“I’d go through, let’s say, 1,200 puffs in a week,” Kumar said.

Vaping became a crutch for them. Like losing a cellphone, losing a vape pen would set off a mad scramble.

“It needs to be right next to my head when I fall asleep at night, and then in the morning, I have to thrash through the sheets and pick it up and find it,” Kumar recalled.

They got sick often, including catching covid-19 — and vaping through all of it.

Kumar, now 24, eventually quit. But many of their generation can’t shake the habit.

“Everyone knows it’s not good for you and everyone wants to stop,” said Jacob Garza, a University of Colorado student who worked to raise awareness about substance use as part of the school’s health promotion program.

“But at this point, doing it all these years … it’s just second nature now,” he said.

Marketing by e-cigarette companies, touting the allure of fruity or candy-like flavors and names, led many teens to try vaping. As more high schoolers and younger kids experimented with e-cigarettes, physicians and it could lead to widespread addiction, creating a “Generation Vape.”

Research has shown to the brains of young people.

New data on substance use among adults ages 18-24 suggests that many former teen vapers remain e-cigarette users. National vaping rates for young adults increased from to .

It’s not surprising that many of them start in high school for social reasons, for all sorts of reasons,” said Delaney Ruston, a primary care physician and documentary filmmaker. “And many of them now — we’re seeing this — have continued to college and beyond.”

Her is “Screenagers Under the Influence: Addressing Vaping, Drugs & Alcohol in the Digital Age.”

In Colorado, the share of those 18 to 24 who regularly vaped rose by about 61% from 2020 to 2022 — to nearly a quarter of that age group.

“That’s an astounding increase in just two years,” Ruston said.

Trends in that state are worth noting because, before the pandemic, in youth vaping among high school students, surpassing 36 other states surveyed.

Nationally, vaping rates among high schoolers dropped from to , according to the Annual National Youth Tobacco Survey. But for many young people who started vaping at the height of the trend, a habit was set.

At Children’s Hospital Colorado, pediatric pulmonologist displayed on her screen a clouded X-ray of the lung of a young adult damaged by vaping.

For years, doctors like her and public health experts wondered about the potentially on pre-adult bodies and brains — especially the big risk of addiction.

“I think, unfortunately, those lessons that we were worried we were going to be learning, we’re learning,” said De Keyser, an associate professor of pediatrics in the .

“We’re seeing increases in those young adults. They weren’t able to stop.”

It’s no coincidence the vaping rates soared during the pandemic, according to several public health experts.

For the past couple of years, undergraduates have talked about the challenges of isolation and using more substances, said Alyssa Wright, who manages early intervention health promotion programs at CU-Boulder.

“Just being home, being bored, being a little bit anxious, not knowing what’s happening in the world,” Wright said. “We don’t have that social connection, and it feels like people are still even trying to catch up from that experience.”

Other factors driving addiction are the high nicotine levels in vaping devices, and “stealth culture,” said Chris Lord, CU-Boulder’s associate director of the .

“The products they were using had than previous vapes had,” he said. “So getting hooked on that was … almost impossible to avoid.”

By “stealth culture,” Lord means that vaping is exciting, something forbidden and secret. “As an adolescent, our brains are kind of wired that way, a lot of us,” Lord said.

All over the U.S., state and local governments have filed suits against , alleging the company misrepresented the health risks of its products.

The lawsuits argued that Juul became a top e-cigarette company by aggressively marketing directly to kids, who then spread the word themselves by posting to social media sites like YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok.

“What vaping has done, getting high schoolers, in some cases even middle schoolers, hooked on vaping, is now playing out,” said .

Juul agreed to pay . The company did not respond to requests for comment on this article.

R.J. Reynolds, which , Vuse, sent this statement: “We steer clear of youth enticing flavors, such as bubble gum and cotton candy, providing a stark juxtaposition to illicit disposable vapor products.”

Other , like Esco Bar, Elf Bar, Breeze Smoke, and Puff Bar, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

“If we lived in an ideal world, adults would reach the age of 24 without ever having experimented with adult substances. In reality, young adults experiment,” said Greg Conley, director of legislative and external affairs with American Vapor Manufacturers. “This predates the advent of nicotine vaping.”

The FDA banned flavored vape cartridges in 2020 to crack down on marketing to minors, but the .

Joe Miklosi, a consultant to the Rocky Mountain Smoke-Free Alliance, a trade group for vape shops, contends the shops are not driving vaping rates among young adults in Colorado. “We keep demographic data in our 125 stores. Our average age [of customers] is 42,” he said.

He has spoken with thousands of consumers who say vaping helped them quit smoking cigarettes, he said. Vape shops sell products to help adult smokers quit, Miklosi said.

Colorado statistics belie that claim, according to longtime tobacco researcher . The data is “completely inconsistent with the argument that most e-cigarette use is adult smokers trying to use them to quit,” said Glantz, the former director of the at the University of California-San Francisco.

For recent college graduate G Kumar, now a rock climber, the impetus to quit vaping was more ecological than health-related. They said they were turned off by the amount of trash generated from used vape devices and the amount of money they were spending.

Kumar got help from cessation literature and quitting aids from the university’s health promotion program, including boxes of eucalyptus-flavored toothpicks, which tasted awful but provided a distraction and helped with oral cravings.

It took a while and a lot of willpower to overcome the intense psychological cravings.

“The fact that I could just gnaw on toothpicks for weeks on end was, I think, what kept me sane,” Kumar said.

This article is from a partnership that includes , , and Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News.

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

If the standards are approved this month, employers in the nation’s most populous state will have to provide relief to indoor workers in sweltering warehouses, steamy kitchens, and other dangerously hot job sites. The rules will extend to schools, where teachers, custodians, cafeteria workers, and other employees may work without air conditioning — like their students.

“Our working conditions are students’ learning conditions,” said Jeffery Freitas, president of the California Federation of Teachers, which represents more than 120,000 teachers and other educational employees. “We’re seeing an unprecedented change in the environment, and we know for a fact that when it’s too hot, kids can’t learn.”

A state worker safety board is scheduled to vote on the rules June 20, and they would likely take effect this summer. The move, which marks Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s latest effort to respond to the growing impacts of climate change and extreme heat, would put California ahead of the federal government and much of the nation in setting heat standards.

The standards would require indoor workplaces to be cooled below 87 degrees Fahrenheit when employees are present and below 82 degrees in places where workers wear protective clothing or are exposed to radiant heat, such as furnaces. Schools and other worksites that don’t have air conditioning could use fans, misters, and other methods to bring the room temperature down.

The rules allow workarounds for businesses, including the roughly 1,000 school districts in the state, if they can’t cool their workplaces sufficiently. In those cases, employers must provide workers with water, breaks, areas where they can cool down, cooling vests, or other means to keep employees from overheating.

“Heat is a deadly hazard no matter what kind of work you do,” said Laura Stock, a member of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board. “If you have an indoor space that is both populated by workers and the public, or in this case by children, you would have the same risks to their health as to workers.”

Heat waves have historically struck outside of the school year, but is making them longer, more frequent, and more intense. Last year was the and closed sporadically during spring and summer, unable to keep students cool.

Scientists say this year . School officials in Vicksburg, Mississippi, last month when air conditioners had issues. And California’s first heat wave of the season is hitting while some schools are still in session, with temperatures in the Central Valley.

Several states, including and , require schools to have working air conditioners, but they aren’t required to run them. Mississippi but doesn’t say to what temperature. Hawaii schools must have classrooms at a “temperature acceptable for student learning,” without specifying the temperature. And Oregon schools must try to cool classrooms, such as with fans, and provide teachers and other employees ways to cool down, including water and rest breaks, when the heat index indoors .

When the sun bakes the library at Bridges Academy at Melrose, a public school in East Oakland with little shade and tree cover, Christine Schooley closes the curtains and turns off the computers to cool her room. She stopped using a fan after a girl’s long hair got caught in it.

“My library is the hottest place on campus because I have 120 kids through here a day,” Schooley said. “It stays warm in here. So yeah, it makes me grouchy and irritable as well.”

A 2021 analysis by the Center for Climate Integrity suggests nearly 14,000 public schools across the U.S. that did not need air conditioning in 1970 now do, because they annually experience 32 days of temperatures more than 80 degrees — upgrades that would cost more than . Researchers found that same comparison produces a cost of to install air conditioning in 678 California schools.

It’s not clear how many California schools might need to install air conditioners or other cooling equipment to comply with the new standards because the state doesn’t track which ones already have them, said V. Kelly Turner, associate director of the Luskin Center for Innovation at the University of California-Los Angeles.

And a school district in the northern reaches of the state would not face the same challenges as a district in the desert cities of Needles or Palm Springs, said Naj Alikhan, a spokesperson for the Association of California School Administrators, which has not taken a position on the proposed rules.

An commissioned for the board provided cost estimates for a host of industries — such as warehousing, manufacturing, and construction — but lacked an estimate for school districts, which make up one of the in the state and already face a of needed upgrades. The state Department of Education hasn’t taken a position on the proposal and a spokesperson, Scott Roark, declined to comment on the potential cost to schools.

Projections of a multibillion-dollar cost to state prisons were the reason the Newsom administration refused to sign off on the indoor heat rules this year. Since then, tens of thousands of prison and jail employees — and prisoners — .

It’s also unclear whether the regulation will apply to school buses, many of which don’t have air conditioning. The Department of Industrial Relations, which oversees the worker safety board, has not responded to queries from school officials or Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News.

Libia Garcia worries about her 15-year-old son, who spends at least an hour each school day traveling on a hot, stuffy school bus from their home in the rural Central Valley community of Huron to his high school and back. “Once my kid arrives home, he is exhausted; he is dehydrated,” Garcia said in Spanish. “He has no energy to do homework or anything else.”

The is pushing state lawmakers to pass a that would require the state to develop a master plan to upgrade school heating and air conditioning systems. Newsom last year , citing the cost.

Campaigns to cool schools in other states have yielded mixed results. Legislation in and failed this year, while a bill in passed on June 7 and was headed to the governor for approval. A Ìýproposal was pending as of last week. Last month, a teachers union in New York brought a portable sauna to the state Capitol to demonstrate how hot it can get inside classrooms, only a quarter of which have air conditioning, said Melinda Person, president of New York State United Teachers.

“We have these temperature limits for animal shelters. How is it that we don’t have it for classrooms?” said Democratic New York Assembly member Chris Eachus, whose bill would require schools to take relief measures when classrooms and buildings reach 82 degrees. “We do have to protect the health and safety of the kids.”

Extreme heat is the No. 1 weather-related killer in the U.S. — deadlier than hurricanes, floods, and tornadoes. Heat stress can cause heatstroke, cardiac arrest, and kidney failure. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported occurred in 2021, which is likely an undercount because health care providers are not required to report them. It’s not clear how many of these deaths are related to work, either indoors or outdoors.

California has had heat standards on the books for outdoor workers , and rules for indoor workplaces have been in development since 2016 — delayed, in part, because of the covid pandemic.

At the federal level, the Biden administration has been slow to release a to protect indoor and outdoor workers from heat exposure. Although an official said a draft is expected this year, its outlook could hinge on the November presidential election. If former President Donald Trump wins, it is unlikely that rules targeting businesses will move forward.

The Biden White House held a and climate change in April, at which top officials encouraged districts to apply an infusion of new federal dollars to upgrade their aging infrastructure. The administration also unveiled an for school districts to tap federal funds.

“How we invest in our school buildings and our school grounds, it makes a difference for our students’ lives,” Roberto Rodriguez, an assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Education, said at the summit. “They are on the front line in terms of feeling those impacts.”

This article was produced by Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News, which publishes , an editorially independent service of the .Ìý

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

It was the first time Xcel Energy preemptively switched off electricity in Colorado as a wildfire prevention tool, according to a company official. The practice, also known as public safety power shut-offs, has and is as a way to keep downed and damaged power lines from sparking blazes and fueling the West’s more frequent and intense wildfires.

In Boulder, Frasier staff and residents heard about the planned outage from news reports. A Frasier official called the utility to confirm and was initially told the home’s power would not be affected. The utility then called back to say the home’s power would be cut, after all, said Tomas Mendez, Frasier’s vice president of operations. The home had just 75 minutes before Xcel Energy shut off the lights on April 6.

Staff rushed to prepare the 20-acre campus home to nearly 500 residents. Generators kept running the oxygen machines, most refrigerators and freezers, hallway lights, and Wi-Fi for phones and computers. But the heating system and some lights stayed off as the overnight temperature dipped into the 30s.

Power was restored to Frasier after 28 hours. During the shut-off, staff tended to nursing home and assisted living residents, many with dementia, Mendez said.

“These are the folks that depend on us for everything: meals, care, and medications,” he said.

Not knowing when power would be restored, even 24 hours into the crisis, was stressful and expensive, including the next-day cost of refilling fuel for two generators, Mendez said.

“We’re lucky we didn’t have any injuries or anything major, but it is likely these could happen when there are power outages — expected or unexpected. And that puts everyone at risk,” Mendez said.

As preemptive power cuts become more widespread, nursing homes are being forced to evaluate their preparedness. But it shouldn’t be up to the facilities alone, according to industry officials and academics: Better communication between utilities and nursing homes, and including the facilities in regional disaster preparedness plans, is critical to keep residents safe.

“We need to prioritize these folks so that when the power does go out, they get to the front of the line to restore their power accordingly,” said David Dosa, chief of geriatrics and professor of medicine at UMass Chan Medical School in Worcester, Massachusetts, of nursing home residents.

Restoring power to hospitals and nursing homes was a priority throughout the windstorm, wrote Xcel Energy spokesperson Tyler Bryant in an email. But, he acknowledged, public safety power shut-offs can improve, and the utility will work with community partners and the Colorado Public Utilities Commission to help health facilities prepare for extended power outages in the future.

When the forecast called for wind gusts of up to 100 mph on April 6, Xcel Energy implemented a public safety power shut-off. Nearly 275,000 customers were without power from the windstorm.

Officials had adapted after the Marshall Fire killed two people and destroyed or damaged more than 1,000 homes in Boulder and the neighboring communities of Louisville and Superior two and a half years ago. Two fires converged to form that blaze, and electricity from an Xcel Energy power line that detached from its pole in hurricane-force winds “” of one of them.

“A preemptive shutdown is scary because you don’t really have an end in mind. They don’t tell you the duration,” said Jenny Albertson, director of quality and regulatory affairs for the Colorado Health Care Association and Center for Assisted Living.

More than half of nursing homes in the West are within 3.1 miles of an area with elevated wildfire risk, according to a . Yet, nursing homes with the greatest risk of fire danger in the Mountain West and Pacific Northwest had poorer compliance with federal emergency preparedness standards than their lower-risk counterparts.

Under federal guidelines, nursing homes must have disaster response plans that include or building evacuation. Those plans don’t necessarily include contingencies for public safety power shut-offs, in the past five years but are still relatively new. And nursing homes in the West are rushing to catch up.

In California, a more stringent law to bring emergency power in nursing homes up to code is expected by the California Association of Health Facilities to . But the state has not allocated any funding for these facilities to comply, said Corey Egel, the association’s director of public affairs. The association is asking state officials to delay implementation of the law for five years, to Jan. 1, 2029.

Most nursing homes operate on a razor’s edge in terms of federal reimbursement, Dosa said, and it’s incredibly expensive to retrofit an old building to keep up with new regulations.

Frasier’s three buildings for its 300 residents in independent living apartments each have their own generators, in addition to two generators for assisted living and skilled nursing, but none is hooked up to emergency air conditioning or heat because those systems require too much energy.

Keeping residents warm during a minus-10-degree night or cool during two 90-degree days in Boulder “are the kinds of things we need to think about as we consider a future with preemptive power outages,” Mendez said.

Federal audits of emergency preparedness at nursing homes in and found facilities lacking. In Colorado, eight of 20 nursing homes had deficiencies related to emergency supplies and power, according to the report. These included three nursing homes without plans for alternate energy sources like generators and four nursing homes without documentation showing generators had been properly tested, maintained, and inspected.

For Debra Saliba, director of UCLA’s Anna and Harry Borun Center for Gerontological Research, making sure nursing homes are part of emergency response plans could help them respond effectively to any kind of power outage. Her after a magnitude 6.7 earthquake that shook the Los Angeles area in 1994 motivated LA County to integrate nursing homes into community disaster plans and drills.

Too often, nursing homes are forgotten during emergencies because they are not seen by government agencies or utilities as health care facilities, like hospitals or dialysis centers, Saliba added.

Albertson said she is working with hospitals and community emergency response coalitions in Colorado on disaster preparedness plans that include nursing homes. But understanding Xcel Energy’s prioritization plan for power restoration would also help her prepare, she said.

Bryant said Xcel Energy’s prioritization plan for health facilities specifies not whether their electricity will be turned off during a public safety power shut-off — but how quickly it will be restored.

Julie Soltis, Frasier’s director of communications, said the home had plenty of blankets, flashlights, and batteries during the outage. But Frasier plans to invest in headlamps for caregivers, and during a town hall meeting, independent living residents were encouraged to purchase their own backup power for mobile phones and other electronics, she said.

Soltis hopes her facility is spared during the next public safety power shut-off or at least given more time to respond.

“With weather and climate change, this is definitely not the last time this will happen,” she said.

This article was produced by Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.Ìý

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

In fall 2021, the 69-year-old climbed a ladder to the top of a shed in her pasture. The roof that protects her horses and cows needed to be fixed. So, drill in hand, she pushed down.

That’s when she slipped.

Broncho said her leg snapped between a pair of ladder rungs as she fell, “and my bone was sticking out, and the only thing was holding it was my sock.”

Broncho arm-crawled back to her house to reach her phone. She hadn’t thought to take it with her because, she said, “I never really dealt with phones.”

Broncho needed nine surgeries and rehabilitation that took months. Her hospital was more than two hours away in Salt Lake City and her home internet connection was vital for her to keep track of records and appointments, as well as communicate with her medical staff.

During the covid-19 pandemic, federal lawmakers launched the Affordable Connectivity Program with the goal of connecting more people to their jobs, schools, and doctors. More than 23 million low-income households, including Broncho’s, eventually signed on. The program provided $30 monthly subsidies for internet bills, or $75 discounts in tribal or high-cost areas like Broncho’s.

Now, the ACP is out of money.

In early May, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) challenged an effort to continue funding the program, saying during a commerce committee hearing that the program needed to be revamped.

“As is currently designed, ACP does a poor job of directing support to those who truly need it,” Thune said, adding that too many people who already had internet access used the subsidies.

There has been a flurry of activity on Capitol Hill, with lawmakers first attempting and failing to attach funding to the must-pass Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization. Afterward, Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) traveled to his home state to tell constituents in tiny White River Junction that Congress was still working toward a solution.

As the program funding dwindled, both Democrats and Republicans pushed for new legislative action with proposals trying to address concerns like the ones Thune raised.

On May 31, as the program ended, President Joe Biden’s administration continued to call on Congress to take action. Meanwhile, the administration announced that more than a dozen companies — including AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast — would offer low-cost plans to ACP enrollees, and the administration said those plans could affect as many as 10 million households.

According to of participants released by the Federal Communications Commission, more than two-thirds of households had inconsistent or no internet connection before enrolling in the program.

Broncho had an internet connection before the subsidy, but on this reservation in rural southeastern Idaho, where she lives, about 40% of the 200 households enrolled in the program had no internet before the subsidy.

Nationwide, about 67% of nonurban residents reported having a broadband connection at home, compared with nearly 80% of urban residents, said John Horrigan, a national expert on technology adoption and senior fellow at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. Horrigan reviewed the data collected by a .

The FCC said on May 31 that ending the program will affect about 3.4 million rural and more than 300,000 households in tribal areas.

The end of federal subsidies for internet bills will mean “a lot of families who will have to make the tough choice not to have internet anymore,” said Amber Hastings, an AmeriCorps member serving the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes on the reservation. Some of the families Hastings enrolled had to agree to a plan to pay off past-due bills before joining the program. “So they were already in a tough spot,” Hastings said.

Matthew Rantanen, director of technology for the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association, said the ACP was “extremely valuable.”

“Society has converted everything online. You cannot be in this society, as a societal member, and operate without a connection to broadband,” Rantanen said. Not being connected, he said, keeps Indigenous communities and someone like “Myrna at a disadvantage.”

Rantanen, who advises tribes nationwide about building broadband infrastructure on their land, said benefits from the ACP’s subsidies were twofold: They helped individuals get connected and encouraged providers to build infrastructure.

“You can guarantee a return on investment,” he said, explaining that the subsidies ensured customers could pay for internet service.

Since Broncho signed up for the program last year, her internet bill had been fully paid by the discount.

Broncho used the money she had previously budgeted for her internet bill to pay down credit card debt and a loan she took out to pay for the headstones of her mother and brother.

As the ACP’s funds ran low, the program distributed only partial subsidies. So, in May, Broncho received a bill for $46.70. In June, she expected to pay the full cost.

When asked if she would keep her internet connection without the subsidy, Broncho said, “I’m going to try.” Then she added, “I’m going to have to” even if it means taking a lesser service.

Broncho said she uses the internet for shopping, watching shows, banking, and health care.

The internet, Broncho said, is “a necessity.”

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

June means it’s time for the Supreme Court to render rulings on the biggest and most controversial cases of the term. This year, the court has two significant abortion-related cases: one involving the abortion pill mifepristone and the other regarding the conflict between a federal emergency care law and Idaho’s near-total abortion ban.

Also awaiting resolution is a case that could dramatically change how the federal government makes health care (and all other types of) policies by potentially limiting agencies’ authority in interpreting the details of laws through regulations. Rules stemming from the Affordable Care Act and other legislation could be affected.

In this special episode of “What the Health?”, Laurie Sobel, an associate director for women’s health policy at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº, joins host Julie Rovner for a refresher on the cases, and a preview of how the justices might rule on them.Ìý

The cases highlighted in this episode:

• and , about how much discretion federal agencies should have in interpreting laws passed by Congress.
• , about whether the FDA exceeded its authority in relaxing restrictions on the abortion pill mifepristone.
• and , about whether the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requirement for hospitals participating in Medicare to provide needed medical care overrides Idaho’s near-total abortion ban in emergency cases.

• Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News' 'What the Health?': Abortion — Again — At the Supreme Court Apr 24, 2024
• Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News' 'What the Health?': The Supreme Court and the Abortion Pill Mar 28, 2024
• Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News' 'What the Health?': Health Enters the Presidential Race Jan 25, 2024
• Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News' 'What the Health?': The Supreme Court vs. the Bureaucracy Jan 18, 2024

Where to find Supreme Court opinions as they are announced:

• The Supreme Court’s
• ÌýThe (not an official government website but run by lawyers and journalists)

[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.]Ìý

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 ato 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 Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News. We’re taping this week on Wednesday, May 29, at 1 p.m. As always, news happens fast and things might’ve changed by the time you hear this. So here we go.

Because it’s a holiday week and health news is a little bit slow, we’re going to do something a little different. It’s about to be June, and that means the Supreme Court is going to issue opinions in some of the biggest cases argued this past term, including two abortion-related cases and one that could literally disrupt the way the entire federal government operates. I’m not sure I remember all the details of these cases, even though we have talked about them all on the podcast. So I’ve asked someone here to remind us what they’re about and give us a preview of how the court might rule in some of them. Laurie Sobel is associate director for women’s health policy here at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº, and one of our top in-house legal experts. Laurie, welcome to “What the Health?” Thanks for joining us.

Laurie Sobel: Hi, Julie. It’s great to be here.

Rovner: So I thought we’d take the cases in the order they were argued before the court, although I know that’s not necessarily the order that we will see the opinions issued in. First up: In January, the justices heard arguments in two cases about, of all things, herring fishing. and . But these cases are about a lot more than herring and could affect a lot more than the Department of Commerce, right?

Sobel: Absolutely. These cases are about what’s called the Chevron doctrine [deference], which requires courts to defer to an agency’s interpretation of a law when the law is silent or ambiguous and the agency’s interpretation is reasonable.

Rovner: And what would an example of that be?

Sobel: Oh, there’s many, many examples. Essentially, Congress doesn’t fill in the details of many laws, and they rely on agencies to fill in those details, assuming that the agency has the expertise to figure out what those details might be. And also, many times the details change as new scientific evidence becomes available or there’s changed circumstances, or there’s a pandemic or something in which the agency needs to respond to.

Rovner: This is basically the entire federal regulatory process we’re talking about here, right?

Sobel: That’s correct.

Rovner: And in health care, there’s a lot of places that regulation affects.

Sobel: Absolutely. So Congress relies on the agencies to implement laws, the ACA [Affordable Care Act], Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP [Children’s Health Insurance Program]. So there’s a lot in health care. In addition, Title X is regulated by the Office of Population Affairs, and those also have regulations. So overturning Chevron would make it very difficult for Congress to continue to rely on agencies to fill in these gaps and to react to real-time situations.

Rovner: And there’s private entities that get regulated, are freaked out by the possibility that they won’t be able to rely on the agencies either.

Sobel: Absolutely. So everything from payment rates to providers and hospitals to negotiating prescription drug prices for the Medicare program. The ACA, I think, has probably more regulations than most laws. And relationship — we’ll talk about the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] in the next case, but the FDA also sets out regulations as does CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], and we really rely on those agencies to have the scientific expertise to react to the situation. So if Congress has to either fill in all the gaps, which is by most people’s assessment impossible, it might really stall how things get implemented and/or create a whole lot of new litigation.

Rovner: And I would say it would give courts a whole lot more authority than they have now, right?

Sobel: Certainly. So right now, the rule is that the agency’s interpretation stands as long as the law is ambiguous or silent and the agency’s interpretation is reasonable. This would give that power back to the courts to then guess what Congress meant or to interpret what Congress meant.

Rovner: Somebody I was talking to about this case suggested that, I hadn’t really thought about before, that if Chevron were to get struck down, that those who had sued over regulations and lost might be able to go back and reopen those cases. I mean, it could just be a flood of litigation.

Sobel: Absolutely. And that came up during oral argument about what would that mean for all the settled cases. And both sides offered different interpretations with the solicitor general arguing that it would really open up this can of worms to tons of litigation, and the plaintiffs essentially saying, “No, no, no, we could let those all stand and just going forward, the Chevron deference would be undone.” And there were some hints that maybe some compromises like that between the justices as they were talking.

Rovner: Exactly. You’re anticipating my next question, which is did we get any hints from the oral arguments about where they might be going with this case? It’s hard to imagine them just completely overturning Chevron.

Sobel: It is hard to imagine, but there are some justices that have been known to wanting to overturn Chevron for quite some time. So in that category I would put Justices [Clarence] Thomas and [Samuel] Alito, as well as [Neil] Gorsuch, as justices that have really been critical of the Chevron deference. Justice [Brett] Kavanaugh highlighted that the rules change when administrations change, and so he tried to counter the argument that there’s a reliance on Chevron for stability. He said, “Wait, wait, wait a minute. Every time there’s a new president, the rules change. So what kind of stability is that?”

Chief Justice [John] Roberts and [Justice Amy Coney] Barrett were really harder to read, and that might be where the decision relies on, where they come out and whether or not they’re able to forge a compromise with the three liberal justices who indicated support for keeping Chevron; both because of precedent, as well as they pointed out examples where they said, “We’re not subject matter experts here. We don’t want to be making these decisions.” Justice [Elena] Kagan was talking about AI and how that would change, and “we really don’t want to be in the position of Justice Kagan figuring out how that should be regulated.”

Rovner: Well, that seems to be an excellent segue to the next case, which is an abortion case concerning the availability of the abortion pill mifepristone. The case, which was argued in March, is called . Let’s start, because it’s about to become important, with what is the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine? And what did their members have against the abortion pill?

Sobel: Well, the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine is a newly formed anti-abortion advocacy coalition. It was formed specifically for this litigation. And they contend that they have members, which are doctors and organizations and associations, in Texas and around the country, who have treated and will continue to treat people who have experienced a complication from medication abortion. So to be clear, none of their members prescribe mifepristone. They don’t believe in abortion. They don’t want to have anything to do with abortion. But their contention is that they are injured based upon having to divert their time and resources away from their regular patients when they have to treat somebody who has had a side effect from mifepristone. Similarly, the association and organizations contend that they’ve had to divert their time to educate people about the dangers of medication abortion.

Rovner: So those are the plaintiffs. And, as you mentioned, some of them are in Texas and they sued in Texas very specifically to get a certain judge, right?

Sobel: Yes, to get Judge [Matthew] Kacsmaryk, who is known for being friendly to these types of cases.

Rovner: So Judge Kacsmaryk, who as you say, is known to be friendly to these types of cases, originally ruled that mifepristone’s entire approval should be rescinded. It was approved in the year 2000, so it’s been on the market for quite a long time. But that’s actually not what’s on the table at the moment before the justices. Explain how we got there.

Sobel: So that decision was then appealed to the 5th Circuit, and the 5th Circuit said, “We’re not going to roll back the original approval of mifepristone to the year 2000, but instead we’ll roll back the requirements to 2011 and say that those are the rules that should be enforced, and that the FDA exceeded their authority in changing the rules since 2011.”

Rovner: And some of those changed rules basically made it easier to get, and you could use it a little bit later into pregnancy because it was found to be safe, right?

Sobel: Exactly. So what those new rules have done is said that you can use it up to 10 weeks instead of seven weeks, that you don’t have to be in person to receive it. So the newest rules have opened up the possibility of using it for telehealth abortion, and also for pharmacists prescribing it. And so if the Supreme Court were to affirm the 5th Circuit’s decision, that would eliminate these new protocols the FDA has established in removing the in-person dispensing requirement, permitting telehealth abortions, and establishing the process for pharmacies to become certified to dispense mifepristone. In addition, it would roll back the gestational ages you just said, from 10 weeks to seven weeks, which is significant because, according to the CDC data, more than 4 in 10 medication abortions occur at seven weeks or later.

Rovner: I was going to say, and yeah, this could be super disruptive. I mean medication abortion is now more than half of all abortions in this country.

Sobel: Oh, it’s two-thirds.

Rovner: So without banning it, making it harder to get could have a big impact.

Sobel: Oh, absolutely. Medication abortion now accounts for nearly two-thirds of all abortions, and telehealth abortions have become very common, from the latest data that we have from WeCount, 1 in 5 abortions was provided via telehealth in December of 2023. So that’s one in all abortions, not one in medication abortions. So that’s quite a big number.

Rovner: Now, this case, even though it could be very disruptive to abortion, is about a whole lot more than abortion. Drugmakers in general seem pretty concerned by the idea of judges making scientific decisions that overrule the FDA. This hearkens back to the last case we talked about, right?

Sobel: Oh, absolutely. So this is the first case to ask the Supreme Court to overrule an FDA decision that a drug is safe and effective. So the outcome of this case could really have very far-reaching implications for the FDA’s authority to continue to regulate not only mifepristone, but a wide range of other drugs. And most likely the other drugs that are perceived to be controversial — gender-affirming care or PrEP — those are the drugs that are most likely to be litigated if this door is opened.

Rovner: And I know that there’s nothing that makes drugmakers … I mean, patent issues and drugmakers and court issues are hard enough, the idea that they could be granted approval by the FDA and then somebody could just come in and sue and make that go away.

Sobel: Oh, absolutely. This got the attention of the entire industry. There were many, many amicus briefs that were filed.

Rovner: So normally you can’t really tell from the oral arguments, as we said, how the justices are leaning. But in this case, the justices seemed fairly transparent about where we think they’re going to go. What are we expecting here?

Sobel: Yes. I mean, as I said before, it’s always dangerous to read the tea leaves too much, but this did seem more transparent than most, and that most justices seemed not convinced that the plaintiffs in this case have legal standing, which requires that you have an injury and that injury can be addressed by what the court decides. So even assuming that the plaintiffs have an injury, the question is what would happen if we roll back the rules that the FDA has back to 2011? Does that make it more or less likely that these plaintiffs would see people with side effects of mifepristone? It’s not really clear. In addition, many of the justices, including Justice Barrett, really pushed back on the lawyer representing the Alliance for where in the doctors’ affidavits it said they were actually participating in something they objected to. Notably, not really about necessarily this case, but about what might come up in the future, both Justice Thomas and Alito did bring up the Comstock Act and signaled that they would uphold the enforcement of the Comstock Act, pretty much inviting a future case or a future administration to enforce the Comstock Act.

Rovner: As much as we’ve talked about it, remind us again what the Comstock Act is.

Sobel: Sure. So it’s a law from 1873, which was an anti-obscenity law, and as part of it, it banned the mailing of any drug or device or instrument that could be used for abortion.

Rovner: Well, I guess during the entirety of Roe [v. Wade], it was irrelevant, right? Because abortion was legal,

Sobel: Right. And it’s been dormant. I mean, we can’t find any enforcement in any modern era.

Rovner: Yes, so it goes back a long ways, but it’s top of mind for a lot of people.

All right, moving on to our last case. On April 24, the court heard and , both of which challenged the federal government’s interpretation of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, EMTALA, to override Idaho’s near-complete abortion ban, at least in medical emergencies. Let’s start by explaining what EMTALA is and how it relates to abortion?

Sobel: Sure. So EMTALA requires hospitals that participate in Medicare, which is pretty much every acute hospital, to provide stabilizing treatment within the hospital’s capability when there’s an emergency medical condition, which includes when the absence of immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected to place the health of the individual in serious jeopardy or serious impairments of bodily functions. So it was really intended as an anti-dumping law initially so that people who were uninsured weren’t just transferred or sent away to another hospital because they didn’t have the capacity to pay.

Idaho’s abortion ban only has an exception for life. It doesn’t have an exception to preserve the health of the pregnant person. And so the Biden administration sued Idaho and said this law then, essentially, puts these hospitals that have this requirement, because they accept Medicare payments, to stabilize patients. And when that care includes abortion care, they’re required to provide that under federal law. So the question is, does the EMTALA preempt the Idaho abortion ban?

It’s clear from the oral argument that Idaho’s position is that there is no conflict because they read into the EMTALA law that “within the hospital’s capability” includes the laws of Idaho and that Idaho gets to set the standard of care, and that that’s up to states, not up to the federal government. Whereas the federal government, the Biden administration’s position, is that, no, EMTALA specifically was an antidumping law, and that includes stabilizing all patients regardless of the care. And we don’t have to say including abortion in order for it to include abortion, it includes all care that’s required to stabilize patients.

Rovner: Of course, a lot of anti-abortion activists will say that the only time abortion is medically necessary is when it threatens life and that would be covered. But we’re seeing that that’s not necessarily the case, right? I mean, we’re seeing individual instances of this these days.

Sobel: Yeah. I mean, we know from Idaho that many patients have been helicoptered out of the state into nearby states that also have some abortion restrictions but just aren’t as restrictive as Idaho is, because they’re going to become septic or they’re going to lose kidney function, or they’re going to lose their reproductive organs. So they’re not in danger of losing their life immediately, but they’re in danger of losing serious bodily functions.

The other question that came up during oral argument was about just how imminent the life needs to be. And this comes down to how this is putting doctors in a pretty uncomfortable place. So yes, the doctors are permitted to provide abortion care in Idaho when they can certify in good faith that without the abortion care, the person’s life is endangered. But they’re concerned that, after the fact, attorneys for the state could come back and say, “Oh, wait a minute, that wasn’t your really good-faith decision and we’re going to prosecute you and we’re going to bring in our own expert.” And the question is really, how much should doctors have on the line? It’s a criminal statute, so there’s jail time involved. Of course, there’s a loss of license. And so how far out should doctors be required to go? And this is, again, it’s making people really uncomfortable, and there are anecdotes of people leaving the state because of this and not feeling comfortable practicing there.

Rovner: More than anecdotes of people leaving the state, there are people who come forward and said they’re leaving the state. And as a result, some hospitals are having to shut down their OB services. I mean, because when the doctors, OB-GYNs who are leaving, so in the ironic position of people who are having babies not being able to find someone who can deliver their baby at the same time.

Sobel: Right, right.

Rovner: That’s obviously one ramification within Idaho, but there could be ramifications outside just on the idea: Isn’t federal law supposed to trump state law? Isn’t that sort of a basic foundation of how we work?

Sobel: Yes. The supremacy clause is pretty basic when you go to law school. So yes. And I think how they word this decision will be very interesting to see because it’s a question of, is there a conflict or is there not? And the attorneys for Idaho were basically suggesting that there’s no conflict. So you don’t even need to say that there’s a preemption. You just have to find that there’s no conflict between Idaho law and EMTALA.

However they rule, if they rule for Idaho and say that you’re allowed to continue having this abortion ban that only has a life exception with no health exception, immediately, there’s four additional states with abortion bans that do not make exceptions for health as well. And those states are Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. So in those states, like Idaho, a hospital cannot legally provide an abortion as stabilizing treatment when a person presents with a health endangerment and not a life endangerment. And so again, those risks can include sepsis, kidney failure, loss of fertility, they’re serious risks, even though they may not be life-threatening at the moment.

And even in the states that do have exceptions for health, we have seen that those exceptions are often very narrow and vague and hard to be implemented in real time. So pregnant people can still be denied emergency abortion care that’s needed to preserve their health, even in states that have a health exception. And if EMTALA doesn’t act as a backstop to say, “But wait, hospital, you’re violating this federal law,” then people are stuck with the state law that is narrow and vague.

Rovner: So I mean, overturning Roe, the justices says, “Oh, great, we won’t have to deal with abortion anymore. It’s all about the states.” But as we can see, it’s not all about the states. The Supreme Court is going to have to continue to deal with this issue.

Sobel: Right. Definitely.

Rovner: All right, well, finally, just a couple of housekeeping issues. We don’t actually know when these decisions will come, right? People who don’t follow the court on a regular basis often think that opinions are scheduled the same way oral arguments are, but it’s always a surprise.

Sobel: Unfortunately, they are not. Right now, the court lists their decision days on their website, which is on their calendar. Right now Thursdays seem to be the popular day, they have Thursdays through June listed. They most likely will add more decision days. On decision days, they start posting decisions at 10 a.m. Eastern Time, and you can follow along either on the or many people go to , which also has a live blog that interprets some of what’s happening for people who are new to the court.

Rovner: And I will put both of those links in the show notes. Laurie Sobel, this has been so helpful. Thank you so much for joining us.

Sobel: Thank you for having me, Julie.

Rovner: OK, that is our show. As always, if you enjoy the podcast, you can subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. 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 fill-in editor this week, Rebecca Adams. As always, you can email us your comments or questions. We’re at whatthehealth@kff.org, or you can still find me at X . We will be back in your feed next week with the news. Until then, be healthy.

Credits

To hear all our podcasts,Ìýclick here.

And subscribe to Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News’ “What the Health?” onÌý,Ìý,Ìý, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Billings-based RiverStone Health is eliminating 42 jobs this spring, cutting nearly 10% of its workforce. The cuts have shuttered an inpatient hospice facility, will close a center for patients managing high blood pressure, and removed a nurse who worked within rural schools. It also reduced the size of the clinic’s behavioral health care team and the number of staffers focused on serving people without housing.

RiverStone Health CEO Jon Forte said clinic staffers had anticipated a shortfall as the cost of business climbed in recent years. But a $3.2 million loss in revenue, which he largely attributed to Montana officials disenrolling a high number of patients from Medicaid, pushed RiverStone’s deficit much further into the red than anticipated.

“That has just put us in a hole that we could not overcome,” Forte said.

RiverStone is one of federally funded clinics in the U.S. that adjust their fees based on what individuals can pay. They’re designed to reach people who face disproportionate barriers to care. Some are in rural communities, where offering primary care can come at a financial loss. Others concentrate on vulnerable populations falling through cracks in urban hubs. Altogether, these clinics serve more than 30 million people.

The health centers’ lifeblood is revenue received from Medicaid, the state-federal subsidized health coverage for people with low incomes or disabilities. Because they serve a higher proportion of low-income people, the federally funded centers tend to have a larger share of patients on the program and rely on those reimbursements.

But Medicaid enrollment is undergoing a seismic shift as states reevaluate who is eligible for it, a process known as the Medicaid “unwinding.” It follows a two-year freeze on disenrollments that protected people’s access to care during the covid public health emergency.

As of May 23, people had lost coverage, including about 134,000 in Montana — 12% of the state’s population. Some no longer met income eligibility requirements, but the vast majority were booted because of paperwork problems, such as people missing the deadline, state documents going to outdated addresses, or system errors.

That means health centers increasingly offer care without pay. Some have seen patient volumes drop, which also means less money. When providers like RiverStone cut services, vulnerable patients have fewer care options.

Jon Ebelt, communications director of the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, said the agency isn’t responsible for individual organizations’ business decisions. He said the state is focused on maintaining safety-net systems while protecting Medicaid from being misused.

Nationwide, health centers face a similar problem: a perfect financial storm created by a sharp rise in the cost of care, a tight workforce, and now fewer insured patients. In recent months, clinics in California and Colorado have also announced cuts.

“It’s happening in all corners of the country,” said Amanda Pears Kelly, CEO of Advocates for Community Health, a national advocacy group representing federally qualified health centers.

Nearly a quarter of community health center patients who rely on Medicaid were cut from the program, from George Washington University and the National Association of Community Health Centers. On average, each center lost about $600,000.

One in 10 centers either reduced staff or services, or limited appointments.

“Health centers across the board try to make sure that the patients know they’re still there,” said Joe Dunn, senior vice president for public policy and advocacy at the National Association of Community Health Centers.

Most centers operate on shoestring budgets, and some started reporting losses as the workforce tightened and the cost of business spiked.

Meanwhile, federal assistance — money designed to cover the cost of people who can’t afford care —remained largely flat. Congress increased those funds in March to roughly $7 billion over 15 months, though health center advocates said that still doesn’t cover the tab.

Until recently, RiverStone in Montana had been financially stable. Before the pandemic, the organization was making money, according to financial audits.

In summer 2019, a $10 million expansion was starting to pay off. RiverStone was serving more patients through its clinic and pharmacy, a revenue increase that more than offset increases in operating costs, according to documents.

But in 2021, at the height of the pandemic, those growing expenses — staff pay, building upkeep, the price of medicine, and medical gear — outpaced the cash coming in. By last summer, the company had an operational loss of about $1.7 million. With the Medicaid redetermination underway, RiverStone’s pool of covered patients shrank, eroding its financial buffer.

Forte said the health center plans to ask state officials to increase its Medicaid reimbursement rates, saying existing rates don’t cover the continuum of care. That’s a tricky request after the state slightly last year following much debate around which services needed more money.

Some health center cuts represent a return to pre-pandemic staffing, after temporary federal pandemic funding dried up. But others are rolling back long-standing programs as budgets went from stretched to operating in the red.

California’s Petaluma Health Center in March laid off 32 people hired during the pandemic, reported, or about 5% of its workforce. It’s one of the largest primary care providers in Sonoma County, based on where people live and poverty is more prevalent in largely Hispanic neighborhoods.

Clinica Family Health, which has clinics throughout Colorado’s Front Range, laid off 46 people, or about 8% of its staff, in October. It has consolidated its dental program from three clinics to two, closed a walk-in clinic meant to help people avoid the emergency room, and ended a home-visit program for patients recently discharged from the hospital.

Clinica said 37% of its patients on Medicaid before the unwinding began lost their coverage and are now on Clinica’s discount program. This means the clinic now receives between $5 and $25 for medical visits that used to bring in $220-$230.

“If it’s a game of musical chairs, we’re the ones with the last chair. And if we have to pull it away, then people hit the ground,” said CEO Simon Smith.

Stephanie Brooks, policy director of the Colorado Community Health Network, which represents Colorado health centers, said some centers are considering consolidating or closing clinics.

Colorado and Montana have among the nation’s . Officials in both states have defended their Medicaid redetermination process, saying most people dropped from coverage likely no longer qualify, and they point to low unemployment rates as a factor.

In many states, health providers and patients alike have provided examples in which people cut from coverage still qualified and had to spend months entangled in system issues to regain access.

Forte, with RiverStone, said reducing services on the heels of a pandemic adds insult to injury, both for health care workers who stayed in hard jobs and for patients who lost trust that they’ll be able to access care.

“This is so counterproductive and counterintuitive to what we’re trying to do to meet the health care needs of our community,” Forte said.

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News correspondent Rae Ellen Bichell in Longmont, Colorado, contributed to this report.

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

But the FDA’s restrictions on donated tissue, a catchall term encompassing everything from a person’s eyes to their skin and ligaments, remain in place. Advocates, lawmakers, and groups focused on removing barriers to cornea donations, in particular, said they are frustrated the FDA hasn’t heeded their calls. They want to align the guidelines for tissue donated by gay and bisexual men with those that apply to the rest of the human body.

Such groups have been asking the FDA for years to reduce the deferral period from five years to 90 days, meaning a man who has had sex with another man would be able to donate tissue as long as such sex didn’t occur within three months of his death.

One of the loudest voices on lightening the restrictions is Sheryl J. Moore, who has been an advocate since her 16-year-old son’s death in 2013. Alexander “AJ” Betts Jr.’s internal organs were successfully donated to seven people, but his eyes were rejected because of a single question asked by the donor network: “Is AJ gay?”

Moore and a Colorado doctor named Michael Puente Jr. started a “Legalize Gay Eyes” and together got the attention of national eye groups and lawmakers.

Puente, a pediatric ophthalmologist with the University of Colorado School of Medicine and Children’s Hospital Colorado, said the current patchwork of donor guidelines is nonsensical considering advancements in the ability to test potential donors for HIV.

“A gay man can donate their entire heart for transplant, but they cannot donate just the heart valve,” said Puente, who is gay. “It’s essentially a categorical ban.”

The justification for these policies, as a means of preventing HIV transmission, has been undercut by the knowledge gained through scientific progress. Now, they are unnecessary and discriminatory in that they focus on specific groups of people rather than on specific behaviors known to heighten HIV risk, according to those who advocate for changing them.

Since 2022, the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research has put changes to the tissue guidance on but has yet to act on them.

“It is simply unacceptable,” Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) said in a statement. He was one of dozens of Congress members who that said the current deferral policies perpetuate stigma against gay men and should be based on individualized risk assessments instead.

“FDA policy should be derived from the best available science, not historic bias and prejudice,” the letter read.

The FDA said in a statement to Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News that, “while the absolute risk transmission of HIV due to ophthalmic surgical procedures appears to be remote, there are still relative risks.”

The agency routinely reviews donor screening and testing “to determine what changes, if any, are appropriate based on technological and evolving scientific knowledge,” the statement said. The FDA provided to Neguse in 2022.

In 2015, the FDA dubbed the “blood ban,” which barred gay and bisexual men from donating blood, before in 2023 with a policy that treats all prospective donors the same. Anyone who, in the past three months, has had anal sex and a new sexual partner or more than one sexual partner is not allowed to donate. An FDA study found that, while men who have sex with men make up most of the nation’s new HIV diagnoses, a questionnaire was enough to low-risk versus high-risk donors.

The U.S. Public Health Service adjusted the guidelines for organ donation . Nothing prevents sexually active gay men from donating their organs, though if they’ve had sex with another man in the past 30 days — down from — the patient set to receive the organ can decide whether or not to accept it.

But Puente said gay men like him cannot donate their corneas unless they were celibate for five years prior to their death.

He found that, in one year alone, at least 360 people because they were men who had had sex with another man in the past five years, or in the past year in the case of Canadian donors.

Corneas are the clear domes that protect the eyes from the outside world. They have the look and consistency of a transparent jellyfish, and transplanting one can restore a person’s sight. They contain no blood, nor any other bodily fluid . Scientists there are no known cases of a patient contracting HIV from a cornea transplant, even when those corneas came from donors of organs that did infect recipients.

Currently, all donors, whether of blood, organs, or tissue, are tested for HIV and two types of hepatitis. Such tests aren’t perfect: There is still what scientists call a “window period” following infection during which the donor’s body has not yet produced a detectable amount of virus.

But such windows are now quite narrow. Researchers with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , which are commonly used to screen donors, are unlikely to miss someone having HIV unless they acquired it in the two weeks preceding donation. Another study even if someone had sex with an HIV-positive person a couple of weeks to a month before donating, the odds are less than 1 in a million that a nucleic acid test would miss that infection.

“Very low, but not zero,” said Sridhar Basavaraju, who was one of the researchers on that study and directs the CDC’s Office of Blood, Organ, and Other Tissue Safety. He said the risk of undetected hepatitis B is slightly higher “but still low.”

At least one senior FDA official has indirectly agreed. Peter Marks, who directs the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, that said “three months amply covers” the window period in which someone might have the virus but at levels too low for tests to pick up. Scott Haber, director of public health advocacy at the American Academy of Ophthalmology, said his is that the tissue donation guideline “should be at least roughly in alignment” with that for blood donations.

Kevin Corcoran, who leads the Eye Bank Association of America, said the five-year abstinence required of corneal donors who are gay or bisexual isn’t just “badly out of date” but also impractical, requiring grieving relatives to recall five years of their loved one’s sexual history.

That’s the situation Moore found herself in on a July day in 2013.

Her son loved anime, show tunes, and drinking pop out of the side of his mouth. He was bad at telling jokes but good at helping people: Betts once replaced his little sister’s lost birthday money with his own savings, she said, and enthusiastically chose to be an organ donor when he got his driver’s license. Moore remembered telling her son to ignore the harassment by antigay bigots at school.

“The kids in show choir had told him he’s going to hell for being gay, and he might as well just kill himself to save himself the time,” she recalled.

That summer, he did. At the hospital, as medical staff searched for signs of brain activity in the boy before he died, Moore found herself answering a list of questions from Iowa Donor Network, including, she recalled: “Is AJ gay?”

“I remember very vividly saying to them, ‘Well, what do you mean by, “Was he gay?” I mean, he’s never had penetrative sex,’” she said. “But they said, ‘We just need to know if he was gay.’ And I said, ‘Yes, he identified as gay.’”

The Iowa Donor Network said in a statement that the organization can’t comment on Moore’s case, but said, “We sincerely hope for a shift in FDA policy to align with the more inclusive approach seen in blood donation guidelines, enabling us to honor the decision of all individuals who want to save lives through organ and tissue donation.”

Moore said her son’s organs helped save or prolong the lives of seven other people, including a boy who received his heart and a middle-aged woman who received his liver. Moore sometimes exchanges messages with her on Facebook.

She found out a year later that her son’s corneas were rejected as donor tissue because of that conversation with Iowa Donor Network about her son’s sexuality.

“I felt like they wasted my son’s body parts,” Moore said. “I very much felt like AJ was continuing to be bullied beyond the grave.”

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

A chorus of stories recount the ways the unwinding has upended people’s lives, but Native Americans are proving particularly vulnerable to losing coverage and face greater obstacles to reenrolling in Medicaid or finding other coverage.

“From my perspective, it did not work how it should,” said Kristin Melli, a pediatric nurse practitioner in rural Kalispell, Montana, who also provides telehealth services to tribal members on the Fort Peck Reservation.

The redetermination process has compounded long-existing problems people on the reservation face when seeking care, she said. She saw several patients who were still eligible for benefits disenrolled. And a rise in uninsured tribal members undercuts their health systems, threatening the already tenuous access to care in Native communities.

One teenager, Melli recalled, lost coverage while seeking lifesaving care. Routine lab work raised flags, and in follow-ups Melli discovered the girl had a condition that could have killed her if untreated. Melli did not disclose details, to protect the patient’s privacy.

Melli said she spent weeks working with tribal nurses to coordinate lab monitoring and consultations with specialists for her patient. It wasn’t until the teen went to a specialist that Melli received a call saying she had been dropped from Medicaid coverage.

The girl’s parents told Melli they had reapplied to Medicaid a month earlier but hadn’t heard back. Melli’s patient eventually got the medication she needed with help from a pharmacist. The unwinding presented an unnecessary and burdensome obstacle to care.

Pat Flowers, Montana Democratic Senate minority leader, said during a political event in early April that 13,000 tribal members had been disenrolled in the state.

Native American and Alaska Native adults are enrolled in Medicaid than their white counterparts, yet some tribal leaders still didn’t know exactly how many of their members had been disenrolled as of a survey conducted in . The Tribal Self-Governance Advisory Committee of the Indian Health Service conducted and published the survey. Respondents included tribal leaders from Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, and New Mexico, among other states.

Tribal leaders reported many challenges related to the redetermination, including a lack of timely information provided to tribal members, patients unaware of the process or their disenrollment, long processing times, lack of staffing at the tribal level, lack of communication from their states, concerns with obtaining accurate tribal data, and in cases in which states have shared data, difficulties interpreting it.

Research and policy experts initially feared that vulnerable populations, including rural Indigenous communities and families of color, would experience greater and unique obstacles to renewing their health coverage and would be disproportionately harmed.

“They have a lot at stake and a lot to lose in this process,” said Joan Alker, executive director of the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families and a research professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy. “I fear that that prediction is coming true.”

Cammie DuPuis-Pablo, tribal health communications director for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Montana, said the tribes don’t have an exact number of their members disenrolled since the redetermination began, but know some who lost coverage as far back as July still haven’t been reenrolled.

The tribes hosted their first outreach event in late April as part of their effort to help members through the process. The health care resource division is meeting people at home, making calls, and planning more events.

The tribes receive a list of members’ Medicaid status each month, DuPuis-Pablo said, but a list of those no longer insured by Medicaid would be more helpful.

Because of those data deficits, it’s unclear how many tribal members have been disenrolled.

“We are at the mercy of state Medicaid agencies on what they’re willing to share,” said Yvonne Myers, consultant on the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid for Citizen Potawatomi Nation Health Services in Oklahoma.

In Alaska, tribal health leaders struck a data-sharing agreement with the state in July but didn’t begin receiving information about their members’ coverage for about a month — at which point more than 9,500 Alaskans had already been disenrolled for procedural reasons.

“We already lost those people,” said Gennifer Moreau-Johnson, senior policy adviser in the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs at the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, a nonprofit organization. “That’s a real impact.”

Because federal regulations don’t require states to track or report race and ethnicity data for people they disenroll, fewer than 10 states collect such information. While the data from these states does not show a higher rate of loss of coverage by race, a that the data is limited and that a more accurate picture would require more demographic reporting from more states.

Tribal health leaders are concerned that a high number of disenrollments among their members is financially undercutting their health systems and ability to provide care.

“Just because they’ve fallen off Medicaid doesn’t mean we stop serving them,” said Jim Roberts, senior executive liaison in the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs of the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. “It means we’re more reliant on other sources of funding to provide that care that are already underresourced.”

Three in 10 Native American and Alaska Native people younger than 65 rely on Medicaid, compared with 15% of their white counterparts. The Indian Health Service is responsible for providing care to approximately 2.6 million of the 9.7 million Native Americans and Alaska Natives in the U.S., but services vary across regions, clinics, and health centers. The agency itself has been chronically underfunded and unable to meet the needs of the population. For fiscal year 2024, Congress approved $6.96 billion for IHS, far less than tribal leaders called for.

Because of that historical deficit, tribal health systems lean on Medicaid reimbursement and other third-party payers, like Medicare, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and private insurance, to help fill the gap. Medicaid accounted for two-thirds of third-party IHS revenues as of 2021.

Some tribal health systems receive more federal funding through Medicaid than from IHS, Roberts said.

Tribal health leaders fear diminishing Medicaid dollars will exacerbate the long-standing health disparities — such as , higher rates of chronic disease, and inferior access to care — that plague Native Americans.

The unwinding has become “all-consuming,” said Monique Martin, vice president of intergovernmental affairs for the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium.

“The state’s really having that focus be right into the minutiae of administrative tasks, like: How do we send text messages to 7,000 people?” Martin said. “We would much rather be talking about: How do we address social determinants of health?”

Melli said she has stopped hearing of tribal members on the Fort Peck Reservation losing their Medicaid coverage, but she wonders if that means disenrolled people didn’t seek help.

“Those are the ones that we really worry about,” she said, “all of these silent cases. … We only know about the ones we actually see.”

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

Residential treatment facilities are usually nondescript homes tucked into neighborhoods. The state’s lowest-intensity homes can provide people with alcohol and drug addiction leaving inpatient care a bridge to independent living. They’re the final option of four tiers of clinical housing and aim to offer residents stability amid daily stressors.

But these particular houses have been disappearing — down to 10 sites today from 14 in 2022. That was the year the state started paying providers a blanket rate for their services through Medicaid, the state-federal program for people with low incomes and disabilities. At the same time, the state increased the homes’ staffing requirements.

State health department officials lauded the 2022 change as an expansion in access to care, saying it increased the houses’ pay and matched the cost to operate. But providers warned at the time that it could backfire because the rates weren’t high enough to cover the new staffing rules.

Terri Russell, who runs John “Scott” Hannon House, a treatment home in Helena, said it has been hard to break even since, and she’s watched other sites close under financial pressure.

“It’s the hardest thing in the world to watch a person leave treatment and go back down to the homeless shelter, or go on the street,” Russell said.

The new voucher program could help fill in some of the gap, Russell said. Approved by the state in April, it pays low-intensity treatment residences to house uninsured people as they sign up for Medicaid or other health coverage. The idea is to reduce barriers to care for vulnerable patients at a key point in their recovery. But the money is capped at $35 a day, with a $1,000 limit per resident a year.

“It’s like it was somebody’s idea for a band-aid,” said Demetrius Fassas, who runs Butte Spirit Homes, which has two eight-bed facilities.

He said the payments fall well below the cost of providing care. And, because of the vouchers’ cap, the aid could run out weeks before someone knows whether they qualify for Medicaid coverage.

Low-intensity programs vary in how long patients stay; it could be a few months or more than a year. Fassas said when things go as intended, clients find stable jobs. That success can lead to residents earning too much money to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford the full cost of care.

Providers have said funding issues are widespread for substance use disorder programs but that shortfalls especially hit these low-intensity homes. The tension in Montana mirrors challenges elsewhere around how to fund transitional treatment so that patients don’t fall off a cliff in their recovery because care is unavailable.

As of 2022, at least 33 states were using money from Medicaid to help run residential treatment programs, . Federal rules prohibit Medicaid dollars from going to room and board at transitional homes, though states can chip in their own money. In North Dakota, for example, lawmakers set aside state funds for a voucher program that addresses treatment barriers, which include the cost of room and board.

Montana once was among the states that let providers seek help covering room and board costs for its poorer residents. The money came from federal grants the state manages for addiction treatment and prevention.

But those room and board grants stopped when Montana’s health department shifted to higher, bundled Medicaid rates in 2022. According to , reducing the block grants to the low-intensity homes allowed officials to put that money toward other “prevention priorities.”

The new rules the state added at the same time brought the residential facilities up to American Society of Addiction Medicine standards. That included having on-site clinical services, a clinical director for each home, and an employee working anytime a resident was in the home, including night shifts.

Fassas, of Butte Spirit Homes, called the rules bittersweet. They increased the quality of care. But, Fassas said, he had to hire six additional workers to comply with the rules and the company now runs at a loss if he doesn’t find additional grants.

Jon Ebelt, a spokesperson with the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, said the new rates, $143 a day per Medicaid resident, were developed by a state-paid contractor as part of Montana’s effort to match the cost of care.

Ebelt said administrative costs were factored into the state’s Medicaid rate, and that traditional room and board expenses typically fall into that category.

Low-intensity homes’ rates haven’t increased since they went into place in 2022.

Malcolm Horn, chief behavioral health officer for the Rimrock Foundation, said the facilities need more help in covering expenses like the mortgage, repairs to the home, or feeding residents.

The Rimrock Foundation, which is based in Billings, is one of Montana’s largest mental health providers. Horn said after the new rules were implemented, Rimrock converted one of its two low-intensity homes for women with children into high-intensity housing, which pays more. The switch displaced families in the low-intensity program.

“We couldn’t actually sustain having both those houses,” Horn said.

Montana officials for the voucher program and estimated that money would help cover initial housing for 329 people in 2024.

Terri Todd, who runs the nonprofit Gratitude in Action in Billings for people in recovery, advocated for the program during the 2023 legislative session. She said the goal had been to follow North Dakota’s model to help cover addiction care for people facing barriers. But Montana lawmakers scaled that back, which Todd attributed to concerns about cost.

Todd said that while what survived the legislature is less than what she had hoped for, the voucher program is still a start in addressing barriers to care.

State Rep. Mike Yakawich, the Republican who proposed the program, said it was initially so broad, he learned, it overlapped with some existing efforts. But he said state staffers told him the low-intensity group homes’ room and board costs were an area that could use more funding.

Yakawich said securing any money felt like a win in a funding tug-of-war. More help to stabilize the state’s mental health system is coming.

Money for the vouchers is coming out of Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte’s HEART Fund initiative, which is due to invest about $25 million a year toward behavioral health programs. Separately, state that they’re creating grants to increase Montana’s bed capacity across residential facilities, including for substance use treatment providers. That money could go toward reopening closed facilities.

But Yakawich said even that infusion of money won’t provide enough to go around.

“Everybody wants a chunk of the pie, and not everyone’s going to get it,” he said.

The voucher program is scheduled to expire in three years, Yakawich said. By then, he said, maybe he can persuade lawmakers to renew the program — with more money.

Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôº Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at Ä¢¹½Ó°Ôºâ€”an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — Milagros Aquino was trying to find a new place to live and had been struggling to get used to new foods after she moved to Bridgeport from Peru with her husband and young son in 2023.

When Aquino, now 31, got pregnant in May 2023, “instantly everything got so much worse than before,” she said. “I was so sad and lying in bed all day. I was really lost and just surviving.”

Aquino has lots of company.

Perinatal depression affects as many as 20% of women in the United States during pregnancy, the postpartum period, or both, . In some states, anxiety or depression afflicts nearly a quarter of new mothers or pregnant women.

Many women in the U.S. go untreated because there is no widely deployed system to screen for mental illness in mothers, despite widespread recommendations to do so. Experts say the lack of screening has driven higher rates of mental illness, suicide, and drug overdoses that are now the leading causes of death in the first year after a woman gives birth.

“This is a systemic issue, a medical issue, and a human rights issue,” said Lindsay R. Standeven, a perinatal psychiatrist and the clinical and education director of the Johns Hopkins Reproductive Mental Health Center.

Standeven said the root causes of the problem include racial and socioeconomic disparities in maternal care and a lack of support systems for new mothers. She also pointed a finger at a shortage of mental health professionals, insufficient maternal mental health training for providers, and insufficient reimbursement for mental health services. Finally, Standeven said, the problem is exacerbated by the absence of national maternity leave policies, and the access to weapons.

Those factors helped drive a in postpartum depression from 2010 to 2021, according to the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology.

For Aquino, it wasn’t until the last weeks of her pregnancy, when she signed up for acupuncture to relieve her stress, that a social worker helped her get care through the Emme Coalition, which connects girls and women with financial help, mental health counseling services, and other resources.

Mothers diagnosed with perinatal depression or anxiety during or after pregnancy are at about three times the risk of suicidal behavior and six times the risk of suicide compared with mothers without a mood disorder, according to recent U.S. and international studies in and .

The toll of the maternal mental health crisis is particularly acute in rural communities that have become maternity care deserts, as small hospitals close their labor and delivery units because of plummeting birth rates, or because of financial or staffing issues.

This week, the Maternal Mental Health Task Force — co-led by the Office on Women’s Health and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and formed in September to respond to the problem — that could serve as hubs of integrated care and birthing facilities by building upon the services and personnel already in communities.

The task force will soon determine what portions of the plan will require congressional action and funding to implement and what will be “low-hanging fruit,” said Joy Burkhard, a member of the task force and the executive director of the nonprofit Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health.

Burkhard said equitable access to care is essential. The task force recommended that federal officials identify areas where maternity centers should be placed based on data identifying the underserved. “Rural America,” she said, “is first and foremost.”

There are shortages of care in “unlikely areas,” including Los Angeles County, where some maternity wards have recently closed, said Burkhard. Urban areas that are underserved would also be eligible to get the new centers.

“All that mothers are asking for is maternity care that makes sense. Right now, none of that exists,” she said.

Several pilot programs are designed to help struggling mothers by training and equipping midwives and doulas, people who provide guidance and support to the mothers of newborns.

In Montana, rates of maternal depression before, during, and after pregnancy are higher than the national average. From 2017 to 2020, approximately 15% of mothers experienced postpartum depression and 27% experienced perinatal depression, according to the The state had the sixth-highest maternal mortality rate in the country in 2019, when it received a federal grant to begin training doulas.

To date, the program has trained 108 doulas, many of whom are Native American. Native Americans make up 6.6% of Montana’s population. Indigenous people, particularly those in rural areas, have of severe maternal morbidity and mortality compared with white women, according to a study in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Stephanie Fitch, grant manager at Montana Obstetrics & Maternal Support at Billings Clinic, said training doulas “has the potential to counter systemic barriers that disproportionately impact our tribal communities and improve overall community health.”

and Washington, D.C., have Medicaid coverage for doula care, according to the National Health Law Program. They are California, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Virginia. Medicaid pays for about in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Jacqueline Carrizo, a doula assigned to Aquino through the Emme Coalition, played an important role in Aquino’s recovery. Aquino said she couldn’t have imagined going through such a “dark time alone.” With Carrizo’s support, “I could make it,” she said.

Genetic and environmental factors, or a past mental health disorder, can increase the risk of depression or anxiety during pregnancy. But mood disorders can happen to anyone.

Teresa Martinez, 30, of Price, Utah, had struggled with anxiety and infertility for years before she conceived her first child. The joy and relief of giving birth to her son in 2012 were short-lived.

Without warning, “a dark cloud came over me,” she said.

Martinez was afraid to tell her husband. “As a woman, you feel so much pressure and you don’t want that stigma of not being a good mom,” she said.

In recent years, programs around the country have started to help doctors recognize mothers’ mood disorders and learn how to help them before any harm is done.

One of the most successful is the Massachusetts Child Psychiatry Access Program for Moms, which began a decade ago and has since spread to 29 states. The program, supported by federal and state funding, provides tools and training for physicians and other providers to screen and identify disorders, triage patients, and offer treatment options.

But the expansion of maternal mental health programs is taking place amid sparse resources in much of rural America. Many programs across the country have run out of money.

The federal task force proposed that Congress fund and create consultation programs similar to the one in Massachusetts, but not to replace the ones already in place, said Burkhard.

In April, Missouri became the latest state to adopt the Massachusetts model. Women on Medicaid in Missouri are 10 times as likely to die within one year of pregnancy as those with private insurance. From 2018 through 2020, an average of 70 Missouri women died each year while pregnant or within one year of giving birth, according to state .

Wendy Ell, executive director of the Maternal Health Access Project in Missouri, called her service a “lifesaving resource” that is free and easy to access for any health care provider in the state who sees patients in the perinatal period.

About 50 health care providers have signed up for Ell’s program since it began. Within 30 minutes of a request, the providers can consult over the phone with one of three perinatal psychiatrists. But while the doctors can get help from the psychiatrists, mental health resources for patients are not as readily available.

The task force called for federal funding to train more mental health providers and place them in high-need areas like Missouri. The task force also recommended training and certifying a more diverse workforce of community mental health workers, patient navigators, doulas, and peer support specialists in areas where they are most needed.

A new in reproductive psychiatry is designed to help psychiatry residents, fellows, and mental health practitioners who may have little or no training or education about the management of psychiatric illness in the perinatal period. A small that the curriculum significantly improved psychiatrists’ ability to treat perinatal women with mental illness, said Standeven, who contributed to the training program and is one of the study’s authors.

Nancy Byatt, a perinatal psychiatrist at the University of Massachusetts Chan School of Medicine who led the launch of the Massachusetts Child Psychiatry Access Program for Moms in 2014, said there is still a lot of work to do.

“I think that the most important thing is that we have made a lot of progress and, in that sense, I am kind of hopeful,” Byatt said.

Cheryl Platzman Weinstock’s reporting is supported by a grant from the National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation.