‘Why HHS is wrong to bring back the stigmatizing monkeypox name’
Nikki Romanik and Demetre Daskalakis at Time
The monkeypox name “carried stigma and confusion, making people less likely to get vaccinated, tested or seek treatment,” say Nikki Romanik and Demetre Daskalakis. The “modernized name, mpox, offered something rare in a health crisis — clarity and dignity for those over-represented in the outbreak.” HHS has “conveyed its intent to return to the old name, ‘monkeypox,’” but this “name was more than inaccurate, it was one of the foundational barriers to stopping the outbreak.”
‘Insurers use cancer patients as leverage’
Selwyn M. Vickers and Scott M. Stuart and The Wall Street Journal
Despite “record profits, major insurers are using the threat of network termination as a bargaining chip in contract disputes with providers,” say Selwyn M. Vickers and Scott M. Stuart. The “negotiation tactic puts patients in the middle of corporate standoffs during serious, often life-threatening, illnesses.” Insurers “respond not with good-faith engagement but with delay tactics, public attacks and abrupt notices that force thousands of cancer patients to worry that they could soon lose access to their doctor.”
‘“The Smashing Machine” is Dwayne Johnson’s big Oscar play, but it’s no typical biopic’
Dana Stevens at Slate
“‘The Smashing Machine’ deliberately sets out to subvert the expectations of audiences,” says Dana Stevens. It’s a “study of a flawed but admirably dedicated athlete.” The film is a “showcase for its star Dwayne Johnson, whose own history as a pro wrestler is an inextricable part of the screen persona he’s created.” But the film “winds up playing its cards too close to the vest, never really giving the star, or the movie, a chance to strut his stuff.”
‘Why Trump’s 20-point plan for ending the Gaza war simply won’t work’
Michael Ratney at Haaretz
Donald Trump’s “20-point plan for the end of the Gaza war includes some positive aspects,” but “none of the comments made by President Trump or Prime Minister Netanyahu on Monday should suggest that the plan will actually be implemented,” says Michael Ratney. And they “certainly shouldn’t be seen as a fundamental shift in the trajectory of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” The deal is “decidedly unpalatable to other, critically important partners in this process: regional governments in the Middle East.”
Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
