Melania Trump documentary from Brett Ratner to be released by Amazon

Company says film will give an ‘unprecedented behind-the-scenes look’ and ‘truly unique story’

Melania Trump will be the subject of a new documentary directed by Brett Ratner and distributed by Amazon Prime Video. The streaming arm of the tech giant got exclusive licensing rights for a streaming and theatrical release later this year, the company said Sunday.

Filming is already under way on the documentary. The company said in a statement that the film will give viewers an “unprecedented behind-the-scenes look” at the former and incoming US first lady and also promised a “truly unique story”.

She also released a self-titled memoir late last year. Her husband Donald begins a second presidency on 20 January after serving as the US’s commander in chief from 2017 to 2021.

The film is the latest connection between Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Donald Trump. The company in December announced plans to donate $1m to help fund the president-elect’s second inauguration – and said that it would also stream the event on its Prime Video service, a separate in-kind donation worth another $1m.

The two men had been at odds in the past. During his first term, Trump criticized Amazon and railed against the political coverage at the Washington Post, which Bezos owns. But he’s struck a more conciliatory tone recently as Amazon and other tech companies seek to improve their relationship with the incoming president.

In December, Bezos expressed some excitement about potential regulatory cutbacks in the coming years and said he was “optimistic” about Trump’s second term.

Bezos in October did not allow the Post to endorse a presidential candidate, a move that led to tens of thousands of people canceling their subscriptions and to protests from journalists with a deep history at the newspaper. This weekend, a Pulitzer prize-winning cartoonist quit her job there after an editor rejected her sketch of the newspaper’s owner and other media executives bowing before the president-elect.

The film also marks the first project that Ratner has directed since he was accused of sexual misconduct by multiple women, including actor Olivia Munn, in the early days of the #MeToo reckoning in November 2017. Ratner, whose lawyer denied the allegations, directed the Rush Hour film series, Red Dragon and X-Men: The Last Stand.

Fernando Sulichin, an Argentine film-maker, is executive producer of the film, which began shooting in December.

Melania Trump, Donald Trump’s third wife, has been an enigmatic figure since her husband announced he was running in the 2016 election. She had sought to maintain her privacy even as she served as first lady, focusing on raising their son, Barron, and promoting her “Be Best” initiative to support the “social, emotional, and physical health of children”.

While she appeared at her husband’s campaign launch event for 2024 and attended the closing night of the Republican national convention in July, she has otherwise stayed off the campaign trail, though the demands of again being first lady may dictate a higher public profile after her husband’s second inauguration day.

FDA Tackles Inequity: Pulse Oximeters Get a Makeover for All Skin Tones!

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is making waves with a bold new initiative focused on pulse oximeters — those essential devices that measure blood oxygen levels and are integral to clinical decision-making. Recent scrutiny has unveiled a glaring issue: these gadgets often fail to deliver reliable results for individuals with darker skin tones. This has sparked the FDA into action, showcasing a commitment to equity in healthcare that is long overdue.

“Although pulse oximetry is useful for estimating blood oxygen levels, pulse oximeters have limitations and a risk of inaccuracy under certain circumstances,” the FDA warns, signaling a need for change. With the agency’s new draft guidance, they’re aiming not only for accuracy but also for a more inclusive approach to medical device validation. This is about leveling the playing field — ensuring that every patient, regardless of skin pigmentation, receives accurate readings when it counts the most.

Dr. Michelle Tarver, the director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, emphasized this mission: “This draft guidance is aligned with the FDA’s broader commitment to helping facilitate the development of high-quality, safe, and effective medical devices.” No longer should clinical outcomes be a dice roll based on the color of one’s skin. The proposed recommendations are set to refine clinical study designs and validation efforts for pulse oximeters, tackling the performance discrepancies that have emerged across a spectrum of skin tones.

Among the keys to this initiative is the anticipation that many existing pulse oximeters on the market can adapt to meet the new performance criteria without hefty modifications. If manufacturers can prove their devices perform comparably across different skin types — even with updated labels and no major hardware or software changes — the FDA aims to expedite the review process. We’re talking about a brisk 30-day turnaround for decisions, ensuring timely access to safe and accurate equipment. This is not just a win for medical professionals; it’s a victory for patients who deserve better.

However, it’s worth noting that this draft guidance doesn’t extend to pulse oximeters marketed as general wellness products. You know, the ones that often sneak into shopping carts with little oversight? “To date, a large number of pulse oximeters available over the counter or for sporting/aviation are considered general wellness products that have not been evaluated by the FDA for use in clinical decision-making,” warns the agency. This distinction is critical — a reminder for consumers to be cautious about trusting unverified devices that could impact their health.

Transparency is key in this new landscape. The FDA plans to launch a publicly accessible webpage listing all FDA-cleared pulse oximeters intended for medical use. This resource will empower healthcare providers and the general public to make informed choices, steering clear of the confusion that often plagues the market.

The FDA’s new direction originates from an in-depth review of countless data sets, including laboratory tests and real-world performance metrics. They’ve engaged with scientists, clinicians, and manufacturers, hosted advisory committee meetings, and even partnered with academic institutions to conduct studies focused on device accuracy for individuals with diverse skin tones. This comprehensive evaluation underlines the agency’s commitment to a healthcare system that prioritizes accuracy and equity.

As the FDA opens the floor for public comments on this draft guidance — a process that will last 60 days — stakeholders have a unique opportunity to influence the final recommendations. The agency will meticulously review these comments, ensuring that the final guidance aligns with the voices of a diverse patient population.

The bottom line? Ensuring equal access to reliable medical devices like pulse oximeters is a crucial step toward a fairer healthcare system. It’s about time we challenge outdated practices that put certain demographics at a disadvantage. With the FDA leading this charge, we are witnessing a significant shift toward a more equitable future in healthcare — a transformation that celebrates diversity and prioritizes the well-being of every individual, regardless of their skin tone.

Shifting Tides: Tenofovir Alafenamide Emerges as a Promising Player in Hepatitis B Treatment

As the tide turns in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B, healthcare professionals are increasingly discerning the potential advantages of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) over its predecessor, entecavir (ETV). The transition is likened to a strategic chess match—each clinical trial and study unveiling new data, impacting the delicate balance of patient care in this complex field. In recent months, the spotlight has shone brightly on TAF, revealing promising insights into its efficacy and safety profile that have left many within the medical community buzzing with anticipation.

while diving into the ins and outs of hepatitis B treatment, the cumulative incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been at the forefront of researchers’ minds. Using Kaplan-Meier curves—a statistical method to estimate outcomes over time—scientists have unearthed critical data. Alarmingly, in the ETV continuation group, two patients developed HCC. It’s an unsettling statistic, showcasing the reality of this chronic condition. However, the difference in HCC incidence between patients sticking with ETV versus those switching to TAF didn’t reach statistical significance, landing at a p-value of 0.08. Numbers tell an important story, yet they obscure the human impact; here, we see young men battling advanced fibrosis and precarious low platelet counts—a harrowing reality that extends beyond mere statistics.

TAF is often touted as the “safer sibling” within the family of nucleic acid analogs. Emerging clinical studies suggest that TAF reduces the frequency of adverse effects—namely renal dysfunction and diminished bone density—that have historically concerned patients about long-term implications. “The evidence is stacking up, and it’s hard to ignore,” one researcher remarked, and it’s a sentiment echoed by many in the field. While at the 48-week mark, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) outperformed ETV in HBsAg-lowering effects, TAF is demonstrating its mettle, emerging as a formidable force in the treatment landscape of hepatitis B.

Yet, as with any shifting paradigm, the transition isn’t without its hurdles. The study’s findings revealed a decline in HB core-related antigen (HBcrAg) levels, which left much to be desired in terms of optimal patient outcomes. “While the numbers might tell one story, the nuanced reality of patient experiences reminds us that this is far from a simple matter.” Indeed, patient experiences are as critical as the statistics that underpin treatment decisions.

The ramifications of these findings resonate far beyond clinical settings, influencing patient care, treatment planning, and long-term management strategies. The medical community is tasked with weighing the advantages and potential pitfalls of TAF as they seek to provide patients with a treatment regimen that doesn’t merely aim at efficacy, but equally prioritizes safety. “It’s not just about switching medications,” said a spirited advocate for patient-centric care; “it’s about ensuring that patients receive the most effective and safest care possible, tailored uniquely to their circumstances.”

Standing at this crossroads of hepatitis B treatment, a fervor of excitement fills the air. The prospect of TAF as a viable alternative invigorates both patients and providers, equipping them with knowledge, research, and an unwavering commitment to better health outcomes. The journey toward comprehensive care for hepatitis B is far from over, but the emergence of TAF signals a hopeful path forward—one that intertwines science with the personal narratives of those affected, illustrating the profound connection between treatment and the human experience.

Mike Rinder, former Scientology exec who became an Emmy-winning whistleblower, dies at 69

Mike Rinder, a former senior executive with the Church of Scientology who later pivoted to criticizing the controversial religious organization publicly with a blog, a podcast and a docuseries co-starring ex-member Leah Remini, has died. He was 69.

The Emmy winner posted about his own impending death Sunday on his personal blog, announcing that the missive — titled “Farewell” — would be the last post on his website.

“I have shuffled off this mortal coil in accordance with the immutable law that there are only two certainties in life: death and taxes,” his message said, adding, “I rest in peace.”

“My only real regret is not having achieved what I said I wanted to — ending the abuses of Scientology, especially disconnection and seeing [my son] Jack into adulthood,” the whistleblower wrote. “If you are in any way fighting to end those abuses please keep the flag flying — never give up.”

The Tampa Bay Times reported that Rinder died Sunday in Palm Harbor, Fla., due to esophageal cancer.

Rinder — who appeared in the bombshell 2015 documentary “Going Clear” and produced and appeared in the subsequent A&E docuseries “Leah Remini: Scientology and the Aftermath” — said his website would remain active as an archive with more than 4,000 posts. He described the site as “a labor of love and passion which has allowed me to speak my mind and offer my perspective with no outside filters.”

“I have been lucky — living two lives in one lifetime. The second one the most wonderful years anyone could wish for with all of you and my new family!” he added.

In a message cross-posted on Rinder’s Instagram page, his wife, Christie, confirmed his death.

“I speak for so many when I say the sadness and pain we feel mirror the depth of our unwavering love for you,” she wrote. “Your courage, bravery, and integrity are unmatched and will forever inspire us. You have been the pillar of stability in our lives, filling our days with your strength, wisdom, love, laughter and devotion. The world will remember you. My best friend, my hero, my love, Michael John Rinder.”

Journalist Tony Ortega, who has long covered Scientology, announced in a June 2023 post on his Underground Bunker blog that Rinder had advanced esophageal cancer.

“Mike Rinder sent us an email today, to let us know that he had shuffled off this mortal coil,” Ortega tweeted Sunday. “That was so like him, thoughtful to the end. We’re just coming to grips with this news.”

Remini posted about visiting Rinder in Florida in December amid his cancer battle and praised the community that mobilized to care for him and his family during his final days. The “King of Queens” star has not yet posted publicly about Rinder’s death, and her representative did not immediately respond Monday to The Times’ request for comment.

Rinder was born on April 19, 1955, in Adelaide, Australia. He was raised as a Scientologist after his parents joined the organization when he was about 6. He said that he “finally escaped the organization” in 2007 when he was 52, publicly speaking out against it in an investigative series for the St. Petersburg Times in 2009.

As a child, he traveled with his family from Australia to England twice in the 1960s to visit the home of sci-fi writer and Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard. His parents participated in advanced Scientology courses and auditing — or counseling — and he joined the senior-level Sea Organization when he graduated from high school in April 1973.

“This is the dedicated core of scientology, Sea Org members sign a billion year commitment to forward the aims of scientology and live communally with other Sea Org members, pretty much out of touch with the outside world,” Rinder said on his website.

He said that as an adult he first met Hubbard, a God-like figure in the organization, in October 1973 aboard Hubbard’s ship Apollo. He remained in Sea Org until 2007, getting married and having two children who were born into Sea Org branches based in Clearwater, Fla., and in Hemet.

The “A Billion Years” author said he and his first wife, Cathy, divorced after he left the church and his mother, daughter Taryn and son Benjamin “disconnected” from him, along with his brother, sister and members of their family.

The ex-member accused Sea Org of fostering a culture of “violence and abuse that had become endemic” under the leadership of Hubbard successor David Miscavige, who took over when Hubbard died in 1986.

“While Hubbard had been unpredictable, sometimes cruel and harsh and other times humorous and compassionate, Miscavige was exclusively cruel and harsh. He had seized power and held onto it ruthlessly,” Rinder wrote on his website.

During the 1980s, Rinder became the executive director of Office of Special Affairs and a public-facing representative for the organization. He handled media and public relations and said he oversaw much litigation for and against the church, dealing with “the so-called enemies” of Scientology and directing their “destruction.” During that time, he said, the church coordinated smear and intimidation campaigns against journalists, former members and critics of Scientology.

More recently, Rinder served as a source for the The Times on stories about the high-profile trials of actor Danny Masterson and director Paul Haggis, who have both been affiliated with the church. The church has publicly denounced Rinder and Remini, who testified on ex-member Haggis’ behalf, and said that they “have no credibility” and make up lies about the church for money. The organization has also waged a campaign to cut down Rinder’s credibility and said he was removed from the church “in total disgrace” by its ecclesiastical leader, “stripped of any authority and ultimately expelled for gross malfeasance.”

Representatives for the church did not immediately respond Monday to The Times request for comment.

Rinder is survived by his second wife, Christie, their son Jack and Christie’s son Shane. In lieu of flowers, he asked that contributions be made Jack’s college fund.

“Let the flowers grow and look to the future,” Rinder wrote on his website.

‘I stand by it’: ‘Conclave’ screenwriter claps back at Megyn Kelly’s ‘anti-Catholic’ accusation after Golden Globe win

Not everyone is a fan of Conclave. Last Sunday Megyn Kelly, a lifelong Catholic, took to X/Twitter to rant about the Catholic-themed thriller, and stated that watching it was a “huge mistake.” Last night, after the movie won Best Adapted Screenplay at the Golden Globes, screenwriter Peter Straughan addressed Kelly’s comments.

The writer spoke to Variety after his win, and while he didn’t check Kelly’s rant first-hand, he had a lot to say about how Conclave depicts Catholicism, as well as his own relationship with religion. During her rant, Kelly called the award-winning movie “disgusting” and “anti-Catholic,” to which Straughan fired back:

“I don’t think the film is anti-Catholic. I was brought up Catholic. I was an altar boy. I think the core message of ‘Conclave’ is about the church always having to re-find its spiritual core, because it deals so much with power. That’s always been a careful, difficult balance. To me, that was a very central Catholic ideal that I was brought up with. I stand by it.”

General audiences and critics also don’t seem to have a problem with Conclave. The movie became a surprise hit in theaters in late 2024, and had its release date moved up once distrubutors realized that it could be a strong Oscar contender. Sure enough, Conclave is dominating the awards season along with blockbusters like Wicked and Dune: Part 2. But this also means that the movie’s popularity will put it on the radar of people who otherwise wouldn’t even consider watching it.

Conclave stars Ralph Fiennes (Harry Potter franchise) as a cardinal who, after the Pope’s death, starts to uncover a conspiracy helmed by other cardinals as to who will succeed the deceased in one of the most powerful positions in the world. The cast also features John Lithgow (The Old Man), Stanley Tucci (The Devil Wears Prada) and Isabella Rossellini (Blue Velvet). The thriller was directed by previous Oscar nominee Edward Berger (All Quiet On The Western Front), and Straughan adapted the story from a best-selling novel by author Robert Harris.

In her viral rant, Megyn Kelly mentioned the cast and director by name, and stated it was a “shame” they made that movie. The biggest problem for her was [spoiler alert] the fact that it is revealed that the Pope was intersex, which infuriated the journalist. She wrote:

I wish I had known so I wouldn’t have watched it. There are almost no redeeming characters in the movie – every cardinal is morally bankrupt/repulsive. The only exception of course is the intersex pope (who – surprise! – has female reproductive parts) & the cardinal who keeps her secret – bc of course that kind of Catholic secret-keeping must be lionized. I’m disgusted. What a thing to release to streaming just in time for Christmas. They would never do this to Muslims, but Christians/Catholics are always fair game to mock/belittle/smear.”

Despite what Kelly stated, Muslims have been the target of Hollywood for decades, which frequently depicts Middle Easterners as terrorists or religious fanatics — or both. The change in how Muslim characters are represented is fairly recent, and it will still be a long while until the prejudice that movies helped construct is torn down.

Conclave currently holds a 93% approval rate on Rotten Tomatoes. At the Golden Globes, it was also nominated in the Best Movie, Best Director and acting categories for Rossellini and Fiennes.

Megyn Kelly unloads on Golden Globe-nominated ‘Conclave’ as…

Megyn Kelly unloaded on the Golden Globe-nominated movie “Conclave” — then scolded the actors who starred in the “anti-Catholic” film in a spoiler-fileld takedown.

The movie, which stands at a 93% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, follows religious leaders as they work to select the new pope while unearthing dark secrets and corruption within the Roman Catholic Church. The film, nominated in six Golden Globes categories, is based on the 2016 novel by Robert Harris.

Kelly took to X ahead of the Golden Globes Sunday evening to criticize the film and scold the actors who starred in it.

“Just made the huge mistake of watching the much-celebrated “Conclave” & it is the most disgusting anti-Catholic film I have seen in a long time,” the media personality said. “Shame on Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci & John Lithgow for starring in it & shame on director Edward Berger (among others). ‘Spoiler:’ They make THE POPE INTERSEX!”

“There are almost no redeeming characters in the movie – every cardinal is morally bankrupt/repulsive,” she went on. “The only exception of course is the intersex pope (who – surprise! – has female reproductive parts) & the cardinal who keeps her secret – bc of course that kind of Catholic secret-keeping must be lionized.

“I’m disgusted. What a thing to release to streaming just in time for Christmas. They would never do this to Muslims, but Christians/Catholics are always fair game to mock/belittle/smear.”

“Conclave” is up for Original Score, Screenplay of a Motion Picture, and Drama Motion Picture. Director Edward Berger, actor Ralph Fiennes and supporting actress Isabella Rossellini were also nominated.

Kelly’s post saw a mixed response from her fans across all religions.

“Try being Mormon (church of Jesus Christ). It’s a double whammy: Christian which a lot of other Christians make fun of. We get it from both sides,” one user wrote.

Others broke with Kelly and bashed the Vatican and Pope as “corrupt.”

“They are not what you think they are,” said one user. “They don’t represent Christ. Huge difference between being a Christian and what they are doing in the Vatican.”

Navigating the New Frontier: The Rise of Tenofovir Alafenamide in Hepatitis B Treatment

Shifting gears in the treatment landscape of chronic hepatitis B, healthcare professionals are increasingly turning their attention to the transition from entecavir (ETV) to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). This strategic switch has kicked up a storm of curiosity—especially as recent studies peel back the layers on the efficacy, safety, and long-term implications of these antiviral therapies. It’s like watching a chess game unfold—every move calculated, each potential outcome considered.

Take a look at the cumulative incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a primary concern for patients battling this chronic condition. Researchers harnessed Kaplan-Meier curves to glean critical insights, and what emerged was quite telling. In the continuation group on ETV, two patients developed HCC—an alarming statistic, but notably, the difference in incidence between those sticking with ETV and those who switched to TAF didn’t reach significance, landing at a p-value of 0.08. This figure—a number grounded in statistics—hides a human story, particularly when the affected individuals were relatively young men, grappling with advanced fibrosis and low platelet counts. The intertwining of these factors with treatment outcomes is fascinating and warrants deeper exploration.

Now, let’s talk about TAF—often hailed as the safer sibling in the class of nucleic acid analogs. Recent studies show that TAF boasts a lower incidence of adverse effects like renal dysfunction and diminished bone density, making it a compelling choice for patients concerned about long-term health. The evidence is stacking up, and it’s hard to ignore. Sure, at the 48-week mark, TDF (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) might outpace ETV in HBsAg-lowering effects, but TAF is proving itself a formidable contender in this treatment arena. We might be looking at a new dawn in hepatitis B care—one that prioritizes not just efficacy, but safety as well.

However, even with promising data, the journey toward effective treatment is not without its bumps. The decline in HB core-related antigen (HBcrAg) levels observed during the study left much to be desired. So, while the numbers might tell one story, the nuanced reality of patient experiences reminds us that this is far from a simple matter.

The implications of these findings ripple outward, touching various aspects of patient care, treatment planning, and long-term management strategies. As the medical community continues to weigh the advantages and potential pitfalls of these therapies, one thing becomes clear—it’s not just about switching medications. It’s about ensuring that patients receive the most effective and safest care possible, tailored uniquely to their circumstances.

As we stand at this crossroads in hepatitis B treatment, there’s an undeniable excitement in the air—an anticipation of what the future might hold. With TAF emerging as a viable alternative, patients and providers alike are charged with the task of navigating this evolving landscape, armed with knowledge, research, and an unyielding commitment to better health outcomes.

Megyn Kelly fired up over papal-election drama ‘Conclave,’ spoils the ending

The conservative commentator also spoils the film’s ending in a fiery social media post.

Megyn Kelly is dabbling in film criticism by sharing her reaction to Edward Berger’s much-lauded new film, Conclave.

The BAFTA-nominated thriller stars Ralph Fiennes as a cardinal who uncovers secrets and scandal within the Vatican while organizing a papal conclave to elect the next pope. The film arrived to critical acclaim when it premiered at last year’s Telluride Film Festival. Since its October debut in theaters, it has continued to garner praise, making it a likely Oscar contender during this year’s awards season.

But Kelly made it clear Sunday that she doesn’t understand the fervor.

“Just made the huge mistake of watching the much-celebrated Conclave & it is the most disgusting anti-Catholic film I have seen in a long time,” the former Fox News anchor wrote in an X post, in which she (be warned) spoils the ending of the film. “Shame on Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci & John Lithgow for starring in it & shame on director Edward Berger (among others).”

Among her issues with the film, the Megyn Kelly Show host pointed to the twist ending, which we won’t spoil here.

Sign up for Entertainment Weekly’s free daily newsletter to get breaking TV news, exclusive first looks, recaps, reviews, interviews with your favorite stars, and more.

“There are almost no redeeming characters in the movie – every cardinal is morally bankrupt/repulsive,” Kelly wrote. The only exception, she notes, is the underdog candidate whose secret further tests Fiennes’ Cardinal Lawrence — Dean of the College of Cardinals — who has been having a crisis of faith as he convenes the meeting of men from around the world to select a new leader of the church.

Kelly, who wrote that she feels “disgusted,” added, “They would never do this to Muslims, but Christians/Catholics are always fair game to mock/belittle/smear.”

Entertainment Weekly’s review of the film praises the film’s end note: “Much of the film interrogates the gap between the Catholic Church’s sins and the true meaning of faith — but nothing does it more so than this final surprise which seeks to see us all as the creatures that God made us, existing in the space between the world’s certainties.”

For his part, Fiennes previously made the case to EW that the film, penned by Peter Straughan based on Robert Harris’ book of the same name, is filled with morally complex characters. Of his role as Cardinal Lawrence, Fiennes said, “He’s a man of spiritual integrity, and I thought that the screenplay portrayed that really well.”

He continued, “It wasn’t sentimental. It showed fallibility; it showed doubt; it showed the humanness. It was neither a cynical takedown or satire on the Vatican, nor was it preaching and overly religious…. The big question is: Who is worthy? Who is the right person to become Pope? Who will have the spiritual foundation and integrity to hold that position?”

Breaking Barriers: Sister Simona Brambilla Becomes the First Woman Prefect in Vatican History

Sister Simona Brambilla has etched her name in history as the first woman to head a major Vatican office, a significant milestone toward gender equality within the Catholic Church’s leadership. Pope Francis, continuing his mission to elevate women’s roles within the Church’s governance, announced Brambilla’s appointment as the prefect of the Dicastery for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life—a position that oversees every religious order, from the renowned Jesuits to lesser-known movements. This isn’t just a step forward; it’s a giant leap into uncharted territory.,Vatican Media confirmed the groundbreaking nature of this appointment, stating it boldly: “Sister Simona Brambilla is the first woman prefect in the Vatican.” In this pivotal role, Brambilla will hold significant influence over the operations and direction of numerous religious orders, demonstrating a shift in the long-standing traditions of a male-dominated hierarchy.,What’s unique about this appointment, as noted in the announcement, is that Brambilla ranks first as “prefect,” with Cardinal Ángel Fernández Artime serving as her co-leader, or “pro-prefect.” This balanced leadership structure is not merely symbolic; it reflects the theological nuances required for the role. The prefect is endowed with the authority to celebrate Mass and fulfill other sacramental obligations—privileges traditionally limited to men in the Catholic Church. Thus, while women like Brambilla are shattering glass ceilings, the Church maintains its doctrinal boundaries.,At 59 years old, Brambilla’s journey within the Church has been remarkable. A member of the Consolata Missionaries religious order, she has not only held the No. 2 position in the religious orders department since last year but has also worked as a nurse and missionary in Mozambique, leading her order from 2011 to 2023 before Francis appointed her as secretary. She is no stranger to leadership, and her life’s work reflects a deep commitment to both her faith and the communities she serves.,While Brambilla’s appointment is a testament to Pope Francis’s intent to provide women a greater voice within the Church, it should be noted that he has neither lifted the ban on female priests nor has he shown a willingness to allow women to be ordained as deacons. The status quo remains—a source of frustration for many Catholic women who tirelessly contribute to the Church’s community service initiatives, often feeling relegated to a second-class status.,Statistics reveal a slow but steady progress; under Francis’s papacy, the percentage of women working in the Vatican has risen from 19.3% in 2013 to 23.4% today. In the Curia, the governing body of the Church, that figure is even higher at 26%. “The appointments are significant—showing by example how women can take leadership roles within the Catholic hierarchy,” said Vatican officials. This highlights a gradual evolution in the Church’s approach to gender roles—though systemic change remains a work in progress.,Among those making waves alongside Brambilla are Sister Raffaella Petrini, who holds the title of the first-ever female secretary general of the Vatican City State, and Sister Alessandra Smerilli, ranked No. 2 in the Vatican development office. These women are not just filling positions; they are redefining what leadership looks like within a centuries-old institution. Their contributions are invaluable, especially in areas like education and health care, where women have historically led the charge.,In this climate of reform, Brambilla’s ascension is both a victory and a reminder of the complex relationship between tradition and progress. The path ahead is still laden with challenges, yet with each appointment, the hope for a more inclusive and equitable hierarchy flourishes. As Sr. Brambilla takes the reins, all eyes will be watching—not just for the changes she will implement, but for the message her leadership sends to women in the Church and beyond. The narrative is shifting; it’s a revolution brewing beneath the surface, and it’s about time.

Women’s Healthcare: The Untapped Goldmine Ready for Investment and Innovation

Women’s healthcare, a sector that has long lingered in the shadows of the medical industry, is finally stepping into the spotlight—set to transform dramatically by 2025. But let’s not kid ourselves: despite increased awareness and funding, we are still operating in a landscape that’s dramatically underserved. It’s not simply a health crisis; it’s a goldmine of economic potential waiting to be tapped. The urgent need for collaboration across the board—from policymakers and investors to employers—has never been clearer if we are to unlock the true innovation this field desperately needs.,In a powerful statement, Carolee Lee, CEO and founder of WHAM (Women’s Health Access Matters), brings the numbers home: “We’re 52% of the population, but we’ve [VCs] only invested 2%.” With the Biden administration injecting a billion dollars into women’s healthcare research, the ball is rolling, but we need far more than a mere nudge to catch up.,Let’s talk about the staggering research gaps. Did you know that only 4% of funding is directed towards heart disease in women? Yes, the very condition that claims more lives than any other—affecting sixty million women in the U.S. alone. It’s nothing short of criminal that this disparity exists. As Lee puts it succinctly, “If you double that small number [$350 million], you get a return of $14 billion to the economy.” Who wouldn’t be on board with that kind of ROI?,Moreover, menopause—a pivotal stage in women’s lives—has finally begun to receive the attention it so rightly deserves. Projected to blossom into an $18.56 billion market in 2025, the conversations surrounding this issue are essential for enhancing women’s quality of life. It’s about time we started recognizing and addressing the realities women face during and after menopause.,And let’s not forget autoimmune conditions, a field that remains shrouded in mystery despite the fact that 80% of those affected are women. As Kathryn Schubert, president and CEO of the Society for Women’s Health Research, highlighted, “If you look at something like lupus in particular, that’s a much higher rate for women of color.” Delving into these research voids is vital—we owe it to millions of women dealing with these often debilitating conditions.,Financially speaking, the stakes couldn’t be higher. The cost of just four diseases—lung cancer, Alzheimer’s, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and cardiovascular disease—translates to nearly $1 trillion for the U.S. economy. It’s a no-brainer: investing in women’s healthcare is an economic necessity, not just a compassionate endeavor.,With a shift in the administration, the focus will likely veer towards the Department of Defense, potentially opening new pathways for addressing military women’s healthcare needs. As Liz Powell puts it, “I think there will be opportunities to address military service women’s health needs.” Legislative action is paramount—this isn’t just about securing funding; it’s about maintaining women’s health as a priority.,Naseem Sayani, a VC investor, elaborates on the role of policy changes in boosting investment in women’s healthcare. Adjusting reimbursement codes and streamlining AI regulations aren’t just bureaucratic maneuvers; they are crucial steps to invigorate this sector.,All these efforts hinge on a robust collaboration—a triad formed by researchers, policymakers, and investors. Lee emphasizes that data, policy, and private investment are the cornerstones for progress.,The venture capital landscape is indeed shifting. After a downturn since its peak in 2021, the tides are turning with an uptick in 2023-2024. VC investors are optimistic, anticipating a surge in funding by 2025. Yet, instead of stifling investment, regulatory constraints have inadvertently sparked a wave of interest and funding into the women’s healthcare sector. The emergence of focused funds and unicorn success stories like Maven—a potential IPO this year—are validating this market’s promise.,To amplify this momentum, WHAM’s High-Impact Investment Collaborative aims to catalyze investment in women’s healthcare innovation significantly. This initiative is no small feat; it’s an ambitious effort to awaken the vast potential of the women’s healthcare market, uniting big-name investment firms to accelerate diagnostics, treatments, and preventative measures.,Moreover, employers can play a pivotal role. By prioritizing benefits that encompass fertility, motherhood, and even menopause, companies not only showcase their commitment to employee well-being but also contribute to a more engaged workforce. As Schubert wisely points out, “If we were to invest a little bit more on those sides of things, you probably would have better productivity.”,Technology, particularly AI, stands on the precipice of revolutionizing women’s healthcare. Imagine improved diagnostics and treatments, especially for underserved areas—it’s not just a dream; it’s a tangible future.,However, let’s not be naive; challenges remain. The road ahead demands rigorous efforts to address research disparities while ensuring that legislative action remains steadfast. Without collaborative efforts and the integration of technology, we risk falling short of realizing this pivotal moment in women’s healthcare—one that promises not only enhancement in health outcomes but also economic prosperity.