HHS removes webpages saying cellphones aren't dangerous, launches study on cellphone radiation

FDA has removed webpages that stated cellphones aren't dangerous, a move that comes as HHS announced it will be launching a study on the effects of cellphone radiation.

Previously, one of FDA's webpages said that "the weight of scientific evidence has not linked exposure to radio frequency energy from cellphone use with any health problems," but that webpage has been taken down.

"The FDA removed webpages with old conclusions about cellphone radiation while HHS undertakes a study on electromagnetic radiation and health research to identify gaps in knowledge, including on new technologies, to ensure safety and efficacy," said HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon.

HHS has not provided any details on who will be leading the study on cellphone radiation.

FDA's website still contains summaries of the removed webpages, but the links to those pages reroute to a landing page describing the agency's regulatory role.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has for years pointed to cellphones as a potential source of illnesses, including cancer. While working as an environmental lawyer, Kennedy successfully petitioned a federal court in 2020 to force the Federal Communications Commission to review its wireless-radiation rules. Kennedy has also represented plaintiffs who sued telecom companies claiming their brain tumors were caused by cellphones.

"Our children are swimming around in a toxic soup," Kennedy told podcaster Joe Rogan in 2023, suggesting that cellphones could be one of the causes of chronic illnesses in children. "The Wi-Fi radiation is a lot worse than people think it is."

According to Elizabeth Platz, a cancer epidemiologist and professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, large epidemiological studies have shown no link between cellphone use and cancer, and cellphones don't emit the type of radiation that causes cancer.

(Whyte/Haggin, Wall Street Journal, 1/15)

Discussions on ACA subsidies extension have stalled

Republican senators on Thursday said that negotiations to extend enhanced subsidies for Affordable Care Act (ACA) enrollees that expired on Jan. 1 have stalled, leading congressional negotiators to work on reviving a separate healthcare deal that likely won't include an extension of the subsidies.

"We are in a little bit of a pothole," said Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who blamed Democratic leaders for the lack of movement. "So for me, I'm going to take a pause until I hear affirmative statements from the Democrat leader and his leadership team that they are willing to contemplate a deal that extends these enhanced premium tax credits with the reforms that we've outlined."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said that Moreno "is trying to distract from the reality."

"The credits expired and Americans are paying thousands more because Republicans can't get their act together," Schumer said.

According to Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaksa), negotiations ran into an issue with language related to the Hyde amendment, which prohibits federal funding for abortion. Some Republicans want additional Hyde amendment language to be included in a healthcare bill to ensure it applies to state-run exchanges, however, any abortion restrictions could potentially be an issue for Democrats.

"We got hung up on what everybody knew the Republicans would get hung up on — that was the Hyde language," Murkowski said. "Then, we've all known that in order to be able to advance something, we're going to have to have buy-in from the White House."

Instead, lawmakers on Tuesday reached a bipartisan, bicameral healthcare deal as part of a four-bill government spending package that does not include any extension of enhanced ACA subsidies. The package includes funding for the Department of Defense, Department of Transportation, Department of Homeland Security, and HHS through Sept. 30.

The deal would extend a number of public health programs, including major telehealth flexibilities, through the end of 2027, and would fund a program run by CMS that reimburses facilities for offering hospital-level care in the home through the end of fiscal year 2030.

The healthcare package would also boost funding for community health centers to $4.6 billion for fiscal year 2026, would allow Medicare coverage for multi-cancer early detection screening tests, and includes provisions to increase oversight of pharmacy benefit managers.

(Sullivan, Axios, 1/14; Yilek/Hubbard, CBS News, 1/15; Guggenheim/King, POLITICO, 1/20; Condon, Becker's Hospital Review, 1/20)

Previous research on a link between the two has been mixed. For example, in a recent review of 46 previously published epidemiological studies, researchers found that 27 reported links between the use of Tylenol by pregnant people and an increased risk of autism or ADHD in their children. However, a separate study of over 2.4 million children in Sweden did not find an association between Tylenol taken during pregnancy and risk of autism or ADHD.

Currently, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says that Tylenol is safe to use in pregnancy, but recommends pregnant people consult with their doctors before using it, as with all medications.

(Ghorayshi, New York Times, 1/20; George, MedPage Today, 1/18)

HHS reverses decision to cut almost $2B in funding for addiction and mental health programs

HHS last week informed more than 2,000 addiction and mental health programs around the United States that it was immediately terminating almost $2 billion of their funding. However, the agency reversed the decision less than 24 hours later following intense lobbying from lawmakers in both parties to restore the cuts, including a letter to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. with signatures from 100 House members.

Last week, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), which is part of HHS, sent a form letter to programs informing them of the cuts. The letter said the funding termination would be effective immediately and that the services no longer aligned with SAMHSA's priorities. The letter described those priorities as supporting "innovative programs and interventions that address the rising rates of mental illness and substance abuse conditions, overdose, and suicide."

The funding cuts would have affected longstanding investments like drug courts that offer treatment as an alternative to incarceration, programs for pregnant and postpartum women in recovery, screening and referral services, and overdose prevention education for young people.

An administration official last week confirmed that the cuts were being reversed but declined to say why.

(Hoffman, New York Times, 1/14)

FDA denies citizen petition aimed at blocking mifepristone access

FDA last week denied a citizen petition that aimed to block the approval of a generic form of the abortion medication mifepristone and eliminate the availability of the drug via telehealth.

In the petition, which was filed in August of last year, anti-abortion medical groups, including the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, asked that FDA deny an application for a generic version of mifepristone for abortion, which FDA approved in October of last year, asked that FDA prohibit the dispensing of mifepristone via telehealth, and asked that FDA "acknowledge the political pretext that has steered [FDA's] mifepristone regulations."

In the response from FDA, which was signed by Tracy Beth Høeg who is acting director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, the agency said it was denying the request to reject the application for generic mifepristone because the petition doesn't require it to render a final decision on a drug product within the 150-day deadline for a response to a petition.

Regarding the petition's other requests, FDA said it would be denying the petition without any comment on whether it would take the actions listed in the future. FDA said it "continues to consider the complex scientific and legal issues you raise and is unable to resolve them within the 150-day time frame set forth in section 505(q) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act."

However, the agency said it would consider the issues raised in the petition "when making determinations regarding currently marketed drug products containing mifepristone as part of FDA's ongoing regulation of these products."

(Karins, Inside Health Policy [subscription required], 1/20)