(WASHINGTON) — New research shows the far-reaching effects of the abortion bans that have proliferated the United States since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Three new studies have provided some of the first nationwide data on the effects of those bans in the states where they are currently active — revealing more births but also a rise in infant deaths.
The impact of those bans have even spread to states where abortion is still legal, the studies showed.
In the first study, Johns Hopkins researchers found that birth rates rose 1.7% in states with abortion bans. It showed that the bans primarily affect racial minorities, younger individuals and those with lower income or education, especially in the South.
“Those experiencing the greatest structural disadvantages and in the states amongst the worst in maternal and child health outcomes experience the greatest impact of these abortion bans on the number of live births,” Suzanne Bell, PhD, MPH, the paper’s lead author and an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told ABC News.
“Many of these occurred in states with among the weakest social services and worst outcomes, potentially deepening existing disparities and placing additional burdens on already strained resources,” she said.
At the same time, infant deaths rose in states with abortion bans, according to another Johns Hopkins study. Analyzing birth and death records from 2012 to 2023, Bell’s team noted 478 more infant deaths than expected in 14 states with the bans. The highest increases were seen in Black infants (about an 11% higher death rate), infants in Southern states and infants born with severe medical conditions.
“When you look at Texas’ contribution to the overall findings, we see that Texas is responsible for 73% of the additional births and 80% of the excess infant deaths,” Bell said.
But states without bans have also felt the effects.
Abortion also rose in Colorado, a state that maintained access to abortion with no gestational limits, according to a research letter recently published in JAMA Network Open.
Colorado State University researchers found that abortions for out-of-state residents in Colorado rose from 13% in 2020 to 30% in 2023. Abortions among Colorado residents also peaked six months after Texas’ abortion ban, with an 11% increase in first-trimester abortions and an 83% increase in second-trimester abortions compared to before the ban.
The surge in demand led to delays, possibly raising costs, emotional toll and procedure complexity, the authors said. However, second-trimester abortions have since stabilized, possibly due to expanded telehealth, self-managed abortions and access in other states, they added.
Currently, abortion is illegal in 12 states, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, and 29 states have some sort of abortion limitation based on gestational age. Nine states have no restriction on abortion.
“The literature we have demonstrates that not being able to obtain an abortion has negative physical, mental and economic implications for birthing persons, their children and their families — and undermines achieving health equity,” Bell said. “These bans are deepening or worsening some of these existing population health disparities that exist.”
Jessica Yang, DO, is a family medicine resident at Main Line Health Bryn Mawr Hospital and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.
(WASHINGTON) — During his confirmation hearings two weeks ago to lead the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), Robert F. Kennedy Jr. repeated several unfounded claims about autism.
Kennedy, an environmental lawyer who has made money through books, speeches and lawsuits while sharing vaccine skepticism, refused to say that vaccines don’t cause autism despite many high-quality studies finding no such link.
He stated during the hearing that autism rates have “have gone from 1 in 10,000 … and today in our children, it’s one in 34.” His claims have been repeated by President Donald Trump on Truth Social.
It’s unclear where Kennedy got his 1 in 10,000 statistic. In 2000, approximately 1 in 150 children in the U.S. born in 1992 were diagnosed with autism compared with 2020, during which one in 36 children born in 2012 were diagnosed, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Some psychiatrists and autism experts told ABC News it’s important to highlight the rising rates of autism, and that at least Kennedy is putting a spotlight on it.
“On the bright side, I think it is really important to place an emphasis on these very high rates, it’s kind of great putting a spotlight on autism, these increased rates,” Dr. Karen Pierce, a professor in the department of neurosciences at the University of California, San Diego and co-director of the UCSD Autism Center of Excellence, told ABC News. “We need more funding. We need more infrastructure to support everybody who is now recognized as on the spectrum. So, I think that that’s actually a really good thing.”
However, the experts said Kennedy and others are missing important context about why autism rates are increasing. They say reasons may include a combination of widening of the definition of the spectrum and of types of symptoms associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) as well as people having children at older ages, better awareness and access to diagnostic testing.
“With the rates increasing, there certainly are valid reasons for that,” Pierce said. “There’s better awareness, and doctors can find autism a lot easier than they could before in the past…. and I think a very big reason is just better record keeping nowadays and easier access to reviewing records.”
What is autism?
ASD is a developmental disability caused by differences in the brain, according to the CDC.
People with ASD often communicate, interact, behave and learn differently, the CDC says. ASD symptoms typically begin before age 3 and can last a lifetime, although symptoms may change over time.
“There can be differences in how one is reading social cues and interpreting them, and then there’s also certain behaviors that we see,” Dr. Anna Krasno, clinical director of the Koegel Autism Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, told ABC News.
“So those include a preference for sameness, a difficulty with transitioning, some cognitive and behavioral rigidity,” she continued. “We also see intense interests, so topics that people are super, super into and want to research, repetitive speech and motor movements. And then we also see really significant sensory differences as well.”
ASD is a spectrum, which means symptoms vary by person — some need little support in their daily lives and some may need a great deal of support in performing day-to-day activities. Some may have advanced conversation skills and others may be nonverbal.
Wider recognition, better understanding
Experts told ABC News there is a wider recognition and a better understanding of what is now understood as autism/ASD.
Traits of what is now known as ASD are built on early observations in the 1940s from Austrian-American psychiatrist Dr. Leo Kanner and Austrian physician Dr. Hans Asperger.
A 1943 paper from Kanner described 11 children who presented with “inborn autistic disturbances of affective contact” while Asperger’s 1944 report focused on boys who had marked social difficulties; unusual, circumscribed interests; and good verbal skills.
It was not until 1978 that autism was recognized as a developmental disorder distinct from schizophrenia by the World Health Organization. It was also in the 1970s that psychologists and psychiatrists first came to describe autism as a spectrum.
“When autism was first described, it was new to people understanding that there was a condition that included social communication difficulties and restricted and repetitive behavior, and people primarily only recognized it when it was at its most extreme,” Dr. Jeremy Veenstra-VanderWeele, division director in child and adolescent psychiatry at Columbia University, told ABC News.
“And so, if you go back and read the initial descriptions today, those are kids who we would recognize in the waiting room, recognize in the grocery store, in whom autism would be very obvious and would not require much assessment in order to diagnose,” he continued.
Better diagnostic tools
Experts say another reason for the increase in rates is having better diagnostic tools than what was available decades ago.
There is no single tool used as the basis of an ASD diagnosis. Typically, tools rely on descriptions from parents or caregivers of a child’s development and a professional’s observation of a child’s behavior, according to the CDC.
Currently, the Autism Society encourages all children to be screened for signs of autism by their family pediatrician three times by the age of three — at nine, 18, and 24 or 30 months. If a child shows symptoms of ASD, more rigorous diagnostic testing can be carried out by a specialist including a full neuropsychological exam.
Additionally, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) provides standard criteria for helping diagnose autism.
Under DSM-5, a child meets the criteria if they have deficits in three areas of social communication and interaction and at least two of four types of restricted, repetitive behaviors.
While the first edition of DSM came out in 1952, it was not until the third edition, DSM-3, in which autism was listed under an entirely new “class” of conditions — the Pervasive Developmental Disorders.
Veenstra-VanderWeele said the change in the criteria is another reason why the number of those diagnosed with autism rose. He likened it to changing the definition of what it means to be tall.
“To just use a crude example, if you would define somebody as tall if they were over six-foot-six, and then 30 years later, say that somebody is tall if they’re over five-foot-10, you’d get very, very different numbers, and that’s part of what’s happened here,” he said.
Pierce added that because of limited knowledge and awareness in the past, there may have been many children who were underdiagnosed and misdiagnosed.
“It’s understandable that people wouldn’t even necessarily think that somebody has autism, because nobody knew what really autism was,” she said. “So, you know, large numbers of people were just put in the books as just having special education needs, maybe as a language delay or of having a cognitive impairment.”
Older reproductive age
Some studies have suggested that people who become pregnant at an older age have an increased risk of giving birth to a child with autism.
A 2012 review and meta-analysis of 16 papers from researchers in New York, London, Israel and Sweden found an association between advanced maternal age and the risk of autism.
Advanced paternal age may also be a risk factor. A 2006 study conducted jointly by researchers in New York, London and Israel found that men who were above age 40 were 5.75 times more likely to have a child with ASD compared to men younger than age 30 after controlling for other factors.
However, questions still swirl about whether or not there is a risk from the age of parents, and not all researchers are convinced.
“I know that there is some research looking at maternal and paternal age with regard to autism, and there’s research around environmental causes,” Krasno said. “I think where I always firmly land is that it is inherited, and it is genetic. So, I don’t know the exact correlation between age and diagnostic rate, but we do know that genetics are highly associated with diagnosis.”
Environmental risk factors
Researchers are also divided over whether or not environmental risk factors play a role in causing autism.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences says the “clearest evidence” involves events before and during birth, including prenatal exposure to air pollution or pesticides; maternal obesity or diabetes; extreme prematurity; and periods of oxygen deprivation to the brain during birth.
“But these factors alone are unlikely to cause autism. Rather, they appear to increase a child’s likelihood for developing autism when combined with genetic factors,” NIEHS states on its website.
Pierce said from the studies she’s read, evidence suggests autism is a genetic condition. She added the environmental factors may play a role but “to a small degree.”
Myth that vaccines cause autism
The myth that vaccines cause autism was born out of a fraudulent 1998 study, hypothesizing that the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine caused intestinal inflammation, which, in turn, led to the development of autism.
The paper has since been discredited by health experts, retracted from the journal in which it was published, and its primary author, Andrew Wakefield, lost his medical license after an investigation found he had acted “dishonestly and irresponsibly” in conducting his research.
More than a dozen high-quality studies have since found no evidence of a link between childhood vaccines and autism.
However, Kennedy has held fast to this claim, saying during a 2023 interview on Fox News that he believes autism comes from vaccines.
During the HHS confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he was not “anti-vaccine” but “pro-safety.” At the same time, Kennedy repeatedly refused throughout the hearings to say that vaccines were not linked to autism, while still insisting he supports vaccination in general.
Experts told ABC News there is no evidence to suggest a link between vaccines and autism, and perpetuating the myth can be dangerous.
“Once there’s a lie and it’s spread, it doesn’t matter that it’s a lie. Once people hear it, then they believe that it’s true despite all of the Herculean efforts to disprove it and debunk it,” Pierce said. “There’s no evidence for it whatsoever, and there’s actually extremely, as far as scientific evidence is concerned, there’s extremely strong evidence to suggest absolutely not.”
Christopher Banks, president and CEO of the Autism Society of America, said the false claim that vaccines cause autism can divert financial resources from much-needed research.
“Instead of advancing support and therapies, time and funding are wasted disproving a debunked theory,” he said. “This misinformation also fuels stigma, implying that autism is something to be feared rather than understood and supported, leading to discrimination against autistic individuals.”
ABC News’ Dr. Jade Cobern, Cheyenne Haslett and Will McDuffie contributed to this report.
Photo by Roberto Pfeil/picture alliance via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — Semaglutide, a medication widely used for diabetes and weight loss, may offer another unexpected benefit — it could help people drink less alcohol.
A study published in JAMA Psychiatry enrolled 48 adults between ages 21 and 65 who had been diagnosed with alcohol use disorder but were not actively seeking treatment.
Half received semaglutide, a type of GLP-1 receptor agonist, while the other half received no treatment. Over the nine-week trial, participants taking semaglutide started at a dose of 0.25 mg per week, which gradually increased to 1.0 mg in the final week — a much lower dose than what’s typically prescribed for weight loss.
”We found the largest effects for outcomes related to drinking quantity or heavy drinking…[semaglutide] appeared to reduce drinking quantity,” said Christian Hendershot, PhD, the study’s lead author and director of clinical research at the USC Institute for Addiction Science, in an interview with ABC News.
In a controlled lab setting, participants taking semaglutide drank less alcohol. However, outside the lab, their overall drinking days and daily alcohol intake did not change significantly. They did, however, report fewer binge-drinking episodes and reduced alcohol cravings.
Hendershot emphasized that the participants were not actively trying to cut back on drinking or become abstinent, making the drug’s impact particularly interesting.
”The reason why semaglutide may have an effect on addictive behaviors and cravings and may play a role in treating alcohol use disorder is still not entirely clear,” said Dr. Stephanie Widmer, an emergency medicine physician and addiction medicine expert. ”More research needs to be done in order to really get a firm grasp on what the pathophysiology is behind this,” she added.
One possible explanation is that GLP-1 receptor agonists increase feelings of fullness, which could make alcohol less appealing, Hendershot said.
Previous animal studies suggest these medications may also affect the brain’s reward system, reducing the desire for substances like alcohol and nicotine. However, it remains unclear if the same effect holds true in humans.
Interestingly, the medication also appeared to reduce cigarette use in a small group of participants who smoked, hinting at broader effects on addictive behaviors.
”Preclinical studies indicate that GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce not just alcohol intake, but also nicotine self-administration and nicotine-related reward,” Hendershot noted. However, no FDA-approved medications currently exist to treat both alcohol and nicotine dependence.
Another unexpected benefit was that those treated with semaglutide lost 5% of their body weight over the course of the study. While this result is consistent with previous research, Hendershot noted the need to evaluate potential side effects, particularly in individuals with lower BMIs.
The study did have several important limitations. It was small, lasted only nine weeks, and was conducted in a controlled setting that may not fully reflect real-world drinking behaviors.
Additionally, because participants were not actively trying to reduce their alcohol consumption, their motivation—or lack of it—could have influenced the results, Henderson implied.
Still, the findings suggest semaglutide could play a role in reshaping addiction treatment. According to the National Institutes of Health, only three medications are currently FDA-approved to treat alcohol dependence, and many individuals with the condition never receive any treatment.
In 2023, more than 2 million people had alcohol use disorder, yet only about 8% received treatment.
”If semaglutide proves to be a better option than the three FDA-approved drugs that are currently in use, this would be a huge breakthrough for many,” Widmer said.
Dr. Christopher Wachuku is an internal medicine preliminary intern at Lankenau Medical Center and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.
(NEW YORK) — Measles cases are rising in the U.S. with infections confirmed in at least five states so far this year.
Cases have been reported in Alaska, Georgia, New York City, Rhode Island and Texas, mostly among individuals not vaccinated for measles, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
In western Texas, an outbreak has grown to at least 24 cases according to an update published Tuesday from the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS).
All of the cases are in unvaccinated people who live in Gaines County, which borders New Mexico, and at least nine of the patients have been hospitalized. Two cases are in adults aged 18 and older, while the remaining cases are among children and adolescents.
“Due to the highly contagious nature of this disease, additional cases are likely to occur in Gaines County and the surrounding communities,” DSHS said on its website.
Vaccine exemptions among children in Gaines County — the epicenter of the outbreak — have grown dramatically in the past few years. Roughly 7.5% of kindergarteners had parents or guardians who filed for an exemption for at least one vaccine in 2013. Ten years later, that number rose to more than 17.5% — one of the highest in all of Texas, according to state health data.
Individual schools saw similar jumps. At Loop ISD, located in the county, 13.08% of students between kindergarten and 12th grade received a conscientious exemption from at least one vaccine during the 2018-19 school year, During the 2023-24 school year, that figure rose to more than 47.95%, according to DSHS data.
Meanwhile, the Georgia Department of Public Health recently confirmed two additional cases of measles in metro Atlanta among unvaccinated family members of a case confirmed earlier this year in January.
Heath officials have been urging parents to vaccinate children who have not received the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) shot yet. The CDC recommends that children get two doses with the first dose at 12 to 15 months old and the second dose between ages 4 and 6. One dose is 93% effective and two doses are 97% effective.
Zach Holbrooks, executive director of the South Plains Public Health District, told ABC News on Tuesday that the district’s clinic in Seminole will be offering MMR vaccines through Thursday.
The cases mirror those seen across the country. The CDC says 14 cases have been confirmed nationwide so far, which does not include the updated cases in Texas or Georgia. Every single case is among someone who is unvaccinated or whose status is unknown.
Vaccination rates have been lagging in the U.S. About 93% of kindergarteners received select routine childhood vaccines, including the MMR vaccine, for the 2022-23 school year, according to a November 2023 CDC report.
This is about the same as the previous school year, but lower than the 94% seen in the 2020-21 school year and the 95% seen in the 2019-20, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The latter percentage had been the standard for about 10 years.
Measles is one of the most contagious diseases known to humans. Just one infected patient can spread measles up to nine out of 10 susceptible close contacts, especially if they are not wearing a mask or not vaccinated, according to the CDC.
Complications from measles are variable, ranging from fairly benign, such as rashes, or they can be more severe, including viral sepsis, pneumonia or brain swelling, or encephalitis.
The rise in cases come as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. seems poised to become the next head of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Kennedy has previously falsely stated that the MMR vaccine causes autism, despite many high-quality studies showing no such link.
During his confirmation hearings in late January, Kennedy said he is not “anti-vaccine” but “pro safety,” yet he refused to say that vaccines don’t cause autism.
Scott J. Ferrell/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The federal government has drastically lowered some of the funding that universities and research institutions receive from medical and scientific grants.
News of the cuts rattled the scientific community with many scientific institutions set to lose millions of dollars in funding annually.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH), the country’s primary agency responsible for conducting and supporting medical research, provides federal research grants to universities and research institutions in two separate buckets – direct and indirect costs.
Direct costs are expenses related to conducting research, such as paying for researchers’ salaries or travel as well as funding the equipment and supplies necessary for experiments. Indirect costs, also known as facilities and administrative (F&A) costs, include other expenses such as student services and paying for building expenses like utilities.
Previously, most universities had negotiated indirect cost funds with the federal government, with some acquiring as much as 70% or more. Now, those rates will be capped at 15%.
Attorneys general from 22 states immediately sued to block the NIH from enacting the rate change, arguing the policy would result in “catastrophic financial consequences.”
The lawsuit alleged that the policy would likely result in the closure of research programs, layoffs and furloughs, disruptions to clinical trips and “potentially [jeopardize] people’s lives and health.”
“Indirect costs are the backbone of IHEs’ research programs and cover everything from utilities to facilities and equipment maintenance to payroll for faculty and staff to compliance programs, hazardous waste disposal, and more,” the lawsuit said. “They quite literally keep the lights on.”
The lawsuit asked the Massachusetts District Court to immediately issue a temporary restraining order blocking the policy, arguing the policy would cause irreparable harm and is a clear violation of Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how the federal agencies create and enforce regulations.
In a social media post, the NIH noted that $9 billion of the $35 billion for research that was granted last year were for indirect costs. The agency anticipates that the rate cap will save more than $4 billion annually.
Funding from the NIH supports roughly 412,000 jobs and $92 billion in economic activity, according to a report from United for Medical Research, a coalition of top research universities, medical associations, and biomedical and pharmaceutical companies.
The report argues that NIH funding is not just responsible for university jobs – but also supports local industry and economic activity that bring additional benefits to their communities and states.
In a letter to students and faculty, Harvard University addressed the rate cuts noting, “the discovery of new treatments would slow, opportunities to train the next generation of scientific leaders would shrink, and our nation’s science and engineering prowess would be severely compromised.”
In a similar letter, Stanford University noted that, “a cut of this magnitude would potentially have deep impacts on medical care, human health, and America’s place in the world as the leader of biomedical research.”
Research funding isn’t limited to institutions in the Northeast or California. Florida, Tennessee, Missouri, Ohio and Georgia all received roughly $1 billion in funding from the institutes, according to active funding data from NIH.
The University of Alabama-Birmingham, the state’s largest employer, is among the top recipients of NIH funding, and received more than $413 million in NIH awards in 2023.
North Carolina, with more than 3,000 active projects and $3 billion in active NIH funding, and Texas, with more than 4,400 active projects and $2.5 billion in active NIH funding, are also among the GOP-leaning states that received NIH grants and support.
In this undated stock photo, signage for the Center for Disease Control and Prevention is shown. (STOCK PHOTO/Adobe Stock)
(WASHINGTON) — Medical groups are expressing deep concern about the sudden removal or alteration of government data sets and webpages from agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at the behest of President Donald Trump’s administration.
The American Cancer Society, a non-profit organization dedicated to eliminating the disease, called on the administration to “restore access to comprehensive data, refrain from changes that would lead to incomplete future data collection and commit to ensure evidence-based science can proceed without additional bureaucracy or red tape” in a statement published on its website on Thursday.
“Any restriction to gather and release these data could thwart our ability to address and reduce the cancer burden across all communities,” interim CEO Dr. Wayne A. I. Frederick said in the statement.
The organization highlighted the removal of the Social Vulnerability Index, which uses U.S. census data to identify county-level risk and vulnerability factors facing communities, taking into account poverty, race, disability, housing and more, according to the CDC.
“Data from public sources like the Social Vulnerability Index are key to deploying the right resources to those who could benefit the most,” the group said. “Therefore, any barriers to accessing these data can also have repercussions on planning and deployment of support services for cancer patients and survivors.”
The Trump administration transition team didn’t immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
Across the federal government, webpages and datasets were removed or altered following Trump’s executive orders on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and transgender identities called for an “end” to any related policies within the federal government.
Webpages about HIV, LGBTQ+ people and multiple other public health topics were taken down. Some of the terms being flagged for removal include pregnant people, chestfeeding, diversity, DEI and references to vaccines, health and gender equity, according to officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who spoke to ABC News on the condition of anonymity.
Several data tools were also removed or modified, according to Frederick.
Frederick said data collected by a plethora of federal and state agencies play a key role in many of the organization’s reports and publications, including the agency’s “Cancer Statistics, 2025” report and its companion, the “Cancer Facts and Figures” report.
The organization’s reports provide up-to-date trends on cancer occurrence, survival, symptoms, prevention, early detection and treatment, Frederick said.
“ACS develops guidelines for cancer screening and prevention, informed by the latest available data and evidence, to meet the needs of clinicians, the general public, and policy,” he said. “We are very concerned that the changes in data collection and dissemination have the potential to impact these efforts in the future.”
The organization is concerned about how the scope and impact of data removal and potential long-term changes to data collection will impact its research capabilities.
The ACS warning came just days after the medical nonprofit group Doctors For America filed a lawsuit against several Trump administration agencies over its sudden removal of health information from multiple government websites.
The suit targets the Office of Personnel Management and the Department of Health and Human Services (which controls the CDC and FDA), asking a federal court in Washington, D.C. to order the government to restore the webpages and datasets.
ABC News has reached out to the agencies for comment.
In a statement to ABC News, the CDC confirmed that changes “to the HHS website and HHS division websites are in accordance with President Trump’s January 20 Executive Orders, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government and Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing.”
The Office of Personnel Management provided guidance on both executive orders, prompting HHS and divisions to respond accordingly, the spokesperson stated.
In a separate emailed statement to ABC News, the CDC’s SVI coordinator also attributed the online restrictions to the HHS “pause on mass communications and public appearances that are not directly related to emergencies or critical to preserving health.”
It said the pause will be brief, “to allow the new team to set up a process for review and prioritization.”
In the lawsuit, Doctors for America expressed concerns that the lack of data “creates a dangerous gap in the scientific data available to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, deprives physicians of resources that guide clinical practice, and takes away key resources for communicating and engaging with patients.”
Asked last Friday afternoon if government websites would be shut down to be scrubbed, the president said it wouldn’t be a “bad idea.”
“DEI … would have ruined our country, and now it’s dead. I think DEI is dead,” Trump said. “So, if they want to scrub the website, that’s OK with me. But I can’t tell you.”
ABC News’ Youri Benadjaoud and Peter Charalambous contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — Outpatient health care visits for flu illnesses are at their highest levels in 15 years, according to data updated Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Nearly 8% of outpatient health care visits for respiratory illnesses are due to flu-like illness, which is the highest seen since the 2009-10 flu season, during the swine flu pandemic, data shows.
During the week ending Feb. 1, 8% of emergency department visits were due to flu compared with 3.2% the same time last year, according to the CDC data.
Additionally, 31.6% of tests came back positive for flu during the week ending Feb. 1 compared to a peak of 18.2% last season, CDC data shows.
“Given the sharp rise [of flu illnesses] particularly among young children and in key regions like New York City, this is a stark reminder of how unpredictable flu seasons can be,” said Dr. John Brownstein, an epidemiologist and chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital and an ABC News contributor.
“With [influenza-like illness] rates exceeding 10% in several states and hospitalization rates climbing in older adults, this wave could put significant pressure on our health systems in the coming weeks,” he added.
What’s more, the rate of people dying from flu is now equal to the rate of people dying from COVID-19, likely for the first time since the COVID pandemic began.
The CDC estimates there have been at least 24 million illnesses, 310,000 hospitalizations and 13,000 deaths from flu so far this season.
At least 57 pediatric flu deaths have been reported so far this season, with 10 reported during the week ending Feb. 1.
Flu vaccines are available for both children and adults, but vaccination coverage remains low, meaning “many children and adults lack protection from respiratory virus infections provided by vaccines,” according to the CDC.
Data shows only 45% of adults aged 18 and older have been vaccinated against flu this season as have 45.7% of children.
CDC data also shows that overall respiratory illness activity is listed as “very high” nationwide. Currently, 12 states are listed as “very high” and 19 states are listed as “high.”
By comparison, seven states were listed as “very high” and 20 states were listed as “high” last week.
Although COVID-19 activity is “elevated” in many areas of the U.S., CDC data shows emergency department visits are at low levels and the number of laboratory tests coming back positive is falling.
Respiratory syncytial virus activity was also described as “elevated” but declining in most areas of the U.S., according to the CDC.
Herd of cows eating hay in a dairy farm. (STOCK PHOTO/Adobe Stock)
(NEW YORK) — A second type of bird flu has been found in dairy cows for the first time, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced on Wednesday.
Until recently, all dairy herd detections in the U.S. had involved a form of bird flu, or avian influenza, known as B3.13.
This strain of bird flu, known as D1.1, has only ever previously been detected in wild birds and poultry, indicating that it has only recently spread to cows.
The detection, found in dairy cattle in Nevada, was a result of the USDA’s national milk testing program that launched in early December, according to the agency’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
“USDA APHIS continues to work with the Nevada Department of Agriculture by conducting additional on-farm investigation, testing, and gathering additional epidemiological information to better understand this detection and limit further disease spread,” the agency said in a statement on its website.
There have been a total of 957 confirmed cattle infections in 16 states, with 36 new infections in the last 30 days in California and Nevada, the latest USDA data showed.
D1.1 has also been shown to be potentially dangerous to humans. Of the 67 human cases of bird flu detected in the U.S. beginning in April 2024, one of the only patients infected with D1.1 was in Louisiana.
The Louisiana patient died earlier this year, although health officials said the patient was over age 65 and had underlying health conditions.
Additionally, a 13-year-old girl in British Columbia, Canada, was admitted to the intensive care unit with the same strain in November.
The Louisiana patient was exposed to a backyard flock, and the Canadian teenager had an unknown exposure.
The CDC said in a statement on Thursday that it is continuing to “monitor this situation closely” for any signs that risk to human health has changed.
“Risk remains low despite what appears to be the introduction of a different genotype of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus into dairy cows based on the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Stakeholder Registry email,” the statement said. “CDC continues to monitor this situation closely for signs that would indicate the risk to human health has changed.”
The CDC noted that the risk to the general public remains low, and that there is no evidence of human-to-human spread.
The USDA issued a federal order late last year, asserting that raw milk samples nationwide be collected and shared with the agency in order to test for bird flu.
The order marked the start of the agency’s National Milk Testing Strategy, a program intended to boost surveillance of the nation’s milk supply and dairy herds and increase understanding of how bird flu is spreading.The USDA said the D1.1 detection in dairy cows “does not change USDA’s [bird flu] eradication strategy and is a testament to the strength of our National Milk Testing Strategy.”
APHIS said it plans to publish a technical brief on the findings on its website and post the sequence data on an open-access databank in the coming week.
ABC News’ Youri Benadjaoud contributed to this report.
(LOS ANGELES) — The percentage of emergency department (ED) visits related to fire and smoke inhalation rose dramatically in the days immediately after the Los Angeles wildfires last month, new data published Thursday shows.
The wildfires broke out in the Pacific Palisades and in Eaton Canyon on Jan. 7. Although several destructive wildfires emerged, the Palisades Fire and the Eaton Fire caused the most damage.
Fueled by strong winds and dry weather, the fires burned more than 57,000 acres, destroyed about 16,000 structures, and killed at least 29 people, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
A team from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reviewed data from the county’s Syndromic Surveillance program, which receives and analyzes real-time data from most county EDs.
By collecting this data, the program can detect early warning signals of a potential public health threat that requires a response and alert health care professionals, according to the department of health.
ED visits, referred to in the report as “encounters,” were classified as being wildfire-associated if fire or smoke inhalation–related terms were listed in the chief complaints or the diagnoses sections.
The team looked at three periods: a three-week period before the wildfires began, the first six days of the wildfires and the week after the wildfires began.
Data showed the average percentage of ED visits associated with the wildfires increased eightfold from 0.06% to 0.52% in the six days after the wildfires. The peak was seen on Jan. 8, with 1.01% of all ED visits related to the wildfires. During the week after the wildfires began, ED visits decreased but still remained elevated at 0.2% compared to baseline.
The average percentage of ED visits was found to be linked to an increase in the average daily Air Quality Index (AQI), which is put out by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Average daily AQI rose from 75, which is classified as “moderate level of concern” to an average of 110, classified as “unhealthy for sensitive groups,” in the six days after the wildfires began. In the week following the outbreak of the fires, average daily AQI returned to “moderate” at 58.
The report found a small increase in the average percentage of burn-related injuries and eye-related injuries but there were no increases seen in the percentage of visits related to asthma or cardiovascular reasons.
In contrast, the report found that immediately after the wildfires began, all-cause ED encounters — meaning visits to the department for any reason — decreased by 9%.
The authors stated that the decrease could for multiple reasons, with some including school closures, business closures, displacements, challenges accessing health care, residents seeking care in clinics or urgent care centers, or residents visiting EDs in neighboring counties.
“Near real-time surveillance of health outcomes during and after wildfires can estimate effects on health care use, serve as an early warning for acute health impacts, and identify opportunities for intervention,” the authors wrote. “Further analyses are planned to identify which illnesses have most affected specific populations.”
(NEW YORK) — More than 1 million children may have been affected by long COVID in 2023, new federal data published Monday suggests.
Long COVID, a condition that occurs when patients still have symptoms at least three months after clearing infection, has been well-documented in adults, but its impact on children has been less clear.
Researchers from two divisions within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention looked at results from the 2023 National Health Interview Survey, a nationwide survey that monitors the health of the U.S. population.
One child aged 17 or under was randomly selected from each sample household within the survey, and parents responded to questions about whether their child had previous COVID-19 illness, if the child had symptoms lasting three months or longer and if the child still had those symptoms at the time of interview.
Results of the analysis, published in the journal JAMA Pediatrics, showed approximately 1.01 million children, or 1.4%, are believed to have ever experienced long COVID in 2023 and about 293,000, or 0.4%, were experiencing the condition when the survey was being conducted.
This is similar to the 1.3%, or about 1 million, of children ever estimated to have had long COVID in 2022, according to the authors.
Children between ages 12 and 17 were most likely to have ever experienced long COVID or to still have the condition. Long COVID prevalence was also higher among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white children compared to non-Hispanic Black and Asian children.
Long COVID was also most common among children with a family income of under $100,000 and of parents with an education level of an associate’s degree or less.
Among children currently experiencing long COVID at the time of interview, 80% reported to have some level of activity limitation compared with before they had COVID-19.
“The large proportion of children experiencing [long COVID] with any activity limitation highlights the need to examine the severity of activity limitation, functional outcomes, and days lost from school,” the authors wrote.
The authors said there may be an under-reporting of long COVID in younger children due to difficulty with the verbalization of their symptoms.
Long COVID most often occurs in people who had severe illness, but anyone can develop the condition, according to the CDC. People who are not vaccinated against COVID-19 are at higher risk of developing long COVID, the agency says.
Scientists are not sure what causes long COVID but have identified risk factors including having underlying conditions.
