Gas reservation policy set for lower house vote today
Australia’s domestic gas reservation is set to be debated and voted on in the lower house today.
Rather than international base companies, determining through algorithms what Australians receive, it empowers people themselves to determine what you receive on your devices, so that you should have that control.
This isn’t about government having a greater role. It’s about people having a greater role, having more control themselves, and it’s deserving of support of this parliament.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will not take action against licensed pharmacists who dispense certain unapproved peptides to consumers, according to a new policy published Oct. 28 in the Federal Register.
Peptides are short chains of amino acids that people inject into their bodies. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said in the past that he is a “big fan” of the unapproved drugs, whose benefits are largely scientifically unproven.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) essentially banned peptides in 2023 because of safety concerns. But an FDA committee met in July to review the evidence on peptides and recommend whether or not to take the highly unusual step of allowing pharmacies to dispense them absent scientific review. The committee was made up of new appointees who consulted with or were employed by companies that were interested in promoting or dispensing peptides; it recommended allowing specialty pharmacies to dispense six peptides, despite FDA staff advising against the move.
The new policy—which was signed by Kennedy—says that after the July meetings, HHS believed there was “significant interest” in the use of obtaining these peptides from compounding pharmacies. “Therefore, to expand and improve patient access, HHS does not intend to take enforcement action against a State-licensed pharmacy, Federal facility, or licensed physician compounding a drug product using a peptide bulk drug substance found in Appendix A,” the notice said. The policy said that it was going to be published in the Federal Register on Oct. 30. The peptides listed in Appendix A were BPC-157, Epitalon, KPV, MOTS-c, Semax, and TB-500—the same ones the committee recommended allowing this summer.
A separate document posted on the HHS website says that after reviewing the recommendations of the committee that met in July, “the Secretary has determined that the policy advances patient choice and freedom while appropriately protecting patient safety.”
The decision to allow the compounding of peptides is a boon for companies like Hims & Hers, which had reportedly been preparing to offer peptides in 2026. Analysts have said the market for peptides could be as high as $3.3 billion. Hims stock shot up 5% after the Oct. 28 announcement.
The move “represents a vital step toward eliminating the unsafe gray and black markets, restoring safe patient access through legitimate, physician-supervised care,” said Lee Rosebush, chair of the American Academy of Peptide Medicine, a new advocacy group, in a statement.
Other public-health professionals raised alarm about the decision, which they say allows compounding pharmacies to dispense these medications absent scientific evidence. “American consumers should not be treated like guinea pigs,” said Fred Mills, chief policy officer for Americans for Safe and Effective Medicines, in a statement. “It is possible to advance both patient safety and access to legitimate medicines, but this is not it.”
At the July hearings, consumer advocacy groups including the Center for Science in the Public Interest had argued that allowing peptides to skip a rigorous evidence-based FDA approval process would be unprecedented and dangerous to consumers.
Many physicians have spoken up against allowing peptides to be compounded. “The peptides under consideration here are untested and poorly characterized experimental drugs that should not be allowed in compounded products,” said Dr. Adriane Fugh-Berman, a professor of pharmacology and physiology at Georgetown University Medical Center, at the public comment portion of the July meeting, reminding the committee that two women had required emergency treatment after receiving peptides at a Las Vegas festival.
Critics also expressed concern that people were turning to compounding pharmacies for untested drugs. Compounding pharmacies are often used to fill specific prescriptions from a doctor, but in recent years, they have mass-produced drugs like GLP-1s for patients looking to save money. The peptide boom will put even more pressure on compounding pharmacies to quickly make drugs for telehealth sites, said Annie Lambert, a pharmacist and clinical program manager for compliance solutions at Wolters Kluwer Health.
"Compounding can and should play a legitimate clinical role, from hospitals to home infusion to filling gaps during drug shortages. But it is not a substitute for FDA-approved manufacturing, and that distinction is where a lot of today's risk sits,” she said in a statement. “My concern is that pharmacies rushing into this space will move to make a dollar faster rather than make sure they meet every requirement, from ingredient sourcing and facilities to staff training and sterility testing.”
Shortly after the new notice was published, a number of telehealth websites were already marketing the six peptides, each for a price of anywhere from $199 to $249 a month.
Effort to loosen rules on unproven peptide drugs, favored by RFK Jr, faced fierce pushback from agency scientists
A plan to give people in the United States easier access to unproven peptide drugs favored by the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, was opposed by most Food and Drug Administration scientific staff members, who had limited input in drafting the policy, according to six people familiar with its development.
The document posted online on Wednesday by Kennedy’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) covers a handful of injectable peptides promoted within the wellness industry for building muscle, healing injuries and boosting energy.
Research looked at prevalence of chronic traumatic encephalopathy in 2,362 players who died in 2008-2023
A new study published on Wednesday estimates that about 75% of former NFL players who died over a 15-year period had evidence of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).
The research, published in Jama Network Open and conducted by a Boston-based team, examined the estimated prevalence of the degenerative brain disease among NFL players who died from 2008 through 2023. Researchers found that the estimated rate of CTE among these players was substantially higher than the rates observed in brain samples collected from the general population.
—Photo-Illustration by TIME (Source Image: Deagreez/Getty Images)
Have you ever had a disturbing thought pop into your head out of nowhere—something you'd never consider actually doing?
Intrusive thoughts are unwanted thoughts, images, or urges that can feel upsetting, confusing, or wildly out of character. They're more common in people with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) but can happen to anyone, and they can involve everything from violence and sex to religion, relationships, and the fear of having done something wrong.
Many people are able to brush off the occasional intrusive thought and move on quickly. People with OCD, on the other hand, can get stuck trying to figure out what the thought means—and whether they might act on it. “We stop and we treat that thought as super important and meaningful,” says Alissa Jerud, a clinical psychologist and clinical assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania.
Intrusive thoughts can feel especially disturbing because they often involve someone or something the person cherishes. “We tend to have intrusive thoughts about the things we care most about,” Jerud says.
Some of Jerud’s patients have kept their intrusive thoughts to themselves for 20 years before telling her. They might be thinking: “Why am I having these thoughts? What does it say about me? Maybe I’m a monster,” she says.
A calm, compassionate response can make it easier to keep talking. “It can help them feel like there’s hope,” Jerud says. “Maybe I don’t have to beat myself up for having these thoughts in the first place.”
Here’s what to say if a loved one tells you they’re having intrusive thoughts.
Start with, “I’m so glad you shared this with me”
Start by thanking your friend for trusting you. Skip responses like “How could you think that?” or “Don’t say that,” which can reinforce the shame they’re already feeling.
It’s helpful, too, to make it clear that what they told you won’t affect your relationship: “This doesn’t change how I think about you,” suggests Madeline Thompson Smith, an Atlanta-based licensed professional counselor who specializes in OCD. Then acknowledge how upsetting the thoughts sound: “That sounds really scary to have stuck in your head.”
Pay attention to how you sound and look, too. A warm invitation to explain more can feel like judgment if you’re staring intensely or using a sharp tone. If you look startled, acknowledge it instead of hoping they didn’t notice. Kimberly Leonte, a psychologist in Boston who specializes in OCD, suggests wording it like this: “I guess I wasn’t expecting that, but I want to hear more.”
Offer support without repeatedly reassuring them
When someone you love is distressed by an intrusive thought, reassuring them can feel like the kindest thing to do. But if they keep coming back with the same question, answering it again and again can become part of the OCD cycle.
Say your partner keeps asking whether an unwanted thought means they’re dangerous. You reassure them, they feel better, and you both get back to your evening. Until another question arrives: But what if you’re wrong? What if they didn’t explain the thought accurately enough? Next thing you know, they’re asking for reassurance again.
A single reassuring response isn’t necessarily a problem, Thompson Smith says. The concern is when seeking reassurance becomes a compulsion—a behavior someone feels driven to repeat to relieve their distress. Each answer briefly helps them feel better, but it leaves them needing another answer when the doubt returns.
Instead of debating what the thought means, acknowledge how they’re feeling and express confidence in their ability to get through the discomfort. Thompson Smith suggests: “I know this feels really uncomfortable right now. I’m not going to help you go down the rabbit hole, but I’m happy to sit with you while it’s hard.”
If reassurance has become a routine between you, talk about changing it together, ideally with guidance from their therapist. Abruptly refusing to answer can leave your loved one wondering what happened. “It’s tough if the person’s used to getting reassurance, and you just stop giving it and they don’t know why,” Leonte says. Instead, discuss how you’ll respond the next time they ask—and make sure you both understand why you’re trying something different.
Meanwhile, aim to avoid suggestions like “Just stop thinking about it” or “Replace it with a happy thought.” Besides being considerably easier said than done, trying to force an intrusive thought away can keep someone preoccupied with whether it’s gone yet.
Ask whether they want you to listen or help
Find out what your loved one wants from the conversation. They might be seeking support in taking a step toward getting mental-health help, or they may simply want you to know what they’ve been going through.
“Do you want me to just listen, or do you want help figuring out what to do next?” Thompson Smith suggests asking. If this is the first time they’ve said their intrusive thoughts out loud, they might not be ready to discuss next steps.
If they’re already in therapy, ask how you can support what they’re learning: “What would your therapist recommend trying right now?” Leonte suggests asking. If they’re interested in learning more about intrusive thoughts but feel overwhelmed, you could offer to read about them together.
Sometimes, they simply want someone to listen. Your loved one might be telling you because “they just don’t want to be alone in this, and you can help them hold it,” Thompson Smith says. Or they may need to know “you’re not gonna judge me or people aren’t gonna run away if I start trying to be open and get help.”
Know when intrusive thoughts call for professional help
If unwanted thoughts are causing significant distress or interfering with daily life, offer to help your loved one find a therapist. Keep it low-pressure: “If you ever want me to help you find a therapist, I’d be happy to do so,” Jerud suggests saying.
For OCD, look for a therapist trained in exposure and response prevention, or ERP, Jerud suggests. It helps people learn to tolerate intrusive thoughts without turning to rituals like repeated reassurance. The International OCD Foundation maintains a directory to help people find one.
There’s also an important distinction between an unwanted thought about harm and wanting or intending to act. Don’t assume that every disturbing thought is benign, Thompson Smith says. If you’re unsure what someone means, ask calmly and directly: “Is this a thought that scares you, or something you want to do?” If they describe wanting to act, ask about plans and help them get professional support right away.
Keep being the friend you’ve always been
After someone opens up about their intrusive thoughts, keep treating them like you always have. Send the ridiculous meme, ask whether they’re still coming to dinner, and keep including them in the things you usually do together.
People often fear that sharing their intrusive thoughts will change how others see them, Thompson Smith says. Pulling away—or asking about their mental health every time you talk—can leave them wishing they’d kept quiet.
You might get frustrated or struggle to find the right words, Leonte says. If you react in a way you regret, apologize and let them know you’re still there for them. “No one’s perfect,” she says. “The goal isn’t to be perfect, it’s just to be supportive.”
In just 7 days, TechCrunch Founder Summit takes over Boston’s SoWa Power Station on November 4. Your chance to save up to $100 on tickets is running out, and the opportunity to learn and connect directly with experienced founders, investors, and startup leaders is almost here.
Increase will add strain on healthcare system already struggling amid cuts by Trump administration, experts say
The number of people with dementia in the United States is projected to increase dramatically over the next 25 years, which will place increasing strain on a healthcare system already struggling to help them amid cuts by the Trump administration, experts say.
According to a new study in Jama Neurology, the annual incidence of new dementia cases globally will more than double, from 11.4m in 2023 to 24.7m in 2050. In the United States, the number of adults diagnosed with dementia each year will increase from 514,000 in 2020 to 1m by 2060, according to a Jama study published in 2024.
Jean Kaseya, of the Africa CDC, warns of the illness spreading like Covid unless more funding is secured to increase preparedness and possible treatment
The “unprecedented” spread of the Ebola outbreak means it could reach the UK and other countries, according to one of Africa’s top health officials.
As the current outbreak reached 10,000 cases, with almost 5,000 deaths, Dr Jean Kaseya, director general of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), compared the outbreak to the Covid pandemic, which first took hold in China before spreading to countries across the world, claiming millions of lives, and ravaging health systems and economies.
Exclusive: Health secretary to extend role of watchdog, which backers say helps hold service in England to account
Yvette Cooper has abandoned plans to abolish the NHS’s independent patient champion after an outcry from MPs across the political spectrum.
The health secretary has decided to keep and extend the role of Healthwatch England, which was due to be axed as part of the government’s reorganisation of the health service in England.
axe the Health Services Safety Investigations Body.
end councils’ automatic representation on the boards of ICBs.
remove the requirement for a nurse on every NHS foundation trust board.
Experts say symptoms such as dark circles under the eyes, grey skin, cracked lips and hair loss can be a warning sign – but there are other factors too
TikTok is rife with influencers warning of “ferritin face”, a term they use to describe the pallor, dark circles, dry skin, and hair loss claimed to indicate low iron stores. But is this based on fact or fiction, and when is it time to head to the GP?
Experts say symptoms such as dark circles under the eyes, grey skin, cracked lips and hair loss can be a warning sign – but there are other factors too
TikTok is rife with influencers warning of “ferritin face”, a term they use to describe the pallor, dark circles, dry skin, and hair loss claimed to indicate low iron stores. But is this based on fact or fiction, and when is it time to head to the GP?
It involves the fracturing of a patient’s ribs, before they spend three months laced into a corset. Some of those who have had this cosmetic procedure say it is like being ‘hit by a bus’. Why is it becoming more popular?
Daniela Cesin was 14 when she began thinking about her looks. “I was a little bit chubby and I started to work out at home and lose weight. I saw the difference in my body: my abs, the muscles in my arms, and I started liking it,” she says. By 31, she had the slim, toned body she had hoped for, but something was still missing. “I wanted to have that guitar hourglass shape.”
In August, Cesin travelled from Miami, where she has lived for the past 15 years, to her native Venezuela for liposuction and a fat transfer to her hips. She met her cosmetic surgeon for the first time the day before the procedure, and he realised she didn’t have enough fat to go ahead with it. Instead, he offered to perform RibXcar: a rib remodelling surgery that would involve fracturing three of her lower ribs on each side and binding them in a corset for three months, to set the ribs in a new position and give her a wasplike waist.
A close-up image shows a bowl of blue M&M candies. | Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images
If you were anything like me as a kid, trick-or-treating meant one, maybe two, pillowcases full of candy every Halloween.
And as fun as collecting all that candy could be, the real fun began when I got home and dumped my winnings onto my bedroom floor. That’s when the sorting began.
I had some very specific rules: The usual suspects — think Smarties, Tootsie Rolls, and Dum Dums — went into one pile. Fun-size chocolates, like Snickers, Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups, and Baby Ruths, went into another. And then there was my prized pile: Skittles, Warheads, Starbursts, and Sour Patch Kids. Those were meant to be eaten slowly throughout November. The rest was fair game.
The ways we sort and eat our Halloween candy are decided by some very particular, personal rules. But Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would like to add another distinction: Which candies are made with artificial dyes?
Kennedy’s ire for synthetic food dyes is years old, and they’ve become a major target of his Make America Healthy Again movement. Last year, he announced a plan to remove “petroleum-based synthetic dyes” from foods, arguing that companies “shouldn’t be feeding it to the rest of us.”
That plan has become a multimillion-dollar problem for Mars, the maker of M&Ms, which promised customers last year that they would create an all-natural version of their tasty chocolatey treats. As the Wall Street Journal reported this summer, however, its latest offering is missing one of the most iconic colored M&Ms — the blue M&M.
M&Ms aren’t the only snack food in Kennedy’s crosshairs: He has called out Doritos, Cheez-Its, Cap’n Crunch, and gummy bears, saying their ingredients include “a lot of poisons.” On Fox News, he described what children eat as “food-like substances” and also said that “some of it was made in petroleum refineries.”
In reality, the evidence is more complicated, because the Food and Drug Administration has long considered many of these approved synthetic dyes to be safe under its rules, while acknowledging that some children may be sensitive to them. Kennedy’s sweeping accusations go much further.
Still, pressure from Kennedy and those in the MAHA movement has led many companies to rethink the recipes of your favorite snacks. But producing those alternatives isn’t easy or cheap, as the story of the blue M&M illustrates.
Jesse Newman, a food reporter for the Wall Street Journal, went inside a Mars factory in Topeka, Kansas, to see the process for herself. She spoke with Today, Explained co-host Noel King about why blue is so difficult to produce naturally, and what changing a candy’s color actually accomplishes.
Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get your podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services, RFK Jr., has some issues with the blue M&M. What, what exactly happened? How did it draw his attention?
He is not a fan of any sort of chemical. He’s really concerned about toxins in our food. And Blue 1, which is the food dye that makes blue M&Ms blue, is a synthetic chemical.
He really takes issue with artificial dyes. He believes that they cause hyperactivity in kids, some neurological challenges. He thinks artificial dyes are linked to cancer.
As a member of the Trump administration, he formally set out to get them removed, didn’t he?
Oh yeah. He’s been putting a lot of pressure on the industry to strip artificial dyes from all kinds of products.
What do we know factually about artificial dyes? We hear that they’re bad for us. We hear that a lot of things are bad for us. We’re all still alive and kicking. Are artificial dyes really detrimental to our health?
The FDA for decades has said that there are nine artificial dyes approved for use in food. And they said that those artificial dyes are safe and have said so for years and years and years, as have other global bodies, so long as they’re used in accordance with some of the standards that the FDA laid out.
A California state agency has found that dyes are linked again to hyperactivity in children. And the FDA itself has said, ‘Okay, we think that these dyes are safe for the vast majority of kids, but some kids might be more sensitive to them than others.’
So I think the real issue is that it’s a chemical doing it. They’re purely cosmetic. They don’t do anything except color food. There is no nutritional benefit that you are getting from these dyes. And so do we need them? Absolutely not.
I think one of the issues is that if you’re looking at the ways our food contributes to health problems, artificial dyes are probably pretty low on the list.
You went inside a factory where they make M&Ms, and you looked at how they’re trying to make this happen. Tell me everything.
I went to this plant in Topeka, Kansas, to see how they were made. And it’s a massive industrial food plant, where they mix these colors and spray them onto these small chocolate orbs, which they refer to as lentils.
The M&Ms move through the plant, and they arrive at these massive [machines] that they call pans, but they look like big tumble dryers. And the M&Ms just tumble around in these pans, and the color is sprayed on. It’s a very, very industrial process, millions of M&Ms a day. And the challenge that Mars has now is making that happen with a natural dye instead of an artificial one.
A blue natural dye is the challenge. What are the problems?
They’ve been working on this for years. And they went with a product called spirulina, which is made from algae. But spirulina comes with a host of problems that they are now dealing with.
Blue 1, which is the artificial dye, arrives at the factories as a liquid. And they pour it into these mixers and they mix it up with this sugary syrup and it’s pretty easy to handle. Spirulina arrives as a powder. So now you’re mixing a powder into this same mixture, into the same recipe, and that is very different.
Because spirulina is a protein, the resulting mixture becomes a lot thicker. What they found was that the mixture containing spirulina would really clog up the piping. It was getting stuck. It moved less smoothly through the pipes.
Also because it is a protein, it was starting to coat and build up on the inside of the machinery. And when that happens, it’s a food safety hazard. It can mold; it can cause problems. For many reasons, it was a challenge to handle.
How much did this all cost?
I should say it’s not done. Mars wouldn’t give me an official figure for how much they spent. But they said that they are spending millions and millions of dollars.
They’re having to retrofit their plants, essentially. Mars said that they’re having to change about 300 types of machinery in their plants. It’s a real investment. And at the end of the day, it all comes down to cost.
What did they actually end up getting done? What was the outcome here?
Mars said what they committed to was that they were going to release a new version of their M&Ms and a few other of their products this year that were made with natural dyes instead of artificial dyes.
They didn’t come out and say we’re eliminating artificial dyes. And so folks should be really clear about that: Their artificially dyed M&Ms aren’t going anywhere. They are still on shelves.
What they said is that they’re going to come out with an option that is naturally dyed. So they tried to do that. And what they found was that they couldn’t do it at a cost that was acceptable to them. With the blue and with the spirulina, it would have been far too expensive to make it work at scale. We’re talking millions and millions and millions of M&Ms per day.
They had problems making the green, the blue, and the brown M&M because, if you go back to your elementary school color theory, they needed blue to make all of those M&Ms. Ultimately they said, “Okay, we can do green. There’s little enough spirulina in the green to make the green M&M.” But blue and brown, they are not able to get there yet due to the amount of spirulina that those colors require.
And so earlier this year, they launched their naturally dyed version of M&Ms with red, orange, yellow, and green M&Ms. And if you take a look at this bag, my colleague referred to these as autumnal. They look very autumnal.
They look sort of muted.
You know, it really isn’t the same. It looks like a mature person’s M&M.
At the end of the day, what are the changes to the M&Ms? Let’s say I go online and get the natural dyed ones. What does that mean for my health? Am I now a healthy and virtuous person if I’m eating the autumnal M&Ms?
It means very little.
I would say you are, hopefully, still enjoying that sugary treat and the pick-me-up in the afternoon as you’re starting to tire. But you’re still eating candy; you’re still eating sugar. It really hasn’t changed very much.
Login
