New Survey Data Cast Further Doubt on the FDA's Opposition to Flavored E-Cigarettes

The "epidemic" of adolescent vaping seems to be fading fast, and vaping is replacing smoking among adults, a harm-reducing trend that regulators seem determined to discourage.

JACOB SULLUM | 8.25.2022 

REASON MAGAZINE

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL

FDA Commissioner Robert Califf (Michael Brochstein/Zuma Press/Newscom)

A federal appeals court this week sided with several companies whose applications to sell nicotine vaping products in a variety of flavors were rejected by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). As Reason's Elizabeth Nolan Brown noted yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled that the FDA's decisions were "arbitrary and capricious" because the agency ignored marketing and age-verification plans aimed at preventing underage vaping. But as Judge Robin Rosenbaum noted in her dissent, the manufacturers' victory probably will be short-lived, because the FDA seems dead set against allowing the sale of vaping products in flavors other than tobacco.

That position is puzzling, since former smokers who have switched to vaping overwhelmingly prefer nontobacco flavors, and the FDA acknowledges that "electronic nicotine delivery systems" (ENDS) hold great promise as a harm-reducing alternative to cigarettes. But the FDA insists there is no solid evidence that flavor variety makes vaping more appealing to adult smokers, even as it worries that flavor variety makes vaping more appealing to teenagers. So when the FDA reconsiders these applications on remand from the 11th Circuit, it is almost certain to reject them again, notwithstanding the steps that the companies are taking to keep their products away from underage consumers

The FDA's opposition to flavor variety is driven by concern about an "epidemic" of adolescent vaping. But as new survey data from the government-sponsored Monitoring the Future (MTF) study confirm, the surge in electronic cigarette use by teenagers that alarmed the FDA in 2018 and 2019 is already receding, even though adults can still buy flavored ENDS that remain on the market because the FDA has not yet decided whether to allow them or has not taken enforcement action against them. Those data also indicate that adolescent smoking continued to decline as vaping became more popular. The picture is similar for young adults: As vaping continued to rise among 19-to-30-year-olds in 2021, cigarette smoking hit a record low.

These trends suggest that we are seeing precisely the sort of harm-reducing substitution that the FDA claims to want. The data certainly are not consistent with the idea that the availability of ENDS has resulted in more smoking. Yet Judge Rosenbaum, who seems to think the FDA's opposition to flavored ENDS is well-grounded, avers that "vaping has been shown to be a gateway to smoking combustible cigarettes." She cites no evidence to support that claim, which seems highly implausible in light of the continuing decline in smoking among teenagers and adults.

The annual MTF survey, which University of Michigan researchers conducts under contract with the National Institute on Drug Abuse, includes students in the eighth, 10th, and 12th grades. In 2021, it shows, the prevalence of past-month nicotine vaping fell sharply in all three grades.

That rate peaked at 10.5 percent in 2020 among eighth-graders before falling to 7.6 percent last year. Among 10th- and 12th-graders, it peaked at 19.9 percent and 25.5 percent, respectively, in 2019 and had fallen to 13.1 percent and 19.6 percent, respectively, by last year. Between 2019 and 2021, the prevalence of "daily" vaping (defined as use on 20 or more occasions in the previous 30 days) fell from 2 percent to 1.1 percent among eighth-graders, from 6.8 percent to 2.5 percent among 10th-graders, and from 11.6 percent to 5.4 percent among 12th-graders.

These findings are broadly consistent with results from the National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS), which is sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). That survey shows the prevalence of past-month e-cigarette use by high school students peaking at 27.5 percent in 2019 before falling to 11.3 percent in 2021. Even though adults still have access to ENDS in a variety of flavors, the "epidemic" decried by the FDA and the CDC seems to be fading fast.

Neither survey provides any evidence of the "gateway" that Rosenbaum perceives. On the contrary, the downward trend in adolescent smoking continued even when vaping was rising sharply. Among 12th-graders in the MTF survey, the prevalence of past-month cigarette smoking fell from 10.3 percent in 2011 to 2 percent in 2021. During the same period, the prevalence of "daily" cigarette smoking fell from 4.3 percent to 0.8 percent. In the NYTS, the prevalence of past-month cigarette smoking among high school students fell from 15.8 percent in 2011 to 1.9 percent last year.

There is reason to think that ENDS, far from interfering with the decline in adolescent smoking, hastened that downward trend, which accelerated as vaping took off. The replacement of smoking by vaping is indisputably an improvement in terms of "public health," which the FDA claims to be promoting. But the agency instead portrays it as a grave danger to the youth of America. When it comes to teenagers, the FDA refuses even to consider the positive impact of such substitution.

A 2019 analysis of NYTS data found that frequent e-cigarette use was concentrated among teenagers who were current or former smokers. So far the recent decline in adolescent vaping has not led to an uptick in smoking, which makes sense if casual users, rather than teenagers who vape instead of smoking, account for most of the drop. But the FDA should be wary of any policy that makes cigarettes easier to obtain than ENDS or makes ENDS less appealing to people who otherwise would be smoking. Over the long term, the upshot could be more rather than fewer smoking-related deaths.

Logically, that analysis should include teenagers as well as adults. But the FDA insists that the health benefits of substituting ENDS for cigarettes don't count when vapers are younger than 21. So let's consider what the MTF data tell us about the potential cost of refusing to let adults buy the vaping products they demonstrably want.

"Cigarette smoking among young adults has been declining steadily since
2004 and reached new historic lows in 2021," an MTF report notes. "Cigarette use in the past 30 days decreased by more than half in the past decade," from 21.2 percent in 2011 to 9 percent in 2021.

In recent years, that downward trend in smoking by 19-to-30-year-olds has been accompanied by an upward trend in vaping. "Since it was first measured in 2017,
nicotine vaping in the past 30 days has nearly tripled among young adults to 16.1% in 2021," the report says. "Nicotine vaping in the past 12 months was reported by 21.8%, just below the all-time high of 23.6% in 2019."

Between 2017 and 2021, as the prevalence of past-month vaping in this age group rose by 160 percent, the prevalence of past-month cigarette smoking fell by 39 percent. Those trends are not consistent with Rosenbaum's theory that more vaping means more smoking. But they are consistent with the theory that many young adults are choosing to vape instead of smoke.

The FDA ostensibly would like to see more of that. The whole premise of approving the sale of ENDS as "appropriate for the protection of the public health"—the standard the FDA is supposed to apply under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act—is that it will help reduce tobacco-related morbidity and mortality by offering smokers a much less hazardous way to consume nicotine. Yet the FDA claims to be unpersuaded that flavor variety plays an important role for smokers who have made that potentially lifesaving switch or might be interested in doing so.

The FDA contradictorily insists that flavor variety is important to teenagers. It thinks at least some of them will eschew vaping if tobacco is the only flavor they can find. The possibility that some teenagers therefore will smoke instead does not enter into the FDA's calculations at all. And it dismisses the danger that the same thing will happen among adults, saying ENDS manufacturers have not produced enough evidence to that effect.

Contrary to its legal duty, the FDA has not carefully weighed the costs and benefits of its supposedly youth-protecting policy. Instead, it refuses to admit there are any costs to consider.

Incidents of “Dangerous Heat” Will Triple In Coming Decades: New Study

"Potentially billions of people are going to be exposed to extremely dangerous levels of heat very regularly."

By The Associated Press

Published on 8/25/2022 at 3:50 PM

PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES

What's considered officially “dangerous heat” in coming decades will likely hit much of the world at least three times more often asclimate changeworsens, according to a new study.

In much of Earth's wealthy mid-latitudes, spiking temperatures and humidity that feel like 103 degrees (39.4 degrees Celsius) or higher -- now an occasional summer shock — statistically should happen 20 to 50 times a year by mid-century, said a study Monday in the journalCommunications Earth & Environment.

By 2100, that brutal heat index may linger for most of the summer for places like the U.S. Southeast, the study's author said.

And it’s far worse for the sticky tropics. The study said a heat index considered “extremely dangerous” where the feels-like heat index exceeds 124 degrees (51 degrees Celsius) — now something that rarely happens — will likely strike a tropical belt that includes India one to four weeks a year by century's end.

“So that’s kind of the scary thing about this,” said study author Lucas Zeppetello, a Harvard climate scientist. “That’s something where potentially billions of people are going to be exposed to extremely dangerous levels of heat very regularly. So something that's gone from virtually never happening before will go to something that is happening every year.”

Zeppetello and colleagues used more than 1,000 computer simulations to look at the probabilities of two different levels of high heat -- heat indexes of 103 degrees (39.4 Celsius) and above 124 degrees (51 Celsius), which are dangerous and extremely dangerous thresholds according to the U.S. National Weather Service. They calculated for the years 2050 and 2100 and compared that to how often that heat happened each year across the world from 1979 to 1998.

The study found a three- to ten-fold increase in 103-degree heat in the mid-latitudes even in the unlikely best-case scenario of global warming limited to only 3.6 degrees (2 degrees Celsius) since pre-industrial times -- the less stringent of two international goals.
There's only a 5% chance for warming to be that low and that infrequent, the study found. What's more likely, according to the study, is that the 103-degree heat will steam the tropics “during most days of each typical year” by 2100

Chicago hit that 103 degree heat index level only four times from 1979 to 1998. But the study’s most likely scenario shows Chicago hitting that hot-and-sticky threshold 11 times a year by the end of the century.

Heat waves are one of the new four horsemen of apocalyptic climate change, along with sea level rise, water scarcity and changes in the overall ecosystem, said Zeppetello, who did much of the research at University of Washington state during the warming-charged 2021 heat wave that shattered records and killed thousands.

“Sadly, the horrific predictions shown in this study are credible,” climate scientist Jennifer Francis of the Woodwell Climate Research Center, who was not part of the study team, said in an email. “The past two summers have provided a window into our steamy future, with lethal heat waves in Europe, China, northwestern North America, India, the south-central U.S., the U.K., central Siberia, and even New England. Already hot places will become uninhabitable as heat indices exceed dangerous thresholds, affecting humans and ecosystems alike. Areas where extreme heat is now rare will also suffer increasingly, as infrastructure and living things are ill-adapted to the crushing heat.”

The study focuses on the heat index and that’s smart because it’s not just heat but the combination with humidity that hurts health, said Harvard School of Public Health professor Dr. Renee Salas, who is an emergency room physician.

“As the heat index rises, it becomes harder and harder to cool our bodies,” Salas, who wasn’t part of the research team, said in an email. “Heat stroke is a potentially deadly form of heat illness that occurs when body temperatures rise to dangerous levels.”

The study is based on mathematical probabilities instead of other climate research that looks at what happens at various carbon pollution levels. Because of that, University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann is more skeptical of this research. It also doesn’t take into account landmark U.S. climate legislation that President Joe Biden signed earlier this month or new efforts by Australia, he said.

“The obstacles at this point are political and no statistical methods, regardless of how powerful or sophisticated can predict whether we will garner the political will to overcome them,” Mann said in an email. “But there is reason for cautious optimism.”

-----

BY SETH BORENSTEIN AP Science Writer

What our shopping choices say about the U.S. economy


Macy's, the nation's largest department store chain, has scaled back its sales forecast for the year.
CREDIT: AP


BY Alina Selyukh
AUG 25, 2022 

NPR

Shoppers are making fewer purchases and fewer trips to stores. But when they do check out at the register, they often spend more, revealing the impact of inflation. Many lower-income shoppers are cutting back on non-essentials like home decor and spending big at discount dollar stores.

These are some of the takeaways from a spate of mid-year financial report cards released by America's leading retailers, including Walmart, Macy's and Dollar Tree. They reflect a deep uncertainty that has set into the U.S. economy, with inflation running at the highest rate in decades.

Department store chains Macy's and Nordstrom, as well as Victoria's Secret this week joined a growing list of retailers cutting their forecasts for the rest of year. Companies are flagging fewer visits from shoppers compared to a year ago, though some retailers, including home goods seller Williams-Sonoma on Wednesday and Home Depot last week, continued to report growing sales despite slower store traffic.

At Dollar General and Dollar Tree, inflation had the result of boosting sales, the companies reported Thursday, as shoppers sought cheaper groceries, smaller packages and more deals on essentials.

Some retailers seeing a dip in sales have blamed their race to discount and sell off unwanted inventory: an unexpected glut of things like pajamas and kitchen appliances that were hot in the pandemic until suddenly shoppers became more interested in travel and outings to restaurants.

People are still shopping

All this comes against a backdrop of a massive, record-blasting shopping spree that marked 2020 and 2021. This year, as pandemic restrictions lifted, people turned back toward experiences rather than things. And then, as prices for gas and food boosted inflation, more shoppers began to switch to private brands or skip discretionary items.

In surveys, people say they feel extremely anxious about finances. Still, in July, retail sales, when adjusted for inflation, edged up both compared to June and to July 2021 as prices somewhat eased.

"Every metric I see is that the economy is pretty resilient," said Sucharita Kodali, an analyst with Forrester, pointing to higher wages, low unemployment, decent savings levels and retail spending remaining above pre-pandemic levels. "Retail spend, even in spite of inflation, is at a record high."

Shoppers are "under pressure"

This week, Macy's, the largest U.S. department store chain, scaled back its forecast for the full year. The company said its shoppers are not switching to less expensive brands, as other retailers have seen, but rather seeking out discounts and prioritizing purchases such as office clothes as more people return to the workplace in person.

The consumer "is actually still healthy, but they're under pressure. Wage rate is not keeping up with the pace of inflation," CEO Jeff Gennette told Bloomberg on Tuesday, suggesting that upscale shoppers were less affected and luxury goods were selling well.

Kodali points out that many retailers – particularly department stores – had wobbled long before the pandemic, particularly as many malls declined and big brands raced to sell directly to shoppers online.

Economists at Wells Fargo are warning that back-to-school shopping was a major factor boosting retail spending in recent months.

"Once the kids return to school and the bills come due, households will begin to tighten their belts," the company wrote in a report last week. "Even as inflation is showing signs of moderating, it will do so only slowly."

Meanwhile, Walmart – whose vast footprint and low prices make it much more of an economic bellwether – has done an about-face from warnings about the rest of the year to signal better times ahead.

In July, the company alerted Wall Street to slumping profits, as people's high grocery bills made products in other aisles less appealing. But last week, Walmart improved its forecast, noting that its stores were drawing more middle-income and higher-income shoppers.

Walmart's biggest rival Amazon, for its part, last month said it had seen no inflation impact on demand at all, with the company's shoppers continuing to spend more. [Copyright 2022 NPR]

Gender Dysphoria Covered by Disability Law, Federal Court Rules

The ruling could become a powerful tool to challenge legislation restricting access to medical care and other accommodations for trans people.

By The Associated Press

Published on 8/25/2022 at 12:01 PM

AP PHOTO

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A federal ruling that gender dysphoria is covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act could help block conservative political efforts to restrict access to gender-affirming care, advocates and experts say.

A panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appellate court in the country to find that the 1990 landmark federal law protects transgender people who experience anguish and other symptoms as a result of the disparity between their assigned sex and their gender identity.

The ruling could become a powerful tool to challenge legislation restricting access to medical care and other accommodations for transgender people, including employment and government benefits, advocates said.

“It’s a very important and positive ruling to increase people’s access to gender-affirming care,” said Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality.

The ruling is binding in the states covered by the Richmond-based 4th Circuit — Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia — but will inevitably be cited in cases in other states, said Kevin Barry, a law professor at Quinnipiac University.

The decision came in the case of a transgender woman who sued the Fairfax County sheriff in Virginia for housing her in a jail with men. The decision is not limited to transgender people challenging jail policies, but also applies broadly to all areas of society covered by disability rights law, including employment, government benefits and services and public accommodations, Barry said.

“This decision destigmatized a health condition — gender dysphoria — and it says that what Congress did in 1990 wasn’t OK,” Barry said

The sheriff’s office did not respond to phone messages seeking comment.
Some Republican leaders who have led efforts to limit access to transition treatment for youths have labeled it a form of child abuse. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott this year, for instance, ordered the state’s child welfare agency to investigate reports of gender-affirming care for children as abuse.

A new rule in Florida restricts Medicaid coverage for gender dysphoria treatments for youths and adults. The state health agency previously released a report stating that puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and sex reassignment surgery have not been proven safe or effective in treating gender dysphoria.

And Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is widely touted as a potential 2024 Republican presidential candidate, recently tweeted that children should not be able to take puberty blockers “or mutilate their body by getting a sex change.”

But leading medical entities contradict those positions, Heng-Lehtinen said.
“This health care is under attack politically in a lot of the country, but medically all of the credible professionals involved — the American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical Association and others — have all recognized for years that this is essentially primary care,” Heng-Lehtinen said.

In the case before the 4th Circuit, Kesha Williams was initially assigned to live on the women’s side of the Fairfax County jail when she arrived in 2018.

Williams told the nurse she is transgender, has gender dysphoria and received hormone treatments for the previous 15 years. But after she explained that she had not had genital surgery, she said, she was assigned to the men’s section under a policy that inmates must be classified according to their genitals.

In her lawsuit, Williams said that she was harassed and that her prescribed hormone medication was repeatedly delayed or skipped. Deputies ignored her requests to refer to her as a woman and instead called her “mister,” “sir,” “he” or “gentleman,” she said. Her requests to shower privately and for body searches to be conducted by a female deputy were denied, she said.

A federal judge granted a motion by the sheriff’s office to dismiss the lawsuit, finding that because the Americans with Disabilities Act excluded “gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments,” Williams could not sue under the law.

A three-judge panel of the 4th Circuit reversed that ruling, sending the case back to U.S. District Court.

The 4th Circuit panel said in its ruling Aug. 16 that there is a distinction between gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria. The court cited advances in medical understanding that led the American Psychiatric Association to remove gender identity disorder from the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and to add gender dysphoria, defined in the manual as the “clinically significant distress” felt by some transgender people. Symptoms can include intense anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation.

The modern diagnosis of gender dysphoria “affirms that a transgender person’s medical needs are just as deserving of treatment and protection as anyone else’s,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote in the majority opinion.

Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. dissented in part.

“Whether we focus on when Congress passed the ADA or look beyond to today, the distinction Williams attempts to draw between gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria fails,” Quattlebaum wrote.

Lt. Uhura Is Taking One Final Space Flight

Nichelle Nichols' ashes will be launched into space aboard the Vulcan rocket.

By Christian Arriaga-Flores

Published on 8/25/2022 at 4:27 PM

PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES

‘Star Trek’ legend Nichelle Nichols made history for becoming one of the only Black actors to star in the original hit series as Lt. Nyota Uhura in 1966.

Though she never physically went to space, her ashes will be sent up to deep space to honor her legacy.

Nichols’ ashes will embark on a rocket called 'Vulcan' later in the year by Texas-based company Celestis, as part of their 'memorial spaceflight services' for those wanting to celebrate the life of their loved ones. Her ashes will be launched into space along with the ashes of two other ‘Star Trek’ actors and the creator of the original series, Gene Roddenberry.

The trailblazing actress, who passed away at the age of 89 in late July, inspired Black women and girls to pursue STEM fields. She also became a spokesperson for NASA to encourage Black women to join the space agency. Dr. Mae Jemison, the first African American woman to go to space in 1992, was inspired by Nichols to join NASA.

House Report Shows Trump 'Deliberately and Repeatedly' Undermined Covid-19 Response

Administration's nearly year-long crusade against FDA resulted in damaging consequences for the coronavirus response," the new publication states.


Dr. Deborah Birx—then the White House's coronavirus response coordinator—and National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci listened as then-President Donald J. Trump speaks during a White House briefing on March 20, 2020 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

BRETT WILKINS

August 24, 2022

White House officials during the tenure of former President Donald Trump "deliberately and repeatedly" pressured the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to authorize unproven and potentially dangerous Covid-19 treatments, while working to derail the agency's vaccine guidance ahead of the 2020 presidential election, a congressional report published Wednesday revealed.

"Senior Trump administration officials undermined public health experts because they believed doing so would benefit the former president politically."

The report, published by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, is the second installment in a series documenting what the panel calls the Trump administration's "rampant political interference with the federal public health response" to a pandemic that has now killed more than 1,040,000 people in the United States.

The publication states that "the Trump administration's nearly yearlong crusade against FDA resulted in damaging consequences for the coronavirus response: Morale inside the agency cratered, and public confidence in FDA's scientific integrity was shaken in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic."

Former FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn told the committee that Peter Navarro, who headed the White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, "exerted inappropriate pressure" on the FDA to renew the emergency use authorization for the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a Covid-19 treatment, even after it was shown to be ineffective and possibly dangerous.

Additionally, Trump officials "sought to generate outside support for hydroxychloroquine by engaging known extremists and prolific conspiracists like former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, Dr. Jerome Corsi, and the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons."

Furthermore, the report contains extensive new evidence that Trump officials, including Navarro, conducted government business using private email accounts—a potential violation of the Presidential Records Act.

"The select subcommittee's findings that Trump White House officials deliberately and repeatedly sought to bend FDA's scientific work on coronavirus treatments and vaccines to the White House's political will are yet another example of how the prior administration prioritized politics over public health," Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), who heads the panel, said in a statement.

Related Content

Documents Expose 'Staggering Pattern of Political Interference' in Trump's Covid-19 Response

Brett Wilkins

"As today's report makes clear, senior Trump administration officials undermined public health experts because they believed doing so would benefit the former president politically—plotting covertly with known conspiracy theorists to dangerously push a disproven coronavirus treatment, bullying FDA to change its vaccine guidance, and advocating for federal investigations into those who stood in their way," he continued.

According to the new report, Trump officials:Orchestrated coordinated pressure campaigns to reauthorize and expand use of hydroxychloroquine;
Pushed to authorize use of convalescent plasma—which used blood from people who have recovered from Covid-19—ahead of the 2020 Republican National Convention, while "grossly misrepresenting the data" on the therapy; and
Attempted to derail the FDA's Covid-19 vaccine guidance ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

"These assaults on our nation's public health institutions undermined the nation's coronavirus response," said Clyburn, "and are precisely why we must never again settle for leaders who prioritize politics over keeping Americans safe."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Dangerous 'Cycle of Escalation' Intensifies After Unauthorized US Bombings in Syria

Iran called the U.S. airstrikes "a terrorist act" as the two countries work to finalize a revived nuclear agreement.


A U.S. soldier stands near the Syrian-Turkish border on August 21, 2022. 

(Photo: Delil SouleiMman/AFP via Getty Images)

JAKE JOHNSON

August 25, 2022

Without legal authorization from Congress, the U.S. military launched a series of bombing campaigns this week against what American officials characterized as Iranian proxies in Syria, intensifying tit-for-tat violence that observers fear could spill into a broader and deadlier conflict.

The U.S. described the strikes, carried out by Central Command (CENTCOM) forces in eastern and northeastern Syria, as retaliation for August 15 rocket attacks on a base housing American military personnel. CENTCOM blamed "Iran-backed groups" for the attacks.

"The continued presence of American troops in parts of Syria is against international laws."

In a statement Thursday after "Iran-affiliated militants" purportedly launched another series of rocket attacks the previous day, CENTCOM said U.S. airstrikes over the past 24 hours have killed "four enemy fighters" and destroyed "seven enemy rocket launchers." It's not clear whether any civilians were killed or harmed.

The Syrian groups' rocket attacks Wednesday reportedly injured three U.S. servicemembers, and additional attacks were reported Thursday.

"The CENTCOM strikes in Syria are now part of a cycle of escalation that is endangering U.S. troops," Erik Sperling, executive director of Just Foreign Policy, warned late Wednesday. "Congress never authorized U.S. military action, as required by U.S. law and the Constitution."

"In fact, last month, 60% of House Democrats voted to end the U.S. military role in Syria," Sperling noted, pointing to a failed amendment led by Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.).

"Stunning that POTUS and CENTCOM try to say that strikes on 'Iranian-backed militias'—sworn enemies of ISIS—is part of the anti-ISIS mission," Sperling added. "Also stunning that they say the anti-ISIS mission is authorized by Congress's vote 7,649 days ago (2001 AUMF)."

In a statement Tuesday after the first round of U.S. airstrikes in Syria this week, CENTCOM claimed its bombings were legal because "the president gave the direction... pursuant to his Article II authority to protect and defend U.S. personnel by disrupting or deterring attacks by Iran-backed groups."

But progressive foreign policy advocates questioned that legal basis, particularly given the rocket attacks followed just a day later.

"The admin's use of an Article II 'deterrence' justification for their 8/23 Syria airstrikes has now been completely discredited," Demand Progress tweeted late Wednesday. "U.S. soldiers have been injured in a retaliatory attack as a result. Congress never approved to put these troops in harm's way."

Iran's Foreign Ministry, for its part, condemned the U.S. strikes as "a terrorist act" and denied "any affiliation" with the Syrian groups.

"The continued presence of American troops in parts of Syria is against international laws and violates the national sovereignty of this country and is considered an occupation," the Foreign Ministry continued. "And on this basis, they should leave Syria immediately and stop plundering the country's oil resources and grains."

The exchange of attacks between U.S. forces and militant groups in Syria comes as the Biden administration and Iran are looking to iron out remaining differences and cement a revival of the nuclear accord that former President Donald Trump violated in 2018.

Colin Kahl, the undersecretary of defense for policy, insisted to reporters Wednesday that U.S. airstrikes in Syria "or elsewhere are not linked to wherever we end up on the nuclear deal."

"Whether the JCPOA is reborn or not, it actually has nothing to do with our willingness and resolve to defend ourselves, and I think the strike last night was a pretty clear communication to the Iranians that these things are on different tracks," Kahl added.

Imploring the Biden administration to ensure a final nuclear deal is reached as soon as possible, MoveOn executive director Rahna Epting said Wednesday that "we've seen how wars of choice in the Middle East have ended in unnecessary suffering."

"We have an opportunity to choose the path of diplomacy with our Iran policy once again," said Epting. "Let's not delay any longer."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

‘I am a human being’, says Finnish Prime Minister Marin

By Pekka Vanttinen | EURACTIV.com

 Aug 24, 2022

A series of videos have been leaked to the media showing Marin dancing and 

partying with friends, as well as two other friends kissing, bare-chested, 

in what appears to be her official residence. While many have leapt to her defence,

 the incidents have dominated criticism levied against her. [EPA-EFE/OLIVIER HOSLET]

Prime minister Sanna Marin became tearful while addressing a crowd in Lahiti where the social democrats were having a summer meeting, following a week of video leaks.

A series of videos have been leaked to the media showing Marin dancing and partying with friends, as well as two other friends kissing, bare-chested, in what appears to be her official residence. While many have leapt to her defence, the incidents have dominated criticism levied against her.

”The week gone by has not been the easiest one in my life. Actually, it has been rather difficult. I would like to believe that people look more at what we are doing at work than what we are doing in our free time. I am a human being,” said Marin.

”Also, I am sometimes yearning for joy, light and fun amidst these dark clouds. Part of that is all sorts of footage and video material that I would not like to see, and from what I know, you would not like to see it either. Despite that, it is presented to us. It is a private matter, it is joy, it is life. But I haven’t missed a single work day, have left no task undone, and I never will.”

”I will learn the lesson. [..] I’m thinking of Ukraine. I’m thinking about you. And I will do my work,” concluded Marin.

Reportedly, Marin has received increased criticism from inside the Social Democratic Party, according to party members interviewed by Helsingin Sanomat on Wednesday, most commenting anonymously.

Some called for a leadership change ahead of the 2023 parliamentary elections, while another source alleged Marin was becoming more authoritarian and less informative towards the party rank and file.

Others, however, interpret these are understandable side effects of the pressures of the pandemic and the NATO membership process.

If I Can't Dance: Solidarity With Sanna


The Prime Minister is out with her friends having fun.

ABBY ZIMET

August 21, 2022

Because girls - also young, progressive, female political leaders - just wanna have fun, video emerged last week of Finland's Prime Minister Sanna Marin on a night out joyously dancing, singing, drinking and getting down with friends, a spectacle of glad normalcy that horrified dour male misogynists who harrumphed this was Just Not Done. Cue the ensuing "absolutely stupid political scandal" known as Partygate, a "very classic 'Finnish scandal,' which is actually not a scandal at all but because Finnish politics tend to be so uptight and slightly boring you have to get creative to stir things up." At 36, Marin is the world's youngest head of state; raised by two women, she is also a fierce supporter of LGBTQ rights, the happily married (straight) mother of a four-year-old, and the multi-faceted, competent leader of a majority-women government who since being elected two years ago has successfully advocated for Finland to join NATO and navigated growing tensions with neighboring Russia after their invasion of Ukraine - all while periodically taking time out to attend music festivals, looking very cool yet. Still, because misogyny, Marin has been criticized for having a life beyond work; in the recently leaked video, she was filmed rowdily singing and dancing with several friends in the private VIP room of a nightclub in Helsinki.

After the video surfaced, right-wing pols - who may be the leakers - began making outraged noises: What about national security? Are they singing about cocaine? Why did she dance with a pop star who's not her husband? Why is she having more fun than we are? Marin defended herself, arguing, "Finnish society and its resilience can withstand me singing and dancing with my friends...I hope that in the year 2022 it's accepted even decision-makers dance, sing and go to parties." She also agreed to take a drug test to shut down the haters. (The results: negative.) Meanwhile, Finnish and Danish women rallied to her cause. Urging "Fight the misogyny and "Let's dance for each other," they posted images of themselves jubilantly, defiantly boogeying under the hashtag #SolidarityWithSanna, Others posted reminders that, "Once upon a time, Finnish heads of state could let their hair down": See 6th president Gustaf Mannerheim, naked on his horse with friends. "Dancing insists we take up space," said Eve Ensler, writer and organizer of One Billion Rising's flashmobs performed to "Break the Chain." "We go there together." Just so, argued anarchist Emma Goldman, who famously, allegedly proclaimed, "If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution." It's an apocryphal quote, writes Alix Kates Shulman, but it echoes Goldman's call for "freedom, the right to self-expression, everybody's right to beautiful, radiant things." So dance on.

I told him to mind his own business, I was tired of having the Cause constantly thrown into my face. I did not believe that a Cause which stood for a beautiful ideal, for anarchism, for release and freedom from conventions and prejudice, should demand the denial of life and joyI want freedom, the right to self-expression, everyboy's right to beautiful, radiant things." Anarchism meant that to me, and I would live it in spite of the whole world--prisons, persecution, everything. . [Living My Life ( Knopf, 1934), p. 56]






ABBY ZIMET has written CD's Further column since 2008. A longtime, award-winning journalist, she moved to the Maine woods in the early 70s, where she spent a dozen years building a house, hauling water and writing before moving to Portland. Having come of political age during the Vietnam War, she has long been involved in women's, labor, anti-war, social justice and refugee rights issues. Email: azimet18@gmail.com

US and Israeli Right-Wingers Want Only One Thing in Iran: Regime Change

They want to rerun the 1953 CIA coup, which deposed populist prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and reinstalled the exiled shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlevi.

U.S. President Joe Biden meets with Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett in the Oval Office at the White House on August 27, 2021 in Washington, DC. During their first face-to-face meeting at the White House, US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett focused their talks on Iran. (Photo: Sarahbeth Maney-Pool/Getty Images)

JUAN COLE

August 25, 2022

 by Informed Comment

Right wing Israeli politicians such as former prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and even centrist politicians like caretaker Prime Minister Yair Lapid have fulminated against any US renewal of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). As with the loony Right wing in the US (increasingly the only Right wing there is), they typically allege that the JCPOA will allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. Since the treaty makes it virtually impossible for Iran to develop a nuclear device, this charge literally makes no sense.

A wealthier and more connected Iran would have more diplomatic influence and be taken more seriously in geopolitics. It could emerge as a genuine rival to Israel in these areas.

Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. It has a civilian program to enrich uranium for fuel for its Bushehr reactor. It has plans to expand the number of its nuclear power plants.

The way it would make a bomb if its leadership ever decided they wanted to go in that direction would be to run thousands of high-powered centrifuges to enrich the uranium and build up a stockpile of High Enriched Uranium (HEU), which could be further enriched in the thousands of advanced centrifuges, until you got it to 95% enriched. Or, it could modify a heavy water reactor being used to generate electricity so as to turn it into a breeder reactor that quickly allowed the harvesting of fissile material.

The UN and the US put sanctions on Iran, and the carrot the UN Security Council and the Obama administration used to convince Iran to mothball 80% of its nuclear enrichment program was that these sanctions would be lifted and Iran would be integrated into the world economy.

When Iran was faithfully adhering to the terms of the JCPOA in 2015-2019, it only ran 6,000 low-tech centrifuges. It was only allowed to enrich to 3.6%. It cast its entire uranium stockpile in a form that could not be further enriched. It halted building a heavy-water reactor at Arak and bricked it in. It accepted regular inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency of the UN. No country under regular IAEA inspections has ever developed an atomic bomb.

In short, the 2015 nuclear deal worked perfectly for 4 years. It made sure that Iran was not in a position to make an atom bomb as long as Tehran adhered to its terms. And if Iran ceased observing the provisions of the treaty, everyone would know it immediately.

It only failed on the economic side. The Republicans in Congress refused to allow Obama to lift US sanctions, which threaten third parties. European companies, fearing the US Treasury Department, refused to invest in Iran. So the country never really got the sanctions relief it was promised. It was taken for a ride.

Once Trump abruptly destroyed the JCPOA, and began waging war on the Iranian economy, even halting the export of Iranian petroleum, Iran felt released from its obligations. It started ramping up new and better centrifuges beyond the 6K limit. It began enriching to the level of High Enriched Uranium, getting even to 60%, which is unprecedented for that country. The IAEA faced restrictions on its inspections and found suspicious uranium signatures at sites where they shouldn't have been. Iran is much closer to having the capability to get a bomb, if it ever decided to take that step, than it ever was before. Ripping up the JCPOA freed Iran to do whatever it wanted, despite the US war on the Iranian economy, which mainly hurt ordinary Iranians, not the ayatollahs.

So it is completely illogical to charge that having Iran in the JCPOA gives it an opportunity to develop nuclear weapons.

Why would anyone say a crazy thing like that?

Neither the Israeli Right wing nor the American Right wing can possibly believe the nonsense they spew on Iran. So they must have an ulterior motive.

One thing the Right wing hates about the JCPOA is the prospect that Iran would be released from trade restrictions and would garner riches from this trade and investment. Iran would become an important trading partner of some European countries. A wealthier and more connected Iran would have more diplomatic influence and be taken more seriously in geopolitics. It could emerge as a genuine rival to Israel in these areas.

Iran emphasizes Palestinian rights and opposes the Israeli Occupation of the Palestinians, and if it were more influential, the standard Israeli narrative, that Palestinians must be deprived of basic human rights because they are inherently violent and dangerous, would begin losing its purchase.

A richer Iran could also be a more generous patron to its client militias in Iraq and Lebanon, both of which Israel sees as a dire threat.

Finally, both the American Right wing and the Israeli Right Wing want Iran's government to be overthrown and replaced by a pro-Western puppet. In other words, they want to rerun the 1953 CIA coup, which deposed populist prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and reinstalled the exiled shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlevi. That regime change was reversed 25 years later by the Islamic Revolution, which was driven in part by resentment at the US and Britain for imposing a hated dictatorship on the Iranian people.

Some people, however, never learn any lessons, and so are dreaming again of a 1953.

So these considerations lie behind the laughable assertions by the Right wing about the Iran nuclear deal. They are maximalists. They don’t actually care so much about Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program. They want to roll back and undo the Islamic Revolution and carry out a regime change operation. Short of that, they want to keep Iran under massive sanctions and bleed its economy, which might cause popular arrest and allow a regime change operation. They surely know that the JCPOA worked. They didn't want it to. They want the whole ball of wax.



JUAN COLE
Juan Cole teaches Middle Eastern and South Asian history at the University of Michigan. His newest book, "Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires" was published in 2020. He is also the author of "The New Arabs: How the Millennial Generation Is Changing the Middle East" (2015) and "Napoleon's Egypt: Invading the Middle East" (2008). He has appeared widely on television, radio, and on op-ed pages as a commentator on Middle East affairs, and has a regular column at Salon.com. He has written, edited, or translated 14 books and has authored 60 journal articles.