Tradeoffs

Dr. Mehmet Oz — surgeon, TV star and former Senate candidate — is poised to take on a new role: leading the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. At his confirmation hearing last week, Oz pledged to work “tirelessly” to expand access to care, but senators pressed him on his history of promoting unproven treatments, financial conflicts of interest and his stance on potential Medicaid cuts. CMS is a $1.5 trillion agency that insures 160 million Americans, making its leadership one of the most powerful positions in U.S. health policy. What impact would an Oz-led CMS have? Former CMS Administrator Tom Scully shared his insights with Tradeoffs Executive Editor Dan Gorenstein. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/gvxKfBgA

I talked w/Tradeoffs about Dr. Oz, the surgeon-turned-TV star who's poised to lead @CMSGov: what I learned reporting on him and what we can glean from his Senate hearing. Come for the policy, stay to hear me laugh while trying to sound professional. https://lnkd.in/g8m9Baf6

President Trump has nominated heart surgeon-turned-TV-star Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Oz's confirmation hearing last week was a lot less contentious and a lot less covered than when his future boss, RFK Jr., went to Capitol Hill a few weeks earlier. But leading CMS is an incredibly important job. The agency provides health coverage for nearly 160 million Americans through Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare, and its budget is $1.5 trillion — nearly double the Department of Defense. This week on Tradeoffs, we take a closer look at Dr. Oz with the help of STAT's Tara Bannow, who wrote an in-depth profile of the nominee, and Thomas Scully, who led CMS under President George W. Bush. We dig into Oz's background, the policies he’s likely to support, and what we can expect from him as one of the country’s top health care officials. https://lnkd.in/ermCmXXC

The Trump administration’s efforts to cut funding from the National Institutes of Health have shaken the scientific community. We asked two researchers at Johns Hopkins School of Nursing about the potential impact on the future of medical research. https://lnkd.in/gxE45hSb

We're grateful for the Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts' support of our work. Tradeoffs has covered the opioid crisis since our founding, including a 2024 examination of how fentanyl is making one of the few treatments for opioid addiction harder to use. Explore our coverage of the opioid crisis at https://lnkd.in/ggdnT6kY

This week’s episode of Tradeoffs is pretty different from what we usually put out. I’ve spent the last few weeks talking with researchers about the Trump administration’s efforts to cut and redirect scientific funding from the National Institutes of Health. Again and again, experienced scientists brought up conversations they’re having with the young people they mentor who keep asking, “Should I stay in academia? Is there a future here?” So we decided to bring you one of these conversations. Yvonne Commodore-Mensah, PhD, MHS, RN, FAAN is an associate dean for research at Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, and Laura Mata López is a fourth-year Ph.D. candidate. Both women study health disparities, and both are concerned they could lose their NIH funding as part of the administration’s anti-DEI efforts. “We can’t just pretend that in four years, we’re going to get another chance,” Laura told Yvonne. “I still do see a viable path as a nurse-scientist, but not in academia.” That possibility scares Yvonne. She worries about the advances in health care that will be lost if the Trump administration pushes talented young scientists like Laura out of academic research. “I acknowledge that it's a challenging period,” Yvonne told Laura. “But we have to be hopeful. I feel like we don't have an option. The opposite of that would be just despair. And I know that our communities are counting on us to still want to fight.” I hope you’ll listen to Yvonne and Laura’s?full conversation or read the transcript. Laura shares her pain at feeling like her work is under attack, and Yvonne shares why, in the face of all the uncertainty, she remains hopeful. https://lnkd.in/ecqMMrg8

“A biased tool is a bad tool.” - Paige Nong, Assistant Professor at University of Minnesota In an interview with Nong, an AI researcher at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health, she breaks down her recent study, which analyzed AI use among U.S. hospitals and how many are evaluating their AI tools for bias. The study, published in Health Affairs, found that about two-thirds of the roughly 6,000 hospitals in the U.S. use AI and predictive models. But of those hospitals that use AI of any kind, only 61% said they tested those tools for accuracy, and just 44% tested them for bias. While Nong says the many guardrails in place reduce the likelihood that biased algorithms harm patient care, she worries about the potential harms of biased AI in billing or appointment scheduling. “If we’re using AI to refer patients to collections agencies faster, that’s not going to result in missing a sepsis diagnosis, but it can result in really devastating financial consequences,” she said. Read more about the uses of AI in health care and the implications of leaving it unchecked: https://lnkd.in/ghWnYefR

As adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities strive to live more freely and fully than ever before, many of America’s doctors, hospitals and insurers are getting in the way. This week, we get an inside look at one doctor’s quest to improve health care for people with conditions like Down syndrome, cerebral palsy and autism. https://lnkd.in/eQYnfPjq

We're grateful to have a dedicated team collaborate across traditional news organization "lines" to work toward our mission to help America have smarter, more honest health policy conversations. Subscribe to our newsletter for deeper insight into our reporting: https://lnkd.in/gH2Bqwqg

In January, Trump signed an executive order reversing a long-standing policy that kept “sensitive locations” like schools, churches and health care facilities off-limits from immigration officials. Now, doctors and hospitals are concerned about the health of their patients who may be skipping medical appointments out of fear of being picked up by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In Chicago, Steph Willding, MPA, CEO of CommunityHealth said they’ve already seen an uptick in no-shows and cancellations, which could pose serious risks for patients with chronic conditions. Learn more about the health impacts of avoiding care and increased stress: https://lnkd.in/gGSUiTzb