Health

The United States is facing a concerning rise in measles cases, the highest numbers seen since 2000, prompting a call to action from an unlikely source: Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. This plea comes as the nation risks losing its status as a measles-eliminated country, a designation increasingly threatened by declining vaccination rates. The situation highlights a complex public health challenge, complicated by ongoing skepticism towards vaccines, even within the current administration.

Dr. Oz, in a recent interview with CNN, urged Americans to get vaccinated against measles, stating simply, “Please, get vaccinated.” He acknowledged that not all diseases pose equal threats, but emphasized the seriousness of measles, a highly contagious and potentially dangerous illness. This message arrives at a critical juncture, as outbreaks are occurring in multiple states, including Carolina del Sur, where cases have surpassed those reported in the 2025 Texas outbreak, and along the Utah-Arizona border. The increasing incidence of measles is raising alarms among public health officials and prompting a reevaluation of vaccination efforts.

A Shift in Tone from the Trump Administration

The call for vaccination from Dr. Oz is particularly noteworthy given the previous stance of the Trump administration, which has often been perceived as skeptical of vaccines. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the current Secretary of Health and Human Services, has long questioned the safety of vaccines and has been overseeing a review of federal vaccination recommendations, including those for hepatitis B, COVID-19, and the combined measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccine. CNN’s Dana Bash directly questioned Oz about the apparent contradiction between his advocacy for vaccination and Kennedy Jr.’s views, a point that underscores the internal tensions surrounding this issue.

Despite Dr. Oz’s urging, experts believe a sudden shift in vaccination levels is unlikely. Current measles vaccination coverage falls below the 95% threshold needed to maintain herd immunity. In areas experiencing significant outbreaks, such as Texas and Carolina del Sur, vaccination rates are considerably lower. This underscores the challenge of overcoming vaccine hesitancy and reaching vulnerable populations.

“Too Little, Too Late?” Experts Weigh In

Sruti Nadimpalli, an associate clinical professor specializing in pediatric infectious diseases at Stanford University, expressed concern that Dr. Oz’s call for vaccination “comes too late.” She emphasized the need for consistent and proactive support for childhood vaccinations from leaders, citing the well-established safety and efficacy of these vaccines. “We need our leaders to proactively, firmly, and consistently support childhood vaccines, whose safety and efficacy have been repeatedly demonstrated,” Nadimpalli stated in an email.

Data from the Johns Hopkins University Center for Immunization Access shows a significant increase in measles cases in the first five weeks of 2026, with 866 cases reported nationwide, compared to just 71 cases during the same period last year. This surge in cases is a stark reminder of the vulnerability created by declining vaccination rates.

Global Trends: A Mixed Picture

While the U.S. Is experiencing a resurgence of measles, other regions are seeing positive trends. Europe and Central Asia reported a 75% decrease in cases between 2024 and 2025. However, this progress is fragile. In September 2025, 32 European countries were declared measles-free, but by January, several, including Austria, Spain, and the United Kingdom, had lost that status. This demonstrates the ease with which measles can re-emerge when vaccination rates decline.

Both in Europe and Central Asia, and in the United States, health services are grappling with a combination of under-vaccination, loss of herd immunity, and outbreaks in vulnerable communities. A lack of understanding regarding the dangers of highly contagious childhood diseases is exacerbating the problem. Fatima Cengic, a UNICEF immunization specialist for Europe and Central Asia, warned, “Given the global evolution of the situation, we foresee a sizeable problem.” She explained that immunization has turn into a victim of its own success, as the relative rarity of measles due to past vaccination programs has led to complacency and decreased vaccination rates.

Cengic similarly pointed to insufficient funding for immunization programs, noting that governments, having successfully prevented deaths from measles, are often less willing to prioritize and invest in these initiatives. “Due to its great success in preventing deaths, governments are not as willing to pay as much attention to it or invest in immunization programs, so they often lack sufficient funds,” she criticized.

The situation underscores the ongoing need for robust vaccination programs, clear public health messaging, and sustained investment in immunization efforts. The coming months will be critical in determining whether the U.S. Can regain control of measles and maintain its status as a measles-eliminated country. Continued monitoring of vaccination rates and outbreak patterns will be essential, as will efforts to address vaccine hesitancy and ensure equitable access to vaccination services.

What steps will public health officials take to address the declining vaccination rates and prevent further outbreaks? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Disclaimer: This article provides informational content about public health and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice. Always consult with a qualified healthcare provider for diagnosis and treatment of any medical condition.

The relentless churn of consumer electronics generates a staggering amount of waste, and a significant portion of it – roughly 5.1 billion kilograms in 2022 alone – is traded across international borders, often illegally. This global flow of electronic waste, or e-waste, disproportionately burdens developing nations in Africa, Asia, and South America, creating a complex web of environmental and social injustice. The issue isn’t simply about discarded gadgets; it’s about a system that externalizes the costs of consumption onto communities least equipped to handle the consequences.

The movement of e-waste isn’t accidental. Economic incentives drive the trade, with the high costs of safe and responsible recycling in wealthier nations contrasting sharply with the lower labor costs and often lax environmental regulations in receiving countries. This creates a perverse situation where exporting countries can avoid the financial burden of proper disposal, while importing countries grapple with the health and environmental fallout. The problem is further complicated by ambiguities in international regulations and a lack of consistent enforcement, allowing the flow to continue largely unchecked.

The Global E-Waste Landscape

The vast majority – nearly 90% – of globally traded e-waste ends up in developing countries, according to recent data. This isn’t a new phenomenon, but the scale has grown dramatically with the increasing pace of technological advancement and planned obsolescence. The types of e-waste vary, but often include computers, smartphones, televisions, and other electronic devices containing hazardous materials like lead, mercury, and cadmium. These substances pose significant risks to human health and the environment if not managed properly.

The economic logic is stark. Recycling electronics safely requires specialized facilities and processes, which are expensive. In contrast, informal recycling operations in many developing countries often involve dismantling devices by hand, exposing workers – including children – to toxic substances. These operations may recover valuable materials like gold and copper, but at a tremendous cost to worker health and environmental quality. A 2022 investigation by Fortune revealed how the U.S. Is contributing to a “hidden tsunami” of toxic e-waste in Southeast Asia, highlighting the scale of the problem and the responsibility of exporting nations. Read more about the investigation here.

The Basel Convention and Its Limitations

The Basel Convention, an international treaty designed to control the transboundary movements of hazardous wastes, was intended to address this issue. Yet, its effectiveness has been hampered by several factors. Ambiguous definitions of what constitutes “waste” allow some materials to be classified as “commodities” for repair or reuse, effectively circumventing the treaty’s restrictions. Weak reporting mechanisms and incomplete enforcement further undermine its ability to regulate the trade.

Malaysia, for example, recently took a firm stance, banning all e-waste imports, declaring it was “done being your digital dustbin.” Luxurious Magazine reported on this ban. This move, while protecting Malaysia’s environment and public health, highlights the growing frustration of receiving countries and the need for more comprehensive solutions.

Addressing the Root Causes

Simply restricting the flow of e-waste isn’t enough. Addressing the structural inequalities that drive this trade requires a fundamental rethinking of responsibility across the entire waste production and management chain. This includes holding exporting countries accountable for the ultimate fate of their e-waste, promoting sustainable product design that prioritizes durability and repairability, and investing in robust recycling infrastructure in developing countries. Some experts suggest redefining responsibility, shifting the burden from importing nations to the producers and consumers in the Global North.

The issue also connects to broader concerns about environmental colonialism, where wealthier nations effectively offload their environmental problems onto less powerful countries. As Agenzia Fides points out, waste is increasingly becoming a new form of colonialism in Africa, and Asia. Learn more about this perspective.

Looking ahead, strengthening the Basel Convention, improving data collection and transparency, and fostering international cooperation are crucial steps. However, true progress will require a shift in mindset – from treating e-waste as a problem to be exported to recognizing it as a shared responsibility that demands a global, equitable solution.

What further steps can be taken to ensure a more just and sustainable approach to e-waste management? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Disclaimer: This article provides informational content on environmental and public health issues and should not be considered professional advice.