Dr. Marty Makary intends to resign as FDA commissioner: Sources
Marty Makary attends an executive order signing in the Oval Office on April 18, 2026.(Allison Robbert/For The Washington Post via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary intends to resign on Tuesday, two sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.
His departure was in the works after he clashed publicly with lawmakers, major pharmaceutical companies and President Donald Trump himself. He was scheduled to testify on Capitol Hill on Wednesday.
Makary, who is a surgeon by training, gained notoriety during the COVID-19 pandemic, arguing against masks for children and vaccine mandates, and criticizing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for citing Israeli data in recommending boosters rather than conducting its own research.
Since taking office in March 2025, the commissioner has focused his efforts on reshaping vaccine policy in the U.S. and transforming American diets.
Makary appeared in a video on X alongside Kennedy when the secretary announced in May 2025 the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC’s immunization schedule for “healthy children and pregnant women.”
“There’s no evidence healthy kids need it today and most countries have stopped recommending it for children,” Makary said at the time.
Last year, Makary appeared at a news conference announcing the HHS and FDA would be implementing a series of measures to phase out eight artificial food dyes and colorings from America’s food supply by the end of 2026.
Makary said at the time that the agencies are looking to revoke authorization for two synthetic food colorings and to work with the food industry to eliminate six remaining synthetic dyes used in cereal, ice cream, snacks, yogurts and more — claiming American children “have been living in a toxic soup of synthetic chemicals.”
Makary also supported Kennedy’s updated federal dietary guidelines earlier this year. The guidelines recommended that Americans limit highly processed foods and refined carbohydrates but also advocated for consuming red meat and full-fat dairy, a reversal of past nutrition guidance.
“For decades, we’ve been fed a corrupt food pyramid that has had a myopic focus on demonizing natural healthy saturated fats, telling you not to eat eggs and steak and ignoring a giant blind spot: refined carbohydrates, refined sugars, ultra-processed foods,” Makary said. “In this new guidance, we are telling young people, kids, schools, you don’t need to tiptoe around fat and dairy. … You don’t need to push low-fat milk to kids.”
In early May, Trump criticized Makary for not moving quickly enough to approve flavored vape and nicotine products, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal.
Trump’s advisers informed him that Makary was delaying the president’s effort to “save” vaping,” a pledge Trump made on social media during his presidential campaign, according to the Journal.
(NEW YORK) — As many as 724,000 service members, their families and veterans may rely on health care at hospitals that face financial vulnerability, partly due to cuts in President Donald Trump’s megabill, according to a new analysis.
The bill, known as HR.1, was signed into law in last summer and included sweeping changes to health care including Medicaid. Strict work requirements, reduced federal funding and tightening provider tax rules impacts hospitals that are dependent on Medicaid, increasing their risk of uncompensated care and reducing revenue.
Service members and their families — many of whom are covered by the military health insurance program TRICARE — rely heavily on civilian hospitals for health care, particularly in areas without military treatment facilities.
The analysis, conducted by researchers the Healthcare Quality and Outcomes Lab at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH) and first viewed by ABC News, looked at how many TRICARE beneficiaries may be reliant on hospitals considered at risk of financial distress under these new changes.
The researchers said many hospitals rely so heavily on Medicaid reimbursements that cuts to the program under HR.1 will affect care the hospitals provide to other patients, including those in the military community.
“We wanted to get a sense of how many hospitals are potentially at risk for becoming potentially financially unstable with the upcoming looming HR.1 Medicaid cuts,” Dr. Jose Figueroa, co-author of the analysis and associate professor of Health Policy and Management at HPSH told ABC News. “There’s a big focus on rural hospitals, but it is not just rural hospitals at risk, that we were finding that across the country, many urban hospitals are at risk.”
Figueroa said medical services that many TRICARE beneficiaries need are often only offered in civilian hospitals or in civilian health care systems. These beneficiaries are then exposed to hospitals that are potentially at financial risk, he noted.
“Military active duty service members on TRICARE and their families also on TRICARE are increasingly relying on civilian hospitals for their care, even when they’re living within a military base,” Figueroa said. “If we’re finding evidence that there are many hospitals across the country that are at risk, to what extent will that affect military personnel and their families?”
TRICARE is run by the U.S. Department of Defense for those connected to the military, including active duty members, National Guard and reserve members, military retirees and their families. It is not the same as Medicaid, although some may qualify for both.
For their analysis, the team used three different criteria to identify a hospital that might be at risk.
If more than one in four of patients being treated at the hospital are on Medicaid, given that the HR.1. cuts are disproportionally affecting those on the federal health insurance program. If the hospital is a safety net hospital, which serves a large number of patients with no insurance or with Medicaid, or a critical access hospital, which is a rural facility that provides essential health care services to underserved communities. The Altman Z-score, which is an aggregate measure of the financial health of a hospital, combining liquidity, profitability, financial efficiency and solvency measures to categorize a hospital as being at risk for bankruptcy. About 4% of hospitals were considered at higher risk of financial distress — meeting three of the criteria and about 19% were at moderate risk of financial distress — meeting two — according to the analysis.
The team then used a dataset to help to identify 8.9 million TRICARE beneficiaries and their ZIP codes.
The analysis estimated that more than 117,000 TRICARE beneficiaries are currently living on or near military installations potentially exposed to a hospital at higher risk of financial distress. Additionally, more than 607,000 are living near a hospital with a moderate risk of financial distress.
This means that more than 724,000 TRICARE beneficiaries are living in military installation ZIP codes — including bases, camps, posts, depots and stations — where at least one hospital has multiple risk factors for financial distress.
Additionally, more than 3.5 million TRICARE beneficiaries living in ZIP codes without a military installation are potentially exposed to a higher-risk or moderate-risk hospital, the analysis found.
“As a country, we should do our best to take care of the people protecting us,” Figueroa said. “Military personnel and their family members should be protected, and sometimes we have to remind ourselves that drastic cuts to our health care that affect our health delivery system also affects our active military personnel and their families as well.”
Last month, during a Senate hearing, Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force David Wolfe said troops were struggling to get health care appointments and made reference to issues with TRICARE’s reimbursement rate for providers.
“What we’ve all seen over the length of our careers is a gradual erosion in the availability of that health care for our service members and their families,” Wolfe said, according to the Military Times.
Based on the results of the Harvard analysis, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D- Mass., is launching an investigation into how the Pentagon is guiding military families through health care cuts and whether Republicans and the Trump administration consulted the Pentagon before the cuts were made, her office told ABC News first.
Warren is also pressing the Pentagon to explain how these cuts are affecting military readiness.
“Donald Trump is putting troops’ lives on the line in the Middle East while ripping away health care from their families at home,” Warren said in a statement to ABC News. “Republicans swore the Medicaid cuts in their Big Beautiful Bill were about cutting waste, fraud, and abuse — is that what they think of our military families’ health care?”
In a statement sent to ABC News, the Pentagon didn’t address Warren’s comments.
“As with all congressional correspondences, the Department will respond directly to the authors as appropriate,” a spokesperson said.
A Pentagon official also said it wouldn’t be appropriate to comment on the methodology of studies not conducted by the department.
The White House didn’t respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
Pfizer logo (Photo Illustration by Nikolas Kokovlis/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Earlier this week, pharmaceutical company Pfizer and its partner Valneva announced that an experimental Lyme disease vaccine showed more than 70% efficacy in late-stage clinical trials.
The candidate, PF-07307405, showed 73.2% efficacy in reducing confirmed cases of Lyme disease cases after the fourth and final dose was administered when compared to a placebo.
However, the companies said there were fewer than anticipated cases of Lyme disease during the trial period and the study missed an important benchmark.
The trial did not reach its primary endpoint to provide an idea of how the results of this vaccine would turn out in a much larger population of people. Only with re-analyzing the data were researchers able to generate a statistically meaningful result.
Experts in tick-borne diseases told ABC News they still need to see the full data from the trials and that it’s early to determine what kind of impact the vaccine will have — but they add that results are “encouraging.”
“There are many other companies that are trying to develop something, but those are years and years and years away from being anywhere close to being marketed,” Dr. Gene Shapiro, a professor of pediatric infectious diseases and epidemiology of microbial diseases, told ABC News. “So, this vaccine was very similar to the vaccine that we know worked in the past. I think we have to pay attention to [this new one].”
Lyme disease is a bacterial infection that is spread through the bite of blacklegged ticks, also known as deer ticks, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Symptoms include fever, headache, fatigue and a skin rash known as erythema migrans, the CDC says. If left untreated, the infection can spread to joints, the heart and the nervous system.
More than 89,000 cases of Lyme disease were reported to the CDC by state health departments and the District of Columbia in 2023, according to the latest data available from the federal health agency. Estimates suggest about 476,000 Americans may be diagnosed and treated for Lyme disease annually.
Currently, no vaccine for Lyme disease is available in the U.S. Previously, a vaccine was available, but it was discontinued in 2002, according to the CDC.
“The uptake was poor. The sales were poor, and the company decided to stop selling it,” Shapiro said. “The currently developed vaccine [by Pfizer and Valneva] is very, very similar to that vaccine, with very minor modifications.”
Dr. Martin Becker, a clinical associate professor in the department of medicine at NYU Grossman Long Island School of Medicine, added that there were concerns raised, including about vaccine recipients having joint problems but several studies examining a link failed to find an association.
Becker said there have been many clinical trials underway “but this one that Pfizer just announced, I believe, is the one that’s been most advanced,” he told ABC News. “We were eagerly awaiting results from this large Phase III trial. Other previous trials were already published showing the safety and immunogenicity [of the vaccine].”
Pfizer and Valneva said they are planning to file for approval with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, with Pfizer telling ABC News that the trial results show there is a level of protection against Lyme disease.
“It doesn’t mean it doesn’t work, but it does mean — if we had higher numbers of incidence of infection — we would be more confident about the degree of protection. It’s very encouraging,” Becker said.
Questions remain about whether the vaccine, if approved, will have higher uptake than the previous vaccine did decades earlier.
Shapiro said there might be more uptake with this vaccine if stronger recommendations are made. At the time the old vaccine was approved by federal regulators, Shapiro said the recommendation from the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices was to consider the shot for those at higher risk, but it was not recommended for those at low or no risk.
“It was not a very strong recommendation,” Shapiro said. “And I think there was less awareness of Lyme disease. So, most likely, [the newer vaccine] would get a stronger endorsement today.”
Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon testifies during the House Natural Resources Committee hearing on Thursday, June 15, 2023. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon signed a bill into law on Monday banning abortion in the state after a “fetal heartbeat” has been detected.
HB 126, or the Human Heartbeat Act, prohibits abortion once cardiac activity is identified, which is around six weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they’re pregnant.
If cardiac activity is detected, an abortion can only be performed in the case of a medical emergency, meaning if the life of the mother is in danger or if continuing the pregnancy would cause serious or irreversible impairment of a major bodily function, according to the bill.
The bill does not include exceptions for pregnancies as a result of rape or incest.
Any person who intentionally or knowingly violates the act will be charged with a felony punishable by up to five years in prison, a fine of up to $10,000, or both, according to the bill.
“Today I signed the Human Heartbeat Act into law, reaffirming my view that life is sacred. I resoundingly share the determination to defend the lives of unborn children and support the intentions behind the Human Heartbeat Act,” Gordon wrote in a post on X on Monday.
Previously, abortion was allowed in Wyoming until fetal viability, which occurs between 24 and 26 weeks of gestation.
Wyoming is now the fifth state at least to have a “heartbeat ban” following bans enacted in Florida, Georgia, Iowa and South Carolina.
“This ban is an attack on Wyomingites’ constitutional freedom to make their own health care decisions, and it puts the health and well-being of our communities at risk,” Julie Burkhart, president of Wellspring Health Access, Wyoming’s only abortion clinic, said in a statement.
“Every day that this law is in effect means people in our state will face even greater barriers to abortion care — and some may be denied this care altogether,” the statement continued. “With so many across Wyoming already struggling to access reproductive health care, restrictive policies like these take us further in the wrong direction.”
Burkhart said Wellspring Health Access is prepared to challenge the ban in court and will continue to work with regional and national partners to help patients access the care they need.
Gordon wrote in the post on X that he was concerned the bill was “well-intentioned” but would lead to a “fragile legal effort with significant risk of ending in the courts rather than in lasting, durable policy.”
Gordon suggested that voters should decide on the issue and that a question be placed on a ballot asking if an abortion ban should be cemented in the state constitution.
