U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has arrested a record number of pregnant people and placed them in detention centers where they receive subpar prenatal and postnatal care. And the agency has lost count of how many have suffered miscarriages.

What’s happening to women who miscarry in ICE custody?

The Trump administration “placed more pregnant immigrants in detention” last fall and winter than at “any time over the previous year,” said The Guardian. In October, there were at least 87 pregnant women and teens in detention, and by November, there were 101, according to government documents obtained by the outlet. ICE reported 18 miscarriages during the first nine months of the Trump administration, but the agency stopped recording miscarriages after Oct. 3. There is no updated data on miscarriages because ICE ended its contract with the Veterans Affairs Financial Services Center, which had been handling medical billing for the agency, according to internal documents.

Detained pregnant women report they are “struggling to access routine and emergency medical care,” said The Guardian. Women who miscarried or were hospitalized for pregnancy complications told the outlet they “did not receive follow-up care, despite experiencing ongoing pain and symptoms.” While it is difficult to attribute the miscarriages to the detention conditions, it is clear these “incarcerated women” are not “getting the prenatal visits that they’re supposed to get,” Deborah Ottenheimer, an obstetrician-gynecologist and medical expert with Physicians for Human Rights, said to The Guardian. They’re not getting “high-risk prenatal visits if they need them.” And if they do miscarry, the “medical care they receive is minimal to none.”

Center for Reproductive Rights reports from earlier this year also indicate high numbers of miscarriages in detention centers and, in severe cases, “allegations of coerced or unnecessary gynecological surgeries and hysterectomies without proper informed consent,” said Forbes. These reports “raise concerns about compliance with established maternal health standards.”

Is anything being done to improve the problem?

Initially, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees ICE, said the agency was tracking miscarriages in monthly reports in response to The Guardian’s follow-up questions about the missing data. Later, the spokesperson confirmed it “does not have data on miscarriages from October 2025 through June 2026,” said The Guardian. DHS has “never before acknowledged” that it lost count of miscarriages, “not even when U.S. senators asked the agency for the data.” It is convenient for the Trump administration that ICE cannot report how many miscarriages happened in its custody, because when “you don’t track something of that magnitude,” you don’t have to be “confronted with the reality of what your policies have yielded,” said Faisal Al-Juburi, the co-chief executive of Texas-based immigration services nonprofit Raíces, to The Guardian. “

In May, Democratic senators Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Mazie Hirono (Hawaii) and Jon Ossoff (Ga.) demanded answers from DHS regarding the “appalling and horrific treatment” of pregnant, postpartum and nursing women in immigration detention, in a letter sent to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and private contractors operating an ICE detention facility in Texas. The trio cited “cases of miscarriages, medical neglect and the use of shackles during pregnancy,” said The Latin Times. They also urged the Trump administration to “restore a policy presuming the release of pregnant women from immigration custody except in extraordinary circumstances.”

This letter came right after new legislation was introduced by Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) that “would establish care standards for federally incarcerated pregnant people,” including those in ICE and Customs and Border Protection facilities, said Mother Jones. The bill builds on one that the “House already passed in 2022,” which only applied to those in the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ custody.

Immigration detention is known to foster “medical neglect, abusive conditions” and “utter disregard for the dignity of people,” Eunice Cho, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s National Prison Project and the co-author of a letter to ICE documenting these conditions, said in an ACLU report. “What we heard from the pregnant women we interviewed” are some of the “most horrifying stories I’ve heard about detention.”

A pharmaceutical company claims to have used artificial intelligence to discover a drug that reverses the impacts of aging. Whether or not the medication is truly effective for antiaging purposes remains to be seen, but the finding highlights how the burgeoning technology could make the drug discovery process easier, or at least faster.

Beating the ‘aging clocks’

Last year, Insilico Medicine, a company that “aims to accelerate drug discovery” using artificial intelligence, announced that a clinical trial of one of its drug candidates suggested it could help treat a chronic lung disease, said The New York Times. The disease in question, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, or IPF, is sometimes referred to as “Alzheimer’s of the lungs.” Now, new data from the same clinical trial shows an even “more intriguing possibility”: The drug, called rentosertib, could “also slow the aging process.” The company used AI to assist in generating the drug’s molecular structure.

Rentosertib reduces the biological markers of age as measured by six separate “aging clocks,” or AI technology “designed to predict a person’s morbidity and mortality,” according to a new study published in the journal Nature Biotechnology. This “elaborate clinical trial” is a milestone in the “widespread effort to improve healthcare” using the same technology that underpins “popular chatbots like ChatGPT and image generators like Midjourney.” Insilico is just “one of many startups, tech giants and academic labs” working to “accelerate drug discovery” and “hone other medical tasks with help from these methods.”

If your biological age is lower, “you are likely to die later,” the AI drug discovery startup’s CEO, Alex Zhavoronkov, said in an interview, per Bloomberg. But these are early results, and the drug’s potential long-term health effects in larger groups of people are unknown.

The clinical trial included just 42 patients who had a chronic lung disease. While longevity enthusiasts have “long embraced the repurposing of existing medications” to delay aging, efforts to develop “novel antiaging drugs” have often “ended in failure,” said Bloomberg. With the advent of GLP-1 treatments, however, whose benefits appear to extend well beyond weight loss and diabetes, “major pharmaceutical players are increasingly showing interest in the field.”

‘Not replacing scientific intuition’

The results of this study are the first to show “very clearly” that “predicted biological age can be reduced,” Vadim Gladyshev, a Harvard Medical School professor who helped build one of the aging clocks, said to the Times. Still, the study is far from conclusive, Gladyshev acknowledges, citing the small sample size and the unreliability of aging clocks. Most notably, Insilico’s drug has “not yet been tested in healthy patients,” said the Times. Because the company conducted its clinical trial solely with IPF patients, the results may be specific to this condition.

The idea of “reducing aging certainly sounds good” and has become the “obsession of some tech bro-types,” but the “actual utility of aging clocks is up for debate,” said Gizmodo. More recent models focus on proteomics, or “measuring blood proteins,” which a 2024 study found could be used to determine if a person had a higher risk of age-related diseases. While some researchers believe that these “catch-all measurements” could be useful, there’s still a “long way to go before they become truly meaningful markers.” There isn’t yet a measurement that “serves as a universally accepted ‘age’ indicator,” and some doctors have warned that “leaning on these metrics could lead to pursuing the wrong interventions.”

AI is not “replacing scientific intuition,” and it is “unlikely to do so anytime soon,” said Forbes. What it can do is “make the costly, time-consuming R&D work” of preparing for clinical trials “more efficient.” For the drug discovery field, that means the “computer screen is becoming nearly as essential as the lab bench.” That shift is “familiar across industries” as “digital tools increasingly become part of the craft rather than merely an add-on.”

While glucagon-like peptide-1s have been widely celebrated for transforming weight loss, some who attempt to use the medications find themselves in a less-studied patient category called nonresponders. This minority of people haven’t experienced any significant change in weight even after adjusting their dose or switching brands.

What are the influencing factors?

Between “9% and a third of participants” in clinical trials for GLP-1 weight-loss drugs lose less than 5% of their body weight after months of use, which is the threshold associated with health improvements, said The Guardian. Now, researchers are “trying to work out why” the drugs are ineffective for nonresponders — a discovery that could help doctors “tailor the use of the drugs, maximize cost-effectiveness and reduce side effects.”

The drug’s lack of efficacy cannot be blamed on patients, said Alexander Miras, an obesity expert at Ulster University, to The Guardian. If the drug does not “reduce hunger and food intake for someone,” it is “just not going to work.”

For now, the “short answer” to why some people don’t respond is that “we don’t really know,” said Miras. Research suggests that factors such as “motivation, intelligence, education and socioeconomics” are not predictors of how patients would “respond to GLP-1 medications.”

Other characteristics such as age, sex and whether or not someone has Type 2 diabetes do appear to have an effect. Studies have also suggested “ancestry might have an impact,” with the medications “most effective in people of European ancestry and least effective in people of African American ancestry,” said The Guardian.

Some may be jumping the gun, however. Many people labeled as nonresponders simply “do not take the medication correctly” or “discontinue treatment before adequate therapeutic effect can be achieved,” said Kingston University biologists Nadine Wehida and Ahmed Elbediwy at The Conversation. Studies show up to 20% to 60% of people “stop treatment within the first year” amid “widespread use of the drug in doses below the recommended amounts.”

Is there hope for nonresponders?

There is “no reliable way” to predict what group one will fall into when trying GLP-1s, said Stanford Medicine News Center. The good news is “you don’t have to wait long to find out.” In general, higher doses produce better results, so doctors “typically start patients low and increase gradually, watching for side effects.”

If the dose is not associated with any weight loss, “waiting three months on the same dose is not going to give you more answers,” said Stanford Medicine endocrinologist Sun Kim to the department’s News Center. You should “increase the dose and reassess.” Whether or not it’s working tends to become clear within the first few weeks.

Certain medical factors such as “thyroid disorders” can “disrupt metabolism,” said Yale Medicine. People with “impaired glucose regulation,” including those with diabetes, therefore tend to “lose less weight on these medications.” A less common underlying condition could also be playing a role.

Sometimes, “despite doing everything right,” a patient “just doesn’t respond the way we would hope,” said Avlin Imaeda, a Yale Medicine gastroenterologist. And this phenomenon isn’t “unique to weight-loss medications,” said Yale Medicine. Some patients may not react to “certain blood-pressure drugs, antidepressants or cancer therapies.” Biology is complex, and treatment responses can vary widely.

For those hoping for something to look forward to, a “series of promising new drugs are in development,” said The Guardian. In the meantime, for nonresponders still struggling to lose weight, “weight-loss surgery may be the only option left.”

GLP-1-based drugs not working does not “predict a lack of response to [bariatric] surgery,” said Miras. In the end, it’s “not your fault,” and it’s not the drug’s fault either. “This is purely luck.”

A notorious rollercoaster at Six Flags Magic Mountain theme park in Santa Clarita, California, has been closed following claims that two people have suffered from brain injuries from riding it. An investigation by CNN found a dozen serious complaints over two decades, including customers who suffered life-altering disabilities or fell into comas after riding X2, with two dying of their injuries.

Ultimate daredevil

The Six Flags Magic Mountain website describes the X2 rollercoaster as a “right (sic) of passage for the ultimate daredevil”. What distinguishes this type of rollercoaster from others is its fourth-dimensional quality, meaning seats are rotating 360 degrees around the track, turning riders upside down, as the trains reach speeds of nearly 80mph for approximately two minutes.

Pamela Guillen said that she lost consciousness after banging her head against the seat’s headrest “multiple times” during an X2 ride in July. A CT scan revealed she had a severe subdural haematoma (bleeding inside the brain) and brain compression. Now, after learning to walk and talk again, she suffers from headaches and relies on medication to prevent seizures. “I’m taking it a day at a time to not overwhelm myself and to not go into a dark hole of mourning who I was and what I was able to do before this,” she told CNN.

A few days later, Naomi Greer-Wilkinson rode the X2 and also lost consciousness. She was hospitalised with a traumatic brain injury and remains in a coma. Her parents have been told to prepare for the worst, according to reports. Her father said that whoever decided to keep X2 open after the first July incident “has a lot to answer for,” and declared, “It’s got to stop.”

Violent halt

As well as complaints of life-altering disabilities, comas and deaths, park officials have received “scores” of complaints of head and neck injuries sustained after an X2 ride, “according to internal records cited by an expert witness for a plaintiff in court filings”. “Despite years of warnings” from riders, lawyers and medical experts about the “perils” of riding this rollercoaster, theme park officials and state authorities “allowed the attraction to continue operating”.

Six Flags Magic Mountain insists that X2 is regularly tested and meets industry safety regulations. It didn’t respond to queries from the media about the most recent injuries, beyond confirming that “the ride remains closed at this time”. Attorneys for the park have previously stated there are signs warning customers that “there are inherent risks” in park rides. The families of Guillen and Greer-Wilkinson said the park offered them food on the night of the injury, but have not been in contact since.

Last month, the family of Christopher Hawley, who died after a ride in 2022, reached a settlement with the park and with ride manufacturer S&S Worldwide Inc, said KTLA. During his ride, the coaster “suddenly, abruptly and violently jolted to a halt”, according to the lawsuit filed by the family. Afterwards, Hawley was rushed to hospital where a CT scan showed he suffered a catastrophic right subdural haematoma which the lawsuit alleged was caused by the rollercoaster, and he died the following day. His father, William Hawley, said legal action was the only way to get answers. “We want to make sure that ride isn’t going to kill somebody else,” he said.

‘Healthcare is more badly broken than political leaders admit’

Marj Halperin at the Chicago Tribune

While “rising costs are a barrier for too many, even those who can afford comprehensive health insurance are finding money can’t buy you a timely appointment,” says Marj Halperin. Americans in cities are “now in much the same bind as patients in rural areas who have long found limited doctors available for routine care, with specialists often a few hours’ drive away.” It is “time for political leaders to spell out a strategy to speed in the opposite direction.”

Read more

‘A wildly popular movie meets the film world’s most revered label’

Sophia Nguyen at The Atlantic

“‘KPop Demon Hunters’ seems to have completely overtaken culture,” says Sophia Nguyen. But “even the most ardent fans likely did not anticipate the mega-hit’s next big merch drop: a disc release from the Criterion Collection, home to some of cinema’s most distinguished titles.” Some of the “label’s longtime devotees greeted the addition of ‘KPop Demon Hunters’ with an eye roll,” but “Criterion has good reason to widen the net: Netflix, Apple and Amazon make and distribute a significant share of films.”

Read more

‘Trump’s tariffs prove even Canada can’t afford to be nice to the United States anymore’

The Philadelphia Inquirer editorial board

It “fell to Canada, a country famous for friendliness, to demonstrate the limits of an age-old friendship with the United States,” says The Philadelphia Inquirer editorial board. After a “decade of dealing politely with President Donald Trump’s manic ricocheting between trade agreements and trade warfare, supplies of northern niceness are sorely depleted, and rightly so.” Prime Minister Mark Carney’s “defiance in the face of his neighbor’s unprovoked bullying should inspire other traditional American allies to abandon appeasement.”

Read more

‘Meta’s $18 billion settlement could reshape social media for young people’

Tom Jones at the Poynter Institute

Meta “reached a landmark settlement and agreed to pay up to $18 billion to 47 states” to settle claims it “endangered children through addictive features,” says Tom Jones. Meta’s promised changes are “meant to curb endless scrolling, which can interrupt sleep and have other negative effects on young people’s health and well-being.” The “smart move for Meta was to settle,” as a “major challenge for all social media companies is verifying the ages of their users.”

Read more

What happened

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. repeatedly testified in his Senate confirmation hearing last year that a 2019 trip to Samoa had “nothing to do with vaccines,” but new documents obtained through freedom of information requests “refute that testimony,” The Associated Press said Thursday. Kennedy was a “prominent anti-vaccine activist" at the time, and "critics said the visit fueled anti-vaccine sentiment" before a measles outbreak that killed 83 Samoans. In one letter, Kennedy “explicitly told the Samoan prime minister he wanted to study” the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine there and “used the words ‘vaccine’ or ‘vaccination’ eight times,” said The Guardian.

Who said what

“RFK’s platform is built on lies” that “leave a trail of dead children,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. “There are consequences for lying to Congress.” Watchdog group American Oversight on Thursday asked the Justice Department to investigate Kennedy’s testimony for false statements. The Health and Human Services Department told the AP that “any claim or insinuation” Kennedy “lied under oath or to Congress” based on these letters is “not only false but outright defamatory.”

What next?

“Lying to Congress is a crime, whether or not the witness is under oath,” Georgetown law professor Josh Chafetz told The Guardian. But this Justice Department is “unlikely” to prosecute Kennedy.

Over 100 days into the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), “the response is still struggling to keep pace”, said Liz Cookman in The Independent. It’s estimated that more than 2,500 people have now died, with the death toll accelerating sharply in recent weeks.

It is the fastest-growing Ebola outbreak on record, spreading much quicker than the deadliest crisis to date, the West African epidemic of 2014 to 2016, which killed more than 11,000 people. To put it in context, that outbreak took a year to reach 2,000 deaths.

Destabilised by conflict

“The situation is bad,” said Devi Sridhar in The Guardian. The mortality rate seems to be nearly 50%. More than half of victims are dying without receiving care. Children make up almost a third of all deaths.

Yet this outbreak isn’t attracting much attention abroad. Compared with the 2014 outbreak, the current silence is “astounding”. That year, Ebola was one of the most Googled terms in the world; this year, “no one wants to hear about infectious diseases”. Things are only going to get worse. A “perfect storm of factors” is making the spread hard to contain. The virus is the Bundibugyo species, for which there is currently no licensed vaccine or specific treatment, although clinical trials are under way.

The location of the outbreak has made it worse, said Matthew Mpoke Bigg in The New York Times. Uganda has succeeded in eliminating an outbreak; but Ituri province in north-eastern Congo is unstable, with ongoing conflict and roaming militias. More than 900,000 people have been displaced, while the region’s gold mines draw workers from a wide area. The virus has now spread to six provinces across the DRC. There are fears that it could spread to South Sudan, and to the Congolese capital, Kinshasa, one of Africa’s biggest cities.

Dismantling of USAID

The situation in DRC has been “disastrously compounded” by cuts to Western aid, said The Guardian, above all by the US. The dismantling of USAID has weakened health infrastructure and surveillance capacity, while Washington’s withdrawal from the World Health Organisation has also undermined the response. European countries, too, have started to treat international aid as “luxury expenditure”.

The 2014 outbreak laid bare the risk of Ebola spreading in the region and beyond. In the wake of the Covid pandemic, countless pieties were uttered about disease control. Yet here we are again. “Subsequent actions by governments have belied those words” leaving the DRC exposed to an epidemic that could soon spiral “out of control”.

What happened

The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday approved a first-of-its-kind drug for advanced pancreatic cancer, one of the deadliest types of cancer and among the hardest to treat. The FDA’s expedited approval of daraxonrasib, a daily pill developed by Revolution Medicines and sold as Rasonque, followed a clinical trial in which patients on the drug lived a median 13.2 months, twice as long as those who underwent chemotherapy, and with fewer side effects. Some “patients who have gotten the drug through clinical trials have lived for years,” The New York Times said.

Who said what

Daraxonrasib has “electrified cancer specialists and patients,” the Times said. It’s “not a cure, but it is the first treatment to substantially extend the lives of patients” with a disease long considered among the “most hopeless in medicine.” Nearly all pancreatic tumors are fueled by a mutated cellular protein, KRAS, that’s stubbornly resistant to interventions. Daraxonrasib “uses what’s essentially a molecular glue to bind with multiple KRAS subtypes” and shut them down, The Associated Press said. Revolution is “studying its technology for several other forms of cancer, including lung cancer.”

What next?

Revolution said Rasonque is “now available in the United States at $39,800 for a 30-day ​supply,” Reuters said. The “vast majority of the cost is expected to be covered through insurance,” the Times said.

‘Sports medicine must get better at treating women’

Ashley Austin at Newsweek

Even as “more eyes turn to women’s sports and female athletes surge in popularity, there’s still a great deal that sports medicine doctors don’t know about actually treating women,” says WNBA doctor Ashley Austin. Americans need “increased investment in women’s sports science — not just to improve outcomes for elite athletes but to improve care for women and girls across the healthcare system.” Doctors should learn to “provide care that is truly based on evidence specific to women’s anatomy and physiology.”

Read more

‘Are US black ops targeting boats in the Galapagos?’

The Dallas Morning News editorial board

Attacks on “fishing boats off the coast of Ecuador earlier this year are surrounded by mystery and unanswered questions,” says The Dallas Morning News editorial board. The “evidence is scarce, but it is enough for Congress to start asking questions.” Who “ordered these attacks and to what end”? If there is “indeed some sort of black ops targeting fishermen with no accountability, it will mark another stain in a long, bad history of U.S. intervention in Latin America.”

Read more

‘I’m a physicist. Congress is about to close the door that let me in.’

Stephanie L. Bailey at The Seattle Times

Somewhere in the “country, a talented future scientist is about to be overlooked, not for lack of ability, but because no one has decided they’re worth helping,” says Stephanie L. Bailey. Two House bill provisions “would bar federal science agencies from funding the offices and grants that broaden participation in STEM.” Some “argue federal agencies should simply fund the best science and that programs like these distract from that mission,” but “in fact, the opposite is true.”

Read more

‘My road trip revealed the good and the bad that hold America together’

LZ Granderson at the Los Angeles Times

There is a “commonality I saw on my drive across America: homelessness,” says LZ Granderson. Americans “like to tell ourselves it’s a California problem, a Chicago problem — something that happens in big blue states.” But of the “states I drove through, all but one were red.” We are “teaching the next generation that, in the richest country that has ever existed, it is acceptable that some people are reduced to huddling in storefront entryways overnight.”

Read more

With the Trump administration pushing back against a swath of DEI-related federal grants, some research related to major diseases, including Alzheimer’s, is being caught in the crossfire. The most recent round of grant axing resulted in two major universities losing millions in funding related to studying brain disease, and experts say it could put them at a large disadvantage.

What research is being impacted?

In 2025, the U.S. awarded 52% fewer grants related to Alzheimer’s research than in 2024, according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), with the number of grants falling from 369 to 177. The figure appears to be on track through 2026 as well, especially given the most recent cuts.

The newest funding slashes involve grant cancellations for “brain health and Alzheimer’s disease research at two leading research institutions, Emory University and the University of Pittsburgh,” said The Guardian. At least “three grants were canceled between the two institutions,” representing $15 million in funds that would’ve been used to study “how discrimination” — or racism — “affects long-term brain health.”

The topics “we’re measuring are scientifically valid concepts,” Andrea Rosso, an associate professor of epidemiology at the University of Pittsburgh, told The Guardian. Black people are two times more likely to develop dementia, according to the Alzheimer’s Association. And while these studies “don’t actually measure structural racism,” they do “use that as a framing for why one population is at such high risk.”

The DEI-related funding cuts are also coming alongside additional efforts by the White House to overhaul how grants are awarded. Under newly proposed rules by the Trump administration, any “multiyear grant could be terminated at any point,” and the government “would not be allowed to fund any DEI-related activities or projects or groups that ‘deny the biological reality of sex or the sex binary in humans,’” said The Boston Globe.

What does this mean for Alzheimer’s patients?

Many are worried that cutting Alzheimer’s research under the guise of the anti-DEI movement could negatively impact patients, specifically those who are Black. One canceled grant at the University of Pittsburgh “studied how Alzheimer’s disease risk was affected in people who live in divested, predominantly African American neighborhoods,” said The Guardian. The research tracked “socially driven Alzheimer’s disease risk factors by collecting surveys, brain imaging and blood samples.” Another grant at Emory University that was slashed by the White House “studied the impact of racial discrimination on the white matter of the brain, in part surveying participants’ self-reported incidences of discrimination.”

Behind all of these killed studies are “people waiting for answers, for therapies, for relief, for hope,” said a pain researcher at Mass General Brigham, per the Globe. This comes as the Trump administration has “been open about wanting a smaller NIH,” said Vox, and originally “proposed cutting the agency’s budget for 2026 by 40%.”

Some researchers say they are considering taking their studies offshore if things do not change. “While I hope to improve the lives of the American people with my research, if I am not able to pursue this aspiration in the U.S., I would rather continue to do so outside of the country,” one Ph.D. student said in comments about the cuts, per the Globe.

The current state of affairs “demonstrates a lack of understanding of our outcomes versus our exposures,” Ann Cohen, an associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh, said to The Guardian. “That’s epidemiology 101.”

Every cancer has its individual mutations, and scientists have long harboured hopes of developing treatments that can be tailored specifically for each individual patient. And now early results from a final-stage trial of personalised cancer vaccines has the research world holding its breath.

US pharmaceutical companies Moderna and Merck have been testing a personalised mRNA vaccine on melanoma patients who had had surgery for their skin cancer. This week, the firms announced that, combined with an established immunotherapy drug, the vaccine had significantly increased the length of time the patients remained cancer-free. This is “a major success in a new field of cancer treatment” that has sent both companies’ shares “surging”, said Reuters.

The results mark “a landmark moment” for the treatment of melanoma, one of the deadliest types of skin cancer, said the study’s principal investigator Georgina Long, medical director of the non-profit Melanoma Institute Australia. This is also “a pivotal moment” for cancer research, said Moderna’s chief executive, Stéphane Bancel.

How does the vaccine work?

It’s made using mRNA technology – as, famously, were some Covid-19 vaccines. But, while the Covid vaccines were created as a standard formulation for everyone, this time it’s created individually for each patient.

To do that, researchers sequence the DNA of each patient’s tumour (by analysing samples after it’s been removed) and identify its unique mutations. They then “encode selected targets into strands of mRNA”, producing a vaccine designed to teach the recipient’s immune system “to recognise and attack any tumour cells that remain”, said The Times. The result is “a personalised anti-cancer jab” specific to the patient’s tumour, said the BBC.

What do we know about the results?

Very little. The phase 3 trial involved 1,137 high-risk patients with melanoma, who were randomly assigned to receive either the vaccine and the immunotherapy drug Keytruda, or just Keytruda, for about a year.

In a similar smaller trial in 2022, Moderna reported that participants who received the vaccine and Keytruda were 44% less likely to develop new tumours or die within three years, compared to those who only received Keytruda.

Moderna has said that these new trial results “demonstrate statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements” in survival times for the vaccine group, and that there had been “no new safety concerns”. But we don’t know exactly how much the vaccine increased survival times.

The results have not been publicly released or peer-reviewed. More findings from the trial will be presented at a medical conference in October.

What could this mean?

“I think it’s fair to call this a breakthrough,” said Marco Gerlinger of the Barts Cancer Institute. These results have “much wider implications” than just for melanoma treatment, he told The Times. They are “proof of principle that personalised cancer vaccines work”,

The hope is that this personalised vaccine “will work for many other types of cancer”, said New Scientist. Moderna and Merck are already trialling similar personalised mRNA vaccines for types of bladder, kidney and lung cancer. BioNTech, “the other big mRNA company”, is also testing personalised cancer vaccines in human trials. Several of these early-stage trials have produced “promising results”.

If successful, these vaccines could prevent nearly 50,000 deaths in the US alone, Yale University estimated last year. “The positive hit here leads us ⁠into truly this next phase in immunotherapy,” Karen Knudsen of the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy told Reuters. “This is an auspicious start – this is where things begin.”

What are the caveats?

Moderna and Merck have only released an interim analysis, not the full trial data. And experts “emphasise caution” until the dataset has been peer-reviewed, said the BBC.

The announcement gave Moderna’s shares “their biggest one-day jump on record”, said The Times, while Merck also rallied. But market moves are “imperfect indicators of real-world significance”, said the Financial Times. It’s “not quite the surprise clinical breakthrough” that the jump might imply. It’s “a big deal for Moderna” but, without all data, it’s “difficult to assess the magnitude, durability, and commercial relevance of benefit”.

Investors will be watching for the “next important steps”: “detailed clinical results, regulatory progress, and evidence that the technology works across other cancers”, a financial markets analyst told Sky News. Even then, they know that manufacturing personalised vaccines at scale is “expensive and complex”. One Reuters report suggested that each vaccine could cost about £147,000.

What happened

Moderna and Merck said Wednesday their experimental mRNA cancer vaccine successfully reduced recurrence of melanoma, and prevented the deadly skin cancer from spreading to other organs, in a large trial. The results “mark the first successful late-stage trial for a personalized mRNA cancer therapy,” The Wall Street Journal said, “validating decades of research” and “paving the way for a potentially new life-extending treatment” for people diagnosed with melanoma and other cancers.

Who said what

The ongoing study involves 1,137 high-risk melanoma patients whose cancer was surgically removed and genetically sequenced. The treatment combines Merck’s immunotherapy drug Keytruda with intismeran, a “made-to-order mRNA vaccine” created by analyzing and weaponizing “mutations found in the patients’ own tumors,” CNN said. The companies didn’t detail the results, but an earlier mid-stage trial showed that pairing intismeran with Keytruda reduced the risk of melanoma recurrence or death by 49% versus Keytruda alone. Moderna’s stock closed up 177% Wednesday.

What next?

Moderna and Merck said they planned to “present the details” of their latest “large, closely watched trial” at an “international medical meeting and to regulators,” The New York Times said. Investors and researchers “will be watching closely to see how effective and tolerable the vaccine proves to be,” the Journal said.

A new generation of drugs could transform the lives of people with narcolepsy and offer hope of future treatments for ADHD and depression.

Orexins help regulate wakefulness, as well as attention, motivation and the brain’s reward system. This month, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the first orexin agonist treatment for narcolepsy. Oveporexton (sold as Orzeyful) is designed to target the cause of the chronic sleep disorder, rather than treat the symptoms with stimulants.

But “the excitement is not just about narcolepsy”, said The Economist. Inspired by the success of drugs that mimic glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), developed to treat diabetes and later used for weight-loss in medication such as Ozempic, drugmakers are “betting” that orexins could “follow a similar path”, potentially leading to treatments for conditions that “burden hundreds of millions” of people.

What are orexins?

They are two peptides (chains of amino acids that act as messengers in the brain) that are involved in the body’s sleep-wake system. Specifically, they are neuropeptides. They act as neurotransmitters, or chemicals, that carry messages between neurons. They are involved with reward and motivation.

Named after the Greek word orexis (appetite), orexins were discovered in 1998 by two teams working independently in the US. The discovery turned “the long march to develop a new kind of sleeping pill into a sprint”, said The Guardian.

But their “true role emerged” in 1999, said The Economist. People with narcolepsy were found to lack the specialised neurons that produce orexins, causing “abnormally low levels”. That means the brain “loses the ability to control when the body sleeps”, said Time.

How do they work?

In 2011, researchers at Takeda, a Japanese pharmaceutical company, found a chemical compound that could block the orexin receptor, and so promote sleep. Orexin antagonists were developed as a treatment for insomnia, differing from conventional sleeping pills that induce sedation.

But “the bigger prize may lie not in blocking orexin’s signal, but restoring it”, said The Economist. The results of Takeda’s trials of oveporexton, published last year in The New England Journal of Medicine, “created a stir”. Volunteers were able to stay awake 12.5 to 25 minutes longer with the drug (depending on the dose) than without it.

The drug “activates the orexin pathway” and “restores the brain’s ability to remain alert”, said Time. Volunteers also had fewer episodes of cataplexy, or loss of muscle control, as well as other symptoms such as hallucinations and irregular sleep. There were “no serious adverse events related to treatment”, said the Smithsonian magazine.

“It’s really a complete revolution,” Emmanuel Mignot, a sleep-medicine professor who led Takeda’s final studies, told The Wall Street Journal. “The first time patients take it, it’s like the light switch.” One 19-year-old trial participant said: “It was the first time I felt somewhat alive in the last 10 years.” “It’s the best thing that has ever happened to me,” he told Nature.

What might the future hold?

In the US and Western Europe, narcolepsy affects about one in 2,000 people, but there is no cure. Existing drugs – “decades-old stimulants and sedatives” – only manage symptoms, said The Wall Street Journal. Oveporexton and its competitors are “designed to treat the disease as a whole”. Morgan Stanley estimates that orexin-based medicines for narcolepsy and other sleep disorders could generate $16 billion a year by 2035, according to SF Globe.

Takeda is testing orexin-targeting drugs for sleep apnea and chronic daytime sleepiness. Alkermes, an Irish biotech company, is testing an orexin drug for ADHD in adults. And this year Eli Lilly (of Mounjaro fame) bought Centessa, a biotech firm with an orexin agonist in trials, in a deal potentially worth up to $7.8 billion. New research has also revealed “the essential role of orexin neurons” in motivation, said BioTechniques.

The twice-daily oral drug Orzeyful could be “a boon for the roughly 120,000 people in the United States with narcolepsy type 1”, said the Smithsonian. But its success also “opens the door to the use of orexin-mimicking drugs for other conditions associated with low levels of the chemical”, such as ADHD and depression. “Orzeyful is just the beginning,” said Andy Plump, Takeda’s president of research and development.

‘I grew up watching Hayden Panettiere. Her death is a reckoning.’

Sara Pequeño at USA Today

The “late-night Aug. 16 notification that Hayden Panettiere died took my breath away,” says Sara Pequeño. Every “so often, a celebrity’s death will feel like an exposed nerve,” and “millennials and Gen Z are still getting used to that feeling.” In the “last years of her life, Panettiere was talking about serious topics that many young women can empathize with.” Hers is “not simply a cautionary tale — it is also a story about the importance of speaking your truth.”

Read more

‘By disparaging 2020 protests as “Woke 1,” liberals are following the right wing’s lead’

Andre Gee at The Guardian

This month has “brought us a referendum on ‘Woke 1’ — a term that reductively brands 2020’s social justice movement — as prominent liberal voices reflect on that time period with disappointing hindsight,” says Andre Gee. “Woke” has “long shifted from Black America’s prideful adjective to a mocking noun that has been weaponized to ridicule Black liberation movements.” Progressive liberals “now adopting that dismissive language while placing confines on the movement for Black lives is damning.”

Read more

‘You cannot rebuild a country with people who are shattered’

Lilia Yapparova at The Boston Globe

“Stigma around mental health care still runs deep in Ukraine,” says Lilia Yapparova. This happens “even though the scale of trauma in Ukraine is extraordinary.” If the nation’s “mental health crisis goes untreated, overlooked grief and loss could become indelible parts of Ukraine’s social fabric, with cascading effects on future generations.” It is “not only soldiers who continue to live in a nightmare of ongoing trauma,” but there is “no systematic, streamlined approach to mental health support in Ukraine.”

Read more

‘Pilots and flight attendants face a real cancer risk. Frequent fliers shouldn’t panic.’

Vishal R. Patel, Christopher M. Worsham and Anupam Jena at Time

There’s a “particular unease that comes from seeing that an ordinary part of life has been linked to cancer,” as “pilots and flight attendants die of radiation-related cancers at higher rates than workers in over 500 occupations,” say Vishal R. Patel, Christopher M. Worsham and Anupam Jena. The “next time a flight attendant hands you a coffee at 30,000 feet, there’s no need to fret over the tiny radiation dose,” but “do consider the doses they take on, day after day.”

Read more

A methamphetamine known as the “crazy pill” is wreaking havoc in Bangladesh and fuelling an addiction crisis. The authorities have struggled for some time to crack down on yaba, which is also known as “Nazi speed”. Their efforts are bearing some fruit but tackling the widespread use of the drug remains an uphill battle.

Black market

Yaba is a street name for pills containing methamphetamine, a powerful, highly addictive stimulant. Users generally crush and smoke the pills, although some swallow them whole. They increase alertness and energy, and raise the heart rate and blood pressure of users. Heavy use can bring on a range of problems, including paranoia, psychosis, seizures, cardiovascular problems, and even death.

Yaba, which means “crazy pill” in Thai, is “pushing thousands into addiction” in Bangladesh, said The Telegraph. The tablets, which are a blend of the stimulant with caffeine and other adulterants, are particularly common in South and Southeast Asia.

Bangladesh has become a leading destination and market for yaba because of its geographic proximity to Myanmar, where production of the drug is particularly concentrated. Rebel militias there are increasingly using yaba and crystal meth as “partial payment for smuggled Bangladeshi goods”, said the Dhaka-based newspaper The Daily Star.

The drug is trafficked westward from Myanmar into Bangladesh, through border areas that are difficult to control. Fishing boats transport Bangladeshi goods to Myanmar and “return with narcotics”. Although most of the drugs are consumed in Bangladesh, some packages are flown on to Oman, Saudi Arabia and Dubai.

Daily drudgery

Since 2006, yaba has been a common for the poor and the realities of the “daily drudgery, which makes life so hard for so many of Bangladesh’s 178 million people”, means there is “little to dull the allure” of the drug, said The Telegraph.

“The reason yaba has become so prevalent here is that it is so easy to transport and far cheaper to buy than other drugs,” government social worker Adnan Zobayer told the newspaper. “People get an easy buzz and quickly become dependent.”

Authorities in Bangladesh have been fighting for years to stamp out trade in the stimulant. In 2018, the government passed a law which makes possession of yaba punishable by death. They are having some success: enforcement agencies seized 43,562,811 amphetamine-type stimulant tablets, including yaba, last year, up 90.58 % from 22,857,751 in 2024. However, drug lords are still able to “churn out” millions of yaba pills from camps in the jungle borderlands of Myanmar at a “relentless” rate, said The Telegraph.

What happened

President Trump signed a nonbinding executive order this week recommending a radical overhaul of the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule, a policy proposal that health experts warned will only sow more mistrust and confusion about lifesaving immunizations. The order proposes reducing the number of recommended childhood vaccines from 18 to 11, downgrading vaccines for diseases such as Covid, hepatitis A and B, and RSV to optional for most children. It directs government health officials to plan for separating the doses in the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, which has been administered as a combined injection for 55 years. The order also authorizes the Justice Department to challenge state vaccine regulations deemed insufficiently respectful of parental objections. Trump claimed without evidence that the combined MMR vaccine can be “quite lethal” if given at once.

With Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by his side, Trump made several other false claims. He said children were being pumped with “vats” of vaccine—the MMR shot is actually a fraction of a teaspoon—and revived the debunked theory that vaccines cause autism. Pediatricians were aghast. “As measles cases reach a 35-year high in the U.S.,” said American Academy of Pediatrics president Dr. Andrew Racine, Trump’s executive order is “not only disheartening but dangerous.” Several states, including New York and Illinois, declared they would keep current childhood immunization rules in place. “We will continue to be guided by the science,” said New York state Health Commissioner James McDonald.

What the columnists said

Trump claimed “nothing bad can happen from what we’re doing,” said Jonathan Cohn in The Bulwark. But “bad things are happening already.” Nearly 2,500 people have contracted measles this year as anti-vax rhetoric has pushed MMR vaccination rates below the community protection threshold. At least two children have died from the disease. And now many more parents will wrongly believe that a proven protection is unsafe, all because “they heard it from the president.”

Trump insists he isn’t promoting “vaccine skepticism,” said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. He claims he’s merely aligning the U.S. with other “peer, developed nations” such as Denmark. But governments with “socialized health systems” have fewer vaccine recommendations because they don’t want to pay to cover rarer diseases, such as meningitis, and because problems like mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B are “less common” there.

“Almost nothing Trump called for is practical or possible today,” said Michael Hiltzik in the Los Angeles Times. No American company even manufactures the individual components for separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines. Successive shots would leave kids vulnerable to the diseases for longer. But Trump and Kennedy “have been beating the anti-vaccination drum for years.” They long for the “good old days” before “excessive” immunizations. “They would expose millions of children to severe disease and death” in the name of misguided nostalgia. “In heaven’s name, why?”

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Moderna’s mRNA flu vaccine, mFLUSIVA. The approval comes despite growing vaccine skepticism, especially toward mRNA vaccines following Covid-19. But research shows that this new vaccine can produce a stronger immune response and be produced more quickly than the traditional flu vaccine.

How does the mRNA vaccine differ from the traditional shot?

The approval of mFLUSIVA “demonstrates the continued strength and versatility of our mRNA platform,” Stephane Bancel, Moderna’s CEO, said in a release. The vaccine was shown to be almost 27% more effective against the flu than the standard flu shot. The FDA has authorized mFLUSIVA for adults over the age of 50 after “documented superiority in effectiveness to normal dose flu vaccines,” particularly “for those with underlying diseases,” Jesse Goodman, the FDA’s former top vaccine regulator, said to The Washington Post.

A move toward mRNA vaccines can create a more effective and faster flu shot. Traditional vaccines are “typically generated in chicken eggs” and are “what we call an inactivated flu vaccine,” Hanover Matz, an immunologist at WashU Medicine in St. Louis and the coauthor of a June study comparing the mRNA vaccine to the traditional flu vaccine, said to Science News. Pieces of the virus “are used to teach your immune system how to fight flu,” and “because the virus is raised in chicken eggs, it takes a long time to generate that vaccine.” This method also requires policymakers to “determine what the most likely strains of the flu virus are going to be for the fall season in the Northern Hemisphere,” and they “need to start that production well before the fall to get the vaccine doses ready.” If “there’s a mismatch in strains, there’s really no way they can go back and update the vaccine and change it.”

By contrast, the mRNA vaccine “contains three RNAs, which each encode the hemagglutinin protein of one of two influenza A strains and one influenza B strain,” said IFL Science. The genetic information “instructs the body to produce a fragment of a virus that then sets off the body’s immune response,” said The New York Times. Because the virus does not have to be produced in eggs, mRNA vaccines can be produced much faster and can be adjusted to “rapidly emerging new flu strains, a capacity we have not had before,” Georges C. Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association, said to the Times.

What is the future of the mRNA vaccine?

Despite the benefits of the mRNA vaccine, it was not an easy route to approval. The mRNA technology, famously used in Covid-19 vaccines, has been the subject of widespread anti-vaccine misinformation campaigns. The FDA “refused to even review Moderna’s application for approval earlier this year but quickly reversed course after a public outcry,” said the Times. In addition, the approval of mFLUSIVA is “likely to face pushback,” especially from some allies of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. “who have expressed skepticism over mRNA-based coronavirus shots,” said the Post.

Those in favor of cite the FDA’s approval as a step in the right direction. The FDA is “signaling openness” to mRNA vaccines, Jeanne Marrazzo, the chief executive officer of the Infectious Disease Society of America, said to NPR. It “could set us up not only for improved response to a bad flu season but also to an improved response to any biological threats.” The flu “remains a significant public health challenge,” Bancel said in the release, and “mFLUSIVA provides an important new option for America’s seniors.”

What happened

President Donald Trump on Monday signed an executive order proposing a reduction in routine childhood immunizations to 11 from 17, and pushing for the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine to be split into three separate single-disease shots administered over several doctor visits. This is Trump’s third attempt to “promote his long-held but discredited theory that childhood shots should be spaced out,” The Associated Press said, and a continuation of his fixation on “connecting autism to vaccines,” even though “scientific consensus and decades of studies have firmly concluded there is no link.”

Who said what

“Nothing bad can happen from what we’re doing,” Trump said before signing the order. But pediatricians and public health experts have “long warned” that spreading out vaccinations “will reduce immunization rates and leave children more susceptible to disease,” CNN said.

Trump’s “renewed focus on vaccines marks a departure” from his administration’s “recent efforts to emphasize less controversial health policies” ahead of November elections, the AP said. Trump’s “own pollsters have warned” that the issue is “unpopular” with voters, Politico said. But the president’s “personal interest” in changing vaccine policy has been “thrown into high gear by his allegiance with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,” a longtime vaccine skeptic.

What next?

It’s unclear whether Trump’s order “has any legal power,” The New York Times said. Federal immunization recommendations come from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and its outside experts, and “only states can require vaccinations for children to enter school or day care.”

People might soon have a lot more to see. A retinal implant that can restore vision degraded by age has been approved for use in Europe and could soon be available in the U.S. Researchers are also evaluating the applicability of the implant for other eye conditions.

So much to see

The PRIMA retinal implant, created by the Science Corporation, can “restore functional central vision” in those with geographic atrophy (an advanced form of macular degeneration), said Stanford Medicine. The implant has shown measurable vision improvement, allowing “those who were considered legally blind to read letters and words.”

“Normal vision in the U.S. is 20/20, and blindness is 20/200,” Frank Brodie, the medical director for vision and the PRIMA implant at the Science Corporation, said to New Scientist. “Patients using PRIMA reached about 20/160, so they went from blind to not blind.”

The implant is “about the size of a pinhead and is inserted beneath the retina” and “used alongside glasses with a frame-mounted camera,” said New Scientist. It operates with a brain-computer interface (BCI), in which the camera “captures and processes images, then projects the result onto the implant’s chips using near-infrared light.” The method “offers users black-and-white vision and the ability to zoom in on objects” without interfering with any existing vision, said Stat News. “We have a cochlear implant for vision now,” Max Hodak, the founder and CEO of Science Corporation, said to Stat News.

Geographic atrophy affects eight million people globally and over one million in the U.S. Currently available treatments for geographic atrophy are “extremely limited.” We “have two [U.S. Food and Drug Administration]-approved medications for the treatment of geographic atrophy that slow down the progressive disease but, unfortunately, cannot bring back lost vision,” Sunir Garg, a doctor at the Wills Eye Hospital in Philadelphia, said to New Scientist.

New field of vision

PRIMA has been approved for use and sale in Europe and is set to launch in Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. The implant also “received a Humanitarian Use Device designation from the FDA in March,” said Stat News. The designation “puts the device on track to debut in the United States early next year if it receives agency approval.” If PRIMA received FDA approval, it would be only the “second brain-computer interface (BCI) to enter the U.S. market.”

Cost could be a barrier. “Each PRIMA device is expected to cost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars,” said TechCrunch. Science Corporation and “its medical partners in Europe are currently in discussion with healthcare providers over reimbursement.” In the U.S., “most of the patient population for the device is over 65, so they expect the device to be covered by Medicare, though those details are yet to be finalized,” said Stat News. Researchers are also evaluating PRIMA for other retinal conditions like Stargardt disease and retinitis pigmentosa.

The Trump administration is recycling the failed message that teens should be sexually abstinent, said Jill Filipovic in Slate, and urging them “to forgo contraception, get married, and plan their lives around having babies.” The Department of Health and Human Services recently canceled 53 of 67 grants, totaling $68 million, provided through the decades-old Teen Pregnancy Prevention program. The federal government will now provide grants only to sex education organizations that emphasize fertility over contraception, falsely depict the pill and hormonal contraception as dangerous, and urge teens to prepare for marriage and parenthood. The new guidelines ban any “content that encourages, normalizes, or promotes sexual activity for minors.” Since TPP began in 2010, the birth rate for 15-to-19-year-olds has decreased by over 65%, reaching a record-low 11.7 births per 1,000 last year. Now HHS is “stripping money from the programs that sent teen pregnancy rates tumbling to put it toward those that tell teens that actually, reproduction is the goal.”

But the teen birth rate has been declining since the 1990s, long before TPP, said Michael J. New in National Review. HHS tried to refocus grants toward abstinence education during Trump’s first term, but grantees sued and kept their funding. They’re doing so again, and “conservatives should hope” Trump is more successful this time. The purpose of sex ed has changed, said Kat Rosenfield in The Free Press. Preventing unplanned teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted disease was a “reasonable and appropriate” goal when they were more common. But it doesn’t make much sense “in a world where young people are barely having sex” compared with previous generations.

The new sex-ed policy is purely political, said Danielle Han in Jezebel. “Eliminating comprehensive sex ed was one of the goals of Project 2025,” the blueprint for Trump’s second term. Anti-abortion activists have sought to “change the curricula to stigmatize abortion” and teach young people that life begins at conception. Legal abortion, contraception, and comprehensive sex ed helped bring the teen pregnancy rate to this historic low, said Lisa Needham in Daily Kos. But “conservative creeps are actually sad that teen birth rates are down.” They aim to boost population growth—“well, population growth for white people, which is what the disgusting ‘pronatalist’ movement is really about.” Under Trump, sex ed now amounts to “more teen pregnancies, please.”

‘Why are we just watching America become a surveillance state?’

Sara Pequeño at USA Today

There is a “larger issue of mass surveillance becoming mainstream,” says Sara Pequeño. Flock cameras have “recently been in the news for what happens when police officers misuse the technology,” but “faceless corporations aren’t the only ones policing our behavior through mass surveillance.” Americans are “also creating the panopticon among ourselves.” People “can opt out of a culture that calls on us to record our fellow man if we ourselves would not like to be documented.”

Read more

‘What should a 21st-century central bank look like?’

Daniel Moss at Bloomberg

Central banks “have done a sterling job in responding to swings in prices and employment, and severe gyrations in capital markets,” says Daniel Moss. Still, they “haven’t always gotten everything right.” Then “there’s the perceived overreach.” Politicians “might insist that they support central bank independence but now want to peel back what policymakers can do, how they can do it and when they can do it.” The “case for freedom to implement policy has never been stronger.”

Read more

‘A “Free Palestine” T-shirt at a Holocaust memorial is no contradiction’

Gideon Levy at Haaretz

“Teenagers from an international anti-fascist youth camp visited Austria’s Mauthausen Concentration Camp Memorial last week,” and a “number of them wore T-shirts with slogans calling for the liberation of Palestine,” says Gideon Levy. The “notion that there is no better place than the ruins of a concentration camp to fight for the liberation of 2 million human beings who are currently incarcerated in the Gaza Strip is beyond the grasp of Israelis.” The “call to free Palestine is not antisemitic.”

Read more

‘Should an insurer or a doctor decide where your care takes place?’

Edmund Pribitkin at The Philadelphia Inquirer

“Every day, physicians, patients and the families who care for them make hundreds of decisions together about where and how care should be delivered,” says Edmund Pribitkin. “Increasingly, however, these collective judgments are being second-guessed — and often overruled — by large insurance companies through policies that prioritize administrative convenience and cost-shifting over clinical judgment.” Healthcare decisions “should be made by patients, their families and their care teams — not by insurance company policies.”

Read more

‘My laundromat accepts Apple Pay. Why won’t they take my cash?’

Mary Anna Mancuso at the Miami Herald

Cash “isn’t going out of circulation; it’s disappearing from everyday transactions,” says Mary Anna Mancuso. Businesses “prefer electronic payments” because it “reduces the risk of robbery, digital transactions go into the bank almost immediately and the bookkeeping is simpler.” But it is “worth asking what we lose when convenience becomes the only option.” A “modern payment system should accommodate everyone — whether they choose to tap their phone, swipe a card or hand over a dollar bill.”

Read more

‘Ukraine has always been here — and always will be’

Lidia Pilecky at the Chicago Tribune

Ukraine’s “history tells the facts. We were here. We are here. And we will remain here,” says Lidia Pilecky. For “centuries, Russian rulers repeatedly tried to ban the Ukrainian language and suppress the very identity Putin claims never existed.” But “today, Ukrainians defend the universal principle that no nation should be destroyed because a more powerful neighbor claims it has no right to exist.” Ukraine’s “fight is also taking place in classrooms where children learn the truth.”

Read more

‘Cyclospora outbreaks will only get worse as climate chaos grows’

Amy Moas at Newsweek

This “has been one of the most dangerous summers on record, and experts have been warning about it for decades,” says Amy Moas regarding “two deaths linked to the outbreak of cyclospora.” It is “easier to associate loss of life with extreme weather when it’s tied to a singular event.” But “you can ‘contact-trace’ this now-fatal outbreak back to the ongoing climate crisis.” If “summer gets longer and warmer, we’ll see a longer, hotter mechanism for the parasite to thrive.”

Read more

‘Fancy sodas fall flat with me’

Brenda Cronin at The Wall Street Journal

Fancy sodas “come in winsome bottles or sleek cans and have ridiculous flavors like watermelon-dandelion or rosehip-jacaranda,” but “they taste like carbonated cough syrup with a Windex chaser,” says Brenda Cronin. People “should be reveling in the gourmet soda parade,” if “only the flavors didn’t sound like products from Bath & Body Works” or “taste like a mashup of SweeTARTS and Jolly Ranchers.” When “drinking feels more like penance than a party, I’ll do without.”

Read more

What happened

Scientists at Stanford University on Thursday reported in the journal Science that they had successfully directed artificial intelligence to create 16 new viruses. This first-ever use of AI to design and build viruses not found in nature raised “hopes for medical advances” like eliminating drug-resistant bacteria, The New York Times said, while also “raising the disturbing possibility that the technology could someday be used to invent dangerous pathogens.”

Who said what

“Synthesizing viruses from scratch is hardly new,” the Times said, but the Stanford and Arc Institute researchers went “well beyond” previous efforts by teaching AI to “recognize patterns of DNA structure in nature, and then to use that data to write recipes for entirely new viruses.” Their AI tool, Evo, was fed genetic sequences “much like ChatGPT and other language models are trained on large sets of existing text material,” CNN said.

What next?

The new study “arrives at a moment of heightened anxiety regarding danger posed by increasingly powerful AI models,” The Wall Street Journal said. Evo was constrained to create “simple viruses” that can “only infect bacteria and pose no threat to humans.” But the breakthrough “raises urgent biosafety and biosecurity questions,” Johns Hopkins health security experts said in a corresponding Science article. “The ability to compose viral genomes using generative AI now exists; the governance to safely steer it does not.”

What happened

The Senate Homeland Security Committee on Thursday voted along party lines to hold former U.S. infectious disease chief Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress for repeatedly refusing to answer questions during testimony on the federal response to Covid-19. Committee Chair Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and other Republicans contended that Fauci could not invoke his Fifth Amendment rights “because he’d already received a preemptive pardon from former President Joe Biden,” CNN said. But “GOP lawmakers also openly acknowledged” last week that they “hoped to get Fauci to perjure himself in his testimony, allowing them to bring new charges.”

Who said what

“Fauci faced no risk of federal prosecution,” Paul said. “All he had to do was tell the truth.” Fauci’s lawyer called the vote a “crude political stunt” to “punish” a public servant for “exercising his constitutional rights.” Paul appears so “hellbent on putting Fauci in jail” that his office immediately hand-delivered the contempt resolution to federal prosecutors, Politico said. Contempt referrals “rarely bypass the full Senate,” The Wall Street Journal said, and “it isn’t clear whether a referral made in such a manner is legally valid.”

What next?

The Justice Department on Thursday evening said it had received Paul’s referral, is “reviewing it and will work with the Senate accordingly.” If prosecutors decide to file charges and win a conviction, Fauci faces up to a year in prison.

‘The godmother of the “conspiracy mom”’

Jessica Winter at The New Yorker

After JFK’s assassination, Oklahoma housewife Shirley Martin “flung herself into investigating the crime and getting to know some of those closest to it,” says Jessica Winter. It is “generally understood today, as it was not understood 60-plus years ago, that those who subscribe to conspiracy theories tend to do so in order to make sense of an unstable reality,” and “in some ways, Martin was a preview of today’s post-Covid, stay-at-home ‘conspiracy mom’ or of the MAHA moms.”

Read more

‘The ethical perils of gene therapy’

Anjana Ahuja at the Financial Times

In China, a “risky experimental treatment was undertaken for a nonfatal condition; oversight by external authorities, regulators and ethical review boards in China was insufficient to avert tragedy,” says Anjana Ahuja. The “episode is another blow to a country vying to become a global leader in biotech,” as “truly advancing science means being open, honest and transparent about mistakes, as well as successes.” Parents “crave better lives for their children and ambitious researchers covet world firsts.”

Read more

‘I used to mock gym bros. Here’s why I became one.’

Emily Hoeven at the San Francisco Chronicle

It “may seem absurd to say that deadlifts and squats and bench presses changed my life,” but “then again, it wasn’t long ago that I couldn’t lift a coffee cup without excruciating pain,” says Emily Hoeven. It is “almost impossible to name an area of life that weightlifting doesn’t improve.” Studies “show that it boosts confidence and mood, strengthens bones, reduces joint pain and chronic inflammation, and improves cognition,” and it “can be especially beneficial for older women.”

Read more

‘How to fight a cloud’

Nitish Pahwa at Slate

It “feels like an inflection point” for the construction of AI data centers, as “more community leaders and elected officials are listening to their concerned constituents and hitting the pause button,” says Nitish Pahwa. But an “even bigger fight is at hand: whether these halts on buildouts will eventually lead to permanent bans, or whether elected officials are just kicking the clankers down the road.” It’s “one thing to impose a pause for a period of time” but “another to actually make use of that time.”

Read more

What happened

The Senate on Wednesday confirmed Dr. Erica Schwartz as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s first permanent director in nearly a year. Schwartz is “widely considered a qualified and traditional selection for the role,” Politico said. She “has repeatedly affirmed the safety and efficacy of childhood vaccines,” The New York Times said, but the 51-44 vote “fell mostly along partisan lines.”

Who said what

Schwartz will take over a “public health agency beleaguered by political meddling and low morale,” The Associated Press said. Her predecessor, Susan Monarez, was ousted after less than a month following a clash with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over vaccine policy, The Wall Street Journal said, and the White House was “looking for a CDC nominee who would minimize controversy” this time around.

What next?

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said he joined Republicans in voting for Schwartz because public health leadership is urgently needed amid the U.S. outbreaks of measles and cyclosporiasis and Congo’s Ebola crisis. “It’s becoming very obvious what happens when the invisible workings of public health are not functioning the way we need them to,” Johns Hopkins biosecurity expert Gigi Gronvall told The New York Times. But it’s not clear “how much good” Schwartz can do when “the main problem is RFK Jr.”

TV might actually be rotting our brains. Watching television for extended periods of time could increase the risk of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease, new research says. To combat this danger, experts recommend taking breaks from binge-watching and engaging in more mentally stimulating activities.

Your brain on TV

Frequent TV watching in midlife was associated with reduced volume in the parts of the brain vulnerable to Alzheimer’s disease, according to a study published in Alzheimer’s & Dementia. The diminished brain systems include those associated with memory and cognition as well as executive functioning. More surprisingly, the brain volume reduction was not tied to sedentary behavior but specifically to watching TV. “People whose jobs involved sitting for much of the day tended to have healthier-looking brains,” said ScienceAlert. Also, “when the researchers accounted for differences in overall physical activity, that didn't seem to impact the outcome.”

The results also showed that men were particularly vulnerable to these brain changes. “This could be because men and women accumulate sedentary time differently,” Natan Feter, a biological scientist and the lead author of the study, said to ScienceAlert. “Women may interrupt their sitting more often,” or “biological differences in how the brain responds to prolonged sedentary behavior” may be to blame. In general, “women tend to prefer TV programming in shorter chunks, though they spend more time watching overall,” said ScienceAlert. By contrast, “men’s preferences for watching sports and movies” mean they are are “more likely to spend long, uninterrupted periods on the couch.”

Researchers analyzed a sample of 1,712 adults with an average age of 53 years who did not have a diagnosis of dementia when the research began. Between 1987 and 1989, “participants completed a detailed physical activity questionnaire during an in-person interview” where they reported “how often they watched television during their leisure time,” as well as “answered specific questions about how often they sat down during their work hours,” said PsyPost. Between 2011 and 2013, the participants underwent an MRI of their brains.

The study “shows an association, not a cause-and-effect relationship” between TV and dementia, Feter said to Healthline. The researchers also “relied on self-reported data for TV consumption, which can be less precise than timed tracking,” said a news release about the study.

Beyond the screen

“For years, we’ve focused on how much people sit,” David Raichlen, a professor of biological sciences and anthropology at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences and the senior author of the study, said in the news release. But these findings “suggest we should also pay attention to what they’re doing while they’re sitting.” For example, working from home, while sedentary, is more “intellectually stimulating” compared to watching TV, said the release.

Because TV watching appears to specifically affect the brain, “we might eventually see a different approach to health guidance around sedentary activities,” said the release. “Rather than just directing their patients to move more, for example, physicians might recommend they reduce television time and add cognitively engaging activities for when they do sit.” Activities like “puzzling, crafts and even texting, which require your brain to work while you are sitting might also change how much sitting negatively impacts your brain,” said ScienceAlert.

“The goal is not to eliminate passive rest,” Dung Trinh, a doctor at the MemorialCare Medical Group and the chief medical officer of Healthy Brain Clinic in Irvine, California, said to Healthline. It is to “build more cognitively engaging moments into the day.”

‘One problem with attacking the Smithsonian? Americans like it.’

Kelsey Ables at The Atlantic

Even as the “museum complex continues to face a pressure campaign from the White House, public fondness for the Smithsonian — for its free entry and eclectic collections — is hard to break,” says Kelsey Ables. Museums have “been largely immune to the most deleterious effects of the culture wars.” Most “Americans, unlike the president, seem to trust these entities to do their thing” so “coming after a history museum may not be the base-galvanizing issue the White House hopes it is.”

Read more

‘The US government’s mislabeled map of Africa at a global AIDS conference shows again a failure to understand the continent’

Kenneth Ngure at The Guardian

At the 26th International AIDS Conference, a “slide presented by a senior U.S. State Department official displayed a map of Africa with country names glaringly scrambled and mislabeled,” says Kenneth Ngure. While the “mistake apparently occurred due to an overreliance on AI tools, it carried a painful symbolic weight.” The map “reinforced a longstanding frustration: that too many political leaders treat Africa as a monolithic abstraction rather than a continent of 54 distinct sovereign nations.”

Read more

‘Why patients wait months for care they don’t get’

Tessa Adzemović at The Boston Globe

Hospitals “were never designed to become long-term accommodations, but that’s become a reality for a select population,” says Tessa Adzemović. These “patients are medically cleared to leave but cannot be discharged because of capacity bottlenecks, insurance delays or legal complexities.” Many “prolonged hospitalizations have significant implications for patient outcomes, hospital resource utilization and healthcare costs.” The “reasons for these delayed discharges range from financial to administrative to legal, so any solution to the problem must be multifaceted.”

Read more

‘“Ted Lasso” is back, but is his moment over?’

A.A. Dowd at The American Prospect

As “comebacks go,” a new season of “Ted Lasso” is “not exactly improbable,” says A.A. Dowd. The show “remains one of the most widely watched series of the last decade, a true juggernaut of popularity.” But at “what point does a show go from having its finger planted firmly on the pulse of now to suddenly looking more out of touch than anything else?” We “may have reached the moment when Ted Lasso’s brand of turn-the-other-cheek humanism is no longer enough.”

Read more

What happened

Ariana Grande “will be taking a step back from visibility” following the conclusion of her world tour due to “endless, ongoing public scrutiny,” a representative for the Grammy winner told People over the weekend. The announcement follows the Friday release of Grande’s “Petal” music video, which “reignited fan concerns about her weight loss,” Variety said.

Who said what

“She looks emaciated” in the video, with “sunken” cheeks and a “protruding” ribcage, said critic Monica Hesse in The Washington Post. Grande’s team is “thoroughly irresponsible for not guiding her away from this deeply damaging image for her young fans to see so glamorized,” actor and activist Jameela Jamil said in a now-deleted Instagram post.

The hiatus decision “was made from a thoughtful and empowered place,” Grande told fans during a tour performance in Chicago. “Human beings can need a break sometimes.” She “performs a very physical show,” a source close to the star told People, “and there is a lot of athleticism involved.”

What next?

Grande will finish her Eternal Sunshine tour on Sept. 1 and then take a “much-deserved break,” her representatives said. Her team confirmed that she is also pulling out of leading a revival of Stephen Sondheim’s “Sunday in the Park With George,” which was expected to open next summer in London’s West End.

What happened

Michigan health officials on Monday confirmed the first two deaths linked to the ongoing cyclosporiasis outbreak. The fatalities mark the “first known deaths related to the multi-state outbreak of explosive diarrhea in the United States,” CNN said.

Who said what

Both victims had “significant underlying health conditions” that may have been “impacted by cyclosporiasis and dehydration,” Michigan’s Department of Health and Human Services said in a website update. The parasitic infection is “generally not a life-threatening illness.” This is the “worst year on record for cyclosporiasis” in the U.S., said The New York Times, and Michigan is “at the center” of the “nine-state outbreak linked to iceberg lettuce supplied by Taylor Farms.”

What next?

Health experts in Michigan are “cautiously optimistic” that the outbreak there is “starting to wane,” said the Times. But the deaths reinforce the “importance of continuing efforts to investigate the outbreak, identify its source, and prevent additional illnesses,” food safety expert Wade Syers said to the Detroit Free Press.

Microplastics could be responsible for a lot of heartache. The tiny pieces of plastic have been found in high amounts in patients who suffered from heart attacks, leading experts to question their effect on cardiovascular health. Plastic likely has a more significant impact on health than we currently know and should be taken into account in analyzing environmental risk management.

Heart of plastic

Microplastics were “detected significantly more frequently” in patients who suffered heart attacks, said a study published in the European Heart Journal. Among those who had heart attacks, “micro and nanoplastics were detected in 84% of patients, compared with 40% of patients with chronic ischemic heart disease and 32% of patients with normal coronary arteries,” said a press release about the study.

The “highest levels of plastics were in blood drawn from the blocked artery itself, at the site of the blockage,” said Time. These tiny plastic particles are “found virtually everywhere in the environment, including the air we breathe, the water we drink and many foods we consume,” Pasquale Paolisso, the first author of the study, said in the release. “Scientists have begun to detect these particles in human tissues and organs, raising concerns about their potential health effects.”

The study also found that “people who smoke were six times more likely to have detectable micro and nanoplastics in the blood supplying their hearts than non-smokers,” David C. Gaze, a senior lecturer in chemical pathology at the University of Westminster, said in The Conversation. Therefore, along with the well-known detrimental effects of cigarettes, they “may also act as an efficient delivery system for microscopic plastic particles.”

The same pattern for smoking held for those who were exposed to bad air quality. “Both exposures appeared to amplify each other,” Paolisso and Emanuele Barbato, another author of the study, said to El País. “All patients who smoked and lived in areas with high air pollution had detectable plastics, compared with only one in eight of those who neither smoked nor were highly exposed.”

World of plastic

The study’s findings “do not prove that microplastics cause heart attacks, but they reveal a strong association between environmental exposures, microplastics in the blood and cardiovascular disease,” Barbato said in the press release. Microscopic plastic particles are present in “synthetic clothing fibers, tire wear, degraded packaging and countless other environmental sources,” Gaze said in The Conversation. But “at the moment, we cannot measure our exposure to plastics” in an accessible way, Rocco Montone, an interventional cardiologist at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli in Rome, said to Time.

Microplastics were previously “found inside the liver, kidney, intestine and human brain, among other tissues,” said El País. Scientists have been interested in the health implications for some time. This study “reframes the issue of microplastics not as an isolated curiosity but as another link in a wider environmental exposome interconnected with the air we breathe and our habits,” the study authors said to El País.

The apparent connection between microplastics, smoking and air pollution also “underscores the urgent need to shift from isolated risk factor management toward comprehensive environmental health strategies,” said the study. Such strategies may include the “integration of air quality monitoring, anti-smoking interventions, plastic pollution reduction and exposomic assessment into cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines.”

“America is about to go over a peptide cliff,” said Tom Bartlett in The Atlantic. An FDA advisory panel voted last month to recommend that six unproven peptides be added to the list of custom drugs that so-called compounding pharmacies can sell. Peptides are chains of amino acids that tell cells to regulate biological processes; some peptides, including insulin and GLP-1s, are FDA-approved medicines. But pharmacies were banned in 2023 from dispensing these six peptides—which adherents claim deliver benefits ranging from improved endurance to reduced inflammation—over efficacy and safety concerns. That annoyed Heath Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a peptides fan, who added eight new members to the panel ahead of the vote, six of whom run clinics that offer the chemicals. The vote is only a recommendation, but “ultimate approval seems likely”—to the glee of sellers anticipating a “peptide gold rush” and the horror of experts who fear we’re opening a “Pandora’s box.”

Demand for injectable peptides is surging “thanks to the endorsement of podcasters, wellness influencers,” and celebrities, said Emily Mullin in Wired. Among the chemicals that got the nod from the panel are two that combine to make the Joe Rogan–backed “Wolverine stack,” which supposedly aids in injury recovery. Undaunted by the lack of evidence that they work, users currently buy peptides on the “unregulated gray market”; the chemicals are sourced from labs in China and India and sold as for “research use only.” The vote “exposed a deep divide” between Kennedy’s appointees and FDA scientists, said Yonathan Daniel in ABCNews.com. The latter cited the absence of clinical trial data and the possibility of harmful immune reactions. But proponents argued thousands of people already take potentially dangerous black market peptides, and that the agency should protect them by granting access to safer product.

This isn’t “just about peptides,” said Julia Belluz in The New York Times. It’s “part of a broader push” to increase access to drugs that haven’t met “the strict evidence standards the FDA usually requires.” The agency “wasn’t designed for this wellness-crazed” telehealth era, in which Americans are “going outside the bounds of traditional health care in growing numbers.” But the FDA is “the only thing standing between consumers and a Wild West market” for untested and potentially harmful drugs. “There has to be a better way forward” than dropping standards and allowing consumer demand to override “scientific evidence.”

‘Kids lose more than just books when school is on a screen’

Sarah Schneider Kavanagh and Katie A. Danielson at The Washington Post

Parents “don’t realize how different many aspects of elementary school have become,” say Sarah Schneider Kavanagh and Katie A. Danielson. Screens “organize the school day,” and “these technological changes in elementary classrooms might look like progress.” But “attention span in particular is weakened when schools prioritize constant stimulation over intellectual endurance.” As “technology becomes more powerful, distinctly human capacities become more valuable, not less.” Children “need a place designed for other aims, such as conversation instead of consumption.”

Read more

‘The New York-ification of media keeps growing, warts and all’

Justin Fox at Bloomberg

The “nation’s media capital is in many ways far less central to the national conversation than it used to be,” says Justin Fox. But in the “production of certain kinds of media — journalism in particular — New York is more dominant than ever.” The “New York-ification of media has for the most part continued to grow.” The “journalists who remain are increasingly concentrated in a city that, while wonderful, is utterly different from most of the rest of the country.”

Read more

‘The box office just rejected Hollywood’s AI bet’

Peter Zerzan at Newsweek

This year’s “box office has become a referendum on how films are made,” says Peter Zerzan. After “years of pandemic disruption, writers’ strikes and uncertainty, theatrical exhibition is finally recovering.” Americans “were told that AI would become the dominant form of visual storytelling.” But “instead, audiences are buying tickets to films that demanded extraordinary effort to make.” They “are discussing performances, practical effects and directorial choices rather than marveling at how efficiently a computer assembled images.”

Read more

‘Clinical trials aren’t the only way to know if flu shots work’

Christopher M. Worsham and Anupam Jena at Time

It is “correct to note that observational studies of annual flu shots suffer from various statistical biases,” say Christopher M. Worsham and Anupam Jena. Randomized trials “have earned their reputation as the ‘gold standard’ because they address a real statistical problem,” and “true randomized controlled trials remain the most rigorous form of evidence.” But this “can be drawn from the data we already have.” The “efficacy of flu shots in children is just one of thousands of questions we could answer this way.”

Read more

Almost three in 10 Britons now use AI chatbots to get health advice. And UK medical-policy experts are concerned that this could create confusion, undermine trust in GPs and other healthcare workers, and make it more difficult to take an informed decision about your health.

The warning, from The Academy of Medical Sciences, comes as Open AI rolls out ChatGPT Health in the US. It allows users to “securely connect” their medical records and wellness apps to “ground conversations” in their own health information, so that the bot can “take a more active role” in their health.

ChatGPT Health is not yet available in the UK but, with more than 300 million people worldwide regularly directing their health-related questions to ChatGPT, it could swiftly become a “democratising force in healthcare”, Tanzeem Choudhury, a health-innovation expert at New York’s Cornell University told CBS News. But there are definite risks and trade-offs. “Used well,” an AI tool such as this can “help direct people to trusted sources”, said Yvonne Doyle, a fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences and former medical director of Public Health England. But it can also mislead “convincingly”.

‘Zero awareness of fallibility’

People have been using the internet to answer their questions for decades, but the “danger” with an AI chatbot is that it responds with “fluent, emotionally convincing paragraphs” and “remembers context”, making it “sound more ‘human’ than many humans”, said Celina Cartoto and Anthony Kelly on RTE. Yet it has “zero awareness of its own fallibility”, always providing an answer, “even when one doesn’t exist”. People need to remember that, though it “speaks like a doctor, listens like a therapist and remembers like a friend”, it is actually “none of them”.

We know that all AI chatbots can “hallucinate” and provide “misleading, inaccurate or even dangerous” information, said CBS News. Open AI has been careful to state that ChatGPT Health is designed to support, not replace doctors, but it has not responded to questions about whether it is “equipped to recognise when to advise a user to seek help from a medical professional”. It seems that “onus is on the user”.

Even before the rollout of the Health feature, there were indications that users could become dangerously reliant on ChatGPT for medical advice. Last month, a 55-year-old US pastor sued OpenAI, claiming its bot “brought him to the brink of death”, by “repeatedly and insistently” misdiagnosing his symptoms of near-fatal pulmonary embolism, said the BBC. An OpenAI spokesperson told CBS News that “ChatGPT is not a doctor and should never be a substitute for medical care, diagnosis or treatment”.

AI can be a “useful educational tool” for health information, said Leana Wen, an emergency doctor in the US, and a clinical associate professor at George Washington University, told CNN. It can “explain medical terminology” and “compare treatment options at a high level”, helping “people prepare questions” for their doctor and be “more engaged” in their care. But “it has important limitations” and “should not replace clinical judgement” by a medically qualified human.

Privacy concerns

There is also the question of privacy. How risky is it to share so much of your individual medical information with an AI tool, such as ChatGPT Health? Open AI has said that Health has “enhanced privacy” and encryption, and that conversations used in the Health tab won’t flow into non-Health chats. But it’s no accident that Health has not yet been rolled out in the UK, or the EU, where data protection and digital privacy laws are stricter than in the US.

“If you are providing data directly to a technology company that is not providing any healthcare services, then it is buyer beware,” Bradley Malin, a biomedical informatics expert, told Time. OpenAI says it will protect your data but “what exactly does that mean”?

It all comes down to whether or not “you trust OpenAI to keep to its word”, Robert Wachter, a medic who has written extensively about AI and healthcare, told the magazine. OpenAI does have “really strong corporate interest in not screwing this up”. Its brand is “dependent” on the user “feeling comfortable” in sharing their information, and any sort of data breach would end that trust.

The end of doctors?

The increasing use of AI programmes for health queries is becoming “existentially threatening” for medics, Jonathan Chen, a doctor at Stanford University Medical Center, told The New York Times. What is our purpose going to be now? Should we “get out of the way and let a computer take over”?

Not for a while yet, Lee Schwamm, associate dean for digital strategy and transformation at Yale School of Medicine, told the paper. And that’s because chatbots can’t yet think critically enough about the health information people are providing – and more importantly, not providing – them with. AI is “really good at matching patterns and making predictions”. But it can only do so “based on the data that it is given about the patient. It has no way to extract” what may be crucial further information itself.

Besides, patients still need a human connection. If you’re going to be told you have a serious health issue, or even how much longer you have to live, “you want to look someone in the eye”.

While the jury is still out on whether diet and zero-sugar drinks are really better for your health than sugary sodas, a recent study has found that the artificial sweeteners they use may have one very unintended side effect: memory loss, particularly among younger consumers. But even though the study found a significant link between artificial sweeteners and memory issues, experts say this is still only a correlation, not causation.

What did the study find?

Several widely used artificial sweeteners may be “associated with faster declines in memory and thinking skills over time,” according to the study published by the American Academy of Neurology. It followed 12,772 adults in Brazil for about eight years and examined their intake of seven sugar substitutes: aspartame, saccharin, acesulfame K, erythritol, xylitol, sorbitol and tagatose. These are “frequently added to ultra-processed products, including flavored water, soft drinks, energy drinks, yogurt and desserts marketed as low in calories.”

Researchers found that the people who consumed the highest amount of artificial sweeteners “experienced a 62% faster rate of cognitive decline than those with the lowest intake,” said USA Today, a rate “estimated to be comparable to about 1.6 additional years of brain aging.” People who were in the mid-range of consumption “experienced cognitive decline that was 35% faster than those in the lowest-intake group.” The memory loss itself was also most prevalent in study participants who were under 60; researchers “did not find the same association among participants older than 60,” said the study.

When it came to the amount of sweetener consumed, those in the “lowest consumption group averaged 20 milligrams per day, while those in the highest group averaged 191 milligrams per day,” said the study. Regarding aspartame, one of the most common artificial sweeteners, the “amount consumed by the highest group was roughly equal to the aspartame in one can of diet soda.”

What is the bigger picture?

This study suggests that sugar substitutes are not as good for you as their marketing makes them seem. “Low- and no-calorie sweeteners are often seen as a healthy alternative to sugar; however, our findings suggest certain sweeteners may have negative effects on brain health over time,” the lead study author, Dr. Claudia Kimie Suemoto of Brazil’s University of São Paulo, said in a press release.

This is not the only new study to suggest that artificial sweeteners have negative health effects; recent research published in the journal Current Atherosclerosis Reports showed that these chemicals are “linked to higher fasting insulin levels and a higher HbA1c — a measure of long-term blood sugar control,” said HealthDay. It also “found that people who consume more artificial sweeteners may have a higher risk of cardiometabolic conditions, including type 2 diabetes and heart disease.”

When it comes to memory issues, scientists are careful to point out that this research doesn’t necessarily mean artificial sweeteners cause lapses. The study “identified a relationship between sweetener intake and cognitive decline but could not determine whether the sweeteners caused the changes,” said USA Today. The data also “did not include every artificial sweetener currently used in foods and beverages,” and Suemoto emphasized that more research was needed.

It’s widely assumed that eight hours is the perfect amount of sleep but a new study found the “sweet spot” is a little less than that, said sleep specialist Dr Allie Hare in The Telegraph.

Getting it right matters because new research, published in Nature, found that “falling short, or exceeding” the “precise window” discovered by the research, is “linked with poorer brain, heart and immune health”.

What did the research say?

People who got between six hours 24 minutes and seven hours 48 minutes of sleep a night were found to have better functioning immune systems, brains and hearts, according to researchers at Columbia University Irving Medical Center.

This ideal amount of sleep was associated with less ageing, as measured by organ-specific biological clocks. Duration alone doesn’t cause organs to age faster or slower, but the findings do suggest that insufficient or excessive sleep may be “markers of poorer overall health across the body”.

Is it different for men and women?

There is also a gender factor because women “seem to do better with a little longer”, Marie-Pierre St-Onge, a professor at Columbia University, told The Washington Post. They need “15, 20 minutes” more sleep, which reflects the “slightly longer” sleep duration reported by the “general population”, which “tends to be slightly longer in women than men”.

Previous research found that sleep is “largely linked to ageing and the pathological burden of the brain”, said Junhao Wen, an assistant professor at Columbia and lead author of the study. But the new research "goes further” and shows that “too little and too much sleep” are “associated with faster ageing in nearly every organ”.

Should we all be getting seven hours?

There are a number of conflicting theories about how much sleep we need. According to individual needs theories, there is no single ideal amount of sleep, because genetics, age, health, activity level and even life circumstances influence how much sleep someone needs. Adaptive or evolutionary theories hold that the correct amount of sleep varies depending on factors such as season, workload, stress, illness and safety.

But we “might be overthinking it”, said Emma Beddington in The Guardian. Sleep is “important and fascinating for science to explore, but surely, for the rest of us”, it’s “best left mysterious”.

There’s “so little we can do” to reach the “ideal” amount of unconsciousness, so “knowing precisely how bad that is for us is unhelpful”.

Social media feeds full of hiking content and glorious views have contributed to a growing interest in the outdoors among young adults. But a worrying number of young people have also needed rescuing from mountainous regions.

Hiking influencers have become an “inadvertent source of inspiration” for their followers to take treks “without understanding the scale of the challenge” and that are “beyond their skill set”, said The i Paper.

#Hiking

Hiking posts can make the “toughest climbs look like a walk in the park”, said Kate Davis, from the Ramblers walking charity. While no influencer would “encourage novices” to take intermediate hikes without proper preparation, said The i Paper, not “everyone is honest” about their experiences.

For example, some content creators will “walk to a scenic spot” and “pose with merchandise” before heading back down, said Nige, who posts on TikTok as W33k3ndwanderer. This can “mislead viewers into thinking” that certain mountains with challenging inclines and scrambles are “easily accessible”.

This combination of misleading content and hikers unaware of factors like weather, technical clothing and time needed to complete a hike could be behind the rise in rescue call-outs.

‘Excitable explorers’

In the Scottish Highlands the number of “mountaineering incidents” involving the 17–25 age group has “nearly quadrupled since 2022”, said The Economist.

In England and Wales last year, 18 to 24-year-olds “kept mountain rescue services busy”, said The Times, with almost 400 incidents, “more than double the 166 in 2019”.

This trend of “excitable explorers” following in “influencers’ footsteps without fully understanding” what the hike entails has led to more rescue call-outs in the US, France, Italy and Switzerland.

Nathan Mburu, 24, a fitness influencer, told the BBC that he and his two friends being “overconfident” and “under-prepared” led to them getting into difficulty on Crib Goch in north Wales last year. The weather conditions quickly turned a “manageable day into something extremely dangerous”, resulting in the group being stuck on a ridge waiting nearly six hours for a rescue team to reach them.

Last year, nearly “a quarter of rescues” in England and Wales were the result of “slipping or tripping”, with common injuries being to the “ankles, lower legs and head”, said The Times. Almost “one in 10 incidents” was because of “poor equipment” and around 20% were due to “severe weather conditions”.

While it’s “great to see more young people going outdoors”, the question is how to make sure every hiker is prepared for the journey ahead. Since people “rarely use maps and compasses”, some parks are “developing signage with common routes”, said Nick Phillips, from Mountain Rescue England and Wales. An initiative will allow people hiking in the Lake District, Peak District and Wales to “scan a QR code” and “upload a map” on to their device with the route “they need to follow”.

‘The drug policy debate’s common ground: better treatment and recovery’

Jim Crotty at The Hill

Few “public policy debates are as polarized as drug policy, which is often framed around two competing visions — prohibition and decriminalization,” says Jim Crotty. Both are “passionate about their positions, and both make valid arguments,” but they “frequently overlook the same prerequisite for success: a system capable of meeting the country’s growing demand for addiction treatment and recovery services.” The U.S. “must help promote careers in treatment and recovery through more competitive pay, streamlined education and licensing pathways.”

Read more

‘AI can fuel biological weapons. We must harness its power for defense.’

Annie Jacobsen at The Guardian

AI can “help bad actors generate recipes for biological weapons” but also “track disease outbreaks and deliver critical public health information to millions of people,” says Annie Jacobsen. The “question is not whether AI can do catastrophic harm in the realm of biological sciences — it most certainly can — but whether public health officials can figure out how to deploy AI as a defensive tool faster than malicious actors deploy it as an offensive one.”

Read more

‘Joint European response to wildfires is essential’

Le Monde editorial board

The “flames currently devastating much of Western Europe are the latest, and dramatic, manifestation of climate change driven by human activity,” says the Le Monde editorial board. Beyond France and Spain, fires are “raging across Germany, Italy, Ireland, Scotland and the Netherlands,” and the “map clearly shows that any response must be coordinated at the European level.” The “increasing frequency of extreme weather events has forced both rapid adaptation and a global rethinking of how to respond.”

Read more

‘We need more therapists. They need more power.’

Isabel M. Perera at USA Today

Americans “need therapy now more than ever before,” but if “you’ve tried to find a therapist recently, you know it’s tough,” says Isabel M. Perera. The “people we rely on to help us cope with life’s hardest moments are themselves unsupported.” Weak “union representation makes it difficult for them to negotiate fair pay” and “advocate for better working conditions.” From “rehab centers to school counselors, the entire mental health ecosystem suffers from underinvestment and fragmentation.”

Read more

“Overlooked and underfunded” adult social care has become “the Cinderella service of our wider welfare system”, said Labour List. Now Andy Burnham, whose father has Alzheimer’s and lives in a care home, has told the BBC that he will put “whatever political capital I have” into fixing it.

He is not the first prime minister to vow to tackle the issue. But “successive governments have come undone when faced with the tricky reality” of adequately funding state support to help older people live safely and independently, said The Times.

What did the commentators say?

There have been 22 botched attempts to the reform the English adult social care system in the past 30 years. And those successive failures carry “a heavy political cost”, said Chris Smyth in the Financial Times: long-term underfunding has made pay and conditions in the sector so unattractive to British workers that “visa rules were loosened after Brexit” and care workers arriving from abroad became “the single biggest reason why net immigration to the UK rose to all-time high”.

Now, as Britain’s “demographic centre of gravity” tilts towards retirement, social care is reaching its “most painful financial pinch point” yet, said The Telegraph's editorial board. In 50 years, more than 25% of the population could be over the age of 65, according to the Office for National Statistics. The “best solution” for funding social care on that scale would be an “insurance-based system, where Britons would be encouraged to pay into a fund that would cover their own care in old age, should they need it”.

But Burnham has said social care should be delivered “on an NHS basis”. This implies “a public service free at the point of delivery and funded by some form of taxation”, said The Guardian’s editorial board. When Burnham was health secretary in 2010, he proposed a “national care service” to be funded by a deferred levy on dead people’s estates. Other options could include “a new form of social insurance” or “a combination of private and state payments”.

A more “ambitious” solution would be take responsibility for funding social care away from local councils, whose “revenues don’t map neatly on to local care needs”, and simultaneously reform council tax as a central tax that better reflects current property values and generates revenue for a national social care service, said Ben Zaranko in The Observer. That would “create losers, be complicated and take time but the course of true radical social care reform never did run smooth”.

What next?

Burnham is scheduled to deliver a speech on adult social care on Wednesday. In it, he will “stop short of unveiling” any concrete plans, said the BBC, instead announcing that he is speeding up Louise Casey’s independent review of possible solutions for the system.

Yet “the veteran Whitehall troubleshooter on whom Burnham is relying to come up with answers” has already warned there is no quick fix, said the FT’s Smyth. Earlier this month, she said “we cannot keep pretending that a few tweaks will fix adult social care, or attempt major reform without the public’s backing”.

Scientists are testing the “surprising theory” that “splitting sleep into two separate blocks” may be “the most effective sleep pattern for people working through the night”, said the BBC.

Better management of insomnia

Biphasic sleep means two distinct sleep periods in 24 hours instead of one. Researchers suggest it may be a more natural rhythm, even if the biological reasons for it are still being debated.

The concept has “captured the interest of many today”, said MediaFeed, and some individuals are “experimenting with segmented sleep patterns”. Its supporters say the benefits include “improved restfulness and better management of insomnia”.

During pre-industrial times people often slept in two blocks. Roger Ekirch, a historian at Virginia Tech, found that sleeping in two halves was the “predominant pattern” in the Western world until the mid-19th century. A “typical family” would “go to bed around nine, wake naturally after midnight for an hour or so – for prayer, chores, conversation – then sink back into what they called their ‘second sleep’.”

This changed when artificial light transformed the “economics of the night” and gas lamps “began lighting London’s streets in 1807”. As a result, “people stayed up later, the gap between the two sleeps narrowed and eventually closed”.

‘Dubious’ findings

The shift to a single period of sleep came at the time of the Industrial Revolution, as people changed to new work schedules, which were dictated by “mechanised time”, said MediaFeed.

But Ekirch believes the old approach hasn’t fully disappeared because the prevalence of “middle-of-the-night insomnia” represents a “persistent echo, a relic of this earlier pattern of sleep”.

A study in 1992 sought to discover whether, without industrialisation, humans would have remained natural biphasic sleepers. It limited participants to just 10 hours of light per day and found that they naturally shifted into a biphasic sleep pattern.

But the experiment drew criticism. In 2023, Niall Boyce wrote in the journal Medical History that its findings were “dubious” and suggested participants were simply restless.

Disrupted sleep, whether by working night shifts or insomnia, does have health implications. When we sleep, “our brain consolidates the memories of the day, processes emotions, and solves problems that defied it in the waking hours. It also strengthens immune defences and repairs muscle tissue”, said the BBC

So for those struggling to get enough sleep, “it’s not solely about being tired, but potentially about repeatedly disrupting a system that's doing far more behind the scenes than many people realise”.

Some experts have warned that biphasic sleep could have health risks, including from disruptions to circadian rhythms. Existing research on the topic is “fragmented” because some studies treat biphasic sleep as “one long sleep plus a brief nap”, but others “count only two equal periods”, so there is “no agreed definition”.

Spring forward, fall back — that old rule of thumb for resetting clocks at the start and end of daylight saving time may soon be a relic of the past, as the House of Representatives last week overwhelmingly supported a bill to make the time change permanent. And President Donald Trump has expressed his support. After all, people like later sunlight hours. But keeping the clock on summer hours could have negative ramifications.

‘Hidden consequences’

Americans are “tired of the biannual time change,” and making daylight saving time permanent is a “commonsense reform that will improve everyday life for millions,” bill sponsor Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) said in a statement, per The Hill. Trump agrees. Passing the bill would be a “very nice WIN for the Republican Party,” he said on Truth Social. But there would be “hidden consequences” to year-round daylight saving, said Axios. Under the reset the “sun won't rise until 8 or 9 a.m. in the winter,” leaving “millions of children” and commuters to start their days “in the dark.”

There would probably be health consequences too. Morning sunlight is “key to maintaining our circadian rhythms” and “overall health,” said The Washington Post. “Circadian misalignment” can cause lost sleep, which in turn is connected to “obesity, Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, mood disorders” and other health challenges. Americans “would be misaligned all year long,” Vanderbilt University’s Beth Malow said to the paper.

The change would disrupt the daily prayer practices of Orthodox Jews, said NPR. Some prayers “can only be said communally” and are often performed “every morning before heading out for work or school.” The change would be a problem for a “synagogue that has had a morning prayer service for 100 years” if it cannot muster enough of the congregation to “show up at the prayer time close to 9 o'clock because they have jobs,” Rabbi A.D. Motzen, national director of government affairs for Agudath Israel of America, said to the outlet. “Some Muslim prayers and religious observances” would also be affected, said Axios.

Airlines “could take up to two years” to adjust their “complex scheduling” to permanent daylight saving, said CBS News. The shift could affect “crew and aircraft positioning” as well as “domestic and international connectivity,” trade group Airlines for America said in a statement. Trucking and railroad companies that are “also timetable dependent” would face challenges as well, said CBS.

‘Abandoned prematurely’

Congress authorized permanent daylight saving in 1973 to save energy during the oil crisis, said The Independent. The project was “abandoned prematurely” amid concerns about “children and criticisms from the construction and agricultural industries.”

Permanent standard time might be a healthier alternative, said Yahoo News. Stanford University researchers determined that sticking to the regular clock all year would result in “300,000 fewer strokes and 2.6 million fewer people with obesity.” People need “more morning light and less evening light” to have a balanced day, Stanford University’s Jamie Zeitzer said to the outlet.

What happened

More than 1,000 people have died of Ebola in Congo, in the fastest-growing outbreak on record, African health officials said Wednesday. Congo’s Ministry of Health said 2,536 cases have been reported since this outbreak was declared May 15. There are no approved vaccines or treatments for the Bundibugyo virus responsible for the outbreak.

Who said what

“These are people dying” because “we don’t have vaccines, we don’t have medicine, we don’t have funding,” Dr. Jean Kaseya, head of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at a health summit in Ghana. In the worst outbreak to date, which killed more than 11,000 people between 2013 and 2016, it “took about eight months from the first case to reach 1,000 deaths,” The Associated Press said. The current outbreak in Congo appears to be “spreading faster than health officials can track it.”

What next?

An Ebola vaccine from Merck licensed to target the Zaire virus could also offer some protection against the Bundibugyo species, according to a paper published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine. The World Health Organization has “expressed lukewarm support” for testing the vaccine in Congo, Stat News said, but Bundibugyo-specific vaccines are “still months away” from clinical trials.

‘This is why our fresh produce keeps making us sick’

Timothy D. Lytton at The New York Times

While “cases of cyclosporiasis have reached a new high this year, the parasitic infection has spread in recent summers, too, abetted by warmer weather and higher consumption of fruits and vegetables,” says Timothy D. Lytton. To “break the cycle of infection, the fresh produce industry has to step up its efforts to prevent contamination on farms and better sanitize food.” The government also “needs to identify outbreaks more quickly so that contaminated food can be removed from store shelves.”

Read more

‘The new college virtue isn’t about if you cheat, but how well’

Natalie Sandoval at USA Today

At colleges, AI “makes cheating easier, certainly,” says Natalie Sandoval. But its “rise is downstream from a cultural shift in higher education.” Americans are “witnessing a move away from a culture that valued honor and integrity (think of the social conditions that once made ‘a man of his word’ mean something) toward one where ambition and prestige are the only markers of worth.” To “be a striver is to be concerned with the appearance of prestige above all else.”

Read more

‘The attack on workers begins and ends with Black women’

Anna Gifty Opoku-Agyeman and Ayanna Pressley at The Boston Globe

Black women have “always been the backbone of the American economy,” say Anna Gifty Opoku-Agyeman and Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.). In 2025, “thousands of Black women left or lost their jobs, with college-educated Black women and Black women in the federal workforce being disproportionately impacted.” What is “happening to Black women in the workforce is a harbinger for every worker and family in America,” a “perfect storm of this administration’s attacks on workers’ rights, equal pay and the workforce.”

Read more

‘“The Odyssey” will overwhelm you — and not only with spectacle’

Will Leitch at The Washington Post

The “movie industry appears to have been turned entirely upside down this year” as big-budget films have “dramatically underperformed,” says Will Leitch. This is “why there remains, truly, no one like Christopher Nolan,” who has “more on his mind than just spectacle.” His new film “The Odyssey” is “about the hubris of man, about how the more we convince ourselves we have conquered nature and the gods, and believe that we no longer need to look to history.”

Read more

What are peptides?

These short chains of amino acids are found naturally in the body and act as useful messengers, telling cells when to repair damaged tissue, produce hormones, reduce inflammation, and more. Scientists have turned a number of peptides into safe and effective drugs, including insulin, which moves sugar from blood into cells, and GLP-1 (the P stands for peptide), which helps regulate appetite and is used in weight-loss medications such as Ozempic. But a growing number of Americans are now taking peptides that, unlike those drugs, haven’t undergone a rigorous testing and approval process.

Administered via self-injection, these chemicals are claimed to result in thicker hair, increased libido, greater muscle mass, better skin, heightened focus, and more. Their seemingly miraculous properties have been praised by tech CEOs, podcaster Joe Rogan, and celebrities such as Gwyneth Paltrow, Jennifer Aniston, and Kim Kardashian, who says her daily regimen “changed my life.” But many doctors are alarmed by a craze that has thousands of people injecting themselves with substances of dubious origin and whose long-term effects are unknown. “It’s unfounded and reckless,” said Eric Topol, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute.

How big is the industry?

Investors believe it’s a $1-billion-to-$3-billion-a-year market, but hard figures are elusive, because most peptides are sold on the quasi-legal gray market. Some are prescribed by doctors and dispensed by compounding pharmacies, which produce tailored medications. Others, which are legal to buy but not approved for use in humans, are sourced from Chinese labs and labeled “for research purposes only.” According to U.S. customs data, imports of Chinese hormone and peptide compounds hit $328 million in the first nine months of 2025, double the total for the same period of 2024. The wild success of GLP-1 drugs, which raised awareness of peptides, has partly fueled the boom, along with growing interest among the wealthy in biohacking—using regimens and supplements to improve the body’s performance and longevity— and glowing testimonials from social media influencers and peptide converts. “I hear it all day, every day: ‘This changed my life,’” said Amanda Kahn, a New York City–based doctor nicknamed the “peptide princess.”

Why do people take peptides?

For a legion of reasons. Proponents of GHK-Cu, a peptide found in human plasma, say it boosts collagen production and improves hair and skin. NAD+, touted by Paltrow as “one of my biggest wellness tools,” is claimed to benefit energy levels and memory. Many peptide fans talk about the makeup of their “stack,” or regimen of daily shots. Combine BPC-157 and TB-500 and you get the Rogan-touted “Wolverine stack,” named after the self-healing Marvel Comics mutant superhero. Iván Pol, a celebrity facialist, says a daily stack including GHK-Cu and BPC-157 has raised his energy, dropped his cholesterol, and lowered his body fat. Hassan Sleiman, a 45-year-old roofing contractor in Michigan, claims a regimen of seven peptides has eased body pains and boosted his vitality. At the University of California, Santa Barbara, says 22-year-old student Ryan Roberts, “everybody does them.” The long-term health risks of this experimentation are not yet known, but doctors are worried about higher cancer risk.

Can peptides increase the risk of cancer?

A recent study by University of Utah researchers found BPC-157 could promote the growth of tumor cells; TB-500 has been shown to speed tumor growth in lab animals. Doctors note that none of these peptides have scientifically proven benefits. People taking them are “becoming lab rats,” said Adam Taylor, a professor of anatomy at Lancaster University in the U.K. Users, even enthusiastic ones, have reported side effects including hair loss, blurred vision, rashes, and dizziness; two women who got peptide injections at an antiaging festival in Las Vegas last year were hospitalized with swollen tongues, elevated heart rates, and breathing trouble. Adding to doctors’ worries are concerns about purity and dosing, because users typically buy from websites selling unregulated Chinese product— some of which comes from plants that previously produced the deadly opioid fentanyl. Irregularities and contamination are common. Still, one high-profile peptide enthusiast wants to make it easier to get peptides: Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

What is Kennedy doing?

A self-declared “big fan” of peptides, he has pledged to end their “aggressive suppression” by the FDA. Under former president Joe Biden, the agency classified 19 peptides as unsafe and barred compounding pharmacies from producing and selling them. Later this month, an FDA advisory panel will meet to discuss seven of the chemicals, including those in the Wolverine stack, and issue recommendations. Since at least seven of the panel’s 14 members have ties to the peptide industry or clinics promoting them, it’s expected they’ll advise removing the restrictions—even though FDA scientists in June recommended against doing so, citing insufficient evidence on the peptides’ effectiveness and safety.

What will happen if the ban is lifted?

It will likely set off a multibillion-dollar gold rush among potential sellers. Among those poised to profit is the San Francisco-based telehealth firm Hims & Hers Health, which last year acquired a peptide-manufacturing facility in Menlo Park, Calif.; the company’s stock price spiked nearly 50% in April in anticipation of possible FDA action. Kennedy and other proponents say removing the restrictions will boost production at reliable, FDA-inspected facilities and open the door to the research critics say is lacking. But critics fear the FDA’s stamp of approval will simply legitimize the use of unproven substances whose dangers may only become apparent in coming years. “We’re all holding our breath a little bit,” said Peter Koshland, who teaches clinical pharmacy at UC San Francisco, “and just hoping that nobody gets hurt.”

What happened

U.S. health officials have linked an ongoing cyclosporiasis outbreak to iceberg lettuce from Mexico that was sent to Taco Bell locations across five states. The supplier has not been officially named, but “two individuals familiar with the inquiry” told The Washington Post the company is Taylor Farms. At least 1,645 cases of the parasitic infection, which can cause explosive diarrhea, have been confirmed as of Friday, most of them in Michigan.

Who said what

“Do not eat shredded iceberg lettuce from Taco Bell locations in Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and West Virginia,” the CDC said in a statement. Taco Bell itself has “taken immediate action” to “indefinitely” remove the lettuce from its nationwide supply chain, the company said in a press release.

What next?

The FDA said it had “increased screening at the border” for the “implicated” products and is working with the supplier to figure out if any contaminated lettuce remains on the market. Taylor Farms is “one of the largest producers of fresh lettuce and vegetables in the country,” serving many leading restaurant chains, The New York Times said. “Additional implicated brands, restaurants, retailers, or distribution channels” may yet emerge, the FDA warned.

What happened

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the Pentagon will introduce testosterone screenings for soldiers over the age of 30. The screenings will be available to troops under 30 by request, and any soldier found to have lower testosterone levels will have the option to undergo hormone treatment. The new policy is designed so soldiers “have the right testosterone levels to operate at” their “absolute best,” Hegseth said in a video on X captioned “The High-T Department of War.”

Who said what

The secretary’s messaging “blends known science” on testosterone with “broader and less substantiated claims,” The Associated Press said. The new policy shows the secretary “takes direction from the far corners of the manosphere,” Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.), an Air Force veteran, told the AP. Hegseth “did not address” whether the “thousands” of women who “serve in frontline combat roles” would also be “subjected to hormone testing,” Politico said.

What next?

The screenings will be “conducted annually as part of service members’ periodic health assessments,” said Task & Purpose. But Hegseth has not disclosed when the screenings will begin.

What happened

Health officials are investigating whether restaurant chain Taco Bell “played a role” in the ongoing multistate outbreak of cyclosporiasis, The Washington Post said Tuesday. The foodborne parasitic infection can cause explosive diarrhea and is suspected to have sickened nearly 7,000 people across at least 34 states.

Who said what

Salad greens could be a “potential source for this outbreak,” Michigan’s health department said in a statement. But no “specific food item” has yet been confirmed as the culprit, said the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. The public is “largely flying blind” about what foods to avoid, CBS News said. Taco Bell said it has started “voluntarily and temporarily” removing some ingredients from select restaurants “as a precautionary measure.”

What next?

Taco Bell said it will continue to “closely monitor the situation and follow the guidance of public health authorities.” The CDC is analyzing lab data “to find a signal connecting the cases,” said Gwen Biggerstaff, deputy director of the CDC’s division of foodborne, waterborne and environmental diseases. Reports of new cyclosporiasis infections will likely continue through August, she added.

Data from more than 747,000 participants has been made available to scientists and doctors, creating an unparalleled genomic and electronic health record database “powering next-generation discoveries” in so-called “precision medicine”, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the US medical research agency, has announced.

What is it?

Precision medicine, as defined by the NIH’s National Human Genome Research Institute, is an “innovative approach that uses information about an individual’s genomic, environmental and lifestyle information to guide decisions related to their medical management”.

Generally considered analogous to “personalised medicine” or “individualised medicine”, its goal is “to provide a more precise approach for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease”.

What are the obstacles?

In theory, “therapies targeted to a person’s genetic make-up should be more effective and have fewer side effects”, said the BBC’s David Cox. But in practice, personalised medicine has in the past proved “erratic and expensive”. Another problem has long been that it “requires people to trust governments and companies with their genomic data, while the regulatory environment around medicines is ill-equipped to cope with therapies that are designed for just one person”.

That is the “paradox at the heart of precision medicine,” said NIH director Jay Bhattacharya. “To tailor treatments to individuals, you actually need very large populations to uncover the patterns that connect genetics, lifestyle, and the environment to health outcomes.”

What conditions could benefit from it?

NIH’s All of Us data has already fuelled more than 1,400 peer-reviewed publications across the US and around the world. Recent related breakthroughs range from a first-of-its-kind clinical genetic test predicting inherited risk of heart disease to the development of a low-cost prostate cancer risk model.

In a small-scale trial in California, people with early-stage dementia were given bespoke treatment plans targeting their personal nutritional deficiencies, ongoing infections and environmental exposures, which saw their symptoms improve.

A new “groundbreaking” genomic test could see millions of women with breast cancer spared debilitating chemotherapy, following the results of a trial that could “transform healthcare guidelines worldwide”, said The Guardian.

And in April, The New York Times reported on the story of KJ Muldoon, born in 2024 with an incredibly rare enzyme deficiency. In the space of just six months, a team at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Penn Medicine designed a personalised therapy that was able to correct the single misspelled letter in his DNA using gene-editing technology. It was perhaps the “most important medical story of the decade”, said the paper.

AI modelling has also made analysis of huge datasets cheaper and more efficient. A recent study in the Annals of Medicine and Surgery suggests this is already having an impact on a range of critical specialities, including cardiology, infectious diseases, and oncology where machine learning models are able to analyse new sets of biomarkers so enabling “ultra-targeted therapies that strike tumour-specific mutations with remarkable precision”.

Even in psychiatry, AI is increasingly being used to predict treatment resistance for antidepressants well in advance. “This is the future of tailored, bespoke medicine,” said Forbes.

What happened

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) revealed Sunday that a fall at his Washington home last month led to a hospital stay. His announcement ends a “weekslong silence” that had “spurred speculation about his condition,” The Wall Street Journal said.

The 84-year-old senator said he briefly lost consciousness after the incident but did not break any bones or suffer a concussion, stroke, heart attack or other serious injury. He was later diagnosed with a mild case of pneumonia.

Who said what

McConnell acknowledged the delay in explaining his condition, saying in a statement that “folks of my generation often hesitate to share the vulnerability that comes with growing older.” McConnell’s injuries were “minor” and he “responded rapidly” to pneumonia treatment, his attending physician said. The Kentucky senator “has faced a string of health concerns in recent years that have caused some to question his ability to serve in the legislature,” The Hill said.

What next?

McConnell said he remains focused on completing his Senate work before retiring when his current term ends in January.

The series of heatwaves “afflicting” Europe this summer have been the “worst ever”, said The Guardian. Cities have become practically “unliveable” and higher temperatures are “further exacerbating” socioeconomic and economic divisions.

The unfortunate consequences of the current heat for many in the UK are “disturbed sleep and sticky days in the home office”. But around the world, high temperatures often exacerbate gender inequality, and women, particularly in low-income families, are “at the sharp end”.

Why are women more affected?

Women are more at risk of health complications during a heatwave for two main reasons, Dr Nighat Arif, an NHS GP who specialises in women’s health, told the BBC. First, women respond differently to men in the heat – they sweat less and start sweating at a higher temperature. These thresholds make it harder to “quickly shed heat” and fewer visible indications mean women can find it hard to judge how much their “bodies are under burden”.

The second reason is hormone regulation. Levels of oestrogen and progesterone shift “most substantially” during the menstrual cycle, perimenopause, menopause, pregnancy and while breastfeeding. This can knock the brain’s temperature regulation systems “out of kilter”, said Dr Arif.

Periods may feel more uncomfortable, while hot flushes and night sweats are more likely for perimenopausal and menopausal women. A recent study published by The Lancet suggested that heat stress may “increase the likelihood of adverse outcomes for the mother and child, particularly in higher-risk pregnancies”, said the BBC.

How does this present itself socially?

“How people experience heat is often gendered” and “socially and culturally determined”, said researchers Febe De Geest and Sergio Jarillo on The Conversation. In domestic settings, particularly across Africa, Asia and Oceania, women are forced to spend more time indoors in “poorly ventilated homes”, acting as primary caregivers. In Bangladesh, Cambodia and Nepal, heatwaves have also been linked to increases in child marriages: “struggling families force unions on their daughters to ease financial stress and reduce household costs”.

In workplace settings, research shows that women are sometimes required to wear more clothing for religious reasons and tend to receive “inadequate sanitation”. So they are likely to drink less to “avoid using unhygienic toilet facilities, leading to dehydration and further health problems”. These factors are not “trivial inconveniences; they compound heat exposure in ways that shape how women experience hot weather”.

Even in countries typically associated with better provisions for the heat, there is a “seasonal upswing in violence associated with hot weather”, said The Guardian. This could be due to the “temperature-aggression theory”, where hot weather increases “discomfort, frustration, impulsivity, and aggression, all of which make violence more likely”, or could be linked to greater alcohol consumption, which in turn “increases the opportunities for interpersonal conflicts and subsequent violence”.

Depressingly, it only takes “fairly small shifts” in temperature to increase the likelihood of domestic violence, particularly for the most vulnerable, said the European University Institute. A 1C rise in daily temperature is associated with “approximately a 2.7% increase in domestic violence reports”.

And in disadvantaged areas the effect is “much more intense”, due to more crowded living arrangements, lower cooling capacity and lower access to outdoor spaces. “Each degree of additional temperature is associated with up to a 50% larger relative increase in domestic violence incidents compared to richer areas.”

What can be done?

In practical terms, during periods of extreme heat it is important that women drink “least six to eight cups of non-alcoholic, non-caffeinated, transparent-liquid drinks” to help with temperature regulation, Dr Anisha Patel told ITV. Above all, women should continue to take prescribed medication as normal, including HRT or other drugs designed to help with the menopause.

Across the world, women are “already adapting creatively, and often without institutional support” to improve their situation, said De Geest and Jarillo on The Conversation. In Ahmedabad, India, women have painted their roofs white and used “coconut husks and paper waste” to make the structures cooler, and in Jakarta women have “established shaded communal areas that function as informal cooling centres”.

Policymakers need to realise that women suffer on many fronts, not just in biology but across “culture, power and intersections of class, caste and migratory status”. Their suffering is “largely invisible” to those heading climate responses.

Making sure women can cope with the heat is “not a woman’s problem”, Dr Arif told the BBC. “This is a societal problem. If we get it right for women, we get it right for everyone.”