Texas AG sues makers of Tylenol over hiding alleged links to autism

(NEW YORK) — Four Western U.S. states have come together to issue unified vaccine recommendations for the upcoming respiratory illness season, and California has enacted a new law to base the state’s immunization guidance on independent medical organizations, rather than the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The West Coast states including California, Washington, Oregon, and Hawaii — all led by Democratic governors — banded together earlier this month to create the West Coast Health Alliance (WCHA), citing what they called an erosion of trust in the CDC.

“The alliance represents a unified regional response to the Trump Administration’s destruction of the U.S. CDC’s credibility and scientific integrity,” stated a press release Wednesday from California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Also on Wednesday, Newsom signed a new law, which will shift the immunization recommendations the state will recommend from the CDC to independent medical organizations that include the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).

The recommendations issued by the West Coast states on Wednesday include guidance for receiving the COVID-19, flu and RSV vaccines.

“Science matters. We will ensure our policies are based on rigorous science. We stand united with our partner states and medical experts to put public health and safety before politics. I will continue to do everything in my power to protect Washingtonians,” said Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson.

The announcement came the day ahead of a two-day meeting of the CDC’s the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), during which the panel of advisers recently picked by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy is expected to vote Thursday on some vaccines on the CDC childhood immunization schedule and Friday on recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines.

The FDA has approved the new COVID-19 vaccines only for those at high risk for severe illness including those 65 and older. Anyone who falls out of those categories is allowed to get a prescription for the vaccine after discussing it with their doctor.

The association that represents many insurance companies (AHIP) pledged to cover the cost for any vaccine that is part of the current guidelines before the new ACIP makes their recommendations this week. The current guidelines suggest anyone older than 6 months should consider getting the COVID-19 and annual flu shot until at least the end of 2026.

Several states have also made rules that allow anyone who wants a vaccine to get one at their pharmacy.

In a statement earlier this month, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services blasted the West Coast states’ plans for a health alliance, criticizing COVID-era policies in “Democrat-run states.”

The statement added, “ACIP remains the scientific body guiding immunization recommendations in this country, and HHS will ensure policy is based on rigorous evidence and Gold Standard Science, not the failed politics of the pandemic.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — People who use their smartphones while sitting on the toilet face are at higher risk for painful, itchy hemorrhoids, according to new research published in the journal PLOS One.

Researchers investigated the bathroom habits of 125 adults undergoing screening colonoscopies at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. About two-thirds of participants reported scrolling through their smartphones while sitting on the toilet.

Those who were glued to their phone while using the bathroom were 46% more likely to have hemorrhoids compared to those who left their device in another room.

“The likely explanation is that prolonged sitting increases pressure in the veins around the rectum, which can contribute to hemorrhoids,” Dr. Ernesto Gonzaga, a gastroenterologist from the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and who did not contribute to the study, told ABC News.

Scrollers spent a longer time on the toilet, the researchers found — about five times as many smartphone users logged over five minutes of toilet time per visit. When researchers asked what they were doing on their phones while doing their business, people confessed to catching up on the news, cruising through their social media feeds, or sending emails and texts.

Gonzaga pointed out that phone users also reported getting less exercise than non-users, suggesting that their broader lifestyle patterns could also contribute to their risk of hemorrhoids.

Hemorrhoids are swollen blood vessels around the anus and rectum, according to the National Institutes of Health. They can cause itching, pain and discomfort, and in many cases, they can also lead to rectal bleeding. Studies show that they are common in both men and women and affect about 1 in 20 Americans and about half of adults over 50 years old have hemorrhoids.

They are mainly treated with more fiber and fluids, soothing creams or sitz baths, and in tougher cases, they may require surgery.

“In clinical practice, we still recognize the more classical risk factors for hemorrhoids, including constipation, straining, low fiber intake, prolonged toilet sitting, pregnancy, obesity, and sedentary lifestyle. Constipation and abnormal bowel habits are particularly strong risk factors, while high fiber intake is protective,” Gonzaga said.

Gonzaga noted that the study does have some limitations. It looked at a small number of subjects and relied on self-reporting, so it doesn’t necessarily prove that phone use on the toilet is a direct cause of hemorrhoids, he said. He called for more research to get to the bottom of it.

“Given that hemorrhoids already account for millions of outpatient visits and substantial healthcare costs, these findings raise a broader public health concern about a growing burden of disease, potentially extending into younger populations as smartphone use,” he added.

Noor Shaik, MD, PhD, is a neurology resident physician and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — During a speech earlier this week, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced the implementation of new fitness standards for the military.

In addition to the newly proposed annual fitness exam, Hegseth’s speech emphasized “gender-neutral” testing with men and women required to meet the same minimum physical performance benchmarks.

Speaking to hundreds of high-ranking military officials in Quantico, Virginia, Hegseth said it was important that certain combat positions return “to the highest male standard,” acknowledging that it may lead to fewer women serving in combat roles.

The current training is not different for male and female servicemembers.

“If women can make it, excellent. If not, it is what it is,” he said on Tuesday. “If that means no women qualify for some combat jobs, so be it. That is not the intent, but it could be the result.”

“I don’t want my son serving alongside troops who are out of shape or in [a] combat unit with females who can’t meet the same combat arms physical standards as men,” Hegseth added.

Before becoming secretary, Hegseth had spoken out against women in combat roles, but softened his stance during his confirmation hearings, saying he supports women serving in combat roles so long as they meet the same standards as men — an approach the military says has been in place for nearly a decade.

Some experts in exercise science and in the history of women’s service in the military told ABC News that while there is room for improvement in military fitness, they are concerned there’s a false narrative that female servicemembers are the only ones not meeting certain fitness standards.

“To me, Hegseth wants a military that looks a certain way … which [is] definitely male and muscular,” Jill Hasday, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School with expertise in sex discrimination in the military, told ABC News. “It seems like his expectation is that once they enforce more ‘rigorous standards,’ more women will be pushed out.”

In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson for the Department of Defense said they did not “have anything to provide beyond Secretary Hegseth’s remarks.”

President Donald Trump also addressed officials at the Tuesday meeting, saying that “together, we’re reawakening the warrior spirit.”

Combat roles for women

In 2016, when the military opened certain high-intensity combat jobs to women, including the special operations forces, then-Secretary Ash Carter stated the importance of making sure female servicemembers “qualify and meet the standards.”

However, during his speech, Hegseth said the Department was issuing a directive that each military branch would ensure each requirement for “every designated combat arms position returns to the highest male standard only.”

In a follow-up memo from Hegseth, he stated the annual service test will require a passing grade of 70% and will be “sex-neutral” and “male standard.”

Additionally, beginning in 2026, the U.S. Army’s new fitness standards will require both male and female soldiers to meet the same minimum physical performance benchmarks for the demands of the battlefield.

Shawn Arent, a professor and chair in the department of exercise science at the University of South Carolina’s Arnold School of Public Health, said there’s nothing wrong with enforcing standards, but that there is a contradiction in Hegseth saying the tests will be “sex-normed” and also “male standard for combat roles.”

“I think we need to get away from referencing ‘male standards,'” Arent told ABC News. “They’re either standards or they’re a sex-specific standard. … I think there’s one really important caveat to this: those standards then need to make sense. In other words, what are they based on? And, if they’re arbitrary standards, then that feels certainly discriminatory.”

Arent said the standards need to be evidence-based and that it is possible the current standards need to be lowered or raised.

“It makes it sound like there’s this dramatic change, and that everything’s based on what a male can accomplish,” he said. “It should be what a combat soldier, Marine, sailor, airman, whatever, what they can accomplish in that particular role, male or female.”

Stewart Smith, a former Navy SEAL and current fitness trainer, including for those looking to enter the military, agreed, saying gender-neutral doesn’t equate to male standards.

“I don’t want to singularly say women can’t do these because there will be women that can, but I don’t think it’s a necessary focus,” Smith told ABC News. “Should [all servicemembers] be in shape and healthy and look good in a uniform? 100%. But … statistically speaking, these [maximum] standards are at a level that most men aren’t getting.”

He went on, “Saying something is gender-neutral doesn’t mean it’s the maximum male standard, right? Because, once again, if that’s the case, most males aren’t reaching that maximum male standard.”

What it would take to improve standards, according to experts

Smith and Arent said they are in favor of improving fitness standards across the military, but that Hegseth’s speech did not take into account all of the additional steps it would take to improve physical performance.

For example, Smith said improving fitness standards needs to come with improving food quality and sleep quality in the military.

“There’s a lot more problems than just high fitness standards,” he said. “Nutrition and sleep are required for that level of physical performance. … Those are the two biggest components to optimal performance that we’re stressing is you need to sleep well, you need to eat well, and you need time to train. All three are not a current priority in the military.”

Arent said this change in standards presents an opportunity for the military to examine how it can train people up to the new standards it will set.

He added that there’s a plethora of information on human performance and human optimization compared to even a decade ago

“As somebody who works with a lot of female athletes, there are ways to absolutely train them to be beasts,” Arent said. “Women are incredibly resilient, cognitively capable, and I think if you start thinking about combat roles, tactical decision-making, the ability to handle stress under these pressure situations — yes, physical fitness is a component to that, but what else are we assessing that goes with these roles?”

“We have a real opportunity here, if they lean into it to rather than setting these standards, like, ‘If you can’t meet it, too bad you suck. You’re out,'” he continued. “What are we going to do to modify how we’re approaching this to actually get more people to hit those standards?”

Too much focus on physical fitness and not other skills

The experts told ABC News that Hegseth’s speech did not focus on the other components that make people qualified to take on military combat roles.

“There’s more to leadership and service than the highest of [physical training] scores,” Smith said. “There’s learning tactics and leadership, and there’s more to leadership than great fitness tests.”

“Obviously, physical fitness can be important for many military roles, but it’s not the only thing that’s important. You don’t win a war through push-ups,” Hasday added. “Even when women were officially barred from combat, there were a lot of female troops that were essentially co-located with the troops, and they would go around with the combat troops.”

Hasday explained that in some countries where troops have been stationed, female civilians are not allowed to speak to men who are not members of their family. Having female service members with the male combat troops allowed the military to speak to female civilians to get information or to provide help.

“So, the idea, again, that you’re going to win a war by going outside someone’s house and doing push-ups, it just doesn’t seem realistic,” she said.

Female veterans hit back at Hegseth

Hegseth’s comments drew criticism from female veterans, particularly those who held combat roles.

Rep. Mikie Sherrill, a Democrat from New Jersey and a former Navy helicopter pilot, released a statement saying there is “no evidence that women cannot ably serve in combat positions.”

“Eliminating the current highly rigorous standards for women in combat positions has nothing to do with increasing lethality and everything to do with forcing women out of the Armed Forces,” she said.

Amy McGrath, a former Marine fighter pilot and Democratic Senate candidate in Kentucky, posted a video on Facebook stating there is no male standard or female standard for roles, including flying a fighter jet or being an artillery officer.

“Since combat roles have been open for qualified women, there have always been one standard for those jobs,” she said. “It’s a slap in the face and offensive to suggest otherwise.”

Arent said he can understand why this would be upsetting to former female servicemembers who held combat roles, particularly in reference to Hegseth’s comments about not wanting his son to be in a combat unit with women who weren’t meeting the same physical standards as men.

“Because of the way it [was] said, it makes it sound like it’s the females that are deficient,” he said. “But I would argue, by the same token, if they are physically capable, what if they’re more cognitively capable, more tactically capable, you would want them alongside your son, if that’s the case.”

Arent went on, “It’s not just women that aren’t meeting these standards. We have a whole lot of men that can’t meet some of these standards.”

 

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.