�������ýҕ�l

As former U.S. surgeons general appointed by every Republican and Democratic president since George H.W. Bush, we have collectively spent decades in service as the Nation’s Doctor. We took two sacred oaths in our lifetimes: first, as physicians who swore to care for our patients and, second, as public servants who committed to protecting the health of all Americans. (Jerome Adams, Richard Carmona, Joycelyn Elders, Vivek Murthy, Antonia Novello, and David Satcher, 10/7)

There couldn’t be a more pressing or galvanizing topic for Americans than the high cost of prescription drugs. And after months of blustery talk from President Donald Trump about lowering prices and cracking down on Big Pharma, his plans are finally starting to take shape, beginning with pacts with manufacturers. But before we get too excited, consumers should demand more transparency about what they’re getting from his dealmaking — and ask who is truly benefiting from the sum of his health care actions. (Lisa Jarvis, 10/7)

Over the past six months, numerous pharmaceutical companies have announced plans to invest in new U.S. manufacturing facilities within the next decade. This so-called “onshoring,” motivated by the Trump administration’s announcement of sector-specific tariffs, seems to make sense on the surface: strengthen domestic manufacturing capabilities and mitigate potential risks of supply disruption. (Gillian Woollett, 10/6)

One of health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s refrains has been that doctors don’t learn enough about nutrition in medical school. In a recent op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, he called for “rigorous, measurable nutrition education at every stage of medical training.” Contrary to what Kennedy might have you believe, medical schools do teach students about nutrition. (Tiffany Onyejiaka, 10/7)

When I go to the doctor, I expect to be offered treatment options that are most likely to help. You might imagine we all do. But that is changing. Last month, the Trump administration announced a ban on coverage of gender-affirming care for millions of federal employees, which takes effect in 2026. This move follows months of abrupt, politically motivated terminations of research studies that have gutted the science that informs our health care. (Heidi Moseson, 10/6)