The Bulletin June 12, 2025
Why it matters: The term has been increasingly adopted by psychologists to denote the chronic imbalance between the time a person needs and that which their work life allows them. A new survey by wellness firm Wondr Health revealed the extent of the issue, finding that the majority (62 percent) of U.S. workers do not take their allotted time off because of the internalized pressures of work and let about one-third of their annual vacation days go unspent.
Read more in-depth coverage:
Trump-Era Economic Shifts Driving Up U.S. Worker Stress Levels
TL/DR: "No one is harder on most of us than ourselves and it leads to time poverty, a condition where we simply do not have enough time for a meaningful work-life balance," said Dr. Tim Church, chief medical officer at Wondr Health.
What happens now? Experts pointed to the need for allotted "mental health days," as well as the willingness of businesses to invest in employee wellness programs and foster open communication with their workforces.
Deeper reading Americans Are Suffering From 'Time Poverty'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Democrats try to force nuns to pay for abortions. Sounds authoritarian to me.
Blue states like California and Pennsylvania refuse to leave the Little Sisters of the Poor alone – and couldn't care less about their religious beliefs. The Little Sisters of the Poor are back in the news. In case you've forgotten who they are and why they matter, let's briefly review what they're all about. According to the group's website, the Little Sisters' mission is to ensure that "the elderly and dying are cared for with love and dignity until God calls them home.' The Little Sisters work in 31 countries and began work in America in 1868. Today, the nuns operate about 20 homes in the United States. It's a lovely mission and one that they should be allowed to do in peace, free from interference from the government. No such luck, however. Blue states like California and Pennsylvania refuse to leave the Little Sisters alone and couldn't care less about their religious beliefs. Since the Obama administration's Affordable Care Act birth control mandate that required employers to provide contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs in their health insurance plans, the Little Sisters have been locked in a legal battle for the past 14 years. Despite clear wins for the nuns and religious liberty at the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016 and 2020, Democrats continue to persecute the Little Sisters. Will they ever stop? Will the Little Sisters have to make a third trip to the Supreme Court? That's 'absurd.' A federal district court in Philadelphia has revived the vindictive fight, siding with Pennsylvania and New Jersey against a 2017 Trump administration religious conscience rule, which offered the nuns and other religious groups protection from the mandate. Now, these states want the Little Sisters to offer contraception and abortion drugs or face millions of dollars in fines. 'The district court blessed an out-of-control effort by Pennsylvania and New Jersey to attack the Little Sisters and religious liberty,' Mark Rienzi, president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, said in a statement. 'It is absurd to think the Little Sisters might need yet another trip to the Supreme Court to end what has now been more than a dozen years of litigation over the same issue.' The Little Sisters will appeal this decision, but it truly is ridiculous that they must waste time fighting the government in this way, when all they want to do is serve people in need. And lest you think it's odd to be talking about nuns and contraception, the Little Sisters employ lay people who work as nurses, cooks and serve other roles in the group's homes for the elderly. The nuns don't want to be complicit in providing services that directly violate their deep belief in the sanctity of life, which guides their work. They shouldn't have to. There are other ways the government could provide contraceptives to these employees without pushing the nuns to do it. Progressives claim Trump is an authoritarian. They should look at themselves. For all the times we've been scolded about how Trump and his supporters are fascists and Nazis, progressives ought to take a hard look at themselves first. Democrats have decided their views on culture are the only ones that should matter, religious liberty be damned. Look at how liberal governments have gone after Catholic adoption agencies, Christian bakers, website designers and farmers and tried to force them to betray their faith just to participate in the public square. These are often yearslong court battles, much like the Little Sisters have undertaken. Thankfully, we have a strong First Amendment that protects our speech and religious freedom. And the Supreme Court keeps ruling on the side of protecting these essential liberties, which are promised in our Constitution. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, in writing the majority for the 2020 case, observed that the Little Sisters 'have had to fight for the ability to continue in their noble work without violating their sincerely held religious beliefs.' Five years later, the fight continues. It's time for Democrats to leave these nuns alone. Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at ijacques@ or on X: @Ingrid_Jacques
UPI
3 hours ago
- UPI
AAP recommends children receive COVID-19 vaccine
The American Academy of Pediatrics is recommending children as young as six months receive the COVID-19 vaccine, despite the Trump administration stating it is not necessary for healthy children. File Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo Aug. 20 (UPI) -- The United States' leading pediatrics association is recommending that children as young as six months old be inoculated against COVID-19, going against the Trump administration, which stopped recommending healthy children receive the vaccine. The American Academy of Pediatrics made the recommendation Tuesday in the publication of its childhood and adolescent immunization schedule for this year. The report specifically recommends that children be inoculated against COVID-19 between the ages of six and 23 months, stating that those in this age range are at the highest risk of suffering the worst effects of the disease. "Children younger than 2 years old are especially vulnerable to severe COVID-19 and should be prioritized for vaccination unless they have a known allergy to the vaccine or its ingredients," the AAP said in a release accompanying the report. The AAP recommendation goes against that of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who in late May said the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was no longer recommending that "healthy children" be immunized against COVID-19. Kennedy, a known vaccine skeptic, cited "a lack of any clinical data" to support booster COVID-19 shots for children. That move prompted AAP and other leading medical groups to sue Kennedy in July for making "unilateral, unscientific changes" to federal vaccine policy, calling it an "assault on science public health and evidence-based medicine." "This administration is an existential threat to vaccination in America, and those in charge are only just getting started," Richard Hughes IV, partner at Epstein Becker Green and lead counsel in the case, said in a statement. "If left unchecked, Secretary Kennedy will accomplish his goal of ridding the United States of vaccines, which would unleash a wave of preventable harm on our nation's children." Kennedy in June also fired all members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and replaced them with his own appointees, including three who have spoken out against the COVID-19 vaccine, two of whom have served as witnesses in lawsuits against vaccine makers and one who served on the board of the nation's oldest anti-vaccine group.
CNBC
6 hours ago
- CNBC
FDA approves first-ever glucose monitoring system for weight loss from Signos
The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday approved the first-ever glucose monitoring system specifically for weight loss from the startup Signos, establishing a new option for Americans to manage their weight. Current treatment options for losing weight – popular drugs like GLP-1s and surgical interventions – are typically limited to patients with obesity or a certain BMI. Obesity drugs such as Novo Nordisk's Wegovy and Eli Lilly's Zepbound can also be difficult to access due to their high costs, limited U.S. insurance coverage and constrained supply. But now, any patient can purchase a Signos membership to access its system. It uses an AI platform and an off-the-shelf continuous glucose monitor, or CGM, from Dexcom to offer personalized, real-time data and lifestyle recommendations for weight management. "There is now a solution that everybody can use to help on the weight loss journey, and you don't have to be a certain number of pounds to use it. It's available for the average American who needs it," said Sharam Fouladgar-Mercer, Signos' co-founder and CEO, in an interview on Tuesday ahead of the approval. "The average person might have five pounds to lose, or others might have 100 pounds to lose. We are here to help them at any point in that journey." The obesity epidemic costs the U.S. health-care system more than $170 billion a year, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. Almost 74% of Americans are overweight or obese, government data says. Signos hopes it can make a "real big dent in that curve for the betterment of many of us," Fouladgar-Mercer said. Customers who sign up for Signos can choose a three-month or six-month plan, which currently costs $139 and $129, respectively. The company will ship out all of the CGMs a patient needs for the number of months in the plan they choose. Insurers currently don't cover the system for weight management, but the plans are a fraction of the roughly $1,000 monthly price of GLP-1s in the U.S. Signos is working with health insurance companies and employers to get coverage for the system, the company said in a statement to CNBC. Signos said it expects "this to evolve quickly as interest for tackling weight continued to expand." The Signos system can be used in combination with GLP-1s or bariatric surgery, said Fouladgar-Mercer. He said patients can also use the system after getting off a GLP-1 to maintain their weight loss. CGMs are small sensors worn on the upper arm that track glucose levels, mainly for people with diabetes. That data is wirelessly sent to Signos' app, which also allows patients to log their food intake and exercise levels, among other information that the AI platform uses to make recommendations. Apart from helping people lose pounds, the system aims to help users understand how their bodies respond to specific foods and exercise patterns and make the right behavioral changes to manage and maintain their weight in the long term. Signos did not share how many patients are currently using its glucose monitoring system, but Fouladgar-Mercer said tens of thousands of people have already tried it over time. He said Signos has scaled up its CGM inventory and software capacity to "handle a pretty massive scale" following the approval.
