| The Trump administration is on a collision course with the Make America Healthy Again movement over its handling of pesticides, my colleague Rachel Roubein reports from The Washington Post newsroom. While the administration has embraced many of the MAHA movement’s priorities — such as changes to dietary guidelines and allowing states to restrict soda and junk food purchases through the SNAP program — it has disappointed some of its most vocal supporters by continuing to allow new pesticide approvals and resisting broader regulatory changes. → The tension spilled into a White House meeting last month that included President Donald Trump, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and regenerative farmers who favor improving soil health and increasing biodiversity over chemical fertilizers that have been criticized by some as leading to later health issues. Rachel reports exclusively that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins indicated during the meeting that the recent Supreme Court ruling limiting lawsuits over a popular weed killer’s possible health impacts was a win for farmers. Jonathan Lundgren, a regenerative farmer, told Rachel that Rollins’s logic “didn’t really add up, in my opinion.” The USDA declined to comment on the session specifically, but told Rachel in a statement that farmers are the “backbone of our nation” and “at the front line in our fight to make America healthy again.” Axios first reported the tense tenor of the White House meeting, which included a detail about Trump being warned by a top agriculture lobbyist that signing an executive order promoting alternatives to pesticides could cost him support from farmers. → Then, five days after the White House meeting, the Environmental Protection Agency approved several new pesticides. Many environmentalists and MAHA activists argue these compounds should not be widespread, contending they could harm human health. The dispute highlights an increasingly visible divide between the Trump administration and MAHA advocates, who expected figures such as Kennedy to push for far more aggressive restrictions on pesticides. Although Kennedy doesn’t have oversight over pesticides at his post, he’s long advocated against the products, previously saying that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, “is one of the likely culprits in America’s chronic disease epidemic.” He even successfully sued pesticide manufacturers as an environmental lawyer. While leading the nation’s federal health agencies, Kennedy has taken a more measured approach — acknowledging disagreements with some White House decisions, while emphasizing efforts to modernize the nation’s food system. The pesticide industry argues EPA reviews are rigorous and science-based, while major farm groups say newer products provide growers safer and more effective tools. CropLife America, a leading industry group, says it has found conversations with many MAHA advocates “productive” despite disagreements over pesticide use. Why it matters: For MAHA leaders, the issue has become a litmus test. Conservative wellness influencers and anti-pesticide advocates warn the administration risks alienating voters. Alex Clark, a prominent conservative wellness influencer and podcaster aligned with the MAHA movement, told Rachel that the backlash has been brewing for some time. In fact, Clark said she’s been sounding the alarm for over a year that the administration could see a “massive shift in support” if it does not address pesticide concerns. “I’ve got moms from the reddest of the red states telling me, ‘I’m just not voting in the midterms,’” Clark said. The moms, she added, say: “‘For the first time in my life, I feel completely backstabbed. … President Trump campaigned on pesticides. Everywhere I turn, the EPA is approving more, or the administration is sending somebody to argue on behalf of Bayer’s side in the Supreme Court case of Monsanto v. Durnell. They don’t have my back on this.’” What to watch: Some MAHA advocates are looking for changes at the state level amid frustrations with actions in Washington. For example, Zach Lahn just secured the GOP nomination in Iowa’s gubernatorial race after blaming the state’s unusual cancer surge in part on pesticides — a once-unthinkable stance for a Republican in the Corn Belt. Read the full story: “MAHA activists thought Trump would limit pesticides. His EPA has green-lit more.” The Senate rejected a measure to roll back the Trump administration’s pilot project that’s testing the use of AI-driven prior authorization in traditional Medicare. The pilot, called the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction, or WISeR, uses contracts with artificial intelligence companies to process requests — which some providers and Democratic lawmakers argue is leading to unnecessary delays in care. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is running the experiment in six states, has defended the model as an effort to root out improper payments involved with multiple services that are at high risk for fraud or overuse. WP Intelligence Lead Health Care Analyst Rebecca Adams reported earlier this year that the model was already causing headaches for providers. The 46-50 vote, which split along party lines, comes nearly two months after Sen. Ron Wyden (Oregon), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, partnered with four other Democratic senators to introduce the resolution. It leans on the Congressional Review Act, a legislative maneuver that allows Congress to roll back recently finalized federal rules with a simple majority vote. Prior authorization is typically only seen in private insurance, but the government-operated Medicare program is testing it out. Wyden called the pilot program a “mistake” on Thursday. “We cannot run the risk of it being sent to other parts of the health care system,” he said on the Senate floor. Why it matters: While the effort had always faced an uncertain path to victory in a GOP-controlled Congress, Democrats could use the vote in messaging against their Republican counterparts during a high-stakes election year. Prior authorization remains one of the most unpopular aspects of the health care system. Prior to the vote, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) defended the WISeR model, arguing that there has been “misinformation” about it leading to delays in care. “Providers deserve predictable payment for services, and avoidable waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare should be stopped,” Crapo said. “Ending this pilot program prematurely will deprive CMS of a useful tool to accomplish each of those goals.” On Wednesday, AARP sent a letter to senators urging them to vote to repeal the model. Bill Sweeney, the advocacy group’s senior vice president of government affairs, said on Thursday that he remains “deeply concerned” about how WISeR could potentially lead to denials or delays in care for older Americans. “Medical decisions should remain in the hands of patients, their families, and their trusted health care providers, not third-party contractors or algorithms,” Sweeney said in a statement. Messaging from the Trump administration that the health care system is burdened by a litany of fraud is resonating with its base — but not as much with the independent voters that Republicans need to capture in high-stakes elections this fall, according to a new poll released by KFF. - More than half of Americans — including 37 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of independents — view health care costs as the most pressing issue ahead of November’s midterm elections, saying that it’s “extremely important” that candidates talk about it.
- Among Republicans, fraud ranked as the issue a majority (55 percent) said was “extremely important” for political candidates to address. Forty-two percent of independent voters agreed.
- For Democratic voters, the “future of Medicare” just slightly edged out high health care costs as the top issue they’d like discussed during election season, with 61 percent and 60 percent, respectively, saying it’s “very important” for candidates to discuss.
- While most voters believe at least a little fraud exists in Medicare and Medicaid, 71 percent told pollsters that ensuring patients have access to care should take precedence over preventing fraud, even if some fraud occurs because of it.
- Voters are also skeptical that the Trump administration’s actions targeting Medicaid programs in states led by Democrats will achieve their stated goals: Just 43 percent believe the actions are likely to save taxpayers money, while only 31 percent think they will lower their own health care costs.
Eli Lilly is making another major bet on neuroscience, agreeing to acquire psychedelics company AtaiBeckley for up to $3.8 billion to bolster its own pipeline of experimental treatments for depression and other mental health disorders. → The acquisition reflects growing pharmaceutical interest in psychedelic-inspired medicines, which researchers hope can provide faster and longer-lasting relief than conventional antidepressants. It’s Eli Lilly’s 11th individual acquisition this year alone of nearly $30 billion. The deal gives Eli Lilly access to an investigational nasal spray that’s a synthetic form of the psychedelic compound 5-MeO-DMT, sometimes known as the “God molecule.” The therapy is being developed for people with treatment-resistant depression who haven’t responded to existing antidepressants. In midstage studies, a single treatment of AtaiBeckley’s nasal spray showed “rapid and durable” improvements in depressive symptoms that lasted for months. The drug, called BPL-003, is now in Phase 3 development. Why it matters: Wall Street analysts say that having an industry giant such as Eli Lilly jumping into the psychedelics space gives the products more heft, and could push more momentum behind development for the entire class of treatments. Other companies — including Otsuka and Compass Pathways — are also working on their own psychedelic treatments. As part of the deal, Eli Lilly will pay an estimated $2.8 billion upfront, with another $1 billion contingent upon future development and regulatory milestones. → Earlier this week, I covered the Trump administration’s efforts to expand research and development into psychedelic treatments, with a particular focus on treating veterans with PTSD and depression. “Hegseth touts a high-testosterone military, as doctors question his claims,” report The Post’s Daniel Wu and Tara Copp. “A viral trend is back. Has ALS research progressed since the first Ice Bucket Challenge?” Daniel also writes at The Post. “Fraud investigations are crumbling this state’s Medicaid system,” Amanda Chu and Robert King report at Politico. This newsletter is published by WP Intelligence, The Washington Post’s subscription service for professionals that provides business, policy and thought leaders with actionable insights. WP Intelligence operates independently from The Washington Post newsroom. Learn more about WP Intelligence. | 
