In 2026, CMS identified 189,000 improper subsidized enrollments and stopped an estimated $738 million in improper payments this year alone. Together with @DrOzCMS, we are rooting out fraud and waste, protecting taxpayer dollars, and making sure these programs serve the Americans who rely on them. We are not removing eligible Americans from these programs. We are removing improper enrollments and stopping improper payments so we can protect these programs for the people who truly need them. That is what fighting fraud is about.

The @nytimes and @apoorva_nyc owe parents the facts behind their alarming hepatitis B reporting. The paper they discuss is a “modeling study” or simulation based on assumptions, not a study of evidence or outcomes. The model assumes allowing parents and doctors to decide when or whether to vaccinate would drive vaccine completion down to just half of children. The researchers did not observe that decline or establish that our policy would cause it. Yet the Times obscures that assumption while amplifying the alarming prediction it produces. At its December meeting, ACIP recommended that parents and doctors decide whether and when to begin hepatitis B vaccination. CDC’s January update to the childhood vaccine schedule carried forward that approach. Yet the researchers assigned sharply different vaccination rates to the two, producing different infection projections. The Times should explain what justifies that difference before attributing its alarming 83% figure to the January update. The article also gets the recommendation wrong. The recommendation did not tell parents to wait until two months to decide. Parents could choose vaccination at birth. The two-month suggestion applied to administering the first dose if parents deferred the birth dose. The recommendation retained birth-dose vaccination for babies whose mothers have hepatitis B or whose status is unknown. For babies whose mothers test negative, it gave parents and doctors a choice about when or whether to begin vaccination. I reject the idea that respecting parents’ choices means abandoning children’s health. Under my leadership, HHS puts informed consent, individual medical circumstances, and conversations between parents and doctors at the center of health decisions. I welcome rigorous scrutiny of our policies. But scrutiny demands accurate reporting, defensible assumptions, and evidence. The Times should correct its error and explain the assumptions behind its headline. Parents deserve the full story. nytimes.com/2026/10/19/healt…

1 day left to comment! HHS is seeking public input on the potential health effects of radiofrequency and electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure from cell phones, Wi-Fi, and other wireless technologies. Help us identify research gaps and better understand how these technologies may affect our health, especially the health of our children. Submit comments by October 21: federalregister.gov/document…

Thank you, @FLOTUS, for your leadership in advancing women’s health. Women deserve clear answers about conditions that uniquely or disproportionately affect them. Today, we are changing how our government pursues those answers. The new Women’s Health Division at @NIH will tackle these questions with gold-standard science, accelerate research, and turn discoveries into better prevention, treatments, and care for women across America.