Man who used megaphone to lead attack on police during Capitol riot gets over 7 years in prison
Michael Kunzelman – April 3, 2024
This image from police body-worn camera video, contained and annotated in the Justice Department’s government’s sentencing memorandum supporting the sentencing of Taylor James Johnatakis, shows Johnatakis at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington. Johnatakis, of Washington state, who used a megaphone to orchestrate a mob’s attack on police officers guarding the U.S. Capitol, was sentenced on Wednesday to more than seven years in prison. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth said videos captured Johnatakis playing a leadership role during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack. (Department of Justice via AP)Rioters at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington. Taylor James Johnatakis of Washington state, who used a megaphone to orchestrate a mob’s attack on police officers guarding the U.S. Capitol, was sentenced on Wednesday to more than seven years in prison. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth said videos captured Johnatakis playing a leadership role during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack. (AP Photo/John Minchillo, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — A Washington state man who used a megaphone to orchestrate a mob’s attack on police officers guarding the U.S. Capitol was sentenced on Wednesday to more than seven years in prison.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth said videos captured Taylor James Johnatakis playing a leadership role during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot. Johnatakis led other rioters on a charge against a police line, “barked commands” over his megaphone and shouted step-by-step directions for overpowering officers, the judge said.
“In any angry mob, there are leaders and there are followers. Mr. Johnatakis was a leader. He knew what he was doing that day,” the judge said before sentencing him to seven years and three months behind bars.
Johnatakis, who represented himself with an attorney on standby, has repeatedly expressed rhetoric that appears to be inspired by the anti-government “ sovereign citizen ” movement. He asked the judge questions at his sentencing, including, “Does the record reflect that I repent in my sins?”
Lamberth, who referred to some of Johnatakis’ words as “gobbledygook,” said, “I’m not answering questions here.”
Prosecutors recommended a nine-year prison sentence for Johnatakis, a self-employed installer of septic systems.
“Johnatakis was not just any rioter; he led, organized, and encouraged the assault of officers at the U.S. Capitol on January 6,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing.
A jury convicted him of felony charges after a trial last year in Washington, D.C.
Johnatakis, 40, of Kingston, Washington, had a megaphone strapped to his back when he marched to the Capitol from then-President Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally near the White House on Jan. 6.
“It’s over,” he shouted at the crowd of Trump supporters. “Michael Pence has voted against the president. We are down to the nuclear option.”
Johnatakis was one of the first rioters to chase a group of police officers who were retreating up stairs outside the Capitol. He shouted and gestured for other rioters to “pack it in” and prepare to attack.
Johnatakis shouted “Go!” before he and other rioters shoved a metal barricade into a line of police officers. He also grabbed an officer’s arm.
“The crime is complete,” Johnatakis posted on social media several hours after he left the Capitol.
He was arrested in February 2021. He has been jailed since November 2023, when jurors convicted him of seven counts, including obstruction of the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress that certified Joe Biden’s 2020 electoral victory. The jury also convicted him of assault and civil disorder charges.
Justice Department prosecutor Courtney Howard said Johnatakis hasn’t expressed any sincere remorse or accepted responsibility for his crimes on Jan. 6.
“He’s going so far as to portray himself as a persecuted victim,” she said.
Lamberth said he received over 20 letters from Johnatakis, his relatives and friends. Some of his supporters don’t seem to know the full extent of Johnatakis’ crimes on Jan. 6, the judge added. He said he would order the clerk of court’s office to send all them copies of his prepared remarks during the sentencing hearing.
“There can be no room in our country for this sort of political violence,” Lamberth said.
Last April, Lamberth ordered a psychologist to examine Johnatakis and determine if he was mentally competent to stand trial. The judge ultimately ruled that Johnatakis could understand the proceedings and assist in his defense.
Approximately 1,350 people have been charged with Capitol riot-related federal crimes. Over 800 of them have been sentenced, with roughly two-thirds getting terms of imprisonment ranging from several days to 22 years.
Several Trump supporters involved in Jan. 6 are running for office this year
Diana Paulsen, Monica Dunn, Kelly Davis and Abigail Russ April 3, 2024
WASHINGTON — Former President Donald Trump has promised to pardon many of his supporters convicted of crimes related to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol if he’s elected in November.
Further down the ballot in the 2024 elections, several convicted rioters and others who were involved in the lead-up to the Capitol attack are running for local and national office themselves.
This fall will also see a candidate who was on the other side of the clash on Jan. 6, 2021. Former Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn, who faced down a crowd of rioters, is running to replace retiring Democratic Rep. John Sarbanes of Maryland. The primary in that race is on May 14.
NBC News has identified seven candidates who are running for elected office this year who were at the Capitol on Jan. 6 or attended the Trump “Stop the Steal” rally that preceded it, plus three more who ran but have already lost in primaries. Only one candidate — Derrick Evans of West Virginia — returned NBC News’ request for comment for this story.
Kimberly Dragoo, Missouri
Kimberly Dragoo before entering the Capitol through a window. (U.S. District Court)
Kimberly Dragoo, who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in connection with the Jan. 6 attack, is running for a seat on the St. Joseph Board of Education in Missouri.
Dragoo participated in the riot with her husband, Steven, who photographed the couple throughout the day, including when she went through a broken window into the Capitol, according to court documents. She is one of 10 candidates running for three open seats for a board that oversees 10,000 students and 1,500 staff members, per the district’s website. The election will occur on April 2.
Michele Morrow, North Carolina
Michele Morrow won the Republican primary for North Carolina Superintendent of Public Education and will face democrat Mo Green in November.
Morrow has said publicly that she attended the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6 but that she did not enter the Capitol building. Morrow spoke to a local news station about her experience shortly after Jan. 6, saying that she “was up there” and “around the Capitol” and tried to discourage others from committing violence. She said she was “telling everyone we cannot expect our lawmakers to uphold the law if we’re going to break the law.” She has not been charged in connection with Jan. 6.
Morrow has recently gained national prominence for past social media posts in which she called for violence against prominent Democrats, including calls for the execution of President Joe Biden and then-President Barack Obama, which were first reported by CNN. In a video posted on X, she responded to the reporting of her posts saying they were “old comments taken out of context, made in jest, or never made in the first place.” She accused the media of reporting on the statements to “hide the radicalism of the Democrat platform.”
If elected, Morrow would oversee the nearly 3,000 public schools in North Carolina, attended by 1.4 million children. Morrow has no elected experience, has said that she homeschools her children and has described public schooling as “indoctrination” in social media posts.
Jason Riddle, New Hampshire
Jason Riddle holds a bottle of wine inside the Capitol. (via NBC Boston)
Jason Riddle pleaded guilty to entering the Capitol and theft of government property and was sentenced to 90 days in prison. Now, he is running for Congress in New Hampshire’s Second District. He admitted to chugging a bottle of wine inside the building and provided a photo of himself holding the bottle to media outlets, per government filings.
This is his second run for Congress. He also ran in 2022, but his candidacy was complicated by the fact that he was incarcerated at the time. He also initially expressed confusion about what office he was running for. In an interview with NBC Boston, Riddle said that he planned to challenge Democratic Rep. Annie Kuster but he “thought Ann was a state representative.” When told that she was a member of Congress, he replied: “Oh, well, I guess I have to run for that then.”
In a survey about his policy positions for the website Ballotpedia, Riddle described himself as a “recently released January 6th political prisoner” and lists Jesus as his only endorsement. The filing deadline for New Hampshire is in June and he is one of several Republicans seeking to run in the GOP primary, which is set for Sept. 10.
Anthony Kern, Arizona
Anthony Kern Anthony Kern argues in support of a provision in the Arizona budget package that strips cash from Maricopa County Sheriff’s office in Phoenix (Bob Christie / AP file)
Anthony Kern is a current member of the Arizona Senate who signed a document falsely “certifying” the Arizona election for Trump as a fake elector. Kern attended the “Stop the Steal” rally and was outside the Capitol while rioters entered it; multiple news outlets identified him in video of the day posted online. Kern tweeted on Jan. 6 that he was in Washington for “D-Day,” using the hashtag #StopTheSteal. He later condemned the violence. He has not been charged in relation to the attack and there is no evidence that he entered the Capitol.
Kern is running for Congress in Arizona’s 8th District, where he faces several opponents in the race to replace retiring Republican Debbie Lesko. His opponents include Blake Masters, the Republican candidate for Senate in Arizona in 2022, and Abe Hamadeh, the Republican candidate for Arizona Attorney General in 2022. (Hamadeh has filed three legal challenges to his loss in the election, all of which are still pending.)
The district, which covers the northwest Phoenix suburbs, is considered solidly Republican, with Trump having won it in 2020 by 13 points.
Jacob Chansley, Arizona
Jacob Chansley at the Capitol riots on Jan. 6, 2021. (Brent Stirton / Getty Images)
Jacob Chansley, better known as the “QAnon Shaman,” has indicated that he’s running for the same seat as Kern, but as a libertarian.
Chansley was sentenced to 41 months in prison for felony obstruction of a proceeding. He is notorious for his unusual attire, having worn a furry horned headdress on Jan. 6.
He filed a statement of interest to run for Congress in November. Chansley does not appear to have a campaign website, has not filed a statement of candidacy with the Federal Election Commission and is not listed as a candidate on the Arizona Libertarian Party’s website. He, like the other candidates, did not respond to NBC News’ request for comment.
Derrick Evans, West Virginia
Derrick Evans at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. (Department of Justice)
Evans, who had been sworn into office just weeks before the Jan. 6 attack, livestreamed his activities that day on Facebook, including him yelling, “Derrick Evans is in the Capitol!”
When reached for comment this week about how his connection to the riot was affecting his candidacy, Evans said in a statement that he believes there was an effort to steal the 2020 election from Trump.
Katrina Pierson, Texas
Katrina Pierson listens during the Conservative Political Action Conference (Dylan Hollingsworth / Bloomberg via Getty Images file)
Pierson is headed to a runoff in her bid for Texas’ 33rd state House District. Pierson, a former Trump spokesperson, helped organize the rally at the Ellipse and served as a liaison between organizers and the White House, including sharing Trump’s plan to call on his supporters to march to the Capitol, according to the House Jan. 6 Committee’s report. There is no evidence that Pierson went near the Capitol or into the building and she has not been charged with any crimes.
Pierson faces incumbent state Rep. Justin Holland, also a Republican, in a May 28 runoff. She was endorsed in the race by Gov. Greg Abbot and Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is targeting state House members who voted to impeach him, including Holland.
Candidates who lost
Several candidates involved in Jan. 6 have already lost their bids for office this cycle.
Ryan Zink, who was convicted of a felony and two misdemeanors for his role in the riot, lost his primary challenge to Rep. Jodey Arrington in Texas’ 19th Congressional District. He filmed himself breaching the Capitol in footage cited by prosecutors, saying, “We’re storming the Capitol! You can’t stop us!” He received about 3% of the vote.
Bianca Gracia lost her bid to represent Texas’ 128th state House District. According to the Jan. 6 committee report, Gracia helped organize a pro-Trump rally in Washington on Jan. 5 and had close ties to the extremist Proud Boys group, even meeting with leaders of that group and of the Oath Keepers on the night before the riot. Gracia gave testimony to the House Jan. 6 committee but largely invoked her Fifth Amendment rights in declining to answer questions. She has not been charged with any crimes and does not appear to have been at or near the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Gracia was endorsed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton but that wasn’t enough to help her defeat ultra-conservative Texas house member Briscoe Cain, who assisted the Trump legal team in its election results challenges in 2020.
1.7 million Texas households are set to lose monthly internet subsidy
Pooja Salhotra – April 2, 2024
A colonia, unincorporated neighborhoods that lack basic services such as street lights, proper drainage, paved roads or waste management, is seen near Edinburg on March 25, 2020. Credit: Verónica G. Cárdenas for The Texas Tribune
The $30 per month Daisy Solis has saved off of her internet bill for the past two years stretched a long way.
Those dollars covered new shoes for her three, growing children, dinners out at the Chick-fil-A that popped up in her town of Peñitas in South Texas, and part of a higher-than-usual electricity bill.
Now, Solis worries she might have to sacrifice on her internet speed because a federal subsidy that has helped her pay for her internet plan is set to expire at the end of April.
The Affordable Connectivity Program provides a $30 monthly subsidy to help low-income households pay for internet service, and up to $75 per month for households on tribal lands. The $14.2 billion program was part of the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and has helped 23 million households in the U.S — including 1.7 million in Texas — save money on their internet bills. The program’s funding is slated to dwindle at the end of April, though, potentially cutting millions off from the internet. In May, limited remaining funding in the program will allow eligible households to receive a partial discount; there won’t be any benefits after May.
“It has really helped me in that I don’t have to stress out about the bill,” said Solis, 27. “Even though it’s $30, $30 goes a long way.”
The program’s termination will disproportionately impact South Texas, where counties along the Texas-Mexico border had higher than average rates of participation. Overall, 1 in 7 Texans used the program. But in some border counties, including Hidalgo County, about half of its residents used the subsidy, according to data from the Federal Communications Commission.
“Some people have told me they might not get internet if [the subsidy] goes away,” said Marco Lopez, a community organizer at La Unión del Pueblo Entero, a nonprofit organization that supports low-income neighborhoods in the Valley. “I don’t know what to tell them because it’s not just cutting off their internet; it’s cutting off their opportunities for jobs, for school, for telehealth.”
A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced a bill that would extend funding for the Affordable Connectivity Program through the end of 2024. But the bill has not moved and faces considerable pushback from Republican lawmakers who claim the Biden administration has spent “recklessly.”
In a December letter to the chair of the FCC, a group of lawmakers, including U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, disputed that the broadband program was necessary. The lawmakers said that most households using the subsidy already had broadband subscriptions. But that’s likely untrue. According to an FCC survey, 47% of respondents reported having either zero connectivity or relying on mobile service before enrolling in the federal program.
On Tuesday, FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel sent a letter to Congress urging them to fund the program until the end of the year. She said the funding has been particularly critical for vulnerable populations, including veterans, seniors, and students.
“We know that nearly half of ACP households are led by someone over the age of 50,” she wrote. “The ACP and the broadband service it supports is ‘need to have’ for many seniors, who depend on the program for managing their health and maintaining access to their medical teams.”
The program’s termination comes as the state and federal government pump historic sums of money to expand broadband infrastructure and close the so-called digital divide. Texas is poised to receive more than $3.3 billion federal dollars to help connect the roughly 7 million Texans who lack access to affordable internet. The state will bolster those funds with an additional $1.5 billion that voters approved in November.
Some advocates worry that terminating the Affordable Connectivity Program at this juncture could jeopardize the success of future broadband investments.
“If we build the infrastructure but then all these people lose internet access, we are going to be taking one step forward and two steps back,” said Kelty Garbee, executive director of Texas Rural Funders, a nonprofit focused on rural philanthropy. “It is important to take a long view.”
Rural areas lag behind their urban counterparts when it comes to broadband access. The combination of low population density and remoteness make such areas unattractive to internet service providers, who are hesitant to invest in expensive infrastructure without a guaranteed pool of customers. Garbee worries that ending the government subsidies could shrink the rural customer base and make those areas even less attractive to internet companies.
Jordana Barton-Garcia, who focuses on broadband investments for nonprofit organization Connect Humanity, said that while the termination of ACP will be a significant loss for high poverty areas, the program is a “Band-Aid” solution. She said the subsidy doesn’t address the root of the problem: that the economics of broadband do not work in rural, low-income areas.
“Instead of being ruled by profit-maximizing major corporations, we need other models to serve low and moderate income communities,” she said. “We need to be able to serve without maximizing profits and instead serve for the public good.”
Some communities have found innovative ways to provide broadband to their rural constituents at a low cost. The city of Pharr in Hidalgo County, for example, created a municipal internet service program that offers plans for as low as $25 per month, the price residents in the border community said they could afford. Barton-Garcia said Pharr won’t be affected by the termination of government subsidies because the city has already secured its own funding. Pharr used grant money, a municipal bond as well as American Rescue Plan dollars to create a municipally-run internet service.
Large internet providers such as Comcast said they will continue to support low-income customers with an affordable plan. Comcast offers eligible customers a plan called internet essentials for $9.95 and a slightly higher-speed plan for $29.95.
For smaller providers in rural Texas, though, a low-cost plan is not financially feasible without government support. Charlie Cano, CEO of ETex Telephone Cooperative, said his lowest cost option is $62 per month.
“Anything lower than that is going to jeopardize our business model,” Cano said. “I’m nervous about what we are going to do about that low-cost option.”
In order to qualify as a grantee for the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment Program — the main broadband program created by the bipartisan infrastructure law — providers must offer a low-cost option to low-income customers. Providers like Cano worry this requirement may make it difficult for companies like his to win federal grant dollars.
Disclosure: Comcast has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
Biden administration points finger at Republicans for internet bill hikes
Brian Fung, CNN – April 2, 2024
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Tens of millions of Americans could see skyrocketing internet bills this spring or may be abruptly kicked off their plans — and it will be congressional Republicans who are to blame, the Biden administration said Tuesday.
The accusation reflects a last-ditch pressure campaign to save a federal program that has helped connect more than 23 million US households to the internet, many for the first time. Without it, those households will be forced to pay hundreds of dollars more per year to stay online.
By the end of the month, funding for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) will run out, jeopardizing the monthly discounts on internet service benefiting an estimated 59 million low-income people, including veterans, students and older Americans.
Many ACP subscribers would be forced to choose between paying for groceries and paying for internet service if the program is shut down, CNN has previously reported.
Although popular with users from across the ideological spectrum, the ACP’s future is in doubt as legislation to extend the program has stalled. Now, as the Federal Communications Commission has begun winding it down, the Biden administration is ramping up pressure on the GOP for standing in the way of a critical lifeline for accessing health care, jobs and education.
“President [Joe] Biden has been calling on Congress to pass legislation that would extend the benefit through 2024. And we know Democratic members and senators have joined him in that effort,” a senior administration official told reporters. “But unfortunately, Republicans in Congress have failed to act.”
Biden has called on Congress to approve $6 billion to continue the ACP. A bill introduced in January by a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate would authorize $7 billion. That legislation has 216 co-sponsors in the House, including 21 Republicans, and three in the Senate, including two Republicans.
But policy experts have said it is unlikely Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson will let the bill onto the House floor as GOP leaders have decried government spending, despite the program being used in virtually every congressional district nationwide.
“It is clear the program would be extended if the speaker would allow a vote,” said Blair Levin, an analyst at the market research firm New Street Research. “So far, he has not said anything about it, but it appears he will not allow the House to vote on the legislation. He has not, to my knowledge, said anything substantive about the legislation or the program.”
Levin added that support by Republican Sens. J.D. Vance of Ohio and Kevin Cramer of North Dakota also suggest the bill would pass the Senate, making the House “the biggest obstacle.”
Spokespeople for Johnson and for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
The result is a stalemate that, if left unresolved, will lead to the collapse of the ACP by early May.
Administration officials declined to say whether Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris have personally discussed the ACP with congressional Republicans. But the officials told reporters there is currently no Plan B if Congress fails to extend the program.
“There are really no good options in a world in which Congress leaves us without any funding,” said another senior administration official. “There are certainly no easy answers for us to move forward if this program ends. So we want to work as hard as possible to make sure we avoid that possibility.”
Some lawmakers had hoped that money for the ACP could have been included in the recent bipartisan spending deal intended to keep the government open, but those hopes were ultimately left unfulfilled.
On Tuesday, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel sent a letter to Congress outlining the impact that the ACP’s disruption would cause.
“The end of the ACP will have broad impact,” Rosenworcel wrote. “But it is worth noting that they will have special impact on certain vulnerable populations, including senior citizens. We know that nearly half of ACP households are led by someone over the age of 50.”
More than 4 million military households are signed up for the ACP, Rosenworcel added, while 3.4 million households within the ACP program reported using school lunch or breakfast programs, indicating that many program subscribers are parents of children whose ability to do homework assignments may be interrupted by the loss of the ACP. To qualify for the ACP, users are required to meet certain income limits or be a participant in one of a number of other federal aid programs, such as the National School Lunch Program.
Rosenworcel called on Sen. Maria Cantwell and the panel she chairs, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to quickly advance legislation to extend the ACP. But the bill’s future remains foggy.
What’s more, a recent government-funded study of 17 National Cancer Institute registries shows cancer is on the rise among younger Americans, particularly women (who saw a 4.4% increase), Hispanic and Asian or Pacific Islander populations. The research also shows that gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are the fastest-growing type of cancer among younger people.
That said, it’s important to understand that many cancers are known as “preventable cancers” and that very few (up to 10%) of cancers are inherited. “Cancers that are preventable are ones that we can take adequate steps to reduce the risk,” Heather Thompson Mackey, a nurse and senior director of cancer prevention for the Prevent Cancer Foundation, tells Yahoo Life.
While certain immutable factors — such as race, age or genetic predisposition — can influence cancer diagnosis and survival rates, there are lifestyle changes that can improve one’s chances. “About 40% of cancers overall can be related to modifiable risk factors,” Mackey says. Here, she and other experts share ways to cut one’s risk.
Cut alcohol consumption
As the CDC notes, drinking alcohol is associated with an increased risk of getting a number of different types of cancer, including liver, prostate and pancreatic. “It’s best for cancer prevention to not drink at all,” says Mackey. However, she acknowledges that if people do drink, they should stick to no more than one drink (for women) or two (for men) per day.
Don’t smoke
According to the CDC, cigarette smoking is the No. 1 risk factor for lung cancer, with statistics showing that smokers are 15 to 30 times more likely to develop or die from lung cancer than non-smokers. But it’s not just lung cancer smokers should worry about.
“There are multiple other cancers that smoking impacts,” Dr. Andrew Hertler, an oncologist and chief medical officer for Evolent, tells Yahoo Life. “Everything from bladder cancer, to cancer of the head and neck region, to esophageal cancer and pancreatic cancer.” (For tips on quitting, look here.)
Know your body
Dr. April Spencer, surgical oncologist and founder of Dr. Spencer’s Global Breast Health and Wellness Center, tells Yahoo Life that people should stay aware of their bodies. Report any changes — such as a mole that’s changed shape or color, a mysterious lump or differences in how the breasts look or feel — to a doctor.
To stay safe and avoid burning, Mackey advises wearing sunscreen that is SPF 30 or higher whenever outside and avoiding intense periods of sun exposure between the hours of 10 a.m. and 2 p.m.
Stay up-to-date on vaccinations
Certain vaccines can help reduce your risk of certain cancers. “Over 90% of cases of cervical cancer are associated with HPV [human papillomavirus], and so HPV vaccination has been a game-changer,” says Mackey. She also recommends making sure you have a hepatitis B vaccine. This vaccine has been named the first “anti-cancer” vaccine by the FDA as it can prevent chronic hepatitis B infections, which help prevent liver cancers caused by the virus.
Eat a healthy diet
It sounds simple, but putting nutrition first can help. “Increase the intake of fruits and vegetables, and reduce the intake of red meat and processed foods and beverages high in sugar,” says Spencer.
Additionally, Mackey suggests avoiding lots of cured or smoked meats due to the ways in which they are processed, which increases your exposure to carcinogens.
Document your family medical history
“Knowing your family history, sharing it with your primary care doctor and determining if you’re someone who should undergo more aggressive screening or genetic testing is very important,” Hertler says. For example, if there’s a history of colon cancer in your family, it’s worth talking to your doctor about getting a colonoscopy before the recommended age of 45 and learning about other preventative measures.
“It’s important to know the types of cancer, and at what age those family members were diagnosed,” says Mackey. “Have that conversation with your doctor, even starting in your 20s.”
For those with a known history of cancer in the family, it’s also important to have conversations about which cancers you might be at risk for. While Hertler says he doesn’t always recommend genetic testing, which can help evaluate an individual’s cancer risk, there are algorithms doctors can use that help estimate a patient’s particular risk and whether or not it’s worth moving forward with genetic testing.
Additionally, prophylactic surgeries — in which an organ or gland is removed before any signs of cancer appear, such as a preventative mastectomy to get ahead of breast cancer — can decrease your odds of developing those particular cancers to about 99%. However, Hetler warns it’s not something that is always recommended and that it isn’t something to go into lightly.
“All of these are tough procedures for patients to go through psychologically and physically, and the alternative is always very aggressive screening programs,” he explains. “I’d emphasize that it’s always an individual decision as to whether to have prophylactic surgery.”
Stay active
A sedentary lifestyle is associated with an increased risk for various cancers. Meanwhile, research shows that getting at least 30 minutes of physical activity per day reduces the risk of colorectal, endometrial and postmenopausal breast cancers. The Department of Health and Human Services Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans also recommends 150 minutes to 300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity, 75 minutes to 100 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity, or an equivalent combination each week, along with muscle-strengthening exercises twice a week and balance training to reduce the risk of chronic conditions including cancer. And our experts agree: The more movement, the better.
Release emotional trauma
Our minds matter. “Studies show that children with emotional trauma are at a higher risk of developing cancer and other illnesses later in life,” says Deming. In fact, adverse childhood experiences can increase unhealthy behaviors as well as increase chronic inflammation, which causes wear and tear on the body, leaving it at an increased risk of cancer.
“Working through emotional trauma is one way to mitigate this increased risk of cancer,” she adds. Keeping children safe from adverse childhood experiences is also recommended.
Do your best to avoid pollutants and carcinogens
The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has identified a large number of chemical substances that are known to be human carcinogens, including formaldehyde, soot, coal tar and coal tar pitch, asbestos and aflatoxins. While Hertler notes that “we all are exposed all the time to pollutants and carcinogenic chemicals,” there are ways to limit that exposure. One way is test your home for exposure to radon, asbestos or lead, suggests Mackey.
“We talk a lot about testing for radon to make sure that you don’t have that chemical exposure and increase your risk of lung cancer,” says Mackey. Other things you can do are test for asbestos and lead in your home. Deming also advises checking for contaminants in your local drinking water or using a filtration system. And be mindful of the ingredients included in the products you’re shopping for, adds Spencer. “Only buy personal care products with minimal preservatives and that are free of possible carcinogenic toxins like parabens, BPAs and phthalates,” she says.
Get cancer screenings as recommended
From mammograms to colonoscopies, cancer screenings are essential in preventing the development of more advanced cancers, and in improving survival rates. Age and frequency recommendations vary — from age 21 for Pap smear to detect cervical cancer to age 50 for a prostate exam — and are subject to change given a person’s risk factors. How soon and how often you screen for certain cancers often depends on family history; the earlier your relatives were diagnosed, the more likely your providers will recommend screening at an earlier age.
Why is prevention key?
While there’s never any guarantee that someone won’t get ever get cancer, staying on top of one’s health can achieve better outcomes and make it more likely that, in the event of a diagnosis, the cancer is caught early. “The earlier it’s diagnosed, the greater the overall survival rates,” says Hertler, who has practiced oncology for over 40 years and has seen advancements in the screenings being developed.
Thinking about the rising cancer rates in the U.S. can feel pretty overwhelming, Mackey says, but she stresses the importance of being proactive.
“This is something that can be very frightening, but there’s a lot you can do to really empower yourself to take steps to reduce your cancer risk,” says Mackey. “We may not be able to prevent all types of cancer, but we can live the healthiest life we can … to reduce our risk.”
Our Trump reporting upsets some readers, but there aren’t two sides to facts: Letter from the Editor
Chris Quinn, Editor, Cleveland Plain Dealer – March 30, 2024
Some readers complain that we have different standards involving Donald Trump and Joe Biden. (AP Photo, File)AP
A more-than-occasional arrival in the email these days is a question expressed two ways, one with dripping condescension and the other with courtesy:
Why don’t our opinion platforms treat Donald Trump and other politicians exactly the same way. Some phrase it differently, asking why we demean the former president’s supporters in describing his behavior as monstrous,insurrectionist and authoritarian. I feel for those who write. They believe in Trump and want their local news source to recognize what they see in him.
The angry writers denounce me for ignoring what they call the Biden family crime syndicate and criminality far beyond that of Trump. They quote news sources of no credibility as proof the mainstream media ignores evidence that Biden, not Trump, is the criminal dictator.
The courteous writers don’t go down that road. They politely ask how we can discount the passions and beliefs of the many people who believe in Trump.
This is a tough column to write, because I don’t want to demean or insult those who write me in good faith. I’ve started it a half dozen times since November but turned to other topics each time because this needle hard to thread. No matter how I present it, I’ll offend some thoughtful, decent people.
The north star here is truth. We tell the truth, even when it offends some of the people who pay us for information.
The truth is that Donald Trump undermined faith in our elections in his false bid to retain the presidency. He sparked an insurrection intended to overthrow our government and keep himself in power. No president in our history has done worse.
This is not subjective. We all saw it. Plenty of leaders today try to convince the masses we did not see what we saw, but our eyes don’t deceive. (If leaders began a yearslong campaign today to convince us that the Baltimore bridge did not collapse Tuesday morning, would you ever believe them?) Trust your eyes. Trump on Jan. 6 launched the most serious threat to our system of government since the Civil War. You know that. You saw it.
The facts involving Trump are crystal clear, and as news people, we cannot pretend otherwise, as unpopular as that might be with a segment of our readers. There aren’t two sides to facts. People who say the earth is flat don’t get space on our platforms. If that offends them, so be it.
As for those who equate Trump and Joe Biden, that’s false equivalency. Biden has done nothing remotely close to the egregious, anti-American acts of Trump. We can debate the success and mindset of our current president, as we have about most presidents in our lifetimes, but Biden was never a threat to our democracy. Trump is. He is unique among all American presidents for his efforts to keep power at any cost.
Personally, I find it hard to understand how Americans who take pride in our system of government support Trump. All those soldiers who died in World War II were fighting against the kind of regime Trump wants to create on our soil. How do they not see it?
The March 25 edition of the New Yorker magazine offers some insight. It includes a detailed review of a new book about Adolf Hitler, focused on the year 1932. It’s called “Takeover: Hitler’s Final Rise to Power” and is by historian Timothy W. Ryback. It explains how German leaders – including some in the media — thought they could use Hitler as a means to get power for themselves and were willing to look past his obvious deficiencies to get where they wanted. In tolerating and using Hitler as a means to an end, they helped create the monstrous dictator responsible for millions of deaths.
How are those German leaders different from people in Congress saying the election was stolen or that Jan. 6 was not an insurrection aimed at destroying our government? They know the truth, but they deny it. They see Trump as a means to an end – power for themselves and their “team” – even if it means repeatedly telling lies.
Sadly, many believe the lies. They trust people in authority, without questioning the obvious discrepancies or relying on their own eyes. These are the people who take offense to the truths we tell about Trump. No one in our newsroom gets up in the morning wanting to make a segment of readers feel bad. No one seeks to demean anyone. We understand what a privilege it is to be welcomed into the lives of the millions of people who visit our platforms each month for news, sports and entertainment. But our duty is to the truth.
Our nation does seem to be slipping down the same slide that Germany did in the 1930s. Maybe the collapse of government in the hands of a madman is inevitable, given how the media landscape has been corrupted by partisans, as it was in 1930s Germany.
I hope not.
In our newsroom, we’ll do our part. Much as it offends some who read us, we will continue to tell the truth about Trump.
Extremist ex-adviser drives ‘anti-white racism’ plan for Trump win – report
Martin Pengelly in Washington – April 1, 2024
Stephen Miller at the White House, in Washington DC on 15 July 2020.Photograph: Anna Moneymaker/The New York Times/Bloomberg via Getty Images
The anti-immigration extremist, white nationalist and former Trump White House adviser Stephen Miller is helping drive a plan to tackle supposed “anti-white racism” if Donald Trump returns to power next year, Axios reported.
“Longtime aides and allies … have been laying legal groundwork with a flurry of lawsuits and legal complaints – some of which have been successful,” Axios said on Monday.
Should Trump return to power, Axios said, Miller and other aides plan to “dramatically change the government’s interpretation of civil rights-era laws to focus on ‘anti-white racism’ rather than discrimination against people of colour”.
Such an effort would involve “eliminating or upending” programmes meant to counter racism against non-white groups.
The US supreme court, dominated 6-3 by rightwing justices after Trump installed three, recently boosted such efforts by ruling against race-based affirmative action in college admissions.
America First Legal, a group founded by Miller and described by him as the right’s “long-awaited answer” to the American Civil Liberties Union, is helping drive plans for a second Trump term, Axios said.
In 2021, an AFL suit blocked implementation of a $29bn Covid-era Small Business Administration programme that prioritised helping restaurants owned by women, veterans and people from socially and economically disadvantaged groups.
Miller called that ruling “the first, but crucial, step towards ending government-sponsored racial discrimination”.
Recent AFL lawsuits include one against CBS and Paramount alleging discrimination against a white, straight man who wrote for the show Seal Team, and a civil rights complaint against the NFL over the “Rooney Rule”, which says at least two minority candidates must be interviewed for vacant top positions.
Reports of extremist groups planning for a second Trump presidency are common, not least around Project 2025, a blueprint for transition and legislative priorities prepared by the Heritage Foundation, a hard-right Washington thinktank.
Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, told Axios: “As President Trump has said, all staff, offices, and initiatives connected to [Joe] Biden’s un-American policy will be immediately terminated.”
Throughout Trump’s term in office, Miller was a close adviser and speechwriter – though one of the 45th president’s less successful TV surrogates, ridiculed for using “spray-on hair”.
Controversies were numerous. Among them were reported advocacy for blowing up migrants with drones (which Miller denied); for sending 250,000 US troops to the southern border; and for beheading an Isis leader, dipping the head in pig’s blood and “parad[ing] it around to warn other terrorists” (Miller denied it and called the source of the story, the former defense secretary Mark Esper, a “moron”).
In 2019, after Miller was discovered to have touted white nationalist articles and books, 55 civil rights groups wrote to Trump, protesting: “Stephen Miller has stoked bigotry, hate and division with his extreme political rhetoric and policies throughout his career. The recent exposure of his deep-seated racism provides further proof that he is unfit to serve and should immediately leave his post.”
On Monday, Cedric Richmond, co-chair of Biden’s re-election campaign, said: “It’s not like Donald Trump has been hiding his racism … [but] he’s making it clear that if he wins in November, he’ll turn his racist record into official government policy … It’s up to us to stop him.”
Despite his legal advocacy in the cause of eradicating “anti-white racism”, Miller is not himself a lawyer.
Ty Cobb, a former Trump White House lawyer, recently told the Guardian those close to the former president were now “looking for lawyers who worship Trump and will do his bidding. Trump is looking to Miller to pick people who will be more loyal to Trump than the rule of law.”
Trump Allies Plan to Reinterpret Civil Rights Laws to Protect White People: Report
Nikki McCann Ramirez – April 1, 2024
Allies of Donald Trump and powerful conservative organizations are preparing to launch an offensive against “anti-white racism” should the former president retake the White House in November. According to a report from Axios, those in Trump’s orbit are gearing up for a widespread re-interpretation of civil rights laws to combat what they perceive as reverse racism against white Americans.
According to the report, this would include a mass gutting of government programs and diversity initiatives. “As President Trump has said, all staff, offices, and initiatives connected to Biden’s un-American policy will be immediately terminated,” Steven Cheung, a Trump campaign spokesperson, told Axios.
The initiative is already being spearheaded by former Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who founded the right-wing judicial activist outfit America First Legal after leaving the White House. Miller has leveraged Civil Rights-era laws intended to protect minorities from discrimination to challenge “woke” corporate policies of inclusion. America First Legal has sued Nike, Disney, United Airlines, the National Football League, and CBS Entertainment — among others— for allegedly discriminating against white men. Several of the lawsuits cite the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
Miller and his organization are not acting alone. America First Legal was consulted by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, in the drafting of its “Project 2025” policy handbook. The handbook contains language calling for an end to “affirmative discrimination,” and calls for an incoming conservative administration to “reorganize and refocus the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division to serve as the vanguard for this return to lawfulness.”
Trump himself has repeatedly claimed to be the target of anti-white discrimination. As previously reported by Rolling Stone, the former president has directed his advisers to look into ways he might compel the Justice Department to investigate New York Attorney General Letitia James, who successfully sued the former president for fraud last year. Trump regularly refers to James as “racist” in his social media posts and public statements.
Last week, National Review contributing editor Deroy Murdock suggested on Fox Business that Trump has grounds to sue James on the basis of discrimination.
“I think what President Trump should do is sue her on the basis of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,” Murdock said. When asked if he had suggested this directly to the former president, Murdock responded that he “will,” and that the message will get to Trump “sooner or later.”
What to know about the ‘oat-zempic’ weight loss trend growing on social media
Jessica Mendoza – April 1, 2024
With the use of drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro growing in popularity for weight loss, some people are trying to get similar results using a lower-cost and easily accessible option, dry oats.
Experts say this trend does not mimic the way these drugs used for weight loss work and could have negative health impacts.
Anita Soth of California told “Good Morning America” she decided to try a meal replacement drink known as “oat-zempic” in order to lose weight for an upcoming trip.
“I’ve been struggling with my weight loss journey for a little while,” Soth said. “I have a trip in a couple weeks so I needed to lose a little extra pounds, so I just said, ‘I’m going to give it a try.'”
Soth told “GMA” she lost around four pounds in several days by following the “oat-zempic” routine along with intermittent fasting, or time-restricted feeding, where you limit the times during which you eat, typically only in an eight-hour time period.
The meal replacement drink known as “oat-zempic” is made by blending a mix of oats, lime and water with a sprinkle of cinnamon.
PHOTO: A video shared by TikTok user @withlove.renita shows her making an ‘oat-zempic’ meal replacement drink. (@withlove.renita/TikTok)
Brandy Frasier, a mom of three, told “GMA” she has found that combining the drink with low-calorie, high-protein meals each day has helped get her closer to her goal weight.
“I needed a pick-me-up because often when losing weight, it’s very slow. And when you don’t see progress on the scale, you get discouraged,” Frasier said, adding that the weight loss she’s seen has given her “energy back.” “And I’m able to walk longer, my knees are not hurting as much. So hopefully that all will continue.”
Ozempic, Mounjaro and Wegovy and other drugs used for weight loss can cost more than $1,000 a month without insurance coverage.
Both Ozempic and Mounjaro are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat Type 2 diabetes, but some doctors prescribe the medication “off-label” for weight loss, as is permissible by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
PHOTO: An Ozempic injection pen is seen on a kitchen table, Aug. 6, 2023, in Riga, Latvia. (Arriens/NurPhoto via Getty Images, FILE)
Wegovy, a medication that contains the same main ingredient as Ozempic, semaglutide, is FDA-approved for weight loss.
In November, the FDA approved Zepbound as a weight loss management treatment for people with obesity, or those who are overweight with at least one related underlying condition, such as high blood pressure — the same prescribing guidance as Wegovy. As a diabetes drug, Zepbound is sold under the brand name Mounjaro, as the two medications contain the same active ingredient, tirzepatide.
The medications work by slowing down movement of food through the stomach and curbing appetite, which can lead to weight loss.
Side effects of the drugs can include severe nausea and constipation.
When it comes to “oat-zempic” as a substitution for a medication like Ozempic, Maya Feller, a registered dietitian and nutritionist, said people should not be confused.
“It absolutely does not mimic what Ozempic gives you,” Feller said Monday on ‘GMA.” “This is a drink based in oats, water, a squeeze of lime juice and perhaps a dash of cinnamon. It is not a medication and it does not mimic Ozempic.”
Feller noted that oats have important nutritional benefits, but she said, as a whole, the ingredients in the “oat-zempic” drink do not have all the nutritional benefits of a meal.
Feller said that people should seek the advice of a healthcare provider before starting a meal replacement drink to lose weight.
“If you’re looking for a meal replacement, it needs to be done under clear medical supervision,” she said. “I would not use this because you’re not going to get all the nutrients that your body needs. You’re essentially starving your cells of what they want so they can function optimally. It’s simply not worth it.”
Feller also said she encourages people to think of their “why” when it comes to losing weight and avoid following a crash diet to quickly lose pounds.
“I understand that folks out there really want to engage in weight loss. I get it,” Feller said. “But we have to be thoughtful about how we do it and not go to the extreme.”
We took Ozempic thinking we’d lose weight — we didn’t, and here’s why
Alex Mitchell – April 1, 2024
Turns out drugs like Ozempic may not be the wonder cure many praised them to be for weight loss.
Here’s a sad jab of the truth.
More evidence is coming out that pricey semaglutides like Ozempic and Wegovy — diabetes medications lauded for secondary weight loss capabilities through appetite suppression — aren’t necessarily helping as many people shed pounds as previously thought.
“There was appetite suppression the first 1½ months but it’s kind of just fallen off after that,” Nashville, Tennessee, resident Melissa Traeger, 40, told the Wall Street Journal regarding her lack of success on the medication type, also known as GLP-1s.
At first, the 300-pound Traeger quickly dropped 10 pounds, but the next five came more stagnantly — and then she said no more weight was lost.
Another man, Anthony Esposito, 68, of Austin, Texas, saw no success on either Ozempic or Wegovy, just feelings of sickness while he took them.
“It did not budge the needle,” he said.
Traeger and Esposito are among many frustrated users, according to the Journal, which also cited a trial that showed only about 14% of patients cut more than 5% of bodyweight, while only one-third lost 10% of it.
Another report published on Epic Research saw that 17.7% of semaglutide users regained all of their weight — if not more — upon stopping.
Ozempic apparently isn’t helping as many people as typically thought. Wild Awake – stock.adobe.com
Doctors have also observed many “non-responders” — about 10% to 15% of people who lose 5% or less of their body weight.
“There’s going to be extreme variability in how people respond,” Dr. Eduardo Grunvald, an obesity-medicine physician at UC San Diego Health, told the Journal.
Grunvald added that issues of weight gain may go beyond something in hormones that the drugs imitate to regulate appetite. He also said that peoples’ other medical issues may play a factor, such as how those with Type 2 diabetes typically lose less than those without the disease.
The doctor added that prior exercise and eating habits before starting the drugs are also highly influential factors.
Those who have made healthy lifestyle changes and already lost weight likely don’t get that much added bonus from the medications.
People who have struggled with obesity for a lifetime may additionally have a genetic mutation that prevents the drugs’ potency, according to Dr. Steven Heymsfield of Louisiana State University’s Pennington Biomedical Research Center.
Some patients on drugs like Ozempic aren’t losing weight. myskin – stock.adobe.comDrugs like Ozempic reportedly aren’t showing be-all, end-all impacts on patients’ lives. Natalia – stock.adobe.com
He added that those who can metabolize drugs quickly also might not see much out of them in this case.
Taking other medications as well, especially antipsychotics or antidepressants, can be associated with weight gain as a side effect.
“You could have some other drug interactions that prevent the effect of the GLP-1 drugs from working,” Heymsfield told the Journal.
