BY THE OPTIMIST DAILY EDITORIAL TEAM The holiday season tends to magnify the pressure to find the perfect gift, especially when the recipient is facing cancer. People often hope that a warm gesture will communicate affection, encouragement, and presence during a frightening time. Yet gift giving under these circumstances can feel unexpectedly fraught. When someone is sick, the meaning of a gift changes. What is meant as comfort can sometimes miss the mark, not because the giver lacks care, but because illness reshapes what comfort actually looks like. That gap between intention and usefulness is what inspired sociologists Ellen T. Meiser and Nathalie Rita to study gifting during cancer treatment. Both researchers were diagnosed with cancer in their early thirties, and their experiences led them to interview fifty millennial women about the social and emotional realities of navigating cancer. The patterns that emerged around gifts were striking, and not at all what they expected. Their research, still forthcoming, revealed a clear mismatch between what people tend to give and what patients actually need. Much of the disconnect, they found, traces back to how cancer has been commercialized and packaged online. What loved ones tend to give most often When Meiser and Rita asked women what they received after their diagnosis, the responses ranged from deeply practical to delightfully quirky. But across all fifty interviews, ten items appeared again and again. These included fuzzy socks, blankets, adult coloring books, mugs and tumblers, gourmet snacks, herbal teas, inspirational self-care products, flowers, books, and monetary gifts such as GoFundMe donations or gift cards. Most women understood the intention. A soft blanket signals warmth. A bouquet makes a room feel beautiful. Yet the consistency of certain items, especially fuzzy socks, raised questions. Why these gifts, and why so often? The researchers traced the trend to two major influences: pre-made cancer care packages and online gift guides that promote predictable assortments of spa items, teas, candies, beanies, and motivational merchandise. These curated boxes often contain nearly identical combinations, mirroring the top few gifts their interviewees repeatedly received. Such patterns highlight the sway of a growing cancer-gifting marketplace. As Meiser and Rita note in their analysis, “businesses seek to extract economic value out of all aspects of daily life,” and cancer has become a surprisingly lucrative niche. Yet the glossy pink ribbons and “you got this” mugs can unintentionally eclipse the harsher realities of illness, encouraging gift giving that looks soothing but may not reflect what patients truly need. Even well-meant care packages sometimes backfire. Their uniformity, the researchers found, can unintentionally signal distance rather than closeness, especially when a person is craving individual attention and genuine understanding. What women going through cancer say actually helps When the researchers shifted their interviews to what women wanted rather than what they received, a very different list emerged. Across the board, the most valued gifts were the most pragmatic: Money or useful gift cards… especially for groceries, takeout, or pet supplies Meals, meal trains, and… pantry staples for the household Hands-on help… including childcare, transportation, cleaning, and yard work Personal notes or cards…  which served as meaningful check-ins Practical self-care items… like thick lotions or gentle soaps that do not irritate skin during treatment These offerings were small, everyday kindnesses that eased tangible burdens. Instead of adding another object to the bedside table, they supported the parts of life that feel heaviest when someone is exhausted, recovering from surgery, or rearranging their days around medical appointments. Notably, Meiser and Rita found that “almost none of the women we interviewed expressed a desire for the nonessential items usually stocked in commercial care packages.” What they longed for were gifts that acknowledged how illness disrupts everyday roles: parenting, partnering, working, caregiving. A plant could not ease financial pressure, but grocery delivery could. A charming mug could not fold laundry, but a friend who stopped by to help absolutely could. Thoughtful support starts with recognizing their reality Gifts that align with a person’s needs have a certain power. They say, I see what your life really looks like right now, and I want to make it a little easier. When patients describe feeling “cared for and seen,” they often reference the moments when someone stepped into the messiness of daily life rather than layering a cheerful slogan over the top. This is why Meiser and Rita encourage gift givers to rethink what support looks like. Instead of relying on mass-produced notions of comfort, they suggest taking a moment to consider the person’s daily responsibilities, sources of stress, and the tasks that have become harder since diagnosis. A casserole, a ride to treatment, or help feeding the pets may not seem glamorous. But those gestures recognize the real impact of illness, and that recognition, their research shows, is the most meaningful gift of all. A gentler way to give this season If someone on your holiday list is facing cancer or any serious illness, the best gift might not be fuzzy socks after all. Thoughtful support often comes from addressing what life looks like behind the scenes: the fatigue, the logistical strain, the emotional load. As the researchers emphasize, small acts can speak volumes when they reduce pressure and restore a bit of breathing room. So before placing that pre-made care package in your cart, consider instead what would make their daily life more manageable. A warm meal, help with chores, a heartfelt message, or a gift card for everyday essentials may be exactly what communicates care in the most human way.The post Gift shopping for a loved one with cancer this holiday season? Here’s what actually helps first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.

With a little ingenuity, and some modifications to an old piece of tech, 11-year-old Desa Kaiser is back where she belongs: on the dance floor. Being paralyzed from the waist down is no impediment to the girl from Pennsylvania, who suffered the debilitating injury in a crash that saw her spend Thanksgiving of 2022 at […] The post ‘Dancing Wheelchair’ Helps Paralyzed Teen Feel ‘Cool’ Being a Different Sort of Dancer (WATCH) appeared first on Good News Network.

Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) warned recently in the London Guardian that artificial intelligence “is getting far too little discussion in Congress, the media, and within the general population” despite the speed at which it is developing. “That has got to change.”To my surprise, as a conservative advocate of limited government and free markets, I agree completely.AI is neither a left nor a right issue. It is a human issue that will decide who holds power in the decades ahead and whether individuals retain sovereignty.As I read Sanders’ piece, I kept thinking, “This sounds like something I could have written!” That alone should tell us something. If two people who disagree on almost everything else see the same dangers emerging from artificial intelligence, then maybe we can set aside the usual partisan divides and confront a problem that will touch every American.Different policies, same fearsI’ve worked in the policy world for more than a decade, and it’s fair to say Bernie Sanders and I have opposed each other in nearly every major fight. I’ve pushed back against his single-payer health care plans. I’ve worked to stop his Green New Deal agenda. On economic policy, Sanders has long stood for the exact opposite of the free-market principles I believe make prosperity possible.That’s why reading his AI op-ed felt almost jarring. Time after time, his concerns mirrored my own.Sanders warned about the unprecedented power Silicon Valley elites now wield over this transformational technology. As someone who spent years battling Big Tech censorship, I share his alarm over unaccountable tech oligarchs shaping information, culture, and political discourse.He points to forecasts showing AI-driven automation could displace nearly 100 million American jobs in the coming decade. I helped Glenn Beck write “Dark Future: Uncovering the Great Reset’s Terrifying Next Phase” in 2023, where we raised the exact same red flag, that rapid automation could destabilize the workforce faster than society can adapt.Sanders highlights how AI threatens privacy, civil liberties, and personal autonomy. These are concerns I write and speak about constantly. Sanders notes that AI isn’t just changing industry; it’s reshaping the human condition, foreign policy, and even the structure of democratic life. On all of this, he is correct.When a Democratic Socialist and a free-market conservative diagnose the same disease, it usually means the symptoms are too obvious to ignore.Where we might differWhile Sanders and I share almost identical fears about AI, I suspect we would quickly diverge on the solutions. In his op-ed, he offers no real policy prescriptions at all. Instead, he simply says, “Congress must act now.” Act how? Sanders never says. And to be fair, that ambiguity is a dilemma I recognize.As someone who argues consistently for limited government, I’m reluctant to call for new regulations. History shows that sweeping, top-down interventions usually create more problems than they solve. Yet AI poses a challenge unlike anything we’ve seen before — one that neither the market nor Congress can responsibly ignore.RELATED: Shock poll: America’s youth want socialism on autopilot — literally Photo by Cesc Maymo/Getty ImagesWhen Sanders says, “Congress must act,” does he want sweeping, heavy-handed regulations that freeze innovation? Does he envision embedding ESG-style subjective metrics into AI systems, politicizing them further? Does he want to codify conformity to European Union AI regulations? We cannot allow a handful of corporations or governments to embed their subjective values into systems that increasingly manipulate our decisions, influence our communications, and deter our autonomy.The nonnegotiablesInstead of vague calls for Congress to “do something,” we need a clear framework rooted in enduring American principles.AI systems (especially those deployed across major sectors) must be built with hard, nonnegotiable safeguards that protect the individual from both corporate and governmental overreach. This means embedding constitutional values into AI design, enshrining guarantees for free speech, due process, privacy, and equal treatment. It means ensuring transparency around how these systems operate and what data they collect. This also means preventing ideological influence, whether from Beijing, Silicon Valley, or Washington, D.C., by insisting on objectivity, neutrality, and accountability.These principles should not be considered partisan. They are the guardrails, rooted in the Constitution, which protect us from any institution, public or private, that seeks too much power.And that is why the overlap between Sanders’ concerns and mine matters so much. AI is neither a left nor a right issue. It is a human issue that will decide who holds power in the decades ahead and whether individuals retain sovereignty.If Bernie Sanders and I both see the same storm gathering on the horizon, perhaps it’s time the rest of the country looks up and recognizes the clouds for what they are.Now is the moment for Americans, across parties and philosophies, to insist that AI strengthen liberty rather than erode it. If we fail to set those boundaries today, we may soon find that the most important choices about our future are no longer made by people at all.

Republican commentator Scott Jennings is sounding the alarm for his party to take the utter ruthlessness of the Democrat Party seriously. Democrats are not wringing their hands over their political choices.…

Australia's Defence Minister Richard Marles at the Hanwha Defence Australia headquarters in Geelong, announcing that the Commonwealth had signed an approximately $4 billion contract with the South Korean…

Heavy Metal star Ozzie Osbourne’s last words to his wife Sharon has been revealed. As the WLT Report previously reported, Ozzy Osbourne, the legendary and controversial singer of the heavy metal band…

One of President Trump’s unheralded accomplishments is that he has given the American people moral clarity around our foreign policy. The president’s decision-making on foreign affairs reflects a…

Not surprisingly, a controversial prediction in the new Trump administration’s National Security Strategy that Europe is facing “civilization erasure” because of out-of-control mass migration infuriated…

Conservatives spend a lot of time debating how to counter the power of the liberal media. Some say build new platforms. Others say to fight bias on the ones that already exist. But there is one simple…

This is completely sick. An Army doctor has been charged after allegedly secretly recording patients at an a Army base medical center in Texas. A police report has revealed the Army doctor was serving…