David Aronoff

@dmaronoff.bsky.social

Internal Medicine, Infectious Diseases, Maternal-Child Health. Music fan. Meh drummer. My views = mine. He/him.

BREAKING: Taylor Farms pulls all iceberg lettuce sourced in central Mexico from U.S. market in cyclosporiasis investigation. AND Sysco, a huge food supplier, has stopped distributing Taylor Farms processed iceberg lettuce products frm Mexico. Our story. 1/2 www.washingtonpost.com/health/2026/...

Taylor Farms pulls all iceberg lettuce sourced in central Mexico from U.S. market

The CDC and FDA advised consumers to avoid eating shredded iceburg lettuce from Taco Bell as it investigates a parasitic outbreak that has sickened thousands.

washingtonpost.com

Brilliant thread I hope we've reached a tipping point: the OMB rule, which would end science in the US, & the authoritarian actions of the ADA, seem to have unleashed a massive outpouring of anger against Trump, Bhattacharya, & Vought (the ADA inviting Jay to speak showed how out of touch they are)

Jenna Norton@jenna-m-norton.bsky.social · 2mo ago

Worth a read. Many have taken note of the growing solidarity in the science community in opposition to the OMB proposed rule. But this must be just the start. For an example, we can look to @sekahn.bsky.social, Justin Ryder & co who spoke up at ADA and were removed for it. 🧵

This unexpectedly blew up, so thank you for the support, encouragement, and mutual celebration! With that, should I be posting more garden and harvest pictures? Would you listen to me talk about women's health research more if I was also thinning radishes? 😆

Dr. Jess Hebert@jesshebert.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Harvested my first bit of baby spinach and radish greens from the garden, cooked them up in olive oil with salt and pepper. I grew that! And cooked that! And ate that! Very proud of my little early garden!

Jay screamed that he was being “cEnsOrEd!¡” during the pandemic because clinicians, outbreak control experts, virologists, & public health professionals rejected his push for mass infection instead of mass vaccination Now, as the nation’s most powerful scientist, he is censoring vaccine science 🧐

Ryan Marino, MD@ryanmarino.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Jay Bhattacharya, who is best known for ranting about COVID conspiracies and “coverups” for the past 5 years, is now literally suppressing the data on COVID vaccines…because he is an antivaccine hack not a scientist

Good news today: @standupforscience.bsky.social is organizing rallies for science. 💪 Bad news: Funded science is way down. This is why I said wks ago the budget bill was “bad because it doesn’t go far enough.” How the science agencies are governed matters!!! This is killing labs. 🧪

Joshua Weitz@joshuasweitz.bsky.social · 5mo ago

The data is in: the NIH goalposts have shifted. What were once almost certain fundable scores have become coin flips and what used to be likely grants have become aspirational, leading to fewer awards. Another manifestation of how HHS policies have led to fewer awards and less science.

Graph of award probability of R35 and R01 from NIH factbook as a function of review rank percentile. As is apparent, 2025 is a significant departure, with lower award probabilities at all scores <40 and significant departures from norm, where even being in the top 10% is no longer a nearly certain indicator of success.

Data source: https://report.nih.gov/nihdatabook/report/302

This is essential viewing—thank you Dr Green for sharing it It’s a genuine tragedy to see the NIH Director embracing censorship so gleefully; his response to Dr Green (“it’s bad science!”) is one of the most repulsive things I’ve seen from Jay Bhattacharya, amidst a long list of vile utterances

Michael D. Green, PhD@michaeldgreen.phd · 5mo ago

Made a short video as a response. 3 questions remain for me. 1) What is the definition of a "DEl activity," and how is it being communicated to NIH staff so they can determine whether a grant qualifies? (Continued below)

The HPV vaccine is durably AMAZING.A massive Swedish registry study w 18 years of follow-up found no waning protection against invasive cervical cancer. If vaccinated before age 17, cancer risk is cut by ~80%. Even those vaccinated later still had substantial protection. www.bmj.com/content/392/...

Extended follow-up of invasive cervical cancer risk after quadrivalent HPV vaccination: nationwide, register based study

Objectives To evaluate the long term risk of invasive cervical cancer after receiving the quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, how risk varies by time since vaccination, and to assess the ...

bmj.com