In today's press tour, we discuss an analysis that questions whether Donald Trump's policies, from the war on Iran and the economic confrontation with Canada to support for data centers, are leading Republicans toward losing the midterm elections. We stop at a report that monitors the deaths of women and children in Afghanistan that says they are linked to a reduction in American aid, before reviewing a global experiment testing the possibility of using a preventive drug for Alzheimer's, before memory problems appear.
We begin with an article by Jonathan Friedland in The Guardian newspaper, in which he wonders whether US President Donald Trump is acting as if he wants the Republican Party to lose the upcoming midterm elections, or if he does not at least care about the possibility of the party losing its majority in Congress.
Friedland believes that this proposal does not seem like a completely crazy theory, as there is reason to believe that Trump is either indifferent to the defeat of the Republicans in November, or secretly desires it.
According to the author, a series of Trump’s decisions seem closer to “deliberate harm,” most notably the war he chose to wage against Iran, which raised the prices of fuel and food, and increased the cost of US government borrowing, which may be reflected in the interest of credit cards and mortgages in conjunction with voters heading to the polls.
He adds that these repercussions weaken the position of a ruling party that came to power pledging to reduce inflation, and also threaten to dissatisfy the base of the MAGA movement (Make America Great Again), which saw Trump as a president who would put an end to the endless wars in the Middle East.
However, Iran may not even be Trump's most electorally damaging foreign adventure, according to Friedland. The economic confrontation that Trump sparked with Canada prompted Ottawa to respond to the tariffs with similar measures, hitting states such as Michigan, Ohio, Maine, Texas, and Iowa, which are states witnessing decisive races for Senate seats.
He points out that Republican candidates are now required to explain the loss of a market that was essential for their states' exports.
The author stops at Trump's support for data centers, despite widespread popular opposition to them due to their energy and water consumption, environmental impacts, and concerns related to artificial intelligence and the future of jobs.
He believes that the president not only contradicted the position of the majority of voters, but also insulted them by describing the communities that reject these centers as choosing to remain “backward and poor.”
Friedland says that Trump's ignoring of broad trends in public opinion extends to his personal projects, such as demolishing the eastern wing of the White House to build a ballroom and putting his signature on the dollar bill, which the writer believes are steps that the majority of Americans oppose.
Friedland explains Trump's indifference to the possibility of Republican losses by saying that the president does not fear congressional investigations or subpoenas, because he believes that the legislative authority lacks practical means to force him to comply, and that his Republican allies in the Senate will not vote to impeach him, regardless of the accusations against him.
The writer adds that all of the above could explain Trump’s lack of fear of Republican defeat in November, but it does not explain why he might actively seek it.
Here, the writer uses what was stated in the book “Regime Change” by Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, which says: Trump may present any major Republican loss as evidence that the party cannot win when his name is not on the ballot.
Friedland points out that Trump's narcissism may lead him to view his party's defeat as evidence that Republicans cannot win without him, rather than reading it as a rejection of his policies.
How are women and children paying the price for reducing US aid to Afghanistan?
And to the newspaper "The Independent" and a report dealing with the repercussions of reducing US aid to women, children and infants in Afghanistan.
The newspaper begins with the story of a newborn child who arrived at Nangarhar Regional Hospital suffering from sepsis and suffocation during birth. He needed a continuous supply of oxygen, but a station that was supplying 50 children’s beds with oxygen stopped working after the freeze on American aid, and the child died.
The newspaper is based on research conducted by Refugees International, which linked at least 161 deaths in Afghanistan during the past 18 months to the unrest that followed aid cuts, and half of the victims were women who died during pregnancy or childbirth, in addition to 30 deaths among newborns and fetuses.
According to the article, the organization’s researcher, Priyali Deepti Sur, conducted interviews with about 550 workers in the health sector, including a large number of midwives, and documented stories about the closure of health centers and the breakdown of artificial respirators, incubators, and oxygen stations due to the cessation of funding and maintenance.
Sur says that these deaths were “100 percent preventable,” warning that stopping money from reaching hospitals leads to the death of women and children.
The Independent notes that the Trump administration abruptly ended more than $1.7 billion in aid to Afghanistan, as part of its efforts to dismantle the foreign aid program and close the US Agency for International Development.
According to the Afghan Ministry of Public Health, the cessation of safe delivery services in US-supported centers has affected about 350 births per month. The newspaper also quoted Save the Children as saying that one in every ten children in Afghanistan suffers from acute malnutrition, in light of the closure of nearly 600 health facilities.
Sur calls for restoring American funding for the health sector and returning midwives to their jobs.
In response to a previous challenge to Elon Musk for critics of the cuts to mention the name of a person who died because of them, the researcher recalled the story of a pregnant woman who died while being transported to a regional hospital, and said: “Her name was Halima.” The US State Department did not comment on the newspaper’s report.
Will Alzheimer's medication become as protective as cholesterol medications?
And to the "Daily Mail", which published about a global medical experiment that will test the possibility of using an Alzheimer's drug before symptoms of the disease appear.
The newspaper's health affairs editor, Sean Waller, reports that people who do not suffer from memory problems will receive a drug known as "trontinimab", to see if it is able to prevent the development of Alzheimer's in people who are most susceptible to infection.
Screening of potential participants will begin in Britain starting Monday, while more than 15 British centers are expected to participate in the global study called “Preventrone.” The Surrey and Borders Partnership, affiliated with the National Health Service, will be the first European center to launch the trial, and will also lead the process of recruiting participants within Britain.
According to the Daily Mail, the study aims to attract about 1,600 people from different countries, between the ages of 55 and 80, and will continue to be followed for a period of between four and six years. Applicants will first undergo memory tests to ensure that they do not have noticeable cognitive problems, before determining their eligibility to participate.
The experiment comes at a time when about a million people are living with dementia in the United Kingdom, while expectations indicate that the number will rise to 1.4 million people by 2040. Dementia, which the newspaper describes as the largest cause of death in Britain, claims the lives of about 76,000 people annually.
