Health & wellbeing

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares138 Views

    Why is the Trump administration obsessed with autism? – podcast

    by

    Archive: Good Morning America, NPR, NBC News, WHAS11, BBC News, CBS News, Jimmy Kimmel Live, LiveNowFox
    Listen to Science Weekly’s episode factchecking Trump’s claims about paracetamol
    Buy Carter Sherman’s book, The Second Coming: Sex and the Next Generation’s Fight Over its Future, here
    Buy Jonathan Freedland’s new book, The Traitor’s Circle, here
    Buy John Harris’ book, Maybe I’m Amazed, about connecting with his son James, diagnosed with autism as a child, through music
    Send your questions and feedback to politicsweeklyamerica@theguardian.com
    Support the Guardian. Go to theguardian.com/politicspodus More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares128 Views

      in US Politics

      Daylight savings haters rejoice: scientists confirm it’s bad for health

      by

      Daylight savings time is not just a hassle – it can also be bad for your health.The twice-yearly “spring forward, fall back” routine rattles our bodies’ daily cycles, known as circadian rhythms, with potentially harmful consequences. And a new study supports what many sleep experts have long argued: the solution is getting rid of daylight savings for good.That will not be easy. While there is plenty of support for eliminating the time change itself, Donald Trump and some in Congress have called for the opposite: making daylight savings permanent. And it may prove unpopular with those of us who enjoy an extra hour of light on a summer’s evening.Researchers at Stanford University found that keeping our clocks on standard time year round, instead of just in the autumn and winter (as in most US states as well as the UK), would reduce the prevalence of obesity and strokes. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, stands apart from much other research thanks to its breadth. Instead of simply looking at what happens when the clocks change, the researchers compared three scenarios: permanent standard time, permanent daylight savings time, and the current switching system, which applies in most US states.Dr Jamie Zeitzer, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences, and Lara Weed, a PhD candidate in bioengineering, modeled sunlight exposure across every county in the 48 contiguous states, and compared that information with federal health data. The goal, Zeitzer says, was to use an existing mathematical model to discover the “circadian burden” of the three daylight scenarios – in other words, “how much stress are we putting on the circadian system?” That stress is associated with a variety of disorders, including obesity and stroke. The result suggested that, at least in circadian terms, permanent standard time is the least burdensome on our health.“This goes along with what we’ve been saying since about 2019,” says Dr Karin Johnson, a neurology professor at the University of Massachusetts Chan school of medicine and a member of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine’s advocacy committee. Johnson testified in favor of permanent standard time in front of a US Senate committee in April, telling lawmakers it would create “a more natural alignment between our social schedules and the sun’s cycle every day of the year”.“Our body rhythms basically get set by the sun,” she says. But because our natural cycle is slightly longer than 24 hours, “we need to get cues every day to stay on track. Otherwise, our rhythms get delayed.” That results in problems ranging from trouble sleeping and waking up to digestive issues. “The more we can stay aligned with the sun time,” she says, “the healthier it is for our body, the better our brain functions, the better our sleep.” The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM), American Academy of Neurology and the health and safety-focused non-profit National Safety Council agree.But that argument runs counter to a repeated effort in Congress to pass the Sunshine Protection Act, which would change the system to make daylight savings permanent. Unlike virtually everything else Congress grapples with, it does not seem to be a highly partisan matter; Ted Cruz, for instance, has heard “serious arguments on both sides” and even Trump has acknowledged it’s a “50-50 issue”.Permanent daylight savings may sound appealing, since skipping an hour in the spring results in long, sunlit evenings, but Johnson says that view is misleading. “It’s really summer people are loving but they connect it in their mind to daylight savings time,” she says. Even under standard time, she notes, summer nights would be long. Permanent daylight savings, on the other hand, would cost us essential light during winter mornings – though of course, late-rising Americans may prefer to have that light in the evening.A Gallup poll this year found declining support for daylight savings time overall, with 48% of Americans supporting permanent standard time, 24% backing permanent daylight savings, and 19% wanting to stick with the current system. In 2023, however, a YouGov poll found that among those who wanted to stop switching the clocks, 50% supported permanent daylight savings and 31% supported permanent standard time.As for Zeitzer, while his latest research argues in favor of permanent standard time, he cautions that circadian rhythms are just a “piece of the puzzle”. “Do people exercise more if there’s more light in the morning? Are fewer kids biking to school because it’s too dark in the morning? Are there better economic outputs that are going to help economically marginalized individuals?” he asks. “There are lots of things that could happen if you move where that hour of light is happening, and frankly, it might be very different in different parts of the country.”Advocates of permanent daylight savings have suggested it could, for instance, help fight seasonal depression, save energy and reduce vehicle crashes. (And while the AASM ranks permanent daylight savings as the worst of the three options, Zeitzer’s study asserts it’s better than the constant switching.)But to Johnson, the answer is clear. “It’s a long, slow process but I think getting the word out with studies like this can hopefully shift that needle” toward permanent standard time, she says. “Because people are desperate to end the time change.” More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      The daylight savings debate misses the point: let’s make work hours flexible | Lynne Peeples

      by

      In a week, we will spring forward to daylight saving time. Donald Trump, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy all recently shared their desires to end the biannual flip-flopping of our clocks. The Republican senator Rick Scott recently reintroduced the Sunshine Protection Act, which would lock our clocks on daylight saving time. Scientists, meanwhile, urge us to adopt the opposite: permanent standard time.The DST debate is heating back up. But all this chatter is, once again, largely missing the point–an omission particularly glaring for an administration that claims to be seeking greater efficiency.The time displayed on our walls and wrists carries only the meaning we attach. If we want to rein in our nation’s spending, if we want to make America healthy again, then we should turn attention to our inner clocks. For starters, we should nudge companies and schools to relax or revise rigid schedules – rather than, for example, reverting to pre-pandemic in-office requirements.We are all born with inner clocks, better known as our circadian rhythms. These biological drumbeats sync with our planet’s patterns to drive our bodies to do the right things at the right times: fall asleep, digest food, and fight pathogens, to name a few vital functions. But our internal timekeepers don’t all tick the same. Your 7am might be my 2pm.The upshot: a lot of money could be saved, and illness avoided, if we dropped the traditional one-schedule-fits-all that gives the clock-on-the-wall so much sway.More circadian-friendly schedules mean more people can wake, work, and learn in closer alignment with their inner clocks. They get more sleep. They take fewer sick days. This is especially true for night owls, whose circadian rhythms are most incongruous with the long-established early bird-biased schedules. Sleep loss alone is estimated to cost the US economy upwards of $400bn a year due to absenteeism, accidents, and reduced productivity. That’s around 1.5% of the country’s GDP – and far more than the approximately 1% of the GDP that pays the salaries of all federal civilian employees, whose jobs have been under attack.Impacts on sleep and sickness aside, it also pays to allow people to work or study during their peak hours of productivity and performance. Alertness, cognition, and learning fluctuate across the day. So does our ability to think critically, communicate effectively, and act morally. Risks of costly lapses of attention and reaction ride these waves, too. And, again, the ebbs and flows are unique for every person.A business’s market value is now about 90 percent intangible – tied to assets like IP, relationships and reputation. In other words, companies are investing primarily in employees’ brainpower. A few have begun optimizing those investments by taking advantage of our biological diversity.Magne Skram Hegerberg, secretary general for the Norwegian Association of Lawyers, told me he uses a curious tool to utilize peak brainpower: an army of plush frogs. During their personal power hours, employees will place one of these brightly colored plush animals on their desk or the door to their office. This signals others to “frog off”. Starting times among his workers also now range from 6.30am to 2.30pm. Meetings are held midday, when early birds and night owls overlap. After making these changes, he said, productivity in some areas doubled and, more broadly, innovation, creativity, and problem-solving improved.View image in fullscreenCamilla Kring, founder of the Copenhagen-based B-Society, has advised Hegerberg and other companies including medical giants Medtronic and AbbVie. She has watched job satisfaction rise and sick days plummet. Her end goal, she said, is to create a “new time architecture” that helps everyone better live by their inner clocks. And that includes B-persons, her term for night owls, an often-stigmatized club to which Trump and Musk belong. “You are born with this rhythm,” said Kring. “It’s not something you choose.”Among the few good things to come out of the Covid pandemic was a glimpse into a more sun-synced life. Some studies found that people, especially night owls, tended to get more sleep and maintain healthier circadian rhythms as school and work schedules were relaxed. But much of that greater flexibility is now being reversed. The Trump administration has issued an executive order to end remote work for federal workers, a mandate pushed by Musk, who enforces strict in-office policies at Tesla, SpaceX, and X. Amazon, too, made the move in January. JP Morgan and Dell plan to do the same in March. Emerging policies that restrict where an employee works also tend to define when. And that can result in wasted resources.Sure, there are benefits to having employees in the office. It can reduce loneliness, encourage teamwork, and inspire creativity. But workplaces can still foster flexibility. Business leaders can spread out work hours and schedule meetings, lunches, and other events for the middle of the day. Those gatherings would probably be more pleasant and productive, anyway, with fewer sleep-deprived and circadian-disrupted participants. And who wouldn’t also appreciate a means to stem the recent rebound in traffic congestion?Some secondary schools in Europe similarly offer students the choice of earlier or later electives while concentrating core subjects to midday periods. And a growing number of middle and high schools in the US have delayed their first bell, acknowledging that traditionally early start times are biologically backwards. Rhythms don’t just vary between us; they also change within us, drifting significantly later during adolescence. But overall progress remains slow.The consequences of permanent DST would disproportionately impact teens and other night owls. When required to arrive at a strict time for work or school, DST effectively forces them up an hour earlier than their already-late preference. The later sunrise also means they get less of the morning light that their rhythms rely on to avoid drifting even later. Some early birds, on the other hand, might appreciate the additional evening light with DST. It can nudge their bodies to postpone pumping out melatonin and let them enjoy a night out with friends.But rather than arguing over whether or how to lock the clock, a more efficient use of regulatory resources is to steer society away from strict schedules, as well as non-essential shift work and illogically drawn time zones. (For the record, there is still one wrong answer: Permanent DST would steal an hour of morning light and tack it onto the evening, further blurring the day-night contrast our inner clocks crave.)Neither Trump nor Musk appear conscious of the value and vulnerability of their inner clocks. Trump regularly posts on social media in the early hours of the morning; Musk wore sunglasses throughout last week’s CPAC conference. Still, it is in their power to help themselves and the American people better live and work with–rather than against–their inner clocks, regardless of whether the clock on the wall reads DST or standard time. It is a matter of efficiency that they would be foolish not to embrace.

      Lynne Peeples is a science journalist and author of the new book The Inner Clock: Living in Sync with Our Circadian Rhythms More

    • 250 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Did RFK Jr really drink fish medicine? He definitely has weird ideas about ‘making America healthy again’ | Arwa Mahdawi

      by

      Robert F Kennedy Jr is many things, but he is not a tropical fish. Someone should probably tell him this because he appears to be guzzling fish medicine. Last week, a video of RFK sitting on a plane and putting a strange blue liquid into his glass of water went viral. It’s not clear what he was taking, but online sleuths are convinced it was methylene blue, which is used to treat parasites in fish as well as aquatic ailments such as swim bladder disease.To be fair, methylene blue does have human uses – in the US, it is FDA-approved to treat a rare blood disorder. Over the last few years, however, it has been touted as a miracle drug in wellness circles and people have been using it off-label in the hopes of staving off everything from jet lag to ageing. “Looks like RFK Jr is in on one of the best-kept secrets in biohacking – methylene blue,” wrote one prominent wellness influencer after the viral video. “When used correctly, it’s a gamechanger for mental clarity and longevity.”That’s a stretch. While some studies show methylene blue may help with those things, self-medicating is a bad idea. Too much of the stuff can turn your urine blue, for one thing. More importantly, it can interact with certain medications, which can have serious consequences.We don’t know for sure that it was methylene blue. But we do know that Kennedy, who is a prominent anti-vaxxer, has a lot of strange – and arguably very dangerous – ideas about medicine. These may stem from some of his own health problems, including one issue he memorably said “was caused by a worm that got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died”. According to the New York Times, the worm may have actually been a “pork tapeworm larva”. Tapeworms aside, Kennedy’s wellness opinions would be entirely his business were it not for the fact that he is closing in on the role of secretary of health and human services and is poised to inflict his ideas on the rest of us, all in the name of a movement he has termed “Make America Healthy Again” (Maha). Like every Maga movement, this one is being aggressively monetised: Kennedy has applied to trademark Maha for use in marketing potential products including food supplements, vitamins and (oddly) vaccines.Some people are aghast at his ideas; others are ecstatic about the prospect of him upending the US’s approach to food and healthcare. There has been a lot of coverage about the “crunchy moms” who are quite justifiably horrified about all the rubbish that is in processed foods and are thrilled by the Maha agenda.It’s interesting, however, to see just how much of the discourse around Maha seems to focus on woo-woo-women and their silly little wellness ideas, because – as Kennedy demonstrates – it’s men who are increasingly dominating the alternative health (if you’re being diplomatic) or pseudoscientific quackery (if you’re not) space. That’s partly because Silicon Valley has rebranded being obsessed with your health as “biohacking”. Men who are into biohacking and longevity don’t casually take vitamin pills like the rest of us. No, no, they build supplementation protocols and personalised “supplement stacks”. Supplementing appears to have become an extreme sport among a certain type of wellness bro: the more pills you swallow, the more macho you are. Bahram Akradi, the 63-year-old CEO of a gym chain, for example, recently said he’s been taking “about 45 to 50” pills every morning for years. Meanwhile, Bryan Johnson, the 47-year-old tech entrepreneur who is spending millions of dollars trying to de-age himself, takes more than 100 pills a day. According to one interview, he wakes up at 4.30am and takes 57 pills, does some ab stimulation, then takes 34 more.Spending a fortune on experimental pills, and not even the fun kind, is about as stupid as it sounds. I don’t know what Akradi has been taking, but for about five years Johnson was downing a pill called rapamycin that had been found to extend the lifespan of mice. But Johnson is not a mouse and he recently quit taking it because another study found it might increase ageing in humans. I think Alanis Morissette would call this ironic, don’t you think?Anyway, the upshot of all this is that the takeover of the US government by weirdos with dangerous ideas continues apace. Meanwhile, remember that you are not a mouse or a fish, and design your “supplementation protocol” accordingly. More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Sold-out farm shops, smuggled deliveries and safety warnings: US battle over raw milk grows

      by

      It’s 8am, and Redmond, an 11-year-old Brown Swiss dairy cow and designated matriarch of the Churchtown Dairy herd, has been milked in her designated stall. She is concentrating on munching hay; her seventh calf is hovering nearby.The herd’s production of milk, sold unpasteurised in half-gallon and quart glass bottles in an adjacent farm store, sells out each week. It has become so popular that the store has had to limit sales.Redmond and her resplendent bovine sisters, wintering in a Shaker-style barn in upstate New York, appear unaware of the cultural-political storm gathering around them – an issue that is focusing minds far from farmyard aromas of mud and straw.The production and state-restricted distribution of raw milk, considered by some to boost health and by ­others to be a major risk to it, has become a perplexing political touchstone on what is termed the “Woo-to-Q pipeline”, along which yoga, wellness and new age spirituality adherents can drift into QAnon conspiracy beliefs.Robert F Kennedy Jr, Donald Trump’s pick to run the US Department of Health, is an advocate. He has made unpasteurised milk part of his Make America Healthy Again movement and recently tweeted that government regulations on raw milk were part of a wider “war on public health”.View image in fullscreenRepublican congresswoman and conspiracy theorist Marjorie Taylor Greene has posted “Raw Milk does a body good”. But the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says that “raw milk can carry dangerous germs such as salmonella, E coli, listeria, campylobacter and others that cause foodborne illness”.Last week, the US Department of Agriculture issued an order to broaden tests for H5N1 – bird flu – in milk at dairy processing ­facilities, over fears that the virus could become the next Covid-19 if it spreads through US dairy herds and jumps to humans. Since March, more than 700 dairy herds across the US have tested ­positive for bird flu, mostly in California. But the new testing strategy does not cover farms that directly process and sell their own raw milk.At the same time, another dairy product has become the subject of conspiracy theories after misinformation spread about the use of Bovaer in cow feed in the UK. Arla Foods, the Danish-Swedish company behind Lurpak, announced trials of the additive, designed to cut cow methane emissions, at 30 of its farms. Some social media users raised concerns over the additive’s safety and threatened a boycott, despite Bovaer being approved by regulators.In the US, raw milk is seen as anti-government by the right, anti-corporate by the left, and amid the fracturing political delineations, lies a middle ground unmoved by either ideology.“Food production has always been political,” says Churchtown Dairy owner and land reclamation pioneer, Abby Rockefeller.Churchtown manager Eric Vinson laments raw milk has been lumped in with QAnon and wellness communities. “There’s an idea around that ­people who want to take ownership of their health have started to become conspiratorial,” he says. “It’s unfortunate. Raw milk may be a political issue but it’s not a right-left issue.”Iowa, Montana, North Dakota, Alaska, Georgia, and Wyoming have passed laws or changed rules to allow the sale at farms or shops since 2020. In New York, sales are legal at farms with permits, although supplies are smuggled into the city marked “for cats and dogs”. There is no suggestion Churchtown is involved in that.Amish communities abandoned a non-political stance in the national elections in November and voted Republican, in part over the raw milk issue. An Amish organic farm was raided by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture in January.There are also the health-aware “farmers’ market mums”, who say they are looking to raw milk for an immunity boost, and who harbour latent anger over the government pandemic response and vaccine mandates.View image in fullscreenRachel, a Manhattan mother of a three-year-old, who declined to be fully identified, citing potential social judgment, said: “After Covid, more of us started thinking about our bodies and health because of scepticism around doctors, hospitals and a corrupted health care system.” But like many people, she said, she felt she’d been “caught in the middle” of a political battle.Sales of raw milk are up between 21% and 65% compared with a year ago, according to the market research firm NielsenIQ. Mark McAfee, California raw milk advocate and owner of Raw Farm USA in Fresno, says production and supply across the state is growing at 50% a year. But the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention call raw milk one of the “riskiest” foods people can consume. Experts say they are “horrified” by a trend they consider a roll-back of Louis Pasteur’s 19th-century invention of pasteurisation.Vinson disagrees with the idea that raw milk is “inherently dangerous” and argues, because conventional dairies rely on pasteurisation, “they don’t have to worry about sanitation around the milking practices – they can cut corners”. “You have to be more careful producing raw milk but it brings a higher price,” he adds.View image in fullscreenSince the pandemic, visitors to Churchtown have increased.Earlier this month, McAfee’s Raw Farm was hit by a notice from the California Department of Health warning that H5 virus, better known as bird flu, had been detected in a batch of cream-top whole raw milk.It’s not yet known if the virus can be transmitted to people who consume infected milk but the CDC officials warn that people who drink raw milk could theoretically become infected.Back at Churchtown Dairy, Vinson is tending the herd. A huge Jersey cow shadows her four-day old calf. At weekends, he offers tours of the barn to raw milk-curious visitors. “One of my main jobs is informing the public about farming and agricultural issues,” he says. That includes being receptive to changes. “It is important to say we don’t know everything and keep an eye open.” More

    • 238 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Weekend podcast: Bernie Sanders on Trump and democracy, Marina Hyde on Prince Harry, and is brain-boosting coffee a fad?

      by

      So Prince Harry is a living legend of aviation? Why not, says Marina Hyde (1m21s); Bernie Sanders on what happens if Trump wins – and how to stop him (8m32s); and mushroom macchiato, anyone? Are the new boosted coffees worth the hype? (34m37s)

      How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know More

    • 175 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘It’s easy to dismiss Black women’s lives’: Texas drags feet on maternal mortality crisis

      by

      When medical staff prepped Shawn Thierry for an emergency C-section, she knew something was very wrong. After an epidural, excruciating pain ran through her legs. Soon, she could barely breathe.“I felt like my heart was going to jump out of my chest and that I might die,” she said.She screamed for her doctor to put her under anesthesia – which happened to be the solution. The epidural, Thierry later found out, was given too high in her spine, causing a paralysis that inched toward her heart.“I was an attorney who had full private healthcare coverage and I almost died,” said Thierry, of the birth of her daughter in 2012. “I cannot imagine what the outcome would be for the thousands of other African American women without health insurance.”Years later, as a member of the Texas House, Thierry was “stunned” to learn of the state’s maternal mortality crisis.The US has the highest maternal death rate among similarly developed countries and is the only industrialized nation where such deaths are rising. But according to data from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in Texas the maternal mortality rate is above the US average, at 18.5 deaths per 100,000 live births.Black women in the state are “disproportionately” affected, accounting for 11% of live births but 31% of maternal deaths. Wide racial and ethnic disparities exist nationally too.I was shocked that black mothers like myself are three times more likely to die than our white counterparts“I was shocked that black mothers like myself are three times more likely to die than our white counterparts,” said Thierry. “And no one in the legislature was really talking about it.”She has repeatedly filed legislation to combat the glaring problem. Her proposals included racial bias training for medical professionals and a bill to fix a “severe” maternal health data backlog by creating a centralized registry.They did not advance in 2019, or in the current legislative session which ends this weekend. Focused on restricting abortion rights, the male- and Republican-dominated state legislature has dragged its feet on maternal mortality.Health advocates were cautiously optimistic that in 2021 Texas lawmakers would at least usher through a proposal to extend Medicaid care to a year after birth.Lawmakers did take action. A proposal was sent to Governor Greg Abbott on Friday. But it stopped short of providing the full Medicaid expansion.‘A large racial disparity’A state maternal mortality and morbidity review committee found that out of pregnancy related deaths in Texas in 2013, about a third occurred 43 days to a year after the end of pregnancy. It also discovered that nearly 90% of such deaths were preventable. Among the leading underlying causes of death with the highest chance of preventability were infection, hemorrhage, preeclampsia and cardiovascular conditions.“It was really striking,” said Dr Amy Raines-Milenkov, a University of North Texas Health Science Center professor and member of the review committee. “We found that most of these deaths could have been prevented but the system is just not set up to prevent them. And we found a large racial disparity, which is a reflection of how we in society value women, especially African American women.”Since 2016, the committee’s No1 recommendation to help save lives has been to extend Medicaid coverage postpartum for low-income mothers to a year. Currently, Texas kicks new moms off Medicaid after 60 days, leading to delayed and less preventative care. The American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists support longer postpartum care.“So many health problems can develop in this really sensitive time period, so it is critical that new moms have that full year of extended coverage,” said Raines-Milenkov. “To think new mothers can identify problems, get timely appointments and follow up with their doctors within just two months of having a baby is unrealistic. Anything less than 12 months is really insufficient.”The Biden administration recently initiated incentives for states to expand postpartum coverage to 12 months. Illinois was the first to have its extension approved and other states including Florida and Virginia hope to implement measures soon.Toni Rose, a Dallas representative, joined Thierry in filing HB 133, to do just that in Texas. The Republican-dominated House passed the bill with rare bipartisan approval and nearly 70 groups, from the Texas Medical Association to the rightwing Texas Public Policy Foundation, expressed support.When it comes to saving the lives of Texas mothers, ‘splitting the difference’ is not appropriateHowever, the ultra-conservative Texas Senate – which ushered through extremist anti-abortion bills in March – did not pass the bill until the final minutes of its session. Even then, the legislation was not what was proposed. Without explanation, Republican Lois Kolkhorst of Brenham reduced the year of coverage to six months.Rose called the legislation a “victory” but said it still “falls short”. Thierry expressed dismay.“The data is clear that women are still at risk of maternal mortalities and pregnancy related complications for up to one year postpartum,” she said. “While the six months negotiated by the Texas Senate is better than the status quo, many new mothers will still be deprived of quality healthcare at a time when they are most vulnerable.“Given that this is an issue in which I have both personal and professional experience, I am disappointed. When it comes to saving the lives of Texas mothers, ‘splitting the difference’ is not appropriate.”Marsha Jones, executive director of the Afiya Center, a Dallas group that supports Black women with reproductive healthcare, said the lack of substantial progress was partly a reflection of the legislature’s misplaced priorities and lack of diversity.The Texas legislature is comprised mostly of white males: 61% of lawmakers in the House and Senate are white, even though white Texans make up just 41% of the population. Women are vastly outnumbered by men.“Black women are dying at an alarming rate for reasons that could be prevented and our state leaders cut down the main proposal that a state-appointed committee recommended to help them – why would that even happen?” said Jones. “I think it’s because it’s so easy to dismiss Black women’s lives.”The legislature expended time and energy on restricting abortion access, including passing one of the most extreme bans in the country, which allows any citizen to sue an abortion provider, as well as a “trigger” bill that bans the procedure in the event Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling which safeguards the right to abortion, is overturned by the US supreme court.Both measures were “top legislative priorities” for the Senate leader, Lt Gov Dan Patrick, who did not make maternal mortality a listed priority.“It seems the only time we want to stand up and care about a life is when it’s in the womb,” Rose told Republicans on the House floor in May.‘Women are obviously choosing a life’In an ideological quest to punish abortion affiliates, Republicans have decimated the Texas reproductive health safety net by blocking low-income Medicaid patients from receiving life-saving preventative care at Planned Parenthood, a move resulting in reduced access to contraception and increased rates of Medicaid births, according to the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.A recent study in the medical journal Contraception showed a correlation between high maternal mortality rates and states that pass abortion barriers.“We have a maternal health crisis and conservative legislators once again made anti-choice bills a priority,” said Thierry. “They fail to realize all the women threatened by maternal deaths are obviously choosing life – they shouldn’t have to do so in exchange for their own.”Lawmakers made no significant gains for Medicaid in general. Texas is home to the highest number of uninsured residents in the US as well as the highest percentage of uninsured women of childbearing age, but it has declined to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act and Republicans blocked legislative efforts to help extend healthcare coverage for the working poor.Texas has one of the steepest Medicaid eligibility requirements in the US. Of 1.4 million Texans who would benefit from expanded Medicaid, 75% are people of color.“Once again, we are kicking the can down the road with many of these solutions,” said Thierry. “It’s absolutely imperative we continue to work on reducing maternal mortality. One death is too many, especially when it’s preventable.” More