Opinion: Dishonesty all around on Gorsuch

In an op-ed for The Arizona Republic, Sen. Jeff Flake declared, “Even President Obama’s two Supreme Court nominees were recognized for their ability to do the job and confirmed without incident.” Sen. John Cornyn of Texas quoted The Wall Street Journal when he tweeted, “Never in U.S. history have we had a successful partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee.” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell accused Democrats of using “obstructionist tactics” to thwart the confirmation of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

Their hypocrisy is palpable.

In referencing President Barack Obama’s “two” Supreme Court nominees, Flake is conveniently forgetting to tell his readers that Obama made three nominations to the Supreme Court, not two: Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, whom the Senate confirmed, and Judge Merrick Garland, whom Senate Republicans refused to consider even though Obama had almost a year left in his term.

Cornyn surely knows that Senate Republicans effectively engaged in a partisan filibuster of Garland’s nomination by refusing even to hold hearings.

And McConnell must recognize that he himself led “obstructionist tactics” to prevent Garland, as Obama’s nominee, from joining the court.

Regardless of the “alternative facts” the Republicans are peddling, we should all understand the GOP’s tactics last year in opposing Garland for what they were: a blatant power grab that ultimately worked.

For their part, Democratic senators who are opposing Gorsuch are not immune from this affliction. There is no principled reason to oppose Gorsuch beyond politics. On any objective measure he is qualified for the job. If Justice Antonin Scalia had passed away this past February, after President Donald Trump took office, then there would be little justification for Democrats to filibuster Gorsuch’s nomination. The Republicans’ brazen action last year on Obama’s nominee clouds the current debate.
Both sides should acknowledge what is really going on: Republicans refused to consider Garland for purely political reasons; Democrats are going to filibuster Gorsuch for similarly partisan justifications.
This state of affairs shows that the Supreme Court confirmation process is broken. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself recognized, some Republican senators who voted to confirm her in 1993 “today wouldn’t touch me with a 10-foot pole.” The Senate voted to confirm Ginsburg by a 96-3 vote. That kind of bipartisanship on Supreme Court nominees is unfathomable today.

What can we do to fix the problem? For one, senators on both sides need to start telling the truth about their real motivations. Republicans should not hide behind a false claim that the Senate treated Obama’s nominees fairly.

Democrats should acknowledge that their filibuster of Gorsuch is directly related to the Republicans’ failure to consider Garland. Actually telling the truth — which should not be so unfathomable — will help voters discern whether to trust the current incumbents come the next election. Senators’ actions should have consequences, but it is difficult for average Americans to evaluate their senator’s activities without honest and accurate information.

In addition, Senate Republicans and the Trump White House should offer Democrats an olive branch. Perhaps it is an agreement to consider only names from a pre-approved list that the Democrats provide for the next vacancy. Maybe Republicans would agree to give Garland a vote if a liberal such as Ginsburg steps down. Or perhaps there is something else that would cause both sides to stand down.

And both because they are in the majority and because they were at fault last year by being so political with the Garland nomination to the Supreme Court, Republicans should be the first actors in a ceasefire. Although the confirmation process was already breaking down somewhat before last year, McConnell pushed it over the edge by refusing to consider Obama’s choice with almost a full year left in the presidential term.

Good leaders know how to compromise for the good of the country. McConnell should show his leadership skills. Both sides are obscuring their real motives for their partisan actions. Neither side’s spin is good for the country.

To get that message across to the Senate, let’s tell our representatives they must acknowledge what they are really doing and force them to account for their political power grabs. It would be the first step in fixing a truly broken process.

Selena Gomez opens up about her struggle

Story highlights

  • Selena Gomez spoke about her new Netflix series, ’13 Reasons Why,’ at a panel on Wednesday
  • The singer turned actress opened up about her life and why the show, which deals with a teenage girl struggling emotionally, ‘hits very close to home’
  • The show premieres March 31 on Netflix

“To be frank with you, I actually was going through a really difficult time when [the show] started production,” Gomez told CNN at a Netflix panel for the show on Wednesday. “I went away for 90 days and I actually met tons of kids in this place that we are talking about. A lot of the issues these characters are experiencing. I would say yes, I’ve had to deal with it on a different scale.”

The 90 days to which Gomez referred were the time she spent in a treatment center beginning last August. At the time she said part of the reason she did that was to deal with “anxiety, panic attacks and depression” which she said are side effects of her ongoing battle with Lupus. But other than one statement on the subject, she has until now largely been silent about her own struggles since then.

“Whether it was just kids or growing up in the biggest high school in the world, which was the Disney channel, it was also adults that had the audacity to kind of tell me how I should live my life,” Gomez continued. “And it was very confusing for me. It was so confusing. I had no idea who I was going to be and what I’m still going to become. It definitely hits home.”

“13 Reasons Why” is based on a young-adult novel by Jay Asher about a teenage girl who leaves behind 13 cassette tapes explaining why she committed suicide.

Gomez hopes that a younger generation will connect to this material like she has.

“It hits a very important part of me and I think this is what [kids] need to see,” she said. “They have to see something that’s going to shake them. They have to see something that’s frightening … I want them to understand it … I would do anything to have a good influence on this generation. It’s hard but I definitely relate to everything that was going on and I was there for the last episode, I was a mess just seeing it all come to life because I’ve experienced just that.”

“13 Reasons Why” premieres March 31 on Netflix.

Inscrutable Gorsuch raises Democratic ire

Gorsuch declined to explain his legal views or offer an assessment of past Supreme Court cases. He said he decides disputes based only on the facts and the law.

“There’s no such thing as a Republican judge or a Democratic judge,” he asserted. “We just have judges in this country.”

In countless ways, the man President Donald Trump has chosen to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia downplayed the judicial branch and the importance of a single justice appointed to a lifetime seat.

But that message belies the many 5-4 rulings in recent years that have changed American life and the reality that judges cannot always look simply to the facts and relevant law to resolve a dispute.

The Constitution contains concepts, not clear-cut formulas. And while justices resist characterization based on ideology or politics, their voting patterns can suggest policy preferences. The current four justices appointed by Republican presidents vote, by and large, for conservative results; the four Democratic appointees vote generally for liberal outcomes.

Gorsuch’s record on a Denver-based US appeals court indicates he would align with Scalia’s views as a fifth conservative justice. That would return the court to the 5-4 posture that produced such decisions as the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which lifted limits on corporate money in elections, and 2013 Shelby County v. Holder, which curtailed voting-rights protections for racial minorities and others who face discrimination at the polls.

Along the same 5-4 lines, the justices in recent years have restricted class-action claims by consumers and workers; allowed more religion in public life, such as prayer at local government meetings; and rejected challenges to the death penalty.

One major exception to that ideological pattern was the 5-4 ruling in 2012 that upheld the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s health care law, which Trump and the House Republican leadership failed to repeal in a stunning legislative defeat last week.

Chief Justice John Roberts cast the decisive vote in the case, siding with the four liberals in preserving Obamacare based on his reasoning about federal taxing power. Roberts’ most vocal critics at the time, including Trump, viewed the move as political, not grounded in facts and law.

For his part, Gorsuch refused to explain his views of congressional authority and separation of powers or constitutional due process and equality in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. He did not tip his hand on how he would resolve disputes over a woman’s right to end a pregnancy, a key question for senators on both sides of the aisle.

To be sure, the 49-year-old federal appellate judge is not the first Supreme Court nominee to keep his views close to the vest, but he did it to a greater extent.

“What worries me,” said the committee’s ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein, of California, “is that you have been very much able to avoid specificity like no one I have ever seen before.”

Rising stakes

The current Supreme Court is split 4-4 on many tough issues and has been cautious about taking up thorny new disputes while shorthanded. The bench has been without a ninth justice for more than 400 days, since February 13, 2016, when Scalia was found dead at a Texas hunting resort. The 79-year-old justice apparently died in his sleep.

Obama nominated Merrick Garland, chief judge of the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, a year ago this month, but Senate Republicans refused to act on the nomination.

Within two weeks of taking the oath of office in January, Trump tapped Gorsuch. At the same time, the President has undertaken a series of initiatives, such as barring travelers from certain Muslim-majority countries, that have prompted a flood of legal challenges and raised the stakes at the high court.

Despite Democratic concerns about Gorsuch’s record and vague testimony, he is likely to be confirmed. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York has threatened to block a vote on the nominee through a filibuster, which would require 60 votes to overcome, Republicans, who hold 52 seats, have threatened to get around the move by changing Senate rules to allow a simple majority of senators to cut off debate and allow a vote.

Some Democrats do not want to lose the filibuster tradition, especially considering that Trump could see more opportunities to alter the court’s ideological balance given the ages of some justices. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal, turned 84 this month, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, the most centrist conservative and a key vote in favor of gay marriage and abortion rights, will be 81 in July.

Defining Judge Gorsuch

As a judge on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals since 2006, Gorsuch has narrowly interpreted constitutional rights and statutory benefits. He takes an “originalist” approach, reading the Constitution in terms of its 18th Century understanding.

Separately, the Harvard law graduate who studied at the University of Oxford, wrote a book, “The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,” that argues against medical aid in dying and deems the intentional taking of human life by private persons “always wrong.”

Overall, he believes societal dilemmas should be left to Congress and elected lawmakers in the states.

“Sometimes we judges judge best when we judge least,” he told senators.

Two of his court opinions drew particular Senate scrutiny. In one, Gorsuch ruled against a truck driver whose trailer broke down in subzero temperatures. The brakes had frozen, and after becoming numb in the cold (the heat was not working in the cab), the driver unhitched the rig and temporarily drove away. His employer fired him for leaving the trailer.

The 10th Circuit ruled for the trucker, who claimed that under the circumstances he should have been protected by federal worker-safety law. Gorsuch dissented, noting that the truck company told the driver to sit and wait for help and finding that his claim fell outside the law’s plain meaning.

Democratic Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota mocked the result as “absurd” and pressed Gorsuch about what he would have done under the circumstances.

“Senator, I don’t know,” Gorsuch said. “I wasn’t in the man’s shoes.”

In another case highlighted by Democrats, Gorsuch narrowly interpreted a federal law that requires equal opportunity for children with disabilities in school instruction and services. In a decision for the 10th Circuit against an autistic child’s claim, Gorsuch said the law dictates that schools provide benefits “merely … more than de minimis.”

In a similar case that the Supreme Court resolved, as it happens, while Gorsuch was testifying Wednesday, the justices rejected that reasoning. By a unanimous vote, the court said in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts that the standard of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is “markedly more demanding” that the one adopted by Gorsuch.

“When all is said and done, a student offered an educational program providing ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all,” Roberts wrote.

Gorsuch told senators he had adhered to 10th Circuit precedent. “If anyone is suggesting that I like a result where an autistic child has to lose, that’s a heartbreaking accusation,” he said.

“A good judge” follows precedent even if he does not favor the outcome, Gorsuch stressed during his three days of testimony before the senators.

But on the assertion that judges always set aside personal values, Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said, “I don’t buy that.”

Durbin said decisions cannot be “so robotic, so programmatic that all you need to do is look at the facts and look at the law and there’s an obvious conclusion.”

Gorsuch said if he revealed his legal thinking, he could be seen as promising to vote a certain way and signaling to litigants that he lacked an open mind. Sitting at the plain desk he chose over the usual stately draped table, Gorsuch stuck to his opening theme: “Putting on a robe reminds us that it’s time to lose our egos and open our minds. … Ours is a judiciary of honest black polyester.”

Democrats seemed more concerned about what he might have promised, even implicitly, to Trump and the conservative advocates from the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation who vetted him. Trump has vowed to appoint judges who would overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that made abortion legal nationwide.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, asked the nominee what he would have done if Trump had asked him to overturn Roe v. Wade.

“I would have walked out the door,” Gorsuch answered. “That’s not what judges do.”

How much sex should you be having?

In what might be welcome news for everyone exhausted from work and frazzled from kids, research suggests you don’t have to get down every day to reap the rewards of sex, at least in terms of happiness and relationship closeness.

“I do think couples can end up feeling pressure to try to engage in sex as frequently as possible,” said Amy Muise, a postdoctoral researcher studying sexual relationships at Dalhousie University in Canada. Once a week “is maybe a more realistic goal to set than thinking you have to have sex everyday and that feels overwhelming and you avoid it,” said Muise, who is lead author of the study, which was published in November in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science.

The study found that sex could boost happiness because it makes people feel more satisfied in their relationship, based on survey data from two separate cohorts, including 2,400 married couples in the U.S. National Survey of Families and Households.

“For people in relationships, their romantic relationship quality is one of the biggest predictors of their overall happiness,” Muise said. “Having sex more than once a week might not be enhancing that (relationship connection), although it is not bad.”

However, there are a couple of rubs with this research, Muise said. One is that it is not clear which came first, sex or happiness. It may be that people who have sex once a week or more were happier in their relationship and life to begin with, and not that the sex helped make them happy. Or both may be true: Sex enhances happiness and happiness enhances sex.

The other catch is that, although a weekly romp might be just what some people need, it might be too much or too little for others. “Certainly there are couples for whom having sex less frequently will be fine for their happiness, and there are couples who will get increases in happiness if they have sex more than once a week,” Muise said.

What’s the right number for you?

“One of the best effects of an article like this (by Muise and her colleagues) is that it opens up conversations with couples” about their sex life, said Vanessa Marin, a sex therapist based in Berlin. For some couples, the question of how often they should have sex might not have come up, which could be a sign they feel sufficiently close and satisfied — or that they are just too busy or disconnected to think about it.

“Most couples want to be having more sex and I think this is really a result of how busy and full most of our lives are,” Marin said.

Marin avoids prescribing an amount of sex that couples should have, because every couple is different, and instead recommends couples test it out for themselves. “I’m a big fan of having clients experiment, like, one month try to have sex twice a week and see how that goes, or once a week, try to play around with it,” Marin said.

As for those lucky couples that are content with how often they get busy under the sheets, one study suggests they may not want to change a thing. Researchers asked couples that were having sex about six times a month to double down on getting down. Couples that doubled their sexual frequency were in worse moods and enjoyed sex less at the end of three months than couples who had stuck to their usual level of bedroom activity.

“Being told you should do something always makes it less fun,” said George Loewenstein, a professor of economics and psychology at Carnegie Mellon University and lead author of the study. That is another reason Marin does not make recommendations to couples about sexual frequency — for fear they could worry they are not living up to expectations and lose their mojo.

However, there’s a far bigger relationship problem than couples worrying they aren’t having quite enough sex — “couples that have pretty much stopped having sex,” Loewenstein said. For these couples, “I think once a week is a good final goal. … It is almost like a natural constant to do it once a week,” he said.

Even if these abstinent couples want to be having more sex, they may lack the desire for their partner. These couples can try conventional strategies, such as scheduling more quality time together or trying a change in scenery. “What couple has not had the experience that you go to a hotel in a new location in a new environment and the person you’re with seems different, and different is good when it comes to sex,” Loewenstein said.

But if these tricks aren’t enough, couples may have to appeal to their rational rather than lustful side and tell themselves to just do it. “These couples might be surprised how enjoyable it would be if they restarted,” Loewenstein said.

Should you schedule your sex?

It might sound like the least romantic thing in the world to pencil in sexy time with your partner. But if you and your partner are game to try, there is no reason not to make a sex schedule.

“For some couples, scheduling sex works really well, it gives them something to look forward to, they like the anticipation, they like feeling prioritized,” Marin said. “Then other couples (say) scheduling sex feels horrible to them, like sex is transactional and just another item on their to-do list.”

Again, Marin recommends couples experiment with scheduling sex to see if it helps them, as long as neither is opposed to it.

A good idea for all couples, whether they like the idea of scheduling sex, is to plan for quality time together — just the two of them. Ideally, this would be about 20 minutes a day with the TV off and cell phones away, but for extra busy couples, it can help to reserve just five minutes a day for a tete-a-tete, Marin said. This time is also the “container for sex,” the time and privacy when sex can be initiated, but you don’t have to feel pressure about it, she added.

Although scheduling sex can help couples that want to be having sex but just can’t find the time, it can make things worse for some. “If there are relationship issues or psychological issues such as stress or anxiety, then scheduling sex might just add to the pressure,” said Acacia Parks, associate professor of psychology at Hiram College.

See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter.

As for when to schedule the sex, the best time is probably the time when you are least likely to be pulled away by life’s obligations. One of the perks of rise-and-shine sex is that testosterone levels are highest in the morning, and this hormone drives sexual desire. On the other hand, tuck-you-in sex could help lull you to sleep, as hormones released during orgasm could help you relax and feel tired.

According to Muise, the participants in her research typically reported having sex at night before going to sleep, which is not that surprising. But it has to work for both parties. “This is another point of negotiation between partners,” Muise said. “One of them is just too exhausted. That might be something to play around with, is there a time on the weekend that we could try instead.”

White House denies it tried to keep Yates from testifying

White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Tuesday the White House did not seek to block Yates’ testimony and denied that the White House had pressured the House Intelligence Committee to cancel her scheduled testimony.

“I hope she testifies. I look forward to it,” Spicer said during the White House briefing. “We have no problem with her testifying, plain and simple.”

The letter was sent on the same day that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes canceled a previously scheduled hearing where Yates was scheduled to testify about ties between Trump advisers and Russian officials. Yates briefed Trump’s White House counsel on former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s meeting with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

The White House Counsel’s office did not weigh in on the matter of Yates’ testimony, a White House official said.

“There is no letter from the White House because Yates attorney’s letter clearly states a non-response will be seen as the White House not asserting executive privilege,” the official said. “So our non-response clearly allows her to freely move forward with testifying.”

Yates’ attorney David O’Neil said in a letter Friday to White House Counsel Don McGahn that Yates would go forward with her testimony and “conclude that the White House does not assert executive privilege” if he did not receive a response by Monday.

Spicer said the White House does not believe executive privilege should be an issue in Yates testifying, which is why McGahn did not respond.

Nunes spokesperson Jack Langer told CNN that neither Nunes nor any intelligence committee staffers spoke with the White House about Yates’ scheduled testimony.

“The only person the committee has spoken to about her appearing before the committee has been her lawyer. The committee asked her to testify on our own accord and we still intend to have her speak to us,” Langer said.

O’Neil, Yates’ attorney, declined to comment or provide the letter he sent to the White House Counsel’s office when contacted by CNN Tuesday.

Yates served as acting attorney general in the early days of the Trump administration until she was fired for refusing to implement President Donald Trump’s order barring travelers form seven Muslim-majority countries.

Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said he was “aware that former AG Yates intended to speak on these matters and sought permission to testify from the White House.”

“Whether the White House’s desire to avoid a public claim of executive privilege to keep her from providing the full truth on what happened contributed to the decision to cancel today’s hearing, we do not know,” Schiff said in statement Tuesday morning. “But we would urge that the open hearing be rescheduled without further delay and that Ms. Yates be permitted to testify freely and openly.”

Rep. Mike Turner, a Republican on the committee, defended Nunes’ decision to postpone the hearing on Tuesday, saying that Nunes needed to hear from FBI Director James Comey in a classified setting before he could hear from Yates publicly.

“That came well before any of this controversy,” Turner told CNN’s Erin Burnett on “OutFront.” “She will voluntarily come. We asked her to. It was the Chairman’s request she be there. The White House isn’t stopping her.”

CNN’s Evan Perez, Theodore Schleifer, Kevin Liptak and Tom LoBianco contributed to this report.

United Airlines was right to bar leggings

The reality is a bit more complicated.
The controversy began when Shannon Watts, who founded Moms Demand Action to fight gun violence, tweeted that she saw a United staff member bar girls in leggings from boarding a flight. She wanted to know if it was because “spandex is not allowed.”

Actress Patricia Arquette quickly followed up, tweeting to her followers: “Leggings are business attire for 10 year olds. Their business is being children.”

And United scrambled to explain itself, eventually saying that the travelers were on “company benefit travel,” for which there’s a dress code that doesn’t apply to all other travelers.

United’s tweet was correct. Arquette’s tweet was also clever, and correct — about ten-year-olds in general, but not in this situation.

Of course, the “Internet” did not really “erupt.” People were angry on Twitter. And there’s a huge difference.

Only 21 percent of all adults online in the United States even use Twitter. And that 21 percent? They don’t always represent the public at large. Sometimes they just represent what really vocal people think.

Think of the angriest, most opinionated guy in your office. Does he speak for you and your colleagues? Probably not.

The point is, sometimes the people who erupt on Twitter aren’t representative — they’re reactive. That’s what happened here.

As a general rule, are leggings improper attire? For shopping at Target, no way. For ten year olds? Generally, no. For anyone — adult or child — attending the White House Correspondents’ Dinner? It might be inappropriate. It depends. Context matters.

For airlines? Leggings are on the high end of what people wear nowadays. People used to dress up for air travel, even for vacations. Now adults routinely dress like they’re going to a slumber party when they fly. So people initially learning of the leggings story had to know there was more to the story, before anyone “erupted” on Twitter.

Here’s the rest of the story: the passengers were “Pass Riders.” United employees or their dependents can fly standby on a space-available basis. They pay a fraction of what the rest of us pay. But there are tradeoffs. Pass Riders are prioritized last on standby.

Plus, “non-revs,” short for “non-revenue,” are subjected to a dress code, which only they can access on the United website with a password; it’s not publicly available.

United’s code bans, among many other things, form-fitting and lycra/spandex clothing, or anything inappropriately revealing. Non-revs are perceived as a kind of unidentified representative of the airline, sometimes known only to the flight crew. Pass Riders — even a ten-year-old child — are treated more like United employees than members of the public.

Was a United employee a little overzealous in this case? Probably. But denying boarding to Pass Riders was within the employee’s discretion. Airline employees have a lot of discretion, if you haven’t noticed.

When it comes to non-revenue passengers, airlines have even more discretion. The airline, at its sole discretion, may cancel pass travel privileges for conduct deemed “detrimental” to United.

I once flew “non-rev,” in college, thanks to the kindness of others, who took pity on a twenty-year old with a negative account balance. I naively wore jeans and was almost denied boarding. I should have known better. They cut me a break. That was back in 1999. The point is, this system has been around for a while.

Nowadays, it’s not an oppressive dress code either — it’s well below the “business casual” that people with actual jobs wear to work. Pass Riders can apparently even wear jeans and sneakers now, too. The airline just asks that they dress in a way that, at a minimum, raises the bar of air apparel on the flight. The idea appears to be this: the other passengers may not know who you are, but we know, and we want you to help us with the aesthetics, not be part of the problem.

In this case, people on Twitter simply didn’t understand the Pass Rider system, and instead saw what they wanted to see: a nationwide ban on yoga pants, or misogynist, ageist policies of discrimination against women and children. And just like that, an outrage was born.

Frankly, the real controversy should be more about improving dress code standards on airplanes, not relaxing them. Have you flown lately? People are allowed on planes barefoot and shirtless these days.

Where’s the Twitter outrage when that happens?

If you want to push a candle through a paper plate and hold a vigil, protesting the bare-chested old guy in the exit row is a noble cause. There’s no reason to erupt over a dress code that is part of an agreed-upon contract between airline and Pass Rider. All the airline is trying to do is raise the standards of those under its control. The general public should try to do the same.

Short-term kidney injury linked to marathons

“It’s possible that marathon running could be an acute stress and may contribute to the progression of existing chronic kidney disease, and this is where runners with this condition need to talk to their physicians and talk to their trainers,” said Dr. Chirag Parikh, a professor at the Yale University School of Medicine and lead author of the study.

He added that, with adequate training, the kidneys can adapt to such physical stress.

“I would think that the majority of marathon runners are doing OK because the 22 people who participated in the study had normal kidney function and had been running marathons for an average of 12 years,” Parikh said. “So, if running marathons caused a great deal of permanent kidney injury, these runners would have minimal kidney function remaining.”

Marathon running in the United States has grown in popularity in recent years.

Between 1990 and 2014, the number of US marathon finishers skyrocketed from about 224,000 to a record high of 550,637, according to Running USA, a nonprofit that tracks the number of marathon runners each year in an annual report.

Last year, about 507,600 runners finished a marathon in the United States, said Scott Bush, a spokesman for Running USA, which was not involved in the new study.

Kidneys show signs of damage, repair themselves

Runners participating in the 2015 Hartford Marathon in Connecticut were recruited for the study and 22 met the study requirements, as well as completed the study.
A day before the marathon, urine and blood samples were collected from the runners and analyzed under a microscope. The researchers examined the samples for cellular changes and shifts in levels of a compound called creatinine, which is a marker used to diagnose acute kidney injury.

Then, within 30 minutes of completing the race, urine and blood samples were again collected from the runners and analyzed for signs of acute kidney injury.

“We wanted the blood drawn soon after the marathon, which is not an easy thing. Many of the runners are exhausted,” Parikh said.

The researchers found higher-than-normal levels of creatinine in the urine and blood samples of almost all of the runners immediately after the marathon, with 82% of the runners showing signs of at least stage 1 acute kidney injury.

“Almost everybody had a significant increase in the novel markers of injury, inflammation, and repair,” Parikh said.

The kidneys’ responses to the stress of a marathon were eerily similar to what Parikh said he would see among patients who might be treated in a hospital for complications with medications that impact the kidneys, or who might be suffering kidney complications after cardiac surgery, for instance.

“It was very surprising that the intensity of the findings were similar,” Parikh said.

About a day and a half after the marathon, samples again were collected, and they no longer showed signs of acute kidney injury.

“The good part was that we were able to confirm that by day two or by 48 hours after the marathon, the findings returned to baseline,” Parikh said.

‘Be careful, think about it, and be prepared’

The participants in the study were not taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, such as ibuprofen, within 48 hours of the race, however such drugs can impact the kidneys and may put runners’ health at risk when combined with marathon running.

Dr. Malissa Wood, co-director of the Corrigan Women’s heart health program at Massachusetts General Hospital and associate professor at Harvard Medical School in Boston, called the study findings “a real wake-up call.”

“I do know these are people who are not taking non-steroidals, who are pretty well trained, and had an average finish indicating they had properly prepared for the marathon, and still 82%, had some kidney impact from the running,” Wood said about the study, in which she was not involved.

“That just says to me, be careful, think about it, and be prepared,” she said.

A limitation to the new study, besides its sample size, is that the researchers didn’t compare the findings among their runners to other race participants or marathon runners as a whole, said Dr. Martin Hoffman, a health sciences clinical professor at the University of California, Davis and a founding member of the Ultra Sports Science Foundation.
The study also didn’t include a change in body weight as a way to get an assessment of how hydrated each runner was, Hoffman said. He was not involved in the new study but has led separate research on acute kidney injuries following ultramarathon running.

“The fact that kidney injury markers were normalized or improving within 24 hours should help alleviate fear of permanent kidney injury, and supports what we have previously demonstrated,” Hoffman said about the new study.

The kidneys are temporarily impacted during marathon running for various reasons, one being that some of the blood supply kidneys typically receive is being pumped to the body’s muscles instead of the organ, Parikh said.

“When someone runs 26 miles, the blood supply to the skin and muscle increases tremendously, because they need a lot of oxygen,” he said. “It’s estimated that up to 25% of blood ends up going to skin and muscle, and when this happens, that means the blood is getting diverted from other organs. So, while the skin and muscle are perfused at a higher rate, the kidneys are receiving a reduced blood supply.”

The environment in which you are running can also influence how a marathon may impact your body, said Wood, the associate professor at Harvard Medical School.

Tips for runners

“The truth is, when you’re exercising for four hours, your body needs to maintain levels of glucose and it needs to be hydrated, especially if you’re running in a warm climate,” Wood said. “Sixty to 70 degrees for a marathon, that’s warm, and 80 or 90 is really warm.”

Wood led a study on 60 runners who completed the Boston Marathon in 2004 and ’05. The runners had some abnormalities in heart structure and function after completing the marathon, according to the study, which was published in the journal Circulation in 2006.

See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter.

“What we saw in our study was that if people didn’t train very much and they were sort of new to marathon running they had a lot more leakage of heart enzymes and it’s a lot harder on their bodies because they haven’t been chronically exposed to the conditions imposed by prolonged exercise,” Wood said. “Prolonged endurance exercise increases bloodflow to the leg muscles but can shunt blood away from the gut and kidneys.”

Therefore, adequate training is key to minimizing any potentially harmful impacts marathon running can have on the body, she said.

Wood and Hoffman, the professor at the University of California, Davis, both offered some tips for safely running a marathon:

  • Pay attention to what your body is telling you during and after a run, Hoffman said.
  • When it comes to proper hydration, simply drink to thirst. By doing this, you will most likely avoid both severe dehydration, which increases the risk of kidney injury, and overhydration, which can also cause serious health issues, Hoffman said.
  • Wood added that many runners don’t like to stop for water during a race due to fear that it may significantly affect their finish time, but “being dehydrated and exercising is really bad for your organs and your physiology,” she said.
  • Make sure that you eat breakfast the morning of a race, Wood said.
  • Get a good night’s sleep the night before a race, Wood said.
  • Properly train before a marathon to avoid injury, Wood said.

“Generally, athletes recover without any need for specific medical intervention by simply rehydrating based on their thirst,” Hoffman said about what to do after running.

“It’s also important to keep this all in perspective,” he said. “While there may be some risks with marathon running, the lack of regular exercise among most of our population is far more dangerous and costly to society than the overall risks from participation in marathon running.”

Top 8 credit cards for excellent credit

Do you have excellent credit? If so, it’s time to upgrade to a better rewards credit card.

The banks are fighting harder than ever to win customers with excellent credit. Take advantage of your excellent credit today by getting a card that earns you more rewards. Our credit card experts have selected the top 8 credit card deals you can take advantage of right now:

BankAmericard Travel Rewards® Credit Card

With the BankAmericard Travel Rewards® credit card, you’ll earn 1.5 points for every dollar you spend, and points can be redeemed for nearly any travel purchase in the form of a statement credit. This card comes with a 20,000-point sign up bonus when you spend $1,000 in the first 90 days. That can be a $200 statement credit towards travel purchases, and it’s one of the few travel rewards cards with no annual fee. This card also offers no foreign transaction fees, making it perfect for traveling abroad. If you’re a traveler looking for a simple no annual fee card that won’t restrict your travel to certain airlines, giving you the flexibility to travel on any airline, at any time, with no blackout dates, then this card is for you.

Capital One® Venture® Rewards Credit Card

Another top travel card. This card earns you 2 miles for every $1 spent and comes with a 40,000 mile sign up bonus after you spend $3,000 on purchases within the first 3 months – equivalent to $400 in travel. It does have an annual fee of $59, but it’s waived the first year. The card allows you to fly any airline, stay at any hotel, anytime with no blackout dates a real plus for last minute travel plans. It also has zero foreign transaction fees and your miles don’t expire. All of these benefits make the Capital One Venture Card a great fit for all travelers and even once-a-year vacations!

Citi® Double Cash Card – 18 month BT offer

This is one of the best cash rewards card out there because it gives you cash back twice. You’ll earn 1% back when you make a purchase, and another 1% back when you make a payment. You’ll also receive a 0% intro APR on balance transfers for 18 months. This is very helpful in paying off a balance when you transfer it to this card from another credit card. The best part about this card’s cash back? There’s no limit to the amount of cash back you can earn! This card is perfect for people who don’t want to keep up with rotating categories each quarter. When used responsibly, this card is a cash back machine. With a great rewards rate, 18 months of 0% intro APR on balance transfers, and no annual fee, the Citi Double Cash is a smart choice for just about everyone!

Blue Cash Everyday® Card from American Express

The Blue Cash Everyday® Card from American Express is one of the more unique cash back cards. It’s best for the average household. For a limited time, this card boasts an unbelievable 10% cash back at U.S. restaurants for the first 6 months, up to $200 back. It provides a competitive 3% cash back (with a $6,000 annual cap) at U.S. supermarkets, 2% at U.S. gas stations and select department stores, and 1% on all other purchases with no annual fee! This card is great for anyone that spends a lot of money on gas and groceries. The cash back is received in the form of Reward Dollars that you can redeem for statement credits. The card also has 0% intro APR on purchases and balance transfers for 12 months, so if you need to transfer your balance from another card you can put it on this with zero interest for a full year.

Discover it® Cashback Match™

This cash rewards card comes with a unique sign up bonus unlike anything you’ve seen; At the end of your first year, Discover will match the cash back you’ve earned. This is the only credit card that will match your cash back at the end of the first year. So if you earned $200 in cash back from purchases in your first year, Discover will match it, making your total cash back for the year $400! The Discover it card earns 5% cash back in popular spending categories that change each quarter and 1% on all other purchases. The 5% cash back categories include things like gas, groceries, dining, and more. On top of the incredible rewards program, this card comes with 0% intro APR on purchases and balance transfers for 14 months. There is even no annual fee, no foreign transaction fees, and no late fee for your first late payment. This card is perfect for cash rewards, financing a big purchase, transferring your high interest debt, and avoiding bank fees to help you save money.

Wells Fargo Platinum Visa® Credit Card

Looking for a unique long 0% intro APR offer and have an expensive smart phone? The Wells Fargo Platinum is the card for you. It offers a $600 protection plan for your cellphone when you pay your cell phone bill with this credit card. If you’ve ever had your phone stolen or damaged, this card could have helped cover your costs. On top of the cell phone protection benefit, the card offers 0% Intro APR for 15 months on purchases and balance transfers. After 15 months, it has a 15.90%-25.74% variable APR, however, if you pay off your bill every month, you won’t incur any interest or annual charges. There are extra perks such as free access to FICO® Credit Scores as well as convenient tools to help you create and stick to a budget while managing your spending with the My Money Map. If you would like extra cell phone protection, 15 months of interest free payments, or access to easy to use financial tools, this card is an excellent choice.

BankAmericard Cash Rewards&#8482 Credit Card

0% intro APR for 12 billing cycles, combined with 3% cash back on gas, 2% cash back on grocery stores/wholesale clubs (on up to the first $2,500 in combined grocery/wholesale club/gas purchases each quarter), and 1% cash back on everything else makes this card a top pick. Did we mention this card comes with no annual fee? In case that wasn’t enough, you’ll also gain access to Bank of America’s award winning online & mobile banking. The reward rates get even better if you have a Bank of America checking or savings account and redeem your cash rewards into your checking or savings account. Finally, when you spend just $500 in the first 90 days, about $6 a day, you’ll receive a $100 bonus. With cash back, no annual fee, a long 0% intro APR, and a $100 sign up bonus, and you can see why this card is a top pick of ours!

Wells Fargo Cash Wise Visa® Credit Card

A cash back credit card that more people should know about is the Wells Fargo Cash Wise Card. This credit card offers a sign up bonus of $150 after spending $1,000 in the first 3 months. Additionally, it offers two unique features: When you pay your monthly phone bill with the Wells Fargo Cash Wise Card you’ll get up to $600 protection on your cell phone against covered damage or theft. You’ll also receive 1.8% cash rewards on qualified mobile wallet purchases, like Apple Pay® or Android Pay® for the first 12 months of opening an account. While you take advantage of the high cash back offer, phone protection, and qualified mobile wallet purchases, you’ll also enjoy unlimited 1.5% cash rewards on virtually every purchase. There is also 0% Intro APR for 12 months on purchases and balance transfers. The variable APR is 13.74%-25.74% after the 0% intro APR for 12 months period. On top of all these amazing perks, you don’t have to worry about an annual fee. If you’re looking for a cash back card with $0 annual fee, a sign up bonus, and excellent perks, this is the card.

*Editorial Note: This content is not provided or commissioned by the credit card issuer. Any opinions, analyses, reviews or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the author’s alone, and may not have been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by the credit card issuer. This site may be compensated through the credit card issuer Affiliate Program.

‘DWTS’: First couple eliminated is…

Story highlights

  • First elimination was held Monday
  • Kattan had a previous injury which affected his dancing

Unfortunately Chris Kattan can’t help that because of a crippling injury in his past.

The former “SNL” star shared in a video on the show Monday night that he had broken his neck 14 years ago and has had multiple surgeries since then which affect his range of motion.

“Part of what I used to do was physical comedy, but now I can’t,” Kattan said with tears in his eyes. “It’s really sad when somebody says, ‘I miss the old Chris.’ That sucks to hear.”

His dance partner, Witney Carson, was also moved to tears after Kattan showed her an x-ray of his back with all the surgical pins he has.

“It’s crazy that somebody can have that happen to them, and then be brave enough to try something like this,” she said.

Low scores landed Kattan and Carson in the bottom two along with singer Charo and her partner Keo Motsepe.

The combination of the judges’ scores and audience votes sent Kattan and Carson home.

“She was an amazing inspiration, and I couldn’t have… done this without her,” Kattan said of Carson after they were eliminated. “I wish that my surgery and all that was noted before.”

What it’s like to live with lupus

Its mark on the body is often invisible. Yet millions around the world suffer from it.

Its symptoms, such as fatigue, confusion, shortness of breath and joint pain, are so common that many of its victims, predominantly women, are written off by society as “lazy or crazy.”

Yet inflammation can easily flare, leading to lengthy hospitalizations, even death. What is this frustrating, covert disease that can take such a toll?

Lupus, also known as systemic lupus erythematosus or SLE.
“But you don’t look sick,” is the most common refrain that a person with lupus will hear, said Christine Miserandino, a lupus patient and chronic disease advocate who runs a website by the same name butyoudontlooksick.com. As she often points out in her writings and speaking engagements, that well-meaning phrase can backfire.

“Many times, being pretty or not sickly looking makes it harder to validate an illness you cannot see,” said Miserandino.

Lupus risks

Lupus is a chronic inflammatory condition where the body’s immune system attacks its own healthy cells and tissues. Any system or organ in the body can be affected — the skin, lungs, blood cells, heart, joints, brain or kidneys — so lupus looks different in everyone.

Because of that, it can be hard to get a diagnosis, as doctors confuse symptoms with other diseases, or discount them entirely.

Selena Gomez and other celebrities

Actor Kristen Johnston, best known for “3rd Rock from the Sun” told her fans on Facebook that it took 17 doctors and “two fun-filled weeks in November partying at the Mayo Clinic” before she was diagnosed in 2013 with lupus myelitis. That’s a rare form of the disease that attacks the spinal cord.
When pop star Selena Gomez took a break from one of her tours, she battled rumors of substance abuse before telling the media that she had lupus.
“I’ve been through chemotherapy. That’s what my break was really about. I could’ve had a stroke,” she told Billboard.
The willingness of other celebrities to speak out, such as Grammy award winning singer Toni Braxton, U.S. soccer team player Shannon Boxx, actor and television personality Nick Cannon, and singer-songwriter Seal, who wears the scars of discoid lupus erythematosus on his face, have helped the disease gain national attention and foster understanding of its many challenges.

Lupus causes

Lupus can attack at any age, but most commonly arrives between the ages of 15 and 44. Women, African Americans, Hispanics and Asians are more likely to be affected. There is no cure and no definitive cause.

There is a form of drug-induced lupus, caused by certain antibiotic, seizure or blood pressure medications, but it normally resolves after the drug is withdrawn. In most cases, experts believe there could be a genetic component to lupus, triggered at some point by an outside cause, such as infection, even sunlight.

Lupus symptoms

Joint pain

Inflammation

Unexplained fever

Headaches

Chronic fatigue

Sensitivity to sunlight

Confusion, memory loss

Butterfly rash

Shortness of breath

While each case of lupus is unique, there are some common symptoms. Nearly everyone with lupus will experience joint pain and inflammation, which can progress to arthritis. Chronic fatigue, unexplained fever, shortness of breath, headaches, hair loss, mouth sores and sensitivity to sunlight are typical.

A facial rash that extends across the forehead, cheeks and nose, and shaped similar to a butterfly, occurs in about half of all cases.

One of the most frustrating symptoms of lupus is frequent confusion and memory loss. Around one in five people with lupus suffer from some sort of brain fog, which happens when lupus antibodies cross the blood-brain barrier and interfere with the brain’s memory center. Most attacks are mild, such as forgetting a familiar number or where you parked your car, but for some memory loss can worsen over time.
A "butterfly rash" on the face occurs in about half of cases.

Lupus also raises the risk of pregnancy complications, infections, even cancer, so obtaining treatment for the condition is critical to living with the disease.

Lupus treatment

Typical treatments for lupus include an immunosuppressant to slow the body’s attack on itself, prednisone and other types of corticosteroids to reduce inflammation, and over the counter pain relievers, such as naproxen sodium and ibuprofen to treat fever and swelling.
The first prescription treatment for lupus in over 50 years was approved in 2011 by the Food and Drug Administration. The drug, Benlysta, is a biologic, which means it was made in a living organism rather than chemically, and works by specifically targeting overactive antibodies, rather than suppressing the entire immune system. It’s given intravenously, and only to those patients for whom other treatments have become ineffective.
There is some evidence that vitamin D, fish oil and DHEA (dehydroepiandrosterone) supplements can help as well. Because sunlight is a trigger, it’s important that anyone with lupus wear protective clothing, sunglasses and sunscreen.

Lupus triggers

Lupus is a variable disease, characterized by periods of wellness with few symptoms, followed by an extreme “flare” of the disease, often triggered by a factor in the patient’s environment. Common triggers include stress, cold, flu and infections, exhaustion, ultraviolet rays from sunlight and in some cases, florescent lights, and various medications, especially those that increase sun sensitivity.

See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter.

Experts suggest avoiding flares by practicing a healthy lifestyle: eat a well-balanced diet, get plenty of sleep and exercise, and avoid as much daily stress as possible. Staying out of sunlight is also key, as is keeping a journal of symptoms to help identify flares early and get immediate medical care.