| | | | |  | | By Ben Leonard and Daniel Payne | | | With help from Carmen Paun
| | |  A new intelligence report sheds no new light on the origin of Covid-19. | Ng Han Guan/AP Photo | COVID ORIGINS — American intelligence agencies don’t know how the Covid-19 pandemic started, declassified intelligence says. The report, released Friday night, doesn’t substantially change the overall conclusion. Carmen writes that the report says all government agencies “continue to assess that both a natural and laboratory-associated origin remain plausible hypotheses to explain the first human infection.” But the report acknowledges that researchers studying coronaviruses at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology — located in the city where Covid first emerged — became ill in fall 2019. The Wall Street Journal, confirming reporting by journalists at the Substack blog Public, reported last week that one sick researcher, Ben Hu, had investigated coronaviruses with U.S. funding. Hu denies falling ill at that time or that his work was tied to Covid's origins. Advocates of the lab-leak theory seized on the news as near-definitive proof that their hypothesis was correct. But the report says it’s not so clear. While several Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers “fell mildly ill in Fall 2019,” the report acknowledges “they experienced a range of symptoms consistent with colds or allergies with accompanying symptoms typically not associated with COVID-19, and some of them were confirmed to have been sick with other illnesses unrelated to COVID-19.” The report confirmed that the lab didn’t always follow safety protocols and that institute researchers have genetically engineered coronaviruses. But the agencies don’t have information showing researchers worked on the strain that led to the pandemic. Why now? The intelligence was released to comply with a law Congress passed unanimously and President Joe Biden signed in March. WELCOME TO MONDAY PULSE. Do you know more about the health data practices at Amazon or other companies? I want to hear from you. Reach me at bleonard@politico.com. And, as always, your regular Pulse host Daniel Payne wants to hear from you, too, at dpayne@politico.com. TODAY ON OUR PULSE CHECK PODCAST, host Kelly Hooper asks Daniel about his reporting on House Republicans' desire to reform Medicare’s oft-criticized payment system and why prospects for legislation this year are slim.
| | | | | | | A message from PhRMA: Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) decide if medicines get covered and what you pay, regardless of what your doctor prescribes. They say they want lower prices, yet they often deny or limit coverage of lower-cost generics and biosimilars, instead covering medicines with higher prices so they make more money. What else are they hiding? | | | | | | | 
Amazon has pushed back the rollout of its Amazon Clinic telehealth service. | David Ryder/Getty Images | AMAZON TELEMEDICINE DELAY — Amazon is putting the launch of a major expansion of its Amazon Clinic telehealth service on hold for three weeks as lawmakers express concerns about the program’s privacy practices, according to an email from a person with direct knowledge that was shared with POLITICO. The email says Amazon is delaying promotional activity for three weeks because of a letter from Sens. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) that raised concerns that the company is “harvesting” health data from patients. The email also mentions that POLITICO is writing a story about the senators’ concerns. The service is available in 33 states and leans on so-called asynchronous care, meaning patients fill out a form for treatment of conditions like urinary tract infections and conjunctivitis and receive emergency contraception and birth control. Amazon planned to announce a 50-state launch of synchronous care — treatment provided via live video — tomorrow. Amazon’s response: An Amazon spokesperson denied there was a “delay as a result of an external inquiry.” “Amazon Clinic has stringent customer privacy policies, and complies with HIPAA and all other applicable laws and regulations. We’re focused on building products and services that our customers love, and we look forward to continuing to bring Amazon Clinic to even more customers to help address their everyday health care needs,” the spokesperson said. The concerns: In the letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, the lawmakers pointed to recent reporting that Amazon Clinic requires patients to sign a release giving the company “complete” access to their health information. By signing, customers authorize Amazon to share their data and acknowledge that it’s not protected by HIPAA, the federal health privacy law. Amazon says patients who sign the release don’t need to provide duplicate information if the third-party provider Amazon Clinic connects them with no longer works with Amazon, which enhances the patient experience. Sharing data among trusted providers is routine — and a goal of the health industry to promote better care — but lawmakers are concerned about protecting patient information as more of it goes online, data brokers sell it and hackers try to steal it.
| | | | SUBSCRIBE TO POWER SWITCH: The energy landscape is profoundly transforming. Power Switch is a daily newsletter that unlocks the most important stories driving the energy sector and the political forces shaping critical decisions about your energy future, from production to storage, distribution to consumption. Don’t miss out on Power Switch, your guide to the politics of energy transformation in America and around the world. SUBSCRIBE TODAY. | | | | | | | | | BIG CA HEALTH CARE DEAL — Major players in California’s health care field have reached a deal on how they want the state to spend $19 billion in proceeds of a renewed tax on insurance plans plus the federal funds that go with it, POLITICO’s Rachel Bluth reports. It’s a massive victory for the health care industry that comes after months of negotiations between bitter industry rivals, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office and state lawmakers. It would impose a tax on health care plans in what those involved described as a once-in-a-generation investment into a system that serves nearly 16 million Californians. The past three times California levied this tax on health plans, it used the money to balance the budget during economic downturns. Now, for the first time, much of the revenue will be spent to improve the state’s publicly subsidized health care system — and in a year when the state faces a $32 billion budget deficit. After federal funds are factored in, the state will be able to spend north of $35 billion, said Jennifer Kent, a former administration official who helped the coalition propose a structure for the tax.
| | | | A message from PhRMA:   | | | | | GOV’T FUNDING WATCH: DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN — Forget Sept. 30: Get ready for another end-of-the-year government funding battle. Three months before the next shutdown deadline, both sides aren’t close to a deal to fund the government, POLITICO’s Caitlin Emma and Jennifer Scholtes report. Top lawmakers think that Congress will punt until the holiday season. The funding deal would fund federal agencies involved in health care, and many hope health policies will ride on the funding vehicle. FTC CHAIR TO TESTIFY — Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan is set to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on July 13, POLITICO’s Rebecca Kern reports. Khan has long been a target of the committee’s chair, Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). She’ll likely be asked about Twitter, but she could be grilled on her agency’s push against hospital mergers and health data crackdown. U.S. antitrust officials have zeroed in on consolidation in the economy, including in health care, and the FTC is seeking to tighten regulation of health data privacy online. FENTANYL IN THE NDAA — Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) have added an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act aimed at countering fentanyl, Carmen reports. It would require a strategy from the Department of Defense to counter fentanyl trafficking and a report on efforts to enhance security cooperation with Mexico to counter transnational criminal organizations. The provision is included in the fiscal 2024 package that cleared the Senate Armed Services Committee in a closed session last week. GLOBAL HEALTH FUNDING — House appropriators approved their fiscal 2024 spending bill in subcommittee Friday to provide $52.5 billion in funding for the State Department and foreign aid programs, POLITICO’s Jennifer Scholtes reports. A total of $25.2 billion would flow to humanitarian programs, and go toward global health, economic and development assistance, for a 12 percent cut from current funding. Once the House returns from recess on July 11, the spending panel is expected to hold a full committee markup of the State-Foreign Operations measure.
| | | | LISTEN TO POLITICO'S ENERGY PODCAST: Check out our daily five-minute brief on the latest energy and environmental politics and policy news. Don't miss out on the must-know stories, candid insights, and analysis from POLITICO's energy team. Listen today. | | | | | | | | | January Contreras is leaving HHS, where she is the assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families. She’ll depart in August to return to Arizona with her family and husband, who recently took a new job there. CJ Mahler is now a professional staff member handling health care for the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. He was previously a legislative assistant for Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.).
| | STAT reports that an experimental Eli Lilly pill led to a 15 percent weight loss in a randomized clinical trial. Fierce Healthcare reports on Amazon Web Services’ new generative AI center.
| | | | A message from PhRMA: Middlemen say they want lower prices, yet they often deny or limit coverage of lower-cost generics and biosimilars while giving preferential coverage to medicines with higher prices. This might be good for PBM’s bottom line, but it can lead to higher costs for patients. What else are they hiding? | | | | | | | Follow us on Twitter | | | | Follow us | | | | |
