The COVID-19 pandemic continues to cast a long shadow over public trust, scientific institutions, and political leadership. On Thursday, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reignited controversy during a Senate Finance Committee hearing, claiming that the federal government had misled Americans about nearly every aspect of the pandemic response. His comments touched off a heated debate that underscored just how polarizing the conversation around vaccines, masks, and public health remains—even five years after the virus first spread across the globe.

When asked by Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) whether he believed COVID-19 had been politicized, Kennedy’s response was blunt: “The whole process was politicized. We were lied to about everything.” He accused the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other federal agencies of concealing the truth about natural immunity, overstating the power of vaccines to block transmission, and misleading the public on the effectiveness of cloth masks.

Also Read: Joe Biden Undergoes Surgery To Remove Skin Cancer Months After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis

Kennedy framed his stance as an effort to “eliminate politics from science,” but his words also echoed his long history of skepticism toward vaccines, a position that has drawn sharp criticism from leading medical organizations.

Vaccines and the Debate Over Transmission

One of Kennedy’s more pointed critiques involved the early messaging on COVID-19 vaccines. In 2021, then-CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said data suggested vaccinated individuals “do not carry the virus, don’t get sick.” That statement, later walked back, has since been cited by skeptics as evidence of misleading communication.

The official guidance at the time, however, noted that vaccines primarily reduced the risk of severe illness and transmission—they did not guarantee complete immunity. Subsequent data confirmed that while breakthrough infections occurred, vaccination significantly lowered the risk of hospitalization and death. Critics argue that Kennedy’s selective framing ignores this broader reality.

Mask Guidance: Shifting Science or Mixed Messaging?

Kennedy also attacked the government’s changing stance on masks. Early in the pandemic, cloth masks were encouraged when medical-grade masks were in short supply. Over time, the CDC emphasized higher filtration masks like N95s and KN95s as the standard for protection.

Public health experts acknowledge that these shifts were confusing but stress they reflected evolving evidence and supply-chain realities, not intentional deception. Kennedy, however, portrayed them as emblematic of a government that “failed miserably during COVID.”

COVID-19 In US: How Many Died?

The most tense exchange of the hearing came when Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.) pressed Kennedy on the U.S. death toll. “How many Americans died from COVID-19?” Warner asked. Kennedy responded: “I don’t think anybody knows.”

According to CDC data—an agency Kennedy oversees—over 1.23 million Americans have died from COVID-19 as of August 2025. Warner, visibly frustrated, accused the health secretary of ignorance and undermining public confidence. “You are sitting as Secretary of Health and Human Services—how can you be that ignorant?” Warner demanded.

Kennedy countered by accusing the Biden administration of creating “data chaos,” suggesting inconsistencies in mortality reporting eroded public trust.

Tensions Over Vaccine Access

The hearing also spotlighted vaccine access. Senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a physician, challenged Kennedy over his role in narrowing vaccine recommendations and replacing expert panels with his own appointees. Cassidy warned that conflicting guidance was making it harder for Americans to access booster shots.

“Effectively, we are denying people vaccines,” Cassidy said. Kennedy flatly rejected the claim: “You’re wrong.” The clash highlighted an underlying paradox—while Kennedy acknowledged Trump’s Operation Warp Speed as a success deserving of a Nobel Prize, he has simultaneously pursued policies that critics say restrict vaccine uptake.

The Fallout at CDC and Leadership Shake-Ups

Kennedy defended his decision to fire CDC Director Susan Monarez after less than a month on the job, a move that triggered several high-level resignations. He called the shake-ups “absolutely necessary,” arguing that the CDC’s leadership had “failed miserably during COVID.”

His critics, including more than 20 medical societies calling for his resignation, argue the opposite—that Kennedy has destabilized one of the country’s most vital public health agencies at a critical time. For them, the firing represents not accountability, but a dismantling of scientific infrastructure.

Fractured Trust in Science and Government

Kennedy’s claim that “we were lied to about everything” taps into deep public skepticism that grew throughout the pandemic. Mixed messaging on masks, shifting vaccine recommendations, and partisan rhetoric all fueled a breakdown in trust.

But public health experts caution that framing this as deliberate deceit oversimplifies a far more complex reality. Science evolves with new data, and policies must adapt accordingly. While communication missteps occurred, the broad consensus among experts remains that vaccines saved millions of lives, masks reduced spread, and public health interventions—though imperfect—were essential.

A Political and Public Health Crossroads

What Kennedy’s testimony underscored most clearly is the enduring politicization of COVID-19. His words resonated with those already skeptical of government institutions but alarmed many physicians and scientists who see them as undermining progress in future health crises.

The tension between politics and public health is unlikely to fade. With respiratory virus season approaching, debates over vaccines, mask mandates, and data transparency remain unresolved. The hearing revealed not just disagreements over past actions, but ongoing battles over how the U.S. should prepare for future pandemics.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s claim that Americans “were lied to about everything” may capture the anger of those disillusioned with government response, but it also risks entrenching misinformation. The legacy of COVID-19 is not only measured in lives lost but also in fractured trust between citizens, science, and leadership.

As policymakers and public health leaders move forward, the question remains, will lessons from the pandemic bring stronger systems and clearer communication, or will the scars of political division continue to shape health policy for years to come?

This is a developing story, we are looking into data mentioned and will bring you more detailed information soon.

Andhra Pradesh may soon follow Australia's steps and ban social media for teenagers under the age of 16 in the state.

Nara Lokesh, Information Technology, Electronics and Communications, Real Time Governance and Human Resources Development Minister for Andhra Pradesh, told Bloomberg at the World Economic Forum 2026 Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland: "As a state, we are studying Australia’s under-16 law, and yes, I believe we need to create a strong legal enactment.

"Youngsters below a certain age should not be on such platforms, as they do not fully understand the content they are exposed to. Thus, a strong legal framework may be required."

Also Read: Chikungunya Spreads Across Tamil Nadu: All You Need To Know

TDP national spokesperson Deepak Reddy supported Lokesh's claim and stated: "Children below a certain age are not emotionally mature enough to comprehend the negative and harmful content that is freely available online. That is why the Andhra government is studying global best practices and examining Australia's under-16 social media law."

If implemented successfully, Andhra Pradesh would be the first Indian state to issue the ban and could pave the way for other states to consider such policies. State officials are yet to clarify when the rule will be implemented and if any fines will be attached to it.

Is Any Other State Considering a Ban?

The petition was to emphasize on the awareness of the stakeholders and parental windows in the device that could control the menace of pornographic material which is easily accessible to children. The court asked Centre to order internet provider service companies to provide a 'Parental Window' to prevent children from accessing such content.

The Madurai Bench of Justices G Jayachandran and KK Ramakrishnan told the authorities of child rights to accelerate this matter. The bench also noted that children could only be prevented from consuming such content only if there is a parental control app on the device.

Judges also noted that parents have a higher responsibility in this, as children are highly vulnerable to such content.

READ MORE: Australia Social Media Ban Explained: Why Government Plans to Restrict Accounts of Under-16s

What Did Australia Do?

To protect the mental health of children, Australia has successfully banned several social media apps including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, and streaming platforms Kick and Twitch.

YouTube Kids, Google Classroom and WhatsApp are not covered under this rule as they do not fit those criteria.

While anyone under 16 will be still able to watch most of the content without logging in, however, they cannot have an account on it. Critics are urging the government to widen the ban to include online gaming platforms such as Roblox and Discord, which are currently not covered.

The government says that it will also reduce the negative impact of social media's "design features that encourage [young people] to spend more time on screens, while also serving up content that can harm their health and wellbeing".

A government study which was commissioned in 2025 found that 96% of children aged 10 to 15 used social media, and that seven out of 10 of them were exposed to harmful content. These content were misogynistic and violent in its nature, furthermore, content promoted eating disorders and suicide.

Children and parents will not be punished for infringing the ban, instead, social media companies will face fines of up to A$49.5m, which is equivalent of US$32m for serious or repeated breaches.

The Directorate of Public Health and Preventive Medicine (DPH) has issued a statewide alert across Tamil Nadu due to a sudden uptick in chikungunya cases in multiple cities.

Cases have been reported across Chennai, Villupuram, Tenkasi, Theni, Cuddalore, Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram and Ariyalur. It remains unknown how many people have been affected and if any deaths have occurred.

Caused by the chikungunya virus, chikungunya virus disease (CHIKVD) is spread by the bite of infected mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus) to humans. The illness usually starts with flu-like symptoms including fever, chills, headache, nausea, vomiting, joint pain and rashes.

Also Read: This Is Why Emmanuel Macron Wore Sunglasses At Davos

Typically, the illness has no clear no symptoms, especially in children and can easily be misdiagnosed as dengue and Zika. While there are no specific antiviral treatments for chikungunya virus infections, medications such as antipyretic and analgesic medications (such as paracetamol) for fever and pain can be used to ease the pain.

Most patients recover completely from the infection, but occasional cases of eye, heart, and neurological complications have been previously been reported with CHIKV infections.

What Are Tamil Nadu Officials Doing To Contain Cases?

Authorities have also emphasized that all government and private hospitals as well as diagnostic laboratories, need to timely report cases to ensure the infection does not spread . Any delay in reporting, officials noted, could allow the virus to spread rapidly within communities.

On the local level, district entomologists and health inspectors have been told to eliminate stagnant water in artificial containers and conduct weekly mass-cleaning drives in high-risk areas.

The DPH has also ordered that all designated dengue and chikungunya wards in hospitals be kept mosquito-free, with adequate bed strength and sufficient mosquito nets for patients.

READ MORE: What Is Chikungunya And How Can It Be Prevented?

Can Chikungunya Spread Easily?

Cases typically emerge mostly in the Americas, Asia and Africa and occasionally in Europe. However, nearly 30,000 CHIKVD cases have been recorded, including 83 associated deaths from 12 countries namely from China, Singapore, Pakistan, France, Argentina, Brazil and Mexico, marking it as one of the biggest outbreaks in the world.

French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday addressed the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. As he spoke on the European solidarity amid US President Donald Trumps' treat to annex Greenland, something else seemed to take the attention away. Macron was seen wearing a pair of blue-tinted mirrored aviator sunglasses. The surprising part was that he wore it indoors. French media had already reported that he was seen wearing sunglasses since last week.

Trump also mocked Emmanuel Macron’s sunglasses during his speech at Davos, joking, “what the hell happened?” regarding the French president’s appearance.

Also Read: Nipah Virus Outbreak In India: After Two West Bengal Cases, Tests On Bats Show No Active Infection

Why Was Emmanuel Macron Wearing Sunglasses Indoors?

On Monday, Macron said that reflective glasses were to disguise a minor eye injury that he had sustained after having been spotted with a heavily bloodshot right eye. "Apologies for the shades, but I have to wear them for a while". He further said that it is for a "mild eye condition".

Last week, when he appeared at a military event in southern France with red eye, while addressing the troop, he said, it was "totally benign" and "completely insignificant", he also added, "Please pardon the unsightly appearance of my eye". He also joked about it, calling it "l'oiel du tigre" or the "eye of the tiger". This was a reference to rock band Survivor's song used in the 1982 boxing moving Rocky III. He said, "For those who get the reference, it is a sign of determination".

What Happened To Macron's Eyes?

As per the French media reports, Macron appeared to have a sub-conjunctival hemorrhage. This means there is a broken blood vessel in his eyes. It is harmless, painless, and does not affect the vision. It also cannot cause permanent injury to the eye, and clears within a fortnight.

Macron Wears Sunglasses Indoor: Is It Absolutely Necessary?

Medical doctor and media commentator Jimmy Mohamed told French broadcaster RTL that Macron "opted for this style for aesthetic reasons, because he is a public figure. However, sunglasses are not necessary to protect vision in this condition. Some people wear it to avoid attracting attention.

"Some people might think he's ill, so to avoid being photographed in that state, he decided to wear sunglasses. The glasses protect his image, but not really his eye," said Jimmy Mohamed.

Read: Why Can't I Hear When I Take My Glasses Off?

How Have Netizen Reacted To Macron Wearing Sunglasses?

He has been called 'kéké', which is a French slang for a show off. Others also joked about him being a "cyborg" or emulating Hollywood actor Top Cruise in Top Gun, the 1986 movie that made wearing aviators a fashion statement.

What Is Sub-conjunctival hemorrhage?

Sub-conjunctival hemorrhage or SCH is a common ocular condition defined by extravasation of blood beneath the conjunctiva, producing a sharply demarcated red patch on the scleral surface. The condition is usually painless and does not impair vision. It usually resolves within 1 to 2 weeks, making it a frequent but benign cause of ocular redness.

It usually happens by a sudden pressure increase from coughing, sneezing, vomiting, or heavy lifting. This could rupture tiny eye blood vessels, or from eye trauma like rubbing or foreign bodies, and can be linked to risk factors like high blood pressure, diabetes, blood thinners, or even childbirth in newborns.