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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
10034
|
Studies endorse ‘virtual colonoscopy’
|
The article describes a new study that supports similar accuracy of virtual colonoscopy (or CT colography) cused to screen for colon cancer compared to traditional colonoscopy. The article does a nice job of describing benefits (providing absolute numbers), costs, availability, novelty, a range of harms, and sources. The article could have been improved by describing the strength of the evidence. For instance, the results are not based on a randomized trial, yet without this information or any other information about study design, readers don’t know how strong these results are. The article also could have included a discussion about absolute risks and benefits of colon cancer screening. While there is no obvious disease mongering, the absolute reduction in risk of dying from colon cancer due to screening is relatively small and some may find the risk or inconvenience of the procedure not worth the benefit. Similarly, presenting the option of not screening is always valid when discussing any screening program.
|
true
|
"The article provides costs of ""regular"" colonoscopy and that of CT colography. The article does state that ""about the same number of advanced polyps"" were found in each group (comparing virtual to regular colonoscopy). It then goes on to give absolute numbers of people with an advanced polyp (the total number of people within groups is also given so that an absolute percentage could be calculated). The story also describes how many people required a regular colonoscopy after virtual colonoscopy and how many people decided to have their polyps watched. The story provides harms of ""regular"" colonscopy, including the number of people in the study who experienced a perforated bowel and those who also required surgery to repair it. Less objective harms, like embarrassment or inconvenience, are not reported, but are also harder to measure. For virtual colonoscopy, the story includes a reference to a concern that radiation from the CT scanner might be a harm. It also implies that because virtual colonoscopy did not measure smaller growths, this could be a harm if that growth somehow went on to develop into cancer. The story also mentions that a bowel prep is needed for the virtual test, which is often a drawback for people. The story does not mention that it’s quite possible and even likely that if a regular colonoscopy is needed, it will probably be done on a different day requiring the prep to be repeated. While the study arranged to have these performed on the same day, this is not likely in the real world. The article doesn’t mention the type of study that the findings are based on. This study was not a randomized trial, which is important, and is not discussed. Readers don’t know how strong these findings are or are not. The information provided by the article about the condition in general is correct and not exaggerated. However, the article could have been improved if a discussion about how much colon cancer screening could benefit an average person was included. While it’s true that colon cancer screening can reduce the chance of getting or dying from colon cancer, most people aren’t aware that the absolute reduction in risk is quite small. For some, this relatively small benefit may not be worth the risks or inconvenience of the procedure. As above. Multiple sources are used, at least two of whom don’t appear to be affiliated with the research. The story also cites potential conflicts of interest of the researchers. No other screening options are discussed (like FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, or a combination of the two). Additionally, the option of not screening is always valid when describing a screening program and was not mentioned. The article states virtual colonoscopy (or CT colography) is currently available at some hospitals and centers. The article also describes that many, if not most, insurers don’t currently pay for this. The story doesn’t provide information on when virtual colonoscopy started to be used. But, perhaps more importantly, it does make it clear that virtual colonoscopy would be a new option for colon cancer screening with new evidence. Since there a sources of information not affiliated with the research, it appears this story does not rely on a press release."
|
|
4675
|
W Virginia to open medical marijuana business applications.
|
Businesses hoping to break into West Virginia’s fledgling marijuana market will soon be able to apply for permits as growers, processors, dispensaries and laboratories.
|
true
|
Medical marijuana, Health, General News, Marijuana, West Virginia
|
The state Bureau of Public Health says its Office of Medical Cannabis will open applications on Dec. 19. Citing a state news release, news outlets report applications are due by February 18 and will be online only. The Charleston Gazette-Mail reports the medical marijuana program created in 2017 was meant launch in July. Delays included the state treasure’s banking vendors refusing to process marijuana funds, per conflicts with federal law. A workaround passed this year allowed credit unions to step in. The cannabis office’s director, Jason Frame, previously said he wanted patients to have access to the drug before the summer of 2021.
|
4066
|
Tick towns: Researchers target neighborhoods in Lyme effort.
|
Maybe it will take a village to fight Lyme disease. Or a bunch of them.
|
true
|
New York City, New York, Ticks, Lyme disease, Health, U.S. News
|
With a bumper crop of blacklegged ticks possible this season, researchers in a Lyme disease-plagued part of New York’s Hudson Valley are tackling tick problems across entire neighborhoods with fungal sprays and bait boxes. The $8.8 million, five-year project aims to find out if treating 24 neighborhoods in Dutchess County for ticks, also known as deer ticks, can significantly reduce cases of Lyme disease and other tick-borne illnesses. “We want to do a better job and actually remove the threat from the neighborhoods, from the places where people are actually exposed to infected ticks,” said Richard Ostfeld, a disease ecologist with the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, about 70 miles (110 kilometers) north of New York City. Dutchess County is a patchwork of forests, rolling farmland and thick residential developments that has long been a hotbed of Lyme disease. Tick checks are a common end-of-day routine here, as are inspections for the red, target-shaped rashes associated with tick bites. People spray on tick repellents, treat their clothes with insecticide and even spray their yards. But Ostfeld notes that spraying individual lawns has not proved effective in fighting Lyme disease. So he’s scaling up from one backyard to many. The Tick Project involves more than 900 families in neighborhoods that consist of about 30 to 50 participants. Yards are being treated in the spring and early summer with a fungal spray that kills ticks. Researchers also are deploying bait boxes to attract rodents. An insecticide in the box kills any ticks on mice and chipmunks, two animals largely responsible for infecting ticks with the bacterium that causes Lyme disease. Researchers check in with families every two weeks in season to see whether anyone in the house, including cats and dogs, had ticks on them over the period. The Tick Project is funded mostly through a $5 million grant from the Steven & Alexandra Cohen Foundation, created by the hedge fund manager and his wife. Ostfeld said 2021 is set aside for data analysis, thought they will have some sense of early results within a year. Ostfeld would not divulge which neighborhoods are involved or who is participating, citing the need for privacy and of keeping good relations with participants. Edward Blundell, mayor of the village of Red Hook, mentioned during an interview that he had agreed to take part in the study. While he felt he could take personal steps to protect himself from Lyme disease, he would be satisfied if something comes out of the research. “Let’s let the scientists look at this and give them a mini-lab site here, so we felt our yard could be the mini-site,” Blundell said. Tick researchers say such area-wide studies are complex and difficult to do. They are costly. It can be hard to get all the needed permissions. And variabilities in tick densities over study areas can make the science challenging. Thomas Mather, director of the Tick Encounter Resource Center at the University of Rhode Island, said executing a well-designed study large enough to produce valid results is a “Holy Grail” of tick researchers. Phillip Baker, executive director of the American Lyme Disease Foundation, said the neighborhood approach sounded like a good one but noted that ticks are a resilient parasite. “Ticks have been around for a long, long time,” Baker said, “and there’s no real easy approach to get rid of them.”
|
5651
|
State reports new findings of mosquito-borne illnesses.
|
Rhode Island officials have confirmed a fourth finding of the potentially deadly mosquito-borne virus eastern equine encephalitis and the first finding of West Nile virus.
|
true
|
Health, Rhode Island, General News, Westerly
|
State environmental and health officials said Tuesday a second mosquito sample trapped at Chapman Swamp in Westerly, Rhode Island tested positive for eastern equine encephalitis and mosquitoes trapped in Tiverton are the first to test positive for West Nile in the state this year. The state said last week that a man over 50 from West Warwick tested positive for eastern equine encephalitis— the first human case in Rhode Island since 2010— and a six-month-old horse in Westerly tested positive. The state has begun trapping mosquitoes in five more communities, for a total of 23 municipalities. Aerial spraying is scheduled to begin at Chapman Swamp Thursday, weather permitting.
|
7361
|
Missouri lawmakers OK mail-in voting on final day of work.
|
Missouri lawmakers wrapped up their work Friday by passing bills allowing people to vote by mail because of the coronavirus and ramping up criminal penalties in response to an uptick in violent crime in the state’s biggest cities.
|
true
|
Bills, Voting, Michael Brown, Health, General News, Elections, Crime, Virus Outbreak, Violent crime, Laws
|
Legislators signed off on the special voting provisions for the 2020 elections shortly before their deadline to pass bills in an unusual session that was interrupted for several weeks because of concerns about the virus that causes COVID-19. Voters currently can request absentee ballots only if they provide an excuse for why they can’t vote in person. Illness is one option, but the law isn’t explicit on whether the illness excuse covers healthy voters concerned about catching or spreading COVID-19. Under the bill sent to Republican Gov. Mike Parson, people considered at-risk of the coronavirus — those age 65 and older, living in a long-term care facility or with certain existing health problems — could vote absentee without needing to have their ballot notarized. Anyone else could cast a mail-in ballot but would need to get it notarized. The bill passed with bipartisan support but received mixed reviews from both parties. Republicans said it doesn’t include enough restrictions to ensure election security, and Democrats said it has too many rules. “When you are not wanting to go to the polls because you are either ill or fearful of becoming ill, but then you have to go get a notary to be able to not go to the polls, it doesn’t really fix the problem,” House Democratic Minority Leader Crystal Quade said. Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft on Friday said he no longer supported the measure after lawmakers stripped a contested photo ID requirement out of it. Lawmakers returned to the Capitol to work on the state budget and other policies days before Parson lifted his statewide stay-at-home order in early May. Members of the public were allowed in the Capitol to watch debate but were encouraged to stay home, prompting concern from some lawmakers about lack of public involvement in crafting major policy changes. Both lawmakers and visitors were quizzed on their health and had their temperatures checked before they could enter the building. “The work that we did here today I think was important enough that legislators made the decision that they were going to go ahead and come to the building to do work,” Republican House Speaker Elijah Haahr said. “We understand the risks involved.” Few lawmakers wore masks in the final days of session, and legislators frequently sat close to one another to vote. Lawmakers also faced pressure to act on crime legislation following a bloody 2019 and a violent start to 2020. The deaths of two men on Tuesday night were Kansas City’s 63rd and 64th homicides this year. St. Louis police reported 53 homicides as of Friday. A bill headed to Parson’s desk would create the crime of vehicle hijacking, expand the number of crimes that are considered dangerous felonies, ban probation for some crimes, and broaden what’s considered a criminal street gang, along with increased penalties for taking part in gang activities. “This is going to help get the most violent habitual offenders off of the streets,” Republican Rep. Nick Schroer said. The bill sparked outrage from House lawmakers who said it could reverse a drop in the state’s prison population following a bipartisan push for criminal justice reform in recent years. “It doesn’t make us safer,” Republican Rep. Shamed Dogan said of longer prison sentences. “It sounds good in campaign ads, but it does not actually increase public safety. This has been shown time and time and time and time again by research.” Longstanding efforts to make Missouri the last state to adopt a prescription drug database to track addictive medications failed. Republican skeptics in the Senate expressed no interest in compromising on the House-backed bill Friday after a feud between the two GOP-led chambers. At issue was a House provision that could thwart efforts to build a wind-energy power line that was slipped onto another Senate bill without senators noticing. Senators on Thursday hurriedly revoked a bill they had just passed, a highly unusual move, when they caught the amendment. Few bills made it across the finish line during lawmaker’s roughly five month session, about 50 compared to more than 90 last year. The Republican-led Legislature this week did succeed in sending a new redistricting plan to the ballot that will ask voters to undo key parts of another redistricting measure they passed less than two years ago. Supporters wanted to accomplish the move this year because new state House and Senate districts will be drawn in 2021. ___ Associated Press writer David A. Lieb contributed to this report.
|
16699
|
"Nathan Deal Says Jason Carter has ""gotten David Axelrod to come down and be his campaign advisor."
|
Deal wrong, Axelrod not working for Carter
|
false
|
Georgia, Elections, Nathan Deal,
|
"Gov. Nathan Deal was on radio recently to address allegations that two of his aides pressured the director of the state ethics commission to settle cases against his campaign. WSB radio’s Erick Erickson asked the governor what he thought of Democratic opponent Jason Carter’s call for an independent investigation. Deal said it wasn’t surprising ""now that Carter has gotten David Axelrod to come down and be his campaign advisor."" Axelrod, a longtime political strategist, is closely tied to President Barack Obama. He was campaign manager when Obama won the presidency in 2008 and followed Obama to Washington to serve as White House senior advisor. He left the administration in 2011 to become senior strategist for Obama’s successful 2012 re-election campaign. Deal is hardly the first candidate in this year’s elections to try to link an opponent to Obama, who has a low 42-percent job approval rating nationally, worse in Georgia. In the state’s GOP Senate race, for example, U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston tried to tar opponent David Perdue by pointing out that a company with Perdue on its board of directors had accepted money from Obama’s stimulus program. Perdue, meanwhile, attacked Kingston for voting to put money into president’s Cash for Clunkers program. But in this case, Deal got it wrong. Axelrod isn’t working on Carter’s campaign. He’s running the Institute of Politics at the University of Chicago. But AKPD Message and Media, a political consulting firm that Axelrod founded and sold in 2009, is working for Carter, a two-term state senator and the grandson of former President Jimmy Carter who was born in Georgia but grew up outside of Chicago. AKPD is doing media consulting for Carter’s campaign for governor and, as of the last disclosure reports, had been paid $67,908. The Chicago firm boasts of a successful track record for Democratic candidates. Jen Talaber, spokeswoman for Deal’s re-election bid, said the campaign wasn’t aware Axelrod had sold the firm five years ago. It was an ""honest mistake,"" she said an email. But Talaber said the governor’s underlying point still stands. ""Carter’s campaign team and consultants are Obama insiders, and his national fundraising list shows the Obama brain trust is in full force,"" she said. Bryan Thomas, communications director for the Carter campaign, said Deal’s claim about Axelrod ""was no slip of the tongue. ""Gov. Deal will do anything he can to distract from his ethical quagmire, including lie about his opponent,"" Thomas said. ""It's not surprising that a governor who plays it so loose with the laws is playing loose with truth, too."" Earlier this month, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution obtained a memo in which Holly LaBerge, head of the state ethics commission, said she was threatened and pressured by Deal’s office in 2012 to ""make (ethics) complaints"" against the governor ""go away."" The complaints included claims Deal improperly paid for use of a private aircraft for campaign travel and questioned his use of campaign funds to pay legal fees during his 2010 campaign. The ethics commission wound up dismissing the major complaints against Deal. He agreed to pay $3,350 in fees for technical defects to his campaign disclosures. Now, the Deal campaign isn’t the only one spreading word of an Axelrod connection. The Georgia Republican Party has a web page on ""Chicago liberals,"" with images of Carter, Axelrod and Obama. It states: ""Sadly, Chicago-style politics have come to Georgia. Atlanta liberal Jason Carter has hired Barack Obama’s trusted ally, David Axelrod."" It goes on to say: ""Liberals know they can’t hit Gov. Deal on jobs, the economy, or education. So they’ve resorted to attacking Gov. Deal’s character … Tell Jason Carter, Barack Obama, and David Axelrod we don’t need Chicago liberals running around Georgia attacking our conservative values. AKPD’s website touts the firm’s founding by Axelrod and has a quote from him on its homepage. We reached out to firm executives just to ask point blank if Axelrod were in someway connected to them or the Carter campaign. We heard back from Isaac Baker, a partner in the firm, who said Axelrod ""does not work for our firm"" and ""is not involved in any way in the Jason Carter campaign."" To summarize, David Axelrod is not working as a campaign advisor to Jason Carter. But the firm he founded and sold five years ago is. Talaber, Deal’s campaign spokeswoman, said the governor made an ""honest mistake"" when he said in a radio interview that Axelrod was working for Carter. But she said the underlying point still stands -- that Carter’s campaign team and consultants are ""Obama insiders."" That doesn’t change the fact that the governor was incorrect in saying that Jason Carter has ""gotten David Axelrod to come down and be his campaign advisor."""
|
20872
|
"Gwen Moore Says Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker eliminated ""cancer screenings for uninsured women"" and offered ""no alternatives."
|
Gov. Scott Walker ended Planned Parenthood contract for cancer screenings, Dem Rep. Gwen Moore says
|
false
|
Corrections and Updates, Health Care, Women, Wisconsin, Gwen Moore,
|
"Twice on Dec. 27, 2011, U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis., accused Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker of eliminating a cancer-screening program for low-income women. ""Scott Walker cuts cancer screenings for uninsured women, offers no alternatives,"" read Moore’s first statement on Twitter, the online messaging site that has some 200 million account holders. ""Walker kills women’s cancer screening program for political gain,"" her second tweet claimed. In the messages, Moore cited two website articles about the state Well Woman program. Among other things, it provides tests for cancer for low-income women who don’t have insurance that covers such screenings. The articles refer to Walker canceling a state contract with Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, which provides services related to the cancer screenings in four counties -- Winnebago, Fond du Lac, Outagamie and Sheboygan -- between Milwaukee and Green Bay. In the vast majority of Wisconsin’s 72 counties, a county health department serves as the local coordinator for the screenings. But since the program was started in 1995, Planned Parenthood has had what now is a $130,000-per-year state contract to serve as coordinator in the four counties. In that role, Planned Parenthood uses two employees to help women sign up for and receive the cancer screenings. In 2010, 715 women in the four counties were served, according to the state Department of Health Services. So did Walker kill a cancer-screening program for poor women? In a word: No. 1. The contract in question was for helping women sign up for and get the screenings, not the screenings themselves. The screenings are separate. Some are done by Planned Parenthood, but they also are done by other health care providers. 2.Walker’s administration did end Planned Parenthood’s contract -- but neither the assistance Planned Parenthood provided, nor the screenings themselves, ever ended. Indeed, the change put the four counties on par with how the program is handled in most of the rest of the state. When we asked Moore spokeswoman Nicole Williams if she had additional evidence to back Moore’s charges against Walker, she provided a news release from Planned Parenthood. But that release made clear both the assistance and the screenings would continue. So let’s see how Moore, who counts Planned Parenthood as an ally, got it all wrong. Walker moves to end contract Walker and Planned Parenthood are political foes. Planned Parenthood’s services -- unrelated to the Well Woman program -- include abortion, which Walker opposes. And two weeks before losing its contract, the organization announced its support of the campaign to recall Walker from office in 2012. Walker earlier in 2011 moved to cut Planned Parenthood’s public funding for family planning services. Controversy over the contract surfaced in December 2011. Dec. 1, 2011: The state health department, according to Planned Parenthood, notifies Planned Parenthood by phone that its contract would end effective Jan. 1, 2012. So, it’s clear the Walker administration abruptly ended the longtime contract -- but that didn’t mean an end to the cancer screenings or the assistance that Planned Parenthood was providing in the four counties. Dec. 23, 2011: The state health department announces that Winnebago County would take over the screening assistance in the four counties and that there would be a transition. (The news release did not mention that the assistance would be transitioned from Planned Parenthood.) So, the state made it clear the cancer screening-related services would continue. The change to Winnebago County puts the four counties in the same position as nearly all other counties in that a local health department, rather than a private agency such as Planned Parenthood, will serve as the local coordinator. But again, that’s not ending the screenings, which was Moore’s claim. Dec. 27, 2011: On the day Moore issued her tweets, Planned Parenthood announces it had agreed to continue providing assistance for the screenings for 60 days past the end of its contract. So, Planned Parenthood itself made it clear that neither the screenings nor the assistance in getting the screenings would end. How Moore went wrong Moore used as her tweets, almost word for word, the headlines from the two website articles she linked to in the tweets. Both articles incorrectly reported that Walker had ended entirely the screenings in question. Moore’s spokeswoman said Moore’s tweets were merely relating what the articles said. But neither article was from a straight news source. And Moore is responsible for stating bad information, even if it came from another source. That’s the approach PolitiFact has consistently taken, with Democrats and Republicans alike. A Dec. 17, 2011, Forbes.com article Moore cited was written by a contributor who took the stance that Walker was playing politics with the contract. And a Dec. 20 article she linked to was written by the left-leaning Huffington Post political website. As for why Planned Parenthood’s contract was canceled, Walker explained his decision, in a news article his spokesman provided to us, by saying: ""There are many clinics that are not as controversial as Planned Parenthood, and our goal was to make sure low-income women had access to those sorts of screenings from other providers around the state that don't carry the controversy you get with Planned Parenthood."" Doug Gieryn, director of the Winnebago County Health Department, told us that local health officials were happy with Planned Parenthood’s work and upset that the state ended its contract. But as for Moore’s claim that Walker eliminated the cancer screenings, Gieryn said: ""That’s inaccurate."" And by quite a lot. Our conclusion Moore said Walker eliminated ""cancer screenings for uninsured women"" in four Wisconsin counties and offered ""no alternatives."" But all Walker eliminated was a contract with Planned Parenthood for assisting women in getting the screenings. And the screenings never ended -- nor did the assistance Planned Parenthood provided. Moore’s claim was false and ridiculous -- our definition of . (Editor's note: In the original version of this story, published Jan. 6, 2012, we stated Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin does not provide the actual cancer screenings. Planned Parenthood does offer the screenings separately from the contract that was canceled, which involved helping women sign up for the screenings. )"
|
15297
|
Caution: Kissing and cuddling chickens can be hazardous to your health.
|
CDC: Kissing and cuddling backyard chickens linked to salmonella infections
|
true
|
Georgia, Agriculture, Animals, Food Safety, Public Health, Urban, Centers for Disease Control,
|
"Raising backyard chickens has been satisfying some foodies’ affection for the uber-local egg and lower-fat meat in urban areas, including metro Atlanta, for about a decade. Now the Centers for Disease Control is warning of a downside to the popular trend: salmonella outbreaks traced to some backyard owners kissing and cuddling their flocks. The CDC findings drew some media attention last month, and a PolitiFact reader who heard the health alert on NPR’s ""Morning Edition"" on July 16 asked us to dig deeper. We went directly to the source, the CDC, which is headquartered in Atlanta and has been investigating four recent Salmonella outbreaks that, as of July 29, had infected 218 people in 41 states. Five of them were in Georgia, 19 were in Alabama, 5 were in North Carolina, 11 were in South Carolina and 6 were in Tennessee. Fifty of the 218 people have required hospitalization for Salmonella, the major symptoms of which are usually diarrhea, fever and abdominal pain. No deaths have been reported, CDC spokeswoman Kristen Nordlund said. So how exactly do CDC officials know that some of these cases are due to backyard breeders kissing and cuddling live poultry? Dr. Megin Nichols, a veterinarian with the CDC, told PolitiFact the agency has been tracking upward trends in both the number of outbreaks and people infected in the past five years and has been working to trace their causes. ""We’ve been trying to interview these people to find out how they are getting sick,"" Nichols said. ""We are finding a certain proportion that are due to very close contact -- something that surprised us here at the CDC."" Salmonella is a germ that lives naturally in the intestine of chickens, ducks and many other animals. It doesn’t typically make the birds sick, but they can transmit the germs in their droppings and on their feet, feathers and beaks, even when they look clean and healthy, the CDC says. The germs also can get on their cages, coops, feed, water dishes, hay, plants and the area where they live and roam. In addition, the bacteria can rest on the hands, shoes and clothes of those who work around the birds or play with them. And Nichols told us that among the people who became ill between 2008 and 2014 due to baby poultry exposure, 49 percent, or 196 out of 400, reported snuggling and holding baby birds. Another 13 percent, or about 53, reported kissing baby birds, she said. Those people, many of whom were young children, became sick through fecal oral contact, Nichols said. Those same interviews also showed that about 46 percent of backyard breeders are keeping live poultry in their homes, she said. Epidemiologic, laboratory, and traceback findings have linked the most recent four outbreaks of human Salmonella infections to contact with chicks, ducklings, and other live poultry from multiple hatcheries. Interviews have been conducted with 140 of those who were recently ill and, 117, or 84 percent, reported contact with live poultry in the week before their illness began, according to the CDC website. Additional interviews to determine whether that contact included snuggling and kissing have yet to be conducted, Nichols said. An increasing number of people around the country are choosing to keep live poultry - mostly chickens, ducks, turkeys and geese as part of a greener, healthier lifestyle. Local governments, including several in metro Atlanta, have changed their zoning ordinances in recent years to accommodate the trend, and groups of backyard poultry buffs meet regularly in the region to talk chicken. Backyard owners have told reporters at The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the benefits include fresh eggs and meat, a built-in source of fertilizer for their gardens and ready-made bug-killers. Some say they give their chickens names, the freedom to roam the house and yard and cuddle and coddle them like family pets. The larger problem According to the CDC, salmonella, named for an American scientist who discovered the bacteria, is estimated to cause a million illnesses in the United States a year, with 19,000 hospitalizations and 380 deaths. Most people develop diarrhea and the other conditions within 12 to 72 hour after infection and recover without treatment in four to seven days. It has the potential to turn deadly if it spreads from the intestines to the bloodstream, and then to other body sites. Prompt treatment with antibiotics is critical, and the elderly, infants, and people with impaired immune systems are more likely to have a severe illness. In the largest recent outbreak, which occurred between March 2013 and July 2014, more than 600 people in 29 states and Puerto Rico were infected with seven outbreak strains. The outbreak was associated with one brand of chicken, which led to a company recall of more than 40,000 pounds of chicken products, according to the CDC. To prevent salmonella infections related to backyard farming, the CDC’s Nichols encourages several common-sense rules. These include thorough handwashing after contact with the chicken, keeping live poultry out of the home, and avoiding snuggling, close contact with the birds’ beaks or other close exposure that would allow ingestion of bacteria. She will be one of the experts featured in a webinar on the topic of practicing backyard bird biosecurity at 7p.m. Thursday. Our conclusion The CDC has issued a warning against kissing or snuggling backyard chickens. It follows four recent Salmonella outbreaks that, as of July 29, had infected 218 people in 41 states. Five of them were in Georgia. Interviews have been conducted with 140 of the ill and 117, or 84 percent, reported contact with live poultry in the week before their illness began, according to the CDC website. The CDC also has evidence from outbreaks between 2008 to 2014. In that period, they found that of the people who became infected with salmonella due to baby poultry exposure, 49 percent, or 196 out of 400 people, reported snuggling and holding baby birds. Another 13 percent, or about 53, reported kissing baby birds.. That’s cause to sound the alarm."
|
15734
|
"US Uncut Says Indiana Gov. Mike Pence ""provides zero state funding for homeless shelters."
|
The activist group US Uncut said Gov. Mike Pence provided zero state funding for homeless shelters. While the state budget and summaries from the experts and staffers we contacted confirmed that, it’s really an approach of the Indiana state government more than that of any particular person. Advocates say the state has never funded homeless shelters, a de facto policy that includes the consent of both the Legislature and former Democratic governors.
|
true
|
Housing, State Budget, PunditFact, US Uncut,
|
"Indiana’s Religious Freedom law quickly turned into a political and economic minefield for Republican Gov. Mike Pence. One activist group, US Uncut, took the moment to cast Pence as a man who defended religion while acting in ways that fell short of Christian charity. It posted this image on its Facebook page, which has since been shared nearly 70,000 times, comparing Pence to Jesus: We wanted to look at the claim that Pence provided ""zero state funding for homeless shelters."" The 2014 Indiana homeless population was 5,971, according to the state’s annual census. Of that population, officials counted 5,568 living in emergency shelters while 403 were found living on the street. Overall, the homeless count was down 12 percent from 2013, officials said. We looked at Pence’s most recent budget and found no money for emergency shelters. Under the line item for homelessness prevention, Pence requested zero dollars in both years of the biennial budget. There is $1.17 million in homeless assistance grants, but those are federal dollars. They come from the McKinney-Vento program administered through the Housing and Urban Development Department. There is also $1 million in mental health services for the homeless, but those too come from Washington. ""There has never been state funding directly for homeless shelters or programs,"" said Brad Meadows, communications director for the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority. Meadows added that towns and cities have the option to spend local money to care for the homeless. However, that would still not be state dollars. Barb Anderson is director of Haven House, a homeless shelter in Jeffersonville, Ind., and a long-time homeless advocate. ""We’ve tried to get state funding for shelters for over 25 years,"" Anderson told PunditFact. ""We’ve stayed open, but no one’s taken a salary in four years."" So Pence has not requested funding homeless shelters, but it’s worth noting that’s far from unique in Indiana. The state budget ultimately is the work product of the Legislature, not the governor. And the lack of state funding has been consistent under Republican and Democratic leadership. (Indiana had Democratic governors from 1989-2005, before electing Republican Mitch Daniels and then Pence.) Michael Stoops, director of community organizing with the advocacy group National Coalition for the Homeless, told PunditFact that Indiana follows the pattern of many rural and southern states. ""They are getting federal homeless dollars and passing them through to the cities and counties,"" Stoops said. ""They don’t spend any of their own money."" We contacted staff at Indiana University’s Public Policy Institute and the Indianapolis Coalition for Homelessness Intervention and Prevention, and they, too, could not identify any state money going toward emergency shelters. Indiana’s State Homeless Planning Council says on its webpage that the priority is on ""systematically preventing and ending homelessness for those most vulnerable in our communities."" The Council writes, ""Merely managing homelessness is in no one's best interest."" Stoops said many states do put their tax dollars into emergency shelters. That list includes, Colorado, Ohio, Oregon and Florida. ""Florida has been doing this since 1989,"" Stoops said. Our ruling The activist group US Uncut said Gov. Mike Pence provided zero state funding for homeless shelters. While the state budget and summaries from the experts and staffers we contacted confirmed that, it’s really an approach of the Indiana state government more than that of any particular person. Advocates say the state has never funded homeless shelters, a de facto policy that includes the consent of both the Legislature and former Democratic governors."
|
10796
|
Early intervention improves preschoolers' heart healthy habits
|
A study in Madrid of 2,000 preschoolers compared those who received special education in heart-healthy living with those who didn’t – and showed a modest improvement for children who received the lessons. An editorial used the word “groundbreaking” for the study, but the numbers seemed quite modest. The release could have provided context to try to justify the excitement. Changing people’s habits is a vital part of reducing the chronic diseases, including obesity and heart disease, that are epidemic in industrial societies. If making health part of the preschool classroom can accomplish this, it would be big news. This news release overstates a study that is mostly showing a proof of principle and will require much follow-up and analysis before one can say the educational intervention made these children any healthier or produced a durable change in their habits.
|
mixture
|
Association/Society news release,cardiovascular disease,Exercise,Weight loss
|
The news release does not talk at all about costs, and this three-year intervention including education for 3-5 year-old children sounds as if it could have had substantial cost. The release does quantify benefits – but it leaves readers a bit underwhelmed. The numerical differences shown are rather small for the conclusion that the release trumpets. We would have liked some context to justify the excitement about this study. Children who received intervention scored 5.5 percent higher in “knowledge, attitude and habits” than the controls, after the first year. However, that difference lowered to just 4.9 percent after the third year of intervention. We suspect that quantifying the “knowledge” of a 4-year-old is tricky and perhaps a bit more subjective than a blood test or other study data. Children who received the intervention had obesity rates of 1.1 percent in the group compared to 1.3 percent in the control group. The release should have explained why the authors believe the difference of only 2/10 of a percent qualified as “groundbreaking.” In addition, we’d note that the release touts reductions in body fat, measured through skinfold measurements, as a positive outcome. But skinfold measurements are a questionable marker of body fat given not only risk of inter-, but intra-operator error in terms of landmarking the exact same skinfold location for repeated measurements. Because the interventions are largely educational and don’t include drugs or therapies, we’ll say that harms are unlikely. But is it theoretically possible that the intervention could have some unforeseen impact on these children that shows up years later? Fear of fat? Anorexia? We won’t penalize the release for not raising the issue, but saying something about downstream potential would have added depth and insight. This study of 2,000 children appears to have a high quality of evidence in the study itself, and the release does a Satisfactory job of summarizing what the researchers did and what they found. But the news release could have gone further. It could have noted, for example, that schools were randomly assigned to participate or not in the intervention — and that this helps assure that the findings represent an isolated effect of the intervention itself rather that other factors that could have had an impact. There is similarly no discussion of potential limitations of the study, nor does the release give us any specifics as to what kinds of education and lifestyle interventions were offered to the children. As we said above, we wish the release had included some context by which to judge the small difference between study subjects and controls. There is no disease mongering in this release. The release does not mention the funding sources for the study, which was supported by government and foundation grants. Although there are no obvious conflicts of interest here, we always ask that news releases provide funding information about studies so that readers and journalists have easy access to this information. The use of education for preschool-aged children to prevent cardiovascular disease appears novel, and we are not aware of a direct alternative “education” that exists. We’ll rule this one Not Applicable. The release mentions that the intervention is part of the SI! program — but it doesn’t establish what that is or whether it’s something that the wider public has access to. One might presume that the program is used only in a research setting at present, but we don’t know that for sure, and the release should have made this clear. The release establishes the novelty of this prevention intervention with a quote: “There is a need for a complete change in the timing of when we deliver care,” said Valentin Fuster, M.D., Ph.D., senior author of the paper. “Until now, the clinical community has focused on cardiovascular disease, which typically manifests in the later stages of life. Now, we need to focus our care in the opposite stage of life–we need start promoting health at the earliest years, as early as 3 to 5 years old, in order to prevent cardiovascular disease.” The biggest claim is that the intervention “improves their [preschoolers] knowledge, attitude and habits toward healthy diet and exercise and can lead to reduced levels of body fat.” That claim is not unjustified, but rather the data seems to show the improvement is slight. But we think it’s unjustified to predict that these results will “translate to a lifelong understanding of healthy habits” as the release claims. There’s no data at all to suggest that these changes would be sustained beyond the active intervention period. We’re similarly concerned with a quote pulled from the accompanying editorial which states that there is a need to pinpoint the mechanisms through which the intervention “achieved positive effects on young children’s health.” We’re not at all sure that a slight increase in knowledge a very small reduction in bodyfat represent “positive effects on health.” Health encompasses much more than these things.
|
35667
|
A bottle of hand sanitizer will spontaneously combust if left in a hot car.
|
Light consists of numerous photons, which are subatomic particles that travel in a straight line, Madden said. Eyeglass and microscope lenses direct the photons so they converge on a point. “You can use that to see something better, get it in focus. Or, you can focus a lot of light onto a very small point and concentrate all that energy, and that can cause melting and burning,” Madden explained.
|
false
|
Viral Phenomena
|
Editor’s note: Fire experts warn that a plastic bottle containing any liquid — including, but not limited to, hand sanitizer — left in a car and exposed to direct sunlight can potentially focus sunlight into a beam hot enough to start a fire. The following article deals specifically with the specific claim that hand sanitizer will “spontaneously combust” if left in a hot car. In April 2020, a series of photographs started to circulate on WhatsApp and Telegram that supposedly showed the aftermath of a car fire caused by an unattended bottle of hand sanitizer. These posts, many of which were written in Portuguese, urged people to be cautious about leaving hand sanitizer in their cars because, they claimed, it can spontaneously combust. A month or so after these posts went viral in Brazil, a similar rumor started to circulate on English-language pages. In addition to being spread by anonymous social media users, these warnings also made their way onto the pages of a real fire departments. The Western Lakes Fire District of Wisconsin (WLFD) in Wisconsin, for instance, shared the following post to its Facebook page on May 21: Soon after, a number of news outlets picked up on this story and ran articles about how a fire department was warning people not to leave hand sanitizer in their cars. Although WLFD truly did post the above-displayed warning, the department later removed the post for stirring confusion. For starters, the picture has not been officially linked to a fire caused by a bottle of hand sanitizer exploding into flame. A number of experts have also weighed in to say that while hand sanitizer does contain alcohol and is flammable, it would require a tremendous amount of heat for spontaneous combustion. Although this sort of fire may be technically possible (more on that later), we’ve yet to see any official reports about a car fire starting this way. Lastly, the WLFD did state that a fire could be started via “magnification of light through the bottle,” but this is true for any plastic bottle and has little to do with its contents. WLFD deleted its original hand sanitizer warning and replaced it with the following message: Our goal in the WLFD is to provide timely, accurate, and educational information while responding to the needs of our customers. It’s become clear that a recent post about hand sanitizer was taken in many different directions from our original goal. We want to take the opportunity to clear up some misunderstandings and assure our position is understood. While we never made the claim that the photo utilized was from our district or from an exploding container of hand sanitizer, it has become clear that that inference and speculation made is seem as though it was. It was to illustrate a door fire resulting from contact with open flame which was the center of our post. Our message was intended to center on preventing fire or injury from the use of hand sanitizer. It also regarded the past history of issues stemming from clear bottles being stored in vehicles. These bottles typically store bottled water or as of late; hand sanitizer. While infrequent, there have been cases in the recent past were reflecting light placed through a clear bottle was able to focus onto a combustible surface and cause a fire. This has primarily been through water bottles but since hand sanitizer is often stored in the same vessel we wanted to pass it along for your safety. The principle is identical and obviously an additional issue would occur if it happened in the presence of an alcohol based product. The open flame comment was to remind people that when hand sanitizer is wet on any surface it will ignite when exposed to flame. With the recent increase in utilization of this product we wanted to remind our customers that it’s important not to allow this to occur. Many people have been sequestered in their homes and with an upcoming holiday accompanied with nice weather we knew grilling, fire pits, and other enjoyments would be in place. While we never referenced grilling in one’s vehicle, we did center on smoking and wanted to assure that the correlation was made illustrating that is also an open flame. We didn’t want anyone injured exercising good hygiene practices and then unintentionally coming in contact with open flame. Video representation of this happening is included for our fans to watch. We simply want our customers to be happy healthy and well and most importantly enjoy the time they have together with family and friends. Our message quickly came became misconstrued and we wanted to assure that we made it right. We apologize for any confusion and wish you an enjoyable holiday weekend. Judging from the amount of mail Snopes received, many people were still confused about what dangers may lurk in bottles of hand sanitizer. So let’s take a closer look at the questions this viral post sparked. Many hand sanitizers contain alcohol, and these alcohol-based hand sanitizers (ABHS) are flammable. The Federal Aviation Administration wrote in a 2010 report: As expected, hand sanitizer is flammable and can easily be ignited with a common grill lighter when poured into a pan. It tends to burn relatively cool, compared to fuel, plastic, or cellulose fires with peak flame temperatures between 500° and 1000°F. The observed temperatures above the flame were higher for the liquid hand sanitizer compared to the gel. Hand sanitizers also give off vapors, and these vapors are also flammable. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) writes: ABHS contains ethyl alcohol, which readily evaporates at room temperature into an ignitable vapor, and is considered a flammable liquid. Although the incidence of fires related to ABHS is very low, it is vital that ABHS is stored safely and that bulk dispensers are installed and maintained correctly. One of the major fears that people had after encountering this rumor on social media was that their hand sanitizer was going to “spontaneously combust” if left too long in a hot car. We won’t say that this is impossible, but we will say that it is extremely unlikely. According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), hand sanitizer would have to be exposed to extreme heats (over 700 degrees Fahrenheit) in order to spontaneously combust. Spontaneous ignition, on the other hand, involves a substance self-heating to a point where it ignites, without the need for any outside ignition source like a flame. Hand sanitizer is not subject to self-heating and would require temperatures to reach over 700 degrees Fahrenheit to spontaneously ignite, according to Guy Colonna, director of Technical Services at NFPA. Those sort of temperatures just aren’t going to be seen inside of a parked car (so long as that car is parked on Earth). A 2018 study published in the journal Temperature found that the average temperature in a parked car on a 95-degree day was about 116 degrees. Specific parts of the car, such as the dashboard, climbed closer to 160 degrees, but that is still far from the 700 degrees needed for spontaneous combustion. The NFPA continued: “Spontaneous ignition would be an ignition source independent of a flame or a spark, [and] it requires a material that is reactive to do what’s called self-heat,” Colonna says in a new video interview on the topic (above). “Internally, it undergoes a reaction and changes its properties, and when changing its properties, it releases lots of heat energy. Hand sanitizer, the alcohol [in it], is a material not inclined to do that. … The ignition temperature of the alcohols are going to be something in excess of 700 degrees Fahrenheit.” In other words, while hand sanitizer gives off ignitable vapors at roughly room temperature or above, that vapor-air mixture still needs to be exposed to very high temperatures to ignite. A flame can do it. A hot car can’t. This claim has more to do with the magnification properties of plastic bottles than it does with the contents of said bottles. In fact, in 2017, a similar warning was circulated on social media that said leaving a water bottle in your car on a hot day could result in a fire. Live Science wrote: Leaving a water bottle sitting in your car sounds benign enough. But on a hot, summer day, the plastic can act as a lens, focusing light into a high-energy beam that’s intense enough to burn material like car-seat upholstery. […] “The water bottle is acting like a lens that’s focusing the light coming through the window,” Odile Madden, a materials scientist at the Getty Conservation Institute in Los Angeles, told Live Science.
|
1644
|
High on the menu: cannabis spaghetti features at Italian foodfest.
|
Any Italian will tell you: pasta is healthy and makes you feel good. But what about spaghetti made from cannabis?
|
true
|
Health News
|
Farmers from southern Italy presenting their wares at a London food festival this week say their hemp pasta, oil and bread won’t get you high, but do provide a healthy, tasty alternative to the traditional, wheat variety. “Hemp food is truly organic,” said Marzio Ilario Fiore, 30, whose farm in the Molise region produces hemp oil and flour. “Hemp requires no pesticides, no fertilizers, and only moderate amounts of water.” Cannabis is most often associated with the psychoactive effects of marijuana, but some strains of the plant can also be cultivated for food. High-growing varieties called hemp, which contain negligible levels of the drug THC, have long been grown to produce food and other products. Italy lifted a ban on hemp cultivation in 1998. “My crop gets regularly checked by Italian police inspectors to ensure that THC is within the legal limit,” said Fiore, one of some 200 Italian food artisans in London for the three-day Bellavita (“Beautiful Life”) Expo. As well as spaghetti made from hemp flour, he provided tastings of hemp taralli - hard savory biscuits from southern Italy - and hemp oil, which has a distinctive, nutty flavor. Hemp seeds are one of the richest sources of vegetarian protein, with high concentrations of omega fatty acids, growers say. While most pasta makers have yet to venture into the hemp market, they are finding new ways to present the staple, patenting new pasta shapes and sizes. La Molisana, for example, showed off its square-shaped variety of spaghetti, the so-called ‘spaghetto quadrato’. Wine makers, too, are looking for ways to differentiate their products, with one producer aging its bottles on the sea bed for up to a year before selling them, encrusted with algae. “The lack of light and constant temperature combined with the ‘massage’ effect of the tides produces great results,” said Gianluca Grilli, co-founder of the Tenuta del Paguro which won Bellavita’s best beverage business award, worth 10,000 euros. Tenuta del Paguro uses the wreck of the Paguro oil drilling platform, which sank in the Adriatic Sea in 1965, to store its wine underwater. The three reds and one white are produced in Riolo Terme, near Ravenna, in central Italy, before being sent to mature under the waves. The bottles sell in Italy for 100-150 euros ($110-160) each, Grilli said. Bellavita offered a maze of hanging salami and cheese from across Italy, including provolone from the milk of the Agerolese cow, a protected crossbreed from the south, as well as cookies flavored with lavender and rosewood extract called ‘Furezze’, from the Venetian dialect word ‘sfureso’, meaning delicacy.
|
1075
|
Scientology cruise ship faces renewed quarantine at home port in Curacao.
|
A Church of Scientology cruise ship quarantined by the Caribbean nation of St. Lucia for measles is due to arrive on Saturday back at its home port on the island of Curacao, where it will face similar restrictions, a top health official there said.
|
true
|
Health News
|
A team of health officers in Curacao plans to board the vessel to determine who aboard may have been exposed to a crew member diagnosed with measles and who aboard has previously been vaccinated against the highly contagious disease, the official said. Dr. Izzy Gerstenbluth, chief epidemiologist for the Curacao Biomedical and Health Research Institute, said passengers and crew who can prove they were already vaccinated or have had measles in the past would likely be free to disembark “and go about their business.” Others would likely be restricted from leaving the vessel for the duration of the incubation period - the time during which they could potentially transmit the disease to others, he told Reuters by telephone. “What we don’t want is for the disease to spread further,” Gerstenbluth said. “There is no other way than ... by not allowing anyone who may be infected off the ship.” Incubation can last up to 21 days after exposure, with infected individuals most contagious from four days before the onset of tell-tale measles rash - while the person is experiencing cold-like symptoms - to four days after the rash appears. Gerstenbluth said the infected crew member had traveled to Europe and rejoined the ship on April 17, then reported feeling ill on April 22. She remained on the vessel after a blood sample taken several days later came back positive for measles, by which time the ship was already en route to St. Lucia. Health authorities placed the ship under quarantine after its arrival there on April 30, barring anyone from disembarking. St. Lucia also was reported to have furnished 100 doses of measles vaccine to the vessel before it departed on Thursday for Curacao. A total of 318 passengers and crew are believed to be aboard the ship, a Panamanian-flagged cruise liner identified by maritime-tracking records as SMV Freewinds, the name of the 440-foot ship owned and operated by the Church of Scientology. The church, on its website, describes Freewinds as a floating “religious retreat ministering the most advanced level of spiritual counseling in the Scientology religion.” It says the boat is based in Curacao, an island once part of the Dutch Antilles north of Venezuela and now an autonomous country within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Scientology officials have not responded to requests for comment. Although the measles-infected crew member has supposedly been restricted to her cabin since diagnosed, the relatively confined interior of a cruise ship and highly communicable nature of the virus - it can linger in an enclosed space for two hours - raises the risk of exposure to others who lack immunity, Gerstenbluth said. The quarantine comes amid a worldwide resurgence of measles blamed by public health officials on declining inoculation rates in some populations due to misinformation about the safety of the vaccine. The number of measles cases in the United States alone in recent months has climbed to more than 700 this week, a 25-year peak. Health authorities in Los Angeles last month ordered quarantines on two university campuses after each one had reported at least one confirmed case.
|
12589
|
No administration has accomplished more in the first 90 days.
|
"Trump said, ""No administration has accomplished more in the first 90 days."" Trump has had some achievements in office, but at the very least, they are much less numerous and far-reaching than those of Roosevelt, the standard against whom all presidents are measured. In more recent years, other presidents, including Obama, have accomplished more in their first 100 days than Trump has, historians say."
|
false
|
National, Donald Trump,
|
"As he neared the end of his first 100 days in office, President Donald Trump touted his first three months as a rousing success. ""No administration has accomplished more in the first 90 days,"" Trump told an audience in Kenosha, Wis. That’s a pretty high bar, especially for an administration that has registered historically low levels of support in public-approval polls for presidents this early in their terms. The White House didn’t respond to an inquiry for this article, but when asked about some of the president’s 100-day accomplishments during the April 19 press briefing, White House press secretary Sean Spicer cited a series of executive orders, including some on regulatory reform; a drop in border crossings; and job creation. He said more details would be offered as the 100-day mark approached. We interviewed historians and considered the 100-day track records of presidents back to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. While there’s a lot of nuance in gauging accomplishments, Trump doesn’t have much evidence to back up his boast that his administration has accomplished the most. First, some caveats All presidencies are different, and there’s an especially big difference between those that began after an election and those that got their start suddenly. The latter category includes presidents who took over after the death of their predecessor (such as Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson) or their predecessor’s resignation (Gerald Ford). In addition, it’s easier for a president to put points on the board quickly if they enter office in the midst of a national crisis. This was true for Roosevelt (the Great Depression), Truman (the end of World War II), Ford (the Watergate scandal), and Barack Obama (the Great Recession). Without a crisis, Congress is less likely to act quickly. Perhaps most notably, there is widespread agreement among historians that the 100-day standard is arbitrary. Just because a president signs a significant law outside the 100-day window doesn’t make it less of an accomplishment. For instance, Johnson and Ronald Reagan ""laid the groundwork for gigantic accomplishments"" such as on civil rights and taxes, respectively, that fell outside the 100-day window, said Princeton University historian Sean Wilentz. And both Truman and Dwight Eisenhower were preoccupied with wars during their first 100 days, said Max J. Skidmore, a University of Missouri-Kansas City political scientist who has written several books on the presidency. This meant they ""did not have much in the way of legislative achievements during that period,"" Skidmore said. All in all, ""most presidents have not considered 100 days a significant milepost,"" said H.W. Brands, a presidential historian at the University of Texas-Austin whose books include Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. ""It's largely a media thing."" The numbers Let’s start with the raw numbers, Our friends at the Washington Post Fact Checker did some calculations comparing Trump’s bill-signing output to that of his predecessors during their first 100 days. The Post counted 28 bills signed by Trump -- the highest since 1949, but well below the 76 signed by Roosevelt in 1933. Moreover, many of Trump’s bills were ""minor or housekeeping bills,"" and none met a longstanding political-science standard for ""major bills."" By contrast, at least nine of Roosevelt’s did. Meanwhile, by the time of the Kenosha speech, Trump had signed 24 executive orders, 22 presidential memorandums, and 20 proclamations, the Post noted. Some of these started the ball rolling to overturn federal regulations. While these may eventually have a significant impact, it’s worth noting that many new presidents routinely issue orders during their first 100 days that overturn actions of their predecessors of the opposite party. For instance, just two days after taking office, President Bill Clinton signed orders overturning restrictions on abortion imposed during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, and with equal speed, President George W. Bush overturned Clinton’s opposition to a ban on aid to international groups that participate in abortions. ""Everyone does that, so it doesn’t give him a comparative edge,"" said David Greenberg, a Rutgers University historian who has written books about Presidents Richard Nixon and Calvin Coolidge. Trump’s accomplishments Historians we checked with mostly agreed that Trump’s appointment of Neil Gorsuch to fill a Supreme Court vacancy was a significant event, and one that could influence public policy long after Trump leaves the White House. That said, some cautioned against making too much of Gorsuch’s confirmation, arguing that it followed the nearly year-long blockage of Obama nominee Merrick Garland by the Republican Senate. ""It was really (Senate Majority Leader Mitch) McConnell's achievement,"" said Jeff Shesol, author of books on Roosevelt and Johnson and a former speechwriter for Clinton. Meanwhile, Trump’s military actions -- his missile strikes on Syria and the dropping of an unusually large bomb on an ISIS bunker -- are hardly unprecedented for a president’s first 100 days. George W. Bush attacked Iraqi radar sites to enforce a no-fly zone, and Obama pledged to double the number of U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan. Trump’s decision to pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement echoes George W. Bush’s decision to pull out of the Kyoto Protocol on curbing global warming. And the Trump administration’s successful effort to win the release of Aya Hijazi, an American aid worker jailed for three years in Egypt on dubious charges, isn’t unprecedented either. Moments after taking office in 1981, Ronald Reagan announced the imminent freeing of American hostages held in Iran for over a year. Several historians said Trump has faced some significant setbacks as well. His first big legislative push -- to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act -- stalled without even a final vote, and he has been slower than his predecessors in making sub-cabinet appointments. Trump also failed to submit a detailed budget proposal of the kind his predecessors had typically submitted by now. Then there’s Trump’s immigration ban, which would likely count as a major accomplishment if it’s enacted, but which is frozen for now. It was issued, blocked by the courts, rewritten, and then blocked again. ""The fact that he has gotten so little done while having Republican majorities in both houses of Congress is a terrible indictment,"" Shesol said. The champion: FDR The 100-day record of just one president -- Franklin Roosevelt -- would be enough to cast doubt on the accuracy of Trump’s claim that no administration has accomplished more. The 15 major bills Roosevelt signed included those that created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Tennessee Valley Authority (both of which still exist) and the Home Owners Loan Corp. He signed the Agricultural Adjustment Act, which established farm subsidies, and the National Industrial Recovery Act, which started public-works efforts to reverse the Great Depression. He signed legislation to legalize the manufacture and sale of beer and wine, and he issued executive orders to establish the Civilian Conservation Corps and to effectively take the United States off the gold standard. All in all, Roosevelt pushed the federal government to take a much bigger role than it had previously, said Adam Cohen, author of Nothing to Fear: FDR's Inner Circle and the Hundred Days That Created Modern America. ""When FDR took office, the banking system had collapsed,"" Cohen said. ""His emergency banking act got the banks open again and the system up and running. He got the Securities Act of 1933 enacted. It was the first major federal regulation of the stock market, which laid the groundwork for the kind of government regulation we now take for granted."" Other presidents’ 100-day achievements Other presidents have chalked up significant achievements as well. Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act, while Obama signed not only a nearly $800 billion stimulus package to combat a spiraling recession but also the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and a law expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program. He also implemented two urgent economic programs formally passed in the final weeks of George W. Bush’s presidency -- the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the auto industry bailout. Other presidents have taken executive actions at least as significant as Trump’s. Kennedy established the Peace Corps (later ratified by Congress). Ford, meanwhile, pardoned his predecessor, Nixon, and offered amnesty to Vietnam War draft dodgers. Truman’s first 100 days were a whirlwind of foreign-policy actions -- the end of World War II in Europe, the writing of the United Nations charter, the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan, and Japan’s unconditional surrender. Sometimes, a president’s biggest accomplishment is intangible. Roosevelt calmed a nation gut-punched by the Depression, while Johnson reassured Americans after the shock of Kennedy’s assassination. ""The main accomplishment of LBJ's first 100 days -- and this should not be discounted just because it did not involve a bunch of bill signings -- was to give the nation and its government a sense of stability and continuity after one of the most wrenching events of the century,"" said his biographer, Shesol. Evaluating Trump’s 100 days One of the biggest impacts of Trump’s first 100 days may fall into this ""intangible"" category. ""Even if there are not many major tangible accomplishments, his administration has changed the political and cultural trajectory of the country -- not as much as FDR did following Herbert Hoover, but more than the average new president does,"" Cohen said. ""It has been somewhat amorphous and hard to quantify, but it is certainly something many Americans are feeling."" John Frendreis, a political scientist at Loyola University in Chicago, said Trump’s 100 days seem most similar to Clinton’s, which were also disorganized, short of focus and marked by the failure to pass an economic stimulus package. That said, he added, ""it is instructive to note that Clinton’s presidency turned out to be reasonably successful after this rocky start, so this suggests a similar turn-around is possible for Trump."" Whatever happens down the road, Trump, like his predecessors, is getting a dose of reality, Brands said. ""The big story of Trump's 100 days is how much reality has intruded on his notions of what a president can accomplish,"" he said. ""Every newcomer to the White House is sobered by the experience. Trump had more sobering to do to most."" Our ruling Trump said, ""No administration has accomplished more in the first 90 days."" Trump has had some achievements in office, but at the very least, they are much less numerous and far-reaching than those of Roosevelt, the standard against whom all presidents are measured. In more recent years, other presidents, including Obama, have accomplished more in their first 100 days than Trump has, historians say."
|
8953
|
Study shows diet and weight may affect response to bipolar disorder treatment
|
There are several red flags for readers to be aware of in trying to understand this unpublished study (presented as a conference poster) looking into possible dietary influences on bipolar disorder. Mainly, this is a very small study, of limited duration, in which supportive data are not provided, and some key study design limitations are not discussed. On a very positive note, the news release does a good job of making it clear the results need to be validated before dietary advice can be incorporated into the treatment of bipolar illness. This news release serves as a good reminder that: Exploring dietary treatments for any kind of illness holds great appeal for many reasons, not the least of which is — if proven effective — it could give patients a greater role in participating in their own care. Avoiding drug approaches also has many potential benefits. But these studies are very often observational, making it hard to prove a cause-and-effect relationship between certain foods and targeted health outcomes. This release does an exemplary job of using cautious language and providing important context from an independent source, a practice we’ve recently encouraged EurekAlert! and other wire services to adopt.
|
mixture
|
bipolar disorder,European College of Neuropsychopharmacology
|
The study investigated three interventions: 1) A combination treatment of over a dozen “mitochondrial enhancing agents” (including N-acetylcysteine, or NAC); 2) NAC alone; 3) placebo. NAC is the only intervention that is routinely used as a treatment. Its cost is not included. According to Amazon.com a 600 mg tablet costs roughly $0.10 – $0.30 (but the dosage used in the study is not mentioned). The lead author is quoted as saying: “We found that people who had a better-quality diet, a diet with anti-inflammatory properties, or a lower BMI (body mass index), showed better response to add-on nutraceutical treatment than those who reported a low-quality diet, or a diet including foods that promote inflammation, or who are overweight” The release identifies a “good” diet as having “lots of fruits and vegetables” versus a “poorer quality diet had more saturated fat, refined carbohydrates, and alcohol.” The foods considered anti-, or pro-inflammatory, are not identified. Nor are the “add-on neutraceuticals.” The BMI criteria for being overweight is not mentioned. Providing this information would have made it easier for readers to place the study’s benefits in context. The harms of NAC, according to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, listed here, are not mentioned. The news release describes the parameters of the research, and significantly, is to be commended for including some limitations of the study and for noting that the results need to be replicated in a larger study. An outside expert is quoted: “This is interesting work, which holds out the possibility that patients with Bipolar Disorder may benefit from a balanced diet. However, it is an early study, and we need more research before we can think whether this might affect clinical practice”. Other limitations of the research we observed is that it is unpublished (ie. unvetted by independent experts); very small (only 133 people completed the study); the duration of follow-up is less than half a year; and dietary information was gleaned from self-reporting (which can be quite unreliable). No disease mongering. The release provides context on what constitutes bipolar disorder. According to the National Institute of Mental Health “an estimated 4.4% of U.S. adults experience bipolar disorder at some time in their lives.” Study funders are noted on the sidebar of the hosting service, EurekAlert! It would be helpful to include that information in the body of the news release as well. Careful review of the author disclosures included in the study reveal no significant conflicts of interest. Bipolar disorder is fairly well-defined in the release, and it’s mentioned “there is a great need for better treatments for the depressive phase.” However, current alternative treatments such as medications, light therapy or electroconvulsive therapy (ETC) in severe cases are not mentioned. The release suggests “nutraceuticals,” including the anti-inflammatory amino acid n-acetylcysteine (NAC) are potentially helpful. NAC is widely available in both prescription and over-the-counter formulations. The release states that if the results can be replicated in a larger trial then it would show that diet and weight affect treatment for bipolar disorder. However, this doesn’t appear to be novel research since there are a host of dietary studies in the bipolar literature. Researchers are looking at dietary interventions in more controlled ways in bipolar disorder, depression and dementia. A major strength of this news release is that it mentions the preliminary nature of the study results on three occasions, including once by an independent source NOT affiliated with the study (although his credentials should have been mentioned).
|
29258
|
Heather Holland, a 38-year-old grade school teacher in Willow Park, Texas, died because she couldn't afford the co-pay for her flu medication.
|
The details of Trump’s proposal, which eschews broad price controls in favor of accelerating the FDA’s drug approval process, tweaking Medicare drug policies, and incentivizing other countries to raise prices to a level such that the U.S. market isn’t overburdened with innovation costs, are laid out in a February 2018 white paper.
|
false
|
Medical, big pharma, flu, flu shot
|
Among the casualties of the 2017-2018 flu season (a season described as especially severe by federal health officials) was a second-grade teacher from Willow Park, Texas. Heather Holland, who died of influenza complications on 4 February 2018, was an otherwise healthy 38-year-old who left behind a husband and two young children. Unlike most of the other flu victims who died this flu season, however, controversy around high medical costs meant Holland’s death became an instant cause célèbre and went viral on social media. As the story would be retold with false nuance on the internet, Holland’s real killers were greedy pharmaceutical companies who over-priced the potentially life-saving medication to a cost beyond her means. The story was shared in meme form by Facebook and Twitter users: MEET HEATHER HOLLAND. #healthcareoverpolitics #HealthcareisaRIGHT #UniversalHealthcare #HealthcareForAll #TheResistance pic.twitter.com/vIeQFUr2zy — JimmyBear 🐻 🏳️🌈 🇺🇸 🌊 (@JimmyBear2) February 11, 2018 The text of the meme reads as follows: Meet Heather Holland, a 28-year-old second grade teacher from North Texas who died 3 days ago because she couldn’t afford the $116 co-pay for her flu medication. Insurance company greed is literally KILLING US. Besides getting the victim’s age wrong (she was 38, not 28), in claiming that Holland “couldn’t afford the $116 co-pay,” the meme’s author botched another crucial detail of her story. According to statements by Holland’s husband quoted in the Wall Street Journal, she did balk at the price of the medication, a generic version of Tamiflu, and delayed filling the prescription for that reason. However, it was not because the family couldn’t afford it. : Ms. Holland went to the pharmacy. She learned the antiviral medication would cost her $116 under the prescription-drug coverage she had as a teacher, and she refused it. They had the money, Mr. Holland said: “It’s principle with her. She’s a very frugal person in general, always has been.” After bringing their children home from church that night, Mr. Holland discovered his wife was taking Nyquil, he said. She told him she thought the price of the antiviral was ridiculous. He went to the pharmacy Thursday morning and got it filled himself. “I made her start taking it,” he said. Frank Holland did express the view that the co-pay for the medicine was too high, though he blamed his wife’s employer-provided insurance coverage for that shortcoming, not the pharmaceutical companies: Looking back, he said, he wished she and other teachers had better drug coverage, given their exposure. Despite the meme’s inaccuracies, it raises a legitimate concern. The cost of prescription drugs in the United States is much higher than what consumers are charged in other countries. That can have life-or-death consequences, especially for people who are under-insured or have no health coverage at all. According to a 2015 study, Americans pay three to 16 times more for top-selling prescription medications than do people in countries where drug prices are subject to some form of government control. Just days before Holland’s death, President Donald Trump announced a government initiative aimed at addressing what he termed the “injustice” of high prescription drug prices (an issue previously taken up by his Democratic rivals in the 2016 presidential campaign).
|
40947
|
Italy disobeyed world health law from the WHO saying not to carry out autopsies on Covid-19 patients.
|
The WHO never said autopsies couldn’t take place.
|
false
|
online
|
Italy has concluded Covid-19 is not a virus, and people are actually dying of amplified global 5G electromagnetic radiation poisoning. Italy disobeyed world health law from the WHO saying not to carry out autopsies on Covid-19 patients. The WHO never said autopsies couldn’t take place. Italy has found that Covid-19 is actually disseminated intravascular coagulation (thrombosis). The way to cure this is antibiotics, anti-inflammatories and anticoagulants. Antibiotics do not directly treat Covid-19, which is caused by a virus. The anti-inflammatory ibuprofen is being trialled for use against Covid-19 and an anticoagulant has been used in some Covid-19 cases. Aspirin is not a specific cure. Covid-19 is not a virus, but a bacterium being amplified by 5G which causes inflammation and hypoxia. Covid-19 patients can get secondary infections from bacteria. Hypoxia and types of inflammation can be symptoms of Covid-19. There’s no proof Covid-19 is in any way related to 5G. People with Covid-19 should take aspirin 100mg and Apronax or paracetamol. Trials into both of these drugs’ effectiveness in treating Covid-19 are ongoing, but haven’t concluded yet. Paracetamol can ease symptoms but isn’t a specific treatment. Covid-19 clots the blood causing thrombosis, stopping blood flow and oxygenating the heart and lungs. Severe Covid-19 can cause blood clotting problems and issues like this have been seen in Covid-19 patients, but this is not the only thing that can be fatal in patients. In a day, Italy sent home more than 14,000 patients after treating them with Aspirin and Apronax. The Italian Medicines Agency doesn’t mention aspirin or apronax in its list drugs used to treat Covid-19 outside of clinical trials. And there’s no record of a day when 14,000 people were sent home from hospital in Italy. There is an order to incinerate or immediately bury Covid-19 bodies without autopsy. There is no such order. Claim 1 of 10
|
10132
|
New drug advances the fight against pancreatic cancer
|
This story succinctly captures the important take-aways of the new study in terms of survival advantage and quality of life, while employing two key experts for perspective. Pancreatic cancer is typically such a poor-prognosis tumor that research like this is newsworthy.
|
true
|
Cancer,USA Today
|
No discussion of cost. The story did an adequate job of summarizing the benefits reported in the study and putting them into context. The story stated that Folfirinox “caused more serious side effects than standard chemo” but never named them nor quantified them. The journal article reports, for example, that: 75 of those in the Folfirinox group (46%) had neutropenia compared with 35 in the Gemcitabine group (21%) 21 of those in the Folfirinox group (13%) had diarrhea compared with 3 in the Gemcitabine group (2%) 15 of those in the Folfirinox group (9%) had sensory neuropathy compared with 0 in the Gemcitabine group Adequate evaluation of the evidence, including a cautionary note from one independent expert. There was no disease-mongering of pancreatic cancer in this story. Two independent sources were quoted. Good sourcing. The focus of the story is comparing the new drug combo with the existing alternative – gemcitabine. The story appropriately ended with this independent expert perspective: “…doctors are testing other drug combinations to treat pancreatic cancer. She’s hopeful that these combinations will work as well or better than Folfirinox, with fewer serious side effects. Folfirinox “is going to be one of a host of options” for patients, Azad says “ The story never explained the availability of the drug in the US or even if it’s FDA approved. The story referred to it as “new…novel combination…I see it becoming the standard of care…going to be one of a host of options” but none of those descriptions explains whether it’s approved and available now. The story refers to Folfirinox as a new drug and a novel combination, but also offers an independent expert’s perspective that “doctors are testing other drug combinations to treat pancreatic cancer. She’s hopeful that these combinations will work as well or better than Folfirinox, with fewer serious side effects…and that Folfirinox “is going to be one of a host of options” for patients.” It’s clear that the story did not rely on a news release.
|
26390
|
“We’ve tested more than every country combined.”
|
The United States has performed more coronavirus tests than any other single country. But it has not done more “than all major countries combined.” The raw tally of coronavirus tests isn’t a good metric, experts say. When you control for population, or consider other meaningful statistics, the United States is still far behind on its COVID-19 response.
|
false
|
Health Check, Coronavirus, Donald Trump,
|
"Responding to weeks of criticism over his administration’s COVID-19 response, President Donald Trump claimed at a White House briefing that the United States has well surpassed other countries in testing people for the virus. ""We’ve tested more than every country combined,"" Trump said April 27. It was a variation on claims he had made April 24, as well as on Twitter the day after — when he said the United States had tested ""more than any other country in the world, and even more than all major countries combined."" The president has made a habit of exaggerating the United States’ capacity for COVID-19 diagnostic testing. But the health system has ramped up its testing since its slow start during the first weeks of the American outbreak. So we wanted to check back. How many people here have been tested? And has the U.S. tested more people than ""every country combined""? We emailed the White House for comment but never heard back, so we turned to the data. Trump’s claim didn’t stand up to scrutiny. In raw numbers, the United States has tested more people than any other individual country — but nowhere near more than ""every country combined"" or, as he said in his tweet, more than ""all major countries combined."" Regardless, raw test numbers aren’t a meaningful metric in gauging the nation’s coronavirus response. When you factor in population size — which experts say is essential in understanding how well we are doing — the U.S. still falls short. We consulted a few independent estimates, all of which were recommended to us by global health experts: the COVID Tracking Project, Worldometer and Our World in Data. All of them place the U.S. total above 5 million tests — the figures range between 5.59 and 5.7 million. And it is correct that no other country has run so many diagnostic tests. But that’s where any semblance of accuracy ends. A White House report on global testing — which sources its numbers from Our World in Data — notes that the United States has done more testing than the combined totals of Australia, Austria, Canada, France, India, Italy, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom. (That addition checks out.) But those are hardly all the world’s ""major countries"" — let alone ""every country."" And to argue the list is exhaustive is absurd, experts said -- especially since it doesn’t include Germany and Spain, which are among Europe’s biggest economies. Additionally, Germany’s robust testing strategy has been credited with its low coronavirus death rate and Russia, also not on that list, is obviously an important player on the world stage. And when you look at European countries alone — which again, is far short of what he claimed — Trump’s comparison quickly falls apart. The Worldometer data shows that, when you add up the number of tests run in Russia, Germany and Italy, the total lands around 6.72 million. You could also tally the number of tests run in Spain, Italy, France, Germany and the U.K. Both Worldometer and Our World in Data place that total above 6 million. Either way, it’s more than what the U.S. has done. Big picture, a truly exhaustive sum of testing by ""every country"" or even ""all major countries"" would generate higher numbers. Trump is also fixating on the wrong figures, global health experts said. ""The highest number of raw tests in and of itself is not meaningful for any particular country or location within a country,"" said Jennifer Kates, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation. (Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent program of the foundation.) The United States has a far bigger population than many of the ""major countries"" Trump often mentions. So it could have run far more tests but still have a much larger burden ahead than do nations like Germany, France or Canada. There are other useful metrics: for one, how many people tested positive for COVID-19 compared with the overall number of people tested. Another useful measure is the per capita rate of testing, or the percentage of the nation’s population that has been tested for the virus. On both counts, the United States still underperforms. Hanage pointed out that Germany, Ireland, Belgium and Canada have all tested a much larger percentage of the population than the United States has. Arguably the more important metric, Hanage said, is the percentage of positive test results. A low percentage indicates a nation is aggressively testing, while a higher percentage suggests the country is testing only very sick people — increasing the likelihood that its tracking system is missing cases of infection, undercounting how many people are COVID-positive. And by this measure, the United States fares far worse than a number of countries, including Canada and Germany. As Kates put it, ""increasing the number of tests is important, but a raw number of tests doesn’t tell you much"" about what’s needed, or how well the country is faring. Trump claimed that the United States has ""tested more than every country combined."" There is no reasonable way to conclude that the American system has run more diagnostics than ""all other major countries combined."" Just by adding up a few other nations’ totals, you can quickly see Trump’s claim fall apart. Plus, focusing on the 5 million figure distracts from the real issue — by any meaningful metric of diagnosing and tracking, the United States is still well behind countries like Germany and Canada. The president’s claim is not only inaccurate but also ridiculous."
|
18151
|
Americans for Prosperity Says health insurance premiums will rise under Obamacare.
|
Americans for Prosperity produced an ad that claimed that health insurance premiums would go up under Obamacare. To make a universal statement, the group both wants us to accept certain details about a woman, Julie, and disregard others. Chief among these is how she gets her insurance today. Statistically, she is most likely to fall into groups that are likely to do well under Obamacare. The most detailed supporting document focuses on the group that represents just 7 percent of today’s insurance market. The individual market is the one most likely to see rate hikes but the ACA provides tax credits to cushion the impact of those hikes. While most states have yet to announce their final rates, every expert we spoke to agreed that some people will pay more. The message a casual viewer would take from the ad is that everyone's rates are going up. But that's not true, based on what experts told us. The AFP ad cherry picks the facts and draws a conclusion beyond what the evidence supports, but it will prove accurate for some people.
|
mixture
|
National, Health Care, Americans for Prosperity,
|
"The conservative organization that spent more than $33 million in the last election to defeat President Barack Obama and other Democrats has turned its sights to undermining support for the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. The group, Americans for Prosperity, launched a television ad in Ohio and Florida. The ad is called ""Questions"" and in it, Julie, a pregnant mother, talks about her concerns about Obamacare. With a backyard swing set in the background, Julie says: Two years ago, my son Caleb began having seizures. The medical care he received meant the world to me. Now? I’m paying more attention. And I have some questions about Obamacare. If we can’t pick our own doctor, how do I know my family’s going to get the care they need? And what am I getting in exchange for higher premiums and a smaller paycheck? Can I really trust the folks in Washington with my family’s health care? In this fact-check, we focus on Julie’s question, ""What am I getting in exchange for higher premiums?"" That line presents higher premiums as a certainty, effectively saying ""premiums will rise."" Whether that’s true in Julie’s case and anyone else’s depends on several key factors: age, income, and perhaps most important, how they get their insurance today. PolitiFact is wary of broad claims on the future of premiums under the Affordable Care Act. When House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, said everyone would pay less, we rated that False because some people would see higher rates. The ad doesn’t tell us much about Julie except that she already has insurance. We asked Levi Russell, spokesman for Americans for Prosperity, whether her current insurance is through the large-group, small-group, or individual markets. We got no details. Russell said ""Julie’s questions about the impact of Obamacare are universal, which is why we’ve chosen not to get into details on her particular insurance coverage."" That would be fine, but if Julie is the Every Woman then her conviction that her premiums will go up is a sweeping statement that needs to be put in the context of the different markets. Cori Uccello, senior health fellow at the American Academy of Actuaries, said there are many factors that will shape how people like Julie fare under the Affordable Care Act. The best thing would be if she gets her insurance through a large employer. ""If they're in the large group market, they wouldn't pay more in premiums,"" Uccello said. We contacted the Insurance Commission in Washington state. They run that state’s exchange, the online shopping tool for small-group and individual plans. Stephanie Marquis, a spokeswoman for the commission, said they will post their final rates in about two weeks. If Julie lives in Washington and is insured under a small-group plan, Marquis says she would do pretty well. ""It’s likely the rates will stay close to the same,"" Marquis said. ""Our essential health benefits that all plans must include are based on benefits already included in most small employer plans. Also, guaranteed issue in the small employer market. People cannot be charged more today, if they’re sick."" Employers provide most of the insurance in this country. About 60 percent of everyone under 65 is covered through either a large-group or small-group plan, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute, an independent think tank. Statistically, if Julie has insurance today, it’s most likely in one of those markets and the ad should not assume that her rates will rise. About 22 percent of people under 65 are with a government program, either Medicaid or a children’s program, S-CHIP. The individual market represents the smallest slice of people with insurance, about 7 percent. In citing support for the claim that premiums will go up, Russell focused on the individual market. He said rates in California will be 64 to 146 percent higher. We were unable to confirm that. Russell also pointed to a Wall Street Journal article. He said the article covered at length the prospect of ""rising premiums for many Americans."" First, we note that in his response, Russell softened the claim in the ad, which assumed that premiums would go up without any qualification. Russell changed that to premiums going up for many people, not everyone. The WSJ looked only at the individual market. It used the proposals from insurance companies that want to participate in the exchanges of eight states. The WSJ found that, ""Healthy consumers could see insurance rates double or even triple when they look for individual coverage under the federal health law later this year, while the premiums paid by sicker people are set to become more affordable."" This could be considered a split decision for the AFP ad. If Julie has a child with a medical history, and buys her insurance with no help from an employer, the article suggests she might do well under Obamacare. On the other hand, if she were young and with a very healthy family, she might pay more. This article is one of the first to assess actual rates, as opposed to predicted rates -- studies that amount to informed guesswork. But while better, the analysis is using proposed not final numbers. Some states, such as Oregon, have seen companies lower their rates after they first submitted them. And other studies analyzed similar data but reached different conclusions. The consulting group, Avalere Health, looked at proposed rates in nine states and saw middle range plans, so-called Silver tier, that had premiums lower than predicted by the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan research arm of Congress. Costs varied widely, from $205 a month in Oregon to $413 in Vermont for a 40-year-old nonsmoker. The state you live in has a significant effect on how the Affordable Care Act changes rates. In Washington state, Stephanie Marquis said her office was surprised with the numbers insurance companies put on the table. ""Several carriers predicted rate changes as high as 70 percent,"" Marquis said. ""Yet that’s not what they filed. Many people will pay slightly more or the same for much better coverage."" When the Washington Insurance Commission compared those proposals with the rates a private insurance company changes today, it found people in their 20s were paying about $50 more each month, while people in their 40s and 60s were saving $22 to $268 a month. Experts have always expected younger workers in the individual market to pay more. The Congressional Budget Office said the price tag for this sort of health insurance plan was likely to go up by 10 to 13 percent. However, the CBO noted that a significant number of the people getting their insurance this way would have incomes low enough to qualify for tax credits that would lower the effective cost. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimated these tax credits would help about 80 percent of them, although even with that subsidy, many in this group would still see rate hikes. The WSJ article did not take the tax credits into account. Bob Laszewski, the CEO of the consulting firm Health Policy and Strategies Associate, is pessimistic on rates in the individual market. ""A family’s costs are much more likely to go up,"" Laszewski said. He said the insurance plans will be better than some offered today and that coupled with other changes will make plans more expensive. On the other hand, he could make no projection for Julie. ""We don't know anything for sure regarding any specific person. If this person lives in (New Jersey), they might just see their premiums go down,"" Laszewski said. Current law in New Jersey tends to push rates higher, making savings under Obamacare more likely. For the most part, uncertainty dominates the picture. ""It is premature to say who will see increases and who will see decreases,"" Cori Uccello with the American Academy of Actuaries said. Our ruling Americans for Prosperity produced an ad that claimed that health insurance premiums would go up under Obamacare. To make a universal statement, the group both wants us to accept certain details about a woman, Julie, and disregard others. Chief among these is how she gets her insurance today. Statistically, she is most likely to fall into groups that are likely to do well under Obamacare. The most detailed supporting document focuses on the group that represents just 7 percent of today’s insurance market. The individual market is the one most likely to see rate hikes but the ACA provides tax credits to cushion the impact of those hikes. While most states have yet to announce their final rates, every expert we spoke to agreed that some people will pay more. The message a casual viewer would take from the ad is that everyone's rates are going up. But that's not true, based on what experts told us. The AFP ad cherry picks the facts and draws a conclusion beyond what the evidence supports, but it will prove accurate for some people."
|
38473
|
A fleet of mutation response vehicles spotted near Longwood, Florida, has stirred speculation about sinister motives.
|
Mutation Response Vehicles Spotted in Florida
|
mixture
|
Government
|
The mutation response vehicles spotted in Florida are real — but they’re not associated with a government agency or coordinated emergency response efforts. Videos and photos of the vehicles quickly made their way around Facebook and YouTube after they were spotted in Florida, just outside of Orlando, on August 17th. Some speculated the vehicles were part of the government’s response to Zika — or worse, a sign of a pending zombie apocalypse. Luckily, that’s not the case. Rather, the mutation response vehicles are owned and operated by Pathogen Trackers, a group that provides food, shelter and shade to people at the Burning Man festival outside Las Vegas. Pathogen Trackers explains on its website that it serves the “inhabitants of Black Rock City” — which is the name of the group that organizes Burning Man each year: Our Mutation Response Vehicles aid in our benevolent mission and serve as a base of operations so that we may help replenish the spirit and quelch the hunger of others. From the top of MRV-1, passersby are welcome aloft to gain a perspective on all that surrounds them. MRV-2 is a secure, sanitary facility committed to the preparation of healthy meals. MRV-3 is outfitted to provide decontamination of both camp members and winners of the daily Wheel of Decontamination contest. Collectively, the themed MRV and MSV units span over 160′ from end to end, and create a visually interesting and interactive street scape. During the day our massive, customized MRV units serve as a needed landmark and a graphic art exhibition for the passers by. At night, they illuminate fully to again help weary travelers find their way home. Even our well-lit, Chilled Hydration Station and 50′ Pathogen Tacking Antenna serve as beacons on the corners our camp. Photos of these mutation response vehicles posted at Pathogen Trackers’ website match those seen in the photos from Florida. However, the mutation response vehicles look much less sinister when they’re lit up with bright neon lights at Burning Man. “Mutant vehicles” are an important part of the Burning Man culture. Black Rock City explains that a Mutant Vehicle (which must be licensed by Black Rock City’s Dept. of Mutant Vehicles to enter) is “a specific variety” of art car: A Mutant Vehicle is an art car classification specifically created for use at Black Rock City. The classification was created because the term “art car” can have a broad definition, and, because of the limit on the number of vehicles the DMV can license, the DMV did not want to deem whether or not someone’s creation was “art”. Mutant Vehicles are integral to the culture and community at Burning Man. They contribute to the surreal, visual quality that binds Black Rock City together. That should put any concerns about the mutant response vehicles responding to a zombie apocalypse or mutated forms of Zika virus. Comments
|
6876
|
Kentucky lawmaker to continue campaign despite brain tumor.
|
The family of a state lawmaker in Kentucky says he will continue his re-election campaign after initial hospital tests indicated he has some sort of a brain tumor.
|
true
|
Health, Tumors, Elections, Kentucky, Campaigns
|
Family members of Democratic state Rep. Wilson Stone posted a message to his personal Facebook page on Sunday. It says Stone “had a spell” while teaching Sunday school. They said testing at a local hospital “revealed some type of brain tumor” and that more tests are scheduled. “He reminded us that the election is 3 weeks from this Tuesday and for everyone to keep his re-election going strong while he recovers!” family members wrote. House Democratic Caucus spokesman Brian Wilkerson confirmed the Facebook account belongs to Stone. Stone faces Republican Brian “Tiger” Gann in the Nov. 6 election. Gann said he is praying for Stone to have a speedy recovery and a return to full health. “He and I are opponents in our race, but we are brothers in Christ,” Gann wrote on his campaign’s Facebook page. Stone has been in the legislature since 2009. When Democrats were in power, Stone had the unofficial job of making the opening motion to begin each day’s session, which included excusing lawmakers who were absent. He was elected House minority whip in 2017, shortly after Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives for the first time in nearly a century. Last month, state Republican Party officials filed an ethics complaint against Stone for using taxpayer money to campaign for votes. Stone sent a survey to his constituents, which is legal. But the survey included the line: “I request your vote and support.” Stone apologized for the mailing and said he would reimburse the state.
|
27065
|
The U.S. House of Representatives voted to compel the Department of Defense to disclose if it ever used ticks as part of a biological weapons program.
|
The next step for Smith’s initiative is to reconcile the House version of the 2020 Defense Authorization with the Senate version, which does not presently contain such an amendment.
|
true
|
Military
|
This article addresses the narrow claim that the U.S. House of Representatives ordered an investigation into whether the Department of Defense experimented with ticks or insects as biological weapons. This claim is true: As first reported by Roll Call on July 15, 2019, the stipulation was added in an amendment to the 2020 Defense Authorization Act and approved with a voice vote on July 11: The amendment is an attempt to confirm or deny reports that Pentagon researchers — at places such as Fort Detrick in Maryland and Plum Island in New York — implanted diseases into insects to learn about the effects of biological weapons and also looked into using such insects to disseminate biological agents. To understand the rationale for such a move, a brief history of U.S. biological weapons research (and its associated controversies) is required. The United States began biological weapons testing during World War I, when the U.S. investigated — but did not use — ricin as a potential weapon. Though President Richard Nixon banned offensive biological weapons research and development in 1969, the period following World War II saw significant experimentation with the use of germs in warfare, primarily as a way to potentially disrupt enemy agriculture, as described by the non-partisan Nuclear Threat Initiative: A September 1945 memo to the Secretary of War detailed the program’s accomplishments: the United States had used pilot plants to mass produce, among other pathogens, Bacillus anthracis (anthrax) and Brucella melitensis (brucellosis); had developed and field tested a new cluster bomb; and had constructed facilities for the large-scale production of several pathogens, including anti-crop agents. [Biological Warfare]-related R&D largely took place at Camp (later Fort) Detrick in Maryland. Plum Island, also mentioned in Smith’s amendment, played a role in the U.S. biological weapons research as well. An island off the eastern end of the coast of Long Island fully owned by the U.S. government, Plum Island has been under civilian control as a Department of Agriculture research station since 1954. In 1993, reports surfaced that some biological weapons research had occurred on Plum Island in the past, as reported in a 1998 New York Times story: For decades, officials denied rumors of biological warfare experiments. But in 1993, Newsday unearthed previously classified documents on plans to disrupt the Soviet economy by spreading diseases to kill its pigs, cattle and horses. Most of the diseases studied, like African swine fever and rinderpest, affect only livestock. But one, Rift Valley fever, also occurs in humans. The warfare plans ended long ago, officials say, and now the laboratory focuses exclusively on preventing diseases. To satisfy their own concerns, Russian scientists inspected the center in 1994. Among the most extreme claims related to U.S. biological weapons research are those that suggest that outbreaks of the tick-borne Lyme disease in the late 60s and early 70s — the first widespread appearances of the condition — and its subsequent spread across much of the nation were the result of the United States government, either intentionally or accidentally. Lyme disease is caused by a bacterium that can live inside ticks and spread to animals and humans. This argument was most recently made in the book “Bitten: The Secret History of Lyme Disease and Biological Weapons” by science writer Kris Newby. Though the idea predates this book, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) has cited “Bitten” as a significant inspiration for the amendment. What that book says it “brings to light is that the U.S. military has conducted thousands of experiments exploring the use of ticks and tick-borne diseases as biological weapons, and in some cases, these agents escaped into the environment.” The book also suggests “there was a deliberate release or an accident” involving biological weapons experimentation with “unintended consequences to the environment.” Newby suggests a “release” of ticks with a transmittable disease in them could have introduced Lyme disease into America. She also suggests that the medically controversial condition of chronic or persistent Lyme disease could be elucidated by records exposing what kind of testing may have been conducted on this bacterial agent. Ultimately, “Bitten” rests on three assertions. First, that U.S. researchers injected transmittable diseases into ticks and other insects. Second, that the first major outbreak of what we now call Lyme Disease in the late ’60s and ’70s happened after the release of infected ticks into the general population. And third, that the agent being experimented with was — or was related to — the bacterial agent now known to cause Lyme Disease: Borrelia burgdorferi. Evidence for each of these pillars comes for the most part from a single source — the U.S. National Institutes of Health scientist for whom that bacterial species is named: William Burgdorfer. Interpreting a video recording of a 2013 interview made of Burgdorfer for a film, Newby writes: [Burgdorfer] seemed to be saying that Lyme wasn’t a naturally occurring germ, one that may have gotten loose and been spread by global warming, an explosion of deer, and other environmental changes. It had been created in a military bioweapons lab for the specific purpose of harming human beings. And somehow it had gotten out. These claims are controversial, and the testimony of Burgdorfer collected by Newby — at the end of his life as he was suffering from Parkinson’s and diabetes — is inconclusive, as conceded by Newby herself in the book’s epilogue: After five years of research, I wasn’t able to find verifiable documents confirming [an alleged release of deer ticks in Long Island]. I’m not sure why Willy [Burgdorfer] refused to fully disclose the details before his death. With his passing, the only way to know the truth is for a whistle-blower to step forward or for a classified report to be released. The primary problem with the notion that Lyme disease was not “a naturally occurring germ” is that the occurrence of Borrelia bacteria living inside ticks goes back to a time at least millions of years before humans existed to insert the bacteria into ticks. In 2014, for example, scientists found a 15-million-year-old tick fossil found in a chunk of amber from the Dominican Republic that showed evidence of being infected with Borrelia bacteria. The existence of Borrelia bacteria in the northeast United States, similarly, predates the U.S. biological weapons program. A study conducted by Yale researchers, who compared B. burgdorferi genomes from different areas collected over a 30-year period, calculated that the bacterium has been in North America longer than humans — at least 60,000 years. This lends support to the more scientifically accepted view about the emergence of Lyme disease: that it had long been dormant in the United States until ecological and economic changes produced conditions that allowed its spread to flourish, as explained in a Yale School of Public Health report on that research effort: [These] findings clarify that the bacterium is not a recent invader. Diverse lineages of B. burgdorferi have long existed in North America and the current Lyme disease epidemic is the result of ecological changes that have allowed deer, ticks and, finally, bacterium to invade. The explosion of deer in the twentieth century into suburban landscapes, free of wolf predators and with strict hunting restrictions, allowed deer ticks to rapidly invade throughout much of New England and the Midwest. Climate change has also contributed. Warmer winters accelerate ticks’ life cycles and allow them to survive an estimated 28 miles further north each year. Ticks expanded into suburbanized landscapes—full of animals like white-footed mice and robins, excellent hosts for B. burgdorferi. The expansion of ticks into habitats with ideal hosts allowed the bacterium to spread. The broader question of whether the United States ever “experimented” on ticks in general, however, has independent support outside of Burgdorfer’s vague claims. In a 2016 interview with the academic journal American Entomologist, Georgia State University entomologist James H. Oliver, who served at Fort Detrick in the ’50s working on biological weapons, stated: They put me in the entomology branch […] so that’s where I started working on ticks and mosquitoes — how to produce a lot of them. Drop them out of airplanes. Everything was very hushhush, very secret. I’m still leery talking about it, because I think they might put me in jail because I’m delivering secrets. It was a crazy time. … We would run all kinds of distribution tests on where these things go when you release them and what were the factors that would cause the migration. Can we drop them out of airplanes and how do we get the bugs to the enemy? As reported in Roll Call, Smith’s amendment would require a report on this topic from the Department of Defense Inspector General: The amendment … says the inspector general “shall conduct a review of whether the Department of Defense experimented with ticks and other insects regarding use as a biological weapon between the years of 1950 and 1975.” If the answer is yes, then the IG must provide the House and Senate Armed Services committees with a report on the experiments’ scope and “whether any ticks or insects used in such experiments were released outside of any laboratory by accident or experiment design.”
|
10868
|
Clinical study finds a specialized lollipop can end a kid's earache in nine of ten cases
|
This release describes a medical device that is promoted as a safe first-line treatment for pediatric ear ache symptoms and an alternative to antibiotics. It combines xylitol (a sugar alternative) and Vitamin C which are delivered in a patented lollipop shape to draw congestion out of the middle ear. All parents can relate to the need for a treatment for earache symptoms but this release skirts major gaps in the evidence for this particular approach. It does not explain that there are no peer-reviewed scientific findings supporting this product. It does not provide a real quantification of the benefits of this product. It skips over risks and alternatives, too. Earaches affect millions of children and there are few options available to treat the symptoms. This problem has contributed to overuse of antibiotics which are not appropriate treatment for most pediatric ear infections. If pediatricians were able to offer an effective treatment for symptom relief, this would be useful for parents and pediatric patients and ease pressures to prescribe unneeded antibiotics. A new approach to avoiding antibiotics for earaches may be great — or too good to be true. We can’t tell from the evidence at hand.
|
false
|
industry/commercial news releases,medical devices
|
The news release does not discuss costs, which is surprising. On Amazon, the cost is $12 for two ClearPop lollipops, more than you might pay out of pocket if you have insurance that covers antibiotics but still relatively cheap. The release does not adequately quantify the benefits of the lollipops. It says: “Children diagnosed with Acute Otitis Media, or ear infection, consumed the xylitol and Vitamin C-based product in pediatric offices. After 20 minutes, 88.5% reported their ear pain dramatically reduced or vanished. The earache episode was totally resolved for 80%.” It does not explain how many children were studied. Is it 88.5% of 100 kids? Is it 88.5% of 50 kids? As it turns out, the number is 88.5% of 25 kids, meaning 22 kids. The release should say, “Out of the 25 children studied, 22 reported their ear pain reduced by X on a scale of Y.” Using 88.5% is also misleading (on the part of the study report and the press release) because it doesn’t include in the denominator the number of subjects who stopped the treatment. There were no risks mentioned for the lollipop device or for the ingredients but we give them a pass on this criteria since harms appear minimal. It’s worth noting that there can be a harm if persistent ear pain that is not resolved by use of the lollipop is not given medical attention. The release says “link to full study here,” and we’re betting that most people never click on the link. If they were to do so, they would see that it does not appear to have been published in a peer reviewed journal. It was conducted in a very small group of patients. There was no control group. And it includes findings such as, “All patients enjoyed the lemony taste of the pop.” That sounds more like marketing that science. The study report is deeply flawed. In addition to the above, there were only two physicians administering the treatment and it’s not clear how they were recruited or their relationship to the product. The lack of control group is particularly troubling because a) the described mechanism of action of the clearpop seems to be no different than what any lollipop or hard candy might achieve and b) the placebo effect alone could be huge. As readers of this site know, we are reluctant to give this distinction, but in this case we feel it was warranted. Instead of just acknowledging that earaches are a bother and — as we note above — could potentially be signs of more serious illness, the release stokes fears, saying: “Due to increasing concern about antibiotic overuse and its links to obesity, celiac disease, and Superbugs, the American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends against the use of antibiotics to treat routine ear infections in children over 2.” The question is: Do you need to run and buy a product for a problem that likely will go away? Antibiotic or no antibiotic, the release seems to be trying to scare people into buying the product. In addition, the release propagates the idea that antibiotics would work for ear infections but that doctors are just “reluctant to prescribe” them. This is a problematic idea that could lead to mistrust and pressure to prescribe in the pediatrician’s office. No confusion here. The release is clearly a promotional vehicle for ClearPop which is noted in the dateline and throughout the copy. It also provides links back to the ClearPop website and states that the creator of Clearpop also started and leads the company. The news release makes no comparisons between this product and the efficacy of antibiotics or other pain relief drugs such as Tylenol, Motrin, aspirin and others that come in pediatric formulations. The news release states clearly where the product is available. The news release does not establish the novelty of the product. This is particularly notable because it seems there is little difference between this or any other lollipop except for the addition of Vitamin C. Stating that the shape of the lollipop is patented and “optimized to pull congestion out of the middle ear and into the mouth” doesn’t prove it is more effective than other lollipops that come in many shapes and sizes. The release does contain unjustifiable language, such as in the headline “Clinical study finds a specialized lollipop can end a kid’s earache in nine of ten cases,” but we won’t double-ding the source since we’ve already commented on most of these concerns under other criteria.
|
37968
|
High school students in Stevenson, Washington were asked about their willingness to smother a crying baby in a Google Classroom lesson in September 2020.
|
On September 16 2020, a Facebook user shared the subsequently viral “smother your crying baby” screenshot to Facebook; separate posts featuring his screenshot spread more widely. Although some readers were outraged by the claim, others correctly pointed out that it has been around in some form or another for years.We have contacted the school district to ask whether the claim was accurate and to request additional context.
|
mixture
|
Disinformation, Fact Checks
|
In September 2020, screenshots of a virtual lesson about the ethics of smothering a crying baby (which was purportedly posed to students in Stevenson, Washington) spread virally on Facebook and Twitter.A September 17 2020 post from user Chellie Anne seemed to be the most popular of the posts (archived here):The question in the image was difficult to read, but it said:Enemy soldiers have taken over your village. They have orders to kill ALL remaining civilians. You and some of your townspeople have sought refuge in the cellar of a large house. Outside you hear the voices of soldiers who have come to search the home for valuables. Your baby begins to cry loudly. You cover his mouth to block the sound. If you remove your hand from his mouth his crying will summon the attention of the soldiers who will kill you, your child, and the others hiding out in the cellar. To save yourself and the others you must smother your child to death. Smothering your child is:A selection scale of one through five followed, with one being “You absolutely could not do this under any circumstances” and five being “You must do this.”The Original PostIt appeared the post was originally shared by user Kevyn Miller on September 16 2020; Miller maintained that the question was posed to his child, who is a student in that district (archived).On September 20 2020, Miller updated his post to include the following:***EDIT***— We have been informed by the School superintendent that we will be updated [on September 21 2020]— –I was mistaken on the origination of the assignment being through Zoom. The assignment actually originated from Google Classroom– As we work with the School Superintendent, we will update the information found and presented so there is less speculation.Miller’s original post remained under the edited portion. He claimed that the purpose of the lesson was to measure students’ willingness to obey orders, or conversely, pose a “threat to the system”:A “question” that came over our 16yr old’s zoom schooling out of Stevenson, WA.Make this go viral. This isn’t schooling, this is gauging an individual’s psychological demeanor so the “schooling” can verify who submits to “authority” and who could potentially be a threat to the system. This is testing before mass conditioning.What pisses me off further is the situation implies no self defense. No arms. It literally proposes killing your own child as a viable solution to the situation vs being armed and rebelling against said “soldiers”.Where’s the answer option that says shoot them in the face? Fight to the end. No, apparently you should kill your own to save yourself.#getreadySome commenters simply replied — correctly — that this is a very old and very common “ethical dilemma” question:This philosophical/moral “crying baby dilemma” has been around for a LOOOONG TIME. Google it.Others on the post, however, were divided, with many agreeing the out-of-context purported question was alarming or indicative of some sort of educational indoctrination. Others, however, reported having encountered the question themselves in various educational contexts: in a forensics or English class, on a blog, as part of a video game, or referenced on the television show M*A*S*H.Although the post attracted more than 1,000 comments, Miller himself commented with updates:Update- School superintendent was contacted and immediately found issue with this. The “lesson” has been pulled and is being looked into.We are pushing for full disclosure of the purpose/intent of this “lesson” as well as how it was to be graded and WHERE that information was going after being collected. […]The super is new to the district and is seemingly taking it head on in all seriousness.At least one commenter pointing out the parallel to the television show M*A*S*H linked to a clip on YouTube (“Saddest TV Moment: Goodbye, Farewell, and Amen.”) A description read:Here’s the story: Hawkeye has gone insane and is spending time at a hospital. Throughout the episode, he tells this story about how they were able to go out to a beach and have a great day. Just playing at the beach. They all pile up on a bus to head home. Suddenly, they realise that the enemy is nearby, so they shut off the engine, turned out all the lights and everybody got quiet. Except this woman in the back who has a chicken that won’t get quiet.That short clip was over three minutes long; at approximately 2:10, the character Hawkeye revealed that the “chicken” was in fact a baby:This is the script from the final show of M.A.S.H.Alan Alda’s character relates a story to the ‘Doc’ about escaping in a bus with Korean refugees. There were enemy troops nearby and they had to be silent or be killed. A lady in the back of the bus had a chicken which was making too much noise, so she strangled it to save the people on the bus from being discovered. As the story is told, the Doc probes further to find out that it wasn’t a chicken. In fact it was a baby. The mother suffocated the baby. This was the event that sent Alda’s character over the edge and into an asylum…..sad stuff.Several other commenters likened the question to “The Trolley Problem,” a similar ethics exercise popularized by the television show The Good Place:1. Not enough information to make a judgement about this. What class was it? AP? College credit? Speech and debate? All influence the type of question posed. 2. This is just the trolley experiment worded differently. Which I was taught in high school. 3. This is a screenshot of the question. What was the lesson? West questions were being asked? Was this a personal assessment?Finally, a self-identified classmate of Miller’s son commented, providing possible context:I am in this class. I was not offended by this question. Both my friend and I didn’t have any problems with this quiz. This is a morality quiz made by Princeton university, not the teacher themself. The instructions were to answer the question as if those were the only two options, it was not meant to put guilt on my peers and I. This quiz was for our Forensics class where we are learning about morals, ethics, and bias because it’s part of the criminal justice system. The teacher specifically told us that they are not trying to push their opinions on us, they are only trying to educate us on how complicated and complex morality is. This teacher has been doing an outstanding job during distance learning. Their lessons really get us thinking about the subject, they make me passionate to learn about the subject. Their slideshow lessons were very helpful and educating. All our teachers are trying and succeeding at teaching us during this hard time, and I personally think it is sad that this person is getting so much hate for only teaching us in a way that makes us really think about the topic at hand. Think about the fact that in only two years people my age can die serving our country, but some people are considering it wrong for us to answer this question.Commenters also linked to a 2013 blog post by an assistant professor of psychology, which mentioned both the “trolley problem” and the “crying baby” question. She contrasted the two, writing:There are many differences between these stories*, but the key one here is that “the trolley” is impersonal, and “the crying baby” is so very personal, defined by researchers as a “me hurt you” scenario. “The trolley” still involves “hurt you”, but the “me” has been removed – given critical space by the fact that you flip a switch to change the outcome of events, instead of using your bare hands to carry them out start to finish.This distinction between personal and impersonal is to some extent the difference between the leader, making decisions on a map rather like a game of chess, and the solider on the ground actually killing another human being. This distinction is played out in people’s decisions – it’s much easier to decide to flip the switch in the trolley than to decide to smother the baby – and in their brains, where thought and emotion compete in two distinct but connected networks. There is not much competition in the impersonal situation; our emotional brains tend not to get drawn in, thanks to the distance of the switch, so it’s easy to make the utilitarian decision to sacrifice one and save five. The personal “crying baby” dilemma, on the other hand, will evoke strong activity in emotional regions of the brain, which must be overridden by non-emotional regions for you to decide to smother one child to save the town.Others shared Miller’s screenshot, often with their own opinions about the subject matter. People also shared the same screenshot to Twitter, often with identical wording in their appended tweets or screenshots:Does this seem like appropriate “school work” because sixteen year old students in Stevenson Wa sure are learning it? pic.twitter.com/rnJkcBWFWk— It's not over yet (@ChristySandhoff) September 19, 2020SummaryOn September 16 2020, a Facebook user shared the subsequently viral “smother your crying baby” screenshot to Facebook; separate posts featuring his screenshot spread more widely. Although some readers were outraged by the claim, others correctly pointed out that it has been around in some form or another for years.We have contacted the school district to ask whether the claim was accurate and to request additional context.Comments
|
6348
|
Health officials: Oakland County measles outbreak over.
|
Health officials in a county that includes many of Detroit’s suburbs say Michigan’s largest local measles outbreak since 1991 has ended.
|
true
|
Pontiac, Health, Measles, Michigan, Detroit
|
The Oakland County Health Division announced the update Wednesday about the outbreak that began in March when an ill traveler from New York visited the area. Forty of the 44 confirmed measles cases in Michigan occurred in Oakland County, and those infected ranged in age from 8 months to 63 years. The county Health Division, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services and others administered more than 3,300 measles vaccines and held 17 special vaccine clinics. Other possible exposure sites were in Detroit, mid-Michigan and western Michigan. The number of cases of the highly contagious disease Michigan was the highest since 65 in 1991.
|
9320
|
F.D.A. Approves New Drug for Flu
|
This story is one of two we are reviewing that focuses on FDA’s approval of a drug designed to speed patient recovery from flu symptoms (the second story is from ABC News). The drug is baloxavir marboxil, marketed under the trade name Xofluza. This New York Times story hits most of the points that we want to see in a story about a new drug. The criteria that we use at HealthNewsReview.org to review health-related news stories were not developed in a vacuum. Rather, these are the criteria we feel are essential to allow patients and health care providers to make informed decisions about diagnosis and treatment options. While we do ding it on a couple things, the story does not exaggerate the findings, and provides people with the fundamental details they need to be informed patients. We were especially pleased that this story did not perpetuate misinformation that’s developed around this drug — that is, that it could help reduce transmission of the virus. To date, there is no evidence to show that as a benefit.
|
true
|
influenza
|
The story devotes its second paragraph to cost, including how that cost may differ depending on whether patients have insurance. Well done. This is a really close one. The story does a lot of things well here. It notes that, in one trial, there was no difference in the benefits between Xofluza and existing flu treatment drug oseltamivir (better known as Tamiflu). However, it does not actually quantify the benefits associated with Xofluza. Instead, the story states that it “may alleviate some symptoms and shorten the time patients feel sick.” We approve of the cautious language used throughout the story, but we like to see quantified benefits in instances where the information is available. In this case, an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine in September reported that Xofluza reduced the “time to alleviation of symptoms” by a mean of 25-38 hours, compared to placebo (the difference depended on the age group of the patient). Ergo, a not satisfactory rating here. The story addresses this issue head on, earning it a solid satisfactory rating from us. One point that would have made it even stronger would have been to note that the company selling Xofluza warns that pregnant women and nursing mothers may want to avoid the drug, as it is not known whether the drug may harm the fetus or if it would pass into breastmilk for nursing mothers. The story does a good job of describing the supporting evidence clearly and concisely. No disease mongering here. In fact, the story provides good context on the risks posed by influenza. The story incorporates input from two sources at the FDA, but the information appears to stem from an FDA statement. Information from pharmaceutical companies is clearly marked, but we really look for news stories to incorporate input from independent sources — beyond what may be available in a news release. The story addresses the similarities (and differences) to other drugs that address flu symptoms, particularly oseltamivir (Tamiflu). The story notes that Xofluza has received FDA approval. As noted above, the drugs similarities and differences to existing pharmaceutical treatment options was laid out clearly. The news peg here was FDA’s approval of the drug, which is also made clear. The work goes well beyond what you would find in any news release. We particularly applaud the story’s discussion of viruses developing resistance to antiviral drugs.
|
10909
|
Drugs To Prevent Weak Bones Linked To Unusual Fractures In Women
|
There was a very clear explanation of the difference between relative and absolute risk. And a very clear summary statement: “That’s obviously a lot more benfit than risk.” The story ends with another strong point: discussing some of the issues that women should be discussing with their doctors in a truly informed shared decision-making environment. This study has the potential to confuse readers and listeners. But the story addresses the seemingly contradictory elements well. Women over 65, who face most of the risk from osteoporosis, will have to question their providers as each new bit of evidence emerges balancing the risk of treatment with drugs against the benefits. An estimated 10 million people in the United States have osteoporosis.
|
true
|
NPR
|
The story gives no cost information. We wish the story had given the yearly cost of at least one of these therapies, and even some comment on the high cost of recovery from a typical hip fracture for the thousands of elderly women who suffer them. The story did a good job explaining the tradeoffs of benefits and harms and quotes a doctor who worries that fear of rare events may be preventing women from taking drugs that could save them from the typical hip fractures. If only the article took the extra step by talking about treatment benefits in absolute terms, rather than relative. The competing Reuters article tries to put the absolute benefit in perspective by noting that about half of people with osteoporosis will have a fracture in their lifetime. NPR does a good job of parsing the harm described in the JAMA article. Extra credit for including the notion of a “drug holiday” that is a practical reaction from treating physicians to a confusing landscape of discoveries about these drugs. The fact that this was the largest study to date is important, since large groups are needed to evaluate rare events like these thighbone fractures. There is helpful discussion of how to interpet the risk vs. benefits outlined in the study. The story avoids being alarmist and takes pains to point out the low absolute risk of the unsual thigh fracture. If anything, the story could have pointed out how devastating a typical hip fracture can be for an individual and society overall. The CDC estimates that one in four who suffer a hip fracture are dead within a year, and one in five will spend at least a year in a nursing home. NPR provides us with three fresh sources beyond the JAMA article itself. One strength of the story was its ending, with a discussion with a bone specialist about the option of taking a drug “holiday” from time to time, and the question of whether women who stop taking it temporarily should start again. The story describes the drugs as commonly available. The drugs are not novel, and the story says so. It’s clear that the story did not rely solely or largely on a news release.
|
37700
|
"President Trump said the ""great pandemic"" of 1917 ""ended World War II"" because all of the soldiers ""got sick."
|
Did Trump Say That in 1917 a ‘Great Pandemic’ Ended World War II Because the Soldiers Were All Sick?
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Politics
|
"On August 10 2020, memes appeared purportedly quoting United States President Donald Trump saying that the “Great Pandemic” of 1917 likely ended World War II, because “all the soldiers got sick”:In addition to “Yes he really said that,” the above meme read:“In 1917, the great pandemic … probably ended the Second World War, all the soldiers were sick.”Dear Professor Trump. It was 1918 and World War I. Please don’t try to sound smart. You aren’t.A tweet by John Fugelsang was shared to Imgur and racked up views; it was similarly popular on Twitter:""The closest thing is, uh, in 1917, they say, uh, The Great- the Great Pandemic; & it certainly was a terrible thing where they lost anywhere from 50 to 100 million ppl; probably ended the Second World War, all the soldiers were sick. ""-The US President just spoke this sentence— John Fugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) August 10, 2020Fugelsang wrote:“The closest thing is, uh, in 1917, they say, uh, The Great- the Great Pandemic; & it certainly was a terrible thing where they lost anywhere from 50 to 100 million ppl; probably ended the Second World War, all the soldiers were sick.”-The US President just spoke this sentenceWe were able to quickly locate the actual quote. Trump made the comments on August 10 2020:The closest thing is in 1917, they say, the great pandemic. It certainly was a terrible thing where they lost anywhere from 50 to 100 million people, probably ended the Second World War … all the soldiers were sick. That was a terrible situation.A short video of the clip also spread on Twitter:The President says the “1917 pandemic” ended the Second World War pic.twitter.com/jSltuSYim2— Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) August 10, 2020Trump was presumably referencing the Spanish Flu epidemic of 1918, the final death toll of which remains unknown:Did the Second Wave of the 1918 Spanish Flu Kill 20 to 30 Million, While the First Wave Killed 3 to 5 Million?As USA Today (and many other sites) noted, that pandemic took place at the same time as World War I, not World War II, which did not start for another two decades, ending in 1945:The president was alluding to the Spanish Flu, which broke out in 1918. The first infections were identified in March of that year and lasted until 1920. The Second World War started in 1939 and ended in 1945 with the surrender of the Axis powers, specifically when Japan surrendered unconditionally after the United States dropped atomic bombs on two Japanese cities.The memes are accurate — Trump erroneously claimed that the “Great Pandemic of 1917” ended World War II, likely intending to reference World War I; he subsequently added that the outbreak stopped the war because all of the soldiers got “sick.”Comments"
|
41703
|
Alcohol deaths in England at record high after 6% rise in a year.
|
Correct, in terms of deaths that are a direct result of alcohol misuse. However, the number of alcohol-specific deaths per 100,000 people has remained virtually the same over the last ten years.
|
true
|
health
|
One in five people are drinking too much alcohol. 21% of adults aged 16+ in England reported to an NHS Digital survey that they usually drank more than the recommended 14 units of alcohol a week in 2017. Alcohol deaths in England at record high after 6% rise in a year. Correct, in terms of deaths that are a direct result of alcohol misuse. However, the number of alcohol-specific deaths per 100,000 people has remained virtually the same over the last ten years. Claim 1 of 3
|
14490
|
Over 32,000 people die from #GunViolence every year. Yet, (The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) is banned from researching ways to prevent this.
|
"Baldwin said ""over 32,000 people die from #GunViolence every year. Yet, @CDCgov is banned from researching ways to prevent this."" The most comprehensive data available supports the first part of the claim, that more than 32,000 people die from gun violence every year. On the research ban, while the language from the Dickey Amendment does not explicitly ban the agency from conducting research, its interpretation effectively banned the practice. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information."
|
true
|
Guns, Wisconsin, Tammy Baldwin,
|
"While Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin is not up for re-election until 2018, she’s still engaging in at least one of the biggest issues in the 2016 campaign. In January, she co-sponsored legislation to appropriate $10 million to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention over the next five years for firearm research. To promote her legislation, Baldwin tweeted this on Jan. 24, 2015, citing limits on what the CDC can do: ""Over 32,000 people die from #GunViolence every year. Yet, @CDCgov is banned from researching ways to prevent this."" We wondered if Baldwin was right. Gun violence numbers As backup for the statistic that 32,000 people die from gun violence every year, Baldwin’s team pointed to the CDC’s National Vital Statistics database. It’s the most comprehensive source for national statistics as it is a census, pulling information from death certificates. The report shows that in 2013, the latest year for which data is available, there were 33,636 gun-related deaths. Beyond that, from 2009-2013, an average of 32,100 people died each year from gun-related injuries. So Baldwin is on target with the number. About one third of gun-related deaths are homicides, with suicides counting for about two thirds of deaths. PolitiFact Texas examined a similar claim from presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton in October 2015: ""We lose an average of 90 Americans every day because of guns."" This claim was backed up by taking the number of firearm deaths tallied by the CDC in 2013 and averaging it out over a year. Clinton hit the number, but didn’t mention that most of those deaths are suicides, not homicides. Dickey amendment In the second part of her claim, Baldwin said the CDC is ""banned from researching ways to prevent"" gun violence. Her tweet linked to a news release that pointed to a 1996 piece of legislation as evidence. The news release said, in part: ""Currently, a Republican appropriations rider from 1996 prohibits funding for such critical research at the CDC, even though the original rider’s author, former Republican Jay Dickey, has since announced his opposition to it noting that the rider’s intention was to prevent the CDC from lobbying for gun control, not from conducting gun-violence research."" This 1996 rider is commonly called the Dickey Amendment. In the early 1990s, the New England Journal of Medicine published research that concluded gun ownership, independent of other factors, increased the risk for a homicide in the home. The study was funded by the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. In the wake of the research, and subsequent media attention, the National Rifle Association campaigned for the elimination of the injury prevention center. While the center survived, new language in the 1996 budget bill said that ""none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."" In some ways the statement was redundant, as general funding cannot be used for advocacy. Congress also took from the CDC’s budget $2.6 million -- the exact amount invested in firearm injury research the previous year. While the language against advocating and promoting gun control did not explicitly ban the CDC from researching gun violence, the CDC stopped the work anyway. Linda Degutis, the former director of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, said the action by Congress sent a strong message to the CDC. ""Even though that language doesn’t say research is prohibited,"" Degutis said, ""everyone who was making decisions interpreted it to mean that you could not do any research on gun violence."" The language, and lack of funding, has carried on in spending bills and even been expanded to the National Institute of Health, another agency in the Department of Health and Human Services. ""It is the equivalent of a ban,"" said David Hemenway, director of the Injury Control Research Center at Harvard University. ""It’s a touch more nuanced than a ban, but there’s basically no real difference in terms of research."" In the wake of mass shootings in 2013, President Barack Obama requested the CDC be granted new funding to study gun violence. Congress did not appropriate the funds. Our rating Baldwin said ""over 32,000 people die from #GunViolence every year. Yet, @CDCgov is banned from researching ways to prevent this."" The most comprehensive data available supports the first part of the claim, that more than 32,000 people die from gun violence every year. On the research ban, while the language from the Dickey Amendment does not explicitly ban the agency from conducting research, its interpretation effectively banned the practice. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information."
|
25828
|
“There have been five randomized controlled, placebo controlled trials that do not show any benefit to hydroxychloroquine.”
|
Studies from the United States, the United Kingdom, Brazil, and Spain looked at whether hydroxychloroquine prevented people from getting infected with the coronavirus, or helped them recover faster. All of the studies randomly assigned patients to treatment and control (non-treatment) groups. None of the studies found that hydroxychloroquine made a difference.
|
true
|
National, Coronavirus, Brett Giroir,
|
"President Donald Trump and top health officials in his administration are now openly at odds over hydroxychloroquine. Both Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Deborah Birx, coronavirus response coordinator for the White House task force, have said careful studies show the drug doesn’t speed recovery from COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. Still, at an Aug. 3 White House event, Trump said he has taken hydroxychloroquine and it is ""very highly thought of."" Trump said the drug is politically toxic because he supports it. On NBC’s Meet the Press, Adm. Brett Giroir, the assistant secretary of health and overseer of the virus testing effort, said it is time to ""move on."" ""There have been five randomized controlled, placebo controlled trials that do not show any benefit to Hydroxychloroquine,"" Giroir said Aug. 2. ""So, at this point in time, we don't recommend that as a treatment. "" We asked Giroir’s office to name the five studies he referenced in that interview. Not all of them used placebos, but they all randomly assigned patients to hydroxychloroquine treatment and conventional treatment groups. The drug proved itself in none of them. Before we summarize the studies, a brief word about why this sort of study matters. If you want to know if a drug works, ideally the only difference between a patient who gets it and one who doesn’t is — no surprise — the drug itself. That’s harder to do than meets the eye. People aren’t identical. You can weigh them, look at their medical histories, check their blood oxygen levels and temperature, and yet, you still might miss something. That’s where randomly assigning patients to treatment and non-treatment groups comes in. ""You don’t know all the possible things going on in the background and all that noise is what randomizing helps filter out,"" said Boston University infectious disease modeler Brooke Nichols. ""It’s the best way to be sure that the only effect is the effect of the drug."" Letting a computer program assign patients also prevents any subconscious choices by doctors from distorting the results. The whole approach is designed to take human foibles out of the picture. To really minimize the human factor, not only do you randomly assign patients to groups, but the patients and the health care workers themselves don’t know what group they are in. So everyone gets a pill, but for half of them, the pill might be just sugar or something equally neutral. That neutral pill is a placebo. ""That’s the gold-gold standard of research,"" said Nichols. ""And just one one small notch below that is the randomized controlled trial without a placebo."" Nichols said that the lack of a placebo takes on more importance when a non-placebo study comes up with different results than one with a placebo. ""When the results are in agreement, it doesn’t matter as much,"" Nichols said. Giroir’s office sent us a list of the studies he had in mind. All of them used the randomized control approach. Two of them used placebos, and three did not. They all found the drug ineffective. Here’s Giroir’s list (plus a couple more we found ourselves): A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Prevention of Covid-19 Transmission and Disease, MedRxIV, July 26, 2020. No placebo. This study out of Spain aimed to see if the drug prevented the disease. It involved about 2,300 people who had been exposed to someone who tested positive for the virus. After random assignment, one group got a dose of hydroxychloroquine for a week, and the other didn’t. The differences were small, too small to be statistically significant. In the treatment group, 5.7% caught the virus. In the non-treatment group, 6.2% did. ""Post-exposure therapy with hydroxychloroquine did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 disease and infection,"" the authors wrote. Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19, New England Journal of Medicine, July 23, 2020. No placebo. This study from Brazil assigned 665 patients (504 with testing-confirmed COVID-19) to three groups: standard care, hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine alone. ""Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care,"" the authors wrote. Hydroxychloroquine in Nonhospitalized Adults With Early COVID-19, Annals of Internal Medicine, July 16, 2020. Placebo used. This study of 491 patients in the United States and Canada used two groups: one receiving hydroxychloroquine and the other a placebo. Participants either tested positive, or had the symptoms of COVID-19 and lived or worked with someone who had tested positive. They could not have had symptoms for more than four days. ""We hypothesized that starting hydroxychloroquine therapy within the first few days of symptoms could alter the course of COVID-19 by reducing symptom severity and duration and preventing hospitalizations,"" the authors wrote. They found that the severity of symptoms after 14 days ""did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups."" No clinical benefit from use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, Recovery Trial - University of Oxford, June 5, 2020. No placebo. This study out of the United Kingdom randomly assigned over 4,600 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 to a hydroxychloroquine treatment group and a standard care group. Researchers measured the death rate and symptoms after 28 days. Among the treatment group, 25.7% died, compared to 23.5% for the standard care group. That was not statistically different. And there were no ""beneficial effects on hospital stay duration or other outcomes."" ""Although it is disappointing that this treatment has been shown to be ineffective, it does allow us to focus care and research on more promising drugs.,"" the researchers wrote. The data has yet to be released. A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19, New England Journal of Medicine, June 3, 2020. Placebo used. This study focused on hydroxychloroquine as a way to avoid getting the disease. They randomly assigned 821 people with no symptoms — but who had spent time close to a person who tested positive — to a treatment or placebo group. The hydroxychloroquine group was slightly less likely to test positive after two weeks, 11.8% compared to 14.3% in the placebo group, but the numbers were too small to pass statistical muster. We found two other randomized controlled studies in addition to those Grigoir referenced. One out of Spain worked with 293 people with confirmed infections, but who were not hospitalized. There was no placebo. They found that hydroxychloroquine did not cut the risk of hospitalization, or help people recover more quickly. An early study in May in Shanghai, China, assigned 75 COVID-19 patients to a hydroxychloroquine treatment group, and another received typical care. It also found no difference in the speed of recovery. There has been one large study in Detroit that concluded that the drug worked. However, patient data in that study was collected after the fact and there was no randomized control process. Giroir said there were five ""randomized controlled, placebo controlled trials that do not show any benefit to hydroxychloroquine."" He is largely correct. There have been more than five randomized controlled trials that found hydroxychloroquine ineffective, either at preventing people from catching the virus, or helping them recover if they become ill. He exaggerated the number of studies that used placebos — out of his list, two did and three did not. The infectious disease modeler we reached said placebos improve the quality of a study, but the lack of one matters less if the results are in line with placebo-driven trials."
|
7332
|
Puerto Rico discovers protective supply cache amid COVID-19.
|
The suspected mismanagement of essential supplies during Hurricane Maria turned out to be a boon for Puerto Rico as it fights a rise in coronavirus cases.
|
true
|
Hurricane Maria, Health, General News, Storms, Latin America, Caribbean, Puerto Rico, Hurricanes, Virus Outbreak
|
Health Secretary Lorenzo González said Saturday that officials discovered a cache of urgently needed personal protective equipment at a hospital in the nearby island of Vieques that remains closed since the Category 4 storm hit the U.S. territory in September 2017. He said the equipment includes face masks, gloves, gowns and face shields that were in good condition and would be distributed to health institutions. “They’re very useful at this moment,” said González, who became the island’s newest health secretary this week, the third in the span of two weeks. He also said officials recently located a warehouse with medicine and medical equipment worth $4 million donated during Hurricane Maria, and that nearly all of it had expired. He did not provide details about what specific items were found. Puerto Rico has reported 18 deaths related to COVID-19, including that of a nurse, and more than 450 confirmed cases, including several police officers who join health workers in demanding more personal protective equipment. “Police are going the extra mile right now, and the government is not protecting us like it should,” said Gregorio Matías, vice president of a police union. The discovery in Vieques outraged many on an island still struggling to recover from Maria and from a series of strong earthquakes that hit Puerto Rico’s southern region in recent months. González said he has ordered an investigation into why those supplies were abandoned in Vieques. The announcement comes two months after a group of Puerto Ricans discovered and broke into a warehouse filled with emergency supplies in southern Puerto Rico at a time local officials sought urgent help for those affected by a string of earthquakes. Other similar discoveries have been made since Maria hit. González said the government still needs other equipment including testing kits and ventilators, noting that there are only 500 available for an island of 3.2 million people with high rates of asthma. “If that’s going to be the difference between life and death, people are going to die,” he said. “Don’t take this lightly.” A doctor who leads a COVID-19 government task force has said the U.S. territory needs at least 3,000 ventilators with the anticipated peak in cases expected in early May. Puerto Rico is in the middle of a month long curfew that is one of the strictest in any U.S. jurisdiction and has shuttered non-essential businesses and banned people from going outside unless they have to buy food, medicine or go to the bank.
|
1844
|
When working out is too much of a good thing.
|
Constantly thinking about the next workout? Upset about missing a exercise class? Fitness experts say more is not always better and overworking a workout can sap strength and invite injury.
|
true
|
Health News
|
People participate in a YogaWorks class in Santa Monica, California in this handout picture taken early 2009. REUTERS/Handout “We have fit people and deconditioned people who overdo it,” said Geralyn Coopersmith, national director of the Equinox Fitness Training Institute. “Exercise is like a drug, if you don’t have enough, you get no benefits, if you have too much, you have problems,” she said. Shin splints, heel spurs, tendonitis are among the common overuse injuries that Coopersmith, who oversees the training of personal trainers for Equinox fitness centers, sees. “Some days should be intense, some days not so intense,” she said. “Exercise is a stressor. If it’s too much, the body can break down.” Extreme fatigue, irritability, moodiness, an elevated resting heart rate, fever, and an inability to work your earlier level are among the signs that you’ve overdone it, she said. California-based group fitness instructor Amy Dixon has broached the subject of overtraining with her clients, she said, but delicately, and only when they are ready to listen. “I had a woman come in before my (indoor) cycling class,” said Dixon, creator of the “Give Me 10” DVD series. “I’d see her on the treadmill for an hour, then she’d take my class, then after she would ride longer or go on the elliptical (trainer) for another 40 minutes.” Poke an exercise addiction, Dixon believes, and you’ll often uncover another addiction. “Maybe they’re a binge eater, or they really party on the weekend,” she said. “If you’re working out morning and night, you’re over-trained. Your body’s getting beaten up.” For Dixon and her colleagues, overtraining is an occupational hazard. “A lot of group fitness instructors and trainers fall into that category because it’s our job,” she said. “I know instructors who teach over 30 classes a week.” Connecticut-based exercise physiologist Tom Holland, who has coached people in everything from climbing mountains to running marathons, has actually dropped clients who wanted him to push them too hard. “I have a lot of types that think they’re Lance Armstrongs,” said Holland, author of “Beat the Gym: Personal Trainer Secrets Without the Personal Trainer Price Tag,” said, referring to the seven-time Tour de France winner. He said a lot of his job involves telling clients what not to do. “I try to keep them from getting hurt,” he said. “I design programs on a case-by-case basis but there’s always a rest day. When clients want to eliminate it I try to explain that you don’t get healthier during the workouts, but during the rest days.” Jessica Matthews, an exercise physiologist with the American Council on Exercise, said she has referred several over-trained clients to psychologists. “It’s great to work with other professionals to help them (clients) recognize that they might have a problem,” said Matthews, who is based in San Diego, California. She said symptoms of overtraining can include constant headaches, sleeplessness and severe muscle soreness, as well as diminished performance. “There are so many benefits to exercise, but if they’re exercising excessively even the greatest benefits, like positive mood and better sleep, start to fall away,” she said. Coopersmith puts in another way: “We are a supersized society,” she said, “but we shouldn’t be supersizing exercise.”
|
1078
|
Monstrous rumors stoke hostility to Pakistan's anti-polio drive.
|
His bearded face was half-covered by a shawl, but Hameedullah Khan’s fear and ignorance was on full display as he delivered a chilling message for anyone who tries to vaccinate his children against polio.
|
true
|
Health News
|
“I will stab anyone who comes to my house with polio drops,” Khan growled, refusing to be filmed or photographed as he shopped in a fly-blown bazaar on the outskirts of Peshawar, a city scarred by years on the frontline of Islamist militancy in Pakistan. This dangerous hostility to immunization teams flared last week after religious hardliners in the city spread false rumors, raising a scare on social media that some children were being poisoned and dying from contaminated polio vaccines. The rumors spread like wildfire, triggering mass panic in northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. Mobs burned a village health center, blocked a highway and pelted cars with stones. Medical workers were harassed and threatened. Mosques made announcements that children were having cramps, vomiting and diarrhea after they were given “poisonous” polio drops. Word went out on social media that some children had died. Panicked parents rushed their children to hospitals, overwhelming health authorities. In Peshawar alone, about 45,000 children were brought to hospitals complaining of nausea and dizziness. Officials described it as mass hysteria, asserting there had been no deaths confirmed. It is easy to feed the fears of communities that feel under siege, as in northwest Pakistan. Mistrust of outsiders and modernity goes a long way to explaining why Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan are two of just three countries in the world - Nigeria is the third - where polio remains endemic. Some Muslim clerics have peddled stories that the vaccines are part of Western plot to make Muslims sterile, while militant groups have killed nearly 100 health workers and their guards since 2012 on the pretext that they could be Western spies. Those killings escalated after a doctor in Peshawar involved in the campaign against polio helped U.S. forces track down and eliminate al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2011. Just late week, militants shot and killed a medical worker and two policemen guarding other vaccination teams in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and neighboring Baluchistan province. But the scale of the most recent backlash against a campaign to eradicate polio is something new for government officials, who worry that the suspicions and backward thinking of a hardline minority has infected the wider public. “The mistrust in one segment of society, that refuses vaccinations due to religious beliefs, is translating into the rest of the country, which is something not seen in the past,” Babar Atta, the government’s top coordinator in the drive against polio, told Reuters. Every year Pakistan’s government mounts public education campaigns and recruits Muslim religious leaders to reassure people, but their suspicions persist. As a result of last week’s false rumors, families of hundreds of thousands of children in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and elsewhere refused to participate in the latest campaign to eradicate a virus that can cause paralysis or death. “No drops for us in the future!,” Saif-ur-Rehman, a father of eight, repeating the rumors that the vaccines were contaminated or expired. “Even my son was saying: ‘The next time they bring polio drops to school, I am going to get up and run away from school’. I said, ‘Do that’.” An inquiry found the false stories originated at two schools on the outskirts of Peshawar. Health workers seeking to vaccinate pupils from the Dar-ul-Qalam and Roza-tul-Atfaal schools had met with repeated refusals, according to provincial officials. Investigators also identified and arrested a man seen in a video telling dozens of children to pose as if the vaccine had rendered them unconscious, Farooq Jameel, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s senior-most health official, said. Police also arrested 16 other men, some of whom had threatened vaccination teams on the streets. A provincial leader of a conservative Islamist party that officials suspected had some links to the schools’ owners denied any connection and went on to endorse the immunization program. “I have been vaccinating my own children and will continue to give them polio vaccine till a certain age, but people have some misconception and doubts about polio vaccine, and the government needs to address their concerns,” Abdul Wasey, secretary-general of Jamat-e-Islami Pakistan in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, told Reuters. But the damage has been done. Pakistan has made huge strides in tackling polio, but officials say that while the latest immunization drive succeeded in inoculating 37.6 million children, 1.4 million were left unprotected. Citing fears of attacks on health workers, authorities called off a two-day catch up for the vaccination drive last week. The global campaign against the disease over the past few decades has been a great success story, with the World Health Organization (WHO) reporting just 33 cases of polio worldwide in 2018. But most of them were in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and the danger is that so long as a single child remains infected the virus can quickly spread into polio-free countries and un-immunized populations. There is no known cure for polio, but the disease can be prevented if children are given multiple treatments with the vaccine. Nadia Gul, a housewife, is among the volunteer health workers who make up the vaccination teams. Two children in her close family are victims of polio. Covering her face with a veil to talk with strangers, Gul spoke of the dangers she faces due to the heinous slurs propagated by ill-educated opponents, but she refuses to be cowed. “We have fears in our minds and in our hearts, but we will not lose courage,” Gul told Reuters. “Our aim, the aim of all the polio workers, is that we end this scourge in our country, so that no child, God forbid, is crippled.”
|
30994
|
During a trip to North Vietnam, Jane Fonda turned smuggled messages from U.S. POWs over to their captors.
|
Nor does she apologize for making broadcasts on Radio Hanoi. “Our government was lying to us, and men were dying because of it,” she said. “And I felt that I had to do anything that I could to expose the lies, and help end the war. That was my goal.”
|
false
|
Military, jane fonda, vietnam war
|
It is perhaps indicative of the divisive nature of U.S. military involvement in the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 70s that one of the persons most commonly associated with the war was neither a world leader nor a politician, neither a general nor a soldier, neither a participant nor a casualty of the war, but an American actress. And in ironic fashion, that actress is most notorious for something she didn’t do in Vietnam rather than all the things she did do. In July 1972, during the waning days of U.S. military involvement in Vietnam, actress Jane Fonda incurred the enmity of untold thousands of Vietnam veterans and their families (as well as service members for generations to come) when she arrived in Hanoi, North Vietnam, and began a two-week tour of the country. Fonda visited North Vietnamese villages, hospitals, schools, and factories damaged in the war, weaving her comments about what she observed at those sites with denunciations of U.S. military policy in recordings broadcast as propaganda to U.S. servicemen via Radio Hanoi; met with international visitors and reporters who were also in North Vietnam; spent about an hour chatting with seven U.S. POWs at a meeting arranged by her North Vietnamese guides; and posed for photographs at an antiaircraft emplacement set up in a rural area just outside Hanoi: She went to tour the country’s dike system, which was rumored to have been intentionally bombed by American forces — something the U.S. government to this day forcefully denies. During her two-week stay, Fonda concluded that America was unjustly bombing farmland and areas far flung from military targets. North Vietnamese press reported — and Fonda later confirmed — that she made several radio announcements over the Voice of Vietnam radio to implore U.S. pilots to stop the bombings. “I appealed to them to please consider what you are doing. I don’t think they know,” Fonda said in a news conference when she returned home. “The people who are speaking out against the war are the patriots.” She said the radio addresses were the only way to get access to American soldiers, because she was barred from meeting them at their bases in South Vietnam. Although Fonda’s actions in visiting North Vietnam were sufficient to earn her the wrath of many Americans, in the years since those events took place they have been embellished to the point that the one tale most commonly associated with her Vietnam trip is an incident that never took place — a tale about U.S. POWs who furtively slipped messages to Fonda while she was meeting with them and whom Fonda promptly betrayed by turning those messages over to the POWs’ North Vietnamese captors (resulting in several of those prisoners’ being beaten, tortured, or killed): “There are few things I have strong visceral reactions to, but Jane Fonda’s participation in what I believe to be blatant treason, is one of them. Part of my conviction comes from exposure to those who suffered her attentions. “In 1978, the Commandant of the USAF Survival School, a colonel, was a former POW in Ho Lo Prison — the Hanoi Hilton. Dragged from a stinking cesspit of a cell, cleaned, fed, and dressed in clean PJs, he was ordered to describe for a visiting American ‘Peace Activist’ the ‘lenient and humane treatment’ he’d received. He spat at Ms. Fonda, was clubbed, and dragged away. During the subsequent beating, he fell forward upon the camp Commandant’s feet, accidentally pulling the man’s shoe off — which sent that officer berserk. “In ’78, the AF colonel still suffered from double vision — permanently grounding him — from the Vietnamese officer’s frenzied application of a wooden baton. “From 1983-85, Col. Larry Carrigan was 347FW/DO (F-4Es). He’d spent 6 [product] years in the Hilton — the first three of which he was listed as MIA. His wife lived on faith that he was still alive. His group, too, got the cleaned/fed/clothed routine in preparation for a ‘peace delegation’ visit. “They, however, had time and devised a plan to get word to the world that they still survived. Each man secreted a tiny piece of paper, with his Social Security number on it, in the palm of his hand. When paraded before Ms. Fonda and a cameraman, she walked the line, shaking each man’s hand and asking little encouraging snippets like, ‘Aren’t you sorry you bombed babies?’ and, ‘Are you grateful for the humane treatment from your benevolent captors? '” “Believing this HAD to be an act, they each palmed her their sliver of paper. She took them all without missing a beat. At the end of the line and once the camera stopped rolling, to the shocked disbelief of the POWs, she turned to the officer in charge … and handed him the little pile of notes. “Three men died from the subsequent beatings. Col. Carrigan was almost number four. “For years after their release, a group of determined former POWs, including Col. Carrigan, tried to bring Ms. Fonda and others up on charges of treason. I don’t know that they used it, but the charge of ‘Negligent Homicide due to Depraved Indifference’ would also seem appropriate. Her obvious ‘granting of aid and comfort to the enemy’ alone should’ve been sufficient for the treason count. However, to date, Jane Fonda has never been formally charged with anything and continues to enjoy the privileged life of the rich and famous. “I, personally, think that this is shame on us, the American Citizenry. “Part of our shortfall is ignorance: Most don’t know such actions ever took place. “The only addition I might add to these sentiments is to remember the satisfaction of relieving myself into the urinal at some air base or another where ‘zaps’ of Hanoi Jane’s face had been applied.” The facts are that while in North Vietnam, Fonda met with only a single group of seven U.S POWs: all seven of those POWs agreed to meet with her, no POWs were tortured for declining to meet with her (or for behaving inappropriately during the meeting), and no POWs secretly slipped Fonda messages which she turned over to the North Vietnamese. The persons named in inflammatory claims about this alleged incident have repeatedly and categorically denied the events they supposedly were part of. First of all, the whole premise on which this tale is based is contradicted by the plain reality of the situation: none of the POWs Jane Fonda met needed to furtively hand her messages encoding their identities in order to “get word to the world that they still survived.” Fonda spent about an hour talking with a single group of seven POWs whose names she had ample opportunity to learn during that time; the POWs didn’t need to sneak Fonda pieces of paper with their Social Security numbers written on them, as she could simply have remembered their names and repeated them once she returned home. Plus, there was no reason for the POWs’ identities to have been kept a secret in the first place — since the North Vietnamese arranged the meeting between Fonda and the POWs for its propaganda value, they very much wanted the American public and the world at large to know exactly whom she’d met with. The POWs also had no need to rely on Fonda to secretly relay other messages from them to the outside world. After politics disrupted the delivery of letters to and from American POWs in North Vietnam via U.S. Mail, many visitors who traveled to Hanoi during the war years (such as members of the group Women Strike for Peace) regularly brought POWs letters from their families and took letters from POWs back to the United States with them. Jane Fonda was no exception: she brought mail for imprisoned U.S. servicemen with her to Hanoi, and she returned to the U.S. carrying 241 letters from American POWs back to their families. (Fonda even called the wives of some of the men she met with to provide them with updates about their husbands.) None of the POWs who met with Jane Fonda had any need to resort to the form of subterfuge claimed in these Internet rumors in order to get information about themselves carried to friends and family back home. Additionally, no POWs were tortured to coerce them into meeting with Jane Fonda or for refusing to do so. Fonda had only a single meeting with a small group of POWs, and there were plenty of volunteers for the occasion: The seven men who met with [Fonda] were not coerced into the meeting; indeed, many more pilots wanted to meet with her than were able. “The entire camp that I was in when Jane Fonda visited wanted to see her,” former POW Edison Miller said, although he didn’t even know who Jane Fonda was. Miller only wanted to see her because he knew she was Henry Fonda’s daughter. The seven POWs and Fonda met around a large table surrounded by chairs. It was a typical meeting between international visitors and American airmen: low-key, filled with small talk, inquiries from the airmen about particular bits of news and sports from home, conversations about their families, requests to call them and pass on a message. Despite the claims of hundreds of Vietnam veterans who maintain they were “there” and affirm that accounts like the “smuggled Social Security number betrayal” are true because they supposedly witnessed them, the fact is that Fonda met only seven American POWs while in North Vietnam: Edison Miller, Walter Wilber, James Padgett, David Wesley Hoffman, Kenneth James Fraser, William G. Byrns, and Edward Elias. None of those men reported her sabotaging their attempts to slip her information about themselves, and anyone other than those seven men who asserts he was “there” and witnessed such a scene is simply not telling the truth. Some of the POWs who actually did meet with Jane Fonda, such as Edison Miller, have spoken out on the record over the years to disclaim the apocryphal stories about her “The whole [e-mail] story about Jane Fonda is just malarkey,” said Edison Miller, 73, of California, a former Marine Corps pilot held more than five years. Miller was among seven POWs who met with Fonda in Hanoi. He said he didn’t recall her asking any questions other than about their names, if that. He said that he passed her no piece of paper, and that to his knowledge, no other POW in the group did, despite the e-mail’s claims. Col. Larry Carrigan, the U.S. serviceman whose name is invoked in the e-mailed reproduced at the head of this article, has affirmed that he neither claimed nor experienced any of what has been attributed to him, and that he never even met Jane Fonda: “It’s a figment of somebody’s imagination.” said Ret. Col. Larry Carrigan, one of the servicemen mentioned in the ‘slips of paper’ incident. Carrigan was shot down over North Vietnam in 1967 and did spend time in a POW camp. He has no idea why the story was attributed to him, saying, “I never met Jane Fonda.” In 2005, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that Carrigan “is so tired of having to repeat that he wasn’t beaten after Fonda’s visit and that there were no beating deaths at that time that he won’t talk to the media anymore.” The tale about a defiant serviceman who spit at Jane Fonda and was severely beaten as a result is often attributed to Air Force pilot Jerry Driscoll. He has also repeatedly stated on the record that it did not originate with him: Driscoll said he never met Fonda, as the e-mail claims — and therefore, never spit on her and didn’t suffer permanent double vision from a subsequent beating. “Totally false. It did not happen,” Driscoll said. “I don’t know who came up with [my] name. The trouble that individual has caused me!” he said, referring to the time he has spent repeatedly denying the persistent myth. Mike McGrath, President of NAM-POWs, has also stepped forward to disclaim the Internet-circulated rumors about Jane Fonda and American POWs: Please excuse the generic response, but I have been swamped with so many e-mails on the subject of the Jane Fonda article (Carrigan, Driscoll, strips of paper, torture and deaths of POWs, etc.) that I have to resort to this pre-scripted rebuttal. The truth is that most of this never happened. This is a hoax story placed on the internet by unknown Fonda haters. No one knows who initiated the story. Please assist by not propagating the story. Fonda did enough bad things to assure her a correct place in the garbage dumps of history. We don’t want to be party to false stories, which could be used as an excuse that her real actions didn’t really happen either. I have spoken with all the parties named: Carrigan, Driscoll, et al. They all state that this particular internet story is a hoax and they wish to disassociate their names from the false story. Even Henry Mark Holzer and Erika Holzer, whose 2002 book “Aid and Comfort”: Jane Fonda in North Vietnam made the argument that Jane Fonda could have been tried and convicted of treason for her activities in North Vietnam, acknowledged that the “slips of paper” tale was untrue: Let’s set the record straight. It has been reported on the Internet in recent years that POWs surreptitiously slipped Fonda messages which she turned over to the North Vietnamese. That story is false. Also untrue is that any POW died for refusing to meet with Fonda. It has been reported in the media and on the Internet that two POWs were tortured in an effort to force them into meeting with Fonda. However, despite considerable effort to find independent corroboration of these stories, we have been unable to do so. Jane Fonda’s inclusion in the 30 April 1999 ABC television special A Celebration: 100 Years of Great Women (hosted by Barbara Walters) fanned the flames of anger within many who felt she had never properly atoned for her behavior. However, that program was produced and broadcast over seventeen years ago; contrary to outdated messages which still make the rounds of the Internet, Jane Fonda’s being honored as one of America’s “great women” isn’t something that just happened or is about to happen. (Nor, as claimed in some versions, does “Obama [now] want to honor her” — the 100 Years of Great Women program was aired over nine years before Barack Obama was elected President.) It’s also not the case, as stated in some later versions of this rumor, that Jane Fonda was slated to “portray Nancy Reagan in an upcoming film biography of the Reagans.” The referenced movie (The Butler) has already been completed, and it wasn’t a biography of Ronald and Nancy Reagan — it was a film about a character named Cecil Gains based on the life of Eugene Allen, who served as the head butler at the White House under eight different presidents between 1952 and 1986. Jane Fonda was one of a large cast of actors and actresses who played supporting roles portraying former presidents and first ladies in that movie. In 1988, sixteen years after the fact, Fonda finally met with Vietnam veterans to apologize for her actions. This nationally televised apology (during which she characterized her actions as “thoughtless and careless”) came at a time when New England vets were successfully disrupting a film project she was working on, leading some to read a huge dollop of self-interest into her apology. Fonda also apologized in 2005, an act which once again coincided with the release of a film in which she had a starring role (Monster-in-Law, her first leading role since 1990’s Stanley & Iris) and a book tour to promote her autobiography. As she had several years earlier, though, Fonda specifically apologized for the act of posing for photographs while seated at (an inoperative) North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun, but not for her other activities in North Vietnam: “I will go to my grave regretting that. The image of Jane Fonda, Barbarella, Henry Fonda’s daughter, just a woman sitting on a enemy aircraft gun, was a betrayal,” said Fonda. “It was like I was thumbing my nose at the military. And at the country that gave me privilege. It was the largest lapse of judgment that I can even imagine. I don’t thumb my nose at this country. I care deeply about American soldiers.” The 67-year-old actress and activist, however, defended her decision to go to Hanoi and said she had no regrets about being photographed with American POWs there or making broadcasts on Radio Hanoi because she was trying to stop the war. “Well, both sides were using propaganda, were using the POWs for propaganda,” said Fonda. “I don’t think there was anything wrong with it. It’s not something that I will apologize for.”
|
36490
|
Signs near the US-Mexico border placed by the federal government plainly state that the territory on American soil is essentially lawless and uncontrolled.
|
Do Border Signs Admit the United States Has Lost Control of Border Territory?
|
mixture
|
Disinformation, Fact Checks
|
On January 13 2019, Facebook user Steve Raabe shared a photograph purportedly showing a sign at the U.S.-Mexico border, along with the following status update:I live on the border with Mexico. As a matter of fact, I live right on the edge. I was raised in Nevada and came to Arizona in 2003 to live. I have a house in both states, but have owned a business in Yuma since 2008 and spend the vast majority of my time in Yuma.There is absolutely nothing between the the subdivision I live in and the Mexican border, except for Mesquite, Creosote Bush and cactus.I have lived here before we secured the 126 mile Yuma Sector with barriers and fencing in 2008 and after. The capture of illegals dropped from 136,000 to less than 9000 in one year, in this sector alone. The car pursuits stopped, the chases stopped, shootings decreased, drug smuggling was significantly reduced, crime rates in our county dropped, the number of immigrants dying in the desert stopped. The safety and lives of those of us who live here have improved greatly.Imagine wanting to spend a fun day in the mountains around your home and passing one of these signs which are everywhere and are posted by the Government of the United States. Your out on your four wheeler and a Yuma county deputy on an ATV stops you to recommend that you not be in these mountains unless you are armed and warns you to be careful.Now you people, who live miles away from these dangers, can all act like experts on border security and listen to whatever bullshit the particular politician you like is spewing, but the truth is we live in a very dangerous area and it doesn’t have to be this way.Americans have been promised a secure border from both political parties for four decades and very little has been done.I don’t care if Peter Pan, Tinker-bell, or Bozo the Effing Clown is supporting building a wall, we need it. You wall experts who live nowhere close to the Mexican border need to get your heads out of your rear ends and get a clue!Feel free to share! This has to stop!The attached photograph showed a sign lacking any connection to a federal or local agency, which said:TRAVEL CAUTIONSmuggling and illegal immigration may be encountered in this areaDo not travel aloneAvoid encounters with suspicious groupsAvoid traveling at nightDial 911 to report illegal activityAccording to the post, the signs were placed by the United States government at the border. In addition to that claim, the user claimed that after a border wall was put up in Yuma, the number of immigrants taken into custody dropped from 136,000 to under 9,000. Drops were measured in crimes of various descriptions, and fewer immigrants died trekking through border territories with harsh conditions.No citations were provided for any of the claims. However, signs like the one shown in this post have appeared before, although not during 2019. In October 2010, the Arizona Daily Star reported that the Bureau of Land Management replaced the version of the signs seen in the photograph after they became a game of “political football”:Warning signs on public land northwest of Tucson alerting visitors to border smugglers and armed criminals have been replaced by the Bureau of Land Management with toned-down notices.In June [2010], the BLM put up 12 signs on the Sonoran Desert National Monument warning visitors that the area was an active human and drug smuggling and that visitors may encounter “armed criminals and smuggling vehicles.”The intent was to inform visitors about the severity of the smuggling activity in the area, including a shooting involving a Pinal County sheriff’s deputy and the discovery of two bodies found slain, said BLM state spokesman Dennis Godfrey. The signs did not mean BLM had lost control of the lands, he said.A January 2011 Arizona Daily Star article further examined the placement of the signs and subsequent barriers, explaining that a primary concern for the agency was damage done to federal and tribal lands:BLM officials put up the barrier to redirect traffic around the federally protected Table Top Wilderness Area, where cars are prohibited. They know it won’t stop drugs from reaching cities across the United States, but they couldn’t sit back and watch the beautiful landscape get trampled. […]The problem isn’t unique to the Table Top Wilderness. From Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Southwestern Arizona to Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge southwest of Tucson to the multiple patches of Coronado National Forest across Arizona’s border, land managers grapple with a multitude of issues related to being the busiest stretch of border for illegal immigration and drug smuggling. Including the Tohono O’odham Nation, nearly 86 percent of the Arizona-Mexico borderlands are federal or tribal lands.Dealing with border issues is nothing new – Arizona has been the route of choice for a decade. But the national attention about how federal public-land managers deal with the cross-border traffic and work with federal law enforcement agencies has amplified in the past year with two high-profile killings in which suspects may have passed through federal lands.BLM officials put up signs south of I-8 in the Table Top Wilderness Area warning visitors that the area was an active human- and drug-smuggling corridor and that they may encounter “armed criminals and smuggling vehicles.” The signs became political fodder in the 2010 election and became a symbol to some that the United States had ceded territory to smugglers.When BLM officials took them down and replaced them in October [2010] with toned-down notices, they were criticized for trying to make it seem that the problem had gone away. The irony – similar signs have been up for years across Southern Arizona.The agency is considering putting up more vehicle barriers in Ironwood Forest Monument just northwest of Tucson. There are already vehicle barriers or fences up along the international border in the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge and the Coronado National Forest.The January 2011 article noted that unsanctioned border crossings had decreased in frequency, citing economic conditions (not signs or enforcement) as the primary reason. Moreover, BLM agents cited litter and damage to land as a major factor in efforts to put up barriers:Though illegal crossings have dipped along with the economy in recent years, federal lands in Arizona continue to be high-risk areas for illegal immigration and drug smuggling, says a November report from the Government Accountability Office.The number of apprehensions by the Border Patrol on federal lands has not kept up with the number of estimated illegal entries there, the report found. Border Patrol agents made more than 91,000 apprehensions on federal lands in the Tucson Sector in fiscal 2009, but the agency estimated there were nearly three times as many illegal entries on these lands, the report said. […]The estimated 2,000 tons of trash left behind by smugglers and illegal immigrants has harmed the fragile Sonoran Desert, landing Buenos Aires, Organ Pipe and Cabeza Prieta on lists of most imperiled federal lands at different points this decade.There is even a website devoted to the trash (www.azbordertrash.gov). The site, run by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, is designed to coordinate cleanups and track results.Finally, the reporting noted that disinformation and misinformation proliferated around the signs and the Bureau of Land Management’s involvement in border matters. Citing an erroneous press release for some of the attention, the paper reported:While the strain of dealing with illegal cross-border activity is nothing new, the pressure on border land managers has escalated in the last year, led by a Republican lawmaker from Utah.A month after Robert Krentz was killed on his Cochise County ranch, U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop introduced a bill that would give Border Patrol agents total access to public lands, where they now must adhere to some restrictions. He justified the legislation based on authorities’ belief that the person who killed Krentz fled into Mexico through the San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge, 17 miles east of Douglas.Bishop was the ranking member of the House Natural Resources subcommittee on national parks, forests and public lands. He was recently named chairman.In June, Bishop’s office sent a press release saying the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge had just days earlier announced the closure of 3,500 acres to the public due to dangers posed by Mexican drug smugglers [in 2010]. The press release missed a key fact: This section of the Buenos Aires Refuge has been closed since October 2006.The erroneous report prompted several national media outlets to report a 4-year-old story as if it were new. The office of Buenos Aires refuge manager Sally Gall was flooded with inquiries, forcing the refuge to issue a press release to clarify things. The increased pressure from Bishop and others and the spreading of inaccuracies has given border public lands in Arizona a bad image, Gall said.“Yes, there probably is increased drug traffic and the drug issue is definitely a concern, but I just think it’s created a lot more fear in people than what was needed,” Gall said. “It portrayed this area as really dangerous and that people should fear coming here.”In the original January 2019 Facebook post, the poster said that unsanctioned border crossings dropped after a border wall was put up in 2008 and 2009. But in October 2018, the Arizona Sheriff’s Association published a widely-shared video and claimed otherwise:Agents apprehended an additional 112 illegal aliens throughout the rest of the day for a total of 220, with a majority of them being Guatemalan nationals traveling in family units. All individuals were processed for immigration proceeding.“Coordinated smuggling of large numbers of Central Americans is taking place daily here in Yuma Sector,” said Yuma Sector Chief Patrol Agent Anthony Porvaznik. “They show flagrant disregard for the laws of our country and are exploiting our need for improved border wall infrastructure.”Yuma Sector’s apprehensions of individuals from other than Mexico is up more than 200% this fiscal year compared to the year-to-date numbers in Fiscal Year 2018.In December 2018, the New York Times fact-checked claims made by United States President Donald Trump about the efficacy of various walls and barriers on or near the border. That piece quoted a statement Trump made during a meeting with legislators:A lot of the wall is built. It’s been very effective. I asked for a couple of notes on that. If you look at San Diego, illegal traffic dropped 92 percent once the wall was up. El Paso, illegal traffic dropped 72 percent, then ultimately 95 percent once the wall was up. In Tucson, Arizona, illegal traffic dropped 92 percent. Yuma, it dropped illegal traffic 95 to 96 percent.The paper reported:This is misleading.Spending bills for the 2017 and 2018 fiscal years included funding for the Department of Homeland Security to replace old barriers with new barriers. These projects are not the same thing as Mr. Trump’s promised 1,000-mile concrete border wall, and many — including most in the sectors Mr. Trump listed — are not yet completed.It is therefore impossible for Mr. Trump to claim that the wall has already been highly effective in stemming illegal border crossings.In San Diego, construction began in June to replace 14 miles of barrier. Carlos Diaz, a spokesman for Customs and Border Protection, estimated that the project was on schedule for completion by May. In El Paso, the agency began a four-mile replacement project in late September, and it will be completed in late April, according to Mr. Diaz. And within the Yuma and Tucson sectors, construction for a 32-mile replacement project will begin in April [2019].The Facebook post that made several false claims about the border region also included a widely-shared and misleading image of a sign that was common in border wilderness areas in 2010, nearly a decade before any 2019 discussions about the international border. The sign sparked wide controversy; BLM then replaced the notices after the signs became politically controversial. BLM maintained that the presence of the signs was being used to falsely suggest areas of wilderness in border states was “lawless.” BLM also cited land protection as a primary aim, not border enforcement. The post also cited baseless numbers about massive drops in unsanctioned border crossings not supported by any facts.
|
4533
|
Warren, candidate with the answers, dodges tax hike question.
|
Elizabeth Warren is rising to the top of the Democratic pack with ambitious promises to reshape the political and economic system. But as she faces growing scrutiny, the Massachusetts senator is opening herself to criticism that she’s just another politician dodging the tough questions.
|
true
|
Health care reform, General News, Politics, Election 2020, Elizabeth Warren, Medicare, Business, Health
|
She is in a bind because of her persistent refusal during two straight presidential debates to say whether she would raise taxes on the middle class to pay for the universal health insurance plan known as “Medicare for All.” By not acknowledging taxes would almost certainly increase for a wide range of income earners, Warren avoids becoming a caricature of a Democrat itching to raise them. But she also threatens to undermine the image she’s fostered of a plainspoken former professor ready to tackle any issue in her quest to protect the middle class from the excesses of corporations and the wealthy. Warren’s progressive rival, Bernie Sanders, has said middle-class taxes would have to rise to pay for Medicare for All. Other White House hopefuls said Wednesday that Warren should be just as direct. “Look, I’m not picking on Elizabeth Warren, but this is ridiculous,” said former Vice President Joe Biden, currently Warren’s chief competitor for the Democratic nomination. Warren “is going to have to tell the truth” or face questions about her willingness “to be candid and honest with the American people.” Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar said Warren “needs to come forward and say” how she’d pay for a new health insurance system. “I’m sure she will eventually,” Klobuchar said. Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, echoed that thought from the campaign trail in Ames, Iowa. “Everybody should be prepared to defend their plans,” he said Wednesday. “It’s serving us well to be very clear about how our plan works and to lay out the fact that it’s paid for.” Warren argues pundits are missing the point by focusing on taxes instead of the bottom-line cost that Americans pay for their health care. She insists that eliminating premiums and co-pays under Medicare for All would lower overall costs for all but wealthy Americans. Her top supporters say she should keep pressing that message. “Democratic voters are actually very appreciative that, on the substance, she wants to bring down health care costs, and, on the politics, she’s not taking the bait and giving Republicans and the insurance industry the TV ad moment that they want to deceive voters,” said Adam Green, a liberal activist and close Warren ally. Still, the lack of specificity on paying for Medicare for All is tricky since Warren famously is the candidate who “has a plan” for everything and proudly sweats even the smallest, wonkiest details. On health care, she says that she’s “with Bernie,” referring to the Vermont senator who authored the Medicare for All legislation in Congress. Warren’s campaign says that no one yet knows Medicare for All’s final price tag — but that Warren is still “reviewing the revenue options” previously suggested by Sanders and that she has been very consistent and clear in saying she’ll pay for it by adhering to the principles of lowering overall costs for middle-class families and raising them for rich people and major corporations. Democratic presidential candidates traditionally go to great lengths to avoid the idea that their party is tax happy. But being blunt about raising taxes is not necessarily an election loser, as long as their effect is targeted. President Barack Obama was reelected in 2012 following a pledge to raise taxes on top earners and did so by allowing previous tax cuts on the wealthy to expire. And Warren’s promises of a 2% wealth tax on households with a net worth of more than $50 million elicits chants of “2 cents!” at her rallies, bolstering her reputation as an economic populist. The generous benefits Warren is promising — surpassing other countries with government-run health care — would require tax increases of a historic magnitude to guarantee cradle-to-grave care for every U.S. resident, however. And that will make it harder to finance the program with surgically targeted tax increases on corporations and the wealthy. A study released Wednesday from the Commonwealth Fund and the Urban Institute estimated the government would need $2.7 trillion in additional revenues if Medicare for All were fully implemented next year. That’s more than half the current federal budget, and Washington is already borrowing heavily to meet its obligations. “It’s a huge tax increase,” said Urban Institute health economist John Holahan. “If you just lay it on a small group of people, how do you get those numbers?” Targeting income brackets also means necessarily picking winners and losers — and a person’s health status at any given time could determine what side of the ledger they wind up on. “The success or failure of major health reform plans always hinges on who would win and who would lose, and we don’t have the detail for the Medicare for All plans to judge that,” said Larry Levitt, a senior health policy expert with the Kaiser Family Foundation. Support for Medicare for All has fallen slightly since the beginning of the year, even as Warren and Sanders have championed it. An October poll by the Kaiser Foundation found 51% of Americans favor the plan, while 73% said they support a public option that would compete with private health insurance. Among Democrats, support for a public option has outpaced support for Medicare for All, 85% to 71%. A public option is backed by more moderate Democratic hopefuls, including Biden and Buttigieg. Traditionally, the U.S. has paid for social insurance programs with broad-based taxes. Medicare’s financing includes a payroll tax, money from the Treasury’s general fund and premiums paid by seniors. Sanders has laid out some options for Medicare for All, including a payroll tax on employers, a “premium” tax on households making more than $29,000 for a family of four and higher taxes on the wealthy — which is further than Warren has gone in explaining where the funding will come from. Releasing a more detailed health care proposal of her own could at least start to address these issues for Warren. But her advisers have long maintained that, while she may eventually do so, it isn’t imperative. “What resonates is not an academic version of her plan — it’s her personal story of struggle connecting with the real-world impact of her plan on everyday families,” Green said. “Medicare for All is about the principles, not the micro-mechanisms for putting it altogether.” ___ Associated Press writers Emily Swanson in Washington, Hunter Woodall in Keene, N.H., Thomas Beaumont in Ames, Iowa, and Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report.
|
1721
|
Key to High Intensity Interval Training found outside comfort zone.
|
With High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT), which consists of short bursts of intensive activity followed by short periods of recovery, fitness experts say the harder the push, the greater the reward.
|
true
|
Health News
|
HIIT can blast calories, build muscle and boost endurance with impressive efficiency in just 20 minutes a day, but the catch is finding the right level of intensity outside the comfort zone, fitness trainers say. Sean Bartram, author of the book “High Intensity Interval Training for Women,” said to find that level people should think about what it is like being chased by a rabid dog. “It’s just below that,” he said. “To gain maximum benefits you have to push your body to a place that’s almost uncomfortable.” The American College of Sports Medicine predicts HIIT will be a top fitness trend in 2015. Bartram said people are drawn to it for its efficiency and almost endless variety of exercises. The bursts can be sprinting or spot jumps and the recovery can be rests or slower paced movements, he explained. “You could alternate 30 seconds of sprinting with 30 seconds of walking, or you could engage in a series of bodyweight exercises, such as push-ups, doing each for 30 seconds with 10 seconds of rest in between,” he said. Dr. Michele Olson, a professor of exercise science at Auburn University at Montgomery, Alabama, said it’s not high intensity unless the heart rate is elevated to near 90-plus percentage of its maximum. “Many people think they are engaging in HIIT but they are really doing traditional interval training, where the heart rate is around 75 to 85 percent of max,” she said. Maximum heart rate is about 220 minus age, according to the American Heart Association. Olson said that if done properly, HIIT can increase the effectiveness in losing abdominal fat and prompt favorable changes in cholesterol and insulin levels. “There is research showing that you can cut your exercise time nearly in half,” she said. About 20 minutes of HIIT can reap similar benefits of doing 35 to 40 minutes of moderate, steady-state cardio, she added, noting the training level must be intense. Hayley Zawadzki, personal training manager at New York Health and Racquet Club fitness centers, suggests that anyone starting HIIT should have a fitness analysis. “If you have a history of high blood pressure or medications, you cannot push to the absolute max,” she said.
|
18249
|
Rick Perry Says New York has ‘bureaucrats telling you whether you can even drink a Big Gulp.’
|
"Perry said New York has ""bureaucrats telling you whether you can even drink a Big Gulp."" City officials are trying to tell New Yorkers they can’t buy large sizes of sugary drinks at some establishments -- but they haven’t succeeded. Notably, the ban Perry referred to would exempt convenience stores."
|
false
|
City Government, Government Regulation, Public Health, Texas, Rick Perry,
|
"Before Gov. Rick Perry took off for New York in hopes of luring businesses to Texas, he previewed his pitch in a radio ad. In the spot, Perry said, ""The new New York sounds a lot like the old New York: Higher taxes. Stifling regulations. Bureaucrats telling you whether you can even drink a Big Gulp."" We learned of the ad, posted online June 12, 2013, by Texas’ state economic development corporation, from a June 12, 2013, Dallas Morning News news blog entry, which said it had a ""slight inaccuracy,"" because convenience stores ""always were exempt"" from a New York ban on big sugary drinks struck down earlier in 2013. Are New York government officials getting between 7-Eleven customers and their self-serve plastic cups? Big Gulp, of course, is a trademark registered to Dallas-based 7-Eleven Inc. convenience stores, alongside Super Big Gulp, Slurp & Gulp, Super Slurpee, Big Brew and many others. Its size has varied from time to time; these days, 7-Eleven spokeswoman Margaret Chabris told us by email, Big Gulp denotes a 32-ounce fountain drink. For comparison, an ordinary soft drink can holds 12 ounces. Perry vetoed a measure June 14, 2013, that would have barred the sale of sugary drinks during class hours at most Texas public schools, saying current policy was adequate and the bill would limit ""innocuous"" beverages such as 2 percent milk. Perry spokeswoman Allison Castle told us by email that the governor’s wording was a play on ""Big Gulp Ban,"" a nickname for the anti-obesity proposal that New York’s mayor launched in 2012 to stop some sales of large sugary drinks, similar in spirit to the city’s 2008 ban on certain fats at restaurants. A May 30, 2012, New York Times news story said Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposal took aim at ""any cup or bottle of sweetened drink larger than 16 fluid ounces"" sold in food service establishments regulated by the city’s health department, unless the beverage contained ""fewer than 25 calories per 8-ounce serving."" Diet sodas, fruit juice, dairy drinks and alcoholic beverages were not covered, the story said. Under the measure, the Times wrote, fast-food and other restaurants, movie theaters, street carts and sports arenas ""would be required to hand out cup sizes of 16 ounces or less"" -- but not grocery stores or convenience stores such as 7-Eleven. Bloomberg spokeswoman Samantha Levine and 7-Eleven’s Chabris said the same, telling us via email that 7-Eleven would not be affected because it is regulated by the state, not the city. A May 31, 2012, CBS news story described the plan as Bloomberg’s latest tactic against sugary drinks, saying he ""previously supported a soda tax that was ultimately shot down by state lawmakers and, in 2010, proposed to ban people from using food stamps to buy sugary drinks, sodas and teas,"" an effort stopped by the USDA. Those earlier efforts could have affected convenience stores, but it appears the 16-ounce portion cap would not have. The city’s statement of purpose for the 16-ounce limit, published in the City Record on June 19, 2012, said, ""To address the obesity epidemic among the city’s residents, the Department proposes that the Board of Health amend Article 81 (of the city health code). The proposed changes would establish maximum sizes for beverages offered and sold in FSEs."" An FSE, or food service establishment, is defined in Section 14 of the city’s health department regulations as ""a place where food is prepared and intended for individual portion service and includes the site at which the individual portions are provided, whether consumption occurs on or off the premises."" The regulations specify that ""retail food stores,"" private homes and certain other establishments are exempt. A June 6, 2012, Times news story headlined ""At 7-Eleven, the Big Gulps Elude a Ban by the City,"" said the Big Gulp would be ""an important exception"" to the ban. Then again, the overall ban fell through March 11, 2013 -- blocked the day before it was to take effect by what the Times called a ""surprise"" ruling from a state Supreme Court judge. The city appealed the decision, according to a June 11, 2013, Times news story. Confusion over which businesses would be affected was a factor in the ruling, which said, ""This court finds that the regulation herein is laden with exceptions based on economic and political concerns"" and mentioned city health officials’ assertion that markets and stores ""including the 7-11 market chains and their famous, or infamous, Big Gulp containers"" would be exempted. The city health department backs up the Big Gulp exception in a ""Fact vs. Fiction"" document on its website, saying that because certain ""retailers, like convenience stores and grocery stores, are not regulated by the health department, they are not covered by the rule."" Bloomberg hasn’t given up on other ways to limit sugary drinks. He and other mayors wrote to Congress on June 18, 2013, with a new request to limit the use of food stamps for buying sugar-sweetened beverages. Our ruling Perry said New York has ""bureaucrats telling you whether you can even drink a Big Gulp."" City officials are trying to tell New Yorkers they can’t buy large sizes of sugary drinks at some establishments -- but they haven’t succeeded. Notably, the ban Perry referred to would exempt convenience stores."
|
38123
|
Partridge Family star David Cassidy died at 67 after being rushed to a Florida hospital with organ failure.
|
Partridge Family's David Cassidy Dies at 67 from Organ Failure-Reported as Fiction!
|
false
|
Celebrities
|
David Cassidy was admitted to a Florida hospital’s ICU with organ failure in November 2017. And false reports of his death quickly followed. But JoAnn Geffen, David Cassidy’s publicist, confirmed on November 20th that the ’70s pop icon remained in critical condition, despite those false reports. Cassidy has suffered various health conditions in recent months and years. That, coupled with his recent hospitalization, fueled false reports of his death. On November 8th, Cassidy’s publicist first confirmed that he’d been admitted to a Florida hospital’s ICU with multiple organ failure, the Associated Press reports: Publicist JoAnn Geffen tells The Associated Press that Cassidy is in a Fort Lauderdale-area hospital with liver and kidney failure. She says he’s in a private room, conscious and surrounded by family. Geffen says there is nothing “imminent” about his condition, and doctors are hoping to “keep him as well as they can until they can find another liver.” By November 18th, false reports of David Cassidy’s death had emerged. The website City-Herald.com led the charge with a story appearing under the headline, “BREAKING: David Cassidy dies of organ failure after brief hospitalization aged 67.” The false report of Cassidy’s death was shared on social media more than 70,000 times, and copycat reports followed. Reuters columnist Ruthy Munoz confirmed the David Cassidy celebrity death hoax. She posted a screenshot of an email form publicist JoAnn Geffen: False Reports of David Cassidy’s Death Follow Serious Health Issues False reports of David Cassidy’s death carried extra weight because of his recent health issues. David Cassidy said in a February 2017 interview that he was battling dementia. “I want to focus on what I am, who I am and how I’ve been without any distractions,” Cassidy said. “I want to love. I want to enjoy life.” Cassidy has also openly talked about his battles with substance abuse. In 2014, the pop icon was arrested twice for drunken driving within a six-month period. Previous reports of his health issues led to widespread belief in the David Cassidy death hoax that surfaced in November 2017. Comments
|
28201
|
"Florida beaches have been invaded with ""sea lice."
|
Sea anemone larvae (and other larval cnidarians) also possess nematocysts that may cause seabather’s eruption.
|
true
|
Critter Country, Lethal Lurkers, sea lice, seabather's rash
|
In June 2016, popular posts on social media claimed that “sea lice” had invaded beaches in Florida. As the term “sea lice” is not widespread, especially among social media users residing in the northern states, these messages were viewed with skepticism. However, these posts stemmed from genuine news articles: Purple flags are popping up all over the Florida panhandle as a nearly-invisible nuisance is causing a headache for beach-goers. Sea lice, also known as beach lice, have been confirmed in South Walton and Santa Rosa Beaches, and they may be moving west towards Alabama. Sea lice are virtually impossible to see underwater, making them difficult to track. They are known to get stuck underneath bathing suits and irritate the skin, causing a rash known as seabather’s eruption. The claim that these creatures have “invaded” the United States’ southern shores is something of an exaggeration, and may have led some to believe that this is a new phenomenon. Actually, the term “sea lice” has been used since at least the 1950s, although researchers preferred the term “seabather’s eruption” as there is an unrelated marine parasite known as a “sea louse”: The term “sea lice” apparently originated during the 1950s and was used by local U.S. residents in describing the condition. This popular term persisted, despite efforts by scientists to discourage use of such an inappropriate designation. Sea lice are actually small parasites that affect fish. While the term “sea lice” can refer to the larval form of several stinging marine creatures, seabather’s eruption is commonly caused by thimble jellyfish larvae: Seabather’s eruption is a rash that occurs when a swimmer is stung by marine life larvae. The condition has many names, including sealice, pika-pika, sea poisoning, sea critters, and ocean itch. Two types of marine life that generally cause this rash are: Thimble jellyfish (Linuche unguiculata). These are found seasonally in the water off the Florida coast and across the Caribbean. The jellyfish breed in the Caribbean throughout the summer, peaking in May. The larvae are barely visible, appearing like a speck of finely ground pepper.
|
33741
|
Woman gives birth to octopus (or lizard, frog, fish, or snake).
|
New York: Paradox Press, 1994. ISBN 1-56389-165-4 (p. 77).
|
false
|
Fauxtography, Gallery Of The Gruesome
|
In his 1948 book The Affairs of Dame Rumor, Jacobson mentions this rumor “flooded the Atlantic states in 1934” and notes the story had been published in the Boston Traveler a few years earlier: Example: [Brunvand, 1984] This teen age girl, growing up in a California coastal town, was obviously pregnant — stomach starting to swell, morning sickness, etc. She, however, tearfully insisted to her mother that she couldn’t possibly be pregnant. She had never “done it” with a boy and it just wasn’t possible. As time went on, however, the signs continued. Her stomach continued to grow, her appetite increased, and so forth. Her mother insisted she was pregnant. The girl insisted it wasn’t possible. She was still a “good” girl. Finally x-rays were taken and the girl was vindicated. She had a large tumor in her stomach and surgery was performed immediately. To everyone’s amazement the surgeons removed not a tumor but a small, live octopus that had fastened itself to the lining of the girl’s stomach. What happened to this girl supposedly is really possible. Octopus eggs are microscopic in size and laid in clusters of tens of thousands. They are usually affixed to kelp at the ocean bottom by a sticky secretion. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that a few could escape and float to the surface where they could be swallowed by an unsuspecting swimmer . . . Anyway, don’t scoff, because the girl was a close friend of my older brother’s girlfriend. Fishbein’s 1930 book Shattering Health Superstitions includes the text of the Traveler piece: A London factory girl is reported to have swallowed something while taking a swim, and immediately after was seized with terrible pains. A local doctor and a specialist both failed to diagnose the case, but an X-ray examination finally showed that she had swallowed an octopus egg, which had hatched out inside her anatomy. Folklorist Jan Brunvand points out there is a traditional folk motif assigned to this type of tale: B784.1.4 — Girl swallows frog spawn; an octopus grows inside her with tentacles reaching to every part of her body. How an octopus can grow from frog spawn remains unexplained, however. There are numerous versions of the basic legend: All of these tales might be considered variations of the “bosom serpent” legend, described by Harold Schecter as a tale in which “through some unfortunate circumstance or act of carelessness . . . a snake. . . is accidentally ingested by, or grows inside the body of, the unlucky individual, where it remains until it is expelled or in some way lured out of the victim’s body.” This motif remains popular in films such as Alien, which features a crew member “impregnated” by an alien creature; once the incubation period is complete, the alien lifeform is “born” by bursting out through his chest. As Schechter notes, “like the traditional, oral versions that have been popular for hundreds of years, [the] only purpose [of the birth scene in Alien] is to produce emotional response: shock, revulsion, morbid fascination.” In June 2004 the Iranian daily Etemaad reported that an unnamed woman from the south-eastern city of Iranshahr had given birth to a frog. According to that paper, the woman’s gynaecologist confirmed that the lady in question, whose period had stopped for six months, had undergone sonography in May which showed she had a cyst in her abdomen and that following severe bleeding, she gave birth to a live grey frog accompanied with mud. Numerous news outlets subsequently carried the story, but in the manner of reporting that an Iranian paper had run the item, not as a confirmation of the facts of the account. If the photo of the frog (as initially provided by the BBC — it was later stripped from their online article and replaced by a map of Iraq) was accurate, it disproved the theory that the purported mother of Kermit came by her amphibian pregnancy through having swum in or drunk frog spawn, because the lily pad jumper so pictured was of a species not native to Iran. In any event, it was always a case of news outlets repeating a weird story that had come to them, not of vetting the tale’s claims. Humans cannot give birth to frogs, or snakes, or fish, or lizards, or octopuses — our biology rules it out. Also told in: The Big Book of Urban Legends.
|
11374
|
Boomer Bodies: Fresh Approach To Pain Relief
|
Regrettably, this CBS News broadcast sounds more like an infomercial than a news report. It describes a “new” device that delivers electrical signals to the skin through a one and a half-inch patch containing more than a thousand tiny needles. The broadcast says that invisible electrical waves “penetrate the nerves and seem to interrupt pain signals—blocking them before they reach the brain.” The story cites “preliminary research” that purportedly shows that the nerve stimulation device “reduced pain quickly and significantly.” But it does not quantify the benefits in either a relative or an absolute frame. How much is “significant”? Moreover, there is no mention of the quality of the evidence—other than that it is preliminary. Is the broadcast referring to small randomized trials that compared the device to a placebo, with subjects and researchers who did not know who received which treatment? Or does “preliminary” simply mean that some people received treatment and said they felt better? It is impossible to know. The story says the device is “new,” but that isn’t completely accurate. According to the FDA’s August 2006 approval letter, it is “substantially equivalent” to TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) devices which have been in use for more than 30 years. The difference is that the newer unit described in the broadcast uses an electrode with tiny needles instead of a standard surface electrode. The addition of needles to a TENS unit is a more recent innovation (but not new), and often marketed as “percutaneous” electrical nerve stimulation devices, or PENS. Interestingly, the story is one among a series of broadcasts titled “Boomer Bodies,” presumably planned with some lead time. The absence of a truly skeptical source to balance the enthusiasm of the story’s primary sources—two patients and a physician who are Biowave proponents—is all the more lamentable. In essence, this broadcast describes a treatment that is expensive, poorly studied, short-lived if effective, and aimed at vulnerable people living in chronic pain. So why is it so gung-ho?
|
false
|
"The story says that the treatment—“for people who’d try anything to make the pain go away”—costs about $300 per treatment and typically is administered during 6 sessions, “one every day or two.” But it says nothing about the costs of a multitude of other treatments for low back pain. The story sums up the benefit by saying merely that the nerve stimulation device “reduced pain quickly and significantly” in “preliminary research.” It makes no attempt to quantify this benefit in relative or absolute terms. The story says the device is noninvasive (attaching to the skin with patches) and “appears to be safe.” But no evidence is cited. Some might say that it is potentially harmful for a person in pain to spend $300 on a treatment whose apparent benefits lasts a mere 24 hours (the duration of benefit cited in the FDA’s approval letter). The broadcast cites “preliminary research” that purportedly shows that the nerve stimulation device “reduced pain quickly and significantly.” There is no discussion of the quality of this evidence. Is the broadcast referring to small randomized trials that compared the device to a placebo, with subjects and researchers who did not know who received which treatment? Or does “preliminary” simply mean some people received treatment and said they felt better? It is impossible to know. Evidence to support the use of other electrical nerve stimulation systems for chronic pain is not very strong. Although it’s a little unclear, this story seems to suggest that the nerve-stimulation device is designed to treat common back pain, leg pain, and/or arthritis. For example, the golfer-patient has “nagging” back pain purportedly caused by arthritis, a disease said to afflict some “20 million Americans.” One of the doctors interviewed says, ""This is one thing that gives us an option to try and help millions of people."" The story makes no mention of the fact that many such aches come and go on their own with no treatment at all. In addition, it fails to note that the device has been approved for use in a very narrow group of people—those with “chronic, intractable pain, [and] post-surgical and post-traumatic acute pain.” Instead of reassuring people, the story nudges them to seek an uNPRoven, expensive treatment for vaguely defined aches and pains. The story is thin on balance, citing one physician and two patients who are unabashed proponents of the technology (and a fourth source who points out that “There is no golden bullet” for arthritis). The broadcast could easily have found an evidence-based observer to provide a skeptical critique of this therapy. The broadcast notes that there are many treatments for osteoarthritis, but it only mentions narcotics and surgery in passing. (In a closing discussion with CBS News anchor Katie Couric the reporter also dismisses glucosamine). Depending on the site of the arthritis or chronic pain, nonsurgical treatments include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, physical therapy, intensive strengthening and rehabilitation, hot pads, assistive devices such as canes and braces, capsaicin cream, and others. The broadcast cites a physician who has treated more than 100 patients with the so-called nerve-stimulation device, but it says nothing about the device’s wider availability. Is the device FDA-approved? If so, for what—chronic back pain, osteoarthritis, something else? According to a document on the FDA’s web site, the device is approved for the treatment of “chronic, intractable pain, post-surgical and post-traumatic acute pain, and symptomatic relief of post-operative pain.” The broadcast says the device is “new,” but that’s not completely accurate. The Biowave is really a repackaging of an old idea. According to the FDA’s August 2006 approval letter, the device is “substantially equivalent” to TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) units that have been in use for more than 30 years. The addition of needles to a TENS device is a more recent innovation (but not new), and often marketed as “percutaneous” electrical nerve stimulation devices, or PENS. No obvious use of text from the press release."
|
|
14558
|
"Samir Chachoua Says he cured Charlie Sheen and the island of Comoros of HIV with ""milk from goats, which had arthritis."
|
"Chachoua said he cured Charlie Sheen and Comoros of HIV with ""milk from goats which had arthritis."" Chachoua is taking a nugget of science and twisting into an absurd claim. There is no proof that CAEV — a relative of HIV that’s studied for its vaccine potential — neutralizes HIV. Sheen and people on the island of Comoros both have HIV."
|
false
|
Global News Service, Health Care, Public Health, Science, Samir Chachoua,
|
"An Australian doctor says he cured Charlie Sheen and the island nation of Comoros of HIV with a curious treatment — specifically, arthritic goat’s milk. Samir Chachoua first made headlines in January, when he became the subject of a Dr. Oz intervention. Sheen told Oz that he stopped taking conventional HIV medication for about a month after Chachoua’s treatment made HIV ""undetectable"" in his blood. Oz pointed out that Chachoua was not licensed to practice medicine in the United States and his method of convincing Sheen — by injecting himself with Sheen’s blood — was not only unorthodox, but highly inappropriate. Sheen agreed to take his medicine again. It gets weirder. A few weeks later, Chachoua expressed his disappointment in Sheen and touted his treatment on Jan. 29’s Real Time with Bill Maher. ""I found a place in Mexico with all these IV drug users, prostitutes, all the high profile things that are necessary for AIDS but I didn’t find AIDS,"" he said. ""What I found was, their people were drinking milk from goats, which had arthritis. These goats have a virus called CAEV, and this virus destroys HIV and protects people who drink it for life."" This treatment, says Chachoua, not only cured Sheen but helped eradicate HIV in Comoros, an island nation in the Indian Ocean, in 2006. Let’s state off the bat that Chachoua has been, as Maher noted, ""called a quack a million times."" His claims that he eradicated HIV in Comoros in 2006 and cured Sheen are profoundly untrue. ""We have no cure for AIDS and it’s certainly not going to be anything related to goat’s milk,"" said Jeffrey Laurence, the senior scientific consultant for programs at amfAR, the Foundation for AIDS Research. The facts on CAEV As its name suggests, the caprine arthritis encephalitis virus or CAEV — which is part of the same genus of viruses as HIV — causes arthritis and encephalitis in goats. Some research shows that infected goats may develop antibodies that will ""cross react"" with HIV. What does this mean? If you remember the lock-and-key model from your biology textbook, you’ll know that your body produces antibodies that are specific to an antigen. Some CAEV antibodies, in addition to flagging CAEV, can also identify HIV. Simply put, they recognize HIV as an antigen. That’s it. There is no evidence these antibodies ""destroy"" or protect against HIV, said Brian Murphy, a professor of pathology at the University of California Davis’ School of Veterinary Medicine, who’s studied CAEV. Scientists have actually known about this cross-reactivity for decades, but in the grand scheme of AIDS research, it’s meaningless, according to Laurence of amfAR. ""It wouldn’t make my list of 100 things to consider in the search for a cure,"" he said. ""There are so many more interesting things to look into without having to look into cross-reactions with goats."" Nonetheless, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases did support research into CAEV’s vaccine potential in the 2000s before determining that it wasn’t viable. Currently, there’s a team of scientists at Joseph Fourier University in Grenoble, France, working on a CAEV-based HIV vaccine. Yahia Chebloune, one of the immunologists on the team, explained the concept to us. The team’s vaccine prototype combines CAEV with HIV and SIV (simian immunodeficiency virus). Unlike HIV, CAEV doesn’t destroy T helper cells — the white blood cells essential to the immune system — nor does it replicate as aggressively and indefinitely or create an AIDS-like disease in goats. So when the vaccine was tested on mice, macaques and llamas, their T helper cells weren’t destroyed and the animals could produce antibodies, suggesting that the vaccine was effective in stopping the HIV strains from replicating. Got goat milk None of this suggests that Chachoua has successfully cured Sheen or the 780,000 inhabitants of Comoros against HIV. Simply ""drinking milk from goats with arthritis"" cannot protect anyone from the virus. CAEV is not transmittable to humans, so Charlie Sheen couldn’t have developed CAEV antibodies — even if they did ""destroy"" HIV (again, they don't). ""This is the craziest story I’ve ever heard,"" said Chebloune. ""The claims of Dr. Sam Chachoua are not scientifically serious."" Is it possible that Chachoua inoculated Sheen with a homemade CAEV-based vaccine like Chebloune’s? Our multiple requests for comment went unanswered so we’ll never know for sure. But the one CAEV vaccine prototype we found triggered an immune response in animals and has yet to be tested on humans. What’s more, as Lawrence of amfAR noted, vaccinating someone against a disease is not the same thing as curing it. Then there’s the most damning evidence against Chachou: Sheen is still HIV-positive, while there were 7,900 HIV cases in Comoros in 2012. ""I’m not cured, no,"" Sheen said on Feb. 11’s Dr. Oz. Salvator Niyonzima, who directs the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS in Comoros, told Oz that he and his colleagues ""have never heard of Dr. Samir Chachoua."" Our ruling Chachoua said he cured Charlie Sheen and Comoros of HIV with ""milk from goats which had arthritis."" Chachoua is taking a nugget of science and twisting into an absurd claim. There is no proof that CAEV — a relative of HIV that’s studied for its vaccine potential — neutralizes HIV. Sheen and people on the island of Comoros both have HIV."
|
1913
|
U.S. judge blocks graphic cigarette warnings.
|
A federal judge blocked a U.S. rule requiring tobacco companies to display graphic images on cigarette packs, such as a man exhaling cigarette smoke through a hole in his throat.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Combination picture of new graphic cigarette packages, released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration June 21, 2011, shows a varied collection of a man on a ventilator, diseased lungs and dead bodies were among the graphic images for revamped U.S. tobacco labels, unveiled by health officials who hope the warnings will help smokers quit. REUTERS/U.S. Food and Drug Administration/Handout U.S. District Judge Richard Leon sided on Monday with tobacco companies and granted a temporary injunction, saying they would likely prevail in their lawsuit challenging the requirement as unconstitutional because it compels speech in violation of the First Amendment. The Food and Drug Administration in June released nine new warnings to go into effect in September of 2012, the first change in U.S. cigarette warning labels in 25 years. Cigarette packs already carry text warnings from the U.S. Surgeon General. The new warnings must cover the top half of the front and back of cigarette packs and 20 percent of printed advertisements and must contain color graphics depicting the health consequences of smoking, including diseased lungs, dead bodies and rotting teeth. Congress instructed FDA to impose the new labels as part of 2009 legislation making the agency responsible for regulating tobacco products. “The sheer size and display requirements for the graphic images are anything but narrowly tailored,” Leon wrote in a 29-page opinion. Just because Congress ordered the size and placement of the new warnings before charging the FDA with carrying out the mandate, “doing so does not enable this requirement to somehow automatically pass constitutional muster,” he said. The content of the images would also not likely survive constitutional muster because the FDA did not attempt to narrowly tailor those either, the judge said. The tobacco lawsuit is the latest effort by corporations to assert a right to free speech, a high-profile legal battle that could end up before the U.S. Supreme Court. Reynolds American Inc’s R.J. Reynolds unit, Lorillard Inc, Liggett Group LLC and Commonwealth Brands Inc, owned by Britain’s Imperial Tobacco Group Plc, sued the FDA in August. They argued the new graphic warnings force them to “engage in anti-smoking advocacy” on the government’s behalf, breaching their right to free speech. The Obama administration’s options include appealing Leon’s ruling or the FDA could try to rewrite the rules. FDA spokeswoman Stephanie Yao said the agency did not comment on proposed, pending or ongoing litigation. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said the department was aware of the decision and was reviewing it. The White House expressed disappointment in the ruling. “Tobacco companies shouldn’t be standing in the way of common sense measures that will help prevent children from smoking. We are confident big tobacco’s attempt to stop these warnings from going forward will ultimately fail,” White House spokesman Nick Papas said. Tobacco is the leading cause of preventable deaths in the United States, accounting for one in every five deaths every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About 21 percent of U.S. adults smoke cigarettes, a number little changed since 2004. Worldwide, tobacco kills nearly 6 million people every year, including more than 600,000 nonsmokers, according to the World Health Organization, which has repeatedly called for graphic images to appear on tobacco packs, saying the pictorial warnings actually work. The tobacco industry had asked Leon to block the FDA’s new requirements, pending a final decision on their constitutionality. They argued they needed a quick ruling because they would have to start in November or December and spend millions of dollars to comply with the requirements. Justice Department attorneys had argued that the money was a small fraction of the companies’ net sales, so they would not suffer irreparable harm without the temporary injunction. Government attorneys said the labels conveyed the dangers of smoking more effectively than words alone, and were needed to stop more people from smoking, especially teenagers. Judge Leon said the images provoked an emotional response rather than just providing factual and noncontroversial information, crossing the line into using company advertising for government advocacy. Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment lawyer representing Lorillard, called Leon’s ruling a “vindication for the well-established First Amendment principle that the government may not compel speech in the commercial area.” He said the case was in its early stages and there was a “good chance” it will eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court. The Dow Jones tobacco index, whose components include Altria, Lorillard and Reynolds American, was just 0.05 percent higher in afternoon trading amid mixed trading for broader U.S. stock indexes as investors kept a worried eye on European debt problems. Altria Group is not part of the lawsuit. The case is R.J Reynolds Tobacco Co et al v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 11-cv-1482.
|
8215
|
India proposes regional fund to fight coronavirus as cases exceed 100.
|
India proposed setting up an emergency fund to fight the coronavirus outbreak in South Asia on Sunday, with New Delhi offering $10 million to get it going, as the number of confirmed infections in the country rose past 100.
|
true
|
Health News
|
“Any of us can use the fund to meet the cost of immediate actions,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi told regional leaders via video conference, adding that India would also offer rapid response teams and other expertise to deal with the crisis. Modi said there were fewer than 150 cases in countries comprising the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, but the situation ahead was uncertain. “This is why it would be most valuable for all of us to share our perspectives,” Modi told SAARC leaders. On Sunday, India’s federal health ministry reported that the number of coronavirus infections had risen to 107, an increase of 23 from the day before, with a western state home to the country’s financial capital the worst hit. Data from the ministry showed that there were now 31 confirmed coronavirus cases in Maharashtra state, where local authorities have closed down schools, colleges and malls in most cities, including in the financial hub of Mumbai. “The number could go up as we are waiting for test reports of people who were in close contact with patients who have tested positive,” a state health official said, declining to be named since he isn’t authorities to speak to media. In Mumbai, unions involved with its Bollywood film industry - one of the largest in the world - said that they would stop all work until the end of March. “We can’t take any chances,” Kulmeet Makkar, CEO of the Producers Guild of India, told Reuters, adding that around 200,000 people are directly employed with the industry in Mumbai. India, a country of 1.3 billion people, has so far fared better than elsewhere in Asia, Europe and North America, with only two deaths because of the virus. But experts say India’s already overstretched medical system would struggle to deal with a major rise in serious cases. India has already suspended most visas to the country and shut many land borders with neighboring countries in a wide-reaching attempt to prevent the spread of coronavirus.
|
36252
|
No public welfare programs existed to help new immigrants in the United States prior to the passage of the Social Security Act in 1935.
|
Did Public Assistance Programs Exist in the United States Before Social Security?
|
false
|
Disinformation, Fact Checks
|
In August 2019, disinformation and misinformation about the history of immigration to the United States flourished online following the announcement that United States President Donald Trump’s administration would pursue the so-called “public charge” standard as a means to curb immigration into the country. Much of that disinformation online concerns the history of public assistance programs in the country, and it is almost entirely wrong.The new rule was announced by the United States Customs and Immigration Services’ acting director Ken Cuccinelli, perhaps best known before this appointment for his time as Virginia’s attorney general advocating for transvaginal ultrasounds for women seeking abortions and for 2012 comments comparing immigrants to rats. It is the finalization of a policy the Trump administration first proposed in September 2018.The new rule is slated to go into effect on 15 October 2019, and it would allow the administration to deny immigrants entry into the United States if it is deemed that they are likely to use services such as Section 8 rental or housing aid, Medicaid, or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program “for more than 12 months in the aggregate within any 36-month period” at any point after entering the United States:This final rule amends DHS regulations by prescribing how DHS will determine whether an alien is inadmissible to the United States based on his or her likelihood of becoming a public charge at any time in the future, as set forth in the Immigration and Nationality Act. The final rule addresses U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) authority to permit an alien to submit a public charge bond in the context of adjustment of status applications. The rule also makes nonimmigrant aliens who have received certain public benefits above a specific threshold generally ineligible for extension of stay and change of status.While the rule has already sparked a legal challenge from two counties in California, specious arguments that it is justifiable because “our ancestors” had no access to social assistance programs have proliferated online:These arguments ignore the fact that emigrating to the United States was vastly less restricted prior to (and even in the years following) the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882; as one advocacy group, the American Immigration Council, noted in a 2016 report, “A growing, increasingly industrialized nation needed workers, and immigration was ‘encouraged and virtually unfettered.’ Potential immigrants did not have to obtain visas at U.S. consulates before entering the country.”Some states offered incentives to entice new immigrants to settle in their region:Although immigrants often settled near ports of entry, a large number did find their way inland. Many states, especially those with sparse populations, actively sought to attract immigrants by offering jobs or land for farming. Many immigrants wanted to move to communities established by previous settlers from their homelands.The Homestead Act of 1862, which in a mighty case of wealth redistribution took land stolen from indigenous Americans and gave it to settlers, included new immigrants by design:A homesteader had only to be the head of a household or at least 21 years of age to claim a 160 acre parcel of land. Settlers from all walks of life including newly arrived immigrants, farmers without land of their own from the East, single women and former slaves came to meet the challenge of “proving up” and keeping this “free land”. Each homesteader had to live on the land, build a home, make improvements and farm for 5 years before they were eligible to “prove up”. A total filing fee of $18 was the only money required, but sacrifice and hard work exacted a different price from the hopeful settlers. […]With application and receipt in hand, the homesteader then returned to the land to begin the process of building a home and farming the land, both requirements for “proving” up at the end of five years. When all requirements had been completed and the homesteader was ready the take legal possession, the homesteader found two neighbors or friends willing to vouch for the truth of his or her statements about the land’s improvements and sign the “proof” document.Anti-immigrant commentary online also fails to account for the existence of other social assistance programs in the United States since the country’s beginnings; as Stefan Riesenfeld, who would become a professor emeritus of law at the University of California-Berkeley, wrote in 1955:….It is still of interest not only as an important milepost on the road of progress but as an irrefutable proof of the fact that society’s concern for its less fortunate members is one of the cornerstones of the American democratic tradition.The American colonies first adopted the practice as an adaptation of England’s Poor Laws of 1601, which set aside funds to assist British subjects affected by an economic depression. As Virginia Commonwealth University’s Social Welfare History Project reported in 2011:Essentially, the laws distinguished three major categories of dependents: the vagrant, the involuntary unemployed, and the helpless. The laws also set forth ways and means for dealing with each category of dependents. Most important, the laws established the parish (i.e.,local government), acting through an overseer of the poor appointed by local officials, as the administrative unit for executing the law.The poor laws gave the local government the power to raise taxes as needed and use the funds to build and maintain almshouses; to provide indoor relief (i.e., cash or sustenance) for the aged, handicapped and other worthy poor; and the tools and materials required to put the unemployed to work.A report published by the National Association of Social Workers in 2013 pointed out that colonial communities — themselves immigrants — adopted similar programs:As early as 1632, town authorities assigned “overseers of the poor” to investigate poverty and problems such as physical and mental disabilities, crime, or vagrancy. Their tasks were to assess need, collect and distribute funds (from a combination of taxes, private donations, church collections), and decide the fates of needy or deviant townspeople. Work was required of all, and so almsgiving (poor relief) was meager, since people believed that it discouraged work and contributed to immorality. War veterans were exceptions: from as early as 1616, they, their survivors, and their dependents were allotted pensions, and by 1777 almost every colony had veterans’ benefits.Even closer to the 20th century, it was still not uncommon for local governments to offer specialized pension programs covering teachers or members of their police and fire departments. According to the Social Security Administration:The teachers’ pension plan of New Jersey, which was established in 1896, is probably the oldest retirement plan for government employees. By the early 1900’s, a number of municipalities and local governments had set up retirement plans for police officers and fire fighters. New York State and New York City set up retirement systems for their employees in 1920-the same year that the Civil Service Retirement System was set up for Federal employees.Companies in the railroad and manufacturing industry, among others, also implemented retirement programs for their workers following the Industrial Revolution. The United States federal government, however, brought assistance programs to the federal level beginning in 1935 with the passage of the Social Security Act in August 1935, in response to the effects of the Great Depression — a system buoyed by immigrants.
|
1374
|
Brexit regulatory uncertainty 'threatens UK med tech'.
|
Regulatory uncertainty in the wake of Brexit could leave Britain’s multi-billion-pound medical technology industry out in the cold, with separate regulatory systems threatening exports and jobs.
|
true
|
Health News
|
That is the warning from the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IME), which on Wednesday became the latest group to highlight the problem of regulatory uncertainty once Britain leaves the European Union. As Reuters reported last month, industries from aerospace to pharmaceuticals and chemicals fear Brexit may create a regulatory vacuum. In a new report, the IME called on the British government to harmonize its post-Brexit rules with EU regulations on medical devices - a category covering everything from heart stents to walking aids - or risk losing billions of pounds in exports. “Leaving the EU without the UK medical technology industry suffering considerable long-term damage, particularly for small businesses, will be a huge challenge,” said Helen Meese, IME’s head of healthcare. “As part of the UK’s Brexit deal, it is vital that the UK is able to maintain continuity with the EU CE certification processes, and enable UK manufacturers to export medical devices into the 100 billion euros European med tech market.” The EU’s system of CE marks offers a single validation for medical devices across the 28-nation bloc, in a similar way that the European Medicines Agency gives an EU-wide license for drugs. British firms would be excluded from this after Brexit unless there was a UK-EU deal for some kind of mutual recognition. Britain’s medical technology sector has annual turnover of 17 billion pounds ($22 billion), with 3,000 firms supporting 90,000 jobs, according to the IME.
|
41004
|
Researchers at the Erasmus Medical Center claim to have found an antibody against coronavirus.
|
Researchers in the Netherlands have released research, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, on an antibody against the new coronavirus.
|
true
|
online
|
Doctors in India have been successful in treating coronavirus with a combination of drugs (Lopinavir, Retonovir, Oseltamivir along with Chlorphenamine) and are going to suggest the same medicine globally. India’s ministry of health has advised that the anti-HIV drugs, Lopinavir and Retonovir, are used in some groups of Covid-19 patients. But it is unclear how successful this treatment has been. The other two drugs from the claim are not mentioned in their guidance. Researchers at the Erasmus Medical Center claim to have found an antibody against coronavirus. Researchers in the Netherlands have released research, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, on an antibody against the new coronavirus. A 103 year-old Chinese grandmother has made a full recovery from Covid-19 after being treated for 6 days in Wuhan, China This has been widely reported in the media. Apple has reopened all 42 China stores. Correct. On 13 March 2020, Apple announced that it had reopened all 42 stores in mainland China after a closure of almost six weeks. Cleveland Clinic developed a Covid-19 test that gives results in hours, not days. The number of new cases in South Korea is declining. Italy is hit hard, experts say, only because they have the oldest population in Europe. Whilst it is true that an older population has contributed to a high number of deaths in Italy, it may not be the sole reason. Scientists in Israel are likely to announce the development of a coronavirus vaccine. Scientists in Israel and elsewhere are working on developing a vaccination to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus, but it won’t be ready for the public for over a year. Three Maryland coronavirus patients fully recovered and are able to return to everyday life. Correct. On 13 March 2020, Montgomery County, Maryland confirmed that three residents who previously had the virus no longer tested positive. A network of Canadian scientists are making excellent progress in Covid-19 research. At least one group of Canadian scientists has recently announced some progress in understanding Covid-19. A San Diego biotech company is developing a Covid-19 vaccine in collaboration with Duke University and National University of Singapore. Tulsa County's first positive Covid-19 case has recovered. This individual has had two negative tests, which is the indicator of recovery. Correct, this patient has recovered according to official Tulsa County sources. Two negative tests is one of three official indicators of recovery among people with Covid-19 (who showed symptoms). All seven patients who were getting treated for Covid-19 at Safdarjung hospital in New Delhi have recovered. There is a news story reporting that seven patients in this hospital in New Delhi had recovered. However, these were not the only Covid-19 patients in the city. Plasma from newly recovered patients from Covid -19 can treat others infected by Covid-19. This is being used as a treatment in some countries, but clinical trials have not yet proved that this is effective. Claim 1 of 15
|
29083
|
Coca-Cola used to contain cocaine.
|
So, yes, at one time there was cocaine in Coca-Cola. But before you’re tempted to run off claiming Coca-Cola turned generations of drinkers into dope addicts, consider the following: back in 1885 it was far from uncommon to use cocaine in patent medicines (which is what Coca-Cola was originally marketed as) and other medical potions. When it first became general knowledge that cocaine could be harmful, the backroom chemists who comprised Coca-Cola at the time (long before it became the huge company we now know) did everything they could with the technology they had available at the time to remove every trace of cocaine from the beverage. What was left behind (until the technology improved enough for it all to be removed) wasn’t enough to give a fly a buzz.
|
mixture
|
Cokelore, classic urban legends, coca-cola, cocaine
|
Coca-Cola was named back in 1885 for its two “medicinal” ingredients: extract of coca leaves and kola nuts. Just how much cocaine was originally in the formulation is hard to determine, but the drink undeniably contained some cocaine in its early days. Frederick Allen describes the public attitude towards cocaine that existed as Coca-Cola’s developers worked on perfecting their formula in 1891: The first stirrings of a national debate had begun over the negative aspects of cocaine, and manufacturers were growing defensive over charges that use of their products might lead to “cocainism” or the “cocaine habit”. The full-throated fury against cocaine was still a few years off, and Candler and Robinson were anxious to continue promoting the supposed benefits of the coca leaf, but there was no reason to risk putting more than a tiny bit of coca extract in their syrup. They cut the amount to a mere trace. Allen also explains that cocaine continued to be an ingredient in the syrup in order to protect the trade name “Coca-Cola”: But neither could Candler take the simple step of eliminating the fluid extract of coca leaves from the formula. Candler believed that his product’s name had to be descriptive, and that he must have at least some by-product of the coca leaf in the syrup (along with some kola) to protect his right to the name Coca-Cola. Protecting the name was critical. Candler had no patent on the syrup itself. Anyone could make an imitation. But no one could put the label “Coca-Cola” on an imitation so long as Candler owned the name. The name was the thing of real value, and the registered trademark was its only safeguard. Coca leaves had to stay in the syrup. How much cocaine was in that “mere trace” is impossible to say, but we do know that by 1902 it was as little as 1/400 of a grain of cocaine per ounce of syrup. Coca-Cola didn’t become completely cocaine-free until 1929, but there was scarcely any of the drug left in the drink by then: By Heath’s calculation, the amount of ecgonine [an alkaloid in the coca leaf that could be synthesized to create cocaine] was infinitesimal: no more than one part in 50 million. In an entire year’s supply of 25-odd million gallons of Coca-Cola syrup, Heath figured, there might be six-hundredths of an ounce of cocaine.
|
36870
|
A long-running rumor that Hillary Clinton once said that nurses were glorified babysitters or overpaid maids (depending on the version) resurfaced during the 2016 presidential contest.
|
Hillary Clinton: Nurses Are Glorified Babysitters
|
unproven
|
Politics
|
There are a number of different versions of Hillary Clinton’s commentary on nurses — but we couldn’t verify the authenticity of any of them. Clinton has been quoted as saying that “nurses are glorified babysitters” or “nurses are overpaid maids” or “nurses are overpaid and uneducated.” Although different, all of these comments carry the same message: nurses are under skilled, overvalued and overpaid. These rumors appear on message boards like All Nurses going all the way back to her first presidential bid in 2008. While many posts question whether or not Clinton actually said it, one such forum post is a little clearer, and is the only one that actually provides a source: I remember reading an article back when I worked in the neuro ICU where Hillary Clinton was quoted to say that nurses are under educated and over paid. I remember the nurses were so furious about it and posted the article of the pittsburgh post newspaper on the bulletin board so everyone could read it. This was during the 90’s so there is not internet documentation but you will find many nurses that remember it. We scoured the Pittsburgh Post archives (the paper is now the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) for the source of the quote, but our search returned zero hits. During that search, however, we found a transcript of a 1993 town hall speech that Clinton delivered to the Democratic Governors Association in Woodstock, Illinois, while she was advocating for healthcare reform as first lady. In the speech, Clinton made a number of general statements about nurses, doctors and the healthcare system that could have been spun (right or wrong) into a commentary about nurses being “overpaid and undereducated.” In reference to nurses (and other medical professionals) having to earn their salaries Clinton said: We can no longer write a blank check for health care in this country. We will have to ask everyone — workers, employers, doctors, nurses, other health care providers, hospitals — to do their part. We’ll have to tell very other aspect of the health care industry that it can no longer expect to be raising its prices and profits growing at two to three to four to five to eight times the rate of inflation. We’re going to tell workers that if they do not do their part to be responsible users of health care, then we will never be able to adequately to rein-in costs. Clinton’s comments don’t exactly match the notorious commentary on nurses, but they could be shoehorned into the general idea that Clinton viewed nurses and doctors as being overpaid at the time. Clinton spoke to training and education for nurses at one point after she said that nurses spend half their time filling out forms: Doctors and nurses will finally be able to do what they were trained and educated to do — keeping people healthy, not filling out forms Again, the quote doesn’t exactly fit the commentary on nurses, but it relates generally to education and training of nurses. Finally, Clinton made one last references to doctors and nurses in her speech that relates generally to nursing wages and/or education: That is one of the most cost-effective things we can do — to encourage doctors and nurses and others to pay off their loans, to be forgiven for their loans, if they will go into areas that need their help. There is hardly a program that is more worthy of consideration than that, and it will be reinvigorated after being allowed basically to die on the vine over the last 12 years. If we make sure that all of our people are covered by integrated delivery networks like Governor Dean and others are talking about, then nobody, no matter where they live, will be without access to decent care. So, although the Clinton town hall speech from 1993 doesn’t exactly fit the narrative that she believes nurses are overpaid and uneducated, that’s the closest thing we could find. And, for what it’s worth, Clinton gave a glowing statement about the role of nurses in the healthcare community when the American Nurses Association endorsed her during the 2016 campaign: “Across the country, nurses provide vital medical care to countless Americans every year. They care for our families and friends, they comfort us in times of uncertainty and grief, and they maintain continuously high standards of medical practice. You won’t find a harder-working, more dedicated, and more trusted group of professionals anywhere. “As President, I will always stand with America’s nurses in the fight to finally achieve universal, affordable health care and fight against any efforts to roll back the protections and coverage of the Affordable Care Act. I will always stand with American workers to protect their rights and safety on the job. And I will fight to ensure that patients get the very best care, including by addressing the looming nursing shortage, investing substantially in tackling America’s substance use disorder crisis, and finally taking mental health as seriously as we do physical health.” Of course, that doesn’t mean that Clinton didn’t once call nurses glorified babysitters, overpaid maids or said that they were “over paid and under educated” — but we couldn’t find any proof that she actually said those things, either.
|
8915
|
Bayer faces fourth U.S. Roundup cancer trial in Monsanto's hometown.
|
Bayer AG is set to face a fourth U.S. jury trial over allegations that its Roundup weed killer causes cancer, with four cancer patients in the hometown of its agricultural subsidiary Monsanto scheduled to begin making their case on Friday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The lawsuit marks the first multi-plaintiff trial in the litigation over whether glyphosate, Roundup’s active ingredient, is carcinogenic, and is the first trial outside of California. It is being held in St. Louis, where Monsanto was headquartered before Bayer bought the company in a $63 billion deal in 2018. Three consecutive juries found the company liable for causing cancer with damages of tens of millions of dollars awarded to each plaintiff. Bayer is appealing those verdicts. Court-appointed mediator Ken Feinberg has put the number of Roundup cancer claimants at more than 75,000 while Bayer said the claims it has been served with in court were below 50,000. Bayer’s share price has tumbled since the first verdict in August 2018 but the stock rose 3% on Friday after Bloomberg reported a possible out-of-court settlement with some plaintiffs that could lead to a total payout of about $10 billion. While traders said the market likes the idea of Bayer settling the litigation, some cautioned that the prospect of a comprehensive deal remained uncertain. Analysts have estimated the size of any such settlement at $8-$12 billion. While most plaintiffs’ lawyers have agreed to postpone trials pending negotiations, some have decided to pursue their clients’ day in court. The case in Missouri’s Circuit Court for the 22nd Judicial Circuit of the City of St. Louis is scheduled to last several weeks, with both sides presenting extensive scientific evidence through expert witnesses. Bayer denies all allegations that Roundup or glyphosate causes cancer, saying decades of independent studies have shown the world’s most widely used weed killer to be safe for human use and noting that regulators around the world have approved the product. “At the end of the day, this trial should come down to the weight of the science, and we remain confident in the extensive scientific record and regulatory assessments that support the safety of our glyphosate-based herbicides and that they do not cause cancer,” the company said in a statement. Several court cases have been postponed by both parties in the past to expedite settlement talks. By pursuing the St. Louis trail The Miller Firm LLC, a key player in the litigation, is seeking to increase pressure on Bayer. The case involves the claims of Bryce Batiste from Louisiana, Ann Meeks from Florida, Glen Ashelman from Pennsylvania and Christopher Wade, a St. Louis resident. All four have been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a blood cell cancer that plaintiffs in the litigation allege is caused by Roundup. Some legal experts said Bayer could benefit from a home advantage in the St. Louis trial, where Monsanto has century-old roots. But juries in the city are also known to dole out massive damages awards against large corporations.
|
34096
|
A CVS drug store refused a customer's Puerto Rican driver's license when he was asked to show ID and demanded immigration papers.
|
What's true: A CVS employee in West Lafayette, Indiana, mistakenly refused to accept a customer's Puerto Rican driver's license as a valid form of identification. What's undetermined: The customer claims that CVS demanded to see a visa and confronted him on his immigration status. CVS said that it was not able to substantiate this accusation in its investigation and that it might have been the result of a misunderstanding stemming from the employee's initial mistake.
|
mixture
|
Politics
|
Drug store chain CVS apologized after employees in West Lafayette, Indiana, mistakenly refused to accept a college student’s Puerto Rican driver’s license when he tried to purchase cold medicine in late October 2019, prompting snowballing internet outrage that became national news. The incident resulted from pervasive ignorance of the fact that Puerto Rico is a U.S. territory and its residents are Americans. In an impassioned Facebook post that went viral, the student’s mother lashed out, writing, “For those of you who don’t know, we are a United States Territory,” Arlene Payano Burgos wrote in frustration on Oct. 25, 2019. “Everyone born in Puerto Rico is born a United States Citizen. Puerto Rican men and women have served in every major war that the United States has fought in, including the American Revolution. Puerto Rican soldiers have served and died fighting for ‘The great American Nation. '” That post went viral and has been seen and shared thousands of times, prompting CVS to both apologize and state that employees will be reminded that identifications issued in U.S. territories like Puerto Rico are valid. The incident started when Purdue University junior Jose Guzman Payano, an engineering major, fell ill and went to CVS in search of the cold medication Mucinex on Oct. 25, 2019. Because some cold medicines like Mucinex contain dextromethorphan, which can be abused, CVS requires that anyone seeking to purchase the product must provide identification. When Guzman Payano did so, the CVS employee mistakenly refused his driver’s license because it was issued in Puerto Rico. When he asked to speak to a store manager, he got the same response. CVS took responsibility for the employees’ error, apologized, stated the incident was isolated, and noted that all employees will be reminded that valid forms of ID include licenses issued in U.S. territories like Puerto Rico. After investigating the incident, CVS stated it found no evidence that its employees interrogated Guzman Payano about his immigration status but rather that, that aspect of the accusation was the result of a misunderstanding. The chain of events was as follows: In an emotional Facebook post on Oct. 25, 2019, Burgos wrote that her son called her after attempting to buy cold medicine at CVS, telling her his Puerto Rico-issued identification was refused. Burgos wrote, “When [the cashier] saw the license she then asked him for his visa, and started confronting him about his immigration status.” Burgos continued, “I guess I should be thankful that he wasn’t thrown in the back of an ICE van and interrogated, or worse. I can’t help to be ANGRY, OUTRAGED, and DISGUSTED. The current issues we are experiencing in the United States related to immigration, ICE raids, and rampant racism are directly fueled disgracefully by President Trump. What happened to my son today is not unlike what many other families have had to face since Trump was sworn into office and it’s completely unacceptable. Enough is enough. The men that signed the Declaration of Independence stated that all men are created equal. Our founding fathers must be rolling over in their graves.” After going viral the story was picked up by the local news media and before long it became national news. Dystopian headlines reported a chilling event in which a routine trip to the drugstore turned into a “show-me-your-papers” nightmare, playing on underlying societal anxiety and anger over President Donald Trump’s hostile stance on immigration. The story sparked such headlines as, “CVS rejects Purdue student’s Puerto Rican ID, asks for immigration papers to buy cold medicine.” Another read, “Student: CVS workers rejected Puerto Rico ID, asked for visa.” Speaking to the Lafayette Journal & Courier, Guzman Payano said he ended up with a case of bronchitis and was only able to get medicine for it when a friend drove him to another drugstore. Guzman Payano, who has been in West Lafayette since the start of the fall 2017 semester, said he was a weekly customer at the CVS store at 720 Northwestern Ave., on the ground floor for the Fuse building. It was close to campus, he said, and he’d be able to pick up a few other things while he was there. He said he rang up the items in a self-scan checkout and waited for a store clerk when the machine’s screen noted that an ID check was required for the cold medicine. When he showed his ID – one that met the Real ID criteria – a clerk told him it wasn’t enough. “She said I needed a visa,” Guzman Payano said. “I tried to explain that Puerto Rico was part of the United States. I didn’t need a visa or anything. She just said the same thing three times.” He said he had his U.S. passport, so he showed that, with no luck. He said the store employee told him he still needed to see some sort of immigration status before he could buy the cold medicine. “That’s when I realized what was happening,” he said. “It wasn’t worth talking anymore.” When questioned about this aspect of the story, CVS sent Snopes a follow-up statement acknowledging that U.S. passports are also valid forms of identification. But employees typically don’t handle customers’ passports and will instead ask the customer to locate the page with the needed information, the store said, which may have been interpreted by Guzman Payano as the employee demanding his immigration information. “CVS accepts US passports as valid identification,” the CVS statement said. “Our employees will typically ask a customer using a US passport to open it to the page showing date of birth so that employees are not opening it themselves and viewing other personal information. We regret the reason for this request may have been misunderstood by our customer in West Lafayette.” Burgos seemed to put a close to the affair with a Nov. 3 Facebook post thanking people for their support but also admonishing others not to take their anger out on CVS employees: My family and I are so grateful for the outpouring of support and love we have received following my post regarding the incident that happened with my son at CVS. I can’t thank everyone enough for that but we would like to ask that we all remember to treat each other with respect. Furthermore I ask that no one harass or threaten any CVS staff in relation to this incident. Let’s all be the better person in this situation. Thank you all again for the support and love for my family. Puerto Ricans have been U.S. citizens since 1917, but a 2017 poll found that almost half of Americans were unaware of that fact.
|
9317
|
Artificial intelligence can predict Alzheimer’s 6 years earlier than medics, study finds
|
This brief, 375-word story published by Fox News was sourced from The Sun. It describes a study using an artificial intelligence algorithm to recognize patterns from brain scans. The story at least warns readers that because of the small study size (just 40 subjects), larger studies would be needed to know if the reported “100% accuracy” for predicting Alzheimer’s six years before diagnosis, can actually be replicated. But beyond that, the story is full of holes and canned quotes. The news release was far more informative. Early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s is a popular research area at this time. Stories about it often highlight the presumption that “catching” Alzheimer’s early will help doctors slow or stop the disease “before it starts.” Although this may have intuitive appeal there is currently no evidence to suggest this is currently feasible, or even possible in the near future. It’s an important point that should be made in all stories touching on both early diagnosis and “prevention” of this degenerative neurologic disease. This sort of framing runs a huge risk of misleading patients and their caregivers and — perhaps more disturbing — providing false hope based on what are usually preliminary findings that are by no means conclusive.
|
false
|
alzheimer's disease
|
Cost is not mentioned. Nor that the type of scan was specifically a PET scan. According to this survey of six Veteran Affairs hospitals, the cost of a PET scan using FDG is approximately $1,900. Without insurance (and without the FDG tracer) CostHelper lists the cost of a brain PET scan as $6,700. Using the AI would presumably add additional costs. The story highlights a single benefit: “The [artificial intelligence algorithm] was able to identify dementia in 40 patients an average of six years before they were formally diagnosed … with 100% accuracy” But who these patients were, and how they were chosen is not mentioned. Nor is it mentioned that the specificity was 82%. In other words, nearly 1 in 5 subjects (18%) were predicted to develop dementia who were never diagnosed with it (aka a “false positive test”). Not mentioned. As with all screening tests, there is a risk of a false-positive or a false-negative result. Either can create anxiety, confusion, and incorrect medical treatment. Regarding the PET scan itself, the American College of Radiology lists the following: The small circular opening of the scanner can elicit anxiety in some patients that may require sedation or stopping the scan. Other than selectively choosing to highlight the dramatic 100% sensitivity of the test (but neglecting to mention the 82% specificity mentioned above in benefits) the story doesn’t mention some key context: Not only was the study group very small (n=40) it was also very select. All the subjects had already been referred to a memory clinic and their attending neurologist had been concerned enough to order a brain scan. That means it’s completely unknown how well this AI model would predict Alzheimer’s disease in the general public. The story at least included quotes from people who made it clear that the results of this small, pilot study need to be refuted or confirmed by larger studies, but it should have been made clear to readers the primary reason for this caution is the highly select/non-representative nature of the study population. Also, the story should have explained that to definitely diagnose Alzheimer’s, an autopsy is needed (or biopsy–rarely done). In this study, only one patient’s diagnosis was confirmed by autopsy. The story does not disease monger. However, we found this sentence problematic and think it’s worth noting: Early detection of Alzheimer’s could open the door to new ways of slowing down or even halting the progression of the disease Although the tone is speculative, it still erroneously suggests that early detection could result in slowing or stopping Alzheimer’s. At this time there is no treatment — regardless of the timing of the diagnosis — that can significantly slow or definitively stop this progressive neurologic disease. The story included quotes that were collected by the Science Media Centre, yet this wasn’t disclosed. The other quote was from the news release, which also wasn’t attributed. There is a lack of proven alternatives, though the story could have provided some context on this by discussing other efforts underway to detect Alzheimer’s early on. It’s clear from the story that this machine-learning technology is not yet available and needs further study. It’s unclear from the story if this is the first time such an algorithm has been used to “predict” the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s diseases or other diseases. Some context was greatly needed. One of the quotes came directly from the news release but was not attributed. It’s worth noting that the news release was superior to the story in terms of useful details.
|
27136
|
Texas Governor Greg Abbott posted a tweet falsely claiming a convicted child rapist was an illegal immigrant.
|
Greg Abbott posted a tweet that falsely characterized the citizenship status of a convict.
|
true
|
Politics
|
On 5 February 2019, Texas Governor Greg Abbott tweeted a link to a junk news site masquerading as the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) that bore the false headline “ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT RAPED HIS ONE MONTH OLD DAUGHTER, LEFT HER WITH 45 BROKEN BONES. PLEASE DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT”: This disgusting rape isn’t tolerated in Texas. We won’t deport him, just to have him return. Instead, he’ll spend the next 244 years in jail– which means life. It won’t be a pleasant stay. #txlege https://t.co/7AN5BHANwH — Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) February 6, 2019 Although Abbott’s commentary that “We won’t deport him” was true, it wasn’t for the reason he seemed to believe. Jeremy Desel, director of communications for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) told us in an email that according to TDCJ records, Patricio Medina, the man convicted of raping his infant daughter, was actually a U.S. citizen and not an “illegal immigrant.” Abbott’s tweet linked to an article from the disreputable “BBC-edition.com” website, a site that deceptively appropriated the identity of the real BBC, plagiarized a CBS News report about a horrifying crime, and embellished that report with a false headline about an illegal immigrant for exploitative clickbait purposes. On 10 October 2018, 27-year-old Patricio Medina of Waco, Texas, was sentenced to a total of 244 years in prison for sexually assaulting his daughter, who at the time was one month old. According to TDCJ inmate records, Medina’s prison sentenced was based on five counts associated with the rape. According to local news reports, Medina admitted in 2014 to sexually assaulting the infant while high on methamphetamine. The child suffered 45 broken bones as a result of the abuse and is now living with an adopted family, where she is reportedly doing well. Gov. Abbott’s inaccurate tweet was initially flagged by the local Houston television station KRIV. In a 12 February 2019 run-down, reporter Maria Salazar recounted that the information contained in Abbott’s tweet didn’t look right to her, and she couldn’t find any credible information about Medina’s being undocumented. So she contacted the TDCJ, who confirmed that Medina was in fact a U.S. citizen. “If you spend maybe five seconds on this web site you’d know something is wrong,” she said of the fake BBCweb site in a 12 February 2019 report: FOX 26 News is still waiting for #Texas Governor @GregAbbott_TX to respond with a comment after @MSalazarNews determined he shared a link to an article that falsely identified a convicted man’s immigration status. https://t.co/zBhFL5BTgO pic.twitter.com/zi33DxEICP — FOX26Houston (@FOX26Houston) February 12, 2019 We sent Abbott’s office questions asking whether he was aware he was promoting false information and why he hadn’t responded to KRIV’s report of his citing a bogus website. We have not yet received a response, and although Abbott posted the misleading tweet more than two weeks prior to this writing, he had yet to correct the record.
|
11272
|
New diet drug: Accidents may happen
|
This story discusses a new over-the-counter drug for weight loss, Alli, with little evidence about whether it works, and how much weight loss is expected. The story focuses on a side-effect of the drug, anal leakage. The story provides some explanation for the mode of action for this drug, interfering with fat absorption, as opposed to appetite suppression. It should have included some information about efficacy of Xenical, the prescription strength version of this drug, as a frame of reference. While the information provided in the story is important and useful to consumers considering the use of this product, it could have done a better job providing context in terms of prevalence of the risks and a little more detail on the benefits that might be gained from the use of this product.
|
mixture
|
The story failed to provide information about the cost of this product. It did mention the $50 starter kit price, but did not include information about the cost of continual use of this product. The enhanced weight loss that an individual may achieve with the use of Alli was reported to be 50% greater than if they followed a comparable weight loss diet without taking Alli. While the story did mention that this estimate of weight loss enhancement came from the manufacturer, information from an independent source would be of greater value to readers. And while the story included testimony from an individual who commented that they found the product helpful for staying on track and losing 20 pounds, the story did not include any estimate for the percentage of people who did, indeed, find this product sufficiently beneficial in terms of weight loss that they continue using it to attain their goal. Anal leakage, one side effect, was emphasized in the story. In addition, the story mentioned that the drug decreased absoprtion of fat soluble vitamins. Although the story did include an estimate for enhanced weight loss with this product and did mention that the estimate came from the drug company (GlaxoSmithKline) that makes the drug, it did not include any discussion of clinical studies that have been conducted with the drug. The focus of the story is one particular side effect, anal leakage, of the weight loss drug Alli. The story did not provide any estimate for the proportion of individuals who experience this side effect. The story does not engage in overt disease mongering. The story did turn to several sources, although one was from the drug company and another was promoting her book. The story discussed that this drug offers a dieter a slight edge; it alludes to other weight loss drugs, and, although mentioning low fat recipes supplied with the drug, the story did not adequately address the requirement of reduced caloric intake and/or increased caloric expenditure for weight loss. The story leads off with a statement that includes the information that Alli is an over-the counter weight loss drug. The story accurately reported that the over-the-counter drug Alli is a lower-dose version of the prescription drug Xenical. Does not appear to rely solely or largely on a press release.
|
|
13446
|
"Donald Trump Says Hillary Clinton’s energy agenda ""will cost the U.S. economy over $5 trillion"
|
"Trump said Clinton’s energy agenda ""will cost the U.S. economy over $5 trillion."" The Trump campaign said Trump was referring to one study that looked at how much it would cost to reach Clinton’s climate goal; it referred to a high-end, 30-year estimate of implementation costs. The study did not actually measure the effects on the economy. Critics of the plan say it will reduce GDP by as much as $2.5 trillion. Supporters say it actually will have a net-positive effect. Trump’s statement is not accurate."
|
false
|
National, Energy, Donald Trump,
|
"Donald Trump attacked Hillary Clinton on energy issues at a campaign stop in Virginia just two days before the two were set to go head-to-head at the first presidential debate. ""Hillary Clinton says she wants to put the miners out of work,"" he said. ""Clinton and Kaine also want to shut down shale, and shut down natural gas. The Clinton regulatory agenda will drive up electricity prices for Virginia families and will cost the U.S. economy over $5 trillion."" Trump’s claim about Clinton wanting to shut down natural gas production is not accurate, but what about his claim on the cost of her energy agenda? The claim is misleading as $5 trillion refers to the cost of implementation, not the cost to the economy. What’s more, the researcher who produced the figure told us the investment will actually help the economy. The $5 trillion figure The Trump campaign referred us to a 2016 working paper by Columbia Business School professor Geoffrey Heal entitled ""What Would it Take to Reduce US Greenhouse Gas Emissions 80% by 2050?"" Heal, who is in favor of climate change action, estimated a cost of $42 billion to $176 billion per year in required investment in production capacity, energy storage, energy transmission and battery-powered vehicles. On the low end, that comes out to $1.3 trillion over three decades and, on the high end, $5.3 trillion over three decades. This, however, does not refer to a loss in GDP, but rather the amount needed to update the U.S. energy system and technology infrastructure. ""It’s not a GDP loss at all,"" Heal told PolitiFact. ""This is infrastructure investment."" He pointed out that Trump and Clinton have both called for long-term infrastructure investment. Spending the $5 trillion on cutting emissions is a ""relatively inexpensive way with a good rate of return,"" Heal said, and the $5 trillion will have a ""multiplier"" effect that will help the economy become cleaner and more productive. Heal also told us to take his estimate with a grain of salt because there a lot of uncertainties, such as the price of technology. Overall, he actually supports Clinton’s ""sensible"" energy and climate change policies. ""She’s pushing for the right things,"" he said. ""I certainly don’t think they’ll bankrupt the country."" What’s more, it’s not entirely accurate to say 80 percent by 2050 is Clinton’s ""regulatory agenda."" Clinton has proposed various energy policies to cut carbon emissions by 30 percent in 2025 relative to 2005 levels. She said her plan will ""put the country on a path to cut emissions more than 80 percent by 2050,"" a goal established by President Barack Obama and found in this year’s Democratic Party Platform. In other words, the analysis offered by Heal doesn’t apply to her actual policies but an aspiration the Democrats share. A 2014 paper by the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project, which brings together energy researchers from around the world, found a similar result: an investment cost equivalent to about 1 percent of GDP. But the researchers note that this price tag is ""incremental"" and has a great level of uncertainty ""because they depend on assumptions about consumption levels, technology costs, and fossil fuel prices nearly 40 years into the future."" They also stipulate that the cost assumes little to no technological change nor does the estimate include benefits like avoided health and infrastructure costs. Economic cost of energy policies If we look at specific policies rather than a 30-year goal, the economic cost of Clinton’s energy agenda is dramatically less expensive. In a speech to the Shale Insight conference in Pennsylvania, Trump specified that the $5 trillion refers to the President Barack Obama’s Climate Action Plan and Clean Power Plan. Obama’s Climate Action Plan proposes new regulations, investments in renewable energy and international cooperation to cut carbon emissions. That plan includes the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan of 2015 (which requires power plants to reduce their 2005 emission levels by 32 percent within 25 years) and the Paris agreement (in which the Obama administration pledged to cut national 2005 emission levels by 28 percent within 20 years). Those plans are currently in limbo. The Supreme Court ruled in February 2016 to halt the Clean Power Plan’s implementation while the Paris agreement has yet to go into effect. Clinton has vowed to defend and implement Obama’s climate change policies, including the Clean Power Plan and the Paris climate agreement. Critics of these policies — namely the oil and gas industry, business groups and free market oriented think tanks — say they’ll impose costs on businesses and consumers alike. But these estimates do not come close to $5 trillion. According to a 2015 report by the conservative Heritage Foundation — which opposes the plan — the Clean Power Plan will lead to a loss of $2.5 trillion in GDP by 2030. Here’s table breaking down the estimates we found, all from groups that are opposed to the plans or that have concerns about them: Group Policy Estimated cost Year of analysis Heritage Foundation Clean Power Plan $2.5 trillion in GDP by 2030 2015 Heritage Foundation Climate Action Plan $1.47 trillion in national income by 2030 2013 Manufacturers Alliance for Productivity and Innovation Clean Power Plan $660 billion in GDP loss by 230 2016 American Action Forum, a center-right advocacy group Paris agreement and existing climate change-oriented regulations $562 billion by 2030* 2015 U.S. Chamber of Commerce Clean Power Plan $510 billion in GDP loss by 2030 2014 *American Action Forum estimated that altogether, existing climate change-geared regulations cost $28 billion annually while the Paris agreement, which kicks in 2020, would raise that number to $45 billion annually. Estimated benefits of climate change policies On the flip side, the Environmental Protection Agency and others argue the Clean Power Plan actually leads to economic gains when health and environmental benefits are included in the analysis. Curbing carbon emissions would reduce health hazards, such as asthma and heart attacks, associated with particle pollution, saving the public $34 to $54 billion per year by 2030, according to the EPA. Factoring in the EPA’s own projected costs of $8 billion per year, that’s an annual net gain of $26 billion to $46 billion. A 2016 cost-benefit analysis by Harvard researchers resulted in a figure in the same ballpark: a net $38 billion per year in net benefits by 2020. Meanwhile, the National Resources Defense Council had even rosier projections. The environmental group estimated that the Clean Power Plan would deliver benefits worth $55 billion to $93 billion, outweighing the costs of $7.3 billion to $8.8 billion. "" The Clinton campaign also pointed us to several papers on the cost of not reducing emissions. For examples, researchers estimated a 23 percent reduction in global incomes by 2100 if climate change is unmitigated. ""Climate change is a serious issue for the economy. It could inflict damages that will add up,"" Heal said. Our ruling Trump said Clinton’s energy agenda ""will cost the U.S. economy over $5 trillion."" The Trump campaign said Trump was referring to one study that looked at how much it would cost to reach Clinton’s climate goal; it referred to a high-end, 30-year estimate of implementation costs. The study did not actually measure the effects on the economy. Critics of the plan say it will reduce GDP by as much as $2.5 trillion. Supporters say it actually will have a net-positive effect. Trump’s statement is not accurate.
|
4859
|
Crumbling health bill dents McConnell image as top tactician.
|
When the banner Republican effort to scuttle and rewrite President Barack Obama’s health care law crumbled this week, the falling debris popped a hefty dent into Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s image as a dauntless legislative tactician three chess moves ahead of everyone else.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Barack Obama, Rand Paul, Health care reform, Statutes, Legislation, Politics, North America, Jerry Moran, Medicaid, Bills, Mitch McConnell, Mike Lee
|
His two attempts to craft legislation replacing Obama’s law have collapsed for lack of GOP support. Republican opposition seems likely to doom a vote next week on his Plan C, a bill simply repealing much of Obama’s statute. Along the way, conservative Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., accused McConnell of a “serious breach of trust” by telling moderates that proposed Medicaid cuts would not occur. His fellow Kentucky Republican, Sen. Rand Paul, was a constant thorn and the most vociferous opponent of McConnell’s effort. And Utah Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, gave party leaders little advance word when he and Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, deserted the bill late Monday, effectively killing it in the dark of night. “This has been a very, very challenging experience for all of us,” McConnell told reporters Tuesday. McConnell faced a difficult environment. Polls have consistently shown Obama’s statute was far more popular than the GOP effort to repeal it, making his bill a tough sell to colleagues. President Donald Trump’s dismal approval ratings and zigzagging engagement haven’t helped. And facing unbroken Democratic opposition, McConnell needed to win over at least 50 of the 52 GOP senators, a .962 batting average he’s been unable to achieve. “Mitch has a tough, tough job and frankly I cut him a lot of slack on this. He can only do so much,” said Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. Democrats, who often grudgingly marvel at McConnell’s moves, kept waiting for him to pull a rabbit from what turned out to be an empty hat. They said he overreached by turning a bill reshaping Obama’s law into one that also cut nearly $1 trillion in taxes over a decade and sliced almost $800 billion from Medicaid, the health care program for the poor, disabled and nursing home patients. They say he boxed himself in by rushing to deliver on his party’s seven-year-old overpromise to repeal Obama’s law. That proved an arduous task that angered tens of millions who’ve benefited from the statute, especially with much of McConnell’s work performed behind closed office doors. “I don’t have any sympathy for him,” said Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., his party’s No. 2 Senate leader. “I assume he felt duty-bound as the Republican leader” to pursue repeal of Obama’s law. But he said McConnell should have known that “rewriting the health care system of America on the fly and in secret was not going to work.” McConnell seemed to be trying to turn lemons into lemonade with next week’s likely rejection of a simple repeal of much of Obama’s law. By losing, GOP leaders would send a message to conservative voters that they tried to obliterate the law, while signaling to Republican senators that the votes aren’t there and it is time to move on. A senator for 33 years, the 75-year-old McConnell has a reputation for weaving compromises that avert onrushing political disasters. He cut several such deals during Obama’s years in the White House, including major budget pacts in 2011 and 2013. But once Donald Trump won the presidency and Republicans took House and Senate control this year, it became McConnell’s job to play offense. In particular, he is quarterback of the Senate GOP drive to repeal Obama’s law. But dismantling the law is not going to happen, at least in the immediate future. Assessing Democrats as unwilling to help them scrap Obama’s law — which they were — McConnell ignored them from the start. That tactic ignored his own advice from his 2016 memoir, “The Long Game,” in which he criticized Democrats for passing Obama’s 2010 statute “without regard for the views of the other side.” “Once you only have 52 votes and you try to do a bill just with Republicans, you set yourself up for a nearly impossible task,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. McConnell’s latest bill would cut Medicaid, letting insurers sell policies with negligible coverage and rolling back Obama taxes on the health care industry. Getting GOP votes for it is a Rubik’s cube-like problem because conservatives and moderates have mutually exclusive demands, like whether to slash Medicaid or erase Obama regulations protecting consumers. “You have first- and second-term twerps that think they know the solution to everything,” said former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., who retired in 2007. “This was always going to be a difficult process and I’m not sure how we would have handled it differently,” said No. 2 Senate GOP leader John Cornyn of Texas. Movement conservatives who have often accused McConnell of not being an aggressive enough champion of their causes do fault him. “Mitchcare collapses,” read a statement by Ken Cuccinelli, who heads the Senate Conservatives Fund, which has clashed with McConnell. Cuccinelli called the bill’s demise “an embarrassing defeat for someone who portrays himself as a strategic genius.”
|
4005
|
Georgia officials identify likely source of measles outbreak.
|
Georgia health officials say a family of five is the likely source of a measles outbreak in a metro Atlanta county that has sickened 11 people.
|
true
|
Atlanta, Measles, General News, Georgia, Public health
|
The Georgia Department of Public Health said Monday the family’s cases appear to have originated during travel out of the state. Two other families in Cobb County have been affected, and all 11 people were either not vaccinated or did not have a clear vaccination status. Health officials say they are continuing to notify people who may have been exposed and could face an increased risk of contracting the virus. Measles is highly contagious. The U.S. has experienced a resurgence of the illness that’s fueled by outbreaks in unvaccinated communities.
|
34696
|
Mr. Rogers' car was returned after the thieves who stole it realized it was his.
|
The legend tends to confirm a theory that many want to believe: that even bad people are sometimes swayed by good impulses.
|
unproven
|
Entertainment, crime, Grand Theft Auto, Mister Rogers
|
In 2003 the television world mourned the loss of Fred Rogers, the gentle and genial host who for over 30 years delivered lessons on love, kindness, and friendship to children on the television program Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood. Mr. Rogers’ show-opening “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” ditty, his daily on-camera donning of a cardigan sweater and comfortable shoes, and his tinkling Neighborhood Trolley were all familiar, reassuring icons to millions of children (and their parents). He was loved. And venerated. According to a widely-traveled tale, Mr. Rogers was so beloved a children’s host and had exerted so great a positive influence on the youth of the day that thieves returned his stolen car to him once they realized whose vehicle they’d made off with. Example: I read a story once about Mr. Rogers that just cemented his total coolness. One day his car was stolen in broad daylight while parked on the street in Pittsburgh. The evening news reported that Mr. Rogers car had been stolen. The next day, it was back in the same spot with a note that said, “Sorry, we didn’t know it was yours.” So far, the earliest printed reference to this the tale we’ve found comes from a March 1990 Wall Street Journal article about this television icon: Children aren’t the only ones with a soft spot for Mr. Rogers. Two weeks ago, his Oldsmobile sedan was stolen while he was babysitting for his grandson. After looking over papers and props he had left in the car, the thieves apparently realized who the owner was. Mr. Rogers found the car parked in front of his house a day or so later. All that was missing was a director’s chair with his name on it. That early version omits an element solidly worked into all later tellings: the note left by the thieves which says “Sorry, we didn’t know it was yours.” Also of interest is where the vehicle is said to have been acquired — the account says the theft occurred while the television star was babysitting his grandson, a detail that would tend to place the purloining in a residential neighborhood. Later renditions (such as the one given in a February 2003 Plain Dealer article) assert that thieves absconded with the car from the parking lot of the Pittsburgh television station where Rogers worked. As to how the thieves purportedly found out whose jalopy they’d made off with, the earliest version says they worked that out for themselves via papers and props left in the vehicle, while some later tellings (such as the one given in a September 2004 St. Louis Post-Dispatch article) assert they gleaned that information from local news broadcast or newspaper reports. Renditions of this story vary in other details as well. Sometimes there is one car thief; in other versions two or three. Where the car is stolen from and where it’s returned to also changes. When the theft occurred is similarly up for grabs: A 1990 recounting of the legend asserted it happened “two weeks ago,” while versions circulated after the television star’s passing stated the crime took place “a year or two before Rogers’ death” (which would place the incident in 2001 or 2002). Additionally, mention is sometimes made of the car’s being returned in better condition than it was when it was taken (e.g., “completely cleaned and detailed”). The legend tends to confirm a theory that many want to believe: that even bad people are sometimes swayed by good impulses. In this case the car thieves thought better of their act once they realized whom they’d stolen from — while they might feel okay about pilfering a car belonging to a stranger, they could not steal from the man who had played such a large and reassuring role in their childhoods. It’s a great story, but it’s doubtful the incident ever happened. While Fred Rogers was interviewed countless times during his life, we’ve yet to happen upon a case of his telling the story himself. Neither have we encountered any instances of his being asked by an interviewer about it, even within articles that presented the tale as an anecdote about him. (His representatives also told us that although they were familiar with the legend, they could not verify that the event it describes had actually taken place.) It’s interesting to note that a similar “returned item” tale has been told of Scottish poet James Montgomery: [Fenster, 2006] The poet had many valuable items stolen from his home in 1812. One of them, a treasured desk, was returned with this note from a member of the burglary gang: “Honored sir: When we robbed your house, we did not know that you wrote such beautiful verses as you do. I send this desk back. It was my share of the booty, and I hope you and God will forgive me.” Although the returned car legend highlights the positive associations many felt and still feel about this man, other rumors about Mr. Rogers are far less acclamatory, such as claims that he was a sniper with many kills to his credit, or that he was a convicted child molester, or that he wore sweaters to conceal large tattoos on his arms. Each of those tales is false.
|
3626
|
Hawaii wind farm allowed to increase incidental bat deaths.
|
Hawaii state and federal agencies have approved an energy company’s request to increase the number of allowed incidental bat deaths at its Maui wind farm, officials said.
|
true
|
Wildlife, General News, Hawaii, Environment, Bats, Wailuku
|
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the state Department of Land and Natural Resources accepted Auwahi Wind Energy’s request to increase the number of allowed hoary bat deaths to 140 by 2037, The Maui News reported Friday. Auwahi Wind Energy submitted the amendments to the incidental take license and habitat conservation plan to federal and state agencies, officials said. The number is up from the 21 bats in its original permit received in 2012. The Department of Land and Natural Resources accepted the final environmental impact statement, the state department said. However, the federal decision must be published in the Federal Register to be made final. Auwahi was one of four Hawaii wind energy projects that applied for a federal permit, officials said. Its request was prepared and signed Sept. 3. The federal agency is expected to issue separate final decisions on each of the four requests through publication in the Federal Register, but the decisions have yet to be published. The risk that the wind turbines pose to bats in Hawaii “was largely unknown and underestimated,” Auwahi said in its original application. There is not enough information to determine the impact wind farms have on bat populations overall, experts confirmed. “We will certainly keep an eye on actual bat take numbers and oppose any additional increase in allowed take since there are known operational changes that would reduce the take to zero or close to it,” said Rob Weltman, president of the Sierra Club Maui Group. Auwahi experimented with changing turbine speeds, and fewer deaths at certain speeds were reported, Sierra Club officials said. Auwahi has worked to reforest bat habitat on Maui, sponsored U.S. Geological Survey bat research, conducted predator control and petrel burrow monitoring, and funded bat pens in the national park, the company said. American Electric Power acquired the west Maui wind farm from Sempra Renewables earlier this year, officials said. ___ Information from: The Maui News, http://www.mauinews.com
|
3664
|
Governor outlines effort to bolster mental health services.
|
Pennsylvania’s governor announced a broad effort Thursday to improve mental health services and change public perceptions of mental illness.
|
true
|
Mental health, Opioids, Health, General News, Pennsylvania, Tom Wolf
|
Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf rolled out an initiative that includes more resources and a public outreach campaign, saying the approach was inspired by a similar strategy the state has deployed in response to the opioid crisis. “For those struggling with their mental health, we have one message: your mental health matters and it’s OK to reach out for help,” Wolf said. Wolf said the initiative may need additional funding but said it was probably too early in the information-gathering stage to be seeking money from the Legislature in next month’s annual gubernatorial budget address. “I want to end the silence because I want to end the stigma,” Wolf said at news conference. “The second step in this, of course, is ensuring that every Pennsylvanian has access to the care they need.” The campaign, “Reach Out PA: Your Mental Health Matters,” includes developing new state regulations on health insurance coverage, coordinating services for physical and behavioral health, analyzing pay and other factors for those who provide mental health services, and finding ways to get more social workers into schools. Wolf will host a discussion about mental illness Friday at Muhlenberg College in Allentown, part of an attempt to reduce the stigma that can be a barrier to mental health treatment. Other aspects of the program include training more state workers in suicide prevention, assessing Department of Military and Veterans Affairs resources regarding post-traumatic stress disorder and self-harm, and widening Aging Department information and training about dementia. The County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania welcomed Wolf’s focus on mental health but said state financial support has lagged while the demand for services has grown. Executive Director Lisa Schaefer said funding for services, beds and other efforts are her group’s top priority, but urged the state to continue to give counties flexibility about how money is spent for mental health and drug and alcohol services for Medicaid recipients.
|
26313
|
Gates Foundation stands to make nearly £31.5 billion on a coronavirus vaccine in U.K.
|
The £31.5 billion figure was calculated by multiplying an estimated cost per vaccine times the population of the United Kingdom. The estimated vaccine cost comes from a Daily Mail story, but we could find no other evidence to back it up. The Gates Foundation has pledged millions of dollars to companies developing potential coronavirus vaccines. There is no evidence that the charity stands to profit from them. The source of the Facebook post is a website that has published false conspiracy theories in the past.
|
false
|
Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"claims about the Gates Foundation’s connection to the novel coronavirus know no borders. In a May 6 Facebook post, an alternative-health page and website called Revive Yourself claimed the philanthropic foundation of billionaires Bill and Melinda Gates stands to profit from the development of a COVID-19 vaccine in the United Kingdom. ""At £477 per vaccine, multiplied by 65 million people in the UK, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are on course to make just under £31,500,000,000 from Great Britain alone. Let that sink in,"" the page wrote. ""And people still ask who benefits from this virus & lock down?"" That’s $38.4 billion in American dollars, by the way. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The image in the post is a screenshot of a May 6 tweet from Ryan Martin, who runs Revive Yourself. The website publishes misleading claims about vaccines alongside recommendations for essential oils and supplements. (Screenshot from Facebook) We’ve fact-checked several and misleading claims about the Gates Foundation’s connection to the coronavirus pandemic — Martin even included one of the claims in his Facebook post. So we wanted to take a closer look at the post, which he also published on his site. The Gates Foundation has pledged millions of dollars to companies developing potential novel coronavirus vaccines. There is no evidence that the Gates Foundation stands to profit from these efforts. The claim has been widely shared in conspiratorial groups on Facebook. The assertion that the Gates Foundation stands to make money from a potential coronavirus vaccine originated on a website with a track record of publishing misinformation. We reached out to Martin for evidence to back up his Facebook post and blog entry. He sent us a YouTube video from Zed Phoenix, who describes himself as an ""investigative journalist, author and broadcaster."" In the video, which has more than 75,000 views, Phoenix makes the same claim about the Gates Foundation making money off a coronavirus vaccine. As evidence, Phoenix points to an article on BeforeItsNews.com, a website that has published stories in the past. The story has been shared hundreds of times in Facebook groups for believers in conspiracies like QAnon, a broad right-wing conspiracy. The article claims without evidence that Gates ""reaps profits through Microsoft and his other companies"" from his philanthropic giving. The story makes several other or misleading claims about the Gates Foundation, vaccines and the coronavirus pandemic — as does Martin’s Facebook post. ""The Facebook post contains a number of claims about the Gates Foundation,"" the charity told us in an email. ""The foundation is not involved in the sale of vaccines in the United Kingdom, or anywhere else."" The basis for the £31.5 billion figure in the Facebook post comes from a March 17 Daily Mail story. The article includes an estimated cost of £477 per injection of a coronavirus vaccine that’s being developed by Moderna Inc., a U.S. biotechnology company. The newspaper attributes the estimate simply to ""analysts."" The Before It’s News story got the £31.5 billion figure by multiplying £477 times the population of the U.K., which was estimated to be around 66.4 million in June 2019. We could not find the cost estimate reported in other publications, or on Moderna’s website. So we reached out to the company for more information about the estimated cost of its vaccine, which entered a clinical trial in mid-March. We haven’t heard back, but the company told Business Insider in March that it would not ""price this higher than other respiratory-virus vaccines."" Other pharmaceutical companies have offered similar statements. The Gates Foundation said in a Feb. 5 statement that it is investing up to $100 million for ""the global response to the 2019 novel coronavirus."" That includes up to $60 million to ""accelerate the discovery, development and testing of vaccines, treatments and diagnostics for 2019-nCoV,"" the scientific name for the novel coronavirus. There are 108 potential vaccines in development, according to the World Health Organization — at last eight of which are in clinical trials. The Gates Foundation is funding some of those efforts, but that doesn’t mean the philanthropy would share in future profits from a successful vaccine. The Gates Foundation is a private nonprofit foundation that gets most of its money from contributions, specifically from the Gateses themselves through their family trust, according to the charity’s tax return. The trust’s most recent holdings report shows that it does not currently own stock in any of the companies that are working on coronavirus vaccines. Additionally, the Gates Foundation does not hold any patents related to the novel coronavirus. A Facebook post and several blog articles claim that the Gates Foundation could make more than £30 billion from a coronavirus vaccine. That number is based on multiplying a reported estimate of the cost of a potential COVID-19 vaccine times the population of the U.K. But the company developing the vaccine has not publicly released an estimate. And while the Gates Foundation has pledged millions of dollars to companies developing potential coronavirus vaccines, there is no evidence that it stands to profit from them. The Facebook post is inaccurate."
|
5314
|
Branagh, Friel among winners of International Emmy Awards.
|
Kenneth Branagh won the International Emmy for Best Actor, while Anna Friel won the Best Actress trophy at the 2017 International Emmy Awards gala Monday night in New York.
|
true
|
Turkey, Emmy Awards, Anna Friel, New York, TV, Entertainment, United Kingdom, France, Norway, Kenneth Branagh, Germany, Science, Belgium, North America, Canada, United States
|
Branagh and Friel were among 11 winning performers and programs spanning eight countries: Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Norway, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The awards are presented annually by the International Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, which represents more than 60 countries and 500 companies from all sectors of TV, including internet and mobile technology. The evening was hosted by Iranian-American comedian-actor Maz Jobrani, who co-stars on the CBS sitcom “Superior Donuts.” “The International Emmys are like the World Cup of TV,” Jobrani cracked, “and like the World Cup a lot of Americans don’t know it’s happening. Presenters included Kevin McKidd (“Grey’s Anatomy”), talk-show veteran Larry King, Freddy Rodriguez (“Bull”) and Melissa Villasenor (“Saturday Night Live”). Branagh won for his role as Swedish detective Kurt Wallander in the popular BBC drama series “Wallander,” which has won an American following on public television’s “Masterpiece.” Friel was awarded for her performance as Sergeant Marcella Backland in the British series “Marcella” (which is available on Netflix). The other winners include: Arts: “Hip-Hop Evolution” (Canada). Comedy: “Alan Partridge’s Scissored Isle” (United Kingdom). Documentary: “EXODUS: Our Journey to Europe” (United Kingdom). Drama Series: “Mammon II” (Norway). Non-English Language U.S. Primetime Program: “Sr. Avila” (carried on HBO Latin America). Non-Scripted Entertainment: “Sorry Voor Alles” (“Sorry About That”), (Belgium). Short-Form Series: “The Braun Family” (Germany). Telenovela: “Kara Sevda” (“Endless Love”), (Turkey). TV Movie or Miniseries: “Don’t Leave Me” (France). In addition, the Emmy Directorate Award was presented to Emilio Azcarraga Jean, head of Grupo Televisa, the world’s largest Spanish-language content provider as well as Mexico’s largest broadcaster and pay-TV provider. Not present was Kevin Spacey, who had been announced as the 2017 recipient of the International Emmy Founders Award. His award was rescinded last month after allegations of past sexual misconduct became public. “The Academy felt that, in light of recent events, we could not present the award to him,” Academy CEO Bruce L. Paisner told the room in his opening remarks. ___ Online: https://www.iemmys.tv
|
9338
|
The Scan That Saved My Life
|
The story about a reporter’s decision to treat a carotid artery blockage exemplifies the powerful strengths and weaknesses of first-person health care reporting. It carries a powerful emotional punch and an apparently happy ending that overwhelms the evidence presented. Numerous psychology studies document the power of “outcome bias,” in which the results of a decision affect beliefs about whether the decision was correct or not. We are very happy that all went well, but it is reasonable to assume this story would have looked very different if had not. There is no mention of the costs of the surgical procedure. Neither is carotid stenting mentioned as an alternative to endarterectomy surgery. Discussion of carotid artery screening of people who do not have symptoms is mixed up with the reporter’s experience with testing done in order to diagnose the cause of symptoms – a somewhat common flaw of conflating diagnostic testing with screening tests. The risk that the surgery could trigger a stroke, including a fatal one, is highlighted, but the risk statistics reported here are lower than those published in major summaries of the evidence. The headline of the story proclaims that a carotid artery scan “Saved My Life.” That may be true, but it is also unknowable. What the best summaries of the evidence conclude is that in cases similar to those of the reporter, surgery to clear a nearly-blocked carotid artery lowers the long-term risk of stroke and death. However, stories on this topic should highlight the fact that the procedure does not actually “save the lives” of most patients. As a systematic review of the evidence by the Cochrane Collaboration concluded, using a statistical analysis known as the number needed to treat (NNT), six patients need to be treated to prevent one stroke or death within five years of the surgery. That means that for five out of six patients, the procedure probably does not alter the outcome: Either they would not have had a stroke or died even without surgery or they still had a stroke or died despite having the surgery. Another important concern with this story is that the reporter uses his own case — where the scan was part of an attempt to track down the cause of his neurological symptoms — to argue for scanning of all older adults, including those who have no symptoms at all. This is a misleading argument since people with blockage severe enough to cause symptoms are likely different in important ways (and more likely to benefit from this scan) than those who don’t display symptoms. While it is certainly reasonable to choose a treatment shown to reduce the risk of stroke and death, it is imperative that stories clearly communicate the difference between screening and diagnosis, and the uncertainty about whether any particular patient will benefit.
|
false
|
stroke
|
While the story reports the cost of scanning carotid arteries to be about $70, it does not discuss the cost of surgery. One analysis of Medicare reimbursements done a few years ago reported hospitals were paid about $11,000 for each patient getting a carotid endarterectomy. An earlier report estimated that in 2008 hospitals charged about $35,000 for the surgery and associated treatment, though the ultimate reimbursements by Medicare were much lower. The story does report on the results of a major trial from 20 years ago that concluded patients who were randomized to surgery had about a 5 percent risk of stroke or death within three years, “less than half that of people treated only with drugs.” But this statistic is overwhelmed by the headline (The Scan that Saved My Life) and the punchline, “mostly I feel lucky to have gotten a test that may have saved my life.” A more recent review of the evidence by the international Cochrane Collaboration concludes that the “number needed to treat‘ (for the type of blockage and symptoms the reporter had) would be six patients. Meaning, six people have to be treated to prevent one stroke or death over a five-year period. In other words, the surgery likely does not alter the outcomes of five out of six patients. Either they wouldn’t have had a stroke or died even without treatment or they did have a stroke or died despite undergoing surgery. We will rate the story as satisfactory because it does clearly point out that the surgery is hazardous, sometimes triggering a stroke, and that some patients die soon after the procedure. However, the story reports stroke and death rates at the lower end of the ranges reported in medical literature. The story says a major task force report estimated the risk of stroke and death within 30 days after surgery as less than 3 percent overall, but up to 5 percent at some hospitals. However, the lower figure in that task force report uses data only from clinical trials, which typically involve highly skilled surgeons and have better outcomes than typical clinical care. That report also said that some observational data indicates a risk of stroke and death of almost 7 percent at some hospitals. The evidence review mentioned above concludes that the 30-day risk of stroke and death is 7 percent in clinical trials of carotid endarterectomy. The story does warn readers that few hospitals and surgeons publish their individual results. The story would have been stronger had it mentioned that there are harms that can occur if we started screening anyone, regardless of whether they had symptoms. As the USPSTF explains, “For the general primary care population, the magnitude of benefit is small to none. Adequate evidence indicates that both the testing strategy for carotid artery stenosis and treatment with [surgery or stenting] can cause serious harms.” The story does refer to certain major trials and guideline reports. However, the story seems to cherry-pick conclusions, favoring those that tilt toward screening and treatment while questioning those that recommend against widespread screening. It features a guideline in favor of screening from a professional society of surgeons. It does not mention the evidence review by the international Cochrane Collaboration. It also does not mention important limitations of studies that appear to favor screening — including that the medical therapy used in some of these older studies is no longer considered state of the art. The headline and punchline of the story portray a sunny and one-sided view that dismisses the complexity and uncertainty of the available evidence. Although the story accurately reports statistics on the number of people who have strokes, it confuses readers by referring to “screening” (which is testing people who don’t have symptoms) with the testing the reporter underwent to diagnose the cause of specific symptoms. After noting that a U.S. task force (the US Preventive Services Task Force) recommends against screening people without symptoms, the story says, “My experience, along with some evidence from screening of thousands of individuals, raises questions about the task force’s conclusions.” Since his experience was with diagnostic testing, it is not relevant to a discussion of screening tests. It is an inherent weakness of this sort of first-person reporting that there is an absence of independent sources. All but one of the physicians quoted in the story were personally involved in the reporter’s case. The one exception is a vascular surgeon who strongly advocates for broader carotid artery screening. There are no quotes from experts who were members of the task force that recommended against widespread screening. The story makes no mention of carotid artery stenting. This omission is surprising, since the reporter has covered this alternative on several occasions: (Full text versions of some stories are behind a paywall.) It is clear that carotid endarterectomy is widely available. The story makes clear that the procedure has been in use for decades. What could have used more exploration–from independent sources–is whether it’s overused. The story is based on the reporter’s personal experience.
|
2389
|
Modern humans more Neanderthal than once thought, studies suggest.
|
It’s getting harder and harder to take umbrage if someone calls you a Neanderthal.
|
true
|
Science News
|
According to two studies published on Wednesday, DNA from these pre-modern humans may play a role in the appearance of hair and skin as well as the risk of certain diseases. Although Neanderthals became extinct 28,000 years ago in Europe, as much as one-fifth of their DNA has survived in human genomes due to interbreeding tens of thousands of years ago, one of the studies found, although any one individual has only about 2 percent of caveman DNA. “The 2 percent of your Neanderthal DNA might be different than my 2 percent of Neanderthal DNA, and it’s found at different places in the genome,” said geneticist Joshua Akey, who led one of the studies. Put it all together in a study of hundreds of people, and “you can recover a substantial proportion of the Neanderthal genome.” Both studies confirmed earlier findings that the genomes of east Asians harbor more Neanderthal DNA than those of Europeans. This could be 21 percent more, according to an analysis by Akey and Benjamin Vernot, published online in the journal Science. Still, “more” is a relative term. According to the paper by geneticists at Harvard Medical School, published in Nature, about 1.4 percent of the genomes of Han Chinese in Beijing and south China, as well as Japanese in Tokyo come from Neanderthals, compared to 1.1 percent of the genomes of Europeans. Anthropologists expressed caution about the findings. Fewer than half a dozen Neanderthal fossils have yielded genetic material, said Erik Trinkaus of Washington University in St. Louis, one of the world’s leading experts on early humans. Using this small sample to infer how much Neanderthal DNA persists in today’s genome is therefore questionable, he said. As expected, since Neanderthals never existed in Africa, Africans and those who trace their ancestry to that continent have almost no Neanderthal DNA, the Harvard team found. Human ancestors began migrating out of humanity’s natal continent as early as 1 million years ago, paleoanthropologists infer from fossil evidence, and between 500,000 and 200,000 years ago evolved into the robust, large-browed Homo neanderthalensis in Western Europe. Ever since scientists extracted DNA from the remains of Neanderthals, they have known that people today carry snippets of cavemen genes, in the amounts of 2 percent to 3 percent. That clinched the case that Neanderthals and modern humans interbred, probably 40,000 to 80,000 years ago, soon after the latter arrived in Europe from Africa. The new studies add details about how much DNA and of what kind we inherited. “The story of early human evolution is captivating in itself, yet it also has far-reaching implications for understanding the organization of the modern human genome,” Irene Eckstrand of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of General Medical Sciences, which partially funded the research, said in a statement. “Every piece of this story that we uncover tells us more about our ancestors’ genetic contributions to modern human health and disease.” The Harvard team used a novel genetic algorithm to estimate the probability that a particular genetic variant arose from Neanderthals. Basically, they started with the genome of a 50,000-year-old Neanderthal, and determined whether pieces of it also appeared in some non-Africans but not in sub-Saharan Africans. The algorithm identified remnants of Neanderthal DNA, called alleles, in genes associated with type 2 diabetes, Crohn’s disease, lupus, biliary cirrhosis and smoking behavior. “But we can’t tell if the Neanderthal alleles are contributing to disease,” said Harvard’s Sriram Sankararaman, lead author of the paper in Nature. Areas “with increased Neanderthal ancestry tend to be higher the farther away you go from genes,” sitting, instead, in regions of the genome that do not actually produce the proteins, enzymes and other working molecules of the body. Neanderthal DNA does sit within some genes, however, such as those for keratin, a fibrous protein that makes skin, hair and nails tough and can be beneficial in colder environments by providing thicker insulation. The endurance of this Neanderthal DNA suggests that our caveman inheritance was adaptive, picked by natural selection to persist in our genome, generation after generation, because it conferred a survival advantage in individuals who carried it. The Harvard team analyzed the genomes of 1,004 people to estimate which populations got more or fewer Neanderthal DNA. Confirming a 2013 study, they found more in the genomes of east Asians than in Europeans. But they also dug deeper. Puerto Ricans and Spaniards have the least Neanderthal DNA, 1.05 percent and 1.07 percent respectively. That is curious because Neanderthals made their last stand on the Iberian peninsula, finally dying out there 28,000 years ago. Across all populations, Neanderthal DNA is conspicuously low in regions of the X chromosome and in testes-specific genes. The paucity of Neanderthal genes among those active in the testes suggests that interbreeding wasn’t a resounding success: It produced viable children, but the males were infertile. Although as much as 20 percent of Neanderthal DNA persists in modern genomes, according to the Washington scientists, vast regions of the latter are Neanderthal deserts. Among them is a region of chromosome 7 that includes a gene called FOXP2. “FOXP2 has previously been implicated in speech and language and may be an example of a gene that influences a uniquely human trait, which is why we find no Neanderthal sequences in these regions,” said Akey.
|
8771
|
Lilly depression drug eases back pain in study.
|
Eli Lilly and Co’s Cymbalta depression treatment significantly reduced chronic low back pain in a relatively small clinical trial, the company said on Monday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Data from the 236-patient trial, which lasted 13 weeks and compared the effectiveness of Cymbalta with placebos, were presented at the annual congress of the European Federation of Neurological Societies in Madrid. Lilly said 31 percent of patients taking Cymbalta experienced a 50 percent reduction in pain, as measured by a standard pain scale, compared with 19 percent of placebo-treated patients. But significantly more patients taking Cymbalta dropped out of the trial because of side effects, which included nausea, dry mouth, fatigue, diarrhea, excessive sweating, dizziness and constipation. Lilly said side effects were similar to those seen in previous trials of Cymbalta for other conditions. Global second-quarter sales of Cymbalta, one of Lilly’s biggest products, jumped 26 percent to $654 million, helped by its other approved uses to treat fibromyalgia and generalized anxiety disorder. The drug works by maximizing the presence of two messenger chemicals in the brain, serotonin and norepinephrine.
|
4823
|
Red Cross reports new outbreak of dengue fever in Yemen.
|
The International Committee of the Red Cross reported a new outbreak of dengue fever in war-torn Yemen on Monday, with thousands of cases reported and several dozen deaths.
|
true
|
Dengue fever, Malaria, Health, Cholera, General News, United Nations, Yemen, Middle East, U.S. News
|
Robert Mardini, the ICRC’s U.N. observer, told journalists that while there has been a de-escalation of fighting in Yemen which is positive news, the Arab world’s poorest nation faces “a very dire humanitarian situation.” It is not only facing an escalation in dengue cases but must also continue to deal with tens of thousands of cholera cases as well as malaria, he said. More than 3,500 cases of dengue have been reported in Taiz, Mardini said. And in Hodeida, where the country’s main port is located, the ICRC heard that 50 people died in late October and early November of dengue fever and malaria, and the local head office reported the number of people infected with dengue fever is 2,000, and close to 3,000 have malaria. “So you can imagine, with the violence and the fighting, it is a big challenge to control this epidemic,” Mardini said. In addition, he said, last year’s “spectacular” cholera epidemic in Yemen isn’t over yet, pointing to more than 56,000 cases reported between January and September. The European Commission’s humanitarian aid operation known as ECHO reported Monday that 10 people died of dengue fever in Taiz governorate last week and local health authorities expected the death toll to increase. As of Thursday, ECHO said, 7,970 cases of dengue fever were reported in the governorate. It said 3,215 were confirmed and 103 patients were under observation in government hospitals. Dengue fever is a painful, debilitating disease caused by viruses transmitted by mosquitoes that breed in stagnant water. Malaria is caused by a parasite also transmitted by mosquitoes, and cholera is caused by eating food or drinking water contaminated by bacteria. Mardini said dengue and malaria are endemic in Yemen though in recent years their prevalence had “been extremely low.” But now, because of the weakness of the country’s health system and problems with its water supplies and sanitation, malaria and dengue are appearing again, he said. The conflict in Yemen began with the 2014 takeover of the capital, Sanaa, by Iranian-backed Houthis who control much of the country’s north. A Saudi-led coalition allied with the internationally recognized government has been fighting the Houthis since 2015. Fighting in Yemen has killed thousands of civilians and created the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, leaving millions suffering from food and medical care shortages and pushing the country to the brink of famine.
|
7409
|
Scientists build DNA from scratch to alter life’s blueprint.
|
At Jef Boeke’s lab, you can whiff an odor that seems out of place, as if they were baking bread here.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Technology, Genetic Frontiers, North America, Health, Science, Asia Pacific, U.S. News, Europe
|
But he and his colleagues are cooking up something else altogether: yeast that works with chunks of man-made DNA. Scientists have long been able to make specific changes in the DNA code. Now, they’re taking the more radical step of starting over, and building redesigned life forms from scratch. Boeke, a researcher at New York University, directs an international team of 11 labs on four continents working to “rewrite” the yeast genome, following a detailed plan they published in March. Their work is part of a bold and controversial pursuit aimed at creating custom-made DNA codes to be inserted into living cells to change how they function, or even provide a treatment for diseases. It could also someday help give scientists the profound and unsettling ability to create entirely new organisms. The genome is the entire genetic code of a living thing. Learning how to make one from scratch, Boeke said, means “you really can construct something that’s completely new.” The research may reveal basic, hidden rules that govern the structure and functioning of genomes. But it also opens the door to life with new and useful characteristics, like microbes or mammal cells that are better than current ones at pumping out medications in pharmaceutical factories, or new vaccines. The right modifications might make yeast efficiently produce new biofuels, Boeke says. Some scientists look further into the future and see things like trees that purify water supplies and plants that detect explosives at airports and shopping malls. Also on the horizon is redesigning human DNA. That’s not to make genetically altered people, scientists stress. Instead, the synthetic DNA would be put into cells, to make them better at pumping out pharmaceutical proteins, for example, or perhaps to engineer stem cells as a safer source of lab-grown tissue and organs for transplanting into patients. Some have found the idea of remaking human DNA disconcerting, and scientists plan to get guidance from ethicists and the public before they try it. Still, redesigning DNA is alarming to some. Laurie Zoloth of Northwestern University, a bioethicist who’s been following the effort, is concerned about making organisms with “properties we cannot fully know.” And the work would disturb people who believe creating life from scratch would give humans unwarranted power, she said. “It is not only a science project,” Zoloth said in an email. “It is an ethical and moral and theological proposal of significant proportions.” Rewritten DNA has already been put to work in viruses and bacteria. Australian scientists recently announced that they’d built the genome of the Zika virus in a lab, for example, to better understand it and get clues for new treatments. At Harvard University, Jeffrey Way and Pamela Silver are working toward developing a harmless strain of salmonella to use as a vaccine against food poisoning from salmonella and E. coli, as well as the diarrhea-causing disease called shigella. A key goal is to prevent the strain from turning harmful as a result of picking up DNA from other bacteria. That requires changing its genome in 30,000 places. “The only practical way to do that,” Way says, “is to synthesize it from scratch.” The cutting edge for redesigning a genome, though, is yeast. Its genome is bigger and more complex than the viral and bacterial codes altered so far. But it’s well-understood and yeast will readily swap man-made DNA for its own. Still, rewriting the yeast genome is a huge job. It’s like a chain with 12 million chemical links, known by the letters, A, C, G and T. That’s less than one-hundredth the size of the human genome, which has 3.2 billion links. But it’s still such a big job that Boeke’s lab and scientists in the United States, Australia, China, Singapore, and the United Kingdom are splitting up the work. By the time the new yeast genome is completed, researchers will have added, deleted or altered about a million DNA letters. Boeke compares a genome to a book with many chapters, and researchers are coming out with a new edition, with chapters that allow the book to do something it couldn’t do before. To redesign a particular stretch of yeast DNA, scientists begin with its sequence of code letters — nature’s own recipe. They load that sequence into a computer, then tell the computer to make specific kinds of changes. For example one change might let them rearrange the order of genes, which might reveal strategies to make yeast grow better, says NYU researcher Leslie Mitchell. Once the changes are made, the new sequence used as a blueprint. It is sent to a company that builds chunks of DNA containing the new sequence. Then these short chunks are joined together in the lab to build ever longer strands. The project has so far reported building about one-third of the yeast genome. Boeke hopes the rest of the construction will be done by the end of the year. But he says it will take longer to test the new DNA and fix problems, and to finally combine the various chunks into a complete synthetic genome. Last year, Boeke and others announced a separate effort, what is now called Genome Project-write or GP-write . It is chiefly focused on cutting the cost of building and testing large genomes, including human ones, by more than 1,000-fold within 10 years. The project is still seeking funding. In the meantime, leaders of GP-write have started discussions of ethical, legal and social issues. And they realize the idea of making a human genome is a sensitive one. “The notion that we could actually write a human genome is simultaneously thrilling to some and not so thrilling to others,” Boeke said. “So we recognize this is going to take a lot of discussion.” ___ Follow Malcolm Ritter at @MalcolmRitter. His recent work can be found here. ___ This Associated Press series was produced in partnership with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
|
9907
|
Coffee found to reduce risk of diabetes
|
There is a growing body of literature suggesting that coffee drinking can lower one’s risk of type II diabetes. This story covered the latest such evidence, and made it clear that this is part of a growing body of “more intriguing evidence.” In a brief story (less than 350 words), ABC News did a decent job of covering the latest research. A brief review of the problem of Type 2 diabetes would have been helpful to anchor the piece, along with a review of ways to prevent the disease (avoid becoming overweight, daily exercise, dietary modification).This article reported on the results of a study in the June 26, 2006 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine which found that increased use of decaf coffee was associated with decreased risk of developing type II diabetes. The article reported this inaccurately as “The study out today found decaffeinated coffee is just as effective against diabetes as regular coffee, because both are loaded with the same nutrients.” In fact, the study found that while decaffeinated coffee was found to be associated with a statistically significant lower risk of developing type II diabetes, caffeinated coffee was not. The story did not address an obvious question: if coffee consumption is so beneficial for reducing the risk of developing type II diabetes, then why is the incidence of this disease on the rise at the same time that Americans are consuming more coffee? Nonethless, in a brief TV news story, ABC News covered many of the bases (and addressed a majority of our criteria).
|
true
|
While there was no mention of coffee cost, this element is not particulary germane to this story. The article reported that drinking four eight-ounce cups of coffee was linked to a 30% reduction in the risk of developing diabetes. Rather than relative reduction, the article should have included the absolute reduction. The rate at which women who drank coffee developed type II diabetes was 6.05% while the rate in women who drank 4-5 cups of coffee per day was 4.30%. The relative difference always sounds more convincing; the absolute difference is what is probably most meaningful to viewers. So, in this case, a 30% relative difference equated to an absolute difference of less than 2%. There was no mention of potential harms that might be derived from increased coffee consumption. The article could have included concern about disrupted sleep, heart palpitations, increased urinary frequency, and jitteriness. Because of the design of the study covered in this story (a prospective epidemiologic study), it is not possible to conclude that increasing decaffeinated coffee consumption will decrease the risk of type II diabetes. This important point was covered by one of the physician quotes in the story. The speculation about what was in decaf coffee that resulted in the decreased risk of type II diabetes was not well grounded. Other than painting perhaps a little too rosy picture of all the potential benefits that might be gained from coffee consumption, this article did not practice disease mongering. It did not present any data on the prevalence of type II diabetes. The story could have mentioned that the Type II diabetes has become rather common place and is a public health issue. It appears that this story is based on a research study in the Archives of Internal Medicine and from comments by one physician and one researcher. It certainly would have been better to actually mention where the study was published rather than referring to it as “the study out today”. It would also have been better to give us some perspective about the value of the quotes provided by giving some background on the two people interviewed. Nonethless, we credit the story for having different perspectives. There was no mention of other lifestyle strategies that an individual might pursue in order to lower the risk of type II diabetes. This is a particularly important public health message. Moderate daily physical activity, such as walking, has also been shown to lower the risk of type II diabetes. The story isn’t about a treatment per se, but about the effects of drinking coffee, which is readily available to all. The story is quite clear about the widespread availability and use of coffee. There is a growing body of literature suggesting that coffee drinking can lower one’s risk of type II diabetes. This story covered the latest such evidence, and made it clear that this is part of a growing body of “more intriguing evidence.” There is no evidence that this story relied solely or largely on a news release.
|
|
3151
|
Petition suggests medical marijuana for Browns, Bengals fans.
|
Petitioners are again asking the State Medical Board of Ohio to consider adding anxiety and autism spectrum disorders to the list of conditions that qualify for a doctor to recommend medical marijuana for patients.
|
true
|
NFL, Cincinnati, Medical marijuana, General News, Football, Marijuana, Cincinnati Bengals, Cleveland, Ohio, Cleveland Browns
|
The conditions suggested in the second round of petitions the board received also include a football-related ailment: being a fan of the Cincinnati Bengals or the Cleveland Browns, both teams coming off disappointing seasons. Don’t expect that proposal to make it very far as a board committee reviews the petitions next month. Board members consider information from medical experts and scientific evidence before deciding whether to add a condition to the list. The panel received 28 petitions for potential new qualifying conditions during the latest window for such submissions — far fewer than in the initial round — but hasn’t yet released details about who submitted each petition and the arguments they made. The list already includes conditions such as AIDS, cancer, epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease. Last year, the board rejected petitions to add anxiety and autism spectrum disorders.
|
30456
|
Assembly Bill 2943 would prohibit the sale of Bibles in California.
|
"A Republican politician and a right-wing television station grossly misrepresented California legislation that would amplify restrictions on ""gay conversion therapy."""
|
false
|
Politics, california, christianity, gay conversion therapy
|
In April 2018, the right-wing One America News Network (OAN) interviewed California State Assembly member Travis Allen, who is running for governor as a Republican, about Assembly Bill 2943, a proposed law currently before state legislators. The bill relates to “gay conversion therapy,” but according to Allen and “Tipping Point” host Liz Wheeler, it would effectively ban the sale of Christian books, including the Bible. In less than 24 hours, a clip of the interview was viewed 1.4 million times on Facebook and triggered multiple inquiries to us about its veracity. In reality, California Assembly Bill (A.B.) 2943 would not ban the sale of Bibles in that state. The clip from Wheeler’s interview with Allen can be viewed below. Here is a transcript of the most relevant section: Wheeler: This is essentially criminalizing religious beliefs. And I don’t mean to speak in hyperbole here, but if this bill were to pass, would this prohibit the sale of the Bible, that teaches these things about sexual morality? Allen: Well, literally, according to how this law is written, yes, it would. This is, you know, PC culture, politically correct culture, gone horribly awry. This is really directly hitting at our First Amendment rights as American citizens. Now the Democrat legislators in this building, right behind me, the California state legislature, they want to tell you how to think, what sort of books that you can read, write and purchase. California Assembly Bill 2943 does not mention the Bible, Christianity, or religion at all, so when Allen claimed that the legislation would “literally” prohibit the sale of the Bible, he was stating something that is demonstrably and clearly false. In reality the legislation, which was introduced in February 2018 by San Jose-based Democrat Evan Low, enhances California’s already-existing prohibition on “sexual orientation change efforts” (SOCE), commonly known as “gay conversion therapy.” In 2012, the California Assembly passed Senate Bill 1172, which banned mental health professionals from performing SOCE on children under the age of 18. The law defines SOCE as: “any practices by mental health providers that seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation. This includes efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.” A.B. 2943, as it stood on 20 April 2018, would extend that earlier prohibition in the following ways: The bill also appears to prohibit SOCE from being performed by any individual, not just by mental health providers, but the Assembly Judiciary Committee’s analysis notes it is not clear whether the text of A.B. 2943 would amount to a blanket prohibition on any and all SOCE. Anthony Samson, a Sacramento attorney and policy advisor told us by email that the bill would prohibit conversion therapy “as a commercial service in exchange for monetary compensation,” adding: that “It does not apply to the sale of books or any other kind of goods, and it does not prevent anyone from speaking or writing on the subject of conversion therapy in any forum.” Low’s bill does not seek to outlaw all religious or moral instruction regarding sexuality and sexual orientation, nor would it ban the sale or possession of generic religious texts such as the Bible. Christian dogma might form the basis of efforts change a person’s sexual orientation, but the Bible itself is not a “gay conversion therapy” manual. The text of the legislation cites rafts of clinical evidence which conclude that SOCE is not a legitimate treatment because it seeks to “treat” same-sex attraction (something that is not classified as a mental illness) and because it can cause harm to the patient. In 2009, the American Psychological Association published the results of a major two-year task force review of peer-reviewed research about SOCE, which concluded by noting that “Efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful and involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates.” The review recommended that mental health providers, faced with an individual who wants to change sexual orientation, should implement a therapy based on “acceptance, support, and understanding” but should not “[impose] a specific sexual orientation identity outcome.” In April 2018, Low — who is openly gay — made an emotional speech before the California Assembly, recounting his own past struggle with his sexual orientation and describing the anxiety and even suicidal thoughts he had wrestled with:
|
9644
|
An Online Program May Help Prevent Depression In Some People
|
The story looks at a study published recently in JAMA that found patients who were at risk of developing major depressive disorder (MDD) were less likely to experience MDD if they engaged in online self-help interventions, within a 12-month timeframe. The story does a good job of describing the interventions and the bulk of the study design. However, the story doesn’t note that study participants could be on antidepressant medications, nor address whether the use of antidepressants may have skewed the results. The story also would have benefitted from an independent source, and a contextual comparison of this treatment to existing alternatives. Depression can have a devastating effect on individuals suffering from the disease, affecting not only their quality of life but the quality of life for their loved ones. And those effects have societal impacts as well. For example, the CDC notes that “the economic burden of depression, including workplace costs, direct costs and suicide-related costs, was estimated to be $210.5 billion in 2010.” Research that is aimed at preventing the onset of MDD is important, affects many people, and is well worth covering.
|
mixture
|
depression,mental health,mental illness,online therapy
|
Cost is not addressed in a meaningful way. The story simply refers to online programs for mental health problems as “low cost.” Given that the online programs used in the study involved generating feedback from online trainers for each session and for each patient, the cost may not be negligible. And it’s not clear whether insurers in the U.S. would be willing to pay for preventive mental health treatment. The research was done in Germany, which has a different health care system than the U.S., but the issue of cost should have been addressed more fully. The story made clear that patients who participated in one of two online self-help interventions had a 27 percent rate of experiencing major depression disorder (MDD) in the 12 months following the study, compared to a 41 percent rate for those who did not participate in the online interventions. That’s enough to earn a satisfactory rating. It would have been even better if the story had addressed whether there was any difference in performance for patients who received the “cognitive behavioral therapy” intervention versus the “problem-solving therapy” intervention. And if the study didn’t differentiate between results for the two interventions, the story could have said that. This is significant because it’s not clear to readers whether one approach might have been significantly more effective at preventing the onsite of MDD, or if they had comparable results. The story does not address potential harms, but there are few potential harms associated with the relevant interventions–other than temporary discomfort, stress or anxiety that can come along with addressing difficult feelings. We’ll rate this not applicable. The story does a lot of things right here: It tells us the number of study participants (406), describes the experimental and control groups, and lays out the broad study design. But the discussion of limitations fell short, especially since the study itself outlined many to keep in mind. One limitation that felt especially important to include, and which the JAMA paper noted, was that study participants were allowed to take antidepressants. How did the study control for that? No disease mongering here. The story does tell readers who funded the work, which is great. However, the only source quoted in the article is the lead author of the relevant study. An independent expert opinion would have been extremely valuable. The study compared online self-help interventions to an online education course about depression, and the story reflects that. The story doesn’t discuss the use of in-person therapy for preventing the onset of MDD, nor does it discuss the use of pharmaceutical interventions. The story not only makes clear that this preventive approach to online interventions is fairly novel, but that there are significant questions about whether it could be scaled up. The story establishes this early on, noting that “Similar programs have been used to treat depression, but this may be the first one tested to prevent it.” The story appears to go beyond any news release on the work.
|
34473
|
Drinking a glass of grape juice three times a day after being exposed to the stomach flu will prevent you from getting sick.
|
Grapes’ viability as a viral prophylactic, however, has yet to be rigorously tested and demonstrated.
|
unproven
|
Medical, Home Cures
|
A common home remedy posted on various parenting webs ites states that grape juice can act as a preventative tool against a viral infection in your stomach should you or a family member be exposed to someone with a contagious viral stomach infection. The most commonly shared version of this claim comes from the web site “Must Have Mom,” which suggests two mechanisms comprise these supposedly preventative properties of grape juice: the regulation of pH and the presence of antiviral chemicals: The grape juice works by changing the pH in your intestinal tract so that the virus can’t multiply. It also harbors various strong anti-viral chemicals in it. Along with the Vitamin C and anti-oxidants in the juice, it’s supposed to flush and kill the virus and/or severely lesson [sic] the symptoms. When you get a stomach virus, it actually isn’t in your stomach, it’s all in your large and small intestines. The effects of what it’s doing to those makes you sick to your stomach (changing the acidity in your stomach). Keeping the pH of the intestines slightly more alkaline is supposed to stop the virus from taking hold and thus making you sick. The pH mechanism is almost certainly bunk. The two main viral causes for gastroenteritis are the norovirus and rotavirus, both of which enter the body through the mouth and infect either the stomach or (more commonly) the intestines. Any pH influence that grape juice may or may not have on the stomach or intestines pales in comparison to the wildly varied pHs the virus would have already survived on its course to one’s gut. The antiviral chemical mechanism may have a bit more to it, but the the science behind is not exactly a settled issue. In the late 1970s, a study utilizing cell cultures seemed to demonstrate that grape juice had the ability to inhibit or reduce the infectability of various viruses. This process was attributed to a class of chemicals called polyphenols found in high concentrations in the skin of grapes, as reported in a 1977 Science News article: Since chemicals known as naturally polymerized phenols appear to provide the antibacterial property of wines, probably by binding to bacterial proteins, [authors] Konwalchuk and Speirs believe that these chemicals may also provide the antiviral activity in grapes and grape products by binding to viral proteins. With such binding, viruses might lose their infectivity. Indeed, phenols have been found in abundance in the skins of grapes, the part of grapes that contains most antiviral activity, have been identified in grape juice, and have been observed in large amounts in red wines but in lesser amounts in white wines. The authors cautioned, however, that the results were not sufficient to make the claim that the discussed properties of grapes were relevant to the prevention of disease in humans: Since the antiviral section of grapes and grape products were only shown at the test-tube level, Konowalchuk and Speirs caution that the results cannot yet be extrapolated to the human situation — that is, prove that grapes and grape products protect people against viral diseases. The problem is that scientists do not know the specific mechanism that would initiate grape compounds’ antiviral properties, and therefore we still do not know if the conditions utilized in vitro would be at all relevant in humans. This issue was covered in a skeptical rebuttal to the work of Konowalchuk and Speirs in a 1979 paper published by the Journal of Food Protection, in which researchers observed that the antiviral effects of grape compounds seemed to be temporary and that viruses would likely be reactivated in the body: These laboratory experimental approaches have failed to produce evidence that ingested grape juice would be valuable for antiviral prophylaxis or therapy in man. We think the potential purchaser would do best to continue to judge the product on its merits as a food. A more recent 2010 review of the beneficial properties of grapes published in the journal Nutrition Reviews didn’t rule out the idea of grape products as preventatives, but it made clear that the science on the topic hasn’t progressed much since the 1970s: No human clinical trials have been conducted in this area, but in vitro work suggests grape juice may exhibit antiviral activity. In monkey cell cultures, researchers have reported reductions in infectivity titers to undetectable levels within minutes of exposure to 25–2,000 mg/mL of proanthocyanidins [a class of polyphenols] from grape juice. […] This antiviral activity is hypothesized to involve an effect on host cell surface involving an alteration in viral receptor sites. As mentioned in this same review, mounting evidence does suggest myriad other potential health benefits from compounds found in grapes: Accumulating evidence suggests that consumption of grapes and grape products can positively influence risk factors associated with cardiovascular health, cancer, neurodegenerative disease, and age-related cognitive decline.
|
33785
|
"Bill Clinton was the ""first pardoned federal felon ever to serve as President of the U.S."
|
Bill Clinton's questionable activities during the Vietnam-era draft did not make him the 'first pardoned federal felon ever to serve as President of the U.S.'
|
false
|
Politics, bill clinton
|
First Pardoned Federal Felon ever to serve as President of the U.S. Bill Clinton’s Draft Records from the Freedom of Information Act files show he was a Pardoned Federal Felon * Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all contractual conditions of registering for the draft. Given Selective Service Number 3 26 46 228. * Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964. * Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968. * Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969. * Bill Clinton dishonors order to report and is not inducted into the military. * Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army Reserves on August 07, 1969 under authority of Col. E. Holmes. Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment. * Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of Arkansas ROTC, September 1969. * Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) ‘registrant who has failed to report … remain liable for induction’. * Bill Clinton’s birth date lottery number is 311, drawn December 1, 1969, but anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction, is INELIGIBLE! * Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974), while a fugitive from justice under Public Law 90-40. * Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976), while a fugitive from justice. * Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977 from Carter. * Bill Clinton FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON ever to serve as President. All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws, and various books that have been published, and have not been refuted by Clinton. The arc of future President Bill Clinton’s controversial (in retrospect) activities in avoiding the military draft during the Vietnam War years of 1968-69 are difficult to trace with certainty in regard to all the details. By the time the issue became one of national interest in 1992, reporters and biographers were faced with reconstructing a 25-year-old account from the decades-old memories of those involved; some of the key participants were already dead, and the one person who knew the whole story, Bill Clinton himself, often responded to questions on the subject with misleading or inaccurate information. Nonetheless, available documentation and personal memories have enabled writers to reconstruct the essential elements of the tale. The saga began when an eighteen-year-old Bill Clinton entered Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service in the fall of 1964. As required by law of all 18-year-old males at the time, Clinton registered with the Selective Service System on 8 September 1964, and on 17 November 1964 he was assigned a 2-S (student deferment) classification by Garland County [Arkansas] Draft Board No. 26. As American military involvement in Vietnam escalated in the mid-1960s, Clinton (like other male students his age) would reasonably have expected that his status as a college student would provide him with deferments from the draft for several more years, especially when in his senior year he was one of thirty-two American men selected to receive Rhodes Scholarships to study at Oxford University in England. However, on 16 February 1968 the federal government eliminated draft deferments for most graduate students, and Clinton would therefore no longer be eligible for additional student deferments after he completed his final term at Georgetown in the spring of 1968. Accordingly, his draft board reclassified him 1-A (available immediately for military service) on 20 March 1968. In mid-1968 Clinton, who maintained that although he was not opposed to the military or war in general he was morally opposed to the Vietnam War in particular, began to seek ways of avoiding the draft. His first opportunity was provided through the political and social connections of Raymond Clinton, his uncle, and Henry Britt, a Hot Springs lawyer and former judge, who made arrangements with the commanding officer of the local Naval Reserve unit, Trice Ellis, to secure a billet for Clinton in the naval reserve: The first relief Raymond Clinton and Britt found for Bill was a naval billet. This would not only give him more time — he would not have to fill it until after the school year ended in June — but it also would more likely keep him out of harm’s way in the war. Trice Ellis, the local naval commander, said he was only too happy to accommodate the request, which he did not consider out of the ordinary, and was “impressed by the chance to enlist someone with a college education.” He called the Navy command in New Orleans and secured a two-year active duty billet for young Clinton. Ellis assumed that Clinton would stop by that summer for an interview, but Clinton never did. When he asked Raymond Clinton what happened, Raymond told him not to worry, Bill would not be coming, he had been taken care of in another way. The “other way” that had “taken care” of Clinton was a favor Henry Britt worked out with William S. Armstrong, chairman of the Garland County draft board, a favor that would provide Clinton with only temporary protection from the draft but would allow him to at least start his first year at Oxford without committing him to military service: Britt called draft board chairman Armstrong, his close friend, and asked him, as he later recalled, to “put Clinton’s draft notice in a drawer someplace and leave it for a while. Give the boy a chance.” This is apparently what Armstrong did for several months. Another member of the Garland County Draft Board, Robert Corrado, later remembered Armstrong holding back Clinton’s file and saying that they had to give him time to go to Oxford. As Clinton biographer David Maraniss pointed out, although the deliberate delay in issuing Clinton’s draft notice was undeniably a case of special treatment, it was by no means an unusual consideration granted to Rhodes Scholars: Special consideration for Rhodes Scholars was not unusual around the country. The draft board in Alameda County, California, was so impressed by the achievements of the only black Rhodes winner that year, Tom Williamson of Harvard, that they granted him a graduate school deferment even though such deferments supposedly no longer existed. Darryl Gless, whose small home town in Nebraska was so proud of him that they strung a banner across the Main Street bank welcoming him back from his successful Rhodes interview, also was given a special deferment. Dartmouth scholar John Isaacson visited his draft board in Lewiston, Maine, and pleaded with them to let him go to Oxford, which they did. University of Iowa scholar Mike Shea went to England “happily but erroneously 2-S” for the first year. Paul Parish’s mother in Port Gibson, Mississippi, received a letter from the governor telling her that Paul should go to England because they were trying to get an exemption for Rhodes Scholars. For virtually every member of the Rhodes class of 1968 there was a similar story. Clinton set sail from New York to begin his first year at Oxford in October 1968. At the end of his first term in December, Clinton received a notice from the Selective Service instructing him to undergo an armed forces physical examination at a U.S. air base near London, which he took (and passed) on 13 January 1969. An Order to Report for Induction from the Garland County Draft Board followed three months later, but because the notice had been sent to England via surface mail it was late in arriving, and the assigned reporting date had already passed. Clinton had begun another school term by then (the academic year at Oxford consisted of three terms rather than two semesters), and the regulations allowed students who received draft notices to finish out their current terms before reporting — but Clinton would be obligated to report for induction after the end of the spring term unless he found an alternative before his new reporting date of 28 July 1969. As Clinton headed home for Arkansas from England, his options for avoiding the draft were limited. He likely would not qualify for conscientious objector status because he did not have a history of opposing military service or war in general, only the Vietnam War specifically. The local Army National Guard and Reserve units were full. He took physicals for the Air Force and Navy officer programs but failed them both. (He was undersize and didn’t possess the visual acuity required for the Air Force program, and he failed the Navy exam due to substandard hearing.) Clinton’s only available out seemed to be joining the advanced ROTC program at the University of Arkansas, which had no quotas and was open to graduate students, but since Clinton had already received an induction notice he would have to obtain the approval of Willard Hawkins, the state Selective Service director (an appointee of the Arkansas governor) to enter the program. Clinton called upon Cliff Jackson, an Arkansas College graduate who had been Clinton’s acquaintance at Oxford and was now working for the state Republican party, and Jackson in turn asked his boss, the head of the Arkansas Republican party, to arrange a meeting between Clinton and Selective Service director Hawkins. Clinton also received assistance from Lee Williams, an aide to U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright of Arkansas (for whom Clinton had worked as a staffer while attending Georgetown University). Williams, a University of Arkansas Law School graduate himself, contacted the director of the university’s ROTC program, Colonel Eugene J. Holmes, to help get Clinton enrolled. After “an extensive, approximately two-hour interview,” Colonel Holmes agreed to accept Clinton into the ROTC program on 17 July 1969 (a mere eleven days before Clinton’s 28 July induction deadline), although Clinton would not actually be able to begin the program until he completed the basic training camp the following summer. Clinton’s draft notice was nullified, and his draft board reclassified him 1-D (reservist deferment) on 7 August 1969. Clinton apparently did intend to begin attending the University of Arkansas Law School that fall, but sometime during the summer he changed his mind and decided to return for a second year at Oxford instead: By Clinton’s account, he talked to Colonel Holmes and gained permission to return to Oxford for the second year since the basic training that he was required to attend before beginning advanced ROTC would not start until the following summer. Holmes said later that he allowed Clinton to return to Oxford for “a month or two,” but expected him to enroll in the law school as soon as possible. But a letter that Clinton wrote in December 1969 in which he apologized for not writing more often — “I know I promised to let you hear from me at least once a month” — is the strongest evidence that Holmes was aware of and approved Clinton’s plan to go back to Oxford. The rest of the ROTC staff was expecting Clinton to enroll that fall. Ed Howard, the drill sergeant, later recalled that there was great anger when word spread through the ROTC office that Clinton was not on campus. The details of Clinton’s subsequent actions and decisions are murky, but sometime after returning to Oxford that fall (where he later helped organize anti-war protests in London), probably between 1 October and 15 October 1969, he changed his mind again and asked his draft board to drop his ROTC deferment and reclassify him 1-A. Given recent policy changes and rumors of upcoming policy changes by the Nixon administration at that time — graduate students who received induction notices were now allowed to finish out their school years rather than just the current terms; Nixon was said to be considering withdrawing 35,000 troops from Vietnam, temporarily suspending the draft, and changing the draft requirements so that only 19-year-olds would be called and only “those draftees who volunteered for service there” would be shipped to Vietnam; and the administration was reportedly pushing for a draft lottery system based on birthdates which would expose eligible men to the draft for one year only — Clinton may have calculated that he was not risking much by opting to drop his ROTC commitment in favor of a 1-A classification, as biographer David Maraniss surmised: The preponderance of evidence leads in one direction: to the notion that with each passing week there were more signs that he might not get drafted even if he abandoned the deferment. If Clinton, acting through his stepfather, arranged to have the local draft board reclassify him 1-A after October 1, he would have known that it was largely a symbolic act providing him with the best of both worlds — the ability to say he had given up a deferment, and the knowledge that even though he was 1-A again, he would not be drafted that year. When the first draft lottery of the Vietnam era was held on 1 December 1969, Clinton’s birthdate of 19 August was selected 311th, a number high enough to practically guarantee that he would not be drafted (and indeed he was not). A few days later, Clinton sat down and wrote the now-infamous letter to Colonel Holmes explaining his reasons for reneging on his agreement to enter the University of Arkansas and its ROTC program. That Bill Clinton went to great lengths to avoid the Vietnam-era draft, that he used political connections to obtain special favors, and that he made promises and commitments which he later failed to honor, are all beyond dispute. However, the timeline quoted above jumps the tracks when it labels Clinton a “felon,” because none of his actions, no matter how unethical or morally questionable they might have been, were illegal. When Clinton agreed in July of 1969 to enter the advanced ROTC program at the University of Arkansas, his draft board rescinded his induction notice and reclassified him with a reservist’s deferment. That he later changed his mind in October 1969 and opted to forego the ROTC program and be reclassified 1-A did not constitute a “failure to report” or make him “AWOL.” At the time of his 1-A re-classification in October 1969 the previous induction notice was no longer in effect, and he was not subsequently re-drafted. If Clinton had still been obligated to report for induction, his draft board could have got him any time they wanted: they certainly knew where to find him, yet no one ordered him to report to an induction center, no federal agents arrested him for draft evasion, and no MPs came and hauled him away for being AWOL, because he hadn’t broken any laws, civil or military. Likewise, President Carter’s executive order of 21 January 1977, which provided pardons and amnesty for those convicted or suspected of violating the Military Selective Service Act between 1964 and 1973 did not apply to Clinton because he committed no such violation. Although what he did may not have been against the law, Clinton’s broken promises and contradictory statements about his efforts to avoid the draft were prime examples of the kind of self-serving doublespeak that later earned him the sobriquet “Slick Willie,” as Maraniss concluded in his Clinton biography, First in His Class: “It was just a fluke,” Clinton would say decades later, when first asked how he had made it through this period without serving in the military. But of course it was not a fluke. A fluke is a wholly accidental stroke of good luck. What happened to Clinton during that fateful year did not happen by accident. He fretted and planned every move, he got help from others when needed, he resorted to some deception or manipulation when necessary, and he was ultimately lucky.
|
28311
|
"U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar has advocated shorter prison sentences for individuals ""caught trying to join ISIS."
|
"What's true: In 2016, Omar wrote to a U.S. District Judge on behalf of a man convicted of terrorism offences, advocating ""restorative justice,"" rehabilitation, and leniency over a ""long-term prison sentence."" What's false: Omar has not consistently promoted a policy of reducing custodial sentences for those convicted of attempting to join ISIS, and her 2016 letter was sent in the context of sentencing one individual in a specific case."
|
mixture
|
Politics, ilhan omar, islam
|
U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar has been the subject of intense scrutiny, as well as misinformation and junk news, on a national scale ever since she began her ultimately successful campaign for the U.S. House of Representatives. Omar, a Democrat from Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, made history in January 2019 as one of the first two Muslim women to serve in the U.S. Congress, and much of the criticism aimed at her by right-leaning observers has centered around her religious affiliation. In late January 2019, the prolific right-leaning Twitter account @Education4Libs — a frequent source of factually-dubious, hyperpartisan content — claimed that Omar had been advocating for would-be Islamic extremist recruits to receive lighter prison sentences: “Rep. Ilhan Omar wants lighter sentences for people who have been caught trying to join ISIS …” one of their tweets proclaimed: Rep. Ilhan Omar wants lighter sentences for people who have been caught trying to join ISIS. Not kidding… She also married her brother & was against a bill that increased penalties for female genital mutilation. This is wrong. Sharia Law & the US Constitution CANNOT coexist. — Educating Liberals (@Education4Libs) January 27, 2019 That claim came after several prominent right-leaning groups and commentators pointed to an episode from 2016, when Omar had just been elected a Minnesota State Representative, as reported in a 25 January Daily Caller article: Back in 2016, Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar wrote a letter to a judge requesting a more lenient sentence on behalf of a Minnesota man who was accused of trying to join ISIS. Abdirahman Yasin Daud was one of two young men arrested in San Diego in April 2015. They were a part of a larger group of nine that was arrested for trying to join ISIS. Daud specifically was caught trying to buy fake passports in order to travel to Syria. Federal prosecutors requested Daud spend 30 years in prison followed by a lifetime of supervised release. Omar was one of the 13 people to write letters to Judge Michael Davis on Daud’s behalf. Some of those who posted on Twitter about the episode made it clear that the events in question took place in the past, while others — including the conservative activist Candace Owens and discredited Twitter commentator Jacob Wohl — described them as if they were recent or ongoing: Our new, Muslim congresswoman @IlhanMN, who was swore in by putting her hand over the Quran— is now pleading for leniency for men that are accused of joining ISIS. Isn’t diversity just the BEST?! Anybody who says it isn’t, is racist.https://t.co/ngEnoTzkg8 — Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) January 26, 2019 Good God! Ilhan Omar, the congresswoman that Laura Loomer tried to warn up about, writes letter asking judge for “compassion” in ISIS recruit sentencing She needs to resign! https://t.co/ky1J6hLsUp — Jacob Wohl (@JacobAWohl) January 25, 2019 @Education4Libs went even further, suggesting not merely that Omar had once intervened in a specific case, or even that she had done so recently or in an ongoing case, but that she was promoting a general policy of “lighter sentences for people who have been caught trying to join ISIS.” Rep. Omar has not consistently advocated a general policy of lighter sentences for would-be ISIS recruits, and she has consistently criticized and opposed Muslim extremism and radicalization. However, it is true that she did once ask a judge to pursue “a restorative approach to justice” rather than a “long-term prison sentence” in the case of one individual convicted of planning to take up arms with the terrorist organization. Although her letter to the judge came in the context of one specific case, some of what she wrote appeared to indicate broader support for a general response to radicalization and terrorism which emphasized rehabilitation and leniency over long prison sentences, lending a degree of accuracy to the claim made by @Education4Libs. In June 2016, a U.S. District Court jury in Minnesota convicted nine Somali-American men of multiple charges relating to their efforts to join and provide support to the Islamic State terrorist organization (ISIS), starting in 2014. One of them, Abdurahman Yasin Daud, was found guilty on three counts: conspiracy to murder outside the United States, conspiracy to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization, and attempting to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization. Federal prosecutors presented evidence that Daud had been an active and enthusiastic participant in a conspiracy to travel to Syria and join ISIS in combat, watching and encouraging others to watch ISIS propaganda videos, as well as plotting and attempting to obtain fake travel documents and journey to the Middle East. Some of the Minnesota men involved in the conspiracy did ultimately join ISIS in Syria and were believed to have subsequently been killed in combat there. In one court filing, the prosecution described Daud in the following terms: Defendant was a committed, dedicated and enthusiastic member of this conspiracy, who was highly motivated to go to Syria, join ISIL, and perpetrate violence on that terrorist organization’s behalf. As discussed in more detail later, Defendant’s desire and dedication to becoming a terrorist for ISIL was most overtly exposed upon his apprehension in San Diego in April 2015 when he was attempting to obtain a fake passport. But long before Defendant’s arrest, Defendant hid in the shadows of the conspiracy – encouraging others to become fighters for ISIL and biding his time until he himself could leave to fight jihad1 in Syria. From the very beginning, Defendant was intimately involved with the group planning to fight for ISIL — participating in weekly meetings to discuss the situation in Syria, and ultimately, deciding that ISIL was his, and his co-defendant’s, chosen terrorist group. Daud could have faced a sentence of life imprisonment, but prosecutors asked U.S. District Court judge Michael Davis to give him a lesser sentence of 30 years in prison, followed by a lifetime of supervised release. Thirteen individuals and groups wrote letters to Judge Davis, pleading on behalf of Daud for a lenient sentence. Many of the petitioners — who included Daud’s mother, brother, and childhood friends — testified to his personal qualities and previous work as a trainee community careworker and camp counselor and described him as a sensitive young man who had been radicalized and led astray from a once-promising future. Among those who appealed to Judge Davis for leniency was Ilhan Omar, who sent her letter on 8 November 2016 — the same day on which she was elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives. In her letter (which can be read in full here), she wrote: As you undoubtedly deliberate with great caution the sentencing of nine recently convicted Somali-American men, I bring to your attention the ramifications of sentencing young men who made a consequential mistake to decades in federal prison. Incarcerating 20-year-old men for 30 or 40 years is essentially a life sentence. Society will have no expectations of the to be 50- or 60-year-old released prisoners; it will view them with distrust and revulsion. Such punitive measures not only lack efficacy, they inevitably create an environment in which extremism can flourish, aligning with the presupposition of terrorist recruitment: “Americans do not accept you and continue to trivialize your value. Instead of being a nobody, be a martyr.” The best deterrent to fanaticism is a system of compassion. We must alter our attitude and approach; if we truly want to affect [sic] change, we should refocus our efforts on inclusion and rehabilitation. A long-term prison sentence for one who chose violence to combat direct marginalization is a statement that our justice system misunderstands the guilty. A restorative approach to justice assesses the lure of criminality and addresses it. The desire to commit violence is not inherent to people — it is the consequence of systematic alienation; people seek violent solutions when the process established for enacting change is inaccessible to them. Fueled by disaffection turned to malice, if the guilty were willing to kill and be killed fighting perceived injustice, imagine the consequence of them hearing, “I believe you can be rehabilitated. I want you to become part of my community, and together we will thrive.” In the end, Judge Davis followed the prosecution’s recommendation and sentenced Daud to 30 years in federal prison, followed by a lifetime of supervised release. As of January 2019, Daud was 25 years old. His scheduled release date is 30 June 2041. Although Omar sent the letter to Judge Davis in the specific context of Daud’s imminent sentencing, the letter never once referred to him or any of the other eight men by name. Omar did not appeal for leniency on the basis of her personal acquaintance with Daud, nor did she testify about his personal qualities. Rather, her letter contained a number of more general, principled statements about what she perceived as the best response to Muslim extremism and radicalization. For example, “The best deterrent to fanaticism is a system of compassion” and “A long-term prison sentence for one who chose violence to combat direct marginalization is a statement that our justice system misunderstands the guilty.” Indeed, Omar even suggested that the imposition of decades-long prison sentences for young offenders could actually fuel radicalization, writing: “Such punitive measures not only lack efficacy, they inevitably create an environment in which extremism can flourish.” Omar did not write to Judge Davis that she believed leniency and rehabilitation were appropriate as a blanket response to each and every instance of ISIS recruitment, or indeed to each and every terrorism-related offence. She did emphasize the relative youth of the nine Minnesota men, whom she described as having made “a consequential mistake.” At the risk of stating the obvious, it is also worth emphasizing that her appeals for leniency and restorative justice were made on the basis that they would have the net effect of hampering and combating future radicalization, not on the basis that she supported or agreed with the crimes the men committed. The claim made by the @Education4Libs Twitter account was that Rep. Omar “wants lighter sentences for people who have been caught trying to join ISIS.” Notwithstanding the fact that she sent her November 2016 letter to Judge Michael Davis on behalf of a specific individual who had been “caught trying to join ISIS,” the principles she invoked and response she advocated in that letter were relevant and applicable beyond the specific circumstances surrounding the conviction of Abdurahman Yasin Daud, and her letter did not mention him by name, nor contain any testimony about his personal character. As such, there is a degree of truth to the claim contained in the meme, and we issue a mixed verdict. We asked a spokesperson for Rep. Omar whether she stood by her 2016 letter, whether she supported shorter prison sentences in general for terrorism-related offences, and whether she had made similar interventions in any other terrorism-related cases. We did not receive a response to those specific questions, but the spokesperson did send us a statement on behalf of Rep. Omar indicating that she retained her preference for restorative justice and rehabilitation as alternatives to incarceration, in general: “Throughout her career, Rep. Omar has supported restorative justice and alternatives to incarceration. It was part of her campaign platform and will continue to be a core tenet of her agenda in Congress. She believes everyone has the ability to be rehabilitated. If we truly believe in reforming our criminal justice system, we must reform the way it treats violent, as well as non-violent, offenders. Research has shown that this problem is particularly acute for perceived Muslim perpetrators. Muslim perceived defendants get four times the prison time for foiled ideologically motivated crimes as white supremacists — even though white supremacist violence accounted for nearly every extremist murder in 2018. Conflating support for a rehabilitative approach to justice with support for the violent acts of offenders — as many on the right have done — is shameful and an intentional distortion of her views.”
|
7471
|
Trump to name former pharma exec as vaccine czar.
|
President Donald Trump is set to name a former pharmaceutical executive to lead his administration’s all-out effort to produce and distribute a coronavirus vaccine by the end of the year.
|
true
|
Understanding the Outbreak, Army, General News, Politics, Science, Donald Trump, Virus Outbreak, United States
|
Moncef Slaoui, a former GlaxoSmithKline executive, will lead “Operation Warp Speed,” Trump’s push to accelerate the vaccine development process for COVID-19, according to an administration official. Slaoui is to serve in a volunteer capacity, and will be assisted by Army Gen. Gustave Perna, the commander of United States Army Materiel Command. The move comes as the president and White House aides hope to produce vaccines for the coronavirus faster than what many scientists believe is realistic. The administration is aiming to have 300 million doses to distribute to Americans by the end of the year, believing a reliable vaccine is the only way to promote an economic rebound. “Operation Warp Speed” is operating largely independently of the existing White House coronavirus task force, which is also shifting its focus toward vaccine development. The initiative is being promoted by White House senior adviser Jared Kushner, and involves officials from the Defense Department and the Department of Health and Human Services. On Tuesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the government’s top infectious disease expert, said a vaccine would not be available by the beginning of the next academic year. “The idea of having treatments available or a vaccine to facilitate re-entry of students into the fall term would be something that would be a bit of a bridge too far,” he said, “even at the top speed we’re going.”
|
16502
|
"Fox admits they lie"" and, under the First Amendment, ""have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves."
|
Facebook post claims Fox 'admits they lie,' have right to 'distort news'
|
false
|
Civil Rights, Corporations, Ethics, Food Safety, Pundits, Transparency, PunditFact, Facebook posts,
|
"Critics of Fox News not-so-fondly call the cable channel ""Faux News."" But, according to an Internet meme, Fox not only admits it airs news, it says it has a legal right to do so. ""Fox News admits they lie,"" reads one version of the meme, ""They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves."" The meme, which quotes a 2003 report in the now-defunct Chicago Media Watch, has circulated around the blogosphere, and the legal case it refers to was featured in documentary on the history of corporations. A reader asked us to look into the claim that Fox News admits to lying and says that right is protected by the First Amendment. What we found is that the claims centers around a lawsuit involving a Florida Fox-owned affiliate, not the national network or cable news channel. And that's not all that is wrong with what the meme. Spilled milk The lawsuit the meme refers to involved two married reporters -- Jane Akre and Steve Wilson -- and their former employer, WTVT Channel 13, a Fox affiliate in Tampa, Fla. In 1996, the husband-and-wife team began reporting on the use of Posilac, a synthetic growth hormone in Florida dairy cattle developed by Monsanto. After eight months of back and forth between the reporters and the station, the story never aired, and the reporters were fired in 1997. Akre and Wilson sued the station for breach of contract and retaliatory firing in 1998. Why the reporters lost their jobs is the heart of the case. According to Akre and Wilson, WTVT caved to pressure from Fox corporate and Monsanto, and fired the pair when Akre threatened to take what Akre described as the station’s deliberate news distortion to the Federal Communications Commission. According to WTVT, the reporters submitted a biased and inaccurate report and were terminated after they refused to make the necessary edits. In 2000, a Tampa jury ruled that WTVT did indeed retaliate against Akre and awarded her $425,000, the Tampa Bay Times (then the St. Petersburg Times) reported. WTVT then appealed the case. In 2003, the Florida Second District Court of Appeals reversed the ruling, arguing that Akre’s retaliation allegation did not hold water. Whistleblowing in the dark Akre’s allegation and the meme involve the intersection of three pieces of media policy: the FCC’s news provision, the FCC’s whistleblower’s statute, and the First Amendment. According to Akre, WTVT deliberately distorted news by airing a revised version of the Posilac story. That, Akre says, is prohibited under the news provision. When Akre threatened to notify the FCC, the station fired her and breached the whistleblower statute that prohibits retaliation against employees who disclose an employer’s ""violation of law, rule, or regulation."" The station denied repeatedly that it had tried to broadcast distorted news and said it wanted fair and balanced reports from Akre and Wilson. WTVT argued that the FCC’s news distortion policy is more a rule of thumb than a codified law, and thus not under the purview of the whistleblower statute. The appeals court agreed. Stuart Benjamin, a professor of telecommunications at Duke University, said he doesn’t see anything in the legal documents that suggests WTVT admitted to any lies or distortion. Rather, the station argued, and the court agreed, that Akre failed to meet her burden of proof, according to Benjamin. ""If a statute prohibits me from hitting you only if I act with malice, and you say that I hit you but don’t establish malice, then I have a simple winning argument in court that you failed to show malice.That doesn’t mean I agree I hit you. It just means I have a winning argument that focuses on the absence of malice,"" he said. Freedom of the press Beyond what was in writing, Akre doesn’t remember WTVT admitting to lying and defending it as a legal right. ""I don’t think they said it just like that, but they basically said we can do what we want,"" Akre told PunditFact. ""They kept saying ‘we have First Amendment rights,’ meaning they can operate with impunity and have the constitutional right to do so."" The First Amendment, as well as the Florida Constitution, ""prohibits judicial review of Defendants’ news judgments and the exercise of editorial discretion, consistent with the guarantees of a free press,"" the station argued in its defense statement. What this means is that the court shouldn’t judge the editing choices of WTVT, the station’s lawyer Patricia Anderson told The Weekly Planet. Anderson invoked the First Amendment because it is dangerous for the courts and the FCC to become involved in disputes between members of the media and tread on either party’s freedom of press rights, according to Alison Steele, a media lawyer and Anderson's’ former law partner. (Steele currently represents the Tampa Bay Times, which operates PunditFact.) Deni Elliott, a professor of media ethics at the University of South Florida, said that by invoking the First Amendment, Fox is suggesting that they are not accountable to anyone -- ""not a reasonable stand for a news organization to take."" But to infer that WTVT used the First Amendment to defend news distortion and declare impunity is wrong. ""That wasn’t ever their position,"" Steele said. ""There was never a factual or logical nexus established between the alleged crippling of the First Amendment and the firing of these two individuals,"" said Thomas McGowan, a media lawyer who was part of WTVT’s defense team. Liane Casten, the reporter who wrote the the Chicago Media Watch article that originated the meme, said WTVT admitted to the news allegations and defended it as a legal right during the trial, but could not recall the specifics. That position, however, is not corroborated by Akre. Steele, who worked with WTVT’s attorney, said it’s possible lawyers conceded the point as a hypothetical. But it was never central to their legal argument, nor an admission in the sense Casten or the meme suggests. ""I can certainly imagine that in oral argument. The other side says, ‘If you did do this,’ and you respond, ‘If I did, it doesn’t matter.’ That’s just part of the refining and defining what the legal argument,"" she said. ""This happens all the time, but it’s not an admission."" The ruling The Internet meme claims, ""Fox admits they lie"" and, under the First Amendment, ""have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves."" The claim doesn't track back to the national cable network most people know. Instead, it's rooted in a wrongful termination lawsuit between a Tampa Fox affiliate and two reporters. The heart of the suit was whether the Fox affiliate wrongly fired the reporters over a story about a synthetic growth hormone in Florida dairy cattle. The reporters and the station disagreed about the accuracy of the story. As part of the lawsuit, lawyers for the station argued that the courts do not have the right to play referee on story decisions -- citing the First Amendment. We found no evidence that the Fox affiliate admitted that it lied about the news it ultimately presented, and we certainly found no evidence that Fox News as a whole admits it lies (in the present tense). While the Fox affiliate argued that it has the right to present the news as it chooses, it’s quite a leap to suggest Fox as a television corporation defended some right to ""distort news reports"" -- other than in a hypothetical sense to quash a wrongful termination suit. This meme wasn’t conjured out of thin air, but it’s not accurate."
|
11245
|
A New Frontier in Sun Protection
|
Drawing on concerns raised earlier this year by a study that found sun damage to skin continues even after exposure to the sun has stopped, this article cites several products that it says may help limit the damage, but it offers scant evidence to support their use. The article takes a consumer’s guide approach to address the potential impact of post-sun exposure skin care. It is an interesting, under-explored area but the primary evidence is anecdotal from those selling the products they tout as beneficial. Reader comments left on the newspaper website were not flattering: This article is not a thorough coverage of well known remedies for sun burn. It is clearly a paid advertisement thinly disguised as reporting. people have to realize you can make any claim you want with these things, you don’t have to prove it. Is this an infomercial? Where is the evidence? Please explain the mechanism by which this glop enters skin cells – for that matter, prove that it does! This is a commercial of products which are intended for health protection but were never clinically tested. The incidence of skin cancers has been increasing in recent decades, according to the World Health Organization, with 2 million to 3 million non-melanoma skin cancers and 132,000 melanoma skin cancers expected to occur this year. That incidence is expected to continue to rise. If using a protective skin product after exposure to the sun could cut one’s skin cancer risk, that might be useful information to many people. What’s more, Americans spend billions of dollars each year on skin care products, so aside from the vital health questions, readers deserve to know whether they are getting what they are paying for.
|
mixture
|
skin cancer/sun protection,Wall Street Journal
|
The story mentions the costs of the products it cites. The story says that “Product formulators are now seeing after-sun care as another line of defense to stop cell mutations and aging in its tracks.” But the story does not cite evidence to show whether their products do that. In the accompanying video, the reporter is more blunt about the uncertainty: “We don’t really know how long it takes for antioxidants to act on the skin,” says the reporter, who then cites several products. “They feel great and they smell great and they feel good on your skin after it’s been sun-parched. As to whether it’s helped my skin defend itself from the sun, it’s too soon to say. I’ve only been using them for a couple of weeks, but I think it’s worth a try.” No mention is made of any possible harms that could be caused by any of the products cited (including the potential harm of paying for something that doesn’t work). The evidence supporting the use of after-sun products was not spelled out by the story, though it allows company representatives to tout their products’ putative benefits. Those putative benefits are not universally accepted. “The key question is, if you spray antioxidants on the skin, do they get to where the cells are?” asked Douglas E. Brash, a senior research scientist in therapeutic radiology and in dermatology at Yale, whose work was cited in the story and who spoke with HealthNewsReview.org in a telephone interview. “I have mixed feelings about whether just spraying antioxidants on the skin is good. It could be great, but I just haven’t seen any evidence showing it.” He said the story struck him as “kind of like a glorified advertisement.” Brash further questioned the value of including a reference to Terrence Collins, the professor of green chemistry at Carnegie Mellon University who is not quoted. “He’s a chemist; not a photo biologist. He works on enzymes that clean up pollution. Yeah, it’s great that she’s manufacturing her stuff according to green chemistry, but that says nothing about whether this helps your skin.” Collins did not respond to a phone call or an email. “My gut reaction is I don’t think any of this will poison you and it might actually do some good but I wish somebody would show some evidence that it would do some good,” said Brash, who noted that he is not a physician. The Yale researcher said the quotes in the story from the proponents of after-sun products were consistent with what he sees as the cosmetics industry’s practice of making no outright claims of efficacy in order to avoid scrutiny from the Food and Drug Administration. “This article is kind of like that,” he said. The story urges sun worshipers to “be aware that some labels only add a trace, ineffective amount of a beneficial ingredient to a product in order to tout its effects on the label, while others have a bona fide antioxidant slant.” But the story does not tell readers how to find out whether a product contains more than a trace amount of “beneficial ingredient.” “Unless you’re an organic chemist, it’s hard to figure out,” said Dr. Darrell Rigel, a clinical professor of dermatology at New York University, who is interviewed in the video attached to the story and who spoke with HealthNewsReview.org in a telephone interview. He described the work supporting the use of antioxidants as “preliminary,” adding that “they have some value, we just don’t know how much.” Finally, the article describes one company as having an “Eco-Cert-certified lab, that creates mostly organic, botanical-based face and body treatments,” but does not say what an Eco-Cert-certified lab is or why it might be better than a non-Eco-Cert-certified lab. Nor does it say why “mostly organic” treatments would be better than non-organic treatments or worse than wholly organic treatments. The article, which does not cite the toll caused by skin cancer, does not overplay the dangers of sun exposure, but it misses an opportunity to shed light on its growing incidence. The reference to Ms. Peterson “surviving melanoma” could be seen as overly dramatic, since most cases are detected early and treated by simply cutting out the skin growth in a doctor’s office. Dermatologist Rand’s one-line caution — “there’s nothing you can do to reverse sun exposure” — is welcome, but does not suffice to balance the overwhelming weight of the rest of the story promoting the products. Though the alternative — staying out of the sun — is mentioned, it is dismissed as unrealistic. “I’m on the phone with you from Hawaii and can see at least 40 people on the beach, soaking in the rays,” says the founder of True Nature Botanicals. “My kids are outside playing. I know that it’s not realistic to say ‘no sun.’ ” It would have been interesting to have heard whether cancer researchers feel the same way about the futility of trying to limit their own children’s sun exposure. The story could have at least made some reference to evidence about the reduction in cancer risk for people who consistently use sun block, limit their time in the sun, and use hats and other clothing that blocks UV light. Without that perspective, readers may be misled into believing that après sun treatments may offer comparable protection. It is clear that the products mentioned in the story are currently available. The photo caption includes links to manufacturer web sites. The article identifies a number of after-sun products and notes that the marketing of these items is spurred in part by a research article published this year. The article includes comments from independent experts so it does not appear to have relied solely on a news release.
|
2357
|
Forty years on, bullying takes its toll on health and wealth.
|
The negative social, physical and mental health effects of childhood bullying are still evident nearly 40 years later, according to research by British psychiatrists.
|
true
|
Health News
|
In the first study of its kind to look at the effects of childhood bullying beyond early adulthood, the researchers said its impact is “persistent and pervasive”, with people who were bullied when young more likely to have poorer physical and psychological health and poorer cognitive functioning at age 50. “The effects of bullying are still visible nearly four decades later ... with health, social and economic consequences lasting well into adulthood,” said Ryu Takizawa, who led the study at the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London. The findings, published in the American Journal of Psychiatry on Friday, come from the British National Child Development Study which includes data on all children born in England, Scotland and Wales during one week in 1958. It included 7,771 children whose parents gave information on their child’s exposure to bullying when they were aged 7 and 11. The children were then followed up until they reached 50. Bullying is characterized by repeated hurtful actions by children of a similar age, where the victim finds it difficult to defend themselves. More than a quarter of children in the study - 28 percent - had been bullied occasionally, and 15 percent were bullied frequently - rates that the researchers said were similar to the situation in Britain today. The study, which adjusted for other factors such as childhood IQ, emotional and behavioral problems and low parental involvement, found people who were frequently bullied in childhood were at an increased risk of mental disorders such as depression, anxiety and experiencing suicidal thoughts. Victims of bullying were also more likely to have lower educational levels, less likely to be in a relationship and more likely to report lower quality of life. Men who had been bullied were also more likely to be unemployed and earn less. Louise Arseneault, also from the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s and who also worked on the study, said its findings showed how important it is “to move away from any perception that bullying is just an inevitable part of growing-up.” “Teachers, parents and policy-makers should be aware that what happens in the school playground can have long-term repercussions,” she said.
|
27551
|
If you die, you can send your ashes to legislators as one final act of protest.
|
In 1988, artist and photographer David Wojnarowicz captured a similar spirit of protest when he wore a jacket bearing the message, “IF I DIE OF AIDS – FORGET BURIAL – JUST DROP MY BODY ON THE STEPS OF THE FDA” during a demonstration outside the Food and Drug Administration building.
|
true
|
Politics, American Health Care Act, posthumous, protests
|
If you die an untimely death, can you have your ashes sent to the person of your choice? What if you would like to send it to your least favorite representative in order to protest legislation they have written or voted for? In theory, it is already possible to have your cremated remains sent to Congress, but the idea has gained traction as a political protest since the passage of the American Health Care Act in the House on 4 May 2017. Shortly after it passed, 20-year-old Zoey Jordan Salsbury revealed that she had created “Mail Me to the GOP”, a web site that offers to help users get their paperwork in order to send their ashes to a “GOP member of Congress” when they die. The site also links to an online fundraiser seeking to unseat the members of Congress who voted for the bill. Salsbury, a junior at American University who won the President’s Volunteer Service Award alongside a friend last year for her online work, lives with depression and anxiety, and was also diagnosed with fibromyalgia in November 2016. She told us: I have several pre-existing conditions that are out of my control. They are things I was born with. And when you have chronic illnesses you befriend others with chronic illness. So I have friends who I see struggle with expensive care, even with insurance. I know they’ll die if the bill is passed by the Senate. I know I’ll die if I can’t afford my psych and pain meds. And I wanted the GOP to see that. The website asks users, “Why will you die because of the Republican health care bill?” and asks them to submit responses. As of 8 May 2017, Salsbury said, just over 1,100 people had signed up to take part in the process, adding: “I’m sure there are a few trolls in there, but from what I’ve scrolled through and seen most are genuine.” However, she said, she will not personally send the cremated remains; instead she planned to help people work with an estate planner in order to make their own arrangements should they choose to follow through with the posthumous protest statement. But as her site has received more notice, Salsbury said, her server has crashed multiple times. She told us: I’m really glad that it’s gotten so much attention. I really hope it makes an impact on GOP members of the Senate. It’s been picked up by some right-wing blogs which has made my Twitter mentions and Facebook messages kind of a nightmare, but it’s worth all the hate if even one member of the Senate votes against this bill because of it. The United States Postal Service does allow the shipment of cremated remains, so long as they are mailed in a package containing padding as well as inner and outer containers. Salsbury said she would do more research”on the legalities of sending ashes to lawmaker after the Senate takes up the matter. “Right now I want to concentrate on making sure this bill dies in the Senate, instead of us dying,” Salsbury told us. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) has said that her colleagues would start over again “from scratch” instead of considering the House version of the bill. We contacted USPS seeking comment regarding any possible special stipulations regarding mail to the Capitol, but have not yet received a response.
|
25951
|
"Wrong"" COVID-19 case count by Orlando Health ""explains the 'outbreak' in Florida."
|
A Florida Department of Health website showed that one of Orlando Health’s 13 testing sites reported a 98% positive rate on 522 tests for COVID-19. Orlando Health said the positive rate for its system was about 10%. Some small labs have been reporting only positive results to the department, which says it is working with those labs to report all results. The rate of positive tests alone is not reflective of the size of the outbreak in Florida, which had 301,810 total cases and on July 12 set a national record for cases in one day.
|
false
|
Public Health, Florida, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"One theory ricocheting around social media blames Florida’s large coronavirus outbreak on mistakes in case reporting. The claim was made by internet prankster Joey Saladino, who says he creates content ""to expose the Democrats and MSM,"" or mainstream media. The onetime candidate for a New York City congressional seat has 156,000 followers on Facebook. His July 14 Facebook post said (typo included): ""The Flordia Covid-19 Outbreak is being EXPOSED as a HOAX!"" It included an image of a tweet he posted on Twitter, which also misspelled the state name: ""BREAKING: Orlando Health admits their Covid-19 numbers are wrong, saying it shows 98% positive, but it’s actually 9.4%. This explains the ‘outbreak’ in Flordia."" One commenter wrote: ""I knew it!"" Other Facebook users made similar claims, saying for example that 33 Florida labs reported ""98% positivity instead of 9.8%. Another claimed the state Department of Health ""increased the COVID-19 case number by a whopping 90%."" There is no evidence of that. Saladino’s Facebook post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) There have been discrepancies, and some confusion, in how test results are reported to the state. But the size of the COVID-19 outbreak has to do with raw numbers of people in Florida who test positive for infection — not what percentage of test results are positive. On July 12, the Sunshine State made headlines by recording 15,300 new coronavirus cases — breaking the U.S. record for most coronavirus cases in a day. Florida led the nation in the number of cases over the previous seven days, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported July 15. The same day, the Florida Department of Health announced that on July 14, its new cases reflected a nearly 14% positive rate — that is, the number of people who test positive for the first time divided by all tests. That’s higher than the 11% positive rate for the 3.4 million tests done during the state’s entire outbreak. ""I think the way our community has come back together over the last couple of weeks has really just been inconsistent with preventing the spread of a respiratory virus,"" Dr. Angus Jameson, medical director with Pinellas County Emergency Medical Services, told the Tampa Bay Times on the record-setting day. Saladino’s Facebook post came the day that Fox 35, a television station in Orlando, did a news story about COVID-19 testing in Florida. The story said that all, or nearly all, of the tests done at some labs were reported to the state as being positive for the virus. That included, according to the story, Orlando Health reporting a 98% positive rate to the state on a batch of tests. The hospital ""confirmed errors"" to the station, according to the story, and said the actual positive rate was only 9.4%. The story was picked up by Fox News and the conservative-leaning Washington Examiner. Orlando Health has 450 locations, including 13 hospitals, as well as clinics, labs and other facilities. Kena Lewis, a spokeswoman for the system, told PolitiFact there has been confusion over how the state Department of Health website reports testing results. On one page, showing data as of July 15, Orlando Health is listed with 98% of its 522 tests showing a positive result. But Lewis gave us data showing the positive rate is only 10% when all 13 of the system’s hospitals, which go by different names, are taken into account. The rate was 9.4% as of July 12, she said. Another problem, according to the Department of Health, is some smaller labs were reporting only the tests that had positive results to the state. On the day the TV story aired, the department issued a statement saying it ""immediately began working with those labs to ensure that all results were being reported in order to provide comprehensive and transparent data. As the state continues to receive results from various labs, the department will continue educating these labs on proper protocol for reporting COVID-19 test results."" Dr. Raul Pino, the local health officer for the Florida Department of Health in Orange County, told the Orlando Sentinel that in tracking most diseases like gonorrhea or HIV, negative tests typically aren’t reported, but in a pandemic, calculating the positivity rate is important to track the spread. As for the errors, Pino said they don’t explain the state’s overall outbreak. ""It takes a lot to change"" the state’s overall positivity rate, Pino said. The state Department of Health and Gov. Ron DeSantis’ office did not respond to our request for additional information on how sites report test results. On July 15, DeSantis echoed Pino’s point, saying ""a number of labs are still doing the default, sending positive only without negatives. They are not trying to be underhanded. But we have identified it and they will start doing the negatives as well."" A Facebook post claimed: ""Wrong"" COVID-19 case count by Orlando Health ""explains the 'outbreak' in Florida."" State data show one hospital in the 13-hospital Orlando Health system reporting a 98% positive rate on its 522 coronavirus tests. However, systemwide, Orlando Health’s positive rate is about 10%. Around the state, some small labs have reported only positive tests to the state, possibly skewing to a small extent Florida’s overall positive test rate. But the size of the COVID-19 outbreak in Florida is reflected in the overall numbers — including the 301,810 total cases and Florida setting a one-day national record for cases."
|
26289
|
“Bill Gates admits his COVID-19 vaccine might kill nearly 1 million people.”
|
The Gates Foundation is trying to develop a coronavirus vaccine. Gates spoke theoretically about how many people might suffer side effects from a vaccine, not about how many might die from it.
|
false
|
Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"The conspiracy section of a conservative website carried an article with this headline: ""Watch: Bill Gates Admits His COVID-19 Vaccine Might Kill Nearly 1,000,000 People."" The article from CloverChronicle.com, shared widely on Facebook, 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.) In the interview, Gates spoke theoretically about how many people might experience side effects from a yet-to-be-developed coronavirus vaccine. He did not say anything about people dying from such a vaccine. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has pledged millions of dollars to companies developing potential novel coronavirus vaccines. There is no evidence that the foundation stands to profit from these efforts. Readers of the article were instructed to go to minute 2:35 of a video that’s embedded in the article. The video is a 4-minute clip of an interview Gates did April 9 on CNBC about the work his foundation is doing to fight COVID-19. CNBC posted the clip on YouTube. It has been viewed more than 74,000 times. Gates mentions needing about 7 billion doses worldwide and says: ""The efficacy in vaccines in older people is always a huge challenge. It turns out the flu vaccine isn’t that effective in elderly people; most of the benefit comes from younger people not spreading it because they’re vaccinated, and that benefits, on a community basis, the elderly. ""Here, we clearly need a vaccine that works in the upper age range because they’re most at risk of that. And doing that so that you amp it up so it works in older people, and yet you don’t have side effects. If we have one in 10,000 side effects, that’s way more — 700,000 people who will suffer from that. ""So, really understanding the safety at gigantic scale across all age ranges — pregnant, male, female, undernourished, existing comorbidities — it’s very, very hard. And that actual decision of, OK, let’s go and give this vaccine to the entire world — governments will have to be involved because there will be some risk and indemnification needed before that can be decided on."" Gates makes no mention of anyone dying from the vaccine. He’s referring to side effects and suggests, theoretically, that if 7 billion vaccines are administered and one in 10,000 people experience side effects, that would mean 700,000 people experiencing side effects. (The full 26-minute interview is here.) This claim is false and ridiculous — ."
|
36403
|
There is a Snapchat sex trafficking ring in Lawrence, Massachusetts, using location functions to find and abduct women.
|
Is There a Snapchat Sex Trafficking Ring in Lawrence, Massachusetts?
|
false
|
Disinformation, Fact Checks
|
On April 24 2019, a Facebook user shared the following status (archived here), claiming that a Snapchat sex trafficking ring was operating in Lawrence, Massachusetts:So there’s a sex trafficking ring going on in Lawrence Mass. If you get a random person who tries adding you on Snapchat this morning and it says “added by search” it’s the trafficking ring and they’re using snapchats to locate girls. I received one this morning, didn’t accept because I don’t accept people that I don’t know because of this reason. Be safe! 👀 Ps…. try me!! !👀👀👀According to the poster, “a random person who tries adding you on Snapchat” was actually part of a ring of sex trafficking operatives. The post claimed that such a request originates with “the trafficking ring” and goes on to claim that “they’re using snapchats to locate girls.” She says that she avoided the risk by declining such a request, reminding fellow Snapchat users in Lawrence to “be safe.”Missing from the post were important details, such as:In its popular form (shared over 130,000 times in 12 hours), the claim was a classic sex trafficking scare with no basis in credible reality. We immediately contacted police in Lawrence, Massachusetts after checking their Facebook page for alerts — so far we have not seen any, and we left a message for the department.Of course, a lack of any information substantiating the rumor or even the general claim about Snapchat as a sex trafficking risk was no barrier to opportunistic websites repeating the rumor as if it were news. According to the user, Snapchat sex traffickers were adding random women and using location services to find and abduct them.However, research commissioned by the state of Nebraska in 2018 through the University of Toledo Human Trafficking and Social Justice Institute into the use of social media (including Snapchat) as a tool by sex traffickers revealed that location services were not the “real risk” faced by vulnerable populations. Dr. Celia Williamson, UT professor of social work and director of the UT Human Trafficking and Social Justice Institute, was one of several trafficking experts consulted by the state in its research.Researchers found that while social media (and Snapchat) can be and has been used as a recruitment tool, the process did not involve “random women” and location services:“The transition from messaging to meeting a trafficker in person is becoming less prevalent,” Williamson said. “As technology is playing a larger role in trafficking, this allows some traffickers to be able to exploit youth without meeting face-to-face. Social media helps to mask traditional cues that alert individuals to a potentially dangerous person.”Williamson cites a 2018 report that says while 58 percent of victims eventually meet their traffickers face to face, 42 percent who initially met their trafficker online never met their trafficker in person and were still trafficked.The experts, whose identities are not being released, said the traffickers educate themselves by studying what the victim posts on commonly used view-and-comment sites such as Facebook, Instagram or SnapChat, as well as dating apps such as Tinder, Blendr and Yellow, or webcam sites like Chatroulette and Monkey, in order to build trust.“These guys, they learn about the girls and pretend to understand them, and so these girls, who are feeling not understood and not loved and not beautiful … these guys are very good at sort of pretending that they are all of these things and they really understand them and, ‘I know how you feel, you are beautiful,’ and just filling the hole that these girls are feeling,” said a professional contributing to the study.Noting that predators tend to “look for indicators of substance abuse, runaway activity and destabilization within the home,” researchers concluded that one common tactic — again, not at all random — involved convincing someone who is already at risk to send a compromising photograph and then using that to extort them. Examples cited were far more involved than simple contact or adding of an unknown contact, and the victim typically communicated their location predators affirmatively (not passively):One expert in Columbus shares a telling story: “The guy was reaching out to a lot of girls all day long. One girl, who is actually in a youth home, she had access to the Internet, and he connects with her on a social media platform. He drives all the way up from Columbus to Toledo, picks her up at her foster home and drives her back down to Columbus, and then traffics her here in Columbus. You know, 20, 30 years ago he would have never been able to connect with her, but because of social media, that connection was immediately made in over a few hours. He found out where she was and she told him, ‘Yeah, please come get me. I want out of here. '”None of that information (nor any we could locate) suggested that Snapchat users in Lawrence, Massachusetts were at heightened risk of such tactics, nor even that Snapchat was riskier than the other platforms mentioned in the research (“Facebook, Instagram … Tinder, Blendr … Yellow … Chatroulette and Monkey”).A September 2018 news story from Nebraska described grooming over social media in the case of one vulnerable 17-year-old who was later trafficked. In fact, a cadre of trafficking-related incidents in Nebraska curated by a religious organization detailed the actual tactics used by predators, none of which involved the simple act of determining a victim’s location through random requests. The cases did follow a pattern, which involved extensive contact between the predator and victim using a number of grooming tactics — often, the victim was shielded by police before they were intercepted by would-be traffickers.The Lawrence, Massachusetts Snapchat sex trafficking rumor called to mind an earlier viral rumor about the purported use of Uber in sex trafficking claims in Florida. A viral Facebook post shared by a woman about a purportedly harrowing near-miss with traffickers using airport Ubers was later described by Tampa police as a “misunderstanding.” Tampa police were seemingly baffled about how a woman’s misidentification of Ubers spiraled into a breathless claim of trafficking at the airport:It looks like the person who posted on Facebook got into the wrong car and then noticed that, you know, we are not going in the right direction. Well, they were going in the right direction — if it was the right person in the car. So it became very confusing. How that became some kind of sex trafficking thing is unclear to me and we’ve checked into it. The other driver is a legitimate Uber driver who was there to pick up somebody else.As we noted in our page about that rumor, the claim was not as confusing to those familiar with the spread of fearmongering on social media. Lenore Skenazy of Free Range Kids described a similar viral frenzy involving a California IKEA in March 2017, expressing profound confusion over what she deemed a strange new form of bragging:What the heck is going on, America? This “My kids were about to be trafficked, I just KNOW it” post is so shockingly similar to last week’s, “My kids were about to be trafficked, I just KNOW it” post that it feels … creepy. A lot creepier than being at Ikea where a couple of men glance at my kids.The reader who sent me this link asked if I thought there might be some “validity” to it, to which I must respond: No. In fact, I think it’s crazy. What, two men are going to grab two or three kids, all under age 7, IN PUBLIC, in a camera-filled IKEA, with the MOM and the GRANDMA right there, not to mention a zillion other fans of Swedish furnishings?Can we please PLEASE take a deep breath and realize how insanely unlikely that is? How we don’t need to be “warned” about this? How NOTHING HAPPENED!You can TELL nothing happened, because the whole thing was described as an “incident.” And Lenore’s #1 Rule of Reporting is: When something is called an “incident,” it’s because nothing happened. In fact, my alternate headline for this post was:POINTLESSLY TERRIFIED MOM URGES OTHER MOMS TO BE POINTLESSLY TERRIFIEDAs we have noted, experts in trafficking routinely decry such claims about the issue. Experts regularly underscore the fact that sex trafficking is rarely (if ever) a “random” crime of sudden abduction; instead, traffickers tend to lure vulnerable teens over time:For answers, we interviewed Professor David Finkelhor. He runs the Crimes Against Children Research Center and has authored several books about child homicide, abductions and sexual abuse.“Child kidnapping is a very rare phenomenon to start out with,” Finkelhor said. “We estimate that there are maybe 100 or so serious kidnappings of children in the United States (each year) … The most typical kind of kidnapping is of a teenage girl for the purposes of sexual assault,” Finkelhor said. “Sometimes — very rarely — [it’s] for the purposes of abducting them into sex trafficking, but even that is very rare.”When it comes to younger children — like the ones described in the Highlands Ranch mom’s Facebook post — kidnappings are usually by a family member during a custody dispute.“I think it’s more likely these are parents who are concerned about a person behaving suspiciously and go to the possibility that this is for reasons of abduction or sex trafficking…” Finkelhor said. “Sex trafficking has gotten a lot of attention lately, so perhaps they immediately went to that idea. But I don’t think that’s a very realistic scenario.”Finkelhor’s theory is backed up by the law enforcement officials 9NEWS interviewed as part of the original verify on this Facebook post.Beth Boggess, the FBI supervisory special agent who heads Colorado’s violent crimes against children unit, told 9NEWS that human traffickers tend to lure vulnerable teens over time.“It’s a completely different crime,” Boggess said. “We don’t see kidnapping for human trafficking.”Neither Boggess or the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office, which investigated this claim and a similar one in May, had heard of a single incident where a young child was kidnapped from a store for the purposes of sex trafficking.And versions of this scenario have been debunked by other law enforcement officials across the country, including Michigan and California.“This is a very unusual and perhaps implausible kind of abduction scenario,” Finkelhor said.Time and again, those knowledgeable about sex trafficking and folklore plant viral posts such as the Lawrence claim in the realm of folklore, not credible crime warnings:This isn't how sex trafficking works, but perhaps @MenloParkMall or @EdisonPolice can comment on this report, said to have taken place in Edison, New Jersey. (H/t @uurraammaa). https://t.co/FKn03Vu7oD— It's an Urban Legend (@ULTweets) April 22, 2019Police in Lawrence, Massachusetts have not yet addressed the Snapchat sex trafficking rumor despite its viral spread. However, it is highly unlikely given the wealth of knowledge and research into how sex and labor trafficking begins and continues.Anti-trafficking organizations like the Polaris project offer information about the causes and methods of sex trafficking here.Update, April 24 2019, 12:14 PM: Police in Lawrence, Massachusetts addressed the Snapchat sex trafficking rumor, asserting that there was “no substance” to the claim:The LPD has been made aware of a social media scam referring to sex trafficking. There is no substance to this matter. As always the public should use caution when responding to, or clicking on posts from individuals they do not recognize. pic.twitter.com/oehtzU2dW6— Lawrence, Massachusetts Police (@lawrencepolice) April 24, 2019
|
2081
|
From machete to machine in Brazil's cane fields.
|
For nearly five centuries, the classic image of sugar production in Brazil has been one of workers setting cane fields on fire and then descending on the crop with their machetes for harvest.
|
true
|
Environment
|
No longer. More than half of the cane in Brazil’s main sugar-producing area of Sao Paulo state was harvested using machines during the 2009/10 season, a historic first that portends greater efficiency in coming years. The shift is occurring so quickly that some producers face a four-month waiting list to get the right equipment. The transition, driven by both increased competition and tougher Brazilian environmental laws, has been a boon for multinational equipment manufacturers supplying the world’s leading producer of sugar and the second largest ethanol producer after the United States. “Brazil’s market is hot,” said Jose Emilio dos Santos, manager of Tratorag Comercio e Representacao, a John Deere dealer based in Piracicaba, the heart of the center-south’s cane growing region in Sao Paulo state. “Many producers are looking to buy a new machine harvester.” Last year, Cosan, the world’s largest sugar and ethanol producer, spent 30.5 million reais ($17.3 million) on mechanization and expects to train between 180 and 200 harvester operators per year for the next four years, said Luis Carlos Veguin, the company’s human resources director. Adoption of the technology by big firms has forced many smaller producers to follow suit. In the first six months of 2010, 3,186 harvesters of all types were sold in Brazil, up from 478 in the same period of 2006, according to figures from Anfavea, the vehicle manufacturer’s association. It’s not just companies that are benefiting from the switch. Izaura Freitas Souza, 39, has wielded a machete in the sugar cane harvest since she was a 15 year old and once almost sliced off her big toe in the fields. Today, Souza drives a harvester for Cosan in Piracicaba and says she has tripled her earnings to 1,800 reais a month, which allows her to save to buy a house. “It is clean work now,” she said, “without the physical wear and tear.” Initial investment in a harvester is expensive but over time is a cheaper alternative to manual labor because wages have been rising in tandem with Brazil’s economy, Veguin said. A new cane harvester from John Deere costs an average 880,000 reais, said dos Santos, the tractor dealer. The company’s main competitor in Brazil is Case IH, a subsidiary of CNH Global. For smaller sugar cane producers who are unable to afford the initial investment, the situation can be dire. Unable to compete with the efficiency of the bigger players, some have been forced to enter into partnerships with Cosan or Bunge, or logistics companies, like Julio Simoes. “Banks request guarantees and the cost of a harvester is quite high,” dos Santos said. “Not all producers can provide sufficient collateral.” Mechanization is given urgency by environmental laws, which will effectively phase out manual cane cutting in Sao Paulo state by 2017. Before manual harvesting begins, workers set fields alight to clear the undergrowth and flush out snakes and insects. Reducing burning is a priority for producers because the method is a blot on otherwise impressive environmental credentials — Brazilian ethanol from cane is about six times more energy efficient than its U.S. corn-derived counterpart — and they have introduced more stringent schedules. “We have a 100 percent target for the elimination of burning (in areas suitable for mechanization in Sao Paulo state) for 2014,” said Antonio de Padua Rodrigues, a director at Unica, the cane industry association. Cane producers fear that environmental reasons might be used as de facto trade barriers to prevent the entry of Brazilian sugar and ethanol into less competitive domestic markets in Europe and North America. This will be important as Brazil seeks to expand in overseas markets. The country’s 2010/11 sugar cane crop will be the ninth record in a row, up 10 percent from the prior year, according to the government’s supply agency, Conab. But the worst hit by mechanization are the cane cutters, many of whom risk losing their jobs if they can’t retrain. A harvester replaces about 100 cane cutters a day, according to Unica, and creates 30 jobs by way of operators and maintenance teams. An operator trainee must be literate and hold a driving license, which excludes many cutters. Although government and producers have stressed retraining, figures from Unica show there were 140,000 manual cane cutters in Sao Paulo state in 2010, down from 190,000 in 2006. Even Souza, the harvester operator, misses the company in the fields. “During the breaks everyone would joke around,” she said. “In the harvester I can only laugh at the memories.” (Editing by Brian Winter and Kieran Murray)
|
14619
|
"Marco Rubio Says Hillary Clinton ""believes that all abortions should be legal, even on the due date of that unborn child."
|
"Rubio said Clinton ""believes that all abortion should be legal, even on the due date of that unborn child."" Clinton does not believe that all abortion should be legal. Instead, she’s said she supports restrictions on late-term abortions except in cases of rape, incest and when the mother’s life and health are in danger. That’s not the same thing as unequivocally supporting abortions ""even on the due date"" of the child. Such an abortion would be a purely hypothetical scenario; doctors said such a procedure doesn't make sense medically."
|
false
|
Abortion, National, Candidate Biography, Marco Rubio,
|
"Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who’s known for his strong anti-abortion views, said Hillary Clinton is the extremist when it comes abortion, not him. ""Why doesn’t the media ask Hillary Clinton why she believes that all abortions should be legal, even on the due date of that unborn child,"" he said during the Feb. 6 Republican debate in New Hampshire. Is it true that Clinton ""believes all abortions should be legal even on the due date""? The Rubio campaign didn’t get back to us. So we looked at comments Clinton made on the issue over the past 15 years. Clinton has said she could support restrictions on abortions in the third trimester (about week 28 of a pregnancy) if the mother’s life and health are taken into account. Rubio casts this position as the equivalent of supporting abortions on the due date, but that exaggerates Clinton’s position. Restricting late-term abortions Clinton responded to Rubio’s attack the morning after the debate, calling it ""pretty pathetic."" ""I think that the life and health of the mother, obviously, rape and incest, have to be always taken into account,"" she said on ABC’s This Week. ""And, you know, when he raises the very, very difficult issue of late-term abortion, he conveniently overlooks the fact that there are medical reasons, there are health-related reasons."" We found many instances of Clinton saying abortion should be ""safe, legal and rare."" In short, Clinton is open to restrictions on late-term abortions provided there are exceptions for the life and health of the mother. This includes both mental health and medical complications like preeclampsia, a pregnancy complication of high blood pressure that could lead to death. We should note that those who want a total abortion ban — a position that Rubio has expressed — see exceptions made for rape, incest and health as loopholes that undermine late-term restrictions. Advocating for exceptions could theoretically encompass a due-date abortion, but Rubio’s conclusion that Clinton supports due-date abortions is not backed by evidence and logically unsound. Here’s a sampling of comments Clinton's made in the past: Sept. 28, 2015, Meet the Press Daily: ""There can be restrictions in the very end of the third trimester, but they have to take into account the life and health of the mother."" June 4, 2007, Democratic presidential forum: ""What I have tried to both talk about and reach out about over the last many years, going back, really, at least 15 years, in talking about abortion being safe, legal, and rare. And, by rare, I mean rare."" Oct. 8, 2000, New York Senate debate: ""I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice."" When abortions can be performed According to the reproductive health nonprofit, the Guttmacher Institute, 20 states limit abortions after ""viability"" (which refers to the point when a fetus can survive out of the womb) and 23 states prohibit abortions between 20 and 28 weeks. Seven states and Washington D.C., have no time restrictions, but this doesn’t mean late-term abortions are common. In fact, only 1.2 percent of abortions occur after 21 weeks, according to the Guttmacher Institute. ""People say we should place legal restrictions on abortion in the third trimester. The reality is the medical community is doing that in practice,"" said Daniel Grossman, a professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of California, San Francisco and an advisor at Ibis Reproductive Health. ""Third-trimester abortion is very uncommon."" As for the scenario Rubio is suggesting — an abortion performed on the due date to save the life of the mother? It doesn’t exist. ""Nobody would talk about abortion on the woman’s due date. If the mother’s life was at risk, the treatment for that is delivery, and the baby survives,"" Grossman said. ""Medically, it does not compute."" Our ruling Rubio said Clinton ""believes that all abortion should be legal, even on the due date of that unborn child."" Clinton does not believe that all abortion should be legal. Instead, she’s said she supports restrictions on late-term abortions except in cases of rape, incest and when the mother’s life and health are in danger. That’s not the same thing as unequivocally supporting abortions ""even on the due date"" of the child. Such an abortion would be a purely hypothetical scenario; doctors said such a procedure doesn't make sense medically."
|
34078
|
"Comedian Howie Mandel penned a list of Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau's ""accomplishments."
|
What moral, functioning Canadian human could possible justify voting for you?
|
false
|
Politics
|
A viral piece of text ostensibly written by Canadian comedian Howie Mandel about Justin Trudeau’s “accomplishments” was widely circulated on Facebook in the lead-up to Canada’s federal election on Oct. 21, 2019. This list was often shared under titles such as “Consider this before you vote” and “Trudeau 4 years of accomplishments.” Many versions were also preceded by a brief paragraph claiming that the viral item was written by comedian Mandel. Here’s how it was summarized on a public posting to the Ben Shapiro Facebook page: If you wanted some fodder against Justin Trudeau aka younger Bernie here you go. Conservatives out west in Canada, Alberta and Sask are seriously chatting about making a change … If Trump ever wanted some of Canada now would be a good time!! LoL A long read …But an eye opener!! Our own Howie Mandel lists Trudeau’s accomplishments. By Howie Mandel. Trudeau 4 years of accomplishments: This list (the full text can be viewed at the bottom of this article) was not written by Howie Mandel; his name was attached to the text in an apparent attempt to lend it more credibility. Such false attribution is a common tactic on social media among those hoping to spread items to larger audiences. While this text may have received some attention on its own, attaching a famous name to it made it seem a bit more credible (and shareable) to some readers. The earliest version of this text we could uncover was shared to Facebook on Sept. 21 and made no mention of who authored it. The text continued to circulate without any attribution for nearly a month until mid-October, when Mandel’s name started showing up at its head. While we have not been able to determine who authored the original text, it was not written by Howie Mandel. This list was never posted to Mandel’s official social media pages, nor was was it published by a credible news outlet under Howie Mandel’s byline. Mandel’s name was not attached to the text untl nearly a month after it began circulating: The full list of Justin Trudeau’s “accomplishments” read as follows: Consider this before you vote: Your minister of finance engaged in insider trading. Also forgot about his villa in France. You blew the Asia Pacific deal. You blew the helicopter deal with the Philippines. You blew the deal with China. You blew the deal with Europe. You invited “irregular” immigration and the taxpayer foots the enormous bill for it. You alienated the United States – our largest trading partner. At the G7 you pledged $400 million to Education around the world along with another $180 million to the Global Partnership for Education in Europe. None of it is going to fix our messed up school systems here at home. Meanwhile education costs are skyrocketing for our youth making university a mountain too high for many to climb. You pledged $241 million to Family Planning around the world including a $20 million donation to the Bill and Hillary Clinton Foundation (because they have integrity!). This all happened while you told vets that they were asking too much. You pledged $2.65 billion to climate change at the Commonwealth Leaders Summit and now you’re trying to bully the provinces into new taxes to pay for this pledge. You pledged $300 million to the Rohingya Refugee crisis while we have a refugee crisis of our own flooding into Quebec that you won’t address. You pledged $125 million to Caribbean Reconstruction while our own infrastructure in cities is falling apart. You pledged $650 million to Sexual and Reproductive health in Haiti and around the globe wanting safer abortions for woman while many women in our own country are left without a family doctor. You pledged $840 million to Syria for Humanitarian Assistance when half the native reserves in our country don’t have clean drinking water. You gave $10.5 million to a convicted…CONVICTED terrorist in a backroom deal. You intentionally paid it out in a way that prevented the widow of the killed soldier from pursuing it. You spent $4.5 billion on a 65 year old pipeline, and now the courts have ruled it shut down. Now it’s back on (at a delay cost of $250 million) – good investment for Canada you said? (And KM uses that money to build a pipeline in Texas) You pressured Jody Wilson Raybould repeatedly & INAPPROPRIATELY with several different high ranking officials to offer SNC Lavalin a DPA instead of prosecution for repeated & sustained corruption AFTER the former AG had determined they were ineligible for such a deal. You lied about the above having ever taken place. Then you obstructed the investigation into this obstruction of justice. You replaced Canada’s old F-18s with Australia’s old F-18s. Your bizarre love of all things Castro. You imposed tough regulations and taxes on oil from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland but not oil from Saudi Arabia. Every new project has to undergo strict environmental assessments…except cement plants in Quebec. You said that a proposed pipeline must consider “the intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors” (what does that even mean???) You chase foreign companies (and their investment capital) out of the country like they have the plague. You chased our WW1 soldiers out of our national anthem… lest we forget. You called small business owners “tax cheats”. People voice concern over money spent on illegal immigration and you call them intolerant racists. We have an equalization program, but you give half of it to one province. You spent $8 million on a skating rink (vanity project) when Canada’s largest skating rink is 500 meters away. You added tens of billions to the national debt while lying to Canada’s face about it. Balance the budget in 2019? Now we’re looking at 2040. You groped a woman and when caught and said she experienced it differently. You elbowed a female MP while dragging another MP by the arm in a petulant fit. Peoplekind? (international embarrassment) You got India to invest $250 million in Canada but we have to invest $750 million in India first. You said returning terrorists will be an extraordinarily powerful voice for Canada. You fought to let terrorists keep their Canadian citizenship. You spent $212,234 on artwork for the cover of the 2017 budget report. You spent upwards to $348,000 on food and alcohol in five flights on our government’s plane. On your G20 trip to Argentina, you spent $103,000 on food and alcohol alone. How is that even possible? You gave Canadian taxpayers’ money to Hamas. You voice outrage over fake racist attacks and say nothing about real terrorist attacks. You took 10 vacations in a single year. Who does this? You spent a little over $1.5 million on the trip to India that did nothing but worsen ties. Plus paid over $17,000 to bring an Indian chef to India to cook Indian cuisine. And to top it off, invited a convicted attempted murderer to diner and posed for pics with him. And you’re the only PM convicted of ethics violations. (multiple times in fact) You destroyed the career of one of Canada’s honest military leaders to cover up possible massive corruption in ship building contracts. You invited Joshua Boyle, an alleged perpetrator of sexual assault and unlawful confinement of his wife for a photoshoot in the Office of The Prime Minister. You threaten to sue the leader of the opposition then chicken out when you realized that your alleged crimes will be exposed in court. You offer over $600 million dollars in subsidies to failing mainstream media outlets if they can prove to be trustworthy. You put a union who vows to destroy your opposition in charge of selecting these new “trusted” sources to receive funding. You could school the Russians in election interference. You pay off your friends to engage in election ads for you and get Elections Canada to pay for it. $13 million to Loblaws for new refrigerators. You made public statements of deep admiration for Chinese communism. You wore preposterous, inappropriate costumes during a state visit to India, paid for by Canadians. Almost $13 billion in promises right before calling the election. Blackface. 3 times. Wow.
|
27995
|
The court declaration given by the 13-year-old boy Michael Jackson allegedly molested in 1993 has surfaced.
|
On 25 June 2009, Michael Jackson died of cardiac arrest at a hospital in Los Angeles at the age of 50.
|
true
|
Legal Affairs, michael jackson
|
Although Michael Jackson was seldom out of the public eye for long, in late 2002 and early 2003 he was the subject of even more intense media attention than usual. Granted, his deep-seated proclivity for strange behavior (wearing masks in public, undergoing bout after bout of plastic surgery to the point that his nose was rumored to be about to fall off, naming one his son’s Prince Michael and then a second one Prince Michael II, ongoing whispers about his sexual molestation of young boys, life at his fantasy home of Neverland Ranch in the Santa Ynez area) kept him perpetually in the spotlight, but two media events caused the unrelenting arc light of celebrity to burn a bit more brightly in the early 2000s: the January 2003 network television broadcast of a British documentary about Jackson’s bizarre private life (followed a month later by “Michael Jackson, Unmasked,” a network special devoted to a study of the pop star’s career through examination of the changes to his face), and a November 2002 incident which drew the ire of parents everywhere when Jackson exuberantly dangled his infant son, Prince Michael II, from a fourth-floor hotel balcony in Berlin. A third incident added to this glare: the publication of the 1993 declaration given by 13-year-old “J. Chandler” in a lawsuit against Michael Jackson, in which he alleged the singer had sexually molested him. That suit was settled out of court in January 1994 for an undisclosed amount of money (thought to be between $15 and $40 million, an astounding figure to an ordinary person but a drop in the bucket to Jackson, whose personal fortune was then estimated at $1.7 billion). No criminal charges arising from those allegations were filed against Jackson, and both parties signed a confidentiality agreement as a condition of the settlement. In February 2003, the exposé web site The Smoking Gun published the four-page declaration that kicked off the 1993 suit against Jackson. In it, “J. Chandler,” self-described as a 13-year-old boy then in the eighth grade, detailed his involvement with the singer and the escalation of their friendship (which began in May 1992 and ended in July 1993) into realms of sexual contact. In addition to listing graphic details about the sexual encounters that occurred between them on a number of occasions, the boy made statements about Jackson’s crying when the youngster attempted to halt certain activities. Penetration does not appear to have been among the claims made by the boy, but incidents of oral and manual sex were: Michael Jackson had me suck one nipple and twist the other nipple while Michael Jackson masturbated. On one occasion when Michael Jackson and I were in bed together, Michael Jackson grabbed my buttock and kissed me while he put his tongue in my ear. I told him I didn’t like that. Michael Jackson started to cry. We’re not going to reproduce the whole thing here, but a copy of this declaration can be viewed at The Smoking Gun’s archives. In a British documentary aired in early February 2003, Jackson, then 44, again denied ever having inappropriate relationships with children, although he admitted sharing his bed with boys.
|
7410
|
Tumor gene testing urged to tell if drug targets your cancer.
|
Colon cancer. Uterine cancer. Pancreatic cancer. Whatever the tumor, the more gene mutations lurking inside, the better chance your immune system has to fight back.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Cancer, Health, Tumors, Politics, Uterine cancer, Genetic Frontiers, North America
|
That’s the premise behind the recent approval of a landmark drug, the first cancer therapy ever cleared based on a tumor’s genetics instead of the body part it struck first. Now thousands of patients with worsening cancer despite standard treatment can try this immunotherapy — as long as genetic testing of the tumor shows they’re a candidate. “It’s like having a lottery ticket,” said Johns Hopkins oncologist Dr. Dung Le, who helped prove the new use for the immunotherapy Keytruda. “We’ve got to figure out how to find these patients, because it’s such a great opportunity for them.” Today, doctors diagnose tumors by where they originate — breast cancer in the breast, colon cancer in the colon — and use therapies specifically tested for that organ. In contrast, the Food and Drug Administration labeled Keytruda the first “tissue-agnostic” treatment, for adults and children. The reason: Seemingly unrelated cancers occasionally carry a common genetic flaw called a mismatch repair defect. Despite small studies, FDA found the evidence convincing that for a subset of patients, that flaw can make solid tumors susceptible to immunotherapy doctors otherwise wouldn’t have tried. “We thought these would be the hardest tumors to treat. But it’s like an Achilles heel,” said Hopkins cancer geneticist Bert Vogelstein. And last month FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb told a Senate subcommittee his agency will simplify drug development for diseases that “all have a similar genetic fingerprint even if they have a slightly different clinical expression.” It’s too early to know if what’s being dubbed precision immunotherapy will have lasting benefits, but here’s a look at the science. WHO’S A CANDIDATE? Hopkins estimates about 4 percent of cancers are mismatch repair-deficient, potentially adding up to 60,000 patients a year. Widely available tests that cost $300 to $600 can tell who’s eligible. The FDA said the flaw is more common in colon, endometrial and gastrointestinal cancers but occasionally occurs in a list of others. “Say, ‘have I been tested for this?’” is Le’s advice for patients. MUTATIONS AND MORE MUTATIONS Most tumors bear 50 or so mutations in various genes, Vogelstein said. Melanomas and lung cancers, spurred by sunlight and tobacco smoke, may have twice as many. But tumors with a mismatch repair defect can harbor 1,500 mutations. Why? When DNA copies itself, sometimes the strands pair up wrong to leave a typo — a mismatch. Normally the body spell checks and repairs those typos. Without that proofreading, mutations build up, not necessarily the kind that trigger cancer but bystanders in a growing tumor. THE PLOT THICKENS Your immune system could be a potent cancer fighter except that too often, tumors shield themselves. Merck’s Keytruda and other so-called checkpoint inhibitors can block one of those shields, allowing immune cells to recognize a tumor as a foreign invader and attack. Until now, those immunotherapies were approved only for a few select cancers — Keytruda hit the market for melanoma in 2014 — and they work incredibly well for some patients but fail in many others. Learning who’s a good candidate is critical for drugs that can cost $150,000 a year and sometimes cause serious side effects. In 2012, Hopkins doctors testing various immunotherapies found the approach failed in all but one of 20 colon cancer patients. When perplexed oncologists told Vogelstein, “a light bulb went off.” Sure enough, the one patient who fared well had a mismatch repair defect and a “mind-boggling” number of tumor mutations. The more mutations, the greater the chance that at least one produces a foreign-looking protein that is a beacon for immune cells, Vogelstein explained. It was time to see if other kinds of cancer might respond, too. WHAT’S THE DATA? The strongest study, published in the journal Science, tested 86 such patients with a dozen different cancers, including some who had entered hospice. Half had their tumors at least shrink significantly, and 18 saw their cancer become undetectable. It’s not clear why the other half didn’t respond. Researchers found a hint, in three patients, that new mutations might form that could resist treatment. But after two years of Keytruda infusions, 11 of the “complete responders” have stopped the drug and remain cancer-free for a median of eight months and counting. Catherine “Katie” Rosenbaum, 67, is one of those successes. The retired teacher had her uterus removed when endometrial cancer first struck, but five years later tumors returned, scattered through her pelvis and colon. She tried treatment after treatment until in 2014, her doctor urged the Hopkins study. Rosenbaum took a train from Richmond, Virginia, to Baltimore for infusions every two weeks and then, after some fatigue and diarrhea side effects, once a month. Then the side effects eased and her tumors started disappearing. A year into the study she was well enough to swim a mile for a Swim Across America cancer fundraiser. “Nothing else had worked, so I guess we could say it was a last hope,” said Rosenbaum, who now wants other patients to know about the option. ___ This Associated Press series was produced in partnership with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
|
29368
|
A video shows a Muslim refugees rioting and taking over an area in France.
|
What's true: Violent protests captured on video erupted in France in February 2017 after a young black man was allegedly sodomized by a police officer. What's false: The video seen here captures one of those protests, not Muslim refugees taking over an area in France.
|
false
|
Fauxtography, muslims, paris, refugees
|
On 14 February 2017, the anti-Islam Facebook group “Our Eye on Islam” shared a video entitled “France Has Fallen” which purportedly showed Muslim refugees taking over an area of the European country: “Our Eye on Islam” provided little context concerning the events glimpsed in the video, and even though an explanation of the cause of the riots was also noticeably absent from the comment sections of the video on Facebook, viewers generally agreed that America needed to “wake up” and stop refugees from entering the U.S. or else “this” (i.e., Muslim refugees committing violent acts) would soon start happening in America as well: Wake up America. This is coming to US! It is just a matter of time before this is happening here. We give them refuge and this is what we get in return. They don’t want to be Americans, they what Americans to become Muslims and they will do whatever is necessary to see that happen. Pull your head out of the sand and wake up before it is too late. The riots depicted in the video have little to do with Muslims or refugees, however. Signs glimpsed in the video showing the locale to be the Paris suburb of Seine-Saint-Denis identify the demonstration as one that took place on 11 February 2017, one of multiple violent clashes between protesters and police took place in France after a young black man was allegedly sodomized by a police officer: It begins, as it does so often in France, in the suburbs of Paris. Clichy-sous-Bois, Villiers-le-Bel, Bobigny, Aulnay-sous-Bois — the names evoke beauty and nature, but the streets frequently become riot zones. The latest explosion was triggered by what is now known as “l’affaire Théo.” The actors are new, but the roles are familiar. On the one hand is Théo, a tall young black man, born in France. Facing him is a squad of French police, all white. Théo, a community worker with an unblemished police record, made the mistake on Feb. 2 of intervening to try to calm a dispute between a friend and a police constable. He was arrested and beaten and then anally raped with a police truncheon. The wounds to his rectum were so serious that Théo, 22, was rushed to hospital for an emergency operation. He’s still in hospital. News of the incident set off violent clashes between protesters and police in Aulnay-sous-Bois. They’ve taken place almost every night since — with cars burnt, stores smashed by balaclava-wearing “casseurs” or anarchists, dozens arrested in several suburbs — all despite a call for calm from Théo himself, lying in his hospital bed. As the Washington Post noted, the protests were sparked by police investigators’ conclusion that the injuries suffered by Théo were unintentional and did not constitute rape: Thousands marched through the suburbs of Paris, some burning cars and smashing bus shelters, after police claimed that the anal violation of a black man with a baton was an accident, not a rape. After a week of nightly clashes between officers and angry residents, Agence France-Presse reported, a huge protest began peacefully outside a courthouse in Bobigny, north of the capital. Demonstrators carried signs — “Police rape,” read one, the outlet reported — and smaller groups assembled in other suburbs. But before the day was done, at least 37 people would be in jail, and a little girl had to be rescued from a burning car. Police told AFP that “several hundred” people rampaged though the streets of Bobigny, “attacking cars, shops and public property.” [Théo] was covered in blood when he arrived at an emergency room Feb. 2. Doctors discovered that his primary injury had been caused by a police truncheon that had been forced inside his rectum during a violent encounter with officers in Aulnay-sous-Bois, a suburb north of Paris. Théo, a 22-year-old French youth worker whose last name has not been released, said that the injury — which required major surgery to repair — was inflicted intentionally and that he was the victim of a horrific sexual assault. More than a week later, investigators have reached an entirely different conclusion: The violent sodomy was accidental and occurred when the officer’s expandable baton happened to slip into the victim’s anus. While noting that the violent encounter was “very serious,” the investigation by France’s national police determined that the incident was “not a rape” because of the “unintentional character” of the penetration …
|
34167
|
U.S. President Donald Trump brandished his middle finger as a gesture of disdain, disrespect, or anger towards an astronaut who publicly corrected him.
|
In reality, the only consistent feature of these incidents is the inconsistency of the circumstances and context that surrounded them. As such, it appears doubtful that Trump typically brandishes his middle finger as a way of expressing disdain or anger or disrespect. A far more plausible explanation appears to be simply that, from time to time, the president’s hairline or eyebrows or skin cause him irritation or discomfort, and he feels compelled to scratch that itch.
|
unproven
|
Politics
|
In October 2019, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the accuracy of social media posts and online articles claiming that U.S. President Donald Trump had made an obscene gesture towards an astronaut after she corrected a factual error he had made. Anti-gun violence activist Shannon Watts tweeted out a short video clip of the incident, writing: “When gently corrected by one of the astronauts about how other women have spacewalked, Donald Trump uses his middle finger to ‘fix’ his hair. How is this even real life?” When gently corrected by one of the astronauts about how other women have spacewalked, Donald Trump uses his middle finger to “fix” his hair. How is this even real life? pic.twitter.com/9bnj7XfY1m — Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) October 21, 2019 The left-leaning Facebook page The Other 98% repurposed Watts’ viral tweet in a video: Jack Brown, whose Twitter bio describes him as a “body language and emotional intelligence expert,” posted a lengthy and widely shared analysis of the president’s non-verbal gestures during the incident, concluding that: “This gesture is very much what it looks like — Donald Trump is giving Astronaut Jessica Meir the finger while she’s walking in space. He’s subconsciously telling her to ‘fuck off’. But if you weren’t paying close attention, you’d miss it.” The left-leaning blogs Crooks and Liars and the Daily Kos joined in the chorus of allegations, with posts whose headlines read “Trump Flips Off Female Astronaut Who Corrected Him During Space Conference” and “POTUS Flipped the Bird at Astronaut Jessica Meir,” respectively. Various other news news outlets did not explicitly claim Trump made the obscene gesture, but they extensively repeated various iterations of the allegation or phrased their headlines as questions. Whether Trump stuck his middle finger up towards Meir as a gesture of anger or defiance against being publicly corrected depends on what his state of mind and intent were at that moment. Since neither we nor anyone else, other than the president himself, can gain access to his state of mind. However, we have reviewed many hours of video footage of Trump’s public appearances and found several instances where he rubbed or scratched his face with his fingers. Our conclusion is that very little evidence exists to support the claim that Trump typically raises his middle finger in anger or disgust during similar incidents, while considerable evidence exists of a much simpler explanation: his hair, his eyebrows, and his face sometimes itch. October 2019 — Spacewalk On Oct. 18, Trump spoke by satellite link to NASA astronauts Jessica Meir and Christina Koch, who had just performed the first all-female spacewalk outside the International Space Station. In his remarks, Trump said of the women: “They’re conducting the first ever female spacewalk to replace an exterior part of the space station …” In response, Meir politely corrected the president, saying: “We don’t want to take too much credit because there have been many other female space-walkers before us — this is just the first time there have been two women outside at the same time.” As Meir made this point, Trump brought his right hand up to his face and briefly rubbed his middle finger along his forehead towards his right temple: This was the source of the many claims that Trump had intended this ,movement as an obscene gesture of disdain, anger, or defiance against being publicly corrected, especially by a woman. Anecdotally, it appears that people more commonly use their index fingers, or multiple fingers, to scratch an itch or rub their faces, and the logic of the argument was that the unconventional use of a lone middle finger meant a simple, innocuous head scratch was not a plausible explanation for Trump’s gesture, and that he must therefore have intended it as a way of telling Meir to “fuck off,” as Jack Brown’s Twitter thread concluded. Few of these claims, often presented with a tone of absolute certainty and authority, mentioned the fact that Trump has actually used his middle finger in this way on multiple occasions, a sample of which we examine in this fact check. Brown has repeatedly claimed that Trump “rarely touches his face/neck/head while speaking,” meaning that “when he does occasionally commits [sic] such a faux pas, we can be sure his action is driven by strong emotions (which over-ride his normal suppression for facial touching).” But none of the claims, including Brown’s, mentioned the fact that Trump had done the same thing in the same room less than three minutes earlier. The full C-SPAN video of the event (as opposed to the truncated version posted to YouTube) shows that, towards the beginning, Trump made the very same movement with his right hand and middle finger. In that moment, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine was offering relatively generic introductory remarks as the room waited for the satellite link to be confirmed and for the president to begin his conversation with Meir and Koch. Immediately before Trump made the gesture, Bridenstine said, “Just so everyone knows, there’s a short window for the downlink, and also they’ve got very busy work to do …”: What “strong emotions” (to use Brown’s term) drove Trump to brandish his middle finger in this case? Was it “There’s a short window for the downlink,” which supposedly provoked such rage and defensiveness in him? Or did he simply have a particularly itchy face during that meeting, which manifested itself twice in less than three minutes? Nobody can say with certainty, but it appears to us much more likely that Trump was rubbing or scratching along his hairline because he had an itch or some discomfort, rather than that — twice in three minutes — he was non-verbally telling the NASA administrator and an astronaut where to go, so to speak. September 2019 — Lenín Moreno on Venezuela On Sep. 25, Trump hosted a multilateral meeting about the political crisis in Venezuela with the attendance of multiple Latin American heads of government, each of whom took their turn in offering remarks. Towards the end of the meeting, Ecuador’s President Lenín Moreno spoke, echoing official U.S. policy (and Trump’s earlier comments) by condemning the regime of Nicolás Maduro and addressing the issue of Venezuelans who had fled to other South American countries. Moreno said “We are talking about over four million people, who are humble people, who have fled …” when Trump raised his right hand to his face and used only his middle finger to briefly scratch between his nose and cheek: Not only was Moreno expressing sentiments about Venezuela that were in line with U.S. policy and were similar to Trump’s own remarks in the meeting, Moreno is, more broadly, something of an ally of Trump’s. Since his election in May 2017, he has sided with the U.S. in opposing Maduro and supporting Juan Guaidó’s claim to the Venezuelan presidency, and he ended the policy of giving refuge to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in Ecuador’s London embassy, potentially laying the ground for his extradition to the United States. So, in using his middle finger during Moreno’s rather friendly speech, was Trump expressing fury at some unknown slight? Or was he, once again, responding to no more than the nerve endings between his nose and cheek? And why did this middle-finger incident not attract the serious analysis of the same social media users and reporters who jumped into action on other occasions? Was it simply because it escaped their attention, or because the context did not provide a factual framework onto which a bird-flipping narrative could be superimposed? August 2019 — Working lunch with Macron On Aug. 24, on the fringes of the 2019 G7 summit in Biarritz, France, Trump held a working lunch with French President Emmanuel Macron. With cameras snapping and journalists recording, the two men took a few minutes to make semi-public, introductory remarks. Trump and Macron have had a complicated public relationship, but based on our analysis of multiple hours of video footage, including several international summits, the two men tend to greet each other with particular warmth in public appearances. And at the Biarritz lunch, each spoke very positively of the other and of the (also historically complicated) Franco-American alliance. Trump declared that “We actually have a lot in common … we’ve been friends for a long time. Every once in a while we go at it just a little bit, not very much, but we get along very well, we have a very good relationship …” Trump nodded in agreement throughout Macron’s preliminary remarks. At one point, the French president said, “When I look at Europe, especially, we need some new tools to relaunch our economy. We decided, we’ll probably decide, to have new tax cuts, which is one of the ways to launch [an economy] …” At that point, Trump raised his left hand to his left temple, and appeared to use his middle finger to rub or scratch his left temple, all while continuing to nod in agreement with Macron: To whom or to what was Trump non-verbally saying “fuck off,” in that moment? Macron in general? Macron’s proposal to lower taxes, in particular? Tax cuts as a mechanism of economic stimulus? Someone off-camera positioned to his left? The security guard standing in the corner of the courtyard, behind the president? Or does none of that make sense because Trump was, yet again, sending no message? September 2017 — Robert Kraft and the anthem protests On Sep. 25, 2017, Trump spoke to reporters about the ongoing controversy surrounding the decision by some NFL players to protest against police brutality and racial injustice by symbolically kneeling during the playing of the U.S. national anthem before games. Trump repeatedly waded into the dispute, and two days earlier he had voiced his opinion that team owners should fire any player who took part in that form of protest, using the phrase “son of a bitch” to describe such players. Several team owners publicly criticized those remarks, including Trump’s longtime personal friend, Robert Kraft, the owner and CEO of the New England Patriots. On Sep. 25, a reporter put it to the president that “Your friend Robert Kraft said he was disappointed by what you said,” to which Trump responded, “Well that’s okay. Look, he has to take his ideas and go with what he wants. I think [the protest] is very disrespectful to our country …” At that point, Trump made the now-familiar movement, bringing his right hand up to his face and dragging his middle finger from above his eyebrow to his right temple: On the basis of that gesture, several Twitter users and websites, including Esquire magazine speculated or claimed that Trump had decided to flip the bird at the mention of Kraft’s criticism. That’s possible, of course, but it should be remembered that Trump and Kraft have been close friends for several decades, and a few months later Kraft said of Trump that: The only bad deal I’ve had in my whole life is when my wife, bless her memory, died of ovarian cancer. [Trump] flew up to the funeral with Melania. They came to my home. And he called me once a week for a year and invited me to things. That was the darkest period of my life. And I’m a pretty strong person. But my kids thought I was going to die. There were five or six people who were great to me. He was one of them … I know he does things or says things that … You know, he doesn’t mean everything he says. I’m privileged to know that. People who don’t know him don’t see the better side. But I’ll tell you one thing: He’s very hardworking. I really believe that he wants to make this country better. And he’s grown in the job. I’ve seen it, too. For me, it’s like having a high school buddy or a fraternity brother become president. It’s weird in a way, but it’s cool. I want to do anything I can to help him help this country. When Kraft was arrested and charged with solicitation of prostitution in February 2019, Trump made sympathetic remarks about his friend without explicitly proclaiming his innocence or offering unconditional support: NEW: Pres. Trump on charges against Patriots owner Robert Kraft: “Well, it’s very sad. I was very surprised to see it. He’s proclaimed his innocence totally, but I’m very surprised to see it.” https://t.co/bHHgDtBTng pic.twitter.com/ZUqrwLMHXj — ABC News (@ABC) February 22, 2019 If the president were aiming a bird at Kraft in September 2017, the gesture didn’t appear to have damaged the friendship between the two men. May 2017 — Paolo Gentiloni says “Good morning” On May 26 and 27 of 2017, Trump attended the annual G7 summit of world leaders, held on that occasion in Taormina, Italy. At the start of the first day, Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni made an introductory speech to welcome the many heads of state and government sitting around a large table. Trump was seated two places to Gentiloni’s right. The prime minister began his speech with, “Well, good morning. Bonjour.” Just as Gentiloni was issuing the same greeting in Italian, Trump raised his left hand to his left eyebrow and used only his middle finger to rub his eyebrow and temple: As we examined in a fact check at the time, Trump’s stray digit prompted multiple left-leaning websites and social media accounts to jump into action, speculating or claiming that the president had intended to fling an obscene gesture of disrespect towards his Italian host. What none of those accounts included, though, was even a token explanation of why Trump was purportedly doing that or how their allegations made sense. Was the U.S. president, as some claimed in the astronaut incident, responding to what Gentiloni had just said? If so, what exactly was it about “Good morning, bonjour” that so outraged Trump? Furthermore, Trump had been chatting and sharing a joke with Gentiloni and Macron just a few seconds earlier and did so again later on: February 2017 — Black History Month On Feb. 1, 2017, shortly after his inauguration, Trump hosted a Black History Month celebration at the White House. Before the meeting began in earnest, and in the midst of a clearly very cordial atmosphere, Trump twice brandished his middle finger. First, the president quickly rubbed from his right eyebrow to his right temple just after sitting down at the table. He didn’t look at anyone in particular, and the only discernible conversation immediately before his gesture involved a woman (not visible on camera) saying “You know chivalry isn’t dead” to the laughter of several attendees, including Trump himself and his former adviser Omarosa Manigault Newman, who was seated immediately to the president’s right. It’s not clear to what the woman was referring, but it’s possible that Vice President Mike Pence had just pulled out a chair for her, in a gesture of what might be described as old-fashioned etiquette. (Trump made the same gesture for Manigault Newman before he took his own seat). Seven seconds later, Trump again ran his right middle finger parallel with his hairline, starting at his eyebrow, after blowing upwards towards his hair. He then immediately followed up those movements by rubbing his right eyebrow with his right index finger: The atmosphere in the room before the meeting was visibly and clearly very warm, with attendees chatting, smiling, and laughing together. The comment that immediately preceded Trump’s first middle finger gesture was a light-hearted remark, possibly about Pence’s “chivalry,” which prompted laughter from Trump and others. The second time the president rubbed his face, he first blew upwards towards his hair — which strongly suggests his hair was bothering him or a few strands were falling out of place, a perfectly plausible explanation for the movements he made with his middle finger. Taking all of this into account, it’s therefore hard to explain how or why Trump was supposedly tossing out birds, one after the other, or whom he was targeting with them — nor to identity the particular “strong emotion” that motivated such purported obscene gestures. Nonetheless, several commentators presented the gestures as just that, with Stephen Colbert joking that the second instance was Trump’s “strong message to the African-American community,” while another YouTube video suggested the birds were aimed at “the media”: In order for non-verbal gestures to have a clear meaning, an individual has to use them in at least a slightly consistent way. We know that Trump does sometimes use his middle finger to touch his face, typically rubbing from his eyebrow to his temple, parallel with his hair line. He has done this while he himself speaks, while others speak, while smiling, while nodding in agreement, while holding a neutral expression, while speaking to an ally whose comments are consistent with his own, while being confronted with the criticism of a close friend, and while hearing the plans of another world leader with whom he enjoys a complicated relationship. He has rubbed his face with his middle finger while an astronaut corrected his error, while a federal agency administrator said nothing in particular, and while another world leader said “Good morning.”
|
18309
|
"U.S. Rep. John Barrow’s plan ""puts the IRS in charge of your health care."
|
GOP group targets Barrow's health care votes
|
false
|
Georgia, Health Care, National Republican Congressional Committee,
|
"U.S. Rep. John Barrow, a Democrat from the Augusta area, keeps arguing he agrees with many Republicans regarding the federal health care law, aka ""Obamacare."" Repeal and replace, he says. Is there a doctor around to examine Barrow? Republican activists ask. Republicans overwhelmingly want the entire law repealed, polls show. Barrow’s position is not strong enough, some GOP activists say. The National Republican Congressional Committee recently announced it was paying for mobile billboards to drive through Barrow’s district to criticize what it says is his approach to health care. ""Congressman Barrow’s Plan: Put the IRS in charge of your health care,"" the ad says. The ad includes a telephone number for anyone ""fed up"" with his plan. The ad quickly made the rounds on several political news sites, including The Atlanta Journal Constitution’s Political Insider blog. PolitiFact Georgia recently fact-checked a somewhat similar claim by the National Republican Senatorial Committee against Barrow and rated it . We wanted to find out if the NRCC accurately reflected Barrow’s stance on this issue. NRCC spokeswoman Katie Prill said the billboard was based on Barrow’s votes against repealing the health care law. ""The IRS is in charge of implementing Obamacare,"" Prill said in one email. The IRS, under fire for its role in scrutinizing some tea party groups and others, is in charge of determining whether individuals have insurance and collecting fines. The Washington Post Fact Checker column recently examined this issue and determined the NRCC claim deserved two Pinocchios, which means there were significant exaggerations or omissions. Other federal agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services, are also involved in implementation of the law. Health and Human Services has taken the lead in organizing its implementation, providing information to the public about the law and providing oversight. Barrow, who fashions himself as a moderate, is consistently one of the top Republican targets during election season. He’s the last white Democrat serving in the U.S. House from the Deep South. The five-term congressman has thus far successfully avoided GOP efforts to oust him. Barrow’s camp says the claim is specious for several reasons. First, they note the congressman voted in 2010 against the legislation to create the contentious health care law. Second, his office says Barrow’s approach to the law is similar to that of many Republicans. He wants to repeal some of the most controversial aspects of the law and keep some elements of it. Barrow wants to remove: The Independent Payment Advisory Board, which is designed to examine quality and access to care under the law, the effects of changes in payments to providers. The individual mandate, which requires nearly all Americans to have health insurance or face a tax penalty. An employer mandate that businesses with more than 50 full-time employees offer health care coverage to their employees or pay a penalty of $2,000 per worker above 30 employees. The congressman wants to keep the provision that allows children to stay on their parents’ health insurance until they’re 26 years old. Third, and most pertinent to the NRCC’s claim, Barrow voted against legislation in April 2011 that would fund as many as 16,500 IRS employees House Republicans said were needed to implement the health care law. ""Further proof that the NRCC is twisting the facts and exaggerating to make their claims,"" said Barrow spokesman Richard Carbo. Prill pointed out that Barrow voted three times against repealing the law, most recently in May 2013 in a 229-195 vote. Every House Republican voted to repeal the law while only two Democrats voted in favor of repeal. The Democratic-led U.S. Senate has not supported repeal. Barrow’s votes on portions of the health care law have been across the spectrum. ""There are a lot of good things in the bill. I don’t believe in voting against the parts that are good. ... We need to amend it, not end it,"" Barrow said after his vote in January 2011 to retain the law. Prill said Barrow’s position is insufficient. ""At the end of the day, John Barrow had the opportunity to repeal this law and he chose not to. Whether it was political pressure from (House Minority Leader) Nancy Pelosi or because he truly believes in this law, he made the decision to keep Obamacare in place and for it on Georgia families. It seems like if John Barrow really wanted to fix our health care system, he would have voted for repeal."" To sum up, the NRCC says in its mobile billboard that Barrow’s health care plan ""puts the IRS in charge of your health care."" Barrow didn’t vote to create the federal health care law. However, the NRCC points out that Barrow’s voted three times against repealing Obamacare, which they say is allowing the law to be implemented. Barrow supports repealing some of the most contentious parts of the law. Barrow’s camp says what’s most important in this debate is the congressman voted against legislation that would fund additional IRS agents to implement the health care law. The billboards, they say, are disingenuous. It’s not really his plan. The IRS will be involved in the implementation of the law, but so, too, will other federal agencies. We believe the billboards omit some important context."
|
10395
|
Diabetes care during pregnancy reduces risk of obese children
|
The Cleveland paper published a shortened version of a story originally reported by the Associated Press. The story describes results from a large study that suggest treatment of maternal high blood sugars in pregnancy may lower risk of overweight or obese children at age 5 or 7. The story does give absolute benefits (proportions of children who are overweight or obese), does obtain a quote from a source apparently not affiliated with the research, does describe treament options, and does discuss what’s new about this study (e.g. women who have blood sugar, but not necessarily high enough for a diagnosis of gestational diabetes may benefit from diabetes treatment in pregnancy). What’s missing is a description of the strength of the evidence–it’s not clear whether this is from a randomized trial, which is the gold standard–or from some other less robust study design. Because of this, readers don’t know how to gauge the new findings. Another missing element is failure to note that women were classified as receiving treatment if their test results placed them in the category that would have been routine for intervention to be provided. Whether and what intervention women received is not addressed and this weakness is important. There is also no mention of costs of treatment for what would be a new group of people being treated and there is no discussion of risks of treatment, which in this case, could include severe episodes of low blood sugar, particularly for those on insulin.
|
true
|
"The article does not mention costs. The story provides absolute proportions of children who were overweight or obese at 5 or 7 years old. Groups compared included children of those mothers with normal glucose levels, children of those with a diabetes diagnosis who were treated, and children of those with high blood sugar levels who were not treated. Although it’s not entirely clear which group actually received treatment. The study does not mention any harms of treatment for high blood sugar, which could potentially include severe episodes of low blood sugar (if treated with insulin). Would also have been helpful to say more about the lifestyle/nutrition interventions and to note that they have not been found to cause harm, though the effects of materal stress/worry and the costs of blood glucose monitoring are not well studied. The story does not make it clear what type of evidence the findings are based on. For instance, it’s not clear if results are from a randomized trial (the gold standard) or some other study design. An astute reader may be able to infer that this is not a randomized clinical trial from the statement that data were ""analyzed"", but one also doesn’t know if the design was prospective or retrospective, which would add to knowledge about the strength of the study. The fact that we actually don’t know what treatment women actually got is also not clearly discussed. There is no obvious embellishment or mistatement about gestational diabetes. The article provides a brief, but accurate description of what it is. The lead line ""women who develop diabetes during pregnancy"" is somewhat misleading because without clarification of the often transient nature of gestational diabetes, readers could think it means Type II diabetes – women who develop and continue to have diabetes. It would be preferable to define and use the term gestational diabetes or pregnancy-related diabetes much earlier. There is a quote from a researcher at Northwestern University who apparently is not affiliated with the latest findings. The story mentions treatment approaches of gestational diabetes, including diet, exercise, and insulin, which are appropriate. The article does not note the option of not treating (especially in the lower range) which is advocated by some. Assuming ""treatment"" in this case is ""exercise, a special diet, or insulin,"" the article does imply that these are available. Most, if not all, people will understand that treatment for high blood sugar is readily available. What’s new is that treatment of women with blood sugar that is high, but not high enough for a diagnosis of diabetes, may benefit from treatment with exercise, diet, or insulin as well. A more important wrinkle in this particular study is that ""treatment"" is inferred by practice patterns used at Kaiser and no individual-level data is available to determine if the women in the group that would have been provided with counseling/intervention of gestational diabetes actually received that counsel or acted on it. Thus the ""treated group"" is actually those who met gestational diabetes criteria by National Diabetes Data Group criteria – thus they are really the treatment eligible group among whom some (likely large) group received some completely not specified treatment. Treatment for gestational diabetes is not new, although the story does not explicitly state this. What the story implies is that diagnosis and treatment of diabetes at lower blood sugar thresholds than those currently treated may have a benefit for children, although more studies are needed. Diagnosing and treating more pregnant women with high blood sugar who don’t necessarily meet the traditional diabetes diagnosis would be new and there is some discussion around this. Since the story used at least one independent perspective, it does not appear to have relied soley or largely on a news release."
|
|
11383
|
Hope for an artificial lung
|
This article explores artificial lung devices currently in development at the University of Maryland Medical Center and elsewhere. It is an example of a local newspaper reporting on potentially significant medical research occuring within its circulation area. But the story falls short in several important ways: It fails to apply scrutiny to the optimistic and self-interested claims made for the devices, and fails to seek commentary from independent sources. It fails to provide information about the costs and outcomes for current devices and treatments. It fails to explore the potential benefits and harms of the improved devices on outcomes and mortality. The story also uses as its hook an extraordinary example of someone who has survived an unusually long time on existing technology. This is a confusing way to begin a story about new technologies, and leads readers to expect a story different from the one delivered.
|
false
|
"The writer does not cite the costs of the current ECMO treatment, the costs of a lung transplant, or the total costs the patient in the opening anecdote generated. It also fails to report on how costs might differ with the new technologies under development. And, if readers aren’t clear about this, these are very expensive treatments. The report does not specify survival rates using current technologies, nor does it attempt to quantify the extent to which the new devices could improve that. The article discusses at length the potential benefits of the devices under development but does not discuss potential harms. The problems of clotting and damage to blood cells are mentioned as potential barriers but are not presented as harms of treatment, how they contribute to mortality, etc. The report does not cite evidence that would support optimism about the coming generation of artificial lung devices. The story is based on an inference, offered early on, that because one patient was able to live for over 100 days on the old technology that a new technology could work better. There is no disease-mongering in the story. But it would have been helpful to cite the sources of the following statistics: ""Some 1,405 American patients received new lungs last year, but 254 died awaiting them. Another 342,000 patients with conditions too severe for transplants died of lung disease."" It appears that all medical sources consulted for the story are involved with developing similar machines. Most work for the same institution. Their financial and professional conflicts of interest are not revealed. No independent medical sources are interviewed on the prognosis for current artificial lung users, for lung transplant patients or for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. No independent sources are consulted on the importance or value of these devices in development. There are no other treatment options available for these patients. The article eventually explains that the artificial lungs under development are uNPRoven and at best a few years from clinical use. But it does not do this early and clearly enough, leaving readers to believe for too long that there are important new machines imminent or in use. The use of an anecdote about someone barely surviving on an old technology contributes to the confusion about whether a superior device currently exists. The article explains that the technologies under development would be novel, largely because of the improved quality of life they may offer patients. There is no evidence the article relies on a press release."
|
|
10442
|
New Take on a Prostate Drug, and a New Debate
|
"This is a story about the use of the drug finasteride to try to prevent or reduce the risk of prostate cancer. The story did a good job of: giving the history of research on finasteride and the reasons why it ""has had its ups and downs""; citing several top clinician-researchers in the field of prostate cancer. But the story had several important flaws: the balance of the piece was thrown off by a beginning and an ending that framed the drug’s benefits only in the often-more impressive-sounding relative risk figures, not absolute risk figures; the top sources it used were out of balance, with advocates of the drug’s use having been given more space and more prime real estate (again the beginning and end of the story), while the story’s one skeptic got far less space in the middle; the story didn’t adequately discuss other options – including NOT taking the drug. Why wasn’t that lone skeptic’s view the lead or the summary point? His points: ""While 10 percent of men 55 and older find out they have prostate cancer, the cancer is lethal in no more than 25 percent of them. So if finasteride reduced the prostate cancer’s incidence by 30 percent, about 7 percent of men would get a cancer diagnosis and approximately 1.8 percent instead of 2.5 percent would have a lethal cancer. Finasteride might make a difference but only in a very small subset of men."""
|
mixture
|
"The story included an estimated price for the generic version of this medication. Mixed grade on this criterion. The story provided both relative and absolute risk reduction figures – although it gave more space and prime real estate (the beginning and end of the story) to the more impressive-sounding relative risk figures. But, with some hesitation, we’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt. The story did raise an important question about harms: ""Should healthy men take a drug for the rest of their lives to avoid getting and being treated for a cancer that, most often, would be better off undiscovered and untreated?Is it worth risking a chance that unanticipated side effects may emerge years later if millions of men with no prostate problems take this drug…"" Although the balance of the story was out of whack – citing more proponents of using the drug than opponents – we’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. To its credit, the story included data in terms of absolute risk from the 2005 study published in New England Journal of Medicine. Unfortunately, the story began and ended with the relative risk reduction calculation that might mislead readers about the true potential benefit. While not incorrect, a 30% drop in disease incidence is more compelling than a 2.2% reduction in the absolute risk of potentially lethal prostate cancer. Having experts in the field talk about medicating all men instead of providing them with some understanding of the magnitude of the risk seems like disease mongering. And ending the piece with two of these experts (Scardino and Thompson) discussing their own possible plans for taking the drug introduces an imbalance to the piece. The story cited several highly-credentialed prostate cancer clinician-researchers. However, the only one expressing a somewhat more negative tone got the least space. The story did not adequately describe the option of not taking this drug as a preventive measure. A lot of space was given to the arguments for prescribing a drug without mentioning the possibility of the clinician having a shared decision-making discussion with the man about not taking the drug – and about the potential tradeoffs of this or any other prostate cancer treatment. The story accurately mentions the availability of this drug as a prescription medication. The story begins with the phase ""For the first time…."" – an odd choice of words for an effect of the drug that was discussed in the medical literature for at least 3 years. Although the story was about the results of a new analysis of data, that opening line suggests a novelty to the approach that isn’t true. In fact, the story itself shows it’s not the first time – that ""In March 2003, 15 months before the study’s scheduled end, its directors halted it abruptly. The reason was that the results were overwhelmingly compelling — men taking the drug were not getting prostate cancer."" It’s like an opening line begging for page 1 attention. While there is no press release in evidence, it is curious that the journal in which the new analysis was published has a link to the New York Times article on the journal’s website. Why would a journal do that? Isn’t the journal article itself good enough for its readers? Does it need the Times to legitimize the study? Odd."
|
|
35775
|
Pressing #-9-0 on your telephone will allow scammers to make long-distance calls and charge them to your phone bill.
|
Snopes has been getting variations on this warning for over 20 years.
|
mixture
|
Fraud & Scams, FDA bans e-juice, Telephone Scams
|
Every few years, we get some variation of this claim in our inbox: [Collected via e-mail, 1998] **HIGH PRIORITY** On Saturday, 24 January 1998, Naval Air Station, Joint Reserve Base, New Orleans’ Quarterdeck received a telephone call from an individual identifying himself as an AT&T Service Technician that was running a test on our telephone lines. He stated that to complete the test the QMOW should touch nine (9), zero (0), pound sign (#) and hang up. Luckily, the QMOW was suspicious and refused. Upon contacting the telephone company we were informed that by using 90# you end up giving the individual that called you access to your telephone line and allows them to place a long distance telephone call, with the charge appearing on your telephone. We were further informed that this scam has been originating from many of the local jails/prisons. Please “pass the word.” [Collected via e-mail, 2002] WARNING! A well known telephone scam is now being used on cellular telephones. There is a fraudulent company that is using a device to gain access to the Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) Card, which contains all subscriber related data (this is the brains in the phone) in your cellular telephone. A scam artist places a call to an unsuspecting person and the caller says he or she is testing mobile (cellular) telephone circuits or equipment. The called party is asked to press #90 or #09. If this happens END THE CALL IMMEDIATELY with out pressing the numbers. Once you press #90 or #09 the company can access your SIM Card and makes calls at your expense. [Collected via e-mail, 2003] If you receive a text message on your mobile from the number 15477 Indicating that you have won a 2 night stay in the Druid’s Marriott in Wicklow, saying that they you must reply with the text “#90” or “#09”, You Should delete this text immediately and not reply. This is a fraud Company using a device, that once you press #90 or #09 and reply text, they can Access your “SIM” card and make calls at your expense. Forward this message to as many friends as you can to stop it. [Collected via e-mail, 2004] Please note the following if you are using the mobile. If you receive a phone call on your mobile from any person, saying that, he or she is a company engineer, or telling that they’re checking your mobile line, and you have to press # 90 or #09 or any other number. End this call immediately without pressing any numbers. There is a fraud company using a device that once you press #90 or #09 they can access your “SIM” card and make calls at your expense. Forward this message to as many friends as you can, to stop it. This item is another example of a scam warning that has been continuously circulating via the Internet for more than fifteen years now, thereby receiving vastly more publicity than the potential threat it describes actually warrants. Although the warning originally had some kernel of truth to it, only a very small, specialized portion of the phone-using public is now vulnerable to the scam described therein. This scam does not affect residential or cell phone customers — it only applies to businesses, hospitals, government agencies, and other organizations that still use telephone private branch exchanges (PBXs) rather than Centrex lines to handle their calls. On certain PBX systems (i.e., ones for which pressing ‘9’ is the signal to obtain an outside line, and there are no restrictions placed on outgoing calls), a scammer could gain access to place expensive, long-distance phone calls by tricking an employee into initiating the #-9-0 sequence. Outside of a few other settings where one might have to press ‘9’ to obtain an outside line (such as hotels), the likely result of pressing #-9-0 will simply be a fast busy signal. Later versions of this warning evolved to include mention of the risk that terrorists utilizing the #90 sequence could “frame innocent people” (presumably by making terrorism-related calls linked to the phone numbers of those innocent parties) and remotely access cell phone SIM cards:
|
3824
|
Pharmacy suspension lifted in drug-ravaged West Virginia.
|
A federal judge has lifted the suspension of a West Virginia pharmacy’s ability to dispense prescription drugs.
|
true
|
Opioids, Health, Prescription drugs, West Virginia
|
The Charleston Gazette-Mail reports U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin last week lifted the suspension against Oak Hill Hometown Pharmacy that U.S. Attorney Mike Stuart had announced in August. Goodwin says federal prosecutors failed to adequately prove the pharmacy posed a public health risk. Stuart says the pharmacy had filled about 2,000 prescriptions for a widely abused drug used to treat opioid addiction. He says more than half of the prescriptions came from an out-of-state clinic and that almost all prescriptions were paid for in cash. West Virginia by far leads the nation in the rate of drug overdose deaths. ___ Information from: The Charleston Gazette-Mail, http://wvgazettemail.com.
|
24600
|
"Seniors and the disabled ""will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care."
|
Sarah Palin falsely claims Barack Obama runs a 'death panel'
|
false
|
National, Health Care, Sarah Palin,
|
"Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska, urged her supporters to oppose Democratic plans for health care reform on her Facebook page. ""As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!"" wrote Palin in a note posted Aug. 7, 2009. She said that the Democrats plan to reduce health care costs by simply refusing to pay for care. ""And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."" We agree with Palin that such a system would be evil. But it's definitely not what President Barack Obama or any other Democrat has proposed. We have read all 1,000-plus pages of the Democratic bill and examined versions in various committees. There is no panel in any version of the health care bills in Congress that judges a person's ""level of productivity in society"" to determine whether they are ""worthy"" of health care. Palin's claim sounds a little like another statement making the rounds, which says that health care reform would mandate counseling for seniors on how to end their lives sooner. We rated this claim ! The truth is that the health bill allows Medicare, for the first time, to pay for doctors' appointments for patients to discuss living wills and other end-of-life issues with their physicians. These types of appointments are completely optional, and AARP supports the measure. Palin also may have also jumped to conclusions about the Obama administration's efforts to promote comparative effectiveness research. Such research has nothing to do with evaluating patients for ""worthiness."" Rather, comparative effectiveness research finds out which treatments work better than others. The health reform bill being considered in the House of Representatives says that a Comparative Effectiveness Research Center shall ""conduct, support, and synthesize research"" that looks at ""outcomes, effectiveness, and appropriateness of health care services and procedures in order to identify the manner in which diseases, disorders, and other health conditions can most effectively and appropriately be prevented, diagnosed, treated, and managed clinically."" The idea here, which Obama and his budget director Peter Orszag have discussed many times, is to make it easier for doctors, health care workers, insurance companies and patients to find out which treatments are the most effective, as determined by clinical studies and other research. Obama has said he believes a comparative effectiveness commission should advise health care workers, not require them to follow certain treatments. ""I actually think that most doctors want to do right by their patients. And if they’ve got good information, I think they will act on that good information,"" Obama said during an interview with the New York Times on April 28, 2009. He also specifically addressed end-of-life care for seniors, discussing the last week of his grandmother's life in 2008, and how her family and doctors decided on treatment for her. ""It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels,"" Obama said. ""And that's part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It's not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that's part of what I suspect you'll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now."" And in fact, the House bill states in the section creating the Comparative Effectiveness Research Center and an oversight commission, ""Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the Commission or the Center to mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies for any public or private payer."" In other words, comparative effectiveness research will tell you whether treatment A is better than treatment B. But the bill as written won't mandate which treatment doctors and patients have to select. Palin's statement seems extreme, but other Republicans, like Newt Gingrich, are backing her up. ""You're asking us to trust turning power over to the government, when there clearly are people in America who believe in establishing euthanasia, including selective standards,"" Gingrich said in an interview on This Week with George Stephanopolous on Aug. 9, 2009. We've looked at the inflammatory claims that the health care bill encourages euthanasia. It doesn't. There's certainly no ""death board"" that determines the worthiness of individuals to receive care. Conservatives might make a case that Palin is justified in fearing that the current reform could one day morph into such a board. But that's not what Palin said. She said that the Democratic plan will ration care and ""my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care."" Palin's statement sounds more like a science fiction movie ( Soylent Green , anyone?) than part of an actual bill before Congress."
|
37711
|
A photograph shows a crowded high school hallway on the first day of school in Paulding County, Georgia in August 2020.
|
First Day of School in Paulding County, Georgia
|
true
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
On August 4 2020, a purported photograph of the first day of school in Paulding County, Georgia circulated on social media — showing a densely crowded school hallway and only a few students wearing masks:The same image was shared to Reddit’s r/trashy, r/pics, and r/awfuleverything:First day of school in Paulding County, GA from picsFirst day of school in Paulding County, GA from awfuleverythingIt was shared on Twitter, too. and Imgur:This is the first day of school in Paulding County, Georgia. pic.twitter.com/fzdidaAABM— 🇯🇲Black🇭🇹Aziz🇳🇬aNANsi🇹🇹 (@Freeyourmindkid) August 4, 2020Paulding County, Georgia:First day of school.4 masks – if you zoom in — and zero social distancing.This is gonna end badly… pic.twitter.com/pGUwzRr6VN— Rex Chapman🏇🏼 (@RexChapman) August 4, 2020According to a link shared by the Paulding County School District’s Facebook page and on Twitter, the official first day of school in that county was August 3 2020:The school district has updated its Back to School Q&A with additional questions regarding the Virtual Academy Waiting List and other topics. Download here: https://t.co/u7DkkYutP2— Paulding County BOE (@pauldingboe) August 4, 2020It looked as if the image was sourced from an Instagram account since made private via a tweet shared early on the morning of August 3 2020:First day of 10th grade, 7th grade, 5th grade and first day as a 6th grade science teacher. Watch out Paulding County Schools, these 4 are going to kill it this year! Here is to a safe… https://t.co/A5c1CR6167— Jamie Corn (@cornjd219) August 3, 2020Another prominent iteration involved gossip site TMZ, but they provided no information about the source of the image. An article by 11Alive.com didn’t directly feature the photograph, but included reporting about Paulding County’s in-person school attendance estimates.A headline for that article, “Students who want virtual learning are forced into in-person school because of waiting list,” indicated that families who wished to opt-in to virtual learning were not always able to select that option. While on the waitlist, students were required to attend school in person:There is no requirement that they [wear masks], even after the principal of North Paulding High School sent a letter to parents telling them that members of the school’s football team had tested positive and that their children may have been exposed, as well.The school system’s policies, which are posted on the system’s website, say, in part, that “schools will employ social distancing as it is feasible and practical.” As for masks, the schools “will encourage students, teachers, and bus drivers to wear masks… wearing a face mask is a personal choice….”[…]A school system spokesperson confirms that students on the waiting list for at-home, on-line learning are required to be in school in the meantime.The spokesperson said that parents of 70 percent of Paulding County’s 31,000 students chose to send their children back to school for in-person classes. That’s nearly 22,000 students. The parents of 30 percent of the students, about 9,000 students, opted for at-home, on-line learning. Information on how many of the 9,000 students are on the waiting list for the on-line learning option was not immediately available.Although we were unable to confirm the original source for the “first day of school in Paulding, Georgia” image, it began circulating around August 3 2020 — when school officially opened in Paulding County. Reporting indicated that due to a waitlist for online learning, many of the schools students were required to attend classes in person.On August 5 2020, BuzzFeed News reported that not only were they able to confirm that the photo (and others like it) is real, the situation at the school is even more alarming than the image suggests:North Paulding High School, about an hour outside Atlanta, reopened Monday despite an outbreak among members of its high school football team, many of whom, a Facebook video shows, worked out together in a crowded indoor gym last week as part of a weightlifting fundraiser.Within days of that workout, several North Paulding players had tested positive for the coronavirus. The school’s parents were notified just hours before the first day of class.And multiple teachers at North Paulding say there are positive tests among school staff, including a staff member who came into contact with most teachers at the school while exhibiting symptoms last week. Teachers and staff said the school won’t confirm coronavirus infections among district employees, citing privacy reasons.We have contacted the school district for comment and will update this story when we hear back.Update 8/6/2020, 8:10 am: Changed rating to “True” and added details about the school. -bbComments
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.