NEW YORK - The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently became the first federal agency to acknowledge health risks from cell phone use. Then, without any explanation, the agency suddenly backtracked on its findings.

Sometime before early June, the CDC posted significant new wording in a "Frequently Asked Questions" section on its website. For the question, "Do cell phones cause health problems in children?" the page read, "It's too soon to know for sure," and went on to say children will have more exposure over a lifetime growing up with cell phones.

However, by last week, the answer was changed to, "It's not known if cell phone use by children can cause health problems." Jim Turner, board chair of Citizens for Health and a public interest lawyer, speculates the changes were triggered either by industry lobbyists, government officials, or both.

"CDC wasn't sitting over there and put the thing up the first time and then said, 'Oh, wait a minute, let's take it down,'" explains Turner. "Somebody alerted them that they wanted it down or there was going to be trouble."

The agency has made other backtracking language changes to their website regarding cancer, and other health risks, from using cell phones.

Louis Slesin, editor and publisher of Microwave News, says the softening of the CDC's language is puzzling because, as he puts it, they've got "bigger fish to fry."

"With Ebola in Africa and all the things that are going on, it's really quite remarkable someone made the effort to change something that was really very, very minor," says Slesin. "All it was saying was, 'We think there's something to this. Don't discount it.' That's all they were really saying."

The CDC website also originally said, "We recommended caution in cell phone usage," but has since removed the "we" in the sentence. Jim Turner says even the softened statement is an eye-opener.

"For the CDC to say that 'some organizations recommend caution in cell phone use' is, in and of itself, a very, very significant statement," says Turner.

Slesin says he can't understand, and adds the CDC won't tell him, why the agency backed away from acknowledging several international studies that suggest health risks from cell phones.

"This is just telling people, 'We see the data. There are some issues here that need to be worked out. Be cautious until it is,'" says Slesin. "The fact they backed away from that is really quite extraordinary."

The agency also says in their FAQs "more research is needed" on cellphone hazard risks. Turner says that statement alone should spur the nation's nearly 328 million cell phone users to learn more about potential health hazards, and what they might do to lessen them.

The CDC has not returned a request for comment.


get more stories like this via email

After more than 50 years of use, some Michigan lawmakers say naloxone may not be the best choice in an overdose situation.

Naloxone is sometimes called the "Lazarus drug" because of its powerful ability to seemingly resurrect people after a drug overdose.

Sen. Kevin Hertel, D-St. Clair Shores, and some of his colleagues have introduced a bill which would open the door for what they say are more costly, but more powerful, antidotes.

"Given the prevalence of fentanyl in our communities, and how much stronger some of these drugs that we're now seeing are, we believe -- and in talking with others -- that there should be other tools to respond to an overdose," Hertel explained. "To make sure we're doing everything we can to save somebody's life."

Not everyone is on board with the proposed legislation, Senate Bill 542. Opponents argued the more expensive naloxone alternatives are not necessary, and using them would only increase profits for the pharmaceutical industry.

Jonathan Stoltman, director of the Opioid Policy Institute in Grand Rapids, said while the naloxone alternatives do help in overdose situations, they can also cause nasty side effects.

"The newer approaches, they put people into more severe withdrawal," Stoltman pointed out. "That's a pretty profound negative side effect. The one approach is very inexpensive and works great; the other approach is far more expensive and has this strong negative side effect."

Sponsors of the bill say they're hoping to give Michigan residents a chance to chime in on the issue in a public hearing sometime in June. Michigan saw more than 3,000 opioid overdose deaths in 2021.


get more stories like this via email

New Mexico saw record enrollment numbers for the Affordable Care Act this year and is now setting its sights on lowering out-of-pocket costs - those not reimbursed by insurance. More than 56,000 New Mexicans are enrolled in a medical health insurance plan on the state exchange - an increase of 12,000 people overall.

Colin Baillio, deputy superintendent with the state's Office of Insurance, said the state has boosted its outreach and made efforts to improve the overall consumer experience.

"We saw a 40% year-over-year increase, and New Mexico saw the biggest percentage increase during the open-enrollment period among all of the state-based marketplaces," he explained

Part of the enrollment increase is due to what's called the "unwinding" - a federal directive that required all states to redetermine Medicaid eligibility following a three-year pause on checks during the COVID pandemic. He said by using expanded tools made available by the federal and state government, 8% of New Mexico's population is now uninsured - down from 23% in 2010.

Following approval by lawmakers in the 2024 legislative session, the New Mexico governor signed seven health care-related bills into law - one of which requires annual reporting of prescription drug pricing. Baililo said the Affordable Care Act built the foundation that has allowed the state to pursue additional affordability initiatives.

"I'm really glad to see that there's so much interest in the next step of health reform, really leaning into these out-of-pocket cost issues and making it easier for people to afford to stay covered and see their doctors," he continued.

Two years ago, the state also passed a one-of-a-kind law that did away with behavioral health co-pays for people in certain insurance plans.

New York's medical aid-in-dying bill is gaining further support. The Medical Society of the State of New York is supporting the bill. New York's bill allows terminally ill people with only six months to live to use this option, with safeguards requiring two physicians' approval.

The bill's Assembly sponsor Amy Paulin, D-Westchester, said despite the growing support, other hurdles lie ahead.

"Now we have what I believe, if it came to the floor, a majority. There's still a hesitation on the part of leadership. You know, we need members to assure leadership that they no longer have reservations," she said.

Other newly resolved concerns center on making sure insurance companies and doctors who don't support this aren't held liable. She's optimistic the bill will pass after nine years in the Legislature. New York would be the 11th state along with Washington, D.C. to have medical aid in dying legislation.

Corinne Carey, senior New York campaign director with Compassion and Choices finds the pandemic drew a vivid picture of a person's end-of-life experience. There were images of people dying on ventilators, apart from loved ones, and unable to communicate. She said people began thinking about a "good death."

"And, what is a good death is being surrounded by loved ones, having some measure of control, experiencing the touch of your loved ones, and being the one in the driver's seat," she explained.

Now people have different options for end-of-life care, each of which presents various challenges. Polls show medical aid in dying has garnered considerable support since being introduced in 2015. A 2022 Compassion and Choices poll finds 57% of nurses support medical aid in dying professionally, although fewer support it personally.