'Not medicine — it's malpractice': Trump HHS buries child sex-change regime with damning report



The Department of Health and Human Services delivered what could prove to be a lethal blow this week to the profitable and predatory child sex-change industry that has been on the defensive since President Donald Trump's Jan. 28 executive order directing all federal agencies to ensure that medical institutions receiving federal funding "end the chemical and surgical mutilation of children."

HHS published an exhaustive peer-reviewed report on Wednesday that should make abundantly clear to those still clinging to LGBT activists' preferred narrative about so-called "gender-affirming care" that "the harms from sex-rejecting procedures — including puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical operations — are significant, long term, and too often ignored or inadequately tracked."

"This is a new day in the Department of Health and Human Services. It's a new day in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, a new day for the country," Admiral Brian Christine, assistant secretary for HHS, told Blaze News. "It is because of President Trump and Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that this information has come out."

'The HHS report should put an end to the scourge of child mutilation masquerading as health care.'

The 410-page report, titled "Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria: Review of Evidence and Best Practices," reads as the weightier American counterpart to Britain's damning Cass Review, detailing:

  • the often glossed-over risks and medical uncertainties involved with puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and sex-change genital mutilations;
  • the unscientific nature and strategic omissions of fact in the World Professional Association of Transgender Health guidelines;
  • the manipulation of medical definitions undertaken in service of gender ideologues' medical agendas;
  • ethical concerns regarding consent for sex-change procedures as well as the regret often experienced by victims of such procedures; and
  • the "international retreat" from the "gender-affirming" model of care.

The report — which National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya indicated "marks a turning point for American medicine" — notes that the overall quality of evidence concerning the effects of sex-change medical interventions on long-term health, psychological outcomes, quality of life, and regret was found to be "very low."

Accordingly, the beneficial effects alleged in the literature and often cited by gender ideologues are likely to differ substantially from the actual effects of the sex-change procedures.

'It's literally a billion-dollar industry. It creates lifelong customers.'

What's more, the report noted that while the risks of child sex changes are many and unmistakable — including infertility, sexual dysfunction, impaired bone density accrual, surgical complications, and heart, metabolic, and psychiatric disorders — publication bias, a failure of existing studies to adequately track and report harms, and other factors may have obfuscated the true fallout of so-called "gender-affirming care."

The report minces no words in its conclusion, stating:

Many U.S. medical professionals and associations have fallen short of their duty to prioritize the health interests of young patients. First, there was a rapid expansion and implementation of a clinical protocol that lacked sufficient scientific and ethical justification. Second, when confronted with compelling evidence that this protocol did not deliver the health benefits it promised, and that other countries were changing their policies appropriately, U.S. medical professionals and associations failed to reconsider the "gender-affirming" approach. Third, conflicting evidence — evidence that challenged the foundational assumptions of the protocol and the professional standing of its advocates — was mischaracterized or insufficiently acknowledged. Finally, dissenting perspectives were marginalized, and those who voiced them were disparaged.

"The American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics peddled the lie that chemical and surgical sex-rejecting procedures could be good for children," HHS Secretary Kennedy said in a statement.

"They betrayed their oath to first do no harm, and their so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ has inflicted lasting physical and psychological damage on vulnerable young people," continued Kennedy. "That is not medicine — it’s malpractice."

RELATED: Sacrificing body parts and informed consent to the sex-change regime

Photo by Bob Riha Jr./Getty Images

When other Western nations, Britain in particular, began to re-evaluate their barbaric medical approaches to gender dysphoria, the Biden administration and the U.S. medical establishment dug in their heels and pushed the child sex-change regime to new extremes.

For instance, Biden's transvestic Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services Rachel Levine, formerly Richard Levine, successfully pressured WPATH to drop its recommended minimum age requirements for sex-change mutilations. His reasoning for lowering the recommended age minimums — 17 for genital mutilations, 15 for healthy breast removals, 16 for breast implants, and 14 for hormone treatments — was apparently not based on scientific evidence but on politics.

Levine's successor, Trump HHS Assistant Secretary Brian Christine, told Blaze News, "There was absolutely an effort by the prior administration and, very specifically, an absolute effort by the individual who was the prior assistant secretary for health, Rachel Levine," to continue politicizing children's health.

He added that both ideology and profit prompted medical professionals and associations to similarly dig in their heels.

"It's literally a billion-dollar industry. It creates lifelong customers," said Christine. "You bring a little boy or a little girl in and you have them either get hormones or they get a mutilating surgery — you've created a lifelong customer. You've created someone who's going to come back again and again and again because of surgical complications or other things going on."

Gender dysphoria is an "emotional and mental condition," he explained. "There's no question about that. These individuals who truly have gender dysphoria, they suffer terribly. They deserve compassion. They deserve mental health care. What they don't need are sex-rejecting surgeries."

Christine said that treating gender dysphoria as a mental health condition is especially important with kids. "You should treat them with mental health care because we know that if you do, the majority of these kids, by the time they're in their late teens, are very comfortable in their own skin," he said.

Neeraja Deshpande, policy analyst for the Independent Women's Forum, said that the report, "in addition to creating a more transparent system, confirms once and for all what never should have been up for debate to begin with: that so-called surgical and chemical body alteration in the name of ‘gender transition’ is a medical danger to children."

Terry Schilling, president of the American Principles Project, said in a statement to Blaze News, "The HHS report should put an end to the scourge of child mutilation masquerading as health care."

RELATED: 'They'll create second sets of genitals': WPATH Files author tells Glenn Beck about 'gender-affirming care' mutilations

Luis Soto/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

"The peer-reviewed study only confirms what the American Principles Project and anyone with common sense has known all along: The gender industrial complex relies on bad faith, bad science, and a radical ideology that places the financial interest of drug companies over those of children," said Schilling.

Schilling suggested to Blaze News that elements within the child sex-change regime are now more likely to reap the whirlwind in court.

"This is, at a minimum, some type of consumer fraud. I do think that because of how horrific the harm that they did was that it does cross into serious criminal areas."

While Schilling noted that the industry presently enjoys robust protection from trial attorneys and left-wing institutions, once major legal actions break through, prompting big payouts, "then you'll have blood in the water, and the sharks will start circling."

Schilling alluded to Chloe Cole's lawsuit as one such potential breakthrough action.

Cole, a detransitioner who has raised awareness across the country about the horrors and fallout of sex-change medical interventions, has sued Kaiser Permanente for alleged medical negligence in connection with the sex-rejecting procedures the health system performed on her as a minor.

Schilling commended the numerous experts who put their names to the report — including doctors and scientists from the Baylor College of Medicine, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Duke University — stating, "They're very courageous for doing this. This is a very powerful and embedded industry that's been doing really big and terrible things in the country ... and for these guys to put their names behind it is a very big deal."

When asked whether this report ultimately amounts to a lethal blow against the sex-change regime, HHS Assistant Secretary Christine told Blaze News, "Yeah, we certainly hope so. We certainly believe it will be. Listen, our job in the administration is to protect our children, protect our citizens. Our job is to produce gold-standard science. That's exactly what we have done. It's exactly what we're doing."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

My kids make me sick!



I never used to get sick.

Every once in a while, sure. But it wasn’t really a regular phenomenon. It also didn’t really matter that much when I did. Yeah, I had work to get done and grocery shopping to do. But when I was a young single guy without any kids, getting sick just didn’t really impact my easy life that much.

I’ve also tried avoiding the illness at all costs. Washing my hands constantly. Staying away from the kids a little. Hugging them gently rather than wrestling like a madman.

Couch bound

Before that, when I was a kid, I loved getting “sick.” Those scare quotes are key. I didn’t actually love getting sick so much as I loved staying home from school because I was sick. That was fun. One day home from school was cool. Two days home was crazy. Going to sleep after the first day home sick, it was glorious knowing that unless a miracle occurred in the middle of the night, there would be yet another day of sitting at home on the couch watching TV.

I remember one year I got mono, and I was home for more than a week. I swear it may have been two weeks. I remember secretly wondering how long I could go with it. “What if I didn’t go back for a month?” A kid can only dream of something so beautiful.

Mono was a serious illness, I guess, but I don’t ever remember really being sad about it. Getting out of school was worth far more than the pain of a sore throat or a feverish head.

Germ magnet

Now I get sick a lot. Well, maybe not a lot, but a lot more than I used to in my 20s, and I certainly don’t like it like I did in my early teens. Now I know without a shadow of a doubt that as soon as I start seeing frost on the grass in the morning, I am going to get sick. And then a month or two after that, I am going to get sick again. And maybe even again after that if I’m really unlucky.

It’s not because I have developed a debilitating disease that results in an unnaturally sickly disposition. It’s because I’m a dad, and my kids are young, and young kids touch stuff in the stores and then stick their hands in their mouths, and then three days later one gets sick, then 24 hours after that another one gets it, and then my wife, and then finally me. Whatever it is runs through the house like a steamroller, and we all get squashed.

RELATED: Sweat equity: The surprising health benefits of a hot bath

Mirrorpix/Getty Images

Amor fati

I’ve tried a variety of different tactics over the years. I’ve tried giving up right from the start. Knowing that I’ll get it eventually, I accept my fate and just sort of live life with the sick kids. It feels pretty good psychologically. I’m not worried or stressed out about how I can avoid the illness. I don’t end up over-monitoring my body, trying to discern if I am getting sick or not. I just sort of march toward the cold in a blissful state.

I’ve also tried avoiding the illness at all costs. Washing my hands constantly. Staying away from the kids a little. Hugging them gently rather than wrestling like a madman. Backing my face away as they cough without covering their mouths, then telling them in a frustrated tone, “You need to cover your mouth.” Trying my hardest to prevent the unpreventable. It’s not a great feeling, and I always end up getting sick anyway. But at least I tried. That’s something, right?

Getting sick is just a part of having kids. I know that now. It can be mitigated by hounding them about washing their hands with hot soapy water and not touching their mouths in stores, but it can’t be eliminated entirely. It’s an inescapable fact of family life. If someone gets sick, everyone gets sick.

Family fever

It’s an allegory, of course. When you have a family, you can’t get away. You can’t separate or isolate. You are no longer just yourself. You are everyone at the same time.

We have our separate bedrooms and separate closets, but we share the same space. We have our own plates and silverware, but we share the same dish. We have our own inner thoughts and our own personalities, but we share the same name, the same blood, and the same familial predispositions that are part nature and part nurture, the ones that can’t really be untangled or even really figured out.

We make our kids into the kids they are in ways we can see and in ways we intend, through the prayers we say and the manners we demand. But we make them into who they are in other ways too. Some we don’t see, and some are unintentional: the phrase a kid says that sounds just like mom or the curse word a kid says that makes you realize you really do need to stop swearing.

We make them, and they make us. I’m different now from what I was before, and it’s partly because they made me that way. When you have a family, you are not only taking on the responsibilities of raising kids but also accepting that you aren’t alone anymore. That nothing in life will be tidy (literally or figuratively) like it was before. You are trapped together, you turn yourself over to no longer being yourself and only yourself.

For better or for worse. In sickness and in health.

The hard truth about sunscreen



Since the 1980s, society has become increasingly heliophobic. Dermatologists warn “there’s no such thing as a healthy tan.” Influencers and celebrities urge us to slather on high SPF products any time we leave the house. Public health agencies like the CDC now list sunscreen as a daily essential alongside seat belts and flu shots.

Is all this solar alarmism really merited?

Dr. Paul Saladino — a double board certified MD, host of the “Fundamental Health” podcast, and author of “The Carnivore Code” — says no. And in fact, it’s the sunscreen itself we should be scrutinizing, he told BlazeTV host Nicole Shanahan on an episode of “Back to the People.”

While sunscreen advocates constantly warn of sun exposure-linked cancers, Dr. Saladino points out that the majority of mainstream sunscreens are ironically full of carcinogens and endocrine disruptors, like benzene, oxybenzone, octocrylene, and avobenzone.

Further, villainizing the sun makes no sense from an “evolutionary, historical, anthropological perspective,” he says. “Most animals have a sense of when they've gotten too much sun. This is just intrinsic to life on the earth.”

“You can't produce vitamin D naturally without sunshine, nor can you produce ... melatonin,” Nicole adds.

“Exactly. ... We can supplement with melatonin, and we can supplement with vitamin D, but questions remain about whether that's the same as being in the sun,” Dr. Saladino agrees.

Sun exposure is also critical for our circadian rhythm – our body’s natural 24-hour internal clock that regulates sleep-wake cycles, hormone release, body temperature, and other functions in sync with day and night.

And perhaps most importantly, it just makes us happy. Sunlight is one of the biggest factors in depression risk. “We know that endorphins are produced when you go out in the sun, so these are the feel-good chemicals in our bodies suggestive of some sort of evolutionary mechanism that spurs us as humans to crave the sun in reasonable amounts,” says Dr. Saladino.

On top of that, sunlight triggers the production of nitric oxide in our skin, which widens blood vessels and lowers blood pressure. Dr. Saladino says that “there have been studies in humans” proving the cardiovascular benefits of sun exposure.

And yet despite all the evidence that sunlight is critical to human flourishing, the medical industry continues to demonize it and insists we douse ourselves in toxic chemicals that block sunlight.

So what’s the answer? How do we reap the necessary benefits of sunlight while still protecting ourselves from overexposure?

Dr. Saladino has several suggestions to help you stay safe and healthy:

1. If you feel you need some protection from the sun, try “covering up” or opting for mineral sunscreens, specifically “non-nano zinc oxide” sunscreens. These products sit on the skin's surface and block UV rays without risk of absorption.

2. As far as sun exposure goes, Dr. Saladino says every person’s limit is different. It “depends on skin tone at base, where you are in the world, and the season,” he says. He recommends using a free app called D-Minder, which calculates your optimal sun exposure time to produce vitamin D without burning based on factors like skin type, location, age, weight, and UV index.

3. For naturally pale-skinned people, he recommends morning sunlight, as there’s less UV rays at that time.

4. Trust your instincts. “Most of us as humans have an intrinsic sense of when we've gotten enough sun,” he says. “If you are sitting indoors and the sun looks delicious ... and it feels heavenly, your body probably needs that sunlight.”

To hear more of Dr. Saladino’s take on the “anti-sun establishment,” watch the episode above.

Want more from Nicole Shanahan?

To enjoy more of Nicole's compelling blend of empathy, curiosity, and enlightenment, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Most Women Are On Crazy Pills, And It’s Bad For Everyone

An entire generation of women is lost amidst engineered anxiety, chasing hollow independence while forsaking the proven anchors of marriage, family, and selfless purpose.

RFK Jr. Probes Health Dangers Of Offshore Wind Turbines

While offshore wind farms’ effect on marine life has garnered much attention, the human element has been largely neglected.

'Pro-death legislators' want euthanasia in Illinois — Canada reveals why that's a terrible idea



Democratic lawmakers in the Illinois legislature have passed a bill that would legalize doctor-assisted suicide across the state.

The bill now awaiting Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker's signature, SB 1950, originally started out as a measure concerning sanitary food preparation. The bill was, however, hollowed out then repurposed. Instead of keeping consumers healthy, the language was changed to expedite death — authorizing a qualified patient with a terminal disease to demand that their doctor prescribe a lethal dose of medication, thereby ending "the patient's life in a peaceful manner."

Catholic leaders in the state are among the bill's loudest critics.

'Now, they can prescribe death.'

In May, Cardinal Blase Cupich, the archbishop of Chicago, wrote, "I have to ask why, in a time when growing understanding of the deteriorating mental health of the U.S. population — and particularly among our youth — caused the country to create the 988 mental health crisis line, we would want to take this step to normalize suicide as a solution to life's challenges."

Cupich stressed that the Illinois legislature should explore options that instead "honor the dignity of human life and provide compassionate care to those experiencing life-ending illness."

Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield stated after legislators ignored Cupich's counsel and passed the bill in a 30-27 vote on Friday, "It is quite fitting that the forces of the culture of death in the Illinois General Assembly passed physician-assisted suicide on October 31 — a day that, culturally, has become synonymous with glorifying death and evil."

RELATED: The total state will kill you for being old

Blaze Media Illustration

"It's also ironic that these pro-death legislators did it under the cloud of darkness at 2:54 a.m. Make no mistake: killing oneself is not dying with dignity. Doctors take an oath to do no harm. Now, they can prescribe death," the bishop continued. "Physician assisted suicide undermines the value of each person, especially the vulnerable, the poor, and those with disabilities."

The Illinois Catholic Conference warned on Wednesday that the legalization of assisted suicide in Illinois will put the "state on a slippery path that jeopardizes the well-being of the poor and marginalized, especially those in the disability community and have foreseeable tragic consequences."

The dangers and fallout of legalized assisted suicide are hardly hypothetical.

North of the border, Canada is weeks away from publishing its sixth annual report on so-called medical assistance in dying. While the official numbers have yet to be released accounting for all MAID deaths in 2024 nationwide, provincial data appear to indicate another year-over-year increase in state-facilitated slayings.

The federal government under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau passed the Medical Assistance in Dying Act in 2016, legalizing euthanasia nationwide. Originally, applicants had to be 18 or older and suffering from a "grievous and irremediable medical condition" causing "enduring physical or psychological suffering that is intolerable" to them.

The state-facilitated suicide program has since been grossly liberalized such that the country's eugenicist-founded health care system can now effectively execute those struggling with anxiety, autism, depression, economic woes, PTSD, and other survivable issues.

In its first year, MAID offed 1,108 Canadians. That number tripled the following year, and by 2021, the number had climbed to over 10,000 assisted-suicide deaths in a single year.

The Canadian think tank Cardus revealed last year that "MAiD in Canada is no longer unusual or rare. Federal predictions about the expected frequency of MAiD have significantly underestimated the numbers of Canadians who are dying by this means."

As of 2022, MAID was tied with cerebrovascular diseases as the fifth leading cause of death in the country. The following year, state-facilitated suicide claimed the lives of 15,343 individuals, accounting for 4.7% of all deaths in the country.

'Feeling like a burden can play on a patient's decision to request and receive a MAiD death.'

Authorities in Nova Scotia, a province of just over 1 million souls, indicated to Blaze News that it saw a drop in completed MAID slayings last year. Whereas there were 380 slayings in 2023, there were allegedly only 169 in 2024, with 286 active cases and 71 recorded natural deaths prior to MAID.

This appears to be the exception, not the rule.

The nation's more populous provinces have alternatively seen continued increases in MAID slayings.

British Columbia's 2024 euthanasia data, for instance, indicate that there were 3,000 state-facilitated suicides in the province last year. While most of the victims were over the age of 65, 1.5% of those slain were between the ages of 18 and 45 and individuals who were not dying. In fact, among the conditions cited as reasons and/or contributing reasons for MAID were "frailty," dementia, mental disorders, and unstated neurological conditions.

The Euthanasia Prevent Coalition noted that MAID deaths in B.C. were up over 8% from the previous year and accounted for 6.7% of all deaths in the province last year.

Alberta, a province of just over 5 million souls, recorded 1,117 deaths in 2024, representing a year-over-year increase of 14.3% and making its total MAID kill count 5,646 victims since 2016.

Data obtained by the MAiD in Canada Substack indicate that in 2024, Ontario had 4,957 deaths, representing an increase of 6.8% and making its grand total 23,333 victims since 2016.

Quebec reportedly had 6,058 MAID deaths last year, representing an increase of 6.4% and making its grand total over 26,000 victims since 2016. In addition to the growing number of deaths, there is apparently a growing cohort of doctors willing to dish out lethal doses in Quebec. A recent government report indicated that over 2,000 physicians were involved in the slayings, representing an 11% increase over the previous year.

Rebecca Vachon, health program director at Cardus, told Blaze News that "based on current reporting from the most populous provinces, we expect to see more than 16,500 'medical assistance in dying' or euthanasia deaths in 2024, which is an increase from the 15,343 deaths reported in 2023. This will likely result in MAiD deaths constituting 5% of total deaths in Canada that year, which, as Cardus discussed in a report released last fall, is a far cry from the expectations set by the courts that MAiD would be for exceptional cases only."

RELATED: ‘Stone-cold communism’: Canadian government seizes hospice center when staff refuses to allow euthanasia

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

The Canadian government released a report in 2020 indicating that the previous year, MAID resulted in a net cost reduction of over $86 million for provincial governments. The report additionally noted that further liberalization of the MAID program under Bill C-7, which was passed in March 2021, would result in an additional $62 million reduction in costs.

When asked whether MAID is being championed in part as a way to cut costs for Canada's immigration-strained health care system, Vachon told Blaze News, "Regardless of intentions, the pressure that feeling like a burden can play on a patient's decision to request and receive a MAiD death should not be understated."

"For instance, Canadian MAiD providers report that almost 50% of the patients they helped die in 2023 reported feeling they were a burden on others — up 10% from the previous year," Vachon said.

'Illinois should be a state that offers compassion, care, and hope — not death — as the answer to human suffering.'

Polls conducted by Cardus in partnership with the Angus Reid Institute found that 62% of Canadians fear that those who are financially or socially vulnerable may consider state-facilitated suicide because of difficulties accessing adequate care, Vachon indicated.

The fear is justified given that 42% of all MAID deaths from 2019 to 2023 involved people who required disability supports. Of those victims, over 1,017 never received those supports.

"Canadians deserve care that alleviates their suffering and prevents it from becoming 'unbearable,'" Vachon said.

Blaze News has reached out for comment to Prime Minister Mark Carney's office as well as to the leaders of the New Democratic Party and Conservative Party, Don Davies and Pierre Poilievre.

While the slope has been greased in Canada and in states such as California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Vermont, and Washington, there's still hope that Pritzker may reconsider, especially after he noted on Monday, "It was something that I didn't expect and didn't know it was going to be voted on, so we're examining it even now."

Rather than sign the bill, the Illinois Catholic Conference has implored Pritzker to "expand and improve on palliative care programs that offer expert assessment and management of pain and other symptoms."

Bishop Paprocki noted, "Pray for Gov. Pritzker to reject this legislation. Illinois should be a state that offers compassion, care, and hope — not death — as the answer to human suffering."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump strikes major deal with pharma giants Lilly and Novo over obesity drugs, Medicare



Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is working on identifying and tackling the root causes of America's obesity epidemic. In the meantime, the Trump administration wants to make sure that Americans have access to affordable diabetes and weight-loss drugs, specifically glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, better known as GLP-1 drugs.

To this end and as part of his months-long campaign to bring most-favored-nation prescription drug pricing to Americans, President Donald Trump has struck a deal with pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, the manufacturer of Ozempic, to cut prices on their weight-loss drugs in exchange for Medicare coverage.

A senior administration official indicated on Thursday that since Trump issued his most-favored-nation pricing executive order in May, GLP-1 drugs "have been top of mind" — not just because of the pharmaceuticals' apparent cardiometabolic benefits "but also because this is, again, an issue of fairness."

RELATED: How MAHA can really save American lives

IM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

Per the terms of Trump's deal with the two companies, "starting oral doses of GLP-1s will cost just $149 for everyone on Medicare, Medicaid, or Trump Rx," said an official. "That's roughly 1/9th of today's list price."

For Medicare, the manufacturers have reportedly agreed to reduce prices on GLP-1 drugs that are currently used for diabetes and other covered conditions to $245 per month across all other doses, added the official.

Savings generated by these price reductions will apparently be used to provide new coverage for GLP-1 drugs to patients struggling with obesity who face high metabolic or cardiovascular risk at the same monthly cost of $245.

As of 2020, over 100 million American adults were obese, and more than 22 million adults suffered from severe obesity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

While the adult obesity rate reportedly declined from 39.9% in 2022 to 37% this year — representing roughly 7.6 million fewer obese adults — Gallup recently indicated that diagnoses of diabetes have reached an all-time high of 13.8%.

Amid the glut of diabetes cases, there has been a significant increase in the number of U.S. adults who report taking GLP-1 drugs — from 5.8% in February 2024 to 12.4% in the latest quarter of 2025. The three-year decline in obesity among most age groups appears to correspond with the embrace of the weight-loss drugs.

When asked roughly how many patients on Medicare and Medicaid would be impacted by these changes, another administration official noted that in Medicare, around 10% of the population will be eligible for the standard access. While the drugs are approved for a much broader population, access has been constrained for "patients that will benefit clinically from it."

There will reportedly be three tiers of patients in Medicare who will have access to these drugs for the purposes of addressing obesity and driving "cardiometabolic improvement": those with a body mass index greater than 27 kg/m² suffering from pre-diabetes or established cardiovascular disease; patients with a BMI greater than 30 who have uncontrolled hypertension, kidney disease, and/or heart failure; and individuals with a BMI exceeding 35.

'We do not believe that GLP-1s or drugs alone are somehow some silver bullet.'

"This is about making America healthy again," said the second official. "This is about preventing strokes, this is about preventing heart attacks, and this is about preventing end-stage renal disease."

The officials acknowledged, however, that cheaper drugs do not amount to a long-term solution to the problem of obesity.

"Make no mistake: We're in a war against obesity. We do not believe that GLP-1s or drugs alone are somehow some silver bullet to make the ... country healthy again," said one official. "They are an important jump-start."

In exchange for their cooperation, the pharma giants are gaining additional access to beneficiaries who wouldn't otherwise be covered by Medicare for obesity indications, certainty from the Trump administration on its approach to drug pricing moving forward, and a commitment to invest in American manufacturing.

One Trump administration official told reporters that this initiative is expected to ultimately be cost neutral, stating, "This is really a win-win on all sides — for taxpayers, for Medicare beneficiaries, as well as for the companies."

Last month, Trump announced an agreement with AstraZeneca that would guarantee every state Medicaid program across the country most-favored-nation drug prices on the pharma giant's products. The previous month, he announced a similar deal with Pfizer.

"In case after case, our citizens pay massively higher prices than other nations pay for the same exact pill, from the same factory, effectively subsidizing socialism [abroad] with skyrocketing prices at home," Trump said in a statement. "So we would spend tremendous amounts of money in order to provide inexpensive drugs to another country. And when I say the price is different, you can see some examples where the price is beyond anything — four times, five times different."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

90-year-old golf legend Gary Player reveals secrets for living to 100



Golf and PGA Tour legend Gary Player is still playing as he turns 90.

The South African was the first international player to win at the Masters in 1961, and a star was born. Even though Player broke the tournament's rules by taking the prized green jacket back home with him in 1962 despite losing to Arnold Palmer — only the reigning champion can take the jacket home, for that year only — a lifetime later, he is still making headlines.

'I really suffered a lot. A lot.'

In April, Player shocked the crowd in Augusta, Georgia, teeing off at 89 years old and finishing his shot with a signature high kick.

"I'm standing here for the 67th time, and I think the word is gratitude, just being here," Player said at the time.

He turned 90 years old on Nov. 1, and now one of the sport's oldest stars is sharing his secrets to living a long life.

"Under eat. Exercise. Read. Prayer/meditate. Love. Ice bath. Gratitude. Sleep. Laugh a lot. Keep busy. Friends. Do things you don't want to do," he said recently.

The secrets were not his, though. While he may have the rules written on a laminated card in his wallet, he once received the advice from a gerontologist as a list of 12 keys to living to 100.

"All the gerontologists varied to a degree, but basically what they all agreed on to live a long time is under eat," Player told Golfweek. "Everybody's eating too much. Obesity, which is killing them."

Publicly declaring that living to 100 is now his goal, Player shared more of his regimen for good health.

RELATED: Justin Bieber confesses Christian faith in candid livestream

Arnold Palmer (L) presents Gary Player (R) with the green jacket at the 1961 Masters Tournament in Augusta, Georgia. Photo by Augusta National/Getty Images

Working out or playing golf as many days as possible is part of Player's plan. Weight training, walking the beach, and swimming are included.

"But not far out," he said. "Because I'm very wary of sharks."

The thought of living to 100 is in Player's head "every day," he explained, saying he thinks he will get there so long as he does not contract a disease. "[It] can happen because the food is all sprayed, you know, and it's the things that prevent you from becoming a hundred."

Player opened up about his younger years in South Africa, saying that when he was a kid he thought of golf as nothing more than a "sissy sport."

Soccer, rugby, and cricket were more revered in his eyes.

"When you experience what I experienced as a young man, which is living like a junkie or a dog ..." he told the outlet. "I went to this great school, which really helped me, but I'd go home at night, nobody there, cook my own food. I'd get up at 5:30 in the morning to travel to school."

When he eventually started playing golf, Player said he made a promise to himself that if he ever became a champion, he would help others in a similar situation.

He continued, "So I really suffered a lot. A lot. I lay in bed for two years on and off wishing I was dead, crying in bed. That was the greatest gift bestowed upon me ever. And that's what made me a world champion."

RELATED: NBA coach, former player arrested in Mafia-tied nationwide gambling bust

Photo by David Cannon/Getty Images

Player has 24 wins on the PGA Tour and 22 wins on the PGA Tour Champions. He has victories in nine majors, winning three Masters: 1961, 1974, and 1978. He also has 118 international wins.

Player was inducted into the World Golf Hall of Fame in 1974.

Through all his success, Player says he knows why people die — it comes from retirement.

"I think people retire too early," he said.

"To me, it's a death warrant," he explained. "They say, 'I've worked hard; I'm going to take it easy.' And yes, literally, they do. They go home and they sit there and they overeat and they watch television and they die within three years."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Study shows massive decline in peanut allergies after previous experts proven wrong



Health experts suggested in years past that mothers with familial predispositions to developing allergies should avoid peanut consumption during pregnancy and breastfeeding and that parents should avoid giving their children peanut products and other common allergens before the age of 3.

According to a National Institutes of Health-backed study published on Monday in the American Academy of Pediatrics' medical journal, Pediatrics, the strategy of avoidance appears to have been the wrong approach.

Background

After observing the prevalence of peanut allergy among children in Western countries double over the course of a decade, an international team of researchers evaluated studies of peanut consumption and avoidance to figure out which was the better approach.

'There are less kids with food allergy today than there would have been if we hadn’t implemented this public health effort.'

The researchers, whose work was partly funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, conducted a randomized trial of peanut consumption in infants at risk for peanut allergy and found that "early introduction of peanuts significantly decreased the frequency of the development of peanut allergy among children at high risk for this allergy and modulated immune responses to peanuts."

Following the 2015 publication of the trial results in the New England Journal of Medicine, numerous health organizations issued consensus-based interim guidance recommending early allergen introduction.

Years later, the NIAID, leaning on the trial data in the 2015 study, released guidelines recommending early introduction for all infants facing low risk of developing a peanut allergy and for high-risk infants where appropriate.

RELATED: The hidden hospital scam driving up drug prices, coming to a state near you

Photo by Amy Brothers/ The Denver Post

Exposure therapy

The new study in Pediatrics indicates that the exposure strategy was worthwhile and has resulted in a 27.2% reduction in the cumulative incidence of peanut allergy among children in the post-guidelines cohort versus the pre-guidelines cohort, and a reduction of over 40% when comparing the pre-guidelines cohort with the cohort situated after the 2017 release of the updated NIAID guidelines.

After analyzing health records from nearly 50 pediatric practices altogether tracking over 120,000 kids, the researchers behind the new study found that overall food allergy rates in kids under 3 dropped from 1.46% between 2012 and 2015 to 0.93% between 2017 and 2020.

The researchers noted further that a Canadian study found that the implementation of early peanut introduction guidelines "was associated with a significant decrease in new-onset anaphylaxis in children aged 2 years or younger."

"I can actually come to you today and say there are less kids with food allergy today than there would have been if we hadn’t implemented this public health effort," Dr. David Hill, an allergist at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and author of the study, told the Associated Press.

While about 60,000 kids have reportedly dodged food allergies since 2015, including 40,000 children who would have otherwise developed peanut allergies, 8% of children remain affected by food allergies. One reason the number remains high may be that only a minority of pediatricians — roughly 29% — indicated they followed the expanded guidance released in 2017.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Is Homesteading the American Dream? Secrets to Self-Sufficient Living | Michelle Visser | Ep 1258
play icon

Is Homesteading the American Dream? Secrets to Self-Sufficient Living | Michelle Visser | Ep 1258