Health & Science

Home Health & Science

Fox News Anchor John Roberts Hospitalized

A stunning new health report.

Fox News anchor John Roberts has revealed he’s been hospitalized after contracting what he described as a “severe case of malaria,” sidelining him from his weekday slot on America Reports.

“I somehow came down with a severe case of malaria,” Roberts, 68, announced via X on Tuesday. “I can honestly say that I am the only person in the hospital with malaria. In fact, one of my doctors said I’m the first case he has ever seen.”

His co-host seat alongside Sandra Smith has been filled by Trace Gallagher, he explained, thanking his replacement.

Roberts, who previously covered the White House for Fox, thanked doctors at Inova Health in Virginia, as well as his colleagues for stepping in.

Viewers, colleagues, and network contributors expressed shock at the news and offered their support, wishing the anchor a quick recovery.

“Beth and I are praying for a swift recovery!!” North Carolina Rep. Mark Harris said.

“Whoa! Feel better soon, John,” added Fox News Chief Washington Correspondent Mike Emanuel.

Malaria was eliminated from the U.S. in 1951, according to the CDC. However, the country still sees about 2,000 malaria cases per year. There were, on average, nearly seven deaths per year between 2007 and 2022.

Malaria cases in the U.S. are now mostly linked to international travel.

Malaria is spread by mosquitoes. Cases in the U.S. were typically in people who traveled to or from countries where the disease is widespread. The CDC said locally acquired, mosquito-transmitted malaria is “rare” in the country.

Malaria patients often reported having recently returned from Africa, the CDC said. Patients commonly reported visiting friends and family as their primary reason for travel.

White House Addresses Trump Health After Viral Photos Spark Speculation

By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed concerns over President Donald Trump’s health during a briefing on Thursday after photographs of his hand appearing bruised and his ankles appearing swollen went viral.

“I know that many in the media have been speculating about bruising on the president’s hand, and also swelling in the president’s legs. So in the effort of transparency, the president wanted me to share a note from his physician with all of you today,” began Leavitt before reading from the note:

In recent weeks, President Trump noted mild swelling in his lower legs. In keeping with routine medical care and out of an abundance of caution, this concern was thoroughly evaluated by the White House Medical Unit. The president underwent a comprehensive examination, including diagnostic vascular studies. Bilateral lower extremity venous Doppler ultrasounds were performed and revealed chronic venous insufficiency, a benign and common condition, particularly in individuals over the age of 70.

Importantly, there was no evidence of deep vein thrombosis or arterial disease. Laboratory testing included a complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, coagulation profile, D-dimer, B-type, natriotic, peptide, and cardiac biomarkers. All results were within normal limits. An echocardiogram was also performed, and confirmed normal cardiac structure and function. No signs of heart failure, renal impairment, or systemic illness were identified.

Additionally, recent photos of the president have shown minor bruising on the back of his hand. This is consistent with minor soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking, and the use of aspirin, which is taken as part of a standard cardiovascular prevention regimen. This is a well-known and benign side effect of aspirin therapy, and the president remains in excellent health.

“Which I think all of you witness on a daily basis here,” added Leavitt. “So the president wanted me to share that note with all of you. I’m happy to take further questions on it. We will provide the memorandum from the president’s physician to all of you, as we always do.

Watch:

Supreme Court Greenlights Trump NIH Cuts Targeting DEI, COVID Research

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for the Trump administration to move forward with nearly $800 million in cuts to National Institutes of Health grants.

The decision allows the administration to withhold funds that had been frozen by a lower court — grants largely tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, as well as studies focused on minority health, LGBTQ+ issues, vaccine hesitancy, COVID-19, and similar public health topics.

A federal trial court in Massachusetts had previously ruled in June that many of the cuts were “arbitrary and discriminatory,” ordering the temporary restoration of those grants.

But the Supreme Court, acting through its emergency — or so-called “shadow” — docket, overrode that ruling in a narrow 5–4 decision.

Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the liberal bloc in dissent. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued a sharply worded dissent of her own, criticizing the court’s reliance on the emergency process and the brevity of the majority’s explanation.

As SCOTUSBlog reports, the court — also by a 5–4 margin — left in place another part of the lower court’s ruling affecting internal NIH guidance documents outlining the agency’s policy priorities:

Justice Amy Coney Barrett provided the key vote on each issue. She joined Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh in voting to allow NIH to terminate the grants, but she joined Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in voting to leave the lower court’s ruling on the guidance documents in place.

Jackson had sharp words for her colleagues, describing the ruling as “Calvinball jurisprudence” – a reference to the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon – “with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins.”

NIH ended hundreds of grants it linked to DEI-related studies in response to a series of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump after his inauguration in January. The first order, titled “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing,” instructed the director of the Office of Management and Budget, assisted by the attorney general and the director of the Office of Personnel Management, to work to end “discriminatory programs, including illegal DEI” programs in the federal government. It was followed by two other executive orders, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” and “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.”

Two separate groups of plaintiffs went to federal court in Massachusetts to challenge the termination of the grants. One group is made up of 16 states whose public universities receive funding from NIH, while the other consists of the American Public Health Association, individual researchers, a union, and a reproductive health advocacy group. They contended that the termination of the grants violated both the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act, the federal law governing administrative agencies.

The administration argues the research in question lacks scientific rigor and was driven more by ideology than merit. Officials also say the cuts are consistent with their broader push to eliminate DEI-related spending across federal agencies.

Democrat-led states and advocacy groups claim the funding loss could have “incalculable” consequences for underserved communities.

This case fits a broader pattern: The court has recently upheld rollbacks on DEI-based spending in areas like teacher training. Critics say the use of the emergency docket limits public transparency and bypasses full hearings. Supporters say it’s a legitimate tool to keep activist courts in check.

Legal challenges are still moving through the lower courts.

In the meantime, universities, NIH personnel, and left-leaning advocacy groups are mobilizing in protest, warning of long-term damage to public health research and institutional equity efforts.

READ NEXT: Police Swarm Former Trump Ally’s Mansion

Letitia James Sues Federal Government

The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) sued the federal government Tuesday, arguing that a new Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) policy unlawfully ties major federal funding streams to compliance with the Trump administration’s new restrictions on gender-related medical care for minors.

The lawsuit challenges an HHS policy that, according to the attorneys general, conditions billions of dollars in health, education and research funding on compliance with a presidential executive order addressing sex and gender-related treatments.

Fox News reports:

“The federal government is trying to force states to choose between their values and the vital funding their residents depend on,” James said in a statement. “This policy threatens healthcare for families, life-saving research, and education programs that help young people thrive in favor of denying the dignity and existence of transgender people.”

The dispute stems from President Donald Trump’s January 2025 executive order directing HHS to take steps to curb what the administration calls “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children. President Trump has made limits on transgender-related medical care for minors a central part of his second-term domestic agenda.

NYC Public Advocate Tish James via Wikimedia Commons

Last month, HHS announced a sweeping package of proposed regulatory actions aimed at ending what it described as “sex-rejecting procedures” for minors. In guidance accompanying the announcement, the department warned that doctors and health systems could be excluded from federal health programs — including Medicare and Medicaid — if they provide treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and gender surgeries to minors.

James’ lawsuit argues that the federal government is using funding leverage to pressure states, hospitals, universities, and other institutions to change policies on transgender care.

The attorneys general also claim HHS lacks legal authority to impose the conditions and is attempting to rewrite federal law through executive action. They argue the policy is vague and fails to spell out what recipients must do to remain compliant, creating uncertainty for states and institutions that rely on federal dollars.

Failure to comply with the policy could lead to termination of grants, repayment of funds already spent, or potential civil or criminal penalties, according to the complaint.

The lawsuit asks a federal court to declare the policy unlawful and block HHS from enforcing it, allowing states and institutions to continue receiving federal funding without changing existing policies.

The legal fight also adds to the long-running political and courtroom clash between Trump and James. James has positioned herself as one of the country’s most aggressive state-level opponents of Trump, repeatedly using New York’s legal powers to pursue high-profile cases involving his businesses and allies. Trump has frequently accused James of pursuing politically motivated investigations.

Trump officials have defended the executive order as a child-protection measure and a pushback against what they say is ideological medicine being imposed through federal agencies and school systems.

The case is expected to intensify a national debate already playing out in Congress and state legislatures, where Republican-led states have moved to restrict or ban gender-related treatments for minors, while Democrat-led states have expanded protections and access.

READ NEXT: Sen. Marsha Blackburn Pushes To Make Fraud A Deportable Offense

Senate Votes To Confirm Health and Human Services Secretary

3
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The U.S. Senate has confirmed Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as the next Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) following weeks of debate over his nomination.

Once again, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) stood alone as the only Republican to vote against President Trump’s nominee. McConnell opposed Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination as director of national intelligence (DNI).

The confirmation process was marked by intense scrutiny of Kennedy’s record and policy positions. The Senate Finance Committee advanced his nomination last Tuesday with a narrow 14-13 vote.

Senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a physician and key swing vote, played a decisive role in moving Kennedy’s nomination forward. Cassidy, who has represented Louisiana in the Senate since 2014, broke with some in his party to support the nominee.

The full Senate advanced Kennedy’s nomination on Wednesday following a successful cloture vote of 53 to 47.

During his confirmation process, Kennedy worked to distance himself from past remarks that raised doubts about vaccine safety.

Despite the controversy, he managed to secure enough backing from Republicans to push his nomination forward.

As head of HHS, Kennedy will oversee federal health policy, including responses to public health crises, health care regulations and medical research funding. His tenure is expected to bring significant policy debates, particularly regarding vaccine policy, regulatory oversight and public health initiatives.

With Kennedy now confirmed, all eyes will be on how he navigates key health policy challenges in the months ahead.

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

MAHA Year One: How Trump & RFK Jr. Are Rebuilding American Health

0
By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CC BY-SA 2.0,

For decades, Americans were told a story about their health that no longer matched reality. We were assured that food was safe, that regulators were vigilant, that medical advice was insulated from politics and profit, and that rising chronic disease was an unfortunate but unavoidable byproduct of modern life. Meanwhile, the health of the nation deteriorated in plain sight. Obesity climbed year after year. Childhood chronic disease became common rather than exceptional. Autism rates surged. Cancer diagnoses among children rose. By the time President Trump returned to office, 76.4% of Americans were living with at least one chronic disease. Eight out of 10 children could not qualify for military service. What should have been treated as a civilizational emergency was instead normalized, until that long-running failure of honesty and accountability culminated during the COVID-19 pandemic, when public health leaders abandoned transparency, misled the public, and, under Dr. Fauci’s direction, shattered trust in medical professionals and the institutions meant to serve them.

The collapse of trust that followed COVID did not occur in a vacuum. It was the culmination of years of regulatory capture, scientific arrogance, and a public health establishment that confused authority with truth. Americans were ordered, not persuaded. Dissent was pathologized. Data was selectively presented. Vaccine policy was enforced through mandate rather than transparency. Dr. Fauci became the symbol of an anti-science regime that claimed infallibility while revising its claims in real time. When institutions insist on obedience while refusing accountability, trust does not merely erode; it implodes.

It is against this backdrop that the Make America Healthy Again initiative must be understood. MAHA is not a branding exercise or a partisan slogan. It is a course correction. President Trump’s decision to place Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the helm of HHS was not an appeal to nostalgia or name recognition. It was an explicit rejection of the managerial consensus that presided over the chronic disease explosion. The mandate was simple and radical: identify root causes, dismantle regulatory capture, and tell the truth even when it disrupts powerful interests.

Skeptics ask whether one year can matter. The answer depends on what one expects a first year to do. MAHA was never going to reverse decades of metabolic, environmental, and institutional decay overnight. Its purpose was to reorient the system, establish credibility, and force long-delayed questions back into the open. By that standard, the first year has been historic.

Start with the scope of institutional change. President Trump signed an executive order establishing the MAHA Commission, chaired by Secretary Kennedy, with a singular focus on chronic disease. For the first time in generations, chronic illness was treated not as an actuarial inevitability but as a policy failure demanding investigation. This alone marked a break with orthodoxy. Under previous administrations, chronic disease spending rose to $1.3T annually while prevention remained an afterthought. When Kennedy notes that the federal government once spent essentially nothing on chronic disease, he is not making a rhetorical point. He is diagnosing a structural blind spot.

The results are already visible. Thirty-seven states have enacted legislation advancing MAHA-aligned reforms. Nearly 100 MAHA-related bills have passed nationwide. Eighteen states secured SNAP waivers to restrict taxpayer-funded junk food purchases that directly fuel obesity and diabetes. These are not symbolic victories. They are structural incentives aligned with public health rather than industry convenience.

Food policy has been the most visible arena of reform, and for good reason. The American diet did not become toxic by accident. It was engineered through regulatory loopholes that allowed synthetic additives to enter the food supply under the GRAS standard with minimal oversight. MAHA moved quickly to overhaul this system. Agreements now cover roughly 40% of the food industry, committing to remove petroleum-based synthetic dyes. The dairy industry has pledged to eliminate artificial dyes from ice cream by 2028. These changes matter because they reset norms. Once voluntary reform becomes expected, resistance collapses.

The same logic applies to infant health. Operation Stork Speed was launched to expand access to safe and nutritious infant formula while removing heavy metals that had no business entering baby food in the first place. For parents who watched institutions minimize legitimate safety concerns during COVID, this shift toward precaution and transparency has been decisive in rebuilding trust.

Critics often ask whether MAHA is anti-science. The premise is backward. MAHA is anti-dogma. It insists that science earns authority through openness, replication, and humility. This is why vaccine policy has been reframed around informed consent and gold standard trials rather than mandates. Honesty about uncertainty is not weakness. It is the precondition of credibility. Public trust returns when institutions stop pretending to be omniscient.

This emphasis on trust extends beyond food and vaccines. HHS issued guidance restoring biological truth, recognizing that there are two sexes, male and female. This was not culture war theater. Medicine depends on biological reality. When institutions deny observable facts for ideological reasons, patients notice. Restoring clarity restores confidence.

MAHA’s critics also underestimate the importance of state-level experimentation. Utah’s decision to ban added fluoride in public drinking water did not impose a national mandate. It reopened a conversation that had been closed by bureaucratic inertia. Communities are once again allowed to weigh risks and benefits rather than defer to outdated consensus.

Health care delivery itself has not been ignored. Prior authorization has long functioned as a hidden tax on patients and physicians, delaying care while enriching intermediaries. Secretary Kennedy and CMS Administrator Oz secured industry commitments to streamline this process across health plans. Less paperwork means faster treatment and lower burnout. These are the reforms patients feel immediately.

Drug pricing has followed the same philosophy. President Trump’s most favored nation order is being rapidly implemented to align U.S. prescription drug prices with those paid abroad. This is not price control masquerading as populism. It is a refusal to subsidize global markets at the expense of American patients. Lower prices are a public health intervention.

Physical health has returned to the cultural mainstream as well. The Pete and Bobby Challenge, launched by Secretary Kennedy alongside Defense Secretary Hegseth, did something that countless white papers failed to do. It made fitness visible again. A nation where most children cannot meet basic physical standards is not merely unhealthy. It is vulnerable.

The MAHA Commission’s release of the Make Our Children Healthy Again strategy, outlining more than 120 initiatives, signaled that childhood chronic disease is no longer being treated as a mystery or a taboo. New data linking rising thyroid and kidney cancers among children demands answers. Autism rates demand answers. MAHA has made clear that asking these questions is not forbidden. It is required.

Perhaps the most underestimated achievement of the first year is cultural rather than regulatory. Trust is returning because institutions are speaking plainly. The public understands that special interests once thrived behind closed doors. They know they were sold better cigarettes and sugar smacks with a health halo. What they demanded in 2024 was not perfection. It was honesty.

President Trump and Secretary Kennedy have delivered the first credible attempt in decades to dismantle the alliance between bureaucratic power and corporate profit that hollowed out public health. The appointments at NIH, FDA, and CMS reflect this shift. These are not partisan enforcers. They are reformers tasked with ending capture and restoring the mission.

No serious observer should claim that the work is finished. Chronic disease did not emerge in one year, and it will not be eliminated in one term. But trajectories matter. Incentives matter. Trust matters most of all. After years in which Americans were told to comply and not question, MAHA has reopened the social contract between the public and medicine.

Public health cannot function without consent. Consent requires trust. Trust requires truth. That is the chain MAHA is rebuilding. It is why the first year matters. Not because every problem has been solved, but because the system has finally been pointed in the right direction.

If you enjoy my work, please subscribe: https://x.com/amuse.

Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.

Trump Signs Executive Order To Tie US Drug Prices To Global Lows

0

On Monday morning, President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order aimed at dramatically lowering prescription drug prices in the United States. At the center of the order is a “most favored nation” (MFN) pricing policy, which mandates that the U.S. pay no more for medications than the lowest price paid by any other country. Trump claims the initiative could cut drug prices by 30% to 80%, potentially saving American taxpayers trillions of dollars.

The MFN policy revives a proposal from Trump’s first term and targets the longstanding disparity in drug costs between the U.S. and other nations. The order also directs the Department of Health and Human Services to begin broad drug price negotiations, while introducing measures to combat anti-competitive practices, expand drug imports, and scrutinize the role of pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs).

The New York Post reports:

“What’s been happening is, we’ve been subsidizing other countries throughout the world,” Trump explained at a White House signing ceremony, calling Monday’s action one of his “most important orders.”

“Some prescription drug and pharmaceutical prices will be reduced almost immediately by 50 to 80 to 90%, he added. “Big Pharma will either abide by this principle voluntarily or we’ll use the power of the federal government to ensure that we are paying the same price.”

The policy is a revival of Trump’s signature “most favored nation” drive from his first term, with a new push to get foreign countries to take on more of the research and development (R&D) costs that experts say America has disproportionately shouldered.

“Our Country will finally be treated fairly, and our citizens Healthcare Costs will be reduced by numbers never even thought of before,” the president previously promised on Truth Social Sunday. “The United States will save TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS.”

The announcement triggered immediate market reaction, with shares of pharmaceutical giants like AstraZeneca and GSK seeing declines. Industry leaders have warned the policy could stifle innovation and competition, arguing it may disincentivize research and development.

Although the Biden administration previously took steps to lower drug prices through the Inflation Reduction Act, Trump’s executive order takes a more aggressive approach by linking U.S. prices directly to global lows.

However, the new policy is expected to face significant legal and logistical hurdles, particularly due to the complexity of the U.S. drug pricing system and the opaque nature of international pricing mechanisms.

Justice Department Opens Investigation Into Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo

Photos from the opening of the new Delta Air Lines terminal in LaGuardia Airport in Queens, NY, on Tuesday, Oct. 29, 2019. (Chris Rank for Rank Studios) (Photos from the opening of the new Delta Air Lines terminal in LaGuardia Airport in Queens, NY, o

The U.S. Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation into former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo for allegedly lying to Congress about his decisions made during the COVID-19 pandemic while serving as governor, a source familiar with the probe confirmed to Fox News.

The New York Times first reported that the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington opened the inquiry into Cuomo about a month ago after senior officials in the DOJ demanded an indictment of New York City Mayor Eric Adams for corruption charges be dismissed.

Cuomo is running in the Democratic primary to serve as the next mayor of New York City, while Adams is seeking re-election as an independent candidate.

“We have never been informed of any such matter, so why would someone leak it now? The answer is obvious: This is lawfare and election interference plain and simple—something President Trump and his top Department of Justice officials say they are against,” Rich Azzopardi, Cuomo’s spokesperson told Fox News. “Governor Cuomo testified truthfully to the best of his recollection about events from four years earlier, and he offered to address any follow-up questions from the Subcommittee — but from the beginning this was all transparently political.”

Last year, Republican lawmakers questioned Cuomo about his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. House Republicans subsequently recommended the Justice Department pursue criminal charges against him. They accused him of intentionally lying to Congress during the House Oversight Committee’s investigation into the excessive number of nursing home deaths.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) referred Cuomo to President Donald Trump’s Justice Department for criminal prosecution. 

Cuomo, who was governor at the time, issued a March 2020 directive that initially barred nursing homes from refusing to accept patients who had tested positive for COVID-19. The directive was aimed at freeing up beds for overwhelmed hospitals. 

More than 9,000 recovering coronavirus patients were released from hospitals into nursing homes under the directive, which was later rescinded amid speculation that it had accelerated outbreaks. Cuomo has previously said that the directive was based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidance at the time.

A report released in March 2022 by the New York state comptroller found Cuomo’s Health Department “was not transparent in its reporting of COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes” and it “understated the number of deaths at nursing homes by as much as 50%” during some points of the pandemic. 

In a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi last month, Comer said, “to our knowledge, the Biden Administration ignored this referral despite clear facts and evidence.” He requested that Bondi review the referral and “take appropriate action.” 

“Andrew Cuomo is a man with a history of corruption and deceit, now caught red-handed lying to Congress during the Select Subcommittee’s investigation into the COVID-19 nursing home tragedy in New York,” Comer said in a statement Monday. “This wasn’t a slip-up – it was a calculated cover-up by a man seeking to shield himself from responsibility for the devastating loss of life in New York’s nursing homes. Let’s be clear: lying to Congress is a federal crime. Mr. Cuomo must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The House Oversight Committee is prepared to fully cooperate with the Justice Department’s investigation into Andrew Cuomo’s actions and ensure he’s held to account.” 

Minnesota Republicans Propose Bill Classifying “Trump Derangement Syndrome” as Mental Illness

Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Minnesota Senate Republicans have introduced a bill to define “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (TDS) as a form of mental illness. Senate Bill 2589, which is set to be formally introduced and read on March 17, 2025, igniting significant debate due to the novelty of a politically charged term in the medical lexicon.

The bill, sponsored by Republican State Senators Eric Lucero, Steve Drazkowski, Nathan Wesenberg, Justin Eichorn, and Glenn Gruenhagen, seeks to amend the state’s definition of mental illness by adding a specific reference to TDS. According to the text of the bill, mental illness would include “Trump Derangement Syndrome” or an organic disorder of the brain that significantly impairs an individual’s ability to function in daily life.

The bill describes TDS as “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and presidencies of President Donald J. Trump.” According to the proposal, individuals affected by TDS exhibit symptoms of paranoia and an inability to separate legitimate political disagreements from perceived personal or psychological pathology in Trump’s behavior.

The bill further characterizes TDS as leading to “Trump-induced general hysteria,” where individuals may struggle to distinguish between policy differences and a supposed mental condition in the former president’s actions. These symptoms, the bill argues, can severely impair personal relationships, work, and other aspects of daily living.

The bill has already been logged into the Minnesota legislature’s official website, but it is set to undergo formal introduction on March 17, 2025. Its introduction has garnered widespread attention, with reactions split along party lines.

Supporters of the bill argue that it is a legitimate attempt to address a condition that they believe affects a significant portion of the population, particularly those who strongly opposed former President Trump. By naming and defining TDS, they argue, the bill opens a discussion about how political figures can profoundly affect the psychological well-being of individuals, especially during times of heightened political polarization.

Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News

Biden Cancer Diagnosis Spurs White House Coverup Accusations

Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The news of former President Joe Biden’s cancer diagnosis has sent shockwaves across America.

Biden’s team announced Sunday that he’d been diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer that had already metastasized to the bone, adding his family would examine suitable treatment for the “management” of the disease.

The shocking news comes amid heightened scrutiny surrounding the Bidens potential coverup of former President Biden’s mental and physical decline while in office.

On Monday, Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX) accused the Biden White House of a “political cover up” and lashed out at Biden’s then-White House doctor, though not by name, and accused the physician of having failed to deliver “world class care” to Biden and engaging in a “cover up.”

President Donald Trump posted a message to his Truth Social app on Sunday from himself and First Lady Melania Trump expressing their sympathy and well-wishes for Biden, after it was announced that the former president is battling very serious prostate cancer.

Trump Jr. likewise initially offered an expression of sympathy, by way of reposting a message on his account at X.

Sharing a screenshot that included the message “Politics aside, we wish [President Biden] a speedy recover,” Trump Jr. commented “Agreed 100%.”

In another post three hours later which also included a screenshot, Trump Jr. had a more critical take on the tragic news.

His screenshot showed a message on the nature of Biden’s particular cancer, and calling into question the timeline of when Democrats, or at least the White House, knew about it.

“What I want to know is how did Dr. Jill Biden miss stage five metastatic cancer or is this yet another coverup???” he said, with a sarcastic jab at former First Lady Jill Biden.

The hosts of Fox & Friends were in disbelief Monday morning at Joe Biden’s advanced cancer diagnosis despite the “fantastic medical care” that he receives as a former president.

“These are the types of things you look for when you get older,” Kilmeade added. “And very curious to see and somewhat discouraging to think someone could have this type of medical attention and have this get to this point.”

Co-host Charles Hurt added: “Especially because it’s a fairly advanced form so much so that it has metastasized to a bone. And you would think that would give you a lot more time to catch it.”

Later in the show, the curvy couch welcomed Fox News medical expert Dr. Marc Siegel, who echoed their surprise.

“Really, really surprising that it’s this advanced at the time of diagnosis,” he said. “Now, you can miss prostate cancer but most of the time regular screening picks it up. A sitting president I would expect to have advanced screening should not be subject to debate what kind of screening.”