Ex-EPA official who spoke about Pruitt scandals claims retaliation in new lawsuit

BY RACHEL FRAZIN - 10/21/20 05:57 PM EDT 

© Getty Images


A former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official who spoke out about scandals involving administrator Scott Pruitt sued the Trump administration this week, claiming that he was retaliated against.

Kevin Chmielewski, who served as the deputy chief of staff in 2017 and 2018, sued both the EPA over his removal and the Energy Department for not hiring him.

Chmielewski's lawsuit alleges that he was “removed for retaliatory reasons and without due process of law because he engaged in a series of allegations to appropriate officials, human resources staff, agency counsel, and Congressional committees that the Administrator was engaged in a pattern and practice of incurring travel expenses, office improvements, and use of staff for personal tasks in violation of federal statutes, regulations and EPA policies.”


While at the EPA, Chmielewski leaked documents and provided information that prompted investigations into scandals like the retroactive altering of Pruitt’s public calendar and a request that staff help him find a condo in Washington.

Pruitt left the agency in 2018 amid a number of ethics controversies and Chmielewski told The Hill at the time that he’d take credit for Pruitt’s departure.

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday and first reported by E&E News on Wednesday.

Chmielewski claimed that after being stripped of access to the EPA’s building, he received documents signed by other officials falsely stating that he had resigned. He alleged that he was later told his insurance was canceled.

EPA spokesperson Molly Block declined to comment, saying in an email that “we can’t comment on pending litigation.”

In the suit, the former official also claimed that his actions at EPA caused him not to be hired by the Energy Department.

He said that he was “unable to find work” after his removal from the EPA until the Energy Department in March of this year “informed him that he would be hired.”

His lawsuit claimed, however, that White House officials told him in April that “every time they tried to pass his paperwork through, it was stopped by numerous people because of what happened at the EPA with Scott Pruitt due to Plaintiff’s disclosures.”

Spokespeople for the Energy Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill.

Controversial mining to proceed near Georgia swamp without federal permit

BY RACHEL FRAZIN - 10/21/20

© Getty


A controversial plan to mine near the Okefenokee Swamp in Georgia will proceed without a federal permit following a Trump administration rollback of waterway protections.

Twin Pines Minerals intends to extract minerals like titanium in a 600-acre area near the swamp, a plan about which environmentalists have raised concerns.

“We have reduced the size of the proposed mine in Charlton County to less than 600 acres, and we have reconfigured its footprint to ensure there will be no impact to ‘waters of the United States’ as defined by the new Navigable Waters Protection Rule,” said a statement from Twin Pines president Steve Ingle.

Army Corps of Engineers spokesperson Billy Birdwell confirmed that Twin Pines on Wednesday withdrew its request for a permit to mine an 898-acre area near the swamp. The 600-acre project will still need a permit from the state of Georgia.

Birdwell said in an email that the Army Corps conducted a jurisdictional determination after the Navigable Waters Rule went into effect and determined that “much of the area no longer required a permit from the Corps of Engineers.”

“Twin Pines may mine on non-jurisdictional wetlands without a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. They will need permits from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources,” he said, stressing that this was not a decision made by the Corps but rather its application of the new rule.

The Navigable Waters Rule, which limited the scope of which bodies of water receive protection under federal law, was finalized this year by the Trump administration and went into effect in June.

Ingle said in a statement to The Hill on Wednesday that moving ahead with mining will not impact the Okefenokee’s water level.

“There is no risk to the swamp because we are far enough away (more than 3 miles), and because all mining will occur at an elevation higher than the swamp. Our studies have shown that mining can be conducted safely, such that it will not impact the area’s waterways, groundwater systems, or the swamp itself,” he said.

Environmentalists have fought against mining near the swamp, saying that mining could harm the swamp’s ability to move and store water and that potentially lowered water levels could also destroy habitats, increase wildfire risk and impact nearby rivers.

Christian Hunt, the Southeast Program Representative with Defenders of Wildlife pledged to “fight as long as it takes” to see the Okefenokee’s protection, in an email to The Hill.

"A slight reduction in acreage makes no difference when operations stand to compromise and lower the water table of the swamp," he said. "The only data, anywhere, to suggest that mining would prove benign was that commissioned by Twin Pines itself. Since the government has abandoned its duties, we intend to utilize every tool at our disposal to prevent Twin Pines from spoiling the refuge and causing irreversible damage."

Documents recently shared with The Hill showed that officials with the Fish and Wildlife Service had expressed concerns about the now-withdrawn proposal to mine 898 acres near the swamp.

One official wrote in May that the project could have posed “risks to the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge (OKENWR) and the natural environment due to the location, associated activities, and cumulative effects of similar projects in the area," adding, "We opine that the impacts are not sufficiently known and whatever is done may be permanent."

In a statement to The Hill on Wednesday, Ingle referred to the 600 acre project as a “demonstration project.”

“Our only plans at present are to conduct the demonstration project on the footprint that is less than 600 acres if and when the state approves,” he said.

Emails that have previously been reported on by The Hill and others show an Army Corps officials saying in January, when Twin Pines had proposed mining a 1,450-acre area, that the company had proposed a “‘demonstration project’ which would allow some work to commence and collect data in support of the larger overall project.”

The 898-acre project was also referred to as a demonstration project when it was being proposed.

The Okefenokee Swamp is located in Georgia and Florida and occupies 438,000 acres. Of that, 402,000 acres make up the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge, which is home to endangered species including the red-cockaded woodpecker, wood storks and indigo snakes, as well as other wildlife.

EPA union buys subscription after agency canceled contract with news outlet dedicated to covering it

The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) largest union is independently subscribing to one of the largest environmental publications, E&E News, after the agency abruptly canceled its subscription in July.

BY REBECCA BEITSCH - 10/22/20 

© Getty Images

The announcement came from the American Federal of Government Employees Council, which said employees saw the cancelation “as anti-transparency, anti-science, and part of a years-long campaign by the Trump administration to discredit critical journalism as 'fake news' and stymie coverage of the union’s work to support employees following a bruising contract negotiation process.”

EPA had subscribed to E&E since 1998, offering all employees access to the news service which covers the agency and related government offices alongside a wide variety of environmental issues.

The deal will only provide E&E access to AFGE’s 7,500 members, about half of the agency’s workforce.

EPA did not respond to request for comment Thursday but had said in July it was canceling the subscription effective immediately due to the cost.

“Over the next two years, EPA would have spent $382,425 to receive" various E&E newsletters, Associate Deputy Administrator Doug Benevento wrote in an email at the time, which the agency adding that the money would be spent "in other higher priority areas."

THIRD WORLD USA 

Eviction crisis sparked by pandemic disproportionately hits minorities

BY MARTY JOHNSON - 10/22/20 

The eviction crisis exacerbated by the pandemic is hitting minorities much harder than other Americans, and experts are concerned the problem will only get worse in the coming months as the coronavirus recession drags on.

A review of more than 8,000 eviction cases by the Center for Public Integrity found that almost two-thirds of the tenants lived in areas with above average minority representation with a median household income below $42,000. The thousands of evictions filed spanned late March to early July, primarily in Florida and Georgia.

Residents on the brink include people like Bishop Donald Harper, who was making nearly $5,000 a month as a chef for Universal's Cabana Bay Beach Resort in Orlando, Fla., before the pandemic hit. Harper, 55, was soon furloughed.

Now, almost eight months into the pandemic, unemployment benefits from the state of Florida are his only source of income. But, at just $275 a week — the max amount offered by the Sunshine State — Harper doesn’t come close to what he was making pre-pandemic.

The extra $600 a week in unemployment benefits given to Americans through the CARES Act, signed in late March, was effective for a time, and it helped Harper, who is Cuban and Trinidadian, to pay rent on his apartment. But that program expired at the end of July, briefly supplemented now by a $300 a week benefit authorized by President Trump as Congress remains deeply divided over another coronavirus relief package.

In the meantime, for Harper and millions of other Americans who have lost their job because of the pandemic, rent is still due.

“What do you do with [$1,100] a month, when everything is due?” Harper, whose rent is $1,900 a month, said to The Hill.

The Princeton Eviction Lab, which tracks evictions across 17 cities in the country, has recorded more than 60,000 evictions during the pandemic, with more than 1,500 coming over the past week.

An August study by the Aspen Institute projected that anywhere from 30 million to 40 million Americans could be at risk of being evicted if nothing changes by Dec. 31, when the moratorium from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) expires.

At the end of September, the National Council of State Housing Agencies released a report that says the debt that renters nationwide will collectively owe by the end of the year could be as high as $34 billion.

During most of the pandemic, the federal government has had in place an eviction moratorium, first through the CARES Act and then through a policy implemented by the CDC. That policy is slated to expire at the end of the year, and experts say the jury is still out on how effective the moratorium between now and the end of year will be.

“[A moratorium’s] effectiveness really depends on how comprehensive it is,” said Alieza Durana, who works for the Princeton Eviction Lab. “Normally, a moratorium can affect three different stages of the eviction process. The first relates to the filing of an eviction. ... The second part of the process relates to the court process itself, and the third relates to the enforcement of the eviction process is usually local law enforcement, such as a sheriff that will go to do a lockout or to remove [a tenant’s] belongings.”

“The most effective way to prevent people from being forcibly removed,” Durana added, “is to either ban all three or to, at the very least, prevent filings, because even the threat of an eviction hanging over a family can negatively impact their physical and mental well-being.”


However, critics have called the CDC’s guidance vague, noting that it largely puts the onus on tenants in guarding against evictions. It also doesn’t provide any additional money for rent relief for tenants or landlords.

Complicating matters is the fact that states often have different tenant laws, meaning the order was interpreted in different ways in courts around the country until the CDC issued a clarifying document that effectively weakened the guidance’s power.

The moratorium is not “intended to prevent landlords from starting eviction proceedings, provided that the actual eviction of a covered person for non-payment of rent does NOT take place during the period of the Order,” the document reads.

The moratorium also doesn’t stop the landlords from charging interest or fees on the back rent.

“It's not a solution. It's not even a band-aid on the problem,” said Dianne Enriquez, co-director of community dignity campaigns at the Center for Popular Democracy. “It's just creating a myth that families are protected when they're really not.”

New research details effect of 'Black tax' on African American homeownership
BY ARIS FOLLEY - 10/22/20 

Black Americans are paying more than white Americans to own a home, making it harder for Black households to accumulate housing wealth at the same rate as their white counterparts, according to new research from MIT.

In a study published earlier this month, MIT researchers found that Black Americans pay $743 more annually than white Americans when it comes to mortgage interest payments, $550 more per year in mortgage insurance premiums and $390 more each year in property taxes — totaling more than $13,000 over the life of the loan.

The study — authored by Ed Golding, executive director of the MIT Golub Center; Michelle Aronowitz, former deputy general counsel for enforcement and fair housing at the Department of Housing and Urban Development; and Jung Hyun Choi, a researcher with the Housing Finance Policy Center at the Urban Institute — found that the inequities totaled to $67,320 in lost retirement savings for Black homeowners.

Citing income data from the National Association of Real Estate Brokers (NAREB), the country’s oldest minority trade association, the study said it found an income gap of $25,800 between Black and white Americans to be “exacerbated by this ‘Black tax’ on homeownership.”

The elimination of those additional costs, the study said, would cut in half the roughly $130,000 gap in liquid retirement savings between white and Black families.

The study also found that African Americans paid higher interest rates due to a lack of refinance opportunities, a problem researchers said results in Black homeowners paying "approximately another $475 per year more than white homeowners, which results in a loss of retirement savings of nearly $20,000."

Golding told The Hill that, for a variety of reasons, Black families don’t refinance or can’t refinance as easily or as quickly as white families.

“So, when the [Federal Reserve] lowers rates, people refinance to lower their mortgage rate. But more Black families are stuck at the old higher rates and our data shows that,” he said, while noting that African American families have a higher unemployment rate, meaning “they're more likely to be in that group that can't refinance.”

While the study notes that the inequities can be “traced to the long history of slavery, segregation, and race discrimination,” it also points to “current policy choices that maintain the disparities” and suggests reforms.

Some of the policy recommendations include forming a “government supported insurance program that makes mortgage payments in the event of unemployment or disability" and including “tax credits for first time homeowners, which could be used as a down payment to reduce the effect of risk-based pricing and the need for mortgage insurance.”

The MIT study builds on previous research from the real estate website Redfin in June that found the homeownership rate for Black families stood at less than 45 percent nationwide, compared to the 73 percent rate for white families.

And an analysis published over the summer — authored by economists Troup Howard, an assistant professor of finance at the University of Utah, and Carlos Avenancio-León, assistant professor of finance at Indiana University — found that Black and Hispanic residents bore a 10-13 percent “higher property tax burden than white residents" in the nation.

When discussing the homeownership gap in an interview this week, Antoine Thompson, executive director of NAREB, which works to promote democracy in housing, said the impact of racist practices in the country that have shut Black Americans out of housing, dating back to slavery, is still being felt today.

Thompson said the suggestion made in the MIT study to pool risk among borrowers in lieu of risk-based pricing was “a great idea,” and one that has been discussed before.

He also pointed to the Great Recession as to why some Black Americans could be reluctant to get a refinance.

For many Black Americans who lost their homes, Thompson said, “their first loan was good, but then someone went after them and encouraged them to refinance and then they no longer had a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage … and once they hit a cliff they couldn't recover.”

The MIT study pointed to capital standards that it noted have “the effect of placing the burden of staving off a repeat of the 2008 Great Recession on black homeowners, even though black homeowners were primarily the victims of the crisis, not its cause.”

Thompson said that going forward, the widening or narrowing of the racial homeownership gap will depend largely on "how we come out of COVID in terms of making sure that more African Americans get a forbearance that need it.”

Another key factor, he said, is employment and whether the country will be able to “break this trend of African Americans going back to work slower” than white Americans, citing data that shows white workers have been making job gains at faster rates than Black workers during the pandemic

Intercept bureau chief on Bolivian election: Right-wing government 'reminded everybody how important it was to have socialists in power'

10/20/2020

The presumptive victory in Bolivia's presidential election by Luis Arce shows the enduring strength of socialist parties and politicians in that country, the Washington, D.C., bureau chief of The Intercept said Tuesday on Hill.TV.

“People who were in their 20s there basically never knew anything other than Morales being in leadership,” the Intercept's Ryan Grim said, referring to the former Bolivian leader Evo Morales, who was forced out of office last year.

“But one year of right wing government reminded everybody how important it was to have socialists in power. The right wing government had no mandate when they came in,” Grim said.

Arce is an ally of Morales, who was also a mentor of new new Bolivian leader.

While the vote is still being counted in the race, the main centrist candidate has conceded, all but completely assuring a victory for Arce, the Socialist candidate.

Grims credited Arce's victory to the previous government doing more “looting the Treasury than actually governing.” He also said the current government was criticized over its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

VIDEO https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/521907-dc-bureau-chief-on-bolivian-election-one-year-of-right-wing-government-reminded?jwsource=cl

Top court in Poland strikes down law allowing abortions for birth defects

BY KAELAN DEESE - 10/22/2020

© Getty


Poland's top court ruled Thursday that a law permitting abortion of fetuses with congenital disabilities is unconstitutional.

The country's Constitutional Court ruled the ban will be effective immediately, outlawing abortions in cases where congenital disabilities are discovered and further limiting abortion access, The Associated Press reported.

Poland, a predominantly Catholic country, already maintains one of the strictest abortion laws in Europe.

The ruling was in response to motions from right-wing lawmakers who argued terminating a pregnancy when congenital disabilities are detected in the fetus was in violation of the Polish Constitution protecting every individual's life.

Julia Przylebska, the court’s president and a supporter of the right-wing government, first announced the verdict Thursday, The Washington Post reported.

The law being challenged was first introduced in 1993 and allowed for abortions when a woman's life or health was endangered or if they are a victim of rape or another illegal act.

Two judges on the 13-member court did not support the majority ruling.

Before the ruling, abortion rights groups demonstrated in protests and human rights organizations argued against further restricting abortion rights.

Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Dunja Mijatović posted on social media the ruling Thursday was a "sad day for women’s rights."

“Removing the basis for almost all legal abortions in #Poland amounts to a ban & violates #HumanRights,” she penned on Twitter. “Today’s ruling of the Constitutional Court means underground/abroad abortions for those who can afford & even greater ordeal for all others. A sad day for #WomensRights.”

Some Polish lawmakers considered a bill earlier this year to implement nearly a full ban on abortions. However, it postponed a final vote on the proposal brought by a Catholic group, the Post reported.

Sanctuary city policies did not result in crime increase: study
BY JUSTINE COLEMAN - 10/21/20 

© Getty

Sanctuary city policies have not resulted in an increase in crime in communities that have imposed them, according to a Stanford University study published this week.

Researcher David Hausman concluded that evidence does not support the argument, voiced by the Trump administration, that sanctuary cities, which limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities, threaten residents' public safety

The study, which was obtained by The Washington Post, was published in the academic journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Hausman studied violent crime and property crime statistics across more than 200 sanctuary jurisdictions between 2010 and 2015, a time period when many of the sanctuary policies in the country were instituted to protect immigrants living in the country illegally.

He determined that the policies helped decrease deportations of nonviolent offenders. But deportations of violent offenders continued at the same rate, which Hausman said was because many sanctuary policies do not take much action to prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from intervening in those cases.

Overall, deportations reduced by about one-third in places with sanctuary policies, and immigrants arrested but not convicted of a crime were about 50 percent less likely to get deported.

“There’s no evidence sanctuary policies harm public safety, and there’s no evidence those policies increase crime,” Hausman, who previously worked with the American Civil Liberties Union that has challenged the administration’s immigration policies, told the Post.

“I think it’s disappointing that the government and this administration rely on anecdotes when there is data,” he added. “The government itself keeps the data I rely on, and if the administration had looked at its own data, it would know these claims are not true.”

ICE officers have the authority to make arrests anywhere in the country, but jurisdictions with sanctuary policies usually do not assist them by detaining suspects for federal authorities to pick up.

The agency sent a statement to The Hill that did not directly address Hausman’s findings but cited instances of crimes linked to immigrants who were previously let go.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) maintains that cooperation with local law enforcement is essential to protecting public safety, and the agency aims to work cooperatively with local jurisdictions to ensure that criminal aliens are not released into U.S. communities to commit additional crimes,” an ICE spokesperson said. “There are numerous examples where an individual without legal status was arrested by state or local law enforcement and released into the community to reoffend while an ICE detainer was in place.”

In recent weeks, ICE has focused on sanctuary jurisdictions through Operation Rise, making more than 300 arrests, according to the Post.

Local officials who pass sanctuary policies assert that the policies make immigrants more likely to report crimes instead of avoiding police out of a fear they could face deportation.

The sad secrets of Glasgow's abandoned mental hospital
Hidden away in a secluded rural spot north of Glasgow, Lennox Castle Hospital is an abandoned building with a very interesting history.

By The Newsroom

The ruins of Lennox Castle Hospital hide a sad and traumatic history. Picture: Ron Shephard/Wikimedia Commons

The castle itself was built in the 1830s, but in early 20th century, the space was converted into what would later become a truly infamous psychiatric hospital.

Lennox Castle Hospital was eventually closed in 2002, leaving the institution’s sad and difficult history to be forgotten, just like its crumbling, abandoned former home.

In 1925, plans were drawn up by Glasgow Council for a new ‘Mental Deficiency Institution’, and the Lennox Castle Hospital complex was opened a few years later, in 1936. When it opened, Lennox was hailed as being way ahead of its time, and was the largest and best equipped hospital of its kind in Britain

The hospital cost over £1 million to build, and had space for 1,200 patients. There were separate dormitories for male and female patients, each one holding around 60 people in two wards.

Patients also had access to two communal dining halls (with seating for 600 people in each) and a central Assembly Hall, which housed a stage, equipment for cinema shows, and recreational facilities.

Despite a promising start, conditions at Lennox Castle Hospital soon began to deteriorate. The hospital was vastly overcrowded, understaffed and underfunded. Vulnerable patients were left to fend for themselves in the large wards.

Friends and family of patients generally reported that staff tried their best, despite the lack of resources, but conditions in the hospital were described as “wretched and dehumanising”. Conditions were so bad by the 1980s that Doctor Alasdair Sim (the hospital’s Medical Director at the time), said he had never worked in a “worse pit”, and that he was “sick to the stomach about the plight of these poor people”.

A 1989 study by the British Medical Journal found that a quarter of patients at Lennox Castle Hospital were dangerously underweight and malnourished. Some claim that there was more than neglect going on at Lennox Castle Hospital.

Former patients recall being given unnecessarily cruel punishments for small offences. Incidents included being struck with a baseball bat and being made to run laps barefoot around the castle, just for forgetting to address a staff member as “sir”.

In more recent years, comparisons have been drawn between Lennox and cult TV series, American Horror Story: Asylum, thanks to the allegations of abuse, neglect and terrible conditions. Those who attempted to run away would be caught and locked up in isolation for up to six weeks, drugged with heavy doses of medication, and refused contact with visitors.

Patients who didn’t need drugs were given them, as a way of ensuring they remained calm and didn’t cause trouble in the overcrowded conditions. In reality, only around 10 per cent of the hospital’s residents genuinely required anti-psychotic drugs.

There are several reports of patients dying or being seriously injured due to the lack of care at Lennox Castle Hospital. One man was found set alight in the bathroom in the middle of the night and died the following day. Another was seriously injured when a nurse threw a scalding cup of tea on him, while a heart attack (brought on by severe distress while being physically restrained) resulted in another patient’s death.

After decades of keeping patients shut away from the outside world, Lennox Castle Hospital finally closed in 2002.

The last few remaining patients were reintegrated back into the local community, or transferred to more modern psychiatric units, before the hospital was abandoned.

Since then, the eerie site has lain empty, and the buildings have rapidly deteriorated. The formerly grand Lennox Castle is now a crumbling shell. The area remains empty, aside from occasional urban explorers looking to catch a glimpse of the former hospital.

Although several plans have been put forward to restore the castle and build new housing on the grounds, none have been successful so far.

In 2007, Celtic Football Club built a new training facility on the grounds of Lennox Castle. It’s likely that many of the players and staff come and go without having any idea about what went on at the former hospital, less than half a mile away from their state of the art training ground.

LONGEVITY HACKS
SCIENCE REVEALS THE PERFECT TIME TO DRINK COFFEE FOR A HEALTHY METABOLISM


South_agency/DigitalVision Vectors/Getty Images

"Knowing this can have important health benefits for us all."

ALI PATTILLO 10.18.2020 

IT'S A VICIOUS CYCLE: Stay up late into the night and revive yourself upon waking with a cup of strong coffee. While the caffeine may perk you up, it could also have a negative effect on your metabolism, new research suggests.

According to the new study, published in the journal British Journal of Nutrition, a single bad night's sleep isn't likely to acutely impair metabolism. Having coffee before breakfast the next day can.

In the experiment, participants who drank strong, black coffee after a disrupted night's sleep, and followed that up with a sugary drink had impaired blood sugar control — a marker for metabolic dysfunction.‌‌

"It may be better to wait until after breakfast to have coffee following a bad night of sleep — rather than before breakfast in order to balance the stimulating effects of the coffee with their potential to disrupt glucose metabolism," study co-author Harry Smith, a researcher at the Centre for Nutrition, Exercise & Metabolism at the University of Bath, tells Inverse.

Moderate coffee drinking is linked to health benefits like lower risk of heart disease, certain cancers, and neurological conditions, so the findings "don’t mean that coffee can’t be part of a healthy balanced lifestyle," Smith adds.

What the research does say is that it may be worth considering when to down your java.

COFFEE EXPERIMENT — To determine how broken sleep and morning coffee influence metabolic function, researchers recruited 29 healthy men and women. The group participated in three overnight experiments in random order:
Participants had a normal night's sleep (approximately eight hours) and consumed a sugary drink upon waking in the morning.
Participants experienced a disrupted night's sleep (where the researchers woke them every hour for five minutes using specially designed texting prompts) and then upon waking were given the same sugary drink.
Participants experienced the same sleep disruption but were first given a strong black coffee (including approximately 300 milligrams of caffeine) 30 minutes before consuming the sugary drink.

At the start of the study, researchers measured participants' height, weight, and waist circumference along with health metrics like sleep quality, mood, and appetite. After completing each condition, researchers took samples of the participants' blood after drinking the sugary drink. The drink was designed to mirror the calories of a typical breakfast.

THE HEALTH IMPACTS OF A CUP OF JOE — The scientists found that one night of broken sleep did not affect people's insulin sensitivity or glucose tolerance —two markers of metabolic health — the next day, compared to a full night of sleep.

The study may be reassuring for those who occasionally miss out on their full eight hours of rest. But those who regularly lose out on snoozing time aren't out of the woods, metabolically speaking.

"More severe acute sleep disruption and/or chronic sleep disruption have been associated with impaired glucose metabolism and increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease," Smith notes.

The results may throw a wrench in the morning routines of avid coffee drinkers.

In the study, consuming strong, black coffee after broken sleep substantially increased the blood glucose response to breakfast by around 50 percent. This shift doesn't necessarily put someone at risk for diabetes or other metabolic disorders, but the scientists say it could influence health if the spike occurs habitually.

"Single occasions of elevated blood glucose responses such as in the study can be predictive of cardiometabolic events in the future, and this response repeated over a long period of time certainly could have an impact on health such as reduced insulin sensitivity," Smith explains. Still, other factors such as physical activity need to be considered when predicting long-term outcomes.

SHIFTING COFFEE ROUTINES — Taken together, these findings suggest drinking coffee after a bad night's sleep can make you feel alert, but may limit your body's ability to tolerate the sugar in your breakfast.

That's because the caffeine contained in coffee beans has a negative effect on sensors in the muscle that help take glucose out of the blood, therefore resulting in this higher blood glucose response, Smith explains. Caffeine also stimulates a greater release of lipids into the blood which also negatively impacts our muscles' ability to take glucose out of the blood.

"If this scenario of caffeinated coffee before breakfast is continued over a prolonged period it is possible that this may have longer-term health implications, however, it is also likely that our body clock may adjust to the morning spike in blood glucose," Smith says.

More, larger randomized clinical trials are needed to hammer out exactly how coffee routines impact daily metabolic function. But for now, these findings suggest people should consume their bean juice after breakfast, not before, to support a healthy metabolism.

"We know that nearly half of us will wake in the morning and, before doing anything else, drink coffee - intuitively the more tired we feel, the stronger the coffee," study co-author James Betts, co-director of the Centre for Nutrition, Exercise and Metabolism at the University of Bath, said in a related statement. "This study is important and has far-reaching health implications as up until now we have had limited knowledge about what this is doing to our bodies, in particular for our metabolic and blood sugar control."

Coffee is the world's most popular beverage, so drinking morning coffee at the perfect time is useful information for billions of individuals.

"Put simply, our blood sugar control is impaired when the first thing our bodies come into contact with is coffee especially after a night of disrupted sleep. We might improve this by eating first and then drinking coffee later if we feel we still feel we need it. Knowing this can have important health benefits for us all."