(SPARTANBURG COUNTY, S.C.) — At least 99 new measles cases are being reported in South Carolina amid the state’s outbreak.
This brings the total number of cases in the state to 310. There are currently 200 people in quarantine, according to health officials.
The outbreak has been ongoing as state health officials continue to push for vaccinations. The majority of cases are located around Spartanburg County.
“The number of those in quarantine does not reflect the number actually exposed,” Dr. Linda Bell, the state epidemiologist, said in a press releases. “An increasing number of public exposure sites are being identified with likely hundreds more people exposed who are not aware they should be in quarantine if they are not immune to measles. Previous measles transmission studies have shown that one measles case can result in up to 20 new infections among unvaccinated contacts.”
South Carolina’s department of public health said it sent a statewide health alert on Jan. 7, “advising health care providers and facilities of the importance of heightened awareness for measles and recommended measures for the use of masks and rapid isolation of suspect measles cases to protect people in health care settings from exposures.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention currently recommends that people receive two doses of the MMR vaccine, the first at ages 12 to 15 months and the second between 4 and 6 years old. One dose is 93% effective, and two doses are 97% effective against measles, the CDC says.
However, CDC data shows vaccination rates have been lagging in recent years. During the 2024-2025 school year, 92.5% of kindergartners received the MMR vaccine, according to data. This is lower than the 92.7% seen the previous school year and the 95.2% seen in the 2019-2020 school year, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.
(NEW YORK) — The American Red Cross declared a severe emergency blood shortage on Monday and called on people to donate.
The humanitarian organization, which says it’s the largest supplier of blood products for hospitals and for patient need in the U.S., said the demand from hospitals has outpaced the available supply of blood.
Dr. Courtney Lawrence, divisional chief medical officer at American Red Cross, told ABC News that almost one-third of the organization’s blood stores across the country have been depleted due to hospital need.
Lawrence said inclement winter weather, which has forced more than 400 Red Cross blood drives around the U.S. to be canceled, is among the reasons that donations are down.
Additionally, the U.S. is experiencing a moderately severe flu season, with some states reporting record levels of weekly cases and hospitalizations.
“That can overwhelm our health care system, and it can also mean that donors may not be feeling well enough to come in to donate or may be busy taking care of their loved ones who are sick,” Lawrence said.
When blood supplies are low, it can affect the ability to treat patients in need including trauma patients, chemotherapy patients with underlying blood disorders, those living with sickle cell disease and others, Lawrence said. She called on Americans to donate if they’re able to.
Reihaneh Hajibeigi, 34, from Austin, Texas, was one of those patients in need, telling ABC News that blood transfusions saved her life.
Hajibeigi said she lost a lot of blood while giving birth to her first child in 2023, and that the hospital gave her some blood and sent her home with her husband and newborn daughter.
“After about a couple weeks, things started to not be so great,” she told ABC News. “What I assumed was just being new mom tired really turned into fatigue. I was losing a lot of blood. I was starting to just not feel so great”
When Hajibeigi went back to the doctor two and a half weeks after giving birth, she said medical staff discovered she had retained a roughly four-centimeter piece of placenta on her uterine wall that was becoming toxic.
Hajibeigi said she underwent a procedure the next morning and began hemorrhaging during the operation, losing about 40% of her total blood volume.
In the recovery room, Hajibeigi said she started to crash again from the loss of blood and doctors raced to give her a blood transfusion.
“Fortunately, they had the blood on hand. They were able to get it into my system and basically brought me back to life,” she said.
Hajibeigi said she hopes that by sharing her story, she can encourage people to donate if they’re able, especially knowing there’s a chance their donation can help someone in need.
“It just made it that much clearer how vital blood donations are and how much sometimes we take it for granted, just assuming that the blood supply was always going to be intact,” she said. “And in that case, I needed the blood. Wonderful.”
“It’s a scary thought to think what if the blood product that I needed wasn’t there?” Hajibeigi said. “Then what would have happened?”
In this handout from Merck & Co, a box and vial of Gardasil, a new cervical cancer vaccine, is seen is this undated photo. Russell Kirk/Merck & Co. via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — A major update to federal women’s health preventive guidance will make it easier for women to get screened for cervical cancer, including a self-collection option that allows some women to test themselves at home instead of going to a doctor for a pelvic exam.
The new option will be covered by private insurance beginning in January 2027.
The updated Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) guidance now advises that people receive a high-risk HPV test – which checks for the virus types most likely to cause cervical cancer – every five years for average-risk women ages 30 to 65 as the preferred screening approach. This can be done with a clinician-collected sample or by the patient at home.
Women in that age group still have other choices: a combination of an HPV and Pap test every five years, or Pap testing alone every three years if HPV testing isn’t available.
“The addition of self-collection really empowers women to make this choice for themselves,” Ann Sheehy, MD, the HRSA’s chief medical officer, told ABC News. “We do retain the option for Pap smear … this is just an additional choice for women.”
For women ages 21 to 29, the recommendations stay the same: Pap tests every three years, which Sheehy said aligns with available evidence.
“By doing this, we’re going to get some of those people that have been falling through the cracks and not getting this testing done in advance,” Tom Engels, administrator of the HRSA, told ABC News. “And by doing that, we’re going to save lives.”
Engels emphasized that the update is meant to expand testing options, not replace the Pap test. Self-collection is intended to remove barriers for women who find in-office screening difficult to schedule, uncomfortable, or hard to access, he stressed.
American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines updated in December, by contrast, recommend that cervical cancer screening should begin at age 25 and centers on primary HPV testing, including self-collection tests.
“The combination of good evidence of the benefits of self-collection, which include increased access to cervical cancer screening, combined with FDA approval, led the ACS and HRSA to include self-collection in their guideline update,” Dr. Robert Smith, senior vice president, Early Cancer Detection Science at the American Cancer Society and author of the organization’s updated guidelines, told ABC News.
Cervical cancer screening is often cited as a major public health success. Over the last 50 years, cervical cancer incidence and deaths have fallen by more than 50% in the U.S., according to the American Cancer Society, largely because screening can catch precancerous changes early, before patients notice any symptoms.
When cervical cancer is found early, five-year survival is higher than 90%, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data suggests. But the HSRA guidance notes that more than half of diagnoses happen beyond the earliest stage, after the disease is spread to other areas of the body. In those later stages, five-year survival is only about 20%, according to the CDC.
Wide use of the HPV vaccine is expected to push cervical cancer rates even lower over time, but most of the historical decline happened before widespread vaccination efforts.
Sheehy said she has seen the consequences when screening doesn’t happen, and why early detection matters.
“I’ve seen women who didn’t have access to screening, and their cancer presented at a very late stage,” she said. “Most women who have early-stage cervical cancer or precancer lesions are asymptomatic, and the only way we’re going to detect that is with screening.”
The updated guidance aims to address stubborn gaps despite the decades of progress, she added, pointing out that about half of women diagnosed with cervical cancer have either never been screened or their screening isn’t up to date, and about one in four women in the U.S. are not up to date with screening, according to the CDC.
Only FDA-approved tests are recommended for self-collection. The FDA first expanded approvals in May 2024 to allow patients to self-collect samples in a clinical setting. In May 2025, the FDA approved the first at-home self-collection cervical cancer screening kit.
The at-home option is available by prescription. Exactly how patients access a covered self-collecting test may vary by insurer and plan.
“There’s some FDA tests that are approved for self-collection in an office-based setting and there is one that is available for self-collection at home,” Sheehy noted.
Sheehy and Smith both added that a positive HPV result is not a cancer diagnosis, but it can mean additional testing is necessary.
The updated guidance also aims to reduce costs that can pile up after an abnormal screening result by clarifying what insurers must cover without cost-sharing, including follow-up testing and diagnostic evaluation such as Pap testing, biopsy, and lab work, depending on individual needs.
A separate HRSA guideline that took effect Jan. 1 also requires insurance coverage for patient navigation services that help women schedule screenings, address care challenges, and follow up after abnormal results.
“We know the health care system is incredibly complicated for patients to navigate,” Sheehy said.
Both Engles and Sheehy emphasized how optimistic they are about the potential benefits of expanding access to cervical screening.
“This could be really, really, game-changing for women,” Sheehy said.
Radhika Malhotra, MD, is an internal medicine-preventive medicine resident at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.
ABC News’ Liz Neporent contributed to this report.
An exterior view of the South Carolina State House. Epics/Getty Images
(COLUMBIA, S.C.) — A few South Carolina lawmakers are holding a hearing on Tuesday to discuss a near-total abortion ban that removes exceptions and could send anyone involved with termination of a pregnancy to prison for decades.
Currently, the state has a six-week abortion ban, signed into law in May 2023, with limited exceptions for rape and incest up to 12 weeks, for fetal anomalies and to save the life of the pregnant person.
However, S.323, also called the “Unborn Child Protection Action,” which is currently being debated in a state subcommittee, would repeal the rape, incest and fetal anomalies exceptions as well as make abortion a felony comparable to “the homicide of a person born alive,” which, if it clears a series of legislative hurdles, could send people who have an abortion to prison for up to 30 years.
If the bill clears the committee, there will be a few other legislative steps before it’s debated during the state legislature’s regular session.
Those who aid, abet or perform an abortion could also face up to three decades in prison.
Additionally, the bill would make it unlawful to possess abortion pills or provide information about an abortion, make it a felony to transport a minor out of state to obtain an abortion, change the definition of legal contraceptive, and redefine embryos as full legal persons, which opponents of the bill say could threaten IVF access.
Opponents argue the bill would be one of the strictest pieces of legislation limiting access to reproductive health care seen in the U.S. and could have far-reaching effects.
“If people think that there are exceptions here, I want to reiterate that there are none,” Amalia Luxardo, CEO of the nonprofit advocacy organization Women’s Rights and Empowerment Network (WREN), told ABC News. “There are none here. … Historically there have been exceptions when legislation like this comes down. And so, it really is, quite literally, the most extreme piece of legislation that we’ve seen in the [reproductive health care] space ever in this country. “
Luxardo said that WREN will be among the groups demonstrating at the state capitol on Tuesday as the bill is discussed during a second hearing of the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs subcommittee.
The first hearing in October lasted several hours with dozens of people testifying during public comment. The hearing on Tuesday will not be open to the public, but people are able to watch a stream.
Nimra Chowdhry, senior state legislative council with the Center for Reproductive Rights, told ABC News that because the hearing is without public comment, it’s difficult for opponents to weigh in on why the bill is “problematic.”
However, she said advocates are continuing to put pressure on lawmakers by having constituents call up their representatives, sharing personal stories of people who have struggled to get abortion care in harrowing situations and legal reasonings behind why some consider the bill unconstitutional.
Chowdhry added that she is concerned that, if the bill passes, lawmakers in other states could replicate the legislation with similar language and penalties.
“We have seen time and time again, when very restrictive legislation sees the light of day, and if it potentially has a chance of moving through the legislature and getting signed and getting enacted, other hostile states very often follow suit,” she said. “Once we see a bill get enacted, we see that kind of momentum get pushed forward. It really opens the door for other states to do something similar.”
Luxardo agreed, adding that if the legislation passes, she believes it could deter providers from practicing in South Carolina.
The bill has also caused friction among anti-abortion rights groups, with some saying S.323 goes too far.
South Carolina Citizens for Life said that while it supports the current six-week ban, it opposes the criminalization of those who receive an abortion.
“Criminalizing women who have an abortion is inconsistent with our decades of work to legally protect both the unborn and the mother,” the statement reads. “Pro-lifers understand better than anyone else the desire to punish the purveyors of abortion who act callously and without regard to the dignity of human life. But turning women who have abortions into criminals, as S.323 does, is not the way.”
Other groups, such as Equal Protection South Carolina (EPSC), have supported the bill. EPSC stated it hopes legal equal protection in the bill can be expanded “for all pre-born babies beginning at fertilization.”
“We are encouraged by the sentiment of the bill and the bill author’s passion to end abortion,” the group wrote. “The imposition of a criminal penalty in all parties involved in an abortion is a laudable departure from the approach traditionally taken by the Pro-Life establishment, which advocates for legislation providing total legal immunity to mothers who willfully murder their pre-born children.”
Co-sponsors of the bill, including state Sens. Richard Cash, Billy Garrett and Rex Rice, did not immediately return ABC News’ requests for comment.
