�������ýҕ�l

Right now, more than 100,000 Americans are waiting for organ transplants. Due to a lack of available kidneys, livers, hearts, and lungs, at least 17 of them die each day. Using 3D bioprinting to create new organs — and personalize them for recipients — could prevent these tragic deaths. Yet inaction at the Food and Drug Administration is impeding the rollout of this technology. (Dan Troy, 6/18)

As an amputee since the age of four, I am particularly attuned to how commonplace it is to hear ableist language describing everything from economies (a "crippling" shift in the markets), to emotional and mental states ("hobbled" by grief), none of which have much to do with the realities of losing a limb. Words—and how we use them—matter. (Emily Rapp Black, 6/17)

In the summers of the early 1950s, multitudes of American children were stuck in their home. Parents didn’t permit them to play together because, when the weather got warm, society entered a nightmare called polio. Children would eagerly begin their school breaks with a bicycle, scooter or kite and end them in crutches, braces or an iron lung. The disease poliomyelitis, or polio, had been in the medical textbooks for decades. In the summers of the early 20th century, however, this illness grew into an epidemic. The virus behind the disease could infect anyone, but in the U.S., it caused the worst damage among children under five years old, and polio was consequently called infantile paralysis. (Ainissa Ramirez, 6/17)

Last week’s controversial decision by the FDA to give aducanumab, Biogen’s Alzheimer’s drug, accelerated approval turned the spotlight on the role of FDA advisory committees. News reports highlighted how the committee that advised the FDA on this drug, of which I was a member, voted against approving it. Since the decision, three members of the committee have resigned from it, one of whom recently called for “a new organization to review drug approvals.” (Madhav Thambisetty, 6/17)

Once again, the Supreme Court has dismissed a challenge to the Affordable Care Act. The conservative-leaning court ruled Thursday that 18 Republican states (and several individuals) did not have the legal standing to overturn the law. With only Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissenting, supporters of President Barack Obama's health care policy celebrated another victory. (Julian Zelier, 6/17)

In rejecting yet another in a seemingly endless series of Republican attacks on the Affordable Care Act, a divided Supreme Court did more than just preserve a crucial protection for millions of Americans with preexisting health conditions that make them vulnerable to gouging or exclusion by insurers. It also preserved the notions that people have to be injured in order to sue and that Congress, not the courts, write the laws in this country. Writing for a 7-2 majority Thursday, Justice Stephen G. Breyer held that the two individuals and 18 Republican-controlled states behind the lawsuit hadn’t shown that a change Congress made in the Affordable Care Act in 2017 was responsible for the financial harm they claimed to have suffered. The court ordered the case dismissed. (6/17)

The Supreme Court’s rejection of the latest effort to dismantle the Affordable Care Act does not mark the end of lawsuits over the law’s constitutionality. The next big case has already been filed, and it involves a clash between an obscure constitutional provision and the law’s guarantee of zero-dollar coverage for preventive services. (Nicholas Bagley, 6/18)