Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

How Might Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Influence the White House?

News Feed
Monday, November 11, 2024

Key Takeaways:Kennedy’s potential role in the Trump administration isn’t solidified, but he said Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies, including the CDC and the FDA.  Kennedy has a long history of spreading discredited theories on vaccines. The controversial figure, who has a history of spreading discredited theories on vaccines, suspended his own independent and at times bizarre campaign for the White House in August and endorsed Trump.Trump thanked him for the endorsement and even gave Kennedy a shoutout in his victory speech on Nov. 6.“I just want to say that on behalf of this great group of people – these are hardworking people, these are fantastic people. And we can add a few names, like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He came out, and he's going to help make America healthy again,” Trump said. “And now he's a great guy and he really means it. He wants to do some things, and we're going to let him go to it.”Photos: Trump’s Victory NightWhile his potential new role isn’t solidified, Kennedy said that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and more. Kennedy has said that “entire departments” within the FDA “have to go.” It’s unclear exactly what authority Trump would grant Kennedy and whether his plans will face any obstacles in Congress or during the rule-making process.Kennedy outlined his goals for the FDA in October: “FDA’s war on public health is about to end. This includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything else that advances human health and can't be patented by Pharma. If you work for the FDA and are part of this corrupt system, I have two messages for you: 1. Preserve your records, and 2. Pack your bags.”The only thing that will be off limits to Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, according to Trump: oil and gas.“Bobby, stay away from the liquid gold,” Trump said during his victory speech. “Other than that, go have a good time, Bobby.”Here are some of Kennedy’s stances on certain health policies that he could have influence over during the Trump administration:VaccinesAside from his family’s name, Kennedy is perhaps best known for his stance on vaccines, a topic on which many health experts have criticized him for raising uncertainty over the public’s safety.In a recent interview with CNN after the election, Kennedy denied claims that he opposes vaccines, adding that he wanted to make sure people had the information they needed to make their own choices about whether to take them.“I’m not going to take away anyone’s vaccines. I’ve never been anti-vaccine,” Kennedy said. “I’m going to make sure the science and the safety studies and efficacies are out there and people can make individual assessments about whether that product is going to be good for them.”But Kennedy’s past comments and record on vaccines offer a much different picture than the one he is now attempting to portray.In a July 2023 interview with Fox News, Kennedy said he believed vaccines were linked to autism in children, a long-disproven myth that was based on the findings of a 1998 Lancet study authored by disgraced former physician and anti-vaccine activist Andrew Wakefield. The British doctor’s study claimed the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine caused autism, findings that subsequent reviews found to be fraudulent and led to Wakefield eventually losing his license to practice medicine in the U.K.Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director for the American Public Health Association, says Kennedy could try to undermine confidence in vaccines in any number of ways from within a Trump administration, such as attempting to appoint people that have anti-vaccine views to key vaccine advisory panels like the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.Whatever influence Kennedy has on health policy, Benjamin says it is his use of the bully pulpit to spread his views that could ultimately have the greatest impact on eroding public trust in taking vaccines – and the agencies tasked with their oversight.“He has historically given bad information around vaccines in terms of misinformation,” Benjamin says. “I think his credibility around vaccines is shot. So even if he’s out there championing a vaccine because he thinks it’s important, who’s going to believe him?”FluorideKennedy has called for the removal of fluoride from the nation’s water supply, alleging its consumption is associated with an array of health risks, including cognitive issues and cancer.“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S., water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote in a Nov. 2 social media post. “Fluoride is an industrial waste associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, IQ loss, neurodevelopmental disorders, and thyroid disease.”Fluoride, a mineral experts say helps strengthen teeth, was first added to the water supply in some parts of the U.S. in the mid-1940s and has been recommended to be included in public water supplies since 1962.While drinking water that contain high levels of fluoride has been associated with pain and stiffness to joints, “no strong link” has been found in population studies or reviews by national and global health agencies, including the World Health Organization and the National Research Council linking fluoridated drinking water to increased risk of developing cancer.A 2023 report from the National Toxicology Program concluded “with moderate confidence” that lower IQ in children could be linked with consuming drinking water containing fluoride at levels of more than 1.5 milligrams per liter, which is twice the recommended level for drinking water in U.S. community water supplies.“One of the things some of these individuals like Mr. Kennedy believe is that there are other ways to deliver fluoride (like toothpaste) that are topical and more focused and, therefore, in his mind have a lower risk profile,” Benjamin says. “But communities that have fluoridated water have better dental outcomes than communities that don’t.”The federal government does not require public drinking water to contain fluoride, and the decision to do so is left up to state and local governments.Still, Kennedy could move to ban fluoride in public drinking water – a process Benjamin says could take years to complete.“He could come in on Day One and try to initiate such a process,” Benjamin says. “But it is a long, torturous process that’s not going to happen quickly.”Chronic DiseaseA key priority touted within Trump’s “Make American Healthy Again” campaign policy was a focus on reducing the rate of chronic illness in the U.S., a situation Kennedy has accused the U.S. medical system of turning into a money-making venture at the expense of health.“We have a medical cartel, which our regulatory agencies, the pharmaceutical companies, doctors and hospitals – which are all owned by hedge funds – are now making a killing on chronic disease,” said Kennedy in comments posted to his YouTube channel earlier this year. “And the sicker we get, the richer they get.”Big FoodPart of Trump’s plan would call for addressing the “root causes” of chronic disease by focusing on issues such as improving diet and “environment toxins,” conditions that Kennedy has suggested in the past were fueling chronic disease.Kennedy has embraced what he calls “clean” foods in his pursuit of holistic health. He has proposed stopping beneficiaries of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program from using that assistance to buy sugar-sweetened beverages or processed foods in an effort to reduce obesity levels.Several cities have implemented excise taxes on sugary beverages to discourage consumption, which evidence has shown to be linked to lower body mass index rates among youth living in those communities.Kennedy has been critical of herbicides like Roundup and large commercial farms that dominate the agriculture industry. He asked Trump to “revisit” pesticide and other chemical-use standards and to reform crop subsidies because they “make corn, soybeans and wheat artificially cheap, so those crops end up in many processed forms.”Big PharmaDuring Kennedy’s campaign for the presidency, he promised to “end” the “corruption” of pharmaceutical companies and criticized the Biden administration for COVID-19 vaccine mandates that he said made money for Pfizer.“How much did your mandates give to all the vaccine companies? You may have capped a few prices, that’s great, but have you ended the corruption in pharma? I don't think so,” Kennedy posted of the Biden administration on social media. “But I will end it.”He said he wants to advance human health through strategies that “can't be patented by Pharma.” His list includes ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, two drugs that gained attention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Neither has been approved by the FDA to treat COVID-19 and data doesn’t demonstrate that they are effective against the coronavirus.

Kennedy has said he wants to end the FDA’s ‘war on public health’ and has said Trump wants him to ‘reorganize’ entire agencies. Here’s a look at his stances on public health.

Key Takeaways:

  • Kennedy’s potential role in the Trump administration isn’t solidified, but he said Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies, including the CDC and the FDA. 
  • Kennedy has a long history of spreading discredited theories on vaccines.

The controversial figure, who has a history of spreading discredited theories on vaccines, suspended his own independent and at times bizarre campaign for the White House in August and endorsed Trump.

Trump thanked him for the endorsement and even gave Kennedy a shoutout in his victory speech on Nov. 6.

“I just want to say that on behalf of this great group of people – these are hardworking people, these are fantastic people. And we can add a few names, like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He came out, and he's going to help make America healthy again,” Trump said. “And now he's a great guy and he really means it. He wants to do some things, and we're going to let him go to it.”

Photos: Trump’s Victory Night

While his potential new role isn’t solidified, Kennedy said that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and more. Kennedy has said that “entire departments” within the FDA “have to go.” It’s unclear exactly what authority Trump would grant Kennedy and whether his plans will face any obstacles in Congress or during the rule-making process.

Kennedy outlined his goals for the FDA in October: “FDA’s war on public health is about to end. This includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything else that advances human health and can't be patented by Pharma. If you work for the FDA and are part of this corrupt system, I have two messages for you: 1. Preserve your records, and 2. Pack your bags.”

The only thing that will be off limits to Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, according to Trump: oil and gas.

“Bobby, stay away from the liquid gold,” Trump said during his victory speech. “Other than that, go have a good time, Bobby.”

Here are some of Kennedy’s stances on certain health policies that he could have influence over during the Trump administration:

Vaccines

Aside from his family’s name, Kennedy is perhaps best known for his stance on vaccines, a topic on which many health experts have criticized him for raising uncertainty over the public’s safety.

In a recent interview with CNN after the election, Kennedy denied claims that he opposes vaccines, adding that he wanted to make sure people had the information they needed to make their own choices about whether to take them.

“I’m not going to take away anyone’s vaccines. I’ve never been anti-vaccine,” Kennedy said. “I’m going to make sure the science and the safety studies and efficacies are out there and people can make individual assessments about whether that product is going to be good for them.”

But Kennedy’s past comments and record on vaccines offer a much different picture than the one he is now attempting to portray.

In a July 2023 interview with Fox News, Kennedy said he believed vaccines were linked to autism in children, a long-disproven myth that was based on the findings of a 1998 Lancet study authored by disgraced former physician and anti-vaccine activist Andrew Wakefield. The British doctor’s study claimed the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine caused autism, findings that subsequent reviews found to be fraudulent and led to Wakefield eventually losing his license to practice medicine in the U.K.

Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director for the American Public Health Association, says Kennedy could try to undermine confidence in vaccines in any number of ways from within a Trump administration, such as attempting to appoint people that have anti-vaccine views to key vaccine advisory panels like the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

Whatever influence Kennedy has on health policy, Benjamin says it is his use of the bully pulpit to spread his views that could ultimately have the greatest impact on eroding public trust in taking vaccines – and the agencies tasked with their oversight.

“He has historically given bad information around vaccines in terms of misinformation,” Benjamin says. “I think his credibility around vaccines is shot. So even if he’s out there championing a vaccine because he thinks it’s important, who’s going to believe him?”

Fluoride

Kennedy has called for the removal of fluoride from the nation’s water supply, alleging its consumption is associated with an array of health risks, including cognitive issues and cancer.

“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S., water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote in a Nov. 2 social media post. “Fluoride is an industrial waste associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, IQ loss, neurodevelopmental disorders, and thyroid disease.”

Fluoride, a mineral experts say helps strengthen teeth, was first added to the water supply in some parts of the U.S. in the mid-1940s and has been recommended to be included in public water supplies since 1962.

While drinking water that contain high levels of fluoride has been associated with pain and stiffness to joints, “no strong link” has been found in population studies or reviews by national and global health agencies, including the World Health Organization and the National Research Council linking fluoridated drinking water to increased risk of developing cancer.

A 2023 report from the National Toxicology Program concluded “with moderate confidence” that lower IQ in children could be linked with consuming drinking water containing fluoride at levels of more than 1.5 milligrams per liter, which is twice the recommended level for drinking water in U.S. community water supplies.

“One of the things some of these individuals like Mr. Kennedy believe is that there are other ways to deliver fluoride (like toothpaste) that are topical and more focused and, therefore, in his mind have a lower risk profile,” Benjamin says. “But communities that have fluoridated water have better dental outcomes than communities that don’t.”

The federal government does not require public drinking water to contain fluoride, and the decision to do so is left up to state and local governments.

Still, Kennedy could move to ban fluoride in public drinking water – a process Benjamin says could take years to complete.

“He could come in on Day One and try to initiate such a process,” Benjamin says. “But it is a long, torturous process that’s not going to happen quickly.”

Chronic Disease

A key priority touted within Trump’s “Make American Healthy Again” campaign policy was a focus on reducing the rate of chronic illness in the U.S., a situation Kennedy has accused the U.S. medical system of turning into a money-making venture at the expense of health.

“We have a medical cartel, which our regulatory agencies, the pharmaceutical companies, doctors and hospitals – which are all owned by hedge funds – are now making a killing on chronic disease,” said Kennedy in comments posted to his YouTube channel earlier this year. “And the sicker we get, the richer they get.”

Big Food

Part of Trump’s plan would call for addressing the “root causes” of chronic disease by focusing on issues such as improving diet and “environment toxins,” conditions that Kennedy has suggested in the past were fueling chronic disease.

Kennedy has embraced what he calls “clean” foods in his pursuit of holistic health. He has proposed stopping beneficiaries of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program from using that assistance to buy sugar-sweetened beverages or processed foods in an effort to reduce obesity levels.

Several cities have implemented excise taxes on sugary beverages to discourage consumption, which evidence has shown to be linked to lower body mass index rates among youth living in those communities.

Kennedy has been critical of herbicides like Roundup and large commercial farms that dominate the agriculture industry. He asked Trump to “revisit” pesticide and other chemical-use standards and to reform crop subsidies because they “make corn, soybeans and wheat artificially cheap, so those crops end up in many processed forms.”

Big Pharma

During Kennedy’s campaign for the presidency, he promised to “end” the “corruption” of pharmaceutical companies and criticized the Biden administration for COVID-19 vaccine mandates that he said made money for Pfizer.

“How much did your mandates give to all the vaccine companies? You may have capped a few prices, that’s great, but have you ended the corruption in pharma? I don't think so,” Kennedy posted of the Biden administration on social media. “But I will end it.”

He said he wants to advance human health through strategies that “can't be patented by Pharma.” His list includes ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, two drugs that gained attention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Neither has been approved by the FDA to treat COVID-19 and data doesn’t demonstrate that they are effective against the coronavirus.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Why the health risks from air pollution could be worse than we thought

A new study found elevated and previously overlooked health risks for communities living near industrial polluters.

Many people who live near heavy industry are routinely exposed to dozens of different pollutants, which can result in a multitude of health problems.Traditionally, environmental regulators have assessed the risks of chemical exposure on an individual basis. But that approach has led to underestimates of the total health risks faced by vulnerable populations, according to a new study.Now researchers at Johns Hopkins University have developed a new method for measuring the cumulative effects on human health of multiple toxic air pollutants. Their findings were published last week in Environmental Health Perspectives.Regulators typically measure community risk by looking at the primary health effects of individual chemicals, an approach that often fails to address their combined risks, said Keeve Nachman, the study’s senior author.Residents in disadvantaged communities are exposed to a toxic stew of chemicals daily, and they “don’t just breathe one at a time, [they] breathe all the chemicals in the air at once,” said Peter DeCarlo, another of the study’s authors.Follow Climate & environment“Very little has happened to protect these people. And one of the major reasons for that is that current approaches have not done a good job showing they’re in harm’s way,” Nachman said.“When we regulate chemicals, we pretend that we’re only exposed to one chemical at a time,” Nachman continued. “If we have each chemical and we only think about the most sensitive effect, but we ignore the fact that it could potentially cause all these other effects to different parts of the body, we are missing protecting people from the collective mixture of chemicals that act together.”Nachman, DeCarlo and their colleagues set out to more accurately account for the total burden of breathing multiple toxic air pollutants.The study assessed the risks faced by communities in southeastern Pennsylvania living near petrochemical facilities using a mobile laboratory to measure 32 hazardous air pollutants, including vinyl chloride, formaldehyde and benzene. The researchers developed real-time profiles of the pollution concentrations in the air and translated them into estimates of what people are actually breathing.Using these estimates and a database of the chemicals’ toxic effects on various organs, the researchers created projections of the long-term cumulative health impacts of the pollution.By looking past the immediate health effects of chemicals and measuring what happens as concentrations increase, negative health outcomes can be detected in other parts of the body, Nachman said.For example, while EPA risk assessments consider only the respiratory effects of formaldehyde, the study found potential health impacts in 10 other organ systems, including neurological, developmental and reproductive harms.The cumulative risk study appears at a fraught moment for environmental regulation. Although the Biden administration in November released a draft framework for monitoring the cumulative impact of chemical exposure, the Trump administration has announced plans to roll back dozens of Biden administration environmental rules and is considering shutting down the EPA’s Office of Research and Development.A spokesperson for the American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, said in an email that the Johns Hopkins research “may provide some useful information” but that “further assessment, replication and validation will be needed” of the methods and substances assessed in the study.“ACC continues to support the development of scientifically robust data, methods and approaches to underpin cumulative risk assessments,” the spokesperson added.The EPA did not provide an immediate comment while it reviewed the study.Jen Duggan, the executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, said communities often face higher health impacts than the EPA estimates due to their exposure to dangerous chemicals from multiple sources.“The authors of this paper powerfully demonstrate how EPA has repeatedly underestimated the true health risks for people living in the shadow of industrial polluters,” Duggan said.

Utah Bans Fluoride In Public Drinking Water

Republican Gov. Spencer Cox signed the legislation despite widespread opposition from dentists and national health organizations.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Utah has become the first state to ban fluoride in public drinking water, despite widespread opposition from dentists and national health organizations.Republican Gov. Spencer Cox signed legislation late Thursday that bars cities and communities from deciding whether to add the mineral to their water systems.Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Utah lawmakers who pushed for a ban said putting fluoride in water was too expensive. Cox, who grew up and raised his own children in a community without fluoridated water, compared it recently to being “medicated” by the government.The ban comes weeks after U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has expressed skepticism about water fluoridation, was sworn into office.More than 200 million people in the U.S., or almost two-thirds of the population, receive fluoridated water through community water. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.But some cities across the country have gotten rid of fluoride from their water, and other municipalities are considering doing the same. A few months ago, a federal judge ordered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate fluoride in drinking water because high levels could pose a risk to the intellectual development of children.We Don't Work For Billionaires. We Work For You.Big money interests are running the government — and influencing the news you read. While other outlets are retreating behind paywalls and bending the knee to political pressure, HuffPost is proud to be unbought and unfiltered. Will you help us keep it that way? You can even access our stories ad-free.You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again. We won't back down from our mission of providing free, fair news during this critical moment. But we can't do it without you.For the first time, we're offering an ad-free experience to qualifying contributors who support our fearless journalism. We hope you'll join us.You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again. We won't back down from our mission of providing free, fair news during this critical moment. But we can't do it without you.For the first time, we're offering an ad-free experience to qualifying contributors who support our fearless journalism. We hope you'll join us.Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.The president of the American Dental Association, Brett Kessler, has said the amounts of fluoride added to drinking water are below levels considered problematic.Opponents warn the ban will disproportionately affect low-income residents who may rely on public drinking water having fluoride as their only source of preventative dental care. Low-income families may not be able to afford regular dentist visits or the fluoride tablets some people buy as a supplement in cities without fluoridation.The sponsor of the Utah legislation, Republican Rep. Stephanie Gricius, acknowledged fluoride has benefits, but said it was an issue of “individual choice” to not have it in the water.

Dozens of House Democrats push back on planned EPA research and development cuts

Dozens of House Democrats pushed back on planned Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cuts in a Thursday letter to the agency. “We are particularly concerned by the proposal to eliminate up to 75 percent of employees within EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD),” the letter, from Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) and addressed to EPA Administrator...

Dozens of House Democrats pushed back on planned Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cuts in a Thursday letter to the agency. “We are particularly concerned by the proposal to eliminate up to 75 percent of employees within EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD),” the letter, from Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) and addressed to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, reads. “Firing nearly 1,200 dedicated ORD public servants across the country would decimate the scientific backbone of EPA which provides independent, objective, and unparallelled research that informs Agency assessments and decision-making,” they added. The letter featured the signatures of over 60 House Democrats including Reps. Nikema Williams (Ga.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Don Beyer (Va.), Joe Neguse (Colo.), Jamie Raskin (Md.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.). The Hill reported last week that the EPA was considering the cutting of its science arm and dropping most of the employees of the branch, per documents reviewed by Democratic staff for the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. The termination of the Office of Research and Development as an EPA National Program Office is called for in a plan reviewed by committee staffers. Fifty percent to 70 percent of the 1,540 staffers in the office would be cut under the plan. “While no decisions have been made yet, we are actively listening to employees at all levels to gather ideas on how to better fulfill agency statutory obligations, increase efficiency, and ensure the EPA is as up-to-date and effective as ever,” EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou said in a previous statement. In his letter, Landsman said dropping “the majority of ORD employees would be particularly harmful to EPA’s work to address industrial pollution, contaminated air and drinking water, environmental health, and worsening natural disasters.” The Ohio Democrat also questioned the EPA about the reasoning behind the staff cuts in the plan and the way the agency is prepping “to mitigate the loss of scientific expertise, institutional knowledge, and subject matter capacity resulting from this proposed action.” The Hill has reached out to the EPA for comment.

When a 1-in-100 year flood washed through the Coorong, it made the vital microbiome of this lagoon healthier

The 2022 floods triggered shifts in the Coorong’s microbiome—similar to our gut bacteria on new diets—revealing why freshwater flows are vital to wetland health.

Darcy Whittaker, CC BYYou might know South Australia’s iconic Coorong from the famous Australian children’s book, Storm Boy, set around this coastal lagoon. This internationally important wetland is sacred to the Ngarrindjeri people and a haven for migratory birds. The lagoon is the final stop for the Murray River’s waters before they reach the sea. Tens of thousands of migratory waterbirds visit annually. Pelicans, plovers, terns and ibises nest, while orange-bellied parrots visit and Murray Cod swim. But there are other important inhabitants – trillions of microscopic organisms. You might not give much thought to the sedimentary microbes of a lagoon. But these tiny microbes in the mud are vital to river ecosystems, quietly cycling nutrients and supporting the food web. Healthy microbes make for a healthy Coorong – and this unassuming lagoon is a key indicator for the health of the entire Murray-Darling Basin. For decades, the Coorong has been in poor health. Low water flows have concentrated salt and an excess of nutrients. But in 2022, torrential rains on the east coast turned into a once-in-a-century flood, which swept down the Murray into the Coorong. In our new research, we took the pulse of the Coorong’s microbiome after this huge flood and found the surging fresh water corrected microbial imbalances. The numbers of methane producing microbes fell while beneficial nutrient-eating bacteria grew. Populations of plants, animals and invertebrates boomed. We can’t just wait for irregular floods – we have to find ways to ensure enough water is left in the river to cleanse the Coorong naturally. Under a scanning electron micrograph, the mixed community of microbes in water is visible. This image shows a seawater sample. Sophie Leterme/Flinders University, CC BY Rivers have microbiomes, just like us Our gut microbes can change after a heavy meal or in response to dietary changes. In humans, a sudden shift in diet can encourage either helpful or harmful microbes. In the same way, aquatic microbes respond to changes in salinity and freshwater flows. Depending on what changes are happening, some species boom and others bust. As water gets saltier in brackish lagoons, communities of microbes have to adapt or die. High salinity often favours microbes with anaerobic metabolisms, meaning they don’t need oxygen. But these tiny lifeforms often produce the highly potent greenhouse gas methane. The microbes in wetlands are a large natural source of the gas. While we know pulses of freshwater are vital for river health, they don’t happen often enough. The waters of the Murray-Darling Basin support most of Australia’s irrigated farming. Negotiations over how to ensure adequate environmental flows have been fraught – and long-running. Water buybacks have improved matters somewhat, but researchers have found the river basin’s ecosystems are not in good condition. Wetlands such as the Coorong are a natural source of methane. The saltier the water gets, the more environmentally harmful microbes flourish – potentially producing more methane. Vincent_Nguyen The Coorong is out of balance A century ago, regular pulses of fresh water from the Murray flushed nutrients and sediment out of the Coorong, helping maintain habitat for fish, waterbirds and the plants and invertebrates they eat. While other catchments discharge into the Coorong, the Murray is by far the major water source. Over the next decades, growth in water use for farming meant less water in the river. In the 1930s, barrages were built near the river’s mouth to control nearby lake levels and prevent high salinity moving upstream in the face of reduced river flows. Major droughts have added further stress. Under these low-flow conditions, salt and nutrients get more and more concentrated, reaching extreme levels due to South Australia’s high rate of evaporation. In response, microbial communities can trigger harmful algae blooms or create low-oxygen “dead zones”, suffocating river life. The big flush of 2022 In 2022, torrential rain fell in many parts of eastern Australia. Rainfall on the inland side of the Great Dividing Range filled rivers in the Murray-Darling Basin. That year became the largest flood since 1956. We set about recording the changes. As the salinity fell in ultra-salty areas, local microbial communities in the sediment were reshuffled. The numbers of methane-producing microbes fell sharply. This means the floods would have temporarily reduced the Coorong’s greenhouse footprint. Christopher Keneally sampling for microbes in the Coorong in 2022. Tyler Dornan, CC BY When we talk about harmful bacteria, we’re referring to microbes that emit greenhouse gases such as methane, drive the accumulation of toxic sulfide (such as Desulfobacteraceae), or cause algae blooms (Cyanobacteria) that can sicken people, fish and wildlife. During the flood, beneficial microbes from groups such as Halanaerobiaceae and Beggiatoaceae grew rapidly, consuming nutrients such as nitrogen, which is extremely high in the Coorong. This is very useful to prevent algae blooms. Beggiatoaceae bacteria also remove toxic sulfide compounds. The floods also let plants and invertebrates bounce back, flushed out salt and supported a healthier food web. On balance, we found the 2022 flood was positive for the Coorong. It’s as if the Coorong switched packets of chips for carrot sticks – the flood pulse reduced harmful bacteria and encouraged beneficial ones. While the variety of microbes shrank in some areas, those remaining performed key functions helping keep the ecosystem in balance. From 2022 to 2023, consistent high flows let native fish and aquatic plants bounce back, in turn improving feeding grounds for birds and allowing black swans to thrive. A group of black swans cruise the Coorong’s waters. Darcy Whittaker, CC BY Floods aren’t enough When enough water is allowed to flow down the Murray to the Coorong, ecosystems get healthier. But the Coorong has been in poor health for decades. It can’t just rely on rare flood events. Next year, policymakers will review the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, which sets the rules for sharing water in Australia’s largest and most economically important river system. Balancing our needs with those of other species is tricky. But if we neglect the environment, we risk more degradation and biodiversity loss in the Coorong. As the climate changes and rising water demands squeeze the basin, decision-makers must keep the water flowing for wildlife. Christopher Keneally receives funding from the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. His research is affiliated with The University of Adelaide and the Goyder Institute for Water Research. Chris is also a committee member and former president of the Biology Society of South Australia, and a member of the Australian Freshwater Sciences Society.Matt Gibbs receives funding from the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Sophie Leterme receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC). Her research is affiliated with Flinders University, with the ARC Training Centre for Biofilm Research & Innovation, and with the Goyder Institute for Water Research.Justin Brookes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Murphy, a Beloved Bald Eagle Who Became a Foster Dad, Dies Following Violent Storms in Missouri

A beloved bald eagle who gained popularity after incubating a rock is mourned after dying from head trauma sustained during violent storms in Missouri last week

A beloved bald eagle who gained popularity for incubating a rock in 2023 is being mourned Saturday after the 33-year-old avian died following intense storms that recently moved through Missouri. Murphy, who surpassed the average life span of 25 years, died last week at the World Bird Sanctuary in Valley Park, Missouri. Sanctuary officials believe the violent storms that ripped apart homes and claimed 12 lives last weekend may have factored in the bird's death. They said birds have access to shelters where they can weather storms and the sanctuary has contingency plans for different environmental situations. But evacuations weren't performed since no tornadoes approached the sanctuary. Three other birds who were in the same shelter with Murphy survived. A veterinarian performed a necropsy and found the bald eagle sustained head trauma. “We are unable to determine if Murphy was spooked by something and hit his head while jumping off a perch or if wind and precipitation played a part in the injury,” a statement shared by the sanctuary on social media said. Murphy lived in the sanctuary's Avian Avenue exhibit area and rose to prominence in 2023 when he incubated a rock. His instincts were rewarded when he was allowed to foster an injured eaglet that he nurtured back to health. The eaglet was eventually released back to the wild and another eaglet was entrusted to Murphy's care. The second eaglet is expected to be released into the wild this summer.“In honor of Murphy’s legacy, we plan to name the eventual eagle fostering aviary Murphy’s Manor, so that we can continue to remember him for decades to come,” the sanctuary's statement added.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.