Spring Offer: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Celebrities mourn the loss of legendary standup Richard Lewis, dead at 76

Comedian and actor Richard Lewis died at the age of 76 at his Los Angeles home after suffering a heart attack, according to a statement from his publicist. 

Having made a name for himself as a self-deprecating standup, appearing throughout the years on "The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson," "Late Night with David Letterman," "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," and in a recurring role as himself on “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” Lewis revealed in 2023 that he had Parkinson’s disease, at which point he made the decision to hang up his mic and focus on acting and writing. Following the announcement of his death, fellow comedians and other celebrities fond of his work, and of him as a person, flooded social media with remembrances. 

“Richard and I were born three days apart in the same hospital and for most of my life he’s been like a brother to me," Larry David wrote in a statement Wednesday. "He had that rare combination of being the funniest person and also the sweetest. But today he made me sob and for that I’ll never forgive him."

"RIP Richard Lewis. A brilliantly funny man who will missed by all. The world needed him now more than ever," Albert Brooks wrote in a post to X (formerly Twitter). 

“Richard will always be a cherished member of the HBO and 'Curb Your Enthusiasm’ families, our heartfelt condolences go out to his family, friends and all the fans who could count on Richard to brighten their days with laughter,” a statement from HBO reads.

Prince Harry loses High Court challenge over UK security levels, says he will appeal decision

Prince Harry has lost a High Court challenge against a British government decision to downgrade his security status after he stepped back from royal family duties. The Duke of Sussex contested the Home Office after it decided in Feb. 2020 that Harry would no longer be given the “same degree” of protection when in the UK. During a hearing in Dec., lawyers for Harry argued the decision meant he was “singled out” and treated “less [favorably],” British news agency PA Media reported. His lawyers reportedly cited a failure to consider the impact on the UK’s reputation of a “successful attack” on Harry, who has lived with his wife Meghan Markle in California since July 2020 after they quit their royal roles.

The court ultimately ruled that the decision was “not marred by procedural unfairness.” A spokesperson for Harry said the Duke of Sussex will appeal.

“The duke is not asking for preferential treatment,” Harry’s lawyers said, per BBC. They also argued that the final decisions made about his protection levels were ultimately unfair.    

On Wednesday, documents related to the judgment in Harry’s recent lawsuit were released, including a letter from the New York City Police Department to the Metropolitan Police in London. The letter, dated Dec. 6, 2023, from the NYPD's Chief of Intelligence said an investigation found “reckless” behavior by paparazzi when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex along with Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, left the Ms. Foundation 2023 Women of Vision Awards on May 16. Following the awards, a spokesperson for Harry and Meghan told PEOPLE that the trio were “involved in a near catastrophic car chase at the hands of a ring of highly aggressive paparazzi.” The pursuit lasted over two hours and resulted in “multiple near collisions involving other drivers on the road, pedestrians and two NYPD officers.”    

At this time, no arrests have been made in connection with the incident. The NYPD said there would be changes in security measures for Harry and Meghan on future visits to the city.

Judge in Trump’s civil fraud case sent envelope with white powder

The New York judge who recently hit former president Donald Trump with a $355 million ruling in his civil fraud business trial was sent an envelope containing white powder, a source close to the situation told NBC. The source shared that neither Judge Arthur Engoron nor his staff were exposed to the substance, which was intercepted by a court officer during the daily pre-screening process for the judge's mail.

The threat marks the latest in a string of targeted attacks. A bomb threat was reported at the judge's Long Island home last month, hours before closing arguments in Trump's trial. Following the start of the trial last year, Engoron and his law clerk faced a barrage of threats after the ex-president publicly slammed them on the internet. In the aftermath of those threats, court officials began working with “the FBI and Homeland Security to devise the appropriate security measures that would be implemented in order to protect the judge, his chambers staff, and those closely associated around him, including his family," as NBC noted. The outlet also reported that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg — who brought the criminal hush money indictment against Trump — was also sent an envelope with a white substance, as was Trump's son, Donald Trump Jr., on Monday at his Florida home.

Three new moons of Uranus and Neptune discovered

Scientists recently noticed three new moons lingering around Uranus and Neptune, which are the most distant planets in our solar system. Precisely, there is one orbiting Uranus, and two are orbiting Neptune. It’s the first discovery of its kind in over twenty years. It underscores that while there is a strong focus on discovering what lies outside of our own solar system, there is still much left to be uncovered in Earth’s own neighborhood. 

“The three newly discovered moons are the faintest ever found around these two ice giant planets using ground-based telescopes,” said Scott S. Sheppard, astronomer at the Carnegie Institution for Science, in a statement. “It took special image processing to reveal such faint objects.”

As Sheppard alluded, these moons likely had not been noticed before previously because they are so dim. The moon orbiting Uranus, called S/2023 U1, is the planet’s 28th satellite and the smallest. Researchers estimate that it takes nearly two Earth years (680 days) to complete one orbit. Astronomers discovered the moon using the Magellan telescopes at Las Campanas Observatory in Chile, which also assisted in the discovery of the two new moons orbiting Neptune. Those moons, called S/2002 N5 and S/2021 N1, bring the total of Neptune’s known moons to 18. The moon S/2021 N1 takes about 27 Earth years to complete an orbit around Neptune while S/2002 N5 takes about nine years to complete an orbit.

These names are just placeholders and the moons will eventually be named something more compelling. Astronomers hope the discovery will help deepen their understanding of the early days of the solar system.

“Even Uranus, which is tipped on its side, has a similar moon population to the other giant planets orbiting our Sun,” Sheppard explained. “And Neptune, which likely captured the distant Kuiper Belt object Triton—an ice rich body larger than Pluto—an event that could have disrupted its moon system, has outer moons that appear similar to its neighbors."

 

Are slushies really bad for young children’s health?

Recently there have been concerning reports in the news of a three-year-old boy who collapsed and was admitted to hospital after drinking a slushy drink. Fortunately, after a few days, the child recovered completely.

This has led to calls for improved labelling where slushies are sold so that parents are better educated about the potential risks to young children consuming these drinks. It has also led to calls for the drinks to be removed from sale at certain venues, such as soft-play centers.

This follows from reports of three other young children being admitted to hospital following consuming slushy drinks containing glycerol, which in 2023 led to the Food Standards Agency in the UK reviewing the safety of glycerol in slushies. These children had low blood glucose and high levels of glycerol before recovering.

This led to the recommendation that slushy drinks containing glycerol should not be offered to children aged four years and younger.

Using these figures it was also recommended that children under ten should not be offered free refills. This advice also includes the recommendation that these customers should be informed of these risks and restrictions for young children, but no recommendations were made about restricting where they could be sold.

 

What is glycerol?

Glycerol also known as glycerine or E422 is recognized as being generally safe as a food additive by the EU and the US Food and Drug Administration. Chemically, it is described as a sugar alcohol.

Aside from slushies, glycerol is also found in flavorings such as vanilla essence and is often used to keep icing soft.

Normally, in our bodies, glycerol is connected to fatty acids, so levels in the blood are low. Also, our bodies do not have a way of regulating or controlling glycerol in the same way we produce insulin to control glucose (blood sugar). So there is no way for our body to simply start using more glycerol in cells in the way we can with glucose after a meal.

This does not mean glycerol is toxic, it just means it can stay in blood for longer than glucose. As this adds to the amount of things dissolved in our blood, it means the plasma in blood becomes more concentrated and can draw water from other parts of the body, including the brain, which can lead to symptoms such as headache, nausea and dizziness.

 

Why use glycerol in slushies?

How slushies are made has changed, at least partly in response to a UK government policy on sugar reduction and the Soft Drinks Industry Levy (the "sugar tax"). Where most sweetened soft drinks, were able to use a mix of low- and no-calorie sweeteners – such as aspartame – this doesn't work when it comes to slushies.

The challenge when making slushies, compared to normal soft drinks, is the sugar does more than provide sweetness. Sugar has the physical function in slushies of decreasing the freezing point of water. Water freezes at 0°C, but adding sugar reduces the ability of the water molecules to connect by hydrogen bonds and form ice.

Adding sugar to water and churning as the temperature drops below zero produces slush rather than ice. To do this, you need at least 12g of sugar per 100ml, which would mean sugar-containing slushies would be liable for the highest rate of tax at 24p per litre in the UK.

In line with sugar reduction strategies, aimed at helping people consume the target set by the government's Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition of less than 5% of energy from added sugar, manufacturers have looked for another solution.

In a slushy, intense sweeteners, such as aspartame, won't work as it is a very intense sweetener being 200 times sweeter than sugar. So you can't just swap out sugars for aspartame. A different solution is needed, one where a similar quantity of sweetener is used compared with sugar. These so-called bulk sweeteners, such as sorbitol and mannitol, can have a laxative effect, so they aren't great options.

Glycerol was the chosen solution, which can make a slushy with around 5g per 100ml. But is that amount safe to consume?

European Food Safety Agency reassessed the safety of glycerol in 2017. It reported that consuming 125mg per kilogram of body weight per hour was enough to increase the concentration of blood and potentially cause symptoms in patients. This was based on how glycerol was used in the past to treat swelling in the brain (cerebral oedema). However, there is little data on the effect of glycerol outside of hospitals, and it was assumed that this level of intake could be linked to potential risks.

For an adult, there are no risks of drinking an average-sized slushy, simply because they are bigger and unlikely to achieve a blood level high enough to bring on symptoms. But for a young child, because of their size, it was considered that the risk was deemed high enough for warnings to be issued.

However, the Food Standards Agency's response and recommendations to restrict the supply of slushies to young children could benefit from being more clearly communicated and more effectively applied.

Duane Mellor, Lead for Evidence-Based Medicine and Nutrition, Aston Medical School, Aston University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How “Avatar: The Last Airbender” helps us contextualize the choice between Biden and Trump

Like "Avatar: The Last Airbender," some animated series are timeless in execution and messaging, propelled by stories untethered to a single epoch that speak to the human condition — especially our arrogance, our adaptability and our willingness to evolve for the better.

That said, I understand why remaking "Avatar" for a new generation with a flesh-and-blood cast would be a draw. There will always be aspects of animation that can’t be replicated by real people and vice versa. Indeed, some of the 2005 series' themes may be too juvenile to effectively translate into Netflix's live-action version.

Believing in others comes down to the persuasiveness of Aang (Gordon Cormier), the story’s namesake Airbender and the last of the Air Nomads. Aang is a being of balance, hewing to a childlike optimism while tapping into an elder's wisdom and learning how to fight in a world divided between Northern and Southern Water Tribes, the Fire Nation and the Earth Kingdom, that has lost patience with diplomacy.

As the Avatar, Aang must master wielding the elements, something he was too young to achieve before he was accidentally frozen in ice. His abilities were intended to keep warmongers in check. Without his intercession, the Fire Nation plunged the world into a century of bloody conquests that began when they wiped out Aang’s entire culture, hoping to kill him, too.

People neglect to factor in Aang’s emotional age when they blame him for vanishing for 100 years. Many are even less charitable in their comprehension of the burden he will inherit, which has only become weightier with time.

Most durable fantasy isn't developed as a direct allegory for a particular war or political era. Nevertheless, it's hard to avoid drawing some parallels.

The original “Avatar: The Last Airbender” premiered early in the Iraq War and George W. Bush’s second term in the White House.

The original “Avatar: The Last Airbender” premiered early in the Iraq War and George W. Bush’s second term in the White House. Bush, however, lacked the cunning and overt egomania Fire Lord Ozai demonstrated, recreated by Daniel Dae Kim in the new "Avatar."

Bush was a touch closer in loopy behavior to Bumi, ruler of the Earth Kingdom city of Omashu. But even that would be considered a compliment: Bumi is wise and clever; Bush, not so much.

Bumi was Aang’s contemporary, which means when they meet again, he looks all of his 100-something years, whereas Aang hasn’t aged a day.

The animated Bumi was optimistic to the verge of revolt: “Instead of seeing what they want you to see, you gotta open your brain to the possibilities!” his younger self tells Aang in the Nickelodeon version.

Netflix showrunner Albert Kim’s take on the character, played by Utkarsh Ambudkar, is darker. Ambudkar’s Bumi, introduced in the fourth episode, isn’t the “mad genius” rooting for Aang whom we met almost 20 years ago. He’s dangerously angry.

Daniel Dae Kim as Fire Lord Ozai in "Avatar: The Last Airbender" (Netfix)In both series, Omashu is among the first places where Aang stops with his traveling companions Katara (Kiawentiio) and her brother Sokka (Ian Ousley), a pair of Water Tribe teenagers. It’s through this encounter that Aang realizes how much the world has declined in his absence. While Aang used to have friends all over, the nations now keep to themselves. Omashu, like the Earth Kingdom Capital Ba Sing Se, is walled off and exclusionary.

Mistrust is rampant. Spies are everywhere.

The animated series pitches Aang’s refusal to entirely abandon his innocence as a gladdening luxury in a world ravaged by war. The live-action turn frequently positions this as a liability, especially through the eyes of his old friend.

Both stories force Aang through a series of tests meant to teach him a lesson, with the original animated series concluding that solving most problems requires thinking differently.

We need your help to stay independent

In the 2024 version, however, the Omashu ruler’s philosophy is guided by resentment and a will to survive. “The world is on fire, people are dying and you got to sleep through it all!” Bumi tells Aang. A few scenes later, when Aang demands to be released so he can save the Northern Water Tribe, Bumi becomes wrathful.

”Have you been fighting the same fight for a century?” he asks. “Have you watched your whole world burn down around you? Let me tell you something, Avatar: You may be 100 years old, but you haven’t lived for 100 years, especially not these hundred years.”

Their encounter ends with a duel in which Bumi moves Aang into a position where he must choose between saving himself or killing his now elderly friend by letting a huge rock crush him. It's Bumi’s way of teaching Aang that leadership entails making impossible choices.

“Do I save this town or that? Who gets the last of the food scraps: the orphanage or the soldiers?” he asks. “You have to make choices like that day after day, year after year — and that’s just to save this one city. You have to save the whole world.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


As was the case with the first “Avatar: The Last Airbender,” there are few clean and precise political parallels between the live-action Omashu king and, say, Joe Biden, save for the common perception of both being doddering old men. “Avatar” plays this as a ruse when the agile Aang faces Bumi, thinking his youth gives him an edge, and the king reveals the mountains of muscles he’s hiding under his cloak.

Likewise, the only qualities Donald Trump shares with Fire Lord Ozai are a thirst for power and a lack of respect for life, the environment and the sanctity of the parent-child bond. Ozai may be repugnant, but he has a clear plan to secure his nation's supremacy. The GOP's leading candidate doesn't.

The “Avatar” nations aren't democracies, but if you place Bumi and Ozai side by side, it illuminates the choice American voters face this November.

If you place Bumi and Ozai side by side, it illuminates the choice American voters face this November.

Between Biden and Trump, we're being asked yet again to select the proverbial lesser of two evils.

One is a leader holding together a kingdom that is crumbling on multiple fronts. We're being asked to re-elect him even though his administration has provided weapons and material support to an ally that has bombed civilian centers and reportedly killed nearly 30,000 people, most of them women and children, under the guise of hunting terrorists.

Then again, his opponent is purportedly plotting to wield the power of his office against critics and opponents and carry out militarized mass deportations.

As such, the debate surrounding the ages of Biden and Trump, though somewhat valid and impossible to downplay, is a ruse meant to distract us from the larger moral questions at stake. Eventually, our choice candidate will come to down to judging the proportional harm each does — or might do — versus the evil already done.

In our tale of two leaders, will we choose the one who can preserve only part of the Earth, or the one who eager to burn the whole place down?

“What’s the point of tests if you don’t learn anything?” Bumi snarks, which we should maybe take as a warning about forgetting the years between 2016 and 2021 and, more to the point, consistently settling for less than ideal over outright terrible. In the long run, that political compromise is unsustainable. But when it comes to the decision lurking before on the horizon, it’s what we’ve got.

Both the live-action and animated versions of "Avatar: The Last Airbender" are streaming on Netflix. 

Mitch McConnell to step down as Senate GOP leader after November election

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky will be vacating his seat as Senate minority leader following the general election in November, he announced from the Senate floor on Wednesday afternoon. “To serve Kentucky has been the honor of my life, to lead my Republican colleagues has been the highest privilege,” said McConnell, who turned 82 last week. “But one of life’s most underappreciated talents is to know when it’s time to move on to life’s next chapter, so I stand before you today, Mr. President and my colleagues, to say this will be my last term as Republican leader of the Senate.”

McConnell noted that his decision came amid "a particularly difficult time for my family,” referring to the recent death of Angela Chao, the younger sister of McConnell's wife, former Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao. “When you lose a loved one, particularly at a young age, there’s a certain introspection that accompanies the grieving process,” McConnell said.

“I still have enough gas in my tank to thoroughly disappoint my critics," the outgoing GOP leader said, "and I intend to do so with all the enthusiasm with which they have become accustomed.”

McConnell made no direct reference to this year's presidential election or to Donald Trump, who will almost certainly be the Republican nominee. He appeared to allude to intra-GOP tensions over foreign policy and the rise of the MAGA movement, however, as one factor in his decision to step down. “I know the politics within my party at this particular moment in time,” he said. “I have many faults. Misunderstanding politics is not one of them. That said, I believe more strongly than ever that America's global leadership is essential to preserving the shining city on a hill that Ronald Reagan discussed.”

As noted by NBC News, McConnell is the longest-serving Senate caucus leader in history, having held his current post in the chamber in 1985. Twice during the summer of 2023, he appeared to suffer highly visible health problems, momentarily freezing up while speaking at public appearances. Those events sparked widespread concern over his age and ability to hold office. 

 

“Real Housewives” star Leah McSweeney sues Andy Cohen and Bravo for discrimination

Former “Real Housewives of New York City” star Leah McSweeney has filed a civil lawsuit against the show’s host and executive producer Andy Cohen. The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the Southern District of New York, also names Bravo Media, NBCUniversal Media, Warner Bros. Discovery, production company Shed Media US and producers John Paparazzo, Lisa Shannon and Darren Ward.

In the 109-page complaint obtained by People, McSweeney claims the defendants pressured employees to consume alcohol and failed to take into consideration her disabilities, including “alcohol use disorder” and “mental health disorders.” She says she told the defendants that she had broken nine years of sobriety, but was sober when filming for season 12 of the show began in 2019. Elsewhere in the complaint, McSweeney alleges that Cohen “engages in cocaine use with Housewives and other 'Bravolebrities' that he employs,” and has a “proclivity for cocaine usage with his employees.” A representative for Cohen told Entertainment Weekly the claims against him are “completely false.”

McSweeney’s lawsuit comes after former “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” star Brandi Glanville alleged Cohen sexually harassed her. A letter Glanville’s attorneys sent to NBCUniversal, Warner Bros. Discovery and Shed Media claims that Cohen sent Glanville a video in 2022 where the Real Housewives EP appeared “inebriated.” Cohen allegedly “boasted of his intention to sleep with another Bravo star that night while thinking of her and invited her to watch via Facetime,” said lawyers Bryan Freedman and Mark Geragos.

“This was an extraordinary abuse of power that left Ms. Glanville feeling trapped and disgusted,” the letter adds. “It is inconceivable that Mr. Cohen remains in his post in spite of this behavior and harkens back to the bad old days of Matt Lauer and NBC News when profits were prioritized over people.”

African great apes face a dire future from climate change, study finds

Humanity's closest cousins are in trouble. The great African apes, which includes gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos are renowned for their intelligence and fascinate both scientists and laypeople because of their physical and genetic similarities with humans.

Yet as a recent study in the journal PLOS Climate demonstrates that, even though apes and humans are part of the same family tree, humans are the inconsiderate relatives who destroy their hosts' home: Human-caused climate change is going to have a devastating impact on ape species throughout Africa.

Led by by Razak Kiribou at Haramaya University in Ethiopia, the researchers examined 363 sites throughout Africa that are home to various ape species. In addition to studying the temperature and rainfall at those locations from 1981 to 2010, the scientists also developed models to project weather conditions in those same areas both short-term (from 2021 to 2050) and long-term (from 2071 to 2099). While their results sometimes varied significantly from region to region, they consistently found that climate change drastically altered living conditions for African apes — for the worse.

"Climate projections suggest that temperatures will increase across all sites," the authors write, adding that changes in precipitation vary from location to location. "We estimated a future increase in heavy precipitation events for 288 sites, and an increase in the number of consecutive dry days by up to 20 days per year (maximum increase estimated for eastern gorillas)."

Every site will experience increases in wildfires and crop failures, with the latter indirectly impacting apes as local communities compensate by increasing deforestation. More than four out of five sites will be exposed to intensified heatwaves; more than three out of four will be subject to increased river floods. Sites in western and central Africa are also expected to experience tropical cyclones and droughts.

"For the first time, we showed that African ape sites have already experienced changes in climatic conditions."

Notably, these figures were developed under the assumption that Earth's temperature does not rise above 1.5 º Celsius from pre-industrial levels (the target established at the 2015 Paris climate accord). If the planet's temperature does exceed that figure, the great apes' future will likely be even more bleak.

"For the first time, we showed that African ape sites have already experienced changes in climatic conditions and are likely to be exposed to extreme events in the future," the authors conclude. "We found that temperatures have increased over the past decades at the majority of ape sites, and in line with a previous study, we found a consistent increase in future temperatures."


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.


"Africa's current PA [protected area] network is likely to be insufficient for preserving suitable habitats and maintaining connected ape populations."

This is not the first study to focus on climate change and primates. Scientists from Concordia University wrote a 2020 paper in the journal Climatic Change that analyzed data from the International Union for Conservation of Nature about 426 species and subspecies of non-human primates. The researchers learned that if the global temperatures increases by 2°C due to climate change, it will have a devastating impact on these primate species.

Specifically, they found that when it came to the Pre-industrial Seasonal Maximum Temperatures (PSMT) in these primates' habitats, 26.1% of all the ranges had temperatures exceeding their PSMTs — and for 8% of the species, their entire range exceeded their PSMTs.

"This suggests the potential for considerable loss of or compromised habitat for non-human primates on a global scale, as a result of the emergence of climate conditions that are outside of the scope of historical experience for many species," the authors warn.

Apes are also threatened by the insufficiency of human efforts to protect them. A 2021 study in the journal Diversity and Distributions employed a large international team of scientists who assessed how ape ranges would shift as a result of environmental alterations like climate change. Different models yielded often starkly contrasting results, yet one thing was certain: Climate change is going to make things very difficult for apes, at least when it comes to their habitats. More ominously for these apes, humans' systems of protected areas and other conservation efforts will not rise to the challenge of helping these species.

We need your help to stay independent

"Massive range decline is expected by 2050, but range gain is uncertain as African apes will not be able to occupy these new areas immediately due to their limited dispersal capacity, migration lag and ecological constraints," the authors write. "Given that most future range changes are predicted outside PAs [protected areas], Africa's current PA network is likely to be insufficient for preserving suitable habitats and maintaining connected ape populations."

Climate change is not the only human-caused problem that afflicts ape species. The illegal wildlife trade ominously looms over the lives of every ape, each of whom faces the prospect that it will be captured or killed for commercial purposes. Even when they aren't being poached, apes are threatened by habitat loss as human civilization increasingly encroaches on their natural habitats. Assaf Levy, the founder and CEO of the conservation group BioDB, explained in a 2023 Salon editorial why the potential loss of these animals is so significant.

"In the tapestry of life, monkeys play a vital role, adding color and vibrancy to the natural world," Levy wrote. "Their survival is not just their own concern; it is a shared responsibility for all of us."

Much more than a “unitasker”: The wonders of the humble potato masher

I have an odd affinity for "unitaskers," a term coined by Alton Brown to describe single-use kitchen tools. Boiled egg holders, those little corn-shaped holders you can use to 'hold' hot corn-on-the-cob, those serrated, jagged grapefruit spoons and the like they were designed for a singular purpose and are perfectly effective and efficient at that and just that. 

It reminds me a bit, albeit in a much more kitchenware-coded capacity, of that Einstein quote: "Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid." There’s something to respect about something that does its intended duty and nothing less and nothing more. 

There is one tool, though, that belies this entire argument. Its primary purpose, which it does exceptionally well, is the focus of its invention, but since then, it’s become capable of doing much more in the kitchen. 

I’m speaking about the potato masher, of course.

I know this might invite some hate mail, but I’m not a mashed potato person, generally. Of course, I eat it on Thanksgiving and Christmas and occasionally throughout the year, but if I’m looking to whip up a side dish for a random dinner on a Tuesday, I don’t think “mashed potatoes" has ever immediately come to mind. Food-wise, I’m too much of a texture-based person to passionately love something that is entirely devoid of it. (I also wrote about this in 2022, so it’s by no means a new development. Sorry, mashed potatoes!)

When I make mashed potatoes, I boil the potatoes in water that’s been heavily salted, along with some peeled garlic cloves. When fully tender, I drain the water, return the potatoes to the same pot, keep the heat incredibly low, and then mash away. After a full mashing, I add cheddar, cream, butter and more salt, along with labneh or mascarpone, and re-mash and stir all together. In this way, I use the masher as both a mashing vehicle and stirrer. I don't even really ever take out a spoon when mashing — until I need to try my final product, of course!


Want more great food writing and recipes? Subscribe to Salon Food's newsletter, The Bite.


Growing up, I recall my parents using a hand mixer to effectively mash boiled, softened and peeled potatoes. I know some also use a food mill or a ricer. However, maybe 15 or so years ago, I picked up a potato masher haphazardly because it was cheap and a tool I didn't have on hand. During the holidays, I quickly realized that it is the ideal tool for properly-mashed potatoes devoid of lumps and I've used it for that purpose since. 

This is especially important because, despite their overall adaptability and relative ruggedness, potatoes are actually a pretty finicky thing. I once tried to make potato-leek soup and threw the whole mixture in a VitaMix and blended it. If you’ve never done this, I implore you to not follow my mistake. The end result was supremely tacky and sticky, as if I poured a bucket of industrial grade glue into a bowl and ate it for dinner. It was, suffice to say, very unsatisfying and a real waste of money. The reason for this is because of the starches in the potato. When they meet the blades of a mixer or food processor, especially if you run the machine for a long time, the end product is — not good.

Hence another reason why I stick with my handy dandy masher.

That said, I find that I use the masher more so for guacamole than I do for potatoes at this point. I like to cut my avocados, remove the seed, scoop the flesh into a large bowl and mash, mash, mash. I then add the other ingredients and whip it all up that way. It’s perfect. It's also a great tool for applesauce, banana bread, egg salad, crushing crackers or cookies, or making refried beans. I'm not a baker, but it's also said to be used for pastry blending and it also makes for a great indentation maker on anything from cookies to gnocchi (and, per a colleague, it’s also great for making homemade baby food!). 

We need your help to stay independent

Of course, there are things that the masher can accomplish outside of the kitchen, too, especially if you’re a DIY kind of person, which I am not. Regardless, the uses are endless.

I also just generally dig the ease of using the tool; it fits in the hand so easily and barely any physical exertion is needed. You’re not going to have to resort to calisthenics to mash that avocado or that potato. The tool does it for you. 

So, no matter if you’re using it for its originally intended purpose or something else entirely — I once read that a masher is a great tool for sauerkraut making — be sure to have at least one potato masher on hand in your kitchen. You never know when it might come in handy. For potatoes, maybe, but probably for something else decisively outside of the tuber realm. The masher might go in the drawer with the unitaskers, but it’s so much more than that.

Drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy could boost the US economy by a trillion dollars, Goldman Sachs says

More Americans taking popular medications used for weight loss, including Ozempic and Wegovy, could benefit the national economy in the future, Goldman Sachs analysts predicted in a recent research report.

Both Ozempic and Wegovy are classified as GLP-1 agonists, a diabetes medication that gained popularity online and among celebrities as an anti-obesity drug. According to a 2023 analysis reported by NBC News, U.S. health care providers wrote more than nine million prescriptions for Ozempic, Wegovy and similar diabetes and obesity drugs during the last three months of 2022. Quarterly prescriptions for those drugs increased 300% between early 2020 and the end of 2022. Ozempic is not approved for weight loss by regulators. However, semaglutide is approved for weight loss under the brand name Wegovy.

Goldman Sachs estimated that GLP-1s could add 0.4% to America’s gross domestic product — a monetary measure of the market value of all the goods and services produced by a country — “in a baseline scenario where 30 million users take the drugs and 70% experience benefits,” and as much as 1% if 60 million Americans take those drugs regularly, according to CNN.

“The main reason we see meaningful upside from healthcare innovation is that poor health imposes significant economic costs. There are several channels through which poor health weighs on economic activity that could diminish if health outcomes improve,” the analysts wrote. Goldman predicted that anywhere between 10 million to 70 million Americans will be taking weight-loss drugs by 2028. The wide range is due to uncertainty over clinical trials, health insurance and available supply, per Fox News.

The true cost of food is far higher than what you spend at the checkout counter

After several years of pandemic-driven price spikes at the grocery store, retail food price inflation is slowing down. That's good news for consumers, especially those in low-income households, who spend a proportionally larger share of their income on food.

But there's more to the cost of food than what we pay at the store. Producing, processing, transporting and marketing food creates costs all along the value chain. Many are borne by society as a whole or by communities and regions.

For example, farm runoff is a top cause of algae blooms and dead zones in rivers, lakes and bays. And food waste takes up one-fourth of the space in U.S. landfills, where it rots, generating methane that warms Earth's climate.

Exploring these lesser-known costs is the first step toward reducing them. The key is a method called true cost accounting, which examines the economic, environmental, social and health impacts of food production and consumption to produce a broader picture of its costs and benefits.

 

Trillions of dollars in uncounted costs

Every year since 1947, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has released an important and widely read report called The State of Food and Agriculture, known in the food sector as SOFA. SOFA 2023 examines how much more our food costs beyond what consumers pay at the grocery store.

Using true cost accounting, the report calculates that the global cost of the agrifood system in 2020 was up to US$12.7 trillion more than consumers paid at retail. That's equivalent to about 10% of global gross domestic product, or $5 per person per day worldwide.

True cost accounting is designed to measure the full impacts of producing, transporting and consuming food.

In traditional economics-speak, hidden costs are known as externalities – spillover effects from production that are caused by one party but paid for by another. Some externalities are positive. For example, birds, butterflies and insects pollinate crops at no charge, and everyone who eats those crops benefits. Others, such as pollution, are negative. Delivery trucks emit pollution, and everyone nearby breathes dirtier air.

True cost accounting seeks to make those externalities visible. To do this, scholars analyze data related to environmental, health, social and other costs and benefits, add them together and calculate a price tag that represents what food really costs.

The Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems at Arizona State University, which I direct, recently conducted a true cost accounting study of cow-calf operations in the Western U.S., in partnership with Colorado State University. It found that the climate costs of these operations are very high – but that solving for climate change alone could threaten the livelihoods of 70,000 ranchers and the rural communities in which they live. A true cost accounting approach can illuminate the need for multidimensional solutions.

I study sustainable food systems and am one of 150 scholars across 33 countries who worked together over several years to design and test this new methodology. Our work was led by the U.N. Environment Program and partially funded by the Global Alliance for the Future of Food, a coalition of philanthropic foundations.

In many ways, true cost accounting is a modern and improved version of cost-benefit analysis, a method embedded in governmental decision-making in most advanced economies around the world. This approach quantifies expected rewards and costs associated with taking a particular action and then compares them to see whether the action is likely to produce a net gain or loss for the public.

Advocates of true cost accounting assert that its more nuanced approach will address shortcomings in traditional cost-benefit analysis – particularly, failing to consider social and health externalities in depth. The hope is that because these two methods have many similarities, it should be relatively easy for governments to upgrade to true cost accounting as it becomes more widely adopted.

 

True costs of food vary across countries

The 2023 State of Food and Agriculture report reveals some clear patterns. Of the $12.7 trillion in worldwide hidden costs that it tallies, 39% are generated by upper-middle-income countries and 36% by high-income countries.

For wealthy countries, 84% of hidden costs derive from unhealthy dietary patterns, such as eating large quantities of red meat and heavily processed foods, which is associated with elevated risk of heart disease, cancer and other illnesses. Getting sick takes people away from work, so these health effects also reduce productivity, which affects the economy.

In contrast, 50% of the hidden costs of food in low-income countries are social costs that stem from poverty and undernourishment. SOFA 2023 estimates that incomes of poor people who produce food in low-income countries would need to increase by 57% for these workers to obtain sufficient revenue and calories for productive lives.

Food insecurity on farms is also an issue in the U.S., where the people who produce our food sometimes go hungry themselves. The food system's reliance on undocumented and low-paid workers yields undernourished children who often are unable to learn.

The fact that many U.S. farmworkers lack access to health insurance also generates costs, since hospitals treat them at public expense when these workers fall sick or are injured.

Food production also has environmental costs. Nitrogen runoff, ammonia emissions, deforestation, water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions combined represent about 20% of the global hidden costs of food production. Other environmental costs, such as those associated with species loss and pesticide exposure, are not included in the SOFA analysis.

 

Should food cost more?

The first question people ask me about true cost accounting is whether using it will make food more expensive. Some advocates do argue for pricing food at a level that internalizes its hidden costs.

For example, a Dutch organization called True Price works with food companies to help them charge more accurate prices. The group operates a grocery store in Amsterdam that charges conventional prices but provides receipts that also display "true" prices, reflecting the goods' hidden costs.

Consumers are encouraged to pay these higher prices. When they do, the store shares the proceeds with two nonprofit organizations that promote land and wildlife conservation and poverty reduction in Africa.

Rather than raising prices, I believe the most effective way to address the hidden costs of food would be to change government policies that provide $540 billion in agricultural subsidies worldwide every year. Of this amount, 87% goes to support production systems that produce cheap food, fiber and biofuels but also generate social and environmental harms. Examples include subsides that promote chemical fertilizer and pesticide use, overuse of natural resources and cultivation of emission-intensive products such as rice.

U.N. agencies have urged world leaders to redirect these subsidies to reduce negative impacts – a strategy they call "a multibillion-dollar opportunity to transform food systems." While it may seem that eliminating subsidies would raise retail prices, that's not necessarily true – especially if they are repurposed to support sustainable, equitable and efficient production.

Using true cost accounting as a guide, policymakers could reallocate some of these vast sums of money toward production methods that deliver net-positive benefits, such as expanding organic agriculture, agroforestry and sustainable fisheries. They also could invest in training and supporting next-generation food and agriculture leaders.

By creating transparency, true cost accounting can help shift money away from harmful food production systems and toward alternatives that protect resources and rural communities. Doing so could reduce the hidden costs of feeding the world.

Kathleen Merrigan, Executive Director, Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems, Arizona State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Lauren Boebert’s son arrested on 22 charges — hours after she attacks “Biden Crime Family”

One of conservative firebrand Lauren Boebert's, R-Colo., sons was arrested Tuesday on vehicle trespass and property theft charges in Rifle, Colorado.

The Rifle Police Department in a Facebook post reported that 18-year-old Tyler Jay Boebert was facing four felony counts of criminal possession of identification documents, one felony count of conspiracy to commit a felony, and over 15 additional misdemeanor and petty offenses.

"This is an ongoing investigation, no further information will be released at this time," the post added. "All suspects are considered innocent until adjudicated guilty in a court of law."

On the day of her son's arrest, the legislator took to X/Twitter to advance a far-right preoccupation casting President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden as criminals, even though Boebert supports former President Donald Trump, who is currently facing four criminal indictments. Hunter Biden in December was hit with nine federal tax-crime charges. "The Biden Crime Family will go down as the most corrupt political family in American history," Boebert tweeted on Tuesday afternoon.

As noted by NBC News, Boebert's son's arrest follows a period of political and personal strain for the congresswoman. She was granted a temporary restraining order from her ex-husband and the father of her four sons this month after she stated that he threatened her and entered the family's home without permission. Her ex-husband refuted her claim, arguing that she was using the restraining order to justify her recent move to a new congressional district. NBC reported that she claimed the move would signify a "fresh start following a pretty difficult year for me and my family." 

Boebert only beat her Democrat opponent by a slim margin in 2022 before swapping districts this year. 

New book details how “incensed” Trump and Melania clashed in the White House

Though always publicly supportive of her husband, former first lady Melania Trump had several spats behind the scenes at the White House with former President Donald Trump, according to a new book released Tuesday. Author Kate Rogers, in "American Woman: The Transformation of the Modern First Lady, from Hillary Clinton to Jill Biden," describes a slate of the couple's conflicts, centering on the former president's attempts to tamp down his wife's independence and her efforts to challenge that.

In one moment in the early days of Donald Trump's presidency, as detailed by People, Melania Trump attempted to redecorate the White House residence only for the then-president to replace her choices with his preferences. In another July 2018 instance on Air Force One, the former president became "incensed" upon finding his wife watching her preferred CNN, over Fox News. As a result, he ordered all TVs on the aircraft — and in their hotel suites — be turned to the conservative network moving forward. 

Rogers also wrote of the times when Melania Trump made efforts to separate her messaging from that of her husband, including when, in 2017, Donald Trump said there "were very fine people, on both sides" of the deadly white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Melania Trump, however, "quickly discouraged violence," Rogers points out, noting the then-first lady tweeted, “Our country encourages freedom of speech, but let’s communicate w/o hate in our hearts. No good comes from violence."

“Her tweets were small gestures that amounted to little more than digital ephemera,” Rogers writes. “Still, compared with her husband’s bridge burners, Melania’s missives established her as a rare figure in the Trump administration who seemed more interested in calming a cultural divide than widening it.”

“I have no answer”: Experts say TrumpWorld’s “star witness” sank their case against Fani Willis

The Georgia attorney conceived as a "star witness" in TrumpWorld's bid to disqualify Fulton County District attorney Fani Willis testified on Tuesday that it was only "speculation" when he told a defense lawyer that Willis had been engaged in an improper personal relationship with the lawyer she appointed to spearhead the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump since 2019. 

I do not have knowledge of it starting or when it started,” Terrence Bradley said of Willis' relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade during a Tuesday hearing. “I never witnessed anything. So, you know, it was speculation.” Bradley, a former law partner of Wade, also said he could not recall when he learned about the relationship, confounding claims made by the defense team which said the relationship started after Willis selected Wade to lead the case. 

As noted by The Washington Post, Bradley’s claims could imperil the defense team's attempts to oust Willis from the election subversion case with allegations of a romantic relationship between Willis and Wade. The Post also reported that Bradley during his testimony attempted to backtrack on several statements he made regarding the relationship to Ashleigh Merchant, a lawyer for Trump co-defendant Mike Roman. When Merchant on Tuesday referred back to the text messages between herself and Bradley, Bradley said he did not remember the correspondence, also noting his claims had been speculation. He additionally shared that he could recollect "one conversation" in which Wade said he was romantically involved with Willis.

Trump lawyer Steve Sadow at one point during the testimony accused Bradley of lying after Bradley said a January 2024 text conversation between himself and Merchant, in which Bradley claimed Willis and Wade had been dating since 2019, was speculation. 

“Why in the heck would you speculate?” Sadow asked

“I have no answer for that,” Bradley replied.

“Except for the fact that you do, in fact, know when it started, and you don’t want to testify to that in court. That’s the best explanation,” Sadow retorted. “That’s the true explanation. Because you don’t want to admit it in court, correct?”

We need your help to stay independent

Merchant eventually presented correspondence with Bradley to the court, citing numerous claims made by Bradley about the nature of the supposed relationship. Bradley remained evasive when confronted with the texts and email, testifying, “I don’t recall that."

Merchant also showed the court an excerpt of a conversation with Bradley in which he asked her to include details about payments he had made as an outside attorney consulting for the district attorney’s office in her motion to disqualify Willis, suggesting that Bradley did so to avoid being identified as a source. Bradley rejected the allegation, stating that he had simply wanted to assist Merchant in being "accurate" about the funds Wade and his partners had received for helping the DA, according to the Post.

Legal experts argued that the hearing failed to bolster the attempt to remove Willis.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


"My take on Terrence Bradley is he shared idle, salacious gossip about his former client, Nathan Wade, with the defense attorney for Michael Roman. Bradley is a yenta. But it's exponentially worse because he also happened to be Wade's lawyer," tweeted MSNBC legal analyst Katie Phang. Still, "Bradley didn't provide any evidence of when Wade and Willis began their relationship because, as he testified, he did not have any knowledge of that timeline," she wrote.

Phang criticized Bradley for giving the defense "their basis to launch this sideshow" but added that he "provided zero evidence as to any personal financial benefit that Willis gained from Wade being appointed."

Georgia State University law professor Anthony Michael Kreis agreed that he doesn't think the "evidence is there for disqualification."

"I think gossiping and inducing someone to make a motion should trigger bar discipline," he added. "And I think the state should admit that the defense had a good faith basis to press their claims and calling for sanctions was wrong."

“There is no way”: Ex-Mueller prosecutor warns new Trump filing will backfire in an “enormous way”

Donald Trump's latest filing in his Florida criminal case claiming his prosecution is politically motivated and unfair won't go well for him, argues Andrew Weissmann, a former Mueller senior prosecutor, during an appearance on MSNBC.

The most crucial part of the case, host Nicolle Wallace said, lies in the national security risk it posed, demonstrating the former president's lack of care for the individuals who may have risked their lives to disclose the information to the United States. Trump's "disdain for the documents and everyone and everything and every life risked to gather them is always stunning to me when we come back to this one," Wallace said, recalling the August 2022 Mar-a-Lago raid.

Weissmann agreed, saying that a lack of understanding of what prompts someone to share classified intelligence with the U.S. is what leads a person to disregard the materials' safeguarding. 

"That lack of empathy is something that leads to this danger to national security, and I think that in terms of the reason for why you saw this extraordinary step is precisely because anybody in the White House or the executive branch would be thinking, 'Our obligation to the public is to recover this'," he explained.

Weissmann went on to describe likely outcomes of Trump's filing: "One, just the enormous way it's going to backfire. This is going to be denied, and it is going to be denied in a judicial decision; if not by Judge [Aileen] Cannon, she will get reversed. The 11th Circuit [Court of Appeals] is going to deny it, " Weissmann told Wallace. "There is no way that this is going to be viewed as selective prosecution. [Trump], of course, will say, 'Ignore those courts' — pretty hard with the 11th Circuit. I mean, those are his people."

Second, he noted, both special counsel Jack Smith and special counsel Robert Hur, who investigated President Joe Biden's retention of classified documents but did not charge him with anything, agreed that the nature of Trump's conduct is different. "It's going to be hard to smear Jack Smith when you have Rob Hur saying the same thing," Weissman said. 

Congressman warns Biden to “wake up” after over 100K Michigan Democrats vote “uncommitted”

More than 100,000 Democrats voted “uncommitted” in Tuesday’s Michigan primary after a campaign by Arab Americans and progressives calling for President Joe Biden to call for an unconditional ceasefire in Gaza.

Biden got more than 617,000 votes, or 81%, easily winning the primary but the number of uncommitted votes rose to more than 100,000, or 13%, with 98% of expected votes reported.  

ABC News’ Jay O’Brien noted that campaigners set low expectations, hoping for just 10,000 “uncommitted” votes in the primary even though more than 20,000 Michigan Democrats voted “uncommitted” in 2012 when President Barack Obama ran for re-election.

"Point being, this is something the Biden campaign, given the numbers tonight, is going to have to take seriously,” O’Brien said.

The uncommitted campaign had already gotten the administration’s attention, The New York Times noted, pointing to the White House deploying officials to Dearborn, Mich. to express regrets about the administration’s response to the Gaza war. Biden earlier this month called Israel’s response “over the top.”  He said over the weekend that he hoped Israel and Hamas could reach a temporary ceasefire agreement by Monday.

Still, the strength of the uncommitted campaign “surprised” Biden’s campaign, the Times added, noting that the movement is now likely to spread to other states.

The White House contrition in Dearborn, where more than half of residents are Arab American, did not appear to quell criticism. “Uncommitted” beat Biden 56-40 in the city, winning 47 of the city’s 48 precincts with most of the votes counted, according to the Detroit Free Press.

“That’s a wow,” CNN’s John King exclaimed while the votes were still being counted Tuesday night.

“This is a place President Biden carried big time in 2020. This is key to his chances of defeating Donald Trump in Michigan,” he said, adding that the concentration of votes signals that Biden’s “big problem” is that “Muslim Americans who were critical, absolutely critical to his big margin in Michigan in 2020, are telling the president tonight that they are mad.”

We need your help to stay independent

Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., the former co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the number of uncommitted votes “show the problem” with Biden’s current course in Gaza.

“Time to wake up to the growing human rights concerns that many Americans have,” he tweeted. “And to recognize Netanyahu isn’t the ally some claim he is.”

The Listen to Michigan campaign said Tuesday its “movement emerged victorious tonight and massively surpassed our expectations.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


“We don’t want a Trump presidency, but Biden has put Netanyahu ahead of American democracy. We cannot afford to pay the bill for disregarding Palestinian lives should it come due in November,” the campaign’s X/Twitter account said. “The only way to achieve freedom and justice for Palestinians surviving a genocide is through an immediate and permanent cease-fire. The only way to ensure the safe return of all hostages and prisoners is through an immediate and permanent cease-fire.”

Some Arab American voters have expressed that there is nothing Biden could do to win them back, according to the Times, but several speakers at the Listen to Michigan election night event on Tuesday suggested they would back Biden if he changed his stance on Gaza.

“We are no longer in a position to beg Democrats to listen to us,” said Gaby Santiago-Romero, a member of the Detroit City Council. “Quite frankly, none of us want Trump to win, which is exactly why we’re doing this. This is the only way we can raise a flag to Democrats that you are going to lose unless you call for an ultimate cease-fire.”

As another government shutdown looms, it’s time for Mike Johnson to step up

Here we are again looking right down the barrel of a government shutdown because one-half of one of the three branches of the federal government is completely dysfunctional under GOP leadership.

We're talking about the Republican House of Representatives of course. They are simply incapable of passing legislation. 2023 was the least productive year since the Great Depression with Congress passing just 27 pieces of legislation that became law. In 1948 President Harry Truman famously called the legislative branch the "Do Nothing Congress" because they only managed to pass 511 bills.

This is the third time in six months that the country has been on the brink of a shutdown because the hard right in the House is holding their breath until they turn blue. It's not clear what they want except perhaps to cause more chaos. The last time it cost Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., his job as Speaker of the House and the same fate may very await current Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., as well. There's nothing in his performance so far that suggests he has the skill or the desire to finesse this situation. 

If there's one guy you'd think would ask himself "What would Jesus do?" it would be Mike Johnson. So far, however, it appears he's more likely to ask himself "What would Trump do?" 

There's no need to reiterate the saga that continues over Ukraine and border funding. We know that both parties came to the table and negotiated in good faith to come to an agreement on both of those issues to meet the demands of the right-wingers. But Donald Trump directed them to walk away because he believes passage of any bill will help Joe Biden in the election in the fall so they did it. So, at the moment, funding for Ukraine, the border, Israel, Taiwan and Gaza is dead and Republicans are screaming incoherently about how the border must be dealt with even though they just shot down a bill that any hard-line, immigrant-hating right-winger should have been thrilled to vote for. None of it makes any sense at all. 

But there are a whole bunch of other spending bills caught in limbo as well. For now, the government continues to operate on the 2022 budget passed by the Democrat-controlled House led by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. As it stands, unless they pass another continuing resolution or come to some kind of agreement, about 20 percent of the federal budget will shut down on March 2. The rest of the government goes down one week later, at midnight on March 9. 

Johnson bought himself some time last fall when he first succeeded McCarthy and managed to pass the continuing resolution that's coming due this week. The House returned from another extended break this week (they're very tired) and found that whatever talks had been going on during their vacation had gotten nowhere. It's hard to know exactly what the hang-up is, but according to the New York Times, the far right has an assortment of demands such as the reversal of "a rule that aims to broaden access to abortion medication or a policy that could make it harder for some veterans deemed mentally ill to purchase guns." They also insist on limiting food stamps for the poor

On Tuesday the four congressional leaders, Johnson, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell met with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris in the White House to assess the lay of the land. They all reported that they were "optimistic" that they can reach an agreement — but they were short on details. 

They all ganged up on Johnson, even McConnell, on the Ukraine funding, trying to get him to let that bill come to the floor so they could get it done. Johnson used to be in favor of it, but he's firmly under Trump's thumb so who knows if he'll budge on that? He's now pushing the fatuous notion that he can only do it if Biden uses executive authority to close the border immediately, as the Times reported:

After the meeting, Mr. Johnson said of the foreign assistance bill that House Republicans were still “actively pursuing and investigating all the various options on that, and we will address that in a timely manner.”

But he reiterated his stance that the effort should take a back seat to immediate action to crack down on migration at the U.S. border with Mexico. “The first priority of the country is our border and making sure it’s secure,” Mr. Johnson said. “I believe the president can take executive authority right now today to change that.”

We need your help to stay independent

Biden tried to educate him about how it would cost money to do that, which will only be available if they pass the bill that appropriates it.

Axios reports that one of the negotiators, Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine, thinks they could unveil a compromise as early as today. But after what the Republicans pulled with the Ukraine/border agreement it's hard to imagine how anyone could trust them to keep their word. Who knows what they'll pull out of their hat at the last minute? And has anyone consulted Dear Leader Donald Trump? In the past he has been in favor of a government shutdown because he thinks it hurts the Democrats, the same rationale he used when he ordered them to scuttle the border bill. He's a bit distracted with all his legal problems at the moment, so maybe they can slip something by before he looks up and realizes they've actually done something.

It's all up to Johnson in the end. He knows he can pass these bills in minutes and get everything funded, including Ukraine and the border, immediately if he will bring the bills to the floor and allow it to pass with Democratic votes and a handful of sane Republicans. But he may very well lose his speakership if he does that, just as McCarthy did. There is nothing so far to indicate that he has the character or the guts to sacrifice his ambition to do that even though many lives are at stake here in the U.S. and around the world. But considering that he always says that if you want to know his values all you have to do is read the Bible, if there's one guy you'd think would ask himself "What would Jesus do?" it would be Mike Johnson. So far, however, it appears he's more likely to ask himself "What would Trump do?" 

Jake Sherman of Punchbowl News reports that despite promising that there would be no more continuing resolutions, Johnson has now proposed to extend the deadlines from March 1 to March 8 and March 22. There is no word as of now whether the Senate and the White House are on board or even if Johnson has the juice to persuade his right flank to allow it. One result of Johnson allowing the clock to run out repeatedly is that it makes it easy for him to just kick the can down the road instead and avoid having to take a risk. The bill has come due for the people of Ukraine and Gaza unfortunately, but at least Johnson will be able to keep his job. 

“I’m a very proud Christian”: Will religion be enough to save Donald Trump?

Do you accept Donald Trump as your personal lord and savior?

Most people, be they Christians or not, would laugh at such a question given that Donald Trump does not attend church, and has repeatedly shown himself to be a cruel and wicked man – if not evil. But many of Donald Trump’s MAGA people see a divinely ordained messiah figure. Why would they believe such a thing? Their religious leaders – and Trump himself – has repeatedly told them it is true.

Trump, an apparent megalomania, recently shared a video on his Truth Social disinformation platform, proclaiming that “god made Trump," in essence granting him superhuman powers. Last week, he continued to amplify his claims of being divinely blessed and a type of emissary-prophet – and now martyr – for Christianity. 

At the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) International Christian Media Convention in Nashville on Thursday, Trump told the audience, “If I get in, you’re going to be using that power at a level that you’ve never used before… With your help and God’s grace, the great revival of America begins on November 5th.” Trump also quoted the Bible and Jesus Christ’s Sermon on the Mount: “The Bible says blessed are the peacemakers. I will be a peacemaker and I will be the only president who can say — and I say this with great conviction — I will prevent World War III.”

Claiming that he is being tortured and made to suffer because he is being put on trial for his obvious crimes, Trump told the audience, “I take all these arrows for you and I’m so proud to take them. I’m being indicted for you." As Trump said this, he looked at the audience, stretching out his arms.

In the same speech, Trump drew upon old right-wing tropes about how “Christians” are being persecuted by “the Communists” and “the Reds." In this context, these “anti-Christian” forces are not Stalin or Mao, but instead the Democrats, President Biden and all others who believe in the Constitution, democracy, the separation of church and state, and the rule of law:

We will protect God in our public square….I will not allow the media or left wing groups silence you, censor you, discriminate against you, or in any way tell you what you have to say….Remember, every communist regime throughout history has tried to stamp out the churches, just like every fascist regime has tried to co-opt them and control them… And, in America, the radical left is trying to do both. They want to tear down crosses where they can, and cover them up with social justice flags….But no one will be touching the cross of Christ under the Trump administration, I swear to you.

Trump, a gifted showman and carnival barker, told the audience exactly what they wanted to hear, making the following ridiculous claim: “The left is trying to shame Christians. They’re trying to shame us. I’m a very proud Christian.”

The attendees at the NRB Convention were ecstatic in their support of Trump. The Associated Press described the scene as follows:

Trump brought the crowd to its feet repeatedly and frequently championed his record on abortion, including appointing three conservative Supreme Court justices who helped overturn the Roe v. Wade decision…. “When he came onto the scene, people were skeptical,” said Troy Miller, president and CEO of the National Religious Broadcasters. “But I think, as they’ve learned more and listened to Donald Trump speak, the one thing I hear all the time from people … is that they really feel like Donald Trump understands them and that’s the biggest connection that people make is, ‘This is a guy in politics who gets us, who understands us, who doesn’t talk like he’s an elitist and talk down to us.’”

"But Trump’s biggest applause lines," the Religion News Service added, "came when he promised to promote school vouchers, seal the United States’ Southern border and prevent transgender men from participating in women’s sports. With him as president, he vowed that America would have only two genders — male and female."

Trump continued with his lies about how Christians are being “persecuted” in America. Trump made similar claims about how “Christians” are being “persecuted” and “discriminated against” and “hunted” in his speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference over the weekend. (In reality, white Christians have a vastly disproportionate amount of power and influence in American society as compared to other groups).

Trump also continued to channel Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, with his lies about how the United States is being betrayed from within by its so-called enemies i.e. people who do not support the MAGA movement and American neofascism:

“The greatest threat is not from the outside of our country – I really believe it is from within. It’s the people from within our country that are more dangerous than the people outside.”

Such lies are but another example of how Donald Trump is continuing with his years-long pattern of using “stochastic terrorism” to encourage political violence by his MAGA followers and other members of the “conservative” movement and right-wing against their shared enemies.

We need your help to stay independent

Predictably, the mainstream news media did not give Trump’s Christofascist speech at the NRB conference the attention it deserved. The media malpractice and resulting normalization of Trumpism and American neofascism continue.

In a very insightful new essay at Common Dreams, Robert Ivie describes the type of White Christian paranoiac thinking and fantasies of persecution and victimhood that Trump is channeling and which powers the MAGA movement:

Trump’s harangue to his diehard followers is more than just an angry lament. It is a recipe for violence that typifies his authoritarian cant and culminates in the destruction of democratic institutions.

A majority that would not abide the raw power of authoritarian rule cannot assemble itself except through democratic discourse.

Trump’s apocalyptic diatribe symbolizes his broader refrain of grievance, vengeance, and call to recover a glorified past. It gestures back specifically to a white America blessed by God, but “Make America Great Again” speaks plainly and poignantly to others who fear being left behind and unredeemed. It projects a dark determination to destroy an unholy adversary that would displace divinely entitled white Christians, an image that expresses vividly the angst of a wider segment of politically disaffected citizens. It is a spellbinding, hermetic discourse of restoration that mutates into a malignant formulation for rejecting democratic values and thwarting reasoned deliberation. To contest its backward slant on its own politico-religious terms of restoration is hopeless, even counterproductive. Recognizing its directionality, however, suggests the value of a forward-leaning alternative.

The symbolic force of redeeming a conservative white Christian nation paralyzes democratic community, strengthens a minority grip on politics, and scatters the majority. Not all white citizens fear displacement by an increasingly diverse polity. Not all Christians are evangelical or fundamentalist. Not all conservatives are retrogressive. Not all citizens are Christian nationalists or among the one third that believes God intended the U.S. to be a promised land for white Christians of European descent. The symbol is a consequential misnomer of loss and recovery. Somehow the scattered majority that thinks otherwise must be reassembled.

Public opinion polls and other research show that potentially many tens of millions of Americans do believe that Donald Trump is “divine” and has been chosen by “god” to be president.

Further reinforcing the above conclusion, new research from the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) highlights how Christian Nationalists (White Christian Supremacists) are integral to the MAGA movement and Trump’s (and his Republican fascist successors’) chances of taking the White House in the upcoming presidential election (and beyond).

PRRI’s findings include:

At the state level, Christian nationalism is strongly linked to red states and 2020 vote for Trump. At the state level, support for Christian nationalism is nearly perfectly correlated with vote for Donald Trump in the 2020 election. If the analysis is restricted to white Americans, the relationship between state-level support for Christian nationalism and 2020 vote for Trump becomes even stronger.

Christian nationalists are more likely than other Americans to see political struggles through the apocalyptic lens of revolution and to support political violence.

A majority of Christian nationalism Adherents (54%) and 45% of Sympathizers agree that, “There is a storm coming soon that will sweep away the elites in power and restore the rightful leaders,” compared with only 22% of Christian nationalism Skeptics and 7% of Rejecters.

Christian nationalists are also about twice as likely as other Americans to believe political violence may be justified. Nearly four in ten Christian nationalism Adherents (38%) and one-third of Sympathizers (33%) agree that, “Because things have gotten so far off track, true American patriots may have to resort to violence to save the country,” compared with only 17% of Skeptics and 7% of Rejecters. Support for political violence among Christian nationalism Sympathizers has gone up by 11 percentage points since 2022 (from 22% to 33%) while it has remained steady among all other groups.

As political scientist Paul Djupe explained to me in a recent conversation here at Salon, Donald Trump is donning his fascist “armor of god” and its glamour has compelled many millions of right-wing “Christians” to follow him.

The question remains, will enough people outside of the MAGAverse rally to Trump’s banner or will they instead be so repulsed by what he represents as to convincingly defeat him and the Republican Party in the 2024 election?

The self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell should serve as a wake up call for the military

“This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal.”

In the coming days, I hope that there will be much reportage and discussion about Aaron Bushnell’s life and his chosen death. I hope that his story will be recorded, if for no other reason than posterity. May his last words spur a change.

In many such cases, however, the first draft of history is often, unfortunately, the only draft. We have seen this story before.

Friends and family of the 25-year-old Air Force service member from Massachusetts will be interviewed, poking at their emotional wounds for the benefit of the press. The cause for which Bushnell gave his life, the liberation of Palestine, will be sketched out in the abstract, leaving it unclear as to how someone could feel so strongly about something that they would be willing to die for it in perhaps the most horrific way possible. Many commentators will say that his dramatic death by self-immolation on the front steps of the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C.  was regrettable, that this didn’t need to happen, that they agree with Bushnell’s sentiment but not with his horrifying method, that his act of sacrifice was carried out in vain. Others will smear him as a madman, a misguided boy who fell victim to pro-Hamas propaganda, a cautionary tale. Meanwhile, the genocide in Gaza still continues. Bushnell’s name will be logged like so many others before him — Alice HerzFlorence BeaumontRonald BrazeeGeorge Winne Jr., Norman Morrison, Ryszard Siwiec, David Buckel, Wynn Bruce — but a blip on the mainstream media’s radar, a hero in some radical zines and blogs perhaps, a curiosity case in some graduate level thesis forty years from now, but then what? A memorial plaque in a genocide remembrance museum in some far-off imaginary Palestinian state? “Fil mish-mish,” the Arabs say. What is for certain is that the Bushnell family will be left to pick up the pieces of a life now fading from memory.

I say these things because this has all happened before, over and over again. I want Bushnell’s death to stir the conscience of our nation. I confess I am not optimistic.

Our society is not able to comprehend people like Bushnell and their actions because we have totally spurned the ability to be morally serious people, along with the vulnerability, earnestness, and humanity which this requires. People don’t give a shit about anything because it’s easier not to. When someone like Bushnell comes along and lights themselves on fire, they indict the whole of our broken society. 

“I’m an active duty member of the United States Air Force, and I will no longer be complicit in genocide,” Bushnell, who became active duty in 2020 during the depths of COVID lockdowns, proclaimed while dressed in full fatigues. The message made clear to his fellow service members.  

I am telling you, if for nothing more than our mere survival, let alone moral integrity: We cannot ignore the messages of people like Bushnell, as much as we’d like to. They are the vanguard that says, either do something about this, or we will all continue to perish. “We are but darkened groping souls, that know not the light often because of its very blinding radiance,” wrote W.E.B. Du Bois in his biography of radical abolitionist John Brown:

Only in time is truth revealed. …and ever and again after the world has complacently dodged and compromised with, and skillfully evaded a great evil, there shines, suddenly, a great white light — an unwavering, unflickering brightness, blinding by its all-seeing brilliance, making the whole world simply a light and a darkness — a right and a wrong. Then men tremble and writhe and waver. They whisper, “But – but – of course;” “the thing is plain, but it is too plain to be true – it is true but truth is not the only thing in the world.” Thus they hide from the light, they burrow and grovel, and yet ever in, and through, and on them blazes that mighty light with its horror of darkness and behind it peals the voice…that must be answered. … It is at once surprising, baffling and pitiable to see the way in which men — honest American citizens — faced this light.

When will we finally face this light? That, if nothing else, is what Aaron Bushnell wanted.

We are witnessing a genocide in Gaza. It is plain. No serious person can mince their words nearly five months after October 7. So long as this continues, we can expect to see more people like Aaron Bushnell. There were others before him who are worth examining.

Naked power is winning.

Two people so far in the U.S. have self-immolated in response to the climate crisis, David Buckel and Wynn Bruce. Perhaps dozens of Westerners self-immolated in response to America’s war in Vietnam. Others have self-immolated in response to rampant inequalityforever wars, or their utter disempowerment. Looking at the words of these immolators, their reasonings for lighting themselves on fire are quite similar.

People living under a system that is responsible for mass immiseration and death — such as with America’s constant wars, or with Western powers making only shallow moves on addressing the climate crisis for which they are largely responsible, or with the facilitation of genocide — will feel something drastic must be done in order to call attention and stir action. People will feel isolated by the seeming apathy and ignorance all around them. A constant theme in the words of self-immolators is that they felt that they had done everything they could do, the powerful weren’t listening, and that those around them weren’t doing enough. 

We need your help to stay independent

Florence Beaumont, a longtime labor organizer who set herself on fire in Los Angeles in 1967 in protest of America’s war in Vietnam, “had a deep feeling against the slaughter,” her husband said. “Florence had done everything she could to stop the war. She lived for the peace movement. She wrote hundreds of letters to her congressmen, her senators, all she got back were form letters. She passed out literature, attended rallies and marches…She registered voters in the Peace and Freedom Party. … But the war had her so frustrated. She would sit and wring her hands when they reported the war news. She felt she had to do something, to make a better world and to wake people up.”

Alice Herz, a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany and the first American to self-immolate in response to America’s war in Vietnam in 1965, spoke to her friend shortly after President Lyndon Johnson’s announcement of the Rolling Thunder bombing campaign. Her friend recalled Herz saying, “‘What can we do? What can we do?’ I tried to console her. I told her that bad as things were, I saw some hope. She said I should be more worried, that this was just the way things had been in Germany.” Another friend said that Herz felt like she was running out of options for making change. “I’ve written everything I can,” she told her, “I’ve spoken everywhere; what can I do?”

What these self-immolators do cannot simply be dismissed as an act borne out of mental health struggles . Theirs is an action compelled by the inability of our structures to respond to the needs of the people. Those who knew these immolators knew that they acted rationally and out of love for humanity. A friend of Beaumont’s said “She was a gentle, thoughtful person who was not known for irrational action. Possessing a rare combination of strength and humanity, she did not act out of weakness or despair.” In the eulogy she gave for Herz at her memorial ceremony, Ruth Gage-Colby, a pacifist leader with Women Strike for Peace, said “in an insane society, Alice sought to make a completely sane testimony,” and that Herz “was not a fanatic, nor a propagandist, but a sincere and intelligent lady.” Later, Gage-Colby said that she was honored to give a eulogy “for such a fine, wonderful friend.” She described Herz as “a warm, loving, truly gentle person, with an unconquerable spirit and a rare combination of moral and physical courage.” Upon visiting her in the hospital, a fellow organizer for Detroit Women for Peace, Lillian Lerman, told Detroit Free Press that Herz “is a rational, reasonable, well-educated woman. It is difficult to see how she could do this — just imagine feeling so strongly.”

But just because it seems impossible doesn’t mean we relinquish ourselves to these systems of death.

In a letter to the Los Angeles Times, a woman defended Beaumont’s immolation from charges of insanity with words that could have been written today about Aaron Bushnell’s sacrifice:

The flames that destroyed this woman were in the hope that more of us would search the dark corners of our own souls and question our complaisance and complicity in the destruction of human life.

In an insane world where the bombing and burning of defenseless villages is an everyday occurrence, visible nightly on television, it unfortunately sometimes takes the expressed feeling of an anguished soul to shock us awake again. If Florence Beaumont was deranged, then sanity is defined by our nuclear stockpile, and insanity by a woman’s sacrificial compassion for human suffering.

Immolations such as Bushnell’s are to be expected in our broken society. I’m afraid they are only going to increase. But troublingly, acts of self-destruction won’t always be directed only at the self. The same factors which contribute to someone choosing to self-immolate can produce quite more destructive outcomes. People feeling betrayed and helpless may, on the constructive end of the spectrum, organize themselves to exert popular control over their society. Or, remaining atomized, they may try to reclaim individual power in pyrrhic victories over others through domestic violence, bullying, mass shootings, and terrorism. As war, famine, political deadlock, and the climate crisis all worsen and more people begin to suffer the consequences, we can expect to see acts of self-destruction, from self-immolation to mass murder, get worse.

The mainstream media has consistently ignored or downplayed the causes for which people self-immolate. The establishment press was caught sleeping on the litany of atrocities occurring in Vietnam; it ignored or downplayed the significance of antiwar immolations, treating them as mere peculiarities; it currently ignores or downplays the exigencies of the climate crisis; it has offered scant reporting on the person who self-immolated in Atlanta over Israel’s genocide in Gaza; it dehumanizes Palestinians while uplifting the “worthy” victims of America’s officially designated enemies, such as Ukrainians. In the face of all this, an individual with strong convictions who feels isolated, helpless, and betrayed will turn towards drastic action.

Today’s collective mood of helplessness is not, I contend, stemming only from the large-scale societal problems we face. The root of it, rather, is the well-founded belief that the people with dominion over our lives are enforcing an undemocratic system that necessarily leads to such societal problems, and that this system is so powerful, self-serving, and self-perpetuating, that any attempts to alter or abolish it are futile. There is no longer an official mode of redress in our society. The self-immolators of the Vietnam War era understood this. They saw that all of the protesting, letter writing, sit-ins, teach-ins, and hippies fucking each other was not stopping the bloodshed in Vietnam. The same is true for the immolators of today.

There is no due process any longer; no official recourse; every attempt at going through the “proper channels” is either ignored or suppressed. Our protests did not stop the war in Vietnam. Our protests did not stop NAFTA. Our protests did not stop the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Our protests did not stop the oil pipelines. Our protests did not stop police violence. Our protests have not stopped the genocide in Gaza.

There are few who see where humanity is headed and who have the fortitude to rebel against it.

As every Palestinian death represents another irrevocable failure on our part, the best I can say is that every action carries a flame. We can never really know what we inspire. Lord knows most of the people who set themselves on fire in protest of the Vietnam War are now long forgotten. And their deaths didn’t stop U.S. soldiers from murdering 5 million Vietnamese. But that’s not really the point. We don’t do such things because we will succeed, as much as we’d like to. We do it because it is right. In the West, there are those who are currently blockading arms shipments to Israel, defacing the buildings of weapons manufacturers, disrupting the meetings and speeches of complicit politicians, staging symbolic acts like die-ins, boycotting Israeli goods and other companies that do business with Israel, lobbying for universities to divest from the apartheid regime, and going on national television to decry the hypocrisy of establishment media. All of these acts are needed and welcomed. But it’s never enough. Even as the Houthis in Yemen blockade international shipping lanes and attack Israel-bound vessels in solidarity with the Palestinians, Western coalitions bomb these fighters. Naked power is winning. 

Still, such futility by itself, in the end, has little bearing on the value of acts of resistance themselves. If we measured the whole value of an act of resistance only by its immediate efficacy, there would be no moral reason for revolt in the first place. Of course, the ends matter. But that is not the reason why we choose to affirm our humanity through struggle and sacrifice. Of course, we want things to be better. But just because it seems impossible doesn’t mean we relinquish ourselves to these systems of death. To give up like that would be a total defeat.

The naked corruption, fecklessness, and moral decrepitude of the political, economic, and media elite, all of whom are beyond the reach of the same laws that are levied so harshly against the great mass of us, leads to our prevalent cynicism, apathy, political and civic dislocation, and our collective rage. This rank corruption, what Thomas Paine, when referring to the despotic French monarchy, described as “the Augean stable of parasites and plunderers too abominably filthy to be cleansed, by anything short of a complete and universal revolution,” degrades the soul of our society and renders the principle of the rule of law into a cruel joke.

“This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal,” Bushnell reminded us. Moments later, engulfed in flames and on the ground, he had a gun aimed at him by a U.S. Secret Service member.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


There are few who see where humanity is headed and who have the fortitude to rebel against it. The immolators had this vision. Their vision was attended by a profound sensitivity and love for humanity. David Buckel, perhaps the first climate immolator in America, “was always a more sensitive and gentle soul,” his niece said. Friends of Wynn Bruce, who immolated on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court over climate change in 2022, said he “had a huge heart” and that he did what he did as “an act of compassion and a desire for his life to go to something that he really cared about.”

You may not agree with someone’s convictions. You may not agree with their actions that follow from those convictions, be it self-immolation or an act of terrorism. But to simply operate under the assumption that our society is healthy, people in power are benevolent, and the actions of our government are always righteous, and to then paint anyone who lashes out against these systems as an incoherent madman, someone who is obviously mentally ill and irrational is to be dismissive of the very real conditions that drive people to extreme acts. It is to ensure that those acts will continue and even swell.

The self-immolations of the Vietnam War era divided the public. Some called them insane, ineffectual and deluded. Others called them saints, martyrs and prophets. Given that we now have a fuller picture of what happened in Vietnam, with U.S. soldiers responsible for the murder of millions of Vietnamese and the torture, rape, and maiming of countless more, the antiwar immolators may be called the vanguard. They saw the path that the U.S. was going down. Those such as Alice Herz precipitated the broader, intense antiwar movement of the later sixties and early seventies. Through her sacrifice, she lit the way forward and kept hope aflame.

Herz, as a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, understood the inhumanity that humans are capable of. She could not sit idly by in 1965 as she watched her adoptive country begin its own industrial mass slaughter of Vietnamese. In a letter to a fellow activist dated just days before her immolation, Herz wrote, “The air is full of mendacious fog. As I listen to the radio news getting more menacing with every hour, I ask what remains of America to distinguish this country from Germany, as I knew it in the first terrible months of the Third Reich?” Herz, emulating the sacrifice of Thich Quảng Dức in Saigon, presaged the immolations of Norman Morrison, Roger Allen LaPorte, Florence Beaumont, Ronald Brazee, George Winne Jr., and others in the West. David Buckel and Wynn Bruce are the vanguards of today’s climate crisis, itself a form of industrialized slaughter.

Aaron Bushnell, as a U.S. service member, was intimately acquainted with the criminal role that the U.S. military plays in the world. He has fallen in the same line as those brave souls before him who chose to sacrifice themselves in order to wake up a slumbering, complicit people. Bushnell took up the flag of Palestine. He offered a shining example for the rest of us. May he not have died in vain.

“Leaky brain”: Lifting the fog behind this long COVID symptom could generate treatment

For many people, COVID-19 can be a relatively mild infection. For many others, it is not. For someone who is living with so-called long COVID, in which the symptoms last for months or even years, it can contain a litany of debilitating symptoms from extreme fatigue to heart problems. For Angela Meriquez Vázquez, a long COVID patient and advocate, "brain fog" is “one of the most disabling symptoms.” The condition is exactly what it sounds like: a cloudy feeling in the mind that can make it difficult to focus or remember. It's one of many ways in which the SARS-CoV-2 virus responsible for COVID can impact the brain and alter perception.

Prior to getting infected with COVID-19 in March 2020, Vázquez said she was decent at multitasking. For example, she could write an email about one topic and engage in a verbal conversation about another topic at the same time. But today, she struggles to maintain focus and attention on phone calls. She tells Salon she is now bad at multitasking. And on days where she is really struggling, she has to turn on closed captioning on Zoom to follow along with the conversation.

“While I don’t think my performance has suffered appreciably, I now spend a majority of my daily energy managing my executive function and pacing my cognitive exertion,”Vázquez told Salon via email. “Things that my brain used to do automatically and with ease.”

By examining brain circulation, they found that long COVID patients with brain fog had a leaky blood-brain barrier when compared to other long COVID patients who had recovered.

Brain fog is a term used to describe a range of neurocognitive symptoms, which can include forgetfulness and difficulties focusing, and paying attention — like what Vázquez described. While it’s been reported to be a symptom during an acute COVID-19 infection, an estimated 50 percent of patients who experience long COVID experience brain fog, which is so insidious in part due to the broad range of symptoms it encompasses. For this reason, it can often be a symptom that’s not taken seriously by doctors or others. But as Vázquez explained, it can affect life on a daily basis and be one of the most difficult parts of living with long-COVID. 

Recent research in the journal Nature Neuroscience suggests we're one step closer to the cause behind brain fog in long COVID patients, specifically "leakiness" of the blood-brain barrier in conjunction with an overactive immune system. It is the first time scientists have found evidence that this debilitating symptom is due to underlying changes in the brain. It could also be the first step to a possible treatment. 


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.


“We and others have been searching for a possible remedy for the leaky blood-brain barrier,” Dr. Colin Doherty, one of the study’s coauthors, who is a neurology professor and head of the school of medicine at Trinity College, told Salon via email. “One target is a protein called Claudin-5 which makes up the most important element of the glue or scaffolding that keeps the barrier together.” 

Prior research indicated that blood-brain barrier disruption could be causing brain fog. But this provides the first biological evidence. In the study, researchers analyzed blood samples to identify biomarker differences between those who did and didn't report brain fog. Specifically, they took blood samples from 76 patients who were hospitalized with acute COVID in 2020. They found that those who reported having brain fog had higher levels of a protein called S100 beta, which is produced by brain cells — but is not normally found in the blood, hence suggesting a leaky barrier in the brain.

In the second part of their study, researchers scanned the brains of 11 people who recovered from COVID and 22 people who had long COVID — half of which reported having brain fog. By examining brain circulation, they found that long COVID patients with brain fog had a leaky blood-brain barrier when compared to other long COVID patients who had recovered.

"The medical community has been split between those who did not believe that long COVID was a ‘real’ disorder and those who were desperate to find a reliable biomarker. We believe this could be that biomarker."

“When we scanned these patients and measured the levels of a molecule called s-100Beta — a brain-derived molecule that can only get into the blood if the barrier is damaged — and compared the scans and S100beta levels to patients who had had acute COVID but had fully recovered,” Doherty said. “The barrier was very leaky and obviously damaged, especially in areas like the temporal lobe which is essential for learning and memory.”

Doherty emphasized that by identifying this biomarker in blood, it could help pave the way for testing and treating brain fog in long-COVID patients. 

“It’s an important finding because the medical community has been split between those who did not believe that long COVID was a ‘real’ disorder and those who were desperate to find a reliable biomarker,” he said. “We believe this could be that biomarker.”

We need your help to stay independent

Matthew Campbell, co-author of the study and a professor in genetics and head of genetics at Trinity College Dublin, told Salon via email that “therapies aimed at regulating the integrity of the blood-brain barrier” should be considered and tested as a potential treatment. 

“There are some drugs such as steroids and losartan that have the capacity to do this,” he said. “But newer, more ‘targeted’ developmental drugs might have better efficacy.”

In regards to next steps, he said researchers need to increase the numbers of people involved in this work and keep testing.

“The MRI study we reported was small, but suggestive that if we expand to larger numbers of patients we will see the same signals,” he said. “So, the biomarker that we have identified will have use for diagnosis but also for clinical trials as we can use it as an indicator that a potential drug has biological efficacy.”

Antarctica’s “Doomsday Glacier” began to retreat in the 1940s because of an El Niño event

Thwaites Glacier goes by an arguably unflattering nickname, the "Doomsday Glacier," and there is a very understandable reason for this. The western Antarctic natural wonder is roughly the size of Florida at 4,000 square miles (192,000 square kilometers), and if it melts, that would be a disaster for humanity. If it collapses on its own, Thwaites will cause sea levels to rise by roughly two feet (65 centimeters). Like an icy domino, however, Thwaites' collapse could trigger other melting events, ultimately increasing sea levels by an estimated 10 feet (3 meters).

That is why scientists reporting in the journal PNAS, and led by the University of Houston, are so concerned. After analyzing the marine sedimentary record to review the glacier's history going back 10,000 years, they discovered that Thwaites began losing large amounts of ice as far back as the 1940s.

To ascertain this, the researchers obtained samples from various locations near both Thwaites and the nearby Pine Island Glacier. By doing so they learned that an extreme El Niño climate pattern likely warmed the west Antarctic's waters between 1939 and 1942. When combined with the effects of human-caused climate change (which already existed back then, though less intense than today), Thwaites barely stood a chance: The glacier rapidly lost an unusually large amount of ice during that period.

"Our work provides robust new evidence that glacier retreat in the Amundsen Sea was initiated in the mid-twentieth century, likely associated with climate variability," the scientists write in their paper. "The glacier is significant not only because of its contribution to sea-level rise but because it is acting as a cork in the bottle holding back a broader area of ice behind it," University of Houston geologist Julia Wellner said in a press release.

Antarctica has melted in the past, as recent studies have helped demonstrate, but one thing is clear this round: human activity is making things much worse.

Jeremiah Brent joins “Queer Eye” cast for season nine after Bobby Berk exit

Say hello to your newest member of "Queer Eye"'s Fab Five — Jeremiah Brent. The long-time interior designer is not a stranger to being on TV for his design work. He and his partner in life and work, Nate Berkus, have had multiple design shows on TLC and HGTV. The new cast announcement comes on the heels of Bobby Berk's departure from Emmy-winning reality show "Queer Eye" after eight seasons in November last year. Berk's exit caused a stir among fans, who theorized there had been a falling out with the cast. But Berk told Vanity Fair that he left because the cast had reached the end of their initial contact with Netflix.

"We thought we were done," he said. Brent will join the crew alongside Antoni Porowski, Jonathan Van Ness, Karamo Brown and Tan France. The new season is reportedly headed to production in Las Vegas this spring to help everyday people find their confidence and makeover their lives for them, Variety reported. Moreover, Brent is the founder of Jeremiah Brent Design and lifestyle brand Atrio. He rose to fame in 2011 when he worked as Rachel Zoe’s styling associate on “The Rachel Zoe Project." Alongside his husband, Berkus, the pair have collaborated on their line Living Spaces and co-host their shows “Nate & Jeremiah By Design,” “Nate & Jeremiah: Save My House” and “The Nate & Jeremiah Home Project.”

Watch our read our Salon Talk interview with Bobby Berk here:

Sara Ramírez will not return as Che for season three of “And Just Like That”

Big news for "Sex and the City" fans — Che Diaz isn't coming back. For good. The character, played by nonbinary actor Sara Ramírez, won't return to season three of the "SATC" spin-off "And Just Like That," Variety reported. Che, who was at the center of lead character Miranda Hobbes' (Cynthia Nixon) queer awakening in season one and eventual tumultuous relationship that ended recently in the show's second season, was met with intense backlash and relentless internet memes. According to sources, "AJLT" starts production for its third season later this year for a 2025 premiere on Max.

Outside of acting, Ramírez is a progressive activist and as of recently has been outspoken and supportive of a ceasefire in the Israel-Gaza war on their Instagram. There has been tabloid speculation that Ramírez was fired from "AJLT" because of their pro-Palestinian views, namely a post that stated “It’s wild how performative so many in Hollywood are. Even more performative than the last character I played.”

https://www.instagram.com/p/C2Kb7sNAClv/

Ramírez isn't the only member of the "AJLT" who has called for a ceasefire, Nixon, who ran for the Democrat primary for New York governor against former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, joined a hunger strike outside the White House to demand a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. Variety reported that Ramírez was not fired for their politics and Instagram posts. Sources said that Che's character arc came to an end in season two with the end of their relationship with Miranda. A spokesperson from Max declined to comment.