plant lover, cookie monster, shoe fiend
19912 stories
·
21 followers

Rhetoric Without Reckoning

1 Share

In light of this, why is it only now that the silence in the American Jewish community over Gaza has at last broken? And what should those of us who were against the war on October 8th expect from those who have taken almost two years—in which we have seen entire families disappeared under the rubble, entire cities reduced to ghost towns, and now an entire civilian population wasting to the bone—to voice their concern?

The most generous explanation for what has taken these Jewish leaders so long is that many American Jews were shocked and horrified by the violence of the October 7th attacks, and subsequently felt it was their duty to stand shoulder to shoulder with Israeli society—95% of which supported the Israeli government’s war, declared in the name of defeating Hamas and freeing the hostages. But Israelis’ understandable grief was immediately sharpened into a monstrous call for revenge, which emanated directly from the Knesset. Mainstream American Jewry rushed to offer their unconditional solidarity and to take on the trauma of the October 7th attacks as their own, bolstered by a media echo chamber rife with misinformation, atrocity propaganda, and fearmongering. In the coming months, as the Israeli military flattened Gaza, American Jews remained stuck in the story of October 7th. They learned the names of every Israeli hostage, but nothing of Khalil Abu Yahia, Hind Rajab, Hossam Shabat, or Mohammed Abu al-Qumsan. Synagogues hosted speakers representing the 115 Israelis who lost both parents on October 7th, and sent solidarity delegations to the kibbutzim, while remaining willfully ignorant of the fact that doctors in Gaza had coined the term WCNSF, for “wounded child no surviving family,” due to the thousands of children they treated whose entire families had been killed. When information about the genocide did break through, it was brushed aside as blood libel and slander, the result of a scourge of rising antisemitism, on campuses and in the streets.

In part, mainstream American Jewish leaders have justified their refusal to face the facts of Gaza’s mass graves, barely functioning hospitals, and flattened universities via a dangerous, self-soothing Jewish exceptionalism—the belief that Jews are guided by a superior ethical code and that Israel as a Jewish state is, too. Speaking on For Heaven’s Sake in December 2023, Hartman declared, “I don’t believe . . . and nobody in Israel believes, that Israel’s targeting civilians. It’s not in our ethos. We know our army. We know our soldiers. That’s not what we do.” At that point, South Africa had detailed ample evidence to the contrary in their application to the International Court of Justice alleging genocide, including reports of summary executions of multiple members of a single family, the murders of unarmed civilians fleeing on designated “safe routes,” and the dropping of 2,000 pound “dumb” bombs which killed indiscriminately within a 1,000-foot radius. Hartman and his co-host Yossi Klein Halevi, both American émigrés to Israel, brushed off the indictment as antisemitism. Others acknowledged the damage but insisted it was a necessary cost of the war. Hartman and Klein Halevi’s colleague across the ocean, Hartman Institute President Yehuda Kurtzer, has made the case repeatedly since October 2023 that “Israel is fighting a just war based on a just cause.” In January 2024 he responded to American Jews growing uneasy with the carnage in Gaza by saying that he still believed there was no “moral imperative” to oppose the war and that he could not identify a clear “limit to the blood sacrifice we must demand or endure” in pursuing ends he believed in.

Watching the persistence of such arguments well into 2025, it’s hard not to conclude that the simplest reason why most American Jewish leaders didn’t speak out sooner is because they weren’t actually opposed to what was happening for most of the last 22 months. For Israel’s liberal defenders, the country’s show of dominance against Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran was necessary to restore Israeli deterrence against future attacks, even if it may have gone a bit too far. In May of this year, on his own Hartman podcast Identity/Crisis, Kurtzer discussed the destroyed buildings, the massacred families, and the campaign of starvation and concluded that he had not changed his opinion that Israel’s fight was just. And yet, where “I was willing to endure the costs to my enemies, to civilians, and even to my own moral fiber in that process,” he said, “I just am not willing to endure it anymore.” In other words, he is satisfied with the damage. Now that it’s done, it’s safe to be uncomfortable with it. In July, Rabbi Doug Kahn, executive director emerita of the San Francisco Jewish Community Relations Council, took a moment to praise Israel’s “brilliant strategic operation against Hezbollah and against Iran” as he implored the country to use its supposed military ingenuity to “find a way to end the humanitarian nightmare that exists in Gaza.”

All of this rhetoric betrays the clear hierarchy of the value of human life endemic to Zionism. Only the logic that Jewish death is unacceptable and Palestinian death is a tragic necessity can explain the way these leaders remained ensconced in a story about Jewish victimhood as Gaza burned. In fact, even within that very first week after October 7th, there was no way to tell a story exclusively about Jewish victimhood unless you simply did not value Palestinian lives. For one thing, over 200 Palestinians had already been killed in the West Bank in 2023, before the Hamas incursion took place. But for another, Israel’s retaliatory bombing began almost immediately, raining death on the neighborhoods of Gaza, while settler violence spread like wildfire across the West Bank. The Palestinian death toll far surpassed that of October 7th within a single week, hitting 2,300 people by October 15th. Early warnings from Palestinian analysts, journalists, and doctors, as well as genocide scholars, human rights organizations, and international bodies about where Israel’s campaign was headed were all ignored. Even now, as some admit aloud to the horrors they’ve long suppressed, most American Zionists frame the end to the war primarily in terms of the benefit to Israel. In articles and statements from conservative columnist Bret Stephens to the Reform movement, Israel’s self-interest and public image remain front and center, and harm to Palestinians remains a footnote.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
9 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Wood heater pollution is a silent killer. Here's where the smoke is worst - ABC News

1 Share

Every year the winter cold brings an ambient haze of wood heater smoke to the suburbs, streets and houses of southern Australia.

This smoke can aggravate asthma, divide neighbours and drive people inside.

Now, new modelling gives a clearer picture of its toll on the nation's health.

The Centre for Safe Air at the University of Tasmania estimates long-term exposure to particles in wood-heater smoke causes more than 720 premature deaths every year in Australia, which is more than the deaths attributable to the same type of emissions from the national fleet of 20 million vehicles, or from energy generation, or even bushfires.

Along with this figure, the Centre has built the first national map of wood-heater emissions and deaths attributable to these emissions, with a resolution that can pick out clusters of suburbs most at risk.

Cost-of-living pressures, power price hikes and a wood-heater sales boom during COVID may mean more houses are burning wood than ever before.

Meanwhile, Australians are increasingly aware the smoke is a risk to their health.

Neighbourly bust-ups over the issue appear to be on the rise.

Here's where the smoke is worst, and where long-term exposure is costing the most lives.

A national map of wood heater pollution

The Centre for Safe Air combined particulate pollution readings from around Australia with surveys of wood heater use to generate its national map of wood heater pollution.

Let's focus on the cities in the south-east corner of Australia, which has the highest concentration of wood heaters.

The map below shows total wood heater emissions by kilograms per year in 2015.

As you might expect, the wood smoke is generally thickest in regional areas.

Towns like Armidale in NSW or Devonport in Tasmania have well-documented smoke problems.

"In small communities where every second person has a wood heater, you do get that pall of smoke and it's really dense," said Fay Johnston, lead investigator at the centre.

But wood heater smoke is not solely a regional issue.

In fact, when we look at its public health impact, or how wood smoke affects the population as a whole, we find wood smoke causes more harm in capital cities than in regional areas.

How does wood smoke affect health?

Every morning, Lisa checks her neighbour's chimney for white smoke.

The young mother, who asked to remain anonymous, realised there was a wood-smoke problem soon after moving with her family to Sydney's Sutherland Shire.

"[The neighbour] runs the wood heater most weekday evenings and throughout the weekend, so we can't open our windows, can't access our backyard," she said.

"Our other neighbour says their cat smells of smoke."

She said she was forced to keep her toddler inside on bad smoke days, worried about his health.

When she politely raised the issue with the wood-burning neighbours, she said they responded defensively: "They said 'We've been doing this for 20 years and no-one else has complained.'"

Wood smoke contains tiny airborne particles that can be trapped in our lungs. Long-term exposure can cause heart and lung disease.

Short-term exposure can aggravate asthma or worsen pre-existing heart conditions.

Even a low background exposure to wood smoke can have a measurable public health impact.

Wood smoke a killer in biggest cities

Wood heaters are so polluting, it only takes a relatively small number of homes burning wood to expose millions of people in a city to pollution, said Professor Johnston from the Centre for Safe Air.

"You don't necessarily see or smell a thick blanket of smoke, but the fact it's increasing the background pollution every winter means we can measure the effect on the health of the population."

By combining this measured effect of wood smoke on health with the estimate of wood heater emissions in different parts of the country, the centre created a second national map, showing the public health impact of wood smoke.

The map below shows estimated earlier-than-expected deaths per 100,000 people due to exposure to wood-heater smoke. The top regions are in south-east Australia.

The public health impact of wood smoke squarely falls hardest on the relatively heavily populated cities, even though the concentration of wood smoke may be lower than in some regional towns.

And there's one city where the public health impact is greatest.

Perhaps surprisingly, given their cooler climates, it is not Hobart or Melbourne.

Which city has the most deaths from wood smoke?

A higher proportion of people die earlier in Lisa's home city of Sydney than expected due to wood-heater pollution than other parts of south-east Australia.

This is partly due to its topography, with the harbour and surrounding land forming a bowl that traps smoke.

"Our topography definitely lends itself to trapping air pollutants within the Sydney basin," said Peter Irga, an expert in air quality at the University of Technology Sydney.

"Other than Launceston, the other major cities don't have that basin topography."

Within this bowl, "middle suburbs" such as Parramatta or Marrickville have a combination of high population density, freestanding homes with chimneys, and access to relatively cheap firewood.

About 5 per cent of homes in Sydney own a wood heater, but the Centre for Safe Air's modelling suggests these relatively few emitters cause more than 300 earlier-than-expected deaths in the city every year.

"The modelled estimate of deaths attributable to wood heater particulate pollution are higher than those attributable to motor vehicle particulate pollution," Professor Johnston said.

"Wood heaters really punch above their weight when it comes to putting pollution into the atmosphere, relative to the benefit they give us in terms of heat.

"We pay a big price in air quality for that heat."

But these maps don't tell the full story. 

The modelling relies on air-quality measurement stations dotted around the country that don't capture the emissions for those directly downwind of wood heater chimneys.

It's here, at the very local scale, that smoke can be thickest.

And where there's smoke, there's often angry neighbours.

Neighbours clash over smoke pollution

Arabella Daniel, a Melbourne-based community organiser against wood smoke pollution, said it was "a neighbour against neighbour issue".

Ms Daniel, who once took legal action against her council in response to smoke coming from a neighbour's fire pit, runs the My Air Quality Australia Facebook page, which has 3,000 members.

"We've really had a surge in members in the last 12 months," she said.

About 10 per cent of households use wood heaters as their primary source of heat, but millions breathe the smoke these heaters produce.

It's this disparity that makes wood-heater smoke a prime source of neighbourly conflict.

Members of the Facebook group share stories of complaints to councils and heated arguments with neighbours.

"There's a lot of suffering. People are silent because to complain about wood smoke means you're dobbing in your neighbour," Ms Daniel said.

"People contact us silently, anonymously. They're in utter despair."

Members of the group who spoke to the ABC asked to remain anonymous.

Max in Thirroul, just south of Sydney, has sealed windows and doorways and installed air purifiers to protect his 11-year-old asthmatic son from wood smoke.

"Soon as it gets cold, around 4pm, the wood smoke becomes so bad you can't go outside."

He said his air-quality monitors regularly clocked particulate readings of more than 50 micrograms per cubic meter, which was considered unhealthy with prolonged exposure.

Amber, in Canberra, fell out with neighbours over wood smoke she said was giving her and her family sinus headaches.

"We were initially really good friends with them … Our whole roof is covered in soot from their chimney."

Several members feared a complaint would lead to their neighbour burning more wood — a practice known in the group as "revenge burning".

Many said complaints to local and state governments had gone nowhere.

These were common stories, Professor Johnston from the Centre for Safe Air said.

"It's a really knotty neighbourhood problem for which we don't have particularly good tools."

Wood smoke pollution was the responsibility of local councils, which were either reluctant to deal with the problem or not resourced to police chimney smoke, she said.

"It really does arouse passions. There's a strong love of wood heaters and a belief in the right to light your own fire."

Wood heater sales (which don't include open fireplaces, fire pits, pizza ovens or other outdoor wood-burners) increased 40 per cent between 2008 and 2021, according to industry group, the Home Heating Association.

Sales dropped after the pandemic, but there's no sign of a long-term decline.

Dr Irga from UTS said cost-of-living pressures and higher electricity prices were driving more Australians to burn wood for heat, including — in some cases — toxic construction materials.

Meanwhile, new air quality monitoring and mapping technologies are making wood smoke harder to ignore.

Keeping track of wood smoke

On July 6, 2025, a combination of cold and calm weekend weather in Melbourne saw wood smoke emissions spike in some areas of the city.

Loading

The night-time event was captured by a relatively new network of low-cost, real-time air quality monitors, many of them privately owned by households.

Called "Purple Air", the data from these monitors is shared to a publicly accessible online database.

On July 6, around 7:30pm, Purple Air sensors around Melbourne showed levels of particulate pollution considered unhealthy for sensitive groups, even for short-term exposure.

As the night wore on, pollution readings peaked. Heater-owners preparing for bed often close heater vents to stop oxygen flow, leading to incomplete combustion causing wood to smoulder, and produces large amounts of smoke that spreads into the surrounding properties.

The pollution spike was also visible on Google Maps, which introduced an air quality overlay this year based on data from government monitoring stations.

New maps may be helping some groups like My Air Quality Australia keep tabs on pollution, but there's little sign they're changing attitudes more widely.

Surveys show Australians are fairly relaxed about wood smoke, despite having one of the highest asthma rates in the world.

Health bodies such as Asthma Australia and the Australian Medical Assocation want state and territory governments to ban new wood heater installs and phase out the existing ones in residential areas.

But governments appear reluctant to impose such a ban.

On Facebook pages like My Air Quality Australia, there's a mounting sense of outrage.

Even as Australia leads the world in rooftop solar uptake, many rooftops continue to host a much less advanced technology: the smoky chimney.

After the July 6 pollution spike, one user observed that about 10 per cent of the 5 million people who live in Melbourne suffer from asthma, which is aggravated by wood smoke.

"That's 500,000 people and it still feels like no-one cares. How is that even possible?"

Editor's note 1/8/25: Reference to Ms Daniel's background as a smoke pollution campaigner has been updated in light of more information.

Editor's note 6/8/25: Reference to deaths attributable to traffic pollution has been updated to clarify the estimate relates to particulate traffic pollution. Vehicles also emit NOx and other gases, which, combined with vehicle particulate pollution, are estimated to account for more premature deaths than wood-heater smoke pollution.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
17 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Antibody drug triggers 'amazing' tumor disappearance in small trial | STAT

1 Share

In a small study, an engineered antibody showed “amazing” promise in countering metastatic cancer.

That is, according to a Phase 1 clinical trial published Thursday in Cancer Cell. Researchers directly injected the drug, which stimulates the immune system to attack cancer cells, into 12 patients’ tumors. Six of the patients had significant tumor reduction even in non-injected sites, with two experiencing complete remission. The research could lay the groundwork for new treatments for the most advanced cancer patients.

“Seeing this in humans is really great news,” said Katelyn Byrne, a cancer biologist at Oregon Health and State University who was not involved in the study. “Especially for patients where we don’t have any options on the table, to be able to put this on the table now — it’s amazing.” 

STAT+

Already have an account? Log in

View All Plans

To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

Subscribe
Read the whole story
sarcozona
18 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Online testosterone improved my life — and could have killed me | STAT

1 Share

Last year, I joined the millions of American men now on testosterone therapy — a treatment whose use has quietly tripled over the past two decades, often at doses far above Endocrine Society guidelines.

Within weeks, I felt younger, stronger, and sharper. But within months, I was at serious risk of right-heart failure.

I didn’t come to testosterone casually. In 2022, I had surgery for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension — six hours on the table with my body cold and bloodless. Afterward, my oxygen saturations crept up from a pre-op 83% to about 94%-95%, which is close to normal, but my energy lagged. I’d seen so many men my age look younger, move better, and swear they “felt like themselves again” after starting testosterone. I wanted in.

The first clinic I visited promised to raise my testosterone from its very low 100 ng/dL to 1,200 — well above the normal range of 300-800 for healthy men, and far above the approximately 400-500 that’s typical for men my age. I passed.

Instead, I found an online provider who, after a brief video consult, prescribed 26 milligrams of testosterone daily. For context, the human body naturally produces the equivalent of about 4-7 mg per day. The Endocrine Society generally recommends replacement doses of 75-100 mg weekly for injections — not 182 mg weekly, which is what I was on.

With an M.D. and Ph.D. to my name, I thought I was pretty smart. I typically do literature searches for my patients.  But I didn’t catch the magnitude of that difference right away. I knew the numbers, but I didn’t stop to examine them. I assumed that a clinic — any clinic — would base its protocols on solid evidence. If I, with access to an academic medical library and decades of training, could miss this, I can only imagine how easily someone without that background could keep going, unaware of the risk.

Still, I can’t pretend I didn’t love it. A week in, I had more energy. By a month, my wife said I was less irritable. I couldn’t wait to lift weights, and within three months, my patients were commenting on how “stacked” I looked. Testosterone fills muscles with glycogen and water, increasing size even before the first curl. My fat seemed to melt away, replaced with muscle. I gained 10 pounds of lean mass in a few months — results I’d never achieved before.

But four months in, the warning signs appeared. My hematocrit, already slightly elevated at 48% post-lung surgery, shot up to 59.8%. Blood that thick strains the heart, especially the right side, which pumps through the lungs’ fragile vessels. Above 54%, pulmonary vascular resistance doesn’t just increase — it spikes. I’d been in right-heart failure three years earlier. I knew what that road looked like.

When I told my online prescriber, they congratulated me for having “more oxygen-carrying capacity.” My local doctors — cardiology, pulmonology, internal medicine — had no strong opinions. It wasn’t their prescription, so it wasn’t their problem.

I knew what I had to do. I stopped the testosterone.

Withdrawal was educational in its own right. I revisited the hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis — the communication loop that starts in the brain and ends in the testes. The hypothalamus sends signals to the pituitary, which then tells the Leydig cells to make testosterone. That hormone’s reach extends far beyond sex drive and muscle mass. It influences endorphins, the brain’s built-in opioids that shape pleasure and pain; it acts on GABA receptors that quiet the nervous system; and it helps regulate mood, energy, and even subtle aspects of perception. 

I also discovered evidence that testosterone may have personal benefits for me beyond mood and muscle. Some studies indicate that testosterone may modulate pulmonary vascular tone and potentially impact vascular remodeling — a finding that may be especially relevant given my history of pulmonary hypertension.

After a month off, I had an important event coming up. I injected about a third of my old daily dose the day before. The next morning, I looked in the mirror and saw a confident, healthy-looking man. The day before, the reflection had been a pale, skinny version of my high-school self.

That small experiment deepened my respect for the hormone — and my unease about how casually it’s prescribed today. Yes, testosterone can improve quality of life, muscle mass, bone density, and even cardiac function in some men. But those benefits exist alongside real risks, particularly when doses are set far above physiologic replacement and hematocrit isn’t monitored closely.

Testosterone therapy has moved from bodybuilding gyms into mainstream medicine — often through retail clinics and online platforms where dose escalation is common, follow-up is thin, and lab work is infrequent. From 2000 to 2020, U.S. prescriptions more than tripled. By 2023, global testosterone sales had reached nearly $2 billion annually. Yet public discussion is almost nonexistent. Men will freely say they’re on Ozempic or Wegovy; few admit to injecting testosterone, perhaps because of the cultural baggage around masculinity and performance enhancement.

My story is a cautionary tale — but I had the training and resources to notice the danger and stop. Without that, I might have pushed on, convinced I was getting healthier, even as I was drifting toward another hospitalization. That’s why this conversation matters: not to scare men away from testosterone, but to make sure the safety nets — appropriate dosing, evidence-based guidelines, and routine monitoring — are there to catch them before it’s too late.

Jeffrey T. Junig, M.D., Ph.D., is triple board-certified in psychiatry, addiction medicine, and anesthesiology.

STAT’s coverage of health challenges facing men and boys is supported by Rise Together, a donor advised fund sponsored and administered by National Philanthropic Trust and established by Richard Reeves, founding president of the American Institute for Boys and Men; and by the Boston Foundation. Our financial supporters are not involved in any decisions about our journalism.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
18 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Germany’s pensions crisis: can €10 a month change how people invest?

1 Comment
JavaScript is disabled in your browser.

Please enable JavaScript to proceed.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 day ago
reply
If this is real, then the government pension fund should be investing in equities and smoothing out the timing and individual stock picking risks. Telling individuals to figure out investing doesn’t work for most people! And between investing and the fees they end up paying for investment instruments or their management, they may not actually come out ahead.

And in the era of climate change? The next 50 years will be *nothing* like the last and a lot of very serious economic researchers expect enormous economic contraction.
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

NJ warns PATH, Light Rail riders of possible measles exposure - Gothamist

1 Share

New Jersey health officials are asking transit riders to be wary of potential exposure to measles after an infected rider rode the rails last week.

The state department of health says that a Hudson County resident with a confirmed case of measles rode the PATH train and Light Rail between August 13 and 15. Officials urged riders to make certain they have received their measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) shots, the department says, and stay vigilant for the symptoms of measles.

Those symptoms include high fever, cough, red eyes, a runny nose, and a distinctive rash which appears a few days after symptoms begin, usually beginning with red spots at the hairline. But measles symptoms may not appear for 10 or 14 days after exposure .

The person with measles rode during morning and evening commute hours on the three days they used public transit. They took the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail, specifically using the 8th Street station and also rode PATH Newark - World Trade Center Line and spent time at Exchange Place Station in Jersey City.

Though New Jersey does not yet have an official measles outbreak, other states across the country are seeing a recent surge in the virus which can be spread when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks, releasing tiny droplets into the air.

Measles was declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000, but many Americans began opting out of vaccinations, based on medically dubious claims about their potential side effects.

The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health reports in 2025 so far there have been 1,378 cases more than any year since 1992. Measles can cause ear infections, diarrhea and pneumonia, according to the school, and in severe cases can result in brain damage and death.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
2 days ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories