npr--2020-10-14--Sleepless Nights, Hair Loss And Cracked Teeth: Pandemic Stress Takes Its Toll

In late March , shortly after New York state closed nonessential businesses and asked people to stay home , Ashley Laderer began waking each morning with a throbbing headache .
`` The pressure was so intense it felt like my head was going to explode , '' the 27-year-old freelance writer from Long Island recalls .
She tried spending less time on the computer and taking over-the-counter pain medication , but the pounding kept breaking through — a constant drumbeat to accompany her equally incessant worries about COVID-19 .
`` Every day I lived in fear that I was going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to infect my whole family , '' she says .
After a month and a half , Laderer decided to visit a neurologist , who ordered an MRI .
But the doctor found no physical cause .
The scan was clear .
Then he asked : Are you under a lot of stress ?
Throughout the pandemic , people who never had the coronavirus have been reporting a host of seemingly unrelated symptoms : excruciating headaches , episodes of hair loss , upset stomach for weeks on end , sudden outbreaks of shingles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disparate symptoms , often in otherwise healthy individuals , have puzzled doctors and patients alike , sometimes resulting in a series of visits to specialists with few answers .
But it turns out there 's a common thread among many of these conditions , one that has been months in the making : chronic stress .
Although people often underestimate the influence of the mind on the body , a growing catalog of research shows that high levels of stress over an extended period of time can drastically alter physical function and affect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least eight months into the pandemic , alongside a divisive election cycle and racial unrest , those effects are showing up in a variety of symptoms .
`` The mental health component of COVID is starting to come like a tsunami , '' says Dr. Jennifer Love , a California-based psychiatrist and co-author of an upcoming book on how to heal from chronic stress .
Nationwide , surveys have found increasing rates of depression , anxiety and suicidal thoughts during the pandemic .
But many medical experts say it 's too soon to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generally appear months after the stress begins .
Data from FAIR Health , a nonprofit database that provides cost information to the health industry and consumers , showed increases in the percentage of medical claims related to conditions triggered or exacerbated by stress , such as multiple sclerosis or shingles .
The portion of claims for the autoimmune disease lupus , for example , showed one of the biggest increases — 12 % this year — compared with the same period last year ( January to August ) .
Express Scripts , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prescriptions for anti-insomnia medications increased 15 % early in the pandemic .
Perhaps the strongest indicator comes from doctors reporting a growing number of patients with physical symptoms for which they ca n't determine a cause .
Shilpi Khetarpal , a dermatologist at the Cleveland Clinic , used to see about five patients a week with stress-related hair loss .
Since mid-June , that number has jumped to 20 or 25 .
Mostly women , ages 20 to 80 , are reporting hair coming out in fistfuls , Khetarpal says .
In Houston @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told fertility specialist Dr. Rashmi Kudesia they 're having irregular menstrual cycles , changes in cervical discharge and breast tenderness , despite normal hormone levels .
Stress is also the culprit dentists are pointing to for the rapid increase in patients with teeth grinding , teeth fractures and temporomandibular joint disorder .
`` We , as humans , like to have the idea that we are in control of our minds and that stress is n't a big deal , '' Love says .
`` But it 's simply not true . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that can affect nearly every organ system .
Although symptoms of chronic stress are often dismissed as being in one 's head , the pain is real , says Kate Harkness , a professor of psychology and psychiatry at Queen 's University in Ontario .
When the body feels unsafe — whether it 's a physical threat of attack or a psychological fear of losing a job or catching a disease — the brain signals adrenal glands to pump stress hormones .
Adrenaline and cortisol flood the body , activating the fight-or-flight response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are n't necessary for immediate survival , such as digestion and reproduction .
When the danger is over , the hormones return to normal levels .
But during chronic stress , such as a pandemic , the body keeps pumping out stress hormones until it tires itself out .
This leads to increased inflammation throughout the body and brain , and a poorly functioning immune system .
Studies link chronic stress to heart disease , muscle tension , gastrointestinal issues and even physical shrinking of the hippocampus , an area of the brain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the immune system acts up , some people can even develop new allergic reactions , Harkness says .
The good news is that many of these symptoms are reversible .
But it 's important to recognize them early , especially when it comes to the brain , says Barbara Sahakian , a professor of clinical neuropsychology at the University of Cambridge .
`` The brain is plastic , so we can to some extent modify it , '' Sahakian says .
`` But we do n't know if there 's a cliff beyond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So the sooner you catch something , the better . ''
In some ways , mental health awareness has increased during the pandemic .
TV shows are flush with ads for therapy and meditation apps , such as Talkspace and Calm , and companies are announcing mental health days off for staff .
But those spurts of attention fail to reveal the full impact of poor mental health on people 's daily lives .
For Alex Kostka , pandemic-related stress has brought on mood swings , nightmares and jaw pain .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coffee bar in New York City for only about a month before the pandemic hit , suddenly anointing him an essential worker .
As deaths in the city soared , Kostka continued riding the subway to work , interacting with co-workers in the store , and working longer hours for just a $ 2-per-hour wage increase .
( Months later , he 'd get a $ 500 bonus . )
It left the 28-year-old feeling constantly unsafe and helpless .
`` It was hard not to break down on the subway the minute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says .
Soon he began waking in the middle of the night with pain from clenching his jaw so tightly .
Often his teeth grinding and chomping were loud enough to wake his girlfriend .
Kostka tried Talkspace , an online therapy program , but found texting about his troubles felt impersonal .
By the end of the summer , he decided to start using the seven free counseling sessions offered by his employer .
That 's helped , he says .
But as the sessions run out , he worries the symptoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find a new therapist covered by his insurance .
`` Eventually , I will be able to leave this behind me , but it will take time , '' Kostka says .
`` I 'm still very much a work in progress . ''
How to fend off chronic stress When it comes to chronic stress , seeing a doctor for stomach pain , headaches or skin rashes may address those physical symptoms .
But the root cause is mental , medical experts say .
`` We should n't think of this stressful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brain , '' says Harkness , the psychology professor in Ontario .
`` Because stress changes the brain , that means positive stuff can change the brain , too .
And there is plenty we can do to help ourselves feel better in the face of adversity . ''
That means the solution will often involve stress-management techniques .
Here are some key evidence-based techniques to try : Exercise .
Even low- to moderate-intensity physical activity can help counteract stress-induced inflammation in the body .
It can also increase neuronal connections in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows this can lead to positive , structural and functional changes in the brain .
Fostering social connections .
Talking to family and friends , even virtually , or staring into a pet 's eyes can release a hormone that may counteract inflammation .
Learning something new .
Whether it 's a formal class or taking up a casual hobby , learning supports brain plasticity , the ability to change and adapt as a result of experience , which can be protective against depression and other mental illness .
KHN ( Kaiser Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covering health issues .
It is an editorially independent program of KFF ( Kaiser Family Foundation ) that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente .

Sleepless Nights, Hair Loss And Cracked Teeth: Pandemic Stress Takes Its Toll
Enlarge this image toggle caption Robin Utrecht/LightRocket via Getty Images Robin Utrecht/LightRocket via Getty Images
In late March, shortly after New York state closed nonessential businesses and asked people to stay home, Ashley Laderer began waking each morning with a throbbing headache.
"The pressure was so intense it felt like my head was going to explode," the 27-year-old freelance writer from Long Island recalls.
She tried spending less time on the computer and taking over-the-counter pain medication, but the pounding kept breaking through — a constant drumbeat to accompany her equally incessant worries about COVID-19.
"Every day I lived in fear that I was going to get it and I was going to infect my whole family," she says.
After a month and a half, Laderer decided to visit a neurologist, who ordered an MRI. But the doctor found no physical cause. The scan was clear.
Then he asked: Are you under a lot of stress?
Throughout the pandemic, people who never had the coronavirus have been reporting a host of seemingly unrelated symptoms: excruciating headaches, episodes of hair loss, upset stomach for weeks on end, sudden outbreaks of shingles and flare-ups of autoimmune disorders. The disparate symptoms, often in otherwise healthy individuals, have puzzled doctors and patients alike, sometimes resulting in a series of visits to specialists with few answers.
But it turns out there's a common thread among many of these conditions, one that has been months in the making: chronic stress.
Although people often underestimate the influence of the mind on the body, a growing catalog of research shows that high levels of stress over an extended period of time can drastically alter physical function and affect nearly every organ system.
Now at least eight months into the pandemic, alongside a divisive election cycle and racial unrest, those effects are showing up in a variety of symptoms.
"The mental health component of COVID is starting to come like a tsunami," says Dr. Jennifer Love, a California-based psychiatrist and co-author of an upcoming book on how to heal from chronic stress.
Nationwide, surveys have found increasing rates of depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts during the pandemic. But many medical experts say it's too soon to measure the related physical symptoms since they generally appear months after the stress begins.
Data from FAIR Health, a nonprofit database that provides cost information to the health industry and consumers, showed increases in the percentage of medical claims related to conditions triggered or exacerbated by stress, such as multiple sclerosis or shingles. The portion of claims for the autoimmune disease lupus, for example, showed one of the biggest increases — 12% this year — compared with the same period last year (January to August).
Express Scripts, a major pharmacy benefit manager, reported that prescriptions for anti-insomnia medications increased 15% early in the pandemic.
Perhaps the strongest indicator comes from doctors reporting a growing number of patients with physical symptoms for which they can't determine a cause.
Shilpi Khetarpal, a dermatologist at the Cleveland Clinic, used to see about five patients a week with stress-related hair loss. Since mid-June, that number has jumped to 20 or 25. Mostly women, ages 20 to 80, are reporting hair coming out in fistfuls, Khetarpal says.
In Houston, at least a dozen patients have told fertility specialist Dr. Rashmi Kudesia they're having irregular menstrual cycles, changes in cervical discharge and breast tenderness, despite normal hormone levels.
Stress is also the culprit dentists are pointing to for the rapid increase in patients with teeth grinding, teeth fractures and temporomandibular joint disorder.
"We, as humans, like to have the idea that we are in control of our minds and that stress isn't a big deal," Love says. "But it's simply not true."
How mental stress becomes physical
Stress causes physical changes in the body that can affect nearly every organ system.
Although symptoms of chronic stress are often dismissed as being in one's head, the pain is real, says Kate Harkness, a professor of psychology and psychiatry at Queen's University in Ontario.
When the body feels unsafe — whether it's a physical threat of attack or a psychological fear of losing a job or catching a disease — the brain signals adrenal glands to pump stress hormones. Adrenaline and cortisol flood the body, activating the fight-or-flight response. They also disrupt bodily functions that aren't necessary for immediate survival, such as digestion and reproduction.
When the danger is over, the hormones return to normal levels. But during chronic stress, such as a pandemic, the body keeps pumping out stress hormones until it tires itself out. This leads to increased inflammation throughout the body and brain, and a poorly functioning immune system.
Studies link chronic stress to heart disease, muscle tension, gastrointestinal issues and even physical shrinking of the hippocampus, an area of the brain associated with memory and learning. As the immune system acts up, some people can even develop new allergic reactions, Harkness says.
The good news is that many of these symptoms are reversible. But it's important to recognize them early, especially when it comes to the brain, says Barbara Sahakian, a professor of clinical neuropsychology at the University of Cambridge.
"The brain is plastic, so we can to some extent modify it," Sahakian says. "But we don't know if there's a cliff beyond which you can't reverse a change. So the sooner you catch something, the better."
The day-to-day impact
In some ways, mental health awareness has increased during the pandemic. TV shows are flush with ads for therapy and meditation apps, such as Talkspace and Calm, and companies are announcing mental health days off for staff.
But those spurts of attention fail to reveal the full impact of poor mental health on people's daily lives.
For Alex Kostka, pandemic-related stress has brought on mood swings, nightmares and jaw pain.
He'd been working at a Whole Foods coffee bar in New York City for only about a month before the pandemic hit, suddenly anointing him an essential worker. As deaths in the city soared, Kostka continued riding the subway to work, interacting with co-workers in the store, and working longer hours for just a $2-per-hour wage increase. (Months later, he'd get a $500 bonus.) It left the 28-year-old feeling constantly unsafe and helpless.
"It was hard not to break down on the subway the minute I got on it," Kostka says.
Soon he began waking in the middle of the night with pain from clenching his jaw so tightly. Often his teeth grinding and chomping were loud enough to wake his girlfriend.
Kostka tried Talkspace, an online therapy program, but found texting about his troubles felt impersonal. By the end of the summer, he decided to start using the seven free counseling sessions offered by his employer. That's helped, he says. But as the sessions run out, he worries the symptoms might return if he's unable to find a new therapist covered by his insurance.
"Eventually, I will be able to leave this behind me, but it will take time," Kostka says. "I'm still very much a work in progress."
How to fend off chronic stress
When it comes to chronic stress, seeing a doctor for stomach pain, headaches or skin rashes may address those physical symptoms. But the root cause is mental, medical experts say.
"We shouldn't think of this stressful situation as a negative sentence for the brain," says Harkness, the psychology professor in Ontario. "Because stress changes the brain, that means positive stuff can change the brain, too. And there is plenty we can do to help ourselves feel better in the face of adversity."
That means the solution will often involve stress-management techniques. Here are some key evidence-based techniques to try:
Exercise. Even low- to moderate-intensity physical activity can help counteract stress-induced inflammation in the body. It can also increase neuronal connections in the brain.
Meditation and mindfulness. Research shows this can lead to positive, structural and functional changes in the brain.
Fostering social connections. Talking to family and friends, even virtually, or staring into a pet's eyes can release a hormone that may counteract inflammation.
Learning something new. Whether it's a formal class or taking up a casual hobby, learning supports brain plasticity, the ability to change and adapt as a result of experience, which can be protective against depression and other mental illness.
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a nonprofit news service covering health issues. It is an editorially independent program of KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation) that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.


npr--2020-10-14--Trump Vs. Biden: How Russia Sees The U.S. Election

Trump Vs. Biden : How Russia Sees The U.S. Election Early this month , President Trump 's national security adviser Robert O'Brien held his first meeting with his Russian counterpart , Nikolai Patrushev .
The two men met in neutral Switzerland as Patrushev , a confidant of Russian President Vladimir Putin , is under sanctions by the United States and the European Union .
`` One of the reasons I went to meet with Gen. Patrushev is to let him know that there would be absolutely no tolerance for any interference with our Election Day , '' O'Brien said after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demanded that Russia not engage in that sort of thing .
The Russians have committed to doing so . ''
Despite Patrushev 's commitment and O'Brien 's apparent acceptance of it , U.S. intelligence agencies say Russia is still trying to interfere .
Last month , FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before Congress that Russia is engaging in `` malign foreign influence '' — including the use of social media and propaganda — that primarily goes after Trump 's Democratic challenger , Joe Biden .
The Kremlin has categorically denied interfering in any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the Kremlin also recognizes that the issue has become an obstacle to improving bilateral relations , even slightly .
A little more than a week after Wray 's testimony , Putin offered the U.S. an agreement that would ban interference in the other country 's electoral processes .
The initiative echoed Putin 's proposal to form a joint cybersecurity unit , which he floated during his 2018 summit with Trump in Finland — and went nowhere .
The Kremlin is sticking to the line that it is in fact the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Three years ago , the Federation Council , the upper house of the parliament , formed a temporary commission on foreign interference in Russia .
`` It 's called 'temporary ' because we hope that the time will come when you wo n't interfere with us , '' Andrei Klimov , the commission 's chairman , tells NPR .
`` If we make the commission permanent , it would mean you 're going to constantly interfere with us .
We still want to believe in the good . ''
Klimov says his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ documentation of U.S. influence efforts .
He claims American foundations connected to the U.S. government work with Russian political activists , and that cyberattacks on Russia originating in the United States are manyfold those in the other direction .
The notion of `` Russian interference '' was a bogeyman , he says , invented during the Obama administration to try to help Hillary Clinton win the White House in 2016 .
In Moscow , the acrimony left over from the last U.S. presidential election is real .
Everything was supposed to be so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the presidency from Barack Obama , promising to improve relations with Russia .
What followed instead were continuing charges of Russian malfeasance by Trump 's own intelligence officials — and bipartisan support in Congress for tightening sanctions .
Now , with about three months left in Trump 's term , U.S.-Russian relations are even more fraught than when he came into office .
The last major arms control treaty between the United States and Russia will expire in February , and negotiations continue to extend it .
On Russian state television 's flagship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Kremlin 's mood , anchor Dmitry Kiselyov used the first presidential debate to criticize America as a whole .
Anyone who watched the contentious debate was left with a `` feeling of disgust , '' Kiselyov said .
`` For decades , America has imposed its way of life on the world as a universal model , '' he said .
`` And now everything has changed so fast . ''
Trump , once celebrated as a friend of Russia , is no longer seen so favorably .
According to a poll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Russians have a positive view of Trump , while 43 % have a negative one .
And 55 % of respondents said they were hearing about Biden for the very first time .
The Kremlin , of course , knows Biden very well .
`` I think the very fact that Biden was Obama 's vice president already makes him not a friendly figure in Russia , '' says Moscow-based political analyst Masha Lipman .
`` Obama looked down on Russia .
In some of his statements , he certainly sounded not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offense on Russia 's part . ''
Even as the Obama administration pursued a `` reset '' in relations with the Kremlin , Biden made disparaging remarks about Russia 's role as a global power , saying in 2009 that it had `` a withering economy '' and was `` clinging to something in the past that was not sustainable . ''
On a visit to Moscow in 2011 , Biden said it would be bad for Russia if Putin ran for a third term — the Russian president is now in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more .
Biden later said that on the same visit he told Putin : `` I 'm looking into your eyes , and I do n't think you have a soul '' — to which Putin , in Biden 's rendering , smiled and replied : `` We understand one another . ''
Three years later , when Russian troops seized Ukrainian territory , Biden became Obama 's point man on Ukraine .
Still , Putin knows Biden could become the next American president .
Asked by a Russian TV reporter last week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be diplomatic .
`` We will work with any future president of the United States , with the person who will have the trust of the American people , '' he said .
`` We know that President Trump has repeatedly spoken in favor of developing Russian-American relations .
We certainly appreciate that very much , '' he said .
He blamed a `` bipartisan consensus on the necessity of containing Russia '' for limiting Trump 's room for maneuver .
At the same time , Putin criticized the Trump administration for signing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty last year .
As for Biden , Putin said the Democratic candidate used `` sharp anti-Russian rhetoric , '' but that the Kremlin was encouraged by Biden 's interest in preserving the New START arms control treaty — originally negotiated by the Obama administration— that expires in February .
Lipman cautions that the prospects for better relations are bleak no matter who wins .
If Biden becomes president , he may consolidate European allies against Moscow , she says , while if Trump is reelected , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy toward Russia .
The only thing that helps the Kremlin , Lipman says , is more polarization and turmoil in the United States .
`` Turmoil means the United States weakened , '' she says .
`` This is what the Kremlin can actually benefit from , not an improvement in relations .
This is the only thing that Russia may hope for . ''

Trump Vs. Biden: How Russia Sees The U.S. Election
Enlarge this image toggle caption Evan Vucci/AP Evan Vucci/AP
Early this month, President Trump's national security adviser Robert O'Brien held his first meeting with his Russian counterpart, Nikolai Patrushev. The two men met in neutral Switzerland as Patrushev, a confidant of Russian President Vladimir Putin, is under sanctions by the United States and the European Union.
"One of the reasons I went to meet with Gen. Patrushev is to let him know that there would be absolutely no tolerance for any interference with our Election Day," O'Brien said after the meeting. He said he "demanded that Russia not engage in that sort of thing. The Russians have committed to doing so."
Despite Patrushev's commitment and O'Brien's apparent acceptance of it, U.S. intelligence agencies say Russia is still trying to interfere.
Last month, FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before Congress that Russia is engaging in "malign foreign influence" — including the use of social media and propaganda — that primarily goes after Trump's Democratic challenger, Joe Biden.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
The Kremlin has categorically denied interfering in any U.S. elections, past or present. But the Kremlin also recognizes that the issue has become an obstacle to improving bilateral relations, even slightly.
A little more than a week after Wray's testimony, Putin offered the U.S. an agreement that would ban interference in the other country's electoral processes. The initiative echoed Putin's proposal to form a joint cybersecurity unit, which he floated during his 2018 summit with Trump in Finland — and went nowhere.
The Kremlin is sticking to the line that it is in fact the United States that tries to interfere in Russian politics. Three years ago, the Federation Council, the upper house of the parliament, formed a temporary commission on foreign interference in Russia.
"It's called 'temporary' because we hope that the time will come when you won't interfere with us," Andrei Klimov, the commission's chairman, tells NPR. "If we make the commission permanent, it would mean you're going to constantly interfere with us. We still want to believe in the good."
Klimov says his commission has accumulated thousands of pages of documentation of U.S. influence efforts. He claims American foundations connected to the U.S. government work with Russian political activists, and that cyberattacks on Russia originating in the United States are manyfold those in the other direction.
The notion of "Russian interference" was a bogeyman, he says, invented during the Obama administration to try to help Hillary Clinton win the White House in 2016.
In Moscow, the acrimony left over from the last U.S. presidential election is real. Everything was supposed to be so different when Donald Trump unexpectedly took over the presidency from Barack Obama, promising to improve relations with Russia. What followed instead were continuing charges of Russian malfeasance by Trump's own intelligence officials — and bipartisan support in Congress for tightening sanctions.
Now, with about three months left in Trump's term, U.S.-Russian relations are even more fraught than when he came into office. The last major arms control treaty between the United States and Russia will expire in February, and negotiations continue to extend it.
On Russian state television's flagship weekly news show, a barometer of the Kremlin's mood, anchor Dmitry Kiselyov used the first presidential debate to criticize America as a whole.
Anyone who watched the contentious debate was left with a "feeling of disgust," Kiselyov said.
"For decades, America has imposed its way of life on the world as a universal model," he said. "And now everything has changed so fast."
Trump, once celebrated as a friend of Russia, is no longer seen so favorably. According to a poll published in September, only 23% of Russians have a positive view of Trump, while 43% have a negative one. And 55% of respondents said they were hearing about Biden for the very first time.
The Kremlin, of course, knows Biden very well.
"I think the very fact that Biden was Obama's vice president already makes him not a friendly figure in Russia," says Moscow-based political analyst Masha Lipman. "Obama looked down on Russia. In some of his statements, he certainly sounded not respectful. This caused this sense of offense on Russia's part."
Even as the Obama administration pursued a "reset" in relations with the Kremlin, Biden made disparaging remarks about Russia's role as a global power, saying in 2009 that it had "a withering economy" and was "clinging to something in the past that was not sustainable."
On a visit to Moscow in 2011, Biden said it would be bad for Russia if Putin ran for a third term — the Russian president is now in his fourth term and looking ahead to two more.
Biden later said that on the same visit he told Putin: "I'm looking into your eyes, and I don't think you have a soul" — to which Putin, in Biden's rendering, smiled and replied: "We understand one another."
Three years later, when Russian troops seized Ukrainian territory, Biden became Obama's point man on Ukraine.
Still, Putin knows Biden could become the next American president. Asked by a Russian TV reporter last week about his preferences, Putin tried to be diplomatic.
"We will work with any future president of the United States, with the person who will have the trust of the American people," he said.
"We know that President Trump has repeatedly spoken in favor of developing Russian-American relations. We certainly appreciate that very much," he said. He blamed a "bipartisan consensus on the necessity of containing Russia" for limiting Trump's room for maneuver.
At the same time, Putin criticized the Trump administration for signing off on new sanctions and for withdrawing from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty last year.
As for Biden, Putin said the Democratic candidate used "sharp anti-Russian rhetoric," but that the Kremlin was encouraged by Biden's interest in preserving the New START arms control treaty — originally negotiated by the Obama administration— that expires in February.
Lipman cautions that the prospects for better relations are bleak no matter who wins. If Biden becomes president, he may consolidate European allies against Moscow, she says, while if Trump is reelected, his political opponents may pursue an even harsher policy toward Russia.
The only thing that helps the Kremlin, Lipman says, is more polarization and turmoil in the United States.
"Turmoil means the United States weakened," she says. "This is what the Kremlin can actually benefit from, not an improvement in relations. This is the only thing that Russia may hope for."


npr--2020-10-15--Outside Witnesses Testifying In Final Day Of Amy Coney Barrett's Confirmation Hearing

Outside Witnesses Testifying In Final Day Of Amy Coney Barrett 's Confirmation Hearing This is scheduled to be the last day of Judge Amy Coney Barrett 's Senate confirmation hearings , and after two days of questioning Barrett , senators will turn to character witnesses and those who are concerned about her likely elevation to the Supreme Court .
Barrett will not be present .
Republicans will be calling on Amanda Rauh-Bieri , a former law clerk for Barrett on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals , and Laura Wolk , the first blind woman to clerk on the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett her mentor .
They 'll also hear from former appeals court Judge Thomas Griffith , whose retirement earlier this year caused a controversy when a liberal group alleged he stepped down from the bench to allow President Trump to appoint a replacement before the election .
Democrats have invited several advocates to speak .
They include Stacy Staggs , the mother of 7-year old twins , who according to a statement released by ranking Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein , D-Calif , `` will discuss the devastating effects on her family if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act ; '' and Crystal Good , who `` fought for her right to obtain an abortion at age 16 .
Crystal will speak about the importance of reproductive rights and justice . ''
The Judiciary committee is expected to vote Oct. 22 on Barrett 's nomination , as Republicans press to confirm her in the full Senate before the Nov. 3 presidential election .
`` You will be confirmed , God willing , '' Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , told Barrett at the close of Wednesday 's hearing @

Outside Witnesses Testifying In Final Day Of Amy Coney Barrett's Confirmation Hearing
Enlarge this image toggle caption Jose Luis Magana/AP Jose Luis Magana/AP
This is scheduled to be the last day of Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Senate confirmation hearings, and after two days of questioning Barrett, senators will turn to character witnesses and those who are concerned about her likely elevation to the Supreme Court.
Barrett will not be present.
Republicans will call on Amanda Rauh-Bieri, a former law clerk for Barrett on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Laura Wolk, the first blind woman to clerk on the U.S. Supreme Court and who has called Barrett her mentor.
They'll also hear from former appeals court Judge Thomas Griffith, whose retirement this year caused a controversy when a liberal group alleged that he stepped down from the bench to allow President Trump to appoint a replacement before the election.
Democrats have invited several advocates to speak. Stacy Staggs, a mother of 7-year-old twins, is one of them. According to a statement released by ranking Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, Staggs "will discuss the devastating effects on her family if the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Care Act." Democrats also invited Crystal Good, who "fought for her right to obtain an abortion at age 16. Crystal will speak about the importance of reproductive rights and justice."
The Judiciary Committee is expected to vote Oct. 22 on Barrett's nomination, as Republicans press to confirm her in the full Senate before the Nov. 3 presidential election.
"You will be confirmed, God willing," Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Barrett at the close of Wednesday's hearing.


npr--2020-10-15--WATCH LIVE: Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court Confirmation Hearing

The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding its fourth and final day of hearings on Thursday on President Trump 's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court .
If confirmed , Barrett , 48 , would replace the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the high court .
You can watch the hearing here beginning at 9 a.m .
ET .
Barrett herself will not be at Thursday 's hearing ; the day is set aside for outside witnesses for and against Barrett .
The nominee faced hours of questioning over two days by the committee this week .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ lightning rod as Democrats charge that Republicans are rushing it to get Barrett confirmed before the Nov. 3 election .
Democrats say the seat should be filled by the next president .
It 's also unclear how the coronavirus pandemic will affect the hearings .
Two GOP members of the panel , Sens .
Mike Lee of Utah and Thom Tillis of North Carolina , have tested positive for the virus .
Democrats , led by Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont , had demanded that the hearing be postponed `` to ensure that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety of fellow senators , Senate staff , other Senate employees , as well as Judge Barrett and her family . ''
But committee chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , vowed to press forward and tweeted , `` Any Senator who wants to participate virtually will be allowed to do so . ''
Lee attended in person on Monday .
All members who wish to vote on Barrett 's nomination will have to be present , however , when it comes time .
The committee is expected to vote on Oct. 22 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This post was originally published on Monday at 8 a.m .
ET .

Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court Confirmation Hearing
Enlarge this image toggle caption J. Scott Applewhite/AP J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Updated at 2:33 p.m. ET
The Senate Judiciary Committee held its fourth and final day of hearings on Thursday on President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If confirmed, Barrett, 48, would replace the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the high court.
Barrett herself did not attend Thursday's hearing; the day was set aside for outside witnesses. The nominee faced hours of questioning over two days by the committee earlier this week. Read through the hearing highlights here.
Barrett's nomination has become a political lightning rod as Democrats charge that Republicans are rushing it to get Barrett confirmed before the Nov. 3 election. Democrats say the seat should be filled by the next president.
The coronavirus pandemic also played a part in the division over the hearings. Two GOP members of the panel, Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, tested positive for the virus but were later cleared by their doctors to participate in person.
Democrats, led by Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, had demanded that the hearing be postponed "to ensure that we don't risk the health and safety of fellow senators, Senate staff, other Senate employees, as well as Judge Barrett and her family."
But committee chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., vowed to press forward and tweeted, "Any Senator who wants to participate virtually will be allowed to do so."
All members who wish to vote on Barrett's nomination will have to be present, however, when it comes time. The committee is set to vote on Oct. 22, followed by a full Senate vote.
This post was originally published on Monday at 8 a.m. ET.


npr--2020-10-15--Coronavirus World Map: Tracking The Spread Of The Outbreak

Coronavirus World Map : Tracking The Spread Of The Outbreak On Sept. 28 , the world marked a tragic milestone : 1 million deaths from COVID-19 .
That 's according to a tally maintained by Johns Hopkins University .
And public health experts believe the actual toll – the recorded deaths plus the unrecorded deaths – is much higher .
While the number of cases has slowed in many countries that were hit hard early on by coronavirus , the number of new cases continues to increase .
Since early July , new daily cases averaged over 200,000 worldwide .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ country-by-country breakdown of new and total cases since January .
At over 7 million cases , the United States leads the world 's COVID-19 crisis .
In late spring and early summer , new COVID-19 cases were largely driven by cases in the Americas .
While the U.S. has consistently had the most new daily cases of coronavirus in the region , Brazil 's new daily cases increased rapidly between May and August .
However , in September , several countries that had previously flattened their curve saw a resurgence in cases , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , daily case counts have risen swiftly since June , without signs of slowing down .
Explore how the number of coronavirus cases have shifted in different parts of the world over time .
The first chart compares each continent to each other , while the next charts highlight the number of cases in select countries by region .
To compare country outbreaks , the chart below graphs trend lines for average new daily cases and deaths against each country 's totals to date .
This type of visualization highlights a state 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overall size of its outbreak .
When both new and total case and death counts grow quickly , the curves bend upward .
As new cases and deaths slow , the curves level or bend down .
In countries like Israel , which is seeing a second wave of case growth after an initial wave in April , the line forms a V-shape , as the initially bent curve spikes upwards again .
Click here to see the state-by-state breakdown of cases in the United States .
This story was originally published on @ @ @ @ @

Coronavirus world map: We've now passed the 600 million mark for infections
Editor's note: This page is no longer being updated. The last update was Sept. 5, 2022. For current data about COVID-19 cases and deaths around the world, Johns Hopkins University and Our World in Data are useful resources.
In late January 2020 only a few dozen COVID-19 infections had been identified outside of China. A year later, the world tallied its first 100 million cases. It took the globe just 7 more months to pass the 200 million mark— then another 5 months to hit 300 million, according to researchers at Johns Hopkins University. Now the virus has spread to every corner of the globe and has been blamed for more than 6 million deaths.
The United States, India and Brazil in that order have had the most COVID cases and the three nations collectively account for almost half of all recorded infections so far in the pandemic.
Explore the chart below to find a country-by-country breakdown of new and total cases since January 2020.
Loading...
Loading...
Explore how the number of coronavirus cases have shifted in different parts of the world over time. The first chart compares each continent to each other, while the next charts highlight the number of cases in select countries by region.
Loading...
Loading...
This story was originally published on March 30, 2020.


npr--2020-10-15--Coronavirus Maps: How Severe Is Your State's Outbreak?

Coronavirus Maps : How Severe Is Your State 's Outbreak ?
More than 7 million people in the U.S. have been infected with the coronavirus and more than 210,000 have died .
Tens of thousands of new cases are reported daily nationwide .
In the graphics below , explore the trends in your state .
View the data via a heat map ( immediately below ) , curve charts , a table of state-by-state trends over four weeks , or a map of total cases and deaths .
The map above shows the risk of infection in each state based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These color-coded risk levels were developed by a consortium of researchers and public health experts .
The group advises states in the red category to issue stay-home orders .
Orange states may need to consider stay-home orders , along with increased testing and contact tracing .
Yellow states need to keep up social distancing and mask usage , and both yellow and green states should continue testing and contact tracing .
To compare state outbreaks , the chart above graphs trend lines for average new daily cases and deaths against each state 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visualization highlights a state 's daily growth or decline relative to the overall size of its outbreak .
When both new and total case and death counts grow quickly , the curves bend upward .
As new cases and deaths slow , the curves level or bend down .
In New York , the curve rose sharply before reaching over 170,000 total cases in April .
Since then , new cases have fallen from about 10,000 per day in mid-April to under 800 per day in late September .
Explore the map above @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the country for both new confirmed cases and reported deaths from COVID-19 .
New York was the original epicenter of the pandemic in the U.S. As of mid August , California , Florida and Texas have surpassed New York for total cases to date , though New York still has the highest death total .
Click here to see a global map of confirmed cases and deaths .
To show trends , the table below shows the change in average new cases per day in each state , week over week for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in shades of red have growing outbreaks ; those in shades of green , are declining .
The graphics on this page pull from data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University from several sources , including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ; the World Health Organization ; national , state and local government health departments ; 1point3acres ; and local media reports .
The JHU team automates its data uploads and regularly checks them for anomalies .
This may result in occasional data discrepancies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resolves anomalies and updates its feeds .
State-by-state recovery data are unavailable at this time .
There may be discrepancies between what you see here and what you see on your local health department 's website .
Figures shown do not include cases on cruise ships .
Fluctuations in the numbers may happen as health authorities review old cases and or update their methodologies .
For example , in early June , Michigan health authorities started including probable cases in its totals .
This resulted in a brief spike in the state 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to reconcile the historical data .
On June 25 , New Jersey included 1,854 previously-unreported probable deaths in its totals , resulting in a spike in the state 's daily death numbers .
On Sept. 2 , Massachusetts changed its methodology for counting probable cases , which lowered its overall case and death numbers .
The JHU team maintains a list of such changes .
This story was originally published on March 16 , 2020 .
Elena Renken was a co-author on that version .
Sean McMinn contributed to and Carmel Wroth @ @ @ @

Tracking the coronavirus around the U.S.: See how your state is doing
Loading...
Note: This page was last updated on Feb. 1, 2023. It will no longer be updated. For current data on COVID cases and deaths, demographics, and hospitalizations, consult the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
As of Feb. 1, there have been more than 101 million confirmed coronavirus infections in the U.S. and more than 1 million people have died of COVID-19. In the graphics below, explore the trends in your state.
Loading...
The above charts show average new cases per 100,000 people for each state over the last 12 months.
Note: Actual cases may be substantially higher, since many who test positive with at-home tests don't report their cases.
For additional data about COVID-19 in the U.S, including cases and deaths, demographics, and hospitalizations, consult the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website.
To show trends, the table below shows the change in average new cases per day in each state, week over week for the last 28 days. States marked in shades of red have growing outbreaks; those in shades of green, are declining.
Loading...
Methodology
The graphics on this page pull from data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University from several sources, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the World Health Organization; national, state and local government health departments; 1point3acres; and local media reports.
The JHU team automates its data uploads and regularly checks them for anomalies. This may result in occasional data discrepancies on this page as the JHU team resolves anomalies and updates its feeds. There may be discrepancies between what you see here and what you see on your local health department's website. Figures shown do not include cases on cruise ships.
Fluctuations in the numbers may happen as health authorities review old cases, process testing backlogs or update their methodologies. The JHU team maintains a list of such changes.
This story was originally published on March 16, 2020. Elena Renken was a co-author on that version. Sean McMinn and Audrey Carlsen contributed to this story. Carmel Wroth edited this story.


npr--2020-10-15--House Democrats' Campaign Committee Launches Blitz Targeting Black Voters

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is launching a seven-figure advertising investment aimed at mobilizing Black voters — with a particular eye toward Black men — across nearly a dozen states , a strategic move by House Democrats ' campaign committee to further energize the key demographic as the election season heads into its final weeks .
The advertisements — a mix of radio , print , digital and mail — are being deployed across targeted congressional districts in Arkansas , Georgia , North Carolina , Ohio , Oklahoma , South Carolina , Texas and Virginia .
The investment , shared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaigns of both President Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden have focused intently on Black male voters , who were a sizeable part of the difference between the record-setting levels of Black turnout that former President Obama won in 2008 and 2012 , compared with the performance of Hillary Clinton in 2016 .
According to the Pew Research Center , 64 % of eligible Black women and 54 % of eligible Black men voted in 2016 .
Cornell Belcher , who was a pollster for President Obama and has worked with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` dramatic '' drop-off among Black men from 2012 to 2016 .
But Belcher said that presents Democrats with an opportunity to reconnect and reengage .
`` If [ Black men are ] sitting on the sidelines thinking that their vote does n't matter , they do n't have the power to make a difference , they 're going to stay on the sidelines , '' said Belcher .
`` What we unpacked in the DCCC 's research , and you can see it in the DCCC 's messaging right now is giving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can in fact bring about change and then connecting that change , that power to an affirmative vote for Democrats . ''
This year , Democrats have explicitly and repeatedly urged Americans to channel their frustrations at a convergence of crises — the coronavirus pandemic which has killed more than 200,000 , the economic downturn , and the unrest surrounding race and justice — into voting .
The new ads seek to portray what Democrats have to offer to Black voters , some of whom may be lukewarm about the Democratic Party or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 've raised our voices .
We 've marched for justice .
We 've come so far .
But to make this moment count , our power must be felt .
And our votes are that power , '' a Black male narrator says in a radio ad that is part of .
He later notes that while Congressional Democrats are `` ready to pass our agenda , '' Republicans `` are blocking it '' and `` even trying to block our votes . ''
One of the print ads makes direct references to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the hands of police , noting that `` his tragic death finally woke up the country . ''
`` What we do now is up to us , '' the ad states .
In the accompanying imagery , a Black man cradles a young girl in his arms .
`` This cycle , we began communicating with Black voters earlier than ever before and this added investment is a critical part of our closing argument that House Democrats are here to fight with and advocate on issues important to Black Americans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Democrats ' campaign chief , said in a statement .
Aides to President Trump 's campaign have suggested in recent days that the president has increased his support among Black voters since 2016 , and that that support is a key part of Trump 's path to a second term — and one that could foreclose the nomination for Biden .
On the campaign trail , Trump has made explicit appeals to Black voters , especially Black men .
He routinely touts low unemployment rates among Black people before the pandemic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for granted .
Belcher and other pollsters and analysts who have done research on Black voters say that they believe Biden will win an overwhelming majority of Black voters .
`` Democrats are in fact doing what they need to do here , that is not take this vote for granted but actually treat this vote as a persuasion target that they have to make a persuasive case for their support , '' Belcher said .

House Democrats' Campaign Committee Launches Blitz Targeting Black Voters
Enlarge this image Russ Bynum/AP Russ Bynum/AP
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is launching a seven-figure advertising investment aimed at mobilizing Black voters — with a particular eye toward Black men — across nearly a dozen states, a strategic move by House Democrats' campaign committee to further energize the key demographic as the election season heads into its final weeks.
The advertisements — a mix of radio, print, digital and mail — are being deployed across targeted congressional districts in Arkansas, Georgia, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
The investment, shared first with NPR, comes as the campaigns of both President Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden have focused intently on Black male voters, who were a sizeable part of the difference between the record-setting levels of Black turnout that former President Barack Obama won in 2008 and 2012, compared with the performance of Hillary Clinton in 2016.
According to the Pew Research Center, 64% of eligible Black women and 54% of eligible Black men voted in 2016.
Cornell Belcher, who was a pollster for Obama and has worked with the DCCC, said that there was a "dramatic" drop-off among Black men from 2012 to 2016. But Belcher said that presents Democrats with an opportunity to reconnect and reengage.
"If [Black men are] sitting on the sidelines thinking that their vote doesn't matter, they don't have the power to make a difference, they're going to stay on the sidelines," said Belcher. "What we unpacked in the DCCC's research, and you can see it in the DCCC's messaging right now is giving them a sense of power that they can in fact bring about change and then connecting that change, that power to an affirmative vote for Democrats."
This year, Democrats have explicitly and repeatedly urged Americans to channel their frustrations at a convergence of crises — the coronavirus pandemic which has killed more than 200,000, the economic downturn and the unrest surrounding race and justice — into voting. The new ads seek to portray what Democrats have to offer to Black voters, some of whom may be lukewarm about the Democratic Party or candidates on the ballot.
"We've raised our voices. We've marched for justice. We've come so far. But to make this moment count, our power must be felt. And our votes are that power," a Black male narrator says in a radio ad. He later notes that while congressional Democrats are "ready to pass our agenda," Republicans "are blocking it" and "even trying to block our votes."
One of the print ads makes direct references to the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis at the hands of police, noting that "his tragic death finally woke up the country."
"What we do now is up to us," the ad states. In the accompanying imagery, a Black man cradles a young girl in his arms.
"This cycle, we began communicating with Black voters earlier than ever before and this added investment is a critical part of our closing argument that House Democrats are here to fight with and advocate on issues important to Black Americans," Rep. Cheri Bustos, who is House Democrats' campaign chief, said in a statement.
Aides to Trump's campaign have suggested in recent days that the president has increased his support among Black voters since 2016, and that that support is a key part of Trump's path to a second term — and one that could foreclose the nomination for Biden. On the campaign trail, Trump has made explicit appeals to Black voters, especially Black men. He routinely touts low unemployment rates among Black people before the pandemic, and says the Democratic Party takes them for granted.
Belcher and other pollsters and analysts who have done research on Black voters say that they believe Biden will win an overwhelming majority of Black voters.
"Democrats are in fact doing what they need to do here, that is not take this vote for granted but actually treat this vote as a persuasion target that they have to make a persuasive case for their support," Belcher said.


npr--2020-10-15--Takeaways From Amy Coney Barrett's Judiciary Confirmation Hearings

Amy Coney Barrett , President Trump 's nominee to the Supreme Court , sat for nearly 20 hours of questioning by 22 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee over two days .
At the outset of the process , Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham acknowledged that her confirmation by the panel was all but guaranteed .
`` This is probably not about persuading each other unless something really dramatic happens .
All Republicans will vote yes and all Democrats will vote no and that will be the way the breakout of the vote , '' Graham said .
But he added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chance to `` find out about Judge Barrett . ''
The hearings revealed little about Barrett 's views on major legal issues like health care , abortion rights , voting rights or gun rights .
Instead , those watching learned about her overarching approach to the law as an originalist who believes the role of a justice is to adhere to the text of statutes rather than interpret or make policy from the bench .
She skillfully parried back and forth with Democrats who were frustrated she would n't be pinned down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — even as many warned that her addition to the court could adversely affect millions of Americans .
At one point , Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn asked her to show what notes she was using to prep for answers and she held up a blank notepad , demonstrating that she was capable of talking for hours on end about a broad range of legal issues without any notes .
With a nationally televised audience and wall-to-wall news coverage , members on both sides of the dais used their time to make political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the proceedings .
Several GOP senators , including Graham , are in increasingly tight reelection bids , and the prospects for Democrats to retake control of the chamber increased , even over the course of the hearings .
The incentive to wrap up the confirmation review and get the Barrett vote to the Senate floor before Nov. 3 was palpable , as two GOP members of the panel who had tested positive for the coronavirus after attending an event unveiling Barrett 's nomination released letters clearing them to participate in person without posing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declined to answer many questions , citing precedent of earlier nominees Nominees for the high court in modern times have deliberately avoided directly responding to questions .
They point out that judicial ethics rules require that judges should not weigh in on any issue that could come before them .
Barrett cited the woman whose seat she would take — the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg — who established what became known as `` Ginsburg rule . ''
At several points Barrett reiterated that this meant `` no hints , no previews , no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surprisingly , not satisfied with that response , or Barrett 's stream of non-answers on a range of issues .
They said that President Trump publicly vowed to appoint judges who would overturn Obamacare and that recently he pushed for speedy confirmation of his nominee to the high court in the event that the 2020 election results ended up before the court .
GOP senators argued that they were making leaps and suggesting some kind of backroom deal .
`` Read the tweets ! ''
Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin said about the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett also refused to say whether she believed climate change was a threat , or whether the administration 's policy on separating children from their parents at the southwest border was appropriate , saying she would not opine on contentious public policy issues .
As soon as Barrett was nominated , the president and others portrayed her as a female version of her mentor , the late Justice Antonin Scalia , for whom she clerked .
Democrats reminded the audience of that , but Barrett made a point of downplaying the comparison and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` If I were confirmed , you 'd be getting Justice Barrett , not Justice Scalia , '' she said .
The Supreme Court is slated to hear a case involving the Affordable Care Act just a week after the November election .
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden 's strategy over the past several months has been to run against the president 's handling of the coronavirus pandemic and to tie that to his pledge to undo Obamacare .
For the most part , Democrats tried to turn the hearings into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ During their opening statements , many sat next to large posters of constituents who they said were struggling with severe health issues and worried about their coverage .
They argued that Barrett 's writings and selection by the president could mean she would be a vote on the court to dismantle the law .
Over and over Barrett said she had no agenda and that she never made any deal or discussed the issue with the president before her nomination .
She was pressed multiple times by Democrats about a January 2017 law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice John Roberts ' reasoning for upholding the law in a key decision .
But she maintained , `` I 'm not here on a mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act . ''
The pending case has to do with the issue of `` severability , '' whether a key provision of the law — the individual mandate requiring insurance — is legally sound , and whether pulling it out would undermine the entire law .
GOP briefs filed by the administration argue for invalidating the statute .
But Barrett , under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always in favor of severability . ''
Pressed by Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar about her writings , Barrett insisted there was no deliberate pitch to show she was open to GOP attempts to legally take down the law that they have been unable to do with legislation .
`` I have no animus or agenda for the Affordable Care Act . ''
But Durbin again reminded those watching that the president who appointed her was clear on the issue and that was the `` orange cloud '' over her nomination .
The issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Supreme Court confirmation hearings .
Democrats repeatedly attempted to pin Barrett down on whether she viewed the landmark case providing protections for women who elect to have abortions , Roe v. Wade , as settled law , but she sidestepped the issue .
She maintained that if she signaled one way or another it would invite litigants to frame legal strategies around her comments .
But in an exchange with Klobuchar , Barrett stated that she viewed a half a dozen cases as `` super-precedents '' — cases that could not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She pointed to a case outlawing school segregation but did not include Roe in that group , explaining that there continues to be litigation on the issue .
`` Roe is not a super-precedent because calls for its overruling have never ceased , but that does n't mean that Roe should be overruled . ''
That led Klobuchar and other Democrats to conclude that she was open to considering a challenge to abortion laws .
Klobuchar lamented that without answers one was left to `` follow the tracks '' based on Barrett 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks away and concerns about close contests or legal challenges , Barrett was asked if she would recuse herself if such a case came before the high court .
She assured the committee she would go through the traditional process justices use to determine whether it 's appropriate for them to rule on a case .
But she also pushed back at the notion that she was being rushed onto the court to tip the scales .
`` I certainly hope that all members of the committee have more confidence in my integrity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be used as a pawn to decide this election for the American people . ''
Democrats also tried to get her to explain what should happen if the president fails to accept a ruling .
Barrett said no person was above the law , but also said `` the Supreme Court ca n't control whether or not the president obeys . ''
Barrett also said she ca n't answer a question about whether the president has an absolute right to pardon himself because it has n't been tested in court and is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
GOP senators chided Democrats for playing politics with the hearing .
One after another they praised Barrett 's ability to balance a large family with seven children and a successful legal career .
Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst , one of two female Republicans on the committee , touted the historic moment of adding a woman to the court in the same year women are marking 100 years of getting the right to vote .
Republicans also went into the hearings spoiling for a fight with Democrats over Barrett 's religious views , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett 's 2017 confirmation hearing for her current circuit court post , the top Democrat on the panel , Sen. Dianne Feinstein , remarked about Barrett 's Catholic faith : `` The dogma lives loudly within you . ''
Republicans accused Democrats of an anti-religious bias and some used their opening statements to chastise any who would suggest that Barrett 's religious views would interfere with her job as a judge .
Ernst told Barrett that opponents were `` attacking your faith and your precious family ... attacking you as a mom and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats , disciplined on keeping the focus on health care , largely steered clear of raising the issue .
Some outside liberal groups did contend that some conservative tenets of Catholicism would have an impact on cases .
But when Democrats raised questions about contraception or abortion , they worked to keep the questioning lines to writings or speeches by Barrett , not any commentary on her faith .
Still , Republicans periodically argued that the Democrats ' line of questioning was unfair or condescending toward the accomplished jurist .
Tennessee Republican Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearings to `` spread some fear and misinformation '' about health care .
She complained that they were trying to paint Barrett as `` a monster with an agenda . ''
Technical issues periodically interrupted the hearings and the coronavirus pandemic made some senators decide to participate remotely .
But the hearings overall were far more civil than the raucous and testy exchanges witnessed during the committee 's consideration of Brett Kavanaugh 's nomination in 2018 .
Graham admitted he was worried , given the unpredictable nature of 2020 , that things could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period he concluded that while the hearings did n't change anyone 's minds , they showed that the committee could function .
He also said that Kavanaugh 's confirmation forever changed the ability to garner large bipartisan votes on nominees to the high court .
`` In another time , in another place , you would get everybody 's vote , '' Graham told Barrett .
Barrett 's ability to maneuver through complicated legal questions and not raise any vetting issues ensured that the process would move forward at a quick pace , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be happening at all when 40 states are already voting in the presidential election .
Graham celebrated Barrett 's place in history on Wednesday , saying , `` This is the first time in American history that we 've nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology , and she is going to the court . ''
The committee will hear from an outside panel of supporters and opponents of Barrett 's nomination on Thursday but is expected to approve her nomination on a party line on Oct. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , R-Ky. , is expected to move for a full Senate vote the week before the election .

Takeaways From Amy Coney Barrett's Judiciary Confirmation Hearings
Enlarge this image toggle caption Susan Walsh/AP Susan Walsh/AP
Updated at 11:30 a.m. ET
Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court, sat for nearly 20 hours of questioning by 22 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee over two days. At the outset of the process, Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham acknowledged that her confirmation by the panel was all but guaranteed.
"This is probably not about persuading each other unless something really dramatic happens. All Republicans will vote yes and all Democrats will vote no and that will be the way the breakout of the vote," Graham said. But he added that the hearings give the American people the chance to "find out about Judge Barrett."
On Thursday, the panel, along party lines, set Oct. 22 as the date for its vote on Barrett's nomination. The full Senate will vote after that.
The hearings revealed little about Barrett's views on major legal issues like health care, abortion rights, voting rights or gun rights. Instead, those watching learned about her overarching approach to the law as an originalist who believes the role of a justice is to adhere to the text of statutes rather than interpret or make policy from the bench.
She skillfully parried back and forth with Democrats who were frustrated she wouldn't be pinned down and kept a cool, calm demeanor — even as many warned that her addition to the court could adversely affect millions of Americans.
At one point, Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn asked her to show what notes she was using to prep for answers and she held up a blank notepad, demonstrating that she was capable of talking for hours on end about a broad range of legal issues without any notes.
With a nationally televised audience and wall-to-wall news coverage, members on both sides of the dais used their time to make political arguments. The election loomed large over the proceedings. Several GOP senators, including Graham, are in increasingly tight reelection bids, and the prospects for Democrats to retake control of the chamber increased, even over the course of the hearings.
The incentive to wrap up the confirmation review and get the Barrett vote to the Senate floor before Nov. 3 was palpable, as two GOP members of the panel who had tested positive for the coronavirus after attending an event unveiling Barrett's nomination released letters clearing them to participate in person without posing any health risks to others.
Barrett declined to answer many questions, citing precedent of earlier nominees
Nominees for the high court in modern times have deliberately avoided directly responding to questions. They point out that judicial ethics rules require that judges should not weigh in on any issue that could come before them.
Barrett cited the woman whose seat she would take — the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg — who established what became known as "Ginsburg rule." At several points Barrett reiterated that this meant "no hints, no previews, no forecasts."
Democrats were, not surprisingly, not satisfied with that response, or Barrett's stream of non-answers on a range of issues. They said that President Trump publicly vowed to appoint judges who would overturn Obamacare and that recently he pushed for speedy confirmation of his nominee to the high court in the event that the 2020 election results ended up before the court. GOP senators argued that they were making leaps and suggesting some kind of backroom deal.
"Read the tweets!" Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin said about the president's regular statements on these issues.
Barrett also refused to say whether she believed climate change was a threat, or whether the administration's policy on separating children from their parents at the southwest border was appropriate, saying she would not opine on contentious public policy issues.
As soon as Barrett was nominated, the president and others portrayed her as a female version of her mentor, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, for whom she clerked. Democrats reminded the audience of that, but Barrett made a point of downplaying the comparison and insisting she would chart her own path.
"If I were confirmed, you'd be getting Justice Barrett, not Justice Scalia," she said.
Democrats zeroed in on health care
Enlarge this image toggle caption Tyrone Turner/WAMU Tyrone Turner/WAMU
The Supreme Court is slated to hear a case involving the Affordable Care Act just a week after the November election. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's strategy over the past several months has been to run against the president's handling of the coronavirus pandemic and to tie that to his pledge to undo Obamacare.
For the most part, Democrats tried to turn the hearings into a forum on the health care law. During their opening statements, many sat next to large posters of constituents who they said were struggling with severe health issues and worried about their coverage. They argued that Barrett's writings and selection by the president could mean she would be a vote on the court to dismantle the law.
Over and over Barrett said she had no agenda and that she never made any deal or discussed the issue with the president before her nomination.
She was pressed multiple times by Democrats about a January 2017 law journal article in which she critiqued Chief Justice John Roberts' reasoning for upholding the law in a key decision.
But she maintained, "I'm not here on a mission to destroy the Affordable Care Act."
The pending case has to do with the issue of "severability," whether a key provision of the law — the individual mandate requiring insurance — is legally sound, and whether pulling it out would undermine the entire law. GOP briefs filed by the administration argue for invalidating the statute. But Barrett, under questioning, said the presumption "is always in favor of severability."
Pressed by Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar about her writings, Barrett insisted there was no deliberate pitch to show she was open to GOP attempts to legally take down the law that they have been unable to do with legislation. "I have no animus or agenda for the Affordable Care Act."
But Durbin again reminded those watching that the president who appointed her was clear on the issue and that was the "orange cloud" over her nomination.
Abortion and debate over "super-precedents"
The issue of abortion rights is always a flashpoint in Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Democrats repeatedly attempted to pin Barrett down on whether she viewed the landmark case providing protections for women who elect to have abortions, Roe v. Wade, as settled law, but she sidestepped the issue. She maintained that if she signaled one way or another it would invite litigants to frame legal strategies around her comments.
But in an exchange with Klobuchar, Barrett stated that she viewed a half a dozen cases as "super-precedents" — cases that could not be overturned because they are established law.
She pointed to a case outlawing school segregation but did not include Roe in that group, explaining that there continues to be litigation on the issue.
"Roe is not a super-precedent because calls for its overruling have never ceased, but that doesn't mean that Roe should be overruled." That led Klobuchar and other Democrats to conclude that she was open to considering a challenge to abortion laws. Klobuchar lamented that without answers one was left to "follow the tracks" based on Barrett's writings.
Election results disputes and presidential pardons
With the presidential election mere weeks away and concerns about close contests or legal challenges, Barrett was asked if she would recuse herself if such a case came before the high court. She assured the committee she would go through the traditional process justices use to determine whether it's appropriate for them to rule on a case.
But she also pushed back at the notion that she was being rushed onto the court to tip the scales. "I certainly hope that all members of the committee have more confidence in my integrity than to think I would allow myself to be used as a pawn to decide this election for the American people."
Democrats also tried to get her to explain what should happen if the president fails to accept a ruling. Barrett said no person was above the law, but also said "the Supreme Court can't control whether or not the president obeys."
Barrett also said she can't answer a question about whether the president has an absolute right to pardon himself because it hasn't been tested in court and is a question that calls for legal analysis.
Republicans defended Barrett, argued judges are not policymakers
GOP senators chided Democrats for playing politics with the hearing. One after another they praised Barrett's ability to balance a large family with seven children and a successful legal career.
Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst, one of two female Republicans on the committee, touted the historic moment of adding a woman to the court in the same year women are marking 100 years of getting the right to vote.
Republicans also went into the hearings spoiling for a fight with Democrats over Barrett's religious views, but that didn't materialize.
During Barrett's 2017 confirmation hearing for her current circuit court post, the top Democrat on the panel, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, remarked about Barrett's Catholic faith: "The dogma lives loudly within you." Republicans accused Democrats of an anti-religious bias and some used their opening statements to chastise any who would suggest that Barrett's religious views would interfere with her job as a judge.
Ernst told Barrett that opponents were "attacking your faith and your precious family ... attacking you as a mom and a woman of faith." But Democrats, disciplined on keeping the focus on health care, largely steered clear of raising the issue. Some outside liberal groups did contend that some conservative tenets of Catholicism would have an impact on cases. But when Democrats raised questions about contraception or abortion, they worked to keep the questioning lines to writings or speeches by Barrett, not any commentary on her faith.
Still, Republicans periodically argued that the Democrats' line of questioning was unfair or condescending toward the accomplished jurist. Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn said Democrats were using the hearings to "spread some fear and misinformation" about health care. She complained that they were trying to paint Barrett as "a monster with an agenda."
Debate mostly civil, confirmation on track
Technical issues periodically interrupted the hearings and the coronavirus pandemic made some senators decide to participate remotely. But the hearings overall were far more civil than the raucous and testy exchanges witnessed during the committee's consideration of Brett Kavanaugh's nomination in 2018.
Graham admitted he was worried, given the unpredictable nature of 2020, that things could go awry. Closing out the questioning period he concluded that while the hearings didn't change anyone's minds, they showed that the committee could function. He also said that Kavanaugh's confirmation forever changed the ability to garner large bipartisan votes on nominees to the high court.
"In another time, in another place, you would get everybody's vote," Graham told Barrett.
Barrett's ability to maneuver through complicated legal questions and not raise any vetting issues ensured that the process would move forward at a quick pace, despite the controversy over whether it should be happening at all when 40 states are already voting in the presidential election.
Graham celebrated Barrett's place in history on Wednesday, saying, "This is the first time in American history that we've nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology, and she is going to the court."
The committee is hearing from an outside panel of supporters and opponents of Barrett's nomination on Thursday and is expected to approve her nomination on a party line on Oct. 22. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is expected to move for a full Senate vote the week before the election.


npr--2020-10-15--The End Of Oil? Battle Lines Drawn As Industry Grapples With Energy's Future

The End Of Oil ?
Battle Lines Drawn As Industry Grapples With Energy 's Future There has never been so much uncertainty about the future of a commodity that keeps the global economic engine running .
And it 's not just environmental activists calling for the end of oil : New reports out this week show the battle lines are shaping up within the industry .
On one side of the argument are those who call for a swift transition away from oil and for charting a path to a zero-emissions future within a few decades .
The influential International @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urgent and unprecedented action from governments worldwide to aggressively shift away from oil and gas , keeping the most devastating effects of climate change at bay .
`` Let 's face it : This is a choice , '' said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol during a news briefing on Tuesday .
`` A choice for citizens , investors , companies — but most of all for our governments around the world . ''
But the powerful oil cartel OPEC is betting the world 's appetite for oil will continue to rise .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ organization was skeptical that governments will even manage to meet their current climate commitments , let alone build on them .
OPEC anticipates a future where demand for fossil fuels is sustained by the economic growth of developing countries , even as the world 's richest countries try to curb their carbon emissions .
`` I think OPEC and others are kind of looking around the world and saying , 'You know , how much is sizzle and how much is steak when it comes to these heroic pledges ? '
`` said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rapidan Energy Group .
All this comes as some of the largest oil companies are slashing jobs and cutting back on oil investments as the coronavirus pandemic leads to a collapse in consumption .
Royal Dutch Shell is cutting 10 % of its workforce and BP is slashing 15 % of its jobs as both companies prepare for a future that 's less reliant on oil .
Schlumberger , the world 's largest oil-field services company , is also cutting about 21,000 jobs , citing the pandemic .
But there are stark differences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ energy demand inevitably recovers from the pandemic : Will the future look much like the past , or will it reflect an extraordinary transformation in how the world powers itself ?
It 's not a hypothetical question .
Companies are shaping strategies now based on which future they predict .
Many European giants , like BP and Shell , are banking their future on a world that is shifting aggressively away from oil and gas and are vowing to invest more in renewables to profit off that transition .
Meanwhile Exxon Mobil shares @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a world where oil and gas projects are still good investments despite efforts to cut emissions .
Which prediction is correct will have huge implications — not just for the energy industry , but for the entire planet .

The End Of Oil? Battle Lines Drawn As Industry Grapples With Energy's Future
Enlarge this image toggle caption Charles Krupa/AP Charles Krupa/AP
Oil is facing an existential crisis.
There has never been so much uncertainty about the future of a commodity that keeps the global economic engine running.
And it's not just environmental activists calling for the end of oil: New reports out this week show the battle lines are shaping up within the industry.
On one side of the argument are those who call for a swift transition away from oil and for charting a path to a zero-emissions future within a few decades.
The influential International Energy Agency global advisory group called for urgent and unprecedented action from governments worldwide to aggressively shift away from oil and gas, keeping the most devastating effects of climate change at bay.
"Let's face it: This is a choice," said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol during a news briefing on Tuesday. "A choice for citizens, investors, companies — but most of all for our governments around the world."
But the powerful oil cartel OPEC is betting the world's appetite for oil will continue to rise.
In a report last week, the organization was skeptical that governments will even manage to meet their current climate commitments, let alone build on them.
OPEC anticipates a future where demand for fossil fuels is sustained by the economic growth of developing countries, even as the world's richest countries try to curb their carbon emissions.
"I think OPEC and others are kind of looking around the world and saying, 'You know, how much is sizzle and how much is steak when it comes to these heroic pledges?' " said Bob McNally, founder and president of Rapidan Energy Group.
All this comes as some of the largest oil companies are slashing jobs and cutting back on oil investments as the coronavirus pandemic leads to a collapse in consumption.
Royal Dutch Shell is cutting 10% of its workforce and BP is slashing 15% of its jobs as both companies prepare for a future that's less reliant on oil.
Schlumberger, the world's largest oil-field services company, is also cutting about 21,000 jobs, citing the pandemic.
But there are stark differences in how companies see the future when energy demand inevitably recovers from the pandemic: Will the future look much like the past, or will it reflect an extraordinary transformation in how the world powers itself?
It's not a hypothetical question. Companies are shaping strategies now based on which future they predict.
Many European giants, like BP and Shell, are banking their future on a world that is shifting aggressively away from oil and gas and are vowing to invest more in renewables to profit off that transition.
Meanwhile Exxon Mobil shares OPEC's worldview and is preparing for a world where oil and gas projects are still good investments despite efforts to cut emissions.
Which prediction is correct will have huge implications — not just for the energy industry, but for the entire planet.


npr--2020-10-15--When False Information Goes Viral, COVID-19 Patient Groups Fight Back

For decades , people struggling with illnesses of all kinds have sought help in online support groups , and during 2020 , such groups have been in high demand for COVID-19 patients , who often must recover in isolation .
But the fear and uncertainty regarding the coronavirus have made online groups targets for the spread of false information .
And to help fellow patients , some of these groups are making a mission of stamping out misinformation .
Shortly after Matthew Long-Middleton got sick on March 12 , he joined a COVID-19 support group run by an organization called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` I had no idea where this road leads , and so I was looking for support and other theories and some places where people were going through a similar thing , including the uncertainty , and also the thing of like , we have to figure this out for ourselves , '' says Long-Middleton , 36 , an avid cyclist who lives in Kansas City , Missouri .
His illness started with chest discomfort , then muscle weakness , high fever , loss of appetite and digestive problems .
But with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported taking massive amounts of vitamins — including Vitamin D which can be harmful in excess — or trying other home remedies not backed by science .
Experts warn that such false or unverified information spread on online support groups can not only mislead patients , but also potentially undermine trust in science and medicine in general .
`` Even if we 're not actively seeking information , we encounter these kinds of messages on social media , and because of this repeated exposure , there 's more likelihood that it 's going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even change the way that we view certain issues , even if there 's no real merit or credibility , '' says Elizabeth Glowacki , a health communication researcher at Northeastern University .
In an effort to help fellow COVID-19 sufferers , some patients , like Vanessa Cruz , spend most of their days fact checking their online support groups .
`` It 's really become like a second family to me and being able to help everybody is a positive thing that comes out of all this negativity we 're experiencing right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a 43-year-old mother of two , moderates the Facebook COVID-19 support group `` have it/had it '' from her home in the Chicago suburbs .
She 's also a `` long-hauler , '' and has been dealing with COVID-19 symptoms , including fatigue , fever and confusion since March .
The worldwide group has more than 30,000 members and has recently been buzzing with reports from India about treating COVID-19 with a common tapeworm medication ( it 's not FDA-approved and there 's little evidence it works ) — as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Other troubling posts include people pushing hydroxychloroquine , which has not been proven to be effective in treating COVID-19 , and sharing the viral video `` America 's Frontline Doctors '' which promotes other unproven treatments and spreads conspiracy theories .
Cruz says supporting fellow patients can be a tricky balance of getting the facts right , but also giving people who are scared the chance to be heard .
`` It 's like you really do n't know what to question , what to ask for , how to reach for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Instead of doing that , they just , they write up their story , basically , and they share it with everybody . ''
To keep the group evidence-based , it has built up a 17-person fact checking team , which includes two nurses and a biologist , that reviews every post that goes up .
However , many online COVID-19 groups do n't have the resources or strategy to address misinformation .
Mel Montano , a 32-year-old writing instructor who lives in New York and has also felt sick since March , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group because she was frustrated by the conspiracy theories that filled its posts .
`` All of these conflicting theories completely took away from the focal point of it , '' Montano explains .
`` It was a mess .
It was [ like ] being on one of those conspiracy theory pages or channels , and it was just not for me . ''
Montano is now a moderator of the Body Politic group on Slack .
Facebook and Twitter have made changes in their approaches toward COVID-19 misinformation , including additional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ falsehoods and removing users or groups that spread them .
However , critics say more changes are needed .
Fadi Quran , campaign director of Avaaz , a human rights group that focuses on disinformation campaigns , says Facebook needs to revise the way it prioritizes content .
`` Facebook 's algorithm prefers misinformation , prefers the sensational stuff that 's going to get clicks and likes and make people angry , '' Quran says .
`` And so the misinformation actors , because of Facebook , will always have the upper hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that misinformation and disinformation had been viewed on Facebook four times as often as information from official health groups , like the World Health Organization .
Facebook did not respond to inquiries for this story .
COVID-19 patient Matthew Long-Middleton thinks the problem goes deeper than getting the data right .
He says a lot of bad information is spread because patients so badly want to find ways to feel better .
After nearly six months of symptoms , Long-Middleton says he 's returned to better health in the past month , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support group members who are still struggling .
He never tried risky treatments discussed in the group himself , but he understands why someone might .
`` You want to find hope , but you do n't want the hope to lead you down a path that hurts you , '' he says .
This story came from a reporting partnership between NPR , Kaiser Health News and KCUR .

When False Information Goes Viral, COVID-19 Patient Groups Fight Back
Enlarge this image toggle caption Jub Rubjob/Getty Images Jub Rubjob/Getty Images
For decades, people struggling with illnesses of all kinds have sought help in online support groups, and during 2020, such groups have been in high demand for COVID-19 patients, who often must recover in isolation.
But the fear and uncertainty regarding the coronavirus have made online groups targets for the spread of false information. And to help fellow patients, some of these groups are making a mission of stamping out misinformation.
Shortly after Matthew Long-Middleton got sick on March 12, he joined a COVID-19 support group run by an organization called Body Politic on the messaging platform Slack.
"I had no idea where this road leads, and so I was looking for support and other theories and some places where people were going through a similar thing, including the uncertainty, and also the thing of like, we have to figure this out for ourselves," says Long-Middleton, 36, an avid cyclist who lives in Kansas City, Missouri. His illness started with chest discomfort, then muscle weakness, high fever, loss of appetite and digestive problems.
But with the support came misinformation. Group members reported taking massive amounts of vitamins — including Vitamin D which can be harmful in excess — or trying other home remedies not backed by science.
Experts warn that such false or unverified information spread on online support groups can not only mislead patients, but also potentially undermine trust in science and medicine in general.
"Even if we're not actively seeking information, we encounter these kinds of messages on social media, and because of this repeated exposure, there's more likelihood that it's going to seep into our thinking and perhaps even change the way that we view certain issues, even if there's no real merit or credibility," says Elizabeth Glowacki, a health communication researcher at Northeastern University.
In an effort to help fellow COVID-19 sufferers, some patients, like Vanessa Cruz, spend most of their days fact checking their online support groups.
"It's really become like a second family to me and being able to help everybody is a positive thing that comes out of all this negativity we're experiencing right now," Cruz says.
Cruz, a 43-year-old mother of two, moderates the Facebook COVID-19 support group "have it/had it" from her home in the Chicago suburbs. She's also a "long-hauler," and has been dealing with COVID-19 symptoms, including fatigue, fever and confusion since March.
The worldwide group has more than 30,000 members and has recently been buzzing with reports from India about treating COVID-19 with a common tapeworm medication (it's not FDA-approved and there's little evidence it works) — as well as speculation about President Trump's recent diagnosis.
Other troubling posts include people pushing hydroxychloroquine, which has not been proven to be effective in treating COVID-19, and sharing the viral video "America's Frontline Doctors" which promotes other unproven treatments and spreads conspiracy theories.
Cruz says supporting fellow patients can be a tricky balance of getting the facts right, but also giving people who are scared the chance to be heard.
"It's like you really don't know what to question, what to ask for, how to reach for help," Cruz says. "Instead of doing that, they just, they write up their story, basically, and they share it with everybody."
To keep the group evidence-based, it has built up a 17-person fact checking team, which includes two nurses and a biologist, that reviews every post that goes up.
However, many online COVID-19 groups don't have the resources or strategy to address misinformation.
Mel Montano, a 32-year-old writing instructor who lives in New York and has also felt sick since March, says she left a large Facebook support group because she was frustrated by the conspiracy theories that filled its posts.
"All of these conflicting theories completely took away from the focal point of it," Montano explains. "It was a mess. It was [like] being on one of those conspiracy theory pages or channels, and it was just not for me."
Montano is now a moderator of the Body Politic group on Slack.
Facebook and Twitter have made changes in their approaches toward COVID-19 misinformation, including additional fact checking, removing posts that contain falsehoods and removing users or groups that spread them.
However, critics say more changes are needed.
Fadi Quran, campaign director of Avaaz, a human rights group that focuses on disinformation campaigns, says Facebook needs to revise the way it prioritizes content.
"Facebook's algorithm prefers misinformation, prefers the sensational stuff that's going to get clicks and likes and make people angry," Quran says. "And so the misinformation actors, because of Facebook, will always have the upper hand."
A study by Avaaz showed that misinformation and disinformation had been viewed on Facebook four times as often as information from official health groups, like the World Health Organization.
Facebook did not respond to inquiries for this story.
COVID-19 patient Matthew Long-Middleton thinks the problem goes deeper than getting the data right. He says a lot of bad information is spread because patients so badly want to find ways to feel better.
After nearly six months of symptoms, Long-Middleton says he's returned to better health in the past month, though he continues to check in on fellow support group members who are still struggling.
He never tried risky treatments discussed in the group himself, but he understands why someone might.
"You want to find hope, but you don't want the hope to lead you down a path that hurts you," he says.
This story came from a reporting partnership between NPR, Kaiser Health News and KCUR.