Health

(NEW YORK) — The first phase of human trials studying a possible nasal COVID-19 vaccine has opened, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced.

The clinical trial, sponsored by the federal health agency, is enrolling participants at three sites across the U.S.

Researchers believe the vaccine candidate may provide even better protection against emerging variants than the COVID vaccines given via injection.

“The concept is that we’re looking for next generation vaccines,” said Dr. John Brownstein, an epidemiologist and chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital and an ABC News contributor. “Throughout the pandemic, we had the incredible scientific breakthrough of COVID vaccines that happened, that got into production incredibly quickly and were safe and effective. But of course, we also recognize that there are challenges of the existing vaccines.”

Here’s what you need to know about the nasal COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial now underway:

What is the new vaccine candidate?

The candidate, MPV/S-2P, uses a live-weakened version of a virus called murine pneumonia virus (MPV), which does not cause disease in humans.

MPV will deliver a stabilized version of the spike protein, which the SARS-CoV-2 virus, that causes COVID-19, uses to attach and infect human cells. This will teach the body to recognize the protein and train immune cells to attack if a person is infected.

Pre-clinical trials in non-human primates found MPV/S-2P to be safe and well-tolerated and that it produced a robust immune response, both in SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and in the epithelial cells that line the nose and respiratory tract.

“Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 come into the body through the nose, into the lungs and then gets integrated into our bloodstream and disseminated through the body,” Dr. Reynold Panettieri, a professor of medicine at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School at Rutgers University, told ABC News.

“What we realized is that systemic vaccination — when we inject it and it goes through the body to build up immunity — is not as effective as generating a mucosal, or lining cell, immunity in the nose or in the lungs,” he said. “And so, when people can inhale the protein, in this case, the spike protein … it actually builds up an immune response that’s much more robust than that when it is injected.”

Challenges with the current vaccine

In December 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized two new messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines, from Pfizer-BioNTech and from Moderna, to target the original variant.

While most vaccines use a weakened or inactivated virus to stimulate an immune response, mRNA vaccines teach the body how to make proteins that can trigger an immune response and fight off an infection.

Because researchers can design mRNA vaccines more quickly than they can produce the live or weakened pathogens needed for a traditional vaccine, mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 were quickly developed, tested, mass produced and delivered to the general population, preventing millions of hospitalizations and deaths, according to analyses.

Both have been updated over time to target new variants including in September 2022 to target both the original variant and BA.4 and BA.5 – offshoots of the omicron variant — and in September 2023 to target the XBB offshoot of the omicron variant. Only the latter is currently in use.

“The current vaccines have diminished efficacy over time,” Brownstein said. “These vaccines were highly protective against severe COVID hospitalizations and deaths, [but] it wasn’t as effective at slowing cases and preventing transmission.”

Additionally, mRNA vaccines require a multi-step process to manufacture as well as ultra-cold storage, which can present logistical challenges. Further, some people may not want to receive mRNA vaccines because they are averse to needles.

“Nasal spray is often more often more accepted by a population, so if it’s a less concerning mode of delivery, plus it offers better protection, plus it offers potentially better storage and distribution potential, it highlights that this could be a really important new step in controlling this virus,” Brownstein said.

How will the trial work?

The clinical trial will enroll 60 healthy adult participants between ages 18 and 64 who received at least three doses of an MRNA COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized by the FDA.

There will be several trial sites including at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston Texas; The Hope Clinic of Emory University in Decatur, Georgia; and New York University Grossman Long Island School of Medicine in Long Island.

Participants will be split into three groups, each receiving different dosages. Researchers will follow-up with the volunteers seven times over the course of a year and measure if the vaccine is safe and if it produces an immune response in the nose and in the blood.

Because clinical trials take time to produce data and require at least three phases before being submitted for FDA authorization, experts say it’s unlikely these vaccines will be available in fall 2024.

“Early in the pandemic, we were moving quicker than usual to get a get a vaccine out there,” Panettieri said. “Not that any steps were skipped, but we needed to save lives.”

Because a COVID-19 infection now results in mild symptoms for most healthy people, “we do have time to actually go through the typical process the FDA takes to approve a new therapy,” he added. “That is going to help everyone. It’s going to be making sure it’s safe and effective.”

Dr. John Beigel, associate director for clinical research in the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ (NIAID) division of microbiology and infectious diseases, told ABC News that MPV/S-2P falls under Project NextGen.

The project, led by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and the NIAID, plans to support 15 next generation vaccines into Phase 1 clinical trials, of which MPV/S-2P is the first.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A new study shows that FDA-approved oral migraine drug atogepant is effective for relieving difficult-to-treat “medication overuse headaches” that are the result of using too much of other pain relieving medications. However, patients often have to jump through hoops to get it covered by their insurance company.

Migraines affect nearly one in eight adults in the U.S. Migraines are also the leading cause of disability in adults under 50 years of age in the United States. This high number underscores the need for better treatments for people with migraines.

Atogepant, marketed under the brand Qulipta by the company AbbVie, is part of a new class of migraine medications known as CGRP inhibitors, so named because they block a protein called calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), which has been found to be a cause of migraines.

Qulipta is one of only two FDA-approved CGRP inhibitors taken as a pill for the prevention of migraine headaches, the other being rimegepant, marketed as Nurtec by Pfizer. All other drugs in this class used for migraine prevention are injectables.

The American Headache Society’s (AHS) recently released a position statement that says that CGRP inhibitors should be the first treatment a doctor prescribes for migraines. But insurance companies often require patients to go through a process known as “step therapy” where they have to try less expensive interventions before they can get access to Qulipta or one of the other CGRP inhibitors.

“CGRP-targeting therapies, unlike most other migraine treatments that were ‘borrowed’ from other indications like antidepressants, blood pressure medications or seizure medications, were developed specifically to treat migraines based upon a solid foundation of evidence,” according to Dr. Andrew Charles, professor of Neurology at UCLA and lead author of the American Headache Society’s position statement.

Step therapy requires patients to try a series of cheaper drugs first, even if they are less efficient and cause more side effects, before they are approved to receive one of the newer treatments. The goal of step therapy is to control costs, but it can also end up delaying proper treatment and patients often find it frustrating and time-consuming because they must needlessly go through several medications before they can get ones that work.

“Step therapy, or fail first requirement, is a no-win situation for people like me living with migraines. For me, using medications that were known to be less effective delayed necessary treatment, and led to worsening disability and chronification of my migraine disease,” says Nancy Harris Bonk, a migraine patient and advocate.

Congress has proposed a bill potentially banning step therapy when it is unsafe, which its often the case for migraine patients.

“It is no surprise that medication costs are a barrier for patients to access these treatments despite this position paper, and a major goal for all of us is to reduce drug costs for patients and the system,” Dr. Matthew Robbins, associate professor of neurology at Weill Cornell and president-elect of the AHS, told ABC News. “However, our primary goal is always to get the right treatments to the right patients, so we are hopeful that the position statement will move along insurance companies, pharmacy benefit managers, and other systems of care to improve access in addition to cost reductions for these medications.”

For example, AbbVie offers a program to help with the expense of the Qulipta by providing a savings card and patient assistance program that can reduce out-of-pocket costs for eligible patients, including those on Medicare and Medicaid.

Pfizer, the makers of Nurtec, offer a similar savings and assistance program but only for those on private insurance plans. People on Medicare and other government-funded insurance may wind up paying high out-of-pocket costs.

“Many patients and healthcare providers are not aware of the patient assistance program offered by Abbvie or other companies. Additionally, pharmacies often do not accept co-pay cards or coupons offered by the manufacturer, which leaves many patients without access to necessary medications,” said Dr. Hida Nierenburg, a board-certified neurologist and headache specialist at Nuvance Health.

“Although they are expensive, some insurers are now acknowledging that the overwhelming evidence supporting their efficacy, tolerability, and safety warrants consideration as a first line treatment for the prevention of migraine” says, Dr. Charles.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Beaches in several states across the country have been closed to swimmers over the last few days due to harmful levels of bacteria in the water.

In Massachusetts, at least 37 beaches were closed as of Monday afternoon due to “bacterial exceedance,” according to the state’s Department of Public Health (MDPH). Many of the beaches tested positive for high levels of a type of fecal bacteria, and beachgoers were warned not to swim or enter the water in those locations to avoid risk of illness, according to the health agency.

Additionally, at least three beaches in Coronado, California – located on a peninsula in San Diego Bay – have been closed since June 26 because “[b]acteria levels exceed health standards.” San Diego County’s Department of Environmental Health and Quality said such closures are usually due to sewage or chemical spills.

Further, New York’s Suffolk County last week issued an advisory against bathing at 63 beaches due to increased bacteria levels caused by heavy rainfall and stormwater runoff.

Although health officials did not elaborate on what types of bacteria were found in California or New York, officials in Massachusetts identified the bacteria as enterococci. The bacteria are typically found in the intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals, including humans, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and may “indicate possible contamination of streams and rivers by fecal waste.”

Enterococci bacteria commonly cause urinary tract infections, and can also cause blood infections and endocarditis, an inflammation of the lining of the heart’s values and chambers, according to the National Institutes of Health.

Heavy rains after long periods of drought can pick up animal or human excrement, which can then be carried by runoff into nearby bodies of water, including oceans. Heavy rains can also cause sewage systems to overflow, causing untreated sewage to likewise contaminate bodies of water.

Additionally, two beaches in Massachusetts were closed due to high levels of cyanobacteria, according to the MDPH. Often referred to as blue-green algae, cyanobacteria are often found in freshwater but can appear in saltwater or brackish water, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) . The bacteria itself doesn’t infect humans but can produce toxins that make people sick.

Ingestion of water that contains cyanobacteria can cause symptoms including headaches, stomach pain, dizziness, vomiting, and diarrhea. It can also cause irritation of the skin, eyes, nose, throat and lungs.

Cyanobacteria can multiply quickly in warm waters that become rich in nutrients, including from fertilizers and septic tank overflows, the CDC said.

Four beaches in Michigan also were closed on Monday due to high levels of Escherichia coli (E. coli), bacteria, according to the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy.

E. coli is another bacterium that lives in the intestinal tract of warm-blooded animals. Most types of E. coli are harmless, but many strains can cause severe illness, including diarrhea, stomach cramps and vomiting, according to the CDC.

The CDC recommends staying out of bodies of water – including oceans, lakes and rivers – if the water looks cloudier than usual, is discolored, or smells bad. Swimmers are also cautioned to stay out of the water if they see pipes draining into or around the water, of if they themselves have diarrhea.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Since the pandemic, concerns over personal health have been at the forefront of consumers’ minds. One of the concerns that took flight was gut health and the microbiome, with a rise in sales for products like probiotics, greens powder, and digestive sodas (like Poppi and Olipop).

But conversations around microbiome health aren’t exclusive to just the gut. The same interest has moved into beauty, with brands touting the importance of maintaining a healthy skin microbiome to prevent premature aging and acne. The Rootist, a new hair-care line launched in April, is introducing fermented ingredients as the next wave of innovation in the shampoo aisle with promises of “anchored, active roots, a hydrated, balanced scalp, and strong, healthy hair.”

Clare Hennigan, principal analyst – Beauty & Personal Care at Mintel, says these brands have already piqued consumer interest.

“In hair care from 2022 to 2023, the number of products that feature microbiome in the product description have actually increased 52.3%,” Hennigan told ABC News. “We really see, especially in hair care, the momentum stirring and the demand growing for microbiome hair care solutions.”

But what are these fermented ingredients, how do brands claim they work and are they worth the hype?

What are fermented ingredients and how can they help maintain and balance the microbiome?

Very simply put, fermented ingredients are bacteria, says Dr. Mona Gohara, MD, a board-certified dermatologist and associate clinical professor at Yale School of Medicine.

“If you leave something out long enough, things kind of grow out of it. One of the things that grows is bacteria,” Gohara told ABC News.

Not all bacteria are bad, however, think of yogurt and kombucha for instance, which are made through fermentation.

The Rootist says that it’s this fermenting process that makes their products “easily recognized and received by roots, scalp, and hair.” Just like skin and the gut, the scalp has its own bacteria and types of fungi which together create its microbiome. According to Gohara, the presumption here is that the fermented ingredients in products like that of The Rootist help feed the bacteria on our scalps which in turn supports the health of our pre-existing scalp microbiome.

And maintaining a balanced scalp microbiome is crucial to keeping hair healthy, says Dr. Jeannette Graf, MD, a board-certified dermatologist and assistant clinical professor of dermatology at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. Conditions like dandruff or acne can be influenced by the microbiome.

“If we have an imbalance of our microbiome or a microbiome is not working correctly, we need to create an environment on the skin of the scalp, on the skin of face, where they can exist,” Graf told ABC News.

“Think of it like a garden, and the soil is the scalp. If the soil is healthy, the plants and the flowers are going to blossom,” explained Gohara. “If the scalp is compromised or inflamed or irritated, it’s less healthy soil, right? And that, and then leads to less healthy, bountiful garden.”

Are they worth the hype?

While in theory fermented hair care ingredients may be beneficial to the scalp microbiome, the bottom line is that there is that there’s still more research that needs to be done.

“Within the personal care industry – there are many new ingredient technologies being developed,” Graf said. “So studies are done by these biotech companies- and good ones. But that is where most of the research and literature is published.”

“It’s safe to say that at a minimum, the product will support a healthy scalp microbiome,” Gohara added, who draws a line at claiming these products will lead to increased hair growth. “It means that in me, whatever my biological potential as a 48-year-old woman at this point, if I use this, it’ll make my hair grow as optimally as it would biologically at this point.”

And while experts say there is still research to be done, Hennigan says the industry is all in on fermented hair.

“This signals broader industry trends overall, where we’ll see how we can really personalize our products specific to even perhaps our own personal microbiomes, to better target and pinpoint our specific needs,” Hennigan said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Growing up in the 1990s and early 2000s just outside of Akron, Ohio, Shane Stahl felt it was taboo to talk about being part of the LGBTQ+ community or about LGBTQ+ experiences.

Stahl, 40, who identifies as a gay man, said that although he grew up in an accepting and supporting family, he didn’t feel like it was possible to openly express himself and feared he would be ostracized from his community if he did so.

As lawmakers in Ohio began to introduce — and sometimes pass — more anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, at both the local and the state level, Stahl said it took a toll on his mental health.

“It made me want to leave if I could,” he told ABC News. “It makes you feel very isolated, and I don’t know that this is everybody’s experience, but my experience always kind of was like, ‘Well, what does that person think about me? Do they have an inclination that maybe I’m gay? And if they do, are they going to treat me any differently? Are they going to say something to somebody that can have an effect on my job or my ability to rent an apartment or get a car, or any of those things that we all need to do to survive?’ So, yeah, it was definitely very isolating and scary.”

About a year-and-a-half ago, Stahl got a new job for Equality California — a nonprofit civil rights organization advocating for LGBTQ+ Californians — and moved to West Hollywood. He said being able to live in an accepting community made him feel welcome and improved his mental health.

Seeing the increase in anti-LGBTQ+ legislation “definitely was part of the motivation to leave Ohio and come to a place where I knew that there were strong laws on the books, that I knew I would be protected as a gay person,” he said. “Coming from a very suburban northeastern Ohio experience, it feels there’s a sense of peace I have now about my life that I didn’t necessarily have before.”

While anti-LGBTQ+ legislation can have a harmful effect on mental health, experts and LGBTQ+ rights advocates say legislation that strengthens protections for LGBTQ+ people can do just the opposite as well as bring a sense of acceptance and belonging.

LGBTQ+ people at higher risk of mental health struggles

Research has shown that LGBTQ+ people are more likely to experience mental health struggles than those who are heterosexual or cisgender.

LGBTQ+ individuals are 2.5 times more likely to have depression and anxiety or to misuse substances compared with heterosexual individuals, according to the American Psychiatric Association.

Additionally, LGBTQ+ youth are at increased risk of suicidal thoughts and ideations as well as attempted suicide.

However, experts say there is nothing that intrinsically puts LGBTQ+ people at higher risk of mental health challenges or suicide, and that it’s largely brought on by stigma, biases and discrimination.

“LGBTQ people are not at higher risk for suicide or other mental health challenges because of anything inherent in who we are. It’s about how we’re treated,” Casey Pick, director of law and policy for the Trevor Project, a nonprofit focusing on suicide prevention efforts among LGBTQ+ youth.

These biases and discrimination can take shape as anti-LGBTQ+ legislation including forced outing in schools, school sports bans, banning gender-affirming care for minors, criminalizing drag performances, book bans and limiting the ability of LGBTQ+ people to foster or adopt children.

In 2023, a FiveThirtyEight analysis found more than 100 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have passed in the last five years with more than half of them passing last year.

More than 500 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been introduced throughout the 2024 legislative session, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Such policies can have a negative impact on mental health.

Pick, who identifies as lesbian, said she remembers when the U.S. was debating marriage equality. In California, in 2008, lawmakers were debating Proposition 8, which was a ballot measure that would have added a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

“I remember being in my early 20s when California was actively debating Proposition 8, and so the constant onslaught of negative ads that would portray people like me, gay people, just trying to have a family as being a threat to children, a threat to family was just a constant negative grind on my mental health,” she said.

As anti-LGBTQ+ laws and policies have been enacted, many people — and some in cases their families — have left their home states to move to more protective states.

“Nobody should feel that they can’t live and call the place they want to call home because of who they are or who they love,” Stahl said. “The goal should not be to relocate these people; the goal should be let’s make their communities inclusive and welcoming.”

Pro-LGBTQ+ legislation positive for mental health

While more research is needed to better understand the full effects that protective legislation can have for LGBTQ+ people, studies have shown pro-LGBTQ+ legislation can have a positive impact on mental health.

One 2018 study found that sexual minority men were more likely to report poor/fair health in states with limited protections compared with heterosexual counterparts. But in this study protective state laws made no difference among sexual minority women who were more likely to report poor/fair self-rated health compared to their heterosexual counterparts in states with both comprehensive and limited protections.

A 2016 study of transgender veterans found those living in states with employment nondiscrimination protections were 26% less likely to have mood disorders and 43% less likely to practice self-harm.

“We know that living in a community that is safe, affirming and accepting of who you are, directly correlates to lower rates of suicide to better mental health outcomes,” Pick said. “That looks like safe schools; that looks like access to necessary health care; that looks like just basic equality in day-to-day life.”

Pick said she was heartened when the conversation around same-sex marriage in the U.S. started shifting in a positive direction.

She contrasted her feelings in 2008 “to just how good it felt, when we started seeing in 2012, those ballot measures going the other way. It was still exhausting to be part of a political campaign that I didn’t ask for, but on the days that we saw that we won those elections, that people were accepting us, that were welcoming LGBTQ people in the community, that made a difference.”

Stahl said he often jokes that moving to a state like California, with its wider slate of LGBTQ+ protections, felt “like a different planet.”

“I walk around my city, and I see businesses that have gay pride flags and pride flags in their windows,” he said. “I see people catering specifically to the LGBTQ+ community; I see a wealth of resources; I see a local and a state government that wants the best for me in my community and is actively working to improve the quality of our lives and let us know that we are welcome and we belong.”

Pick and Stahl recommend that people contact their state lawmakers to push back against anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and advocate for protective legislation.

They add that it is also important to create safe, accepting and supportive communities for LGBTQ+ people.

“Something as simple as be the house where not just your child, but maybe your child’s LGBTQ friends can come over feel safe, get cookies after school, be the place where they know that they can just let down and relax and where they won’t be confronted with the kind of hostility that is all too common out there today,” Pick said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — After Lauren Brown and her wife Amanda Brown married in 2018, they knew quickly afterward they wanted to start their own family.

The Browns saved up money and began fertility treatment, opting to undergo reciprocal IVF treatment. Embryos were created with Amanda Brown’s eggs and donor sperm, and then Lauren Brown carried three pregnancies, and after an immense journey, the Browns were able to welcome their sons Judah in 2020 and Malachi in 2022.

Inspired in part by her experience and with the blessing of her family, Lauren Brown, 36, decided to look into becoming a surrogate, especially for another LGBTQ+ family like her own and particularly for a gay couple.

Giving the gift of life

“I had been interested in participating in the gift of life in some shape or capacity for a long time,” the mom of two told Good Morning America of her motivation.

Brown partnered with Brownstone Surrogacy, also an LGBTQ-owned agency, and is now in the second trimester of her fourth pregnancy, for which she will be compensated, and said she is feeling “great” overall.

“[It] has been really fun and really life-giving to be able to give back to other members of our community in a similar way that we have been given so much,” Brown, who shares on social media about LGBTQ+ family building, said.

For intended parents Matthew McConnell and Stephen Elkind of San Francisco, the journey to parenthood has been a “rollercoaster” but matching with Brown as their surrogate, nearly 3,000 miles away in the Washington, D.C. area, was an unexpectedly quick and near immediate process through Brownstone Surrogacy.

“I’ll remember that day forever,” McConnell told “GMA” of their first virtual meeting through a Zoom call. “We were nervous but so excited and conversation just flowed so naturally.”

“And then I think within five or 10 minutes, both us and Lauren as well sent emails being like, ‘It’s a yes,'” McConnell continued.

The state of surrogacy in the U.S.

Surrogacy has been on the rise and according to one study, nearly 31,000 babies were born via surrogacy between 1999 and 2013, with at least a 2.5% increase during the decade.

Surrogacy is also not regulated on the federal level and paid surrogacy is currently legal in 48 states, except for Nebraska and Louisiana. In March 2024, Michigan also decriminalized paid surrogacy contracts.

Hope for the Future

Elkind and McConnell, as well as Brown, said they wanted to open up publicly about their shared journey to offer an example for others, especially in the LGBTQ+ community, who are looking to build their families.

“We, in the queer community deserve to have the families of our dreams,” Elkind said. “We don’t see a lot of these stories personally out there and so we want to let people know it’s possible.”

“There is a lot of work to do to get there and it can be very expensive but if it’s a goal of yours, if it’s something that you want, it’s not impossible,” he continued.

“For LGBTQ+families, for many of us, maybe having dealt with unsupportive family members, where family might be a place of pain or sadness or of loss or rejection, to be able to create the families that we dream of can be so particularly redemptive and can be such a joy,” Brown added.

McConnell and Elkind, who described Brown’s offer to be their surrogate as “everything,” are expecting their child later this year on Thanksgiving Day and they’ve already affectionately nicknamed them their “little turkey.”

“It means everything for us that Lauren has agreed to be our surrogate and is in this process with us,” Elkind said. “As a queer community, we have what it takes to make a family. We just have to work together.”

“This has been such a wonderful experience. It seemingly couldn’t go better,” McConnell said.

For anyone else considering surrogacy, Brown encouraged them to do it.

“If you have had an uncomplicated pregnancy in the past, you really should consider it because it’s not something that you will ever regret,” she said. “Helping somebody create the family of their dreams is just priceless.”

Pregnancy is a potentially life-threatening condition and being over the age of 35 poses increased risks for complications, even in individuals with prior uncomplicated pregnancies.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(UVALDE, Texas) — After the tragic event at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, where a gunman killed 19 students and two teachers in 2022, a local librarian is giving back to the community where he was raised.

Mendell Morgan, Director of Development for El Progreso Memorial Library, welcomes people, especially those in Uvalde, to come for counseling services and other mental relaxation.

“After the tragedy here, I really wanted to do something for the community of Uvalde,” Morgan said. “I felt I was given so much growing up here I wanted to encourage our library to be a place of healing. I wanted to make a difference.”

El Progreso Memorial Library is situated in a rural area on the southwest side of Uvalde. The region is marked by poverty and students struggle with educational achievement.

Morgan was appointed library director in 2014, and the role transitioned to a more community-development position in January 2024. Morgan now helps people deal with grieving, death and anxiety through books in the library.

He also brought in therapy dogs and ponies to help people who are dealing with separation.

Locals in the community say he has been very resourceful, and he’s found ways to make the library a place that’s for everybody.

“He’s so kind,” Eliana Romero said. “He makes everybody feel like welcome and part of his group, and he’s just always trying to find ways to make the library better.”

To better connect with young people, Morgan began hosting game nights at the library, offering children a chance to learn chess and play Dungeons & Dragons.

The library also hosts a summer reading program, which Morgan says is extremely popular with young people.

“The goal is to keep up their interest in reading during this summer and help them be better prepared for the school year that lies ahead,” Morgan said. “Every Wednesday morning we start out with the song. And then we sit on our little special story rug and the story is read.”

Morgan says it is such a reward for him to see the results of the library’s programs: children acquiring a love for reading, being interactive with the library, experiencing the excitement of discovery.

He’s happy to see activity, life and good things going on in the Uvalde community, something he experienced as a child.

“I had a young mother come in to say in tears how thankful and grateful she was to see her child smiling again because that had not been seen since before the tragedy,” Morgan said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A new study published in the journal Sleep Medicine analyzed existing data about sound levels of white noise machines and concluded that many devices can produce sounds louder than recommended for even adult workers — making them capable of being too loud for infants, who are more susceptible to negative effects of loud noises.

“Those devices exceeded what is appropriate for hearing health for any individual, just walking around and living their life,” Dr. Isaac Erbele, one of the study’s authors who specializes in ear and skull surgeries at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, told ABC News.

He is worried that many commercially available white noise machines are too loud to be safe for kids based on these findings. These machines are not federally regulated and the noise levels on these machines are sometimes not clearly labeled.

Current pediatric sound guidelines do not offer parents a specific decibel cutoff for white noise machines. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) states that machines should be located “as far away as possible from the infant, set the volume as low as possible, and limit the duration of use.” ABC News has previously reported on AAP’s warning to keep these machines seven or more feet away from a child.

The consequences of these sounds are less clear though. Existing studies show that loud noise can cause a stress response in neonates, but lullabies and breath sounds can help calm babies. The AAP does warn that excessive noise exposure from things like loud traffic, headphones and concerts can cause permanent hearing loss.

In the absence of decibel recommendations for infants, Erbele and his team used existing National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), guidelines as “a good ceiling,” for how loud white noise machines should be.

He was concerned that of the 24 white noise machines and six phone apps reviewed in his study, all of them “had levels that were higher than are permissible for an eight-hour shift by NIOSH.”

NIOSH has a recommended exposure limit (REL) of 85 decibels over eight hours. The louder the sound, the shorter the recommended exposure limit. 

According to NIOSH, “Workers who are exposed to noise at or above the NIOSH REL are at risk of developing significant hearing loss over their working lifetime.”

However, Erbele said more research is needed, and the decibel limit is probably even lower for children. He and his colleagues recommended a 60 decibels limit “based on our understanding of the literature available right now.”

“I don’t think people should be afraid of white noise machines, and for a lot of people that can be really helpful,” said Dr. Landon Duyka, an ear, nose, and throat doctor at Northwestern Medicine who was not associated with the study.

However, if parents are seeking to wean their children off these machines, Duyka recommends incrementally decreasing the noise level on the white noise machine until the child no longer needs it. First start with nap time and then implement these changes at nighttime, he said.

Erbele also recommends that parents measure the loudness of white noise machines by using the “Sound Level Meter” app developed by NIOSH. If parents want to keep using machines but reduce negative effects, they can move the machine further away from the child, and turn the machine off soon after the child falls asleep.

Finally, parents should continue to monitor their children for signs of hearing loss. Both doctors stated that a child not reacting to loud sounds, like a door slamming or dog barking, is concerning. A variety of hearing tests also exist for children, and a pediatrician can guide parents on which test could be helpful.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A new report by the World Health Organization, which looked broadly at global substance use for people 15 years and older, shows over three million people died from substance use in 2019 and 400 million people live with substance use disorders, which can have a number of negative health impacts.

“Substance use severely harms individual health, increasing the risk of chronic diseases, mental health conditions and tragically resulting in millions of preventable deaths every year. It places a heavy burden on families and communities, increasing exposure to accidents, injuries and violence,” WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a press release Tuesday.

According to the report, 2.6 million deaths were due to alcohol use and 206 million people had alcohol dependence. About two-thirds of deaths due to alcohol were among men and the highest number of deaths were in the European and African region, while current consumption was common among teenagers.

“On a global scale, [alcohol] is one of the most widely used drugs. Definitely having a negative impact on health,” Dr. Jennifer Ashton, ABC News chief medical correspondent, said on ABC’s Good Morning America on Wednesday.

Rates of alcohol deaths have declined since 2010, but the number of people who are dying from alcohol consumption “remains unacceptably high,” according to the report. Many of these deaths were attributed to chronic diseases due to alcohol such as heart disease and cancer.

“Alcohol is now considered a class one carcinogen, meaning known to cause cancer, on par with asbestos and tobacco,” Ashton said.

Younger people in particular are being negatively impacted by alcohol use

The highest percent of alcohol-attributable deaths in 2019 were among young people between the ages of 20 and 39 years old, and about 25% of all 15- to 19-year-olds said they currently drink alcohol. The highest rates of daily consumption in this age group were among teens in the European region and the Americas, where about 46% and 44% said they currently drink alcohol, respectively.

In addition to leading to alcohol use disorder, there are numerous negative health effects from moderate to heavy alcohol consumption, such as liver and heart disease, certain cancers and an increased risk of injuries, according to NIH MedlinePlus.

According to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, moderate alcohol use is consuming two drinks or less in a day for men and one drink or less a day for women. A standard drink is 12 ounces of regular beer, 5 ounces of wine or 1.5 ounces of distilled spirits or liquor.

Binge drinking for men is about five or more drinks within a few hours or about four or more drinks within a few hours for women. Heavy alcohol use is defined for men as having more than five drinks on any day or more than 15 drinks per week, and for women, is defined as having more than four drinks on any day or more than eight drinks per week.

“We have to really come to terms with the fact that there is no safe amount of alcohol and particularly for women,” Ashton said. “When you talk about breast cancer, even light alcohol consumption, less than one drink a day, associated causally with a 15% increased risk of breast cancer … that is stark.”

While men tend to drink more alcohol than women, women tend to metabolize alcohol at a slower rate, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This slower absorption makes women more susceptible to the negative effects of alcohol. Alcohol also affects the heart differently in men than in women. The CDC says that women who binge drink are at an increased risk of heart damage at lower levels of alcohol use and over a shorter period of time compared to men.

The report called for urgent action to reduce deaths due to alcohol and substance use through community awareness and engagement, the health care system and national policies.

“To build a healthier, more equitable society, we must urgently commit to bold actions that reduce the negative health and social consequences of alcohol consumption and make treatment for substance use disorders accessible and affordable,” Ghebreyesus said this week.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Multivitamin supplements have become a routine addition to many Americans’ diets, with as many as 1 in 3 U.S. adults consuming them regularly, but are these daily doses improving overall health and longevity?

A study from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) published Wednesday found that multivitamins won’t help extend your life, with researchers reporting, “multivitamin use to improve longevity is not supported.”

The study analyzed data from nearly 400,000 adults over 20 years. Participants had a median age of 61.5 years old and were generally healthy, with no history of chronic diseases, according to the study published in JAMA Network Open.

The study found no evidence that daily multivitamin consumption reduced the risk of death from conditions such as heart disease or cancer.

Rather than living longer, otherwise healthy people who took daily multivitamins were slightly more likely (4%) than non-users to die in the study period, according to researchers.

Researchers reported nearly 165,000 deaths occurring during the follow-up period of the study, out of the initial group of 390,000 participants.

The study, however, did not analyze data from people with pre-existing vitamin deficiencies.

“What this study shows is that, generally, multivitamins aren’t going to help you live longer,” Dr. Jade A Cobern, MD, MPH, board-certified physician in pediatrics and general preventive medicine, told ABC News.

“Even though the cost of many multivitamins isn’t high, this is still an expense that many people can be spared from,” Cobern said.

Cobern explained that, when possible, it’s best to get vitamins and minerals from your diet, focusing on increasing vegetable intake and limiting red meat consumption, rather than relying solely on a supplement.

“We can all likely benefit from adding more vegetables and whole grains or legumes into our diets, reducing red meat intake, decreasing our sedentary time and reducing alcohol intake,” Cobern suggested.

While taking a multivitamin supplement does not increase longevity, Cobern said it’s important for people to ask their doctor to know if a multivitamin or specific vitamin supplement would be helpful in their case, based on their health history and diet.

“If a doctor prescribes a vitamin for someone, it’s important to take that medication,” Cobern said, adding, “I recommend everyone get routine health checkups and to talk to doctors about your dietary history and disclose any supplements you’re taking in those appointments.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.