Authored by Jon Fleetwood via JonFleetwood.com,

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) quietly granted full approval to Moderna’s mRNA COVID-19 injection for children while Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was on vacation – and without his knowledge or consent.

As head of the department overseeing the FDA, Kennedy should have been directly informed of any decision involving pediatric mRNA shots—especially one as politically and medically sensitive as full approval for children as young as six months.

On July 10, Moderna, Inc. announced the FDA approved the supplemental Biologics License Application (sBLA) for Spikevax®, the Company’s COVID shot, in “children 6 months through 11 years of age who are at increased risk for COVID-19 disease.”

The approval was made despite Moderna’s own scientists’ admission that there are “unacceptable toxicity” levels in mRNA vaccines, and that “lipid nanoparticle structural components, production methods, route of administration and proteins produced from complexed mRNAs all present toxicity concerns.”

It was also made without Secretary Kennedy’s knowledge.

According to multiple sources, neither Kennedy nor his Deputy Chief of Staff Stefanie Spears were briefed or consulted ahead of the decision, raising alarm over internal operations at one of the nation’s most powerful health agencies.

Only July 16, White House correspondent and media host Emerald Robinson reported on Twitter/X that FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary “did not inform @RobertKennedyJr (who was on vacation) or his office that FDA was going to approve the mRNA shots for children,” citing sources familiar with the matter.

On July 17, CNN reported that Secretary Kennedy had fired two of his top aides “in an abrupt shakeup of the leadership at the nation’s sprawling health department,” also citing unnamed sources.

“Kennedy’s chief of staff, Heather Flick Melanson, and deputy chief of staff for policy Hannah Anderson left HHS after only a handful of months on the job, following internal clashes that culminated in both of their removals this week,” the report explained.

The CNN article didn’t connect the firings to the FDA’s decision to approve Moderna’s jab for kids.

However, the MAHA PAC (Make America Healthy Again Political Action Committee)—a pro-Trump super PAC founded by RFK Jr.’s former staff to promote his health-focused agenda—corroborated Robinson’s account and connected the firings to the FDA’s Moderna decision.

On July 20, MAHA PAC cited Dr. Robert Malone—now serving on the newly restructured ACIP vaccine panel—as confirming that neither Kennedy nor Spears were informed of the FDA’s decision regarding Moderna and that a major HHS leadership purge unfolded upon their return.

“The unfortunate facts are that this decision… was made public when both the Secretary of HHS and his trusted deputy Chief of Staff Stefanie Spears were on vacation,” said Dr. Malone, citing insider knowledge. “Neither Sec. HHS nor his deputy Chief of Staff (dCOS) were briefed or read in on this decision.”

The move apparently set off a chain reaction.

According to Malone, shortly after Kennedy and Spears returned, “a major reorganization of HHS leadership occurred.”

Anderson was “walked off the premises and was so upset that she crashed her car into the Secretary’s government-provided vehicle.”

Melanson, a veteran of the Trump-era HHS, claimed she resigned voluntarily.

CNN sources say otherwise, alleging she was fired after Kennedy lost confidence in her leadership following the dismissal of Anderson.

A spokesperson for HHS said that Matt Buckham, the department’s White House liaison, will serve as acting Chief of Staff.

The FDA’s end-run around Kennedy not only signals potential deeper insubordination within HHS, but also highlights a promising shift under his leadership—one where incompetence, secrecy, and disloyalty are no longer tolerated, and where restoring integrity, transparency, and public trust could be the new standard.

Follow us on Instagram @realjonfleetwood & Twitter/X @JonMFleetwood.

The cost of a typical American home has raced far ahead of paychecks.

This graphic (and below video), via Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao, charts how the median sales price of a newly-built privately-owned residential units (including houses and apartments) and the median household income have moved since 1967.

Data for this graphic is sourced from the Census Bureau (both home prices and household incomes).

The Federal Reserve’s CPI-U index was used to convert both to 2023 dollars for an apples-to-apples comparison.

Tracking U.S. Home Prices vs. Household Incomes

The median sales price of a new U.S. home reached $428,600 in 2023. That price was more than five times the median household income of $80,610 that year.

See how both metrics have moved since 1967 in the video below.

The widening gap underscores why today’s buyers feel squeezed, even with low-down-payment loans and longer mortgage terms.

It also hints at deeper forces, from land-use rules to interest-rate cycles, shaping the housing market’s boom-and-bust rhythm.

The Affordability Ratio Has Doubled Since 1970

Dividing price by income yields a home-price ratio, a quick gauge of affordability. A ratio of 3 is often cited as a sustainable benchmark.

Back in 1970, the typical new home cost just 3.2 times the median income.

By 2004, that ratio had breached 5x for the first time, and it has rarely dipped below 5 since the Great Financial Crisis. In 2022, the ratio peaked at 5.83—an all-time high.

Even with a slight pullback in 2023, the multiple remains about two times higher than it was half a century ago, signaling persistent affordability pressure.

Boom-and-Bust Cycles Leave Lasting Scars

The 2000-2006 housing boom pushed home prices up faster than incomes, inflating the ratio from 4.3 to 5.4 in just six years.

After the 2008 crash, prices corrected, trimming the multiple to 4.5 by 2009.

Yet incomes stagnated while credit conditions eased, allowing prices to roar back. Each bust resets the market, but the floor keeps rising—suggesting structural supply shortages and demographic demand that quick corrections cannot fully unwind.

Pandemic Stimulus Supercharged Home Prices

Record-low mortgage rates and a surge in remote-work moves propelled home prices in 2020-22. Median new-home prices jumped nearly $63,000 in two years—while median incomes fell slightly.

Even as interest rates climbed in 2023 and prices cooled, the typical buyer still needed more than five years of gross income to purchase a newly built home.

Unless incomes rise faster or supply meaningfully expands, the era of “stretch” affordability looks set to continue.

Median values are good for quick understanding but hide variance across the country. For more nuanced data, check out The Income Needed to Buy a Home in Every U.S. State on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick said on Sunday that President Donald Trump will renegotiate the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) when the trade pact is due for review next year.

The USMCA, enacted during President Donald Trump’s first term in July 2020, replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The agreement requires that 75 percent of automobile components be made in the United States, Mexico, or Canada for a vehicle to qualify for tariff-free treatment. The trade agreement also mandates that up to 45 percent of parts and components be made by workers earning at least $16 per hour, according to the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.

It also includes a provision requiring the three nations to review the deal every six years from its enactment.

In an interview with CBS News that aired on July 20, Lutnick said that it would make “perfect sense” for Trump to renegotiate the deal as part of an effort to protect U.S. workers.

“He wants to protect American jobs. He doesn’t want cars built in Canada or Mexico when they could be built in Michigan and Ohio. It’s just better for American workers,” he told CBS’s “Face The Nation.”

Lutnick said that about 75 percent of imports from both countries are covered under the USMCA, which exempts those imports from tariffs.

“I think the president is absolutely going to renegotiate USMCA, but that’s a year from today,” the commerce secretary said.

Trump has announced 35 percent tariffs on Canadian imports and 30 percent on Mexican goods, which are set to take effect on Aug. 1. Lutnick called the date “a hard deadline” for implementing those tariffs and the rates imposed on other trading partners, including the European Union.

Lutnick noted that the United States will continue to engage in trade negotiations with other nations even after the new tariff rates take effect.

“Nothing stops countries from talking to us after August 1, but they’re going to start paying the tariffs on August 1,” he said.

Trump told Fox News in October 2024 that he plans to invoke the six-year review provision of the USMCA upon taking office for a second term, pledging to make it “a much better deal.”

Since returning to the White House for a second term, Trump has imposed a universal 10 percent baseline tariff on U.S. trading partners, alongside reciprocal tariffs announced in April that vary depending on each country’s trade barriers with the United States. Initially, he applied a 90-day pause on most of these reciprocal tariffs and later extended that reprieve to Aug. 1 through an executive order.

Over the past week, Trump has sent letters to more than 20 U.S. trading partners, notifying them of the tariff rates they will face on exports to the United States if they fail to reach trade deals with his administration.

Authored by Cindy Li via The Epoch Times,

Australia could become a supplier of weapons and munitions for the United States under a new radical proposal designed to better equip the world’s largest military to deal with any threat in the Indo-Pacific.

The Guided Weapons and Explosive Ordnance (GWEO) Enterprise, developed in partnership with the United States, is geared towards building local production facilities for missiles and munitions in Australia.

Launched in 2021, the project is backed by a government commitment of $16–21 billion over the next decade.

Despite some progress—including the release of the Australian government’s GWEO Plan in late 2024—the project still faces obstacles.

As a result, its growth has not kept pace with the region’s worsening security situation, according to the new report titled, “Partnering for forward deterrence in the Indo-Pacific: Overcoming barriers to U.S.-Australia cooperation on Australia’s GWEO Enterprise,” by the University of Sydney’s U.S. Studies Center.

Recommendations for US and Australia

The report, led by Dr Cynthia R. Cook, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, urges the U.S. government to recognise the value of putting more resources into the GWEO.

The report suggests it could be “a potentially important solution to U.S. munitions shortfalls”—not by replacing the American industrial base, but by expanding it and incorporating Australia into it

For Australia, such a scheme could build U.S. confidence in Australian strategic and industrial capabilities, and advance regulatory reform.

The report also highlights the need to map out the munitions supply chain and identify its weaknesses for this to work.

‘America First’ Means Closer Integration With Allies: Analyst

Mark Cao, a military and aerospace commentator, known for the channel Mark Space, believes the integration is feasible, pointing to the February meeting between U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles.

The two highlighted defence industrial cooperation on munitions as a key opportunity for strengthening bilateral ties.

“Since Australia’s weapons systems are highly dependent on U.S. technology, the GWEO program is largely based on joint ventures with American defence contractors to produce the required guided weapons domestically,” he told The Epoch Times.

As part of this initiative, the Australian government has signed a A$37.4 million contract with Lockheed Martin Australia to commence local production of Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System missiles in 2025.

The government also plans to invest A$60 million over the next five years to develop hypersonic and long-range strike capabilities.

Furthermore, A$22 million will be allocated over the next three years to seek industry options for establishing a rocket motor manufacturing facility.

Test fire of a development Joint Strike Missile on the US Air Forces F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Courtesy of Kongsberg Defence Australia and the Australian Department of Defence.

Cao also approves the report’s call for the White House to recognise GWEO as a key way to address U.S. munitions shortfalls.

“Although the United States currently champions the slogan of ‘America First,’ it has in fact strengthened cooperation with its allies when it comes to ensuring the combat readiness of its military,” he said.

“For example, to accelerate the maintenance and servicing of U.S. Navy warships, the U.S. has commissioned shipyards in South Korea and Japan to assist with repairs and has even asked South Korean shipbuilders to help train skilled workers.

“In order to speed up the delivery of 155 millimetre artillery shells to Ukraine, the U.S. first drew from stockpiles held by U.S. forces stationed in South Korea, then purchased shells from South Korea to replenish its own reserves.”

The military commentator noted that the Russia-Ukraine war has long turned into a protracted war of attrition. Coupled with nearly two years of ongoing conflict in the Middle East, it has significantly depleted the U.S. military’s readiness stockpiles.

“As a key U.S. ally, Australia’s GWEO program largely operates in partnership with American defence contractors to produce U.S.-standard weapons. If production is limited to the domestic Australian market, output would be small and costs would rise,” he wrote.

“However, by integrating into the U.S. military supply chain, Australia can both help boost U.S. ammunition supplies and reduce per-unit costs — a mutually beneficial outcome for both countries.”

US Scepticism an Issue

Carl Schuster, former director of operations at U.S. Pacific Command’s Joint Intelligence Center, was more cautious.

“Unfortunately, America’s politicians and military industrial see all bilateral and multilateral projects as a loss for U.S. industry,” he told The Epoch Times in an email.

Schuster argued for an exception in this case, noting that Australia has stood by the United States in every conflict since World War I.

“No other ally has been that loyal or reliable,” he wrote. “Moreover, U.S. industry lacks the employee base to expand at the pace required to be ready in this decade.”

“We need and can rely on Australia. The challenge is to identify a convincing political-economic vision in both countries. That means the U.S. and Australian leaders must negotiate a division of labor and the funding to achieve it.”

Australia’s Minister of Defence Richard Marles (C) and Minister of Defence Industry and Capability Delivery Pat Conroy (R) announce the accelerated delivery of Australia’s first High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) at the Australian International Airshow in Avalon on March 24, 2025. Australia’s army has received its first delivery of a “game changer” mobile long-range US rocket system, the government said on March 24. William West/AFP via Getty Images

Schuster, an instructor at the Department of History in Hawaii Pacific University, noted the report’s did not account for ongoing scepticism towards the U.S.-Australia relationship.

“Much of that is driven by America’s poor strategic decisions of the last 20 years (invading Iraq, U.S. policies in Afghanistan that proved a costly failure) and the Obama administration’s deliberate ignoring of the Indo-Pacific until the final two year of his administration,” he said, adding that in the last two years of the Obama administration, efforts were more statistical (decommissioning units in Europe) than real (no new resources were transferred to the Pacific).

In addition, there was the policy inconsistency.

“The constant changing of policies between consecutive administrations tends to breed distrust and diminish any desire to enter long-term agreements.”

Overall, Schuster concluded that the GWEO initiative is good and necessary for both countries, while suggesting closer integration with Japan and South Korea.

“Japanese warships are built with the Indo-Pacific in mind, while European warship designs tend to optimise their designs for operations in the Atlantic and Mediterranean.”

On Monday Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree mandating that all vessels arriving at Russian ports from foreign countries must first receive formal authorization from the Federal Security Service (FSB).

The directive takes effect immediately, with the executive order invoking a constitutional clause related to legal measures during wartime which stipulates that any ship coming from an international port may only dock in Russia with approval from an FSB representative.

The precise rationale for the new policy wasn’t stated by the Kremlin press releases; however, it seems clear the action is due to the increased security pressures on Russia in the context of the Ukraine war, which has seen sabotage operations on Russian soil and at Russian ports, as well as constant cross-border drone attacks.

Recent months have seen major bombings of several rail lines in Russia’s south as well, which were suspected Ukrainian intelligence operations. There are also growing concerns and suspicions that Ukraine may be behind a covert campaign aimed at disrupting Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet”.

A Financial Times report issued early in July shed light on recent ‘mystery’ explosions impacting oil tankers which had departed Russian ports prior to their being sabotaged.

“A series of mysterious limpet mine attacks on oil tankers has shaken the shipping world, prompting speculation that the explosions were part of a state-backed sabotage campaign,” the July 1st FT report began.

“Five vessels have been hit by deliberate blasts this year, with the latest incident flooding the engine room of the Greek-owned tanker the Vilamoura last week as it sailed off the coast of Libya,” the report continued.

“All the vessels called at Russian ports within weeks of the attacks, prompting some security experts to suggest that Ukraine had a hand in the explosions.” In some instances the engine rooms of the large tankers were directly targeted, resulting in flooding.

Other than a few Western mainstream media reports, these attacks didn’t individually receive a lot of coverage when they occurred. 

Most of the explosions had happened while the tankers were traversing the Mediterranean, but one tanker was hit in the Baltic Sea. Almost all of the vessels are owned by Greek and Cypriot firms.

Importantly, the FT noted that “There is no suggestion the other vessels breached G7 rules by carrying Russian oil bought for more than $60 a barrel. Ship tracking data suggests the vessels attacked called mainly at Russian ports that handle oil produced in Kazakhstan, which is not subject to sanctions.” Still, media reports have tended to use the ‘shadow fleet’ label in reference to these ships.

Authored by Yeny Sora Robles via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Reps. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) and Verónica Escobar (D-Texas), along with 18 other bipartisan lawmakers, introduced a new version of the Dignity Act immigration reform bill on July 15, which seeks to grant protected status to some illegal immigrant workers.

“It takes a lot of courage to step up and say that you want to be part of the solution, especially on the issue of immigration, one of the toughest in the country,” Salazar said at a press conference on July 15 in the House Triangle of the U.S. Capitol in Washington.

“Today begins the path to giving dignity to the millions who live in darkness!” she wrote on X on June 15 before introducing the bill.

The Dignity Act of 2025 seeks to address immigration issues after securing the border, allowing certain illegal immigrants to apply for legal status if they meet specific criteria and expedite the asylum application process. It replaces the one introduced in 2023.

Rep Maria Salazar sells her Dignity (Amnesty) bill on Miami television:

“We give them dignity. At some point in the future, another legislator will write another law to give them path to citizenship.”

“Right now, what we need to do is to buy peace for these people.” pic.twitter.com/MlGeovjk3O

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) July 21, 2025

“After more than two years of negotiation, there is an updated compromise that addresses legal status and protections for undocumented immigrants, border security, asylum reform, and visa reform,” Escobar said in a statement.

The bill proposes the Dignity Program, valid for seven years, which would offer legal status—not citizenship—to illegal immigrants who have been in the United States since before Dec. 31, 2020, if they pay $7,000 in restitution, remain in legal compliance, and do not receive federal benefits, allowing them to work, obtain legal status, and be in good standing with the law.

That means they’ll pay a $7,000 fine over seven years, using their own health insurance, without access to any federal programs, and will contribute 1% of their salary to the U.S. Treasury,” Salazar said.

Additionally, the law includes protections for Dreamers who meet educational, work, or military service standards; a modernization and streamlining of the legal immigration system to reduce backlogs in green card applications and create new temporary visa options for families and students; and the establishment of a $70 billion investment in the American workforce, among other initiatives.

“We still have more than 10 million people working in construction, hospitality, agriculture, dairy, fishing, and slaughterhouses, who are undocumented, but they are not criminals,” Salazar said. “Yes, they broke the law, but someone gave them a job because they needed those workers, workers who are still needed today.”

Escobar said that after two years of negotiations among the lawmakers supporting the bill, an agreement was reached that she said adapts to the “current political environment.”

“I have seen firsthand the devastating consequences of our broken immigration system, and as a member of Congress, I take seriously my obligation to propose a solution. Realistic, common-sense compromise is achievable, and is especially important given the urgency of this moment,” Escobar said in a statement.

“Immigrants—especially those who have been in the United States for decades—make up a critical component of our communities and also of the American workforce and economy.”

White House border czar Tom Homan on July 16 said officials from the Department of Agriculture, the Labor Department, and Homeland Security are evaluating policies related to illegal immigrant workers in certain industries, such as agriculture and hospitality, but no details were provided.

“The president committed there will be no amnesty, but there are a lot of smart minds at the White House talking about is there something for farm workers, is there something for hospitality,” he said.

“My job is to operate within the framework provided me by the administration. So, if the president comes up with a policy, and says, ‘OK, here’s what we’re going to do with farm workers,’ then ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] will abide by that policy.”

President Donald Trump said in a July 8 Cabinet meeting that there would be no amnesty for farm workers who are illegal immigrants.

“There’s no amnesty,” Trump said. “What we’re doing is getting rid of criminals, but we are doing a work program.”

Jack Phillips contributed to this report.

President Trump still has an interest in achieving peace and stability in the Middle East, particularly related to the conflicts Israel is still engaged in on several fronts – which is why US administration officials have been voicing frustration at what they see as reckless Netanyahu policies.

Axios reported Sunday that senior White House officials are increasingly at odds with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, particularly over Israel’s recent airstrikes in Damascus, which occurred despite reported US efforts to dissuade Israel from targeting Syria. President Trump has made clear he wants to see a ‘new Syria’ emerge under the Sharaa government.

“Bibi acted like a madman. He bombs everything constantly,” one White House official told Axios in a surprisingly blunt assessment, also warning that such actions jeopardize President Trump’s broader goals to restore regional stability.

Washington has been working toward a normalization agreement between Israel and Syria’s new government, despite Sharaa and his Hayat Tahrir al-Sham fighters being essentially a rebrand of Syrian al-Qaeda.

But Trump admin officials have been criticizing much more than just Tel Aviv’s Syria adventurism. For example, another American official expressed outrage over an Israeli tank attack that struck Gaza’s only Roman Catholic church days ago, killing three Christians, and wounding more, including the priest.

“Every day there’s something new. What the f***?” the official said. A third commented that Netanyahu behaves “like a child who just won’t listen,” Axios wrote.

The report indicated it remains unclear whether President Trump shares his own advisers’ displeasure. The reality is that Trump has continued to show public support for Netanyahu – going so far as to call for an end to his corruption trial.

There’s also reason to think that those US officials vehemently criticizing Netanyahu are likely not in the majority, given for example that Israeli officials have claimed that Tel Aviv never expected Washington to object to the strikes in Syria.

After all, President Trump has encouraged Israel to retain captured Syrian territory – and the US admin has also been completely silent on Israeli military actions in the south, despite the clear violation of sovereignty against a sitting United Nations member.

But it remains that there probably is an internal clash over Israel still bombing key Syrian government buildings. Israeli leaders have of late teased the possibility of another regime change operation in Damascus, something Washington would more than likely object to at this point.

Update (1842ET):

Sarepta Therapeutics puked further in after-hours trading in New York after a Bloomberg report cited an email from Children’s Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA) announcing it would halt the use of Elevidys, the pharma’s gene therapy for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. The decision follows two reported deaths linked to the treatment.

CHLA halted the use of Elevidys last Friday—the same day the Food and Drug Administration requested that Sarepta halt distribution of the drug. Sarepta has since refused.

“Patient safety is paramount at CHLA and the hospital has communicated its decision with affected patient families while it awaits any further determination by the FDA,” a CHLA spokesperson told Bloomberg News in an email. 

In post-market trading, shares plunged another 9%, compounding the day’s 5.36% loss. Year-to-date, the stock is down a staggering 89%, trading at lows not seen since 2015. 

Earlier, HC Wainwright & Co. analyst Mitchell S. Kapoor made the rare move of slashing Sarepta’s price target to zero—from a prior target of $10—while maintaining a sell rating. According to the latest Bloomberg data, there are 3 sell ratings, 16 holds, and 7 buys on the stock. The average 12-month price target among Wall Street analysts is $30.41. 

“We view this battle with the gatekeeper US regulatory agency as unwinnable,” Kapoor told clients, adding, “Since the request for voluntary action was likely a courtesy, we expect the FDA to ultimately require removal of Elevidys from the market.”

He noted, “In the absence of future Elevidys revenues, we see no intrinsic value left in SRPT shares.”

Deutsche Bank analyst David Hoang told clients, “We anticipate this series of events and lack of transparency will have seriously damaged patient demand, taking perhaps years to rebuild trust.” 

*    *    *  

Sarepta Therapeutics Inc. has refused a request from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to halt all shipments of its gene therapy Elevidys after three patient deaths, Bloomberg reported this weekend.

The FDA disclosed that two teenage boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, both unable to walk, died recently from acute liver failure after receiving Elevidys. In addition, a 51-year-old participant in a trial of a different Sarepta gene therapy targeting limb-girdle muscular dystrophy died last month, also of acute liver failure.

Bloomberg writes that following these events, FDA officials met with Sarepta and asked the company to voluntarily pause shipments of Elevidys, which accounts for more than half the company’s product revenue. “The company refused to do so,” the agency stated.

Sarepta, in its own statement Friday, defended its decision to continue distribution “based on our comprehensive scientific interpretation of the data, which shows no new or changed safety signals” in patients who are still ambulatory.

In June, the company had already suspended Elevidys shipments to non-ambulatory patients. According to Sarepta, boys who can still walk represent about 85% of those treated with the therapy since its launch.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said in an interview Friday the agency is reviewing whether Elevidys should remain on the market.

The most recent death involved a gene therapy using the same viral delivery platform as Elevidys, suggesting potential broader safety implications. “We think the risks of the FDA removing the drug fully from the market are now greatly amplified,” Baird analyst Brian Skorney wrote in a Friday note.

On Friday, at around 1:00 p.m. ET, Reuters reported—citing a source familiar with the matter—that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration would request Sarepta to halt all shipments of Elevidys. By 1:30 p.m. ET, the news has been reported by Bloomberg.

The company had confirmed a third patient death linked to its gene therapy programs, this time involving a 51-year-old man who died in June from acute liver failure after receiving the investigational therapy SRP-9004 for limb-girdle muscular dystrophy (LGMD).

The company confirmed the death to BioSpace and it was widely reported on Friday morning. Sarepta shares were lower by about 25% heading into the cash open and ultimately closed down more than 30%.

Like Elevidys—Sarepta’s approved Duchenne muscular dystrophy gene therapy—SRP-9004 uses an adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector, which the company has previously associated with fatal liver complications.

The death, which went unmentioned during Sarepta’s corporate restructuring update earlier last week, has drawn scrutiny from analysts.

“We think the LGMD patient death could amplify patient hesitancy to use commercial Elevidys and increase investor distrust since the company did not disclose the event on its call,” William Blair noted Friday.

Authored by Mary Prenon via The Epoch Times,

A recent report by WalletHub has identified the best and worst cities for first-time homebuyers, with Palm Bay, Florida, topping the best list. Five additional Florida locations—Tampa, Cape Coral, Orlando, Lakeland, and Sunrise—are among the top 10 cities ripe for picking by first-time potential buyers.

Other cities that made the Top 10 list include Boise, Idaho; Surprise and Gilbert, Arizona; and Huntsville, Alabama.

WalletHub, a national personal finance company, prepared the report by comparing 300 cities of various sizes, using key categories of affordability, market attractiveness, and quality of life. These included factors such as real estate taxes, homeowners’ insurance costs, median home price appreciation, foreclosure rates, school systems, job market, total home energy costs, and crime rate.

A Mix of Affordability and Livability

Chip Lupo, a WalletHub analyst, told The Epoch Times that buying a home for the first time can be a very stressful and difficult process, especially with rising housing costs and interest rates

“While affordability did weigh heavier into this, we also looked at important quality of life considerations like the job market, school systems, and crime rates,” he said.

Based purely on affordability, Flint and Detroit, Michigan, ranked first and second, followed by Peoria and Springfield, Illinois, and Toledo, Ohio, as the top five most affordable cities. However, those locations, along with many others, had much lower quality of life scores.

“Affordability doesn’t necessarily mean desirability,” Lupo said. “In many cases, if housing is priced extremely low, there’s a reason for that.”

The report also indicated that in 2024, first-time buyers accounted for 24 percent of home purchases—a historic low—marking a decrease of 32 percent from 2023. It found that, in addition to increasing home prices and interest rates, many prospective homeowners begin their search with unrealistic expectations.

“When working with first-time home buyers, I usually suggest narrowing down the neighborhoods that fit within their price range, located close to amenities that would be used frequently and then schools with high rankings,” John Sobota, a lecturer with the Wiedner Center for Residential Property Management at University of Wisconsin, said in the report.

“When they have picked the neighborhood that meets these criteria, then I suggest buying a home in the medium price range of that neighborhood.”

Where a home is located is just as important as its features, Sobota said. An unpleasant neighborhood can ruin the experience of even a great home.

Palm Bay Leads Top 10 Best Cities

Analyzing the popularity of Florida cities for first-time homeowners, Lupo noted that the Sunshine State has always been a destination for retirees and younger families.

Palm Bay, which scored number one on the list, is located on Florida’s east coast about halfway between Coco Beach and Vero Beach. The area has a population of 142,023, with a median household income of $67,521 in 2023.

While Palm Bay ranked very high for quality of life, its affordability level is in the mid-range. However, the city does have the fifth highest millennial home-ownership rate in the country along with the third-highest home appreciation nationwide.

Boise, Idaho, took second place, due mostly to its low crime rate and highest home appreciation rate. The state’s capital city, Boise’s population is almost 238,000 with a median household income of $81,308 as of 2023.

“I think Boise has also gained popularity as many people continue to flee very expensive areas like California … they’re getting top dollar for their homes and buying bigger but less expensive ones in Idaho or Arizona,” Lupo said.

“It’s not surprising because they’re also probably getting a better quality of life.”

Elizabeth Hume, president of the Boise Regional Realtors, has lived in the city for more than 20 years. “We deal with a lot of first-time buyers here, and Boise, as well as Idaho, have several great programs available for first-time homeowners,” she told The Epoch Times.

Idaho Realtors also helped to enact the Idaho First Time Homebuyers Savings program where first-time buyers can contribute up to $15,000 individually or $30,000 per couple each calendar year. The program offers tax-free withdrawals when used for home down payments, fees, or taxes on the purchase of a single-family home in Idaho.

Hume’s clients include both out-of-state buyers and locals.

“I think what attracts people to our area is that we have four seasons, so many outdoor activities, and a very low crime rate,” she said.

“There’s so much open space with hiking and biking trails, and Boise is also very close to whitewater rafting in the summer and ski resorts in the winter.”

As of June, Hume noted that median prices of a single family home in Idaho was $580,000—much higher than the national median price of $422,800 reported in May by the National Association of Realtors.

“We do have a lot of builders coming in with buyer incentives, and in suburban Eagle, there are townhomes on the market for under $400,000,” she said.

Hume touted the fact that the region has been ranked as one of America’s safest places.

“Prices are a bit higher here but the area does offer a better quality of life—and that’s something that first-time buyers also need to consider—especially if they have young children,” she said.

Under Idaho’s LEAP Program, churches owning underutilized land are allowing the construction of homes to provide more affordable housing for those who qualify.

Oakland Scores Lowest on Quality of Life

On the opposite side of WalletHub’s report, California is home to 16 of the top 20 worst cities for first-time buyers. Berkeley was rated the worst in the nation, followed by Santa Monica, Oakland, San Francisco, Santa Barbara, and Los Angeles.

“Most of these communities are unaffordable and many have high crime rates,” Lupo said.

Oakland had the lowest quality of life score, followed by Berkeley, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.

Chevron is approaching a production plateau in the Permian Basin—America’s top oil field—and expects this shift to generate billions in free cash flow, according to Bloomberg.

The company is cutting back on drill rigs and frack crews as it nears its long-term target of 1 million barrels of oil equivalent per day, which it expects to sustain through 2040.

“We’re going from growth to cash generation,” said Bruce Niemeyer, president of Chevron’s shale business. “We’re already in the earliest phases of that. We’re making adjustments to rigs and the frack spreads which will reduce the amount of capital we’re spending on an annual basis.”

Chevron has reduced its rigs from 13 to 9 and frack crews from four to three this year. These cutbacks are expected to boost free cash flow from the Permian by $2 billion over this year and next, reaching $5 billion annually by 2027, assuming Brent crude averages $60 a barrel.

“A million barrels is the right plateau for us to carry out into the next decade,” Niemeyer said. “It’s the natural next phase. You want to create something at scale that ultimately supports our dividend objectives.”

Bloomberg writes that unlike conventional oil production, shale wells decline quickly and require constant reinvestment. But Chevron believes it’s cracked the code: after 65% production growth over five years, the company now operates at a scale and efficiency that allows it to maintain output with lower capital spending.

“Chevron shifting from growth to flat-lining is coming at the right time because the market doesn’t need them to meaningfully grow,” said Neil Mehta, an analyst at Goldman Sachs. “Now that they’ve gotten to scale, the right thing to do is to shift this business into a free cashflow orientation.”

Chevron’s position is strengthened by a rare asset: mineral rights inherited from a 19th-century railroad bankruptcy. Originally acquired by Texaco in the 1960s, these rights—now part of Chevron—mean the company produces about 15% of its Permian oil with zero capital costs.

“It’s a meaningful competitive advantage for them as an organization,” said Mehta. “Chevron has that embedded in its portfolio and doesn’t necessarily always get full cost recognition for it.”

While other oil majors exited the Permian during downturns, Chevron stayed. That decision paid off when shale boomed.

“The decision to stay in the Permian was very deliberate,” Niemeyer said. “We tend to enter basins and stay for a very long period of time, and that isn’t true of everybody.”