(MASSACHUSETTS) — A Massachusetts judge ruled on Monday in favor of medical organizations in their litigation against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over his changes to federal vaccine policy.
The judge temporarily blocked changes to the childhood vaccine schedule that were made at the beginning of this year, in which Kennedy reduced the number of recommended shots from 17 to 11.
The judge also suspended the appointments of the 13 members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory committee, who were all appointed unilaterally by Kennedy after he fired all the preceding members.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
In this photo illustration a girl looks at the screen of her smartphone on April 16, 2021 in Bonn, Germany. (Ute Grabowsky/Photothek via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — So-called “night owls” may face a higher risk for heart attack and stroke, a new study published Wednesday finds.
Researchers found that “evening type” people had poorer cardiovascular health scores than those who were neither “morning type” or “evening type” people and had an associated 16% higher risk of heart attack and stroke.
The study, published in the Journal of the American Heart Association, analyzed survey and biometric data from more than 320,000 British adults aged 39 to 74.
Participants were asked whether they considered themselves a “definite morning” person, a “definite evening” person or somewhere in between, termed “intermediate.”
Researchers then calculated each person’s heart health using the American Heart Association’s Life’s Essential 8 (LE8) score. These factors include four health behaviors — diet quality, physical activity, sleep duration and nicotine exposure — and four health factors, including blood pressure, body mass index, blood sugar and blood fat levels.
“These are the factors the American Heart Association has identified as cardiovascular disease risk factors,” Kristen Knutson, associate professor of neurology and peventive medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine specializing in sleep and circadian rhythm research and fellow at the American Heart Association, told ABC News.
“Different people will have them in different combinations, but they are all correlated with one another,” she added.
Evening people were 79% more likely to have poor overall heart health compared with those in the intermediate group, the study found. Morning people did slightly better than the intermediate group, with a 5% lower risk of having a poor LE8 score.
Researchers found the evening people had a 16% higher risk of both heart attack and stroke. Researchers estimated that about 75% of this higher risk was explained by other LE8 factors, rather than sleep timing alone.
“It isn’t being a night owl that’s a problem,” Knutson said. “I think being a night owl who’s trying to live in a morning lark’s world is a conflict between one’s internal clock and their social clock.”
The higher risk appeared to be due to certain lifestyle behaviors and other health factors, the study found.
Nicotine use had the strongest impact on heart health, explaining 34% of the link between late bedtime and heart disease. Shorter sleep duration accounted for 14% of the extra risk, high blood sugar for 12% and body weight and diet each accounted for about 11% of the increased risk.
Behavioral effects of being a night owl were stronger in women than in men — women were 96% more likely to have lower LE8 scores compared to 67% in men, though they did not have a higher risk of heart attack or stroke.
“Women are further stressed by that lifestyle because they’re having to still get up and be the primary caregiver for family members,” Dr. Sonia Tolani, preventative cardiologist, Associate Professor of Medicine, and co-director of the Columbia University Women’s Heart Center, told ABC News.
Heart disease remains the leading cause of death in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The researchers concluded prevention efforts should focus on improving lifestyle habits when spending more time awake at night.
“The most obvious way is to quit smoking and that’s not new advice,” Knutson says. “But sleep regularity, meaning trying to go to bed at about the same time every day and not jumping around the clock — particularly on days off — can really help lead to regular timing of other behaviors like light exposure, meals, exercise activity.”
“Prioritize the low-hanging fruit” recommended Tolani. If an hour at the gym is not doable, “maybe you can find a way to do a 10-minute walk or cut a little bit of salt from your diet. Just try to make small changes,” she said.
(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.
Members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee On Immunization Practices at the Center for Disease Control (CDC) headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, US, on Friday, Dec. 5, 2025. (Megan Varner/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced on Monday it is changing the childhood immunization schedule.
The federal health agency is removing the universal recommendation for multiple shots, in what it calls an attempt to mirror the schedules of peer countries.
Instead of being universally recommended for almost all children at certain age cut offs, vaccines are now split into three categories: vaccines for all children, vaccines for certain high-risk groups and vaccines based on shared clinical decision making.
Shared clinical decision making is the term used by CDC to imply that patients, and parents, should talk to their provider about whether they should be vaccinated.
Some of the vaccines and immunizations that are no longer universally recommended include RSV, flu and COVID, as well as the hepatitis and meningococcal vaccines.
For children not in certain high-risk groups, no vaccine is recommended before the age of two months.
The change comes after President Donald Trump signed a memo in early December last year directing Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to examine how other nations structure their childhood vaccine schedules.
HHS officials say the change will not affect health insurance coverage of vaccines.
“President Trump directed us to examine how other developed nations protect their children and to take action if they are doing better,” Kennedy said in a statement. “After an exhaustive review of the evidence, we are aligning the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule with international consensus while strengthening transparency and informed consent. This decision protects children, respects families, and rebuilds trust in public health.”
The changes drew rebuke from doctors, who expressed concern that such a change did not undergo further debate before being implemented.
The CDC’s vaccine advisory committee met last month to discuss the childhood vaccine schedule, but only voted to remove the universal recommendation for the hepatitis B vaccine at birth.
“I thought there might be proposals that were debated amongst experts in a public meeting, and then maybe something like this resulting from that, but not in the way this has been done, where a new schedule is released, which has already been signed on to by all the health advisors for the president,” Dr. Dave Margolius, an internal medicine physician and director of public for the city of Cleveland, told ABC News.
Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, former director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said altering the schedule without consulting U.S. experts in pediatrics, infectious diseases and public health “undermines both scientific rigor and transparency.”
He told ABC News that the American health care system is unique, which makes it difficult to align the U.S. vaccine schedule to those of peer nations.
“Vaccine schedules should be crafted to reflect the specific patterns of disease and access to healthcare in the United States; unfortunately, these vital factors were not adequately considered in the development of the new schedule,” Daskalakis said.
In a press briefing representing the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Dr. Sean O’Leary, an infectious disease physician and chair of the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases, said the federal government can no longer be trusted in its role to protect American children from vaccine-preventable diseases.
“Tragically, our federal government can no longer be trusted in this role,” O’Leary said. “Unfortunately, our government is making it much harder for pediatricians to do our jobs, and they’re making it much harder for parents to know what to do.”
O’Leary confirmed the AAP was not consulted by HHS ahead of this decision to change the vaccine schedule.
Additionally, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a physician and chair of the Senate’s health committee, distanced himself from the CDC’s decision to change the childhood vaccine schedule.
“Changing the pediatric vaccine schedule based on no scientific input on safety risks and little transparency will cause unnecessary fear for patients and doctors, and will make America sicker,” Cassidy wrote in a post on X, rejecting the recent changes.
Cassidy added that the schedule is “not a mandate,” but rather a recommendation that gives parents the “power” to choose which vaccines their children receive.
