'Many long COVID patients adjust to slim recovery odds as world moves on'

 There are certain phrases that Wachuka Gichohi finds difficult to hear after enduring four years of living with long COVID, marked by debilitating fatigue, pain, panic attacks and other symptoms so severe she feared she would die overnight.

Among them are normally innocuous statements such as, "Feel better soon" or "Wishing you a quick recovery," the Kenyan businesswoman said, shaking her head.

Gichohi, 41, knows such phrases are well-intentioned. "I think you have to accept, for me, it’s not going to happen."

Recent scientific studies shed new light on the experience of millions of patients like Gichohi. They suggest the longer someone is sick, the lower their chances of making a full recovery.

The best window for recovery is in the first six months after getting COVID-19, with better odds for people whose initial illness was less severe, as well as those who are vaccinated, researchers in the United Kingdom and the United States found. People whose symptoms last between six months and two years are less likely to fully recover.

For patients who have been struggling for more than two years, the chance of a full recovery "is going to be very slim," said Manoj Sivan, a professor of rehabilitation medicine at the University of Leeds and one of the authors of the findings published in The Lancet.

Sivan said this should be termed "persistent long COVID" and understood like the chronic conditions myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, or fibromyalgia, which can be features of long COVID or risk factors for it.

WANING ATTENTION

Long COVID, defined as symptoms persisting for three months or more after the initial infection, involves a constellation of symptoms from extreme fatigue to brain fog, breathlessness and joint pain.

It can range from mild to utterly disabling, and there are no proven diagnostic tests or treatments, although scientists have made progress on theories about who is at risk and what might cause it.

One British study suggested almost a third of those reporting symptoms at 12 weeks recovered after 12 months. Others, particularly among patients who had been hospitalized, show far lower rates of recovery.

In a study run by the UK's Office for National Statistics, two million people self-reported long COVID symptoms this past March. Roughly 700,000, or 30.6%, said they first experienced symptoms at least three years previously.

Globally, accepted estimates have suggested between 65 million and 200 million people have long COVID. That could mean between 19.5 million and 60 million people face years of impairment based on the initial estimates, Sivan said.

The United States and some countries like Germany continue to fund long COVID research.

But more than two dozen experts, patient advocates and pharmaceutical executives told Reuters that money and attention for the condition is dwindling in other wealthy countries that traditionally fund large-scale studies. In low- and middle-income countries, it was never there.

"The attention has shifted," said Amitava Banerjee, a professor at University College London who co-leads a large trial of repurposed drugs and rehabilitation programmes.

He says long COVID should be viewed as a chronic condition that can be treated to improve patients' lives rather than cured, like heart disease or arthritis.

'PROFOUNDLY DISABLING'

Leticia Soares, 39, from northeast Brazil, was infected in 2020 and has battled intense fatigue and chronic pain ever since. On a good day, she spends five hours out of bed.

When she can work, Soares is a co-lead and researcher at Patient-Led Research Collaborative, an advocacy group involved in a review of long COVID evidence published recently in Nature.

Soares said she believes recovery seldom happens beyond 12 months. Some patients may find their symptoms abate, only to recur, a kind of remission that can be mistaken for recovery, she said.

"It's so profoundly disabling and isolating. You spend every time wondering, 'Am I going to get worse after this?'" she said of her own experience.

Soares takes antihistamines and other commonly available treatments to cope with daily life. Four long COVID specialist doctors in different countries said they prescribe such medicines, which are known to be safe. Some evidence suggests they help.

Others have less success with mainstream medicine.

Gichohi's illness was dismissed by her doctor, and she turned to a functional medicine practitioner, who focused on more holistic treatments.

She moved out of her hectic home city of Nairobi to a small town near Mount Kenya, policing her activity levels to prevent fatigue and receiving acupuncture and trauma therapy.

She has tried the addiction treatment naltrexone, which has some evidence of benefit for long COVID symptoms, and the controversial anti-parasitic infection drug ivermectin, which does not but she says helped her.

She said shifting from "chasing recovery" to living in her new reality was important.

A piecemeal treatment approach is to be expected while research progresses, and perhaps longer-term, said Anita Jain, a long COVID specialist at the World Health Organization.

Meanwhile, long-haulers face a new challenge with each spike in COVID cases. A handful of studies have suggested re-infection can exacerbate existing long COVID.

Shannon Turner, a 39-year-old cabaret singer from Philadelphia, got COVID in late March or early April of 2020.

She was already living with psoriatic arthritis and antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, autoimmune diseases for which she regularly took steroids and an immunotherapy. Such conditions may increase the risk of developing long COVID, researchers say.

This past summer, Turner got COVID again. Once again, she is extraordinarily tired and uses a walker for mobility.

Turner is determined to pursue her music career despite ongoing pain, dizziness and a racing heart rate, which regularly land her in hospital.

"I don't want to live my life in bed," she said.

https://www.aol.com/news/many-long-covid-patients-adjust-060826748.html

'Borderless Europe fights brain drain as talent heads north'

 Until recently aerospace engineer Pedro Monteiro figured he'd join many of his peers moving from Portugal to its richer European neighbours in the quest for a better-paid job once he completes his master's degree in Lisbon.

But tax breaks proposed by Portugal's government for young workers - up to a temporary 100% income tax exemption in some cases - plus help with housing are making him think twice.

"Previous governments left young people behind," said Monteiro, 23, who is studying engineering and industrial management at the Higher Technical Institute in the Portuguese capital. "The country needs us and we want to stay but we need to see signs from the government that they are implementing policies that will help."

Monteiro cites in particular the cost of buying or renting a home amid a housing crisis aggravated by the arrival of wealthy foreigners lured by easy residency rights and tax breaks.

He is doubtful the government's new measures will be enough.

"Some of my friends are now working abroad and earn substantially more money... and have better career development opportunities," he said. "I'm a little bit sceptical concerning my job opportunities here in Portugal."

Portugal is the latest country in Europe to seek to tackle a brain drain holding back its economy. Tax breaks for young workers in the budget currently going through parliament will take effect next year and could benefit as many as 400,000 young people at an annual cost of 525 million euros.

Talent flight to wealthier countries of the north is a problem Portugal shares with several others in southern and central Europe, as workers take advantage of freedom of movement rules within the trade bloc. Countries including Italy have tried other schemes to counter the flight, with mixed results.

Aerospace engineer Pedro Monteiro, 23, with a year left to complete his master's degree in Industrial Engineering and Management at Instituto Superior Tecnico, poses for a picture in a Lisbon University facility, Portugal, November 6, 2024. REUTERS/Pedro Nunes© Thomson Reuters

By exacerbating regional labour shortages and depriving poorer countries of tax revenues, it is yet another hurdle for the EU as it tries to improve its ebbing economic growth while addressing population decline and lagging labour productivity.

Donald Trump's victory in U.S. elections this month raises the stakes, with the risk of across-the-board trade tariffs on European exports of at least 10% - a move that economists say could turn Europe's anaemic growth into outright recession.

About 2.3 million people born in Portugal, or 23% of its population, currently live abroad, according to Portugal's Emigration Observatory. That includes 850,000 Portuguese nationals aged 15-39, or about 30% of young Portuguese and 12.6% of its working-age population.

More concerning still is that about 40% of 50,000 people who graduate from universities or technical colleges emigrate each year, according to a study by Business Roundtable Portugal and Deloitte based on official statistics, costing Portugal billions of euros in lost income tax revenue and social security contributions.

DEMOGRAPHIC HELL

"This is not a country for young people," said Pedro Ginjeira do Nascimento, executive director of Business Roundtable Portugal, which represents 43 of the largest companies in the nation of 10 million people. "Portugal is experiencing a true demographic hell because the country is unable to create conditions to retain and attract young talent."

Internal migration within the EU is partly driven by the disparity in wages between its member states. Some economic migrants also say they are looking for better benefits such as pensions and healthcare and less rigid, hierarchichal structures that give more responsibility to those in junior roles.

Concerns are mounting over the long-term viability of Europe's economic model with its rapidly ageing population and failure to win substantial shares of high-growth markets of the future, from tech to renewable energy.

Eszter Czovek, 45, packs up her house as she moves to Austria, in Budapest, Hungary, October 28, 2024. REUTERS/Bernadett Szabo© Thomson Reuters

Presenting a raft of reform proposals aimed at boosting local innovation and investment, former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi said in September the region faced a "slow agony" of decline if it did not compete more effectively.

Eszter Czovek, 45, and her husband are moving from Hungary to Austria, where workers earn an average 40.9 euros ($29.95) per hour compared to 12.8 euros per hour in Hungary, the largest wage gap between neighbouring countries in the EU.

Tech worker Alessandra Mariani poses for a picture during an interview in Milan, Italy, October 30, 2024. REUTERS/Alex Frasier© Thomson Reuters

The number of Hungarians living in Austria increased to 107,264 by the beginning of 2024 from just 14,151 when Hungary joined the EU.

Czovek's husband, who works in construction, was offered a job in Austria, while she has worked in media and accounting at various multinationals. She cited better pay, pensions, work conditions and healthcare as motives for moving. She also mentioned her concern over the political situation in Hungary, which she fears might join Britain in leaving the EU.

"There was a change of regime here in 1989 and 30 years later we are still waiting for the miracle that will see us catch up with Austria," Czovek said of the revolution over three decades ago that ended communist rule in Hungary.

Since Brexit, the Netherlands has replaced Britain as a preferred destination for Portuguese talent while Germany and Scandinavian countries are also popular.

Many Europeans still head to the United States in search of better jobs - about 4.7 million were living there in 2022, according to the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute, which notes nonetheless a long-term decline since the 1960s.

In 2023, 4,892 Portuguese emigrated to the Netherlands, surpassing Britain for the first time, which in 2019 received 24,500 Portuguese.

At home, they face the eighth-highest tax burden in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) even as house prices rose 186% and rents by 94% since 2015, according to property specialists Confidencial Imobiliario.

A single person in Portugal without children earned an average of 16,943 euros after tax in 2023 compared to 45,429 euros in the Netherlands, according to Eurostat.

Portugal will offer under 35s earning up to 28,000 euros a year a 100% tax exemption during their first year of work, gradually reducing the benefit to a 25% deduction between the eighth and tenth years.

Young people would also be exempted from transaction taxes and stamp duty when buying their first home as well as access to loans guaranteed by the state and rent subsidies.

"We are designing a solid package that tries to solve the main reasons why the young leave," Cabinet Minister Antonio Leitao Amaro said in an interview with Reuters.

'THINGS WON'T CHANGE'

Leitao Amaro said he did not know for sure if the tax breaks would work but that his government, which came into office in April, had to try something new.

"If we don't act ambitiously, things won't change and Portugal will continue down this path," he said.

The Italian government has already found that tax breaks used as incentives are costly and open to fraud.

In January, Italy abruptly curtailed its own scheme that was costing 1.3 billion euros in lost tax revenue, even as it lured tech workers such as Alessandra Mariani back home.

Before 2024, returners were offered a 70% tax break for five years, extendable for another five years in certain circumstances. Now, it plans to offer a slimmed-down scheme targeting specific skills after it attracted only 1,200 teachers or researchers - areas where Italy has a particular shortage.

Mariani said the incentives were key to persuading her to return to Milan in 2021 by allowing her to maintain the same standard of living she enjoyed in London.

"Had the opportunity been the same without the scheme, I would not have done it at all," said Mariani, now working at the Italian arm of the same large tech company.

With her tax breaks poised to be phased out by 2026 unless she buys a house or has a child, Mariani faces a drop in salary and she said she's once again eyeing the exit door.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/other/borderless-europe-fights-brain-drain-as-talent-heads-north/ar-AA1u42yD

'RFK Jr.'s plan for changing the U.S. food and drug system'

 Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an environmental and anti-vaccine activist, was selected by President-elect Donald Trump to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, the United States' top health agency.

The following are some of the main policy positions Kennedy has taken in recent months in editorials, tweets and interviews:

Vaccines

Kennedy has criticized vaccines, including making false medical claims that vaccines are linked to autism. He opposed state and federal COVID-19 restrictions. However, he told Reuters every American who wants a vaccine for themselves or their children will have access to them.

Processed foods

Kennedy calls for banning hundreds of food additives and chemicals. He has called for getting ultra-processed foods out of school lunches as part of a goal to reduce the incidence of diet-related chronic diseases.

Nutrition guidelines

He has said the nutrition department at the Food and Drug Administration that is in charge of nutrition labels on food has "to go. They're not doing their job. They're not protecting our kids."

Weight loss drugs

Kennedy has criticized the popular Novo Nordisk NOVOb.CO drug Ozempic, which is often prescribed for weight loss, saying it focused on symptoms of the obesity crisis rather than fixing the food system, and that the drugs "gladden the wallets" of pharmaceutical executives.

Drug Research

Kennedy has said half of research budgets from the National Institutes of Health should be directed toward preventive, alternative and holistic approaches to health.

Raw Milk

Kennedy wants to end the "FDA's war on public health" including what he called "aggressive suppression" of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, and more.

Fluoride

He has called for removing fluoride from public water.

Medical schools

He has said classes in nutrition at federally funded medical schools should be required.

Farms

He has called for revisiting pesticide and other chemical-use standards, as well as reforming crop subsidies.

https://www.marketscreener.com/news/latest/RFK-Jr-s-plan-for-changing-the-U-S-food-and-drug-system-48371528/

How Can We ‘Trust The Science’ When We Can’t Trust The Data?

 Climate change is the challenge of our lifetimes,” we in the energy-hungry West often hear when lectured by leftist government officials and their allies pushing the “Net-Zero” religion. But what happens if much of the vital data behind the climate-change threat are made up?

Turns out, quite a lot of it is. At least that’s what the Daily Sceptic, a British-based science watchdog, claims. It recently detailed the allegations made by an independent journalist showing that 103 of the 302 supposed “weather stations” that provide data for both the United Kingdom government’s and academic scientists’ climate change forecasts don’t exist or produce actual data.

That’s right. Instead of data, the government manufactures “estimates,” as journalist Ray Sanders found.

If so, that means all of the science based on the falsified data is null and void. That includes the British government’s frequent dire predictions of massive global heating that will soon make life on planet Earth unbearable.

Still, that’s just the UK, right? Wrong.

If you live in the U.S., you’ve been hectored by big-government leftists for years to “trust the science.” But the U.S. government has its own problems with our temperature data.

The United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) was set up to provide accurate temperature numbers to policymakers, meteorologists, and scientists.

Unfortunately, as in Britain, the U.S. is shutting down many of its weather stations, making apples-to-apples data comparisons statistically impossible. The data go back 100 years.

“They (weather stations) are physically gone — but still report data — like magic,” according to Lt. Col. John Shewchuk, a certified consulting meteorologist. “NOAA fabricates temperature data for more than 30% of the 1,218 USHCN reporting stations that no longer exist.”

But it’s not only about data.

This revelation comes as COP29, the awkward acronym for the United Nation’s 29th annual conference on climate change, gets underway in Baku, Azerbaijan, with literally dozens of CO2-spewing government and private jets flying an anticipated 50,000 people thousands of miles for the occasion.

“Carbon for me, but not for thee,” could be the motto of the Climato-crats in attendance.

According to U.N. Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell, on Tuesday of this week Britain agreed to “a new target of cutting emissions 81% by 2035, for its new NDC.” That’s up from an already unreachable 78% before.

In case you’re wondering, “NDC” is United Nation-ese for ‘”Nationally Developed Contribution.” But it just as well could be called NBB, for “National Bankruptcy for Britain.” Because what the government has planned is nothing short of taking Britain’s development back decades.

This is how the British Independent news site describes what must happen due to Britain’s pledge at the U.N. meeting:

The CCC (Climate Change Committee) said electricity will need to be zero carbon by 2035, with a phaseout of gas power that does not have technology to capture and store its carbon emissions, and renewables – in particular offshore wind – generating 70% of power.

It also said sales of natural gas boilers need to be phased out by 2033 with the majority of homes switching to heat pumps that run on electricity.

Sales of new petrol and diesel cars, motorbikes and vans, including plug-in hybrids, must be phased out by 2032, with most new sales ended by 2030.

People should also be encouraged to reduce their meat and dairy consumption by 20% by 2030, which will free up land for restoring peatland so it absorbs carbon and to plant trees.

And cuts to demand for other carbon intensive activities will also be needed, including slower growth in flights, reductions in car travel, and cutting waste and boosting recycling, the advisers said.

Sound like the kind of place where you want to live? Eat less? Stop traveling? Buy only electric vehicles? It’s basically a climate police state, which is precisely what Britain’s far-left government intends.

And no, it doesn’t end there. The sacrifices go on and on, with no offsetting gains for the economy, and it’s happening across Europe, with shockingly predictable results.

In “Europe Is Pricing Itself Out Of Existence,” Macro Strategy Partnership economist Andrew Lees argues that the EU has “traded growth for ideology,” with renewable energy costing five times what conventional energy sources cost.

In short, as it strains under the burden of the “Net-Zero” movement, the EU is going backward as it kills off economic growth, forces factories to shut down and lay off workers, and raises the cost of living for already-strapped, highly-taxed EU citizens.

Our friends at The Committee to Unleash Prosperity said it best in their headline: “Green Energy Has Decimated Europe.” That’s no exaggeration.

And it’s a high price to pay for a climate theory based on iffy, if not outright fraudulent, data.

The move to Net-Zero globally, which is what COP29 represents, will be absurdly expensive and put a major dent in economies around the world. Estimates range from $1.5 trillion a year (Goldman Sachs) to $3.5 trillion a year (McKinsey) to a stunning $5 trillion a year (Global Financial Markets Association).

It ain’t peanuts.

And that doesn’t include the trillions of dollars less-developed nations want as reparations for the “damage” (it used to be called “development”) global warming supposedly causes them. This year’s COP29 “features the demand that developed countries fork over billions, if not trillions, more dollars to the Global South, ostensibly to help it adjust to climate change,” notes Heather Mac Donald in City Journal.

With shrinking economies and a collapsing industrial base in many nations, and cratering demographics around the world, how will nations pay for this? They won’t. They can’t. They will be bankrupt, which is the global warming movement’s real goal.

Given that it’s all based on somewhat spurious readings of temperature data both past and present, the trillions of dollars spent doesn’t seem like a prudent investment. No, it looks more like the biggest gamble ever. Do you “trust the science?”

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/11/14/how-can-we-trust-the-science-when-we-cant-trust-the-data/

The Hegseth Nomination

by John Hinderaker 

I confess to being taken aback by President-Elect Trump’s nomination of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense. Pete is a friend, a patriot, and a great guy. But to run a near-trillion dollar bureaucracy? What in his experience qualifies him to do that?

Byron York makes the point:

The fact is that despite his impressive qualifications — Princeton, Harvard, two Bronze Stars, and professional success — Hegseth does not have the resume one would expect from a secretary of defense, most notably the management experience to run one of the largest bureaucracies in the world, with an $841 billion budget this year. But Trump clearly wanted a change in direction.

On reflection, maybe being the World’s Greatest Bureaucrat isn’t the real qualification for the job of Defense Secretary. They can bring on a couple of bean counters as deputy secretaries to manage the department. And in any event, maybe no one can do it. I got together with Donald Rumsfeld in Washington, not long after he finished his second tour of duty as Secretary of Defense. He described the Pentagon as an almost insuperable obstacle to getting anything done. When he had a high priority project, the temptation was to bypass the bureaucracy entirely, and hire a team of independent contractors to get the job done. That isn’t a good practice, in principle, and the taxpayers wind up paying twice. But it was, in his view, the only way around the Pentagon blockade.

Trump probably has a different mission in mind for Hegseth. He wants him to be the public face and the emblem of a basic change in direction. The armed forces are no longer to be used as a vehicle for social experiment. (It was Pete Hegseth, after all, who wrote the book on how wokism has degraded our military.) Instead, they will be returned to their traditional function as a deadly war-fighting machine. Pete Hegseth, young and a war hero, is an excellent person to convey that message. And his communication skills are unsurpassed.

Maybe what Trump is trying to bring about is not incremental change, but a fundamental reminder of what our armed forces are all about. That, plus getting recruitment numbers back up to sustainable levels. The kinds of young women and women who enlist to fight for their country are not, for the most part, interested in careers in DEI. Maybe Pete is the right guy to convince young Americans that in this new era, it is once again time to sign up.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/11/the-hegseth-nomination.php

What does 'equity' mean?

 by Vinay Prasad

Recently, a friend was telling me about her daughter in SF public schools. The daughter, a 6th grader, already knows the math that is being taught in her class. The parent asked if she could be advanced to a higher math class. The school said the answer is no, and the reason:

Because of “equity”

What precisely does that mean? Practically it means that because other 6th graders are not yet capable of 6th grade math, this 6th grader can’t take advanced math because it would be unfair. In other words: because some kids are struggling, this kid cannot soar.

That is a brain dead and bankrupt ideology. Because the school is not able to keep the poorest performers up to snuff, the students who thrive must be held back. No honorable society would do this.

In fact, it is not equitable. It is fair to the students who are lagging to get extra attention, but it is not fair to the students who are thriving to be held back, and prevented from learning more. In fact, it strikes me as abusive, and limiting their potential.

The word equity is used more and more often to describe practices that I think are patently absurd. It is used to justify failure. Consider this example from medicine….

Currently, a number of medical interviews are taking place on zoom. That means rising residents don’t get to visit the campus. Worse, it means that all dialog happens in the impersonal and cold space of the online forum. Many hate zoom interviews.

Why do they continue? To me, it reeks of laziness. We went to zoom because of the pandemic, and we stayed there because faculty and staff are too lazy to come to work in person.

Because of zoom interviews, students can interview at dozens or more places with no commitment. They don’t have to shell out for flights or a hotel. So we don’t know how serious they are.

The NRMP created a signaling mechanism to try to overcome this. In other words, they invented a medication to treat the side effects of the first one.

Why do zoom interviews continue? Some say ‘equity’. Not all students can afford to travel. But consider how laughable this statement is. The same students who you just billed 200k in tuition and spent 80k in living expenses, can’t borrow 5 k to travel to interviews? If you cared about equity, pay for their hotel and flights, like any other job would, and don’t make up bullshit about cost being the motivating force.

‘Equity’ is just used to justify laziness.

The idea that people should be treated equally and fairly is a good one. Hampering a student who is thriving or making interviews worse is not fair, it is the broken ideology of ‘equity’. It has to go.

https://www.drvinayprasad.com/p/what-does-equity-mean

In Most U.S. Cities, Social Security Payments Last Married Couples Just 19 Days Or Less

 Relying solely on Social Security for retirement, especially as a married couple, may need a serious second look. New findings from GOBankingRates reveal that in 50 major U.S. cities, Social Security income won't even cover a full month’s expenses. At best, these benefits might last up to 19 days, but in six of these cities, they fall short in under 10 days.

GOBankingRates conducted an analysis of the 100 largest U.S. cities by population, using the average Social Security benefits for married couples to assess how far this income stretches when set against living costs.

The recent study reveals that in many U.S. cities, Social Security benefits fall far short of covering even half a month’s living expenses for married retirees. In particular, six major cities—including Irvine, Fremont, San Jose, San Francisco, Honolulu, and San Diego—offer the briefest financial coverage from Social Security, with benefits lasting between just 6.73 and 9.59 days, according to GoBankingRates.com.

Irvine, California, stands out as the city where benefits stretch the least, covering under a week’s worth of expenses, with a monthly cost of living that exceeds $9,700 for a couple.

The findings show that California is a challenging state for retirees relying on Social Security alone, with 15 of its cities appearing in the top 50 cities where benefits last the shortest.

Within the top 10 cities with the shortest Social Security coverage, California holds seven spots, underscoring the high cost of living in the state. While Irvine ranks as the most expensive, Stockton, California, provides the most days of coverage in the state at nearly 18 days—though even this is well below a full month.

At the other end of the spectrum, Saint Petersburg, Florida, ranks as the city where Social Security lasts the longest among the 50 cities analyzed, stretching to 19.38 days for married couples. This reflects the lower cost of living in Saint Petersburg, where expenses amount to $1,584 monthly.

Florida's comparatively affordable living costs mean that, while Social Security coverage still falls short of a full month, retirees may face less financial strain.

The GoBankingRates.com study showed that beyond California and Florida, cities like Arlington, Virginia, and Seattle also show limited Social Security coverage, lasting only around 10 to 11 days. Arlington, with a monthly cost of $5,307, and Seattle, at $4,733, both represent high-cost areas where retirees might struggle to maintain financial stability on Social Security alone.

Honolulu is the sole representative from Hawaii in the top six, where the high cost of living cuts Social Security coverage to just over 8 days.

The study’s detailed breakdown shows a significant disparity between cities, where monthly costs range from $9,794 in Irvine to $1,584 in Saint Petersburg. Even cities with more affordable housing and expenses, such as Gilbert, Arizona, and Austin, Texas, provide just around 16 days of coverage, demonstrating that even in lower-cost cities, retirees would need supplementary income to cover basic living expenses each month.

Ultimately, the findings illustrate the pressing financial challenge facing retirees in urban areas across the United States. With the cost of living continually rising, retirees must consider alternative income sources or substantial savings to bridge the gap left by Social Security benefits, especially in cities where expenses drastically outpace what Social Security provides.

You can view the study's methodology and full results here. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/most-us-cities-social-security-payments-last-married-couples-just-19-days-or-less