Author: bkellaway

PLEASANTVILLE, Iowa — Zach Mecham has heard politicians demand that Medicaid recipients work or lose their benefits. He also has run into a jumble of Medicaid rules that effectively prevent many people with disabilities from holding full-time jobs.

“Which is it? Do you want us to work or not?” he said.

Mecham, 31, relies on the public insurance program to pay for services that help him live on his own despite a disability caused by muscular dystrophy. He uses a wheelchair to get around and a portable ventilator to breathe.

A paid assistant stays with Mecham at night. Then a home health aide comes in the morning to help him get out of bed, go to the bathroom, shower, and get dressed for work at his online marketing business. Without the assistance, he would have to shutter his company and move into a nursing home, he said.

Private health insurance plans generally do not cover such support services, so he relies on Medicaid, which is jointly financed by federal and state governments and covers millions of Americans who have low incomes or disabilities.

Like most other states, Iowa has a Medicaid “buy-in program,” which allows people with disabilities to join Medicaid even if their incomes are a bit higher than would typically be permitted. About two-thirds of such programs charge premiums, and most have caps on how much money participants can earn and save.

Some states have raised or eliminated such financial caps for people with disabilities. Mecham has repeatedly traveled to the Iowa Capitol to lobby legislators to follow those states’ lead. The “Work Without Worry” bill would remove income and asset caps and instead require Iowans with disabilities to pay 6% of their incomes as premiums to remain in Medicaid. Those fees would be waived if participants pay premiums for employer-based health insurance, which would help cover standard medical care.

Disability rights advocates say income and asset caps for Medicaid buy-in programs can prevent participants from working full time or accepting promotions. “It’s a trap — a poverty trap,” said Stephen Lieberman, a policy director for the United Spinal Association, which supports the changes.

Lawmakers in Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Mississippi, and New Jersey have introduced bills to address the issue this year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Several other states have raised or eliminated their program’s income and asset caps. Iowa’s proposal is modeled on a Tennessee law passed last year, said Josh Turek, a Democratic state representative from Council Bluffs. Turek, who is promoting the Iowa bill, uses a wheelchair and earned two gold medals as a member of the U.S. Paralympics basketball team.

Proponents say allowing people with disabilities to earn more money and still qualify for Medicaid would help ease persistent worker shortages, including in rural areas where the working-age population is shrinking.

Turek believes now is a good time to seek expanded employment rights for people with disabilities, since Republicans who control the state and federal governments have been touting the value of holding a job. “That’s the trumpet I’ve been blowing,” he said with a smile.

The Iowa Legislature has been moving to require many nondisabled Medicaid recipients to work or to document why they can’t. Opponents say most Medicaid recipients who can work already do so, and the critics say work requirements add red tape that is expensive to administer and could lead Medicaid recipients to lose their coverage over paperwork issues.

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds has made Medicaid work requirements a priority this year. “If you can work, you should. It’s common sense and good policy,” the Republican governor told legislators in January in her “Condition of the State Address.” “Getting back to work can be a lifeline to stability and self-sufficiency.”

Her office did not respond to KFF Health News’ queries about whether Reynolds supports eliminating income and asset caps for Iowa’s buy-in program, known as Medicaid for Employed People with Disabilities.

National disability rights activists say income and asset caps on Medicaid buy-in programs discourage couples from marrying or even pressure them to split up if one or both partners have disabilities. That’s because in many states a spouse’s income and assets are counted when determining eligibility.

In Iowa, for example, the monthly net income cap is $3,138 for a single person and $4,259 for a couple.

Iowa’s current asset cap for a single person in the Medicaid buy-in plan is $12,000. For a couple, that cap rises only to $13,000. Countable assets include investments, bank accounts, and other things that could be easily converted to cash, but not a primary home, vehicle, or household furnishings.

“You have couples who have been married for decades who have to go through what we call a ‘Medicaid divorce,’ just to get access to these supports and services that cannot be covered in any other way,” said Maria Town, president of the American Association of People with Disabilities.

Town said some states, including Massachusetts, have removed income caps for people with disabilities who want to join Medicaid. She said the cost of adding such people to the program is at least partially offset by the premiums they pay for coverage and the increased taxes they contribute because they are allowed to work more hours. “I don’t think it has to be expensive” for the state and federal governments, she said.

Congress has considered a similar proposal to allow people with disabilities to work more hours without losing their Social Security disability benefits, but that bill has not advanced.

Although most states have Medicaid buy-in programs, enrollment is relatively low, said Alice Burns, a Medicaid analyst at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News, the publisher of California Healthline.

Fewer than 200,000 people nationwide are covered under the options, Burns said. “Awareness of these programs is really limited,” she said, and the income limits and paperwork can dissuade potential participants.

In states that charge premiums for Medicaid buy-in programs, monthly fees can range from $10 to 10% of a person’s income, according to a KFF analysis of 2022 data.

The Iowa proposal to remove income and asset caps has drawn bipartisan backing from legislators, including a 20-0 vote of approval from the House Health and Human Services Committee. “This aligns with things both parties are aiming to do,” said state Rep. Carter Nordman, a Republican who chaired a subcommittee meeting on the bill. Nordman said he supports the idea but wants to see an official estimate of how much it would cost the state to let more people with disabilities participate in the Medicaid buy-in program.

Mecham, the citizen activist lobbying for the Iowa bill, said he hopes it allows him to expand his online marketing and graphic design business, “Zach of All Trades.”

On a recent morning, health aide Courtnie Imler visited Mecham’s modest house in Pleasantville, a town of about 1,700 people in an agricultural region of central Iowa. Imler chatted with Mecham while she used a hoist to lift him out of his wheelchair and onto the toilet. Then she cleaned him up, brushed his hair, and helped him put on jeans and a John Deere T-shirt. She poured him a cup of coffee and put a straw in it so he could drink it on his own, swept the kitchen floor, and wiped the counters. After about an hour, she said goodbye.

After getting cleaned up and dressed, Mecham rolled his motorized wheelchair over to his plain wooden desk, fired up his computer, and began working on a social media video for a client promoting a book. He scrolled back and forth through footage of an interview she’d done, so he could pick the best clip to post online. He also shoots video, takes photos, and writes advertising copy.

Mecham loves feeling productive, and he figures he could work at least twice as many hours if not for the risk of losing Medicaid coverage. He said he’s allowed to make a bit more money than Iowa Medicaid’s standard limit because he signed up for a federal option under which he eventually expects to work his way off Social Security disability payments.

There are several such options for people with disabilities, but they all involve complicated paperwork and frequent reports, he said. “This is such a convoluted system that I have to navigate to build any kind of life for myself,” he said. Many people with disabilities are intimidated by the rules, so they don’t apply, he said. “If you get it wrong, you lose the health care your life depends on.”

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

BOULDER, Colo. — Colorado regulators are issuing licenses for providing psychedelic mushrooms and are planning to authorize the state’s first “healing centers,” where the mushrooms can be ingested under supervision, in late spring or early summer.

The dawn of state-regulated psychedelic mushrooms has arrived in Colorado, nearly two years since Oregon began offering them. The mushrooms are a Schedule I drug and illegal under federal law except for clinical research. But more than a dozen cities nationwide have deprioritized or decriminalized them in the past five years, and many eyes are turned toward Oregon’s and Colorado’s state-regulated programs.

“In Oregon and Colorado, we’re going to learn a lot about administration of psychedelics outside of clinical, religious, and underground settings because they’re the first to try this in the U.S.,” said William R. Smith, an assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine.

Psychedelic mushrooms and their psychoactive compound psilocybin have the potential to treat people with depression and anxiety, including those unresponsive to other medications or therapy. The National Institute on Drug Abuse, part of the National Institutes of Health, says the risk of mental health problems caused by ingesting mushrooms in a supervised clinical setting is low, but may be higher outside of a clinical setting. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a social media post last year, before his nomination as U.S. health secretary, that his “mind is open to the idea of psychedelics for treatment.”

Medical experts say more research is needed, particularly in people with a diagnosis or family history of psychotic or bipolar disorder. Adverse effects of psilocybin, including headache and nausea, typically resolve within one to two days. However, extended difficulties from using psychedelics can last weeks, months, or years; anxiety and fear, existential struggle, social disconnection, and feeling detached from oneself and one’s surroundings are most common. After the decriminalization and legalization in Oregon and Colorado, psychedelic mushroom exposures reported to poison control centers ticked up in these states and nationally.

In February, about 40 people organized by the psychedelic advocacy group the Nowak Society gathered in Boulder to talk about the coming changes in Colorado. They included Mandy Grace, who received her state license to administer psychedelic mushrooms, and Amanda Clark, a licensed mental health counselor from Denver, who both praised the therapeutic power of mushrooms.

“You get discouraged in your practice because the current therapies are not enough for people,” Clark said.

Colorado voters approved Proposition 122 in 2022 to legalize natural psychedelics, after Oregon voters in 2020 approved legalizing psilocybin for therapeutic use. Colorado’s program is modeled after, but not the same as, Oregon’s, under which 21,246 psilocybin products have been sold as of March, a total that could include secondary doses, according to the Oregon Health Authority.

As of mid-March, Colorado has received applications for at least 15 healing center licenses, nine cultivation licenses, four manufacturer licenses, and one testing facility license for growing and preparing the mushrooms, under rules developed over two years by the governor-appointed Natural Medicine Advisory Board.

Psychedelic treatments in Oregon are expensive, and are likely to be so in Colorado, too, said Tasia Poinsatte, Colorado director of the nonprofit Healing Advocacy Fund, which supports state-regulated programs for psychedelic therapy. In Oregon, psychedelic mushroom sessions are typically $1,000 to $3,000, are not covered by insurance, and must be paid for up front.

The mushrooms themselves are not expensive, Poinsatte said, but a facilitator’s time and support services are costly, and there are state fees. In Colorado, for doses over 2 milligrams, facilitators will screen participants at least 24 hours in advance, then supervise the session in which the participant consumes and experiences mushrooms, lasting several hours, plus a later meeting to integrate the experience.

Facilitators, who may not have experience with mental health emergencies, need training in screening, informed consent, and postsession monitoring, Smith said. “Because these models are new, we need to gather data from Colorado and Oregon to ensure safety.”

Facilitators generally pay a$420 training fee, which allows them to pursue the necessary consultation hours, and roughly $900 a year for a license, and healing centers pay $3,000 to $6,000 for initial licenses in Colorado. But the up-front cost for facilitators is significant: The required 150 hours in a state-accredited program and 80 hours of hands-on training can cost $10,000 or more, and Clark said she wouldn’t pursue a facilitator license due to the prohibitive time and cost.

To increase affordability for patients in Colorado, Poinsatte said, healing centers plan to offer sliding-scale pay options, and discounts for veterans, Medicaid enrollees, and those with low incomes. Group sessions are another option to lower costs.

Colorado law does not allow retail sales of psilocybin, unlike cannabis, which can be sold both recreationally and medically in the state. But it allows adults 21 and older to grow, use, and share psychedelic mushrooms for personal use.

Despite the retail ban, adjacent businesses have mushroomed. Inside the warehouse and laboratory of Activated Brands in Arvada, brown bags of sterilized grains such as corn, millet, and sorghum and plastic bags of soil substrate are for sale, along with genetic materials and ready-to-grow kits.

Co-founder Sean Winfield sells these supplies for growing psychedelic or functional mushrooms such as lion’s mane to people hoping to grow their own at home. Soon, Activated Brands will host cultivation and education classes for the public, Winfield said.

Winfield and co-founder Shawn Cox recently hosted a psychedelic potluck at which experts studying and cultivating psychedelic mushrooms discussed genetics, extraction, and specialized equipment.

Psychedelic mushrooms have a long history in Indigenous cultures, and provisions for their use in spiritual, cultural, or religious ceremonies are included in Colorado law, along with recognition of the cultural harm that could occur to federally recognized tribes and Indigenous people if natural medicine is overly commercialized or exploited.

Several studies over the past five years have shown the long-term benefits of psilocybin for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder, and the Food and Drug Administration designated it a breakthrough therapy. Late-stage trials, often a precursor to application for FDA approval, are underway.

Smith said psilocybin is a promising tool for treating mental health disorders but has not yet been shown to be better than other advanced treatments. Joshua Woolley, an associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of California-San Francisco, said he has seen the benefits of psilocybin as an investigator in clinical trials.

“People can change hard-set habits. They can become unstuck. They can see things in new ways,” he said of treating patients with a combination of psilocybin and psychotherapy.

Colorado, unlike Oregon, allows integration of psilocybin into existing mental health and medical practices with a clinical facilitator license, and through micro-healing centers that are more limited in the amounts of mushrooms they can store.

Still, Woolley said, between the federal ban and new state laws for psychedelics, this is uncharted territory. Most drugs used to treat mental health disorders are regulated by the FDA, something that Colorado is “taking into its own hands” by setting up its own program to regulate manufacturing and administration of psilocybin.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado declined to comment on its policy toward state-regulated psychedelic programs or personal use provisions, but Poinsatte hopes the same federal hands-off approach to marijuana will be taken for psilocybin in Oregon and Colorado.

Winfield said he looks forward to the upcoming rollout and potential addition of other plant psychedelics, such as mescaline. “We’re talking about clandestine industries coming into the light,” he said.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

On a sunny weekday in Atlanta, a small crowd of people gathered for a rally outside of a labor union headquarters building.

The event, put together by Atlanta-area Democratic U.S. Rep. Nikema Williams, was attended mostly by union members and recently fired federal workers, including Ryan Sloane.

“I was fired by an anonymous email at 9 p.m. in the middle of a holiday weekend,” he said.

Sloane is still seeking reinstatement, but he feels he no longer has much to lose by speaking out.

“I’m only here today because they cannot fire me twice,” Sloane said.

When he received his termination notice, he was a few months into a job as a public affairs specialist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

At the CDC, his days were spent updating far-flung local TV, radio, and newspaper journalists about threats such as seasonal flu, measles, and food safety in their communities.

A judge has ordered the reinstatement of some fired federal employees, at least temporarily. But their jobs are still on the line.

Sloane said his former colleagues at the CDC whose jobs aren’t yet in limbo are scared.

“They are terrified that their life’s work is going to be deleted from servers and not backed up because it does not comport with the ideologies of the new administration,” he said. “No one is benefiting from this.”

From the end of January to mid-February, the Trump administration took offline some CDC webpages and froze external communications, including its widely read Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report epidemiological digest.

The webpages that were removed included CDC public health reports, datasets, and guidance on infectious diseases and sexual health. After a court order, some agency information was restored, at least for now.

But even temporary disruptions to CDC communications could have big ripple effects.

It is information that state and local health departments, hospitals, university researchers, and others rely on to help them respond to outbreaks.

“CDC is there to provide technical information, provide funding, provide support, but it’s a collaborative work, working together to keep Americans safe,” said former CDC Director Tom Frieden, who headed the agency from 2009 to 2017. He is now president and CEO of the nonprofit organization Resolve to Save Lives. “In this country, we have a patchwork or network of public health. It’s really up to the local, city, and state health departments to get the job done.”

City and state health agencies also need the collaboration of CDC experts to help investigate local disease outbreaks and other threats to public health.

A clinician who has worked at the agency for more than two decades pointed to the CDC’s singular ability to send medical supplies and deploy highly specialized teams of scientists to help local communities identify and contain outbreaks. KFF Health News agreed not to use the clinician’s name because she fears she will be fired for airing these views publicly.

“A lot of them are assigned to state and local health departments, so really even beyond individual positions, any funding cuts that the agency takes are also passed on to state and local health departments,” the clinician said. “A lot of their budget comes from federal money as well.”

The Trump administration has attempted to terminate hundreds of employees from the CDC alone, along with hundreds more workers at the National Institutes of Health and other federal agencies with a U.S. health and safety role.

Many public health and science researchers are concerned about the cuts’ impacts on the nation’s ability to respond to threats — and about whether state and local public health departments will be able to keep communities healthy without the CDC’s partnership.

Billionaire Elon Musk has said his Department of Government Efficiency intends to keep cutting federal agencies’ budgets and staff, targeting what it calls “fraud.”

“Anytime someone gets fired, it’s always difficult. But with $36 trillion in debt, we have to reduce the size of the federal government,” Republican U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene told WABE during a March visit to the Georgia State Capitol.

Her district includes parts of suburban Atlanta about 30 miles from CDC headquarters.

Greene also chairs a House subcommittee also called “DOGE,” for “Delivering on Government Efficiency.”

“Fortunately, with all the investments that are being brought back into the country under President Trump, I really hope that those federal workers are able to find new jobs,” she said.

She did not comment on whether local public health departments around the country would be able to work efficiently without the support of CDC experts who have been terminated.

But many U.S. public health experts are expressing concern.

The CDC has long been a key training ground for the next generation of U.S. public health researchers.

Emory University epidemiology professor Patrick Sullivan was one of them earlier in his career. The HIV expert previously worked at the CDC for about 15 years.

“When I started working in HIV prevention at CDC in the early 1990s, we didn’t have the treatments that essentially allowed people living with HIV to have a full, healthy, normal lifespan,” he said. “We didn’t have the treatments that essentially allowed people living with HIV to have a test that people could take home to test themselves.”

Sullivan said the progress he has seen over the last several decades gave him optimism, and that advances in HIV treatment and prevention are a great example of the importance of federal support for public health work.

“Discovery science and pharmacy science really have given us the tools that we need to end the HIV epidemic in the United States,” he said.

But, to have those scientific tools without adequate public health staff or funding to use them, he said, will cost American lives.

This article is from a partnership that includes WABE, NPR, and KFF Health News.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

En un soleado día de semana en Atlanta, un pequeño grupo de personas se reunió para realizar una manifestación frente a la sede de un sindicato.

Al evento, organizado por Nikema Williams, representante demócrata en el Congreso nacional, asistieron miembros del sindicato y también trabajadores federales recientemente despedidos, entre ellos Ryan Sloane.

“Me despidieron a través de un correo electrónico anónimo a las 9 pm en pleno fin de semana festivo”, declaró.

Sloane sigue peleando por su reincorporación, pero siente que ya no tiene mucho que perder alzando su voz.

“Estoy aquí hoy porque no pueden despedirme dos veces”, declaró Sloane.

Cuando recibió su notificación de despido, llevaba unos meses trabajando como especialista en información pública en los Centros para el Control y Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC).

En los CDC, dedicaba sus días a informar a periodistas locales de televisión, radio y periódicos sobre amenazas como la gripe estacional, el sarampión y la seguridad alimentaria en sus comunidades.

Un juez ha ordenado la reincorporación de algunos empleados federales despedidos, al menos temporalmente. Pero sus puestos de trabajo siguen en riesgo.

Sloane comentó que sus colegas de los CDC, cuyos puestos aún no están en el limbo, están asustados.

“Les aterra que el trabajo de toda una vida se borre de los servidores y no se respalde porque no se ajusta a las ideologías de la nueva administración”, declaró. “Nadie se beneficia con esto”.

Desde finales de enero hasta mediados de febrero, la administración Trump desconectó algunas páginas de internet de los CDC y congeló las comunicaciones externas, incluido su resumen epidemiológico, el Informe Semanal de Morbilidad y Mortalidad, un material muy leído y consultado.

Las páginas web eliminadas incluían informes de salud pública, conjuntos de datos y directrices sobre enfermedades infecciosas y de salud sexual. Tras una orden judicial, se restableció parte de la información de la agencia, al menos por ahora.

Pero incluso las interrupciones temporales en las comunicaciones de los CDC podrían tener un gran impacto.

Es información de la que dependen los departamentos de salud estatales y locales, los hospitales, los investigadores universitarios y otros para responder a brotes.

“Los CDC están ahí para proporcionar información técnica, financiación y apoyo, pero es un trabajo colaborativo, trabajando juntos para mantener a los estadounidenses seguros”, dijo el exdirector de los CDC, Tom Frieden, quien dirigió la agencia de 2009 a 2017.

Actualmente, Frieden es presidente y director ejecutivo de la organización sin fines de lucro Resolve to Save Lives. “En este país, tenemos una red fragmentada de salud pública. Depende de los departamentos de salud locales, municipales y estatales hacer el trabajo”.

Las agencias de salud municipales y estatales también necesitan la colaboración de los expertos de los CDC para ayudar a investigar brotes locales de enfermedades y otras amenazas de salud pública.

Una médica que ha trabajado en la agencia durante más de dos décadas destacó la singular capacidad de los CDC para enviar suministros médicos y desplegar equipos de científicos altamente especializados para ayudar a las comunidades locales a identificar y contener brotes. KFF Health News acordó no revelar su nombre por temor al despido por opinar públicamente.

“Muchos de ellos están asignados a departamentos de salud estatales y locales, así que, incluso más allá de los puestos individuales, cualquier recorte de fondos que implemente la agencia también se traslada a esos departamentos”, declaró la médica. “Gran parte de sus presupuestos también proviene de fondos federales”.

La administración Trump ha intentado despedir a cientos de empleados de los CDC, junto con cientos de trabajadores de los Institutos Nacionales de Salud (NIH) y otras agencias federales con funciones en materia de salud y seguridad.

Muchos investigadores de salud pública y ciencia están preocupados por el impacto de los recortes en la capacidad del país para responder a amenazas, y sobre si los departamentos de salud pública estatales y locales podrán mantener la salud de las comunidades sin la colaboración de los CDC.

El multimillonario Elon Musk ha declarado que su Departamento de Eficiencia Gubernamental (DOGE) tiene la intención de seguir recortando presupuestos y personal de las agencias federales, combatiendo lo que denomina “fraude”.

“Cada vez que despiden a alguien, es difícil. Pero con una deuda de $36 mil millones, tenemos que reducir el tamaño del gobierno federal”, declaró la representante republicana Marjorie Taylor Greene a WABE durante una visita al Capitolio estatal de Georgia en marzo.

Su distrito incluye zonas suburbanas de Atlanta, a unos 48 kilómetros de la sede de los CDC. Greene también preside un subcomité de la Cámara de Representantes, también llamado DOGE.

“Afortunadamente, con todas las inversiones que se están reincorporando al país bajo la presidencia de Trump, espero de verdad que esos trabajadores federales puedan encontrar nuevos empleos”, afirmó.

No comentó si los departamentos locales de salud pública de todo el país podrían trabajar eficientemente sin el apoyo de los expertos de los CDC que han sido despedidos.

Pero muchos especialistas en salud pública están expresando su preocupación.

Los CDC han sido durante mucho tiempo un centro de formación clave para la próxima generación de investigadores de salud pública del país.

Patrick Sullivan, profesor de epidemiología de la Universidad Emory, fue uno de ellos al principio de su carrera. Este experto en VIH trabajó en los CDC durante unos 15 años.

“Cuando comencé a trabajar en la prevención del VIH en los CDC a principios de la década de 1990, no contábamos con los tratamientos que permitieran a las personas con VIH tener una vida plena, saludable y normal”, dijo. “No contábamos con los tratamientos que permitieran a las personas con VIH llevarse un kit a casa para hacerse la prueba ellos mismos”.

Sullivan afirmó que el progreso que ha visto en las últimas décadas le generaba optimismo, y que los avances en el tratamiento y la prevención del VIH son un gran ejemplo de la importancia del apoyo federal al trabajo de salud pública.

“La ciencia del descubrimiento y la ciencia farmacéutica realmente nos han proporcionado las herramientas que necesitamos para acabar con la epidemia de VIH en Estados Unidos”, afirmó.

Pero agregó que, sin esas herramientas científicas, sin financiación y sin personal de salud pública, se perderán vidas.

Este artículo es parte de una colaboración que incluye a WABE, NPR y KFF Health News.

Esta historia fue producida por KFF Health News, conocido antes como Kaiser Health News (KHN), una redacción nacional que produce periodismo en profundidad sobre temas de salud y es uno de los principales programas operativos de KFF, la fuente independiente de investigación de políticas de salud, encuestas y periodismo. 

BOULDER, Colorado — Los organismos reguladores de Colorado están emitiendo licencias que permiten suministrar hongos psicodélicos con fines terapéuticos. A fines de la primavera o principios del verano es posible que ya estén autorizados los primeros “centros de sanación” estatales, donde se podrán consumir los hongos bajo supervisión.

Esto ocurre casi dos años después de que Oregon autorizara el uso de estos hongos también bajo regulación del estado.

Los hongos son una droga de la Lista I y según las leyes federales son ilegales excepto para la investigación clínica. Sin embargo, en los últimos cinco años, más de una docena de ciudades en todo el país los han despenalizado o ya no priorizan enfrentar su uso. Y muchos observadores están atentos a los programas estatales regulados de Oregon y Colorado. 

“En Oregon y Colorado vamos a aprender mucho sobre la administración de psicodélicos fuera de entornos clínicos, religiosos y clandestinos, porque son los primeros en probar esto en Estados Unidos”, dijo William R. Smith, profesor asistente de psiquiatría en la Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad de Carolina del Norte. 

Los hongos psicodélicos y su compuesto psicoactivo, la psilocibina, tienen el potencial de tratar a personas con depresión y ansiedad, incluso a aquellas que no responden a otros medicamentos o terapias.

El Instituto Nacional sobre el Abuso de Drogas, que forma parte de los Institutos Nacionales de Salud (NIH), indica que el riesgo de que se presenten problemas de salud mental derivados del consumo de hongos en un entorno clínico supervisado es bajo, pero que puede ser más significativo fuera de ese contexto.

En una publicación en redes sociales el año pasado, antes de su nominación como secretario de Salud de Estados Unidos, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. comentó que tenía “la mente abierta a la idea de los tratamientos con psicodélicos”. 

Los médicos expertos consideran que se necesita más investigación, especialmente en personas con diagnóstico o antecedentes familiares de trastorno psicótico o bipolar. Los efectos adversos de la psilocibina, como dolor de cabeza y náuseas, suelen resolverse en uno o dos días.

Sin embargo, hay efectos persistentes derivados del uso de psicodélicos que pueden durar semanas, meses o incluso años. Los síntomas más comunes incluyen ansiedad y miedo, crisis existencial, desconexión social, y sensación de desapego de uno mismo y del entorno.

Tras la despenalización y legalización en Oregon y Colorado, los casos informados de consumo de hongos psicodélicos reportados a los centros de control de intoxicaciones aumentaron tanto en estos estados como a nivel nacional. 

En febrero, unas 40 personas se reunieron en Boulder, en un encuentro organizado por Nowak Society, un grupo de defensa de los psicodélicos, para hablar sobre los próximos cambios en Colorado.

Entre ellas estaban Mandy Grace, quien recibió su licencia estatal para administrar hongos psicodélicos, y Amanda Clark, consejera de salud mental con licencia en Denver, ambas defensoras del poder terapéutico de los hongos. 

“Ver que las terapias actuales no son suficientes para las personas, te desanima en tu práctica profesional”, explicó Clark. 

En 2022, los votantes de Colorado aprobaron la Propuesta 122 para legalizar los psicodélicos naturales, después que los votantes de Oregon aprobaran, en 2020, la legalización de la psilocibina para uso terapéutico.

El programa de Colorado se basa en el de Oregon, aunque no es idéntico. En Oregon, hasta marzo, se habían vendido 21.246 productos de psilocibina, un total que podría incluir dosis de seguimiento administradas a un mismo paciente, según la Oregon Health Authority.

Hasta mediados de marzo, Colorado había recibido por lo menos 15 solicitudes de licencias de centros de sanación, nueve para cultivo, cuatro para manufactura y una licencia de instalación para análisis del cultivo y preparación de los hongos bajo normas desarrolladas durante dos años por la Junta Asesora de Medicina Natural, designada por el gobernador. 

En Oregon, los tratamientos psicodélicos son costosos y es probable que en Colorado también lo sean, advirtió Tasia Poinsatte, directora en Colorado del Healing Advocacy Fund, una organización sin fines de lucro que apoya los programas estatales de terapia psicodélica. En ese estado, las sesiones con hongos psicodélicos suelen costar entre $1.000 y $3.000, no están cubiertas por las aseguradoras, y deben pagarse por adelantado. 

Los hongos en sí no son costosos, explicó Poinsatte, pero el tiempo del facilitador y los servicios de apoyo sí lo son, además de las tarifas estatales.

En Colorado, para dosis superiores a los 2 miligramos, los facilitadores deberán evaluar a los participantes al menos 24 horas antes. Además, supervisan la sesión, que dura varias horas, en las que los participantes consumen y experimentan con los hongos. Finalmente, realizan una reunión posterior para analizar la experiencia. 

Los facilitadores, que pueden no tener experiencia en emergencias de salud mental, necesitan adquirir formación en detección, consentimiento informado y seguimiento posterior a la sesión, dijo Smith. “Debido a que estos modelos son nuevos, necesitamos recopilar datos de Colorado y Oregon para garantizar la seguridad”, agregó.

En Colorado, los facilitadores generalmente pagan una tarifa de capacitación de $420, que les permite cumplir con las horas de consulta necesarias, y alrededor de $900 anuales por la licencia. Los centros de sanación pagan entre $3.000 y $6.000 para obtener las primeras licencias.

El costo inicial para los facilitadores es significativo: las 150 horas requeridas en un programa acreditado por el estado y las 80 horas de formación práctica pueden costar $10.000 o más. Clark dijo que no solicitaría una licencia de facilitadora debido al tiempo y al costo, que considera prohibitivo.

Con el propósito de aumentar la accesibilidad en Colorado, Poinsatte dijo que los centros de sanación planean ofrecer opciones de pago en cuotas y descuentos para veteranos, beneficiarios de Medicaid y personas de bajos ingresos. Las sesiones grupales son otra opción para reducir costos. 

La legislación de Colorado no permite la venta minorista de psilocibina, a diferencia del cannabis, que puede venderse tanto con fines recreativos como medicinales. Sin embargo, autoriza que los adultos mayores de 21 años cultiven, consuman y compartan hongos psicodélicos para uso personal. 

A pesar de la prohibición de venta minorista, los negocios relacionados con los psicodélicos han aumentado considerablemente. Dentro del almacén y laboratorio de Activated Brands, en Arvada, se venden bolsas de granos esterilizados como maíz, mijo y sorgo, junto con sustratos de suelo, materiales genéticos y kits listos para el cultivo. 

Sean Winfield, cofundador de la empresa, vende estos suministros para el cultivo de hongos psicodélicos o no psicoactivos, como el llamado la “melena de león”, a personas interesadas en cultivarlos en su casa. Además, pronto, Activated Brands ofrecerá clases de cultivo y educación al público, dijo Winfield. 

Winfield y su socio, Shawn Cox, organizaron recientemente una comida comunitaria sobre psicodélicos en la que expertos en el estudio y cultivo de este tipo de hongos hablaron sobre genética, extracción y equipamiento especializado. 

Los hongos psicodélicos tienen una larga historia en las culturas indígenas, y las disposiciones para su uso en ceremonias espirituales, culturales o religiosas están incluidas en la ley de Colorado junto con el reconocimiento del daño cultural que podrían sufrir las comunidades y los pueblos indígenas reconocidos a nivel federal si la medicina natural se comercializa o se explota en exceso. 

Varios estudios realizados en los últimos cinco años han evidenciado los beneficios a largo plazo del uso de la psilocibina en el caso de trastornos depresivos mayores resistentes al tratamiento, y la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA) la ha reconocido como una terapia innovadora. En la actualidad, se están realizando ensayos en fases avanzadas, que suelen ser el paso previo para solicitar la aprobación de la FDA.

Sin embargo, Smith dijo que, aunque la psilocibina es una herramienta prometedora para tratar trastornos de salud mental, aún no se ha demostrado que sea más eficaz que otros tratamientos avanzados.

Joshua Woolley, profesor asociado de psiquiatría y ciencias del comportamiento en la Universidad de California-San Francisco, dijo que, como investigador en ensayos clínicos, ha visto los beneficios de la psilocibina.

“Las personas pueden cambiar hábitos profundamente arraigados. Pueden salir de bloqueos. Pueden ver las cosas de nuevas maneras”, afirmó, refiriéndose al tratamiento de pacientes con una combinación de psilocibina y psicoterapia. 

Colorado, a diferencia de Oregon, permite la incorporación de la psilocibina en las prácticas de salud mental y médicas existentes mediante una licencia de facilitador clínico, así como a través de microcentros de sanación que tienen mayores limitaciones en la cantidad de hongos que pueden almacenar. 

Aun así, Woolley señaló que, debido a la prohibición federal y a las nuevas leyes estatales sobre psicodélicos, este es un territorio inexplorado. La mayoría de los medicamentos utilizados para tratar trastornos de salud mental están regulados por la FDA, algo que Colorado “está tomando en sus propias manos” al establecer su propio programa para regular la fabricación y administración de psilocibina. 

La Oficina del Fiscal de Estados Unidos para el Distrito de Colorado no quiso comentar sobre su política hacia los programas de psicodélicos regulados por el estado o las disposiciones sobre el uso personal, pero Poinsatte espera que en Oregon y Colorado se adopte, para la psilocibina, el mismo tipo de enfoque federal de no intervención que rige para la marihuana. 

Winfield dijo que espera ansiosamente las próximas regulaciones y la posible incorporación de otras plantas psicodélicas, como la mescalina.

“Estamos hablando de que las industrias clandestinas salgan a la luz”, afirmó.

Esta historia fue producida por KFF Health News, conocido antes como Kaiser Health News (KHN), una redacción nacional que produce periodismo en profundidad sobre temas de salud y es uno de los principales programas operativos de KFF, la fuente independiente de investigación de políticas de salud, encuestas y periodismo. 

The Host

Two months into the new administration, federal workers and contractors remain off-balance as the Trump administration ramps up its efforts to cancel jobs and programs — even as federal judges declare many of those efforts illegal and/or unconstitutional.

As it eliminates programs deemed duplicative or unnecessary, however, President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency is also cutting programs and workers aligned with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” agenda.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Health News, Jessie Hellmann of CQ Roll Call, Sarah Karlin-Smith of the Pink Sheet, and Rachel Roubein of The Washington Post.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

• Kennedy’s comments this week about allowing bird flu to spread unchecked through farms provided another example of the new secretary of health and human services making claims that lack scientific support and could instead undermine public health.
• The Trump administration is experiencing more pushback from the federal courts over its efforts to reduce and dismantle federal agencies, and federal workers who have been rehired under court orders report returning to uncertainty and instability within government agencies.
• The second Trump administration is signaling it plans to dismantle HIV prevention programs in the United States, including efforts that the first Trump administration started. A Texas midwife is accused of performing illegal abortions. And a Trump appointee resigns after being targeted by a Republican senator.

Plus, for “extra credit,” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: The Washington Post’s “The Free-Living Bureaucrat,” by Michael Lewis.

Rachel Roubein: The Washington Post’s “Her Research Grant Mentioned ‘Hesitancy.’ Now Her Funding Is Gone.” by Carolyn Y. Johnson.

Sarah Karlin-Smith: KFF Health News’ “Scientists Say NIH Officials Told Them To Scrub mRNA References on Grants,” by Arthur Allen.

Jessie Hellmann: Stat’s “NIH Cancels Funding for a Landmark Diabetes Study at a Time of Focus on Chronic Disease,” by Elaine Chen.

Also mentioned in this week’s podcast:

To hear all our podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to KFF Health News’ “What the Health?” on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. 

SACRAMENTO — A judge has initiated a federal court takeover of California’s troubled prison mental health system by naming the former head of the Federal Bureau of Prisons to serve as receiver, giving her four months to craft a plan to provide adequate care for tens of thousands of prisoners with serious mental illness.

Senior U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller issued her order March 19, identifying Colette Peters as the nominated receiver. Peters, who was Oregon’s first female corrections director and known as a reformer, ran the scandal-plagued federal prison system for 30 months until President Donald Trump took office in January. During her tenure, she closed a women’s prison in Dublin, east of Oakland, that had become known as the “rape club.”

Michael Bien, who represents prisoners with mental illness in the long-running prison lawsuit, said Peters is a good choice. Bien said Peters’ time in Oregon and Washington, D.C., showed that she “kind of buys into the fact that there are things we can do better in the American system.”

“We took strong objection to many things that happened under her tenure at the BOP, but I do think that this is a different job and she’s capable of doing it,” said Bien, whose firm also represents women who were housed at the shuttered federal women’s prison.

California corrections officials called Peters “highly qualified” in a statement, while Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office did not immediately comment. Mueller gave the parties until March 28 to show cause why Peters should not be appointed.

Peters is not talking to the media at this time, Bien said. The judge said Peters is to be paid $400,000 a year, prorated for the four-month period.

About 34,000 people incarcerated in California prisons have been diagnosed with serious mental illnesses, representing more than a third of California’s prison population, who face harm because of the state’s noncompliance, Mueller said.

Appointing a receiver is a rare step taken when federal judges feel they have exhausted other options. A receiver took control of Alabama’s correctional system in 1976, and they have otherwise been used to govern prisons and jails only about a dozen times, mostly to combat poor conditions caused by overcrowding. Attorneys representing inmates in Arizona have asked a judge to take over prison health care there.

Mueller’s appointment of a receiver comes nearly 20 years after a different federal judge seized control of California’s prison medical system and installed a receiver, currently J. Clark Kelso, with broad powers to hire, fire, and spend the state’s money.

California officials initially said in August that they would not oppose a receivership for the mental health program provided that the receiver was also Kelso, saying then that federal control “has successfully transformed medical care” in California prisons. But Kelso withdrew from consideration in September, as did two subsequent candidates. Kelso said he could not act “zealously and with fidelity as receiver in both cases.”

Both cases have been running for so long that they are now overseen by a second generation of judges. The original federal judges, in a legal battle that reached the U.S. Supreme Court, more than a decade ago forced California to significantly reduce prison crowding in a bid to improve medical and mental health care for incarcerated people.

State officials in court filings defended their improvements over the decades. Prisoners’ attorneys countered that treatment remains poor, as evidenced in part by the system’s record-high suicide rate, topping 31 suicides per 100,000 prisoners, nearly double that in federal prisons.

“More than a quarter of the 30 class-members who died by suicide in 2023 received inadequate care because of understaffing,” prisoners’ attorneys wrote in January, citing the prison system’s own analysis. One prisoner did not receive mental health appointments for seven months “before he hanged himself with a bedsheet.”

They argued that the November passage of a ballot measure increasing criminal penalties for some drug and theft crimes is likely to increase the prison population and worsen staffing shortages.

California officials argued in January that Mueller isn’t legally justified in appointing a receiver because “progress has been slow at times but it has not stalled.”

Mueller has countered that she had no choice but to appoint an outside professional to run the prisons’ mental health program, given officials’ intransigence even after she held top officials in contempt of court and levied fines topping $110 million in June. Those extreme actions, she said, only triggered more delays.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on March 19 upheld Mueller’s contempt ruling but said she didn’t sufficiently justify calculating the fines by doubling the state’s monthly salary savings from understaffing prisons. It upheld the fines to the extent that they reflect the state’s actual salary savings but sent the case back to Mueller to justify any higher penalty.

Mueller had been set to begin additional civil contempt proceedings against state officials for their failure to meet two other court requirements: adequately staffing the prison system’s psychiatric inpatient program and improving suicide prevention measures. Those could bring additional fines topping tens of millions of dollars.

But she said her initial contempt order has not had the intended effect of compelling compliance. Mueller wrote as far back as July that additional contempt rulings would also be likely to be ineffective as state officials continued to appeal and seek delays, leading “to even more unending litigation, litigation, litigation.”

She went on to foreshadow her latest order naming a receiver in a preliminary order: “There is one step the court has taken great pains to avoid. But at this point,” Mueller wrote, “the court concludes the only way to achieve full compliance in this action is for the court to appoint its own receiver.”