Selena Gomez has married music producer and songwriter Benny Blanco, announcing the news in an Instagram post showing the couple kissing and embracing on a lawn.”My wife in real life,” Blanco responded to the post Saturday by the Grammy- and Emmy-nominated performer. Gomez wore a white halter bridal dress with floral flourishes, and Blanco wore a tuxedo and bow tie, both custom-made by Ralph Lauren. Video above: Selena Gomez goes cold turkey for good reasonPaparazzi had snapped photos of a massive outdoor tent and other preparations in the Santa Barbara area.Friends in the entertainment industry and brands she’s linked to responded with heart emoji and congratulations. “Our Mabel is MARRIED,” said the account of her “Only Murders in the Building” series, and her Rare Beauty line of cosmetics posted: “so happy for you two.” Best wishes were also sent by Camila Cabello, Amy Schumer and others.Blanco, 37, and Gomez, 33, met about a decade ago and got engaged at the end of last year. They worked together on the 2019 song “I Can’t Get Enough,” which also featured J Balvin and Tainy. Among the songs he’s credited on as a writer and producer: Katy Perry’s “Teenage Dream,” “Circus” by Britney Spears and Maroon 5’s “Moves Like Jagger.”Gomez, whose hits include “Calm Down,” “Good for You,” ”Same Old Love” and “Come & Get It,” has been in the spotlight since she was a child. She appeared on “Barney and Friends” before breaking through as a teen star on the Disney Channel’s “Wizards of Waverly Place.” She earned awards nominations in recent years for her ongoing role alongside Martin Short and Steve Martin in Hulu’s “Only Murders in the Building.” Gomez has a massive audience on social media with 417 million Instagram followers, the most for any woman on the platform.
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. —
Selena Gomez has married music producer and songwriter Benny Blanco, announcing the news in an Instagram post showing the couple kissing and embracing on a lawn.
“My wife in real life,” Blanco responded to the post Saturday by the Grammy- and Emmy-nominated performer. Gomez wore a white halter bridal dress with floral flourishes, and Blanco wore a tuxedo and bow tie, both custom-made by Ralph Lauren.
Video above: Selena Gomez goes cold turkey for good reason
Paparazzi had snapped photos of a massive outdoor tent and other preparations in the Santa Barbara area.
Friends in the entertainment industry and brands she’s linked to responded with heart emoji and congratulations. “Our Mabel is MARRIED,” said the account of her “Only Murders in the Building” series, and her Rare Beauty line of cosmetics posted: “so happy for you two.” Best wishes were also sent by Camila Cabello, Amy Schumer and others.
Blanco, 37, and Gomez, 33, met about a decade ago and got engaged at the end of last year. They worked together on the 2019 song “I Can’t Get Enough,” which also featured J Balvin and Tainy.
Among the songs he’s credited on as a writer and producer: Katy Perry’s “Teenage Dream,” “Circus” by Britney Spears and Maroon 5’s “Moves Like Jagger.”
Gomez, whose hits include “Calm Down,” “Good for You,” ”Same Old Love” and “Come & Get It,” has been in the spotlight since she was a child. She appeared on “Barney and Friends” before breaking through as a teen star on the Disney Channel’s “Wizards of Waverly Place.”
She earned awards nominations in recent years for her ongoing role alongside Martin Short and Steve Martin in Hulu’s “Only Murders in the Building.” Gomez has a massive audience on social media with 417 million Instagram followers, the most for any woman on the platform.
I’ve never really fancied the idea of marriage or being someone’s wife. But I am very much in love with my partner of 13 years. So, to celebrate, we decided to throw a ‘non-wedding’, instead. We’d always loved going to weddings together but always felt it wasn’t really ‘us’. But one thing we knew we wanted was a party. Yes, I wore a white dress, there were speeches, there were even tears… but no vows were exchanged, and no legal contracts were made. We chose a bar that was strenuously quirky, shamelessly kitsch and served the strongest cocktails in South East London – which suited our non-traditional event perfectly.
Some said we were “having our wedding cake and eating it”.
But on the invitation, we called it a ‘Til Death do us Part-y’.
We’re a 30-something heterosexual couple – we call each other ‘partner’ and we live together in a traditional way. So, what prompted the decision to not tie the knot?
Well, both sets of our parents are divorced, so it’s fair to say that we’ve not seen marriages lasting until the “death do us part” bit. Although our parents are all happy now, either in new relationships, married again or happily dating, statistics showing that nearly half of marriages end in divorce didn’t exactly make us want to rush out and book the registry office.
It’s actually our friends who have shown us that there are lots of ways to be in relationships, whether they are straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, non-monogamous or asexual. Don’t get me wrong, most of our friends are married or want to be married, but seeing other partnership styles has changed our perspective.
I sat with three consultants to go through the next stages. I was given two options. There’s the medical route, which involves taking a tablet that allows the foetus to pass through naturally – the other option was surgery to remove the foetus and my right fallopian tube. I didn’t initially want the surgery, as it would be so invasive and I felt I’d lose a part of me.
According to the NHS, an ectopic pregnancy is “when a fertilised egg implants itself outside of the womb, usually in one of the fallopian tubes”. It adds: “If an egg gets stuck in them, it won’t develop into a baby and your health may be at risk if the pregnancy continues. Unfortunately, it’s not possible to save the pregnancy. It usually has to be removed using medicine or an operation.”
In my case, I was told to wait. I was sent home that day, and had another blood test the following morning to see if my HCG levels were lowering (indicating my body was naturally flowing the foetus through). But they didn’t lower – and I started to experience extremely heavy bleeding, soaking through numerous sanitary towels. Another scan showed that my fallopian tube had started to rupture, with internal bleeding in my stomach – and a life-saving operation was my only option.
I went straight into emergency surgery, with my boyfriend and mum right by my side when I woke. I lost my right fallopian tube during the procedure, but was lucky enough to keep both ovaries – meaning as usual they take it in turns to release an egg but only go through one fallopian tube instead. I still have a 60-80% chance of a healthy pregnancy again one day. Luckily, from that day, my period has been on time ever since, despite my PCOS.
I didn’t think I’d be one of the one in 90 pregnancies that become ectopic in the UK, but sadly I was. When I look back, I wish I knew the signs more clearly – but ectopic pregnancy is notoriously hard to spot, since the symptoms often seem like those of a normal early pregnancy.
At the age of 23, an ectopic pregnancy wasn’t even something I’d heard of before. Now, I’m so glad that my instinct told me that something wasn’t right, and I sought out another opinion.
February 7th 2024 would have been my due date. I never thought my experience of ectopic pregnancy would have affected me as much as it did. Even though the pregnancy wasn’t planned, I still missed something I never had.
Signing a few legal documents before surgery meant I agreed that the hospital would cremate their remains, scattering the ashes in their garden amongst all their flowers. Now, each time I look down at the three little scars on my tummy, it means a part of my nine-week-old baby’s self will always be a part of me.
If you have questions about ectopic pregnancies, speak to your GP. For baby loss support, visit tommys.org.
This year, I’m going to get into shape. It does not matter that I’ve made this same resolution every year for more than a decade, or that I gave up after a month each time. In 2024, I mean it. Unlike years past, my motivation is not aesthetic but utilitarian: I want to get fit so I stop feeling like garbage. As I enter my late 30s, I’m struggling with the health issues that come with the terrain—high blood pressure, lower-back pain, and persistently achy joints. On top of those, I’m a new mom, chronically sleep-deprived and exhausted. My six-month-old son saps all my energy but also steels my resolve to protect it.
With all my new motivation, I first had to find a workout regime. Scrolling through social media for inspiration, I saw athletes of every variety across my feed. There were people sweating it out at a Navy SEAL–style workout, a Muay Thai–inspired kickboxing class, and a workout designed and taught by former inmates. Yoga isn’t just yoga anymore; it can be hot, aerial, acrobatic, Drake, and even goat. Personal trainers shout commands through media including YouTube, VR headsets, and, uh, mirrors. You can work out alone or in a group (or alone in a group, if Peloton is your thing). For the graceful, there is barre; for the nerds, there is a Lord of the Rings–themed app that logs exercise as movement from the Shire to Mordor.
We are living in a golden age of fitness: With workouts to accommodate every skill level, interest, time commitment, and social capacity, it should be easier than ever for novices to find one and get started. But it’s not. Instead of finding a workout that suited me, choice overload left me even more inert, and less motivated, than I was when I started my search. If you’re serious about committing to a fitness regime, choosing one isn’t just about moving your body. It could shape your future schedule, lifestyle, and even identity. To others, the way you exercise might say something about who you are, whether that’s a marathon maniac or a #PelotonMom. To the exercise newbie, this can make the stakes feel dauntingly high.
The stakes are high. Exercise will lead to results only if you do it consistently, potentially spending hours on it each week. It’s essential to pick right. I was never fitter than when I played in a basketball league in my early 20s and was held accountable for going to games and practice. Since then, I’ve only dabbled in activities—like kickboxing, spinning, and something called Dance Church. None of them stuck. In the search for the ideal workout, baseline criteria include practical concerns such as location and affordability. No matter how exciting the class, a gym that’s out of the way or prohibitively expensive is not one you will attend regularly. Then there is what I call doability—as in, Can my body do that? Answering honestly can eliminate unlikely options, such as the gruelingcircuit that turned actors into Spartans for the movie 300. Being too pragmatic, however, can also stifle fitness aspirations. If your goal is an eight-pack, the “lazy-girl workout” probably isn’t going to cut it.
Ruling out options based on practicality only whittles the list down so much. The next step is harder: figuring out what you actually want to do. For a goal as broad as “get in shape,” you can drive yourself crazy trying to find the answer. Picking a workout that ticks all the boxes is virtually impossible, because there will always be other options that seem better. At first, streaming Yoga With Adriene in my living room seemed like a cheap, enjoyable, and physically demanding option, but it lacked a social component to hold me accountable. Programs inspired by high-intensity interval training (HIIT), such as F45, promise to get people ripped—fast!—but exercising under a constant deadline is my idea of hell. I found flaws in workouts as varied as rock climbing, rugby, Orangetheory, Tabata, Aqua Tabata, and Tabata-style spinning.
Adding to the gravity of the decision is what it signals about who you are. Personal fitness is rarely personal these days. Stereotypes inform the culture of certain workouts and how their adherents are seen: Indoor rock climbing is associated with tech bros, running with intensely driven morning people, weight lifting with gym rats. Many boutique workouts come with even more distinct personality types, perpetuated by the communities they spawn in real life and on social media. Perhaps the most recognizable is the CrossFit Bro, an aggressive, bandanna-wearing jock who can’t stop talking about CrossFit. Pure Barre and SoulCycle call to mind lithe, athleisure-clad smoothie drinkers; Peloton, the kind of person who can afford a Peloton.
New identities can also form by virtue of the lifestyle shifts that these workouts can bring about. Friendships are nurtured by sweat spilled during class; exercise may even shift eating habits. For some, fitness programs become so embedded in daily life that they begin to resemble institutionalized religion. In an extreme case of life imitating exercise, a couple who met at CrossFit got married and served a paleo cake at their wedding, which was held during a CrossFit competition. Because exercise is so good at fostering community, the search for a workout is sometimes described as finding “your tribe.”
These stereotypes are not always true, of course, and they can also be aspirational. Embarrassed as I am to admit it, I would love to be a smoothie girl. But the notion of joining a tribe makes pedaling on a stationary bike or joining a rock-climbing gym feel much more consequential than the activities themselves. I was getting nowhere in my own fitness search, so I turned to experts for a reality check. Selecting from a multitude of fitness options is “quite a dilemma,” Sarah Ullrich-French, a kinesiology professor at Washington State University, told me, but the way out is to focus on what feels good, physically and psychologically. Fitness identities, however palpable, only have to mean something if you want them to. If the stereotype of the intensely focused predawn runner inspires you to get up for a morning jog, lean into it. But if it seems like an annoying downside to running, it’s okay to treat it as such. Pay attention to workouts that bring up anxiety and dread; even if you aspire towards a certain identity, “negative associations and feelings will often win over our goals and what we think we should do,” Ullrich-French said.
Part of my problem was having a goal that was too diffuse. Theoretically any workout could help me get fit, but if I refined my ambition to, say, “getting up the stairs to work without heaving,” doing so would narrow my options to exercises that optimize stamina and strength. Instead of immediately signing up for a weekly running club, start with small, attainable goals, such as taking the time to stretch each morning, Adam Makkawi, an assistant professor of medicine at Columbia University, told me. Small goals are easier to achieve, and can help make more workout options a real possibility.
My biggest mistake was to treat choosing a workout as an intellectual endeavor, sort of like shopping for a new vacuum by reading endless online reviews. Test several options, and when you’ve found one that you like, customize its intensity and frequency until it suits you, Catherine Sabiston, a professor of kinesiology and physical education at the University of Toronto, told me. The likelihood you’ll stick to it, she added, boils down to competency—how well you feel you can accomplish a task—and enjoyment, both of which can be known only through experience.
Choice overload is real, but it can also be a powerful excuse to stay inert. Although a little self-reflection about fitness identities can be helpful, fixating on them can rule out perfectly viable options. In this spirit, I compiled a list of doable, challenging, and conceivably fun workouts to try—and even mustered up excitement for a fitness identity that brought me joy. This week, I begin my search in earnest, embarking on a virtual Lord of the Rings running journey across the rugged terrain of Middle Earth.
According to “common factors theory,” the essence of successful therapy lies in shared core elements, and the differences between therapeutic approaches are often less important than fulfilling these fundamental criteria.
One frequent question people ask themselves when they first decide to seek therapy is, “What type of therapy should I get?”
There are many different types of talk therapy to choose from. Often specific types of therapy are geared toward specific mental disorders. Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy is common for depression and anxiety disorders, Dialectic Behavioral Therapy is common for bipolar and mood disorders, and EMDR is common among those with PTSD.
How much do these therapies differ? How much does it matter?
One interesting idea in psychology is “common factors theory.” The basic premise is that effective therapy isn’t necessarily based on any specific type of therapeutic tool or technique, but rather there are underlying factors behind all therapies that make them successful.
Many therapeutic systems have been invented over the past century. Today, every popular therapist or coach has their own trademarked brand that’s sold as the absolute best approach to mental health.
The less glamorous truth is that most successful therapies aren’t special. There’s significant overlap between different approaches, with a couple extra bells and whistles. However, at the end of the day the biggest reason they are successful is because they all meet fundamental criteria.
Below you’ll learn more about these “common factors” behind successful therapy, including: collaboration, empathy, alliance, positive regard, genuineness, and individual differences.
6 Common Factors Behind All Successful Therapy
One interesting study identified 6 common factors behind all “evidence-based” therapy. They also calculated estimates on how much each factor contributed to the overall variability of therapeutic outcomes.
Here are the 6 common factors behind all successful therapy:
Goal consensus / collaboration (11.5%) – The most important factor is that both the therapist and client share the same goal and they’re willing to work together to achieve it. A goal can be anything from managing negative emotions, to stopping bad habits, to improving communication skills. If their goals mismatch (such as the client not wanting to change or the therapist wanting to go in a different direction), then it’ll be difficult if not impossible to make any progress. Both people need to be on the same page.
Empathy (9%) – The therapist must have a clear understanding of who their patient is and where they are coming from. This means being aware of their current thoughts and feelings, but also learning a comprehensive history of that patient’s past experiences and background. We build empathy by seeking knowledge and understanding about another person. Don’t try to guess, label, or project where someone is coming from. Ask questions and learn. A therapist must treat each person as their own individual case. A scientific study of n=1. Every person has a unique story and a therapist’s job is to learn each person’s story.
Alliance (7.5%) – Both therapist and client must see their relationship as a partnership where each puts in equal effort to realize their shared goal. For the therapist, this means providing advice, encouragement, compliments, and constructive feedback. For the client, this means putting in work outside of the therapy session (in everyday life) so they actually see changes and results. A healthy alliance requires three main components: 1) A shared bond between therapist and client, 2) Agreement about the goals of therapy, and 3) Agreement about the tasks to achieve it (practical advice, tips, suggestions, exercises, homework). Therapy has to be viewed as more than just talking once per week, but rather an impetus to work together, create a plan, and achieve real progress.
Positive regard / affirmation (7.3%) – It’s important that the therapist treats the patient with optimism, positivity, compliments, and encouragement. While a therapist sometimes needs to provide critical and constructive feedback, they should generally promote the patient’s self-esteem and core values. If a therapist tries to fundamentally change something about a person that they don’t want to, there’s naturally going to be conflict and difficulties. One idea known as unconditional positive regard was popularized by the humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers. He highlighted the importance of being agreeable and respectful toward the patient’s core beliefs, values, and goals (even if you disagree with them). Rogers saw therapy as a tool to encourage self-discovery and self-awareness, not tell a patient exactly how they should live their life.
Congruence / genuineness (5.7%) – Both the therapist and patient need to be open, genuine, and authentic. If the patient feels the therapist is just “putting on an act” or “pretending to be nice,” they are going to want to pullback and disengage from the process. A good therapist needs to be just as vulnerable as the patient. This means sharing relevant thoughts and feelings, being honest and matter-of-fact, and being willing to express emotions when appropriate. One telltale sign of incongruence is when there is a mismatch in body language (including posture, facial expressions, or tone of voice). If a therapist’s words don’t match their body language, the patient likely won’t develop any trust or rapport.
Therapist differences (5%) – The last important factor, which may be beyond our control, is personality differences between the therapist and client. Not everyone is designed to get along with everyone, and sometimes the therapist and patient are just too different when it comes to attitude, temperament, background, or lifestyle. Many therapy sessions don’t work out simply because the therapist/patient relationship doesn’t seem to mesh right. This is why it’s recommended that a person tries out multiple therapists when first starting out. Then they can find someone that fits with their personality and a therapist to commit to long-term.
These are the 6 most common factors behind successful therapy. They account for ~50% of the total variability in therapeutic outcomes, so there are still many other factors at play.
In truth, different types of therapies have their advantages and disadvantages, and certain approaches may work better for some and not at all for others.
Regardless of the system, successful therapy often needs to meet the basic requirements listed above. Without these common factors being met, no technique or approach is going to work.
A Warning on Overspecialized Therapy
A therapist needs to be flexible in their approach and try not to force fit everyone into their preferred model.
The more a person is trained and/or educated on a specific field in psychology, the more they seem to be “locked in” to only one way of observing the human condition. They don’t talk to people as human beings at face value, but instead think, “How does this person fit into my cognitive/behavioral/psychodynamic/evolutionary model?”
Expertise (and overspecialization) can narrow vision. A certain element of beginner’s mind is the best approach to therapy. Start with the basic questions, “Who is this person? What do they care about? What makes them tick? What do they want to change?”
Assume nothing and ask questions. Learn about the person from scratch. Connect to them human-to-human and see where it goes.
More concerning, certain therapies have become popularized and over-hyped in recent years. They’ve turned into commercial brands. “Cognitive-behavioral therapy” has become a buzzword in many circles because the average person associates it with the only “evidence-based” therapy.
Of course I’m not against specific therapies. I’ve learned a lot of helpful tools and techniques from various systems (including CBT) that I still practice today.
At the end of the day, I’m a pragmatist, so there’s almost no therapy, treatment, medication, or technique I’m 100% for or against. If it helps just one person, then it’s that much effective.
However, in general, a good therapist needs to have a comprehensive understanding of how humans work. Tools and techniques can be in your back-pocket, but first and foremost you need to approach people as individual human beings seeking growth.
Successful therapy can’t be reduced to a checklist.
The Gloria Tapes: 3 Therapeutic Approaches
This topic reminds me of an old series of videos known as the Gloria Tapes.
It was an educational film made in the 1960s to teach psychology students the differences between therapeutic approaches.
The series follows a single patient, Gloria, who receives therapy from three distinguished psychologists of the time: Carl Rogers, Fritz Perls, and Albert Ellis.
The therapy is limited since it’s only one session each, but you can get a good understanding of the radically different approaches by each therapist.
You can watch each of the sessions here:
Each of these videos reveals a different approach to therapy.
Albert Ellis is most aligned with modern cognitive and rational-based approaches. Carl Rogers has a more gentle and humanistic approach. Fritz Perls has a direct and provocative approach (almost to the point of bullying).
If I remember correctly, the patient Gloria felt the most comfortable with Rogers, but she actually went for a second session with Perls. I don’t know how to interpret that – it’s possible she felt “unfinished business” with Perls or she simply enjoyed arguing with him.
None of this says anything about “successful therapy.” Just one session isn’t adequate to measure “success” vs. “failure” when it comes to a long-term process like self-growth. However, these examples will give you a taste for the different types of therapies out there.
Ultimately, successful therapy depends on both therapist and patient. The most important factor is to have a healthy, working relationship and a “build together” attitude. Once you have that foundation, anything is possible.
Stay updated on new articles and resources in psychology and self improvement:
Two weeks before chaos hit St. Luke’s hospital in Boise, Idaho—before Ammon Bundy showed up with an armed mob and the hospital doors had to be sealed and death threats crashed the phone lines—a 10-month-old baby named Cyrus Anderson arrived in the emergency room.
The boy’s parents, Marissa and Levi, knew something wasn’t right: For months, Cyrus had been having episodes of vomiting that wouldn’t stop. When he arrived in the ER, he weighed just 14 pounds, which put him in the .05th percentile for his age. Natasha Erickson, the doctor who examined him, had seen malnutrition cases like this in textbooks but never in real life. Cyrus’s ribs were clearly visible through his chest. When he threw up, his vomit was bright green.
Erickson hooked the baby up to an IV and a feeding tube, and he slowly started to gain weight. But Levi and Marissa were anxious to leave. They were members of an anti-government activist network that Bundy, the scion of America’s foremost far-right family, had founded, and they shared his distrust of medical and public-health authorities. To Marissa—whose father, Diego Rodriguez, is himself an extremist leader and Bundy’s close friend—the hospital was a “lion’s den.”
By the next evening, Levi and Marissa were demanding to take their baby home, but hospital staff said it wasn’t yet safe. They left a few days later, with instructions to bring Cyrus in for follow-up appointments. When they failed to show up for a scheduled weigh-in at a local clinic the following week—Marissa was feeling sick herself and decided to postpone it—a nurse there referred the case to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. Cyrus missed another appointment that afternoon at St. Luke’s, and another nurse contacted the detective on the case. Someone had to see the infant right away, she said.
That night, officers pulled the family over at a gas station in nearby Garden City. Marissa begged for Bundy’s help by phone. “They’re trying to take my baby. They’re trying to take my baby,” she kept telling him, until she was out of breath. Police lights were flashing all around her as a crowd began to gather. She couldn’t understand how things had escalated so fast.
Bundy put out a call for help from his group, the People’s Rights Network, which claimed to have more than 50,000 members, and told Marissa to livestream what was happening on Facebook. When a police officer demanded that she hand Cyrus over, she pleaded with him. “Do you understand what happens when the state takes custody of babies?” she said. “I’ve seen this so many times. I can’t be that next person—I can’t.” While Bundy was driving to the gas station, he learned that both Levi and Marissa had been arrested, and Cyrus was on the way to another St. Luke’s branch, an ER about 10 miles away in Meridian. Bundy and his supporters headed there.
Within an hour, a small crowd was blocking the ambulance bay, forcing the hospital to divert patients elsewhere. Protesters shouted that the hospital staff were kidnappers and child molesters. Some followed nurses to their cars as they left the building. Bundy himself was arrested for trespassing on hospital property, and Rachel Thomas, the lead doctor in the ER that night, feared that the crowd would break down the doors and try to take the baby.
Protesters gather outside St. Luke’s Boise Medical Center in downtown Boise, Idaho, in March 2022. (Darin Oswald / Idaho Statesman / AP)
In the early hours of the next morning, after getting out of jail, Bundy posted a video urging more of his followers to join the protest. “It’s just sickening, sickening, sickening,” he said. “These people believe they have the authority to take our little babies. They are wicked.”
By that time, it was clear to Dr. Thomas that the child had to be moved back to the hospital in Boise as quickly as possible for security reasons. She wrapped Cyrus in a blanket and carried him through the bowels of the hospital to an ambulance at a back entrance. Security officers led the way, searching each area for intruders before giving the “all clear” and letting her enter. She felt like she was in a cheap action movie. To avoid the crowd, the ambulance jumped the median as it made a U-turn and sped east on I-84.
Dr. Erickson met Cyrus on his arrival. He looked even sicker than he had the week before. His weight now put him below the .02nd percentile. As doctors reinserted the IV and the feeding tube, Bundy sent out a new People’s Rights alert redirecting the crowd to the Boise campus. Protesters arrived with Free Baby Cyrus signs. Bundy told his followers to call St. Luke’s, and soon threats were pouring in by the hundreds.
“The parents of a child have all the rights,” one caller said. “I need you to remind everybody who works there before we come and lop off your fucking head, bitch. We will fucking kill you.” Rodriguez, Marissa’s father, began holding regular rallies at the hospital and at one of them called on God to “crush the necks of those that are evil.” Three days into this ordeal, the FBI and state authorities warned St. Luke’s that some of Bundy’s followers were planning to storm in and take the baby by force. About 30 Boise police officers were called in. Hospital workers constructed a barricade of furniture to block access to the children’s wing.
As the protest escalated, Health and Welfare workers spirited Cyrus to a secret location, where they babysat him in shifts. A few days later, and about a pound heavier, he was returned to his parents. The protesters dispersed, and Bundy and Rodriguez celebrated. Cyrus’s return home, Bundy said, was nothing short of “a miracle.”
In the months that followed, Bundy pleaded guilty to misdemeanor trespassing at the hospital and avoided time in jail. But the protests he and Rodriguez had fomented with their false accusations of child trafficking resulted in a civil suit against them. This past August, after a weeklong trial that Bundy and Rodriguez skipped, a judge assessed $52 million in damages, almost certainly more than their combined net worth.
Bundy has promised to hold firm. If the county sheriff ever showed up on his property to collect, he told one interviewer, he’d “meet ’em at the front door with my friends and shotgun.”
In early August, I flew out to Idaho to visit Bundy. But at 3:11 a.m. the night before we were scheduled to meet, he texted me to cancel. He was on the verge of financial ruin, he said, and it was getting harder and harder to shield his children from the effects. The message went on for some 230 words about how a man described as one of America’s most dangerous right-wing extremists was “fighting a lot of emotional anxiety.”
If he did confront the sheriff, it wouldn’t be the first time his family had done battle with the law. In 2014, about a thousand militiamen and other supporters helped his family repel government agents trying to impound their cattle in Bunkerville, Nevada. Bundy’s followers still speak with awe about how officers Tasered him three times, and three times, with the help of the crowd behind him, he ripped out the Taser darts and stood his ground. His father, Cliven, led that battle, but when the Bundys clashed with government agents again in 2016, Ammon was in charge. His six-week occupation of an Oregon wildlife refuge left a rancher dead, shot down by police officers after a backwoods car chase.
Left: An armed man stands guard as Bundy supporters arrive at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in January 2016. Right: Early morning at the front-gate guard post during the occupation. (Alex Milan Tracy / AP; Jeffrey Schwilk / Alamy)
In 2020, with the start of the pandemic, Bundy found a new purpose. One of the first meetings of his People’s Rights Network, held in April of that year, was to plan an Easter service in defiance of local COVID-19 restrictions. At another early demonstration, members gathered outside a health commissioner’s home in Montana and burned masks on a grill. In August 2020, Bundy was arrested and jailed after leading a contingent of supporters, some with guns, as they stormed the Idaho statehouse, pushing officers and shattering a glass door, during a special legislative session on public-health precautions.
When People’s Rights members started telling Bundy about how the government was unjustly separating children from their parents, that became another cause. Instances of actual overreach by Child Protective Services became, for them, evidence supporting QAnon-style conspiracy theories about “government subsidized child trafficking,” as Rodriguez put it, which were proliferating in extremist circles and beyond. By the time Cyrus was taken, People’s Rights members had already staged protests on behalf of supposedly “kidnapped” children in Missouri, Oregon, and Washington. But none of those had escalated like the one at St. Luke’s.
Despite his late-night text, Bundy did in the end agree to see me, for what was supposed to be a quick hello but stretched into a day-long visit. I’d spend more time with him in the weeks that followed, and speak with him regularly on the phone. We discussed many aspects of his life, but most of all we talked about the judgment against him, and what would happen if the government tried to take his home.
“I feel like I’m not supposed to yield,” he told me at one point. If he were killed, he said, his friends and followers would avenge him: “They’ll go take the life of the judge and the sheriff and St. Luke’s CEO and the head attorney and all the most culpable people.” He delivered these words with an unnerving lack of menace—less like a threat than like a weather forecast.
Ammon Bundy in his auto-repair workshop
Bundy’s home sits on a five-acre property at the edge of Idaho’s Emmett Valley, just across the road from Last Chance Canal. If he could choose any place in the world to live, he told me, it would be here.
When I showed up, I found him pacing around his auto-repair workshop, looking for parts. His beard is almost fully gray, and at 48, he has a bit of a belly, which he finds embarrassing. As always, he wore a chocolate-brown cowboy hat and a mechanic’s jacket with the logo of the fleet-maintenance company he once ran. He’s worked on cars ever since he was a teenager, when his father told him that the family ranch could not sustain him and his siblings.
Ammon was the fourth of six children of an unhappy marriage. Cliven was often away, working construction jobs in Las Vegas. Ammon’s mother, Jane Marie, resented the lonely domesticity she’d been consigned to, he told me. When he was 5 years old, she left. One night soon after, a huge storm took down a tree in the yard. The next morning, as he and his siblings played in the wreckage, he remembers thinking, Where’s Mom? She had not said goodbye.
With their mother gone and their dad away, the Bundy children mostly raised themselves. Instead of doing homework, Ammon and his brothers hunted rabbits in the hills and built Quonset huts. After high school, he went on his Mormon mission to Minnesota and then started a truck-repair business. A couple of years later, he married Lisa Sundloff, a student at Southern Utah University whom he met through his secretary, and they moved to Arizona.
Their first apartment was tiny, but as Bundy’s business took off, they moved into a house in the Phoenix suburbs, then a bigger one with a stone fireplace and a swimming pool, a home he still speaks of with pride. He didn’t drink or smoke; he had five kids and avoided trouble with the law. He leaned libertarian, but he was no militant: In 2010, he took out a $530,000 loan from the Small Business Administration.
It isn’t easy, now, to reconcile that law-abiding suburban dad, his growing business supported by a federal loan, with the man he has become. Thirteen years and two standoffs later, Ammon believes the proper functions of government are limited to preventing violent crime, protecting private property, and defending the country from foreign threats. He says that abortion is murder and homosexuality is an abomination, but also that the government doesn’t have any business outlawing gay marriage (though it should prohibit same-sex couples from raising children). He opposes a border wall and views Trumpian policies as insufficiently compassionate, a position for which he has been criticized by other prominent right-wingers. He thinks it would perhaps be best if the country were divided in half before a partisan civil war breaks out.
At one point, he asked about my faith, and when I said Jewish, he remarked on how interesting it is that Jews hold so many positions of power in government, media, and finance. Somehow this didn’t sound like conspiracism, the way he said it. More like: Well played, Jews, from our small religious minority to yours.
Invariably, though, conversation turned back to his current predicament. He ranted for hours about the corruption of the government, the corruption of medical institutions, the corruption of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The courts, he said, are simply a “playbox” for the rich and powerful, a place for them to justify their misdeeds. Though he’d been cleared of any crime associated with the standoffs in Oregon and Nevada, the final legal victory came after he’d already spent nearly two years in prison, much of it in solitary confinement, he said. By the time he was released, his business had all but collapsed, and he’d missed those years of his children’s lives. “That changed me,” he said. It taught him that even when you win, the process is the punishment.
I asked Bundy what he thinks motivates his many enemies, and how he accounts for so much wickedness. He reached for the Book of Mormon, put on his glasses, and began to read aloud. The passage he’d chosen told the story of Jared, a prince who devises a scheme to have his father beheaded and seize the throne for himself. The conspirators form “a secret combination,” which is “most abominable and wicked above all, in the sight of God,” and their scheme succeeds.
That is what Ammon Bundy believes is happening in America. His enemies, motivated by the desire for power, have formed secret combinations, which threaten, as the Book of Mormon warns they will, to “overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries.”
Ammon Bundy with one of his sons in Emmett
That night, I tagged along with Bundy to a barbecue hosted by Scott Malone, a friend of his who runs a dietary-supplement business and lives just down the road. About 30 people, many of them members of the LDS Church and most of them members of People’s Rights, sat at picnic tables with checkered tablecloths eating burgers and hot dogs and peach cobbler. After dinner, we played cornhole.
“I’m pretty much into conspiracy theories,” Malone told me. A sprawling web of nefarious forces is undermining our freedom, he explained, at the center of which are the Freemasons. In Gem County, where he and Bundy live, the sheriff and his deputies are all Masons. Malone knows this because he rents office space directly below the Masonic lodge, and he says he sometimes catches evil spirits wandering around the office on his security cameras. To cast them out, he performs exorcisms. “We think the basement has some kind of an underworld connection,” he said. “Crazy things, but we take it in stride.”
When Ammon launched the People’s Rights Network in early 2020, Malone was an early member. The group is sometimes described as a paramilitary organization—a sort of “Uber for militias.” That description is not wholly inaccurate, but it is misleading. People’s Rights’ membership does overlap with that of militias like the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters, and it serves in part to connect groups like these around the country. But it’s much bigger than those other groups, and it draws in people who would never join a traditional paramilitary organization. Most of its activities are mundane. Some members use the network to trade and barter; others organize workshops with naturopathic doctors. When one member’s truck broke down in early August, he put out a call via People’s Rights for someone to pick him up. In that sense, the group is less of a militia than a mutual-aid organization, where the aid sometimes takes the form of armed resistance to perceived despotism.
Which is not to say that it doesn’t pose a threat. In addition to the protest at St. Luke’s and other instances of potentially dangerous intimidation, one member got into a shootout with police after a traffic stop in 2020. And its leaders have stated plainly that bloodshed is not only justified but necessary for resisting tyranny. “There is no silver bullet to securing liberty,” Bundy himself wrote on the People’s Rights website. “It is going to take unity, suffering and the willingness to use violence in defense.” The Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, which monitors extremist organizations such as the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, ranks Bundy’s group “at the top of our threat matrix.”
Beyond some basic tenets and anxieties of extreme libertarianism, those in Bundy’s group don’t agree on much. Some are fans of Donald Trump; others aren’t. Few would say that they support the police. Each seems to have his or her own peculiar origin story. While visiting Bundy, I met a onetime Ron Paul delegate who’d grown disillusioned with the Republican Party and stepped away, only to be drawn back in by the imposition of pandemic-era “Sharia law.” I met a former foster child turned chain-smoking Hempfest organizer who tried to live as a hermit before deciding that the only answer to government tyranny was active resistance. I met a Black kickboxing champion who has an on-screen credit in a Mad Max movie and, over the course of a decade, went from protesting the gentrification of Boise’s historically Black neighborhoods to sketching a portrait of Barack Obama with swastika-pupils.
And I met Malone, who may well be Bundy’s most loyal supporter. “He’s a good man, and I love him as a brother,” Malone told me. “I told my wife, ‘If I die with him, I die with him … I’m 72, and if this is how I end my life, then that’s how it ends. It couldn’t happen in a better way.”
By 9 o’clock, the party was winding down. The group prayed for me, just as they had when I’d arrived. (“We’re also grateful for our new friend, Jacob. Please bless him and help him on his journey and on his way.”) A grandmotherly woman who seemed genuinely concerned for my health warned me to stay away from the COVID vaccine. Another told me to be very careful driving home at this hour. A kid who’d recently returned from his Mormon mission invited me to go fishing the next day. Over the course of the evening, several people joked about the media calling them a militia. A militia?! they seemed to say. Just look at us!
As the sky darkened, everyone gathered in a circle to sing hymns. Bundy sat with his youngest son on his lap, the sunset at his back.
The next day, I met with Rachel Thomas, the ER doctor who’d ferried baby Cyrus to the back exit of the Meridian hospital as the mob pressed in. We sat at a small round table in a Boise coffee shop while her 6-year-old son ate a chocolate-chip muffin and watched Minions on his iPad for the dozenth time.
As we talked, Thomas noticed that a user named “Wolf Man” had just left a series of comments on her Facebook profile calling her a criminal and a perpetrator of “vile,” “disgraceful and appalling” acts. The comments linked to a new YouTube video Bundy had posted about the St. Luke’s case that very morning. “See, this is the problem with people like Rachel Thomas,” he says to the camera, after offering a litany of examples of her alleged dishonesty. “They are revered by the public because they are doctors and professionals, but they have no scruples. They are liars.”
With each new post like this, Thomas told me, the harassment ramps up again. “This is my life,” she said. “The second I feel like I can take a breath, they come after us again.” She pointed at her son, oblivious and chocolate-smeared behind her. “He didn’t sign up for this.”
For Natasha Erickson, the St. Luke’s pediatrician who first saw Cyrus, the threats and abuse began immediately and never stopped. Diego Rodriguez posted her photo and hospital bio on his website under the heading “Child Trafficker Profile.” “It is obvious she has a ‘god complex,’” he wrote, “and loves to threaten families using CPS as a weapon.” Bundy posted a video of his own calling Erickson “a wicked person for instigating this.” They said that she’d run unnecessary tests on Cyrus in order to profit off him and that she’d misdiagnosed his mild dehydration as life-threatening malnutrition. Commenters asked her how she’d feel if her kids were stolen.
Supporters gather on Bundy’s property after a judge issued a misdemeanor warrant for his arrest for contempt-of-court charges in April 2023. (Kyle Green / AP)
Erickson was less worried that large numbers of people would end up believing these claims than that a delusional person would take it upon himself to exact justice. She attached an emergency whistle to her purse, and her husband started carrying his handgun around whenever they were in public. She forbade her kids from playing in the front yard or answering the door, no matter who they thought was on the other side. The locks stayed bolted at all times.
For a while, Erickson was obsessed with what Bundy and Rodriguez were saying about her. She’d check their websites two or three times a day. At the grocery store, she was constantly afraid of who might be in the next aisle over. She took to wearing sunglasses whenever she could. Almost every time she saw a new patient, she worried that the parents might have seen her “Child Trafficker Profile,” and that they might genuinely believe it. So much of her job had been about forging personal connections with the “kiddos”: You like unicorns? My children love unicorns. But now even that felt fraught. When one child’s father asked her how old her kids were, she froze, retreated to the nurses’ station, and broke down sobbing. She considered leaving medicine entirely.
Both she and Thomas testified in the defamation case against Bundy and Rodriguez; so did a nurse who had seen Cyrus for a checkup and then coordinated his care for weeks after. But whereas Erickson and the nurse were named as plaintiffs, Thomas was not, because at the time St. Luke’s filed the lawsuit, she hadn’t yet been doxxed. She wound up getting the worst of both worlds: all of the harassment, none of the money.
This past summer, as she was driving with her son, he asked her out of the blue if “that Ammon Bundy guy” was gone yet, and whether he might hurt them. “No, buddy, we’re going to be okay,” she told him. By that point, the family had already taken steps to ensure their safety. In September, they packed up for New Zealand. They plan to stay for at least a year.
In between my trips to Bundy’s land in Idaho, I made a stop in Bunkerville, Nevada, to visit his father at the family ranch. When I got there, Cliven Bundy was sitting in a black leather recliner beneath a portrait of him by Jon McNaughton, the realist painter famous for his hagiographic renderings of Donald Trump. In the portrait, titled “Pray for America,” Cliven rides on horseback and raises an American flag. In the flesh, he chuckled a lot in a folksy-grandpa sort of way and held forth for some three and a half hours in his high-pitched rasp about faith, politics, biodiversity, and his decades-long conflict with the U.S. government.
If you were to tell the complete story of that conflict, you could begin in 1844, with the murder of Joseph Smith. Or you could begin in 1877, with the arrival of the Bundy family’s ancestors in Utah’s Virgin Valley. Or in 1934, with the Taylor Grazing Act. Or even in 1976, with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. But you could not begin any later than 1989, with the Mojave desert tortoise. That year, the tortoise was given an emergency endangered-species designation, and as part of its recovery plan, the Bureau of Land Management told Bundy and his fellow Clark County ranchers a few years later that they would have to limit their use of public lands for grazing cattle. At the same time, the county struck a deal with the Fish and Wildlife Service that allowed real-estate developers to expand the Las Vegas metropolitan area into the tortoises’ habitat. The ranchers got squeezed in favor of the city.
Almost all of the roughly 50 ranchers in Clark County took a buyout from the government. Cliven refused. He continued grazing his cattle the same way he always had, and his herd fanned out into the lands vacated by his former neighbors. For 20 years, this remained the uneasy status quo: Bundy’s fines soared into the seven figures, but no one tried very hard to collect. Finally, a federal judge ordered Bundy—now calling himself “the last rancher standing” in the valley—to remove his cattle. He ignored the judge, and so in early 2014, the BLM came in to do it for him. The next day, Cliven’s wife, Carol, posted on the family website: “Range War begins tomorrow.”
Left: Cliven Bundy speaks during a news conference near his ranch in April 2014. Right: Protesters gather at the Bureau of Land Management’s base camp, where the Bundys’ cattle were being held. (David Becker / Getty; Jim Urquhart / Reuters)
The climactic standoff took place at a sandy underpass beneath Interstate 15, near the spot where the BLM was keeping the impounded cattle. Federal agents were outnumbered and outgunned by Cliven’s militiamen supporters, and within a couple of hours, they’d released the herd. A group of armed vigilantes—cowboy heroes, they believed, in their own modern Western—had prevented the U.S. government from enforcing the law. And they seemed to be facing no repercussions.
Almost overnight, the Bundys were the “first family” of the Patriot Movement, with Cliven as its public face. Republican Senators fawned over him; Sean Hannity had him on Fox News again and again. And then, at a public meeting less than two weeks later, Cliven self-destructed. “I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said, before wondering aloud whether Black people were maybe “better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things,” than they were on the dole.
That was the end of Cliven Bundy’s brief stint as a Republican darling. Ammon took over as the family spokesman. He was good in front of a camera, with a soft-spoken polish that none of his siblings could match. A few weeks earlier, he’d been a successful businessman in Phoenix, living a comfortable, suburban life. He hadn’t been particularly political, and was certainly not a militant—an early BLM threat assessment had labeled him the least dangerous of the Bundy men—but now he was angry, and he saw the federal government as his enemy. Less than two years later, at Cliven’s urging, he went to Oregon to stage a standoff of his own.
To this day, Cliven’s cattle continue to graze on public lands, the courts be damned. At dusk on the evening of my visit, he rose from his recliner, and Ammon’s brother Ryan drove us up into the desert hills to see them. On the way, Cliven and Ryan explained their not-entirely-scientific theory of the mutually beneficial relationship between cattle and tortoises. “A cow never conflicted with a tortoise ever,” Ryan said.
The Mojave desert tortoise is extremely rare, but we’d been driving for only a few minutes, when, sure enough, we came face-to-face with one. Ryan stopped the car and we all got out. The animal looked prehistoric, its mud-colored shell weathered and chipped in places, its scales the same dusty black as the stones around it. Cliven walked over and started knocking on its shell. “Hey! Hey!” he said. The tortoise retreated inside. “Go on. Go on then!” Cliven said. It did not go on.
“You’re not gonna make him move,” Ryan said. Cliven reached down to try to overturn the tortoise, but it squirmed and hissed at him. After a few tries, he gave up. “He’s protecting himself,” Ryan said. “Imagine having to live in the rocks like he does. What a life, huh?”
On a Friday evening near the end of summer, six sheriff’s deputies arrested Ammon Bundy at a fundraiser for his son’s high-school football team. This was not the dreaded standoff, not the government coming for his land. But there had been a warrant out for Bundy’s arrest on contempt-of-court charges since April, and the sheriff seized his chance.
The officers marched into the hall just as people were finishing dinner. Bundy did not resist. He just put on his cowboy hat and placed his hands behind his back. Some people shouted and booed as the officers led him outside. Some sat quietly and looked away. “Nobody knows what they’re going to do to him!” his wife yelled. “They will abuse him!” Her voice broke. “This is our son! We’re here to support our boy! Come on! Come on, you guys, rally together! Help us!” She was sobbing now. Nobody moved.
When I went out to Emmett a few days later, I again found Bundy in his workshop, this time lying on his back beneath a ’67 Chevy Nova with his phone beside him. He’d posted bond Sunday morning, and now he had his father on speaker. “I feel like you shouldn’t have bailed out,” Cliven said. “You should’ve made a process of it.”
“I was going to, but the last time I did that, when they sent me to Ada County, they literally about killed me,” Ammon told him, referring to time he’d served as a result of the 2020 statehouse protest. “They call it the cold box. It’s an extremely cold cell. No pads, all concrete. And then they strip you. So all you’ve got is your underwear. No shoes, no nothing”—the jail says this isn’t accurate—“and it literally is torture, and that’s what they do. I just couldn’t think about going through that again.”
“I understand. I’ve been there before,” Cliven said. “But I don’t know.”
There was no sympathy in his voice. And perhaps one shouldn’t expect any from a man who, during the trial that followed the Bunkerville standoff, at the age of 71, had spent an extra month in prison rather than be released on house arrest, because he would accept nothing short of unconditional freedom. I know it’s hard, he seemed to be telling his son, but you’ve gotta suck it up.
That day, Ammon seemed more resigned, more circumspect than he had a week earlier. He told me that he’d decided to contest the legal case against him. “Not because I have a whole lot of faith in the courts,” he said. But he’d already started mourning the loss of his home, and he wasn’t sure it made sense to hold his ground. “There’s many ways to fight, and I may very well go down that route,” he told me, “but it just gets tiring to fight those battles. Alone, almost. Least it feels that way.”
This was a strange admission from the leader of a national network of rights-defending citizens, a network designed for just this sort of situation. “Maybe I shouldn’t say, but I think in his mind he was really hoping that People’s Rights would back him,” Cliven would later tell me. “But when it gets right down to it, I don’t know. He claims he has, like, 70,000 or more followers, but does he have one that would actually stand and fight with him?” Many of the People’s Rights members I put that question to were noncommittal. They’d have to see how the situation played out.
I visited Bundy one last time in mid-September. “The dog seems to always be chasing me,” he’d told me during our very first conversation, and now it seemed it might finally catch him. He didn’t have a lawyer, so he’d been staying up all night writing his own legal motions. Sometimes he lost track of what day of the week it was. At one point, I watched him try and fail to navigate a CAPTCHA prompt six times in a row as he attempted to access a legal document. The courts had frozen his assets and forbidden him from continuing to make false accusations against St. Luke’s and its staff.
Bundy’s co-defendant, Diego Rodriguez, had already moved, in 2022, to Florida, where he lives with Levi, Marissa, and Cyrus, who celebrated his second birthday in May. (Rodriguez declined to be interviewed for this story.) The baby’s vomiting problem has not gone away entirely, Marissa told me, though he is doing much better now. As of this month, she said, Cyrus is in the 28th percentile on the growth chart. (Though Levi was arrested at the gas station, he was never charged with a crime; charges against Marissa were dropped last December. The medical staff at St. Luke’s have said this didn’t seem like a case of intentional abuse or neglect but rather that Levi and Marissa did not appear to appreciate the gravity of their baby’s health problems.)
Just a few weeks earlier, Bundy told me, he’d nearly given up and fled the state too. This whole saga could devour years of his life, he’d realized, and so rather than let it, he’d go elsewhere, start fresh. The kids had been upset at first, but they’d come around. The boxes were packed. The mover was scheduled. And then, as Bundy lay in bed on the morning they were supposed to leave, he thought he heard the voice of God. The Lord wanted him to stay and fight.
How long? He didn’t know. Fight how? He couldn’t say. But he trusted that this would all become clear in time. “I have to believe that the things going on here are going to mean something,” he said in a video about his decision. It was hard not to hear these words as a sort of desperate self-exhortation, the sort of thing you whisper to yourself over and over in the hope that repetition will make it so.
Emmett, Idaho
One morning a few weeks ago, Scott Malone arrived at the Bundy property to find it deserted. He’d come to pick up some pots and stoves he’d lent to Ammon for the apple harvest, and he found those in the driveway. Otherwise there was nothing. The trucks were gone. The house was cleaned out. The workshop was stripped. Bundy hadn’t even said goodbye—a noble act, Malone believed, meant to protect friends from being implicated.
A few days after they left, Lisa posted a farewell message on Facebook (“It’s not goodbye, it’s ‘I’ll see you later’”), but she and Ammon stopped answering my messages and calls. When I finally managed to get in touch with Ryan Bundy, he told me that his brother had tried to muster a group to fight with him, “but when it come down to it, only about half of ’em are willing to stand.” And so now, Ryan said, Ammon was a “refugee.”
Malone says he has no idea where Bundy is. Lawyers for St. Luke’s have heard that the family is in southern Utah, hardly an hour’s drive from where Cliven lives, and from where the family staged its first standoff nearly a decade ago. But Bundy seems to have kept his plan a secret, even from his father. “I don’t know why he quit,” Cliven told me a few days later. “My way of thinking is you can’t give up on something like this. You got a battle going, and it’s a terrible one, and you know”—he trailed off, seemingly at a loss—“I don’t know.”
Ammon Bundy still faces an ever-growing list of contempt-of-court charges, and there is still a warrant out for his arrest, with bail set at $250,000. For Rachel Thomas and Natasha Erickson, the news of his flight delivered both relief and frustration: relief because it meant that, for the moment at least, they would not have to testify in the scheduled contempt trial; frustration because, once more, he had escaped accountability. Seeing him behind bars wouldn’t have undone the pain of the past year and a half—Erickson was still considering leaving medicine, and even in New Zealand, Thomas’s son was still asking, “Mommy, that Ammon Bundy guy can’t come here, can he?”—but it would have brought a degree of closure, a feeling that justice had been served.
Law enforcement could still come looking for Bundy in Utah, or wherever he is, and bring him back to Idaho. And if that happens, he could face months or even years in jail. Even if it does not, St. Luke’s will soon claim possession of the home he left behind.
Standing there alone on the deserted property, Malone felt his own mix of emotions. He, too, was relieved: Had Bundy stayed and fought, the sheriff and his deputies would have gunned him down, Malone was sure of it. He, too, was frustrated: People’s Rights could have done more; people weren’t prepared to lay down their lives for freedom the way they used to be. And he was also heartbroken: The others may have been afraid, but he really would have died by his friend’s side. And now Ammon Bundy was gone. The specific era of American extremism that had begun a decade earlier at Bundy Ranch was, in some sense, over.
Ammon never returned my calls, but he did eventually send me a brief message via an encrypted app. “I have always told the truth,” he said, “and God will be my judge.”
His note called to mind something he’d once told me about his enemies. “I think most people over the years come to think that they’re doing what should be done,” he said. “And it doesn’t change the fact that what they’re doing is not right.”
When it comes to tech house, one of the brightest breakthrough acts is Sherm. Hailing from Chicago, he’s brought a irresistible energy to the house music scene in a way that’s caught on with fans all over the world.
Fresh off of hosting his first panel at ADE along with a massive showcase performance with Hood Politics & Bring The Kingdom, Sherm is back, this time teaming up with close friends BLUPRNT for their single ‘Real Life’. Laced with a groovy bass line, dark melodic undertones, hypnotic vocals and thumping drums, Sherm & BLUEPRNT create an irresistible song that is destined for a bright future.
“I’ve been such a big fan of BLUPRNT since their release “House In My Life” on Hood Politics and knew a time would come for us to collaborate. This track immediately grabs your attention and keeps it until the last kick. Simply put, this track is BIG and brought out the best in us as producers. Hood Poli was the only label this track was going to.” – Sherm
There are two ways of taking pills—two and only two.
You pinch the pill between your thumb and index finger, pick it up, and place it on your tongue. You take a drink of water. This method is thetweezers.
Or else: You place the pill in your palm and launch it toward your mouth, as if your teeth were battlements and your arm a siege machine. Don’t bother with the water. This method is thecatapult.
In real-world situations, many people—let’s say most—make a habit of the tweezers. In the movies, the opposite is true. An on-screen pill bottle works like Chekhov’s gun: Eventually, its contents will be fired at an actor’s mouth, or smashed between his lips, or hurled into his gullet.
Think of Austin Butler as the lead in Elvis, alone in his hotel room: He slaps those quaaludes in, liquid-free, sideburns tilted toward the ceiling. It’s a textbook movie swallow, the Stanislavski Fling. Butler got an Oscar nomination; so did Ellen Burstyn, popping diet pills in Requiem for a Dream. On Succession, Jeremy Strong and Kieran Culkin, each a two-time Emmy nominee, gobble meds on-screen. Going catapult is everywhere in cinema; it’s a gesture that befits the biggest stars. Angelina Jolie shoots her pills in Girl, Interrupted. So does Brittany Murphy. Jake Gyllenhaal catapults a pill in Donnie Darko. Albert Brooks in Modern Romance. In Goodfellas, Ray Liotta does it twice.
I love the movies! But it’s time we had a public-health announcement: The catapult is not, in fact, how a person should be taking pills. The act of swallowing a medication is so pervasive—and so intimate—that one easily forgets it is a skill that must be learned. In the U.S., roughly three-fifths of all adults are on prescription drugs; perhaps one-sixth will falter when they try to gulp it down. Twenty years ago, Bonnie Kaplan, a research psychologist at the University of Calgary, devised a new technique for helping people overcome this problem. Her method, as laid out in a mesmerizing video, suggests that you turn your head to make a pill go in. (No one has ever done this in a movie and no one ever will.) The turning motion helps open your upper esophageal sphincter, Kaplan says, though she does admit that more familiar postures have their own advantages. Some people like to raise their chins: “They say it is easier for the pill to slide down their throat, as if their tongue is a ski jump and it is a straight shot down the hill.” Others tip their heads the other way, chin-to-chest, “because they say it is more relaxing in the neck.”
But on the all-important matter of the hand, Kaplan’s messaging is very clear: You pick up the pill between your fingers; then you place it on your tongue. Which is to say, you do thetweezers. Other training methods are consistent with this rule. One approach for teaching children, published in 1984, describes “correctly placing” a pill on the back of the tongue—which clearly cannot be accomplished via a whole-hand toss; another, from 2006, says to “place the pill on your tongue towards the back of your mouth.”
That’s how people ought to take their pills. But how do people really do it, in real life? At the start of her research, Kaplan told me, she wasn’t telling takers what to do; she spent time observing how they liked to swallow medications on their own. The cinematic catapult was simply nonexistent in the wild, she said. “I never saw anyone just throw it back.” Never?Anyone? I asked Kaplan to describe the way she swallows pills herself, and she paused before she answered, as if she’d never really thought this through. “My husband and I both turn our heads to the right,” she said at last. First she’ll place the pill on the back of her tongue, and then she’ll twist and swallow. “But you know what?” she said. “I do often clap my hand to my mouth with my last pill or two.”
“It’s very individual,” Cindy Corbett, a nursing-science professor at the University of South Carolina, told me. She’s on a team that uses smartwatch accelerometers to track patients’ adherence to their medication regimen. Their system knows when someone moves a hand up to their face, she told me, but it won’t distinguish how a pill is being held, or whether it is placed or flung into the mouth. (Indeed, the study’s four-step “protocol-guided medication-taking activity” includes this ambivalent instruction: “Place/toss pill to mouth.”) When I asked Corbett what she’s seen herself in this regard, as a clinician, she drew a blank. “I’ve never thought about it that much.”
Maybe this is it: If you even have to think about the way you swallow pills, then you’re almost certainly someone who has trouble taking pills; and if you’re someone who has trouble taking pills, then you really should be taking pills in tweezer mode. In the off-screen world, to catapult is a privilege reserved for those with floppy throats. It’s the difference between the gags and the gag-nots. That inequality is only reinforced by the movieland fantasy of universal tossing, which sets up (as only Hollywood knows how) an impossible and unhealthy standard for behavior. Look, Elvis gobbles benzos; why can’t I? “People’s preconceived notions of how they’re supposed to swallow pills does lead to mental barriers,” says Marissa Harkness, a co-creator of the Pill Skills training kit, a case of sugar-based placebos made in different shapes and sizes.
When actors catapult on camera, they get the benefit of looking more dramatic: bigger gestures, more to see. But something more important is going on in movie swallows, a deeper meaning to the movement—an implied relationship of power. Taking pills by catapult suggests that you’re a victim, that your body and your mind are under siege. A hand that’s driven by compulsion fires drugs into the face. A teenage boy is pelted by his Prozac. But some stories need to have this flipped, so the pill can be a tool instead of an affliction. In Taxi Driver, Robert De Niro tweezers bennies. He’s a man on a mission. And the most famous pill-taking scene in movie history, from The Matrix, has Keanu Reeves pinch a pill between his thumb and index fingers in dramatic close-up, and deposit it into his mouth. Then he drinks a glass of water. (Is that a movie first?) A character who tweezers is going on a journey, the film director John Magary told me. He’s curious. He’s in control. (From Magary’s films to date: two catapults, zero tweezers.)
Perhaps the movies have this figured out. There are two ways of taking pills—two and only two. The tweezers or the catapult; self-knowledge or oblivion. In the end, the choice is yours.
A few weeks ago, a three-inch square of plastic and metal began, slowly and steadily, to upend my life.
The culprit was my new portable carbon-dioxide monitor, a device that had been sitting in my Amazon cart for months. I’d first eyed the product around the height of the coronavirus pandemic, figuring it could help me identify unventilated public spaces where exhaled breath was left to linger and the risk for virus transmission was high. But I didn’t shell out the $250 until January 2023, when a different set of worries, over the health risks of gas stoves and indoorair pollution, reached a boiling point. It was as good a time as any to get savvy to the air in my home.
I knew from the get-go that the small, stuffy apartment in which I work remotely was bound to be an air-quality disaster. But with the help of my shiny Aranet4, the brand most indoor-air experts seem to swear by, I was sure to fix the place up. When carbon-dioxide levels increased, I’d crack a window; when I cooked on my gas stove, I’d run the range fan. What could be easier? It would basically be like living outside, with better Wi-Fi. This year, spring cleaning would be a literal breeze!
The illusion was shattered minutes after I popped the batteries into my new device. At baseline, the levels in my apartment were already dancing around 1,200 parts per million (ppm)—a concentration that, as the device’s user manual informed me, was cutting my brain’scognitive function by 15 percent. Aghast, I flung open a window, letting in a blast of frigid New England air. Two hours later, as I shivered in my 48-degree-Fahrenheit apartment in a coat, ski pants, and wool socks, typing numbly on my icy keyboard, the Aranet still hadn’t budged below 1,000 ppm, a common safetythreshold for many experts. By the evening, I’d given up on trying to hypothermia my way to clean air. But as I tried to sleep in the suffocating trap of noxious gas that I had once called my home, next to the reeking sack of respiring flesh I had once called my spouse, the Aranet let loose an ominous beep: The ppm had climbed back up, this time to above 1,400. My cognitive capacity was now down 50 percent, per the user manual, on account of self-poisoning with stagnant air.
By the next morning, I was in despair. This was not the reality I had imagined when I decided to invite the Aranet4 into my home. I had envisioned the device and myself as a team with a shared goal: clean, clean air for all! But it was becoming clear that I didn’t have the power to make the device happy. And that was making me miserable.
CO2 monitors are not designed to dictate behavior; the information they dole out is not a perfect read on air quality, indoors or out. And although carbon dioxide can pose some health risks at high levels, it’s just one of many pollutants in the air, and by no means the worst. Others, such as nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide, and ozone, can cause more direct harm. Some CO2-tracking devices, including the Aranet4, don’t account for particulate matter—which means that they can’t tell when air’s been cleaned up by, say, a HEPA filter. “It gives you an indicator; it’s not the whole story,” says Linsey Marr, an environmental engineer at Virginia Tech.
Still, because CO2 builds up alongside other pollutants, the levels are “a pretty good proxy for how fresh or stale your air is,” and how badly it needs to be turned over, says Paula Olsiewski, a biochemist and an indoor-air-quality expert at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. The Aranet4 isn’t as accurate as, say, the $20,000 research-grade carbon-dioxide sensor in Marr’s lab, but it can get surprisingly close. When Jose-Luis Jimenez, an atmospheric chemist at the University of Colorado at Boulder, first picked one up three years ago, he was shocked that it could hold its own against the machines he used professionally. And in his personal life, “it allows you to find the terrible places and avoid them,” he told me, or to mask up when you can’t.
That rule of thumb starts to break down, though, when the terrible place turns out to be your home—or, at the very least, mine. To be fair, my apartment’s air quality has a lot working against it: two humans and two cats, all of us with an annoying penchant for breathing, crammed into 1,000 square feet; a gas stove with no outside-venting hood; a kitchen window that opens directly above a parking lot. Even so, I was flabbergasted by just how difficult it was to bring down the CO2 levels around me. Over several weeks, the best indoor reading I sustained, after keeping my window open for six hours, abstaining from cooking, and running my range fan nonstop, was in the 800s. I wondered, briefly, if my neighborhood just had terrible outdoor air quality—or if my device was broken. Within minutes of my bringing the meter outside, however, it displayed a chill 480.
The meter’s cruel readings began to haunt me. Each upward tick raised my anxiety; I started to dread what I’d learn each morning when I woke up. After watching the Aranet4 flash figures in the high 2,000s when I briefly ignited my gas stove, I miserably deleted 10 wok-stir-fry recipes I’d bookmarked the month before. At least once, I told my husband to cool it with the whole “needing oxygen” thing, lest I upgrade to a more climate-friendly Plant Spouse. (I’m pretty sure I was joking, but I lacked the cognitive capacity to tell.) In more lucid moments, I understood the deeper meaning of the monitor: It was a symbol of my helplessness. I’d known I couldn’t personally clean the air at my favorite restaurant, or the post office, or my local Trader Joe’s. Now I realized that the issues in my home weren’t much more fixable. The device offered evidence of a problem, but not the means to solve it.
Upon hearing my predicament, Sally Ng, an aerosol chemist at Georgia Tech, suggested that I share my concerns with building management. Marr recommended constructing a Corsi-Rosenthal box, a DIY contraption made up of a fan lashed to filters, to suck the schmutz out of my crummy air. But they and other experts acknowledged that the most sustainable, efficient solutions to my carbon conundrum were mostly out of reach. If you don’t own your home, or have the means to outfit it with more air-quality-friendly appliances, you can only do so much. “And I mean, yeah, that is a problem,” said Jimenez, who’s currently renovating his home to include a new energy-efficient ventilation device, a make-up-air system, and multiple heat pumps.
Many Americans face much greater challenges than mine. I am not among the millions living in a city with dangerous levels of particulate matter in the air, spewed out by industrial plants, gas-powered vehicles, and wildfires, for whom an open window could risk additional peril; I don’t have to be in a crowded office or a school with poor ventilation. Since the first year of the pandemic—and even before—experts have been calling for policy changes and infrastructural overhauls that would slash indoor air pollution for large sectors of the population at once. But as concern over COVID has faded, “people have moved on,” Marr told me. Individuals are left on their own in the largely futile fight against stale air.
Though a CO2 monitor won’t score anyone victories on its own, it can still be informative: “It’s nice to have an objective measure, because all of this is stuff you can’t really see with the naked eye,” says Abraar Karan, an infectious-disease physician at Stanford, who’s planning to use the Aranet4 in an upcoming study on viral transmission. But he told me that he doesn’t let himself get too worked up over the readings from his monitor at home. Even Olsiewski puts hers away when she’s cooking on the gas range in her Manhattan apartment. She already knows that the levels will spike; she already knows what she needs to do to mitigate the harms. “I use the tools I have and don’t make myself crazy,” she told me. (Admittedly, she has a lot of tools, especially in her second home in Texas—among them, an induction stove and an HVAC with ultra-high-quality filters and a continuously running fan. When we spoke on the phone, her Aranet4 read 570 ppm; mine, 1,200.)
I’m now aiming for my own middle ground. Earlier this week, I dreamed of trying and failing to open a stuck window, and woke up in a cold sweat. I spent that day working with my (real-life) kitchen window cracked, but I shut it when the apartment got too chilly. More important, I placed my Aranet4 in a drawer, and didn’t pull it out again until nightfall. When my spouse came home, he marveled that our apartment, once again, felt warm.