Connect with us

Tech

Why Are Some Women Training for Pregnancy Like It’s a Marathon?

Published

on

Why Are Some Women Training for Pregnancy Like It’s a Marathon?


Rohr, as one of 10 children with 29 nieces and nephews, has watched countless family members and friends navigate hard pregnancies. In response, she’s determined to have a positive, empowering one. “I always thought having a baby was, like, the least casual thing ever,” she says. “It just seems like this life-changing thing that I wanted to be super, super sure about.”

Doctors say that, in general, all this new attention surrounding the “zero trimester” is a very positive, exciting development. Healthy moms usually spell better outcomes for mom and baby. Currently, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend doctors ask patients of reproductive age if they plan to get pregnant within the year during checkups. “There’s so many things that we can do to optimize underlying health in that preconception year that will make outcomes in pregnancy better,” says Natalie Clark Stentz, an ob-gyn and reproductive endocrinologist and infertility specialist at Michigan Medicine. This is especially true if you have a chronic health condition, like diabetes, hypertension, depression, or a thyroid disease, that needs to be managed and monitored during pregnancy.

At the same time, that “prep” should be expert-vetted and backed by science, and it usually doesn’t involve the TikTok Shop. A doctor’s preconception toolbox is much simpler than what you might see online, and really hasn’t changed much in decades: ensure vaccinations are up to date, avoid alcohol, stop smoking and taking drugs, start a prenatal vitamin with folic acid to prevent neural tube defects at least a month before getting pregnant, and go through any prescription medications and supplements with your doctor. Only 5 percent of the preconception nutritional claims on social media reviewed in a 2025 study were referred to in current international preconception guidelines, and 54 percent were considered to have “no evidence for the health outcome.” TikTok and Instagram had a higher percentage of “no evidence” claims than other platforms.

For instance, raw milk is a darling of self-proclaimed “crunchy moms,” yet unpasteurized milk can introduce harmful germs like listeria, which can cause a miscarriage or harm a fetus. Extreme diets and exercise can work against your fertility, too, by affecting the hormones that are necessary for conception, says Kara Goldman, an ob-gyn and associate professor of reproductive endocrinology and infertility and director of fertility preservation at Northwestern University. Recently, a patient with a history of estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer told her she’d been taking beef organ supplements, not realizing until Goldman dug into the ingredients that the capsules included “ovary” and “uterus.” This meant she was inadvertently taking supplemental estrogen after years of avoiding unnecessary estrogen exposure. Additionally, organ meats like liver can be rich in Vitamin A, which Stentz says can be “very toxic” for pregnancy.

“Any buzzy individual thing is likely sensational, whether that’s Brazil nuts, organ meats, or whatnot,” Stentz adds. “The evidence-based things, they’re not sexy. Maintain a normal BMI, stop smoking, pick a boring prenatal vitamin.”

Pregnancy prep regimens can get pricey fast. A month’s supply of Perelel’s “conception support pack,” which includes a prenatal, omega DHA + EPA, and CoQ12 + folate, costs $58.77. A full swap-out of all kitchen Tupperwares, cooking utensils, and pans can run you hundreds. Add on “soft movement” like Pilates, organic produce, a whole new set of makeup and skin-care products, and it becomes all the more expensive.





Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tech

Anthropic Supply-Chain-Risk Designation Halted by Judge

Published

on

Anthropic Supply-Chain-Risk Designation Halted by Judge


Anthropic won a preliminary injunction barring the US Department of Defense from labeling it a supply-chain risk, potentially clearing the way for customers to resume working with the company. The ruling on Thursday by Rita Lin, a federal district judge in San Francisco, is a symbolic setback for the Pentagon and a significant boost for the generative AI company as it tries to preserve its business and reputation.

“Defendants’ designation of Anthropic as a ‘supply chain risk’ is likely both contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious,” Lin wrote in justifying the temporary relief. “The Department of War provides no legitimate basis to infer from Anthropic’s forthright insistence on usage restrictions that it might become a saboteur.”

Anthropic and the Pentagon did not immediately respond to requests to comment on the ruling.

The Department of Defense, which under Trump calls itself the Department of War, has relied on Anthropic’s Claude AI tools for writing sensitive documents and analyzing classified data over the past couple of years. But this month, it began pulling the plug on Claude after determining that Anthropic could not be trusted. Pentagon officials cited numerous instances in which Anthropic allegedly placed or sought to put usage restrictions on its technology that the Trump administration found unnecessary.

The administration ultimately issued several directives, including designating the company a supply-chain risk, which have had the effect of slowly halting Claude usage across the federal government and hurting Anthropic’s sales and public reputation. The company filed two lawsuits challenging the sanctions as unconstitutional. In a hearing on Tuesday, Lin said the government had appeared to illegally “cripple” and “punish” Anthropic.

Lin’s ruling on Thursday “restores the status quo” to February 27, before the directives were issued. “It does not bar any defendant from taking any lawful action that would have been available to it” on that date, she wrote. “For example, this order does not require the Department of War to use Anthropic’s products or services and does not prevent the Department of War from transitioning to other artificial intelligence providers, so long as those actions are consistent with applicable regulations, statutes, and constitutional provisions.”

The ruling suggests the Pentagon and other federal agencies are still free to cancel deals with Anthropic and ask contractors that integrate Claude into their own tools to stop doing so, but without citing the supply-chain-risk designation as the basis.

The immediate impact is unclear because Lin’s order won’t take effect for a week. And a federal appeals court in Washington, DC, has yet to rule on the second lawsuit Anthropic filed, which focuses on a different law under which the company was also barred from providing software to the military.

But Anthropic could use Lin’s ruling to demonstrate to some customers concerned about working with an industry pariah that the law may be on its side in the long run. Lin has not set a schedule to make a final ruling.



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

How Trump’s Plot to Grab Iran’s Nuclear Fuel Would Actually Work

Published

on

How Trump’s Plot to Grab Iran’s Nuclear Fuel Would Actually Work


President Donald Trump and top defense officials are reportedly weighing whether to send ground troops to Iran in order to retrieve the country’s highly enriched uranium. However, the administration has shared little information about which troops would be deployed, how they would retrieve the nuclear material, or where the material would go next.

“People are going to have to go and get it,” secretary of state Marco Rubio said at a congressional briefing earlier this month, referring to the possible operation.

There are some indications that an operation is close on the horizon. On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Pentagon has imminent plans to deploy 3,000 brigade combat troops to the Middle East. (At the time of writing, the order has not been made.) The troops would come from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, which specializes in “joint forcible entry operations.” On Wednesday, Iran’s government rejected Trump’s 15-point plan to end the war, and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the president “is prepared to unleash hell” in Iran if a peace deal is not reached—a plan some lawmakers have reportedly expressed concern about.

Drawing from publicly available intelligence and their own experience, two experts outlined the likely contours of a ground operation targeting nuclear sites. They tell WIRED that any version of a ground operation would be incredibly complicated and pose a huge risk to the lives of American troops.

“I personally think a ground operation using special forces supported by a larger force is extremely, extremely risky and ultimately infeasible,” Spencer Faragasso, a senior research fellow at the Institute for Science and International Security, tells WIRED.

Nuclear Ambitions

Any version of the operation would likely take several weeks and involve simultaneous actions at multiple target locations that aren’t in close proximity to each other, the experts say. Jonathan Hackett, a former operations specialist for the Marines and the Defense Intelligence Agency, tells WIRED that as many as 10 locations could be targeted: the Isfahan, Arak, and Darkhovin research reactors; the Natanz, Fordow, and Parchin enrichment facilities; the Saghand, Chine, and Yazd mines; and the Bushehr power plant.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Isfahan likely has the majority of the country’s 60 percent highly enriched uranium, which may be able to support a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction, though weapon-grade material generally consists of 90 percent enriched uranium. Hackett says that the other two enrichment facilities may also have 60 percent highly enriched uranium, and that the power plant and all three research reactors may have 20 percent enriched uranium. Faragasso emphasizes that any such supplies deserve careful attention.

Hackett says that eight of the 10 sites—with the exception of Isfahan, which is likely intact underground, and “Pickaxe Mountain,” a relatively new enrichment facility near Natanz—were mostly or partially buried after last June’s air raids. Just before the war, Faragasso says, Iran backfilled the tunnel entrances to the Isfahan facility with dirt.

The riskiest version of a ground operation would involve American troops physically retrieving nuclear material. Hackett says that this material would be stored in the form of uranium hexafluoride gas inside “large cement vats.” Faragasso adds that it’s unclear how many of these vats may have been broken or damaged. At damaged sites, troops would have to bring excavators and heavy equipment capable of moving immense amounts of dirt to retrieve them

A comparatively less risky version of the operation would still necessitate ground troops, according to Hackett. However, it would primarily use air strikes to entomb nuclear material inside of their facilities. Ensuring that nuclear material is inaccessible in the short to medium term, Faragasso says, would entail destroying the entrances to underground facilities and ideally collapsing the facilities’ underground roofs.

Softening the Area

Hackett tells WIRED that based on his experience and all publicly available information, Trump’s negotiations with Iran are “probably a ruse” that buys time to move troops into place.

Hackett says that an operation would most likely begin with aerial bombardments in the areas surrounding the target sites. These bombers, he says, would likely be from the 82nd Airborne Division or the 11th or 31st Marine Expeditionary Units (MEU). The 11th MEU, a “rapid-response” force, and the 31st MEU, the only Marine unit continuously deployed abroad in strategic areas, have reportedly both been deployed to the Middle East.



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Amazon’s Spring Sale Is So-So, but Cadence Capsules Are a Bright Spot

Published

on

Amazon’s Spring Sale Is So-So, but Cadence Capsules Are a Bright Spot


The WIRED Reviews Team has been covering Amazon’s Big Spring Sale since it began at on Wednesday, and the overall deals have been … not great, honestly. So far, we’ve found decent markdowns on vacuums, smart bird feeders, and even an air fryer we love, but I just saw that Cadence Capsules, those colorful magnetic containers you may have seen on your social media pages, are 20 percent off. (For reference, the last time I saw them on sale, they were a measly 9 percent off.)

If you’re not familiar, they allow you to decant your full-sized personal care products you use at home—from shampoo and sunscreen to serums and pills—into a labeled, modular system of hexagonal containers that are leak-proof, dishwasher safe, and stick together magnetically in your bag or on a countertop. No more jumbled, travel-sized toiletries and leaky, mismatched bottles and tubes.

Cadence Capsules have garnered some grumbling online for being overly heavy or leaking, but I’ve been using them regularly for about a year—I discuss decanting your daily-use products in my guide to How to Pack Your Beauty Routine for Travel—and haven’t experienced any leaks. They do add weight if you’re trying to travel super-light, and because they’re magnetic, they will also stick to other metal items in your toiletry bag, like bobby pins or other hair accessories. This can be annoying, especially if you’re already feeling chaotic or in a hurry.

Otherwise, Capsules are modular, convenient, and make you feel supremely organized—magnetic, interchangeable inserts for the lids come with permanent labels like “shampoo,” “conditioner,” “cleanser,” and “moisturizer.” Maybe you love this; maybe you don’t. But at least if you buy on Amazon, you can choose which label genre you get (Haircare, Bodycare, Skincare, Daily Routine). If this just isn’t your jam, the Cadence website offers a set of seven that allows you to customize the color and lid label of each Capsule, but that set is not currently on sale.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending