[syndicated profile] vox_feed

Posted by Benji Jones

An aerial view shows lush dark green tree cover rolling away to a blue horizon, but there are huge plumes of white smoke rising from it as several fires burn through the trees.
Fires ignited by people burn in the Amazon rainforest on September 4, 2024. | Michael Dantas/AFP via Getty Images

In 2021, more than 140 countries around the world promised to put an end to deforestation by the end of the decade. Those countries — including Brazil, Colombia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, all of which are heavily forested — acknowledged in their pledge a basic, undeniable fact: Forests provide critical services that we rely on, from producing oxygen to cooling the landscape

That pledge, just like similar promises made over the years, has so far failed to do much at all. 

While there’s some year-to-year variation, deforestation is going up, not down. And last year, the destruction reached new heights. New data from the University of Maryland, a leading authority on global forest loss, reveals that the tropics lost more than 6.7 million hectares (16.6 million acres) in 2024. That’s around the size of Panama and the largest extent of loss in at least the last two decades, the length of UMD’s record. 

!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if(r.contentWindow===a.source){var d=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";r.style.height=d}}}))}();

The analysis focused on the tropics because that’s where most deforestation, or deliberate forest clearing, occurs. Tropical forests, which center around the equator, are also global hotspots of animal diversity.  

The researchers linked the recent surge in deforestation to an increase in forest fires, as well as industrial agriculture. Unlike in temperate or boreal forests in North America and Europe, fires here are not a natural part of the ecosystem, according to Elizabeth Goldman, co-director of Global Forest Watch, a project run by the World Resources Institute, which published the findings along with UMD. Most of those fires were likely ignited by people to clear land for cattle and commercial crops such as soybeans, Goldman said. Once lit, those fires burn out of control “because of hot and dry conditions,” she said. 

Last year was the warmest on record. Rising temperatures and the wildfires they fuel are both clear signals of climate change. 

“The 2024 numbers must be a wake-up call to every country, every bank, every international business,” Goldman said in a press call last week. “Continuing down this path will devastate economies, people’s jobs and any chance of staving off climate change’s worst effects.”

But there’s not much of a reason to believe that the world will heed this wake-up call. 

Most of the big forest nations that promised to end deforestation by 2030 are experiencing more forest loss than they did when they made the pledge. The US, meanwhile, is moving in the wrong direction under President Donald Trump: While the country has few tropical forests, it’s attempting to supercharge climate-warming fossil fuels and upend the science needed to understand how tropical forests are changing. 

The lack of progress is frustrating, said Elsa Ordway, an ecologist and tropical forest expert at University of California Los Angeles who was not involved in the analysis. For many people, reports about forest loss seem to be just “background noise,” she said. “When we’re thinking about a planetary crisis that our entire species needs to confront and it’s being ignored, it’s incredibly disheartening,” Ordway said. “We need to be taking these trends very seriously.” 

And forest loss in the Amazon or central Africa isn’t just some distant problem with no bearing on peoples’ lives outside the tropics. Everyone depends on these forests — whether for the very real pharmaceutical drugs derived from jungle plants or for the carbon emissions they absorb, which helps slow the pace of warming. Our actions impact these forests too: Certain foods we buy in the supermarket are fueling this destruction. The No. 1 driver of deforestation in Brazil, for example, is clearing forests to raise cattle, some of which is exported as beef. (“Maybe don’t consume beef from Brazil,” Ordway says.)

The analysis did include a few bits of good news: The pace of deforestation in Indonesia, a heavily forested country, remains low, following years of devastating loss. While wildfires caused record-breaking forest loss in Bolivia last year, a newly established Indigenous territory in the country was able to keep fires at bay, according to WRI. “Supporting community-led management can have a real impact,” Ordway said. 

But the headline takeaway is, as it’s been for years now, bleak: The world’s tropical forests continue to fall. Will the story ever change?

Bon motto

May. 20th, 2025 11:37 pm
spamsink: (Default)
[personal profile] spamsink
Спросил я у ChatGPT (по-английски), дескать, девизы некоторых стран хорошо известны, тех же США или Бразилии, а с Россией как дела обстоят?

Не стал он галлюцинировать, изложил как на духу: был, вот, у РИ девиз - "Съ нами Богъ!", был и у СССР - "Пролетарии всех стран, соединяйтесь!", а у РФ - нету.

Ну хорошо, говорю, а исходя из текущей политики РФ, как внутренней, так и внешней, а также экономики и культуры, какая крылатая фраза, цитата или афоризм подошли бы в качестве девиза?

Ой, говорит, any answer will inevitably carry a degree of interpretation or satire.

Но предложил несколько, конечно. Один из предложенных вариантов был "Правда в силе", обыгрывая цитату из "Брата 2", другой - "The state is eternal; the people endure" (типа "Res publica longa, populus brevis", надо полагать), еще один - "Feared is better than loved" (оборванная цитата из Макиавелли).
[syndicated profile] lawyersgunsmoneyblog_feed

Posted by Scott Lemieux

“The public health situation was much better when mean life expectancy was 31 years” is the kind of Forbidden Knowledge that the Woke Establishment doesn’t want you to see:

I assume the Ivermectin people will be in touch to make sure he clarifies that it’s the one exception to the rule.

It’s the “subscribe” button that puts it over the top for me. I’m trying to imagine the person who 1)would pay to see this guy’s tweets and 2)hasn’t already been swindled out of any money that could theoretically be used to pay for it and…nope, just loud buzzing noises.

The post Checking in on the Intellectual Dark Web appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

Среда

May. 21st, 2025 05:46 am
silent_gluk: (pic#4742429)
[personal profile] silent_gluk
А сегодня среда, и с нами очередная старая фотография. Осень 2012 года, Москва, может быть, наш двор, а может быть, и нет. Кстати, как у вас осенью с краснолистными кленами? Мне они так редко попадаются! В основном у всех желтые листья. А когда-то встречались и красные, я помню (причем я не имею в виду красные клены, у которых листва даже летом красноватая).

The Mainstreaming of the Spy Genre…

May. 21st, 2025 01:14 am
[syndicated profile] lawyersgunsmoneyblog_feed

Posted by Robert Farley

Some interesting observations here:

In all the years of the Emmys, only two shows about espionage have ever won the Outstanding Drama Series award: Mission: Impossible in 1967 and 1968 (it was the 1960s) and Homeland in 2012 (we’d just killed Bin Laden). It’s not that the Television Academy lacked for spy series, from The Man from U.N.C.L.E. and Alias to The Hour and The Americans. But for some reason, Emmy voters pre-2000 seemed to prefer shows about everyday folks doing everyday jobs. From 1981 to 1999, there were only two years when the Outstanding Drama winner wasn’t about cops, lawyers, or doctors (and in the case of David E. Kelley’s Picket Fences, all three!). In the quarter-century since, the genres expanded to include crime shows (The SopranosBreaking Bad), political shows (The West WingThe Crown), and shows about the moral decay of the American character as incubated in Manhattan office towers (Mad MenSuccession). Yes, several spy series from this period produced Emmy winners in acting and writing — Matthew Rhys got Lead Actor in a Drama for The Americans; Abi Morgan won for writing The Hour — but in many cases, you could argue they deserved much more. We had to watch Victor Garber go Emmy-less for his Alias performance three years in a row. That damages a person!

I love conversations about how genres get mainstreamed, from Westerns to gangster flicks to metal to whatever else you can imagine. I suppose, though, that I’d never really thought about where the spy genre fit into the firmament of TV. The Mission: Impossible wins are interesting as historical artifact, but I guess maybe I find them even a little less surprising than Homeland’s win. Homeland was bad, y’all. Entertainingly bad for a while but good lord, not good.*

In terms of the best that the genre has to offer… I think a lot about rewatching both Sandbaggers and the Americans to see whether they live up to my memories, but they were very, very good. To my mind they represent the Respectable Poles of spy fiction, situated between the heroic and the bureaucratic. Too heroic and you get to James Bond, which has its place but is tiresome, while too bureaucratic…. well, I just love stories about bureaucracy. The show that’s on now that I’d place in or near this rank is Slow Horses, plus possibly the recently departed Andor…

Your thoughts are welcome.

*anyone who hunts down a glowing contemporary review of Homeland from the author risks an immediate and total ban.

The post The Mainstreaming of the Spy Genre… appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

(no subject)

May. 20th, 2025 08:47 pm
annageish: (Default)
[personal profile] annageish
1. The Mayor of NY Eric Adams was under the criminal investigation by the Justice Dept on corruption charges.
2. Adams made a deal with the Trump admin over immigrant arrests.
3. The charges against him were dropped.
4. Former Gov Andrew Cuomo announced his bid for the race to be the next NY Mayor (against Eric Adams).
5. The Justice Dept announced a criminal investigation into Cuomo
(over his testimony about managing the Covid pandemic).

Putin's Russia at its finest.
[syndicated profile] lawyersgunsmoneyblog_feed

Posted by Scott Lemieux

Roger Gregory’s concurrence in J.O.P. v. D.H.S. is very much worth reading for its explanation for why the Alien Enemies Act does not authorize any of Trump’s removal actions:

This is literally the Trump administration’s argument — invoking the AEA allows the government to ignore all previous binding agreements, making illegal removals legal by fiat. Which makes the fact that there’s no actual “invasion” within the meaning of the statute particularly important.

And then there’s the additional fact that many of the Venezuelan nationals being sent to torture prisons without due process were in the country legally and had no criminal records.

Does this seem like a man who is telling the truth?

Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong. -Deportation=sending ppl back home, not imprisoning them in a 3rd country -The US govt is among many sources of information that *at least* many aren't in gangs -There was no margarita -Abrego Garcia isn't a human trafficker -Nor a gang member

[image or embed]

— Emily L. Hauser (she/her) (@emilylhauser.bsky.social) May 20, 2025 at 12:59 PM

The post The transparent illegality of Trump’s AEA deportations and foreign imprisonments appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

[syndicated profile] lawyersgunsmoneyblog_feed

Posted by Scott Lemieux

I wish I was joking or even exaggerating:

Days after the Trump administration threatened to attempt to suspend habeas corpus in an effort to bulldoze due process protections for its mass deportation campaign, one key Cabinet member seems a bit confused about the scheme.

“What is habeas corpus?” Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire asked Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a committee hearing Tuesday.

“Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country, and suspend their right to—,” Noem responded, before a visibly alarmed Hassan intervened.

“Let me stop you,” the Democratic lawmaker interjected. “Excuse me, that is incorrect.”

“President Lincoln used it,” Noem insisted.

[…]

Hassan emphasized this point on Tuesday. “It has never been done without approval of Congress,” she said. “Even Abraham Lincoln got retroactive approval from Congress.”

Later in the hearing, however, Noem admitted that she was unaware of key aspects of this argument. Asked by Sen. Andy Kim if she knew where in the Constitution the suspension of habeas corpus was discussed, Noem replied: “I do not. Nope.”

My only regret from the exchange is that I wish Hassan had given her a little more rope to express her view that Lincoln was exercising his right of habeas corpus rather than ignoring a writ of habeas corpus after Ex Parte Merryman.

HASSAN: What is habeas corpus? NOEM: Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country HASSAN: That's incorrect

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) May 20, 2025 at 7:16 AM

Ideally, Trump would like every member of his cabinet to be as dumb, ignorant, and authoritarian as he is, and you have to say on that score you can’t dispute that he’s been mostly successful.

The post Kristi Noem thinks habeas corpus is the power to detain people arbitrarily appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

[syndicated profile] vox_feed

Posted by Ian Millhiser

People wave flags and signs including the trans pride flag and “We want to live free,” in front of the Supreme Court building on a cloudy day.
Transgender rights activists rally outside the Supreme Court. | Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images

There are no heroes in Libby v. Fecteau, a decision about an anti-trans lawmaker that the Supreme Court handed down on Tuesday. With only two justices publicly dissenting, the Court handed down a brief order temporarily lifting sanctions against that lawmaker.

The lawmaker at the heart of the case, Maine Republican Rep. Laurel Libby, was sanctioned by her colleagues for posting an unblurred picture of a transgender high school athlete, along with the student’s name and the name of her school, in order to protest against including transgender girls in women’s sports. 

The sanction those colleagues imposed on her could not possibly be constitutional: They effectively stripped her of her right to vote on legislation as a member of Maine’s House of Representatives, stripping Libby’s constituents of their representation in the state House. And Libby’s fellow lawmakers likely also violated her First Amendment rights in the process. 

As a legal matter, Libby closely resembles Bond v. Floyd (1966), a case brought by a Georgia state lawmaker who was not allowed to take his seat in the state legislature — ostensibly because his colleagues objected to his opposition to the Vietnam War. Bond held that the First Amendment “requires that legislators be given the widest latitude to express their views on issues of policy.”

To be sure, no moral comparisons can be drawn between the plaintiffs in Bond and Libby. Bond involved Rep. Julian Bond, a Black man and a prominent civil rights activist who was elected to the Georgia legislature just as Jim Crow was beginning to lose its grip on the South. Libby, by contrast, arises out of Libby’s decision to bully a high school student.

But the First Amendment protects offensive speech just as surely as it protects speech that is now widely viewed as prescient and wise. Indeed, nearly all First Amendment cases arise out of speech that someone in a position of power deemed offensive — why else would they have tried to censure or ban that speech?

After Libby posted the picture of the high school student on Facebook, Maine House Speaker Ryan Fecteau asked her to take it down due to concerns “that publicizing the student’s identity would threaten the student’s health and safety.” When Libby refused, the state House passed a resolution formally censuring her — which, under the Maine House’s rules, meant that Libby “may not be allowed to vote or speak” on the House floor until she apologizes for the conduct that resulted in her censure. Libby refuses to apologize, which means that her constituents effectively do not have representation in the state House, at least with respect to bills that receive a vote on the floor.

The Supreme Court’s order in the Libby case is very brief and does not explain why the justices decided to reinstate Libby’s floor privileges. Notably, however, none of the justices defended the state legislature’s decision to strip Libby of her voting rights.

The Court’s order includes a single line noting that Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, but Sotomayor did not explain why. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, meanwhile, penned a brief dissenting opinion which largely criticizes her colleagues for overusing the Court’s “shadow docket” — a mix of emergency motions and other matters that the Court decides without full briefing and oral argument. It was on this docket that Libby was heard.

As Jackson notes, the Court used to be exceedingly reluctant to rule in favor of parties that seek shadow docket relief — she quotes Justice Potter Stewart’s 1968 warning that such relief “should be used sparingly and only in the most critical and exigent circumstances.” And Jackson, who emerged as the Court’s most outspoken opponent of the shadow docket after she became a justice in 2022, is right that the Court’s practices have changed dramatically in recent years. 

Prior to the first Trump administration, Supreme Court decisions on the shadow docket were exceedingly rare outside of death penalty cases, where the justices often had to act right away to prevent an execution from moving forward before they could review the case.

But, regardless of whether the justices should have acted as quickly as they did — or, as Jackson suggests, waited until the lower courts had fully considered this case before stepping in — there’s little doubt that Libby should have prevailed eventually. Libby’s constituents have a right to representation, regardless what views their representative holds.

And, if lawmakers were allowed to strip their colleagues of their voting rights at will, there’s no guarantee that another legislature would not use that power to target elected officials who, like Bond, can more easily claim the moral high ground than Libby.

RIP George Wendt

May. 20th, 2025 07:57 pm
[syndicated profile] atrios_feed
I saw George, along with Stacey Keach and David Dukes, in this.

Oldheads might remember that "Atrios" was a misremembered character name from that play (one couldn't easily google things back then).  Antrios was the unseen artist who painted the white canvas that was the central source of friction for the 3 friends in that play.  In this performance, it was Stacey (Marc)  being enraged at David (Serge) for buying a ridiculous painting. George (Yvan) was the middle peacemaker.

A silly light 3 hander, mostly, but the ending always stuck with me, with angry Marc finally recognizing himself in the object of his rage:
Under the white clouds, snow is falling.
You can't see the white clouds, or the snow.
Or the cold, or the white glow of the earth.
A solitary man glides downhill on his skis.
The snow is falling.
It falls until the man disappears back into the
landscape.
My friend Serge, who's one of my oldest friends,
has bought a painting.
It's a canvas about five feet by four.
It represents a man who moves across a space
then disappears.

End Of The Elon Era

May. 20th, 2025 06:30 pm
[syndicated profile] atrios_feed
"DOGE" is still with us, but it does seem that co-president Musk no longer has the public-facing role he once did. That is good for my sanity, at least.

President Deals

May. 20th, 2025 05:30 pm
[syndicated profile] atrios_feed
I do think that even our finest foreign policy/affairs minds are always about 15 years behind where the rest of the world actually is.
Japan on Tuesday clarified its stance on U.S. tariffs, saying it wants all new levies put into place by the administration of President Donald Trump completely removed, confirming a hard-line position ahead of high-level negotiations that might be held later this week in Washington.

“As we have repeatedly stated, we find the series of U.S. tariff measures — including those on automobiles, auto parts, steel, aluminum, and reciprocal tariffs — extremely regrettable,” said Ryosei Akazawa, Japan’s chief tariff negotiator, at a news conference.

Trump Burger

May. 20th, 2025 07:31 pm
[syndicated profile] lawyersgunsmoneyblog_feed

Posted by Erik Loomis

I was amused by this Eater piece where someone went to Trump Burger in Texas, which is of course owned by an immigrant from Lebanon.

From Civil Rights-era lunch counter sit-ins to restaurant kitchens operated by immigrants across the country, food — its systems, histories, and cultural patterns — has always been political. Some restaurants, however, make it more evident than others.

Trump Burger, which loudly proclaims its support for President Donald Trump, has quickly become one of the most controversial fast-casual restaurants in Texas. What started as one politically charged burger joint in Bellville, Texas, in 2020 has since expanded to a chainlet across the region, bringing its unapologetically MAGA branding to cities like Flatonia, Texas; Kemah, Texas; and, most recently, West Houston on Chimney Rock Road.

Owner Roland Beainy, a Lebanese immigrant who says he opened the restaurant in support of Trump, has been candid with local media. Though his restaurants have no official affiliation with the president, Beainy has said he thinks Trump greatly improved the economy during his first presidency (spoiler: he didn’t) and hopes to collaborate with him one day. Not everyone, however, seems as enthusiastic. Even before opening its doors in May, Trump Burger’s Houston outpost was met with middle fingers from passing drivers, according to a Houston Chronicle report — a sign of the friction in a predominantly Democratic city. But Trump Burger isn’t trying to win everyone over. From the “Made in USA” logos plastered on the menu to burgers literally stamped with the Trump name, the restaurant makes its deference to the president (and a particular group of diners) resoundingly clear.

So, how does Trump Burger really stack up to the compelling burger options already in Space City? Eater Houston tried it so you don’t have to. Here’s the rundown.

It sounds like the food is extremely whatever, which doesn’t make it different than most burger chains. But here’s the rub:

Every Trump Burger location tries to outdo itself in nationalist and personality cult aesthetics. Though Houston’s exterior is more subdued and minimalist, the Kemah location features a stage for live music and cocktails. The Bellville location seems most over the top: Images of Trump dominate the space, with life-size posters alongside flags, slogans, and merchandise that blur the line between restaurant decor and propaganda. A particularly jarring image shows Trump raising his fist, bloodied ear and all, after surviving an alleged assassination attempt in 2024 — an image positioned not far from shelves stocked with Trump-branded mugs, hats, and koozies.

But for all the visual noise, the actual atmosphere can feel eerily subdued. As I walked in on a recent Sunday, the tension, likely combined with our nervousness, felt palpable. Here, the vibe wasn’t festive — it was stiff, uncertain, and uncomfortable, particularly for me, a woman of color. The other diners present avoided eye contact. Even the playlist, looping music videos on wall-mounted televisions, couldn’t inject life into the space. The most excitement I saw was among families toddling around with their kids, many wearing Trump memorabilia (a boy, no older than 7, donned the shirt that read “Daddy’s Home”). It was a stark contrast to the raucous, family-friendly energy you’d expect at most burger joints.

The sad thing about this is not that restaurant owners and patrons like Trump. I’ve been in breweries for example whne driving around the nation that are obviously Trumpy and it’s kind of weird. But there’s a whole other level from having your establishment being copaganda and it being festooned in Trump gear, including the buns. It’s just a sad state of affairs when people choose their dining options based on the politics of the owners and the branding as openly fascist. That has nothign to do with the food or even the politics, but because it’s just a dreary experience for all involved. No one is really just relaxing and having fun. Either you are so seething with hate that you come to this place or you feel like the enemy who just wants to leave.

It’s like right-wing students who take college courses in order to get their professors in trouble. What a pathetic and sad way to spend four years. Why would you do this?

The post Trump Burger appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

More on Democrats’ Unionbuster

May. 20th, 2025 06:31 pm
[syndicated profile] lawyersgunsmoneyblog_feed

Posted by Erik Loomis

Remember, Jared Polis sucks and should be excommunicated from the Democratic Party.

On Friday, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, vetoed a bill passed by the Democratic-controlled legislature that repealed the state’s sui generis right-to-work law. Colorado legislators had voted to pass the Worker Protection Act (SB25-005) by a 22-to-12 margin in the Senate and by 43-to-22 in the House, in both cases along party lines.

Existing Colorado labor law—the Labor Peace Act—was enacted in 1943 before the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act enabled states to pass right-to-work laws that curtailed unions’ ability to collect dues from all the workers they represented in collective bargaining. Colorado’s Labor Peace Act prefigured those right-to-work laws in several ways. Under its terms, once a majority of workers vote to form or join a union, it requires that union to win 75 percent of the workers’ votes in a second election to be able to collect dues from all the workers it represents once it has successfully bargained a contract with the employer.

The difficulty unions have in clearing that second bar—a hurdle unique to Colorado—explains in large part why the percentage of unionized Colorado workers is so low. Data from the Economic Policy Institute indicates that Colorado’s union density (7.7 percent in 2024) much more closely resembles that of right-to-work states (with an average of 6.2 percent in 2024) than non-right-to-work states (15.8 percent in 2024). Colorado is the only state with Democratic trifecta control of government to have such a law.

The bill Polis vetoed drew unanimous support from Democratic legislators, and from Colorado Worker Rights United, a statewide coalition of labor unions and worker centers. Given that vetoes occurring after the Colorado General Assembly’s session can’t be overridden, there isn’t an opportunity for legislators to nullify Polis’s decision.

“I believe there must be a high threshold of worker participation and approval to allow for bargaining over mandatory wage deduction. And SB 25-005 does not satisfy that threshold, which is why I am vetoing the bill,” Polis wrote in his veto letter.

This marks a sharp departure from the views Polis presented when he sought the Colorado AFL-CIO’s endorsement in 2018, at which time he positioned himself as an ally of working people set on strengthening the state’s labor movement.

The question is this–are there red lines to be a Democrat. For instance, I’d have a real hard time accepting someone as a Democrat who does not support gay marriage or legal abortion rights. But I feel there’s a lot of Democrats who think those rights are more important than union rights. That should not be. If you don’t have a class analysis, you aren’t really a Democrat. You don’t have to be a personal fan of unions, just like you don’t have to personally think abortion is a good thing. But you do need to support the basic legal rights that allow both unions and abortion to thrive. Jared Polis is a Democrat who hates working people. There’s no room for that. Go away rich boy.

The post More on Democrats’ Unionbuster appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

[syndicated profile] lawyersgunsmoneyblog_feed

Posted by Paul Campos

This of course is only the beginning:

Annual COVID-19 shots for healthy younger adults and children will no longer be routinely approved under a major new policy shift unveiled Tuesday by the Trump administration.

Top officials for the Food and Drug Administration laid out new requirements for access to yearly COVID shots, saying they’d continue to use a streamlined approach that would continue offering them to adults 65 and older as well as children and younger adults with at least one health problem that puts them at higher risk.

But the FDA framework urges companies to conduct large, lengthy studies before tweaked vaccines can be approved for healthier people. In a framework published Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, agency officials said the approach still could keep annual vaccinations available for between 100 million and 200 million people.

The upcoming changes raise questions for people who may still want a fall COVID-19 shot but don’t clearly fit into one of the categories.

“Is the pharmacist going to determine if you’re in a high-risk group?” asked Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “The only thing that can come of this will make vaccines less insurable and less available.”

One of the greatest achievements of medical science, that saved many millions of lives both in the US and around the world, is being undermined by the religious nutcase/kale smoothies cure cancer/the Holocaust didn’t happen crank synergy.

When asked hypothetically if he would vaccinate his children today for measles during a House hearing Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said “probably,” but added he doesn’t think people should be taking medical advice from him.

“My opinions about vaccines are irrelevant,” he said in response to the question from Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin during the House Appropriations Committee hearing. “I don’t want to seem like I’m being evasive, but I don’t think people should be taking medical advice from me.”

When pressed, he repeated he didn’t want to give advice to other people.

“But that’s kind of your jurisdiction, because CDC does give advice, right?” Pocan asked. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is under HHS.

“I think what we’re going to try to do is to lay out the pros and cons, the risks and benefits, accurately as we understand them, with replicable studies,” Kennedy replied.

Teach the controversy!

The post Bobby Brainworms says no Covid vaccine for you appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

Business As Usual

May. 20th, 2025 03:30 pm
[syndicated profile] atrios_feed
Specifics of the crypto bill, aside they shouldn't be cooperating on anything!
The Department of Justice charged Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver with assaulting federal law enforcement during a chaotic melee that erupted outside of an ICE detention facility in her home state of New Jersey, acting US Attorney Alina Habba said Monday.
I don't know how to convince DC consultant brains that "a party that won't even defend its own members is unlikely to defend 'me'" is a perfectly sensible conclusion for voters to come to.

You don't reach swing voters by finely calibrating your means testing regime, you reach them by not looking like fucking losers.
[syndicated profile] smbc_comics_feed

Posted by Zach Weinersmith



Click here to go see the bonus panel!

Hovertext:
Fortunately, world leaders will read this comic, see the error in their ways, and work to correc themselves at once.


Today's News:

Profile

scholar_vit: (Default)
scholar_vit

January 2019

S M T W T F S
  12345
678 9101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 21st, 2025 10:32 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
OSZAR »