Coroner confirms infant died of measles in PA

Lancaster County coroner Stephen Diamantoni on Friday confirmed that the death of a 6-week-old infant was caused by measles, after CDC and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. questioned the legitimacy of attributing this and another death to the disease.

Earlier this month, Pennsylvania reported two deaths from measles, which marked the first deaths from the disease in the United States this year and the first measles deaths in the state in 35 years.

Following the announcement, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shaprio (D) criticized Kennedy for his rhetoric around vaccines. Kennedy then suggested that an aide to Shapiro had fabricated the deaths in order to blame Kennedy and accused Shapiro of using tactics Democrats utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic to rebut critics and steer people towards getting vaccinated.

Following Kennedy's comments, CDC Director Erica Schwartz ordered agency officials to challenge the two measles deaths reported by Pennsylvania, a highly unusual move that departs from the agency's practice of accepting data shared by states.

Initially, Diamantoni said a pathologist who examined the deceased newborn told him the primary cause of death was a spleen laceration hours after birth, and that although the child tested positive for measles, the pathologist didn't believe the virus played a role in the baby's death.

On Friday, Diamantoni said the infant had come from the Amish community and was born with Amish lethal microephaly, a rare genetic condition not generally found outside of the Amish community. According to Diamantoni, most babies with the condition only live four to six months. Soon after birth, the baby had been placed in palliative care.

"They often die of respiratory illness, and as a result of respiratory illness and low oxygen as a result of the measles infection, having Amish lethal microcephaly made the child very susceptible to severe illness and death," Diamantoni said. "The child contracted measles, and measles caused the death of the child," he added.

Following the coroner's report, Kennedy acknowledged the findings, saying in a social media post that the coroner "has now publicly stated that measles caused only the second infant's death."

(Sun/Roubein, Washington Post, 9/4; Rosenbluth, New York Times, 9/4; Swai, The Hill, 9/5)

RFK Jr. hires COVID vaccine skeptic to investigate claims of military deaths from the vaccine

Lt. Col. Theresa Long, an Army doctor with no specialized training in vaccines or viruses, said in a deposition that she is working as senior medical military advisor to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Department of Defense (DOD) Secretary Pete Hegseth to investigate claims of more than 2,500 U.S. service members deaths resulting from the COVID-19 vaccine.

In the deposition, Long said she was appointed to investigate 55,000 reports of adverse effects of the vaccine and 2,544 deaths among service members who received a COVID-19 vaccine. The reports of adverse effects and deaths were submitted to HHS' Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Long, who is board certified in aerospace medicine and has a master's in public health, said that she had personal knowledge of the deaths of 28 service members as a result of the COVID-19 vaccine. She also said she knew of several service members who lost pregnancies after receiving the shots, and that the vaccines had caused a pregnancy loss rate of around 82%. Long noted she hoped to finish her research "within a year."

Studies in hundreds of thousands of women have shown the COVID-19 vaccine is not linked to an increased risk of miscarriage, stillbirth, or preterm birth. In addition, a March report from the Pentagon, as well as one from July 2025, found there were no deaths of military members as a result from the COVID-19 vaccines.

Experts noted that while the VAERS database is the largest, it's also the least reliable, as reports can be submitted by anyone and are not vetted.

(Mandavilli/Hoffman, New York Times, 9/4; Paun/Gerstein, POLITICO, 9/3)

Congressional Democrats have suggested the savings from the program's elimination may be part of an agreement signed by NIH and DOD to collaborate on biodefense and pandemic preparedness in an effort to redirect NIH money to defense spending.

"As if cancelling lifesaving medical research and clinical trials and firing cancer researchers en masse were not bad enough, the Trump administration is now trying to rob NIH of billions of dollars that Congress provided for medical research so that it can pad the Pentagon's budget," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) in a press release. "This outrageous agreement must be terminated immediately, and we need Republicans in Congress to join us in using their power to ensure that happens. We cannot allow this administration to shred patients' hopes of new, lifesaving cures and treatments so that President Trump and [Defense] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth can secretively fund their own priorities in defiance of Congress."

The agreement is focused on chemical and biological defense research and does not specify a dollar figure for the partnership or which research projects would be included, according to a copy reviewed by the New York Times. People familiar with the agreement told the Times it could involve as much as $2 billion from NIAID, which is roughly a third of the agency's budget.

(Frieden, MedPage Today, 9/4; Edmondson/Johnson, New York Times, 9/4)

Over two-thirds of new drugs approved by FDA have been based on a single study

Over two-thirds of new drugs approved by FDA in 2024 received their approval based on findings from a single study, according to a new analysis published in PLOS One.

For the analysis, researchers at Stanford University looked at 6,763 studies associated with new FDA drug approvals from Jan. 1, 2016, through Dec. 31, 2024. They found the average number of studies supporting an approval in 2016 was 3.41, but that number dropped to 1.50 in 2022 and 1.39 in 2024.

In addition, the analysis found that industry-backed studies accounted for 44.6% of the research associated with approvals in 2016 compared with 80.4% in 2024. Meanwhile, studies sponsored by NIH or other government sources represented less than 3% of total study funding during this period.

"The growing practice of approving medications on the basis of a single trial is concerning, as it allows products to reach the market without independent confirmation of the findings," said Robert Kaplan, senior author of the analysis and an adjunct professor of medicine at Stanford.

According to the analysis' authors, the results highlight the need for greater transparency and stronger regulations.

"Moving forward, policies that bolster post-market surveillance, enforce timely and comprehensive trial result reporting, and support independent clinical research are crucial for maintaining the integrity of the drug approval process," they wrote.

(Bergeson, CIDRAP News, 8/28)