For seafood lovers, there are few things more appealing than a simple slab of raw tuna — a fish whose fatty, savory, and tender muscle tissue has been a delicacy for thousands of years.
Unfortunately for those foodies, fresh raw fish comes with the distinct possibility of parasitic infection. Off the coasts of southern Brazil, that risk is rising, as hauls of the common skipjack tuna come with the near certainty of parasitic contamination.
Out of 53 skipjack, marine researchers counted over 1,600 worms infesting nearly every organ of every fish hauled in from the ocean. Only the kidneys and hearts of the tuna remained worm-free, the researchers noted. Everything else, including the muscle tissue we humans eat, was festering with flatworms and roundworms.
Though most preparation methods will kill the parasites, the images are pretty off-putting. As the researchers explain, the sheer volume of parasitic infection is alarming.
“These results highlight the importance of sanitary inspection and emphasize the importance of immediate evisceration to avoid the migration of larvae from the viscera to the musculature,” the authors write.
Still, parasitologists say the worms aren’t all bad. Though increased presence of worms also comes with more risk of infection, University of Washington parasitologist Chelsea Wood told ScienceAlert in a prior story that they can actually be a sign that the fish is well-sourced.
“Everyone assumes that worms in your salmon is a sign that things have gone awry,” Wood said. “But the anisakid [roundworm] life cycle integrates many components of the food web. I see their presence as a signal that the fish on your plate came from a healthy ecosystem.”
After health officials in Pennsylvania found that two young children died from measles, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is refusing to count their deaths as being caused by the deadly virus.
“This week’s measles outbreaks update will not include the two measles-associated deaths reported by the Pennsylvania Department of Health on Aug. 25,” the CDC posted on its website, in a high unusual announcement.
It’s a precedent shattering action. The New York Times called it an “extraordinary move for the CDC,” breaking with the agency’s long-standing procedure of accepting data shared by states.
The challenge by the CDC comes amid a political showdown between health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, who oversees the CDC, and Pennsylvania’s Democratic governor Josh Shapiro.
At a news conference last week, Shapiro announced the deaths of the two children from measles and condemned Kennedy for spreading vaccine misinformation, saying that “there’s real life consequences for spreading misinformation.”
RFK Jr responded on social media by accusing Shapiro of taking “giddy delight” in their deaths and even suggested he may even “fabricated” them. The CDC’s own announcement that it would not be counting the deaths as measles related came just days after the public spat.
According to the latest reporting, one of the deceased was a newborn with a ruptured spleen, and the other was a child of unknown age. Both were unvaccinated and tested positive for measles, the Pennsylvania Health Department said, per the NYT. They came from Lancaster County, the center of a measles outbreak where 242 people have been infected with the disease so far, the most in the state.
Conflicting information over the children’s deaths gave rise to the heated controversy.
Though the state’s health department said both deaths were due to measles, Lancaster County coroner Stephen Diamantoni, a Republican, said that his office’s pathologist determined that the newborn — which was born infected with virus which it inherited from its mother — died of a ruptured spleen, not measles.
But some top medical experts have pushed back against Diamontoni. Measles can enlarge a baby’s spleen and make them prone to rupturing during birth, wrote Paul Offit, a renowned vaccine and pediatric infectious disease expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, in a widely reported essay on Substack. Once the spleen ruptures, it’s difficult to determine if it was enlarged after the fact.
Offit called on Diamontoni to provide more details surrounding the newborn’s death — and that, if it wasn’t measles, to offer an alternative explanation for the baby’s ruptured spleen. Since ruptured spleens in newborns is exceedingly rare and can be caused only by a handful of disorders or infections, he said, if one of those conditions wasn’t found in the child, then the “only obvious cause left would be measles.”
None of this explains why the CDC also refused to count the other child’s death, few details on whom have been released ot the public.
The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, defended its decision in a statement.
“The two measles-associated deaths announced by Pennsylvania have not been confirmed based on the information currently available to CDC,” it said, per the NYT. “The information currently posted reflects the best available information and our commitment to transparency and telling the American people the truth — a foundational principle of the Trump administration.”
If you’re one of the many people chowing down on melatonin gummies to help get to sleep, you may want to check out this study.
A new piece of research published by the American Heart Association made an alarming discovery about long-term use of melatonin supplements, an over-the-counter sleep aid used by tens of thousands. Basically, those who use melatonin over a year or more had a 90 percent higher risk of developing congestive heart failure over a five-year period.
Before you go flush your gummies down the toilet, there are a few caveats. For starters, the findings weren’t based on a clinical trial, but on data from a large database of anonymous health records. Researchers drew from data on chronic insomniacs, specifically, splitting them into two groups: those who have dosed the sleep-regulating hormone over a period of 12 months or more, and those who suffer without.
Still, the results are clearly worrisome. Overall, the study found that 4.6 percent of the melatonin group went on to develop heart failure, compared to 2.7 percent for the control group.
That wasn’t the only data point suggesting it may be time to wean off the ‘tone. A secondary analysis performed by the researchers found that melatonin users were nearly 3.5 times more likely to be hospitalized for heart failure than those in the other group, with hospitalization rates of 19.0 and 6.6 percent, respectively.
“Melatonin supplements are widely thought of as a safe and ‘natural’ option to support better sleep, so it was striking to see such consistent and significant increases in serious health outcomes, even after balancing for many other risk factors,” Ekenedilichukwu Nnadi, the study’s lead author and chief resident in internal medicine at SUNY Brooklyn, said in a press release.
While more in-depth research is needed to confirm the study’s results, the early findings indicate that melatonin use comes with some serious risks in the long-term.
“Melatonin supplements may not be as harmless as commonly assumed,” as Nnadi explained. “If our study is confirmed, this could affect how doctors counsel patients about sleep aids.”
A new paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association this month concluded, after surveying hundreds of studies on AI in medicine, that not only is AI already an indispensable tool that supports doctors, but that it’s in many ways surpassing them, and will soon be able to care patients on its own better than a human physician could.
“In cognitive medical functions, AI-alone medical care is likely to be better than physician-only or physician-AI hybrid care,” the authors, the widely renowned bioethicist Ezekiel Emanuel and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla, flatly declare.
But many physicians aren’t having it, Wired reports. One of the paper’s chief critics is the CEO of the American Medical Association himself, John Whyte. According to Whyte, some of the studies it surveyed are simulations, instead of blinded experiments, the gold standard of medical studies. And some contradict the author’s conclusions, such as a Nature article from February that found that most patients had a hard time talking to AI chatbots to get the expertise they needed, he argued.
“The AMA does see the potential in these tools, but they have to be utilized in the context of a care plan that’s governed by a physician,” Whyte told Wired.
The controversial study cites the rapid progress of LLMs since being publicly introduced in November 2022 with the release of ChatGPT. In spite of the tech’s relatively young age, the paper claims it already surpasses doctors at five fundamental tasks, which include: eliciting relevant medical information from patients, diagnosing the patient and conducting diagnostic testing, and managing chronic diseases.
This gap between physicians and AI will widen because AI is “rapidly improving,” it predicts, while human doctors have their own capabilities diminished, or are “deskilled,” by becoming dependent on the very same AI models.
“We’re making a prediction for four years from now,” Emanuel told Wired. “You don’t think that [AI is] going to be way more advanced than a doctor?”
Taking this to its logical endpoint, the paper makes another bold claim: human physicians are better off not getting in AI’s way, finding that human-AI hybrids “actually degrade performance compared with AI alone.”
“Thus, as AI improves, having humans in the loop will likely worsen patient care,” it adds.
There’s a kernel of truth to this. AI-deskilling is already happening, with senior doctors warning of how med students are already heavily relying on AI tools. To be fair to the med students, though, so are actual doctors: internal data from OpenEvidence, an AI chatbot specifically designed for clinicians, suggests that around two thirds of physicians in the US are using the tool.
New ground in AI in medical applications, meanwhile, is being broken seemingly every day. Last week, a team of neurosurgeons in the UK announced that they’d used an AI tool that guided them as they performed surgery to remove a tumor from a patient’s brain.
Robert Wachter, head of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco (and a friend of Emanuel), cautions that AI and humans together are better for now, but that in the future, there “will be times when humans will muck up the performance,” he told Wired.
Still, he emphasized that human doctors will always be irreplaceable. He called the idea of AI automating doctor’s jobs an example of the “doorman fallacy”: the fear that doormen would be made obsolete with the introduction of automatic doors. Doormen stuck around, accepting packages while also providing an air of hospitality that a robotic door can’t. The idea that highly trained doctors who spend years of their life honing their craft will become a bougie novelty like the doorman, somehow, is meant to be comforting.
In any case, it’s common to hear highfalutin claims to come from advocates of AI technology, and nearly as common to see holes poked in them. Advocates of AI in education declared victory when a much-hyped study concluded that ChatGPT can have a “large positive impact on improving learning performance,” for instance, but the study was later retracted by the publisher Springer Nature after it found major discrepancies in its analysis.
Ever seen the guy online who eats raw liver? What about the podcast by the guy who only eats meat and a little spinach? Unlike tigers or sharks, people aren’t carnivores. But you’d never know that if you went on social media.
A lot of influencers on social media and podcasts promote diets with as much protein — and as few carbohydrates — as possible. Some diet influencers talk about carbohydrate-rich foods, such as potatoes and bread, as though they’re poison, not a source of nutrients.
Even the U.S. government has gotten on the low-carb bandwagon.
For more than 100 years, government agencies have helped people decide which foods to eat. Past guidelines often looked like a pyramid. The biggest section at the bottom — the foundation — comprised those foods that people should eat the most.
These images and guidelines changed over time as scientists learned more about how our bodies respond to food. But until 2026, the guidelines always promoted eating lots of bread, rice, cereals, fruits and veggies. These foods all have one important thing in common: carbohydrates. These foods are high in sugars, starch and fiber.
The latest food guidelines have now turned that pyramid upside down, literally.
The old food pyramid (left) had grains and carbohydrates at the bottom, making up the base. It suggested you should eat a lot of them. The new food pyramid (right) is flipped, with grains only at the tip. It now suggests you should eat very few carbs. Left: Gurzzza/iStock/Getty Images Plus Right: U.S. Department of Agriculture/U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; adapted by LSH
Scientists and doctors have worried that too many sugary treats can promote weight gain and poor health. And carbohydrates tend to be a big component of cookies, candy and soft drinks. Based on that, some people trying to promote health will suggest we eat as few carbohydrates as possible. There are even people who try to eat mostly meat and fats — and go on social media trying to get others to do the same.
But carbohydrates aren’t evil. Often, they’re exactly the burst of energy our bodies need.
Carbs come in many different types. Some provide quick energy for our brains and muscles. Others feed our gut bacteria or help us poop. Too many carbohydrates from sugars can be harmful in the long run. But cutting them from our diet isn’t the answer. Carbs can be an important — and delicious — part of healthful eating.
How to build carbohydrates
All living cells contain carbs. The word “carbohydrate” points to what these molecules are made of: a mix of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen atoms. (Carbo refers to carbon. Hydrate points to their hydrogen and oxygen atoms.) Which carbohydrate they are will depend on how many atoms come from each element and how they are arranged.
Every carbohydrate is built from sugar units called saccharides (SAK-uh-rydes). The smallest building block — a monosaccharide (MON-oh-sak-uh-ryde) — denotes that it has just one saccharide.
Glucose is a monosaccharide. Its chemical formula — C6H12O6 — denotes that it has 6 carbon atoms, 12 hydrogens and 6 oxygen atoms. This molecule is important to health. It provides energy for our cells, including our muscles and brain. The term blood sugar refers to the amount of this glucose circulating in our blood.
Amylose
This is a chemical drawing of amylose, a type of starch that is a long chain of glucose molecules linked together. The brackets indicate a single glucose unit. The “n” at the bottom right corner is to show that there could be many more glucose molecules.
Hbf878/Wikimedia Commons
Other monosaccharides your body might encounter include fructose (FROOK-tose), galactose (gah-LACK-tose) and xylose (ZY-lose).
Sucrose, sometimes called table sugar, sweetens a lot of candy and baked goods. It’s a disaccharide (die-SAK-uh-ryde), meaning made of two sugar units — in this case, a glucose hooked onto a fructose molecule.
Then there are the polysaccharides. These “are usually long chains of multiple glucose molecules joined together,” explains Michael Gleeson. He’s a sport nutritionist at Loughborough University in England.
Glycogen
Mikael Häggström, used with permission/Wikimedia Commons
This is a chemical drawing of glycogen, a carbohydrate molecule that our bodies use to store glucose. The long chains here are made up of glucose molecules waiting to be used.
Although there are many types of polysaccharides, our bodies encounter three most often. One is glycogen. Animals use this molecule to store sugars as energy. “We find that in our muscles and our liver,” Gleeson says. The second, or starch, is “a storage form of energy in plants,” he explains. The third type is fiber, which our bodies can’t turn into energy.
When scientists talk about carbohydrates in food, they call monosaccharides and disaccharides “simple” sugars. These are common in processed foods. Polysaccharides such as starch are “complex” carbohydrates and more commonly turn up in less-processed foods, explains Kimber Stanhope. She’s a nutrition researcher at the University of California, Davis. “Rice and wheat and oats and corn — those foods are mostly starch,” she notes.
Types of carbs
Type of carbohydrate
Examples
Where to find them
Monosaccharides
Glucose, fructose, galactose, xylose
Glucose tablets or nutrition supplements
Disaccharides
Sucrose, lactose
Table sugar, sugar in milk
Oligosaccharides
Starches such as amylose and amylopectin
Starchy foods like bread or rice
Polysaccharides
Pectin, cellulose, hydrocolloids, guar gum
Whole fruits and vegetables, beans, jams and jellies, corn starch
From food to fuel
Foods we classify as “carb-rich” often contain a mix of different carbohydrate molecules. For example, a cookie will have plenty of sucrose. But it also has flour, which contains starch. Whole-wheat bread will have starch and some sugar, as well as fiber. Vegetables, such as carrots, are made of cells that contain starch, sugars and fiber.
Our bodies can use glucose molecules right away. Other carbohydrate molecules must first be broken down.
Complex carbohydrates “are relatively large molecules,” Gleeson explains. The gut can’t directly absorb them. They must be digested — their polysaccharide chains broken apart — to release their glucose units.
That digestion starts in the mouth, Gleeson explains. Saliva contains enzymes — molecules that speed up chemical reactions. “Your spit contains some enzymes, which break down the long-chain carbohydrates into disaccharide units,” he says. Those much simpler sugars head to the stomach. But, he adds, little carbohydrate digestion goes on there. Why? “The enzymes that are coming [in with] the saliva,” he explains, “are inactivated by [stomach] acid.”
After the stomach, “you’ve mixed everything up into a nice sort of soup-like consistency,” called chyme (KYME), Gleeson explains. “That’s sort of squirted, almost, into the small intestine. And there we secrete enzymes into the small intestine from the pancreas.”
Those enzymes finish the job, splitting disaccharides into monosaccharides such as glucose. Our blood then absorbs the glucose and moves it around the body.
When that blood reaches the liver, an enzyme grabs glucose from it. Called glycogen synthase (GLY-koh-jen SIN-thays), this enzyme links up the glucose molecules to form glycogen. Glycogen then gets stored in the liver and muscles. Fat cells also store glucose in the form of triglycerides (Try-GLIH-sur-ides). The body will draw on these sources when it needs more energy.
This liver-enzyme reaction has turned carbs from food into a stored fuel. The liver turns off this enzyme when it determines that it has made enough glycogen.
Sugar’s not always sweet
The body aims to keep blood glucose levels fairly constant. So when cells draw down this sugar, the liver begins breaking down some stored glycogen, releasing its glucose into the blood.
That’s especially important during exercise, as your muscles burn through glucose to power activity.
It’s a different story for fructose. This monosaccharide pairs up with glucose to make sucrose. But it’s also found on its own in fruits, vegetables and honey. Manufacturers have also sweetened many sugary foods and drinks with this sugar in the form of high-fructose corn syrup.
Sweetened drinks can contain a lot of sucrose, a disaccharide made of equal amounts of glucose and fructose. But many are sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup, which has more fructose than glucose. taka4332/iStock/Getty Images Plus
In the liver, an enzyme called fructokinase (Frook-toh-KY-nase) sets off the first step in turning fructose into glycogen. But unlike the enzyme that processes glucose, fructokinase “doesn’t seem to get turned off — ever,” explains Stanhope at UC Davis.
So if you’re drinking a sugary soft drink, “86 percent of all the fructose you’re consuming in that … drink goes into the liver,” Stanhope says. “The liver does the best it can with all this fructose, but now it’s overloaded.” The liver will now turn any excess into fat, she explains.
Too much fat can hamper how the liver reacts to hormones such as insulin. As a result, the organ stores even more sugars as fat. “You just keep going around in circles and making the situation worse,” Stanhope explains.
That’s why eating too much fructose can be a problem. The issue isn’t fructose from fruits and vegetables, though. Consider a sweet fruit, such as grapes, Stanhope says. “They basically average around 16 percent of their weight as sugar.” But fruits and veggies also contain fiber and other complex carbohydrates, as well as vitamins and other nutrients.
Most of the sugar in our diet doesn’t come from fruit but from sweetened baked goods and drinks. Oreos, for instance, are 38 percent sugar, of which fructose is half.
Many sweets have even higher levels of fructose than that. Some highly processed foods — not only soda but also canned soups and some sauces — can contain a type of corn syrup that is 55 percent fructose (five percent more fructose than in table sugar), Stanhope says.
What really worries her are some corn syrups where the share of fructose is higher still. One 2014 study tested sodas and juices containing high-fructose corn syrup. Many of these drinks contained 60 percent fructose — some even close to 70 percent. That’s a lot for the liver to handle.
Fruits, vegetables, beans and whole grains have lots of fiber, which can help control cholesterol and blood glucose — and help you poop. apomares/E+/Getty Images
Too much sugar, not enough fiber
While our bodies can break down starches and sugars for energy, other carbohydrates are tougher. Consider fiber.
Fibers are polysaccharides found in plants. Our bodies cannot fully break these down. Fibers include the cellulose that makes plant cell walls stiff. They include the pectins (PEC-tins) that firm up fruits. You’ll find them in whole fruits, vegetables, beans and whole-grain products (such as whole-wheat bread).
Our bodies can’t convert fiber into energy. But our bodies still find it useful, notes Leslie Cho. A cardiologist, or heart specialist, she works at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.
Fiber comes in two types. Soluble fiber, as its name suggests, dissolves in water. This type shows up in foods such as apples, bananas, avocados, citrus fruits, carrots, beans and oats. By acting like a sponge, Cho says, “it helps you lower your cholesterol and glucose.”
Cholesterol (Ko-LES-ter-ol) is a fatty material that drifts in our blood. Over time, it can collect in blood vessels and increase someone’s risk of heart attack or stroke. By soaking up cholesterol, soluble fiber helps eliminate it.
That sponge-like fiber can also trap glucose so that it takes longer for those sugar molecules to enter the blood stream. If you eat a lot of sugar and no fiber, Cho explains, “you absorb glucose very quickly and you tend to get hungry again.” Soluble fiber keeps you feeling fuller longer. And it’s especially helpful for people with high blood sugar, such as those with type 2 diabetes.
The other fiber — the insoluble type — “doesn’t dissolve in water, and it helps you with your stomach and your intestine,” Cho says. Vegetables, whole-wheat bread, potatoes, beans, nuts and seeds all contain this type.
This fiber even helps you poop; it’s one of the ways your body takes out the trash. How? Insoluble fiber adds bulk and pulls water into your stool. That keeps you pooping just often enough for comfort.
Soluble and insoluble fibers also serve as an important food for the bacteria in your microbiome. Those are the bacteria that live in your gut, Gleeson explains. “They have a big influence on your immune system and on your health.”
Bacteria can break some fiber down into molecules that affect our immune and other systems. These bacteria “also produce chemicals that can communicate with the brain,” Gleeson says. In this way, “They influence your mood and your sleep.”
Most people eat too little fiber, Gleeson says. Diets with lots of simple sugars don’t have enough fiber to keep our microbes happy. We’re talking about meals that contain lots of white bread or rice, cookies and cakes — and too few fruits, vegetables, beans or whole grains.
Like proteins and fats, carbohydrates are an important macronutrient. But do people need them?
The body needs certain fatty acids and amino acids to build cells and operate effectively. That’s why we need to eat fats; they provide some essential fatty acids that our bodies can’t make, notes Gleeson. And, he adds, “Protein is absolutely essential, because there are [also] amino acids in those proteins” that we can’t make on our own.
But technically speaking, he says, you can live without eating carbohydrates.
Glucose is an essential fuel for the brain, Gleeson explains. Fortunately, the body can make it from fats, amino acids and water. Getting glucose this way wouldn’t be a very tasty life, though. And people who live on extremely low-carb diets can miss out on fiber, vitamins and other nutrients.
But for some carbs, reducing how much of them you eat isn’t a bad idea. We don’t need nearly as much sugar — especially soft drinks, candy or cake — as we eat, observes Stanhope at UC Davis.
“There is simply no doubt,” she says: “Evidence shows sugar is detrimental to our health when consumed at high levels.” The problem: “We just don’t know for sure how high ‘high’ is.”
Because of worries about too much sugar, some people try diets with as few carbohydrates in them as they can manage — eating mostly meat and a few veggies. But such low-carb diets won’t necessarily result in a healthy body, Gleeson points out.
Living the low-carb life tends to be high in fats and protein. Long term, all that fat and protein can put people at risk for heart disease, type 2 diabetes and problems with their kidneys (the organs that produce urine). People on low-carb diets who don’t eat enough fiber also don’t poop enough, suffering constipation.
Carbohydrates are important forms of energy, especially if you’re about to do a high-intensity workout, like sprinting. Tony Anderson/Stone/Getty Images
And if you’re an athlete, your body definitely needs carbs. Athletes perform their best with carbs, Gleeson has shown in his research. Complex and simple carbohydrates are the easy energy our bodies use to work hard.
“As soon as you start doing hard running, sprinting as fast as you can, performing any all-out efforts, then you’re going to be using carbohydrate,” he says.
“There is no food group that’s bad,” Cho adds. “You can’t eliminate one whole thing and think you’re doing a good job.” Although high doses of simple sugars can cause problems, other carbohydrates don’t. “We often [confuse] ‘good’ carbohydrates with ‘bad’ carbohydrates,” she notes. And unfortunately, that can give important nutrients a bad rap.
The trick is eating enough carbs — and a diverse mix of them — to give us energy and a great-tasting diet. Just don’t overdo it.
“Moderation is important, even though these things taste good,” Cho says. And much as cookies, soda and candy are delicious, they don’t contain fiber or other nutrients. “Instead of having five chocolate bars, maybe you can just have one.”
Editor’s note: The enzyme used to transform glucose to glycogen was originally misreported as phosphofructokinase. This was corrected to glycogen synthase on September 9. In addition, fat stores glucose not as glycogen, but as triglycerides.
The biggest fibromyalgia genetics study yet zeroed in on 26 genetic risk factors for the pain disorder, including one in the Huntington's disease gene.
Patel lacked virtually any degree of relevant working experience for the job before the Senate confirmed him — and now, the agency is opening the doors for even more highly questionable hirings.
As inside sources told CBS News, the FBI has quietly lowered standards of its background checks for potential federal agents and other personnel. The bureau is now officially looking the other way when it comes to prostitution, for instance — as long as recruits didn’t hire sex workers over three times.
Even more eyebrow-raising is that the FBI is even allowing the consideration of candidates who engaged in bestiality or animal cruelty, according to CBS‘ sources. However, any such incidents would’ve had to have taken place before the candidate turned 18.
The broadcaster’s sources also said there was no distinction between candidates who were forced into sexual activity with animals or if they did so willingly. An FBI spokesperson claimed that eligibility requirements were limited to a “narrow set of circumstances, such as in cases where a person was sexually abused with animals as a child.”
Experts, however, were appalled at the news, arguing that the FBI is undermining its responsibility in vetting applicants by changing background check standards.
“Bestiality is clearly a potential indication of a more serious emotional issue, and even in a circumstance where it is not, the pool of candidates should be extensive enough that the criteria should certainly not be eliminated,” former FBI agent James Davidson told CBS.
Before the changes, which were reportedly implemented earlier this summer, the FBI’s webpage was clear about automatically disqualifying special agents who engaged in “prostitution or bestiality.”
Both current and former FBI employees told the CBS that the bureau could now be hiring “people with questionable backgrounds,” allowing them to undermine the integrity of the service. Others warned that the news was evidence of a major “recruiting problem.”
Considering the fact that the agency is being helmed by a personality as controversial as Patel, these changes shouldn’t come as too much of a shock.
While he hasn’t personally acknowledged the latest changes, Patel has frequently called for new hiring standards at the bureau, arguing that “we are losing too many qualified candidates to the rigors of the requirements from yesteryear” in a July interview with former FBI agent John Nantz.
Patel’s motivation for lowering standards could be to bring in his closest associates. As ProPublica reported in November, his personal assistant didn’t clear their polygraph test and required a waiver, claims the FBI has since denied.
Login
