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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
37570
|
A statement issued by a quarantined nurse in California describes what they believe are insufficient testing protocols.
|
Statement from a Quarantined Kaiser Nurse in California
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
On March 6 2020, an Imgur post with the title “Thank god for unions, but damn” appeared, purportedly showing a statement “by a quarantined nurse from a northern California Kaiser facility”:The statement was dated March 5 2020, and the text in the image read:As a nurse, I’m very concerned that not enough is being done to stop the spread of the coronavirus. I know because I am currently sick and in quarantine after caring for a patient who tested positive. I’m awaiting “permission” from the federal government to allow for my testing, even after my physician and county health professional ordered it.I volunteered to be on the care team for this patient, who we knew was positive. I did this because I had all the recommended protective gear and training from my employer. I did this assuming that if something happened to me, of course I too would be cared for. Then, what was a small concern after a few days of caring for this patient, became my reality:I started getting sick.When employee health told me that my fever and other symptoms fit the criteria for potential coronavirus, I was put on a 14-day self-quarantine. Since the criteria was met, the testing would be done. My doctor ordered the test through the county.The public county officer called me and verified my symptoms and agreed with testing. But the National CDC would not initiate testing. They said they would not test me because if I were wearing the recommended protective equipment, then I wouldn’t have the coronavirus.What kind of science-based answer is that? What a ridiculous and uneducated response from the department that is in charge of our health in this country.Later, they called back, and now it’s an issue with something called the “identifier number.” They claim they prioritize running samples by illness severity and that there are only so many to give out each day. So I have to wait in line to find out the results.This is not the ticket dispenser at the deli counter; it’s a public health emergency! I am a registered nurse, and I need to know if I am positive before going back to caring for patients.I am appalled at the level of bureaucracy that’s preventing nurses from getting tested. That is a health care decision my doctor and my county health department agree with. Delaying this test puts the whole community at risk.I have the backing of my union. Nurses aren’t going to stand by and let this testing delay continue; we are going to stand together to make sure we can protect our patients—by being protected ourselves.Claims made in the letter were not uncommon in late February and early March 2020 reporting on the novel coronavirus strain (COVID-19), the public health response protocols, and a shortage of tests. On March 6 2020, NPR reported limited ability to test for COVID-19 in at least six states:More laboratories around the U.S. are finally gaining the ability to test for the coronavirus disease, after what Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, calls “missteps” in the federal government’s plan to create, produce and distribute tests.Six U.S. states — Alabama, Maine, Ohio, Oklahoma, West Virginia and Wyoming — currently have no labs with the verified ability to run COVID-19 diagnostic tests, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Thursday afternoon.“We’re not there yet, but soon,” Fauci said of the effort to make testing more widely available.As NPR’s Allison Aubrey reports, “Some academic hospitals are developing their own tests and commercial options are expanding really quickly.” The results, she adds, “can take three or four days” before they’re reported to local health officials and the CDC … Vice President Pence acknowledged a shortage of tests on [March 5 2020], saying, “We don’t have enough tests today to meet what we anticipate will be the demand going forward.”A March 6 2020 article published by The Atlantic also focused on insufficient availability of tests for COVID-19 across the United States. Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Thomas Frieden compared the CDC’s testing response to COVID-19 with that of previous outbreaks:On [March 2 2020], Stephen Hahn, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, estimated that “by [March 6 2020], close to a million tests will be able to be performed” in the United States. On [March 4 2020], Vice President Mike Pence promised that “roughly 1.5 million tests” would be available [that] week.But the number of tests performed across the country has fallen far short of those projections, despite extraordinarily high demand, The Atlantic has found.“The CDC got this right with H1N1 and Zika, and produced huge quantities of test kits that went around the country,” Thomas Frieden, the director of the CDC from 2009 to 2017, told us. “I don’t know what went wrong this time.”Testing-related coronavirus news and rumors were themselves endemic in the first week of March 2020, with one thread on Twitter about the subject of COVID-19 tests in Seattle spreading virally. We also examined claims that the CDC removed figures to do with testing from their website between March 1 and 2 2020 — which the agency did.According to The Atlantic, discerning how many Americans had been tested for the novel coronavirus strain was not a straightforward undertaking. However, the report managed to verify that only a few thousand Americans had been tested for coronavirus. At the time the information was removed from the CDC’s site, that number was just under 500:Through interviews with dozens of public-health officials and a survey of local data from across the country, The Atlantic could only verify that 1,895 people have been tested for the coronavirus in the United States, about 10 percent of whom have tested positive. And while the American capacity to test for the coronavirus has ramped up significantly over the past few days, local officials can still test only several thousand people a day, not the tens or hundreds of thousands indicated by the White House’s promises.To arrive at our estimate, we contacted the public-health departments of all 50 states and the District of Columbia. We gathered data on websites, and we corresponded with dozens of state officials. All 50 states and D.C. have made some information available, though the quality and timeliness of the data varied widely. Some states have only committed to releasing their numbers once or three times a week. Most are focused on the number of confirmed cases; only a few have publicized the number of people they are capable of testing.By and large, news stories about COVID-19 testing strongly suggested that states were profoundly underprepared to test individuals exposed to or exhibiting symptoms of the novel coronavirus strain, a claim echoed in the statement reproduced above.As for the statement purportedly made by a quarantined California nurse exposed to and exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19, it was correctly attributed. A March 4 2020 press release on NationalNursesUnited.org announced a press conference the following day, March 5 2020. The document was available verbatim on their site as a PDF, also titled “Statement by a quarantined nurse from a northern California Kaiser facility.” In the release, the organization urged the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to step in, asserting that data showed that “hospitals are unprepared [and] confirm little planning, poor communication, and shortage of equipment” around the COVID-19 outbreak.
|
10671
|
Antidepressants’ risks to children slim, study says
|
The story provides the reader with a comparison of anti-depressants' effectiveness and the risk of suicidal thoughts or actions in young children and teenagers. The story describes results of a recently published meta-analysis and explains why the results of this new study may differ from data on which an FDA warning of increased suicidal behavior in children taking anti-depressants was based. The story provides the number needed to harm as well as other quantitative information on the benefits of anti-depressants for particular mood disorders. The story focuses on only one potential harm of treatment, i.e. suicide and suicidal ideation. It would have been reasonable to report on other common side effects of these medications (e.g. stomach problems, insomnia, irritability, and mania in some children). While these medications are considered safe – even with the FDA warning – there is little long-term data on their safety in these groups. The original version of the story by the Associated Press included several items left out by the Cleveland Plain Dealer when it picked up the story: an interview with a second, independent expert source; mention of other treatment options such as psychotherapy, especially cognitive behavioral therapy. The story interviews one of the lead authors of the study. However we are not told if he has financial ties with the pharmaceutical makers of anti-depressant medications. The JAMA article gives conflict of interest info and there are potential conflicts that are not reported in the news story. Other clinical and patient perspectives are needed to provide balance to the story and as a means of discussing this treatment option for children and teenagers.
|
true
|
The cost of anti-depressant medications are not mentioned. Cost of generic prozac is about $16/month. Branded versions are about $80-120/month The story does provide absolute data on the positive benefit of these medication for several mood disorders. The story also presents the number needed to harm. The story presents an adequate risk to benefit comparison by providing the data. The story focuses on only one potential harm of treatment, i.e. suicide and suicidal ideation. The story does not list the side effects of these medications (stomach problems, insomnia, irritability, and mania in some children). While these medications are considered safe – even with the FDA warning – there is little long-term data on their safety in these groups. The story gives an overview of the meta-analysis and explains why the results of this new study may differ from earlier studies on which an FDA warning of increased suicidal behavior in children taking anti-depressants were based. The story provides the number needed to harm as well as other quantitative information on the benefits and risks of anti-depressants as they relate to improved mood and risk of suicidal thoughts and feelings. The story simply reports the results of a review of many studies looking at suicidal behavior in children and adults who were prescribed anti-depressant medications. The story would be improved by giving information on frequency of the conditions discussed, but there is NO disease mongering The story interviews one of the lead authors of the study. However we are not told if he has financial ties with the pharmaceutical makers of anti-depressant medications. The JAMA article gives conflict of interest info and there are potential conflicts that are not reported in the news story. The version of the story we reviewed was in the Cleveland Plain Dealer. This version does not provide other treatment options for children and teenagers who have anxiety disorders and/or depression such as psychotherapy, especially cognitive behavioral therapy. But the original AP story did include an interview with a Duke expert, unconnected with the JAMA study, who commented on cognitive behavioral therapy. The story does not provide information about the availability of anti-depressant medications for young children and teenagers. However, since this story deals with possible risks from these drugs, this criterion seems less important in this story. Anti-depressant medication treatment is children is a relatively new phenomenon. The story does not mention this. However, the focus of the story was to provide a more up-to-date report of the risk of suicidal ideation and behavior in children taking these medications. Data from this recent systemic review suggest the risk is still there, but not as great as previously thought. The original AP story had interviews with two experts, one of them not connected with the research. So it's safe to assume it did not rely solely or largely on a news release. But the Cleveland Plain Dealer, in which we picked up the story, cut out the quotes from this independent source.
|
|
8844
|
Celebrex risky in high-risk patients, study finds.
|
Doctors should prescribe the lowest doses of Celebrex possible in patients at high risk of heart problems, researchers who did a combined analysis of six studies of the Pfizer Inc pain drug said on Monday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The analysis suggests the potentially harmful effect of Celebrex dosage is most pronounced in higher-risk patients, researchers said at the American College of Cardiology scientific meeting. “Patients at low cardiovascular risk should take some level of comfort,” said Dr. Scott Solomon, lead researcher of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored analysis. “That wasn’t so clear previously.” Doctors should exercise caution in prescribing the drug, generally known as celecoxib, in high-risk patients, said Solomon, whose analysis was also published online in the journal Circulation. Celebrex belongs to a class of pain drugs known as cox-2 inhibitors and is the only such drug still on the market in the United States. Merck and Co Inc withdrew its widely used cox-2 drug, Vioxx, from the market in 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in long- term users. Another cox-2 inhibitor from Pfizer called Bextra was also pulled from the U.S. market due to safety concerns. While the analysis sheds light on how the drug should be used, Solomon said he could not judge whether the data lift the cloud over this class of drugs. The six trials involving a total of 7,950 patients all studied Celebrex against a placebo for uses other than arthritis. Patients received either 400 milligrams once a day, 200 mg twice a day, or 400 mg twice a day. The primary goal of the pooled analysis was an assessment of the combined risk of cardiovascular death, heart attack, stroke, heart failure or events involving blood clots. Researchers found the heart risk was lowest at the 400 mg daily dose. They found nearly a two-fold risk of adverse heart events with the 200 mg twice daily dose and that jumped to about a three-fold risk at the 400 mg twice daily dose. “Even 400 mg once a day showed elevated risk” in the high-risk population, Solomon said, adding he could not extrapolate whether doses lower than 400 mg cut risk further. The increased risk was not affected by aspirin use, researchers said. “Most of the data used in this pooled analysis have previously been published and are consistent with what we already know about the cardiovascular risks of Celebrex and other prescription arthritis pain relievers,” said Gail Cawkwell, Pfizer’s executive medical director. “The analysis doesn’t provide any new conclusions on the FDA-approved doses of Celebrex, including the most commonly prescribed dose of 200 mg daily,” she said. Dr. Steven Nissen of the Cleveland Clinic, who has a study on lower doses underway, added: “There aren’t long-term randomized placebo-controlled trials for that dose, The only way we’re ever going to answer these questions is with good randomized prospective data,” he said. “We’ll tell it like it is when the data is in.”
|
7523
|
Presidents in health crises: Trump more hands-on than many .
|
Woodrow Wilson was more focused on the end of World War I than a flu virus that was making its way around the globe, ultimately sickening hundreds of thousands of Americans, including the president himself.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Health, General News, Flu, Politics, Latin America, Financial markets, Natural disasters, Pandemics, George W. Bush, Terrorism, Virus Outbreak, Europe, Public health, World War I, Barack Obama
|
George W. Bush stood with a bullhorn on a pile of rubble after the 9/11 attacks on lower Manhattan and promised that the people who were responsible “will hear all of us soon.” Barack Obama was in office for just a few months when the first reports came in about the H1N1 virus, which would eventually be declared a pandemic like today’s new coronavirus. Most American presidents will confront a crisis — or crises — before they leave office, whether it is a natural disaster, war, economic downturn, public health threat or terrorism. What matters is how they respond, historians say. “The number one thing a president can do in a moment like this is try to calm the nation,” said Julian Zelizer, a presidential historian at Princeton University. It’s what Franklin D. Roosevelt did during an extraordinary 12 years in office, guiding the nation through a bleak period of Depression-era unemployment, a severe Midwest drought known as the Dust Bowl and battle against the Nazis and Japanese in World War II. During the influenza of Wilson’s time, which killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide, including about 675,000 in America, presidents were not involved in public health issues in the same way that President Donald Trump has become engrossed in the U.S. effort against the new coronavirus. Such issues were left for public health professionals at the state and local level. “Wilson never issued any public statement whatsoever,” said John M. Barry, author of “The Great Influenza,” a book about the 1918 flu. “He was entirely focused on the war. Period.” In fact, Wilson was so focused on the post-war peace talks he was participating in in Paris that he, too, ended up stricken with the flu. He recovered. Trump, on the other hand, seems intent on being the public face of the effort against what has become his most serious challenge in this reelection year. Trump, who has no scientific or medical training, now leads a daily White House briefing on coronavirus efforts by a task force he tapped the vice president to lead. Trump styles himself as a “wartime president” fighting an “invisible enemy” responsible for hundreds of deaths and thousands of infections in the U.S. - numbers that will continue to rise as the virus spreads — and a dramatic upheaval of everyday life. Millions of people have been ordered or urged to stay home for the foreseeable future, cut off from simple pleasures like going to restaurants, shopping malls or movies in a bid to slow the virus. But Trump’s crisis management has earned mixed reviews, with praise from many supporters and criticism from detractors, including mayors and governors who are desperate for Trump to more robustly use his authority to help them get much-needed protective gear and supplies for doctors and nurses. The president’s early attempts to minimize the severity of the situation, and to suggest that it was under control, have been panned, though he recently adopted a more urgent tone. But the damage has been done, said Steve Morrison, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, citing lack of public trust due to Trump’s early handling of the situation. “Not having trust and confidence is a huge liability heading into something this catastrophic,” said Morrison, senior vice president and director of the Global Health Policy Center at CSIS. Obama was a few months into his first term in 2009 term when reports started coming in that April about the H1N1 flu. He addressed the situation that month, assembled a team and ultimately declared both a public health emergency and a national emergency to deal with the threat. “This is obviously a very serious situation, and every American should know that their entire government is taking the utmost precautions and preparations,” Obama said as he opened a White House news conference that month. He said public health officials had recommended that schools with confirmed cases consider temporarily closing, and that he had asked Congress for $1.5 billion in emergency funding to help monitor and track the virus, and to build a supply of antiviral drugs and other equipment. “Everyone should rest assured that this government is prepared to do whatever it takes to control the impact of this virus,” Obama said. Dr. Howard Markel, director of the University of Michigan’s Center for the History of Medicine, said Obama was “very hands on” during H1N1 — but not as visibly as Trump. Obama’s director of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention conducted daily briefings from Atlanta. “He took a step back because he allowed his experts to run the show,” Markel said of Obama. “He didn’t have to be in front of the podium, but you knew he was there.” Nearly 12,500 deaths due to the H1N1 flu were reported in the U.S. between April 2009 and April 2010, when the World Health Organization declared an end to the pandemic. Obama spent nearly $1 billion and sent U.S. military personnel to West Africa to help with the response to an outbreak of Ebola in 2014. Still feeling his way through his first year in office, Bush became a wartime president the instant hijackers recruited by the al-Qaida militant network flew commercial airliners with passengers into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field on Sept. 11, 2001. Days later, Bush stood atop the rubble and memorably spoke for the nation. “I can hear you!” Bush blared through the bullhorn as emergency responders cheered. “The rest of the world hears you! And the people – and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.” Weeks after that appearance, Bush authorized military airstrikes against Taliban military installations and al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan. U.S. military engagement in Afghanistan continues to this day. ___ This story has been corrected to reflect that Morrison’s first name is Steve, not Scott. ___ Bev Banks contributed to this report. Follow Darlene Superville on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsupervilleap ___ 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.
|
7835
|
Long-distance runners lap up miles for the love of it.
|
Although many people begin running as a practical path to weight loss or fitness, for many it becomes a love affair as the miles increase.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Tom Holland, running coach and author of “The Marathon Method,” tells his clients that running for 3 miles was horrible for him too, but farther down the road things changed. “It happens for different people at different times and different distances: that runner’s high,” he said in an interview. Holland calls it a cardiovascular turning point where the run becomes exponentially easier. “There’s a point where the run becomes enjoyable,” he said. “Whether this happens at 8 or 10 or 12 miles down the road, it will happen,” he said. A veteran of 60 marathons, Holland was set to run his ninth New York City Marathon earlier this month, until the 26.2-mile (42.2-kilometer) race was canceled in the wake of Superstorm Sandy. “Over 100,000 people apply to the New York City Marathon each year,” he said. “There must be something there that people want.” Gregory Chertok, a sports psychologist with the American College of Sports Medicine, said many people are drawn to running because it’s an uncomplicated activity. “Put one foot in front of the other and when you work hard, you improve,” Chertok said. “Not everything in life is so simple. You could spend 10 years in a ballet studio and not become a ballerina.” Few runners enter a marathon to win it, he said. “It’s so rare in sporting culture for those who aren’t physically or aerobically gifted to feel included in something that’s competitive but not exclusive.” While it’s tough to categorize athletes, Chertok said, long-distance running seems to be appreciated by those who enjoy solitude - or periods of solitude - and are OK with monotony. Chertok differentiates external from internal motivation and said studies show that people who set goals based on intrinsic motivation are more successful. “People run with the initial goal of losing weight or getting fit, which are external goals, but during training they realize they love running, so they end up running for internal reasons,” he said. Qualitative evidence for the runner’s high suggests that for those prone to its euphoria, it probably contributes to running’s addictive quality. “Those that have it swear by it,” he said. Most sports medicine practitioners would agree that people are born to be mobile, he said, but not necessarily to run long distances. “Physicians will deter people from running marathon distances, but it’s such a powerful allure that it becomes greater than risk of hamstring injury,” he said. Richard Finn, spokesman for New York Road Runners, organizers of the New York City Marathon, agrees that long distances do not suit everyone. “Running 26.2 miles is a big, bold brash undertaking,” he said. “You’ve got to put heart, soul, mind, body in it for months. It’s like climbing Mount Everest. Not everybody should be doing it.” He said a runner is a runner whether you’re doing a marathon or a five0kilometer (3.1-mile) race. “We do running 365 days a year, since 1959,” Finn said of the New York Road Runners. “Get those sneakers on and run, even on a treadmill. We’re not elitist. We think running is good for you.” Holland believes running also exposes our weakest link so he urges novices to start slow. “Running is an amazing cheap thing that can make us feel great about ourselves,” he said. “But the secret to running is balance. We’re born to run but we’re not born to run six days a week at the start.”
|
9594
|
Your Fitbit Could Help You Get Pregnant — Here’s How
|
The story focuses on how wearable technology — particularly the Fitbit — could help women track their ovulation cycle in order to increase the odds of becoming pregnant. The story does, briefly, address the fact that this will not help women who have other medical obstacles to becoming pregnant, but could have done more to address (even in brief) meaningful issues related to infertility. Similarly, while the story mentions the small sample size of the relevant study, it doesn’t stress that a study involving only five people is statistically not significant. Choosing to have a child is among the most important and personal decisions that a woman can make, and subsequent difficulties with conceiving can cause significant emotional distress. And these difficulties are not uncommon. According to the National Institutes of Health, “Studies suggest that after 1 year of having unprotected sex, 15% of couples are unable to conceive, and after 2 years, 10% of couples still have not had a successful pregnancy.” Many factors can contribute to fertility problems — in both women and men. Technology may prove to be an effective tool for helping women track their ovulation cycles, but the study discussed here is far too small to make any significant claims — and would still not be a guarantee that it will help many women become pregnant.
|
false
|
Fitbit,Pregnancy
|
The story quotes a company official calling this a “cheaper” method for those who want to get pregnant. But no numbers are provided to back this up. Fitbits can cost anywhere from 60 to more than 100 dollars. They also require users to have smartphones or tablets to interact with the fitbit — and with the (free) app discussed in the bulk of the article. Other technologies are also discussed in the article, with no mention of related costs. The benefit here would presumably be that women wishing to become pregnant would be more likely to become pregnant more quickly if they were using a Fitbit to track their ovulation cycles. To our knowledge, no study has been done to determine whether that’s the case — and the story doesn’t address this. What’s more, it’s not clear whether the 5 women studied are part of the 90% of childbearing-age women who would be able to become pregnant without resorting to this device. It’s not clear what any potential harms might be in this case, though one possibility is that some women may delay taking steps to diagnose possible fertility problems in order to use this technology. Another possible “harm” is the bother and cost of using this device by women who would become pregnant anyway without any problem. While the story doesn’t address those issues, we give kudos to the story for addressing another possibility: that women may use the technology to track their ovulation cycle in order to avoid becoming pregnant. The story tackles this issue head on. This one is a close call. The story does describe the study as “small” and “preliminary,” but doesn’t explain just how poor the quality of the evidence is. This is not even a real study, just an uncontrolled observation in a few women who work for the company. The small sample size makes it virtually impossible to draw conclusions about the relevance of the findings to, well, anyone who didn’t participate in the study. The story doesn’t acknowledge that. The story says that getting pregnant can be “tricky,” and it can be. But it doesn’t make it clear that the vast majority of women are able to conceive without this device. In fact, the story doesn’t really give any sense as to how common or uncommon it is to have difficulty conceiving. Without that context, the story may perhaps contribute to women unnecessarily seeking out and purchasing the device for a problem they don’t have. We suppose that there is not much harm in that, but it could cost. There are no independent sources in the story. Only two sources are quoted, and each of them works for a tech company whose products address fertility issues. The story compares the use of the Fitbit to manually tracking one’s cycle (i.e. taking daily temperature and tracking consistency of cervical mucus). It also mentions some other gadgets that track body temperature. We’ll award a Satisfactory on that basis, but there are a host of other options available for women who are seeking help in becoming pregnant. The story doesn’t address any of them. Fitbits are widely available, though the story seems to take it for granted that readers will know this. Similarly, the story refers to the relevant app, called “Clue,” as a “women’s health data startup.” It’s not clear from that description whether the relevant app is already available. (It is.) The story does note the availability of other, related technologies. The story discusses other technologies that perform related functions. The story goes beyond any news release we could find related to the work.
|
4683
|
New deal between UPMC, Highmark extends in-network access.
|
Under a new agreement, Highmark health insurance will maintain in-network access to University of Pittsburgh Medical Center hospitals in western Pennsylvania.
|
true
|
Bedford, Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Tom Wolf, University of Pittsburgh
|
Gov. Tom Wolf thanked both health systems in an announcement on Thursday. Wolf, a Democrat, praised the rival companies for reaching the agreement following their 2014 contract. In-network access to UPMC facilities for Highmark patients was set to expire in 2019. Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, UPMC Altoona, UPMC Bedford and multiple other hospitals and specialty facilities will remain open to Highmark patients. The locations include centers that specialize in transplant services, cancer treatment and psychiatric health. “This is medical care that simply is not available anywhere else in the region, and denying affordable access to this vital care is just not acceptable,” Wolf said in a release. UPMC executive vice president David Farner praised the agreement. The pact helps preserve community-based care for patients across the state, Highmark president Deborah Rice-Johnson said. The health system agreement doesn’t address a dispute between Williamsport-based PMF Industries Inc. and UPMC, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported. UPMC disagreed on PMF’s use of reimbursement estimates that are based on Medicare rates. Evangelical Community Hospital has sided with UPMC in rejecting its reimbursement system.
|
2404
|
Relapse of 'cured' HIV patients spurs AIDS science on.
|
Scientists seeking a cure for AIDS say they have been inspired, not crushed, by a major setback in which two HIV positive patients believed to have been cured found the virus re-invading their bodies once more.
|
true
|
Science News
|
True, the news hit hard last month that the so-called “Boston patients” - two men who received bone marrow transplants that appeared to rid them completely of the AIDS-causing virus - had relapsed and gone back onto antiretroviral treatment. But experts say the disappointment could lay the basis for important leaps forward in the search for a cure. “It’s a setback for the patients, of course, but an advance for the field because the field has now gained a lot more knowledge,” said Steven Deeks, a professor and HIV expert at the University of California, San Francisco. He and other experts say the primary practical message is that current tests designed to detect even very low levels of HIV present in the body are simply not sensitive enough. As well as having the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the Boston patients both also had a type of blood cancer called lymphoma, for which they were treated using bone marrow transplants - one man in 2008 and the other in 2010. They continued taking the antiretroviral AIDS drugs, but eight months after each patient’s transplant, doctors found they could not detect any sign of HIV in their blood. In the early part of 2013, both patients decided to stop taking their AIDS drugs and both appeared to remain HIV-free - prompting their doctors, Timothy Henrich and Daniel Kuritzkes from Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital, to announce at a conference in July that they may have been cured. Yet in December came news that one of the men had begun to show signs of an HIV rebound by August, while the second patient had a relapse in November. Henrich said the virus’ comeback underlined how ingenious HIV can be in finding hiding places in the body to evade attack efforts by the immune system and by drug treatment. “Through this research we have discovered the HIV reservoir is deeper and more persistent than previously known and that our current standards of probing for HIV may not be sufficient,” he said, adding that both patients were “currently in good health” and back on antiretroviral therapy. Barely a decade ago, few HIV scientists would have dared put the words HIV and cure in the same sentence. Yet some intriguing and inspiring cases in recent years mean many now believe it is just a question of time before a cure is found. First was the now famous case of Timothy Ray Brown, the so-called “Berlin patient,” whose HIV was eradicated by a complex treatment for leukemia in 2007 involving the destruction of his immune system and a stem cell transplant from a donor with a rare genetic mutation that resists HIV infection. Such an elaborate, expensive and life-threatening procedure could never be used as a broad-spectrum approach for the world’s 34 million HIV patients. But the results in Brown focused scientific attention on a genetic mutation known as ‘CCR5 delta 32’ as a target for possible gene therapy treatment. Then last March, French scientists who followed 14 HIV-positive people known as the “Visconti patients”, who were treated very swiftly with HIV drugs but then stopped treatment, said that even after seven years off therapy, they were still showing no signs of the virus rebounding. That announcement came only weeks after news of the “functional cure” of an HIV-positive baby in Mississippi who received antiretroviral treatment for 18 months from the day she was born. By the time she was two this appeared to have stopped the virus replicating and spreading. A “functional cure” is when HIV is reduced to such low levels that it is kept at bay even without treatment, though the virus can still be detected in the body. Sharon Lewin, an HIV expert at Monash University in Australia, said all these developments, as well as the setback suffered by the Boston patients, inspired scientists to investigate many different approaches in the search for a cure. “We’ve learnt many things here - and one of the most important is that a tiny, tiny amount of virus can get the whole thing going again,” she told Reuters. “It’s a clear message that we need better ways to pick up the virus.” Scientists are now more convinced than ever that a two-pronged approach which aims to firmly suppress the virus while bolstering the immune system provides the best way forward. “We need to attack in two ways - reduce the virus to very low levels and also to boost the immune response. We can’t do one without the other,” said Lewin. “So we still have to think of other creative ways to control HIV. And it’s still early days... before we can say which approach is likely to be the winner.”
|
41068
|
Snakes kill 137 people every day
|
This is an underestimate. Snakes kill around 378 people per day.
|
false
|
online
|
26,383 people die of cancer each day. 24,641 die of heart disease every day. This is an underestimate for all cardiovascular disease deaths, but close to the daily figure of those who die from coronary heart disease specifically. 4,300 people die of diabetes every day. Suicide is the cause of death for around 3,000 people per day Suicide is the cause of death for around 2,000 people per day. Mosquitoes kill 2,740 people every day. This appears to be an overestimate. Mosquitoes are responsible for no more than around 700,000 deaths per year, or 1,900 a day. Humans kill 1,300 fellow humans every day. Snakes kill 137 people every day This is an underestimate. Snakes kill around 378 people per day. Claim 1 of 8
|
16676
|
Since 1999, 440 people have been killed in attacks on church property in the United States.
|
Gun group's church violence stats can't be verified
|
false
|
Georgia, Guns, GeorgiaCarry.org,
|
"It’s been a month since House Bill 60 became law and cleared the way for Georgians to carry concealed weapons in several new venues – all bars, many government buildings and, generating the most news coverage, churches that allow it. Jerry Henry, executive director of GeorgiaCarry.org --- a pro-gun group that advocates for fewer gun restrictions --- repeated a strikingly high and somewhat specific number in defending allowing guns in sanctuaries. More than 440 people have been killed in attacks on church property since 1999, he told Georgia Public Broadcasting this spring. A reader questioned that figure shortly after the bill became law on July 1. We decided it was a worthy target for the AJC Truth-O-Meter. Already, PolitiFact found flaws in a specific count from the other side of the gun debate. Everytown for Gun Safety claimed there were 74 school shootings in the United States since Sandy Hook, a tally that included incidents such as a teacher who committed suicide in a school parking lot overnight. Henry told PolitiFact Georgia that he relied on two specific websites, Cops and Cross and Carl Chinn's church security site, for the statistic. He used the term church generically, to cover all houses of worship. Cops and Cross is run by Jimmy Meeks, a former police officer who teaches church safety across the country. A recent banner on the site listed more than 470 ""violent deaths on church and faith-based property since 1999,"" but does not include sources for those figures. Instead, it directs users to the site run by Carl Chinn, a former building engineer for Focus on the Family. Chinn was among responders when a gunman took four people hostage at the conservative Christian group’s headquarters, and later surrendered, in 1996. Chinn said in an email that he relies on news reports, official records and blog items for his figures. Many incidents have multiple sources. That count, though, includes broad incidents not likely to be considered attacks. For instance, the first page of incidents for 2014 show at least two suicides on church property that, according to news reports, are not connected to the house of worship. GeorgiaCarry.org’s claim could also not be backed up with unimpeachable data elsewhere. The Centers for Disease Control found that the majority of the 166 deaths that occurred at houses of worship between 2003 and 2011 were suicides. But the National Violent Death Reporting System covers only 17 states, including Georgia. The CDC cannot provide specific numbers on suicides from the total figure, a spokeswoman said, because that sample is too small. That means the figures are not nationally representative and cannot be used to create an estimate to verify or refute Chinn’s numbers. There is similar incomplete coverage from the National Incident-Based Reporting System, with only about 38 percent of Uniform Crime Reporting agencies providing information, according to the FBI. Without more data, the FBI cannot verify the statistic. The federal government has generally stopped funding such research over political battles between gun control advocates and gun rights advocates. Several prominent social scientists have asked that barriers to firearms research be lifted, and President Obama has signed an executive order for the CDC to research causes and prevention of gun violence. Without reliable statistics, Chinn’s data could be the best approximation of data available. And although advocates often speak with more certainty than data supports, David Kopel, the research director at the Libertarian-leaning Independence Institute, said there is value in stories behind some of the numbers. Anecdotally, backers of Georgia’s law need only to point to Matthew Murray, who killed two missionaries in a Colorado church’s mission training center in 2007, Kopel said. Murray continued his spree by killing two more people at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs. A congregant volunteering to help with security shot Murray, who then took his own life. There have been incidents closer to home. In July 2012, two people were killed in a shootout with each other outside a funeral at Victory for the World Church near Stone Mountain. In October of that year, Floyd Palmer gunned down Greg McDowell as he led a prayer at World Changers Church International in College Park. Palmer also was charged in 2001 with shooting a man outside a Maryland mosque. ""Are there incidents where someone comes into church with a gun, with the intent to commit suicide? I’m sure,"" said Clayton Cramer, an adjunct history professor at the College of Western Idaho who specializes in firearm history. ""How often? We don’t know."" ""Until such time that we have some real, hard data,"" Cramer added, ""the best thing to say is, there are examples where a churchgoer having a gun during a confrontation mattered or would have mattered,"" And that is where the claim of specific counts falls short. The data has some value in capturing the number of attacks on or at religious institutions. But there is no way to remove suicides from the death counts to ensure a more strict definition of attacks as understood by the general public. Without that ability, even a claim with some truth gives the wrong impression."
|
6065
|
Michigan probes Detroit-area hospital’s 7 Legionnaires cases.
|
State health officials are investigating after seven people treated at a suburban Detroit hospital were diagnosed with Legionnaires’ disease.
|
true
|
Health, General News, Legionnaires disease, Detroit, Mount Clemens, Michigan
|
The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services says it’s working with the Macomb County Health Department to investigate the illnesses at McLaren Macomb Hospital in Mount Clemens. The departments say six of the seven Legionnaires’ cases have been reported at the hospital since mid-September. Both agencies are investigating the source of the disease and whether there are more infected people. The hospital is cooperating with the investigation and plans to increase water testing to look for any signs of the Legionella bacteria that causes the illness. Legionnaire’s is a flu-like illness contracted when infected water vapor is inhaled. The elderly and people with weakened immune systems can be particularly susceptible.
|
33322
|
Under Obamacare, patients 76 and older must be admitted to the hospital by their primary care physicians in order to be covered by Medicare.
|
Finally, a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) “Hospital Inpatient Admission Order and Certification” document from September 2013 that covers the procedure for submitting an order for inpatient services under Medicare Part A states that “payment for hospital inpatient services under Medicare Part A, section 1814(a)” requires only “physician certification of the medical necessity that such services be provided on an inpatient basis.” It, too, makes no mention of requiring hospital admission specifically by a primary care physician, nor of any upper age limit on Medicare coverage.
|
false
|
Medical, aca, medicare, obamacare
|
This alarmist warning claims a provision of the Affordable Care Act [ACA] (commonly known as “Obamacare”) supposedly requires that a primary care physician must admit patients of age 76 and older to a hospital in order for those patients’ hospital costs to be covered by Medicare. It originally turned up as a piece tacked onto to the widely-circulated (and largely erroneous) “Judge Kithil” criticism of pending health care legislation and now makes the Internet rounds as a separate, stand-alone piece. In short, there’s nothing to it. Nothing in the text of the Affordable Care Act requires that a primary care physician admit patients 76 or older in order for their hospital care to be treated under Medicare. Medicare coverage for hospital care is governed not by the ACA, but by provisions of the Social Security Act that establish the criteria for Medicare Parts A and B, and by rules and guidelines provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. None of those provisions or rules set an upper age limit on Medicare coverage: What do I pay as an inpatient? • Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) covers inpatient hospital services. Generally, this means you pay a one-time deductible for all of your hospital services for the first 60 days you’re in the hospital. • Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance) covers most of your doctor services when you’re an inpatient. You pay 20% of the Medicare-approved amount for doctor services after paying the Part B deductible. What do I pay as an outpatient? • Medicare Part B covers outpatient hospital services. Generally, this means you pay a copayment for each individual outpatient hospital service. This amount may vary by service. • Part B also covers most of your doctor services when you’re a hospital outpatient. You pay 20% of the Medicare-approved amount after you pay the Part B deductible. Likewise, the “Inpatient hospital care” section of the Medicare.gov web site simply states that “all people with Medicare are covered” whenever “a doctor makes an official order which says you need inpatient hospital care to treat your illness or injury” — it makes no mention of requiring admission specifically by a primary care physician, nor of any upper age limit on Medicare coverage: Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) covers hospital services, including semi-private rooms, meals, general nursing, drugs as part of your inpatient treatment, and other hospital services and supplies. This includes the care you get in acute care hospitals, critical access hospitals, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, long-term care hospitals, inpatient care as part of a qualifying clinical research study, and mental health care. Who’s eligible? All people with Medicare are covered when all of these are true:
|
11974
|
Women in our state will continue to have cost-free access to reproductive health care
|
"Cuomo said women in New York state ""will continue to have cost-free access to reproductive health care"" because of an action the state took earlier this year. But not every woman is in an insurance plan regulated by the state. It’s possible a self-insured large employer in New York state could apply for an exemption from the federal birth control mandate. If granted the exemption, the company would not have to provide health coverage for birth control to its employees. Those exemptions are not expected to be widespread, but they are possible. Cuomo’s statement needs clarification."
|
true
|
Abortion, Women, New York, Andrew Cuomo,
|
"Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo says women in New York state don’t have to worry about new Trump administration rules ending a federal requirement that employers must include birth control coverage in their health insurance plans. The new rules exempt employers from the Obama-era mandate if they have religious or moral reservations to the coverage. But Cuomo said contraception will still be covered in New York state. ""This year, we ensured that whatever happens at the federal level, women in our state will continue to have cost-free access to reproductive health care,"" Cuomo said in a statement. States can set certain insurance standards beyond what the federal government requires. New York state told insurance companies in January they are required to cover birth control and abortion services. That condition still stands, but is Cuomo right that women in New York state are not affected by Trump’s decision? Limits to state regulation State regulations, like the one from January, do not apply to all plans. The state Department of Financial Services regulates everything sold on the state health exchange, called New York State of Health. That includes plans sold to individuals and companies with 100 or fewer employees. The agency says the state’s birth control mandate covers 1.35 million residents in those plans. Health care offered through companies with more than 100 employees is more complicated. Companies that go the traditional route of buying health coverage through an insurance carrier must adhere to the rules. About 2.5 million people in that category are covered by the state’s birth control mandate. But companies that are self-insured, where the employer assumes a large part of the costs, are not regulated by the state, meaning they need not adhere to the state's birth control mandate. About 60 percent of private sector workers in the U.S. who get their health coverage through an employer were enrolled in a self-insured plan in 2015. That’s up from 46 percent in 1996, according to research from the Employee Benefit Research Institute. In New York state, about 54 percent of private sector employees who get health insurance through their employer had a self-insured plan last year, according to the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The option is most popular for companies with at least 1,000 employees. Eighty percent of private sector employees at companies that size in New York state are enrolled in a self-insured plan. What about public health insurance? The federal government sets the baseline for what services are covered under Medicaid. Government workers are covered under state regulation, but Medicaid and Medicare enrollees are not.States can add to that list. The list of services covered by Medicaid in New York state goes well beyond the federal standard. New York is one of multiple states where Medicaid covers birth control and abortion services. About a third of the state’s population alone is on Medicaid. Our ruling Cuomo said women in New York state ""will continue to have cost-free access to reproductive health care"" because of an action the state took earlier this year. But not every woman is in an insurance plan regulated by the state. It’s possible a self-insured large employer in New York state could apply for an exemption from the federal birth control mandate. If granted the exemption, the company would not have to provide health coverage for birth control to its employees. Those exemptions are not expected to be widespread, but they are possible. Cuomo’s statement needs clarification."
|
4267
|
Doctors: Global warming is taking a toll on people’s health.
|
Global warming is hurting people’s health a bit more than previously thought, but there’s hope that the Earth — and populations — can heal if the planet kicks its coal habit, a group of doctors and other experts said.
|
true
|
Climate, Climate change, International News, Environment, Health, Environmental health
|
The poor and elderly are most threatened by worsening climate change, but there remains “glimmers of progress” especially after the 2015 Paris agreement to limit heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions, according to a new big study published Monday in the British medical journal Lancet. Comparing the report to a health checkup, four researchers and several outside experts described Earth’s prognosis as “guarded.” “There are some very severe warning signs, but there are some hopeful indicators too,” said co-author Dr. Howard Frumkin, a professor of environmental health at the University of Washington. “Given the right treatment and aggressive efforts to prevent things from getting worse, I think there’s hope.” The report highlighted health problems stemming from more frequent heat waves, disease spread by insects, air pollution and other woes. While the disasters have been costly, deaths haven’t been increasing because society is doing a better but more expensive job adjusting to the changing conditions, the researchers noted. A team of 63 doctors, public health officials and scientists from around the world wrote what they considered the first of a regular monitoring of the health of the planet, similar to having a “finger on the pulse of the patient,” said Dr. Hugh Montgomery, an intensive care specialist and director of the University College of London’s Institute for Health and Performance. Based on 40 indicators, the study said “the human symptoms of climate change are unequivocal and potentially irreversible.” While other disease rates are dropping, cases of dengue fever — a mosquito-borne disease — has doubled every decade since 1990 with 58.4 million cases and 10,000 deaths in 2013. Frumkin, a former environmental health director at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said climate change, which allows mosquitoes to live in more places and stay active longer with shorter freeze seasons, is part but not all of the reason. The same goes for the increase in tick-borne Lyme disease in the United States, Frumkin said, adding “the ticks do better with warmer weather.” Between 2000 and last year, the number of vulnerable people — those over 65 or with chronic disease — exposed to heat waves increased by about 125 million, the study said. It also highlighted the increasing likelihood of food shortages as climate change worsens. Columbia University’s Madeline Thomson, who wasn’t part of the study team, praised the work, saying “climate is a stress multiplier” so it is important to monitor this way. Acting on climate can have side benefits, Frumkin said. Cutting coal takes smog and soot out of the air, while eating less meat and bicycling and walking more to use less electricity means fewer accidents and reduced obesity, he said. ___ Follow Seth Borenstein on Twitter at @borenbears. His work can be found here.
|
18336
|
"Mark Warner Says 70,000 children ""have lost their Head Start slots"" because of the sequester."
|
"Warner said 70,000 children have ""lost their Head Start slots"" because of the sequester. He strains the limit of an Obama administration estimate that ""up to"" that number of children may lose out. There’s no doubt that many children will lose Head Start spots as the budget cuts sink in, but at this point, nobody knows how many already have. HHS is gathering that information. The White House estimate assumes that local Head Start organizations will respond to funding cuts by reducing slots, but that isn’t the only option. Many organizations are exploring different options, such as fundraising and reducing hours. Warner’s statement contains an element of truth in that some children already have lost Head Starts slots and others have less access to the program. But by and large, he assumes that a worst-case scenario for Head Start has already taken place."
|
false
|
Children, Education, Federal Budget, Poverty, Virginia, Mark Warner,
|
"Faced with complaints about airport delays being caused by the sequester, Congress last month halted a furlough of air traffic controllers that had been part of its budget-cutting agreement. U.S. Sen Mark Warner, D-Va., recently wondered why members of Congress -- frequent fliers, themselves -- haven’t shown the same urgency to protect disadvantaged 3- and- 4-year-olds who also are being hurt by the spending cuts. ""Everybody gets up in arms when people have to wait to get an airplane ride and Congress acts immediately because that’s visible,"" he said during a May 14 interview on WHRV-FM in Norfolk. ""What’s not visible is the 70,000 kids who have lost their Head Start slots..."" For several years, Warner has been seeking a bipartisan solution to the nation’s budget stalemate that includes spending cuts and tax increases. He has called the sequester, which began triggering automatic cuts to defense and domestic programs on March 1, ""the most stupid option on the table."" During his recent radio interview, he also lamented sequester-caused reductions in federal grants for college students and research at the National Institute of Health. We were struck by his claim that 70,000 children have lost access to Head Start, an educational program that prepares disadvantaged kids to start elementary school, and decided to see whether Warner is right. More than a million children -- from families that live below the poverty line or receive public assistance -- are enrolled in Head Start half-day or full-day programs. The federal government offers competitive contracts to public and private providers, so many groups may offer Head Start programs in a locality. As PolitiFact Florida recently noted examining a similar claim, Head Start enrollment hit record highs in recent years because the Obama administration nearly doubled the number of children eligible for Early Head Start, which serves eligible children up to the age of eligibility for Head Start. Congress then decided to spend more money on Head Start to maintain enrollment for those children. A month before the sequester began, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sent a Feb. 1 letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee detailing cuts to programs under her purview. Among them, she wrote, ""up to 70,000 children would lose access to Head Start and Early Head Start services."" Warner’s statement went a step further, saying 70,000 children ""have lost their Head Start slots."" When we asked his office for an explanation, spokesman Kevin Hall emailed us two news releases and two news articles about the sequester that were written after Sebelius’ letter. He included a Feb. 8 White House fact sheet on the harm of the sequester. At the top of the list, it said ""70,000 young children would be kicked off Head Start …"" Hall also sent news articles written by NPRand Education Week and web postings from the National Head Start Association -- a group of the agencies that run local programs -- that, in varying ways, say a reduction of 70,000 Head Start slots may or will happen. Annual funding for Head Start is being cut by 5.27 percent. HHS spokesman Ted Froats said Sebelius’ estimate of losing up to 70,000 spots hasn’t changed. But he also said HHS does not know how many children have been dropped since the sequester began and that the agency is gathering that data and hopes to release a report in June. Each local program across the nation has the flexibility to determine how it will adjust to its budget cuts and news reports say many are exploring solutions that don’t involve reducing enrollment, such as switching from a full-year to a nine-month program, closing one day a month, or fundraising. For Virginia, the White House estimated that up to 1,000 children would lose Head Start or Early Head Start services before the end of the year. But state officials don’t yet know what the results will be. Maxine McKinney, executive director of the Virginia Head Start Association, wrote in an email that she thinks most state programs so far have been able to maintain programs because the sequester did not begin until well into their budget year, which runs from the start from July to the end of June. But she hasn’t received figures yet on how the local programs will cope with the coming budget year. ""Many programs are reducing enrollment,"" she said. ""Others are able to absorb the cuts by eliminating non-mandated services, reducing staff, etc."" Of the 21 programs she’s heard from so far, 10 are reducing their slots by 263. But the 21 programs accounts for fewer than half in the state. Our ruling Warner said 70,000 children have ""lost their Head Start slots"" because of the sequester. He strains the limit of an Obama administration estimate that ""up to"" that number of children may lose out. There’s no doubt that many children will lose Head Start spots as the budget cuts sink in, but at this point, nobody knows how many already have. HHS is gathering that information. The White House estimate assumes that local Head Start organizations will respond to funding cuts by reducing slots, but that isn’t the only option. Many organizations are exploring different options, such as fundraising and reducing hours. Warner’s statement contains an element of truth in that some children already have lost Head Starts slots and others have less access to the program. But by and large, he assumes that a worst-case scenario for Head Start has already taken place."
|
9892
|
New Hope for Early Detection of Autism
|
"In a story reported before the study results were even presented at a scientific meeting, researchers suggest that key differences seen using functional magnetic resonance imaging may be a key diagnostic tool for autism. The story headline suggests the test is a ""new hope"" for diagnosing the disorder. The reader is then provided with a series of conflicting statements about the value of the test and its relative prospects as a diagnostic method. While the story does provide a balance of opinion by quoting two additional experts, the enthusiasm displayed in the opening paragraph and headline make this a less than desirable report. Parents of children with autism, and adults who are living with autism, are an active, growing community looking for concrete treatments and preventative measures. There are many researchers trying to find cures and early detection methods, but there are nearly as many untested therapies that are giving people false hope."
|
mixture
|
"At a minimum, the reporter could have found out what a typical fMRI scan costs for someone without insurance and for someone with basic insurance. It also could have found out what one of the machines costs a hospital to purchase and, perhaps, how many are acutally in use nationwide. It talks about the potential benefits, but it doesn’t quantify them. There were 30 children in the study with autism and 14 without. It does not make it clear whether all 30 children showed differences in their brain activity patterns or some fraction of them. Instead of a he said/she said between experts, the research may show that all children, no matter where they are on the autism spectrum, show a clear difference in brain activity compared to chilldren without autism. This is what the story indicates, but it doesn’t make it clear. It also does not even attempt to estimate how many people might benefit from this. It makes a pass at this by saying the screening may inadvertently detect other brain problems and lead to misdiagnoses, but it doesn’t develop the theme. Although fMRI does not use ionizing radiation, the procedure is long and the subject’s head need to be restrained for the scans to be taken, In addition, the scan itself produces a good deal of noise (loud thumping) requiring the subject to wear protective earphones. And, the test will take up to one hour to complete. Mixed bag. The first quote introduces one hesitation in the story. The researchers say, ""If we could do this with other markers, we could probably identify people early on…"" Two graphs later it says, ""But another expert pointed out that the study is extremely preliminary."" So preliminary, in fact, that it does not appear to have been published in a peer reviewed journal, which is one thing that isn’t clear from the article. Still, the overall sense of the story is that the evidence is preliminary and needs more study. Unlike most autism stories, which tend to spend a lot of time talking about the exponentially larger number of kids with autism every year and the horrors that the disease brings to a family, this article was straight forward. We all know what autism is, even if we haven’t lived with a family member who has that diagnosis, and here is what a group of researchers is trying to do to pin down what exactly is going on inside an autistic child’s brain. The idependent sources were well chosen and well quoted. The researchers themselves are given the proper context, for the most part, too. The story does not identify conflicts of interest. One could see if one of the researchers had an interest in an fMRI machine manufacturer, but everyone involved and not involved seems to agree that we are a long way from a marketable product. The reader would have benefited from a brief discussion on the current gold standard approach to the disgnosis of autism. While structural and functional diagnostic studies are used in research, they are not commonly applied in routine clinical care. The failure to compare existing methods to the study method does not allow the reader to appreciate how far from the norm the testing procedure is. There could have been more discussion of other diagnostic techniques that are in experimental trials or past techniques that have been tried and discarded. The story makes it clear several ways that this is early research and would require further development before a detection protocol was available. There’s no context for what similar research has come before, and what competing research is out there. Even though the reporter did the right thing by talking with two outside experts, there should have been some clear statements in here about how much fMRI has been studied in relation to autism and whether other diagnostic tools have been studied. Since independent sources are quoted, it does not appear that the story relied solely on a press release."
|
|
29447
|
Republican vice presidential candidate Mike Pence signed legislation forcing women to hold funerals for miscarried or aborted fetuses.
|
Pratt’s ruling means that, despite the efforts of Pence and state Republicans, Indiana women will not be asked whether to they wish to bury or cremate (rather than donate) their miscarried or aborted fetuses. Even so, had the law not been suspended, parents would not have been forced to hold funerals for abortions or miscarriages — much less at their own expense.
|
false
|
Uncategorized, 2016 presidential election, abortion, mike pence
|
As the 2016 presidential elections continued to heat up, the vice presidential candidates began to weigh in their own particular interests and issues. Republican vice presidential candidate Mike Pence spotlighted his views on abortion as part of his platform: I’m pro-life and I don’t apologize for it. We’ll see Roe vs. Wade consigned to the ash heap of history where it belongs. The Indiana governor reiterated his stance during a 4 October 2016 debate with his Democratic Party counterpart, Tim Kaine: I know Senator Kaine, you hold pro-life views personally, but the very idea that a child that is almost born into the world could still have their life taken from them is just anathema to me. Following the debate, Pence’s critics focused on his support for a measure he signed into law on 24 March 2016, which purportedly made women liable for the cost of funerals for fetuses they had aborted or miscarried. The accusation quickly became a meme, and permeated reporting about the issue: The law did something truly bizarre. It would have basically forced women to seek funerary services for a fetus — whether she’d had an abortion or a miscarriage, and no matter how far along the pregnancy was. The law Pence backed would have required all fetal tissue to be cremated or buried, an unprecedented measure in state law. The law also banned abortion if the fetus had a “disability” — which would have denied women the right to end a pregnancy even in case of serious fetal anomalies. The wording of the burial provision meant that technically, even if a woman had a miscarriage at eight weeks of pregnancy at home, she would have to keep the blood and tissue, take it to a hospital or clinic, and have it buried or cremated by a funeral home. The law would have also dramatically increased the cost of an abortion, since providers would have had to spend time and money on arranging the funerary services. The law, which was passed by the Republican-heavy state legislature, does require that aborted or miscarried fetuses be buried or cremated. It also requires that women involved in these cases be given the chance to decide how this is carried out. However, it did not require the women involved to be present during — or to pay for — the disposal of the material. Instead, that fell to the facility in which the miscarriage or abortion took place: A health care facility having possession of a miscarried fetus shall provide for the final disposition of the miscarried fetus. The burial transit permit requirements under IC 16-37-3 apply to the final disposition of the miscarried fetus, which must be cremated or interred. However: (1) a person is not required to designate a name for the miscarried fetus on the burial transit permit and the space for a name may remain blank; and (2) any information submitted under this section that may be used to identify the parent or parents is confidential and must be redacted from any public records maintained under IC 16-37-3. There is a section, however, covering instances in which “the parent or parents” handle the cost: If the parent or parents choose a means of location of final disposition other than the means location of final disposition that is usual and customary for the health care facility, the parent or parents are responsible for the costs related to the final disposition of the fetus at the chosen location. The measure also bans women from donating the material toward medical research. In this respect it is similar to legislature in other states: In March, South Dakota made it illegal to use aborted fetal tissue in research, and in April, Idaho and Alabama made it illegal to buy, sell, donate, or experiment on these remains. Tennessee made it illegal for sale. The legislatures of Ohio, South Carolina, and Mississippi have all recently considered burial and cremation requirements, and Arkansas and Georgia already have similar statutes in place. Pence said when he signed HEA 1337 into law that it would “ensure the dignified final treatment of the unborn.” However, it was quickly challenged in court by the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood of Indiana. On 30 June 2016, U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt suspended the law a day before it was slated to take effect.
|
33815
|
A customer who picked up some fried chicken from a fast food outlet discovered that an unusual-tasting piece was actually a batter-fried rat.
|
The frequency of attachment of an urban legend to the largest company or corporation is so common as to be considered a law of urban folklore.
|
false
|
Food, Food Contamination
|
The “Kentucky Fried Rat” tale is one of the hoariest of food contamination urban legends: [Collected by Fine, 1976] An old lady ordered out for Kentucky Fried Chicken. She was eating along when she noticed teeth; she pulled back the crust and discovered she was eating a rat. She had a heart attack and died, and her relatives sued Kentucky Fried Chicken for a lot of money. [Collected by Fine, 1977] There was a wife who didn’t have anything ready for supper for her husband. So she quick got a basket of chicken and tried to make her dinner look fancy with the pre-pared chicken. Thus, she fixed a candle-light dinner, etc. When her and her husband started eating the chicken, they thought it tasted funny. Soon to find out it was a fried rat. Some elements of its spread are easy to explain. Within the context of fast food restaurants, the offending eatery has to be a fried chicken outlet in order for the rat to be suitably disguised as a piece of food. Once the restaurant is established as one that serves fast-food chicken, it becomes KFC because, as folklorist Gary Alan Fine writes, “The frequency of attachment of an urban legend to the largest company or corporation is so common as to be considered a law of urban folklore.” (These days, however, KFC outlets receive their chicken pieces pre-battered, and thus one of them could not “accidentally” batter and fry a rat.) The choice of a rat as a contaminant is also easy: rats have turned up in food products before; they’re the right size and shape to be mistaken for pieces of chicken (especially when fried in batter); and rats are vermin, symbols of filth and decay. The fact that the rat-chicken is usually eaten in the dark is a plot device to prevent premature discovery of the “secret,” although some might consider it an important symbolic aspect of the legend. So, what does this legend have to say? As our society becomes more urbanized (and frenetic), we become less and less involved with the preparation of our own food, frequently dining out instead of eating at home, scarfing a quick meal rather than enjoying a leisurely one, and leaving the food preparation entirely in the hands of others. And these others are not local restaurateurs we know well, but anonymous corporate fast food franchisees and their faceless employees. The combination of our guilt at abdicating this responsibility and our mistrust of corporations is expressed as fear that fast food entities who don’t care about us will serve us tainted food prepared under unsanitary conditions, due to carelessness, laziness, or sheer malice. Women are most often the victim in this legend probably because they are considered more vulnerable than men, but perhaps also because this tale reinforces the notion that women have abdicated their traditional role as the family’s meal preparers (with tragic results). The ultimate in impersonal endings occurs when the victims file a lawsuit against the restaurant. A personal apology or settlement is no longer feasible: the impersonal corporate franchise must be battled in the equally impersonal civil court system. In the “You Deserve a Beak Today” category, on 28 November 2000, a breaded deep-fried chicken head was reportedly found in a box of chicken wings purchased at a McDonald’s in Newport News, Virginia. Katherine Ortega said she discovered the McNoggin while divvying up the wings at home for her family of four. (Fried chicken wings were being test-marketed in that area.) On 30 November 2000, the Ortegas announced they had hired a lawyer and were contemplating a lawsuit against McDonald’s. Legal experts didn’t think the family would win an award much higher than a couple of thousand dollars (even if the fried chicken head were real) because no one ate the piece or was physically harmed by it. Katherine Ortega posed for a number of photographs of her holding the chicken head, and those who viewed the pictures noted that the fried batter on the item looked to be the same as that used with the chicken wings. The McNoggin, however, was never examined by experts. John E. Smith, owner of the McDonald’s in question and two others, stated at the time that “My ability to conduct a thorough investigation has been delayed because I have not been given an opportunity to examine the object in question. Although I have made several requests to see this object, the customer refuses to give me that opportunity.” An enforcement officer at the U.S. Department of Agriculture who looked into the case was at a loss to explain how a chicken head could have ended up in Ortega’s order of wings. The first thing that happens in the processing of live chickens into poultry parts is their beheading, with the heads immediately being discarded. The carcasses then go on to the next stage (which is being dropped into the boiling water to de-feather them). Though the process is mostly mechanized, a plant operator helps with evisceration (the removal of the bird’s internal organs) and an on-site USDA inspector is supposed to check each and every chicken. The chances that a chicken head could have made it through this process are very small. As far as we know, it never was determined if Katherine Ortega was a deliberate participant in a hoax, if a poultry plant worker or McDonald’s employee thought he’d have himself an innocent bit of fun, or if something went severely wrong with the food processing procedures at the plant and thus a McNoggining actually took place. In September 2003, Tony Hill, a pastor in Baltimore, claimed he bit into a batter-fried mouse at a Popeye’s fried chicken outlet in that town. Popeye’s declined to comment on the matter, but the city health commissioner stated at the time that the Popeye’s outlet in question had had rodent infestation problems before and had been closed two other times for infestation or unsanitary conditions. As far as we know, no resolution to this case was reported. In June 2015, Devorise Dixon of Watts, California, posted a photograph to Facebook of what he claimed was a batter-fried rat found in a box of KFC chicken tenders: DON’T EAT FAST FOOD!!! I WENT TO KFC YESTERDAY AND BOUGHT A 3PIECE CHICKEN TENDER. AS I BIT INTO IT I NOTICED THAT IT WAS VERY HARD AND RUBBERY WHICH MADE ME LOOK AT IT. AS I LOOKED DOWN AT IT I NOTICED THAT IT WAS WAS IN A SHAPE OF A RAT WITH A TAIL. IT SENT DEEP CHILLS THROUGHOUT MY WHOLE BODY! I’VE BEEN FEELING WEIRD EVER SINCE. I BOUGHT THIS IN COMPTON, CA ON WILMINGTON AND 120TH. I’VE NEVER SEEN CHICKEN LIKE THIS BEFORE ITS SICK!!! KFC indicated via Facebook that they were investigating the issue but had seen no evidence to support the claim and had been unable to reach Mr. Dixon: KFC takes customer claims very seriously, and we are continuing to investigate this matter. Our chicken tenders often vary in size and shape, and we currently have no evidence to support this claim. We are aggressively trying to reach Mr. Dixon, and we request that he return to the restaurant with the product for testing, or call us at 1-800-Call-KFC. Later, KFC corporate declared this claim to be a hoax: A customer has made a serious claim against KFC and refuses to cooperate in the investigation. The images the customer originally posted do not include this second angle [seen below] because it clearly shows it’s a piece of hand-breaded white meat chicken. Based on this, and the fact that he refuses to allow anyone to see the product, we are left to believe that he intended to deceive the public with this hoax and we are considering all options.
|
6121
|
Seniors can use virtual reality for travel, health issues.
|
Joy Golliver recently visited the Washington state community where she and her late husband lived for more than 20 years. And her sons, who live in Seattle, texted their 84-year-old mother asking how she was able to travel from Tucson, Arizona, to Kachess Lake without them knowing.
|
true
|
Seniors, Virtual reality technology, Arizona, Health, General News, Tucson, Travel, Dementia
|
Thanks to virtual reality, Golliver actually never left Tucson. “This technology can take us to any memory in our life that we want to visit,” she said. Golliver lives at the Fountains, one of two Tucson retirement communities serving as the launching pad for a program to see how virtual reality technology helps seniors. With a headset, residents have been able to ride a roller coaster and visit the Egyptian pyramids, Eiffel Tower and places they used to live. Some researchers say virtual reality can aid seniors with cognition, dementia and loneliness. Besides traveling, Golliver is using the technology to help write her memoirs. The program, Engage VR, was developed for Watermark Retirement Communities specifically. It uses a cordless headset system called Oculus Quest. Zoe Katleman, a project manager with Watermark, said they will eventually make the technology available at dozens of facilities nationwide, the Arizona Daily Star reported. Watermark also wants to allow residents across its communities to be able to meet up virtually. Grayson Barnes, 20, spent two years developing the Engage VR program for Watermark while studying at Rochester Institute of Technology. He said most research suggests that dementia patients are more like themselves after experiencing virtual reality. Also, one group of researchers has “turned to virtual reality as a potential method to screen for early signs of dementia,” Barnes said in an email. Dr. Marvin Slepian, a professor of medicine and director of the Arizona Center for Accelerated Biomedical Innovation, said doctors are using virtual reality more often for diagnosing and therapy. “Advances in wearable technology, virtual reality and integrative imaging hold the promise of revolutionizing how we monitor, control and prevent disease,” Slepian said. ___ Information from: Arizona Daily Star, http://www.tucson.com
|
10183
|
Less Stress, Better Sleep May Help You Lose Weight
|
The story provided the important viewpoint that it may make sense to manage a chronic health condition such as obesity in a holistic setting that goes beyond consideration of just caloric intake and energy expenditure. However, the insight that those obese individuals who are able to sleep better may be better able to lose weight does not translate into a recommendation that obtaining more sleep will result in weight loss as was suggested by one of the authors of the study. The story should have challenged that call to action and explained the limitations of drawing conclusions from observational studies, but it didn’t. Results of an observational study should not be confused as – or communicated as – strategies for obtaining an outcome. The research is important. But it has limitations that were not adequately explained.
|
true
|
HealthDay
|
Not applicable. The story presented the outcome of 472 obese individuals and examined in more detail those who were able, on average, to loss 14 pounds over a period of 26 weeks. The story did not provide any insight as to whether this amount of weight loss resulted in any health improvement in the obese individuals who were studied. So the true benefit – the true significance of the potential benefit – was not explained. Further – while the study found that those who got an adequate amount of sleep were among the cohort of individuals who were found to lose the most weight, the story did not explicitly point out that the study does not inform us about whether enforced hours of sleep would impact weight loss and weight loss management. So, again, the headline, the story’s first sentence, and the call to action by the researcher were not balanced. The story was reporting on the impact of getting adequate amounts of sleep on weight loss. While there was no overt discussion of the harm of obtaining adequate amounts of sleep, there doesn’t appear to be any harm involved in adequate sleep. Similar to the LA Times story we reviewed on the same study, this story did not challenge researchers’ comments that went too far in promoting a call to action based on one observational study – a study that can’t prove cause and effect. Its opening sentence is an example of that flaw: “If you’re looking to lose those extra pounds, you should probably add reducing stress and getting the right amount of sleep to the list…” Later, it didn’t challenge a researcher when he said, “If you want to lose weight, things that will help you include reducing stress and getting the right amount of sleep.” That’s pushing the limits of what one can conclude based on one observational study and the story should have explained that limitation. Toward the end, in describing another study, it started in a good direction by explaining that conclusions “should be considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.” Actually, they should be considered preliminary because they were based on analysis of just 26 people. They should be considered to have evaded full scrutiny by expert colleagues until published in a peer-reviewed journal. Just because work has not been peer-reviewed does not make it preliminary. The intent, we think, was correct. But the explanation – the limitation – was not defined appropriately. The story did not engage in overt disease mongering. This story included expert quotes and also some insight from the results of a recently presented study. One of the strengths of this story in comparison with its shorter LA Times competition is the context it provided, much of it from an independent expert who said: “People who are healthy and vital tend to be healthy and vital not because of any one factor, but because of many. And the factors that promote health — eating well, being active, not smoking, sleeping enough, controlling stress, to name a few –promote all aspects of health. …The important message is that weight loss should not be looked at with tunnel vision. … This study encourages weight loss in a more holistic context.” Not applicable. The story was framed as taking a broader perspective when contemplating weight loss and including other lifestyle factors which can affect food intake and exercise. Better than its LA Times competition, at least this story nodded in the direction of one other recent study on sleep and weight, thereby conveying that the newer study is not the only research on this topic. It’s clear that the story did not rely solely on a news release.
|
24577
|
If we went back to the obesity rates that existed back in the 1980s, the Medicare system over several years could save as much as a trillion dollars.
|
Obama says lower obesity rates would save Medicare $1 trillion
|
false
|
National, Health Care, Medicare, Barack Obama,
|
"We don't expect President Barack Obama to remember everything we write about him, but when he repeats a claim we had earlier found to be , we think it's worth calling him out. On Aug. 20, 2009, President Obama held a discussion and conference call at a national health care forum sponsored by Organizing for America, the successor to Obama for America, his campaign organization. In response to a question about how food and lifestyle affect health care, the president responded, ""Well, this is a great question. Look, this is an interesting statistic. If we went back to the obesity rates that existed back in the 1980s, the Medicare system over several years could save as much as a trillion dollars. I mean, that's how much our obesity rate has made a difference in terms of diabetes and heart failure and all sorts of preventable diseases."" It wasn't the first time Obama had talked about the cost of obesity. The earlier instance came at a Des Moines Register presidential debate among Democratic primary contenders on Dec. 13, 2007. ""Well, just to emphasize how important prevention and cost savings can be in the Medicare system, it's estimated if we went back to the obesity rates that existed in 1980, that would save the Medicare system $1 trillion,"" Obama said. But there's a problem. When we reviewed his claim in 2007, we found it . We noted that he was accurately quoting that number from a report issued by the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank. The report states, ""If we were able to reduce obesity to 1980s levels, Medicare would save $1-trillion."" It attributes the number to the Commonwealth Fund and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But that study — and his claim — are not supported by the data. At issue is the increased prevalence of obesity. The percent of the U.S. population considered to be obese has roughly doubled since the 1980s. Researchers have documented that these people need more health care due to complications from obesity-related diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, certain types of cancers and other illnesses. Researchers have also developed models to calculate costs for obesity-related health care. And it's true that obesity does drive up health costs, but you can't get to $1 trillion, according to our estimates. (Our friends at Factcheck.org reached the same conclusion; check out their analysis here .) The Centers for Disease Control cited a study on health spending due to people who are overweight or obese that shows numbers significantly less than $1 trillion. We also verified our assessment with Eric Finkelstein, a health economist with the research group RTI International who has studied the issue extensively and written several papers on the topic. Finkelstein said obesity accounts for excess health spending of about $90 billion a year. About half of that — about $45 billion — is billed to Medicare and Medicaid together. Medicare's share of obesity spending therefore is between $20 billion and $25 billion. If obesity rates rolled back to 1980s levels, Medicare spending would be about half that, or about $12 billion a year. That's a far cry from $1 trillion. From the perspective of 2009, we can offer two additional developments — and neither improves the accuracy of Obama's assertion. The first is that Finkelstein and his colleagues published an updated paper on July 27, 2009, in the online version of the journal Health Affairs. In it, they said, ""We estimate that the medical costs of obesity could have risen to $147 billion per year by 2008."" That estimate is about 63 percent higher than it was in the previous paper. So if we increase all of our previous calculations by 63 percent, the number goes up — but not by enough to push the total cost to $1 trillion any time soon. Even the most generous estimate, factoring in inflation and other factors, would mean that $1 trillion would be reached in perhaps 30 years. And that's where the second new development comes in. Unlike in his comment in 2007, Obama actually gave a time frame the second time he cited the statistic -- specifically, ""over several years."" And 30 years doesn't sound like ""several"" to us. We contacted Finkelstein to see whether he agreed with our logic, and we reached his co-author on the paper instead. Justin Trogdon, a research economist at RTI International, said he agreed that the increase in the cost burden from obesity, while a substantial jump in a relatively short time, did not get Obama much closer to the mark. ""It's a little higher today, but I don't think it's increased enough to get there,"" he said. ""It would be tough to get to $1 trillion."" Medical research supports Obama's broad point that obesity is a serious health issue that imposes significant financial, as well as physical, costs on the American public. However, obesity doesn't cost anywhere near as much as the president has said it does."
|
6178
|
Highly-contagious bird flu found in Japan, culling start.
|
Japanese health authorities have confirmed a highly contagious avian flu strain in poultry in two prefectures in northern Japan, with culling of hundreds of thousands of birds starting Tuesday at the affected farms.
|
true
|
Health, Asia Pacific, Bird flu, Flu, Japan
|
The government confirmed that the highly virulent H5 strain was detected in birds at a chicken farm in Niigata, where about 40 of them were found dead Monday. Dead ducks at a farm in another prefecture of Aomori also tested H5 positive. Culling of about 310,000 birds began Tuesday at the Niigata farm and will continue through Friday. Workers in hazmat suits dug holes and dumped dead birds in them to contain the spread of virus. About 165,000 ducks in Aomori were also being culled. Officials restricted the movements of poultry and eggs within 3 kilometers (5 miles) of the infected farms. About 60 chicken farms operate in the neighborhood of the affected farm in Niigata, where about half a million chickens are raised. The farm in Aomori and two other neighborhood operators are specializing in French duck known as “Barbarie.” Suspected bird flu cases have been found in wild birds in those areas since early November. Environment Minister Koichi Yamamoto told reporters that his ministry is sending experts to the areas for investigation, while raising the caution level to the highest level. The Agricultural Ministry has also dispatched an investigative team to both prefectures.
|
37553
|
More than 12,000 Americans died of H1N1 (swine flu) in the United States in 2009, and 275,000 Americans were hospitalized.
|
Did 12,000 Americans Die of H1N1/Swine Flu, and Were 275,000 Hospitalized?
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
As concerns over novel coronavirus strain COVID-19 crested in mid-March 2020, comparisons between the effects of the strain versus that of H1N1 (or “swine flu”) more than a decade before triggered a flurry of fact checks, a Facebook flag on the memes, and exacerbated distrust in the efficacy of Facebook’s fact-checking program.Although several memes circulated, the two-level nature of the claims unwittingly exposed the limitations of Facebook fact-check flags. We collected several, which all contained roughly the same information and claims. We’ve broken them down into statistic-related facts versus unverifiable opinion:We examined the first two claims above. Although an argument could be made that the third was verifiable or otherwise form the basis of a fact-check, reception of subsequent fact-checks on the claims informed our decision to separate the two.A March 13 2020 tweet showed one iteration of the claims:pic.twitter.com/2EZDTcPlPu— FactRage (@FactRage) March 13, 2020That user tweeted an image, which read:President Trump Corona Virus US cases: 164 US deaths: 11 Panic Level: Mass hysteriaPresident Obama H1N1 Virus US Cases: 60.8 million US Deaths: 12,469 Panic Level: Totally chillDo you all see how the media can manipulate your life?The secondary claim we are not addressing here held that the media was responsible for grossly overemphasizing the risks posed by COVID-19, especially when comparing it to the H1N1 epidemic during United States President Barack Obama’s administration in 2009.It is important to bear in mind that novel coronavirus or COVID-19 is not exclusive to the United States. The World Health Organization declared the strain a pandemic in March 2020. “The media” as described in the tweet could not possibly influence the decisions of public health officials in every affected country.When that was put aside, we were left with four relevant figures, two of which had to do with COVID-19. If the numbers were ever accurate, they were certainly outdated by March 13 2020. Given that fact-checks of the meme dated back several days, we excluded that claim from this fact check and were left with two statistics:Another version we saw appeared with an image of right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh and was shared on March 12 2020. The post was flagged with a Facebook warning for users who clicked through:Underneath the flag and alongside a status update (“Tell me the Hysteria isn’t political!”), the post read:[“]60 million Americans were infected with Swine Flu resulting in 274,304 hospitalizations and 12,469 deaths. No media panic, no trashing of President Barack Obama and no travel ban. You don’t even remember it.” – Rush LimbaughAgain, several statements were subjective or pure opinion, such as:Obviously, the latter was immediately disproved by the memes’ circulation — all memes referenced H1N1, and clearly people remembered the outbreak. We might even hazard a guess that people — perhaps even Rush Limbaugh — “trashed” Obama during the outbreak, but there were other figures speaking to the meme’s credibility:That meme was flagged, which looked like this:A fact-check from LeadStories.com was appended under the flag. That was also the case for yet another version of the meme posted on the same day (March 12 2020) to a Facebook group for fans of both Disney parks and President Trump.In that iteration, the flaws in Facebook’s use of the flag became clearer. The original post was a share of the following meme (which was labeled “partly false” via flag) alongside a link to a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) page on H1N1 with the following commentary:This is all facts. But it’s blocking it! How scary. Here are the facts from CDC. This is scary how they try to hide the truth.Further complicating matters was the fact that clicking through to the LeadStories.com page did not work. Several commenters also reported being unable to click through. We visited the LeadStories site and located the page, but not every user would do that — further undermining the credibility of such flags.We uncovered the meme in this screenshot for visibility:Across an image of United States President Barack Obama with a finger to his lips, text read:12000 DIED OF H1N1 IN 2009 UNDER OBAMA WITH 275000 HOSPITALIZEDDO YOU RECALL THE MEDIA BLAMING OBAMA AS THEY ARE PRESIDENT TRUMP ABOUT 26 DEATHS FROM CORONA VIRUS?Commenters were clearly confused by the “partly false” flag “blocking” the content, but juxtaposed with a link to the CDC matching the numbers:Commenters objected to the numbers in the meme being marked false, writing:“And FB fact checkers strike again. Thank you for posting the link to the CDC. Now we know FB is biased.”“The left is all in on this. Everyone who is closing/cancelling are either never Trumpers or straight up Trump haters…. They’ve been trying to tank the economy for the past two+ years… problem for them…. in 6 months the only thing anyone will remember, how much god damn toilet paper they still have… lol”In additional comments, users speculated the non-working LeadStories.com link was to conceal the content of fact-checking related to the meme:“When I tried to follow the fact check link, it wasn’t available. I’m sure they really just disagreeing with a minor statement.”“Checked by independent fact checkers under the Obama administration.”Once again, the meme made a combination of subjective or opinion claims and verifiable statistics. Like the others, this meme maintained:As noted above, we managed to access LeadStories.com’s fact check, which was published on March 12 2020. That post included a similar, but not identical, version of the iteration linked above from Twitter, and it linked to a since-deleted Facebook post. That deleted Facebook post was followed by an archived link, which did not work. A screenshot was mentioned, but we were unable to see a screenshot.That quoted material involved a slightly different figure for US deaths of H1N1.President Trump Corona Virus US cases: 164 US deaths: 11 Panic Level: Mass hysteriaPresident Obama H1N1 Virus US Cases: 60.8 million US Deaths: 22,469 Panic Level: Totally chill NBC News February 12, 2010: “Swine flu sickened 57 million Americans”.We searched Twitter for the number “22,469,” and it did frequently appear in similar tweets. However, since the iterations we found exclusively cited the 12,000 or 12,469 number of deaths, that is the number we are including in our own fact-check here. And again, whether or not the media treated Obama better than Trump or vice versa was largely subjective in the scope of these memes and this fact-check. Clearly, grouping the claims together only led to confusion among Facebook users, some of whom saw fact-check flags with “partly false” ratings juxtaposed with what appeared to be official statistics.The third meme from the Disney/Trump group claimed that 12,000 Americans died and 275,000 were hospitalized due to H1N1. The user linked a CDC page on H1N1 with final statistics from 2011, which reported:During the pandemic, CDC provided estimates of the numbers of 2009 H1N1 cases, hospitalizations and deaths on seven different occasions. Final estimates were published in 2011. These final estimates were that from April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010 approximately 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million), 274,304 hospitalizations (195,086-402,719), and 12,469 deaths (8868-18,306) occurred in the United States due to pH1N1.In 2010, the CDC was still estimating the number of deaths, hospitalizations, and infections. Several revisions and ranges were included, among them:Updated Estimates from April 2009 – February 13, 2010Using the same methodology CDC has again updated the estimates to include the time period from April 2009 through February 13, 2010 on March 12, 2010.CDC estimates that between 42 million and 86 million cases of 2009 H1N1 occurred between April 2009 and February 13, 2010. The mid-level in this range is about 59 million people infected with 2009 H1N1. CDC estimates that between 188,000 and 389,000 H1N1-related hospitalizations occurred between April 2009 and February 13, 2010. The mid-level in this range is about 265,000 2009 H1N1-related hospitalizations. CDC estimates that between 8,520 and 17,620 2009 H1N1-related deaths occurred between April 2009 and February 13, 2010. The mid-level in this range is about 12,000 2009 H1N1-related deaths.In 2013, NBC News reported:CDC says H1N1 infected 61 million Americans during the pandemic and killed around 12,000. H1N1 is now part of the annual seasonal flu mix.Estimates compiled as of 2013 were down slightly from earlier estimates of as many as 17 million H1N1 deaths during the flu season of late 2009 and early 2010. A more recent CDC page on the 2009-2010 H1N1 pandemic (updated in June 2019) included the revised statistics:From April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million), 274,304 hospitalizations (range: 195,086-402,719), and 12,469 deaths (range: 8868-18,306) in the United States due to the (H1N1)pdm09 virus.Again, memes were marked partly false based on two-level claims. One claim was that U.S. President Donald Trump was scrutinized more strongly than his predecessor, President Barack Obama, during respective pandemics — H1N1/swine flu in 2009, and COVID-19/coronavirus in 2020. That element of the claim was arguably subjective, but more importantly, the more math-based element of the claim caused broad confusion over fact-checks related to it.The second part of the claim held that 12,000 or 12,469 Americans died of H1N1 during a 2009-2010 pandemic, that 60.8 million or 60 million Americans were sickened, and that 247,000 to 275,000 were hospitalized. All three claims appeared on all three memes in some form, and all three were accurate whether rounded or exact. In 2013, the CDC revised figures to the more precise and unrounded ones, and the memes accurately stated those figures as they appeared on CDC resources. Separating out only the figures, all three memes contained accurate figures for the H1N1 pandemic in 2009 and 2010, but had the unforeseen effect of showing where Facebook’s methodology for utilizing fact-checkers was weakest.
|
9530
|
Driving home from night shift may be safer with light therapy
|
The U. S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which conducts research on driver behavior and traffic safety, estimates that drowsy driving causes at least 100,000 auto crashes each year. This Reuters story describes a recent study that found that exposing sleep-deprived participants to 45 minutes of bright light before putting them into a driving simulator eliminated the simulated car crashes that occurred when those participants were exposed only to dim light. This story was well done–it gives ample space (albeit lower in the text) to the study’s limitations and to the caution of researchers not affiliated with the study that the only proven remedy for sleepiness is…sleep. Ample independent researchers were included, and the measured benefits of the intervention are stated clearly. Sleep deprivation is common among folks who work night shifts, and even among the general public. While societal calls for getting a good 7 to 8 hours’ sleep—still the only proven remedy for the problem—are growing, both the sleep-deprived and their physicians continue to seek ways to manage sleepiness, from caffeine consumption to cars that notice sloppy driving patterns and suggest the driver take a break. Exposure to bright light as an alerting mechanism has been studied for years and may join the coping arsenal if further studies support its use.
|
true
|
light therapy,sleep problems
|
Cost information is not provided, but the cost of a bright light is presumably reasonable. The story is specific about the number of sleep-deprived participants who crashed their simulated cars after exposure to dim light (5) compared to those whose simulated drive home was preceded by 45 minutes of bright light (0). Exposure to light in this way isn’t harmful, so we’ll rate this N/A. However, such a therapy could encourage people to skip on an intervention that would be more effective such as sleep. Or it could inure a false sense of security. The writer devotes an entire paragraph to the limits of the study, which include a small number of participants (19) and the generalizability problems that stem from experiments in lab settings. Sleepy drivers are dangerous drivers, so this study focuses on a real risk. A strong point of this story is how sources in the story are clearly identified as aligned with or independent of the study, and there were several of them. We could find no potential conflicts of interest with the researcher who was interviewed. An independent source notes that the only “proven” way to avoid the effects of drowsiness when driving is “to consistently get enough sleep.” Other strategies for remaining alert behind the wheel are also mentioned. Light sources are readily available. One can find many studies of the role of bright light in reducing symptoms of sleepiness, but none of that context finds its way into this story. A release relevant to this story did not emerge from our search efforts. The addition of independent sources bolsters the idea that enterprise reporting undergirds this text.
|
9209
|
Sun Pharma Announces Positive Topline Results of Confirmatory Phase-3 Clinical Trial for Seciera™ for Treatment of Dry Eye
|
This release reports on the results of a phase 3 trial of a cyclosporine A ophthalmic solution (trade name Seciera) intended to treat dry eye symptoms. The release states that the randomized, controlled trial involved 744 patient volunteers, which suggests good evidence, but the release omits information from the study that would be useful to journalists and the public. It provides no numerical data on the results of the trial, only vague statements, and doesn’t explain any potential harms of the medication. No information is given on where the study was conducted, or information to rule out conflicts of interest. In essence, this release seems more interested in establishing a foothold in what is seen as a growing commercial market than it is in explaining the actual research, There’s no question that having dry eyes is at least a nuisance and at worst a clinical problem needing a solution, but it is clearly not a disease. Dry eyes can be a side effect of some medications or surgical procedures, a symptom of some diseases, and a condition affecting older individuals. Unfortunately, labeling it as a disease as this release does places an artificial urgency on the need for products to treat it, thereby profiting its manufacturer more than aiding the public.
|
false
|
cyclosporine,dry eye,Sun Pharma
|
There is no mention of the cost of this new product, nor is there any information on its needed frequency of use, which would be helpful to consumers considering it versus other products intended to curb dry eye symptoms. Another prescription cyclosporine ophthalmic product for dry eyes already on the market averages more than $400 for a one month supply (60 vials of Restasis 0.4ml). The release doesn’t provide any quantification of the results of this trial, instead it offers vague terms such as “showed statistically significant improvement in the primary end point,” and “showed statistically significant improvements compared to vehicle.” It also offers, “Based on published data, the efficacy and safety endpoints in these trials compared favorably to other formulations of cyclosporine A with the advantage of early onset,” a statement which also provides no numerical information for readers. While the release does acknowledge harms by saying, “Adverse events reported in the trial were mild to moderate in nature and similar to other approved drugs in the category,” that offers no useful information for readers as to what those adverse events are, or how troublesome they might be to those using the product. The U.S. National Library of Medicine lists these possible side effects from cyclosporine ophthalmic: “burning, itching, stinging, redness, or pain of the eyes, overflow of tears, red eyes.eye discharge, blurred vision or other vision changes, feeling that something is in the eye.” The release describes the study protocol as a “12 week, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, vehicle controlled Phase 3 confirmatory study, 744 dry eye patients were treated either with Seciera™, or its vehicle.” This release steps over the line in this category by referring to “dry eye disease.” Dry eyes are a condition that plague some individuals due to aging or changes in hormones; it may be a symptom of other ailments or a side effect of some medications or procedures, such as Lasik surgery. But calling the dry eye condition a disease suggests the need for a cure and therefore pushes the idea that a new product might solve that situation. Furthermore, the release itself reinforces that by having one of the product’s company officials discuss the “rapidly growing, underserved, and dynamic Dry Eye market, which is expected to reach $5 billion by 2020.” There is no mention in the release of who funded the study. Also, there is no information about where the study was conducted, or which institutions were involved, although it identifies the study as “multicenter.” There is a quote from an individual identified as a “study investigator” but no other information is offered, including any disclosures as to possible conflicts of interest. The release does refer to “other approved drugs in the category” but it provides no information about what other approaches might be useful in dealing with dry eyes. The National Eye Institute, for example, offers several approaches to dealing with the problem including prescription and over-the-counter medications, as well as surgical procedures. This was another close call. We’ll rate this category satisfactory since the release reports on a phase 3 trial, which means the product is not yet available to the public, and a Sun Pharma executive is quoted as saying, “We look forward to discussing these results with US FDA and agree on next steps for the program.” FDA approval is prerequisite on a product’s availability to the public. There are several other forms of cyclosporine A solutions already available to the public for treatment of this condition (such as the prescription medication Restasis) and this release is arguably linked to an attempt to enter that market. With little data provided in the release, it’s hard to discern what makes this drug novel. The release does not appear to use any unjustifiable language.
|
7949
|
Macron warns France that coronavirus epidemic is coming.
|
President Emmanuel Macron on Thursday said a coronavirus epidemic was inevitable in France as his government and others worldwide bolstered measures to fight the spread of infection.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Macron visited a Paris hospital where a 60-year-old Frenchman this week became the second person to die from the coronavirus in France, and sought to reassure a medical profession angry over healthcare spending that it had his support. “We have a crisis before us. An epidemic is on its way,” Macron, dressed in a suit and without any protective gear, told a group of doctors. The coronavirus has infected more than 80,000 people and killed nearly 2,800, the majority in China. Its rapid spread elsewhere in recent days has met the definition for a pandemic. France is on high alert after neighboring Italy became a new front in the global fight to contain the outbreak. France has registered 18 confirmed cases. The French government has instructed anyone returning from China, Singapore, South Korea or the Italian regions of Lombardy and Veneto to take their temperature twice a day, wear a mask and avoid all contact with weak and elderly people for 14 days. School children who have traveled to those zones have been told to stay at home for two weeks. Macron’s visit to the Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital was kept secret in advance. One doctor confronted Macron, saying the coronavirus underlined the need to shore up France’s public health sector with more money. “When the Notre-Dame de Paris cathedral needed saving, many people were emotionally moved,” neurologist François Salachas said. “Now, we must save public hospitals.” Macron, a former investment banker who became president in 2017, replied that he had inherited a health service neglected by past leaders. “I am counting on you and you can count on me,” said Macron, whose government announced billions of euros of debt relief for the country’s hospitals and extra cash in November to end doctors’ strikes. Two people have died from the coronavirus so far in France - an elderly Chinese tourist and the 60-year-old teacher. “We are only at the beginning,” Macron said.
|
42011
|
Thanks to the immigrants who illegally cross the U.S. Mexican border, and the Democrats who refuse to stop them, the Measles virus has been declared a public health emergency in 2019.
|
A Facebook meme incorrectly blames the measles outbreak in the U.S. on immigrants from South America. The virus, however, was eliminated there in 2016. The recent uptick in measles cases is due to travelers returning from countries with outbreaks.
|
false
|
immigration, measles, Memes, vaccines,
|
A Facebook meme incorrectly blames the measles outbreak in the U.S. on immigrants from South America. The virus, however, was eliminated there in 2016. The recent uptick in measles cases is due to travelers returning from countries with outbreaks. The outbreak of measles in the U.S. and around the world is due largely to inadequate vaccination rates in some communities, not illegal immigration, as one popular meme on Facebook claims.The meme shows a picture of a baby who appears to be infected with measles and says: “Thanks to a highly effective vaccination program the Measles virus was eliminated from the U.S. in 2000. Thanks to the immigrants who illegally cross the U.S. Mexican border, and the Democrats who refuse to stop them, the Measles virus has been declared a public health emergency in 2019.”The first part of that claim is correct. Measles was eliminated in the United States in 2000 and it was eliminated across both North and South America in 2016.Elimination means cases can still occur, but the disease isn’t being continuously spread for a year or more in a specific area.The second part of the claim, however, is incorrect.The virus has been brought into the U.S. by people who have traveled to places where there is an outbreak or where the disease is still common, such as parts of Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Pacific, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. From those travelers, the disease can then spread in U.S. communities that have unvaccinated people, according to the CDC.For example, the New York City health department declared a public health emergency on April 9. That measles outbreak, which started in 2018 and spread in the Orthodox Jewish community, was brought on by travelers who had been in Israel, where a large outbreak is occurring, according to the Pan American Health Organization.This year marks the largest number of measles cases since the disease was eliminated in the U.S., according to the CDC, which issued a statement in April identifying misinformation about vaccines as a “significant factor” contributing to the outbreak. Similarly, the executive director of UNICEF and the director general of the World Health Organization issued a joint statement calling measles “the canary in the coalmine of vaccine preventable illnesses.” They, too, cited online misinformation about vaccine safety as a contributing factor in the rising number of measles cases in high and middle income countries.Over the years we’ve written several stories about various false and misleading claims made about vaccines — claims that were either made by public figures or spread over the internet.Some major social platforms have recently taken steps to curb the spread of misinformation about vaccines. Facebook announced in March that it would reduce the visibility of vaccine misinformation and YouTube said in February that it would prevent users who promote vaccine misinformation from running ads.Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to debunk misinformation shared on the social media network. Our previous stories can be found here. United Nations. “‘A global measles crisis’ is well underway, UN agency chiefs warn.” 15 Apr 2019.“Over 20 million children worldwide missed out on measles vaccine annually in past 8 years, creating a pathway to current global outbreaks – UNICEF.” Press release. UNICEF. 24 Apr 2019.“Region of the Americas is declared free of measles.” Press release. Pan American Health Organization. 27 Sep 2016.“De Blasio Administration’s Health Department Declares Public Health Emergency Due to Measles Crisis.” Press release. City of New York. 9 Apr 2019.Epidemiological Update Measles. Pan American Health Organization. 18 Apr 2019.CDC Media Statement: Measles cases in the U.S. are highest since measles was eliminated in 2000. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 24 Apr 2019.
|
6615
|
Einstein proof: Nobel winners find ripples in the universe.
|
For decades astronomers tried to prove Albert Einstein right by doing what Einstein thought was impossible: detecting the faint ripples in the universe called gravitational waves. They failed repeatedly until two years ago when they finally spotted one. Then another. And another. And another.
|
true
|
AP Top News, International News, Physics, Sweden, Technology, Nobel Prizes, California, Science, U.S. News, Europe, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts
|
Three American scientists — including one who initially flunked out of MIT — won the Nobel Prize in physics Tuesday that launched a whole new way to observe the cosmos. Sweden’s Royal Academy of Sciences cited the combination of highly advanced theory and ingenious equipment design in awarding Rainer Weiss of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Barry Barish and Kip Thorne of the California Institute of Technology. “It’s a win for the human race as a whole. These gravitational waves will be powerful ways for the human race to explore the universe,” Thorne told The Associated Press in a phone interview. The trio were part of a team of more than 1,000 astronomers who first observed gravitational waves in September 2015. When the discovery was announced several months later, it was a sensation not only among scientists but the general public. These are waves that go through everything — including us — but carry information on them that astronomers could not get otherwise. “The best comparison is when Galileo discovered the telescope, which allowed us to see that Jupiter had moons. And all of a sudden, we discovered that the universe was much vaster than we used to think about,” Ariel Goobar of the Swedish academy said. Weiss said he hopes that eventually gravitational waves will help science learn about “the very moment when the universe came out of nothingness.” Gravitational waves were first theorized a century ago by Einstein, but he didn’t think technology would ever be able to detect the tiny wobbles, smaller than a piece of an atom. The waves are like “a storm in the fabric of space-time that is produced when two black holes collide,” Thorne said. The first detection came from a crash 1.3 billion light-years away. A light-year is about 5.88 trillion miles. The prize is “a win for Einstein, and a very big one,” Barish told the AP. The waves are detected by a laser device, called an interferometer, which must be both exquisitely precise and extremely stable in a project that cost $1.1 billion dollars. The first observation involved two of the devices about 1,900 miles (3,000 kilometers) apart — in Hanford, Washington, and Livingston, Louisiana. They came about 7 milliseconds apart, consistent with the speed of light. A new detector in Italy went online and helped in the discovery of the fourth wave. With the technology that the three developed “we may even see entirely new objects that we haven’t even imagined yet,” said Patrick Sutton, an astronomer at Cardiff University in Wales. The German-born Weiss, 85, who initially spearheaded the research effort, was awarded half of the 9-million-kronor ($1.1 million) prize amount. Thorne, 77, a theorist, and Barish, 81, who was a project director, will split the other half. For decades, the scientists pushed for money to start the massive LIGO project, getting their first National Science Foundation grant in 1992. The first version of the detector went through six long runs looking for gravitational waves, but didn’t find them because it wasn’t technologically precise enough, Barish said. And computer programs needed to solve Einstein’s equations weren’t quite right and “the quest was foundering,” said Thorne, who peeled away from the detector work to form another collaboration to get better computing for detection. Two decades after construction “we finally struck gold,” Barish said. Weiss also overcame failure. After flunking out of MIT, he didn’t have anything to do so he offered himself as an electronics technician to a lab at MIT and learned how to solder and deal with people. He returned to school, got his bachelor’s and doctorate at MIT and ended up as a professor there. “There was a person who thought I was OK. I wasn’t a complete dope,” Weiss said. “I got some confidence out of that.” In a moment of poetry aimed at making the distant and infinitesimal phenomenon understandable to non-experts, the academy announcement said gravitational waves “are always created when a mass accelerates, like when an ice-skater pirouettes or a pair of black holes rotate around each other.” Professor Alberto Vecchio, from the University of Birmingham’s Institute of Gravitational Wave Astronomy, said this discovery will produce results for decades to come. “They have taken me, as well as hundreds of my colleagues, through such an intellectually rewarding and recently adrenaline-packed journey that we could not have even remotely imagined,” he said. “The best part is that this is just the beginning of a new roller-coaster exploration of the universe.” For the past 25 years, the Nobel physics prize has been shared among multiple winners. Last year’s prize went to three British-born researchers who applied the mathematical discipline of topology to help understand the workings of exotic matter such as superconductors and superfluids. The 2017 Nobel prizes kicked off Monday with the medicine prize being awarded to three Americans studying circadian rhythms — better known as body clocks: Jeffrey C. Hall, Michael Rosbash and Michael W. Young. The chemistry prize will be announced Wednesday, the Nobel literature prize on Thursday and the peace prize on Friday. The economics prize, which is not technically a Nobel, will be awarded on Monday. ___ Heintz reported from Stockholm. David Keyton in Stockholm, Christopher Weber in Pasadena, California, Rodrigue Ngowi in Newtonville, Massachusetts, Collin Binkley in Boston, Massachusetts, Bob Lentz in Philadelphia, Michelle Monroe in Phoenix and Malcolm Ritter in New York contributed to this story. ___ Follow the AP’s coverage on the Nobels here: https://apnews.com/tag/NobelPrizes
|
2058
|
Hold the lime with Corona, may cause skin reaction.
|
In a TV advertisement for Corona beer, a woman on a beach, irritated by her companion ogling a bikini-clad blonde, squirts him with the lime sitting atop his beer.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Bottles of Corona beer speed past a worker in the bottling line of Mexico City's Modelo brewery, May 19, 2004. REUTERS/Andrew Winning He may be in for worse than a surprise: a nasty skin reaction that one doctor is calling “Mexican beer dermatitis.” A substance in lime juice, if left on the skin in the sun, can cause the skin to become discolored, as if by poison ivy or a jellyfish sting — and the marks can last for months, reports Scott Flugman in the Archives of Dermatology. Mexican beers, particularly Corona, are typically served with a lime slice wedged in the top of the bottle. The drinker shoves the lime into the bottle and holds his or her thumb over the bottle’s mouth while turning the bottle over to mix in the juice. But if the drinker is not careful, the beer’s carbonation can spray lime juice and beer all over his or her skin — “especially in a patient who is shirtless by a beach or pool,” wrote Flugman, a dermatologist in New York. The resulting reaction is due to a substance called psoralen, used to make the skin more sensitive to a wavelength of ultraviolet light, UV-A, used to treat certain skin conditions. Lemons contain psoralens too, but not as strong. “It’s just a cosmetic issue,” Flugman told Reuters Health, though he said the discoloration — most frequently in people like bartenders who work outdoors with limes — may take an emotional toll. “People are worried that it’s something serious. You might have some brown spots you’re been looking at for a few months,” he said. Olive-skinned Caucasians may be especially susceptible. No ties have been shown between the reaction and skin cancer, said Flugman, who added that he sees two or three cases a year. They are often mystified why a dermatologist is asking them if they’ve recently drunk Mexican beer. His advice? “If you do this and you spritz the beer or the lime, just wash it off. Don’t leave it on there and sit out in the sun,” he said. Or, if you are disinclined to get up for a while, “throw a towel over it.”
|
9163
|
Teaching happiness to men with HIV boosts their health
|
In a study by Northwestern University, 80 patients newly diagnosed with HIV infection were given training in thinking positively and compared to a control group of 79 who did not receive the training. Measures of viral load — more than a year later — were lower in the group who received the five-week intervention than those who did not. To its credit, the release explains that the difference could be due to stronger adherence to anti-retroviral drug therapy in the group that received training in positive thinking and that’s what led to the decreased viral load. The release headline about “teaching happiness” seems to both exaggerate and oversimplify the science of psychological intervention. We wish the release had provided more numbers illustrating the benefits, and we question the researcher’s quote calling the results “amazing.” An estimated 40,000 people in the United States find out they have an HIV infection every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control. A therapy that could potentially improve mental health and reduce symptoms of HIV infection would be a welcome addition to the therapies already available. This intervention is not yet proven to do so.
|
false
|
HIV,mental health,Northwestern University
|
We did not find any discussion of the cost of bringing patients in for five sessions of what is called “positive skills intervention.” While it may be low-cost, we need some mention of that to help evaluate the practicality of this therapy. The study itself devotes space to cost analysis. “The [intervention] was quite time intensive for both the study team and the participants which lessens the likelihood that it can go to scale in this format.” “We have begun work on translating the intervention to a self-guided online format that would significantly reduce the cost.” If the news release had included these details, it would have added some practical context for readers. We were confused by the statement below and the contrasting information in the journal manuscript reporting the study results. First, let’s see what the release claimed as benefit: “Fifteen months after the interventions, 91 percent of the intervention group had a suppressed viral load compared to 76 percent of the control group. In addition to the potential benefit of a lower viral load on the infected person, there may be public health benefits.” And the quoted researcher called this an “amazing” difference. But this is what the study abstract stated: “This comparatively brief positive affects skills intervention achieved modest improvements in psychological health, and may have the potential to support adjustment to a new HIV diagnosis.” The results of the study itself are very mixed; it describes some of the measurements of the study as “not reaching statistical significance.” It seems clear that the intervention group did have improved (or at least not decreased) psychological health, which is a reasonable outcome for having gotten psychological attention and therapy. If the researchers believe the intervention is without harm, the release needed to spell that out. Harms were also not measured or disclosed in the study itself, but it’s something we encourage news release writers and journalists to seek to clarify. There are several issues related to the quality of the evidence that we think this news release left out. Since the differences found in the study between the trained group and the controls were relatively small (the effect sizes under 0.4, which is poor to fair only), it is likely that modifying the intervention without the face-to-face intervention with an engaged volunteer would result in lower differences and may actually be identical to the control group. A couple of other things were worth mentioning in the release related to quality of evidence. It was a randomized study but there is no mention in the release about blinding of patients or observers, the absence of which could lead to bias in the results of the psychological observations. There were also a large number of patients who did not qualify for the study, making generalization of the study a problem. Finally, it would help readers to know that studies have raised questions of the reproducibility of much psychological research. In other words, when the same experiment is tried by others, it often doesn’t turn out the same way. It might be too much to expect a news release to delve into this topic, but we include it herein for the benefit of our readers. There was no disease mongering. The release provides a little context about previous research in this area but some background on the numbers of people living with HIV, or the number of new cases diagnosed each year would have been useful to readers. The release noted the grants that supported the research. The study didn’t note any financial conflicts of interest. The release does not mention support groups, meditation or other behavioral management training programs that exist to help patients cope with chronic illnesses, nor does it say how this intervention might compare with other therapies currently used in clinical practice. The release doesn’t address availability of the training. In claiming this research has not been done before it suggests that the intervention would only be available via clinical trials. The release could have been more specific about whether the skills training has been standardized or whether it is in widespread use in any context. Because we can’t give the release a satisfactory score – because availability wasn’t addressed – we also didn’t think we could ding it with an unsatisfactory score. Thus, the N/A score. The release contains this claim of novelty: “This is believed to be the first test of a positive emotion intervention in people newly diagnosed with HIV. Based on the study results, the intervention is promising for people in the initial stages of adjustment to any serious chronic illness.” We believe others in medicine have probably used “positive” intervention before, but they may have called it support or emotional coaching or many other phrases. Cognitive-behavioral therapy, massage, and other means to improve a person’s coping skills could be considered “positive emotion intervention.” We find the word “amazing” used to describe the results as too much of an exaggeration for a study that in its peer reviewed journal format is called “modest” for results. The best that the study showed was a fair to poor difference between the two groups of patients studied.
|
39840
|
Several claims: 1. A regimen of drinking water in the morning on an empty stomach can cure several diseases including cancer, arthritis, and diabetes. 2. Drinking cold water with meals can cause sludge in the intestines and lead to cancer. 3. Women should be aware of heart attack symptoms.
|
The way you drink water can cause deadly disease.
|
unproven
|
Medical, Warnings
|
Let’s take the topics one at a time: 1. Drink water in the morning on an empty stomach and cure diseases. So called “Water Therapy” is a popular recommendation among practioners of alternative medicine but we have not found any credible evidence of the value of the method suggested in this email or that it would cure serious diseases such as cancer. Such claims are not backed up with valid research. 2. Drinking cold water with meals can cause sludge in the intestines and lead to cancer. We have not found “Japanese Medical Society” referred to in the email. Although there are doctors and nutritionists who sometimes recommend not drinking water with meals, we have not found any documentation that drinking ice water clogs up the intestines. One nutritionist we asked said it doesn’t make much of a difference because all food and drink, whether hot or cold, eventually gets to the same internal temperatures and long before getting to the intestine. 3. Women should be aware of heart attack symptoms. Physicians have long recommended that women be as sensitive to heart attack symptoms as men. We found no documentation that 60% of people who have a heart attack while asleep do not wake up but the symptoms of heart attack that are described are generally true. Comments
|
27843
|
NORAD annually tracks Santa's progress because a child trying to reach Santa via a newspaper advertisement called the wrong phone number.
|
The story of how NORAD came to track Santa's progress every Christmas Eve.
|
true
|
Holidays, santa claus
|
Ever since the mid-1950s, generations of children in North America (and, since the advent of the Internet, children from all over the world) have eagerly turned to an annual service provided by the U.S.-Canada North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) to help them track the progress of Santa Claus every Christmas Eve as he departs the North Pole and traverses the globe in his reindeer-driven sleigh, delivering presents to good little boys and girls around the world. NORAD’s engaging well over a thousand people to provide a yearly Santa-tracking program seems to many like a rather whimsical venture for a staid defense-based agency to be engaging in. And, in fact, NORAD didn’t set out to be in the business of providing real-time Santa updates every Christmas Eve: that service came about strictly by accident, the result of a misdialed number published in a local department store newspaper advertisement. Back in 1955, NORAD’s predecessor, the Continental Air Defense Command (CONAD) was based in Colorado Springs, Colorado. At Christmastime of that year, a Sears department store advertisement placed in a Colorado Springs newspaper featured a picture of Santa urging children to “Call me on my private phone and I will talk to you personally any time day or night.” Unfortunately, the phone number included in the ad was either misprinted or misdialed, and a child who called ended up not on the phone with St. Nick but rather with one Colonel Harry Shoup, the officer on duty that day at CONAD. Rather than informing his juvenile caller they had reached a wrong number and brusquely instructing them to get off the line, Col. Shoup opted to play along and asked his staff to accommodate the inquisitive youngster by providing them with updates on Santa’s Christmas Eve progress. The story of the accidental origins of NORAD’s Santa-tracking program has been told and re-told many times over the decades. Here’s how Col. Shoup’s daughter related it back in 2009: One morning that December, U.S. Air Force Col. Harry Shoup, the director of operations at CONAD, the Continental Air Defense Command — NORAD’s predecessor — got a phone call at his Colorado Springs, Colo., office. This was no laughing matter. The call had come in on one of the top secret lines inside CONAD that only rang in the case of a crisis. Grabbing the phone, Shoup must have expected the worst. Instead, a tiny voice asked, “Is this Santa Claus?” “Dad’s pretty annoyed,” said Terri Van Keuren, Shoup’s daughter, recalling the legend of that day in 1955. “He barks into the phone,” demanding to know who’s calling. “The little voice is now crying,” Van Keuren continued. “‘Is this one of Santa’s elves, then? '” The Santa questions were only beginning. That day, the local newspaper had run a Sears Roebuck ad with a big picture of St. Nick and text that urged, “Hey, Kiddies! Call me direct … Call me on my private phone and I will talk to you personally any time day or night.” But the phone number in the ad was off by a digit. Instead of connecting with Santa, callers were dialing in on the line that would ring if the Russians were attacking. Before long, the phone was ringing off the hook, and, softening up, Shoup grabbed a nearby airman and told him to answer the calls and, Van Keuren said, “‘just pretend you’re Santa. '” Indeed, rather than having the newspaper pull the Sears ad, Shoup decided to offer the countless kids calling in something useful: information about Santa’s progress from the North Pole. To quote the official NORAD Santa site, “a tradition was born.” From that point on, first CONAD and then, in 1958, when NORAD was formed, Shoup’s organization offered annual Santa tracking as a service to the global community. A phone number was publicized and anyone was invited to call up, especially on December 24, and find out where Santa was. Manning those phones over the years have been countless numbers of Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps personnel and their families, and for many people, turning to NORAD to find out where Santa is became something to look forward to each year. Grabbing the phone, Shoup must have expected the worst. Instead, a tiny voice asked, “Is this Santa Claus?” “Dad’s pretty annoyed,” said Terri Van Keuren, Shoup’s daughter, recalling the legend of that day in 1955. “He barks into the phone,” demanding to know who’s calling. “The little voice is now crying,” Van Keuren continued. “‘Is this one of Santa’s elves, then? '” The Santa questions were only beginning. That day, the local newspaper had run a Sears Roebuck ad with a big picture of St. Nick and text that urged, “Hey, Kiddies! Call me direct … Call me on my private phone and I will talk to you personally any time day or night.” But the phone number in the ad was off by a digit. Instead of connecting with Santa, callers were dialing in on the line that would ring if the Russians were attacking. Before long, the phone was ringing off the hook, and, softening up, Shoup grabbed a nearby airman and told him to answer the calls and, Van Keuren said, “‘just pretend you’re Santa. '” Indeed, rather than having the newspaper pull the Sears ad, Shoup decided to offer the countless kids calling in something useful: information about Santa’s progress from the North Pole. To quote the official NORAD Santa site, “a tradition was born.” From that point on, first CONAD and then, in 1958, when NORAD was formed, Shoup’s organization offered annual Santa tracking as a service to the global community. A phone number was publicized and anyone was invited to call up, especially on December 24, and find out where Santa was. Manning those phones over the years have been countless numbers of Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps personnel and their families, and for many people, turning to NORAD to find out where Santa is became something to look forward to each year. A number of recent accounts have pointed out the inconsistencies that crept into Col. Shoup’s story over the years (i.e., was it a newspaper misprint or a randomly misdialed number the led a child to call; did NORAD receive misdirected calls from multiple children or a single child) and have intimated that the whole tale was a concocted work of fiction. But the basic elements of Shoup’s story (if not the finer details) remained consistent across time, and no disproof or plausible alternate version of events has been offered to contradict them.
|
7433
|
Lamont moving ahead with May 20 reopening despite concerns.
|
Despite a call on Thursday by a group of Democratic state senators to delay plans to begin phasing out Connecticut’s COVID-19 restrictions next week, Gov. Ned Lamont said his administration is still moving ahead carefully toward the planned May 20 partial reopening of certain Connecticut businesses.
|
true
|
Ned Lamont, Health, General News, Connecticut, Business, Virus Outbreak, Public health
|
The governor, a Democrat, noted that hospitalizations are in the third week of a downward progression and the state is on pace to “blow through” a projected 42,000 tests per week beginning next week, ramping up to more than 100,000 by June. “I appreciate the ongoing concern that people have, but I think we’ve got the right balance going forward right now,” Lamont said during his daily media briefing. “I think you have a sense that we put public health and public safety first and foremost. Whatever we do, we’re doing very cautiously. ” In one of two letters, lawmakers noted how some parts of the state are still seeing increasing numbers of COVID-19 cases. The latest data show cases climbed by 609 from Wednesday, to nearly 35,500. But that comes as the state is ramping up testing. Meanwhile, the number of deaths spiked by 94 since Wednesday, for a total of 3,219. More than half of those are nursing home residents. “Reopening is essential — but to do it while the first wave of the pandemic is still raging will not lead to a second wave, it will simply add fuel to the first wave, delaying our eventual recovery,” the senators wrote to Lamont. Senate Republican Leader Len Fasano said he supports the first reopening date — Wednesday, May 20 — noting the state has the medical capacity to deal with an uptick in cases of the coronavirus. In the meantime, he said, the state is suffering in other ways because of current restrictions, noting an increase in domestic violence, drug abuse and mental health problems. “Those are all huge health care concerns,” he said. “Huge.” For most people, the virus causes mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough, that clear up in two to three weeks. For some, especially older adults and people with existing health problems, it can cause more severe illness or death. In other coronavirus-related developments around Connecticut: ___ NURSING HOMES Representatives of nursing home and assisted living facilities in Connecticut said new data released Thursday evening show the coronavirus “still has a hold” on the state’s nursing homes. In a joint statement, the presidents of LeadingAge Connecticut, the Connecticut Association of Health Care Facilities and the CT Assisted Living Association, said the latest numbers also reveal “the pernicious character of the highly contagious virus, now known to be transmitted by asymptomatic carriers” and is “no way a reflection of the quality” of the facilities and the care they provide. The state’s figures show 163 nursing homes and 75 assisted living facilities in the state have had at least one positive case of COVID-19. In nursing homes, there have been 6,947 positive cases, 1,487 laboratory-confirmed COVID-associated deaths and 440 probable COVID-associated deaths. In assisted living facilities, there have been 874 positive cases, 207 laboratory-confirmed COVID-associated deaths and 69 probable COVID-associated deaths. ____ CASINO TOWNS A bipartisan group of eastern Connecticut state lawmakers on Thursday urged Lamont to to personally engage with Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan tribal leaders to determine how the state can help them reopen Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods Resort Casino as soon as possible and support the roughly 10,000 workers who are currently out of work, as well as the hundreds of impacted local vendors. The lawmakers also called on Lamont to authorize the tribes to operate internet gambling and sports betting, a revenue source they argue is needed to help restart “two economic powerhouses” in the region. “The continued closure of the casinos is untenable,” they wrote, noting how the situation warrants the governor’s personal involvement. Both casinos have been shuttered since March 17. It remains unclear when they might reopen. “I really do care about the people. I care about getting those people back to work safely,” Lamont said. “I do worry a lot about the nature of a big gathering place like a casino. It does bring in people from all over the region, all over the Northeast region ... It can be a place that’s a source of high risk.” Paul Mounds, Lamont’s chief of staff, said the governor and his administration have been in constant contact with the tribes, with more discussions planned Friday. Meanwhile, Lamont said he’s not inclined to authorize internet gambling and sports betting in an executive order, but said he is open to further discussions. Also, he said he plans to ask his economic advisor to see if there’s a way to help target some federal assistance to the businesses impacted by the casino closures. ___ PRISON VIDEO VISITS The state Department of Correction says it has begun allowing 30-minute video calls between juvenile offenders and family members. The “video visits” are being conducted over the Zoom Cloud Meetings application from the York Correctional Institution for women and the Manson Youth Institution. The department says the visits can only be made to people on the offenders approved visitation list. Three authorized adult visitors may participate. Visitors under 18 may only participate if accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. In person visitation has been suspended during the pandemic and previously inmates had been limited to telephone calls with their loved ones. ___ HOSPITAL FLYOVERS The Connecticut Air National Guard conductED a statewide flyover Thursday to salute the state’s health care workers. The guard’s C-130H aircraft flew above hospitals and other health care facilities throughout the state. Numerous people posted photos of the four-engine turboprop military transport aircraft on social media as it flew overhead. Maj. Gen. Francis Evon, the adjutant general of the Connecticut National Guard, said it’s a way to show “appreciation to the thousands of heroes at the front line battling COVID-19.” ____ EDUCATION FUNDING Connecticut is receiving $111 million in federal coronavirus relief aid to help school districts during the global pandemic. The Connecticut State Department of Education is developing an application process for school districts, who can use the money for things like computer and software purchases, mental heath services and summer learning.
|
16785
|
Without the financial resources provided by hunters to protect habitat and stop poachers, there would be no infrastructure for wildlife management.
|
"Jones, who has been criticized for posting photos of big game kills while visiting in Africa, claimed that, ""Without the financial resources provided by hunters to protect habitat and stop poachers, there would be no infrastructure for wildlife management."" First, while the quote was published in National Geographic, it was written as part of a pro-hunting opinion piece. Second, the claim is inaccurate. Experts agree that hunting reserves can help wildlife management in the right circumstances, but other efforts -- including ecotourism and photo tourism -- have a more significant impact. No matter the size of the contribution, it’s clear that wildlife management isn’t solely being supported by big game hunts."
|
false
|
Environment, Corrections and Updates, Sports, PunditFact, Kendall Jones,
|
"Texas teenage cheerleader Kendall Jones, the hunter who became the hunted, shot back at critics recently, defending her controversial big game hunts as conservation efforts. Jones made news by posting photos of her hunting trip to Zimbabwe on her Facebook page, posing and grinning next to her kills -- including a lion and other big cats. The pictures created an uproar among animal lovers and Jones was labeled the ""most eminently hateable person on the Internet right now."" But the 19-year-old -- who counts more than 577,000 fans of her Facebook page -- says these outraged animal lovers are missing the point. ""Tanzania also has 15 photo-safari areas, which have been lauded as a non-consumptive alternative to traditional hunting tourism,"" Jones wrote in a July 2, 2014, Facebook post, quoting National Geographic magazine. ""Unfortunately, only 4 of the 15 photo-safari areas are financially viable. The remaining 11 are subsidized by hunter-generated funds. So without the financial resources provided by hunters to protect habitat and stop poachers, there would be no infrastructure for wildlife management."" The point being, if people like Jones didn’t pay to hunt, then wildlife lovers wouldn’t have any animals to look at. We wondered: Is Jones really a misunderstood Artemis or just a wolf in sheep’s clothing? Falling prey to facts A quick Google search confirmed that the quote Jones referenced is indeed from National Geographic, published Sept. 2, 2013. But it’s from an opinion piece titled ""African Lions Should Not Be Listed as Endangered,"" submitted to the magazine by Melissa Simpson of Safari Club International, a conservation group composed of hunters. Simpson wrote, ""The regulated hunters in Africa make a vital contribution to conservation efforts, primarily through the revenues their hunting expeditions generate for local communities and wildlife resource agencies."" Historically, game reserves in Africa were set up by colonial sport hunters when animal populations began to disappear in the 19th and 20th centuries from over-hunting by early European settlers, according to environmental historian John MacKenzie. But today, sustainable trophy hunting alone is not enough to protect wildlife and stop poachers, said African Wildlife Foundation spokesperson Kathleen Garrigan. It’s just one of a set of ""tools"" used to protect wildlife and habitats. And that’s only under good governance, at a low volume, and with social and economic benefits to local people, according to guidelines set by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), one the world’s leading conservation groups. Others share a similar view on game reserves. Both the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation and wildlife conservationists say that hunting tourism can do good for communities and wildlife, where alternatives are not possible. Photo tourism, which needs more capital and infrastructure to implement, won’t work for certain landscapes, says IUCN ecologist Rosie Cooney. ""There are areas with sufficiently low density of animals that no tourist is going to pay thousands of dollars a night to chase them around. In the Serengeti, people will line up two years in advance to see animals because there are scores of them but, in other parts, that’s just not the case,"" said mammal biologist Bruce Paterson. In these areas, especially where human populations are growing, trophy hunting can foot the bill for keeping natural landscapes natural. But assuring healthy animal populations requires hunting operators to be knowledgeable about population dynamics and reasonable about trophy quotas, the age of the animals hunted, profit margins, etc., Paterson said. There are only about 500 West African lions left, which are considered fair game because they’re mistakenly grouped with other African lions instead of their real family, endangered Asian lions. And when trophy hunting is successful in maintaining large wildlife populations and diversity, it’s well-managed, well-regulated, and often paired with other efforts. ""South Africa, through an aggressive conservation initiative that involved ecotourism, hunting, breeding, translocations, and other conservation efforts, was largely responsible for bringing the southern white rhinoceros back from the brink of extinction,"" Garrigan said. Trophy hunting doesn’t do it alone So while experts say trophy hunting can help wildlife management, they agree that it’s just one way to do so. As for which tool is the sharpest in the tool shed, the IUCN says it’s not trophy hunting. With the same level of management and regulation, the conservation results in hunting areas are lower than those obtained by the neighbouring national parks, the IUCN wrote in a 2009 report. In some places, without the proper oversight, the hunting industry is actually contributing to wildlife declines, Garrigan said. On top of that, there’s even less of a bite in the financial argument for trophy hunting. ""Sure, some element of (wildlife management) is happening with fees paid by hunters who go into fishbowls to shoot fish. But the major thrusts are governments and private managers of the photo tours,"" said environmental historian James McCann. Contrary to Jones’ Facebook claim, the non-consumptive tourism sector -- meaning you can look but you can’t touch -- is overall more profitable than trophy hunting. Botswana recently banned hunting in favor of high-cost, low-density ecotourism. Tanzania’s national park system actually receives about $11 million annually from just one photographic tourism area, whereas hunting revenue altogether averages $10.5 million, according to wildlife conservationist Peter Lindsey. ""Photographic ecotourism undoubtedly generates greater gross revenues than trophy hunting in Africa, and where large numbers of tourists visit, employment opportunities for local peoples can be higher than just hunting,"" Lindsey wrote in a widely cited 2006 study that actually recommends trophy hunting. Hunting groups including Safari International, NGOs and academics alike report that the entire trophy hunting industry generates about $200 million in annual revenue, $100 million in South Africa alone. But this figure, which comes from Lindsey’s study, is questionable, says the Economists at Large in their 2013 report. The $100 million figure, for example, was taken from an unpublished study by the Professional Hunters Association of South Africa. Whatever the number, trophy hunting revenue is a small slice of the pie. Altogether the IUCN reports that the hunters are contributing all of 1.3 percent of tourism revenue in the big game countries, and have created 0.0001 percent of the jobs (and most are part time). Averaged out over land used, hunting generates less than $2 per hectare -- about $1 if we exclude South Africa -- and moreover, local communities get just a dime of that. In Tanzania, where the financial contribution by game revenue is the highest, hunting contributes to about 0.3 percent of the national budget but uses about a quarter of land. Our ruling Jones, who has been criticized for posting photos of big game kills while visiting in Africa, claimed that, ""Without the financial resources provided by hunters to protect habitat and stop poachers, there would be no infrastructure for wildlife management."" First, while the quote was published in National Geographic, it was written as part of a pro-hunting opinion piece. Second, the claim is inaccurate. Experts agree that hunting reserves can help wildlife management in the right circumstances, but other efforts -- including ecotourism and photo tourism -- have a more significant impact. No matter the size of the contribution, it’s clear that wildlife management isn’t solely being supported by big game hunts. Correction: This report initially misspelled the name of African Wildlife Foundation spokeswoman Kathleen Garrigan."
|
28575
|
NASA will hire someone (with a secret security clearance) to ensure alien life doesn't make its way to Earth.
|
What's true: In July 2017, NASA opened applications for the job of Planetary Protection Officer, a role primarily concerned with preventing contamination from Earth to other planets. What's false: While the job does have a mandate to prevent extraterrestrial contamination from entering Earth’s biosphere, most of the job involves working with missions to design systems that prevent them from accidentally bringing life with them to other worlds.
|
mixture
|
Science, extraterrestrials, nasa
|
On 2 August 2017, USA Today reported on a NASA job posting for a “planetary protection officer” in a way that — while sure to boost page views — took serious liberties with the nature of, and need for, the position advertised. Several other web sites reprinted the USA Today article, using headlines like “NASA is Hiring Someone to Protect Earth from Aliens,” which stated: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is currently looking for someone with a secret security clearance to ensure alien life, or “organic-constituent and biological contamination” doesn’t make its way back in a space ship. While this statement is technically true, it misrepresents of the nature of the work performed by the planetary protection officer — the most significant aspect of which is to prevent other planets and space objects from becoming contaminated by us. The NASA job posting makes this clear: This position is assigned to Office of Safety and Mission Assurance for Planetary Protection. Planetary protection is concerned with the avoidance of organic-constituent and biological contamination in human and robotic space exploration. NASA maintains policies for planetary protection applicable to all space flight missions that may intentionally or unintentionally carry Earth organisms and organic constituents to the planets or other solar system bodies, and any mission employing spacecraft, which are intended to return to Earth and its biosphere with samples from extraterrestrial targets of exploration. This policy is based on federal requirements and international treaties and agreements. And on their web site, the Planetary Protection Office also describes the two-way nature of the job: Planetary protection is essential for several important reasons: to preserve our ability to study other worlds as they exist in their natural states; to avoid contamination that would obscure our ability to find life elsewhere — if it exists; and to ensure that we take prudent precautions to protect Earth’s biosphere in case it does. Typically, planetary protection is divided into two major components: forward contamination, which refers to the biological contamination of explored solar system bodies; and backward contamination, which refers to the biological contamination of Earth as a result of returned extraterrestrial samples. This NASA position, and the concept of planetary protection in general, is far from new. The role of planetary protection officer dates back to 1963, when the organization formed a position they dubbed the planetary quarantine officer. This position was later reorganized to carry out NASA’s commitment to principles set forth in the 1967 “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies,” which says: States Parties to the Treaty shall pursue studies of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, and conduct exploration of them so as to avoid their harmful contamination and also adverse changes in the environment of the Earth resulting from the introduction of extraterrestrial matter and, where necessary, shall adopt appropriate measures for this purpose. By law, the position of planetary protection officer has a term-limit — three years with an option to extend the post by two years — necessitating regular job announcements. Given that NASA deals with classified defense projects, it is not shocking that the job would come with security clearance, either. The current planetary protection officer, Catharine Conley, spoke to Scientific American about the duties of her job: The purpose is explicitly to protect the activities that humans want to do. Initially that would be science, but other things will be done in the future as well. If you wanted to drill into an aquifer on Mars, it would be in the interest of future colonists that you keep the drilling clean because organisms can grow in the aquifer and change the conditions so that it is no longer available. We’ve seen that happen on Earth. That would be really unfortunate. Speaking in the forward of a NASA-published history of planetary protection, Conley described a personal experience that illustrated the importance of planetary protection: My interest in planetary protection is much more personal. As part of my laboratory’s research on muscle atrophy, my first spaceflight experiment was flown on the last mission of the Space Shuttle Columbia that tragically disintegrated during reentry on 1 February 2003. Surprisingly, when we opened our recovered hardware several months after the accident, many of our experimental animals had survived the crash. Inadvertently, our research had demonstrated that, if properly shielded, even multicellular animals could survive a meteoritic-style entry event, one of the key steps required for the natural transport of living organisms between planetary bodies. This recognition makes it even more critical that we don’t carry life from Earth with us on missions to search for life elsewhere—otherwise, if we find some, we might not be able to tell the difference! To be fair to USA Today, the job does involve protecting Earth from any potential biological contamination brought back home from space as well. For example, the upcoming Mars 2020 Rover mission has floated the idea of caching samples on the surface of the planet for later return to Earth by another mission. Such proposals must be evaluated by and designed in conjunction with the planetary protection officer to make sure nothing biologically native to Mars would contaminate Earth. However, the majority of missions in NASA’s immediate future are either Earth-observing missions or robotic missions to Mars or potentially far off rocky moons like Europa that will not return to Earth. That means much of the job will entail designing strategies to prevent the potential for contamination to these places from Earth, and not — as lightly suggested by USA Today — serving as an intergalactic “Men in Black” agent.
|
11322
|
Internet-based therapy shows promise for insomnia
|
This was a generally well written and balanced story about a small exploratory study on a possible new therapy for insomnia. The story effectively describes the methodology and patient population and includes expert commentary from independent sources. The story also appropriately cautions that larger studies with a more diverse patient population are warranted to verify the results and determine their generalizability. While the story meets many of our criteria, it would have been greatly improved by providing the reader with quantitative data and some context to help determine if the results translated to any real, meaningful benefit in peoples’ lives. For example, information on the Insomnia Severity Index, which was used to measure efficacy of the Internet-based program, would have been helpful. A brief exploration of cost, and of any potential harms (or lack of), would also have substantially strengthened the piece.
|
true
|
The story mentions that the Internet-based program is a “low-cost” option for treating insomnia; however, nothing more specific regarding cost is provided. It is presumed that the site will be proprietary; if so, what are the expected usage fees? The story states that compared to the control group, the treatment group woke up fewer times, spent fewer minutes awake, and had an improved score; however, the reader is not given any quantitative data or context to determine if these improvements are really meaningful in a person’s life. The story does not mention any possible harms that may be associated with managing insomnia via an Internet-based program. For example, might people develop worsening insomnia because of reinforcement of bad habits? A comment regarding the lack of identifiable harms would have been sufficient. The story accurately described the methodology and the participants; although this could have been further improved by providing more information about the control group, namely, that they did receive any type of treatment for insomnia. Additionally, the story effectively conveyed that this was a small study with a fairly homogenous population. This story does not directly address the prevalence of insomnia, but the overall tone does not suggest disease-mongering. This story includes comments from two independent experts, as well as a study co-author. The writer also mentions that the study was funded by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health. This story includes information on the benefits of cognitive behavioral therapy and working with a therapist for treating insomnia and briefly mentions sleep medications. The story states that this Internet-based program “could one day” be an option for treating insomnia, which suggests that it is not yet ready for prime time. The story conveyed that this is a novel treatment modality for insomnia. The story does not appear to rely on a press release and quotes multiple sources that appear to be from interviews.
|
|
10725
|
Trial Help for Sex Problems
|
"The one thing we didn’t like in the story was letting the independent urologist get away with his claim that the findings were ""clinically significant."" We liked the way one observer put it in an online comment posted after the WSJ online story: ""I had to chuckle when reading about the ""clinically significant"" 5.5-fold increase. Although the men rated their experience significantly higher on measures of control and satisfaction, was this 5.5 increase from about 56 seconds to 3 mins.18 seconds sufficient to make their experience as a couple more meaningful and rewarding? Did the partners rate their experiences as improved? I would characterize this finding as ""less than perfect"" just as the urologist quoted referred to the alternative treatments. Perhaps the study can be improved by combining spray plus sex therapy for one experimental group, spray treatment alone for another group, and sex therapy alone for the third group. I also think that giving the couples a stop watch injects an artificial component that is likely to have its own sent of negative ramifications."" Sexual dysfunctions can be serious and life altering, and there is a steady parade of therapies being offered both through the standard scientific process and through outright hucksterism. It is important for reporters not to be blinded by the glare of sex therapy and to focus on the details the way they would with any other drug or treatment."
|
true
|
"The company behind the product undoubtedly has done market research about how much of this product it might sell and at what price. At a minimum, that information should have been included here. It presents the benefits in both relative and absolute terms in the second paragraph of the story. It would be nice to have a NNT or number needed to treat in here. It also would be nice to see the range of performance after using the drug. Did some of the men on placebo have gains in ejaculation time that were unusually high? Did some on the drug have no gain or even a loss of time? It’s also not clear how the researchers knew what the ""no drug"" ejaculation time was, how they were chosen for the research or whether they fell into a particular age bracket. The story did a ""satisfactory"" job quantifying the benefits, not a perfect job. And in an imperfect world of health stories, this part of the story was actually above average. It talks about the potential side effects, but it limits that discussion to what the study found in a very small group of men. Are there long term effects from lidocaine exposure that have been found in other studies? Does the body build up resistance to lidocaine? This isn’t a short term problem that can be solved with a few weeks of therapy. It is usually a life long problem, and the story should be framed that way both in discussing the benefits and the harms. By using an outside expert to say in the third graph that the findings are ""clinically significant,"" the story makes it sound as if the case for this drug has already been made. Perhaps Tom Lue gave some context around this comment, but that context is not included. Instead, we are told that patients will be ""much happier."" If you have this problem, you are looking up the company’s website to get on their mailing list. But both groups experienced a gain in ejaculation time. Why would that be? And, given that these sexual encounters were self timed, how confident can we be in the results? Another thing that the story never addresses is the idea of optimal time for sex. It also treats this particular sexual dysfunction as a purely single male problem instead of a larger issue of an unsatisfying sexual relationship between a man and his partner. The drug was tested with two people having sex, but the person who did not receive the spray is never taken into account. The men ""rated their sexual experiences significantly higher"" than those who got placebos. The only reference to the partners is literally the second to the last sentence, ""Also, 0.6% of the men’s female partners reported at least some loss of sensation."" We don’t hear anything about the limitations of the study design. It appears to be a quasi-synthesis of 2 clinical trials. There isn’t any caution about the limited or nonexistent peer-review which takes place for an ""abstract"" at a meeting. Regarding study design, all we know is that researchers took 2 previous trials already made public (would have been helpful to include what the primary findings were) and ""combined them with added new data."" This study design is highly suspect. We do not know anything about whether the 2 trials were similar enough to combine, and in what manner they were combined. The section describing premature ejaculation does a better than average job attempting to define the scope of the problem while describing the limitations of the research that has been done in this area. One line could be a model for other journalists to learn from: ""Surveys have suggested that as many as 20% to 30% of men may suffer from premature ejaculation, though these figures are often drawn from broadly worded survey questions and may overstate the number of men with significant problems."" The reporter clearly read a lot about the problem and the potential treatments and does a fairly good job synthesizing this information. The story makes it clear that the two outside sources were not involved in this research. It is unclear whether these doctors are involved in any competing research or research into a similar product. There are three full graphs in a 12 graph story about the standard treatments and off-label treatments. I felt like I knew more about the state of premature ejaculation medicine after reading this story than I did about the actual success of these two trials. The story makes it clear, even in the headline, that these are the results of a trial and that there currently is no product even in the FDA pipeline. It also talks about a drug therapy from Johnson & Johnson and where it is being sold. It says at one point in the story that the ""findings of both trials had previously been made public."" It would have been nice to know where, how and why. Presumably at previous conferences, and, if so, why is this treatment not already in the FDA pipeline. Reporters should always be wary of scientists, especially corporate ones, who are using the trade show circuit to build momentum for their product instead of following a rigorous peer review process. This story really is all about the novelty, and it does a good job of exploring some of the other treatments available. Clearly, there is no published study. The company involved in the drug did issue this press release (http://www.renalandurologynews.com/novel-treatment-for-premature-ejaculation-shows-promising-results/article/171435/)There are some differences between the numbers used in the story and the numbers in the press release, but it’s not clear how much of this is because of different caveats. (The number of men who actually completed the study, for example, versus all of those who were involved.) The story goes well beyond the release and was finished before the press conference at the AUA meeting."
|
|
11635
|
Mammograms May Not Be Fool-Proof at Catching Second Cancers
|
Although the story addressed most of our criteria satisfactorily, it didn’t: include information about the psychological and financial costs of biopsies for women with a false positive mention the possible confounding factors such as the biological factors associated with treatment of the first cancers that were noted by the study authors. Women already diagnosed with breast cancer are at risk of developing a second breast cancer. Breast cancer survivors would benefit from evidence of the accuracy of screening mammography in detecting second breast cancers. In addition, this evidence is useful in determining clinical practice guidelines. Because there are nearly two million breast cancer survivors, accuracy of screening affects many women. While over 40,000 women die each year of breast cancer, the majority of those diagnosed survive their disease.
|
true
|
Cancer,HealthDay,Imaging studies,Screening
|
The article does not include information about the psychological and financial costs of biopsies for women with a false positive diagnosis of breast cancer. Among women with a personal history of breast cancer, 1.7 % were referred for biopsies that determined there was no second breast cancer while 1% of the women without breast cancer had false positive determinations. The article does point out that 18% of women with a personal history of breast cancer were called back for additional imaging or biopsies compared with 8.3% of those without breast cancer but there is no discussion of the psychological or financial costs connected with the additional imaging. By quantifying the benefits of screening mammography for women with a personal history of breast cancer in absolute numbers, the story presents this information accurately and in a useful, understandable way for women with breast cancer. The story discusses false positives & interval cancers & provides explanations of both of these problems associated with screening mammography. The story does not explain that the study was a retrospective study based on mammograms performed from 1996-2007 in five states at facilities affiliated with the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. There is no mention in the story of the possible confounding factors such as the biological factors associated with treatment of the first cancers that were noted by the study authors. The story also fails to include information about the subgroups of women with the highest observed cancer rates for whom the study authors note that alternate screening might be considered. The headline of this story misleads the reader by stating that “Mammograms May Not Be Fool-Proof at Catching Second Cancers.” No type of screening for breast cancer is fool-proof whether it is for an initial diagnosis or for a second breast cancer. Regarding the accuracy of screening mammography for an initial breast cancer diagnosis, the Komen for the Cure website states that in women age 50 and older “…between six and 27 percent of breast cancers may be missed by mammography alone.” Mammography is most effective in women 50 and older. Quotes from two independent sources are included in the article. Dr. William Audeh, director of the Wasserman Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Program at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, presents possible explanations for some of the higher false positives among women with a personal history of breast cancer. Quotes from both Dr. Audeh and Dr. Robert Smith, director of cancer screening for the American Cancer Society, point out that screening mammography may not have been as effective among women with a personal history of breast cancer as it was in those without a breast cancer diagnosis but that most of the cancers detected were stage I or ductal carcinoma in situ, a non-invasive breast cancer. The article could have noted that study authors declared no conflicts of interest and that the study was funded by a grant from the National Cancer Institute. Satisfactory mostly because of the inclusion of the comments by Dr Audeh about MRI, which is really the only acceptable alternative to mammography for followup of breast cancer survivors, and it is still unclear how MRI and mammography should be used in concert. Not applicable. Mammography is widely available and recommendations for annual mammography screening after a breast cancer diagnosis are standard. So the story didn’t need to specifically discuss the availability. Satisfactory. The novelty of mammography is not in question, and the whole point of the story was the new study about mammography’s performance in breast cancer survivors vs. controls. It may have been helpful for readers to know that the study was the first to examine the accuracy of screening mammography for women with a personal history of breast cancer. The article does not rely solely on a news release. It includes several explanatory quotes from Dr. Diana Miglioretti, one of the co-authors of the study as well as quotes from two doctors not connected with the study.
|
7641
|
Bayer CEO says would consider glyphosate settlement depending on costs.
|
Bayer AG’s chief executive said this week the company might consider settling lawsuits over Monsanto’s glyphosate-containing weed-killers depending on how high court costs rise, but stressed it remained focused on defending the combined company against claims they cause cancer.
|
true
|
Environment
|
Bayer acquired Monsanto this year for $63 billion. “If we can settle nuisances at some point where the defense costs in preparing cases are higher than potential settlement amounts, we will of course consider it from an economic standpoint,” CEO Werner Baumann told reporters when asked whether there was any scenario in which Bayer would consider settling. He added: “We will resolutely and with all means defend ourselves in this (glyphosate) litigation.” Baumann was speaking on Monday to German media invited to visit Bayer’s new operations in the former research and development facilities of Monsanto in St. Louis, Missouri. The remarks, made on Monday, were embargoed to the end of the week to allow media to return home. Shares in Bayer have lost 25 percent in value since Aug. 10, when a San Francisco jury awarded $289 million to Dewayne Johnson on grounds Monsanto failed to warn the school groundskeeper and other consumers of the cancer risks posed by glyphosate-based RoundUp and Ranger Pro. Johnson has terminal non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma that he alleges was caused by the herbicides. A judge later reduced the award to $78 million. Bayer denies that glyphosate causes cancer and says decades of scientific studies and real-world use have shown the chemical to be safe for human use. The company is appealing the findings. The number of glyphosate cases that Bayer faces across the United States has jumped to more than 8,700, prompting concerns among investors about the impact of litigation costs on Bayer’s bottom line. Baumann expressed confidence that Bayer could handle the litigation, and cited its “inexpensive” $12 million settlement of 4,000 lawsuits over its contraceptive Mirena device. Bayer also won five of six trials over its best-selling bloodthinner Xarelto, over which it faces 24,000 U.S. lawsuits. The sixth jury found in favor of a plaintiff, but a judge later overturned the decision. “Due to our exposure as a pharmaceutical company, we have the experience to defend those (glyphosate) cases,” he said. Baumann said the company’s legal strategy had been revised following the integration of Bayer and Monsanto in mid-August. He declined to provide details, but recent court filings reveal some of the steps the company has taken. Last week, Bayer added the attorneys from law firm Arnold & Portner who won the Xarelto cases for the company to its glyphosate defense team. It is also trying to change the juror selection process for upcoming trials. In filings last week in San Francisco federal court, where a new glyphosate trial is scheduled to begin on Feb. 25, 2019, Bayer said the “jury pool likely has grown more hostile” due to negative media coverage following the Johnson verdict. Michael Miller, one of the attorneys for the plaintiff, said the company’s claims were “hypocritical beyond belief” given its own efforts to control the message on glyphosate, most recently in a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post. Bayer has asked U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, who is overseeing the San Francisco case and some 580 others, to significantly expand the jury pool and question prospective jurors about their knowledge of the media coverage of the cases. Chhabria is expected to decide on the requests in December.
|
10420
|
Studies: Bone drugs may help prevent breast cancer
|
This story covers the results of preliminary findings of two large observational studies presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium which suggest that bisphosphonates, for example Fosamax, Boniva and Actonel, may play a role in reducing the risk of breast cancer. This story was informative and provided a high level of detail about how the studies were designed. It presented results in both relative and absolute terms. The story described the significance of the research but clearly indicated that role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer prevention is an unfolding story that requires further investigation. Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in women, following lung cancer. Currently, there are no preventive measures for women of average risk. The research results reported in this story add to other recent studies that have created interest in the potential roles of bisphosphonates – which are taken by millions of women with bone loss and osteoporosis – in reducing cancer risk.
|
true
|
This story informs the reader of the cost range for some generic and brand name drugs. It states that a 3-month supply of alendronate, a generic version of Fosamax, costs about $100 and that biannual infusions of the Novartis drug Zometa costs up to $1,200. Although it is not stated, these are estimated retail costs. This story does a good job of presenting potential benefits in detail, including the number of women in each study, the study design and factors that need to be taken into account when considering the results. Results are presented in both relative and absolute terms. For example, one of the studies reported about a 30% decreased incidence of developing invasive breast cancer over about 8 years in women who took oral bisphosphonates compared to those who did not. The story explains that in absolute terms, for every 1,000 women taking bisphosphonates for one year there would be one less case of invasive breast cancer. The story mentions some of the potentially severe side effects of bisphosphonates including bone, joint or muscle pain and, in rare cases, jawbone decay. The story also mentioned that one of the studies showed a slight increased risk of noninvasive tumors in women who took bisphosphonates compared to those who did not. It could have also mentioned that gastrointestinal distress is another potential side effect, but did confirm that bisphosphonates are generally well-tolerated. The story should have emphasized that this was an observational study and that the association is just that — an association, not cause and effect. Women who develop osteoporosis tend to be women who may have lower breast cancer risk to begin with, perhaps due to lower circulating estrogen levels. This concern was addressed in a New York Times story the same studies:
|
|
3847
|
Salina pharmacist, husband sentenced in opioid diversion.
|
A 29-year-old Salina pharmacist has been sentenced to three years of probation for diverting prescription drugs containing opioids.
|
true
|
Salina, General News, Prescription drugs, Opioids
|
Kirsty Hartley was sentenced Thursday. The sentence includes 18 months of house arrest. U.S. Attorney Stephen McAllister says Hartley’s husband, Dalton Hartley, was given the same sentence because he received the drugs from her. Kirsty Hartley pleaded guilty to distributing a prescription painkiller outside the usual course of professional practice. Dalton Hartley pleaded guilty acquiring controlled substances through fraud. Kirsty Hartley worked at a CVS pharmacy. She admitted she gave more than 21,000 tablets of hydrocodone with acetaminophen to her husband. He consumed or traded them for marijuana. As part of her plea, Kirsty Hartley surrendered her pharmacist’s license.
|
1983
|
Special Report: An end to AIDS?.
|
For his doctors, Timothy Ray Brown was a shot in the dark. An HIV-positive American who was cured by a unique type of bone marrow transplant, the man known as “the Berlin patient” has become an icon of what scientists hope could be the next phase of the AIDS pandemic: its end.
|
true
|
Science News
|
A still image provided by KPIX TV and taken from the broadcaster's video footage shows Timothy Ray Brown during an interview at his home in San Francisco. Timothy Ray Brown, was a young HIV-positive American living and working in Berlin who had developed leukaemia and suffered a relapse after initial treatment. REUTERS/Courtesy KPIX TV/Handout Dramatic scientific advances since HIV was first discovered 30 years ago this week mean the virus is no longer a death sentence. Thanks to tests that detect HIV early, new antiretroviral AIDS drugs that can control the virus for decades, and a range of ways to stop it being spread, 33.3 million people around the world are learning to live with HIV. People like Vuyiseka Dubula, an HIV-positive AIDS activist and mother in Cape Town, South Africa, can expect relatively normal, full lives. “I’m not thinking about death at all,” she says. “I’m taking my treatment and I’m living my life.” Nonetheless, on the 30th birthday of HIV, the global scientific community is setting out with renewed vigor to try to kill it. The drive is partly about science, and partly about money. Treating HIV patients with lifelong courses of sophisticated drugs is becoming unaffordable. Caring for HIV patients in developing countries alone already costs around $13 billion a year and that could treble over the next 20 years. In tough economic times, the need to find a cure has become even more urgent, says Francoise Barre Sinoussi, who won a Nobel prize for her work in identifying Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). “We have to think about the long term, including a strategy to find a cure,” she says. “We have to keep on searching until we find one.” The Berlin patient is proof they could. His case has injected new energy into a field where people for years believed talk of a cure was irresponsible. Timothy Ray Brown was living in Berlin when besides being HIV-positive, he had a relapse of leukemia. He was dying. In 2007, his doctor, Gero Huetter, made a radical suggestion: a bone marrow transplant using cells from a donor with a rare genetic mutation, known as CCR5 delta 32. Scientists had known for a few years that people with this gene mutation had proved resistant to HIV. “We really didn’t know when we started this project what would happen,” Huetter, an oncologist and haematologist who now works at the University of Heidelberg in southern Germany, told Reuters. The treatment could well have finished Brown off. Instead he remains the only human ever to be cured of AIDS. “He has no replicating virus and he isn’t taking any medication. And he will now probably never have any problems with HIV,” says Huetter. Brown has since moved to San Francisco. Most experts say it is inconceivable Brown’s treatment could be a way of curing all patients. The procedure was expensive, complex and risky. To do this in others, exact match donors would have to be found in the tiny proportion of people — most of them of northern European descent — who have the mutation that makes them resistant to the virus. Dr Robert Gallo, of the Institute of Virology at the University of Maryland, puts it bluntly. “It’s not practical and it can kill people,” he said last year. Sinoussi is more expansive. “It’s clearly unrealistic to think that this medically heavy, extremely costly, barely reproducible approach could be replicated and scaled-up ... but from a scientist’s point of view, it has shown at least that a cure is possible,” she says. The International AIDS Society will this month formally add the aim of finding a cure to its HIV strategy of prevention, treatment and care. A group of scientist-activists is also launching a global working group to draw up a scientific plan of attack and persuade governments and research institutions to commit more funds. Money is starting to flow. The U.S. National Institutes of Health is asking for proposals for an $8.5 million collaborative research grant to search for a cure, and the Foundation for AIDS Research, or amfAR, has just announced its first round of four grants to research groups “to develop strategies for eradicating HIV infection.” Until recently, people in HIV and AIDS circles feared that to direct funds toward the search for a cure risked detracting from the fight to get HIV-positive people treated. Even today, only just over five million of the 12 million or so people who need the drugs actually get them. HIV first surfaced in 1981, when scientists at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention discovered it was the cause of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). An article in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report of that June referred to “five young men, all active homosexuals” from Los Angeles as the first documented cases. “That was the summer of ‘81. For the world it was the beginning of the era of HIV/AIDS, even though we didn’t know it was HIV then,” says Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who has made AIDS research his life’s work. In the subsequent three decades, the disease ignorantly branded “the gay plague” has become one of the most vicious pandemics in human history. Transmitted in semen, blood and breast milk, HIV has devastated poorer regions, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, where the vast majority of HIV-positive people live. As more tests and treatment have become available, the number of new infections has been falling. But for every two with HIV who get a chance to start on AIDS drugs, five more join the “newly infected” list. United Nations data show that despite an array of potential prevention measures — from male circumcision to sophisticated vaginal or anal microbicide gels — more than 7,100 new people catch the virus every day. Treatment costs per patient can range from around $150 a year in poor countries, where drugs are available as cheap generics, to more than $20,000 a year in the United States. The overall sums are huge. A recent study as part of a non-governmental campaign called AIDS2031 suggests that low and middle-income countries will need $35 billion a year to properly address the pandemic by 2031. That’s almost three times the current level of around $13 billion a year. Add in the costs of treatment in rich countries and experts estimate the costs of HIV 20 years from now will reach $50 to $60 billion a year. “It’s clear that we have to look at another possible way of managing of the epidemic beyond just treating everyone forever,” says Sharon Lewin, a leading HIV doctor and researcher from Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. In some ways, we have been here before. Early AIDS drugs such as AZT came to market in the late 1980s, but within a decade they were overtaken by powerful cocktail treatments known as HAART, or highly active antiretroviral treatment. HAART had a dramatic effect — rapidly driving the virus out of patients’ blood and prompting some to say a cure was just around the corner. But then scientists discovered HIV could lie low in pools or reservoirs of latent infection that even powerful drugs could not reach. Talk of a cure all but died out. “Scientifically we had no means to say we were on the way to finding a cure,” says Bertrand Audoin, executive director of the Geneva-based International AIDS Society. “Scientists ... don’t want to make any more false promises. They didn’t want to talk about a cure again because it really wasn’t anywhere on the horizon.” The ultimate goal would allow patients to stop taking AIDS drugs, knocking a hole in a $12 billion-a-year market dominated by Californian drugmaker Gilead and the likes of Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Merck. It’s unlikely to happen anytime soon, but Brown’s case has opened the door to new ideas. “What it proved was that if you make someone’s cells resistant to HIV...then all the last bits of HIV, that hang around for a long time in patients on treatment, did in fact decay and disappear,” says Lewin. Now scientists working on mimicking the effect of the Berlin patient’s transplant have had some success. One experimental technique uses gene therapy to take out certain cells, make them resistant to HIV and then put them back into patients in the hope they will survive and spread. At an HIV conference in Boston earlier this year, American researchers presented data on six patients who had large numbers of white blood cells known as CD4 cells removed, manipulated to knock out the existing CCR5 gene, and then replaced. “It works like scissors and cuts a piece of genetic information out of the DNA, and then closes the gap,” says Huetter. “Then every cell arising from this mother cell has this same mutation.” Early results showed the mutated cells managed to survive inside the bodies of the patients at low levels, remaining present for more than three months in five. “This was a proof of concept,” says Lewin. Another potential avenue is a small group of patients known as “elite controllers”, who despite being infected with HIV are able to keep it under control simply with their own immune systems. Researchers hope these patients could one day be the clue to developing a successful HIV/AIDS vaccine or functional cure. Scientists are also exploring ways to “wake up” HIV cells and kill them. As discovered in the late 1990s, HIV has a way of getting deep into the immune system itself — into what are known as resting memory T-cells — and going to sleep there. Hidden away, it effectively avoids drugs and the body’s own immune response. “Once it goes to sleep in a cell it can stay there forever, which is really the main reason why we can’t cure HIV with current drugs,” says Lewin. Her team in Melbourne and another group in the United States are about to start the first human trials using a drug called SAHA or vorinostat, made by Merck and currently used in cancer treatment, which has shown promise in being able to wake up dormant HIV. As scientists begin to talk up a cure, the old question of whether that’s the right goal has re-emerged. Seth Berkley, a medical epidemiologist and head of the U.S.-based International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) is concerned. An HIV-positive person holds a placard during a programme organized to mark World AIDS Day in Kathmandu December 1, 2010. To match Special Report AIDS/ REUTERS/Deepa Shrestha “From a science point of view, it’s a fabulous thing to do. It’s a great target and a lot of science will be learned. But from a public health point of view, the primary thing you need to do is stop the flow of new infections,” says Berkley. “We need a prevention revolution. That is absolutely critical.” Vuyiseka Dubula agrees. The South African activist finds talk of a cure for HIV distracting, almost disconcerting. “This research might not yield results soon, and even when it does, access to that cure is still going to be a big issue,” she says. “So in the meantime, while we don’t have the answer on whether HIV can be cured or not, we need to save lives.”
|
11534
|
Just 30 minutes a day: Regular exercise relieves asthma symptoms
|
The news release from Concordia University in French-speaking Montreal highlights a new study published in BMJ Open Respiratory Research, which explored the correlation between regular exercise and patients’ control of asthma symptoms. The release makes good use of direct quotes from the study’s lead author, who brings color into the piece. On the other hand, it lacks a thorough discussion of the study’s important limitations and inappropriately suggests that exercise is responsible for the benefits seen in those who exercise more — e.g. the headline “Regular exercise relieves asthma symptoms.” That’s a conclusion that simply can’t be drawn based on this observational study, which showed a correlation only and cannot demonstrate cause and effect. This study seeks to address the relationship between physical activity and symptoms in patients with asthma. The study interviewed individuals with asthma recruited from a hospital’s population with this condition and asked them questions about activity and symptom control. The study reported that those who were more physically active also reported better control of their asthma. This resulting news release then goes on to imply that this proves that we should encourage patients with asthma to be more physically active. Though this may be true, the study doesn’t actually show this. Only by taking those patients who are inactive and then randomly assigning them to an activity program or continued inactivity can we know whether the claims made in the release are true. It may simply be that those who had less severe asthma were able to be more active. The attenuation of the reported findings when controlling for differences among those who were more or less active supports this. While efforts to promote physical activity should be commended, such advice shouldn’t imply benefits that aren’t well-established without clearly noting limitations in the evidence.
|
false
|
Observational studies,University news release
|
Physical activity was broadly defined in the study and included activities such as walking, dancing and swimming. We rate this, since cost is not a major factor here. But we need to keep in mind that this piece was recommending 30 min per day of activity. That’s 3.5 hours per week. This is time that could be spent doing other things (including paying work) and there may be a cost – either positive or negative – associated with it. In theory, if exercise does in fact reduce asthma symptoms, one could argue that patients with asthma who exercised would have lower costs of care for things such as emergency visits. But this, of course, is unproven. The news release reported the benefits of physical activity in relative numbers, stating “those who engaged in optimal levels of physical activity on a regular basis were nearly two-and-a-half times more likely to have good control of their symptoms, compared with those who did no exercise.” To which we respond: Two-and-a-half times more than what? While the statistic is technically accurate, there is no translation of this into an absolute number that a reader could use to interpret the result – such as x% of those who exercise reported adequate control versus y% of those who did not. The news release also prefaced this statement with “Results were overwhelmingly clear.” But many questions were left unanswered. What does it mean to have “good control of their symptoms?” And who exactly experienced these benefits? Does “optimal levels of physical activity” mean 30 minutes every day? More clarification would have been welcome here. The news release points out some precautions people need to take before exercising. The study’s lead author explains that patients should use “releaver medication” (sic) before they exercise and adds they should take the time to cool down afterward. He also says people could exercise indoors during the winter months, since cold air provides another trigger for asthma symptoms. It would have also been helpful to note that any physical activity triggers asthma symptoms in some people. In these cases, patients may have to take medicines before they exercise. The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute recommends easing into physical activity with a warm-up period and also wearing a mask or scarf over the mouth when exercising in cold weather. More detail would have been appreciated here, but we feel the news release had enough for a Satisfactory rating. The news release does not point out any limitations of this observational study and uses inappropriate language to describe the findings. The headline — “Regular exercise relieves asthma symptoms” — suggests that exercise causes a reduction in asthma, which is something this study couldn’t show. Why doesn’t this study demonstrate causality? Imagine that patients who report exercising more have less severe asthma. Maybe it isn’t the exercise that matters, but rather the underlying mildness of the symptoms that allows them to exercise more than those with more severe symptoms. In theory, one could control for this by knowing their lung function tests, but we don’t have that information. The information collected can’t fully address this source of bias and should lead to much greater caution about interpreting the results than is shown in this news release. The news release does not engage in disease mongering. A little context could have been helpful, however, such as what exactly asthma is, what triggers the condition and how many people suffer from it. According to the original research report, asthma remains poorly controlled in the majority of patients: 60 percent of Canadian and 75 percent of European patients report not having their asthma symptoms under control. These patients often use more health care services, perhaps driving up costs for the sector, and also experience greater functional impairment. Asthma is a long-term disease with no cure, and the costs of buying pills and inhalers to control the condition could add up during the lifetime of a patient. Any alternative that could help patients control their asthma and maybe also save money on the side would be newsworthy, since more than 25 million people in the US are known to have asthma – in which 7 million are children, according to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. The news release states the funding sources, which were grants from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council, Fonds de recherche du Quebec – Sante, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Michel Auger Foundation of Hopital du Sacre-Coeur de Montreal. No conflicts of interests were declared, both in the original journal article and in the news release. A bit of context was missing here. The news release quotes the study’s lead author saying, “It would be great to see physicians recommending physical activity to patients with asthma, alongside traditional pharmacological treatments,” but the news release doesn’t detail what those drugs are. According to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, asthma is treated with two types of medicines: long-term control and quick-relief medicines. Long-term control medicines, like inhaled corticosteroids, help reduce airway inflammation and prevent asthma symptoms. Quick-relief inhalers, or “rescue,” medicines relieve asthma symptoms that may flare up. Another problem here is that this study really doesn’t provide anything to support the author’s desire to see physicians recommending more exercise. Should we simply tell patients with severe asthma to exercise? Or do we need to treat them in a way that permits them to exercise safely? This study isn’t designed to answer these questions, so it really can’t compare alternatives. We would have given credit if the release had simply said that “only interventional studies designed to examine the combination of physical activity and medication recommendations can determine how best to see if this observation can lead to better patient outcomes.” The availability of exercise is not in question. Studies have already been conducted looking into the link between increased physical activity and better health outcomes for asthma patients, such as this 2009 study and another one from 2009. In general, researchers have found that higher levels of physical activity are beneficial – both in terms of better health outcomes and decreased use of health care services – for those suffering from asthma. The original journal article from this study states this was the first time researchers have looked into seasonal variations in physical activity and its correlation with asthma control. Patients who undertook physical activity during the winter months (rather than the summer) had better control of their asthma, the research report emphasized. Although this point was touched upon in the news release, it does not explicitly state what was novel in the research or what it brings to the existing body of literature, which is why we give the news release a Not Satisfactory rating here. This point was also touched upon in the “Quality of Evidence” section. We feel some of the wording used in the news release could have been toned down, such as “simple antidote,” “overwhelmingly clear,” “significant reduction” and a “whopping 245.” The release also incorrectly implied causality rather than association with its choice of words — e.g. “relieves symptoms” in the headline. We would recommend more neutral and even cautionary language when reporting the findings of a study with significant limitations such as this one.
|
40777
|
The number of EU nurses coming to the UK has fallen by 90% since the Brexit vote.
|
The number of nurses and midwives from the EEA joining the Nursing and Midwifery Council’s register fell by 91% from 2015/16 to 2017/18.
|
true
|
health
|
The number of EU nurses coming to the UK has fallen by 90% since the Brexit vote. The number of nurses and midwives from the EEA joining the Nursing and Midwifery Council’s register fell by 91% from 2015/16 to 2017/18. The number of EU nationals leaving the NHS jumped by 14% in 2017. EU nationals have fallen as a percentage of those joining the NHS. EU nationals made up 8% of new staff (whose nationality was known) joining the NHS in England in the year to June 2018. That compares to 11% in the year to June 2016. It’s possible that the number in June 2016 was unusually high. Claim 1 of 4
|
35982
|
"The @UPS Twitter account sent a tweet ""thanking"" law enforcement for their service just after an innocent UPS driver who had been taken hostage by robbery suspects was shot and killed in a police shootout."
|
UPS Thanks Police for Killing Driver Frank Ordonez
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
On December 5 2019 — after law enforcement officers in south Florida shot and killed a hostage, a bystander, and two suspected thieves during a daytime shootout in a busy intersection during rush hour — a number of popular tweets claimed that UPS had publicly thanked police for killing the hostage, who was one of their drivers:When the cops shoot you dead in the street your boss will thank the cops https://t.co/mHR0EBjGfl— Dennis Hogan (@dennismhogan) December 6, 2019The tweet above — sent a day after UPS driver Frank Ordonez, bystander Richard Cutshaw, and robbery suspects Lamar Alexander and Ronnie Jerome Hill were shot dead in the rush-hour police chase turned gun battle, mused:When the cops shoot you dead in the street your boss will thank the copsTwitter was alight with tweets excoriating the parcel service for “thanking” police after the shootout:While UPS management bends over backwards to thank the cops for killing a worker, the Teamsters don’t mince words: “murdered while delivering packages” #1u https://t.co/IrwI2cJWjT— Aaron Freedman🌹 (@freedaaron) December 6, 2019cops went fucking buck wild lighting up the ups truck killed the driver AND another innocent bystander and ups tweets out a thank you to the cops what the fuck pic.twitter.com/fcnnRAzMMm— jordan (@JordanUhl) December 6, 2019You don’t have to thank the cops for murdering somebody— Branson Reese (@bransonreese) December 6, 2019Their first tweet included a thank you to the murderous cops that killed Frank. UPS is a despicable company with great package handlers and drivers but horrible management. Upper management doesn’t give a rats ass that an employee was murdered and their 1st statement proves that pic.twitter.com/TnHto339Pv— SocMediaIsSometimesOk (@socmediaisdumb) December 7, 2019Dear Cops,Thank you for your service. Please don't come over here and kill the rest of us.We love you,UPS— Troy (@MetalOriginal) December 6, 2019Yeah i too would thank the cops for killing my employee yes thank you— srko (@tayoIor) December 6, 2019However, no such tweet was visible on the verified @UPS Twitter account. A tweet sent at 3:20 PM Eastern time on December 6 2019 mentioned Ordonez by name and alluded to a “senseless act of violence”:pic.twitter.com/RgWb94o3C6— UPS (@UPS) December 6, 2019A CBS News article published three hours later maintained that the deaths of Ordonez and Cutshaw were being “questioned” due to an “overwhelming use of force” by police:The overwhelming use of force is being questioned after a chase in Florida ended in a deadly shootout with police. It started when two men, who the FBI said were already wanted for two similar heists near Miami, robbed a jewelry store and hijacked a UPS van.After a 23-mile chase, the officers opened fire when the gunmen shot at them, leaving drivers in rush-hour traffic panicked and scrambling.The two men who police said robbed the jewelry store were killed. But so was 70-year-old Richard Cutshaw, who was waiting in his car at the intersection. The UPS driver who was taken hostage, Frank Ordonez, was also killed.Ordonez’s stepfather Joe Merino told reporters that his family was beyond “devastated” by his stepson’s death:For this to happen, I think, it was just unnecessary … Other tactics should have been applied, and they weren’t, so when I say the word devastated, it’s an understatement.Although @UPS appeared to have deleted their original tweet, it was archived on a third-party website. It was sent at 6:38 PM on December 5 2019, and it read:We are deeply saddened to learn a UPS service provider was a victim of this senseless act of violence. We extend our condolences to the family and friends of our employee and the other innocent victims involved in this incident. We appreciate law enforcement’s service and will cooperate with the authorities as they continue the investigation.Although the tweet did not say “thank you” specifically, it is true that UPS initially tweeted and deleted an initial statement thanking law enforcement for their “service,” service which resulted in the deaths of their driver Frank Ordonez, bystander Richard Cutshaw, and two robbery suspects, cousins Ronnie Jerome Hill and Lamar Alexander.
|
17962
|
"Chris Larson Says Gov. Scott Walker ""hasn't done a public event this entire year."
|
"Larson said Walker ""hasn't done a public event this entire year."" Larson may believe Walker needs to be more open, but it’s ridiculous to say Walker hasn’t done even one public event in 2013."
|
false
|
State Budget, Transparency, Wisconsin, Chris Larson,
|
"Gov. Scott Walker has so cocooned himself from regular folks, state Senate Minority Leader Chris Larson contends, that he ""hasn't done a public event in this entire year."" Wait, what? Larson made the statement Aug. 27, 2013, on Madison-area radio station WEKZ-FM (93.7), then quickly told liberal talk show host John Sylvester what he meant. ""Just to be clear, Sly. His events, they're open to press, donors and for invited guests. I wouldn't consider that a public event,"" Larson said. ""A public event, I would consider something where folks, the working class, can actually make it, where it's not working hours and it's something where it's not invite-only."" So, the Milwaukee Democrat has his own idea of what constitutes a public event, although we’re not bound by that definition in rating his claim. Narrow definition When we asked Larson to back his statement, he elaborated by saying that, besides being open without invitation and held outside of regular working hours, a public event should allow ordinary citizens to express opinions to or ask questions of the governor, he said. But that’s not evidence of what Larson said in the interview and it’s an even more narrow definition of public event. By that definition, most meetings of legislative committees -- typically scheduled during business hours -- are not ""public events."" And it suggests that when the governor visits a factory or business and talks to workers, it shouldn’t count simply because someone off the street couldn’t walk in and participate. So, Larson doesn’t exactly back off his claim. He just aims to shift it to more favorable terms for himself. Larson also pointed to a series of public hearings he held on evenings and weekends on the 2013-’15 state budget, saying Walker has appeared at no such events this year. There's no question that access to the governor -- really, any governor -- is limited. Walker typically gives a day’s notice to news media of what some of his appearances will be the following day. Indeed, he doesn't release detailed daily itineraries until weeks after the fact, a practice followed by Walker’s predecessor, Democrat Jim Doyle, for most of his time as governor. Yet, just a few weeks before Larson made his claim, there was Walker addressing folks along with Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, a Democrat, to open the Wisconsin State Fair, and attending the Governor’s Red, White and Blue Ribbon Livestock Auction. The fair, obviously, is about an accessible public an event as there is. So, let's take a closer look at where Walker has been. Events in 2013 Walker spokesman Tom Evenson sent us a list of more than 100 Walker events in 2013 that Evenson described as public. Some were easily accessible to the general public; others, because of cost, membership requirements or other reasons, weren't. Here's a sampling: The World Championship Snowmobile Derby in Eagle River, an event that attracted thousands. Television news coverage showed Walker delivering opening remarks and shaking hands with folks wearing snowmobile suits. A Martin Luther King Jr. ceremony in the Capitol rotunda in Madison. Hundreds of people attended the 33rd annual event, including a few who booed during Walker’s remarks, according to the Wisconsin State Journal. The annual State Education Convention at a Milwaukee hotel. Hundreds of school district officials and school board members heard Walker speak, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. The three-day Governor’s Conference on Economic Development in Madison. Registration cost a minimum of $250 for Wisconsin Economic Development Association members and up to $340 for non-members. The National Rifle Association state convention in Wausau, where Walker gave a speech. A South Suburban Chamber of Commerce awards dinner in Oak Creek. More than 220 people attended, according to the chamber. The dinner cost $50. Military-related ceremonies in Pewaukee, at Camp Douglas and elsewhere. TV coverage of one event, at the Experimental Aircraft Association in Oshkosh, showed Walker speaking to a large gathering of Army National Guard members and their families. Independence Day parades in Menomonee Falls and Wauwatosa. A number of government meetings in Madison, including Walker presenting his state budget proposal and giving his ""state of the state"" address. In criticizing Walker’s availability to the general public, a progressive blogger pointed out that an upcoming meeting of the state Building Commission, which the governor is a member of, would be open to the public. An open house held by Pierce Manufacturing near Appleton to mark the firetruck maker’s 100th anniversary. Hundreds heard Walker speak, according to one account. Walker spoke to an audience of predominantly students in a speech at St. Norbert College in De Pere, the student newspaper reported. He also mingled with students and posed for pictures with them, according to images from a local TV station. The governor’s annual prayer breakfast. Tickets were priced at $30 and up. The annual Greater Milwaukee Law Enforcement Memorial Ceremony. Walker was among the speakers at the outdoor event, near the Milwaukee County Courthouse. News conferences, including one at the University of Wisconsin-Superior. TV news coverage showed an opponent of Walker’s state budget plan talking with the governor at the event. So, attendance is limited at some public events Walker attended, but not at others. In any case, Larson’s claim was absolute. Our rating Larson said Walker ""hasn't done a public event this entire year."" Larson may believe Walker needs to be more open, but it’s ridiculous to say Walker hasn’t done even one public event in 2013."
|
35298
|
"Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said COVID-19 social-distancing restrictions should be eased because ""there are more important things than living."
|
The Texas Democratic Party said in a statement that Patrick and Gov. Greg Abbott would put Texans at risk to enrich business interests.
|
true
|
Politics, COVID-19
|
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick raised some eyebrows in March 2020 when he seemingly suggested during an appearance on Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight” that exposing vulnerable, older members of the U.S. population to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic was a reasonable trade-off for getting the U.S. “back to work” and “back to living”: Texas’ lieutenant governor said that the U.S. should get back to work in the face of the global pandemic and that people over the age of 70, who the Centers for Disease Control says are at higher risk for the coronavirus, will “take care of ourselves.” Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick made the comments while appearing on Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” Patrick, 69, went on the program after President Donald Trump said that he wanted the country getting back to business in weeks, not months. “Let’s get back to work. Let’s get back to living. Let’s be smart about it,” Patrick said. “And those of us who are 70 plus, we’ll take care of ourselves. But don’t sacrifice the country.” Patrick raised even more eyebrows the following month when, according to social media postings, he declared (in reference to the lockdowns prompted by the COVID-19 outbreak) that “there are more important things than living”: Indeed, on April 20, 2020, Patrick again appeared as a guest on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” and echoed his earlier remarks on that program in questioning whether the threat posed by the coronavirus disease was exaggerated and worth the trade-off of shutting down businesses for a prolonged period of time: At the end of January, Dr. Fauci, who I have great respect for, said this wasn’t a big issue. Three weeks later, we were gonna lose two million people. Another few weeks later, it was one- to two-hundred thousand. Now it’s under 60,000, and we’ve had the wrong numbers, the wrong science. And I don’t blame them, but let’s face [the] reality of where we are. In Texas, we have 29 million people, [and] we’ve lost 495. Every life is valuable, but 500 people out of 29 million and we’re locked down. And we’re crushing the average worker, we’re crushing small business, we’re crushing the markets, we’re crushing this country. And what I said when I was with you that night, there are more important things than living, and that’s saving this country for my children, and my grandchildren, and saving this country for all of us. And I don’t wanna die. Nobody wants to die. But we gotta take some risks, and get back in the game, and get this country back up and running. As NBC News reported of Patrick’s controversial remarks, he is not alone in expressing the viewpoint that the importance of maintaining a functioning economy outweighed the dangers posed by the COVID-19 pandemic:
|
35337
|
Vice President Mike Pence was filmed delivering empty boxes that were supposed to be filled with personal protective equipment to a rehabilitation center in Virginia.
|
You can see this exchange around the 9-minute mark of the following video from C-Span:
|
false
|
Politics, COVID-19
|
In May 2020, a video supposedly showing Vice President Mike Pence delivering empty boxes that were supposed to be filled with personal protective equipment (PPE) to the Woodbine Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center in Alexandria, Virginia, was featured on the show “Jimmy Kimmel Live.” A clip of this segment was later shared on social media along with the caption: “Mike Pence caught on hot mic delivering empty boxes of PPE for a PR stunt.” Mike Pence caught on hot mic delivering empty boxes of PPE for a PR stunt. pic.twitter.com/IduvGhiPwj — Matt McDermott (@mattmfm) May 8, 2020 This is genuine footage of Pence. However, it does not show him “caught on hot mic” admitting that he just delivered a bunch of empty boxes to a health care facility. This video actually shows Pence making a humorous quip after delivering boxes that were truly filled with PPE. The full video from C-Span shows Pence transporting several boxes from a truck to the door of the health care center. After unloading the boxes from his dolly, Pence returns to the truck to grab another round of boxes but is informed by someone that the remaining boxes are empty. Pence then jokes that he should carry one of the empty boxes for the cameras. The man replies with a quip of his own, saying that the empty ones are much easier to carry than the full ones, which draws laughter from the crowd. Pence then closes the van door.
|
15834
|
The infant mortality rate is 15 percent higher in states with right-to-work laws.
|
Lassa says right-to-work states have higher infant mortality than states without such a law. She’s right on the raw numbers. But there are many more factors at work -- some of them are vigorously disputed -- when it comes to how such laws affect wages, incomes and especially lower income people whose babies are more at risk. That’s simply not settled. Over the years, we have examined a series of claims that take a wage or job related statistic and say it is either better or worse in a right-to-work state. Generally, we have rated these Half True -- the statistic is right, but there is no clear evidence of a causal relationship. That fits here as well.
|
mixture
|
Labor, Wisconsin, Julie Lassa,
|
"The arguments against right-to-work legislation usually focus on economic matters. Supporters say such a law will make a state more friendly to business; opponents say it will reduce the strength of unions, and depress the state’s wages and incomes. The Republican-pushed bill, which prohibits employers from signing contracts with unions that require employees to pay union dues, was fast tracked in the Legislature and is expected to reach Gov. Scott Walker’s desk by March 6, 2015. When the state Senate debated the right-to-work bill Feb. 25, 2015, state Sen. Julie Lassa (D-Stevens Point) criticized the measure with the wages-and-income argument -- then she took it a step further. Said Lassa: ""Families in right-to-work states are less likely to have health insurance, and the infant mortality rate is 15 percent higher than in other states."" Wait. Babies are at greater risk of death in right-to-work states? Looking at the evidence When we asked Lassa for her evidence, her staff pointed to a Jan. 23, 2015 report by the liberal Economic Policy Institute written by Gordon Lafer, a political economist at the University of Oregon. His report says that by a number of measures -- including infant mortality rates -- Wisconsin fares better than the 24 states with right-to-work laws. And he says right-to-work states are worse off than those without such laws. For infant mortality numbers, Lafer relies on data from 2010 collected by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. To do the right-to-work comparison, he added up the infant mortality rates in those states and divided by 24, to get 6.7 deaths per 1,000 births. The same approach for the other states found 5.8 deaths per 1,000 births. The difference is 15 percent. But simply adding up the rates and dividing by the number of states isn’t an accurate method because the calculation could be skewed by states with relatively more or fewer births and deaths, said Geoffrey Swain, medical director and chief medical officer for the City of Milwaukee Health Department, and an expert on infant mortality. His office provided the raw data from the CDC for births and infant deaths for 2012, the most recent year available. Using those numbers, right-to-work states had 6.48 deaths per 1,000 live births, while the remaining states (and the District of Columbia) had 5.54. The difference under this approach is actually larger -- 16.97 percent. So, Lassa is about right when it comes to the numbers. But she linked the number to right-to-work status, suggesting there is a causal relationship: One leads to the other. That’s a lot less clear, and it depends on the impact the law would have on the state’s economy, income and wages. And, of course, the sides disagree on that front. A study prepared for the conservative Wisconsin Policy Research Institute by Ohio University economist Richard Vedder argues that right-to-work laws added ""about six percentage points to the growth rate of RTW states from 1983 to 2013. With such a law, Wisconsin’s per capita personal income growth of 53.29 percent would have been, instead, about 59.29 percent."" Translated: right-to-work boosts the economy and wages. Lafer’s report comes to a much different conclusion. His study says right-to-work ""is associated with lower wages and benefits for both union and nonunion workers. In a RTW state, the average worker makes 3.2 percent less than a similar worker in a non-RTW state."" He also said average household income in right-to-work states is $6,430 less than in states without such laws. Of course, it’s impossible to predict how the law will affect jobs and wages in Wisconsin. The linkage Lafer -- and Lassa -- make also is based upon the idea that infant mortality rates are themselves correlated with poverty and other factors. Swain noted that a 2012 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that there was an improvement in key factors affecting infant mortality when the federal earned income tax credit -- targeted at low income people -- was expanded. Putting a relatively modest amount of money in the hands of the most needy helped, Swain said. ""These people are living on the margins and giving them a little more (income) would make a difference,"" Swain said. Therefore, he said, ""it’s likely that lower wages are going to lead to worse outcomes."" For their part, CDC officials say they ""haven’t investigated the association between wages (or right to work states) and infant mortality."" Our rating Lassa says right-to-work states have higher infant mortality than states without such a law. She’s right on the raw numbers. But there are many more factors at work -- some of them are vigorously disputed -- when it comes to how such laws affect wages, incomes and especially lower income people whose babies are more at risk. That’s simply not settled. Over the years, we have examined a series of claims that take a wage or job related statistic and say it is either better or worse in a right-to-work state. Generally, we have rated these -- the statistic is right, but there is no clear evidence of a causal relationship. That fits here as well."
|
35165
|
A Chinese intelligence officer revealed that a new coronavirus was developed in a lab as a bioweapon.
|
Ram Dass, who in the 1960s joined Timothy Leary in promoting psychedelic drugs as the path to inner enlightenment before undergoing a spiritual rebirth he spelled out in the influential book “Be Here Now,” died at home on Sunday. He was 88 years old.
|
false
|
Junk News, COVID-19
|
“With tender hearts we share that Ram Dass (born Richard Alpert) died peacefully at home in Maui on December 22, 2019 surrounded by loved ones,” according to his official Instagram account. “He was a guide for thousands seeking to discover or reclaim their spiritual identity beyond or within institutional religion.” The man who would become a serene, smiling forerunner of the New Age movement and play a leading role in bringing Eastern spirituality to the West grew up as Richard Alpert in a Jewish family in Newton, Massachusetts. He considered himself an atheist, and after graduating from Tufts University and earning a Ph.D. from Stanford University, was an up-and-coming psychology professor and researcher at Harvard University in the early ‘60s. Ram Dass would later describe himself at the time as a driven “anxiety-neurotic” who had an abundance of knowledge but lacked wisdom. Things began to change when Leary joined the Harvard faculty and the two became close friends. He had been introduced to marijuana in 1955 by his first patient while working as a health services counselor at Stanford University but Leary took him farther with psilocybin, the compound that gives certain mushrooms hallucinogenic qualities. In his first psychedelic experience, “the rug crawled and the picture smiled, all of which delighted me,” Ram Dass wrote in “Be Here Now.” Ram Dass and Leary wanted to open the mind to a deeper consciousness and conducted experiments that included giving the drug to “jazz musicians and physicists and philosophers and ministers and junkies and graduate students and social scientists.” Afterward, they had them fill out questionnaires about their experiences. Ram Dass said the subjects found bliss, heightened physical senses, accelerated thought processes, a relaxing of biases and hallucinatory experiences, such as seeing God. Ram Dass and Leary began including the hallucinogenic drug LSD, which like psilocybin was legal at the time, in their experiments but Harvard was upset that they were using students as subjects and fired them in 1963. The two former professors later moved to a mansion in Millbrook, New York, made available to them by heirs to the fortune of industrialist Andrew Mellon, and continued their experimentation there. Anti-war protest leader Abbie Hoffman and Beat Generation writers Allen Ginsberg and Jack Kerouac were among those who dropped in. In an effort to avoid the disappointment of “coming down” from a drug experience, Ram Dass said he and five others locked themselves in a building at the estate for three weeks and took LSD every four hours. “What happened in those three weeks in that house no one would ever believe, including us,” he wrote in “Be Here Now,” but they were not able to avoid the inevitable return to reality. As the hippie movement grew, Ram Dass and Leary were among the counterculture luminaries at the Human Be-in, a 1967 gathering of some 25,000 people in San Francisco where Leary spread his “turn on, tune in, drop out” credo. Poets such as Ginsberg and Michael McClure, anti-war activists Dick Gregory and Jerry Rubin and rock acts Janis Joplin, the Grateful Dead and Jefferson Airplane also took part. In search for a more permanent enlightenment, later that year Ram Dass went to India, as members of the Beatles would in 1968. He found what he was looking for in the form of Hindu mystic Neem Karoli Baba, also known as Maharaj-ji. Alpert said that through Maharaj-ji he found a spiritual love deeper than anything he had experienced. Ram Dass had taken a batch of LSD with him to India to share with holy men in order to get their opinion of it. At Maharaj-ji’s request, Ram Dass gave him a super-sized dose of LSD but said there was no discernable effect on him, nor was there three years later when they repeated the experiment. The guru gave him the name Ram Dass, which means servant of God, and he returned to the United States with long hair, a beard and instructions from Maharaj-ji to “love everyone and tell the truth.” Drugs would no longer be a major factor in Ram Dass’ life. He wrote about his conversion in “Be Here Now,” which became popular in the 1960s and provided a road map for the burgeoning New Age movement of spirituality. Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, who used LSD in his younger years, said the book “transformed me and many of my friends” and George Harrison used the title and general philosophy for one of his post-Beatles songs. “I was a sort of spiritual uncle to a movement - to a consciousness movement bringing the East and West together,” Ram Dass told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2004. Ram Dass spread his interpretation of Eastern philosophy as an author and lecturer, advising acolytes to be loving (“we’re all just walking each other home”) and to sublimate the ego for the sake of the soul (“the quieter you become, the more you can hear”). In 1978 Ram Dass co-founded the Seva Foundation, a charity to fight blindness and other health problems around the world. Ram Dass suffered a near-fatal stroke in 1997 that partially paralyzed him and hampered his speaking ability but left him feeling more compassionate and humble. In 2007 he moved to Hawaii and used the internet to deliver lectures. In his later years he focused on aging and dying without fear. “(I’m) an uncle to the Baby Boomers, teaching them about illness and aging,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2004. “Not to be frightened of aging. That it’s OK.”
|
34293
|
Neutrogena Makeup Remover Cleansing Towelettes are causing a number of severe allergic reactions.
|
We searched for corroborating information indicating that Neutrogena Makeup Remover Cleansing Towelettes are causing a high number of allergic reactions, but were unable to turn up anything relating to that particular product. We contacted Neutrogena to ask about rumor involving Makeup Remover Cleansing Towelettes, but have not yet received a response.
|
unproven
|
Business, consumer warnings, makeup, neutrogena
|
On 2 May 2018, a Facebook user shared a warning about Neutrogena Makeup Remover Cleansing Towelettes, claiming that the product caused a violent allergic reaction: Within a few days, the post was shared tens of thousands of times. Several users shared the post on Neutrogena’s Facebook wall, but the brand did not immediately respond to those posts. According to Neutrogena.com, ingredients for Neutrogena Makeup Remover Cleansing Towelettes are as follows: Water, Cetyl Ethylhexanoate, Isostearyl Palmitate, Pentaerythrityl Tetraethylhexanoate, Isononyl Isononanoate, Cyclopentasiloxane, Hexylene Glycol, PEG-4 Laurate, PEG-6 Caprylic/Capric Glycerides, Sucrose Cocoate, Carbomer, Sodium Hydroxide, Benzoic Acid, Dehydroacetic Acid, Phenoxyethanol, Iodopropynyl Butylcarbamate, Fragrance (EU 1279) The ingredients list is not very much different from products made by competitors, such as Aveeno or Olay. The Neutrogena claims are similar to 2016 rumors about baby wipes, and as with similar rumors about baby diapers and wipes, it is virtually impossible to attribute any single reported reaction to a single topical product used on anyone’s skin, infant or adult. Anecdotal reports are difficult to verify, because contact dermatitis can be caused by any of thousands of known allergens and irritants. Furthermore, reactions to any substance used in skincare products can be highly personal, and a substance that irritates the skin of one individual can potentially be tolerated by a majority without incident.
|
23216
|
Houston suffered $1.7 billion in operating losses under Mayor Bill White.
|
Rick Perry says Houston had a $1.7 billion operating loss under Bill White
|
mixture
|
Economy, Message Machine 2010, Taxes, Texas, Rick Perry,
|
"In a recent television ad, Gov. Rick Perry says Democratic gubernatorial nominee Bill White was a poor financial manager as mayor of Houston Perry's spot levels budget-related charges including this one: ""Houston suffered $1.7 billion in operating losses under Mayor Bill White."" We dug into this figure, which also pops up in a Perry ad that refers to the total as 17 billion dimes. In support of the number, Perry's campaign pointed us to a July report from Citizens for Public Accountability, which calls itself ""a bipartisan group of retired partners of some of Houston's accounting firms."" The report — written by Bob Lemer, a retired Ernst & Young accountant who often criticized city finances on White's watch — is titled ""City of Houston Total Operating Losses Fiscal Years 2004-2009: $1.7 billion."" In an interview, Lemer told us that he reached the figure by adding up the ""change in net assets"" entry from the city's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for each of the years White was mayor, 2004 through 2009. Because Houston's net assets declined every year, the cumulative change was a negative $1.69 billion. That figure, Lemer said, is the amount by which the city's expenditures exceeded its income during White's tenure. White spokeswoman Katy Bacon challenged the characterization of the $1.7 billion as an operating loss. ""An operating loss is a business concept, not a government concept,"" she said. Lemer's report distorts ""financial statements that are generated under government accounting standards,"" Bacon said. Say what? We decided to hit the books — one book, anyway — for a crash course in municipal finance. Our question: What are a city's ""net assets"" and what does it mean when they go up or down? According to ""Financial Management in the Public Sector"" by XiaoHu Wang, a public administration professor at the University of Central Florida, assets include land, building and equipment, as well cash and cash equivalents. Liabilities are what an organization owes to others. Subtracting liabilities from assets yields net assets. Cities track their net assets from year to year in their financial reports. A positive change means net assets increased; a negative number means they declined. The change ""can be seen as an organization-wide operating surplus (or deficit),"" the book says. Next, we asked Wang if it's fair to equate ""change in net assets"" with ""operating loss,"" as Lemer did. Yes, Wang said, because both terms indicate a deficit. However, he cautioned that no single indicator, including this one, is sufficient to gauge a city's overall financial health. Other experts were critical of calling the $1.7 billion figure ""operating losses."" Lewis McLain, former executive director of the Government Finance Officers Association of Texas, told us that the problem with applying ""for-profit"" accounting terms — like operating loss — to nonprofit public entities is that their enterprises serve different purposes. ""You wouldn’t expect the accounting for church finances to be exactly the same as for an automobile corporation,"" he said. While a company ""focuses on measuring its use of assets to return a profit,"" a city focuses on the funding of a variety of expensive services for its citizens, ""from road repair to police and fire officers to libraries and mowed parks."" Diana Thomas, controller for the City of Austin, said the term ""operating losses"" is an unfair description; she noted that among the expenses subtracted from the city's net assets each year are long-term liabilities such as depreciation of assets and retiree benefits that will actually be paid out later. Cities only recently were required to account for some of those future costs on their current financial statements, Thomas said. McLain said the changes in accounting rules are a reason that Houston's ""change in net assets"" report shows high negative numbers. ""The accounting profession has changed rules to recognize more of these (long-term) costs, since to not do so makes a huge liability less transparent,"" McLain said. ""Houston is experiencing the same pressures as many cities across the state and nation. These liabilities have been accumulating for a number of years, mostly in the last three decades. It is not an overnight problem, and the solutions are going to be slow and painful."" When asked what changes in net assets say about a city's financial health, McLain said: ""Virtually nothing. In fact, they can be misleading and misused."" The central purpose of a city's annual financial report, McLain said, is to fully report the financial affairs of a city functioning as ""a multi-business entity with legal constraints on various monies that are placed in standalone funds for the purpose of accountability, control and disclosure."" In fact, said McLain, ""if you are going to talk about operating losses or gains,"" a more telling number is the balance in its general fund at the end of the year. The general fund, which is the government's largest kitty, helps supports most basic services, including police and fire protection. In Houston's case, the general fund balance increased every year that White was in office, except for 2009, McLain said, going from $136 million in 2004 to $332 million in 2008. The balance fell to $304 million in 2009. ""That means revenues had to be bigger than expenditures for operations"" during those years, McLain said. Summing up: The $1.7 billion figure for net operating losses in White's time as mayor has a basis in fact; the city's net assets did decline by that amount on his watch, though changes in accounting practices also drove up the number. Problematically, using a single private-sector measure to gauge overall financial performance in the public sector doesn't necessarily produce conclusive results. Houston's accumulated ""changes in net assets"" by themselves are an incomplete reflection of the city's fiscal health while White was mayor; the $1.7 billion figure may even be meaningless in this regard."
|
18188
|
"United Florida Horsemen Says Florida ""rubber-stamped phony horse racing."
|
"In an ad campaign, United Florida Horsemen contend that Florida ""rubber-stamped phony horse racing."" ""Phony"" is a strong word that takes on a different meaning depending on whom you ask. Someone who just wants to watch horses take off? They may say the Gretna flag drop is cool. Someone from the traditional quarter horse industry may say NO WAY. The horsemen deployed a heaping of rhetoric in trying to get the attention of Scott and other people who just aren’t interested in horse racing. We get that, but we think an otherwise pretty accurate point about the division allowing a race track to offer offbeat, controversial parimutuel flag-drop racing is obscured by the hyperbole."
|
mixture
|
Gambling, Regulation, Florida, United Florida Horsemen,
|
"A masked thief fanning $100 bills is the backdrop for an ad blasting ""phony horse racing."" You’re probably thinking, ""Phony horse racing? Huh?"" We thought it too when we recently saw the ad on our website. Here’s the deal: A coalition of horse breeders and owners used the phrase for races they deem improper at a rural racino west of Tallahassee. Expansion of this brand of rodeo-style racing will have dramatic consequences for the traditional quarter horse industry and other parimutuels across the state, opponents say. The United Florida Horsemen want state leaders to give ""phony"" horse racing the same boot they gave Internet cafes this year following a massive federal-state investigation. The group’s ad derides Florida’s loophole-laden gambling laws and chides state regulators for signing off on ""phony"" horse racing events in spite of a judge’s order. ""Florida outlawed Internet cafes, but rubber-stamped phony horse racing,"" begins the ad. ""Gov. Scott, can you tell us why?"" Is the ad’s message hyperbole, or does it make a fair point? We wanted to explore. The backstory is years-long, bitter and complicated, especially for the uninitiated. For our purposes, the conflict really boils down to a simple question: What is Florida’s definition of a parimutuel horse race? The answer is crucial in determining whether a facility can offer on-site gambling, such as card rooms and slot machines, that brings in big bucks. The parimutuel industry has been in decline for decades. Back in fall 2011, the state’s Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering approved a license for Gretna Racing to run parimutuel barrel match races at its Gadsden County facility, even though the department had never before licensed that kind of parimutuel activity. Like falling dominos, other tracks around the state received permission to run barrel events. These races did not resemble a traditional race, in which quarter horse or thoroughbred horses sprint around an oval track head-to-head. In a barrel race, contestants sprint one at a time around three barrels in a clover-leaf pattern. The clock determines who wins. At Gretna, two barrel races occurred at the same time in separate enclosures, appearing like a traditional matchup. The horsemen found it very disturbing that Gretna Racing could offer such low-production races, deeming it a cheap way to offer poker rooms, simulcast races and, one day, slot machines. So the associations sued the department’s Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering. ""The division had no right to allow something like parimutuel barrel racing in the state of Florida,"" Kent Stirling, executive director of Florida Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association, told us. ""You’re knocking out one of Florida’s biggest industries by letting these people run a barrel race meet."" After a legal challenge spanning a year and a half, an administrative law judge agreed. In a May 6 order, Judge John Van Laningham slammed the state division for approving licenses for Gretna with knowledge the track planned to offer barrel match races. Van Laningham stated in his scathing 85-page order that even though parimutuel barrel match racing is not explicitly banned in state law, it was not okay for the division to essentially make up its own definition of a horse race. This should have been established in an open, discussion-driven process via division rulemaking or by the Legislature, he wrote. The horsemen cheered, but it wasn’t the end. Gretna Racing attorney and co-owner Marc Dunbar and the division agreed in a consent order that Gretna would offer ""flag-drop"" races while the case on barrel racing was being appealed. In flag-drop races, at least two horses sprint side by side for at least 100 yards. A similar quarter horse event was held April 2012 at Gulfstream Park in Hallandale Beach, for which Dunbar is an attorney. That set off more incredulous reactions by the horse associations who consider it the latest allowance of ""phony"" racing. In their view, the judge determined that any quarter horse race must be something that would be approved by the American Quarter Horse Association, even if it is not involved. ""Parimutuel barrel match racing"" does not count, so parimutuel flag drop racing should not fly either, they say. ""I don’t even know when the last time they used the drop-flag racing or whatever else it might be,"" said Trey Buck, AQHA executive director of racing. ""It’s fun for backyard fun and just goofing around, but when you’re talking about real horse racing, it needs to be done the correct way."" Not surprisingly, Dunbar has a very different interpretation of the judge’s final order and of what makes a horse race. He said the judge found Gretna’s barrel racing problematic on a technicality because racers competed in separate arenas divided by a barrier. Remove the barrier, and the judge’s issue is solved, Dunbar said. He said the horse groups also are exaggerating about flag-drop racing being new to Florida gaming. Scott’s press office deferred comment to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, which oversees the division tasked with oversight of parimutuel wagering. A spokeswoman told us it is the division’s job to issue operating licenses, not to get facilities to report how their races will be started. One way to do that is via flag drop, she said. Flag-drop racing, which traditionally involved a brightly colored handkerchief dropped by a noblewoman, led to lots of complaints about false starts, said Bob Jarvis, Nova Southeastern University gambling law professor. (Remember the Seinfeld episode of Jerry ""jumping the gun"" in a race against the fastest runner in school?) With the invention of the starting gate, that problem was gone. That’s important to know because Laningham specifically said the definition of horse racing should be understood as the voters who adopted the modern state Constitution in 1968 understood it. By that time, it had been many years since races started with a flag drop, Jarvis said. ""At the end of the day, I don’t think there’s any question that flag-dropping is not the kind of racing that the voters intended to approve when they made revisions of the Constitution,"" Jarvis said. ""And I don’t think it’s the kind of racing that voters in 2013 have in mind when they are talking about parimutuel racing."" Still, even as a liberal Democrat who voted against Scott, Jarvis said it’s unfair for the horsemen to draw a connection between the governor and ""phony racing"" permitted by the division. Part of the agency’s job is to make rulings, and it cannot be frozen as it awaits the results of the Gretna track’s appeal that could take years in court. Our ruling In an ad campaign, United Florida Horsemen contend that Florida ""rubber-stamped phony horse racing."" ""Phony"" is a strong word that takes on a different meaning depending on whom you ask. Someone who just wants to watch horses take off? They may say the Gretna flag drop is cool. Someone from the traditional quarter horse industry may say NO WAY. The horsemen deployed a heaping of rhetoric in trying to get the attention of Scott and other people who just aren’t interested in horse racing. We get that, but we think an otherwise pretty accurate point about the division allowing a race track to offer offbeat, controversial parimutuel flag-drop racing is obscured by the hyperbole."
|
607
|
Death toll in southern Philippines earthquake rises to seven.
|
The death toll from a strong earthquake in the southern Philippines has risen to seven, disaster and police officials said on Tuesday, as aftershocks continued to jolt many parts of Mindanao.
|
true
|
Environment
|
The 6.6 magnitude quake hit early on Tuesday, damaging buildings, toppling power lines and triggering landslides in the central area of the Philippines’ southern island. A seven-year-old child and his 44-year old father were among those who were killed in the North Cotabato province after they were struck by a boulder, disaster officials said. Authorities said the death toll could rise further because many injured were not immediately brought to hospitals. “It was depressing to see the damage left by the earthquake,” Abril Espadera, a disaster official in North Cotabato, told Reuters, as he recalled seeing collapsed homes and demolished buildings in the province, including schools. Smaller tremors rattled nervous residents throughout the day and those who were afraid to return to their homes set up tents to shelter near school yards, Espadera said. In Magsaysay town in Davao del Sur province, rescuers were trying to recover three bodies after landslides in two separate towns swallowed parts of agricultural areas, police said. The quake, whose magnitude was initially put at 6.7 by the European-Mediterranean Seismological Centre, was the second powerful quake to strike Mindanao in two weeks. Authorities had flagged the risk of landslides after the 6.3 quake on Oct. 16 in central Mindanao that killed seven and injured more than 200. Earthquakes are common in the Philippines, which is on the geologically active Pacific Ring of Fire. Power cables swayed in Davao city, the home town of President Rodrigo Duterte, where people rushed to open spaces, and some fainted out of fear. The quake also triggered power cuts in nearby General Santos city, media said. Some schools in the area have suspended classes. Duterte’s office has called for calm as it mobilized all government agencies to undertake damage assessment and to coordinate rescue and relief operations.
|
4362
|
Tuberculosis case reported in Syracuse school district.
|
Health officials in central New York say they have identified an active case of tuberculosis in the Syracuse City School District.
|
true
|
New York, Health, Tuberculosis, Syracuse
|
Onondaga County Health Department officials say the infected person is affiliated with Fowler High School’s Public Service Leadership. Officials did not disclose if the person was a student, faculty member or staff member. The district is working with the health department to identify individuals who may have been exposed. County health commissioner Dr. Indu Gupta says although tuberculosis is less common now, it is still a public health concern. Gupta says anyone can contract the disease after being exposed to an active case.
|
3434
|
Rapper T.I.’s remarks spark NY bill to end virginity tests.
|
New York could bar doctors from performing so-called virginity tests under legislation prompted by the rapper T.I.’s controversial claim that he has a gynecologist check his daughter’s hymen annually.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Health, Andrew Cuomo, Entertainment, Hip hop and rap, Music, New York, T.I., Celebrities, U.S. News, General News
|
Assemblywoman Michaelle Solages said Tuesday the bill she submitted last month would prohibit medical professionals from performing or supervising such examinations, though it’s unclear how common they are in the U.S. New York would also consider it sexual assault when such tests are performed outside of a medical setting. “It’s medically unnecessary,” the Democrat said. “It’s often painful, humiliating, traumatic. All in all, it’s a form of violence against women.” Her bill has attracted support from three Democratic lawmakers, and Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration officials called the practice “disturbing.” Solages said no other states have such bans. The World Health Organization, U.N. Women and the U.N. Human Rights office called for the end of the tests worldwide last year. They said the testing often involves inspecting the hymen or inserting fingers into the vagina. T.I., also known as Clifford Joseph Harris, Jr., drew criticism when he said in a November episode of the podcast “Ladies like Us” that he asked a gynecologist to check his teenage daughter’s hymen shortly after her birthday each year. She is now 18. “I put a sticky note on the door: ‘Gyno. Tomorrow. 9:30,’” Harris said. After his comments prompted backlash on social media, he told Jada Pinkett Smith on the Facebook interview show Red Table Talk he’d been exaggerating and that “he was never in any exam room.” Phone and email messages were left with Harris’ publicist Tuesday. Experts say such testing is painful and that there’s no evidence such testing shows whether a woman or girl has had vaginal intercourse. “There is no test that can tell you whether someone had intercourse, whether consensually or non-consensually,” Ranit Mishori, professor of family medicine at Georgetown University School of Medicine and senior medical adviser for Physicians for Human Rights. Mishori said there’s a mistaken belief that you can tell whether someone’s had vaginal intercourse from a tear in a hymen, which can also tear from tampons or physical activity. Some women lack a hymen, a membrane that partly covers vaginas and can also change as a girl matures due to hormonal change. “It’s of course not only impossible to tell for sure, but also a violation of woman’s rights,” said retired obstetrician-gynecologist Jaana Rehnstorm, who is the founder and president of gender equality non-profit The Kota Alliance. Such testing stems from cultural concerns about a woman’s “purity” or “marriageability,” Mishori said. “If a women is not a ‘virgin,’ her prospects of being married, her prospects of securing a family, her prospects of being thought of as an upstanding citizen can go down the drain,” she said. ”But these are very sexist ideas about women and sexuality.” But criminalizing the practice is “misguided,” Mishori said. “I think the solution is we have to think about education, we have to think about changing social norms,” she said. “We have to think about breaking down stigma and educating not only the patients in front of us but the family members and community members.” “I think unfortunately, if you ban it or if you criminalize it, it will drive it underground,” she said. Such examinations have been documented in at least 20 countries. The extent of whether they are performed in the U.S. is unclear, though Mishori said that physicians have shared anecdotes of patients and parents requesting such testing. “This happens in different communities — not just migrant or immigrant communities, but also maybe very, very religious communities,” she said. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists President Ted Anderson has said the organization does not have guidance on so-called virginity testing. “As a medical organization, ACOG releases guidance on medically indicated and valid procedures,” he said in a statement. Solages called the practice “barbaric” and based on the idea that women are men’s property. She said just one instance, such as T.I.’s, of such an examination happening is enough for a ban. “Whether he was being serious or he was being sarcastic, he brought to the limelight that this is happening in the U.S.,” she said.
|
32568
|
A mother was arrested for tattooing her 2-year-old boy and trading him for drugs.
|
This image does not show a young boy who was sold for drugs after his mother tattooed him. While the exact origins of this image are unknown, the photograph has been circulating online since at least 2012 and was likely digitally manipulated.
|
false
|
Junk News, news4ktla, Shaunetta Wright, tattoo
|
On 20 June 2016, the clickbait web site News 4 KTLA published an article reporting that a woman had been arrested after she allowed her boyfriend to etch a full-chest tattoo on her two-year-old son and then traded the boy for crack cocaine: A manhunt for 24 year old Shaunetta Wright came to a peaceful end early Monday morning after she was apprehended in Alabama for child abuse, neglect and several other charges. Authorities say that Wright is accused of allowing her boyfriend to etch a full chest tattoo across her two-year-old son’s upper torso and then trading the boy for crack cocaine. There was no truth to this story. News 4 KTLA is a clickbait fake news site that masquerades as a local television station’s news site and publishes fabricated stories intended to drive readers to the site and generate advertising revenues. News 4 KTLA does not carry a disclaimer identifying their content as fiction, but the web site has a track record of publishing fake news stories, such as articles about a 9-year-old killing his parents over a lack of Wifi, a parasite in Dasani water products, or dead bodies being the true source of contamination in the Flint River. As with many of their other articles, News 4 KTLA placed a generic news ticker over an unrelated photograph in order to lend a whiff of credibility to their baseless report:
|
17418
|
"NFL ""players are living, on average, longer than the average male."
|
"Goodell said that NFL ""players are living, on average, longer than the average male."" His claim is backed up by a government study that examined former NFL players who played from 1959 to 1988. But the study, which was released in 2012, did conclude that bigger players had an increased risk of dying from heart disease and did not evaluate more modern-day players. Modern-day players are bigger."
|
true
|
Sports, PunditFact, Roger Goodell,
|
"Fox started its wall-to-wall coverage of Super Bowl XLVIII on Fox News Sunday, with host Chris Wallace interviewing NFL commissioner Roger Goodell live from MetLife Stadium. Goodell talked about the weather, and how it appears conditions will be fine for the Denver Broncos and the Seattle Seahawks. He addressed a proposal to eliminate extra points, saying they’re almost automatic (as we previously reported, they are). And he discussed the health of NFL players amid concern that the sport is too violent. Goodell offered a defense that we hadn’t heard before. ""Our players are living, on average, longer than the average male,"" Goodell said. After serious talk about concussions in the NFL and some prominent suicides in the sport, we wondered about Goodell’s claim. It’s accurate, it turns out, but requires some additional explanation. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a government research agency within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, studied the mortality rates of former NFL football players in a report released in 2012. The study included nearly all NFL players who played in the league for five or more years from 1959 to 1988 -- a pool of 3,439 men. Researchers said based on current mortality rates, they expected 625 players to be deceased. But by the end of 2007, only 334 were. ""We found the players in our study had a much lower rate of death overall compared to men in the general population,"" researchers wrote to the NFL players in a March 2012 letter. ""This means that, on average, NFL players are actually living longer than men in the general population."" The former NFL players also had lower rates of heart disease and cancer compared to average males, the report found. There are a few important caveats to point out. NFL players aren't like your average male in a number of ways. They are professional athletes, many of whom might be wealthy, and they are likely to have access to quality health care. The report also raised red flags. Researchers found that men who were considered obese, those with a Body Mass Index of 30 or more when they played, had twice the risk of death from heart disease than other players. African-American players also had a higher heart disease risk than Caucasian players, the report found. Another important note: Because the study excludes modern-day players, it fails to account for the changing physique of today’s football player. Of the 3,439 men in the NIOSH study, only 1 percent had a Body Mass Index of 35 or more when they played, and 33 percent had a Body Mass Index between 30 and 35. Today’s NFL players are much bigger. To create an example, we looked at the current 53-man roster of the Denver Broncos and calculated each player’s Body Mass Index using a calculator from the National Institutes of Health. Of 53 Broncos players, 13 have a Body Index above 35 (24.5 percent) and another 14 have a Body Mass Index between 30 and 35 (26.4 percent). That’s an important distinction that may affect the results of future studies. Our ruling Goodell said that NFL ""players are living, on average, longer than the average male."" His claim is backed up by a government study that examined former NFL players who played from 1959 to 1988. But the study, which was released in 2012, did conclude that bigger players had an increased risk of dying from heart disease and did not evaluate more modern-day players. Modern-day players are bigger."
|
5855
|
Health officials: Number of syphilis cases have doubled.
|
New Hampshire health officials say the state is experiencing an outbreak of syphilis, with the number of reported cases so far for 2017, about double that of previous years.
|
true
|
Sexually transmitted diseases, New Hampshire, Health, Syphilis
|
From January to May, 42 cases of syphilis, a reportable sexually transmitted disease, were identified. That’s an increase compared with the past five years, when an average of 20 cases were reported during those months. Health officials say between 2012 and 2016, there were on average about 80 total cases per year of the disease reported in New Hampshire, with 2016 having the highest number of 104 cases reported for the entire year. They say the outbreak in New Hampshire is consistent with national trends. Approximately 60 percent of cases have been in Hillsborough and Rockingham counties. Dr. Benjamin Chan, state epidemiologist, says it can be cured when a person is given the right antibiotics.
|
11543
|
Fighting prostate cancer by doing nothing
|
The article provides an overview of treatment for early prostate cancer. Major strengths of the article are that the true natural history of prostate cancer is accurately described, namely that prostate cancer is slow-growing, many men will die of something else, and that men may not need to be treated at all. The article also does a good job of comparing and contrasting what men might stand to gain or lose by undergoing treatment or by waiting. Information on costs could improve the article as well as stating more explicitly that the benefit of aggressive treatment of early prostate cancer is unknown and/or uncertain.
|
true
|
The article doesn’t mention costs of “active surveillance” or any other treatment strategy. There is a cost associated with any of these choices. Because of the uncertainty over treatment benefit, quantification of benefits, such as how much longer can one expect to live or how many lives are saved can’t be known. However, the article could have been more explicit about the issue of uncertain benefits with aggressive treatment for early prostate cancer. The article does a good job of discussing harms of treatment, including risk of losing an opportunity to cure one’s disease by waiting, risk of sexual problems and leaking urine with treatment, and risk of having treatment and subsequent side effects and still having prostate cancer threaten your life. The story is an informational piece about prostate cancer treament in general, making this a difficult criterion to evalaute. However, one overarching message is that there is a great deal of uncertainty around treating early prostate cancer. With that in mind, the article does describe that there are no direct head to head trials comparing surgery and radiation treatments, which accounts for much of the uncertainty. It remains controversial whether any aggressive treatment of early prostate cancer is effective. The article does a terrific job of discussing early prostate cancer, includuing the fact that many prostate cancers are slow-growing, that many men will die of something else, and that many men may never need treatment. It also does a good job of comparing and contrasting what a man might have to gain and lose with and without treatment. Calling surgeons “medical artists” is a bit dramatic, but this term is attributed to patient support groups. The story used several independent sources of information and for that we give it a satisfactory score. However, one concern is reporting that “researchers–and a few doctors–are beginning to agree” about waiting for treatment. Many of the researchers are themselves doctors, so this is clumsily confusing. The article does a nice job of comparing and contrasting treatment options, including active surveillance, surgery, and radiation. It also talks about hormone therapy, but appropriately cautions readers about what is and isn’t known about the timing of this option as well. The article describes several available treatment choices currently being used for prostate cancer. This story refers to “active surveillance” as the “newest thinking in the disease.” However, this really isn’t a new treatment option and is widely used in other countries. It’s probably more accurate to describe this as a treatment that is chosen less commonly rather than a new treatment. There is no evidence that this story relied solely or largely on a news release.
|
|
11344
|
New Non-Surgical Treatment Freezes Breast Cancer in its Tracks
|
This news release plays up a liquid nitrogen-based procedure for treating breast cancer, called IceSense3 (ICE3). The probe is inserted into the breast via a small incision, guided into the middle of a tumor, and pumped with liquid nitrogen to freeze and kill the cancerous lesion from the inside out. This allows the body to naturally dismantle and get rid of the dead tissue — no major surgery required and it lasts less than 30 minutes, we’re told. And it’s stated (over and over again) how “minimal” the procedure is, plus the “excellent cosmetic results” it has, since it can get rid of cancers that would otherwise call for disfiguring breast surgeries and mastectomies. The technology is described as a new-and-improved version of a cryoablation method used to treat “liver, kidney, prostate and other cancers.” But the release offers no hard numbers of efficacy of those treatments, nor does it make any meaningful comparison as to how good they are compared to surgery. Unless the reader is a clinician or very well-informed patient, ICE3 could come off sounding like a magical cure-all. The reality is that no treatment is foolproof, and there are also other uncomfortable treatments that precede and/or follow surgery — radiation therapy and chemotherapy being the two principles ones. At its core, the release is a sales pitch intended to recruit women recently diagnosed with breast cancer into a clinical trial for ICE3, since how well the procedure treats breast cancer is an unknown. But the pitch falls short. Describing the efficacy of cryoablation compared to surgery, even with other types of cancers, would have made this a much stronger, more balanced, and more convincing release. So would have describing typical follow-up radiation and chemotherapy treatments. Bowing to cosmetic appeal doesn’t necessarily save lives when it comes to breast cancer, but it matters a great deal to women diagnosed with the disease. They want to come out of their treatment feeling as whole and like themselves as possible. So, any effective and minimally invasive procedure that lowers the need for breast surgery is welcome in the suite of tools to treat breast cancer. But for better or for worse, it takes brave volunteers to prove the efficacy of such treatments.
|
mixture
|
Breast cancer,industry/commercial news releases,Women's health
|
There isn’t a dollar sign anywhere in this release, but other cryoablative therapies cost about $11,000 to $12,000 per session and multiple sessions are sometimes necessary. The release says that “the benefits of cryoablation over traditional breast cancer surgery are significant.” And it lists many purported benefits including greater convenience, cosmetic advantages, and fewer complications. But we’re not given any hard numbers on recurrence or spread of breast cancer following an ICE3 procedure — arguably the most important outcomes. This would be difficult to report on, since the procedure is currently undergoing clinical trials to assess just that. But not including a sentence that concisely explains this is a pretty glaring omission. ICE3 is also compared to cryoablation therapy for other cancers (e.g. liver, prostate, kidney). Numbers here comparing those treatments to traditional surgery would have helped us grasp how effective the procedure might be. The most we get is that patients felt “minimal discomfort.” But could ICE3 leave cancerous tissue behind without a clinician knowing? And are there any other side effects? We aren’t told, and this seems strange given that the “cosmetic” benefits are so well-known and touted so frequently in the text. The National Cancer Institute does describe a few potential harms of cryoablation (which they classify as a type of cryosurgery), including hemorrhaging and bad interactions with chemotherapy. These probably should be mentioned in the release. The release claims ICE3 could help “thousands of women” and that the clinical trial being conducted is limited to patients with a breast tumor that’s 1.5 cm wide or smaller. But it offers no other details about the nature of the trial being conducted, nor does it discuss the evidence from other studies of this approach, whether in breast cancer or in other cancers. It would have been nice, for example, to see some discussion of the difficulties in doing a randomized clinical trial of this surgical procedure. There is such a high likelihood of bias in trials of surgery that there should be something about how they would avoid that in the current (undocumented) trial. Similarly, a few words about the strength of the evidence from other trials would’ve helped ground the discussion. There’s some strong language describing the pain and lengthy recovery of surgery, and the suffering that many women experience following surgery. But that’s not disease-mongering per se — it’s more of a way for the release to pump up the advantages of the new approach. IceCure Medical, the manufacturer of ICE3, is named as the source of the release. ICE3 is compared extensively to surgery, which is the leading treatment for breast cancer. However, it would have helped to put the treatment into context with preceding and follow-up treatments, including radiation and chemotherapy. We’re told ICE3 is currently in clinical trials for treating breast cancer and is only available at 20 US sites, at least two of which are named in the release. Breast cancer isn’t normally treated with cryoablation, and the release makes this clear. We’re also told the improvements built into ICE3 makes treating cancer with it “more precise” and reliable. The introduction is pretty dramatic — “Imagine. A nick of the skin, a flash of cold…” — but the release crosses the line with its language about the disfiguring nature of surgery. It says women achieve “excellent cosmetic results” with cryoablation and that they are “extremely relieved to avoid painful, disfiguring surgery and long recovery times.” According to the release, it seems that the only alternative to cryoablation is disfiguring mastectomy, but there are other intermediate surgical options (lumpectomy) that minimize scarring and post-mastectomy reconstruction is available. The release should have been more tempered in its description of surgical outcomes.
|
33999
|
The U.S. Constitution states that if a president is impeached by the House but not convicted by the Senate, that person's first term is nullified and they are eligible to run for office two more times.
|
Nowhere in the Constitution, however, does it state that a failed impeachment process would “nullify” a presidential term and allow a president to seek extra time in office.
|
false
|
Politics
|
As talk of impeachment flooded the internet in September 2019, we came across two rumors concerning the impact of the impeachment process on President Donald Trump’s reelection opportunities. The first held that a president who was impeached by the House, but not convicted by the Senate, could run for office two more times because the failed impeachment would nullify the first term. The second posited that if the House votes to impeach a president, but the Senate doesn’t convict and remove the person from office, the president is barred from running for office again. We’ll take a look at each of those theories below. But first, a quick look at how the impeachment process works. People often use the word “impeachment” when referring to the removal of a president from office. But that’s not exactly how it works. The House of Representatives has the “sole Power of Impeachment,” as stated in Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution. But it is up to the Senate to convict and remove a president from office. In this way, “impeachment” is roughly akin to bringing formal charges against an individual. It is then up to the Senate to convict the individual on those charges. The aforementioned theories both deal with the gray area between impeachment and conviction. In other words, what happens if the president is impeached by the House of Representatives but is not convicted by the Senate? Theory 1: If a president is impeached by the House but not convicted by the Senate, the first presidential term is nullified and the president may run for election two more times. FALSE: This theory has been posited by a few social media users, but it reached a larger audience when it was shared by pizzagate conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec: The tweet reads: “These Democrats don’t realize that if they impeach Trump and the Senate doesn’t confirm it then it nullifies Trump’s first term and he gets to run two more times. Read the Constitution, people.” This is not how impeachment works. Before we get to what the Constitution says about impeachment, we can get a glimpse of the hypothetical scenario posited in this tweet by taking a quick look at our country’s recent history. President Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on Dec. 19, 1998. However, Clinton was not convicted by the Senate. We searched news reports from the time and found no serious reporters, historians, or politicians arguing that the Senate’s failure to convict Clinton literally nullified the president’s previous term and gave him the opportunity to run for office again. The Associated Press reported on Feb. 12, 1999: The Senate today acquitted William Jefferson Clinton of perjury and obstruction of justice, ending a 13-month drama that catapulted an affair with a White House intern into only the second presidential impeachment trial in history. Permitted to finish his term, the 42nd president declared he was “profoundly sorry … for what I said and did.” “This can be and this must be a time of reconciliation and renewal for America,” Clinton said in a brief statement from the White House Rose Garden about two hours after the historic verdict. Chief Justice William Rehnquist pronounced Clinton’s acquittal at 12:39 EST. “It is therefore ordered and adjudged that the said William Jefferson Clinton be and he hereby is acquitted of the charges in the said articles,” he intoned. The process for impeachment is laid out in Article I and Article II of the U.S. Constitution. This text says nothing about a president’s term being “nullified” by an impeachment proceeding. Furthermore, the 22nd amendment of the Constitution explicitly states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” Doug Pennington, director of communication for the Constitutional Accountability Center, told us in an email that Posobiec’s statement was false: The 22d Amendment alone unequivocally disproves that ridiculous, dangerous claim. The first words of the Amendment state: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice ….” Donald Trump has been elected once. Provided he isn’t convicted by the Senate in an impeachment trial and disqualified from holding future office, he can run for a second term, and only a second term. That’s enough to negate that dreadful tweet, but anyone who considered some version of that question in good faith would have looked anywhere — literally anywhere — in the Constitution for textual support for the belief that if “[1] they impeach Trump and [2] the Senate doesn’t confirm it then [3] it nullifies Trump’s first term and [4] he gets to run two more times.” Having found absolutely none, instead coming across Article I Section 3 and the 22d Amendment, among other sections, such a good-faith questioner would have concluded that the opposite is true, and would not have made such a claim publicly for fear of spreading disinformation. Theory 2: A president is barred from seeking a second term once impeached. A number of social media users seem to be under the impression that Trump would not be able to seek reelection if the House of Representatives impeaches him. One Twitter user, for instance, wrote: “If he gets impeached he won’t be able to run in the next election like he plans to. It would guarantee that we can’t have 4 more years under his leadership.” But that isn’t the case. A president who is impeached by the House but is not convicted by the Senate could still run for reelection. Pennington told us: “Nothing in the Constitution’s language on impeachment prevents a president impeached but not convicted from running for a second of a two-term maximum.” In fact, before House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced an official impeachment inquiry into Trump in September 2019, political pundits noted that a “failed” impeachment could help Trump’s reelection efforts. An opinion piece in The Hill noted: If the Democratic majority in the House impeaches the president without broad political consensus in the Senate (and country) to convict the president and remove him from office, impeachment will be weaponized by the president in the 2020 campaign. Trump will argue that liberal Democrats and the news media are out to get him, that he has done nothing wrong, and that you can’t impeach a president who has done a great job. This mantra will play well with his loyal base. However, a bit of truth is offered here. The Constitution explains the country has two penalties for impeachment: removal from office and disqualification “to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” If a president is impeached by the House of Representatives, the Senate could convict, remove the president from office, and disqualify the person from holding future office. This scenario, however, falls into some gray area because it has never been tested at the presidential level. It is possible that the Senate could take two separate votes, one on removal from office and one on disqualification from future office, which could result in a president’s removal from office but provide an opportunity to seek reelection. It’s also theoretically possible that a president who has been impeached, convicted, removed, and disqualified, could seek office at a lower level of government. We asked Pennington about the possibility of a president seeking reelection after the House has impeached and the Senate convicted the person. He told us: A convicted president can be prohibited from again holding office if the Senate so decides, per Article I Section 3, which includes: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” Disqualification is not automatic, but up to the Senate’s discretion. While unsettled, a strong argument exists, however, that members of Congress are not encompassed by the language “Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” If so, then perhaps an impeached president could run for the House or Senate. It’s untested. Additionally, some argue (at fn. 23) that an impeached and convicted official who the Senate decided to disqualify from holding future office, per Article 1 Section 3 above, would not be disqualified from holding a state office. Again, untested. More confident saying that a Senate disqualifying a president from holding office after an impeachment conviction would at least prohibit him/her from holding a federal office in either the executive or judicial branches, and at least possibly congressional or state office. To sum up: Although a president is impeached by the House of Representatives, the repercussions of this legal process don’t come to fruition until the Senate votes to convict the president. If that happens, the Senate can vote to remove the president from office and disqualify the person from holding future office. If the Senate does not convict, the president will not be removed from office, nor will the person be prevented from seeking reelection (if he/she has not already reached the two-term limit).
|
26495
|
Facebook post Says video of body bags being dumped in a ditch shows the “situation in Italy” due to the coronavirus.
|
A widespread Facebook post wrongly claims that a video of body bags being dumped in a ditch shows the “situation in Italy” due to the novel coronavirus. The video is actually a scene from the 2007 TV miniseries, “Pandemic.”
|
false
|
Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"A video viewed thousands of times on Facebook wrongly claims that footage of body bags being dumped in a ditch shows the ""situation in Italy"" due to the novel coronavirus. The footage is stolen from a 2007 TV miniseries called ""Pandemic,"" a fictional show about the spread of a deadly virus infecting residents of Los Angeles. The video, which appeared first on TikTok but was shared widely on Facebook, was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) In the video, body bags roll down the slope of a hill and into a ditch. A voice is heard talking about ""information from a knowledgeable source"" before that audio is drowned out by edited-in music from the song ""Can We Kiss Forever?"" Fact-checkers in India and France matched the visual of the body bags and the audio of the voice in the clip to a scene from ""Pandemic."" The actual scene from ""Pandemic"" shows a fictional reporter broadcasting about the so-called ""riptide virus"" as the body bags are seen tumbling. Here’s what the reporter says: ""Though unsubstantiated by state and city authorities, we now have information from a knowledgeable source that tells us that the city's temporary morgues are filled beyond capacity. Mass graves have been dug for the incineration and burial of the dead. The current death toll due to the riptide virus is now in the thousands and growing."" You can watch the full clip from ""Pandemic"" here. Italy has seen a high death toll as a result of the coronavirus, which was first detected in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. According to the World Health Organization, the country had recorded 139,422 confirmed cases and 17,669 deaths from COVID-19 as of April 9. But the clip passed off by Facebook users as footage of the ""situation in Italy"" is lifted from a 2007 TV series about a fictional pandemic."
|
12043
|
Said there is cholera in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria.
|
Krugman said that cases of cholera had been reported in Puerto Rico. By his own account, that was incorrect. He assumed someone he trusted had verified the facts and the person hadn't. Health care professionals raised the concern that massive damage to the water supply system increased the risk of cholera, but that falls well short of an actual outbreak. While references to a cholera outbreak littered the twittersphere, those accounts were being rejected two days before Krugman’s tweet.
|
false
|
Natural Disasters, Public Health, PunditFact, Paul Krugman,
|
"In the span of six hours, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman tweeted then retracted the claim that cholera had been reported on Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria. Conservative websites came down hard on Krugman for his error, taking it as a case study of mainstream media spreading fake news. There’s no question that Krugman was wrong. Here’s how the episode played out. At about noon on Sept. 30, Krugman tweeted, ""Cholera. In a US territory. Among US citizens. In the 21st century. Heckuva job, Trumpie."" Cholera is spread by bacteria in dirty water and can bring on severe diarrhea, so severe, it can even be fatal. Within minutes, people peppered Krugman with tweets asking for his source and noting that that were no confirmed cases of cholera. A University of New Hampshire journalism professor wrote, ""UPDATE (please share): Cholera outbreak in Puerto Rico is UNCONFIRMED at this time."" About six hours after the initial tweet, Krugman retracted his claim. ""OK, cholera not confirmed,"" he wrote. ""Conjunctivitis yes; lack of clean water (situation worsening, not improving) makes it a risk. But not certain."" OK, cholera not confirmed. Conjunctivitis yes; lack of clean water (situation worsening, not improving) makes it a risk. But not certain About half an hour before Krugman sent out his correction, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tweeted, ""CDC does not anticipate cholera cases in Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands b/c of #Maria."" CDC does not anticipate cholera cases in Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands b/c of #Maria. #MariaPR https://t.co/dzSnsaj50u Krugman’s original tweet was shared over 14,000 times. The correction was retweeted 567 times (as of this writing). We were curious about where this rumor came from and asked Krugman. He said he saw it in a tweet from Kurt Eichenwald and ""was far too quick to assume it was validated."" Kurt Eichenwald, a liberal commentator and contributing editor to Vanity Fair, tweeted on Sept. 29, ""Cases of cholera now being reported in Puerto Rico. I can’t believe this is America. We're too incompetent or uncaring to get them water?"" That tweet was retweeted more than 13,000 times. We found no retraction by Eichenwald on Twitter. Warnings for the potential for cholera had been bouncing around the web. A couple of days before Krugman’s tweet, the liberal information and political action website Daily KOS included and then retracted reports of the disease. The corrected headline for a Sept. 28 blog post said ""SOS Puerto Rico: The suffering continues; Update: Cholera cases possible (not confirmed)."" At the end of the post, was this note: ""An earlier version of this diary included a Tweet saying that cases of cholera had been reported. Given the facts of the ground — including, particularly, the lack of clean drinking water — this is definitely a possibility. Importantly, though, I have been unable to find confirmation of the information in that Tweet. I should not have posted it as fact, and have updated the title."" The Daily Beast had an article that underscored the potential for an eruption of cholera. Under the headline ""Outbreaks begin in Puerto Rico while Trump tweets ‘amazing job’,"" was the warning ""mayors and a top physician tell The Daily Beast the island faces deadly outbreaks of cholera and hepatitis unless the federal government surges help."" The earliest tweet we found that declared that people had cholera in Puerto Rico came on Sept. 27 from a man in Boston who wrote, without any supporting evidence, that ""Reports of cholera already breaking out."" Conservative websites took Krugman to task. ""NYT’s Paul Krugman ly blames ‘Trumpie’ for non-existent cholera outbreak in Puerto Rico,"" read the Daily Caller’s headline. TownHall wrote ""No, Mr. Krugman, There is not a cholera outbreak in Puerto Rico."" And the Blaze wrote ""NYT columnist slams Trump after cholera reported in Puerto Rico — except there’s just one problem."" Krugman said that cases of cholera had been reported in Puerto Rico. By his own account, that was incorrect. He assumed someone he trusted had verified the facts and the person hadn't. Health care professionals raised the concern that massive damage to the water supply system increased the risk of cholera, but that falls well short of an actual outbreak. While references to a cholera outbreak littered the twittersphere, those accounts were being rejected two days before Krugman’s tweet."
|
28741
|
During a campaign rally, Chelsea Clinton stated that marijuana use can be fatal.
|
What's true: Chelsea Clinton made the (ostensibly inaccurate) claim that individuals in states with legal marijuana have died due to drug interactions involving the substance. What's false: Chelsea Clinton didn't claim that marijuana use alone is fatal.
|
mixture
|
Politics Ballot Box, cannabis, chelsea clinton, marijuana deaths
|
At a 24 September 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign event in Youngstown, Ohio, her daughter Chelsea controversially asserted that “anecdotal evidence” from Colorado indicated that marijuana use (which is now legal in that state) has led to drug interaction fatalities: But we also have anecdotal evidence now from Colorado where some of the people who were taking marijuana for [medicinal] purposes … the coroner believes … after they died, there was drug interactions with other things they were taking. Chelsea Clinton implies here that marijuana can kill you. Uhh pic.twitter.com/cdBWGgDG5P — Lee Fang (@lhfang) September 27, 2016 The younger Clinton didn’t expressly state that marijuana use itself could be fatal, but she did maintain that “anecdotal” evidence from Colorado included coroners’ reports of deaths caused by adverse interactions of marijuana (taken for medicinal purposes) with other drugs (presumably of the prescription, rather than recreational, variety). In a broader context Clinton seemed to be saying (in response to a question from an audience member about the possible rescheduling of marijuana by the DEA) that insufficient evidence was available regarding the effects of medicinal marijuana usage in conjunction with various medical issues and medical treatments and thus there was a danger of fatal interactions [My mother] absolutely supports more research. One of the challenges with the experiments happening around the country at the state level — she supports states making whatever choices they think are right vis-à-vis medical and recreational marijuana use — is that we have no real way to study them. So that anecdotally we have lots of evidence in the area you talked about, in epilepsy, but also in autism, in stimulating appetite for people who are on intensive chemotherapy regimens, for people who have non-epilepsy seizure disorders and challenges. But we also have anecdotal evidence now from Colorado where some of the people who were taking marijuana for those purposes, the coroner, after they died, there was drug interactions with other things they were taking. And so one of the reasons we really do need rigorous study into your point about rescheduling marijuana is one, we want to know where it works and where it doesn’t work, because probably there’s some areas where it works and probably there’s some areas where it doesn’t work, like other things that we think have medicinal uses. But two, one of the reasons the FDA has such rigorous testing, and one of the reasons our FDA approval process is the gold standard for the world, is the rigorous study of how new proposed drugs interact with drugs that are already on the market, both prescription drugs and over-the-counter drugs. That’s why if any of us get a prescription, there are all of those warnings “be careful” and “don’t use heavy machinery or drive or don’t drink alcohol,” but sometimes they’re really explicit instructions, “if you are taking these four drugs please make sure your doctor knows that before you start this prescription.” We just need so much more data than we have so that people who might benefit have the chance to benefit, people who might be in danger are protected. So absolutely my mom strongly supports the need for more rigorous study and then subjecting it as we do with everything else that might have a medicinal purpose to FDA approval, scrutiny, and ultimately regulation. Marijuana advocate Tom Angell tweeted that he attempted to obtain additional detail from the Clinton campaign about that topic but did not receive a response: Clinton campaign still hasn’t responded to request for clarification on Chelsea’s claim that marijuana can kill youhttps://t.co/ThWiCUQspN — Tom Angell (@tomangell) September 26, 2016 Without clarification from Clinton, it is virtually impossible to determine what purported incidents she was citing. Several high-profile deaths have occurred in Colorado in which families claimed marijuana was a contributing factor, but not as part of a drugs interaction. Moreover, those deaths largely involved recreational (not medicinal) use of cannabis: Another death in Colorado has been listed as having “marijuana intoxication” as a factor, according to a KCNC investigation, and several other families are now saying they believed the deaths of their loved ones can be traced to recreational marijuana use. Daniel Juarez, an 18-year-old from Brighton, died Sept. 26, 2012 after stabbing himself 20 times. In an autopsy report that had never been made public before, but was obtained by KCNC, his THC level — the active ingredient in marijuana — was measured at 38.2 nanograms. In Colorado, anything over 5 nanograms is considered impaired for driving. Up until now, just three other deaths in Colorado were seen as having links to marijuana. Levy Thamba Pongi, a 19-year-old college student jumped from a Denver balcony to his death in 2014 after eating marijuana edibles. Marijuana intoxication was listed as a factor in his death. Richard Kirk of Denver is accused of killing his wife, Kristine. Before her death, she called police and said her husband seemed to be hallucinating after ingesting marijuana edibles and prescription medications … And college student Luke Goodman killed himself in Keystone in March shortly after ingesting marijuana edibles. Three of the deaths described as “marijuana related” in Colorado were suicides, and a fourth was an alleged murder. None involved the purported interaction of marijuana with any other substance, and marijuana is largely believed to have either no adverse effect or a synergistic effect when used in concert with other medications. On 27 September 2016, cannabis researcher Dr. Michele Ross reiterated that information, asserting Clinton’s “anecdotal evidence” claim elided vast published research into marijuana (and specifically drug interactions with cannabis): Cannabis can synergize with certain medications such as opiates to actually increase the analgesic, or pain relieving, effects of the drug. What it doesn’t seem to synergize with is the side effect of the drugs. So, for example, whereas opiates can depress your breathing, slow it down, cannabis will not enhance that. There have been over 20,000 studies published on PubMed [a federal database of biomedical research]. This is not anecdotal. This one plant has been researched more than Tylenol, more than Adderall, more than any other medication. Chelsea Clinton did imply “anecdotal evidence” from Colorado indicated adverse interactions involving marijuana had led to documented deaths, but we were unable to corroborate that claim. Moreover, the claim seemingly contradicts a body of research suggesting that cannabis is unlikely to interact adversely with other medications. Clinton also maintained that marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I drug meant little research had been performed on it to determine whether it was safe, but marijuana researchers have firmly rejected that claim.
|
29299
|
Floodwaters in parts of Southeast Texas tested positive for diseases and contaminants including typhoid fever and MRSA in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey.
|
What's true: Some contamination of floodwaters is likely, and floodwaters in nearby Houston have tested positive for E. coli and sewage contamination. What's false: There is no evidence of any testing done on floodwaters in the southeast Texas cities specified in the viral post, and local and state officials were not aware of any such testing having been performed.
|
false
|
Science, harvey, health warning, hurricane harvey
|
In September 2017, a viral rumor spread on Facebook, reporting that the waters in southeast Texas had tested positive for a variety of potentially harmful contaminants and diseases. The message typically read: DISEASE WARNING: I just got a call from a Southeast Texas disaster relief group (I was in direct contact with them and a few other groups assisting with rescues via phone). They’re spreading the word that the water in all areas (Beaumont, Vidor, Port Arthur, Orange, Lumberton, Bridge City, etc.) has tested positive for MRSA, Typhoid Fever, flesh eating bacteria, sewage, and toxic chemicals. If you or anyone you know were participating in rescues, or were in the water with open wounds, and start experiencing signs of illness, get to a hospital immediately for vaccination and antibiotics. They’re already getting reports of people becoming violently ill. We contacted officials in various local authorities in the cities and counties specified in the Facebook post, and none were familiar with any tests being conducted for the contaminants and diseases listed. On 5 September, the city of Beaumont’s public health department issued a statement in response to the rumor: There have been rumors that people in our area have tested positive for MRSA, Typhoid Fever, flesh eating bacteria, sewage and toxic chemicals. These conditions are required by law to be reported to the Health Department. Currently, we have no reports. The Health Department would like to take this opportunity to remind physicians, hospitals, and laboratories that these conditions are required to be reported to the local health authority. A spokesperson for the Texas Department of State Health Services also told us that the department was not familiar with any test results indicating the presence of MRSA (bacteria that can cause skin infections and sepsis) or typhoid fever. We’re conducting disease surveillance in the shelters and haven’t gotten any reports of MRSA or typhoid fever cases related to Harvey from shelters or otherwise. Both of those illnesses are required by law to be reported in Texas. The spokesperson warned, however, that the public should avoid entering floodwaters, if possible: That said, there’s no question that flooding raises concerns about bacterial and chemical contamination, and that’s why we recommend people avoid contact direct with the water as much as possible. Anyone with an open wound that comes into contact with floodwater should wash it promptly with soap and clean water and should watch for signs of an infection (swelling, pain, discoloration, blisters) and seek medical attention if they think the wound has become infected. Similarly, an 11 September 2017 statement by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality warned about the potential dangers presented by floodwaters: Floodwaters contain many hazards, including bacteria and other contaminants. Precautions should be taken by anyone involved in cleanup activities or any others who may be exposed to flood waters. These precautions include heeding all warnings from local and state authorities regarding safety advisories. In addition to the drowning hazards of wading, swimming, or driving in swift floodwaters, these waters can carry large objects that are not always readily visible that can cause injuries to those in the water. Other potential hazards include downed power lines and possible injuries inflicted by animals displaced by the floodwaters. There is no evidence of floodwaters in southeast Texas testing positive for the diseases and contaminants claimed in the viral Facebook post, and the local and state officials we contacted did not express any familiarity with any such testing. Although there is no evidence that floodwaters in southeast Texas have tested positive for the diseases and contaminants claimed in the Facebook post, that doesn’t mean that future testing won’t reveal such a contamination — or that the floodwater is safe. We know from testing organized by CNN and the New York Times that floodwaters in the Houston area have tested positive for exceptionally high levels of E. coli and sewage contamination. Houston is around 100 miles from the locations mentioned in the viral Facebook post.
|
11244
|
Fighting Advanced Thyroid Cancer with Immunotherapy
|
This release summarizes the preliminary results of an early Phase 1 safety trial using the drug pembrolizumab (marketed as Keytruda) in 22 patients with thyroid cancer that had not responded to chemotherapy. The study was presented at the large American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting as an abstract and has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal. While almost ignoring the safety aspect — the main purpose of a Phase 1 study — the abstract and release tout a 9.1 percent “overall response rate” among the six patients that completed the trial. Of the six completing the trial, two had a partial response. We think these results are too preliminary and based on too small of a group to warrant a news release calling Keytruda “promising” for advanced thyroid cancer. The release also omitted mention of the trial funders and the financial ties that exist between the investigators and the drug manufacturer. This study of a new drug for treating thyroid cancer is part of a wider area of research into immunotherapy, in which drugs target mechanisms of the human immune response. This drug is an example of targeted chemotherapy which is becoming more important as treatments can be fine-tuned to the cancers of individual patients. In patients with intractable cancers, immunotherapy appears to offer some new hope while also bringing sobering questions about affordability and disparity of access by income. The drugs are typically very expensive — with some estimates putting the treatment cost for a single patient as high as $1 million.
|
mixture
|
Academic medical center news release,Cancer
|
The release doesn’t mention cost. Immunotherapy drugs like Keytruda that are already on the market have received wide attention specifically because of their high prices..The cost of Keytruda is easily obtainable and is approximately $5,000 per 50mg single use vial. Although the dose was 10mg every two weeks, that would require two vials at approximately $10,000 per month drug costs or $240,000 for the two-year treatment program. The news release used careful language when describing the limited benefits seen in this Phase 1, safety oriented clinical trial. We appreciate the fact that this is not a journal article, but an abstract presentation for a conference. But we think that readers deserved a bit more information “At the time we reported our results, six of the 22 patients remained on treatment. Of those who completed therapy, two patients had a partial response for an overall response rate of 9.1 percent, and there was a stable disease rate of 54.5 percent. The six-month overall survival rate was 100 percent and the six month progression free survival rate was 58.7 percent.” That being said we are not provided with any information about the expected stable disease rate or progression-free survival rate in untreated patients. While the stable disease and progression free survival rates were provided, the reader has nothing to compare them to. There is one sentence related to harms in the release, but it doesn’t tell us what they are. “There were no treatment-related deaths or therapy discontinuations due to drug-related adverse effects.” The package insert lists the most common side effects as fatigue, cough, nausea, diarrhea, constipation, anorexia, arthralgia (joint pain), pruritus (severe itching), and rash. The release is clear about the early phase use of this drug in a small number of patients. There is no disease mongering. However, the release notes: “…the chance of being diagnosed with thyroid cancer has risen rapidly in the United States in recent years. This appears to be due to increased use of technology to detect thyroid nodules that may not otherwise been found previously.” But, no absolute numbers are provided. How many people are diagnosed? How has the rate changed in the last ten years? What are the implications of improved detection? Although there is no outright disease mongering, the reader is left with an incomplete picture of the relative risks of the disease. The release contains no description of funding sources or conflicts. Of the multiple authors, the link to the abstract (click the blue words “abstract disclosures”) identifies many connections to Merck which manufactures pembrolizumab. The release does not mention or compare any of the alternatives. According to Cancer.Net, approved treatments (depending on the type and stage of the thyroid cancer) include surgery, hormone treatment, radioactive iodine, external-beam radiation, chemotherapy and other therapies that target the immune system. The release makes it clear that pembrolizumab is under study in an early clinical trial. It does not, however, point out that the drug is in fact commercially available under the trade name Keytruda, a drug we have heard a great deal about in the past few months related to its use in melanoma. The release clearly states this was the first time the drug was administered to thyroid cancer patients. The release doesn’t engage in unjustifiable language.
|
26293
|
“Cannabis may stop coronavirus from infecting people, study finds.”
|
Cannabis extracts could be part of a treatment that helps prevent coronavirus — according to a preliminary study. The study has not been peer reviewed and it’s based only on lab testing. The lead researcher said more study, including testing on humans, must be done before any conclusions can be drawn.
|
false
|
Corrections and Updates, Drugs, Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Marijuana, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"Weed preventing COVID-19? That high hope seemed to rise from this headline: ""Cannabis May Stop Coronavirus From Infecting People, Study Finds."" The headline appeared on an article on MerryJane.com that was widely shared on Facebook. But readers should not get too excited. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The website updated its headline with more accurate information following the publication of this fact-check. A preliminary study supported researchers’ theory that certain cannabis extracts could be used as part of a treatment to prevent coronavirus infections. But the study has not been peer reviewed and no testing has yet been done on humans. ""Yes, this is an overstatement,"" Igor Kovalchuk, the lead researcher of the study, told PolitiFact about the headline. Cannabis and marijuana are not exactly the same. Cannabis refers to all products derived from the plant Cannabis sativa. The cannabis plant contains about 540 chemical substances. Marijuana refers to parts of, or products from, the plant Cannabis sativa that contain substantial amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). THC is the substance that’s primarily responsible for the effects of marijuana on a person’s mental state. The website that published the article is part of Los Angeles-based Merry Jane, which describes itself as a ""multi-media and lifestyle company that’s creating the new mainstream culture by connecting cannabis and pop culture."" The article, however, is more nuanced than its headline. The article says that based on the study, ""cannabis extracts could work as an ‘adjunct therapy’ in new medical products that could reduce the chances of someone getting COVID-19."" In other words, despite the headline on the article, the study isn’t saying cannabis alone could prevent infection. The study referred to in the article was done by six researchers from universities of Lethbridge and Calgary, both in Canada. The researchers are also affiliated with two startup companies that do medical cannabis and disease research. Their study was published April 19 in Preprints, which describes itself as a platform for ""early versions of research outputs"" that are not peer-reviewed. So, this is a preliminary research paper. According to the study, all cannabis plants for the study were grown in a licensed facility at the University of Lethbridge to obtain the extracts, which were then applied to artificial human 3D tissue models of oral, airway and intestinal tissues. ""Application was intended to model medical delivery, such as local mouthwash applications, encapsulated extracts and dosed oils, and inhalers or nebulizers, and therefore these results cannot be extrapolated to the effects of cannabis smoking,"" the study said. The extracts, ""pending further investigation, may become a useful and safe addition to the treatment of COVID-19 as an adjunct therapy,"" the study concluded. These extracts also ""can be used to develop easy-to-use preventative treatments in the form of mouthwash and throat gargle products for both clinical and at-home use. Such products ought to be tested for their potential to decrease viral entry via the oral mucosa. Given the current dire and rapidly evolving epidemiological situation, every possible therapeutic opportunity and avenue must be considered."" In short, the researchers theorize that cannabis extracts could interfere with the virus’ process of infection in cells — but this is based on laboratory testing on specially engineered tissue to fully mimic human organs, not testing on humans. ""Clinical trial (on humans) is a must,"" to determine whether extracts could help prevent COVID-19, Kovalchuk said. Virologist Angela Rasmussen, a research scientist at Columbia University, told PolitiFact ""it may be worth more study, but in my opinion this is a very long way from being a legitimate candidate for therapeutics or preventative products like mouthwash."" The headline of an article shared on Facebook said: ""Cannabis may stop coronavirus from infecting people, study finds."" The study found, based on lab testing, that cannabis extracts could be part of a treatment that dramatically reduces the chances of being infected by COVID-10. But the study is preliminary, has not been peer reviewed and tests on humans would need to be done to determine if the extracts could be part of a treatment that blocks the coronavirus, the study’s lead author said. The headline contains only an element of truth. Clarification, May 28, 2020: The study found cannabis extracts should be investigated as an adjuct treatment for COVID-19 in addition to its use in possible preventative products like mouthwash. This story has been updated to better reflect that distinction. Update, June 1, 2020: This story has been updated to reflect that MerryJane.com changed its headline following publication of this fact-check."
|
9503
|
Acupuncture May Be Effective Painkiller in the ER
|
This HealthDay story explains the findings from what it describes as the “the world’s largest randomized, controlled trial of acupuncture in the emergency department.” More than 500 patients were seen in four major hospital emergency departments for acute lower back pain, migraine headaches or ankle sprains. For pain control, they received either conventional painkiller drugs, acupuncture or a combination of the two. The story states that the acupuncture was proven as safe and effective as other treatments. Yet, as the study abstract states, “none of the examined therapies provided optimal acute analgesia.” That point didn’t make it into this story, which relied heavily on the news release. For another in-depth take on this story and the news coverage, see “A skeptical look at a study of acupuncture delivered in emergency rooms.” Given the growing trend in overdosing and dependency with the use of opiate painkilling medications, any effective alternative will be a welcome addition to public health care. Some patients cannot use some conventional analgesic medications and having an alternative therapy when needed would certainly be an improvement. But the story fails to give readers any insight into whether they might expect acupuncture as a possible alternate therapy when they visit the hospital’s emergency department.
|
false
|
acupuncture
|
There was no mention of the cost of acupuncture treatments in the story, nor was there any comparison between such costs and the costs for standard analgesic drugs that might be administered in an emergency department. A provider trained in acupuncture would need to be available at the time the patient needed assistance. If acupuncture increased time in the ED, that would add cost and reduce capacity for other patients. These are important considerations (as cost drivers) in a fast-paced environment. The story does a good job quantifying the measured benefits of the study, giving readers a lot of information on what the researchers measured, especially when it describes how many points the pain dropped on the pain scale. However, the story makes the claim that “acupuncture is a safe and effective alternative to pain medications for some emergency room patients, a new study reports.” None of the data presented in the story proves it is a safe and effective alternative. Instead, the data just shows that none of the pain interventions worked very well. As the story describes, “one hour after treatment, less than 40 percent of all patients had significant pain reduction, meaning at least a 2-point decline on the 10-point scale.” And as the study abstract states, “none of the examined therapies provided optimal acute analgesia.” That point didn’t make it into this story. There is no mention in the story of possible harms from the use of acupuncture. While the risks may be slight in most cases, they are not negligible. Infection is always possible and some can be serious. Also if a patient is not given an actual pain reliever and has to revisit the ER later, that is a harm. The story identifies this research as a multi-center, randomized clinical trial comparing three alternative therapeutic approaches. It also states that this was “billed as the world’s largest randomized, controlled trial of acupuncture in the emergency department” and included a patient population of more than 500 people. Still, we would have appreciated more information on what they meant by “satisfied” in the follow-up visit. Did they say the pain was much better? Or gone? Wouldn’t a majority of the patients in a typical ER with one of these three problems (acute back pain, migraine, or ankle sprain) have their pain “satisfied” (mostly gone) no matter what you gave them, since those issues are all self-limited? These and other limitations needed more discussion in the story. The story does not appear to be disease-mongering. This story offers quoted statements only from the lead investigator for the trial. No independent sources or quoted, nor are we told who funded the study. The story explains that the study compared the result of using acupuncture versus the use of painkillers versus the use of both in tandem, so it is clear that there are alternatives available for analgesia. However, the three conditions–acute low back pain, migraines or ankle sprains–are all treated differently and have a host of known appropriate strategies. For example, rest for back pain, triptan medications for migraine, ice and elevation for sprain. We think this deserved a mention in the story. While acupuncture is becoming more widely available in most communities, there is no information in the story that suggests how available it might be in large hospital emergency departments. Also, would it be available in a timely manner? It would be pretty novel if the study had shown that acupuncture was more effective than conventional analgesic drugs in controlling pain, but that’s not what this study showed. While both the study and the story did seem to indicate that acupuncture was as effective as either painkillers or painkillers and acupuncture, the abstract of the study also said “none of the examined therapies provided optimal acute analgesia.” Controlling pain was arguably the reason the study’s patients went to the emergency departments. The study basically said acupuncture was as good as painkillers for pain control but that for these patients, neither was successful. We think that should have been explained in the story to help establish the novelty of this research. The two quoted statements in this story are identical to those in the university’s news release. The story appears to rely heavily on that news release. For example, this quote appears in both the news story and the news release: “While acupuncture is widely used by practitioners in community settings for treating pain, it is rarely used in hospital emergency departments,” said study lead investigator Marc Cohen. He is a professor in the School of Health and Biomedical Sciences at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia.
|
32267
|
Chelsea Clinton's home is actually a medical care facility for Hillary Clinton in order to more effectively hide and treat her health problems.
|
Even if Hillary Clinton were receiving clandestine medical care at a secret facility, there would be no reason for that facility to be located at Metrocare Home Services’ former site, as all of the medical care offered by them was, by nature, outside their office.
|
false
|
Politics Conspiracy Theories, 2016 presidential election, chelsea clinton, hillary clinton
|
On 11 September 2016, video of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton swaying and appearing to faint at an event added fuel to already rampant rumors that she was battling everything from a brain tumor to vascular dementia. The rumors were not tamped down by the Clinton campaign’s disclosure that she was, in fact, suffering from pneumonia, nor were they affected by her appearance at her daughter’s apartment later that day. In fact, her trip to her daughter’s New York City apartment gave rise to a new rumor: That Chelsea Clinton’s purported apartment is actually a front for a medical facility, placed in New York specially so that her mother could receive clandestine medical care whenever she needed it. This particular theory was bolstered by the fact that the apartment building, The Whitman, really did have an office for a medical care facility at some point: But, as the New York Department of Health listing clearly says, the facility closed well before its relaunch as a luxe apartment complex in 2013: The units start at $10 million and go up to $22.5 millionfor the penthouse. Lorber tried to put a bargain-minded spin on things by pointing out that that’s only $2,000/square foot, and “today you start saying to yourself, why is it only $2,000/foot?” given other prices in the area. (The assembled brokers chuckled uncomfortably.) That penthouse comes with 27,000 square feet of air rights, which a buyer could choose to use or — and we’re not sure whether to be worried or intrigued by this — to resell. The Whitman was built in 1924, originally intended as the headquarters for a textile company called “Clarence B. Whitman & Sons.” It went through many iterations before it became the “luxury fortress” that Chelsea Clinton bought just after its conversion into apartments. A profile of the building mentions that the developer who converted them bought them in 2011: “One of the things that attracted me to this building is that there are so few parks, especially South-facing buildings parks,” said developer David Mitchell of Mitchell Holdings LLC, whom The Observer met when we toured the still under-construction building (it is expected to be completed by early Spring). Mitchell Holdings bought the 1924 building — a former showroom — from the plumber’s union for a mere $13 million in 2011. Mr. Mitchell gestured out the big windows to the park beyond, noting that the living room in which we stood might not look particularly large, but it was actually 1,500 square feet. The Plumbers Local 1 had owned the building since the 1970s, and much of it was empty by the time Mitchell’s company bought it out: Christen Portelli, managing principal of Highcap Group LLC has sold 21 East 26th St. (aka 16 East 27th St.) located between Fifth and Madison Aves. which sold for $13.5 million. The Plumbers Local 1 had owned the property since the 1970s and it was once used as a headquarters. The 28,600 s/f elevator block-through building was delivered mostly vacant and the new ownership plans to convert the property into condominiums. The conversion project is scheduled to appear on Bravo’s “Million Dollar Listing.” Part of the building was evidently used by Metrocare Home Services (and other businesses, as is common in New York City) for some time, as can be seen by the following document dated August 1991: As of 2012, Metrocare is a division of Tri-Borough Home Care, which offers support services for the elderly and those with Alzheimer’s, diabetes, HIV and AIDS, and other health issues that limit mobility inside and outside the home; while it does offer on-site care, the company is headquartered elsewhere. After the merger, the company pruned its staff and closed some of its offices, presumably including the office in the building now occupied by Chelsea Clinton, although we were unable to locate any official records of when that particular office actually closed. However, Tri-Borough Home Care and Metrocare don’t have a main facility that services patients; the services they offer are strictly at the patients’ homes (which is why they have home care right in the name). From Tri-Borough Home Care’s web site: Home health care is becoming a much more common way to receive medical care, whether it’s for at-home nursing care after a hospital stay or ongoing assistance with daily living. The reasons vary. Patients are being discharged sooner from hospitals and are receiving care in their own homes. Thanks to technological advances, many procedures, including dialysis, chemotherapy and wound care, which previously could be performed only in a medical facility, can now be safely and efficiently carried out in a home setting. As time goes on, it is expected that more and more Americans will be receiving much of their medical care where they prefer — in the comfort of their own homes. When the Whitman’s fourth floor apartment was offered for sale in early 2013, over five months before Chelsea Clinton and her husband purchased it, its listing included no photographs or mention of a medical facility among its amenities.
|
37573
|
Joe Biden voted for a bill which made it difficult or impossible to discharge student loans during bankruptcy; Bernie Sanders voted against it.
|
Did Joe Biden Vote for a Bankruptcy Bill Which Made Student Loans ‘Ineligible for Financial Relief’?
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Politics
|
A March 5 2020 r/SandersForPresident (and r/all) thread featured a title maintaining that Democratic Party presidential candidate Joe Biden “passed the bill” making student loans “ineligible for financial relief,” and an attached ten-second clip featured fellow presidential Bernie Sanders making a similar statement:Joe Biden passed the bill that made student loans ineligible for financial relief. Joe Biden is the reason so many of us don’t have families yet. Joe Biden is why we can’t afford houses. Joe Biden is why we’re working longer hours for lower wages. from SandersForPresidentThat thread had a long title: “Joe Biden passed the bill that made student loans ineligible for financial relief. Joe Biden is the reason so many of us don’t have families yet. Joe Biden is why we can’t afford houses. Joe Biden is why we’re working longer hours for lower wages.”By contrast, in the ten-second video, Sanders said:Joe Biden voted for a bankruptcy bill, on behalf of the credit card companies, and that bill has done a lot of harm to working families all over this country … I voted against it.A difference in wording between the title and the clip was important — the original poster stated Biden “passed the bill,” while Sanders stated that Biden had “voted for a bankruptcy bill.” Here, we are examining whether Biden voted for a bankruptcy bill with the described features, as Biden himself was not empowered to “pass” a bill — presumably the submitter was echoing Sanders’ claims in the clip.The snippet originated from a longer interview with Sanders conducted by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on March 4 2020. Although MSNBC curated short clips from the interview, none was specifically labeled as having to do with Sanders’ claim about Biden and the bankruptcy bill. (We were unable to find a transcript. )In the clip we transcribed above, Sanders didn’t mention a specific bill. However, it wasn’t difficult to narrow down specific legislation due to the prominence of student debt as an issue in the 2020 primary.In December 2019, The Guardian published an article with a headline (“How Biden helped create the student debt problem he now promises to fix”) making claims similar to those made by Sanders in the brief video shared to Reddit. With a subheading claiming that the “former vice-president and 2020 presidential hopeful backed a 2005 bill that stripped students of bankruptcy protections and left millions in financial stress,” it reported in part:In [February 2020] Joe Biden will lay “Joe’s vision for America” at the feet of Iowa’s caucus-goers in the hope that the first voters in the Democratic presidential race will put him on the road to the White House.Among his promises is that he will fix the student loan crisis saddling 45 million Americans with crippling debt now totalling a staggering $1.5tn … [Biden’s] pledge is one of the most striking policies on offer from Democratic candidates in the 2020 race, given how the problem Biden now proposes to resolve came about in the first place. Private student loans were largely stripped of bankruptcy protections in 2005 in a congressional move that had the devastating impact of tripling such debt over a decade and locking in millions of Americans to years of grueling repayments.The Republican-led bill tightened the bankruptcy code, unleashing a huge giveaway to lenders at the expense of indebted student borrowers. At the time it faced vociferous opposition from 25 Democrats in the US Senate.But it passed anyway, with 18 Democratic senators breaking ranks and casting their vote in favor of the bill. Of those 18, one politician stood out as an especially enthusiastic champion of the credit companies who, as it happens, had given him hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions – Joe Biden.The Guardian quoted University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill law professor Melissa Jacoby on Biden’s role in the bill’s passage:Biden was one of the most powerful people who could have said no, who could have changed this. Instead he used his leadership role to limit the ability of other Democrats who had concerns and who wanted the bill softened[. ]In January 2020, TheIntercept.com covered the origins and progression of student loan debt in the United States, up to and including its prevalence in Democratic primary debates and platforms.… as a senator from Delaware, Biden was one of the most enthusiastic supporters of the disastrous 2005 bankruptcy bill that made it nearly impossible for borrowers to reduce their student loan debt. The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act raised the bar for families to pursue Chapter 7 bankruptcy protections. It overwhelmingly passed in the Senate at the end of the Clinton administration, over the objections of [Elizabeth] Warren, then a bankruptcy expert who had tangled for years with Biden over the issue. She lobbied first lady Hillary Clinton, who herself persuaded Bill Clinton to veto it.Biden came back to the legislation under the Bush administration; it passed the Senate in 2005 on a 74-25 vote, with most Democratic lawmakers, including then-Sen. Barack Obama, voting against it. ([Hillary] Clinton, by then a senator from New York, voted for it.) George W. Bush signed it into law, and private student loan debt skyrocketed in the wake of its passage. The total amount of private student loan debt more than doubled between 2005 and 2011, growing from $55.9 billion to $140.2 billion, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.In February 2020, RealClearPolitics examined Biden’s 2020 campaign stance on student debt, and contrasted it with his support in the early 2000s for more restrictions on student borrowers:Biden’s student-loan plan represents a radical departure from positions he held during bankruptcy-law negotiations in the early 2000s. Then a senator from Delaware, he forcefully backed measures that made it much harder for private student-loan borrowers filing for bankruptcy to shed that debt. Representing many of the big financial institutions based in his home state, Biden was such a reliable advocate for the financial services industry that he was often referred to as “the senator from MBNA,” the credit-card company that regularly doled out contributions to his campaigns.In promoting a 2005 bankruptcy reform measure, Biden argued that too many people were skipping out of their debts too easily and sticking other borrowers with the bill while interest rates rose as a result… A bankruptcy court judge also testifying [the same day as Biden] took issue with Biden’s stance, arguing that government-backed student loans aren’t dischargeable – something that has remained the case since then, as well.“You would never be able to [discharge government-backed student loans like] that,” Judge Randall Newsome said.“Like heck you can’t,” Biden countered. “…You are full of malarkey, judge.”Newsome was just one of the many opponents of the bill whom Biden sparred with at the time. Elizabeth Warren, then a Harvard law professor, opposed the bankruptcy bill so aggressively that she says it inspired her to run for the Senate.“I got in that fight because [families] just didn’t have anyone, and Joe Biden was on the side of the credit card companies,” Warren said at an April rally in Iowa. “It’s all a matter of public record.”As Newsome noted, discharging government-backed student loans is, and has always been, nearly impossible. However, the 2005 bill was described as involving private student loan debt, not debt held by the federal government.In January 2020, the American Prospect reported that Biden had voted several times against “softening” the effects of that bill (abbreviated as BAPCPA) on myriad demographics hardest hit by its provisions:Biden also consistently voted against efforts to soften BAPCPA’s blow on vulnerable populations. He voted against three amendments to ease bankruptcy requirements for consumers whose financial troubles stem from medical expenses. He voted against an amendment that would have helped seniors keep their homes. He voted against exempting servicemembers and widows of servicemembers killed in action from the law’s eligibility restrictions. He voted against an amendment to exempt women whose financial troubles stemmed from deadbeat husbands’ failure to pay child support or alimony. And Biden even voted against an amendment that would have ensured that children of debtors could still be given birthday and Christmas presents. Biden also voted against allowing debtors to pay their union dues during bankruptcy, potentially imperiling their employment and ability to achieve financial rehabilitation.In excerpts above, the bill Biden was often accused of supporting was referenced by its name — the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Text of the bill was available on Congress.gov, and Section 220 of the bill declared both private and federal student debt exempt from being discharged in bankruptcy. A summary of all of the bill’s points can be viewed here.In the clip, Sanders made two claims about voting on the bill, stating that Biden voted for it, and that he — Sanders — had voted against it. According to Senate.gov, Biden voted in favor of the bill in the Senate on March 10 2005. Per GovTrack.us, Sanders (then in the House of Representatives) did vote against the same bill on April 14 2005.On Reddit, a post to r/SandersForPresident misstated Sanders’ statement on the 2005 bankruptcy bill making it virtually impossible to discharge private student debt. Sanders said that Biden “voted for a bankruptcy bill, on behalf of the credit card companies, and that bill has done a lot of harm to working families all over this country … I voted against it.” Sanders was correct — Biden was among the few Democrats voting in favor of that 2005 bill in the Senate, and when it came around to the House the following month, Sanders voted against it.
|
5841
|
STD cases increase in Montana.
|
Health officials say cases of sexually transmitted diseases have increased in Montana.
|
true
|
Sexually transmitted diseases, Health, Missoula, Montana, Gonorrhea, Syphilis, United States
|
Dr. Chris Baumert, a family physician at RiverStone Health, told the Billings Gazette there’s been a steep increase in the number of cases of syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has labeled the threat of antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea one of the nation’s most urgent public health threats. The rate of gonorrhea cases in the United States has increased 75.2 percent since the historic low in 2009. Montana officials are projecting more than 1,000 cases of gonorrhea in the state this year, compared to 867 in 2017. ___ Information from: The Billings Gazette, http://www.billingsgazette.com
|
26688
|
Akira’ is a 1988 movie about an apocalyptic event taking place months before Tokyo 2020 Olympics, showing the (World Health Organization) advising Japan to postpone the Olympics because of a pandemic risk
|
The movie does not feature a pandemic of any sort. The WHO is never mentioned in the movie. Neo Tokyo, the fictional city in the movie, was scheduled to host the 2020 Olympics.
|
false
|
Health Care, Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Viral image,
|
"The coronavirus is a global pandemic, according to the World Health Organization. But it is not one that was predicted by the 1988 Japanese thriller ""Akira."" A viral post circulating on Facebook claims that a conspiracy theory surrounds Katsuhiro Otomo’s 32-year-old animated film. ""‘Akira’ is a 1988 movie about an apocalyptic event taking place months before Tokyo 2020 Olympics, showing the WHO advising Japan to postpone the Olympics because of a pandemic risk,"" reads the first panel of the image. The post, which had been shared more than 32,000 times as of March 11, makes it seem as though ""Akira"" predicted an outbreak like that of the coronavirus decades ago. But almost none of its claims are true. Yes, in ""Akira"" the city of Neo Tokyo is scheduled to host the 2020 Olympic games. Neo Tokyo is the name of the city built after Tokyo was destroyed by a massive bomb in 1988 at the very beginning of the film. At one point, a scene identifies that the Olympics’ Opening Ceremonies are 147 days away, but the Olympics are only mentioned a handful of times throughout the movie. In fact, the final battle takes place at the Olympic stadium, but the Olympics are not central to the plot of the film. The film, which is available to watch on Hulu in both an English-dubbed version and a Japanese version with English subtitles, is an adaptation of Otomo’s popular comic book series. It tells the story of a teenage biker gang that roams the streets looking for trouble, until the group accidentally gets caught up in a secret government experiment that involves children with psychic abilities. The plot is complex and culminates in an epic battle against an overwhelming energy force, but there is no outbreak of disease. The WHO was not present and not mentioned at any point in the film. The topic of canceling the Olympics was never discussed on screen, though when Mashable Southeast Asia looked into this conspiracy, they reported that some of the graffiti on the sign that counts down to the opening ceremonies reads, ""Just cancel it,"" in Japanese. Furthermore, the ""apocalyptic event"" the post seems to refer to occurs within the first two minutes of the film. A massive explosion destroys Tokyo, but this takes place in 1988 before the film jumps in time to 2019. Our ruling A social media post claims that the film ""Akira"" shows ""the WHO advising Japan to postpone the Olympics because of a pandemic risk."" In the film, there is no outbreak of disease, the WHO never makes an appearance, and the Olympics aren’t canceled due to a pandemic risk. (It is also worth noting that the WHO has not advised Japan to cancel the 2020 Tokyo Olympics at this point.)"
|
36114
|
"A Facebook post shows an explicitly anti-abortion sculpture called ""the neverborn child."
|
Pro-Life Art: ‘The Neverborn Child’ Meme
|
mixture
|
Disinformation, Fact Checks
|
"In early October 2019, the Facebook disinformation page “ForAmerica” shared the following meme, insisting that it shows a “pro-life sculpture” called “the neverborn child”:Captions added to the image and a status update read:PRO-LIFE ART “THE NEVERBORN CHILD” BY ARTIST MARTIN HUDACEKBeautiful! Wish it wasn’t necessary.As it was presented and shared in the United States, the claim was similar to one about an empty cradle purportedly representing “aborted children.” No further information about the artwork — even basic details, such as where the sculpture is displayed — nor any news links about it accompanied the post.We did a reverse image search to find earlier versions of the sculpture and possibly uncover more information about its creator. A February 2017 post to Reddit’s r/pics included the image and discussion about its meaning:A monument in Slovakia. It’s called ""The Child who was Never Born."" from picsIn a comment, a Redditor acknowledged that readers readily inferred it was about abortion:So, another take on this, and the one I took away when I saw this monument, is that this represents a child never born because they either were not conceived, were stillborn, or were lost early. As someone who has had multiple miscarriages and is still trying for our first after ten years, I saw it in a completely different way than most who have already commented.In our initial search, we located two previous “meme” versions of the sculpture — both featuring a different claim about the piece:The text read:“The Child Who Was Never Born” a statue of a woman after a miscarriage.This sculpture was called ‘Child That Was Never Born.’ Sharing for all the mothers who have lost a child to miscarriage to let you know our angels walk beside us every day, so beautiful #mommymomentsImmediately, we had two conflicting explanations for the sculpture. One was that a “pro-life sculptor” created it as an unfortunately “necessary” message about abortion, the other that the work was intended to comfort grieving mothers of miscarried babies.On blogs and websites, the sculpture was presented in both contexts. A 2015 blog post to a therapy practice’s site described it in a post simply titled “Lost Children,” implying that it carried a more inclusive message:It is a beautifully poignant sculpture and I simply invite you to look at the image and ponder whatever lies in your heart.Another 2015 post on an anti-abortion, Catholicism-centric site included quotes from sculptor Martin Hudacek. Hudacek is Slovakian, and abortion is a topic handled differently both legally and culturally in Slovakia. Although opposition to abortion exists, the political landscape is not analogous to that of the United States:Abortion laws in Slovakia are relatively liberal compared to those in countries like Poland or Malta, which have among the strictest laws in the European Union and often allow them only in cases like rape.It’s worth noting that any explicit mention of abortion is not a direct quote, instead inferred and interspersed into half-sentences and other remarks by Hudacek. That post was titled “With a child’s touch, sculpture seeks to comfort those who mourn abortion”:He told [the site] that a friend inspired the project.“It all began when on my way back home from my friend’s place who prays and meditates a lot, (and) he told me I have to carve a statue” that depicts the effects of post-abortion syndrome, “a big problem and there is no such statue regarding this issue.”Hudacek said that he was “touched in such way that I wanted to make a monument for the unborn children,” but he had no idea where to start. He asked people to pray.“I was praying and many people came to me and said I need a picture of forgiveness,” he said. As time passed, the image became clearer and clearer in his mind: “it looked like a crying mother and a child who forgives her.”The two primary interpretations (abortion and miscarriage) seemed to be reflected in Hudacek’s account of the sculpture’s effects on people who view the sculpture:Many people have come to him to tell how the statue speaks directly to their problem. When they look at the statue, “they see and experience what they needed to see and experience,” the artist said.That was again evident in subsequent quotes from Hudacek, alongside information about a version of the sculpture placed in a cemetery. That site reported that the third iteration showed “a father alongside the grieving mother and their aborted child.” But that statue was actually placed at the grave of a child who was miscarried or stillborn, not aborted:[In October 2015] Hudacek completed a third version of the “Memorial for Unborn Children” statue. This edition is seven feet tall. But there is an addition: it shows a father alongside the grieving mother and their aborted child.This statue now sits inside a cemetery in Wroclaw, Poland, where it has been placed above the crypt of a child who died before birth. This particular statue was done “only for the people in Wroclaw,” explained the artist, who currently lives in the small Slovakian village of Telgárt.In 2012 Hudacek’s brother (not Hudacek himself) referenced abortion in response to a question from an American anti-abortion website. On his site, Hudacek references the globally-recognized statue in his biography, alongside a separate work with a theme of infant and child spirits comforting bereaved parents:… In 2012 [Hudacek] graduated from the Academy of Arts in Banská Bystrica, department of sculpture. His debut, The Memorial of Unborn Children, was created as a bachelor thesis. Master thesis is called, “As a Child”. It’s a baby that falls from the stand. She has no fear, she is smiling and held out her hand. She knows that the parent is close and will catch her.In a 2012 interview with a blog, Hudacek described the same inspiration he mentioned in the half-quoted 2015 interview linked above:Martin got the idea for the sculpture as he was walking home one day. He met up with a friend that encouraged him to make a memorial for unborn children. At first, Martin resisted the idea. The idea persisted. It resided in his heart in a way that couldn’t be resisted – one of those quite whispers that are hard to ignore – the kind of whisper that you attribute to the Creator alone. Martin gives God the credit for the decision to make this sculpture his “bachelor’s study work[.”]In 2014, Hudacek answered questions about his work and the sculpture in a lengthy interview [PDF] with a religious magazine. Of the piece’s creation, Hudacek described initial resistance to his concept. Later, he said, the sculpture began striking a chord globally — first in Latin America, where anti-abortion organizations first began embracing it:The photo of the original [sculpture was] later received on the web and [spread] around the whole planet. [People] responded in particular Latin America, where the [work was discovered by] Rachel’s Vineyard dealing with the concept of a conceived child. They asked for permissions, to use the photo for their promotional material … I got a lot of newspapers every day from America, Russia, Australia, Italy, France, Spain … that this is what they are experiencing. I was delighted that The Holy Spirit has arranged it this way. I understood, that this is a topic not only for Slovakia, where it is in the beginning it was not understood. Maybe also as a result, it has expanded further. The whole thing turned around. Currently a statue recognized and incorporated into contemporary modern Art. But if it wasn’t for me in the beginning [challenged] by [my] associate professor, I do not know how turned out. [The professor] fulfilled his mission.According to Hudacek, reaction to the statue and its popularity among anti-abortion groups influenced his subsequent views. When asked about how the statue and its popularity affected his life, Hudacek responded:First of all, it moved me in the direction to support [protecting life]. The doctrine of the Church is clear: we are to protect life. But after these values are so treading (wars, riots, abortions …) that today’s society cannot accept. Well, we always have to talk. Although we do not speak. Art has a way of conveying the message.When asked about his work’s themes, Hudacek mentioned “God’s mercy” as a motivating theme:It symbolizes that however great a sin might be, God’s mercy is greater. Pieta is installed in front of the church in Sobrance. The place is public and people can bring to it their burdens….Hudacek’s “Memorial to Unborn Children” is often presented as a work explicitly about abortion in the politically tense debate about the topic in the United States. Sculptor Martin Hudacek created it in 2010, but we were unable to find any indication that the sculpture was created with either abortion or miscarriage in mind; visually, the sculpture represents a “spirit” child comforting a grieving mother. In later years, Hudacek acknowledged the piece’s popularity among anti-abortion groups globally, and described how that reaction had influenced his feelings about the topic of “life” in general (with respect to war and abortion).Any definitive declaration of exclusive meaning relating to Hudacek’s “Memorial to Unborn Children” potentially negates the other, and the sculpture had also been shared as a representation of pregnancy and infant loss, particularly in relation to miscarriage and stillbirth. As is the case with most art, its meaning is inherently subjective — and commenters illustrated its “Rorschach test” nature. Readers with strong political views on abortion viewed it through that lens, and bereaved parents another.We emailed Hudacek to see if he could clarify his inspiration versus his later feelings about the piece, but have not yet received a response."
|
30183
|
A girl in need of a kidney transplant receives a $1 donation for that purpose every time her photo is shared on Facebook.
|
Even if no money actually changes hands in connection with these posts, the sharing of them indirectly assists scammers by driving followers, shares, and likes to their social media pages, creating popular platforms from which they can launch other fraudulent schemes.
|
false
|
Fraud & Scams
|
Many social media users have encountered a post showing a picture of a little girl in what looks to be a hospital bed, along with any one of several captions indicating she is awaiting a kidney transplant and will receive $1 every time her picture is shared via social media: She gets a dollar for every pic that’s shared on messenger it goes towards her kidney transplant…. you gotta share plz she is my neighbors kid The child pictured here is not awaiting the transplant of a kidney (or any other organ). According to Click Paraná, she is (as of October 2017) a four-year-old Brazilian girl named Aninha who is undergoing chemotherapy for treatment of leukemia in Paraná (one of Brazil’s 26 states). This item is just another iteration of a long-running online hoax/scam entreating users to share posts and photographs under the false premise that doing so will help to secure an organ transplant or money for surgery needed by a desperately ill child.
|
9881
|
New study widens debate on the value of mammograms
|
This story clearly outlines how a study of mammography screening in Norway feeds into debate about the value of breast cancer screening. It includes the comments of experts who have a variety of perspectives on the latest data. Women have been whipsawed by often confusing statements and claims about whether and when to get a mammogram. This story lays out how the latest study data points to benefits of screening… but that the benefits appear to be smaller than most people believe.
|
true
|
The story does not mention the cost of mammography (or of follow up tests and treatments) to the individual, or, collectively, to society. Based on the results of this study, 2,500 women would have to be screened every other year for a decade in order to prevent one death from breast cancer. As the story points out, during that same time 1,000 of those women would have at least one false alarm and 500 would undergo an unnecessary biopsy, thus adding to the price tag. The story reports both the 10 percent reduction in breast cancer deaths that the researchers attributed to screening, as well as the calculation that 2,500 women would have to be screened for a decade to prevent one breast cancer death. The story points out that there are many false alarms among women who are screened with mammography and that most of the cancers that are found and treated would not have been lethal. It notes calculations from an editorial accompanying the study that for every breast cancer death prevented five or more women are treated for tumors that would never have become lethal. The story accurately describes the study and highlights some of the advantages of the methods used in this study compared to earlier studies. We wish it had mentioned some of the limitations of the observational methods used. For instance, the researchers mentioned that a longer study may have found a larger benefit to screening. Nonetheless, we’ll give it the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. The story does not exaggerate the threat of breast cancer and emphasizes that this study and others indicate that the effect of mammography screening is more modest than most women believe. The story includes more than one independent source. However, the story does not tell readers the sources of funding, which were the Cancer Registry of Norway and the Research Council of Norway. The story highlights experts talking about the decision about whether or not to get screening mammograms, and therefore addresses even the option of foregoing mammograms. Although the availability of mammography is not at issue in this story, it could have pointed out that the researchers attributed most of the decrease in breast cancer deaths to multidisciplinary breast cancer management teams. While all the women screened by mammography in Norway had access to these expert teams, women in the U.S. who get mammography may not have access to this sort of treatment support. In this case, the novelty of the approach is the study method. The story reports that Norway provided researchers with a unique opportunity, since mammography screening was phased in over a nine year period, thus allowing researchers to compare the outcomes of women who were screened to similar women who were not. The story includes interviews and other information that does not appear to come from a news release.
|
|
8885
|
FDA says Germany recalls blood-thinner heparin.
|
Germany has recalled supplies of the blood thinner heparin following reports of severe reactions, expanding a withdrawal of the drug linked to 19 U.S. deaths, the Food and Drug Administration said on Thursday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The recall brings into question the safety of European supplies of the drug, which become the target of a U.S. investigation after a spike in fatalities and severe reactions in some patients taking heparin sold by Baxter International Inc. “What is significant about the German recall is that the heparin active ingredient in their product was not obtained from SPL,” or Scientific Protein Labs, Baxter’s supplier, FDA Deputy Commissioner Janet Woodcock said. “We’re concerned about worldwide, this contaminant, in heparin and making sure it is safe, (and) out of the heparin supply,” Woodcock said. German authorities do not expect a shortage of the drug, FDA said. The FDA began probing Baxter’s heparin several weeks ago after it was linked with to four deaths and hundreds of severe reactions, such as breathing problems and rapid drops in blood pressure. On Wednesday it said it identified a contaminant that may be linked with the drug’s problems. Some 19 fatalities have now been associated with use of the drug in the United States, the FDA said on Wednesday. However, all the deaths have not been linked to a specific drug maker. The other major U.S. heparin supplier, APP Pharmaceuticals Inc, has ramped up production to avoid a drug shortage. Tests on APP’s heparin have not found any contamination, Woodcock said on Wednesday. No fatalities were seen in Germany, and “less than 100” severe reactions led to the recall, the FDA said. The German product manufacturer, Rotexmedica GmbH, could not be immediately reached for comment. Heparin is derived from pig intestines. It is used in dialysis and heart procedures, among other surgeries, to avoid blood clots. FDA officials also advised companies and countries to begin using a sophisticated testing technique the agency used to find the potential contaminant, to test all heparin on the market. “With this testing method, there will be a way to protect the heparin supply,” Woodcock said. Baxter’s main supplier is Wisconsin-based Scientific Protein Laboratories LLC (SPL), which has a major facility in China, a main subject of FDA’s investigation. About 80 percent of the active pharmaceutical ingredients come from foreign sources, according to U.S. government investigators. Most of the world’s heparin supply is from China, according to Baxter. The FDA inspects only about 7 percent of foreign manufacturing facilities annually, according to the Government Accountability Office, a congressional watchdog agency. China’s reputation has been tainted after health scares with pigs and massive recalls of pet food and children’s toys containing lead paint. Sidney Wolfe, head of health research at the consumer group Public Citizen, said the FDA has poorly allocated its resources for inspections. “China has a tiny fraction of plants being inspected as opposed to India, which is dangerous considering that China is a country far less advanced,” Wolfe said. The FDA conducted about 13 inspections at Chinese plants in 2007, versus 65 at plants in India. China has 714 facilities against India’s 410, according to the GAO report. Baxter has recalled most of its U.S. supplies of the drug. It sells the product in other European countries but not in Germany. But Baxter does not sell the specific vial-based product linked to the four U.S. deaths in European markets, company spokeswoman Erin Gardiner said.
|
2643
|
Cities' efforts to make exercise easier pays off.
|
Fitness is often a combination of personal choice and environmental support, experts say, and a ranking of the 50 healthiest U.S. cities seems to reinforce the theory.
|
true
|
Health News
|
A man jogs under a canopy of cherry blossoms around the Tidal Basin in Washington, March 25, 2010. REUTERS/Jim Young High rates of physical activity helped to propel Minneapolis-St. Paul to the top of the list of the American College of Sports Medicine’s 2012 American Fitness Index (AFI) for the second year in a row, while raised obesity levels and smoking pushed Oklahoma City to the bottom. “When I say Minneapolis ranked No. 1, people give me an ‘are you kidding me’ kind of look,” said Walter Thompson, the chairman of the AFI Advisory Board. “Between November 1 and April 1 they have cold and snow, but they’ve addressed that.” Thompson said the solution was a proliferation of exercise studios that dot main streets, and a local government that has invested resources in park lands. When people in Minneapolis were asked if they had any physical activity in last 30 days, he said 82.9 percent said they had. The index, which considered factors ranging from the number of tennis courts to the percentage of smokers, relied on information from federal government data, such as Centers for Disease Control and U.S. Census reports, as well as information from the 50 cities. Washington, D.C., Boston, San Francisco, and Hartford in Connecticut were the five fittest, healthiest metro areas, while Birmingham, Dallas, Texas, Louisville, Detroit, Michigan and Oklahoma City fared the poorest. “A couple of cities have made significant improvements,” said Thompson about the rankings, which began in 2008. “A policy decision can dramatically impact environmental indicators, like smoking bans or bicycle lane ordinances.” New York City, ranked 22, climbed eight spots since 2011, while Nashville, at 27, gained 10 and Las Vegas climbed four spots to 39. Shirley Archer, a spokeswoman for the American Council on Exercise, said studies show that many environmental factors affect how physically active people are in their communities. “The more available green spaces, the more likely kids and adults are to enjoy that outdoor space, so simply having more parks and playgrounds makes a huge difference,” said Archer. “If you add walking, jogging or biking paths, people will use them.” Connecticut-based exercise physiologist and running coach Tom Holland also believes that if you build it, they will come. He said last year his home town of New Canaan, in Connecticut, filled holes and covered up tree roots and rocks on a popular public park trail to make it safer for running. “Stimulus money that went to fixing/repaving roads has made running and biking on them much safer and more fun,” he said. With an obesity rate of over 31 percent and almost 23 percent of residents still smoking, according to the index, Louisville’s 48th place ranking does not surprise Kathy Harrison, communications director for Louisville Metro Public Health & Wellness. But she’s optimistic about the future. “I really feel like we mirror a lot of the country. We have quite a few problems when it comes to health,” Harrison said. “But since 2004 we’ve been making quite few changes.” Initiatives include bringing farmers markets into so-called food deserts, which Harrison defines as low-income areas saturated with fast-food options but short on public transportation choices. “We’re also working with convenience stores to become healthier,” she said. “We’ll assist them if they meet certain criteria.” Projects are also under way to dramatically increase the biking/hiking trails around Louisville. “We’re a working on a ‘road diet,’ taking highways from four lanes to three,” Harrison said about the project to accommodate and encourage more foot and bicycle traffic. “We’ve created some fun events to promote fitness. We have natural amenities,” Harrison said. “Promoting a sense of fun brings people to them.”
|
27407
|
"Sen. Tom Cotton's office has sent ""cease-and-desist"" letters to constituents ordering them not to contact him."
|
We contacted Cotton’s office seeking further comment on the October 2017 letters and explore any connection to the town halls, but did not receive response.
|
true
|
Politics, Ozark Indivisible, Sen. Tom Cotton
|
Activists in Arkansas accused Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of sending constituents “cease-and-desist” letters. But while it’s true that at least one member of the group received one, it is unclear how many constituents at large have as well. A spokesperson for Cotton’s office, Caroline Rabbitt Tabler, confirmed the existence of the letters, saying that they were issued “under extreme circumstances.” She also said that it was rare to send any constituent such a letter. There has been no confirmed tally of how many times it has happened. The letters began getting attention when the liberal group Ozark Indivisible posted a picture of one on Twitter on 17 January 2018, along with a message taunting the senator: #TraitorTommy @TomCottonAR scared of his constituents calling so he’s sending out cease and desist letters. You’re too [chicken] to lead CIA if you can’t even listen to constituents! #arpx #TraitorTommy @TomCottonAR scared of his constituents calling so he’s sending out cease and desist letters. You’re too 🐔 to lead CIA if you can’t even listen to constituents! #arpx pic.twitter.com/N1HAGCmbW6 — Ozark Indivisible (@OZRKIndivisible) January 18, 2018 The letter stated: This letter is immediate notification that all communication must cease and desist immediately with all offices of US Senator Tom Cotton. All other contact will be deemed harassment and will be reported to the United States Capitol Police. The letters themselves, however, are not recent; the one posted by Ozark Indivisible was dated 17 October 2017. A Fayetteville resident, Stacey Lane, identified herself as the recipient of the letter posted online. Rabbitt Tabler said Cotton’s office did not accuse her of saying anything threatening but did not go into detail on why it sent her the letter. Ozark Indivisible confirmed to us on 19 January 2018 that Lane is a member of their organization. They also disputed reports that Lane threatened anyone or called a staffer a “cunt.” The group added: There have been others who have received the letters, but they do not want to come forward. They are not OI members. According to reports, “an unspecified number of individuals” received letters that month. Rabbitt Tabler said in a statement that they are “only used under extreme circumstances”: Senator Cotton is always happy to hear from Arkansans and encourages everyone to contact his offices to express their thoughts, concerns, and opinions. In order to maintain a safe work environment, if an employee of Senator Cotton receives repeated communications that are harassing and vulgar, or any communication that contains a threat, our policy is to notify the U.S. Capitol Police’s Threat Assessment Section and, in accordance with their guidance, send a cease and desist letter to the individual making the harassing or threatening communication. Another person, who did not identify themselves, told the Arkansas Times that they received a similar letter. They said: I believe if Tom Cotton’s office were to respond as to why they sent this letter, I think they just honestly don’t want to listen to any citizen’s opposing view or hear the numerous grave concerns U.S. citizens have about the serious & ongoing attack on our Democracy and past election cycle in which a foreign, hostile Russian government interfered, they don’t want U.S. citizens to call and speak their mind and truth in a very direct manner and they obviously don’t want to be held accountable for their words and actions while serving all the people in this nation. I may have used unprofessional and unbecoming language at times as the anxiety and stress of what I’m witnessing is at times too great a burden to control and I have vehemently expressed my righteous anger at Senator Cotton’s complicitness with this harmful regime. Cotton, whose current term in office runs through 2020, has come under criticism from his constituents in the past. During February and April 2017 town hall events, he was pelted with questions regarding various issues and hit with chants that included, “Do your job.”
|
8761
|
Tobacco caused 2.4 million U.S. cancers: report.
|
Tobacco use caused 2.4 million cases of cancer in the United States from 1999 to 2004, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported on Thursday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
A man smokes a cigarette in front of a pub in Bensheim early July 30, 2008. REUTERS/Alex Grimm As might be expected, lung and bronchial cancer accounted for nearly half the cases but cancers of the larynx, mouth and pharynx, esophagus, stomach, pancreas, kidney, bladder, cervix, as well as acute myelogenous leukemia are also caused by tobacco, the CDC found. “The data in this report provides additional, strong evidence of the serious harm related to tobacco,” said Sherri Stewart of the CDC’s Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, who led the study. Stewart’s team looked at cancer surveys and registries covering 92 percent of the U.S. population. Kentucky had the highest rates of lung cancer among men and women, while Western states with low rates of smoking also had low rates of cancer. Tobacco-related cancers were more common among blacks, non-Hispanic whites and men, reflecting the groups that use tobacco more, the CDC found. “Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of disease and premature death in the United States and the most prominent cause of cancer,” said the CDC’s Dr. Matthew McKenna. “The tobacco-use epidemic causes a third of the cancers in America.” Tobacco use kills 438,000 people prematurely every year, including 38,000 people who breathe only secondhand smoke, the CDC said. “Tobacco use causes more deaths each year than alcohol use, car crashes, suicide, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), homicide, and illegal drug use combined,” the report reads. “In addition, smoking accounts for $167 billion annually in health care expenditures and productivity losses.” The report is available here
|
9305
|
How a breakthrough new fertility test is offering hope for families who have suffered miscarriages
|
ABC News pursues a story idea they heard about in a special issue of National Geographic magazine and calls it a “breakthrough fertility test.” But what ABC delivers is one satisfied success story. We’re given no broader context other than the vague reference to the fact that it hasn’t been tried “on many” women. How many? And with what results? How can the audience judge whether the breakthrough label fits in this case? They can’t. Yes, couples with infertility problems are desperate for answers. But that is why context and evidence is so important – not merely single anecdote success stories that may not be representative of the experiences of other women who have been similarly treated. There are many causes of infertility, of which recurrent pregnancy loss (repeated miscarriage) is only one. Roughly 70% of women who have 2 or more miscarriages eventually have a successful pregnancy, but for the rest, the inability to carry a pregnancy to term can be devastating. Couples faced with recurrent pregnancy loss deserve to have accurate information on what is known, and not known, about new treatments, so that their distress is not further amplified by unrealistic expectations.
|
false
|
infertility
|
This is a tossup. In the online text piece there was no discussion of costs, nor of whether insurers were likely to reimburse for the procedure. If online readers clicked on the video at the top of the piece – and sat through a Ford commercial or some other ad – they would hear that the testing can cost from $800 to $1,000 and is not covered by insurance. But we still have questions. There is no discussion online or on-the-air about what the total package of treatment – including the implantation and followup – costs. No information is provided about how many women have been treated with this approach – only that it is “not many.” So there is no context for readers (or ABC’s viewers) to be able to judge what the likelihood of benefit is. They hear only one satisfied success story. Biomarkers for endometrial receptivity have been under study for over a decade, but there have been few studies to validate specific biomarkers such as DNA testing. The way ABC addressed potential harms is peculiar. The online story concludes: One risk of the procedure many women may not take into account is the emotional effects of it not working and you still miscarrying, Shepherd said. It is a new process and important to go over the risks of the procedure — which can vary per person — with your health care provider. OK, that’s one risk. Are there others? This excerpt states that it’s “important to go over the risks” – plural. If they are so important, why wouldn’t they be mentioned – along with some estimate of how often they are likely to occur – in a nationally broadcast and online news story? The plural of anecdote is not data. And we learn of only one anecdote. No context is provided about how many times this approach has been tried and by how many physicians in how many settings. The on-air demonstration of how the soil jars and the flower are exactly like the uterus seemed like something out of a fifth grade science class. The story did explain that “the ideal candidates are women who have had three or more miscarriages or women over 40, but emphasized that the test is not for everyone and infertility is a spectrum.” And it offered an estimated of 12% of couples with infertility problems. We’ll award a hesitant satisfactory score for this criterion. The fertility specialist who treated the woman profiled in the story was interviewed. And so was another OB-Gyn, but no explanation was given of where she works or why she was chosen to be interviewed. So we don’t know if she’s connected in some way with the fertility center in question. The fertility test in question was called a breakthrough. But readers and viewers are given no evidence-based comparison between it and the countless other methods to try to help infertile couples. The online text piece doesn’t offer any information about how often this approach has been tried – or in how many settings. Only that it hasn’t been done “on many” women. Does that mean five times, 50? In one setting, in 10? Neither readers nor viewers are given appropriate context. There is little published information on DNA testing for endometrial receptivity and there is no test available for clinical use to my knowledge. Basic questions that were never addressed: Again, we’ll award a generous grade of Satisfactory here. ABC acknowledges that it based its story on a National Geographic special. But there is no evidence that it copied from a news release.
|
829
|
U.S. scientist to file whistleblower complaint after agency halts his climate work.
|
A climate scientist for the Trump administration’s health protection agency who was ordered to drop work on climate issues will file a whistleblower complaint this week with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, his lawyers said on Wednesday.
|
true
|
Environment
|
George Luber, who ran the climate and health program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is an expert on the health impacts of climate change including risks to hospitals and public health infrastructure and of diseases borne by mosquitoes and ticks as they increasingly move into northern regions as temperatures rise. Luber has been a contributor to U.S. government reports including the National Climate Assessment, which last year warned that climate change could cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars. The administration of President Donald Trump, who rejects mainstream climate science, has a policy of rolling back regulations limiting emissions scientists link to climate change and has ordered cuts to climate science advisory panels. Luber’s office of about 18 people was rolled into a bigger asthma program, which initially was set to include the word climate in its title, but was ultimately named asthma and community health. Ken Archer, a deputy of the climate office, was moved into unrelated work. The CDC offered Luber the top job at the merged program, but he attracted attention for complaining that the combination of the offices would result in an illegal blending of $10 million the U.S. Congress had set aside specifically for climate work. The CDC then filed papers charging Luber with misconduct including that he had failed to renew ethics clearance paperwork five years earlier, and that he wrote a book in 2013 without agency authorization, moves his lawyers said were retaliation for complaining. Although those were the first charges against Luber, who has worked at CDC for 16 years, the agency stripped him of his badge and keys. He now works from home reviewing CDC science papers unrelated to climate, must be accompanied by an armed guard to visit his old office and is prohibited from contacting former colleagues who did climate work, his lawyers said. “As our climate spins out of control, bureaucrats eager to please the Trump administration have worked feverishly to destroy the reputations of climate scientists who stand in its way,” said Kevin Bell, a lawyer for Luber at the watchdog group the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, or PEER, who is filing the complaint. The CDC does not comment on personnel matters, a spokeswoman said. She added that the combined office allows climate, asthma and air pollution experts to work on a range of shared health impacts. Last month Luber was served with CDC papers that propose to suspend him from the agency for 120 days without pay, which renewed an earlier proposal that the agency later retracted after media reports about Luber’s situation. Luber hopes the whistleblower complaint will result in a ruling that will allow him to return to climate work at the CDC, his lawyers said. Bell added that the complaint seeks to restore Luber’s reputation as a scientist, which is at risk from the agency’s retaliatory actions. The Office of Special Counsel does not have independent investigatory powers on whistleblower cases but can order agencies to undertake investigations and disclose details of them.
|
10800
|
Study: Ginkgo biloba has no effect on Alzheimer’s, dementia
|
In fewer words than its HealthDay competitor (404 words vs. 740), this story did a slightly better job on providing context and balance. Americans spend about $100 million a year on this stuff.
|
true
|
"The story states that US sales for the product hit $99 million in 2008. But it never explained the cost to the individual. The study ""found no effect,"" the story states succinctly. The story said the researchers found the product to be safe. But it could have mentioned that the National Center for Complementary & Alternative Medicine states ""Side effects of ginkgo may include headache, nausea, gastrointestinal upset, diarrhea, dizziness, or allergic skin reactions. More severe allergic reactions have occasionally been reported."" Although the discussion was brief, it did refer to the study as ""properly designed"" and ""placebo controlled."" There was no disease-mongering of dementia or cognitive decline. 3 short quotes with different perspectives, presented in balance. In a story based on a study that pokes holes in some peoples’ beliefs about a product to prevent cognitive decline, there could have been at least one line about other research into cognitive decline. The widespread use of the product is clear in the story. The story states that the product has been in use for more than 500 years. We can’t be sure of the extent to which the story was influenced by a news release. it apparently did lift one quote from a news release/statement."
|
|
11400
|
Aspirin May Help Patients Beat Prostate Cancer
|
Readers of this story gets a fairly detailed description of a study that looked at medical records of prostate cancer patients to see if the use of anticoagulant drugs, including aspirin, was associated with any differences in outcomes. However, readers also get a headline and lead that leap to the conclusion (unsupported by this study) that aspirin may cause death rates to drop. The story also misleads readers by failing to point out that what the researchers reported were differences in deaths from prostate cancer, not deaths overall. The caution about the relative lack of peer review scrutiny of studies presented at medical meetings is welcome. Is there some important difference between prostate cancer patients who take aspirin or other anticoagulants and those who don’t? And could that difference explain some or all of the differences in death rates? This type of study can’t answer that question. This story should have, but didn’t, highlight that limitation.
|
mixture
|
"A story that says that aspirin seemed to account for more benefit than far more expensive drugs certainly should address the cost differential between the inexpensive ""ubiquitous…pedestrian"" drug and others. Cost was never mentioned. When reporting the results of observational studies, it is important to avoid saying the results show cause-and-effect, when such studies can only identify associations. This story flunks that test by saying the study suggested that aspirin and other anticoagulants “may cut the risk of dying.” Indeed, the story quotes the researcher saying it would be premature to recommend treating prostate cancer patients. The story should have put that caveat near the top of the story, rather than burying it. The story further errs by stating that those who were taking anticoagulants had lower death rates. What the researchers actually reported was only the death rates from prostate cancer, not how many of the men overall were still alive after several years. On the plus side, this story tells readers how many men were included in this research analysis. It also reports the actual differences in death rates, not just the relative differences (though as noted above, the researchers actually reported differences in death rates from specifically prostate cancer only.) Still, the story emphasized relative risk reduction twice in the story – ""risk of dying from cancer was reduced by more than half"" and ""this translates to a risk reduction of about 50 percent."" That seems pointless when you’ve already provided the absolute numbers. The story does mention that aspirin comes with risks, including stomach bleeding, so it might barely meet this criterion. However, the mild warning minimizes the risks in some frail or elderly individuals, where gastrointestinal bleeding can be lethal. The story left out a comment from the researcher that anticoagulants increase the potential for rectal bleeding in patients treated with radiation, which seems like an important consideration for men diagnosed with prostate cancer. Calling aspirin ""pedestrian"" in the first line is inadequate in the context of potential harms. There’s nothing ""pedestrian"" about the catastrophic bleeding that may occur in some people. This is one of the areas in which this story was on the doorstep of a satisfactory score, when it stated that ""Retrospective studies…looking for associations are not as reliable as prospective trials."" But it never went any further to explain why and to explain that such studies CAN’T establish causation. It failed to make clear the tentative and limited nature of the conclusions and the vital questions that this type of study is incapable of answering. The story erroneously reported that the researchers reported differences in death rates, when actually they reported only the differences in death due to prostate cancer. There were no figures released about other causes of death. This study looked only at the medical records of patients (including anticoagulants prescribed for other health conditions) and was not a randomized trial. Readers should have been clearly alerted that there may be important differences between the patients who were taking anticoagulants and those who weren’t… and that those differences might affect or explain the observed differences in prostate cancer outcomes. The story should not have used the comment from the researcher about men who already take asprin perhaps getting an additional benefit without also including the rest of his comment during the news briefing: that first this study needs to be followed up by prospective studies to see if the findings hold up… and if so, what type, dose, and duration of medication might be best."
|
|
19692
|
"In 2010, Betty Sutton ""voted to destroy Medicare."
|
NRCC targets Betty Sutton's support for health care reform in claim she voted to destroy Medicare
|
false
|
Ohio, Health Care, Medicare, National Republican Congressional Committee,
|
"Senior citizens, you are dupes and rubes. That seems to be what too many politicians and the political groups think of you, anyway (we disagree vehemently), the way they try to scare you. Both parties are guilty, as PolitiFact has noted repeatedly, but today, it’s the National Republican Congressional Committee’s turn. Consider what the NRCC said on July 30, in an apparent attempt to gain senior votes: Congresswoman Betty Sutton ""voted to destroy Medicare."" No, Sutton did not. This is a bit like the earth-is-flat argument, put to rest hundreds of years ago. PolitiFact has been through several iterations of the Medicare claim, voiced in variations by both parties, but here’s the thing: People are still using it. The NRCC claim is based on Sutton’s 2010 vote to pass the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which you might know as ""Obamacare."" The act, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, aims to make health care readily available to uninsured Americans. But it also slows the rate at which Medicare will grow over the next decade. Medicare is the government program that provides health insurance to seniors, and a number of experts say its growth rate is unsustainable. So here is what will happen to spending on Medicare because of the Affordable Care Act. Its cost will grow $7.1 trillion over a decade, according to Congressional Budget Office projections previously reviewed by PolitiFact. You read that right. It will grow. Without the Affordable Care Act, Medicare spending would grow even more, by an additional $500 billion. The difference means the rate of growth will be slowed by about 7 percent. With $500 billion less, you’d think that Medicare might have to scale back its ambitions or services. President Barack Obama’s administration says the savings will come from eliminating waste and duplication. Savings also will come from a program called Medicare Advantage, which provided extra money to private insurers in hopes that they would expand their coverage to more rural areas. That didn’t happen, so the government says it wants to stop giving them extra money and will grade Advantage programs -- and give or withhold bonuses -- based on effectiveness. Reasonable people can be suspicious as to how, exactly, this will play out. Some Medicare Advantage patients have enjoyed a generous level of government benefits, and they fear they will lose some. But the CBO has been clear: Medicare spending will grow. The Affordable Care Act has extra money for prevention services, and seniors are getting a break on out-of-pocket expenses for their prescription drugs. OK, don’t believe the government. Skepticism is healthy and sometimes deserved. Now consider that Sutton, a Democratic congresswoman from Copley Township, voted for the Affordable Care Act. Does that mean that she ""voted to destroy Medicare,"" as the NRCC said in its news release July 30? We asked NRCC spokeswoman Katie Prill about the claim, since Prill sent the email to reporters. Prill cited, among other things, a Washington Post articlein 2010 that described $500 billion worth of ""cuts"" to Medicare under the health law. But the Washington Post’s own Fact Checker column has been over this repeatedly, and has saidthe characterization of ""cuts"" is an ""oldie but goodie."" (The Post also said, ""Someone must be falling for this stuff, however, or else it would not keep getting repeated."") Prill also cited a Wall Street Journal opinion piece in 2011 that referred to health care ""rationing"" from an unelected 15-member Medicare advisory panel. The piece said that this Independent Payment Advisory Board, to be appointed by the president by 2014 to make recommendations on controlling Medicare costs, could ""throw granny over the cliff"" if Medicare isn’t reformed. Granny doesn’t want to go over the cliff, assuredly. But Prill’s third piece of backup seems to soften that likelihood. Prill cited a story last March from Bloomberg BNAabout a House of Representatives committee hearing in which health experts discussed the Medicare advisory panel’s power. They said the panel’s real power will be limited, leaving members few choices other than to recommend cutting fees that doctors earn by treating Medicare patients. Doctors in turn will limit the number of Medicare patients they see, stop taking new ones or quit practicing, one witness said. We’re not sure if that’s the same as throwing granny over the cliff. But that very argument -- that doctors will stop taking Medicare patients or quit -- is voiced every year right now, because of what has been a regular failure by Congress to assure physician reimbursements. Granny’s doctor is tired of this annual game, and says so regularly. Yet this plays out as often as the buzzards return to Hinckley, Ohio. Might Medicare change? It’s possible. If you are in an Advantage plan, you might want to ask your insurer a lot of questions or look at other coverage options. But destroying Medicare is strong medicine, and it goes far beyond the inconvenience of changing coverage. Sutton did not prescribe it. In fairness, both parties play this game. Sutton ly accused her Republican opponent, Rep. Jim Renacci, of voting to ""end Medicare"" because he supported Republican budgets that would privatize the program and provide vouchers. PolitiFact Ohio gave Sutton a on the Truth-O-Meter for making the claim. That doesn’t make the GOP claim against her any more accurate. On the Truth-O-Meter, the NRCC claim rates ."
|
113
|
'Sorry, this is an emergency': Climate protesters block streets around the world.
|
Thousands of climate-change protesters took to the streets in cities around the world on Monday, launching two weeks of peaceful civil disobedience to demand immediate action to cut carbon emissions and avert an ecological disaster.
|
true
|
Environment
|
In London, police arrested 276 activists from the Extinction Rebellion group as they blocked bridges and roads in the city center, and glued themselves to cars, while protesters in Berlin halted traffic at the Victory Column roundabout. Dutch police stepped in to arrest more than 100 climate activists blocking a street in front of the country’s national museum and there were similar protests in Austria, Australia, France, Spain and New Zealand. “SORRY that we blocked the road, but this is an emergency,” declared placards held by activists in Amsterdam. In New York’s financial district, protesters spattered the Wall Street Bull and themselves with fake blood and lay prone around the sculpture to evoke their fears of a deadly environmental catastrophe. The protests are the latest stage in an global campaign for tougher and swifter steps against climate change coordinated by Extinction Rebellion, which rose to prominence in April when it snarled traffic in central London for 11 days. Last month, millions of young people flooded onto the streets of cities around the world, inspired to take action by 16-year-old Swedish activist Greta Thunberg. Extinction Rebellion says it expects peaceful protests over the next two weeks in more than 60 cities from New Delhi to New York calling on governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2025 and halt a loss of biodiversity. Banging drums and chanting, protesters in London took over Trafalgar Square and marched down the Mall, the avenue that leads to Buckingham Palace. They carried banners with slogans including “Climate change denies our children a future unless we act now”. “We’re here because the government is not doing enough on the climate emergency,” protester Lizzy Mansfield said. “We only get one planet and so we’re here to try and defend it.” Police chiefs said last week they would mobilize thousands of officers to handle the protests in London and that anyone who broke the law, even as part of non-violent civil disobedience, would be arrested. On Saturday, officers used a battering ram to enter a building in south London where activists had been storing materials to use during the protests. Eight people were arrested during the raid. Defying almost freezing temperatures in Berlin, activists singing “Solid as a rock, rooted as a tree” gathered at dawn at the Victory Column roundabout near Tiergarten park. At sunrise, some were sleeping in insulated bags in the middle of the roundabout as police on motorbikes drove by. No arrests were made and the protest remained peaceful. Police blocked the five avenues that converge on the roundabout to stop cars and buses reaching the demonstration, as this would have resulted in traffic chaos during rush hour. By midday, the protest had swelled to 4,000 people, a policeman said, and a second main roundabout was also blocked by activists sitting in the middle of the road. Police began removing chanting protesters from Berlin’s Potsdamer Platz later in the day after they had occupied the central artery for much of the day, singing, making speeches and fashioning a makeshift camp out of salvaged armchairs and tents. The rallies came as German Chancellor Angela Merkel defended climate protection measures her government is due to approve on Wednesday but which critics have condemned as unambitious. In Amsterdam, police were lining up empty city buses to take the arrested demonstrators away as they tried to clear a major thoroughfare in the afternoon. “The climate crisis is not being taken seriously enough by politics, and also not by the companies. That’s why I joined,” said one demonstrator, who gave his name as Christiaan. Meanwhile activists in London, some wearing yellow safety helmets with “Rebel at Work” painted on the side, glued or chained themselves to cars parked in the middle of roads or to street lamps, making it hard for police officers to detain them. “We are out of time, there is none left, we have to act now,” said a protester called Benjamin. In central Paris, dozens of Extinction Rebellion activists blocked a street and bridge in the Chatelet district. They also built temporary shelters or held impromptu concerts and workshops in a good-natured atmosphere. “This is clearly non-violent, it is human, we are not here with guns, we are here as human beings,” protester Francoise Loiseau said. With events like extreme weather, thawing permafrost and a sea-level rise unfolding much faster than expected, scientists say the urgency of the climate crisis has intensified since the signing in 2015 of the Paris accord on curbing global warming. Nearly 70 countries announced plans at a U.N. climate action summit last month to beef up their Paris pledges, but most major economies including the United States and China failed to announce stronger new measures.
|
35242
|
A CBS News program used a brief clip from an Italian hospital in a segment about the coronavirus crisis in New York City.
|
After @CBSNews was called out for airing footage of a hospital in Italy and saying it was New York, they apologized and said it was an error.
|
true
|
Media Matters, COVID-19
|
On March 25, 2020, the “CBS This Morning” news program aired a segment described in a teaser as “Desperation in New York as coronavirus cases there continue to skyrocket”: That segment, which aired above a chyron reading “AMERICA’S EPICENTER — New York Now Accounts for More than Half of New U.S. Cases,” featured a brief clip of Dr. Deborah Birx, the Coronavirus Response Coordinator for the White House Coronavirus Task Force, declaring that, “We remain deeply concerned about New York City and the New York metro area.” Then a narrator related the following information while scenes showing hospital personnel, equipment, and patients played on the screen: NARRATOR: That is because more than half of the nation’s new coronavirus cases are being found right here. Crowded subway cars may have accelerated the spread. New York’s governor says FEMA gave the state 400 ventilators. To that he said this: GOV. ANDREW CUOMO: “What am I going to do with 400 ventilators when I need 30,000? You pick the 26,000 people who are going to die because you only sent 400 ventilators.” NARRATOR: The governor now projects that the state will need up to 140,000 beds, with an additional 40,000 ICU beds. Across the river from New York, at Holy Name Medical Center in New Jersey, the chief infectious disease specialists says his hospital has just ten ventilators. Barely enough for now. However, some sharp-eyed viewers noticed that one of the brief hospital scenes used in the “CBS This Morning” report on New York coronavirus cases was identical to footage that had been aired by Sky News three days earlier and shot at a hospital in Bergamo, Italy: During a Pandemic it is essential that the Media gives us real and accurate information. It’s completely irresponsible for @CBSNews to use footage from an Italian Hospital when talking about the outbreak in New York City. This is unacceptable. pic.twitter.com/Essp4uEHle — ALX 🇺🇸 (@alx) March 30, 2020 CBS News acknowledged the error. A spokesperson said, “It was an editing mistake. We took immediate steps to remove it from all platforms and shows.” A week later, however, CBS News apparently used a very brief bit of that Italian footage again while referencing coronavirus cases in Pennsylvania:
|
31629
|
Left-handed people die younger than right-handed people.
|
This approach, which is not biased by the same statistical issues as the previous studies, agrees with the general scientific consensus that longevity and handedness are completely unrelated.
|
false
|
Medical, death rates, left handed, right handed
|
On 19 May 1988, the scientific journal Nature published a brief report by two psychologists titled “Do right-handers live longer?” It purported to demonstrate a statistically significant difference in longevity between right and left handers, based on data collected on professional baseball players: To investigate further the relationship between handedness and age of death, we have analysed all baseball players listed in The Baseball Encyclopedia for whom dates of birth and death, as well as throwing and batting hand, are reported. A subject was assigned to a handedness a group only when both throwing and batting hand were the same with no indicated I change in hand use. Mean age at death for the 1,472 right-handers was 64.64 years (s.d. = 15.5) and ( 236 left-handers was 63.97 years (s.d. = 15.4). These same authors published another study (“Handedness and Life Span”) in the equally prestigious New England Journal of Medicine by sampling the death records for the year 1990 in two California counties, which demonstrated — they argued — an even larger difference in lifespan between left and right handers: In order to test the relation between handedness and life span in a general population, we obtained death certificates from two counties in southern California. Two thousand questionnaires concerning the handedness of the deceased family member were sent to the listed next of kin, which resulted in 987 usable cases (495 male subjects and 492 female subjects). Subjects were designated as right-handers if they wrote, drew, and threw a ball with the right hand. All other subjects (left-handers and mixed-handers) were assigned to a non-right-handed group. When we turn to the effect of handedness on life span, the results are striking in their magnitude. The mean age at death in the right-handed sample was 75 years, as compared with the life-span for the left-handers is significant (Fl,945 = 22.36, P<0.0001). Critics of these studies have noted that their methodologies are flawed, as they assume an static proportion of left and right handed people throughout time — despite the fact that many people who were born in early 1900s were likely pressured to become right-handed at an early age, and would not identify as left-handed at death. Historical records support this argument, presented in the book Language Lateralization and Psychosis: About 90% of people are right-handed and 10% are lefthanded […]. It is probable that about 8% to 10% of the population has been left-handed for at least the past 200 000 years or so. Detailed data only began to become available for those born in the nineteenth century, and there is growing evidence that the rate of left-handedness fell precipitously during the Victorian period, reaching a nadir of about 3% in about 1895 or so, and then rising quite quickly until an asymptote is reached for those born after about 1945 to 1950, with 11% to 12% of men and 9% to 10% of women typically being left-handed in Western countries. This means that taking at a single cohort of individuals who died in the year 1990 would be biased by the fact that people who identified as left handers were, statistically speaking, a younger group of people. A good explanation of the result of such a bias is provided in a series of letters to the editor regarding the NEJM study, notably this one from epidemiologist Kenneth Rothman: Comparing mean ages at death is a classic fallacy, as it involves comparing only the numerators of rates, rather than the rates themselves. Using the same approach as Halpern and Coren, one would conclude that nursery school is more dangerous than paratrooper training, since the mean age at death of children in nursery school is much lower than that of paratrooper trainees. This same question was addressed using data from the Danish Twin Registry, which looked at 118 opposite-handed twin pairs to see which individual died first: We compared mortality in a subgroup of 118 opposite-handed twin pairs by counting in how many instances the right-handed twin died first. There was no evidence of differential survival between right-handed and non-right-handed individuals in the entire 1900–1910 cohort. […] We did not find evidence of excess mortality among non-right-handed adult twins in this follow-up study.
|
12183
|
(For) white working-class America, death rates among white men are up 20 percent.
|
"Castellanos said that for the white working class, ""death rates among white men are up 20 percent."" Research has shown that death rates are up for white men, which is a cause for concern because death rates have historically declined. But that research is not without controversy. Also, the researchers who documented the increase in death rates say it’s not as alarmingly high as 20 percent just for white men. A more accurate estimate would be around 7 percent. Castellanos has a point about increased death rates among whites, but he incorrectly cited figures from the study."
|
false
|
Health Care, Workers, PunditFact, Alex Castellanos,
|
"President Donald Trump’s supporters continue to back him because they felt so besieged by the political landscape and life in general that it’s literally killing them, a GOP strategist said on ABC’s This Week. Alex Castellanos, who has worked as a consultant for George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, said during an Aug. 20, 2017, discussion on the show that Trump’s backers have stuck with him through controversies because they didn’t see an alternative option. Democrats attacking Trump’s response to violence in Charlottesville, Va., just fed into growing bitterness among his base over their dire socioeconomic situation, he said. ""What I think a lot of Trump supporters heard this week was, the Democrats are just painting us, Trump supporters, with a Nazi brush. We're all white supremacists. That's their excuse for why they lost the election,"" Castellanos said. ""No. White working-class America, death rates among white men are up 20 percent. They're unemployed. Gwen Ifill said, ‘no wonder they're resentful.’"" We wondered about his statistic that working-class white men are dying at a higher rate than before. It turns out that researchers have identified increasing mortality among the white working class, but it’s not as high for men as the 20 percent number Castellanos cited. In response to our questions, Castellanos sent us two articles from the New York Times and the Guardian about a 2015 paper by husband-and-wife Princeton economists Angus Deaton and Anne Case. Their research showed that death rates for middle-aged, white Americans had been going up, while they had been going down for every other age, race and ethnic group. Those rates also had been falling in other countries. This was a reversal of a years-long trend in which mortality rates had been steadily decreasing, meaning that Americans across many groups were living longer. From 1978 to 1998, white Americans were seeing mortality rates fall about 2 percent each year. So the fact that Case and Deaton found an increase was considered significant. But Deaton told us the 20 percent number Castellanos cited for men was too high. (That’s a number the Guardian reported, but it cites the increase as being for ""the death rate for white Americans aged 45 to 54."") ""In our 2015 PNAS paper, we say that for all white non-Hispanics (men and women together), mortality rates for those aged 45 to 54 rose at half of one percent per year, which from 1998 to 2013 is 7.8 percent, not 20 percent, and certainly not 20 percent for men only,"" Deaton wrote via email. Case added that that was for all levels of education, not just people who didn’t have a college degree. Deaton and Case’s study showed that mortality rates were climbing for white, non-Hispanic Americans aged 45 to 54 with a high school education or less. The research further showed that deaths were up from drug and alcohol poisonings, suicides, chronic liver diseases and cirrhosis. Mortality rates rose for all education groups, but ""those with less education saw the most marked increases,"" the paper read. It’s important to note that overall mortality rates for African-Americans were still higher than whites. But African-Americans still recorded an overall drop in the same time period, not an increase. Researchers were surprised by the Case and Deaton study in 2015. Dartmouth economists Ellen Meara and Jonathan Skinner said in an analysis that while most Americans’ life expectancies had gone up in the face of the Great Recession and rising income inequality, the study’s findings ""dashed even this cautiously optimistic view of the past several decades."" ""These trends are indeed concentrated among the least educated Americans who never attended college,"" Meara told PolitiFact. ""Of note, the trends do not apply to current retirees, nor youth, both groups that have experienced mortality improvements in recent decades."" Others questioned the paper’s results. Columbia University statistics professor Andrew Gelman argued that the situation wasn’t as dire as it first appeared. He said that some statistical adjustments showed that middle-aged white women largely made up the difference in mortality rates, and the figures evened out when you combined men and women. Deaton and Case addressed some of these doubts in a 2017 follow-up to their paper. While the 2015 data didn’t focus on differences between men and women, their latest work did, along with adjusting their age groups. ""For non-Hispanic white men aged 30 to 59 without a four-year college degree, age-adjusted all-cause mortality rose by 7 percent from 1998 to 2015,"" Deaton said of the latest data. Again they found that a lack of education was a major factor for increasing mortality rates, among other issues. (Gelman and Jonathan Auerbach, a Columbia doctoral student, again disputed their findings.) ""We propose a preliminary but plausible story in which cumulative disadvantage from one birth cohort to the next, in the labor market, in marriage and child outcomes, and in health, is triggered by progressively worsening labor market opportunities at the time of entry for whites with low levels of education,"" the 2017 paper read. There’s evidence that whites with less education on the lower end of the income spectrum didn’t make up the bulk of Trump’s voters. The Washington Post reported that his base is largely affluent Republicans, whether they have a college education or not. Deaton said Castellanos was speaking too broadly, and the spirit of his comment misses what the research really says. ""To be fair, that mortality rates are going up at all is a big deal, and is a measure of the fact that bad things are happening to these people,"" he said. Castellanos said that for the white working class, ""death rates among white men are up 20 percent."" Research has shown that death rates are up for white men, which is a cause for concern because death rates have historically declined. But that research is not without controversy. Also, the researchers who documented the increase in death rates say it’s not as alarmingly high as 20 percent just for white men. A more accurate estimate would be around 7 percent. Castellanos has a point about increased death rates among whites, but he incorrectly cited figures from the study."
|
26733
|
"The Obama administration ""didn't do anything about” swine flu."
|
There were more than 60 million cases of swine flu in the United States during 2009 and 2010. The Obama administration responded with two emergency declarations, triggering billions in spending and other public health responses.
|
false
|
Coronavirus, Donald Trump,
|
"Asked about reassuring Americans about the coronavirus, President Donald Trump downplayed the number of people stricken, then went on the attack. Without mentioning President Barack Obama, Trump criticized the Obama’s administration response to another outbreak — H1N1, commonly known as swine flu. Trump made the attack during an interview on March 4, 2020, with Fox News talk show host Sean Hannity: Hannity: ""You have said that you are evaluating (the coronavirus) on a daily basis. ... What are we prepared as a country to do to keep our citizens safe?"" Trump: ""Well, I just say that it's, you know, a very, very small number in this country. And we're going to try and keep it that way as much as possible. I will say, though, the H1N1 — that was swine flu, commonly referred to as swine flu — and that went from around April of '09 to April of '10, where there were 60 million cases of swine flu. And over — actually, it's over 13,000. I think you might have said 17—. I had heard it was 13—, but a lot of — a lot of deaths. And they didn't do anything about it."" We wanted to fact-check Trump’s claim that the Obama administration ""didn't do anything"" as millions of swine flu cases mounted. The Trump campaign didn’t respond to our requests for information. The H1N1 influenza virus was discovered in the United States in the spring of 2009 and spread around the world. It was originally referred to as ""swine flu"" because many genes in the virus were similar to influenza viruses that normally occur in pigs in North America. From April 12, 2009, to April 10, 2010, in the United States, there were 60.8 million cases of swine flu, as well as 274,304 hospitalizations and 12,469 deaths, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated. Obama’s acting director of health and human services declared H1N1 a public health emergency on April 26, 2009. That was when the United States had only 20 confirmed cases of H1N1 and no deaths. Two days later, the administration made an initial funding request for H1N1 to Congress. Eventually $7.65 billion was allocated for a vaccine and other measures. On Oct. 24, 2009, six months after his administration declared H1N1 a public health emergency, Obama declared it a national emergency. By then, H1N1 had claimed more than 1,000 American lives, according to the CDC. When Obama made his declaration, thousands of people were lining up in cities across the country to receive vaccinations, as federal officials acknowledged that their vaccination program had gotten off to a slow start, with some states having requested 10 times the amount they had been allotted, the New York Times reported at the time. The national emergency declaration allowed the federal government to temporarily waive or modify requirements of the Medicare, Medicaid, and State Children's Health Insurance programs. It also permitted doctors and hospitals to bypass certain requirements as they responded to H1N1. Trump said: ""There were 60 million cases of swine flu"" during the Obama administration ""and they didn't do anything about it."" His assessment on the nation’s response is incorrect. The Obama administration issued two emergency declarations, triggering billions of dollars in spending toward vaccines and other public health response measures. The statement is ."
|
30997
|
NASA has warned of imminent disaster due to the trajectory of another planet that will intersect Earth's orbit.
|
The American space agency has not issued any warnings about the trajectory of another planet intersecting Earth's orbit.
|
false
|
Junk News, fake news, news4ktla, nibiru
|
On 10 March 2016, the web site News4KTLA published an article reporting that NASA had issued a frightening advisory concerning the possibility that the trajectory a “rogue planet” known as “Nibiru” or “Planet X” would intersect Earth’s orbit, with potentially disastrous consequences: Is this the end of the world as we know it? Doomsayers have prophesied for decades about a giant, rogue planet in our solar system — dubbed Planet X or Nibiru — that has the capacity of colliding or passing near Earth, with catastrophic consequences. And of course, NASA has known about the mystery planet for years, but declined to warn us … until now. Finally, after the announcement of “Planet Nine” in January, conspiracy theorists have proved to the skeptics that they have been right this entire time, and NASA finally has to admit its wrongs. The planet, according to Caltech researchers, has a mass about 10 times that of Earth and takes about 15,000 years to make a full orbit around the sun – And it’s heading towards Earth, with a collision date of August 21, 2016. Although Caltech researchers have admitted that we are headed for doomsday. NASA continues to tiptoe around the subject. “Although our scientists at NASA have emphasized for years that Nibiru doesn’t exist, we are ready to reveal the fact that it does exist,” said NASA spokesperson Heather Cartwright. “The truth is we have been tracking the object for at least a decade and it is definitely headed towards planet Earth. However, we are expecting a close flyby – not the doomsday collision that Caltech researchers are predicting. There is no need to cause mass panic.” In a response to NASA’s statement, Caltech researcher Randall Smith had this to say: “For NASA to minimize the threat to our earth by calling it a ‘close flyby’ is insulting to our research. We have concrete evidence that proves Nibiru is headed straight for earth with a collision that will destroy life as we know it. NASA is just trying to avoid mass panic and chaos within our world. But we all deserve to know that our days are numbered.” This report was untrue, just another clickbait fabrication originating with News4KTLA, a fake news site that has appropriated the call letters of a legitimate Los Angeles television station and news outlet (KTLA). NASA has never issued any such warning, nor reported the existence of any “rogue planet.” In fact, NASA has stated just the opposite, that no planet such as “Niburu” is known to exist: Nonetheless, fringe religious elements periodically invoke doomsday scenarios that posit an apocalypse brought about by another planet’s passing in close proximity to Earth, with one such instance supposedly set to occur on 23 September 2017, as reported by Fox News: Christian numerologists claim that the world will end on Sept. 23, 2017 as they believe a planet will collide with Earth. According to Christian numerologist David Meade, verses in Luke 21: 25 to 26 is the sign that recent events, such as the recent solar eclipse and Hurricane Harvey, are signs of the apocalypse. The verses read: “25: There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’ “’26: Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.’ Sept. 23 is a date that was pinpointed using codes from the Bible, as well as a “date marker” in the pyramids of Giza in Egypt. Meade has built his theory, which is viewed with a widely skeptical lens, on the so-called Planet X, which is also known as Nibiru, which he believes will pass Earth on Sept. 23, causing volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and earthquakes. Ed Stetzer, a pastor and executive director of Wheaton College’s Billy Graham Center, took exception to such reporting in a piece published on the web site of Christianity Today: First, there is no such thing as a legitimate ‘Christian numerologist.’ Sure, the writers of Scripture do, indeed, use numbers to point to a few things—that’s first-year seminary. But, it stops at first-year seminary because there are not secret numerical codes that require a profession called “Christian numerology.” Seminaries don’t offer this as a formal degree nor do any professional, accredited institutions. David Meade, the man the Fox News article cites as their source for these claims, doesn’t have any formal, academic training in numerology. That’s right, multiple news outlets are referencing the findings of a man with, according to his website, nothing more than a bachelor’s degree in Economics and Astrology from an unnamed institution. Furthermore, Meade doesn’t provide us with evidence of any biblical training he has received in order to speak authoritatively about the end times. He is discussing biblical matters of profound significance and making predictions about events of global importance without any real authority on these topics. To make matters worse, the planetary alignments that Meade is using to support his claims about the end of the world have, according to an Express article, already happened four times in the past 1000 years. Meade is a made-up leader in a made-up field, and should not be on the front page of anything, let alone Fox News. And, when we remind people of this, maybe they will be less likely to report on it next time.
|
35103
|
Harvard professor Charles Lieber was arrested for concealing funding from a Chinese lab supposedly connected to the origin of the new coronavirus.
|
What's true: Professor Charles Lieber was arrested in January 2020 for misleading federal authorities about funds he allegedly received from Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) and his connections to a Chinese government-sponsored recruitment program. What's false: The conspiracy theory that the new coronavirus is a bioweapon developed in a lab is unfounded and has been dismissed by several leading researchers. Lieber has no known connections to the 2020 outbreak of coronavirus.
|
mixture
|
Science, COVID-19
|
On Jan. 28, 2020, Harvard professor Charles Lieber was arrested and charged with making a materially false statement to federal authorities about receiving funding from China. Lieber’s arrest was big news in academic circles; but after internet users noticed that the alleged funding was coming from a university in Wuhan, China, the center of an outbreak of a new coronavirus, wild speculation went viral and unfounded connections were drawn between Lieber and a conspiracy theory that the coronavirus was a lab-made bioweapon. A viral Facebook post took it further, relaying more details about Lieber’s arrest and making use of some conveniently placed scare quotes: In case you missed it, today, Federal Agents arrested Dr. Charles Lieber, chair of Harvard University’s Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, with lying to the Department of Defense about secret monthly payments of $50,000.00 paid by China and receipt of millions more to help set up a chemical/biological “Research” laboratory in China. Also arrested were two Chinese “Students” working as research assistants, one of whom was actually a lieutenant in the Chinese Army, the other captured at Logan Airport as he tried to catch a flight to China – smuggling 21 vials of “Sensitive Biological Samples” according to the FBI. Oh, almost forgot. The research lab the good professor had helped set up? It’s located at the Wuhan University of Technology. Wuhan China is ground zero to the potentially global pandemic known as the “Coronavirus”which is both spreading rapidly and killing people. This is Stephen Coonts international spy novel stuff happening in real life – and it has barely made the news. The claims made in this Facebook post are generally true. Lieber was truly arrested in January 2020 for lying to federal agents about funding he had allegedly received from China. However, Lieber’s arrest was not connected to the coronavirus and there’s no evidence to support claims that this disease was a human-made bioweapon. Let’s take a closer look and separate the facts from the rumors in this case. In short: Lieber was arrested for lying to authorities about his involvement with a Chinese government program to recruit and cultivate scientific talent. Lieber was the Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University and the Principal Investigator of the Lieber Research Group. Because this group had received grant funding from National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DOD), Lieber was required to disclose any funding he received from foreign governments or entities that could lead to a conflict of interest. The Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges in its complaint that Lieber became a “strategic scientist” at Wuhan University in 2011 and that he was a contractual participant in China’s Thousand Talents Plan, a government program aimed at recruiting and cultivating high-level scientific talent. The DOJ says that Lieber was arrested for lying to investigators about his involvement in this program and his affiliations with WUT: China’s Thousand Talents Plan is one of the most prominent Chinese Talent recruit plans that are designed to attract, recruit, and cultivate high-level scientific talent in furtherance of China’s scientific development, economic prosperity and national security. These talent programs seek to lure Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts to bring their knowledge and experience to China and reward individuals for stealing proprietary information. Under the terms of Lieber’s three-year Thousand Talents contract, WUT paid Lieber $50,000 USD per month, living expenses of up to 1,000,000 Chinese Yuan (approximately $158,000 USD at the time) and awarded him more than $1.5 million to establish a research lab at WUT. In return, Lieber was obligated to work for WUT “not less than nine months a year” by “declaring international cooperation projects, cultivating young teachers and Ph.D. students, organizing international conference[s], applying for patents and publishing articles in the name of” WUT. The complaint alleges that in 2018 and 2019, Lieber lied about his involvement in the Thousand Talents Plan and affiliation with WUT. On or about, April 24, 2018, during an interview with investigators, Lieber stated that he was never asked to participate in the Thousand Talents Program, but he “wasn’t sure” how China categorized him. In November 2018, NIH inquired of Harvard whether Lieber had failed to disclose his then-suspected relationship with WUT and China’s Thousand Talents Plan. Lieber caused Harvard to falsely tell NIH that Lieber “had no formal association with WUT” after 2012, that “WUT continued to falsely exaggerate” his involvement with WUT in subsequent years, and that Lieber “is not and has never been a participant in” China’s Thousand Talents Plan. In short: The DOJ announced three separate arrests in January 2020. The first was Lieber. The second involved Yanqing Ye, a lieutenant in the Chinese army accused of stealing U.S. research. And third was Zaosong Zheng, who stole 21 vials of biological research. While these three arrests all involve people lying about their ties to China, they took place at different universities and are not related. On Jan. 28, 2020, the DOJ announced the arrests of three different individuals in three separate cases related to China. Dr. Charles Lieber, 60, Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University, was arrested this morning and charged by criminal complaint with one count of making a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement. Lieber will appear this afternoon before Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler in federal court in Boston, Massachusetts. Yanqing Ye, 29, a Chinese national, was charged in an indictment today with one count each of visa fraud, making false statements, acting as an agent of a foreign government and conspiracy. Ye is currently in China. Zaosong Zheng, 30, a Chinese national, was arrested on Dec. 10, 2019, at Boston’s Logan International Airport and charged by criminal complaint with attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research to China. On Jan. 21, 2020, Zheng was indicted on one count of smuggling goods from the United States and one count of making false, fictitious or fraudulent statements. He has been detained since Dec. 30, 2019. Yanqinq Ye, a lieutenant of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the armed forces of the People’s Republic of China and member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), reportedly lied about being a “student” on her visa in order to attend Boston University. The DOJ alleges that Ye conducted research and assessed military websites while studying at BU’s Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering and sent U.S. documents and information to China. Zaosong Zheng was arrested at Logan Airport as he was attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research that he allegedly stole from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. In short: Cancer cells. As news of Zheng’s arrest circulated on social media, some made the unfounded claim that these vials of “biological research” were somehow connected to the coronavirus. According to The New York Times, however, these vials contained cancer cells: Inside his checked luggage, wrapped in a plastic bag and then inserted into a sock, the officers found what they were looking for: 21 vials of brown liquid — cancer cells — that the authorities say Mr. Zheng, 29, a cancer researcher, took from a laboratory at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. While some conspiracy theorists assumed that Zheng’s plan involved a bio-weapon, Zheng told authorities that he planned on using the samples to further his career: Under questioning, court documents say, Mr. Zheng acknowledged that he had stolen eight of the samples and had replicated 11 more based on a colleague’s research. When he returned to China, he said, he would take the samples to Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital and turbocharge his career by publishing the results in China, under his own name. In short: There is no evidence that coronavirus was human-made and several leading researchers have debunked this notion. While this conspiracy theory has started to receive some mainstream attention (it was even pushed by Republican Sen. Tom Cotton), there is no evidence to support this claim. In fact, several researchers have debunked this claim, calling it illogical and noting that the current evidence indicates that the coronavirus mutated naturally. Trevor Bedford of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle said: “There is no evidence whatsoever of genetic engineering that we can find,” he said at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Seattle. “The evidence we have is that the mutations [in the virus] are completely consistent with natural evolution.” Two more researchers gave statements to The Washington Post: “There’s absolutely nothing in the genome sequence of this virus that indicates the virus was engineered,” said Richard Ebright, a professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University. “The possibility this was a deliberately released bioweapon can be firmly excluded.” Vipin Narang, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said it is “highly unlikely” the general population was exposed to a virus through an accident at a lab. “We don’t have any evidence for that,” said Narang, a political science professor with a background in chemical engineering. “It’s a skip in logic to say it’s a bioweapon that the Chinese developed and intentionally deployed, or even unintentionally deployed,” Narang said In short: No. Lieber’s arrest (as well as the two other cases) was related to economic and academic espionage. There’s no indication that Lieber’s research, arrest, or connections to China were related to the spread of coronavirus. Lieber was arrested in January 2020 for allegedly working with a university in China to further the country’s recruitment and development of scientific talent. While Lieber was reportedly working with a lab in Wuhan, China (it should be noted that Lieber allegedly started working with the Wuhan University of Technology 9 years before there would be an outbreak of coronavirus in the area), there’s no evidence to suggest that this is anything more than a coincidence. Lieber’s arrest, as well as the two other cases brought by the DOJ in January 2020, dealt with an academic battle between the U.S. and China. Lieber was allegedly working with a Chinese recruitment program, Ye was allegedly attempting to steal United States research and documents, and Zheng’s was attempting to steal biological samples. FBI Boston Division Special Agent in Charge Joseph R. Bonavolonta said in a statement that all three of these cases dealt with “economic espionage” and China’s attempts to steal trade secrets: China’s goal, simply put, is to replace the United States as the world’s leading superpower, and they’re breaking the law to get there. Massachusetts is a target-rich environment with world-class academic institutions, research facilities, hospitals, cleared defense contractors, and start-ups. And each and every one of them are in danger of having their research, development, and investments stolen right out from under them. The ruling Communist Party of the PRC wants what we have so they can get the upper hand on us. And while we are still confronted with traditional spies seeking our state secrets, often working under diplomatic cover, or posing as everyday citizens, I can tell you China is also using what we call “non-traditional collectors” such as professors, researchers, hackers and front companies. All three individuals charged today are manifestations of the China threat. […]
|
11277
|
FDA OKs Pfizer Anti-Smoking Pill
|
This news story covers the recent FDA approval of the drug varenicline for smoking cessation. This drug may help quell nicotine cravings by binding to the nicotine receptors in the brain and only partially activating them, so there is less stimulation than by nicotine itself. Varenicline (trade name Chantix) was given priority status and fast-tracked for approval due to the “significant improvement” over existing therapies for smoking cessation; however, the long-term benefit of this drug over existing anti-smoking therapies is not that impressive. This drug’s performance is not much better than smoking cessation rates for bupropion (marketed as Zyban) versus placebo in other randomized controlled studies. Varenicline may be an option for people who have not been able to quit smoking using bupropion or other anti-smoking therapies, however, there is more information on the long-term safety of bupropion. The recent approval of varenicline was largely based on two double-blind, randomized studies of 2000 smokers in which the drug was compared with bupropion and a placebo. The studies were both funded by Pfizer, maker of varenicline. The story correctly avoids the use of only relative numbers (which Pfizer emphasizes in its press release) and presents longer-term (one year) abstinence rates, which are important for evaluating smoking cessation therapies. However, reports of side effects in this story are very limited. The incidence and severity of nausea, the most common side effect and the only one listed in this story, is not mentioned. There is also no comparison of how tolerable were the side effects from varenicline and bupropion. There is acknowledgment in this story that the long-term success rate for smoking cessation may be due to a number of combined therapies, though there is also a warning that varenicline should not be taken with other smoking-cessation products. While counseling and other behavioral support are briefly mentioned as aiding smoking cessation, it is not explained if counseling was part of the long-term follow up treatment in studies evaluating varenicline. The Pfizer press release announcing the recent FDA approval of this drug also mentions plans to offer users an interactive smoking cessation support program. There is no discussion of the cost of this anti-smoking therapy (which must be taken twice daily) or a cost comparison with existing treatments; however, projected sales for Pfizer are mentioned.
|
true
|
The story does not provide the cost of varenciline (which must be taken twice daily), or cost comparison with existing treatments. The story frames the data appropriately. The story avoids the use of only relative risk that the company emphasizes in its press release. The drug was given priority status and fast-tracked for approval due to the “significant improvement” over existing therapies for smoking cessation, which weren’t all that signficant. Nausea is the only harm discussed, though there is no mention of the rate or severity of nausea in the treatment and placebo groups, or if participants dropped out of the study due to this side effect. Other side effects of the medication included headaches, insomnia and stomach problems, which are also not mentioned in the story. The story only briefly mentions clinical evidence, and provides an incomplete discussion of the design of the Chantix trials. The numbers were from two fairly well-designed, randomized, double-blind trials (2000 participants), which the story fails to note. Abstinence rates were evaluated between varenicline (Chantix), bupropion (Zyban) and placebo groups at 12 weeks, then continuous abstinence for another 40 weeks. Incidence of nausea, the most common side effect, is not mentioned. There is acknowledgment in the story that the long-term success rate for smoking cessation may be due to a number of combined therapies, including non-drug behavioral treatment. The drug was given priority status and fast-tracked for approval due to the “significant improvement” over existing therapies for smoking cessation, which weren’t all that signficant. There does not seem to be evidence of disease mongering. The story uses federal agency data to describe prevalence of smoking and numbers desiring to quit. The study was funded by Pfizer, which is noted in the story. The story mentions that the inventor of the drug is an employee of Pfizer, so his testimonial on its effectiveness may be somewhat biased. The story mentions other drug treatments such as nicotine replacement therapies and bupropion. There is some discussion of non-drug methods of smoking cessation (e.g. behavioral counseling ) with regards to long-term abstinence. The story mentions recent FDA approval of varenicline for smoking cessation, however, we don’t know if it is available (presumably not as there is no price yet) or when it will become available. The story explains how this drug differs from nicotine replacement, and that it is different from bupropion. Varenicline binds to the nicotine receptor and only partially activates it so there is less stimulation than by nicotine itself. One of the downstream events from nicotine receptor binding is dopamine release in the parts of the brain wired for reward. There is no evidence that the story relied solely on a press release. The author cites, responsibly, multiple national experts who put the drug in perspective.
|
|
955
|
Brazil Senate panel says Vale CFO, ex-CEO should be indicted for murder.
|
Iron ore miner Vale SA’s chief financial officer and its former chief executive should be indicted for murder, a Brazilian Senate committee probing a deadly dam collapse recommended on Tuesday.
|
true
|
Environment
|
The committee is also seeking the indictment of Vale and dam stability auditor TÜV SÜD for environmental damages and corporate responsibility for actions of their employees in the late-January disaster that killed nearly 250 people. The 400-page report recommended that a total of 15 individuals, including the two executives, be indicted for murder, wrongful bodily injury, environmental damages and pollution. Fabio Schvartsman stepped down as Vale’s CEO under pressure from prosecutors in March. Luciano Siani, also targeted by the committee, continues to serve as CFO. The committee’s initial report recommended manslaughter charges but at a hearing it approved an amendment to upgrade the charges to murder and add a 15th individual to its list for recommended indictments. Vale, a formerly state-owned Brazilian “national champion” which is a leading exporter and employer, said it “respectfully disagrees” with the indictment recommendations. A “forensic, technical and scientific conclusion about the causes of the dam burst” should be arrived at before holding certain people responsible, the company asserted in a statement. TÜV SÜD said it was cooperating in full but declined to comment further, citing ongoing investigations. Vale shares, which early in the session touched their highest since before the Brumadinho disaster, closed down 4.2%. The nonbinding recommendations could influence prosecutors in their ongoing probe of Vale and its executives for negligence regarding the disaster. “Vale’s tragedy is a series of tragedies,” the committee said in its report. “The immeasurable human loss; the countless dead animals; the environment destroyed for years, perhaps decades; the dreams and heritage of a lifetime buried by the carelessness, neglect, greed, usury, irresponsibility, indifference and sloppiness of a company that used to be a role model.” Brazil must take action to ensure that “never again” will such a disaster occur, it said, recommending three laws that would require congressional approval. One would outlaw all tailings dams for mining and industrial waste. That would go far beyond a ban instituted in February on the specific type of “upstream” dam that ruptured. It would allow for 10 years to decommission the hundreds of existing tailings dams around the country, a costly move for miners. A separate bill would hike taxes calculated on mineral production, with a tax of up to 40% on more profitable or larger scale mines. The investment banking unit of Brazil’s Bradesco said such a tax is unlikely to be implemented given that comparable taxes in Australia and Mexico are up to 7.5%. But the bank said the rate is likely to rise for Brazilian miners from the current 3.5%. A third proposed law would expand the list of environmental crimes. Barclays analyst Amos Fletcher said he doubted that Congress would follow through on shutting down all types of tailings dams, a move that would halt a significant amount of mineral production, which Brazil counts on for a large portion of its GDP, he said. The recommendations may be depressing Vale’s stock price more than the indictments because of worries that such changes “would lead to more supply being squeezed,” he said. Vale’s tailings dam ruptured in the city of Brumadinho in the mining state of Minas Gerais in late January, releasing a torrent of mud that buried hundreds of people, including a cafeteria full of workers at lunchtime. In the following months, investigators and regulators pointed toward a risky “upstream” style of dam construction, improper maintenance and negligence. TÜV SÜD certified the dam as stable in 2018 despite pointing out concerns about drainage and monitoring systems. Vale has argued that it followed all the required safety measures. While authorities have yet to conclude the cause of the rupture, a Minas Gerais state official and other experts suspect liquefaction, in which solid materials such as sand lose strength and become more like liquid. That was the same cause of a 2015 rupture of another upstream Vale dam that killed 19.
|
24584
|
I'm 59. In either Canada or Great Britain, if I broke my hip, I couldn’t get it replaced.
|
At 59, GOP congressman says he couldn't get a hip replacement in Canada or England
|
false
|
National, Health Care, Roy Blunt,
|
"Critics of President Barack Obama's health care plan have often cited problems with government-run health care in Canada and Britain to make a point that there could be long lines or inadequate care under the Democratic plan. During a meeting with with reporters and editors at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in early August 2009, Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said he was living proof of the drawbacks of the Canadian and British systems. ""I'm 59. In either Canada or Great Britain, if I broke my hip, I couldn't get it replaced,"" he told them, asserting that he was too old to be eligible for the expensive surgery. Our friends at the Post-Dispatch checked the assertion and found it to be false. We did our own fact-checking and verified their work. In an Aug. 16 editorial challenging Blunt's assertion, the newspaper wrote that ""at least 63 percent of hip replacements performed in Canada last year and two-thirds of those done in England were on patients age 65 or older. More than 1,200 in Canada were done on people older than 85."" Let's take those numbers individually. On the question of Canadian hip replacements, the Post-Dispatch cited a report by the Canadian Institute for Health Information, which describes itself as ""an independent, not-for-profit organization that provides essential data and analysis on Canada’s health system and the health of Canadians."" The report draws on information from several databases, including nationwide figures on medical procedures undertaken in hospitals. Using those statistics, it found that in all of Canada (except for the province of Quebec, for which information was unavailable), 63 percent of all hip replacements in 2006-2007 were performed on patients 65 and older. So Blunt was wrong, and the newspaper was right. As for the the number of Canadian hip replacements for the 85-and-older demographic, the newspaper actually underestimated how many there were. The number for 2006-2007, according to the same report, was 1,577. Just to make sure these numbers were valid, we checked with Shirley Chen, a senior analyst at the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry, a project of CIHI and orthopedic surgeons in Canada that collects statistics on hip and knee joint replacements. She confirmed the numbers reported here. For Britain, the Post-Dispatch got its figures from a 2000 report by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, a group that determines whether particular treatments are covered by the British National Health Service. The report said that ""the over 65-year age group accounts for two in every three"" hip replacements. When we called Britain's National Health Service's Information Center for Health and Social Care — the NHS's hub for medical statistics — they provided new numbers showing that 87 percent of hip replacements were performed on people age 60 or over. That's a different age bracket than what the newspaper used, but it still means Blunt was wrong. Blunt acknowledged his mistake to the Post-Dispatch and promised to do better. ""I'm glad you pointed that out to me,"" he told the newspaper. ""I won’t use that example any more."" He blamed the bad information on testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, given by ""some people who are supposed to be experts on Canadian health care."" We looked through past congressional testimony using both Congressional Quarterly and Google but we couldn't find a reference that fit the description. Blunt's office did not respond to our request for an explanation. Unlike others who have been caught in falsehoods in the health care debate, it's notable that Blunt has acknowledged his mistake and said he was sorry. But still, he was wrong about both countries and would be eligible for hip replacements for many years to come. Public officials have a duty not to get things wrong, especially when it has the potential to frighten people. (You may recall we gave Vice President Joe Biden a for saying during the swine flu scare that when you sneeze, it travels through the whole plane.) Likewise, this claim could scare many senior citizens. So we have to set the meter ablaze and give Blunt a !"
|
11477
|
Simple Test May Spot Early Lung Cancer
|
This story is based upon new research that examines genes and biochemical pathways associated with lung cancer in smokers with and without lung cancer. This would allow lung cancer to be detected in its early, more treatable stages or before it developed. Hyperbolic writing and choice of quotes resulted in phrases such as:
|
false
|
"Not applicable because of the early stage of research. Didn’t give any numbers on how well the test performed. And didn’t explain that inositol was tested in just a few people. Very weak in this area. No potential harms are discussed. Bronchoscopy can be risky, especially in those with already compromised lung function such as smokers. There is no mention of the magnitude of effect, number of subjects studied, or other details that shed light on the quality of evidence. Very weak in this area. No overt disease mongering about lung cancer. Barely satisfactory. One independent expert quoted – but one whose quote offered no analysis. Financial interest of the lead investigator is mentioned. Not only was the other genetic signature research not mentioned, there was no discussion of other means of detecting early lung cancer such as chest CT – albeit controversial. The opening line of the article — ""Researchers may have found an easy way to detect lung cancer in its early or even pre-cancerousstages, as well as a way to reverse the start of the deadly disease with a readily available, over-the-counter drug"" – overstates the evidence for inositol’s effectiveness, and implies that it is available in a form that could reverse the development of lung cancer. Didn’t put this new research into the context of any of the other lung cancer genetic expression research underway, so this story provides no context on the true novelty of this approach. One independent expert quoted, so apparently did not rely on a news release."
|
|
35191
|
A letter providing tips on how to protect against the new coronavirus was authored by pathologist James Robb.
|
His history with coronaviruses is accurately recounted. In the late 1970s, as professor of pathology at the University of California, San Diego, Robb published some of the earliest descriptions of coronaviruses. He also published a book chapter on this class of viruses for “Comprehensive Virology.”
|
true
|
Medical, COVID-19
|
In late February 2020, as a new coronavirus spread worldwide, a letter providing advice on avoiding a viral infection was shared and memed heavily. The letter is attributed to pathologist James Robb who described himself as “one of the first molecular virologists in the world to work on coronaviruses.” The letter itself provides common-sense solutions to preventing disease transmission: 1) NO HANDSHAKING! Use a fist bump, slight bow, elbow bump, etc. 2) Use ONLY your knuckle to touch light switches. elevator buttons, etc.. Lift the gasoline dispenser with a paper towel or use a disposable glove. 3) Open doors with your closed fist or hip – do not grasp the handle with your hand, unless there is no other way to open the door. Especially important on bathroom and post office/commercial doors. 4) Use disinfectant wipes at the stores when they are available, including wiping the handle and child seat in grocery carts. 5) Wash your hands with soap for 10-20 seconds and/or use a greater than 60% alcohol-based hand sanitizer whenever you return home from ANY activity that involves locations where other people have been. 6) Keep a bottle of sanitizer available at each of your home’s entrances. AND in your car for use after getting gas or touching other contaminated objects when you can’t immediately wash your hands. 7) If possible, cough or sneeze into a disposable tissue and discard. Use your elbow only if you have to. The clothing on your elbow will contain infectious virus that can be passed on for up to a week or more! The portion of the missive that garnered the most attention, however, was the pathologist’s recommendation of zinc lozenges: Stock up now with zinc lozenges. These lozenges have been proven to be effective in blocking coronavirus (and most other viruses) from multiplying in your throat and nasopharynx. Use as directed several times each day when you begin to feel ANY “cold-like” symptoms beginning. It is best to lie down and let the lozenge dissolve in the back of your throat and nasopharynx. Cold-Eeze lozenges is one brand available, but there are other brands available. This portion of the letter apparently resulted in memes suggesting the product Cold-Eeze was a “silver bullet” that would “kill coronavirus”: We reached out to Robb to ask if he was the author of this letter. Via email, he told us that he did indeed write it, but that it was never meant to be for anyone besides family and close friends, and that it was not intended to be an advertisement for any specific product: It was my email to my family and close friends ONLY. Someone put it on their Facebook page. It was intended to be a monologue – not a dialogue. I do not use any social media and may have been too naive about what “sharing” means today.
|
26301
|
$100B contact tracing bill “is about controlling/tracking population, not about coronavirus.”
|
A Facebook post claims new federal legislation to support contact tracing “is about controlling/tracking population, not about coronavirus.” The bill strictly targets the novel coronavirus. It would provide $100 billion to organizations that do COVID-19 contact tracing and testing, or that offer services to people who are isolating at home.
|
false
|
Government Regulation, Public Health, Privacy Issues, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"Proposed legislation in the U.S. House would provide new funding for testing and contract tracing to help public-health officials track and control the spread of the coronavirus. But a Facebook post claims that the $100 billion bill ""is about controlling/tracking population, not about coronavirus."" The May 12 post, which had more than 100,000 views by the next day, was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The $100 billion is strictly targeted to fight COVID-19. It would fund not only contact tracing, a process aimed at stopping the spread of the disease, but also COVID-19 testing and services for people isolating at home. Contact tracing has become a key strategy of the White House plan to reopen states that went into shutdown because of the coronavirus pandemic. The process tasks public health workers with learning as much as they can about whom a patient has been in contact with, so they can be notified about their potential exposure. While it does raise some privacy concerns, contact tracing has been used to slow the spread of other diseases, such as SARS and HIV. It’s a common strategy in public health agencies across the country. State and local public health officials are hiring thousands of new contact tracers, but some experts say the federal government needs to spend billions of dollars to bolster those efforts. The claim about the proposed legislation is made by former television news reporter Ben Swann, who describes himself as a ""journalist who speaks truth to power!"" He runs TruthInMedia.com, which says it provides ""content focusing on issues that impact humanity."" The headline of Swann’s post is: ""H.R. 6666: $100 Billion Contact Tracing Bill is About Controlling/Tracking Population, Not About Coronavirus."" The post says: ""A House resolution from Illinois Democrat Rep. Bobby Rush that would put Big Government in charge of tracking citizens’ movements as they relate to COVID-19 mitigation efforts — even sending health bureaucrats to ‘individuals’ residences, as necessary,’ as the legislation states."" That wording is nearly the same as the first paragraph of a Washington Times article that’s labeled opinion/analysis and was published the same day as the Facebook post. The post also includes a 15-minute video in which Swann claims the bill would create ""a massive new surveillance structure in this country."" In the video, which we did not fact-check, Swann argues that contact tracing is useful only in the early stages of an outbreak and now ""is completely useless"" in the United States because ""a massive amount of the population have been exposed to the disease."" Based on that, Swann argues that the contact tracing supported by the bill would be done to ""monitor you in your own home, traced in your home, your associations monitored, your movements monitored."" H.R. 6666 was introduced by Rush on May 1 and is called the COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone Act, or TRACE Act. It would provide $100 billion in grants in the current fiscal year to faith-based organization, clinics, medical centers and other organizations that: Perform testing for COVID–19; Do contact tracing; or Provide services for individuals who are isolating at home. The bill would ""authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to award grants to eligible entities to conduct diagnostic testing for COVID–19, and related activities such as contact tracing, through mobile health units and, as necessary, at individuals’ residences, and for other purposes."" Swann told PolitiFact that the ""other purposes"" wording ""leaves room for interpretation and expansion."" A Facebook post claims new federal legislation to support COVID-19 testing and contact tracing ""is about controlling/tracking population, not about coronavirus."" The bill strictly targets the novel coronavirus. It would provide $100 billion to organizations that do COVID-19 testing or contact tracing or that provide services to people who are isolating at home."
|
4460
|
Chimps varied ‘culture’ matters for conservation, study says.
|
Some chimpanzee groups are stone-throwers. Some use rocks to crack open tree nuts to eat. Others use sticks to fish for algae.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Genetics, International News, Fish, Africa, Chimpanzees, Science, Cultures, Animals, Algae
|
As researchers learn more about Homo sapiens’ closest living genetic relatives, they are also discovering more about the diversity of behaviors within chimpanzee groups — activities learned, at least in part socially, and passed from generation to generation. These patterns are referred to as “traditions” — or even animal “culture.” In a new study , scientists argue that this diversity of behaviors should be protected as species themselves are safeguarded, and that they are now under threat from human disturbance. “What we mean by ‘culture’ is something you learn socially from your group members that you may not learn if you were born into a different chimpanzee group,” said Ammie Kalan, a primatologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. “As chimpanzee populations decline and their habitats become fragmented, we can see a stark decline in chimpanzee behavioral diversity,” said Kalan, co-author of the sweeping new study published Thursday in the journal Science. The 10-year study, led by researchers at the Max Planck Institute and the German Center for Integrative Biodiversity Research, examines data on 144 chimpanzee communities in Africa and the occurrence of 31 specific behaviors, such as tool usage or rock throwing. The regions with the least human impact showed the greatest variety in chimp behaviors. But areas greatly altered by logging, road-building, climate change and other human activities showed markedly less behavioral diversity — an 88 percent lower probability of exhibiting all behaviors. Multiple factors drive the loss, the authors say. “With the increase of human disturbance, chimps may not be able to live in such large groups anymore — and it has been shown that group size is connected with social learning,” said Hjalmar Kühl, also a primatologist at the Max Planck Institute and a co-author. For example, researchers studying chimpanzee groups in parts of West Africa encountered mysterious piles of stones alongside battered tree trunks. The rocks had been thrown against the trees by chimpanzees for reasons still unclear to the scientists who first documented the behavior in 2016. Perhaps the purpose was to mark territory, or proclaim dominance within a group, or start a game, or something else, the biologists surmised. But not all chimpanzees are stone-throwers. Some groups use stones to crack open tree nuts. Researchers recently discovered an archaeological site in West Africa that showed chimpanzees had used stones there for nut-cracking for more than 4,000 years. Elsewhere in West Africa, sticks were the tools of choice, with young chimps in Guinea learning from their elders to use them to “fish” in lakes for long strands of algae to eat. Or, in Nigeria, to poke termite mounds to gather the insects for food. Sixty years ago, scientists had limited knowledge of chimpanzees in the wild, until researcher Jane Goodall first recorded behaviors like tool usage, which previously were associated only with humans. In 1999, Goodall and other scientists popularized the phrase “chimpanzee cultures” in an article in the journal Science. The use of the term has ignited debate ever since — including resistance from some anthropologists— but also launched further research. Most likely genetics and socially learned behavior interact to form animal “culture” in chimpanzees and other species, said Carl Safina, an ecologist and author of several books on animal behavior who was not involved in the study. This has implications for conservation. “We have come to understand that behavioral diversity matters for protecting species,” said Andrew Whiten, an evolutionary psychologist and zoologist at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, who was not involved in the study. “The greater the diversity of behavior, the more likely a species will be able to deal with future changes and challenges in their environment,” he said. “It’s not good news when their options are limited.” Last month, Whiten co-authored a “Policy Forum” article in Science, entitled “Animal cultures matter for conservation,” arguing that policy-makers should include behavioral diversity alongside other measures of biodiversity. “Culture is not the tip of the iceberg for these great apes — some kind of nice luxury — but an intrinsic and essential part of their local adaptation,” Carel van Schaik, an anthropologist at the University of Zurich who was not involved in the new study, wrote in an email. Lydia Luncz, a primatologist at the University of Oxford, agrees. “We are far from understanding yet what is the cultural repertoire of chimps,” said Luncz, who also was not involved in the study. “It would be a tragedy to lose more of the cultural heritage of our closest living relatives.” ___ Follow Christina Larson on Twitter at @larsonchristina ___ 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 conten
|
10663
|
Merck Receives FDA Approval of ZEPATIER™ (elbasvir and grazoprevir) for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 1 or 4 Infection in Adults Following Priority Review
|
Merck’s PR release fills us in on its freshly FDA-approved drug — Zepatier (elbasvir and grazoprevir) — to treat two different forms of hepatitis C and claims to “cure” upwards of 94% of infections based on 12- and 16-week trials. The combination pill is taken once a day throughout treatment. The release seems targeted primarily to healthcare professionals, rather than consumers, so it’s chock-full of jargon and statistics. While the release indicates the risks, benefits and costs, we saw some weaknesses in the presentation of the evidence. For example, the news release did not provide the outcomes for the placebo group, even though the studies compared the drugs with placebo. Nor did it explain that the outcome assessed — sustained virologic response — is a short-term proxy for the longer-term results that patients really care about, such as rates of liver failure and cancer. Speaking of costs, what this release doesn’t cover (although who would expect a for-profit drug company to do so?) is the insane cost of specialty drugs, the rising demand for them, and their increasing burden on the U.S. healthcare system. HealthNewsReview.org contributor Trudy Lieberman expands on this issue in a recent blog post, which happens to focus on another (very expensive) hepatitis C drug. Hepatitis C is caused by a virus that attacks the liver — an organ you can’t live without because it breaks down toxins, fights infections, helps regulate metabolism, and aids digestion. Infections can be passed down in a variety of ways, including from mother to child (during pregnancy), use of unsanitary needles (e.g. drugs or tattoos), or having sex with someone who’s infected. Severe infections can lead to liver transplants, and cure rates with drugs in the past decade were less than 50%. Treatment has evolved rapidly as new drugs hit the market each year. Now drug sponsors are claiming that 80% to more than 90% of chronic infections can be essentially eliminated with drugs, but they do not come cheap. Harvoni, made by Gilead, costs $94,500 per 12-week course of treatment — $1,125 per pill. Gilead’s other hepatitis C drug Sovaldi costs $84,000 per course. And now Zepatier, made by Merck and now FDA-approved, costs $54,600 — what the Financial Times called the latest volley in a hepatitis C drug price war. Unfortunately, the need for such expensive drugs is on the rise, and with it is an increasing burden on the healthcare system. About 3.5 million people in the US live with chronic hepatitis C. And according to the CDC’s latest estimates, the number of new US cases is growing: There were about 16,500 new cases in 2011, 24,700 new cases in 2012, and 29,700 new cases in 2013 — and more than three quarters of these cases lead to a chronic infection. The effect of these drugs on outcomes of reducing effects of Hep C virus on the liver, longevity or cancer rates has never been proven or quantified. Before we can talk about the effect of the price of the drug, we need to quantify the effect (NNTB) of the drug for patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic Hep C.
|
true
|
Health care costs,industry/commercial news releases
|
We’re told a 12-week regimen costs $54,600. However, we’re not clued in as to how much a 16-week treatment costs and that’s important since some of the trials lasted 16 weeks. Generally, according to the NIH, treatments take anywhere from 24 to 48 weeks. It’s unclear if this is true of Zepatier, although the results seem to indicate one round of treatment is all you need. There’s also a notable addition in this release in regard to cost: Financial assistance that brings the cost down to “as little as $5 for each prescription” for private insurance plans that aren’t generous when it comes to drugs. As the recent HealthNewsReview.org post by Lieberman might suggest, this is part of a growing trend to conceal the true cost of expensive drugs to the consumer, forcing those with more substantial insurance plans to foot the bill. “Do we want the health system to work for a few or for everyone?” Lieberman wrote. “That should guide our reporting when the next news release touting the newest specialty drug shows up.” After 12 to 16 weeks of treatment, Merck claims its drug can cure two types of hepatitis C in 94% of people. This includes people who had cirrhosis, HIV or kidney impairment. However, it should have been explained that the response or “cure” refers only to the reduction of viral load, which does not address long-term effects or adverse effects of the drug. The benefits are given in absolute terms, but viral loads are not reported and the response or viral loads in the placebo group are not reported at all in the release. This would be a critical element to be adequately reported in describing the results of studies on the efficacy of a particular drug. Finally, since some of the patients already had cirrhosis, there is no way the drug can prevent this outcome, and the needed study outcome should be reduction in the rate of liver or other GI cancers. The discussion on harms includes a long list of drugs to avoid mixing with Zepatier as well as common side effects and adverse reactions including headaches, fatigue, nausea, and anemia in about 5% of people who took the drug. Although we wouldn’t expect harms from placebo to be severe, we expected to see at least a mention of them since the drug was compared against placebo. And, since the minor harms were listed so extensively, we would have liked to see a mention of the risks for more rare but serious side effects due to the drug. In its news release on the approval, the FDA writes, “Zepatier carries a warning alerting patients and health care providers that elevations of liver enzymes to greater than five times the upper limit of normal occurred in approximately 1 percent of clinical trial participants, generally at or after treatment week eight.” Drugs must pass high bars to achieve FDA approval, and here we’re given the detailed results in five randomized, double-blind clinical trials for one form of hepatitis C (GT1 HCV) and one trial for another — GT4 HCV. Each of the trials used a few different populations with different pre-existing conditions. Despite the exhaustive accounting of study results, we’ll ding the release here for not acknowledging that the studies were all designed to find the “disease oriented” and not “patient oriented” outcomes. This means that the trial looked at the reduction in viral load, not the prevention of specific conditions like cirrhosis, an outcome that is supposed to be prevented by the use of these drugs. Patients care most about conditions that affect them and not how many virus particles are in their blood, so this was an important omission. There are no harrowing, overly dramatic details here. Merck is clearly labeled as the sponsor of the release. In the clinical trials section, some alternative treatments are named, including “IFN or PegIFN ± RBV” and “boceprevir, simeprevir, or telaprevir in combination with PegIFN + RBV.” We’ll award a Satisfactory on that basis, although the trials mentioned are all compared against placebo and not these drugs. It would have helped to know what those treatments are, and their effectiveness. We will note, however, that highly successful curative hepatitis C treatments are very new — basically, within the past few years. The alternatives prior to that were liver transplants, which can cost $300,000, and viral interferon treatments, which were less than 50% effective. Merck’s release states the drug will start shipping to wholesalers within 7 days of Jan. 28, 2016. This is the second one-pill, once-a-day option for hepatitis C. We don’t think the release demonstrates novelty. “Multiple therapeutic tools” to treat hepatitis C are mentioned in a quote by the executive director of the Hepatitis Education Project, but we’re not clued in to what those are or where Zepatier fits in. Alternative drugs have similar, albeit slightly lower, cure rates in the high-80% to low-90% range. We see the word “cure” four times in the release. The release defines its use of the term cure early on in the release as “Sustained virologic response is defined as HCV RNA levels measuring less than the lower limit of quantification at 12 weeks after the cessation of treatment (SVR12), indicating that a patient’s HCV infection has been cured.” We disagree because there’s no indication that these “sustained” responses are prolonged for a long period after the drug is discontinued.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.