Consumer News: FDA approves twice-yearly injection for HIV prevention

The National Council on Aging says 15% of seniors live below the poverty line

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The National Council on Aging says the 2026 Social Security COLA of 2.8% falls short of covering rising Medicare costs.

• Older Americans face increasing poverty, with 15% of people aged 65+ living below the poverty line.

• The NCOA urges stronger action to ensure all Americans can age with dignity and financial security.

The National Council on Aging (NCOA) is warning that the newly announced 2.8% cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for Social Security in 2026 will not be enough to offset the growing expenses faced by older Americans, especially when it comes to health care.

In a statement, NCOA President and CEO Ramsey Alwin said that while the COLA mirrors inflation, it is woefully insufficient for seniors struggling with higher Medicare premiums, deductibles, and everyday living costs.

Older adults will once again be forced to make heart-wrenching decisions about whether to spend their fixed incomes on health care, food, or housing, Alwin said. Medicare costs are expected to rise between 4% and 12% next yearfar outpacing the COLA increase.

Growing poverty among older adults

Alwin pointed to alarming data showing that the poverty rate among people aged 65 and older climbed to 15% in 2024, affecting more than 9 million Americans. This makes older adults the only age group to experience an increase in poverty that year.

The poverty rate for older Americans is proof that the COLA does not reflect the true cost of living, Alwin said. We also know that poverty is a death sentence for too many.

NCOAs research, conducted in partnership with the LeadingAge LTSS Center at UMass Boston, underscores that link: people age 60 and older earning $20,000 or less per year die an average of nine years earlier than those making $120,000 or more.

A call for change

Alwin urged policymakers and the public to address the structural inequities that continue to harm aging Americans.

Millions of our older family members and friends who have worked hard their entire lives still face devastating economic insecurity, she said. We must work together to create the conditions that enable every American to age well.

The new price will take effect in 2027

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The Danish pharmaceutical giant Novo Nordisk has struck an agreement with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to set a negotiated price for its blockbuster drug ingredient Semaglutide.

• The deal will apply under the U.S. Medicare prescription drug program and comes under the price-negotiation framework created by the Inflation Reduction Act.

• For consumers, this means that when the new price takes effect in 2027 under the current schedule, Medicare beneficiaries using Ozempic, Wegovy or other semaglutide-based medications may see improved access and potentially lower out-of-pocket costs.

Novo Nordisk has reached an agreement with the U.S. government for the negotiated price of its popular weight loss drugs, such as Ozempic and Wegovy, that contain the active ingredient semaglutide.

The drugs, approved for type 2 diabetes and weight loss, are expensive in some cases more than $1,000 a month.

Because of its popularity and high cost, Medicare Part D flagged semaglutide for negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Acts drug-pricing provisions.

CMS indicated that for negotiation purposes, all formulations of semaglutide Ozempic, Wegovy, the oral form Rybelsus would be treated as a single product based on the active ingredient (active moiety) concept.

What the deal means for consumers

• Better bargaining power: Because Medicare now has the authority to negotiate with manufacturers, medications like semaglutide may be priced more affordably (at least for Medicare beneficiaries) than the original list price.

• Access issues to follow: If youre on Medicare and your doctor prescribes Wegovy or Ozempic, this deal could help reduce cost barriers, but only if your plan covers the medication for your indication and if your prescription aligns with eligibility rules.

• Plan design still matters: Even with a lower negotiated price, how much you end up paying depends on your Part D plans formulary, tier placement, co-pays/coinsurance, and whether your indication is covered (for example, Medicare historically has had limitations around covering weight-loss drugs under certain conditions).

• Timing is important: The new price is scheduled to take effect in 2027 under the current guidance. This means that until then, you may still face higher prevailing list prices (or coverage restrictions) and savings may be limited to whatever manufacturer and insurer discounts exist today.

• Watch for ripple effects: A negotiated price sets a benchmark. That may influence how private insurers, other federal/state programs, or pharmacies set their pricing or negotiation strategies for semaglutide. Over time, this could affect cash-pay patients, coverage for non-Medicare populations, and competition.

Why the company agreed and what it signals

From Novo Nordisks perspective this deal offered a path to stability. By agreeing now, the company may be managing risk: unpredictable policy outcomes, potential tax/penalties for non-participation, or delay in market access issues.

It also signals that even high-demand blockbuster drugs arent immune to policy pressure and public scrutiny over drug pricing. For consumers, this shift may reflect a growing emphasis on affordability and accessespecially for treatments that millions rely on.

For patients and advocacy groups, this is a win in principle: a major manufacturer agreeing to work within the Medicare negotiation framework may help reduce one major barrier cost. But its not a guarantee of low cost yet, and youll still need to engage proactively. Patients should consult their doctor, check plan coverage and ask about generics/alternatives and manufacturer assistance programs.

New research sheds light on how artificial brightness could raise your cardiovascular stakes

• Even when taking into account exercise, diet, sleep habits and genetics, higher nighttime light exposure was linked with increased heart and vascular issues.

• Researchers tracked nearly 89,000 adults for up to 9.5 years using wrist-worn light sensors to see how light at night fits into heart health.

• People in the highest night-light exposure group had significantly higher risks of coronary artery disease, heart attack, heart failure, atrial fibrillation and stroke.

We know things like diet, smoking, exercise and sleep matter for heart health but what about the lights in your bedroom?

A new study led by Flinders University in Australia found that being exposed to brighter light at night may be an independent risk factor for serious heart- and blood-vessel related problems.

The researchers suggest that, beyond what you already know about lifestyle, simply living and sleeping in a brighter-than-dark environment may be doing its own damage.

This is the first large-scale study to show that simply being exposed to light at night is a strong and independent risk factor for heart disease, researcher Dr. Daniel Windred said in a news release.

Disrupting your bodys internal circadian clock by repeatedly exposing yourself to bright light at night, when it would typically be dark otherwise, will put you at a higher risk of developing dangerous heart issues.

The study

To get at this question, the team used data from the UK Biobank cohort: 88,905 adults aged over 40 who wore wrist-mounted light sensors for about a week.

The sensors recorded personal light exposure both during the day and at night (defined roughly from 12:30 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.). The researchers then followed these participants for up to 9.5 years (June 2013 to November 2022) to see who developed cardiovascular issues such as coronary artery disease, heart attack (myocardial infarction), heart failure, atrial fibrillation or stroke.

They adjusted for many potential confounders: age, sex, ethnicity, household income, education, smoking, alcohol consumption, diet score, sleep, physical activity and even genetic risk of cardiovascular disease.

The results

The researchers found that the more light people were exposed to while sleeping, the higher their odds of developing heart problems later on. Those in the brightest nighttime-light group were noticeably more likely to experience major cardiovascular conditions even after accounting for other health factors like exercise, diet, and genetics.

Compared to people who slept in darker environments, those with the most night-time light exposure had about:

• 30% higher risk of developing coronary artery disease, which can block blood flow to the heart

• 50% higher risk of a heart attack or heart failure, both of which can be life-threatening

• 30% higher risk of atrial fibrillation, a condition that causes irregular heartbeat

• 25% higher risk of stroke, which occurs when blood flow to the brain is disrupted
  

Interestingly, the connection between night light and heart disease appeared stronger in women and younger adults, suggesting that some groups may be more sensitive to light exposure during sleep.

Even when researchers controlled for sleep duration and quality, physical activity, and family history, the link remained meaning light at night itself may play a role.

Keeping the lights low

The researchers emphasized that even small habits can make a difference when it comes to our sleeping habits and risk of heart concerns.

Thankfully, we do have some control over our exposure to light at night, Dr. Windred said. By using blackout curtains, dimming lights, and avoiding screens before bed, we can help to reduce the health risks associated with light at night.

Everyday habits, like scrolling on your phone in bed or falling asleep with the TV on or bedroom lights on, can expose you to potentially harmful levels of light, Associate Professor Andrew Phillips said in the news release.

Were not talking about extreme cases, even low levels of indoor light can interfere with your bodys natural rhythm.

Gallup data shows the strongest declines among adults aged 40 to 64 the same group most likely to use the drugs

• The U.S. adult obesity rate dropped from 39.9% in 2022 to 37.0% in 2025 representing an estimated 7.6 million fewer obese adults.

• Use of GLP-1 injectable drugs for weight loss rose sharply from 5.8% in February 2024 to 12.4% in 2025, with women (15.2%) outpacing men (9.7%).

• Sharpest obesity drops occurred among 4049 year-olds (down 4.3 points to 43.3%) and 5064 year-olds (down 5.0 points to 42.8%)the same age groups with the highest GLP-1 use (16.2% and 17.0% respectively).

Theres a bit of encouraging news in the weight-health world.

According to a new report by Gallup, the share of U.S. adults classified as obese (BMI 30 or higher) slipped to about 37% in 2025, down from a peak of nearly 40% in 2022.

At the same time, more Americans are turning to GLP-1 injectable medications (think semaglutide/liraglutide) for weight-loss purposes than ever before.

The convergence of those two trends raises plenty of questionsand some cautious optimism.

Obesity on the decline

Gallups survey of roughly 16,946 U.S. adults conducted in the first three quarters of 2025 found the adult obesity rate at 37.0%, down from the 2022 high of 39.9%.

That drop represents about 7.6 million fewer Americans categorized as obese.

While still far above ideal, its a meaningful shift after years of little change. The decline was greater among women (down 3.5 points to 38.8%) than men (down 2.3 points to 35.2%).

The GLP-1 surge

Part of what might be driving the change: the growing use of GLP-1 weight-loss injectables.

In February 2024, just 5.8% of adults reported using this class of drugs for weight lossbut by 2025, that number had climbed to 12.4%.

Among women, usage is at 15.2%, and among men 9.7%. These drugs (originally developed for type 2 diabetes) are increasingly being prescribed and used off-label for weight loss.

Public awareness of these types of drugs also increased from 80% to 89% during this same period.

Age groups and patterns

The decline in obesity wasnt evenly distributed. The biggest drops showed up in the 40-49 and 50-64 age brackets: 40-49 fell 4.3 points to 43.3%, and 50-64 dropped 5.0 points to 42.8%.

These groups also reported the highest rates of GLP-1 use: 16.2% and 17.0% respectively.

In contrast, younger adults (30-39) and those 65 + showed little change in obesity rates, even though the older group (65+) is reporting higher usage of the drugs (11.1%) yet without the same drop in obesity.

What it means for you

If youre watching your weight or wondering if this GLP-1 wave might apply to you this data suggests that the medications are becoming part of the broader story of U.S. weight trends but theyre not a magic bullet.

The decline in obesity is modest and concentrated, and crucially, the rate of diagnosed diabetes (13.8%) continues rising even as obesity drops, because diabetes is a lifetime diagnosis.

Ultimately, the takeaway for consumers: yes, GLP-1 treatments are growing fast and may be correlated with recent improvements in obesity, especially in middle-aged adults but healthy habits, consistent medical guidance and realistic expectations remain key.

22 states fight Education Department over loan forgiveness restrictions

• New York Attorney General Letitia James leads 22-state lawsuit challenging new rule limiting Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

• The rule would let the federal government disqualify state agencies and nonprofits based on perceived illegal activities.

• Coalition argues the regulation is politically motivated and threatens millions of public servants loan relief.

Attorneys general say rule turns loan forgiveness into political weapon

New York Attorney General Letitia James is leading a coalition of 21 other attorneys general in suing the U.S. Department of Education and Secretary Linda McMahon, alleging that a new federal rule unlawfully narrows eligibility for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program.

The coalitions lawsuit contends that the rule, finalized October 31, gives the federal government sweeping and arbitrary power to declare entire state governments, schools, hospitals, and nonprofit organizations ineligible for PSLF based on ideology rather than law.

Public Service Loan Forgiveness was created as a promise to teachers, nurses, firefighters, and social workers that their service to our communities would be honored, James said in announcing the suit. Instead, this administration has created a political loyalty test disguised as a regulation.

A new test for acceptable public service

The PSLF program, established by Congress in 2007, forgives remaining federal student loan debt after ten years of qualifying service with a government or nonprofit employer. More than one million borrowers have already had loans forgiven, including tens of thousands of New Yorkers.

Under the new rule, however, the Department of Education could unilaterally decide that an organization has a substantial illegal purpose a term not defined in the PSLF statute and strip its employees of eligibility. The departments interpretation of illegality, the attorneys general argue, conveniently mirrors the administrations political targets, including organizations that:

• Support immigrants

• Provide gender-affirming care

• Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion, or

• Engage in political protest.

The rule, set to take effect in July 2026, would give the federal government discretion to deny forgiveness to borrowers who work for employers it disfavors potentially leaving teachers, healthcare workers, and legal aid attorneys without relief after years of qualifying payments.

Public servants could wake up one day to find they no longer qualify for PSLF because their employer fell out of favor with Washington.

Potential nationwide fallout

The lawsuit warns that the rule could destabilize the public workforce nationwide. State and local governments rely on PSLF to recruit and retain employees in critical areas such as education, healthcare, and law enforcement.

If this rule stands, the complaint states, entire classes of public workers could lose eligibility through no fault of their own, creating widespread confusion, fear, and instability.

For example, the attorneys general note that the Department of Justices past lawsuit against New Yorks Protect Our Courts Act could have rendered thousands of state employees suddenly ineligible for PSLF under the new standard.

Legal challenge argues rule exceeds federal authority

The coalition contends the rule violates both the law that created PSLF and the Administrative Procedure Act. The PSLF statute, they argue, clearly guarantees forgiveness to anyone working full-time in qualifying public service with no ideological exceptions. The new substantial illegal purpose clause, they say, is arbitrary and capricious, granting the Education Department unchecked power to redefine public service based on political preference.

The attorneys general are asking the court to vacate the rule and block its implementation.

What the states PSLF lawsuit means for your student loan forgiveness

It is unjust and unlawful to cut off loan forgiveness for hardworking Americans based on ideology.
New York Attorney General Letitia James

A new federal rule could change who qualifies for Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) and 22 states are suing to stop it. Heres what you need to know if you work in government or the nonprofit sector.

Who could be affected

The rule, set to take effect in July 2026, would give the U.S. Department of Education sweeping power to declare entire employers ineligible for PSLF if it determines they have a substantial illegal purpose.

That phrase isnt defined in law, and critics say it could be used to punish certain types of organizations. Among those that could be targeted:

• Nonprofits providing immigrant support

• Clinics offering gender-affirming care

• Schools or agencies with diversity and inclusion programs

• Groups involved in social or political advocacy

If an employer is disqualified, its workers could lose PSLF eligibility even if theyve already made years of qualifying payments toward forgiveness.

What borrowers should do now

• Check your employers eligibilityusing thePSLF Employer Search Tool.

• Keep making paymentsto stay on track for forgiveness.

• Save all documentation payment records, employment certifications, and correspondence.

• Stay informedthrough official sources such as yourstate attorney generals officeorstudentaid.gov.

• Avoid .You never have to pay for PSLF assistance; ignore calls or emails offering instant forgiveness.

Tip:If youve switched jobs, submit a new PSLF certification form right away it keeps your record current and protects your progress.

What happens next

The rule hasnt taken effect yet and is now being challenged in court by New York Attorney General Letitia James and 21 other state attorneys general. The coalition argues the change is politically motivated and unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Until the courts rule, PSLF continues as usual. Borrowers can still earn credit toward forgiveness if they meet existing requirements.

Related: Federal Student Aid PSLF Overview

Why this matters

More than one million borrowers have received forgiveness through PSLF since 2007, including thousands of teachers, nurses, and social workers.
If the new rule survives, entire classes of public employees could lose eligibility overnight not because they changed jobs, but because Washington decided their employers mission no longer fits federal preferences.

The 22-state lawsuit seeks to stop that from happening before it affects borrowers.