Horror as 'Frankenstein' drug that's FORTY TIMES stronger than fentanyl wreaks havoc across the US... and kids are buying it on their phones
Nitazenes, a class of synthetic drugs pouring in from China, are up to 2,000 times more potent than heroin, meaning that a tiny dose can kill.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Daily Mail
The unlikely group 'destined' to be struck by Alzheimer's disease as early as 40
Alzheimer's disease is largely seen as one of old age. The most common form of memory-robbing dementia, Alzheimer's affects nearly 7 million Americans, most of whom are over the age of 65. Your browser does not support iframes. Your browser does not support iframes. Your browser does not support iframes.
The Independent
10 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump dubbed himself the ‘father of IVF' on the campaign trail. But his pledge to mandate insurance cover has disappeared
Donald Trump's vow to expand in vitro fertilization (IVF) access to millions of Americans is on hold, with White House officials backing away from plans to require Obamacare health plans to include the service as an essential health benefit, the Washington Post reported on Sunday. The Post reported that White House officials have privately moved away from the prospect of pushing for legislation to address the issue despite it being one of Trump's signature campaign promises, citing two persons with knowledge of internal discussions in Trumpworld. A senior administration official also acknowledged to the newspaper that changing Obamacare to force insurers to cover new services would require congressional action, not an executive order. The president has governed largely by executive fiat in his second term as he grapples with a closely-divded Congress and an unruly GOP majority in the House of Representatives. He's used those executive orders to dismantle whole parts of the federal government, including USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The president even tried to take an axe to the Department of Education, though that battle is still being waged in the courts. The Supreme Court recently cleared the way for Trump to cut roughly a quarter of the agency's staff. But many of Trump's campaign promises lie outside of his ability to influence via the hiring or firing of people and redirection of agency resources or agendas. In 2024, he laid out no direct path for his goal to expand IVF access, only telling voters that insurance companies would be forced to cover it. Still, he proclaimed himself the 'father of IVF' at at Fox News town hall, and promised during an NBC News interview: 'We are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment. We're going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.' At the time, there was little to no acknowledgment of the fact that many if not most conservatives still oppose the Affordable Care Act and the same healthcare exchanges which Trump was now promising to utilize as he sought to use the power of the federal government to expand healthcare coverage. Now, with the passage of Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' without any provisions expanding IVF access, and with the prospect of further policy gains before the midterms growing dimmer, it's unclear when the White House would have another chance to press the issue in Congress. In February, the president signed an executive order directing his advisers to 'submit to the President a list of policy recommendations on protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs for IVF treatment.' It's been crickets on the issue since then. In 2024, many of Trump's critics and the media pointed out that the policy would essentially amount to a reversal or at the very least coming in sharp contrast to the first Trump administration's efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which ended in failure, and a contradiction of the conservative view that government should not exercise that level of control over Americans' health care decisions. The president's promise thrilled his party's natalists, embodied by Vice President JD Vance and an army of right-wing immigration hawks who fear the changing American demographics brought on as a result of falling birth rates and high levels of migration. It also wowed some of his Democratic and left-leaning critics, who see the policy as a means of furthering their goal of expanding access to healthcare for poorer Americans. For Vance, the issue of declining U.S. birth rates predates his MAGA heel-turn. In 2019, he told a gathering of conservatives in Washington: 'Our people aren't having enough children to replace themselves. That should bother us.' 'We want babies not just because they are economically useful. We want more babies because children are good. And we believe children are good, because we are not sociopaths,' the future vice president added at the time. Two years later, he'd tell a right-leaning podcast: 'I think we have to go to war against the anti-child ideology that exists in our country.' During the 2024 campaign, those views emerged again as Vance attacked Democrats as 'childless cat ladies' and leaned heavily into attacking the left for supposedly being anti-family. Progressives fought back, pointing to efforts to expand the child tax credit and other benefits that aid young families under Joe Biden and other Democratic administrations, including the passage of Barack Obama's signature law: the Affordable Care Act.
The Guardian
14 hours ago
- The Guardian
BMA rejects NHS claim that less than third of resident doctors went on strike
The doctors union has rejected NHS figures showing that less than a third of resident doctors joined strike action in England last week and 93% of planned operations and procedures went ahead. NHS England said it maintained care for an estimated 10,000 more patients during the latest doctors' strike compared with last year's, while the health secretary, Wes Streeting, seized on the figures and said it was time to 'move past the cycle of disruption'. But the British Medical Association (BMA) rejected the figures, saying complex work schedules and doctors taking leave made it 'almost impossible to know' how many had joined the action. The number that took part in the five-day walkout was down by 7.5% on the previous round of industrial action, according to an early analysis of management information. NHS England said it would publish the fuller data in due course. Resident doctors, previously known as junior doctors, went on strike demanding a 29% pay rise and have been embroiled in an increasingly acrimonious war of words with the government, which has refused to negotiate on pay. Streeting said this weekend: 'A majority of resident doctors didn't vote for strike action and data shows that less than a third of residents took part. I want to thank those resident doctors who went to work for their commitment to their patients and to our shared mission to rebuild the NHS. 'I want to end this unnecessary dispute and I will be urging the BMA to work with the government in good faith in our shared endeavour to improve the working lives of resident doctors, rather than pursuing more reckless strike action.' But the BMA said: 'NHS England's claim that the majority of England's 77,000 resident doctors chose to 'join the NHS-wide effort to keep the services open' requires a huge stretch of the imagination, given it is almost impossible to know the exact number of residents working on any given day because of complex work patterns, on-call schedules and the strike spread across a weekend. 'Added to that, in July many doctors are using up their remaining annual leave before their new posts start and would therefore not show up as striking. We look forward to seeing hard and fast data on NHS England's claim. 'The strike could have been averted, as could any future ones, if Mr Streeting had come, and will come, to the table with a credible offer that resident doctors in England can accept.' Resident doctors make up about half of all doctors in the NHS and have up to eight years' experience working in hospitals or three in general practice. Some NHS trusts experienced minimal disruption from the latest strike. The West Hertfordshire teaching hospitals trust carried out 98% of its planned activity while the University College London hospitals trust and Northumbria healthcare foundation trust both carried out 95%. James Mackey, the NHS chief executive, said that care was still disrupted for thousands of people as a result of the strike and that any repeat would be 'unacceptable'. He urged the resident doctors committee to 'get back to the negotiating table'. NHS Providers, which represents hospital trusts, said the walkout took a toll and that trusts were concerned about potential wider industrial action in the health service. Saffron Cordery, the NHS Providers deputy chief executive, said: 'This dispute can't drag on. The union says resident doctors want this to be their last strike. With talks due to resume, let's hope so. Bringing disruptive strikes – where the only people being punished are patients – to an end must be a priority. 'We're concerned, as trusts worked hard to minimise disruption and to keep patients safe during the resident doctors' strike, by the threat of wider industrial action in the NHS.'
