Tag: Health

  • Voters Put Preventing Maternal Deaths at the Top of Their Health Agenda, and Federal Data Show 649 Women Died in 2024

    Voters Put Preventing Maternal Deaths at the Top of Their Health Agenda, and Federal Data Show 649 Women Died in 2024

    Asked to name their top two priorities for policymakers on maternal health, registered voters put preventing maternal deaths first, at 32 percent, ahead of early care and intervention during pregnancy at 22 percent.

    The survey, released July 30 by the advocacy organization Healthy Moms, Healthy Babies America and conducted by KAConsulting, polled 1,001 registered voters nationwide between July 12 and 16, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Because it was commissioned by an organization advocating for maternal health policy, its framing and question wording reflect that purpose, and the findings should be read as advocacy polling rather than independent research.

    What makes the result worth reporting is that federal surveillance data exist to check it against. Opinion tells you what people want addressed. Vital statistics tell you what is actually happening.


    The Federal Numbers Behind the Priority

    The National Center for Health Statistics published final 2024 maternal mortality data in March. In 2024, 649 women died from maternal causes in the United States, compared with 669 the year before. The rate was 17.9 deaths per 100,000 live births, which NCHS described as not significantly lower than the 2023 rate of 18.6.

    That word matters. The apparent decline is within the range of statistical noise. NCHS notes that maternal mortality rates fluctuate year to year because the absolute number of events is relatively small, and because accuracy in recording maternal deaths on death certificates remains an ongoing data-quality problem the agency is still working on.

    The disparities are larger than the year-to-year movement. For Black non-Hispanic women, the 2024 rate was 44.8 deaths per 100,000 live births, three times the rate of 14.2 for white non-Hispanic women. Changes from 2023 to 2024 across racial groups were not statistically significant.

    Age is the other major gradient. Women 40 and older had a maternal mortality rate of 62.3 per 100,000, nearly five times the rate of 13.7 among women younger than 25. Women aged 25 to 39 fell at 16.5.


    Two Different Federal Counts, and Only One Measures Preventability

    Readers encountering different maternal death figures are usually seeing two separate systems, and the distinction matters for the question the poll asked.

    The NCHS figures above count maternal deaths, defined internationally as deaths during pregnancy or within 42 days of the end of pregnancy from causes related to pregnancy. That is a vital statistics count drawn from death certificates.

    A second system, Maternal Mortality Review Committees, examines pregnancy-related deaths, which include deaths up to one full year after the end of pregnancy. These committees are multidisciplinary panels that review individual cases in detail, and they are the only source that assigns preventability determinations and issues recommendations. CDC funds this work through the ERASE MM program, which supports committees across most states and territories.

    That second system is what the poll’s language about “preventing” maternal deaths actually maps onto. A vital statistics count establishes how many women died. A review committee establishes whether the death could have been avoided and what would have changed the outcome. Congress reauthorized the Preventing Maternal Deaths Act in February 2026 through 2030, with $113.5 million appropriated to the account funding this work.


    Where the Poll and the Data Line Up

    Several of the specific policies voters endorsed correspond to problems the surveillance data identify.

    Eighty-eight percent of respondents supported expanding specialty care and telehealth for women with high-risk pregnancies in rural and underserved communities. Access to risk-appropriate care is a recurring theme in review committee findings, and rural obstetric unit closures have lengthened travel distances for delivery in many states.

    Eighty-seven percent supported a whole-health approach including maternal mental health, nutrition, and chronic disease management. That aligns with the extended one-year window review committees use, since deaths in the later postpartum period frequently involve mental health conditions, substance use, and cardiovascular disease rather than delivery complications.

    Across 15 policy proposals tested, 13 drew support from at least 80 percent of respondents, all 15 drew at least 72 percent, and 79 percent said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate supporting them. Fifty-five percent held an unfavorable view of the U.S. health care system overall, and 51 percent viewed it unfavorably specifically on care for women.

    One figure in the poll should be handled carefully. Seventy-two percent said they were more likely to support reforms after being told maternal mortality and morbidity cost the economy $165 billion in 2020. Questions that present a fact before asking for a response measure persuasion, not baseline opinion, and should not be reported as if they measured the latter.


    What Patients and Families Can Do with This

    Nothing in polling changes an individual’s risk. What does change outcomes is recognizing warning signs and being heard when reporting them.

    CDC’s Hear Her campaign identifies urgent maternal warning signs that warrant immediate care during pregnancy and for a full year afterward. They include severe headache that will not go away, changes in vision, trouble breathing, chest pain or a racing heart, severe belly pain, a fever of 100.4 degrees or higher, extreme swelling of hands or face, thoughts of harming oneself or the baby, and heavy bleeding.

    The one-year window is the part most often missed. Postpartum visits frequently stop at six weeks, while a substantial share of pregnancy-related deaths occur later. Anyone who gave birth within the past year and develops these symptoms should say so explicitly when seeking care, because clinicians who do not know about a recent pregnancy may not consider pregnancy-related causes.

    Practical steps include identifying the nearest hospital with obstetric capability before delivery, particularly in rural areas, and asking about postpartum Medicaid coverage, which most states have extended to 12 months. Patients whose symptoms are dismissed can ask for the concern to be documented in the chart, request a second opinion, or contact the hospital’s patient advocate.

    What happens next is a data question. NCHS publishes provisional maternal mortality estimates on a rolling basis and final annual figures with roughly a 15-month lag, meaning 2025 final data are not yet available. Whether the flat trend of the past two years turns into a genuine decline will not be answerable for at least another year.



    Frequently Asked Questions

    What did the poll find? Registered voters named preventing maternal deaths their top maternal health priority for policymakers at 32 percent, followed by early care and intervention during pregnancy at 22 percent.

    Who conducted it? KAConsulting for Healthy Moms, Healthy Babies America, an advocacy organization. It surveyed 1,001 registered voters July 12 to 16, 2026, with a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

    How many women die from maternal causes? Federal data recorded 649 maternal deaths in 2024, a rate of 17.9 per 100,000 live births, which NCHS said was not significantly different from 2023.

    How large are the racial disparities? Black non-Hispanic women had a rate of 44.8 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2024, three times the rate of 14.2 among white non-Hispanic women.

    Why do different maternal death numbers circulate? Vital statistics count deaths within 42 days of pregnancy. Maternal Mortality Review Committees examine pregnancy-related deaths up to one year afterward and assess preventability.

    What warning signs require immediate care? Severe persistent headache, vision changes, trouble breathing, chest pain, severe belly pain, fever of 100.4 or higher, extreme swelling, heavy bleeding, or thoughts of self-harm during pregnancy and for a year after.

    How long does postpartum risk last? Up to a full year. Anyone who gave birth in the past 12 months should tell clinicians about the pregnancy when seeking care for new symptoms.

    Source link

  • Healosen – Your Health Command Centre

    Healosen – Your Health Command Centre

    Product Name: Healosen – Your Health Command Centre

    Click here to get Healosen – Your Health Command Centre at discounted price while it’s still available…

    All orders are protected by SSL encryption – the highest industry standard for online security from trusted vendors.

    Healosen – Your Health Command Centre is backed with a 60 Day No Questions Asked Money Back Guarantee. If within the first 60 days of receipt you are not satisfied with Wake Up Lean™, you can request a refund by sending an email to the address given inside the product and we will immediately refund your entire purchase price, with no questions asked.

    (more…)

  • FTC Alleges a Telehealth Company Sent Users’ Health Conditions to Ad Platforms After Promising Discretion

    FTC Alleges a Telehealth Company Sent Users’ Health Conditions to Ad Platforms After Promising Discretion

    Federal regulators have accused one of the largest direct-to-consumer telehealth companies of routing customers’ health conditions to advertising platforms while marketing itself on privacy.

    The Federal Trade Commission, joined by Utah and by California through Los Angeles County Counsel, sued Hims and Hers Health on July 29 in federal court in San Francisco. The complaint alleges the company shared sensitive health information about medical conditions with third-party advertising platforms despite promising privacy, and separately alleges deceptive billing and cancellation practices.

    None of this has been proven. The company disputes the allegations and says it will defend itself. A complaint is an accusation, and the court has made no findings.

    The reason it matters to readers who have never used the platform is the category. The conditions named are the ones people specifically seek online care for because they do not want to discuss them in person.


    What the Complaint Says Moved, and Where

    The alleged mechanism is a tracking pixel, a small piece of code embedded in a web page that reports visitor activity back to a third party. Pixels are ordinary infrastructure across commercial websites. They become a health privacy question when the page being tracked reveals a medical condition.

    According to the complaint as reported by TechCrunch, the company placed trackers supplied by Meta and Snap as well as Microsoft, Pinterest, Reddit, and X. The FTC also alleges the company uploaded lists of certain customers to advertising platforms, a separate practice from pixel tracking that matches known customer identities against platform user accounts.

    The service lines named in reporting on the complaint include erectile dysfunction, premature ejaculation, hair loss, weight management, and mental health. The FTC’s contention is that the company advertised privacy and discretion for exactly these categories while the data pipeline ran the other direction.

    Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in the agency’s announcement that the complaint describes “consumers unknowingly locked into recurring subscriptions” alongside disclosure of private health information without consent.


    The Billing Allegations Sit Alongside the Privacy Ones

    The complaint pairs the data claims with allegations about money, which is unusual and is part of why the case is being watched.

    Regulators allege the company advertised free consultations and displayed language indicating no payment was due at intake, then charged consumers and enrolled them in recurring subscriptions once a provider wrote a prescription, in some cases before any consultation had occurred. The complaint further alleges that cancellation was made difficult, leaving some customers paying for refills they did not want.

    The cited legal authorities are the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, a 2010 statute governing online negative-option billing, which requires clear disclosure of terms, informed consent before charging, and a simple cancellation mechanism.

    The company has responded firmly. In statements reported by BioPharma Dive and others, Hims and Hers called the claims baseless, said its privacy policy makes clear that users may choose how their data is used, and said it is confident in its position. It did not explicitly deny the specific factual allegations in the statements reported.


    A Pattern the Agency Has Pursued Before

    This is not a novel theory of enforcement. The FTC brought similar actions against GoodRx and BetterHelp in 2023, and against the telehealth startup Cerebral and the alcohol recovery provider Monument, in each case alleging that consumer health data reached advertising platforms through website technology.

    The industry has responded to that pressure. Pixel deployment on hospital websites fell from about 98 percent in 2021 to roughly 30 percent in 2025, according to tracking data compiled by health marketing analytics firm Hedy and Hopp and reported by Bloomberg Law. That figure describes hospitals rather than direct-to-consumer telehealth, and should not be read as a measure of the latter.

    One legal point is worth understanding because it surprises people. Most direct-to-consumer telehealth platforms operate in a space where HIPAA’s application is contested or limited, which is part of why the FTC rather than the HHS Office for Civil Rights is the agency bringing this case. Consumers frequently assume that anything involving a prescription is covered by federal medical privacy law. That assumption does not reliably hold for app-based commercial health services.


    Steps for Anyone Who Has Used a Telehealth Platform

    Nobody should stop needed treatment over a privacy dispute, and nothing here suggests any medication is unsafe. The relevant actions are about accounts and settings.

    Check advertising controls on the platforms named. Meta, Google, and other services allow users to review and delete off-site activity that businesses have shared, and to limit how that data informs ad targeting. Those controls are typically found under account settings labeled activity, ad preferences, or data sharing.

    Review recurring charges. Anyone enrolled in a telehealth subscription can check the current billing terms, the renewal date, and the cancellation process, and should document the date and method of any cancellation request. Consumers who believe they were charged without consent can dispute the charge with their card issuer and file a complaint with the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.

    For future care, consider that browsing a condition-specific page on a commercial health site is not equivalent to a conversation in an exam room. Care delivered through a health system patient portal generally does sit under HIPAA. That is a meaningful difference for anyone who considers the condition itself sensitive.

    Several things remain unresolved. The company has not filed its formal response. No court has ruled on any allegation. How many consumers were affected, what specific data elements moved, and what remedy regulators will seek are all matters for the litigation. MedicalDaily will report the company’s answer and any rulings.



    Frequently Asked Questions

    What did the FTC allege? That Hims and Hers shared consumers’ sensitive health information with third-party advertising platforms despite promising privacy, and separately deceived users about billing and cancellation.

    Have the allegations been proven? No. The complaint was filed July 29, 2026, and no court has made findings. The company calls the claims baseless and says it will defend itself.

    What is a tracking pixel? A small piece of code embedded in a web page that reports visitor activity to a third party. It becomes a health privacy issue when the page reveals a medical condition.

    Which platforms are named? Reporting on the complaint identifies Meta and Snap along with Microsoft, Pinterest, Reddit, and X.

    Does HIPAA cover telehealth apps? Not always. Many direct-to-consumer platforms operate outside or at the edges of HIPAA, which is why the FTC rather than HHS is bringing this action.

    What can users do now? Review ad and data-sharing settings on the named platforms, check subscription billing terms and cancellation processes, and document any cancellation request.

    Has the FTC done this before? Yes. It brought similar cases against GoodRx and BetterHelp in 2023, and against Cerebral and Monument.

    Source link

  • The Benefits of Being Optimistic: How Positive Thinking Can Improve Your Physical and Mental Health

    The Benefits of Being Optimistic: How Positive Thinking Can Improve Your Physical and Mental Health

    Introduction

    In today’s fast-paced world, it’s easy to get bogged down in negative thoughts and emotions. However, research has shown that having a positive outlook on life can have a significant impact on both physical and mental health. Being optimistic can bring numerous benefits, from reducing stress and anxiety to improving relationships and overall well-being. In this article, we’ll explore the benefits of being optimistic, how positive thinking can improve your physical and mental health, and provide tips on how to cultivate a more optimistic mindset.

    The Power of Positive Thinking

    Positive thinking is more than just a mindset; it’s a way of life. When we focus on the positive aspects of our lives, we begin to see the world in a different light. We start to notice the good things, the beauty, and the joy that surrounds us. This, in turn, can have a profound impact on our mental and physical health. Studies have shown that people who practice positive thinking tend to have lower levels of stress and anxiety, better sleep quality, and a stronger immune system. They also tend to be more resilient, better equipped to handle life’s challenges, and more likely to achieve their goals.

    The Benefits of Optimism for Physical Health

    Being optimistic can have a significant impact on our physical health. Research has shown that optimistic people tend to have:

    • Lower blood pressure: Studies have found that people who are optimistic tend to have lower blood pressure, which can reduce the risk of heart disease and stroke.
    • A healthier weight: Optimistic people tend to have a healthier weight, which can reduce the risk of chronic diseases such as diabetes and certain types of cancer.
    • A stronger immune system: Positive thinking has been shown to boost the immune system, reducing the risk of illness and infection.
    • Less chronic pain: Optimistic people tend to experience less chronic pain, which can improve overall quality of life.

    The Benefits of Optimism for Mental Health

    Being optimistic can also have a significant impact on our mental health. Research has shown that optimistic people tend to have:

    • Lower levels of stress and anxiety: Positive thinking can help reduce stress and anxiety, which can improve overall mental well-being.
    • Fewer symptoms of depression: Optimistic people tend to experience fewer symptoms of depression, which can improve overall quality of life.
    • Better relationships: Positive thinking can improve relationships, which can lead to a stronger support network and improved mental health.
    • Improved cognitive function: Optimistic people tend to have better cognitive function, which can improve problem-solving skills and overall mental performance.

    How to Cultivate a More Optimistic Mindset

    So, how can we cultivate a more optimistic mindset? Here are a few tips:

    • Practice gratitude: Take time each day to reflect on the things you’re grateful for. This can help shift your focus to the positive aspects of your life.
    • Reframe negative thoughts: Challenge negative thoughts by reframing them in a more positive light. For example, instead of thinking “I’ll never be able to do this,” try thinking “I’ll learn and grow from this experience.”
    • Surround yourself with positive people: The people we surround ourselves with can have a significant impact on our mindset. Surround yourself with positive, supportive people who encourage and uplift you.
    • Take care of yourself: Taking care of your physical health can also improve your mental health. Make sure to get enough sleep, exercise regularly, and eat a healthy diet.

    Overcoming Obstacles to Optimism

    Of course, it’s not always easy to be optimistic. Life can be challenging, and it’s easy to get bogged down in negative thoughts and emotions. Here are a few tips for overcoming obstacles to optimism:

    • Practice self-compassion: Be kind to yourself when you’re struggling. Remember that it’s okay to not be okay, and that you’re doing the best you can.
    • Seek support: Talk to a trusted friend or family member, or seek out professional help if you’re struggling with negative thoughts or emotions.
    • Take things one step at a time: When faced with a challenging situation, try to break it down into smaller, more manageable tasks. This can help you feel more in control and more optimistic about the future.
    • Focus on the present moment: Instead of getting bogged down in worries about the future or regrets about the past, try to focus on the present moment. Mindfulness techniques such as meditation and deep breathing can help you stay present and focused.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, being optimistic can have a significant impact on both physical and mental health. By practicing positive thinking, cultivating a more optimistic mindset, and overcoming obstacles to optimism, we can improve our overall well-being and quality of life. Remember that it’s okay to not be okay, and that it’s a process to develop a more optimistic mindset. With time and practice, you can learn to focus on the positive aspects of your life, cultivate a more optimistic mindset, and improve your overall health and well-being.

    FAQs

    Q: What is optimism, and how can it benefit my life?
    A: Optimism is a positive mindset that can bring numerous benefits, from reducing stress and anxiety to improving relationships and overall well-being.
    Q: How can I cultivate a more optimistic mindset?
    A: You can cultivate a more optimistic mindset by practicing gratitude, reframing negative thoughts, surrounding yourself with positive people, and taking care of your physical health.
    Q: What if I’m struggling with negative thoughts and emotions?
    A: If you’re struggling with negative thoughts and emotions, try practicing self-compassion, seeking support, taking things one step at a time, and focusing on the present moment.
    Q: Can optimism really improve my physical health?
    A: Yes, research has shown that optimistic people tend to have lower blood pressure, a healthier weight, a stronger immune system, and less chronic pain.
    Q: How can I overcome obstacles to optimism?
    A: You can overcome obstacles to optimism by practicing self-compassion, seeking support, taking things one step at a time, and focusing on the present moment.
    Q: Is it possible to learn to be more optimistic?
    A: Yes, it is possible to learn to be more optimistic. With time and practice, you can develop a more optimistic mindset and improve your overall health and well-being.

  • When the Therapy Room Becomes Another Closed Door: Why Traditional Western Mental Health Care Fails Survivors of Torture and State Violence 

    When the Therapy Room Becomes Another Closed Door: Why Traditional Western Mental Health Care Fails Survivors of Torture and State Violence 

    A woman sits in a therapist’s office in a Western city. She fled her country after surviving months of detention, interrogation, and torture at the hands of a government that wanted to silence her. She made it out. She is, by every external measure, safe now. 

    The therapist is kind. Educated. Well-meaning. They ask her to rate her anxiety on a scale of one to ten. They suggest breathing exercises. They offer a worksheet on cognitive distortions. 

    She never comes back. 

    Each time, I feel the same quiet grief—not for the therapist’s failure of compassion, but for the field’s failure of imagination. 

    I have heard this story, in different forms, with different detail, more times than I can count. And each time, I feel the same quiet grief—not for the therapist’s failure of compassion, but for the field’s failure of imagination. 

    Traditional Western therapy was not designed for her. And until we are honest about that, we will keep losing people who have already survived the unsurvivable, not to their trauma, but to our inadequacy. 

    Examining Our Assumptions About Safety & Healing

    Western psychotherapy and mental health care rests on a set of foundational assumptions so embedded in the model that most practitioners never think to question them. 

    Western psychotherapy rests on a set of foundational assumptions so embedded in the model that most practitioners never think to question them.

    It assumes that healing is an internal process, something that happens inside one person, in a private room, between two people who meet weekly for fifty minutes. It assumes language is the primary vehicle for processing trauma. There is an understanding that emotions can and should be named, examined, and reframed. In this framework, safety is a feeling, one that can be cultivated through technique. 

    For survivors of torture and state violence, almost every one of these assumptions fails. 

    When a person has been systematically targeted by a government, imprisoned, interrogated, beaten, humiliated, sexually assaulted, subjected to mock execution, and stripped of their humanity, the wound is not primarily psychological in the Western sense. It reaches deeper than that. 

    The perpetrator was not an individual. It was a system, one that in many cases is still in power, still persecuting those left behind, still present in the world that survivors now have to live in and explain themselves within. 

    When Betrayal Revisits In a Place That Was Supposed to Be Safe

    For most survivors of state violence, the deepest wound is the destruction of trust—in institutions, in strangers, and in the world’s basic safety. That wound begins in their home countries, where the very governments meant to protect them become the source of persecution, imprisonment, torture, and terror. But for some survivors, the trauma does not end when they escape.

    I have worked with individuals who survived the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Taliban, and other repressive regimes, believing that if they could just reach the United States, they would finally be safe. They believed they had made it to a country built on democracy, due process, and human rights—a place where the rules would finally be different.

    Instead, some found themselves behind another locked door.

    For survivors who have already endured torture, the greatest injury is often not simply being harmed again—it is realizing that the place they believed would protect them became another source of fear.

    Survivors have described being held in detention under conditions they experienced as profoundly traumatizing. Several reported physical abuse, psychological abuse, prolonged isolation, humiliation, threats, and treatment that echoed the very tactics they had fled.

    What made this experience uniquely devastating was not only the suffering itself, but the betrayal. They expected cruelty from authoritarian regimes. They never expected to experience abuse in the country they believed represented freedom, justice, and the rule of law.

    Many have asked me, “If this can happen here, then where is safe?”

    For survivors who have already endured torture, the greatest injury is often not simply being harmed again—it is realizing that the place they believed would protect them became another source of fear. That second betrayal can fracture whatever fragile trust remained, leaving them feeling that nowhere in the world is truly safe.

    Offering An Anchor in Mental Health Care that Holds

    When someone survives torture by a government, they don’t just feel anxious or depressed. They lose their fundamental sense that the world is safe, that they matter, that life has meaning, that justice is real. They have been told, implicitly and explicitly, by their governments, their communities, and sometimes even their own minds, that their suffering did not matter. It shatters the ground a person stands on. No breathing exercise addresses that reality. No cognitive reframe touches it. 

    For this reason, I place greater emphasis on rebuilding trust, restoring agency, bearing witness, and creating relational safety before introducing any technique that requires sustained inward attention.

    I recognize that trauma-sensitive mindfulness has been helpful for some survivors. However, in my own clinical work with survivors of torture and state violence, I generally do not use mindfulness-based interventions that ask clients to focus inward on their bodies or remain in prolonged silence.

    People who have survived the unsurvivable are not waiting to be saved. They are waiting to be believed.

    Here’s why: Many of the people I work with learned that paying attention to their bodies meant anticipating pain. Their bodies are not experienced as places of safety, but as places where unimaginable violence occurred. Directing attention inward can evoke flashbacks, panic, dissociation, or overwhelming physiological arousal. Likewise, prolonged silence and stillness may closely resemble solitary confinement, detention, or interrogation, making these practices feel threatening rather than regulating.

    For many survivors, healing begins not with looking inward, but with discovering that another human being can remain present without causing harm.

    People who have survived the unsurvivable are not waiting to be saved. They are waiting to be believed, to have someone sit with them in their reality—not to fix it, not to reframe it, not to rush them toward resilience, but to say, simply and firmly: What happened to you was real. I believe you. And there is still a future that belongs to you. 

    Through my work with former political prisoners and survivors of torture, I had to unlearn many of the protocols and tools I was trained in. When we ask survivors to sit still, to maintain eye contact, to articulate what they are feeling in precise language, we are often asking them to do things that their bodies experience as threat. The clinical setting itself—enclosed, formal, power-imbalanced—can unconsciously mirror the very environments in which they were harmed. 

    Often the very vocabulary of Western mental health care—PTSD, trauma, triggers, self-care—often does not translate. Not just linguistically, but conceptually. Many of my clients do not identify as traumatized. They identify as survivors, as resisters, as people who did what they had to do. 

    In Western therapy, language is everything. Talk therapy is built on the premise that speaking about suffering is healing. But for many survivors I work with—Iranians, Afghans, people from communities with no cultural tradition of discussing psychological pain with a stranger—language is already a site of violence. They were interrogated. Their words were used against them. They learned, in the most brutal way possible, that speaking carries risk. And then we ask them to come into a room and speak.

    Beyond this, the very vocabulary of Western mental health care—like PTSD, trauma, triggers, self-care—often does not translate. Not just linguistically, but conceptually. Many of my clients do not identify as traumatized. They identify as survivors, as resisters, as people who did what they had to do. Pathologizing their experience, organizing it around a diagnosis, can feel like another form of erasure, another institution telling them who they are. 

    Perhaps the most undervalued skill in this work is simply the capacity to hear what happened and not look away.

    So What Does Actually Work? 

    For most survivors of state violence, the deepest wound is the destruction of trust—in institutions, in strangers, in the world’s basic safety. Healing begins not in a therapy room but in the slow, careful rebuilding of community: peer support, cultural spaces, shared ritual, the experience of being among people who won’t inflict pain, and where trust can start to be rebuilt. 

    Every culture has its own frameworks for understanding suffering and restoration. For my Iranian clients, poetry, Hafez, Rumi, the great Persian literary tradition, carries healing power that no DSM category can touch. For my Afghan clients, community prayer, collective mourning, the presence of elder women—these are not supplementary to treatment. They are treatment. Our role as practitioners is to make room for them, not to replace them. 

    Sustained, unflinching witness is profoundly healing, because it is the precise opposite of what the perpetrators wanted. They wanted silence. They wanted the world to look away. When we do not, we become part of the survivor’s resistance. 

    Perhaps the most undervalued skill in mental health care work is simply the capacity to hear what happened and not look away. Not to analyze or reframe. Not to move too quickly toward hope. To stay in the truth of what is being shared. This act of sustained, unflinching witness is profoundly healing, because it is the precise opposite of what the perpetrators wanted. They wanted silence. They wanted the world to look away. When we do not, we become part of the survivor’s resistance. 

    The mental health field is not malicious. Most practitioners who fall short with this population do so because they were never taught otherwise. Our training programs, our diagnostic frameworks—they were built for a different kind of suffering, in a different kind of world.



    Source link

  • Meditation and Mental Health: The Surprising Benefits for Your Wellbeing

    Meditation and Mental Health: The Surprising Benefits for Your Wellbeing

    Introduction to Meditation and Mental Health

    Meditation has been practiced for thousands of years, originating from ancient Eastern cultures as a means to cultivate mental, emotional, and spiritual well-being. In recent decades, the Western world has increasingly adopted meditation as a tool for improving mental health and overall wellbeing. The practice involves training your mind to focus, relax, and become more aware of your thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensations. As the world grapples with rising rates of anxiety, depression, and other mental health challenges, meditation has emerged as a powerful adjunctive therapy, offering a variety of benefits that can enhance mental health and promote a sense of wellbeing.

    Understanding Meditation

    Meditation is a broad term that encompasses a range of practices, including mindfulness meditation, loving-kindness meditation, transcendental meditation, and movement meditation, among others. At its core, meditation involves setting aside time to sit comfortably, close your eyes, and focus your mind on a particular object, thought, or activity. For beginners, this often starts with focusing on the breath, noticing when the mind wanders, and gently bringing it back without judgment. Regular practice can lead to a deeper understanding of oneself, reduced stress levels, and an improved ability to handle life’s challenges with grace and resilience.

    The Surprising Benefits for Mental Health

    The benefits of meditation on mental health are multifaceted and well-documented. Regular meditation practice has been shown to reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression, improve sleep quality, enhance cognitive functioning such as attention and memory, and boost the immune system. Meditation also promotes emotional regulation, allowing individuals to better manage their emotions and respond to stressful situations in a more thoughtful and less reactive manner. Furthermore, meditation cultivates self-awareness, enabling individuals to understand their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors more clearly, which is crucial for personal growth and development.

    Impact on Anxiety and Depression

    One of the most significant benefits of meditation is its impact on anxiety and depression. These are two of the most prevalent mental health disorders worldwide, characterized by persistent feelings of worry, fear, sadness, and loss of interest in activities. Meditation has been found to decrease the production of stress hormones like cortisol, leading to a reduction in the symptoms of anxiety and depression. By teaching the mind to stay present and focused on the current moment, rather than dwelling on the past or worrying about the future, meditation helps to break the cycle of negative thinking that often accompanies these conditions.

    Enhancing Cognitive Function

    Beyond its emotional benefits, meditation has a profound impact on cognitive function. Regular practice has been linked to improvements in attention, memory, and problem-solving abilities. Meditation helps to strengthen the neural networks within the brain, enhancing communication between different brain regions. This can lead to better performance in work and academic settings, as well as improved overall cognitive health. Furthermore, meditation has been shown to have neuroprotective effects, potentially reducing the risk of age-related cognitive decline and neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s.

    Promoting Better Sleep

    Sleep is a critical component of mental health, with sleep disturbances often being a symptom or cause of various psychiatric conditions. Meditation can help improve sleep quality by reducing stress and anxiety, making it easier to fall asleep and stay asleep throughout the night. Regular meditation practice before bedtime can signal to the body that it is time to sleep, creating a healthy sleep routine. Improved sleep quality, in turn, can enhance mental health, lead to better mood regulation, and reduce the risk of developing mental health disorders.

    Cultivating Emotional Regulation

    Emotional regulation is the ability to manage and modulate emotional responses to various situations. Meditation cultivates this skill by increasing self-awareness and teaching the mind to observe emotions without judgment, rather than becoming overwhelmed by them. This can lead to more harmonious relationships, improved decision-making, and a reduced tendency to react impulsively to stressors. By learning to navigate emotions in a healthier way, individuals can develop resilience and better cope with life’s challenges.

    How to Incorporate Meditation into Your Life

    Incorporating meditation into daily life can be simple and accessible. Starting with short sessions, even just a few minutes a day, can be beneficial. Using guided meditation apps, joining a meditation group, or following meditation videos can provide structure and motivation for beginners. Finding a quiet, comfortable space to meditate and making it a consistent part of your daily routine, such as right after waking up or before bedtime, can help turn meditation into a sustainable habit.

    Conclusion

    Meditation offers a wide range of benefits for mental health and wellbeing, from reducing symptoms of anxiety and depression to enhancing cognitive function and promoting better sleep. By incorporating meditation into daily life, individuals can cultivate greater self-awareness, improve their emotional regulation, and develop resilience in the face of stress and adversity. As the world continues to navigate the complexities of mental health, the ancient practice of meditation stands as a powerful tool, available to anyone, anywhere, offering a pathway to improved mental health and a deeper sense of wellbeing.

    FAQs

    • Q: What is meditation, and how does it work?
      A: Meditation is a practice that involves training your mind to focus, relax, and become more aware of your thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensations. It works by reducing stress, improving emotional regulation, and enhancing cognitive function, among other benefits.
    • Q: Do I have to be religious or spiritual to meditate?
      A: No, meditation is a practice that can be adapted to anyone’s beliefs and values. It is about cultivating mental and emotional wellbeing, and can be practiced by people of all religious and spiritual backgrounds.
    • Q: How often should I meditate to see benefits?
      A: The frequency of meditation can vary, but starting with daily practice, even if it’s just a few minutes, can be beneficial. Consistency is key, and as you continue, you can adjust the duration and frequency based on your needs and schedule.
    • Q: Can meditation help with specific mental health conditions?
      A: Yes, meditation has been shown to help with a variety of mental health conditions, including anxiety, depression, PTSD, and substance abuse. It is often used as an adjunct to traditional therapies and treatments.
    • Q: How do I get started with meditation if I’m a beginner?
      A: You can start by using guided meditation apps, following meditation videos, or joining a meditation group. Finding a quiet, comfortable space and making meditation a part of your daily routine can help you get started and maintain your practice.
  • A Telehealth Mental Health Company Billed Medicaid for Visits That Never Happened — And It Is Not Alone

    A Telehealth Mental Health Company Billed Medicaid for Visits That Never Happened — And It Is Not Alone

    A telehealth company that provided mental health services through video appointments admitted it billed Medicare and Medicaid for patient appointments that never took place — and agreed to pay $300,000 to resolve the allegations.

    The company, Aptihealth, Inc., and Aptihealth Medical, PLLC, is based in Clifton Park, New York. According to the U.S. Department of Justice’s announcement on June 23, 2026, the settlement resolves False Claims Act allegations that included billing for patient appointments where patients did not show up, billing for patient messages without regard to whether those communications involved billable clinical content, and billing for psychological testing services that were not adequately documented.

    Aptihealth also admitted to implementing a patient incentive program involving $25 gift cards that the government contends violated the Anti-Kickback Statute.


    Why This Matters

    Telehealth mental health services have transformed access to psychiatric care for millions of Americans — reducing geographic barriers, eliminating transportation requirements, and expanding appointment availability for people who previously could not access care at all.

    That growth has attracted fraudulent billing on a significant scale. The DOJ’s 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown, announced simultaneously with the Aptihealth settlement, charged 455 defendants — including 90 licensed medical professionals — in connection with more than $6.5 billion in alleged fraud. Telehealth and digital health billing fraud were specifically named as one of the takedown’s key targets, with 49 defendants charged in connection with $1.17 billion in allegedly fraudulent telehealth and genetic testing claims.

    When telehealth companies bill for services that never occurred, two harms result: the federal programs are defrauded, and patients may develop billing records that do not accurately reflect their care history, with consequences for insurance, disability claims, or future treatment.


    What We Know So Far

    According to the DOJ announcement, Aptihealth’s billing violations included:

    • No-show billing: Submitting claims to Medicare and Medicaid for patient appointments that did not occur because the patient did not attend.
    • Message billing: Billing for responses to patient messages without determining whether those communications involved clinically billable content.
    • Documentation failures: Billing for psychological testing services without sufficient documentation to support the claims.
    • Anti-Kickback violation: Offering $25 gift cards to patients who attended therapy sessions — a financial incentive that the government determined violated the Anti-Kickback Statute because it could improperly influence patients’ decisions to use the service.
    • Compliance program failures: Aptihealth’s compliance program did not meet New York statutory requirements for billing oversight, compliance monitoring, and training.

    The settlement was filed as a whistleblower action by a former Aptihealth employee under the False Claims Act’s qui tam provisions. The whistleblower will receive approximately $51,000 of the settlement proceeds.


    Not an Isolated Case

    The Aptihealth settlement is one of the smaller cases in the 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown, but it illustrates a fraud pattern that investigators say is systemic in the telehealth sector.

    According to the DOJ’s Fraud Division, the largest telehealth fraud case in the takedown was United States v. Blackman, involving Brett Blackman, founder and CEO of HealthSplash. His company, DMERx, used foreign call centers to blast spam to Medicare beneficiaries, pressuring elderly patients to accept medically unnecessary orthotic braces. The fraud involved $1 billion in allegedly fraudulent Medicare claims for equipment that, in many cases, was never ordered by a legitimate physician or needed by the patient.

    The Southern District of Florida takedown included charges against 12 defendants in connection with more than $4 billion in allegedly fraudulent claims for community mental health services, among other categories, illustrating the scale at which telehealth billing fraud now operates.


    What the Evidence Shows — and What It Does Not

    The Aptihealth settlement involves admitted conduct — the company admitted responsibility for the billing practices described. This is a settlement, not a jury trial verdict, and the $300,000 payment is not described as encompassing the full amount billed improperly. Settlement amounts in False Claims Act cases typically do not represent the full extent of alleged fraud.

    The DOJ’s 2026 Takedown data represent alleged fraud that has been charged or settled, not a comprehensive picture of the total volume of telehealth billing irregularities that may exist in the market. Experts in health care fraud have noted that telehealth billing is particularly difficult to monitor in real time because virtual care occurs without the physical presence of oversight, and documentation standards vary widely.


    Who Is Most Affected?

    • Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries who received mental health services through telehealth platforms and may have claims in their records for sessions they did not attend
    • Patients who were billed for message-based consultations that did not meet the clinical threshold for a billable service
    • Taxpayers and program beneficiaries generally, since telehealth billing fraud increases costs borne by the Medicare and Medicaid trust funds

    What You Can Do Now

    • If you receive mental health services through telehealth and are covered by Medicare or Medicaid, review your Explanation of Benefits (EOB) or Medicare Summary Notice carefully. Check that every listed service date corresponds to an appointment you actually attended.
    • If you see a claim for a session you did not have, contact your insurance company or 1-800-MEDICARE (1-800-633-4227) to report it.
    • If you receive telehealth care, you have the right to ask your provider for a copy of your billing records. These records should reflect only services that were actually provided.
    • Report suspected Medicare or Medicaid billing fraud to the HHS OIG Hotline at 1-800-HHS-TIPS (1-800-447-8477).
    • If you work for a telehealth company and suspect fraudulent billing, the False Claims Act’s whistleblower provisions allow you to report it and, if the case results in a recovery, receive a portion of the settlement proceeds.

    Cost and Access: What Patients Should Know

    Patients whose Medicare or Medicaid records contain claims for services they did not receive should not owe out-of-pocket costs for those fraudulent claims. If a co-payment or cost-sharing was collected for a session that did not occur, patients should request a refund from the provider. If the provider does not respond, contact your insurance plan or state Medicaid agency.

    Patients who have experienced genuine fraudulent billing should not discontinue telehealth mental health care as a result of this fraud. The fraud problem lies with the billing practices of specific providers, not with telehealth as a modality for delivering legitimate mental health services.


    What Happens Next

    The DOJ’s 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown is ongoing, with additional enforcement actions expected. CMS has suspended billing privileges for 1,403 providers and revoked them for 1,079 more as part of the 2026 action. A newly announced Health Care Fraud Data Fusion Center will deploy artificial intelligence and cloud computing tools to identify telehealth billing fraud patterns more rapidly. MedicalDaily will continue tracking enforcement actions in the telehealth sector.


    The Bottom Line

    A telehealth mental health company admitted it billed Medicare and Medicaid for appointments that never happened, and the DOJ’s 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown makes clear this is not an isolated case. Telehealth billing fraud is one of the fastest-growing categories of health care fraud. Patients who use telehealth for mental health care should review their billing records regularly, confirm that every claim in their record corresponds to an actual appointment, and report any discrepancies promptly.

    References

    Source link

  • The Most Effective Community Mental Health Clinic Model Just Received More Than 3 Million in New Federal Funding

    The Most Effective Community Mental Health Clinic Model Just Received More Than $223 Million in New Federal Funding

    The most evidence-based community mental health delivery model in the United States just received its largest single infusion of federal funding in years. On June 17, 2026, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced more than $700 million in new behavioral health investments — including $223.1 million specifically for Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (CCBHCs) — during a visit to an Easterseals MORC CCBHC clinic in Clinton Township, Michigan.

    The announcement also introduced the STREETS program ($96 million), designed to connect people experiencing homelessness to addiction and mental health treatment, and $211.1 million to improve local 988 crisis line capacity. The total package represents one of the most significant federal investments in community behavioral health since the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022.


    Why This Matters

    The United States faces a profound mental health and substance use disorder crisis that costs lives and strains emergency rooms, jails, hospitals, and families. More than 57 million adults in the U.S. experienced a mental illness in the past year, and more than 28 million had a substance use disorder. Fewer than half of those with mental illness received any treatment.

    The CCBHC model was specifically designed to close that gap. Unlike traditional outpatient mental health clinics that operate on business hours and serve only those who can afford to wait, CCBHCs must provide same-day care regardless of patients’ ability to pay, 24-hour mobile crisis response, integrated treatment for both mental illness and substance use disorders, peer support services, and primary care screening.

    And unlike many promising models in mental health, CCBHCs have been rigorously studied — and the evidence works.


    What We Know So Far

    According to SAMHSA’s grants dashboard, the $223.1 million for CCBHCs breaks down as $94 million for CCBHC Planning, Development, and Implementation grants and $117.1 million for CCBHC Improvement and Advancement grants, plus $12 million for state planning grants. Individual clinic grants can reach up to $1 million per year.

    The HHS announcement specifically framed the investment as part of President Trump’s Great American Recovery Initiative, an anti-addiction and mental health policy platform.

    “Every community deserves access to effective behavioral health services that help people prevent addiction, achieve recovery, address mental health challenges, and respond to crises,” said Christopher D. Carroll, principal deputy assistant secretary of SAMHSA. “Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics are a cornerstone of this effort, providing comprehensive, community-based care that helps people sustain recovery and rebuild their lives.”


    What the CCBHC Model Requires

    To be certified as a CCBHC, a clinic must meet nine mandatory service requirements established under Section 223 of the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 and made permanent under the 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act. Those requirements include:

    • 24-hour mobile crisis response
    • Same-day outpatient mental health and substance use treatment
    • Screening, assessment, and diagnosis
    • Primary care screening and monitoring for chronic disease
    • Peer support and family support services
    • Targeted case management
    • Psychiatric rehabilitation
    • Community-based mental health care for veterans
    • Services for individuals experiencing a substance use disorder, including opioid use disorder

    The requirement that no patient be turned away due to inability to pay — and that same-day care must be available — distinguishes CCBHCs from most mental health providers in the current system.


    Where the Impact Would Be Greatest

    CCBHCs are concentrated in communities that have historically had the least access to behavioral health care: rural areas, low-income urban neighborhoods, and communities with significant populations of people experiencing homelessness, substance use disorders, or co-occurring mental illness and medical conditions.

    The CCBHC Medicaid Demonstration Program — which provides enhanced federal Medicaid funding to states that implement the model — now includes 10 new states following a June 2024 expansion round. Colorado submitted a new CCBHC Demonstration application in March 2026, reflecting growing state-level interest in the program.

    States that have implemented the CCBHC Demonstration have seen measurable improvements in access to care, including reductions in emergency department visits and psychiatric hospitalizations for participating patients.


    What Doctors and Experts Say

    Research on the CCBHC model has consistently shown reductions in emergency department visits, reduced psychiatric hospitalizations, improved treatment retention for both mental illness and substance use disorder, and better coordination between behavioral health and primary care.

    According to SAMHSA, the CCBHC Improvement and Advancement grants are designed to “enhance and improve CCBHCs that currently meet the CCBHC Certification Criteria,” recognizing that existing clinics benefit from sustained investment to maintain the demanding services the model requires.

    The announcement of the STREETS program — which specifically focuses on moving people from the streets into treatment and recovery — reflects the connection between untreated mental illness, substance use disorder, and homelessness that advocates have long documented.


    What the Evidence Shows — and What It Does Not

    The CCBHC model has been studied more rigorously than most community mental health approaches. Multiple evaluations of the original eight-state CCBHC Demonstration Program, which began in 2017, documented reduced emergency department visits and hospitalizations, improved access to care in underserved communities, increased treatment retention, and greater integration between behavioral health and primary care.

    The model is not a cure for the U.S. mental health crisis. There are not enough CCBHCs to serve the full population that needs them. The certification process takes 12 to 18 months, meaning new grants announced today will not produce new clinics immediately. And the model requires ongoing federal and state funding to maintain its elevated service requirements — making it more vulnerable to funding disruptions than simpler models.


    Who Faces the Greatest Risk Without Access?

    Communities and individuals most in need of CCBHC services include:

    • Adults with serious mental illness who lack insurance or are enrolled in Medicaid
    • People with co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders
    • Veterans with PTSD, depression, or substance use disorders
    • People experiencing homelessness or housing instability
    • Residents of rural counties without local psychiatric care
    • Children and adolescents with serious emotional disturbance

    What You Can Do Now

    • Check whether a CCBHC is available in your community. SAMHSA maintains a behavioral health treatment services locator at findtreatment.gov.
    • If you or someone you know is in a mental health or substance use crisis, contact the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline by calling or texting 988. The June 17 announcement also included $211.1 million for 988 capacity expansion.
    • If you are a mental health provider or community organization interested in CCBHC certification, contact your state behavioral health authority for information on the certification process.
    • Patients currently enrolled in Medicaid can ask their caseworker whether CCBHC services are available in their plan.

    Cost and Access: What Patients Should Know

    CCBHCs are required to serve patients regardless of their ability to pay. For uninsured patients, CCBHCs operate on a sliding scale and may coordinate with other federal programs including Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program services, substance use block grants, and community health centers.

    Most CCBHC services are billable to Medicaid, and the CCBHC Demonstration provides enhanced federal Medicaid matching rates to participating states, increasing the financial sustainability of the model.


    What Happens Next

    The grants announced June 17 will be awarded through SAMHSA’s competitive grant process over the coming months. New CCBHC Planning, Development, and Implementation grantees will spend their first year building toward certification, with the goal of becoming fully certified CCBHCs and eventually Medicaid Demonstration participants. MedicalDaily will track the expansion of CCBHC capacity and 988 upgrades as new clinics come online.


    The Bottom Line

    The CCBHC model works, and it just received its largest federal investment in years. These clinics provide same-day psychiatric care, round-the-clock crisis response, and integrated addiction treatment to the communities that need it most — without turning anyone away for inability to pay. For the millions of Americans who cannot access mental health care today, this funding represents a meaningful step toward closing the gap. The next step is getting people through the doors.

    References

    Source link

  • Philadelphia Declares a Heat Health Emergency — Cooling Centers Open, Field Teams Dispatched, Heatline Active

    Philadelphia Declares a Heat Health Emergency — Cooling Centers Open, Field Teams Dispatched, Heatline Active

    Philadelphia declared a Heat Health Emergency on June 19, 2026, as the Juneteenth heat wave — which has placed approximately 80 million Americans under some form of heat advisory — brought heat index values forecast to reach 103°F and potentially exceed 100°F in the city.

    The declaration — issued by Philadelphia Health Commissioner Dr. Palak Raval-Nelson — activates a comprehensive set of city services designed specifically to reach those most at risk from heat illness and death: elderly residents living alone without air conditioning, people experiencing homelessness, outdoor workers, and residents with medical conditions that impair heat tolerance. “The Health Department declares a Heat Health Emergency when the temperature gets high enough that vulnerable people — especially our elderly neighbors and family members — are at an increased risk of getting sick or dying from the heat,” Commissioner Raval-Nelson said.

    This is not Philadelphia’s first heat health emergency of the summer. The Keystone Newsroom’s June 2026 coverage documented that Philadelphia had already come through two prior heat events in early June — the city’s first and second heat waves of 2026 — with temperatures reaching 97–98°F on consecutive days. The June 19 Juneteenth declaration represents the third heat emergency activation of the season.

    What a Philadelphia Heat Health Emergency Actually Activates

    According to the City of Philadelphia’s official Heat Health Emergency services page, a declaration triggers a coordinated set of emergency programs that go significantly beyond issuing a public advisory. The full activation includes:

    The Heatline — 215-765-9040. The Philadelphia Corporation for Aging’s (PCA) Heatline opens for calls during extended hours (8:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. during the emergency). City Health Department nurses answer calls directly, available to discuss medical concerns related to the heat, identify whether callers are in danger, and help connect residents with appropriate services. This is not a call center with scripted responses — it is a nurse-staffed clinical support line.

    Cooling centers with extended hours. As confirmed by the Philadelphia Inquirer’s coverage of the June 11 emergency and CBS Philadelphia, dozens of cooling centers open at community centers, libraries, religious centers, and parks across the city — with extended hours specifically during Heat Health Emergencies. Residents can find cooling center locations and hours at phila.gov or by calling 311. Parks and Recreation Older Adult Centers are open specifically for elderly residents.

    Home visits by special field teams. This is perhaps the most operationally significant activation in the declaration. As the City of Philadelphia’s public health documentation confirms, home visits by specialized field teams go to elderly residents and others identified in city health databases as being at elevated risk — people who may not access general public advisories, who may not know to call the Heatline, and who may be in danger before their distress is visible to neighbors or family. This proactive outreach distinguishes Philadelphia’s response from systems that rely entirely on self-reporting.

    Homeless outreach mobilization. The city mobilizes Homeless Services personnel and street outreach teams to offer shelter and services to people sleeping outside. As documented by both Philadelphia Patch and the Philadelphia Inquirer, street teams patrol the city offering shelter and services to anyone found outside in dangerous conditions. A 24/7 outreach hotline is available at 215-232-1984 for anyone who spots a person outside in need of help.

    Utility shutoff suspension. Residential utility shutoffs for nonpayment are suspended during Heat Health Emergencies, ensuring that residents who are behind on bills are not left without power for air conditioning during the most dangerous heat period.

    Pool access expansion. Philadelphia Parks & Recreation opens more than 60 outdoor pools on a rolling basis during Heat Health Emergencies, with free swim during open hours.

    Philadelphia Heat Health Emergency — Activated Services Detail
    Declaration authority Health Commissioner Dr. Palak Raval-Nelson
    Heatline 215-765-9040 (8:30 a.m. – 8:30 p.m. during emergency)
    Cooling centers Dozens of locations; community centers, libraries, religious centers, parks; call 311
    Home visit teams Special field teams dispatched to high-risk elderly and other identified residents
    Homeless outreach Mobilized Homeless Services personnel and street outreach teams
    24/7 homeless/outreach hotline 215-232-1984
    Outdoor pools 60+ opened on rolling basis; free swim during emergency
    Utility shutoffs Suspended during emergency (no shutoffs for nonpayment)
    Older Adult Centers Open with AC during emergency hours
    Heat index forecast 103°F + possible triple digits
    2026 context Third heat wave for Philadelphia; June 11–12 and prior June events also declared emergencies

    Philadelphia’s Specific Heat Vulnerabilities

    Philadelphia is one of the most heat-vulnerable large cities on the U.S. East Coast for reasons that go beyond temperature — they are structural.

    The urban heat island effect is severe. Philadelphia’s dense urban fabric — asphalt, concrete, limited tree canopy in many low-income neighborhoods — means that the city retains significantly more heat than surrounding suburban and rural areas. During a heat wave, urban core temperatures regularly exceed surrounding area temperatures by 5–10°F. Low-income and predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods consistently show less tree coverage and higher surface temperatures than wealthier neighborhoods — a documented environmental justice disparity that concentrates the health burden of heat on the populations least resourced to address it.

    Air conditioning access gaps remain. While the majority of Philadelphia households have air conditioning, significant gaps remain among elderly residents on fixed incomes who avoid running AC to limit electricity bills, low-income renters whose landlords are not required to provide adequate AC, and residents in older housing stock where window units are not feasible.

    Older adults living alone. Philadelphia has a substantial elderly population, and a significant proportion of seniors live alone. During the 1995 Chicago heat wave — which killed 739 people in six days and remains the defining case study for heat mortality in a major U.S. city — living alone was one of the single strongest predictors of death, particularly when combined with no air conditioning and social isolation. Philadelphia’s home visit program exists precisely to address this known risk pattern.

    Anyone in Philadelphia who is concerned about themselves or a family member during the heat emergency should call 311 to find the nearest cooling center, call the PCA Heatline at 215-765-9040 to speak with a nurse, or call the 24/7 outreach line at 215-232-1984 for immediate street outreach assistance.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What does Philadelphia’s Heat Health Emergency declaration activate?

    The declaration activates: the PCA Heatline at 215-765-9040 (nurse-staffed); cooling centers with extended hours at dozens of locations; home visits by specialized field teams to high-risk residents; mobilization of Homeless Services personnel and street outreach teams; free pool access; and suspension of residential utility shutoffs for nonpayment.

    Where can I find a cooling center in Philadelphia?

    Call 311 or visit phila.gov to find the nearest cooling center. During the Heat Health Emergency, dozens of locations are open with extended hours, including community centers, libraries, religious centers, parks, and Older Adult Centers.

    How do I get help for someone who appears to be in heat distress outdoors in Philadelphia?

    Call the 24/7 outreach line at 215-232-1984 to request immediate assistance for anyone you find outside who may be in heat distress. For a life-threatening emergency, call 911.

    What is the Heatline, and when is it available?

    The Philadelphia Corporation for Aging’s Heatline (215-765-9040) is staffed by City Health Department nurses during Heat Health Emergencies. Hours are 8:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. Nurses can answer medical questions about heat-related health concerns and help connect callers with services.

    Is there free swimming available during the emergency? Yes. Philadelphia Parks & Recreation opens its 60+ outdoor pools on a rolling basis during Heat Health Emergencies, with free swim during open hours. Check phila.gov for current open pool locations.

    Source link

  •  Billion in Rural Health Funding Won’t Reopen Martin County’s Closed Hospital — Here’s What the Fine Print Actually Says

    $50 Billion in Rural Health Funding Won’t Reopen Martin County’s Closed Hospital — Here’s What the Fine Print Actually Says

    Stanley Sears was 50 years old when he had a heart attack in Martin County, North Carolina. Emergency crews from a neighboring town worked on him for half an hour, but couldn’t revive him for the long drive to the closest hospital. Martin County’s only hospital had closed a year before his death.

    His sister, Debra Pierce, still wonders. “The sad thing is we’ll never know if he could have been saved that night or not, because we don’t have a higher level of care in this county,” she told KFF Health News reporter Sarah Jane Tribble.

    In the political moment following the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the story of Martin County is being told differently by different people. Republicans point to the $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program included in the bill as evidence that rural communities will be helped. Martin County Manager Drew Batts, who has walked through the shuttered corridors of Martin General Hospital with federal and state lawmakers, has a simpler assessment: “The $50 billion is not something that is specifically going to help our situation. It’s not going to help us get this place reopened.”

    He is correct. And the reasons why are an object lesson in the gap between what a federal health fund promises and what it can actually deliver.

    What the $50 Billion Rural Health Fund Is — and What It Isn’t

    According to KFF’s comprehensive analysis of the fund, the Rural Health Transformation Program was added to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in response to concerns from lawmakers representing rural states about the bill’s massive Medicaid cuts. The fund provides $10 billion per year over five years (fiscal years 2026–2030), for a total of $50 billion. CMS has broad discretion over distribution and — critically — those distribution decisions are not subject to administrative or judicial review.

    The fund’s structural design creates several limitations that directly affect communities like Martin County:

    Limitation 1: The fund goes to existing organizations, not to closed facilities. North Carolina distributes its $213 million first-year allocation among existing health and social service organizations. As KFF Health News reported, federal regulations set limits on how much can be spent on construction and building renovations. Martin General Hospital isn’t open — so it isn’t an existing organization that can receive funds.

    Limitation 2: The hub-and-spoke distribution model concentrates money in larger systems. North Carolina’s plan creates a hub-and-spoke model that allots money to six large regional leads, including nonprofits such as ECU Health’s affiliate Access East. Those hubs then distribute to local entities. ECU Health’s affiliate did win a portion of North Carolina’s first-year payout — but the federal money cannot be used to reopen Martin General, according to ECU Health’s Chief Operating Officer Brian Floyd.

    Limitation 3: The fund is temporary; the Medicaid cuts are not. KFF analysis shows the $50 billion could offset approximately 37% of the estimated cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas ($137 billion over ten years). But while the rural health fund is limited to five years, nearly two-thirds of the ten-year reductions in federal Medicaid spending occur after fiscal year 2030 — meaning the fund’s support runs out before most of the damage it’s supposed to offset materializes.

    Limitation 4: The math doesn’t work for the most rural communities. KFF analysis shows that Connecticut (with 3 rural hospitals by one definition) could receive the same amount as Kansas (with 90 rural hospitals) if both states are approved for funding. The allocation formula gives equal weight to states regardless of rural hospital density, diluting the fund’s impact in states most desperately in need.

    $50 Billion Rural Health Fund — Key Facts Detail
    Total fund size $50 billion ($10B/year for FY 2026–2030)
    Authorizing legislation One Big Beautiful Bill Act
    CMS discretion over distribution Broad; not subject to administrative or judicial review
    NC first-year allocation $213 million
    Distribution model in NC Hub-and-spoke; six large regional lead organizations
    Can NC funds reopen Martin General? No — federal rules limit construction; hospital must be operational
    Fund’s offset of rural Medicaid cuts ~37% of estimated $137B in rural Medicaid cuts over 10 years
    Timing mismatch Fund runs FY 2026–2030; 64% of Medicaid cuts come after FY 2030
    Martin County’s situation 22,000 residents; no hospital since 2023; no paramedics on ambulances
    Distance to nearest ER 20+ miles
    ECU Health projected Medicaid cut impact $1 billion over 10 years (CEO testimony)

    What Martin County Actually Needs — and What It Would Take

    ECU Health signed a letter of intent to reopen Martin General as a rural emergency hospital (REH) — a federal designation that allows smaller facilities to operate with 24-hour emergency services and outpatient care but without inpatient beds. Under that plan, Martin County would pay to refurbish the hospital, and the North Carolina General Assembly would need to provide ECU Health with $210 million — of which $150 million would fund construction of a new inpatient tower at ECU’s Beaufort Hospital.

    That legislative appropriation has not materialized. And even if it did, Representative Don Davis, whose district encompasses Martin County, told KFF Health News the rural health fund money “is essentially putting a band-aid on a much, much broader situation that needs dire help.” Davis has introduced legislation to increase Medicaid reimbursements for rural hospitals — the structural fix that would prevent hospital closures — but it has not moved forward.

    The closure of Martin General in August 2023 was abrupt. Employees were not notified. Patients being treated were wheeled out on stretchers and transported to other facilities. The company operating the county-owned hospital, Quorum Health, did not notify local elected leaders before filing for bankruptcy.

    Martin County also does not have paramedics on its ambulances — only emergency medical technicians (EMTs), who have a more limited scope of practice. The closest emergency rooms are 20 miles or more away, often overcrowded. One woman told KFF Health News she drove 2.5 hours from a small town near the Outer Banks so her 79-year-old aunt could get care at an ECU Health ER in Greenville — and was told to wait outside because of capacity issues.

    “It’s a real healthcare crisis that has already proven itself to have lost lives that perhaps didn’t have to be lost,” said ECU Health COO Brian Floyd. “They just want to not die because there’s nowhere to go when you have an emergency.”

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is the $50 billion rural health fund?

    The Rural Health Transformation Program, included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, provides $10 billion per year for five years (FY 2026–2030) for rural health. CMS has broad discretion over distribution, and distribution decisions are not subject to administrative or judicial review.

    Why won’t the fund reopen Martin County’s hospital?

    Because the fund is distributed to existing health and social service organizations, and federal regulations limit how much can be spent on construction and renovation. Martin General Hospital closed in 2023 — it is not an existing operational facility that can receive funding. Martin County’s situation requires capital investment in a closed hospital that the fund’s design specifically does not accommodate.

    Does the $50 billion offset the Medicaid cuts in the same bill?

    Only partially. KFF estimates the fund could offset approximately 37% of the $137 billion in estimated cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas over ten years. Critically, the fund runs through FY 2030, but nearly two-thirds of the Medicaid cuts occur after that — meaning the fund’s support ends before most of the cuts’ impact materializes.

    What happened to Martin County’s hospital?

    Martin General Hospital, the county’s only hospital, closed abruptly in August 2023 when the company operating it (Quorum Health) filed for bankruptcy without notifying local elected leaders or staff. Patients were wheeled out on stretchers. The county has approximately 22,000 residents with no hospital, no paramedics on ambulances, and emergency rooms 20+ miles away.

    What would it take to reopen Martin General?

    ECU Health has a letter of intent to reopen it as a rural emergency hospital (REH), but the plan requires the North Carolina General Assembly to appropriate $210 million to ECU Health and Martin County to fund building refurbishment. Those appropriations have not materialized. ECU Health’s CEO has separately warned the system expects to lose $1 billion over the next 10 years from Medicaid cuts under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

    Source link