82
Trump’s new CDC head said ‘abortion surveillance’ will be a critical focus (www.huffpost.com)
submitted 14 hours ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/health@lemmy.world
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

There is no evidence that states are purposefully misclassifying abortion data to the CDC.

Dr. Erica Schwartz, who on Wednesday became the new director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, made some alarming comments about abortion care during her confirmation hearings and signaled a potential increased surveillance of abortion patients.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) asked Schwartz if she would commit to collecting better data on abortions, pointing to the CDC’s annual report of how many abortions are done each year in the U.S. The data program is voluntary, meaning some states like California, Maryland and New Jersey choose to not report annual abortion numbers to the federal agency. However, 44 states currently have some form of required reporting system for abortion care.

“Abortion surveillance is absolutely a critical component of what the CDC is currently doing,” Schwartz responded.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] otter@lemmy.ca 5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Health research needs accurate data, and it's how we figure out which medications/procedures are better/worse/harmful. In normal circumstances, that research would protect the people involved

However, in some situations, that potential benefit isn't worth the potential harm from the data being abused. I can see why people would prefer to limit that data in the states, even if that is to the detriment of those seeking care

Based on the way the new CDC director responded, it sounds like she wants the data for harmful reasons, rather than helping improve care

[-] iThinkDifferentThanU@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Fuck that, pen and paper. Fuck ai, fuck ur data centers. Man I wasn't born with enough middle fuckin fingers

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 hours ago

The point was about whether medical data can be good, and people carefully explained the cases where it can be good and why its bad in this situation.

If you're saying that old fashioned research was helpful but the modern "AI" junk is stupid, then yes that is the exact point I was making.

Or we can just keep commenting "fuck this fuck that" at everything and bury our heads in the sand.

[-] Krusty@quokk.au 2 points 11 hours ago

You don't think

[-] iThinkDifferentThanU@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

More than you obviously

[-] Krusty@quokk.au 2 points 11 hours ago

So...

You don't think + more than me .. obvi. 🤣

this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2026
82 points (100.0% liked)

Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related

4450 readers
190 users here now

Health: physical and mental, individual and public.

Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.

See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.

Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.

Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.

Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.

Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
WhoRoger@lemmy.world
RoyalEngineering@lemmy.world
Awa@lemmy.world