On Monday, Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch ruled that the police shooting of 1-year-old boy Kohen Wiley was a "justified" use of force. ​Kohen was fatally shot in June, outside of a Walmart, as cops investigated his mother and her friend for stealing diapers. Fitch didn't explain the reasoning behind the decision or what evidence was considered in a case that has sparked national backlash.

According to a June 14 statement from the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation (MBI), officers from the Senatobia Police Department (SPD) and Tate County Sheriff's Office were responding to a shoplifting call when "officers encountered two subjects and a juvenile child fleeing from the store into a vehicle." They "attempted to stop the vehicle, but the driver drove in the direction of the officers, almost striking one," and the officer then "discharged their weapon and the vehicle fled the scene." The family went to a local hospital, where 1-year-old Kohen Wiley was pronounced dead.​

Kohen's mother, Vellesiya Wiley, has a different version of events, which she outlined in a video on X following the tragedy. She said that after police tried to stop her friend (the driver) outside the Walmart, Wiley continued to go to her car, saying the interaction had "nothing to do" with her. Once she got into the car, her friend arrived and began to back out of the parking spot. Then officers came over to the car, drawing their guns. She says that after she raised Kohen to show him to the officers and try to defuse the situation, they opened fire. "[The police] tried to say that [my friend] forcefully was trying to drive and hit them, but they was all on the right side, and she was driving towards the left….They personally just shot at the car," she said. In the months since the incident, the family held several rallies, demanding justice for Kohen's death.​ 

The tragedy of the shooting has been compounded by a lack of transparency from the SPD, as well as alleged expert analysis that counteracts the MBI's statement. According to reporting from Mississippi Today, Ben Crump, a civil rights attorney who is representing the Wiley family, claims that an independent autopsy conducted by forensic pathologist Robert Mitchell indicates that the bullets entered through the front passenger door, rather than the windshield, suggesting that the officer wasn't in the vehicle's path when he discharged his gun.​

In response to Fitch's announcement on Monday, Crump released a statement asking, "How can anyone accept that conclusion when Kohen's family and the public still have not been allowed to see the body-camera footage?" 

"If the footage supports the state's decision, release it. We will not stop fighting until this family gets the truth," he added. To this point, the SPD has declined to release the footage, saying it's standard procedure during an ongoing investigation.

Crump was also keen to point out complaints of racism in the SPD: "This is a department whose chief was fired after reports of racial slurs in his text messages, and whose officer faced a complaint alleging a racially offensive remark two days before he shot Kohen."​

The SPD's chief at the time, Harold Vanderford, was unceremoniously fired after journalists from Mississippi Today, The New York Times, and Verite News revealed a slew of racist text messages he sent. According to reporting from Verite News, in one of the messages he said he "almost beat a nigger and white woman's ass a few minutes ago." Senatobia's Board of Aldermen rejected his attempted resignation and voted to fire him instead on September 1.

Crump also cited a complaint filed by Officer Dexter Smith, who claimed that Sergeant Hunter Foster, the officer who shot Kohen referred to him as "a black motherfucker" on June 12, just two days before the incident. According to reporting from Mississippi Today, Smith's complaint states that he was filling out paperwork in the booking room when he heard Foster say, "Who is this Black motherfucker back there?" to his colleagues. Smith claims to have had almost no relationship with Foster prior to the encounter.​

It's hard not to feel outraged considering that this little boy lost his life over something as trivial as shoplifting—a misdemeanor in Mississippi that does not justify use of lethal force, as Reason's Joe Lancaster wrote in June—and for diapers no less. With the bodycam footage yet to be released, all the public is left with is the state's word that the investigation found no wrongdoing. Given the multiple instances of racism within the department, it shouldn't come as a surprise if the public isn't content to take them at their word.

The post Mississippi A.G. Says Killing of 1-Year-Old Boy Over Stolen Diapers Was 'Justified' appeared first on Reason Magazine.

Last July, President Donald Trump imposed 50 percent tariffs on various Canadian goods, a list he subsequently expanded to include additional imports, some of which he banned outright. His legal justification was Section 338 of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which Congress approved in 1930. Section 338 authorized tariffs in response to discriminatory trade practices. But in the 96 years since it was enacted, no president had ever used it to impose tariffs.

Why is that? According to a lawsuit that the Liberty Justice Center (LJC) filed on Tuesday in the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), the answer is clear: Section 338 was superseded by subsequent legislation that likewise targeted discriminatory trade barriers, beginning with the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 and culminating in Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Section 301, the current remedy, includes requirements that Trump apparently sought to dodge by invoking Section 338 instead.

That maneuver is illegal, the LJC argues. "Congress already gave the executive branch a tool for responding to unfair foreign trade practices: Section 301, which requires an investigation, public comment and other safeguards," says Jeffrey M. Schwab, the LJC's director of litigation. "The administration cannot skip those protections by reaching for a 1930 statute that no president had ever used to impose a tariff."

Why not? "Where provisions in two acts are in irreconcilable conflict, the later act, to the extent of the conflict, constitutes an implied repeal of the earlier one," the lawsuit says. "Where a later act covers the whole subject of an earlier one and is clearly intended as a substitute, it operates similarly as a repeal. And a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute controls the construction of an earlier one even absent express amendment."

Even if Section 338 somehow survived congressional approval of contrary laws, the LJC adds, Trump's tariffs exceed the authority it grants. And if Trump's interpretation of Section 338 were correct, the lawsuit says, the provision would violate the nondelegation doctrine, which bars Congress from delegating its tariff power to the president without providing "an intelligible principle" to guide and constrain his exercise of it.

Trump's Section 338 tariffs, in short, are "the Administration's latest attempt to exercise, through a statute never designed for the purpose, the tariff power that the Constitution assigns to Congress." That pattern should be familiar by now.

Shortly after taking office in 2025, Trump claimed to have discovered a previously unnoticed delegation of extensive tariff authority in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law that does not mention import taxes and had never been used to impose them. That claim was rejected by every court that considered it, and last February the Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs at all.

Trump responded to that decision by immediately announcing similarly broad tariffs under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which addresses "fundamental international payments problems" caused by "serious United States balance-of-payments deficits." In May, the CIT ruled that the new tariffs were illegal because Trump had failed to "identify balance-of-payments deficits within the meaning of Section 122."

Trump then switched to Plan C, invoking Section 301 of the Trade Act, which authorizes tariffs in response to a foreign "act, policy, or practice" that is "unreasonable or discriminatory" and "burdens or restricts" U.S. commerce. He claimed that provision justified tariffs on 86 trading partners, accounting for nearly all U.S. imports, because they had failed to "impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor." The CIT is currently weighing challenges to those tariffs, including an LJC lawsuit.

Trump's Section 338 tariffs have now added to the CIT's caseload. The LJC represents Gellert Global Group, an importer that was hit hard by those taxes after Trump added cheese to the list of disfavored Canadian goods. The lawsuit asks the CIT to certify a class of importers, numbering in "the hundreds, if not the thousands," that likewise have been clobbered by Trump's 50 percent tariffs.

Since Trump obviously is aware of Section 301, why did he resort to a never-used, seemingly obsolete provision to justify the tariffs on imports from Canada? As the LJC notes, Section 301 requires an investigation by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, "consultation with the foreign country concerned, notice, public comment, a hearing, and determinations within statutory deadlines." It also requires "that action be equivalent in value to the burden imposed, that duties be preferred over other import restrictions, and that actions terminate after four years absent a request for continuation and review."

Can Trump avoid those constraints by invoking Section 338 instead? The LJC thinks not: "Congress did not intend to leave in place a parallel authority that would allow the President to impose the same remedies, for the same conduct, free of every one of those safeguards."

Section 338 has been "impliedly repealed," the LJC argues. "At a minimum, Section 301 controls where, as here, the President seeks to respond to foreign practices within Section 301's scope, and the President may not impose duties in response to such practices while disregarding the procedures and limits Section 301 imposes. Because the President did not proceed under Section 301, the Section 338 Tariffs are unlawful whether or not Section 338 survives."

Even if you ignore subsequent legislation, the LJC argues, the Canadian policies that Trump cited when he announced the tariffs do not qualify as "discrimination" under Section 338. "Canada's motor vehicle surtax and its provinces' alcohol purchasing decisions are responses to tariffs that the United States imposed on Canada, not discrimination by Canada against the United States," it says. Trump also complained that Canada treats European cheese imports more favorably than U.S. cheese imports. But "when Congress enacted Section 338, a preference granted under a reciprocal agreement was not 'discrimination.'"

Section 338 "addresses discrimination: measures that single out United States commerce for worse treatment than the commerce of the world at large," the lawsuit says. "It is not a general authorization to impose tariffs whenever the President disagrees with a trading partner's policies, or whenever a trading partner responds to tariffs the United States has imposed on it."

Trump also was unfazed by Section 338's requirement that the president set duties to "offset" the costs imposed by discriminatory practices, which implies proportionality. Rather than attempt that, the LJC notes, Trump imposed "the statutory maximum rate of 50 percent without tying it to any measured burden."

As interpreted by Trump, the lawsuit warns, Section 338 authorizes the president to "impose tariffs of up to 50 percent on any products of any country that extends better treatment to any other country in any respect—including through any of the hundreds of preferential trade agreements to which the United States is not a party—or that responds to tariffs the United States has imposed on it." Yet Section 338 "contains no clear statement authorizing that power," contrary to the "major questions" doctrine, which applies to assertions of executive authority with "vast economic and political significance."

If Section 338 conferred the sort of unfettered authority that Trump is claiming, the LJC says, it "would supply no intelligible principle constraining the exercise of Congress's power to lay duties." His reading "would convert a narrow, fact-dependent provision into an effectively unrestricted delegation of Congress's tariff power," which would be "an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power."

This case "is not about the president," says LJC CEO Sara Albrecht. "It is about the presidency. No president should have the power to pull a dormant statute off the shelf and use it to impose sweeping tariffs or import bans without the limits Congress required."

The post Trump's 50% Tariffs on Canadian Goods Illegally Rely on a Superseded Statute, a Lawsuit Argues appeared first on Reason Magazine.

On Monday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced it would "make $8 billion available for one-time payments to American farmers this harvest season to provide relief during temporary market disruptions and increased input costs."

Using a formula derived from the USDA's production, yield, and price estimates, the Harvest Fuel Relief program will "provide simple, proportional support to producers." It will only cover a "portion of modeled losses during the 2026 crop year." The Farm Service Agency—an office within the USDA that administers credit and loan programs—will administer the $8 billion in one-time payments using funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation, a federal entity authorized to draw up to $30 billion from the U.S. Treasury to fund agricultural initiatives. Payment rates won't be released until November, and the USDA's notice leaves open the possibility of additional payments for "non-Title I commodities, including specialty crop growers and fishermen."

A fiscally questionable decision, the program comes at a time when farmers are feeling a significant price pinch. The dyed diesel American farmers and ranchers use is exempt from state and federal highway taxes, but that has done little to offset skyrocketing fuel prices. In September, the American Farm Bureau Federation projected that fuel expenses would reach $22 billion this year, up 29 percent from 2025. The Farm Bureau estimates that total production expenses will reach nearly $500 billion in 2026. According to its own predictions, the USDA doesn't expect the situation to improve anytime soon.

In its latest Commodity Costs and Returns report, released in June, the USDA projects farmers and ranchers will face record production costs in 2027—higher than during the COVID-19 supply chain disruptions—driven by higher prices for necessary inputs such as fuel, fertilizer, seeds, machinery, and labor. 

While the USDA has blamed "temporary market disruptions" for these cost hikes, the blame more accurately falls to President Donald Trump, thanks to his illegal war in Iran. As of Tuesday, Trump's war—and the subsequent shocks it has caused to the global diesel supply—have pushed the national average price in the U.S. up $2.70 per gallon from a year ago, a 74.6 percent increase, according to AAA data.

Unfortunately, the war in Iran is just one of several Trump administration policies making life more expensive for everyone, including the nation's farmers and ranchers. Tariffs on imported fertilizer, which began in 2020 during the first Trump administration, have made it difficult for American farmers to afford what they need. By the Farm Bureau's estimates, fertilizer costs for 2026 are projected to reach a record $40 billion, up 15 percent from the previous year.

The $8 billion program is part of a windfall of taxpayer money the Trump administration has sent to farmers as relief for harms caused by the president's actions. Last December, the USDA sent $11 billion in one-time bridge payments to more than half a million farmers nationwide. Earlier this month, the USDA announced it would provide a record $13.8 billion in gross payments to agricultural producers to cover revenue losses. 

In a speech in Kansas touting the program, Trump claimed that the state's residents would see a "plunge" in prices once the war ends. That's likely an exaggeration, given the host of questionable economic policies he seems hell-bent on implementing. 

Still, that shouldn't discredit the president's suggestion. Ending the war would benefit farmers, ranchers, and consumers, without doling out billions in another government bailout for a favored industry.

The post Trump's $8 Billion Diesel Bailout Pays Farmers for a Problem He Created appeared first on Reason Magazine.

O ministro Adjunto e da Reforma do Estado, Gonçalo Matias, afirmou, esta terça-feira, 20 de outubro, que o Governo está interessado em alargar e melhorar a medição dos resultados das reformas legislativas e que vai discutir o uso de Inteligência Artificial com o antigo primeiro-ministro britânico Tony Blair.

Matias tem planeada uma visita na quarta-feira em Londres ao Instituto Tony Blair para a Mudança Global, que trabalha com a inteligência artificial em matérias de governação.

O ministro recordou que durante os Executivos de Blair foram criadas ‘delivery units’, estruturas de apoio ao primeiro-ministro destinadas a acompanhar a execução das prioridades governativas em áreas como a saúde, educação ou criminalidade, e medir se foram cumpridas.

“Para a reforma de estado é fundamental medir o ponto de partida e o ponto de chegada e saber exatamente o que é que uma reforma produziu”, sublinhou o ministro à Agência Lusa, explicando que o sucesso de uma reforma se avalia comparando a situação antes e depois da sua implementação.

Segundo Matias, “mais importante do que apresentar os códigos [legislativos] é garantir que são implementados, que produzem efeitos e que esses efeitos chegam realmente às pessoas”.

Gonçalo Matias referiu que já existem unidades de medição e avaliação no centro do Governo português, como é o caso da Planapp na Secretaria-Geral e do comité da OCDE que está a monitorizar a reforma do Ministério da Educação.

Também na quarta-feira, o ministro vai encontrar-se com o secretário Parlamentar do Gabinete do Governo britânico, Mark Ferguson, com o qual pretende trocar experiências sobre o desenvolvimento da inteligência artificial.

Do programa da visita de três dias à capital britânica fizeram parte contactos no serviço digital do Governo britânico e no Open Data Institute, uma organização sem fins lucrativos fundada pelo “inventor da Internet, Tim-Berners-Lee.

Sobre esta última, considerou a reunião “muito interessante” para antecipar dificuldades práticas na execução da futura Lei da Interoperabilidade, em apreciação no Parlamento português e com parecer favorável da Comissão Nacional de Proteção de Dados.

A lei visa permitir a partilha de documentos de cidadãos e empresas entre diferentes serviços do Estado, medida implicará passar de 124 entidades atualmente ligadas à plataforma de interoperabilidade para cerca de cinco mil.

«Reconheceram que o nosso projeto era ambicioso e que tínhamos os mecanismos certos, mas alertaram para dificuldades práticas, muitas vezes relacionadas com a resistência dos serviços que detêm a informação», referiu o ministro, sublinhando que a partilha de experiência permite preparar melhor a implementação.

El PSG ha ganado al Barcelona este martes en la tercera jornada de la Champions League y los azulgrana han encajado su primera derrota de la temporada. El inicio de partido del equipo de Luis Enrique fue eléctrico y Kvaratskhelia avisó con un remate al poste. Reaccionó a los 10 minutos el Barça que comenzó a dominar el encuentro y Raphinha estuvo a punto de poner por delante a los de Flick, pero Safonov estuvo muy atento para detener un remate del brasileño a escasos metros de la portería. La contienda se igualó muchísimo y llegaron entonces dos lesiones: Ferran sustituyó a Dembélé y Fermín a Dani Olmo. La entrada de Ferran dio alas a los parisinos y el delantero valenciano tuvo dos mano a mano que Joan García tapó. El PSG se animó de nuevo y en una gran recuperación en campo contrario Doué disparó desde la frontal del área para perforar la portería y poner por delante al equipo de Luis Enrique. En la segunda mitad, Joan García volvió a sacar una gran mano y sostuvo a los azulgrana que lograron empatar el partido por medio de Xavi Espart. A raíz del gol el Barça comenzó a dominar, pero en un saque de esquina Lucas Hernández le ganó la partida a Gordon para cabecear y volver a poner a los parisinos por delante. Parecía que el PSG tomaba el control ahora, pero apareció Lamine para inventarse una nueva genialidad ante Zaire-Emery y batir a Safonov por su palo. Volvieron otra vez las tablas al marcador, pero Vitinha primero y Fabián después sentenciaron el encuentro para los parisinos.

Giorgia Meloni’s administration has announced the deployment of 500 military troops to Milan after a weekend of intense protests and riots resulted in broken windows at luxury shops. 

But while mainstream coverage has focused on exclusive brands hiding inventory from angry demonstrators, progressive organizations emphasize that the rage witnessed on the streets of several northern Italian cities is a result of the government’s own policies.

“A Louis Vuitton bag can cost €5,600, while the monthly maximum for the wage guarantee fund in 2026 is €1,340,” wrote the grassroots union Unione Sindacale di Base (USB). In a statement on Tuesday, the union cited devastating national statistics, including data showing that over 14% of working-class families live in absolute poverty.

Broken windows can be repaired, USB noted. “Five years of lost wages, an impoverished family, and a denied future cannot be recovered so easily.”

Students oppose austerity at school and beyond

Significant mobilizations preceded the weekend’s protests. On Friday, October 16, roughly 400,000 students flooded the streets for “No Meloni Day”. They criticized the government’s so-called securitization measures which in practice has meant stifling the right to protest, as well as the unabated turn toward war and armament.

Protesters warned that by prioritizing these points over public services and working conditions, Meloni and her ministers knowingly undermine the future of a whole generation. 

Read more: Curfews imposed in French cities as rebellion against austerity grows nationwide

Echoing developments in France, where teachers’ unions have supported students’ demands over recent weeks of historic struggle for a stronger public education system, educators in Italy began circulating appeals to do the same.

“The established order is the worst of all possible worlds – or comes very close to it – and our schools are a mirror of this: they are falling apart, alienating, militarized,” the appeal reads. “Places where the need to stretch one’s legs is labeled ‘indiscipline,’ and where the ‘foreigner’ is blamed for the decline in knowledge, rather than two decades of underfunding and neglect.”

Real solutions, not repression, needed to address social crisis

Trade unions, teachers, and students all denounced the repression authorities unleashed in response to the protests – both after mobilizations in cities and during school occupations. 

“This government – incapable of offering solutions to the social crisis raging across the country – is once again attempting to manage the streets and social discontent solely through the lens of ‘public order,’ while intensifying repression and shrinking the space available for political activity,” emphasized youth organization Cambiare Rotta.

Teachers specifically called upon others in the system not to endorse crackdowns on students while invoking democratic values. “Democracy today resists in the French and Spanish squares, in the occupied Italian schools, in the resistance to the genocide of the Palestinian people, in the words and deeds of those who oppose the piecemeal world war,” they wrote.

“It is not to be found in threats, in tear gas, in police officers inside schools, or in students maimed by the weapons of our law enforcement. It is not to be found in the unjust rules that too many persist in defending.”

Read more: Mediterranean dockworkers launch historic international strike

The increased protest activity has given hope that the spark that inspired massive mobilizations throughout 2025 might resurface. It comes less than two weeks before a new general strike – and an international dockworkers’ strike in which Italian port workers are set to play a notable role – on October 30.

U.S. president warns the situation will only worsen without an agreement.

On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump insisted that he wants Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to reach a peace agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

RELATED:

Colombia And Ukraine Discuss Matters Related to Soldiers Of Fortune

“Zelensky has to want to end this war; if he doesn’t, I think it will be something very negative,” he said in response to questions about the meeting in Oslo between the Ukrainian leader and White House negotiator Steve Witkoff.

Trump stated that he “would like to see an agreement reached” and added that he believes “the immense hatred” between Zelensky and Putin is “to a large extent, the reason why they have not been able to reach an agreement” to end the war.

“We want Zelensky to reach an agreement; he can do it (…) Ukraine must have the will to make a deal, given that the United States has spent a fortune, just like Europe. Europe is already tired of all this, and if they don’t reach an agreement, in the long run, in my opinion, the situation is simply going to get worse,” he warned.

Trump also recalled that his country has delivered to Ukraine “hundreds of billions of dollars” in aid and weapons shipments. “We have received nothing in return, except a high price for diesel,” he repeated, referring to his accusations that Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy facilities have driven up fuel costs, which have soared for months due to the U.S. war on Iran.

His statements come after he signed a fuel purchase agreement with Russia and eased sanctions on Moscow, amid a sharpening of tensions between his administration and Zelensky, who has denounced delays in deliveries of Patriot interceptor missiles.

Added to this are the Ukrainian’s complaints about interruptions in the flow of U.S. intelligence and restrictions on connection to Starshield (the military satellite version of Starlink). Zelensky has attributed all of this to an alleged intention by Trump to force Ukraine to capitulate to Russia.

On Wednesday, Witkoff will travel to St. Petersburg to convey to Putin a proposal to relaunch peace contacts put forward by Zelensky.

teleSUR/ JF

Source: EFE

• Christina Applegate recently learned that she was misdiagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS).
• Applegate was first diagnosed in 2021 after multiple tests and worsening symptoms.
• About 15% of MS patients are believed to be misdiagnosed, given how complex the disorder is.

After being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) in 2021, living with severe symptoms, and becoming one of the most famous celebrities with the disorder, Christina Applegate learned some shocking news: She doesn't actually have MS.

In an October 20, two-part episode of her podcast "MeSsy" with Jamie Lynn Sigler (another actor diagnosed with MS), Applegate shared that she took over half a year off from recording the podcast to process the news of her MS misdiagnosis.

According to Applegate, her doctor framed the revelation as a positive update. "She came into my room and said, 'Congratulations, you don't have MS,'" Applegate said in the podcast.

But to Applegate, no longer having an explanation for the pain, balance issues, tremors, incontinence, and fatigue she'd been living with for years felt more like being "back at square one."

"You don't get misdiagnosed and then all of a sudden, I'm better," she said. "If anything, I've gotten worse, in some ways."

Applegate's story is far from a medical anomaly. MS researchers estimate that about 15% of worldwide MS patients are actually misdiagnosed, based on a 2024 meta-analysis of multiple studies.

The risks to patients are two-fold, Dr. Marwa Kaisey, an associate professor of neurology at Cedars-Sinai, who also appeared on the podcast, told Business Insider. "One is thinking you have MS — a lot of the medications we use to treat MS have side effects and risks like infections," she said. "The other category is, if you don't know what you have, then you're not getting treated for your actual diagnosis."

Kaisey and another researcher shared why MS is so challenging to diagnose — and why more people might end up with Applegate's experience in the future.

The race to diagnose a hard-to-diagnose disorder

There is no single blood test that can diagnose MS.

Instead, doctors often piece together an MS diagnosis using a neurological exam (testing balance and reflexes), MRI scans, a lumbar puncture (or spinal tap), and possible blood tests to rule out other conditions such as Lyme disease.

Sometimes, doctors overrely on a single diagnostic, such as an MRI finding, without performing enough other tests, Dr. Andrew J. Solomon, a professor of neurological sciences at the University of Vermont who co-authored the meta-analysis, told Business Insider.

In 2019, Solomon co-authored an MS misdiagnosis study that found that patients who were initially diagnosed with MS were later told they actually had other conditions, such as migraine, radiologically isolated syndrome, spondylopathy, and neuropathy, which can share overlapping symptoms with MS and similar brain scan results.

In the podcast, Applegate revealed that she had a nerve test to rule out peripheral neuropathy, as well as MRIs and a lumbar puncture. While her spinal fluid test showed a low level of immune proteins that can support an MS diagnosis, she had nearly 40 brain lesions and worsening symptoms, leading doctors to diagnose her with MS.

Solomon said MS should be diagnosed by "confirming each element of our diagnostic criteria and ruling out other things," rather than assuming it must be MS if the MRIs and symptoms fit.

The problem is, both physicians and patients are eager to diagnose MS as early as possible, he said. Correctly spotting MS early can lead to better treatment results and a higher likelihood of disability prevention, according to research.

Plus, for patients dealing with a plethora of debilitating symptoms, "a period of diagnostic uncertainty is uncomfortable," he said, even though the best course of action is to wait and perform more tests.

A new testing protocol revealed Applegate's misdiagnosis

In the podcast, Applegate shared that her brain lesions were missing "strings" associated with MS.

It's a finding associated with a new, more accurate diagnostic tool for Kaisey, who also co-authored the 2019 study with Solomon, explained on the podcast.

The central vein sign (CVS), is an MRI biomarker that can help differentiate MS brain lesions from ones associated with other disorders. It refers to a small vein that appears as a dot or thin line through the center of a brain lesion.

CVS was only recently adopted as part of the recommended MS diagnostic criteria, in 2025 — four years after Applegate was first diagnosed with MS. Kaisey told Business Insider that part of her work is expanding education around newer diagnostic tools, noting that not all physicians are using CVS yet.

Solomon hopes more doctors will include CVS in their diagnostic protocols, especially for existing MS patients or those who switch providers without being evaluated by their current doctors. "If something doesn't fit, there's an opportunity there to reevaluate if the diagnosis is right," he said.

Many misdiagnosed MS patients feel exactly like Applegate does

When it comes to learning about an MS misdiagnosis, Solomon said experiences like Applegate's aren't that uncommon.

"I've heard many stories where some doctor was very enthusiastic about telling a patient they actually didn't have MS," he said. "But many of these patients are suffering, and they still have symptoms. So it's not always necessarily a happy thing."

For Applegate, her initial MS diagnosis provided clarity and direction. "That was my answer to everything that was going on," Applegate said. Some might relate to Applegate's "square one" feeling, particularly if their doctor was an MS specialist and won't see them anymore, Solomon said. Without a formal diagnosis, they might also worry about insurance coverage for treatments that have provided some relief.

There is also the emotional part of having an MS diagnosis. "I leaned into other friends, I leaned into the community," Applegate said. "I had a reason as to why my day sucked every day, and now I don't have a reason."

Knowing she doesn't have MS also made her feel like she "let everybody down" after becoming one of the "poster children for MS," she said. It made her wonder if she was somehow imagining symptoms or at fault for her pain.

Given how common MS misdiagnosis is, Solomon believes it's a good thing that Applegate is sharing her story.

"It's kind of wonderful that Ms. Applegate is public with this because if the number is really 15%, you can do the math," he said. "There are a lot of people out there who might ask their doctors about the accuracy of their diagnosis and find out that, in fact, they had something else."

A segunda temporada do 'Ruído', série de Bruno Nogueira, estreou este mês na RTP1, e já inspirou um restaurante no Porto a fazer alterações na sua carta (ainda por tempo limitado). 

Um dos sketches que mais deu que falar nas redes sociais foi o do "Menu Piço". No mesmo, Cristóvão Campos (novo membro do elenco), chega a um café e em vez de pedir o habitual menu, decide optar por um conjunto de coisas diferente, nomeadamente, sopa, wrap de legumes, chá de tília e iogurte natural.

No momento em que descreve o seu pedido, Bruno Nogueira, que interpreta o empregado de balcão, pergunta se este antes não preferiria o "Menu Piço", que estava a fazer um grande sucesso na zona. 

Pois bem. O Goela, restaurante no Porto, decidiu incluir na sua carta precisamente o "Menu Piço", conforme informou na sua página de Instagram. 

"Um menu com coisas que não são bem almoço para pessoas que trabalham em ambientes empresariais. Qualquer semelhança com a ficção não é mera coincidência. É mesmo culpa da série Ruído, do genial Bruno Nogueira".

A título de curiosidade, o "Menu Piço" estará disponível até ao dia 23 de outubro e inclui chá, ovo cozido, wrap de legumes, iogurte, sopa e claro, granola.

Entretanto, veja ou reveja o sketch que tanto deu que falar...

Quer um "menu piço" cheio de proteína? As escolhas de um nutricionista

A série “Ruído”, de Bruno Nogueira, deu a conhecer o “menu piço”. A sátira apresentou um menu cheio de opções saudáveis, mas será que são mesmo? Um nutricionista revela algumas das escolhas mais saudáveis e cheias de proteína que pode pedir neste tipo de menu.

Adriano Guerreiro | 21:21 - 15/10/2026

A combination of maritime fuel blockades, power grid collapses, and legal indictments deepens economic hardship across the island nation.

Since the beginning of Donald Trump’s second administration, the United States’ relentless hostility toward Cuba has been on the rise. This friction has centered on unilateral sanctions, trade restrictions, and direct legal actions against former Cuban government leaders.

RELATED:
Russia Condemns U.S. Arrest Warrant for Raul Castro

2026 brought to Cuba a series of severe economic challenges, particularly regarding its energy sector. U.S. executive orders and maritime monitoring actions aimed at restricting oil shipments to state-owned Cuban entities contributed directly to fuel shortages across the island. These restrictions affected power generation, agricultural transport, municipal services, and health sector logistics.

In May, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed a federal jury indictment in Miami charging former Cuban President Raúl Castro and five co-defendants with conspiracy and murder related to a 1996 aerial shootdown.

Cuba Fuel Restrictions and the Energy Infrastructure Crisis

On January 29, Trump issued an executive order stating that the U.S. would impose tariffs on any country that sent oil to Cuba. The U.S. government authorized certain fuel shipments exclusively to private commercial entities, while blocking access to state-managed refineries and power facilities.

This policy created severe fuel deficits for public utilities responsible for national electricity generation. A deficit that led to recurring shutdowns across the National Electrical System. On March 16, 2026, the national grid suffered a complete collapse after a major boiler leak occurred at the Antonio Guiteras Thermoelectric Power Plant in Matanzas. By October 2026, another mechanical breakdown left up to 75 percent of the country without power.

The energy deficits extended beyond residential electricity. In February 2026, fuel shortages forced Cuban aviation authorities to suspend refuel operations for foreign air carriers. Consequently, airlines such as Air Canada, Rossiya, and Nordwind suspended flights to the island. International tourist arrivals dropped by approximately 58 percent by June 2026 compared to prior operational benchmarks.

Public sanitation and healthcare systems reported operational disruptions due to the fuel deficit. In Havana, local authorities reported that only 44 of 106 municipal collection trucks were operational in early 2026 due to empty fuel tanks.

In June 2026, United Nations human rights monitors showed a 60 percent decline in agricultural production caused by fuel shortages for farming equipment and transport vehicles.

Hybrid Operations and International Diplomatic Positions

Throughout 2026, the U.S. diplomatic campaign was accompanied by increased military surveillance, intelligence monitoring, and diplomatic warnings. Reports documented an increase in U.S. military reconnaissance flights operating over international airspace near the Cuban coastline.

Cuban defense officials countered that the frequency of these flights constituted deliberate psychological pressure and surveillance of national infrastructure.

In parallel with maritime and aerial activities, U.S. diplomats engaged with governments in Latin America and Europe to restrict economic partnerships with Havana.

The U.S. State Department urged partner nations to terminate bilateral agreements involving Cuban medical professionals. Several governments, including Guatemala, Honduras, and several Caribbean nations, subsequently reduced or phased out participation in Cuban medical exchange programs.

In August 2026, UN human rights rapporteurs released a joint statement concluding that unilateral fuel restrictions and financial blockades exacerbated severe shortages of basic goods, medicine, and food.

The Legal Prosecution of Raul Castro and the 1996 Case

On May 20, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed a federal indictment in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida charging former Cuban President Raúl Castro and five co-defendants with conspiracy, destruction of aircraft, and four counts of murder.

The legal push escalated further on October 19, 2026, when Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced that the Office of Statewide Prosecution and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement secured a state arrest warrant for Castro, charging him with conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.

Both prosecutions center on an incident that took place on February 24, 1996, when Cuban military MiG fighter jets intercepted and shot down two civilian Cessna 337 aircraft. The planes were operated by Brothers to the Rescue (Hermanos al Rescate), a Miami-based organization founded by José Basulto.

The group initially focused on search-and-rescue operations for Cuban migrants in the Florida Straits, but later expanded its activities to include dropping political leaflets directly over Havana.

The 1996 aerial interception resulted in the deaths of four crew members: Carlos Costa, Armando Alejandre Jr., Mario de la Peña, and Pablo Morales. U.S. federal and state authorities asserted that the civilian planes were destroyed over international waters without legal justification.

Florida state prosecutors cited military chain-of-command statements from the period in which Castro, then Minister of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, authorized commanders to shoot down unauthorized aircraft over the sea without prior consultation.

In response, the Cuban government stated that the civilian aircraft had repeatedly violated Cuban sovereign airspace despite official diplomatic warnings issued to the U.S. State Department prior to the incident.

Cuban authorities and foreign affairs analysts characterized the revival of thirty-year-old charges as a coordinated exercise of extraterritorial judicial power. Officials in Havana rejected the dual legal actions as politically motivated efforts to criminalize Cuba’s historical leadership and create legal grounds for continuing trade and financial sanctions.

Domestic Mobilization and Sovereign Defense

The Cuban government and civic organizations responded to the rising external pressures through formal diplomatic rejections, official government statements, and public mobilizations.

Following the unsealing of the May 2026 U.S. indictment against former President Raúl Castro, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla rejected the legal action in an address to international media and diplomats.

Rodríguez Parrilla characterized the indictment as a politically motivated maneuver designed to justify economic sanctions and interfere with Cuban domestic jurisdiction. President Miguel Díaz-Canel reiterated this position, stating that national sovereignty and historical decisions regarding territorial air defense remain non-negotiable under international law.

In urban centers across Cuba, including Havana, Santiago de Cuba, and Matanzas, civil organizations and neighborhood committees organized rallies opposing external interference and economic restrictions.

At the same time, state ministries implemented emergency measures to manage reduced fuel supplies and maintain essential public services. Municipal governments established scheduled electricity rotations, prioritized available diesel fuel for medical facilities and water distribution pumps, and expanded the use of draft animals and non-motorized transport in agricultural regions.

On the international stage, Havana received diplomatic backing from several multilateral organizations and regional governments. The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA-TCP) issued a joint declaration condemning unilateral coercive measures against Cuba’s energy sector.

During the United Nations General Assembly in September 2026, representatives from non-aligned nations called for an immediate end to the trade embargo, citing its negative impact on civilian health, infrastructure, and human development.

Analysis of Coercive Strategies and Long-Term Impacts

The events of 2026 reflect an intensification of U.S. policy toward Cuba through a combination of trade restrictions, infrastructural pressure, and legal mechanisms targeting state leadership.

The strategic focus on restricting fuel imports significantly affected Cuba’s national power grid, agricultural logistics, and public transportation. Simultaneously, the unsealing of a thirty-year-old indictment against Raúl Castro added a significant legal dimension to bilateral relations.

Economic data, energy assessments, and reports from international monitors demonstrate that the primary burden of fuel deficits and infrastructure instability falls directly on the civilian population. The disruptions to medical supplies, food distribution, and municipal sanitation illustrate the direct impact of unilateral economic sanctions on daily life.

Despite persistent resource constraints and structural deficits, the Cuban government has maintained state operations and institutional control through domestic conservation strategies and international partnerships.

Sources:  Granma – Juventud Rebelde – Cuba Debate – Cubavisión – CiberCuba – EcuRed – TeleSUR – BBC – CNN – The Guardian – La Radio del Sur