Keen to divert attention away from the fact he’s a massive fucking pedo, Donald Trump announced a new drugs initiative yesterday. TrumpRx will apparently give users “the world’s lowest prices on prescription drugs”. However, as with most of the pervert in chief’s plans, this will benefit very few average Americans.

TrumpRx is too good to be true

TrumpRx is a direct-to-consumer marketplace that gives discounted drug prices direct from manufacturers. This is done using Most Favoured Nation pricing. This basically ensures a consumer gets the product at the lowest possible price in other countries. Customers get a coupon card which they can take to participating pharmacies.

The prices listed for drugs are, by all accounts, huge discounts, anything from 33-93% off. But as a British person, it also brings into stark focus just how much disabled Americans are expected to pay per month for vital medication. What do you fucking mean it’s five hundred dollars a month for an asthma inhaler?!

There is, however, of course, a catch. The discounted drugs can only be purchased in cash. This means only those who can afford to buy the medication in the first place can access it. Most sick and disabled citizens rely on health insurance or government schemes such as Medicaid to afford their sky-high medication.

It’s also not clear yet whether buying these drugs in cash will count towards health insurance deductibles in the way that traditional prescribing will. Which means patients could be shelling out what they think is a lower price every month, whilst facing higher-than-usual insurance bills.

This means that, once again, while Trump is appearing to help all Americans, he’s only serving the wealthy few.

Trump stretching the truth again

The TrumpRX site boasts

Thanks to President Trump, the days of Big Pharma price-gouging are over. Leveraging the full weight and power of the United States of America, the President has ensured every American gets the lowest prices on prescription medications in the developed world.

This is, however, not true. According to Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker analysis, four other countries sell Ozempic for less than the $100 TrumpRx is boasting. These are also the manufacturer prices – not what the consumer often actually ends up paying. TrumpRx also has to warn that those with insurance could actually end up paying more than usual.

CNN pointed out that some of the medications listed are already available at the discounted prices Trump is bragging about

For instance, GoodRx lists multiple pharmacies where consumers can pick up Pfizer’s Duavee, which is used to treat menopause symptoms, for $30.30 without insurance – the same price as on TrumpRx.

This isn’t even Trump’s idea, as many pharmacies and manufacturers already do this. As CNN also points out, Mark Cuban has been running Cost Plus Drug since 2022. Pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk also has NovoCare, and Eli Lilly has Lilly Direct.

TrumpRx could drive up the drive of medication for those who need it most

There’s also the fact that you don’t require a prescription to purchase the drugs on TrumpRx. With a huge array of very popular and profitable drugs on offer, it could drive up the price for those who desperately need them. This could particularly be true in the case of Ozempic and other “weight loss” drugs, which are actually vital diabetes medications.

There are also fears that with these drugs being readily available at “knock-down” prices, greedy insurance companies might stop covering them. After all, if the government is claiming they’re cheap, you don’t need insurance for them, surely.

Stacie Dusetzina, a health policy professor at Vanderbilt University Medical Center told a briefing hosted by KFF [also in the CNN article linked]

Even when you have very large discounts provided for brand-name drugs, they still end up with prices that are not really that affordable to the average person. We know from research that once a price goes above about $100 a month, that a lot of people stop filling their drugs at that price point.

Let’s face it – Trump doesn’t serve the average American

The fact of the matter is, this won’t make much difference to those actually struggling with the costs of medications. It won’t do anything to ease the pressures of sick and disabled Americans who have to fight with insurance companies and their own government to get the medication they need to survive.

But it will once again benefit the rich, because let’s not forget who Trump really cares about.

Featured image via the Canary

Israel have been accused of spraying mysterious chemicals inside Lebanon.  Now the Lebanese PM and rights groups have called the attack a ‘crime’ after it emerged the chemicals were a potentially cancer-causing compound.

Prime minister Joseph Aoun called it an act of “aggression”:

This is an environmental and health crime against Lebanese citizens and their land.

These dangerous practices that target agricultural lands and the livelihoods of citizens and threaten their health and environment require the international community and relevant United Nations organisations to assume their responsibilities to stop these attacks.

Israel accused of yet another war crime

Unifil, the UN mission in Lebanon, said shortly after the attack that they’d been told about the airborne operation. They also said that it had stopped peacekeepers carrying out their duties:

Peacekeepers could not perform normal operations near the Blue Line along about a third of its length and were only able to resume normal activities after over nine hours.

The Blue Line is a 120km strip which marks the line of Israel withdrawal from south Lebanon in 2000. The UN and Lebanese army tested the chemicals. Those tests now seem to have come to a conclusion.

The Guardian said:

Lebanese authorities said that laboratory analysis identified that the spray contained glyphosate, a potent herbicide that was in 2015 classified by the World Health Organization as “probably carcinogenic to humans”.

Lebanon’s ministries of agriculture and the environment said some samples showed glyphosate at:

20 and 30 times higher than normal [use].

They said such high concentrations would:

damage vegetation in the targeted areas, with direct repercussions on agricultural production, soil fertility and ecological balance.

Others said this was another example of Israel’s scorched earth policy.

War crime?

Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said the “deeply alarming” attack may constitute a war crime:

The deliberate targeting of civilian farmland violates international humanitarian law, particularly the prohibition on attacking or destroying objects indispensable to civilian survival.

They added:

Large-scale destruction of private property without specific military necessity amounts to a war crime and undermines food security and basic livelihoods in the affected areas.

Euro-Med said they directly observed the spraying, which they considered part of

a systematic destruction of agricultural land.

The NGO warned:

This incident cannot be viewed in isolation from the scorched-earth policy pursued by the Israeli army.

Israel sprayed farmland with “pesticides of unknown composition in Syria in January 2026, causing:

widespread crop destruction, posing a serious threat to economic and food security and violating farmers’ rights to work and to an adequate standard of living by destroying their primary sources of income without military justification.

Strip aways Zionist claims about birthright and indigeneity and you’ll find nothing more mystical, historical or religiously motivated than an old-fashioned settler land grab. From Syria to Lebanon, Gaza to the West Back, the Israeli state will keep displacing locals and expanding its territory by whatever means it can, for as long as it can, until someone stops it.

Featured image via the Canary

The Israeli occupation sent a grisly delivery to what’s left of the al-Shifa hospital in Gaza yesterday, 5 February. Bags were delivered containing dismembered bodies and body parts.

Speaking to al-Arabi, hospital director Dr Mohammed Abu Silmiya said that the occupation had delivered 66 bags of human body parts along with 55 Palestinian corpses to the hospital. On opening the bodies, shocked hospital staff found they contained skulls.

None of the bodies or body parts bore any identification. The bodies returned showed clear signs of severe mutilation consistent with systematic organ theft and medical experimentation. Many of the skulls also bore surgical incisions.

At least ten thousand Palestinians are detained indefinitely without charge in Israel, where many suffer starvation, rape and frequent torture. Thousands more are officially ‘missing’, many of them likely still buried under millions of tonnes of rubble. The occupation refuses to allow bulldozers and other clearance equipment into Gaza so that bodies can be recovered.

Abu Silmiya said that this latest horror is yet more evidence of Israel’s serious and systematic violations of human dignity and international humanitarian law during the Gaza genocide.

No western ‘mainstream’ media have bothered to report it.

This is not the first such incident. Israel has routinely dumped large piles of its Palestinian victims’ bodies on waste ground in Gaza. Many bear marks of torture, execution and organ theft.

Featured image via Aljazeera

Anti-genocide direct action activist Drew Robson has today, 6 February 2025, won his appeal to quash his conviction for criminal damage. Robson occupied the Manchester office of Fisher German, at the time property manager for Israeli weapons firm Elbit Systems. The firm eventually cut all ties with Elbit after a sustained pressure campaign.

Drew Robson wins his appeal

Drew Robson’s appeal victory comes hot on the heels of a jury’s refusal to convict six members of the ‘Filton 24’ group of anti-genocide direct action activists. They were the first of their group to face trial and won despite the attempts of a judge to pressure the jury into convicting. If found guilty, all could have faced sentences of up to 20 years prison. The 24 have been jailed for up to 19 months without trial. Some face more than a year’s further wait as Starmer seeks to protect Israel by punishing protest and free speech against genocide.

 

View this post on Instagram

Advertisement

 

A post shared by Da’m Support – Defend & Mobilise (@da3m.support)

Featured image via screengrab

Content warning: this article contains discussion of rape and sexual assault

After almost a year’s silence on the matter, author Neil Gaiman released a statement this week to once again deny the allegations of sexual assault against him.

The allegations against Gaiman date back to 2024. They were first reported on the Tortoise Media podcast Master: The Allegations Against Neil Gaiman. The New York Vulture then published a more lengthy – and widely read – article in 2025 entitled:

There Is No Safe Word

How the best-selling fantasy author Neil Gaiman hid the darkest parts of himself for decades.

Beginning with an initial two, eventually nine women would come forward with allegations including rape, other forms of sexual assault, and non-consensual and un-negotiated BDSM practices. Many of the descriptions are graphic in the extreme, and I try not to repeat them here without need.

‘I should have done so much better’

At the time, 14 January 2025, Gaiman put out a statement on his blog denying the accusations. He described re-reading messages from the accusers on the dates of the situations they described as assault – messages which displayed consent.

These messages are now a matter of public record. They do appear to display consent, although the Vulture article framed this as a product of being scared to upset Gaiman.

In his statement, Gaiman also wrote:

And I also realise, looking through them, years later, that I could have and should have done so much better. I was emotionally unavailable while being sexually available, self-focused and not as thoughtful as I could or should have been.

However, he also stated unambiguously that all of his relationships were consensual, and that:

Some of the horrible stories now being told simply never happened, while others have been so distorted from what actually took place that they bear no relationship to reality. I am prepared to take responsibility for any missteps I made. I’m not willing to turn my back on the truth, and I can’t accept being described as someone I am not, and cannot and will not admit to doing things I didn’t do.

However, production companies moved quickly to cancel adaptations of Gaiman’s works across stage and screen. These projects included a musical version of Coraline, a Disney production of The Graveyard Book, and the Netflix adaptation of Dead Boy Detectives. 

‘Smear campaign’: Neil Gaiman

Gaiman then remained relatively removed from the public eye for over a year. However, on 2 February 2026, he posted a new statement. Again, he denied all of the allegations against himself:

I’ve learned firsthand how effective a smear campaign can be, so to be clear:

The allegations against me are completely and simply untrue. There are emails, text messages and video evidence that flatly contradict them.

In particular, Gaiman decried the “echo chamber” of journalism reporting on the allegations. He spoke about his conviction that the “truth would, eventually, come out”:

I expected that when the allegations were first made there would be journalism, and that the journalism would take the (mountains of) evidence into account, and was astonished to see how much of the reporting was simply an echo chamber, and how the actual evidence was dismissed or ignored.

Then, he went on to single out one blogger whom he believed exemplified the journalistic rigor he’d expected:

I was a journalist once, and I have enormous respect for journalists, so I’ve been hugely heartened by the meticulous fact and evidence-based investigative writing of one particular journalist, whom some of you recently brought to my attention, who writes under the name of TechnoPathology.

This investigator, Technopathology, produced pages and pages of reporting on Gaiman, under the umbrella title of “Neil Gaiman is Innocent”. Gaiman actually linked to the introductory page of the Substack blog in his statement.

Technopathology and ‘Neil Gaiman is innocent’

For full disclosure, in writing this article I read a lot of Technopathology’s blog, but not all of it. There is an awful lot to get through, and I have other articles to write. The author makes some valid points about the overall timbre of the reporting and its motivations, and some that I found reaching or off-mark. I’ll get to them later.

Technopathology’s introduction to their extensive project contained a complaint that there was “no room for nuance” in the reporting on Gaiman:

Even requiring evidence was deemed to be ‘‘victim blaming’’. No deviation from the party line, (that is to say – utter and complete condemnation) went unpunished.

This type of complaint will be familiar to anyone who observed public reactions to the MeToo movement. Technopathology talks about the importance of the MeToo movement, but couples that with their disbelief in the specific allegations against Gaiman.

In the introduction, the author mentioned something that made me sit up in my seat:

I wasn’t completely unprepared, I am after all a journalist and make all of my paltry income from writing. I have a steady beat with technology trade magazines, and used to pen a lot of political articles for The Canary. But I had no idea what form the investigation should take. It was new territory.

So, a fellow (ex-)Canary writer. One other mention of the Canary on the blog indicated that they were around for the inception of the site, long before my time or that of most of the current employees. After a bit of digging, we’re confident in our guess on who they are, but that’s not terribly important for this article.

Fact and speculation

Some of the points that Technopathology raises in their articles are valid. In particular, they highlight that the allegations against Gaiman were gleefully seized upon and amplified by elements of the far-right, including Nazi-types and transphobes, due to Gaiman’s Jewish heritage and outspoken support for LGBTQ+ causes.

However, other conclusions that they draw are much more of a stretch. This includes speculation that one accuser, Caroline Wallner, could in fact have known another, Scarlet Pavlovich, before they made their allegations, which could potentially cast doubt on the similarities in their accounts of Gaiman’s behavior.

The problem is that Technopathology’s speculation rests on the fact that Wallner is a friend of Michael Stipe, the lead singer of REM:

Interestingly, Michael Stipe is good friends with Tilda Swinton, who Scarlett Pavlovich says personally gave her a scholarship to her school in Scotland. I’m not altogether convinced that there was no prior contact between the accusers, so these degrees of separation are interesting.

This is quite an extraordinary reach, even if it is framed as a speculation.

Consent is consent

However, and most importantly, I feel that Technopathology elides some of the features of the cases that simply shouldn’t be ignored. For example, the blogger highlights one exchange between Pavlovich and Gaiman, and the way the Master podcast framed it. Pavlovich told Gaiman that:

I have told Amanda [Palmer, Gaiman’s then-wife] that even though it began questionably eventually it was undoubtedly consensual and I enjoyed it.

Technopathology then highlighted their problems with the the reporting of the exchange:

Master of course zooms in on ‘’questionably’’ rather than ‘‘undoubtedly consensual’’. Questionable does not mean non-consensual, and it’s not certain what element is questionable. There’s always ways to do better.

I would point out that if the very first sexual encounter between two people features ‘questionable’ consent, then that’s no consent at all. If consent isn’t firmly and unambiguously established beforehand, it can’t be gained retroactively when people are left to decide what happened. That’s not how this is meant to work.

Pavlovich’s relationship with Gaiman began the day she arrived at his house to work informally as a nanny. Gaiman ran her a bath in the middle of the garden. He then later climbed in with her. Technopathology quotes from Pavlovich’s interview on Master regarding the encounter:

“He ended up sort of asking me to put my legs down and I ignored him.”

We should note that he is ‘asking’, she is not compelled to put her legs down, thus revealing her body.

Advertisement

But the next time he asks, she does. There is no force here. This is an action freely taken, at Gaiman’s request.

“He asked me again and sort of gestured, so I put them down.”

Again, the problem with Technopathology’s framing here is that when Gaiman made a sexual advance that Pavlovich didn’t take up, that should have been the end of it. Anything after that point carries an implicit threat, because it doesn’t take a lack of ‘yes’ as an answer in itself.

Neil Gaiman and Technopathology

Technopathology later writes that:

Reluctant consent vs enthusiastic consent is a big topic of discussion, but its a lot to go into here. Suffice to say, in legal terms, even reluctant consent is still consent – and it’s not clear if she was reluctant at the time or if this a later reframing. Certainly the WhatsApp messages affirm an enthusiastic consent, effusively and repeatedly.

Definitions of sexual assault and rape vary from country to country. As such, I’m not particularly concerned with guilt or innocence in the law, and I won’t make pronouncements on it.

However, what I will say with confidence is that anyone who was particularly concerned with consent probably wouldn’t show up naked to a bathtub someone else was in without asking first.

Even if they missed that detail, making requests that the other person doesn’t acquiesce to isn’t a prompt to ask again.

Technopathology, among their many articles on Gaiman’s purported innocence, analyses a lot of situations and exchanges around Gaiman in similar detail. You can go read them if you like.

However, I chose the bathtub scene as an illustrative example. The fact that Gaiman pointed specifically to Technopathology’s Substack as the kind of journalistic integrity he expects is a point that I find damning in itself.

Yes, Technopathology poured at length over the reporting and some of the dubious motivations behind it. They also took it upon themself to scour the accusers’ stories for inconsistencies. However, the blogger’s actual understanding of consent is very, very different to mine, and – I would hope – most everyone else’s, too.

If that’s what Gaiman thinks is proof of his innocence, I’d hate to see his definition of guilt.

Featured image via the Canary

On the red carpet at the premiere of Wuthering Heights – Australian actress Margot Robbie, when asked about her stunning necklace made two glaringly inaccurate statements.

Firstly, Robbie legitimises the ownership of the jewel to Hollywood:

It’s Elizabeth Taylor’s necklace. It is the Taj Mahal diamond that Richard Burton gave it to her… there is something kind of Cathy and Heathcliff about Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor in my mind.