The Wellness Women Are on the March

Published

4 weeks ago

June 3, 2025

admin

On Instagram , the wellness women dont seem like a political movement. Their pictures scroll by like snapshots from heaven. Angels with luminous skin offer glimpses into their livesearth-toned vignettes of gleaming countertops and root vegetables. You can look like us, feel like us, their chorus goes, if you follow our rules and purchase our powders.

Here, an influencer named Kendra Needham, known to her 369,000 followers as the Holistic Mother, recommends a red-light-therapy gadget for pain and thyroid problems. There, Carly Shankman, who posts as CarlyLovesKale, evangelizes about the healing powers of hydrogen-rich water and a probiotic oral-care regimen. Courtney Swan, the host of a health-trends podcast called Realfoodology, links to a menstrual-cycle-tracking app and her own line of immunity boosters in minimalist-chic packaging.

Scrolling through these accounts, I try to reassure myself: I eat vegetables and exercise. My body is fine the way it is, sturdy and practical like a short-bed pickup truck. But I am susceptible to retail therapy, and, boy, are these ladies sellingproducts, yes, but also anxiety that perhaps you havent been doing wellness very well at all. Linger long enough on any of their pages, and you will start to feel afraid: of seed oils, childrens cereal, hormonal birth control. Above all, you will grow more suspicious of doctors and scientists.

Cultivating such feelings has been key to the merger between Donald Trumps MAGA supporters and the wellness world that has resulted in the formation of the Make America healthy again campaign. Although many Americans are skeptical of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a scion of Americas most famous political family, as the potential next head of the Health and Human Services Department, his supporters see him as the supreme commander in the battle against Big Food and Big Pharma. Kennedy is not merely a man who has stumbled into the spotlight; he is a leader with a legion behind him.

Trumps election win has been quickly written up as evidence of his campaigns success in reaching young men via podcasts and the right-wing mediasphere. What that narrative misses is how Instagram became a rallying point of crunchy moms for a contest in which the predicted wave of women for Kamala Harris never materialized. Influencers such as these wellness women brought hordes of voters to Trump.

People who have, until this point, mostly been outsiders beating against the barricades of the health-care establishment, have at last been let inside. Now MAHA leaders see a chance to usher in their version of a wellness revolution.

Read: RFK Jr. is in the wrong agency

The wellness movement has always been about individual autonomy and responsibilityan effort to take charge of ones own physical and mental health, through diet change, the use of specialized products, or the adoption of new habits. The appetite for such health-care individualization is tremendous: Earlier this year, McKinsey estimated the global market for what it calls consumer wellness products at $1.8 trillionmaking it roughly twice the size of the pharmaceutical industry. The sheer scale of the movement suggests a culture of people feeling very out of control in their own livesand fearful of people who they deem as being in control, Mariah Wellman, a communication professor at Michigan State University who studies the wellness movement, told me.

In September, I went to Capitol Hill to cover an early MAHA event, a roundtable on American health and nutrition involving health experts moderated by Ron Johnson, the Trump-aligned senator from Wisconsin. Kennedy attended, alongside a dozen other leaders in the wellness biz, most of whom did not have relevant degrees but did have a product or a program to promote. Realfoodologys Swan and Vani Hari, the Food Babe, were there; so was Alex Clark, a podcaster for the conservative-youth organization Turning Point USA. Also present were the close Kennedy advisers and sibling co-authors of a new book about how to hack your metabolism, Casey Means, a former ear, nose, and throat surgeon, and Calley Means, a former food and pharma lobbyist who now runs a wellness company.

The panelists had a combined Instagram following of more than 16 million people, including many in my high-school and college circle. I get it: People want to be healthy, and America has a serious health problem. We spend nearly twice as much on health care per person as any other wealthy nation, yet our rates of obesity and diabetes are higher than most other countries. People feel seen by the wellness world, and often scolded by conventional health-care providers advice: Exercise more; eat your greens; get your shots.

Different versions of the wellness movement have permeated both the left and the right, and social media has drastically expanded its reach on both sides. COVID-19 exploded that influence: Masking rules, school closures, and vaccine mandates led to plummeting trust in doctors and scientists as well as frenzied do your own research expeditions.

Republicans, in particular, have benefited from that surging distrust. This summer, in Texas, I attended Turning Points annual gathering of young conservative women, where party activists and commentators mingled with anti-vax homesteaders and sourdough-making tradwives. They sold supplements and detox guides, and chanted for Trump. It was a precursor to the MAHA movement, which solidified in August when Kennedy officially endorsed Trump. Although Kennedy had also apparently been willing to endorse Vice President Harris in exchange for a role in her administration, his ultimate alliance with Trump makes more sense. Both have branded themselves as disruptors of the status quo: Down with expertise, up with matching hats. And both Kennedy and Trump are promising cure-alls for the countrys most grievous ailments.

The typical MAHA Instagrammer, according to Wellman, is a middle-to-upper-class mom between 20 and 40 years old, with a similarly situated audience of followers. For most of these influencers, their scope of expertise knows no limit. Kendra Needham, who calls herself a holistic health practitioner, posts information about mammograms, pink eye, autism, and natural remedies for curing your childs toe-walking. On her landing page, she also recommends a $47 tick-removal kit.

Like Needham, most MAHA influencers are skeptical of vaccines and critical of Americas pediatric-vaccine schedule. They allege that medical professionals oppose their ideas because they have been bought by Big Pharma, and that nutritionists are in bed with Big Food. They argue that, as Wellman summarizes it, all of the money in U.S. politics has led to the takeover of our public-health system, and that has led to increasing numbers of cancer and diabetes and heart disease and obesity. The wellness women are constantly reminding their followers that they understand the strain mothers are underthe overwhelming pressure to look good, feel good, and keep their families healthy. In their posts, they offer messages conveying solidarity. You got this, mama! they say. Its so hard to unlearn everything youve been taught.

How Kennedy would actually translate wellness into action at HHS remains to be seen. The Make America Healthy Again PAC, which isnt affiliated with Kennedy but is led by former Kennedy campaign advisers, is light on policy specifics and heavy on hopeful ambiguities about ending the chronic disease epidemic and removing toxins from the environment. That vagueness is likely an intentional effort to make Kennedy, a longtime anti-vax crusader, more palatable to skittish Republican lawmakers as they ponder his confirmation. But the MAHA influencers see no need to tread so lightly.

For months, theyve liberally peppered presidential politics into their messaging, and laid out their expectations of Kennedy and the other Trump appointees charged with fixing Americas health. Online, a groundswell has formed around a few key priorities: restricting food additives such as high-fructose corn syrup, artificial dyes, and sed oils; tap-water safety; and childhood vaccines. Their understanding is that were going to get rid of everything, from toxins to government corruption, Wellman said.

And they couldnt be more excited to get started. Clark, the Turning Point podcast host, described her vision of an America under Trump and Kennedy: Organic food in abundance. Breathe free without chemicals falling from the sky. Paychecks fat, people arent. Needham expressed incredulity at the idea that all parents arent filled with so much gratitude right now.

Kennedy himself seems eager to go wild at HHS, per his charge from Trump. Given recent statements, he may urge Americans to cook with beef tallow instead of canola oil and push for the removal of fluoride from tap water, ideas that some cardiologists and dentists say would increase rates of heart disease and tooth decay. Doctors are even more concerned about the consequences of Kennedys vaccine skepticism. If vaccination rates drop, expect a return of highly preventable childhood diseases such as measles. Kennedy has already been linked to a deadly measles outbreak in 2019 in Samoa, where local health officials said he contributed to a disinformation campaign about vaccines.

Kennedys other wellness-inspired prioritiessuch as his plan to ban TV advertising by pharmaceutical companiescould have an anti-corporate, pro-consumer appeal. The challenge, of course, is that the party with which Kennedy and his followers have aligned with is, quite famously, opposed to the kinds of regulation and funding these plans would require.

During Trumps first term, he demonstrated his unwavering commitment to deregulating both the food and agricultural sectors. A similar approach this time around could poison the Trump-Kennedy alliance and alienate the incoming presidents MAHA supporters. Or perhaps, eternally uninterested in policy detail, Trump will choose to indulge them.

For now, the MAHA influencers will continue operating as an Instagram booster club for the Trump-Kennedy agenda. And if Kennedy is ultimately confirmed at HHS, expect them to wield their following to support whichever policy he champions firstespecially if he faces resistance. Prepare for the bad guys to completely gaslight so many American people and convince them to defend their toxic products, Needham wrote on Instagram. We saw it happen with c0v!d and we will certainly see it again. We arent falling for it.

Read: America cant break its wellness habit

The prospect of a MAHA takeover at HHS is alarming to the people who have spent their lives studying public health. In recent months, many have launched their own countermovementdespite how Sisyphean that task looks right now.

The MAHA movement, its critics say, obscures the systemic problems with American health in favor of minor detailsand profits from doing so. They point to figures such as Hari, the Food Babe, who has long decried various artificial food ingredients and whose recent quest has been to force Kelloggs to remove certain additives from Froot Loops. The additives in question, four dyes and a preservative, have been linked to health problems in larger doses, though the FDA has deemed them safe in the smaller amounts of a typical portion. Haris project has spawned petitions and protests; meanwhile, she promotes her own, additive-free products to her 2 million followers on Instagram.

Americans are not unhealthy because of individual ingredients, Jessica Knurick, a dietician with 186,000 Instagram followers, told meand other professionals in the field tend to agree. Americans are unhealthy because they consume too many calories, dont move enough, and arent getting enough fiber. And because nutrient-dense foods arent affordable for families, and schools are reimbursed only about $4 for every lunch a student eats. Programs that help families access and afford healthy food are constantly being cuttypically by Republican politicians.

The social determinants of health are never talked about by this movement, Knurick said. Of course, social determinants dont sell supplements. This is not a movement to make America healthy, Knurick said. Theyre trying to erode trust in health expertsand their motive for doing so, she argues, is to make money, secure votes for Republicans, and distract from the new administrations coming bonfire of regulations.

Communicating all of this is a complicated jobone too complicated for Instagrambut that hasnt stopped Knurick from trying. She and other health experts on Instagramincluding the Food Science Babe, a chemical engineer and food scientist whose name is a rejoinder to her wellness nemesis, the Food Babe; Andrea Love, an immunologist and a microbiologist; and the nutritionist Adrian Chavezhave made hundreds of videos and posts in recent weeks responding to MAHA claims, point by point. Getting audience and attention is a tough task, because accurate science communication is nuanced. And frankly, nuance is kind of boring.

Right now, MAHA is on offenseand any criticism of the movement guarantees days of harassment, emailed death threats, and accusations of corruption. Even though were called paid shills all the time, were doing these videos in our free time, after we get home from work, Love, the immunologist, told me. Its the consequence of MAHAs ascendance that she and other critics fear most: a society not only distrustful of science and expertise, but actively hostile toward both.

Since Trumps win last month, the wellness influencers have been celebrating. Its our time, CarlyLovesKale wrote on Instagram. This is the shift our world needs. But they are frustrated, too, to be facing so much scrutiny. Resistance is wrong, they say, and questioning their motives makes you complicit. If you had told me that in 2024 we would have people actively against making America healthy again, I wouldnt have believed you, Swan, of Realfoodology, wrote. If you are against a healthier food system, she added, youre def not on the right side of things.

After all, the MAHA victors insist they are selling a healthier America. Who wouldnt want to buy that?

Sports

Kershaw joins the 3K club! Where does he rank among pitchers with 3,000 strikeouts?

Published

2 hours ago

July 3, 2025

admin

Kershaw joins the 3K club! Where does he rank among pitchers with 3,000 strikeouts?

Bradford DoolittleJul 2, 2025, 11:44 PM ET
Close

The 3,000-strikeout club has grown by one, with Clayton Kershaw of the Los Angeles Dodgers whiffing the Chicago White Sox‘s Vinny Capra in the sixth inning Wednesday at Dodger Stadium, becoming the 20th pitcher in baseball history to reach that milestone.

The 3K pitching club doesn’t generate as much hullabaloo as its hitting counterpart, but it is more exclusive: Thirty-three players have reached 3,000 hits.

When you look at the list of pitchers with 3,000 strikeouts, and Kershaw’s place on it, a few things jump out.

• None of them pitched at Ebbets Field, at least not in a regular-season game. I frame it like that to illustrate that this level of whiffery is a fairly recent phenomenon. The Dodgers bolted Brooklyn after the 1957 season, and at that point, Walter Johnson was the only member of the 3,000-strikeout club. A career Washington Senator, he never pitched against the Dodgers. Every other 3K member made his big league debut in 1959 or later. Half of them debuted in 1984 or later. Three of them (Kershaw, Max Scherzer and Justin Verlander) are active.

• For now, Kershaw has thrown the fewest career innings of any 3K member, though he’s likely to eventually end up with more frames than Pedro Martinez.

• Kershaw has the highest winning percentage of the 20 (.697) and the best ERA+ (155), though his edges over Martinez (.685 and 154) are razor thin.

• Kershaw tops the list in average game score (61.9) and is tied for second (with Bob Gibson) for quality start percentage (68%), behind only Tom Seaver (70%).

• Kershaw lags behind in bWAR, at least among this group of current, future and should-be Hall of Famers with 77.1, ranking 16th.

So where does Kershaw really rank in the 3K club? I’m glad you asked.

First, what should be obvious from the above bullet points is that the response to the question will vary according to how you choose to answer it. The ranking below reflects not only how I chose to answer the question but how I’d like to see starting pitchers rated in general — even today, in the wildly different context from the days of Walter Johnson.

1. Roger Clemens

FWP: 568.8 | Strikeouts: 4,672 (3rd in MLB history)

Game score W-L: 477-230 (.675)

The top three pitchers on the list, including Rocket, match the modern-era top three for all pitchers, not just the 3K guys. (The string is broken by fourth-place Christy Mathewson.) Before running the numbers, I figured Walter Johnson, with his modern-era record of 417 career wins (the old-fashioned variety), would top the list. But Clemens actually started more games (relief appearances don’t factor in) and had a better game score win percentage.

2. Randy Johnson

How we ranked the pitchers

To determine these ratings, I first created a database that logs every start made in an AL or NL game since 1901, using TruMedia. Next, I generated a modified version of Bill James’ game score for every start — more than 420,500 game scores and counting. The modification enforces a harsh penalty for pitchers who don’t get to four innings completed in a game, to offset the recent proliferation of the opener.

Then, I compared the two starters in each game. The higher game score earns the win, with any ties going to the pitcher who started for the team that won the game. Thus, in every game every starter earns either a win or a loss. There are no no-decisions. I tallied the career win-loss totals for all starters in this way.

To convert these career game score records to a single number, I borrowed another James formula called Fibonacci Win Points (FWP) — a combination of a pitcher’s win volume and win percentage.

FWP: 532.9 | Strikeouts: 4,875 (2nd)

Game score W-L: 421-182 (.698)

Since we’re lopping off pre-1901 performances, the method does Cy Young dirty. Only two pitchers — Young (511 wins) and Walter Johnson got to 400 career wins by the traditional method. By the game score method, the club grows to nine, including a bunch of players many of us actually got to see play. The Big Unit is one of the new 400-game winners, and of the nine, his game score winning percentage is the highest. The only thing keeping Johnson from No. 1 on this list is that he logged 104 fewer career starts than Clemens.

3. Walter Johnson

FWP: 494.7 | Strikeouts: 3,509 (9th)

Game score W-L: 437-229 (.656)

Don’t weep for the Big Train — even this revamping of his century-old performance record and the fixation on strikeouts can’t dim his greatness. That fact we mentioned in the introduction — that every 3K member except Walter Johnson debuted in 1959 or later — tells you a lot about just how much he was a man out of his time. Johnson retired after the 1927 season and surpassed 3,000 strikeouts by whiffing Cleveland’s Stan Coveleski on July 22, 1923. It was nearly 51 years before Gibson became 3K member No. 2 on July 17, 1974.

4. Greg Maddux

FWP: 443.3 | Strikeouts: 3,371 (12th)

Game score W-L: 453-287 (.612)

There is a stark contrast between pitcher No. 4 and pitcher No. 5 on this ranking. The wild thing about Maddux ranking above Nolan Ryan in a group selected for strikeouts is that no one thinks of Maddux as a strikeout pitcher. He never led a league in whiffs and topped 200 just once (204 in 1998). He was just an amazingly good pitcher for a really long time.

5. Nolan Ryan

FWP: 443.1 | Strikeouts: 5,714 (1st)

Game score W-L: 467-306 (.604)

Ryan is without a doubt the greatest strikeout pitcher who ever lived, and it’s really hard to imagine someone surpassing him. This is a guy who struck out his first six batters in 1966, when Lyndon Johnson was in the White House, and his last 46 in 1993, when Bill Clinton was there. Ryan was often criticized during his heyday for his win-loss record, but the game score method clears that right up. Ryan’s revised winning percentage (.604) is markedly higher than his actual percentage (.526).

6. Max Scherzer

FWP: 385.7 | Strikeouts: 3,419 (11th)

Game score W-L: 315-145 (.685)

Here’s another club Mad Max is in: .680 or better game score winning percentage, minimum 100 career starts. He’s one of just eight members, along with Kershaw. The list is topped by Smoky Joe Wood, who dominated the AL during the 1910s before hurting his arm and converting into a full-time outfielder. The full list: Wood, Martinez, Randy Johnson, Lefty Grove, Mathewson, Kershaw, Stephen Strasburg and Scherzer.

7. Justin Verlander

FWP: 385.0 | Strikeouts: 3,471 (10th)

Game score W-L: 349-190 (.647)

Like Scherzer, Verlander is fresh off the injured list. Thus, the two active leaders in our version of FWP have resumed their tight battle for permanent supremacy. Both also resume their quests to become the 10th and 11th pitchers to reach 3,500 strikeouts. Verlander, who hasn’t earned a traditional win in 13 starts, is 4-9 this season by the game score method.

8. Pedro Martinez

FWP: 383.5 | Strikeouts: 3,154 (15th)

Game score W-L: 292-117 (.714)

By so many measures, Martinez is one of the greatest of all time, even if his career volume didn’t reach the same levels as those of the others on the list. His 409 career starts are easily the fewest of the 3K club. But he has the highest game score winning percentage and, likewise, the highest score for FWP per start (.938).

9. Steve Carlton

FWP: 379.8 | Strikeouts: 4,136 (4th)

Game score W-L: 420-289 (.592)

When you think of Lefty, you think of his 1972 season, when he went 27-10 (traditional method) for a Phillies team that went 59-97. What does the game score method think of that season? It hates it. Kidding! No, Carlton, as you’d expect, dominated, going 32-9. So think of it like this: There were 32 times in 1972 that Carlton outpitched his starting counterpart despite the lethargic offense behind him.

10. Tom Seaver

FWP: 371.3 | Strikeouts: 3,640 (6th)

Game score W-L: 391-256 (.604)

Perhaps no other pitcher of his time demonstrated a more lethal combination of dominance and consistency than Seaver. The consistency is his historical differentiator. As mentioned, his career quality start percentage (70%) is tops among this group. Among all pitchers with at least 100 career starts, he ranks fifth. Dead ball era pitchers get a leg up in this stat, so the leader is the fairly anonymous Jeff Tesreau (72%), a standout for John McGraw’s New York Giants during the 1910s. The others ahead of Seaver are a fascinating bunch. One is Babe Ruth, and another is Ernie Shore, who in 1917 relieved Ruth when The Babe was ejected after walking a batter to start a game. Shore replaced him, picked off the batter who walked, then went on to retire all 26 batters he faced. The other ahead of Seaver: Jacob deGrom.

11. Clayton Kershaw

FWP: 370.9 | Strikeouts: 3,000 (20th)

Game score W-L: 301-137 (.687)

And here’s the guest of honor, our reason for doing this ranking exercise. As you can see, Kershaw joined the 300-game-score win club in his last start before Wednesday’s milestone game, becoming the 38th member. In so many measures of dominance, consistency and efficiency, Kershaw ranks as one of the very best pitchers of all time. When you think that he, Verlander and Scherzer are all in the waning years of Hall of Fame careers, you can’t help but wonder who, if anyone, is going to join some of the elite starting pitching statistical clubs in the future.

12. Don Sutton

FWP: 370.6 | Strikeouts: 3,574 (7th)

Game score W-L: 437-319 (.578)

For a post-dead ball pitcher, Sutton was a model of durability. He ranks third in career starts (756) and seventh in innings (5,283⅓). During the first 15 seasons of his career, Sutton started 31 or more games 14 times and threw at least 207 innings for the Dodgers in every season.

13. Ferguson Jenkins

FWP: 353.8 | Strikeouts: 3,192 (14th)

Game score W-L: 363-231 (.611)

Jenkins is in the Hall of Fame, so we can’t exactly say he was overlooked. Still, it does feel like he’s a bit underrated on the historical scale. His FWP score ranks 17th among all pitchers, and the game score method gives him a significant win-loss boost. That .611 percentage you see here is a good bit higher than his actual .557 career winning percentage. He just didn’t play for very many good teams and, in fact, never appeared in the postseason. He’s not the only Hall of Famer associated with the Chicago Cubs who suffered that fate.

14. Gaylord Perry

FWP: 335.6 | Strikeouts: 3,534 (8th)

Game score W-L: 398-292 (.577)

Perry, famous for doing, uh, whatever it takes to win a game, famously hung around past his expiration date to get to 300 wins, and he ended up with 314. Poor Perry: If my game score method had been in effect, he’d have quit two wins shy of 400. Would someone have given him a shot at getting there in 1984, when he was 45? One of history’s great what-if questions.

15. Phil Niekro

FWP: 332.5 | Strikeouts: 3,342 (13th)

Game score W-L: 408-308 (.570)

Knucksie won 318 games, and lost 274, the type of career exemplified by his 1979 season, when he went 21-20. We aren’t likely to see anyone again pair a 20-win season with a 20-loss season. His .537 traditional winning percentage improves with the game score method, but he’s still the low man in the 3K club in that column. Niekro joins Ryan and Sutton on the list of those with 300 game score losses. Sutton, at 319, is the leader. The others: Tommy John, Tom Glavine and Jamie Moyer. Of course, they were all safely over the 300-game-score win threshold as well.

16. CC Sabathia

FWP: 323.2 | Strikeouts: 3,093 (18th)

Game score W-L: 339-221 (.605)

Sabathia will be inducted into the Hall of Fame next month, and his place in this group only underscores how deserving he is of that honor. Sabathia debuted in 2001, and to reach the 250 traditional-win level (he won 251) in this era is an amazing feat. The only pitcher in that club who debuted later is Verlander, stuck at 262 wins after debuting in 2005. Right now, it’s hard to imagine who, if anyone, will be next. Of course, if we just went with game score wins, that would be different.

17. Bob Gibson

FWP: 321.0 | Strikeouts: 3,117 (16th)

Game score W-L: 305-177 (.633)

Gibson, incidentally, also won 251 games — and also gets enough boost from the game score method to climb over 300. His revised percentage is better than his traditional mark of .591. His average game score ranks third in this group, a reflection of his steady dominance but also of the era in which he pitched. Gibson is tied for eighth in quality start percentage among all pitchers. In 1968, when Gibson owned the baseball world with a 1.12 ERA, he went 22-9 by the traditional method. The game score method: 26-8. You’d think it would be even better, but it was, after all, the Year of the Pitcher.

18. Bert Blyleven

FWP: 320.2 | Strikeouts: 3,701 (5th)

Game score W-L: 391-294 (.571)

It took a prolonged campaign by statheads to raise awareness about Blyleven’s greatness and aid his eventual Cooperstown induction. He finished with 287 traditional wins, short of the historical benchmark. Here he would fall short of the 400-win benchmark, but, nevertheless, he is tied with John and Seaver for 11th on the game score wins list. His actual winning percentage was .534.

19. Curt Schilling

FWP: 307.1 | Strikeouts: 3,116 (17th)

Game score W-L: 281-155 (.644)

There are 31 pitchers who have broken the 300 FWP level, and it’s hard for me to imagine how anyone in that group could be left out of Cooperstown. You can sort this out for yourself in terms of baseball and not baseball reasons for this, but the group not there is Clemens, Schilling, John and Andy Pettitte, plus the greats (Kershaw, Verlander, Scherzer) who are still active.

20. John Smoltz

FWP: 273.8 | Strikeouts: 3,084 (19th)

Game score W-L: 290-191 (.603)

Smoltz won 213 games the traditional way, and he falls just short of 300 by the revised method. But all of this is about starting pitching, and with Smoltz, that overlooks a lot. After missing the 2000 season because of injury, he returned as a reliever, and for four seasons he was one of the best, logging 154 saves during that time. He’s the only member of the 200-win, 100-save club.

Business

How markets reacted to uncertainty over Rachel Reeves’s future

Published

2 hours ago

July 3, 2025

admin

How markets reacted to uncertainty over Rachel Reeves's future

The pound fell and state borrowing costs rose during a period of uncertainty over the chancellor’s future on Wednesday.

During Prime Minister’s Questions, Sir Keir Starmer declined to guarantee whether a visibly emotional Rachel Reeves would remain chancellor until the next election following the government’s welfare bill U-turn.

Money blog: Cash in your pocket set to change

Following his remarks, the value of the pound dropped and government borrowing costs rose, via the interest rate on both 10 and 30-year bonds.

Although market fluctuations are common, there was a reaction following Sir Keir’s comments in the Commons – signalling concern among investors of potential changes within the Treasury.

Sterling dropped to a week-long low, hitting $1.35 for the first time since 24 June. The level, however, is still significantly higher than the vast majority of the past year, having come off the near four-year peak reached yesterday.

While a drop against the euro, took the pound to €1.15, a rate not seen since mid-April in the aftermath of President Donald Trump’s tariff announcements.

Meanwhile, the interest rate investors charge to lend money to the government, called the gilt yield, rose on both long-term (30-year) and ten-year bonds.

The UK’s benchmark 10-year gilt yield – so-called for the gilt edges that historically lined the paper they were printed on – rose to 4.67%, a high last recorded on 9 June.

And 30-year gilt yields hit 5.45%, a level not seen since 29 May.

Both eased back in the hours following – as a spokesperson for the prime minister attempted to quell speculation about the chancellor’s future.

Sky News understands the prime minister made clear to the chancellor that she has his “complete support” and remains integral to his project.

Ms Reeves has committed to self-imposed rules to reduce debt and balance the budget. Speculation around her future led investors to question the government’s commitment to balancing the books – and how they would do that.

The questions over her future came after the government scrapped the core money-saving component of its welfare bill, which had been intended to reduce spending in order to meet fiscal rules.

Business

More bad news for Elon Musk as Tesla deliveries miss target again

Published

2 hours ago

July 3, 2025

admin

More bad news for Elon Musk as Tesla deliveries miss target again

Tesla’s woes have deepened as latest production and deliveries figures showed a greater fall than expected.

A total of 384,122 Teslas were delivered from April to June this year, a 13.5% drop on the same period last year and the second quarter of slumping output.

Wall Street analysts had expected Tesla to report about 1,000 more deliveries.

It’s bad news for Tesla chief executive Elon Musk in a week of attacks from President Donald Trump on him personally, as well as his companies.

Money blog: Customers to get up to £2,000 compensation from water companies

Mr Musk found himself on the wrong side of Mr Trump and the majority of US congresspeople in his opposition to the so-called big beautiful bill approved by the US Senate.

His criticism of the inevitable debt rises the bill will result in led Mr Trump threatening to end subsidies for Mr Musk’s numerous businesses and to deport him.

His role as founder and chief executive of numerous businesses has made him the world’s richest man, according to Forbes.

As well as Tesla, Mr Musk founded space technology company SpaceX and Starlink. He also acquired the social media company Twitter, which he rebranded X.

It was the poor performance of Tesla that pushed him out of full-time politics and back to the Tesla offices.

After months of share price tumbles and protests at Tesla showrooms, sales drops and car defacings, Musk left his work with the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Not everyone viewed the figures as negative.

Analysts at financial services firm Wedbush said: “Tesla’s future is in many ways the brightest it’s ever been in our view given autonomous, FSD [full self-driving], robotics, and many other technology innovations now on the horizon with 90% of the valuation being driven by autonomous and robotics over the coming years but Musk needs to focus on driving Tesla and not putting his political views first.”

After a 5% share price fall earlier this week when Mr Musk strayed back into political matters, Tesla stock rose 4.5% on Wednesday.

The latest financial details for Tesla will be published later this month.

In the first three months of the year, Tesla’s profits fell by 71% to $409m (£306.77m) from $1.39bn (£1.04bn). Revenues were also well below forecasts, dropping 9% to $19.3bn (£14.5bn).