claim_id
stringlengths 1
234
| claim
stringlengths 14
491
| explanation
stringlengths 1
4.18k
| label
stringclasses 5
values | subjects
stringlengths 0
223
| main_text
stringlengths 18
41.7k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18292
|
"Chain email Says ""At age 76 when you most need it, you are not eligible for cancer treatment"" under Affordable Care Act."
|
Will seniors be denied cancer treatment under Obamacare?
|
false
|
Oregon, Health Care, Medicare, Chain email,
|
"According to a chain email making the rounds, people over 75 years old will be denied cancer treatment under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, after President Barack Obama. The email also states that vitamin B12 shots won’t be covered under Medicare because of Obamacare. Also, your primary care physician will have to admit you into a hospital -- as opposed to, oh let’s say, an emergency care doctor -- or Medicare won’t pay for it, again, because of Obamacare. Here’s a portion of the chain email, which a reader in Northeast Portland forwarded to PolitiFact Oregon, with a plea for more information. She said it came from a friend: ""Your hospital Medicare admittance has just changed under Obama Care. You must be admitted by your primary Physician in order for Medicare to pay for it! If you are admitted by an emergency room doctor it is treated as outpatient care where hospital costs are not covered. This is only the tip of the iceberg for Obama Care. Just wait to see what happens in 2013 & 2014! … (ellipses) Please for the sake of many good people, please... pass this on. We all need to be informed. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS... At age 76 when you most need it, you are not eligible for cancer treatment page 272."" The email goes on with a long list of other claims as assessed by a Judge David Kithil of Marble Falls, Texas. PolitiFact Oregon hopped to it. And we learned very quickly -- through the power of the Internet -- that a version of this chain email has been kicking around since 2009, based on H.R. 3200, a 2009 bill that did not become law. Many of the claims have been debunked. In fact, FactCheck.org found just four of the 48 claims in the original email to be accurate. PolitiFact ruled two statements to be . The chain email has morphed over the years, with new assertions added. As for the cancer-related statement, the email cites page 272 of H.R. 3200 to back up its assertion that seniors at 76 are not eligible for cancer treatment. Later, the email specifies that under Section 1145 of H.R. 3200, ""cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age."" Neither statement is accurate. There is no rationing, based on age or otherwise, on cancer treatment under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed into law in March 2010. Likewise, there is no rationing or cut-off age in 2009’s H.R. 3200. H.R. 3200 contained a section on ""treatment of certain cancer hospitals."" But the American Nurses Association described the section as ""the opposite of rationing. The section allows Medicare to pay cancer hospitals more if they are incurring higher costs."" FactCheck.org agrees with the nurses group. And again, the bill never became law. ""All medically necessary treatment is covered by Medicare. Including cancer treatments, regardless of age,"" said Katherine Fitzpatrick with the Medicare Rights Center in Washington, D.C. and in New York. Yet, none of the debunking seems to matter, because four years later, the email lives on via the forward button. The Internet is unstoppable. What, we wondered, did the Texas judge think of his undying notoriety? ""I wish it would die. I can’t control it,"" David Kithil told PolitiFact Oregon. ""I don’t know how something like that goes viral like that."" The former judge said he wrote a letter to his local newspaper in 2009, protesting the initial version of the health care act. The letter was published in the River Cities Daily Tribune, circulation 5,000. Somehow, he said, the letter was republished online. Kithil wants readers to disregard his letter as it is outdated and based on legislation that did not become law. ""I’ve had calls from all over the country, 300 to 400 calls over three or four years on this,"" he said. He pleads with the callers, ""Don’t pass it on. It’s not accurate anymore. Trash it."" He says he still has problems with the Affordable Care Act, but that’s neither here nor there. Both the Medicare Rights Center and AARP, the national organization for seniors, verified that hospital admittance has to do with billing under parts A or B of Medicare, the government health plan for seniors 65 and older. The Affordable Care Act reduces Medicare payments to hospitals with readmissions within 30 days for certain conditions, such as pneumonia, but that’s not based on who admits the patient. Also, a spokesman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid says Medicare has never covered vitamin B12 shots as a preventive benefit. Again, this isn’t related to the Affordable Care Act. Older patients diagnosed with cancer need not worry that treatment will be rationed or denied under the Affordable Care Act. The claim is based on an inaccurate reading of a bill that went nowhere. We don’t know where or how the specific age of 76 was added -- Kithil said he doesn’t remember including a specific age in his letter. But we do know enough to rule this widely debunked and ridiculous-on-its-face statement a ."
|
26523
|
“As soon as I endorsed (Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly), the Wisconsin Democrats said, let’s move the election to two months later.”
|
Trump is connecting dots on a coincidence and forgetting his own past endorsements. Evers’ call to switch to a mail-in election came an hour after Trump tweeted an endorsement of Kelly. But the push to delay the election entirely wasn’t until days later And most notably, that wasn’t Trump’s first endorsement of Kelly. He also urged supporters to vote for Kelly in a January campaign stop.
|
false
|
Elections, Wisconsin, Donald Trump,
|
"The mid-pandemic election in Wisconsin yielded no shortage of bizarre storylines. But a noteworthy one emerged late in the day when President Donald Trump tried to put himself at the center of a debate over whether the election should have even been held as scheduled. The April 7, 2020, contest featured a Democratic presidential primary and a Wisconsin Supreme Court race between conservative-backed Daniel Kelly and liberal-backed Jill Karofsky, as well as numerous local elections. At his daily briefing that day, Trump connected his endorsement of Kelly to Gov. Tony Evers’ last-minute attempt to change the election. The implication was Democrats thought they’d have a better chance of boosting Karofsky by extending the election period. Here’s an excerpt of Trump’s extended discussion on the topic: ""(Wisconsin Democrats) didn't want to move the election. As soon as I endorsed him, the Wisconsin Democrats say, ‘Oh, let's move the election to two months later, three.’ They didn't mind having the election until I endorsed him, which is very interesting."" So Trump is saying his endorsement caused Evers to try moving the election back two months. Let’s take a closer look at that timeline. In case you lost track of the election back-and-forth, the basics are these: Evers had said for weeks he didn’t have the authority to move the election on his own. Then on Friday — four days before the election — he called on the Republican Legislature to switch to an all-mail election that would allow votes to come in through May 19, 2020. He also ordered a special session of the Legislature for the following day to take up the matter. The state Assembly and Senate both gaveled out of that session in seconds, without taking action. Then, 18 hours before polls opened, Evers issued an order to delay the election to June 9, 2020. Republicans appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, where the conservative majority overturned Evers’ order, clearing the way to hold the election. Trump is claiming his endorsement of Kelly was a pivotal moment in this back-and-forth. Trump sent a tweet at 12:12 p.m. April 3, 2020, saying Kelly has his ""complete endorsement."" Evers’ call for a mail-in election was released about an hour later. But that’s a coincidence. Here’s why Trump is wrong. Evers’ call at that point was not to move the election by two months, but to switch the format to mail-in only and extend the deadline to May. The attempt to move the in-person election to June didn’t come until several days later. And the Evers’ administration had been moving toward that mail-in announcement well before Trump’s tweet, including calls to Republican leaders, said Evers spokeswoman Melissa Baldauff. But there’s a much more glaring oversight from Trump. He had already endorsed Kelly several months earlier. At a rally in Milwaukee on Jan. 14, 2020, Trump urged his supporters to ""go vote for Justice Daniel Kelly to defend the rule of law."" At that time, of course, coronavirus was barely a blip on the national radar. And it was the pandemic that fueled the back-and-forth over Wisconsin’s election, not a repeat of a prior endorsement. In a statement later on Election Day, Evers said Trump was not a factor in his decision-making. ""I don’t pay any attention to who the president endorses,"" the governor said. ""Frankly, my focus right now is on keeping the people of this state safe, and that’s why I issued an executive order to extend Wisconsin’s election date and make sure everyone could vote safely from home."" Trump claims his endorsement of Kelly caused the Wisconsin attempts to push the election back until June. That’s not at all how it happened. Trump had already endorsed Kelly back in January. And in any case, the action from Evers that coincidentally followed Trump’s reiterated endorsement on Twitter was to shift to a mail-in election, not to move the whole election by several months. That leaves us with a claim that is both false and ridiculous."
|
9491
|
New Heart Imaging Method May Predict Heart Attack
|
From the headline to the text, this story is problematic–readers don’t learn the actual results of the study, which identified and measured the size and shape of inflamed and unstable fat cells in the arteries of people undergoing bypass surgery, and compared them in some fashion to people having angiograms to assess the presence of heart disease. The story also seems to confuse two separate issues. One issue is gradual narrowing of arteries over many years, which is what this new test seems to be looking at. The second issue is a sudden heart attack that occurs in seconds, which is not the same thing. Most confusing is that the study is designed to assess the possibility of using inflammation to predict risk in people long before they have atherosclerotic buildup that can been seen with angiograms or heart CT scans; or before there are heart disease symptoms. But the study was performed on people having bypass surgery or angiograms, presumably because they already have heart disease or symptoms. That’s a big limitation to this research that’s never discussed in the news story. The article also makes some claims about the value of statins as anti-inflammatories that need context. Heart disease remains the number one killer of Americans, and while the use of statins, other drugs, better heart imaging and lifestyle changes (diet, exercise, smoking cessation) have seriously lowered the risk of some heart attacks and strokes, having a tool that could more accurately predict who needs statins and other interventions sooner would be most welcome. This article attempts to describe a study designed to validate arterial tissue inflammation as a sensitive marker for heart attack risk, but stories about diagnostic advances need to make very clear what was measured, what the study’s endpoints were, i.e. what question was asked and answered; and why the investigators think their advance is worth pursuing.
|
false
|
ct,heart attacks,heart disease
|
The article doesn’t discuss what the study authors new “way” of assessment might add in the way of costs. The story didn’t provide any data to give a sense of the potential benefit of the new approach. No numbers were given to explain how well it worked. Because there is so little information about the imaging technique and what it requires, it’s hard to say what the harms or benefits might be, but certainly the story might have mentioned the potential risk of drug intervention (or non-intervention) if the inflammatory cell “marker” is valid as a predictor of heart attack risk. Also, it would have been worth discussing if the new imaging technique exposes patients to radiation, which has been shown to increase the risk of cancer if used repeatedly. The story does not adequately establish the quality of the evidence, except to indicate that more research is needed, implying that this is preliminary work. From the journal article itself: “The main limitation of this study is the lack of data demonstrating a predictive value of these imaging markers for clinical outcomes, which falls beyond the scope of this current work.” There was no such caveat in the news story. Rather, the headline trumpets that it “May Predict Heart Attacks.” No disease mongering here. The story stated that “about 750,000 Americans have a heart attack every year.” The article appears to quote only those who conducted the study. The article does describe current means of assessing heart attack risk, as well as some interventions (surgical and medical) to address those risks. However, the article doesn’t mention how this new technique would stack up against standard tests like stress tests or nuclear perfusion scans. There also is the option of simply treating people with risk factors and not utilizing imaging tests. The story explains that more research is needed before the technology might be available to everyone. The story focuses on the use of inflammatory heart tissue as having potentially better predictive value than current risk assessment tools for heart attack. But it’s a reluctant satisfactory, because the narrative is confusing and no numbers were given to estimate the scope of the potential benefit–how well the new approach worked. We could not locate a release from the University of Oxford or Science Translational Medicine.
|
2974
|
New Mexico man in house arrest sues to use medical marijuana.
|
A New Mexico man serving a house arrest sentence for drunken driving is suing to be allowed to use medical marijuana.
|
true
|
Medical marijuana, General News, Marijuana, Oddities, Arrests, New Mexico, Lawsuits
|
Attorney and Democratic state Sen. Jacob Candelaria recently filed a lawsuit in state district court on behalf of Joe Montano, who said authorities recently seized his medical cannabis, KOAT-TV reports. According to court documents, correctional officers searched Montano’s home while he was on house arrest, found the marijuana, and put him in jail for a month as punishment. The petition is seeking a judge to order the jail to allow him to possess and use his medical marijuana. State lawmakers passed a measure last year to allow people on house arrest to use medical marijuana. In a statement, Metropolitan Detention Center Chief of Corrections Ralph Fernadez said Community Custody Program inmates are considered in jail custody, and medical marijuana use is prohibited in the detention center.
|
18022
|
"Obamacare provision will allow ""forced home inspections"" by government agents."
|
"Bloggers passed around a claim last week that a provision of the new health care law will allow ""forced"" home inspections by government agents. But the program they pointed to provides grants for voluntary help to at-risk families from trained staff like nurses and social workers. What bloggers describe would be an egregious abuse of the law — not what’s allowed by it."
|
false
|
National, Civil Rights, Health Care, Public Health, Privacy Issues, Bloggers,
|
"A startling Obamacare claim swept from blog to blog last week: ""SHOCKING: Obamacare Provision Will Allow ‘Forced’ Home Inspections."" One blogger used a photo of armed officers entering a cottage, with the overline, ""We’re from the government and we’re here to raid your home."" Another said ""this is why the IRS has been training with AR-15s."" A reader sent us a post from BenSwann.com, ""Obamacare provision: ‘Forced’ home inspections."" He wondered if it were true. So did we. South Carolina’s concern ""Forced home inspections""? Um, no. The flurry originated with BenSwann.com blogger Joshua Cook on Aug. 13. He picked up the phrase ""forced home inspections"" from a state lawmaker in South Carolina. Back in March, as a group of state legislators discussed a bill to fight the Affordable Care Act, Rep. Rick Quinn offered a specific example of something in the law that worried him: ""The forced home inspections that I’ve heard about."" Cook was there. And the comment nagged him. He noticed people weren’t really writing about the issue. ""It's just been bothering me,"" he told PolitiFact. So he wrote about it last week, talking with an attorney who spoke at the committee hearing and posting a video clip of Quinn’s comment. ""The point is South Carolina legislators believe it, and are convinced this is going to happen,"" Cook told us. Quinn, indeed, had added an amendment to the South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act to prevent state workers from conducting any ""involuntary … in-home visitation."" It passed the House, but the Senate didn’t have a chance to vote. Cook says lawmakers hope to revive the legislation in the next session. But that Obamacare program that worries Quinn? It already is — by statute — voluntary. There’s literally nothing to suggest raids or weapons. Home visiting programs Concerned bloggers pointed to an Obamacare-funded grant program for ""maternal, infant and early childhood home visiting."" In 2011, the government announced $224 million in funding. Most of those grants are going to health departments — none, so far, in South Carolina. The idea: fund visits from nurses and social workers to high-risk families to help them develop skills to keep kids healthy, get them ready for school, and prevent child abuse and neglect. Home-visit programs already existed in 40 states. But to Kent Masterson Brown, a health care litigator invited by South Carolina lawmakers to help them avoid implementing Obamacare, the programs suggest overzealous nonprofits telling parents how to raise their children without their consent. Brown raises the specter of a home-schooling family subject to ""intervention"" for school readiness, their children forced into schools and onto medications and vaccines. ""The federal government will now set the standards for raising children and will enforce them by home visits,"" he wrote about the law. But consent is built into the program. A home visitor could no more compel a family to vaccinate kids than a pediatrician could, said Kay Johnson, a professor of pediatrics at Dartmouth Medical School who’s one of the nation’s experts on state home visiting policy. Here’s what the Affordable Care Act says: Home-visiting programs must assure they’ll have procedures that ensure ""the participation of each eligible family in the program is voluntary."" Here’s how that might work, according to Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health law and policy at George Washington University, who supports such programs. A low-income mom gets her prenatal care at a community health center. Her doctor asks if she would like visits from a nurse after the baby comes to offer tips and answer questions. Mom could say yes — or no. It’s like the old days of health care, Rosenbaum said, when nurses would visit families to show how to breastfeed, sterilize bottles, care for babies and cope when you’re exhausted. ""It's real health education in the home, is the purpose of it,"" she said. Such programs have a long history backed by peer-reviewed research, she said. They work. ""They make sure that you don't go home to nothing. It's done to help families, not to police them."" A classic randomized trial in Elmira, N.Y., showed nurse visits to families of newborns reduced child abuse and neglect, even years later. They also reduced government spending for low-income unmarried women. Brown, the lawyer, says he’s concerned families have no protection from social workers. He’s concerned workers won’t be well-trained and will overstep families’ rights. Nobody should knock on your door without a badge, he said. ""What I see in this is a monster, frankly. And you can quote me on that,"" he said. That’s the fear. The law, however, specifies that programs be voluntary, their staffs trained and supervised, and the home-visiting models they follow based on strong research. Any ""forced home inspection"" wouldn’t be under the law — it would be in direct opposition to it. And if a family welcomed help but later decided it made them uncomfortable? Samantha Miller, a spokeswoman for the U.S. agency administering the program, said families could stop accepting services ""without consequence at any time and for any reason."" Our ruling Bloggers passed around a claim last week that a provision of the new health care law will allow ""forced"" home inspections by government agents. But the program they pointed to provides grants for voluntary help to at-risk families from trained staff like nurses and social workers. What bloggers describe would be an egregious abuse of the law — not what’s allowed by it."
|
8920
|
Cruise ship passengers 'in limbo' off San Francisco awaiting coronavirus tests.
|
First, the food buffet was shut down as gloved staff scurried about wiping every surface in sight. Then the ocean liner’s gym, bar, casino and boutiques were closed, with passengers urged to keep to themselves. Finally, they were confined to their staterooms.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Once the captain announced their vessel may be tainted with coronavirus, Grand Princess cruise ship guests like Kathleen Reid were left with little to do but contemplate the prospect of extended isolation at sea, or worse. “My first reaction was, ‘Oh, crap. We’re going to be quarantined, and maybe get sick,’” Reid, 67, a retiree from Granbury, Texas said. “We don’t know what’s happening, so we’re just kind of in limbo, waiting.” Reid, who spoke to Reuters by cell phone on Thursday, was one of some 2,300 passengers stuck with about 1,100 crew members aboard the Grand Princess, idled off the coast of California a day after the ship was denied entry to its home port in San Francisco. Like the Diamond Princess, the liner held in quarantine off Japan last month, the Grand Princess is owned by a unit of Carnival Corp, the world’s largest cruise operator. Experts have criticized Japanese bureaucrats’ handling of the onboard quarantine, as ultimately about 700 people were infected and six have died in what was at the time the largest concentration of coronavirus cases outside China. California Governor Gavin Newsom insisted that the Grand Princess remain at sea until passengers and crew complaining of flu-like symptoms during a 15-day roundtrip cruise to Hawaii could be tested for possible coronavirus infection. On Thursday, the U.S. Coast Guard airlifted a batch of diagnostic kits to the ship via helicopter, and public health officials said samples collected would be flown back to a San Francisco Bay Area state laboratory for testing. Results were expected in about 24 hours, said Mary Ellen Carroll, executive director of the city’s Department of Emergency Management. State and local officials acted after learning that 35 people aboard the ship had fallen ill, and that two passengers who had traveled on the same vessel for a voyage last month between San Francisco and Mexico later tested positive for coronavirus. One, an elderly man from Placer County near Sacramento with underlying health conditions, died this week, marking the first documented coronavirus fatality in California. The other, from the Bay area, was described by Newsom as gravely sick. Health officials say both individuals likely contracted the virus while they were aboard the ocean liner. The Princess cruise line said fewer than 100 passengers and crew from the Hawaii voyage of its Grand Princess have been identified for testing, including those who were ill. Tests will also be given to dozens of holdover passengers from the Mexico trip who stayed on the ship for the voyage to Hawaii, as well as “guests currently under care for respiratory illness,” the cruise line said in a statement. They will remain quarantined on the ship until cleared by medical staff. Specialists from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were working with local health authorities and the Coast Guard to coordinate the operation. They also were seeking to contact some 2,500 passengers who disembarked in San Francisco on Feb. 21 after the earlier cruise to Mexico. One of them, a Canadian woman from the province of Alberta, tested positive for the virus this week, health officials there said. Princess Cruises has canceled the next scheduled departure of its Grand Princess Hawaii voyage from San Francisco, which had been set for March 7. Passengers on the current cruise, meanwhile, were forced to make do with a rapidly shrinking choice of amusements. Having already lost access to many of the ship’s favorite attractions - the bar, casino, shops, food buffet and gym - guests were also urged to practice “social distancing,” making an effort to keep at least 6 feet away from strangers on the ship, the company said. By midday on Thursday, they were asked to confine themselves to their staterooms until further notice. It was unclear what would occur should anyone now aboard the ship test positive for the respiratory virus, which has infected more than 95,000 people worldwide, most of them in China, where the outbreak originated. “Once we have results from the tests, the CDC and the state will determine the most appropriate location for the ship to berth, and the location needs to provide for the safety of the surrounding community as well as the passengers and crew,” Carroll told reporters on Thursday. She said the ship might be directed to an arrival point other than San Francisco. Reid, who is traveling with her husband, said the ship’s captain was keeping passengers informed of developments throughout the day with announcements every couple of hours, and that fellow guests seemed to be taking the uncertainty mostly in stride. “People are, I’m sure, a little anxious, but nobody has just gone screaming mad yet,” Reid said, adding she had seen no obvious signs of anyone being sick. “Hand-washing is a big deal,” she said, but “nobody is walking around sneezing or coughing.”
|
2304
|
Study paves the way for a blood test to predict Alzheimer's.
|
British scientists have identified a set of 10 proteins in the blood that can predict the onset of Alzheimer’s and call this an important step towards developing a test for the incurable brain-wasting disease.
|
true
|
Science News
|
Such a test could initially be used to select patients for clinical trials of experimental treatments being developed to try to halt progression of Alzheimer’s, the researchers said, and may one day move into routine use in doctors’ clinics. “Alzheimer’s begins to affect the brain many years before patients are diagnosed (and) many of our drug trials fail because by the time patients are given the drugs the brain has already been too severely affected,” said Simon Lovestone of Oxford University, who led this work from King’s College London. “A simple blood test could help us identify patients at a much earlier stage to take part in new trials and hopefully develop treatments,” he said. Alzheimer’s is the most common form of dementia, a brain-wasting disease which in 2010 was estimated to be costing the world $604 billion a year. The fatal disease affects 44 million people worldwide, with the number set to triple by 2050, the campaign group Alzheimer’s Disease International says. Several big pharma firms including Roche, Eli Lilly, Merck & Co and Johnson & Johnson, are pursuing various approaches to get to the root cause of Alzheimer’s and try to find treatments to halt its progression. Yet over the past 15 years, more than 100 experimental Alzheimer’s drugs have failed in trial. Lovestone and other experts believe this may be because drug trials are conducted too late, in patients whose condition has already gone too far. A predictive test for use before people develop symptoms would help researchers select the right people for drug trials, and help show whether the experimental drugs are working. Previous studies have found that PET brain scans and tests of lumbar fluid can be used to predict the onset of dementia from people with a less severe condition known as mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but these tests are expensive and invasive, so scientists are keen to develop a cheaper, simpler blood test. MCI includes problems with day-to-day memory, language and attention. It can be an early sign of dementia, or a symptom of stress or anxiety. Around 10 percent of people diagnosed with MCI develop dementia within a year. Apart from regular assessments to measure memory decline, there is currently no accurate way of predicting who will or won’t develop dementia. For this study, published in the journal Alzheimer’s & Dementia, Lovestone’s team used blood samples from 1,148 people - 476 with Alzheimer’s, 220 with mild cognitive impairment and 452 elderly controls without dementia. They were analyzed for 26 proteins previously found to be linked with Alzheimer’s. The team found 16 of these 26 proteins to be strongly associated with brain shrinkage in either MCI or Alzheimer’s and then ran a second series of tests to see which of these could predict which patients would progress from MCI to Alzheimer’s. With this second series, they found a combination of 10 proteins capable of predicting with 87 percent accuracy whether people with MCI would develop Alzheimer’s disease within a year. Experts in the field welcomed the results but said they should be replicated in larger studies before an Alzheimer’s blood test could be rolled out for use in doctors’ clinics. “The results reported today are interesting, but as the authors point out there is still a very large amount of work remaining until a usable blood test for Alzheimer’s disease becomes available,” said Adrian Pini of the MRC Center for Developmental Neurobiology at King’s College London. James Pickett, head of research at the Alzheimer’s Society, said the research “does not mean that a blood test for dementia is just around the corner”. “These 10 proteins can predict conversion to dementia with less than 90 percent accuracy, meaning one in 10 people would get an incorrect result,” he said. “Accuracy would need to be improved before it could be a useful diagnostic test.”
|
37788
|
"If you Google ""unprofessional hairstyles for men"" and """"unprofessional hairstyles for women"" or ""professional hairstyles for men"" and ""professional hairstyles for women,"" results appeared to be racially biased."
|
‘Unprofessional Hairstyles for Men or Women’ Versus ‘Professional Hairstyles for Men or Women’ Google Image Results
|
mixture
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
On June 9 2020, Facebook user Xavier Dillingham shared the following Twitter screenshots, which purportedly showed Google search results for the terms “professional hairstyles men,” “unprofessional hairstyles men,” “professional hairstyles women,” and “unprofessional hairstyles women”:Dillingham included screenshots of tweets by @Denzel_Success and @dave_fieri with a visible date on one of June 6 2020:It’s deeper than police brutality https://t.co/6bJKhJa1w3— DENZEL SMITH (@Denzel_Success) June 6, 2020Hold up pic.twitter.com/xBBR8OZ7Cr— DAVE FIERI ❼ (@dave_fieri) June 6, 2020One of the screenshots visible in the Facebook post appeared to show at least one result specifically about the matter of Google’s purported racial bias in organizing images of men’s and women’s “professional hairstyles” and “unprofessional hairstyles.”When we searched “professional hairstyles men” on June 19 2020, the results were primarily of white men:As was a search for “professional hairstyles women”:When we searched “unprofessional hairstyles men” and “unprofessional hairstyles women,” the results appeared to have been altered by discourse on social media. For the second search, a number of collages appeared, along with links to content about bias in Google results:We also found discussions about the matter going back for years. On April 6 2016, Mic.com covered the same issue in an article titled “If You Google ‘Unprofessional Hairstyles for Work,’ These Are the Problematic Results,” reporting that April 2016 results included versions of the same hairstyle for both searches:The people in a search for professional hairstyles are predominantly white. Conversely, people in searches for unprofessional are mostly black — though for some reason, Elizabeth Banks as The Hunger Games’ Effie Trinket makes a surprise appearance.Twitter user MalumDube pointed out the irony of a similar style worn by Rachel McAdams was somehow deemed “unprofessional” when worn by a black woman.British outlet The Guardian published an editorial about the April 2016 controversy, in which the author described clicking through some of the images and explained their occasional context:In the case of the great hair debate, Google Images seems to have taken many of the pictures of black women wearing the “unprofessional” hairstyles were from blogs, articles and Pinterest boards. Many of these are by people of colour explicitly discussing and protesting against racist attitudes to hair. One image led me to a post criticising Hampton University’s ban on dreadlocks and cornrows; another was linked with a post celebrating natural hair and the “ridiculous” pressure to straighten it for the office; here’s a rejection of the idea that big, natural curls are “distracting” in a newsroom.One thing was clear between the 2016 popularity of a Google image search for “unprofessional hair men/women” and “professional hair men/women” — viral discourse in both instances appeared to influence the images returned by Google in both cases. Collages we found in the results on June 19 2020 often accompanied reporting on the Google results, pushing down what may have been earlier, accurately described results before tens of thousands of Google users tested the hypothesis.On June 10 2020, The Shade Room published a statement from Cathy Edwards, Vice President of Google Images, about the discussion. Edwards reiterated the claim that articles decrying descriptions of black women’s natural hair as “unprofessional” made up some but not all of the images:Google spoke exclusively to us to explain these image results, which are usually linked to articles that are actually denouncing the biases that black men and women face when it comes to their hair and society’s idea of what professional hair is supposed to look like.“Our Google Images search systems rely on a number of factors, including word matching, to surface results,” Cathy Edwards, VP of Google Images, tells us. “For many of the results, the words ‘unprofessional hairstyles’ appear in the articles, and many of these stories are rightly denouncing the discrimination people of color face when it comes to their hair.”While the images may be alarming, for the purposes of clarity, Google has taken the liberty of adding captions to help people under the relevancy of the images.“While we include captions to help people understand why these images are relevant to the query, we acknowledge that the association can be concerning and painful to see without the fuller context,” Edwards said. “Ensuring that all people and communities are able to find helpful results in Google Images is something we care about deeply and are actively working to improve.”Rating the veracity of the claim that Google search results for the terms “professional hairstyles men,” “unprofessional hairstyles men,” “professional hairstyles women,” and “unprofessional hairstyles women” demonstrated racial bias was difficult due in part to how viral the claim became. Facebook posts and tweets with tens of thousands of shares reshuffled the results, and Google could have changed their algorithms in the two-week period between the June 6 2020 tweets and our June 19 2020 fact check. It is true that some of the results remained (and were the subject of scrutiny in 2016), but the results we evaluated were influenced by the interest generated by the claims — and other forces that remained invisible.Comments
|
33085
|
According to a body language expert, a photograph of President Obama crying reveals he is a psychopath.
|
According to Dr. Glass, the thrust of the meme is unequivocally false. Whether folks believe President Obama’s tears at the 5 January 2016 appearance were legitimate or not, the meme based on that moment in no way represents the analytical work of the body language expert to whom it is attributed.
|
false
|
Politics Politicians, barack obama, body language, lillian glass
|
"On 5 January 2016, President Obama proposed several measures to curb gun violence while delivering remarks on the topic in the East Room of the White House. As he discussed gun deaths involving children, the President began crying (as seen at the 0:44 mark in the video embedded below): // <! [CDATA[ (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = ""//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.3""; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); // ]]> Some versions of the meme attributed its claims to Dr. Lillian Glass: In her 2013 book “The Body Language of Liars,” behavioral analyst Lillian Glass wrote that psychopaths are really bad at crying: “When psychopaths cry, they will often wipe underneath each eye, one at a time. When people cry genuine tears they cry with both eyes, and so they will tend to wipe both eyes at once.” A brief online search indicated that the quote cited above was lifted directly from a 6 November 2013 Business Insider article titled “7 Signs You’re Working with a Psychopath.” The article predictably described an entirely different context: They are really bad at crying. “When [Susan Smith] gave a press conference and cried about her missing children, her fake tears were actually what raised suspicions that she was the killer,” says Glass. When psychopaths cry, Glass says they will often wipe underneath each eye, one at a time. “When people cry genuine tears they cry with both eyes, and so they will tend to wipe both eyes at once.” In their original context, Dr. Glass’ observations clearly pertained to video footage (not a still image). Dr. Glass’ web site includes a blog wherein her observations consistently describe analysis of subjects in context and motion (utilizing photographs to illustrate the body language she described in a broader context throughout). Nowhere in her writings did we locate an example of her making such a definitive diagnosis based upon a single still image, nor of her throwing around severe diagnostic language such as “psychopath.” We contacted Dr. Glass regarding the meme and the use of language from her 2013 book The Body Language of Liars. Dr. Glass told us she was aware of the quote’s newfound popularity and was deeply dismayed by the lengths to which her words and work had been misconstrued due to the meme (and related articles). Dr. Glass strongly repudiated the assertions of the meme, noting that the quote originally appeared in her 2013 book and was used for the Business Insider piece in a very different context. Moreover, she stated that she would never engage in body language analysis so flippantly, nor did she consider the subject matter of the meme appropriate for such observations. Mostly, Dr. Glass was dismayed at the virality of a grossly misconstrued, unrelated, out-of-context quote from her book in a meme that misrepresented her work. We asked psychologist Dr. Emily Perrine-Gifford about the claims; she explained why the armchair diagnoses of social media made little sense to mental health clinicians: I don’t think people understand what a psychopath really is. A psychopath is someone who is literally born without a conscience. That means that if Obama were really a psychopath, he would have shown signs and symptoms from childhood. Psychopathy may be understood as the worst form of Antisocial Personality Disorder. Antisocial Personality Disorder can not be diagnosed until adulthood, but with psychopathy, since this is potentially the worst form of Antisocial Personality Disorder and is thought to have genetic origins as well as psychosocial origins, certain symptoms may be seen before adulthood. These symptoms, most notably, for psychopaths, are fire setting, problems wetting the bed past an age appropriate time period, and a blatant disregard for the safety of self or others. Psychopaths are notoriously difficult to diagnose as they can be charming and manipulative. However, I have particular expertise in this area as I have worked in forensic psychiatric hospitals and super maximum security prison settings. I am not convinced that President Obama is or ever was a psychopath. He shows little to no signs or symptoms of Antisocial Personality Disorder and these symptoms would have to present in order to be diagnosed as a psychopath."
|
28379
|
At least 100,000 churches called for the withdrawal of Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination.
|
What's true: The National Council of Churches, an umbrella organization representing over 100,000 Christian congregations, called for the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to be withdrawn. What's false: All of those congregations did not individually call for Kavanaugh's nomination to be withdrawn.
|
mixture
|
Politics, brett kavanaugh, christine blasey ford
|
On 3 October 2018, the National Council of Churches (NCC) umbrella organization, a large consortium of Christian churches around the United States, issued a statement calling for the withdrawal of the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court. The NCC represents over 100,000 local congregations and 40 million churchgoers. Their statement was posted to the organization’s official Facebook page and read as follows: The National Council of Churches (NCC) calls for the withdrawal of the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court of the United States. We believe he has disqualified himself from this lifetime appointment and must step aside immediately. We note several reasons. During his appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Judge Kavanaugh exhibited extreme partisan bias and disrespect towards certain members of the committee and thereby demonstrated that he possesses neither the temperament nor the character essential for a member of the highest court in our nation. We are deeply disturbed by the multiple allegations of sexual assault and call for a full and unhindered investigation of these accusations. In addition, his testimony before the Judiciary Committee included several misstatements and some outright falsehoods. All citizens must be expected to speak truthfully when under oath, however, this is especially true for anyone who seeks a seat on the Supreme Court. Moreover, Judge Kavanaugh’s extensive judicial and political record is troubling with regard to issues of voting rights, racial and gender justice, health care, the rights of people with disabilities, and environmental protections. This leads us to believe that he cannot be an impartial justice in cases that are sure to come before him at the Court. Therefore the National Council of Churches calls for the withdrawal of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court immediately. NCC was the second prominent religious organization to call for Kavanaugh’s nomination to be withdrawn. On 27 September 2018, America, the flagship publication for the Jesuit order within the Roman Catholic Church, published an editorial that concluded: “For the good of the country and the future credibility of the Supreme Court in a world that is finally learning to take reports of harassment, assault and abuse seriously, it is time to find a nominee whose confirmation will not repudiate that lesson.”
|
31932
|
A landline disengaged from its cradle will eventually self-dial 911.
|
Technology has brought along with it alternatives for individuals to summon help without dialing 911 and speaking to an emergency dispatcher, a particularly useful function in dangerous situations where a victim cannot discuss their situation. However, experts in emergency telecommunications have confirmed that simply knocking the phone off the hook was never a failsafe for callers in need of assistance. And while people and pets (and the occasional tomato) have on occasion accidentally summoned the police, they did not do so by simply removing a receiver from its hook.
|
false
|
Technology, 911 calls, police, public safety
|
The advent of various technologies enabling contact with emergency services (or easier identification during such an event) has not quelled interest in core functions of long-standing institutions such as 911 and the Emergency Alert System (EAS). A side effect of the advancement of gadgets and networks into our daily lives is lingering concern those devices will one day fail us; even the cellular phone was (in the not-so-distant past) eyed with some skepticism by first responders. Accordingly, the notion police or paramedics are best summoned via landline due to its long-developed and trustworthy capabilities remains despite the popularity and ubiquitousness of mobile phones. Landlines are are thought to make it easier to track down a person in need of assistance — and in films or on television, mobiles seem to regularly fail in moments of high tension (clip contains some profanity): Various versions of that rumor have circulated in both the United States and the United Kingdom, dating back to at least 2006. The rumor’s functionality exists on at least two levels: one cautioning against inadvertently summoning the police (leading at best to embarrassment and at worst, actual harm), and another reassuring people (inaccurately) that even if you cannot complete a call for help, the cavalry will eventually arrive all the same. The latter notion is one where belief in the claim presents a risk, suggesting that one need only knock a landline off its receiver to eventually summon first responders. We contacted the Federal Communications Commission, which referred us to the National Emergency Number Association (NENA): As The Voice of 9-1-1™, NENA is on the forefront of all emergency communications issues. The association serves its members and the greater public safety community as the only professional organization solely focused on 9-1-1 policy, technology, operations, and education issues. With more than 9,000 members in 48 chapters across the United States and around the globe, NENA promotes the implementation and awareness of 9-1-1, as well as international three-digit emergency communications systems … Through the association’s efforts to provide effective and efficient public safety solutions, NENA strives to protect human life, preserve property, and maintain the security of our communities. A NENA representative told us he was unfamiliar with the rumor, adding that to the best of his knowledge a “presented dial tone will time out and the line will become inaccessible to inbound calls.” (Or, to put it another way, a “busy signal.”) Until the mid-2000s, mobile phones were largely considered a secondary form of contact to be used sparingly in the absence of a landline, and fixed-location phones were often inadvertently or (perhaps more often) deliberately left “off the hook” to disable incoming calls — a not uncommon occurrence, as one New York Times writer lamented in 2012: But there was also another part of the Friday night ritual — very likely the most important part. “Nick, go and take the phone off the hook,” my father would command. I’d excitedly rush into the hallway, lift up the phone receiver, and toss it to the floor. Then, I’d race back into the living room before showtime. As the opening credits for the movie began, the phone left off the hook would echo in the hall: Beep. Beep. Beep. Beep … and then, silence. No way to answer the phone, and no way to leave a message, meant that no one could get through. And rightly so: it was movie night, after all.
|
34447
|
"Massaging olive oil into breast skin and tissue can prevent and reverse ""sagging."
|
There is research [PDF] (conducted by individuals who contracted with cosmetic medical firms) that indicates some success in the ongoing development of a topical version of botulinum toxin type A (popularly known by the brand name Botox) and intended solely for the face. However, that research only concerns a clinically prescribed substance (botulinum toxin, not a pantry product) and included no indications that it could be used on breast tissue.
|
unproven
|
Medical
|
On 12 February 2017, the Facebook page “GreenYatra” published an image that bore the claim that olive oil can be used to prevent or reverse “sagging breasts”: The image-based claim didn’t link to any articles or other corroborating information, saying only: Massaging your breasts with olive oil is an excellent technique to firm sagging breasts. Olive oil is a rich source of antioxidants and fatty acids that can reverse the damage caused by free radicals and prevent sagging breasts. Plus, it will help improve the skin tone and texture. According to the claim, topical application of olive oil either circumvents or reverses loss of elasticity in breasts. No specific reason was provided for the claim that olive oil, versus any other type of oil, could replicate the effect shown. The efficacy of topical treatments for sagging breasts or loss of skin elasticity is often discussed in cosmetic circles, thanks in part to the cost and invasiveness of surgical approaches. But research demonstrating any single topical ingredient can prevent (much less reverse) loss of skin elasticity is notably skimpy: Antioxidant ointments, creams, and lotions may help reduce the risk of wrinkles and protect against sun damage. Unlike sunscreens, they build up in the skin and are not washed away, so the protection may last longer. Selenium, coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), and alpha-lipoic acid are antioxidants that can be applied to the skin. Evidence of their benefit is limited and more studies in humans are needed. More commonly used antioxidants are described below. Your dermatologist (skin doctor) can tell you which product is right for you. Research from 2012 indicates that anxioxidants could potentially prevent damage to facial skin, but evidence was “limited” and reversal was not referenced. Only 1.5 percent of olive oil contains antioxidants (and that fraction is not composed entirely of antioxidants). Other foods are described as being higher in antioxidants, but no memes recommended rubbing a berry paste onto breasts for firmness. Research overwhelmingly examined efficacy of topical treatment for facial skin, which lacks the weight and density of breast tissue. And although topicals designed for facial skin need only penetrate a few dermal layers, any product designed or intended for use on breasts would have to enter the breast tissue to “lift” or prevent elasticity loss (a far taller order). A blog post written by Miami-based cosmetic surgeon Dr. Ary Krau directly addresses the question of whether any specific topical substance (including olive oil) had ever shown promise to improve loss of elasticity for breast tissue in clinical research: Unfortunately, no cream or lotion has been clinically proven or FDA-approved to lift the breasts into a higher position. Don’t waste your money on any product that claims to improve your breast position. While genetics play a big role in breast sagging, there are a few things you can do to prevent it in the first place. Try not to fluctuate greatly in body weight; gaining and losing a lot of weight in a short period of time can take its toll on the breasts. Be diligent about wearing sunscreen on your chest and décolletage area to protect the skin from the sun’s rays. Wear a supportive bra as much as possible, especially when performing high-intensity aerobic exercise. We contacted Dr. Krau’s office, and a representative for the clinic told us that no effective topical treatment appears to exist. A thorough search of related studies turned up no strong evidence facial skin or breast tissue could be firmed by topical treatments at all. A 5 percent concentration of Vitamin C (not olive oil) showed moderate success in treatment of photo-aging in a small 2003 study, but those findings were not relevant to breast tissue or olive oil.
|
26777
|
The mortality rate for the flu is “right around” that of the new coronavirus: “It’s right around 2%.”
|
"The mortality rate for the flu is considered by most experts to be about 0.1%. That's ""sort of the canonical seasonal influenza mortality figure,"" said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security. Although this percentage seems like a small number, influenza is responsible for an estimated 30,000 to 40,000 deaths annually. Estimates for the mortality rate for coronavirus are currently around 2%, but this number could change depending on how cases are diagnosed."
|
false
|
Health Check, Coronavirus, Chad Wolf,
|
"During a Senate appropriations Feb. 25 subcommittee hearing, Chad Wolf, the acting secretary of Homeland Security, said the U.S. flu mortality rate was about the same as the current estimated global mortality rate of the coronavirus outbreak. He made this statement during an exchange with Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) regarding what the acting secretary knew about the coronavirus, which causes a disease known as COVID-19. This C-SPAN video shows the full discussion between the two. Kennedy first asked what the worldwide mortality rate for coronavirus is, to which Wolf responded, that it was ""under 2%"" but that he would need to check with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to get the actual figure and that ""it changes daily."" The Louisiana senator then asked, ""What’s the mortality rate for influenza over, say, the last 10 years in America?"" Wolf answered: ""It’s also right around that percentage as well. I don’t have that offhand, but it’s right around 2% as well."" We asked the Department of Homeland Security where Wolf’s figure came from. A DHS spokesperson said in an email, ""As the acting secretary said in his hearing, he did not have that information on hand and refers to Health and Human Services -- the federal agency in charge of the federal government’s coronavirus response."" The comparison of coronavirus to flu in terms of mortality rates seemed like an important mechanism to understanding the growing concern about the reach of coronavirus, so we decided to dig deeper to find out if these statistics hold up. We also asked experts to explain what the numbers mean in terms of risk. Digging into mortality rate numbers The CDC directed us to its online influenza resources and referred us to the World Health Organization for more information on coronavirus. Christopher Mores, a global health professor at George Washington University, helped make sense of some of the figures. He calculated the average, 10-year mortality rate for flu using CDC data and found it was 0.1%. That 0.1% rate is frequently cited among experts, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, called it ""sort of the canonical seasonal influenza mortality figure."" It’s important to note, that although this percentage seems like a small number, influenza is responsible for an estimated 30,000 to 40,000 deaths annually. Now, for coronavirus. According to statistics released Feb. 17 by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the mortality rate for coronavirus was 2.3%. That’s based on cases reported through Feb. 11 and calculated by dividing the numbers of coronavirus-related deaths at the time (1,023) by the number of the confirmed cases (44,672) of the coronavirus. (These numbers reflect the information available at the time of the secretary’s testimony.) But this report has limitations, Mores said, including the vague way Chinese officials are defining who has been infected by the coronavirus. ""We have not been able to understand what precisely has gone on there,"" said Mores. ""They have changed their case definitions multiple times. It’s murky what has gone into the case count and who has gone into being counted on cases."" The WHO said in a press conference Monday that in Wuhan, China, the city where the virus first hit, the mortality rate ranged from 2% to 4%. Officials said that in the rest of China, outside of Wuhan, the mortality rate of coronavirus is 0.7%. Mike Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, said the mortality rate in China has since risen to 0.9%. Right now he doesn’t see a similarity in the flu mortality rate and the coronavirus mortality rate. ""We don’t have any evidence to that being the case,"" said Osterholm. Mores said U.S. health officials just don’t have enough information to know whether the two mortality rates are similar. Understanding this comparison would offer a means to better understand the severity of the coronavirus. It could also help in educating the public about the novel illness. ""Until we can gain our own experience with this virus, it’s going to be pretty squishy. So, all the numbers that you have come across here are within the range of possibility,"" he said. ""Absolutely, the hope is we will end up with something similar to the flu, but we just don’t know yet."" Multiple experts told us that the number of coronavirus cases not just in China but worldwide has probably been undercounted because many people with the infection do not suffer serious symptoms and may not seek medical treatment. It is possible that only those who have tested positive are being counted as ""confirmed cases."" Until the case definition is expanded, they said, to include people clinicians think may have COVID-19 but who were not tested for it, then the total estimated number of cases will remain lower than the likely reality. But, if the number of cases widens to include those with mild symptoms who have not been tested, then the mortality rate will go down. This is the way mortality rates are calculated for the flu, said Mores. The numbers of flu illnesses and deaths are estimates based not only on positive flu tests, but also on doctors’ suspicions and symptomatic diagnosis. One key difference between the flu and the coronavirus illness, Osterholm cautioned, is that, with the flu, the population has a partially built up immunity, whether through receiving flu shots or already having been exposed to the illness. Mores concurred. ""You know, the risk is this: We have a brand-new virus in a completely naive population on Earth, we’re all susceptible to it. Everyone is potentially infectable with this virus,"" he said. ""Even with a high transmission rate and the low case fatality rate, that still becomes a massive number of ill and fatal cases."" Our ruling There are two ways to parse out this claim: First, is it true that the average U.S. mortality rate for flu is 2%? That’s not true, according to data from the CDC and exchanges with multiple global health experts. On average, the flu mortality rate during the past 10 years has been 0.1%. In addition, Wolf and a DHS spokesperson admitted that the acting secretary did not have the statistics in front of him when he answered questions at the hearing about the mortality rates. Second, is it true the COVID-19 mortality rate is similar to the flu mortality rate? Wolf is also wrong on that account, based on the limited information currently known about the coronavirus. Recent data from the Chinese government set the COVID-19 mortality rate at 2.3%. That’s vastly different from the flu’s mortality rate of 0.1%. Experts also said that while it’s possible the mortality rate from the new virus could come close to the flu’s mortality rate eventually ― if the case definition of coronavirus is expanded -- it’s too soon to make that assumption with the limited information available."
|
8865
|
Clot-busting drugs save limbs from frostbite.
|
Doctors using specialized imaging methods to precisely deliver drugs to frostbitten hands and feet may be able to save them from amputation, researchers reported on Monday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The radiologists used angiography, an X-ray of the blood vessels, to confirm loss of blood flow in the severely frostbitten hands and feet of 17 patients. They threaded catheters into the arteries to directly deliver clot-busting drugs to dissolve the blood clots and anti-spasmodics to relax the arteries. This helped 90 percent of the patients, they told a meeting in Washington of the Society of Interventional Radiology. “Previously, severe frostbite was a one-way route to limb loss. This treatment is a significant improvement.” said Dr. George Edmonson, an interventional radiologist with St. Paul Radiology in St. Paul, Minnesota, who worked on the study. “We’re opening arteries that are blocked so that tissues can heal and limbs can be salvaged. We were able to reopen even the smallest arteries, saving patients’ fingers and toes,” Edmonson added. Severe frostbite can block blood flow and cause small clots to form. These clots can worsen already slowed blood flow. “For half our patients who received the clot-busting drug Tenectaplase, this technique worked beautifully, saving all fingers, hands, toes and feet that otherwise would have been lost,” said Edmonson. “Overall, in about 80 percent of the cases, it significantly improved patients’ outcomes. Within one to three days of treatment, we saw improvement.”
|
26324
|
Mitch McConnell said he wanted states to go bankrupt instead of the federal government providing relief. Today, Thom Tillis agreed.
|
U.S. Senate Leader Mitch McConnell said he doesn’t want the federal government to help states pay for debt that wasn’t incurred as part of the coronavirus outbreak, which could include allowing them to declare bankruptcy. U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) said he agrees with McConnell “more or less,” but never explicitly said he wants states to declare bankruptcy. Tillis added that he doesn’t support an “across the board” bailout, and wants to review aid on a “case-by-case basis.”
|
false
|
North Carolina, Coronavirus, Cal Cunningham,
|
"Local and state governments are expected to have budget shortfalls as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. And, according to the Democrat in North Carolina’s U.S. Senate race, the Republican incumbent thinks struggling communities should go bankrupt. That’s what Cal Cunningham said about Sen. Thom Tillis. ""Mitch McConnell said he wanted states to go bankrupt instead of the federal government providing relief. Today, Thom Tillis agreed,"" Cunningham tweeted April 24, linking to a Politico story. Is that true? There’s a lot of context being left out. Yes, Tillis did say he is ""more or less aligned"" with what McConnell, the U.S. Senate majority leader, said about not giving more federal dollars to states that had pre-existing budget problems. McConnell proposed allowing them to file for bankruptcy, which states are not currently permitted to do. But Cunningham exaggerated what we know about Tillis’ position. Tillis’ comments clearly show he doesn’t want the federal government to pay for state debt that wasn’t incurred during the coronavirus outbreak. What’s less clear is whether he wants those states to go the bankruptcy route. So what did McConnell say about bankruptcy? In a radio interview on April 22, McConnell said states with pre-existing problems might be better off declaring bankruptcy than by expecting additional funding from the federal government. But he didn’t specifically say he ""wanted"" states to declare bankruptcy, only that he supports it as an option. ""I would certainly be in favor of allowing states to use the bankruptcy route. It saves some cities. And there’s no good reason for it not to be available,"" McConnell said. ""My guess is their first choice would be for the federal government to borrow money from future generations to send it down to them now so they don’t have to do that. That’s not something I’m going to be in favor of."" As The Atlantic reported, McConnell expanded on his bankruptcy comments in another radio interview that day: ""We’re not interested in solving their pension problems for them. We’re not interested in rescuing them from bad decisions they've made in the past, we’re not going to let them take advantage of this pandemic to solve a lot of problems that they created themselves (with) bad decisions in the past."" That brings us to Tillis and how closely he has ""agreed"" with McConnell. Audio of the April 24 town hall shows a constituent named Charles saying he has a question about the future: ""Will the Senate vote to bail out poorly-run states that were near bankrupt before COVID-19 hit?"" Tillis wasn’t asked about states in general. He was asked specifically about ""poorly-run states that were near bankrupt"" prior to the pandemic. Tillis said he doesn’t think those states should be bailed out. ""Well, Charles, that's a great question and personally I don't think we should, and I don't think that we can,"" Tillis said. He then said the $2 trillion economic stimulus gave him ""pause,"" but was worth it. Then he used North Carolina’s state government as an example of good financial stewardship: ""I'm not so sure that taxpayer dollars for North Carolina should go to a state, a county, or a city that, like you said, was in poor economic shape before we ever had the virus. We need to take care of first responders. We need to take care of law enforcement. And we will do that. But I don't believe that I can support any measure that is effectively a bailout for poorly run state and local governments. ""We can look at things on a case-by-case basis where it's very clear that the damage is done because of the virus impact. But a broad-based bailout is not something I'd be prepared to support."" That’s when Tillis brought up McConnell’s comments. ""You probably heard Leader McConnell's comments about it, I'm more or less aligned with Leader McConnell on the issue,"" Tillis said, a few seconds later adding: ""I think we need to work on executing (plans already signed into law) and not really entertain a discussion of trillions more going into jurisdictions that really need to get their financial houses in order."" Cunningham spokeswoman Rachel Petri said Tillis’s comments about McConnell show he’s in lockstep with the Senate leader, who said ""I would certainly be in favor of allowing states to use the bankruptcy route."" Tillis elaborated on his position in an interview with Fox News radio's Guy Benson on April 29. Benson asked him about McConnell’s comments that money should not cover pre-pandemic budget holes (without mentioning the bankruptcy idea). Tillis said the Senate ""will go back and take a look at well-documented cases for the costs of the response, potentially the cause of some of the revenues in this year based on closures."" When PolitiFact asked about Tillis’ position on the bankruptcy option, Tillis campaign spokesman Andrew Romeo said: ""Sen. Tillis has never advocated for any state or municipality to go bankrupt as a result of COVID-19, has already delivered billions of dollars in relief to North Carolina, and has consistently said that he supports providing targeted assistance for communities that have been impacted by the virus."" Cunningham tweeted, ""Mitch McConnell said he wanted states to go bankrupt instead of the federal government providing relief. Today, Thom Tillis agreed."" The tweet lacks so much context that it’s several degrees removed from what’s actually been said. McConnell wasn’t talking about just any states, he was talking about states that were in poor financial shape before the coronavirus outbreak. Additionally, McConnell said he supported bankruptcy as a novel option for states, particularly for those with pre-existing pension liabilities. Tillis said he agreed with McConnell ""more or less."" He agreed that Congress shouldn’t pay for revenue losses that aren’t related to the coronavirus outbreak. But Tillis never actually said he wanted states to go bankrupt. And he said he will consider federal aid for smaller governments on a case-by-case basis. Cunningham’s tweet exaggerates what McConnell said and misrepresents what Tilils has said about federal coronavirus aid. It contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."
|
25645
|
David Perdue Says his policy is that “health insurance should always cover preexisting conditions. For anyone. Period.”
|
Perdue has voted to do away with Obamacare and the protections it provides. His bill to provide similar protections contains loopholes for insurance companies. He weighed in on the side of extended short-term plans, which can legally deny coverage based on preexisting conditions.
|
false
|
Georgia, National, Health Care, David Perdue,
|
"Health insurance has emerged as a defining issue in the Georgia Senate race, and Republican incumbent Sen. David Perdue declared that there is one angle where he can’t be attacked. ""I’ve always believed in protections for Americans with preexisting conditions. Period,"" Perdue tweeted Aug. 18. ""Anyone who says otherwise just isn’t telling the truth."" The campaign ad attached to the tweet adds, ""Health insurance should always cover preexisting conditions. For anyone. Period."" That is a sweeping policy — guaranteed coverage for anyone, with no penalty for a preexisting condition. If that’s Perdue’s position now, it doesn’t jibe with his record as a lawmaker. He’s voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act — Obamacare — and a bill he cosponsored to guarantee coverage fails to match the ironclad protections under that law. Perdue makes no bones about opposing the ACA, which contains several interlocking provisions that protect people with preexisting conditions. He voted to repeal it in 2015 and backed the Senate’s failed repeal-and-replace effort in 2017. Perdue’s campaign said that it’s possible to be against Obamacare, and in favor of patient protections. It said, ""Perdue co-sponsored legislation to ensure preexisting conditions are covered at no additional cost to those patients."" That bill, called the Protect Act, never came to a vote in the Senate and doesn’t match the ACA’s guarantees. The current law blocks insurers from using any eligibility rule, list of covered services or pricing to deny anyone coverage. The Protect Act does say that insurance companies can’t deny coverage based on ""any preexisting condition."" But it gives a carrier the option to deny certain coverage, if ""it will not have the capacity to deliver services adequately."" Since the bill doesn’t define what that clause means, it leaves open the possibility that carriers could use it to drop coverage of certain expensive diseases from all of their policies. To Allison Hoffman, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, that’s a big loophole. ""Insurers could exclude someone’s preexisting conditions from coverage, even if they offered her a policy,"" Hoffman told us in 2018 when the bill was first introduced. ""That fact alone sinks any claims that this law offers preexisting condition protection."" Rodney Whitlock, a health policy expert who worked for Republicans in Congress, told us concerns about loopholes are reasonable. ""Insurers will use the rules available to them to take in more in premiums than they pay out in claims,"" Whitlock said in 2018. ""If you see a loophole and think insurers will use it, that’s probably true."" Hoffman notes that the Protect Act’s language against insurers discriminating based on genetic information also concerns her. The bill says carriers ""shall not request, require, or purchase genetic information with respect to any individual prior to such individual's enrollment."" But the bill says information collected incidentally can be used by insurers. That could happen, for example, when an employee inadvertently reveals details on a questionnaire, despite being told not to include information that can be linked back to their DNA. Insurers can’t use that information for setting premiums, but Hoffman says it could shape the list of covered maladies. ""If an insurer comes across genetic information incidentally, it seems to me that they could exclude any related conditions,"" Hoffman warned. ""This loophole could be huge considering the amount of incidental collection and how broadly it is construed."" The bill has other holes: for instance, permitting insurers to charge women more than men. Perdue’s stance on short-term health insurance plans also raises issues. These plans offer limited coverage that’s intended to tide people over when they’re between jobs. They don’t need to follow the strict rules of the ACA. They don’t have to cover the package of essential benefits under the law and they can exclude coverage for preexisting conditions. Under the ACA, they were limited to 90 days’ coverage. The Trump administration extended that to 364 days, with the option to renew them for up to three years. Perdue voted against a 2018 resolution to oppose Trump’s expansion of short-term plans. The measure failed by one vote. The Perdue campaign said that Obamacare isn’t the only way to take care of people. ""The best way to protect those with preexisting conditions, lower costs for all Georgians, and expand access to coverage is through free market solutions,"" the campaign said in a statement. The campaign noted that many counties have only one insurance company offering coverage. It argues that if more companies found it profitable to move into those areas, competition would improve the options for consumers. Perdue said that his policy is that ""health insurance should always cover preexisting conditions. For anyone. Period."" Perdue opposes the Affordable Care Act and weighed in on the side of short-term health plans that lack some of the ACA’s strong protections for people with preexisting conditions. Perdue’s bill to maintain those protections contains loopholes that insurance companies could use to avoid covering certain conditions. Perdue’s promise is sweeping and absolute. The policies he has backed offer some limited protections, but don’t match that promise."
|
26845
|
Amy, I looked online at your (health care) plan. It’s two paragraphs.
|
Warren’s campaign said she was referring to just the paragraphs that specifically addressed universal health care. But those two paragraphs are just one part of a four-webpage policy statement that collectively runs 64 paragraphs long.
|
false
|
Health Care, Elizabeth Warren,
|
"Sen. Elizabeth Warren loves to tout her plans for any and all policy questions, including climate change, child care and especially health care. This became a point of contention during the Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas on Feb. 19, where she criticized her rivals over a lack of specificity in their health plans. Warren said a proposal from Pete Buttigieg is ""not a plan. It's a PowerPoint."" Then she turned to Senate colleague Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. ""And Amy's plan is even less,"" Warren said. ""It's like a Post-It note, 'Insert Plan Here.'"" After some additional digs and discussion, Warren and Klobuchar had this exchange: Warren: ""So I actually took a look at the plans that are posted. … Amy, I looked online at your plan. It's two paragraphs. Families are suffering, and they need …"" Klobuchar: ""OK, that's it."" Warren: ""You can't simply stand here and trash an idea to give health care coverage to everyone without having a realistic plan of your own. And if you're not going to own up to the fact either that you don't have a plan or that your plan is going to leave people without health care coverage, full coverage, then you need to say so."" Warren’s campaign told PolitiFact that she was referring specifically to Klobuchar’s plan for ""universal health care."" Her campaign pointed to the two paragraphs at the end of a Klobuchar campaign web page that specifically follow the heading ""Propose legislation to get us to universal health care."" However, this is a selective reading of the health care policy pages that Klobuchar posted on her website. Klobuchar supports building on the Affordable Care Act and adding a public option that expands Medicare and Medicaid. By contrast, Warren initially joined rival candidate Bernie Sanders in supporting a wholesale switch to a single-player plan — a more aggressive approach than Klobuchar’s — then later eased off. Warren currently backs two bills, one for a public option and another for a single-payer plan. The problem with Warren’s attack is that it focuses on two paragraphs, which ignores most of her rival’s health care plan. There is quite a bit of detail in Klobuchar’s plan. Klobuchar’s website has no fewer than four different web pages that address the topic — a main health care policy page, a more detailed sub-page, a sub-page on prescription drugs and a sub-page on mental health. Some of Klobuchar’s bullet-pointed priorities include: • ""Immediately suspend the Trump Administration’s efforts to eliminate the Affordable Care Act’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions."" • ""Develop best models of care to address disparities in maternal and infant mortality and address the shortage of maternity care health professionals in underserved rural and urban areas."" • ""Expand Medicaid reimbursement for people receiving mental health or substance use treatment."" • ""Expand the open enrollment period for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act so more people can get insurance coverage."" • ""Stop Trump sabotage of the ACA by ending workarounds that allow states to raise premiums for sicker people and shift ACA premium subsidies away from lower-income enrollees."" All told, the four Klobuchar web pages by our count have 64 paragraphs, not counting overlap — far more than two. Warren said, ""Amy, I looked online at your (health care) plan. It’s two paragraphs."" Warren’s campaign said she was referring to just the paragraphs that specifically addressed universal health care. That wasn't clear on stage, where she dismissed Klobuchar's health policy ideas as small enough to fit on a Post-It. Klobuchar's two paragraphs on universal health care are just one part of a four-webpage policy statement that collectively runs 64 paragraphs long."
|
10982
|
Vitamin B and its role in improving memory
|
This story provided insightful information about whether there exists an associations between the intake of specific B vitamins, including B6, folic acid (B9), and B12 (cobalamin), and chance of developing dementia or Alzheimer’s disease, this story is a very well organized discussion about what is and is not known about these vitamins, the levels of the amino acid homocysteine, and age-related or disease related cognitive impairment. The story never explained why this information was being reported at the current time, but it did provide a well considered look at the research on a complicated topic. As the population ages, we are feeling the effects of cognitive decline in large numbers of people. Most families have been affected in some way by Alzheimer’s or a similar condition. A simple solution like B vitamins would provide hope for many, and stories like this provide readers a welcome analysis of the true basis for that hope.
|
true
|
Los Angeles Times,Supplements
|
There was no discussion of costs. Were people to begin taking B vitamins in the quantities necessary to show improvement along the lines of what has been seen in some of the studies mentioned, B vitamins could become a lifelong treatment with significant cumulative costs. The slant of the story was to question the wisdom in augmenting vitamin B intake in light of the studies failing to demonstrate benefit. The story itself, however, reported on several pieces of evidence over time rather than reporting on the results of a specific study or studies. Where it did provide numbers on benefits, it did so in a clear and cautious way. For example, it noted “a recent study in which brain atrophy (or shrinkage, which occurs in older people who are losing brain function) slowed by 30% in elderly patients with both high homocysteine levels and mild cognitive impairment who took a B vitamin pill daily for two years. Brain shrinkage occurred at a rate of about 0.75% in the people taking B vitamins in the study, compared with a rate of 1.1% per year in a group that took a placebo.” By including the actual percentages for people in both groups, the story shows the reader that the shrinkage was not dramatic to begin with and that the difference between the two groups could also be described as a 0.26 percentage point difference. The story did include information about possible side effects and harms associated with excessive consumption of B vitamins. The story provided a reasonable description of several studies in which outcomes were not changed with vitamin B supplementation. There was a useful quote by one of the researches indicating that only a minority of studies showed any indication of benefit from increasing vitamin B intake. We wish it had taken a little more care in making clear distinctions between the different populations being studied. In some cases, the studies were focused on anyone of advanced age, while in others they were focused specifically on Alzheimer’s patients, but there was no discussion in the story about whether these differences may also have accounted for the different findings among the studies. The story did not engage in disease mongering. The story detailed several studies of the relation between the B vitamins and cognitive impairment; it included quotes from two researchers (Haan and Miller) in the field who are at different institutions but have several studies that they have worked on and published together. There was no discussion of how the fortification of common foods in the supply chain, such as grains, flour, cereal, energy bars and drinks, has affected the levels of B vitamin. There was also no mention of other specific therapies to stop cognitive decline. The story described the urge to rush out and purchase B vitamins, which is suggestive of their ready availability. The story neglected to mention that many foods are already fortified with B vitamins, which may already cover the recommended intake levels for many readers. This story provided a nice overview of what is known about B vitamins in relation to age- and disease- related cognitive decline. The story does not appear to rely solely on a news release. It is not clear why this information about the long-term research interest of two local scientists is news right now, but it is an interesting piece nonetheless.
|
8012
|
Iran plans tougher restrictions as coronavirus toll rises.
|
Iran had 117 new coronavirus deaths in the last 24 hours, bringing the total to 2,757, a health ministry spokesman said on Monday, prompting the Middle East’s worst hit country to consider tougher curbs on movement.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The total number of infections climbed to 41,495. “In the past 24 hours we had 117 new deaths and 3,186 new confirmed cases of people infected with the coronavirus,” Kianush Jahanpur told state TV, calling on Iranians to stay at home. Iran has had an intercity travel ban since Thursday and the government has extended the closure of universities and schools and the suspension of all cultural, religious and sports events. “If necessary, we might impose tougher measures as our priority is the nation’s safety and health,” said Iran’s first Vice President, Eshaq Jahangiri, according to state TV. Iran last week warned of a surge of cases as many Iranians ignored calls to avoid traveling for Persian New Year holidays that started on March 20. To stem the spread of the virus in crowded jails, Iran’s judiciary on Sunday extended furloughs for 100,000 prisoners. On March 17, Iran said it had freed about 85,000 people from jail temporarily, including political prisoners. Iranian media on Monday, citing the governor of Iran’s Fars province, Enayatollah Rahimi, reported that prisoners at one prison “broke cameras and caused other damage in two sections of the prison where violent criminals are kept”. The state news agency IRNA said similar riots had erupted in other prisons since March 20. Families have called for the release of all prisoners.
|
29128
|
Red Bull and Bang energy drinks test positive for various illicit or prescription drugs in substance or urine tests
|
What's true: The meme may have alluded (knowingly or unknowingly) to the theoretical possibility that the energy drinks in question could, like other innocuous substances, produce false positives for the drugs listed in the meme. What's false: We found no evidence of a pattern of Red Bull, Bang, or other energy drinks producing false positives for methamphetamine, ecstasy, or the other drugs listed in the meme. The photograph included in the meme did not constitute evidence that supported its claims, which were expressed in misleading and confusing terms.
|
false
|
Science
|
In late summer 2019, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the accuracy of a viral Facebook post that claimed the popular energy drinks Red Bull and Bang test positive for various illicit substances, including methamphetamines, ecstasy, and the prescription opioids OxyContin and Suboxone. The claims were posted in July by user Angie Rider Freese, who included photographs of what appeared to be a urine screen-test cup, with “Red Bull” written on the lid. We have edited her post for clarity: “Today at work a patient had a Red Bull. [I] told him they [test positive] on drug screens. He didn’t believe me. So I had him pour some in a new cup, and it [tested positive] for [methamphetamine] and [oxycodone] and [buprenorphine]. Also Bang will [test positive] for [ecstasy/MDMA].” Rider Freese subsequently deleted the post in question, but she later confirmed its authenticity with a second post in which she explained that she had taken it down because its viral spread had caused her to be inundated with friend requests and messages. Although the original post was deleted, social media users have continued to share a screenshot of it, meaning its claims continued to be promulgated. The claims were inaccurate and misleading in several ways, but they did allude (whether knowingly or not) to a flaw in some substance-testing field kits that have caused innocuous substances to incorrectly test positive for drugs such as methamphetamines. Experts told us that a false positive of this kind could, in principle, be produced in certain tests of a sample of Red Bull or other energy drinks, or a urine sample taken from a person who had consumed the beverages. However, we found no evidence of an actual pattern of such false positive test results. The first point to clarify is that neither Red Bull nor Bang nor any other energy drink contains methamphetamine, buprenorphine (often sold as suboxone), oxycodone (often sold as OxyContin), or MDMA (commonly known as ecstasy or X). What the meme alluded to (whether knowingly or unknowingly) was the phenomenon of false positives, in which a drug test incorrectly indicates the presence of a substance that is not present, either in a biological specimen (usually urine and blood) or a sample of the substance in question. The ingredients of both Red Bull and Bang can be found listed here. Despite Rider Freese’s claim that the energy-drink samples tested positive for various drugs, it’s not clear that the urine test cup in the second photograph illustrates any such positive tests. The test strips on urine screen-test cups, such as the one shown in the photograph, invariably indicate a negative result where two horizontal red bars are visible. The only clearly visible test strips in Rider Freese’s photograph show horizontal, double red lines, suggesting negative results for unidentified substances. The second misleading feature of the meme is that Rider Freese said she used a urine screen test to screen for methamphetamine, buprenorphine, and oxycodone in a sample of Red Bull. This makes little sense, because that kind of test is used to screen for illicit substances in a person’s urine, not in a beverage. Testing substances, rather than biological specimens, is done via a “presumptive substance test.” The typical use of such a test would be where police found a powder in someone’s car, which they suspected might be a prohibited substance like cocaine or heroin, so they either send a sample of the substance for laboratory testing, or conduct a field test themselves. Typically, law-enforcement agents use a type of substance testing called colorimetric testing, which involves adding a small sample of the questionable substance to a liquid solution, and inducing particular chemical reactions that cause specific changes in the color of the solution. The presence or absence of those color changes indicates the possible presence or absence of the substance being tested. The following is a helpful and relatively straightforward video guide to presumptive colorimetric drug field tests, produced by Florida International University’s (FIU) National Forensic Science Technology Center: These field tests are imperfect and can sometimes produce false positives. However, the preliminary or “presumptive” result they produce is typically enough to give a law-enforcement agent probable cause to make an arrest. After that, samples are typically sent to a laboratory for “confirmatory” testing, which either confirms the initial result, or shows that the initial result was a false positive. Many private companies design various kinds of field-test kits and sell them to law-enforcement agencies throughout the United States. Those kits vary in their reliability, specificity, and sensitivity, and a pattern of false positives has emerged in recent years, with various innocuous household substances showing up as illicit drugs. For example, the Marijuana Policy Project has documented cases in which chocolate tested positive for hashish, flour tested positive for cocaine, and soap tested positive for gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), which is used recreationally and as a date rape drug. In 2017, Georgia woman Dasha Fincher was arrested and imprisoned for three months, awaiting confirmatory test results, after police performed a field test on a substance that produced a false positive for methamphetamine but was in fact cotton candy. In principle, it’s possible that a sample of Red Bull, Bang, or some other energy drink could produce a false positive for one of the drugs mentioned in the July 2019 meme. However, we found no evidence of an actual pattern of Red Bull or Bang producing such false positives, which significantly undermines the claim that Red Bull “pops” for methamphetamine and Bang “pops” for ecstasy. It should also be noted once again that Rider Freese attempted to support her claims with photographic evidence of a urine test cup, which is a different test and simply would not be used to test a sample of a beverage (or any other substance) as opposed to a urine sample. Moreover, that photograph did not clearly show a positive test for any substance. It’s possible but unlikely that a urine sample provided by someone who drank a can of energy drink could test positive for methamphetamine or other drugs. Even if it did, it would only be the result of a false positive, just as in the case of substance testing. Kirk Grates, chemistry research project manager at FIU’s National Forensic Science Technology Center, told Snopes: “… There may be some analytes that are contained within these aforementioned energy drinks that could possibly cause a false positive.” Certain innocuous items have been known to cause false positives for various drugs in individuals who consume them before providing a urine sample. For example, the over-the-counter, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) ibuprofen has caused urine samples to give false positives for phencyclidine (PCP), and other NSAIDs have provided false positives for marijuana. The urine of individuals who use a Vick’s inhaler has been known to provide a false positive for methamphetamine. In principle, it’s possible that certain ingredients in Red Bull, Bang, or other energy drinks might trigger false positives for the drugs listed in Rider Freese’s meme, but we found no evidence of an actual pattern to this effect. The photographs posted by Rider Freese did not constitute evidence of a positive result for any substance, and, anyway, she claimed to have used a urine screen test cup to test a sample of Red Bull itself, rather than the urine of an individual who had consumed the drink. On the whole, we found no evidence to support the specific claims made in the meme, which was in any case expressed in confusing and misleading terms. However, the meme may have alluded (whether knowingly or unknowingly) to the possibility that the energy drinks in question, like other innocuous products, could in theory produce false-positive test results for the drugs listed in the meme, either through substance or urine testing.
|
11214
|
Blood drug trades benefit for risk
|
This article, reporting on findings of a published paper on the experimental blood-thinning drug prasugrel, is an excellent example of a thorough, intelligent and disinterested report on study findings. Specifically: It makes clear that, while the findings can be interpreted favorably, FDA approval is not guaranteed It makes clear that the benefits and risks need to be carefully compared and are controversial. It does so using both study data and commentary from a number of knowledable experts. In each case the relationship of the source to the study, both professional and financial, is made clear. The article places the controverial findings in the context of market competition, which is the proper backdrop for a study of what is essentially a copycat drug. It’s worth noting that this excellent five-star story was reported in fewer than 1,000 words. It was done by a medium-market newspaper, with a reporter filing under deadline on the road. It’s also worth noting that this same newspaper announced 60 staff cuts this week. We hope it doesn’t affect future health care news coverage.
|
true
|
"The article includes price information for the drug’s likely competitor, Plavix–about $4 per day, a significant cost for a drug that is taken daily, perhaps for a lifetime. The article correctly indicates that the price of Plavix is likely to come down when it goes generic in four years. The article properly includes speculation that the pricing of prasugrel may be a key factor in its adoption, should it be approved. The reporter includes considerable data about several key clinical endpoints of both benefits and harms, in two cases using both absolute numbers of patients and percentage increase or descrease. The reporter gets extra points for including ""number needed to treat""–the number of people who would have clinically significant outcomes for each 1,000 treated with the drug. The story is built around the question of the drugs’ risks vs. benefits. Data about harms are mentioned early and often, and described in detail. A direct comparision of the fatal bleeding rates for the two drugs would have been additionally useful. The New England Journal of Medicine article is based on results of a Phase III trial that appears to meet all the important criteria for significance: the study is prospective, the study group is large, the patients were randomized, the treatments double-blinded, the clinical endpoints signficant. While there is no placebo group, this was likely decided for ethical reasons, so all patients in the study would receive at least current best-practice treatment. The article assigns proper crediblity to the study, which to appear in NEJM has received rigorous peer review. The article does nothing to exaggerate the risk of death or the consequences of heart attacks, strokes or cardiovascular disease deaths. It allows the outcome figures to speak for themselves. The article quotes five experts in cardiology from different institutions, providing greater balance and context than just one or two experts would. In each case the relationship of the souce to the study and/or its funders is revealed. The considerable conflicts of interest of the investigators are made very clear. The article makes clear that prasugrel is being developed as an option to Plavix, and that Plavix with aspirin is currently best-practice treatment. The article makes clear that the drug prasugrel is not FDA approved and that its approval is uncertain. The article makes clear that this is a drug that is very similar to Plavix, and that it may be marginally more effective. No claims of novelty are made. The companies’ joint press release, an enthusiastic announcement about the drug’s benefits, bears little resemblance to this story."
|
|
26131
|
Wearing masks for the coronavirus “decreases oxygen intake, increases toxin inhalation, shuts down immune system, increases virus risk, scientifically inaccurate, effectiveness not studied.”
|
Studies show masks can curb spread of the novel coronavirus. Experts say the face coverings do not cause health problems.
|
false
|
Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"A Facebook user declared, ""I’m starting a public movement called TAKE IT OFF,"" in attempting a six-point takedown of facial coverings and how effective they are in fighting COVID-19. The post features an image labeled ""Face Mask Safety — Know The Facts Before You Wear One."" The image makes this six-part claim about masks: ""Decreases oxygen intake; increases toxin inhalation; shuts down immune system; increases virus risk; scientifically inaccurate; effectiveness not studied."" The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) ""Well, that all sounds like a lot of dangerous nonsense,"" Texas A&M University-Texarkana virologist Ben Neuman told PolitiFact. As we’ve reported, facial coverings are not in themselves totally effective in fighting the coronavirus and there is a need for more study. But health officials largely agree that wearing any kind of face mask, coupled with social distancing and frequent hand-washing, is more protective than going unmasked. While the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doesn’t recommend masks for children under age 2 or for people who are unconscious or have breathing conditions, it generally recommends wearing masks in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain, such as grocery stores, pharmacies, and gas stations. As the CDC puts it: ""Your cloth face covering may protect them. Their cloth face covering may protect you."" Here’s a rundown on why each part of the post is wrong. ""Breathing through a mask decreases the amount of oxygen we need to live & be healthy, increases blood acidity & makes breathing difficult."" A mask does not reduce oxygen intake nor does it make blood more acidic, virologist Angela Rasmussen, a research scientist at Columbia University, told PolitiFact. Neuman said a mask ""will add some resistance to the breathing process, meaning it may feel like it takes a bit more work to take a breath, but it won't materially change the makeup of air that comes through the mask."" ""Toxins that we normally exhale as we breathe become trapped in the mask and re-inhaled into the lungs, increasing symptoms."" Repeated, long-term usage of the same unwashed mask could potentially lead to bacteria accumulating on the inside, which is why paper masks shouldn’t be reused and cloth masks should be laundered with soap between uses, Rasmussen said. ""However, there’s no reason to worry about ‘toxins,’’ she said. ""The only potentially toxic molecule that you routinely exhale is carbon dioxide, which is only toxic when it displaces oxygen,"" and it easily passes through the mask. Neuman also said carbon dioxide would not be trapped by a mask. ""Decreases oxygen intake, increases carbon dioxide & toxin intake putting body under stress, releasing cortisol & shutting down immune processes."" Not true. ""There’s no decreased oxygen or increased carbon dioxide from normal breathing while wearing a mask, and no evidence that masks have any effect on the immune system or immune function,"" Rasmussen said. Inhaling high levels of carbon dioxide is dangerous, but this is very unlikely to happen from wearing a cloth face mask — especially if you’re only wearing it for short periods of time, according to the Cleveland Clinic. There are studies that show that medical N95 respirators may result in increased carbon dioxide, which can lead to headaches and fatigue. This is one reason they're not recommended for home use,"" University of San Francisco research scientist Jeremy Howard told PolitiFact. ""Cloth masks, on the other hand, have excellent breathability and the same problems have not been demonstrated with them."" A USA Today fact-check said a similar claim, that masks weaken the immune system, was . ""Encourages triggering & infection from dormant retro viruses already in the body, taking advantage of a weakened immune system due to mask wearing."" Masks can be effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19 because COVID-19 spreads mainly from person to person through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes, or talks, according to the CDC. The droplets can land in the mouths or noses of people who are nearby or possibly be inhaled into the lungs. ""It’s absurd to think that masks would ‘trigger’ their activation and cause disease, especially since mask-wearing has no effect on immune system function,"" Rasmussen said. ""Virologists measure COVID-19 to be 80-140nm in size making the weave of material masks to be the equivalent of a chain-link fence to a mosquito."" (NM is a reference to the nanometer measure of diameter.) Rasmussen said virus particles are much smaller than the weave of masks, but infected people do not shed individual virus particles into the environment — they shed them in respiratory droplets. Masks prevent most, but not all, of these respiratory droplets from being dispersed into the environment. ""In addition, although we don’t know how many virus particles it takes to cause an infection, it’s almost certainly more than one. So you have to be exposed to enough respiratory droplets containing enough virus to establish an infection to actually become infected. Reducing droplet dispersal by wearing a mask greatly reduces this exposure risk, though it does not eliminate it completely,"" she said. Neuman said there is a growing number of research papers that demonstrate the effectiveness of surgical face masks in preventing transmission of a range of viruses, or demonstrate the effectiveness of face covering in limiting the novel coronavirus spread. ""Absolutely no peer-reviewed studies have been carried out of mask effectiveness within a social environment to control, prevent or eliminate the spread of disease."" Both papers cited by Neuman are published and peer reviewed. One was published in April by the journal Nature and the other on June 11 by the National Academy of Sciences. In terms of being ""within a social environment,"" 246 individuals provided exhaled breath samples in the first study, roughly half with masks and half without; the second study was a review of coronavirus mitigation efforts undertaken in Wuhan, China, Italy and New York City. Said Rasmussen: ""It’s true that to my knowledge masks have not been subjected to a large, randomized clinical trial, but a growing body of evidence does suggest that masks substantially reduce droplet spread."" A Facebook post claimed that wearing masks for the coronavirus ""decreases oxygen intake, increases toxin inhalation, shuts down immune system, increases virus risk, scientifically inaccurate, effectiveness not studied."" There is no evidence to back any of the six parts of the claim."
|
6801
|
Wisconsin man accused in illegal THC vaping cartridge scheme.
|
A Wisconsin man is accused of running a 10-man operation that manufactured thousands of counterfeit vaping cartridges loaded with THC oil every day for almost two years, authorities said.
|
true
|
Wisconsin, Health, General News, Arrests, Business, Kenosha, U.S. News
|
Kenosha County prosecutors said 20-year-old Tyler Huffhines had employees make professionally packaged cartridges. Authorities said the employees filled about 3,000 to 5,000 cartridges per day and were sold for $16 each. “Based on how everything was set up, this was a very high-tech operation that was running for some time,” Andrew Burgoyne, Kenosha County assistant district attorney, said during a Monday court hearing to set bond. Police said the business started in January 2018. Police arrested Huffhines on Thursday. He was being held on a $500,000 cash bond while he awaits charges to be filed. He was due in court Friday. His attorney, Mark Richards, did not respond to an email or a phone message left at his office. The Drug Enforcement Administration, the Kenosha Drug Operations Group and other agencies executed search warrants at two homes. The Kenosha News reports that authorities seized 188 pounds (85 kilograms) of marijuana, THC oil, eight firearms, and about $20,000 in cash. The arrest comes as health officials investigate 450 possible cases in 33 states where vaping was linked to a severe lung disease. Kansas reported its first death tied to the outbreak on Friday. Nationwide, as many as six people have died. Health officials have warned against buying counterfeit vaping cartridges. It’s unknown if the Wisconsin operation has been linked to any illnesses. No single vaping device, liquid or ingredient has been tied to all the illnesses. But recent attention has been focused on devices, liquids, refill pods and cartridges that are not sold in stores. New York state has focused its investigation on an ingredient called Vitamin E acetate, which has been used to thicken marijuana vape juice but is considered dangerous if heated and inhaled. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is also investigating Vitamin E acetate, but officials said they’re looking at several other ingredients as well. Last week, the CDC warned against buying vaping products off the street because the substances in them may be unknown. The agency also warned against modifying vaping products or adding any substances not intended by the manufacturer. This isn’t the first time Huffhines has made it into the headlines. Last year, the Kenosha News wrote a feature story about him when he was an 18-year-old Central High School student, selling athletic shoes online. The story’s headline was “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”
|
10789
|
Yoga shows some benefit for diabetes
|
The story discussed the impact of yoga on levels of ‘oxidative stress’. The story never clarified that the link between oxidative stress and disease is tenuous at best. Even the weight loss was not really quantified; what does “a handful of pounds” really mean? There are many individuals managing type II diabetes with an interest in the most effective means of management. But they certainly need a lot more detailed information and context than what was provided in this story.
|
false
|
Diabetes,Reuters Health
|
There was no discussion of class costs. How much do yoga classes – several times a week – cost? The story provided much discussion about the impact of the yoga on levels of ‘oxidative stress’. Besides the fact that the link between oxidative stress and disease is tenuous at best, the story reported that those in the yoga group had a 20% reduction in oxidative stress when the study results showed that they had a 20% reduction in one marker of oxidative stress but at the same time showed reductions in two pathways form managing oxidative stress – which could be interpreted as increasing their risk from oxidative stress. Even the weight loss was not really quantified (the writer mentioned “a handful of pounds” lost). This does not actually address what is known about any potential harms of the type of yoga reported on. The story could have mentioned that the study mentioned that there were no adverse events reported during the 3 months of yoga classes but that about 5% of those assigned to the yoga classes dropped out and were not included in the final analysis. The story did not provide sufficient details for readers to evaluate how the study results might apply to them. And the story included only hand picked pieces of information from the study. While it is potentially exciting that the change in body weight between the groups was statistically different at 3 months, the magnitude of that change is not clinically significant. The story also didn’t explain what measures of oxidative stress were used. The story did not engage in overt disease-mongering. The story did not quote any independent sources. There was no discusion about how adding other lifestyle changes in addition to the other management strategies in place affect the health of those with type II diabetes. For example, prior studies have examined the benefits of regular light exercise. A discussion of exercise alternatives and their relative benefits would have helped the readers judge the benefit of yoga in context. The story indicated that gentle yoga classes might be found in hospitals and local community settings. The story didn’t give any context about prior reports examining the potential for people with type II diabetes to benefit from participation in regular series of yoga classes. We can’t be sure of the extent to which the story relied on a news release. We do know that it quoted only a single source – the lead researcher.
|
9131
|
New study from KKI shows feasibility of acupuncture in young children with ASD
|
This news release focusing on a small study of acupuncture treatment adherence published in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine does a good job framing what the study can and cannot tell us — for the most part. However, it strays a bit when it says the study should give parents of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) a “hopeful sign” and states it measured the effects of the intervention on the children’s behavior, ability to pay attention, sleep, and parenting stress — but shared none of these findings. There is no mention of quantified benefits, cost or potential harms. According to the release, the study was designed to determine whether young children, ages 3 to 10, with autism were able to complete an eight-week regiment of acupuncture treatment. The key finding appears to be the fact that all 10 children completed the therapy, which was performed twice weekly over eight weeks. The release would have been improved had it included more details and some data from the study on those aspects of the things that were measured — the children’s behavior, attentiveness and sleep. Or, since this was such a tiny study whose results are likely to be unreliable anyway, perhaps those aspects should have been left out of the release entirely. According to the CDC, approximately 1 in 68 children in the U.S. has ASD. In other words, a lot of people are affected. People who have ASD can present a wide variety of behaviors. ASD’s impact on an individual’s quality of life also varies, depending on each person’s situation and the behaviors he or she exhibits. This study looked specifically at parents of young kids, between the ages of 3 and 10. Many, if not most, parents are willing to do whatever they can to help their kids. And if they think that acupuncture might help their child with ASD, they may seek it out. This release says, in its headline, that the relevant study “shows feasibility of acupuncture in young children with ASD.” We wish the release had also told readers why parents and caregivers should consider acupuncture for children with ASD in the first place. The study was not intended to evaluate acupuncture as a therapy and the release could have spelled that out more plainly. The study was intended to determine the feasibility of using acupuncture on a population that requires a lot of time and effort to undergo therapy. The release might be helpful for other researchers but much less so for parents or the general public.
|
false
|
acupuncture,autism,Inc.,Mary Ann Liebert
|
Costs are not mentioned at all. The costs of acupuncture treatment can vary widely, but most people can expect to pay at least $60 per session (and often considerably more). Given that this study involved 16 sessions, and that not all health plans would cover acupuncture to treat ASD, the expense could be considerable. According to the news release, the researchers “identified the most positive outcome of the study as the high compliance rate, with all parents of the children ages 3-10 completing the intervention.” While it is good to know that the patients were able to complete the study, most readers probably wanted to know if the patients benefited from the treatment in any way. The release notes that “researchers measured the effects of the intervention on factors such as the children’s behavior, ability to pay attention, sleep, and aspects of parenting stress” — but doesn’t tell readers whether any of those things changed as a result of treatment. The closest the release comes to quantifying a benefit is when it states that “most parents reported that the intervention had a positive impact on their relationship with their child.” It’s not clear what they mean by “most parents,” how much their relationship improved, how it improved, or why it may have improved. In fairness, the release states that the goal of the study was “to determine if young children with autism spectrum disorder and their parents would tolerate and adhere to an office- and home-based acupuncture/acupressure intervention.” However, the release also says “While a small study, the tolerance and adherence with acupressure this pilot [sic] are both hopeful signs for families of those in their care with autism spectrum disorder.” Why should families be hopeful? Who knows? Given that there had been more than a dozen clinical trials involving acupuncture and children with ASD as of 2012, it’s not clear what questions this new study has answered. Potential harms aren’t discussed at all. To be clear, the risks here are low. As the Mayo Clinic notes, “The risks of acupuncture are low if you have a competent, certified acupuncture practitioner.” But, then again, the release also doesn’t mention the importance of finding a certified acupuncture practitioner. And even with certified practitioners, there are risks, from soreness and bruising to infections. In addition, individuals with bleeding disorders are not good candidates for acupuncture. The release offers very little information about the study. For example, while the release refers to it as a “pilot feasibility study,” it doesn’t even tell readers how many patients participated (there were 10). No disease mongering here. The release doesn’t mention who funded the work. In this case, the work was funded by Autism Speaks. Many people have strong feelings about Autism Speaks, one way or the other, making the funding organization particularly worth mentioning here. It also doesn’t mention any conflicts of interest but there don’t appear to be any. The release doesn’t describe potential benefits for ASD patients, so it’s not clear what alternatives are relevant in this context. Alternatives to what? Ergo, we’ll rank this as not applicable. The release doesn’t address availability at all. While many (or most) readers are aware that acupuncture therapy exists, they may be less familiar with how widely available it is. Readers may not be aware of pediatric acupuncture at all, much less pediatric acupuncture for children with ASD. Is there a special certification for pediatric acupuncture therapy? What about for pediatric ASD acupuncture therapy? The release doesn’t tell us. Acupuncture research related to ASD is not new. Here’s a systematic review of the relevant literature from 2011, and another from the same year. The Cochrane review, among the collection of studies included in the reviews above, concludes that: “We need high quality trials of larger size and longer follow-up as the evidence base at present has many limitations.” But the study described here tackles the subject in a new way, that of the feasibility of being able to complete therapy. Prior studies haven’t shown that it’s feasible for families to commit to longer term acupuncture therapy. The release doesn’t rely on sensational language. We do caution that when a news release includes a quote that says a study offers “hopeful signs for families,” it should be obvious why those families should be hopeful. This release doesn’t do that, because it is not clear how or whether these patients were better off at the end of the study than they were at the beginning. It’s not as egregious as releases (or news stories) that claim amazing results based on limited data, but no release (or news story) should leave readers no wiser at the end than they were at the beginning.
|
3718
|
Colombian rebel-turned-candidate OK after heart surgery.
|
Doctors in Colombia have successfully performed heart surgery on Rodrigo Londono, the leader of the country’s once-largest guerrilla group who is running for president.
|
true
|
Bogota, Rodrigo Londono, Elections, Latin America, Health, Colombia, Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, Presidential elections
|
A statement from Bogota’s Shaio Clinic says Londono is in “satisfactory” condition following Wednesday’s coronary bypass surgery. The ex-rebel was also diagnosed with chronic lung disease and a clogged artery. Londono is more commonly known by his nom-de-guerre — Timochenko. After the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia disarmed following a peace agreement with Colombia’s government, Londono announced his presidential candidacy. But his campaign has been marred by protests and complicated by his own health problems, including a stroke last year. Analysts expect Timochenko to come in last in the presidential election. But his party will be awarded 10 congressional seats under the 2016 peace deal.
|
40952
|
Covid-19 clots the blood causing thrombosis, stopping blood flow and oxygenating the heart and lungs.
|
Severe Covid-19 can cause blood clotting problems and issues like this have been seen in Covid-19 patients, but this is not the only thing that can be fatal in patients.
|
false
|
online
|
Italy has concluded Covid-19 is not a virus, and people are actually dying of amplified global 5G electromagnetic radiation poisoning. Italy disobeyed world health law from the WHO saying not to carry out autopsies on Covid-19 patients. The WHO never said autopsies couldn’t take place. Italy has found that Covid-19 is actually disseminated intravascular coagulation (thrombosis). The way to cure this is antibiotics, anti-inflammatories and anticoagulants. Antibiotics do not directly treat Covid-19, which is caused by a virus. The anti-inflammatory ibuprofen is being trialled for use against Covid-19 and an anticoagulant has been used in some Covid-19 cases. Aspirin is not a specific cure. Covid-19 is not a virus, but a bacterium being amplified by 5G which causes inflammation and hypoxia. Covid-19 patients can get secondary infections from bacteria. Hypoxia and types of inflammation can be symptoms of Covid-19. There’s no proof Covid-19 is in any way related to 5G. People with Covid-19 should take aspirin 100mg and Apronax or paracetamol. Trials into both of these drugs’ effectiveness in treating Covid-19 are ongoing, but haven’t concluded yet. Paracetamol can ease symptoms but isn’t a specific treatment. Covid-19 clots the blood causing thrombosis, stopping blood flow and oxygenating the heart and lungs. Severe Covid-19 can cause blood clotting problems and issues like this have been seen in Covid-19 patients, but this is not the only thing that can be fatal in patients. In a day, Italy sent home more than 14,000 patients after treating them with Aspirin and Apronax. The Italian Medicines Agency doesn’t mention aspirin or apronax in its list drugs used to treat Covid-19 outside of clinical trials. And there’s no record of a day when 14,000 people were sent home from hospital in Italy. There is an order to incinerate or immediately bury Covid-19 bodies without autopsy. There is no such order. Claim 1 of 10
|
19716
|
"George Flinn Says his ""patents in ultrasound have revolutionized modern medicine."
|
Memphis candidate George Flinn claims his patents “revolutionized modern medicine”
|
false
|
Tennessee, Health Care, George Flinn,
|
"Dr. George Flinn is well known in Memphis as a radiologist, radio station magnate and a big-spending, self-funding Republican political candidate who is running for Congress again this summer, this time in Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District. Fewer know him as an inventor with patents on file in Washington, but that’s what he claims in a commercial he’s airing as he seeks to defeat 2010 GOP nominee Charlotte Bergmann. The winner in Thursday’s Aug. 2 primary will face the winner of the primary between incumbent U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen and school board member Tomeka Hart. The commercial boldly claimsthat Flinn is ""a doctor whose patents in ultrasound have revolutionized modern medicine, whose innovations have saved lives throughout the world."" Based on the scant evidence we were able to discover and our lack of deep knowledge in the history of ultrasound technology, we are narrowing the focus to whether Flinn does indeed hold patents in ultrasound technology that might have revolutionized modern medicine. The only Flinn patent we were able to find was awarded on July 3, 2007, and it is not for ultrasound technology. Flinn and two others received patent No. 7,238,370 B2 for their invention of a substance made of pumice and an aqueous surfactant (like a detergent) that experiments showed increased skin thickness and gave it a ""more youthful appearance."" It was also tested on shaved guinea pigs. Its claim is that it prevents and treats ""photoaging"" of skin. Whatever the usefulness of this substance, we’re comfortable concluding it has not revolutionized modern medicine. It took Flinn’s campaign more than a week to provide information about other innovations the campaign believes backs up Flinn’s claims. OnThursday evening, July 26, campaign manager Kristi Stanley sent along three acknowledgement letters from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office confirming receipt of applications for patents. Not patents, but applications for patents. The letters state that the information Flinn provided (which was not provided to PolitiFact) ""will be examined for patentability."" The letters also extend Flinn the right under federal law to seek a patent in foreign countries. Nothing that Stanley provided indicates Flinn sought foreign patents. She did note that Flinn also was involved in obtaining patents while employed by the National Institutes of Health that are held, not by him, but by that government agency. So let’s look at the three patent applications, according to the initial letters from the Patent and Trademark Office dated in May and June of this year. One (Customer No. 062439) is for ""Chemotherapy Treatment Using Microspheres to Deliver a High Concentration of a Drug to a Tumor."" The letter provided by Stanley provides no other information about the patent itself, just details about Flinn’s rights. It does not appear to deal with ultrasound. The second is titled ""Process for an Improved Galactogram Procedure,"" with, again, no supporting description or detail. The third: ""Color Encoding Method for Ultrasound Images."" Again: No detail. We could explain that galactography is the examination of the breast by mammography and, specifically, examination of the milk ducts, or that microspheres are particles smaller than one millimeter in diameter. But it seems we can make short work of this analysis by saying that, although Flinn claims to deserve the patent for them, these are not patented inventions and he only sought them after he was deeply involved in this congressional campaign. If the technologies are being employed in medicine to demonstrative salubrious effect, it isn’t because they are his patents because the patents have not yet been granted. When contacted initially, the campaign indicated it was eager for us to examine the claim but did not provide the kind of supportive documentation that would establish its veracity. Instead, the documentation establishes the application for patents. But Flinn’s commercials flatly claim he his patents in ultrasound technology revolutionized modern medicine, when the record shows he he only applied for patents several months after this congressional campaign was under way. That kind of deliberate deception of voters earns this claim a"
|
3675
|
Kansas lawmakers want stronger law on mental health coverage.
|
A bipartisan group of Kansas lawmakers is proposing a measure aimed at making sure that health insurance companies don’t skirt a state law for ensuring that they cover mental health services.
|
true
|
Legislature, Mental health, Lawrence, Health, General News, Kansas, Topeka, Tom Holland
|
Democratic state Sen. Tom Holland of Baldwin City and Republican Sen. Molly Baumgardner of Louisburg outlined the details of their bill during a recent Statehouse news conference, the Lawrence Journal-World reports. They’ve already drafted it and filed it so that it will be introduced when lawmakers open their next annual session Jan. 13. The measure would strengthen a state law that requires health insurance companies to cover mental health services in line with how they cover medical care. Holland and Baumgardner say people suffering from mental illness and their families have discovered that insurers can throw up obstacles to getting services, such as requiring prior approval or not authorizing coverage unless someone has attempted suicide first. The bill would rename the state’s mental health coverage parity law after Kristi L. Bennett, a Lenexa woman who overdosed on antidepressant medication eight months ago, family members said, after being told that her outpatient treatment wouldn’t be covered unless she had tried to commit suicide first. “Imagine if an individual — family member, neighbor, or co-worker — with coronary artery blockage was told by their insurance company that they wouldn’t cover stent surgery until they first suffered a heart attack. That seems irrational,” Baumgardner said. “But that is what’s happening with individuals facing a mental health crisis.” This bill would require insurance plans to provide coverage without requiring prior authorization or a review by the insurance company when a health care provider deems treatment medically necessary. Four other Democratic senators have joined Holland and Baumgardner as sponsors. The measure also would require that when no in-network treatment facility is immediately available, the insurer must provide exceptions to ensure coverage within 24 hours. “It is imperative that Kansas lawmakers begin knocking down those barriers that would deny life-saving services and treatments to those Kansans desperately crying out for help in a time of crisis,” Holland said.
|
35062
|
The Trump administration fired the U.S. pandemic response team in 2018 to cut costs.
|
On Feb. 24, 2020, the Trump administration requested $2.5 billion to address the coronavirus outbreak, an outlay critics asserted might not have been necessary if the previous program cuts had not taken place. Fortune reported of the issue that:
|
true
|
Politics, COVID-19
|
Amid warnings from public health officials that a 2020 outbreak of a new coronavirus could soon become a pandemic involving the U.S., alarmed readers asked Snopes to verify a rumor that U.S. President Donald Trump had “fired the entire pandemic response team two years ago and then didn’t replace them.” The claim came from a series of tweets posted by Judd Legum, who runs Popular Information, a newsletter he describes as being about “politics and power.” Legum’s commentary was representative of sharp criticism from Democratic legislators (and some Republicans) that the Trump administration had ill-prepared the country for a pandemic even as one was looming on the horizon. Legum outlined a series of cost-cutting decisions made by the Trump administration in preceding years that had gutted the nation’s infectious disease defense infrastructure. The “pandemic response team” firing claim referred to news accounts from Spring 2018 reporting that White House officials tasked with directing a national response to a pandemic had been ousted. Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer abruptly departed from his post leading the global health security team on the National Security Council in May 2018 amid a reorganization of the council by then-National Security Advisor John Bolton, and Ziemer’s team was disbanded. Tom Bossert, whom the Washington Post reported “had called for a comprehensive biodefense strategy against pandemics and biological attacks,” had been fired one month prior. It’s thus true that the Trump administration axed the executive branch team responsible for coordinating a response to a pandemic and did not replace it, eliminating Ziemer’s position and reassigning others, although Bolton was the executive at the top of the National Security Council chain of command at the time. Legum stated in a follow-up tweet that “Trump also cut funding for the CDC, forcing the CDC to cancel its efforts to help countries prevent infectious-disease threats from becoming epidemics in 39 of 49 countries in 2018. Among the countries abandoned? China.” That was partly true, according to 2018 news reports stating that funding for the CDC’s global disease outbreak prevention efforts had been reduced by 80%, including funding for the agency’s efforts in China. But that was the result of the anticipated depletion of previously allotted funding, not a direct cut by the Trump administration. And as the CDC told FactCheck.org, the cuts were ultimately avoided because Congress provided other funding.
|
4868
|
Former NFL player Ryan Leaf gives speech on substance abuse.
|
Former NFL quarterback Ryan Leaf returned to his Montana hometown and delivered a speech about dealing with mental health and substance abuse, a report said.
|
true
|
College football, Ryan Leaf, Health, NFL, Montana, Great Falls, Professional football, Football, Mental health
|
Leaf appeared Thursday at C.M. Russell High School in Great Falls for the first time in more than 20 years, The Great Falls Tribune reported Friday. In a speech titled, “Lying to Myself,” Leaf discussed his football career as a star at Washington State University, Heisman Trophy finalist and second-overall pick in the 1998 NFL draft by the San Diego Chargers. Four years later he was out of professional football and became addicted to prescription pills, which led to burglary and drug charges and a prison sentence, Leaf said. He recalled attending a boxing match in Las Vegas in the time shortly after hanging it up in the NFL and being booed loudly by the crowd as the announcer recognized celebrities in attendance. At an after-fight party, he took a Vicodin, and for the next eight years, kept trying to chase that high, he said. “I was a drug addict long before I ever took a drug,” Leaf said. “I didn’t know any better.” Leaf’s goal in telling his story was to connect with the audience and “try to give back to a community that I took so much from and victimized,” he said. He also spoke about the need for more discussion of mental health issues in Montana. “There is a mental health epidemic in this state,” Leaf said. “We need to come together as a community.” He does not practice a specific religion but spoke of spirituality, community and accountability. Leaf found his calling working as an assistant to a substance abuse counselor in prison, he said. He is now a program ambassador for Transcend Recovery, an addiction treatment center in Los Angeles where he worked after getting sober. As a pro athlete, “I was making $5 million a year and was miserable,” Leaf said. “Now, I was making $15 an hour and felt valued.” ___ Information from: Great Falls Tribune, http://www.greatfallstribune.com
|
12046
|
"Some states hit hardest by opioid deaths ""have more opioid prescriptions than residents."
|
"Schneiderman said some states hit hardest by the opioid crisis ""have more opioid prescriptions than residents."" West Virginia and Kentucky — two states with the highest rates of opioid deaths in the country — reported more opioid prescriptions than their respective population, according to CDC data. Six other states had more prescriptions than residents, too."
|
true
|
Drugs, New York, Eric Schneiderman,
|
"New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said prescribers in some states have been so lenient that they have given out more prescriptions than there are residents in those states. With 33,091 opioid-related deaths in 2015 across the country, the ease in getting prescriptions for the painkillers has become an issue attracting attention from state officials. ""Some states hardest hit by the crisis have more opioid prescriptions than residents,"" Schneiderman said at a press conference. Twenty-three states have a higher rate of opioid overdose deaths than New York state. But is Schneiderman right that some of those states have more opioid prescriptions than residents? National numbers Eight states reported more opioid prescriptions than residents in 2015, according to the Centers for Disease Control. The states are Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, West Virginia, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Louisiana. Alabama recorded the highest rate, with 125 opioid prescriptions for every 100 people in the state. Even so, Alabama had a lower rate of opioid-related deaths than most other states, according to Centers for Disease Control data analyzed by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a health policy research organization. Two other top prescribing states — West Virginia and Kentucky — had some of the highest rates of opioid related deaths. West Virginia had the highest rate in the country, with 36 opioid deaths for every 100,000 residents. The state reported 111 opioid prescriptions for every 100 residents. Kentucky, ranking sixth with 21 deaths for every 100,000 residents, had 102 prescriptions for every 100 residents in 2015. West Virginia’s rate decreased in 2016 to 96 prescriptions for every 100 people. Kentucky’s went down to 97 opioid prescriptions for every 100 people. Alabama remained highest with 121 prescriptions for every 100 people. New York state numbers New York state had 42 prescriptions for every 100 residents in 2016. There were no counties in New York with more opioid prescriptions than residents, according to the state Department of Health. Montgomery County had the highest rate in the state with 82 opioid prescriptions for every 100 residents in the county. The county had two opioid deaths for one of the lowest opioid-related death rates in the state. Our ruling Schneiderman said some states hit hardest by the opioid crisis ""have more opioid prescriptions than residents."" West Virginia and Kentucky — two states with the highest rates of opioid deaths in the country — reported more opioid prescriptions than their respective population, according to CDC data. Six other states had more prescriptions than residents, too."
|
2079
|
The chubby girl from Ipanema? Brazil puts on weight.
|
Brazilians’ waistlines are bulging, belying the country’s image as a place of buff sun worshipers and lithe soccer players.
|
true
|
Health News
|
A woman sits on Arpoador beach in Rio de Janeiro August 27, 2010. REUTERS/Sergio Moraes Nearly half of adult Brazilians are overweight and about 15 percent are obese, Brazil’s IBGE social statistics agency said on Friday, citing the results of a national study carried out with the Health Ministry. Among 20- to 24-year-olds, the percentage of men who were overweight jumped to 50.1 percent from 18.5 percent in a survey carried out in 1974, while the percentage of overweight women rose to 48 percent from 28.7 percent. “We are in a situation of absolute red alert,” Brazil’s Health Minister Jose Gomes Temporao told reporters in beach-side Rio de Janeiro. “If we stay at this pace, in 10 years we will have two-third of the population overweight (or obese), as has happened in the United States.” Incomes in Brazil have been rising rapidly in recent years as Latin America’s largest country enjoys a prolonged economic boom that has lifted millions out of poverty. The IBGE did not give reasons for Brazilians’ expanding girth but said the biggest incidence was found among higher-income men, older people and in the wealthier south of the country. “The excess of weight and obesity is a growing phenomenon that is happening everywhere (in Brazil),” said Marcia Quintsler, the IBGE’s coordinator. “This information on obesity shows that clearly.” One in three Brazilian children between 5 and 9 years old was above the weight recommended by the World Health Organization, it said. The IBGE said 49 percent of adult Brazilians were overweight in 2009, based on the body mass index that is calculated from a person’s height and weight. That is more than the third of Americans defined as overweight. The Brazilian obesity rate of 15 percent is still well below the U.S. rate of nearly 27 percent.
|
38268
|
Charles Manson has been granted parole and will be released from prison.
|
Charles Manson Granted Parole, Will Be Released from Prison
|
false
|
Animals, Crime / Police
|
An old hoax about Charles Manson being paroled that was started by a known fake news website in June 2014 resurfaced in June 2017. The rumor stems from a 2014 report that appeared at Empire News under the headline, “Charles Manson Granted Parole,” that reports Manson had been granted parole due to prison overcrowding: The ruling, issued by three judges overseeing the state’s efforts to ease the overcrowding, gives California until February 2016 to achieve their goals. But, the judges said, the state has to make elderly inmates and those with serious illnesses eligible for parole immediately. Manson, who was denied parole in April of 2012 and wasn’t scheduled for another parole hearing until 2027, was re-evaluated due to his age and health and the Parole Board recommended his parole. The site’s disclaimer, however, states that it’s content is “intended for entertainment purposes only,” meaning that its reporting should not be taken as fact. It’s not clear why Charles Manson parole rumors resurfaced in June 2017. Manson was denied parole by the California Department of Corrections in 2012 and his next parole hearing was scheduled for 2027, when Manson would be 92 years old. In January 2017, however, Manson was transferred to a hospital for treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding, and Manson’s condition was described as “serious” by family members. He had been transferred back to prison by the time the rumor resurfaced. It’s possible that parole decisions regarding the release of other former Manson Family members could have contributed to Charles Manson parole rumors resurfacing. A panel recommended the release of a former Manson Family member named Bruce Davis who murdered musician Gary Hinman and stuntman Donald “Shorty” Shea in 1969. The final decision, however, will rest with California Gov. Jerry Brown, who had about five months to make a decision. the Los Angeles Times reports. Meanwhile, an appeals panel postponed a decision on wether or not to recommend the release of former Manson Family member Patricia Krenwinkel in December 2016, Fox News reports. Krenwinkel was present at the 1969 murder of Sharon Tate and four others. But regardless of developments with other members of the Manson Family, all Charles Manson parole rumors should be considered “fiction” until at least 2027, when his next hearing is scheduled. Comments
|
18569
|
Only three in 10 Texas doctors are currently accepting new Medicaid patients.
|
"Perry said only three in 10 Texas doctors currently accept new Medicaid patients. In a recent year, some 67 percent of Texas physicians submitted at least one Medicaid claim. More recently, 42 percent of the state’s physicians responding to a 2012 survey said they refuse all new Medicaid patients. Then again, 32 percent said they accept all new Medicaid patients and 26 percent said they limit such patients--signaling that 58 percent of physicians accept at least some new Medicaid patients. By not specifying that the cited ""three in 10"" reflects only doctors who accept all new Medicaid patients, Perry’s statement falls off target by nearly 30 percent. Still, it has en element of truth."
|
false
|
Federal Budget, Health Care, Medicaid, Public Health, State Budget, Texas, Rick Perry,
|
"Saying Medicaid is a broken system that should not be expanded in Texas, Gov. Rick Perry and the state’s U.S. senators suggested many physicians decline to serve patients insured by the state-federal program. In an April 1, 2013, press release issued in conjunction with their joint Texas Capitol press conference, Perry and Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, all Republicans, said that nationally, Medicaid expenditures surged from 1990 to 2010, outpacing its caseload. Also, their press release said: ""Only three in 10 Texas doctors are currently accepting new Medicaid patients."" Elaborating in the press conference, Perry said: ""And we fear that number may actually decrease if expansion went through."" The 3-in-10 claim, brought to our attention by analyst Anne Dunkelberg of Austin’s liberal-leaning Center for Public Policy Priorities, sounded familiar, especially after spokespeople for Perry and each senator said by email that it was based on a 2012 survey of Texas physicians by the Texas Medical Association. Preliminary results from the survey figured into one of our fact checks earlier this year. Final survey results are now compiled, Donna Kinney, the association’s lead researcher, told us by phone. Kinney said the results break out to 32 percent of Texas physicians saying they accept all new Medicaid patients and 42 percent declining all new Medicaid patients--with 26 percent limiting their new Medicaid patients. Put another way, the final results indicate that about four in 10 Texas physicians decline all new Medicaid patients while about six in 10 accept at least some new patients. ""They may accept them only in the emergency room,"" Kinney speculated. ""The limits could be anything."" Early this year, we rated the association’s claim that only 31 percent of Texas physicians accept all new Medicaid patients, compared with 67 percent in 2000. The group’s Twitter post about the figure was missing clarification that the figure came from a survey. At the time, though, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission told us that some 67 percent of the state’s physicians had accepted Medicaid at least once during a recent 12-month period. Agency spokeswoman Stephanie Goodman told us by email that 34,290 Texas physicians had claims paid by Medicaid in the fiscal year that ran through August 2011. According to the Texas Medical Board, there were nearly 51,000 practicing physicians in the state at about that time. Goodman said then that she did not have information on the share of physicians not accepting all new Medicaid patients. Brent Annear, a medical association spokesman, guided us to a March 2012 web post by the group stating that 27,917 physicians and medical residents were asked to fill out its online survey and the group fielded 1,139 responses, a 4 percent response rate. The group’s ""preliminary findings"" document says the respondents were a ""representative sample"" of all physicians. The survey reached members and non-members, Kinney told us by email. The key question lists physician reimbursement methods including private insurance, Medicare and Medicaid. ""For patients covered by the following payers,"" the question says, ""does your practice currently (1) accept all new patients, (2) limit new patients that you will accept, or (3) accept no new patients?"" According to the final results, Kinney said, 32 percent said they accept all new Medicaid patients. Some 26 percent said they limit their new Medicaid patients, and 42 percent said they decline all new Medicaid patients, compared with 32 percent in 2010. For our previous check, Annear said by email that physicians have difficulties with Medicaid’s rates and bureaucratic hurdles that delay payments. The rates decreased four times from 2000 to 2011, an association spokeswoman, Pam Udall, said by email, though the state also agreed to a 25-percent boost in funds covering certain physician services provided to children on Medicaid, as part of resolving a lawsuit. We asked Kinney to speculate on why nearly 70 percent of Texas physicians submitted at least one Medicaid claim in a recent year. She said about 60 percent of the state’s physicians--including many specialists in radiology, pathology and anesthesiology--must accept Medicaid to maintain their hospital admitting privileges. Those kinds of doctors would have responded to the survey by saying they limit new Medicaid patients, she said by phone. For a ""real-world"" take, we ran the preliminary survey result by Austin opthalmologist Michelle Berger, the 2013 president of the Travis County Medical Society, which is affiliated with the medical association. Berger said by phone that the society frequently fields inquiries from individuals newly on Medicaid seeking a doctor. Berger said she stopped accepting new Medicaid patients in her practice because related paperwork proved onerous and government payments, which have not kept up with inflation, were not quickly forthcoming. Then again, she said, doctors who do not accept new Medicaid patients may still provide charity care--the result being that some low-income patients are served even though their doctors do not seek payment. Asked to appraise the Texas leaders’ declaration--that only three in 10 physicians accept new Medicaid patients--Kinney said: ""The language does matter. They should have said ‘all’"" new patients. In emails, Perry spokesman Josh Havens and Cornyn spokeswoman Jessica Sandlin each said the leaders’ statement accurately reflected the association survey. Havens added that ""you cannot continue to add context to manipulate the result you want."" Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier, also standing by the claim, said by email that the point is that Medicaid is a broken system. Our ruling Perry said only three in 10 Texas doctors currently accept new Medicaid patients. In a recent year, some 67 percent of Texas physicians submitted at least one Medicaid claim. More recently, 42 percent of the state’s physicians responding to a 2012 survey said they refuse all new Medicaid patients. Then again, 32 percent said they accept all new Medicaid patients and 26 percent said they limit such patients--signaling that 58 percent of physicians accept at least some new Medicaid patients. By not specifying that the cited ""three in 10"" reflects only doctors who accept all new Medicaid patients, Perry’s statement falls off target by nearly 30 percent. Still, it has en element of truth."
|
2712
|
Samsung Bioepis biosimilar to Roche's Herceptin wins FDA nod.
|
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Friday it had approved a biosimilar to Roche Holding AG’s blockbuster breast cancer treatment, Herceptin.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The biosimilar, Ontruzant, is sold by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a unit of Merck & Co Inc, and is developed by Samsung Bioepis Co Ltd, which is a joint venture between Samsung BioLogics and Biogen Inc. The approval here comes just a few weeks after the health regulator gave Celltrion Inc's Herzuma - another biosimilar to Herceptin - its nod to market it commercially. Herceptin, which generated sales of 7.01 billion Swiss francs in 2017, is one of the world’s most successful antibody drugs and has been a mainstay of Roche profits for many years. Herceptin and other complex medicines called biologics are made from living cells, making them difficult to copy with precision. Their similar versions are called biosimilars, instead of generics. The FDA had declined to approve Pfizer’s biosimilar of Herceptin in April. (This story corrects paragraph 2 to say Ontruzant is “sold” by Merck Sharp & Dohme and Corp not “co-developed”. Also removes reference to Merck from headline)
|
34178
|
A set of photographs shows the gruesome results of a pico jackfruit snake bite.
|
In sum, the above photographs most likely show the gruesome aftermath of a snake bite, but because we were unable to uncover specific details about the pictures.
|
unproven
|
Fauxtography
|
A set of gruesome photographs supposedly showing the aftermath of a “pico jackfruit snake” bite is frequently shared online. We’ll be posting these photographs below. As they show a severe hand injury, this article may not suitable for all viewers. The photographs first went viral in August 2017 after they were posted to the Facebook group Faculty of Veterinary Medicine in New York. The first photograph in the set shows what appears to be a small cut on a person’s thumb. Subsequent photographs show the injury worsening, due to the snake’s venomous bite, until eventually the thumb is amputated. Again, the following photographs may not be suitable for all viewers: We haven’t been able to uncover too many specifics about these photographs, such as where they were taken or the identity of the snake-bit victim. When these images first started circulating on Facebook in 2017 (the original post has since been deleted), the snake was identified as a “sharp-nosed viper,” not a “pico jackfruit snake.” In fact, we found no snake by the latter’s name. It likely refers to a bushmaster snake, another genus of venomous pit-vipers, which is known by a variety of names across South America, such as the pineapple snake, the silent rattlesnake, and the stinging jackfruit. Regardless of the specific species of snake, these photographs appear to provide a genuine look at the painful aftermath of a venomous snakebite. News.com.au talked to Brian Fry, an associate professor in the school of biological sciences at the University of Queensland, when these images first went viral: “That type of snake [Sharp-nosed viper] has a venom that is extremely tissue destroying,” Dr Fry told news.com.au. “The reason for this is that they kill their prey by haemorrhagic shock, where some parts of the venom damage the blood vessel walls, while other parts destroy the ability of the blood to clot, leading to a state of massive internal bleeding in a prey animal.” As Associate Professor in the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Queensland, Dr Fry said because it is a Chinese snake; antivenom for a bite like this might be hard to come by in remote areas. “If it was in a private collection somewhere, they probably didn’t have it and likely none of the nearby zoos would either,” he explained. “Thus, they’d have to suffer through the full effects.” While we haven’t been able to find much information about this specific set of photographs, we have found other snake-bite cases that resulted in similar injuries. A 2015 article from the BBC explained some of the science behind deadly venomous snake bites: Snake venom is made up of several hundred proteins which all have a slightly different toxic effect on the human body. One snake’s poison may not be like another’s, even if they are from the same species. But, on the whole, there are two main ways snakes make us suffer — by attacking the circulatory system (ie. the blood) and/or the nervous system. Haemotoxic venom goes for the bloodstream. It can trigger lots of tiny blood clots and then when the venom punches holes in blood vessels causing them to leak, there is nothing left to stem the flow and the patient bleeds to death. Other venoms can increase blood pressure, decrease blood pressure, prevent bleeding or create it. They are all bad news. Neurotoxic venom tends to act more quickly, attacking the nervous system and stopping nerve signals getting through to the muscles. This means paralysis, starting at the head, moving down the body until, if untreated, the diaphragm is paralysed and the patient can’t breathe. A classic sign of this is ptosis, when people can’t keep their eyes open. Around the area of the bite, necrosis can set in. That happens when the venom destroys nearby muscles, tissues and cells. Long-term, this can lead to amputations, the loss of the use of a limb or the need for multiple skin grafts.
|
8644
|
Italy experts say reliable coronavirus antibody test may be ready soon.
|
A reliable antibody blood test to find out who has already had the coronavirus would give a better picture of the extent of Italy’s epidemic and could possibly be identified within days, scientific advisers to the government said on Friday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
More than 115,000 people have tested positive for the virus in Italy since the outbreak was discovered in its wealthy northern regions on Feb. 21 and almost 14,000 have died, the highest death toll in the world. But daily tallies of new infections and fatalities have been steady in recent days, which experts hope points to a decline soon. Pressure is growing to find out who has been exposed to the virus and whether some people have developed immunity, in order to soften the severe lockdown measures the government has imposed to curb the contagion. Franco Locatelli, the head of Italy’s Higher Health Council, said a reliable antibody testing system to use at the national level had still to be identified, though various products had already been proposed. Locatelli told reporters that government scientists were working hard to analyse the tests and hoped to have a result “in a few days”. He added that it would probably then take another month before the health authorities are able to roll out recommendations on a nationwide testing procedure. Some badly hit Italian regions have already started buying some of the tests already on the market. Speaking at the same news conference, health officials said the lockdown had prevented a potentially ruinous spread of the contagion from its northern epicentre to less developed southern regions. “The social distancing measures adopted on a national scale have meant that where the number of infections was relatively low, it remained low,” said Giovanni Rezza, director of infectious diseases at the national health institute. The government said this week that curbs on movement and business activities introduced nationwide on March 9 would stay in place until at least April 13. The head of the Civil Protection Agency, Angelo Borrelli, said on Friday he expected them to remain beyond May 1.
|
10514
|
Drug’s benefit to younger breast cancer patients in question
|
This story never adequately characterized the results of a randomized controlled trial called AZURE on the use of zoledronic acid (Zometa) for early stage breast cancer. Other studies had indicated that zoledronic acid (a bone density-enhancing bisphosphonate) may also prevent bone tumors in various metastatic cancers, including metastatic breast cancer. Its role in early stage breast cancer, however, isn’t clear. The headline and lead muddled the main conclusion of the study: that zoledronic acid failed to provide any benefit in the study population as a whole, and the story gave too much weight to a subgroup analysis indicating that the drug does extend life among women with established menopause. Even when they are pre-planned, as in this study, subgroup analyses are difficult to interpret—since they involve only a portion of study subjects. The story also failed to tell readers about some serious adverse events, including bone disease in the jaws of some women in this trial. Zoledronic acid and other bisphosphonates have been employed as treatments for osteoporosis and to prevent skeletal complications among women with metastatic breast cancer. However, their role in the prevention of recurrence among women with early stage breast cancer isn’t clear. Animal studies suggest that bisphosphonates may have direct anti-tumor effects in bone. Proponents of zoledronic acid believe it may provide a significant advantage for women with early stage breast cancer—in terms of recurrence and survival. But the results of studies in humans have been contradictory. A large randomized controlled trial from Austria (the ABCSG-12 trial) published in 2009 suggested that the addition of three years of zoledronic acid to hormonal therapy following surgery for early stage breast cancer provided a 32% advantage in disease-free survival, compared to subjects who did not receive this drug. All the women in the ABCSG-12 trial had chemically induced menopause. The AZURE trial attempted to confirm the benefits of zoledronic acid in a different study population, one that included both premenopausal and postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer. AZURE and other trials are important not only to assess any benefits of zoledronic acid but also to study its adverse effects—which include the potentially devastating side-effect of osteonecrosis of the jaw bone.
|
mixture
|
Cancer,Los Angeles Times
|
We won’t require a discussion of costs in this story because the use of zoledronic acid for early stage breast cancer is still up in the air. However, since the drug is already being sold for other indications, the story would have been better if it had told readers something about the costs of using the drug for approved indications. The story headline and lead muddled the main conclusion of the AZURE trial: that there was no survival benefit to adding zoledronic acid to standard therapy for women with early stage breast cancer. In contrast to the headline of this story saying that any benefit to younger women is “in question,” the other story we reviewed included a quote from the lead author of the study article saying that not only did younger patients get no benefit, “If anything, they are doing a little bit worse.” The story did accurately report that there may be some benefit to postmenopausal women, but the story should have been more cautious in presenting the results of the sub-group analysis. Overall, the thrust of the story didn’t appear to match the negative results that researchers reported. The article did not mention any adverse effects associated with zoledronic acid. The story should have at least discussed the incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw bone—a serious complication affecting more than one percent of study subjects. The article never mentioned that roughly one percent of women taking zoledronic acid in this trial developed a serious side effect: confirmed osteonecrosis of the jawbone. And another half a percent of subjects may have developed this bone-destroying problem. Women weighing the pros and cons of zoledronic acid for early breast cancer—or for other indications such as metastatic breast cancer—would certainly want to take this potentially devastating side-effect into account in their decision-making. And it deserved mention in the article. The article provided an adequate description of the randomized trial. In addition, it offered readers background on an earlier trial, highlighting some possible reasons that trial produced different results. However, it appeared to overstate the power of a subgroup analysis to produce conclusive results; in this case that the drug may extend the lives of women with established menopause. To produce strong take-home messages, the results of subgroup analyses have to be tested in further clinical trials. The story did offer a statement from an independent expert to this effect further down the page—but never explicitly stated that subgroup analyses have inherent limitations. There was no hint of disease mongering in this article. The article used an independent source. Howeever, it failed to tell readers about the support provided by the pharmaceutical company that markets this drug or about speaker fees paid to the lead researcher. The story did point out that the women in this trial did receive standard therapy, though it did not specifically say what that treatment entails. We will give the story a satisfactory rating since it is not clear that there is a proven alternative that would provide the type of recurrence and survival benefits seen in a previous study of zoledronic acid for early stage breast cancer. The article did not clarify the regulatory status of zoledronic acid. The FDA has approved zoledronic acid as a treatment for metastatic breast cancer but not for early stage breast cancer. The article made it clear that zoledronic acid is already being used in routine clinical care for other indications. The article did not appear to be overly reliant on a news release.
|
33540
|
Image shows radioactive seepage spreading across the Pacific Ocean from the Fukushima nuclear plant.
|
A chart purportedly showing radioactive water seeping into the ocean from the Fukushima nuclear plant actually depicts something else.
|
false
|
Fauxtography, ASP Article, fukushima, radiation
|
The massive (8.9) Tohoku earthquake and subsequent tsunami that hit Japan in March 2011 resulted in a series of equipment failures, nuclear meltdowns and releases of radioactive materials from the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, the largest nuclear disaster since the catastrophic accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine in April 1986. In August 2013, news accounts quoted an official from Japan’s Nuclear Regulatory Authority as stating that highly radioactive water was seeping from the plant into the Pacific Ocean and creating an “emergency” situation that the plant’s operators were not adequately containing: Highly radioactive water seeping into the ocean from Japan’s crippled Fukushima nuclear plant is creating an “emergency” that the operator is struggling to contain, an official from the country’s nuclear watchdog said on Monday. This contaminated groundwater has breached an underground barrier, is rising toward the surface and is exceeding legal limits of radioactive discharge, Shinji Kinjo, head of a Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NRA) task force, [said]. Countermeasures planned by Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco) are only a temporary solution, he said. Tepco’s “sense of crisis is weak,” Kinjo said. “This is why you can’t just leave it up to Tepco alone” to grapple with the ongoing disaster. “Right now, we have an emergency,” he said. References to these news accounts were widely circulated on the Internet accompanied by a color graphic supposedly showing the flow of radioactive discharge from Fukushima all the way across the Pacific Ocean to the western coasts of North and South America and down to Antarctica: However, that chart did not actually track or measure radioactive discharge emanating from Fukushima in 2013, or any other aspect of the Fukushima disaster. It was a plot created by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) immediately after the Tohoku earthquake in March 2011 showing the wave height of the tsunami that followed. It had (and has) nothing to do with the flow or spread of radioactive seepage from Fukushima. As for whether the current Fukushima “emergency” poses a danger to residents of the U.S., American officials have stated that the diluting effects of the vast Pacific Ocean expanse would likely neutralize any deleterious effects from the radioactive seepage by the time it reached U.S. shores: In the United States, across the Pacific, there was no sense of alarm. “With the amount of dilution that would occur, any kind of release in Japan would be non-detectable here,” said David Yogi, spokesman for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Eric Norman, a nuclear engineering professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said the latest leak was not a concern. “The Pacific Ocean is an enormous place,” said Norman, who found radiation from the Fukushima nuclear power in California rainwater, milk and plants soon after the earthquake and tsunami. “There’s a lot of material between us and Japan. No matter what happens in Fukushima, it’s not going to be a problem over here.” Likewise, the Hawaii State Department of Health has been monitoring Japanese water quality surveys and anticipates no public health effect in that state due to leaks from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant: The Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) continues to monitor the results of water quality surveys [from Japan] and does not anticipate any public health effect on beachgoers or seafood safety around the Hawaiian Islands, due to the following factors: • Water acts as a diluent. While there may be significant quantities of radioactive material released into the sea near the Fukushima reactor site, the massive amount of water in the Pacific Ocean would rapidly dilute and disperse the materials to negligible levels. • Some radioactive isotopes rapidly decay. For example, the half life of Iodine-131 (I-131) is about eight days. This means that the activity level of the I-131 isotope drops by half every eight days. Given the length of time since the event, the short-lived radionuclides would have decayed to near background levels and therefore pose no health hazard. Although Cesium isotopes have longer half-lives (Cs-134 has a half-life of about two years, Cs-137 a longer half-life of about 30 years), the radionuclides also undergo biological excretion and do not continue to build up in fish forever. (Similar “false image” fears were spurred by the Internet circulation of a nuclear fallout map back in March 2011.) In December 2013, alarmist reports were spread on the Internet with headlines such as “TEPCO Quietly Admits Reactor 3 Could Be Melting Down Now!” and “Persons residing on the west coast of North America should IMMEDIATELY begin preparing for another possible onslaught of dangerous atmospheric radiation!” Such claims were exaggerations based on much less sensational reports (similar to ones issued several months earlier) which simply stated that the plant’s operators, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), had recently observed steam issuing from one of the damaged Fukushima reactor buildings but had “not identified [any] abnormal plant conditions.” As noted at the Fukushima Diary blog: Since the end of 2013, a hoax has been going around on the Internet saying that Reactor #3 is experiencing a meltdown. (In fact, it had already melted down some time earlier.) From my observation, this mess started with an article on Enenews saying that Reactor #3 had been observed still steaming multiple times in December, which is correct. However, “steam” has been observed issuing from that reactor beginning in July 2013, and since then it has been observed almost every day. From the frequency of the “steam,” I assume it is evaporated coolant water leaking out of primary containment vessel, and we’re seeing it now because TEPCO has removed the major debris from the top of the reactor. Probably the steam has been coming up since just after [the earthquake of] March 2011. Sure it’s extremely radioactive, nobody can stand on the top of reactor #3, and it’s harmful for the west coast. However, it’s been that way for 3 years now.
|
5621
|
Brazil’s Bolsonaro eyes new body for environmental policy.
|
The administration of President Jair Bolsonaro is considering a dramatic change in the council that oversees Brazil’s environmental policy, replacing a broad-based panel of independent voices with a small group of political appointees, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.
|
true
|
Brazil, Environment, Climate, International News, Forests, Deforestation, Business, Jair Bolsonaro, Environmental policy
|
Activists say they fear the move, which reflects Bolsonaro’s oft-stated skepticism about environmental organizations, could lead to more deforestation and less oversight in the nation that holds about 60% of the vast Amazon rainforest, which scientists see as crucial for efforts to slow global warming and for the world climate systems. A policy roadmap drafted by Bolsonaro’s transition team before he took office Jan. 1 proposes a decree creating a “government council” to replace Brazil’s National Council of the Environment, which has almost 100 members, including representatives of independent environmental and business groups. The new body would consist of five presidential appointees plus Environment Minister Ricardo Salles, who is one of the authors of the plan. The documents, first published by the Brazilian Climate Observatory environmental group, were obtained and verified by the AP. Brazil’s Environment Ministry did not reply to a request for comment. Part of the transition plan has already come into force. The country’s forestry service, aimed at promoting “knowledge, sustainable use and widening of forestry coverage,” was transferred to the Agriculture Ministry on Bolsonaro’s second day in office. On the same day, the Agriculture Ministry was given the power to determine the limits of indigenous lands, rather than Brazil’s official indigenous rights agency. As a congressman and candidate, Bolsonaro often questioned the reality of climate change and cast environmental groups as foreign-influenced meddlers restraining Brazil’s economic growth by holding back mining and agriculture — stances that resemble those of U.S. President Donald Trump, who before taking office described the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a “disgrace” that largely should be dismantled. The authors of Bolsonaro’s transition plan say the current Environment Council, known as CONAMA, is a “confusing” body that “acts emotionally, without due technique, being subjected to ideological interference.” In another transition team document, lawyer Antonio Fernando Pinheiro Pedro argues that CONAMA’s decisions have led to “the emission of norms and standards that are far from reality.” In an interview shortly after his election, Bolsonaro complained that it could sometimes take a decade to get an environmental license. “That will not continue,” he said. While officials haven’t yet formally proposed the smaller council, there has already been increased friction over CONAMA. Security guards blocked alternate members of the council from joining the main meeting at a March 20 session in the capital of Brasilia, breaking a long tradition of wide-open debate in Brazil’s top environmental council. Carlos Rittl, executive secretary of the Brazilian Climate Observatory, which includes several nonprofit groups, said he believes that chaotic meeting was “more evidence that the plan (for a smaller council) is indeed being implemented.” “Deforestation ended 2018 on the rise. It is on the rise in 2019, but we haven’t heard a word from the minister about that. We have heard about limiting the access to civil society so we can’t have a fair discussion,” Rittl said. Former Environment Minister Rubens Ricupero speculated the new administration may have delayed creating the new council due to public anger over the collapse of a mine dam near the city of Brumadinho in January that killed at least 223 people, with 70 still missing. Ricupero noted that Bolsonaro’s chief of staff suggested closing the environmental ministry during the campaign, but said that the powerful agribusiness lobby is afraid such a move would damage trade and has prevented any such move. “Then Brumadinho showed that our problem is not excessive care in environmental licensing — it is the lack of it,” Ricupero said. He added that hopes Bolsonaro would engage with environmentalists have not come to pass. Bolsonaro recently defended his environmental ideas at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, saying that Brazil “is the country that most preserves the environment” and that “those that criticize us actually have a lot to learn from us.” The Bolsonaro transition plan also suggested closing the federal agency that oversees conservation zones such as national parks and biological reserves and issues fines for violation of environmental laws there. Many of those penalties are never paid, but several Brazilian agribusiness leaders have complained about them over the years. Pinheiro Pedro, the transition team lawyer, wrote that the agency should be folded into the Environment Institute, which enforces other environmental legislation and aims to promote the sustainable the use of natural resources. He said the two have “the same objective” and streamlining environmental governance is key to “avoid international interference.” Rittl, of the Brazilian Climate Observatory, said he believes that change would reduce oversight in key areas by diluting the focus of regulators. Environmentalists also took umbrage at the language used in the transition documents, though the tone echoes Bolsonaro’s own pronouncements. The plan says NGOs involved in climate change discussions are “uncontrollable organisms” that need to be stopped so the system is “closer to ministerial control.” It also contends Brazil’s environmental governance is crafted to give jobs to political appointees, describing that as “a risk to national sovereignty.” Emilio Bruna, a tropical ecologist focused on the Amazon who is based at the University of Florida, said the transition plan shows the “worst fears” about Bolsonaro’s presidency “are starting to come true.” “Scientists are not only concerned about the government not creating new protected areas, but also the downgrading of existing protections in the rainforest,” he said. “There was already a culture of impunity, but now it’s being reinforced.” ___ Associated Press science writer Christina Larson and EPA reporter Ellen Knickmayer in Washington contributed to this report.
|
9747
|
Heart Drug Linked to Extra Years for Cancer Patients
|
This Wall Street Journal article nicely summarizes the findings of a retrospective study of 1,400 cases of women with ovarian cancer; some of whom had been prescribed beta-blockers for high blood pressure and appeared to have better outcomes than those not taking beta-blockers. It hits on nearly all of our criteria, and was more thorough and balanced than an MD Anderson news release that initially announced the findings to the world. (More on that below.) A bit more detail on the cost of these drugs, and a bit more restraint in discussing the outcomes of a small group of women who were taking a particular class of beta-blocker and had much better survival statistics, would have rounded out this story. We often say that news releases can set the tone for subsequent media coverage of new research, and that a poor news release can lead to a great deal of misinformation reaching the public. We’ve compared this phenomenon to sheep following one another. However, it’s also true that good reporting can fill in the holes left by an incomplete news release and present a more balanced portrait of findings to readers. In this case, MD Anderson announced the results of this study with a news release that has been reviewed separately on HealthNewsReview.org and found wanting in several areas. Specifically, it used inappropriate language to describe the benefits and lacked a discussion of harms and limitations of the research. This story by and large addresses those issues and demonstrates how good health reporting can play an important and useful role in informing the public. There are plenty of reporters out there who can’t be led like sheep, and our project aims to shine a light on them and hopefully cultivate many more of them.
|
true
|
beta-blockers,ovarian cancer
|
The story mentions that beta-blockers are available as generics but doesn’t specifically mention costs. As a class, beta blockers drugs are low cost ($10 to $200 a month according to some estimates). The article describes the median survival time afforded the women with ovarian cancer under different scenarios – with or without beta blockers in addition to their chemotherapy. For example, women who had been taking any beta blocker at the time of their chemotherapy had a median survival of 47.8 months while women who were not being treated with beta blockers while on chemo had median survival time of 42 months. The article notes that the quoted source and the study authors cautioned that beta blockers carry some side effects and additional research is needed to determine if the drugs’ benefits outweigh their risks for cancer patients. It specifically mentions risks for people with asthma. Other specific harms from beta-blockers for the general population include depression and diarrhea. Beta-blockers may also cause complications for people with diabetes. The article provides a good overall description of the size of the study and how patients were followed. It describes the median survival time afforded the 1,425 women with ovarian cancer under different scenarios – with or without beta blockers in addition to their chemotherapy. The use of language is appropriate in that it says these drugs were “linked to” and “associated with” benefits, but never claims that the drugs “prolonged survival” as stated in the MD Anderson news release. The story also briefly touched on the study limitations. Because the research was a retrospective look at 1,425 cases in a database of ovarian cancer cases, it wasn’t randomized. The article also notes that more research is needed to determine if the findings will translate into new treatments, and that “This is not something that people should rush out and start taking.” One area of concern is that the subheadline touts the dramatic benefits seen in a subgroup of patients taking nonselective beta-blockers — “A type of beta blocker is tied to more than four-year increase in survival for women with ovarian cancer, study finds” — but the story never specifically cautions readers about the small size of this group (only 75 people). Findings from such a small subgroup should be treated very carefully, and we’re not sure that they should have been highlighted for readers in the headline. We say this knowing full well that reporters often have no control over what gets put in the headline. We observed no evidence of fear-mongering language in the story. The story includes an independent source who wasn’t affiliated with the research. Christina Annunziata, a director with the Center for Cancer Research at the National Institutes of Health, said that while she found the study “interesting” and “thought-provoking,” she cautioned that “I don’t think it’s practice-changing quite yet.” Annunziata co-authored an editorial accompanying the report which were both published in the American Cancer Society’s Cancer journal. The story would have been even stronger had it outlined the funding sources for this study, which included government and foundation grants. However, since we didn’t find any significant conflicts in the list of funding sources, we didn’t think this omission unbalanced the coverage. The relevant research is based on evaluating the use of beta blockers in conjunction with conventional chemotherapy, not as an alternative to chemotherapy or other courses of treatment. As such, we’ll rate “Compare Alternatives” as Not Applicable. Beta blockers are called “common heart drugs” in the story and are thus generally understood to be widely available. Beta-blockers first came on the market more than 50 years ago and their use has become widespread as researchers found more applications for this class of drugs. Generic versions are available, making them some of the most affordable prescription drugs. A close call here. The story acknowledges previous research in this areas when it says, “Mouse and test-tube studies have shown that so-called nonselective beta blockers inhibit molecular pathways that promote tumor growth. Selective versions, designed to minimize side effects for heart patients, are less effective in hitting such targets. Dr. Sood and his colleagues wondered if the same effect would be found in people.” That’s good context, but the story could also have noted that a number of studies have indeed examined the impact of beta-blocker use on ovarian cancer patients, and did not find the same prolonged survival rates that are reported on in this story. The researchers think that’s because these earlier studies didn’t distinguish between the two types of beta-blockers. Because the article quotes an independent, unaffiliated cancer expert, we are confident the article doesn’t rely solely on a press release.
|
33027
|
Residents of Flint, Michigan have been threatened by CPS with removal of their children if they refuse to pay for contaminated water.
|
An article claims that CPS threatened to remove children affected by the Flint water crisis from their homes if families refused to pay for lead-contaminated water.
|
false
|
Politics Legal, flint water crisis, the free thought project
|
In January 2016, an event primarily dubbed the “Flint water crisis” (involving lead contamination in the city’s water supply at levels that posed a serious health danger) garnered national headlines. Although some details were murky as the situation unfolded, a number of items related to the crisis were circulated worldwide via social media. The undisputed core of the public health crisis was summed up by the New York Times‘ report that “[h]igh levels of lead had leached from pipes into the water supply” in Flint in a period beginning around April 2014: Among the items related to the water crisis that circulated online was a piece from the Free Thought Project titled “Flint Residents Told That Their Children Could Be Taken Away If They Don’t Pay for City’s Poison Water”: There is no denying that the water in Flint is undrinkable and that it is contaminated with lead and other substances, and it is clear that the government of Flint is responsible for the problem. However, the city’s government continues to charge people for the poison water and then threatening to foreclose their home or take their children if they refuse to pay. Michigan law states that parents are neglectful if they do not have running water in their home, and if they chose not to pay for water they can’t drink anyway, then they could be guilty of child endangerment. Activists in Flint say that some residents have already received similar threats from the government if they refuse to pay their bills … Flint residents have recently filed two class action lawsuits calling for all water bills since April of 2014 to be considered null and void because of the fact that the water was poisonous. “Essentially, the residents have been getting billed for water that they cannot use. Because of that, we do not feel that is a fair way to treat the residents,” [attorney Trachelle] Young added … Despite the fact that the issue is obviously the government’s responsibility, they have made it illegal for people to sell their homes because of the fact that they are known to carry contaminated water. Meanwhile, residents are still left to purchase bottled water on their own, in addition to paying their water bill. The article confusingly vacillated between assertions supported by a largely undisputed chain of events (i.e., the water supply in Flint had been compromised for some time, and its effect on families was severe) with alarming but unsubstantiated claims (i.e., CPS was threatening to remove children affected by the crisis). The headline clearly stated that residents of Flint had been threatened with the intervention of Michigan’s Children’s Protective Services (CPS) agency if they refused to pay for water that was clearly not potable, but we were unable to locate any other account reporting on what would be an extraordinary scenario. The Free Thought Project excerpt reproduced above was the sole source for this otherwise uncited claim. A careful reading of the text suggests that the site perhaps extrapolated two unrelated factual items to form a third hypothetical conclusion: It was true the Flint water crisis was unresolved at the time the article was published, and that Michigan’s Department of Health & Human Services’ (MDHHS) list of possible red flags for child abuse or neglect allows the inference that a lack of running water in a home is grounds for investigation and removal of children. Page 15 of a publicly available document titled “Mandated Reporters’ Resource Guide” [PDF] further describes scenarios under which mandated reporters are obligated to contact CPS and file a report. Appendix 2, Section I (physical neglect), portion A pertains to neglect with respect to living conditions: under a list of items by which mandated reporters can observe potential conditions of neglect, “running water in the home” is listed as a potential signifier. As such, the above-excerpted item quite possibly extrapolated its conclusion based on the existence of the Flint water crisis and demonstrated standards of child abuse and neglect evidenced by Michigan’s documentation of those criteria. If so, the item made a significant leap between something that could conceivably happen (children’s being removed from homes due to a lack of running water under normal circumstances) and something that might be far less likely to happen (CPS’ tasking itself with imposing upon the crisis in the city of Flint by using its scant resources to target families and children already burdened by an ongoing and unprecedented contamination of Flint’s water supply). We were unable to find any other reporting of such claims aside from ones citing The Free Thought Project, nor could we locate any independent, anecdotal reports claiming that CPS was removing children from homes “without running water” in Flint. We contacted several divisions of MDHHS to determine whether there was any truth to the claim that CPS has removed children for reasons directly related to the Flint water crisis, or whether any such information or demands had been transmitted to families in Flint with respect to the water crisis. Under normal circumstances, the lack of running water in a home could certainly serve as grounds to initiate an investigation or even trigger removal of children from their home until basic living conditions are restored to the satisfaction of agencies tasked with ensuring children are safe from abusive or neglectful homes. Given widespread coverage of the Flint water crisis and its ongoing nature, the assertion doesn’t make much plausible sense (nor does it seem likely CPS could have the manpower to engage in such a large undertaking). The existence of such a crisis in Flint and its effect on the city’s residents are not in dispute and reasonably warrant alarm, but unsupported claims exacerbating concern and anxiety are not helpful to the residents of Flint or other people seeking credible information about the extent of an ongoing public health incident. In response to our inquiry, a representative from Michigan’s Department of Health & Human Services confirmed children are not removed from homes solely due to a lack of running water (due to the current situation in Flint, or otherwise): We do not petition a court for removal solely because of lack of water. Instead CPS works to make sure the children have water – by having them apply for State Emergency Relief, or making sure they have access to water at a relatives’ home or bottled water. On 26 January 2016, MDHHS Children’s Services Agency provided us with a statement from executive director Steve Yager. Yager’s statement confirmed no such complaints or removals occurred due to the Flint water crisis: MDHHS has not assigned a single Children’s Protective Services complaint due to any issues related to Flint water. MDHHS works proactively to assist families whose water is shut off and to ensure families have water filters and bottled water in Flint. When a family is without water, our goal is to help that family provide clean water for their children. That can be through assisting families in applying for State Emergency Relief, setting up plans for children to access safe water at a relative’s home or providing bottled water. We do not petition the court to remove a child solely for the lack of water in a family’s home. We also contacted the author of the original The Free Thought Project article for additional information supporting the claim. He directed us to the above-quoted MDHHS guidelines, as well as the article’s embedded RT video. In that clip, a Flint resident speculated that refusal to pay water bills could result in the eventual removal of children due to a lack of running water in the home:
|
9011
|
University of Waterloo develops new way to fight HIV transmission
|
This very brief news release about a University of Waterloo study looks at a medicated vaginal implant designed to diminish the T-cell immune response to HIV infection. It’s based on previous observations which suggest that women who may be naturally resistant to HIV infection show low baseline T-cell activation in the vaginal wall. This so-called “immune quiescent” state can be achieved with the medication hydrochloroquine (HCQ) embedded in the implant which, in turn, is embedded in the vagina not unlike an IUD device. Although the news release does a nice job of describing how the implant works as a medication delivery system, as well how the medicine affects T-cells and subsequently risk for HIV transmission, it falls short in several important ways. First, even though the language repeatedly implies the approach could “prevent women from getting HIV infection,” it fails to mention the study is in rabbits and can make no claims of efficacy in humans. Also, claims of efficacy, reliability, and affordability are not backed up with any data whatsoever from the study. There’s also no discussion of potential harms, or just how much more time or research is needed before this implant could be tested in humans. Over 36 million people around the world were living with HIV in 2016. Most of these people live in the developing world where anti-HIV medications and condoms may be hard to get. So the idea of a women-oriented strategy to prevent the spread of HIV in an affordable and effective way holds strong appeal; especially if it could work as a stand-alone option, or even if it was used as an adjunct with current strategies. This study is very preliminary, based entirely on an animal model, and quite clearly in a very developmental stage. That’s key information that needs to be shared clearly and up high in the release. Otherwise, the news release runs the risk of being misleading, and instilling false hope in people who need reliable information in the face of a global public health threat.
|
false
|
HIV,University of Waterloo
|
The lead author is quoted as stating the implant could prevent HIV infection “more reliably and cheaply,” but the cost is not provided in the release. The cost may well be unknown since the treatment is experimental and in development. However, the published research states that the active ingredient — hydroxychloroquine, or HCQ — “is an inexpensive drug.” Perhaps that price could have been included. And cost is relevant since the vast majority of HIV infections occur in the developing world where cost could have a major influence on compliance with prevention measures. As stated in the news release: The tool, a vaginal implant, decreases the number of cells that the virus can target in a woman’s genital tract Two problems here. First, the emphasis on woman’s is ours because the research was done in rabbits. (The fact that this research used an animal model was not mentioned until the penultimate sentence.) Second, we’re given no data whatsoever to understand just how beneficial or significant the results really are. However, we did appreciate the inclusion of this quote from the lead researcher: What we don’t know yet is if this can be a stand-alone option for preventing HIV transmission or if it might be used in conjunction with other prevention strategies. We aim to answer these questions with future research. Given that the news release opens with “Scientists at the University of Waterloo have developed a new tool to protect women [emphasis added] from HIV infection” it might lead some interested women to ask about side effects. The question of harms is never addressed. That’s a huge oversight given that the device is implanted and there are many risks associated with such procedures: pain, bleeding, infection, the device becoming dislodged, follow-up surgeries to remove the implant. No potential risks are mentioned. In addition, if the device is not effective in comparison to existing preventive strategies then there’s a potential harm in relying on the device and acquiring HIV. This is a major weakness of the news release. Claims of efficacy, reliability, and affordability are made in the release with absolutely no supporting data from the study. Many readers might be familiar with the commonly quoted statistic that condoms — when used properly and consistently — are well over 90% effective in preventing HIV transmission. They would naturally want to know if this implant can approach that efficacy and be accomplished affordably and without side effects. But the news release does not include this. If such information can not be gleaned from the study — either because it wasn’t measured or because of the limitations of applying results from animal studies to humans — then we encourage news release authors to follow up with the researchers and ask for clarity. No disease mongering. Prevention of HIV transmission is a global public health priority. The release does not mention funding sources. The published study does not include any disclosures of financial conflicts of interest by the authors. The news release briefly mentions “conventional methods of HIV prevention, such as condoms or anti-HIV drugs.” Given the preliminary nature of this experimental device it’s unlikely the authors can conclude how effective this vaginal implant is in comparison to these well-studied, conventional approaches. But mentioning how effective condoms and anti-HIV medications are might have been helpful context. It’s not made clear enough that this vaginal implant is experimental, in development, and has never been tested on humans and that it could be years — if ever — before the device is available. Although the release does not claim novelty specifically, it does mention the past failure of a related attempted preventative (nonoxynol-9). The researchers do emphasize in the published paper that this study is the first of its kind to use a vaginal implant to deliver HCQ to reduce the response of T-lymphocytes in the vagina. Furthermore, they point out this is a uniquely women-oriented strategy against HIV infection (versus a male-dominated one such as condoms). Alluding to potential impacts on women or people four times in the first few paragraphs, but not mentioning the research utilized an animal model until the penultimate paragraph, is quite misleading and unjustified. We’d suggest changing the headline to: “University of Waterloo develops a new way to fight HIV transmission in rabbit study.”
|
11092
|
Partnership plans to build cancer treatment machine
|
This story reads like a promotional vehicle for a new, potentially cost-prohibitive machine manufactured by TomoTherapy. Information in this story does not go beyont that found in a press release by TomoTherapy, Inc. (maker of the device) and there is little, if any, new enterprise reporting in the piece. The story cites Dr. DeVere White and Dr. Matthews of UC Davis Cancer. Researchers at the Center helped finance and develop the proton therapy machines with TomoTherapy, Inc., so they have an interest in positively promoting their work. The story also cites a senior project manager at TomoTherapy, Inc., who also cannot provide unbiased information about this new device. The story needs balance, possibly from interviews with cancer researchers (radiologists) and clinicians who could provide perspective on this emerging technology as cancer treatment. The story presents proton therapy as a newer, alternative option for shrinking tumors; however, this technology as cancer therapy is still in early development, though it has received FDA approval. The story gives us no data to support this newer option as better than existing methods of X-ray radiation treatment for cancer. The story does not mention that current forms of X-ray radiation can be targetted to a tumor via computer imaging and the use of devices (i.e. balloon, seeds, etc.) This sometimes reduces harm to healthy tissue. Despite company reassurances, we do not know if this form of therapy is as efficacious as current radiation or if it is safe. We are also not told if this therapy is only for a particular type of cancer or if it could be used on tumors anywhere in the body. Lastly, the story lists the cost of the machine but does not mention how this would influence treatment costs for the patient. We are not told if this method of cancer treatment would be covered by health insurance, or how the cost would compare to current radiation treatments. In short, the story needed more on costs, context, and evidence in comparison with existing alternatives. Independent perspectives were sorely needed.
|
mixture
|
"The story provides the cost of the machine but does not mention how this would influence the treatment costs for the patient. We are not told if this method of cancer treatment would be covered by health insurance, or how the cost would compare to current radiation treatments. The story does not provide any quantification of benefit. The story is a promotional vehicle for a new, potentially cost-prohibitive machine manufactured by TomoTherapy. We are told that proton therapy will work better for patients than radiation, but no data are given to show that this is the case. The story notes potential harms of radiation, but mentions no harms of proton therapy. Proton therapy is not without side effects; this story inappropriately minimizes potential harm of proton beam. Clearly, future clinical studies will help define better the harms, but the story should have noted potential for harms. Common harms include hair loss, skin rash, fatigue – story says ""patient won’t have undue side effects"" whatever ‘undue side effects’ may mean – the harms are not inconsequential for sure. Here’s what another proton center lists: What are some of the side effects from proton therapy?Side effects will depend on the patient’s age, medical history, diagnosis, disease size and location. Some patients may receive chemotherapy in conjunction with proton therapy; some will receive much lower radiation doses than others and therefore symptoms will vary significantly. Common symptoms include temporary hair loss and skin reactions in the direct path of the radiation. Fatigue is also associated treatment to large areas. The story provides no quantitative evidence that the proton therapy is better than current radiation. Despite company reassurances, we do not know if this form of therapy is as efficacious as current radiation or if it is safe. We are also not told if this therapy is only for a particular type of cancer or if it could be used on tumors anywhere in the body. The story does not engage in disease mongering, but promotes a new technology and potential future option for cancer treatment. The story cites Dr. DeVere White and Dr. Matthew of UC Davis Cancer. Researchers at this center helped finance research and development of the proton therapy machines with TomoTherapy, Inc., so they have an interest in positively promoting their work. The story also cites a senior project manager at TomoTherapy, Inc., who also cannot provide unbiased information about this new device. The story needs balance from cancer researchers (esp. radiation oncologists) and clinicians to provide perspective on this emerging technology as cancer treatment. The story presents proton therapy as a newer, alternative option for shrinking tumors; however, this technology as cancer therapy is still in early development, thought it has received FDA approval for cancer treatment. The story gives us no data to support this newer option as better than existing methods of X-ray radiation treatment for cancer. There have been advances in standard radiation therapy with the goal of minimizing harm to healthy tissue, and the story does not mention that current forms of X-ray radiation can be targeted to a tumor via computer imaging and the use of devices (i.e. balloon, seeds, etc.) Mary, unsure here if we need to mention the latter, but thought it was important as they position this as proton therapy v. harmful radiation. Radiation, at least as much as I know for breast cancer, is now safer. The story mentions that the proton therapy machines are only in five cancer centers in the U.S.. Space and cost are provided as the reason this therapy is not widely available, but cancer centers may be waiting for evidence that this therapy is safe and works as well (or better) than current forms of targeted radiation delivery. The story presents a new technology–proton therapy–as an option for shrinking tumors; however, the story gives us no data to support this newer option as better than existing methods of X-ray radiation treatment for cancer. We can’t be sure if the story relied soley or largely on a press release, but there is very little new information in the story that is NOT in a news release posted by TomoTherapy, Inc., makers of the proton therapy machine promoted in the news story."
|
|
34800
|
Jacqueline Saburido, the victim of a drunk driving accident, seeks donations to help with the expenses of medical treatment for her extensive injuries.
|
Jacqui Saburido, the victim of a drunk driving accident, sought donations to help with the medical treatment for her extensive injuries.
|
mixture
|
Inboxer Rebellion, Medical Appeals
|
A Microsoft PowerPoint file that made the rounds of the Internet in 2003 presented the viewer with a chilling slide show: four pictures of a pretty young woman with her friends and family, a post-accident photograph of the charred remains of a car, nine images of a horribly disfigured woman pursuing her daily routine (sharing time with her father, receiving medical treatment, eating, reading), and finally a reproduction of a “Don’t Drink and Drive” poster from the Texas Department of Public Safety bearing pre- and post-disfigurement photos of the young woman under the legend “Not everyone who gets hit by a drunk driver dies”: This was one of the cases we really wished would have turned out to be someone’s sick idea of hoax. Unfortunately, the story was all too real. The slide show documented what happened to Jacqueline Saburido, a 20-year-old woman who had taken a break from attending college in Venezuela to come to the United States and study English. Her HelpJacqui website described the horrific accident that turned her life upside-down: Early on Sunday morning September 19, 1999, Jacqui — then 20 years old — and four friends were on their way home from a birthday party. Reggie Stephey, an 18-year-old high school student, was on his way home from drinking beer with some buddies. On a dark road on the outskirts of Austin, Texas, Reggie’s SUV veered into the Oldsmobile carrying Jacqui and the others. Two passengers in the car were killed at the scene and two were rescued. Within minutes, the car caught fire. Jacqui was pinned in the front seat on the passenger side. She was burned over 60% of her body; no one thought she could survive. But Jacqui lived. Her hands were so badly burned that she no longer can use them. She lost her hair, her ears, her nose, her left eyelid and much of her vision. She has had more than 40 operations since the crash and has many more to go. A May 2002 profile in The Austin American-Statesman also described the terrible extent of Jacqui’s injuries: At a distance Jacqui looks old. Up close, ageless. She has a baggy neckchin and thin crumpled lips. Her cheeks are splotchy and rough in places, smooth in others. Where her right ear should be, she has a slender crescent of cartilage around a pea-size black hole. On the left side, she has only a hole. Her nostrils are ragged, torn. A flap of skin hides her left eye. For more than two years, the eyeball floated naked in the socket, mostly blind but perpetually staring behind a clear plastic goggle. Her right eye sees behind a veil of scar. Her burned skin can’t sweat or protect her from heat and cold. It feels hot and tight, like having a sunburn. Scars run down her body, halting at her knees and before her size 7-1/2 feet, which the fire never touched. She has learned to use her feet like hands — her toes stroke a blanket’s softness and test shower water. Her fingers are amputated between the knuckle and the first joint. On her right hand, they are fused together like a mitten. Nerve damage has left parts of her body numb. She can make out some texture with the bottom of her right palm. Her left hand feels only pinpricks — “like a thousand needles,” she says. Her hands hurt every day, but Jacqui doesn’t take painkillers. (The other driver, Reggie Stephey, was arrested and charged with two counts of intoxication manslaughter. He was found guilty in 2001 and served seven years in prison.) As Jacqui’s web site noted, she continued to receive medical treatment for her extensive injuries in Louisville, Kentucky, where she and her father Amadeo lived, and specialists were performing a series of skin grafts and working to rebuild her right hand. Jacqui was eventually able to resume her studies and enroll in intensive English classes, and she established a private bank account to receive donations to help pay her living and medical expenses. On 24 November 2003, Jacqui garnered national attention when she appeared as a guest on The Oprah Winfrey Show, and then again in 2009 when Orpah counted down her most memorable guests of the past 25 years: Jacqueline Saburido passed away at the age of 40 in April 2019, but she left behind a legacy of inspiring “hope among a legion of followers across the globe” in her roles as a motivational speaker and anti-drunken driving spokeswoman: “I thought she was the bravest, most courageous person I have ever met,” said Janet Lea, former senior vice president of the Sherry Matthews Group, which organized the campaign for TxDOT. “With all of her injuries, she was still wickedly funny and also willing to speak to anybody who would listen to her about the dangers of drinking and driving.” The TV spot, with Saburido’s before and after images, “was a real punch in the gut,” Lea said. “It just went nuts. She got thousands and thousands and thousands of letters and was interviewed by media all over the world.” An educational kit, which included a video and a teacher’s guide, was sent to every middle and high school in Texas. Bentley Nettles, executive director of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, said: “Jacqui did not let the tragic circumstances of her accident diminish her, instead using her life story as a lesson on the importance of preventing drunken driving. We are eternally grateful for Jacqui’s bravery, her compassion and her drive to help others. Saburido was featured in safety campaigns as far away as Australia, her scarred face persuading a generation of students that drunken driving has consequences.
|
9732
|
Text Reminders Help People Lower Cholesterol, Blood Pressure
|
The story focuses on a JAMA study that found coronary heart disease patients who received four health-related text messages per week for six months were more likely to take steps to reduce their risk of heart-related health problems — and saw corresponding improvements in cholesterol and blood pressure. The story does a nice job of describing the study and is careful to note the study’s limitations, but could have done more to explain the extent to which patients benefited from the intervention. According to the CDC, heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States for both men and women, and coronary heart disease is the most common form of heart disease — killing more than 370,000 people annually. In short, the odds are good that just about everyone knows someone who has been affected by coronary heart disease. In addition, the disease has an enormous economic impact. For example, the estimated burden of cardiovascular disease in the U.S. in 2010 was $444 billion. Behavior change is an important piece of reducing heart disease risk, and lifestyle changes such as exercise are associated with other positive health outcomes as well, including reduced risk of stroke, better mental health outcomes (depression and anxiety), and lower extremity arthritis.
|
true
|
text messaging
|
This is a tricky one. The story does not explicitly address cost, except to call text messaging “a scalable and affordable approach.” For many (or most) patients, the cost of receiving four text messages a week would likely be negligible — covered by an individual’s phone plan or by nominal text rates. However, not everyone owns a mobile phone, a fact that makes access (and cost) a more significant issue. However, the story does deliver on this point. The story discusses both the number of U.S. adults who own mobile phones (90 percent) and the fact that text messages are more accessible than other forms of mobile health communication (such as apps, which require patients to own smartphones or other smart devices). So, while we’d prefer a more in-depth discussion here, we’ll award a Satisfactory rating for the story’s nod in this direction. The story addresses the range of benefits reported in the study, such as reduced cholesterol and blood pressure, but doesn’t quantify that information or offer readers any context. For example, while the story says “patients who had received the text messages had reduced their cholesterol,” the JAMA paper reports that patients who received the text messages had a “mean difference [of] −5 mg/dL” in “LDL-C.” In other words, the information in the paper, while quantified, probably isn’t very useful to many readers outside the health industry. Is “a mean difference of −5 mg/dL in LDL-C” good? Bad? Irrelevant? This is where reporters have an opportunity to shine. If a news story can take those numbers and translate them into language that is accessible to non-experts, it provides a very real service. It would have been great to see that here. As long as people aren’t driving and checking their cell phones, there don’t appear to be any harms associated with receiving well-meaning text messages four times a week, so we’ll mark this one “not applicable.” This is a strong suit. The story not only offers a concise, but good, summary of the study — but it also goes out of its way to address the study’s limitations. For example, the study notes that the study “can’t tell us whether text messaging could eventually lead to fewer subsequent heart attacks among the patients receiving those messages or whether the positive health outcomes would continue past the six-month study window.” Good points, and we’re glad the story includes them. No disease mongering here. The story includes input from an outside expert who was not involved with the research. The story clearly meets our bar here, although it would have been stronger if it had reached out to at least one more independent source — preferably one who hadn’t written an editorial that ran in conjunction with the paper in JAMA. Yes, the editorial was independent and provides some insightful commentary. But it also means we already knew where this source stood on the issue. Finding another reputable expert, who hadn’t already weighed in publicly on the work, would have been great. The focus of the story is not so much on how the text message intervention directly reduced heart disease risk, but on the extent to which it resulted in patients taking steps to reduce their own risk — such as by exercising more, smoking less, making dietary changes, or taking prescription drugs on a regular basis. The story does discuss other “mobile health interventions,” such as smartphone apps — but notes that there don’t appear to be many mobile health projects that rely simply on text messages. The story also looks at how the text messages helped patients pursue lifestyle changes — like exercising more and smoking less — that reduced their risk. It was fairly clear from the story that this was a clinical trial, and that this particular service doesn’t seem to be available to offer customized, encouraging text messages for heart disease patients. From the start, the story frames this research in the context of the much larger “mobile health” field. For example, the story notes that “While there are more than 100,000 health-related apps on the market, the evidence to date is lacking as to whether many of those apps are safe or effective.” Since the story includes quotes from an interview, we can be fairly certain it went beyond the related JAMA news release.
|
20418
|
Nearly 45 percent of the women who receive health screenings through (the Women’s Health Program) do so at a Planned Parenthood health center.
|
The Democratic legislators wrote that nearly 45 percent of women who received health screenings through the targeted family-planning program in fiscal 2010 had them at Planned Parenthood clinics. That could be so, but we identified a couple of unsettled hitches. According to the state, 46 percent of the cited program’s clients went to a Planned Parenthood clinic, but the state has no breakdown of the number of women who were screened overall, which is what the Democrats focused on. Also, the Democrats’ statement implies that 46 percent of women rely on Planned Parenthood exclusively for screenings, but some women included in the 46 percent could have had screenings at a different kind of clinic, though (again) such details are not available.
|
mixture
|
Abortion, Health Care, Public Health, Women, Texas, Elliott Naishtat,
|
"Speaking out against the exclusion of Planned Parenthood clinics from a Texas family planning program for low-income women, five Democratic legislators aired a statistic indicating that the group is a crucial provider. ""Nearly 45 percent of the women who receive health screenings through this program do so at a Planned Parenthood health center,"" said a commentary in the March 6, 2012, Austin American-Statesman by Austin state Reps. Elliott Naishtat, Dawnna Dukes, Eddie Rodriguez, Mark Strama and Donna Howard. We looked into that figure amid debate over the state’s decision, which led the Obama administration to set in motion a phased-in cutoff of about $30 million in annual federal funds for the Texas Medicaid Women’s Health Program, which has served tens of thousands of women a year since its launch in 2007. To participate in the program, providers may not perform elective abortions. Since the program’s start, dozens of Planned Parenthood health centers in Texas have qualified because they don’t provide abortions and are legally separated from Planned Parenthood clinics that do. That is changing, however. The Texas health and human services commissioner signed a rule in February 2012 barring entities affiliated with abortion providers from the program, which had the effect of disqualifying Planned Parenthood health centers that do not provide abortions. In response, the Obama administration declined to renew the program, arguing that Texas’ new rule violates federal law by restricting women’s abilities to choose their own caregivers. Perry has pledged to continue the program with state money — and without Planned Parenthood. Under the program, participating women may receive health screenings, including a Pap smear, during the one family planning exam per fiscal year that the program covers. Examples of other screenings, related to family planning, that women can get during their visit: breast exam, pregnancy test, routine urinalysis, as well as testing for diabetes, sexually transmitted diseases and high blood pressure. Screenings are not covered outside of the annual exam. The program also pays for birth control such as pills and condoms. Naishtat aide Nancy Walker told us by email that the ""nearly 45 percent"" figure came from ""multiple sources,"" including the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. She said the agency told her that in fiscal 2010, about 46 percent of clients in the state’s Women’s Health Program had received services from Planned Parenthood — which, we noticed, is a wider description than the legislators’ reference solely to ""health screenings."" Commission spokeswoman Stephanie Goodman told us that the state has not compiled data on where women in the program receive health screenings. Asked about the figure that Naishtat’s aide cited from the commission, Goodman told us that the figure is based on a data analysis for fiscal 2010 — Sept. 1, 2009, through Aug. 31, 2010 — showing that of the 106,711 women who were served by the program, 49,162 received a service from a Planned Parenthood clinic. That’s 46.1 percent. We wondered, though, if it’s correct to assume that all women in the program received health screenings, as the Democrats’ article suggests. Goodman speculated that it might be, pointing out that all women in the program are entitled to an annual exam with health screenings. Also, the Democrats’ article leaves the impression that the referenced women solely depended on Planned Parenthood clinics for their screenings. That might not be so. According to the commission’s figures, 27,256 of the 49,162 Women’s Health Program clients who were served by Planned Parenthood in fiscal 2010 also received a Women’s Health Program service from a provider not linked to Planned Parenthood. In a previous fact-check, we laid out a couple of possible explanations for those women being served by both Planned Parenthood and another type of provider. For one, some portion of the 27,256 women may have had their exams and screenings at a Planned Parenthood clinic and then any tests processed at an outside lab. In those cases — and the state couldn’t tell us how many of them there were — the only ""services"" that a woman would have received from a non-Planned Parenthood provider was lab testing. These women would not affect the Democrats’ statistic, since they received their screenings at Planned Parenthood. But under the program, it’s also possible for women to switch providers during the year and receive another exam and screenings. So some portion of the 27,256 women may have received screenings from both a Planned Parenthood and a non-Planned Parenthood provider during fiscal 2010. And if the number were large enough, the percentage of women in the program who received their screenings exclusively from a Planned Parenthood clinic would be smaller than 46 percent. Goodman told us the state has not teased out the detailed data that would settle this issue. Our ruling The Democratic legislators wrote that nearly 45 percent of women who received health screenings through the targeted family-planning program in fiscal 2010 had them at Planned Parenthood clinics. That could be so, but we identified a couple of unsettled hitches. According to the state, 46 percent of the cited program’s clients went to a Planned Parenthood clinic, but the state has no breakdown of the number of women who were screened overall, which is what the Democrats focused on. Also, the Democrats’ statement implies that 46 percent of women rely on Planned Parenthood exclusively for screenings, but some women included in the 46 percent could have had screenings at a different kind of clinic, though (again) such details are not available."
|
6787
|
In Madagascar, plague outbreak now threatens largest cities.
|
As plague cases rose last week in Madagascar’s capital, many city dwellers panicked. They waited in long lines for antibiotics at pharmacies and reached through bus windows to buy masks from street vendors. Schools have been canceled, and public gatherings are banned.
|
true
|
Madagascar, Health, Antananarivo, Africa, Epidemics, Plague, Indian Ocean, International News
|
The plague outbreak has killed 63 people in the Indian Ocean island nation, Madagascar’s government says. For the first time, the disease long seen in the country’s remote areas is largely concentrated in its two largest cities, Antananarivo and Toamasina. Global health officials have responded quickly. The World Health Organization, criticized for its slow response to the 2014 Ebola epidemic in West Africa, has released $1.5 million and sent plague specialists and epidemiologists. The Red Cross is sending its first-ever plague treatment center to Madagascar. On Wednesday, Madagascar’s minister of public health rallied doctors and paramedics in a packed auditorium at the country’s main hospital, saying they’re not allowed to go on vacation. “Let’s be strong, because it’s only us. We’re at the front, like the military,” Mamy Lalatiana Andriamanarivo said. The outbreak could continue until the end of infection season in April, experts warn. Madagascar has about 400 plague cases per year, or more than half of the world’s total, according to a 2016 World Health Organization report. Usually, they are cases of bubonic plague in the rural highlands. Bubonic plague is carried by rats and spread to humans through flea bites. It is fatal about the half the time, if untreated. Most of the cases in the current outbreak are pneumonic plague, a more virulent form that spreads through coughing, sneezing or spitting and is almost always fatal if untreated. In some cases, it can kill within 24 hours. Like the bubonic form, it can be treated with common antibiotics if caught in time. The WHO calls plague a “disease of poverty” caused in part by unsanitary living conditions. Madagascar has a per capita GDP of about $400, and national programs to control the disease have been “hampered by operational and management difficulties,” according to a report by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. But the airborne pneumonic plague, which accounts for about 75 percent of cases in the current outbreak, makes no class distinctions. “Normally, the people who catch the plague are dirty people who live in poor areas, but in this case we find the well-to-do, the directors, the professors, people in every place in society, catching the disease,” said Dr. Manitra Rakotoarivony, Madagascar’s director of health promotion. The current outbreak began in August, earlier than usual, when a 31-year-old man who had spent time in a village in the central highlands, Ankazobe, traveled by bush taxi to the east coast, unaware that he had the plague. He died en route and was buried without any safety precautions in Toamasina. Four people in contact with him also died. Residents of the capital began to relax in recent days amid the global response to the outbreak, but the disease remains a serious threat with the number of new cases per day remaining steady. Madagascar has fought the disease for more than a century. It was introduced to the island in 1898 when steamships from India brought rats infected with the bacteria that causes the disease. The plague nearly disappeared from Madagascar for 60 years, starting in 1930, but re-emerged in recent decades. The black rats that carry the disease in the highlands have gradually developed resistance to it. Unsafe burial practices that involve touching corpses are another reason the disease spreads, according to a 2015 study by scientists at the Pasteur Institute in Madagascar. The outbreak has alarmed neighboring countries. A 34-year-old man in another Indian Ocean island nation, the Seychelles, contracted the pneumonic plague while in Madagascar. He was treated in his own country and no longer has symptoms. It was the first-ever plague case in the Seychelles, said the country’s public health commissioner, Dr. Jude Gedeon. Another Seychellois, a 49-year-old basketball coach, died of the plague last month while in Antananarivo for a tournament. Seychelles authorities have established a plague isolation ward and announced that schools will be closed through Tuesday. Foreign travelers who have recently visited Madagascar are not being allowed into the country. While the WHO says the risk of the epidemic spreading beyond the region is very low and does not advise restrictions on travel to Madagascar, Air Seychelles has canceled all flights to and from the island until further notice. “The situation is still not under control in Madagascar,” Gedeon said.
|
10986
|
Preventive neuroradiology: Brain imaging bolsters efforts to lower Alzheimer's risk
|
Vague descriptions, sweeping generalizations, overly laudatory quotes — these are some of the things that we think news releases should avoid. But this release includes all three and accordingly received low marks on most of our criteria. What are the major problems? The news release provides no evidence to back up its central claim — that MRI imaging will help convince people to adopt healthier behaviors that reduce Alzheimer’s disease risk. It also provides no meaningful description of the review article that’s the basis for the release, and does not describe the methodology utilized in identifying the studies included in the review. The release also never establishes what exactly is new here that merits attention. And it displays no awareness that overuse of medical technology (including so-called “MRI abuse”) is one of the main drivers of spiraling health care costs. In fact, there is no mention of costs at all in this release. Nearly 44 million people worldwide suffer from Alzheimer’s disease, which is the sixth leading cause of death in the US. Not only that, treatment is expensive: The cost of caring for Alzheimer’s patients in the US is estimated to be $226 billion in 2015, according to the Alzheimer’s Association. Since there is no cure for Alzheimer’s disease, any measures that could identify and prevent cognitive decline would be beneficial to patients and clinicians. What we don’t need are expensive new tests that will raise the cost of care without any evidence that they improve outcomes.
|
false
|
Alzheimer's disease,Association/Society news release,Health care costs,Imaging
|
There is no mention of costs in the release, but overuse of medical technology such as MRI scanning is one major reason for soaring health care costs. According to personal finance website Nerdwallet.com, median prices of a brain MRI range from $525 in Atlanta to a whopping $3,310 in Milwaukee. The main contention of the news release is that “imaging findings can help spur beneficial lifestyle changes in patients to reduce risk for Alzheimer’s disease.” But there’s no evidence presented to show that these images have any effect — good or bad — on patients’ adoption of beneficial lifestyle changes. Does performing an MRI increase the likelihood that someone will lose weight, exercise, and stop smoking? The release also states, “institutions… meld these approaches into novel ways to improve patient care,” but the report doesn’t detail what those “novel” therapies are. Experts in the report talk about pinpointing “volume loss in the brain” and characterizing imaging markers, but these are all surrogate endpoints. In other words, how do these translate to tangible health outcomes for patients? Bottom line: The idea that a brain MRI is going to help motivate people to adopt meaningful lifestyle changes — and that those changes will, in turn, lead to an actual reduction in the number of Alzheimer’s disease cases — requires several leaps of logic that have very limited support from evidence. The release owed it to readers either to point out the preliminary nature of the hypothesis or provide some evidence to back it up. The release did neither. Procedures almost always carry risks, and MRI is no exception. Some physicians are concerned with “MRI abuse,” pointing out that MRIs often pick up abnormal – but harmless – findings that muddy up the clinical picture. These so-called “incidentalomas” can lead to more tests and treatments that cause harm and add to costs. Unnecessary imaging is a major contributor to spiraling health care costs in the US, since a single scan on average in the US costs $2,611, according to Medicare data. Beyond stating that it exists, this news release provides no information about the journal article that is the subject of the release. Nor does it detail any of the studies that supposedly support the value of imaging for Alzheimer’s disease prevention. We’d add that the journal article itself provides limited-quality evidence — it doesn’t detail the process for selecting articles that are included in the review (raising the possibility of “cherry-picked” studies) and includes little in the way of critical evaluation of the studies that are cited. Strangely, three physicians, who weren’t listed as authors of the study, are quoted in the release and allowed to tout the benefits of quantitative MRI technology. They make sweeping statements, such as that this technology “will have a huge impact in the future” and that imaging “can have a powerful impact [on patients]” But the report fails to go into detail. One of these experts adds, “Patients seem to enjoy reviewing results of their imaging studies, more so than reading the results of their blood tests or other clinical evaluations.” But one physician’s anecdotal observation is not evidence of enhanced quality or effectiveness of care. Again, supporting data is needed. The news release does not engage in disease mongering and states that as many as three million cases of Alzheimer’s dementia could be prevented with lifestyle changes. However, it does imply that there would be more cases prevented with the addition of brain imaging, a claim that is not supported by the release or the underlying review article. The release does not specify funding sources for the work, which included the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering and the National Institutes of Health. Many of the authors are consultants for medical device and pharmaceutical companies, including Toshiba (cited as “related” or relevant in the original research report). The release does not disclose this. The main premise of the news release is that MRI imaging can help people lower their risks for cognitive decline by encouraging them to make lifestyle and behavioral changes. It states that risk factors include obesity, diet, sleep, hypertension, diabetes, depression and smoking. However, the release does not address any alternatives — besides brain imaging — that might help people make the desired changes. Behavioral change counseling, which is an established approach to reducing problematic behaviors, is not discussed. The release doesn’t address the availability of quantitative MRIs of the brain. MRI in general has been used since the 1970s, and its availability is not in question. But since the issue is not specifically addressed by the release, we’ll rate it Not Applicable. Using quantitative MRI technology to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease in its early stages is not a new concept. There have been blog posts and numerous studies in the past 10 years devoted to this topic. We’re not really sure what’s new here. The news release refers to “novel ways to improve patient care,” but does not specify what these new approaches are. The language of the release bordered on sensational, with neurologist Majid Fotuhi touting the benefits of quantitative MRI technology and claiming it will have a “huge impact in the future of diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer’s disease.” The release never clarifies the how and why of this statement.
|
7712
|
European measles cases highest in a decade as pockets refuse vaccination.
|
Europe had a record number of measles cases last year, in part due to a growing number of pockets where parents are refusing vaccination for their children, the World Health Organization said on Thursday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
At the same time, the WHO said, record numbers of children are getting the vaccine - offering hope that the rise in infections may not last. “Progress has been uneven between and within countries, leaving increasing clusters of susceptible individuals unprotected, and resulting in a record number of people affected by the virus in 2018,” it said in a statement. Measles is a highly contagious viral disease that can cause hearing loss and brain disorders in children and, in severe cases, can kill. Vaccination coverage needs to be around 95 percent to prevent the virus circulating in communities - so-called “herd immunity”. In many countries, anti-vaccine campaigners seek to dissuade parents from getting their children immunized, despite strong scientific evidence that vaccines are safe and effective. In Italy, the co-ruling anti-establishment Five Star Movement has questioned the safety of some vaccines and loudly denounced efforts to make vaccinations mandatory. In the WHO’s European region, which covers nearly 900 million people, some 82,600 in 47 countries contracted measles last year - the highest number this decade. Of those, 72 cases were fatal. Six of the 53 countries did not report. In 34 of the countries, estimated coverage with a second dose of measles vaccine was below 95 percent. “(Immunization) gaps at local level still offer an open door to the virus,” the WHO’s European director, Zsuzsanna Jakab, said in a statement. Professor Arne Akbar, president of the British Society for Immunology, said the figures were “extremely concerning”. Heidi Larson, a specialist in vaccines and public health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said the increase in cases was a “wake-up call on the importance of building confidence in vaccination”. A report published by the European Commission last year and compiled by a team led by Larson found that measles immunization coverage has fallen in 12 EU countries since 2010, and that seven out of the 10 countries with the lowest vaccine confidence in the world are in Europe.
|
4248
|
Wisconsin residents using medical cannabis amid restrictions.
|
After four decades of using strong prescription drugs to treat Crohn’s disease, a chronic digestive disorder, Patty developed an aggressive form of skin cancer.
|
true
|
Madison, Wisconsin, Cancer, Medical marijuana, Skin cancer, General News, Marijuana
|
“It’s because my body has been suppressed for so long, it can’t fight it (cancer),” the Wisconsin resident said. Patty, who has worked at her father’s restaurant for 27 years, now struggles to handle full-time duties. “I’m trying to get disability, but I’ve been denied once already. I don’t plan on quitting working. I just need help. I need help because I can’t do a full-time job,” Patty said. In March 2017, a friend who lives in New Mexico, where medical marijuana is legal, mailed her Buddha Tears, a cannabis oil product containing cannabidiol (CBD), and THC, the psychotropic component of cannabis. After consuming a tiny amount of the oil each day — as well as smoking marijuana — Patty said she saw a massive improvement in her condition. “Unfortunately, I have to smoke everyday, because if I don’t, I will be in the bathroom all the time,” said Patty, who asked that her last name not be published because she is using an illegal substance. But these days, Patty is again struggling with the symptoms. “My connection (for CBD and marijuana) got cut off,” she said. “I’m very angry.” While Patty and others have found success treating their medical ailments with cannabis, the drug remains illegal in Wisconsin. And because of its status as a Schedule I drug — the most restrictive classification — there has been limited research in the United States about its effectiveness as medicine. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized one component of cannabis to treat serious and rare seizure disorders, as well as three drugs with synthetic cannabis substances; no other uses have been approved. ___ The nonprofit news outlet Wisconsin Watch provided this article to The Associated Press through a collaboration with Institute for Nonprofit News. ___ Although it remains illegal federally, 33 states and the District of Columbia have authorized medical use of cannabis. A bipartisan group of lawmakers has proposed legalizing it for medical use in Wisconsin, and another group of Democratic lawmakers introduced a bill in October to decriminalize possession of less than 28 grams. But Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, remains opposed. An April poll conducted by the Marquette Law School Poll showed that 83% of registered voters polled support the use of marijuana for medical purposes with a doctor’s prescription. “When issues receive more than 70% support from registered voters in Wisconsin, the Legislature needs to listen and act,” said Rep. David Bowen, D-Milwaukee. According to Dr. Angela Janis, director of psychiatry for University of Wisconsin-Madison’s University Health Services, Schedule I drugs, including marijuana, are considered to have no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse, whereas for Schedule II drugs, there is less potential for abuse, and there is some therapeutic benefit. Janis is intimately familiar with this distinction. In addition to her university job, Janis is chief medical officer at LeafLine Labs, a Minnesota-based medical marijuana company. “To put this in perspective: methamphetamine is Schedule II because it’s approved for obesity. Cocaine is Schedule II because it’s approved for nasal surgery since it can constrict your blood vessels as they do surgery in your nose. So that’s the bar for what ‘medical benefit’ means,” Janis said. According to Janis, cannabis has less abuse potential than any of those substances. “Cannabis is not appropriately scheduled. And that’s one of the barriers, but not the only barrier, to research,” Janis said. Janis recommends rescheduling the drug so researchers can further study its properties. Even Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), which opposes marijuana legalization, is “fully supportive” of drugs containing cannabis that have been approved by the FDA, said Colton Grace, a spokesman for the group. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, cannabinoids are substances within the cannabis plant that act on specific receptors in the human brain and body. They are the main active ingredients in the medical products derived from cannabis. These receptors affect many essential functions, including one’s memory, thinking, concentration and coordination. Interfering with it can have profound effects — both positive and negative. Two of the most extensively studied cannabinoids are delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and CBD. However, there are dozens of cannabinoids that may also have medical uses. “Many strains of the cannabis plant can have 60, 70, 80 cannabinoids in them that all interact in different ways,” Janis said. The National Institutes of Health reported spending $191 million on researching cannabinoids for medicinal use in 2017-18. Some effects are already known. For example, THC can affect the central nervous system, producing benefits such as decreased vomiting and nausea, increased appetite, reduced pain and anti-inflammatory effects. CBD also acts as an anti-inflammatory, increasing immune function, reducing pain and keeping certain cells from proliferating. Cannabinoid receptors are not in areas that control breathing, which is why there are no fatal overdoses with marijuana, Janis said. CBD actually blocks the psychotropic effects of THC, Janis said. In addition to all those cannabinoids, the cannabis sativa plant has a lot of other chemicals. For instance, terpenes, which give each strain its particular smell, such as lemon or pine, “are thought to have a lot of effects, but we just don’t know what they actually do in the body,” Janis said. In 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine came out with one of the most comprehensive reviews of scientific research on what is known about the health effects of cannabis and cannabis-derived products. The committee considered more than 10,000 scientific abstracts. It reached nearly 100 conclusions, finding substantial evidence for just a few indications — the biggest one being pain. The report found there is substantial evidence that cannabis is an effective treatment for chronic pain in adults, specifically nerve pain, Janis said. The group also found conclusive evidence for cannabis treating chemotherapy-associated nausea and vomiting and MS-associated muscle spasms. The report also showed moderate evidence that cannabis or cannabinoids are effective for improving sleep in individuals with sleep apnea, fibromyalgia, chronic pain and multiple sclerosis. It also found limited evidence for cannabis as effective for increasing appetite and decreasing weight loss associated with HIV/AIDS, relaxing muscle tightness and pain from MS, symptoms of Tourette syndrome, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Anecdotal evidence has also proven the effectiveness of cannabinoids for treating Rett syndrome. Norah Lowe, 10, started feeling relief from the rare neurological disorder one year ago when she began using CBD to treat her symptoms. Rett syndrome impacts nearly every part of a child’s life, including the ability to speak, walk, eat and breathe. A distinct feature of the condition is repetitive, almost constant hand movements. At a news conference arranged by state Rep. Melissa Sargent, D-Madison, to introduce her latest bill to legalize medical and recreational marijuana, Norah’s father, Josh Lowe, said he is frustrated that state law prohibits her from trying medical marijuana, which has helped others with her condition. Norah, who uses a wheelchair, has experienced “increased flexibility, decreased pain and muscle cramping, increased communication, cognitive ability, reduction in seizures, better mood control, and the list goes on and on,” Lowe said. A 2017 study published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews analyzed several studies, concluding that cannabis-based medicines were better than placebos for pain relief — and that these medications also improved sleep and psychological distress — it concluded that any potential benefits might be outweighed by their potential harms. According to the Marijuana Policy Project, the most common conditions accepted by states that allow medicinal cannabis relate to the relief of the symptoms of cancer, glaucoma, HIV/AIDS and MS. Some other common indicators include Alzheimer’s disease, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s, Parkinson’s disease and PTSD, according to the group, which advocates for marijuana legalization. Additionally, the University of Michigan published a study in the February issue of Health Affairs to understand the reasons why people are using cannabis for medical purposes, and whether those purposes are evidence-based. The authors found that 85.5% t of uses of medical cannabis were for conditions for which there was substantial or conclusive evidence of their therapeutic effectiveness. Even more, they found that chronic pain is currently the most common qualifying condition reported by medical cannabis patients, used by 64.9% of such patients in 2016. “That’s a good sign,” Janis said. “Even though a physician can write it (a cannabis prescription) for a variety of things, it seems to be being used for what it’s intended for.” Since cannabis is a Schedule I drug, it is “very difficult to study at any institutional level” because, in order to do so, researchers need sign-offs from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, which has “historically been unwilling to provide them,” said David Abernathy, vice president of data and government affairs for the Arcview Group, a firm that advises investors in the cannabis industry. Because of this, “Things like double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials weren’t happening in the U.S.,” Abernathy said. But there has been a lot of research in the past decade in other countries including Israel, Canada, China and Italy, and “now we’re starting to see more research in the U.S.,” he said. The 2017 National Academies review of cannabis research agreed that the drug’s status as a Schedule I substance made it hard to study. “Researchers also often find it difficult to gain access to the quantity, quality, and type of cannabis product necessary to address specific research questions,” the review found. Patty, the Crohn’s patient, believes that her cannabis treatment not only alleviated her Crohn’s symptoms, but she credits it with keeping her aggressive skin cancer at bay. According to a 2018 article published in Biochemical Pharmacology, studies have shown the potential of cannabinoids to reduce of skin cancer progression. However, there is a significant lack of clinical studies promising enough to make any conclusive statements at this time. “I haven’t had the cannabis oil since March of 2018, and once I couldn’t get it anymore, I mean I just finished my 12th surgery (for cancer),” Patty said. “So, you tell me, what do you think?”
|
7434
|
Denver to furlough thousands of workers amid coronavirus.
|
Denver Mayor Michael Hancock said Thursday that thousands of city employees, including himself, will be furloughed for eight days this year to help close what is expected to be a $226 million budget gap caused by the coronavirus, joining mayors across the country that have made the same move or are thinking about it.
|
true
|
Virus Outbreak, Colorado, Health, General News, Denver, Business, Public health, U.S. News
|
“This pandemic is not only a public health crisis, it is also fueling an economic crisis the likes of which we have not seen since the Great Depression,” Hancock said at a news conference. Denver has seen steep declines in sales, lodging and other taxes since the pandemic hit Colorado two months ago, and the state is still under a safer-at-home order that has placed restrictions on businesses. City leaders say the drop in tax revenue is affecting the fund that pays for police and fire services, as well as street maintenance. American cities, from Puyallup, Washington, to Miramar, Florida, have also furloughed employees to save money in the face of dire economic forecasts. In April, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti released a spending plan he called “a document of our pain” that includes service cuts and furloughs for nearly 16,000 workers. Under the proposal, city employees would take 26 furlough days, the equivalent of a 10% pay cut, in the coming year. The spending reductions in Los Angeles are likely to be a sign of what’s to come at city halls across the nation, as jobless lines grow and local treasuries see steep drops in tax revenue. Denver’s planned furloughs, which do not apply to uniformed employees like firefighters, police officers and sheriff’s deputies, will save the city about $16 million. The city also is reducing travel, hiring and purchases, and it is asking departments to cut 7.5% from their budgets. About 3,000 of Denver’s 12,000 employees are uniformed workers. “I want everyone to know that we have worked to exhaust every other tool we had before taking this step,” said Hancock, who repeated his call for lawmakers to include cities in the next federal stimulus package. “The reality is this: If cities can’t recover, there will be no national recovery,” he said. Brendan Hanlon, the city’s chief financial officer, said he thought the fallout from the 2008-2009 Great Recession was astonishing, but the current crisis will be harder to address. “I could have never imagined seeing the numbers that we’re seeing right now and the gravity that it means to the services that we provide to the public every day here in Denver,” he said. The city last instituted furloughs in 2011. A survey by the National League of Cities found nearly universal agreement that cities would be hit hard by revenue shortfalls caused by the coronavirus outbreak, and in many cases furloughs and layoffs would be used to close budget gaps.
|
24532
|
"Insurers delayed an Illinois man's treatment, ""and he died because of it."
|
Obama says decision to revoke insurance led to Illinois man's death
|
false
|
National, Health Care, Barack Obama,
|
"To show that insurance companies can be callous, President Barack Obama recently cited the case of an Illinois man who Obama said had died because of an insurer's decision. ""More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won't pay the full cost of care,"" the president told a joint session of Congress on Sept. 9, 2009. ""It happens every day. One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn't reported gallstones that he didn't even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it."" The man Obama was referring to was Otto S. Raddatz, who died earlier this year. But Lynn Sweet, a reporter with the Chicago Sun-Times , found the president was wrong to blame Raddatz's death on the insurance company. Raddatz, a restaurant owner, was insured by Fortis Insurance Co., according to congressional testimony by his sister, Peggy. In September 2004, at 59, he was diagnosed with stage IV non-Hodgkins lymphoma and began chemotherapy. As he was preparing for a stem cell transplant for which timing was crucial, he was told that his coverage was being rescinded due to a ""routine"" review that had found that he'd failed to disclose having gallstones and an anyeurism. Explaining that the doctor had never even told him about the discovery, and that no treatment had ever been urged, Peggy Raddatz went to the state attorney general for help. Within weeks, the attorney general's office got the decision reversed, and Raddatz was able to proceed with his transplant. The case drew national attention, including stories in Slate and on National Public Radio, and Peggy Raddatz testified twice to congressional commitees about her brother's story. But the president's version of the story was challenged by a Sept. 13, 2009, blog post by Sweet, who covers the White House for the Sun-Times . She noted that the transplant went ahead and Raddatz lived for another three years — an indication that the company's decision to rescind his treatment didn't cause his death. Peggy Raddatz's testimony backs this up. On June 16, 2009, Raddatz recounted the experience before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Raddatz is still angry with the insurer — in her prepared testimony, she called what the company did to her brother ""unethical"" and ""cruel"" — but she gave no indication that the delay hampered her brother's survival. At one point, the full committee's ranking Republican, Joe Barton of Texas, asked Raddatz whether her brother had received the stem cell transplant he needed. ""He did indeed receive the stem cell transplant,"" she responded. ""It was extremely successful. It extended his life approximately three-and-a-half years. He did pass away January 6th of 2009, and he was about to have a second stem cell transplant. Unfortunately, due to certain situations, his donor became ill at the last minute, and so he did pass away on January 6th. But again, (the initial transplant) extended his life nearly three-and-a-half years. And at his age, each day meant everything to him."" The White House acknowledges that the facts got garbled, but insists that the larger lessons from the story are unchanged. ""The story President Obama referenced in his speech underscores what so many Americans have learned the hard way: Insurance companies look for ways to rescind their coverage when you need it most,"" White House spokeswoman Kate Bedingfield said. ""A media account of Mr. Raddatz’s story that the president relied on in his speech confused some of the details, but the underlying point remains the same. President Obama wants to end the practice that allows insurance companies to pull insurance for individuals like Mr. Raddatz when they need it most."" In her piece, Sweet noted that a fellow Sun-Times reporter, Cheryl V. Jackson, talked to Raddatz after the speech, and she had no complaint with Obama's account of her brother's death. ""The point is that my brother lost his insurance coverage when he was dying,"" the article quoted Raddatz as saying. Still, the president said that Otto Raddatz's death was caused by a delay in his surgery caused by the insurer's decision to rescind his policy. But as Peggy Raddatz testified, government intervention enabled her brother to have the procedure, and he lived, despite his cancer, for another three and a half years. When Raddatz eventually died earlier this year, his sister said that his death came while waiting for a second procedure that did not happen because the transplant donor unexpectedly fell ill. Critics can still blame the insurance company for insensitivity — and it's true that the company only paid for Raddatz's treatment after the attorney general's office acted — but the evidence shows that it's inaccurate to say a delay in care caused his death."
|
37019
|
"Fetal cells from abortions are being used to flavor commercial foods and drinks or in the production of a mysterious substance known as ""adrenochrome."
|
Are Fetal Cells Ingredients in Food and Drinks?
|
false
|
Disinformation, Fact Checks, Food / Drink, Viral Content
|
Wild claims that cells from aborted fetuses are used as ingredients in food and drinks have been around since at least 2011:The Christian media is swarming with accusations that Senomyx, a San Diego-based research and development company, whose clients include food heavy-hitters Nestle, Campbell’s Soup, Kraft Foods, and PepsiCo, is conducting research with HEK293, originally derived from human embryonic kidney cells.These accusations began with an action alert issued by Largo, Florida-based Children of God for Life, a nonprofit, pro-life organization focused on the “bioethical issues of human cloning, embryonic, and fetal tissue research.” In the alert, Debi Vinnedge, executive director of Children of God, calls for the public to “boycott products of major food companies that are partnering with Senomyx, a biotech company that produces artificial flavor enhancers, unless the company stops using aborted fetal cell lines to test their products.”In March 2012, that same Florida-based anti-abortion group issued an updated press release claiming outright that Senomyx had used human embryonic kidney cells — also called HEK293 — to test its products, but the group seemed to misunderstand where those cells came from:In a shocking decision delivered Feb 28th, President Obama’s Security and Exchange Commission ruled that PepsiCo’s use of aborted fetal remains in their research and development agreement with Senomyx to produce flavor enhancers falls under “ordinary business operations”.The letter signed by Attorney Bryan Pitko of the SEC Office of Chief Counsel was sent in response to a 36-page document submitted by PepsiCo attorneys in January, 2012. In that filing, PepsiCo pleaded with the SEC to reject the Shareholder’s Resolution filed in October 2011 that the company “adopt a corporate policy that recognizes human rights and employs ethical standards which do not involve using the remains of aborted human beings in both private and collaborative research and development agreements.”The group again called for a boycott of companies that had partnered with Senomyx.The original claim that Senomyx had used HEK293 to test its products is true, but thanks to anti-abortion groups enabled by some Christian media outlets, the original claim has morphed over the years. Today, viral emails and blogs claim that cells from aborted babies are used as ingredients, which is completely false.The HEK293 cell line dates back to the 1970s. Today, it is commonly used to test new drugs and vaccines:The cells, called HEK 293 cells (that stands for human embryonic kidney) were taken from an aborted fetus in the 1970s in the Netherlands. Bits of chopped up DNA from the adenovirus, a virus that causes a pretty severe cold. The kidney cells were forced to take up bits of DNA using a technique invented in 1973 that used a calcium solution. The resulting cells don’t act much like human cells at all, but they are very easy to work with and have become workhorses of cellular biology. That’s why they’re used in the development of drugs and vaccines. No new fetal tissue has been used to keep the cell culture going; the use of this cell line isn’t leading to new abortions.In 2008, Senomyx was awarded a patent on “recombinant methods for expressing a function sweet taste receptor” that lists the cells as part of the process, and according to 2011 reports, many of the company’s 77 patents listed HEK293.While it appears to be true that these cells are used to develop and test new ingredients, the claim that the cells themselves are used for ingredients is false and based on a fundamental misunderstanding of scientific research and development and how it works.Iteration: Adrenochrome (“Adenochrome”) and fetal tissue harvestingRumors about cells from aborted fetuses in commercial products like Pepsi re-circulated after the January 22 2019 passage of new abortion-related laws in New York State, and those long-circulating claims merged with a related rumor involving a substance known as “adrenochrome” (often misspelled as “adenochrome”).Users of 4Chan’s /pol/ board were among proponents of the claim, evidenced in a February 2 2019 post titled “FUCK: Was the recent abortion law pushed to produce enough adrenochrome for RBG to survive? ?” Variations of the rumor also appeared on Instagram (archived here):Adrenochrome is a byproduct of the oxidation of adrenaline (epinephrine). It has long been thought to be a powerful recreational drug due to its mention in Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, but the substance described in the book was intended to be fictional and its resemblance to an extant substance was accidental. Thompson’s reference to the substance as a drug appears to have driven the pop culture belief that it was both rare and powerful, but by and large, information around adrenochrome (regarldess of how it is purportedly harvested) is believed to be a myth.
|
12017
|
I personally am pro-choice. I always have been. And I made no qualms about that when I was elected governor.
|
"Bruce Rauner said his signing of a controversial abortion bill was consistent with his pro-choice principles and that he had never presented himself as anything but pro-choice. We looked through numerous campaign appearance videos, ads and news stories and found no evidence that Rauner ever tried to hide or downplay his pro-choice beliefs. In fact, his campaign touted the Rauners’ support of abortion rights groups to rebut the charge that he was not pro-choice. Rauner sought anti-abortion voters by assuring them that, as governor, he had no social agenda and that ""the right for a woman to choose is the national law and… that ain’t gonna change in Illinois."" Politically, it proved to be a smart strategy that helped gain him election in 2014. By 2017, however, it became impossible to continue finessing the issue. In picking a side, Rauner declared that he has been consistent in declaring his pro-choice beliefs."
|
true
|
Abortion, Health Care, Medicaid, Illinois, Bruce Rauner,
|
"Gov. Bruce Rauner’s signing of a controversial abortion bill last month triggered an avalanche of protest from his fellow Illinois Republicans and anti-abortion groups, who said he had betrayed them. The bill, House Bill 40, removed a ""trigger provision"" in Illinois law that would have made abortion illegal should the U.S. Supreme Court overturn Roe vs. Wade. It also made abortion eligible for coverage under Medicaid in Illinois and under the state’s employee health insurance plan. Opponents were angry that Rauner broke a promise he made five months earlier to veto the bill because of its Medicaid and insurance component, which for the first time would use state taxpayer funds to pay for abortion outside of cases of rape or incest or to protect the life of the mother. They also claimed Rauner reneged on a campaign pledge that he had ""no social agenda,"" which they interpreted as Rauner having no plans to change the state’s abortion laws. In a Sept. 28 press conference in which he announced his intent to sign the bill, Rauner lamented that he could not convince Democratic lawmakers to split the legislation into separate bills, one covering the trigger provision and the other dealing with insurance coverage. But he defended his action as consistent with his pro-choice principles. ""I personally am pro-choice. I always have been. And I made no qualms about that when I was elected governor,"" Rauner said. Rauner’s statement sent us combing through video clips, ads and news coverage of the 2014 gubernatorial election to see if he really was consistent in presenting his pro-choice stance to voters during that hotly contested race. Here’s what we found. Rauner, a wealthy private equity investor who had never run for elected office, sought to build his campaign solely on economic, educational and political reform issues. He stated often that he had no social agenda, and his wife, Diana, appeared in a campaign ad making that very statement. This helped Rauner avoid taking a direct stand on same-sex marriage, which was a hot topic in Illinois politics in the months preceding the 2014 GOP primary for governor. In May 2013, just before Rauner formally declared his candidacy, longtime state GOP chairman Pat Brady resigned in part because of fallout from him having declared his support for same-sex marriage. Rauner’s no-social-agenda claim also proved useful when it came to navigating the political minefield of abortion. To win election in a Democratic-leaning state, Rauner needed to get votes from Democrats who support abortion rights and moderate Republicans without antagonizing social conservatives. ""My opponent is desperate for social issues to become prominent in the campaign,"" Rauner said in a campaign appearance with his running mate, Evelyn Sanguinetti, in June 2014. ""And I’ve been crystal clear: I do not have a social agenda. Evelyn and I are not running on social issues. We all have our personal beliefs. We are not advocating leading on social issues, we are fine with the status quo on that."" That said, we found several examples in which Rauner explained his position on access to abortion during the campaign. In an appearance before Wauconda Township Republicans on Oct. 2, 2013, Rauner said: ""Abortion is a tragedy. It’s a loss of life. To me that’s not debatable. However, I do not advocate making it illegal. I can’t, I won’t, I’m not going to talk about making it illegal. I’m going to work and support efforts to make it safe and rare. Parental notification, late-term restrictions, teaching abstinence outside of marriage and strongly encouraging adoption as a far better alternative."" To residents of HeatherRidge community in Gurnee on Nov. 3, 2013: ""The reality is the right for a woman to choose is the national law and we’re not gonna, that ain’t gonna change in Illinois. I think we can agree on some common-sense ways where abortion can be more rare and safe. I support parental notification. I support late-term restrictions. I strongly encourage adoption as a far better alternative to abortion. There are things we can agree on to work on to try and get done, realistically… ""I just think it’s better for a woman and her physician and her family and her minister or priest make the decision than the government. That’s my view. People can disagree with me. I respect that. But that’s my view, it ain’t gonna change."" It came up in an interview on the ""Big John and Amy Show"" on WIND-AM 560 on March 17, 2014: Amy Jacobson: ""If there was a possibility that the decision was passed from federal to state jurisdiction, what would your position be?"" Rauner: ""My position would be abortion is a tragedy but it should be an issue left to a woman with her physician and her family and her minister, not the government."" It wasn’t just the candidate himself proclaiming his ""pro-choice"" bona fides during the campaign. Diana Rauner, head of the child advocacy concern the Ounce of Prevention Fund, became a strong spokeswoman for her husband’s no-social-agenda agenda, especially where it concerned reproductive rights. ""You can trust him that there’s no way he will ever let anything happen to our reproductive rights,"" Diana Rauner said in an interview with NBC5 political reporter Mary Ann Ahern on Sept. 26, 2014. ""I actually think this is a great opportunity in this race where we actually don’t have to think about the social issues because both candidates are pro-choice."" The campaign featured a 30-second TV ad in which Diana, who claimed to be a Democrat, sought to bring Democrats to her husband’s side by telling viewers, ""Bruce doesn't have a social agenda. He has an economic and educational agenda."" After an Oct. 24, 2014, event in Chicago in which feminist icon Gloria Steinem endorsed Quinn and accused Rauner of financially supporting anti-abortion causes and candidates. ""In terms of money and action, he is, in fact, anti-choice,"" Steinem said during her appearance with Quinn. Diana Rauner provided the response in an interview with then ABC-7 political reporter Charles Thomas. ""Bruce has a strong history of being a supporter of reproductive rights,"" she said. ""He’s a social moderate and he’s committed to education and has shown that commitment over the years."" Throughout the campaign, Rauner found himself in the strange position of being a Republican candidate forced to deny charges that he opposed abortion. Despite Rauner’s many statements to the contrary, the Quinn campaign sought to portray Rauner as a major funder of anti-abortion candidates and organizations. The Chicago Tribune story on Steinem’s appearance carried this rebuttal from Rauner’s campaign: ""Rauner campaign aides said the candidate and wife Diana have donated money to abortion rights groups including Planned Parenthood and the Roger Baldwin Foundation."" The Baldwin Foundation is a branch of the American Civil Liberties Union that litigates issues including reproductive rights. At the same time, however, Rauner was a heavy donor to Republican candidates and state and national Republican organizations that were firmly in the anti-abortion camp. Chicago Magazine detailed the political/ideological conflict of the Rauners in an article published the day before the 2014 election headlined, ""Is Bruce Rauner Pro-Choice, Anti-Choice, or Just an Opportunist?"" (I)t’s interesting to look at the self-proclaimed Democrat, Diana, who has given in 2014 the max in the primary and/or general to several Republicans, some who are decidedly not socially moderate... Just a couple of examples: David McSweeney (abortion and gay marriage opponent), Mark Neerhof (against gay marriage). Diana has also given generously ($10,000 in 2012; $5,300 this time around) to the Republican Renaissance PAC of the late ultra-conservative Jack Roeser (anti abortion, anti gay marriage). Bruce has a much more extensive record of contributions—including $27.6 million to himself, $5 million to the state Republican party, and also, along with Diana, donations to McSweeney, Neerhof, and to Roeser’s PAC. (Roeser, who died last June, was an early Rauner backer and a member of his gubernatorial exploratory committee.) Considering the contradictory nature of the Rauners’ donations -- giving heavily to groups that support abortion rights and also to political candidates and organizations that oppose them -- it’s reasonable to believe that some anti-abortion voters might have inferred anti-abortion leanings in candidate Rauner. But we found no evidence of Rauner himself attempting to hide his stance. In 2014, campaigning on maintaining the status quo on abortion was a viable option. State finances were a wreck and there appeared to be little pressure either way to change the state’s laws on abortion. The election of Donald Trump, who stated an intent to overturn Roe v. Wade and turn the question of abortion’s legality back to the states, changed that overnight. Almost immediately, Democrats in the Illinois General Assembly began advancing a bill to both keep abortion legal should Roe v. Wade be overturned and provide insurance coverage for it under Medicaid and Illinois’ state employee health insurance. ""I look at it as an insurance parity issue. There’s no excuse about the cost,"" Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, D-Chicago, said in December 2016. By packaging the trigger language and the expanded insurance coverage into a single bill, supporters of what became HB 40 effectively boxed Rauner by forcing the no-social-agenda governor to pick a side in the culture wars. He would infuriate pro-choice voters by either vetoing the bill outright or issuing an amendatory veto to strike the abortion insurance provision, the practical effect of which would be to kill the measure anyway. But signing HB 40 would be sure to antagonize much his Republican base, much of which remains passionately opposed to abortion. This was something Rauner had worked throughout the spring to avoid, at times sending out mixed signals about how he intended to handle the bill if lawmakers sent it to his desk. He made public statements in April promising to veto the bill as written. When he broke that promise, he faced the wrath of everyone from rank-and-file Republican lawmakers to Chicago Cardinal Blaise Cupich. Rauner, speaking haltingly and appearing physically uncomfortable, explained at his signing press conference that adding government funded insurance coverage was consistent with his pro-choice beliefs. ""I also believe that no woman should be forced to make a different decision than another woman make purely based on her income,"" Rauner said. ""I believe that a woman living with limited financial means should not be put in a position where she has to choose something different than a woman of higher income would be able to choose."" Bruce Rauner said his signing of a controversial abortion bill was consistent with his pro-choice principles and that he had never presented himself as anything but pro-choice. We looked through numerous campaign appearance videos, ads and news stories and found no evidence that Rauner ever tried to hide or downplay his pro-choice beliefs. In fact, his campaign touted the Rauners’ support of abortion rights groups to rebut the charge that he was not pro-choice. Rauner sought anti-abortion voters by assuring them that, as governor, he had no social agenda and that ""the right for a woman to choose is the national law and… that ain’t gonna change in Illinois."" Politically, it proved to be a smart strategy that helped gain him election in 2014. By 2017, however, it became impossible to continue finessing the issue. In picking a side, Rauner declared that he has been consistent in declaring his pro-choice beliefs."
|
15370
|
"Tammy Baldwin Says Scott Walker's views on abortion are more restrictive ""than any Republican president in recent times."
|
"Baldwin said Walker's views on abortion are more restrictive ""than any Republican president in recent times."" Walker supports outlawing abortion in all circumstances. The three most recent GOP presidents each supported exceptions, such as allowing abortion to protect the life of the mother."
|
true
|
Abortion, Candidate Biography, Civil Rights, Legal Issues, Women, Wisconsin, Tammy Baldwin,
|
"It’s clear that Scott Walker’s views on abortion will get intensified scrutiny now that he has joined the crowded Republican presidential field. In 2014, during the final weeks of the campaign before he won re-election as governor, Walker was attacked in a TV ad by a national political action committee that works to elect Democratic women who support abortion rights. And weeks before his White House run announcement on July 13, 2015, Walker was targeted twice: once in a TV ad by the nation’s oldest abortion rights advocacy group and once on a TV talk show by U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin. Baldwin, a Wisconsin Democrat, used her June 3, 2015 interview on MSNBC to cast Walker as out of step with other Republicans on abortion. After host Chris Hayes suggested that Walker’s support for a law banning abortion after 20 weeks was mainstream among Republicans, Baldwin agreed. But she drew a contrast, stating: ""Yes, but if you look at the history of those who have been elected president, Scott Walker's views are clearly more extreme than any Republican president in recent times -- much more extreme than President George W. Bush with regard to the issues of having exemptions that deal with the health and the life of the mother, and the issues of exemptions for rape victims and incest."" On abortion, is Walker to the right of any recent Republican president? Previous claims Some statements about Walker and abortion have missed the mark, including the two we mentioned. The TV ad by EMILY’s List shortly before Walker defeated Democrat Mary Burke in 2014 claimed Walker was ""forcing some women to undergo a transvaginal probe to get an abortion."". A law Walker signed says women can choose either a transvaginal or transabdominal ultrasound, though in certain cases a transvaginal probe may be medically necessary. The TV ad by NARAL Pro-Choice America, which aired in June 2015 in Iowa and New Hampshire, claimed Walker had said that ""forcing women facing abortion to get invasive ultrasounds was 'just a cool thing.’ "" The ""cool"" reference wasn’t to forcing some women to get vaginal ultrasounds, but rather to the ultrasound technology that produces images from the womb. Nevertheless, there is no question that for decades -- going back to before his time as governor and as a state lawmaker -- Walker has been staunchly anti-abortion. Baldwin’s office didn’t respond to our requests for information to back her claim, and Walker’s campaign didn’t weigh in, either. But we can compare Walker’s public positions on abortion to those of recent GOP presidents. NARAL, Planned Parenthood We asked NARAL Pro-Choice America, formerly known as the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, and the Planned Parenthood Federation of America about how they rate politicians on abortion rights. The groups told us they don’t produce ratings on a continuum. They put politicians into broad categories -- not on a scale that would rank one as more extreme, to use Baldwin’s term, than another. NARAL gave Walker and 13 other Republican presidential contenders a grade of F, for Fail. The group points to Walker’s votes in the Legislature and measures he has signed into law as governor restricting access to abortion services. Planned Parenthood rates the Republican and Democratic 2016 contenders more broadly, on access to abortion, affordable birth control and family planning. Like most of the other GOP hopefuls, Walker was given a red X on each measure, rather than a green checkmark. Planned Parenthood notes that besides wanting to ban abortion even in cases of rape and incest, Walker tried to repeal a law requiring insurance companies to cover prescription birth control and defunded Planned Parenthood, which is something Walker himself highlights in his campaign speeches. The website of the National Right to Life Committee, meanwhile, highlights the records of President Barack Obama and his four most recent predecessors, dating back to the late Ronald Reagan, but doesn’t do any ratings. So let’s look more closely at Walker and the three most recent GOP presidents, dating back to Reagan. Walker vs. Bushes, Reagan Walker’s basic position is clear. In 2010, a week before he was elected to his first term as governor, we rated a claim that Walker wants to make abortion illegal even in cases of rape, incest or to protect the life of the mother. He acknowledged that was his position. As Matt Sande of Pro-Life Wisconsin told us, since then, Walker has not contradicted that position in words or actions. In fact, Walker has underscored his support for banning abortion without exceptions commonly accepted by other abortion opponents. In March 2015, Walker released an ""open letter on life,"" which began by noting that he had ""earned a 100 percent rating with pro-life groups in Wisconsin."" And in June 2015, Walker pledged to sign legislation to ban abortions in Wisconsin after 20 weeks -- with no exceptions for cases of rape or incest. That measure was passed by the Legislature the next month and is awaiting Walker’s signature. No recent Republican president has gone so far in opposing exceptions. As president, George H.W. Bush (1989-’93) and George W. Bush (2001-’09) both supported allowing abortions in cases of rape or incest, or to protect the life of the mother. The elder Bush said in 1992 he said: ""My own position on abortion is well-known and remains unchanged. I oppose abortion in all cases except rape or incest or where the life of the mother is at stake."" The younger Bush declared in 2006: ''My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incest and the life of the mother."" Meanwhile, Reagan (1981-’89), an idol of Walker’s, was closer to Walker’s position. He didn’t support an exception for rape or incest, but did support one to protect the life of the mother. In 1987, he promoted a bill with a provision that ""no funds appropriated by Congress shall be used to perform abortions, except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term."" Our rating Baldwin said Walker's views on abortion are more restrictive ""than any Republican president in recent times."" Walker supports outlawing abortion in all circumstances. The three most recent GOP presidents each supported exceptions, such as allowing abortion to protect the life of the mother."
|
36601
|
"Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen is selling ""emotional support chicken"" for weary flight passengers."
|
Is Popeye’s Offering ‘Emotional Support Chicken’ to Harried Travelers?
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
On December 18, 2018, a spate of posts and articles about fast food chain Popeye’s new “emotional support chicken” appeared on social media:The move appeared to be a stunt that was either tasty or tasteless, depending on your perspective. Although several general news outlets posted about the Popeye’s product, readers and social media users remained on high alert for leg pulls and marketing stunts based on the topics of the day — in this case, the ongoing controversy around emotional support animal companions and air travel:Delta says it saw an 84 percent increase in reported incidents involving service and support animals in 2016 and 2017. According to the trade group Airlines for America, airlines in the US saw a 74 percent increase overall in emotional support animals from 2016 to 2017. This increase has caused other major airlines including American and United to tighten their policies.Even if you haven’t encountered a nonhuman passenger on your own flight, you’ve probably heard one of the viral stories about one, which seem to surface every few weeks. In January [2018], a woman was barred from bringing her emotional support peacock on a United flight, even when she offered to buy the bird its own seat.Likely owing in part to the evergreen popularity of the debate, Popeye’s advertisement of a new purported product relating to emotional support animals proved popular on social media:Sorry, Fido. Popeyes #EmotionalSupportChicken doesn’t bark on the plane. (Available in the Philadelphia airport on 12/18.) pic.twitter.com/vWyBWq4PTe— Popeyes Chicken (@PopeyesChicken) December 18, 2018Popeye’s issued a press release on December 18, 2018 about its purported new product:There is no doubt the holiday season is one of the busiest and most stressful travel times of the year. The airports are crowded, the delays are frustrating, and travelers are stressed about getting from point A to point B with gifts in hand. This year, POPEYES® is launching “Emotional Support Chicken” to provide a good-hearted laugh most need to get through stressful holiday air travel. Starting Tuesday, December 18 [2018], travelers passing through Philadelphia International Airport can purchase their fried chicken meal with an “Emotional Support Chicken” carrier at the Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen in Terminal C to bring with them on their flight.Emotional support animals provide comfort and companionship, especially during a highly stressful time like air travel. However, according to recent headlines, some travelers are pushing the envelope with the types of animals they try to bring on flights and classify as “emotional support animals,” including the likes of peacocks, squirrels and tarantulas. Knowing this, Popeyes decided to launch its new “Emotional Support Chicken” to bring holiday travelers some humor to what is one of the most stressful places to be during the holidays – the airport.As is often the case with headline-grabbing fast food news, Popeye’s “Emotional Support Chicken” promotion was a bit overhyped for its real-world impact. The product was only available at one location (Philadelphia International Airport), and only while supplies lasted. Overall, the announcement largely served to get Popeye’s a bunch of news mentions, with little substance behind the novelty item.
|
2897
|
EU panel recommends suspension of risky bone disease drug.
|
European regulators have recommended suspending a popular bone-building drug made by unlisted French firm Servier because of the risk of serious heart problems and blood clots.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The European Medicines Agency had already restricted the use of Protelos - also known as Osseor or strontium ranelate - last April but its pharmacovigilance committee said on Friday the drug should no longer be used to treat osteoporosis at all. The move follows an analysis which found that for every 1,000 patient-years there were four more cases of serious heart problems, including heart attacks, and four more cases of blood clots among patients taking the drug than those on placebo. The recommendation will now be sent to the agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, which is expected to issue a final opinion at its January 20-23 meeting.
|
280
|
Fate of opioid litigation hinges on government 'police power'.
|
The fate of thousands of lawsuits seeking to hold drugmakers responsible for fueling the U.S. opioid epidemic hinges in part on a thorny legal question: Can a company use a bankruptcy to stop lawsuits from cities and states?
|
true
|
Health News
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Gross is expected in July to decide whether to halt more than 160 active lawsuits brought by state attorneys general, cities and counties against opioid manufacturer Insys Therapeutics Inc. When it filed for Chapter 11 protection in Delaware earlier this month, Insys requested the cases be paused. A bankruptcy filing would normally halt active litigation immediately, giving a company such as Insys time to reorganize and preserve money that would otherwise be spent fighting the cases. But a longstanding exception in U.S. bankruptcy law can keep the lawsuits alive if they are enforcing government officials’ “police or regulatory power.” The exception holds that government actions seeking to enforce laws related to matters such as public health and safety are not automatically stopped by a company’s bankruptcy filing as other lawsuits are. State and local officials are suing Insys and other drugmakers in an attempt to address harm from an opioid crisis that has killed nearly 400,000 people between 1999 and 2017. More than half these deaths resulted from prescription painkillers, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. For a graphic, click tmsnrt.rs/2EgfT0n “Criminal enterprises … should not be permitted to shield themselves from the consequences of their misconduct by running to bankruptcy court and obtaining the equivalent of a stay that allows them to evade justice,” said Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh in a Tuesday legal filing opposing Insys’s request to halt lawsuits. The opioid crisis “is a national public health emergency,” they said in the filing, which other state attorneys general supported, including those in New York, New Jersey and Arizona. “The interests of the public therefore are served by allowing these police powers actions of the states to continue unfettered by the injunctions that Insys seeks.” A spokesman for Insys, which faces trials in Maryland and Minnesota beginning in August, declined to comment beyond the company’s court filings. Insys already had reached a $225 million settlement before filing for bankruptcy with the U.S. Justice Department, admitting to illegal conduct in resolving claims that it bribed doctors to write prescriptions, including medically unnecessary ones, for a fentanyl spray called Subsys designed to treat cancer pain. The Chandler, Arizona-based company still faces, overall, more than 1,000 lawsuits raising similar allegations of deception and fraud in marketing its opioids. The misconduct occurred under a prior management team that has since “entirely turned over” and Insys is now committed to lawful marketing practices, the company said in court papers. Insys contends in bankruptcy-court filings that Judge Gross should halt the lawsuits against it regardless of any exceptions, lest the company drain limited financial resources fighting cases on multiple fronts. Allowing the cases to continue would leave less money for creditors, including the very government officials seeking to hold it to account, Insys contends, adding that its request is not an attempt to escape liability. It had less than $40 million in the bank when filing for bankruptcy and predicts spending up to $9 million through December to continue fighting lawsuits, according to court papers. The judge’s ruling is expected to influence whether another opioid manufacturer facing 2,000 lawsuits - OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma LP - decides to file for bankruptcy protection, according to a person familiar with the matter and legal experts. A Purdue spokesman declined to comment. A ruling allowing the Insys litigation to proceed could discourage Purdue from seeking bankruptcy protection, while pausing the cases might signal that Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings are a viable way to halt lawsuits and take advantage of breathing room to reach a broader settlement with plaintiffs, according to the person familiar with the matter and several legal experts. Insys lawyers are attempting to persuade government officials to agree to voluntarily halt their cases, according to a bankruptcy-court filing. Insys is nearing a deal that would effectively halt some of those legal claims against the drugmaker that are consolidated in an Ohio federal court, said Paul Hanly, a lead lawyer for plaintiffs in the opioid litigation. An Insys spokesman declined to comment on the potential agreement. Insys has some legal precedent backing its approach. In 2017, a bankruptcy judge sided with Takata Corp when temporarily halting lawsuits brought by Hawaii, New Mexico and the U.S. Virgin Islands against the Japanese supplier of automobile airbags that exploded, finding that allowing the litigation to continue threatened the company’s reorganization. That would have harmed creditors, including those seeking to hold Takata accountable for widespread deaths and injuries, the judge ruled. The ruling allowed Takata to focus on completing a sale to a rival, creating a combined company called Joyson Safety Systems. A Joyson representative declined to comment. The Minnesota and Maryland attorneys general argued in their legal filing on Tuesday that Insys has not demonstrated the kind of exceptional circumstances present in the Takata case - an unprecedented automotive recall - that warranted halting government lawsuits. While the outcome in the Insys case is not critical for opioid manufacturers with stronger balance sheets that face lawsuits, such as Johnson & Johnson, it holds significance for the likes of OxyContin maker Purdue, according to several legal experts. In March, Reuters reported that Purdue was exploring filing for bankruptcy protection to address lawsuits alleging it pushed prescription painkillers while downplaying their abuse and overdose risks, according to people familiar with the matter. Purdue’s CEO later confirmed the company was considering a bankruptcy filing. The company has denied allegations it contributed to the opioid crisis, pointing to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approving labels on its drugs carrying warnings about risk and abuse associated with treating pain.
|
32696
|
Retailers T.J. Maxx and Marshall's sell counterfeit salon products.
|
However, it is likely the rumor will persist among stylists and salons seeking to warn clients off low-priced alternatives.
|
false
|
Uncategorized, CHI, marshall's, tj maxx
|
In May 2016, photographs and messages reproduced above began circulating on Facebook along with claims that lurking underneath labels of pricey salon-brand hair products purchased through discount retailers were cheaper, lower quality brands. Photographs show the CHI line of hair care products with T.J. Maxx price tag and the label half peeled away to show a bottle bearing a less expensive (and presumably lower-quality) hair care product. Most versions of the claim included an assertion that salon-brand hair products should only be bought at hair salons, not discount retailers. The rumors served as a tacit criticism of salon clientele who purchase product from third parties rather than from salons or stylists (who would earn commission and meet salon sales goals otherwise). A similar social media rumor maintained that eyelash extensions can cause “lash lice,” a story spread primarily by multi-level marketing salespeople hawking mascara. In another instance, salons and stylists spread a rumor that Pantene (one of the top-selling drugstore hair care brands) can be flammable in combination with popular hair-lightening treatments. Both rumors began with or were passed along by people invested in the sale of competing products at full price. T.J. Maxx said that the CHI products depicted were genuine: At T.J. Maxx, conducting our business with integrity means everything to us and we take pride in offering our customers great values on high quality brand-name products. We have looked into your concerns and can assure you that the contents of the bottle are authentic and are as described on the outer label. We have also confirmed with our supplier that its relabeling of the bottle was appropriate. We thank you for your ongoing patronage of our stores. CHI also responded our questions about the photographs. The company explained that the labeling was due in part to manufacturing fluctuations, as well as cutting back on unnecessary waste: Recently, several of our customers have noticed cans of CHI® products with labels covering up other products. We sincerely wish to clear up any confusion. The Egyptian Oil and French Oil and other cans you may have seen were originally another CHI® product brand we manufactured. Due to a legal challenge that arose concerning the new brand names and designs, we were forced to cease production. As a result of this, we were left with many empty cylinders. To avoid them taking up vital space in our warehouse but most importantly, adding unnecessary waste to landfills, we decided to uphold our environmentally conscious efforts that we have maintained since 1986. We felt we made the right decision by placing original CHI® labels over these cylinders and filling them with our CHI® formulas. Therefore, the product is authentically made by Farouk Systems with the correct CHI® label on them and product inside. We sincerely apologize for any confusion this may have caused our customers. One of the two viral photographs didn’t display a T.J. Maxx or Marshall’s price tag, strongly suggesting that the relabeled bottles were indeed not restricted to non-salon retail environments. CHI’s statement affirmed the relabeled bottles were in no way different than any other from the brand, whether purchased in a salon or a discount department store. In this instance, both the retailer and the manufacturer said that the product packaging was simply repurposed, but the contents remain authentic and identical to products sold in salons and other non-discount retail environments. (In instances where counterfeiting occurs, the company being impersonated is typically the first to object to dilution of their brand.)
|
16880
|
"ISIS leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi was ""released by Obama in 2009."
|
"Pirro said that Obama released the current head of ISIS from government custody in 2009. The Defense Department said that the man now known as Baghdadi was released in 2004. The evidence that Baghdadi was still in custody in 2009 appears to be the recollection of an Army colonel who said Baghdadi’s ""face is very familiar."" Even if the colonel is right, Baghdadi was not set free; he was handed over to the Iraqis who released him some time later. But more important, the legal contract between the United States and Iraq that guaranteed that the United States would give up custody of virtually every detainee was signed during the Bush administration. It would have required an extraordinary effort to have held on to Baghdadi and there is no evidence that he was on anyone’s radar screen, assuming that he was in custody at all in 2009. The U.S.-Iraq agreement drove the release of thousands of detainees in 2009, but Obama had nothing to do with that."
|
false
|
Iraq, Terrorism, PunditFact, Jeanine Pirro,
|
"The march of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, across a swath of Iraq has fractured a nation and spurred Republican attacks that the Obama administration is on the verge of ""snatching defeat from the jaws of victory."" Fox News host Jeanine Pirro tied President Barack Obama to the roots of the current assault. On June 14, Pirro offered listeners this insight into the ISIS leader. (ISIS is also called ISIL, for Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.) ""The head of this band of savages is a man named Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, the new Osama Bin Laden,"" Pirro said. ""A man released by Obama in 2009, who started ISIS a year later. And when Baghdadi left Camp Bucca, where the worst of the worst were held in Iraq, he threatened his American jailers saying, ‘I’ll see you in New York.’ "" A reader wanted to know if Obama actually released Baghdadi, and we decided to look into it. Whatever the truth, the assertion has gained traction. For the president’s critics this fits with their disdain for the recent prisoner swap that freed Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl in exchange for five Taliban leaders who had been kept at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Red State, a conservative blog, used the Baghdadi connection to talk about Obama’s ""catch-and-release"" policy. We have two elements to verify. Was Baghdadi in U.S. custody in 2009 and did Obama have a direct connection to his release? We’ll deal with them in order. Will the real Abu Bakr al Baghdadi please stand up There have been several articles -- from Slate, and NBC among others -- that place Baghdadi at a detention facility in Iraq called Camp Bucca in 2009 (when Obama would have been president). However, all the talk tracks back to a Daily Beast interview with Army Col. Kenneth King, the former commander of Camp Bucca. That article said King knew Baghdadi at the camp and that he didn’t expect to see him become the leader of a spectacularly vicious and brutal movement. ""I’m not surprised that it was someone who spent time in Bucca but I’m a little surprised it was him,"" King said. ""He was a bad dude, but he wasn’t the worst of the worst."" In this storyline, Baghdadi was handed over to Iraqi justice system late in 2009 shortly before Camp Bucca closed. However, when PunditFact asked the Defense Department to confirm the story, officials there said Baghdadi was released in 2004, not 2009. ""Ibrahim Awad Ibrahim Al Badry, also known as ‘Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’ was held as a ‘civilian internee’ by U.S. Forces-Iraq from early February 2004 until early December 2004, when he was released,"" the Pentagon said in a statement. ""He was held at Camp Bucca. A Combined Review and Release Board recommended ‘unconditional release’ of this detainee and he was released from U.S. custody shortly thereafter. We have no record of him being held at any other time."" In short, according to the Defense Department, the man who heads ISIS was released in 2004, long before Obama took office, and was not recaptured. ABC News also has questioned King’s recollection, citing a ""a U.S. official"" that Baghdadi was not in American custody in 2009. ""I could be mistaken,"" King told ABC News, ""but I’m 99 percent. He’s a dead ringer for the guy I had the run-in with … His face is very familiar."" King declined to comment to PunditFact. A troubled detention policy If Baghdadi wasn’t in American custody in 2009 as Defense Department officials say, then there’s no way Obama could be to blame. But even if he was, the link between the ISIS leader and the American president are flimsy because the framework was set in in 2008 while George W. Bush was president. A little backstory. By July 2005, the United States had four detention facilities -- two near Baghdad, one in the northeastern corner of the country, and Camp Bucca in the far southeastern corner near the Kuwait border. The entire operation was known as Task Force 134. In the course of the war, some 80,000 people passed through these centers, according to the Defense Department. A Pentagon-commissioned study by RAND, a private policy analysis group, described a system that struggled with competing expectations. The incoming population was a mix of captured Sunni and Shiite militants, people rounded up in military raids and ordinary criminals. At times, a blend of overcrowding and sectarian animosities led to riots. The RAND study also said the 2007 ""surge"" -- the addition of 20,000 new troops into Iraq to quell spreading unrest -- pushed detainee levels to over 25,000 people. From 2007-08, Navy Captain Brian J. Bill served as the legal adviser to Detainee Operations for the Multi-National Force in Iraq. Bill described the process of vetting inmates in the U.S. Naval War College journal, International Law Studies. The military established nine review boards, working six days a week, to hear 20 cases each day. Bill reported that when the boards first began they released about 25 percent of the individuals who came before them. Later, that rose to 40 percent. The end of the detention policy At the end Bush’s second term in 2008, American and Iraqi negotiators moved toward getting the United States out of the business of holding large numbers of Iraqis. Robert Chesney, professor of international security law at the University of Texas School of Law, said neither side wanted to see the network of detention centers continue. ""Its demise reflected a deliberate policy choice by the United States and Iraq to phase out that system and to rely instead on the Iraqi criminal justice system as the sole mechanism for detention going forward,"" Chesney wrote in 2011. That goal became part of the U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, signed in November 2008. Under that agreement the United States agreed to ""turn over custody of such wanted detainees to Iraqi authorities pursuant to a valid Iraqi arrest warrant and shall release all the remaining detainees in a safe and orderly manner."" The United States continued to hold about 200 prisoners judged to pose the greatest risk. They were what remained from a group that numbered about 14,000 at the start of 2009. ""Aside from the so-called ‘Deck of Cards’ detainees held at Camp Cropper (the top leaders in Saddam Hussein’s government), it’s hard to imagine how anyone in Washington would have any interest in who we held or released,"" Bill told PunditFact. ""By the end of 2009, it’s hard to imagine how we could have continued to hold anyone if the Iraqis themselves didn’t decide to detain them."" Our ruling Pirro said that Obama released the current head of ISIS from government custody in 2009. The Defense Department said that the man now known as Baghdadi was released in 2004. The evidence that Baghdadi was still in custody in 2009 appears to be the recollection of an Army colonel who said Baghdadi’s ""face is very familiar."" Even if the colonel is right, Baghdadi was not set free; he was handed over to the Iraqis who released him some time later. But more important, the legal contract between the United States and Iraq that guaranteed that the United States would give up custody of virtually every detainee was signed during the Bush administration. It would have required an extraordinary effort to have held on to Baghdadi and there is no evidence that he was on anyone’s radar screen, assuming that he was in custody at all in 2009. The U.S.-Iraq agreement drove the release of thousands of detainees in 2009, but Obama had nothing to do with that."
|
24101
|
More people are driving under the influence of drugs than are driving under the influence of alcohol. A recent roadside survey showed that 16 percent of the people tested, tested positive for illicit or licit drugs. That's significantly higher than alcohol.
|
Drug czar says more people drive under influence of drugs than alcohol
|
mixture
|
National, Crime, Transportation, Marijuana, Gil Kerlikowske,
|
"Much has been made of the United States' success in reducing the amount of drinking and driving over the past few decades. But is there a growing problem with drivers on drugs? During a March 31, 2010, interview on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, Gil Kerlikowske -- the head of the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy, and more commonly known as the drug czar -- seemed to suggest as much. ""More people are driving under the influence of drugs than are driving under the influence of alcohol,"" Kerlikowske said. ""A recent roadside survey showed that 16 percent of the people tested, tested positive for illicit or licit drugs. That's significantly higher than alcohol."" This surprised us, so we decided to take a closer look. We located the study that Kerlikowske was referring to -- the National Roadside Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use by Drivers. It was conducted in 2007 for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration -- part of the federal Department of Transportation -- through a contract with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation. It was the fourth major roadside survey (earlier ones were undertaken in 1973, 1986 and 1996) and was the first to look at drugs as well as alcohol. The 2007 study randomly stopped drivers at 300 U.S. locations on weekend nights (10 p.m. through midnight on Fridays and Saturdays, and 1 a.m. to 3 a.m. on Saturdays and Sundays) and also made some daytime stops for comparisons. Participation in the survey and its testing was voluntary. The stops targeted private vehicles, including motorcycles, but they excluded commercial vehicles such as semitrailer trucks. In all, 11,000 drivers participated, with 86 percent tested by breathalyzer, 71 percent by oral fluid samples and 39 percent by blood samples. (The blood test was for nighttime drivers only.) Because the nighttime sample provides the most complete data on drug use, we'll stick to the nighttime sample for alcohol use as well. During the nighttime tests, 2.2 percent of drivers registered a blood-alcohol content of at least .08 percent -- the level at which a driver is presumed impaired under Florida law. By contrast, a whopping 16.3 percent of drivers tested positive for drugs, defined in the study as ""illegal, prescription, and over-the-counter products, including stimulants, sedatives, antidepressants, marijuana, and narcotic analgesics."" The most commonly detected drugs were marijuana (8.6 percent), cocaine (3.9 percent) and methamphetamine (1.3 percent). If that were the end of the story, Kerlikowske's comment would be resoundingly accurate -- 16.3 percent is indeed ""significantly higher"" than 2.2 percent. But there are two caveats that deserve a mention. • Legal vs. illegal levels of alcohol. The 2.2 percent of drivers registering .08 or above is, by historical standards, impressively low -- that number has steadily declined since the first survey, from 7.5 percent in 1973 to 5.4 percent in 1986 to 4.3 percent in 1996 before dropping to 2.2 percent in 2007. Still, that number underestimates the total percentage of drivers who registered some alcohol in their bloodstream. In all, the survey found that 12.4 percent of drivers had some alcohol in their bloodstream -- 7.9 percent with levels between .005 and .049 and an additional 2.3 percent with levels between .05 and .079. Low, but detectible, blood-alcohol levels do not impair a driver as much as illegal levels do, but they can have an effect. According to the Federal Aviation Administration, such symptoms as ""mild euphoria, talkativeness, decreased inhibitions, decreased attention, impaired judgment and increased reaction time"" can begin at .03 percent, and numerous countries have set legal thresholds lower than .08. Indeed, the California Department of Motor Vehicles says that blood-alcohol content below .08 percent ""does not mean that it is safe or legal to drive."" The state calls levels from .01 to .04 a ""possible DUI"" (driving under the influence) and .05 to .07 a ""likely DUI."" For drivers under 21, both categories are illegal outright. • We don't know much about how drugs affect the act of driving. Compared to the effects of alcohol, the impact of drugs on driving is not yet well understood. Some of this has to do with the long head start in research on alcohol and driving, and some has to do with the greater chemical complexity of drugs compared to alcohol. The authors of the study were open about the limitations of today's knowledge. ""In addition to the prevalence of drug use by drivers,"" they wrote, ""several other questions need to be answered in order to assess the drug-impaired driving problem, including: Which drugs impair driving ability? What drug dose levels are associated with impaired driving? Which drugs are associated with higher crash rates?"" They added a strongly worded caveat. ""The reader is cautioned that drug presence does not necessarily imply impairment,"" they wrote. ""For many drug types, drug presence can be detected long after any impairment that might affect driving has passed. For example, traces of marijuana can be detected in blood samples several weeks after chronic users stop ingestion. Also, whereas the impairment effects for various concentration levels of alcohol are well understood, little evidence is available to link concentrations of other drug types to driver performance."" To offer a more concrete example, it's unclear how much impact a joint of marijuana inhaled two weeks ago may have on a driver today. It could well be that the two-week-old joint is less of an impairment than a legal level of alcohol in the blood -- even though the study would count the marijuana user as part of that 16 percent ""under the influence of drugs"" yet exclude someone with .07 percent alcohol from the 2.2 percent of alcohol-impaired drivers. Thomas McLellan, deputy director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, told PolitiFact that the sensitivity of the oral swabs makes it ""highly unlikely"" that marijuana use ""even half a day earlier would have shown up"" in the survey. Still, in addition to the survey authors' written caution, several independent experts we contacted agreed that the lack of data on drug-use-and-driving interactions suggests that the survey's results be taken with a degree of caution. Barbara Harsha, executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association, added that there's strong evidence that, regardless of the comparative data on substances in drivers' systems, ""drunk driving is still the bigger problem. . . . Alcohol-related crashes were 32 percent of the total in 2008. There’s no comparable data for drug-related crashes, since there are no standards for drug impairment while driving, but the estimates are in the 10 percent to 15 percent range."" If you look no further than the outcome of the survey he cites, Kerlikowske's comment are accurate. But the caveats listed above reduce our confidence that, as he puts it, ""more people are driving under the influence of drugs than are driving under the influence of alcohol."" There's reason to believe that not all of the 16 percent of drivers testing positive for drugs would have been ""under the influence of drugs."" The survey only reveals who has some level of drugs in their system, and does not provide an accurate measure of who was impaired by drugs when they were surveyed. By the same token, it's quite possible that many more than 2.2 percent of the study participants were indeed ""driving under the influence of alcohol"" even if they weren't over the .08 legal threshold. Did these two percentages approach each other in the middle, thus undermining Kerlikowske's statement? Maybe -- or maybe he is right after all. Ultimately, the research isn't yet detailed enough to be sure. With this degree of uncertainty,"
|
4679
|
Cricketer Maxwell to take break due to mental health issues.
|
Cricket Australia says batsman Glenn Maxwell will take a break from the game to deal with mental health issues.
|
true
|
Cricket, Australia, Mental health, Health, Sports - Asia, Adelaide
|
Maxwell, 31, started the Australian summer season in strong form when he hit 62 runs off just 28 balls against Sri Lanka on Sunday and executed a run-out from near the Adelaide Oval boundary. Australia won that match by 134 runs and the second on Wednesday by nine wickets, when Maxwell wasn’t required to bat, to clinch the three-match series. Maxwell met with Cricket Australia staff on Wednesday, and is expected to miss the rest of the T20 internationals against Sri Lanka on Friday in Melbourne and against Pakistan in three matches next week. Team psychologist Dr. Michael Lloyd said Thursday that Maxwell “has been experiencing some difficulties with regards to his mental health. As a result, he will spend a short time away from the game ... Glenn was proactive in identifying these issues and engaging with support staff.” Australia coach Justin Langer said he approached Maxwell before Sunday’s match. “There’s been a few times over the last 12 months where I’ve probably suspected that he’s been battling a little bit,” Langer said. “The day before the game in Adelaide he didn’t seem to have his normal zip and enthusiasm, although he still worked hard. “People in public positions have to put on a mask and that’s the mask he puts on. He’s the great entertainer, but underneath the mask I could probably just sense he wasn’t quite right.” D’Arcy Short has been chosen as a replacement player and will join the Australian T20 squad on Friday ahead of the final Sri Lanka match. ___ More AP cricket: www.apnews.com/cricket and https://twitter.com/AP_Sports
|
40516
|
The email says that Simon and Schuster has announced a new CD-ROM computer game where “…to win the game, boys must strip supermodels down to their underwear, then provide photographs of them to aliens who wore out their one lingerie catalog – or else the aliens hormone driven anger will destroy the earth.”
|
New CD-ROM computer game features panty raids
|
true
|
Computers, Warnings
|
According to Simon and Schuster’s website, it’s the truth. The game is called “Panty Raider: From Here to Immaturity.” The publicity says, “Gamers will Seek Out Supermodels to Strip Them Down to Their Bra and Panties.” Here are some other tidbits from the Simon and Schuster publicity: PANTY RAIDER takes gamers to Model Isle where a supermodel photo shoot is taking place. The player is on a mission to photograph specific styles and colors of panties worn by supermodels to satisfy three testosterone-driven aliens and keep them from blowing up the Earth.One day on a planet far, far away, a catalog from a famous lingerie store inexplicably showed up in the mailbox at one horny alien’s home. Some time later, he and his two buddies had worn out the catalog and they needed more! So they hijacked a flying saucer for a joy ride across the universe in search of supermodels in their underwear.The player assumes the role of “Nelson,” an innocent bystander who is forced to help the aliens in their perverted quest. Nelson’s job is to photograph specific models, wearing specific types and colors of underwear (as specified by the aliens). If Nelson does not get the photos that the aliens are asking for, in the amount of time given, the aliens will destroy Earth.Once on the island, Nelson can use all the tools available to him: * Pick up lines – Use cheesy pickup lines to lure models out of the woods. * X-Ray glasses – You know the ones seen in the back of comic books? These actually work – allowing the player to see what kind of underwear each girl is wearing, before they go through the process of undressing her. Keep in mind if you waste too much time undressing a supermodel
.BOOM! Earth will be destroyed
can you control yourself? * Lures – Items such as tiny mints (lunch!) and credit cards. No self-respecting supermodel can resist these items. * Camera – Once the correct model is found wearing the right panties, and the outer clothing has been removed, it’s time to use the camera to photograph the model. These photos are then added to the player’s inventory. If all the correct models in the correct lingerie are photographed within the given amount of time, Earth is saved. Otherwise, the frustrated aliens are forced to take their hormone driven anger out on the planet. Last updated 11/13/00 For more information: Simon and Schuster News Release Comments
|
35145
|
If you can hold your breath without coughing, discomfort, stiffness, or tightness, your lungs do not suffer from fibrosis and therefore you have no COVID-19 infection.
|
Fibrosis occurs when excess connective tissue is deposited in the lungs in response to scarring or other factors. This excess of tissue can severely reduce the ability of lungs to bring oxygen to the body. To date, no major health agency has listed fibrosis as a symptom of COVID-19 at any stage in its progression. It is not listed as a symptom in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) “Clinical Guidance for Management of Patients with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease,” nor is it listed as a symptom in the World Health Organization’s joint report with China on the progression and spread of the disease.
|
false
|
Medical, COVID-19
|
As the new coronavirus, which is responsible for the disease COVID-19, spreads worldwide, so too has viral advice for combating the pandemic. One frequently copied and pasted bit of text that has gone viral on Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp suggests a simple self-check for coronavirus infection, usually attributed to “Taiwan Experts,” “Stanford University,” or “Stanford Hospital Board,” among others: The new Coronavirus may not show signs of infection for many days. How can you know if you are infected? By the time you have fever and/or cough and go to the hospital, the lung is usually 50% fibrosis. Taiwan experts provide a simple self-check that we can do every morning: Take a deep breath and hold it for more than 10 seconds. If you do this successfully without coughing, without discomfort, stiffness or tightness, there is no fibrosis in the lungs; it basically indicates no infection. In critical times, please self-check every morning in an environment with clean air. Stanford Health Care, for their part, explicitly stated they had nothing to do with the email: A widely distributed email about COVID-19 that is attributed to a “Stanford Hospital board member” contains inaccurate information. It did not come from Stanford Medicine. The viral text is often combined with other frequently recurring coronavirus claims including a paragraph attributed to “serious excellent advice by Japanese doctors” about keeping your throat moist, and a set of recommendations that begins with a claim about differentiating between a cold and COVID-19. Snopes addressed the “serious excellent advice” here, and addressed the list of tips that begin with a purported way to diagnose a cold versus COVID-19 here. This article deals only with the “self-check” claim attributed to Taiwan experts, which is flawed for several reasons. The “simple self-check” hinges on two central and unsupported assertions: First, that early COVID-19 infections include as a symptom a condition known as pulmonary fibrosis; and second, that the ability to hold your breath for 10 seconds is an accurate indicator of fibrosis. Neither is the case.
|
33696
|
The fruit of the graviola tree (soursop or guyabano), or other components of the plant (A. muricata), are a viable cure for cancer.
|
While it is factual that laboratory and animal studies suggest the potential for some chemicals found within the graviola plant to have anticancer or antitumor effects, no studies have demonstrated its efficacy as a treatment, let alone cure, for cancer. Studies have, however, shown that there is a credible risk that the plant’s active components are neurotoxic as well as toxic to cancer cells. Because of this, we rank the claim that this plant is the “cure” for cancer as false.
|
false
|
Medical, ASP Article, cancer cure, graviola
|
The fruit (soursop, guyabano), leaves, and bark of the graviola tree (A. muricata), have long been utilized as a folk remedy in parts of Africa and South America for myriad conditions. Claims of their potential to “cure” cancer, similarly, have long been a fixture in certain regions of the Internet — fringe health websites and supplement hucksters, primarily. In their most exaggerated form, such claims take the form of a widespread conspiracy alleging a pharmaceutical coverup to squash evidence of viable, powerful, and universal cure for cancer in favor of financial gain. The dubious Health Sciences Institute, (promoter of a previously debunked claim that Hillary Clinton has worked to hide a cancer cure dubbed “sour honey”) described the plant’s potential this way: Since the 1970s, the bark, leaves, roots, fruit, and fruit seeds of the Amazonian Graviola tree have been studied in numerous laboratory tests and have shown remarkable results with this deadly disease. Several years ago, a major pharmaceutical company began extensive independent research on it. They learned that certain extracts of the tree actually seek out, attack, and destroy cancer cells. […] After more than seven years of work behind closed doors, researchers at this company realized they couldn’t duplicate the tree’s natural properties with a patentable substance. So they shut down the entire project. It basically came down to this—if they couldn’t make huge profits, they would keep the news of this possible cure a well-guarded secret. But one researcher couldn’t bear that, and decided to risk his job with the hope of saving lives. Indeed, there has been research on many parts of, and chemicals within, the graviola tree with regard to their ability to kill cancerous cells. In terms of a possible mechanism, most ideas revolve around unique chemicals contained within the fruit — annonaceous acetogenins — that may present a novel pathway to kill cancer cells. These chemicals are found only in the family of plants Graviola belongs to (Annonaceae) and some research indicates they may have the ability to inhibit chemicals that aid cellular respiration, which can cause a “programmed death” of cancer cells. Perhaps most notably, this mechanism has been explored using extracts from graviola material against human lung, colorectal, and liver cancer cell lines. Such studies have found that extracts were indeed able to cause programmed cell death as hypothesized. Other studies have shown limited potential in reducing the proliferation of cancer cells in some animals and cell lines as well. It is worth mentioning, however, that many chemicals that show anti-cancer properties in laboratory settings do not translate to viable cures or treatments for cancer. Investigations on laboratory animals, too, have shown limited but somewhat positive results with regard to the plant’s anticancer potential. Studies on rats and mice, respectively, have shown some anti-tumor potential with prostate cancer and breast cancer, and studies on rats have, as well, shown potential preventive effects for colon cancer. Outside of singular case reports from people alleging benefits from the plant, no large scale clinical human studies have been published on its efficacy as a legitimate treatment for cancer (at least one clinical trial has been registered, however). As such, the view of the UK based Cancer Research, and other Cancer groups, is as follows: There have not been any studies [of Graviola] in humans. So we don’t know whether it can work as a cancer treatment or not. Many sites on the internet advertise and promote graviola capsules as a cancer cure but none of them are supported by any reputable scientific cancer organisations. Both the United States Food and Drug administration as well as the United States Federal Trade Commission have issued warnings to groups selling graviola extract with claims of its cancer-curing potential. In 2008, in a press release describing a “sweep” of graviola supplement sellers, the FTC described their products as “bogus“. Outside of overblown claims, there are also legitimate concerns about the safety of these products. Numerous studies have suggested that the potentially active chemicals within the graviola tree may be neurotoxic. Epidemiological studies of cultures that regularly use the plant in traditional medicine have shown associations between the plant’s consumption and Parkinson’s disease: Epidemiological studies, however, linked the consumption of Annonaceae to a high prevalence of atypical parkinsonism, in Guadeloupe, in parts of the Afro-Caribbean and Indian population in London and New Caledonia. In several patients who desisted in their consumption of Annonaceae fruits, the progression of atypical parkinsonism ceased […]. Chemical investigations of active components within the plant reveal strong evidence of its neurotoxicity, as well: The fruit pulp extract of A. muricata revealed the strongest neurotoxic effect, with 67% cell death at a concentration of 1 µg/mL. A high reduction in cell viability coupled with pronounced cell death was found at 0.1 µg/mL for an Annonaceous seed extract. These results demonstrate that the intake of dietary supplements containing plant material from Annonaceae may be hazardous to health in terms of neurotoxicity.
|
10967
|
New Drug Shows Promise Against Huntington’s Disease
|
The HealthDay story covers a phase III drug study that was recently published in The Lancet Neurology. The main problem with this story is its contradictory statements regarding the drug’s benefits. The article states that a higher dose of pridopidine showed a “significant benefit,” but how significant? Later in the story, an independent source comments that the “benefit is modest.” The story did not mention anything about the researchers’ inability to meet their primary endpoint. The apparent benefits of the drug were found in the tertiary endpoint – a sign that the magnitude of the drug’s effects may be smaller. The article did not detail any research methods from the study. For example, how did researchers measure improvements in motor function? The story highlights the difficulty in deciphering ambiguous medical evidence for the general public. On one hand, the researchers were not able to prove their main hypothesis. But they uncovered benefits in another endpoint that may prove to be promising. The article could have differentiated this evidence and provide a more cautious interpretation of the study’s findings, which could have made for a more thorough and more accurate story.
|
mixture
|
HealthDay
|
There is no mention of costs in the story. Although pridopidine is an experimental drug, it may have been useful for the reader to know whether pridopidine could be at least a cheaper alternative to tetrabenazine, the only drug currently approved for Huntington’s disease. The story did not detail the potential benefits of pridopidine. Specifically, how did the patients improve their motor function? The only number provided was that 70% of patients improved. We need to know how this function was measured and to what degree they improved (it is not clear whether the story was talking about statistical significance or clinical significance). The story notes, “Side effects among patients taking the drug were similar to the placebo group.” Dr. Alessandro Di Rocco also agrees with this statement, since the “compound is apparently well tolerated without significant side effects.” However, the story could have been more thorough in letting the reader know exactly what those side effects are. The story makes contradictory statements on the study’s results. At one point, the article reports, “…the drug showed a significant benefit,” while further down in the article, Dr. Alessandro Di Rocco is quoted as saying, “the benefit is modest and limited to the motor symptoms of the disease.” The story could have expanded on Di Rocco’s comment and also could have included some of the study’s limitations. For example, the researchers could not prove their primary hypothesis, for which they wrote in The Lancet: “This study did not provide evidence of efficacy.” The apparent benefits came from the tertiary endpoint, which merits a more cautious interpretation of the results. There is not any disease mongering, but the article does not provide much background information on Huntington’s disease, regarding its epidemiology, risk factors and treatments. However, the story does mention dopamine and its role in movement and coordination. Dr. Alessandro Di Rocco from NYU Langone Medical Center is used as an independent source. The story also adds that the study was funded by European pharmaceuticals company NeuroSearch A/S. The article mentions tetrabenazine – the only drug on the market for Huntington’s disease – and adds that it can “cause serious side effects.” The story mentions that study results are from a phase III clinical trial, but it does not clearly comment on the availability of pridopidine, or the class of dopidine drugs in general. The story could have simply said that this drug is investigational and is not available yet. Pridopidine is an experimental drug candidate for Huntington’s disease and has been in clinical trials for the past several years. The same quotation in the news release is used in the HealthDay story, suggesting that the article was somewhat based off the news release. However, there is some evidence of original reporting, with the inclusion of Dr. Alessandro Di Rocco’s comments.
|
26850
|
Michael Bloomberg Says “black babies die at rates twice as high as white babies because of a lack of access to affordable health care.”
|
Bloomberg's figure about infant mortality rates is accurate, but his claim oversimplifies the cause of this disparity.
|
true
|
Children, Families, Health Care, Women, Texas, Michael Bloomberg,
|
"At a rally in Houston, Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg apologized for supporting the stop-and-frisk policy he endorsed while serving as mayor of New York City from 2002 to 2013. Bloomberg told the mostly black audience at the rally that he should have ""acted sooner and faster"" to stop the policy and said if he were elected, he’d use ""the power of the presidency to right the wrongs of institutional racism."" He used the rally as an opportunity to unveil a new initiative that he says will address issues specific to the black community in the United States: ""Mike for Black America."" One issue he highlighted in his address was access to health care. ""We will build a future in which we better protect the health of black mothers and their babies,"" Bloomberg said at the rally. ""You should know that black babies die at rates twice as high as white babies because of a lack of access to affordable health care and here, in the wealthiest country in the world, we cannot accept that and we will change that."" Bloomberg’s figure is accurate, but is he right in his assessment of the cause of this disparity? His team did not return a request for more information about his claim. Mortality rate higher for black infants The latest statistics on infant mortality from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that there were 22,341 infant deaths reported in the United States in 2017, putting the mortality rate at 5.79 infant deaths per 1,000 live births. Statistics on infant mortality are compiled based on birth and infant death certificates in cases where infants less than a year died during the calendar year. Generally, the infant mortality rate has trended downward since 1995 and has declined 16% since 2005, when the rate was 6.86 deaths per 1,000 live births. The CDC also analyzes the infant mortality rate by race. In 2017, infants born to black women had the highest mortality rate of 10.97 deaths per 1,000 live births. The mortality rate for infants born to non-Hispanic white mothers was 4.67 deaths per 1,000 live births, meaning infants born to black mothers have an infant mortality rate 2.35 times higher than infants born to white mothers, according to the CDC. Bloomberg’s claim wasn’t limited to Texas, but this trend is also visible at the state level. A 2018 report from the CDC looked at infant mortality data from 2013 to 2015 by state and race and found that, in Texas, the mortality rate for infants born to non-Hispanic white women was 5 deaths per 1,000 live births and was 10.52 for infants born to black women. Exploring causes of disparity It’s true that infants born to black mothers have died at rates twice as high as white babies in recent years, but is it true that it is due to a lack of access to affordable health care? It isn’t that simple. The five leading causes of all infant deaths in 2017 identified by the CDC were all health related: In a 2019 report, the CDC noted that infants born to black women had the highest mortality rates for disorders related to short gestation (premature birth) and low birthweight and maternal complications. Numerous academic studies and media investigations have highlighted correlations between access to health care and the disparity in infant and maternal mortality rates between black and white mothers. But access to health care is widely considered to be one of many contributing factors. One 2017 study published in the American Journal of Public Health identified other factors that contribute to the high black infant mortality rate: socioeconomic status, maternal behavior, ""exposure to protective and risk factors over the course of a woman’s life,"" and certain historical factors like segregation, limited educational opportunities, structural racism, and intergenerational poverty. This is not to say that a lack of access to health care is not a significant cause of this disparity. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2019 explored how state Medicaid expansion associated with changes in low birthweight and preterm birth across different races — which are more likely to affect black mothers and infants than white mothers and infants. The study did not explore the link between Medicaid expansion and reducing infant mortality. Researchers found that overall, Medicaid expansion was not associated with differences in rates of low birth weight or preterm births. However, they identified ""significant improvements in relative disparities for black infants compared with white infants in states that expanded Medicaid vs. those that did not."" In other words, states that expanded Medicaid saw rates of low birthweight and preterm births decline among black mothers and infants. In general, black mothers were less likely than white mothers to access prenatal care, according to data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s Office of Minority Health. In 2017, black mothers were 2.3 times more likely to receive no prenatal care or late prenatal care than non-Hispanic white mothers. The same year, 66.6% of black mothers received prenatal care during the first trimester, compared to 82.4% of white mothers who accessed early care. Our ruling Bloomberg said: ""Black babies die at rates twice as high as white babies because of a lack of access to affordable health care."" Bloomberg’s figures about the black infant mortality rate vs. the white infant mortality rate are accurate. Studies show that access to healthcare is a contributing factor to this disparity, but it is far from being the only issue at play."
|
5430
|
Moldy bread or grain blamed for Canada geese deaths.
|
Moldy bread or grain has been blamed for the death of dozens of Canada geese in an upstate New York park.
|
true
|
Malone, Geese, New York, Environment, U.S. News, Canada, Birds
|
The state Department of Environmental Conservation says an investigation determined the geese died of the fungal disease Aspergillosis, caused by eating moldy grain or bread. Three dozen Canada geese were found dead in a pond at the Malone Recreation Park in Franklin County near the Canadian border. State wildlife staff in Albany tested the dead birds. The state agency is asking the public not to feed waterfowl to help prevent the fungal disease or cause poor nutrition, delayed migration and other problems. Officials are also asking farmers to dispose of moldy grain and silage by burying it rather than spreading it over fields.
|
8817
|
Nordic scientists start trial on nicotine vaccine.
|
Nordic scientists have launched a trial on a vaccine designed to help smokers kick the world’s deadliest habit by depriving them of one of its chief pleasures, the firm that owns the vaccine said on Tuesday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
A woman smokes a cigarette in an undated file photo. REUTERS/File Independent Pharmaceutica, a private company based at Stockholm’s Karolinska Institute and founded in 1997 by Professor Torgny Svensson, joins a growing line-up of biotech companies seeking to develop an anti-nicotine shot. Its researchers say the vaccine eliminates the quick high smokers relish by creating antibodies that bind to nicotine molecules, making them too bulky to enter the brain. Once the high is gone, the argument goes, so is the main cause of addiction. In the Phase II study on 400 people in three Nordic countries, researchers will measure the effect of the vaccine on those who have quit smoking and want to avoid relapse. But they may use it in future to help active smokers quit, according to Independent Pharmaceutica. Several other vaccines against nicotine dependence are under investigation, but Independent Pharmaceutica Chief Executive Lena Degling Wikingsson said her company hopes to produce a more potent product with fewer side effects than competitors. “After this Phase II study, we want to have co-operation with a bigger pharmaceutical company to be able to take this further,” Wikingsson told Reuters on Tuesday. “We are discussing (this) with the world’s biggest pharmaceutical companies.” Switzerland’s Cytos Biotechnology published results from a Phase II trial in 2005, showing 42 percent of patients who achieved high antibody levels at vaccination stayed smoke-free after 12 months, against 21 percent in the group given a placebo. Bermuda-based private equity firm Celtic Pharma has said it will announce results from its Phase II trial on a nicotine vaccine this quarter, while U.S. company Nabi Pharmaceuticals is developing a similar product. According to the World Health Organization, tobacco use is the number one preventable cause of death in the world, killing 5.4 million people every year, an increasing proportion of those in low-income countries.
|
4656
|
State awards license to grow medical marijuana in Missouri.
|
Missouri officials have granted licenses to 60 of the more than 500 companies that applied to grow marijuana for the state’s fledgling medical cannabis industry.
|
true
|
Michael Brown, Medical marijuana, Health, General News, Marijuana, St. Louis
|
The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services announced the winning applicants Thursday, just days after the state awarded licenses to companies seeking to transport cannabis products. Testing facilities were licensed earlier this month, reports the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. The newly announced licensees included Blue Arrow Holdings LLC, a newly formed company that plans to retrofit a building in the long-shuttered Lempt Brewery complex in St. Louis to grow cannabis indoors, reports the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. “We’ll be taking over that space and sustaining it,” said Max Bonanno, a consultant to Blue Arrow Holdings. “It’s pretty cool.” But some of the applicants that didn’t win licenses threatened to sue or appeal. Among them was Dr. Paul Callicoat, a retired cardiologist and a principal of Sarcoxie Nursery in southwest Missouri, who said his family will review “all available lawful remedies” to reverse this decision. Voters made medical marijuana legal in 2018. The licensing program is expected to wind up by February with the awarding of licenses to applicants seeking to sell cannabis products to Missourians holding doctor-approved cards.
|
26511
|
Instagram posts Says “Bill Gates and other globalists, in collaboration with pharmaceutical companies, are reportedly working to push tracking bracelets and ‘invisible tattoos’ to monitor Americans during an impending lockdown.”
|
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded research into invisible ink technology that could accompany vaccines to strengthen vaccination record-keeping in developing countries. MIT began its research in July 2016, years before the first cases of the novel coronavirus emerged. There’s no evidence Bill Gates is pushing for tracking bracelets, or that the MIT research has anything to do with “tracking Americans” amid the pandemic.
|
false
|
Public Health, Science, Technology, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Instagram posts,
|
"If living through a pandemic doesn’t already make you feel like you’re walking around in a brave, new world, then conspiratorial social media posts about the global outbreak may push you to the brink. According to a claim we spotted on Instagram and beyond, Bill Gates ""is pushing"" an effort during the current outbreak to track Americans using bracelets and invisible tattoos that would be delivered alongside a vaccine. The theory also insinuates the project came along ""days"" after Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, stepped down from the company’s board of directors. The post reads: ""Bill Gates and other globalists, in collaboration with pharmaceutical companies, are reportedly working to push tracking bracelets and ‘invisible tattoos’ to monitor Americans during an impending lockdown. MIT and Gates have ‘created an ink that can be safely embedded in the skin alongside the vaccine itself, and it’s only visible using a special smartphone camera app and filter.’ This comes days after Gates stepped down from Microsoft’s board."" The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has helped fund research into increased vaccine tracking, especially in under-resourced communities, but this post makes unsupported assertions and distorts the timeline of that research. Let’s take a look. Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are seeking to address vaccine tracking challenges in developing countries by creating an invisible ink that could be injected into children along with vaccines. The study began in July 2016, MIT told us, more than three years before the first novel coronavirus cases emerged. It was not inspired by the current outbreak. The idea behind the research is that the dye would be visible under near-infrared light for up to five years and provide a quick, affordable way of helping health providers keep track of a child’s vaccinations, even when paperwork gets lost or parents forget whether their child is up to date. The dye wouldn’t monitor people’s habits or movements, as the Instagram post implies. It would essentially be a marker to see if someone received a vaccine upon inspection by a medical official. Scientists hope an invisible, embeddable medical record that could accompany vaccines could help solve that problem. The Gates Foundation has contributed funds for this research. Some governments such as Hong Kong are using electronic wristbands to track people who have tested positive for the novel coronavirus in order to enforce quarantines and reduce the spread of the virus. But we find no evidence in news archives or other internet searches that Gates specifically stated he is ""pushing"" or advocating for the development of tracking bracelets. The only mention of ""bracelets"" we could find associated with Gates came about in 2012, when the Gates Foundation funded a study into bracelets that would measure student engagement in classrooms. That said, Gates has said he supports the idea of a national tracking system to monitor the virus that causes COVID-19. In a March 18 Ask Me Anything session on Reddit, Gates lauded South Korea’s tracking system, which uses a smartphone app to gather information about COVID-19 spread. He said that, although thousands of tests are being offered per day at the University of Washington in Seattle, for example, ""no one is connected to a national tracking system"" and that ""whenever there is a positive test it should be seen to understand where the disease is and whether we need to strengthen the social distancing."" Gates has been interested in vaccinations and vaccination tracking, particularly in low-resource areas, for several years. He stepped down from Microsoft’s board of directors on March 13, 2020. And, as we mentioned, MIT’s research into a vaccination-related invisible ink program has been going on for several years as well. MIT published a study on its research on Dec. 18, 2019, in the journal Science Translational Medicine. The research was submitted to the journal in July 2019, and an MIT spokesperson told PolitiFact that it began back in 2016 — years before the first cases of the virus were reported. The Gates Foundation told PolitiFact that it awarded a grant to MIT to improve the way childhood vaccinations are tracked; it had nothing to do with the 2019 coronavirus outbreak. Additional funding also came from the National Cancer Institute. ""The researchers are exploring storing data in a pattern of dye, invisible to the naked eye, that is delivered under the skin at the same time as the vaccine. The technology is currently in the proof-of-concept phase,"" the foundation told PolitiFact in an email. ""If successful, governments could elect to incorporate this kind of tool in their immunization programs in place of, or in addition to, their current methods of tracking vaccinations."" None of the research is specific to America, as the Instagram post suggests. Nor is it tied specifically to COVID-19. An online post says that Bill Gates is pushing tracking bracelets and invisible tattoos to monitor Americans during the novel coronavirus pandemic. We find no evidence that Gates has supported the concept of ""tracking bracelets."" His foundation awarded a grant to MIT to study invisible dyes that could accompany vaccines to keep track of vaccinations in developing countries. But this research began in 2016, and there is no evidence that it has anything to do with the current coronavirus pandemic, or to ""monitor"" Americans specifically. This post takes a small kernel of truth and frames it in a way that gives a misleading impression."
|
15144
|
"Pediatricians have cut down on the number and proximity of vaccines because they recognize there have been ""too many in too short a period of time."
|
"Carson said pediatricians have cut down on the number and proximity of vaccines because they recognize there have been ""too many in too short a period of time."" Leading medical organizations have concluded that the scheduling of vaccines -- including multiple ones at once -- is safe. While there is evidence that some parents ask pediatricians to delay vaccines, that’s a decision based on parents’ wishes and isn’t based on scientific evidence. There is no evidence that pediatricians are cutting down the number and proximity of vaccines based on any conclusion by them that there have been too many in too short a period of time. Carson has provided no evidence to support his claim."
|
false
|
Public Health, Florida, Ben Carson,
|
"CNN’s Jake Tapper noted that a backlash against vaccines was blamed for a measles outbreak in California. Meanwhile, Donald Trump has linked childhood vaccines to autism despite the medical community debunking that myth. During the second GOP debate, Tapper asked Ben Carson, a retired pediatric neurosurgeon who now lives in West Palm Beach, if Trump should stop making such a claim. Carson said Trump should look at the evidence, noting that there is ""extremely well-documented proof that there’s no autism associated with vaccinations."" Carson then turned the subject to the scheduling of vaccines: ""But it is true that we are probably giving way too many in too short a period of time. And a lot of pediatricians now recognize that, and I think are cutting down on the number and the proximity in which those are done, and I think that’s appropriate."" Are pediatricians cutting down on the number and proximity of vaccines? As for Trump’s claim about autism, as PolitiFact has noted before, decades of epidemiological research have demonstrated autism rates do not increase when vaccines are introduced to a population. We contacted Carson’s campaign to ask for his evidence and did not get a reply. Vaccines Doctors follow a childhood vaccination schedule prepared by the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Children may receive as many as 24 immunizations by their second birthday and may receive up to five injections during a single doctor’s visit, according to a 2013 paper by The Institute of Medicines of the National Academies. That vaccine schedule is also supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control. More than 90 percent of children entering kindergarten have been immunized with recommended vaccines in accordance with this schedule. But some parents have sought to delay vaccines or reduce the number given per visit, while others have rejected them entirely, despite recommendations by the scientific community. That’s not a good idea, according to the report. ""Delaying or declining vaccination has led to outbreaks of such vaccine-preventable diseases as measles and whooping cough that may jeopardize public health, particularly for people who are under-immunized or who were never immunized,"" wrote researchers. The researchers also concluded that there is ""no evidence that the schedule is unsafe."" The American Academy of Pediatrics issued a press release in 2013 stating that it agreed with the paper’s conclusion. After the Republican debate, it issued a new statement in support of vaccines: ""Claims that vaccines are linked to autism, or are unsafe when administered according to the recommended schedule, have been disproven by a robust body of medical literature. It is dangerous to public health to suggest otherwise,"" wrote Karen Remley, executive director of the academy. Despite the scientific consensus, pediatricians are facing pressure from parents to delay vaccines. A survey of 534 pediatricians done for the American Academy of Pediatricians in 2012 showed that 93 percent reported that within a typical month some parents asked to spread out the vaccinations. The vast majority thought these parents were putting their children at risk for disease but thought they would build trust with the families if they agreed to the request. While there is anecdotal evidence that some pediatricians have acquiesced to parents’ requests to delay vaccinations, that decision is not rooted in public health or science. ""There is no evidence that pediatricians 'recognize' that we give too many vaccines in too short a time,"" said Mark Schleiss, division director of pediatric infectious diseases at University of Minnesota. ""Far from it. ... There is no evidence at all that spacing vaccines out or changing the schedule would improve health or help children."" Eugene R. Hershorin, chief of the division of general pediatrics at the University of Miami, pointed to what happened a decade ago when England and Japan delayed the DTaP vaccine, a combination vaccine used to prevent diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis. ""There was a tremendous increase in the incidence of pertussis in both countries, leading them to re-institute the schedule immediately,"" he said. Our ruling Carson said pediatricians have cut down on the number and proximity of vaccines because they recognize there have been ""too many in too short a period of time."" Leading medical organizations have concluded that the scheduling of vaccines -- including multiple ones at once -- is safe. While there is evidence that some parents ask pediatricians to delay vaccines, that’s a decision based on parents’ wishes and isn’t based on scientific evidence. There is no evidence that pediatricians are cutting down the number and proximity of vaccines based on any conclusion by them that there have been too many in too short a period of time. Carson has provided no evidence to support his claim."
|
26203
|
Joe Biden Says President Donald Trump “took more than a month to allocate Congress’ emergency funding to tribes — and only did so after tribes sued.”
|
The $2.2 trillion CARES Act included $8 billion for tribal governments. The law said funds had to be disbursed within 30 days. More than a month after the CARES Act, the Trump administration said it would begin giving tribes part of the funds. A judge presiding over a lawsuit on the delay said the administration should have made more progress, but did not find that the delay was egregious.
|
true
|
Economy, Health Care, Public Health, Coronavirus, Joe Biden,
|
"Native American tribes have been among the hardest hit by the coronavirus pandemic, and Joe Biden claims that President Donald Trump has not done enough to help. ""Donald Trump has failed to live up to our trust and treaty obligations to Native Americans,"" Biden told The Arizona Republic May 21. ""He took more than a month to allocate Congress’ emergency funding to tribes — and only did so after tribes sued. He has failed to provide tribes with adequate protective personal equipment and medical supplies. It’s unacceptable."" Indian treaty rights recognized and established rights, benefits, and conditions for tribes who agreed to cede millions of acres of land to the United States and to accept the United States’ protection. Under a ""trust responsibility"" legal principle, the United States federal government is obligated to ensure the survival and welfare of Indian tribes. Is Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, right that it took more than a month for tribes to get funding allocated by Congress, and that it happened only after suing the Trump administration? The chronology lines up, but omits important context. The Treasury Department has argued that payments were delayed because it is required to consult with tribes and the Interior Department regarding how much money to allocate to tribes. That consultation process started before the lawsuit over the delay in payments. A separate lawsuit filed by tribes to prevent corporations in Alaska from receiving aid has also affected the process. Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, and Trump signed it into law March 27. The $2.2 trillion measure included a $150 billion Coronavirus Relief Fund for states, local governments, and tribal governments. The law set aside $8 billion for tribal governments. The law said the Treasury secretary had to make the payments within 30 days; so by April 26, all entities were supposed to have received funds. It wasn’t until May 5 that the Treasury Department said it would begin making funds available to tribal governments. So that part of Biden’s claim adds up. By May 5, the Trump administration was facing several lawsuits by multiple tribes: for delay of payment. The lawsuits also challenged the administration for intending to direct some of the funds to the Alaska Native Corporations, which are regional and village corporations recognized under Alaska law and created by Congress as part of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971. In the lawsuit to stop the corporations from getting a share of the $8 billion, tribes argued that corporations do not meet the statutory definition of ""tribal government,"" or ""Indian tribe"" and therefore did not qualify for the relief. A federal district judge on April 27 issued a preliminary injunction to prevent the Treasury from giving money to the corporations. Pending a final determination, the judge did not direct the Treasury secretary to immediately disburse the entire $8 billion to the tribes. In its May 5 announcement, the Trump administration said it would begin paying tribes 60% of the $8 billion, or $4.8 billion, based on population data. The remaining 40% would be paid at ""a later date"" based on employment data and tribe expenses related to COVID-19. Amounts calculated for corporations would be held back ""until pending litigation relating to their eligibility is resolved."" The Navajo Nation, which joined tribes in the lawsuit, on May 5 said the judge’s April 27 ruling ""led to the (Treasury) Department’s announcement to begin distributing funds to federally-recognized tribes."" In a separate lawsuit over the delay in the disbursement of funds, lawyers for the Trump administration argued that providing funds to tribal governments required a more involved and difficult process than the one for states and local governments. While the CARES Act imposed a 30-day deadline for funds disbursement, it also called for a consultation process among tribes and the Treasury and Interior departments. According to the Trump administration, Treasury staff spent about 2,200 hours on efforts to get tribes the appropriated money. The same federal district judge from the corporations case said that those hours of labor ""arguably should have produced better results,"" but a court intervention was not warranted. ""‘Egregious’ delay is the governing standard, and the Secretary is not there quite yet, even in the midst of a public health crisis,"" U.S. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta wrote in a May 11 opinion. Mehta did not find that the Treasury secretary was ""lagging unreasonably"" behind in delivering the funds. ""The Secretary has not been ‘twiddling his thumbs’,"" he said, citing language from a precedent. Mehta said he would not give the Treasury department a deadline for disbursing the rest of the funds, but if it took the department double the amount of time Congress directed for the disbursement, ""then the question of egregiousness becomes a closer one than it is today."" Biden said Trump ""took more than a month to allocate Congress’ emergency funding to tribes — and only did so after tribes sued."" It did take more than a month for tribes to begin receiving funds appropriated by Congress, and they began to flow after lawsuits were filed against the Trump administration. But a consultation process for disbursing the funds began before the administration was sued."
|
2989
|
Amid doc’s murder case, lawsuits reflect battle over blame.
|
In the year since an Ohio hospital system announced an intensive care doctor had ordered excessive painkillers for dozens of patients who then died, the allegations led to murder charges against him, lawsuits, firings and potential disciplinary action for some of his colleagues.
|
true
|
Columbus, Health, General News, Ohio, U.S. News, Lawsuits
|
As the criminal case moves toward possible trial this year, related pending lawsuits reflect a battle over blame. A look at where things stand: THE ALLEGATIONS The Columbus-area Mount Carmel Health System determined William Husel ordered excessive doses for nearly three dozen patients over several years, though it said the doses likely weren’t what caused six of those deaths. Reviewers found that in many cases, the drugs were accessed by overriding a dispensing system. Husel was fired in December 2018, weeks after a concern was raised. Mount Carmel later said three patients died during those weeks after receiving excessive doses he ordered. ___ CRIMINAL CASE Last June, Husel was charged with murder in 25 deaths and pleaded not guilty in one of the biggest cases of its kind ever brought against a U.S. health care professional. He was charged only in cases involving 500 to 2,000 micrograms of the powerful painkiller fentanyl – doses so unusually large that prosecutors said it indicated an intent to snuff out lives. His initial lawyer said Husel was providing comfort care to dying patients, not trying to kill them. Husel’s current lawyers in the criminal case — including Florida-based Jose Baez, who is known for successfully defending high-profile clients such as Casey Anthony and Aaron Hernandez — haven’t said much publicly about his motives. Husel’s lawyers in civil cases contend that he provided appropriate care and that Mount Carmel misled the public about what happened. Mount Carmel publicly apologized, tightened its drug policies, fired other employees and changed leadership but has stood by its investigation and subsequent decisions. “There is nothing more important to us than our patients’ safety and their trust in us — and we will do everything in our power to continue to improve,” it said in an emailed statement Tuesday. Trial for Husel, 44, is currently scheduled for June. _____ LOTS OF LAWSUITS More than 30 lawsuits have been filed against Mount Carmel in the matter, and it has agreed to more than $13 million in related settlements so far. Husel and Mount Carmel unsuccessfully argued the remaining lawsuits should be put on hold until the criminal case is resolved. Husel also has filed lawsuits. One against Mount Carmel and its parent company, Michigan-based Trinity Health, alleges defamation. Another against Trinity and its insurer seeks to force them to cover costs of his defense in the criminal case, just as in civil cases against him. _____ FORMER COLLEAGUES Authorities aren’t prosecuting those who administered the drugs, though they have faced other fallout. Mount Carmel said it fired 23 nurses, pharmacists and managers after its internal investigation. Ten of Husel’s former colleagues recently sued Mount Carmel for defamation and, in some cases, wrongful termination. The group of mostly nurses decried a “ false narrative of an evil rogue doctor and his complicit staff” and said the spread of that narrative damaged their lives and livelihoods regardless of whether they were fired. Three pharmacists and 25 nurses still face potential disciplinary action from their respective state boards and have administrative hearings scheduled in the coming months. Husel is in line for one, too, after the Ohio State Medical Board suspended his license. It hadn’t previously disciplined him. ___ Follow Franko on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/kantele10.
|
40827
|
The number of mental health nurses has fallen from 46,155 to 39,358 [since 2009].
|
This is the difference in the number of mental health and learning disabilities nurses between two different months which isn’t the best way to compare the figures. Comparing the figures in September 2009 and 2017 shows the drop has been larger.
|
mixture
|
mental-health
|
The number of mental health nurses has fallen from 46,155 to 39,358 [since 2009]. This is the difference in the number of mental health and learning disabilities nurses between two different months which isn’t the best way to compare the figures. Comparing the figures in September 2009 and 2017 shows the drop has been larger. The number of doctors in specialist psychiatry training fell from 3,187 in 2009 to 2,588 in the first quarter of this year. This 20% drop was between September 2009 and March 2018, which isn’t a fair comparison. Comparing September 2009 and 2017 there was a 15% decrease. Claim 1 of 3
|
18519
|
"Abortion coverage is a standard insurance benefit ""in nearly 90 percent of private plans sold in the U.S."
|
"NARAL said McDonnell’s amendment banning an upcoming health care exchange from offering insurance plans that include abortion denies Virginians ""coverage that currently exists as a standard benefit in nearly 90 percent of private plans sold in the U.S."" NARAL bases its claim on a 9-year-old study by the Guttmacher Institute that found 87 percent of typical of typical employer-based insurance policies covered ""medically necessary or appropriate abortions."" Contrary to NARAL’s contention, the findings do not reflect coverage ""that currently exists."" The research focused on policies that were offered in 2002. Guttmacher never updated its report. The only other major research on abortion coverage was conducted by Kaiser in early 2003 and produced a different result. It found that 46 percent of workers with employer-based insurance had coverage for abortions. Experts have struggled to reconcile the two numbers. Guttmacher, in 2011, said that the ""actual level of coverage is probably somewhere between"" its estimate and that of Kaiser. So NARAL is citing as gospel an old figure that even its authors undercut."
|
false
|
Abortion, Health Care, Virginia, NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia,
|
"The General Assembly on April 3 narrowly approved an amendment by Gov. Bob McDonnell that will ban insurers participating in an upcoming federal health care exchange in Virginia from offering policies that cover most abortions. The action was disappointing to NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia. The group said, among other things, that McDonnell’s proposal would force the exchange to offer more restrictive coverage than most private insurance plans. ""McDonnell’s amendment prohibits Virginians participating in the new health exchange from purchasing any insurance plan that includes coverage for abortion -- coverage that currently exists as a standard benefit in nearly 90 percent of private plans sold in the U.S.,"" NARAL said in a March 26 news release. Two Democrats running for lieutenant governor -- state Sen. Ralph Northam of Norfolk and Aneesh Chopra, former U.S. chief technology officer of the United States -- quickly sent out similar statements. We decided to check NARAL’s claim that abortion coverage is standard in almost 90 percent of the private plans now being sold. We should note McDonnell’s amendment has an exception that allows insurance companies on the exchange to cover abortions in instances of rape, incest or when a mother’s life would be endangered by continuing a pregnancy. NARAL said it got the figure from a 2004 report by the Guttmacher Institute, an organization based in New York City that specializes in research on reproductive health issues. Although Guttmacher supports access to abortion and birth control, its research has been cited by both sides of the abortion debate. NARAL cited a Guttmacher synopsis that says the study examined abortion coverage through private insurance in 2002. It found that 87 percent of typical employer-based policies back then covered ""medically necessary or appropriate abortions."" Rebecca Wind, a spokeswoman for the Guttmacher Institute, said the definition of ""medically necessary or appropriate abortions"" is whatever a physician deems is required to protect the ""health or mental health of the patient."" Guttmacher said its figure on private insurance coverage for abortion did not consider plans that offered benefits only in limited circumstances such as cases of rape, incest or to protect the life of a mother. But the Guttmacher memo also noted another survey examining the issue came up with different results. That study, by Kaiser Family Foundation, found in 2003 that 46 percent of workers with employer-based insurance had coverage for abortion. The Guttmacher and Kaiser studies conducted early last decade offer the only detailed looks available on abortion coverage. Experts have not reconciled the difference in results. We spoke to Jon Gabel, a researcher who helped compile the 2003 Kaiser survey and now is a senior fellow at NORC, a social science research foundation at the University of Chicago. He said the 46 percent Kaiser cited refers to workers who were covered for ""elective abortions"" that did not involve a medical emergency. Gabel said he interpreted Guttmacher’s study as an examination of abortion coverage for medical necessity. Guttmacher, in a 2011 memo, essentially said the two studies asked different sets of questions that may have led to the different results. Guttmacher did not defend its original finding as definitive. ""The actual level of coverage is probably somewhere between the estimates made by Guttmacher and Kaiser, meaning that most Americans with employer-based insurance currently have coverage for abortion,"" the memo said. Our ruling NARAL said McDonnell’s amendment banning an upcoming health care exchange from offering insurance plans that include abortion denies Virginians ""coverage that currently exists as a standard benefit in nearly 90 percent of private plans sold in the U.S."" NARAL bases its claim on a 9-year-old study by the Guttmacher Institute that found 87 percent of typical of typical employer-based insurance policies covered ""medically necessary or appropriate abortions."" Contrary to NARAL’s contention, the findings do not reflect coverage ""that currently exists."" The research focused on policies that were offered in 2002. Guttmacher never updated its report. The only other major research on abortion coverage was conducted by Kaiser in early 2003 and produced a different result. It found that 46 percent of workers with employer-based insurance had coverage for abortions. Experts have struggled to reconcile the two numbers. Guttmacher, in 2011, said that the ""actual level of coverage is probably somewhere between"" its estimate and that of Kaiser. So NARAL is citing as gospel an old figure that even its authors undercut."
|
17622
|
The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined.
|
"One Wisconsin Now wrote: ""The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined."" For comparison purposes, the latest data available, for 2010, the figure is 41.5 percent."
|
true
|
Corporations, Economy, Income, Labor, Wealth, Wisconsin, One Wisconsin Now,
|
"On Nov. 27, 2013, a Madison-based liberal advocacy group used a mass email to promote protests that were planned against Walmart stores for two days later -- Black Friday. The demonstrations aimed to ""expose Wal-Mart’s shameful labor practices and support workers,"" according to One Wisconsin Now, which then made this claim: ""The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined."" That reminded us of a March 2011 claim by filmmaker and liberal activist Michael Moore. He said in a Madison speech that 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined. Based on online hits, it became one of our most popular fact-checks ever. So we wondered about the Walmart claim. Wealth, not income In the days before and after Black Friday, leaders no less prominent than President Barack Obama and Pope Francis decried the extent of income disparity in the United States and around the world. Obama called the growing income gap a ""defining challenge of our time."" The pope said that while the earnings of a minority ""are growing exponentially, so, too, is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few."" Walmart, of course, is a big target. According to Forbes, as of May 2013 the international retailer had $469 billion in sales and 2.2 million employees, including 1.3 million in the United States. The corporation has been criticized for low wages; and in December 2012, PolitiFact National rated as Mostly a claim that more Walmart employees are on Medicaid and food stamps than other companies. But let’s be clear up front: Although income and wealth are related, they’re not the same. Wealth is commonly measured in terms of net worth -- the value of a person’s assets minus liabilities. So, things like savings and retirement accounts, minus what is owed on a home mortgage, credit cards, etc. That means a person with heavy debt can have little wealth, or negative wealth, even while earning a six-figure income. One more point before we get to the wealth figures. Walmart was founded by the late Sam Walton, who opened the first store in Arkansas in 1962. Walmart incorporated in 1969 and became a publicly traded company a year later. So, Wal-Mart is not family owned, but rather owned by its stockholders; on the other hand, according to Bloomberg and other news reports, the Walton family members still have control of the company, owning about half of the shares. Group's evidence Scot Ross, One Wisconsin Now's executive director, told us his evidence to back his group’s claim is a July 2012 article by economist Josh Bivens, research and policy director of the liberal Economics Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. Bivens wrote that in 2010, the wealth of six Walton family heirs was $89.5 billion, 22 percent higher than in 2007. Meanwhile, the median wealth of American families in 2010 was $77,300, nearly 39 percent lower than three years earlier. (Median wealth refers to the American family that is exactly wealthier than half of all families and less wealthy than half.) As for measuring one against the other, Bivens said the Walton family wealth in 2010 was as large as the wealth of the bottom 48.8 million families in the United States, or 41.5 percent of all American families. Rounded up, 41.5 percent would be 42 percent, the figure One Wisconsin Now claims. But let's keep shopping around a little. Similar claim It turns out that a statement nearly identical to the one made by One Wisconsin Now was uttered in July 2012 by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats. Sanders said the Walton family owns ""more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of America,"" a claim PolitiFact National rated . Our colleagues found that Sylvia Allegretto, a labor economist at the University of California, Berkeley, compared the Waltons’ cumulative net worth with that of the overall population, as cited in the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances. That survey was published in August 2012. Allegretto found that the Waltons’ wealth in 2010 was valued at $89.5 billion -- equal to the entire bottom 41.5 percent of American families. The 2010 figures are the latest available for doing comparisons with the net worth of the overall population. But we found, using the Forbes 400 list for 2013, that the wealth of six of Sam Walton’s descendants has continued to grow. Here are their rankings and their wealth: No. 6 Christy Walton (daughter-in-law), $35.4 billion No. 7: Jim Walton (son), $33.8 billion No. 8: Alice Walton (daughter), $33.5 billion No. 9: S. Robson Walton (son), $33.3 billion No. 95: Ann Walton Kroenke (niece), $4.7 billion No. 110: Nancy Walton Laurie (niece), $4 billion Total Walton family wealth: $144.7 billion. A note before we close: Allegretto told us the housing crisis is a key reason that the gap between the Walton family wealth and the wealth of other American families has grown. More Americans were left with ""negative wealth"" because they lost their biggest asset -- their home -- and often significant amounts of their savings, as well, she said. Our rating One Wisconsin Now wrote: ""The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined."" For comparison purposes, the latest data available, for 2010, the figure is 41.5 percent. To comment on this item, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's website."
|
13521
|
You've got a medical report on me that meets the same standard as Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.
|
"Clinton said, ""You've got a medical report on me that meets the same standard as Mitt Romney and Barack Obama."" If Romney and Obama exemplify a standard, then the information Clinton has provided to the public is on a comparable level. But Clinton's statement implies a standard that doesn’t really exist, according to the experts. And both the quality and quantity of information on presidential candidates has varied widely. Because the statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.
|
true
|
National, Candidate Biography, Disability, Elections, History, Transparency, Privacy Issues, Hillary Clinton,
|
"Hillary Clinton's near-collapse at a Sept. 11 memorial service and the subsequent revelation that she had been diagnosed with pneumonia two days earlier has people wondering about the health of the two major presidential candidates. The Clinton campaign promised more medical data on her health, and Republican Donald Trump pledged to release details of a recent checkup. Both candidates have already released letters from their doctors saying they are healthy enough to be president. Clinton’s team argues that Trump has released less information about his health than Clinton. In an interview with Anderson Cooper on CNN, Clinton said her two-page 2015 letter from her physician is consistent with what presidential candidates have released in the past. ""You know, you've got a medical report on me that meets the same standard as Mitt Romney and Barack Obama"" when the two ran for president, Clinton said. ""Donald Trump's doctor said he'd be the healthiest president in history. That's just not even serious."" When Cooper asked what additional information she would be supplying, Clinton did not offer any details. ""Well, we're going to be releasing more information, and I think it's fair to say, we've already met the standard of disclosure of past presidential candidates like Mitt Romney and President Obama."" Actually, there is no ""standard"" for the type of medical information that should be released. The experts we consulted agreed. But Clinton's disclosures are on the same level as Obama and Romney in previous elections. ""There is no 'standard' of medical disclosure, just whatever the voting public is comfortable with,"" said Jerald Podair, professor of history at Lawrence University in Wisconsin. ""This means, of course, that as much secrecy as possible has been the historical norm."" Thus, he said, the public didn't know about Grover Cleveland's cancer, Franklin Roosevelt's paralysis or John Kennedy's Addison’s disease. ""All kept the true nature of their illnesses secret from the American public. Obviously, is is harder to do so today, but as Hillary (‘darn these allergies’) Clinton has shown, the system can still be gamed."" ""This is an imaginary standard set up by candidates,"" said Brooks Simpson, a presidential historian at Arizona State University. Interest in candidate medical records has varied over time. There was a lot of interest when John McCain ran against Obama in 2008. McCain was 71 and had a history of skin cancer. He released 1,173 pages of records going back to 2000. In contrast, medical records were not much of an issue in 2004 when George W. Bush, then 58, sought re-election against John Kerry, then 60. Both were known to be big fitness enthusiasts. Bush had received regular checkups as president but that year decided to have his physical after the election. As CNN reported at the time, ""Neither President Bush nor Senator Kerry have released their full medical records, but there isn't much public pressure for either man to release more details. Americans may want a healthy commander-in-chief, but 61 percent say the president has the same rights as other citizens to keep medical records private, compared to just 38 percent in favor of releasing all information that might affect his ability to serve."" It's more of an issue today, in part, because both candidates are so old. ""These people are in the Ronald Reagan category,"" said Simpson. Trump, if elected, would be the oldest person to assume the presidency. Clinton would be the second oldest behind Reagan. ""Maybe 70 is the new 60, but these people are old,"" Simpson said. ""Neither one has really satisfied issues of disclosure in the public mind,"" although Clinton has been more forthcoming, he said. ""Trump's efforts have been pretty feeble. But the incident on Sunday and the cough just illustrated a personal attack narrative and has given traction to an accusation that her health is less than ideal. This is a way not just to raise questions about candidate health, but about candidate transparency."" When we contacted the Clinton campaign, spokesman Josh Schwerin acknowledged that there is no real standard. He said the candidate was simply referring to the examples of Obama and Romney as a relevant point of comparison. How do their medical summaries compare? Candidate Obama Romney Clinton Trump Year 2008 2012 2015 2015 Words in doctor letter 280 535 578 174 Blood pressure 90/60 130/80 100/65 110/65 Heart rate 60 40 72 Not mentioned Triglycerides 44 179 69 Not mentioned Total cholesterol 173 169 195 Not mentioned Good cholesterol 68 Not mentioned 64 Not mentioned Bad cholesterol 96 Not mentioned 118 Not mentioned Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 0.6 Normal Not relevant .015 Allergies mentioned? No Yes Yes No Past health problems detailed? No Yes Yes Yes Family history mentioned? Yes Yes Yes No Because there is no standard, the doctors of different candidates included different levels of detail. The letters for all four candidates gave blood pressure. The letters for Obama, Romney and Clinton offered at least some blood test results, such as total cholesterol. Trump's does not. Family history, a key factor for predicting a person's lifespan or potential health problems, is missing from Trump's letter. The doctors for Clinton and Romney go into more detail about the candidate's past health problems, but that may be because they had some issues in the past. We don't know about Trump's history, but the detailed 2014 health report for Obama once he became president says he's had no significant medical problems, including no surgeries. The most detailed template was Obama’s annual presidential physical. The 2014 report contains far more information than he released when he first ran in 2008. It talks about immunizations. It lists medications (without giving doses), a fasting blood sugar level and cholesterol counts. There's also discussion of the status of his heart, lungs, eyes, head neck, bones, muscles, nerves and skin. ""Probably Hillary is about right since the standard is that most politicians conceal their debilitating illnesses or fabricate (maybe exaggerate) how wonderfully healthy they are,"" said Bert Rockman, professor emeritus of political science at Purdue University. Because of their age, ""there is bound to be something wrong with each of them despite Trump's likely-dictated note to his doctor, which meets the standard of a school boy note."" ""Of course, some candidates are in terrific shape — Romney and Obama, for example, and Carter,"" he said. ""And you likely wouldn't run for president if you were seriously (physically) debilitated,"" putting the cases of Kennedy and Roosevelt aside. ""In other words,"" said Rockman, ""the bar is really low, and Hillary likely met it by historical standards."" Our ruling Clinton said, ""You've got a medical report on me that meets the same standard as Mitt Romney and Barack Obama."" If Romney and Obama exemplify a standard, then the information Clinton has provided to the public is on a comparable level. But Clinton's statement implies a standard that doesn’t really exist, according to the experts. And both the quality and quantity of information on presidential candidates has varied widely.
|
11144
|
Relapses of childhood leukemia improve with high doses of common chemo drug
|
This release reports the findings of a large clinical trial testing whether alternative dosing regimens of standard chemotherapeutic drugs can improve the treatment of B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The study showed that using high doses of the drug methotrexate, rather than the standard regimen of gradually increasing doses, improved the outcomes for patients with the disease. The study also showed that using the steroid dexamethasone increased a debilitating bone condition in patients 10 and older but not in patients nine or younger. While the study results are promising, they are by no means clear-cut in the release. The release needed some qualifiers in order to give a clear picture of the benefits. The release also neglected to discuss costs and potential conflicts of interest among the investigators. This form of cancer — B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia — is the most common cancer in children and a major cause of cancer death in patients under 40 years old. And while the majority of patients survive with appropriate treatment, anywhere from one-fifth to one-quarter of patients do not. This study showed that refining the dosing of standard cancer drugs may improve the outcome for some high-risk patients.
|
true
|
Academic medical center news release,Cancer
|
This release makes no mention of the costs of the drugs compared in this study, even though the drugs have been in use for years and are widely available. Since the study is a comparison of various treatments for this form of cancer, it seems relevant to offer a cost comparison as well as a comparison of efficacy. It appears that the high dose methotrexate is given over a 24-hour period, presumably in the hospital, while the standard methotrexate is given as a single dose. Also, the high dose methotrexate is followed by leucovorin administration while the standard dose is not. According to the site GoodRx, the cost for methotrexate in low-dose (2.5 mg) pill form averages out to about $50 for a month’s supply. Newer, injectable variations of the drug cost upwards of $500 a month for the 25 mg dose. The release states that patients receiving high doses of the drug methotrexate “had a significantly better outcome, by 5 to 6 percent” than did patients receiving the current standard of care, which is gradually escalating doses of the drug. The release also explains that patients nine years old or younger who were also treated with a steroid called decadron (dexamethasone) for half as long as normal (14 versus 28 days) benefited from the treatment while patients 10 and older did not. We’re not sure of the meaning behind these results as portrayed in the release. Which outcome was better by 5 or 6 percent? The study has several. Does that mean the relapse rate was reduced or is it the event free survival that was better? It would be more meaningful to readers if the release had included the actual relapse and event free survival rates for each group analyzed in terms most people can understand. For example: “relapse rates were 5 percent lower in Group X compared to Group Y.” We’ll give this category a satisfactory rating largely due to the release including information that patients 10 and older receiving dexamethasone “were at much higher risk for a debilitating bone condition called osteonecrosis,” although we would have been happier if that greater risk would have been quantified. However, the published study explains that there were toxicity problems beyond that of dexamethasone and the release would have been stronger including that information as well. The release stated the study was randomized and controlled, and provides a broad overview of the study design, for which we give the release a borderline satisfactory under this criteria. However, these are the superficial results. On deeper delving into the study methodology, the statistical significances of the results were very close to not statistically significant. This is due to their planned interim stopping of the treatment and the fact that they were looking at multiple outcomes in multiple groups. This release doesn’t demonstrate disease-mongering. While the release does say that this clinical trial was run by the Children’s Oncology Group, which is funded by the National Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of Health, it makes no mention of possible conflicts of interest. Compounding that is the fact that the published study says, “Disclosures provided by the authors are available with this article at www.jco.org,” but that information is behind the journal’s paywall for most readers, so it’s unknown if there is, or is not, a conflict. It appears as though five of the authors (out of a total of about 20) have some conflicts of interest, mostly from several types of drug company payments. The release is comparing the efficacy of treatment regimens using different drugs so alternative treatments for B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia are noted. The release makes clear at the end that the treatment of this disease is improving thanks to refinement of the use of existing drug treatments, meaning that they are readily available for patient use. The release suggests the study findings could change the way childhood leukemia is treated. Modifying existing treatments to enhance a patient’s survival is certainly novel enough to warrant a release. There is no use of unjustifiable language in this release. However, the tone may be a bit overly optimistic given the study findings.
|
4348
|
Governments to discuss tackling tuberculosis at UN summit.
|
Governments from around the world will gather Wednesday to discuss the persistent scourge of tuberculosis, which last year claimed more lives than any other communicable disease.
|
true
|
Health, United Nations, Tuberculosis
|
About 1.3 million people worldwide died of TB in 2017. A further 300,000 people with both HIV and TB died in last year, according to World Health Organization figures released this month. Once referred to as ‘consumption’ because of the way sufferers appear to waste away, tuberculosis has been known for centuries. The bacterium responsible for TB was discovered 136 years ago and the development of an effective antibiotic helped rich countries to largely contain the disease after World War II. Still, the U.N. health agency estimates that about 10 million people worldwide become newly infected with TB each year, mostly in poor countries where access to health care is limited. “It really is a global epidemic,” said Dr. Tereza Kasaeva, who heads WHO’s program to combat TB. Speaking ahead of a high-level meeting on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly, Kasaeva said the U.N.’s target of eradicating tuberculosis worldwide by 2030 “is very ambitious given that for now progress is too slow.” Like HIV, tuberculosis remains a highly stigmatized illness, preventing some sufferers from seeking treatment. Experts are particularly concerned about the rising number of people contracting drug-resistant variants of TB, many of which aren’t diagnosed properly. Treating them can be costly and arduous, requiring years of medication with strong side effects. Dr. Ralf Otto-Knapp of the German Central Committee to Combat Tuberculosis, a group established in the late 19th century when the disease was still widespread in much of Europe, warned against complacency about the disease in an age of global travel. “Because of the increasing mobility in society it also affects economically more powerful countries,” he said. “We need a joint political will and the necessary resources to fight tuberculosis effectively.” Kasaeva said she hoped leaders attending the New York meeting Wednesday will commit to closing the growing gap between the amount of money available and the billions more required to tackle the disease. Campaigners applauded a recent decision by the World Health Organization to recommend a change in the way drug-resistant tuberculosis is treated, prioritizing oral drugs over injectable medication. The group Doctors Without Borders said such treatment can reduce debilitating side effects, help improve cure rates and cut the number of deaths, but noted that it requires U.S. pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson, which makes the key drug bedaquiline, to reduce its price in low- and middle-income countries with high rates of drug-resistant TB. The company has already sharply reduced costs for the drug in some countries, but in others a six-month course of treatment can cost several thousand dollars — far more than most people can afford. Companies have been reluctant to invest in developing TB medication — with only two new drugs coming onto the market in the past 50 years.
|
10450
|
Low-Carb Diet Lowers Blood Pressure
|
More information was needed on how well these diet plans might work in the real world. There is no information on who dropped out of the study or how well the two groups were able to adhere to the diet. Single source, straight from a news release. Bad news. Obesity and hypertension are both prevalent and use of low carbohydrate diets is a very common strategy to combat them. Also important: What’s the point of health journalism if not to critically examine the claims put out by press offices?
|
false
|
Cost is particularly important when many patients may have to pay out of pocket for weight loss drugs. The story does not provide any information about the cost of orlistat, the cost of the food in the study diets, or the cost of the counseling provided to study participants. A quotation from one of the study researchers suggests that a low-carb diet might be a cheaper alternative to a low-fat diet plus medication. While this is certainly possible, it also seems possible that low-carb eating, with its emphasis on protein from meat, would be more expensive than low-fat eating, and that this would cancel out any savings on medication. In any case, making any kind of judgment in this area would require more hard data, but the story provides only speculation. The story earns points for noting the absolute reduction in blood pressure in each group. We wish, though, that it had provided the weight loss in similar terms of actual pounds or kilograms lost instead of as a percentage of bodyweight. Similar to the HealthDay piece, the story provides no information about the potential adverse effects of orlistat or a low-carbohydrate diet. Similar to the HealthDay piece, the story gives a decent overview of the basic study design and outcomes. However more information would have helped us judge how well these diet plans might work in the real world. There is no information on who dropped out of the study or how well the two groups were able to adhere to the diet. In addition, the story states that low-carb dieters were advised to consume 20 g of carbohydrate per day, but it seems very unlikely that participants were able to maintain that level of carbohydrate restriction for almost a year. Overall, this story squeaks by with a satisfactory. The story does not exaggerate the prevalence or consequences of obesity. The story’s only quotes come from Dr. Yancy, a researcher affiliated with the study. The story also does not inform readers that Dr. Yancy and another co-author on the study have received funding from the Robert C. Atkins Foundation, which promotes research on low-carb diets. Given the story’s focus on blood pressure, it should have mentioned how the results of this study might compare to treatment with blood pressure medication. The story mentioned that orlistat, the weight loss medication tested in the study, is the active ingredient in Xenical and Alli. Unlike the competing piece in HealthDay, however, it did not specify that Xenical is a prescription drug and that Alli is available over the counter. Although this information would have been helpful, providing the trade names for both drugs is probably enough to orient most readers. The story mentions that both low-carb and low-fat diets are proven to produce weight loss. However, it suggests that we should be surprised that a low-carbohydrate diet could produce such beneficial effects on blood pressure. In fact, this effect was well-documented in another comparison of weight loss diets published in JAMA in 2007. The story lifts two quotes directly from a news release put out by Duke University. While the story admits that the quotes came from a release, it doesn’t perform the basic task of finding another source to provide an alternate viewpoint. The reader is left wondering if this is journalism or simply an extension of the Duke University press office.
|
|
31268
|
The household plant Dieffenbachia, one of the most common indoor plants, is so poisonous it can kill a child in one minute and an adult in 15 minutes.
|
Krenzelok told us it was not uncommon at his center to see patients, most commonly children, for exposure to Dieffenbachia. In fact, it is the second most common plant exposure treated in American poison control centers, and a majority of those cases involve children. Krenzelok said the Center typically treated these cases by providing the child milk or water (“It didn’t matter. Basically, just to take the irritation away,” he explained) and by offering assurances to the parents that there would be no long term problems once the pain subsided.
|
false
|
Medical, botany, dieffenbachia, dumb cane
|
Viral claims regarding the purported dangers of common household plants belonging to the genus Dieffenbachia (shown above) have been on the internet for years. One article (titled, colorfully, “My Son Died for This Damn Plant it Is Urgent That Everyone Knows, Kills a Child in 1 Minute and an Adult in 15! !”) appears identically across multiple websites and provides the following representative claim: Please read this carefully. My son died because he put a piece of leaf in his mouth and tongue and these swelled to suffocate. This plant is very common in many homes and offices. It is deadly poisonous and dangerous, to the point of killing a child in 1 minute and an adult in 15 minutes. If you touch it by chance you should never bring your fingers to your eyes, as this could cause permanent blindness. Warn your friends and family. This post does not seek to debunk that specific story, in part because it comes with no details that allow any aspect of it to be verified. Instead, this post addresses more broadly the risk posed to humans by this widespread potted plant. Dieffenbachia is indeed very common among household plants (it’s simple, and requires little sunlight), and eating its leaves or rubbing your eyes with your hands after coming into contact with the plant may indeed cause irritation, which in turn can cause the swelling described above. As far as the plant causing death, however, Ed Krenzelok, an emeritus professor of pharmacology at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and a former director of the Pittsburgh Poison Center who has researched Dieffenbachia toxicity specifically, is skeptical: I’ve never ever seen a fatality in my experience related to Dieffenbachia or any of the members of the Arum family. I’ve reviewed, virtually […] hundreds of thousands of cases in my career involving plants of this nature. The risk of irritation from Dieffenbachia is not news. People have been aware of its properties as an irritant since at least the first century A.D. Later, Jamaican slave traders — sadistically — rubbed the juice of these plants on the tongues of slaves, causing their mouths to become painfully swollen, as a form of punishment, making one of its common names “dumb cane“. The cause of this irritation comes from a chemical called calcium oxalate, which exists in varying concentrations across the entire plant kingdom, including a variety of food crops. In Dieffenbachia and some other groups of plants, this chemical forms microscopic (but razor-sharp) crystals called raphides that can rip apart and irritate tissues in your mouth or your eyes, as described by Krenzelok: Think of a micro-miniature balloon filled with crystal in the cells of the dieffenbachia and when you bite down on that, you squeeze the cells and the enzymes that are in there and the oxalate crystal are expelled. […] If you just touch a dieffenbachia or rub it on your arm or whatever, without breaking the integrity of the leaf, you’re not going to have a problem. Calcium oxalate is a ubiquitous chemical in nature. It is produced as a byproduct of a variety of cellular processes, and can form many different types of chemical structures depending on the species of plant. Not limited to plants, it is also produced as a byproduct in mammalian metabolism as well, and it is one of the most common minerals that form kidney stones. The risk to humans — at least, when speaking about the reactions described in these viral posts — would come not from the inherent toxicity of calcium oxalate, but from physical abrasion caused by these tiny sharp crystals, as explained by the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia: Oxalate crystals can cause intense pain and swelling if they come in contact with the skin or mouth. When any part of these plants is chewed and swallowed, the crystals stab the sensitive tissues of the tongue, gums and throat, creating the sensation of biting into ground glass. Pain, difficulty swallowing, swelling and temporary hoarseness may occur. Poisoning from swallowing an oxalate-containing plant is rare because the intense mouth pain usually prevents children from eating a significant quantity of the plant. In terms of contact with the eyes, Krenzelok says he frequently saw eye irritation at his center, but never traumatic, permanent eye damage: I’ve seen a lot of cases where ocular exposure has occurred, but generally because people have a broken stem or something and they get some of the juice on their fingers and they happen to rub their eye and they have a little irritation. But I’ve never ever seen or observed a traumatic ocular exposure either. [In my experience], I’ve never seen loss of vision or anything of that nature.
|
26670
|
“The CDC can detain anyone with a fever — indefinitely. … Vaccination (is) a way people could get out of detention.”
|
The CDC does have the power to isolate people with certain infectious diseases and quarantine those who had contact with an infected person. However, many of the details of this assertion are wrong. People can’t be quarantined for just having a fever; they have to be shown to have been exposed to one of a specific set of diseases. Most quarantines are done voluntarily, not by force of the government. And vaccination is not a ticket out of quarantine. Most quarantine decisions are up to states and localities, rather than the CDC.
|
false
|
Health Care, Public Health, Coronavirus, Bloggers,
|
"As the spread of coronavirus has fed fears of illness, it has also spurred fears of mass quarantines. And looking at other countries that have been hit hard by the virus, including China and Italy, it’s not an idle question. On March 12, a reader sent us a comment from a website called Stop Mandatory Vaccination, run by a group that opposes bills to curb exemptions for vaccinations. (Here’s some background on the anti-vaccine movement.) The website said in part, ""The CDC can detain anyone with a fever — indefinitely. … Vaccination (is) a way people could get out of detention."" Similar comments on social media soon prompted high-level debunkings. Late on March 15, the National Security Council took to Twitter to knock down rumors about a national quarantine: ""Text message rumors of a national #quarantine are FAKE. There is no national lockdown. @CDCgov has and will continue to post the latest guidance on #COVID19. #coronavirus."" Text message rumors of a national #quarantine are FAKE. There is no national lockdown. @CDCgov has and will continue to post the latest guidance on #COVID19. #coronavirus Quarantines are real, but there’s a lot of misinformation floating around about the details. Here, we’ll attempt to clarify what’s accurate, and what’s not, about quarantines. (An inquiry to Stop Mandatory Vaccination was not returned.) There are two related terms that address this phenomenon: quarantine and isolation. ""Isolation"" separates people with a confirmed case of a communicable disease from people who are not sick. ""Quarantine"" separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposed to a contagious disease to see if they become sick. The last federal quarantine prior to the coronavirus outbreak came in the early 1960s, when officials were concerned about a smallpox outbreak. It’s been a century — back to the 1918-19 ""Spanish flu"" pandemic — since large-scale isolations and quarantines were last enforced. Federal quarantine power stems from Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act, which authorizes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries and between states. Federal regulations revised in 2017 allow the CDC ""to detain, medically examine, and release persons arriving into the United States and traveling between states who are suspected of carrying"" certain communicable diseases. (Here’s what a sample quarantine order looks like.) Those powers are carried out with help from other federal agencies, such as Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard. This federal government has exercised this power recently with travelers returning from locations where coronavirus has been spreading, based on presidential proclamations like this one. So far we’ve been referring to federal quarantines. But most quarantine power actually resides with state and local governments, as well as tribal law on tribal lands. That’s because federal quarantine powers are limited to persons entering the United States from elsewhere. By contrast, states and localities enforce those powers within their own borders ""CDC officials are ‘preparing as if (the new coronavirus) is the next pandemic,’ but in reality, the laboring oar falls to state and local health departments,"" Polly J. Price, a professor of law and global health at Emory University, has written in the Atlantic. So the assertion we’re checking in this article, by focusing on CDC, misses a lot of where the action is: state and local governments. Historically, forcible quarantines have been rare, and they require a court order. Most of the time, experts said, people who are infected are released on their own recognizance with a promise to self-quarantine. There’s judicial precedent for quarantine powers dating back to the early 1800s, but subsequent case law has required a degree of due process, especially given that a quarantine, unlike an arrest, involves the detention of someone who is not suspected of a crime. Past cases ""suggest that there are important limits on the ability of the U.S. and state and local governments when it comes to some types of public health action,"" said David Schultz, a professor of political science and legal studies at Hamline University. The government has to show real harm, as well as that people get due process and a chance to appeal. Becoming subject to forcible quarantines isn’t just a question of having a particular germ; it also requires a strong likelihood that you will spread it to other people. ""Since most people can take precautions, this typically only happens in the case of person who can’t stay away from other people,"" such as people who have a severe mental illness, said Wendy K. Mariner, a professor of health law at the Boston University School of Public Health. What if you refuse a mandatory order? Practical consequences for such an action are tricky. While fines and incarceration are allowed, no public health expert today recommends jailing a person unwilling to quarantine, because they would be introducing a contagion into a confined population. ""The likelier answer is hospitals with secure wards,"" Mariner said. Not any fever gets you quarantined, contrary to the assertion we’re checking. The government ""would have to have good evidence that the individual was exposed to COVID-19"" to impose a quarantine, said Lawrence O. Gostin, faculty director of Georgetown University's O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law. ""‘Fever’ is too broad a definition,"" Mariner agreed. In addition to coronavirus, the CDC is able to quarantine only for the following diseases: cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague, smallpox, yellow fever, viral hemorrhagic fever, SARS and pandemic flu. It’s an exaggeration to say quarantine is ""indefinite"" detention by the government, especially given what we know so far about the course of coronavirus disease. First, as we noted, quarantine is usually self-regulated. And for those instances when it’s not, such as when an individual is uncooperative, the person is able to leave quarantine when they are no longer contagious. Vaccination doesn’t get you out of quarantine. Typically, vaccinations aren’t cures; they’re preventive measures. In any case, it’s moot for coronavirus, because there is no vaccine yet. Claims on the internet said ""the CDC can detain anyone with a fever — indefinitely. … Vaccination (is) a way people could get out of detention."" The CDC does have the power to isolate people with certain infectious diseases and quarantine those who had contact with an infected person. But this claim is wrong or misleading about many of the details. Most quarantine decisions will be up to states and localities, rather than the CDC. People can’t be quarantined for just having a fever; they have to be shown to have been exposed to a specific set of diseases. Most quarantines are done voluntarily, not by force of the state. And vaccination is not a ticket out of quarantine."
|
37394
|
"An article published in a medical journal makes reference to nicknames for hormone replacement therapy that included ""antiboyotics, trans-mission fluid, and the Notorious H.R.T."
|
Did a Medical Journal List ‘The Notorious H.R.T.’ as a Nickname for Hormone Replacement Therapy?
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
An image that purports to show a screengrab from a medical journal was featured on a tweet that gained traction on January 15 2020.The tweet contains a capture of this citation:It says:Hormone replacement therapy has many nicknames among transfeminine people, including titty pills, titty skittles, smartitties, chicklets, anticistamines, mammary mints, life savers, tit tacs, breast mints, femme&m’s, antiboyotics, trans-mission fluid, and the Notorious H.R.T.“oh fuck this was in an actual medical journal I’m gonna cry lmao,” the user wrote.While it is legitimate, many of the users sharing it may not be aware of the context behind it. The citation was included in an article published by the McGill Journal of Law and Health, a publication covering healthcare-related law. The story itself is a first-person account by activist Florence Ashley regarding their experience seeking medical care both pre-and post-gender transition.Their listing of the nicknames for hormone replacement therapy (HRT) appears alongside a passage covering the temporary effects from stopping the treatment prior to reassignment surgery:I had to stop taking the hormones three weeks before surgery, give or take a few days. I was ill-prepared for this endeavour. Because hormones regulate emotions, amongst many other things, changes in hormonal regimen can have a heavy impact on mood stability and mental health. In my case, the fluctuations were large enough that I had to raise my dosage of antidepressant.A few months after surgery, my reflection in the mirror elicited an emotional reaction I had not yet grown accustomed to. After over a year on hormone replacement therapy, my body had changed in ways that finally began feeling comfortable. After decades of discontent, I was finally feeling at home in what I had previously described as a flesh prison. It had only taken a few weeks without hormones to lose what I estimated as six months of progress, noticeable in terms of fat redistribution, breast tissue loss, and changes to sexual functioning. The mirror served me a cruel reminder of this loss of self.In their paper, Ashley argues that current regulations covering disclosure of information between medical providers and transgender patients rely “on overly narrow conceptions of informed consent and underestimates the role that communal knowledge should play in health care.”Their own surgeon, for example, did not mention what the side effects would be of stopping HRT prior to surgery.“I would not have changed my mind about having surgery, it is true, but I could have done more to prepare had I known about the impact of ceasing hormone replacement therapy,” they wrote:Knowing in advance is crucial to psychological preparation and adaptation. Armed with knowledge, I could have scheduled appointments with my therapist, warned my loved ones about my increased need for support and softness, and refrained from in-person commitments. I did the latter two of those for a subsequent surgical procedure.
|
10880
|
Mammograms’ Value in Cancer Fight at Issue
|
This story offers readers a comprehensive overview of the study of screening mammography in Norway. It clearly explains how this study is different from earlier examinations of the effect of mammography, so that readers can get a better understanding of why the results of this latest study are different from what has been reported in the past. This story does a good job of presenting the comments of experts who have different interpretations of the results of the study, so that readers can see their conclusions in context, rather than just a “he-said-she-said” argument. The story also highlights the role of the multidisciplinary treatment teams available to all the women who were screened with mammography in Norway, thus making clear that screening is just one component of a overall approach to dealing with breast cancer. Readers of this story will see the new results as a useful addition to other evidence on the value of mammography screening. By providing proper context, the story helps readers understand why these researchers concluded that mammography may have smaller benefits than had been believed, so that the latest findings can be seen as an advance in understanding, rather than a contradiction of earlier reports.
|
true
|
The story does not mention the costs of screening or follow-up tests or treatment – to the individual or, collectively, to society. Those costs are significant. This story uses several different statistics and expert perspectives to explain what the researchers found in their examination of the effects of mammography screening. It not only include the relative risk reduction (10 percent) and an absolute risk reduction statistic (among women in their 50s, a decade of screening would boost the likelihood of avoiding a fatal breast cancer from 995.6 out of 1,000 to 996 out of 1,000), but it also offered comments from different experts about how they would personally value effects of that size. The story notes that screening mammography exposes women to false alarms scares as well as the risks and harms of treating tumors that actually would not have become life-threatening. This story explains how this study is different from earlier research on mammography. It points out both advantages of the study methods (comparing women in regions with screening to those without as Norway rolled out a national program over a 9 year period) and limitations (an observational study like this is not as powerful as a randomized trial, and the study might have found more benefits to screening if it had lasted longer). The story also noted the uncertainty in the numbers the researchers reported and that the real differences might be different. The story does not exaggerate the risk of breast cancer or the need to be screened for it. The story includes comments from several independent sources offering a variety of perspectives. It does not mention that the study was funded by the Cancer Registry of Norway and the Research Council of Norway. The story notes that improved treatments appear to have reduced the breast cancer death rate even among women who did not have regular screening mammograms. Not being screened was clearly acknowledged as an alternative, something not all competing stories explicitly addressed. The availability of mammography screening is not at issue. This story does point out that the women who were screened in Norway had access to special treatment teams. And it noted that these treatments are available at “many major medical centers in the United States.” Mammography is not new, but this story does a good job of explaining what is new about the way these researchers examined the effects of screening. The story includes comments from several sources and does not appear to rely on a news release.
|
|
9026
|
New tool helps identify risk for post-surgical dislocations following hip replacement
|
This news release describes an unpublished study looking at hip replacement outcomes among patients who underwent a new assessment protocol prior to surgery. Compared with those who did not undergo the protocol, these patients had lower rates of hip dislocation after their surgery, which would presumably reduce the need for revision surgeries to replace a failed implant. How did the protocol help? The release suggests that pre-operative imaging scans helped identify and guide the treatment of patients with spinal problems who needed so-called dual mobility implants. These implants allow a greater range of motion and are credited with decreasing the risk of a hip dislocation. Here’s what we liked about the release: It features a relatively thorough description of how the study was conducted, quantifies the benefits in absolute terms, and gives good insight on why such a presurgical assessment might be helpful to direct patient care. Our main concern is this: The release suggests that the new protocol deserves all the credit for the better outcomes, when in reality it’s not clear whether other factors played a role. Information about costs and the potential harms of dual mobility implants would also have been helpful for readers. Update 3/16/18: Due to an editing error, the release was scored 2 stars. We have updated the review to indicate the release scored 3 stars. Hip dislocation is one of the reasons that hip replacement surgeries can fail, leading to pain, disability, and possibly a costly second surgery. If there were a way to predict which patients were more likely to suffer hip dislocations, and use implants that would reduce the risk, it would represent an advance for patient care and likely reduce the overall costs of treatment. Total hip replacement surgery is commonly performed in older individuals with pain and impaired function due to hip arthritis. It is also done in younger individuals for a number of reasons including trauma or congenital conditions. Hip dislocation following surgery is an uncommon but scary complication. Though not stated in this release, most dislocations occur soon after the surgery and can be treated non-surgically under anesthesia. Around 30-40% may require repeat surgery. Fortunately, hip dislocation is an uncommon complication occurring in only 1-2% of procedures. Regardless, identifying those at increased risk for dislocation and working to prevent this complication would seem like a good thing.
|
mixture
|
hip replacement,NYU Langone Health
|
There are three costs not mentioned in this news release that are critical in evaluating the relevance of this unpublished study. First, the release could have compared the costs of “dual mobility cup” hip transplants vs. conventional implants. We’re told the former are “more expensive” but it would be helpful to know by how much, since the study suggests dual mobility cup transplants may be indicated in patients at high risk for dislocation. Second, the study is based on a “novel risk assessment tool” which suggests pre-operative scans in the sitting and standing positions. How much does this cost? It’s not mentioned. Third, how much money could potentially be saved by reducing the need for “revision surgeries” in patients whose implant becomes dislocated? It is unlikely that this will reduce costs overall given the small number of individuals who may require repeat surgery, even in this high risk group. Thus, the question is whether this is a cost-effective strategy or not. This study was done in two parts. Part one: a retrospective review of 1,082 conventional (not dual cup) total hip replacements (THRs), over 2 years, in which the dislocation rate was 1.8% (19 patients). We’re told about a third of the total cohort (320 of the 1,082) had “spinal disease and deformity” on imaging scans. In this group of 320, 10 patients (3.1%) had subsequent dislocations. Part two: Beginning in 2016 researchers began employing their risk assessment tool — pre-operative sitting/standing scans of the hip, and factoring in other risk factors like previous spinal fusion — and identified 192 of 1,009 patients (19%) as ‘high risk’ for dislocation. About three-fourths of these patients received dual cup transplants with only 1 having a subsequent dislocation (0.5%). The news release gives us the absolute rate of dislocations in both high-risk groups (3.1% vs. 0.5%), which is vital information to understand the scope of the potential benefit. And on that basis we’ll award a satisfactory grade here. However, we note limitations under the Evidence criterion below that have a bearing on these statistics. The news release does not mention any risks associated with hip replacement surgery in general, nor does it address potential harms specific to dual mobility cups, which are described in the release as the recommended approach to reduce risk for dislocations. The release notes that dual mobility cups may carry risks “if implanted unnecessarily” but doesn’t describe or quantify those risks. Of note, there is some concern that this type of replacement joint may release higher levels of metal ions than conventional joints when implanted in younger, more active patients. As presented, the only downside of these newer devices are the increased cost. It would be helpful to know if there are any other risks. Newer devices may have some risk simply due to not having long-term experience with them. Current hip replacement devices have been shown to work for 20+ years. It will take considerable time to know whether the same may hold for these newer devices. The release provides a relatively thorough description of how the study was conducted, noting that one group of patients was treated before the introduction of a new assessment protocol (in 2014-2015), and that the second group had their treatment guided by the new protocol (introduced in 2016). The fact that the second group had better outcomes (i.e. a lower rate of dislocations following hip replacement) indicates that the protocol must be helpful for identifying high-risk patients and treating them more appropriately, the release suggests. What’s lacking, though, is any acknowledgment that these two groups of patients might not be directly comparable. For example, did these two groups have the same types of “spinal disease and deformity” — the nature of which might impact the failure rate for their hip replacements? Did they also have the same level of mobility and co-existing illnesses? Did anything else about the treatment provided to patients change in the time between the first group’s treatment and the second group? Were both groups followed for the same length of time post-surgery? Differences in any of these areas could have biased the results. To conclusively demonstrate the effectiveness of the new protocol, researchers would need to randomly assign patients to receive the new protocol, or not, and document how both groups fared following treatment. A brief note to that effect, or at least a mention of some of the limitations inherent in the current study’s design, would have been helpful. The report should have mentioned that the comparison was not a direct one. The best way to examine these outcomes would be to compare patients screened to be at high risk and then randomize them to the new device or a standard one. It is possible that the benefit is from knowing that they are at higher risk. For example, physical therapy or other instruction may be given to mitigate the risk, irrespective of the device inserted. No disease mongering. The release states that dislocations occur in about 1% of patients following hip replacement. The release doesn’t discuss funding for the study or possible conflicts of interest among the study authors. A quick search of the federal Open Payments database shows that the lead author, Dr. Jonathan Vigdorchik, receives payments from a number of device companies, including those that make dual mobility hip implants. Since we’re not aware of alternatives to this tool we’ll rate this criteria Not Applicable. It’s clear that patients who undergo hip replacement at NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital have access to the risk assessment screening and treatment algorithm prior to surgery. But what about patients who can’t travel to New York? Is anything similar in use at other institutions? The release is silent on this point. The release clarifies the problem this new assessment tool is trying to solve and why it’s worth reading about: Some newer hip implants are designed with dual mobility cups that allow for increased range of motion, which helps reduce dislocation risk. However, no guidelines currently exist to aid clinicians in deciding when to use these more flexible implants, which are often more expensive than conventional implants, may not be medically necessary, and may carry added risks if implanted unnecessarily. No unjustifiable language.
|
41721
|
"No other country comes even close to"" the ""nearly 40,000 people in this country"" lost to gun violence."
|
The first of the back-to-back Democratic debates in July included spin from the candidates on gun violence, Republican tax cuts, climate change, manufacturing jobs and more.
|
false
|
climate change, farmers, green jobs, gun violence, health insurance, manufacturing, Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,
|
We flagged false and misleading claims from several candidates:The second set of Democratic primary debates was hosted by CNN at Detroit’s Fox Theatre on July 30 with 10 candidates. Another 10 will take the stage on July 31.O’Rourke falsely claimed that “no other country” has as many firearm-related deaths as the U.S.O’Rourke: How else can we explain that we lose nearly 40,000 people in this country to gun violence, a number that no other country comes even close to.O’Rourke didn’t specify a time period, but 39,773 people died from firearm-related injuries in the U.S. in 2017, according to the most recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. Of those deaths, 60% were suicides and 36.6% were homicides.But it’s not true that no other country comes close to the U.S., as O’Rourke said.In 2016, there were an estimated 43,200 firearm injury deaths in Brazil, according to a 2018 study published in JAMA. That was more than the estimated 37,200 firearm deaths that year in the U.S. Mexico, with an estimated 15,400 deaths by firearms, was the next closest country.The U.S., with 10.6 deaths per 100,000 people, also did not have the highest firearm injury death rate. More than a dozen countries had a higher rate than the U.S., including Brazil (19.4), Honduras (22.5), Guatemala (32.3) and Venezuela (38.7). El Salvador’s rate of 39.2 deaths per 100,000 people was the highest.O’Rourke also claimed that the CDC is “prevented from actually studying the issue [of gun violence] in the first place.” Under what’s known as the Dickey Amendment, no CDC funds “for injury prevention and control … may be used, in whole or in part, to advocate or promote gun control.” However, compromise language accompanying a 2018 spending bill clarified that, while that prohibition remains, “the Secretary of Health and Human Services has stated the CDC has the authority to conduct research on the causes of gun violence.”Update, July 31: A spokesman for O’Rourke’s campaign told us the former congressman meant that “no other developed country comes close to the number of gun deaths” in the U.S. That claim is accurate, but it’s not what he said in the debate. The candidates engaged in some misleading claims about the effects of the 2017 Republican tax cut.“Left everyone behind?” — Klobuchar referred to the bill as “that regressive tax bill that left everyone behind, but really made his Mar-a-Lago friends richer.” The bill did benefit wealthy people like those able to afford the $200,000 membership fee to join Trump’s Palm Beach resort. A 2017 analysis by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimated that in 2018 the average tax cut for those in the top one-tenth of 1% in income would amount to $193,380.But the bill certainly didn’t “leave everyone behind.” The TPC analysis estimated that the middle 20% in income would get an average cut of $930 in 2018.Klobuchar would have been correct to say that the bill favored the rich more than others. The TPC analysis estimated that the middle 20% would see their after-tax income go up 1.6%, less than half the 3.4% increase in after-tax income for the top 1%.“83 cents”? — Williamson dusted off a shopworn and misleading Democratic talking point that we’ve debunked before. She said, “We had a $2 trillion tax cut, where 83 cents of every dollar goes to the very, very richest among us.” That’s misleading.She’s referring to the TPC’s analysis of the effect of the Trump tax bill in 2027 — which is after most of the individual income tax changes would expire, should Congress not extend them. In 2025, when all of the bill’s provisions would still be in effect, the top 1% would get just over 25 cents of every dollar of the cuts.In explaining how he would run against Trump in the general election, Hickenlooper accused the president of “malpractice” and ticked off several examples — including manufacturing job growth.“Where’s the small manufacturing jobs that are supposed to come back?” he asked.It’s true that there are still 892,000 fewer manufacturing jobs, as of June, than there were in December 2007, when the Great Recession started. However, manufacturing jobs have increased under Trump.The economy has added 486,000 manufacturing jobs between Trump’s inauguration and June, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As we wrote in the most recent installment of “Trump’s Numbers,” that amounts to 3.9% growth — the same rate as total employment has grown during that time.In discussing climate change, two candidates referred to decade-long deadlines to take action on the issue.Buttigieg broached the subject in his opening statement, saying, “Science tells us we have 12 years before we reach the horizon of catastrophe when it comes to our climate.”O’Rourke also referenced a similar time period. “I’ve listened to the scientists on this, and they’re very clear,” he said. “We don’t have more than 10 years to get this right.”In his closing statement, Buttigieg returned to the idea, adding, “By 2030 we will have passed the point of no return on climate.”As we explained in our coverage of the last Democratic debate, the time frames both politicians reference are pulled from a special report issued by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2018.The IPCC report concluded that to avoid many of the more severe impacts of climate change, global warming would have to be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels — or about half a degree more than current warming. To reach that goal, the report said carbon dioxide emissions around the world would need to fall 45% below 2010 levels by 2030, and be net-zero by 2050.With just 12 years between 2018 and 2030, the report’s message was misinterpreted by many to mean that just over a decade remained to take action on climate change, or before an ecological catastrophe.“The problem with that framing from a scientific perspective is that climate change is not pass/fail,” Benjamin Cook, a climate scientist at NASA explained in a phone interview. “The 1.5 and 2 degree thresholds aren’t magical tipping points,” he said, where “we’re okay before then and it’s a disaster afterwards.”The consequences will be worse if we wait, he said, but even if the world surpasses 2 degrees of warming, any action we take to prevent further warming would still have value.It’s a point that other scientists have made as well. “Please stop saying something globally bad is going to happen in 2030,” wrote Myles Allen, an author of the IPCC report and the leader of the ECI Climate Research Programme at the University of Oxford, in a Conversation article. “Bad stuff is already happening and every half a degree of warming matters, but the IPCC does not draw a ‘planetary boundary’ at 1.5°C beyond which lie climate dragons.”Sonali McDermid, a climate scientist at New York University, noted in an email that the longer we wait to take action, the harder it will be to make progress on climate change, which after the 1.5 degree target, could lead to or exacerbate loss of key ecosystems, increases in extremes, changes in seasonality that affect food production and infrastructure, and higher sea level rise. “But that doesn’t – and shouldn’t – imply or mean that we just give up after 12 years,” she wrote.So while the candidates are correct to say that scientists have warned about the effects of climate change — and advocate for sooner, rather than later movement on the issue — it’s not the case that 2030 is a “point of no return” or that there is a particular deadline for taking action.Ryan said of farmers, “They haven’t made a profit in five years.” That’s far from being true.The Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture recently projected that net farm income would rise 10% this year, to $69.4 billion. And that broad measure of farm profits hasn’t been below $60 billion since 2006.It’s true that net farm income peaked at $123 billion in 2013 — a period of high commodity prices. Ryan would have been on firmer ground had he said farmers haven’t seen a big profit increase in five years.Sanders twice said that there were “87 million uninsured or underinsured,” saying this was the case “tonight in America, as we speak.” A Commonwealth Fund study supports that figure, though it includes those who were insured at the time they were surveyed but had had a gap in coverage in the prior year.“Of the 194 million U.S. adults ages 19 to 64 in 2018, an estimated 87 million, or 45 percent, were inadequately insured,” the study found, directing readers to Tables 1 and 2. The 87 million figure includes: 24 million uninsured in 2018, 43.8 million who were “underinsured” and 19.3 million who were insured at the time of the survey but had a gap in coverage in the previous year. The underinsured measure looks at out-of-pocket costs, not including insurance premiums, and the plan deductible. It includes people whose out-of-pocket costs were 10 percent or more of household income over 12 months, or 5 percent or more of household income for those earning under 200% of the federal poverty level; it also includes those whose deductibles were 5 percent or more of household income.The study found that fewer adults were uninsured in 2018, compared with 2010, but more people were underinsured.Warren defended her plan to fund child care and education by taxing “the top one-tenth of 1% of fortunes in this country.”By collecting a 2% tax on net worth over $50 million and a 3% tax on net worth over $1 billion, Warren promises to provide universal child care for kids up to age 5 and universal pre-K, raise the wages of child care and preschool teachers, offer free tuition at community and technical colleges, dedicate $50 billion to historically black colleges and universities, and cancel student debt for 95 percent of those who have it.Delivering on that promise depends on her tax plan generating $2.75 trillion over 10 years. But some economists are skeptical that it will actually raise that much. We wrote about it here.An op-ed from Lawrence Summers, a former treasury secretary and an economic adviser to former President Barack Obama, and Natasha Sarin, a law and business professor, suggested that Warren’s plan would raise about 40% of the projection.The Warren campaign hit back on the criticisms raised in that piece, arguing that the tax plan wouldn’t be weakened by loopholes and would include funds to bolster IRS enforcement. But it’s far from settled as to whether or not Warren’s plan will be able to pay for everything it has promised.When asked about the economic impact of policy proposals that would reduce public reliance on fossil fuels, O’Rourke said “wind and solar jobs are the fastest-growing jobs in the country.” We covered this issue once before — when Washington Gov. Jay Inslee made a similar statement — and found no federal data that could support such a claim.The BLS, the country’s official custodian of employment data, discontinued collecting data on all so-called “green jobs” in 2013. However, the agency does measure the number of jobs for some individual green occupations on an annual basis and projects job growth for these occupations.In 2017, BLS projected that solar photovoltaic installers and wind turbine technicians will be the two fastest-growing occupations by 2026. But that’s future growth, not current growth, and it is on a percentage basis. The actual number of additional jobs projected by 2026 is quite small.By 2026, BLS projects there will be 11,800 additional solar installers and 5,600 new wind turbine service technicians. That would be a 105 percent increase in solar photovoltaic installers and a 96 percent increase in wind turbine technicians from 2016 levels. By contrast, the third fastest-growing occupation — home health aides — will add 431,200 jobs, an increase of 47 percent.Home health aides also appears on the agency’s “most new jobs” projections, but the solar and wind jobs do not.We also found that, as of May 2018, there were an estimated 8,950 solar installers and 5,580 wind turbine service technicians. But a BLS spokesman told us that those figures represent a moving three-year average, so those figures should not be compared with those from previous years.The BLS data limitations make it impossible to measure the growth in “green jobs” in a way that is comparable with other occupations tracked by the agency. Two candidates misrepresented the Green New Deal during the debate, inaccurately stating that the nonbinding resolution offers Americans a guarantee of a government job.When asked why he felt the Green New Deal was unrealistic, Delaney responded, “Well, first of all, because it ties its progress to other things that are completely unrelated to climate, like universal health care, guaranteed government jobs, and universal basic income. So that only makes it harder to do.”Hickenlooper made the same claim in the last debate, and repeated it again twice in this debate.The Green New Deal, he said, would “make sure that every American is guaranteed a government job that they want.” Later, when Hickenlooper was also asked why he is opposed to the Green New Deal, he replied, “Well, I think the guarantee for a public job for everyone who wants one is a classic part of the problem. It’s a distraction.”As we explained after the June debate, the Green New Deal guarantees “a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.” The legislation, which failed to advance in the Senate in March, does not require the job be a public sector position. The Global Burden of Disease 2016 Injury Collaborators. “Global Mortality From Firearms, 1990-2016.” JAMA. 28 Aug 2018.Santhanam, Laura. “There’s a new global ranking of gun deaths. Here’s where the U.S. stands.” PBS NewsHour. 28 Aug 2018.Kochanek K.D., et al. “Deaths: Final data for 2017.” National Vital Statistics Reports; vol 68 no 9. National Center for Health Statistics. 24 Jun 2019.Collins, Sara R. et. al. “Health Insurance Coverage Eight Years After the ACA.” The Commonwealth Fund. 7 Feb 2019.Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. “Distributional Analysis of the Conference Agreement for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” 18 Dec 2017.Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Highlights From the March 2019 Farm Income Forecast: Farm Sector Profits Expected To Increase in 2019.” 7 Mar 2019.Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Value added to the U.S. economy by the agricultural sector, 2000-2009 Nominal (current dollars).” Data accessed 31 Jul 2019.Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Value added to the U.S. economy by the agricultural sector, 2010-2019F Nominal (current dollars).” Data accessed 31 Jul 2019.McDonald, Jessica. “The Facts on the ‘Green New Deal.’” FactCheck.org. 15 Feb 2019.Allen, Myles. “Why protesters should be wary of ‘12 years to climate breakdown’ rhetoric.” The Conversation. 18 Apr 2019.IPCC, 2018: Summary for Policymakers. Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.Cook, Benjamin. Climate scientist, NASA. Interview with FactCheck.org. 26 Jul 2019.McDermid, Sonali. Assistant Professor of Environmental Studies, New York University. Emails sent to FactCheck.org. 28 and 30 Jul 2019.Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey; All employees, thousands, manufacturing, seasonally adjusted.” Accessed 31 Jul 2019.Jackson, Brooks. “Trump’s Numbers July 2019 Update.” FactCheck.org. 12 Jul 2019.Kiely, Eugene. “Jay Inslee’s Green Jobs Claim.” FactCheck.org. 16 Apr 2019.Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Thirty fastest growing occupations projected to account for 19 percent of new jobs from 2016 to 2026.” Press release. 30 Oct 2017.Torpey, Elka. “Green growth: Employment projections in environmentally focused occupations.” Bureau of Labor Statistics. Apr 2018.Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Most New Jobs.” Updated 12 Apr 2019. Accessed 31 Jul 2019.Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2018. 47-2231 Solar Photovoltaic Installers.” Accessed 31 Jul 2019.Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2018. 49-9081 Wind Turbine Service Technicians.” Accessed 31 Jul 2019.
|
30
|
Villains or visionaries? Hedge funds short companies they say 'greenwash'.
|
Tens of trillions of global investment dollars are pouring into companies touting robust environmental, social and governance credentials. Now short-sellers spy an opportunity.
|
true
|
Environment
|
Such hedge funds, often cast as villains of the piece because they bet against share prices, scent a profit from company valuations they believe are unduly inflated by ESG promises or which they say ignore risks that threaten to undermine the company’s prospects. The fact short-sellers, who look to exploit information gaps, are targeting the ESG sphere underlines the complexities facing investors in accurately gauging companies’ sustainability credentials. Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg last week spoke of CEOs masking inaction with “creative PR”. Against a backdrop of growing public and political concerns about climate change and economic inequality, companies are under increasing pressure to show they are taking greater responsibility for how they generate their profits. Investments defined as “sustainable” account for more than a quarter of all assets under management globally, according to the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance. About $31 trillion has been invested, buoyed by analyst reports that show companies with strong ESG narratives outperform their peers. Some short-sellers, including Carson Block of Muddy Waters, Josh Strauss of Appleseed Capital and Chad Slater of Morphic Asset Management, argue share prices can be bolstered by corporate misrepresentation about sustainability, or so-called “greenwashing”. “Greenwashing is absolutely rampant now,” says Slater, whose fund bets on both rising and falling share prices. If companies fail to engage with long-term investors, he sees a red flag. “From the short side, it’s quite interesting.” Analytics companies that provide corporate ESG ratings use a combination of company disclosures, news sources and qualitative analysis of third-party data. They are a major source of information for investors, but it is not an exact science. Hedge funds have various strategies for selecting targets, often focusing on those they think show both ESG and more traditional financial or operational weakness. A high ESG rating can attract short interest. A Reuters analysis of data from financial information company Refinitiv and national regulators in Britain, France, Germany, Spain and Italy shows the five companies in each country with the best ESG scores collectively were being shorted more than those with the worst scores. The short positions against the companies deemed to have the best ESG credentials were 50% greater in size than those placed against the worst-performers. (Graphic: ESG shorts - UK: here) For an interactive version of the graphic, click here tmsnrt.rs/2RwpBDj. For additional graphics covering the other countries mentioned, see related content. ESG data providers compile ratings based on a slew of measures ranging from energy usage to board gender make-up, salary gap data and the scale of negative press reports on the company from newspapers across the world. Refinitiv, part-owned by the parent company of Reuters News, factors in more than 400 ESG measures for each company, taken from a range of sources including company reports, regulatory filings, NGO websites and news articles. A key problem, though, is scant regulations governing what ESG measures and risks companies must disclose and their patchy nature, said Diederik Timmer, executive vice president of client relations at Sustainalytics, a major ESG data provider. “When things go well, companies report quite well on those, when things don’t go so well it gets awfully quiet,” he added. Some policymakers, largely in Europe, are pushing for standardized disclosures to help investors better gauge the risks, something which will leave less wriggle room for companies and make scores even more reliable. Two leading global asset managers interviewed by Reuters, who manage nearly $1 trillion in assets but declined to be identified, said they had tested their portfolios using several data providers and found the correlation between ESG ratings to be so low, they are building their own ranking system. Peter Hafez, chief data scientist at RavenPack, which helps hedge funds analyze data to get a trading edge, agreed. “There’s no perfect ESG rating out there,” he said. The influence of news flows on investor sentiment was underlined by a Deutsche Bank study here published in September that mapped 1,600 stocks and millions of company announcements and climate-related media reports over two decades. It found companies that had a greater proportion of positive announcements and press over the preceding 12 months outperformed the MSCI World Index by 1.4% a year, on average, while those with more negative news underperformed by 0.3%. For graphics of the data, click here tmsnrt.rs/2ncsFY0 and here tmsnrt.rs/2nd5hcT. Short-sellers borrow shares, pay the lender a fee and sell them on, betting the price will fall before buying them back and returning them to the original lender - pocketing the difference, minus the fee. But it is not for the faint-hearted. If funds trigger a share price fall, they can earn millions, but the downside, should shares rise, is unlimited. The perils of the practice were shown by the shorts burnt by a 17% surge in the shares of Elon Musk’s Tesla (TSLA.O) in October after a surprise quarterly profit. Short-sellers suffered paper losses of $1.4 billion, erasing most of their 2019 profits, according to analytics firm S3 Partners. And in a decade-long stock market bull-run, short-selling can be tricky. Morphic’s joint chief investment officer Slater said the Sydney-based money manager’s standalone short positions in its Trium Morphic ESG long-short fund had weighed on the portfolio over the past 12 months. Niche activist short-sellers, who can torpedo company valuations by publishing negative reports on targets - often alleging fraud or serious failures - are often criticized for undermining long-term company objectives and blurring the lines between whistleblower and market manipulator. Short-sellers agree they are biased, but argue no more than long investors, the banks that raise money for the company and the company’s management. Carson Block, founder of American short-seller Muddy Waters, who shot to prominence spotting wrongdoing in some Chinese-run companies, is now seeking a “morality short” on ESG - branching out from a traditional focus on corporate governance issues to targets whose success he says hinges on secretly harming society. As an example of what he is seeking, he points to the U.S. opioid crisis, which has triggered around 2,500 lawsuits by authorities seeking to hold drugmakers responsible for stoking a scandal that has claimed almost 400,000 overdose deaths between 1999 and 2017. “I’m really skeptical of ESG,” he says, likening the use of the acronym by the corporate world to the token straw slipped into a large plastic cup with a plastic lid. “ESG is the paper straw of investing,” he says. “I definitely want to find companies like that because I know they’re out there and I want to help put them down.”
|
5569
|
Berlin nightclub patrons urged to get meningitis test.
|
Berlin authorities on Thursday urged patrons of a famed nightclub in the German capital to immediately visit a doctor to be checked for bacterial meningitis after a visitor was hospitalized for the illness.
|
true
|
International News, Health, Berlin, Europe, Meningitis
|
The patient likely contracted meningitis at the downtown club on Saturday, officials said. The KitKatClub is renowned for its sexually uninhibited techno parties that draw visitors from around the world. City authorities issued a warning this week after being alerted to the Berlin patron’s exposure to the disease, urging all others who were at the club at the time to consult with a doctor. Bacterial meningitis can be spread via saliva and close body contact. Common symptoms are strong headaches, high fever, a stiff neck, dizziness and weakness. The disease can become life-threatening within hours. In a statement on its home page, the club itself said that “while infections in the club were very unlikely according to doctors and authorities ... anybody suffering from symptoms should immediately see a doctor.” The club said that none of its employees had shown any symptoms so far, but all had been offered antibiotics as a preventive measure. City officials said there was no need to shut down the club because it wasn’t the source of infection, and the site itself was not contaminated.
|
9435
|
Want to Live Longer? Every Movement Counts, Even Cleaning the House
|
The story recaps a recent study published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society that used accelerometers to track the activity of women between the ages of 63 and 99. The study followed study participants for a mean of 3.1 years, tracking mortality for all participants. The study found that even “light activity” reduced the relative risk of dying during the study period. In other words, even light physical activity can contribute to health. The story did a good job explaining what “light activity” means in this context, and explaining how the study was designed. But, when it came to the risk reduction, we wanted to know what this translated to in absolute terms, but the story doesn’t say. Also, as the story points out, the study can’t prove a cause-and-effect relationship between light activity and reduced mortality. Yet the story never really explains why this is the case, and it contradicts itself with the clickbait headline. Telling readers that the study wasn’t able to prove cause and effect is a good start, but providing more information on why this is the case helps them understand why studies like these are often contradicted by later, more rigorous research.
|
false
|
limits of observational studies
|
Cost wasn’t mentioned, but given that this is light activity, we’ll rate this N//A. Still, the story could have explicitly said that the activities that are highlighted in this study probably have no cost associated with them. The story notes that engaging in light activity for 30 minutes per day reduced relative risk of mortality during the study period by 12 percent. It also noted that engaging in moderate activity for 30 minutes per day reduced that risk by 39 percent. But what about the absolute risk reduction? As the NIH has noted, the benefits of physical activity far outweigh the risks. For that reason, we won’t ding this story for not going into details regarding the risks associated with light physical activity. Nonetheless, it would have been nice to see the story mention that older adults may want to consult with a health professional to determine what types of activity they should (or should not) engage in. The story does briefly point out that this type of study can’t prove cause and effect, though it quickly pivoted to a “however…” to weaken that point. A limitation that should have made it into the news story is that individuals weren’t assigned a level of activity–rather they presumably went about their usual activities for a week (just a week) and the device captured it. The authors then categorized individuals into three categories of increasing level of activity. The challenge is that people who are less active, may be that way for a reason. Maybe they are sick, or have other issues that make them less active. And that might have been a temporary problem. This helps readers understand why the study can’t prove cause and effect. There’s really no disease mongering here, though there is one note we’d like to make that falls under this heading as well as anywhere. The story tells readers that increased physical activity is “linked to a lower risk of death.” Reader, we have bad news…death is inevitable. It would be more accurate to note that physical activity reduced the relative risk of dying during a given timeframe (in this case, the three-year period of observation). No outside sources are cited in the story, nor does the story make clear who funded the research (addressing potential conflicts of interest). The study compared different levels of physical activity. As such, it was comparative. However, there are other important lifestyle habits that affect mortality (cigarette smoking or drinking alcohol, for instance), and it would be interesting to know how helpful light activity is compared to these other lifestyle modifications. The story does a good job of defining what light activity means, which is important for understanding how accessible it is. Bike riding is a moderate activity, for example, whereas “strolling around the neighborhood” is a light activity. The story refers to national guidelines and some (nonspecific) “recent analyses,” noting that the “new study refutes that research.” But is this the first study to show benefits like these from engaging in low-intensity daily activities? No. For example, this 2014 study published in Preventive Medicine examined “examine[d] the association between household physical activity and all-cause mortality in a cohort of older adults from Spain.” The study relied on self-reporting from study participants, but found that — among other things — “Household physical activity may have benefits for longer survival in older women.” It would have been interesting to see the article look at how the new study compared to the 2014 study. Do the findings support each other? How do they differ? This sort of context would be valuable for readers. What does appear novel is the use of a device to assess activity–versus recording what people report as their activity levels. This is borderline. The story maps very closely to the news release. However, the story appears to incorporate quotes from study author Andrea LaCroix that are not found in the news release.
|
1854
|
As America's waistline expands, costs soar.
|
U.S. hospitals are ripping out wall-mounted toilets and replacing them with floor models to better support obese patients. The Federal Transit Administration wants buses to be tested for the impact of heavier riders on steering and braking. Cars are burning nearly a billion gallons of gasoline more a year than if passengers weighed what they did in 1960.
|
true
|
Health News
|
A normal-sized gurney (L) is pictured alongside an oversized one at the children's and women's maternity ward at the University of Alabama Hospital in Birmingham, Alabama, April 26, 2012. OBESITY/ REUTERS/Marvin Gentry The nation’s rising rate of obesity has been well-chronicled. But businesses, governments and individuals are only now coming to grips with the costs of those extra pounds, many of which are even greater than believed only a few years ago: The additional medical spending due to obesity is double previous estimates and exceeds even those of smoking, a new study shows. Many of those costs have dollar signs in front of them, such as the higher health insurance premiums everyone pays to cover those extra medical costs. Other changes, often cost-neutral, are coming to the built environment in the form of wider seats in public places from sports stadiums to bus stops. The startling economic costs of obesity, often borne by the non-obese, could become the epidemic’s second-hand smoke. Only when scientists discovered that nonsmokers were developing lung cancer and other diseases from breathing smoke-filled air did policymakers get serious about fighting the habit, in particular by establishing nonsmoking zones. The costs that smoking added to Medicaid also spurred action. Now, as economists put a price tag on sky-high body mass indexes (BMIs), policymakers as well as the private sector are mobilizing to find solutions to the obesity epidemic. “As committee chairmen, Cabinet secretaries, the head of Medicare and health officials see these really high costs, they are more interested in knowing, ‘what policy knob can I turn to stop this hemorrhage?’” said Michael O’Grady of the National Opinion Research Center, co-author of a new report for the Campaign to End Obesity, which brings together representatives from business, academia and the public health community to work with policymakers on the issue. The U.S. health care reform law of 2010 allows employers to charge obese workers 30 percent to 50 percent more for health insurance if they decline to participate in a qualified wellness program. The law also includes carrots and celery sticks, so to speak, to persuade Medicare and Medicaid enrollees to see a primary care physician about losing weight, and funds community demonstration programs for weight loss. Such measures do not sit well with all obese Americans. Advocacy groups formed to “end size discrimination” argue that it is possible to be healthy “at every size,” taking issue with the findings that obesity necessarily comes with added medical costs. The reason for denominating the costs of obesity in dollars is not to stigmatize plus-size Americans even further. Rather, the goal is to allow public health officials as well as employers to break out their calculators and see whether programs to prevent or reverse obesity are worth it. The percentage of Americans who are obese (with a BMI of 30 or higher) has tripled since 1960, to 34 percent, while the incidence of extreme or “morbid” obesity (BMI above 40) has risen sixfold, to 6 percent. The percentage of overweight Americans (BMI of 25 to 29.9) has held steady: It was 34 percent in 2008 and 32 percent in 1961. What seems to have happened is that for every healthy-weight person who “graduated” into overweight, an overweight person graduated into obesity. Because obesity raises the risk of a host of medical conditions, from heart disease to chronic pain, the obese are absent from work more often than people of healthy weight. The most obese men take 5.9 more sick days a year; the most obese women, 9.4 days more. Obesity-related absenteeism costs employers as much as $6.4 billion a year, health economists led by Eric Finkelstein of Duke University calculated. Even when poor health doesn’t keep obese workers home, it can cut into productivity, as they grapple with pain or shortness of breath or other obstacles to working all-out. Such obesity-related “presenteeism,” said Finkelstein, is also expensive. The very obese lose one month of productive work per year, costing employers an average of $3,792 per very obese male worker and $3,037 per female. Total annual cost of presenteeism due to obesity: $30 billion. Decreased productivity can reduce wages, as employers penalize less productive workers. Obesity hits workers’ pocketbooks indirectly, too: Numerous studies have shown that the obese are less likely to be hired and promoted than their svelte peers are. Women in particular bear the brunt of that, earning about 11 percent less than women of healthy weight, health economist John Cawley of Cornell University found. At the average weekly U.S. wage of $669 in 2010, that’s a $76 weekly obesity tax. The medical costs of obesity have long been the focus of health economists. A just-published analysis finds that it raises those costs more than thought. Obese men rack up an additional $1,152 a year in medical spending, especially for hospitalizations and prescription drugs, Cawley and Chad Meyerhoefer of Lehigh University reported in January in the Journal of Health Economics. Obese women account for an extra $3,613 a year. Using data from 9,852 men (average BMI: 28) and 13,837 women (average BMI: 27) ages 20 to 64, among whom 28 percent were obese, the researchers found even higher costs among the uninsured: annual medical spending for an obese person was $3,271 compared with $512 for the non-obese. Nationally, that comes to $190 billion a year in additional medical spending as a result of obesity, calculated Cawley, or 20.6 percent of U.S. health care expenditures. That is double recent estimates, reflecting more precise methodology. The new analysis corrected for people’s tendency to low-ball their weight, for instance, and compared obesity with non-obesity (healthy weight and overweight) rather than just to healthy weight. Because the merely overweight do not incur many additional medical costs, grouping the overweight with the obese underestimates the costs of obesity. Contrary to the media’s idealization of slimness, medical spending for men is about the same for BMIs of 26 to 35. For women, the uptick starts at a BMI of 25. In men more than women, high BMIs can reflect extra muscle as well as fat, so it is possible to be healthy even with an overweight BMI. “A man with a BMI of 28 might be very fit,” said Cawley. “Where healthcare costs really take off is in the morbidly obese.” Those extra medical costs are partly born by the non-obese, in the form of higher taxes to support Medicaid and higher health insurance premiums. Obese women raise such “third party” expenditures $3,220 a year each; obese men, $967 a year, Cawley and Meyerhoefer found. One recent surprise is the discovery that the costs of obesity exceed those of smoking. In a paper published in March, scientists at the Mayo Clinic toted up the exact medical costs of 30,529 Mayo employees, adult dependents, and retirees over several years. “Smoking added about 20 percent a year to medical costs,” said Mayo’s James Naessens. “Obesity was similar, but morbid obesity increased those costs by 50 percent a year. There really is an economic justification for employers to offer programs to help the very obese lose weight.” For years researchers suspected that the higher medical costs of obesity might be offset by the possibility that the obese would die young, and thus never rack up spending for nursing homes, Alzheimer’s care, and other pricey items. That’s what happens to smokers. While they do incur higher medical costs than nonsmokers in any given year, their lifetime drain on public and private dollars is less because they die sooner. “Smokers die early enough that they save Social Security, private pensions, and Medicare” trillions of dollars, said Duke’s Finkelstein. “But mortality isn’t that much higher among the obese.” Beta blockers for heart disease, diabetes drugs, and other treatments are keeping the obese alive longer, with the result that they incur astronomically high medical expenses in old age just like their slimmer peers. Some costs of obesity reflect basic physics. It requires twice as much energy to move 250 pounds than 125 pounds. As a result, a vehicle burns more gasoline carrying heavier passengers than lighter ones. “Growing obesity rates increase fuel consumption,” said engineer Sheldon Jacobson of the University of Illinois. How much? An additional 938 million gallons of gasoline each year due to overweight and obesity in the United States, or 0.8 percent, he calculated. That’s $4 billion extra. Not all the changes spurred by the prevalence of obesity come with a price tag. Train cars New Jersey Transit ordered from Bombardier have seats 2.2 inches wider than current cars, at 19.75 inches, said spokesman John Durso, giving everyone a more comfortable commute. (There will also be more seats per car because the new ones are double-deckers.) The built environment generally is changing to accommodate larger Americans. New York’s commuter trains are considering new cars with seats able to hold 400 pounds. Blue Bird is widening the front doors on its school buses so wider kids can fit. And at both the new Yankee Stadium and Citi Field, home of the New York Mets, seats are wider than their predecessors by 1 to 2 inches. The new performance testing proposed by transit officials for buses, assuming an average passenger weight of 175 instead of 150 pounds, arise from concerns that heavier passengers might pose a safety threat. If too much weight is behind the rear axle, a bus can lose steering. And every additional pound increases a moving vehicle’s momentum, requiring more force to stop and thereby putting greater demands on brakes. Manufacturers have told the FTA the proposal will require them to upgrade several components. Hospitals, too, are adapting to larger patients. The University of Alabama at Birmingham’s hospital, the nation’s fourth largest, has widened doors, replaced wall-mounted toilets with floor models able to hold 250 pounds or more, and bought plus-size wheelchairs (twice the price of regulars) as well as mini-cranes to hoist obese patients out of bed. The additional spending due to obesity doesn’t fall into a black hole, of course. It contributes to overall economic activity and thus to gross domestic product. But not all spending is created equal. “Yes, a heart attack will generate economic activity, since the surgeon and hospital get paid, but not in a good way,” said Murray Ross, vice president of Kaiser Permanente’s Institute for Health Policy. “If we avoided that heart attack we could have put the money to better use, such as in education or investments in clean energy.” The books on obesity remain open. The latest entry: An obese man is 64 percent less likely to be arrested for a crime than a healthy man. Researchers have yet to run the numbers on what that might save.
|
12527
|
"Under ‘Trumpcare,’"" domestic violence and sexual assault ""could be considered pre-existing conditions."
|
"Moore says that ""under ‘Trumpcare,’"" the Republican replacement for Obamacare, domestic violence and sexual assault ""could be considered pre-existing conditions"" -- something that could trigger higher insurance prices for those victims. Moore’s claim goes too far. Simply being a victim of domestic violence or sexual assault would not mean a person had a pre-existing condition. But it is important to know that conditions stemming from those assaults, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, could. For a statement that contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression"
|
false
|
Health Care, Legal Issues, Crime, Public Health, Women, Wisconsin, Gwen Moore,
|
"Democrats savaged the Republican legislation, pushed by President Donald Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan, that would replace Obamacare. ""Under ‘Trumpcare,’"" U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore of Wisconsin declared in a May 4, 2017 news release, ""being a victim of domestic violence or sexual assault could be considered pre-existing conditions."" The claim by Moore, who has talked publicly about being a victim of domestic violence and sexual assault herself, cuts to one of the big fears around health care -- that having something that is considered a pre-existing condition means a person has to pay more for insurance, or could be denied coverage altogether. Typically, this refers to things such as diabetes or cancer. But sexual assault or domestic violence? Obamacare vs ‘Trumpcare’ The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is the 2010 legislation adopted under President Barack Obama. It prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage -- or charging higher premiums -- because a person has a pre-existing medical condition. Under the American Health Care Act (sometimes called ""Trumpcare""), insurers would still be prohibited from denying coverage based on a pre-existing condition. The bill was narrowly approved by the House of Representatives and could be changed in the Senate. But in its current form, the bill would give states the option to allow insurers to charge people with pre-existing conditions higher prices. Republicans argue those people would be protected, because those states would have to set up high-risk pools to insure people with pre-existing conditions. But many analysts believe the law would still leave those people more vulnerable to cost increases that could make their plans unaffordable. (The day after the House passed the bill, GOP Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said he would consider allowing insurers to charge higher prices. But later that day -- in an indication of how politically touchy the issue is -- he backed away from that comment after it drew criticism.) Pre-existing conditions Bloggers claimed that under the GOP bill, sexual assault is a pre-existing condition, which PolitiFact National rated . PolitiFact National spelled out what would happen under the GOP bill regarding sexual assault and experts told us that the same would apply to domestic violence. In a nutshell: The bill does not single out any specific medical event or diagnosis as a pre-existing condition. Conditions stemming from a sexual assault or domestic violence, such as post-traumatic stress disorder or certain sexually transmitted diseases, could be judged to be a pre-existing condition. States would have the option to allow insurers to charge higher prices to people with an existing condition, possibly making coverage unaffordable. Our rating Moore says that ""under ‘Trumpcare,’"" the Republican replacement for Obamacare, domestic violence and sexual assault ""could be considered pre-existing conditions"" -- something that could trigger higher insurance prices for those victims. Moore’s claim goes too far. Simply being a victim of domestic violence or sexual assault would not mean a person had a pre-existing condition. But it is important to know that conditions stemming from those assaults, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, could. For a statement that contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, our rating is ."
|
14259
|
"The Human Rights Campaign is ""more powerful than the NRA."
|
"McCrory said the main group against HB2, the Human Rights Campaign, is ""more powerful than the NRA."" It’s a strong claim, given the NRA’s reputation for power and influence, and even the HRC spokesman was unwilling to embrace it. That’s not to say the HRC isn’t powerful. It’s a multimillion-dollar organization and the country’s largest gay rights group. But it doesn’t have the resources, adherents or success rate that the NRA does. In every way we tried to define influence, the HRC doesn’t even come close to the NRA’s level of power."
|
false
|
Campaign Finance, Gays and Lesbians, Sexuality, North Carolina, Pat McCrory,
|
"When one thinks of the country’s most powerful lobbying groups, acronyms like NRA, AIPAC and AARP spring to mind. So do phrases like Big Pharma, Big Oil and Wall Street. During an appearance April 17 on NBC’s ""Meet The Press,"" North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory made the argument that the Human Rights Campaign is also among the most powerful lobbies in the United States. ""The Human Rights Council, my gosh, they’re more powerful than the NRA,"" McCrory said, meaning the Human Rights Campaign and the National Rifle Association. The Human Rights Campaign, or HRC, is a major player in the opposition to North Carolina’s controversial new law, House Bill 2, which limits LGBT rights in public accommodations — and which McCrory was on national television to defend. ""They are putting on a lot of pressure instead of having good dialogue,"" McCrory said. The HRC is the country’s largest gay rights group. It has led the charge for gay marriage and for the types of LGBT discrimination protections that HB2 prohibited cities in North Carolina from making. But has the group really eclipsed the NRA, an oft-cited stereotype of a powerful lobbying group that can shape public policy and opinion? McCrory says it has. And in the last few days, that claim has been picked up as a talking point by supporters of HB2. Measuring political power It would be big news if McCrory was right. Debates over gay rights, as with gun rights, are a large part of modern political discourse. We don’t know what criteria McCrory was using, if any, to make his claim. ""Meet The Press"" host Chuck Todd didn’t ask him to elaborate. When we asked McCrory’s campaign about his rationale, spokesman Ricky Diaz called it a ""ridiculous question"" and declined to answer. We also asked both the HRC and the NRA whether they agreed with McCrory. The NRA did not respond, and the HRC declined to answer. There are many ways to measure a group’s strength. We asked an expert, UNC-Chapel Hill political science professor Frank Baumgartner, who has written multiple books on special interest groups and lobbying. He listed three main ways to measure influence: Money and resources, ""cultural resonance"" and record of success or failure. Baumgartner said he believes McCrory’s comparison is "" or substantially exaggerated."" But let’s look into the numbers to see if they back that up. Money Money is especially important in modern politics because of the Citizens United ruling that McCrory mentioned, which allows for unlimited political spending. In 2014, according to federal tax filings, the NRA and its foundation had revenue of $356.1 million, compared with $51.2 million for the HRC and its foundation. Money allows interest groups to hire lobbyists, contribute directly to politicians and political groups or take part in what’s known as outside spending – TV ads, mailers and other political initiatives. In the 2014 election cycle, according to the Center For Responsive Politics, the NRA’s political spending was 7.5 times greater than the HRC’s ($36.8 million to $4.8 million). In the 2012 cycle, the NRA spent five times as much ($26.9 million to $5.1 million). In both cycles, the NRA spent more on lobbying than the HRC spent on lobbying, contributions and outside spending combined. For outside spending in particular, the NRA spent about $350 for every $1 the HRC spent. ""Cultural resonance"" How do you measure this? It sounds intangible, but there are ways to break it into specific, quantifiable pieces. And in everything we looked at, the NRA came out on top. Membership, magazine subscriptions, Google searches, social media following and official government mentions all show the NRA’s presence is anywhere from 2 to 10 times larger than the HRC’s. Both groups have magazines. The HRC’s goes to more than 350,000 homes, according to a group spokesman this week. According to the publishing group Alliance for Audited Media, the NRA’s three magazines had a combined circulation in 2015 of more than 3.5 million. As for membership, both have been accused in the past of inflating their numbers. Take it with a grain of salt, but the NRA claims 4.5 million members compared with 1.5 million for the HRC. The NRA also has a larger audience on social media – 4.8 million Facebook likes and 345,000 Twitter followers, compared with 2.3 million Facebook likes and 529,000 Twitter followers for the HRC. We also compared online searches, which indicate how interested people are in learning about the groups. When their Google searches over the last 12 years are graphed against each other, the HRC’s results show up as an almost flat line hovering just above 0. We used Google Trends to aggregate numerous terms related to both groups and map their relative popularity as compared with all other searches each month. The NRA is in red and the HRC is in blue. Even the HRC’s best month didn’t surpass the NRA’s worst month. We also counted how often they’re mentioned in congressional hearing transcripts and other documents listed by the U.S. Government Publishing Office search engine –1,408 results for ""National Rifle Association"" and 393 for ""Human Rights Campaign."" Reputation and success Baumgartner said he thinks this was the point McCrory was trying to make – on a group’s ""ability to push public policy in a direction the group prefers."" And again, Baumgartner said, the HRC doesn’t quite stack up. ""I'd say Human Rights Campaign has had some success,"" he said. ""But no, they would not compare to the long-run success of groups such as the NRA, the Realtors, the petroleum industry, the Chamber of Commerce and many others."" The NRA is famous for its clout and success in Congress. The HRC, on the other hand, has achieved most of its biggest victories – gay marriage, gay adoption rights and the invalidation of anti-sodomy laws – at the Supreme Court. The HRC has existed since 1980. For most of that time, one of its top priorities has been a federal LGBT anti-discrimination law. Efforts to pass such laws state-by-state have been mostly unsuccessful, as we explored in a previous fact check. On the national level, friendly legislators have introduced the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, ENDA, in nearly every Congress since 1994. It has failed each time, despite polling that shows about three quarters of Americans support such laws. The NRA has done the opposite, persuading Congress to repeatedly kill legislation that has even broader public support than ENDA does. Even though about 90 percent of Americans support background checks on gun buyers – previous PolitiFact rulings have found a range of 85 to 93 percent – the federal Fix Gun Checks Act has been voted down several times since 2011. It would allow for universal background checks, and the NRA is strongly opposed to it. As for the HRC, it hasn’t been totally unsuccessful in Congress. The group successfully pushed for a 2009 law that expanded federal hate crime definitions to include LGBT status. And what about outside of government, in the corporate world? It’s undeniable that the HRC’s influence there is growing. The group started ranking how ""LGBT friendly"" companies were in 2002 in what it calls its Corporate Equality Index. About a dozen received a perfect score that year. In 2016, more than 400 companies did. And many businesses have followed the HRC in criticizing North Carolina over HB2. But that hasn’t meant much so far. Key legislators have said they have no plans to repeal HB2 or make major changes to it, despite the pressure. On the other hand, the NRA has seen many of its initiatives passed in North Carolina, like 2013 law that loosened restrictions on concealed carry. Our ruling McCrory said the main group against HB2, the Human Rights Campaign, is ""more powerful than the NRA."" It’s a strong claim, given the NRA’s reputation for power and influence, and even the HRC spokesman was unwilling to embrace it. That’s not to say the HRC isn’t powerful. It’s a multimillion-dollar organization and the country’s largest gay rights group. But it doesn’t have the resources, adherents or success rate that the NRA does. In every way we tried to define influence, the HRC doesn’t even come close to the NRA’s level of power."
|
37939
|
"On August 13 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump said: ""They need that money in order to make the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots... Now, if we don’t make a deal, that means they don’t get the money. That means they can’t have universal mail-in voting, they just can’t have it.”"
|
Did Trump Say That Without a Deal ‘They Can’t Have Universal Mail-in Voting, They Just Can’t Have It’?
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Politics
|
"During ongoing controversy over United States Postal Service slowdowns and mail-in voting in August 2020, historian Heather Cox Richardson posted a status update to Facebook quoting United States President Donald Trump as saying that withholding USPS funding meant “they can’t have universal mail-in voting”:The post began:August 13, 2020 (Thursday)Today was another one for the history books.This morning, in an interview with Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo, Trump came out and said it: he wants to starve the United States Postal Service to destroy mail-in voting. Claiming that mail-in voting favors Democrats, he said: “Now they need that money in order to make the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots… Now, if we don’t make a deal, that means they don’t get the money. That means they can’t have universal mail-in voting, they just can’t have it.”It was fairly easy to determine the veracity of the quote; myriad news outlets in the United States and abroad covered the interview between Trump and Bartiromo on August 13 2020. A clip of the comments also circulated on Twitter:Trump this morning why he won’t fund US Postal Service. “Now they need that money in order to make the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots … But if they don’t get those two items that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting.” pic.twitter.com/73NBmSnoNC— The Recount (@therecount) August 13, 2020That video clip started with Trump saying “they want,” with no previous context about the “they” he referenced. Those comments appeared after memes began circulating, warning voters to avoid using USPS to submit ballots in November 2020:‘Don’t Mail Ballots In, Drop at Board of Elections, This is an Inside Tip from a Postal Worker, Can’t Say More than That’Both controversies occurred against the backdrop of comments made by Trump in March 2020, in which he appeared to express disapproval of broader access to voting:Trump openly admitting if we made voting easier in America, Republicans wouldn't win electionsTrump: ""The things they had in there were crazy. They had levels of voting, that if you ever agreed to it you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again."" pic.twitter.com/x5HmX6uogo— Lis Power (@LisPower1) March 30, 2020With respect to the August 13 2020 Bartiromo interview on Fox Business, most clips and transcripts started with “they,” making it not entirely clear which “they” Trump referenced. However, Slate published a partial transcript of the portion of the video about USPS funding and mail-in voting. Bartiromo asked what specifically Democrats were seeking that was “causing a breakdown in any deals”:Bartiromo: What specifically are they pushing for that is causing a breakdown in any deals? Nancy Pelosi said that the Democrats and the White House are still miles apart on any stimulus.Trump responded, indicating “they” were congressional Democrats:Trump: Well they’re right. And it’s their fault. They want $3.5 billion for something that’ll turn out to be fraudulent. That’s election money, basically. They want $3.5 billion for the mail-in votes. Universal mail-in ballots. They want $25 billion—billion—for the post office. Now they need that money in order to have post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots. Now, in the meantime, they aren’t getting there. By the way, those are just two items. But if you don’t get those two items, that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting. Because they’re not equipped to have it. And you see how bad it’s been with this Carolyn Maloney scam. She scammed her way into an election she probably lost. But they said mail-in ballots, its all mixed up. Paterson, New Jersey, same thing. Yesterday Virginia, 500,000 applications for ballots got sent to everybody, nobody even knows. Got sent to dogs. Got sent to dead people. Nobody has no idea what happened. They said, Oh we made a mistake, I’m sorry. Five hundred thousand ballots sent in Virginia. How do you feel about Virginia going in there when you have 500,000 phony ballot applicants? And this is all over.Bartiromo asked about whether quibbling over USPS funding and infrastructure for mail-in voting was “holding up money for the American people,” referring to stimulus payments during the COVID-19 pandemic. In his second response, Trump confirmed that funding for mail-in voting was at issue in broader negotiations:Bartiromo: This is what’s holding up money for the American people? They want mail-in voting and they want money for the post office? This is one of the sticking points that’s holding back stimulus for Americans during this coronavirus?Trump: That’s one of them. [Cross talk]Trump: That’s one of them. That’s right. Maria, how would you like to have $3.5 billion for mail-in voting. Billion! You know how much that is? Nobody has any idea, you people, Oh, you know, 3½ billion. They want $25 billion for the post office, because the post office is going to have to go to town to get these ridiculous ballots in. You know, there’s nothing wrong with getting out and voting. They voted during World War I and World War II. And they should have voter ID, because the Democrats scam the system. But two of the items are the post office, and $3.5 billion dollars for mail-in voting. Now, if we don’t make a deal, that means they don’t get the money. That means they can’t have universal mail-in voting. They just can’t have it. So, you know.As such, the comments Heather Cox Richardson shared were accurate; Trump said Democrats sought money in order to have the post office functioning “so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots,” and “if we don’t make a deal, that means they don’t get the money,” and “they can’t have universal mail-in voting … they just can’t have it.” The commentary occurred across exchanges with Bartiromo, in the same short section of an interview on Fox Business. The segment in its entirety can be viewed here.Comments"
|
2441
|
Predicting violence in psychopaths is 'no more than chance'.
|
Assessment tools used to predict how likely a psychopathic prisoner is to re-offend if freed from jail are “utterly useless” and parole boards might just as well flip a coin when deciding such risks, psychiatrists said on Tuesday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Publishing a study that found risk score tools are only around 46 percent accurate on how likely psychopathic convicts are to kill, rape or assault again, they said probation officers and judges should set little or no store by such tests. They warned that clinicians carrying out such classifications must be aware of their severe limitations, and make sure prisoners undergo comprehensive psychiatric diagnosis before any risks assessment is made. “If you apply these (tests) to somebody who is a psychopath, they’re utterly useless, you might as well toss a coin,” said Jeremy Coid, director of the forensic psychiatry research unit at Queen Mary University of London who led the study. “They will not predict accurately at all,” he told reporters at a briefing in London about his findings. Coid and other forensic psychiatrists say the findings - which also showed the tools perform only moderately well in prisoners with disorders like schizophrenia, depression, drug and alcohol dependence - could have major implications for risk assessment in criminal justice systems. “There are increasing expectations of public protection from violent behavior, and psychiatrists can be seriously criticized if they make wrong decisions,” he said. Seena Fazel, a consultant forensic psychiatrist at Britain’s University of Oxford, said the reliability of the tests’ predictive ability was so low that it might be best not to use them at all - and warned that at the very least, their results should only be noted by parole boards, rather than acted upon. “If you’re going to use these instruments, be aware of their strengths and limitations,” he told reporters. The estimated prevalence of adult psychopathy in the general population is around 1 percent, but that rises to between 15 percent and 25 percent among men in prison. Coid, whose study was published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, analyzed data from 1,396 male prisoners in England and Wales who were interviewed between six and 12 months before their release. All the men were serving sentences of two or more years for a sexual or violent offences. The prisoners were assessed for personality disorders, symptoms of schizophrenia, depression and drug and alcohol dependence, as well as being measured for psychopathy on a reputable scale known as Hare Psychopathy Check List. After their release, data on their re-offending rates was added to the study, and showed that among three different re-offending risk assessment tools used before their release, the accuracy among psychopaths was below 50 percent. While the tools were more accurate in predictions for prisoners with no mental health disorders - at around 75 percent accuracy - they were only around 60 percent right when it came to prisoners diagnosed with schizophrenia and depression. For prisoners with anti-social personality disorders the predictive value of the tests ranged from poor to little more than chance, with an average 53.2 percent predictive accuracy. And for the 70 prisoners rated as psychopathic, none of the tests was statistically better than chance. Coid said the results suggest it is time to question the expectations put on psychiatrists and psychologists asked to forecast future behavior of offenders, and to consider what can happen to their reputations if predictions are wrong. “The easy solution is to be highly restrictive on who is released, and be risk averse. However, even for serious offenders, most will be released at some stage and someone has to carry out a risk assessment,” he said. “We need to prioritize the development of new assessment tools for these hard-to-predict groups.”
|
10393
|
Nonalcoholic Beer Aids Marathon Recovery
|
The story states that it’s reporting on “a new study” but it never explains that the study is only an abstract of a presentation given at a professional meeting. Thus the data have not been peer-reviewed, and no detailed methods or results are available. The only perspective on the research comes from the lead author, and no other alternatives for marathon recovery are discussed. The story specifically states that the beer was only effective if it was nonalcoholic. However, this was not tested, so this is unknown. In addition, the properties of the nonalcoholic beer that might be responsible for the beneficial effects are not known, since it’s not clear what placebo beverage was used. The lead researcher is quoted as hypothesizing that the beneficial effects of the beer might be due to the presence of polyphenols, but there is no evidence to support this. The story then focuses in on polyphenols, discussing other foods that contain large amounts of polyphenols. Running a marathon can be grueling and can result in reduced immune function, which can lead to an increase in upper respiratory tract infections such as colds. Athletes, from weekend warriors to professionals, could benefit from treatments or products that aid recovery.
|
false
|
New York Times
|
Discussion of costs is relatively unimportant as most individuals would know how much beer costs. The story did quantify the benefits of one parameter by quoting the abstract “incidence of upper respiratory tract infections was 3.25-fold lower” – but it was not mentioned that these were self-reported upper respiratory tract infections. The story mentions that there was ‘significantly less evidence of inflammation….and lower counts of white blood cells than the placebo group” but does not provide numbers. The story also states that the ‘beer experiment’ showed benefits of minimizing post-race damage. But the study didn’t measure damage, it measured blood markers of immune function. In the study, participants consumed 1-1.5 liters/day of non-alcoholic beer (or a placebo) for 5 weeks total. There could be several potential adverse effects such as weight gain from extra calorie consumption, imbalances in nutrients if the liquid replaced other fluids, etc. No potential harms were mentioned. The quality of evidence in the research study was low as it was a non-peer reviewed abstract that was presented at a scientific meeting only, and this is not mentioned. While the treatment (non-alcoholic beer) was compared to a placebo in a double-blinded design, the nature of the placebo is not known, other than that it was a beverage. The research does not mention whether numerous important factors were controlled in the study design (the training regimens of the participants, their diets, their total beverage consumption, etc) and these extensive limitations are not mentioned in the story. No disease mongering. Marathon running was described as “punishing to the body, causing muscle soreness and inflammation.” This is accurate. The story quotes the lead author extensively. Unfortunately, no other independent perspectives are provided. No potential conflicts of interest are noted. The article does not mention potential alternatives that might aid marathon recovery, including any other dietary alterations, and does not discuss the advantages and disadvantages compared with any other approaches. Not applicable. The availability of nonalcoholic beer is not in question. However, it is not clear from the original abstract whether the type of beer matters, as the brand and/or the characteristics (such as calories) were not provided. This is not mentioned in the story. (note: the brand was provided in a press release) The treatment, beer, is not novel, and is not presented as such. Other substances that also contain the purported active ingredient, polyphenols, are discussed. There was an American College of Sports Medicine news release for the abstract, but it doesn’t appear to have been relied upon. Maybe it should have been, since the news release actually includes a disclaimer the story did not include – that the research was presented at a professional meeting but has not been peer-reviewed.
|
24064
|
"Bill White Says Republican state leaders are using ""Soviet-style"" budget management."
|
"Bill White objects to what he calls ""Soviet-style"" budget management by Republican leaders"
|
false
|
State Budget, Texas, Bill White,
|
"In a public interview hosted by the Austin-based Texas Tribune, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Bill White compared Republican leadership on state budget woes to how things swung in ye olde U.S.S.R. You remember, the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics -- home of the late dictator Joseph Stalin and run single-handedly by the Communist Party prior to the government's collapse in 1991. White said March 9 he’d take a more deliberate approach to spending than the state's top leaders, all Republican, who asked government agencies in January to suggest ways to cut their budgets by 5 percent. White said if he's in charge, ""it won’t be done by things that are just across the board, Soviet style, you know, budget management that only career politicians seem to embrace."" Pressed by interviewer Evan Smith, White said: ""Is it just a coincidence that 5 percent is the appropriate amount for each state agency?... No. It’s because that’s the way that career politicians know how to run government."" We started our review of White's statement wondering what ""Soviet-style"" budget management means. Several expert professors said that historically, the term didn't refer to across-the-board budget cuts. Professor Paul Gregory of the University of Houston Department of History said ""Soviet style"" makes him think of a monopoly party (in this case, the Communist Party) dictating everything to subordinates without any possibility of change. Gregory said Soviet-style budgeting also means hiding expenditures you don’t want people to see—such as massive investments in military infrastructure. Peter Caldwell, a Rice University professor of history, said budget-writing in the Soviet Union most often consisted of “huge and crude” decisions to invest in one part of the economy at the expense of another. And H. Stephen Gardner, chairman of the Baylor University Department of Economics, said he’d define Soviet-style management as overly centralized as opposed to giving autonomy to individual units of government. So are there ""Soviet style"" ways that state leaders have approached the budget? Some background: In January, Gov. Rick Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Joe Straus--mindful of a projected state revenue shortfall that could reach $15 billion by next January--jointly asked agencies to submit plans identifying savings in 5 percent “priority increments” in their 2010-11 appropriations from state revenue. Such plans could lead to cuts, though no decisions have been made and some programs have already been excused. No doubt, the leaders' request is a centralized one. But is it Soviet-style in any other way? We turned to White for elaboration. White’s campaign pointed us to a statement issued by White, the former Houston mayor, in January: “Well-run organizations cut spending based on priorities and where they can best attain productivity improvements. So, for example, in the city of Houston we made smaller cuts in public safety because that was the highest priority. And we were able to cut more in garbage collection and disposal through productivity improvements.” White then told us that by ""Soviet style,"" he doesn't mean that Texas state government owns the means of production, as in the Soviet Union. “Obviously we have a market system,” White said. He described his alternative approach to the looming revenue gap, saying that as governor, he'd focus on funding priorities such as education while encouraging agencies to improve productivity via ""process re-engineering"" without hurting the delivery of services to taxpayers. He said the state also would seek savings by renegotiating vendor contracts. Also, he said, there’d be regular meetings with agency chiefs to talk about how they’re cutting spending and avoiding non-essential hirings. “I would have had reports back to me weekly and monthly concerning the efficiencies identified,” White said. We didn't get to why White considers the existing approach ""Soviet style"" before he had to go. We asked the professors if ""Soviet style"" accurately characterizes the GOP leaders' request for proposed budget cuts. Gregory said describing the request from Perry, et al. that way “doesn’t seem to have any relevance to what was actually practiced in the Soviet Union. ... It's inappropriate to use that term."" Gardner agreed, saying: ""It’s a bit hyperbolic to refer to this (budget cutting) as Soviet style. I should admit I have done exactly the same thing myself on matters of budgeting.” The point of saying as much, Gardner said, is to elicit an emotional reaction. He added that Republicans who cast President Barack Obama as socialist — Perry has told reporters he thinks Obama has socialist beliefs — are likewise guilty of hyperbole for dramatic effect. The professor, who said he considers Obama a centrist, speculated that Noam Chomsky, a left-leaning linguist who writes on public affairs, would call the president a ""crazed capitalist."" ""If White’s point is that budget management is being handled in an overly centralized way,"" Gardner said, ""I can see the element of truth there. The problem I would have is even if you say I am going to be more careful and more surgically look at the right places to cut, you’re still using a more centralized approach.” Caldwell agreed with the psychological impact, if not the accuracy, of ""Soviet style."" Generally, he said, “anyone who ever mentions the Soviet economy or Naziism when they’re talking about American domestic debate is usually off track. They’re referring to crude examples to raise the stakes of a debate. They’re not necessarily wanting a careful, rational debate. Who in America wants the Soviet economy or supports Naziism?” Our conclusion? The GOP leaders' request that agencies submit proposed budget cuts isn’t Soviet style — not even close. At best, White's statement is an example of how politicians try to light up a room. It's so off base, we're lighting up the meter: !"
|
5652
|
Man in Rhode Island tests positive for rare equine virus.
|
Public health officials say a Rhode Island man has tested positive for the potentially deadly mosquito-borne virus eastern equine encephalitis.
|
true
|
Rhode Island, Westerly, Health, General News, West Warwick, Public health
|
The state health department said Friday the case was confirmed in a man over 50 from West Warwick. It’s the first human case in Rhode Island since 2010. State environmental officials said Thursday a six-month-old horse tested positive for the virus in Westerly. Mosquitoes carrying the disease have been found in Westerly and Central Falls. Ana Novais, the health department’s deputy director, says there’s a high risk for transmission of the disease to humans through mosquito bites. She recommends taking extra precautions to prevent bites. In neighboring Massachusetts, there have been four confirmed human cases of the virus this year, one of them fatal. The virus can cause brain infections.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.