Category: Wires

  • Billionaire Les Wexner says he was ‘duped’ by adviser Jeffrey Epstein, ‘a world-class con man’

    Billionaire Les Wexner says he was ‘duped’ by adviser Jeffrey Epstein, ‘a world-class con man’

    NEW ALBANY, Ohio — The billionaire behind the retail empire that once blanketed shopping malls with names such as Victoria’s Secret and Abercrombie & Fitch told members of Congress on Wednesday that he was “duped by a world-class con man” — close financial adviser Jeffrey Epstein. Les Wexner also denied knowing about the late sex offender’s crimes or participating in Epstein’s abuse of girls and young women.

    “I was naive, foolish, and gullible to put any trust in Jeffrey Epstein. He was a con man. And while I was conned, I have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide,” the 88-year-old retired founder of L Brands said in a statement to the House Oversight and Reform Committee released before his interview.

    The panel’s Democrats had subpoenaed him after the latest Justice Department release of Epstein-related documents revealed new details about Wexner’s relationship with the well-connected financier. Ranking member Rep. James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, said that Wexner “answered every question asked of him” during the six-hour proceeding and that a video and transcript would be released soon.

    Wexner described himself to the lawmakers as a philanthropist, community builder and grandfather who always strove “to live my life in an ethical manner in line with my moral compass,” according to the statement. He said he was eager “to set the record straight” about his ties with Epstein. Their relation ended bitterly in 2007, after the Wexners discovered he’d been stealing from them.

    As one of Epstein’s most prominent former friends, Wexner has spent years answering for their decades-long association and he sought to use the proceeding to dispel what he called “outrageous untrue statements and hurtful rumor, innuendo, and speculation” that have shadowed him.

    Rep. Robert Garcia, a California Democrat who sat in on Wednesday’s interview, expressed skepticism in comments to reporters gathered near the proceeding.

    “There is no single person that was more involved in providing Jeffrey Epstein with the financial support to commit his crimes than Les Wexner,” he said.

    In response to allegations by the prominent late Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, who claimed in court documents that Wexner was among men Epstein trafficked her to, Wexner testified to utter devotion to his wife of 33 years, Abigail. He said he’d never once been unfaithful “in any way, shape, or form. Never. Any suggestion to the contrary is absolutely and entirely false.”

    Wexner’s name appears more than 1,000 times in the Epstein files, which does not imply guilt and Wexner has never been charged with any crimes. His spokesperson said the number of mentions is not unexpected given their long-running ties.

    ‘A most loyal friend’

    Epstein first met Leslie Wexner through a business associate around 1986.

    It was an opportune time for Wexner’s finances. The Ohio business owner had grown a single Limited store in Columbus into a suite of 1980s mall staples: The Limited, Limited Express, Lane Bryant and Victoria’s Secret. Bath & Body Works, Abercrombie & Fitch, Lerner, White Barn Candle Co., and Henri Bendel would follow.

    Wexner told lawmakers that it was several years before he turned over management of his vast fortune to Epstein, after the “master manipulator” connived to gain his trust. He gave Epstein power of attorney in 1991, allowing Epstein to make investments and do business deals and to purchase property and help Wexner as he developed New Albany from a small rural city to a thriving upscale Columbus suburb.

    Epstein had “excellent judgment and unusually high standards,” Wexner told Vanity Fair in a 2003 interview, and he was “always a most loyal friend.”

    On Wednesday, the billionaire said he didn’t circulate in Epstein’s social circle, but often heard accounts of his encounters with other wealthy people.

    Epstein “carefully used his acquaintance with important individuals to curate an aura of legitimacy,” Wexner said. He said he visited Epstein’s infamous island only once, stopping for a few hours one morning with his wife and young children while they were cruising on their boat.

    “It is interesting that Mr Wexner has already begun to clarify in his mind that somehow he and Mr. Epstein weren’t even friends,” Garcia told reporters. “We should be very clear that the two were very close, per reporting. They spent a lot of time together.”

    Epstein recalls ‘gang stuff’

    In one of the newly released documents, Epstein sent rough notes to himself about Wexner saying: “never ever, did anything without informing les” and “I would never give him up.” Another document, an apparent draft letter to Wexner, said the two “had ‘gang stuff’ for over 15 years” and were mutually indebted to each other — as Wexner helped make Epstein rich and Epstein helped make Wexner richer.

    Wexner spokesperson Tom Davies said Wexner never received the letter, characterizing it as fitting “a pattern of untrue, outlandish, and delusional statements made by Epstein in desperate attempts to perpetuate his lies and justify his misconduct.”

    Wexner told the congressional representatives that Epstein “lived a double life,” presenting himself to his wealthy clients as a financial guru with steady girlfriends while “most carefully and fully” hiding his misdeeds with underage girls. “He knew that I never would have tolerated his horrible behavior. Not any of it,” he said.

    Exploiting a sexy brand

    Some accusers said Epstein touted his ties to Wexner and claimed that he could help get them jobs modeling for the Victoria’s Secret catalog.

    One woman, an aspiring actor and model, told the FBI that Epstein said he was best friends with the longtime Victoria’s Secret owner and that she’d have to learn to be comfortable in her underwear and not be a prude, according to recently released grand jury testimony. Another woman said she reported Epstein to police in 1997 after he groped her during what she thought was a modeling interview for the Victoria’s Secret catalog. After Epstein’s 2019 arrest, Wexner’s lawyers told investigators that the business owner had heard a rumor that Epstein might be holding himself out as connected to Victoria’s Secret, prosecutors wrote in a recently disclosed memorandum summarizing the probe. When Wexner asked Epstein about it, Epstein denied doing so, the lawyers said, according to the memo.

    Wexner did not address the specific issue in his statement Wednesday, but repeatedly lamented being deceived by Epstein — “an abuser, a crook, and a liar.” L Brands sold off Victoria’s Secret in 2020, in one of Wexner’s final acts as chair.

    A relationship unravels

    Wexner did not publicly reveal until after Epstein’s arrest on federal sex trafficking charges in July 2019 that he had severed their relationship. In a Wexner Foundation letter that August, he said that happened in 2007. But the Justice Department’s newly released records show the two were in touch after that.

    Wexner emailed Epstein on June 26, 2008, after a plea deal was announced that would require him to serve 18 months in a Florida jail on a state charge of soliciting prostitution from a minor in order to avoid federal prosecution. He wound up serving 13 months.

    “Abigail told me the result … all I can say is I feel sorry. You violated your own number 1 rule … always be careful,” Wexner wrote. Epstein replied: “no excuse.”

    Davies said the 2007 date Wexner cited in 2019 applied to firing Epstein as financial adviser, revoking his power of attorney, and removing his name from Wexner’s bank accounts.

    Wexner also said in the 2019 letter that Epstein had misappropriated “vast sums” of his and his family’s fortune while overseeing his finances. An investigative memo from the latest document release says that Wexner’s attorneys told investigators in 2008 that Epstein had repaid him $100 million. Wexner said in Wednesday’s statement that Epstein returned “a substantial amount” of the undisclosed total.

    Garcia said that congressional investigators have identified more than $1 billion that was “either transferred, provided in stocks or given directly” by Wexner to Epstein — though Wexner “appears to be unaware” of much of it.

    Continuing fallout for Wexner

    On Wednesday, Wexner testified that he had never seen Epstein with any young girls and acknowledged the “unfathomable” pain he inflicted, even as discoveries in the Epstein files have placed new pressure on him.

    One survivor, Maria Farmer, said a redacted FBI report contained in the document release vindicated her longstanding claim that she filed one of the earliest complaints against Epstein while she was under his employ in 1996 working on an art project at the Wexners’ estate.

    Meanwhile, survivors of a sweeping sexual abuse scandal at the Ohio State University are citing Wexner’s association with Epstein to try to get his name removed from a campus football complex and university nurses also want his name scrubbed from the Wexner Medical Center.

  • Team USA defeats Sweden in OT to advance to Olympic men’s hockey semis

    Team USA defeats Sweden in OT to advance to Olympic men’s hockey semis

    MILAN — The U.S. and Canada are moving on to the semifinals at the Olympics. Each needed extra hockey to get through the quarterfinals.

    Quinn Hughes scored in overtime to put the U.S. past Sweden 2-1 after the Americans surrendered the tying goal to Mika Zibanejad with 91 seconds left in the third period. Dylan Larkin deflected Jack Hughes’ second-period shot in for the only U.S. goal in regulation.

    Earlier Wednesday, Nick Suzuki tied it for Canada late in regulation against Czechia, and Mitch Marner won it 4-3 in overtime to avoid what would have been a stunning early exit.

    “It was just all relief,” Canada’s Macklin Celebrini said after scoring three minutes in and then assisting on Marner’s goal. “A weight lifted off our shoulders, for sure. Just seeing that puck go in, knowing that we won the game. … It was a good feeling for all of us.”

    Finland also escaped an upset bid by rallying to beat Switzerland 3-2 in OT. Sweden is going home early from a tournament that did not go as planned for a team with a full roster of 25 NHL players, while upstart Slovakia is making another improbable run at the Olympic Games.

    After Canada did its part, albeit with a roller coaster of drama and emotion, the U.S. kept alive the possibility of the North American rivals meeting in the gold medal game Sunday by riding goaltender Connor Hellebuyck’s solid play past Sweden.

    The U.S. will face Slovakia in one semifinal on Friday night. Just before that, also unbeaten Canada plays Finland in the other.

    Canada survives Czechia’s upset bid

    After losing captain Sidney Crosby to injury, Canada was staring down what would have been a stunning quarterfinal exit until Suzuki tied it on a deflection goal with 3:27 left. Then Marner scored a little more than a minute into overtime to beat Czechia 4-3 and send the tournament favorite into the semifinals.

    “Everybody had complete faith in whoever was going over the boards,” coach Jon Cooper said. “It just felt it was like a matter of time. It was going to happen.”

    The nerves were palpable when Canada fell behind with 7:42 remaining on Ondřej Palát’s goal on an odd-man rush off a pass from Martin Nečas. Replays showed Czechia had six skaters on the ice, which Nathan MacKinnon said he and his teammates were aware of, even if on-ice officials didn’t notice.

    Mitch Marner was the hero for Canada in Wednesday’s quarterfinals.

    Suzuki just about did it all on the tying goal, sending the puck out to the point to Devon Toews and then redirecting the defenseman’s shot that was going well wide past Lukáš Dostál and into the net.

    “Toewser gave me a perfect opportunity to tip it,” Suzuki said. “Just trying to put something on net there.”

    Jordan Binnington denied Nečas on a breakaway with 70 seconds left to send the game past regulation. It was the biggest of Binnington’s 21 saves in an excellent performance from Canada’s starter.

    Then Marner summoned some more heroics playing for Canada, scoring his second OT goal in an international tournament in as many chances. Marner also scored in a similar fashion a year ago at the 4 Nations Face-Off.

    “It’s the ‘it’ factor, man: Mitch Marner’s got it,” Cooper said. “He doesn’t disappoint. Sometimes your hair falls out at times, but in the end, he never disappoints.”

    Finland rallies past Switzerland

    Much like Canada, Finland was trailing late in its game against Switzerland. The Finns also got a late goal to avoid an upset defeat.

    Miro Heiskanen tied it with 72 seconds left, Artturi Lehkonen scored in overtime, and Finland escaped with a 3-2 victory. Heiskanen’s shot banked in off Switzerland defenseman Jonas Siegenthaler’s stick and past goaltender Leonardo Genoni.

    “We are a relentless team,” Heiskanen said. “We never give up. We know we had a tough start. It was a slow start, but we kept playing, kept working, and it paid off.”

    Finland was actually down two goals after Switzerland’s Damien Riat and Nino Niederreiter scored 1:12 apart in the first period. It took until there was 6:06 left before Sebastian Aho got Finland on the board.

    Slovakia reaches semis

    Dalibor Dvorský turned in another brilliant performance with a goal and an assist, fellow NHL forward Pavol Regenda scored twice as part of his three-point game, and Slovakia dominated Germany 6-2 to reach the semifinals and guarantee playing for a medal in Milan.

    “Amazing,” said alternate captain Erik Černák, a two-time Stanley Cup champion with the Tampa Bay Lightning. “Before the tournament, if we would say we’re going to make semifinals, probably people would laugh at you. But we did it, and it’s not done yet.”

    Slovakia got an injury scare in the second period when 21-year-old emerging Montreal Canadiens star Juraj Slafkovský, the reigning Olympic MVP, went head-first into the boards and was slow to get up. A trainer applied an ice pack to the back of Slafkovsky’s neck, and he held it on himself when he got up to celebrate a goal scored while he was getting medical attention.

    “I’m OK,” Slafkovský said. ”I was a little shaken up, but after a couple minutes I felt OK again. I went out there, and head wasn’t spinning. I was seeing normal.”

  • Mark Zuckerberg quizzed on kids’ Instagram use in social media trial

    Mark Zuckerberg quizzed on kids’ Instagram use in social media trial

    LOS ANGELES — Mark Zuckerberg and opposing lawyers dueled in a Los Angeles courtroom on Wednesday, where the Meta CEO answered questions about young people’s use of Instagram, his congressional testimony and internal advice he’s received about being “authentic” and not “robotic.”

    Zuckerberg’s testimony is part of an unprecedented social media trial that questions whether Meta’s platforms deliberately addict and harm children.

    As of early afternoon, Zuckerberg has not directly answered the central question of the case: whether Instagram is addictive. The plaintiff’s attorney, Mark Lanier, asked if people tend to use something more if it’s addictive.

    “I’m not sure what to say to that,” Zuckerberg said. “I don’t think that applies here.”

    Attorneys representing the plaintiff, a now 20-year-old woman identified by the initials KGM, claim her early use of social media addicted her to the technology and exacerbated depression and suicidal thoughts. Meta Platforms and Google’s YouTube are the two remaining defendants in the case, which TikTok and Snap have settled.

    Beginning his questioning, Lanier laid out three options of what people can do regarding vulnerable people: help them, ignore them, or “prey upon them and use them for our own ends.” Zuckerberg said he agrees the last option is not what a reasonable company should do, saying, “I think a reasonable company should try to help the people that use its services.”

    When he was asked about his compensation, Zuckerberg said he has pledged to give “almost all” of his money to charity, focusing on scientific research. Lanier asked him how much money he has pledged to victims impacted by social media, to which Zuckerberg replied, “I disagree with the characterization of your question.”

    Lanier questioned the Meta CEO extensively about a comment he made during a past congressional hearing, where he said Instagram employees are not given goals to increase amount of time people spent on the platform.

    Lanier presented internal documents that seemed to contradict that statement. Zuckerberg replied that they previously had goals associated with time, but said he and the company made the conscious decision to move away from those goals, focusing instead on utility. He said he believes in the “basic assumption” that “if something is valuable, people will use it more because it’s useful to them.”

    Lanier also asked Zuckerberg about what he characterized as extensive media training, including for testimonies like the one he was giving in court. Lanier pointed to an internal document about feedback on Zuckerberg’s tone of voice on his own social media, imploring him to come off as “authentic, direct, human, insightful and real,” and instructing him to “not try hard, fake, robotic, corporate or cheesy” in his communication.

    Zuckerberg pushed back against the idea that he’s been coached on how to respond to questions or present himself, saying those offering the advice were “just giving feedback.”

    Regarding his media appearances and public speaking, Zuckerberg said, “I think I’m actually well known to be sort of bad at this.”

    The Meta CEO has long been mocked online for appearing robotic and, when he was younger, nervous when speaking publicly. In 2010, during an interview with renowned tech journalists Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg, he was sweating so profusely that Swisher asked him if he wanted to “take off the hoodie” that was his uniform at the time.

    Lanier spent a considerable stretch of his limited time with Zuckerberg asking about the company’s age verification policies.

    “I don’t see why this is so complicated,” Zuckerberg said after a lengthy back-and-forth, reiterating that the company’s policy restricts users under the age of 13 and that they work to detect users who have lied about their ages to bypass restrictions.

    Zuckerberg mostly stuck to his talking points, referencing his goal of building a platform that is valuable to users and, on multiple occasions, saying he disagreed with Lanier’s “characterization” of his questions or of Zuckerberg’s own comments.

    Zuckerberg has testified in other trials and answered questions from Congress about youth safety on Meta’s platforms. During his 2024 congressional testimony, he apologized to families whose lives had been upended by tragedies they believed were caused by social media. But while he told parents he was “sorry for everything you have all been through,” he stopped short of taking direct responsibility for it. This trial marks the first time Zuckerberg stands before a jury. Once again, bereaved parents are sitting in the courtroom audience.

    The case, along with two others, has been selected as a bellwether trial, meaning its outcome could impact how thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies are likely to play out.

    A Meta spokesperson said the company strongly disagrees with the allegations in the lawsuit and said they are “confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people.”

    One of Meta’s attorneys, Paul Schmidt, said in his opening statement that the company is not disputing that KGM experienced mental health struggles, but rather disputing that Instagram played a substantial factor in those struggles. He pointed to medical records that showed a turbulent home life, and both he and an attorney representing YouTube argue she turned to their platforms as a coping mechanism or a means of escaping her mental health struggles.

    Zuckerberg’s testimony comes a week after that of Adam Mosseri, the head of Meta’s Instagram, who said in the courtroom that he disagrees with the idea that people can be clinically addicted to social media platforms. Mosseri maintained that Instagram works hard to protect young people using the service, and said it’s “not good for the company, over the long run, to make decisions that profit for us but are poor for people’s well-being.”

    Much of Mosseri’s questioning from the plaintiff’s lawyer centered on cosmetic filters on Instagram that changed people’s appearance — a topic that Lanier is sure to revisit with Zuckerberg. He is also expected to face questions about Instagram’s algorithm, the infinite nature of Meta’s feeds and other features the plaintiffs argue are designed to get users hooked.

    Meta is also facing a separate trial in New Mexico that began last week.

  • FDA reverses course and will review Moderna’s mRNA-based flu shot

    FDA reverses course and will review Moderna’s mRNA-based flu shot

    The Food and Drug Administration has reversed course and agreed to review Moderna’s application for the first mRNA-based flu vaccine under a revised approach, company and federal officials said Wednesday.

    Last week, Vinay Prasad, the agency’s top vaccine regulator, declined to review the vaccine, a rare move that shocked the company and that public health experts saw as the latest example of the Trump administration’s hostility toward immunization. Federal health officials argued that Moderna lacked an “adequate and well-controlled” study and should have used a high dose flu shot for adults 65 and older in a large clinical trial.

    The company met with the FDA and proposed seeking full approval for the vaccine for adults 50 to 64 years of age and accelerated approval for adults 65 and older, along with a requirement to further study the vaccine in older adults, according to Moderna.

    “We appreciate the FDA’s engagement in a constructive Type A meeting and its agreement to advance our application for review,” Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said in a statement. “Pending FDA approval, we look forward to making our flu vaccine available later this year so that America’s seniors have access to a new option to protect themselves against flu.”

    The target date for completing the review and making a decision is Aug. 5, according to Moderna. If approved, the vaccine could be on the market for the next flu season.

    The Department of Health and Human Services confirmed it held a formal meeting with Moderna, and it had accepted the company’s new approach.

    “FDA will maintain its high standards during review and potential licensure stages as it does with all products,” Andrew Nixon, an HHS spokesman, said in a statement.

    FDA Commissioner Marty Makary personally sought a quick resolution but was not involved in the regulatory decision for the new approach, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share private details.

    Katalin Karikó and her Penn colleague Drew Weissman won the 2023 Nobel Prize in medicine for their messenger RNA research, which paved the way for COVID-19 vaccines that are credited with saving millions of lives.

    MRNA vaccines are faster to develop than traditional vaccines. Medical experts hope such technology could help vaccine makers respond more rapidly to changes in the flu strain. Flu vaccines are updated annually, and their effectiveness varies every season depending on the quality of the match.

    But Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other health officials in the Trump administration have criticized the use of the technology for respiratory virus immunization and have pulled federal funding for mRNA research, including for flu vaccines.

    Vaccine experts had raised concerns over Prasad’s initial decision to refuse to review the vaccine, saying that shifting guidance from the FDA could deter future investments in pricey clinical trials. For the Moderna vaccine, Blackstone, a private equity company, invested $750 million into conducting a large-scale clinical trial and potential licensure of the vaccine.

    Companies conduct clinical trials in consultation with the FDA. According to Moderna, the FDA in April 2024 told the company that its trial design for the mRNA flu vaccine compared with a standard flu shot was “acceptable.” The FDA recommended comparing the mRNA flu vaccine against a higher-dose flu shot for those 65 and older, but the recommendation was not binding.

    Moderna conducted two late-stage trials — one of the final steps before seeking approval of its mRNA flu vaccine — enrolling more than 43,000 adults ages 50 or older. In one trial, more than 40,000 participants received either a dose of the experimental mRNA flu vaccine or a standard dose of an existing flu shot. In a smaller trial, participants received a dose of the mRNA vaccine, a standard shot or a high-dose influenza shot recommended for adults 65 and older.

    The administration had defended the decision to decline to review the shot. In a statement last week, Nixon said that “Moderna exposed participants aged 65 and over to increased risk of severe illness by giving them a substandard of care against the recommendation of FDA career scientists.”

    In an interview last week, Moderna president Stephen Hoge said the company was “surprised” and “confused” by the refusal. He said the agency had not identified any issues around the safety or efficacy of its product.

    At an event Tuesday held by the major industry lobby organization PhRMA, Makary said the company was given “pretty clear guidance.”

    “The application was reviewed, and that letter, in my mind, is part of a conversation where you’ll see a dialogue between the company and the agency,” he said.

  • 8 backcountry skiers found dead and 1 still missing after California avalanche

    8 backcountry skiers found dead and 1 still missing after California avalanche

    NEVADA CITY, Calif. — Crews found the bodies of eight backcountry skiers near California’s Lake Tahoe and were searching for one more after they were caught in an avalanche, the nation’s deadliest in nearly half a century, authorities said Wednesday.

    Authorities said the skiers had little time to react.

    “Someone saw the avalanche, yelled avalanche, and it overtook them rather quickly,” said Capt. Russell “Rusty” Greene, of the Nevada County sheriff’s office.

    Six from the guided tour were rescued six hours after the avalanche hit Tuesday morning during a three-day trek in Northern California’s Sierra Nevada, as a monster winter storm pummeled the West Coast.

    Nevada County Sheriff Shannan Moon said investigators would look into the decision to proceed with the trip despite the forecast for relentless weather.

    Authorities have told the families the mission has moved from rescuing people to recovering bodies, Moon said during a news conference.

    The victims, including three guides, were found fairly close together, Greene said. The dead and missing include seven women and two men, ranging in ages from 30 to 55. The crews have not yet been able to remove the victims from the mountain because of the extreme conditions, the sheriff said.

    Three to six feet of snow has fallen since Sunday, when the group started its trip. The area was also hit by subfreezing temperatures and gale force winds. The Sierra Avalanche Center said the threat of more avalanches remained Wednesday and left the snowpack unstable and unpredictable in an area known for its steep, craggy cliffs.

    Rescuers were guided by beacons and a cell phone in dangerous conditions

    Rescuers reached the survivors just before sunset on Tuesday.

    The skiers all had beacons that can send signals to rescuers and at least one of the guides was able to send texts, but it wasn’t clear if they were wearing avalanche bags, which are inflatable devices that can keep skiers near the surface, Greene said.

    While they waited to be rescued, the survivors used equipment to shelter themselves and fend off temperatures dipping below freezing. The survivors located three others who had died during the wait, Moon said.

    Rescuers used a snowcat to get within 2 miles of the survivors, then skied in carefully so they didn’t set off another avalanche, the sheriff said.

    One of those rescued remains in a hospital Wednesday, Moon said.

    The area near Donner Summit is one of the snowiest places in the Western Hemisphere and until just a few years ago was closed to the public. It sees an average of nearly 35 feet of snow a year, according to the Truckee Donner Land Trust, which owns a cluster of huts where the group was staying near Frog Lake.

    The avalanche is the deadliest in the U.S. since 1981, when 11 climbers were killed on Mount Rainier, Wash. Each winter, 25 to 30 people die in avalanches in the U.S., according to the National Avalanche Center.

    It was the second deadly avalanche near California’s Castle Peak this year, after a snowmobiler was buried by one in January.

    Skiers were heading for the trailhead when the avalanche struck

    Greene said authorities were notified about the avalanche by Blackbird Mountain Guides, which was leading the expedition, and the skiers’ emergency beacons. The sheriff’s office said Tuesday night that 15 backcountry skiers had been on the trip, not 16 as initially believed.

    One skier had pulled out at the last minute, Moon said.

    Authorities were waiting to release the victims’ names to give the families time. “They’re still reeling,” Moon said. “I could not imagine what they’re going through.”

    The skiers were on the last day of the backcountry trip and had spent two nights in the huts, said Steve Reynaud, an avalanche forecaster with the Sierra Avalanche Center. He said the area requires navigating rugged mountainous terrain. All food and supplies need to be carried to the huts.

    Reaching the huts in winter takes several hours and requires backcountry skills, avalanche training and safety equipment, the land trust says on its website.

    The area near Donner Summit was closed for nearly a century before it was reopened by the land trust and its partners in 2020. Donner Summit is named for the infamous Donner Party, a group of pioneers who resorted to cannibalism after getting trapped there in the winter of 1846-1847.

    Blackbird Mountain Guides said in a statement that the group, including four guides, was returning to the trailhead when the avalanche occurred.

    When asked what went through her mind as her staff and volunteers responded to the scene, Moon said she was hoping they would be able to make it there safely. Once they did, she said she was “immediately thinking of the folks that didn’t make it, and knowing our mission now is to get them home.”

  • Trump officials limit FEMA travel to disaster areas amid funding lapse, emails show

    Trump officials limit FEMA travel to disaster areas amid funding lapse, emails show

    The Department of Homeland Security has halted almost all travel amid the ongoing standoff over its funding, restricting the ability of hundreds of Federal Emergency Management Agency staff members to move in and out of disaster-affected areas, according to emails and documents obtained by the Washington Post.

    Much of the department ran out of money over the weekend after negotiations stalled between the White House and Democratic lawmakers over restrictions on federal immigration enforcement. It is normal for the department to stop employees from traveling across the country for various assignments, such as trainings, during a funding lapse, 10 current and former FEMA officials said. But it is unusual for a government shutdown to impede ongoing disaster recovery efforts, the officials explained, saying it further reflects sweeping policies instituted under Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem.

    Typically, FEMA staffers who work on disasters are able to travel to and from ongoing recovery projects regardless of DHS funding issues. And a current veteran officials said that disaster travel is always allowed because it is mission-critical.

    In a statement, DHS criticized Democratic lawmakers over the stalled funding negotiations and said the department and FEMA are coordinating closely to “ensure effective disaster response under these circumstances.”

    “During a funding lapse, FEMA prioritizes life safety and property protection. FEMA continues mission-essential operations for active disasters, including immediate response and critical survivor assistance,” FEMA spokesperson Daniel Llargués said in the statement. “While some non-essential activities will be paused or scaled back, FEMA remains committed to supporting communities and responding to incidents like Hurricane Helene.”

    Congressional Democrats have demanded new restrictions on federal immigration agents after federal personnel killed Alex Pretti and another U.S. citizen, Renée Good, in Minneapolis in January.

    On Tuesday night, DHS sent out an email ordering a stop to all travel, including for disaster-related work, sparking confusion across FEMA as teams continue to respond to 14 ongoing disaster declarations as a result of brutal winter storms that hit parts of the country last month. In another message obtained by the Post, a FEMA official said that “ALL travel stopped” and noted that 360 people who were slated to go to trainings and other assignments had to stand down. People who were supposed to deploy could begin some work virtually, but DHS now had to sign off on their in-person assignment, the message said.

    The next morning, officials within DHS and FEMA had to scramble and negotiate guidance for how disaster-specific workers could continue to travel, according to an official familiar with the situation.

    “In most cases, FEMA’s ability to deploy staff to active disaster response and recovery operations is not impacted by a DHS funding lapse,” said former FEMA administrator Deanne Criswell. “Those personnel are funded through the Stafford Act’s Disaster Relief Fund, which is specifically designed to ensure continuity of operations during emergencies. If DHS experiences a shutdown, FEMA employees supported by the Disaster Relief Fund should still be able to travel and carry out response missions.”

    Emails and documents obtained by the Post show that FEMA officials must submit a justification to DHS headquarters explaining why a staffer needs to travel during the funding lapse, including employees who are paid through the Disaster Relief Fund. Officials also have to state whether the travel is “mission essential,” meaning it involves the “safety of human life or protection of property.”

    “DHS imposing restrictions on FEMA’s ability to deploy our response/recovery workforce slows us down and limits our ability to respond quickly and effectively to the needs of impacted states and communities,” said one official in a region still cleaning up from the heavy onslaught of sleet and snow.

    According to one email sent Tuesday night, agency staff members currently deployed in another region that was hit particularly hard can continue assisting communities. But those who were slated to travel to these locations after Thursday can no longer do so. Employees who were on a rotation — perhaps home for a week to see family or go to the doctor — are not able to return to their job under the order.

    These rotations are critical to disaster work because they enable people who have been working nonstop to take a break and then come back to their work. FEMA is also required to relieve employees who have been working too long in a state where they do not live.

    In the email, FEMA staff members who had not yet begun their deployments or returns from rotation were directed to cancel their travel and notify their point of contact to “receive updated reporting instructions.”

    “Additional agencywide information will be forthcoming,” it read.

    The snag with some FEMA employees being unable to travel for disaster work, take breaks or relieve their colleagues adds to the beleaguered agency’s long list of operational issues since President Donald Trump took office for a second time and his appointees implemented significant changes in how the agency functions.

    The travel pause has also halted some of FEMA’s other critical work, such as leading exercises and assessments for emergency plans and procedures at nuclear facilities, and flood-mapping meetings with communities, according to an email obtained by the Post and an agency official familiar with the situation. That “will delay flood map updates, which directly impacts people waiting on new maps for any number of reasons,” the official said.

    As the winter storms barreled in last month, Noem, who has been spearheading many of FEMA’s staffing reductions and reforms, was particularly hands-on, embedding at the agency’s headquarters, hosting a call with governors to show her support and holding news conferences with FEMA staff members in front of maps laying out where the weather would hit.

    DHS also made a big push to pre-position teams, millions of ready-made meals and liters of water, blankets, and hundreds of generators in several states that were expected to be slammed.

    That’s why instituting travel restrictions when staffers are still working on these storm responses is even more frustrating, several current employees said.

    “They are just trying to make it hurt, and the only people they are hurting are survivors and FEMA employees,” one veteran official said. “They just pull new rules out every day.”

  • White House taps Jay Bhattacharya, CDC critic, to lead agency for now

    White House taps Jay Bhattacharya, CDC critic, to lead agency for now

    Jay Bhattacharya, a top Trump administration health official and an outspoken critic of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, will lead the CDC on an acting basis, according to four people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe personnel moves.

    Bhattacharya, who will continue his role as director of the National Institutes of Health, replaces Jim O’Neill, who had served as the CDC’s acting director. O’Neill, who had also served as the deputy secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, will be nominated to run the National Science Foundation after he declined a potential ambassadorship to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, two of the people said.

    The installation of Bhattacharya at the CDC is the latest move by the White House and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to shake up HHS’s leadership team ahead of the midterms, as the Trump administration seeks to stabilize a department rattled by internal fights and controversial messages.

    The New York Times first reported that Bhattacharya would serve as the acting head of CDC, which is charged with protecting Americans from health threats and issues recommendations on vaccines and other public health matters. Trump officials have said they are planning to find a full-time CDC director, a post that requires Senate confirmation. Susan Monarez, who was confirmed as CDC director in July, was ousted less than a month later after clashing with Kennedy over his plans to change vaccine policies.

    Bhattacharya, a Stanford University physician and economist, rose to prominence during the pandemic by arguing that the government’s response to the outbreak was too harsh, a stance that put him at odds with public health leaders who said his proposals would imperil the most vulnerable Americans. He co-wrote the Great Barrington Declaration, which was published in October 2020 and called for an end to coronavirus shutdowns. The declaration drew rebukes from government officials — a clash that ultimately boosted his profile and helped draw the support of Kennedy, a fellow critic of the government’s pandemic response.

    “The CDC peddled pseudo science in the middle of a pandemic,” Bhattacharya wrote on X in 2024, criticizing agency leaders’ past claim that widespread masking could end the coronavirus outbreak.

    As CDC’s acting head, Bhattacharya is poised to oversee the agency’s vaccine recommendations, which have emerged as a political flash point as Kennedy has worked to roll them back over the objections of public health leaders. A KFF poll published this month found that 47% of U.S. adults now trust CDC for reliable information on vaccines, down from 85% in early 2020.

    Bhattacharya has said he supports vaccination for childhood diseases.

    “I think the best way to address the measles epidemic in this country is by vaccinating your children for measles,” Bhattacharya said at a Senate hearing this month.

    Bhattacharya and other NIH leaders in January also published a commentary in the journal Nature Medicine that criticized the public health response to the pandemic led by other agencies.

    “Many of the recommended policies, including lockdowns, social distancing, school closures, masking, and vaccine mandates, lacked robust confirmatory evidence and remain the subject of debate regarding their overall benefits and unintended consequences,” they wrote. “Where enforced, vaccine mandates contributed to decreased public confidence in routine voluntary immunizations.”

  • Ousted South Korean president faces death penalty in insurrection case

    Ousted South Korean president faces death penalty in insurrection case

    SEOUL — A South Korean court is set to issue its verdict Thursday in the insurrection case against the country’s impeached president, who declared martial law in an alleged power grab in late 2024, and now faces the death penalty or life imprisonment if convicted.

    The impeached president, Yoon Suk Yeol, has been on trial for his failed attempt to install a military-led government in the democratic country late one night in December 2024. Yoon is charged with numerous crimes, including organizing an insurrection — which under South Korean criminal law carries possible sentences of life imprisonment, with or without labor, or death.

    Prosecutors have requested the death sentence.

    The case marks a pivotal moment in South Korea’s relatively young democratic history, which dates to 1987 after a democratic uprising toppled a brutal military-led government under Chun Doo-hwan. Chun was sentenced to death in 1996 after being convicted on similar insurrection charges for seizing power during a coup in 1979. On appeal, the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, and he was later pardoned.

    Yoon’s conviction would uphold the rule of law and reaffirm the nation’s democratic system and principles, democracy advocates and experts say.

    “The conviction of an ex-president demonstrates that no one is above the law,” said Andrew Yeo, a senior fellow at Brookings Institution’s Center for Asia Policy Studies in Washington, adding: “The conviction of Yoon through the judicial process reflects South Korea’s democratic resilience.”

    If convicted, Yoon, too, ultimately could be spared execution.

    South Korea has not carried out an execution since 1997 and is widely regarded as a country where, for all practical purposes, the death penalty is banned.

    A death sentence for Yoon, nonetheless, would be highly symbolic as delivering accountability for a head of state who went rogue and attempted to use military force to halt operations of the legislature, seize control of the National Election Commission and arrest political opponents.

    “In practical terms, a death sentence would almost certainly remain symbolic, but the symbolism would be immense,” said Hannah Kim, a political scientist at Sogang University in Seoul. “It would reflect a judicial judgment that a ‘palace coup’ led by the constitutional guardian of the state is not just political misconduct, but a direct attack on constitutional sovereignty and the democratic order.”

    A lesser sentence of life in prison would still convey the seriousness of Yoon’s actions but would reflect “a degree of pragmatism among the justices,” Yeo said, especially in a deeply polarized country still reeling from the fallout of the declaration of martial law.

    Jeong Hye-won (center) and other protesters celebrate on April 4, 2025, in Seoul after the removal of Yoon from power by South Korea’s Constitutional Court.

    Two top aides to Yoon have been convicted on charges related to the decree of martial law. Former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo was sentenced last month to 23 years in prison for his role. Han is appealing the ruling. And former Interior Minister Lee Sang-min last week was sentenced to seven years in prison. He is also appealing the ruling, according to national media reports.

    In both cases, the court deemed the declaration of martial law an act of insurrection, which legal experts said was a key determination that could seal Yoon’s conviction Thursday.

    Yoon is facing eight separate trials stemming from his decree, but the insurrection case to be decided Thursday is the most consequential. Last month, a Seoul court sentenced him to five years in prison for abuse of power, obstruction of justice and falsifying documents, meaning Yoon will not go free even if acquitted.

    For many South Koreans, Yoon’s insurrection trial may feel familiar.

    Yoon is expected to stand in Courtroom 417 of the Seoul Central District Court, the same room where Chun, wearing a light blue prison jumpsuit, was sentenced to death nearly 30 years ago.

    During their sentencing request last month, prosecutors argued Yoon deserved the harshest possible penalty, citing the need to stop “history from repeating itself.” They referred to Chun’s case and South Korea’s authoritarian past.

    Yoon has denied all charges and contends that martial law was a legitimate exercise of the president’s emergency powers. Yoon has said that he declared martial law to confront the opposition-controlled National Assembly, which he said was paralyzing his administration through repeated efforts to impeach top officials. He has denied that the brief deployment of troops to the National Assembly was an act of insurrection.

    Yoon’s late-night decree on Dec. 3, 2024, made in a televised address, prompted thousands of protesters to mass outside the National Assembly and demand a return to democratic governance.

    As soldiers and police surrounded the National Assembly complex, lawmakers scaled the walls to bypass them. In defiance of the decree’s ban on political activity, they voted to reverse Yoon’s decision. And despite a gag order on the press, reporters from traditional and independent media alike flooded the scene and delivered live reports.

    Yoon lifted his order six hours later, but the incident shocked and outraged the nation — now a thriving democracy where political protests and marches of all stripes are a weekly occurrence — and it spurred South Korea’s most harrowing political crisis in decades.

    Yoon was impeached with his presidential powers suspended less than two weeks later, and ultimately removed from office.

    Yoon, formerly the nation’s top prosecutor, was a divisive president during his more than 2½ years in power. Rather than seeking to unify the deeply divided nation, Yoon instead appealed to his conservative base, exacerbating polarization and often deadlocking with opposition lawmakers.

    South Korean presidents are often disgraced. Nearly every president since South Korea’s democratization has become embroiled in scandals involving corruption, bribery, embezzlement, or abuse of power.

    Yoon’s downfall, however, stands apart even by South Korean standards, as the first democratically elected president to impose martial law and the first sitting president to face a criminal investigation.

  • Should you feed a cold and starve a fever? Here’s what experts say.

    Should you feed a cold and starve a fever? Here’s what experts say.

    Most of us have heard the adage “Feed a cold, starve a fever.”

    It comes from an outdated theory that a cold makes your body cooler and eating can help warm it up, and that a fever makes your body warmer and fasting can help cool it down. The premise itself is flawed: While fevers do raise your body temperature, colds don’t make your body cold. You might even get a fever when you have a cold.

    As for whether you should eat more or less, in most cases, there’s no convincing evidence that limiting food intake when you’re sick plays a meaningful role in recovery, experts said.

    There may be a more accurate approach. “Feed a cold. Feed a fever, too,” said Roy Gulick, the chief of the infectious-disease division at Weill Cornell Medicine and an attending physician at New York-Presbyterian Hospital.

    Experts recommend staying hydrated and eating healthy foods — at least when your stomach will allow it — to support your body when you’re sick. The advice holds true whether you’re dealing with a cold, which is an upper-respiratory infection that can be caused by more than 200 viruses, or a fever, which can be caused by viral and bacterial infections, autoimmune issues, and reactions to medications, among other things.

    “If you are truly not feeling hungry, you don’t necessarily have to eat more than you feel like eating,” said Geeta Sood, an assistant professor in the infectious-disease division at Johns Hopkins University. However, you do want to make sure you’re getting enough calories, protein, and nutrients — and hydration — to help support your body as it heals, she said.

    What does the research show?

    Research in this area is limited — and mostly in animals. For example, in a 2016 study, mice were infected with either a bacterium that causes gastrointestinal illness or a virus that causes influenza. In mice with the bacterial infection, fasting was protective while nutritional supplementation was detrimental, the authors found. The pattern was reversed in mice with the flu and viral sepsis. While interesting fodder for further research, these results can’t be applied directly to humans, experts said.

    In humans, researchers who conducted a 2021 review concluded that there is some evidence that nutrients such as vitamins and minerals can help support the body’s immune response and help fight infections in general. And a 2024 review that included newer studies that were conducted during the pandemic suggested that nutritional needs may depend on the specific pathogen you’re fighting and other variables, such as the duration and severity of your illness — not simply on whether it’s a bacterium or virus.

    The reality is that most studies on how nutrition affects infections have looked at only a handful of pathogens, said David Schneider, a professor of microbiology and immunology at Stanford University. To further complicate matters, when you’re experiencing symptoms such as a runny nose or fever, you may not know whether you’re sick with a bacterium or virus, he said. Both of these things make it difficult to give generalized recommendations about what might be best for every cold or every fever, he said.

    Why do I lose my appetite when I’m sick?

    There is some rationale to the adage, because it’s common to lose your appetite when your body is fighting off an infection. As your immune system ramps up, it releases chemical messengers, known as cytokines, to rally immune cells to fight infection, and those same signals also tell the brain that eating isn’t a priority, said Sharon Bergquist, an internal medicine physician and associate professor at the Emory University School of Medicine.

    While not well understood, one theory states that a drop in calorie and protein intake triggers a process called autophagy, which helps recycle damaged cell parts and may play a role in immune defense, she said.

    That said, the process of fighting an infection is “metabolically really costly,” Bergquist said, explaining that although you can skip food for a day if you aren’t hungry, going longer than that may leave you without adequate nutrition. “It takes so much energy and calories that there’s a rationale for us needing to increase our food and our hydration during times of illness so that we can support our immune system,” she said.

    What can I do if I have an infection?

    Vaccines are the first-line defense to help prevent and lessen the severity of some viral infections, including COVID and the flu. If you get sick, however, you can try some medications that may help you recover faster.

    • Antibiotics target specific kinds of bacteria such as those that cause strep throat, pneumonia, or urinary tract infections.
    • Antiviral medications can help treat certain viral infections, including the coronavirus and influenza. Three antivirals — Paxlovid, remdesivir, and molnupiravir — are available by prescription to treat COVID in people who are at high risk of serious complications, and four antivirals are approved to treat the flu.

    There are also a few other things you can do to help support your body.

    • Stay hydrated. Losing water and electrolytes through sweat when you have a fever, as well as through diarrhea and vomiting, can put you at risk for dehydration, so it’s important to drink plenty of water and make sure you’re getting enough electrolytes, Gulick said. Pediatric beverages and sports drinks with added sodium and potassium can help you stay hydrated, and warm liquids such as soups, broths, and caffeine-free herbal teas can help ease symptoms such as congestion, body aches, and chills, Sood said. Avoid alcohol and caffeinated drinks because they are diuretics and can make dehydration worse.
    • Eat, when possible. Listen to your body, but when you have an appetite, eat healthy, whole foods rich in vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants such as fresh fruits and vegetables. One strategy is to make smoothies or soups, Bergquist said. Avoid foods high in saturated fats and processed carbohydrates.
    • Get rest. Take time to rest as your body does much of its repair work while you sleep, Bergquist said. “Don’t push your body because you want to dedicate that energy to your immune system,” she said.
    • Take hot showers or baths. The steam can help break up congestion and clear airways.
    • Try zinc. Zinc may help shorten a cold by a day or two. In a 2024 review, researchers found some evidence that zinc might reduce the duration of symptoms by about two days compared with a placebo, though the mineral was associated with mild side effects such as nasal and oral irritation, problems with taste, stomach pain, constipation, diarrhea, and vomiting. Most other supplements have no real advantage for colds, including vitamin C, which, when started at the onset of symptoms, doesn’t help lessen the duration or severity, research shows.
    • Use honey for a cough or sore throat. Adults and children older than 1 year can add honey to warm tea or water to help soothe sore throats and calm coughs.
  • The Atlantic’s essay about measles was gut-wrenching. Some readers feel deceived.

    The Atlantic’s essay about measles was gut-wrenching. Some readers feel deceived.

    When Kelly McBride read Elizabeth Bruenig’s essay in the Atlantic about a child’s death from measles complications, she was moved and quickly shared the story on her Facebook account. She hadn’t realized that Bruenig’s family had been ravaged by virus and the well-known journalist had lost a child.

    McBride, a media ethicist and senior vice president at the Poynter Institute, also didn’t realize the story was a hypothetical scenario — and the child a composite character based on the author’s research — until a friend alerted her to an editor’s note at the bottom of the story. Then, McBride felt duped.

    “I feel deceived,” McBride said. “I spent all weekend talking about this story to my friends as if the reporter had experienced it.”

    Bruenig’s stirring account of a mother’s experience learning her child will die of the long-term effects of measles has remained one of the Atlantic’s most read stories since it was published Thursday, receiving more than 700 comments. Written in the second person, some readers have called the essay a visceral and gut-wrenching exposé of the human impacts of the measles epidemic.

    It has also generated controversy. Readers and media experts have condemned the story as breeching journalistic ethics by informing the reader that the story is fictionalized through a short editor’s note at the end of the 3,000-word essay. Some public health experts argued the story was a dangerous writing exercise that could evoke backlash and confusion as vaccine skepticism hits an all-time high across the country.

    “Grateful to @ebruenig for sharing her and her family’s ordeal,” Gabby Stern, a former World Health Organization communications director, wrote on X shortly after the story published. “Friends, please ensure that your children receive vaccinations against preventable diseases like measles.”

    She followed up soon after: “I missed the disclaimer at the bottom. Others did, too. You get to the end and you’re shattered, not looking for caveats and fine print. Disappointed in the magazine. The topic is too high-stakes for such shenanigans.”

    Adrienne LaFrance, executive editor at the Atlantic, told The Washington Post in a statement that the magazine was “pleased that so many people are reading and praising Liz’s remarkable essay.”

    “We trust our readers to understand all different kinds of writing and writerly devices,” she said. “And while we included a note about Liz’s methods for transparency’s sake, we’re finding that most readers already understand the second-person well enough to know that the ‘you’ referenced throughout the piece is not literally ‘you,’ the reader.”

    The Atlantic, one of the most popular American magazines with 1.4 million subscribers, has become a destination for health reporting in recent years. The Atlantic is among a cohort of outlets that have reported on rising measles cases across the United States, as well as the role that misinformation and shifting government guidelines have on childhood vaccinations. Once eliminated in the country, outbreaks have led to the highest count of measles cases in more than three decades. Atlantic staff writer Tom Bartlett was first to find and interview the parents of a child who died of measles in Texas, the first such death in a decade.

    Bruenig, a former Post opinion writer, has twice been a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing, one of the industry’s top honors for narrative journalism. (This reporter worked for the Atlantic from 2017 to 2019.)

    Bruenig wrote the essay in the second person, detailing a scenario where two unvaccinated children attend a birthday party and catch measles from an infected-but-asymptomatic child. “Your daughter behaves normally over the next week while the virus slowly spreads inside her, infecting immune cells that carry it to the lymph nodes, where it replicates and spreads at a rapid pace.”

    It includes a short disclaimer at the bottom of the 3,000-word piece: “This story is based on extensive reporting and interviews with physicians, including those who have cared directly for patients with measles.”

    Reported hypotheticals have been used in other grim chronicles such as Outside Magazine’s 1997 story “Frozen Alive,” about freezing to death; a passage of Kathryn Schulz’s 2015 New Yorker essay “The Really Big One” about the risks of a large earthquake; and the 2024 Annie Jacobsen book “Nuclear War: A Scenario,” about how nuclear warfare could transpire. The first two stories also are written in second person.

    Many readers, including physicians, praised the Atlantic essay, writing that its evocative writing and storytelling forced readers to grapple with the impact of vaccine hesitancy. “Read this while holding my almost-one-month-old, and it absolutely wrecked me. What a powerful and important piece,” one commenter wrote. “Tragically realistic story exquisitely described by Ms. Breunig,” wrote another. “I’m a pediatrician who has never seen a case of measles but am awaiting my first one.”

    Others, however, expressed their confusion in the essay’s comments. “The fact that readers in the discussion are unsure of whether this is a true story or fiction highlights a fundamental failure on the part of the author, and the editor,” one reader wrote.

    “I know the internet is full of made up stuff, but I trusted the Atlantic,” another reader wrote. “I feel foolish that I told my husband about this as if it were the truth. Glad I didn’t share it with my sisters. We are all pro vaccines, and I’m concerned this story masquerading as a first person memoir will encourage people on the edge to blow off vaccines.”

    Tom Rosenstiel, a professor at University of Maryland’s Philip Merrill College of Journalism and former executive director of the American Press Institute, felt the piece did the reader a disservice by not being fully transparent about they were about to read. He said the Atlantic needed to clearly explain the unusual choices in the story upfront, avoiding deception.

    “Any time you’re answering questions about why you did something in the story after you’ve published it, you’re in a bad place,” he said.

    Some physicians argued the uncertainty around the essay could fan distrust of vaccines. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan who edits the journal “Vaccine,” said she found the essay scientifically sound but extremely confusing. She initially believed the essay was about Bruenig’s real child and felt the essay could backfire. “We need effective communicators like this,” she said. “But if that effective communication is being presented in such a way that it actually diminishes trust further, then we’re in real trouble.”

    Rachael Bedard, a physician and writer, called herself an admirer of Bruenig, but expressed similar concerns in a series of posts on X.

    “One of the things that people who have actually interacted [with] anti-vaxxers know is that they often think the liberal media is lying to them about how bad measles is,” she wrote, writing that the Atlantic’s presentation of this essay as anything other than fiction “affirms all of those concerns.”

    Bruenig, in an interview with the website Nieman Lab, defended the structure of her essay. “It is a hypothetical account of a very real phenomenon based on careful reporting,” she said. “I would place it somewhere on the creative nonfiction spectrum.” She said that she interviewed doctors for her piece, and based the character of the mother on herself.

    “I have no doubt that there are a lot of people out there who are unhappy with the story or reject its premises, and they are entitled to their interpretations. I get it,” she said. “But my job is to report the truth about the world — and I use all kinds of literary, and narrative devices to do that. I do it because telling the truth is important in its own right, whether or not anyone finds it persuasive.”