Tag: health care

A Mysterious Ancient Egyptian Text Reveals Evidence of Advanced Medicine 1000 Years Earlier Than Once Thought

It was 1862, and the American Egyptologist Edwin Smith had just made a fascinating discovery in Luxor, Egypt, the site of ancient Thebes.

This was no archaeological mystery unearthed from the country’s time-worn sands, however. Instead, Smith’s acquisition came from an Egyptian dealer, Mustafa Agha, who sold him an unusual papyrus that seemed to describe medical practices from Egypt’s Second Intermediate Period.

Smith kept the papyrus until his death in 1906, largely unaware of its contents, as his understanding of hieratic was limited and he was unable to translate it. After Smith’s passing, many of the items in his collection, including the mysterious papyrus, were given to the New York Historical Society by his daughter, where they quietly remained for several more years.

It wasn’t until 1920 that the ancient treatise came to the attention of the classical archaeologist and Egyptologist Caroline Ransom Williams, who brought it to the attention of noted archaeologist James Henry Breasted.

“The papyrus is probably the most valuable one owned by the Society,” Williams wrote to Breasted at the time, “and I am ready to waive my interest in it, in the hope that it may be published sooner and better than I could do it.” Recognized as the first chair in Egyptology and Oriental History in the United States at the University of Chicago, Breasted was immediately fascinated by the ancient text and set to work deciphering it.

One decade later, Breasted had finally completed the task of interpreting the obscure ancient document in its entirety, a translation of which was published in 1930. The result was a fundamental shift in our understanding of the ancient history of medical science and its early beginnings, revealing evidence for advanced medical knowledge in ancient Egypt as much as 1000 years before what scholars had commonly accepted at the time.

The Edwin Smith Papyrus: Obscure Origins and a Cliffhanger Ending

The document, known today as the Edwin Smith Papyrus, was cut into one-column pages at some point in the last century. It features Egyptian hieratic written in ink of two different colors: most of the text is black, while some portions with addenda to the primary document appear in red.

Little is known about the author of the papyrus, although scholars agree that the version that exists today is likely the work of a single scholar, and probably also represents a copy of an even older manuscript from Egypt’s Old Kingdom.

Several clues point to this possibility: despite the document’s physical age, scholars note the inclusion of archaic forms of Egyptian words and grammar, suggesting the papyrus is a copy of a much earlier document. Equally tantalizing is that the document ends in mid-sentence, suggesting that, in addition to being a copy, the surviving version is an incomplete work.

From Ancient Magic to Medical Science

Most intriguing of all is the information the document contains. Outlined in an illustrated survey of 48 case histories, the Edwin Smith Papyrus presents a remarkable ancient Egyptian perspective on various injuries and their treatments. Each case details a different region of the body and/or a specific organ and discusses each injury systematically, even including references to the original doctor’s notes on ailments “which I will treat,” suggesting a physician logging their diagnoses of conditions afflicting their patients.

From descriptions of human anatomy to treatments for bleeding, curing infections, and closing wounds, the medical knowledge outlined in the papyrus is remarkably advanced for the period in which it is believed to have originated. Additionally, discussions of medicines featured in the document reveal a level of understanding that exceeds that previously known to have existed at the time by a significant margin, even going beyond medicinal knowledge first recorded by the Greek physician Hippocrates, close to 1000 years later.

Perhaps most significant of all, the document’s precocious discussion of medical knowledge marks a significant shift away from the use of spells and incantations, which are widely believed to have been commonly used for the treatment of a variety of ailments during Egypt’s Old Kingdom. Although the Edwin Smith Papyrus does still contain some references to magic—there are eight magic spells that appear on its “verso” (back left-hand) side—it is believed that these magical references may have represented a sort of “last effort” in cases where all forms of medical treatment had proven ineffective.

Keep reading

The Feds Are Investing in Wearable Health Trackers. That Could Put Your Private Data at Risk.

By gathering continuous data about sleep, heart rate, and physical activity, biowearable devices can give individuals more control over their well-being. But they also create a detailed digital record of our daily lives—one that the federal government may soon be able to access readily.

Consider this scenario.

You’ve recently received a government-subsidized biowearable. Accordingly, the authorities now know when you’re sleeping, because the device reports your sleep cycle, location, and daily movements in real time to a cloud server accessible through a legal process. It knows when you’re home. It knows when you leave.

Those data are then obtained by an FBI field office (either through direct purchase or, if necessary, a legal process), because a federal prosecutor has decided that your criticism of immigration enforcement operations and your social media posts supporting Immigration and Customs Enforcement protesters constitute “incitement to violence” against federal agents. Under the Trump administration’s elastic (and legally dubious) domestic terrorism definitions and designations, that is enough to open a criminal investigation.

And because the government has known for weeks when you’re at home sleeping, it knows exactly when to break down your door.

That scenario may sound far-fetched, but it is getting closer to reality. In March, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) would begin investing in new biowearable technologies through a program it called Delphi, after the ancient Greek sanctuary where the maxim “know thyself” was inscribed. It’s a fitting name for a program designed to help people understand their bodies, but it also raises an uncomfortable question: Who else might come to know them just as well?

The program aims to develop biosensors capable of continuously monitoring cytokines (cellular inflammation markers) and hormone levels, going substantially beyond what current wearables can detect. Funding will be determined on a competitive basis as private-sector stakeholders submit proposals; no specific appropriation has been announced.

It remains unclear why this taxpayer funding is necessary in a field that is already thriving. The global wearables market was valued at roughly $43 billion in 2024 and is projected to exceed $168 billion by 2030.

Devices worn on the wrist, finger, or skin can already monitor heart rates, blood oxygen levels, sleep patterns, physical activity, and—in the case of continuous glucose monitors—blood sugar levels in real time. Some smartwatches can even conduct electrocardiograms capable of detecting irregular heart rhythms, such as atrial fibrillation.

Until recently, people could access most of this information only during periodic visits to a clinic or hospital. Biowearables now enable people to monitor many of these signals continuously in everyday life.

Keep reading

How Will Corporate Lobbyists Fix Healthcare? Don’t Ask—Because You Can’t

Corporate media political reporting has always been a clubby endeavor, but a recent reporting experience suggests that the insider culture in Washington, DC, is more insular than ever.

It’s often a challenge for independent media to get responses from Washington insider sources—especially on stories critical of powerful actors—but it’s become increasingly difficult even to pose the questions to those sources. Corporate news sources now issue press releases without bothering to include any information about who to contact with follow-up questions, as if the source is handing the truth down from on high.

When I first encountered this phenomenon after returning to journalism three years ago, I assumed it was a function of the laziness and/or incompetence of individual PR hacks. In my previous life, I had written a few dozen press releases, and “who’s the contact person?” was always a key question to answer in planning media outreach. But today, a failure to offer contact information increasingly appears to be a deliberate strategy to stymie journalistic inquiry.

‘No Surprises’ unsurprising fiasco

Last November, my healthcare politics online newsletter, Healing and Stealing (11/7/25), published an investigation of a national coalition of health insurers and other big businesses. The Coalition Against Surprise Medical Billing includes major business lobbying trade associations like the National Retail Federation, National Restaurant Association, National Association of Manufacturers and the health insurance industry trade group AHIP. Through those associations and business/labor health policy alliances, most of the largest employers in the US and many major labor unions are part of the Coalition, in alliance with the health insurance companies that sell them health plans for their employees.

The Coalition lobbied for passage of the No Surprises Act. The law, passed in December 2020 and signed by President Donald Trump, limits the amount that patients have to pay out of pocket when they unknowingly see a doctor or use another service that is not covered in their health insurance plan’s network. The law also set up a new arbitration system to resolve disputes—between employers and insurers on one side, and hospitals, labs, doctors’ offices and ambulance companies on the other—over the rest of the bills.

Keep reading

Why your flu shot may work differently than you think

Two decades of federal surveillance data reveal how immune imprinting and an aging immune system undermine flu vaccine effectiveness. Current universal vaccination policy has not caught up to the biology.

Every autumn, public health authorities deliver a message that is simultaneously accurate and misleading: get your flu shot. All Americans aged six months and older are recommended to receive one. The guidance is consistent, reassuring, and considerably more complicated than it sounds.

A synthesis of two decades of CDC surveillance data, which will be published separately in Malone.News makes an argument that has been quietly building in the immunology literature for years: the current one-size-fits-all approach to seasonal influenza vaccination fails to account for two fundamental features of how the immune system actually works. The first is that your first flu exposure as a child permanently shapes how you respond to every flu vaccine you will ever receive. The second is that the immune system ages in ways that make older adults both the most important target for vaccination and the least reliable responders to it.

This is not a case against flu vaccination. It is a case for being honest about what the vaccine does and does not do, and for whom. In other words, it is a case for open and transparent informed consent.

Keep reading

COVID Inquiry Finds Lockdowns May Have Cost THOUSANDS OF Lives

The authoritarian COVID lockdowns and stay-at-home orders sold as life-saving measures have been unmasked once again as a deadly failure of big government overreach.

A new UK Covid-19 Inquiry report has concluded that the relentless “Stay Home, Protect the NHS, Save Lives” messaging likely cost thousands of lives by convincing people they could not get access to health services.

The inquiry, led by Baroness Hallett, slammed the slogan created by Cabinet Office officials without input from health leaders. It “led some people to feel they must avoid burdening the NHS” and “may have inadvertently sent the message that healthcare was closed,” contributing to a sharp decline in A&E attendances for life-threatening emergencies such as heart attacks.

The report states plainly: “It is clear that, during the pandemic, worsening delays in diagnosis and treatment led to increased ill-health and suffering and, in some cases, cost lives.” Some patients waited so long their conditions became “untreatable,” with permanent loss of mobility.

Baroness Hallett stressed: “It is important that government communication campaigns do not deter those in need from accessing healthcare.” She urged future governments to consult healthcare professionals on messaging “to avoid unintended consequences.”

Office for National Statistics data backs this up, recording more than 17,000 excess deaths from non-Covid conditions at the height of the pandemic. Cancer screenings were paused, diagnoses plummeted, and non-urgent care cancellations left patients suffering. Hospital visiting bans were branded too tough, with dying people left alone and families devastated.

Keep reading

‘Radical’ Biden Judge Reverses RFK Jr. On Trans-Child Surgeries, Other Procedures

A federal judge deemed ‘too radical‘ by GOP lawmakers during his confirmation hearings said on Thursday that he will grant a motion by blue states to vacate (reverse) a declaration by HHS Director Robert F. Kennedy Jr. blocking breast removal and other procedures for youths with gender dysphoria. 

Oregon US District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai, who was appointed by Biden in late 2024 and only confirmed after Senate Democrats invoked cloture on his nomination by a 51-43 vote, said during a hearing that he would soon issue a formal written opinion and an order denying the government’s bid to dismiss the states’ case, and granting the states’ motion for summary judgement, according to court records. 

Kennedy issued a declaration in late 2025 that “ex-rejecting procedures for children and adolescents are neither safe nor effective as a treatment modality for gender dysphoria, gender incongruence, or other related disorders in minors, and therefore, fail to meet professional recognized standards of health care.”

This was based on a report by the Department of Health and Human Services which looked at procedures and treatments available for gender dysphoria, and concluded that many of them risk infertility. The Trump administration said that health care providers who perform breast removal and other procedures would be out of compliance with updated standards, while officials also moved to bar hospitals that participate in Medicare or Medicaid from performing the procedures on children. 

New York and 18 other states immediately sued, claiming that the new rules were illegal, and “amounts to an end-run around the free choice of provider statute because it effectively bars Medicaid beneficiaries from choosing providers that are otherwise qualified, simply because they furnish gender-affirming care to children or adolescents,” the states said in their motion for summary judgement. 

New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of the plaintiffs, said the forthcoming ruling siding with the states showed Kennedy “cannot unilaterally change medical standards by posting a document online, and no one should lose access to medically necessary health care because their federal government tried to interfere in decisions that belong in doctors’ offices.” –Epoch Times

At least 17 hospitals or health centers have been referred for possible punitive action for violating the HHS declaration, they said. 

Government lawyers argued in a brief that the declaration reflected Kennedy’s “non-binding policy position on the safety and efficacy of certain pediatric and adolescent treatment modalities,” and that the HHS report was one of many pieces of information officials considered in their decision. 

The admin also asked the court to dismiss the case over a lack of jurisdiction. 

Keep reading

What Covid Policy Did to Doctors Who Refused to Stay Silent

The sound I remember most from the early days of Covid-19 is not the alarms. It was the silence between them. Intensive care units became Covid wards. Monitors glowed in dark rooms while ventilators pushed air into failing lungs. Nurses, shrouded in protective gear, moved quietly. Families were absent—barred from being with loved ones in their final hours.

One night at 3 am, I stood by a patient whose oxygen levels were steadily falling. Outside the room, another patient crashed. Down the hall, a third awaited intubation. For months, this was every night. For 715 consecutive days, I worked in that environment without taking a single day off. In moments like that, medicine becomes very simple. There are no politics in an ICU at 3 am. There is only a physician and a patient, and the responsibility to do everything possible to keep that patient alive.

That philosophy has guided physicians for generations. It is the foundation of clinical medicine: when a patient is dying, you explore every reasonable option that might help.

Yet during Covid, something extraordinary happened. What made the shift so jarring was not simply the presence of disagreement. Physicians have always disagreed. In fact, disagreement is the normal language of medicine. Grand rounds exist for that reason. Journal clubs exist for that reason. The entire structure of scientific publication—from peer review to replication—exists because medicine advances through argument, not obedience. During the pandemic, however, the culture of medicine changed almost overnight. Instead of asking whether a treatment might work, institutions began asking whether discussing that treatment might create the wrong public message. The priority quietly shifted from discovery to control.

Scientific debate faded. Physicians who questioned policies or explored treatments were treated as threats rather than colleagues. Instead of debate, there was enforcement.

Hospitals warned physicians to stay quiet. Medical boards hinted at disciplinary action. Social media platforms censored discussion of therapies that doctors around the world were actively studying. Media outlets portrayed dissenting physicians as reckless or dangerous. What had once been normal scientific discourse was suddenly labeled misinformation.

To physicians trained in earlier decades, this shift was deeply unsettling. Medicine has always lived with uncertainty. Treatments begin as hypotheses and evolve through observation and debate. During the AIDS crisis, clinicians tried multiple strategies before effective therapies emerged. The same was true for sepsis, trauma care, and organ transplantation. No one expected immediate unanimity. Yet during Covid, uncertainty itself became suspect. If a physician acknowledged that evidence was incomplete—or that clinical experience suggested alternative approaches—those statements were sometimes interpreted as challenges to authority rather than contributions to knowledge.

Keep reading

Google Discontinues AI Health Feature Filled with Misleading Advice

Google has quietly discontinued an AI search feature that offered users health advice crowdsourced from non-medical professionals worldwide.

The Guardian reports that Google has removed a controversial AI-powered search feature called “What People Suggest” that provided users with crowdsourced health advice from people around the world. The decision comes amid growing scrutiny over the technology company’s use of artificial intelligence to deliver health information to millions of users.

Three sources familiar with the decision confirmed that Google has scrapped the feature. A company spokesperson acknowledged that “What People Suggest” had been discontinued, stating the removal was part of a broader simplification of the search results page and was unrelated to concerns about the quality or safety of the feature.

The feature was initially launched in March of last year at an event in New York called “The Check Up,” where Google announced plans to expand medical-related AI summaries in its search function. At the time, the company promoted “What People Suggest” as demonstrating the potential of AI to transform health outcomes globally by connecting users with information from people who had similar lived medical experiences.

Karen DeSalvo, who served as Google’s chief health officer at the time of the launch, explained the rationale behind the feature in a blog post. “While people come to search to find reliable medical information from experts, they also value hearing from others who have similar experiences,” DeSalvo wrote. The feature used AI to organize perspectives from online discussions into themes, making it easier for users to understand what people were saying about particular health conditions.

DeSalvo provided an example of how the feature would work, noting that someone with arthritis seeking information about exercise could quickly find insights from others with the same condition, with links to explore further information. The feature was initially available on mobile devices in the United States before being discontinued.

Keep reading

‘Equity for All Patients’: Arizona Senate Moves to End Vaccine Incentives for Doctors

The Arizona Senate this week approved legislation that would bar insurance companies — including Medicaid — from reimbursing physicians at different rates based on whether their patients “refuse one or more vaccines,” according to the Arizona Mirror.

Lawmakers passed the bill Tuesday by a 16-13 party-line vote. The measure now moves to the Arizona House of Representatives. If approved there, it would head to Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs for consideration.

Bill sponsor Sen. Janae Shamp, a Republican nurse, said the proposal is a response to parents who say they struggle to find pediatric care for their children if they don’t follow the full childhood vaccination schedule from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

“This specifically comes from a lot of parents asking for help for their children to be able to go to a pediatrician’s office when they don’t meet the entire vaccine schedule minimums to go to a practice,” Shamp told colleagues on the Senate floor. “This is about equity for all patients.”

Shamp previously said she lost her nursing job after refusing the COVID-19 vaccine.

‘Bill protects families’ rights to make informed decisions’

Ursula Conway, president emeritus of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Arizona Chapter, said the legislation reflects broader debates about medical choice and physician incentives.

Shamp’s bill reflects “Arizona’s commitment to each individual’s right to make their own healthcare decisions,” Conway said.

She said some physicians receive financial bonuses tied to vaccination rates within their practices. She argued that those incentives can influence how doctors treat families who decline shots.

“Consequently, some practitioners choose to restrict their practice to those families who agree to the recommended vaccine schedule, thus securing their bonus income,” she said.

Families who don’t follow the schedule face difficulty finding care, according to Conway.

Keep reading

California bill seeks to restore Medi‑Cal coverage for undocumented adults in 2027

A proposed California bill could pave the way for undocumented Californians ages 19 and older to once again receive Medi-Cal coverage, beginning Jan. 1, 2027.

State Sen. María Elena Durazo and Assemblymember Joaquin Arambula, both Democrats, introduced the Medi‑Cal Access Restoration Act to end the freeze and reinstate full‑scope Medi‑Cal benefits for undocumented adults.

As of Thursday afternoon, the bill states that it would “make an individual who is 19 years of age or older, who does not have satisfactory immigration status, eligible for the full scope of Medi-Cal benefits subject to certain limitations, such as the payment of premiums and certain dental benefits.”

According to the Fresno Bee, California faced a deficit of more than $10 billion last year before rolling back health insurance access for undocumented adults, a benefit the state had been expanding for several years, to help balance the 2025‑26 budget.

The state is again projecting a nearly $3 billion deficit as lawmakers prepare next year’s spending plan.

Lawmakers say the freeze does not eliminate health needs and instead shifts costs to counties, hospitals and emergency rooms.

“Undocumented Californians pick our crops, build our homes, and care for our families – and they pay billions in taxes to do it,” said Senator Durazo. “Denying them basic health coverage isn’t saving money, it’s borrowing trouble. We pay more when people end up in the emergency room. SB 1422 is the fiscally responsible thing to do, and it’s the right thing to do.”

According to officials, undocumented Californians contribute $8.5 billion annually in state and local taxes and make up roughly one-tenth of the state’s workforce.

Keep reading