Tuesday 15 September 2026
Evening EditionRSS

ZOTPAPER

News without the noise

ZOTPAPER
US Politics

CDC excludes two Pennsylvania measles deaths from national tally in break with precedent

New agency director Erica Schwartz ordered the change, questioning whether measles caused or contributed to the deaths

edit
By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has excluded two measles deaths reported by Pennsylvania health officials from its latest national surveillance data, publicly challenging the state's determinations in a move that breaks with the long-standing precedent that states are the arbiters of case and death reporting. The decision, reported by The New York Times and The Washington Post, was ordered by the CDC's new director, Erica Schwartz, who is less than a month into the job.

The CDC's website for measles surveillance data now carries an unusual statement saying the update will not include the deaths reported by Pennsylvania. "At this time, available information does not establish whether measles caused or contributed to the deaths or whether the individuals died from other causes while infected with measles," the statement reads.

The Washington Post reported that the CDC changed the information on the page multiple times over the weekend. On August 29 at 2:33 pm ET, the chart listed total measles deaths for 2026 as "0." The next day at 12:09 pm ET, the chart was updated to "2," with a note reading: "Health departments make determinations about measles-associated deaths and share relevant information with CDC." By 3:23 pm ET, the two deaths had been deleted and replaced with an asterisk referencing the statement, which remains on the page.

The move follows the deaths of two unvaccinated people in Pennsylvania, which state officials confirmed last week. The CDC's action publicly questions the accuracy of the state's death determinations, a notable departure from the usual federal-state relationship in disease surveillance. The New York Times reported that Schwartz is behind the decision, though the CDC has not issued a public explanation beyond the website statement.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The CDC's exclusion could affect public trust in national measles data during an active outbreak year.
  • The move challenges the traditional division of authority, where states determine deaths and the CDC aggregates them.
  • Uncertainty around official death counts could influence vaccination messaging and public health responses.

Background

Measles is a highly contagious viral disease that was declared eliminated in the US in 2000, but outbreaks continue to occur in communities with low vaccination coverage. In the US public health system, state and local health departments typically investigate cases and deaths, then report those determinations to the CDC for national surveillance. The CDC ordinarily relies on state determinations rather than re-evaluating them.

Key Perspectives

CDC leadership: Director Erica Schwartz appears to be applying a higher evidentiary standard, saying available information does not establish that measles caused or contributed to the deaths. Pennsylvania health officials: The state reported the deaths as measles-related, and its determinations have historically been accepted by the CDC. Public health experts: Some may view the CDC's intervention as concerning, given the precedent that states are the arbiters of death determinations, and worry about politicization of public health data.

What to Watch

  • Whether Pennsylvania provides additional medical or autopsy information to support its determinations.
  • Whether the CDC's national data is updated again in the coming days or remains at zero.
  • Any public statements from health officials or elected leaders in Pennsylvania or Washington responding to the dispute.

Sources

newspaper

Zotpaper

Articles published under the Zotpaper byline are synthesized from multiple source publications by our AI editor and reviewed by our editorial process. Each story combines reporting from credible outlets to give readers a balanced, comprehensive view.

Editorial ProcessSubscribe