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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1876
|
Study finds one percent of human genes switched off.
|
Scientists studying the human genome have found that each of us is carrying around 20 genes that have been completely inactivated, suggesting that not all switched-off genes are harmful to health.
|
true
|
Science News
|
A team at Britain’s Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is developing a new catalogue of so-called “loss-of-function” (LoF) gene variants to help identify new disease-causing mutations, and say their work will help scientists better understand the normal function of human genes. Working as part of larger study called the 1000 Genomes Project, the team developed a series of filters to identify common errors in the human genome, which maps the entire genetic code. “The key questions we focused on for this study were how many of these LoF variants were real and how large a role might they play in human disease,” said Daniel MacArthur of the Sanger Institute, who worked on the team. The researchers looked at nearly 3,000 possible LoF variants in the genomes of 185 people from Europe, East Asia and West Africa. Their findings were published in the journal Science on Thursday. Loss of function variants are genetic changes that are predicted to severely disrupt the function of genes. Some are known to cause severe human diseases such as muscular dystrophy and cystic fibrosis. Previous genome sequencing projects have suggested there are hundreds of these variants in the DNA of even perfectly healthy individuals, but researchers were not able to tell exactly how many. In this study, the filters revealed that 56 percent of the 3,000 possible LoFs analyzed were unlikely to seriously affect gene function. But of the true LoF variants, 100 are typically found in the genome of each European, the researchers said, and 20 affect both copies of the gene - meaning they are likely to result in complete loss of gene function. “This shows that at least 1 percent of human genes can be shut down without causing serious disease,” said Mark Gerstein, a professor of biomedical informatics from Yale University in the United States, who also worked on the study. “We were able to use the differences between such ‘LoF-tolerant’ genes and known human disease genes to develop a way of predicting whether or not a newly discovered change in a gene is likely to be severely disease-causing.” Chris Tyler-Smith, who led the team at the Sanger Institute, said the findings would prove immediately useful for current DNA sequencing studies in patients with particular diseases. The results produced a list of more than 1,000 LoF variants, he said, “and in most cases little or nothing is known about how these genes work or what they do. “By studying the people carrying them in detail, we should get new insights into the function of many poorly known human genes.”
|
2995
|
Mandated hep C treatment for SC inmates gets initial consent.
|
A federal judge granted preliminary approval Tuesday of a proposed settlement mandating testing and treatment for hepatitis C of all inmates in South Carolina correction facilities.
|
true
|
Health, General News, Lawsuits, Hepatitis, South Carolina
|
Plaintiffs Russell Geissler, Bernard Bagley and Willie James Jackson filed a lawsuit in 2017 against the Department of Corrections over a lack of treatment for hepatitis C. A proposed class-action settlement was submitted after the lawsuit was filed. “This is a major step toward eliminating a point source for hepatitis C,” class counsel Reuben Guttman, with the law firm Guttman, Buschner & Brooks, said in a press release. Judge Margaret Seymour gave the proposed settlement the preliminary approval, news outlets reported. Identifying and treating inmates with hepatitis C will cost between $4,000 and $15,000 per person, depending on the individual’s health. The agency began testing current and former inmates in 2018. The department also received $10 million in its 2019-2020 budget to cover drugs, staffing, equipment and other expenses related to the testing and treatment for hepatitis C. Testing for all 18,125 South Carolina inmates is on schedule to be completed by June. The agency’s director, Bryan Stirling, said this a big step toward providing inmates with a safe environment. “We know that about 85% of inmates return to society within five years, and this will save medical treatment costs for taxpayers in the long run,” Stirling said. Hepatitis C is a viral infection that is spread through exposure to blood or blood products, commonly through sharing needles during intravenous drug use.
|
17547
|
"In altered photo, says Barack Obama wants ""more of Texans’ private data"" via health care."
|
"Dewhurst said Obama wants ""more of Texans’ private data."" The subset of Texans shopping for coverage through the online marketplace are providing additional private data for a reason: to ensure they’re qualified. Dewhurst's statement overlooks these aspects. Regardless, many more Texans will be asked to give the IRS information about their health coverage that was previously not requested."
|
true
|
Health Care, Homeland Security, Medicaid, Welfare, Taxes, Texas, Privacy Issues, David Dewhurst,
|
"Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, campaigning for re-election, tweeted a parody of President Barack Obama promoting his signature health-care law. Around midday Dec. 12, 2013, the official White House Twitter account posted a photo of Obama holding a sign urging Americans to get health coverage because ""nobody should go broke just because they get sick."" Social media denizens started creating versions that rewrote the sign’s text; Dewhurst’s had Obama saying, ""I want more of Texans’ private data."" Some perspective: Texas in 2012 had approximately 19.5 million insured residents and 5.2 million legal residents without insurance according to a March 18, 2013, report by the state Health and Human Services Commission. Does the Obamacare law demand private data on them that wasn't known to the government before? PolitiFact reporters have checked out several claims about how the Affordable Care Act’s online marketplaces will handle personal information. Many of the concerns addressed are about how government agencies will share information they already collect -- and how secure that information will be. As part of a May 2013 fact-check, PolitiFact in Washington, D.C., reported that a federal ""data hub"" resulting from the 2010 law would pull information from government agencies, but not expand federal data collection. For example, the Social Security Administration is asked to verify a person's Social Security number, and the IRS confirms financial data to see if a person is eligible for a subsidy. PolitiFact in D.C. gave a False rating Sept. 19, 2013, to a claim by former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey that ""Obamacare will question your sex life,"" finding that nothing in the health care law required such questions. So what information does the government collect under the Obamacare law? If you apply to shop in the federal online insurance marketplace or the marketplace for your state, you’ll supply information on yourself and perhaps family members, some of which the government already has. Healthcare.gov offers a checklist for people preparing to fill out applications, whether online or printed: Social Security number, employer, income, current insurance policy numbers and information about your employer’s insurance plans (if any). Such answers will help determine whether you’re eligible to buy insurance through the marketplaces and if you can get free- or reduced-cost coverage via tax credits, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program. The standardized family application asks for information on you and everyone who lives with you, including whether you are pregnant and how many babies you’re expecting, whether you have a health condition that limits daily activities, whether you live in a nursing home and whether you were in foster care after age 18. Other questions concern employment, military service, sources of income, tax deductions taken and whether you are American Indian or Alaska Native. A Sept. 18, 2013, fact sheet from the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said, ""Personal health information (PHI) will be requested only when it is needed to complete the application and make an eligibility determination for health coverage options."" Health privacy expert Deven McGraw told us by email that the applications do collect some information the government did not already have, but said it’s the same type of information gathered when people apply for public coverage such as Medicaid. ""They are questions that are specifically designed to match eligibility criteria. So none of it is extraneous,"" said McGraw, director of the health privacy project at the Center for Democracy and Technology, which advocates for Internet freedom. And, she said, the data can’t be used for any purposes other than the marketplaces’ functions. More information about you could come, the fact sheet says, from ""common federal data sources including the Social Security Administration (SSA), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Department of Homeland Security (DHS)."" Wait -- Homeland Security? According to the National Immigration Law Center’s website, applicants who are not U.S. citizens will have their status verified through a Homeland/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service database. Agencies already use the web service, called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE), to determine immigrants’ eligibility for benefits including Medicaid, housing loans and unemployment. Via email, Social Security spokeswoman Kia Anderson told us her agency can, when CMS needs the information to determine eligibility, provide applicants’ ID numbers, citizenship data, death or disability indicators and Social Security income and coverage earned. So the application process puts together some information the government already had with some it didn’t have. People who aren’t applying to shop in the marketplaces but are subject to the Obamacare law’s mandate will also be sharing some new information with Uncle Sam. The mandate to have or get insurance applies, according to the immigration law center, to all U.S. citizens, naturalized citizens and legal immigrants. Via email, IRS spokeswoman Lea Crusberg said 2014 tax returns will ask whether you have health coverage that meets the new standards or an exemption, whether you got coverage through an Obamacare marketplace and whether you got a tax credit to help defray the cost. The law’s new tax payments and credits will also be on returns, of course. In 2015, Crusberg said, the IRS will start collecting coverage information from insurance providers. Employers who insure their own workers in-house will report which employees are enrolled and give enough information so the IRS can tell if those workers are due a tax credit. Self-insuring employers will also put the cost of the plan they’re providing on W-2 forms so workers can see it. Is the new data ""private"" information? Per the CMS fact sheet, Obamacare applicants could be asked to cough up some personal health information. But the fact sheet also says the marketplaces’ systems ""will not store this information"" -- which casts some doubt on whether the government is really ""collecting"" it, but serves as an indication that it’s considered sensitive. How about when the IRS asks where your insurance comes from, whether you got a tax credit for it and whether it meets the Obamacare law’s standards? Generally, the IRS regards what you put on your tax return as private. For example, tax preparers who disclose such information without your consent can face criminal charges. Final IRS regulations governing who can disclose what tax return information to HHS under the Obamacare law were issued Aug. 13, 2013. An FAQ posted by the IRS that day said that ""officers and employees of the IRS will disclose to HHS, the Marketplace, and state agencies only, upon written request and subject to strict privacy and security rules, certain return information ... for the purpose of determining eligibility for certain health care affordability programs."" Our ruling Dewhurst said Obama wants ""more of Texans’ private data."" The subset of Texans shopping for coverage through the online marketplace are providing additional private data for a reason: to ensure they’re qualified. Dewhurst's statement overlooks these aspects. Regardless, many more Texans will be asked to give the IRS information about their health coverage that was previously not requested. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information."
|
35302
|
The White House Gift Shop is selling coronavirus commemorative coins.
|
Breathing masks are selling out in Sydney with the city enveloped in the smoke from bushfires sweeping across a large swath of Australia’s east coast, damaging the country’s clean and green reputation.
|
false
|
Politics, COVID-19
|
Office workers wearing protective masks, previously a rarity, have become a common sight in recent weeks in downtown Sydney, where record pollution levels have consistently ranked the city above the likes of Jakarta, Shanghai and Mumbai. The world-famous Opera House and Harbour Bridge have regularly been shrouded by thick smoke that has turned the daytime sky a dark orange. Ash has fallen like a shroud over the sky, propelled by strong winds from the fires burning on the outskirts of greater Sydney. Australia has been fighting wildfires across the country’s east coast for weeks, with blazes killing eight people - including two firefighters overnight - destroying more than 700 homes and razing nearly 3 million acres (1.2 million hectares) of bushland. State health officials have warned people with respiratory conditions to stay inside as much as possible, but health experts said that advice is not a good enough response given the crises has now been running for weeks. “It breaks my heart when I see my patients because they’re like my family and when I see that they’re being punished by the smoke and heat I have felt powerless,” family doctor Kim Loo told protesters at a rally outside Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s Sydney residence on Thursday. “I’ve gone to government for the last five years, state and federal, and it looks as though we have no health policies to deal with climate change federally.” Bunnings Warehouse, one of Australia’s largest retailers, said some of its stores have run out of breathing masks amid warnings the smoke pollution could impact lung function and lead to the development of respiratory diseases. “We’re working closely with suppliers to get more masks into impacted areas,” Bunnings regional operations manager Robyn Hudson said in an emailed statement. Morrison’s conservative Liberal-National coalition government has come under sustained pressure to defend its climate change policies as it has downplayed links to the unprecedented early arrival and severity of this year’s bushfire season. Morrison cut short a family holiday in Hawaii on Friday to head back to Sydney amid the criticism, as worries grew about Australia’s own tourism credentials. “Australia’s reputation as clean and green has been a major contributor to luring tourists,” said David Beirman, senior lecturer in tourism at the University of Technology in Sydney. “The longer this crisis goes on, the more damage it will have to that image and potentially on tourism.” Medical experts said the health damage to both locals and tourists could be long-running and difficult to immediately diagnose. Edward Jegasothy, an expert at the University of Sydney’s school of public health, said one of the biggest risks came from invisible small particles suspended in the atmosphere that are produced from the burning of wood. Those particles, which can travel long distances, can get down into the lungs and bloodstream, causing inflammation and other system effects, Jegasothy told Reuters. “When air pollution is short, it’s easy to tell people, give people advice about how to avoid it, stay indoors, avoid physical activity,” he said. “But when it’s sustained over a number of days or weeks, then the messaging becomes more complicated.” GRAPHIC - Forests in flames: Images from space show Australia’s bushfires in different light:
|
10338
|
Firm says test judges risk for common breast cancers
|
"The focus of the story is a newly available genetic test to assess a woman’s risk of developing of developing one of the more common forms of breast cancer. The story does not provide any evidence about the test itself (despite alluding to it). The story does mention that this test has not been validated in an external review, so any evidence would be from company-sponsored studies. The story notes that the FDA does not regulate this or similar types of predictive genetic tests, and there is concern about the validity of such tests that have not been subjected to external review. The test manufacturer CEO’s speculation that insurance companies will eventually cover the test because it’s easy to perform and ""any doctor can order the test"" is an inappropriate rationale for any screening, especially when such screening may place a woman at risk for unnecessary surgery or other treatments. The story mentions current prevention guidelines for women who are considered higher than average risk of developing breast cancer. This includes additional surveillance with MRI and mammography, chemoprevention and adopting a healthier lifestyle, namely reducing alcohol consumption and lowering body fat. However,the evidence of survival benefit for lifestyle and screening is fairly limited. Most of recent decrease in breast cancer mortality is attributed to advances in treatment not necessarily screening. Currently, breast cancer risk for women who do not carry the BRAC1/2 genes is determined via population-based calculators such as the Gail Risk Model. This tool provides an estimated 5-year risk and is only validated for Caucasian women, so a well-validated, individualized predictive test would, in theory, be useful for some women. It is not clear how the new genetic test improves on this current practice, as there was no evidence presented. Researchers and clinicians interviewed help educate the reader about a new test may have many more cons than pros. The story does note, via a patient advocate, that some women may still go ahead with the test if they feel it may help guide them in future breast cancer prevention efforts."
|
true
|
"The story includes the cost of this test $1,625 and mentions that insurance companies currently don’t cover the cost of the new genetic test for breast cancer. The test manufacturer CEO’s speculation that insurance companies will eventually cover the test because it’s easy to perform and ""any doctor can order the test"" is an inappropriate rationale for any screening, especially when such screening may place a woman at risk for unnecessary surgery or other treatments. It is not clear how this test improves on these current practice as there was no evidence presented about it. The story appropriately expresses caution when presenting the value of this new test to predict a woman’s lifetime risk of developing cancer. There is a wide range of experts interviewed, all of whom express concern about the current available evidence for the predictive value of this test. Most experts advise against women taking this test, and the American Cancer Society does not promote the test. The story provides appropriate caveats for women who are considering this test. Namely, a lower than average score might suggest a woman could forgo screening. Women with a higher than average risk score could experience unnecessary anxiety and possibly choose treatments they do not need (such as prophylactic mastectomy). The story does not provide any evidence about the test itself (despite alluding to it). The story does mention that this test has not been validated in an external review, so any evidence would be from company-sponsored studies. Additionally, peer-reviewed studies need to be done to determine the best course of prevention if a woman chooses to take the test and discovers she is at higher risk of developing breast cancer. Because the story raised appropriate questions about the quality of the evidence, we give this a satisfactory score. The story lists the annual incidence of new breast cancers and mortality rate. The story is tempered in reporting about a new genetic test which may or may not be another option for women looking to assess their risk. The story mentions that knowing individual risk may inform a woman’s decision whether to increase surveillance and/or take chemoprevention medication, such as tamoxifen. Several leading breast cancer researchers, a member of the American Cancer Society and a spokesperson for the FDA are interviewed for this story. These interviewees do not have a vested interest in this test–unlike Decode’s chief executive, who is also interviewed, mainly promoting his company’s product. Researchers help educate the reader about a new test may have many more cons than pros. The story does note, via a patient advocate, that some women may still go ahead with the test if they feel it may help guide them in future breast cancer prevention efforts. The story mentions current prevention guidelines for women who are considered at higher than average risk of developing breast cancer. This includes additional surveillance with MRI and mammography, chemoprevention and adopting a healthier lifestyle, namely reducing alcohol consumption and lowering body fat. However, the evidence of survival benefit for lifestyle and screening is fairly limited. Most of recent decrease in breast cancer mortality is attributed to advances in treatment not necessarily screening. Currently, breast cancer risk for women who do not carry the BRAC1/2 genes is determined via population-based calculators such as the Gail Risk Model. This tool provides an estimated 5-year risk and is only validated for Caucasian women, so a well-validated, individualized predictive test would, in theory, be useful for some women. The test discussed in this story has not been studied long enough, nor have results of company studies been subjected to an external review. The focus of the story is a new, widely available genetic test. The story says that any doctor can order this test to assess a woman’s risk of developing of developing one of the more common forms of breast cancer. The story notes that the FDA does not regulate this or similar types of predictive genetic tests, and there are questions about the validity of tests that have not been subjected to external review. The story notes that there are other genetic tests, but this is one of the first for breast cancer for women who do not carry the BRCA1/2 gene. The story does not mention that there are several other risk calculators to estimate a women’s risk. The story does not rely on the Decode Genetics press release. There is independent reporting and a balanced review of this new genetic test."
|
|
9517
|
Experimental Brain Cancer Treatment Is a Success
|
This TIME.com story describes a single-patient clinical test of injections of modified immune cell proteins, a type of immunotherapy known as CAR-T cell therapy. It has had a few successes in blood cancers but essentially none in solid tumors, including those in the brain. Described in a report in The New England Journal of Medicine, the study was conducted and promoted by officials and physicians at the City of Hope Beckman Research Institute and Medical Center, an organization that has touted treatment as “miracles” and encouraged coverage of compelling individual cancer patient stories to support sometimes exaggerated claims of major advances in cancer treatment. Unfortunately, this story carries a questionable headline (“Experimental Brain Cancer Treatment Is a Success”) and lacks any outside voices of moderation or caution about extrapolating lessons from a case study. In other words, this article could have done a much better job of contextual reporting. See our six tips for writing accurately about cancer immunotherapy drugs. At least one other news story covering this same patient, appearing in STAT (see our review), did a better job of providing context and caution. Still, the value of reporting on these single cases remains in doubt. Journalists and journals alike are clearly struggling with how and when (and perhaps most significantly, even whether) to report such individual cases, and more widely the painfully incremental advances in immunotherapies given their extremely limited (so far) success in bringing more than some months of life to 5 to 15 percent of patients at enormous financial, emotional and sometimes physical expense. Perhaps the best (and most) that could and should have been reported here is that in an apparent “first,” this patient experiment demonstrated a temporary beneficial response to the therapy, and without serious side effects. The missing context from TIME’s story is that while its success in extending some possibly cancer-free time for one man is heartening for that patient, the study says very little scientifically because factors that accounted for the limited success and ultimate failure remain essentially unknown. Do CAR-T cell therapies and other immunotherapies collectively hold the potential to work as a truly curative strategy for cancer? Many oncologists believe they do, but as we’ve seen in the past with anti-angiogenesis, interleukin, radiation, standard and combination chemotherapy, and surgery, successes are hard won, too often short-lived, and raise as many questions as they answer with respect to the individual genetic and epigenetic roots of cancer and its deadly spread. In sum, stories like this need an FTC or FDA cautionary label: ‘This is a Single-Patient-Only Story. Read With Abundant Caution.’”
|
mixture
|
brain cancer,immunotherapy
|
Although there may not yet be any accurate prediction of the cost of the particular therapy described for this single patient, it is generally well established and well documented that immunotherapies–particularly those that involve modifying a patient’s own immune cells– are many times more expensive than standard treatments, sometimes running to annualized costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. This story says nothing about this. The story fairly describes the patient’s course before and after the experimental treatment, and cites some data about the short life expectancy of patients with his type of brain cancer (glioblastoma). It could have done a much better job, however, of quantifying what actually occurred or is happening now in the other eight people undergoing the same therapy at City of Hope, and of defining specifically what it means to say the patient in the story had his tumor “under control” for “almost” eight months. The article duly notes that CAR-T cell therapy has potentially dangerous side effects when used the way it was in in this trial, and acknowledges surprise on the part of the investigators as to why the patient did not develop them. The story might have been stronger if it had noted that the treatment is well known for serious side effects in experiments on patients with other forms of cancer. (See our tips for reporting accurately about the harms, side effects and risks of immunotherapy.) Other stories about this patient, including the one in STAT that we also reviewed, extensively quoted those not involved in the study about the almost-anecdotal dimensions and strength of this trial. This story used a few phrases to tamp down expectations, but sorely needed other expert comment. The story did not disease-monger about glioblastoma, a very deadly form of brain cancer. No outside sources were quoted, which is a vital aspect of any journalism regarding City of Hope Medical Center, which we’ve called out for its “miracle mongering.” An independent source–such as we saw in our STAT review–can be a vital way to ascertain differing viewpoints on and help keep expectations in check. The article does a pretty good job of describing the standard therapies available and, in this case, delivered to the patient. The article makes clear that the therapy is experimental, that complexities are numerous, that much is still unknown, and the trial is ongoing. The article ably describes what is novel about the way this immune therapy is created, and why it offers some hope as a strategy against a deadly cancer. The story does not provide much beyond the news release, but did not appear to rely on it, as the story’s tone is not nearly as miracle-mongering as the news release.
|
8187
|
Long lines at San Francisco area cannabis stores exempt from coronavirus lockdown.
|
Millions of California’s Bay area residents can still legally light up as cannabis facilities are exempt from a cornonavirus lockdown that has shuttered most businesses in San Francisco and nearby cities.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Cannabis store managers say they have lines longer than local grocery shops and waiting room only. Most staff at a dozen stores reached Tuesday evening said they were too busy to talk to Reuters. “Oh man, we’re flooded. As soon as people heard we were still open, they started lining up,” said Anthony Barajas, the general manager of Cana Culture in San Jose. “Once all the toilet paper got sold out, they knew they needed some relief,” he said. Bars, clubs, gyms and other businesses all closed Monday under one of the strictest orders made so far in the United States aimed at stemming the coronavirus pandemic. Around 7 million people reside in the area affected by the orders. Cannabis stores and vendors join the short list of “essential” places that can stay open along with grocery stores, pharmacies and doctors offices, the San Jose Mercury News and other media reported, citing the state’s Bureau of Cannabis Control and local officials. California has more than 500 confirmed cases of coronavirus and at least 12 people have died. Cana Culture is following strict rules, such as no more than 10 people in the facility at a time, either shopping or relaxing in a smoking area. Outside, the store’s security officers enforce a store rule that everyone has to stand about an arm’s length away from each other. “We’re a necessary service,” said Barajas. “People need this for medical purposes and recreation. The public still needs access to lab-tested medicine.” “It’s been steady from the time we open right up until we close, with people still waiting outside,” Barajas said. “And we’re still allowed to do curb-side service.” He added: “I guess the state still needs some tax revenue while everything else is closed.”
|
9512
|
Good news for people who love spicy food
|
The story opens with a click-bait headline, a brief description of the main study finding, and then pulls its own punch by detailing the limitations of the observational study. We’re pleased to see the caveats high up before any readers head to the grocery to buy some red hot chili peppers. But we’d be happier to see such a story be put into more context, with some discussion of other dietary factors that affect death rates and some outside experts to comment on what this study really means for the American eaters of any kind of peppers. How dietary factors may influence life — how long and vigorously one lives — is of great interest to readers of health news. And yet dietary research that focuses on singular ingredients (or individual nutrients) inevitably ends up being click-baity. Regardless of how well a study is reported, these stories contribute to the deification/demonization of specific foods. In turn, it fuels the idea of superfoods and fad diets while simultaneously distracting from bigger picture issues around healthy living.
|
mixture
|
hot chili peppers
|
Not applicable. The intervention was an easily available and inexpensive food. The story says the benefit was a 13% lower risk of death, but relative risks can be misleading to the average reader as we point out in this primer on the topic. The study itself says that study participants were followed for a median of 19 years and 21.6% of consumers of red hot chili peppers died during followup as compared to 33.6% of abstainers. But those numbers might also be misleading, because they don’t reflect adjustment for other factors (age, race, physical activity, etc) that may have affected the outcomes. So in this case there likely isn’t a perfect way to express the size of the benefit observed by the researchers. Given imperfect options, however, we think it’s always a good idea to give the absolute rate of whatever outcomes are being discussed — e.g. something like “21.6% of chili consumers died during the study period compared with 33.6% of abstainers.” That’s intuitively more meaningful than saying, “consumption of hot red chili peppers was associated with a 13 percent lower risk of death.” 13% lower than what? The story addresses potential harms from eating red hot chili peppers, by quoting an expert source warning about discomfort and worsening symptoms in people with digestive disorders such as stomach ulcers. Despite the overoptimistic title, the story discusses limitations of the research clearly and early on. The study is described as observational and plainly says no cause and effect relationship can be established. It also mentions that there’s no good understanding of the mechanism by which red hot chili peppers might influence risk of death. But with observational studies there are always caveats. The study also found an association between those who consumed more hot red chili peppers and gender, age, ethnicity, marriage status, smoking and alcohol consumption, certain diet preferences, lower HDL-cholesterol levels, and lowered income and education levels. The study might have focused on one of those variables instead of longevity. The story doesn’t engage in disease mongering. The story cites phrases from the paper itself, but otherwise the study authors are not quoted. The only true quote is pulled from a 2015 CBS News story about another study in which eating spicy food is linked to lower risk of death; the quote comes from that study’s author. No other sources were quoted, which could have given the story much needed context. Of all the things people might do to live a longer, healthier, life, how does eating red hot chili peppers stack up? The reader of this story has no help evaluating how 13% decrease risk of death compares to other dietary factors, such as the fruit and vegetable recommendations included in USDA dietary guidelines. Red hot chili pepper are widely available in American supermarkets. The story doesn’t claim novelty but says the study “strengthens the growing body of evidence that spicy food may have protective health properties that can lead to a longer life.” The story does not appear to rely on a news release.
|
2059
|
Walking may keep brain from shrinking in old age.
|
Walking at least six miles a week may be one thing people can do to keep their brains from shrinking and fight off dementia, U.S. researchers said on Wednesday.
|
true
|
Science News
|
A man leaves the polling booth during the second-round of parliamentary election in Budapest April 25, 2010. REUTERS/Karoly Arvai A study of nearly 300 people in Pittsburgh who kept track of how much they walked each week showed that those who walked at least six miles had less age-related brain shrinkage than people who walked less. “Brain size shrinks in late adulthood, which can cause memory problems. Our results should encourage well-designed trials of physical exercise in older adults as a promising approach for preventing dementia and Alzheimer’s disease,” said Kirk Erickson of the University of Pittsburgh, whose study appears in the journal Neurology. Alzheimer’s disease, the most common form of dementia, slowly kills off brain cells, and activities like walking have been shown to build brain volume. Erickson and colleagues tested to see if people who walk a lot might be better positioned to fight off the disease. They studied 299 volunteers who were free of dementia and who kept track of how much they walked. Nine years later, scientists took brain scans to measure their brain volume. After four more years, they tested to see if anyone in the study had cognitive impairment or dementia. They found that people who walked roughly six to nine miles a week halved their risk of developing memory problems. “Our results are in line with data that aerobic activity induces a host of cellular cascades that could conceivably increase gray matter volume,” the team wrote. They said more studies need to be done on the effects of exercise on dementia, but in the absence of any effective treatments for Alzheimer’s, walking may be one thing people can do that may help down the road. “If regular exercise in midlife could improve brain health and improve thinking and memory in later life, it would be one more reason to make regular exercise in people of all ages a public health imperative,” Erickson said. No current drugs can alter the progression of Alzheimer’s, which affects more than 26 million people globally.
|
29168
|
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said the existence of billionaires was wrong.
|
What's true: Ocasio-Cortez said it was wrong for billionaires to exist side-by-side with chronic poverty and deprivation. What's false: Ocasio-Cortez's remarks had a clear and significant context that was elided: she was condemning income inequality and economic injustice, rather than the existence of billionaires per se.
|
false
|
Politics, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, turning point USA
|
U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was the target of widespread scrutiny and criticism, mostly from right-leaning commentators, towards the end of 2018 and during the early months of 2019, after she became the youngest female member ever elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. In particular, some conservatives took aim at comments the New York Democrat made about income tax and wealth distribution, especially her proposal for a 70 percent marginal tax rate on high-income earners. Against that background, in February the conservative Turning Point USA group posted a meme that included a partial quotation attributed to Ocasio-Cortez: “‘A society that allows billionaires to exist…is wrong.’ — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez”: In reality, that quotation was a grossly misleading representation of remarks Ocasio-Cortez made on 21 January 2019 during a wide-ranging interview with the writer Ta-Nehisi Coates as part of the 2019 “MLK Now” event in Harlem, New York. In one section of that interview, Coates and Ocasio-Cortez discussed issues around taxation, income inequality, and economic justice. Ocasio-Cortez framed the issue of the marginal tax rate in the following way: “It’s an economic question but it’s also a moral question. [The 70 percent marginal tax rate] is the policy translation of a proposed answer to ‘What kind of society do we want to live in?’ Are we comfortable with a society where someone can have a personal helipad while this city [New York] is experiencing the highest rates of people experiencing homelessness since the Great Depression? Should those two things coexist at the same time?” Here is a transcript of a later section of that discussion, the one most relevant to the Turning Point USA meme: Coates: “Do you think it is moral for individuals to, for instance — do we live in a moral world that allows for billionaires? Is that a moral outcome — Ocasio-Cortez: No — Coates: — in and of itself? Ocasio-Cortez: — it’s not. It’s not. And I think it’s important to say that — I don’t think that necessarily means that all billionaires are immoral. It is not to say that someone like Bill Gates, for example, or Warren Buffet, are immoral people. I do not believe that. I’m not saying that, but I do think a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don’t have access to public health, is wrong. And I think it’s wrong that a vast majority of the country does not make a living wage, I think it’s wrong that you can work 100 hours and not feed your kids, I think it’s wrong that corporations like Walmart and Amazon can get paid by the government, essentially — experience a wealth transfer from the public for paying people less than a minimum wage. It not only doesn’t make economic sense but it doesn’t make moral sense and it doesn’t make societal sense. So it’s true that Ocasio-Cortez did say “a system that allows billionaires to exist … is wrong,” but what that selective quotation left out — the section in the middle — was crucial. She said, infull: “I do think a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don’t have access to public health, is wrong.” So although the Turning Point USA meme alluded to the fact that Ocasio-Cortez had provided context in her remarks, by including an ellipsis (…) in the middle of the quotation, the meme still deliberately left out that crucial context, and the net result of the quotation was to present a grossly misleading impression of what the Congresswoman actually said. Ocasio-Cortez was making a point about wealth inequality and economic injustice, rather than simply about wealth. She was articulating the view that the existence of vast personal wealth among a small number of people in the United States was morally insupportable if it coincided with dire poverty and depravation among a greater number of people — an age-old piece of progressive and left-wing orthodoxy. In other words, it was not the existence of billionaires, as such, that the Congresswoman said was “wrong” (as the meme misleadingly suggested), but the existence of billionaires under the socioeconomic conditions currently prevailing in the United States, some examples of which Ocasio-Cortez went on to list. Whether or not one agrees with the Congresswoman’s viewpoint or analysis, that distinction — between what she said in its proper context and what the meme presented her as saying — was far from trivial.
|
11908
|
The No. 1 job vacancy in Florida every month for seven years has been nursing.
|
Putnam said the No. 1 job vacancy in Florida every month for seven years has been nursing. He’s right. The top online job advertisement in Florida has been registered nurses every month for the past seven years. Experts agreed that the shortage has been an issue for awhile in Florida.
|
true
|
Public Health, Florida, Adam Putnam,
|
"In the Florida governor’s race, both Republicans and Democrats have highlighted an issue facing the Sunshine State: a shortage of nurses. For months now, Republican Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam has highlighted a surprising factoid about Florida’s nursing workforce, often while emphasizing the importance of trade education and career training outside of a four-year bachelor’s degree. ""The No. 1 job vacancy in Florida every month for seven years has been nursing,"" Putnam said Oct. 31 during a campaign stop at Whitey's Fish Camp in Fleming Island. Democratic Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum (and Putnam’s possible opponent) has also mentioned a nursing shortage in the state, so we wanted to take a look at it. We found that Putnam’s claim is backed up by state data, and experts in Florida agreed that the shortage of nurses has been a problem since the 1990s. Data from the Department of Economic Opportunity shows that registered nurses have consistently topped the lists of monthly online job advertisements and annual job openings. Department spokeswoman Karen Smith told PolitiFact Florida the top online job advertisement in Florida has been registered nurses every month for the past seven years. We asked for a sample of that data and got a year’s worth of monthly reports for Help Wanted OnLine, a tool used by the Department to measure real-time labor demand. These reports are posted on the DEO’s site and updated monthly. The most recent month of data (October 2017) shows there were 13,619 online ads placed for registered nurses. The second-most popular ads sought retail salespersons at 7,207 postings, followed by ""first-line supervisors"" for retail sales workers with 6,467 ads. Putnam has also talked about the need for truck drivers, which place fourth for online job ads. In addition, Florida's Statewide Demand Occupations List shows that registered nurses have consistently ranked as the most in-demand occupation since at least 2011. Mary Lou Brunell is the executive director of the Florida Center for Nursing, which was set up in 2001 by the Florida Legislature to address the nursing shortages in the state. In recent years, she said the problem has been exacerbated by a lack of students studying to become nurses, a shortage of faculty teaching future students, and an aging workforce and state population. ""You put all those pieces together, and it’s just not getting better,"" said Dianne Morrison-Beedy, the former dean at the University of South Florida College of Nursing. The nursing workforce is also aging. According to a 2017 report from the Florida Center for Nursing, 44 percent of registered nurses are over the age of 50 and expected to retire in the next 5 to 10 years. The economic turnaround in the late 2000s also decreased the number of nurses in the workforce. When the economy plummeted in 2008, many people trained in nursing but not working returned to their job or delayed retirement. As the economy improved, there were once again more vacancies because those nurses returned home or retired. Brunell also said she’s also concerned about the need for licensed practical nurses, which work under the guidance of registered nurses or physicians. She said there’s been an increase in home care facilities, which is why she predicts more licensed practical nurses (LPNs) will be needed in the future. Morrison-Beedy said that in order to fix the problem, the focus has to be on the how to develop faculty and support for people who want to become nurses. In Florida, becoming a registered nurse requires either a two-year associate degree or a bachelor’s of science degree in nursing. ""We need more students in the baccalaureate program, we need to provide financial support for students to go to school, and in order to do that we have to have enough faculty to teach those students,"" she said. ""We want the best educated and the best kind of nurses because that’s where we’ll see better outcomes."" Putnam said the No. 1 job vacancy in Florida every month for seven years has been nursing. He’s right. The top online job advertisement in Florida has been registered nurses every month for the past seven years. Experts agreed that the shortage has been an issue for awhile in Florida."
|
10726
|
Study: Gene therapy improves Parkinson’s symptoms
|
Room for improvement: Some discussion of costs. While the gene therapy is in the early stages of development and a price is not likely available at the moment, the cost of other non-drug treatments could have been included. There were some critical gaps in the evaluation of the evidence and the reporting was not entirely accurate. More complete discussion of harms. Medication can be very effective for reducing the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease, especially in the first few years after onset. However, Parkinson’s is a progressive disorder that can eventually cause significant disability in a significant number of sufferers. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been used for almost two decades for people who no longer benefit from drug therapy. Although DBS provides relief of symptoms for many, it is not a panacea. The kind of experimental gene therapy discussed in this story could eventually provide another option to help patients manage their symptoms.
|
mixture
|
Associated Press
|
We would have liked to have seen some mention of costs. While the gene therapy is in the early stages of development and a price is not likely available at the moment, the cost of other non-drug treatments could have been included. For example, deep brain stimulation costs approximately $30,000 per side of the brain affected as is covered by many insurers. This information would provide readers with some perspective on costs. The story relays the primary outcome in appropriate statistical terms when it says, “After six months, those who got the gene therapy scored 23 percent better on a standard test to measure motor skills while those who got the sham operation did about 13 percent better.” However, the story gets carried away in the last paragraph when it describes the anecdotal benefit of a single patient who goes from being nearly frozen to playing jazz music. Although the treatment was “like a miracle” for this patient, the magnitude of the benefit seen in the study was clinically quite small and not consistent with this description. There was also no reporting on the secondary outcomes, which included measures that assess quality of life and how well a patient is able to function. The treatment seemed to improve some of these measures, but not others. Any discussion of an experimental procedure deserves comments on the potential and actual harms of the treatment. This is perhaps especially true for viral vector gene therapies that requires burring a hole in the skull and injecting precisely into the brain. To its credit, the story says that we don’t know if there might be any long-term damage from introducing viruses into the brain. However, it also should have mentioned that the treated patients in this study had more headaches and nausea than the sham surgery group (although these problems were described as mild to moderate and had resolved by the end of the study). This was a carefully conducted study and the story’s coverage of it was fairly detailed considering the relatively short length. The description of the sham surgery was particularly good. Nevertheless, there were some critical gaps and the reporting was not entirely accurate. The story states, “Kaplitt and colleagues tested the gene therapy on 16 people while 21 others received a sham surgery.” That is actually not the case. A total of 22 patients were enrolled to receive the gene treatment and 16 were evaluable at the 6 month time period. This compares to 23 enrolled in the sham procedure with 21 evaluable. That’s a 27% drop out rate for the gene therapy group compared with only 9% for the sham surgery. And while the story notes that one of the limitations is a lack of longer-term data on how these patients fare, it doesn’t comment on the difficulty of generalizing results from such a small study to the larger population of Parkinson’s patients. Lastly, given the issues of observer and subject bias, we think that some comment on the blinding of the study would have been appropriate. There was no disease-mongering in this story. The story quotes an independent expert with a research and advocacy group. The story also discloses that the study was paid for by the drug’s developer, Neurologix, and that the researchers have financial ties to the company and other pharmaceutical companies. The story noted that it is unclear whether the new treatment is as effective as another surgical technique, deep brain stimulation. The lead sentence called the new treatment “experimental” and the study a “mid-stage test,” so we think readers will understand that this surgery is not currently available to the average patient. Given the early stage of the research, the story is probably a tad overoptimistic when it quotes one researcher saying, “We are getting much closer to a reality where this treatment can be offered to patients.” While this is true, the treatment still has many hurdles to clear before it can be widely used. The story says that this is the first time a gene therapy for Parkinson’s disease has shown positive results in a placebo-controlled study. This is accurate, and the therapy does seem to be quite novel. It would have been informative to note that other gene therapies have been shown to be beneficial in open label trials and failed in randomized trials as compared to placebo. A previous attempt to demonstrate the value of another gene therapy for Parkinson’s failed in large measure due to problems with the study design. This story was not based on a news release
|
9741
|
Pathway launches 'liquid biopsy' to find cancer in healthy people
|
This story did a very nice job of examining the premise behind “liquid biopsies” and pointing out the lack of supporting evidence — a slightly more thorough look than was given by a strong competing story from Bloomberg. While the story could have had a fuller explanation of the costs associated with liquid biopsies and how the tests are ordered, it better explained the potential harms and made better use of independent sources to provide context than Bloomberg did. Genomic testing of healthy people is going to cost this country a lot of money, and the proposed benefits of such testing haven’t been proven at all.
|
true
|
liquid biopsy,Pathway Genomics
|
The story mentioned the cost of the test, but the competing Bloomberg story gave a more detailed breakdown of costs. There was no mention of insurance coverage, or of total costs of work ups of positive tests and the need for continual testing. The story cites a company figure stating that the test “is more than 99 percent accurate in detecting mutations in blood samples that contain at least nine copies of a tested mutation.” It then knocks down that figure with a quote from a researcher who says the statistic represents the test’s “technical ability to detect DNA in the blood.” It goes on to state that a large clinical trial would be needed to determine the test’s true accuracy, including false positive and false negative results. But such a study hasn’t yet been done. The competing Bloomberg story gave a nod to false positives and false negatives, but Reuters really explained why these tests could lead to harms. The story says, for example, “Patients might be attracted to a less-invasive test for colon cancer, but if it is less effective, it might result in more cases of colon cancer, not fewer. Another concern is that the tests may pick up on markers that are never destined to be cancer, something already known to occur in blood tests for prostate cancer”. The story nicely explained the lack of evidence for this particular test. There was no disease mongering in this story. Quite the opposite. It turned a light onto this growing industry and questioned whether tests of biomarkers would actually lead to better clinical outcomes. The story quoted more independent sources than the competing Bloomberg story, and it also did a good job of identifying where people had conflicts. For example, the last expert quoted says that the test should undergo a large clinical trial, a point of agreement among multiple experts quoted in the press. But then the story says that this expert, “is advising two companies developing liquid biopsy tests for cancer screening: Sysmex and Personal Genome Diagnostics.” The true alternative to these tests is routine cancer screening using proven screening methods recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force. In fact, the whole name “liquid biopsies” is wrong. These are not biopsies at all, they are screening tests for healthy people that look for biomarkers of cancer in the blood. But we don’t know what kind of clinical significance they have or if they will lead to better outcomes. Neither story gave a full explanation of the alternative screening approaches, although this story did mention colonoscopies (which are one such screening method) as well as screening tests for prostate cancer. We’ll give the benefit of the doubt. The story says that “The tests must be ordered by a doctor, based on a patient’s risk profile.” However, it’s not clear that this fully describes the process. While the tests can be ordered through the patient’s physician, the Pathway website also suggests that patients can order them autonomously online through Pathway’s “online physician network.” Here’s the text: Patients can also order CancerIntercept™ Detect online through Pathway Genomics’ online physician network. After speaking with a client services representative, the patient must create a personal account with Pathway Genomics Member Site (members.pathway.com) and enter all personal health information into the website for physician review. It will take up to 1-2 business days for physician review, at which time a sample collection kit will be sent to the patient’s provided shipping address if the test is approved. This process seems essentially to be a direct consumer purchase with the involvement of an online physician middleman — something which is not fully conveyed by the text. We’ll give the benefit of the doubt since it’s debatable whether the story is technically wrong on this point or not. But we wish more detail had been provided. The story establishes what’s novel about the test compared with existing tests. The story went beyond any news release that may have been issued.
|
1919
|
ADHD drugs do not increase heart problems in kids.
|
Stimulants used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder do not increase the risk of heart attacks, strokes or sudden death, U.S. researchers said on Monday, in a finding that should reassure millions of parents whose children take the drugs.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Researchers studied the medical records of more than 1 million children and young adults aged 2 to 24 who were taking or had taken stimulants such as Ritalin or Adderall and found no sign of increased risk of heart problems. “We don’t see any evidence of increased risk,” said Dr. William Cooper of Vanderbilt University, whose study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The study in children is the first of three commissioned by the Food and Drug Administration to understand the potential heart risks of the drugs after U.S. and Canadian regulators received a number of reports in 2006 of heart attacks, strokes and sudden cardiac arrest in children taking the medications. The reports prompted several FDA advisory committee hearings on heart problems, and Health Canada temporarily suspended marketing of ADHD drugs. The concerns also prompted the American Heart Association to issue guidelines suggesting that children who were just starting to take the drugs should be tested for potential underlying heart problems. “There was a lot of concern and confusion among families and providers about what the best approach would be to treating kids who had ADHD and who might benefit from these medicines,” Cooper said by phone. ADHD is one of the most common child mental disorders, affecting around 3 to 5 percent of children globally. Children with ADHD are excessively restless, impulsive and easily distracted, and often have trouble at home and in school. There is no cure, but the symptoms can be kept in check by a combination of behavioral therapy and medication. In the United States, some 2.7 million children have prescriptions for ADHD drugs including Novartis’ Ritalin or methylphenidate and Focalin; Johnson & Johnson’s Concerta, Shire’s Adderall and Vyvanse and Eli Lilly’s Strattera. For the study, Cooper’s team used prescription data from four large, geographically and demographically diverse health plans on 1,200,438 children and youth, including both current and past users of the drugs. They checked health records for evidence of heart problems, including heart attacks, strokes and sudden cardiac deaths, in children who were currently taking the drugs or who had taken them. The team found no increased risk of heart problems for either current or past users of the drugs. Yet because there were so few cases of serious heart problems — just 81 — the study may not have been large enough to detect it. But even if there were a risk of heart problems, it is extremely slight, Cooper said. In a guidance document issued on Tuesday, the FDA said it continues to recommend that the drugs not be used in patients with serious heart problems. It added that patients should be monitored for changes in heart rate or blood pressure. Jefferies analyst Peter Welford said the findings will likely reassure investors in Shire, maker of Adderall and Vyvanse. But because there were so few heart problems, the study was underpowered and cannot conclusively dispel concerns about cardiovascular risks. Shire’s shares were flat on Tuesday, outperforming a sharply lower market.
|
3863
|
Some Kansas City-area patients ditch fee-for-service doctors.
|
Patients who are fed up with the bureaucracy of the health insurance industry are ditching the copays and high deductibles for a different way to get primary care.
|
true
|
Kansas City, Insurance industry, Health, Kansas, Health care services
|
One such patient is self-employed attorney Dan Hobart, who struggled to find insurance because of his pre-existing conditions. Even after Affordable Care Act went into effect, doctor visits were still too costly for him to get the care he needed. After learning about direct primary care from a friend, Hobart signed up immediately. “It’s really like a blessing,” Hobart said. “I just wanted a doctor and couldn’t believe that I could afford one.” In the Kansas City region, 26 direct primary care, or DPC, clinics have formed the Midwest Direct Primary Care Alliance. It consists of doctors who are opting to leave the traditional fee-for-service practice for a private practice offering patients membership-based health care services. Hobart told KCUR-FM that he hadn’t had regular doctor since he was a child until signing up with Allison Edwards, a doctor at Kansas City Direct Primary Care, last fall. Edwards’ office charges $65 a month for the average adult; a family plan for $140 a month includes unlimited routine visits, phone and email availability directly with her. Now, Hobart said, he enjoys direct access and the ability to have a personal relationship with his doctor. “I can email her directly and if there’s a big issue she can address that quickly,” Hobart said. The alliance is still “playing the insurance game,” Edwards said. But the alliance has the ability to negotiate prices with independent companies that offer services such as labs and radiology at wholesale prices. “We’re using it to democratize things,” she said of the group’s collective power. Through the DPC independent partnerships, a patient would pay approximately $40 for a chest X-ray, $10 for a diabetes screening and $9 for a thyroid check of the thyroid, with no hidden fees, copay or insurance. Insurance was meant to be a financial protection product, Edwards explained, but the health care industry has strayed from that concept and uses it for all services, even though some can be paid out of pocket. Patients aren’t the only ones rejecting the industry’s red tape. After paying off her medical-school loans, Jennifer Smith was ready to quit practicing medicine because she had grown so fed up with insurance companies who prioritized patient volume over patient care. On average, she said, she was only able to spend seven minutes on each patient. This wasn’t enough time to address their needs. “I just felt like this wasn’t appropriate care and I wanted to do something that was going to allow me to spend that time with my patients,” Smith said. A colleague told her about DPC and it wasn’t long before she opened Accomplished Health and Wellness in Lawrence. With the freedom to practice medicine in a more personalized way that best serves her patients’ needs, Smith said she is happier now that she’s no longer regulated by the pressure of the insurance industry. Both Smith and Edwards said they recommend that their patients have some form of insurance to cover more costly incidents such as cancer or other critical-care needs. But their practices do not accept insurance. Edwards, too, said she’s “1,000 times happier” since transitioning away from the bureaucracy of the insurance agencies, even though she’s making less money. “It doesn’t matter how much you pay somebody for a job that’s ultimately soul-sucking and meaningless,” Edwards said, “which is what primary care is becoming with its checking boxes and all that.” ___ Information from: KCUR-FM, http://www.kcur.org
|
2932
|
BrainStorm says stem cells helped patient with ALS and MG.
|
A patient suffering from both ALS and myasthenia gravis (MG) showed significant improvement in cognitive and motor function following treatment with BrainStorm Cell Therapeutics adult stem cells, according to a published case report.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Israel-based BrainStorm said on Monday a case report is being published in the February issue of “Muscle & Nerve” by the principal investigator and his colleagues at Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem and a professor from the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota. The report is already available online. A 75 year-old-man diagnosed with both MG and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease, was treated with BrainStorm’s NurOwn cells. Both are neurodegenerative diseases. One month after receiving injections of the cells, the patient and his family reported significant improvement in cognition, speech, and muscle power. After six months, due to progression of weakness and deterioration in cognition, a repeat injection of NurOwn was performed. Again, improvements in the ALS functional rating scale were observed, the report said, adding that treatment with NurOwn appeared safe and well tolerated. “The results suggest that repeated therapy may maintain and enhance the clinical benefits of NurOwn cell therapy in neurological diseases,” it said. Chaim Lebovits, president of BrainStorm, said the report in “Muscle & Nerve” was very promising. “This publication is an important milestone for BrainStorm as this is the first human data on NurOwn to be published in a prestigious scientific journal,” he said. He said the company expects to finalize its Phase IIa clinical trial in the first half of 2014. According to the ALS Association, 5,600 people in the United States are diagnosed each year with the disease, which has severely disabled British physicist Stephen Hawking.
|
9228
|
FDA approves Intrarosa for postmenopausal women experiencing pain during sex
|
The US Food and Drug Administration just approved Intrarosa, a once-daily vaginal insert used to treat women experiencing pain during sexual intercourse. The news release states that the drug’s efficacy was confirmed in two 12-week placebo-controlled clinical trials of around 400 postmenopausal women. “Intrarosa, when compared to placebo, was shown to reduce the severity of pain experienced during sexual intercourse,” it says. That was about the extent of the discussion in addressing benefits and quality of evidence, as there are no quantitative data given, and no mention of the study’s design and limitations. With such lack of detail, we also don’t know how concerned we should be with the drug’s adverse effects, which could include “abnormal” pap smears. If the news release refers to studies that the FDA used to evaluate the drug’s efficacy, it would be helpful if the FDA included the journal name and date of publication of the trials that informed the approval. And then the news release should clearly break down the results of those studies — complete with quantitative data — for journalists and the public. Vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) is a common condition affecting 50 to 60 percent of postmenopausal women. Symptoms include vaginal dryness, pain during sexual intercourse and irritation/itching. Intrarosa’s active ingredient dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), also known as prasterone, is already sold over-the-counter as a dietary supplement — which is not FDA-approved, as the news release points out. Potential effects of DHEA on cardiovascular and brain health, metabolism and sexuality have been extensively studied for the past 20 years in postmenopausal women. Although short-term usage is not considered problematic, researchers are unsure if DHEA is safe with long-term usage or at higher doses. Therefore, it is critical that our regulatory agency evaluates independent, unbiased clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals. And if any trial has an obvious limitation, such as a short follow-up time, then it is the responsibility of the news release to highlight this, even in the wake of FDA approval.
|
mixture
|
FDA,Intrarosa,Vulvovaginal atrophy
|
The FDA evaluates drugs without consideration of cost, so it’s understandable that they wouldn’t comment on it — and that’s why we’re rating this Not Applicable. We look forward to the day when any news release about a new drug — even one from the FDA — includes some mention of cost in its message. After all, the value of a new drug is a function not just of how well it works, but its cost-effectiveness. With the newly approved Intrarosa are we looking at $10 or $100 for each round of treatment? Its active ingredient, DHEA, is sometimes used as a dietary supplement. On Goodrx.com, a bottle of 300 25-mg tablets of Natrol goes for $13.29. The news release states simply, “Intrarosa, when compared to placebo, was shown to reduce the severity of pain experienced during sexual intercourse.” No data are provided to back up this claim. Without any numbers, it’s impossible to evaluate how beneficial the treatment actually is. How many women from the treatment group experienced this benefit? And although it’s difficult to quantitatively assess pain, it could still be addressed by scores (e.g. On a scale from one to ten, how bad was the pain before treatment and then after treatment?). Without any idea of how much pain was actually reduced, readers have no idea whether the advantages of this therapy outweighs its costs and risks. This is a point that we recently addressed in one of our blog posts, since news releases put out by the FDA often miss the mark on this criterion. More details, especially in the form of quantitative data, are badly needed. As a result, we give the news release a Not Satisfactory rating here. Every intervention carries its own sets of risks. For Intrarosa, the most common side effects include vaginal discharge and an abnormal pap smear, according to the news release. But it doesn’t detail what “abnormal” means or explain what the implications are for women who receive such a result. It also doesn’t quantify the potential harms, including how many women experienced these adverse effects. Furthermore, the clinical trials cited in this release lasted for only 12 weeks, meaning long-term effects were not investigated. According to the US National Library of Medicine, the active ingredient DHEA may be unsafe if taken in high doses or long-term. Researchers also say DHEA may cause decreased breast size, a deep voice, increased genital size, irregular periods, oily skin and unnatural hair growth in women. Since the news release doesn’t describe potential harms or talk about the drug’s long-term effects, we give it a Not Satisfactory rating here. We wish the news release would have gone into more detail on what clinical studies were used to gain FDA approval for the product. All we know is that there were two 12-week placebo-controlled clinical trials in 406 healthy postmenopausal women between 40 to 80 years of age. We don’t know whether the trials were randomized and blinded, how the participants were selected, how the trials were run (assessment criteria, number of follow-ups, etc.) and whether the results were published in peer-reviewed journals. We also aren’t exactly sure to which studies the news release is referring or how to access them for additional reference. Due to all these reasons, we give the news release a Not Satisfactory rating here. There is no disease mongering in this news release. The release doesn’t disclose the funders of the studies the drug approval was based on. In the one study we could find via an online search, it disclosed that EndoCeutics sponsored the research. The first author of the Menopause journal article is also the President and CEO of EndoCeutics, while the second author is an EndoCeutics consultant and receives grants for clinical studies. We feel this is a major conflict of interest that should have been highlighted in the news release. There is no discussion of alternatives in this short news release. There are many interventions available now for vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA), including hormonal and non-hormonal therapies. Over-the-counter treatments include non-hormonal vaginal moisturizers for VVA symptoms, as well as lubricants to alleviate pain during sexual intercourse. Water-based vaginal moisturizers are available as liquids, gels or ovules and are inserted every few days. Silicone or water-based vaginal lubricants are shorter acting than moisturizers and are applied right before sexual activity. Postmenopausal women can also opt for low-dose vaginal estrogen preparations in the form of creams, rings or tablets to treat their VVA. Since none of these options are mentioned in the news release, we give it an Not Satisfactory rating here. The news release doesn’t disclose how soon consumers can expect to find Intrarosa at their local drug store. However, it does make clear that DHEA is already out on the market as a dietary supplement, although these have not been FDA approved for safety and efficacy for “diagnosing, curing, mitigating, treating or preventing any disease.” We feel this mention is good enough for a Satisfactory rating here. DHEA is not a new drug. Researchers have also looked at DHEA’s effects on cardiovascular risk, memory and metabolism in older populations. And it’s also sold over-the-counter as a dietary supplement, the news release points out. But it also states Intrarosa is the first FDA approved product containing prasterone, or DHEA. Therefore, we give it a Satisfactory rating here. The news release does not use unjustifiable, sensational language. The single quote from the FDA spokesperson also contains neutral, measured language.
|
34842
|
Electric car manufacturers rely on child labor to extract cobalt for their car batteries.
|
What's true: Child labor has been used in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Cobalt is a chemical element used to make rechargeable batteries. What's false: However, cobalt is not used exclusively for electric car batteries. This chemical element is also used to make the rechargeable batteries in phones, tablets, and laptops. Electric car manufacturers, such as Tesla and BMW, have started to use ethically sourced cobalt from areas outside of the DRC.
|
mixture
|
Business
|
The use of child labor in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where nearly 60% of the world’s cobalt is currently produced, is certainly a major issue that deserves the attention of consumers, corporations, and governments. However, some media outlets and social media users have distorted the issue into a rallying cry against the use of electric cars and clean energy. In February 2017, an investigation by Sky News revealed that children as young as 4 years old were working in horrid conditions in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC): While the news outlet reported that cobalt was an “essential part of most mobile gadgets sold around the world,” the Daily Mail seized on another use of cobalt, the manufacturing of electric car batteries, when it repackaged the Sky News report in an August 2017 article entitled: “Child miners aged four living a hell on Earth so YOU can drive an electric car: Awful human cost in squalid Congo cobalt mine that Michael Gove didn’t consider in his ‘clean’ energy crusade.” The headline of the Daily Mail article may have left some readers with the impression that cobalt is used solely in the manufacturing of electric car batteries. This chemical, however, is also used to manufacture rechargeable batteries in cellphones, laptops, tablets, and other electronics. The Cobalt Institute reports that about 42% of all cobalt produced globally can be found in these rechargeable batteries. A quarter of that, according to a February 2018 article on Phys.org, is used for electric car batteries. In other words, only about 10% of all cobalt produced globally is used in electric car batteries. The remaining 58% of the cobalt produced globally is used in industrial and military applications (super alloys, catalysts, magnets, and pigments, among others). The Daily Mail article also stated that “almost every big motor manufacturer striving to produce millions of electric vehicles buys its cobalt from the impoverished central African state,” but that is also misleading, because many electric car manufacturers have committed to procuring their cobalt from ethical sources. BMW, for instance, recently stated that it will purchase all of its cobalt from Australia and Morocco to ensure that child labor isn’t used in the mining of this material. BMW also insists on transparency in every step of the supply chain in order to ensure that the cobalt it procures comes from an ethical source: The BMW Group currently only obtains cobalt directly through the purchase of battery cells. However, taking all stages of the value chain into account is an integral part of the company’s corporate strategy. For this reason, the BMW Group also examines the origin of this raw material very closely and critically. This applies above all to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, from where two thirds of the quantities required worldwide originate. “We are working intensively on measures to ensure that our suppliers and their supply chain also consistently comply with the social and environmental standards we expect. This is currently only guaranteed in large-scale industrial mining. However, around 20 percent of cobalt produced in the Congo originates from artisanal mines where workers mine cobalt on a small scale using simple tools,” says Claudia Becker, expert for sustainable purchasing at the BMW Group. In order to prevent cobalt mined under adverse social and ecological conditions from being used by the BMW Group for batteries in the BMW i3 or the BMW i8 for example, the company demands absolute transparency – above all from every stage of the cobalt supply chain: “We only accept companies that extract cobalt from mines where employees are protected,” emphasizes Becker. Moreover, BMW regularly publishes information on cobalt smelters and the raw material’s countries of origin. Tesla has also been working to both reduce the amount of cobalt needed to manufacture its batteries and to procure cobalt from more ethical sources. Since 2012, Tesla has reduced the amount of cobalt in its batteries from 60% to just 3%. Company Founder Elon Musk has also stated that he is hoping to eliminate cobalt altogether in the company’s next generation of batteries. Tesla has also committed to sourcing its cobalt from more ethical sources in North America.
|
311
|
Therapy in the office: banks take mental health fight in-house.
|
In ‘Billions’, a U.S. television show set in the world of hedge funds, traders at the fictional Axe Capital regularly attend sessions with an in-house psychiatrist.
|
true
|
Health News
|
In real life, finance professionals are rarely so open about seeking psychological help. On Wall Street and in the City of London, hyperambition and an ‘always on’ attitude are richly rewarded and people are often wary of revealing something that could be perceived as a weakness. Two out of three people working in financial services have experienced mental health issues as a result of work or where work was a related factor, according to a 2018 survey, broadly in line with the wider workforce. The Mental Health at Work poll questioned over 4,600 British employees from a range of industries. Many don’t tell their bosses for fear of damaging their careers. “Stigma definitely still exists,” said Beth Robotham, an executive director at Goldman Sachs in London. “Legislation is supposed to protect people from that kind of discrimination and employers are trying much, much harder but it would be naïve of me to say that that wasn’t an issue any more.” Robotham experienced anxiety attacks when she was in charge of recruiting bankers focused on the healthcare sector for Goldman in Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA) in 2010. It took her months to tell her managers and seek help. “I just assumed that people like me must just fall out of ‘the system’, and therefore I should just keep quiet or else I will be pushed out,” she said. Robotham, deputy chair of the City Mental Health Alliance, which promotes good mental health among London’s financial workforce, is one of a growing group of executives choosing to speak publicly about their problems to reassure others they are not alone. People can experience anxiety, depression and other mental health issues regardless of their job. But punishing schedules can pile on extra pressure. All-nighters and 100-hour work weeks are not unusual in investment banking, particularly when working on deals or public offerings of debt or equity. Some 44 percent of banking employees said they felt under excessive pressure to perform in their work, according to a survey of over 70,000 people carried out by Britain’s Banking Standards Board last year. A quarter said that working at their firm was bad for their health. In recent years, banks have tried to lighten workloads, relax dress codes and give staff more time to focus on life outside the office to retain talent and avoid costly burnout. But bankers with mental health problems, especially those still early in their careers, are often reluctant to flag them in case their bosses think they can’t hack the pace. Matt Evans, global head of investment bank recruiting and head of firmwide recruiting for EMEA at JPMorgan, said he spent nearly 20 years concealing his struggle with depression until the bank’s ‘This Is Me’ campaign in 2017 prompted him to share his experiences. “There’s been no downside for me in telling my story. The support I’ve had has been significant,” he said. “I got promoted to MD after disclosing my condition.” Evans was recently diagnosed with bipolar disorder and took three months off last year. He was phased back into work in December and says he is “100 percent convinced” the break will have no impact on his professional prospects. But not everyone shares his confidence around attitudes to mental health. While it is illegal for employers to discriminate against people for having mental health problems, more than half of 2,000 UK workers surveyed by health-tech firm Mynurva feared telling their manager would hinder their chances of promotion, while 57% believed disclosure would harm relationships with colleagues. Mynurva, which provides online counseling, also reported a surge in demand from financial executives who are bypassing their employers’ services because they fear the consequences. “The findings show the fear and embarrassment employees have when disclosing their condition to their employer. And it explains why professionals would rather suffer in silence than seek the necessary help,” said Dr Zain Sikafi, CEO of Mynurva. One in four people will be affected by mental or neurological disorders at some point in their lives and the annual cost to the global economy is estimated at $1 trillion in lost productivity, according to the World Health Organization. Brian Heyworth, global head of client strategy at HSBC and chairman of the City Mental Health Alliance, wants his bank and others to help employees before they become seriously ill. “In an organization of 235,000 people, some will be having suicidal thoughts but many more will be sliding along the spectrum towards that point. We want to anticipate and prevent that,” he said. HSBC is considering hiring on-site counselors as part of its ‘Healthiest Human System’ initiative, the brainchild of CEO John Flint. JPMorgan’s first UK-based on-site counselor is due to start work at the bank’s offices in London’s Canary Wharf this summer. The bank already has full-time counselors in nine U.S. locations, including New York, Delaware, Chicago and Texas and also offers a Resilience App providing stress management tips. Goldman Sachs is planning to train dozens of UK staff as mental health first aiders so that they can spot signs that colleagues may be starting to spiral due to stress or anxiety — including changes in appearance, working habits or social patterns, Robotham said. Goldman has also launched a paid internship program in the United States for people who identify as ‘neurodiverse’. Neurodiversity covers a wide range of neurological differences including autism, dyslexia, developmental disorders and mental health conditions. As the public profile of mental health grows, employers in Britain who fail to show adequate mental wellbeing provision for staff could be sued under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations Act 1999, which compels employers to assess the nature and scale of health risks at work, including stress. “The harm and detriment to an employer stemming from these kinds of issues are not solely financial, they can inflict greater damage to reputation, public image, productivity and retention,” said Matthew Cole, partner at law firm Prettys. Cole said he had not seen any significant rise in the number of staff seeking damages from employers due to stress-related conditions but said companies were very sensitive to the risk. “If an employee ends up with a psychiatric condition which prevents them from working in an environment where they might have otherwise earned six figures, that can amount to some significant liabilities.” Prevention is much cheaper. Britain’s Mental Health Foundation estimates that mental health support in the workplace could save UK businesses up to 8 billion pounds a year. The charity puts the cost of providing information and advice on mental health online and via workshops at around 80 pounds per employee per year. Heyworth has grappled with anxiety and depression since childhood and was hired by HSBC after a period of leave from Bank of America. He knows that he is one of the lucky ones, both banks knew of his mental health problems and were supportive. “Make no mistake, we are still in the foothills on this journey,” he said. “The positive thing is that more people are now asking for help, but we also need to accept that there are probably more people who need help too. The next phase of the challenge is creating the conditions where we can reverse that trend.”
|
38099
|
U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), while undergoing taxpayer-funded cancer treatments, voted to end cancer treatments for Medicare beneficiaries.
|
Sen. John McCain Votes to End Cancer Treatments for Medicare Beneficiaries
|
false
|
Government, Health / Medical
|
John McCain voted in support of the GOP’s tax reform bill, which experts warn could trigger Medicare spending cuts. But McCain did not “vote to end cancer treatments for Medicare beneficiaries,” as has been claimed. If the GOP tax plan is enacted, and $1.5 trillion in unfunded tax cuts trigger pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budget rules, the bill could trigger mandatory Medicare spending cuts. However, that hasn’t yet happened. So claims that John McCain voted to end cancer treatments for Medicare beneficiaries are mostly fiction. Does GOP Tax Plan End Medicare Cancer Treatments? Again, the GOP tax plan does not outline specific Medicare cuts. And John McCain did not vote for a bill to end cancer treatments for medicare beneficiaries. But a statutory budget rule known as “PAYGO” could trigger mandatory spending cuts to certain programs, including Medicare. The PAYGO rule requires across-the-board mandatory cuts to non-exempt federal programs when legislation increases the deficit over a five- or ten-year budget window without any offsets. The $1.5 trillion cost of the GOP’s tax plan would trigger the PAYGO rule, and the result would be up to $28 billion in Medicare cuts in 2018. By 2027, the mandatory 4 percent cut (or sequester) to Medicare would grow to $56 billion, the Committee for Responsible Federal Budget reports. However, John McCain (and other senators) could avert the PAYGO rule. The Senate could pass a budget resolution that exempts specific legislation (the tax reform bill) from the PAYGO rule. Another method would be for Congress to change how federal spending is scored. Dynamic scoring, which takes into account economic growth resulting from spending, could prevent the GOP tax plan from triggering PAYGO. Check out our previous coverage of dynamic scoring vs. static scoring of the GOP tax plan here. So, the GOP tax plan could trigger 4 percent Medicare spending cuts under the PAYGO rule. But it’s not clear if that will happen. It’s also not clear if John McCain would support a bill that ends Medicare cancer treatments. Would John McCain Support a Bill Ending Medicare Cancer Treatments? John McCain announced on Nov. 30 that he would support the GOP tax reform plan. The senator called the bill “far from perfect,” but said it would enhance American competitiveness, boost the economy and provide tax relief. McCain’s statement didn’t reference Medicare cuts. His statement did, however, voice support for health care reform. More specifically, McCain supported repealing the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate (which the GOP tax plan would accomplish). Medical groups argue that ending the individual mandate could lead to widespread loss of cancer treatment coverage for Americans who rely on ACA plans. But it’s not clear that the GOP’s tax reform bill would eliminate Medicare cancer treatments — even if PAYGO rule cuts go into effect. AARP said an immediate $25 billion reduction in Medicare funding would affect payments to doctors and hospitals that care for Medicare beneficiaries: The $25 billion reduction would affect the payments that doctors, hospitals and other health care providers receive for treating Medicare patients. Individual benefits would not change and neither would premiums, deductibles or copays. But with so much less money going to providers, the cuts could have major impacts on patient access to health care — such as fewer physicians accepting Medicare patients. And Medicare’s coverage of cancer treatment typically comes from Medicare Part A, Medicare Part B and Medicare Advantage. Beneficiaries have to enroll in these programs and (most) have to pay additional premiums. It’s not clear at this time how Medicare sequester cuts would impact Medicare Part A, Part B or Medicare Advantage plans. While the GOP tax reform bill could trigger Medicare cuts, that hasn’t happened yet. Additionally, it’s not clear how (or if) those cuts would impact coverage of cancer treatments. Comments
|
9166
|
Pet exposure may reduce allergy and obesity
|
This news release from the University of Alberta reports that certain types of bacteria in the gut are more prevalent in people who have furry pets (in the study, 70 percent were dogs), and speculates that there may be an association between pets and the development of allergies and obesity. Despite being short on details and explaining what the limitations are, the release is careful not to exaggerate the study findings. It says early on “don’t rush out and a adopt a furry pet just yet.” The provocative theory whereby exposure to pet dogs in the womb or in the first three months of life can result in fewer allergies and even reduced incidence of obesity is far from proven. The release is clear about that. Still, we wish it had provided more details and numbers about what was studied and how many infant stool samples were taken. If exposure to furry animals while in the womb or as a small infant were safe, harmless, relatively inexpensive and effectively helped children grow up to be free from allergies or obesity then this might be trumpeted as a true medical or social advance. As further research about the gut microbiome emerges so might understanding about how we can better avoid developing allergies, which are medically costly and extremely bothersome for a large portion of society. These pet-friendly relationships are worth following up with more research. But the release was correct to be cautious with the study findings.
|
mixture
|
allergy,furry pets,University of Alberta Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry
|
This is not relevant because we can assume that anyone who owns a dog is likely aware of the cost of housing, feeding and maintaining that animal and those amounts can be quite considerable. We learn from the release: “The abundance of these two bacteria were increased twofold when there was a pet in the house,” and those effects take place “during pregnancy as well as during the first three months of the baby’s life.” But we’re left wondering, twofold of what? And what kind of effects are related to a twofold increase in these two bacteria? The release doesn’t tell us. There are no harms mentioned in the release release. Presumably there are some dangers of exposing babies in the womb and newborns to pet dogs and cats but we aren’t given any hint that they exist or what they are. One of the most common “harms” associated with furry pets is allergies, the very condition this study purports to lessen or prevent. The causal relationship suggested in the headline is not warranted. At this stage of the research, a more accurate headline might be: “Pet exposure may or may not reduce allergy and obesity.” The release would have been improved had it provided more discussion about the research. It noted the Canadian government has been running a study of children’s asthma and dog cohabitation for more than two decades. But the release omits some of the basics about the research. For example, it mentions it analyzed infant stool samples but it doesn’t tell us how many samples nor from how many children. It also says there were “higher levels of two types of microbes associated with lower risks of allergic disease and obesity” in the samples. What is considered a “high” level? What’s considered average? The published study tells us that the gut bacteria of 746 infants (a sub-sample from the Canadian Healthy Infant Longitudinal Development Study) were studied through fecal samples taken at 3.3 months. Researchers compared the bacteria found in the stool samples among those with or without pet exposure during pregnancy and 3 months after giving birth. They found that the infants whose families kept pets (a little more than half) had a higher presence of the Ruminococcus and Oscillospira bacteria which have been negatively associated with childhood allergies and obesity. We do credit the release for at least acknowledging through a quote from the lead researcher that “It’s far too early to predict how this finding will play out in the future.” There is no obvious disease mongering here, but the release might plant the suggestion that if readers don’t own a dog and don’t expose their infant to dog-related bacteria, then they may be exposing their children to a greater risk of some form of allergy or even obesity later on. It’s important for releases about association studies like this one was to describe the prevalence of a disease or condition so that people have a sense of what the normal rate of allergies might be in households with or without a dog. The release tells us that the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Allergy, Genes and Environment Network (AllerGen NCE) funded the study. This study is focused on describing the association between allergies and pets that were observed over a long-term study. But since the ultimate goal seems to be reducing allergies and asthma there are alternatives to exposing your baby to a dog to prevent them, such as incremental exposure and allergy screening tests. These alternatives were worth a brief mention. It’s pretty clear that the availability of dogs in the US is a fact that doesn’t even need to be mentioned. According to the ASPCA, 44% of American households have a dog. The release doesn’t claim a novel intervention but does say that this research builds on existing research and increases understanding of the pet-allergy connection. We’ll give them the benefit of the doubt on that. There were some statements that bordered on unjustified terms, but nothing that rose to the level of sensationalism. For example, when the release referred to the “immunity-boosting exchange” that happens with various forms of childbirth we wondered: Where’s the evidence that these exposures ‘boost’ immunity? Is there such evidence? And while the comment, “…Kozyrskyj doesn’t rule out the concept of a “dog in a pill” as a preventive tool for allergies and obesity,” is clever and catchy, it doesn’t have any basis in reality from this research which is still very much in the theory stage.
|
27360
|
Katie Flynn was decapitated while wearing a seat belt, in a 2005 car crash on Long Island, New York.
|
A website that publishes viral content accurately recounts the terrible story of Katie Flynn's death in 2005.
|
true
|
Horrors, car crash, deaths, drink driving
|
In February 2018, the web site Newsner, which produces viral content, recounted the horrifying story of the death of Katie Flynn, a seven-year-old girl who was decapitated in a devastating car crash on Long Island, New York, in 2005. We received several enquiries about the veracity of the article, and a similar one published by Trending Stylist, on 28 February. Unfortunately, it’s true. In the early hours of 3 July 2005, a drunk driver traveling at 70 miles per hour the wrong way down a highway crashed into a limousine carrying several members of Katie’s family, who were returning home after a wedding. The collision caused the instant deaths of the limousine’s driver, 59-year-old Stanley Rabinowitz and seven-year-old Katie Flynn, a niece of the bride. Other passengers suffered serious injuries, including Chris Tangney, the father of the bride, whose leg was broken so badly in the crash that it had to be amputated. As CNN reported in 2008: An off-duty security officer returning home from work was first on the scene. “I approached the limo driver, and I guess I went into shock,” says New York State court officer Michael Lerardi. “It looked like an explosion. The motor, basically, was just sitting on top of him. I knew he was dead.” The limo driver, 59-year-old Stanley Rabinowitz, was killed instantly. Next to arrive was Lt. Michael Tangney, the bride’s uncle, who had attended the wedding just hours before. “I was walking to the rear of the limousine when a gentleman was coming away from it, and he said, ‘Don’t go back there. It’s bad,'” Lt. Tangney says. “I opened the rear door to the limousine and realized it was my family.” Lt. Tangney’s brother — Jennifer’s father, Chris — was lying on the floor, his legs wrapped around the service bar, broken in numerous places. The rest of the family was piled on top of each other. Jennifer’s mother, Denise, was severely injured, as was Jennifer’s husband, Neil, who tried to crawl out of the limo to get help despite his broken back. Five-year-old Grace was also trapped inside the wreckage. Jennifer, whose foot was injured, managed to climb out and was searching for Katie, who had been lying on the side seat before the crash. “We couldn’t find Kate,” Lt. Tangney says. Then, Jennifer made a devastating discovery — Katie had been decapitated by her seat belt. “Then all of a sudden Mrs. Flynn came out of the car with her child’s head in her hand,” says Michael Lerardi, one of the 70 paramedics and police officers who were called to the scene. “I got numb. I thought I was going to collapse,” says Officer Christopher Pandolfo. “I looked into the back of the limousine, and I saw Katie’s remains. She was wearing this dress, and I just started shaking.” This fact check includes links to court testimony that some readers might find disturbing. In February 2007, New York Supreme Court Justice Alan Honorof sentenced 25-year-old Martin Heidgen to a minimum of 18 years in prison on two counts of second-degree “depraved indifference” murder, and related charges. Heidgen had been drinking for several hours in Manhattan and Nassau County, before he drove his pick-up truck into the limousine. At the trial, there was some dispute over whether Katie Flynn had been wearing a seat belt at the time of the collision. Dr Michael DeMartino, who conducted Flynn’s autopsy, testified under cross-examination from the defense that his autopsy report had described her as a “rear seat unrestrained passenger,” based on preliminary information provided to DeMartino by some first responders. However, DeMartino agreed with the prosecution that Flynn’s injuries were “consistent with a child who had been lap belted and was lying down on a bench seat and thrown forward during the high-speed crash,” but also said that the injuries “might be” consistent with the girl not wearing a seat belt. Ultimately, DeMartino appeared to lean heavily toward the likelihood that Flynn had been wearing a seat belt at the time of her death, and that the seat belt getting caught around her neck may have led directly to the terrible manner of her death. He noted that had she not been wearing a seat belt, it would have been reasonable to expect much more severe injuries to the rest of her body than were actually observed, namely “very small bruising” to her left knee and elbow and some bruising on her left hand. Furthermore, the family of Katie Flynn, who were present in the limousine with her that night, adamantly insisted that she was wearing a seat belt. At the trial, Jennifer Flynn — Katie’s mother, and the sister of the bride — testified that her husband Neil had placed Katie on a bench seat in the limousine, and “seat belted her in” while she was sleeping. Chris Tangney — a retired Nassau County police officer, father of the bride, and grandfather of Katie Flynn — similarly testified that the girl had been lying down, asleep, on a bench seat in the limousine, with her seat belt buckled, at the time of the collision. In a devastating and scathing victim impact statement read out to the court, Jennifer Flynn said: Drunk driving continues because people aren’t afraid not to. Punishments are not that big of a deal. They are not severe enough because society doesn’t view it as the crime it should… Katie’s head was severed from her body. The entire front end was embedded in Stanley Rabinowitz. To clean it up and water it down so it’s more palatable for the papers and the news, the jury and the defendant is wrong. In 2010, Jennifer and Neil Flynn took part in an anti-drunk driving campaign in New York state, describing the terrible impact of Katie’s death.
|
11264
|
SBRT Offers Curative Option for Lung Cancer Patients Age 80 and Older
|
lung cancer illustrationThe release, which summarizes a study of patients 80 or older who underwent stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for early stage lung cancer, should have stuck to what the researchers actually studied. In the headline, main text and quotes, the release makes unjustified claims about treatment effectiveness, claiming SBRT can “safely add years to the lives of elderly patients who have early stage lung cancer but cannot undergo an operation for it.” However, the study was merely a look back at a few dozen cases that produced results the researchers considered evidence that age, by itself, should not disqualify patients. There was no comparison group that would allow any conclusions about effectiveness, including longer survival. The release does not mention cost nor does it report funding or author disclosures. Many research studies investigating the benefits and risks of various therapies exclude very old individuals. As such, it is often difficult to provide evidence-based recommendations for this population. A study of elderly people, if evidence-based, would be helpful to patients, their families and physicians. But it is important for news releases to be clear about what was studied and what was not. This summary of the experience of a few dozen elderly patients may provide some assurance that patients should not be disqualified from considering SBRT for early stage lung cancer merely because they are old. However, there was no control group, no comparison to other treatments that would support claims of effectiveness and added years of life. Muddling study results with the opinions of researchers that are based on their clinical experience or interpretation of other studies produces a confusing picture of the evidence or lack thereof.
|
false
|
Association/Society news release
|
The release does not report the cost of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) or any alternatives a patient could consider. The release provides some data on benefits with this statement: “At two years following definitive SBRT for lung cancer among elderly patients, survival rates were 73 percent for cancer specific survival (CSS) and 57 percent for overall survival (OS).” So the release is claiming that SBRT can add years to the lives of elderly patients. But the study was merely a review of a series of cases and did not actually compare SBRT to any other treatment, so it provides no direct evidence of a survival benefit. The same section of the release refers to other studies, but provides no numerical description of the benefits from the other studies. In fact, other studies have relied on comparisons to historical controls, not randomized trials, so even though SBRT has become standard care for this sort of lung cancer patient when surgery is not an option, there is a lack of evidence about the precise benefits. The release reports that just over one-third of the 58 patients experienced radiation pneumonitis (inflammation of lung tissue), and that two had cases severe enough to possibly require oxygen or steroid treatment. However, the release does not mention other harms of this sort of radiation treatment, which can include fatigue lasting for several weeks, neuropathic pain, rib fractures and other problems. There is no mention of any measurements of these other radiation effects. The release reports that the study was a retrospective analysis of 58 patients with different types of tumors — adenocarcinomas (40 percent), squamous cell carcinomas (29 percent) and those not diagnosed with biopsy (31 percent). Half of those not receiving a biopsy had a previous history of lung cancer. The fact that more than one-third of the tumors treated were not categorized is concerning. We would have liked to see a clear note that this study was neither randomized nor blinded and that the study design is not able to provide evidence of effectiveness. Without this sort of clarifying statement, the release relies on readers to understand the generally low quality of evidence that a retrospective case series produces. Because the results are not compared to any other treatments, it is impossible to state whether the treatment offered benefit, and if it did, how much. It should be clear to readers that this study applies only to elderly patients with early stage lung cancer who are not able to undergo surgery. The release does not report anything about the funding of the study or any disclosures by the researchers. There is a note about how to seek information about the author disclosures, but this information should be contained in the release itself. The release claims that SBRT is effective, without mentioning other types of radiation therapy or other options for lung cancer patients who are not candidates for surgery. It is unclear to the reader what this “new” treatment is meant to replace. The release notes that SBRT is a common choice for early stage lung cancer patients who are not candidates for surgery. But it’s not clear how widely available this treatment is. This study was done “across four academic sites within Emory between 2010 and 2015.” This implies that it may be available at academic institutions, but it doesn’t state anywhere whether this is widely available in other treatment settings. It is clear that this study provides new information about the experiences of some elderly patients. The use of “curative” in the headline and the suggestion that SBRT is a “curative treatment” is misleading. The release doesn’t say whether the tumors treated originated in the lung or if they metastasized from some other part of the body. Particularly in the case of metastasized tumors, the treatment would be “palliative,” but not curative. The claims of treatment effectiveness and added survival are not supported by this study. What’s more, evidence from other studies is weaker than the release implies. It is not justifiable for a researcher to plainly state the “SBRT can effectively and safely add years to the lives of elderly patients” when the study did not compare treatments. It would have been better for the release to limit itself to the actual results of the study; that is, that this group of elderly patients appeared to do as well as their doctors expected, and so age itself should not be used to disqualify patients from considering SBRT.
|
9875
|
Back Surgery Not Always the Cure for Pain
|
Too often, back surgery is touted as a miracle cure with amazing results. Little attention is given to the fact that few people with back pain are actually candidates for surgery and that it is still unclear whether people end up better off than if they had chosen a non-surgical route. This ABC news story does a decent job of describing these controversies, although the story is flawed in several ways. The story provides good information on how the likelihood of having the surgery in the U.S. is so much higher than in other countries. Although the story mentions spinal fusion and physical therapy as alternatives to discectomy, the story should have discussed other options and the pros and cons of each option. The story explains that there is not good evidence that surgery is better than non-surgical therapy. However, the story should have further described the strength of the available evidence. The story does not quantify the benefit of treatment, does not explain if laparoscopic surgery is novel or not, does not mention costs, and other than to say that sugery is often unnecessary, the story does not discuss harms of treatment, which can be substantial. Publisher’s note: this story was part of a series on back pain airing that week on ABC World News Tonight. The network should be applauded for dedicating extra time to this important consumer health issue.
|
mixture
|
The story does not mention costs of discectomy or fusion. The story does not quantify the benefit of treatment. Other than to say that sugery is often unnecessary, the story does not discuss harms of treatment, which can be substantial. Though discectomy in general involves a low risk of complications, they occur. In addition, the use of laparascopic discectomy as opposed to microdiscectomy (small surgical incision) hasn’t clearly been shown to be safer or more effective. Rates of complications for spinal fusion are more common than for discectomy. The story explains that there is not good evidence that surgery is better than non-surgical therapy. However, the story should have further described the strength of the available evidence. The story provides reasonable information about the evidence for spinal stenosis. However, there is no evidence presented for discectomy. The viewer may be left thinking that disc herniations always need surgery. The answer is usually no. Many patients with a disc herniation can be managed without surgery. The body has the ability to fix the disc herniation on its own. It just takes more time. By accurately describing how often back surgeries are performed, the story avoids disease mongering. The story also provides good information on how the likelihood of having the surgery in the U.S. is so much higher than in other countries. It would have made the point even stronger to state that rates within regions of the U.S. can vary up to 15 fold. What is true is that the differences are even greater among U.S. and European countries. The story quotes three independent sources. Although the story mentions spinal fusion and physical therapy as alternatives to discectomy, the story should have discussed other options and the pros and cons of each option. The story does not mention treatment options for a herniated disc. Spinal fusion is not considered an alternative to discectomy for an acute disc herniation. The story also does not mention the option of standard microdiscectomy versus the newer laparascopic discectomy. The option of steroid injections and other non-surgical treatment are not mentioned as well. Spinal fusion is most commonly performed for chronic low back pain thought to be due to a disc problem. There are other indications for spinal stenosis as well. For each of these indications, the treatment options are somewhat different. The story states that surgery is available. However, though not stated, the laparascopic discectomy presented is not as widely available as the standard microdiscectomy. The story says that discectomy is a common procedure performed in over 300,000 Americans a year, so it’s clear that it is not a new procedure. What is less clear is how the story implies that the laparascopic discectomy is a new standard, trumping the standard surgical procedure called microscopic discectomy. The jury is still out on whether laparoscopic procedures are safer or equally effective. Nonethless, we give the story the benefit of the doubt with a satisfactory score here. Because the story quotes three sources, the viewer can assume that the story did not rely on a press release as the sole source of information.
|
|
2913
|
J&J petitions FDA to require 'similar' names for biosimilars, biologics.
|
Johnson & Johnson on Wednesday said it submitted a citizen petition asking that U.S. health regulators require copies of biological products to bear names that are similar and not identical to those of their reference products.
|
true
|
Health News
|
J&J’s view on naming of biosimilars contrasts that of Mylan Inc and Novartis AG over the past few months, as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration continues to work on drafting regulations for the approval of biosimilars — cheaper versions of expensive biologics, or the original reference drugs. “Assigning names that are similar but not the same will appropriately reflect the legal and scientific reality that biosimilars are similar to but not the same as their reference products or other biosimilars,” J&J’s Chief Biotechnology Officer Jay Siegel said in a statement. Creating copies of biologics is complicated as these products are produced in living cells, bringing inevitable unpredictability. As a result, their copies can only ever be “similar,” not exact replicas. Names of biosimilars are also bound to impact their sales and adoption as substitutes to the original products. Novartis and Mylan have both previously expressed support for a system that requires that a biosimilar share the same international non-proprietary name (INN) as the biologic products to which it refers, saying that same names would avoid frivolous brand tactics and confusion in the marketplace. Mylan in September said it supported a petition filed by the Washington, DC-based Generic Pharmaceutical Association that recommended biosimilars have the same names because by definition they are highly similar to their reference products and have no meaningful differences that require a unique name. Novartis advocated for the same by filing its own petition in October. Biologic medicines, typically administered via an injection, and are used to treat cancers, immunological diseases like rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis and other chronic illnesses, but their high price tag can keep them out of reach for many patients. The FDA in February 2012 issued draft guidance on approval pathways for biosimilars, but is yet to finalize that guidance, while European regulators have already cleared cheaper copies of some biotech medicines. The global biosimilars market is expected to be worth about $11 billion to $25 billion in 2020, equivalent to a modest 4 to 10 percent of total biotech drug sales by that time, according to healthcare information firm IMS Health.
|
6732
|
Dem senator: Trump VA pick vows not to privatize vets care.
|
President Donald Trump’s pick to be Veterans Affairs secretary is promising not to privatize the agency, a key Democratic senator said Tuesday, taking a stance on a politically charged issue that his predecessor says led to his firing.
|
true
|
Confirmation hearings, Health, Privatizations, Politics, North America, Ronny Jackson, David Shulkin, Jon Tester, Veterans, Veterans affairs, Donald Trump
|
The confirmation hearing of Ronny Jackson, Trump’s White House doctor and a Navy rear admiral chosen to speed up improvements to the VA, is scheduled for next week. On Tuesday, he met privately with Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, the top Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, as a part of visits this week to assure lawmakers he could effectively lead the government’s second-largest department. Tester said after the meeting that Jackson had committed to the same stance against privatization as David Shulkin, who pledged before his confirmation as VA secretary last year to continue strong investment in core VA programs and facilities while expanding access to private doctors. Shulkin was fired last month. “We talked extensively about why Shulkin got fired with the issues revolving around privatization and capacity building,” Tester said. He “seems to be somebody who doesn’t want to privatize the VA.” Asked if Jackson had pledged not to privatize VA, Tester said “yes.” “He said basically the same thing Shulkin said--that he wanted to build capacity at the VA,” Tester said. According to Tester, Jackson had not yet informed Trump of his views but would be doing so. Both Tester and Sen. Johnny Isakson, the Republican chairman of the veterans committee who met with Jackson Monday, have declined to endorse Jackson in advance of his confirmation hearing on April 25, saying they need to hear more about his plans to fix VA. Jackson is “certainly not an expert on VA,” Tester said. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., a Senate committee member who also met Tuesday with Jackson, said she needed more assurances that Jackson would resist undue White House pressure to aggressively expand private care. Major veterans groups view VA medical centers as best suited to treat complex battlefield injuries, such as traumatic brain injury. “In our meeting today, I appreciated how strongly Dr. Jackson spoke against privatizing the VA, but I still need to know more about how he will stand up to ideological opponents of VA and remain fully committed to putting the needs of veterans first,” Murray said. The issue of privatizing VA has been a political hot button since the 2016 campaign, when Trump pledged to aggressively expand veterans’ access to private doctors outside the government-run VA system at taxpayers’ expense via the Veterans Choice program. Trump’s comments came in the wake of a 2014 scandal at the Phoenix VA medical center in which some veterans died while waiting months for medical appointments. After he was fired as VA secretary, Shulkin blamed “political forces” in the Trump administration that he says are bent on privatizing the agency and prioritizing “companies with profits” over the care of veterans. On Tuesday, the White House reiterated that there were “no discussions” about privatizing VA. “This administration has taken several unprecedented steps to transform and modernize the VA,” White House spokesman Raj Shah said in a statement. “We look forward to continuing our work with Congress to reform and strengthen the VA Choice program to provide our veterans with more choice in their health care.” Several Democratic senators, including Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, have vowed to oppose Jackson’s nomination if it leads to greater privatization at the agency. Before he was confirmed last year as VA secretary, Shulkin, a holdover from the Obama administration, declared in advance that he wouldn’t “privatize” VA. “VA is a unique national resource that is worth saving, and I am committed to doing just that,” Shulkin said in February 2017. “There will be far greater accountability, dramatically improved access, responsiveness and expanded care options, but the Department of Veterans Affairs will not be privatized under my watch.” ___ Follow Hope Yen on Twitter at https://twitter.com/hopeyen1
|
34334
|
"The Amish own 20 percent of the nation's ""puppy mills."
|
Because there are millions of unwanted pets in animal shelters, animal advocates generally encourage prospective pet owners to adopt from shelters and rescues instead of purchasing from breeders (but in cases where a breeder is preferred, HSUS also provides a checklist on how to find a responsible one). According to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 3.3 million dogs enter shelters every year, and of those, 670,000 are euthanized. These numbers have been in decline since 2011, owing to an increase in the number of pets adopted and lost animals successfully reunited with owners.
|
unproven
|
Viral Phenomena, amish, animal abuse, animal memes
|
In late November 2017, a meme circulated on Facebook with the claim that the Amish community, a relatively small and isolated group of Christians who live throughout the American Northeast and Midwest and abide by the lifestyle and technology of a bygone era, own 20 percent of the nation’s “puppy mills,” a term used by animal advocates to refer to commercial dog breeding kennels: It cannot be said with certainty what percentage of the nation’s dog breeding for profit is done by members of the Amish community, because while some breeders are licensed and tracked by both their respective states and the federal government, many operate unregulated or illegally. According to the Humane Society of the United States, there are an estimated 10,000 licensed and unlicensed “puppy mills” in the nation. In Pennsylvania and Ohio, which have the highest Amish populations, the vast majority of known commercial breeding kennels are in Lancaster and Holmes counties respectively; both counties have the nation’s oldest and largest Amish population concentrations. According to Pennsylvania state records, there are 119 known commercial breeding kennels in Lancaster — although many are listed as closing, or have already closed. In Ohio, 134 of the state’s total 268 breeding facilities are in Holmes County. The states do not track the religious views of the breeders. Amish people make up a small percentage of Americans, with an estimated population of roughly 300,000. But, according to animal welfare groups, the Amish are prolific dog breeders, and in many of those operations, dogs are kept in poor conditions. In May 2017, the Pennsylvania Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals rescued 27 dogs from an illegal breeder in Lancaster County, SPCA spokeswoman Gillian Kocher told us. At least two, a yellow Labrador retriever and a bulldog, were in desperate need of immediate veterinary care. All the dogs were rehabilitated and adopted into permanent homes, she said, and the SPCA has pressed charges against the breeder. According to the Humane Society, unlicensed breeders can mean terrible conditions for dogs, including neglect, untreated health problems, and dogs forced to produce litter after litter of puppies. HSUS’s yearly list of 100 “horrible” breeders includes accounts of everything from shivering, wounded dogs to a breeder still in operation even though she shot a dog in the head in 2008. According to HSUS, these breeders continue to operate despite receiving multiple warnings and citations from law enforcement.
|
41088
|
US patent number 20120251502 is for Ebola.
|
This application number was for a strain of the Ebola virus but the application has now been abandoned. The virus was not created by those who filed the patent.
|
mixture
|
online
|
US-Patent 8835624 is for the H1N1 virus. The patent with this number was for a strand of DNA that binds to the H1N1 virus, not the virus itself. US patent number 20120251502 is for Ebola. This application number was for a strain of the Ebola virus but the application has now been abandoned. The virus was not created by those who filed the patent. US patent number CA2741523 is for swine flu. This is the application number for a patent for the Ebola virus made to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office. This patent has not been granted, and doesn’t mean the Ebola virus was created by someone. 0070031450 A1 is a US patent for BSE (mad cow disease). There is a patent application number one digit away from this that mentions BSE, but is not a patent for BSE itself. ATTC VR-84 is a patent for Zika virus that comes from the Rockefeller Foundation. This is the name of a certain strain of Zika virus, which was first isolated in the 1940s in a lab funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. This strain was not patented. US patents 7897744 and 8506968 are for SARS. The first number is the US patent number for the SARS virus. The patent application was made by the CDC, but after the outbreak in 2002. The second number is a patent for a SARS vaccine which has now expired. US patent 10130701 is for coronavirus. This number is not a patent for the new Wuhan virus, Covid-19. It’s a patent for a weakened version of a virus in the same family as Covid-19, a family which includes the common cold and SARS. Claim 1 of 8
|
34832
|
The shopping cart was not a resounding success when first introduced.
|
We could happily conclude our history of the shopping cart there, but that would leave out all the sex. Modern shoppers have found new uses for this now seemingly mundane grocery conveyance — it has at least in some parts of the U.S. become a component in a specialized way to indicate via non-verbal signals potential sexual availability.
|
true
|
Business, Product Origins
|
In the middle of the Depression, Sylvan Goldman, an Oklahoma grocer, acquired several Humpty Dumpty stores (a bankrupt chain of retail grocers in the South) and tried to make them profitable. His 1934 acquisition didn’t originally look to have been a wise decision — the economy was shot, and although it’s true that even in bad times people have to eat, what they choose to buy is influenced by the economic climate. During downturns, folks gravitate towards cheaper, more basic foodstuffs that have smaller markups built into the price. Lowered markups can mean the difference between an outlet’s thriving or failing, because the profit margin in the grocery business is razor-thin. Even a busy grocery store can be losing money if the markup on what it is selling is too small to cover the expenses of running the business. Goldman’s chain was in trouble. He studied his shoppers, looking for clues in their actions that would help him restore profitability to his enterprise. He began to notice they generally terminated their activity when their hand-carried baskets became uncomfortably heavy and would then head for the checker rather than start a new basket. This observation led to his 1936 instructions to employee Fred Young to affix an undercarriage (made from a folding chair with wheels added to it) to pairs of metal, over-the-arm baskets. If weight were taken out of the equation, would customers buy more? Would they shop longer? The answer was a resounding no — folks preferred to stick with what they knew rather than play around with an unusual-looking contraption, and customers continued to use the heavy arm-borne baskets to carry all their goods to the checkers. Goldman did not give up — he hired decoy shoppers to wheel the new carts through the store, so providing a visual demonstration of what this innovation could do. He also stationed someone at the front door to greet patrons and offer them carts as they entered. The strategy paid off. Folks began using the wheeled baskets, and they quickly established a lasting preference for them. Shopping carts became an ordinary part of the shopping experience in other retail outlets. The shopping cart thus rolled its way into marketing history. Upon his death in 1984, Goldman left behind an estate worth more than $400 million, a lot of it earned thanks to a wheeled folding chair affixed to the underside of two baskets. The invention of a once-struggling businessman revolutionized the shopping experience in terms of how shoppers make their purchasing decisions. The average shopper, pushing a cart, goes into a store with a list, but also leisurely perambulates down aisles and past displays, filling the cart not only with intended buys but also impulse items whose displays or prices strike his fancy. The maneuverability and ease of shopping with a cart freed the consumer to roam the length of the store, thus putting him in the way of retail temptation that the heavy arm-borne basket cocooned him from.
|
40328
|
Embattled “7th Heaven” actor Stephen Collins has committed suicide.
|
7th Heaven Actor Stephen Collins Committed Suicide
|
false
|
Celebrities, Crime / Police
|
Stephen Collins, who played the role of Eric Camden on the television show 7th Heaven, has not committed suicide. Police were called to Collins’ home on October 7, 2014, for a report of a suspected suicide, US Weekly reports. Officers found the 67-year-old actor’s house empty and no evidence of a gunshot. The reported suicide quickly went viral when former “Baywatch” star Donna E’Errico picked up the thread on Twitter and provided a blow-by-blow account of the police response. “That guy from 7th Heaven lives right around the corner from me & just shot himself a few minutes ago,” D’Errico said. D’Errico tweeted that a street outside Collins’ home had been cordoned off. She also posted a photo of a flurry of police cars before tweeting an apology for spreading misinformation. “I just tweeted out what I was being told by my neighbor who were on scene. I apologize for tweeting what I heard before confirming it,” D’Errico tweeted. The embattled Collins faces accusations that he molested three underage girls decades ago, the USA Today reports. Collins played a pastor and father on the long-running family television show. Posted 10/10/14 Comments
|
1351
|
Father-son team plans Antarctic trek powered by renewable energy.
|
With solar panels tacked to their sledges and a biofuel made from wood chips to keep them warm, a British father and son duo will attempt to reach the South Pole relying solely on green energy.
|
true
|
Environment
|
Seasoned explorer Robert Swan and his 23-year-old son Barney will begin their eight week, 600-mile expedition on Wednesday, hoping to show renewable energy can work in extreme conditions and prove a viable alternative to fossil fuels. “For the first time in history we will be surviving only on renewable energy. It’s never been done,” 61-year-old polar veteran Swan, the first person to walk to both the North and South poles, told Reuters. The Swans’ 5,000 daily calorie intake will come from sustainable and energy-giving foods, such as grains and almond bars, to help them overcome temperatures of -40 degrees Celsius and the obvious risks of frostbite, altitude sickness and snow blindness. Perpetual sunlight will charge the solar panels, which will power a NASA-designed ice melter to provide them with enough water for drinking and cooking. “Water is gold down in Antarctica, without it you’re going to be dying pretty quickly, as dad always reminds me,” said Barney Swan. While their aim is to complete the trek using just solar energy, under extreme weather conditions they’ll turn to an advanced biofuel made out of wood chip waste. “The fuels have been tested to minus 60 degrees Celsius...it won’t get as cold as minus 60. We may get minus 40 which is, trust me, cold enough,” the elder Swan said.
|
16481
|
The president referred to the Syrian opposition just a few months ago as pharmacists and doctors, and so on.
|
"In discussing Obama’s decision to arm opposition forces in Syria, Hayden said, ""The president referred to the Syrian opposition just a few months ago as pharmacists and doctors, and so on."" We found several examples of Obama, as recently as June and August, characterizing the Syrian rebels as pharmacists and doctors, as well as dentists, radio reporters and teachers. Usually he was describing their capacity to fight Assad, but that doesn’t make Hayden’s point any less accurate."
|
true
|
Iraq, Terrorism, PunditFact, Michael Hayden,
|
"President Barack Obama drew harsh criticism for comparing the terrorist group Islamic State to a ""JV team"" — and then again for claiming that’s not what he said (PolitiFact rated that statement False). On Sunday, another one of his characterizations of the situation in the Middle East came under fire as the political talk shows debated his plan for dealing with instability there. Former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden was asked about Obama’s decision to arm local rebel groups in Syria to help fight the Islamic State there. He wondered why Obama was suddenly interested in arming opposition forces there. ""The president referred to the Syrian opposition just a few months ago as pharmacists and doctors, and so on,"" Hayden said. ""We've turned on the dime in terms of our expectation for them, so if we're going to get them to this force that he said it was fantasy to rely on to the force that's going to be, as (White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough) said, the anvil in a combined arms operation, they're going to need an awful lot of help."" In this case, we're checking whether Obama described the Syrian rebels as ""pharmacists and doctors."" We're not checking whether the rebels actually are pharmacists or doctors, as we'll explain in a bit. We tried to reach Hayden but were unsuccessful. McDonough, though, was asked about Obama’s comment during an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union. ""I think that the question that the president was responding to at the time was looking back a couple of years,"" McDonough said. ""We have had a relationship with these fighters now for a couple of years. They're getting better and more capable."" If that’s the case, then maybe Hayden was embellishing Obama’s comments. Keep in mind, the debate over arming the Syrian opposition forces in their fight against Syrian President Bashar al Assad has been ongoing for years. PolitiFact noted in a fact-check last week that several key members of Obama’s national security team favored the move in August 2012. Let’s take a look at exactly what Obama said. We found four instances of Obama describing the Syrian opposition forces in recent months. May 29 Obama discussed his foreign policy during an interview with NPR. He was asked if conditions were more ""robust"" for aiding the rebels than in the past. ""I wouldn't say the conditions are better,"" Obama said. ""In many ways, the conditions are worse. ""When you talk about the moderate opposition, many of these people were farmers or dentists or maybe some radio reporters who didn't have a lot of experience fighting,"" he added. ""But creating a capacity for them to hold ground, to be able to rebuff vicious attacks, for them to be able to also organize themselves in ways that are cohesive — all that takes, unfortunately, more time than I think many people would like."" For what it’s worth, the Washington Post fact-checked Obama’s claim about the makeup of Syrian rebels as farmer, dentists and radio reporters and found it to be dubious. June 19 In mid June, a few days before Obama asked Congress for $500 million to train and equip some of the Syrian opposition, he discussed the makeup of those forces on a couple occasions. In a June 19 press conference, a reporter asked Obama if ""the expansion of the Syria war into Iraq changed your mind about the type of weapons and training we’re now willing to give the opposition there?"" Obama responded: ""The question has always been, is there the capacity of moderate opposition on the ground to absorb and counteract extremists that might have been pouring in, as well as an Assad regime supported by Iran and Russia that outmanned them and was ruthless. ""And so we have consistently provided that opposition with support,"" Obama said. ""Oftentimes, the challenge is if you have former farmers or teachers or pharmacists who now are taking up opposition against a battle-hardened regime, with support from external actors that have a lot at stake, how quickly can you get them trained; how effective are you able to mobilize them. And that continues to be a challenge."" The next morning, he made a similar comment to CBS' This Morning. ""When you get farmers, dentists and folks who have never fought before going up against a ruthless opposition in Assad, the notion that they were in a position suddenly to overturn not only Assad but also ruthless, highly trained jihadists if we just sent a few arms is a fantasy."" Aug. 8 In a sitdown with New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, Obama again was asked about why he chose not to arm the Syrian rebels. ""This idea that we could provide some light arms or even more sophisticated arms to what was essentially an opposition made up of former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth, and that they were going to be able to battle not only a well-armed state but also a well-armed state backed by Russia, backed by Iran, a battle-hardened Hezbollah, that was never in the cards,"" Obama said. Counter to what McDonough said Sept. 14, Obama very much seems to be talking about the Syrian opposition in the present and the challenges in providing them with assistance and arms. This continued up until August. The one caveat that Hayden does not mention is the conversation was largely in the context of the opposition’s capacity to go up against Assad and the Syrian regime, not their ability to fight a rogue terrorist organization like the Islamic State. Still, it is a noticeable about-face that as recently as August, Obama told Friedman he believed ""there’s not as much capacity as you would hope"" for providing these individuals training. Our ruling In discussing Obama’s decision to arm opposition forces in Syria, Hayden said, ""The president referred to the Syrian opposition just a few months ago as pharmacists and doctors, and so on."" We found several examples of Obama, as recently as June and August, characterizing the Syrian rebels as pharmacists and doctors, as well as dentists, radio reporters and teachers. Usually he was describing their capacity to fight Assad, but that doesn’t make Hayden’s point any less accurate."
|
31038
|
"During a speech in which he declared Jesus Christ his ""redeemer,"" Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan gave indications that he was breaking with Islam in favor of following Christianity."
|
We reached out to the Nation of Islam for comment on this rumor, but have not yet received a reply.
|
false
|
Politics, louis farrakhan
|
In August 2017, various online sources reported that Louis Farrakhan, the 84-year-old leader of the Chicago-based religious group Nation of Islam, had posted a video on his Facebook page in which he declared Jesus as his redeemer, seemingly contradicting his own Muslim teachings. For example, the Christian Post stated: Reflecting on his inevitable physical death, leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, 84, declared in a controversial video recording Tuesday that Jesus will save him from the grip of death despite his organization’s creed that there is only “One God whose proper Name is Allah.” The declaration came the same day Farrakhan was shown visiting Bishop Larry Trotter, longtime pastor of Chicago’s Sweet Holy Spirit Church, who was hospitalized last Wednesday with a “serious illness” following a trip to Israel. “I thank God for guiding me for 40 years absent my teacher (Elijah Muhammad). So my next journey will have to answer the question. I’m gonna say it,” Farrakhan teased briefly in the clip before declaring: “I know that my redeemer liveth.” Similarly, Dan Calabrese of Canada Free Press wrote: Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is 84 years old. We all know the Islamic radicalism and racial division he’s been preaching for decades, so there’s no reason to go over it in detail here. But what’s this? Farrakhan released this video yesterday, and if it’s what it appears to be on first glace, he’s made quite a radical change of direction: But what about this? “I say to the devil, I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years. You can have the money, you can have the clothes, you can have the suit, you can have the house but, me, you can’t have.” If that doesn’t sound like full-throated repentence, I don’t know what does. And, according to Black Christian News: Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, has declared that Jesus Christ is his “Redeemer” and has indicated that he knows he will have to “pay” for his false teachings. In a video released Tuesday, while reflecting on his inevitable death, the 84-year-old religious teacher said, “I thank God for guiding me for forty years absent my teacher [Elijah Muhammad]. So my next journey will have to answer the question. I’m gonna say it: I know that my redeemer liveth.” He emphasized, “I know. I’m not guessing that my Jesus is alive. I know that my redeemer liveth and because he lives I know that I, too, will pass through the portal of death yet death will not afflict me.” The video clip is authentic, released via Farrakhan’s multiple social media accounts. However, the interpretation of his words as a sign of a deep change in his belief system — specifically, as a turning away from or renunciation of Islam and a conversion, tentative or complete, to Christianity — is erroneous and disproven by other statements he has made before and since. Regarding the excerpt itself, the clip represents a minute and a half of a speech that lasted an hour and 41 minutes. Farrakhan said a great many things during the 30 July 2017 talk, which was delivered from the pulpit of the Union Temple Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. on the occasion of the 40th pastoral anniversary of his friend, the Rev. Willie Wilson: Going deeper, Farrakhan’s writings and speeches indicate he believes that the Messiah prophesied in the Torah, the Qur’an, and the Bible — the figure to whom he refers as “my redeemer” — is, in fact, former Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad, who died in 1975, but whom Farrakhan believes is still “physically alive”: “I haven’t been the same since,” said Min. Farrakhan. “Because everything that Elijah Muhammad said to me made sense. It would not make sense if he were dead, it could only make since if he’s alive and all the things he told me about myself and my future didn’t make sense if he was dead. But when I came to see that he was alive, Saviours’ Day 1981, I mentioned it.” Confusion also surrounds Farrakhan’s statement that “I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years.” Some have taken it to mean Farrakhan was admitting he will have to repent to God for uttering false teachings (i.e., Islam), but that interpretation ignores the opening of his statement, which begins: “I say to the devil, I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years.” In context, Farrakhan was speaking of the price he will have to pay for a lifetime of standing up against the false religion (“corrupted” Christianity) invented by Satan and preached by white people to deceive blacks into accepting subjugation and slavery. Farrakhan is saying he knows the devil will extract payment, but there’s a limit to what he can take: I say to the devil, I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years. You can have the money, you can have the clothes, you can have the suit, you can have the house but me you can’t have. In short, it’s a grave mistake to take Louis Farrakhan’s pronouncements about Jesus Christ as having the same meaning ordinary Christians (or even Muslims) would give them. It’s an even greater mistake to suppose that Farrakhan renounced Islam. Here’s a tweet he composed barely a month after delivering the above address: You have to know and believe that Allah is sufficient for all our needs. — MINISTER FARRAKHAN (@LouisFarrakhan) September 3, 2017
|
12401
|
"Obamacare premiums have doubled"" in Wisconsin."
|
"Trump says ""Obamacare premiums have doubled"" in Wisconsin. The average premium for individuals who buy their own health insurance in the Obamacare marketplace nearly doubled from 2013 to 2017. But the vast majority of Wisconsin residents buying those plans get Obamacare subsidies that protect them from the premium increases. Moreover, insurance coverage on individual plans is generally more comprehensive than before Obamacare. For a statement that is partially accurate but leaves out important details, our rating is Half True. "
|
mixture
|
Health Care, Government Regulation, Public Health, Wisconsin, Donald Trump,
|
"On his second visit to Wisconsin since entering the Oval Office, President Donald Trump stepped off Air Force One on June 13, 2017, and tore into Obamacare. Joined by two Wisconsin families whom he described as victims of the Affordable Care Act, Trump said in Milwaukee: ""These are sad but familiar stories in Wisconsin, where Obamacare premiums have doubled. Obamacare is one of the greatest catastrophes that our country has signed into law."" By not stating a time frame with his claim, the president left it to his audience to determine how alarmed to be; premiums doubling in one year, of course, is much different than over a span of years. And premium increases can’t be considered in isolation. So, let’s sort this out. Obamacare vs. GOP plan Three days before Trump’s trip, Vice President Mike Pence visited Milwaukee, saying that under the Republican replacement for Obamacare everyone with preexisting medical conditions will ""have access to the coverage and the care that they need -- no exceptions."" We found the pledge misleading. Based on the GOP plan passed by the House of Representatives, people with preexisting conditions could potentially face huge increases in premiums, though changes in the bill could still be made by the Senate. Around the country, there have been huge premium increases for people who buy health insurance on their own through Obamacare. We rated a January 2017 claim by House Speaker Paul Ryan that Obamacare premiums had gone up as much as 116 percent (in Arizona) from 2016 to 2017 -- though it’s important to note that before Obamacare, millions had no coverage at all. But there are multiple problems with the president’s claim. Trump’s evidence The vast majority of Americans get health insurance through their employer or through a government program such as Medicaid or Medicare. So, Trump’s claim refers to the relatively few people who buy health insurance coverage on their own. The White House pointed us to a May 2017 report from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that compared premiums in the individual market in 2013 to 2017. The report says 2013 was chosen because that’s when key regulations that are part of Obamacare took effect. The average premium in Wisconsin nearly doubled, based on the analysis: Obamacare individual market 2013 average monthly premium 2017 average monthly premium Increase Wisconsin $266 $514 93% United States $232 $476 105% But Cynthia Cox, a health reform and private insurance expert at the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, a leading authority on health care, told us the analysis is skewed in a way that inflates the average premium for 2017 because it includes only policies that are sold in the Obamacare marketplace. The average 2017 premium would have been lower had the analysis also included individual policies that are not sold on the marketplace. That's because people who buy individual policies off the marketplace tend to buy less expensive plans because they aren't receiving Obamacare subsidies, she said. Other factors There are two other key factors to consider. 1. Obamacare subsidies offset much of the impact of premium hikes. In a news article on premium increases for 2017, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that tens of thousands of Wisconsinites who buy individual health plans, but earn too much income to qualify for Obamacare subsidies, would have to absorb double-digit increases. But the story also said that because of the subsidies, most people buying those policies would see little, if any, change in their monthly costs. Economist Gail Wilensky, who ran the Medicare and Medicaid programs under Republican President George H.W. Bush, told us the same is true nationally: People buying individual policies on the exchange are mostly protected from premium increases, though the subsidies that rise along with premium increases are a hit to other taxpayers. 2. Coverage: Premiums are up, but benefits are better. Before Obamacare, millions of Americans had no health insurance and policies on the individual market offered ""very limited benefits,"" University of North Carolina social medicine professor Jonathan Oberlander told us. For example, most of those policies didn’t cover maternity, mental health and substance abuse services. But now insurers are required to cover those services. The federal government estimates that 83 percent of Wisconsin marketplace participants receive premium tax credit subsidies and 51 percent receive cost-sharing subsidies. ""For these residents, nongroup insurance today provides more protection for less money than in 2013,"" said Karen Pollitz, a senior fellow at Kaiser. Our rating Trump says ""Obamacare premiums have doubled"" in Wisconsin. The average premium for individuals who buy their own health insurance in the Obamacare marketplace nearly doubled from 2013 to 2017. But the vast majority of Wisconsin residents buying those plans get Obamacare subsidies that protect them from the premium increases. Moreover, insurance coverage on individual plans is generally more comprehensive than before Obamacare. For a statement that is partially accurate but leaves out important details, our rating is ."
|
29088
|
Mortality rates in hospitals go up in July due to an influx of inexperienced doctors.
|
Yet being the first under the knife on any given day may confer certain advantages to the patient. Being early on the day’s roster means one’s surgery will start on time, whereas patients booked later in the day may find their procedures pushed back as complications in the operating room work to make a mess of the day’s schedule. Also, the operating room is at its cleanest prior to the first operation, a factor for those concerned about the risk of post-operative infection.
|
mixture
|
Medical, Medical Myths
|
Precious few who are under the weather skip happily into hospitals, a song on their lips, and not a care in the world. Typical inpatients worry about many things: the condition that’s caused them to be hospitalized, being away from their homes and families, and even the quality of medical care they will receive while hospitalized. Example: “Avoid hospitals in July like the plague.” If you can, stay out of the hospital during the summer, especially July. That’s the month when medical students become interns, interns become residents, and residents become fellows and full-fledged doctors. In other words, a good portion of the staff at any given teaching hospital is new on the job. Summer hospital horror stories aren’t just medical lore: The adjusted mortality rate rises 4% in July and August for the average major teaching hospital, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. That means eight to 14 more deaths occur at major teaching hospitals than would normally without the turnover. Another scheduling tip: Try to book surgeries first thing in the morning and preferably early in the week, when doctors are at their best and before schedules get backed up. The piece quoted above (which we began seeing circulated in e-mail in June 2010) speaks to that last concern. Its text was harvested from a 4 March 2010 Wall Street Journal‘s SmartMoney Magazine article titled “10 Things Your Hospital Won’t Tell You,” where its topic of July mortality rates in hospitals appeared as item nine. That seemingly helpful heads-up is a summary of information pulled from another source, with some key aspects left out. The “10 Things” item drew its information from a 2005 National Bureau of Economic Research article titled “Cohort Turnover and Productivity: The July Phenomenon in Teaching Hospitals.” That paper examined what is termed “the July phenomenon,” “the July effect,” or “the new resident hypothesis”: a reduction in quality of service related to the annual turnover of house staff in teaching hospitals. Using patient-level data gathered from roughly 700 hospitals per year over the period from 1993 to 2001, it concluded that there is a measurable increase in both length of patient stay and rates of patient mortality during the July-August transition, when experienced residents and interns are replaced by new ones. Key to the understanding that paper, however, is noting that its conclusions apply solely to teaching hospitals, institutions where residents and interns treat patients as part of their medical training. It’s therefore not true that all hospitals become a bit more dangerous in July. It’s also not true that all teaching hospitals experience this decline. As the paper noted, “In fact, the most-intensive teaching hospitals manage to avoid significant effects on mortality following this turnover” thanks to better supervision of new doctors. However, at teaching institutions where oversight of new staff is less stringent, the “July effect” is real. Moreover, it lasts not merely throughout that month but for the rest of the calendar year as well. While risk-adjusted mortality rates may rise by roughly 4 percent in the July-August period, that increase remains at between 2 and 4 percent until the New Year, resulting in 8 to 14 additional deaths per annum at a typical teaching hospital. The increase in patient deaths does not, as many people assume, have to do mostly with untrained surgeons running amok; it is instead largely attributable to fatal medication errors, according to a May 2010 study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine. In that study, researchers from the University of California, San Diego examined computerized death certificates from 1979-2006, focusing on the certificates of inpatients, outpatients, and those who died in the emergency department, in which medication error was recorded as the primary cause of death. (Computerized death certificates do not record whether the patient died in a teaching hospital, but they do record the county of death, so researchers looked at the proportion of major teaching hospitals in each county.) Counties containing teaching hospitals experienced a 10% rise in fatal medication errors in July, whereas counties lacking teaching hospitals did not experience that spike. The lethal mistakes included dispensing the wrong drugs, overdoses, and accidents involving drugs or biological agents. In a bit that didn’t come from any of the studies discussed above, the e-mailed item asserts: Try to book surgeries first thing in the morning and preferably early in the week, when doctors are at their best and before schedules get backed up. Surgeons aren’t necessarily at their best first thing in the morning: like other mere mortals, some are bright-eyed and bushy-tailed as soon as their eyes snap open but fade as the day goes on, others hit their strides no earlier than the afternoon, and others are everywhere in between. Similarly, the day of the week doesn’t appear to affect the skill level of surgeons. According to an October 2009 article in the journal Anesthesiology (produced by the American Society of Anesthesiologists), there is no bad time of the day, week, or year to have elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery, thus one needn’t worry about being a Thursday or Friday operation. It had been postulated the crazy hours surgeons work would impart fatigue-related disadvantages to patients who underwent operations later in the week, yet that did not prove to be the case: results from surgeries performed early and late in the week and at different times of the day were all similar. The reason why coronary artery bypass grafting was studied was because that procedure is the most common heart surgery, and there are well-established protocols for it. The analysis was limited to elective operations because emergency procedures are inherently riskier and are often performed on patients that have additional medical problems.
|
10510
|
Some Blood Pressure Drugs May Stave Off Dementia
|
"Generally well done though the story may have been, we’re troubled when a story talks about ""a small but protective effect "" and uses active verbs to say the drugs ""may stave off dementia"" when it also states in the story this is not convincing proof of cause and effect. Then how can you have a protective effect? Association, maybe? Causation and protection, not yet. This is an important and intriguing area of research. But stories that make it sound as though cause-and-effect has been proven – when it hasn’t – don’t do a service to public understanding. See how blogger Emlly DeVoto wrote about the same problem with causal language used in a Guardian article on the same study."
|
true
|
"The cost of the drugs was not mentioned. And the possible cost-effectiveness ramifications of the research were not mentioned. As is often the case with 70% of the stories we review, cost just doesn’t seem to matter. But we all know it does. The benefits are given only in relative, not absolute terms. See our primer on this topic. So when the story says ""24 percent lower incidence of dementia"" or ""The risk was 19 percent lower"" or ""The risk was nearly halved"" – readers need to know 24% of what? 19% of what? Half of what? One harm was mentioned – ""There are potential hazards, such as too-low blood pressure that can lead to damaging falls."" That’s an incomplete listing, but we’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt in at least nodding in the direction of potential harms. The story did state: ""The new report describes an observational study, one that lacks the strict controls that are needed for convincing proof."" And it further quoted the lead researcher saying, ""Any study like this is hypothesis-generating. You only know for sure when you have done clinical prospective trials."" So we’ll give it a satisfactory grade. But we do with mixed feelings. That’s because we’re troubled when the story talks about ""a small but protective effect "" and uses active verbs to say the drugs ""may stave off dementia."" That is terribly misleading to the reader. ""Protective effect"" when you state in the story this is not convincing proof of cause and effect? Blogger Emlly DeVoto wrote about the problem with causal language used in a Guardian article on the same study. There is no overt disease-mongering of dementia in the story. The story did quote one independent expert who injected a cautionary note – in addition to the lead researcher. The story did note other observational studies that have ""implicated various molecules"" in dementia. We’ll again give the story the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. Although never explicity stated, the widespread availability of angiotensin inhibiting drugs can be inferred from the story. The story doesn’t frame the new study into the context of past research linking high blood pressure to dementia. There’s no evidence that the story relied on a news release."
|
|
10754
|
Midlife: Drop in testosterone can affect sexual desire in men and women
|
The piece does little to evaluate the evidence behind health claims made for testosterone products, provides no quantification of benefits or of harms and does not discuss any cost information. It does, however, provide some independent commentary that should give readers enough cautionary notes to not run out and start trying one of these uNPRoven products to ill effect.
|
false
|
Los Angeles Times
|
The story makes no mention of costs. These treatments can be costly and may not be covered by insurance. A 30-pill box of AndroGel costs $295 on Drugstore.com. If, as the story states, “testosterone use is very widespread but it’s misused a lot,” cost certainly seems to be an important issue to address. As with the harms, none of the benefits of testosterone are actually quantified. The story did not, by any means, hype testosterone products as a cure all, and, as noted above, spent considerable time explaining the complexities of sexual health. That said, the framing of the story was about what happens when testosterone levels drop, and this leads readers to think that more testosterone must be better. For example, in noting that there are currently no approved testosterone products for women, instead of saying that no company has been able to make a case through clinical trials that testosterone supplements in women would have any positive effect, the story says, “To fill the void, doctors sometimes resort to prescribing off-label treatments for women, such as low doses of the gels approved for men, says Sheryl Kingsberg, a clinical psychologist and chief of obstetrics/gynecology behavioral medicine at University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland.” The assumption here is that “the void” has been created by a slow or ineffective FDA and that women definitely need testosterone supplementation. If that is truly the case, the story should have provided some clear numbers to back that up. And there’s no information given on how many men benefit – and to what level of benefit – from any of the products mentioned. The story starts to strike a bit of a cautionary tone. The very first quote in the story says, “Testosterone use is very widespread, but it’s misused a lot.” That’s Dr. Glenn Braunstein, an endocrinologist and chairman of the department of medicine at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. The story goes on to say, “Inaccurate diagnoses can result simply because blood draws were done at the wrong time of day. In men, testosterone levels peak in the morning and dip in the afternoon, so if doctors rely on a single blood test done in the afternoon, they may misdiagnose the source of the problem, Braunstein says.” That’s great information. But the story never described the potential harms from testosterone replacement. Skin rash, acne, prostate enlargement and headache are just a few of the more common side effects. The story makes several claims about the effectiveness of testosterone replacement that are unreferenced and not supported by the larger body of medical evidence. In 2004, the National Academy of Science concluded, “…no beneficial effects of administering testosterone have been well established.” Although the story does provide the reader with a bit of information on the complexities of sexual health and low libido, it treats declining testosterone levels in both men and women as something that needs to be treated. For example, the story notes, “Men’s testosterone levels decrease by about 1% per year and then drop faster as they approach older age.” At this point we don’t know if this is bad but it certainly cannot be good. In the very next line, we are provided with the answer. Not only is it not good but there is a treatment, “Testosterone treatment for men and women can help restore the hormone to a level that will push the sexual accelerator.” Indeed, even in the first sentence, the story is framed as the “dizzying” conspiratorial assault on sexual desire in midlife. Let’s face it: we are all likely to grow older and with age comes a host of age related changes. Levels of testosterone do decline as we age and testosterone is an important hormone in both men and women. But unlike low estrogen levels in women, the impact of falling testosterone in men is really not clearly defined. Although reduction in bone density, decreased libido, type 2 diabetes, changes in muscle mass and strength have all been associated with testosterone deficiency, replacement of the hormone has not demonstrated any consistent results. The Institute of Medicine in a published report from 2004 concluded, “…no beneficial effects of administering testosterone have been well established.” A story that focuses on libido only, provides no supporting evidence and suggests that testosterone replacement works in everyone is simply wrong. In one sense, the story makes good use of experts who give readers the broad scope of sexual health and don’t allow the story to become too narrowly focused on any one type of therapy. Typical of the comments is this one from Sheryl Kingsberg, a clinical psychologist and chief of obstetrics/gynecology behavioral medicine at University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland: “It’s important for post-menopausal women to know that the quality of a relationship has been shown to be a much better predictor of sexual health and sexual satisfaction than age and menopausal status.” But we were troubled by the fact that both experts quoted have done work for some of the companies that make these testosterone products, either taking grants directly or working on advisory boards. Both recently particiapted in a progam sponsored by a maker of a testosterone gel that was geared toward the investment community. We think that is always context that readers deserve to have. The story does not make any head-to-head comparisons, which we would have liked to see. But the story at least briefly mentioned: “Kingsberg emphasizes that other factors — such as exercise, fatigue, sleep deprivation, stress, cardiovascular disease and obesity — cannot be overlooked when trying to restore, or maintain, sex drive. “All of those things absolutely affect overall health and sexual health,” she says.” So we’ll give it a barely satisfactory grade on this criterion. The story does not make any claims for the novelty of testosterone products, and so we are rating this one not applicable. The story does not rely on any news release.
|
41718
|
The government gave the police much more use of Tasers to help deal with street crime.
|
The Home Office announced police in England and Wales can bid for part of a fund to equip their force with more Tasers. Final funding allocations will be announced in February.
|
true
|
health
|
There will be 50,000 more nurses going into the NHS. The government has committed to do this by 2024/25. Not all of these nurses will be ‘new’. The government have announced the end of hospital parking charges for patients. In December it was announced that hospitals in England will have to provide free car parking to frequent hospital visitors, blue badge holders and at certain times to staff and parents of child patients. The government will build 40 new hospitals. Six hospitals in England are getting the money to upgrade their buildings within the next five years. Up to 38 hospitals are getting money to develop plans for their hospitals between 2025 and 2030, but not to actually begin any building work. The government is putting 20,000 more police on the streets. The government has committed to do this. If this happens it will take the number of police in England and Wales to almost, but not quite the same level as it was at in 2010. The government gave the police much more use of Tasers to help deal with street crime. The Home Office announced police in England and Wales can bid for part of a fund to equip their force with more Tasers. Final funding allocations will be announced in February. The government are lifting the living wage by the biggest ever amount, up to £8.72, and it will go up to £10.50. The national living wage set by the government is set to rise to £8.72 in April, the largest rise since it was put in place in 2016. It was also announced at last year’s Conservative party conference that it would rise to £10.50 within the next five years. Claim 1 of 7
|
17702
|
Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out.
|
"Israel said, ""Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out."" There definitely were problems, and in some cases, the parallels between the prescription benefit program’s introduction and the Obamacare marketplaces are strikingly similar. While we also found some serious differences in the laws, we can’t find fault with Israel’s fairly general statement."
|
true
|
National, Health Care, Medicare, Retirement, Technology, Steve Israel,
|
"Democrats are pleading for patience as they try to reassure the country that the online insurance marketplaces critical to President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul can be fixed. Big programs have seen rocky rollouts only to achieve success later, they say. Their top example: the 2005 launch of Medicare Part D, President George W. Bush’s prescription drug benefit plan. ""Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out,"" Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., told MSNBC on Nov. 6. ""When things go wrong, there are two things we can do as a country. We can spend all our time figuring out who to blame, or we can spend all our time figuring out how to fix it."" Eight years after it went live, Medicare Part D is now widely popular among the seniors who use it. Were there major problems with the rollout of Medicare Part D? And were they comparable to the challenges facing Obamacare? We decided to take a more a detailed look at its implementation. Strangely similar Let’s play a quick game: who made this statement? ""This is a huge undertaking and there are going to be glitches. My goal is the same as yours: Get rid of the glitches."" A Democrat in 2013? Wrong! Actually, it was Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican who chaired the House Energy and Commerce Committee, about Medicare Part D in 2006. The similarities between the two health care programs, both heralded as the signature domestic achievements of the presidents who signed them into law, are at times eerie. Supporters of the laws asked for time and promised a quick fix. Critics did not mince their words. Even the lingo -- words like ""glitches"" -- has been recycled. A report documenting the history of Medicare Part D was released earlier this year by a group of health policy experts at the Center on Health Insurance Reform at Georgetown University. It highlighted several areas where Medicare Part D struggled in its implementation that sound extremely familiar. For one thing, the Bush administration faced a difficult political battle to get the bill passed in 2003. That damaged public opinion of the law, making it a challenge to educate 43 million seniors on its nuances. Enrollment in the law was set to begin in late 2005. In April of that year, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that only 27 percent of respondents understood the law, while only 21 percent favored it. (In a comparable Kaiser poll in April 2013, 35 percent viewed the Affordable Care Act favorably and less than half felt they were well-informed of its details.) The Medicare site, meant to help seniors pick benefit plans, was supposed to debut Oct. 13, 2005, but it didn’t go live until weeks later in November. Even then, ""the tool itself appeared to be in need of fixing,"" the Washington Post reported at the time. ""Visitors to the site could not access it for most of the first two hours. When it finally did come up around 5 p.m., it operated awfully slowly,"" the Post reported. (Sensing a pattern?) Once seniors began to enroll, problems persisted. According to the report, the online tools had ""accuracy problems,"" and local organizations designated with assisting seniors ""reported problems getting necessary and accurate information."" Call centers provided by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services underestimated ""the needed capacity to ensure that reliable answers could be provided"" and ""service representatives were not knowledgeable or failed to provide accurate information."" The Georgetown experts anticipated similar hiccups with the Affordable Care Act, noting that the country’s experience with Medicare Part D suggested ""the experience will be far from perfect"" and ""problems were not always addressed as quickly or as thoroughly as critics would have liked, but fixes were usually found."" These days, nine in 10 seniors who utilize the program report they are satisfied with it. ""There’s really a striking amount of similarity even though this time it’s a far larger and daunting task. It’s a fair comparison,"" said Jack Hoadley at the Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute and one of the authors of the study. ""Once something works its way through the problems, you forget the problems."" Still different But there are important differences between Medicare Part D and the Affordable Care Act that make the challenges facing the exchanges different. Because it was aimed at seniors and e-commerce was still relatively young, Medicare.gov was not intended to be the main hub for people to purchase and review plans, said David Brailer, the first National Coordinator for Health Information Technology under Bush. ""The issue with Medicare Part D is there were choices of 70 to 100 plans,"" Brailer said. ""People were overwhelmed with the choices, with the options available and didn't know how to navigate and pick one. I don’t remember a conversation at all blaming any IT people. This was about how do you really navigate through all these choices."" Meanwhile, most people who logged on to healthcare.gov in the opening weeks couldn’t even get far enough to review what options were available. Also, prescription drugs are a relatively small and easy-to-understand part of health care. Shopping for an insurance plan is more complicated. ""For those who did choose to enroll (in Medicare Part D) online, they checked out their options by typing in drugs they used, and once you did, you got an estimated out-of-pocket cost to make your comparisons. In the exchange world you have a full health care benefit to buy,"" Hoadley said. ""The drug cost is relatively predictable, certainly a lot more predictable than overall health costs. The challenge for this website is a lot greater, probably by a significant amount of magnitude."" And there’s the political climate as well. When Medicare Part D passed, Democrats were not happy with the final bill and were critical of its botched rollout. But even then, they were generally supportive of its intended outcome and worked with constituents who had difficulty signing up or utilizing their new benefits. When Medicare Part D faced early troubles, many blue states came to its rescue. The New York Times reported in 2006 that ""about 20 states, including California, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and all of New England, have announced that they will help low-income people by paying drug claims that should have been paid by the federal Medicare program."" By contrast, not a single Republican voted for the Affordable Care Act, and in the years since it passed, the party has made its repeal a top priority. In the states, many Republican governors have bucked the Medicaid expansion and rejected offers to build their own insurance marketplaces, putting greater pressure on the federal government. Henry Aaron, a health policy expert at the Brookings Institute, said the opposition from Republicans has forced the Obama administration into a ""two-front war"" Bush did not have to fight. ""On the one hand, one must and should address the administrative problems that no one denies is plaguing the problem,"" he said. ""But you’re also waging a war of public opinion against the hysterics of its critics."" Our ruling Israel said, ""Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out."" There definitely were problems, and in some cases, the parallels between the prescription benefit program’s introduction and the Obamacare marketplaces are strikingly similar. While we also found some serious differences in the laws, we can’t find fault with Israel’s fairly general statement."
|
37720
|
"On July 28 2020, United States President Donald Trump lamented that doctors Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx were popular for their coronavirus response, but ""nobody likes me."
|
A chyron reading “TRUMP AS U.S. NEARS 150,000 DEATHS: “NOBODY LIKES ME” circulated on social media, often without much context about the veracity or substance of the quote. On July 28 2020, Trump provided a response at length to a reporter during a coronavirus news conference, covering a range of topics before addressing the popularity of Fauci. At the end of the answer, Trump made the remark before moving on.According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit organization focusing on public and national health issues throughout the United States, the official American death toll due to COVID-19 as of the end of July 28 2020 was 149,033.
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Politics
|
On July 29 2020, an apparent CNN screen capture featuring a chyron quoting United States President Donald Trump as saying “nobody likes me” circulated on sites like Reddit:Does this count? from facepalmTrump: ‘Nobody likes me’ from politicsThe ChyronIn the first of the two Reddit posts above, shared to r/facepalm, a “Breaking News” chyron timestamped at 4:06 PM Pacific read:TRUMP AS U.S. NEARS 150,000 DEATHS: “NOBODY LIKES ME”However, the image didn’t link to any additional information about whether Trump said “nobody likes me,” or in which context he might have done so.C-SPAN Video and Trump’s Response to a ReporterC-SPAN published video on July 28 2020 with the description, “President Trump Coronavirus News Conference.”In the 26-minute and 36-second clip below, Trump took questions from reporters about COVID-19 and sub-topics (such as controversy over a Facebook video touting the disputed safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine). After praising the controversial video, Trump calls on a reporter to take a question. The reporter asks about a statement by Trump made about Dr. Anthony Fauci and hydroxycloroquine, in the form of retweeting material later flagged by Twitter:… last night [on July 27 2020] in tweets that were deleted by Twitter, you said Dr. Fauci misled the country on hydroxychloroquine … how so?In response, Trump rambles at length about Fauci, hydroxychloroquine, Dr. Deborah Birx, his belief that the drug failed to catch on as a COVID-19 treatment due to his support of it, and generalized approval ratings:No, not at all. I think … I don’t even know what [Fauci’s] stance is on it. I … was just – you know, he was at the … he was at the task force meeting a little while ago.I have a very good relationship with Dr. Fauci. You know, it’s sort of interesting — we’ve listened to Dr. Fauci … I haven’t always agreed with him, and it’s … I think, pretty standard. That’s okay. He did not want us to ban [stammers] put up the ban to China, when China was heavily infected – very badly, Wuhan. He didn’t want to do that, and I did and other things.And [Fauci] told me I was right, and he told me I saved tens of thousands of lives, which was generous, but it’s – you know, I think it’s fact that I banned — I did the ban on Europe. But I get along with him very well and I agree with a lot of what he’s said … so, you know, it’s interesting. He’s got a very good approval rating, and I like that. It’s good. Because remember, he’s working for this administration. He’s working with us, John. We could have gotten other people. We could have gotten somebody else. It didn’t have to be Dr. Fauci. He’s working with our administration, and for the most part, we’ve done pretty much what he and others — Dr. Birx and others, who are terrific – recommended.And he’s got this high approval rating, so why don’t I have a high approval rating with respect – and the administration, with respect to the virus? We should have a very high — because what we’ve done in terms of — we’re just reading off about the masks and the gowns and the ventilators and numbers that nobody has seen, and the testing at 55 million tests, we tested more than anybody in the world. I have a graph that I’d love to show you … perhaps you’ve seen it … where we’re up here [gestures] and the rest of the world is down at a level that’s just a tiny fraction of what we’ve done in terms of testing.So it sort of is curious … A man works for us, with us very closely — Dr. Fauci, and Dr. [Deborah] Birx, also highly thought of … and yet, they’re highly thought of, but nobody likes me. It can only be my personality. That’s all. Go ahead.In the broader context of the video, Trump addressed myriad topics in response to a reporter’s question about whether he believed Dr. Fauci “misled the country on hydroxychloroquine.” Trump maintained he had “a very good relationship” with Fauci, that Fauci said Trump “saved tens of thousands of lives,” and added that he has not “always agreed” with Fauci.Subsequently, Trump mused that Fauci (and Birx) had a “very good approval rating,” asking, apparently rhetorically, why he and his administration did not appear to enjoy the same level of approval — referencing “the masks and the gowns and the ventilators and numbers that nobody has seen.”As he wrapped up his response, Trump described it as “curious ” that Fauci and Birx were “highly thought of,” and added that “nobody likes me.”TL;DRA chyron reading “TRUMP AS U.S. NEARS 150,000 DEATHS: “NOBODY LIKES ME” circulated on social media, often without much context about the veracity or substance of the quote. On July 28 2020, Trump provided a response at length to a reporter during a coronavirus news conference, covering a range of topics before addressing the popularity of Fauci. At the end of the answer, Trump made the remark before moving on.According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit organization focusing on public and national health issues throughout the United States, the official American death toll due to COVID-19 as of the end of July 28 2020 was 149,033.Comments
|
34629
|
Nylabone brand pet products are toxic and cause dogs to have seizures.
|
Nylabone stands for quality in chews and treats. It is our goal to exceed consumer expectations for our products in innovation, safety, quality, and the enjoyment of the people and pets we serve.
|
unproven
|
Uncategorized
|
In March 2016, a message reporting that a Nylabone brand pet product had caused a dog to have a seizure began circulating on Facebook, with the earliest iteration of the claim we could find having been posted on 8 March 2016 by Samantha Love: FYI. To all my friends and family who have a pet. This weekend A pet friend bought a couple bones at “pets mart” for Guido and Smudge. The name of the bone is “NYLABONE” chicken flavored. Smudge had a seizure while chewing the bone. He is two. Her sister googled the Nylabone. One of the side effects is they are toxic and can cause seizures. Your pet can not digest the bone if they swallow it. And you’ll need to have it surgically removed. There is a push to get them pulled off the shelves. So pet owners beware. I’m buying only natural bones and horns & antlers to chew. Although Samantha Love’s dog may have suffered a seizure while chewing on a Nylabone product, there’s no evidence proving a cause-and-effect relationship between those two phenomena. Love apparently based her claim on the notion that “one of the side effects” of Nylabones is that “they are toxic and can cause seizures,” information she supposedly found through a Google search but for which she provided no relevant links. We attempted to replicate Love’s search but couldn’t find any source claiming that Nylabones were toxic or that one of their side effects was seizures. While Love did not identify a specific product in her Facebook post, it’s likely that she was referring to Nylabone’s “FlexiChew Bone — Chicken” item. This product is made from “Inert Soft Thermoplastic Polymer” and “Chicken Flavor” and comes with a warning that it is “not recommended for strong chewers.” On 11 March 2016, Nylabone released a statement concerning the “misinformation” about their product line that was circulating on Facebook: Recently there has been some misinformation about the safety of our products circulating on Facebook. This negative information is incorrect, and we would like to set the record straight. All of our products are made from Non-Toxic, Pet-Safe materials and are designed for the specific chewing style and size of your dog. From gentle teething puppies to extreme power chewers, Nylabone has a chew for every dog. At Nylabone, we pride ourselves on being the leader in responsible animal care for over 50 years.
|
6169
|
Bird flu detected in chicken breeding facility in Tennessee.
|
A commercial chicken breeding facility in south-central Tennessee has been hit by a strain of bird flu, agriculture officials said Sunday.
|
true
|
U.S. News, Health, Flu, Animal health, Tennessee, Bird flu, U.S. News, Agriculture
|
The state Agriculture Department said in a news release that tests confirmed the presence of the H7 strain of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza, or HPAI, at a facility in Lincoln County. The facility alerted the state veterinarian’s office on Friday about an increase in chicken deaths. The statement did not name the facility. The facility and about 30 other poultry farms within about a six-mile radius of the site are under quarantine. “Animal health is our top priority,” said Dr. Charles Hatcher, the state veterinarian. “With this HPAI detection, we are moving quickly and aggressively to prevent the virus from spreading.” The U.S. Department of Agriculture said 73,500 chickens are in the facility’s flock. Officials said HPAI poses no risk to the food supply, and no affected chickens entered the food chain. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HPAI can cause up to 100 percent mortality in flocks, often within 48 hours. “Many Tennessee families rely on the poultry industry for their livelihoods, and the state is working closely with local, county and federal partners and the poultry industry to control the situation and protect the flocks that are critical to our state’s economy,” Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam said. According to the Tennessee Poultry Association, there are more than 1,650 commercial broiler and breeder houses on more than 550 family farms in the state. The state ranks 13th nationally in broiler production and processing with more than 6 million birds per week at five plants. The statement said the most recent U.S. detection of HPAI was in January 2016 in a commercial turkey flock in Indiana. More than 414,000 turkeys and chickens were euthanized to contain the outbreak. In 2015, U.S. poultry producers, primarily in the upper Midwest, lost more than 48 million birds to bird flu. Minnesota, the country’s top turkey producer, and Iowa, the top chicken-egg producer, were the hardest-hit states.
|
5846
|
Indiana health agency urges residents to get tested for STDs.
|
State health officials are urging Indiana residents to get tested for sexually transmitted diseases as the nation marks STD Awareness Month during April.
|
true
|
Sexually transmitted diseases, Chlamydia, Health, Gonorrhea, Syphilis, Indiana
|
The Indiana State Department of Health said Thursday that chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis are of particular concern in the state. Indiana has nearly 31,000 cases of chlamydia, 9,500 cases of gonorrhea and 800 cases of primary and secondary syphilis reported in 2016. State Health Commissioner Kris Box warns that STDs could cause serious health problems, including brain and nervous system damage, infertility and babies born prematurely. People with such diseases also are more likely to transmit HIV. Most STDs can be treated but are hard to find out as they often have no symptoms. Box urges anyone who is sexually active to get tested annually.
|
2354
|
Marijuana fans pack 4/20 events in Colorado, Washington state.
|
Thousands of marijuana enthusiasts gathered in Colorado and Washington state over the weekend for an annual celebration of cannabis culture with rallies, concerts and trade shows in the first two U.S. states to legalize recreational marijuana.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Voters in both Western states approved ballot initiatives in 2012 allowing personal possession and use of marijuana by anyone aged 21 and or older for purposes of just getting high, though public consumption of pot remains illegal. In January the world’s first state-licensed retail marijuana outlets opened for business in Colorado, and stores in Washington are set to follow suit later this year. Both states are among 20 that have already removed criminal sanctions for medical use of marijuana. The federal government still classifies marijuana as an illegal narcotic, but the Obama administration has given states new leeway to experiment with legalized cannabis. In Denver’s Civic Center Park near the state capitol, revelers on Sunday gathered to hear music and listened to speakers during a weekend event that organizers billed as the “world’s largest 4/20 rally.” The date of April 20, or 4/20, corresponds to the numerical code widely recognized within the cannabis subculture as a symbol for all things marijuana. Police officers standing by on the fringes of the Denver festival issued 63 citations on Sunday, most for smoking pot in public - a ticket that carries a fine of $150. About half as many were cited on Saturday, police said. At least eight individuals were taken to a detoxification facility for treatment during the two days, police said. Denver police spokesman Sonny Jackson said officers have refrained from wading into the crowd to arrest violators, but instead were citing people who openly defied the public consumption ban. “Those ticketed were blatantly in violation of state law and city ordinances,” Jackson said. Organizers of the rally and city officials beefed up security at the event after three people were wounded by gunfire at last year’s rally. Separately, the Cannabis Cup, a trade show sponsored by High Times magazine, drew sold-out crowds over the weekend at a Denver convention venue. The two-day event featured marijuana sampling and workshops, such as how to open a pot shop, cultivation tips, and how to talk to children about weed, according to the event’s website. Rachel O’Bryan, spokeswoman for Smart Colorado, an organization that advocates for stricter enforcement of marijuana laws, said the cannabis industry needs to do more to police its own. “People are flouting the law by openly consuming,” she said. “We’re concerned about the message that sends to our kids.” In Seattle, several hundred people who paid $15 a head crowded the cavernous interior of a former brewery where Rainier Beer was made for decades to attend a 4/20 gathering organized by sponsors of the city’s annual Hempfest rally. Reggae music played over loudspeakers and the air inside was thick with the sweet, skunky odor of cannabis. But no police were visible at the event, which organizers deliberately held on private space leased from the brewery owners in an industrial section of the city south of downtown. The gathering featured a workshop on how to roll a joint with an entire ounce (28 grams) of marijuana - the legal limit for personal possession in the state - as well as vendors selling pipes and other paraphernalia, and a blind-toke test in which participants tried to distinguish between different strains of pot by sampling them. Attendees ranged from middle-aged baby boomers to a younger crowd from the so-called millennial generation. A cheer from the crowd went up at precisely 4:20 p.m. local time, as many attendees milling about outside lit joints and pipes simultaneously, sending puffs of smoke into the air followed by raucous fits of coughing. One woman in the crowd accepted a joint handed her from a bearded bystander. “You look just like Jesus,” she exclaimed in an apparent reference to the event coinciding with Easter Sunday. “How does it feel to be risen?” Doug Medina, 54, said he traveled hundreds of miles with his wife and daughter from Billings, Montana, to Seattle for the 4/20 weekend celebrations there. “It feels a little more open than it did five or 10 years ago,” he said while smoking a joint outside the brewery.
|
28402
|
"In August 2018, ""researchers"" provided a ""warning"" about the spread of the ""flesh-eating STD"" donovanosis."
|
"What's true: Authorities in the U.K. disclosed information showing that a woman in England had been infected with donovanosis, in the preceding 12 months. If left untreated, the ulcers which commonly accompany donovanosis can spread and destroy healthy tissue around the genitals. What's false: Researchers did not issue a warning about donovanosis or provide evidence that the disease is ""making the rounds"" or ""making a comeback"" rather than being a very rare disease with one recently-documented diagnosis in the U.K. Donovanosis ulcers will not spread and damage healthy tissue (i.e. become ""flesh-eating"") unless they are left untreated."
|
mixture
|
Medical, sexually transmitted disease
|
In August 2018, several news outlets around the world reported on a rare sexually-transmitted infection contracted by a woman in England, offering that information under scary-sounding headlines which raised the specter of a “flesh-eating STD” running rampant. Fox affiliates WFLD (in Chicago) and WTTG (in Washington D.C.) both reported “‘Flesh-eating’ STD allegedly making the rounds,” while the network’s Rockford, Illinois, affiliate WQRF went with the grammatically challenged “‘Flesh-eating’ STD causes genitals to ‘rot away’ making the rounds.” These headlines created the impression that an unusually dangerous or gruesome STD was increasing in its virality or prevalence. Perhaps the most egregious example of this representation came from San Francisco ABC affiliate KGO-TV, which offered the headline “Researchers warn of resurgence of flesh eating STD after it’s found in England”: Neither KGO-TV’s article nor the accompanying video segment provided any details about the purported “warning” or the “researchers” who had supposedly given it, nor any explanation of what was meant by a “resurgence” of the disease or the claim that it was “making a comeback.” The basis of these sensationalized reports was a 22 August article from the English Lancashire Post newspaper, which read as follows: The first case of a super-rare sexually transmitted disease which causes the genitals to erupt into flesh easting ulcers has been diagnosed in Southport. According to an FOI [Freedom of Information request] submitted by online pharmacy chemist-4-u.com, the unusual sexually transmitted disease has been diagnosed in a woman between the age of 15 and 25 in the past 12 months in the region. If left untreated, donovanosis causes nasty genital ulcers which grow and spread before flesh in the groin region starts to eat itself. There have been no previous cases of the the disease, which is usually only found in far-flung tropical and subtropical countries such as southeast India, Guyana and New Guinea. The British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) say they have carried out past searches for UK cases, but appear to have drawn a blank. This original article gave the reader plenty of important context, much of it missing from subsequent reporting by U.S. news outlets. Firstly, the disease is “super-rare,” and the basis of the article is a single diagnosis, itself apparently unprecedented in the U.K. So not only did U.S. news reports mislead viewers and readers by claiming “researchers” had “warned” about the disease (donovanosis), but they did so on the basis of just one diagnosis of a person living in Southport, near Liverpool — thousands of miles away from those news outlets’ American audiences. As for claims that donovanosis is “making the rounds” or that a “resurgence” in the spread of the disease has occurred, nothing in the original Lancashire Post report (or anywhere else) supported those contentions. Any claim that a disease is becoming more prevalent or undergoing a “resurgence” must first provide data to demonstrate what its prevalence was during an earlier period of time, and then make a methodologically robust comparison with its prevalence during a more recent period of time. It must also clearly explain the geographical area or areas in which this putative resurgence is taking place. A single (apparently unprecedented) diagnosis of a disease in England does not constitute a trend, and certainly not one with any epidemiological implications for viewers in Illinois, Washington, D.C., and California. Second, the Lancashire Post article provided some context on what was meant by “flesh-eating.” As Popular Science noted, “‘Flesh-eating’ is just a scary way of saying an infection is destroying tissue.” In this case, the disease (donovanosis) only begins to destroy healthy tissue (i.e., becomes “flesh-eating”) if ulcers attendant with it are left untreated and allowed to spread: Left unchecked, the ulcerations can spread and eat away at healthy tissue — this is what happens when many sorts of bacterial infections in your skin go untreated. This is not a fate commonly associated with Donovanosis, nor is it a fate unique to Donovanosis (or, for that matter, sexually transmitted infections). “Flesh-eating” is just a scary way of saying an infection is destroying tissue. Left totally untreated, Donovanosis can be dangerous. But totally untreated, gonorrhea and chlamydia can also be dangerous. So can a sore throat. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the treatment of donovanosis (also known as granuloma inguinale) can be tricky, consisting of at least three weeks on oral antibiotics with the possibility of relapse after between six and eighteen months. However, serious destruction of tissue is not a necessary consequence of being infected with donovanosis. So the “flesh-eating STD” which formed the basis of so many frightening news reports and headlines in August 2018 was only “flesh-eating” under certain uncommon and preventable circumstances. Nothing in the original Lancashire Post article established that the infection actually reached this stage in the single case of the woman they reported on. While readers should of course take the usual precautions in order to protect themselves and others from contracting any sexually-transmitted diseases, the manner in which several U.S. news outlets described a single diagnosis of donovanosis in England had the effect of sensationalizing the implications for the public and included some elements of misleading or erroneous misinformation.
|
2938
|
UK lawmakers criticize govt's stockpiling of Roche drug Tamiflu.
|
British lawmakers on Friday criticized government spending of 424 million pounds ($702 million) to stockpile Roche’s medicine Tamiflu, saying doubts about the drug’s effectiveness suggest it may not be money well spent.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Parliament’s influential Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said it was “surprised and concerned” to discover that information on methods and results of clinical trials of such prescribed drugs “is routinely withheld”, and said there was a “lack of consensus over how well Tamiflu ... actually works”. “The case for stockpiling antiviral medicines at the current level is based on judgment rather than on evidence of their effectiveness during an influenza pandemic,” said Richard Bacon, a leading member of the committee. He added that as well as spending more than 420 million pounds on stockpiling Tamiflu, an antiviral medicine, the Department of Health was forced to write off 74 million pounds of that as a result of poor record-keeping by the National Health Service. “Before spending money in future to maintain the stockpile the (health) department needs to review what level of coverage is appropriate,” he said. Tamiflu has been approved by regulators worldwide and is stockpiled by many governments in case of a global flu outbreak. Sales of the drug hit close to $3 billion in 2009, due to the H1N1 swine flu pandemic, although they have since declined. But some researchers claim there is little evidence Tamiflu works and have lobbied since 2009 for Swiss drugmaker Roche to hand over all its data from clinical trials of the medicine. After a lengthy fight, Roche agreed last year that it would hand over the data to outside researchers at the Cochrane Collaboration, a non-profit group that reviews trial data to assess the value of drugs. The PAC said it was “extremely concerning that there has been a five-year delay and that there continues to be a lack of clarity” over whether medicines regulators and safety authorities had access to full trial results. Beyond the Tamiflu situation, the committee said it was concerned that information on methods and results of clinical trials is routinely and legally withheld. “This longstanding regulatory and cultural failure impacts on all of medicine, and undermines the ability of clinicians, researchers and patients to make informed decisions about which treatment is best,” it said in its report. The PAC report forms part of a wider debate about access to data from clinical trials conducted by the pharmaceutical industry to test the efficacy of and win marketing approval for new drugs. Critics say drugmakers routinely hide or bury trial data which is unfavorable. Tracey Brown, director of a group called Sense About Science, which a year ago launched AllTrials - a campaign fighting for all data from all trials of all prescribed drugs to be made available - said the PAC report “adds to the clamor of voices” calling for more transparency in the drug industry. “There is no excuse for not publishing results, but a huge public benefit to having a complete picture of what was found in trials conducted on treatments currently available to patients,” she said. ($1 = 0.6038 British pounds)
|
4458
|
Gene-edited food quietly arrives in restaurant cooking oil.
|
Somewhere in the Midwest, a restaurant is frying foods with oil made from gene-edited soybeans. That’s according to the company making the oil, which says it’s the first commercial use of a gene-edited food in the U.S.
|
true
|
Genetics, Health, North America, Genetically modified organisms, Science, Trans fats, Technology
|
Calyxt said it can’t reveal its first customer for competitive reasons, but CEO Jim Blome said the oil is “in use and being eaten.” The Minnesota-based company is hoping the announcement will encourage the food industry’s interest in the oil, which it says has no trans fats and a longer shelf life than other soybean oils. Whether demand builds remains to be seen, but the oil’s transition into the food supply signals gene editing’s potential to alter foods without the controversy of conventional GMOs, or genetically modified organisms. Among the other gene-edited crops being explored: Mushrooms that don’t brown, wheat with more fiber, better-producing tomatoes, herbicide-tolerant canola and rice that doesn’t absorb soil pollution as it grows. Unlike conventional GMOs, which are made by injecting DNA from other organisms, gene editing lets scientists alter traits by snipping out or adding specific genes in a lab. Startups including Calyxt say their crops do not qualify as GMOs because what they’re doing could theoretically be achieved with traditional crossbreeding. So far, U.S. regulators have agreed and said several gene-edited crops in development do not require special oversight. It’s partly why companies see big potential for gene-edited crops. “They’ve been spurred on by the regulatory decisions by this administration,” said Greg Jaffe of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a health watchdog group. But given the many ways gene editing can be used, Jaydee Hanson of the Center for Food Safety said regulators should consider the potential implications of each new crop. He cited the example of produce gene-edited to not brown. “You’ve designed it to sit around longer. Are there problems with that?” he said. Already, most corn and soy grown in the U.S. are herbicide-tolerant GMOs. Just last week, regulators cleared a hurdle for salmon genetically modified to grow faster. The fish is the first genetically modified animal approved for human consumption in the U.S. Though regulators say GMOs are safe, health and environmental worries have persisted, and companies will soon have to disclose when products have “bioengineered” ingredients. Calyxt says its oil does not qualify as a GMO. The oil is made from soybeans with two inactivated genes to produce more heart-healthy fats and no trans fats. The company says the oil also has a longer shelf life, which could reduce costs for food makers or result in longer-lasting products. Soybean oils took a hit when regulators moved to ban oils with trans fats. Other trans fat-free soybean oils have become available in the years since, but the industry has found it difficult to win back food makers that already switched to different oils, said John Motter, former chair of the United Soybean Board. Calyxt said the first customer is a company in the Midwest with multiple restaurant and foodservice locations, such as building cafeterias. It said the customer is using it in dressings and sauces and for frying, but didn’t specify if the oil’s benefits are being communicated to diners. Calyxt is working on other gene-edited crops that it says are faster to develop than conventional GMOs, which require regulatory studies. But Tom Adams, CEO of biotech company Pairwise, said oversight of gene-edited foods could become stricter if public attitude changes. “You should never think of regulation as settled,” Adams said. Pairwise is partnering with Monsanto-parent Bayer on developing gene-edited crops. Views on gene-editing vary too. The National Organic Standards Board said foods made with gene editing cannot qualify as organic . And last year, Europe’s highest court said gene-edited foods should be subject to the same rules as conventional GMOs. ____ Follow Candice Choi at www.twitter.com/candicechoi ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
|
9012
|
Multiple Studies Show Freespira® Eliminates Panic Attacks in 80% of Patients
|
This news release claims that 80% of patients with panic attacks due to anxiety could get relief after 4 weeks of using a biofeedback device and training package known as Freespira. The device includes a sensor to measure carbon dioxide in the breath of a patient, and a tablet computer and an app to help them understand and change their breathing and potentially avoid panic attacks. The Freespira system is FDA cleared to market to patients for at-home use with physician guidance. But the release does not give us the date or publication of corroborating studies and simply says there was a presentation at a conference about these results. We are left unable to judge the news value of the latest study from such scant details. To our knowledge, the most recent study about this biofeedback device was published a year ago. Anxiety disorders are very common in the United States. The National Institutes of Mental Health estimates that almost one-third of adults will experience this once in a lifetime. But the release does not give readers enough information to judge whether there is new proof of effectiveness from a just completed research study, or whether this announcement is referencing old studies in a conference presentation. Note: We reviewed a story in 2015 about this same device and reviewers then had some similar concerns about the evidence surrounding the device, but found the author did a responsible job reporting on the device.
|
false
|
Freespira,Palo Alto Health Sciences
|
The news release does not give us the cost of the Freespira treatment. This is especially troubling since the release claims that the treatment reduces overall costs “by 50%” after a year of treatment. When we reviewed a news story about Freespira in 2015, the monthly cost was reported as $500. The release does not give us absolute numbers for benefits. It offers some percentages for improvement, but does not show in detail how the improvement was measured to get those numbers. Here are some of the percentages offered in the release: “Two studies reported nearly 80% of Freespira-treated patients were panic attack free at 12 months post-treatment. Two additional studies reported that patients with mixed anxiety disorders and low exhaled CO2 at baseline were less responsive and/or discontinued treatment with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or Acceptance Commitment Therapy. “Early data from a fifth study reported on Freespira treatment for patients with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Ninety percent of patients in this study experienced a significant improvement in PTSD symptoms at two months and six months post-treatment.” Unfortunately, the release provided no guidance on where to look for any of these these studies so those interested in the device could learn more or assess the study protocol of evidence. The release does not mention harms. (For a tutorial on how unsafe medical devices have been allowed into the marketplace, see our toolkit article.) The release could have linked us to clinical research publications supporting the claims, but it did not do that. Without any access to those publications, the evidence quality is low. There was no disease mongering. We are not told the source of money for any specific clinical trials. The release was written by Palo Alto Health Sciences, the company that sells the Freespira system. But we aren’t told if the company supported any of the clinical trials financially and without access to the studies, we can’t look up any potential conflicts of interest disclosures. The release does not discuss alternatives. Cognitive behavioral therapy, medications and startegies for managing stress are all known therapies for anxiety disorders. The release did not compare effectiveness of the device therapy with any other known therapies. The device has apparently been commercially available for many years but this is not specifically addressed in the release. The release does not provide proof of the claim that there is a “new” clinical research study supporting the headline. The headline word “eliminates” seems unjustifiable. We aren’t given enough information about numbers of patients studied, or the long-term follow up that would justify that word.
|
15607
|
Ben Carson is running for president to ‘eliminate dependency on government.’ But he doesn’t mention that he grew up in public schools, got public housing and food stamps, got free glasses from a government program, was helped by Affirmative Action, and got Pell Grants for college.
|
A popular liberal Facebook meme aims to hold up Carson’s past reliance on public assistance against him as he calls for eliminating government dependence in high-profile speeches. The meme gets many details of Carson’s biography right, though it also jumps to some conclusions in a few places. More complicated is the comparison between Carson’s past and his plans if elected president. Carson has said he wants to eliminate government dependency, but he also has made clear he intends to maintain programs public safety nets for people who need them. Carson hasn’t elaborated what programs fall into what category, and how those he benefited from would be treated. Overall, the meme is partially accurate but leaves out important details and takes things out of context.
|
mixture
|
National, Candidate Biography, Welfare, Occupy Democrats,
|
"With Ben Carson officially in the ring of Republican presidential contenders, Democratic social media activists are using his famous scraps-to-scalpel narrative against him. Carson, 63, was raised in a single-parent, impoverished household in Detroit and went on to become a Yale University-educated neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital. Carson, in 1987, was the first doctor to separate twins conjoined at the head. The Facebook group Occupy Democrats accuses Carson of wanting to take away some of the very same government benefits that helped support Carson’s family. The Facebook meme shared May 4, 2015, says, ""Tea party icon Dr. Ben Carson is running for president to ‘eliminate dependency on government.’ "" ""But he doesn’t mention that he grew up in public schools, got public housing and food stamps, got free glasses from a government program, was helped by Affirmative Action, and got Pell Grants for college. ""Hypocrisy, much?"" A reader asked us to look into Carson’s biography and see if the facts align with the meme’s claims. The meme is rather thinly sourced to a blogpost that links back to another post that links to another post (as memes do). So we’ll deal with the claims line by line. ‘Grew up in public schools’ This checks out. Raised by a single mother with a third-grade education, Carson grew up very poor and attended public schools in Detroit, including Higgins Elementary School, Wilson Junior High School, Hunter Junior High School and Southwestern High School, where he graduated third in his class. In his 1990 autobiography Gifted Hands, Carson describes how he briefly attended fourth grade at a small private church school when his mother, Sonya, moved him and his older brother, Curtis, to live with relatives in Boston after the Carsons’ father moved out. His mother thought the boys would get a better education there than at the public schools. She was wrong. ""Though Curtis and I both made good grades, the work was not as demanding as it could have been, and when we transferred back to the Detroit public school system I had quite a shock,"" Carson wrote. ‘Got public housing’ The details here are a little thin. When Carson’s mother divorced his father, she received their ""modest house"" in the settlement. Carson described it as the size of most modern garages, less than 1,000 square feet. But as the family’s financial situation deteriorated, they were forced to ""move into the Boston tenements"" with his aunt and uncle. It seems likely from his words that the tenements were for very poor families likely receiving government assistance, perhaps even for the homes. Carson describes ""armies of roaches,"" ""hordes of rats"" and omnipresent ""winos and drunks."" When Sonya Carson saved enough to move back to Detroit, the family moved into a multifamily dwelling in Detroit in an ""upper lower-class neighborhood,"" he wrote. Carson doesn’t outright describe the houses as Section 8 or federally funded projects. Other examinations of his life have, such as a Success.com article that described this second Detroit home as in ""Detroit’s downtown housing projects"" and ""the ghetto."" Eventually his mother saved enough to return to the Carsons’ original home in a better neighborhood. Got ‘food stamps’ This claim checks out. In his autobiography, Carson recounted the humiliation he felt using food stamps from his mom to pay for bread and milk. He would hide from classmates in the grocery store until it was safe to check out unnoticed. As hard as his mother worked in various domestic jobs, it wasn’t enough to keep the family completely off of public assistance, he wrote. ""By the time I went into ninth grade, Mother had made such strides that she received nothing except food stamps,"" he wrote. ""She couldn't have provided for us and kept up the house without that subsidy."" ‘Got free glasses from a government program’ This, too, is correct. An eye exam in the fifth grade proved life-changing for Carson. In the fourth chapter of Gifted Hands, he says it wasn’t until he failed to read letters on a chart on the wall that he realized his eyesight had deteriorated over time, contributing in part to his struggles at school. ""The school provided glasses for me, free,"" he wrote. Carson counts his glasses as a significant reason for his improvement in school because he could finally see the chalkboard. Carson wanted to go out of state for college, even though the University of Michigan in his home state ""actively recruited black students"" and was willing to waive application fees for low-income students, he wrote. He narrowed his sights on either Harvard or Yale, and decided to go with Yale after an impressive win against Harvard on College Bowl on TV. He started classes at Yale in 1969 and received a 90 percent scholarship, he wrote. Were affirmative action policies to thank for his admission? Carson’s resume was impressive — he was third in his class, advanced so high within ROTC that he was offered a scholarship to West Point, and had high test scores. Still, Carson says he knew his minority background was valuable, saying ""most of the top colleges were scrambling to enroll Blacks."" ""The school reps flocked around me because of my high academic achievements, and because I had done exceptionally well on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), ranking somewhere in the low ninetieth percentile--again, unheard of from a student in the inner city of Detroit,"" he wrote. After graduating from Yale with a degree in psychology, Carson was accepted into the University of Michigan Medical School, which he chose because it was in his home state, meaning lower tuition, and it was highly rated. In 1976, he applied for his residency in neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, which he said took only two interns a year. The school chose Carson, who said he made an impression on his interviewer by sharing a love for classical music. ""Years later Dr. Udvarhelyi told me that he had made a strong case for my being accepted to Dr. Long, the chairman,"" he wrote. "" ‘Ben,’ he said to me, ‘I was impressed with your grades, your honors and recommendations, and the splendid way you handled yourself in the interview.’ "" Carson remained convinced that their exchange over a classical music concert gave him an edge. He did not, however, mention his race. ‘Got Pell grants for college’ This claim, too, is unproven and in many ways the weakest claim tracing Carson’s life story. Carson definitely received financial assistance to pay for college, but he does not offer details about the grants, at least not in Gifted Hands or to reporters in the last two decades. He also worked during the summers to help pay for other costs during school. The only mention of ""Ben Carson"" and ""Pell Grants"" in a LexisNexis search is in the context of his criticism of Obama’s proposal to offer free community college. ""First of all, it is only free if no one has to pay for it. It is not free if we rob Peter to pay Paul,"" Carson wrote in a February column. ""Secondly, Pell grants already exist to pay for community college expenses for needy students. For those who are not needy, there is an old-fashioned remedy that is very effective called work. In fact work might even be beneficial for those who are needy. It certainly provided some very valuable experiences for me."" The article the meme holds up as support for its claims references a since-deleted post from a Facebook user who said Carson ""benefited from affirmative action to enter college; used federal loans and Pell grants in undergrad school; benefited from affirmative action to enter medical school,"" and ""med school paid for with grant from USPHS."" We contacted the author about where he got this information via Facebook. We’ll update the story if anything becomes of it. Comparing Carson’s life story and his political platform The meme, of course, is trying to accomplish more than just recounting Carson’s biography. It’s also suggesting Carson would end many of the programs he benefited from growing up. That is the most difficult allegation to prove of all. Carson directly addressed this criticism May 4, 2015, the day he announced his run for president. ""Many people are critical of me because they say, ‘Carson wants to get rid of all the safety nets and welfare programs even though he must have benefited from them,’ "" he said, according to a Politico account. ""This is a blatant lie. I have no desire to get rid of safety nets for people who need them. I have a strong desire to get rid of programs that create dependency in able-bodied people."" This is similar to his response to a question about how he would get his message to minority voters at February’s 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference. ""I’m not interested in getting rid of the safety net,"" he said. ""I’m interested in getting rid of dependency, and I want us to find a way to allow people to excel in our society, and as more and more people hear that message, they will recognize who is truly on their side and who is trying to keep them suppressed and cultivate their votes."" Carson’s campaign website does not mention specific reforms to the safety net, but his rhetoric indicates he indeed wants to eliminate government dependency. What’s not clear is if that would involve axing the same programs that helped his family get by decades ago. For the record, we could not locate the exact quote referenced in the meme ""Eliminate dependency on government,"" though that language wouldn’t be out of character for Carson. Carson spokeswoman Deana Bass said Carson’s ""family did receive benefits briefly when he was growing up in Detroit,"" but didn’t answer our specific questions about whether he used Pell grants or grew up in public housing. Our ruling A popular liberal Facebook meme aims to hold up Carson’s past reliance on public assistance against him as he calls for eliminating government dependence in high-profile speeches. The meme gets many details of Carson’s biography right, though it also jumps to some conclusions in a few places. More complicated is the comparison between Carson’s past and his plans if elected president. Carson has said he wants to eliminate government dependency, but he also has made clear he intends to maintain programs public safety nets for people who need them. Carson hasn’t elaborated what programs fall into what category, and how those he benefited from would be treated. Overall, the meme is partially accurate but leaves out important details and takes things out of context."
|
31348
|
A commercial produced by Volkswagen employs suicide bomber imagery.
|
“We are prepared to pursue the two individuals but need to locate them to ensure the success of our legal claim,” the company said in a private memo, details of which have been obtained by MediaGuardian.co.uk.
|
false
|
Fauxtography, Advertisements, Volkswagen
|
The availability of the Internet as a tool to spread information quickly, cheaply, and (mostly) anonymously has enabled the advent of “viral marketing”: buzz-generating advertisements whose content is often unsuitable for traditional media (such as television) and is therefore distributed through “unofficial” channels such as social media and e-mail forwards. Viral ads may not be obvious about what product they’re promoting, or even obvious as advertisements at all. Companies often try to obscure the connections between themselves and their viral ads, sometimes claiming that promotions were “unauthorized” or “accidentally released.” Though this technique may be effective in generating publicity, it can also backfire: If someone does indeed produce an unauthorized viral ad that creates negative publicity for the business it supposedly promotes, how can a company prove it wasn’t behind it? This was the dilemma faced by Volkswagen in 2005 regarding a viral ad seemingly calculated to offend as many human beings as possible. The spot begins with a motorist leaving his house and hopping into his Volkswagen Polo — a motorist with a distinctly Middle Eastern appearance who sports a black-and-white checkered kaffiyeh like the one commonly associated in the public mind with the late Palestinian chairman Yasser Arafat (and thus, by extension, with terrorists and suicide bombers). After a short jaunt, the driver pulls up in front of a busy restaurant with curbside seating (as women holding babies, talking on cellphones, and just strolling down the street flash by in the background), pulls out a detonator, and depresses the button. Rather than causing widespread death and destruction, however, the muffled blast is completely contained by the car, leading to the end slogan: ‘Polo. Small but tough’: Muslim Culture Meets German Engineering, a 15-second commercial. Looks like VW is once again putting out a fine product. VW could never get away with this advertisement in the U.S. In the United Kingdom and Ireland it is the most popular TV commercial playing. People allegedly call in to learn the schedules for showing this commercial. So just who produced this offensive spot? The advertisement didn’t appear to be a spoof put together by some rogue amateur filmmakers, as its production values (e.g., shot on 35mm film, probably at a cost in the tens of thousands of dollars) would indicate, but Paul Buckett, a Volkswagen spokesman, denied that the automobile manufacturer had anything to do with it: Two creatives known to our advertising agency, DDB (Doyle Dane Bernbach) London, sent in this work on spec. The agency wouldn’t have anything to do it. I can only assume the people who made it put it on the web. We were horrified. This is not something we would consider using: it is in incredibly bad taste to depict suicide bombers. It gives the impression we’ve condoned or supported it, and is potentially very damaging to Volkswagen. Our legal department is planning an action …’ According to the UK newspaper The Guardian, the “suicide bomber” spot was created by the Lee and Dan team, a British pair who have produced a number of other advertisements (including virals) known for their quirkiness. The duo maintained that the clip was a self-promotional work not intended for public viewing: We made the advert for Volkswagen. We never really intended it for public consumption. It was principally something we made to show people in the industry but it got out somehow. About half the work we do is for our own purpose, it is self-promotional. The ad’s a comment on what’s happening at the moment. People see this on the news every day. The car is the hero that protects innocent people from someone with very bad intentions. The ad got out accidentally and spread like wildfire. We’re sorry if it has caused any offence. Others quoted by the Guardian concurred with the self-promotional nature of the spot, if not necessarily about its release being an “accident”: Matt Smith, of the ad agency Viral Factory, said he thought the advert had been made as a “test” in order to get work. “My suspicion is that it was made for a very small audience in order to get work. It’s such a risky piece — it wasn’t meant to be seen by a mass audience.” A spokesman for Volkswagen said the company was considering legal action and blamed the advert on “two young creatives who are trying to make a name for themselves”. “We don’t take these sorts of risks with our advertisements. We regard ourselves as honest and respectable.” On 26 January 2004, the Guardian reported they had located the director of the clip, Stuart Fryer, who disputed Lee and Dan’s claim its production had cost £40,000 and affirmed that the spot was not meant for public viewing: Both Lee and Dan have apologised for the film, which they said had a £40,000 budget, but have refused to identify themselves or explain how it was funded. But in a new development, MediaGuardian.co.uk has tracked down the director of the spoof advert, Stuart Fryer, 35. Breaking his silence for the first time, he said he was horrified by the reaction to the ad and had only ever meant it to be used on a showreel and never seen by the public. He disputed Lee and Dan’s estimate of its £40,000 cost, saying the cost had been “more like £400”. “If it cost that much I would like to know where the money went,” Mr Fryer said. “It was made in my spare time. It’s remarkable what you can do for such a low budget. “I just wanted it for show reel purposes, not seen by millions of people around the world. “I don’t want to offend people, I just want to make advertisements. I wanted to show it to the Saatchis and BBHs of this world. “Little did I know that the advert that I made would be sent out on the internet and create such a fuss — it’s shocked me.” Volkswagen also announced they would be initiating legal action against the video’s creators (although nothing more was reported about the case, so we assume the idea of pursuing a lawsuit was quietly dropped): After a week of prevarication, the car giant has decided to go ahead and sue the people behind the advert on the grounds that it was damaging its reputation around the world and falsely linked the VW with terrorism. “We are taking legal action but because it’s early stages we cannot comment further,” a Volkswagen spokesman said. But the company privately admitted that it cannot locate Lee and Dan, the London based advertising creative partnership who dreamed up the film, which has been seen around the world via the internet.
|
8352
|
As Myanmar farmers lose their land, sand mining for Singapore is blamed.
|
From a boat on the Salween River in southeastern Myanmar, Than Zaw Oo pointed to a brown stretch of water he said was once full of lush paddy fields.
|
true
|
Environment
|
“This used to be my land,” said the 51-year-old farmer, frowning at the murky waves. All but six of the 24 acres where he used to grow rice and vegetables have slipped into the water in recent years, he said. Another farmer, Than Tun, said he had lost 15 acres of his land to erosion. While official records were not available, other villagers backed their accounts. Farmers and politicians in Chaungzon township, just outside the southern town of Moulmein, worry that erosion in the area is being exacerbated by the ships that dredge its bed for sand each night. The sand is mainly bound for Singapore, the world’s biggest importer, for use in reclamation and construction projects. Both the Myanmar government and the company whose ships do the dredging in Chaungzon deny the dredging is causing the erosion. But the dispute highlights the fractious issue of sand-mining in Southeast Asia as Singapore is forced to look farther afield to slake its thirst for the mineral following bans on the trade in countries like Malaysia and Indonesia over environmental concerns. Sand mining has been blamed by scientists for damaging sensitive ecosystems around the world, accelerating coastal and riverine erosion, and exacerbating the frequency and severity of floods and droughts, according to a 2019 report by the U.N Environment Programme. Malaysia, formerly the biggest source of sand for Singapore, in 2018 introduced an outright ban on the export of sea sand, used for land reclamation, and imposed tighter controls on river sand, used mostly in construction. Cambodia made a similar move in 2017, while Indonesia banned exports to Singapore in 2007, causing a “sand crisis” that brought building activity almost to a halt. Singapore, an island state that has grown 25 percent since its independence in 1965 thanks largely to aggressive land reclamation, has since bolstered its stockpiles, according to sand traders. Officials in Myanmar and industry sources in Singapore say the bans have prompted Singapore to seek new supplies from countries like Myanmar. Almost 1 million tonnes of sand went from Myanmar to Singapore in 2018, earning over $6 million, according to the most recent UN data on the trade. That amount is expected to have increased substantially following the Malaysia bans, according to the Myanmar government. “Since the Philippines, Cambodia, and Vietnam almost completely stopped exporting sand to Singapore, the sand from Myanmar has become much more in demand,” said Aye Lwin, joint secretary-general of the Myanmar Port Authority, which grants licenses for sand-mining operations. The benefits of the mining – including tax revenues for the government – outweighed the costs, he said. “I believe it only causes little environmental damage,” Aye Lwin said. “But it generates funds for the government.” The Singapore-registered company dredging in Chaungzon, Starhigh Asia Pacific Pte Ltd., has extracted hundreds of thousands of tonnes of sand since 2013, according to the local member of Parliament, Kyi Kyi Mya. She said at least 150,000 tonnes were extracted in 2018-2019, but did not have the exact number for other years. Starhigh dredges the sand legally through a license with the local government that does not limit the amount of sand the company can extract. Most of the sand Starhigh extracts is sent to Singapore. The company last year bid to supply sand to JTC Corporation, a Singapore government agency for infrastructure development, according to a tender on a government procurement site. Starhigh also supplied sand for a JTC reclamation project in Singapore completed in 2018, according to Starhigh’s managing director, Si Thu Phyo. He said the sand for that project came from Myanmar as well as Vietnam and the Philippines. JTC referred questions from Reuters to Singapore’s Ministry of National Development, which said the country imports sand on a commercial basis and that suppliers are expected to abide by laws and regulations in source countries. The Myanmar government says the environmental impact of the dredging is minimal and necessary to clear waterways of built-up sediment. In 2014, the company paid compensation to local farmers who claimed that mining too close to the shore had led to landslides, according to Kyi Kyi Mya, the MP in Chaungzon. Starhigh did not comment on any compensation paid to farmers but said “whenever it is possible, we will help locals with small landfill work at our own cost.” Si Thu Phyo, the Starhigh managing director, told Reuters that erosion was present in the area before dredging work started. “Dredging is always an easy target when it comes to environmental complaints,” he said. “People don’t understand and are worried.” Riverbank erosion along the Salween is not an entirely new phenomenon, with factors including climate change worsening the problem by contributing to higher levels of flooding and siltation, said Vanessa Lamb, a geography lecturer at the University of Melbourne who has studied the river. She said that a lack of baseline data about the river made it difficult to track just how much sand dredging was affecting riverbank erosion. But in a 2019 research paper, Lamb said locals blamed accelerating erosion on the rise in sand-mining. It was not possible to verify those claims from local records or old photographs. Dr Aung Naing Oo, deputy speaker of the Mon state parliament and the author of a parliamentary report on sand extraction in the region, said there was little transparency around the industry. He said that there was no consistent monitoring process and that authorities were not checking how much sand was being extracted or whether companies were taking material only from agreed sites. For now, the government says it does not have plans to end the dredging or compensate farmers for lost land. Than Zaw Oo, the farmer in Chaungzon, said he is now in debt after borrowing more than $2,600 to pay for embankments in an attempt to keep erosion at bay. “I am lost and I don’t know what to do,” he said. “The sadness is just beyond words.”
|
36216
|
"Tim Allen shared ""pearls of wisdom"" about Trump 2020, Chelsea Clinton, Maxine Waters, and the putative death of America should the sitting president not be re-elected."
|
Tim Allen ‘Trump 2020 or America Is Dead’ Commentary
|
false
|
Disinformation, Fact Checks
|
"In late August and early September 2019, a number of Facebook users shared “pearls of wisdom” attributed to actor Tim Allen; topics discussed included United States President Donald Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign, the death of America as we know it, former First Daughter Chelsea Clinton, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-California), and “fighting evil.”The first iteration of the missive we were able to find credited to Tim Allen appeared on August 29 2019 (archived here), in the public Facebook group “Trump 2020!” It read:Tim Allen is credited with writing this. From :Tim Allen Here are some interesting points to think about prior to 2020, especially to my friends on the fence, like moderate Democrats, Libertarians and Independents and the never Trump Republicans and those thinking of “walking away” from the Democratic party. Women are upset at Trump’s naughty words — they also bought 80 million copies of 50 Shades of Gray. Not one feminist has defended Sarah Sanders. It seems women’s rights only matter if those women are liberal. No Border Walls. No voter ID laws. Did you figure it out yet? But wait… there’s more. Chelsea Clinton got out of college and got a job at NBC that paid $900,000 per year. Her mom flies around the country speaking out about white privilege. And just like that, they went from being against foreign interference in our elections to allowing non-citizens to vote in our elections. President Trump’s wall costs less than the Obamacare website. Let that sink in, America. We are one election away from open borders, socialism, gun confiscation, and full-term abortion nationally. We are fighting evil. They sent more troops and armament to arrest Roger Stone than they sent to defend Benghazi. 60 years ago, Venezuela was 4th on the world economic freedom index. Today, they are 179th and their citizens are dying of starvation. In only 10 years, Venezuela was destroyed by democratic socialism. Russia donated $0.00 to the Trump campaign. Russia donated $145,600,000 to the Clinton Foundation. But Trump was the one investigated! Nancy Pelosi invited illegal aliens to the State of the Union. President Trump Invited victims of illegal aliens to the State of the Union. Let that sink in. A socialist is basically a communist who doesn’t have the power to take everything from their citizens at gunpoint … Yet! How do you walk 3000 miles across Mexico without food or support and show up at our border 100 pounds overweight and with a cellphone? Alexandria Ocasio Cortez wants to ban cars, ban planes, give out universal income and thinks socialism works. She calls Donald Trump crazy. Bill Clinton paid $850,000 to Paula Jones To get her to go away. I don’t remember the FBI raiding his lawyer’s office. I wake up every day and I am grateful that Hillary Clinton is not the president of the United States of America. The same media that told me Hillary Clinton had a 95% chance of winning now tells me Trump’s approval ratings are low. “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”— Margaret Thatcher Maxine Waters opposes voter ID laws; She thinks that they are racist. You need to have a photo ID to attend her town hall meetings. Trump — They’re not after me. They’re after you. I’m just in their way. Read that again. Again copy and paste.From there, a number of sharers appeared to follow the directive in the post’s final line: “copy and paste.” By copying and pasting rather than sharing, iterations of the post would fan out across users, accruing a handful of shares unique to that post. We were unable to locate an iteration attributed to Tim Allen published prior to August 29 2019. Posts often featured a unique title of sorts, occasionally formatted to suggest Allen sent the message as an email:“TIM ALLEN – ON TRUMP”“PUTTING IT OUT THERE. Tim Allen is credited with writing this.”“Interesting 🤔🤔🤔 Tim Allen is credited with writing this. From :Tim Allen”“Let this sink in. Wake up America! Tim Allen is credited with writing this.”“Whatever your feelings for Trump, these are some interesting points that Tim Allen makes. Put your hatred aside and think about these observations.”Allen maintained a verified Twitter account, but no references to the “pearls of wisdom” message appeared on it.It is not uncommon for email or social media forwards to languish in virtual obscurity until such point they’re misattributed to a specific celebrity, which then gives those forwards a new life — Morgan Freeman is one common author of many dubiously attributed writings, and George Carlin is another. Allen is well-liked for his work on the Toy Story franchise (as Buzz Lightyear), as well as for the 1990s-era sitcom Home Improvement. He has also gone on record to express mild conservative viewpoints, context that provides a veneer of believability to social media sharers:The star of “Last Man Standing,” which returns on Fox after [2017]’s cancellation by ABC, will have another opportunity to play Mike Baxter, a conservative character in a scripted TV environment where liberals are far more commonplace.In “Man’s” first, six-season incarnation, “We were sticking it to progressives — not Democrats. The really noisy part of the Democratic Party, just like the really noisy part of the Republican Party, is easy pickings. We were doing that constantly.”… Some fans theorized that “Man” was canceled for its politics, but [executive producer Kevin] Abbott says it had more to do with money, because ABC didn’t own the show. (Fox does. )Mike’s fiscal conservatism will be apparent this season when he handles business regulations and environmental studies, especially when dealing with his company’s “People’s Republic of California store,” a Communist allusion Allen makes to the People’s Republic of China.A 2018 article about Allen’s relationship to the character he played on Last Man Standing delved into the actor’s positions versus the character’s:Allen, who was born in Colorado and grew up in Michigan, is not a fan of what he calls the liberal “bubble of Hollywood” and agrees with some of Mike’s opinions. “I love that he constantly jabs at California. Even my liberal buddies go, ‘Did we just get another tax here? '”The actor is also a conservative, but he separates himself from Mike.“Tim Allen is not Mike Baxter. If you want Tim Allen’s opinion, come see me in Vegas,” he says of his stand-up act. “I’m much much more anarchist-thinking because I’m a comedian. I take shots at everybody, but it’s literally to make you laugh.”At the same time the article excerpted above was published (September 2018), Allen addressed questions about his view of Trump head-on in an Entertainment Weekly interview. In the exchanges below, Allen’s responses to an interviewer is highlighted in bold:Despite a lot of assumptions about you online, you haven’t, from what I’ve read, actually ever endorsed Trump. You actually endorsed Kasich right?Yeah, I endorsed Kasich. Politically I’m kind of an anarchist if you see my stand-up. I’m for responsible government that actually does what we pay them to do. I’ve worked different jobs and I’ve had a colorful past and I pay a lot in taxes. I wish we got more for our money. Whatever political party is for more responsible use of our money — that’s all I meant. In Los Angeles, I’m concerned about the 26,000 homeless people and I do the best I can. I’m concerned about keeping my roads and stuff clean in North Hollywood. Generally, the government is no help and people have to do that themselves. Kasich said that in a speech — that the government can’t do stuff that you won’t do yourself. Jump in! Do whatever it takes to get people engaged — not putting on a hoodie and screaming in the streets — but actually figure out how to help North Hollywood or Encino or wherever you live to get better. My political party is that I’ve never liked taxes, period, so whatever that means … I don’t like paying people who never seem to do what I would do with my money. I always thought it would be funny if I had a little menu on my tax returns where I could tell them where my money would go[. ][…]But you’re assumed to be a Trump supporter, and you did attend his inauguration. So I guess what I’m wondering is … it’s been a year and a half, after all we’ve seen, as a self-described “fiscal conservative’ in Hollywood whose TV show dabbles in political humor: Are you a Trump fan, at this point, or not?You know … it’s a very loaded question. I’ve met [Trump] at the charity event years ago, and that certainly doesn’t fit with the man who tweets. I’ve met a lot of people in private whose public persona is a bit off. My perception is “let’s see what he gets done.” Let’s stop banging on the pilot’s door and trying to pull the guy out of his seat while he’s still flying. You might not like how he’s flying the plane but let’s let him land it. Do I like him or agree with him? … I don’t know. Somebody got this NAFTA thing done. How did that happen? It’s like a [sleight] of hand with this dude. There’s this smoke and smelly food but over here he just fixed a pothole. The theater of this is fascinating. He doesn’t do it very attractively but you don’t even realize the economy is doing better. Is it? There’s so much drama. Maybe it took this type of guy to get stuff done because it was so stuck in the mud. I’m just watching the theater of it and trying to keep my personal opinions out of it. What difference does it make whether I like him?Allen confirmed that in the 2016 primary, he endorsed Trump challenger John Kasich. Allen went on to express lukewarm feelings for Trump, ultimately concluding that his fans ought not be invested in whether or not he liked the president. Overall, Allen expressed the position that the Trump he’d met was unlike the man portrayed in the news. Given that Allen’s feelings on Trump were openly ambivalent and ambiguous at best (and his social media did not feature the “pearls of wisdom” commentary), it seems unlikely he was the writer of the circulating post.Another compelling datapoint indicated Allen was not the screed’s original author. The message was first credited to Allen on August 29 2019. Five days earlier, on August 24, the same message was shared to the Facebook page of a different celebrity — Ted Nugent. While most of the message was intact, the introduction was different:If you can come up with crazier more illogical dangerous corrupt criminal abuse of power please let me know. The Democrats are the enemies of mankind. Trump 2020 or America is dead.Share this with everyone you possibly can. Maybe there is hope for a good America.Pearls of wisdomLife is not a fairy tale. If you lose your shoe at midnight, you’re drunk.Crucially, the message was copied and pasted without attribution and shared by a Facebook user the following day, August 25 2019. Incidentally, that user was named Tim Allen — but he was clearly not the actor Tim Allen.Nugent’s message and the version attributed to Tim Allen converged at the next line:If women are upset at Trump’s naughty words, who in the hell bought 80 million copies of ‘50 Shades of Gray’?That comment was shared to Twitter by actor Kevin Sorbo in June 2019 in a larger series of tweets (which were not unlike the Facebook “Tim Allen” forward):If women are upset at Trump’s naughty words, who in the hell bought 80 million copies of 50 Shades of Gray?— Kevin Sorbo (@ksorbs) June 16, 2019The next eight passages were also tweeted by Sorbo that same month:Jim Comey answered “I don’t know,” “I don’t recall,” and “I don’t remember” 236 times while under oath. But Remembered enough to write a book …..— Kevin Sorbo (@ksorbs) June 16, 2019Chelsea Clinton got out of college and got a job with NBC that paid $900,000 per year. Her mom flies around the country speaking out about white privilege.— Kevin Sorbo (@ksorbs) July 15, 2019Socialism: An idea that is so good, it has to be mandatory!— Kevin Sorbo (@ksorbs) June 18, 2019Bernie Sanders walks into a bar and yells, ""Free drinks for everyone!"" Cheers all around! Then Bernie says, ""Who's buying? ""#BernieSanders #realDonaldTrump— Kevin Sorbo (@ksorbs) June 17, 2019And just like that they went from being against foreign interference in our elections to allowing non-citizens to vote in our elections.— Kevin Sorbo (@ksorbs) June 30, 2019Subsequent one-liners appeared on the internet months or years prior, occasionally in Facebook posts or on meme sites. From the “and just like that” tweet above, much of the missive appeared to have been copied verbatim from a separate June 2019 Twitter thread by @Brn2Wander1:More things to ponder todayWhat is the difference between an Illegal immigrant and E.T.? E.T. learned to speak English and went home.And just like that they went from being against foreign interference in our elections to allowing non-citizens to vote in our elections.— Brn2Wander (@Brn2Wander1) June 16, 2019Watching the left come up with schemes to “catch Trump” is like watching Wile E. Coyote trying to catch the Road Runner.President Trump’s wall cost less than the Obamacare website. Let that sink in, America.— Brn2Wander (@Brn2Wander1) June 16, 2019Alexandria Ocasio Cortez wants to ban cars, ban planes, give out universal income and thinks socialism works. She calls Donald Trump crazy.Bill Clinton paid $850,000 to Paula Jones To get her to go away. I don’t remember the FBI raiding his lawyer’s office..— Brn2Wander (@Brn2Wander1) June 16, 2019Next up were July 2019 tweets, again copied word for word into the missive posted by Nugent and later attributed to Tim Allen:Nancy Pelosi invited illegal aliens to the State of the Union. President Trump Invited victims of illegal aliens to the State of the Union. Let that sink in.— Barbara Espinosa (@1Barbara1) July 12, 2019A socialist is basically a communist who doesn’t have the power to take everything from their citizens at gunpoint … Yet!— Matty Ritch (@matty8704) July 5, 2019And then a December 2018 tweet and an old blogosphere aphorism about socialism, paraphrased from Margaret Thatcher:Tell me…How do you walk 3,000 miles through rugged Mexico, without “food or support” and show up at the border 100 lb overweight with iPhones?🤦🏼♂️I call #BS— Randall (@4RANDALL1) December 9, 2018“Margaret Thatcher famously observed that the problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money. @Ocasio2018 hasn’t grasped that yet,” writes @rogerkimball https://t.co/nSSUrKUQpb— Spectator USA (@SpectatorUSA) July 26, 2018Other versions of the commentary were shared by a Twitter user in July 2019, and copied by another Twitter user in August. Also in August 2019, a version was shared to 4Chan’s /pol/. The forward’s Fifty Shades of Grey quip was lifted from an October 2016 Twitter meme.When the subsequently-attributed-to Tim Allen “pearls of wisdom/Trump 2020” message was shared by Ted Nugent on August 24 2019, roughly a thousand social media users also shared it. Although Nugent didn’t disclaim authorship, he clearly did not write the commentary itself. Neither did Tim Allen write it, although a different Tim Allen shared it early on.In sum, the post was composed from tweets and similar brief one-line comments shared around the internet, a large number of which were tweeted by Kevin Sorbo in June 2019. The message in the “Tim Allen” form began circulating as a Twitter thread no later than July 2019, after which point it was shared by Nugent and falsely attributed to Allen."
|
18488
|
"If an individual is determined ""to commit suicide, the availability of a gun is not a factor"" because they will find a way."
|
"State Rep. Michael Chippendale said, ""If an individual is under enough emotional or psychological distress where they’re going to commit suicide, the availability of a gun is not a factor."" There is evidence that such substitution takes place, but it is limited and contradicted by other data. Most experts told us the real issue is impulsiveness. Some people determined to kill themselves are locked into that decision and will find another method if a gun isn't handy. But research suggests that most suicide attempts are not the result of such premeditation. Their determination is spur-of-the-moment. Thus, the presence or absence of a firearm can play a big role in whether the person is successful. Because the statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, e-mail us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
|
false
|
Rhode Island, Public Health, Guns, Michael Chippendale,
|
"More than 60 percent of the 31,000 gun deaths in the United States each year result from suicide, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. One of the arguments used by supporters of gun control is that restricting access to guns could prevent some of those suicides. Some gun-control opponents dispute that, arguing that suicidal people will simply find another way to kill themselves. Those opposite positions were expressed when WPRI-TV taped a debate April 12 on ""Newsmakers"" featuring two state representatives -- Republican Michael Chippendale of Foster and Democrat Linda Finn of Middletown. Finn said gun-related suicides are ""primarily young adults, young men having access to firearms and killing themselves."" ""If an individual is under enough emotional or psychological distress where they’re going to commit suicide, the availability of a gun is not a factor,"" Chippendale responded. He went on to explain, ""There’s bridges to jump off. There are drugs to take. There are plenty of ways, if one is in such a state of mind to dispatch their own lives, where they will do it. The availability of a gun is not what makes a person commit suicide, mental illness is. A firearm is a tool."" We were interested in Chippendale's assertion that the availability of a gun is not a factor in whether a person commits suicide because suicidal people just find other ways to end their lives, a phenomenon researchers refer to as ""substitution."" Chippendale sent us to two studies to support his claim. The first, done in Australia and published in 2010 in the Medical Journal of Australia, compared suicide rates before and after the country instituted strict gun restrictions and a gun-buyback program. After one fifth of the guns were taken out of circulation, gun-related suicides decreased but suicides by hanging increased, suggesting that at least some people were switching to that method. (The low rate of gun use in Australia made it difficult to be definitive.) The other study was published in 1992 by the New England Journal of Medicine. Chippendale highlighted a chart saying that although having a gun in the home made it 4.8 times more likely that a successful suicide would occur, there were other factors such as whether someone was using illicit drugs, or had been hospitalized due to drinking, or was taking mental illness medication. But it didn’t address the substitution issue. The chief author, Dr. Arthur Kellermann, now a senior policy analyst at the Rand Corporation, said he published a more-relevant study in 1990 that compared suicide rates in Seattle and neighboring Vancouver, similar cities with different gun cultures. That analysis found that while the risk of gun suicide was more than twice as high in gun-friendly Seattle, that was offset by the fact that non-gun suicides were 1.5 times more common in Vancouver. ""There is evidence of substitution,"" but it's far from universal, he said. It's mostly likely in cases where someone is hell-bent on killing themselves. ""For younger groups and suicides that are more impulsive, I think that ready access to a highly lethal means does make a difference. In many of those cases, if they survive the attempt, they are grateful they didn't die and have a chance at getting their act together."" In contrast to the few studies Chippendale offered to support his statement, we found several more that didn't. In addition, other suicide experts with whom we spoke said bluntly that Chippendale is wrong because suicide is usually an impulsive act, and having a gun available dramatically increases the chance that any attempt will be successful. Between 80 percent and 90 percent of those who use a gun die, compared with 3 percent to 6 percent of those who try by another means, according to various studies. Most people who survive one attempt don't try again. ""If you are determined, you will eventually find a way to die. What people don't understand is for many suicidal people, that period of intense suicidality doesn't last that long,"" said Catherine Barber of the Harvard School of Public Health’s Injury Control Research Center. Among people interviewed after they nearly died from a suicide attempt, 71 percent said they had only felt suicidal for one hour or less before they tried to take their lives and only 13 percent said it was a day or more. And other data suggest that most people don't look for other means of suicide if a gun isn't handy. A soon-to-be-released Harvard study found that in 16 ""high-gun"" states where 50 percent of the households have a firearm, the total number of suicides in 2008 and 2009 was 11,889. In six ""low-gun"" states with a comparable population, there were half as many suicides -- 6,038. The reason: the rate of firearm suicides was a whopping 77 percent lower than in the ""high-gun"" states. The same trend is clear in earlier data from 1999 to 2007. And it's not because people are less-prone to suicide in ""low-gun"" states. In fact, the estimated number of suicide attempts was 23 percent higher in the low-gun states. So, Barber asked, if Chippendale were correct, ""why wouldn’t we simply see more non-firearm suicides in the low-gun states and roughly equal suicide rates across the two groups?"" But you don't. Other studies also suggested that Chippendale is wrong. In Israel, the Israeli Defense Force had a high suicide rate that dropped by 40 percent once the troops were prohibited from taking their guns with them when they went home for the weekend. In Great Britain, where putting your head in the oven was once a common way to kill yourself, the suicide rate dropped by a third when the country started using a less-toxic form of natural gas. In Sri Lanka, where the preferred method of suicide was poisoning with pesticide, the rate dropped by half once the country switched in 1995 to pesticides that are less toxic to humans. If Chippendale were correct, the suicide rate in those countries wouldn’t have gone down because these were people intent on suicide, Barber said. Said David N. Miller, a professor of psychology at the State University of New York at Albany and and president-elect of the American Association of Suicidology: ""Restricting the means of suicide in one area (for example, restricting access to guns) does not inevitably lead to an increase in suicide by other methods, as the politician suggests. In fact, this often does not occur."" Our ruling State Rep. Michael Chippendale said, ""If an individual is under enough emotional or psychological distress where they’re going to commit suicide, the availability of a gun is not a factor."" There is evidence that such substitution takes place, but it is limited and contradicted by other data. Most experts told us the real issue is impulsiveness. Some people determined to kill themselves are locked into that decision and will find another method if a gun isn't handy. But research suggests that most suicide attempts are not the result of such premeditation. Their determination is spur-of-the-moment. Thus, the presence or absence of a firearm can play a big role in whether the person is successful. Because the statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, e-mail us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
|
7526
|
Woman who went to hospital twice tests positive for virus.
|
A woman who went to a Georgia emergency center with flu-like symptoms late last month has tested positive for COVID-19 by the state health lab, officials said Friday.
|
true
|
Georgia, Health, General News, Flu, Atlanta, Virus Outbreak, Public health
|
The Georgia Department of Public Health said it is still awaiting final confirmation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the Floyd County case. The 46-year-old woman went to the emergency care center on Feb. 29, but didn’t meet testing criteria for COVID-19 and was released, Floyd Medical Center said in a statement. She returned, with worsening symptoms, on Tuesday. But she still didn’t quality for testing. “Despite the patient, again, not meeting COVID-19 screening criteria, Floyd clinicians made the determination to admit her to the hospital due to her condition,” the hospital statement said. For a time, testing was limited, in part because CDC guidelines said it should be focused on travelers who had been to mainland China or to patients who had been in close contact with infected people. Last week, the CDC changed its criteria, saying it’s also appropriate to test a patient if flu and other respiratory illnesses have been ruled out and no source of exposure has been identified. The patient was isolated, officials said. Though she still didn’t meet the criteria for coronavirus testing, her doctor and the district health director for the region pushed for it, the hospital said. At the “adamant urging” of the two local health officials, the CDC and the state health agency authorized the testing. The initial testing that returned a positive result was completed Thursday, state health officials said. State officials have requested expedited processing for an official determination from the CDC, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp said in a statement Friday. Officials haven’t disclosed where the woman went or who she might have been in contact with in the three days between her two visits to the emergency room. However, state health officials are now working to identify any people who might have been exposed, the agency said in statement. Floyd County is about 70 miles (115 kilometers) northwest of Atlanta. If confirmed, it would be the third case of COVID-19 in Georgia. The state’s first case was a 56-year-old Fulton County man who had traveled to Atlanta from Milan, Italy on Feb. 22. He began showing symptoms of the disease a few days later, health officials said earlier this week. The man’s teenage son also tested positive for the disease. ___ The Associated Press receives support for health and science coverage from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
|
42106
|
A meme claims that “if you cross the border illegally in the U.S., you get a Drivers License, Medical Insurance, housing, career training, the right to vote.”
|
Q: Does the U.S. provide medical insurance and voting rights to immigrants in the country illegally? A: No. A viral meme misrepresents what such immigrants are entitled to in the U.S.
|
false
|
Illegal immigration, Memes,
|
Q: Does the U.S. provide medical insurance and voting rights to immigrants in the country illegally? A: No. A viral meme misrepresents what such immigrants are entitled to in the U.S.A viral meme on Facebook criticizes the U.S. for supposed benefits afforded to immigrants who enter the country illegally, and it attempts to contrast U.S. policies with those of other countries.“If you cross the border illegally in the U.S., you get a Drivers License, Medical Insurance, housing, career training, the right to vote…” reads the meme, which is attributed to the conservative blog Patriot Journal. “SHARE = FED UP!”Tens of thousands did just that, spreading the text-based image on the social media platform. But the meme is misleading on a number of fronts.Such claims about benefits being given to those living in the U.S. illegally aren’t new. We wrote about this when Texas Sen. Ted Cruz claimed during a 2016 GOP presidential debate that, if he were elected, “we will end welfare benefits for those here illegally.”As we noted then, U.S. law already prohibits such immigrants from receiving most federal benefits. There are some exceptions, such as emergency medical care; short-term, non-cash emergency disaster relief; limited housing or community development assistance to those who were already receiving it in 1996; public health assistance for communicable diseases; and programs such as soup kitchens.The meme, however, makes false and exaggerated claims about driver’s licenses, medical insurance and the right to vote. Driver’s Licenses. Some states do indeed afford immigrants driving privileges regardless of their immigration status — but it’s far from a guarantee given to all immigrants living in the country illegally. As of May 2017, 12 states — plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico — have such laws, according to the National Immigration Law Center.Medical Insurance. Immigrants in the country illegally are not eligible for government health care programs, including Medicare and non-emergency Medicaid. And they’re not eligible to receive federal subsidies or to outright buy their own insurance through the Affordable Care Act’s insurance exchanges. Some unauthorized immigrants may receive care through private employers, but many remain uninsured. Estimates vary. The Kaiser Family Foundation has estimated that 39 percent of immigrants in the country illegally do not have insurance. A 2013 report by the Migration Policy Institute, meanwhile, found that 68 percent of employed, adult workers in the country illegally did not have coverage.That said, immigrants without insurance do sometimes receive care through emergency services, charity care or community health centers. The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation notes: “Medicaid payments for emergency services may be made on behalf of individuals who are otherwise eligible for Medicaid but for their immigration status. These payments cover costs for emergency care for lawfully present immigrants who remain ineligible for Medicaid as well as undocumented immigrants.”Also, KFF says, some states “provide prenatal care to women regardless of immigration status by extending CHIP coverage to the unborn child.” CHIP is the federal Children’s Health Insurance Program. There are also some state and local programs that provide care to immigrants regardless of status.Right to Vote. Federal law bars noncitizens from voting in federal elections. However, some municipalities — including several in Maryland — have allowed noncitizens to vote in local elections. In San Francisco, city voters approved a measure allowing some immigrants in the country illegally — those who are parents or guardians of school-age children — to vote in local school board elections there.The meme attempts to contrast the treatment of immigrants crossing the border illegally in the U.S. with that of other countries, saying: “If you cross the border illegally in Canada you get a $5000 fine.”We reached out to the Canada Border Services Agency to verify the penalties for entering that country illegally and were referred to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which hasn’t provided us with an answer yet. We’ll update this story when it does. Either way, it’s worth noting that U.S. law does allow for penalties and fines for illegal border crossings.The law explicitly prohibits foreigners from entering the country illegally and calls for fines and/or imprisonment of up to six months (and up to two years for subsequent offenses). Civil penalties for those apprehended trying to enter illegally range from $50 to $250 for the first offense.In addition, violations of a provision that outlines reporting requirements for those arriving in the U.S. can result in a civil penalty of up to $5,000 (and up to $10,000 for subsequent violations). Criminal penalties can include a fine of up to $5,000 and a year imprisonment. U.S. Customs and Border Protection cited that measure when they arrested two men in 2014 for illegally entering the country from Canada and collectively fined them $10,000.The meme makes other claims, saying that for crossing the border illegally in Iran, “you get 8 years in prison.” Two American hikers in 2011 were sentenced to eight years in prison after they illegally crossed the Iranian border, but the court sentence reportedly included five years for alleged spying and three for entering the country illegally.Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to debunk misinformation shared on the social media network.Capps, Randy, et. al. “A Demographic, Socioeconomic, and Health Coverage Profile of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States.” Migration Policy Institute. May 2013.“Health Coverage of Immigrants.” Kaiser Family Foundation. 13 Dec 2017.“Immigrant Eligibility for Health Care Programs in the United States.” National Conference of State Legislatures. 19 Oct 2017.Kiely, Eugene, et. al. “FactChecking the Eighth GOP Debate.” FactCheck.org. 7 Feb 2016.Spencer, Saranac Hale. “Noncitizens Get Narrow Access to Polls in San Francisco.” FactCheck.org. 26 Jul 2018.“State Laws Providing Access to Driver’s Licenses or Cards, Regardless of Immigration Status.” National Immigration Law Center. May 2017.
|
41915
|
"A White House plan to rescind unspent CHIP funds would be ""taking money away from kids who need health care."
|
Sen. Chuck Schumer said the White House proposes “taking money away from kids who need health care.” But congressional budget experts say a plan to rescind unspent funds wouldn’t affect federal spending or the number of individuals covered in the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
|
mixture
|
children's health insurance, government spending,
|
The White House has proposed rescinding $7 billion in unspent funds from a children’s health program, a move Sen. Chuck Schumer said would be “taking money away from kids who need health care.” But congressional budget experts say most of that money cannot be legally spent and the number of individuals covered would not be affected.The main point of contention is the Trump administration’s proposal to take $2 billion from a contingency fund used if states face a shortfall and higher-than-expected enrollment in the Children’s Health Insurance Program. CHIP, which is jointly funded by the federal government and the states, is for children and pregnant women in families with low incomes, but not low enough to qualify for Medicaid.Since fiscal 2009, when the Child Enrollment Contingency Fund was established, three states — Iowa, Michigan and Tennessee — have received payments from it, according to a 2018 report from the Congressional Research Service. The three states spent a total of $108.6 million in contingency funding.“States have not had to access the contingency funds that much over time,” Robin Rudowitz, associate director for the Kaiser Family Foundation’s Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured, told us. But, then again, “we don’t know what exactly might happen.” The fund was set up as a safeguard, she said.Several Democrats have criticized the White House proposal, and even Republican Sen. Susan Collins questioned why there would be a “cut” to CHIP. Schumer, the Senate minority leader, said in a statement that “millions of children rely on” this money “during outbreaks of the flu and other deadly illnesses.”Schumer, May 7: It appears that sabotaging our health care system to the detriment of middle-class families wasn’t enough for President Trump and Republicans; now they’re going after health care dollars that millions of children rely on, especially during outbreaks of the flu and other deadly illnesses. Let’s be honest about what this is: President Trump and Republicans in Congress are looking to tear apart the bipartisan Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), hurting middle-class families and low-income children, to appease the most conservative special interests and feel better about blowing up the deficit to give the wealthiest few and biggest corporations huge tax breaks.It’s possible an outbreak of disease could cause states to need more money for CHIP, though they’d have to have higher enrollment and a shortfall in funds to qualify for a payment from the contingency fund. States “have to meet both of those conditions,” Rudowitz said.At a May 8 press conference, Schumer characterized the Trump proposal as “taking money away from kids who need health care.”Rescissions of unspent CHIP funds have occurred before, including from the contingency fund, as recently as this year, when Congress passed an omnibus spending bill.All told, the administration has proposed $15 billion for rescission — or pulling back of funding that had been authorized but not yet spent. Most of the funding isn’t expected to be used, in fact. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget wrote in a blog post that “most of these rescissions,” including the ones to CHIP, “would cut budget authority for money that will not otherwise be spent, resulting in no direct effect on the deficit.”CRFB points out that the White House’s Office of Management and Budget estimates that the $15 billion package would only reduce federal outlays (or spending), and therefore the deficit, by $3 billion. The plan requires congressional approval.Overall, since fiscal 2009, federal appropriations for CHIP have been more than enough to cover CHIP spending. Rudowitz explained that the program operates like a “block grant,” so the yearly appropriations don’t always equal the outlays.Through several appropriation bills, Congress has rescinded $42.8 billion from CHIP from fiscal 2011 to fiscal 2017, the Congressional Research Service report said. Most of the rescissions from CHIP came from a performance bonus payment fund for states that increased Medicaid enrollment of children. And $11.1 billion came from “unobligated national allotments,” or federal funds not allocated to states. The CRS report said that $1.7 billion was rescinded from the Child Enrollment Contingency Fund in fiscal 2016 — marking the first time rescissions were made to the emergency fund.The largest part of the Trump administration’s rescission request from CHIP is $5.1 billion from funds for fiscal 2017 “that can no longer be spent,” CRFB said. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office explained in a May 8 letter that those funds can no longer be distributed to states, because the authority to do so expired in 2017. So, the main issue — and the focus of Schumer’s criticism — is the $1.9 billion from the Child Enrollment Contingency Fund. CBO wrote that “based on information from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CBO projects that the rescission from the Child Enrollment Contingency Fund would not affect payments to states over the 2018-2028 period.”It said that rescinding the $7 billion in CHIP money “would not affect outlays, or the number of individuals with insurance coverage.”The budget watchdog group CRFB said the contingency money “likely will not be used.” As we said, since the contingency fund was established in 2009, three states have received payments from it when they faced both a shortfall and higher-than-expected enrollment of children, according to CRS. (Total federal appropriations for CHIP were still more than enough to cover all states’ spending as a whole. )Michigan got a $52.6 million payment from the fund in fiscal 2015, according to a 2016 fact sheet from the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission. Michigan Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Angela Minicuci told us that the state had higher-than-expected enrollment, and a subsequent funding shortfall, due to federal poverty level changes in the Affordable Care Act.Tennessee received $226.7 million in September 2016 but only spent $27.1 million a few months later. It needed the money for “retroactive CHIP expenditures as a result of changes to the CHIP eligibility standards dating back to January 1, 2014,” according to Sarah Tanksley, director of communications, Division of TennCare. She said the state can no longer access the remainder of the unspent contingency payment.Iowa received $28.9 million in fiscal 2011, according to another MACPAC report. Matt Highland, public information officer at the state’s Department of Human Services, told us the money covered shortfalls in fiscal 2011 and 2012.CRFB noted that a rescission from the contingency fund was made in the bipartisan omnibus spending bill passed in March.The omnibus rescinded nearly $2 billion from the fund. It passed the Senate by a 65-32 vote, with many Democrats voting yes. “In other words, most who are attacking this policy now for ‘cutting’ CHIP supported nearly the same policy just a few months ago,” Patrick Newton, press secretary at CRFB, told us in an email.Schumer was asked in a May 8 press conference why he supported the omnibus but objects to a similar rescission now. He said the difference was that the omnibus money was used for “good things.” But now Trump is “not putting the money into good things; he’s just cutting.” Schumer went on to say: “They’re just taking money away from kids who need health care.”We asked his office how the senator could say the rescission was “taking money away from kids” when the money hadn’t been allocated and isn’t expected to be spent at all. Schumer’s office responded in an email: “It has been used in the past though. It’s there in case of emergency.”His office maintains the contingency money might be needed and should be preserved. “We shouldn’t be gambling with those programs and children’s health care in order to pay down a fraction of a percent of the deficit that Republicans created with their massive tax breaks to the wealthy,” Schumer’s office said.One additional issue is that the new request comes on top of that omnibus rescission, leaving about $500 million in the contingency fund for fiscal 2018, which ends in less than five months on Sept. 30.Schumer’s office referred us to comments by Joan Alker, executive director of Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families, who told the Washington Post that this “sets a very dangerous precedent” for CHIP. Alker wrote on the center’s website that “rescinding $2 billion from the fund undermines the very assurance it was created to provide.”The contingency fund should get a fresh influx of money in fiscal 2019, which starts Oct. 1, if current practices are followed. Edwin Park, a research professor at Georgetown’s Center for Children and Families, told us that up to 20 percent of the national allotment for CHIP is allocated to the fund each budget year. That would mean up to about $4.5 billion should go into the contingency fund next fiscal year.Federal funding for the states for CHIP will total $22.6 billion for 2019. States recently faced a gap in federal CHIP funding of several months while Congress debated extending the program. In measures passed in late January and early February, Congress extended CHIP funding through fiscal 2027.Update, May 11: We updated this story to include information on contingency fund payments to Tennessee and Iowa.
|
22859
|
"Donna Garner Says Joe Straus ""was co-author of a bill that would have allowed Planned Parenthood to control public school sex education."
|
Conservative education activist Donna Garner says Texas House Speaker Joe Straus coauthored a bill that would have allowed Planned Parenthood to control public school sex education
|
false
|
Education, Health Care, Texas, Donna Garner,
|
"Blasting House Speaker Joe Straus, R-San Antonio, as a ""Republican in name only,"" the conservative Texas Eagle Forum says ""he has much more in common with the Democrats."" In a Nov. 9 newsletter, the group urges Texans to tell their state representative to vote for one of the other Republicans running for speaker. Legislators will choose the speaker for 2011-12 after the biennial legislative session convenes in January. In a section challenging Straus' conservative bonafides, the newsletter says he ""was co-author of a bill that would have allowed Planned Parenthood to control public school sex education."" Really? Some background: Planned Parenthood is a reproductive health care provider with facilities nationwide that offer family-planning services, including abortion. The organization advocates for comprehensive sexual health care and education. When we sought backup for the statement, Pat Carlson, president of the Texas Eagle forum, noted that the claim originated with Donna Garner of Hewitt, a retired teacher and a conservative education activist. Next, Garner told us via e-mail she was referring to House Bill 1842, a 2007 measure titled the ""Prevention First Act,"" which cleared a committee but died before the full House could take it up. Straus was one of its 14 co-authors. In an e-mail, Garner guided us to a May 2007 analysis of the legislation by the House Research Organization, a nonpartisan arm of the Texas House. According to the analysis, the legislation directed the state to promote family-planning services for low-income women and required school districts that provide sex education — including instruction on contraceptives — to explain the difference in effectiveness between correct and incorrect use of contraceptives. Garner stressed a section in the bill analysis outlining opponents' arguments against the bill. Among them: the proposed changes in how schools teach students about contraceptives would thwart efforts to promote abstinence and require detailed discussions about how to put on a condom. The legislation also described ""abstinence-only instruction"" to mean instruction that doesn't ""include information about preventing pregnancy, sexually-transmitted diseases,"" HIV and AIDS through any means other than abstinence. Opponents argued that the definition should reflect the definition that appears in Title V of the Social Security Act. The federal law describes abstinence-only instruction as teaching that abstinence is the expected standard for all school-age children and teaches that sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects, among other points, according to the bill analysis. Again in an e-mail, Garner told us that ""Straus' bill was meant to force teachers to emphasize condom/contraceptive use to students which would have, in turn, de-emphasized Title V guidelines that emphasize abstinence-only sex education.... changes in his bill would have resulted in a shift in the way sex education has been taught under Title V in the public schools in Texas."" But we found no language in the act potentially putting Planned Parenthood in charge of sex education in Texas. The legislation did not change current law that requires each school district's board and local advisory council of parents and community representatives to review course materials dealing with sexuality, and to comply with a list of restrictions as to how the courses can be taught, with emphasis on abstinence. Garner told us: ""If Straus had been a true conservative, he would not have supported H.B. 1842. His deep roots (and those of his wife) with Planned Parenthood undoubtedly led to his being a co-author of this bill. It is no surprise that Planned Parenthood in its fall 2009 Horizon newsletter publicly highlighted Joe Straus' support of its agenda."" Straus' wife was on the board of directors of the Planned Parenthood Trust of San Antonio and South Central Texas in the early 1990s, according to a January 2009 Austin American-Statesman news article. Finally, we consulted folks across the ideological spectrum about whether the proposed legislation would have allowed Planned Parenthood to control public-school sex education. In the ""no"" camp: Rochelle Tafolla, a spokeswoman at Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas told us ""the statement is not at all accurate."" She did say Planned Parenthood, which has pushed ""for broader access to medically-accurate, comprehensive sex education and affordable family planning services,"" supported the legislation. One of the bill's five authors, Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin, told us that Planned Parenthood was supportive of the legislation and was among the groups the authors consulted in drafting it. But he said that the legislation would not have allowed Planned Parenthood to control public school sex education. Tracy Young, a spokeswoman for Straus, also called Garner's statement ""inaccurate,"" and told us that the bill would have required HHSC to conduct an education outreach campaign to promote the reduction of unintended pregnancies and sexually-transmitted diseases. Kyleen Wright, president of the pro-life group Texans for Life who was listed as a witness against the bill, told us that ""it's obviously a stretch to say it gives Planned Parenthood control of sex education."" She said the legislation left the proposed outreach-campaign funding in the hands of the state. ""It certainly didn't hand (Planned Parenthood) sex education in the state,"" she said. We got a different take from Jonathan Saenz, director of legislative affairs at the right-leaning Liberty Institute. He told us he thought Garner's claim was valid. ""If Planned Parenthood (working through an elected official) has control and/or influence over changes to our statewide law governing how sex education is taught, changes that result in a version of sex education and related women's services that Planned Parenthood desires, approves of, and lobbies for, then they effectively have control of public sex education,"" he said in a statement. Our finding: In 2007, Straus co-authored a measure intended to promote family planning and to ensure that school districts that teach sex education spell out the effectiveness of contraceptives when used properly and not. Planned Parenthood supported the proposal and worked on the bill with Strama's office, but even if it had passed, it would not have changed the state-mandated, pro-abstinence focus on sex education in Texas schools. Garner can argue that legislation would have changed the education code to align more with Planned Parenthood's values than her own, but to say that it would have put the organization at the helm of sex education in public schools is an over-the-top claim."
|
14162
|
"Water rates in Manila, Philippines, ""were raised up to 845 percent"" when a subsidiary of the World Bank became a partial owner."
|
Moore said that when the International Finance Corporation became a part-owner of Manila Water, rates rose 845 percent. The source cited by Moore’s staff undermines that number. The International Finance Corporation bought its stake in 2004. Between 2004 and 2012, rates rose about 170 percent. Moore incorrectly used a figure that would apply to the period from 1997 to 2012. However, the IFC crafted the plan for privatization in the first place. All parties knew that important capital investments would follow, and that rates would go up. It is also true that in terms of the actual size of a family’s water bill, rates rose faster each year after the IFC bought its share than before. Moore wrongly pegged the rate increase to the date of IFC’s equity position, but the development corporation played a key role from the start.
|
mixture
|
Global News Service, Financial Regulation, Foreign Policy, Water, Gwen Moore,
|
"If a city can’t provide safe drinking water, should it turn the whole operation over to a private company? No, we’re not talking about Flint, Mich. This concerns the southeast Asian city of Manila, the capital and biggest city in the Philippines. In 1997, officials in the Pacific island nation set up not one but two private companies to deliver water to homes and businesses. One of those companies has been a financial success. So healthy, that the private banking arm of the World Bank, the International Finance Corporation, became a part-owner in 2004 for about $15 million. During a hearing on April 27, 2016, the International Finance Corporation’s role drew criticism from Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis. ""In Manila, for example, when the IFC, the development arm, took an equity position in the water company, water rates were raised up to 845 percent,"" Moore said. She was pressing a Treasury Department official on how to make international development banks more accountable. We decided to see whether residents had to pay more than eight times as much for their water once the International Finance Corporation bought a stake in the Manila Water Company. What we found, between 2004, when the IFC bought its share of the company, and 2012, is that rates did climb. But they only rose by about 170 percent, not the 845 percent Moore cited. Moore’s office said she relied on a 2010 resolution from the Philippines House of Representatives. Making apples-to-apples comparisons of rates is challenging. The soundest data we could find was in a 2013 report from local regulators, the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System. This table shows the average price (in Philippine pesos) of a cubic meter of water at three points, when privatization took place in 1997, when the IFC gained part ownership in 2004 and 2012. 1997 2004 2012 Average rate (pesos/cubic meter) 4.02 14 38.12 Change from 1997 (percent) 248% 848% Change from 2004 (percent) 172% PolitiFact analysis of a typical bill Typical household bill (1997 pesos) 121 295 537 As you’ll see, the increase from 1997 to 2012 was 848 percent, near the increase Moore claimed. The 2010 resolution from the Philippines House of Representatives said that the cost of water rose by 845 percent between 1997 and 2009. The problem, though, is that the IFC did not become a part owner until 2004. The rate increase between that year and 2012 was about 170 percent. There are a few other important dimensions to bring into the picture. A better water service By the mid 1990s, Manila’s public water system was in crisis. About a third of the city’s residents, roughly 3.5 million people, had no running water. Leaks and water theft were literally draining the pipes. Water pressure could drop at any moment, leaving many with a completely unpredictable water supply. Cholera and infection-related diarrhea were on the rise. The Philippine government turned to the World Bank, which brought in the International Finance Corporation to devise a privatization plan. Gregory Pierce, a lecturer at Urban Planning at UCLA, told us privatization ""was a big fad in the early to mid 1990s."" The IFC’s role was advisory, but the framework it crafted produced the circumstances that exist today. Major capital investments, and rising rates to pay for them, were part of the plan. In other words, while Moore linked her comment to the year when the IFC took an equity position, its involvement dates back years earlier to the launch of a privatized water system. The Manila metro area was divided into two zones, and an international consortium, that included the American Bechtel Corporation, was the winning bidder for the eastern section. The company was called Manila Water. Manila Water soon spent over $300 million to install more than 1,200 kilometers of piping. The good news is, by every measure, quality and reliability went up. In 2007, an article in Economics and Management in Developing Countries reported that by 2002, the fraction of people with service had gone from about 60 percent to over 80 percent. Unlike before 1997, the water moving through the pipes met government drinking water standards. Leaks were repaired twice as quickly and while service might drop out, the average went from taps running 17 hours a day before the change to 21 hours a day afterward. As the authors of the journal article put it, ""If one goes by the numbers for water coverage, availability and quality, water privatization in Metro Manila seemed to have worked. However, water rates had risen dramatically during the same period."" Frederick Jones, a spokesman for the International Finance Corporation, said the benefits have been widely shared. ""While tariffs have increased for some residents of Manila, many of the people not previously connected to water services were poor families, who were forced to pay $3 a cubic meter for bottled water on the open market,"" Jones said. ""Today, the average tariff in Manila is $1.30, but this tariff is helping subsidize the poorest families, who now only pay 18 cents per cubic meter."" Two ways to look at price hikes Moore couched her claim in terms of the percentage rise in the cost of water. But Nathaniel Meyer, a senior organizer with the advocacy group Corporate Accountability International, said from a household perspective, what really matters is how much you pay. ""If a family in Manila in 1997 paid 4 pesos for their water and it’s gone up in absolute pesos, that's going to leave them less for food, health care, clothes for the kids and everything else,"" Meyer said. We ran the numbers for a household paying the average rate on 30 cubic meters of water a month. In its publications, Manila Water says 30 cubic meters is the amount used by the typical household. In inflation-corrected pesos, the typical bill went up about 20 percent faster each year after 2004 than before. Our ruling Moore said that when the International Finance Corporation became a part-owner of Manila Water, rates rose 845 percent. The source cited by Moore’s staff undermines that number. The International Finance Corporation bought its stake in 2004. Between 2004 and 2012, rates rose about 170 percent. Moore incorrectly used a figure that would apply to the period from 1997 to 2012. However, the IFC crafted the plan for privatization in the first place. All parties knew that important capital investments would follow, and that rates would go up. It is also true that in terms of the actual size of a family’s water bill, rates rose faster each year after the IFC bought its share than before. Moore wrongly pegged the rate increase to the date of IFC’s equity position, but the development corporation played a key role from the start.
|
9940
|
Heart failure therapy twice as effective in women
|
The story didn’t deliver the numbers and the explanations to help readers evaluate the evidence. It is not clear from the story what ‘a 70% reduction in heart failure compared with a 35% decline in men’ actually means. The story went on to mention a ‘dramatic’ reduction in cause of death from any cause. But what does that mean? How big is a ‘dramatic’ reduction? Heart disease (coronary artery disease) and heart failure are common, age-related conditions. Providing readers with accurate information that they can use in their decision making process about treatments is valuable. This story just didn’t click on all cylinders.
|
false
|
heart disease,Reuters Health,women's health
|
There was no discussion of costs. These things are not cheap. In this story, the ‘result’ of the combination device in men was described as ‘good’ as compared to women in whom the benefit was described as ‘fantastic’ . What exactly was the ‘result’ the clinician was describing, and then how does ‘good’ compare to ‘fantastic’? Is the difference statistically significant or clinically meaningful? Similarly – ‘a dramatic reduction in heart failure events’ – what is the nature of these ‘events’ ? And then lastly – opening with the information that women had ‘a 70% reduction in heart failure compared with a 35% decline in men’ fails to provide the reader with any insight about what was being measured and because only the relative change is presented rather than the absolute difference – readers have no idea about that actual size of the difference. There was no discussion of potential harms from the use of the device. Other than providing the name of the trial (MADIT-CRT) and its source of funding (Boston Scientific) the story provided insufficient information to readers to help them evaluate the quality of the evidence. It is not clear what ‘a 70% reduction in heart failure compared with a 35% decline in men’ actually means. The writer probably meant reduction in heart failure related hospitalizations. But without this information the statement is not able to be interpreted. The story went on to mention a ‘dramatic’ reduction in cause of death from any cause. While this seems like a potentially good thing – how big is a ‘dramatic’ reduction? The story ended with disease mongering about the 42 million American women ‘living with heart disease’ in a story about heart failure, which, while it may fall under the rubric of heart disease, is only a subset of the vast 42 million. The story then went on to share that ‘It’ is the ‘leading killer of women’. Why not simply provide heart failure stats, and heart failure stats by gender? No independent sources were cited or quoted. The story did mention that the study reported on was funded by the manufacturer of the device discussed. There was no discussion about alternatives. At the end of the story, it mentioned that what it earlier referred to as ‘a combination pacemaker and defibrillator device’ had had it use expanded by ‘U.S. regulators’ to include mild heart failure. It seemed clear from the story that the combination device was not new but that its use had recently been expanded. We’re going to rule this Not Applicable because it’s an odd case. Different quotes are attributed to the researcher – some from “a statement” and some from a telephone interview. We can’t be sure how much original reporting was done. An older press release (June 2010) may have been the source for some of the information presented in this story. http://bostonscientific.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=932
|
2864
|
Australian scientists microchip bees to map movements, halt diseases.
|
Australian scientists are gluing tiny sensors onto thousands of honey bees to track their movements in a trial aimed at halting the spread of diseases that have wiped out populations in the northern hemisphere.
|
true
|
Science News
|
Scientists at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia’s national science agency, said the microchips could help tackle so-called colony collapse disorder, a situation where bees mysteriously disappear from hives, and the encroachment of the parasitic varroa mite. Scientists will use tweezers to glue on the sensors, weighing about 5 milligrams and measuring 2.5 millimeters (a little more than 1/16 of an inch) square, after soothing the bees to sleep by refrigeration. Some young bees, which tend to be hairier than older bees, need to be shaved before the sensor can be glued on. Scientists will examine the effectiveness of pesticides in protecting the bees from colony collapse disorder and varroa mite. The study will also enable farmers and fruit growers to understand and manage their crops, given the honey bee’s crucial role in the pollination of crops globally, the CSIRO said in a statement issued on Wednesday. “Honey bees play a vital role in the landscape through a free pollination service for agriculture, which various crops rely on to increase yields,” the CSIRO’s Paulo de Souza, who is leading the project, said in the statement. “Using this technology, we aim to understand the bee’s relationship with its environment.” Scientists plan to fit sensors on 5,000 bees in the southern island state of Tasmania over the Australian summer. The radio frequency identification sensors work like an electronic tag for cars on a toll road, recording when insects pass a checkpoint. That will allow scientists to build a three-dimensional image of the insects’ movements, a process described as “swarm sensing”. The scientists are working on shrinking the sensor to 1 mm square so they can be attached to smaller insects, including mosquitoes.
|
37948
|
There’s more cases of Covid in the White House than in all of New Zealand.
|
A viral tweet claiming that there were more cases of COVID-19 in the White House than all of New Zealand, was — although likely intended as to be a bit hyperbolic — was not, mathematically speaking, true. New Zealand reported twelve new cases on October 1 2020 and zero on October 2 2020, and appeared to have a minimum of 32 “active cases” of the virus as of October 2 2020.
|
false
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
After news broke of U.S. President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump testing positive for COVID-19, a viral tweet contrasted the spate of positive tests in the White House outstripped the rate of positive tests in all of New Zealand:There’s more cases of Covid in the White House than in all of New Zealand— Forrest B (@ForrestBrung) October 2, 2020In an October 2 2020 tweet, a Twitter user wrote:There’s more cases of Covid in the White House than in all of New ZealandNew Zealand’s Global Standing During the PandemicNew Zealand’s effective response to and containment of COVID-19 during the global pandemic was a frequent talking point in mid-2020.A photograph of a crowded, live rugby game went viral in July 2020, as Americans realized that residents of New Zealand enjoyed fewer restrictions on daily living:‘New Zealand Rugby Game Today as We Have No COVID Cases’At various times, New Zealand went long periods without a single case of community transmission — even as the pandemic raged and deaths increased in other countries. In early August 2020, news circulated that the United States had issued a travel advisory for New Zealand.That claim was out of context, however, and appeared to reflect the lifting of restrictions rather than imposition of them:Did the United States Issue a COVID-19 Travel Advisory for New Zealand?Nevertheless, New Zealand reported intermittent new cases through the summer of 2020 and into the fall.White House Cases in September 2020On the night of October 1 2020, news broke that White House advisor Hope Hicks — who is often in close contact with President Trump — tested positive:Breaking—not only is Hope Hicks #COVID19 positive, but it was known Wednesday night, and she TRAVELED on Air Force 1 Wednesday night. https://t.co/4z2tz0d9Uq— Eric Feigl-Ding (@DrEricDing) October 2, 2020Roughly four hours later and about an hour after midnight Eastern time on October 2 2020, reports that Donald and Melania Trump had also tested positive also began to emerge:BREAKING: President Trump tweets that he and first lady Melania Trump have tested positive for the coronavirus https://t.co/svKJjGE7pT pic.twitter.com/toHcjdlKrG— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) October 2, 2020Trump himself disclosed that information at 12:54 AM Eastern:Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19. We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 2, 2020In an October 2 2020 liveblog, CNN reported that Trump’s family members and Vice President Mike Pence initially tested negative — but noted incubation might take longer, and that further, false negatives are fairly common:Vice President Mike Pence, as well as various Trump family members – including Trump’s son Barron and daughter Ivanka – may have just tested negative for coronavirus, but that doesn’t mean they are in the clear, one pathologist said Friday [October 2 2020].Dr. Alan Wells, medical director of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center’s Clinical Labs, points out the rapid tests used to make quick daily diagnoses do not catch all cases, and any test performed too early will give a false negative.The White House issued two memoranda, one disclosing the President and the First Lady’s diagnoses, the other indicating that Pence had tested negative.It appeared the number of cases in the White House as of October 2 2020 was confirmed to be three — Hicks, President Trump, and Mrs. Trump.New Zealand’s Case Counts on October 1 and 2 2020Google’s pandemic dashboard showed twelve new cases on October 1 2020 in New Zealand, and zero new cases on October 2 2020:New Zealand’s official pandemic dashboard (archived) provided an up-to-date summary of current cases. In the two screenshots below, it appeared there were between 32 and 43 “active cases” in managed isolation or quarantine as of October 2 2020 in New Zealand:TL;DRA viral tweet claiming that there were more cases of COVID-19 in the White House than all of New Zealand, was — although likely intended as to be a bit hyperbolic — was not, mathematically speaking, true. New Zealand reported twelve new cases on October 1 2020 and zero on October 2 2020, and appeared to have a minimum of 32 “active cases” of the virus as of October 2 2020.Comments
|
2561
|
Long-lived bats offer clues on diseases, aging.
|
The bat, a reservoir for viruses like Ebola, SARS and Nipah, has for decades stumped scientists trying to figure out how it is immune to many deadly bugs but a recent study into its genes may finally shed some light, scientists said on Friday.
|
true
|
Science News
|
Studying the DNA of two distant bat species, the scientists discovered how genes dealing with the bats’ immune system had undergone the most rapid change. This may explain why they are relatively free of disease and live exceptionally long lives compared with other mammals of similar size, such as the rat, said Professor Lin-Fa Wang, an infectious disease expert at the Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School in Singapore who led the multi-centre study. “We are not saying bats never get sick or never get infections. What we are saying is they handle infections a lot better,” Wang said in a telephone interview. What was missing from both species of bats was a gene segment known to trigger extreme, and potentially fatal, immune reactions to infections, called the cytokine storm. Cytokine storms end up killing not only offending viruses in the body, but the host’s own cells and tissues too. “Viruses rarely kill the host. The killing comes from the host’s immune response. So it looks like what bats are doing is depress the inflammation (cytokine storm). If we can learn that, we can design drugs to minimize the inflammation damage and control viral infection,” Wang said. The study, which saw the participation of researchers from China, Denmark, Australia and the United States, was published on Friday in the journal Science. Compared with other mammals of similar size, bats live a long time, with lifespans of between 20 and 40 years. Rats live between 2 and 3 years, on average. Interestingly, Wang and his colleagues found that the highly evolved genes that give bats their superior immune system also enable them to fly. Out of more than 5,000 types of mammals on the planet, bats are the only one capable of sustained flight and some species can fly more than 1,000 km in a single night. Such intense physical exertion is known to produce toxic “free radicals” that cause tissue damage and it is these same genes that give the bat the ability to repair itself, Wang said. “What we found was the genes that evolved fastest were genes involved in repairing DNA damage. That makes sense ... because when you fly, metabolism goes up and it generates free radicals that are toxic to cells,” Wang said. “Because bats fly, they (would have had) to evolve and adapt ... to get genes that can repair DNA damage.” Wang said we have much to learn from the bat, which has evolved to avoid disease and live exceptionally long lives. “Cancer, ageing and infectious disease, these are the three major areas of concern for people,” he said. “We have studied rats for 150 years to understand how to do better in these three areas. Now we have a system, the bat, that has done very well in evolution. We can learn from the bat. With modern techniques, we can design new drugs to slow down the ageing process, treat cancer, fight infections.”
|
9119
|
Football boosts bone development in boys
|
The news release reports on a British study comparing bone development in 12- to 14-year-old boys who played football (or soccer, as it’s known in the United States) to those involved in competitive cycling or swimming and to active boys who did not regularly play sports. The release touts the bone-building benefits of playing football but omits that the study on which it reports identified almost no significant difference in bone development measures between highly competitive soccer players and boys who were active but not involved in sports. It also left out any discussion of the risks or the financial costs associated with playing soccer competitively. Bone development during childhood and adolescence has lifelong implications for health. Poor bone development during youth increases adults’ risk for osteoporosis and fractures, which can lead to other negative health outcomes. The news release also is important because soccer is the most popular sport in the world. In 2014, more than 3 million youth (boys and girls, ages 5-19) were members of the U.S. Youth Soccer organization, which claims to include 85 percent of all registered youth soccer players in the United States. However, the rate of youth soccer injuries also has increased, more than doubling between 1990 and 2014. It’s important to note that the release (or the study on which it’s based) does not offer any guidance to the families of the vast majority of children who are more casual athletes, nor does it mention what role weight-bearing sports might play on girls’ bone development. At this point, the conclusions could be useful to researchers continuing to study exercise and bone health, but readers should approach these conclusions with caution.
|
false
|
bone development,soccer,University of Exeter
|
The news release provides no discussion of costs. While a soccer ball isn’t terribly expensive, the boys involved in this study weren’t casually kicking the football around the back yard or the neighborhood soccer pitch; they were “aspiring professionals who played as much as nine hours a week,” according to the study’s lead author. That level of training almost guarantees that the boys were participating in traveling soccer teams, and while the costs might be lower in the United Kingdom, where the study was conducted, in the United States, playing on a traveling soccer team is far from cheap. A September 2015 USA Money article described a California family who spent $17,500 annually for their four boys to play competitive soccer, including club fees of $675 per month, $1,500 per year for a private coach, more than $1,000 for cleats and other gear, $100 participation fees per child per tournament, along with the costs of tournament travel. Those costs, of course, might well be higher than average, but the bottom line is that the news release provides no information about the likely cost of having a child playing competitive soccer/football. The news release states that lower back bone mineral content (BMC) among football players was 7 percent higher than that for adolescents who were involved in cycling; BMC measurements in the upper leg were 5 percent higher. This is the only specific information offered in the release, although the study found statistically significant differences – none of them reflecting differences of more than 10 percent — in other comparisons between the swimmers, cyclists and football players. Most importantly, the news release doesn’t explain that the only statistically significant difference between football players and the boys in the active control group was higher scores on a measure of vitamin D levels. Furthermore, the release offered no context of the benefit. Five percent higher BMC in healthy individuals who all have BMC levels within normal limits is not of certain clinical significance. What sort of benefit could a regular individual playing soccer expect if high level athletes saw a 5 percent increase? The news release included no discussion of the potential harms of playing soccer, especially in a highly competitive environment. In a 2010 report on soccer injury risks, the American Academy of Pediatrics noted that soccer “has a higher injury rate than many contact/collision sports such as field hockey, rugby, basketball and (American) football.” Lower leg and foot injuries are most common, and the rate of concussions is similar to those suffered by American football and hockey players. The news release excluded some important aspects of the study methods and findings. First, this was an observational study. The authors appear to have accounted for many of the factors that could influence bone growth, but there could be others – such as nutritional intake – that would have influenced the findings. The discussion section of the study states that football players’ increases in BMC were higher than those for active youth not involved in regular sports; however, those differences were not statistically significant. In addition, the study notes that soccer players spent more hours training and had trained for more years than had either cyclists or swimmers, a fact that would have been expected to contribute to greater bone mass among the soccer players. The data analysis accounted for bone mass at the beginning of the study but did not include hours spent training as a variable in the final comparison of the young athletes’ bone development. Finally, of course, the study did not include any female athletes, so it provided no information about whether playing soccer might benefit adolescent girls’ bone growth. The news release notes that poor bone growth before age 30 can increase an individual’s risk of fractures and osteoporosis later in life, but it does not engage in disease mongering. The news release notes that funding for the study came from a Marie Sklodowska-Curie fellowship, provided by the European Union. The researchers do not appear to have any conflicts of interest in connection with this study. The study itself compared the bone growth benefits of playing soccer to those of participation in non-weight-bearing sports (cycling and swimming), providing one discussion of alternatives. In addition, the news release quotes the article’s lead author, Dr. Dimitrios Vlachopoulos, noting that other high-intensity weight-bearing sports such as tennis, basketball and badminton could have similar effects as playing soccer. This is particularly important given that the study findings actually showed no significant differences in bone growth between boys who played football competitively and boys who were active but not involved in any regular sports participation. It would have been helpful if the release had mentioned some of the other comparative benefits/harms of soccer with swimming and cycling such as cardiovascular benefits, the overall fitness benefits, and the potentially better safety profiles of swimming and cycling versus soccer. The release doesn’t mention availability. True, soccer is the world’s most popular sport and there are opportunities to play — but not all families are able to invest the time and expense required for intense participation in a sport. The original article notes that this was the first study to comprehensively evaluate bone acquisition in adolescent male athletes. However, health experts have long understood that exercise is a key to healthy bone growth. The most important finding of the study, which is addressed in the news release, actually may have been that participation in non-weight-bearing sports such as cycling or swimming does not seem to produce better bone growth. The headline and first sentence of the news release state that playing football improves bone development in boys, but the data suggest that for all but one measure (a test of vitamin D levels), there were no significant differences between boys who played football and active, non-sports-involved boys. Thus, although playing football likely does improve bone development, this study did not show that it improved bone development over active participation in other weight-bearing sports such as running, tennis, weight-lifting, etc. In addition, because the study only examined boys competing at high levels in their sports, it provides little information about the value of more casual participation in soccer.
|
32110
|
Hillary Clinton vowed that she would shut down the NRA and ban handguns if she were elected President.
|
In short, Hillary Clinton spoke of wanting to implement broader, universal background checks for gun purchasers to keep firearms away from domestic abusers and people with serious mental health problems, but not of shutting down the NRA or banning handguns entirely. “I will get the NRA shut down if I become president. If we can ban handguns we will do it.” is a completely fabricated quote that was not spoken by Hillary Clinton (or anyone else) and did not appear in the Des Moines Register (or any other source) on 8 August 2015 (or any other date).
|
false
|
Politics Guns, gun control, hillary clinton, nra
|
On 25 October 2015, a Tumblr page dedicated to dubious Hillary Clinton quotes posted an image of the Democratic presidential candidate along with a quote supposedly uttered by her during an interview with the Des Moines Register on 8 August 2015 about her vowing to shut down the NRA and ban handguns if she were elected President: The “Shocking Hillary Clinton Quotes …” Tumblr page claims that all of their quotes are 100% sourced and even provides links to make it appear as if the quotes have been verified: Get to know the psychopath known as Hillary Clinton a little better. These are 100% sourced and verified quotes. We recommend you SHARE and SPREAD these far and wide, to friends and family. But the link included with the above-displayed meme didn’t lead to a page containing Clinton’s purported quote; it just pointed to the Des Moines Register‘s main page. Additionally, a search of the Des Moines Register‘s archives yielded no results for the phrase in question (on 8 August 2015 or any other date). Hillary Clinton did campaign in Iowa in the summer and fall of 2015, and she was interviewed by the Des Moines Register more than once during that period. But she wasn’t in Iowa on 8 August 2015, she wasn’t interviewed by the Register on that date, nor was she quoted in the Register on that date. On 14 July 2015, the Register quoted Clinton on the subject of guns as follows: “I’m going to speak out against the uncontrollable use of guns in our country because I believe we can do better than that,” she said. “A majority of Americans and a majority of gun owners agree with universal background checks to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and people who are mentally unstable and even terrorists.” On 26 August 2015, the Register quoted Clinton on the subject of guns as follows: In answering questions about the murder of a TV reporter and cameraman in Virginia, Clinton said she was deeply saddened, but added that their deaths need to spark action to restrict access to handguns. “We’ve got to do something,” she said. “It’s a very difficult political issue. But we are smart enough, compassionate enough to balance legitimate Second Amendment rights concerns with preventive measures and control measures, so whatever motivated this murderer … we will not see more needless, senseless deaths.” And on 6 October 2015, the Register quoted Clinton on the subject of guns as follows: Most Americans, including most gun owners, would support reasonable limits on guns to help stop massacres like the one in Oregon, Hillary Clinton told Iowans. “I’m tired of people in public life saying, ‘Our thoughts and prayers are with families whose children are murdered at community colleges or elementary schools or people killed at Bible studies or going to the movies,’” the Democratic presidential candidate said. “We can’t tolerate that. This doesn’t just happen … We let it happen.” Her audience at Davenport’s RiverCenter applauded as Clinton vowed to make it harder for people who shouldn’t have guns to obtain them. Among other things, she favors broader background checks, including sales at gun shows, and stronger measures to prevent gun purchases by domestic abusers or people with serious mental health problems. “We keep getting stymied because of the lobby for a very small minority of gun owners and the gun manufacturers, which stand in the way,” she said. Clinton has spoken throughout the campaign about her intention to implement tighter gun rules, despite pressure from the National Rifle Association. This week, she released specifics of her proposals. “I feel like this is unfinished business in our country, and I am very determined that we are going to try to bring some sanity back, so that people’s Second Amendment rights are protected — but they are not absolute, the way the NRA wants them to be. There are common-sense ways to make sure people are not using guns to commit mass murders.”
|
25983
|
A patient discharge document proves that “The WHO and CDC do NOT recommend that healthy people wear masks.”
|
A photo of discharge paperwork from the Beaumont Emergency Center in Texas says that the CDC does not recommend healthy people wear face masks, but that advice is outdated and the emergency center says it has corrected it. The CDC does generally recommend healthy people wear face masks.
|
false
|
Texas, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Viral image,
|
"A Facebook user who recently shared what he described as his discharge papers after getting a COVID-19 test in Beaumont, Texas, has caused confusion over face mask recommendations, and fairly so. ""Paperwork from my negative test today, Beaumont Emergency center,"" he wrote alongside a photo of a document dated June 23. Circled on the paper is this sentence: ""CDC does not recommend that people who are well wear a facemask to protect themselves from respiratory diseases, including COVID-19."" Others on social media have shared the post and added their own commentary. ""For those obviously deaf and blind mask shamers: The WHO and CDC do NOT recommend that healthy people wear masks,"" one woman wrote. 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.) We reached out to Beaumont Emergency Center about the photo of the paperwork and a spokesperson responded with a statement that it also posted to its Facebook page on June 29, when it became aware someone had shared images of its discharge documentation. The statement said that some patients had mistakenly received outdated instructions. ""Beaumont Emergency Center stands by local agency, county and state government recommendations for the wearing of masks for the safety of our citizens and patients,"" the statement says. ""WEAR A MASK, WHETHER TESTING NEGATIVE OR POSITIVE, TO HELP REDUCE THE POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO THE CORONAVIRUS. We regret that due to a late computer update that some of our patients received erroneous discharge instructions. We have taken measures to correct and update these instructions and to inform patients of the updated instructions."" We have previously reported that though the CDC once did not advise healthy people to wear face masks, the federal agency revised its recommendations in April. Now nearly everyone should wear a mask in public, under the new guidelines. The CDC says people should ""wear a cloth face mask covering their nose and mouth in community settings,"" especially in areas of widespread COVID-19 illness. The World Health Organization has a slightly different view on masks. It recommends health workers, anyone with COVID-19 symptoms and anyone caring for someone with a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19 should wear medical masks. But WHO says it doesn’t recommend masks for ""widespread use among the public for control of COVID-19."" Still, in areas of widespread transmission and when people can’t stay more than 3 feet away from each other, ""WHO advises governments to encourage the general public to use non-medical fabric masks."" Our ruling Sharing an authentic picture of outdated discharge instructions concerning face masks, the Facebook post claims WHO and CDC don’t recommend that healthy people wear masks. That’s not true. The CDC does recommend healthy people wear masks, and while WHO doesn’t recommend their widespread use to control COVID-19, it suggests healthy people should wear them in some situations."
|
10270
|
Antiviral Treatment During Pregnancy Reduces Mother-to-Child Transmission of Hepatitis B
|
This news release describes a clinical trial testing whether an antiviral drug given to pregnant women in their third trimester reduces their hepatitis B viral load. The study also examined whether the drug limits the transmission of the virus from mother to baby. The answers to both questions are yes, suggesting a new strategy for dealing with the spread of this disease. The release does a good job describing harms, quantifying benefits and describing the study protocol. Because the cost of hepatitis drugs has been widely debated for the past few years, a mention of the drug’s cost would have made the release stronger. Almost 240 million people are infected with hepatitis B virus and about 780,000 die each year from the disease, according to the World Health Organization. The hepatitis B virus infects the liver and while many recover with treatment, it can become a chronic infection. Babies and young children infected with the virus are more likely to develop chronic hepatitis B. If administering a drug to infected mothers reduces the proportion of newborns getting the disease, it would be a considerable improvement in public health.
|
true
|
Academic medical center news release
|
The release makes no mention of the cost of the drug in question, Tenofovir. A web search found that the cost for a month’s supply of the antiviral drug averages just over $1,000. For some patients, that cost may be prohibitive. The cost is an issue of particular concern for developing countries, but it is also true that the price may be much lower for them than in the United States. Many pharmaceutical companies offer their drugs at steeply discounted rates in poorer countries to expand access to life-saving medicines. The release clearly says that 68 percent of women receiving the drug reduced their viral load while only 2 percent of the women in the control group had that success. It also says that the transmission of hepatitis B from mother to newborn dropped from 18 percent to 5 percent, an important clinical outcome. The release includes a discussion of harms. It states that “tenofovir was well tolerated; only one participant treated with tenofovir voluntarily withdrew from the study due to nausea.” It also says that researchers “found no significant differences between the tenofovir-treated group and the control group with regard to fetal development and infant growth.” Lastly, it calls for longer term, observational studies to confirm the safety of fetal exposure to tenofovir treatment. The release provides a good overview of the randomized, placebo-controlled trial which was undertaken to gauge the efficacy of the drug in both reducing the viral load of hepatitis-B-positive mothers and reducing the rate of transmission of the disease from mother to newborn. It offers solid, numerical evidence of both outcomes. It describes the number of patients (200 pregnant women), defined what constituted a “high” viral load, and described the approximate length of treatment. It did omit a mention of whether the trial was blinded. This release does not commit disease mongering. The release notes that the research is funded by Gilead Sciences. It should also have mentioned that a corresponding author disclosed speaking and advising fees from Gilead, according to the published study. The release is comparing the use of an antiviral drug given to pregnant women versus the normal procedure of giving both a vaccine and immune globulin. The release doesn’t mention that tenofovir (marketed as Viread), the drug being tested, is already an FDA approved drug so many readers may not know that it’s available. It was approved by the FDA in 2001 for HIV and in 2008 for chronic hepatitis B. The release just barely implies novelty with this statement which suggests a change in treating infected women who are pregnant: “Based on the findings, the investigators recommend that women be tested for HBV viral load at week 28 of pregnancy. Those with a high viral load should receive tenofovir treatment starting at gestational week 30 until delivery to reduce the risk of transmission to their infants.” While the drug itself isn’t novel, positive outcomes from a controlled trial on pregnant women carrying the virus does seem to introduce a new treatment approach. This release does not use any unjustifiable language.
|
4442
|
China convicts 3 researchers involved in gene-edited babies.
|
A Chinese scientist who set off an ethical debate with claims that he had made the world’s first genetically edited babies was sentenced Monday to three years in prison because of his research, state media said.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Genetics, He Jiankui, Health, General News, International News, China, Asia Pacific, Scientific research
|
He Jiankui, who was convicted of practicing medicine without a license, was also fined 3 million yuan ($430,000) by a court in the southern city of Shenzhen, China’s official Xinhua News Agency reported. Two other researchers involved in the project received lesser sentences and fines. The verdict said the three defendants had not obtained qualification as doctors, pursued fame and profits, deliberately violated Chinese regulations on scientific research, and crossed an ethical line in both scientific research and medicine, according to Xinhua. It also said they had fabricated ethical review documents. The court also confirmed a third birth, saying the researchers were involved in the births of three gene-edited babies to two women. It said all three scientists pleaded guilty during the trial, which Xinhua reported was closed to the public because of privacy concerns. He, the lead researcher, shocked the scientific world when he announced in November 2018 that he had altered the embryos of twin girls who had been born the same month. He described his work in exclusive interviews with The Associated Press. The announcement sparked a global debate over the ethics of gene editing. He said he had used a tool called CRISPR to try to disable a gene that allows the AIDS virus to enter a cell, in a bid to give the girls the ability to resist the infection. The identity of the children has not been released, and it isn’t clear if the experiment succeeded. The CRISPR tool has been tested elsewhere in adults to treat diseases, but many in the scientific community denounced He’s work as medically unnecessary and unethical, because any genetic changes could be passed down to future generations. The U.S. forbids editing embryos except for lab research. He, who is known as “JK,” told the AP in 2018 that he felt a strong responsibility to make an example, and that society would decide whether to allow the practice to go forward. He disappeared from public view shortly after he announced his research at a conference in Hong Kong 13 months ago, apparently detained by authorities, initially in an apartment in Shenzhen, a city in Guangdong province that borders Hong Kong. It wasn’t clear if the three-year prison term includes any of the time he has already spent in Chinese custody. A Chinese scientist said the sentence should have been harsher to deter others. Kehkooi Kee, a Tsinghua University researcher who conducts gene-editing research on stem cells, also said that He should be held responsible for any fallout from the experiment on the lives of the babies and their families. Dr. William Hurlbut, a Stanford University bioethicist whose advice He sought for more than a year before his experiment, said he felt sorry for the scientist, his wife and two young daughters. “I warned him things could end this way, but it was just too late,” Hurlbut wrote in an email addressed to the AP; the director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis Collins; and gene-editing pioneer Jennifer Doudna at the University of California, Berkeley. “Sad story — everyone lost in this (JK, his family, his colleagues, and his country), but the one gain is that the world is awakened to the seriousness of our advancing genetic technologies,” Hurlbut wrote. Dr. Eric Topol, who heads the Scripps Research Translational Institute in California, noted it’s almost unheard of for a scientist to get imprisoned “but in this case the sheer recklessness and unethical behavior warranted it.” Topol praised China for standing up “for proper medical research conduct.” Doudna told the AP she was concerned about the “mysterious” legal process in China, but she said the sentences are “a step toward bringing this case to closure” and send a strong message to discourage other such work. (Doudna is paid by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which also supports AP’s Health and Science Department.) “As a scientist, one does not like to see scientists going to jail, but this was an unusual case,” Doudna said. He’s work was “clearly wrong in many ways.” Before setting up a lab at the Southern University of Science and Technology of China in Shenzhen, He studied in the U.S. The verdict accused him of colluding with Zhang Renli and Qin Jinzhou, who worked at medical institutes in the same province. Zhang was sentenced to two years in prison and fined 1 million yuan, Xinhua said. Qin received an 18-month prison sentence, but with a two-year reprieve, and a 500,000 yuan fine. ___ Associated Press Chief Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione in Baltimore and researchers Shanshan Wang and Yu Bing in Beijing and Fu Ting in Bangkok contributed to this report.
|
11348
|
New drug clears psoriasis in clinical trials
|
This release summarizes results from a group of three phase 3 studies that evaluated ixekizumab, a new drug treatment for psoriasis. The clinical trials enrolled nearly 4,000 patients from 21 countries. About 80 percent of the patient volunteers with moderate-to-severe psoriasis that received the drug saw improvement that lasted about a year, according to the release. The release avoided exaggeration of benefits, and carefully noted the side effects and that the drug manufacturer, Eli Lilly, funded the research and hired the first author as a paid consultant. A little more information about the drug itself — specifically that it is an injection — and a discussion of the cost would have made this an even more thorough elease. An estimated 7.5 million people in the United States have psoriasis, an inflammatory auto-immune disorder of the skin and other tissues, according to the American Academy of Dermatology. The positive results being published in a high-level New England Journal of Medicine report (on which the release is based) will likely result in this treatment being used in clinical practice.
|
true
|
Academic medical center news release
|
The release does not mention cost or whether it’s covered by private insurance or Medicare, and in this case, it’s a pretty big omission. This may be an enormously expensive treatment for patients — and it’s why we have a cost criterion in our reviews. The hopeful psoriasis patient who sees this release without a cost discussion might already have their hand on the phone to call their dermatologist. Here’s a very rough estimate of what that patient might face in terms of cost: Based on a conservative wholesale price of roughly $4,000 per 80 mg injection and following the recommendation (found on the package insert) of two injections every two weeks for 12 weeks, followed by monthly injections, we calculated $48,000 for the first 12 weeks plus $36,000 for the following 9 months or $84,000 total. The release stated that by week 12, “76.4 to 81.8 percent of patients had their psoriasis classified as “clear” or “minimal” compared to 3.2% of patients on the placebo. By the 60th week, 68.7 to 78.3 percent of patients had maintained their improvement.” We also wanted more detail on the measured strength of the response for each patient. For example, what constitutes “minimal”? The release adequately addresses harms and notes that long-term side effects are unknown with this sentence: “Adverse events associated with ixekizumab included slightly higher rates of neutropenia (low white blood cell count), yeast infection and inflammatory bowel disease compared to the placebo. The safety of therapy longer than 60 weeks will need to be monitored in the future.” The release clearly and thoroughly describes the three phase 3 international trials at 21 sites, that they enrolled a large number of patients, and that they were randomized and controlled. There was no disease mongering. The release describes what psoriasis is and its prevalence, and explains that these trials were for moderate to severe psoriasis which covers at least 10 percent of the body. The release is very transparent in stating that the drug manufacturer paid for the research and that the lead researcher is a paid consultant to Eli Lilly. The release did not compare the many different ways that patients treat psoriasis, some with topical agents and some with oral steroids or other medications. The release states that the drug has been approved by the FDA following the completion of the trials. This is a strong indication that the drug is or soon will be available. The release should have noted that the drug is already being marketed under the brand name Taltz. The release makes an understated claim to novelty with this quote from the lead researcher: “Ten years ago, we thought complete clearance of this disease was impossible. It wasn’t something we would even try to do. Now with this drug, we’re obtaining response levels higher than ever seen before.” There was no unjustifiable language in the release.
|
39072
|
An email is making the rounds that talks about a woman in Texas whose family has experienced a variety of health problems which she says are due to the lead content of some candles. The email warns that burning candles in the home can lead to health problems.
|
Beware of potential pollution from certain candles
|
true
|
Health / Medical, Household, Warnings
|
The Texas woman’s name is Cathy Flanders and she has been on a crusade to bring the problem of indoor pollution from candles to the forefront. She has filed a lawsuit against the store that sold her candles which she says resulted in toxic levels of lead in her home and with serious medical consequences on her family. Regardless of the merits of her case, it is true that indoor pollution from certain kinds of candles is becoming a focus of research and is one of the hot topics right now among professionals concerned with health issues in the home. Not all the researchers are focused on lead and there are some who say they feel the danger from lead is reduced by the fact that U.S. candle makers have not used lead in candles for more than 25 years. There is increased focus on what researchers say is a significant contribution of candles to soot residue in buildings, more than has previously been realized, and to what extent that soot can contribute to health problems. While that is being studied, pollution experts recommend choosing candles from U.S. manufacturers that are made of hard wax, have low aromatic properties, burn with a low, even flame and with wicks that burn down evenly with the rest of the candle. They also recommend keeping burning candles out of drafts and not allowing an extinguished candle to continue emitting smoke. For more information: CNN Article about Cathy Flanders Article about Black Soot in the Home from the Environmental Illness Society of Canada Comments
|
12712
|
More than half of Planned Parenthood facilities are in rural or medically underserved areas.
|
NY Rep. Maloney: More than half Planned Parenthood clinics are in underserved areas
|
true
|
Abortion, National, Health Care, Public Health, Women, Carolyn Maloney,
|
"During debate on the Republican health care bill, U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., spoke passionately about the impact it will have on women’s health and especially on Planned Parenthood. ""We all know by now that the recent CBO analysis has bad news for millions of Americans, but it has some especially bad news for women,"" Maloney said on the House floor on March 16, 2017, the same day that the House Budget Committee approved the bill. ""The GOP plan makes Planned Parenthood ineligible for any reimbursement from Medicaid or Medicare for one entire year,"" Maloney said. ""More than half of Planned Parenthood facilities are in rural or medically underserved areas."" Maloney was right that the bill restricts funds for Planned Parenthood. The American Health Care Act has a provision that won’t allow states to use direct spending of federal funds on prohibited entities. Planned Parenthood is a prohibited entity under the bill because it is a provider that is ""primarily engaged in family planning services, reproductive health and related medical care"" or ""provides for abortion"" in any situation besides saving the life of the mother, incest or rape. We were intrigued, however, by the claim that half of Planned Parenthood facilities are in rural or underserved areas. It’s a tricky thing to measure, but the evidence suggests the claim is sound. Our research Maloney’s spokeswoman Jennifer Bell pointed us to data from Planned Parenthood’s website. Statistics there show that 54% of Planned Parenthood facilities are located in health professional shortage areas, rural or medically underserved areas. This percentage was calculated by the Health Resources & Services Administration Shortage Area Database system. The HRSA is an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The HRSA's programs help provide health care to people who are geographically isolated, or economically or medically vulnerable. The agency identifies areas where health care is difficult to come by. Planned Parenthood matched up their locations to the HRSA data."
|
15282
|
"In FY 2014 Planned Parenthood performed 327,653 abortions while receiving $528 million from taxpayers, in violation"" of ""the Hyde amendment."
|
John Cornyn says Planned Parenthood provided abortions, fielded aid, violating Hyde amendment
|
false
|
Abortion, Families, Federal Budget, State Budget, Texas, John Cornyn,
|
"U.S. Sen. John Cornyn said Planned Parenthood performed hundreds of thousands of abortions in a recent year while fielding hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars--in violation of federal law. Planned Parenthood has been under fire from Republican quarters in the wake of stealth videos showing its representatives talking about providing fetal tissue to individuals posing as medical researchers. And the day the Texas Republican piped up, the GOP-majority Senate was debating whether to shift federal aid from Planned Parenthood to other health care providers. Cornyn said in an Aug. 3, 2015, tweet brought to our attention by a reader: ""In FY 2014 Planned Parenthood performed 327,653 abortions while receiving $528 million from taxpayers, in violation"" of ""the Hyde amendment."" Later in the day, after our initial inquiry, Cornyn deleted the tweet and posted a new one that left out mention of the Hyde amendment while saying that in 2013, Planned Parenthood performed 327,653 abortions; and in fiscal year 2014 received $528 million from taxpayers. Cornyn’s spokesman, Drew Brandewie, said by email that Cornyn wrote the new tweet because ""the timeframe for the data is inconsistent and presented in a confusing way in the"" latest annual report from Planned Parenthood, ""and it’s ambiguous as to whether or not federal funding is being directly used for or indirectly subsidizing abortions."" Separately, Cornyn left in place this similar tweet he’d posted Aug. 2, 2015: We asked how Cornyn concluded Planned Parenthood received such money in violation of the Hyde amendment, which struck us as a potentially consequential no-no. Cornyn’s office did not say. The Hyde amendment refers to longstanding language barring federal funding for most abortions; the first version of the provision, named after its original sponsor, Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill, passed into law in 1976. Texas is among more than 30 states to limit state funding of abortions in accord with the federal restrictions, according to a 2009 report by the Guttmacher Institute, which studies and advocates on issues related to reproductive health. The Hyde language does not single out specific groups barred from getting funds. Let’s cover Cornyn’s abortion count, then turn to the money he says Planned Parenthood got in violation of Hyde. Abortions provided To our inquiry, Brandewie pointed out Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report, published in December 2014. The report says the group provided 327,653 abortions in the 12 months from July 2013 through June 2014--while a headline on another chart says 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s services in 2013 consisted of abortions and a footnote to that says the chart actually speaks to the 12 months that ran through September 2013. (Confusing? A bit.) Overall, the group said, its clinics provided nearly 11 million services to some 2.7 million patients. The report’s breakdown of other services: Sexually transmitted infection/disease testing and treatment: 4,470,597 Contraception: 3,577,348 Cancer screening and prevention: 935,573 Pregnancy tests: 1,128,783"
|
21992
|
"The Central Falls School system ""spent $100,000 on a time clock."
|
State Sen. John Tassoni says the Central Falls school system paid $100,000 for a time clock
|
false
|
Rhode Island, City Budget, Education, John Tassoni Jr.,
|
"State Sen. John Tassoni Jr. is waging an aggressive campaign to oust the leadership of the embattled Central Falls school system In a news release, he called for the immediate resignation of Supt. Frances Gallo, saying that management of the state-funded district is ""erratic at best and incompetent at worst. … State money is being used to operate the schools, and some of that money is being wasted and used irresponsibly."" We’re not about to wade into a controversy over who should be leading the school system. Gallo and the schools have made national news for reform efforts that have kept administrators and the teachers locked in a nasty fray for more than a year. But we were curious about one example Tassoni gave of questionable financial decisions. In his press release, he stated that ""he has learned that the department spent $100,000 on a time clock."" Really? Could a time clock cost that much? Without punching in, we got right to work on this one. When we met with Tassoni, he showed us three Central Falls school district documents that he called ""purchase orders."" He noted that each made reference to a time clock and that each had a different total: $40,543.64, $55,414.68 and $5,581.68. So he added them up. Grand total: $101,540. ""That $100,000 disturbed me -- $100,000 for a time clock?"" he said. A first glance at the documents, however, reveals that there’s a great deal more to the purchase than a ""time clock."" Two of the documents specify the order was for ""TimeClock Plus 6.0 Professional."" There’s enough detail to make clear it’s a computerized system. ""It’s not just a clock. It’s a whole system,"" Gallo said when we contacted her. ""It’s automated and has brought us out of antiquity into a truly networked system."" We pictured Fred Flintstone ending his day at Slate Rock and Gravel Company by simply sticking his time card into a dinosaur’s mouth. And we recalled those classic wall-mounted clocks, the kind Moocher, in the movie ""Breaking Away,"" smashes with his fist when his boss says, ""Don’t forget to punch the clock, Shorty."" What can the new system do better? And how does it work? No one sticks a card into a clock in Central Falls schools anymore. Hourly employees place a finger on a scanner to record their arrival and departure. Their fingerprints are checked to verify their identity. Forget punching in for a friend who hasn’t shown up for work. The clocks relay employees’ hours to payroll systems, reducing the time staff must spend processing cards and avoiding human error that could result in payment mistakes, according to Giovanna Venditti, the School Department’s director of finance, and Kathy Gaouette, director of human resources. The system can notify administrators when employees are approaching overtime. TimeClock can also ease record-keeping by tracking which hours should be paid out of the general fund or from an account set up for a specific grant, they said. Of the 500 full- and part-time employees who support the 2,800-student district, only 182 mostly non-salaried employees -- including maintenance workers, crossing guards, bus monitors and drivers -- use the new system. But the district wants its 340 teachers to agree to use it, too. Now back to those documents that Tassoni used to support his $100,000 claim. Only two are actual purchase orders, said Venditti. One for $55,598.68, dated March 15, 2010, was for hardware, software, licensing fees, training and systems support. The purchase included 11 time clocks -- not one -- for nine school buildings. The other purchase order, for $5,581, dated Feb. 23, 2011, was to renew a technical support agreement for the TimeClock system for another year. And that third document, the one with the $40,539 total? It’s just a packing slip. Unlike the other two documents, it does not say ""purchase order"" at the top in large bold letters or include any similar information, such as a ""P.O. date"" or ""P.O. issued to."" Data Management Inc., of San Angelo, Texas, simply included it in a shipment of items it sent to Central Falls. The packing slip didn’t total $55,598, the amount of the purchase order, because the $13,442 fingerprint scanning equipment and one other item were shipped separately. So Tassoni, by simply adding the totals of the three documents, counted some items twice, inflating the original purchase of $55,598.68 (excluding the systems support renewal) by nearly 75 percent. ""It is not $100,000,"" said Venditti, the finance director. TimeClock was recommended by UniFund, the New Hampshire company that sold Central Falls its BudgetSense financial software, which helps the schools meet state financial reporting requirements. The programs are compatible. Like Central Falls, Barrington purchased TimeClock at the advice of UniFund. The town paid only $18,996, said Ronald Tarro, director of administration and finance -- a lot less than Central. Falls. But Barrington bought two fewer clocks and decided not to pay extra for the fingerprint technology. Barrington schools use badges instead. Barrington’s costs are also substantially lower because only 25 non-salaried maintenance and custodial staff are using TimeClock. Data Management charges a fee based on the number of users--$15 for each of the 500 employees that Central Falls wants to use the clocks. With the clock still running, where does this leave us? For starters, Tassoni could have asked school officials about the documents he was shown. Instead, the senator -- who publishes a union newspaper and is a former union administrator -- simply added up the totals on the three documents to push his case against the school leadership. That’s flimsy backup for saying he ""learned"" of a $100,000 expenditure and, then, choosing two words out of context, calling the purchase a ""time clock."" It clearly was not just a time clock. And it didn’t cost $100,000. The total was just over half that (plus the annual support contracts which are typical of software purchases). When he turned over the documents to PolitiFact, Tassoni even admitted, ""I could be all wet."" He IS all wet. But not to worry. We’re going to flame-dry his Dockers with a ! (Get updates from PolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on our PolitiFact Rhode Island Facebook page.)"
|
10622
|
Drug gives couch potato mice benefits of a workout
|
When you report on mouse research, you can’t include enough caveats. This story – about mouse research on compounds to provide the benefits of exercise without the exercise – didn’t place enough emphasis on the lack of evidence of efficacy and safety in humans. Also, the story should have mentioned the process that these drugs will need to go through to determine whether or not they are effective and safe in humans. The story failed to: explain that one of the compounds is already approved for another use in humans, and so has some track record for harms and for costs – which the story didn’t describe; explain a key aspect of the research – that it examined two target tissues (two specific muscles). In addition, since the study was conducted in a single strain, meaning a group of genetically identical individuals, it is not known whether the results apply to any other strain of mice, let alone other organisms like people; explain the results in absolute rather than just relative terms. So the compound-using mice ran 68% longer and 70% farther. What does that mean? Longer and farther than what baseline? Many news organizations gave this story a lot of space in print and a lot of airtime in broadcast. This just happened to be a story that fell into our cycle for review on that day. In the end, you have to wonder why so many media gave that much attention to a preliminary study in mice.
|
false
|
Although not approved for the use described in the story, cost information about at least one of the compounds described is available and could have been mentioned. While the story provided relative improvement in exercise capacity, it would have been clearer if it had presented absolute improvement. This might have made it less likely that a reader would simply extrapolate the results from mouse to human. 68% longer and 70% farther than what baseline? The story only provided the most positive spin of the study results. There was no mention of the possible downsides (other than doping for athletic events) that might be associated with these compounds. Given that AICAR is available for treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in people, it should have been possible to report on some of the potential side effects. The story did not do an adequate job describing the results of the story it was reporting on. It would be hard for a reader to assess the value of the study results. The study examined the impact of the two compounds discussed in a small number of young mice over a short period of time. While it might be assumed that because the mice could exercise more (run longer and further) that this would mean there were no harmful effects. But it is very premature to draw this conclusion as they only examined two target tissues (two specific muscles). In addition, since the study was conducted in a single strain, meaning a group of genetically identical individuals, it is not known whether the results apply to any other strain of mice, let alone other organisms like people. The story should have mentioned whether or not these drugs are currently even being tested for this indication in people. The story did not engage in disease mongering. It did engage in couch potato encouraging. Two individuals who were not directly associated with the research reported on were quoted as part of this story. Although we were told where they were affiliated, the story did not explicitly indicate that these two individuals were not involved in the study. The story picked up the notion that was part of the press release about the compounds having potential for use by elite athletes to enhance their performance. The story did not include much information about means by which an individual might improve their aerobic capacity and exercise capacity in general beyond the use of the compound described in the story. The story did not explain that one of the compounds, AICAR, is currently used for the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The story should have made it clearer that there is no information about the efficacy and safety of these compounds in humans at this time. The story did say that both compaounds have been studied by researchers for other uses. It should have made clear that one is approved for another use. There’s no evidence that the story relied solely or largely on the press release which accompanied the on-line publication of this research study.
|
|
24549
|
The claim ... that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens ... is a lie, plain and simple.
|
"Obama is correct that ""death panel"" charge is a lie"
|
true
|
National, Health Care, Barack Obama,
|
"In his address to a joint session of Congress, President Barack Obama brought up the most explosive charge to emerge in the health care debate: the specter of ""death panels."" ""Some of people’s concerns (about the health care legislation) have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost,"" Obama told lawmakers and a national television audience on Sept. 9, 2009. ""The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but by prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Now, such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple."" The president was referring to a notion most prominently raised by former Alaska Republican Gov. Sarah Palin in a note posted on her Facebook page on Aug. 7, 2009. ""And who will suffer the most when they ration care?"" Palin wrote. ""The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."" We have read all 1,000-plus pages of the Democratic bill and examined versions in various committees. There is no panel in any version of the health care bills in Congress that judges a person's ""level of productivity in society"" to determine whether someone is ""worthy"" of health care. When we first assessed Palin's claim on Aug. 7, 2009, we gave it our lowest rating — . Palin may have jumped to a conclusion about the Obama administration's efforts to promote comparative effectiveness research. Such research has nothing to do with evaluating patients for ""worthiness."" Rather, comparative effectiveness research finds out which treatments work better than others. The health reform bill being considered in the House of Representatives says that a Comparative Effectiveness Research Center shall ""conduct, support, and synthesize research"" that looks at ""outcomes, effectiveness, and appropriateness of health care services and procedures in order to identify the manner in which diseases, disorders, and other health conditions can most effectively and appropriately be prevented, diagnosed, treated, and managed clinically."" The idea here, which Obama and his budget director Peter Orszag have discussed many times, is to make it easier for doctors, health care workers, insurance companies and patients to find out which treatments are the most effective, as determined by clinical studies and other research. The House bill states in the section creating the Comparative Effectiveness Research Center and an oversight commission that ""nothing in this section shall be consd to permit the Commission or the Center to mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies for any public or private payer."" In other words, comparative effectiveness research will tell you whether treatment A is better than treatment B. But the bill as written won't mandate which treatment doctors and patients have to select. Nothing has emerged to suggest to us that the death panels claim is any more today than it was when Palin first floated it. We still rate it as today. In our book, that counts as a ""lie, plain and simple."" So we find Obama's claim ."
|
29600
|
"American liberals are debating the merits of ""after birth abortion."
|
While the subject drew the interest of many during a debate over abortion and medical ethics, the July 2015 articles mashed up old medical ethics debates with current ideological disputes to manufacture social media outrage over a non-existent issue. (The issue-no-one-was-debating template bore a striking resemblance to a earlier manufactured “post birth abortion” controversy promulgated in October 2014.)
|
false
|
Politics, after birth abortion, american news, conservative post
|
On 29 July 2015, the unreliable web site Conservative Post published an article titled “Liberals Debate to Introduce ‘After-Birth Abortions’ as Newborns ‘Are Not Persons. '” The similarly disreputable web site American News published a similarly titled article on the same day. The two articles featured nearly identical content, light on details and context but weighing heavy on the outrage scale: Alberto Giubilini with Monash University in Melbourne and Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne write that in “circumstances occur[ing] after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible.” The circumstances, the authors state, where after-birth abortion should be considered acceptable include instances where the newborn would be putting the well-being of the family at risk. Both headlines suggested American “liberals” had embraced the idea of “after birth abortion” but supported that claim by referencing assertions made by two University of Melbourne (Australia) ethicists in a 2012 Journal of Medical Ethics paper titled “After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?” Not only were the ethicists (Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva) neither American nor liberals (in the sense suggested by the title), but neither were politicians in their home countries nor politically advocating for the merits of infanticide. The paper on which these July 2015 articles were predicated was submitted back in 2011, and outcry at the time was global and almost universally in disagreement with the ideas most believed had been proposed in the original paper. On 2 March 2012, the paper’s authors post a public letter to the Journal of Medical Ethics blog that addressed some of the widespread outrage resulting from their original piece: However, we never meant to suggest that after-birth abortion should become legal. This was not made clear enough in the paper. Laws are not just about rational ethical arguments, because there are many practical, emotional, social aspects that are relevant in policy making (such as respecting the plurality of ethical views, people’s emotional reactions etc). But we are not policy makers, we are philosophers, and we deal with concepts, not with legal policy. Moreover, we did not suggest that after birth abortion should be permissible for months or years as the media erroneously reported. If we wanted to suggest something about policy, we would have written, for example, a comment related the Groningen Protocol (in the Netherlands), which is a guideline that permits killing newborns under certain circumstances (e.g. when the newborn is affected by serious diseases). But we do not discuss guidelines in the paper. Rather we acknowledged the fact that such a protocol exists and this is a good reason to discuss the topic (and probably also for publishing papers on this topic). However, the content of (the abstract of) the paper started to be picked up by newspapers, radio and on the web. What people understood was that we were in favour of killing people. This, of course, is not what we suggested. This is easier to see when our thesis is read in the context of the history of the debate. Minerva and Giubilini’s submission (to a medical journal covering the broad subject of ethics) in 2011 was almost immediately misconstrued to be an argument for infanticide. Whatever their intent with respect to the article was, the submission was not recent in July 2015 (at which time it was nearly four years old). Moreover, the points made by the paper’s authors met near-universal objection at the time they were published, and no mainstream political groups (including liberals) leaped to embrace them; we were unable to locate any vocal medical, social, or political entity (mainstream or fringe) actively campaigning for infanticide (or as the articles called it, “after birth abortion”) in mid-2015.
|
34579
|
Scented candles can cause cancer (or other major health problems).
|
The evidence does indicate that there are dangers associated with pollutants that result from burning candles (and incense), although how much damage can be caused (and by which candles) is still up in the air. Moderation is probably the best approach, as is keeping areas well-ventilated and not leaving candles unattended. While research noted above does seem to indicate that vegetable-based candles, like soy, are healthier, The NCA also weighed in to say that all candles burn the same and there are no more health risks associated with parafin than there are soy candles. Finally it’s a good idea to avoid the ingredient limonene, no matter how good it might smell, in any cleaning or fragrance product.
|
unproven
|
Uncategorized, candles, scented candles, toxins
|
Anecdotal stories abound about the dangers of burning scented candles in an enclosed space. The information is difficult to track down, muddied by vague claims about “toxins” and what seems to be conflicting information: Some studies indicate that scented candles cause cancer, others conclude they don’t. Yet another study concludes that it’s what the candle is made of, as opposed to the scent itself, that can be harmful. There doesn’t seem to be an agency in the United States that has jurisdiction to oversee whether scented candles present a health risk or not. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Consumer Product Safety Committee either said they do not have jurisdiction over scented candles, or referred us to one of the other agencies upon inquiry. The National Candle Association (NCA), meanwhile, wrote to us on 23 August 2016 and said candles are safe. One study done by researchers from the United States and Europe concluded that under “normal conditions,” scented candles do not present a health risk. Another study by a researcher at South Carolina State University concluded that burning candles made of paraffin can result in health problems, including cancer and asthma. Still another indicated that candles (and incense) can contain everything from particulate contaminants that can affect air quality to lead, which is put into wicks to make them stand straight and can still be found in scented-candle circles despite a voluntary ban. Per the NCA: It is important to note that this [EPA study is a] 2001 review of candles and incense stated that “the primary constituent of public health concern in candle emissions is lead.” At the time, lead wicks were still found in some candles coming from China, which were indeed a health concern. Members of the National Candle Association, who account for some 90 percent of all candles made in the US, had voluntarily discontinued the use of lead wicks in the 1970s due to health concerns, and the US Consumer Product Safety Commission formally banned them from the U.S. marketplace in 2003. What to believe? In January, British publication The Telegraph reported that a study completed by Professor Alastair Lewis of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science at the University of York found the ingredient limonene — which gives products a citrus smell — could be carcinogenic. Professor Lewis told the publication: The really surprising thing is just how high the concentrations of some fragrances are now in people’s homes…Fragrance chemicals now completely dominate the inside of most homes. The issue is we don’t really know what the consequences of long-term exposure to formaldehyde are. It is a chemical that is known to harm you long-term. Limonene reportedly mutates into formaldehyde upon contact with air. According to the NCI, formaldehyde is a carcinogen: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies formaldehyde as a human carcinogen. In 2011, the National Toxicology Program, an interagency program of the Department of Health and Human Services, named formaldehyde as a known human carcinogen in its 12th Report on Carcinogens.
|
9815
|
Magnesium-rich diet may lower stroke risk: study
|
Except for the headline, the story was carefully framed to avoid overstating the findings. This story is a good example of how to report on an observational meta-analysis. We know how headlines are almost always written by someone other than the reporter. The disconnect here was clear. Stroke is a major cause of death and disability in the aging population. We can decrease stroke risk by treating hypertension and taking aspirin. If dietary interventions decrease risk further, this is important public health information. People need to understand the context, however, because no one should rush out to buy magnesium supplements to the exclusion of other good health habits.
|
true
|
Reuters Health,Stroke,Supplements
|
Not applicable. The cost of such a diet is not in question. The story provided the absolute number of strokes observed in the analysis, and the relative risk reduction observed. With a meta-analysis it is not statistically appropriate to pool absolute risk reductions, so the way the story treated the evidence is as good as can be done (showing the relative risk reduction and an “anchor” in terms of absolute risk.) Harms weren’t discussed, but we’re not sure there any substantial harms of a diet rich in leafy green vegetables, nuts and beans worth mentioning. We appreciate how the story’s second sentence emphasized: “But the authors of the study, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, stopped short of recommending people take a daily magnesium supplement because their analysis focused on magnesium in food — and it may be another aspect of the food that is responsible for their finding.” There was no disease mongering. The story included one independent expert’s perspective. We’ll give the story a satisfactory grade for emphasizing that this study could not address whether other aspects of peoples’ diets affected the findings – and that the results were consistent with dietary recommendations. The story would have been stronger if it had mentioned the importance of hypertension control in stroke reduction – and that it may be the favorable dietary pattern that is working with these people through improved blood pressure control. Not applicable. The availability of this kind of diet is not in question. The story was clear that this study was an analysis of seven studies published in the past 14 years. The story did not appear to rely on a news release.
|
1676
|
Fitness studios keep clients on track with photos, social media.
|
Need a little extra encouragement to shape up in time for that wedding, class reunion or vacation?
|
true
|
Health News
|
Boutique fitness studios are keeping track of clients’ progress with methods ranging from videotaping their workouts to measuring their fat, to posting a friendly nudge on their Facebook pages. Gregory Chertok, a sports psychology consultant with the American College of Sports Medicine, said research has shown that even small amounts of social support can produce large and lasting gains in physical activity. In a 2007 study by Stanford University in California, researchers showed that even a simple, computer-generated phone call could be effective in motivating the sedentary to exercise. “These exercisers are being held accountable by their fitness studios to a degree,” he said. AKT InMotion, a New York/Connecticut chain of dance and circuit-based interval training studios, offers a $2,000, personalized, eight-week exercise and nutrition program. It includes periodic body measurements and is supervised by a fitness concierge. Anna Kaiser, founder of AKT, said photographs and measurements are taken every two weeks to track progress. “A client will say ‘I still feel fat’ because you don’t actually see that you’re changing, so it helps,” said Kaiser, who added that measurements were private and optional. Accountability, she explained, is a two-way street. Clients must show up as well as work on nutrition, and if aspects of the program are not producing results, AKT will change it. Videotaping is popular for tracking progress. At Refine Method studio in New York City, which features full-body circuit training and small classes, it is used to give clients a concrete measure to gauge progress. Clients do a few key assessment moves, such as a squat, and the videotape will show how they have improved over time. Founder Brynn Putnam, a former New York City Ballet dancer, said unlike professional athletes, who can count their wins, most people don’t get clear indications of progress. Regularity is also an important factor for improvement. Barry’s Bootcamp, a national chain of interval cardiovascular treadmill and strength-training studios, clients can sign up for a program called ‘Academy,’ in which they commit to the same classes at the same-time Monday to Friday for four weeks. Trainer Joey Gonzalez said he has used Facebook to reach out to no-shows. “Social media gives us a short cut for clients who have signed up for accountability-based programs,” he said.
|
35842
|
A drug used to treat animal parasites like heartworm and roundworm is a potential cure for coronavirus.
|
What's undetermined: The preliminary results of several studies may show potential for the effectiveness of ivermectin as an antiviral in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. However, it is too early to draw overarching conclusions. Clinical trials and further research are still necessary to determine whether the drug is both safe and effective in human patients infected by SARS-CoV-2.
|
unproven
|
Politics Medical, COVID-19
|
Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug used as the primary ingredient in canine heartworm preventatives, was touted as a “new tool” in the “arsenal” against SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus strain responsible for the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. Media publications like far-right cable channel OAN touted the drug as a “cure” that could kill the virus in “just 48 hours.” Our analysis determined that this claim is a mixture of half-truths combined with misleading and overzealous claims. Such claims began circulating online in April 2020 when Australian researchers with the Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute and the Peter Doherty Institute of Infection and Immunity shared findings from an in vitro study that was in preprint and had not yet been peer reviewed by the scientific community. Similar claims made headway again in June, when the research was published in the scientific journal Antiviral Research, concluding that the FDA-approved drug ivermectin — which is most commonly used to treat internal and external animal parasites — was found to effectively stop SARS-CoV-2 virus from replicating in cells cultured in petri dishes. An in vitro study differs from an in vivo study in that the research occurs inside of extracted or grown cells cultured in a lab setting rather than in vivo, whereby the research takes place within a plant, human or animal. In vitro studies typically occur in the very early stages of research as a way to test pharmaceutical drugs or interventions before moving on to living organisms. However, there is currently little evidence to suggest that ivermectin can “cure” COVID-19 in humans. That’s because throughout the course of the study, the drug was not given to people or animals, and the findings can only provide a potential path of future study into the safety and effectiveness of the drug. In a separate study published in July 2020 in the Journal of Bangladesh College of Physicians and Surgeons, researchers described treating 100 patients in Bangladesh who tested positive for COVID-19 — an admittedly small sample size — with a combination treatment of ivermectin and doxycycline, along with “supportive treatment.” Nearly three-quarters of the patients were considered to have a “mild” case of the disease while one-in-ten were classified as “moderate,” which begs the question of whether the test subjects improved on their own accord or if it was some form of the various treatments given. “It is too early in this pandemic to claim major successes of the effectivity of our combination therapy (Ivermectin and Doxycycline) as our number is small and there is no control group,” concluded the study authors. “Nevertheless, the results encourage us to continue the clinical study for people of the world in this improbable crisis as each and every life counts.” There are studies underway to further determine whether ivermectin may be used in future human trials, though they have neither been peer-reviewed nor published in a reputable journal at the time of writing. One such study is a U.S. clinical trial that took place between May 31 and July 27, 2020, in which researchers administered a preventative treatment of ivermectin to more than 200 asymptomatic individuals who had come in close contact with a confirmed COVID-19 patient but were not diagnosed with the disease themselves. Patients were measured for their development of COVID-19 symptoms within 14 days and diagnosis was then confirmed via a swab test. The preliminary and small-scale study, which has not been published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, suggested that ivermectin may be used to prevent infection of COVID-19. But again, the findings require further testing and evidence before they may be applied to larger human populations. Ivermectin is a key ingredient in the canine heartworm preventative Heartguard. The anti-parasitic belongs to a class of medication called anthelmintics and is commonly given to animals via an oral tablet that works by either killing the parasites or stopping them from developing, according to the U.S. National Library of Medicine. Ivermectin is approved by the FDA for human use and is mainly prescribed in its topical form as a treatment for external parasites like head lice. In some cases, ivermectin may be prescribed as an oral tablet, a medication called Stromectol, to treat some parasitic roundworm infections. Throughout the course of the pandemic, the scientific community rushed to find potential treatments for SARS-CoV-2, a single-stranded RNA virus closely related to SARS-CoV, the coronavirus responsible for the 2003 SARS pandemic. Scientists turned to previous SARS-related research in order to find treatments that may also be effective in treating COVID-19, one of which was ivermectin. To test whether the anti-parasitic may have a similar effect on SARS-CoV-2, scientists cultured the cells of fetal pigs — again, not humans — in petri dishes in a laboratory setting before infecting the cultured cells with the coronavirus. When ivermectin was administered, it was shown to effectively stop SARS-CoV-2 replicating in these cultured cells. Within 24 hours of infection, there was a 93% reduction in viral replication and a 99.8% reduction by 48 hours. Though results are promising and show potential for the effective use of the drug as an antiviral in COVID-19 and other diseases, there is no clinical evidence to suggest that ivermectin can inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. In short, it is far too early to claim that ivermectin is an effective cure or a treatment, or that it may become one in the near future.
|
9404
|
FDA approves first blood test for concussion
|
This story managed to earn three stars despite grossly misleading readers. It reports the FDA’s approval of a blood test to detect biomarkers associated with brain lesions, which the FDA says will eliminate the need for a CT scan in at least a third of suspected concussions. The story covers cost and availability and usefully points out that this test hasn’t been approved for kids. But the lead gets it wrong when it says the test is designed to “help detect concussion”; it’s not. The test is designed to detect structural brain injuries that might be picked up by a CT scan, such as skull fractures or bleeding in the brain. The story also doesn’t address uncertainties with the quality of evidence or potential harms. Finally, it misses an opportunity to educate the public about the need for more judicious use of CT scans, which are not helpful for detecting concussions. Greater understanding about the short- and long-term consequences of head injuries has generated a lot of interest in how to detect and treat them. That was no doubt a factor in the widespread coverage of the FDA’s approval of this test. CNN wasn’t the only news outlet to get this story wrong, but that’s no excuse. Widespread misreporting of this test as a way to detect concussion could lead to harms, such as people being falsely reassured if they undergo this test and get a negative result. It’s also important for news stories to reinforce the appropriate use of CT scans. According to Choosing Wisely, CT scans “cannot show if you have a concussion.” Only a doctor can diagnose a concussion, based on a face-to-face evaluation. A CT scan — and presumably this new test — can detect a skull fracture or bleeding in the brain. Finally, news stories should flag weaknesses in the evidence used to support regulatory approvals, particularly for tests that are fast-tracked.
|
mixture
|
blood test,Concussion
|
The story quotes Hank Nordoff, chairman and CEO of the company that makes the device, on the anticipated cost of the blood test compared with the cost of a CT scan: “Where a CT scan can cost $800 to $1,500, Nordhoff predicts that the new test would cost closer to $150.” A neutral source on the price of CT scans would have been better, but that doesn’t appear to be far off the mark. The story blunders when it states, “When compared with a CT scan, the blood test was 97.5% as effective in detecting concussion and 99.6% effective in ruling out concussion.” In fact, the figures pertain to detecting brain lesions, not concussions. It also states the most significant purported benefit: “The FDA believes that using the new blood test, imaging can be avoided in at least a third of patients who are suspected of having a concussion.” Presumably the risks associated with this biomarker test are quite small, but this is not stated in the story. There is no discussion of the potential harms of using a biomarker to rule out the need for a CT scan. For example, might some people who get a negative reading mistakenly think that means they don’t have a concussion? Would false positives lead to unnecessary CT scans or other intervensions? We wish the story had done more to flag uncertainties about the quality of the evidence. For example, while the FDA asserted that the test would reduce the need for CT scans, it’s unclear whether it will in practice. Reducing scans could be a challenge if other forces that compel their use — including clinicians’ fears about missing a clinically significant injury — aren’t addressed. Further, the story’s reference to the fact that the biomarker test has been approved by the FDA might give readers the wrong impression that there were rigorous clinical trials. There’s no mention that the new breakthrough devices program under which this product was approved allows the FDA to accept what many consider to be a lower standard of evidence than what’s historically been required. The story says the FDA evaluated a clinical study of 1,900 blood samples from people thought to have concussion or mild traumatic brain injury. It also refers to “clinical trials,” but no clinical trials are mentioned in the FDA’s news release. This could be confusing to readers, who might not understand that what appears to be an observational “study” of available blood samples does not match the rigor of a clinical trial. The FDA’s news release does not contain details about how the data was gathered or analyzed, and some researchers have raised concerns about the evidence supporting the blood test. On the positive side, the story does mention that a separate test has yet to be developed to detect damage from repeated hits. Head injuries, traumatic brain injuries, and concussions are often in the news. This story appropriately addresses the seriousness of the medical condition. The story also contains this data: “According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were approximately 2.8 million incidents involving traumatic brain injury emergency department visits, hospitalizations and deaths in 2013.” There’s input from a neurologist, David Dodick, MD, who appears to be an independent source. There’s no discussion of alternative strategies to decrease the use of CT scans, such as better educating parents and clinicians about their appropriate use. It is fair to assume that with the FDA approval of the biomarker test some hospitals may begin trialing its use. This may not be widely available anytime soon, but it is reasonable for the public to be informed about the existence of the test. The story quotes the CEO of the company that makes the test as saying it “would be available to hospitals,” and “he hopes a handheld sideline device could be commercially available in the near future.” Laudably, the story states in the lead that the test has been approved for adults, which is significant because many kids are suspected of having concussions while playing sports. It further states that the study supporting the device’s approval did not include data on children, though the company “plans to include them in future studies.” The story states this is the first time the FDA has approved a blood test to “help detect concussion in adults.” Actually, the test does not detect concussions; it detects biomarkers for brain lesions. The primary content in the story was found in an FDA news release, but the reporter did supplement the story with additional reporting. However, in this case, we wish the story had stuck more closely to the wording of the news release for the sake of accuracy.
|
7447
|
Dispute over reopening California Tesla factory may be over .
|
It appears the dispute between Tesla and San Francisco Bay Area authorities over the reopening of a factory in the face of shutdown orders appears to have ended.
|
true
|
U.S. News, San Francisco, Health, General News, Detroit, Business, California, Elon Musk, Virus Outbreak, Public health
|
The Alameda County Public Health Department announced on Twitter late Tuesday that the Fremont, California, plant will be able to go beyond basic operations this week and start making vehicles Monday — as long as it delivers on worker safety precautions that it agreed to. It wasn’t clear from a news release whether Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk would face any punishment for reopening last Monday in defiance of county orders. Messages were left early Wednesday seeking comment from health officials and Tesla. The release said Fremont police would verify whether Tesla was holding up its part of the agreement. The deal requires that public health indicators have to remain stable or improve for the factory to stay open. “We will be working with the Fremont PD to verify Tesla is adhering to physical distancing and that agreed upon health and safety measures are in place for the safety of their workers as they prepare for full production,” the release said. Tesla’s factory reopened Monday for pre-production with Musk practically daring local authorities to arrest him, and operations apparently continued into Tuesday. The company met a Monday deadline to submit a site-specific plan to protect worker safety. But the reopening defied orders from the health department, which has deemed the factory a nonessential business that can’t fully open under restrictions intended to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus. The health department has said it warned the company was operating in violation of the county health order, and hoped Tesla will “comply without further enforcement measures” until the county approves a site-specific plan required by the state. Gov. Gavin Newsom framed the issue Wednesday as a local dispute, noting that the state guidelines have allowed some manufacturing “for weeks” when counties permit resumption. He said he’s urged local governments to follow the state’s approach in dealing with rogue operators by seeking “not to be punitive at first.” “It sounds like, based upon the progress that’s been made public, with the county and Tesla, that they were able to resolve their issue in fairly short order along those same lines,” he said. State law allows a fine of up to $1,000 a day or up to 90 days in jail for operating in violation of health orders. The plant in Fremont, a city of more than 230,000 people south of San Francisco, was closed March 23. It employs about 10,000 workers. Public health experts have credited stay-at-home orders with slowing the spread of the coronavirus, and helping hospitals handle an influx of cases. The coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms for most people. But it has killed more than 80,000 people in the U.S., with the death toll rising. Alameda County was among six San Francisco Bay Area counties that were the first in the nation to impose stay-at-home orders in mid-March. Newsom has repeatedly said that counties can impose restrictions that are more stringent than state orders. The order in the Bay Area has been extended until the end of the month, but the counties plan to allow some limited business and manufacturing starting May 18, the same day Detroit automakers plan to reopen auto assembly plants. Some auto parts plants were to restart production this week. The Detroit automakers’ 150,000 U.S. workers are represented by the United Auto Workers union, which has negotiated for added safety precautions. Tesla’s workers do not have a union. Musk, whose company has sued Alameda County seeking to overturn its order, threatened to move Tesla’s manufacturing operations and headquarters from the state. Tesla contends in the lawsuit that Alameda County can’t be more restrictive than orders from Newsom. The lawsuit says the governor’s coronavirus restrictions refer to federal guidelines classifying vehicle manufacturing as essential businesses that are allowed to continue operating. Tesla released a plan to maintain worker safety, including wearing gloves and masks, installing barriers between workers and maintaining social distancing. Local officials said the company initially pushed back on checking employee temperatures before boarding a company bus to get to work. But Tesla relented and agreed to check workers. ___ This story has been changed to clarify that the health department tweet came late Tuesday PST. ___ Associated Press writer Juliet Williams contributed to this report.
|
9667
|
To quit smoking, it's best to go cold turkey, study finds
|
This story looks at a study that investigated whether going cold turkey (quitting abruptly) is more effective than cutting back gradually. The article does a good job quantifying the benefits, and informing readers of the quality of the research. We also liked how the author made an effort to place this latest study in the larger body of research on smoking cessation, and used plainspoken language to let us know the results weren’t “overwhelming.” However, the story lacked comments from an independent source–or even one of the researchers. Well-designed research on smoking cessation is vital to helping smokers overcome their addiction. The media’s role is important, too–readers eager to quit smoking are not likely to be reading medical journals, but they are reading the news. Therefore, media reports about smoking cessation research must help readers make sense of new findings, and not overhype lackluster results or downplay serious harms or costs.
|
true
|
cold turkey,nicotine addiction,smoking cessation research
|
Both groups in this study used smoking cessation products, and so it would have been helpful to know how much they cost, even if it was just a quick approximation or discussion of affordability. At the same time, these aren’t high-dollar items, so cost isn’t as important to discuss as say, when reporting findings about a new cancer drug or surgery. The story gives the absolute number of participants (697) who were enrolled in the trial and then reports the percentages of participants who stopped smoking. While it reported reduced cigarette consumption in relative numbers, it did specify that participants smoked at least 15 cigarettes a day, giving somewhat more meaning to these percentages (e.g. “decrease their smoking by an average of 29%”). It told us quit rates at four weeks and six months, too–so we get some sense of change over time on results. It also placed these results in the greater context of what we know about quit rates among smokers. When quitting, heavy smokers can experience withdrawal symptoms–such as depression, insomnia and decreased heart rate–even if they use nicotine replacement products. The article did refer to “withdrawal” and “urge intensities” and so we’ll considered that sufficient. However, the piece would have been stronger had it specifically discussed the withdrawal symptoms mentioned above. The story sufficiently discusses the quality of evidence here, including that participants were assigned to one of two treatment groups. We’re told how far out the the study lasted, too–an indirect measure of quality, since long-term success rates are important for addictive behaviors. We also liked this frank sentence: “The researchers acknowledge that this is hardly the last word on the best way to quit.” The story does not engage in disease mongering–a smoking habit is unhealthy and harmful, and efforts to improve quit rates are important to study. This story does not include any comments from independent sources–or even from one of the researchers themselves. It only refers to the original journal article. Why does this matter? It’s always a good idea to consult an outside source because it’s likely to yield insights and context that otherwise would be lacking. But overall, this is a case where the story is still fairly strong, regardless of the lack of sourcing or interviews. The study is comparing two alternatives when quitting smoking–either cold turkey or gradually. The story discusses these options, along with the use of nicotine replacement in both scenarios. That’s enough to qualify as Satisfactory. However, another alternative the author didn’t mention was medications that can help with cravings–such as bupropion. What does the research say (if anything) about how those medications might augment quitting? That’s important to discuss. The availability of cigarettes or smoking cessation products is not in question. Although the story uses the word “new” when it means “latest” in the lead paragraph, we feel it did a good enough job referring to other studies to merit a Satisfactory rating. Despite the lack of original comments, this LA Times article does not appear to be based on any news releases we found online.
|
41761
|
If you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations, your house just went down 75 percent in value. And they say the noise causes cancer.
|
During an April 2 speech to the National Republican Congressional Committee, President Donald Trump once again attacked wind power, falsely claiming that noise from turbines causes cancer and that turbines sink property values by 75 percent. Both claims are unsubstantiated.
|
false
|
cancer, wind energy,
|
During an April 2 speech to the National Republican Congressional Committee, President Donald Trump once again attacked wind power, falsely claiming that noise from turbines causes cancer and that turbines sink property values by 75 percent.The president has repeatedly erred when it comes to wind power. As we’ve explained before, when the president said living near turbines is noisy enough to make someone “go crazy after a couple of years,” there’s no direct evidence that the sound is harmful to human health. Here, we’ll explain why there’s no turbine-cancer link, and describe some of the economic research about what happens to home prices once wind turbines are constructed.Trump, April 2: Hillary wanted to put up wind. Wind. If you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations, your house just went down 75 percent in value. And they say the noise causes cancer, you tell me that one, okay?There is no evidence that wind turbines cause cancer. The American Cancer Society told us in a statement that it is “unaware of any credible evidence linking the noise from windmills to cancer.” We also searched the biomedical literature for any studies investigating a link, and couldn’t find any.There is also no particular reason to think that wind turbines would cause cancer. Cancer, or what scientists think of as uncontrolled cell growth, is at heart a genetic disease because it starts when a cell has or acquires a mutation in its DNA that allows it to grow unchecked, as the National Cancer Institute explains.Usually many of these failures are needed to form a tumor, which can then become malignant and spread throughout the body. The mutations can be inherited, come about naturally as cells replicate, or can come from environmental exposures, such as cigarette smoke, pollution or ultraviolet light. Typically, these environmental exposures are the things that people are concerned with when they talk about cancer causes. Not all of them directly impact DNA; some can lead cells to divide more quickly, increasing the odds of mutation, as the American Cancer Society says.Sound waves, however, aren’t thought to mutate DNA or to cause cancer in any other way. In fact, some sound waves help diagnose cancer, and they might even fight off the disease, researchers at the Institute of Cancer Research outside London have found.The only plausible way wind turbines might contribute to even a small amount of cancer risk is by increasing stress or disrupting sleep. But it hasn’t yet been demonstrated that those problems do contribute to cancer risk, or that they are caused by turbine noise. Trump’s claim is baseless.As with his cancer claim, Trump’s idea that property values decline by 75 percent when wind turbines go up is also unsubstantiated. Last month, at an event in Ohio, the president made a similar claim when he said, “Put the windmills up and watch the value of your house — if you’re in sight of a windmill, watch the value of your house go down by 65 percent.”This time, the president increased the number by 10 percentage points. But no studies on the issue suggest that property values decline by that much. Many of the strongest and most relevant studies, in fact, indicate small or no changes to property values.A July 2014 paper published in the journal Energy Economics by researchers at the University of Rhode Island, for instance, found “no statistically significant negative impacts on house prices, in either the post public announcement phase or post construction phase.” The study followed more than 48,000 transactions of single-family homes across the state, including more than 3,000 located within a mile of a turbine.Similarly, a large study of more than 120,000 home sales in Massachusetts also found no significant drop in property values due to wind turbines. “The study found no net effects due to the arrival of turbines in the sample’s communities,” the report’s conclusion reads. “Weak evidence suggests that the announcement of the wind facilities had an adverse impact on home prices, but those effects were no longer apparent after turbine construction and eventual operation commenced. The analysis also showed no unique impact on the rate of home sales near wind turbines.” The study was commissioned by the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, and performed by researchers at the University of Connecticut and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.One 2012 Clarkson University study of about 11,000 home transactions did identify negative impacts to property values in some parts of upstate New York. Depending on the model the researchers used, their calculations showed property values could fall between 8 and 35 percent if a turbine were installed half a mile from a home. But relatively few homes were that close to turbines. And for one of the three counties studied, the group found that wind turbines generally did not decrease property values.Research from Europe has tended to find more wind turbine impacts on property values. But those studies still aren’t reporting drops as high as 75 percent. A recent working paper produced by the German nonprofit RWI Essen found that house values fell by an average of 7.1 percent if turbines were within 1 kilometer, or 0.6 miles, of a home. The hits were highest for older houses built before 1949, which saw up to a 23 percent decline in property value.Other studies from Europe suggest similar or less severe drops in property values. One 2015 report from the London School of Economics, for example, found average price reductions of 5 to 6 percent when U.K. homes were within 2 kilometers, or 1.2 miles, of a wind farm. Large wind farms, however, could take off up to 12 percent of home values within the same distance. In contrast, a 2016 Dutch study identified just a 1.4 percent drop in property values when turbines were located within 2 kilometers.While individual owners may have unique experiences, there is nothing to corroborate Trump’s claim that wind turbines regularly result in property value drops of 75 percent.In his remarks, Trump also complained about wind turbines killing birds and falsely said that shooting a bald eagle in California can land someone in jail for five years. Trump, April 2: And of course it’s like a graveyard for birds. If you love birds, you’d never want to walk under a windmill because it’s a very sad, sad sight. It’s like a cemetery. We put a little statue for the poor birds. It’s true. You know in California if you shoot a bald eagle, they put you in jail for five years. And yet the windmills, they wipe them all out. It’s true. They wipe them out. It’s terrible.As we’ve addressed previously, the maximum penalty for shooting a bald eagle is a fine or two years in prison, which only applies for a second or felony-level conviction. Most people do not serve jail time.Turbines do kill birds. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service estimates that 140,438 to 327,586 birds die every year from collisions with turbines. But turbines do relatively little damage compared with other sources. More than a billion birds are lost to cats every year, and millions more to vehicles, electric lines and buildings.Trump also repeated a fanciful story of a woman wanting to watch television, but not being able to because the wind wasn’t blowing — a tale he also relayed during his Conservative Political Action Conference speech on March 2. But people do not lose their electricity when the wind doesn’t blow. The energy generated by wind turbines feeds into the electrical grid, which, as we’ve explained before, is almost always able to handle the intermittent nature of wind power or any other power source.
|
6537
|
FDA approves lower-cost alternative to biotech drug Humira.
|
Federal regulators on Friday approved the first alternative version of the second-best selling drug in the world, Humira, the blockbuster injection used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory diseases.
|
true
|
CA State Wire, AP Health, Arthritis, IL State Wire, Health, Rheumatoid arthritis, Amgen Inc
|
The Food and Drug Administration cleared a near-copy of the drug, dubbed Amjevita, developed by Amgen Inc. Regulators approved the drug for more than a half-dozen conditions listed on the original drug’s label, including severe psoriasis and Crohn’s diseases. Humira posted sales of nearly $15 billion in 2015 and was for many years the top-selling prescription drug in the world, according to data from IMS Health. It’s the fourth time that the FDA has formally approved a so-called biosimilar, the industry term for a lower-cost version of a biotech drug. Biosimilar drugs, long available in Europe, are thought to have the potential to generate billions in savings for the U.S. health system. But currently only one biosimilar cleared by the FDA approval pathway is actually on the market in the U.S., Novartis’ Zarxio, an alternative to Amgen’s Neupogen that sells for about 15 percent less than the original product. The drug helps boost red blood cells in cancer patients. Amgen did not discuss plans for the drug’s launch or price in a release issued Friday evening. But Wall Street analysts have noted that AbbVie claims it holds patents protecting Humira until at least 2022. They have previously estimated that Amgen’s version could launch sometime between 2018 and 2022, depending on the outcome of court litigation. First approved in 2002, Humira accounted for 60 percent of AbbVie’s total revenue last year. The injectable drug, which blocks chemicals linked to inflammation, is part of a family of biotech drugs including Enbrel and Remicade, which are also facing pending biosimilar competition. Development of lower-cost anti-inflammatory drugs is considered pivotal in reducing U.S. spending on specialty drugs, which has doubled to $150 billion since 2010, according to IMS Health. Thousand Oaks, California-based Amgen is itself a biotech powerhouse, and it too has medications facing competition from cheaper versions. The company is working to hedge those loses by developing lower-cost versions of competitors’ drugs. AbbVie Inc. is based in North Chicago, Illinois.
|
2560
|
Idaho, California cities deemed best in U.S. for men.
|
U.S. men looking for the best place to find happiness, health and a good quality of life might consider heading to Boise, Idaho, or San Jose and San Francisco in northern California.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The three western U.S. cities top the list of the 100 best towns for men in a new ranking compiled by Men’s Health magazine, while Charleston, West Virginia, Philadelphia and Birmingham, Alabama are considered the worst. “Anytime we do a best and worst city ranking and a city comes in at the very top like this, it immediately says to us they were consistently strong across the board in pretty much all of the 38 criteria that we looked at,” Men’s Health Executive Editor Matt Marion said. Boise, which jumped from fifth place last year, scored high marks for the physical and mental health of its residents, its low crime rate and short commuting times - an average of just 18 minutes. “Boise finishing number one was interesting to us because it is a city that would have finished in the top 20, but to come in right at the top is impressive,” Marion said. San Francisco, which consistently ranks high in the annual list, impressed with its small percentage of obese people, low number of smokers and highly educated and generally fit population. San Jose had very low death rates from cancer and heart disease, the lowest percentage of smokers in any of the 100 cities in the ranking, and not much crime. Plano, in Texas and Seattle rounded out the top five, followed by Burlington, Vermont, which dropped from the top spot last year. At the opposite end of the list, high cancer rates, violent crime and poor fitness levels assured Birmingham last place. In addition to Philadelphia and Charleston, West Virginia, the bottom five included Toledo, Ohio and St. Louis, Missouri. New York ranked 33rd and Los Angeles was in the middle of the ranking. The magazine compiled the list, now in its 12th year, by ranking the cities on criteria ranging from the cost of living, number of jobless, obesity, crime and death rates, to air quality and the ratio of men to women. It used data from various sources including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, the National Center for Health Statistics, state cancer registries and federal crime statistics. “The things that we do focus on ultimately are the ones that will make a difference in terms of whether or not you will be happy and healthy,” Marion said. The full list can be found here
|
30709
|
Dolly Parton said that the people of California were being punished with droughts, fires, mudslides and other natural disasters as punishment for embracing Satan.
|
“And in any religion we’re supposed to be that—we’re supposed to be kind…we’re not supposed to pass judgment. Our Bible says, ‘Judge not, lest ye be judged,’ and I believe in all those kinds of things.”
|
false
|
Junk News, dolly parton, fake news, fake quote
|
In January 2018, click-seeking web site YourNewsWire.com fabricated an inflammatory Dolly Parton quote — a sure-fire way to attract attention. According to the web site, the actress and country music star blamed California’s recent natural disasters on the city’s “embracing Satan”: “California just keeps on being hit by disaster after disaster as foretold in the Bible,” the Grammy Award-winning entertainer and businesswoman told guests at Dolly Parton’s Stampede, a dinner and entertainment evening. “Pestilence, and epidemics, and crime, and disease. And you know what? They don’t even realize what is happening to them. They are so corrupted, they can’t even see what is right in front of their eyes.” “First they had the drought that lasted years and years, killing off billions and billions of dollars in crops, and making the soil so incredibly dry that a large rainstorm could easily turn into a major flood. “Then they had the fires. Awful, awful fires. Historical, deadly fires. Thousands lost their homes, scores lost their lives and their livelihoods. Did you know the Thomas fire is still burning? In the winter!“ […] “And don’t forget the sexual abuse scandals rocking Hollywood. They are being punished for embracing Satan and rejecting God.” The web site likely targeted Parton because of news this week that the dinner show attraction”Dolly Parton’s Dixie Stampede” had stripped the word “Dixie” from its title to avoid glorifying the antebellum South. The show will now be known as “Dolly Parton’s Stampede.” The news angered a portion of the public (mainly those upset over the removal of confederate monuments), providing Your News Wire with another opportunity to stir the pot. The quote Your News Wire reported does not appear in any genuine news publication. The web site doesn’t provide any video or audio recording to prove that Parton actually spoke these words. This fictional quote also stands in stark contrasts to Parton’s previous comments and actions following natural disasters. After fires ravaged Tennessee in November 2016, for instance, the country icon established the My People Fund to aid the recovery effort. She said at the time: I know the money helps but most of all I want people to know we will always provide you a shoulder to lean on.” The success of the “My People Fund” inspired Parton to lend a hand to other disaster victims. After a series of hurricanes battered the United States in 2017, she donated books and money to One America Appeal for Hurricane Relief. Nor does the quote square with Parton’s previously-stated religious beliefs. In a 2015 Reuters interview, she spoke about the need for tolerance: “We don’t try to shove anything down anybody’s throat. We are very open,” says Parton, who is well known for her support of the LGBT community. “So many of my businesspeople and my best friends are different faiths, and I work with them, live with them, love them. The gays and lesbians, they come to our parks. I think people just know I’m a very open and accepting person.
|
11306
|
Study: Medical Marijuana Relieves Range of Symptoms With No Serious Side Effects
|
This story drew largely from a news release about two studies purporting to show sweeping health benefits of marijuana, based on user-reported data from the Releaf phone app. There was no critical examination of the underlying evidence, and this story is basically providing free marketing for all sorts of things the authors of the study have financial stakes in. Medical marijuana is becoming big business that’s thriving on big buzz. Journalists need to scrutinize the evidence behind claims of medical benefits — especially as the cannabis industry attempts to sway public perception in advance of scientific research that will determine whether marijuana does help with certain diseases. This story doesn’t do that.
|
false
|
U.S. News & World Report
|
There’s no discussion about the cost of marijuana. Also, the story doesn’t mention that the app is free to users. The story gave some numbers, but provided inadequate data on the quantity of reported benefits for any specific condition. For example, it reported that 94% of users with medical problems reported a reduction in their symptoms, and users suffering from 27 health conditions “with symptoms ranging from seizures to depression reported a mean reduction in symptoms of 2.8 to 4.6 points on a zero to 10 point scale after consuming cannabis in various forms.” Only for insomnia did it say that users experienced a “reduction of symptom severity of an average 4.5 points on a zero to 10 point scale.” But even for that condition, no data was provided on how severe the symptoms were on average, and what proportion of people actually saw an improvement. The story didn’t mention any potential harms of medical marijuana. Instead, it said the use of marijuana “was associated with non-serious side effects.” In reality, medical marijuana is known to have side effects that can range from minor to serious. These include dizziness, dry mouth, disorientation and confusion, among others. The research in this area is not extensive, particularly related to harms associated with long-term use. The story doesn’t address numerous limitations with this research and failed to scrutinize the quality of the evidence. Caveats–such as the lack of a control group–were easily found in the study, and these should have been discussed in the story: “The study was limited primarily by the lack of a control group, e.g., non-cannabis users with the same symptom using a mobile device to indicate their immediate symptom intensity levels. There is also the potential confound of user-selection bias and exclusion of users that failed to complete sessions or even use the Releaf AppTM due to a lack of symptom relief or negative side effects. (It is possible that selection bias could have worked in the opposite way, excluding patients that are already satisfied with their cannabis choices and therefore choose not to use the software app).” The story doesn’t engage in disease-mongering. The story used no independent sources and omitted a significant conflict of interest. While the story said the app was “developed by several of the studies’ authors,” it didn’t disclose that the app operates in a partnership with a cannabis advocacy group, Americans for Safe Access, which is funded by various businesses in the marijuana industry. The maker of the app also has “partnered” with dispensaries to use the data as a “feedback loop” for the marijuana industry. There was no serious discussion of other available treatments, even those that have been proven to work in rigorous trials. Rather, the story parroted the news release’s dismissal of prescription drugs as having “negative side effects” and relayed a baseless quote from a study author that claimed marijuana “could systematically replace multi-billion dollar medication industries.” The story doesn’t explain where medical marijuana is legal and where it isn’t, or whether a prescription is needed to get it. The story described the app as “the largest repository of user-entered information on the consumption and effect of cannabis use in the United States,” with almost 100,000 entries. It’s not clear if the reporter confirmed this or not. The story drew largely from a University of New Mexico news release, but also took some data from the studies. It just barely earns a satisfactory rating here.
|
763
|
Thousands try to flee hurricane-devastated Bahamas islands.
|
Hundreds of people fled the Bahamas island of Great Abaco by boat and plane on Friday and thousands more lined up to get on a cruise ship leaving neighboring Grand Bahama to escape the catastrophic aftermath of Hurricane Dorian.
|
true
|
Environment
|
The most powerful hurricane on record to hit the Bahamas swept through the islands earlier this week, leveling some neighborhoods, swallowing others with storm surge, and causing what one official described as a “staggering” number of deaths. Hundreds, if not thousands, are still missing in the country of about 400,000 people, but the official death toll stands at only 43, according to news media reports late on Friday, including the Washington Post and NBC. Eight people were confirmed dead from the storm in Grand Bahama and 35 people in the Abaco Islands, the Post reported, citing officials in the Bahamas. That toll is likely to soar as more bodies are discovered in the ruins and floodwaters left behind by the storm. In Freeport, witnesses said thousands crowded the port to try to get on a Bahamas Paradise Cruise Line ship offering free passage to Florida to those with necessary U.S. immigration documentation. Dazed evacuees, some with nothing but the clothes on their backs and plastic shopping bags, sat in the Kendal G. L. Isaacs National Gymnasium in Nassau which has been turned into a shelter. “Nobody can help anybody in Abaco, there’s no place safe, everything is destroyed,” said Firstina Swain, 75, who said she lost her home. “The people of Abaco need to get out, there are too many dead bodies, and I don’t think they finished finding them.” A boat with 250 evacuees left battered Abaco and arrived in Nassau, the capital of the Bahamas, which is located on New Providence island to the west and was less affected. Another boat with hundreds aboard was on its way, National Voice of the Bahamas radio reported. Approximately 200 people were also evacuated from Abaco Friday on Bahamasair flights, according to a NEMA spokesperson who declined to be named. “Free air evacuations on Bahamasair from Abaco started (Thursday) and will continue until all Grand Bahama and Abaco residents who want to leave are off the islands,” Prime Minister Hubert Minnis said in a tweet. Four survivors told Reuters on Thursday they had been charged $75 for a seat on a Bahamasair flight from Abaco to Nassau. “I thought a relief flight would be free,” said Anthony Thompson, 27, who said he paid the fare for himself, his wife and his sister. “I thought wrong.” A Bahamasair official, who requested anonymity, told Reuters the airline was collecting its customers whose flights had been canceled during the hurricane. To the extent extra seats were available, it was offering to ferry others off Abaco “at cost,” the official said. Bahamas Health Minister Duane Sands said there had been “a tremendous loss of life” in Abaco’s main city of Marsh Harbor. The medical chief of staff at Princess Margaret Hospital in Nassau said two refrigerated, 40-foot trucks would be needed to hold the “staggering” number of bodies that were expected to be found. “We’ve ordered lots of body bags,” said Dr. Caroline Burnett-Garraway. Those injured by the storm, which at one point was a Category 5 hurricane on the five-step Saffir-Simpson scale of intensity, were treated for fractures, head injuries, lacerations, skin rashes and dehydration. Near an area called The Mudd in Marsh Harbour, the commercial hub, a Reuters witness described a devastating scene, with most houses leveled, a man lying dead near a main street and dead dogs in water. Some residents were leaving the area with meager possessions, while others were determined to remain. The U.S. Coast Guard, working with NEMA, has rescued 295 people since Dorian began, the U.S. embassy in Nassau tweeted. Relief groups are focusing on getting doctors, nurses and medical supplies into the hardest-hit areas and helping survivors get food and safe drinking water. The relief effort faces formidable logistical challenges because of the widespread destruction caused by Dorian, which hovered over the Bahamas for nearly two days with torrential rains and fierce winds that whipped up 12- to 18-foot (3.7- to 5.5-meter) storm surges. The risk of outbreaks of diarrhea and waterborne diseases is high because drinking water may be contaminated with sewage, according to the Pan American Health Organization, which described the situation for some people on Abaco as “desperate.” The United Nations estimated 70,000 people were in “immediate need of life-saving assistance” such as food, water and shelter. The U.N. World Food Programme is airlifting storage units, generators, prefab offices, and satellite equipment as well as 8 metric tonnes of ready-to-eat meals. A Reuters witness saw widespread looting on Abaco, with people breaking into supermarkets and liquor stores. Wendy Hawkes, whose home on Abaco was largely destroyed, described seeing neighbors standing outside their front doors with shotguns to ward off looters. Claudin Loriston, 39, said he and his three young children were among the “lucky ones” to get on a plane out of Abaco. He said he had no documents with him, but he would try to get a job to support his family. “There are too many dead bodies there,” said the Haitian carpenter. “The government needs to remove everyone from the island, the smell is everywhere, it’s in the water.”
|
24621
|
Only 15 percent of drug users are African-American, yet 74 percent of all drug offenders sentenced to prison are black
|
Arianna Huffington calls drug imprisonment rates for blacks disproportionate
|
mixture
|
National, Legal Issues, Crime, Pundits, Marijuana, Arianna Huffington,
|
"In another example of how the arrest of African-American scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. has driven pundits to talk about issues of race and crime, Arianna Huffington, the founder of the liberal Huffington Post news Web site, offered some statistics about race, drug use and incarceration during a July 26, 2009, roundtable on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos . Huffington said, ""It is really stunning that only 15 percent of the total drug population — drug offending population is African-American. And yet you have 74 percent of them who wind up in jail."" A staffer for Huffington clarified her point: African-Americans make up 15 percent of drug users, but 74 percent of drug offenders sentenced to prison. Her comment echoed longstanding calls by critics of U.S. drug policy and criminal sentencing guidelines. These critics have argued that blacks are unfairly targeted by U.S. drug laws as well as the ways those laws are enforced. So we decided to dig into Huffington’s numbers to see if they were correct. An aide to Huffington said her numbers came from a 2006 ACLU report, ""Cracks in the System: Twenty Years of the Unjust Federal Crack Cocaine Law,"" and she did indeed report the numbers correctly from that study. The ACLU, in turn, footnoted those numbers to a fact sheet posted by a group called the Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative. When we checked that group’s Web site, however, we could not find any further footnoting for the statistics. So we decided to look at the raw federal data ourselves. To determine whether blacks account for 15 percent of drug users, we first turned to the 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, released by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services. That study is considered the most reliable in the field, though experts say it probably undercounts harder-core addicts who cannot be reached by survey takers. Among other things, the study quantifies the rates of illicit drug use by different racial and ethnic groups. The drugs studied include marijuana, cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens and inhalants, as well as the nonmedical use of prescription drugs. The numbers do not include tobacco or alcohol. According to the survey, 9.7 percent of blacks, 8.1 percent of whites and 7.6 percent of Hispanics reported using illicit drugs within the prior month. To convert these figures into something comparable to what Huffington said, we cross-referenced these drug-use rates to the current populations of each ethnic group, according to the Census Bureau. Our calculations showed that 70 percent of drug users are white, 14 percent are black and 13 percent are Hispanic. On this fact, then, Huffington was very, very close. She wasn’t as accurate, however, on the second half of her assertion, that 74 percent of all drug offenders sentenced to prison are black. To verify her number, we turned to ""Prisoners in 2007,"" a report by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, which is the statistical arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. That report offered estimated figures for offenders sentenced to state prison for drug violations: 113,500 blacks, 72,300 whites and 51,100 Hispanics. On a percentage basis, this means that 29 percent of inmates for drug offenses were white, 20 percent were Hispanic and 45 percent were black — well under the 74 percent level asserted by Huffington. In the federal system, the percentages are lower still for African-Americans. According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, for fiscal year 2008, there were 25,273 federal sentences for drug offenses. Of that number, African-American prisoners didn’t even account for the highest percentage among the three biggest groups. Hispanics led with 40 percent, followed by blacks at 31 percent and whites at 25 percent. One drug policy expert we contacted, Beau Kilmer of the RAND Corp., said our calculations were sound, though he added that Huffington’s comparison of drug use and incarceration has some logical holes. ""We have to realize most drug use is marijuana, and that’s not the reason why people are going to prison — it’s the harder drugs,"" Kilmer said. Ultimately, Huffington was right about one number and quite a bit off with the other. However, even at the much lower rates of incarceration we found, black Americans — who account for about 13 percent of the U.S. population — are still imprisoned for drug offenses at wildly disproportionate rates."
|
11609
|
Study: Riskier surgeries for back pain raise costs
|
"Thorough report, including a glance at how marketing and financial conflict of interest may have influenced the rise in costly, complex surgeries. The story ends with an important quote from a spine surgeon: ""Too much fusion surgery is done in this country and often for inappropriate reasons"" and patients ""should not hesitate to get a second opinion."""
|
true
|
"The story deal with cost very early in the story: ""You have one kind of operation that could cost $20,000 and another that could cost $80,000 and there’s not good evidence the expensive one is being used appropriately in the majority of cases""… Add to that the expense for patients whose problems after surgery send them back to the hospital or to a nursing home and ""that’s not a trivial amount of money"" for Medicare… The cost to Medicare, just for the hospital charges for the three types of back surgery reviewed is about $1.65 billion a year, according to the researchers. The story clearly stated, ""The study didn’t address how successful the various types of surgeries were at relieving pain."" Good job using absolute risk data: Nice job emphasizing what’s known and what’s not known. Excerpts:"
|
|
2498
|
Tai chi: getting there more slowly, but gracefully and intact.
|
For modern, harried lifestyles focused on getting and spending, fitness experts say tai chi, the ancient Chinese slow-moving exercise, can be an ideal way for anyone to stay fit.
|
true
|
Health News
|
A staple in senior citizen centers and a common dawn sighting in public parks, the practice can offer long-term benefits for all age groups. “In this high-tech world that’s all about speed, greed and instant gratification, tai chi is the antidote to bring us back to balanced health,” according to Arthur Rosenfeld, a tai chi master and the author of a new book called “Tai Chi — The Perfect Exercise: Finding Health, Happiness, Balance, and Strength.” “It doesn’t mean you can win the marathon or clean and jerk 750 pounds or win a cycle sprint,” said the South Florida resident, 56. “It’s not about getting there sooner.” Tai chi is more about how the body works than how it looks, and is about aging gracefully and “with less drama.” “The last time I looked, there were some 500 studies about the various physical benefits of tai chi, from improving balance and attention span to boosting the immune system to beating back the symptoms of arthritis, asthma and insomnia,” said Rosenfeld. An estimated 2.3 million U.S. adults have done tai chi in the past 12 months, according to a 2007 National Health Interview Survey. The practice is not perfect. Tai chi “does not supply the cardiovascular component that we’d be looking for in a well-rounded routine,” said Jessica Matthews, a San Diego, California-based exercise physiologist. “The exertion level, while challenging, is not going to increase your heart rate.” T’ai chi ch’uan, as it is formally known, derives from a form of Chinese martial arts. Explaining the slow, circular movement of the practice, Rosenfeld said tai chi is a philosophical term that means the harmonious interplay of opposing forces. When nature encounters a strong force, the way it answers that force to maintain harmony in the world is with a spiral, he said. “Astronomers see galaxies moving in spirals, water goes down the drain in a spiral, tornados form as a spiral. We spiral in tai chi because the most effective way to move fluid through solid is a spiral.” Hawaii-based personal and group-fitness trainer Jordan Forth, who has studied tai chi since 2006, said one translation of tai chi is “grand ultimate motion.” “I recommend it to everybody,” said Forth. “It teaches people to move well in multiple planes of motion with a state of awareness not cultivated in everyday fitness. Most people check out on a treadmill or during high-intensity activity.” Forth said tai chi improves mobility, movement and flexibility and can be even more dynamic than yoga, which the 35-year-old has studied since he was a teenager. “With tai chi you’re grounded the entire time,” he said. “For me, (it) translates more into functional everyday movement.” Matthews, who is also a spokeswoman for the American Council on Exercise, said because tai chi is slow motion and low impact, many assume it’s just for older people or not a viable means of exercise. Not so, she said: Research studies have found that the practice increased mineral bone density, boosted endurance, strengthened the lower body, and eased depression.
|
26602
|
Donald Trump Says Nancy Pelosi’s coronavirus bill includes “tax credits for solar and wind energy … retirement plans for community newspaper employees … $300 million for PBS … climate change studies” and more.
|
The House version of a coronavirus relief bill does include several requirements for airline companies that take federal assistance from the bill. The House bill also includes provisions related to community newspaper pension plans and a $300 million funding boost for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. However, the bill does not include language on tax credits for solar and wind energy.
|
true
|
Environment, Energy, Federal Budget, Pensions, Transportation, Taxes, Coronavirus, Donald Trump,
|
"As President Donald Trump’s negotiators were working with congressional leaders to assemble a coronavirus economic relief package, the president’s re-election campaign didn’t shy away from blasting one key Democratic leader, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. On March 24, Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale shared a video focused on the coronavirus bill Pelosi had released the day before. It named a half-dozen provisions in the Take Responsibility for Workers and Families Act that the Trump campaign considered outside the scope of the current crisis. On screen, the ad says: ""Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats clog their coronavirus relief bill with leftist wishlist. Democrat bill includes: tax credits for solar and wind energy … emissions standards and carbon offset requirements for airlines … policing racial makeup of corporate boards … retirement plans for community newspaper employees … $300 million for PBS … climate change studies for civil aviation and aerospace industries. Democrats don’t care about your health or the economy. They only care about politics"" Democratic officials acknowledge that most of those provisions are in the bill, which at the time the ad was launched was taking a back seat to negotiations over a Senate bill. However, one of the provisions cited by the Trump campaign’s ad is not in the bill. A still from a Trump campaign ad targeting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's coronavirus relief bill. Pelosi’s bill seeks to shape the behavior of any airlines that accept federal assistance to the benefit of their workers, customers and the environment. Carbon offsets are addressed in section 704 of the bill. Corporate board diversity, in the form of retrospective reporting requirements, is part of section 407, while the climate change study is in section 707. A statement provided by the Democratic leadership said that ""the extreme impacts that COVID-19 has had on corporate operations, the workforce, the lack of adequate contingency plans designed to protect worker interests and needs, and the impact this has had on the national economy highlights the need to have worker interests represented on corporate boards."" This language, in section 404, is largely drawn from H.R. 1916, a bill that has been introduced but not advanced. The bill would change rules for community newspapers’ defined-benefit pension plans. The Democratic leadership says this is part of an overall pension package to help cash flow for companies. This would be a supplemental appropriation for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds PBS and which is facing shortfalls due to the coronavirus, the Democratic leadership says. This is the one provision cited by the ad that is not actually in the House bill, despite pressure from the industry to include it. The campaign ad says that Pelosi’s coronavirus bill included provisions on ""tax credits for solar and wind energy … emissions standards and carbon offset requirements for airlines … policing racial makeup of corporate boards … retirement plans for community newspaper employees … $300 million for PBS … climate change studies for civil aviation and aerospace industries."" The ad is correct that five of those six provisions are in the House bill. The remaining provision, on tax credits for solar and wind, is not."
|
13359
|
"Donald Trump Says after Hillary Clinton helped a man accused of raping a 12-year-old, ""she's seen laughing on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl who was raped."
|
"Trump said after Clinton helped a man accused of raping a 12-year-old, ""she's seen laughing on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl who was raped."" Trump is referring to an audio tape in which she does respond with amusement at her recollections of the oddities of the case, which involve the prosecution and the judge. At no point does she laugh at the victim."
|
false
|
National, Candidate Biography, Corrections and Updates, Criminal Justice, Women, Donald Trump,
|
"Donald Trump offered a confusing mashup of unsavory accusations during Sunday night's presidential debate as he lumped allegations against Bill Clinton with a claim about Hillary Clinton's attitude when she discussed her defense of a man accused of raping a child in 1975. Trump, asked about his offensive comments while taping a segment of Access Hollywood more than a decade ago, said, ""If you look at Bill Clinton, far worse. Mine are words, and his was action. His was what he's done to women. There's never been anybody in the history of politics in this nation that's been so abusive to women. So you can say any way you want to say it, but Bill Clinton was abusive to women."" Trump continued: ""Hillary Clinton attacked those same women and attacked them viciously. Four of them here tonight. One of the women, who is a wonderful woman, at 12 years old, was raped at 12. Her client she represented got him off, and she's seen laughing on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl who was raped. Kathy Shelton, that young woman is here with us tonight."" The alleged rape of a 12-year-old had nothing to do with Bill Clinton. Trump was suddenly, and without explanation, shifting gears to Hillary Clinton's successful defense of the alleged rapist after she was reluctantly assigned to the case. That's the part of Trump's claim we'll fact-check here. At the time, Clinton, 27, was working at a University of Arkansas legal aid clinic. The accused man was indigent and specifically asked for a woman to represent him. He ultimately pleaded guilty to unlawful fondling of a minor, receiving a year in jail and four years' probation. When we asked the Trump campaign about the allegations, a spokesman referred us to a July 15, 2014, article in the conservative Washington Free Beacon, which uncovered audio recordings of Clinton, although it's not clear when the recordings were made. The Beacon says they date from 1983 to 1987. In the tapes, she calls it a ""terrible case"" and ""a fascinating case,"" for reasons that will become clear. The article notes that she can be heard laughing at several points on the tape, but it doesn't say she was laughing at the victim, as Trump claims. She is ""discussing the crime lab’s accidental destruction of DNA evidence that tied (the accused man, Thomas Alfred) Taylor to the crime,"" destruction that led the prosecution to seek a plea deal on a lesser charge, according to the article. (For the record, DNA testing as we know it was years away, but labs did determine blood type in criminal cases in that era.) ""I plea bargained it down because it turned out they didn't have any evidence,"" Clinton says. In the tape, available on YouTube, Clinton says of the case, ""It's sad."" ""But you know what was sad about it was that the prosecutor had evidence,"" Clinton says. However, she recounts that the crime lab had taken a key piece of evidence — the accused man's underpants, which had blood on it — neatly cut out a piece, and then threw that piece away once testing was done, eliminating the ability to do independent testing. In this case, it's the interviewer, Arkansas journalist Roy Reed, who can be heard laughing, not Clinton. On the tape, in which Reed laughs a few more times at her story, Clinton can be heard chortling when she reports that the prosecutor didn't want her to see the underwear before it was presented at trial. Defense attorneys have the right to see all the evidence first. And when the judge is considering the plea deal, Clinton recounts that the judge wanted her to leave the room while he talked to the accused man. Clinton says she told the judge, ""Judge, I can't leave the room. I'm his lawyer."" The judge reportedly responded, ""I know, but I don't want to talk about this in front of you."" Again, Reed can be heard laughing after saying, ""Oh God. Really?"" It's not clear if Clinton is laughing as well. At another point, Clinton says of the accused man, ""I had him take a polygraph, which he passed — which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs."" She and the reporter laugh. And she laughs when she recalls telling the prosecution that she was prepared to bring in a top expert witness to testify ""to prevent this miscarriage of justice."" The reporter laughs as well. It should be noted that it's clear from the record that Clinton aggressively defended the man and did file motions questioning the victim's credibility. But there is no evidence, including this audio tape, that Clinton or Reed were laughing at the victim. Our ruling Trump said after Clinton helped a man accused of raping a 12-year-old, ""she's seen laughing on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl who was raped."" Trump is referring to an audio tape in which she does respond with amusement at her recollections of the oddities of the case, which involve the prosecution and the judge. At no point does she laugh at the victim. CORRECTION, Oct. 18, 2016: This story was amended to note that the blood test referenced in the Washington Free Beacon story could not have been a true DNA match test. That technology was not available in 1975."
|
7458
|
Arkansas orders venue not to defy restrictions with concert.
|
Arkansas has ordered a large theater to abandon its plans to defy the state’s coronavirus restrictions on gatherings by holding what could be the nation’s first major concert this far into the pandemic.
|
true
|
Fort Smith, General News, Entertainment, Arkansas, Asa Hutchinson, Virus Outbreak, Public health
|
Gov. Asa Hutchinson said Tuesday that the state Health Department was sending a cease and desist letter to the Fort Smith venue, TempleLive, to postpone or cancel a concert Friday night by country rock singer Travis McCready. The event, which is expected to draw more than 200 people, would be held three days before Arkansas allows large indoor entertainment venues to reopen. “You can’t just arbitrarily decide when the restrictions are lifted. That is something that is done based upon a public health requirement,” Hutchinson told reporters. The state is allowing theaters, arenas and other entertainment venues to open Monday, but with a cap of 50 people in the audience. Hutchinson said last weekend that the 50-person limit was being revised to allow venues to fill to one-third capacity if they submit a plan approved by the state. TempleLive did not immediately respond to messages Tuesday afternoon. Organizers have said they planned to reduce capacity at the former Masonic temple from 1,100 people to 229 for the show and to implement other rules, including requiring patrons to wear masks and to have their temperatures checked at the door. TempleLive on Monday said it planned to move forward with the show after Hutchinson called organizers plans “insufficient.” “We appreciate that the situations faced by the governor and his staff are serious and complex, and much of Arkansas’s COVID-19 approach has been praiseworthy,” Lance Beaty, president Beaty Capital Group Inc., the venue’s parent owner, said Monday. “However, in these complex matters, general policies and directives are not always best as ‘one size fits all.’” Arkansas was one of a handful of states that didn’t issue a stay-at-home order, though the state imposed other restrictions that it began rolling back in recent days. ___ Check out more of the AP’s coronavirus coverage at https://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak
|
33548
|
Eating turkey makes people especially drowsy.
|
People still feeling anxious about the prospect of tearing into a drumstick and suddenly being overcome by an irresistible urge to nod off should consider that those who took tryptophan-based supplements as sleep aids were, on the average, ingesting between 500 and 2,000 milligrams of L-tryptophan daily. Four ounces of turkey contains only about 350 milligrams of tryptophan, and (unlike people taking tryptophan-based supplements, who take them every day) most folks don’t ingest that much turkey every day of the week.
|
false
|
Holidays, cooking, Odd Ingredients, thanksgiving
|
Most fans of the popular sitcom Seinfeld recall a subplot from a November 1997 episode in which Jerry and George plied Jerry’s girlfriend Celia with a dinner of wine and turkey in the hopes that the combination of alcohol and tryptophan (along with some of George’s boring home movies) would put her to sleep, enabling them to play with her vintage toy collection (which she otherwise wouldn’t let them touch) while she snoozed: Thus did Seinfeld reinforce to yet another generation of viewers the widespread bit of lore holding that something in turkey induces sleepiness, making those who partake of the bird unusually drowsy. In this instance lore somewhat intersects with science, but not nearly to the extent claimed in popular belief. Turkey does contain tryptophan, an amino acid which is a natural sedative (to the extent that L-tryptophan has been marketed as a sleep aid); but to put an ordinarily awake person into a state of slumber it would generally have to be consumed on an empty stomach, in combination with little no other protein (which limits the absorption of tryptophan by the body), and in amounts larger than are typically gobbled even during a holiday feast. That lazy, lethargic feeling so many celebrants are overcome by at the conclusion of a festive seasonal meal is usually due not specifically to the turkey on the dinner menu, but to a combination of drinking alcohol and overeating a carbohydrate-rich repast (as well as some other factors): Two other factors that contribute to the desire to sleep at the dinner table are meal composition and increased blood flow to the gastrointestinal tract. Studies have shown that a solid-food meal resulted in faster fatigue onset than a liquid diet. The solid-food meal also causes a variety of substances to jump into action that ultimately leads to increased blood flow to the abdomen. This increase in blood flow and an increase in the metabolic rate for digestion can contribute to the “coma.” Those who still feel wary of turkey’s purported sleep-inducing properties should note that many other items we commonly eat contain tryptophan. Milk, cheese, beef, chicken, pork, and beans are among the foodstuffs that house this amino acid, and experts say the average serving of chicken or ground beef contains about as much tryptophan as does a serving of turkey. If tryptophan were truly the sandman’s henchman, we’d all be falling asleep at the wheel on our way home from KFC or McDonald’s. As Drs. Carroll and Vreeman note in their book Don’t Swallow Your Gum! : The truth is, turkey is not to blame for your sleepiness. Chicken and ground beef contain almost the same amount of tryptophan as turkey — about 350 milligrams per 4-ounce serving. While you might have heard someone claim that turkey made them drowsy, you have probably never heard someone say that chicken, ground beef, or any other meat made them sleepy. Swiss cheese and pork actually contain more tryptophan per gram than turkey, and yet the American classic, a ham and cheese sandwich, somehow escapes blame. The amount of tryptophan in a single 4-ounce serving of turkey (350 milligrams) is also lower than the amount typically used to induce sleep. The recommendations for tryptophan supplements to help you sleep are 500 to 1,000 milligrams.
|
2843
|
South Africa risks spreading totally drug-resistant TB: study.
|
Patients with contagious and highly drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) are being routinely discharged from hospitals across South Africa, exposing others in their communities to potentially deadly infections, researchers said on Friday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
In a study in the medical journal The Lancet, they said the patients, with strains of TB known as extensively-drug resistant (XDR) and totally drug resistant (TDR) TB, have exhausted all available treatment options and are sent home. “These patients can survive for months or even years and are contributing to the community-based spread of XDR-TB,” said Keertan Dheda, who led the study at the University of Cape Town’s department of medicine. Tuberculosis infects the lungs and can spread through coughing and sneezing. In recent years, drug-resistant strains have spread around the world, batting off standard antibiotics and posing an increasingly urgent public health threat. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that in Eastern Europe, Asia and South Africa, 450,000 people have MDR-TB, and around half of these will fail to respond to existing treatments. Dheda’s team followed 107 patients with XDR-TB from three provinces in South Africa between March 2008 and August 2012 to establish their fate. They also took samples from 56 patients and tested them to find out which and how many of 10 first- and second-line anti-TB drugs they were susceptible to. Despite being treated intensively with an average of eight anti-tuberculosis drugs, many of the patients fared poorly, with high rates of treatment failure and death. Five years after treatment initiation, only 12 of the patients had favorable outcomes and 74 percent had died. The researchers found that almost two-thirds of the tested patients had resistance to at least eight drugs, and there was one case of totally drug-resistant TB that was not susceptible to any of the 10 drugs tested. More worrisome, Dheda said, was that of the XDR-TB patients discharged into the general community, some 42 percent had failed to get better on treatment and were testing positive for active TB, and of these almost a third were at high risk of transmitting the disease. The patients also survived in the community for an average of 20 months - plenty of time to infect others. When people with lung TB cough, sneeze or spit, they propel the TB germs into the air. Another person needs to inhale only a few of these germs to become infected. “Alarmingly, we have shown for the first time that... treatment failure and discharge of such patients into the wider community is occurring systematically on a country-wide level in South Africa,” Dheda said in a statement about the findings. In one case where the researchers followed a genetic trail of transmission, they found that a patient with XDR-TB who was discharged after failing treatment went on to infect his brother, who also eventually died. Dheda said the reason many TB patients are being sent away from hospitals appeared to be lack of bed space in designated tuberculosis hospitals. “And alternative long-term residential and palliative care facilities are scarce.” Commenting on the findings in The Lancet, Max O’Donnell from New York’s Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the United States said they should serve as an “urgent alarm”. “MDR-TB (multi-drug-resistant TB) in all its forms is an out-of-control problem with potentially vast and devastating consequences for global public health,” he wrote. “The situation regarding MDR and XDR-TB is bleak.”
|
26493
|
"It is the decision of the President,"" not governors, to ""open up the states."
|
Reopening businesses, schools and public facilities is a decision with major implications for public health, the economy and education. Governors have issued their own closures of non-essential businesses without Trump’s direction. Legal experts say governors have the right to order closures of non-essential businesses and end such closures.
|
false
|
States, Coronavirus, Donald Trump,
|
"President Donald Trump said it’s up to him — not the governors — to decide when to reopen the states amid the COVID-19 pandemic. ""For the purpose of creating conflict and confusion, some in the Fake News Media are saying that it is the Governors decision to open up the states, not that of the President of the United States & the Federal Government. Let it be fully understood that this is incorrect,"" Trump tweeted April 13. ""It is the decision of the President, and for many good reasons. With that being said, the Administration and I are working closely with the Governors, and this will continue. A decision by me, in conjunction with the Governors and input from others, will be made shortly!"" ....It is the decision of the President, and for many good reasons. With that being said, the Administration and I are working closely with the Governors, and this will continue. A decision by me, in conjunction with the Governors and input from others, will be made shortly! Trump’s tweet comes as he weighs whether to extend his stay-at-home guidelines, which expire April 30, a decision he has described as ""the biggest decision I’ve ever had to make."" Reopening businesses, schools and public facilities is a decision with major implications for public health, the economy and education. But Trump’s tweet is misleading because governors do have power to shut down — and reopen — businesses and public spaces in their state. Trump has traded barbs with governors during the pandemic, especially over where responsibility lies in securing medical supplies for the states. But governors have largely made their own calls about what to close down. It’s not surprising, then, that governors pushed back against Trump’s comments on who has authority to ""open up the states."" Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican and chair of the National Governors Association, said on CNN: ""Governors made decisions to take various actions in their states based on what they thought was right for their states, based on the facts on the ground, talking with doctors and scientists. And I think individual governors who made those decisions will have the ultimate decision about what to do with their states."" New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican, said on CNN that ""all these orders are executive state orders, so therefore it would be up to the state and governor to undo all of that."" We contacted the White House to ask for evidence behind Trump’s claim and did not get a reply. On March 16, Trump issued guidelines to slow the spread of COVID-19, which included recommendations on social distancing and to ""listen to and follow the directions of your state and local authorities."" But it was the governors who issued more specific directives that closed non-essential businesses and many other facilities, such as schools, bars, swimming pools and beaches. Many legal experts and political scientists have said that governors have the authority to make such decisions. States provide licenses for businesses and hold the primary responsibility for making decisions about public health. ""The simple answer is governors have way more legal authority than the president of the United States to make these decisions about closing and opening facilities, closing and opening the economy,"" said David Schultz, professor of political science and legal studies at Hamline University. University of Texas law professor Robert Chesney told PolitiFact that Trump has no inherent or statutory authority to command the governors to change shelter-in-place or business-shutdown orders. While federal powers are supreme, they are limited in scope, Chesney wrote in the Lawfare Blog in March. State governments are independent entities, not mere subordinate layers underneath the federal government, he wrote. ""The federal government cannot commandeer the machinery of the state governments (or, by extension, of local governments),"" Chesney wrote. ""That is, the federal government cannot coerce the states into taking actions to suit federal policy preference. … And so, the federal government cannot compel state and local officials to promulgate different rules on social distancing and the like."" No existing federal law — including the Public Health Service Act and the Stafford Act — can be read to confer such authority on the president, Chesney wrote. And there is little chance that this Congress will pass a law that gives Trump power to override state and local rules. James Hodge Jr., a health law professor at Arizona State University, said the president can’t simply command states to re-open. ""He can strongly encourage, advise, or even litigate whether states’ authorities to restrict public movements re: shelter in place or stay home orders are warranted, but cannot tell sovereign governors to lift these orders all at once just because the federal government determines it is high time to do so,"" he told PolitiFact in an email. There are other ways Trump could pressure governors, tweeted University of Texas law school professor Steve Vladeck. He could pull emergency funding, or call the federal workforce back into work, Vladeck listed as examples. Still, most action has been taken by local authorities. Wendy K. Mariner, Boston University health law professor, said the governors have the authority to end their closure orders, though that isn’t the same as ordering them to reopen, which some may not be able to afford to do. Also, in most states, the state legislature can end the emergency declaration if the governor keeps it going beyond the period specified by statute. Trump’s tweet raises some practical implications. Congress can pass legislation to regulate interstate commerce, but it would be exceedingly odd for the federal government to require businesses to open. ""As a practical matter, such an unprecedented action would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce,"" she said. Trump also tweeted that he’s making a decision ""in conjunction with the Governors and input from others."" But governors don’t necessarily speak with a collective voice, said Chris Cooper, a Western Carolina University political scientist, who noted that some states have not enacted statewide stay-at-home orders. Though Trump has criticized some governors, he has generally not interfered with their powers. In a press briefing April 10, Trump said that he had faith in Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis to make the right decision about whether to reopen schools in May. ""I like to allow governors to make decisions without overruling them, because from a constitutional standpoint, that’s the way it should be done,"" he said. ""If I disagreed, I would overrule a governor, and I have that right to do it. But I’d rather have them — you can call it ‘federalist,’ you can call it ‘the Constitution,’ but I call it ‘the Constitution.’ I would rather have them make their decisions."" Trump said ""it is the decision of the President,"" not governors, to ""open up the states."" The White House provided no evidence to show that it is up to Trump and not the governors to reopen the states. The governors used their authority to issue emergency orders to close non-essential businesses and public spaces such as beaches and swimming pools, and they can use their powers to reopen them. Trump can pressure governors to act as he sees fit, but he has not provided evidence that he can decide whether to reopen the states."
|
7988
|
Canada coronavirus deaths jump by 35%, Quebec says equipment running low.
|
Canada’s death toll from the coronavirus outbreak jumped by 35% to 89 in less than a day, officials said on Tuesday, and the major province of Quebec said it was running low on key medical equipment.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Ottawa said it would spend C$2 billion to help buy supplies amid complaints from some doctors and nurses about shortages of personal protection gear. “The situation is going to get worse before it gets better. That is the unfortunate truth,” Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland told a daily briefing. By 9 a.m. eastern time (1300 GMT,) those diagnosed with the coronavirus had risen by 15% to 7,708. The respective figures at 1200 ET on Monday were 66 deaths and 6,671 positive diagnoses. Chief public health officer Theresa Tam said she was particularly concerned the virus was spreading to enclosed settings where vulnerable people live, such as seniors’ residences, prisons and aboriginal communities. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Ottawa would invest $2 billion to support testing and to purchase ventilators and protective personal equipment such as masks, face shields, gowns and hand sanitizer. In Quebec, the second-most-populous of the 10 provinces, Premier Francois Legault said “my biggest concern right now is for the medical supplies. Currently, for some equipment, we have only (enough) for three to seven days”. New shipments should arrive “in the next few days,” he told a daily briefing. Ottawa has signed agreements with three Canadian companies to produce the needed supplies, with five other deals pending, said Trudeau. “We know that the demand for critical equipment and supplies will grow in the coming weeks, so we need a sustainable, stable supply,” he told reporters. “That means making them at home and we’re optimistic that they will be available in the coming weeks.” Procurement Minister Anita Anand said Ottawa had already bought more than 157 million surgical masks. Boosting supplies of medical equipment is part of Ottawa’s response to an outbreak that has forced the closure of many businesses and schools. Ontario Premier Doug Ford said schools in what is the most populous province would be closed until at least May 1. “I’m prepared to extend these closures even further,” he added. Manitoba said it would close schools for the rest of school year. Ottawa has pledged financial help for people and employers hit by the crisis. Finance Minister Bill Morneau will provide details on Wednesday, officials said.
|
9090
|
LED lights safer, more effective in producing Vitamin D3 than sunlight
|
This news release from the Boston University School of Medicine covers a study describing a new technology in which ultraviolet (UV) LEDs at a specific wavelength produce more vitamin D in a shorter amount of time in human skin samples compared to natural sunlight. These lights are also a safer alternative than sunlight, the news release claims. However, the release offers no caution that findings from in vitro skin samples may not necessarily be replicated in living humans and that larger studies are needed to show if the lights make a difference in actual health outcomes that people care about. We also wish the release had been more cautious in discussing the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency. There’s disagreement among experts over the rate of deficiency, and the effects of vitamin D on conditions other than bone loss needs more research. We do appreciate the findings being given in absolute terms, since this helps readers judge the treatment’s benefits more accurately. The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and its links to certain diseases is a source of continuing debate in the United States. Since vitamin D deficiency is linked to bone health and future studies may confirm links to other diseases and conditions, health professionals and the public remain interested in interventions to treat vitamin D deficiency.
|
false
|
Boston University School of Medicine,LED lights,vitamin D
|
Our philosophy: if not too early to talk about a device’s effectiveness, then it’s not too early to start discussing its potential price on the market. And the release claims there “will be” a new generation of marketable products based on this research. The news release states RayVio’s 293nm UV LED was the most effective out of all the UV LEDs tested in this study. The California-based manufacturer sells its UV LED products online, with unit prices ranging between $6.93 to $68.06 for a single device. Since costs are not discussed in the news release, we give it a Not Satisfactory rating here. The news release states skin samples exposed to RayVio’s UV LED produced “more than twice as much vitamin D3” after 0.52 minutes compared to samples exposed to 32.5 minutes of sunlight. We applaud the news release for giving readers absolute values for the time instead of providing relative figures. However, we’re not sure from the news release exactly how much vitamin D3 was produced in these samples. And how was this measured? Was there any variation in the amount of vitamin D3 produced depending on the wavelength and skin type? In the original journal article, researchers looked at the percent conversion from an intermediate chemical compound to previtamin D as a way to measure vitamin D production. Since benefits data were only half released. The release gives a nod to harms, although only to discuss how it would reduce risk compared with sunlight exposure. It states: “A vitamin D3 producing UV LED device could be used on skin areas that experience less exposure to sunlight such as upper legs and arms and abdomen and back thus minimizing risk for developing non-melanoma skin cancer. The UV LED device also emits a much narrower band of UVB light and thereby decreasing likelihood of skin damage that can occur when the skin is exposed to higher wavelengths of UV radiation.” Almost all interventions are associated with potential harms, and light therapy is no different. Although light therapy is considered generally safe, it may cause eyestrain, headache, nausea, irritability or agitation, and mania, euphoria, hyperactivity or agitation associated with bipolar disorder. Specifically, UV light can cause eye and skin damage, as well as increase one’s risk of skin cancer. Since harms from UV LED aren’t addressed in this news release, we give it a Not Satisfactory rating here. Readers can deduce from the release that this was a controlled study based on the description comparing UV LED vs. sunlight results. Some things that would have made this release better in terms of evidence: An acknowledgement that more research is needed to know if these tests in isolated skin samples would achieve the same result in actual living patients. And we’d need even more studies to know if the lights made a difference in actual outcomes that people care about as opposed to a lab value. Without stating the source or elaborating further, the release states that 75 percent of teens and adults in the US are vitamin D deficient. However, noted experts have disputed high claims of deficiency as being a misinterpretation of Institute of Medicine nutrition guidelines. Being vitamin D deficient in itself is not a disease. It can lead to a loss of bone density, contributing to osteoporosis and fractures. Severe vitamin D deficiency in the US is rare, and the effects of vitamin D on other conditions need to be investigated further. The news release discloses the study’s funding sources, which include the Boston University School of Medicine and a Boston University Ignition Award. The original journal article states the study authors have no competing interests. Natural sunlight is the main alternative discussed in the news release, since skin samples exposed to sunlight needed much more time to produce comparable levels of vitamin D3 than those exposed to RayVio’s UV LED. The news release also mentions diet, pointing out that vitamin D is also found in plants, yeast and mushrooms. Other foods containing vitamin D include oily fish — like salmon, mackerel, and blue fish — as well as fortified milk and other dairy products. Another alternative to treat vitamin D deficiency is oral supplementation. We feel the news release’s comparison to natural sunlight is enough for a Satisfactory rating here. RayVio already has other UV LEDs out on the market for health and hygiene purposes, but these don’t include the 293nm UV LED — the prototype tested in this study. The news release makes clear that this technology is still being developed, hinting that a “wearable device” could be available to consumers in the future. We wish the news release had given more information on the types of UV light therapies accessible now for patients, as well as what a treatment session currently looks like. Since the news release makes clear that the 293nm UV LED technology isn’t widely available. The news release makes it sound as if UV LED therapy is a novel treatment option, since it states “this study will lead to a new generation of technology…labeled as photopharmacology.” It adds that “the use of LEDs with targeted wavelengths can cause specific biologic effects in human skin to help treat and prevent chronic illnesses.” UV light therapy, also known as phototherapy, has been widely used as an option to treat skin diseases, like psoriasis, T-cell lymphoma, vitiligo and atopic dermatitis. UV lamps to synthesize vitamin D have been around since the 1940s, when the Sperti lamp was available in US pharmacies to prevent and treat rickets. In addition, UV LED therapy has been previously explored. A 2016 study in Food Chemistry looked into the efficiency of UV LEDs in producing vitamin D3 in pig skin. Another 2014 study published in the National High School Journal of Science also looked at the effect of UV LEDs on vitamin D production. We especially would have liked more context surrounding UV LED research. We wish the news release had used more neutral, cautionary language, especially in its quotations. Red flags are raised when we see unsubstantiated, extolling phrases, such as “this study will lead to a new generation of technology” and “potentially improve and save hundreds of thousands of lives.” Furthermore, this technology has “enormous” potential.
|
10895
|
Have a baby at new low, low price, says fertility doctor Joel Batzofin
|
Is cheap really the whole story? This piece focuses on a novel infertility or subfertility treatment that is still an active subject of active research in the biomedical research community. It provides little data and little balanced expert comment. Also, there is NO evidence that anyone has data that directly compares IVF and IVM, let alone understands cost per cycle, conception, or healthy pregnancy. The story does note that IVM (in vitro maturation) treatments are not widely available and this method is not as successful or widely accepted in the medical community as IVF (in vitro fertilization) treatments, and that Dr. Batzofin is one of the first doctors in Manhattan to offer the treatments while simultaneously conducting a clinical trial on IVM. Dr. Batzofin discusses his own “number needed to treat” in order to consider IVM a success (20 to one pregnancy), however, this seems arbitrary. There is no sense of valid expected outcomes from data. Doing this story when even the outcomes of the first three transfers is unknown is showmanship not reporting. The story makes a simple comparison of IVF v. IVM for the lay reader, but does not discuss risks for women with and without polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOs). Other methods to increase fertility are not discussed. The story does compare average costs of one course of IVF treatments with one course of IVM treatments. But given the lack of proven success with IVM, multiple rounds of treatments may be necessary to conceive. This is not specifically stated and the focus of the story, a promotion of IVM (and Dr. Batzofin’s clinic) as a more cost-effective method of fertility treatments is misplaced. The story mentions that IVM has been studied in some clinical trials in Denmark and Canada; results have been mixed and mostly included younger women, who would have an easier time conceiving. We are not told if these are randomized clinical trials. There are no data presented from these trials. Lastly, the story does not do a good job finding unbiased sources to speak to the difference between IVF and IVM treatments–only one person is cited. An additional researcher or fertility expert could provide a balanced review of the current evidence (both benefits and harms of IVM for PCO and non-PCO women) and discuss less dramatic first-line treatments to enhance fertility. The story does interview women who serve mainly to promote Dr. Batzofin’s clinic.
|
false
|
"The story does compare average costs of one course of IVF treatments with one course of IVM treatments. Given the lack of proven success with IVM, multiple rounds of treatments may be necessary to conceive. This is not specifically stated and the focus of the story is promoting IVM as a more cost-effective method of fertility treatments. This emphasis is misplaced. There NO evidence that anyone has data that directly compares IVF and IVM, let alone understands cost per cycle, conception, or healthy pregnancy. Kathie, confused here and not sure if we should ding given that they did list the cost of each treatment? Dr. Batzofin discusses his own ""numbr needed to treat"" in order to consider IVM a success (20 to one pregnancy), however, this seems arbitrary. The story should include the typical success rate of IVM compared with IVF and with other fertility treatment methods. There is no sense of valid expected outcomes from data. Doing this story when even the outcomes of the first three transfers is unknown is showmanship not reporting. The story does not adequately list the harms of this treatment for women with and without polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCO). Instead the story focuses on the potential downsides of IVF and the risks of hormones for some women. The target group, that is, women with subfertility, can enhance their likelihood of conceiving with modest weight loss and conventional medications as needed, but who might be lured into this ""tennis shoe"" treatment out of fear that they won’t conceive rather than doing the harder thing of diet, activity, and physical activity. This is not dicussed. However, IVM requires egg retrieval and embryo transfer, the same as IVF, and these risks should be mentioned– the former with small risks of bleeding and infection and the latter with small risk of infection and poorer reproductive outcomes. The story mentions that IVM has been studied in some clinical trials in Denmark and Canada and that results have been mixed and mostly included younger women, who would have an easier time conceiving . There are no data presented from these trials. In a Pubmed search for these and other studies on the topic of IVM, it appears there are still no RCTs comparing IVM v. IVF, and information is inadequate to understand differences. The story does note that the treatment is new and Dr. Batzofin is conducting his own clinical trial. We are not told of the design of this trial nor who is funding. The story inappropriately describes women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCO) as those ""who don’t produce mature eggs and can get sick on fertility drugs."" As a sweeping statement it is way off the mark and given the focus in the scientific literature about IVM is on this subfertile group, it is an exagerration. In a British study that is a good example of reproductive epidemiology (Clayton RN, Clin Endocrin 1992) that systematically screened 353 women with ultrasound for PCO they found: Proven prior fertility was the same in PCO (56%) and non-PCO (64%) women and an equal proportion in each group had not yet tested their fertility. Of those women with previously proven fertility, self-perceived difficulty in conception occurred in similar proportions of women with and without PCO. Unresolved primary or secondary infertility (2.5-4%) was similar in both groups. The prevalence of PCO in the general population and in infertility treatment populations don’t match – it is a biased sample that are referred – and the outcomes are not comparable. A number of trials have shown metformin and clomiphene citrate (both pills) to enhance conception in women with PCO and metabolic syndrome. These drugs do not cause ovarian hyperstimulation and thus would be general gynecology treatments used far before IVF (or IVM with IVF). The story does not do a good job finding unbiased sources to speak to the difference between IVF and IVM treatments–only one person is cited. An additional researcher or fertility expert could provide a balanced review of the evidence (both benefits and harms) of these and additional fertility treatments, which might also be appropriate for women who cannot take hormones typical of IVF regimens. The story does interview women who serve mainly to promote Dr. Batzofin’s clinic. The story focuses on a comparison of IVF v. IVM. Other methods to increase fertility are not discussed. Women with subfertility and PCO may try less dramatic means to enhance their likelihood of conceiving with modest weight loss and conventional medications as needed. The story notes that IVM (in vitro maturation) treatments are not widely available and this method is not as successful or widely accepted in the medical community as IVF (in vitro fertization) treatments. The story notes that Dr. Batzofin is one of the first doctors in Manhattan to offer the treatments and is conducting a clincal trial on IVM. The focus of the story is IVM as a newer method of fertility treatment. The story is clear that there have not been many births from this method. We can’t be sure if this story is based on information from a press release."
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.