New study. We had adults place historical figures on the left-right ideological spectrum. Folks most often place history's villains (Hitler, Stalin, etc) as extreme examples of their opponents. But they place heroes (Jesus, MLK, Lincoln) are on their own team. 1/4 www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
There is no public health justification for this.
Like so many actions the Trump administration has taken in just about every area of policymaking... cruelty is the point.
Even before RFK Jr. upended the childhood vaccine schedule, Hep B vaccine uptake was on the decline. I talked with Vox about how we got here, and why declining vaccine uptake is so dangerous for public health.
can't help but notice whose losses are expressed in dollars and whose losses are expressed in lives
Government insiders are making millions on prediction markets. That's not just corrupt -- it's a major national security concern.
Today at RS, @robertralston.bsky.social & I discuss why Congress needs to step up and put an end to insider trading.
responsiblestatecraft.org/prediction-m...
Fair tbh!!
I think one of the things that bothers me the most about the way Polymarket presents itself to the world is that it's adopted the language of journalism to make itself sound more legitimate. Like look at this post from yesterday morning incorrectly "projecting" the winner.
Great. Now we also have to worry about insider train-ing.
Today in HA Forefront: we argue that Trump admin efforts to cancel vaccine-related research grants aren't just unlawful -- they're a major threat to public health.
@mccuskey.bsky.social @thcallaghan.bsky.social @michaelrulrich.bsky.social & Nicole Huberfeld
www.healthaffairs.org/content/fore...
Congress rejected massive cuts to US science budgets for 2026, but much of the money still isn’t flowing to researchers.
The culprit? The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is quietly slow-walking the release of funds. 🧵👇
This aged well. Note the author.
Government officials should be forbidden from trading on prediction markets. Full stop. The national security risks are far too great.
I'll be calling my reps and asking them to advance H.R.7004 - Public Integrity in Financial Prediction Markets Act of 2026
www.coindesk.com/markets/2026...
This legitimately made me laugh out loud 🤣
"I mean, it's one beef liver, Michael..."
I mean this sincerely: has *anyone* in the Trump administration ever been to a grocery store before?
The entire Democratic strategy debate — "moderate" or move left? fight or compromise? — is based on a misreading of data. Voters don't think Dems are too progressive; they think Dems are weak. The actual math on what to do about this isn't even close!
New: www.gelliottmorris.com/p/new-poll-d...
BREAKING: Columbia President Claire Shipman says DHS agents entered a residential buliding this morning and detained a student.
"Our understanding at this time is that the federal agents made misrepresentations to gain entry to the building to search for a 'missing person.'"
Right now, Casey Means is appearing in the Senate and refusing to rule out a vaccine-autism link.
I worry that she will use this position to make claims that *sound* scientific (like calling for "more research"), but are at odds with well-studied science.
www.nytimes.com/2026/02/25/w...
Providence ends up just shy of 38”, obliterating the blizzard of ‘78. A first ballot hall of fame storm today.
Libertarian investor Jim O'Neill (Trump's pick to lead NSF) believes that health care should be run as a "free market" and that drug efficacy should be assessed *after* approval.
I worry that he's going to turn a cornerstone of American science into (close ally) Peter Thiel's personal piggybank.
🚨Health politics/policy researchers! 🚨
@asnpls.bsky.social is funding data collection expenses for up to three proposals. Proposals + funded projects will be published in Politics & the Life Sciences following peer review.
See CFP here!
www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
Excited to announce publication of new JHPPL special issue: Public Health Under Siege (ungated) that explores the fate of public health during the second Trump administration:
read.dukeupress.edu/jhppl/issue/...
So thankful to be part of this special issue.
Writing and publishing work like this isn't easy to do. But, in these unprecedentedly dangerous times for public health, this work is more important now than ever.
The full issue is free to download at this link!
BREAKING: The Supreme Court STRIKES DOWN Trump's "emergency" tariffs. The vote is 6–3. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
This thread about how the Trump administration is trying to give us to symbolic victories instead of making any substantive changes to ICE is now an op-ed.
Honestly, the *real* advice he gives to parents as HHS Secretary might be even more dangerous advice than this.
⬇️ New study in Nature demonstrates that X's algorithm pushes people systematically toward more conservative policy positions
These effects are "sticky" and persist even if people later switch to a chronological feed since they're still following more right-wing voices
![https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling_for_resurrection Gambling for resurrection is a situation in international relations when a leader weakened domestically is willing to risk war or prolong war to maintain office.
Theory
The term "gambling for resurrection" was first formalized in academic discourse by George W. Downs and David M. Rocke in their book "Optimal Imperfection? Domestic Uncertainty and Institutions in International Relations" [1] published in 1995. The phrase refers to the risky actions taken by political leaders, particularly when they face domestic challenges or imminent removal from power. These leaders might adopt extreme strategies, such as starting a diversionary war, in the hope that a dramatic success will turn the tide in their favor, thus "resurrecting" their political fortunes.
Gambling for resurrection could also mean prolonging an existing war that should rationally be ended, and might normally have resulted in removal from office or punishment (imprisonment, exile, or death).[2] The leader thus continues the war against the country's interest, adopting risky military strategies in the hope of a dramatic reversal of fortune in the war's outcome. In this situation, escalation is more attractive than peace because the losses are below the leader's removal threshold. Once it appears that the leader will in any case be removed from office, there is no other sanction that can be applied to the leader — who thus has nothing to risk from further escalation, but may win the right to stay in office should the gamble be successful.[3]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:o7xolczmsmgspo2alr3rlwjm/bafkreieeswxyp2opds2uakznge5sckgilrkdnez3j52ke5rmddbyvlisgi)
Trump is deeply unpopular.
– Less popular than Joe Biden was at this point in his term.
– Less popular than he himself was during Trump I.
An aging, unpopular, narcissistic leader with autocratic tendencies who doesn't know how to moderate....
It's a recipe for gambling for resurrection.
I've got a piece out today @theatlantic.com with @dashunwang.bsky.social on how the Republican Party in Congress continues to fund science, pushing back against the Trump Administration's most anti science funding proposals. (gift link)
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/0...
Definitely a path that's been tried before in other contexts -- it could be a useful path here!
