More people are drinking less alcohol—and sometimes, their friends take that personally. People who have ditched booze describe being hammered with questions about why they’re staying sober, treated like they’re sucking all the fun out of the room, or, if they’re women, inevitably asked if they’re pregnant. Being prepared with a handful of comebacks when you’re encouraged to drink—or asked why you're abstaining—can help you stick to your goals and diffuse any tension. Here, experts and sober influencers share their favorite go-to responses. Advertisement “Well, alcohol was really impacting my mental health.” In 2020, during the long pandemic days when it felt like there was little to do but drink, Madeline Forrest realized she had a problematic relationship with alcohol. Overdoing it, which became a daily norm, “gave me crippling anxiety in the morning,” she recalls. “Even if people assured me, ‘You didn’t do anything,’ I couldn’t remember, and it sent me into this shame spiral.” She finally realized: “‘Oh my god, I can't feel this way anymore.’” Today, Forrest—who runs a virtual sober community called the Happiest Sober Hub—is thriving sans alcohol. But explaining herself in social situations hasn’t always been easy. In the early days, she encountered a lot of comments downplaying the way alcohol affected her. “People would say, ‘Oh, you weren't that bad. You don't have to stop,’” she says. “It was really hard, because I was in a place where I wasn't comfortable with it yet. I really struggled with, ‘Am I being dramatic? Could I go back and start over?’ It makes those doubts louder.” Read More: Why, Exactly, Is Alcohol So Bad for You? The best way to respond to these comments, Forrest has found, is to switch the emphasis from whether she had a drinking problem—which could become a matter of debate—to the impact it had on her, which couldn’t. That means clearly and simply explaining that alcohol doesn’t mesh with her mental health. “No one can argue with that,” she says. “You’re the only one who knows your internal struggle.”

Everyone has a morning routine. But yours probably doesn’t start before 4 a.m. or involve spending hours guzzling bottles of fancy water (and dunking your face into an icy bowl of it), scrubbing your skin with a banana peel, or diving into a rooftop pool. Still, you may be one of the hundreds of millions of people who enjoyed (and probably rolled your eyes at) the video of fitness trainer Ashton Hall’s elaborate morning routine that went viral recently and now has more than 741 million views on X. While many have speculated the video is marketing for the water brand or a gimmick, it’s understandable to be fascinated by glimpses into other people’s habits. Advertisement “For better or for worse, it is in our nature to compare ourselves to others,” says Raphael Wald, a neuropsychologist at Marcus Neuroscience Institute, part of Baptist Health South Florida. “It is difficult for us as people to appreciate our successes without using others as a measuring tape.” Many competing feelings can arise during social comparison: Envy, admiration, motivation, fear of missing out, validation, and social connection, says Bisma Anwar, a licensed therapist at Talkspace. But often, shame and inadequacy bubble up to the top, Wald says. The video is the latest in a slew of other morning habits shared on social media, which are also racking up millions of views. Why are other people’s morning routines so fascinating? Here’s what psychology experts say. Our long fascination with morning routines People have been obsessed with how famous, successful figures spend their mornings for centuries. Benjamin Franklin wrote about his morning routine in his autobiography in the late 1700s, describing how he woke up at 5 a.m., set intentions for the day, read, and studied. In his 1854 book Walden, Henry David Thoreau discussed going for a swim during the “awakening hour.” These old-fashioned routines have even roused interest now; people in the present day are posting about their experiences trying, for instance, "The daily routine of the original OG Benjamin Franklin.”

In the past year, doctors have performed history-making transplants, placing genetically modified pig kidneys and pig hearts into patients. Now, a group of doctors and scientists in China report they have done the same with a pig liver. In a study published in Nature, the group describes transplanting a gene-edited pig liver into a brain-dead patient. At the request of the patient’s family, the study was terminated after 10 days and the pig liver was removed. The patient’s original liver was not removed, so the experiment served as a way to test whether a pig liver could supplement the function of failing livers for patients waiting for a transplant. Advertisement “The transplanted pig liver successfully secreted bile and produced liver-derived albumin, and we think that is a great achievement,” said Dr. Lin Wang, a surgeon at Xijing Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University and one of the senior authors of the paper, during a briefing. “It means the pig liver could survive together with the original liver in a human being—and would give additional support to an injured liver, maybe, in the future.” Pigs are promising sources of organs, but the human immune system rejects transplanted pig tissue. Scientists have been getting around this by genetically modifying the pigs that provide the organs. The donor liver in this case came from a pig that had received six modifications to certain genes in order to remove major pig proteins that would have led to rejection; the editing technique also added genes that made the liver appear more human to immune cells.

The genetic testing and information company, 23andMe, announced on March 23 that it has filed for bankruptcy, after years of financial struggles and data privacy concerns. Filing for bankruptcy will allow the company “to facilitate a sale process to maximize the value of its business,” 23andMe said in a press release. The news also comes amid management changes; according to the press release, Chief Executive Officer Anne Wojcicki is stepping down from her role, effective immediately, but will continue to serve as a board member. The company’s board selected Chief Financial and Accounting Officer Joe Selsavage to serve as the interim CEO. Advertisement In the press release, 23andMe said it “intends to continue operating its business in the ordinary course throughout the sale process. There are no changes to the way the Company stores, manages, or protects customer data.” “We are committed to continuing to safeguard customer data and being transparent about the management of user data going forward, and data privacy will be an important consideration in any potential transaction,” Mark Jensen, chair and member of the Special Committee of the Board of Directors, said in the press release. Still, some officials are urging customers to consider deleting their data. Just a few days before the bankruptcy announcement, on March 21, California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a consumer alert to 23andMe customers, advising them to consider deleting their data from the company’s website. “Given 23andMe’s reported financial distress, I remind Californians to consider invoking their rights and directing 23andMe to delete their data and destroy any samples of genetic material held by the company,” Bonta said in a press release. Read More: Want to Live Long? Lifestyle Matters More Than Genes Some technology experts also encouraged 23andMe users to delete their data. Meredith Whittaker, the president of the messaging app Signal, said in a post on X: "It's not just you. If anyone in your FAMILY gave their DNA to 23&me, for all of your sakes, close your/their account now. This won't solve the issue, but they will (they claim) delete some of your data." In October 2024, NPR reported on customers' concerns over what could happen to their private data amid the company's financial challenges. A 23andMe spokesperson told NPR that the company was committed to privacy, but wouldn't answer questions about what the company might do with customer data. Legal experts said that there are few federal protections for customers, and worried that the sensitive data could potentially be sold off or even accessed by law enforcement, NPR reported.

If there’s one thing you can say about Americans at this point in time, it’s that we’re stressed—and we’re constantly told by health experts to reduce or manage our stress because it’s killing us. But what if I told you that stress can actually be good for you—and that, sometimes, more stress is actually helpful. As a doctor and researcher in stress and healthy aging, I know that sounds nonsensical or, at best, counterintuitive, but that’s exactly what the fascinating new science of hormesis, or “good stress,” shows. Certain kinds of stress are not only beneficial; they are essential. They build resilience, support brain and metabolic health, and even promote longevity. This new approach to stress is one of the most exciting and upcoming areas of longevity and wellness research. Advertisement While it is unquestionable that chronic stress from situations like caregiving, unmanageable workloads, chronic illness, difficult relationships, and financial hardship can harm your health, so-called hormetic stressors are different. They are intermittent, acute bursts of stress, such as periods of fasting, vigorous exercise, or learning a new skill. From the Greek “to excite,” hormetic stressors activate your body’s innate ability to grow stronger and more mentally and physically resilient. Leveraging good stress—and learning the difference between “stress” and being “stressed out”—may be the most transformative and accessible self-help tool we have today. And perhaps also the most fun. The science of good stress So, what exactly is stress? Stress is any challenge that disrupts our body’s natural balance, or homeostasis. An intriguing discovery in stress biology is that recovery from stress doesn’t simply restore us to our previous state. In the process of re-establishing balance, we either net harm—which is the case with chronic stress—or we overcompensate and gain resilience, which underlies the health-enhancing benefits of hormetic stress. All stress leaves long-lasting effects that shape-shift our biology. But while chronic stress leaves us less resilient, good stress makes us stronger. Advertisement Holiday inbound tourism thrives Branded Content Holiday inbound tourism thrives By China Daily Stress ripples down to the level of our cells. Hormetic stressors—such as eating plant-based phytochemicals, high-intensity interval training (HIIT), cold and heat exposure, intermittent fasting that optimizes circadian rhythms, and intentional mental and emotional challenges—activate a highly conserved set of genes crucial for our survival called vitagenes (short for vitality genes). These genes carry the code that heals, repairs, and regenerates our body. They ramp up our antioxidant capacity, regulate inflammation, repair damaged DNA and proteins, recycle old and dysfunctional cells, and increase the energy-making mitochondria that make up our life force. You may be wondering why all this matters. The most common symptoms I encounter in my medical practice, including fatigue, brain fog, digestive issues, mood imbalances, and pain, are manifestations of cellular damage. They stem from damaged DNA, impaired mitochondria, oxidative stress, chronic inflammation, and improperly folded or clumped proteins. Over time, cellular damage leads to chronic conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, dementia, depression, and cancer. Even the alarming decline in life expectancy can be traced to how our modern environments and lifestyles are harming our cells.

The reservation of the Kashia Pomo Tribe, based in Sonoma County, Calif., is nearly two hours away from the nearest hospital or center providing critical medical services. Reno Keoni Franklin, chairman emeritus of the Kashia Pomo Tribe, says the long commute is just one of several inconveniences impacting American Indians, whose medical care is funded by federal dollars. Funding for Indian Health Service (IHS), the agency that provides Native Americans with medical care, is under threat by slashes to national spending imposed by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which tribal leaders say could worsen their situation. Advertisement “These cuts are jeopardizing a system that's working. The notion by DOGE is that it's of no real value… They don't know what these workers do to provide essential services,” says Ron Allen, chairman of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe. “They’re an essential pipeline to help the community. We do what we can to make a difference. And we're still struggling.” Tribal reliance on federal funds for medical care is part of the existing legal trust obligation to provide certain services, including health care, to Native Americans because the government took over Indigenous land. But looming DOGE cuts could upend the already-underfunded IHS. For fiscal year 2025, IHS received a budget of some $8 billion, far below its estimated need. The IHS National Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup recommended the agency receive $73 billion—nine times the amount allotted to the agency. Administrators for tribal public health boards are able to supplement lack of funding by applying for federal grants—which are also being gutted by DOGE—and other third-party revenue reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid. While President Trump has said that Medicaid and Medicare will not be cut, Congressional Republicans have pledged to make massive cuts to their budget, and constituents fear the two programs will be affected.

When Geoff Perlman’s 20-year-old son broke his arm in December 2022, the bill was paid by strangers who chipped in to cover the costs. And rather than paying a monthly premium to a health care company, Perlman writes a check each month, never exceeding $420 for his family of four, to foot strangers’ health care bills, covering part of a pregnancy for one family or chemotherapy for another. Perlman, a 61-year-old tech CEO from Austin, Texas, is a member of CrowdHealth, a health care startup that seeks to replace health insurance with a crowd-funding model that the company says lowers costs and diverts money from insurance conglomerates to real people. Perlman likes the company because he says it sidesteps insurers’ incentive to deny claims and seek profit, while erasing patients’ ignorance about what health care actually costs. Advertisement “You have a feeling you’re part of a community and you’re looking out for them,” says Perlman. “It feels like the money I am paying is helping other people.” CrowdHealth, which was founded in 2021, offers a new take on an old idea. For decades, religious health-sharing ministries with names like Medi-Share and Samaritan Ministries have asked communities to pitch in for the medical bills of strangers. CrowdHealth has no spiritual affiliation; it’s a peer-to-peer financial-technology company that allows its roughly 10,000 paying members to make payments toward fellow members’ medical expenses. To join, members pay an administrative fee of about $55 a month. Each month, they get a message from CrowdHealth informing them that another member needs financial assistance for a specific medical issue. Members can agree to pay their share of the bill, which doesn’t exceed $140 per month for a single person under 55, or $420 for a family of four. Or they can decline—at the cost of eroding their rating on CrowdHealth’s site, making it less likely that fellow members will contribute to their own needs. Read More: Why Some Food Additives Banned in Europe Are Still on U.S. Shelves. When a member has a health care expense, they’re instructed to pay in cash, or tell a hospital that they are a self-pay customer, save the receipts, and submit them to CrowdHealth for compensation. (CrowdHealth sometimes negotiates the price of planned labs or procedures ahead of time.) The company says it covers 99.8% of claims, though it does not specify what exactly is counted in that statistic. What draws people to CrowdHealth is deep discontent with the U.S. health insurance system. The share of Americans who said that the quality of health care in the U.S. is excellent or good—44%—is the lowest since at least 2001, according to a December Gallup poll. Even many of those with good insurance coverage are frustrated at the system’s perverse incentives, byzantine regulations, and opaque processes. It’s this frustration, in part, that led to a groundswell of public support for Luigi Mangione, who was charged with first-degree murder in December for allegedly gunning down UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan. (Mangione has pleaded not guilty.)

If you’ve been sleeping on TikTok trends, you might not realize that across the internet, millions of people are stocking up on supplements like magnesium, eating kiwis before bed, or taping their mouths shut—all in pursuit of better sleep. “Sleepmaxxing,” as the trend is called, is an umbrella term coined by social-media users to describe hacks that can maximize or improve sleep quality and quantity. “You can sort of think of it as a modified or upgraded version of sleep hygiene,” says Dr. Sam Kashani, a sleep medicine specialist and assistant clinical professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. Advertisement Is it useful—or just another waste of time and money? “I think it’s a positive thing that people want to take measures to optimize their sleep,” he says. “But there’s a fine line between ‘healthy’ sleepmaxxing and being somewhat obsessive and hyper-fixated on sleep.” Here’s what experts want people to know about the trend—including the point at which it goes too far. What are the most popular sleepmaxxing strategies? There’s no single way to practice sleepmaxxing. Rather, people combine the products, techniques, and strategies that work for them. Among the options: Taking magnesium and melatonin supplements Avoiding liquids for two hours before bed Using a white-noise machine Mouth-taping Eating a kiwi before going to sleep Using a weighted blanket or cooling pillow Lowering bedroom temperature Wearing a sleep mask Showering one hour before bed Meditating Not setting an alarm clock

Abortion rights advocates are closely following what they call a growing and alarming trend: lawmakers in several states have introduced bills that would allow authorities to charge people who obtain abortions with homicide. Such bills have been introduced in at least 10 states for the 2025 legislative session: Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is tracking these proposals. Most of those states have already banned abortion either in nearly all circumstances or after six weeks of pregnancy. (Missouri and North Dakota are the only exceptions; both of them previously had near-total abortion bans that have since been overturned.) Advertisement The bills refer to an embryo or fetus as an “unborn child” or “preborn child.” They claim that an embryo or fetus can be a homicide victim, opening the door for authorities to charge and prosecute people who seek abortions. Some of the bills also propose removing clauses from state laws that protected pregnant people seeking abortions from prosecution. The bills include limited exceptions, such as in a situation resulting in “the unintentional death of a preborn child” after “life-saving procedures to save the life of a mother when accompanied by reasonable steps, if available, to save the life of her preborn child.” Lizzy Hinkley, senior state legislative counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, says she believes there has been an uptick in the number of these bills that have been introduced this year, which is “very, very alarming.” Hinkley points out that many of the states considering these bills, such as South Carolina, allow for the death penalty. “It’s very much right out of the anti-abortion playbook to be introducing bills that try to control, try to oppress, and punish pregnant people,” she says. Three of these bills—in Indiana, North Dakota, and Oklahoma—have since failed to advance. And Mary Ziegler—a professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law with expertise in abortion—says the likelihood of the remaining bills passing is “relatively low.” These types of proposals are generally unpopular; Ziegler says that even conservatives and anti-abortion activists are divided on whether to penalize people seeking abortions. “Having said that, I think [these bills are] more likely to pass now than they were in previous years, and the fact that they keep coming back is significant,” Ziegler says. She adds that more of these bills have been introduced since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which ended the constitutional right to abortion.

If you subscribe to the “MAHA” approach to nutrition—the acronym for “Make America Healthy Again,” led by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—then you already know about beef tallow. One of the movement’s rallying cries is to “Make Frying Oil Tallow Again,” and it’s already having an effect: the fast-food chain Steak ‘n Shake recently announced that it now cooks its French fries in “100% all natural beef tallow” instead of seed oils, an ingredient much maligned by MAHA. In social media posts, Kennedy has largely blamed obesity on seed oils—a claim that nutrition experts dispute. Advertisement Beef tallow, however, is a less familiar ingredient to the rest of the country. Is it actually good for you? Is it really a healthy alternative to seed oils? Here’s what nutrition experts say. What is beef tallow? Beef tallow is an edible fat found underneath the skin and near the organs of a ruminant animal—typically a cow—“making up about 5-6% of the animal's total weight,” says Violeta Morris, a dietitian in Columbus, Ohio. The tallow used in food is produced by rendering, or melting down, this fatty tissue. “It’s been used for centuries in cooking—specifically for frying, roasting and baking,” says Kim Yawitz, a registered dietitian and gym owner in St. Louis. Its popularity has waxed and waned, largely due to shifting views on dietary fats. The nutritional profile of beef tallow can vary depending on the part of the cow from which the tallow is derived and whether the cattle are grass-fed or grain-fed, Morris says. But in general, nearly half of the fat in beef tallow comes from saturated fat—which raises concerns among experts about its risks for heart health.