I woke up from surgery groggy, with three minuscule incisions in my abdomen and huge peace of mind. I’d just had my fallopian tubes laparoscopically removed, as it’s the best—and possibly only—defense against ovarian cancer, which, though rare, is the most lethal gynecological cancer there is.

There is no detection method for ovarian cancer (a common misunderstanding is that it’s the pap smear, but that’s for cervical cancer). That’s largely because of something discovered relatively recently: About 80% of the time, cancer of the ovaries forms in the fallopian tubes, which are not easily reached or biopsied. So the cancer is not found until it spreads beyond the tubes, by which point it has typically reached a later stage and is harder to treat, with cure rates as low as 15%. 

The cancer and its pre-cancer lesions are also not detectable through blood tests. 

I myself had no idea about any of this until 2023, when I wrote about the Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance (OCRA) making sweeping recommendations: that all women get genetically tested to know their risk of the disease, and that all women, regardless of their risk factor, consider having what’s called an opportunistic salpingectomy—the prophylactic removal of fallopian tubes if and when they are already having another abdominal surgery.

The strategy—endorsed by the American College of Obstetrics & Gynecology since 2015—was believed to cut down the risk of ovarian cancer by up to 60%. It was adopted as a wide recommendation after a sobering U.K.-based clinical trial followed 200,000 women for more than 20 years and found that screening and symptom awareness do not save lives.

As a breast cancer survivor, the idea of ovarian cancer possibly hanging out in my fallopian tubes was haunting. So when I had the opportunity to get them removed during a recent minor abdominal surgery, I seized it. 

Recovery from the anesthesia—along with incision-site soreness and uncomfortable bloating from the gas the surgeon pumped into my belly so she could see her way around—slowed me down for about a week, while waiting for the internal healing kept me out of the gym for a month. But now I feel incredibly relieved about my decision. 

That’s especially true in light of major new findings out of Vancouver, British Columbia, which started a public campaign about prophylactic salpingectomy in 2010 and has been following about 80,000 people—half who opted for the procedure and half who did not—ever since. The results, announced in March 2024 at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research and again at a recent annual meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, were major: that salpingectomy cuts down one’s risk of ovarian cancer by a staggering 80%.  

“There’s very little in medicine that gets you an 80% risk reduction,” says study lead Gillian Hanley, associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of British Columbia. “It’s remarkable.”

So why don’t more women know about it?

The effort to raise awareness of opportunistic salpingectomy 

Dr. Rebecca Stone, a gynecologic oncologist at Johns Hopkins Medicine, is a leader in the effort to get the word out about preventing ovarian cancer—diagnosed in about 20,000 Americans a year and killing over 12,000. Seeing so many patients die was something that kept the surgeon awake at night. 

She began to truly make opportunistic salpingectomy her mission starting in 2023, when the dismal U.K. trial results prompted organizations like OCRA to make headlines with the new recommendations.

“When all that came out, I was like, ‘Oh, great. Thank God.’ But I was also like, ‘We’re not ready yet,’” Stone tells Fortune.  

That’s because there was no infrastructure around making salpingectomy the norm—no educational materials for women to leaf through while waiting at the gynecologist’s office, no awareness among non-gynecological (and even some gynecological) surgeons about offering the procedure, and not even any billing codes that would make insurance coverage for the procedure possible.

Around the same time, Stone was asked to join a meeting of the scientific advisory board for Break Through Cancer, a collaborative effort among top researchers and physicians to prevent and cure the deadliest cancers. Someone asked her if she knew how to cure ovarian cancer. 

“I was like, ‘Believe me, I’ve been trying. Sometimes we get lucky, but most of the time I bury my patients,’” she says. “And then I said, ‘But we do know how to prevent it.’” At that, she recalls, “People’s hair blew back.” Not even the top cancer minds on the call had heard about the effectiveness of salpingectomy.

That call led to the creation of a new Break Through Cancer initiative, Intercepting Ovarian Cancer, which aims to both improve detection of fallopian tube pre-cancers and to expand salpingectomy as a prevention tool within the general population. Stone has already succeeded in working with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to create specific billing codes for the procedure, and is now gearing up to launch the Outsmart Ovarian Cancer Campaign with Memorial Sloan Kettering gynecologic surgeon Dr. Kara Long.

Courtesy of Break Through Cancer

“Remember when smoking cessation was a cancer prevention strategy that people got behind? The billboards and advertisements? That is, I think, what we need here,” says cancer biologist Tyler Jacks, Break Through Cancer’s president. 

“This is a systemic problem that will take true cultural change within the medical community and beyond to solve,” adds OCRA president and CEO Audra Moran about the slow adoption of salpingectomy. “We know it’s not being adopted as widely as it could be.”

Indeed, there are still barriers to the effort—including how to present the issue with sensitivity in some communities of color, which carry the historic U.S. burden of coercive sterilization; convincing some surgeons that there is enough evidence behind it, as all of it up until the Vancouver findings has been based on historic data; and also the idea of surgical prevention itself, which can be off-putting. 

But there is another surgical prevention embraced as the norm, Stone is quick to point out. “It’s called a colonoscopy,” she says, “And the risks of the colonoscopy are much higher,” including the possibility of bowel perforation. “And then, guess what? You have to do it all again in five or 10 years.” Salpingectomy, she argues, is a one-and-done, and is “much more cost-saving” in the long run.  

Plus, notes Hanley, “of course, we are not suggesting that every person with fallopian tubes needs to go and have them surgically removed. That will never be the recommendation. It is a surgical intervention, and surgery is not without risk.” But she does see the approach as “exciting,” as, “for so many years, we have not had a lot of cancer prevention that was not lifestyle-focused—revolving around diet, exercise, environmental exposure to carcinogens, and things that are really challenging to change.”

Is salpingectomy right for you?

Anyone finished having children or not planning on having children who is already going to have another abdominal surgery—appendectomy, gallbladder removal, hysterectomy, for example—is a candidate for opportunistic salpingectomy.

“What we’re really saying is that if you are already having some kind of a surgery, because of some other benign disease that you’re treating, and the surgeon is there already, we have really compelling evidence that adding this to another procedure does not change your risks at all compared to what you would already risk with surgery,” Hanley says.

If you’re not having another surgery and really want your fallopian tubes removed anyway, you could opt to do it as a route to sterilization (instead of tubal ligation), which it technically is.

Women at high risk—such as the less than 1% who have a genetic mutation such as BRCA1 or BRCA2, which raises the risk of ovarian cancer from 1% to 5%—“should be recommended a stand-alone salpingectomy for risk reduction,” says Stone. They might also consider an oophorectomy—removal of the ovaries—depending on their age, she adds.

While the long-term risks of salpingectomy, if any, are not known, there are no short-term risks, as fallopian tubes don’t serve any known purpose beyond reproduction—as opposed to the ovaries, which still produce important hormones likely well beyond menopause, she says.

I opted to keep my ovaries. But these decisions are, of course, highly personal. I never thought I’d be someone to get elective surgery in the first place, but the statistics convinced me. 

As for Stone, she says she has spent too many hours in the operating room trying to save patients “with this horrible disease” to give up on awareness.  

“I am going to spend every minute of my remaining life to get this information out there,” she says, “and to reach as many people as humanly possible.”

More on women and cancer:

• 3 in 4 women are skipping a routine appointment and putting themselves at higher risk for cancer
• With ovarian cancer, there’s no such thing as early detection. Here’s what to learn from tennis great Chris Evert’s battle with the disease
• Women will now be notified about breast density after mammograms. Here’s what should happen next

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

Sleep is commonly elusive. Whether you’re one of the roughly 18% of Americans who struggles with insomnia or often wake up tired from poor-quality sleep, you may be familiar with common recommendations to improve sleep: Limit screen time before bed, keep your room cold and dark, and create a wind-down routine. While those tips can be helpful, it turns out what you do during the day—specifically what you eat, and not just before bed—could play a pivotal role in boosting your sleep quality.

A small new study led by researchers at UChicago Medicine and Columbia University found that eating more fruits and vegetables during the day was associated with better sleep at night.

“Dietary modifications could be a new, natural, and cost-effective approach to achieve better sleep,” said co-senior author Esra Tasali, MD, director of the UChicago Sleep Center in a UChicago write-up on the study.

While research already shows that sleep can impact what you eat, with poor sleep causing people to reach for unhealthier foods higher in fat and sugar, the relationship appears to go both ways. Previous research has associated high fruit and vegetable intakes with better overall sleep quality—but this new study is the first to establish a connection between daytime dietary choices and sleep quality that same night.

The study looked at self-reported food consumption and sleep data from a wrist monitor of 34 healthy U.S. adults ages 21 to 35 who regularly sleep seven to nine hours a night. They were specifically looking at “sleep fragmentation,” which refers to how often someone wakes up or shifts from deep to light sleep throughout the night.

Researchers found that increasing dietary intake of fruits and vegetables from zero to five cups per day—the Centers for Disease Control’s recommendation—was associated with 16% better sleep quality, with participants experiencing deeper, less interrupted sleep that same night. A similar association was found for eating more complex carbohydrates like whole grains as well. Those who ate higher intakes of red and processed meat, however, had more disrupted sleep. 

“People are always asking me if there are things they can eat that will help them sleep better,” coauthor Marie-Pierre St-Onge, PhD, director of the Center of Excellence for Sleep & Circadian Research at Columbia, told UChicago. “Small changes can impact sleep. That is empowering—better rest is within your control.”

How to increase your fruit and vegetable intake

The CDC estimates that only 12% of U.S. adults meet the recommended 1.5 to 2 cups of fruits per day, and only 10% are hitting the recommended 2 to 3 cups of vegetables per day. But it can be tricky to visualize what exactly that might look like if you’re not measuring out a cup of berries.

The Department of Agriculture says the following are all equivalent to one cup (so double it for fruits and double or triple it for vegetables):

• 1 large banana
• ½ cup of dried fruit
• 32 red seedless grapes
• 1 cup of 100% juice
• 12 baby carrots
• 1 large sweet potato
• 2 cups of raw spinach
• 1 cup of cooked black beans

If you’re struggling to up your fruit, veggie, and complex carbohydrate intake, here are tips nutrition experts shared with Fortune:

• Swap out animal proteins for plant-based ones, such as chickpeas, lentils, or beans, in meals like curries or stews.
• Put more beans and corn into your favorite chili.
• Fill half your plate with vegetables, or try to add one extra serving of vegetables to every meal.
• Swap whole grains for refined carbohydrates, like bulgur or barley in place of white rice, or whole-grain bread for white bread, for example.

For more on sleep:

• Here’s why more Americans are opting for a ‘sleep divorce’
• This workout mistake could hurt your sleep and make you feel worse
• Night owls tend to have more health risks than early birds—including cognitive decline, new study finds
• Meet ‘cognitive shuffling,’ the emerging strategy for better sleep

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

Loneliness was declared a public health epidemic just two years ago, with then-U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy citing links to increased risk of heart disease, depression, cognitive decline, dementia, and early mortality.

But now come findings that could challenge that—specifically, the connection to early mortality, which had come out of a body of research including a 2015 meta-analysis and another from 2018. 

The new international study, led by researchers at the University of Waterloo’s School of Public Health Sciences and published in the Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, has found that loneliness, while common among older adults receiving home care, is not associated with an increased risk of death.

“Our findings suggest that loneliness may not independently increase the risk of death after controlling for other health risk factors among older adults in home care,” said lead author Bonaventure Egbujie, a professor in Waterloo’s School of Public Health Sciences, in a news release. “This contradicts much of the existing literature based on the general population.”

For the latest study, researchers analyzed data from more than 380,000 home care recipients aged 65 and older in Canada, Finland, and New Zealand. “Home care recipients are a particularly important population to consider because they may be especially vulnerable to adverse effects of loneliness,” the study authors write. “Mobility problems, sensory impairments, and complex health needs may limit their engagement in the community, leaving them relatively isolated in their homes.”

But what researchers found was that lonely individuals actually had a lower risk of dying within one year compared to their non-lonely counterparts (after adjusting for health conditions, age, and other risk factors).

Still, said senior study author John Hirdes, a professor in Waterloo’s School of Public Health Sciences, that doesn’t mean it isn’t still a serious health concern.

“Loneliness is a serious threat to psychological well-being,” Hirdes said in the news release. “The mental health consequences of loneliness make it an important priority for public health, even if loneliness doesn’t kill you.”

In the new research, loneliness prevalence—meaning the number of people per 100 who reported feeling lonely—ranged from 15.9% of home care recipients in Canada to 24.4% in New Zealand. “Interestingly,” notes the news release, “people in better physical shape and who got less help from family or friends were likelier to feel lonely, suggesting a complex link between health status, caregiving needs, and social connection.”

The authors call for more longer-term studies and for policymakers and health-care providers to treat loneliness as a quality-of-life issue, not only focusing on its potential link to mortality.

“Home and community care services,” said Hirdes, “must play a protective role by supporting social contact for isolated people.”

More on loneliness:

• Gen Z and millennial men in the U.S. are among the loneliest in the western world. Here’s why
• Remote employees are lonelier, sadder, and angrier, survey finds
• The reality of AI’s promise to curb older adults’ loneliness

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

23andMe holds millions of customers' genetic information. Here's what you can do to protect your data.

Beleaguered genetic testing company 23andMe announced Friday that it has reached an agreement to sell itself to TTAM Research Institute, a nonprofit led by the company's co-founder and former CEO Anne Wojcicki.

Breast cancer. Colon cancer. An enlarged thyroid gland. A family history of tumors and cancers as well. It wasn't until the woman developed an annoying case of dry mouth that doctors put it all together. By then, she was in her 60s.

According to a new case study in JAMA Dermatology, the woman presented to a dermatology clinic in Spain after three months of oral unpleasantness. They noted the cancers in her medical history. When she opened wide, doctors immediately saw the problem: Her tongue was covered in little wart-like bumps that resembled a slippery, flesh-colored cobblestone path. (Image here.)

Such a cobblestone tongue is a telltale sign of a rare genetic condition called Cowden syndrome. It's caused by inherited mutations that break a protein, called PTEN, leading to tumors and cancers.

Read full article

Comments

© Getty | Andrea Pistolesi

Dementia affects more than 6 million Americans and accounts for more than 100,000 deaths each year, according to the National Institutes of Health. Further, researchers estimate that 42% of Americans over 55 will eventually develop dementia—and that an aging U.S. population could cause the number of new dementia cases per year to double by 2060.

Now, researchers at the University of California San Francisco have identified the U.S. regions, as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where dementia occurs most often.

The large and comprehensive study, published in JAMA Neurology, examined data on more than 12.6 million veterans 65 and older enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration system; only 2% were women. 

Researchers found the highest incidence in the Southeast (North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida) and the lowest in the Mid-Atlantic states (Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, New Jersey, Washington D.C.). 

Further, using the low Mid-Atlantic region for comparison, dementia incidence was:

• 25% higher in the Southeast (Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi)
• 23% higher in the Northwest (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington)
• 23% higher Rocky Mountains (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming)
• 18% higher in the South (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas)
• 13% in the Southwest (Arizona, California, Hawaiʻi, and Nevada)
• 12% higher in the South Atlantic (North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida)
• 12% higher in the Midwest (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska)
• 7% higher in the Northeast (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, and New York)
• 7% higher in the Great Lakes (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin)

What accounts for the differences in dementia incidence?

Regional variation may be influenced by several factors, the study notes, pointing to prior research which suggests demographic factors including sex, race, ethnicity, and education level impact the risk of dementia across populations. 

The prevalence and management of cardiovascular disease and related risk factors, known to increase risk of dementia and cognitive decline, vary across the country. ^“Rurality of residence may also play a role,” wrote the researchers, “with studies showing greater dementia and cognitive impairment among rural adults, possibly due to health care access or poverty.”

The results, they add, “underscore the influence of regionally patterned risk factors or diagnostic practices, highlighting the importance of tailored health care strategies, public health initiatives, and policy reforms.”

The varied findings highlight the need for targeted health care planning, public health interventions, and policy development—as well as more research. “Quality of education, early life conditions, and environmental exposures may be among those factors,” lead author Christina Dintica, PhD, said in a news release. But the next important step, she said, is to investigate the factors driving these differences.

More on dementia:

• It’s not just forgetfulness: 8 early warning signs of dementia
• Marriage has a surprising link to dementia risk, new study finds
• Paying attention to these 14 risk factors can reduce your risk of dementia, science says

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Wednesday named eight new vaccine policy advisers to replace the panel that he abruptly dismissed earlier this week.

They include a scientist who researched mRNA vaccine technology and became a conservative darling for his criticisms of COVID-19 vaccines, a leading critic of pandemic-era lockdowns, and a professor of operations management.

Kennedy’s decision to “retire” the previous 17-member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices was widely decried by doctors’ groups and public health organizations, who feared the advisers would be replaced by a group aligned with Kennedy’s desire to reassess — and possibly end — longstanding vaccination recommendations.

On Tuesday, before he announced his picks, Kennedy said: “We’re going to bring great people onto the ACIP panel – not anti-vaxxers – bringing people on who are credentialed scientists.”

The new appointees include Vicky Pebsworth, a regional director for the National Association of Catholic Nurses, who has been listed as a board member and volunteer director for the National Vaccine Information Center, a group that is widely considered to be a leading source of vaccine misinformation.

Another is Dr. Robert Malone, the former mRNA researcher who emerged as a close adviser to Kennedy during the measles outbreak. Malone, who runs a wellness institute and a popular blog, rose to prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic as he relayed conspiracy theories around the outbreak and the vaccines that followed. He has appeared on podcasts and other conservative news outlets where he’s promoted unproven and alternative treatments for measles and COVID-19.

He has claimed that millions of Americans were hypnotized into taking the COVID-19 shots and has suggested that those vaccines cause a form of AIDS. He’s downplayed deaths related to one of the largest measles outbreaks in the U.S. in years.

Other appointees include Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a biostatistician and epidemiologist who was a co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, an October 2020 letter maintaining that pandemic shutdowns were causing irreparable harm. Dr. Cody Meissner, a former ACIP member, also was named.

Abram Wagner of the University of Michigan’s school of public health, who investigates vaccination programs, said he’s not satisfied with the composition of the committee.

“The previous ACIP was made up of technical experts who have spent their lives studying vaccines,” he said. Most people on the current list “don’t have the technical capacity that we would expect out of people who would have to make really complicated decisions involving interpreting complicated scientific data.”

He said having Pebsworth on the board is “incredibly problematic” since she is involved in an organization that “distributes a lot of misinformation.”

Kennedy made the announcement in a social media post on Wednesday.

The committee, created in 1964, makes recommendations to the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC directors almost always approve those recommendations on how vaccines that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration should be used. The CDC’s final recommendations are widely heeded by doctors and guide vaccination programs.

The other appointees are:

—Dr. James Hibbeln, who formerly headed a National Institutes of Health group focused on nutritional neurosciences and who studies how nutrition affects the brain, including the potential benefits of seafood consumption during pregnancy.

—Retsef Levi, a professor of operations management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies business issues related to supply chain, logistics, pricing optimization and health and health care management. In a 2023 video pinned to an X profile under his name, Levi called for the end of the COVID-19 vaccination program, claiming the vaccines were ineffective and dangerous despite evidence they saved millions of lives.

—Dr. James Pagano, an emergency medicine physician from Los Angeles.

—Dr. Michael Ross, a Virginia-based obstetrician and gynecologist.

Of the eight named by Kennedy, perhaps the most experienced in vaccine policy is Meissner, an expert in pediatric infectious diseases at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, who has previously served as a member of both ACIP and the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory panel.

During his five-year term as an FDA adviser, the committee was repeatedly asked to review and vote on the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines that were rapidly developed to fight the pandemic. In September 2021, he joined the majority of panelists who voted against a plan from the Biden administration to offer an extra vaccine dose to all American adults. The panel instead recommended that the extra shot should be limited to seniors and those at higher risk of the disease.

Ultimately, the FDA disregarded the panel’s recommendation and OK’d an extra vaccine dose for all adults.

In addition to serving on government panels, Meissner has helped author policy statements and vaccination schedules for the American Academy of Pediatrics.

ACIP members typically serve in staggered four-year terms, although several appointments were delayed during the Biden administration before positions were filled last year. The voting members all have scientific or clinical expertise in immunization, except for one “consumer representative” who can bring perspective on community and social facets of vaccine programs.

Kennedy, a leading voice in the anti-vaccine movement before becoming the U.S. government’s top health official, has accused the committee of being too closely aligned with vaccine manufacturers and of rubber-stamping vaccines. ACIP policies require members to state past collaborations with vaccine companies and to recuse themselves from votes in which they had a conflict of interest, but Kennedy has dismissed those safeguards as weak.

Most of the people who best understand vaccines are those who have researched them, which usually requires some degree of collaboration with the companies that develop and sell them, said Jason Schwartz, a Yale University health policy researcher.

“If you are to exclude any reputable, respected vaccine expert who has ever engaged even in a limited way with the vaccine industry, you’re likely to have a very small pool of folks to draw from,” Schwartz said.

The U.S. Senate confirmed Kennedy in February after he promised he would not change the vaccination schedule. But less than a week later, he vowed to investigate childhood vaccines that prevent measles, polio and other dangerous diseases.

Kennedy has ignored some of the recommendations ACIP voted for in April, including the endorsement of a new combination shot that protects against five strains of meningococcal bacteria and the expansion of vaccinations against RSV.

In late May, Kennedy disregarded the committee and announced the government would change the recommendation for children and pregnant women to get COVID-19 shots.

On Monday, Kennedy ousted all 17 members of the ACIP, saying he would appoint a new group before the next scheduled meeting in late June. The agenda for that meeting has not yet been posted, but a recent federal notice said votes are expected on vaccinations against flu, COVID-19, HPV, RSV and meningococcal bacteria.

A HHS spokesman did not respond to a question about whether there would be only eight ACIP members, or whether more will be named later.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Jacquelyn Martin—AP

Hey, protein-obsessed Americans: Starbucks sees you. 

On Tuesday, the country’s No. 1 coffee chain announced it was entering the frenzied protein market by testing a new beverage option: a sugar-free vanilla latte topped with banana foam containing 15 grams of protein. 

Starbucks announced its newest product on Tuesday at a company event in Las Vegas, Bloomberg reported. 

The new protein foam will come from a powder (of an as-yet-unspecified source), Starbucks told Bloomberg, and customers will be able to add it to any cold foam flavor. It will be tested at five U.S. locations and comes months after CEO Brian Niccol said, on a first-quarter earnings call, “Innovation is going to be a key piece of the puzzle to keep the brand relevant, to keep the menu relevant.”

Starbucks did not immediately respond to Fortune’s request for more details. 

The addition of the test product follows the country’s No. 3 coffee chain, Dutch Bros, offering a line of protein lattes that contain anywhere from 13 to 39 grams of protein. Dunkin’, the No. 2 coffee chain in America, does not (yet) offer protein drinks stateside, but does in the U.K., with a Strong Brew coffee containing 20 grams of protein.

Starbucks also has a protein option in the U.K., as it launched a ready-to-drink protein coffee last year. 

The current protein craze has included people sharing protein Diet Coke concoctions, daily high-protein goals, and recipes for high-protein ice cream on TikTok, where there are over 204 million posts on “high protein” alone. 

Still, while protein is an important part of building muscle and can help support weight loss, many people tend to focus on its consumption and ignore the body’s other needs, especially fiber, nutritionists told Fortune recently. They debunked the message that people aren’t getting enough protein.

“If you’re meeting your caloric needs … you’re meeting your protein needs,” said registered dietitian Abbey Sharp.

Still, Niccol told Axios that the idea for the protein foam arose from observing Starbucks customers in action.

“I was watching people coming to our stores; they would get three shots of espresso over ice,” he said. “And in some cases, they pull their own protein powder out of their bag, or in other cases, they have a protein drink, like a Fairlife, and they’d pour that into their drink. I’m like, ‘Well, wait a second, we can make this experience better for them.’”

He added, “The good news is now I think we’re right on trend, and we can do it I think arguably better than anybody else.”

More on protein:

• Your protein needs change as you get older. Here’s how much you should be eating at every age
• You might be overdoing it on protein and not getting enough of another vital nutrient, dietitians say
• Here’s exactly how much protein you need based on your workout routine

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

© Getty Images

So-called “less-lethal” weapons like those that have been used against demonstrators in Los Angeles can cause severe, lasting harm like nerve or brain damage or blindness. They can also kill.

Outro, which is now available in seven states, wants to help people taper off antidepressants without experiencing debilitating side effects.

NB.1.8.1 has mutations that could increase the virus’s transmissibility and decrease the efficacy of certain neutralizing antibodies against it.

Since its founding in 2014, a16z Bio+ Health has raised four funds of nearly $3 billion each, including a $1.5 billion fund that closed in 2022.

A new report highlights the dangers of menstrual tracking apps, which collect data that could jeopardize the safety and wellbeing of people who menstruate.

Over 300 researchers from the National Institutes of Health have published a letter rebuking its director and the Trump administration for deep, politically motivated cuts to research funding, as well as disrupting global collaboration, undermining scientific review processes, and laying off critical NIH staff.

"We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political momentum over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources," the letter states, linking to independent news reports on the harms of NIH trials being halted and that the administration's cuts to the agency have cost, rather than saved, taxpayer money. Since January, the Trump administration has terminated 2,100 NIH research grants totaling around $9.5 billion and $2.6 billion in contracts, the letter notes. The researchers also accuse the administration of creating "a culture of fear and suppression" among federal researchers.

The letter describes the researchers' action as "dissent" from the administration's policies, quoting NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in his congressional confirmation hearing as saying, "Dissent is the very essence of science."

Read full article

Comments

© Getty | Andrew Harnik

Like his "White Lotus" character Saxon Ratliff, Patrick Schwarzenegger is a lover of smoothies determined to match his parents' stratospheric success.

While his arrogant and shallow character rubbed many viewers the wrong way, Schwarzenegger, however, is nothing but charming as we chat on the phone while he gets his steps in around LA. "I walk and talk," he explains.

I've discovered there are parts of Schwarzenegger's routine that Saxon would be positively allergic to, such as heading to the beach with his fiancée in the morning to say prayers and share a moment of gratitude.

For the latest installment of Business Insider's "5-9" series, which Schwarzenegger took part in to promote Venmo's new debit card, the 31-year-old actor shared how else he spends the hours of the day when he's not working.

What time do you usually get up, and what's your morning routine?

I've gone to a new state or country every week since "The White Lotus" came out, so it's been a whirlwind of not having a routine and waking up at the most random times.

This is my first full week in LA since the start of the year, and it's been great. I got up today at 6.15 a.m. — I never set an alarm clock, but I always wake up around 6 a.m. My fiancée and I went on a walk for our coffee and then down to the beach to say our gratitude and prayers.

Usually, I'd work out after, but I didn't today as my fiancée had to go to the airport. So we made some breakfast, I had a sauna, and then went to the office.

What do you have for breakfast?

This morning, I had egg bites and Greek yogurt with berries, which is what I have on most days: eggs, Greek yogurt, fruit, or oatmeal. I try to get 40 to 50 grams of protein and some sort of carbs and fat.

Do you eat before or after working out, or both?

Afterward, if I'm working out really early in the morning, but sometimes I'll have something light before, like some fruit and nuts or peanut butter and banana.

Much has been made of your character's love of smoothies on "The White Lotus." Are you a fan?

Oh yes, I am. I used to drink smoothies all the time. Now I don't drink them as much, but I do love them. This conversation is actually making me want to go get a smoothie.

If I'm gearing up for a role or a project and I need to gain weight, then I will bring in the smoothies because they help me get a lot of calories quickly. So I do love a peanut butter banana smoothie.

The best combo.

10,000 steps and recovering in the sauna

Tell me more about your approach to working out.

I work out in the mornings when I can and try to get my 10,000 steps in too.

Are you walking now?

I am. I walk and talk. I try to do five days of lifting a week, and some sort of cardio. I stay pretty active.

Do you follow a particular workout split?

I usually do a push day, pull day, and leg day, or a more cardio-focused full-body day. Sometimes I do typical weight training, other days more high-intensity interval style.

What are your recovery essentials?

Food, sleep, and hydration are the main things. I love the sauna, the jacuzzi, and massages, but they're less important.

When you're not working, how do you relax and have fun?

Working out is fun for me. It is part of my daily life and what I like to do, and I feel better. And the same with my eating.

I also like going on walks, hanging with my friends and family, hiking, biking, and watching movies and TV shows. I love cooking and baking and finding new coffee shops, and I use my new Venmo debit card for all of it.

Martinis and early nights

What do you like to have for dinner, and who cooks?

I would get in trouble if I said I always cook dinner. Abby cooks most of the time. I cook breakfast pretty much every morning, although she made the egg bites today.

We go out frequently, but try to cook as much as possible when we're in town because we're not often here.

What's your favorite thing to cook?

We cook sweet potatoes every night. We love Japanese sweet potatoes. We also make a lot of eggs and pancakes. Abby makes a really good chicken salad. She makes a bunch of good stuff for me.

Lucky you.

I know, seriously.

So what's your ideal evening when you're at home?

Well, last night Abby and I went and did a workout together. We did this hot Pilates class, and then we picked up some food, made dinner, had a little dessert, went on a walk afterward for the sunset, then watched a movie. If it's a date night, we go out, get some cocktails, and have fun.

Do you have a favorite cocktail?

I've been on a martini kick in recent years.

Nice. Do you have a nighttime routine?

No, I don't really. I kind of just get in bed, and I'm usually pretty tired from the day. I try not to watch TV in the bedroom, and I fall asleep pretty easily at around 10 p.m. I try to get eight hours.

I suppose when you're so active, you get into bed and you're exhausted.

Yeah, exactly … I'm always out in the sun and walking around, and I sleep better.

Smart wearables company Ultrahuman has launched a new device that monitors changes in home environments that could impact your health. Ultrahuman says its $549 Home gadget tracks air quality, temperature, noise, light, and humidity, helping users optimize the climate within their homes to improve breathing and sleeping habits.

The Ultrahuman Home resembles a Mac Mini in terms of size and appearance. Its air quality features monitor levels of fine particulate matter, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and chemical pollutants like acetone and formaldehyde. The device also tracks noise levels and various types of light exposure, including UVA, UVB, UVC, blue, red, green, and infrared, to help users “align home lighting with their body’s natural rhythm,” according to Ultrahuman.

Users who have an Ultrahuman Ring wearable can pair it with the Home device to unlock an “UltraSync” feature that suggests how environmental data may be impacting heart rate, sleep, and recovery patterns. For example, Ultrahuman says that UltraSync can suggest if the user was woken during the night by elevated noise or light levels.

We should note that the Ultrahuman Home won’t actually address the concerns it detects. The device is equipped with sensors and microphones for monitoring environmental changes via a mobile app, but it doesn’t include features like a built-in dehumidifier or air purification, and it doesn’t offer any way to integrate it into smart home ecosystems. There’s no recurring subscription to pay, and Ultrahuman says the “data and insights are with the user, always.” 

Still, $549 is expensive for a device that doesn’t actually do anything — except maybe increase paranoia —  unlike smart indoor air quality sensors available from Ikea, Amazon, SwitchBot and others.

Notorious anti-vaccine advocate David Geier has begun working at the US Department of Health and Human Services and is seeking access to sensitive vaccine safety data that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had previously barred him from accessing—at least twice—according to reporting from The Wall Street Journal.

Geier and his father, Mark Geier, who died in March, are known for peddling the thoroughly debunked falsehood that vaccines cause autism, publishing a long list of dubious articles in low-quality journals that push the idea. In particular, the two have blamed the mercury-containing vaccine preservative, thimerosal, despite numerous studies finding no link. Thimerosal was largely abandoned from vaccine formulations in 2001 out of an abundance of caution.

In 2011, an investigation by the Maryland State Board of Physicians found that the Geiers were misdiagnosing autistic children and treating them with potent hormone therapies in a treatment they dubbed the "Lupron Protocol." Mark Geier was stripped of his medical license. David Geier, who has no medical or scientific background and holds only a bachelor's degree, was disciplined for practicing medicine without a license.

Read full article

Comments

© Getty | Tasos Katopodis

• My maiden name is Lee Kelly, and people used my names interchangeably.
• I was named after my maternal grandfather and given his last name as my middle name.
• When I got engaged, I was sure I'd be taking my future husband's name.

"Kelly Lee!" chirped my 9th-grade algebra teacher during roll call, just as she had every day of the school year. But this time, a giggle rippled through the class.

When Ms. Wade — a woman who brooked no nonsense — demanded to be let in on the joke, a classmate blurted out, "That's not her name!"

My name was an honor and a headache

My maiden name is Lee Kelly. I used to joke that I had two last names and two first names because people used my two names interchangeably. Since Lee is traditionally a man's name, and I am not a man, people would look at me, see my name, and automatically flip my name around.

The male name was intentional. My parents named me after my maternal grandfather, who was sick when I was born and died when I was a year old. Carrying his name was an honor and a pain in my daily life. And I couldn't use my middle name to help bail me out. It was Pallardy, my grandfather's last name, giving me a full name that was all surnames. My family takes honorary naming very literally.

So I was stuck being Kelly Lee.

Kelly Lee could pop up anywhere — in school, mail, phone calls, or other interactions with strangers. Sometimes, I corrected the error. But a lot of the time, I didn't even bother. Even though the mistake drove me crazy, it didn't seem worth the energy to call out the other person.

It got to the point that I responded to "Kelly" just as readily as I responded to "Lee." The only thing that would end my name duality was a legal name change.

I knew I would take my husband's last name

When my husband and I got engaged, I was 100% ready to take his name. I had no qualms about shedding my family identity. There were no feminist hesitations about the patriarchal expectation to subvert my identity for my husband's. I wasn't going to be Kelly Lee anymore.

My husband's last name is O'Connell, and it was perfect. It wasn't weird or unattractive. When paired with my first name, it would have no unfortunate associations or sounds (think Lee Oswald or Lee Roy). And there was no way anyone would confuse it for a first name. I would never have to correct anyone about my name again. I would never be O'Connell Lee.

No one gets it wrong now

In the 14 years I've been married, I haven't had to correct someone about my name once. I am always Lee, never Kelly. My ears don't prick up when I hear "Kelly" anymore, and I don't feel compelled to answer to any name besides my own.

Strangely, I received a letter addressed to Kelley Lee O'Connell two years ago. When I took my husband's name, I followed the convention of making my maiden name my middle name, mostly so I had a female name somewhere in there. As soon as I saw that letter, I texted a photo to the high school friend who sat next to me in algebra, the one person who jokingly calls me Kelly Lee to this day. "She does exist!" I exclaimed.

Weighed against all the problems in the world, having people get my name wrong is pretty insignificant. It was a minor irritation that never meaningfully impeded my day.

What bothered me about it was that so many people were willing to initiate an interaction or a relationship with me based on an assumption of who I was or who they thought I should be. And that assumption was wrong. It would've been more refreshing and more generous to have them get curious about who I am, to explore whether my reality challenged their assumptions.

Now that it's behind me, it's easy to consider my double name as a quirky blip from my past, compared to my present ease of always being Lee and never Kelly. People occasionally still assume I'm a man, so you can't win everything.

• I'm a digital nomad and met my partner in Argentina two years ago.
• We talked daily for the next eight months, and I decided to return to Argentina in 2024.
• We fell in love and are building a life together in an unconventional way, but it works for us.

When I started traveling full-time almost four years ago, I promised myself I'd go on dates, but I also knew that a long-term relationship was out of the question.

As a digital nomad and freelance writer, I get the unique opportunity to travel all over the world and write about my experiences. It's truly a dream job, but sacrifices and tradeoffs must always be made — like relationships.

How could I develop a meaningful connection if I only spend one or two months in a city at a time? Even if I did find someone I wanted to pursue a future with, I knew I was unwilling to change my lifestyle. Full-time travel is a dream that I can't give up.

All of that changed when I met my partner.

I found love unexpectedly in Argentina

I spent the first few months of 2023 in Argentina, one of my favorite countries in the world.

In February, I received a message on Grindr, which is notoriously known as a gay hookup app with a low success rate for relationships. Still, I hoped for something more, and I figured if I was on the app, there must also be a couple of other people like me out there.

Over the next few days, I started chatting with this person, who introduced himself as Lauti. He asked me out on a date, but unfortunately, I was leaving Buenos Aires to go to a different city in Argentina the following morning. I told him I'd be back in six weeks, and we decided to meet then.

The day after I flew back to Buenos Aires, we went on our first date, and something clicked. For the next three weeks, we embarked on a whirlwind romance and were virtually inseparable.

Then, I packed up and flew to Mexico, and even though we liked each other, I knew nothing could realistically come from it. We decided to take things one day at a time and not put a label on anything — just see what happened while I was traveling.

Our relationship blossomed as I continued to travel

As the days went on, the texting and phone calls continued. After Mexico, I flew to Europe for the summer, and even with five or six hour time differences, we found ourselves prioritizing each other and making space for video call dates, life updates, and deeper conversations. Despite the distance, things got more serious month after month, and I realized I was essentially in a long-distance relationship.

So, I planned my return to Argentina for January 2024 — eight months after I left. We finally put a label on what we both felt, and a few weeks later, he told me he loved me for the first time. We faced yet another goodbye in April when I left for Peru. Luckily, this period of long-distance was short since he came to visit a month later for his birthday in May.

Then, we went seven months without seeing each other while I was off exploring Europe, Asia, and Australia. He came to Colombia in December 2024 for our first holiday season together, which was every bit as magical as we hoped it would be. I returned to Argentina at the end of January this year, and we've lived together for the past four months.

Luckily, our time apart seems to be getting shorter each year. I'll leave Argentina in a few weeks, and we will be apart for just three months.

Navigating an unconventional relationship

Each long-distance period has its challenges. During the first stint, we were still getting to know each other, which made communication tricky. The second time, we were much better at communicating, but it was more challenging in its own way. I often don't know where I'll live in a few months' time, so it's impossible to know when we will be together again.

Even so, we're embracing the challenges of a long-distance relationship. How do we prioritize seeing each other? How do we balance two different cultures? How can we accomplish our own goals while still growing together? These questions don't have simple answers, and they are constantly evolving.

Some aspects of our relationship progressed quickly, while others have been harder to nurture due to my lifestyle. However, this has become our normal, making us appreciate our time together so much more. In our time apart, we still prioritize each other, but also spend time planning our future and growing individually.

I had an idea of what a relationship was supposed to be, and I thought that a nomadic lifestyle would be antithetical to that ideal. I've realized there isn't a perfect relationship, and I can accomplish two things simultaneously: a loving relationship and an unwavering desire to see every corner of the world. I don't have to sacrifice one to achieve the other, but I must be intentional with my time.