a stat examination
Health care giants are trimming jobs
Camille MacMillin/STAT
In recent years, the American workforce has grown in large part due to the health care industry. But a new analysis from STAT's Bob Herman shows that large, for-profit health care companies have not been driving that job growth. For example: The eight largest publicly traded health insurers — many of which also own medical clinics, pharmacies, and other non-insurance businesses — collectively shed 20,000 jobs in 2025.
Bob analyzed the number of employees listed in the annual filings of 50 of the largest publicly traded health care companies. Overall, there's a lot of variance by sector, but muted total job growth. "Health insurance is just designed for AI," economist Dean Baker said. "I have to think we're going to see some serious job loss in that sector in the next three, four, five years." Read more.
circling back
The Lancet withdraws an influential article on talc
The list of ways you might interact with talc, a clay mineral, is long. It's in makeup, candy, and any medications in tablet form. That's not inherently risky — talc is safe to consume. But asbestos, a known carcinogen, is a geological next-door neighbor to talc and can easily contaminate talc products. The FDA first considered regulations to limit asbestos in cosmetic talc products in the 1970s, but industry influence has continually kicked the can down the road.
Last week, academic journal The Lancet retracted a 1977 article that had been used to combat regulation. It turns out the original piece, published without attribution, was written by a paid consultant for Johnson & Johnson. "There is no reason to believe that normal consumer exposure to cosmetic talc has in the past led either to cancer at any site," the author wrote. J&J is now known to have spent decades concealing the presence of asbestos in its baby powder products.
"This unsigned commentary has been used to justify the continued marketing of cosmetic talc for nearly half a century," two researchers wrote, noting that the company cited the paper as a defense in lawsuits brought by people who developed cancers. Lancet editors thanked the researchers for bringing the conflict of interest to their attention, and said they believed that staff at the time were unaware of the consultant's affiliation.
No comments