By ALI SWENSON

WASHINGTON (AP) — In the whirlwind first year of President Donald Trump’s second term, some of the most polarizing changes have taken place within the Department of Health and Human Services, where Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has openly rebuffed the medical establishment as he converts the ideas of his Make America Healthy Again movement into public policy.

Related Articles

Foods with healthy-sounding buzzwords could be hiding added sugar in plain sight

As youth sports professionalize, kids are burning out fast

FDA panelists questioned antidepressants in pregnancy. But doctors call them a lifeline

Experts question Denmark’s vaccine program as a model for U.S.

How one father created an organ empire

Since entering office in February, the health secretary has overseen a dramatic reshaping of the agencies he oversees, including eliminating thousands of jobs and freezing or canceling billions of dollars for scientific research. As part of his campaign against chronic disease, he has redrawn the government’s position on topics such as seed oils, fluoride and Tylenol. He also has repeatedly used his authority to promote discredited ideas about vaccines.

The department’s rapid transformation has garnered praise from MAHA supporters who say they long viewed HHS as corrupt and untrustworthy and have been waiting for such a disruption. And both Democrats and Republicans have applauded some of the agency’s actions, including efforts to encourage healthy eating and exercise, and deals to lower the prices of costly drugs.

But many of the drastic changes Kennedy has led at the department are raising grave concerns among doctors and public health experts.

“At least in the immediate or intermediate future, the United States is going to be hobbled and hollowed out in its scientific leadership,” said Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University public health law professor who was removed from a National Institutes of Health advisory board earlier this year with a letter that said he was no longer needed. “I think it will be extraordinarily difficult to reverse all the damage.”

HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon denied any threat to scientific expertise at the agency and lauded its work.

“In 2025, the Department confronted long-standing public health challenges with transparency, courage, and gold-standard science,” Nixon said in a statement. “HHS will carry this momentum into 2026 to strengthen accountability, put patients first, and protect public health.”

The overhaul comes alongside broader uncertainties in the nation’s health system, including Medicaid cuts passed by Congress this year and expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies that are putting millions of Americans’ insurance coverage in jeopardy.

Here’s a closer look at Kennedy’s first year leading the nation’s health agency:

FILE – President Donald Trump listens as Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Oct. 16, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Kennedy’s vaccine views ripple across the department

After many years spent publicly assailing vaccines, Kennedy sought during his confirmation process to reassure senators he wouldn’t take a wrecking ball to vaccine science. But less than a year later, his health department has repeatedly pushed the limits of those commitments.

In May, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women — a move immediately questioned by public health experts who saw no new data to justify the change.

In June, Kennedy fired an entire 17-member CDC vaccine advisory committee — later installing several of his own replacements, including multiple vaccine skeptics.

That group has made decisions that have shocked medical professionals, including declining to recommend COVID-19 shots for anyone, adding new restrictions on a combination shot against chickenpox, measles, mumps and rubella and reversing the longstanding recommendation that all babies receive a hepatitis B shot at birth.

Kennedy in November also personally directed the CDC to abandon its position that vaccines do not cause autism, without supplying any new evidence to support the change. While he left the old language on the website to keep a promise he made to Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, he added a disclaimer saying it remained because of the agreement.

Public health researchers and advocates strongly refute the updated website and note that scientists have thoroughly explored the issue in rigorous research spanning decades, all pointing to the same conclusion that vaccines don’t cause autism.

Kennedy has promised a wide-ranging effort to study environmental factors that potentially contribute to autism and in an Oval Office event with Trump in September promoted unproven and in some cases discredited ties between Tylenol, vaccines and the complex brain disorder.

FILE – The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services building is seen, April 5, 2009, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Kennedy reconfigures HHS with massive staffing and research cuts

Within two months of taking office, Kennedy announced a sweeping restructuring of HHS that would shut down entire agencies, consolidate others into a new one focused on chronic disease and lay off some 10,000 employees on top of 10,000 others who had already taken buyouts.

While parts of the effort are still tied up in court, thousands of the mass layoffs were allowed to stand. Those and voluntary departures significantly thinned out the sprawling $1.7 trillion department, which oversees food and hospital inspections, health insurance for roughly half of the country and vaccine recommendations.

Kennedy also has fired or forced out several leaders at HHS, among them four directors at the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration’s former vaccine chief and a director of the CDC whom he had hired less than a month earlier.

On top of staffing cuts, he has overseen significant cuts to scientific research. That includes NIH slashing billions of dollars in research projects and the termination of $500 million in contracts to develop vaccines using mRNA technology.

Amid the cuts, Kennedy has proposed or funded some new research on topics related to his MAHA goals, including autism, Lyme disease and food additives.

MAHA gains momentum, despite some stumbles

Kennedy started using the phrase “MAHA” on the campaign trail last year to describe his crusade against toxic exposures and childhood chronic disease, but 2025 was the year it became ingrained in the national lexicon.

In his tenure so far, the health secretary has made it the centerpiece of his work, using the MAHA branding to wage war on ultra-processed foods, pressure companies to phase out artificial food dyes, criticize fluoride in drinking water and push to ban junk food from the program that subsidizes grocery store runs for low-income Americans.

The idea has even spread beyond Kennedy’s agency across the federal government.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has appeared with Kennedy to promote fitness with pull-up displays. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy teamed up with Kennedy in early December to announce $1 billion in funding for airports to install resources like playgrounds and nursing pods for mothers and babies. And Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lee Zeldin recently announced he is working toward unveiling a MAHA agenda with health-related goals for his own department.

MAHA has earned widespread popularity among the American public — even as it has endured some administration foibles. In May, for example, HHS faced scrutiny for releasing a MAHA report that contained several citations to studies that didn’t exist.

But to the extent that the initiative has included calls to action that aren’t based on science — such as urging distrust in vaccines or promoting raw milk, which is far more likely than pasteurized milk to lead to illness — critics say it can be dangerous.

By KIKI SIDERIS

Here’s some good news as the holidays wrap up: Many New Year’s resolutions people already make — eating healthier, saving money, getting organized — double as climate-friendly habits.

Related Articles

‘Trump’s EPA’ in 2025: A fossil fuel-friendly approach to deregulation

2025 was one of three hottest years on record, scientists say

How bomb cyclones form and create dangerous conditions

A power outage can turn dangerous fast. Here’s how to prepare

It’s been 25 years since America decided to save the Everglades. Where do we stand?

Whether you want to spend less, declutter or eat right, here are a few choices that could make a difference for you and the climate. Bonus: They’re all low-effort and low-cost.

Saving money on bills

If you want to save money, start at home. Electronics and appliances can continue drawing power even when they’re turned off. You can cut phantom energy use by unplugging items you’re not using, such as chargers and entertainment systems or using a power strip with an on-off switch.

Adjusting your thermostat a few degrees when you’re not home can also reduce energy use and save money. The U.S. Department of Energy says that adjusting your thermostat by 7-10 degrees Fahrenheit (4-6 degrees Celsius) for eight hours a day can save up to 10% a year on heating and cooling.

Another simple tip: Washing your clothes on the cold setting and air-drying them when possible can help lower energy use and utility costs. Heating water is the biggest energy draw in laundry, and clothes dryers are among the most energy-intensive household appliances, said Matthew Gonzales, the vice chairman of the National Hispanic Energy Council, which advocates for affordable energy for communities of color. This can also reduce wear and tear on clothing.

Gonzales said other simple swaps include switching to LED bulbs, sealing drafty windows and replacing dirty air filters so heating and cooling systems run more efficiently. He also suggested using natural light during the day, opening or closing curtains and windows strategically to manage heat and turning off the lights when you don’t need them.

Savings vary widely depending on where someone lives, how old their home is and local energy prices. But he said households in high-cost states can see meaningful savings from small changes over time.

“Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough,” Gonzales said.

Eating healthier and wasting less

Cutting down food waste can also benefit your wallet, your diet and the environment.

Food waste costs U.S. consumers $728 every year, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, and generates the annual planet-warming greenhouse gases equivalent to 42 coal-fired power plants.

One place to start is by using what you already have in your pantry before hitting the grocery store, said cookbook author Anne-Marie Bonneau.

“If you have fat and an onion and a couple of random vegetables — or even one random vegetable or some leftover cooked proteins or grains — you’ve got soup in the making,” Bonneau said. “If you’ve cleared out so much food that you don’t even have an onion and fat, it’s probably time to go shopping.”

She also recommends preserving food before it spoils, including fermenting vegetables, which, she says, is easier than it seems. For example, you can make sauerkraut with just cabbage, salt and a glass jar. You can also make sauces from seasonal vegetables like tomatoes and freeze them for use later in the year.

Using a multicooker to make things like apple sauce, yogurt, stews and beans can also help with meal prep while reducing energy use.

As a general rule, Bonneau added, eating fewer ultra-processed foods — such as sugary cereals, hot dogs, chicken nuggets and TV dinners — can benefit both your health and the environment. Those foods are often heavily packaged in plastic, which can shed into food and contribute to pollution.

“You’ll improve your diet, you’ll reduce your waste and your food will come in less contact with plastic,” she said.

Decluttering and buying less

Getting organized doesn’t have to mean buying storage bins or throwing things out. Often, it starts with using what you already have.

Spending even an hour organizing your space, spotting duplicates and rediscovering forgotten items can reduce impulse spending by helping people understand what they actually use, said Katrina Caspelich, communications director for Remake, an advocacy group for human rights and climate justice in fashion.

She said a “one-in, one-out” rule — where you can only buy a new thing if it replaces an old thing — can be effective because it keeps wardrobes from growing and helps prevent clutter by encouraging more intentional purchases.

Unsubscribing from brand emails and sale alerts can also help. “Most impulse purchases start with a notification, not a need,” Caspelich said, adding that waiting 24 hours before buying something new often turns a “must-have” into a pass.

For a more structured reset, you might try a no-buy challenge, pausing new purchases for 30 or 90 days while re-wearing, repairing, swapping with friends, or, if you can’t commit to buying nothing, shopping secondhand instead of new. “The key is flexibility,” she said. “Framing it as an experiment rather than a strict rule makes it feel empowering instead of restrictive.”

Remake estimates that someone who takes part in a 90-day no new clothes challenge can save about 3,900 liters (1,030 gallons) of water, avoid roughly 300 kilograms (about 661 pounds) of carbon dioxide emissions, and keep around 9 kilograms (about 20 pounds) of clothing waste out of landfills while saving an average of nearly $300 by pausing new purchases.

Zoom out and the scale becomes clearer: Americans generated about 17 million tons of textile waste in 2018, most of it clothing, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

For anyone overwhelmed by the advice, the takeaway is simple: You don’t have to do everything, and you don’t have to do it perfectly. Starting with one habit you’ll actually keep can make a difference for your budget, your routine and the climate.

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Three members of the Minnesota Wild are all but locks to be in Italy in February chasing an Olympic gold medal as part of Team Sweden. Nearly every roster projection includes Joel Eriksson Ek at forward, Jonas Brodin on defense and Filip Gustavsson in goal.

But another Wild player might have have Team Sweden coach Sam Hallam thinking about a roster addition.

On Monday night in Vegas, Wild forward Marcus Johansson scored his 12th goal of the season just 26 seconds into the game, and followed it up with the trio of assists in Minnesota’s walk-away 5-2 win. The dozen goals are more than Johansson, 35, notched in either of his two previous full seasons, and the 2025-26 campaign will not be half done until the conclusion of Wednesday’s game in San Jose.

“I think he’s really playing with a lot of confidence. I think his skating has been great,” Wild coach John Hynes said after Johansson posted a four-point game for the second time in his career. “His two-way game has been really solid, and I think he’s certainly deserving of the production that he’s getting.”

For players not headed to Milan for the 2026 Winter Olympics, the three-week break from the NHL schedule will be a time to relax and recover. But as he plays some of his best hockey, Johansson made it clear he would welcome the opportunity to play for his country instead of visiting a beach somewhere.

As of Monday night, he had not been contacted by anyone from Team Sweden.

“I would love to. Hopefully I’ve shown enough. We’ll see,” he said to reporters in the postgame scrum in Vegas. “It’s an honor to play for your country. Like I said, I’ve done … what I can to earn a spot. We’ll see.”

Putting on the blue and gold has been an important part of Johansson’s career, starting in 2007 and 2008 when he skated for Sweden in the World Juniors. He also donned the three crowns in the 2014 Winter Olympics, and most recently last spring when he posted eight points in nine games for the Swedes in the 2025 IIHF World Championship.

Hynes, who has coached Team USA at the international level many times, said in Johansson this season he has seen an on-ice resume that deserves a second look from his countrymen.

“Obviously I’m not the decision-maker, but I think the way that he’s played to date, and (because) he’s played on other Sweden national teams,” Hynes said. “He’s gone to the World Championships numerous times. He’s played in the Olympics, and he’s playing some of his best hockey. Good for him. I’m hoping he certainly makes it.”

Team Sweden opens Olympic play Feb. 11 versus host Italy.

Related Articles

Wild hit the jackpot in Vegas blowout

Coach John Hynes juggles lines ahead of Wild’s first Vegas visit

World Juniors: Bob Motzko says world-wide talent, depth are eye-opening

Jesper Wallstedt is Wild’s man who doesn’t know too much

Late heroics lift Wild past Jets in overtime

By KEN SWEET, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — The White House cannot lapse in its funding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a federal district court judge ruled on Tuesday, only days before funds at the bureau would have likely run out and the consumer finance agency would have no money to pay its employees.

Related Articles

After quiet off-year elections, Democrats renew worries about Trump interfering in the midterms

Without pennies, should retailers round up or down? States offer their 2 cents

New 2026 laws are among the first of their kind to tackle climate change, drunken driving

Iran’s president says answer to attack would be harsh in apparent response to Trump warning

National Guard to patrol New Orleans for New Year’s a year after deadly attack

Judge Amy Berman ruled that the CFPB can continue to get its funds from the Federal Reserve, despite the Fed operating at a loss, and that the White House’s new legal argument about how the CFPB gets its funds is not valid.

At the heart of this case is whether Russell Vought, President Donald Trump’s budget director and the acting director of the CFPB, can effectively shut down the agency and lay off all of the bureau’s employees. The CFPB has largely been inoperable since President Trump has sworn into office nearly a year ago. Its employees are mostly forbidden from doing any work, and most of the bureau’s operations this year has been to unwind the work it did under President Biden and even under Trump’s first term.

Vought himself has made comments where he has made it clear that his intention is to effectively shut down the CFPB.

The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents the workers at the CFPB, has been mostly successful in court to stop the mass layoffs. The union sued Vought earlier this year and won a preliminary injunction stopping the layoffs.

In recent weeks, the White House has used a new line of argument to potentially get around the court’s restraining order. The argument is that the Federal Reserve has no “combined earnings” at the moment to fund the CFPB’s operations. The CFPB gets its funding from the Fed through expected quarterly payments.

The Federal Reserve has been operating at a paper loss since 2022 as a result of the central bank trying to combat inflation. The Fed holds bonds on its balance sheet from a period of low interest rates during the COVID-19 pandemic, but currently has to pay out higher interest rates to banks who hold their deposits at the central bank. The Fed has been recording a “deferred asset” on its balance sheet which it expects will be paid down in the next few years as the low interest bonds mature off the Fed’s balance sheet.

Because of this loss on paper, the White House has argued there are no “combined earnings” for the CFPB to draw on. The CFPB has operated since 2011, including under President Trump’s first term, drawing on the Fed’s operating budget.

White House lawyers sent a notice to the court in early November, where they argued that the CFPB would run out of appropriations in early 2026, using the “combined earnings” argument, and does not expect to get any additional appropriations from Congress.

This combined earnings legal argument is not entirely new. It has floated in conservative legal circles going back to the moment the Federal Reserve started operating at a loss. However, it has never been tested in court.

“It appears that defendants’ new understanding of “combined earnings” is an unsupported and transparent attempt to starve the CPFB of funding and yet another attempt to achieve the very end the Court’s injunction was put in place to prevent,” Berman wrote in an opinion.

A White House spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Berman’s opinion.