‘Desperate Housewives,' actress has died, she was 71
Valerie Mahaffey, an Emmy-winning actress who rose to fame for her role on the TV series 'Northern Exposure,' has passed away. She was 71.
Jillian Roscoe, the publicist for Mahaffey, confirmed to USA TODAY that the actress passed away on Friday, May 30, following a prolonged struggle with cancer.
Over a five-decade career, she performed on Broadway, appeared on numerous TV shows, and starred in movies like 'Seabiscuit,' 'Sully,' 'Jungle 2 Jungle,' and 'No Pay, Nudity.'
Mahaffey received a Daytime Emmy nomination for Outstanding Supporting Actress in 1980 for her performance in the NBC soap opera 'The Doctors.'
In 1992, she was awarded a Primetime Emmy for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Drama Series for her portrayal of Eve in 'Northern Exposure.'
Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
26 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Scottie Scheffler joins Tiger Woods as only repeat winners at Memorial
DUBLIN, Ohio — Scottie Scheffler is winning with such alarming regularity that describing his dominance is not a comfortable topic. So when he won the Memorial on Sunday for the second straight year, he at least had tournament host Jack Nicklaus at his side. Nicklaus is a great authority when it comes to Scheffler because the Golden Bear sees so much of himself in the world's No. 1 player.
Medscape
28 minutes ago
- Medscape
ADA Issues New MASLD Guidelines
A new consensus report from the American Diabetes Association (ADA) provides a practice-oriented framework for screening and managing metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) in people with diabetes and prediabetes. Published online on May 28, 2025, in Diabetes Care, the report is a comprehensive update to the recommendations the ADA released in 2023. It is intended for clinicians treating patients with diabetes — primarily type 2 diabetes (T2D) — but also type 1 diabetes with obesity and prediabetes. Topics covered include the rationale for the recent change in terminology, epidemiology, fibrosis risk stratification, monitoring, treatment, and referral guidance, with interprofessional team management emphasized throughout. 'This will provide primary care doctors and anyone taking care of people with diabetes the tools to diagnose [MASLD] early and guide therapy…to prevent cirrhosis, and refer to the hepatologist as needed for additional therapy and monitoring,' lead author Kenneth Cusi, MD, professor of medicine at the Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism in the Department of Medicine at the University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, told Medscape Medical News . The guidelines recommend that clinicians routinely screen people with T2D or prediabetes for MASLD. 'We explain that the liver should be incorporated into our management in the same way we do for chronic kidney disease, eye disease, and nerve disease as an end-organ damage that is particularly affected by diabetes,' Cusi said. In the United States, at least 70% of people with T2D have MASLD, about half of whom have the more progressive form termed metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis (MASH). About 1 in 5 with T2D have advanced liver fibrosis. The presence of MASH increases the risks for complications including cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and overall mortality, according to the new consensus report. Liver disease has not been a focus of diabetes management until recently, Cusi noted. 'We didn't think about it. The epidemic of obesity, and with that, of diabetes, is driving this liver disease. The obesity epidemic has had a big worsening since the 1990s, so this damage in the past 20 or 30 years is just now becoming evident in the liver.' Terminology Change: Highlighting Insulin Resistance, Reducing Stigma The document reviews the current nomenclature for SLD, which was officially changed in 2023 to remove the words 'fatty' and 'alcoholic.' Now, MASLD is defined as the presence of SLD with at least one metabolic risk factor such as obesity, hypertension, prediabetes, high triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or T2D, with minimal or no alcohol consumption (< 20 g/d for women; < 30 g/d for men). The term 'MetALD' is used for those with MASLD who also have increased alcohol consumption (20-50 g/d for women; 30-60 g/day for men). Steatosis in the setting of alcohol consumption above those levels is termed 'alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD).' The term MASH is defined as steatohepatitis with at least one metabolic risk factor and minimal alcohol consumption. 'At-risk MASH' refers to steatohepatitis with clinically significant fibrosis (stage F2 or higher). Diagnosis: Staged Screening for Fibrosis The document recommends routine screening of people with T2D, prediabetes, and/or obesity with cardiovascular risk factors, with the goal of identifying those with high-risk MASH. Intervention is then aimed at preventing fibrosis progression and cirrhosis. A graphic diagnostic algorithm advises initial use of the noninvasive Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) tool, which risk stratifies based on age, liver enzymes, and platelet count. 'The FIB-4 is composed of very simple things that are already in the electronic medical record of all patients. We also discuss the role of electronic medical records to improve implementation,' Cusi said. Those with a FIB-4 < 1.3 have a low risk for future cirrhosis and can be managed in primary or team care with optimized lifestyle and repeated FIB-4 every 1-2 years. If the FIB-4 is > 2.67, direct referral to a liver specialist is advised. If FIB-4 is between 1.3 and 2.67, a second risk-stratification test is recommended. Ideally, this would be a liver stiffness measurement (LSM), most commonly with transient elastography. If that is unavailable, an alternative is the noninvasive enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test. If the LSM is < 8.0 kPa or ELF is < 7.7, the fibrosis risk is low and routine management can continue with repeat testing in 1-2 years. But if higher, hepatology referral is recommended. Treatment: Lifestyle, Plus Old and New Drugs The report details lifestyle modification for MASLD, including nutrition plans; physical activity; behavioral health; and the role of diabetes self-management, education and support. The role of obesity treatment in people with MASLD, both metabolic surgery and pharmacotherapy, is also discussed at length. No current pharmacologic treatments have been approved for MASLD, but both semaglutide and tirzepatide have demonstrated benefit in treating MASH and are approved for treating T2D, obesity, and other related comorbidities. A thyroid hormone receptor beta agonist, resmetirom, was approved in early 2024 for the treatment of MASH with fibrosis stages F2 and F3, but is extremely expensive at about $50,000 a year, Cusi noted. An older, generic glucose-lowering drug, pioglitazone, has also shown benefit in reducing fibrosis and may be a lower-cost alternative. The document also includes a section on alcohol intake, which complicates the MASLD picture, Cusi noted. 'We think that this is going to help doctors to consider alcohol, which is often overlooked and under-reported. If patients have moderate fibrosis, they should completely quit alcohol.' Cusi has received research support (to his institution) from Boehringer Ingelheim, Echosens, Inventiva, Labcorp, and Perspectum, and has served as a consultant for Aligos Therapeutics, Arrowhead, AstraZeneca, 89bio, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novo Nordisk, ProSciento, Sagimet Biosciences, Siemens USA, Zealand Pharma, and Terns Pharmaceuticals.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
BarEhud Barak: Israel Must Back Trump's Gaza Deal
U.S. President Donald Trump greets Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he arrives at the White House on April 7, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Credit - Alex Wong—Getty Images In the coming few days, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will face a defining choice between a politically motivated "war of deception" in Gaza and a deal to release all hostages while ending the war. He must choose between his extreme-right ministers—Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich—or aligning with Donald Trump. There is no symmetry here. Accepting a hostage deal, ending the war, and working with Trump and free world leaders, won't be effortless. Any choice requires detailed negotiations and compromises. But this path is far superior to any realistic alternative. Based on the achievements of the Israel Defense Forces—including damage to Hamas, weakening Hezbollah, destroying Syria's military arsenal during Assad's collapse, and demonstrating Israel's capability to strike deep into Iran—Israeli leadership could, from a position of strength, pursue releasing all hostages simultaneously, halt this senseless war, end the humanitarian crisis, and uproot Hamas from power. This would enable Israel, though belatedly, to join Trump's vision of a New Middle East, including normalization with Saudi Arabia, regional deployment to tackle the Iranian challenge, and participation in the trade corridor project from India through the Gulf to Europe. Choosing a "war of deception" instead—where misleading propaganda presents political warfare as serving Israel's security—would be a grave mistake. It's highly doubtful that continuing the war could produce results different from previous Gaza rounds over the past 20 months. But it would certainly constitute a death sentence for some or most living hostages and deepen the diplomatic tsunami and International Criminal Court claims Israel already faces. This approach might make sense if it could achieve "total victory" over Hamas, but that won't happen. When this new war inevitably halts—under diplomatic pressure, humanitarian crisis, battlefield events, or domestic political developments—we would find ourselves in precisely the same situation as today. To understand, examine recent history. The October 7th barbaric attack created a compelling imperative for Israel to ensure Hamas could never again reign over Gaza or threaten Israel from there. The question was how to achieve this goal. Since Ben-Gurion, Israel has followed four strategic maxims: wars should be aggressive, fought on enemy territory, ended quickly to translate battlefield results into diplomatic and political realities while maintaining international legitimacy, and—extremely important—never lose the moral high ground. That's how we won in 1967 in six days and 1973 in three weeks. Netanyahu has betrayed almost all these principles. Read More: The Israel-Hamas Ceasefire Was Never Going to Last Another strategic maxim, from Clausewitz to Kissinger, holds that war must have a clearly defined, operationally feasible political purpose. As the Roman saying goes: "If you don't know which port you want to reach, no wind will take you there." This maxim was deliberately ignored. Netanyahu has blocked any discussion of this issue since October 7th, 2023. It was clear to any serious observer that Hamas suffered major military blows daily, losing most weapons systems and leadership figures since October 7th. However, since any Hamas group or individual can easily "disappear" within minutes, hiding among the Strip's 2 million civilians and emerging from tunnels or building windows to attack Israelis, their absolute elimination remains a Sisyphean task. Even after 58 years in the West Bank, we never fully eliminated Hamas' presence in Jenin or Tulkarm. The only way to ensure Hamas cannot reign over Gaza and threaten Israel is by replacing it with another governing entity legitimate to the international community, Arab neighbors like Egypt, UAE, and Saudi Arabia, and Palestinians themselves. Practically, this means a temporary inter-Arab force backed by the Arab League, potentially supported by UN Security Council resolution, funded by Saudi Arabia and UAE, with a technocratic government overseeing Palestinian bureaucracy and a new, non-Hamas security body trained by the inter-Arab force under U.S. supervision. Israel would present only two conditions: no Hamas military branch member could participate in the new entity's organs, and the IDF, initially deployed to the Strip's perimeter, would withdraw to the border only after all pre-agreed security benchmarks are met. This plan, easily implementable a year ago, and appearing to save Gaza and Gazans from further destruction, is harder now, because it could be interpreted as saving Israel from sinking into Gazan mud. But the plan remains viable despite the Israeli government's refusal to consider it. Since this is the only practical "day after" plan, there's no sense sacrificing hostages' lives or endangering Israeli troops in pointless warfare. Who can look into the eyes of future bereaved parents, newly widowed spouses, new orphans, disabled and traumatized soldiers, and claim with clear conscience that everything was done to prevent loss, or that it had justification? As long as Israel rejects hostage release and war's end, the risk increases of international initiatives, including Arab neighbors calling for Israel boycotts and steps toward recognition of a Palestinian state by European countries—many of them stable friends of Israel. Read More: I Am a Former Hamas Hostage. Here's My Message to Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu Permanent occupation of the Gaza Strip, population transfer of 2 million Palestinians, and Israeli resettlement on the that land are base and delusional visions that would backfire and accelerate confrontation with the world. Why is Netanyahu, an intelligent, experienced, savvy politician, failing? The answer isn't simple. Netanyahu has ruled since 2015 through an alliance with ultra-Orthodox parties who don't serve in the army and care only about sectoral needs, and since January 2023 added ultra-right zealots believing Gaza resettlement and Palestinian transfer are heavenly orders. He's caught in a dilemma: 80% of the public sees him as primarily responsible for the country's worst day, 60% believe he should resign. A heavy majority perceives his judicial reform, initiated immediately after January 2023 elections, as a "judicial coup d'état"—an attempt to castrate the legislative branch and demolish Supreme Court independence. Many believe the aim of his blatant attack on democracy is to escape his bribery, fraud, and breach of trust court case. For him, any pause in the war—even 60 days, certainly longer—would immediately bring reckoning and accountability: accelerated court proceedings; demands for national inquiry committee investigating October 7th, and events before, during and after; coalition meltdown; and probable disgraced ejection from public life. I believe Netanyahu genuinely wants all hostages home. But when this clashes with immediate threats to his political survival, he prefers leaving them in Gaza. He has already torpedoed several hostage deal opportunities, and seems to be doing it once again over the weekend, by resisting U.S. guarantee to Hamas for an end to the war in exchange for release of all hostages and entering, together with the Trump Administration, into Trump's New Middle East Order (to include the replacement of Hamas, described above). Netanyahu sticks to his eternal war in order to avoid a pause in fighting, which might lead to the end of his political career. This behavior is unacceptable to Israel and Israelis. We are, as former Supreme Court President Aharon Barak wrote years ago, 'defending democracy' that "should be capable of defending itself against those who try to use the very freedoms and tools it provides to destroy it from within." We're led by someone who lost his strategic and moral compass, dragging the nation into war motivated by personal political interests against our security and common future. Israel urgently needs new, sober leadership with clear realistic vision and self-confidence—leadership capable of reading our people's soul, understanding partners' and rivals' minds, and above all, having courage to make decisions and power to implement them. The world will pass judgment. But the burden of bringing Israel back on track is ours—Israeli citizens. I believe we will overcome. This war will end soon, and Israel's worst ever government will be replaced by a responsible, effective one. A long path of repair must follow. Contact us at letters@
