James' World 2

Hmmmm  ….  Vote crazy Trump administration out!

Click the link below the picture

.

Polls show that Canadians strongly back Mr. Carney’s decision to end trade talks with Washington last month and hit back with tariffs on about $20 billion in American products entering Canada. But there is also concern over what might happen next. Mr. Trump has repeatedly threatened another round of American tariffs if Canada follows through on its plan.

Some in Canadian industry say they are inclined to take Mr. Trump at his word, at least on this threat.

People in the Trump administration “are willing to hurt themselves, their own sectors and industries, in pursuit of their goal, however misguided I think it is,” said Flavio Volpe, the president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’​ Association of Canada. “So they may escalate. I hope that we don’t end up in a tit-for-tat situation.”

In what appeared to foreshadow Mr. Trump’s latest intentions, he announced on Monday that Bombardier, the Montreal-based aerospace company, would be banned from selling in the American market unless it built in the United States. “They live off American Buyers, American Companies, American Airports, and American Service — All while Canada blocks our GREAT American Banks, and Companies, throughout the U.S.A.,” Mr. Trump wrote in a social media post announcing the ban.

Mr. Carney announced Canada’s new tariffs after he pulled Canadian negotiators out of talks in Washington last month — an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to stave off 50 percent American tariffs on $20 billion in Canadian exports and to reduce or eliminate tariffs of up to 50 percent on Canadian steel, aluminum and automobiles.

The Trump administration said the tariffs it imposed last month were in part a response to retaliatory tariffs Canada placed last year on some U.S. imports, particularly autos. American officials have repeatedly noted that only China and Canada retaliated against the United States since Mr. Trump began upending global trade.

Since trade tensions began to rise with Canada at the start of Mr. Trump’s second term, the United States has lashed out in ways both substantive and symbolic, including threats to block the reopening of a U.S.-Canada bridge and an executive order to rename Lake Ontario to “Lake America.”

At a news conference after a sternly worded speech announcing the tariffs, Mr. Carney declared that Canada had been attacked by the United States and that the two countries are now “at war.”

.

The Blue Water Bridge, connecting Sarnia, Ontario, and Port Huron, Mich., this month. Credit…Carlos Osorio/Reuters

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

The Trump administration has remained silent so far on vaccination recommendations as flu season approaches. But leaders of some of the country’s largest medical organizations are urging Americans to get their shots to avoid serious illness.

On Wednesday, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Infectious Diseases Society of America, as well as the University of Minnesota’s Vaccine Integrity Project, released recommendations indicating that the vast majority of people should get vaccinated against influenza, COVID and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

“Unfortunately, today the federal government is not fulfilling that responsibility in the way that it historically has. But the need for that work has not disappeared,” said Bruce Gellin, a member of the Vaccine Integrity Project’s board of advisers and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University, during a press briefing on Tuesday.

“Americans should have access to the best available scientific evidence and recommendations from the physicians and medical experts who care for them so they can make informed decisions about vaccination. Whatever happens to the federal vaccine policy process, we cannot lower that scientific standard,” Gellin said.

The recommendations come as an increasing number of people opt not to get themselves or their children vaccinated for various diseases. Nodding to data showing that the nation’s medical institutions are suffering from a crisis of confidence among a growing number of Americans, the consortium released summaries of research into the shots’ safety and efficacy in the Journal of the American Medical Association and online to accompany the new guidelines.

The group’s guidance acknowledges the fact that COVID is less dangerous today than it was at the height of the pandemic. But during the 2025–2026 respiratory virus season in the U.S., an estimated 15,000 to 42,000 people still died of the disease, while up to 240,000 people were hospitalized and millions more experienced less severe illness. The consortium’s research review for the COVID shots finds that they cut the risk of hospitalization for adults older than age 65 by 53 percent and reduce that risk for pregnant women by 58 percent. There are also signs that the vaccines’ benefits are passed on to the latter’s babies, who tend to have fewer COVID-related hospital visits than children of unvaccinated mothers. Adults who are immunocompromised see their risk of being put into intensive care or of dying from COVID cut by the vaccines by between 32 and 53 percent.

Influenza is the leading cause of vaccine-preventable respiratory illness. Vaccines against the illness reduce its hospitalization rate among adults older than age 65 by 31 percent and cut deaths among infants and children by 80 percent, according to the group’s research review for these shots. Meanwhile, the consortium’s review of RSV vaccines finds that they reduce hospitalization rates by up to 83 percent among people older than 60, while vaccination during pregnancy reduces hospitalization for infants by up to 70 percent.

Despite the evidence showing the vaccines are safe and effective, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which usually produces an annual campaign to push people to get vaccinated against respiratory illnesses, has yet to roll out a similar effort this year. The CDC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The CDC recommends vaccinations against the flu and COVID for most Americans, including pregnant women and healthy children. Still, those guidelines are at odds with vaccine-skeptic statements and positions taken by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and other members of the administration.

Kennedy’s apparent opposition to vaccines could make access to the shots more difficult for some parents, said AAP president Andrew Racine at the same press event. Racine said it’s also unclear at this time if the CDC’s Vaccines for Children Program, which provides shots for families that can’t afford them, will cover the cost of the recommended vaccines.

“Last year Vaccines for Children covered all of the recommended vaccines that we had put in our vaccine schedule,” Racine said. “I can’t say necessarily what’s going to happen going forward, but it’s our anticipation that the federal government, with Vaccines for Children and other programs that they run, have a responsibility and an interest in making sure that children of any income get all of the care that they need in order to keep them healthy and safe.”

Still, Racine pointed out that, while there is a decline, most U.S. children are vaccinated and that polling data indicate that most families prefer to get medical information from their pediatricians.

“I’m not saying this to say that we don’t have work to do,” he said. “We do have work to do. Certainly, the trends are not moving in the direction we would like, but I do think that we have lots of advantages in our day-to-day work.”

.

SanyaSM/Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

It’s fall migration season in the Park! A key stop on the Atlantic Flyway, Central Park welcomes more than 210 bird species each year. On this hands-on tour, you will learn the basics of bird identification while you explore the Ramble, a vibrant woodland habitat that supports a variety of NYC wildlife. Our expert Conservancy guides will share helpful tips for spotting and identifying birds. Bring your own binoculars or borrow a pair from us.

BUY TICKETS

• Sunday, September 6

  10:00 am EDT Sold Out

• Saturday, September 12

  10:00 am EDT Sold Out

• Friday, September 18

  10:00 am EDT

• Sunday, September 27

  10:00 am EDT Sold Out

.

Central Park is a birding haven! Join us this season to make the most of fall migration.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth decided in early 2025 to spike Gen. Christopher T. Donahue’s nomination to be the top U.S. military officer in Europe.

Mr. Hegseth believed that President Trump wanted heads to roll for the deaths of 13 U.S. service members in a suicide bombing at the Kabul airport during the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. General Donahue was not responsible for security at the bombing site. But he was a top commander at the airport, and so Mr. Hegseth decided he needed to go.

It fell to Joe Kasper, Mr. Hegseth’s chief of staff, to try to convince him that he was wrong.

Mr. Kasper asked a senior Pentagon official to prepare a card with a half-dozen bullet points laying out the facts in General Donahue’s defense, current and former officials said. He took it with him in March of last year as he and Mr. Hegseth sped through traffic to the White House for a press event.

For those few minutes in the car, Mr. Kasper knew he would have his boss’s undivided attention.

Sirens were blaring. He handed Mr. Hegseth the card.

These were the facts of General Donahue’s three-decade career: He had seen more combat in his 20-plus deployments than just about any officer in the U.S. military. A star in the clandestine world of special forces, he had spent years in the shadows hunting terrorist leaders. And then as the world and warfare changed, he changed with it.

He had played a central role in the U.S. military’s efforts to help Ukraine hold off a much larger Russian force, a job that inspired his vision for a new kind of combat that married divebombing drones, robotics, and artificial intelligence.

Now his fate lay in the hands of Mr. Hegseth, a former Fox News host who had two deployments as an Army officer to Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Hegseth had come to the Pentagon vowing to weed out the “small” and “feeble” generals who he believed had failed in those wars.

What played out in the 16 months after the car ride was a clash between Mr. Hegseth and General Donahue’s supporters, who viewed him as a generational talent.

That clash, and its outcome, was described to The New York Times by more than 40 people at the Pentagon, in Congress and around the world, nearly all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retribution.

It amounts to one of the most consequential chapters in Mr. Hegseth’s campaign to drive out those he sees as out of step with his priorities, a leadership purge that his critics say is driven by ideology, identity and suspicion of those with tenuous ties to former military leaders that he does not like. And it shows the intensity of the behind-the-scenes battle to save one general.

The more General Donahue’s allies pushed, the more Mr. Hegseth’s opposition seemed to harden.

The Pentagon declined to answer questions about General Donahue, saying in a statement that all senior military leaders serve at the pleasure of the president and the defense secretary.

In the spring of 2025, General Donahue was commanding ground forces in Europe. Mr. Hegseth was new to the Pentagon. To the extent he was familiar with General Donahue, it was largely through the prism of the Afghanistan withdrawal and a grainy photo that indelibly linked the general to the war’s tragic end.

General Donahue was the last U.S. soldier to leave Afghanistan. As he stepped onto a hulking military cargo plane, an Army photographer snapped his picture using his cellphone camera and night vision device.

The green-and-black image rocketed around the world. Senior Pentagon officials said Mr. Hegseth seemed to be fixated on the photo, mistakenly referring to it as a “selfie.”

The first item on the card that Mr. Kasper handed to Mr. Hegseth in the car clarified that the photo was not a selfie and that General Donahue had nothing to do with its distribution. Other bullet points noted that Marines, not General Donahue’s paratroopers, were in charge of the gate where the suicide bombing occurred.

The defense secretary glanced at the card and passed it back to his chief of staff.

“I don’t care,” Mr. Hegseth told Mr. Kasper.

.

Gen. Christopher T. Donahue greeted service members before the 2023 renaming of Fort Bragg in North Carolina. The general had extensive combat experience and strong support in the Army. Credit…Allison Joyce/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

The world is likely to overshoot 1.5°C of warming within the next few years, a report by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) acknowledges. However, it says it is still possible to cool the planet back down to this level by the end of the century. Can it really be done? It isn’t impossible, but it certainly isn’t the most likely outcome.

The goal of limiting the increase in the average global surface temperature to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels looked implausible even back in 2015, when it was adopted as part of the Paris Agreement. The UNEP report can be seen as an “official” acknowledgment of what many have been saying for years: that it is now certain that we are going to blast right past this limit.

But some aren’t giving up on the target. There are no good outcomes if we remain above 1.5°C, says Inger Andersen at UNEP. “Even if we exceed 1.5, let’s be very clear: that 1.5 target is still the goal. But now we need to approach it differently, from above.”

Much of the report looks at the consequences of overshooting 1.5°C and the need for adaptation to cope with the severe impacts this will bring. “We will see increased food insecurity, increased water insecurity, impacts on human health – physical and mental – danger to our homes and our infrastructure,” says Debra Roberts at the University of KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa, one of the authors of the report. “This will lead to the loss of livelihoods and certainly lives.”

The world isn’t prepared for overshooting 1.5°C, she says. “Therefore we have to advance our adaptation and development strategies to deal with those higher levels of warming, the greater range of risks and impacts… Adaptation needs to be transformational to allow us to plan for a changing world.”

There will be no going back to how things were, says Roberts. “Some losses will be irreversible, which means returning to 1.5 doesn’t mean we return back to the same world we left.”

But what exactly should we be preparing for? The report focuses on a scenario in which rapid emissions cuts and massive-scale removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere result in a return to 1.5°C of warming by the end of the century.

But achieving this would require limiting temperature rises to no more than 1.8°C, says Roberts. Beyond this, there will be cascading effects from all the irreversible changes that make it much harder.

However, restricting warming to this level requires a halving of global emissions by 2035, says report author Joeri Rogelj at Imperial College London. That seems highly unlikely given that emissions are still rising worldwide.

In addition to emissions cuts, the scenario envisaged in the report also requires carbon removal on a truly gigantic scale – enough not just to balance out hard-to-tackle emission sources, such as farming, and achieve net zero, but to go well beyond that to remove around 10 gigatonnes of CO2 each year. That compares with current emissions of around 40 gigatonnes.

This means scaling up carbon removal by a factor of around 100,000, says Reto Knutti at ETH Zurich in Switzerland, who wasn’t involved in the report. Cheap forms of carbon removal, such as planting forests, can’t be scaled up this much because there isn’t enough land. Direct air capture could be scaled up, but it is really expensive, he says.

Knutti thinks achieving this is technically and financially possible, but not politically plausible. “We should be honest when we talk to policy-makers and the public that this is not the thing to plan for,” he says. “I think the plan should be to adapt for at least 2 degrees, if not more.”

James Dyke at the University of Exeter in the UK is even less optimistic. “There are still no credible plans for large-scale carbon dioxide removal,” he says. “Human societies must adapt and prepare for a warmer and more dangerous world that will persist potentially for centuries.”

Konstantin Weber, also at ETH Zurich, points out that among the latest emissions scenarios that will be used by climate modellers, only two imply a return to 1.5°C before 2150. The scenario based on current policies suggests warming of around 3°C by 2100.

Until recently, overshooting and returning to 1.5°C was no more than a scientific thought experiment, says Oliver Geden at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. Now it could become the “official” plan B for 1.5°C. “The overshoot concept may turn out to be no more than a way to mask ongoing failure,” he says.

But even if getting the temperature back down to 1.5°C isn’t likely, we have to try, says Weber. “We have to give it a shot. There’s no real alternative.”

“Now is the time to double down on climate action, not to give up on it,” says Andersen. “Every fraction of a degree avoided, every year by which overshoot is shortened, and every adaptation action taken will save lives, protect ecosystems and reduce economic losses.”

.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Key points

• Micro-nanobubble technology removes over 90% of microplastics from wastewater in lab tests.
• This method could improve wastewater treatment and potentially filter microplastics from drinking water.
• Reducing plastic use and preventing microplastics in the environment are key to protecting health and ecosystems.

Featured Story: How Nanobubbles Could Remove the Majority of Microplastics from Wastewater

Microplastics seem to be everywhere. They can make their way into our wastewater, which in turn flows into our oceans.1 Doing a load of laundry with synthetic textiles, using certain household cleaning products like sponges and using certain cosmetics can all release microplastics that end up down the drain.

Fortunately, scientists are continuing to find solutions to reduce microplastics from entering our environment. A recent study published in the American Chemical Society’s ES&T Water journal found that enhancing wastewater treatment by using microbubbles and nanobubbles significantly improved the removal of microplastics from water.

So, what are “microbubbles” and “nanobubbles” exactly? We asked study author Biplob Pramanik, PhD, to give us the breakdown.

“Microbubbles are tiny air bubbles (typically 10–100 micrometres) that provide buoyancy and lift particles to the water surface,” he explains. “Nanobubbles are much smaller (less than 1 micrometre) and have unique surface properties that enhance particle attachment and aggregation. In our approach, nanobubbles help microplastics clump together, while microbubbles float these larger particles to the surface where they can be removed. By combining both bubble types, we achieved over 90% microplastic removal in laboratory-scale wastewater treatment.”

The combined system removed up to 95% of polyethylene (a type of synthetic plastic) and 97% of polystyrene (a synthetic polymer found in packing peanuts and Styrofoam), which could further improve methods already in use by wastewater treatment plants.

While Pramanik notes that wastewater treatment plants already do a great job of filtering out microplastics from the water, this additional science can help filter wastewater more effectively.

“Due to the large volumes of wastewater processed every day, even a small amount of escaping microplastics can result in significant environmental releases,” Pramanik says. “In addition, many captured microplastics accumulate in sewage sludge, which may be reused as biosolids. Improving microplastic removal at the early stages of treatment can further reduce their release to waterways and biosolids, helping to protect ecosystems and public health.”

But wait, there’s more: while more testing is still needed, this micro-nanobubble process could potentially be used to filter drinking water, which could help significantly reduce our microplastic intake in our daily lives.

“[It] could be adapted for drinking water treatment because it is based on physical separation and flotation principles already used in water treatment facilities,” Pramanik shares. But he admits that there’s still a long way to go, as “drinking water applications would require additional testing and optimisation to ensure consistent removal of very small particles while meeting strict drinking water quality and safety standards.”

Microplastics shouldn’t be your no. 1 concern when it comes to your food and drink choices. But new technology lowering the amount of microplastics that allow themselves into our drinking water and wastewater is always good news to hear about. In the meantime, you can reduce your microplastic intake with simple steps—like swapping out plastic cooking utensils in your kitchen.

“People should be aware of microplastics rather than alarmed,” Pramanik says. “Microplastics are widespread in the environment, and research is ongoing to better understand their long-term impacts on ecosystems and human health. While many questions remain, reducing unnecessary plastic use and preventing microplastics from entering the environment are sensible precautionary measures.”

.

Credit: Design elements: Getty Images. EatingWell design.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Hmmmm  ….    Force the Trump administration to release Epstein files! Force the Trump administration to release Epstein files! 

Click the link below the picture  

.

The move could end up redirecting money away from working parents and their child care providers, causing some to raise their rates or even close, critics said, potentially worsening what many experts say is a child care crisis in the country.

About 80 percent of the 870,000 families who currently get the child care subsidies have single working parents, most of them mothers, according to Health Department data.

The policy change would effectively create a government incentive for parents to stay home with their children, an idea embraced as part of a broader conservative effort to advance policies that promote more mothers staying at home.

The new rule being drafted would allow married couples with one stay-at-home parent in certain income brackets to collect a subsidy, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the plan before it is finalized. The change could be made without approval from Congress.

More than 80 percent of stay-at-home parents are mothers, according to the Pew Research Center.

The plan is being pushed by the White House and is seen as a top priority of Mr. Vance, according to several people familiar with the discussions. The draft rule also incorporates policies in legislation written by Secretary of State Marco Rubio when he was a senator from Florida.

Representatives for the White House, Mr. Vance and the Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to requests for comment.

Mr. Vance, whose wife Usha, a former corporate lawyer, gave birth to their fourth child in July, has long advocated for more mothers to stay at home with young children and called for efforts to open up child care subsidy programs to those providing “kinship care.”

In 2021, Mr. Vance co-wrote an opinion essay in The Wall Street Journal contending that day care can harm children and declaring, “Young children are clearly happier and healthier when they spend the day at home with a parent.”

He also wrote then on Twitter that “normal Americans” want a “family policy that doesn’t shunt their kids into crap day care so they can enjoy more ‘freedom’ in the paid labor force.”

Some family policy experts said the changes to the program would hurt parents who have to work and have difficulty affording child care.

“I am a big proponent of more support for stay-at-home parents. But this is not how I would choose to do it,” said Patrick T. Brown, a fellow at the Life and Family Initiative at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative think tank.

“Expanding the eligibility without increasing funding would mean more parents competing for the same dollars, and leaving more parents — particularly single working parents — worse off,” he said.

The $12 billion Child Care and Development Fund, which is run by the Health Department’s Administration for Children and Families, was created during the Clinton administration to support the employment of low to moderate-income parents. It subsidizes the care of children up to age 13 and currently offsets the costs for caring for about 1.3 million children.

Under the current rules, most of the money is distributed to states, which in turn distribute it to parents, usually in the form of vouchers or direct deposits to child care providers.

.

About 80 percent of the 870,000 families that currently get child care subsidies from the Health and Human Services Department have single working parents, most of them mothers, according to department data. Credit…Julia Nikhinson/Associated Press

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

GLP-1 weight-loss drugs are transformational. From helping people lose weight to controlling their blood sugar to tamping down inflammation and improving heart health, these medications herald a new age of medicine. And now a new study in mice suggests that starting semaglutide, a GLP-1 (glucagonlike peptide 1) medication sold under the brand names Wegovy and Ozempic, in old age extends the lifespan by about 12 percent.

Not only that, but semaglutide outperformed dieting in terms of maintaining memory and keeping blood sugar in check. It’s an intriguing result: Scientists already knew that restricting calories seems to boost longevity and hold off the ill effects of aging. But sticking to such a diet is hard, and researchers have long looked for a drug that delivers the same benefits without the hunger. The new results, published in Nature, suggest they may have found it.

In the study, scientists gave semaglutide to female mice that were 20 months old—roughly equivalent in age to a woman in her 60s—and injected them with the drug for the rest of their lives. Against a comparison group of the same age that ate freely and received only saline shots, the mice’s median lifespan rose by about 12 percent—from 742 days to 834.

Semaglutide’s list of uses has grown long in recent years. Beyond being used to treat diabetes and obesity, it is approved to lower cardiovascular risk, slow kidney decline, and treat fatty liver disease, with trial data piling up for sleep apnea and osteoarthritis. Why one drug works in so many seemingly unrelated conditions is a mystery. “I read in journals about all these benefits for all kinds of diseases, and I don’t think there was an answer in the scientific community,” says Danica Chen, a longevity researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, and senior author of the new study.

Chen as researched calorie restriction for two decades and thought that semaglutide might work as a dieting substitute because it also reduces calorie intake, albeit through appetite suppression rather than willpower and discipline. Perhaps, she reasoned, by slowing aging itself through the same calorie restriction effect, the drug would push back the diseases that aging can bring on. It worked.

Mice on semaglutide explored more, balanced longer on a rotating rod, ran farther on a treadmill, and solved a maze faster—gains that held even after the researchers accounted for the animals just being leaner than their peers. Compared with the untreated animals, their tissues were less worn out and inflamed, and they died later.

Then Chen and her team set up a separate, five-month experiment in which a group of late-life mice got the drug while another group was simply fed 24 percent less—about the same amount of food as the treated mice had cut back on because of appetite suppression. Semaglutide treatment matched the diet on measures of muscle strength and coordination.

To see whether the drug works through the same biological mechanism as dieting, the team sequenced gene activity in the livers of treated mice and compared that to existing data on calorie restriction. The overlap was significant: both calorie restriction and the GLP-1 quieted down inflammation and fat processing, and both stepped up the genes for handling blood sugar and maintaining proteins. The results suggests semaglutide mimics calorie restriction but has an additional power: the GLP-1 mice had better memory scores, curiosity levels and blood sugar.

“In that sense, it’s more than just a calorie restriction,” Chen says. Why the drug apparently has this edge over dieting is unclear. “The short answer is: we don’t know yet,” she says.

The study doesn’t answer whether dieting or semaglutide extends the lifespan more. “Maybe calorie restriction increases the lifespan more?” wonders Nir Barzilai, a longevity researcher at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine who was not involved in the study. “The data is not there, and it bugs me.” It bugs Chen, too.

That experiment is currently ongoing, she says. “I don’t predict what the results might be. The results always surprise us.”

.

Alones Creative/Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture to show all links in the post 

.

Summer ’26 is winding down, but before you soak up the last unofficial weekend of summer, don’t miss the wave of Labor Day sales happening right now. As a deals editor, I’ve sorted through the discounts to find the ones actually worth your time, from fashion and clothing to vacuums and outdoor upgrades like grills. (P.S. Our top-tested pellet grill is nearly 30% off.)

Can’t-miss deals:

• Best mattress deal: Bear Elite Hybrid (35% 0ff) $2,570 $1,670
• Best beauty deal: Dyson Airwrap i.d. (20% off) $650 $519
• Best Apple deal: AirPods 4 (23% off) $129 $99
• Best tech deal: JBL Charge 5 Speaker (25% off) $180 $135
• Best bedding deal: Rest Evercool Comforter (32% off) $199 $136
• Best vacuum deal: ECOVACS Robot Vacuum (44% off) $800 $450
• Best appliance deal: Whirlpool Washing Machine (21% off) $1,055 $829
• Best clothing deal: COACH Hamptons Hobo (30% off) $295 $206
• Best shoe deal: New Balance Cross Trainer (40% off) $75 $45

While scanning these markdowns, I kept the GH Institute’s favorite products in focus, along with editor favorites and highly rated finds. That’s because our team of pros only recommends brands and buys that’ve performed well in tests—so when I see one of their go-to’s on sale, I know it’s worth it.

Jump to:

• Mattress deals

• Beauty deals

• Apple deals

• Tech deals

• Bedding deals

• Vacuum deals

• Appliance deals

• Clothing finds

• Shoe sales

Best Overall Mattress in multiple categories

Saatva Classic Mattress

Now 20% Off

$2,229 $1,784 at Saatva

Credit: saatva

Ahead of Labor Day, you can get 20% off Saatva mattresses (after spending at least $1,000) by using our exclusive discount link through September 7. The Saatva Classic has been praised by our Textiles Lab for its durability, comfort, and support.

Best Hybrid Mattress

Bear Elite Hybrid Mattress

Now 35% Off

$2,570 $1,670 at Bear Mattress

Credit: bear

Our team at the Textiles Lab named the Bear Elite Hybrid the best overall hybrid mattress, thanks to its comfortable memory foam-and-coil construction. Use the code GH40 at checkout for 40% off.

best hybrid mattress for couples

Helix Dusk Luxe

Now 22% Off

$2,399 $1,874 at Helix Sleep

The Helix Dusk Luxe is ideal for couples—primarily those with different sleep styles—thanks to its medium firmness that works for a variety of sleeping positions.

.

We’ve been independently researching and testing products for over 120 years. If you buy through our links, we may earn a commission. Learn more about our review process.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article (and links to all the deals):

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

The Candace Award is an award that was given from 1982 to 1992 by the National Coalition of 100 Black Women (NCBW) to “Black role models of uncommon distinction who have set a standard of excellence for young people of all races”.^[1] Candace (pronounced can-DAY-see) was the ancient Ethiopian title for queen or empress. “Candace, queen of the Ethiopians” is mentioned in the Bible: Philip meets “a eunuch of great authority” under her reign and converts him to Christianity (Acts 8:27-39).^[2] The awards ceremony was held each year at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City.^[1]

The award was established in 1982 as part of an effort to increase recognition of the achievements of Black intellectuals. The award was given annually to several women and one man in select categories including arts and letters, business, community service, economic development, education, health, science, history, and technology. Sponsorship was provided by The Paddington Corporation (through their brand Baileys Irish Cream) and then by AT&T. Tiffany & Co. customized engraved crystal for the awards ceremony.^[3] The President of the NCBW, Jewell Jackson McCabe, founded the award.^[4]

.

1986 Candace Award

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________