Have we been going after this denial of pain meds ALL WRONG?

 

Maybe we have been going at this problem of denial of pain management all wrong.

For the last 4+ years all the media had to say was “that no one is above the law”, yet that seemed like a incomplete sentence “EXCEPT those who are in charge of enforcing our laws or has friends that are in charge of enforcing the law”

There was a time that the DOJ/DEA would try to attach a OD/poisoning to a prescriber no matter the time frame between the prescriber had once prescribed a opioid for a person  and when  the DOJ/DEA would claim that a single Rx was the start of the person’s addiction, and his/her on going addiction, which ended in their OD/poisoning death!

Recently the DOJ/DEA accused CVS & Walgreens of filling millions of illegal Rxs. Within the article the DOJ/DEA claimed that they illegally filled concurrently the three meds opioids, benzo & muscle relaxant and that was an ILLEGAL COMBINATION.  Of course, CVS & Walgreens just BENT OVER and agreed to pay billions, while not admitting to doing anything wrong.

Recently there was an illegal alien and his third DUI and involved in a auto accident and killed a Mother and her Daughter.

What ever DA, prosecutor, judge let that guy out after the first & second DUI.. should they have some responsibility for the death of those two legal citizens?

https://nypost.com/2025/08/02/us-news/allegedly-drunk-illegal-kills-mom-girl-in-nj-head-on-crash-authorities/

I would put money on that if that accident that  the Mother ending up killing the  Daughter, and the Mother had taken some Rx that made her drowsy, she would be charged and sent to jail. “They” would have probably tried to go after the prescriber as well.

Maybe it is time that Pam Bondi to go after the bureaucrats behind this all these illegal aliens  doing illegal things even killing some of the people of our legal society. Isn’t their actions “contributing to” these illegal acts by having no-cash bail

Should “we” be pushing for civil liability for any part of our judicial system or legislative system whose actions directly/indirectly causes the death of one of our legal citizens..  Depriving  those citizens their right to Life.. Liberty …pursuit of Happiness?

https://afn.net/legal-courts/2025/05/01/rogue-judges-face-the-music-after-helping-criminal-illegals-escape-ice/

This article is about judges helping illegal aliens avoid being captured by ICE

there are both cities/counties/states that have declared they are pro abortion and anti abortion

Yes, there are states, counties, and cities in the U.S. that have declared themselves as sanctuaries for women seeking abortions, as well as ones that have done the opposite—designating themselves as “sanctuary cities for the unborn,” which restrict abortion access.

Sanctuary States for Abortion Access

  • California, Illinois, New York, New Mexico, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington are among the states that have codified abortion rights and taken steps to establish themselves as so-called “abortion sanctuary” states. These states have passed laws to protect out-of-state patients traveling for abortion and, in some cases, limit local or state law enforcement cooperation with investigations into abortion-related activity originating from anti-abortion states.

Illinois and New Mexico in particular have seen dramatic increases in patients traveling for abortion from surrounding restrictive states

  • In practice, these states and their major cities have become destinations where women from more restrictive regions travel to obtain legal abortion care.


there are many cities, counties, and states that explicitly declare themselves as sanctuaries for banning abortion, sometimes using the term “Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn.” These entities pass local ordinances or state laws aimed at outlawing abortion within their boundaries and, in some cases, restricting assistance for those seeking abortion elsewhere.

US Attorney Admits that He was Directed to Target Doctors Who had NO criminal intent

Who Agrees with Terry Cole sentiments?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DEA Administrator Terry Cole swears in DEA’s newest Diversion Investigators from Basic Diversion Investigator Class 62.

The work you do will save lives!

Your work is essential!

your service is valued!

Congratulations! hashtagDEADiversion

Number Doubles Suicide Hotline Contacts

From these numbers it appears that the USA has a massive and GROWING mental health crisis. In the first three years they averaged about 5 million/yr contacts and by early 2025 it had increased to 600,000/month  (7.2 million ) on a annual basis. Be sure to open this link to a breakdown of people/kids <24 y/o.  

IMO, since addiction has a substantial underlying mental health issues, these numbers could be extrapolated to the number of potential people dealing with substance abuse issues. Maybe being a kid in the 50’s & 60’s wasn’t all that hard. Maybe these kids just need 12 yrs of parochial school with NUNS. You “toed the line – or else”!

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2837598

The US launched the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline in July 2022 following a rise in youth suicide rates. In the 3 years since transitioning from a 10-digit number to an easier-to-remember 3-digit number, usage has steadily increased. To date, the free service—which connects users to a network of more than 200 call centers that provide crisis counseling and referrals—has received 16.5 million contacts, including 11.1 million calls, 2.9 million texts, and 2.4 million chats. Monthly contacts have doubled from approximately 300 000 in May 2022 to 600 000 in early 2025, according to KFF, a nonprofit organization focused on health policy.

It’s too soon to fully determine 988’s effect on suicide prevention, KFF stated. Public awareness of the service was initially low, and the overall number of suicide deaths remained stable from 2022 to 2023, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But the crisis number’s growing contact volume suggests improved recognition.

Although the US Health and Human Services budget proposes maintaining current 988 funding levels, the federal government recently eliminated the specialized 988 service for LGBTQ+ youth, which handled about 10% of all crisis line contacts. Additional cuts to Medicaid and other programs may lead states to reduce spending on behavioral health services, KFF reported.

Is some practitioners in OHIO PARANOID OR JUST OFF THE RAILS?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If a long term intractable chronic pain pt was to be taken off their oral opioids and put on buprenorphine patches. Why would any practitioner would take a intractable chronic pain pt off of oral opioids that apparently were working well and the pt’s total MME/day was 90. Besides such a irrational thought of stopping a intractable chronic pain pts oral opioids. There is a suggested process in properly transitioning a pt from oral opioids to a buprenorphine patch and I asked perplexity.ai what the process is so that I would not miss a step or two, regurgitating it from memory.  Besides the FDA made the following statement about the potential harm to pts from rapid dose reduction. IMO, reducing a pt’s opioid dose by 66% and concurrently put a buprenorphine patch on the pt, is about as close to moronic as one can come. This pt’s BP quickly elevated to 240/120. Defined by the American Heart Assoc as Hypertensive Crisis Level. And below is a graphic that outlines the damage to the human body from untreated high blood pressure. That has always been known as “the silent killer”.

 The FDA is now requiring that opioid labels emphasize the importance of avoiding rapid dose reduction or abrupt discontinuation in patients who may be physically dependent on opioid pain medicines, as it can cause serious harm.

 

Can we thank HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for this new PROHIBITION?

 

 

 

 


From a chronic pain pts interaction with their pain doc!

Well. I. Just. Saw my pain. Dr. He’s. Putting me on. bupe patch. He said. I am. On. Way. To high. Of. opioids I take 90 MME/day.. I am confused

He put me on… Suboxone patches, because I am on way to high of opioids trying. The Patches I am.  Kinda. Scared. As. My body reacts crazy. To some meds. Morphine. put me in a coma, I almost died.

Wow. He. Kinda. Has. Me. Against the. Wall. I can’t. Say. I am. Not trying Cause if I did. He. Would. Say. Bye he had. Never. Mentioned. Anything he was. Like. I am. Putting you. On. This. Patch and I am. Cutting. Your. oral opioids

confirmed-suspected suicides of 3 CVS pharmacists & 2 CVS techs who worked in stores within approximately 50 miles of each other

Some CVS Pharmacists Have “Disappeared:” The Pennsylvania EPIDEMIC!

https://pharmacistactivist.com/2025/July_2025.shtml

(Editor’s note: In this editorial, I refer to the recent confirmed or suspected suicides of three CVS pharmacists and two CVS pharmacy technicians who worked in stores within approximately 50 miles of each other. I have read the obituaries and tributes for each of these individuals. However, I identify only Mason Porta by name because he and his father have been publicly identified in the courageous reporting of Susan Shapiro of WGAL-TV).

In the June 2025 issue of The Pharmacist Activist, I reported that I had been informed of the suicides of two CVS pharmacists who worked at stores that are approximately 5 miles apart. The stores are in Lancaster, PA. A 50-year old pharmacist who had worked at CVS for about 20 years took his life on June 12, 2025. He was well known to and highly respected by shocked local pharmacists.

Three days later on June 15, 28-year old CVS pharmacist Mason Porta took his life, leaving numerous grieving loved ones and devastated colleagues. I have resided in Lancaster for less than a year. Local pharmacists have shared their concerns and memories with me, and news of the tragedies has been widely communicated by pharmacists on social media. However, for weeks, there was essentially no news or awareness of the local community including most CVS customers about the suicides. I have been told that CVS management has informed/threatened the employees of the CVS stores that they must not discuss or respond to questions about these situations, and that they could be in legal trouble if they did.

I did not know either of the pharmacists, or the workplace, personal, and other factors that culminated in their decisions to take their lives. I recognize that many suicides result from a collision of several factors that result in the tragic action of taking one’s life. Although more is unknown than known about the factors involved in the decisions of these two pharmacists, the following information is known:

  • All of the approximately 1250 Rite Aid stores have or are being closed. CVS has purchased substantially more of the prescription files from the closing Rite Aids than all other pharmacies combined.
  • Less than 2 weeks before his death, Mason Porta told another pharmacist (who did not work at CVS) that his store had received prescription files from 2 Rite Aid stores, and that the workload had significantly increased.
  • There have been continuous complaints/concerns from CVS pharmacists for a number of years about understaffing, stress, and errors. These concerns have been widely communicated in the local and national media, as well as in The Pharmacist Activist.
  • CVS management has instructed its store employees to not discuss the suicides of their colleagues. I understand the importance of respecting the privacy of grieving loved ones, providing grief counseling for employee colleagues, and the confidentiality of personal employee information. But why is CVS management so determined to prevent even a tribute to a departed colleague? Why and What do they not want the media, public, the Board of Pharmacy, and others to know?

The CVS NON-response

Over a period of several weeks, I made multiple calls to CVS. In each call I voiced my concerns about the suicides of two pharmacists and asked whether CVS had a statement such as expressing remorse or a tribute to these pharmacists. I initially went to the CVS website to locate a phone number for media relations. Although there were numerous media personnel identified with their email addresses, there was no phone number provided. I was, however, able to locate a number for the corporate offices. For each call I made I was placed on hold after voicing my question:

  • Call 1: I was informed that no information was available.
  • Call 2: A second call to the corporate offices several days later resulted in the same response.
  • Call 3: My third call to the corporate offices number was transferred to customer relations and the response was that no information was available. I then used the customer relations number for my subsequent calls.
  • Call 4: I asked to be transferred to the office of the CEO whom I identified by name. I was asked to spell his name which I did, and after a period of time on hold, I was informed that was not possible.
  • Call 5: I asked to be transferred to the office of the CEO whom I identified by name, which she recognized. Following my being on hold, she responded that “being referred to the office of the President is not as easy as you might think it is.” I responded that I considered the matter of the suicides of two CVS pharmacists to be urgent, but that I could not confirm that there was even an awareness of anyone in the corporate offices of the deaths of their employees. She responded that she would forward my message to “Leadership” and that someone should get back to me.
  • Call 6: About a week later I called customer relations and asked to be transferred to media relations. Following a lengthy hold, I was informed that there was no phone number for media relations and that I would have to contact them via email. I then stated the reason for my call and that I had been told the previous week that my concerns were being forwarded to leadership. She said she would check the status of that message and placed me on hold. When she returned to the call, she noted that my message was documented but had NOT been forwarded to leadership. I noted that my message should include my opinion that the view of CVS executives appears to be that these two pharmacists just DISAPPEARED. She said she would forward it to leadership and mark it Priority.

There has been no response.

In the more than six weeks since the deaths of Mason Porta and the 50-year old pharmacist, additional information has been acquired and actions taken:

  • I have filed a complaint/concern with the Pennsylvania State Board of Pharmacy and urged an investigation.
  • I have been made aware of the recent suspected suicides of three other CVS employees. A 24-year old CVS technician who planned to study pharmacy died unexpectedly on February 14, 2025. A 36-year old CVS pharmacist died unexpectedly on April 10, 2025. A 21-year old CVS technician died unexpectedly on June 23, 2025. All three of these individuals worked in CVS stores in suburban Philadelphia, about one hour away from Lancaster. I continue to be informed of suspected suicides, as well as physical and mental health crises, of other CVS employees in this area and in other states.

The WGAL-TV investigation

Susan Shapiro is a news anchor/reporter at WGAL, an NBC affiliate in Lancaster. She became aware of the suicides of the two local CVS pharmacists. Although news media do not ordinarily report on suicides, Ms. Shapiro immediately recognized that prescription errors are more likely when pharmacists experience heavy workloads and related stress, particularly when prescription files from Rite Aids that were closing were being transferred to other stores. Therefore, not only were the mental health and well-being of pharmacists in jeopardy, but the safety of the public who were obtaining prescriptions was also at increased risk of consequences of errors. Ms. Shapiro had interviewed Mason Porta’s father, Michael Porta, and former CVS pharmacist Kati Forbes prior to interviewing me. I was impressed with her insightful questions, as well as her thoroughness and objectivity. She was shocked to learn that there is not a requirement to report prescription errors.

Pharmacists in our local community who never worked, or do not currently work, for CVS made me aware of the suicides of the two CVS pharmacists. I also knew that CVS management had threatened its current employees that they must not discuss the deaths of their colleagues. Accordingly, I intentionally avoided speaking with any current CVS employee, even though some of the pharmacists were my former students at the Philadelphia College of Pharmacy. When the investigative report in which I was interviewed was aired, and If CVS management asked any current employee if they had spoken or otherwise communicated with me, they would be able to truthfully respond that they had not. I did make one exception and tried to contact the district leader (DL). I did that because I wish to provide support and advocacy for all pharmacists, and that I recognized that a pharmacist’s role as a district leader was also a difficult one, even though their challenges are very different from those of the in-store pharmacists. I called the number of the district leader on July 16 and heard a message that the party I was calling was not available. I left a brief message identifying myself and asking her to return my call. When I did not receive a response, I called again on July 18 and had the same experience. I left a message and noted that I had a suggestion for her to consider.

It was announced that Susan Shapiro’s investigative report regarding the suicides of pharmacists was scheduled to air on the 6 pm news on July 24, and the station aired brief excerpts from the report on its news programs for several days to encourage viewers to watch it. In mid-morning of July 24, I received a call from the CVS district leader from a number that was different from the one on which I left my voicemail messages. She said she had been on vacation I voiced my concerns about the recent deaths of the two CVS pharmacists and she immediately responded that she could not discuss anything. I replied that I knew that but I wanted to voice my support and advocacy for all pharmacists, including in-store pharmacists and DL pharmacists. I told her that she was the only one who could make a decision that she considered best for herself, but that I had a suggestion for her to consider and that was that she resign from CVS. I repeated that this was my suggestion but that the decision was hers. I had been informed by a friend that the DL had previously held pharmacy positions at several other companies and also had an unrelated business interest. I started to ask her if my understanding was correct regarding the business interest when she interrupted and stated that she had an emergency call and hung up.

Several hours later I received a call from reporter Susan Shapiro who asked if I had a phone discussion with the DL. I responded that she had called me several hours ago in response to my earlier voicemail messages. Susan asked me if I had said anything “threatening” to her such as CVS would terminate her. I replied, “absolutely not!” and added that my comments were supportive of her and provided a suggestion for her to consider with my recognition that any decision was hers to make.

CVS had contacted WGAL that day in an attempt to suppress the report. I have not yet seen a copy of the CVS message and do not know who at CVS provided it, how it was communicated (e.g., phone, email), or whether it included information other than the misrepresentation of my discussion with the DL.

The WGAL news began at 6 pm and, after several minutes of breaking news, an announcement was made that the report on pharmacist suicides would be aired at a later time. Had CVS misrepresentation and censorship succeeded? Fortunately, my concern was short-lived, and I learned the next day that the report had been rescheduled for the 6 pm news on Monday, July 28. Until the report aired on July 28, there was essentially no awareness of the Lancaster-area community of the tragic deaths of the two CVS pharmacists on June 12 and June 15. Susan Shapiro and WGAL are to be commended for their courage and perseverance in conducting the investigation and airing it.

Apparently realizing that it was not going to suppress the report, CVS provided a lengthy statement to WGAL in an attempt to portray a more positive image for the company and the steps it says it has taken. The statement begins, “We were devastated to learn about the deaths of two CVS Pharmacy colleagues….Our thoughts and prayers are with their families, friends, and colleagues during this incredibly different time. Counseling and support services are being offered to all colleagues.”

The following are excerpts from the rest of the CVS statement:

“We’re committed to ensuring there are appropriate levels of staffing and resources at our stores and pharmacies. We regularly make investments in our CVS Pharmacy locations to help ensure our teams are supported and able to deliver excellent service to our patients. Ongoing actions we’ve taken in recent years include scheduling additional support, enhancing recruitment and hiring, and strengthening training programs. We’ve also introduced innovative tools to support workload and workflow, enabling our pharmacy teams to better focus on patient care.”

“Regarding our acquisition of prescription files from Rite Aid, prior to taking on the new prescriptions, we’ve been focused on ensuring our pharmacies are appropriately staffed and that our pharmacy teams are properly equipped to provide pharmacy care to both existing and new patients….To help further support our teams, we’ve hired more than 1,500 pharmacy team members in Pennsylvania this year, including nearly 50 in the Lancaster area.”

“Pharmacy care must be safe, effective, and efficient for patients to achieve their best possible health outcomes, which is why we provide our pharmacy teams and leaders with tools to ensure the safety and quality of their services. While we’ve reduced the number of metrics in recent years, we do use tools and metrics to have a clear picture of what is working and where improvements may be needed to continuously improve our colleague and patient experiences.”

CVS Health regularly offers all our colleagues, including our store and pharmacy teams, several resources to support them – whether they need help dealing with day to day issues, emotional resilience, relationship challenges or more serious mental health concerns.”

Most CVS and other pharmacists give no credibility to most of the CVS statement based on their personal experiences or what they have learned from colleagues or from media reports of prescription errors, harm to patients, lawsuits against CVS, and the suicides of pharmacy team members when CVS management has not been able to suppress the reports.

Requesting examples or data from CVS that would support its deceptive claims would be an exercise in futility. However, one sentence of the CVS statement provides specific data – “we’ve hired more than 1,500 pharmacy team members in Pennsylvania this year, including nearly 50 in the Lancaster area.”

I decided to ask CVS about the numbers 1,500 and 50 that they provided in an attempt to impress others that they were being proactive. Because I had become aware that the media relations people can only be contacted by email, I sent the following email message to the individual whose name I had heard most often in CVS communications:

“I am a resident of Lancaster, PA and also write a monthly newsletter. I am familiar with the suicides of the two CVS pharmacists last month and the CVS response. I have several questions and would ask that you contact me at xxx-xxx-xxxx. Thank you.”

I received a very prompt response: “Thanks for your e-mail. Feel free to send me your questions and I’ll do my best to answer them.”

I responded that my questions pertained to the number of pharmacy team members CVS hired in Pennsylvania, and asked the following questions:

“How many of the new hires of more than 1,500 and nearly 50 are pharmacists and how many are pharmacy technicians?”

“How many of the numbers of more than 1,500 and nearly 50 represent NEW positions, and how many of the new hires are considered replacements for employees who have retired or are no longer with CVS for other reasons?”

The email response I received from the media relations individual identified her title and contact information, including a phone number that I had previously been informed was not available. When I did not receive a response to my emailed questions within three days, I called her phone number and left a voicemail message requesting a return call. I have not yet received a response and I provided the following comments via email:

“I am surprised that you have not provided responses to my questions, particularly given the CVS emphasis on metrics and the fact that my questions relate to information that CVS chose to share publicly.

I am also making an additional request. On July 24, someone at CVS communicated with WGAL in Lancaster regarding a report in which I was interviewed that was to be aired. I am asking that you provide me with the name and contact information of the individual at CVS who contacted WGAL, as well as a copy of the part(s) of the communication that pertain to me. Thank you.”

It was CVS which provided the numbers of 1,500 and 50 in its statement to WGAL that was intended to impress others. Why will it not provide answers to questions that would provide more clarity for its own numbers? The only conclusion is that the answers would not be impressive and expose its deception. If these data in the CVS statement are not credible, there is no reason to consider any part of the statement credible.

Pharmacists at risk

The suicide rate of pharmacists (20 per 100,000) is higher than that of the general population (12 per 100,000). One suicide is a tragedy. For three CVS pharmacists in a local region of Pennsylvania (not including the CVS technicians or the possibility of other suicides of which I am not yet aware) to take their lives should be viewed as an epidemic and must be investigated.

Often there is not just one factor that results in a decision to take one’s life, and I do not know the personal circumstances of the three CVS pharmacists. However, we do know that CVS pharmacists have been complaining for years of understaffing and excessive workloads, continuing stress, and increased prescription errors. In addition, the actions of CVS management to prevent employees from discussing the suicides, and to suppress media coverage and community awareness invite suspicion that the workplace conditions and resultant stress were important factors in the decisions of the pharmacists to take their lives. Why else would CVS management be so determined to suppress media and other publicity, and threaten employees who might discuss the situations? Accordingly, even if there are other contributing factors, the investigations must start at CVS!

Pharmacists wish to achieve perfection in their responsibilities, but no one is perfect and rare errors occur. CVS pharmacists have huge responsibility but NO authority with respect to the management-imposed policies and decisions that are extremely important factors in the occurrence of prescription errors (e.g., prescription department staffing, quotas). In the horrible situation in which a prescription error results in serious harm or death, it is the PHARMACIST who is considered responsible for the error. Depending on the circumstances that resulted in the error, a pharmacist could have her/his license suspended or revoked. In addition to the possibility of disciplinary action by a Board of Pharmacy, the patient harm resulting from the error increases the risk of mental anguish for the pharmacist, and even self-harm.

Although less likely when serious errors occur, the licenses of pharmacist district leaders and pharmacists at higher management levels who make and impose decisions such as staffing levels, could also be at risk. They probably have not thought about this because they are not personally in the stores in which an error originated. If they are the individuals who are monitoring and enforcing decisions that result in an understaffed pharmacy department in which a serious error is made, they also could be at risk of disciplinary action by the Board of Pharmacy or other agencies.

Other than pharmacists, are there any others among the tens of thousands of CVS employees who are at risk of losing their license and livelihood if a serious prescription error is made? I don’t think of any. Accordingly, the executives and other high-level management decision-makers who establish policies, metrics, quotas, and other factors that impact the workplace environment, have established a corporate structure that absolves them from any personal accountability or culpability when even a fatal prescription error occurs. The “Protect the company and the executives” strategy is immediately implemented. The highest priority of the company is given to the determination of whether there was any CVS policy violation that occurred for which the pharmacist can be faulted and the company absolved.

Contrary to their statements, CVS executives and other management decision-makers do not appear to care about their in-store pharmacists and other employees, the stress of their workplace, and their mental health. If they did, they would take corrective actions that would document the results of their self-promotional statements in their press releases. They only value the licenses the pharmacists hold which the company must have to meet legal requirements. They do not care about their pharmacists’ knowledge and skills because they know that their understaffing, metrics, and quotas will permit no or little time to be allocated to discussions with patients. In essence, CVS hires licenses which must be accompanied by pharmacists. They can always be replaced by another license with a pharmacist. The actions of CVS in response to the recent suicides of its pharmacists are clear examples of its priorities. In conjunction with the availability of grief counseling, employees are threatened that they must not discuss the tragedies or respond to questions, which only add to the stress for the employees. Information is suppressed to avoid negative publicity and media coverage that could prompt investigations that would reveal an extremely stressful, error-prone workplace environment that CVS does not want known. There was no expression of remorse or any tribute or recognition of the employment of the Lancaster pharmacists UNTIL it became known that WGAL was conducting an investigation. DO CVS EXECUTIVES HAVE NO CONSCIENCE? DO THEY HAVE NO HUMANITY?

Patients at risk

The accuracy with which every prescription is prepared and dispensed has life or death implications. In the best pharmacy workplace settings, prescription errors will occur, but they are rare. In a workplace environment in which there are long lines of prescription customers, hundreds of prescriptions still to be completed, cars waiting in the drive-thru, vaccines to be administered, technicians to monitor, and responding to questions, it is inevitable that a significantly larger number of errors will occur, some of which will be harmful or even fatal. Thus, understaffed pharmacies and workplace stress that may have been contributing factors to the suicides of the CVS pharmacists are also important factors in the occurrence of errors that place prescription customers at risk of harm. In considering the tens of thousands of prescriptions that are dispensed in just one store, the potential for errors becomes a very important and possibly deadly public health/safety issue.

The statistics regarding prescription errors are elusive, incomplete, and underestimated. Many errors are caught during the dispensing process and corrected before the medication is provided to the customer. CVS requires that errors that involve prescriptions that are provided to patients before being recognized be reported to management. Therefore, CVS management has most of the specific data regarding prescription errors that have occurred in its stores. But even this data are incomplete because pharmacists sometimes do not report an error (in violation of company policy). The mandated reporting of errors to CVS management is for disciplinary purposes, and not for correcting the workplace conditions (i.e., root causes) that are important factors in the occurrence of the errors.

Infrequently, even fatal consequences may be experienced without a prescription error being recognized or suspected as a contributing factor. As an example, if a drug that affects heart function is dispensed in error, an individual may experience a deadly heart attack or arrhythmia that is viewed as a tragic random event. Notwithstanding information gaps such as those noted above, CVS has the most complete and detailed information regarding prescription errors in its stores. However, they will not reveal it! When harm, death, and lawsuits result from the errors, the highest priority of CVS management is to avoid negative publicity. Very few lawsuits will go to trial because CVS will pay whatever it takes to settle them out of court with confidentiality restrictions and without admitting any wrongdoing. If there is any question whether CVS has the wealth to do that, consider that the company recently agreed to a multi-billion dollar settlement with respect to its alleged role in the opioid overdosage deaths epidemic, and a federal judge has recently ordered CVS’s Omnicare division to pay $949 million in a lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act, alleging that Omnicare submitted false claims for prescription drugs to government healthcare programs. The total amount of CVS settlements of lawsuits of customers and their families must pale in comparison with the above amounts, but we don’t know.

When CVS management shows so little respect for its own employees that it does everything possible to suppress any information about their lives and suicides, customers who are harmed become anonymous statistics. For CVS management, errors and their harmful and financial consequences are just a cost of doing business.

Actions needed

The increasing number of suicides of CVS pharmacists and team members, and the increasing number of customers who are harmed or die as a consequence of prescription errors must no longer be tolerated. Investigations must be conducted and actions taken, starting with, but not limited to, the following:

  • State Boards of Pharmacy (SBOP) in every state in which CVS has stores should require CVS to provide the names and other pertinent details regarding the unexpected deaths of every pharmacist, pharmacy technician, and student pharmacist during the period of their employment and, for those no longer employed, for the 6-month period following their employment. The information required should be for the period from January 1,2020 (the approximate start of the COVID-19 pandemic) until the present.
  • For every pharmacy team member who died unexpectedly since January 1, 2020, the SBOP should require CVS to provide the number of hours of pharmacist and technician staffing, and the number of prescriptions dispensed and immunizations administered each day, in the store in which they worked during the two-month period prior to their death.
  • The SBOP in every state in which CVS stores are receiving prescription files being transferred from Rite Aid stores that have already closed or will be closing, should require CVS to provide for each of the stores receiving Rite Aid prescription files the number of hours of pharmacist and technician staffing, and the number of prescriptions dispensed and immunizations administered each day during the two-month period prior to and following the transfer of the Rite Aid files.
  • The SBOP in every state in which CVS has stores should require CVS to provide the records of prescription errors in each store since January 1, 2020 to the present, and information about any changes implemented to reduce the risk of errors.
  • The SBOP in every state in which CVS has stores should require CVS to provide specific information regarding each lawsuit filed against the company since January 1, 2020 that is related to a prescription error, regardless of whether the lawsuit is settled out of court or goes to trial, or whether CVS acknowledges wrongdoing.
  • CVS should establish a fund to appropriately compensate (as determined by an outside party) customers and/or family members who are victims of errors, and pharmacy team members who die unexpectedly and workplace experience is considered to be a contributing factor, as well as family members and other loved ones who are directly affected.
  • All SBOP, in conjunction with state pharmacy associations and legislators, should consider developing legislation that requires more than 50% of the ownership of a pharmacy to be held by a licensed pharmacist. North Dakota has had such a requirement for decades; although it has often been challenged, the challenges have not been successful.
  • The American Pharmacists Association should compile documentation regarding the pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, and student pharmacists who took their own lives. Even if the names of the individuals are redacted, their responsibilities (e.g., community pharmacist, hospital pharmacist) and employers (and colleges in the cases of student pharmacists) should be identified. The individuals who took their lives were valued friends and professional colleagues of many, and should not only be considered as anonymous statistics (i.e., 20 suicides per 100,000).

Associations and Boards of Pharmacy

The American Pharmacists Association (APhA), the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), and the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy (NABP) convened an invitation-only summit titled “Implementing Solutions: Building a Sustainable Healthy Workforce and Workplace” on June 20-21, 2023. The “discussions and solutions focused on five workplace themes: practice advancement, mental health, workforce, regulations, and technology and workplace efficiencies.” The more than 80 invited pharmacists discussed issues such as stress, burnout, well-being, and resilience, developed “actionable solutions” for the five workplace themes, and identified the “actors” who should address the solutions including individuals, employers, associations, and NABP/boards of pharmacy. The participants in the summit whom I know personally are capable, dedicated pharmacists, and I assume the other participants are also. The report from the summit was completed and apparently made available in September, 2023. In addition to the report, these three organizations, as well as other national pharmacy organizations, have developed numerous excellent resources for pharmacists and colleagues who experience mental health challenges. However, questions must be asked: “How many pharmacists (even the members of APhA and ASHP) are even aware of the summit report, and how many have read it?

On June 22-23, 2025, the APhA, ASHP, and NABP convened another invitation-only event, “Implementing Solutions Summit 2.0: Building a Sustainable, Healthy Pharmacy Workforce and Workplace.” I have heard nothing about the “solutions” identified in the discussions, and the summit report is expected this fall. However, my expectation is that, like the first summit, Summit 2.0 will completely ignore the MOST IMPORTANT issues that threaten the mental health and lives of pharmacists and their colleagues. I can’t believe that the more than 80 participants are oblivious to the elephant (i.e., CVS) just outside the summit room that is ready to ignore and crush the summit findings, and eventually destroy the ENTIRE profession of pharmacy, not just community practice.

CVS is the largest employer of pharmacists, and has the size, wealth, and influence to block almost all challenges, including those of its competitors such as Rite Aid and Walgreens. The only challenges that are of any concern to CVS are extensive negative publicity that might result in public outrage and actions of SBOP and other regulatory agencies. However, if NABP and the largest pharmacy associations refuse to even speak about CVS, let alone take any action, CVS will continue unchallenged, and even more CVS pharmacists and team members will commit suicide, and even more CVS customers will be harmed and die from prescription errors.

I highly commend the several boards of pharmacy (e.g., Ohio) that have boldly challenged the violations, policies, and metrics of CVS, as well as the states (e.g., Arkansas) that have challenged its monopolistic and unfair practices. However, all boards of pharmacy and NABP, with the strong support of the associations and colleges of pharmacy, must take URGENT actions. The future of the profession of pharmacy is at risk.

The toxic and stressful culture of the workplace in CVS stores is already seriously eroding the pool of potential applicants who might otherwise consider pursuing education and a career in pharmacy. CVS, with its Caremark and Aetna divisions, is systematically contributing to the elimination of the competition, including thousands of independent pharmacies, and large retailers like Target and Rite Aid. Does any pharmacist or association of pharmacists believe that, if CVS executives could identify a legal way to dispense prescriptions without employing pharmacists, that they wouldn’t do it? CVS management is already moving in that direction by claiming that its mostly self-inflicted shortage of pharmacists necessitates greater use of technicians, remote central-fill facilities, and its mail-order pharmacies that are not or poorly regulated. As pharmacists disappear, they will be replaced by medication technicians, robots, artificial intelligence, and drones (MTRAID) to the great peril of the health and safety of the public and the profession of pharmacy.

We do not need more surveys, summits, or timid and ineffective policies and resolutions from pharmacy associations. URGENT BOLD ACTIONS ARE REQUIRED!

 

the DEA’s Diversion Control Division: SYSTEMIC ROT

DEA’s Cannabis Incompetence on Full Display: A Parade of Cluelessness and Corruption: TERRY COLE FIX IT!

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/deas-cannabis-incompetence-full-display-parade-corruption-duane-boise-hcpbe/

MMJ is Developing FDA approved cannabis medicines that best serve patients with unmet medical needs.

Terrance Cole’s Choice: Reformer or Cover-Up Artist? New DEA Administrator Terrance Cole stands at a crossroads:

  • Break rank, clean house, and restore the DEA’s credibility by approving MMJ BioPharma’s application.
  • Or protect the old guard’s corruption and go down as the next puppet in a failed prohibitionist machine.

America doesn’t need more prohibition era crooners in suits. It needs a leader who prioritizes patients over politics, science over bureaucracy, and integrity over careerism.

The DEA’s war on cannabis research is not just a failure of policy-it’s a failure of morality.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – August 5, 2025

While patients suffering from Huntington’s disease, Multiple Sclerosis, and other debilitating conditions await life saving cannabis based treatments, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) continues to flaunt its profound ignorance, regulatory negligence, and outright corruption. The agency’s mission claims to “ensure an adequate and uninterrupted supply of controlled substances for medical and scientific needs,” but internal statements and actions reveal a shocking pattern of incompetence, deceit, and deliberate obstruction.

From field agents to senior leadership, the DEA’s handling of cannabis research applications has devolved into a circus of bureaucratic malpractice-one that prioritizes power over patients, red tape over science, and self-preservation over public health.

The DEA’s Greatest Hits: A Compilation of Cluelessness and Corruption

Here are actual quotes from DEA officials tasked with overseeing cannabis research-exposing an agency that is either catastrophically inept or intentionally sabotaging medical progress:

  1. Thomas Cooke, Diversion Investigator, Rhode Island: (2021) “I know nothing about marijuana. Are you growing it in the 10 by 20 vault?”
  2. Mark Rubins, New England Diversion Supervisor: (2022) “If your doctor doing the clinical trial had a Schedule I Researcher’s Registration previously that expired, just tell him to reapply and DEA Headquarters will approve him.”
  3. Matthew Strait, DEA Deputy Policy Administrator: (2023) “The other applicants that got approved just did the Bona Fide Supply Agreement with the DEA purchasing the marijuana from the growers-that will be OK.”
  4. Ricardo Quintero, DEA Section Chief: (2023) “Oh, you are calling about your MMJ bulk manufacturing application? And why do you want to know?”
  5. Aarathi Haig, DEA Chief Counsel (to MMJ’s attorney Megan Sheehan): (2024) “Oh, the DEA will settle your litigation-just have your client withdraw their application, and we will expedite their new one.”
  6. Thomas Prevoznik, DEA Deputy Administrator (in a formal letter to MMJ): (2024) “After a careful review of your application and consistent with my obligation to ensure public safety under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801, et. seq.), I deny the request to discontinue or defer administrative proceedings. Furthermore, I have determined there is no potential modification of your application that could or would alter my decision in this regard.”

The Bigger Scandal: A Culture of Corruption

These quotes are not isolated incidents-they reflect a systemic rot within the DEA’s Diversion Control Division:

  • Fraudulent Licensing: The DEA rubber-stamped eight cannabis research licenses between 2021-2022, but seven are inactive, bankrupt, or non-compliant. One was even set up in a garage.
  • Unconstitutional Tactics: The DEA dragged MMJ into an administrative law tribunal that the Supreme Court has since ruled unconstitutional (Axon v. FTC, Jarkesy v. SEC).
  • Ethical Violations: DEA attorney Aarathi Haig remains on the case despite her lapsed bar standing, violating 28 U.S.C. § 530B (requiring federal attorneys to comply with state ethics rules).

The Human Cost: Patients Left to Suffer

While the DEA plays bureaucratic games:

  • Huntington’s Disease patients face a 10-20 year death sentence with no effective treatments.
  • Multiple Sclerosis patients endure irreversible nerve damage while the DEA blocks potential therapies.
  • Children with epilepsy are denied FDA-approved cannabis medicines, while contaminated street products flood the market unchecked.

The Solution: Dismantle the DEA’s Obstruction Machine

Congress, the courts, and the White House must act now:

  1. Fire the Culprits: Prevoznik, Strait, Haig, Quintero, Cooke, and Rubins must be removed and investigated.
  2. Transfer Oversight: Cannabis research should be moved to the FDA or NIH, where science-not stigma-guides policy.
  3. End Unconstitutional Tribunals: The DEA’s rigged Administrative Law Judge system must be dismantled per Supreme Court rulings .

Terrance Cole’s Moment of Truth (2025)

New DEA Administrator Terrance Cole faces a choice:

  • Continue the cover-up, protecting the corrupt officials who sabotaged medical research.
  • Or clean house, approve MMJ’s application, and end this national disgrace.

America doesn’t need more anti-science bureaucrats-it needs leaders who put patients over politics.

The DEA’s cannabis obstruction isn’t just incompetence-it’s institutional malpractice.

MMJ is represented by attorney Megan Sheehan.

Walgreens rolls out nationwide flu shot appointments – TOO EARLY!

Barb & Myself always gets our flu shot the last week of Sept or the first week of Oct. The antibodies from the flu shot will peak in 2-4 weeks and  will decrease significantly at abt 3 months after being vaccinated and will most likely completely fade away by 6 months after the vaccination

The best time of the year to get your flu shot is in September or October, ideally before the end of October, to ensure optimal protection before flu activity increases1236712. This timing allows your body about two weeks to build up immunity before the flu season typically ramps up in the fall and peaks between December and February68.

Key recommendations:

  • General public: Most people should aim to get vaccinated in September or October3612.

  • Older adults (65+): Avoid getting the vaccine too early (such as in July or August), as immunity may wane before the end of flu season. Waiting until September or October is preferred612.

  • Young children needing two doses: Start the first dose as soon as the vaccine is available, since the second dose needs to be given at least four weeks after the first12.

  • Pregnant individuals (third trimester): Vaccination in late summer (July or August) may be recommended to help protect infants who will be born during flu season127.

  • If you miss October: It is still beneficial to get the flu shot later; vaccination is recommended as long as flu viruses are circulating, often into spring679.

Flu activity and vaccine timing may vary each year, and personal circumstances (such as travel or underlying health conditions) could require adjustments, so consult with your healthcare provider for personalized guidance567.

  1. https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/its-good-time-get-your-flu-vaccine
  2. https://www.baystatehealth.org/articles/do-i-need-a-flu-shot
  3. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/flu/in-depth/flu-shots/art-20048000
  4. https://hms.harvard.edu/news/how-childrens-birthdays-help-show-best-month-flu-shots
  5. https://www.memorialcare.org/blog/when-best-time-get-your-flu-shot
  6. https://historyofvaccines.org/blog/timing-your-flu-shot-science-behind-when-get-vaccinated/
  7. https://www.fffenterprises.com/vaccines/seasonal-viral-respiratory-vaccine-information/when-to-get-the-flu-shot.html
  8. https://nortonhealthcare.com/patient-resources/norton-now/flu-symptoms-treatment/annual-flu-shot/
  9. https://www.piedmont.org/living-real-change/whats-the-best-time-to-get-a-flu-shot
  10. https://www.ncoa.org/article/what-older-adults-need-to-know-during-flu-season/
  11. https://www.azblue.com/inspire-health/blog/when-where-and-why-you-should-get-the-flu-shot
  12. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines/keyfacts.html

Walgreens rolls out nationwide flu shot appointments

Walgreens is now offering flu shots for anyone three years and older at stores nationwide. Individuals and families can walk into their nearest Walgreens pharmacy or schedule an appointment online or via the retailer’s app.

Starting Aug. 1, myWalgreens members will receive 20% off their next eligible purchase with any vaccine received.

Walgreens said community pharmacies continue to serve as a trusted destination for vaccinations and other preventive healthcare services. Pharmacies accounted for the administration of almost 38 million flu vaccine doses throughout the 2024-2025 season—nearly double the 22 million doses delivered in medical offices. 

Walgreens is investing more in the experience with simplified scheduling, seamless walk-in options and whole-family appointments to make it easier for customers.

The retaileer said it is making it easy to stay healthy this year, offering convenient and timely options for vaccination, testing and treatment, offering personalized guidance from experts, coadministration made easy with scheduling enhancements and digital check-ins.

Advertisement – article continues below
Advertisement

Every year, common respiratory viruses like flu and pneumonia cause hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations and thousands of deaths. Preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that the 2024-2025 flu season was one of the most severe for people of all ages, a first since 2017-2018, Walgreens said.

Walgreens noted that the CDC recommends that everyone six months and older gets an annual flu vaccine, ideally by late October, to ensure optimal protection throughout the season.

“Vaccines are the best way to help prevent and reduce the severity of potentially deadly viruses like flu,” said Rick Gates, chief pharmacy officer, Walgreens. “At Walgreens, we’re committed to making it easy and convenient for people to get the protection they need. It is important that everyone is up to date on their recommended vaccines heading into the fall and winter, when viruses like flu are more likely to surge.”

The Right to Discriminate Against a Patient

The Right to Discriminate Against a Patient

https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/second-opinions/116741

Tennessee’s vague conscience protections offer an avenue for legal discrimination

When the woman stood up to speak in a Washington County town hall meeting, she had no idea her story would go viral on social media

Having recently realized she was pregnant, she sought out a physician for prenatal care — but was denied service.

“That provider told me that thanks to [the 2025 Medical Ethics Defense Act, they were not comfortable treating me because I am an unwed mother and that goes against their Christian values.” She revealed she must now cross state lines for basic prenatal care.

“I call Marsha [Blackburn’s] [R-Tenn.] office twice a day. I’m either blocked or she has all calls going directly to voicemail...When I contacted [Sen.] Bill Hagerty’s [R-Tenn.] office, I was told he’s not obligated to listen to his constituents.”

The allegations appalled everyone present. “If you were in that room, you believed her,” Tennessee State Rep. Gloria Johnson (D-90), who had attended the meeting to answer questions about Medicaid cuts, said to me. The video rapidly circulated online, attracting ire from reproductive rights advocates and critics alike. Its subject was unprepared for and overwhelmed by the attention.

“She’s afraid for her job and her child,” Rachel Wells told me. Wells is the journalist who first broke the storyon her Substack, TN Repro News, and had spoken to the woman on the grounds of anonymity.

It is important to know that these are allegations. I imagine someone will speculate that it’s a hoax, which would be extremely disappointing and attack the credulity of other female patients, who already struggle to be believed. However, beyond the particulars of these allegations, a state law exists that appears to permit doctors to discriminate when providing medical care. That is dangerous.

Conscience Rights

Historically, conscience protections are usually applied to abortion and other aspects of reproductive healthcare. If you truly define life as beginning at conception, I can appreciate why you personally would not want to be involved in an abortion. A religious institution may similarly object to specific services. For instance, many Catholic hospitals will not participate in sterilization, abortion, or contraception as a matter of religious principle, which is a federally-protected right

But denying a patient general care based on the patient’s lifestyle choices is a different matter — and not a new one.

In 1999, Guadalupe Benitez was denied artificial insemination by physicians who claimed that providing such treatment to an unmarried individual violated their religious beliefs. Benitez argued that they declined to treat her because of her sexual orientation (she had disclosed she was a lesbian, and statements made by staff members at the clinic suggested that her sexual orientation was the real issue at hand).

A Catholic physician would likely decline to provide this procedure regardless of the patient’s marital status, because artificial insemination is “unnatural.” But, to my knowledge, caring for an unmarried person does not violate any religious tenet. The California Supreme Court unanimously decided in favor of Benitez in 2008, holding that physicians do not have the right to refuse care based on sexual orientation, even on religious grounds. The question of Benitez’s marital status was left largely unresolved but is relevant under this Tennessee law.

I cannot understand why treating an individual whose lifestyle does not align with your own would violate any religious principle. I’m a Christian, and know of no Biblical verse prohibiting me from caring for anyone, even if I believe they have sinned — in fact, I distinctly recall Jesus ministering to sinners.

Rep. Johnson told me that the issue of conscience protections for physicians was predominantly pushed forward by the Alliance Defending Freedom, whose senior counsel, Greg Chafuen, applaudedTennessee’s Medical Ethics Defense Act when it was signed into law in April 2025.

The law states

A healthcare provider must not be required to participate in or pay for a healthcare procedure, treatment, or service that violates the conscience of the healthcare provider.

But Tennessee already had conscience protections in place for physicians, argued Amy Gordon Bono, MD, MPH, alarmed by the bill’s vague language. She testified unsuccessfully against it. “Time and time again, I see this legislative body choose to politicize talking points rather than prioritize real solutions to the issues at hand. This bill will not heal the moral injury present in our healthcare system.”

The law does not apply to services governed by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). In short, emergency protections are safe (for now), but are seemingly the only thing preventing a potentially bigoted doctor from actually denying a vulnerable patient vital care.

Unintended Consequences

The vagueness of this bill is troubling: a doctor could feasibly refuse to treat anyone, claiming that doing so violates their deeply-held beliefs — highly unclear language that could mean anything.

What if doctors at academic medical centers did this? Our most complex patients, who might not be able to receive appropriate care elsewhere, would suffer disproportionately.

What if such legislation came to my home state of New York? Could I then decline to care for a child abuser, someone with racist tattoos, or an adulterer? These choices disagree with my own Christian faith. Yet, I have treated all, adhering to the standard of care without hesitation.

I wonder if the bill’s authors have considered other consequences of its enactment. How might they feel if a doctor claims that a certain religion is inconsistent with their values and refuses that patient treatment? We can all agree this would be outrageous. But technically, it would be legal.

Or, hypothetically, doctors might invoke conscience protections if a former governor with an alleged history of sexual harassment, a twice-divorced real estate magnate with a sexual abuse conviction, or a CEO having an affair with the head of human resources at a Coldplay concert showed up in clinic. Would politicians pushing vague conscience protections feel differently if doctors declined to treat them on moral grounds?

Tennessee may not be alone; similar legislation exists in Illinois, Florida, Mississippi, and potentially other states, and has not been challenged.

So, it falls on us as a profession to ask ourselves: given the opportunity to discriminate, is this who we want to be as a field?

Chloe Nazra Lee, MD, MPH, is a resident physician in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York. The views in the above piece reflect only the author’s and not any institution with which she is affiliated.

Attorney General Files Misconduct Complaint Against Anti-Trump Judge

Attorney General Files Misconduct Complaint Against Anti-Trump Judge

https://officialtrumptracker.com/government/attorney-general-files-misconduct-complaint-against-anti-trump-judge/njackson/2025/07/

The Justice Department has filed an official complaint alleging misconduct by US District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg. 

The complaint, which was directed by AG Pam Bondi and reviewed by Fox News, was written by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle and addressed to the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Sri Srinivasan.

“The Department of Justice respectfully submits this complaint alleging misconduct by U.S. District Court Chief Judge James E. Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Donald J. Trump to the Chief Justice of the United States and other federal judges that have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,” says Mr. Mizelle.

Judge Boasberg is presiding over a high-profile case involving the deportation of several migrants to El Salvador and has talked about holding DOJ lawyers in contempt because of his assertion that his order to turn airborne planes around was not followed. President Trump has also made critical comments about Judge Boasberg.

The complaint details two occasions on which Judge Boasberg made comments that the Justice Department alleges undermine the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

“On March 11, 2025, Judge Boasberg attended a session of the Judicial Conference of the United States, which exists to discuss administrative matters like budgets, security, and facilities. While there, Judge Boasberg attempted to improperly influence Chief Justice Roberts and roughly two dozen other federal judges by straying from the traditional topics to express his belief that the Trump Administration would “disregard rulings of federal courts” and trigger “a constitutional crisis.” Although his comments would be inappropriate even if they had some basis, they were even worse because Judge Boasberg had no basis—the Trump Administration has always complied with all court orders. Nor did Judge Boasberg identify any purported violations of court orders to justify his unprecedented predictions.”

“Within days of those statements, Judge Boasberg began acting on his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would not follow court orders. First, although he lacked authority to do so, he issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Government from removing violent Tren de Aragua terrorists, which the Supreme Court summarily vacated.

“Taken together, Judge Boasberg’s words and deeds violate Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, and, erode public confidence in judicial neutrality, and warrant a formal investigation.” 

Federal Judge James Boasberg became a key figure in the fight over border security this year, after issuing a controversial temporary restraining order on March 15 that blocked President Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to speed up deportations of hundreds of Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador.

Boasberg went so far as to demand that all flights bound for El Salvador be “immediately” returned to U.S. soil—an order that was not carried out. His emergency action set off a chain of legal challenges around the country, beginning with the March 15 case in his court, and eventually drew in the Supreme Court. The high court would later rule—twice—that the Trump administration’s expedited removals did not violate constitutional due process.

Despite these rulings, Boasberg and his handling of the matter have been sharply criticized by Trump administration officials, who say his order interfered with the executive branch’s authority to secure the border. President Trump himself suggested earlier this year that Boasberg could be impeached over his conduct, prompting Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare public statement.

The current complaint against Boasberg—originally appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush in 2002—comes just as he may once again play a decisive role in a major class-action case involving the same group of former CECOT migrants.

Trump administration is launching a new private health tracking system with Big Tech’s help

Trump administration is launching a new private health tracking system with Big Tech’s help

https://apnews.com/article/trump-ai-rfk-jr-health-tech-fa73703bd1fd557c787ef0b590e151f1

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration announced it is launching a new program that will allow Americans to share personal health data and medical records across health systems and apps run by private tech companies, promising that will make it easier to access health records and monitor wellness.

More than 60 companies, including major tech companies like Google, Amazon and Apple as well as health care giants like UnitedHealth Group and CVS Health, have agreed to share patient data in the system. The initiative will focus on diabetes and weight management, conversational artificial intelligence that helps patients, and digital tools such as QR codes and apps that register patients for check-ins or track medications.

“For decades America’s health care networks have been overdue for a high tech upgrade,” President Donald Trump said during an event with company CEOs at the White House on Wednesday. “The existing systems are often slow, costly and incompatible with one another, but with today’s announcement, we take a major step to bring health care into the digital age.”

Related Stories
The system, spearheaded by an administration that has already freely shared highly personal data about Americans in ways that have tested legal bounds, could put patients’ desires for more convenience at their doctor’s office on a collision course with their expectations that their medical information be kept private.
 President Donald Trump walks from Marine One after arriving on the South Lawn of the White House, Tuesday, July 29, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

President Donald Trump walks from Marine One after arriving on the South Lawn of the White House, Tuesday, July 29, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

“There are enormous ethical and legal concerns,” said Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University law professor who specializes in public health. “Patients across America should be very worried that their medical records are going to be used in ways that harm them and their families.”

Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, who will be in charge of maintaining the system, have said patients will need to opt in for the sharing of their medical records and data, which will be kept secure.

Those officials said patients will benefit from a system that lets them quickly call up their own records without the hallmark difficulties, such as requiring the use of fax machines to share documents, that have prevented them from doing so in the past.

“We’re going to have remarkable advances in how consumers can use their own records,” Dr. Mehmet Oz, who leads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said during the White House event.

Popular weight loss and fitness subscription service Noom, which has signed onto the initiative, will be able to pull medical records after the system’s expected launch early next year.

That might include labs or medical tests that the app could use to develop an AI-driven analysis of what might help users lose weight, CEO Geoff Cook told The Associated Press. Apps and health systems will also have access to their competitors’ information, too. Noom would be able to access a person’s data from Apple Health, for example.

“Right now you have a lot of siloed data,” Cook said.

Patients who travel across the country for treatment at the Cleveland Clinic often have a hard time obtaining all their medical records from various providers, said the hospital system’s CEO, Dr. Tomislav Mihaljevic. He said the new system would eliminate that barrier, which sometimes delays treatment or prevents doctors from making an accurate diagnosis because they do not have a full view of a patient’s medical history.

Having seamless access to health app data, such as what patients are eating or how much they are exercising, will also help doctors manage obesity and other chronic diseases, Mihaljevic said.

“These apps give us insight about what’s happening with the patient’s health outside of the physician’s office,” he said.

CMS will also recommend a list of apps on Medicare.gov that are designed to help people manage chronic diseases, as well as help them select health care providers and insurance plans.

Digital privacy advocates are skeptical that patients will be able to count on their data being stored securely.

The federal government, however, has done little to regulate health apps or telehealth programs, said Jeffrey Chester at the Center for Digital Democracy.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and those within his circle have pushed for more technology in health care, advocating for wearable devices that monitor wellness and telehealth.

Kennedy also sought to collect more data from Americans’ medical records, which he has previously said he wants to use to study autism and vaccine safety. Kennedy has filled the agency with staffers who have a history of working at or running health technology startups and businesses.

CMS already has troves of information on more than 140 million Americans who enroll in Medicare and Medicaid. Earlier this month, the federal agency agreed to hand over its massive database, including home addresses, to deportation officials.

The new initiative would deepen the pool of information on patients for the federal government and tech companies. Medical records typically contain far more sensitive information, such as doctors’ notes about conversations with patients and substance abuse or mental health history.

“This scheme is an open door for the further use and monetization of sensitive and personal health information,” Chester said.

The Trump administration tried to launch a less ambitious electronic record program in 2018 that did not get finalized during his first term, but it did not have buy in from major tech companies at the time.