for 30 days, pose a problem for farmers who move pregnant cattle to farms that specialize in calving, to graze in states with gentler winters, and to return home for milking. “When the federal order came out, some producers said, ‘I’m going to quit testing,’” Bohl said.

In May, the USDA , such as up to $10,000 to test and treat infected cattle. “The financial incentives will help,” Turley said. But how much remains to be seen.

Federal authorities have pressed states to extract more intel from farms and farmworkers. Several veterinarians warn such pressure could fracture their relationships with farmers, stifling lines of communication.

Having fought epidemics around the world, Farrar cited examples of when strong-arm surveillance pushed outbreaks underground. During an early 2000s bird flu outbreak in Vietnam, regulations by moving poultry at night, bribing inspection workers, and selling their goods through back channels. “Learning what drivers and fears exist among people is crucial,” Farrar said. “But we always seem to realize that at a later date.”

A powerful driver in the U.S.: Milk is a . Public health is also bound to bump up against politics in Texas, a state so aggrieved by pandemic restrictions that lawmakers passed a bill last year barring health officials from recommending covid-19 vaccines.

Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said that when he heard that federal agents with the CDC and USDA were considering visits to farms — including those where farmers reported the cattle had recovered — he advised against it. “Send federal agents to dairy that’s not sick?” he said. “That doesn’t pass the smell test.”

From Texas to the Nation

Peacock said of H5N1 viruses point to Texas as ground zero for the cattle epidemic, emerging late last year.

“All of these little jigsaw puzzle pieces corroborate undetected circulation in Texas for some time,” said Peacock, an author on about the outbreak.

Evidence suggests that either a single cow was infected by viruses shed from birds — perhaps those geese, grackles, or blackbirds, he said. Or the virus spilled over from birds into cattle several times, with only a fraction of those moving from cow to cow.

Sometime in March, viruses appear to have hitched a ride to other states as cows were moved between farms. The limited genomic data available in Texas directly to others in New Mexico, Kansas, Ohio, North Carolina, and South Dakota. However, the routes are imprecise because the USDA hasn’t attached dates and locations to data it releases.

Researchers don’t want to be caught off guard again by the shape-shifting H5N1 virus, and that will require keeping tabs on humans. Most, if not all, of about 900 people diagnosed with H5N1 infections worldwide since 2003 acquired it from animals, rather than from humans, Farrar said. About half of those people died.

Occasional tests of sick farmworkers aren’t sufficient, he said. Ideally, a system is set up to encourage farmworkers, their communities, and health care workers to be tested whenever the virus hits farms nearby.

“Health care worker infections are always a sign of human-to-human transmission,” Farrar said. “That’s the approach you want to take — I am not saying it’s easy.”

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Without Ozempic or a similar drug, Cooper Harris suffers blackouts, becomes too tired to watch her grandchildren, and struggles to earn extra money braiding hair. Marcus Harris, who works as a Waffle House cook, needs Trulicity to keep his legs and feet from swelling and bruising.

The couple’s doctor has tried prescribing similar drugs, which mimic a hormone that suppresses appetite and controls blood sugar by boosting insulin production. But those, too, are often out of stock. Other times, their insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace burdens the couple with a lengthy approval process or an out-of-pocket cost they can’t afford.

“It’s like, I’m having to jump through hoops to live,” said Cooper Harris, 46, a resident of Covington, Georgia, east of Atlanta.

Supply shortages and insurance hurdles for this powerful class of drugs, called GLP-1 agonists, have left many people who are suffering from diabetes and obesity without the medicines they need to stay healthy.

One root of the problem is the very high prices set by drugmakers. About 54% of adults who had taken a GLP-1 drug, including those with insurance, said the cost was “difficult” to afford, according to released this month. But it is patients with the lowest disposable incomes who are being hit the hardest. These are people with few resources who struggle to see doctors and buy healthy foods.

In the United States, Novo Nordisk charges about $1,000 for a month’s supply of Ozempic, and Eli Lilly charges a similar amount for Mounjaro. Prices for a month’s supply of different GLP-1 drugs before insurance coverage, according to the Peterson-Ģ��ӰԺ Health System Tracker. Medicare spending for three popular diabetes and weight loss drugs — Ozempic, Rybelsus, and Mounjaro — reached $5.7 billion in 2022, up from $57 million in 2018, according to .

The “” price has “the potential to bankrupt Medicare, Medicaid, and our entire health care system,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who chairs the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, wrote in a letter to Novo Nordisk in April.

The high prices also mean that not everyone who needs the drugs can get them. “They’re kind of disadvantaged in multiple ways already and this is just one more way,” said Wedad Rahman, an endocrinologist with Piedmont Healthcare in Conyers, Georgia. Many of Rahman’s patients, including Cooper Harris, are underserved, have high-deductible health plans, or are on public assistance programs like Medicaid or Medicare.

Many drugmakers have programs that help patients get started and stay on medicines for little or no cost. But those programs have not been reliable for medicines like Ozempic and Trulicity because of the supply shortages. And many insurers’ requirements that patients receive prior authorization or first try less expensive drugs add to delays in care.

By the time many of Rahman’s patients see her, their diabetes has gone unmanaged for years and they’re suffering from severe complications like foot wounds or blindness. “And that’s the end of the road,” Rahman said. “I have to pick something else that’s more affordable and isn’t as good for them.”

GLP-1 agonists — the category of drugs that includes Ozempic, Trulicity, and Mounjaro — were first approved to treat diabetes. In the last three years, the Food and Drug Administration has approved rebranded versions of Mounjaro and Ozempic for weight loss, leading demand to skyrocket. And demand is only growing as more of the drugs’ benefits become apparent.

In March, the FDA approved the weight loss drug Wegovy, a version of Ozempic, to , which will likely increase demand, and spending. Up to 30 million Americans, or 9% of the U.S. population, are expected to be on a GLP-1 agonist by 2030, the financial services company .

As more patients try to get prescriptions for GLP-1 agonists, drugmakers struggle to make enough doses.

Eli Lilly is urging people to avoid using its drug Mounjaro for cosmetic weight loss to ensure enough supplies for people with medical conditions. But the drugs’ popularity continues to grow despite side effects such as nausea and constipation, driven by their effectiveness and celebrity endorsements. In March, Oprah Winfrey released an hourlong special on the medicines’ ability to help with weight loss.

It can seem like everyone in the world is taking this class of medication, said Jody Dushay, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and an endocrinologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. “But it’s kind of not as many people as you think,” she said. “There just isn’t any.”

Even when the drugs are in stock, insurers are clamping down, leaving patients and health care providers to navigate a thicket of ever-changing coverage rules. State Medicaid plans of the drugs for weight loss. Medicare if they are prescribed for obesity. And due to the drugs’ cost.

Health care providers are cobbling together care plans based on what’s available and what patients can afford. For example, Cooper Harris’ insurer covers Trulicity but not Ozempic, which she said she prefers because it has fewer side effects. When her pharmacy was out of Trulicity, she had to rely more on insulin instead of switching to Ozempic, Rahman said.

One day in March, Brandi Addison, an endocrinologist in Corpus Christi, Texas, had to adjust the prescriptions for all 18 of the patients she saw because of issues with drug availability and cost, she said. One patient, insured through a teacher retirement health plan with a high deductible, couldn’t afford to be on a GLP-1 agonist, Addison said.

“Until she reaches that deductible, that’s just not a medication she can use,” Addison said. Instead, she put her patient on insulin, whose price is capped at a fraction of the cost of Ozempic, but which doesn’t have the same benefits.

“Those patients who have a fixed income are going to be our more vulnerable patients,” Addison said.

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Sin Ozempic o un medicamento similar, Cooper Harris sufre desmayos, se cansa demasiado para cuidar a sus nietos y lucha por ganar dinero extra haciendo trenzas. Marcus Harris, que es cocinero en Waffle House, necesita Trulicity para evitar que sus piernas y pies se hinchen y se hagan moretones.

La médica de la pareja ha intentado recetarles medicamentos similares, que imitan una hormona que suprime el apetito y controla el azúcar en sangre al aumentar la producción de insulina. Pero no suele haber stock de estas drogas. Otras veces, el plan médico que tienen a través del mercado de la Ley de Cuidado de Salud a Bajo Precio (ACA) les impone un largo proceso de aprobación o un costo de bolsillo que no pueden pagar.

“Es como si tuviera que saltar obstáculos para vivir”, dijo Cooper Harris, de 46 años, residente de Covington, Georgia, al este de Atlanta.

La escasez de suministros y las barreras que ponen las aseguradoras para obtener esta poderosa clase de medicamentos, llamados agonistas de GLP-1, han dejado a muchas personas que viven con diabetes y obesidad sin los medicamentos que necesitan para mantenerse saludables.

Una de las raíces del problema es el precio muy establecido por las farmacéuticas que fabrican estos medicamentos. Alrededor del 54% de los adultos que habían tomado un medicamento GLP-1, incluidos aquellos con seguro, dijeron que el costo era “difícil” de pagar, según los resultados de publicada este mes.

Pero los más afectados son los pacientes con ingresos más bajos: personas con pocos recursos que luchan por ver a los médicos y comprar alimentos saludables.

En Estados Unidos, Novo Nordisk cobra alrededor de $1,000 por un suministro mensual de Ozempic, y Eli Lilly cobra una cantidad similar por Mounjaro. Los precios de un suministro mensual de diferentes medicamentos GLP-1 varían antes de la cobertura de la aseguradora, según el Peterson-Ģ��ӰԺ Health System Tracker.

El gasto de Medicare en tres populares medicamentos para la diabetes y la pérdida de peso —Ozempic, Rybelsus y Mounjaro— alcanzó los $5.7 mil millones en 2022, frente a los $57 millones en 2018, según .

El precio tiene “el potencial de llevar a la quiebra a Medicare, Medicaid y todo nuestro sistema de salud”, escribió el senador Bernie Sanders (independiente de Vermont), presidente del Comité de Salud, Educación, Trabajo y Pensiones del Senado de EE.UU., en una carta a Novo Nordisk en abril.

Los precios altos también significan que no todos los que necesitan los medicamentos pueden obtenerlos. “Ya están en desventaja de múltiples maneras y esta es solo una más”, dijo Wedad Rahman, endocrinóloga de Piedmont Healthcare en Conyers, en Georgia. Muchos de los pacientes de Rahman, incluidos los Cooper Harris, están desatendidos, tienen planes de salud con deducibles altos o están en programas de asistencia pública como Medicaid o Medicare.

Muchos fabricantes de medicamentos tienen programas que ayudan a los pacientes a comenzar y mantenerse en tratamientos con medicamentos por poco o ningún costo. Pero esos programas no han sido confiables para drogas como Ozempic y Trulicity debido a la escasez de suministros. Y los requisitos de muchos aseguradoras, que los pacientes reciban autorización previa o primero intenten con medicamentos menos costosos, suman demoras en la atención.

Para cuando muchos de los pacientes de Rahman la ven, su diabetes no ha sido controlada durante años y están sufriendo complicaciones graves como heridas en los pies o ceguera. “Y ese es el final del camino”, dijo Rahman. “Tengo que elegir algo más que sea más asequible y que no sea tan bueno para ellos”.

Los agonistas de GLP-1, la categoría de medicamentos que incluye Ozempic, Trulicity y Mounjaro, fueron aprobados por primera vez para tratar la diabetes. En los últimos tres años, la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA) ha aprobado versiones con nuevas etiquetas comerciales de Mounjaro y Ozempic para la pérdida de peso, lo que ha llevado a que la demanda se dispare.

Y la demanda solo está creciendo a medida que se hacen más evidentes los beneficios de los medicamentos.

En marzo, la FDA aprobó el medicamento para la pérdida de peso Wegovy, una versión de Ozempic, para , lo que probablemente aumentará la demanda y el gasto. Hasta 30 millones de estadounidenses, o el 9% de la población, se espera que estén usando un agonista de GLP-1 para 2030, según estimó la .

A medida que más pacientes intentan obtener recetas de agonistas de GLP-1, los fabricantes se esfuerzan por producir suficientes dosis.

Eli Lilly está instando a las personas a evitar usar su medicamento Mounjaro para la pérdida de peso cosmética, para asegurar suficientes suministros para personas con afecciones médicas. Pero la popularidad de los medicamentos sigue creciendo a pesar de efectos secundarios como náuseas y constipación, impulsada por su efectividad y el respaldo de celebridades. En marzo, Oprah Winfrey lanzó un especial de una hora sobre la capacidad de los medicamentos para ayudar con la pérdida de peso.

Puede parecer que todo el mundo está tomando estos medicamentos, dijo Jody Dushay, profesor asistente de medicina en la Escuela de Medicina de Harvard y endocrinólogo en el Centro Médico Beth Israel Deaconess. “Pero no son tantas personas como piensas”, dijo. “Simplemente no hay suficientes”.

Incluso cuando los medicamentos están en stock, las aseguradoras están tomando medidas, dejando a los pacientes y proveedores de atención médica navegando por una maraña de reglas que cambian constantemente.

Los planes de Medicaid estatales de los medicamentos para la pérdida de peso. Medicare los medicamentos si se recetan para la obesidad. Y las aseguradoras comerciales debido su costo.

Los proveedores de atención médica están diseñando planes de atención en base a lo que está disponible y lo que los pacientes pueden pagar.

Por ejemplo, la aseguradora de Cooper Harris cubre Trulicity pero no Ozempic, que ella prefiere porque tiene menos efectos secundarios. Cuando su farmacia se quedó sin Trulicity, tuvo que depender más de la insulina en lugar de cambiar a Ozempic, dijo Rahman.

Un día en marzo, Brandi Addison, endocrinóloga en Corpus Christi, Texas, tuvo que ajustar las recetas de los 18 pacientes que vio debido a problemas de disponibilidad y costo de los medicamentos, dijo. Una paciente, con cobertura a través de un plan de salud para maestros jubilados con deducible alto, no podía permitirse un tratamiento con un agonista de GLP-1, dijo Addison.

“Hasta que alcance ese deducible, simplemente no es un medicamento que pueda usar”, dijo Addison. En cambio, puso a su paciente bajo tratamiento con insulina, cuyo precio está limitado a una fracción del costo de Ozempic, pero que no tiene los mismos beneficios.

“Esos pacientes que tienen un ingreso fijo serán nuestros pacientes más vulnerables”, concluyó Addison.

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

She received coverage through Florida’s Medicaid program until it abruptly stopped at the end of March, she said.

“Every day the anxiety builds,” said Saa, who lost her home health aide for 11 days, starting April 1, despite being eligible. The state has since restored Saa’s home health aide service, but during the gap she leaned on her mother and her 23- and 15-year-old daughters, while struggling to regain her Medicaid benefits.

“It’s just so much to worry about,” she said. “This is a health care system that’s supposed to help.”

Medicaid’s home and community-based services are designed to help people like Saa, who have disabilities and need help with everyday activities, stay out of a nursing facility. But people are losing benefits with little or no notice, getting bad advice when they call for information, and facing major disruptions in care while they wait for the issue to get sorted out, according to attorneys and advocates who are hearing from patients.

In , , and ., the National Health Law Program, a nonprofit that advocates for low-income and underserved people, has filed civil rights complaints with two federal agencies alleging discrimination against people with disabilities. The group has not filed a lawsuit in Florida, though its attorneys say they’ve heard of many of the same problems there.

Attorneys nationwide say the special needs of disabled people were not prioritized as states began to review eligibility for Medicaid enrollees after a pandemic-era mandate for coverage expired in March 2023.

“Instead of monitoring and ensuring that people with disabilities could make their way through the process, they sort of treated them like everyone else with Medicaid,” said , a senior attorney for the National Health Law Program. Federal law puts an “obligation on states to make sure people with disabilities don’t get missed.”

At least 21 million people nationwide have been disenrolled from Medicaid since states began eligibility redeterminations in spring 2023, according to a .

The unwinding, as it’s known, is an immense undertaking, Edwards said, and some states did not take extra steps to set up a special telephone line for those with disabilities, for example, so people could renew their coverage or contact a case manager.

As states prepared for the unwinding, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that regulates Medicaid, that they must give people with disabilities the help they need to benefit from the program, including specialized communications for people who are deaf or blind.

The Florida Department of Children and Families, which verifies eligibility for the state’s Medicaid program, has a specialized team that processes applications for home health services, said , the department’s communications director.

People with disabilities disenrolled from Medicaid services were “properly noticed and either did not respond timely or no longer met financial eligibility requirements,” McManus said, noting that people “would have been contacted by us up to 13 times via phone, mail, email, and text before processing their disenrollment.”

Allison Pellegrin of Ormond Beach, Florida, who lives with her sister Rhea Whitaker, who is blind and cognitively disabled, said that never happened for her family.

“They just cut off the benefits without a call, without a letter or anything stating that the benefits would be terminating,” Pellegrin said. Her sister’s home health aide, whom she had used every day for nearly eight years, stopped service for 12 days. “If I’m getting everything else in the mail,” she said, “it seems weird that after 13 times I wouldn’t have received one of them.”

Pellegrin, 58, a sales manager who gets health insurance through her employer, took time off from work to care for Whitaker, 56, who was disabled by a severe brain injury in 2006.

Medicaid reviews have been complicated, in part, by the fact that eligibility works differently for home health services than for general coverage, based on that give states more flexibility to determine financial eligibility. Income limits for home health services are higher, for instance, and assets are counted differently.

In Texas, a parent in a household of three would be limited to earning no more than $344 a month to qualify for Medicaid. And most adults with a disability can qualify without a dependent child and be eligible for Medicaid home health services with an income of up to $2,800 a month.

The state was not taking that into consideration, said , a supervising attorney for community integration at Disability Rights Texas, a nonprofit advocacy group.

Even a brief lapse in Medicaid home health services can fracture relationships that took years to build.

“It may be very difficult for that person who lost that attendant to find another attendant,” Anstee said, because of workforce shortages for attendants and nurses and high demand.

Nearly all states have a waiting list for home health services. About were on waiting lists in 2023, most of them with intellectual and developmental disabilities, according to Ģ��ӰԺ data.

Daniel Tsai, a deputy administrator at CMS, said the agency is committed to ensuring that people with disabilities receiving home health services “can renew their Medicaid coverage with as little red tape as possible.”

CMS this year for states to monitor Medicaid home health services. For example, CMS will now track how long it takes for people who need home health care to receive the services and will require states to track how long people are on waitlists.

Staff turnover and vacancies at local Medicaid agencies have contributed to backlogs, according to focused on civil rights.

The District of Columbia’s Medicaid agency requires that case managers help people with disabilities complete renewals. However, a complaint says, case managers are the only ones who can help enrollees complete eligibility reviews and, sometimes, they don’t do their jobs.

Advocates for Medicaid enrollees have also complained to the Federal Trade Commission about developed by Deloitte, a global consulting firm that contracts with about two dozen states to design, implement, or operate automated benefits systems.

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News found that multiple audits of Colorado’s eligibility system, managed by Deloitte, uncovered errors in notices sent to enrollees. A 2023 review by the Colorado Office of the State Auditor found that 90% of sampled notices contained problems, some of which violate the state’s Medicaid rules. The audit blamed “flaws in system design” for populating notices with incorrect dates.

Deloitte declined to comment on specific state issues.

In March, Colorado officials paused disenrollment for people on Medicaid who received home health services, which includes people with disabilities, after a “system update” led to in February.

Another common problem is people being told to reapply, which immediately cuts off their benefits, instead of appealing the cancellation, which would ensure their coverage while the claim is investigated, said attorney , founder of the Florida Health Justice Project.

“What they’re being advised to do is not appropriate. The best way to protect their legal rights,” Harmatz said, “is to file an appeal.”

But some disabled people are worried about having to repay the cost of their care.

Saa, who lives in Davie, Florida, received a letter shortly before her benefits were cut that said she “may be responsible to repay any benefits” if she lost her appeal.

The state should presume such people are still eligible and preserve their coverage, Harmatz said, because income and assets for most beneficiaries are not going to increase significantly and their conditions are not likely to improve.

The Florida Department of Children and Families would not say how many people with disabilities had lost Medicaid home health services.

But in Miami-Dade, Florida’s most populous county, the , a nonprofit that helps older and disabled people apply for Medicaid, saw requests for help jump from 58 in March to 146 in April, said , the organization’s director of its Aging and Disability Resources Center.

“So many people are calling us,” she said.

States are not tracking the numbers, so “the impact is not clear,” Edwards said. “It’s a really complicated struggle.”

Saa filed an appeal March 29 after learning from her social worker that her benefits would expire at the end of the month. She went to the agency but couldn’t stand in a line that was 100 people deep. Calls to the state’s Medicaid eligibility review agency were fruitless, she said.

“When they finally connected me to a customer service representative, she was literally just reading the same explanation letter that I’ve read,” Saa said. “I did everything in my power.”

Saa canceled her home health aide. She lives on limited Social Security disability income and said she could not afford to pay for the care.

On April 10, she received a letter from the state saying her Medicaid had been reinstated, but she later learned that her plan did not cover home health care.

The following day, Saa said, advocates put her in touch with a point person at Florida’s Medicaid agency who restored her benefits. A home health aide showed up April 12. Saa said she’s thankful but feels anxious about the future.

“The toughest part of that period is knowing that that can happen at any time,” she said, “and not because of anything I did wrong.”

Have you or someone you know with disabilities unexpectedly lost Medicaid benefits since April 2023? Tell Ģ��ӰԺ Health News about it .

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News correspondents Samantha Liss and Rachana Pradhan contributed to this report.

Ģ��ӰԺ Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ģ��ӰԺ—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).