More than 25% of Gen Z patients don’t have doctors. Experts weigh in on the cost of skipping care

Kraig Pakulski 0 31 Article rating: No rating
Many young adults turn to urgent care clinics first for non-emergency-related medical issues.

By Amen Galinato, CNN

A yearly physical is the standard preventive measure for adults, but many Gen Z patients are forgoing regular doctor appointments.

More than 1 in 4 young adults don’t have a primary care provider, according to a recent national survey by the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center.

For Gen Zers who do have a physician, most skip scheduled checkups or don’t schedule them: Only 47% of 18- to 29-year-olds said they have had an annual wellness visit in the past year, according to the survey findings, released June 29.

Skipping doctor visits in early adulthood could have severe consequences, experts say, noting that missed prevention opportunities earlier in life can lead to greater chances of developing later-in-life diseases and conditions. In recent years, colorectal cancer rates have skyrocketed in younger adults, becoming the leading cause of cancer deaths for people younger than 50.

“An annual visit isn’t just about today’s health — it helps identify future risks, keeps preventive care on schedule and gives you a trusted clinician who knows your medical history and can help navigate health concerns, be they physical health or mental health concerns, as they arise,” said CNN wellness contributor Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician and clinical associate professor at George Washington University, in an email to CNN. Wen was not involved in the study.

Finding the right doctor for you

The poll queried 1,006 respondents across several age groups about their medical habits. Out of all the age groups, older adults were most likely to have a primary care doctor, with 97% of respondents age 65 and older saying they had a regular provider compared with 71% of younger adults.

Many Gen Zers instead turn to their local urgent care clinic for non-emergency-related health issues, with 36% looking first to an immediate care facility, the survey found. However, the doctor-patient relationship is essential to staying healthy.

There are lost opportunities “to build a relationship of trust with somebody who can potentially keep you out of the emergency room or help support you in ways that help maintain your health over the long-term,” said Dr. Russell Phillips, senior adviser on innovation in the primary care division of general medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. Phillips was not involved in the survey.

Younger adults may be less worried about health risks than older generations, since they are generally less likely to develop age-associated diseases such as cardiovascular and neurodegenerative disorders.

But that doesn’t mean Gen Z and millennials aren’t at risk of developing severe diseases earlier in life.

“We lowered the age for routine colon cancer screening for everybody from 50 to 45, but that age can be even lower if our family history is more complex,” said family medicine physician Dr. Zachary Bittinger, a clinical assistant professor at Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center who was not directly involved with the survey.

If the first doctor you see isn’t a good match, experts say that it’s perfectly acceptable to keep searching until you find one that you’re comfortable with.

“If we have an initial visit or two with

E. Jean Carroll officially receives more than $5M from Trump in sexual abuse and defamation judgment

Kraig Pakulski 0 38 Article rating: No rating
E. Jean Carroll leaves Manhattan Federal Court following the conclusion of her civil defamation trial against former President Donald Trump on January 26 in New York City.

By Kara Scannell, CNN

(CNN) — More than $5 million was transferred to E. Jean Carroll, a significant move in a protracted legal battle with President Donald Trump coming three years after a jury found he had sexually abused and defamed the former magazine writer.

The disbursement of $5,625,005.48 – the damages award plus interest – was ordered by Judge Lewis Kaplan after the Supreme Court rejected Trump’s request to hear the case. Trump tried to stop the payment by arguing it should not go through until the Supreme Court decides whether to rehear his petition, a long-shot gambit that is rarely successful. The Supreme Court has not responded.

The transfer to Carroll’s attorneys was confirmed on the court docket Tuesday.

Carroll’s lawyers said in a court filing that she would use the money to fund her retirement and will “place the award in an interest-bearing account until Defendant’s petition for rehearing is denied.”

Trump’s attorneys are continuing to fight. On Friday, Trump’s lawyers asked a federal appeals court to intervene and stay, or stop the transfer, until the Supreme Court decides whether to reconsider. His lawyers asked the appeals court to issue an injunction if the funds were disbursed and order the transfer of funds back to the court-controlled account while the appeal plays out.

The federal appeals court, which denied a request for an emergency stay, has not addressed the latest effort.

Carroll, who is 82, is expected to get the full amount. Her lawyers, who are paid on a contingency basis, will not take legal fees from the award.

“Three years ago, a unanimous nine-person jury found President Trump liable for sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll,” Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan said in a statement. “Today, we are pleased to report that she has received the damages payment the jury awarded her as a result of that verdict.”

Carroll was not the first woman to accuse Trump of sexual abuse, but she took her civil lawsuit to trial and testified in open court in detail about Trump sexually abusing her in a New York department store in the mid 1990s. Trump did not attend the first trial but in public he forcefully denied assaulting Carroll. The jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation for statements he made denying her allegations of sexual assault, saying she wasn’t his type, and suggesting she made it up to sell copies of her book. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million in damages.

During a CNN town hall the day after the verdict Trump called Carroll a “whack job” and called her allegations a “fake story.” Carroll, who had already sued Trump over similar statements he made in 2019, asked to amend her lawsuit to include the additional statements.

Trump attended the second trial and faced off with Carroll, who testified again. He briefly took the witness stand.

The jury found Trump’s 2019 statements were defamatory and awarded Carroll $83 million in damages. Trump said he will file a petition with the Supreme Court to ask them to consider his arguments related to presidential immunity. The brief is due at the end of the month.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

The post Read more

Beach Hazards Statement issued July 14 at 9:00AM PDT until July 15 at 11:00PM PDT by NWS Los Angeles/Oxnard CA

Kraig Pakulski 0 35 Article rating: No rating

* WHAT…Dangerous rip currents and breaking waves with elevated
surf expected. Minor coastal flooding possible.

* WHERE…San Luis Obispo County Beaches, Santa Barbara County
Central Coast Beaches, Santa Barbara County Southwestern
Coast, Santa Barbara County Southeastern Coast, Ventura County
Beaches, Malibu Coast and Los Angeles County Beaches.

* WHEN…Through Wednesday evening.

* IMPACTS…There is an increased risk of ocean drowning. Rip
currents can pull swimmers and surfers out to sea. Waves can
wash people off beaches and rocks, and capsize small boats
nearshore.

* ADDITIONAL DETAILS…Southerly swell combined with abnormally
high tides of 7.0 to 7.6 feet will bring the potential for minor
coastal flooding in low-lying areas each evening.
Remain out of the water due to hazardous swimming conditions, or
stay near occupied lifeguard towers. Rock jetties can be deadly
in such conditions, stay off the rocks.

The post Beach Hazards Statement issued July 14 at 9:00AM PDT until July 15 at 11:00PM PDT by NWS Los Angeles/Oxnard CA appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

Killings of three British politicians in a decade shine light on febrile political mood

Kraig Pakulski 0 34 Article rating: No rating
Britain's former Prime Ministers John Major

By Issy Ronald, CNN

(CNN) — For the third time in a little over a decade, British lawmakers stood up one-by-one in Parliament on Monday, paid tribute to a slain politician, and echoed each other’s fears about the rising tide of violence in politics.

“Politics is a calling for those of us here, but it should not be a dangerous one,” the country’s Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said, as she sought to reassure Members of Parliament (MPs) of their security. “We must always be vigilant and respond to changing threats.”

The killing of former MP Ann Widdecombe last week, coming after the murders of sitting MPs Jo Cox and David Amess in 2016 and 2021, respectively, has reinforced that the last decade has been one of the most dangerous periods for UK politicians in the country’s history.

Not since “The Troubles,” the name used to describe the sectarian violence in Northern Ireland from the late 1960s until the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, have so many politicians been killed in a short period of time. During that time, four MPs were killed by Irish republican militants between 1979 and 1990.

Unlike then, however, there has been no active conflict within the country’s borders during this spate of violence. Police launched an investigation after Widdecombe, a former Conservative MP who then served as the immigration spokesperson for the right-wing populist Reform UK party, was found dead at her home last week having sustained “serious injuries.”

Police initially said there was no information to suggest her killing was politically motivated, before later announcing that counter-terrorism police were leading the investigation. A 28-year-old White, British man who has not been named was arrested, first on suspicion of murder, then on suspicion of “commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.”

On Tuesday, the force said Widdecombe had been killed in a “targeted attack.” They have not given any indication of the motive, but said one “line of enquiry” was whether the suspect was targeting Reform UK figures.

The murders of Cox and Amess were propelled by very different motives from each other. Cox, a member of the center-left Labour Party, was killed by a man who had extreme right-wing views and an extensive collection of Nazi memorabilia. Meanwhile, a “fanatical Islamist” inspired by Islamic State was found guilty of murdering Amess, who represented the center-right Conservatives. So instead of a unifying ideology driving this uptick in violence, as during the 1980s, these instances seem more disparate.

Alan Renwick, a politics professor at University College London and director of the college’s Constitution Unit, cautions against “making links between the very extreme actions of a small number of individuals and wider trends in society.”

Yet he acknowledges that the threat level faced by politicians has risen in recent years, raising alarm bells about the impact on British democracy

“At the same time, it is clear that MPs and others in public life are now facing numerous threats almost routinely,” he told CNN. “This is a change from the past, and it seriously impairs democracy.”

The annual number of crimes against MPs reported to the police hit almost 1,000 in 2025, almost doubling since 2022, the Times revealed in March. And that number marks a ten-fold increase from the 151 crimes reported by MPs in 2017,

RSS
First346347348349351353354355Last