Health News Articles

Excerpts of key news articles on

Below are key excerpts of revealing news articles on health from reliable news media sources. If any link fails to function, a paywall blocks full access, or the article is no longer available, try these digital tools.

For further exploration, delve into our comprehensive Health and Food Corruption Information Center.

Note: Explore our full index to revealing excerpts of key major media news articles on dozens of engaging topics. And read excerpts from 20 of the most revealing news articles ever published.

Purdue Pharma has agreed to pay $270 million to settle a historic lawsuit brought by the Oklahoma attorney general, who accused the OxyContin maker of aggressively marketing the opioid painkiller and fueling a drug epidemic that left thousands dead in the state. The settlement comes after Purdue [sought] to delay the start of the trial, which is scheduled for May 28. Attorney General Mike Hunter said ... that $102.5 million of the settlement would be used to help establish a national addiction treatment and research center at Oklahoma State University. The company will also provide $20 million of addiction treatment and opioid rescue medications to the center. A remaining $12.5 million from the settlement will be used directly to help cities and counties with the opioid crisis. The Sackler family, who founded and own Purdue Pharma, will also contribute $75 million over the next five years to the treatment and research center. The lawsuit was brought by Hunter against some of the nation's leading makers of opioid pain medications, alleging that deceptive marketing over the past decade fueled the epidemic in the state. Hunter has said the defendants - Purdue Pharma, Johnson & Johnson, Teva Pharmaceuticals, Allergan and others - deceived the public into believing that opioids were safe for extended use. The settlement was only with Purdue Pharma, and the other defendants are still scheduled to go to trial. Thirty-six states have brought cases against Purdue and other opioid drugmakers.

Note: Many doctors also profited from excessive prescribing of dangerous opioids. And according to a former DEA agent, Congress helped drug companies fuel the opioid epidemic. For more along these lines, see concise summaries of deeply revealing Big Pharma corruption news articles from reliable major media sources.

When nurse Meleney Gallagher was told to line up with her colleagues on the renal ward at Sunderland Royal Hospital, for her swine flu vaccination, she had no idea the injection she was about to have had not gone through the usual testing process. It had been rushed into circulation after the swine flu virus had swept across the globe in 2009. Gallagher was one of thousands of NHS staff vaccinated with Pandemrix, a vaccine made by pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). Eight years later, her career in the NHS is a memory and she's living with incurable, debilitating narcolepsy and suffers from cataplexy, a sudden, uncontrollable loss of muscle tone that can cause her to collapse without warning. Because of her condition, she can no longer work or drive. People with narcolepsy experience chronic fatigue and difficulty sleeping at night. They can have night terrors, hallucinations, and a range of mental health problems. Gallagher is not alone. More than a dozen frontline NHS staff are among around 1,000 adults and children across Europe who are believed to have developed narcolepsy after being given Pandemrix. Gallagher and four other NHS professionals – two nurses, a community midwife, and a junior doctor – have told how they felt pressured into receiving the vaccine, were given misleading information, and ultimately lost their careers. They are all suing GlaxoSmithKline seeking compensation for what they believe was a faulty drug that has left them with lifelong consequences.

Note: Yet the media and big Pharma continually tout the safety of their vaccines. For more along these lines, see concise summaries of deeply revealing news articles on vaccines from reliable major media sources.

The latest study to look at the long-term effects of Roundup, a popular weed killer developed by Monsanto in the 1970s, raises questions about the herbicide's possible contributions to poor health in certain communities. The study, published Tuesday in JAMA, tracked people over the age of 50 in southern California from 1993-1996 to 2014-2016, with researchers periodically collecting urine samples during that time. The percentage of people who tested positive for a chemical called glyphosate, which is the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup, shot up by 500% in that time period. The levels of glyphosate also spiked by 1208% during that time. One trial from the UK, in which rats were fed low levels of glyphosate throughout their lives, found that the chemical contributed to a higher risk of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, a condition in which fat accumulates in the liver and contributes to inflammation and scarring of the tissue. [Researcher Paul] Mills says that the levels of glyphosate documented in the people in his study were 100-fold greater than those in the rats. While Roundup was developed to eliminate most weeds from genetically modified crops – and thus reduce the amount of pesticides sprayed on them – recent studies have found that many weeds are now resistant to Roundup. That means growers are using more Roundup, which could only exacerbate potential negative health effects on people who consume those products.

Note: Bayer recently agreed to a $10 billion settlement over claims that its glyphosate-containing product RoundUp causes cancer. Meanwhile, Mexico is banning glyphosate and GMO corn. For more along these lines, see concise summaries of deeply revealing news articles on food system corruption and GMOs from reliable major media sources.

It's hard to talk about the dangers of cell-phone radiation without sounding like a conspiracy theorist. This is especially true in the United States, where non-industry-funded studies are rare, where legislation protecting the wireless industry from legal challenges has long been in place, and where our lives have been so thoroughly integrated with wireless technology that to suggest it might be a problem ... is like saying our shoes might be killing us. Except our shoes don't send microwaves directly into our brains. And cell phones do - a fact that has increasingly alarmed the rest of the world. There are multiple reports, mostly out of Europe's premier research institutions, of cell-phone and PDA use being linked to "brain aging," brain damage, early-onset Alzheimer's, senility, DNA damage, and even sperm die-offs. In September 2007, the European Union's environmental watchdog, the European Environment Agency, warned that cell-phone technology "could lead to a health crisis similar to those caused by asbestos, smoking, and lead in petrol." In the U.S., there's been very little resistance to the march of the cell towers. In fact, in Congress there's been almost nothing but support. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 ... was the result, in part, of nearly $50 million in political contributions and lobbying largesse from the telecom industry. A rider known as Section 704 ... specifically prohibits citizens and local governments from stopping placement of a cell tower due to health concerns.

Note: For more along these lines, see concise summaries of deeply revealing news articles on wireless technology risks from reliable major media sources.

For 40 years the United States Public Health Service has conducted a study in which human beings with syphilis, who were induced to serve as guinea pigs, have gone without medical treatment for the disease and a few have died of its late effects, even though an effective therapy, was eventually discovered. The study was conducted to determine from autopsies what the disease does to the human body. It is too late to treat the syphilis in any surviving participants. The experiment, called the Tuskegee Study, began in 1932 with about 600 black men mostly poor and uneducated, from Tuskegee, Ala., an area that had the highest syphilis rate in the nation at the time. Four hundred of the group had syphilis and never received deliberate treatment for the Venereal Infection. A control group of 200 had no syphilis and did not receive any specific therapy. As Incentives to enter the Program, the men were promised free transportation to and from hospitals, free hot lunches, free medicine for any disease other than syphilis and free burial after autopsies were performed. The Tuskegee Study began 10 years before penicillin was found to be a cure for syphilis and 15 years before the drug became widely available. Yet, even after penicillin became common, and while its use probably could have helped or saved a number of the experiment subjects, the drug was denied them. Senator William Proxmire ... called the study "a moral and ethical nightmare."

Note: Read more about the disturbing history of government and industry experiments on human guinea pigs. For more along these lines, see concise summaries of deeply revealing news articles on government corruption from reliable major media sources.

As the 2025 USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans take shape, a serious disconnect threatens public health. Some advocates are calling for higher intake of animal fats and promoting so called ancestral or animal based keto diets, citing traditional wisdom and nutrient density. Diets like Keto often rely on meat and dairy from industrial production systems, where contamination with drugs and chemicals is routine. The promise of healing through meat and fat collapses when those foods carry residues of antibiotics, steroid hormones, synthetic preservatives, arsenicals, cocciodiostats, and pesticides. Many of these toxins accumulate precisely in the fats and organs being celebrated as nutrient rich. A decade ago, as policy director at the Center for Food Safety, I helped publish a report entitled "America's Secret Animal Drug Problem," identifying over 450 animal drugs and feed additives used in U.S. meat production. That number alarmed me then. Today, the Food and Drug Administration has approved nearly 700 veterinary drugs for use in food-producing animals. This figure includes not only growth promoters and antibiotics but also synthetic hormones, beta agonists, coccidiostats, and antiparasitics. Less than 1% of meat and dairy in the United States is produced in regenerative organic systems on pasture. The remaining 99% comes from animals housed in industrial facilities, fed chemically saturated GMO grains.

Note: For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on factory farming and toxic chemicals.

Everywhere they look, they find particles of pollution, like infinite spores in an endless contagion field. Scientists call that field the "exposome": the sum of all external exposures encountered by each of us over a lifetime, which portion and shape our fate alongside genes and behavior. Plastic is now threaded through the flesh of fish, where it is interfering with reproduction, and the stalks of plants, where it is interfering with photosynthesis, and in much else we place upon our dinner plates and set about eating. There might be plastic in your saliva, and almost certainly in your blood. Plastic has been found in human hearts and kidneys and other organs, in the breast milk expressed by new mothers and on both sides of their placentas. The penetration appears so complete that some researchers have begun to worry that their methods, too, are compromised by ambient contamination and plastic materials in the lab. The buildup inside brain tissue has grown 50 percent in just eight years, and that, as of last year, there might be inside your skull the equivalent of a full plastic spoon – by weight perhaps one-fifth as much polymer as there is brainstem in there. Beyond plastics, there is PFAS, that category of long-lasting industrial compounds often called "forever chemicals." Whole environmental movements of the past have been built on fears of incipient contamination. But what are the lessons when pollution is seemingly everywhere, and in everyone, already?

Note: This article is also available here. For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on health and toxic chemicals.

The transparency of donations to the World Health Organization (WHO) Foundation–an independent body that seeks funds from across industry, civil society and governments, and awards grants to the WHO – has plummeted over its first 3 years of operations, a new analysis has found. The analysis found that the majority of donors are not publicly disclosed, including some unnamed gifts as big as $11 million, which raises concerns about the potential "level of outside influence and role of commercial interests in setting WHO priorities," the researchers wrote. In 2020, the foundation was set up to solicit funds from a wider range of donors than the WHO can directly accept, including wealthy individuals and corporations. Some academics and civil society organizations are concerned that accepting donations from industry, such as businesses selling alcohol and infant formula, poses a conflict of interest. Evidence suggests that some companies use donations "as opportunities to distract or reframe product harms.., and assist wider lobbying efforts against public health regulation," wrote the authors of the new analysis. Using a scale to judge transparency in donations developed by Open Democracy, an independent international media platform, the researchers gave the WHO Foundation a D grade. This grade is for organizations that only name a minority of funders and not in a systematic way, putting it on par with some ‘dark money' think tanks.

Note: Concerns about WHO's growing dependence on opaque funding are not abstract. Past investigations show how Purdue Pharma influenced WHO opioid guidelines to expand sales globally and how Coca-Cola–linked consultants shaped WHO's aspartame reviews. Bill Gates' hundreds of millions to WHO now give him outsized influence to prioritize corporate interests under the guise of public health philanthropy, which have led to mass suicides in India, worsening environmental degradation and poverty in Africa, and increasing corporate control over the media.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced Wednesday its proposed decision to reregister dicamba, a herbicide widely used on soybean and cotton farms that has been banned twice by federal courts. The EPA originally approved dicamba's use on genetically engineered soybeans and cotton in 2016. Environmental groups sued the EPA over dicamba in 2020 because of its potential drift away from the intended target, especially during warmer temperatures, and harm neighboring crops, nearby ecosystems and rural communities. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled against the EPA and said the agency "understated the amount of dicamba damage." The court determined that dicamba "caused substantial and undisputed damage" that tore the "social fabric of the farming communities." After the court vacated the herbicide's registration, the EPA re-registered it months later, and was again challenged by environmental groups. A second federal court vacated that registration in 2024 and prohibited the sale of the herbicide. The popularity of dicamba, which was first introduced in 1967, arose from a need to find solutions to Roundup-resistant weeds, also known as "superweeds." Monsanto ... began selling genetically engineered seeds that could survive being doused by dicamba and Roundup in 2016. Between 2016 and 2019, dicamba use across the country nearly quadrupled to an estimated 31 million pounds a year.

Note: For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on government corruption and toxic chemicals.

In the last decade, private equity firms have been quietly taking control of dental care from behind the scenes, largely through secondary business organizations that push dental practices to cut costs and, in some cases, encourage unnecessary and irreversible dental procedures. In 2024, the dental industry witnessed 161 private equity deals – the highest number of any health care industry, as tracked by the watchdog organization, Private Equity Stakeholder Project. The data reveals that these investment firms are increasingly acquiring dental practices or inserting themselves into clinic management roles, where they then cut corners on patient care. The dental industry is an especially alluring target for private equity firms because it's comprised of thousands of independent clinics, offering investors a fragmented industry to consolidate and streamline. Between 2011 and 2019, private equity firms bought up $4.4 billion worth of dental practices. Dentists at ClearChoice Dental Implant Centers – a dental chain owned by Aspen Dental, one of the largest dental service organizations – were allegedly extracting healthy teeth from patients and replacing them with expensive implants. Experts have warned in various lawsuits against the implant center that this irreversible procedure exposes patients to excessive costs and surgery complications, plus a greater risk of future dental problems like infections and bone loss.

Note: BlackRock and Vanguard manage over $11 trillion and $8 trillion respectively–an unprecedented concentration of financial power. We hear outrage about billionaires and oligarchs, but rarely about private equity firms, who are backed by both political parties and are drastically reshaping our economy, contributing to environmental destruction, and extracting wealth from communities in the US and all over the world. For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on health and financial industry corruption.

Since 2000, the food and chemical industry has greenlighted nearly 99% of food chemicals introduced onto the market without federal safety review. This problematic situation happened through companies exploiting a loophole in food chemicals laws allowing them to decide which chemicals are safe to consume. Since 2000, food and chemical companies have petitioned the FDA only 10 times to approve a new substance. By contrast, they have added 863 chemicals, through the "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS, loophole. That's 98.8% of new food chemicals. The loophole lets those companies – not the FDA – decide when a substance is safe. The GRAS loophole was intended to apply narrowly to common ingredients like sugar, vinegar and baking soda. But as EWG's analysis shows, the loophole – not FDA safety review – has become the main way new chemicals are allowed into food. A GRAS determination shows a company believes "the substance is generally recognized, among qualified experts, as having been adequately shown to be safe under the conditions of its intended use." The company can submit a notice to the FDA about its conclusion, through a process that is entirely voluntary. Even Michael Taylor, a former FDA deputy commissioner for food, admitted in 2014 that the FDA "simply do[es] not have the information to vouch for the safety of many of these chemicals."

Note: For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on food system corruption and toxic chemicals.

In our first hearing of this Congress titled, "The Corruption of Science and Federal Health Agencies: How Health Officials Downplayed and Hid Myocarditis and Other Adverse Events Associated with the COVID-19 Injections," I asked Dr. Joel Wallskog, an orthopedic surgeon injured by the Covid injections, to describe how those suffering from Covid injection injuries felt. His one-word answer: "Abandoned." The passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 ... led to blanket immunity for vaccines through subsequent regulation. An explosion in the number of vaccine doses on the childhood schedule was the result. Prior to 1986, there were 3 routine vaccines totaling 7 injections. Today the CDC's Maternal and Child & Adolescent vaccine schedules include 19 vaccines requiring 76 injections with 94 total doses of antigen. In August 1997, the FDA ... issued draft guidance to allow pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to consumers beyond print media into TV and radio. According to one estimate, drug companies spent $10 billion on direct-to-consumer advertising in 2024. That amount of spending has paid off handsomely for Big Pharma and its ability to control the narrative and suppress stories of drug and vaccine injuries. But to understand the true reality we face, there is nothing like hearing from those who have suffered the adverse events that are rarely acknowledged by the medical establishment, federal health agencies, and the corporate media.

Note: Watch the full Senate hearing video and read all statements from mothers and scientists who testified at hearing here. For video clips of witness testimonies, click here. Our well-researched and nuanced Substack reveals the undeniable evidence that COVID vaccine injuries and deaths were covered-up and censored. For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on COVID vaccine problems and Big Pharma corruption.

Dozens of companies that make ice cream and frozen dairy desserts announced on Monday that they would remove artificial food dyes from their products by 2028, marking yet another voluntary move away from such food coloring within the food industry. It comes in response to a mission set forth by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to remove the artificial additives. In April, Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary said the agency would move to eliminate several synthetic dyes by the end of next year. That includes Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, Blue 1, and Blue 2. Red 3 was set to be banned in food by 2027 because it caused cancer in laboratory rats; the FDA called for that deadline to move up. Artificial dyes are used widely in U.S. foods. In Canada and in Europe – where synthetic colors are required to carry warning labels – manufacturers mostly use natural substitutes. Several states, including California and West Virginia, have passed laws restricting the use of artificial colors in foods. Health advocates have long called for the removal of artificial dyes from foods, citing mixed studies indicating they can cause neurobehavioral problems, including hyperactivity and attention issues, in some children. The FDA has maintained that the approved dyes are safe and that "the totality of scientific evidence shows that most children have no adverse effects when consuming foods containing color additives."

Note: For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on food system corruption.

If you've been on social media lately, chances are you've heard about endocrine disruptors. People say they can interfere with your hormones, leading to serious health conditions. There are over 1,000 types of these chemicals, according to some estimates, and we are exposed to them daily: They can be found everywhere from your nonstick pan and canned foods to your shampoo and hair dye. The endocrine system consists of glands that secrete hormones, like estrogen, testosterone and cortisol, that then interact with targets (receptors) in the body to regulate our growth, development, reproduction, metabolism, energy balance and body weight. Chemicals that interfere with this complex communication system are called endocrine disruptors. These chemicals work in a variety of ways, including overstimulating receptors, blocking receptors so that normal hormones can't interact with them and altering hormone production or availability. Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical used in the production of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins. It belongs to the larger class of chemicals called bisphenols. The primary exposure for most people is through their diet: BPAs can leach into food or drinks from the protective, internal epoxy resin coatings of canned foods and from consumer products such as polycarbonate tableware, food storage containers and water bottles. Laboratory experiments ... have found that BPAs may cause cancer cell growth.

Note: For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on health and toxic chemicals.

The number of American children diagnosed with A.D.H.D. more than doubled in the early 1990s, from fewer than a million patients in 1990 to more than two million in 1993, almost two-thirds of whom were prescribed Ritalin. Despite Ritalin's rapid growth, no one knew exactly how the medication worked or whether it really was the best way to treat children's attention issues. The diagnosis rate ... kept rising, hitting 5.5 percent of American children in 1997, then 6.6 percent in 2000. Last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 11.4 percent of American children had been diagnosed with A.D.H.D., a record high. That figure includes 15.5 percent of American adolescents, 21 percent of 14-year-old boys and 23 percent of 17-year-old boys. From 2012 to 2022, the total number of prescriptions for stimulants to treat A.D.H.D. increased in the United States by 58 percent. For a significant percentage of people diagnosed with A.D.H.D., [clinical psychologist Joel] Nigg says, "there's nothing neurobiologically notable about them. Instead, their symptoms are situational or conditional. They may have had a hard life, or they have a lack of social support, or they're in the wrong niche in life." Amphetamines can be powerfully addictive, and last year, a study in The American Journal of Psychiatry found that even a medium-strength daily dose of Adderall more than tripled a patient's likelihood of developing psychosis or mania. [UC Irvine research psychologist James Swanson] acknowledges that medication can often produce short-term improvements in children's behavior. But, he says, "there is no long-term effect. The only long-term effect that I know of has been the suppression of growth."

Note: We recommend reading the full article to explore the complex rise in ADHD diagnoses–and the growing concerns around stimulant medications. According to the scientists interviewed in this article, stimulants neither treat the root causes of ADHD nor improve academic achievement or long-term success. For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on mental health.

On July 2022, Morgan-Rose Hart, an aspiring vet with a passion for wildlife, died after she was found unresponsive at a mental health unit in Essex. Her death was one of four involving a hi-tech patient monitoring system called Oxevision which has been rolled out in nearly half of mental health trusts across England. Oxevision's system can measure a patient's pulse rate and breathing without the need for a person to enter the room, or disturb a patient at night, as well as momentarily relaying CCTV footage when required. Oxehealth, the company behind Oxevision, has agreements with 25 NHS mental health trusts, according to its latest accounts, which reported revenues of about Ł4.7m in ... 2023. But it is claimed in some cases staff rely too heavily on the infra-red camera system to monitor vulnerable patients, instead of making physical checks. There are also concerns that the system – which can glow red from the corner of the room – may worsen the distress of patients in a mental health crisis who may have heightened sensitivity to surveillance or control. Sophina, who has experience of being monitored by Oxevision while a patient ... said: "I think it was something about the camera and it always being on, and it's right above your bed. "It's the first thing you see when you open your eyes, the last thing when you go to sleep. I was just in a constant state of hypervigilance. I was completely traumatised. I still felt too scared to sleep properly."

Note: For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on Big Tech and mental health.

Is President Trump pushing gender-confused kids to commit suicide? This shocking claim hit mainstream and social media within minutes of the president's Jan. 28 executive order banning federal funding for child sex-change treatments. The way the argument goes, if kids can't get puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries, their mental health will deteriorate to the point of no return. But as I've seen while working with more than 1,000 such kids, there are deeper reasons why they're so unhappy – and giving them powerful experimental drugs and irreversible surgeries is more likely to worsen their condition. From 2018 to 2022, I worked as a case manager for the Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children's Hospital. As kids kept coming back for follow-up check-ins and treatment – almost every kid who begins puberty blockers goes on to receive cross-sex hormones – I realized something was very wrong. When my colleagues and I asked about their mental health, they usually reported that it was the same or better. But as soon as we dug deeper, it became clear that the real answer was no – that their mental anguish was worsening. We ignored or explained away co-morbidities like autism, depression and bipolar disorder while using every new development or difficulty in a kid's life to justify continuing down the sex-change road. In my experience, kids typically find the "treatment brings happiness" mantra of their doctors, nurses and case managers hard to see through. Some literally couldn't look themselves in the mirror, even if they physically looked the part of a boy-turned-girl or vice-versa. While activists insist that kids simply "know who they are," reality is more complicated.

Note: This article was written by Jamie Reed, a queer woman married to a trans man. Many transgender medical care experiences can indeed be life-changing and even life-saving, yet not all experiences align with the mainstream narratives. Reed isn't the only whistleblower who's worked in the field of youth transgender medicine. Even advocates who publicly promote gender medicine for kids question its ethics behind closed doors. Watch our nuanced 25-minute Mindful News Brief on the controversy surrounding youth gender medicine. For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on transgender medicine.

The payment scheme for people injured by vaccines has cost taxpayers more to run than it has paid out to victims, official figures suggest, fuelling calls for "urgent reform". The Government has spent more than Ł25 million since Nov 1 2021 on medically assessing thousands of claims that vaccinations have left people seriously disabled. It is more than the total Ł23.6 million that since that date has been paid out to 197 victims, with each claim worth Ł120,000. The Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS) was established in 1979 and pays tax-free cash to those deemed to have suffered life-changing injuries as a result of certain vaccinations – including those against Covid-19. It awards a one-off Ł120,000 tax-free payment to people who have been severely injured, or to the families of those who have died, as a result of a vaccination. The scheme has been heavily criticised for being too slow to assess cases. Victims also claim that the payouts are insufficient and that the threshold claimants must meet to qualify for a payout is too harsh a measure. Kate Scott, whose husband was left with permanent brain damage after taking the AstraZeneca vaccine against Covid-19, criticised the imbalance between the money the scheme costs to run and the sums paid out. Public hearings for the fourth module of the Covid-19 inquiry started in London on Tuesday. It will hear issues around vaccine safety from families of those who suffered side effects from Covid jabs.

Note: The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a voluntary government reporting system that only captures a portion of the actual injuries. Vaccine adverse event numbers are made publicly available, and currently show 38,264 COVID Vaccine Reported Deaths and 1,658,330 COVID Vaccine Adverse Event Reports. Our Substack dives into the complex world of COVID vaccines with nuance and uncensored investigation.

Campaigners have accused Facebook parent Meta of inflicting "potentially lifelong trauma" on hundreds of content moderators in Kenya, after more than 140 were diagnosed with PTSD and other mental health conditions. The diagnoses were made by Dr. Ian Kanyanya, the head of mental health services at Kenyatta National hospital in Kenya's capital Nairobi, and filed with the city's employment and labor relations court on December 4. Content moderators help tech companies weed out disturbing content on their platforms and are routinely managed by third party firms, often in developing countries. For years, critics have voiced concerns about the impact this work can have on moderators' mental well-being. Kanyanya said the moderators he assessed encountered "extremely graphic content on a daily basis which included videos of gruesome murders, self-harm, suicides, attempted suicides, sexual violence, explicit sexual content, child physical and sexual abuse ... just to name a few." Of the 144 content moderators who volunteered to undergo psychological assessments – out of 185 involved in the legal claim – 81% were classed as suffering from "severe" PTSD, according to Kanyanya. The class action grew out of a previous suit launched in 2022 by a former Facebook moderator, which alleged that the employee was unlawfully fired by Samasource Kenya after organizing protests against unfair working conditions.

Note: Watch our new video on the risks and promises of emerging technologies. For more along these lines, read our concise summaries of news articles on Big Tech and mental health.

Too many people are being prescribed antidepressants to deal with stressful life events or social problems, according to a growing chorus of doctors and researchers. More than 14% of Australians are currently taking antidepressants, one of the highest rates in the world. Dr Matt Fisher, who researches wellbeing and the impact of stress, says while he has heard health workers talk about this "as a good thing, because it means more people are getting access to help", he doesn't see it as a success story. Fisher ... is concerned Australia's high use of antidepressants "constitutes a failed attempt to medicate away what are, in fact, social problems". He says while "antidepressants may be of benefit to some people suffering persistent psychosocial distress," they should not be the default, first response. Chronic stress, where people are exposed to an ongoing, recurrent stressor without any easy or accessible way to resolve it – increasing the risk of isolation, exclusion, humiliation and harm – is a significant driver of mental distress in Australia. The common causes of chronic stress include things such as being in debt, having a low income, poor working conditions, or being exposed to racism or domestic violence. "Governments evade the problem by persisting with individualised, medicalised, drug-based strategies," he says. "These strategies aren't reducing high rates of mental distress, sometimes do harm, and marginalise attention on social causes."

Note: The UK's medicines regulator is launching a review of over 30 commonly prescribed antidepressants, including Prozac, amid rising concerns about links to suicide, self-harm, and long-term side effects like persistent sexual dysfunction–especially in children. Our latest Substack, Lonely World, Failing Systems: Inspiring Stories Reveal What Sustains Us, dives into the loneliness crisis exacerbated by the digital world and polarizing media narratives, along with inspiring solutions and remedies that remind us of the true democratic values that bring us all together.

Important Note: Explore our full index to revealing excerpts of key major media news articles on several dozen engaging topics. And don't miss amazing excerpts from 20 of the most revealing news articles ever published.