Monday, April 01, 2024

Social media use may help to empower plastic surgery patients


Survey suggests positive effects on patient decision-making, reports Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery®


WOLTERS KLUWER HEALTH





Waltham — March 28, 2024 —For patients considering or undergoing plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) procedures, using social media to gather information and answer questions can enhance patient empowerment – potentially leading to increased autonomy and better decision-making, reports a study in the April issue of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery®, the official medical journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS). The journal is published in the Lippincott portfolio by Wolters Kluwer

"Our study suggests that connecting to social media is associated with meaningful increases in empowerment for PRS patients, and may have positive effects on patient-centered decision-making," comments ASPS Member Surgeon Samuel J. Lin, MD, MBA, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston. 

Social media use linked to higher empowerment scores 

The researchers performed an online survey using Amazon's Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing platform. Of 473 respondents, about 70% had undergone some type of PRS: cosmetic in 40%, reconstructive in 23%, and both cosmetic and reconstructive in eight percent. A modified version of the Cyber Info-Decisional Empowerment Scale (CIDES) was used to explore assoiciations between social media and patient empowerment.  

About three-fourths of patients reported seeking plastic surgery information online at some time during their PRS experience. Depending on the resources used, patients who obtained information online had higher scores for patient empowerment. 

In particular, social media users scored higher on six out of seven CIDES categories: patient knowledge; the decision to consult with a plastic surgeon and questions during the consultation; and treatment decision-making, awareness of treatment decisions, and awareness of other treatment options. 

Compared to those using other social media platforms, Facebook users had higher scores in certain categories: decision to consult, questions during consultation, and awareness of other treatment options. RealSelf, a plastic surgery-focused platform, was also associated with increased empowerment in treatment options.  

Plastic surgeons urged to 'engage with and contribute to' social media 

Social media use had a greater impact on empowerment for patients undergoing cosmetic breast surgery, and for reconstructive procedures on the abdomen/trunk or hand. Most patients said that they received helpful information from their plastic surgeon's office, although some found this information difficult to read. 

"As medical care shifts toward a model of patient-centered decision-making, it's important to understand how online information, and social media in particular, affects patient empowerment," says Dr. Lin. "Our findings suggest that social media can be a useful tool to promote patient autonomy and decision-making among patients considering PRS procedures." Previous studies suggest that patient empowerment is associated with improved healthcare experiences and outcomes. 

Social media platforms such as Facebook and RealSelf offer a "forum-like interface" for patients to post questions and read opinions from other patients and physicians, providing a "sense of community or connection." Dr. Lin adds: "Plastic surgeons can contribute to patient empowerment by engaging with and contributing to social media platforms, providing information based on evidence-based care, and ensuring that the information provided by their office is readable and understandable." 

Read Article: Which groups of plastic surgery patients are impacted by social media use: An in-depth review of social media engagement  

Wolters Kluwer provides trusted clinical technology and evidence-based solutions that engage clinicians, patients, researchers and students in effective decision-making and outcomes across healthcare. We support clinical effectiveness, learning and research, clinical surveillance and compliance, as well as data solutions. For more information about our solutions, visit https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/health

### 

About Wolters Kluwer 

Wolters Kluwer (EURONEXT: WKL) is a global leader in information, software solutions and services for professionals in healthcare; tax and accounting; financial and corporate compliance; legal and regulatory; corporate performance and ESG. We help our customers make critical decisions every day by providing expert solutions that combine deep domain knowledge with technology and services. 

Wolters Kluwer reported 2023 annual revenues of €5.6 billion. The group serves customers in over 180 countries, maintains operations in over 40 countries, and employs approximately 21,400 people worldwide. The company is headquartered in Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands.  

For more information, visit www.wolterskluwer.com, follow us on LinkedInFacebookYouTube and Instagram

Social media images of pediatric craniofacial patients – parents voice concerns


Surgeons should seek consent from children as young as nine years, suggests survey in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery®



WOLTERS KLUWER HEALTH





Waltham — March 29, 2024 —Parents voice strong concerns about social media sharing of images of children undergoing craniofacial surgery, reports a survey study in the April issue of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery®, the official medical journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS). The journal is published in the Lippincott portfolio by Wolters Kluwer

"Pediatric plastic surgeons must understand that consent and assent are necessary before posting patient images online," comments senior author Kenneth L. Fan, MD, of Georgetown University Hospital. "Based on our findings, we recommend seeking consent from not only the parents but also the children themselves, at ages as young as nine years."  

The study was performed in partnership by researchers from Georgetown and University of Michigan. Dr. Fan's coauthors were Samuel S. Huffman, BS, Peter T. Hetzler III, MD, MHS, Steven B. Baker, MD, DDS, and Christian J. Vercler, MD. 

Study explores parental perceptions of posting children's photos online 

Social media use has become widespread in plastic surgery, raising potential ethical and professional concerns. Sharing patient images can play a valuable role in information and education for plastic surgeons and other healthcare professionals, as well as patients and families. 

Posting images of children with craniofacial deformities poses unique ethical challenges because they show the head and face, by definition they make the child potentially identifiable. While patients always have the right to revoke permission to share images or other personal information, images posted on social media leave a "permanent online footprint." 

The researchers designed an online survey exploring parents' perceptions of social media use by pediatric plastic surgeons. The anonymous survey included examples of full-face pictures of children, ranging from infants to preteens, who underwent craniofacial surgery. All images had been publicly posted by surgeons on popular social media platforms.  

Survey questions highlighted the consent/assent process and professional issues raised by social media posting. Of 656 responding parents, six percent had a child who had been operated on by a plastic surgeon. Parents overwhelmingly believed that surgeons need to obtain consent before posting pictures of children on social media. About 90% of respondents indicated that surgeons must obtain consent from parents before sharing images, regardless of the child's age.  

Social media sharing should 'focus on the vulnerability of the patient' 

Respondents also believed that surgeons should seek consent from the children themselves before sharing images. The average age at which parents thought surgeons needed to obtain the child's consent was 9.65 years. Nearly half of parents felt that surgeons need to document assent for younger children and even for infants – "even if only to say the child is not old enough for proper assent," the researchers write. 

Parents who followed plastic surgeons on social media were more likely to believe that surgeons need to document assent from all pediatric patients. Forty percent of parents felt that children portrayed in pictures on social media were being exploited, regardless of age. This view was more common among parents with higher levels of education. 

"Our study suggests that a strong majority of parents believe that surgeons should obtain written consent from parents before posting pictures of pediatric patients on social media," Dr. Fan and colleagues write. They note that this finding is consistent with the ASPS Code of Ethics social media policy, which can be found here.  

Dr. Fan and coauthors conclude: "The use of social media by craniofacial plastic surgeons has the promise to positively affect the field, but it must be done professionally and ethically with an intentional focus on the vulnerability of the patient." 

[ Read Article: "Parents’ Perceptions of Social Media Use by Pediatric Plastic Surgeons" ] 

Wolters Kluwer provides trusted clinical technology and evidence-based solutions that engage clinicians, patients, researchers and students in effective decision-making and outcomes across healthcare. We support clinical effectiveness, learning and research, clinical surveillance and compliance, as well as data solutions. For more information about our solutions, visit https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/health

### 

About Wolters Kluwer 

Wolters Kluwer (EURONEXT: WKL) is a global leader in information, software solutions and services for professionals in healthcare; tax and accounting; financial and corporate compliance; legal and regulatory; corporate performance and ESG. We help our customers make critical decisions every day by providing expert solutions that combine deep domain knowledge with technology and services. 

Wolters Kluwer reported 2023 annual revenues of €5.6 billion. The group serves customers in over 180 countries, maintains operations in over 40 countries, and employs approximately 21,400 people worldwide. The company is headquartered in Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands.  

For more information, visit www.wolterskluwer.com, follow us on LinkedInFacebookYouTube and Instagram

 

How blocking a neural receptor responsible for addiction could reduce alcohol use


A Scripps Research team found that a new therapeutic that targets the kappa opioid receptor in the brain may reduce alcohol dependence



SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE





LA JOLLA, CA—Scripps Research scientists have found that LY2444296—a compound that selectively blocks the kappa opioid receptor (KOP)—may reduce drinking in cases of alcohol dependence in animal studies. The findings, which were published March 9, 2024, in Scientific Reports, could eventually inform new treatment options for people who experience alcohol use disorder (AUD).

“Compounds designed to selectively block the KOP are very promising because this receptor is involved in a lot of mental illnesses, such as anxiety and depression,” says Rémi Martin-Fardon, PhD, an associate professor in the Department of Molecular Medicine. “The KOP system is also important in alcohol use disorder, so the idea is if it’s targeted and blocked, you can stop alcohol abuse.”

The KOP system controls brain circuits that affect a range of neurological processes, including addiction, emotion, pain and reward seeking. Both acute and chronic exposure to alcohol negatively affects this system, according to the study’s first author, Francisco Flores-Ramirez, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow at Scripps Research.

For their study, Martin-Fardon and Flores-Ramirez sought to find out whether orally administering LY2444296 could decrease alcohol consumption in rats that formed alcohol dependency. The aim was to mitigate withdrawal symptoms, which would hypothetically lead to reduced alcohol intake. Once rats received LY2444296 at doses as low as 3 mg per kg following 8 hours of abstinence—when acute withdrawal symptoms typically start— withdrawal signs and alcohol consumption tapered down significantly. The researchers also determined that LY2444296 may be innocuous, as it had neither a positive nor negative effect on rats without alcohol dependency.

 

Martin-Fardon and his team didn’t expect LY2444296 to reduce withdrawal signs after only 8 hours of alcohol abstinence because earlier studies showed that other compounds capable of binding to the KOP had no effect on alcohol withdrawal. The scientists don’t yet know why LY2444296 was effective in the present study, and they plan to investigate further.

“People drink to get rid of the sensations of withdrawal,” Martin-Fardon says. He added that withdrawal is associated with physical pain, and that oftentimes, “the only thing that can fix the problem is to have a drink.” But if LY2444296 is taken before withdrawal symptoms begin, “you can decrease the symptoms, so you feel better and drink less.”

Still, the question remains which specific parts of the brain are best targeted to mitigate withdrawal symptoms. Next on their agenda, Martin-Fardon and Flores-Ramirez hope to determine whether LY24444296 can block the effects of stress and other cues that can trigger alcohol relapse.

“We’re also interested in what brain regions are changing as a function of alcohol dependence,” Flores-Ramirez says. “Maybe we could target them to see if the compound could reverse both drinking and relapse behavior.”

This work and the researchers involved were supported by funding from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (grants AA028549, AA026999, AA006420, and T32 AA007456).

In addition to Flores-Ramirez and Martin-Fardon, authors of the study, “LY2444296, a κ-opioid receptor antagonist, selectively reduces alcohol drinking in male and female Wistar rats with a history of alcohol dependence,” are Jessica M. Illenberger and Glenn Pascasio of Scripps Research; and Lars Terenius of Karolinska Institute.

 

Veterans help provide greater insight into Klinefelter and Jacobs syndromes


CU Anschutz researchers say study could lead to better health outcomes for men with additional X and Y chromosomes



UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO ANSCHUTZ MEDICAL CAMPUS




AURORA, Colo. (March 29,  2024) –Researchers at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and collaborators across the country have conducted the largest and most diverse study of men with extra X or Y chromosomes in the US using a large dataset of military veterans. The results could lead to better diagnoses of these underrecognized conditions and earlier treatment of associated diseases.

The study was published today in JAMA Network Open.

“One in 400 males have an additional X or Y chromosome, however 86 percent of these individuals are not diagnosed,” said the study’s first author Shanlee Davis, MD, PhD, associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. “This study supports that men with X and Y variations successfully serve in the US military but experience many medical and psychiatric comorbidities that could potentially be prevented with appropriate diagnosis and care.”

Men with an extra X chromosome, known as Klinefelter syndrome, or Y chromosome, also known as Jacobs syndrome, have an increased risk of delayed development, learning disabilities, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disorders. Men with Klinefelter syndrome also have impaired testicular function associated with low testosterone and infertility. All of the research we have on these conditions is from the <15% who are clinically diagnosed and are almost entirely of Western European ancestry.   

Nearly 600,000 veterans in the Million Veteran Program (MVP) were involved in this study - the first to look at a more diverse population. Through genetic analysis, extra X was found in 862 men and an extra Y in 747 men – similar rates to the general population. Unexpectantly, this research revealed that white and Asian veterans had the highest prevalence of the syndromes with black and Hispanic veterans having the least. Most do not know about their extra X or Y, but those without a clinical diagnosis were similarly affected to those who were previously diagnosed.    

"There’s still a lot we don’t know about these men who have gone years without a proper diagnosis,” Davis said. “Studying this aging population will allow us to learn the risks associated with extra X and Y chromosomes, even when we do not know about the genetic difference clinically. Early identification of these conditions, which is now often happening prenatally, gives us an opportunity to prevent some of the illnesses associated with Klinefelter and Jacobs syndromes.”

Davis and her colleagues are now working with other global biobanks to gather more data to support future studies.

About the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus

The University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus is a world-class medical destination at the forefront of transformative science, medicine, education and patient care. The campus encompasses the University of Colorado health professional schools, more than 60 centers and institutes, and two nationally ranked independent hospitals - UCHealth University of Colorado Hospital and Children's Hospital Colorado - that treat more than two million adult and pediatric patients each year. Innovative, interconnected and highly collaborative, the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus delivers life-changing treatments, patient care and professional training and conducts world-renowned research fueled by over $705 million in research grants. For more information, visit www.cuanschutz.edu.

USC Schaeffer Center study finds few hospitals promoting potentially predatory medical payment products


As Americans struggle to pay off billions of dollars of medical debt, consumer advocates are looking to rein in predatory lending practices. But a recent USC study finds concerns about hospitals offering medical payment products may be overblown

Peer-Reviewed Publication

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA




Fifty million Americans are on a financing plan to pay off medical or dental bills, with one-quarter of those bearing some interest. Increasingly, medical payment products (MPPs) – which include credit cards and loans administered by hospitals, physician practices, or third-party companies – have come under scrutiny by the Consumer Financial Protections Bureau, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services and the Treasury. 

The agencies’ concern is that the products may be sidestepping a broad range of patient and consumer protections and inflating medical bills with financing costs – but little research existed on the topic.

Researchers with the USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics conducted a cross-sectional study to find out how often these payment products were being promoted by hospitals. Analyzing a nationally representative sample of hospitals, they found few hospitals promote potentially predatory lending on their websites. Notably, those hospitals that did promote interest-bearing payment products to their patients were more likely to be non-profits and face higher rates of uncompensated care than hospitals that didn’t promote these products. 

Their study was published today in JAMA Health Forum.

“As we started our research, we thought we might uncover widespread promotion of interest-bearing credit cards and loans on hospital websites, but that’s not what we found,” said study author Erin Duffy, a research scientist and director of research training at the USC Schaeffer Center. “Fewer than one-in-ten hospitals promoted interest-bearing medical payment products, and those promoting them were disproportionately non-profit hospitals with more uncompensated care. Based on our study, we suggest regulators take a close look at the financial conditions of hospitals promoting medical payment products before enacting regulation.” 

Study highlights include the following:

  • Of the 670 hospitals in the study sample, 19% offered any MPP. 
  • 8.5% of hospitals promoted an interest-bearing MPP. Over half of those explicitly described an interest-free promotional period, and the interest rates among the handful that publicly reported them ranged from 5.25% to 29.99%.
  • Hospitals offering interest-bearing MPPs were more often non-profit and had higher total unreimbursed and uncompensated care cost as a percent of operating expenses than other hospitals.
  • While interest-bearing MPPs were rare, hospital-administered payment plans were common. They were offered by 87% of the hospitals in the sample. 

While anecdotal accounts of hospitals partnering with third parties that offer high-interest credit cards have been in the news, researchers say that doesn’t appear to be the typical patient experience with third-party medical financing.

The Schaeffer Center study was already underway when the Consumer Financial Protections Bureau, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services and the Treasury published a request for information about MPPs. While more research may be needed, given the small number of interest-bearing MPPs included in the sample, the researchers say they are hopeful that the results will inform regulators. 

“Our findings suggest that if regulators pursue policies limiting hospitals’ ability to promote medical payment products, that may need to be combined with efforts to stabilize hospital finances,” said study coauthor Erin Trish, Co-Director of the USC Schaeffer Center and Associate Professor at the USC Mann School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences. “Hospitals may be relying on these products when they lack the resources to offer longer-term, interest-free financing.”

Additional study authors include Samantha Randall, Nicholas Wong, Josephine Rohrer, and Nina Linh Nguyen. The study was funded by the USC Schaeffer Center.

 


JAMA NETWORK

Reports of COVID-19 vaccine adverse events in predominantly republican vs democratic states





About The Study: This study found that the more states were inclined to vote Republican, the more likely their vaccine recipients or their clinicians reported COVID-19 vaccine adverse events. These results suggest that either the perception of vaccine adverse events or the motivation to report them was associated with political inclination. 

Authors: David A. Asch, M.D., M.B.A., of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, is the corresponding author. 

To access the embargoed study: Visit our For The Media website at this link https://media.jamanetwork.com/ 

(doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.4177)

Editor’s Note: Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, conflict of interest and financial disclosures, and funding and support.

#  #  #

Embed this link to provide your readers free access to the full-text article This link will be live at the embargo time http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.4177?utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_term=032924

About JAMA Network Open: JAMA Network Open is an online-only open access general medical journal from the JAMA Network. On weekdays, the journal publishes peer-reviewed clinical research and commentary in more than 40 medical and health subject areas. Every article is free online from the day of publication. 

 

DEJA VU
Trump posts column claiming he's 'the chosen one' in Easter social media blitz


OR DEMENTIA


David Edwards
March 31, 2024

Former President Donald Trump used his Easter morning to share an article claiming he is "the chosen one" and was sent by God.

A Gateway Pundit column by conservative podcaster Wayne Allyn Root was buried in a flurry of more than two dozen posts by the former president.

"Do you believe in miracles?" Root asked in the column. "President Trump is that miracle."

Root acknowledged that Trump had been compared to Adolf Hitler and the Ku Klux Klan. But the column said Trump's poll numbers were "supernatural" and "biblical."

"Do you believe in miracles? It's time to start believing. What's happening is supernatural. Everyone is starting to see it. Everyone is starting to believe. The signs are there. Trump is 'the Chosen One.' Trump is sent by God and blessed by God," Root wrote. "What we are all witnessing is 'The Trump Miracle.'"

Recently, Trump began selling a special Bible called the "God Bless the USA Bible" for $59.99. He announced this Bible for sale in a video on Truth Social, the social media platform he uses to communicate with his supporters. He encouraged people to buy it during Holy Week, leading up to Good Friday and Easter.

This Bible is part of Trump's various commercial ventures, including selling sneakers, cologne, perfume, and digital trading cards. Trump's ventures often use his name and image under license agreements.

The website selling the Bible states it is not political or linked to any political campaign. It also mentions that Trump's name and image are used under a paid license, which can be terminated or revoked.



The Volokh Conspiracy

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

FREE SPEECH

Journal of Free Speech Law: "Fake News, Lies, and Other Familiar Problems," by Prof. Sam Lebovic

The fifth of twelve articles from the Knight Institute’s Lies, Free Speech, and the Law symposium.

| 

The article is here; the Introduction:

In the last months of 1919, a year in which a pandemic had killed hundreds of thousands and the nation's cities had been marred by racial pogroms and mob violence, Walter Lippmann reflected on the state of the American public sphere. "[A] nation," he complained, "easily acts like a crowd. Under the influence of headlines and panicky print, the contagion of unreason can easily spread through a settled community." The press was awash in fictions and propaganda; Americans had "cease[d] to respond to truths, and respond simply to opinions." There wasn't even a way to make sure people didn't deliberately and cynically lie to the public: "[If] I lie to a million readers in a matter involving war and peace, I can lie my head off, and, if I choose the right series of lies, be entirely irresponsible." The public was acting not in response to its objective social reality, but to what Lippmann dubbed a "pseudo-environment of reports, rumors and guesses." How, he wondered, could democracy function in such an environment?

Over the coming years, as Lippmann sought to answer this question, he produced a series of books that constitute perhaps the most serious effort to think through the problems, possibilities, and limits of public opinion in modern American democracy. In particular, he developed two key insights about democratic theory that can help us today, as another generation of Americans looks on their public sphere—awash in fake news, rumor, and cynical lying—with disdain and despair.

The first was his rejection of what he dubbed the myth of the "omnicompetent citizen." Americans, Lippmann argued, cling to "the intolerable and unworkable fiction that each of us must acquire a competent opinion about all public affairs." That simply wasn't possible. American society was too complex, too vast, too differentiated. The divisions of labor were too deep, social life too confusing—a kaleidoscope of shifting experiences. And the tempo and sweep of political life, sliding from crisis to crisis, from issue to issue, made it impossible for the citizen to catch their breath. How could anyone, in the spare moments between work and leisure and family, be expected to come to a considered understanding of international trade policy one night, a labor strike the next, and a public health scandal the day after?

Inevitably, Lippmann pointed out, the individual had to rely on others to help them make sense of what was going on, they had to form their opinions in a social and political environment. Yet no one had really grappled with what this meant for the operation of democracy because people continued to presume that opinions were formed and expressed by self-sufficient individuals. The result was a tendency to think about the problems of public opinion as a problem of individual rights, of the regulations and prohibitions impinging on the way individuals exchanged their ideas. And that meant that "democrats have treated the problem of making public opinions as a problem in civil liberties." They were focused on arguing about whether individuals had the right to express certain ideas or not, assuming that public opinion would emerge out of a marketplace of competing arguments.

But in his second important insight, Lippmann pointed out that this was the wrong way entirely to think about the problem of public opinion. In arguing about the "privileges and immunities of opinion," he explained, "we were missing the point and trying to make bricks without straw." What really mattered was the "stream of news" upon which opinions were based. "In going behind opinion to the information which it exploits, and in making the validity of news our ideal, we shall be fighting the battle where it is really being fought." That meant thinking not about what any one individual believed or was saying, nor even about what rights should be afforded to any class of political expression, but in thinking about how the society, as a whole, was arranging the political economy of its information.

In this essay, I want to use these two points as a guide to thinking about the best way to navigate the contemporary crises of the American public sphere. Our anxieties about the spread of fake news—of lies about stolen elections and harmful vaccines and deep state conspiracies—continue to take the form of anxieties about the way that particular forms of expressive (mis)conduct influence the (in)competence of individual citizens. As a result, the most commonly proposed remedies—particularly the temptation to regulate lies—focus on the privileges and immunities of opinion. In short, seeing fake news as an illegitimate cancerous growth, we seek to cut it out of the body politic.

Drawing on Lippmann's analysis, I will argue that this is the wrong way to think about the very real problems of American democratic life. The argument will proceed in three parts. In part one, inspired by Lippmann's reminder that lying has been a problem for over a century, I compare the lies of a conservative political faction in the present moment with lies of their ancestors in the era of McCarthy and Massive Resistance. The success of angry, conspiratorial, racist lying even in the very different media environment of the post-WWII "golden era," I suggest, helps us identify the lies of the present moment not as an unprecedented epistemic crisis, but as an expression of a conservative political formation in American political life.

In part two, I argue that this political formation is benefiting from a broader crisis in the information economy of the U.S. Drawing on Lippmann's distinction between the "stream of news" and the politics of expression, I show that the collapse of journalism as a profession has led to the underproduction of information in the polity and favored the politics of outrageous expression—both of which have benefited the conservative political formation in its effort to win elections by lying. Having developed this understanding of the contemporary problem, part three considers solutions to the current epidemic of lying.

Following Lippmann's reform suggestions from 1919, it argues that the key task is a broader politics of democratic revitalization, which will include new efforts to improve the "stream of news" by encouraging the production of information in new institutions devoted to that task. Such reform efforts should be contrasted to efforts to deal with lies by seeking to eradicate or counter them directly in the discourse, whether by censorship, civic education, or mandated counterspeech. By focusing on the politics of opinion rather than information, reform efforts centered on speech law and speech acts risk exacerbating, rather than ameliorating, the crises of American democracy.