News from the USA, United States of America

[Chandelier]

'Punching down': Comedian Jon Stewart under fire as mockery falls flat with progressives

www.rawstory.com

400-word article.

AI Summary

• Jon Stewart faced backlash after joking on The Weekly Show about people who still wear masks in progressive workplaces.
• Critics accused him of “punching down” at COVID-cautious and medically vulnerable people.
• Disabled individuals, caregivers, and Long COVID advocates said masking is a necessary health precaution, not a joke.
• Commentators argued that asking why someone masks is invasive and dismissive of disability and chronic illness.
• Stewart was also accused of hypocrisy, given his strong advocacy for 9/11 first responders suffering long-term health effects.

 

[rvallee]

Sometimes I wonder if after all this messaging rejoicing the good news of how "only" vulnerable people were dying of COVID has led to most people just assuming that COVID killed everyone who was vulnerable and therefore there aren't any left.

Which, ooof. But also years of messaging promoting infections as good for health might do that all by itself. In combination, though, yikes.

 

[V.R.T.]

Sometimes I wonder if after all this messaging rejoicing the good news of how "only" vulnerable people were dying of COVID has led to most people just assuming that COVID killed everyone who was vulnerable and therefore there aren't any left.

Which, ooof. But also years of messaging promoting infections as good for health might do that all by itself. In combination, though, yikes.

I keep seeing people saying locking down to protect the vunerable was a mistake. Because people think only ill and disabled people died or got really sick.

[*The media and governments during the lockdowns] were saying everyone who died who wasn't elderly had 'pre existing conditions'. But when you looked even things like depression counted, so anyone could have pre existing conditions. In The Wire, they call this kind of figure manipulation 'juking the stats'.

*Used to read 'they'. Edited for clarity.

 

[rvallee]

They were saying everyone who died who wasn't elderly had 'pre existing conditions'. But when you looked even things like depression counted, so anyone could have pre existing conditions. In The Wire, they call this kind of figure manipulation 'juking the stats'.

It's not a perception that can be fully controlled or managed, but it seems that there is a huge problem with how people understand "pre-existing conditions" as basically "were going to die soon anyway", rather than literally anything that can be diagnosed, including things like relatively benign asthma and so on, which amounts to something like 1/3 of the population in most countries.

It takes a very close reading of the news to know better, while most people only ever see bits and pieces and so missed the context entirely. Because of course that perception was thoroughly abused to hint strongly that it was all fine. Many big problems fall in this category, where similar things are equated for a purpose, but the comparison sticks for entirely different ones, like how "infections are good for you" was meant (by most MDs anyway) to only apply to some viruses, but even then the whole "it's just the flu" mess. Just like "hey, the flu and other common infections also trigger chronic disabling health problems that can't be treated so let's keep ignoring it all, yeeehaw!"

 

[DHagen]

It takes a very close reading of the news to know better, while most people only ever see bits and pieces and so missed the context entirely. Because of course that perception was thoroughly abused to hint strongly that it was all fine. Many big problems fall in this category, where similar things are equated for a purpose, but the comparison sticks for entirely different ones, like how "infections are good for you" was meant (by most MDs anyway) to only apply to some viruses, but even then the whole "it's just the flu" mess. Just like "hey, the flu and other common infections also trigger chronic disabling health problems that can't be treated so let's keep ignoring it all, yeeehaw!"

As with so much else in this world, I think the essential problem is that people do not want to be bothered, in any sense of the word. The only course of action that is acceptable is that which is understood to preserve or restore comfort; the logic which allows this is essentially irrelevant. They want to not feel bad - they do not want to do anything, that would require effort and inconvenience, so any line of reasoning that will allow them to take this course of action will be accepted as the default. The only way to break through this is to create the perception that doing nothing will bring a higher personal cost in the immediate future than taking action, which usually requires public shaming. Unfortunately, once someone realizes that divesting themselves of shame, empathy, and even reason brings less obviously negative immediate consequences (and may even bring immediate rewards) than taking action (like wearing a mask) would, it becomes all but impossible to persuade them to reconsider.
I don't have any solution for this. People are awful.

 

[Trish]

The only way to break through this is to create the perception that doing nothing will bring a higher personal cost in the immediate future than taking action, which usually requires public shaming. Unfortunately, once someone realizes that divesting themselves of shame, empathy, and even reason brings less obviously negative immediate consequences (and may even bring immediate rewards) than taking action (like wearing a mask) would, it becomes all but impossible to persuade them to reconsider.
I don't have any solution for this. People are awful.

That's a very bleak view of humanity. I prefer to see it as some people are awful and have power over others who they misinform and/or keep in ignorance for their own ends. I think most people are decent but ill informed and struggle to know who to believe.

 

[Sly Saint]

Trump 2.0 is dismantling American science. Here's what's at stake, according to researchers​

From beginning to end, 2025 was a year of devastation for scientists in the United States.

January saw the abrupt suspension of key operations across the National Institutes of Health, not only disrupting clinical trials and other in-progress studies but stalling grant reviews and other activities necessary to conduct research. Around the same time, the Trump administration issued executive orders declaring there are only two sexes and ending DEI programs. The Trump administration also removed public data and analysis tools related to health disparities, climate change and environmental justice, among other databases.
February and March saw a steep undercutting of federal support for the infrastructure crucial to conducting research as well as the withholding of federal funding from several universities.

And over the course of the following months, billions of dollars of grants supporting research projects across disciplines, institutions and states were terminated. These include funding already spent on in-progress studies that have been forced to end before completion. Federal agencies, including NASA, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Agency for International Development have been downsized or dismantled altogether.

The Conversation asked researchers from a range of fields to share how the Trump administration’s science funding cuts have affected them. All describe the significant losses they and their communities have experienced. But many also voice their determination to continue doing work they believe is crucial to a healthier, safer and more fair society.

MSN

 

[Chandelier]

The silent struggle of Long COVID patients in Nevada - The Nevada Independent

One Sparks resident says Long COVID has led to everything from fatigue and an 85-pound weight loss to the inability to enjoy a cup of coffee. Nevadans have fewer options than those in other states to get help.

thenevadaindependent.com

1600-word & reader-funded article.

 

[Dolphin]

Director of NIH neurological disorders institute is ousted, adding to leadership churn

Walter Koroshetz, director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, will soon be leaving his role, STAT has learned. His departure

www.statnews.com

Director of NIH neurological disorders institute is ousted, adding to leadership churn​

Agency declines to reappoint Walter Koroshetz, who has led NINDS since 2015​

Medscape Medical News:

"Long-Time NINDS Director Walter Koroshetz Terminated"

Long-Time NINDS Director Walter Koroshetz Terminated

After a decade leading NIH’s neurologic research arm, NINDS Director Walter Koroshetz was abruptly terminated — 1 day after Christmas.

www.medscape.com

*National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke