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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5674
|
Early study results suggest 2 Ebola treatments saving lives.
|
Two of four experimental Ebola drugs being tested in Congo seem to be saving lives, international health authorities announced Monday.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Health, Anthony Fauci, Ebola virus, Business, General News
|
The preliminary findings prompted an early halt to a major study on the drugs and a decision to prioritize their use in the African country, where a yearlong outbreak has killed more than 1,800 people. The early results mark “some very good news,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, which helped fund the study. With these drugs, “we may be able to improve the survival of people with Ebola.” The two drugs — one developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and the other by NIH researchers — are antibodies that work by blocking the virus. While research shows there is an effective albeit experimental vaccine against Ebola — one now being used in Congo — no studies have signaled which of several potential treatments were best to try once people became sick. During the West Africa Ebola epidemic several years ago, studies showed a hint that another antibody mixture named ZMapp worked, but not clear proof. So with the current outbreak in Congo, researchers compared ZMapp to three other drugs — Regeneron’s compound, the NIH’s called mAb114 and an antiviral drug named remdesivir. On Friday, independent study monitors reviewed how the first several hundred patients in the Congo study were faring — and found enough difference to call an early halt to the trial. The panel determined that the Regeneron compound clearly was working better than the rest, and the NIH antibody wasn’t far behind, Fauci explained. Next, researchers will do further study to nail down how well those two compounds work. The data is preliminary, Fauci stressed. But in the study, significantly fewer people died among those given the Regeneron drug or the NIH’s — about 30% compared to half who received ZMapp. More striking, when patients sought care early — before too much virus was in their bloodstream — mortality was just 6% with the Regeneron drug and 11% with the NIH compound, compared to about 24% for ZMapp, he said. Among people who receive no care in the current outbreak, about three-fourths die, said Dr. Michael Ryan of the World Health Organization. All of Congo’s Ebola treatment units have access to the two drugs, he added, saying he was hopeful that the news would persuade more patients to seek care — as soon as symptoms appear. Tackling Congo’s outbreak has been complicated both by conflict in the region and because many people don’t believe Ebola is real and choose to stay at home when they’re sick, which spurs spread of the virus. “Getting people into care more quickly is absolutely vital,” Ryan said. “The fact that we have very clear evidence now on the effectiveness of the drugs, we need to get that message out to communities.” Fauci said Regeneron and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, which has licensed the NIH compound, told authorities enough doses are readily available. One issue researchers will have to analyze: Occasionally people who receive the Ebola vaccine still become sick, including some in the treatment study, which raises the question of whether their earlier protection inflated the drugs’ survival numbers. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
|
25839
|
“You know what’s in this bill? No medical malpractice suits until 2024, even if they’re not COVID related.”
|
The bill does not prohibit the filing of medical malpractice lawsuits, but it does set strict standards that must be met for a case to succeed. The standards could restrict the number of cases filed, experts said. Although the bill refers to “coronavirus-related medical liability action,” the definition in the bill for “coronavirus-related health care services” is broad enough that it could apply to cases that were not directly COVID-19 related.
|
false
|
Health Care, Legal Issues, Public Health, Coronavirus, Charles Schumer,
|
"Sen. Chuck Schumer rejected a coronavirus relief bill proposed by Republicans in the Senate, calling it extreme and ""a giveaway to corporate interests."" Schumer said the proposal focused on protecting businesses, schools and hospitals from liability. ""You know what's in this bill? No medical malpractice suits until 2024, even if they're not COVID-related,"" said Schumer in a July 28 interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. ""What it says is, if a employer—"" ""Wait a second, wait a second, wait a second, really?"" Hayes asked. ""That's in the bill, yes,"" Schumer said. ""It's in the bill. It's amazing."" Is that true? PolitiFact examined the bill and asked law professors for their review of it to determine if any aspect of the bill did what Schumer claimed. What Schumer said was ""in the bill"" is not actually in the bill. The bill does not explicitly ban the filing of lawsuits until 2024. Language does, however, make cases more difficult to succeed, experts said. Does the bill extend to non-COVID-19 related cases? ""It doesn't seem that it's intended to apply to medical malpractice suits that don't relate to non-COVID-19 related care,"" said via email Michelle M. Mello, a law professor at Stanford Law School. But certain definitions and wording in the bill support Schumer’s interpretation, she said. Schumer’s claim is based on a bill introduced by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, that’s part of a package promoted by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. McConnell has argued that the bill does not provide immunity from lawsuits and that it still allows for accountability for gross negligence and intentional misconduct. The bill would extend to health care services provided from December 2019 to October 2024, or the date when the national emergency over the coronavirus ends. A spokesperson for Schumer said that while the bill cites ""coronavirus-related medical liability action,"" it also gives a broad definition of what constitutes as ""coronavirus-related health care services."" Here’s how the bill defines coronavirus-related health care services: ""the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of coronavirus;"" ""the assessment or care of an individual with a confirmed or suspected case of coronavirus; or"" ""the care of any individual who is admitted to, presents to, receives services from, or resides at, a health care provider for any purpose during the period of a federal emergency declaration concerning coronavirus, if such provider’s decisions or activities with respect to such individual are impacted as a result of coronavirus."" The ""for any purpose"" phrase in that definition ""would enable the preemption"" of medical malpractice lawsuits even if the health care services are not directly related to COVID-19, said Justin Goodman, a spokesperson for Schumer. ""Because the provider can be expected to say that the pandemic impacted their decisions and activities for all services they provided,"" he said. Mello, of Stanford Law School, offered this scenario: ""Suppose I come to a hospital clinic for chemotherapy, and the hospital is so overwhelmed and distracted with its COVID care and surge preparations that they don't staff the chemo service at normal levels and something important gets missed in my care — the hospital could argue that my injury fits the definition."" The hospital could say that care was suboptimal because it had diverted resources and attention to COVID-19, Mello added. Drew Brandewie, a spokesperson for Cornyn, argued that the ""for any purpose"" wording in the bill is irrelevant to Schumer’s claim. ""Nothing in the bill, including that provision, preempts or bars a lawsuit from being filed — which is what Sen. Schumer said,"" Brandewie said. Law experts said there were provisions in the bill that could reduce the number of suits filed, including a standard for negligence that’s higher than what state laws commonly require. ""The bill only permits liability for the most egregious misconduct,"" said David C. Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown Law. Plaintiffs would have to prove that a health care provider intended to hurt them, he said. In the evidence-gathering process, people seeking to sue must also show that information requested from a health care provider ""equals or exceeds the burden or cost"" placed on the health care provider. That provision and the one-year limit for filing claims, can also challenge a plaintiff's ability to file claims, experts said. When Cornyn introduced his bill, he said that as states reopen, health care workers, businesses, and schools faced ""a second pandemic of frivolous lawsuits threatening to bankrupt them."" What might be the effect of his bill if it becomes law? There would be extremely few COVID-19-based medical malpractice lawsuits and nearly zero frivolous ones, said Charles M. Silver, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, who has studied medical malpractice litigation in Texas. ""The impact of the bill will be to prevent the few plaintiffs with very strong negligence claims from collecting compensation,"" Silver said. Silver disagreed with Cornyn’s premise that health care providers were getting lots of frivolous lawsuits. Medical malpractice lawsuits are expensive and hard to win, even when clients have strong claims, Silver said. ""The single most validated finding about medical malpractice litigation is that the system routinely sends victims with valid claims home empty-handed or, at least, under-compensated,"" Silver said. Schumer said of a Republican coronavirus relief bill, ""You know what’s in this bill? No medical malpractice suits until 2024, even if they’re not COVID related."" Schumer was imprecise and inaccurate describing a provision in the bill. Despite what Schumer said, the bill does not prohibit the filing of medical malpractice lawsuits. It does set strict standards that must be met for a case to succeed. The standards also could restrict the number of cases filed, experts said. Regarding the bill's impact on lawsuits not related to COVID-19 care, some experts say the language is broad enough to have a chilling effect on all types of medical malpractice lawsuits. Schumer’s statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."
|
30211
|
A.A. Milne created the animal characters in 'Winnie-the-Pooh' to represent various mental disorders.
|
The idea that Winnie-the-Pooh and his fictional forest friends suffer from various mental disorders is based on second-hand observations made by a group of neurodevelopmentalists more than 70 years after the Pooh works were first published. While these characters may exhibit some of the tendencies typical of the listed conditions, it was not Milne’s intention to have his characters represent different mental disorders.
|
false
|
Entertainment, a.a. milne, books, fan theory
|
In August 2018, coincident with the release of the Disney film Christopher Robin, a new generation of Winnie the Pooh fans were exposed to a popular theory holding that the animal characters who populate the Hundred Acre Wood in A.A. Milne’s most famous works were created to represent various mental disorders: Like similar theories positing that the seven characters on the sitcom Gilligan’s Island personified the seven deadly sins, or that the five main characters in the animated children’s show Scooby-Doo were each based on one of five eastern colleges, the notion that characters such as Eeyore, Rabbit, Piglet, Roo, and even Pooh himself represent various mental disorders is a fanciful latter-day interpretation and not an expression of the authorial intent of Pooh creator A.A. Milne. This theory was first popularized in a tongue-in-cheek paper published in 2000 (more than 70 years after the appearance of the first Winnie-the-Pooh book) in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. The BBC reported at the time that lead researcher and primary author Sarah Shea’s intention was to “remind people that anyone can have disorders.” The introduction to the study also noted that the characters were diagnosed with different mental disorders by a “group of modern neurodevelopmentalists,” not Milne: On the surface it is an innocent world: Christopher Robin, living in a beautiful forest surrounded by his loyal animal friends. Generations of readers of A.A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh stories have enjoyed these seemingly benign tales. However, perspectives change with time, and it is clear to our group of modern neurodevelopmentalists that these are in fact stories of Seriously Troubled Individuals, many of whom meet DSM-IV3 criteria for significant disorders (Table 1). We have done an exhaustive review of the works of A.A. Milne and offer our conclusions about the inhabitants of the Hundred Acre Wood in hopes that our observations will help the medical community understand that there is a Dark Underside to this world. Although the observations made by Shea and her team may fall in line with modern medical standards, the paper’s humorous tone makes it clear that these determinations weren’t offered with a straight face. Take this selection from Roo’s diagnosis, which ended with a prediction about the young kangaroo’s dismal future: We predict we will someday see a delinquent, jaded, adolescent Roo hanging out late at night at the top of the forest, the ground littered with broken bottles of extract of malt and the butts of smoked thistles. We think that this will be Roo’s reality, in part because of a second issue. Roo’s closest friend is Tigger, who is not a good Role Model. Peer influences strongly affect outcome. The researchers also suggested that an intervention might be in order for Winnie-the-Pooh himself, as the fictional character likely suffers from “Shaken Bear Syndrome” (a play on the medical term “Shaken Baby Syndrome,” or SBS), as he was repeatedly dragged up and down the stairs by Christopher Robin: Early on we see Pooh being dragged downstairs bump, bump, bump, on the back of his head. Could his later cognitive struggles be the result of a type of Shaken Bear Syndrome? Pooh needs intervention. We feel drugs are in order. We cannot but wonder how much richer Pooh’s life might be were he to have a trial of low-dose stimulant medication. With the right supports, including methylphenidate, Pooh might be fitter and more functional and perhaps produce (and remember) more poems. I take a PILL-tiddley pom It keeps me STILL-tiddley pom, It keeps me STILL-tiddley pom Not fiddling. iNews reached out to Shea in September 2017 to talk about her study in light of the news that the new Milne biopic Goodbye Christopher Robin would mention A.A. Milne’s struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Shea said that her paper was written before she knew of Milne’s struggle with PTSD and reiterated that her intention was to poke fun at her profession and not to offer a serious medical examination of a characters inhabiting a fictional world: “I received some very cranky letters. Some people felt we were ‘wasting research money.’ Some people got angry that we were besmirching the beloved characters. Some thought it was pro medicating children.” Dr Shea insists that the paper was conceived to poke fun at “our own professional process wherein we sit in judgement as we diagnose and label others.”
|
33307
|
Former NBA superstar Michael Jordan has died in his sleep of a heart attack.
|
Reports that former NBA superstar Michael Jordan has died of a heart attack are another celebrity death hoax.
|
false
|
Inboxer Rebellion, celebrity death hoaxes, hoaxes, michael jordan
|
In February 2015, the web site Cronica MX published an article reporting that former Chicago Bull basketball star Michael Jordan had passed away of a heart attacj at the age of 52: This morning the ex basket ball player and also icon of world sports, Michael Jordan, was found dead while in his sleep in his residence in North Caroline. Around 3 am eastern time, Yvette Prieto, now widow of the star noticed that her husband showed no vital signs and she proceeded to call 911. Minutes after the paramedics arrived, they confirmed the death of the athlete due to a heart attack. The wife, Yvette Prieto, said she feels devastated for the sudden death of his beloved husband and in a short speech to some news reporters she thanked them for all the support. She said that Jordan was a great person and everybody loved him. The web site also produced a video in order to lend some credibility to the claim that His Airness had died. Although the clip was designed to look like a breaking news segment, the footage posted to YouTube was not anything broadcast by a credible news network: The dead giveaway that this video was a fake (and the report of Jordan’s death a hoax) came at the 25-second mark, when reporter Rich Eisen appeared on screen to give a tearful goodbye to the sports legend. Although the footage of Eisen was real, the sports reporter was not shown mourning the death of Michael Jordan; rather, that portion of the clip was a recycled portion of an NFL Game Day broadcast from January 2015 which aired shortly after the death of Eisen’s fellow ESPN anchor Stuart Scott:
|
1365
|
Britain to hold inquiry into contaminated blood scandal which killed 2,400.
|
Britain will hold a public inquiry into contaminated blood supplied to patients in the state-run National Health Service which killed at least 2,400 people, the government said on Tuesday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
During the 1970s and 1980s, blood products supplied to the NHS was contaminated with viruses such as HIV or hepatitis C and infected thousands of people with hemophilia or other bleeding disorders. Health minister Philip Dunne said many documents were publicly available which gave a comprehensive picture of events and decisions made at the time. “However, I recognise for those affected these steps do not go far enough to provide the answers that they want to get to the truth of what happened,” he told parliament. “In light of these concerns and a report of new evidence and allegations of potential criminality, we think it is important to understand the extent of what is claimed and the wider issues that arise.” Families of victims will be consulted to decide what form the inquiry would take. A report by lawmakers in 2015 said the Department of Health estimated that more than 30,000 people might have been infected with hepatitis C between 1970 and 1991 when Britain imported some blood products from the United States but just 6,000 had been identified. A further 1,500 were infected with HIV between 1978 and 1985. The inquiry comes after leaders from all of Britain’s main political parties, except the ruling Conservatives, wrote a joint letter to May demanding an investigation into the issue. “For decades people with bleeding disorders and their families have sought the truth,” said Liz Carroll, Chief Executive of The Haemophilia Society. “Instead, they were told by the government that no mistakes were made while it repeatedly refused to acknowledge evidence of negligence and a subsequent cover up. Finally, they will have the chance to see justice.”
|
24149
|
For years now, we have spent more money than we have taken in.
|
Mayor Annise Parker says that for years, Houston has been spending more than it takes in
|
mixture
|
Economy, Texas, Annise Parker,
|
"With the city of Houston running short about $11 million to fund its budget this year and projecting a revenue shortfall of $100 million for next year — Houston's first-year mayor, Annise Parker, recently floated the possibility of furloughs and layoffs for city employees. ""For years now (in Houston), we have spent more money than we have taken in,"" Parker said March 10, according to a news article in The Houston Chronicle. ""You can't spend more than you earn. It is a very unbusinesslike approach to running things."" The Bayou City running in the red for years? We wondered if Parker, who was Houston's controller before she took office in January, has that right — especially because her predecessor as mayor, Bill White, touted his financial acumen while winning the 2010 Democratic nomination for governor. Janice Evans, Parker's director of communications, told us: ""The city has offset revenue shortfalls in recent years by drawing down the (general) fund balance, which was built up in good times so that it would be available during leaner times."" She was referring to the city's practice of socking away enough money so that the fund balance at the end of each fiscal year is equal to 7.5 percent of expenditures before debt service — essentially a savings account, which was built up over eight consecutive years. Michelle Mitchell, the city's finance director, said that starting in fiscal year 2009 — July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009 — revenue coming into the general fund has fallen short of expenditures. The general fund, which is the government's largest kitty, helps supports most basic services including health and human services, the police force and the fire department. ""General revenues such as property tax, sales tax, came in lower than expenditures,"" Mitchell acknowledged in an e-mail. But she cautioned that ""there are other sources of funds that have to be looked at for the whole picture. These include funds such as sale of assets, proceeds from bonds, transfers from other fund sources, etc. With all revenues being considered, then the city did not outspend (its) revenues (prior to fiscal year 2009)."" Judy Gray Johnson, who served as Houston's finance director from 2004-2008, agreed with Mitchell's summary. ""If you have higher fund balances at the end of the year than you had at the beginning of the year, than you couldn't have spent more than you took in,"" Johnson said. When White became mayor in 2004, the undesignated fund balance — money saved — was $83 million. The city last added to the fund in fiscal year 2008 which ended June 30 of that year. At that time the balance was about $287.2 million, according to the city's annual audited financial reports. In fiscal year 2009, there wasn't any extra cash to add to the general fund kitty. In fact, Houston's charter requires the city to keep a balanced budget, and for the past two years, the city has relied in part on reserve funds to satisfy the requirement. The city drew $26 million from the undesignated fund in fiscal 2009, lowering the balance to $261.1 million by June, 2009. Mitchell has projected the balance will drop to about $166 million by June 30 this year. Summing up: Houston took in more money than it spent for most of White's six-year tenure as mayor, and socked some of it away. Since fiscal 2009, the city has been drawing on those reserve funds, ending each year with less than it started. So far, it has drawn $56 million from the fund. Parker is correct that the city has spent more than it's taken in for years, though her time reference works only because the city's fiscal year always includes portions of two calendar years — in this case, 2008 and 2009. Put another way, the city has taken in less than it’s spent for about a year and a half, which includes one complete fiscal year and part of the current one."
|
33475
|
The U.S. Army secretly feeds new recruits saltpeter in order to suppress their sexual urges.
|
The rumor doesn’t reside only within the ranks of the service; it also pops up wherever teenage boys or men are housed together. Many believe saltpeter is secretly introduced into the food at colleges, boys’ schools, and prisons, all places where the belief flourishes because the inmates need to explain away their lack of sexual arousal.
|
false
|
Military, Aphrodisiacs, erectile dysfunction, military legends
|
A common report by male recruits undergoing basic training is their inability to troop the morning colors, so to speak. Erections that came so easily before boot camp become few and far between. This surprising downturn of events is frequently attributed to the presence of saltpeter in the chow rather than to the powerful combination of anxiety to succeed, physical exhaustion, and a radical change of lifestyle. Barracks life also contributes to this suppression, with the knowledge of the close proximity of many others subconsciously working to inhibit that aspect of an individual’s expression. “I’m worried that I might not make it through the training,” “I’m dead tired,” “I don’t yet feel like this is my home,” and “There are all these other guys around” are weak-sounding admissions to give voice to, so it is comforting to instead be able to cling to the belief that the Army, in its all-knowing wisdom, must be slipping something into the food to cause what’s seen as a striking physiological betrayal in young men who haven’t previously experienced such a dry spell: Examples: It was certainly well-known that ‘they put bromide in the tea/coffee’ to reduce randiness, though such measures were hardly necessary in view of the strenuous regime we had to follow at the time. Such stories seem to have been prevalent everywhere and through the ages — ‘the myth of the doctored wine.’ It is reported that the sexual prowess of recruits always diminished, and who can be surprised at that? In France, the wine was doctored; in Poland it was the coffee. In South Africa, it was the food itself which contained a mysterious anaphrodisiac called ‘blue-stone’ — as it had allegedly been in the First World War. In Germany, iodine was put into the coffee, and soda into the meat. [Collected on the Internet, 2000] Potassium Nitrate! Saltpeter! The military used to put it in the eggs at breakfast so a certain “joint” wouldn’t get stiff when it wasn’t supposed to. We could spot it right off in the Army. It, the saltpeter, gave the eggs a greenish tint. This need to believe that an outside force is deliberately working to keep things down fuels the saltpeter myth. Such a construct works to reassure the woodless recruit that there’s nothing wrong with him — it’s all the sneaky doings of those in charge. The myth is every bit as empowering as it is reassuring; it says “We are such rampantly virile men that those in command fear us and what we might do if left unchecked.” It thus works to build pride in the unit by helping to establish an internalized reputation for being such wild men that the group as a whole has to be drugged into docility if its commanders are to have any hope of keeping it under control. Yet the truth is, there’s no additional levels of saltpeter hidden in Army chow. There’s also no proof potassium nitrate (saltpeter) has any effect on libido, plus or minus, so there would be nothing to be gained from such a doctoring of edibles. Yes, saltpeter has long rumored to be an anaphrodisiac, a substance that reduces sexual drive. But it’s all rumor and no fact. Saltpeter has a long history of medical use. It and other nitrates were employed by doctors during the 18th century to treat such varied problems as asthma, sore throats, and arthritis. Not that it was used wisely for these purposes, however — physicians were far less knowledgeable in those days, and potassium nitrate’s hazards were not then understood as well as they are now. Saltpeter can be toxic in large quantities. It can cause anemia, methemoglobinemia (a blood disorder), headache, stomach upset, dizziness, kidney damage, and can raise one’s blood pressure to a dangerous level. It is thus strongly recommended against, and no one in his right mind would dose himself or anyone else with it. Given that saltpeter doesn’t suppress sexual urges and is dangerous to use, the Army lacks any reason to administer it to those within its ranks. Yet those two facts will probably do little to dissuade those who are certain the coffee continues to taste funny.
|
7565
|
Scientists fault UK’s pandemic strategy as deaths rise.
|
As the coronavirus continues to infect people across Britain in what will likely turn out to be Europe’s worst outbreak, the government has come under criticism from scientists, who say it has neglected the fundamentals of epidemic control.
|
true
|
Understanding the Outbreak, Epidemics, Europe, General News, Health, London, Pandemics, Virus Outbreak, Europe, Public health, Science
|
Hundreds of outbreak experts have questioned the U.K’s pandemic response, ridiculing the government’s claim of “following the science.” “There was a sense of fatalism and I think the government ruled out containment options that should not have been ruled out,” said Martin McKee, a professor of European public health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. “And now we have to deal with the fall-out.” The fallout includes a death rate that has now reached 28,446. That is only slightly less than Italy, Europe’s worst-hit nation with 28,884 confirmed deaths. For weeks, the U.K. was focused on widespread testing, setting itself the goal of conducting 100,000 COVID-19 tests per day by the end of April. It met the target but has failed to keep the number at that level. Epidemic experts warned that Britain’s overwhelming focus on testing ignored an equally essential element of outbreak control: the tracking and isolation of contacts of cases. Allyson Pollock, a public health doctor at Newcastle University said Britain ignored basic World Health Organization guidelines on stopping outbreaks. “The government put far too much weight on testing and the strategy now seems quite confused,” she said. That follows an already delayed response to the pandemic. While WHO declared the coronavirus to be a global emergency on January 30, it wasn’t until March 5 that Britain made the disease “notifiable,” requiring doctors to report it. Britain’s department of health said recently it would train 18,000 people to track contacts of cases to monitor the virus’ spread, and aimed to have them in place by mid-May. But it has not released details of how the program will work. Such lack of precision, experts worry, could lead to a devastating second wave of disease. Still, some of the U.K’s leading disease experts have applauded Britain’s response. Dr. Jeremy Farrar, who heads the Wellcome Trust, said it was correct to focus on immediate issues like testing while developing more detailed future plans. But David McCoy, a professor of global public health at Queen Mary University of London, said Britain’s pandemic response plan has been overly influenced by mathematical models rather than by established outbreak interventions. “The problem with models is they just produce scenarios based on assumptions that may be right or wrong and they don’t tell you what you should do,” he said. Britain’s lockdown was triggered the day after modelers suggested there might be 250,000 deaths in a best-case scenario. Some have also questioned the independence of the government’s scientific advisers, especially after it emerged that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s controversial chief aide, Dominic Cummings, attended meetings of the U.K’s top scientific advisory committee. Some scientists argued that having political aides attend meetings compromised experts’ ability to assess evidence or make recommendations independently of political considerations. After declining to publish a membership list for its scientific committee, citing the privacy of the scientists involved, the government released a list of names Monday, excluding those who asked not to be identified. The department of health dismissed concerns about the validity of its outbreak strategy and said it has been “guided at all times by the best scientific advice.” Efforts to trace contacts as restrictions are being lifted vary significantly among other hard-hit countries including France, Italy, and Spain, with few concrete details on how precisely the virus will be monitored. Annelies Wilder-Smith, a public health expert at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said it was troubling that Britain had no plans to remove contacts of cases out of the community in specialized facilities, similar to what was done in China and Singapore. “If you don’t isolate contacts who could have the disease, then they will just stay at home and infect their friends and families,” she said. Most Western countries have so far declined to consider such interventionist policies, and some experts say their refusal to do so is fueling virus transmission. Britain’s Health Secretary Matt Hancock announced Monday it would begin testing a smartphone app on the Isle of Wight this week, with all of the isolated island’s 80,000 households receiving an invitation to download it. He said the app logs details of nearby phones that also have the app. If a user gets symptoms, those other phones will receive an alert and people will be able to order a coronavirus test. But the app’s success depends on large swathes of the population being willing to share their personal data. “There are a minefield of problems here,” said Ross Anderson, a cybersecurity expert at the University of Cambridge who was consulted by a government group developing the app and called it “unworkable.” “The (National Health Service) has repeatedly broken its privacy promises whenever it collects data of any value to somebody else,” Anderson said. Other scientists say the U.K.’s deliberate withdrawal from regular Europe-wide discussions on COVID-19 have further compromised its response. In March, Britain failed to join an EU-wide program to buy ventilators, even though it is eligible to, since the Brexit transition period lasts until the end of the year. The British government blamed a lost email for the missed opportunity and said it would participate in the future. ___ Jill Lawless in London contributed to this report. ___ Follow AP pandemic coverage at http://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak
|
24146
|
Hospitals, doctors, MRIs, surgeries and so forth are more extensively used and far more expensive in this country than they are in many other countries.''
|
Romney says hospitals, doctors, surgeries used more in U.S.
|
true
|
National, Health Care, Mitt Romney,
|
"While promoting his new book in an appearance on Fox News Sunday on March 7, 2010, Mitt Romney offered an interesting explanation of why health care costs so much in the United States. He said there are undoubtably some bad health insurance companies among the many in the United States, and they should be held accountable, but the industry is not the cause of increasing health care costs. ""The president is scapegoating. It's something which he is fond to do any time one of his programs gets in trouble. He decides to pick a target and say, 'This is the cause of America's problem,' whether that's Wall Street, or Goldman Sachs, or bankers, or wealthy people, or whether it's insurance companies,'' Romney said. ""To suggest that the overall health care cost of America, which, by the way, is dramatically higher than any other nation in the world, is because of the insurance companies is obviously quite silly. ""Our health care costs are very, very high because we use a lot of health treatments. Hospitals, doctors, MRIs, surgeries and so forth are more extensively used and far more expensive in this country than they are in many other countries. It's not the insurance companies that are driving our health care cost up and up. The reason their premiums are going up is because doctor bills and hospital bills and usage and so forth is also going up.'' That's a lot to check -- hospitals, doctors, MRIs, surgeries --but we were game. We found that while Romney is correct in parts of the claim, he's wrong in others.Although ""many countries"" can be interpreted a lot of different ways, for the purposes of our analysis, we think it's fair to compare the United States with other economically developed countries in the world. Fortunately for our fact-checking, there's a group that compiles this data: the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, or OECD. They gather data from around the world on health, medicine, economics and other social indicators, and their statistics are widely respected. Let's start with hospitals. According to OECD data, Romney is correct about U.S. hospitals costing more, but wrong about them being more extensively used. As a percentage of the population, fewer Americans are admitted to hospitals, and spend less time in hospitals than the average country.The United States also has fewer hospital beds, with 3.1 beds per 1,000 people versus the OECD average of 5.7. The length of stay in a hospital for acute care is a full day less than in the average OECD country (5.5 versus 6.5 days), and the United States has 126.3 hospital discharges per 1,000 people versus the average 157.8. Discharges are used to measure the amount of visits to the hospital. Moving on to doctors, Romney is right again about what doctors are paid -- more in the United States -- but wrong that they're used more extensively. U.S. doctors are paid significantly more than the average doctor in other countries. The ""price"" includes fees and activities, so one reason U.S. doctors may be paid more is because they see more patients, but the OECD suspects that American doctors are largely paid more because their fees are higher. Doctors in the United States are paid $25,000 to $40,000 more than those in Britain, Germany and Canada. However, there are fewer practicing physicians in the United States than the average, and American patients have doctor consultations much less often than citizens do in other countries monitored by the OECD.In the United States there are 3.8 doctor consultations per person annually, which is almost half of the 6.8 average of countries monitored by the OECD. A consultation includes general practitioners and specialists, and includes almost any type of environment in which you would consult a doctor. The only caveat is that this does not include people like registered nurse practitioners, who are allowed to prescribe medicine to patients but are not doctors.Romney is unquestionably correct when it comes to MRIs. Magnetic Resonance Imaging provides doctors with a detailed image of, for instance, cardiovascular damage. The United States gives the most MRI exams of all the countries monitored by the OECD, with more than twice the average amount of exams given per year and twice the average amount of MRI machines as a percentage of the population. The International Federation of Health Plans, a group of private insurers in different countries, reports that the United States has significantly higher fees than Germany, Canada, the Netherlands, France and Britain. The average fee for an MRI exam in the United States is $1,200. It is $179 in Britain, $235 in Spain, $567 in the Netherlands and $839 in Germany. Regarding surgery, the United States appears to have an above-average amount of in-patient surgeries and ambulatory surgeries. Ambulatory surgery is a component of what is considered a day surgery -- an operation in which the patient leaves the clinic or hospital the same day. The United States has 92.8 in-patient surgeries per 1,000 people annually versus the average of 68.3. According to the OECD, ambulatory surgeries are especially disproportionate, with the United States having a rate three times greater than the average country. The OECD does not have data on the amount of total surgeries in the United States, but all the available data suggest that it has a higher rate of surgeries than the average of the countries the group monitors.It's fairly well established that the United States spends more on health care than other economically developed countries, so high costs do not come as a surprise. Romney was right about MRIs, surgery, hospitals and doctors all costing more in the United States. Regarding quantity, he was also right about higher rates of MRI exams and surgery here, but wrong about hospital usage and doctor consultations. We're rating this ."
|
23133
|
"Scott Walker Says Gov. Jim Doyle and the DNR have not put hunters first and mismanaged the deer herd; as a result ""the deer population has dwindled."
|
Scott Walker says the DNR has mismanaged the state’s deer herd and lowered the deer population
|
false
|
Environment, Recreation, Wisconsin, Scott Walker,
|
"Scott Walker’s first deer hunting expeditions gave him a taste of the frustration that has been felt by many Wisconsin hunters: He got skunked. Now, in his bid for governor, Walker has waded into the single most contentious state natural resources issue: the size of the state’s deer herd and how the balance is struck between the wishes of hunters, the effects of deer on the environment, the concerns of farmers and the safety of drivers. The annual deer hunt helps drive tourism and, for many, helps define Wisconsin. Walker, a Republican facing Democrat Tom Barrett in the Nov. 2, 2010 election, is a recent hunter, though his story may have a common ring to it. Two years ago, on his first hunt, he saw a buck but couldn’t shoot, because he was in an area where hunters first had to kill a doe before they could shoot a buck. Last year’s hunt was equally unsatisfying: Walker didn’t see a deer. Walker made increasing the number of deer -- and the number of hunters -- a central part of a tourism plan he unveiled Oct. 14, 2010. In the three-page document, Walker says Gov. Jim Doyle and the state Department of Natural Resources have engaged in ""political games"" and ""put bureaucrats in Madison ahead of hunters of the state."" The result, he argues, is a smaller herd, fewer deer taken and fewer hunters. In a news release, Walker claimed that the ""deer population has dwindled"" as a result of ""mismanagement"" by Doyle and the DNR. That’s the statement we put in our cross hairs. Is it true the deer population has dwindled? And, if so, is the frustration of hunter a result of political games and mismanagement in Madison? We started with Walker, but his campaign said he was unavailable to talk to PolitiFact Wisconsin about the matter. Out hunting votes, no doubt. The campaign referred us to adviser Greg Kazmierski, a member of the Hunters Rights Coalition, a lobbying group and longtime critic of the DNR. Kazmierski, owner of Buck Rub Outfitters Ltd. in the Town of Delafield, believes the DNR’s system of managing the deer herd -- and the hunt -- is out of whack. His list of complaints is long: Deer population estimates, used to establish hunting targets, are ""not anywhere close to accurate""; the department itself doesn’t do enough to encourage hunting and is ""anti-hunter""; bureaucrats focus too much on other factors, such as car-deer accidents and farmers who have their crops damaged. ""We are moving in a direction that people want to give (hunting) up,"" said Kazmierski, whose business is based on hunting. ""There are too many rules and regulations."" OK, let’s dig into the claim, starting with the last word: ""dwindled."" The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines dwindle as ""To become steadily less: shrink."" That can apply to the deer population in the state -- which is estimated at 1.3 million -- down from about 1.8 million in 2007. But Walker’s statement glosses over two critical factors. First, the population is an estimate -- no one knows exactly how many deer there are. Second, the numbers are down on purpose; the smaller herd is part of a policy compromise that involves many players and in some years a vote by the Legislature. Under state law, the DNR must establish a ""post-hunt"" deer population goal. Once every three years, that goal is voted on and approved by state lawmakers. It is not a decision for bureaucrats or the governor alone -- as Walker suggests when he blames them for mismanagement. Everything starts with estimates of the overall deer herd -- an inexact science, but one that the state was praised for as a national leader in a 2006 review by out of state experts. The DNR also receives advice from various groups and sportsmen in each county, via members of the Wisconsin Conservation Congress, a statewide network that has existed for 76 years. The prospects for hunters are far from the only consideration that plays into the target deer population. When there are large numbers of deer, farmers complain of damage to their crops. In suburban areas, deer begin to show up, wandering in cul-de-sacs and backyards. And, of course, some become part of car-deer accidents. For instance, as the number of deer has declined, so has the number of car-deer accidents: 16,338 in 2009, down from 17,555 in 2005 and 19,914 in 2001. But after a disappointing 2009 hunt, many hunters blamed the DNR. The post-hunt goal for the fall 2010 hunt was set last spring at about 794,000. That compares with a post-hunt goal of about 706,000 in 2005 and a post-hunt goal of about 704,000 in 2000. So, while Walker argues the overall population is dwindling, the post-hunt goal has actually been increasing. This year, a special committee recommended setting the post-hunt deer population at 745,636. The agency bumped it to 794,172, after taking into account that some members of the committee -- including Kazmierski -- wanted a goal in excess of 1 million. Let’s look at some other numbers, which also relate to Walker’s claim -- that tourism is being harmed because the number of hunters is down. Number of Wisconsin hunters: Licensed resident deer hunters were 800,372 in 2009, according to the DNR. That’s down 1,513 from the year before. But the number is up from 2005, when it was 780,719. Number of out-of-state hunters: Non-resident licenses were 43,998 in 2009, down 1,575 -- about 3.5 percent -- from the year before. Out of state licenses totalled 42,397 in 2005. Total deer harvest: In 2009, the total was 329,103, down 124,377 from the year before and 134,832 less than in 2005. With that drop, it’s no wonder many hunters are frustrated. In 2009, there were 39 deer killed per 100 licensed hunters, compared with 56 deer per 100 hunters in 2005. However, the percentage of successful hunters is actually even lower, because many hunters bag more than one deer. Walker’s plan calls for the governor to appoint ""white tail deer trustee"" (We think ""deer overseer"" is a bit more poetic) to advise the state on deer management. What do others say about the issue? -- ""The deer herd is down, but it’s not decimated. It’s down, but it’s coming back,"" said Mark Toso, president of the Wisconsin Deer Hunters Association, a group he says has 1,000 members. Toso said Walker is ""trying to feed off of anti-DNR sentiment"" and frustration among hunters: ""A lot of deer hunters only know what they see in the woods. If they don’t see a deer, it’s the DNR’s fault."" -- Ed Harvey, chairman of the Conservation Congress, said the group was formed precisely to ""depoliticize"" deer management. He noted: ""If something’s politicized, it’s a lobbying group."" He said the DNR has erred in estimated deer counts in some parts of the state, leading to hunter frustration: ""The department has taken some very big strides to correct that. It will take some time."" Asked about the deer trustee advisor, Harvey’s response was simple: ""That’s what the Congress does."" -- ""In my professional opinion, the statement that the deer herd has been mismanaged is wrong,"" said Tim Van Deelen, a University of Wisconsin-Madison biology professor and expert on deer populations. He noted the 2006 audit that found the state’s approach to counting the herd more rigorous than that of other states: ""When I consider the totality of the information available, I don't think the deer herd has dwindled -- decreased somewhat, maybe, but not substantially."" OK, let’s get out of the woods. Walker points to ""political games"" by Doyle and the DNR, whom he blames for the state’s ""dwindling"" deer population. That view is certainly shared by many frustrated hunters. However, Walker’s statement leaves out critical information: The size of the deer herd, itself an estimate, is down by design, not by mistake. The goals are based on a system built on input from across the state and attempt to balance the concerns of hunters against those of farmers and drivers. Indeed, it has been successful in helping reduce the number of car-deer accidents. What’s more, in response to pressure from hunters, the 2010 population goal was increased."
|
10875
|
Glaucoma Drug-Dispensing Eye Insert Shows Promise as New Option for Patients Struggling to Take Daily Prescription Eye Drops
|
This news release reports phase 2 trial results of a silicone ring that slowly releases glaucoma medication onto the surface of the eye, potentially eliminating the need for patients to self-administer eye drops. The study was funded by the developer of the device, ForSight VISION5, and appeared in Ophthalmology, the journal of the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Glaucoma medications work by reducing internal fluid pressure that could permanently damage the optic nerve, resulting in vision loss. This randomized controlled trial of 130 patients, 64 of whom were given a medicated ring dispensing the drug bimatroprost along with artificial tears, showed the device lowered eye pressure in glaucoma patients by about 20 percent over six months. We found the news release adequately addresses potential harms and conflicts of interest, but could have done a better job discussing costs, study limitations, and alternative approaches to improve treatment delivery. Patient non-adherence to glaucoma treatment regimens is a serious problem, believed to contribute to glaucoma remaining a leading cause of blindness. Medication to lower eye pressure is generally preferred over traditional surgery and laser surgery because it has fewer risks and lower costs. But many patients fail to take daily eye drops for a variety of reasons including side effects, lack of understanding about the disease, and physical difficulties. These roadblocks are compounded in older patients who have physical and cognitive impairments. Consistent treatment is critical because even short periods without medication can result in vision loss. A number of strategies have been recommended to increase patient adherence including simplifying drug regimens and improving patient communication. There’s urgency to improve treatment options. From 2010 to 2050, the number of people in the U.S. with glaucoma is expected to increase by more than double, from 2.7 million to 6.3 million, according to the National Eye Institute.
|
true
|
Association/Society news release
|
The news release doesn’t mention costs, despite the fact that investors would need to recoup the enormous cost of developing a device and winning Food and Drug Administration approval. It might be too early to estimate the market price of the ring, but the news release could have helped readers understand financial implications by mentioning the typical high cost of new medical devices as well as what it might cost to pay a clinician to insert, monitor and replace a medicated ring at regular intervals. It could have also mentioned costs for existing treatment options, and in more rare cases, the cost of surgeries that are performed when patients fail to adhere to treatment plans. The news release states that the ring containing the drug bimatoprose reduced eye pressure in glaucoma patients by about 20 percent over six months, and eye pressure fell 3.2 to 6.4 mmHg, compared with 4.2 to 6.4 mmHG for the group taking standard eye drops. The news release could have given more context to these numbers to help readers understand what they mean in terms of patient outcomes. It’s worth mentioning that reducing intraocular pressure is an intermediate outcome. The real goal is to slow vision loss. While this trial is too short for that, it could have been mentioned when discussing future trials that the real goal is yet to be studied. We won’t dock points for that omission here since we address it below under the “Evidence” criterion. The news release quotes the authors saying the device is “well-tolerated and safe” with a retention rate of 89 percent at six months. It also pointed out that some patients experienced itchiness and redness, which it describes as common adverse effects for patients taking glaucoma medication, and that the ring became dislodged in 15 patients, requiring it be replaced so therapy could continue. While the release adequately covers the known risks, in a study this small it would be good to remind readers that the device has not yet been tested on a large and diverse group of patients who might have different results. We also wonder how the ring would work in practice. Would patients who have difficulty following a treatment regimen in the first place be prompt about getting to a physician’s office promptly to have a ring replaced? The news release carries an overall cautious tone in reporting on the small study, but it becomes less informative than it could be by excluding a discussion of the study limitations. The release does not address limitations of this phase 2 trial, which was designed to determine whether the device could achieve a short-term reduction in eye pressure in a few select patients rather than whether it would actually slow vision loss in a broad and diverse population over the long-term. Study participants agreed to adhere to a twice-daily regimen of either medicated or artificial eye drops, whereas the intent of the insert is to help patients who aren’t able to adhere to a daily eye drop routine. The phase 2 study was also limited to six months, while glaucoma treatment is typically lifelong. As the study says, long-term studies with a high-risk populations are required “to demonstrate the full usefulness” of the ring in preserving eyesight, but such studies “will require several years of follow-up and currently and currently are not feasible at this stage of development.” It adds that a real word long-term observational registry can be done only after the product is approved and available to physicians and patients. Also, the news release says study authors believe the ring could be used for non-glaucoma medication “with potential applications for dry eye, allergies and inflammation” as well as for “delivering multiple ocular drugs at once.” Those are interesting ideas, but there’s no data to back them up. There is no disease mongering. The news release states that the authors of the study receive financial support from ForSight VISION5, which makes the ring. The news release does not compare the ring with existing approaches to help patients adhere to treatment plans, such as better physician-patient communication and simplified drug regimens. It also gives a quote from a study author saying, “What is exciting is that this is just one of several sustained-release drug delivery methods designed to help patients who have trouble taking daily eye drops.” But there’s no elaboration to explain what these other methods are or whether they have been studied or approved for use in glaucoma patients. The new release accurately states says the device “may one day be a promising option” for patients who struggle with administering eye drops, though it could give readers a better sense of just how far off that day might be. The news release says a phase 3 trial of larger groups of patients is expected to begin this year, but does explain how long that would take or mention the lengthy process required to win approval from the Food and Drug Administration. The news release does not seem to make any unfounded claims about the novelty of this device. In fact, it quotes a study author as saying that the device “is just one of several sustained-release drug delivery methods designed to help patients who have trouble taking daily eye drops.” The news release states that the device “may one day be a promising option” for glaucoma patients who struggle with eye drops without mentioning the obvious corollary that it may not do that. However, the article otherwise does not engage in sensational language.
|
9758
|
How Well Does the Newly Approved Weight-Loss 'Balloon' Work? Expert notes it will probably only be effective for short-term weight loss
|
This story describes a device, ReShape, inserted inside the patient’s stomach that appears to help with weight loss on a short-term temporary basis. Besides the gastric ulcers that struck more than one-third of patients in the study group, we think this device also may also represent a “harm” if it encourages patients down a short-term path rather then helping them make a long-term permanent change in their health. The small study described was financed by the device manufacturer. The story did a good job outlining some of the harms of the device, but the list of potential harms could have been even longer. If someone who is not “medically” obese pays for this device and this procedure and is exposed to risks for only a limited chance at a temporary benefit, is that a harm? This story does not answer that question. Let’s face it, whatever intervention a person undertakes to lose weight, that weight will return when the intervention ends. As a consequence, unless there’s a medical need for rapid weight loss, there’s a limited role for a by-definition temporary intervention, let alone one that confers real risk. So as good a job as the story did in covering the basics of what was behind the FDA’s approval, there could have been – and still could be – an important followup on some of these broader medical/ethical questions.
|
true
|
obesity,ReShape,weight loss
|
The story does discuss costs. The discussion would be better if it included the cost of implanting the device. The story only told the price of the device in Europe “average price is about $6,200, according to the manufacturer.” But it was not clear whether that price includes fees to the doctor and clinic for insertion and removal. And readers/consumers should also think about this: given the high likelihood of “intolerable” nausea, what is the impact this might have on lost work time? We are not given context of prices for other procedures related to this one – such as bariatric surgeries. The story states “the ReShape system helped people more than double their weight loss compared to those trying to lose weight through diet and exercise.” We also also note that because previous studies on weight loss suggest that the average individual is hoping for a loss of 20% or more of presenting weight, “double” as a descriptor, when discussing very small losses, may be a bit loaded. In the final paragraph, the story includes absolute values of weight loss: “In the clinical trial, the 187 participants who used the device lost an average of more than 14 pounds, or about 7 percent of their total body weight. Patients who did not receive the device lost about half that amount of weight — just over 3 percent of their total body weight, the FDA said.” Kudos to the writer for including the comments from the researcher who said the results may be temporary. The story explained that nausea that made some patients drop out of the study, and explained that gastric ulcers were seen in the stomachs of more than one-third of patients. Since the device appeals to a consumer who “does not qualify” for medical obesity treatment and has only temporary benefit, we believe the story should have quoted at least one critic. Given that the patients in this study are those who “do not qualify” for the medical management of obesity, one might raise questions about the ethics of an intervention that isn’t medically indicated. Given the temporary nature of the device, the risks should be expected to outweigh the benefits – especially since the benefits in turn, unless marked behavior changes are permanently undertaken, will, by definition, be temporary. This can be viewed as an extreme intervention in the name of non-medically necessary weight loss – the kind of approach that runs the risk of encouraging people to pursue all sorts of nonsensical, and, at times, dangerous diets and interventions. The story correctly points out that this information is from an FDA news release, based on a summary of the clinical research. The story also identifies the research as funded by the device manufacturer. We will give the story the benefit of the doubt on this criterion, but in so doing, will try to raise reader’s awareness of a broader issue. Despite the line that states the intervention isn’t medically necessary, the story doesn’t touch on the disease-mongering that can take place when messages imply that weight scales can measure health, and when people are medicalized simply on the basis of their weights. The story identifies the device manufacturer, ReShape, as the financial sponsor of the clinical research on their own device. And it includes extensive quotes with an obesity surgeon who provides expert perspective on some of the limitations of the intervention. The story skates very quickly by the notion that diet and exercise are alternatives to the ReShape device, as well as alternatives to bariatric surgery. It would have helped to quote a psychologist or other expert on behavior change about what permanent value may or may not come from such a short-term weight loss. To have a medical device, with very real risks, temporarily placed in someone’s stomach in the name of temporarily losing 7 more pounds than matched controls (whose weight losses may well be longer lived given they were fueled by behavior change) is not good medicine. The story – perhaps through the input of an independent expert – could have made the point that well-supported behavior modification may have achieved the same result as the balloon intervention did. The story makes clear the device has just won FDA approval, and has been available in Europe. But the story doesn’t comment on what might be the obstacles to use in the US. What training is required? How many physicians have been trained? How might availability be held back if (as the story appropriately suggests) patients have to pay cash for it? Are there any lessons from Europe that would educate American consumers? The story makes clear the device just won FDA approval and works differently than others. The story does not rely solely on the release, but shows independent reporting. [http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm456296.htm]
|
9854
|
Low-dose lithium reduces side effects from most common treatment for Parkinson's disease
|
We appreciate that there is a need to get a reader’s attention with the title of any document, including news releases. This headline grabs readers with the suggestion that lithium “reduces side effects of most common treatment for Parkinson’s disease,” a statement that’s simply not supported as no humans with Parkinson’s disease were studied. Treating mice with an induced form of the disease is not the same as treating actual people with Parkinson’s disease. Having said that, the release recovers quickly — in the very first sentence — to clarify that the research was done in mice, which is commendable. The release also includes some useful caveats regarding the quality of evidence and what additional research needs to be done before lithium can be considered a viable option in humans. A bit more information about the actual research findings and potential harms of lithium would have been helpful. Parkinson’s disease is primarily a disease of the late middle-aged and elderly population. At the moment there are between 500,000 and 1,500,000 people in the US with the disease and approximately 60,000 are diagnosed annually. Although there are now numerous innovative approaches to managing symptoms, dopamine replacement therapy is the dominant treatment. As noted in the news release, the effects of dopamine replacement on the classic symptoms of Parkinson’s are frequently replaced by a set of equally crippling movement disorders. An inexpensive and low-risk solution for the treatment related movement disorders would be a welcomed option for sufferers of the disease and their families
|
mixture
|
Animal research,Independent research center news release
|
After a misleading headline, the release establishes quickly that the research is in mice and that clinical trials haven’t been performed. And at this early stage of development, the cost of treatment is not an issue. So we rule this Not Applicable. Having said that, if lithium augmentation of carbidopa/levodopa did indeed work in humans, the low cost of lithium is a distinct advantage to patients. We aren’t really provided with much in the way of information here — the number of animals involved or how they measured the actual improvement in abnormal movements or what the results were. One of the researchers talks about “significant behavioral improvement,” but is that “significant” only in a statistical sense or something that would be noticeable to an average person? We are also told, “lithium boosted the expression of tyrosine hydroxylase which increases dopamine synthesis via the inhibition of calpain-1, an enzyme that normally reduces dopamine synthesis” but without really informing the reader with why this is important. We are also told about findings from two earlier studies, “We clearly saw a prevention of the motor difficulties we would expect to see in the animals,” said Andersen. “The treatment also protected the area of the brain that is normally damaged by Parkinson’s.” It would have been helpful to have some numbers here, or a more thorough description of what the study actually showed. The news release is silent on the issue of the potential for toxicity with lithium augmentation. Although the research was conducted in mice, the researchers did note the potential for toxicity in their publication, “…in a few reported cases lithium treat- ment was suggested to be detrimental to PD patients and to cause side effects…” Since lithium is also used in the treatment of psychiatric disorders, it’s possible the release could have pulled from the literature on this use to discuss potential side effects. On its own, the headline of this news release is misleading: “Low-dose lithium reduces side effects from most common treatment for Parkinson’s disease.” Any reader would take this to mean that we’re talking about humans with Parkinson’s disease, when the research was done in mice with an induced form of the disease. That being said, we applaud the release for clarifying in the very first sentence that we’re talking about mice — something that’s not often done in news releases. We also think the excellent comments of Dr. Simon provided some clarity and placed the study into the right context. “This study suggests potential therapeutic benefit in PD…..One caveat is that other agents that have shown clear efficacy in this model of PD have subsequently failed to show benefit in clinical studies in PD (e.g. CoQ10, creatine, and pioglitazone). However, this study provides additional evidence on top of prior work from Dr. Andersen’s lab and others that lithium may have therapeutic potential in PD, which is a hypothesis that should be tested in clinical trials,” So, although the headline alone would be given an unsatisfactory rating, the immediate and extensive clarifications about the quality of evidence saved the day. The release notes that Parkinson’s disease is diagnosed in 60,000 new people each year, a figure which is supported by the NIH. It would have been helpful to state one’s lifetime risk of developing the disease, to help put this number in context. The funding source for the research is clearly identified in the release. However, we are not advised that the Buck Institute and the two senior authors of the paper filed a patent application for low-dose lithium in Parkinsons (US20130017274 A1). Although levodopa/carbidopa is the main approach to treatment, other drugs are available that are not mentioned. In addition to medical therapy, deep brain stimulation is also available at most academic medical centers. The release makes it clear that lithium is currently available and used for psychiatric illness. Given that the drug is available, it’s conceivable that desperate patients will seek treatment with lithium based on these findings — which is why it’s all the more important to carefully qualify the results in the headline. It is clear that the use of lithium for this purpose is new. The release also establishes that there was previous research leading up to the study. The headline of the release cannot be justified on the basis of the information provided or by the results of the study itself.
|
28296
|
A company is developing a lab-grown chicken nugget made from feathers.
|
What's true: A number of companies are developing lab-grown meat products; cultured nuggets can be grown from cells collected from a feather. What's false: While nuggets can be grown from cells collected from a feather, the company JUST said that its first commercially available products won't use this method. What's undetermined: When these lab-grown nuggets will hit store shelves.
|
mixture
|
Food
|
In March 2019, we started receiving queries about “lab grown chicken nuggets made from feathers” that were expected to hit store shelves by the end of the year. While various companies have been working on such meat for awhile, many readers apparently were confused by the meaning of “made from feathers” and were curious about when these products would be available for purchase. In October 2018, outlets such as Food Beast reported that the food-manufacturing company Just (formerly Hampton Creek) was developing a cultured chicken nugget. This development was frequently reported under headlines using the phrase “made from feathers,” which may have given some readers the wrong impression about how cultured nuggets were made. In fact, many readers seemed to have come away from these articles with more questions than answers. Are people eating feathers? No. In order to make lab-grown meat, or clean meat, manufactures start by collecting some cells. While these cells can be collected from a feather, Just’s head of communications, Andrew Noyes, said that their first products won’t be produced from cells collected from a feather: To make cultured chicken, you have to first collect some cells, and that can be done through a small, harmless biopsy from a live chicken, through a cell bank or even from a feather, among other means, Noyes told Munchies. In a video Just posted last year, the company said that when it used the feather method, it chose “the single best chicken that we could find,” — a chicken with clean feathers, a healthy comb and a nice wattle. However, Just’s first product won’t be produced from cells collected from a feather, said Noyes. Once cells are collected, they’re loaded into a bioreactor and given nutrients and a scaffolding material on which to grow. Just says once it’s ready to make a product, growing meat from cells can take anywhere from a few days up to a few weeks. So they take cells, grow them into a chicken, and then kill the animal to make nuggets? No. One driving factor for this industry is that these cultured meat products can be created without killing an animal. While the process is a bit complicated, here’s a brief explanation from Vox about how the synthetic sausage (or chicken) is made: Lab-grown meat starts with cells — you can use stem cells, muscle cells, fat cells, myo- or fibroblasts — that you submerge in a growth medium. The medium is “a soup of nutrients that mimics what happens in the animal’s body,” explains Vitor Santo, a senior scientist with Just (formerly Hampton Creek, the company that brought you plant-based Just Mayo). Depending on the type of cells and the medium ingredients, you can grow different kinds of tissue. Muscle cells grow more muscle cells, fat cells grow more fat cells; both are in meat as we know it. Stem cells can be coaxed into growing different kinds of tissue. There’s one more element beyond cells and soup: scaffolding. The cells need something to grow on. If the scaffolding is going to be part of the eventual product (as it would if you’re growing a whole muscle meat like a steak or a chicken breast), then it obviously has to be edible. If the meat gets removed from the scaffold, as it would if the product was more like ground meat, then it just has to be safe. Here’s a video from Just explaining the process: Will clean meats be available in the supermarket in 2019? Not likely. While a number of companies have successfully made synthetic meat products, and while a few brave journalists have sunk their teeth into them, we’re still a ways away from having cultured nuggets in the supermarket aisle. One factor that could be slowing down their release is cost. In January 2019, Just’s cultured nugget was featured on ITV Tonight’s “Food Challenge: Meat vs Vegan.” In addition to explaining more about how these nuggets are made, Just CEO Joshua Tetrick said that one nugget currently costs about $100: . @HelenSkelton becomes the first person in the UK to try this $100 chicken nugget, grown entirely in a lab from a single chicken cell. How close is it to the real thing? Find out more in #ITVTonight’s ‘Food Challenge: Meat vs Vegan’, on @ITV at 7:30pm. pic.twitter.com/HkqBXJooxw — Tonight (@ITVTonight) January 24, 2019 There are also still questions about how to regulate clean meat products. The BBC reported that adventurous American eaters may have to travel overseas to get their first taste of a cultured nugget, as the United States hasn’t quite figured out how to regulate lab-grown meats: If Just does manage to produce enough chicken nuggets to sell this year, it is unlikely to be in an American restaurant as the US government is still deciding how to proceed. Most food in the US is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). But some – mostly conventionally raised meat – is regulated by the USDA. So if you’re buying a frozen pizza in the US, the USDA handles the pepperoni version and the FDA handles the cheese. “There are a number of countries in Asia and Europe that we’re talking to,” Tetrick says. “There’s a lack of clarity” about regulations in the US while the USDA and FDA hold public hearings, he explains. “I think countries want to take the lead in this. Whether it’s food scarcity, whether it’s sustainability issues or they just want to build an entirely new economy, they want to take the lead in doing this,” Tetrick said. While Just is truly developing a cultured nugget, as far as we can tell this product has yet to hit store shelves. We reached out to Just for more information on when these nuggets will be available to the public. Memphis Meats, another company developing cultivated chicken (and duck), hopes to release its own products by 2021. In short, several companies are working on developing lab-grown meat products, but these foods aren’t quite ready for wide release. Furthermore, while saying that these cultured nuggets can be “made from feathers” is technically true, this is just one method in which the required cells can be collected.
|
5539
|
Niger says cholera epidemic has killed at least 68 people.
|
Niger’s public health ministry says at least 68 people have died in a cholera epidemic that began in July.
|
true
|
Niamey, Health, Cholera, Africa, Epidemics, Niger, Public health
|
The ministry this week said it has registered more than 3,690 cases of the disease, which is caused by contaminated food or water and can kill within hours if untreated. The epidemic has spread in the central Maradi region and has also affected the northern Tahoua, eastern Zinder and southwestern Dosso regions. The U.N. children’s agency and World Health Organization have estimated that only 37 percent of the population in the Maradi region has access to clean drinking water and only 10 percent has access to basic sanitation. Niger’s heavy rainy season from June to September allows the disease to spread easily.
|
7025
|
John Mayer launches foundation focused on veterans.
|
John Mayer is launching a foundation focused on improving the health of veterans through scientific research.
|
true
|
Post-traumatic stress disorder, Health, John Mayer, Entertainment, North America, Music, Veterans
|
The Grammy-winning singer on Friday announced The Heart and Armor Foundation, which plans to focus on veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder and meeting the emerging needs of women veterans. Though he publicly announced the foundation on Friday, Mayer has been working on the organization since 2012 alongside veterans, scientists and clinicians. “We’re going to the public with things like published research papers and having raised enough money to really build some pilot programs. We have some really great data and ... we want it to be working first so that a lot of the questions were answered before we brought things to people by way of awareness,” Mayer said in an interview with The Associated Press. “I think it just makes it that much more compelling and much more concise to bring it to people with the message being, ‘Hey, this is not taking something that is zero to try to get it to five. This is something that is at 50 and we want to get it to 100.’” Mayer, whose father was a World War II veteran, said part of the reason he started The Heart and Armor Foundation came after he visited the Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in 2008. “Now this was with a friend of mine, so I was just plus one and nobody knew that the musician-guy was going. That gave me a really fluorescent look at what was going on in the barracks. It wasn’t like they rolled out the red carpet for a celebrity, it was kind of a normal day,” he said. “It was going to the wounded warrior barracks that I think changed me forever. It immediately showed me that my notion of what I think (are) the wounds of war are completely wrong. The way in which I was proven wrong was so compelling and fascinating and nuanced.” The foundation has released 10 publications in peer-reviewed journals, developed an exercise-based intervention for PTSD and created a screening tool for nutrition in women veterans, among other accomplishments. “I’ve been in meeting after meeting where people ask, ‘Where did you get the money to do this exercise study? Where’d you get the money?’ I’m like, ‘Well I’ll tell you.’ People are excited about it before I tell them John Mayer did it,” said Gerard Choucroun, executive director of The Heart and Armor Foundation. The foundation also has a goal of bringing the military and veteran communities closer together with outreach, events and conversation. An event will be held Friday night called “How War Changes Women, How Women Change War” that will stream live at Facebook.com/JohnMayer and Facebook.com/HeartAndArmor at 7 p.m. Eastern. “We think that there’s something in here for everybody. This is not a quick black-and-white conversation. This is a very nuanced conversation. There’s a lot of an American identity going on in our relationship to vets. It’s a relationship between the citizenry and the people who absorb and commit violence for that citizenry is such a rich, cultural ground dating back to the ancient Greeks that for us now, we want to be a part of that conversation. It goes much deeper than this set of wars that we’re in now,” Choucroun said.
|
2623
|
Bill Gates' foundation puts money on solar-powered toilet.
|
Bill Gates is betting the toilet of the future for the developing world will be solar powered.
|
true
|
Environment
|
The world’s leading private philanthropist handed a $100,000 prize to the California Institute of Technology on Tuesday for its work on a self-contained, sun-powered system that recycles water and breaks down human waste into storable energy. Gates is focusing on the need for a new type of toilet as an important part of his foundation’s push to improve health in the developing world. Open defecation leads to sanitation problems that cause 1.5 million children under 5 to die each year, Gates said, and Western-syle toilets are not the answer as they demand a complex sewer infrastructure and use too much water. The Microsoft Corp co-founder is looking to change that by sparking new inventions in toilet technology, which he says has not fundamentally changed since the invention of the flush toilet in 1775. “Imagine what’s possible if we continue to collaborate, stimulate new investment in this sector, and apply our ingenuity in the years ahead,” Gates said at his foundation’s Seattle headquarters on Tuesday. “Many of these innovations will not only revolutionize sanitation in the developing world, but also help transform our dependence on traditional flush toilets in wealthy nations.” His foundation announced $3.4 million in new funding on Tuesday for toilet projects being worked on by various organizations, bringing total investment in its “Reinvent the Toilet Challenge” to about $6.5 million. About 2.6 billion people, or 40 percent of world’s population — mostly in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia — lack access to safe sanitation and are forced to defecate in the open, according to Gates. Last year the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation gave grants to eight universities around the world to help tackle the problem by creating a hygienic toilet that uses little or no water, is safe and affordable and can transform waste into energy, clean water and nutrients. Gates presented prizes on Tuesday to the teams that showed the most progress, handing Caltech the first prize of $100,000 for its working model of a solar-powered bathroom, where a solar panel produces power for an electrochemical reactor that breaks down feces and urine into hydrogen gas, which can be stored in hydrogen fuel cells to provide a back-up energy source for night operation or use in low-sunlight conditions. The workings of the toilet are designed to be buried underground beneath a conventional-looking stall and urinal set-up, which the Caltech team showed in cross-section at the Gates Foundation courtyard. Water recovered from the continuous process is pumped up again to provide water to flush the toilet. Gates also handed out prizes to Britain’s Loughborough University and Canada’s University of Toronto for their designs, which focus on transforming feces into usable resources. The software pioneer is hoping many of the universities work together to develop the best technologies and is aiming to get new-style toilets into use in the next two to four years. Gates’ foundation is spending about $80 million a year on water, sanitation and hygiene issues, areas where it thinks it can make a marked difference in people’s lives. The $370 million in total it has committed to that area so far is still only a small slice of global funding for health, development and education provided by the foundation, which has handed out, or is committed to, more than $26 billion in grants since Gates started his philanthropic endeavors in 1994. The foundation, which Gates co-chairs with his father and wife, Melinda, is the world’s biggest private philanthropic organization with an endowment worth more than $33 billion.
|
4940
|
Georgia GOP Sen. Isakson to retire over health issues.
|
Republican Sen. Johnny Isakson’s announcement Wednesday that he will retire at year’s end because of health problems instantly raised Georgia’s status as a must-watch 2020 battleground by ensuring both of its Senate seats will be on the ballot.
|
true
|
Johnny Isakson, Georgia, Parkinsons disease, Health, General News, Politics, Elections, AP Top News, David Perdue
|
Isakson’s pending departure after more than four decades in Georgia politics gives Democrats a surprise opening in a Southern state where the GOP’s lock on statewide elections has shown signs of slipping. The state’s junior senator, Republican David Perdue, is already a top target as he seeks reelection for the first time next year. Isakson, 74, said he is leaving the job he loves because “mounting” health issues, including Parkinson’s disease, are “taking their toll.” He won a third term in 2016 and would have faced reelection in 2022. “I have concluded that I will not be able to do the job over the long term in the manner the citizens of Georgia deserve,” Isakson said in a statement . “It goes against every fiber of my being to leave in the middle of my Senate term, but I know it’s the right thing to do on behalf of my state.” The November 2020 ballot in Georgia will now include a special election for the remaining two years of Isakson’s term in addition to Perdue’s race for another six-year term. It’s a doubly tantalizing target for Democrats who increasingly believe that Georgia, which has become less rural and less white in recent decades, stands on the verge of becoming a swing state after roughly two decades of leaning solidly Republican. “Georgia is going to be a major decision maker in the reelection of Donald Trump and control of the U.S. Senate now,” said Brian Robinson, a Republican political adviser in Georgia who served as communications director under former Gov. Nathan Deal. It’s an uphill battle for Georgia Democrats, who haven’t elected a governor or U.S. senator since 1998. Bill Clinton was the last Democratic presidential candidate to win here, in 1992. But statewide races have become more competitive in recent elections. Trump won Georgia by just over 5 percentage points in 2016, compared with his double-digit victory margins in other Deep South states. In last fall’s race for Georgia governor, Republican Brian Kemp beat Democrat Stacey Abrams by just over 1% of the vote. “This is yet another seat Republicans will need to defend next year in an increasingly competitive battleground,” said Stewart Boss, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Kemp gets to appoint Isakson’s replacement, who will serve until the special election. Isakson plans to step down in December. There will be no primary elections for seat, meaning the November 2020 contest will be open to qualified candidates from all political parties. That could significantly increase the likelihood of a runoff, required by Georgia law if no candidate receives over 50% of votes. Former White House official Nick Ayers, who recently returned to Georgia, said in an email that he won’t offer himself for the seat. Republican strategists say other potential candidates include Georgia Reps. Doug Collins and Tom Graves, and statewide officers such as Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan and Attorney General Chris Carr. “This is a very short sprint to the 2020 election,” Robinson said. “You’re going to need somebody who’s a proven fundraiser, has a good built-in network and already has some knowledge of the issues. That narrows the field somewhat.” Three Democrats have already declared their candidacy for Perdue’s seat. Abrams, who had been wooed to run against Perdue, “will not be a candidate” for Isakson’s seat, a spokesman said on Twitter. She will instead continue to focus on voter access issues in Georgia and nationally. As chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Isakson has worked to expand programs offering more private health care choices for veterans. He said he plans to return to Washington when the Senate resumes next month. But deteriorating health will keep him from staying long. Isakson was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2013. The chronic, progressive movement disorder often left him walking the Capitol’s corridors with a noticeably slower, shuffling gate. After winning reelection in 2016, Isakson underwent surgery the following year to address spinal deterioration. At times, he has been in a wheelchair. He’s been recovering from a July fall at his Washington apartment that fractured four ribs. And Isakson revealed Wednesday that earlier this week he had surgery to remove a growth from one of his kidneys. Fellow senators from both parties saluted Isakson’s tenure. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., called Isakson “the gold standard” for the Senate. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Democratic whip, said Isakson is “one of our best.” Isakson, who made millions of dollars in real estate, first won election to the state legislature in 1976. His years as a Republican lawmaker when Democrats still dominated Georgia politics shaped him into an affable consensus builder — a style he clung to even as Congress became bitterly partisan, said former U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston, a Georgia Republican who worked with Isakson at both state and federal levels. “There are a lot of times when you want to tell the other side to go to hell,” Kingston said. “Johnny always refrained from that. But he never was intimidated by those in power, whether it was Nancy Pelosi or Donald Trump.” ___ Bynum reported from Savannah, Georgia. AP Chief Congressional Correspondent Lisa Mascaro contributed from Washington.
|
8990
|
Large international study links blood vitamin D levels to colorectal cancer risk
|
This news release describes an analysis of data from 17 different studies where blood levels of vitamin D were reported. The main finding: higher circulating vitamin D levels are associated with lower risk of colorectal cancer. The release provides a careful and appropriately cautious overview that explains why the study is newsworthy. This document should set the stage for balanced and informative coverage from news organizations. A few minor improvements — such as mentioning specific limitations that affect the conclusions that can be drawn from this type of analysis — would’ve improved the message even further. This is an important study by some of the nation’s top vitamin D researchers. Its findings have the potential to impact recommendations concerning Vitamin D supplementation. It’s worth keeping in mind, however, that there is a growing mountain of research on the effects of Vitamin D, some of it positive and some of it negative, and that any recommendation related to what are considered “optimal” concentrations should be made in the context of all that research, not just its apparent effects in one particular organ system.
|
true
|
american cancer society,colorectal cancer
|
This release is not reporting on vitamin D supplementation but about circulating levels of vitamin D in the body. Although some readers may not make this distinction, cost is not strictly applicable here and we won’t penalize the release for not mentioning it. Benefits are only presented in relative terms — not absolute numbers. For example: “those with deficient concentrations of vitamin D had a 31% higher risk of colorectal cancer during follow-up, which averaged 5.5 years (range: 1 – 25 years). Similarly, concentrations above bone health sufficiency were associated with a 22% lower risk.” While that’s not good enough for a satisfactory rating, we acknowledge that it would probably be quite difficult to provide absolute risk reduction figures based on these data. And the release does provide the lifetime absolute risk of colon cancer in men (4.5%) and women (4.2%) — which helps contextualize the 22% relative reduction associated with higher vitamin D levels. To meet our standard, however, the release should have attempted to provide some clarity on what that 22% reduction might indicate in terms that are actually meaningful for readers. In other words, if my lifetime risk of colorectal cancer is 1 out of 22 (the rate given for men in the news release), how might a 22% reduction change that risk? The news release indicates that vitamin D should ideally be obtained from the diet, and that there are no known harms to eating foods with vitamin D (an exception being when a mishap caused over-fortification of a local milk supply a few decades ago). Skin cancer risk associated with sun exposure was covered appropriately. The evidence is explained with sufficient care for a layperson to understand exactly what was being compared, with the exception of the actual vitamin D levels reported. More specifics on that would have been very helpful. The release is also careful not to use cause-and-effect language to describe the results — which would be inappropriate for this kind of study. Furthermore, the release is appropriately circumspect about the implications of the new results, stating that “health agencies do not recommend vitamin D for the prevention of colorectal cancer,” and that the study “adds new information that agencies can use when reviewing evidence for vitamin D guidance.” The release would have been improved with a discussion of limitations that affect the conclusions we can draw from this type of study. For example, might people with higher vitamin D levels differ from those with lower levels in important ways (e.g. diet, exercise, socioeconomic status, etc) that impact cancer risk? If so, the effects attributed to vitamin D might actually be the result of some other factor. There is no obvious disease mongering here. In fact, numbers of incident cases and deaths in the US expected in 2018 are given for accuracy and to anchor the discussion. Well done. Vitamin D supplement manufacturers appeared to play no role in the analysis, and the funders are from the American Cancer Society, the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and the U.S. National Cancer Institute. The release mentions the types of food (and sunlight) where one obtains Vitamin D, which is useful information. However, the benefit addressed by the release is the prevention of colorectal cancer, and a brief mention of other approaches to reducing risk for this cancer would have been appropriate. The only proven approaches to reducing deaths from colorectal cancer are screening via a stool test or endoscopy. Supplements, vitamin D-containing foods, and sunlight are pretty much available everywhere. There are no unwarranted claims to novelty here and it is pretty clear that this is a subject that has a fairly long history of research. The release also makes it clear what was new about the latest study compared to previous research. For example: A single, widely accepted assay and laboratory was used for new vitamin D measurements and calibration of existing vitamin D measurements. “In the past, substantial differences between assays made it difficult to integrate vitamin D data from different studies,” explained Regina G. Ziegler, PhD, a National Cancer Institute epidemiologist and co-senior author on the article. “This calibration approach enabled us to systematically explore risk over the broad range of vitamin D levels seen internationally.” There are no instances of unjustified language.
|
12430
|
In 2012, you were discussing how you led the effort to defund breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood.
|
"Ossoff said, ""In 2012, you were discussing how you led the effort to defund breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood."" Handel did say that she led efforts, but she also said at the time that the decision wasn’t entirely hers, and that Komen’s board ultimately approved the move, which was later reversed."
|
true
|
Abortion, Georgia, Women, Jon Ossoff,
|
"The Democratic contender for Georgia’s open congressional seat, Jon Ossoff, accused his Republican opponent of spearheading a controversial decision to cut off funding for breast cancer screenings. Ossoff charged that Karen Handel, while working as a top official at Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, worked to pull funding for screenings performed by Planned Parenthood. ""In 2012, you were discussing how you led the effort to defund breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood,"" Ossoff said in a June 6 debate with Handel, adding that she had ""imposed her own views"" while at Komen. Ossoff, a former congressional aide, is running against Handel in the June 20 special election in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District in northern Atlanta, a historically Republican district. During the debate, Handel pushed back by saying she had been instructed to develop options for disengaging from Planned Parenthood. She downplayed her personal role in the controversial decision, adding that no single employee would have been authorized to unilaterally pull funding. The Komen foundation reversed the move after public criticism. ""I was directed to come up with options for how the organization could disengage,"" she said. ""It was a business decision ultimately decided by the board of Komen."" We decided to take a closer look at Ossoff’s claim that Handel said she had led the effort to defund breast cancer screenings. Handel did a media interview shortly after her February 2012 resignation as the Komen foundation’s vice president of public policy. Her departure came after the group’s decision to pull Planned Parenthood’s breast cancer screening funding caused a firestorm. First, Handel downplayed her personal role -- similarly to the way she pushed back in her debate with Ossoff. ""I was part of (the) decision-making process,"" Handel told the reporter, ""but I was not the sole decider."" But then Handel pivoted to her feelings about the role she played, saying, ""I embrace the fact that I was involved in the project."" Finally, she said: ""I embrace the fact that I led the project."" Ossoff said, ""In 2012, you were discussing how you led the effort to defund breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood."" Handel did say that she led efforts, but she also said at the time that the decision wasn’t entirely hers, and that Komen’s board ultimately approved the move, which was later reversed."
|
35520
|
In response to a question in a July 2020 CNN interview about what would happen if a COVID-19 outbreak occurred in schools, U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said, “You can’t plan for something that hasn’t happened yet.”
|
What's true: Betsy DeVos said during an interview that if a COVID-19 flare-up occurred “for a few days, that’s a different situation than planning for an entire school year in anticipation for something that hasn’t happened.” What's false: Devos did not use the exact words, “You can’t plan for something that hasn’t happened yet.” The language attributed to her in a meme was more specific than what she said in the interview, during which she skirted direct responses.
|
false
|
Politics, COVID-19
|
Through the summer of 2020, the question of whether U.S. schools should reopen amidst the COVID-19 disease pandemic grew into a contentious political issue. School superintendents across the country were dismayed by President Donald Trump’s push to reopen schools despite the health risks of doing so, and after Education Secretary Betsy DeVos gave an interview with CNN in July 2020 during which she reiterated the administration’s goal, one statement attributed to her began making the internet rounds. Snopes readers asked us if DeVos actually said, “You can’t plan for something that hasn’t happened yet,” in response to a question about what would happen if a school had a COVID-19 outbreak. The following image reproducing that alleged statement was widely shared on Facebook: The statement appeared to be a highly paraphrased version of what DeVos said during her July 12 interview with CNN’s Dana Bash. We watched the 21-minute interview and found that Devos’ response at roughly the 17:44 mark appears to be what was referenced in the meme. In answering Bash’s questions, Devos often went in circles, hedged, or sidestepped providing direct responses. She did not use the exact words presented in the meme, and although she did say something similar, it was in a different context than that offered in the meme. During the interview, Bash persistently queried DeVos about what school districts should do in the event of a COVID-19 outbreak in the classroom, and a transcript of part of that exchange reads as follows: Bash: I am asking you ma’am, as Secretary of Education, if there is a flare-up [of COVID-19], should schools revert to remote learning? DeVos: I think the go-to needs to be kids in school, in person, in the classroom, because we know for most kids that’s the best environment for them … Bash: [interrupts] I understand that, but what if they can’t? DeVos: What if they can’t what?
|
36322
|
A photograph shows rosaries confiscated from border detainees.
|
Does a Photograph Show Rosaries Confiscated from Border Detainees?
|
mixture
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
In June 2018, a Facebook user shared a post (archived here) featuring a screenshot of a tweet about rosary beads purportedly confiscated from migrants taken into custody by border agents.That post was shared more than 89,000 times in a year. The tweet was originally published on the same date, and it accrued more than 209,000 shares on Twitter:Remember the piles of wedding rings taken from holocaust victims and how we see it now and wonder how we ever let the violation of human rights get so far well yeah https://t.co/POKdmibgKk— Literally Kirby 💕 (@clarissalule) June 18, 2018The tweet (and repost) read:Remember the piles of wedding rings taken from holocaust victims and how we see it now and wonder how we ever let the violation of human rights ever get so far well yeah [link]Rosaries confiscated from immigrants at the Arizona/Mexico borderIn the tweet embedded above, the user compares the confiscated rosaries to “piles” of wedding rings confiscated from Holocaust victims. Those referenced images circulated online in December 2018.Neither the Facebook version nor the embedded tweet above included the original source link, a March 12 2017 New Yorker article headlined, “A Janitor Preserves the Seized Belongings of Migrants.” Although the image struck a chord in 2018 and 2019, the story was originally published in March 2017. Moreover, the items were collected throughout the previous decade, beginning in 2007:Tom Kiefer was a Customs and Border Protection janitor for almost four years before he took a good look inside the trash. Every day at work — at the C.B.P. processing center in Ajo, Arizona, less than fifty miles from the border with Mexico — he would throw away bags full of items confiscated from undocumented migrants apprehended in the desert. One day in 2007, he was rummaging through these bags looking for packaged food, which he’d received permission to donate to a local pantry. In the process, he also noticed toothbrushes, rosaries, pocket Bibles, water bottles, keys, shoelaces, razors, mix CDs, condoms, contraceptive pills, sunglasses, keys: a vibrant, startling testament to the lives of those who had been detained or deported. Without telling anyone, Kiefer began collecting the items, stashing them in sorted piles in the garages of friends. “I didn’t know what I was going to do,” he told me recently. “But I knew there was something to be done.”A gallery of images showing items collected by Kiefer included toilet paper, toothbrushes and toothpaste, condoms, wallets, and rosaries:[Customs and Border Control] considers rosaries to be potentially lethal, non-essential personal property, and agents dispose of them during intake.As the story goes on to explain, Kiefer quit his job in 2014 — several years before “zero tolerance” border policy and family separations were first announced in April 2018:In 2014—after more than a decade working with C.B.P., and after seven years of sneaking out the trash—Kiefer quit his job to work on “El Sueño Americano” full-time. One day in Ajo, he ran into a secretary from his old job: the C.B.P. agents, she told him, were “furious” that he’d spent his on-the-clock time “stealing” government property for a private project. Working in his studio today—picking the next set of objects to photograph, arranging them just so—he thinks about his old colleagues at the border. Some were nice people, as far as he could tell; others, he felt sure, would be taking Trump’s anti-immigrant invective as license for new cruelties. Kiefer, for his part, has thrown away none of the possessions he collected. Maybe, he says, they could someday be housed in some sort of Arizonan Museum of Migration. Barring that, he plans to keep them.Although the image is authentic and unaltered, it was worth noting that the confiscated items (wallets, condoms, and blankets among them) were gathered at some point between 2007 and 2014, well before the election of U.S. President Donald Trump and implementation of his policies. The image was interpreted outside of that context, but nevertheless, it is real.
|
9025
|
Researchers find bone density scans can also help identify cardiovascular disease
|
Using a simple, non-invasive test like a bone density scan to determine the future risk of cardiovascular disease would make sense if such a test was accurate and led to actions that could alter that risk. Unfortunately, the release on the study summarized here is lacking in details needed to gain a good understanding of how and when such a test would be used. The suggestion of a linkage between osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease has been the topic of research for a number of years. Additional data supporting this linkage would add to our understanding. Because bone density is a non-invasive and widely available test, any suggestion that the test adds important information at the time must be appropriately conveyed in news reports. If such a test could also determine cardiovascular risk, then a patient might have twice as many reasons for it to be done. Because all tests, however, have the risks of false negatives and positives, as well as the potential for overdiagnosis and the future testing and unnecessary treatment it might cause, there is rightly a very high bar that needs to be cleared before subjecting whole populations to such a test. This news release contains almost none of the important bits of information needed to make an informed decision about this test.
|
false
|
bone density scans,Hebrew SeniorLife Institute for Aging Research
|
The cost of a bone density scan is not mentioned and this is an important omission. Cardiovascular risk is currently assessed based on the epidemiological data from the Framingham Heart Study. The Framingham Cardiovascular Risk Calculator is based on these data and provides an easily obtained validated 10-year risk assessment. The only tests required are a blood test for total and HDL cholesterol (at a cost of $30-$40). The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening for the presence of osteoporosis in women over age 65 years based on a cost-benefit assessment for that disorder. That means the cost of the screening is offset by the clinical benefits obtained. The use of a bone density scan to identify cardiovascular disease, especially in women under the age of 65 specifically for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease is a separate issue. While the cost of a bone densit scan is roughly $150-250 and still relatively low compared to other type of scans, it exceeds the cost of a total cholesterol and HDL cholesterol blood test. Unless and until the use of a bone density scan has been shown to provide more precise information, the cost could be viewed as excessive. The proposed benefit is to find people at increased risk of heart disease with a bone density scan and treat them. One of the authors is quoted: “We found that that the presence of calcifications increased the likelihood of having cardiovascular disease such as heart attacks, and even the likelihood of cardiovascular deaths and mortality in general.” However, the release doesn’t provide numbers that put the presumed benefit in context. No harms were mentioned. A bone density scan is a non-invasive and safe test, but the news release is silent on the issue of harms from false-positive or false-negative results — either of which could lead to over- or under-treatment. The release does not provide an adequate amount of information to determine the quality of the evidence. The reader is told only that there were 1,000 older women (no defined age group), nothing is mentioned about their baseline risk factors and they were followed for 15 years for “the occurrence of cardiovascular disease,” which is not defined. Importantly, the release does not explain how the information from the scan compares to that provided by already-recommended cardiovascular screenings, or whether it would lead to changes in treatment for anyone who is scanned. There was no disease mongering. There are no details in the release about how the authors of this research may or may not be tied to the bone density testing industry. But the published report makes it clear that they have ties to Hologic, which makes bone density testing machines: Dr. Wilson is an employee of Hologic Inc. and reports personal fees, non-financial support and other from Hologic, Inc., during the conduct of the study; personal fees and other from Hologic, Inc., outside the submitted work; In addition, Dr. Wilson has multiple densitometer imaging and reporting patents which may be relevant, US and worldwide, both pending and issued owned by Hologic, Inc. These are the kinds of financial ties that should always be disclosed in news releases. As we noted previously, the Framingham Cardiovascular Risk Calculator is commonly used to assess the 10-year risk of a cardiovascular event and guide related treatment. The release does not mention this tool or how the results of bone density scanning would compare or improve upon it. The release notes that bone density scanning is routinely used to diagnose osteoporosis and presumably it is widely available. What is not clear is whether bone density scanning to determine the degree of aortic calcification is generally available. As we noted earlier, a link between bone density and cardiovascular disease has been explored for a number of years. Banks, L.M., Lees, B., MacSweeney, J.E. and Stevenson, J.C., 1994. Effect of degenerative spinal and aortic calcification on bone density measurements in post‐menopausal women: links between osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease?. European journal of clinical investigation, 24(12), pp.813-817. However, this may be the first use bone density scanning machines to explore the issue. Previous studies have used computed tomography (CT) scanners. The language seems appropriate.
|
7079
|
USC medical school official feared dean was ‘doing drugs’.
|
A former vice dean of University of Southern California’s medical school testified he feared the then-dean, Dr. Carmen Puliafito, “could be doing drugs” before Puliafito abruptly quit in 2016.
|
true
|
U.S. News, California, Medical schools, University of Southern California
|
Dr. Henri Ford’s testimony at a state Medical Board hearing marks the first suggestion that any USC administrator had suspicions about Puliafito’s possible drug use, the Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday. Ford said he expressed concerns about Puliafito’s general well-being to the university’s provost. Puliafito gave up his $1.1 million-a-year dean’s post in the middle of the 2016 spring term, saying he wanted to explore outside opportunities. He did not mention that three weeks earlier, 21-year-old Sarah Warren had overdosed in his presence in a hotel room but recovered, according to the newspaper. Puliafito remained a faculty member until last year, when USC said it was firing him in the wake of a Times report that he kept company with a circle of criminals and people who used drugs and had been captured on video apparently smoking methamphetamine. During his testimony Tuesday, Puliafito placed much of the blame for his meth use on Warren. He said Warren upended his life by introducing him to the drug. He testified that he subsequently used meth with her once a week. The Medical Board hearing this week in Los Angeles will determine whether Puliafito is allowed to resume practicing medicine. Puliafito denied that he provided drugs to Warren. She told the Times as well as the Medical Board that he gave her methamphetamine and other drugs. She invoked the 5th Amendment and was excused from testifying at the hearing. The USC medical community has been rocked by scandal in recent years. Last week, the university announced that President C.L. Max Nikias was stepping down in the wake of a Times report that USC for years ignored complaints that a campus gynecologist had engaged in misconduct with students. ___ Information from: Los Angeles Times, http://www.latimes.com/
|
27737
|
"A North Carolina provider of mental health services is named ""Nutz R Us."
|
The Carolina Public Press piece dug further into the business practices of Nutz R Us but ultimately did not find any information suggesting that the business intended to change its name. While it appears that the company occasionally contracts with the state of North Carolina, it remains privately held and uninhibited from doing business under its name of choice.
|
true
|
Business, mental health, nutz r us, questionable names
|
Oftentimes the structure of incorporated businesses enables details to escape initial notice, as appeared to be the case with a cluster of North Carolina-based mental health facilities incorporated under the questionable name “Nutz R Us.” Despite its garnering widespread public attention in June 2016, the unpalatable business name wasn’t newly discovered then: a February 2015 letter to the editor of Asheville’s Citizen-Times featured a missive from a local psychiatrist questioning whether her initial findings with respect to the “Nutz R Us” business name were correct: Question: So, this inquiry comes from a psychiatrist at Broughton Hospital in Morganton, Dr. Suzannah McCuen, who a few weeks back sent us a letter questioning the name choice of a local company. “I learned today that a company in the Buncombe County area whose business it is to provide care facilities for the mentally ill is called Nutz R Us,” McCuen said. “I found that hard to believe and so Googled them and called one of their homes, White Fawn. The woman who answered the phone verified that Nutz R Us is the corporate name. She seemed to think that using a “z” in the spelling mitigated the harm, I suppose, as she pointed that out to me. An online search reveals this company runs several homes in the area. While I am grateful that this company is providing homes for the mentally ill, I find their choice of a company name offensive, to say the least. I am hopeful that some public exposure will convince them to change the company name while still endeavoring to provide much needed services and homes for the mentally ill in Western North Carolina.” My [] answer: I didn’t have much more luck than the good doctor in getting hold of someone with the company. I left multiple messages in January and last week with the administrator and at the White Fawn home, and I’ve not heard anything back. I don’t think McCuen is going to let this go. She’s alerted a patient advocacy organization and the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. Businesses often use colorful parent company names — I know one or two that would not be appropriate for a family newspaper. But this one does seem a bit tin-eared for a mental health provider. As McCuen noted, Nutz R Us maintained a credible Internet presence (including Facebook and LinkedIn pages) suggesting it existed and operated in the state of North Carolina: The topic once again came to issue with a 23 June 2016 Carolina Public Press article specifically pertaining to the questionable business name: Nutz R Us, a Buncombe County company that incorporated under that name in 2008, operates assisted living facilities catering to mentally ill adults. Multiple officials with state and local public health agencies have told Carolina Public Press that they find the name Nutz R Us appalling. But they also said they lack the statutory authority to do anything about it. The parent of a mentally ill adult, whom a court-ordered guardian placed in a Nutz R Us facility, recently contacted CPP with grave concerns about the quality of care there. Some of her concerns appear supported by deficiencies recorded on the facilities’ inspections. Even so, the homes that Nutz R Us operates are officially licensed and operating according to state law. The inspection deficiencies have led to penalties and a requirement for corrections, rather than an outright threat of more serious state intervention … CPP attempted to ask that very question of Forrestene “Tina” Muckelvene of Asheville, who founded Nutz R Us and continues to be listed the corporation’s registered agent. But she did not respond to a request for an interview prior to this report’s publication. Carolina Public Press found that while the name considered offensive to a number of people, state agencies were neither legally nor logistically able to require the company to rename itself: A spokesperson for the North Carolina Secretary of State’s Office told CPP recently that nothing about the name violated North Carolina statutes for incorporated companies, despite its obvious offensiveness, given the type of services that the Asheville company provides. The Secretary of State’s incorporation division doesn’t have the staff to probe too deeply about those seeking to incorporate, even if the law gave it that authority, which it doesn’t … So while Nutz R Us did what was required to operate under that name, this doesn’t mean anyone with the state has vetted the company to see how legitimate its operations as a corporation are. The name may have raised red flags for state officials, but there was nothing they could do about it.
|
16334
|
We were told there would never be a case of Ebola in the United States.
|
"McCain said, ""We were told there would never be a case of Ebola in the United States."" Based on public statements, Obama and CDC officials have repeatedly said there’s a chance an Ebola case could appear in the United States, but the possibility of an outbreak is extremely low. We found no instance in which an official said Ebola would ""never"" make it here -- rather, it has always been acknowledged as a possibility."
|
false
|
National, Ebola, Health Care, Military, Public Health, Public Safety, John McCain,
|
"Early Sunday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced a second person had contracted Ebola in the United States. The patient is a female nurse in Dallas, who had treated the first patient diagnosed in the United States -- Thomas Eric Duncan, who came into contact with Ebola in Liberia, fell ill in Dallas and died there Oct. 8. The CDC believes the nurse, who had been taking CDC-mandated precautions, was exposed to Ebola because of a ""breach in protocol."" The new case is fanning the fears of those who think the government is not doing enough to prevent an Ebola outbreak in the United States -- despite the CDC’s repeated assurances that it is highly unlikely the disease would spread here. In light of the news, the Sunday talk shows shifted from their scheduled topics to discuss the case. On CNN’s State of the Union, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. -- invited on the show to talk about U.S. military activity in Iraq -- said it’s not obvious to the public that anyone in the government is taking charge over Ebola. ""Americans have to be reassured here,"" McCain said on Oct. 12, 2014. ""I don’t think we are comforted by the fact that we were told there would never be a case of Ebola in the United States, and obviously that’s not correct."" At a press conference Sunday, CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden said there’s a risk that the Dallas area might see additional cases in coming days because of this possible ""breach in protocol."" However, the organization remains ""confident that wider spread in the community can be prevented."" We decided to look back and see if any official said that a case of Ebola would ""never"" come to the United States. Although many media outlets and health care officials have urged people not to panic about Ebola, we could not find a single instance where someone said it would ""never"" get here. As far as we can tell, the CDC and the President Barack Obama’s message has been the same throughout the epidemic, which began in Africa in December: It’s possible a case might make its way to the United States, but a full-fledged outbreak is highly unlikely. (We reached out to McCain’s staff, but they never got back to us.) The administration’s reasoning: America’s health system is much better prepared to fight diseases like Ebola than those in places like Liberia and Sierra Leone, where the disease has been spreading. Here’s some of the CDC’s statements: July 28, after two Americans contracted the disease in Africa: ""There is no significant risk in the U.S. While it is unlikely that the disease would spread if imported into the United States, the recent infections in U.S. health care workers working abroad highlight the need for vigilance."" (The CDC has issued periodic updates on Ebola since March, but this was the first one we could find that addressed the disease spreading to the United States.) Aug. 13, press release: ""A disease threat anywhere in the world is a threat everywhere in the world, and CDC is preparing for any possibility, including that a traveler might become ill with Ebola while in the United States. Although Ebola poses very little or no risk to the U.S. community at large, CDC and health care providers in the United States need to be prepared."" Sept. 17, testimony at congressional hearing: ""We do not view Ebola as a significant public health threat to the United States. … It is possible that infected travelers may arrive in the United States, despite all efforts to prevent this; therefore we need to ensure the United States' public health and health care systems are prepared to rapidly manage cases to avoid further transmission."" The White House: July 31, press briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest: ""The CDC has concluded that there is no significant risk in the United States from the current Ebola outbreak. And while it is unlikely that the disease would spread if the virus were detected in the United States, the CDC is taking action to alert health care workers in the U.S. and remind them how to isolate and test suspected patients while following strict infection control procedures."" Sept. 16, Obama’s remarks at the CDC: ""First and foremost, I want the American people to know that our experts, here at the CDC and across our government, agree that the chances of an Ebola outbreak here in the United States are extremely low."" Oct. 8, Obama’s statement to state and local officials, after Duncan (the first Dallas patient) died: ""Because we’ve got a world-class medical system, because we’ve put in place tough safety measures, because of the work that many of you have done in conjunction with organizations like the CDC and dealing with infectious disease generally, and because of the nature of Ebola and the fact that it’s not something involving airborne transmission, the chance of an Ebola outbreak in the United States remains extremely low. … I’m confident that so long as we work together, and we’re operating with an appropriate sense of urgency that we will prevent an outbreak from happening here."" The common refrain in all those comments? A widespread outbreak is extremely unlikely in the United States. But individual or isolated cases were possible, hence the need for the CDC to be ready. Our ruling McCain said, ""We were told there would never be a case of Ebola in the United States."" Based on public statements, Obama and CDC officials have repeatedly said there’s a chance an Ebola case could appear in the United States, but the possibility of an outbreak is extremely low. We found no instance in which an official said Ebola would ""never"" make it here -- rather, it has always been acknowledged as a possibility."
|
26349
|
Under the mayor’s COVID-19 order, Kansas City “churchgoers must register with the government.”
|
A blog post claimed that Kansas City’s stay-at-home order in response to COVID-19 required churchgoers to “register with the government.” The mayor issued an order, as part of gradually reopening the city, that would have required churches to keep attendance lists for their events in case a coronavirus outbreak was traced to a particular gathering. But before that order took effect, the mayor issued a new order that made the attendance lists recommended, not mandatory. There was never a requirement for churchgoers to register with the government.
|
false
|
Corrections and Updates, Government Regulation, Religion, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Liberty Counsel,
|
"A group fighting COVID-19 stay-at-home orders that restrict religious gatherings made a reference to Nazi Germany in a post that carried this ominous headline: ""Churchgoers Must Register With the Government in Kansas City."" The post was published by Liberty Counsel, a national conservative Christian organization based in Orlando, Fla. It was signed by the group's founder, Mat Staver, who is a pastor and attorney, and included several fundraising appeals. The blog post, widely shared 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.) The group changed its headline after we published this fact-check. Kansas City’s mayor did issue an order that would have required churches to keep attendance lists at their gatherings, to be used by health officials in the event that a coronavirus outbreak was tied to a particular gathering. Such information could help with contact tracing, a process by which public health workers try to learn as they can about who a patient has been in contact with so those people can be notified about their potential exposure. But before that order took effect, the mayor issued a new order making the lists voluntary, not mandatory. Churchgoers were never required to register with the city. In its May 1 post, Liberty Counsel claimed Kansas City officials are ""requiring every church to submit a list of members and attendees along with their names, addresses and telephone numbers to city officials for tracking and surveillance purposes."" The last five words appear in italics. ""The Germans did this very thing to Jews — collecting the names and locations of all known synagogue attendees -- in the early days of the Nazi regime,"" the post claimed. (It’s worth noting that the group sued Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear in April after attendees at an Easter Sunday service inside a Louisville-area church were issued quarantine notices by Kentucky State Police.) Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas issued a stay-at-home order on March 12 and has amended it five times as the coronavirus outbreak has played out. When PolitiFact asked Liberty Counsel for information to back up its claim, the group cited Lucas’ fourth and fifth amended orders. On April 30, the Fourth Amended Order said that effective May 6, non-essential businesses, including churches, could reopen to the public. They had to limit their premises to no more than 10 customers or guests at a time, or 10% of the building occupancy, whichever is larger; and they had to keep records of anyone who stayed on the premises for more than 10 minutes. The order singled out religious gatherings, including weddings, funerals, memorial services and wakes. The order said the so-called ""10/10/10"" provisions apply, although up to 50 people could gather for outdoor events, as long as organizers for any events ""maintain a record of attendees."" The mayor’s office reiterated in a news release at the time that religious gatherings could resume as long as event organizers record the names and contact information of all attendees. The city’s rationale for recording names was that health officials or event organizers could contact people in the event of a COVID-19 outbreak traced to a particular gathering. The requirement for keeping attendance lists never took effect, however. On May 4, three days after the Liberty Counsel post, Lucas amended the order again to make keeping lists of customers or guests recommended, but not required, for non-essential businesses. The Fifth Amended Order again singled out religious gatherings: ""In the interest of public health and to avoid a COVID-19 outbreak in the community, event organizers should consider maintaining a record of attendees where appropriate. Attendees are not required, however, to provide their names or contact information at any religious gathering."" Lucas was criticized for making the change without any news release or other announcement. In a frequently asked questions document on the order, the city said the purpose of the recommendation was ""to more quickly trace, test and isolate individuals who may have been exposed to COVID-19 if an employee or customer had the virus at the time they frequented the business."" It also stated that all data would ""remain confidential and will be used only to address public health concerns and contact individuals who may have been exposed to COVID-19."" An article shared on Facebook claimed that under a Kansas City mayor’s COVID-19 order, Kansas City ""churchgoers must register with the government."" As part of an order governing the gradual reopening of the city, the mayor initially ordered churches to keep lists of people attending church gatherings so that attendees could be contacted if a coronavirus outbreak traced to a particular gathering occurred. Four days later, that order was changed to make attendance list keeping recommended, but not mandatory. However, no order ever required churchgoers to register with the government. In the event of a COVID-19 outbreak, however, it’s possible that names on attendance lists kept by churches would be turned over to the city. The claim contains an element of truth, but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. UPDATE, May 11, 2020: This story has been updated to reflect that Liberty Counsel updated its blog post with a new headline following publication of this fact-check."
|
25857
|
A common cold can cause a positive COVID-19 test.
|
A screenshot from the CDC website that appears out of context is a warning about COVID-19 antibody tests, not viral tests for current infections. Antibody tests check for past infections and might tell you if you had COVID-19. But they are unreliable, so if you test positive, it could mean that you have antibodies from the new coronavirus that causes COVID-19, or that you have antibodies from another coronavirus, like a cold. Viral tests for current COVID-19 infections do not give positive results if you have only a common cold.
|
false
|
Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Viral image,
|
"Sometimes social media posts blatantly share misinformation about the coronavirus. Other times, it’s implied. An image currently circulating on Facebook falls in the latter category. It’s a screenshot from the website of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a stateside clearinghouse for information about the virus. ""A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold."" This 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 post’s comments make clear that some people are seeing this image and believing that a common cold can cause a positive on a COVID-19 test. But if you visit the CDC’s website, specifically the page where this screenshot was taken, you can see that the agency is discussing an antibody test, not a viral test. There are two kinds of tests available for COVID-19: viral tests and antibody tests. A viral test tells you if you have a current infection by testing a sample from your respiratory system. A sample could be taken using a swab to swipe inside your nose. An antibody test is meant to tell you if you had a past infection by testing a sample of your blood for antibodies. The CDC notes that antibody tests ""should not be used to diagnose a current COVID-19 infection."" If you test positive, you could have antibodies from the new coronavirus that causes COVID-19, or you could have antibodies from another coronavirus, like a cold. As Johns Hopkins Medicine notes, coronaviruses are a family of viruses and there are many different kinds of coronaviruses. Some cause disease and some don’t. A spokesperson for the CDC told AFP that the traces of other coronaviruses — like the common cold — won’t produce a positive result from COVID-19 viral test. This post, which is a screenshot of part of a CDC webpage about COVID-19 antibody tests, is cropped in a way that may suggest the warning pertains to the viral test. It doesn’t."
|
31164
|
"In July 2017, President Trump dispatched federal investigators to the hamlet of Islamberg, New York, where they uncovered ""America's worst nightmare""."
|
A search of news articles about Islamberg returned reports only about violent threats made toward Islamberg (not by anyone living there); credible violent threats toward the hamlet (including several threats and a planned anti-Islamberg rally just before this story appeared, as if to justify them) appear to be rather common.
|
false
|
Politics, freedom daily, islamberg, muslims
|
On 18 July 2017, the Freedom Daily blog published an article with a terrifying sounding title: “Trump Sends Feds In To Raid NY’s Islamberg After 2 DECADES – Uncover America’s WORST Nightmare.” The page gained traction on social media thanks to its alarmist headline, but the text made no mention of President Trump or the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Instead, it contained a number of wild claims framed as “rumors”, most of which centered around the June 2017 arrest of a local resident on firearms charges: There’s a mysterious hidden Muslim compound called Islamberg that’s nestled deep within the woods of the Catskill mountains in New York. The only way to access the 70-acre compound is through primitive dirt roads, where more than 100 Muslims live in seclusion away from the prying eyes of curious Americans. For over two decades, infidels have been prohibited from entering, as anyone attempting to enter will be “greeted” by armed Muslims patrolling a guard shack at the compound’s entry gate. Without access to the compound, there’s been no way to confirm rumors about the location being used as a training ground for Muslim terrorists. But after an alarming incident involving one of the Islamberg residents, police were finally able to obtain a warrant and raid the place. And what they discovered that these Muslims have been quietly plotting for years is nothing short of chilling. Locals in the area have often times reported the sounds of gunfire and explosions emanating from the compound, but because the Muslims weren’t necessarily breaking any laws, there was nothing that law enforcement could do except keep a close eye on the place from a distance … with a recent arrest of Islamberg resident Ramadan Abdullah who was recently caught trying to steal several cases of ammunition from a local mountain store in the area, authorities finally had their chance to obtain a search warrant for the compound, and what they discovered was nothing short of chilling. The article continued with its editorializing and repetition (“nothing short of chilling”), finally concluding: It’s absolutely ridiculous that Muslims in this country are allowed to have their own freaking jihadi compounds, where they’re actively training their residents on the necessary tactics to carry out terror attacks! While Americans are protected under the Constitution against illegal searches and seizures, when known freaking terrorists are leading these compounds, it’s time to stop letting these Muslims hide behind our laws and put them all in GITMO where they belong! Islamberg, which is a small New York town inhabited by a few dozen Muslim families, has had a peaceful history since it was first founded in the 1980s by a group of people hoping to escape the crime and poverty that riddled Brooklyn at that time. However, it has been the subject of numerous threats, including a planned attack in 2015 by a one-time congressional candidate. The piece itself appears to be mostly about Ramadan Abdullah, a 64-year-old man who was indicted in July 2017 after an investigation into his alleged theft of four boxes of ammunition uncovered a storage locker filled with powerful weapons in the town of Union. A 14 June 2017 article reported: Abdullah is charged with criminal possession of stolen property and five felony counts of criminal weapons possession. Law enforcement recovered 16 guns, more than 10,000 rounds of ammunition and dozens of high-capacity ammunition feeding devices. “There’s no indications there was a plan in place to commit an act of violence. However, it begs the question, what was he doing with all this and what were his intentions down the road?” said New York State Police Maj. Jim Barnes … Officials say there is no indication Abdullah posed an immediate threat to the area, but they said getting illegal weapons off the streets makes Broome County safer. Despite the fact that the Freedom Daily blog was clearly trying to use Abdullah’s case as proof that Islamberg, New York, is a hotbed of terrorism training camps and militant leanings, it omitted an important detail: The weapons cache uncovered by police was not actually in Islamberg. The location of the investigation was provided as the “town of Union” and “Broome County” New York, while Islamberg is in the town of Tompkins in Delaware County, nearly an hour away by car: Geography made Freedom Daily’s claim that President Trump ordered a federal raid on Islamberg, New York implausible at best. We contacted the Delaware County Sheriff’s Office in an attempt to corroborate the claim. The office was familiar with the article and told us that there was “absolutely no truth” to its headline or claims. Similarly, New York State police were unaware of any connection. Although Abdullah was arrested on weapons charges in June 2017, the relevant events (such as the incident, searches, and indictment) occurred in a jurisdiction nearly an hour from Islamberg. No federal raid was conducted on the orders of President Trump or anywhere else.
|
26712
|
“You’re more likely to die of influenza right now” than the 2019 coronavirus.
|
Based solely on the numbers, you’re more likely to die if you get the 2019 coronavirus than if you get the flu. But, as of now, the flu is more common in the United States than the coronavirus. Both diseases spread similarly and affect similar at-risk groups. Researchers are still learning more about the severity of the coronavirus. That uncertainty makes it hard to make risk comparisons to other viruses.
|
mixture
|
Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, PunditFact, Coronavirus, Dr. Drew Pinsky,
|
"The 2019 coronavirus has infected more than 113,000 people in 109 countries. But Dr. Drew Pinsky wants the press to focus more on the flu. In a Feb. 3 segment on Daily Blast Live, a live daytime news and entertainment program, Pinsky, an internist and television personality, lambasted press coverage of the coronavirus outbreak. At the time, more than 17,000 people had been infected, almost all in China. ""The press is overreacting, and it makes me furious,"" he said. ""The press needs to shut up. Because you’re more likely to die of influenza right now."" Over the following month, the virus spread to 84 other countries, killing thousands of people in the process. But in a follow-up segment March 5, Pinsky doubled down on his comments. ""As I’ve been saying for the last month, what we should be talking about is flu generally,"" he said. ""There’s 16,000 dead, 280,000 hospitalized in this country from influenza. The message should be: Get your flu shot."" The Feb. 3 video 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.) It has been repurposed into a meme. Since its outbreak in Wuhan, China, in December, we have fact-checked a slew of social media posts and statements that aim to minimize the threat of the 2019 coronavirus. Some of them falsely claim there is a media-run conspiracy to exaggerate the threat of the virus. Is Dr. Drew, whose own show was canceled in 2016 after he speculated about Hillary Clinton’s health, right to say that the flu poses a bigger threat than the coronavirus? Yes and no. Based solely on the numbers, you’re more likely to die if you get the 2019 coronavirus than if you get the flu. (Several factors apply, such as age and health.) As of March 10, 4,012 people around the world had died after being infected with COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus. The death toll in the United States is 28. A study of 44,672 confirmed cases of the virus from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that about 80% of the cases were mild, but the virus had a fatality rate of 2.3%. A more recent estimate from the World Health Organization puts the number at 3.4%, although that figure is likely inflated given how many cases are mild and not treated in hospitals. For comparison, the fatality rate of this year’s strain of the flu is estimated to be between 0.05% and 0.1% in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Between 20,000 and 52,000 have died. As of now, the flu is more common in the United States than the coronavirus. So even though it has a lower mortality rate, it kills more people. ""The prevalence of flu is higher at this moment in time,"" said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Health Security. ""(But) pound for pound, if you had both viruses, the one that’s more likely to make you die is the coronavirus."" We reached out to Dr. Drew for comment, but we haven’t heard back. Experts cautioned against minimizing the potential harm of COVID-19. As of March 10, there were 647 confirmed cases of the coronavirus in the United States. Meanwhile, the CDC estimates that there were between 34 million and 49 million flu illnesses this season. ""For most people, the immediate risk of being exposed to the virus that causes COVID-19 is thought to be low,"" the CDC says in its risk assessment. ""This virus is not currently widespread in the United States."" According to the Chinese CDC study, those most likely to die from the coronavirus were older than 60 and/or had preexisting medical conditions, like hypertension, cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Men were also more likely than women to die. Those risk factors are pretty similar to those for the flu. Both diseases also spread similarly: through respiratory droplets in coughs and sneezes. Here are 4 real ways to protect yourself Researchers are still looking into how contagious the 2019 coronavirus is compared with other viruses, at what points it can be transmitted to other people and how common it really is in American communities. That uncertainty makes it hard to draw comparisons between the potential threat of COVID-19 and the current threat of the flu. ""We know a great deal more about transmission of influenza; we know a great deal about who is most likely to become gravely ill; we have drug treatment; we have a vaccine, even if imperfect,"" said Dr. Myron Cohen, director of the Institute for Global Health & Infectious Diseases at the University of North Carolina, in an email. ""I think you can see big differences."" The ways to prevent the spread of both the 2019 coronavirus and the flu are similar: wash your hands, avoid touching your face, disinfect your home and stay away from people who are sick. ""While it may be true that ‘you're more likely to die of influenza right now,’ that is really the wrong way to look at the question,"" said Emily Bruce, a faculty scientist at the University of Vermont’s Division of Immunobiology, in an email. ""It's more important to ask, ‘What will the situation look like three months from now if we do nothing?’"" Part of the current public health response is trying to prevent COVID-19 from becoming an established, regularly occurring illness like the flu. Dr. Drew said ""you’re more likely to die of influenza right now"" than the 2019 coronavirus. The key phrase in this claim is ""right now."" It’s true that, as of March 10, the flu poses a more immediate threat to the American public than the 2019 coronavirus. That’s because it’s currently more widespread; the CDC estimated there were as many as 49 million flu illnesses from October to February, while there have been 647 coronavirus cases in the United States. But the mortality rate of the flu is lower than that of COVID-19 — the former is estimated to be as high as 0.1%, while the latter is around 3.4% so far. That means you’re more likely to die if you get the coronavirus than if you get the flu, even though you’re less likely to contract COVID-19. Dr. Drew’s claim is partially accurate but leaves out important details."
|
3946
|
Less common flu strain helps boost number of Virginia cases.
|
The number of flu cases in Virginia is on the increase, and state health officials say a less common type of the virus is turning up more often.
|
true
|
Health, Richmond, General News, Flu, Virginia
|
The Virginia Department of Health says that out of more than 1,800 cases confirmed through lab reports since the beginning of the current flu season, 75% have been identified as Type B, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports. “We normally see increases a little later, but it’s not unusual. It’s tracking along with what we saw in the 2014-2015 season,” said Em Stephens, respiratory disease coordinator for the health department. “The unusual thing about this season is flu B.” The frequency of type B influenza in Virginia mirrors what’s being seen across the country. It has been found in 68% of all lab-tested cases reported to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Health officials said type B is generally more common in children. It also means that people over 65 who are usually susceptible to the flu might not catch it this year. Scott Pauley, a spokesman for the CDC, said it’s the first time since the 1992-1993 flu season that influenza B has been identified more often than influenza A nationally. “It’s good news in the fact that hopefully it’ll be a less severe season in terms of deaths, but it’s still looking like it will be a strong flu season,” Pauley said. “We’re not sure when it could peak, but it could be sometime between now and February.” In eastern and Northern Virginia, officials have respectively confirmed about 1,000 and 325 flu cases this season. In central Virginia, which includes the Richmond metro area, there have been 84 confirmed flu cases. So far through the 2019-2020 flu season, there have been 255 reported pneumonia and influenza-associated deaths reported by the state health agency. There have been no reported pediatric deaths so far this season. The CDC estimates there have been 2,100 deaths from the flu nationally this season.
|
10081
|
Triumph for Drug to Straighten Clenched Fingers
|
This story is about the long journey to approval of a new drug called Xiaflex used to treat Dupuytren’s contracture–a condition in which cords of collagen cause fingers to clench involuntarily. While the main story focuses mostly on the financial maneuverings related to the drug’s development, this sidebar provides a very informative overview of the drug’s benefits and risks for patients, costs, and effectiveness compared with other treatments. Overall, an excellent effort – markedly different than an earlier story on this drug by ABC News.com. A drug’s approval by the FDA is often accompanied by excessive hype regarding the new therapy’s benefits but little scrutiny of potential downsides. It’s nice to see an approval story that balances excitement about benefits with sober analysis of costs and possible harms. Dupuytren’s contractures can be a debilitating disease that until recently has required surgical interventions. The availability of a new drug treatment is a welcomed addition to the treatment options available to patients with the disorder. The role of Xiaflex as compared to surgery is unclear at the present time.
|
true
|
"The main story estimates a course of treatment will cost about $5400, and the sidebar helpfully compared this amount to some of the other treatment options including surgery and needle aponeurotomy. The sidebar describes the outcomes of the main clinical trial of Xiaflex in absolute terms. It reports that 64% of treated joints straightened out, compared with 7% of control group joints. The story relied a bit heavily on a positive patient anecdote in the sidebar lead-in, but it also managed to find a second patient who offered a unique perspective on the treatment. This second patient had successful Xiaflex injections on three fingers and open surgery on a fourth finger which didn’t respond to the drug. In this patient’s view, the drug was preferable to surgery. The sidebar mentions that Xiaflex can rupture tendons ""in rare circumstances"" and that the injections ""often"" cause temporary pain and bruising and ""sometimes"" cause allergic reactions. We wish that the story had been a bit more precise in its quantification of these adverse effects, but we feel the descriptions provided are enough to paint a reasonably accurate portrait of the drug’s potential harms. The sidebar provided the essential details on the main clinical trial used to support approval of Xiaflex. It noted that the study compared Xiaflex to placebo in 306 patients with Dupuytren’s. It also pointed out limitations in the currently available data, including the lack of long-term follow-up on these patients and the lack of data showing whether Xiaflex is better than the standard surgical treatment. There was no exaggeration of the prevalence or consequences of Dupuytren’s contracture. Most of the sources in this story are affiliated in some way with organizations that will profit from the sale of Xiaflex. These conflicts are disclosed, however, and the story does offer some clinical perspective from a hand specialist who does not appear to be connected to Xiaflex. The story compares costs and outcomes for Xiaflex with open surgery and needle aponeurotomy. The story states that Xiaflex was approved last month and will go on sale later this month. The story chronicles Xiaflex’s 50-year journey from discovery to FDA approval. It does not attempt to portray the drug as ""new."" The depth and sourcing of this story precludes the possibility that it was based on a press release."
|
|
338
|
U.S. states accuse Teva, other drugmakers, of price-fixing: lawsuit.
|
U.S. states filed a lawsuit accusing Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc of orchestrating a sweeping scheme with 19 other drug companies to inflate drug prices - sometimes by more than 1,000% - and stifle competition for generic drugs, state prosecutors said on Saturday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Soaring drug prices from both branded and generic manufacturers have sparked outrage and investigations in the United States. The criticism has come from across the political spectrum, from President Donald Trump, a Republican, to progressive Democrats including U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren, who is running for president. The 20 drug companies engaged in illegal conspiracies to divide up the market for drugs to avoid competing and, in some cases, conspired to either prevent prices from dropping or to raise them, according to the complaint by 44 U.S. states, filed on Friday in the U.S. District Court in Connecticut. A representative of Teva USA, a unit of Israeli company Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, said it will fight the lawsuit. “The allegations in this new complaint, and in the litigation more generally, are just that – allegations,” it said in a statement. “Teva continues to review the issue internally and has not engaged in any conduct that would lead to civil or criminal liability.” The 500-page lawsuit accuses the generic drug industry, which mainly sells medicines that are off patent and should be less expensive, of a long history of discreet agreements to ensure that companies that are supposedly competitors each get a “fair share.” The situation worsened in 2012, the complaint said. “Apparently unsatisfied with the status quo of ‘fair share’ and the mere avoidance of price erosion, Teva and its co-conspirators embarked on one of the most egregious and damaging price-fixing conspiracies in the history of the United States,” the complaint said. With Teva at the center of the conspiracy, the drug companies colluded to significantly raise prices on 86 medicines between July 2013 and January 2015, the complaint said. Representatives of Sandoz, another company named in the lawsuit, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The drugs included everything from tablets and capsules to creams and ointments to treat conditions including diabetes, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, cancer, epilepsy and more, they said. In some instances, the coordinated price increases were more than 1,000 percent, the lawsuit said. The lawsuit also names 15 individuals as defendants who it said carried out the schemes on a day-to-day basis. “The level of corporate greed alleged in this multistate lawsuit is heartless and unconscionable,” Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak said in a statement. According to New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal, more than half of the corporate defendants are based in New Jersey, and five of the individual defendants live in the state. The lawsuit seeks damages, civil penalties and actions by the court to restore competition to the generic drug market. Generic drugs can save drug buyers and taxpayers tens of billions of dollars a year because they are a lower-priced alternative to brand-name drugs. “Generic drugs were one of the few ‘bargains’ in the United States healthcare system,” the lawsuit said. However, it added, “Prices for hundreds of generic drugs have risen – while some have skyrocketed, without explanation, sparking outrage from politicians, payers and consumers across the country whose costs have doubled, tripled, or even increased 1,000% or more.” As a result of the drug companies’ conspiracies, it said, consumers and states paid “substantially inflated and anticompetitive prices for numerous generic pharmaceutical drugs” while the drug companies profited. The lawsuit filed on Friday is parallel to an action brought in December 2016 by the attorneys general of 45 states and the District of Columbia. That case was later expanded to include more than a dozen drugmakers.
|
9054
|
Screening could prevent a quarter of hip fractures in older women
|
Getty Images This news release describes results of a five-year study in which older women in seven areas of Britain were randomly assigned to either go through a screening procedure for osteoporosis called FRAX, or not. Women who were screened were 28% less likely to experience a hip fracture over the period of study, though their incidence of all osteoporosis-related fractures was no different than that of women who were not screened. Strengths are that this is a large, population-based randomized trial that measures important clinical endpoints. The intervention is innovative, easy to implement, and offers the possibility that screening can be conducted more efficiently. A discussion of the cost of treating more women as a result of enhanced screening deserved a mention. In an aging society like Britain, a tool that reduces risk of hip fractures is an important innovation. Hip fractures can be disabling for the elderly, and many older people never fully recover from them. Unfortunately, although the release vaguely suggests that the tool is cost-effective, no specific information is provided to support that contention. In America, the US Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends a screening bone density scan for women 65 and over. The British study is innovative because it incorporates fracture risk into the screening process. Theoretically, using FRAX to guide bone density scan (DXA) referrals could be more cost-effective than routinely performing DXA scans based just on age. The release does not provide supportive evidence, but notes that these analyses are ongoing.
|
true
|
hip fractures,older women,University of Birmingham
|
This release was very thorough in most areas. However, we’re only told that the proposed screening program is “low cost.” But the FRAX screening is just a questionnaire, so there is minimal cost to using it. The costs of screening, of course, arise from those women who go on to get bone density scans and get treated for osteoporosis. We think the additional costs of scans and treatment deserved a mention. Benefits are quantified. We learn how many women in the treatment arm of the study were placed on osteoporosis medication following screening and how many hip fractures were potentially avoided among the women who received the screening procedure. The release reports both the relative and absolute risk reductions associated with screening. It also projects how many hip fractures might be prevented in Britain on an annual basis if the screening procedure were adopted nationwide. Given that this news release addresses effectiveness of a community screening effort rather than a treatment, harms are likely to be few. However, we think potential harms deserved some attention. Harms could arise from medication complications — which for bisphosphonates (the most commonly used drug class for treating osteoporosis) can paradoxically include atypical fractures. This is a risk calculator, so we’re not as concerned about over-diagnosis. The expectation is that the risk information should be incorporated into discussions of treatment options. The bigger concern would be under-diagnosis — how many fractures occur in women whose FRAX score is low and then don’t go on to bone density scanning (DXA) so the opportunity to diagnose and treat osteoporosis is lost. The release goes into great detail about the study design, the number of participants, and the sampling procedure. The release indicates that 12,000 women were randomized and notes that the follow up was 5 years, which is helpful information. The release takes a balanced approach to the severity of the health issue under study. There is no disease mongering. Hip fractures are common and are associated with poor outcomes — disability, loss of independence, and death. The source of funding and universities involved in the study are clearly stated. This was a report of the findings of a clinical trial regarding a health condition for which no screening procedure is currently recommended. The alternative in the US is to perform bone density scans based on age. This was a clinical trial of the proposed adoption of a screening procedure which the researchers hope will contribute to national healthcare policy. The risk calculator used in screening, FRAX, is already widely available. Screening for risk factors is not currently advocated in the U.K., but the release doesn’t tell us that. Readers who depend solely on this release for their information won’t know whether the FRAX risk calculator is an improvement on an already existing practice, or whether doctors simply don’t screen for osteoporosis currently. Without that information readers can’t get a perspective on exactly how novel these results are. No unjustifiable language was identified.
|
10840
|
Two New Drugs Show Promise for Patients with Aggressive Breast Cancer
|
This Penn Medicine news release describes two trials of experiemental breast cancer treatments, neratinib and veliparib with carboplatin, with potential to be used alongside chemotherapy to eradicate residual cancer cells before an operation to remove a breast cancer tumor for patients with aggressive HER2-positive or triple negative breast cancer. While neglecting to mention alternative treatments already available, and some serious side-effects of neratinib treatment, the news release does a decent job of not over-claiming for the results of these phase 2 trials. The trials measured the likelihood that the treatments would be successful in larger phase 3 trials, and the news release comes close to claiming this research milestone has important implications for patients and doctors, which would have been unjustified. The news release does a good job of highlighting why these potential new breast cancer treatments might be important, but should be weighted with the major proviso of waiting on the results of phase 3 trials. These experimental drugs are part of the I-SPY 2 Trial (Investigation of Serial Studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response With Imaging And moLecular Analysis 2), a heavily accelerated method of analyzing potential new drugs using fewer patient volunteers and at reduced cost, according to an interview with the principal investigator. The drugs in the trial are aimed at more aggressive subtypes of breast cancers where HER2/neu (human epidermal growth factor receptor) is over-expressed and in triple negative breast cancers. While response rates to chemotherapy can be excellent in these aggressive cancers, some tumors progress despite aggressive therapy. With 40,000 U.S. women dying every year due to metastatic breast cancer, patients and the general public are hanging on every new study that is published, waiting for some bit of news to offer hope, especially to those dying of the disease.
|
mixture
|
Academic medical center news release,Breast cancer
|
No mention is made of the costs of either neratinib or veliparib/carboplatin. Both treatments are experimental and so do not have a market price, but it should be possible to give a rough estimate of the price range of new cancer drugs when they gain regulatory approval. Although the trials detailed in the news release are too early stage to talk about impending approvals, given that the release raises the possibility of ‘promise for patients’ (in the headline), we think it’s not too early to consider how much patients would have to pay. The news release doesn’t include any statistics on the benefits of the treatments but does make strong pitches on their effectiveness: “Compared to standard therapies alone, the drugs tested in the trial substantially reduced the presence of residual disease in the breast tissue and lymph nodes (known as achieving pathological complete response, or “pCR”) when administered before surgery,” according to a co-investigator. “… when added to standard, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the combination of the molecularly targeted experimental drug veliparib plus carboplatin showed sufficient improvement to meet the pre-specified threshold for “graduation” from the trial, signifying a high likelihood for success in a modest, confirmatory phase 3 neoadjuvant trial in the triple negative subset. Likewise, the experimental drug neratinib was found to have sufficient improvement in the pCR rate for patients in the HER2-positive/HR-negative subset, that it too was “graduated” from the I-SPY 2 trial.” This is a close call. These are small, phase 2 trials, and therefore not designed to provide clear data on drug efficacy. And had the release made that point explicitly, perhaps we’d be more inclined to rule this Satisfactory. However, we think that readers deserve to know what “substantially reduced” and “sufficient improvement” refer to, particularly when the researchers are making strong claims about potential efficacy. How many patients benefited? What is meant by “high likelihood of success” in a future trial? We wished for some numbers to make this clearer. Although highlighted in the NEJM paper describing the neratinib trial, the news release doesn’t mention that 38% of patients receiving the drug experienced severe diarrhea, requiring a change to the trial protocol. A related NEJM editorial also noted that a phase 3 trial including trastuzumab, pertuzumab and neratinib (compared to standard of care trastuzumab and pertuzumab) could result in significant side effects when added to chemotherapy, and they raise concerns of over-treatment of a large number of patients. The news release doesn’t overclaim for the effectiveness of the two treatments. However, by presenting suggestive evidence that they might be successful in a phase 3 clinical trial as “new treatment options on the horizon,” the news release isn’t clear on how strong the evidence actually is. It’s well known that the failure rate of phase 3 trials is high; between 25% and 75% depending on who you ask. This is often because data that looked significant in small phase 2 trials ends up being a statistical blip when tested in larger populations. The related editorial in the NEJM describes how the favorable effects seen in the two trials could be from factors other than the effectiveness of the drugs themselves, and predicts potential problems with scaling up to phase 3 trials. The editorial notes that a significant benefit has already been seen in patients with triple negative breast cancer with the additional of platinum agents, and that the benefit in the triple negative patients in the I-SPY 2 study might have been from these agents, not the PARP inhibitor (targeted agent) veliparib. However, the news release does explain why the I-SPY 2 trial design is optimized for identifying compounds which are most likely to be successful in phase 3 trials. Since this feature of trial design is the backbone of the NEJM papers described by the news release, it seems fair to give a satisfactory rating. Aggressive subtypes of breast cancers are common, serious diseases with fewer treatment options and are highly worthy of public attention. The sponsor of the trial is given as QuantumLeap Healthcare Collaborative, a non-profit set up by Silicon Valley entrepreneurs. The manufacturers of neratinib and veliparib — Puma Biotechnology and Abbvie, respectively — are listed as “strategic partners” on the QuantumLeap Healthcare Collaborative website, suggesting potential financial involvement. That’s a financial tie that should have been noted in the news release as well. Both NEJM papers explicitly state that the pharmaceutical companies had no direct involvement in the trials except to provide the drugs. No alternatives are mentioned for treatment of either HER2-positive or triple negative breast cancer. This is a major oversight given that a variety of treatments, such as Herceptin, are available for HER2-positive breast cancer. Both neratinib and veliptarib are described as “experimental” so it is clear that neither are currently available outside of clinical trials. Both neratinib and veliptarib are described as new drugs in the news release, but they are talked about in the context of augmenting standard cancer therapy. No suggestion is made that these drugs are a sea change in how breast cancer is treated. The phrases “‘promise for patients” and “treatments on the horizon” teeter towards unjustifiable language since the trials being described have produced data on how likely the treatments are to make it through a phase 3 trial, rather than being meaningful for patients and doctors. We don’t think the language is so sensationalistic as to warrant an unsatisfactory rating. The release seems to be making the case that the trial design, rather than the drug data, is the cause for excitement.
|
2757
|
Two Obamacare exchanges see more health insurer competition.
|
At least two U.S. states running their own Obamacare health insurance exchanges expect new insurers to enter their marketplaces and bolster competition in 2015, officials said on Friday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Kynect, which is Kentucky’s marketplace, and the Rhode Island Health Benefits Exchange have had separate talks about 2015 with health insurers that could opt to join the online marketplaces set up under President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform law. Kentucky also expects an expansion of physician networks available within current plans. Increased competition would increase consumer choices and tend to put downward pressure on health insurance cost trends. It could also help ensure the future of Obama’s Affordable Care Act, which depends on the success of new online marketplaces. Kentucky and Rhode Island are among states with the most successful Obamacare launches. Obama himself highlighted Kentucky’s performance in his State of the Union address on Tuesday. Each state also has only a small number of insurers. Kynect currently has three insurers and has enrolled more than 44,000 people in private plans since its October 1 launch. The Rhode Island exchange, with two insurers for individual consumers, has enrolled about 12,000 people. It was not clear whether more competition would be in the offing for other states with their own exchanges or the federal government, which runs a marketplace for 36 states that have chosen not to operate their own. “We expect our number of carriers to certainly grow and our networks to become more robust,” said Audrey Haynes, a one-time aide to former President Bill Clinton who is now secretary of the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services. Christine Ferguson, director of the Rhode Island exchange, predicted an expansion would result from insurer interest in individuals and small-business employees. “We are definitely in conversations with other carriers to come in. And I think we’ll be successful with that,” she said. Both women were speaking to reporters at an event hosted by the nonprofit Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which tracks healthcare trends. Healthcare marketplaces, which began operating in all 50 states and the District of Columbia on January 1, allow consumers who lack coverage to purchase private health insurance, often at federally subsidized rates. But a botched autumn launch of the federal marketplace and lagging enrollment among younger adults have raised concerns about the success of the marketplaces, with critics predicting big increases in costs down the road. Haynes said officials in Kentucky had spoken to managed care plans owned by larger national insurance companies. “We’ve heard that they want to come into the market,” she said. California, which operates the nation’s largest state-run healthcare exchange, has 13 insurers and has enrolled more than 625,000 people through private plans since October 1. The state has barred new insurers from entering its marketplace in 2015, but officials say they are confident about the current roster of insurers. “All of the plans with Covered California are really recognizing that this is a long-term play and are looking at things like benefit design, how do we improve the benefits,” Peter Lee, executive director of the California exchange, told the same forum.
|
16406
|
"Joni Ernst Says personhood legislation she sponsored would not have restricted access to reproductive services and was ""simply a statement that I support life."
|
"Ernst said personhood legislation she sponsored would not have restricted access to reproductive services and was ""simply a statement that I support life."" Both Braley and Ernst have exaggerated here. Ernst has a point that the legislation does not literally call for the restrictions on reproductive rights Braley cited, but it’s more than just a ""statement"" of principle -- it would change the Iowa Constitution in a way that could, at some point, enable many or all of the consequences Braley foresees to be enacted."
|
mixture
|
Abortion, National, Women, Joni Ernst,
|
"Rep. Bruce Braley, D-Iowa, says his opponent in the Senate race, Republican state Sen. Joni Ernst, introduced legislation that would have severely limited abortion rights in Iowa. Not so, Ernst countered in a recent debate. Braley and Ernst -- who are vying to succeed retiring Democrat Tom Harkin in one of the nation’s tightest and most-watched Senate contests -- butted heads over core issues, including women’s rights, in the Sept. 28, 2014, debate in Des Moines. At one point, the candidates were asked if they would pursue abortion-related legislation at the federal level. Braley responded first. (Video here.) ""What I won't do,"" Braley said, ""is support the type of legislation that Sen. Ernst introduced in Iowa that would have banned all forms of abortion, that would have prevented certain forms of contraception from being available to Iowa women, that would have prevented in vitro fertilization and would have prosecuted doctors for performing what are now legal procedures."" Ernst responded, ""The amendment that's being referenced by the congressman would not do any of the things that he stated it would do. That amendment is simply a statement that I support life."" This debate has come up before: Earlier this month, Braley released an ad that attacked Ernst on the same grounds. We decided to take a closer look to see whose portrayal was more accurate. In April 2013, Ernst joined 20 other Iowa state senators in sponsoring ""personhood"" legislation. Had it passed, the measure would have amended the state Constitution to legally define someone as a ""person"" at conception. The U.S. Supreme Court currently defines a ""person"" when the fetus is at a stage of ""post-viability,"" said Tim Hagle, a politics and constitutional law professor at the University of Iowa. Ernst has said she believes life begins at conception. At a Republican Senate primary debate in May, she said if a personhood bill passes, she thinks abortion providers ""should be punished."" Abortion-rights supporters have criticized such ""personhood"" laws -- which have been proposed in several other states, without having passed -- as creating a legal avenue for lawmakers to restrict women’s access to certain reproductive services. Braley, for instance, said the proposed Iowa legislation would have done a number of things: banned all abortions, prevented access to certain forms of contraception, stopped in vitro fertilization and left doctors open to prosecution. However, that’s speculation -- because at only 200 words, the measure doesn’t include any of those provisions. The measure would have changed the state’s Constitution to say: ""The inalienable right to life of every person at any stage of development shall be recognized and protected."" Unlike some measures in other states, it did not specifically define the term ""person."" Although it doesn’t include those specific measures Braley mentioned, the bill’s main sponsor has said the intent behind many personhood bills is to pave a road to protect anti-abortion legislation in the future because they would give legal rights to unborn fetuses. ""In and of itself, (the resolution) doesn’t change a whole lot,"" Republican state Sen. Dennis Guth told the University of Iowa student newspaper. ""But it ensures that if pro-life legislation is passed, it won’t be struck down by the Iowa Supreme Court. It’s a supporting document."" And if that’s the case, then personhood legislation could provide legal justification for prosecuting anyone who harms a human embryo beginning at conception. This would effectively make abortions illegal, and it could endanger at least some forms of birth control. Some common birth control methods, like intrauterine devices and ""Plan-B,"" can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. (Such forms of birth control were also the ones at issue in the Hobby Lobby Supreme Court case earlier this year.) Ernst has expressed wider acceptance of birth control measures than she has about access to abortion. ""When it does come to a woman's access to contraception, I will always stand with our women on affordable access to contraception,"" she said in Sunday’s debate. ""That's something that Congressman Braley has been trying to mislead our women voters on. I do believe in a woman's right to contraception."" In-vitro fertilization practices -- when a child is conceived in a lab outside of the body -- could also be affected. In-vitro fertilization specialists often create multiple embryos for one client. After the woman conceives, the remaining embryos may be discarded. If a personhood measure takes effect, it would be illegal to dispose of these extra embryos, and the state could be obligated to find women to gestate them, said Sylvia Law, a professor of law and medicine at New York University. So it’s not hard to imagine impacts of a personhood measure on all of the areas Braley cited -- abortion, contraception, in-vitro fertilization and a risk of prosecution for physicians. But it’s also short of a guarantee that any of these restrictions could come to pass. Experts we interviewed said the law that Ernst sponsored is too ambiguous to predict its legal ramifications. ""The amendment, if adopted, may lead to all the effects noted by Bruce Braley, but it remains uncertain since no personhood amendment has yet been passed (in other states),"" added Maya Manian, a professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law and an expert in reproductive health care. In addition, these more restrictive policies couldn’t take effect without overcoming additional hurdles, including overturning federal law, which currently protects women’s right to an abortion, said I. Glenn Cohen, codirector of the Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology and Bioethics at Harvard University. ""Even if it purported to have the effect Braley is worried about, the U.S. federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land and trumps Iowa's state Constitution,"" Cohen said. Our ruling Ernst said personhood legislation she sponsored would not have restricted access to reproductive services and was ""simply a statement that I support life."" Both Braley and Ernst have exaggerated here. Ernst has a point that the legislation does not literally call for the restrictions on reproductive rights Braley cited, but it’s more than just a ""statement"" of principle -- it would change the Iowa Constitution in a way that could, at some point, enable many or all of the consequences Braley foresees to be enacted."
|
9361
|
One Blood Test Might Be Enough to Diagnose Diabetes
|
This story reported on a study that examined data from a long-running U.S. heart disease study to conclude that testing both a patient’s fasting glucose and A1C from a single blood sample is sufficient to confirm type 2 diabetes. Current guidelines call for performing either test once, followed by a second confirmatory test, thus requiring two separate lab visits and blood draws. The study was reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine. The story’s strong point was that it tapped two independent sources. On the downside, it didn’t report that the single-sample testing method could miss many cases of diabetes or explore whether it would lead to better outcomes for patients, like avoiding complications of diabetes. For help understanding medical tests such as these, see our primer: Understanding medical tests: sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Testing for diabetes can help patients manage the disease before the onset of serious complications such as eye disease, kidney disease, heart disease, and stroke. Testing can also identify people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes, allowing them to make lifestyle changes such as losing weight. Evidence supporting a simplified testing strategy — which is apparently already in use — might offer reassurance that the strategy is effective in identifying people who are likely to develop diabetes. On the other hand, it’s unclear from this study how much an impact this strategy would have on averting bad outcomes for patients.
|
mixture
|
diabetes
|
The story provided no information on how much these tests cost. A check online found CVS drug store offered these tests for $59 apiece. The story referred to the potential for a single test to result in quicker diagnosis and treatment of diabetes, thus “saving patients time and health care costs” and leading to better outcomes. But it offered no data on how much more rapidly diagnosis and treatment might occur with single-sample testing, or more importantly how much difference it would make in heading off the many complications of diabetes. According to the news release, 90% of those who tests positive in both tests went on to be diagnosed with diabetes within 15 years. The story would have benefited from an exploration of the harms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Many of the patients who tested positive in both tests didn’t develop diabetes until a decade or two later. Potentially, patients like that could be treated overly aggressively with drugs that could do them harm. Likewise, an accompanying editorial notes that the criteria proposed by the study might miss more people with diabetes than the conventional method of repeated blood glucose tests. In the data studied, simultaneous A1C and blood glucose tests agreed only about 40% of the time, versus 70% agreement for successive blood sugar tests. Important caveats should have been mentioned, such as the study authors’ own acknowledgment that their findings need to be confirmed in other data sets. The five-year intervals between blood glucose tests in the study population were much longer than what happens in clinical practice today, given screening recommendations for those at high risk. As the editorial noted, the study included only black and white Americans aged 45 to 64 years, so the usefulness of these findings for other patient groups is uncertain. There was no disease-mongering, but the story would have been stronger with information about who should be screened. For example, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends checking for abnormal blood glucose as part of cardiovascular risk assessment in adults who are overweight and between 40 and 70 years old, and referring those with abnormal levels to intensive behavioral counseling. The story tapped independent diabetes experts. While the study was funded by government grants, one of the authors disclosed grants and personal fees from industry, unrelated to the study. The story made it clear that doing tests one at a time is called for in the current guideline. But the story doesn’t mention the fasting plasma glucose test and the oral glucose tolerance test, which along with the glucose blood test, can be used if A1C test results aren’t consistent, the A1C test isn’t available, or you have a condition such as pregnancy that might render the A1C test inaccurate. The story explained that both blood tests are routinely performed for diabetes. The story explained that that some doctors already do conduct dual tests from a single blood sample, and that the study’s findings might support adding that strategy to clinical guidelines. The story drew heavily from a Johns Hopkins news release but also used other sources.
|
8856
|
Government sees overhaul of AIDS vaccine effort.
|
The U.S. government began a major overhaul of its effort to produce an AIDS vaccine on Tuesday, stressing a return to basic scientific research after the failure of a key clinical trial last year.
|
true
|
Science News
|
A woman passes an anti-AIDS poster in Beijing in a file photo. The U.S. government began a major overhaul of its effort to produce an AIDS vaccine on Tuesday, stressing basic scientific research after the failure of a key clinical trial last year. REUTERS/Claro Cortes IV Government officials at a summit with AIDS scientists pledged to prioritize spending on lab work and animal tests rather than expensive, and thus far disappointing, large-scale vaccine trials on humans. “We need to turn the knob in the direction of discovery. That is unambiguous,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who convened the meeting outside of Washington. “We really do need new and novel ideas.” The vaccine summit follows the failure last year of an experimental HIV vaccine developed by Merck & Co which had been widely touted as one of the best hopes in the field. Clinical trials, however, indicated the vaccine candidate did not protect against infection with the AIDS virus and might even have made recipients more susceptible, although how is not exactly clear. Scientists said the surprising outcome of the Merck trials demonstrated how little HIV is understood after more than two decades of intensive research. “Despite hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars, the reality is that in 2008 an effective HIV/AIDS vaccine is beyond our grasp,” said Warner Greene, a co-chair of the summit and professor of medicine at the University of California-San Francisco. “There is no question in my mind that the HIV vaccine effort is in need of a major mid-course correction.” Fauci suggested the overall AIDS research budget at his institute, now about $1.5 billion, could tilt more in favor of basic laboratory work rather than vaccine product development, which currently accounts for about a third of spending. “We really need to seriously look at torquing that balance more to answering some of the fundamental questions that we don’t have answers to,” he said. The new funding initiative is expected to begin within months and will focus on both broader, more imaginative research and on encouraging younger scientists to begin cracking HIV’s mysteries, Fauci said, adding that all projects were being examined. “Everything is on the table,” he said. Nearly 30 potential AIDS vaccines are being tested on people around the world, and advocates argue that ultimately an effective vaccine would be the best way to stop a virus that still infects some 12,000 people every day. Globally, AIDS has killed about 25 million people. Some AIDS advocacy groups have criticized U.S. spending on the vaccine effort. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation this week said suspending U.S. funding for a vaccine and investing in strategies that save lives and stop new infections would be the wisest and most effective use of limited public resources. Fauci said any suggestion that the overall AIDS vaccine project would stop was off the mark. “Under no circumstances will we stop AIDS vaccine research. Not only will we not cut it, wherever possible we will increase it,” he said.
|
36050
|
"Legendary performer David Bowie had a one-on-one meeting with one autistic child when the film ""Labyrinth"" originally premiered."
|
David Bowie Meeting an Child With Autism at ‘Labyrinth’ Premiere
|
unproven
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
On October 27 2019, Facebook user Micah Daigle shared what appeared on first glance to be a secondhand anecdote about a friend’s touching introduction to David Bowie at a premiere of the film Labyrinth in 1986.A photograph of David Bowie holding a mask accompanied the lengthy written post:“My friend told me a story he hadn’t told anyone for years. When he used to tell it years ago people would laugh and say, ‘Who’d believe that? How can that be true? That’s daft.’ So he didn’t tell it again for ages. But for some reason, last night, he knew it would be just the kind of story I would love.When he was a kid, he said, they didn’t use the word autism, they just said ‘shy’, or ‘isn’t very good at being around strangers or lots of people.’ But that’s what he was, and is, and he doesn’t mind telling anyone. It’s just a matter of fact with him, and sometimes it makes him sound a little and act different, but that’s okay.Anyway, when he was a kid it was the middle of the 1980s and they were still saying ‘shy’ or ‘withdrawn’ rather than ‘autistic’. He went to London with his mother to see a special screening of a new film he really loved. He must have won a competition or something, I think. Some of the details he can’t quite remember, but he thinks it must have been London they went to, and the film…! Well, the film is one of my all-time favourites, too. It’s a dark, mysterious fantasy movie. Every single frame is crammed with puppets and goblins. There are silly songs and a goblin king who wears clingy silver tights and who kidnaps a baby and this is what kickstarts the whole adventure.It was ‘Labyrinth’, of course, and the star was David Bowie, and he was there to meet the children who had come to see this special screening.‘I met David Bowie once,’ was the thing that my friend said, that caught my attention.‘You did? When was this?’ I was amazed, and surprised, too, at the casual way he brought this revelation out. Almost anyone else I know would have told the tale a million times already.He seemed surprised I would want to know, and he told me the whole thing, all out of order, and I eked the details out of him.He told the story as if it was he’d been on an adventure back then, and he wasn’t quite allowed to tell the story. Like there was a pact, or a magic spell surrounding it. As if something profound and peculiar would occur if he broke the confidence.It was thirty years ago and all us kids who’d loved Labyrinth then, and who still love it now, are all middle-aged. Saddest of all, the Goblin King is dead. Does the magic still exist?I asked him what happened on his adventure.‘I was withdrawn, more withdrawn than the other kids. We all got a signed poster. Because I was so shy, they put me in a separate room, to one side, and so I got to meet him alone. He’d heard I was shy and it was his idea. He spent thirty minutes with me.‘He gave me this mask. This one. Look.‘He said: ‘This is an invisible mask, you see?‘He took it off his own face and looked around like he was scared and uncomfortable all of a sudden. He passed me his invisible mask. ‘Put it on,’ he told me. ‘It’s magic.’‘And so I did.‘Then he told me, ‘I always feel afraid, just the same as you. But I wear this mask every single day. And it doesn’t take the fear away, but it makes it feel a bit better. I feel brave enough then to face the whole world and all the people. And now you will, too.‘I sat there in his magic mask, looking through the eyes at David Bowie and it was true, I did feel better.‘Then I watched as he made another magic mask. He spun it out of thin air, out of nothing at all. He finished it and smiled and then he put it on. And he looked so relieved and pleased. He smiled at me.‘’Now we’ve both got invisible masks. We can both see through them perfectly well and no one would know we’re even wearing them,’ he said.‘So, I felt incredibly comfortable. It was the first time I felt safe in my whole life.‘It was magic. He was a wizard. He was a goblin king, grinning at me.‘I still keep the mask, of course. This is it, now. Look.’I kept asking my friend questions, amazed by his story. I loved it and wanted all the details. How many other kids? Did they have puppets from the film there, as well? What was David Bowie wearing? I imagined him in his lilac suit from Live Aid. Or maybe he was dressed as the Goblin King in lacy ruffles and cobwebs and glitter.What was the last thing he said to you, when you had to say goodbye?‘David Bowie said, ‘I’m always afraid as well. But this is how you can feel brave in the world.’ And then it was over. I’ve never forgotten it. And years later I cried when I heard he had passed.’My friend was surprised I was delighted by this tale.‘The normal reaction is: that’s just a stupid story. Fancy believing in an invisible mask.’But I do. I really believe in it.And it’s the best story I’ve heard all year.”-Paul MagrsOctober 2019 wasn’t the first time the story appeared. In October 2017, Neil Gaiman published the same text to his Tumblr account, also crediting Paul Magrs:Less than a week later, the story was shared to Tor.com, titled “At Labyrinth Screening 30 Years Ago, David Bowie Helps a Little Boy With His ‘Invisible Mask. '” It began by once again crediting the tale to Magrs:When people who portray or embody beloved characters show themselves to be heroic in everyday ways, it’s always inspiring. But sometimes the ways in which they’re heroic are particularly moving — like they were to the person who told this story about David Bowie at a Labyrinth screening 30 years back …The story going around Tumblr was told by novelist Paul Magrs, who is relating an encounter told by his friend, an autistic man. Magrs begins by explaining that three decades ago, it was rare to find people who would freely use the term “autistic” (which his friend does), that growing up his friend was often simply called “shy” or “withdrawn.” He then puts forward the story that his friend told him of attending a Labyrinth screening where children got to meet the Goblin King himself[. ]A link to Magrs’ original version of the story was included. That link was since redirected, but a version of it published and archived on October 3 2017 is available here. The post itself appeared to have been reproduced in full in those subsequent iterations, beginning with ” … My friend told me a story he hadn’t told anyone for years.”At some point in October 2019, Magrs replaced the content on the page with an update explaining that his original anecdote had gone viral and explaining that he’d written an “expanded version” of the story as a book after obtaining additional details from his unnamed friend:Two winters ago I was told a story by a friend of mine. A true story, about an episode from his childhood he’d never mentioned before … It was story I knew that people would love: the tale of the shy, clever, autistic boy and how he met David Bowie, who was kind to him, and as magical as anyone could hope for. And who told him about the wearing of invisible masks…I wrote a short piece about it and, within twenty minutes of posting it on my blog, it had gone viral. Somehow it had been noticed by people. David Bowie’s widow retweeted it with hearts, and so did his son. And then, suddenly, thousands and tens of thousands and then hundreds of thousands of fans were retweeting it. It made them remember how wonderful Bowie was: and they were pleased to hear that he was magical in real life, when you got as close to him as the character in my true-life story.By the end of that day a huge number of people had read and shared that blog piece. Amanda Palmer and Neil Gaiman tweeted it at each other, almost simultaneously, and all their followers went on to read it … I had to write an expanded version because my friend – delighted and mystified by all the attention his memory was getting – had carried on talking to me, and he gave me further details … When I had my story finished ‘Stardust and Snow’ slotted perfectly into place as my title.A separate blog reported that the book was due to be released some time in late 2019. On his blog post, Magrs said of Bowie as inspiration:David Bowie is more than just a rock star – he’s a mythic figure. He’s a pagan spirit of midwinter in this story. He’s Jack Frost. He’s a beguiling Christmas Elf. He’s here and gone in a twinkling of a green wizard’s eye.Magrs also tweeted about the book’s release in October 2017:Two years ago i wrote this piece about Bowie, his invisible mask and an autistic boy. I so wanted to bring out a longer version as a Christmas book.This piece has been read and shared a lot – notably by @neilhimself https://t.co/hzxumrWJvf— Paul Magrs (@paulmagrs) October 7, 2019Another notable share of the Bowie story in October 2017 was a post to the forum MetaFilter. Some commenters relayed stories of similar encounters and experiences:I saw a film of an exhibition of Bowie’s things, and one of the anecdotes was of Bowie walking through New York, no hat, no glasses. Asked by his companion why apparently no one was recognizing him, he said “Oh, I don’t have it turned on”. By way of proving a point, he turned it on, and was almost immediately recognized by groups of people. He was clearly a man of many different invisible masks.A few participants were a little skeptical of the tale’s veracity:Nice pat story. Nobody’s even a little suspicious?Others suggested authenticity wasn’t the point of the story, positing it was “essentially true” by being in line with Bowie’s persona. However, the user allowed for the possibility the tale was “consciously made up”:The things that you’re liable to read in the bible — they ain’t necessarily so.People are stories just as much as they’re flesh, bone and blood. Bowie was a thousand stories. Sometimes it matters that the stories reflect a physical actuality as closely as possible — when I go to the doctor, I want the story she tells me to match my actual biology, and the things she makes happen should be on the basis of as much informed objectivity as we can muster. When I read Alice in Wonderland to my six year old son at bedtime, not so much. Stories we tell each other can be profoundly affecting and change our lives, and have not an ounce of ‘objective truth’ in them, and they can be extremely important nonetheless.Realising this, when one is very invested in finding and telling the truth, can be very disconcerting. It’s certainly very important to know which sort of story you’re telling — or hearing — otherwise how can you tell the difference between a religion and a pack of lies?In this case, whether Bowie was in that room with that kid, and whether the memory is ‘true’ or whether the story is consciously made up, who can tell? I believe it’s substantially true, because it’s so in keeping with much of Bowie’s life and behaviour, and if you don’t believe in the real effects of practical magic on real people you’ve no business reading books or watching movies. You certainly have no business with David Bowie, who was an intensely accomplished practical magician.The air of the noosphere may not be made of oxygen and nitrogen, but it’s still safe to [breathe].Another chimed in:I heard a sermon by a rabbi once, about the story of the exodus from Egypt. His point was that it’s not as important whether the story is true. Rather, it’s more important what the story says about you.Our search for information about the story traced immediately back to Magrs, who announced in 2019 that he had written an “expanded” novel about his friend’s experience. But we didn’t find any information about whether the friend in the viral anecdote had ever stepped forward after it became so popular (even, Magrs said, reaching and affecting Bowie’s widow Iman. )It could be that the referenced friend was shy or disinterested in internet fame, but the possibility remained the friend didn’t exist as anything other than Magrs’ narrative device. As we have noted many times previously, a “friend of a friend” and ensuing proximity in stories is often a feature of urban legends and modern folklore:[Urban legends typically] are too odd, too coincidental, and too neatly plotted to be accepted as literal truth in every place where they are told and localized. Such stories deal with familiar everyday matters like travel, shopping, pets, babysitting, crime, accidents, sex, business, government, and so forth. Although the stories are phrased as if factual and are often attached to a particular locality, urban legends are actually migratory, and, like all folklore, they exist in variant versions. Typically, urban legends are attributed to a friend-of-a-friend, and often their narrative structure sets up some kind of puzzling situation that is resolved by a sudden plot twist, at which point the story ends abruptly. I emphasize story throughout this informal definition; I am not including plotless rumors, gossip, bits of misinformation, etc. Although these materials share some of the same features as urban legends, they are not technically the same genre, even though a few such borderline cases do merit mention in some of my entries.In October 2019, a Facebook user shared a story about David Bowie purportedly meeting a young autistic boy at a Labyrinth premiere in the 1980s. An individual named Paul Magrs originally told the story in early October 2017, and iterations were intermittently viral since; Neil Gaiman drew attention to the story on Tumblr that same month. Magrs claimed to have obtained additional information from his unnamed friend to turn the popular story into a December 2019 book.However, whether the story is literally true or simply a creative ode to the popular conception of David Bowie remains unknown.
|
16077
|
Surveys of teens in high school reveal that knowing a classmate who sells cannabis is 90 times more common than knowing a classmate who sells alcohol.
|
"James P. Crowley wrote that ""Surveys of teens in high school reveal that knowing a classmate who sells cannabis is 90 times more common than knowing a classmate who sells alcohol."" But he could only cite one survey, and we couldn’t find any others that asked the same question. One data point does not a trend make. In addition, his statement suggests that the findings of this survey reflect the results from all students polled. It doesn’t. It only looked at the subset of students who said they knew of someone who sold drugs in school. Because the statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, email us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
|
mixture
|
Rhode Island, Children, Drugs, Education, Crime, Polls and Public Opinion, Public Health, Pundits, Marijuana, James Crowley,
|
"A retired doctor recently included an eye-catching statistic in a commentary in The Providence Journal urging the legalization of marijuana in Rhode Island. ""Surveys of teens in high school reveal that knowing a classmate who sells cannabis is 90 times more common than knowing a classmate who sells alcohol,"" wrote James P. Crowley, a past president of the Rhode Island Medical Society and professor emeritus of medicine at Brown University, in a piece published Dec. 6, 2014. Crowley cited the statistic to demonstrate that cannabis is the most commonly sold drug in schools. He warned that its prohibition introduces teens to an underground culture of increasingly more dangerous substances. Crowley supports legislation that would regulate, rather than prohibit cannabis. (In 2013, Rhode Island became the 15th state to decriminalize non-medical marijuana possession; anyone caught with up to one ounce is subject to a $150 fine instead of facing a misdemeanor criminal charge.) While we were doubtful about an underground culture of selling alcohol in schools, we wondered whether Crowley was right. We sent him an email asking him for his source. We also reached out to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to see what comparable statistics these federal agencies had. All responded they did not have data to verify the statement. When Crowley got back to us, he attributed the information to Jared Moffat, director of Regulate Rhode Island, a group that supports legalizing marijuana. Moffat, in turn, referred us to a survey of students, ages 12 to 17, published in 2012 by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. The ""National Survey of American Attitudes on Substance Abuse XVII: Teens,"" found that 44 percent of the 1,003 students surveyed reported they knew a student who sold drugs at their school. Among that 44 percent, 91 percent reported that they knew a student who sold marijuana on school grounds while about 1 percent, said they knew a student who sold alcohol. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University did not pose the same question to students in previous surveys, and did not publish a 2013 survey. We reached out to Rhode Island KidsCount and to the state Department of Education to see what information they might have for Rhode Island students. KidsCount did not track that particular information. Elliot Krieger, spokesman for the state Department of Education, referred us to the ""SurveyWorks"" student survey of 2013-2014. Among the roughly 32,000 Rhode Island students who offered a response, 10.2 percent said someone had sold or given them an illegal drug on school property in the past year. Similarly, 9.5 percent reported that they had been under the influence of alcohol at school in the same timeframe. We also asked Robert Houghtaling, director of the East Greenwich Drug Program, for his take on Crowley’s claim that high school pot dealers far outnumbered students selling alcohol. ""Kids usually don’t have to sell alcohol. It’s so easily accessible,"" Houghtaling said. ""They steal it from their parents, secure a fake ID, or arrange for someone to buy it for them. ""In terms of using, alcohol is still the predominantly most-used drug,"" he said. ""Alcohol is so prevalent people view it as a rite of passage."" Our ruling James P. Crowley wrote that ""Surveys of teens in high school reveal that knowing a classmate who sells cannabis is 90 times more common than knowing a classmate who sells alcohol."" But he could only cite one survey, and we couldn’t find any others that asked the same question. One data point does not a trend make. In addition, his statement suggests that the findings of this survey reflect the results from all students polled. It doesn’t. It only looked at the subset of students who said they knew of someone who sold drugs in school. Because the statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context, (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, email us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
|
9606
|
Stem cell study for ALS patients shows promise, yet causes pain
|
A man with ALS participates in a fundraiser for research in New York City. This story describes a small Phase 2 safety-focused trial of stem cell injections to treat amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease. The trial involving 15 patients tested whether the stem cell injections, previously performed in low doses at Emory University, would be safe in progressively larger doses administered at multiple medical centers. The study was published in the journal Neurology. There isn’t much news here; the question remains open as to whether stem cells could be a safe and effective therapy for ALS. Nothing from these studies suggest that this treatment may slow or reverse progression of ALS. Given that, the story did a good job outlining the harms and risks from the procedure, and it included quotes from independent experts. But it is another example of how stem cell therapies get news coverage, even when the research is still preliminary. ALS is a rapidly progressive, fatal disease that attacks the nerve cells that control muscles. It’s relatively rare, with 3.9 cases in every 100,000 Americans, according to the National Institutes of Health. Most people with ALS die from respiratory failure, usually within 3 to 5 years from the onset of symptoms, according to the NIH, though about 10 percent of those with ALS survive for 10 or more years. There is no cure, though the drug riluzole can prolong survival. Converting patients’ stem cells into healthy motor neurons is one ongoing research pathway for a possible treatment. The concept of replacing these dying spinal nerve cells with new ones seems intuitively appealing, but it is unknown whether this could slow the progression or ideally reverse it.
|
true
|
ALS,stem cell therapies
|
There’s no mention of how much this procedure costs. Though this is still in its earliest stages, one could simply mention this issue, as it’s likely to be very expensive. Since this was primarily a safety study, there are no measurable benefits to quantify, and the story lets us know with this statement: “Unfortunately, the procedure provided no benefit to patients.” We’ll count this as sufficient for a Satisfactory rating. However, we encourage journalists to think twice about giving air time to early-phase trials, especially for stem cells. In many cases, there isn’t a lot to report yet, since benefits haven’t been established in any meaningful way. Better to wait until bigger trials are conducted, which was even implied with this ending quote in the story: “We are just now getting started with testing our hypotheses about using stem cells as therapeutics,” Glass said. “We do not know if these treatments will work, and it will take time to test these therapies in a systematic and safe way.” The story provided a lot of detail on the harms noted in the study, earning it a Satisfactory rating in this criterion, albeit with caveats. Certainly, the bar for safety may be lower for ALS than for other diseases, but we think the story misleads by calling the treatment “generally safe.” As the story explains, two of the 15 patients developed “severe complications,” including partial paralysis and “incapacitating pain.” More detail is warranted here. In fact, the 15 patients in the study experienced a total of 81 adverse events that researchers said were probably or definitely related to the treatment, mainly surgery. While most of these were not serious, they may have reduced the quality of life at least temporarily for patients who probably have little time left to live. In addition, these patients spent several days in a hospital going through an uncomfortable procedure. The story doesn’t explain much about how the study was performed nor its specific findings. But there are other details that help readers assess the status of the evidence. For example, the story says “no unusual acceleration of disease occurred” and “the study wasn’t designed to measure effectiveness of the treatment.” And it ends with this quote: “Importantly, people should understand that, at least for neurological diseases like ALS, we are just now getting started with testing our hypotheses about using stem cells as therapeutics,” Glass said. “We do not know if these treatments will work, and it will take time to test these therapies in a systematic and safe way.” The story does not engage in disease mongering. In fact, it explains that ALS is rare. The story includes quotes from two people who are not involved in the research. However, it does not mention that the study was partly funded by Neuralstem, a biopharmaceutical company focused on stem cell technology. In addition, study authors have numerous financial ties that weren’t disclosed. The story mentions that there are no effective treatments available. The story quotes a lead researcher saying, “we are just now getting started with testing our hypotheses about using stem cells as therapeutics. … We do not know if these treatments will work, and it will take time to test these therapies in a systematic and safe way.” The story sufficiently provides context on past studies in this area to help readers understand where this research fits into the big picture. The story does not appear to rely on a news release.
|
8707
|
Northern Ireland coronavirus restrictions extended by three weeks.
|
Northern Ireland will keep coronavirus restrictions in place for another three weeks, First Minister Arlene Foster said on Wednesday, keeping the British-run region in line with similar measures in neighbouring Ireland due to run until May 5.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Northern Ireland late last month introduced what the devolved government described as “sweeping powers” to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, with many restrictions on businesses tougher than in the rest of the United Kingdom. The British government will make an announcement on Thursday on its review of social-distancing measures, a spokesman for Prime Minister Boris Johnson said earlier on Wednesday, repeating that advisers do not believe Britain has passed the peak of the coronavirus pandemic. “We have decided restrictions will remain in place for another three weeks and we will review that coming up to that time,” Foster told a news conference, saying Northern Ireland was still in the middle of its first wave of infections. “If we relax our guard now all will have been in vain.” Northern Ireland has prohibited anyone from leaving home without reasonable excuse, compelled certain premises to shut and has warned it will use its power of direction to close or restrict businesses that do not ensure employees’ safety. The number of coronavirus deaths in Northern Ireland rose by 10 to a total of 134 on Wednesday, with 1,967 confirmed cases. There have been 12,868 deaths so far in hospitals across the United Kingdom and 98,476 positive cases. The true UK death toll far exceeds the hospital toll as people have also died in nursing homes and in the wider community, broader data showed on Tuesday. Ireland, which shares an open border with Northern Ireland, has so far reported 406 deaths and 11,479 cases. It includes people who have died in nursing homes in its data. Northern Ireland plans to publish the number of care home deaths on Friday. Deputy First Minister Michelle O’Neill said the figures would be “sobering”. “It will, I believe, reflect a truer picture of the devastation caused by COVID-19. It will bring home to us all just how serious the situation is,” O’Neill told the news conference. Britain is working towards including coronavirus deaths that take place outside of hospital in its daily figures, a senior health official said on Tuesday.
|
18512
|
"A proposed bill in the Florida Legislature ""would authorize the public hoarding of cats by feral cat activists."
|
"The American Bird Conservancy said a bill ""would authorize the public hoarding of cats by feral cat activists."" The bill would authorize people to neuter and release feral cats. But it’s difficult to predict how these future cat colonies will be managed and controlled by local ordinances. Is it possible that someone could hoard feral cats outdoors? Sure. But animal hoarders typically want to be able to control their cats, so that’s why they hoard inside their own homes. The research we reviewed about feral cats focused on numbers, health problems and threats to wildlife they pose -- not whether it constitutes hoarding. That could be because hoarding isn’t the central debate about these feral cats, but it is a heated word that draws attention."
|
mixture
|
Animals, Crime, Florida, American Bird Conservancy,
|
"Florida legislators are taking up the usual public policy topics this session: health care, taxes and campaign finance reform. Then there’s the bill about feral cats. Don’t call them feral cats, though. Bills in the Legislature are re-branding them with a more user-friendly name: ""community cats."" Not so fast, say the bird lovers. The American Bird Conservancy is crying fowl, er foul. The bills ""would authorize the public hoarding of cats by feral cat activists, in the face of potential public health and property value impacts, as well as predicted high mortality for native animals,"" the groups said in a press release. The conservancy says passage of two bills (HB 1121/SB 1320) would make it easier for people to dump unwanted cats in areas where they roam aplenty. ""This is shocking,"" said Grant Sizemore, the conservancy’s Cats Indoors program manager. ""Hoarding of animals in homes is prohibited in most places, but we now have Florida encouraging it in public places such as city parks. There is no question that the health of local citizenry -- including children -- is being put at risk, property values in the hoarding areas will be impacted and local wildlife will continue to be devastated."" PolitiFact Florida wanted to research whether this bill would allow cat hoarding. The cat bills The ""Community Cats"" legislation, sponsored by Rep. Holly Raschein, R-Key Largo, and Sen. Darren Soto, D-Orlando, attempts to rein in cat overpopulation. Several communities have established programs to spay and care for feral cats and release them, however there were concerns among some involved in such programs that the release of cats would constitute abandonment and violate state animal cruelty laws. The bill amends the state’s animal cruelty law to state that someone who spays or neuters a feral cat and then releases it is not abandoning the cat or breaking the law. The bill also states that counties and cities can still adopt their own ordinances to curtail the feral cat population. The bill defines a community cat as an ""outdoor, free-roaming cat that lacks visible owner identification"" and defines a ""community cat owner"" as someone who gives that cat food or water. Cat and wildlife activists have been battling each other about how to handle feral cats for years. A 2003 Tampa Bay Times article described a cat vs. rat battle at the Ocean Reef Club, an exclusive community of multimillion-dollar homes near a state park and wildlife refuge. Homeowners set up a program to take care of hundreds of stray cats, but meanwhile the populations of the Key Largo wood rat and cotton mouse, both endangered, dwindled. Wildlife experts pointed fingers at the cats. ""It's a very serious problem for Key Largo wood rats,"" University of Florida wildlife scientist Frank Mazzotti said at the time. ""Releasing a feral cat in a natural area is like releasing a serial murderer in a maternity ward."" Central to the bill debate is whether programs that encourage the trap, neuter and release of feral cats reduce the feral cat population and the dangers to wildlife and humans. A study by scientists including from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that cats kill up to 3.7 billion birds a year, and found no connection between the programs (called TNR) and fewer bird deaths. ""Claims that TNR colonies are effective in reducing cat populations, and, therefore, wildlife mortality, are not supported by peer-reviewed scientific studies,"" it said. A 2003 Florida International University study concluded that TNR cat programs at two parks encouraged illegal dumping of cats and led to a population increase at one park, while the other remained stable. The Florida Department of Health, which remains neutral on the cat bill, stated in a 2012 rabies prevention report that managing feral cats ""is not tenable on public health grounds because of the persistent threat posed to communities from injury and disease."" Bill supporters point to a study published in the journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association that concluded a TNR program at the University of Central Florida reduced the population. They also point to this research about the benefits of vaccinating cats. Would this lead to hoarding? So there is evidence that feral cats carry diseases and kill wildlife. But would this bill allow animal hoarding? A spokeswoman for the Humane Society, a group supporting the bill, said bill opponents are misusing the word ""hoarding."" ""Animal hoarding is a serious mental illness,"" Humane society spokeswoman Katie Lisnik told PolitiFact. ""It is a severe case of neglect and abuse of animals."" That’s different from programs that care for cats, she said. Hoarding -- generally speaking, not exclusively to animals -- will be listed by the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and statistical Manual for the first time this year, said Smith College psychology professor Randy Frost who studies hoarding. We asked Frost if Florida’s bill could lead to increased hoarding. ""I don’t know that there is any way to tell,"" he said. ""I think it would be hard to hoard in a field or public place. ... I don’t know of many cases of hoarding where hoarding occurred in public. I’d have to think about that."" Brevard County recently placed a moratorium on registration for cat colonies -- county officials know of several hundred colonies. Bob Brown, captain of enforcement for Brevard County animal services, said he doesn’t think he would call these cat colonies hoarding. In a cat colony, ""they have no control if the cat comes or goes. Usually cat hoarders want to keep things confined within their control."" An outdoor colony is different than the homes where there are cat urine stains all over the walls or cat feces dripping out of cabinets. ""We’ve seen some real doozies,"" he said. Robert Johns, a spokesman with the bird conservancy, said the law removes penalties for people who abandon animals to public places. ""Instead of having a hoard of cats in a house, which is illegal in many places, we would simply have dozens or hundreds of them outdoors in many places, essentially taking over public land to be used by feral cats,"" he said. Our ruling The American Bird Conservancy said a bill ""would authorize the public hoarding of cats by feral cat activists."" The bill would authorize people to neuter and release feral cats. But it’s difficult to predict how these future cat colonies will be managed and controlled by local ordinances. Is it possible that someone could hoard feral cats outdoors? Sure. But animal hoarders typically want to be able to control their cats, so that’s why they hoard inside their own homes. The research we reviewed about feral cats focused on numbers, health problems and threats to wildlife they pose -- not whether it constitutes hoarding. That could be because hoarding isn’t the central debate about these feral cats, but it is a heated word that draws attention."
|
33640
|
Fanta was invented by the Nazis.
|
Fanta is still a Coca-Cola product, and today it comes in seventy different flavors (though only some are available within each of the 188 countries it is sold in).
|
false
|
Business, Corporate Alliances
|
The histories of a number of popular consumer items have been rumored to have at least tenuous connections with certain unsavory elements. Contemporary lore is rife with product rumors that assert ties to the Ku Klux Klan (e.g., Marlboro cigarettes, Snapple fruit drinks, KFC, Troop clothing, Tropical Fantasy fruit drink) and the Nazis (e.g., Coors beer), groups mainstream American society views as evil. Such rumors are wholly without substance. Of all the product rumors of this class, only those associating the soft drink Fanta with Nazi Germany have anything to them, and even then, the truth of the matter is far more innocuous than the whispers. We’ve seen the Fanta/Nazi rumor rendered a number of ways, including: It is the last that is closest to the truth; the other three are naught but canard. Prior to the outbreak of the second world war, Coca-Cola’s only unqualified success on the international scene was its bottling operations in Nazi Germany. Sales records were being set year after year in that venue, and by 1939 Coca-Cola had 43 bottling plants and more than 600 local distributors in that country. However, the war was about to change that. As the inevitable clash loomed ever closer, obtaining the key ingredients necessary for the production of Coca-Cola syrup became increasingly difficult in Germany, grinding production towards a standstill. In 1938, the man in charge of Coca-Cola’s operations in Germany, American-born Ray Powers, died of injuries received in an automobile accident. His right-hand man, German-born Max Keith, took over: Meanwhile, the German government placed Max Keith in charge of Coca-Cola’s properties in the occupied countries, and he sent word through Coca-Cola’s bottler in neutral Switzerland that he would try to keep the enterprises alive. But with no means of getting ingredients, Keith stopped making Coca-Cola and began marketing an entirely new soft drink he called Fanta, a light-colored beverage that resembled ginger ale. [Allen, 1994] Fanta came by its name thanks to Keith’s instructions to employees during the contest to christen the beverage — he told them to let their Fantasie [Geman for fantasy] run wild. Upon hearing that, veteran salesman Joe Knipp immediately blurted out Fanta. This new soda was often made from the leavings of other food industries. (Remember, Germany did have a bit of an import problem at that time.) Whey (a cheese by-product) and apple fiber from cider presses found their way into the drink. As for which fruits were used in the formulation, it all depended on what was available at the time. In its earliest incarnations, the drink was sweetened with saccharin, but by 1941 its concocters were permitted to use 3.5 percent beet sugar. Fanta sold well enough to keep the plants operating and Coca-Cola people employed. In 1943, 3 million cases of Fanta were vended, but not all were imbibed — some were used to flavor soups and stews. (Sugar rationing inspired many a housewife to look to unusual sources for that which could no longer be bought outright in large enough quantities to satisfy.) Until the end of the war, Coca-Cola executives in Atlanta did not know if Keith was working for the company or for the Nazis, because communication with him was impossible. Their misgivings aside, Keith was safeguarding Coca-Cola interests and people during that period of no contact. It was thanks largely to his efforts that Coca-Cola was able to re-establish production in Germany virtually immediately after World War II. According to a report prepared by an investigator commissioned by Coca-Cola to examine Max Keith’s actions during that unsupervised period, Keith had never been a Nazi, even though he’d been repeatedly pressured to become one and indeed had endured hardships because of his refusal. He also could have made a fortune for himself by bottling and selling Fanta under his own name. Instead, in the face of having to work for the German government, he kept the Coca-Cola plants in Germany running and various Coca-Cola men alive throughout the war. At the end of the conflict, he welcomed the Coca-Cola company back to its German operations and handed over both the profits from the war years and the new soft drink. So where does all this leave the question of who or what invented Fanta and why? The truth is simple, even if it doesn’t run trippingly off the tongue: Fanta was the creation of a German-born Coca-Cola man who was acting without direction from Atlanta. This man wasn’t a Nazi, nor did he invent the drink at the direction of the Third Reich. Rather, in an effort to preserve Coca-Cola company assets and protect its people by way of keeping local plants operating, he formulated a new soft drink when it became impossible to produce the company’s flagship product.
|
2607
|
Space shuttle Endeavour home in Los Angeles after final flight.
|
The space shuttle Endeavour touched down in Los Angeles on Friday on the back of a jumbo jet, greeted by cheering crowds as it ended a celebratory final flight en route to its retirement home at a Southern California science museum.
|
true
|
Science News
|
The 75-ton winged spaceship, ferried by a modified Boeing 747, landed at Los Angeles International Airport shortly before 1:00 p.m. after hop-scotching across the country from Cape Canaveral, Florida, and flying a victory lap over California. Hundreds of office workers stood atop downtown skyscrapers, cheering as the shuttle banked low around the city as it arrived from its last stopover at Edwards Air Force Base, about 100 miles north of the city in the Mojave desert. “Let me be the first to say, welcome to Los Angeles, Endeavour,” Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said during a ceremony on the tarmac. The shuttle’s arrival brought two major freeways leading to the Los Angeles airport to a standstill as drivers got out of their cars to watch the spacecraft make its final approach. Tens of thousands more spectators, armed with photo and video cameras, had jammed into Griffith Park and Observatory and the surrounding area to catch a glimpse of Endeavour as it soared over the landmark Hollywood sign. “It’s the end of an era,” said John Norman, 45, a technical manager from Los Angeles, who visited Kennedy Space Center in Florida to see Endeavour’s final launch. “It’s just one of those boyhood dreams.” Applause and cheers rolled through the hills when the orbiter and its escort roared past three times, each pass closer than the one before. In San Francisco, people crowded the city’s waterfront to catch a glimpse of the shuttle as it flew over the bay. “There’s a lot of nostalgia,” said Anthony Falzone, a 40-year-old lawyer. “When I was a kid, Apollo was long gone, and this was the space program, this was my experience with manned spaceflight.” Endeavour’s flight from Edwards to Los Angeles marked the shuttle’s last ferry flight and the final airborne journey for any of NASA’s three surviving shuttles. NASA retired Endeavour and the rest of its shuttle fleet last year after completing the U.S. portion of the $100 billion International Space Station, a permanently staffed research complex orbiting 250 miles above Earth. The arrival at Edwards was a homecoming of sorts for the California-made shuttle, built as a replacement for Challenger, which was lost in a 1986 accident that killed seven astronauts. Endeavour went on to fly 25 missions, including 12 to help build and outfit the space station, and logged nearly 123 million miles (198 million km) in flight during 4,671 orbits. “(Endeavour) was my first ride to space and it was in 2008. It was very special being a rookie with her and I look forward to seeing her when she’s finally settled into her new home,” former NASA astronaut Garrett Reisman said. “Though I do have a bone to pick with her. She had a few malfunctions and the alarms went off twice. But at the end of the day I’m here, she kept me safe. I forgive her,” he said. Endeavour is the second of NASA’s three surviving shuttles to be sent to a museum. The oldest one surviving, Discovery, is on display at the Smithsonian Institution’s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center outside Washington. Endeavour will next undergo preparations to be moved through city streets to the California Science Center in downtown Los Angeles, where it will be put on display starting October 30. To make way for the mammoth orbiter along its 12-mile (19-km) route, crews are cutting down nearly 400 trees, raising overhead utility wires and temporarily removing hundreds of utility poles, street lights and traffic signals. The center has agreed to plant 1,000 new trees to replace those scheduled for removal.
|
6511
|
Critics protest proposed drilling in Alaska’s Arctic refuge.
|
Protesters in Alaska urged federal officials to keep oil rigs out of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge despite a federal law requiring lease sales in the wilderness area.
|
true
|
Wildlife, Anchorage, Arctic, Land management, Alaska, North America, Environment, Business, Laws, Salmon, U.S. News, Fish
|
At a Bureau of Land Management environmental review hearing in Anchorage, Laura Herman urged that no drilling be allowed because of the effects of extraction on the region and the long-term effects of burning the fossil fuel. Herman, 29, said she was too young to be telling “old-timer” stories about how cold it used to be in Alaska, but she did say signs of climate change are all over her home state. “If you’ve lived in Alaska for more than 15 years, you can see it with your own eyes,” she said. Until last summer, she said, her family always stocked their freezer with salmon from the Copper River. However, they weren’t able to fish for salmon last summer because warming ocean temperatures did not allow sufficient salmon to return to allow spawning and fishing, she said. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was created in 1960 during President Dwight Eisenhower’s administration. Congress in 1980 expanded the refuge to nearly the size of South Carolina with the provision that 2,300 square miles (5,957 sq. kilometers) of the coastal plain be studied for natural resources. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the plain holds 10.4 billion barrels of oil. Multiple representatives of Defend the Sacred-Alaska denounced petroleum development in the refuge for the effects it would have on the Porcupine Caribou Herd. The coastal plain is the nursery for the herd, named for the Porcupine River. The 200,000-animal herd migrates from Canada to a strip of flat tundra in Alaska’s northeast corner between Brooks Range mountains and the Arctic Ocean. Gwich’in Natives in Alaska and Canada depend on hunting the caribou for their subsistence lifestyle. Siqiniq Maupin grew up in the village of Nuiqsut and said the air has been damaged by flaring of natural gas. Some Alaska Native leaders, she said, have traded clean air for dollars. “When all of the water is gone, and all of the clean air, what are we going to do with green paper?” she said. The BLM listed a no-action alternative for the refuge but that would ignore congressional direction, said Joe Balash, the Interior Department’s assistant secretary for land and minerals management. Congress in December 2017 approved a tax bill that requires an oil and gas lease sale in the refuge to raise revenue for a tax cut backed by President Donald Trump. “A no-action alternative would fly in the face of what Congress told us to do,” Balash said. Critics are not willing to trade an intact wilderness ecosystem and scoff at the tax bill’s projections that lease sales will put more than $1 billion into federal coffers over 10 years. Opponents also say development will create a spider web of roads and pipelines connecting drill pads, affecting acreage throughout the wilderness area. Drilling supporters said additional production is crucial for Alaska and can be done in a manner that follows environmental law. Carl Portman grew up in Fairbanks and said he remembered life before the trans-Alaska pipeline. The pipeline now runs at one-quarter capacity and could face premature shutdown without increased production, he said. That would be an unmitigated disaster for the state, Portman said. “Like thousands of Alaskans, my livelihood depends on the oil and gas industry, yet I do not work directly for the industry,” he said. Ken Federico, a carpenter, said he has worked an assortment of jobs in North Slope oil fields over four decades and watched enforcement of environmental law transition from “the Wild West” to strict. A subcontractor recently fired two truck drivers for urinating along the side of a road, he said. “Guys lost $75,000, $80,000-a-year jobs just for taking a leak,” he said. “That’s how strong the oil companies are pushing contractors and subcontractors up there to be very concerned about the environment.”
|
5939
|
Rand Paul undergoes lung surgery stemming from assault.
|
U.S. Sen. Rand Paul underwent lung surgery in a procedure he says stems from injuries suffered when a neighbor tackled him outside his Kentucky home in 2017.
|
true
|
Rand Paul, Health, General News, Kentucky, Tennessee, Donald Trump
|
The Republican lawmaker and former presidential candidate tweeted Monday that part of his lung damaged in the assault was removed during the weekend surgery in Tennessee. The senator is continuing his recovery at home, a Paul spokeswoman said. “I will have to limit my August activities,” the 56-year-old Paul said in the tweet, adding that he “should” be able to return to the Senate in September. “Sen. Paul will need to recover from his surgery for a few weeks, which will limit his travel and events,” his spokeswoman, Kelsey Cooper, said in a statement. “He will continue to work on diplomacy, legislative and constituent issues during that time.” Paul, an ally of President Donald Trump, was tapped for mediation efforts to potentially open a back channel for restarting nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran. Both of Kentucky’s senators are laid up with health issues during Congress’ August break. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell suffered a shoulder fracture Sunday when tripping on his outdoor patio at his Louisville home. The 77-year-old Republican leader also is recovering and working from home. Paul underwent the lung surgery at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. In his tweet, he thanked the doctors, nurses and staff. It’s his latest surgery for injuries suffered from being tackled by Rene Boucher when the neighbor became angry over lawn maintenance at Paul’s home in Bowling Green, Kentucky. The assault broke several of Paul’s ribs. Earlier this year, Paul had hernia surgery at a hospital in Canada. Boucher pleaded guilty to assaulting a member of Congress and received a 30-day prison sentence. Federal prosecutors have appealed, saying 21 months would have been appropriate. Paul sued Boucher, and a jury in Bowling Green awarded him more than $580,000 in damages and medical expenses. Boucher has since sold his home next door to the senator. Paul testified during the civil trial that he feared for his life as he struggled to breathe after Boucher, an anesthesiologist by trade, slammed into him in their upscale Bowling Green neighborhood. Paul testified that he got off his riding mower to pick up a stick and was straightening up when Boucher hit him from behind. Paul said he was wearing noise-canceling headphones and didn’t hear Boucher coming toward him. Paul said that for a moment, he had a flashback to the 2017 shooting at a baseball field when members of Congress were practicing for a game. Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana suffered serious injuries in that shooting. During his testimony, Boucher acknowledged he wasn’t thinking rationally and called it “two minutes of my life I wish I could take back.”
|
3513
|
Frist launches new long-term health care tech company.
|
Former U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is launching a new long-term health care technology company backed by more than $40 million in funding, including from the venture capital arm of Google’s parent company.
|
true
|
Health care reform, General News, Bills, Bill Frist
|
A news release Monday says CareBridge will offer a range of services, including electronic visit verification and real-time sharing of detailed clinical information among patients, caregivers, health plans and state officials. It will also feature 24-7 support for patients at high risk of hospitalization and a predictive model for determining the amount of home and community-based services that patients living at home need. “Over half of the dual eligible individuals in the country receive long-term support services,” said Frist, the board chairman, said in the news release. “CareBridge offers a unique opportunity to significantly improve care for this vulnerable population, which is only going to grow as baby boomers continue to age.” The company was formed in part through acquisition of HealthStar, an electronic visit verification company based in Knoxville, and Sinq Technologies, a Chicago-based data aggregation and value-based payment company. Frist, a Republican and a heart and lung transplant surgeon, represented Tennessee in the Senate from 1995 until 2007. His father and one of his brothers were founders of Hospital Corporation of America.
|
7418
|
Trump says US can never declare ‘total victory’ over virus.
|
President Donald Trump said Thursday that he believes the U.S. can never declare “total victory” over the coronavirus because too many people have died. But he added that he will count it a win when the virus is gone and the economy fully reopened.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Health, General News, Politics, Joe Biden, Business, Virus Outbreak, Economy, Donald Trump
|
With more than 60,000 Americans fallen to the virus, Trump pointed out that the death rate in the U.S. was lower than in many other countries, and he offered the optimistic prediction that the battered economy would be vastly improved in a matter of months and “spectacular” by 2021. He also said he was considering ordering that U.S. flags at the White House and elsewhere be lowered to half-staff to honor those killed by the virus — now more than all U.S. troops killed during the Vietnam War — as he pushed back against criticism from presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden that he lacks “empathy or concern” for Americans. “I want the virus gone, and we want to have a vibrant economy,” Trump said at a White House event designed to highlight the administration’s efforts to protect residents of nursing homes grappling with the virus. Speaking of the nation overall, Trump said he didn’t want people “sitting 6 feet apart. I want our country back. I want people to go out and see football games and baseball games and basketball and hockey and golf and all of these sports and not worry about getting sick and violently ill.” Earlier in the week, Biden called on Trump to order White House flags to be lowered to half-staff and accused the president of talking more about how he’s been inconvenienced by the virus than about Americans affected by the pandemic. Asked about Biden’s criticism, Trump said lowering the flags was among the steps he would be discussing with his advisers later Thursday as he considers how to honor the fallen. He also dismissed Biden’s criticism. “I don’t think anybody can feel any worse than I do about all of the death and destruction that is so needless,” Trump said. “Nobody’s thinking about it more. Nobody has spent more time, late in the evening, thinking about what’s happened to this country in a short period of time. But at the same time, we have to get our country open again.” Trump is trying to turn the page on the virus, even as the nation’s death toll continues to climb and jobless claims rise. While economists are warning of serious long-term economic damage, Trump is predicting a strong fourth quarter thanks to pent-up demand. “I feel it,” Trump said in comments earlier in the day during an Oval Office meeting with New Jersey’s Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy. “I think sometimes what I feel is better than what I think, unfortunately or fortunately.” Separately, Trump announced that the Federal Emergency Management Agency will soon be sending supplemental personal protective equipment to the nation’s 15,400 nursing homes, adding $81 million in spending to increase inspection of such facilities, and that he was establishing a new coronavirus commission for safety and quality in nursing homes. He added that his administration was also finalizing a new federal rule requiring nursing homes to report on virus testing to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and post testing details online. “I guess you could call it a little bit of a weak spot because things are happening in nursing homes, and we’re not happy about that,” Trump said. It was a rare, albeit muted, acknowledgement of a shortcoming in his administration’s virus response. More than 11,000 U.S. coronavirus deaths have been connected to U.S. nursing homes. The moves to bolster nursing home safety come as his campaign advisers have grown increasingly concerned that fallout from the virus outbreak is eroding Trump’s support among older voters. Aides have warned the president that seniors, who are among the most vulnerable to COVID-19, have been rattled by the administration’s scattershot handling of the crisis and Trump’s increasingly contentious daily press briefings, according to two campaign officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations. Older Americans are an important component in Trump’s reelection strategy. People older than 45 composed a larger share of voters than the national average in 2016 in all six states that both sides consider the most likely to determine the next president, especially Arizona, Michigan and, above all, Florida. It has been more than two decades since a Democratic candidate won seniors, but the Trump campaign has begun to fear that Biden could be poised to do the same or at least cut into Trump’s margin with the group. Trump had centered his reelection message before the outbreak around his stewardship of a strong economy. But with more than 30 million Americans filing jobless claims and the stock market plunging from record highs in recent weeks, the president’s prosperity pitch to voters has become complicated. Economists have warned a sharp comeback may not be realistic. They point to expected flare-ups that could force reopened businesses to shut down again, concerns that employees and consumers afraid of contracting the virus could continue to stay home, and the fact that shuttered businesses may not open again. With so much of the economy paralyzed, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that economic activity will plunge this quarter at a 40% annual rate. ___ Madhani reported from Chicago. Associated Press writer Jonathan Lemire in New York contributed to this report.
|
9507
|
It's Snakes to the Rescue for Heart Patients
|
Animal studies can reveal important scientific insights and, when appropriately reported, can provide useful news for a broader audience. But this story about the therapeutic use of a compound derived from viper venom could have done more to temper expectations. While there’s a nod to the “early” stage of the research, the story’s headline and first paragraphs speculate mainly about a treatment for “human heart patients” that would be safer than existing blood-thinners. We’re far from knowing if this will ever be true–and the story could have established that fact sooner and with more emphasis. Current blood-thinning medications have advantages and drawbacks. Because they help prevent blood clots, these medications are useful for reducing the risk of heart attacks and strokes. At the same time, their blood-thinning action puts patients who take them at increased risk of bleeding, which can be serious. A bloodthinner that prevents heart attacks with a lower risk of bleeding could be a good addition to current treatment options. That being said, most drugs tested on mice never make it to market, which is why we always urge abundant caution when writing about rodent research.
|
mixture
|
heart attack
|
The story did not discuss costs, but our rule of thumb is: If it’s not too early to speculate about benefits, it’s not too early to talk about what the cost might be. The story describes benefits in qualitative terms, “that mice who received the compound had slower blood clot formation than untreated mice.” However, it provides no specifics on how this was measured or how this might or might not translate to humans. While there was one cautionary statement near the end of the story about the limitations of mouse studies, the story’s headline and first paragraph emphasized claims that the compound might work for “human heart patients.” That’s unbalanced. A source included a risk of blood thinners in general– that they can cause bleeding–so the story gets a Satisfactory rating. But the story could have clarified that other potential harms are unknown at this point. There is little evidence here. There is no discussion of how the study was carried out, no numbers, basically no data. The story also spent a lot of time speculating about what this compound might do in humans. But it did at least acknowledge the preliminary nature of the evidence, both in the headline and further down: “Still, experiments in animals often don’t translate to success in humans, so further research is needed.” We’ll give the benefit of the doubt. The story did not disease monger. There was at least one independent source. But the story didn’t disclose that the researcher interviewed in the story has a patent application for the compound, and other financial interests that are related. The story didn’t discuss existing blood thinners, of which there are several. The story indicates more research is needed before this compound will be available (if ever). Although the story’s lede makes it sound like this is a novel idea, the story later explains it isn’t: “Blood thinner medications have a long and storied history with snake venom,” said Dr Satjit Bhysri, a heart specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. In fact, “many current blood thinners are based on initial experiments from proteins found in snake venom,” he added. Yet, we never learn why this new compound is different than other products already on the market. We could go either way with this one but again, we’ll give the benefit of the doubt. The study includes an independent source, and there’s no evidence that it relied excessively on this news release about the study.
|
13623
|
"Patrick Murphy Says Marco Rubio ""voted against the bipartisan Violence Against Women Act."
|
"Murphy said Rubio ""voted against the bipartisan Violence Against Women Act."" Rubio voiced support for the original law, but he and some Republicans in both the Senate and House opposed certain provisions added to the bill pertaining to spending and federal oversight. Rubio voted against the bill in 2012 and 2013, but it passed with bipartisan support the second time. Even though he had clearly stated his reasons why, Rubio still voted nay."
|
true
|
Voting Record, Florida, Patrick Murphy,
|
"Democratic U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy is attacking Marco Rubio, his presumptive general election opponent in the race for Senate, for allegedly voting against domestic violence measures. Murphy lambasted Rubio for having a ""terrible record on women’s health"" in an Aug. 19 post on his website. Murphy’s post said Rubio opposed the right to choose an abortion, Obamacare and Planned Parenthood. ""He even voted against the bipartisan Violence Against Women Act,"" Murphy’s campaign wrote. That sounded like a ready-made attack for election season, so we checked the voting record. Sure enough, Rubio voted against the legislation. But he had his reasons. Qualified support The original 1994 Violence Against Women Act was championed by then-Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware. It provided grants to authorities on the state and local levels for domestic violence hotlines, police training, legal and housing assistance, and more. It has been credited for a decrease in domestic violence and an upswing in reporting incidents to police. The act was reauthorized in 2005, then due to expire in 2011. That brings us to Rubio’s first term. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., sponsored a Senate bill in 2011 to continue the provisions of the act. It didn’t come to a vote until the following year. Rubio said he supported reauthorizing the law. But he voted against it. On April 26, 2012, Rubio and 30 other Republicans voted against Leahy’s bill, which still passed with at least some support from both sides of the aisle. Rubio released a statement after the vote saying he was in favor of the act, but opposed portions of the bill. Rubio pointed out he had voted for a proposed amendment he thought better addressed rape kit backlogs, sentencing guidelines and law enforcement databases. He added that he was against Leahy’s bill because it didn’t deal with spending controls the way he liked and gave the Justice Department control over state programs. ""I support reauthorizing the current Violence Against Women Act as written and hope we can vote for it once it comes out of the House-Senate conference committee,"" Rubio said. Leahy’s bill passed the Senate, but died in the House that year. The reauthorization came back in 2013, with Rubio again voting against it in the Senate, where it passed Feb. 13 with bipartisan support, 78-22. All 22 nays were Republicans. Rubio released another statement saying he liked provisions of the bill and was proud it included human trafficking protections, but he again said he wished the original law had been reauthorized. ""Unfortunately, I could not support the final, entire legislation that contains new provisions that could have potentially adverse consequences,"" he said. He echoed some concerns from the year prior, saying he disagreed with how the bill shifted funding from domestic violence programs to sexual assault programs and took power out of state hands. He also opposed a provision allowing Native American tribal governments greater jurisdiction in abuse cases, giving tribal courts the power to prosecute non-Native American men. On Feb. 28, 2013, the House reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act with a bipartisan vote of 286-138, with 87 Republicans voting for it. Our ruling Murphy said Rubio ""voted against the bipartisan Violence Against Women Act."" Rubio voiced support for the original law, but he and some Republicans in both the Senate and House opposed certain provisions added to the bill pertaining to spending and federal oversight. Rubio voted against the bill in 2012 and 2013, but it passed with bipartisan support the second time. Even though he had clearly stated his reasons why, Rubio still voted nay."
|
9096
|
Scientists discover and target brain area in patients with schizophrenia who 'hear voices'
|
The release focuses on research presented at a conference that found a third of patients who have schizophrenia and experience auditory verbal hallucinations (AVHs) — meaning they hear voices — responded favorably to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of a specific region of the brain. The release notes that the finding is valuable for two reasons: because it points to a specific region of the brain associated with AVHs in schizophrenia patients; and because it is a controlled trial for a treatment technique that has been discussed for years but was lacking clinical evidence one way or the other. The release does a fair job of articulating the importance of the new findings and placing them in context. However, more information on related costs and risks would be valuable. More importantly, the release refers to research that is not published, and is therefore not yet publicly available. The public would be better served if the release had been pushed out only when the relevant research was also publicly available, so that interested parties — including healthcare professionals — could assess the research itself. According to the National Institute of Mental Health, schizophrenia affects about 1 percent of the U.S. population. And approximately three-quarters of patients with schizophrenia report AVHs. In short, this is a health problem that affects a great many people. New findings that advance our understanding of what causes AVHs, and new treatments to help us address them, are certainly worthy of interest. It’s important to keep in mind that this research targets just one symptom of schizophrenia — auditory hallucinations (or hearing voices). This symptom may not be the one that causes someone with schizophrenia the most distress or inability to function. Also, the results were looked at two weeks after treatment so we don’t know how long TMS might help alleviate the voices for those who find the therapy helpful. Schizophrenia is a lifelong disease, and if people have to receive treatment every two weeks, then cost would be an issue, but we don’t have any information yet on what the best treatment schedule is.
|
mixture
|
European College of Neuropsychopharmacology,schizophrenia,transcranial magnetic stimulation
|
Cost is not discussed. TMS therapy is already available for the treatment of other mental health conditions, including depression, so cost estimates should not have been difficult to come by. And since costs can reach into the thousands of dollars, depending on the length of treatment, it is not an insignificant issue for patients and their families. The release states that “researchers found that 34.6% of the patients being treated by TMS showed a significant response, whereas only 9.1% of patients in the sham group responded.” Of equal importance, the release clearly defined what “significant response” meant: “a more than 30% decrease in the Total Auditory Hallucinations Rating Scale score.” In addition, the release quotes one study author’s qualification of the finding: “treatment with high frequency TMS makes a difference to at least some sufferers, although there is a long way to go before we will know if TMS is the best route to treat these patients in the long-term.” That’s good context. TMS is generally regarded as a low-risk treatment. That does not, however, make it a no-risk treatment. According to the Mayo Clinic, the use of TMS to treat depression can have side effects ranging from headache and lightheadedness to (in rare cases) seizures and hearing loss. We don’t think the release needs to include a laundry list of potential risks, but it does need to address the risk of potential harms in some meaningful way — even if it is only to highlight that there is a low risk of significant harms. The release does a good job of explaining the size of the trial and the study design. The release would have been stronger if it had noted that it’s not clear how long the benefits lasted beyond two weeks. No disease mongering here, and we appreciated the discussion of prevalence of schizophrenia. The study funders (French Health Ministry (PHRC) and Basse Normandie Regional Council) are listed on a sidebar of the EurekAlert! site, where the release is hosted. We encourage news release writers to include funders in the text as well. The release doesn’t address whether the researchers had any conflicts of interest. To be clear, we are not claiming that such conflicts of interest exist (it’s impossible to tell, since the release doesn’t tell us the names of all the researchers involved). But a release should make clear whether any such conflicts exist. If there are no conflicts, say so. This is a close one. The release includes a quote from an independent researcher who was not associated with the study. In that quote, the researcher says, “While response rates were moderate, TMS is a welcome addition to the therapeutic repertoire especially for patients who do not respond to medication.” That’s useful information. However, the release would have been far stronger if it had offered even one or two sentences about other treatment options, including medication. For example, do AVHs persist for many patients on medication for schizophrenia? Other non-drug techniques such as cognitive behavioral techniques are being used for auditory hallucinations as well. The release does not address availability of TMS for treatment of AVHs specifically. The release does note that TMS “has been shown to be effective in several psychiatric conditions.” However, it’s not clear from the release how widely available TMS is, or even whether it is clinically available at all. This may be because the release is aimed more at practitioners (who are aware of TMS’s availability) than at a more general audience. However, since many reporters and news consumers don’t have that professional background and insight, it would be much better to simply address the issue of availability head on. The release does a good job here. For example, the release notes that TMS “has been suggested as a possible way of treating the hearing of voices in schizophrenia….However, there is a lack of controlled trials to show that TMS works effectively with AVH sufferers.” The release also quotes an independent source saying that “This work builds on previous studies that have shown a critical role of excessive activity of subregions of the temporal lobe in the generation of voice hallucinations in schizophrenia. To move this into treatment, controlled trial such as the one by Dollfus and coworkers are important.” That’s valuable context. However, there is one point that raises some confusion. The release notes that this study involved 59 patients in all, and that it has been accepted for publication in a forthcoming issue of the journal Schizophrenia Bulletin. However, a search online finds that a very similar study, by at least one of the same researchers (the only one whose name we know), involving 74 patients, was published online in the journal Neurophysiologie Clinique (Clinical Neurophysiology) in June. Is this part of the same study discussed in the release? If not, how does it differ from the study being discussed in the release? If it is the same, why was there a different number of patients? This is a close one. In its opening sentence, the release states that “For the first time, scientists have precisely identified and targeted an area of the brain which is involved in ‘hearing voices’, experienced by many patients with schizophrenia.” But there have been previous studies that have tied areas of the brain to hallucinations (e.g., this 2015 Nature Communications paper). That initially gave us pause. However, we’ll give the release the benefit of the doubt given that the opening sentence notes that this study “precisely” identifies an area of the brain associated with AVHs specifically. It’s a minor point, but we don’t think it was necessary to repeatedly put quotation marks around the phrase “hearing voices.” People with this symptom of schizophrenia hear voices. Period. They’re generated from within their brains, without the benefit of outside sensory input, but they hear them as if they were.
|
28573
|
Video clip shows an elephant painting a picture of an elephant.
|
Video clip shows an elephant painting a picture of an elephant. Is this the real thing, the product of digital trickery, or something else?
|
mixture
|
Fauxtography, animals, elephants
|
The video seen here is “true” in the basic sense that it captures the real phenomenon of elephants who perform the physical process of creating drawings by holding brushes in their trunks and applying them to cards mounted on easels. A BBC News article described an exhibition of such paintings at an Edinburgh gallery in 1996: Pictures which were painted by elephants have gone on display at an Edinburgh gallery. Art graduate Victoria Khunapramot, 26, has brought the paintings from Thailand to the Dundas Gallery on Dundas Street. They include “self-portraits” by Paya, who is said to be the only elephant to have mastered his own likeness. Paya is one of six elephants whose keepers have taught them how to hold a paintbrush in their trunks. They drop the brush when they want a new colour. Mrs Khunapramot, from Newington, said: “Many people cannot believe that an elephant is capable of producing any kind of artwork, never mind a self-portrait. “But they are very intelligent animals and create the entire paintings with great gusto and concentration within just five or 10 minutes — the only thing they cannot do on their own is pick up a paintbrush, so it gets handed to them. “They are trained by artists who fine-tune their skills, and they paint in front of an audience in their conservation village, leaving no one in any doubt that they are authentic elephant creations.” Mrs Khunapramot, who set up the Thai Fine Art company after studying the history of art in St Andrews and business management at Edinburgh’s Napier University, said it took about a month to train the animals to paint. The web site of the Asian Elephant Art and Conservation Project explains the background behind elephants’ being taught to paint, with the resulting artworks being sold and the monies so raised being used to fund elephant conservation projects. The site includes a video gallery that features several clips of pachyderm artists in action similar to the one linked above, as well as galleries displaying the individual elephants’ works. (Based on the similarity of drawings, we’d guess that the elephant shown in the example video is Hong, a nine-year-old female living at the Maetaman Elephant Camp in Thailand.) However, although these animals may be creating artworks in a purely physical sense, critics contend that the elephants participating in this activity are not actually “painting” in any meaningful sense of the word: They aren’t engaging in any form of creativity, much less abstractly making free-form portraits of whatever tickles their pachydermic fancies at the moment; rather, they’re simply actors performing in tourist trap attractions in Thailand, where they do nothing more than outline and color specific drawings they’ve been painstakingly trained to replicate — and they manage that much only while receiving a good deal of prompting and guidance throughout the process from their mahout (trainers). As zoologist Desmond Morris wrote after he and scientist Richard Dawkins traveled to Thailand in 2008 to investigate the “elephant painting” phenomenon: So are these endearing mammals truly artistic? The answer, as politicians are fond of saying, is yes and no. Let me describe exactly what happens. A painting session begins with three heavy easels being wheeled into position. On each easel a large piece of white card (30in x 20in) has been fixed underneath a strong wooden frame. Each elephant is positioned in front of her easel and is given a brush loaded with paint by her mahout. He pushes the brush gently into the end of her trunk. The man then stands to one side of his animal’s neck and watches intently as the brush starts to make lines on the card. Then the empty brush is replaced by another loaded one, and the painting continues until the picture is complete. The elephant then turns towards its audience, bows deeply and is rewarded with bananas. The paintings are then removed from their frames and offered for sale. They are quickly snapped up by people who have been astonished by what they have just witnessed. To most of the members of the audience, what they have seen appears to be almost miraculous. Elephants must surely be almost human in intelligence if they can paint pictures of flowers and trees in this way. What the audience overlooks are the actions of the mahouts as their animals are at work. This oversight is understandable because it is difficult to drag your eyes away from the brushes that are making the lines and spots. However, if you do so, you will notice that, with each mark, the mahout tugs at his elephant’s ear. He nudges it up and down to get the animal to make a vertical line, or pulls it sideways to get a horizontal one. To encourage spots and blobs he tugs the ear forward, towards the canvas. So, very sadly, the design the elephant is making is not hers but his. There is no elephantine invention, no creativity, just slavish copying. Investigating further, after the show is over, it emerges that each of the so-called artistic animals always produces exactly the same image, time after time, day after day, and week after week. Mook always paints a bunch of flowers, Christmas always does a tree, and Pimtong a climbing plant. Each elephant works to a set routine, guided by her master. The following video clip reveals something of how much an elephant is actually guided by its mahout during the painting process: Other critics contend that not only is the elephant painting phenomenon a misleading show put on to garner money from tourists, but that the animals who participate in it have been abused; therefore, visitors to Thailand should shun the purchase of such works: I was recently sent an email video which shows an elephant painting a picture of an elephant holding a flower over its head and was asked to comment on it. As you may or may not know, I returned home last night after my 7th trip to Chiang Mai, Thailand, where the video was shot. I can tell you with absolute certainty that elephant did not create that picture out of a need for a creative outlet. It was trained to follow the mahout’s (trainer) command and was purely following orders out of fear of the abuse it suffered during the training process. If you look closely during the wide angle shots you will see other mahouts standing on their elephant’s left side and they too are leading their elephant during the process. The close ups show an elephant’s trunk moving a paint brush across a canvas and it appears to be creating a picture, except it is taking commands from its mahout who is out of the shot. The training process is called the ‘phajaan’ or ‘crush’ and is centuries old and is used throughout Asia today. It involves taking a 3-year-old baby from its mother’s side and roping it into a small bamboo cage in which it cannot move except to breathe. Of course the elephant fights for its freedom and is beaten, poked with sharp bamboo, starved, dehydrated, and sleep-deprived until it submits to its captors’ demands. The process may take a week, depending on how long it takes to ‘crush’ the elephant’s spirit. About 50% of the babies die from the process and the survivors are left with physical and emotional scars for the rest of their lives. The demand for elephant paintings comes mostly from Japan, Europe, and the US, and the motivation from the Thai people is purely financial since a single painting can fetch several thousand dollars. I honestly hope that if people knew the true process for creating a picture, they would not offer any support at all for it. So PLEASE tell your friends, family, anyone who will listen: DO NOT SUPPORT ELEPHANT PAINTINGS IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM!
|
34531
|
Coconut oil has a positive effect on cognition and focus.
|
That doesn’t mean the concept is not possible or even unlikely. Future experimental research on large studies of healthy individuals may complete the drawing of the connecting line yet.
|
unproven
|
Food
|
Coconut oil products have seen an uptick in popularity due to myriad claims of health benefits from their use as a food additive, supplement, or skin product. One notable claim is that ingesting coconut oil (or some of the specific compounds in the oil) can improve focus and restore mental clarity. Unlike many health claims spread online, this one comes with a pretty specific concept of how it would work. The basic premise is that coconut oil has an anomalously large amount of medium chain fatty acids (MCTFAs). (The “medium chain” here refers to the number of carbon atoms in these compounds.) When ingested, these MCFAs lead to the production of chemicals called ketones in the bloodstream. Ketones, in turn, can be utilized by the brain in place of (or in addition to) glucose, the sugar from which our cells derive most of their energy, leading to leading to increased clarity and focus. To convincingly argue that this mechanism is possible requires solid, peer-reviewed evidence for the three foundations on which it rests: 1) that coconut oil contains an abundance of MCFAs; 2) that ingesting MCFAs can raise the concentration of ketones in one’s bloodstream; and 3) that raising these concentrations in the bloodstream can, in fact, positively affect one’s mental functioning. Each foundational component is analyzed below: Coconut oil does in fact contain significantly large concentrations of MCFAs, as has been known for for decades. Here are the basic points, as reviewed in a 2002 Journal of Agricultural Food and Chemistry study: About 50% of coconut oil consists of fatty acids of medium chain length (C6 — C12) of which the major fatty acid is lauric acid (C12). Notably, coconut oil has the largest proportion of the C6, C8, and C10 fatty acids among the palm oils. Ingesting this coconut oil and its high levels of MCFAs will raise the level of ketones in your blood stream, which form from the breakdown of fatty acids of many lengths. As it turns out, MCFAs are much more efficient at breaking down into ketones than their longer-chain counterparts because they are absorbed more directly and require fewer chemical steps to be converted, as discussed in a 2016 “Hypothesis and Theory” paper in the journal Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience: There are two reasons why MCFA are particularly effective ketogenic substrates: first, an oral dose of MCFA is mostly absorbed from the gut directly into the portal vein. […] Second, unlike a long chain fatty acid which requires carnitine-dependant activation to a Coenzyme A before accessing the mitochondria, beta-oxidation of MCFA occurs without activation by carnitine. The third foundation — that high concentrations of ketones in the body positively affect cognition — is a bit shakier. The high presence of ketones in the blood stream induces a metabolic state known as ketosis, and in this state cells are able to derive energy not only from glucose (the usual source), but also from the breakdown of ketones. The goal is to have the brain cells tap into that new energy. There are indications that a brain might do this, too — at least in certain circumstances. One of those circumstances could be Alzheimer’s disease (AD), which some evidence suggests could be related to lack of glucose metabolism in certain parts of the brain, as described in a 2014 case study published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience: The brain is one of the most metabolically active organs in the body, and under most conditions, relies almost exclusively on glucose for its energy needs. Using [a chemical tracer], the cerebral metabolic rate of glucose (CMRglc) can be measured. [Chemical tracer] studies in the early 1980s compared AD subjects with normal controls and found significant diminished cerebral glucose metabolism (DCGM) in AD patients. And there are compelling suggestions that inducing a state of ketosis in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s improves their cognitive function, suggesting that the ketones are utilized in places where glucose metabolism is lacking. A 2014 study published in Neurobiology Aging compared the cognitive effects of patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s after being treated with either a single dose of a specific MCFA or a placebo, as described in the 2014 case report: A single 40 g dose of [caprylic triglyceride, a MCFA] induced mild ketosis and a significant positive correlation between performance on the paragraph recall task and [concentrations of ketones in the blood] was found. A similar concept that researchers have looked into is hypoglycemia impaired cognitive performance — a lack of blood sugar in diabetics that sometimes leads to a rapid deterioration of cognitive functions. One 2009 study in the journal Diabetes demonstrated that diabetic patients experiencing cognitive problems related to hypoglycemia could reverse those issues by ingesting MCFAs: A total of 11 intensively treated type 1 diabetic subjects participated in stepped hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic-hypoglycemic-clamp studies. During two separate sessions, they randomly received either medium-chain triglycerides or placebo drinks and performed a battery of cognitive tests. […] Hypoglycemia impaired cognitive performance in tests of verbal memory, digit symbol coding, digit span backwards, and map searching. Ingestion of medium-chain triglycerides [chemicals related to MCFAs] reversed these effects. These (and later studies) suggest that cognitive impairment can result from poor glucose metabolism in the brain, and that the presence of ketones caused by the breakdown of MCFAs can help ameliorate these issues. However, these studies address only the effect of ketosis on brains with a known problem with glucose metabolism. All that said, no rigorous, scientific, peer-reviewed studies have addressed the potential role of coconut oil or its MCFA derivatives in healthy and cognitively un-impaired individuals. At the moment, science says you can reasonably draw a line from coconut oil, through MCFAs and ketosis, all the way to ketones improving the function of areas of the brain suffering from underperforming glucose metabolism. That line falls just short of reaching evidence of coconut oil boosting cognitive performance in people with normal glucose metabolism, however.
|
8777
|
FDA approves 1st therapy to help ease Huntington's.
|
U.S. health officials have approved the first drug aimed at easing symptoms of Huntington’s disease, an incurable neurological disorder that can cause uncontrollable movements.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The drug, called Xenazine, does not treat the hereditary disease. It is instead designed to help quell the jerky, involuntary body movements that can increase as brain cells waste away, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Friday. While clinical trials showed the drug can help improve movement short-term, they also found it can worsen a patient’s mood as well as mental functions like cognition, the FDA said. Other side effects included insomnia, depression, drowsiness and nausea, according to the agency. Xenazine, made by privately held Prestwick Pharmaceuticals Inc, works by decreasing the amount of the natural chemical dopamine, which helps control nerve cells in the brain. In Huntington’s patients the interaction can be too active and trigger abnormal movement. Those with the degenerative disease can also experience emotional problems and mental decline. Huntington’s is rare, affecting roughly 30,000 people in the United States, according to the FDA. The disease progresses slowly, allowing patients to live 10 to 20 years after symptoms develop. Most signs of the disease occur between ages 30 and 50.
|
37944
|
A PBS interview showed that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's hands were a different color than his face.
|
Was Rudy Giuliani Filmed with Discoloration on his Hands?
|
mixture
|
Fact Checks, Politics
|
As news spread of a rash of coronavirus infections hitting United States President Donald Trump as well as his wife and other Republican allies, online users raised their own questions in October 2020 about the health of Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani.Photos circulated online showed what appeared to be a discoloration in the former New York City mayor’s hand, compared to his face; “Rudy is not among the living,” one Twitter user wrote.rudy is not among the living pic.twitter.com/Gb3pGJT1Qd— slate (@PleaseBeGneiss) October 5, 2020The photograph was taken from a PBS Frontline interview with Giuliani released in September 2020 in which Giuliani’s hands can be seen at various points:While the interview was posted on PBS’s YouTube page in September, however, it was conducted on June 12, 2020. On October 2, 2020 — three days after attending the first presidential debate between Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden — Giuliani told the New York Daily News that he and his partner had tested negative for COVID-19.Trump revealed early on October 2 2020 (or late on October 1, depending on your time zone) that both he and First Lady Melania Trump had tested positive for the virus, after which several other Republican officials and White House staffers — including Republican Senators Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, and Thom Tillis — as well as ex-New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie announced that they had also tested positive. Both Christie and Giuliani assisted Trump in preparing for his debate with Biden, the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee.After being treated for three days at Walter Reed Medical Center — during which physician Dr. Sean Conley was criticized for his evasiveness regarding the president’s condition — Trump moved himself on October 5 2020 to the White House to continue treatment.The Trump administration, however, is reportedly refusing to administer contact tracing related to a gathering held there on September 26, 2020 to mark the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. At least eight people who attended that event subsequently tested positive for the virus.Comments
|
4813
|
Syndergaard to DL again due to hand-foot-and-mouth disease.
|
In the latest bizarre medical development for the baffling New York Mets, ace pitcher Noah Syndergaard is headed back to the disabled list after contracting hand-foot-and-mouth disease.
|
true
|
Baseball, Mickey Callaway, Health, New York Mets, Noah Syndergaard, North America, Foot-and-mouth disease, Sports, New York, MLB baseball, Major League Baseball
|
The team figures it’s likely Syndergaard caught the contagious virus when he made an appearance at a baseball camp for kids last Thursday during the All-Star break. Mets manager Mickey Callaway said that probably explains why Syndergaard weakened and his velocity decreased during Friday night’s victory at Yankee Stadium. “Hand-foot-and-mouth, are you serious? I guess it’s very uncommon in adults, period,” Callaway said Sunday. “It’s kind of odd. Maybe the first DL stint in Major League Baseball with hand-foot-and-mouth? I don’t know. A record or something.” According to WebMD.com, hand-foot-and-mouth disease is an infectious disease that “most often occurs in children under 10 and is characterized by a rash of small blister-like sores on the palms of the hands, soles of the feet, and in the mouth. Symptoms include fever, sore throat, and headache.” The disease can spread from one person to another through saliva or fluid from blisters, among other things, and the infection normally passes in a week. The only treatment is a pain reliever such as acetaminophen, according to the website. “It took its toll the other night. He had trouble breathing, and that’s why you saw his velo down,” Callaway said. “During the game, we couldn’t quite figure it out. But I put my hands on his legs to talk to him when he came out, and I felt his legs shaking. He was just weak and run down.” Syndergaard, who missed most of last season with a torn lat muscle, just returned from the disabled list July 13 after being sidelined for more than six weeks with a strained ligament in his right index finger. He is 6-1 with a 2.89 ERA in 13 starts this year for the struggling Mets, who began the night last in the NL East. Assistant general manager John Ricco said the pitcher will be placed on the 10-day DL again Monday. Syndergaard stayed home Sunday and Callaway said no other members of the team have shown symptoms of the disease. “It’s not a long-term thing and hopefully he misses one start,” Ricco said. New York initially planned to recall rookie right-hander Corey Oswalt from Triple-A Las Vegas to pitch in Syndergaard’s place Wednesday against his hometown San Diego Padres. But after Sunday night’s scheduled game versus the Yankees was postponed because of rain, the Mets listed their starters for Tuesday and Wednesday as TBA. The game against their crosstown rivals will be made up in the Bronx on Aug. 13. The news regarding Syndergaard came two days after an alarming health revelation from slugger Yoenis Cespedes, who said he might need surgery on both heels that would require an eight-to-10-month recovery. “I think he probably was a little bit frustrated that it was more painful than he expected. So I can’t speak for why or how he said it, but he did say it and I think we have to take it seriously,” Ricco said. “I don’t think it’s a disconnect,” he added. “It’s not like he’s been saying this for months and we haven’t been listening. For the first time, to our knowledge, when he was considering the surgery was when he said that.” The 32-year-old Cespedes homered Friday night in his return from the DL after missing two months with a strained right hip flexor. He disclosed after the game that calcification on his heels has bothered him for 15 years and caused the lower-body injuries that have limited him to 119 games in 1½ seasons since he signed a $110 million, four-year contract. “They’re all connected,” Ricco said. “So you’ve got to treat the whole problem. We got him to where the legs are strong, but the heel’s an issue. If he can manage the pain, he can play. “Surgery hasn’t been a consideration up until this point, until he really brought it up the other night.” New York initially planned to use Cespedes as the designated hitter Saturday against the Yankees and then start him in the outfield Sunday night, but he was sore Saturday and did not play. He felt better Sunday and offered to be the DH. But before the game was called, the Mets held him out of the posted lineup again and said he would be monitored throughout the night to see if he might be available off the bench. “It’s something that he’s managed, we’ve managed with him. It’s one of these things, he has good days, bad days with it. It’s a condition that, surgery is definitely kind of a last-resort thing,” Ricco said. “The way you treat this is with various conservative methods, whether they be orthotics, stretching, anti-inflammatories, and that’s kind of how he’s managed those symptoms over the past years. In this case, he was checked out down in Florida a few weeks ago and it was the same diagnosis. The surgery is fairly radical. It’s going to put you out for a while. So it’s not something that you look to do immediately.” Cespedes will be examined by doctors Monday, according to Ricco. “We’re not at odds with him by any stretch. He’s agreeing with every step of the way, the treatment that we’ve given him, to the point where he was anxious to come back, he was feeling good and then he came back and he felt this on Friday,” Ricco said. “I would tell you there’s no disconnect. I spoke to his agent a half-hour ago and we’re all on the same page.” In other news, the Mets recalled reliever Paul Sewald from Las Vegas. He fills the roster spot that opened when closer Jeurys Familia was traded to Oakland on Saturday. ___ More AP baseball: https://apnews.com/tag/MLBbaseball
|
11359
|
Daily Aspirin Linked to Steep Drop in Cancer Risk
|
This story says many of the right things about a new study indicating that daily low-dose aspirin appears to lower the risk of death from several common types of cancer. It quotes a researcher who said that the findings should not be viewed as reason for everyone to go out and starting taking aspirin. Unfortunately though, the story never explains to readers why the results might not provide a strong enough foundation for such a recommendation, so the call for restraint lacks sufficient heft when compared with enthusiastic description of benefits which were based entirely on relative risk comparisons. The potential for harm was mentioned only the last line of the story and never quantified. This is particularly worrisome considering that the prevention benefit is not realized for many years. Some of the other stories we reviewed gave more weight to the limitations of the data, included more independent voices and a more thorough discussion of potential harms. Recommendations that affect the public health should ideally be based on the gold standard of evidence: randomized controlled trials. And while the data discussed in this story come from studies which appear to meet this standard, it is important to recognize that these trials were originally designed to look at heart disease, not cancer. The cancer analysis was conducted after the fact and provides a more limited basis upon which to draw conclusions. The findings are more likely to be biased and provide less information about the harms of long-term aspirin use than a trial that was designed to look at cancer from the start. To be sure, the study discussed in this story was well conducted and provides some of the best quality evidence we’re likely to see on this question for many years to come. And this topic is important in general because aspirin is one of the only agents we have that may be effective for prevention of cancer. Although not harmless, it is easy to take for most patients, and with the benefits for heart disease and stroke, is an important tool for disease prevention. Because of limitations in this study, however, we don’t have all the evidence we would wish for when recommending a health intervention to the entire population.
|
mixture
|
Cancer,HealthDay
|
The cost of aspirin is not in question. Nevertheless, a broad recommendation to begin taking aspirin daily in middle age would likely be followed by at least hundreds of millions of people, thus the cumulative costs would be large. Also, such widespread use would increase the costs of treating bleeding ulcers and other adverse events caused by aspirin, though hoped-for savings in reduced cancer treatment would be an offestting factor to consider. Still, because the cost of aspirin on an individual basis is low and well-known we won’t insist on this point. The use of relative risks throughout this story inflates the likely benefits of aspirin. For example, the story states that overall cancer death risk “plummeted by 21 percent” among those taking low-dose aspirin while the studies were still underway. But in absolute terms, the rate of cancer death was 2.3% (327 deaths out of 14035 people) in the aspirin group and 3% (347 out of 11,535) in the placebo group, for a reduction of 0.7%. This is statistically significant difference and may have important implications for the overall public health, but the benefit that this represents for an individual is certainly much more limited than what the 21% figure suggests — especially when one factors in the uncertain risk of adverse effects. To be fair, we had to search the original study pretty thoroughly and make our own calculations to determine this absolute risk. Nevertheless, we expect stories to go the extra mile to make statistics meaningful for the decision-making of individual readers. Potential side effects of aspirin mentioned in the story — “bleeding and stroke” — are relegated to the last line of the story and are given nowhere near the prominence they deserve. For one thing, “bleeding” doesn’t convey the seriousness of potentially fatal gastrointestinal hemorrhage that can result from daily aspirin. Second, the story didn’t make any attempt to quantify these risks so that they can be balanced against benefits. Not bad, but not quite good enough for a satisfactory. The story cautions readers that the findings can’t be considered definitive, and it even quotes a researcher who states flatly that “these results do not mean that all adults should immediately start taking aspirin.” However, such admonitions ring hollow without a more substantive explanation of why the findings may not be reliable. Importantly, although the data used in the analysis come from randomized controlled studies, the trials were originally designed to look at heart disease, not cancer. Researchers in the current study went back after the fact and tried to determine the effects of aspirin on cancer deaths many years after the studies were completed. The retrospective nature of the study means the findings are more likely to be biased than a study that was designed and initiated from the start to look at cancer outcomes. To the story’s credit, it included the total number of patients and range of study durations, and noted the fact that the studies were not originally meant to study cancer. However, the discussion of limitations was not detailed or prominent enough to provide an appropriate counterweight to the enthusiastic description of benefits. The story did not exaggerate the impact of cancer and it accurately described the possible relevance of this study to a large segment of the population. The story includes comments from an independent cancer expert. That’s the most important factor in this case, so we will pass this story on this criterion. However, while the study itself did not receive outside funding, readers should have been told that some of the authors have had consulting relationships with pharmaceutical companies. Some of the other news stories about this study pointed out that avoiding smoking and obesity are known to reduce cancer risk. This story should also have pointed out these options, which also do not have potential adverse effects. The availability of aspirin is not in question. The story would have been better if, like some of the other stories we reviewed, it had pointed out that aspirin is approved for use as an anagesic and, for certain people, to reduce the risk of some cardiovascular events, but it is not currently recommended for cancer prevention. The story did not try to oversell the novelty of using aspirin to prevent cancer. However, it should have provided more discussion of the extensive body or previous research on aspirin and cancer. Previous trials and observational studies have come to conflicting conclusions about the benefits of aspirin for cancer prevention, and this new study needs to be viewed in the context of this existing research. The story acknowledges taking some quotes directly from a news release about the study, and a number of passages bear a resemblance to the text of the release. However, the story does also solicit feedback from an independent expert not affiliated with the study. Borderline, but enough for a satisfactory.
|
15462
|
Here are the stats: Per population, we kill each other with guns at a rate 297x more than Japan, 49x more than France, 33x more than Israel.
|
"Obama tweeted, ""Here are the stats: Per population, we kill each other with guns at a rate 297x more than Japan, 49x more than France, 33x more than Israel."" It’s always worth being cautious of international comparisons of crime statistics, given technical limitations with the data. But even if some data sources produce different numbers than the ones Obama cited, the general pattern is the same -- the United States has firearm homicide rates many times higher than those in the three countries mentioned."
|
true
|
National, Criminal Justice, Crime, Guns, Barack Obama,
|
"Ever since nine people were killed by a gunman at a historic African-American church in Charleston, S.C., President Barack Obama has taken to various forums to discuss the issue of gun violence in the United States. In a tweet sent from his @POTUS account on June 20, 2015 -- three days after the killings -- Obama said, ""Here are the stats: Per population, we kill each other with guns at a rate 297x more than Japan, 49x more than France, 33x more than Israel."" The tweet clearly struck a nerve; within the first three days, Obama’s message was retweeted almost 40,000 times and favorited almost 30,000 times. The data appear to come from a credible source, a study by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The Guardian, a British newspaper, used raw data from that U.N. report to create a streamlined, country-by-country table showing selected measurements. One of the metrics included in that table was homicide rate by firearm per 100,000 population. Here are the rates for the four countries Obama cited, according to the Guardian: United States: 2.97 per 100,000 Japan: 0.01 per 100,000 France: 0.06 per 100,000 Israel: 0.09 per 100,000 Using this data, the United States has a rate 297 times higher than Japan, 49.5 times higher than France and 33 times higher than Israel -- precisely as Obama said. We will note a few caveats, all of them common for this kind of claim. The data is a bit old. It's from 2007 (for the United States, France and Israel) and 2008 (for Japan). The data is not ideally standardized. The data is culled from various international sources that have different standards and degrees of quality control. There is at least one different data set. A website produced by the University of Sydney in Australia, gunpolicy.org, has data from the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that is slightly different. The ratio was 3.4 times higher than Israel in 2011, and almost 18 times higher for France in 2010. (Japan can't be easily calculated because its rate approaches zero.) Still, the broad patterns held. David Hemenway, a professor of health policy at the Harvard School of Public Health, urged caution in making international comparisons, but he added that Obama seems to use the available data responsibly. ""The exact numbers change every year and can change a fair amount since the number of homicides from these other countries are so low each year,"" he said. Still, he added, ""the story the data tell is largely the same whichever source or year is used."" Our ruling Obama tweeted, ""Here are the stats: Per population, we kill each other with guns at a rate 297x more than Japan, 49x more than France, 33x more than Israel."" It’s always worth being cautious of international comparisons of crime statistics, given technical limitations with the data. But even if some data sources produce different numbers than the ones Obama cited, the general pattern is the same -- the United States has firearm homicide rates many times higher than those in the three countries mentioned."
|
24456
|
"The Democrats' health care bill ""gives a new Health Choices Commissioner the right to look at an individual's tax return to determine what medical benefits or subsidies that person qualifies for."
|
Conservative group says health care reform bill allows government to pry into tax records
|
mixture
|
National, Health Care, Taxes, Concerned Women for America,
|
"Concerned Women for America, a conservative group, says the Democrats' health care reform bill could allow the government to peek into your tax records. On its Web site, the group states, ""Not only are your medical records at risk under Obamacare, but your financial records too. The proposed bill expressly gives a new Health Choices Commissioner the right to look at an individual's tax return to determine what medical benefits or subsidies that person qualifies for."" The CWA statement seems to be referring to the health care bill (H.R. 3200) that was approved in the summer of 2009 by three House committees. That bill — which formed the basis for the version from the House Democratic leadership introduced on Oct. 29, 2009 — would create a health choices commissioner. This new post would wield broad authority over the federal program, including setting minimum standards for health care plans, operating a new health insurance exchange and, most importantly for the purposes of the CWA's claim, determining who will qualify for federal subsidies to buy health insurance. Under the bill, Congress would set income levels to establish who is eligible for ""affordability credits,"" which are designed for people in the lower middle class who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but who don't earn enough to buy their own insurance. The credits would allow them to get insurance on the health care exchange, a new virtual marketplace for people who are currently uninsured or buy coverage on the individual market. The commissioner is assigned to determine who qualifies. H.R. 3200 includes a passage that gives the commissioner authority to get tax records to determine how much people earn: ""In carrying out this subtitle, the Commissioner shall request from the Secretary of the Treasury consistent with section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 such information as may be required to carry out this subtitle."" In the new House bill introduced on Oct. 29, lawmakers included similar language. We looked up Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code and found that it does indeed cover ""Confidentiality and Disclosure of Returns and Return Information."" So the passage in the bill does indicate that the CWA is right that the commissioner would have the ability to access information from tax returns in order to run the program that provides individual affordability credits. Meanwhile, the Senate Finance Committee bill — which would also provide health insurance subsidies for qualifying Americans — has language similar to that in the House bills, with the main difference being that it would rely on the Department of Health and Human Services rather than the newly created health choices commissioner. ""The bill permits the IRS to substantiate the accuracy of income and family size information that has been provided to HHS for eligibility determination,"" the Senate bill states. So in this regard, the House and Senate are consistent, and CWA's claim is largely correct. Still, experts we spoke with offered a couple of caveats. • The notion that federal officials would look at tax information to determine ""medical benefits"" is a significant exaggeration. The bills allow the government to use tax information when determining if someone is eligible for subsidies. But it is incorrect to suggest, as CWA seems to do, that the commissioner might deny a specific treatment for a disease based on something on one's tax return. Our experts could think of only one scenario in which a federal official's use of personal tax information might influence benefits, and that would be indirectly. If someone applied for a subsidy to purchase a private plan, but officials found that their income was too low to be eligible for the subsidy, they would need to apply instead for Medicaid, the federal-state program that provides health care for the poor. Presumably, Medicaid and the private plan the person had been looking at would offer a different package of benefits. But even if that happened, there's reason to think that Medicaid would actually offer a better and cheaper package for the beneficiary than private coverage, especially if they have a disability, said Edwin Park, a senior fellow at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. And in any case, there's nothing included in any of the health care bills that says that federal officials would be determining specific medical treatments based on information gleaned from a tax return. • The group was a bit overbroad in characterizing what private information federal officials could look at. While the CWA said that the commissioner would have ""the right to look at an individual's tax return to determine what medical benefits or subsidies that person qualifies for,"" the commissioner would actually have the right to look at the pertinent information from that return — not the entire return. In this case, that would include such information as a taxpayer's filing status, number of dependents and modified adjusted gross income. • The commissioner would not be looking at everyone's tax information — only the information for people who apply for the affordability credits. (And even then, it's not clear whether the commissioner would request information for every applicant or simply spot-check for audit purposes.) • Finally, this authority to review tax information isn't new. Under existing law, tax returns, or information from returns, can be shared with federal, state or judicial officials for many reasons, including: — Social Security benefits, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and federal housing subsidies — Tracking down people who are behind in child support or are delinquent on their student loans — Various forms of Medicare benefits While we conclude that the CWA is partly right on this one, it has cranked up the hyperbole. Federal officials would be able to look at specific tax information, but they couldn't go through entire returns. And while officials would have the power to see private tax information, they would not be able to use it to decide what specific medical treatments someone would receive. So we find the group's claim ."
|
34693
|
Swallowing active dry yeast before drinking alcohol will prevent you from getting drunk.
|
Ultimately, however, the lack of peer reviewed data or research on this topic—for or against the claim—prevents us from making a concrete ruling on the topic at this time.
|
unproven
|
Medical, Home Cures
|
In April 2014, Esquire magazine published an interview with billionaire Jim Koch, the co-founder and chairman of the Boston Beer Company. In that interview, Koch divulged his secret for how to “drink beer all night long and never get drunk” — the secret being to swallow one teaspoon of active dry yeast per beer prior to imbibing: “You wanna know my secret? How I can drink beer all night long and never get drunk?” In fact, I had always wondered that. Though this was the first time I’d ever formally met Koch, I’d “met” him in the past at a few beer festivals. Those sorts of events are always kind of Bacchanalian shit shows, with people imbibing dozens of beer samples in a short period and soon stumbling around large convention halls drunk of their asses. Brewers included. But not Koch, who I’d long noticed was always lucid, always able to hold court, and hold his own with those much younger than him. This billionaire brewing raconteur was doing likewise with me at 4 PM on a Thursday afternoon despite the fact we were both now several beers deep. So what was the secret? “Yeast!” “Yeast?” “Active yeast. Like you get at the grocery store.” Koch told me that for years he has swallowed your standard Fleischmann’s dry yeast before he drinks, stirring the white powdery substance in with some yogurt to make it more palatable. “One teaspoon per beer, right before you start drinking.” To understand the purported science behind this claim, however, it is first necessary to review the basics of how alcohol breaks down in the human body once it has been imbibed. According an article on hangovers in Scientific American, this process is aided by a specific alcohol-altering enzyme, ADH: Shortly after a person starts consuming an alcoholic drink, the liver gets to work. The enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) metabolizes the ethanol (that’s the type of alcohol in alcohol) into toxic acetaldehyde. From there the liver enzyme aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) metabolizes acetaldehyde into acetate, a less toxic compound that breaks down into water and carbon dioxide. ADH is produced naturally in the human body and can be found in high concentrations in the lining of the stomach wall and in the liver. It is also — and this is where the science gets a bit confusing — added to beer in order to produce alcohol in the first place. When added to beer, it is done so via the addition of yeast. Yeast are single-celled, microscopic fungi that have been used for millennia to create alcoholic beverages through fermentation. In beer brewing the process utilizes yeast’s natural ability to produce ADH, but this ADH-mediated reaction can go in both directions: non-booze chemicals into booze, or booze into non-booze chemicals — it depends on the specific chemistry of ADH, as discussed by pharmacologist David Kroll in a Forbes article about this claim: In the brewing process, that’s how we get alcohol from the sugars that are released from the malted barley and other grains. But it can also work in the reverse direction to metabolize the alcohol back into its precursor, acetaldehyde. Yeast also have multiple forms of the enzyme the predominate in one direction or another. What it all boils down to is this: an enzyme exists that is capable of both converting stuff into alcohol (which is its role in brewing) and also of converting alcohol into something else (its role when found in your stomach and liver). Koch’s claim rests on the assertion that eating a tablespoon of Fleischmann’s bakers yeast adds enough ADH to your system, and in the right manner, to increase the rate of alcohol breakdown in the stomach, leaving less booze to enter your bloodstream. The scientific community has, for the most part, reacted with skepticism to Koch’s claims. Speaking to NPR, microbiologist Benjamin Tu argued that while yeast can degrade alcohol, they prefer sugars, making it unlikely that yeast delivered via a sugary spoonful of yogurt would be interested in breaking down the alcohol instead: “Yeast can degrade ethanol,” says [Tu]. “But they love other sugars — glucose, maltose — more. When those sugars are around, the cells turn off the genes needed for alcohol degradation.” Many beers contain some leftover sugars that don’t get fermented. Yogurt has sugars, too. So if Koch is eating the yeast with yogurt, that offers the fungi something more tempting than alcohol. Another issue raised by Tu was the amount of time the yeast would be in contact with the alcohol before being absorbed by the digestive tract — not enough, in his view. “I think the exposure time of the alcohol to the yeast is too low,” he told NPR, “Any effect of the yeast [on BAC] will be marginal.” That issue would perhaps be compounded by another one raised in both online debates and in articles: Whether or not the yeast able to remain active at all in the highly acidic environment that is the stomach. In the Forbes piece, Robert Sclafani, a professor of biochemistry at the University of Colorado Denver’s School of Medicine, argued that the pH would likely reduce many of the purported ADH breakdown in the stomach: “The pH of the stomach varies from 2-4 but will be at 2 when you are eating. My guess is that the combination of pH 2 and active digestive enzymes will make it unlikely that yeast ADH can work well (its pH optimum is about 8.6).” From a larger standpoint, only 10% of the alcohol breakdown process takes place in the stomach to begin with. That means that even if that yeast were breaking down alcohol in the stomach, Koch is only increasing the effectiveness of a minor component of a larger system that breaks booze down. The remainder of the breakdown process happens almost entirely in the liver over a longer time period. According to George Koob,director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, If the yeast had any effect on intoxication at all, it would most likely be from the fact that any food residing in the stomach prolongs the amount of time alcohol will be absorbed by the digestive tract (and therefore lower the speed at which it would be entering your bloodstream). “Anything you take that occupies the stomach lining is going to impede the absorption of alcohol” he told NPR. While the scientific community’s reaction to Koch’s claim was one of bemused skepticism, many in the media have used it as an opportunity to brush up on the scientific method. Aaron Goldfarb, the author of the original Esquire interview with Koch, tried it out: So the next day I grabbed a six-pack of beer and a packet of Fleischmann’s and went to work. The older I get, the more of a lightweight I surely become, but after shoveling down six teaspoons and tilting back six bottles I felt nothing more than a little buzzed. Koch told me he keeps a breathalyzer around at all times just to assure he’s never too drunk. He never is. And, though I had no tangible “proof,” besides the fact I was still awake, I was pretty sure I wasn’t all that drunk either. Likely the most systematic (but still quite limited) attempt was made by the writers of NPR’s The Salt blog, who performed their own yeast-booze experiment with a still admittedly small dataset. By drinking beer and wine in combination with yeast/yogurt, with water, and with nothing, they found nearly no difference between yeast and and just drinking without anything else. The largest difference came from the water: “A few conclusions were clear: Yeast in yogurt doesn’t slow down the absorption of alcohol very much — perhaps only a tad. But drinking a bunch of water before and between beers might have a slightly bigger effect on peak BAC than the yeast-yogurt combo.” Unfortunately, the only other data to refute or support these informal experiments come from a non-peer reviewed patent filing. That patent was submitted by a man Koch cites as both a mentor and as the source of the hot tip about yeast-based inebriation prevention: The late fermentation expert and biochemist Joseph L. Owades. These experiments were conducted in a similar way to the NPR experiment, but resulted in much more compelling results ranging from 28% to 38% reductions in BAC which he attributed to the yeast. Kroll, in his Forbes article, took issue with the quality of these data, however: Owades’ experiments in the patent application have never been published in a peer-reviewed journal. In fact, I doubt that any journal reviewers would let the work be published as presented. First of all, the earliest breathalyzer reading, and highest alcohol concentration, is at 10 minutes. But alcohol remaining in the mouth can make this appear artificially high. Ideally, breath should best be measured beginning at 20 minutes after the last drink. Also, we don’t know how many times the analysis was repeated at each time. Finally, Owades mixed the types of alcoholic drinks, subjects, and even the yeast, used across only eight subjects.
|
26674
|
Joe Biden Says Bernie Sanders voted against the auto bailout
|
Sanders voted against a set of funds that financed most of the auto bailout, but the funds’ primary purpose was bailing out Wall Street firms, which Sanders strongly opposed. Sanders voted in favor of a standalone meausre providing auto companies with $14 billion, which was separate from the Wall Street bailout funds he opposed. The standalone measure failed.
|
mixture
|
National, Economy, Joe Biden,
|
"As the United States faces economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic, former Vice President Joe Biden and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders argued about their past records on bailouts following the 2008 financial collapse. Sanders said that he voted against the 2008 bailout while Biden supported it. Biden then countered: ""Part of that was bailing out the automobile industry — saving thousands of jobs, tens of thousands of jobs over time. (Sanders) voted against that as well."" Sanders interjected: ""No, I did not vote against that. That bailout money was used later on by Bush to protect the automobile industry."" We found that both Biden and Sanders are only telling part of the story about Sanders’ votes. The money was intended to assist financial institutions, but it also ended up bailing out the auto industry. That December, Congress tried to pass a separate $14 billion bailout program specifically for the auto industry. But the measure failed in the Senate, so President George W. Bush instead used his authority to allocate some of the TARP funds to General Motors and Chrysler. Just days before President Barack Obama started his first term in January 2009, some members of Congress tried to block the release of the the second half of the $700 billion TARP funds, a package that included some auto bailout money. The attempt failed, and the funds went out to the banks and motor companies. So Sanders had two opportunities to show support on the auto bailout: in December 2008, when Congress tried and failed to pass an auto bailout, and again in January 2009, when members considered blocking TARP funds. Sanders voted in favor of the December separate auto bailout and against the January measure. After the favorable December vote, Sanders spoke in an interview about the value of automobile industry jobs, which he described historically as the ""gold standard for manufacturing workers"" due to the good wages, benefits and strong union. Sanders told Vermont Public Radio that he supported the measure because ""I think it would be a terrible idea to add millions more to the unemployment rolls."" However, Sanders voted to block the release of the second half of the TARP funding, including the auto bailout funds. (Sanders opposed the initial TARP bill in October.) Sanders said he opposed bailout funding for financial firms, which is where the majority of TARP dollars were headed. ""I have strong reservations about continuing this bailout without strong taxpayer protections written into law,"" he said in a statement. ""I also object to using middle-class taxpayer money to bail out the exact same financial institutions whose greed and recklessness led to the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression."" Auto companies ended up receiving about $85 billion in TARP funds, according to the New York Times. Biden said that Sanders voted against the auto bailout. Sanders did vote against a set of funds that financed most of the auto bailout — though the funds’ primary purpose was bailing out Wall Street firms, which Sanders strongly opposed. But Biden left listeners with the impression that Sanders’ opposed bailing out the auto industry. Sanders voted in favor of providing auto companies with $14 billion, which was separate from the Wall Street bailout funds he opposed. That standalone measure failed."
|
6345
|
Lawsuit: Georgia jail conditions bad for mentally ill women.
|
Prolonged solitary confinement and harrowing conditions at a Georgia jail result in a substantial risk of serious psychological harm for mentally ill women held there, a federal lawsuit says.
|
true
|
Union City, Georgia, Health, Trials, Lawsuits, Atlanta, U.S. News
|
Urine and toilet water pool on the floor of cells and meals of moldy sandwich meat are not uncommon at the South Fulton Municipal Regional Jail in Union City, the lawsuit filed Wednesday says. Lawyers have observed women in psychological distress lying on the floor, their bodies and the walls of their cells smeared with feces or food. The women are subjected to harmful long-term isolation and those deemed incompetent to stand trial are denied mental health treatment provided to jailed men with similar mental health problems, the lawsuit filed against Fulton County Sheriff Theodore Jackson and four jail officials says. Sheriff’s office spokeswoman Tracy Flanagan declined to comment, citing the pending litigation. Because of the policies and practices in place at the jail and the unsanitary conditions, mentally ill women held there “continue to face a substantial risk of serious psychological harm and indeed to suffer such harm on a regular basis,” the lawsuit says. “That harm can result in dramatic worsening of symptoms, decompensation, psychosis, self-injury, and suicide,” the lawsuit says. It was filed on behalf of two homeless women diagnosed with serious mental illness who are being held in isolation at the jail and the Georgia Advocacy Office, a private nonprofit organization that advocates for the rights of people with disabilities. It seeks class-action status. Because of their mental illness and psychological deterioration caused by the terrible conditions, some women lose the will or ability to clean themselves or their living areas, the lawsuit says. Many are unresponsive, while others mutter incoherently, the lawsuit says. Photos included in the lawsuit show women huddled under blankets or, in some cases, without blankets because their bedding has been used to sop up water on the floor from leaking toilets. There are also pictures of cells strewn with trash and old food, feces and scum on shower mats, and messages written on the walls in food or feces. One of the plaintiffs, identified in the lawsuit by her initials, M.J., is 20 years old and was arrested in October on a charge of criminal trespassing, accused of proselytizing at a shopping center and refusing to leave when asked. The other, identified as K.H., is 26 and was arrested in November on charges of criminal trespassing and prowling. Both women have bonds set at $500 but remain in the jail because they can’t afford to pay. The charges they face usually carry little or no jail time if convicted. They generally spend more than 23 hours a day in their cells and when they are allowed out, they spend time alone in the cell block dayroom and are deprived of meaningful social interaction and therapeutic activities, the lawsuit says. M.J. has tried to kill herself more than once, and K.H. has banged her head and face against the wall hard enough to require medical attention, the lawsuit says. The lawsuit says many other women with mental illness have deteriorated psychologically while held in prolonged solitary confinement at the jail and includes descriptions of the situations of about a dozen other women identified by their initials. “It is unacceptable in our modern era to isolate people with psychiatric disabilities in solitary confinement cells,” said Southern Center for Human Rights managing attorney Sarah Geraghty, who filed the lawsuit. “But to jail women charged with low-level misdemeanors in these conditions for months on end is particularly pointless and cruel.” People found incompetent to stand trial can’t resolve their cases until their competency is restored. A competency restoration program at the main county jail offers a therapeutic environment with structured programming, counseling, therapy and group activities supervised by psychiatrists. But it’s only open to men. Women found incompetent to stand trial have to wait months for a bed to open up at a state-run hospital, which means they have to wait much longer and spend more time in jail before resolving their cases, the lawsuit says.
|
18406
|
"Ken Tanner Says ""The idea of one casino per tribe is a false one."
|
Is the idea of one casino per tribe a false one?
|
mixture
|
Oregon, Gambling, Ken Tanner,
|
"The Coquille Indian Tribe wants to turn a bowling alley in Medford into a casino with 600 video gambling machines, adding to another casino it operates in North Bend. Coquille Tribal Chief Ken Tanner told a reporter that the tribe has the right to build a second casino. ""The idea of one casino per tribe is a false one. Evidence of that is that the governor signed our compact which allows us a second casino,"" he said in a radio report that aired April 24, 2013, on Oregon Public Broadcasting. Tanner’s claim was news to PolitiFact Oregon. Is the ""one casino per tribe"" idea a false one, not grounded in reality? We always thought the policy was the norm in Oregon. Federal law calls for a tribe and state to negotiate a compact agreement before a casino can be sited. The compact spells out location, security and size. There is no federal or state law that limits tribes to one casino each. It is a policy of Gov. John Kitzhaber, who served two four-year terms from 1995 to 2003 and was elected to a third term that began in 2011. Gov. Ted Kulongoski, who served in-between, also adhered to this policy. Each of Oregon’s nine federally recognized tribes has a current compact with the state that identifies one casino location: The Grand Ronde has Spirit Mountain Casinoand the Siletz has Chinook Winds Casino. The Warm Springs opened Indian Head Casino in 2012, and in doing so, closed its casino at Kah-Nee-Ta Resort and Spa. Coquille We spoke with Ray Doering, spokesman for the Coquille Economic Development Corporation, which operates the Mill Casino in North Bend. (Tanner later followed up with an e-mail to PolitiFact Oregon, saying that he stood by his statement.) Doering made two points: One, the proposed venture is a different type of casino, one that does not need to go through the compact process. Two, he said, the tribe never agreed to Kitzhaber’s policy, even if it signed a compact in 2000 for the Mill Casino. Doering said it doesn’t matter what other tribes say they agreed to because the Coquille did not. ""There was no agreement to keep it at one facility. What it says in this contract, we agreed to not seek an additional compact for a period of five years and that (provision) ended eight years ago,"" Doering said. Indeed, the 52-page agreement signed in 2000 specifies that the Coquille waives any right for a period of five years to even think about negotiating an agreement for another casino unless another tribe is allowed to operate more than one casino. Doering points to the compact language as evidence that the tribe could negotiate for a second casino after five years. Kitzhaber’s legal counsel says the language does not entitle the tribe to a second casino. The Burns Paiute, Klamath, Siletz and Umatilla tribes have similar five-year language in their compacts, said a spokesman for the governor. The compacts for Cow Creek, Warm Springs and Grand Ronde are more explicit, and the tribes waive any rights they may have to pursue a second casino, regardless of time frame. Governor, others The Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, which operates the Seven Feathers Casino Resort in Canyonville, is at risk of losing money to a 600-machine casino in Medford and opposes the proposed second casino. Cow Creek leaders say Kitzhaber’s one casino, one tribe policy was agreed to by Oregon’s tribes and preserves the balance of casino gambling in the state. ""We see it as an agreement made in good faith. The governor’s office calls it a policy; we would call it an agreement,"" said Susan Ferris, spokeswoman for Cow Creek. There’s another aspect we need to address: Types of casinos. The governor has authority to negotiate compacts for the large-scale tribal casinos currently in Oregon, called Class III. He has no authority over Class II casinos, which the National Indian Gaming Commission defines as casinos offering bingo and ""when played in the same location as bingo - pull tabs, lotto, punch boards, tip jars, instant bingo, other games similar to bingo."" The proposed casino would fall into this category. The ruling: Tanner is correct that the idea of one casino per tribe is a malleable one. This is Kitzhaber’s policy, and one that might fail in a legal challenge. Also, a future governor could decide on no limits at all. And the governor has no authority over any proliferation of bingo-oriented casinos. But it’s not entirely accurate to say that the idea of one casino per tribe is ""a false one,"" or that the idea is non-existent. Kitzhaber, in a letter this week urging the Bureau of Indian Affairs to reject the Coquille proposal, wrote, ""My ‘one casino per tribe’ policy direction and the gaming compacts entered into between the State and the tribes provide support for the notion that, as a State, we have consistently attempted to strike a balance between tribal pursuit of economic enterprise and a check on the expansion of gambling in our State."" In the eyes of Coquille leaders, the policy does not apply because they did not agree to it. But a policy does exist, in the governor’s stated words and in the compacts of other tribes in Oregon. The Warm Springs closed one casino in order to open another. The Cow Creek believe it to be an agreement made by the tribes. The statement is -- partially accurate but missing important details."
|
6791
|
Walker signs bill lifting Wisconsin mining moratorium.
|
Gov. Scott Walker signed a bill Monday lifting Wisconsin’s moratorium on gold and silver mining, reversing his vote from nearly 20 years ago imposing the ban and brushing aside conservationists’ warnings that the measure will lead to devastating pollution.
|
true
|
Wisconsin, Scott Walker, Rhinelander, Environment, Pollution
|
The governor signed the GOP-authored bill during a mid-day stop at the Oneida County Airport in Rhinelander. The bill’s supporters say lifting the moratorium will re-energize mining in northern Wisconsin and boost the region’s economy. Lawmakers from both parties put the ban in place in 1998 out of concerns about sulfide mining polluting Wisconsin’s waters. Walker was a member of the state Assembly at the time and voted to impose the prohibition. His spokesman, Tom Evenson, has said in recent weeks that the governor believes mining can be done without harming the environment, but he hasn’t offered anything more to explain the governor’s change of heart. “If there’s anywhere in the world that should be able to conduct safe and environmentally sound mining, it should be the Badger State. #WIWorking,” Walker tweeted Monday. He followed up with a news release in which he called mining a piece of Wisconsin’s history. “With this new bill, we’re paying tribute to our state’s rich roots in the field and creating new family-supporting careers in the mining industry, all while protecting our abundant and valuable natural resources,” Walker said. Gold, copper, zinc, nickel and other metals are typically found bonded to sulfur. Such compounds produce sulfuric acid when exposed to oxygen and water, creating the risk of runoff polluting streams and rivers. Sulfuric acid readily mixes with water and can kill fish, plants and insects as well as burn human skin, according to the National Wildlife Federation. Acidic waters also can release heavy metals such as arsenic and mercury when they pass through waste mining rock and mining tailings, according to the federation. The 1998 law requires sulfide mining applicants to prove a similar mine has operated for 10 years somewhere in North America without causing pollution. It also requires applicants to prove a similar mine has been closed in North America for a decade without causing pollution. No other state has such requirements. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has never issued a final determination that any mining applicant has satisfied the standards. The bill eliminates those requirements as well as eases sulfide mining regulations. Large-scale sampling operations will no longer need to obtain environmental impact statements. Administrative law judges wouldn’t be able to block any DNR decisions on mining applications, forcing challengers into circuit court. Mining applicants also will no longer have to establish perpetual trust funds to cover environmental damage, although they would be financially responsible for any environmental damage within 40 years of the mine’s closure and would have to maintain the mine’s water management systems for 250 years. The measure comes as Aquila Resources Inc. is considering mining ore deposits in Taylor and Marathon counties. The company has been eyeing the deposits since 2011 but hasn’t filed any formal permit applications. “The Governor joins fellow GOP legislators who embrace highly polluting and damaging mining over long-term sustainable development for central and northern Wisconsin,” Dave Blouin, mining chair for the Sierra Club’s Wisconsin chapter, said in a statement. “This law will not result in prosperity for northern Wisconsin and threatens the natural resources that are the foundation of sustainable jobs from tourism, agriculture and our outdoor heritage.” Walker’s allies praised the signing. Eric Bott, leader of the conservative group Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin, praised the governor for signing the bill, saying in a statement that the measure is “an early Christmas present to the working men and women of Northern Wisconsin.” The bill marks the second significant piece of legislation designed to jump-start the mining industry in northern Wisconsin that Walker will have signed since taking office in 2011. The other bill dramatically loosened Wisconsin’s iron mining regulations. The measure was designed to clear the way for Gogebic Taconite to dig a massive open-pit mine near Lake Superior. The company promised the mine would create hundreds of jobs but ultimately gave up on the project. Most bills take effect within days of the governor signing them, but Republican Rep. Jerry Petrowski amended the moratorium bill to delay its effective date for six months. Petrowski said he wanted to give local governments time to develop their own mining ordinances, saying in a letter to the Wisconsin counties and towns associations that sulfide mining carries “inherent risks.” ___ Follow Todd Richmond on Twitter at https://twitter.com/trichmond1
|
37548
|
Who the hell tries to slip taxpayer funded abortion funding into a #Coronavirus bill? That is just sick Nancy and the Dems
|
Did ‘Nancy and the Dems’ Try to ‘Slip Taxpayer-Funded Abortion’ into a Coronavirus Aid Bill?
|
false
|
Fact Checks, Politics
|
On March 12 2020, a Facebook user shared a status update claiming that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the entire Democratic Party tried to “slip taxpayer-funded abortions” into a funding package designed to help blunt the worst effects of a global pandemic:Across a black background, white text read:Who the hell tries to slip taxpayer funded abortion funding into a #Coronavirus bill? That is just sick Nancy and the DemsAs noted in previous fact-checks, images generated by text-based Facebook status updates remained a pernicious source for the spread of false information. The posts, which are limited to a small number of characters and with no linking functionality, are visually bold statements designed to circulate quickly, regardless of their veracity.According to this particular rumor, Democrats (led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi) attempted to “slip” provisions for “taxpayer funded abortion” into a bill that is designed to fight the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. Alas, no contextual information accompanied the claim, making it difficult for users to check whether it was true before sharing.And share it they did, with more than 44,000 users passing the claim forward as of March 16 2020. A cursory search for similar claims led to a CBN News item headlined, “Report: Pelosi Stalled Coronavirus Aid Bill by Trying to Sneak Abortion Funding Agenda into It”:According to several White House officials, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attempted to include federal funding for abortion in the coronavirus economic stimulus plan.In an exclusive story, The Daily Caller reports several officials allege that while Pelosi was negotiating the stimulus package with US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, she tried to lobby for “several” provisions which stalled bipartisan guarantees to the measure.CBN referenced the Daily Caller, whose piece (“EXCLUSIVE: White House Officials Allege Speaker Pelosi Pushed To Include Hyde Amendment Loophole Into Coronavirus Stimulus Plan”) also leaned heavily on its status as a “report,” citing “sources” in the White House:House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought to include a potential way to guarantee federal funding for abortion into the coronavirus economic stimulus plan, according to multiple senior White House officials.Speaking to the Daily Caller, those officials alleged that while negotiating the stimulus with U.S. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, Pelosi tried to lobby for “several” provisions that stalled bipartisan commitment to the effort. One was a mandate for up to $1 billion to reimburse laboratory claims, which White House officials say would set a precedent of health spending without protections outlined in the Hyde Amendment.The Daily Caller or CBN presumably inspired the sourceless Facebook post, which claimed that Pelosi and Democrats had tried to sneak funding for abortion into an unrelated coronavirus bill. But another top result for “abortion coronavirus bill” was a post on Reddit’s r/politics, featuring a title with inverse claims:Republicans Are Sneaking Abortion Restrictions into the Coronavirus Bill. Anti-choice lawmakers are stalling emergency legislation. from politicsThat r/politics post linked to a Vice.com article, which in turn reported that anti-abortion lawmakers were “stalling emergency legislation” around COVID-19. Just as the Facebook post claimed Pelosi “and the Dems” were trying to “slip” funding for abortions into a coronavirus bill, Vice.com’s report (“Republicans Tried to Sneak Abortion Restrictions into the Coronavirus Bill”) involved “report” or “reportedly,” beginning:As lawmakers neared a deal on a coronavirus rescue package that would include paid sick leave and free virus testing, a few roadblocks emerged. Among them: Republican attempts to wedge anti-choice restrictions into the House’s relief bill, turning — if momentarily — a public health crisis into an abortion debate.The tensions reportedly revolved around the Hyde Amendment, a decades-old provision that blocks federal funds from going to abortion services, preventing millions of low-income Americans on Medicaid from accessing abortion care. […]According to conservative media, some top Republicans believed a stipulation in the House bill requiring the government to reimburse private laboratories doing coronavirus testing could effectively overturn the Hyde Amendment by establishing a government funding stream not subject to the restrictions. In response, anti-choice lawmakers insisted on including language in the legislation that would reaffirm the principles of the amendment.According to the Daily Caller, “White House officials [said testing reimbursement] would set a precedent of health spending without protections outlined in the Hyde Amendment.” Vice.com said “some top Republicans believed a stipulation in the House bill requiring the government to reimburse private laboratories doing coronavirus testing could effectively overturn the Hyde Amendment by establishing a government funding stream not subject to the restrictions.”Both approaches described Republican concern over whether a portion of the bill involving reimbursement for laboratories — if not otherwise stipulated — would weaken the Hyde Amendment, which explicitly blocks use of federal funds for abortions, by establishing coronavirus-related streams of federal reimbursement not explicitly subject to restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortion.Vice.com linked Vox as its source, which framed its March 12 2020 article as reporting on negotiations involving a coronavirus “economic relief bill,” which had nothing to do with abortion. Describing an announcement from House Democrats on March 11 2020, Vox.com noted that Republicans and Democrats were working on legislation to offset the financial impact of COVID-19 on Americans.In its fifth paragraph, the article mentioned abortion and the Hyde amendment:House Democrats released their coronavirus economic relief bill late [on March 11 2020, at] night, as layoffs related to the outbreak were reported. But the timing of when they’ll vote on it is still up in the air nearly 24 hours later.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had been negotiating the text of the bill with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin throughout the day on [March 12 2020]. The two had their fifth phone call shortly before 4 pm, her spokesperson said. (This piece will be updated as negotiations on the bill continue. )The new multibillion-dollar bill contains a number of emergency economic measures designed to assist working people and families dealing with the virus — including free coronavirus testing, paid sick leave, and expanded unemployment benefits for those laid off related to the virus. Provisions in the bill expanding food assistance alone would cost $1 billion; a Congressional Budget Office score is expected.“It will be in the billions, and I won’t go beyond that, but it will be costly,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) told reporters of the bill. “But I will tell you this: It will be much more costly if we don’t provide relief.” (For context, the federal government’s discretionary spending was well over $1 trillion last year. )The impasse between Republicans and Democrats on the bill centers on two things; Republicans don’t like a provision in the relief bill that would establish a permanent paid sick leave program, and Democrats are pushing back on Republicans wanting to add language referencing the Hyde amendment, which bans federal funds being used to pay for abortions.What is the Hyde Amendment? According to the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF.org), it came into existence shortly after the Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v. Wade decision, and it prohibits public funding from being used on abortion or related services in all but a few circumstances:Since the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, abortion has been squarely in the middle of political debates at the national and state levels. Soon after the Court’s ruling, Congress enacted the Hyde Amendment, which blocks federal funds from being used to pay for abortion outside of the exceptions for rape, incest, or if the pregnancy is determined to endanger the woman’s life, resulting in dramatically limited coverage of abortion under Medicaid and other federal programs.In Vox’s excerpt above, the words “[Republicans] wanting to add language referencing the Hyde amendment” linked to a March 12 2020 Roll Call item about expected action on the bill the following day (March 13 2020). However, the words “abortion” or “Hyde amendment” did not appear in that reporting:Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin were nearing agreement on an economic stimulus package to combat the effects of the coronavirus pandemic but weren’t close enough to be ready for a vote [on the night of March 12 2020].After eight phone calls between the two, and several hours of meetings between Pelosi and top Democratic lawmakers, negotiations were set to continue into [March 12 2020].It’s fair to say we are close to an agreement subject to the exchange of paper and hope to have an agreement tomorrow,” Pelosi, D-Calif., said late [on March 12 2020].If a deal is reached [March 13 2020], the House would vote on the package later in the day. But senators left town for the weekend [on the afternoon of March 12 2020] and can’t take a roll call vote on the measure until [March 16 2020] at the earliest. Despite guidance from state and federal health officials to limit travel amid the COVID-19 pandemic, many senators planned to go back to their states this weekend before returning to the Hill on[March 16 2020].At the center of the negotiations is a dispute over paid leave provisions in the Democrats’ initial bill. The legislation would require employers to let workers accrue seven days of leave that would apply in future public health emergencies, on top of an immediate 14 days of leave due to coronavirus-related work stoppages.Republicans have been pressing to use the incentive of tax credits to employers rather than government mandates to make paid emergency and sick leave available to workers, according to multiple sources who spoke on condition they not be identified due to the sensitivity of the talks.Roll Call’s reporting was in-depth, but it didn’t describe any sort of dispute over abortion or the Hyde Amendment when discussing differences between Republicans and Democrats on the bill. The outlet described provisions sought by Democrats, but didn’t mention taxpayer-funded abortion:The Democrat-authored aid package would offer, in addition to paid sick leave, expanded food assistance, extended unemployment insurance, free coverage of coronavirus testing and increased federal funding for state and territorial Medicaid costs, among other things.Over and again in most articles, talks between the parties were described as “sensitive,” and sources for all reporting insisted they not be named. In the same article, a summary of Republican provisions also appeared:Republicans have been pressing to use the incentive of tax credits to employers rather than government mandates to make paid emergency and sick leave available to workers, according to multiple sources who spoke on condition they not be identified due to the sensitivity of the talks.On March 13 2020, the Los Angeles Times reported Democrats and Republicans hammered out an agreement on an economic stimulus bill during the coronavirus pandemic. Abortion was not mentioned in that reporting — but it alluded to “some elements” causing a “last-minute hitch”:WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin reached a deal [March 13 2020] on an economic stimulus package to address the coronavirus, providing paid sick leave for workers and pumping billions of dollars to states for food programs and unemployment benefits.Pelosi announced the agreement [March 13 2020 in the] evening, not long after President Trump trashed it at an afternoon news conference.“We are proud to have reached an agreement with the administration to resolve outstanding challenges, and now will soon pass the Families First Coronavirus Response Act,” she wrote in a letter to colleagues late [on March 13 2020].A few hours later, Trump tweeted his own endorsement. “I encourage all Republicans and Democrats to come together and VOTE YES!” Trump wrote.The deal hit a last-minute hitch when some Republicans reportedly voiced concerns about some elements.As of March 16 2020, the bill passed the House and moved to the Senate; neither abortion nor the Hyde Amendment appeared in reporting on the bill’s initial passage in the House and its move to the Senate.The claim we set out to fact-check held that Democrats and/or Nancy Pelosi attempted “to slip taxpayer funded abortion funding into a Coronavirus bill.” But that’s not what the Daily Caller — presumptively the first source for the claim — actually claimed in their reporting. Partisan outlets, both conservative and liberal, accused both parties respectively of delaying the bill as they haggled over abortion, but those same outlets described the same abortion coronavirus bill scenario in strikingly similar terms. Putting aside the fact all those pieces were predicated on “sources” who refused to be named (thus making the claims unverifiable and indicating an internecine information battleground within the United States government), the Daily Caller didn’t say that Pelosi or Democrats tried to “sneak” or “slip” abortion funding into the coronavirus bill, but instead that that parties had debated whether laboratory reimbursement provisions need explicitly be subject to the Hyde Amendment. One day after the March 12 2020 articles appeared, an agreement was reached and the bill moved on to the Senate.Update, April 15 2020: For additional information on the current status of coronavirus stimulus payments, or if your deposit has not arrived, please visit this page:Where is My Stimulus? How to Get Your Missing IRS Coronavirus Check
|
9057
|
Soy, cruciferous vegetables associated with fewer common breast cancer treatment side effects – Georgetown University Medical Center
|
This news release rather thinly describes a study designed to demonstrate whether chemicals naturally found in soy-based foods and cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli and kale are linked to reduced side effects of hormone-related treatments among breast cancer survivors. Although the release ably describes some of the reasons the dietary intervention might work and how, it offers no numbers or measurements to support the conclusion that these foods are associated with fewer menopausal symptoms such as fatigue and hot flashes. Nor does it describe how dietary data were collected, and thus how reliable they are. While it aptly cautions breast cancer patients not to start a soy-rich diet until further research is done, it doesn’t say why caution is recommend. Nor does it describe just how much of these foods might be considered beneficial or harmful in a normal diet. So-called “chemoprotective” or “chemopreventive” components such as sulforaphanes found in broccoli sprouts and in soy products have for decades been the subject of studies designed to link them to lower prostate and other cancer rates and to other health benefits. If in fact dietary interventions can be shown to reduce common side effects of breast cancer treatments — particularly those that affect estrogen — women might be more interested in long-term therapies that suppress female hormones, and also greatly improve the quality of their lives. Thus, studies like this one are likely to make news, but readers need information that offers context, and the potential downsides as well as upsides.
|
mixture
|
Georgetown University Medical Center,menopausal symptoms,side effects,soy-based foods
|
While dietary interventions often are considered inexpensive, they are not free. The cost of adding cruciferous veggies and soy products to the shopping lists of potentially millions of women is worthy of a mention. Beyond vague descriptions of benefits such as “fewer reports of menopausal symptoms,” the news release does not offer any meaningful measure of what the patient’s symptoms were at the beginning of the study and how much symptoms were reduced among those who ate “more” of the soy and cruciferous vegetable diets. It also isn’t clear on which menopausal symptoms were decreased. The release responsibly devotes some attention to harms. It notes that in preclinical animal studies, “biologically active compounds present in both soy and cruciferous vegetables cause breast cancer cells to grow, but have opposite effects in animals that consume these compounds well before cancer is diagnosed and continue consuming them during and after cancer treatments.” It also cautions that breast cancer patients shouldn’t start eating soy now if they haven’t consumed it previously, noting that more research is needed to understand potential risks. Numerous studies have examined the impact of soy-based foods on women with breast cancer — with conflicting results — and we expect this debate will continue. Some recent studies suggest that eating soy, benefits women with breast cancer, particularly at the low rate it is consumed in the American diet. Readers really would have benefited from some numbers in this release, particularly how the researchers measured diets, the range of reduced symptoms, and the number of women who experienced what range of symptoms and symptom reduction. None of that is included, nor would readers with cancer learn enough about the study population (the age range of the study participants, what stage of cancer, kinds of therapy, etc.) to make any sense of how or whether the findings relate in some way to their own experiences. We did appreciate the framing of the headline and lede which states soy is “associated” with reduced symptoms. The release avoids overstating the benefit — something we see all too often in news releases. No mongering. But more detail on the number of women who experience menopausal symptoms as side effects from cancer treatments beyond saying they “often” do would help put the problem in context. There was disclosure of the funding sources, and the release tells us that the study authors had no financial conflicts of interest. Good job. The news release could have noted whether or not most women’s symptoms resolve over time, and whether there are non-dietary means of reducing or coping with symptoms. There was no mention of any of the existing alternatives for helping reduce menopausal symptoms including medications and lifestyle changes. It’s understood that soy and cruciferous vegetables are found in basically all grocery stores so we’ll rate this Not Applicable. However, there needs to be more recognition that people who live in “food deserts” across the country — urban areas with limited access to affordable and fresh vegetables — cannot so easily access healthy food. The release does a pretty good job of explaining “what’s new” about the study, particularly as it relates to the study population. We can’t be sure how generalizable the results are to all breast cancer patients. The authors didn’t use unjustifiable language and did mention that more research is needed to confirm their study findings.
|
31491
|
The date of Earth Day was chosen as April 22 by the Unicorn Killer to coincide with Vladimir Lenin's birthday.
|
A good many historical events and birthdays (including those of Isabella I, Emmanuel Kant, and J. Robert Oppenheimer) have taken place on April 22, but neither any of them nor Ira Einhorn has anything to do with the choice of that day for Earth Day. The true (and more mundane) explanation is that when founder Gaylord Nelson was pondering when his first “National Teach-In on the Crisis of the Environment” should take place, he wanted a date that fell during the Spring but would be far enough into the season that the weather would likely be temperate enough for outdoor celebrations. He also wanted a date late enough in the calendar to avoid any potential conflicts with school exams, spring breaks, or Easter/Passover celebrations that might find students too busy or too far away from school to attend the teach-in. Having determined that the week of April 19–25 was optimal for his purposes, Nelson selected the mid-point of that week (Wednesday, April 22) for what would later become celebrated as the first “Earth Day.”
|
false
|
Holidays, earth day
|
Earth Day is an annual event celebrated since 1970 on April 22, a day on which events are held around the world to demonstrate support for environmental protection. The modern Earth Day observance originated with efforts set in motion by Wisconsin senator Gaylord Nelson amidst the burgeoning environmental movement of 1969, to create a national day of school teach-ins about environmental issues: On September 9, 1969, Gaylord Nelson spoke a few words to a small crowd in Seattle about his idea for a day of national teach-ins on the environment. Within a few months the Earth Day idea had become a nationwide grassroots event supported by millions of people. How did this happen so quickly? The idea’s momentum began with newspapers. The Associated Press and United Press picked up the story in September 1969 and newspapers across the country reprinted Nelson’s proposal. “Nelson Leads Movement,” the headline in the Manitowoc Herald Times proclaimed. Readers learned of a day when “college scientists, public leaders, students, and faculty discuss threats to the ecology of the world.” Nelson relayed his wish to see programs scheduled at all the nation’s universities. As wire stories popped up in the next few weeks, the national press took notice. A small notice in Time on October 10 notified millions of Americans about the teach-in. “Wisconsin Senator Gaylord Nelson is convinced that the hottest growth stick in U.S. protest is conservation,” the article titled “American the Befouled” began. “In fact, he has been toiling to make the nation’s campuses erupt next spring — in a giant, peaceful teach-in about environmental evils.” Many read these words and immediately got to work planning their own events. On November 11, 1969, Nelson and his staff announced that April 22, 1970 would be the day of what they named the “National Teach-In on the Crisis of the Environment.” Another flurry of media attention followed. His November Senate newsletter announced the proposal to his Wisconsin constituents. A New York Times article featured a photograph of University of Minnesota students conducting a ceremonial burial of an internal combustion engine and included the prediction that Nelson’s teach-in “could be a bigger and more meaningful even than the antiwar demonstrations.” Press coverage swelled throughout the winter and into the spring of 1970. Several newspapers and magazines hired reporters to cover the new environmental beat. Life, Newsweek, Time, Fortune, Esquire and other major periodicals published special environmental editions. Nelson’s teach-in proposal simultaneously gained grassroots support and national publicity from this widespread media attention. Nearly a half-century after that first Earth Day observance, the most common question now associated with this environmental event is “Why is Earth Day on April 22?” The date has no seeming significance: It falls in the spring, an appropriate season for a celebration dedicated to the preservation and renewal of our planet’s ecology and resources, but it doesn’t fall on the symbolically appropriate first day of spring (also known as the vernal equinox). Peace activist John McConnell proposed a day to honor the Earth and the concept of peace at a 1969 UNESCO Conference in San Francisco, a day to be observed on the first day of spring in the northern hemisphere (21 March 1970), but the modern Earth Day takes place a month later. In the lack of any obvious reason for a chosen date of April 22 as Earth Day, various theories have been floated to explain it, ranging from the sensible (it was chosen to coincide with Arbor Day, a traditional day on which the public was encouraged to plant and care for trees), to the ridiculous (that it was selected by “Unicorn Killer” Ira Einhorn to coincide with the birthday of Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin): I’m seeing a lot of articles and facebooks posts about Earth Day being founded by Ira Einhorn (the Unicorn Killer), and he made it on Lenin’s birthday. Since the latter example is unfortunately prominent enough to be in need of debunking, we’ll offer one here. Ever since the very first Earth Day, rumors have been floated linking its date of April 22 to the birthday of Vladimir Ilich Lenin, Russian leader of the Bolshevik Revolution and first head of the Soviet state, who was born on that day in 1870. Just after the first Earth Day, Time magazine famously reported claims that the choice of an April 22 date was all part of “a Communist trick” implemented by “subversive elements [who] plan to make American children live in an environment that is good for them.” Later commentators have asserted a putative connection between Earth Day and the father of Communism by maintaining that “Lenin’s goal was to destroy private property, and this goal is obviously shared by environmentalists.” Into this unsavory brew of notorious Earth Day connections has been stirred the exploits of Ira Einhorn, an environmental activist in the 1960’s and 70’s who was nicknamed “Unicorn” because his last name means “one horn” or “unicorn” in German. After Einhorn’s then-girlfriend, Helen “Holly” Maddux, broke up with him and moved to New York, she returned to their shared apartment in Philadelphia on 9 September 1977 to collect her personal belongings and was never seen again. Einhorn told police inquring into her disappearance that “she had gone out to the neighborhood co-op to buy some tofu and sprouts and never returned;” it wasn’t until 18 months later, after one of Einhorn’s neighbors complained about a reddish-brown, foul-smelling liquid leaking from their ceiling (directly below Einhorn’s bedroom closet) that police searched the apartment and found Maddux’s body stuffed in a trunk full of Styrofoam packing, air fresheners and newspapers. Einhorn jumped bail after his arrest and spent the next two decades evading U.S. authorities and hiding out in various European countries before he was finally extradited to the United States from France and put on trial in 2002 (after having been declared guilty via an in-absentia trial in 1993). At his in-person trial, Einhorn (who had been dubbed the “Unicorn Killer” by the press) offered the bizarre defense that his ex-girlfriend had been killed by CIA agents, who had in turned framed him for her death because he knew too much about the agency’s paranormal military research. The jury didn’t buy it, and Einhorn was (again) convicted of Maddux’s murder and sentenced to life in prison. Einhorn has since been linked to Earth Day in various news reports identifying him as a “co-founder” of the event and/or “master of ceremonies at the first Earth Day;” and accounts of Einhorn’s crime have played up those supposed Earth Day connections and his environmentalist past by (erroneously) stating that he “composted” his murdered girlfriend. This confluence of circumstances has led to the rumor that it was the evil, communistic “Unicorn Killer” himself who selected the date for Earth Day, and he chose April 22 because it coincided with Lenin’s birthday. However, Einhorn’s involvement with the original Earth Day was minor and tangential, and his claims of having had more substantial involvement in the event have been disputed by the accounts of others who took part in it, such as testimony of psychiatrist Donald Nathanson offered during Einhorn’s murder trial: Einhorn, during his testimony the day before, had spoken at length about his ’60s-era protest activities in an effort to make the case that powerful interests may have had an interest in setting him up on a murder rap. One of his claims was that he had been the organizer of the 1970 Earth Day protest, and in fact had been the event’s MC in Philadelphia. But Nathanson, who said he had been on the organizing committee for Earth Day, testified that the committee had barred Einhorn from their discussions, considering him a nuisance. There was no MC, Nathanson said, and Einhorn’s only role at the event had been as a liaison with poet and featured speaker Allen Ginsberg. But, Nathanson said, Einhorn didn’t merely introduce Ginsberg — he “commandeered the stage,” speaking “incoherently” for half an hour and refusing repeated requests to leave and let the program continue. It was devastating testimony, and the defense offered no evidence to counter it. The Earth Week Committee of Philadelphia, the group responsible for setting up the first Earth Day, has also denied that Einhorn was significantly involved in the birth of that environmental holiday: We are former members of the original 1970 Earth Week Committee of Philadelphia. Our group, which was made up of 33 members and 92 sponsors, organized the first Earth Day and Earth Week in Philadelphia. We were inspired to undertake this activity because of a speech that was given in 1969 by U.S. Senator Gaylord Nelson, the founder of Earth Day. His idea was implemented not only in Philadelphia, but also in thousands of communities across America in 1970. Much to our dismay, we now find that the self-styled hippie guru and alleged murderer of Holly Maddux, Ira Einhorn, has been taking credit for initiating and/or organizing Earth Day. He is not telling the truth. A group of very dedicated young people worked very hard to organize Earth Day, but Einhorn was not one of them. In fact, Einhorn was asked to leave several meetings of the organizing committee which he attempted to disrupt. He was not welcome there, nor did he contribute in any material way to the committee’s activities. Einhorn, given a small role on the stage at Earth Day, grabbed the microphone and refused to give up the podium for thirty minutes, thinking he would get some free television publicity. We just waited until he had completed his “act” and then got on to the serious business at hand, the keynote speech of U.S. Senator Edmund Muskie, author of the landmark U.S. Clean Air Act of 1970.
|
8875
|
Heart defibrillator implants can be hacked: experts.
|
Implanted heart defibrillators, which automatically shock a fluttering heart back into a normal rhythm, can be hacked from the outside, U.S. researchers reported on Wednesday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
There is no immediate danger to patients, the team of computer experts, electrical engineers and cardiologists said. But they made one Medtronic Inc device give up patient information off its computer chip, got it to fire improperly, and ran its battery down, all using inexpensive equipment. They offered a way to fix these weaknesses and said they were publishing their findings not to frighten patients but to inform the industry and regulators. “I think patients with implantable defibrillators should not be worried by this,” Dr. William Maisel of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School said in a telephone interview. “I think we would be doing them a disservice if this upsets them. There has never been a documented malicious attack on someone’s implantable cardiac defibrillator.” Maisel said his team had contacted the U.S. Food and Drug Administration because it could be an industry-wide problem. Medtronic’s Rob Clark said the company’s devices had carried such telemetry for 30 years with no reported problems. “This is a very low-risk event for patients that have these devices,” Clark said in a telephone interview. “The primary focus for us is on the safety and efficacy of the device. A close second on that is security and privacy.” He said the company was aware of the risks and would take them into account when designing products. “The technology in these devices constantly evolves and improves, and we will continue to incorporate measures to protect security and patient information for these devices,” Clark said. “It may be possible to deter malicious activities by making patients aware of those activities,” Maisel, Tadayoshi Kohno of the University of Washington and colleagues wrote. Their report, to be presented in May at a meeting of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Symposium on Security and Privacy in Oakland, California, is available on the Internet at http://www.secure-medicine.org. Maisel said more and more devices will use radio technology to communicate with physicians. “Right now these devices communicate over several feet most of time but it concerns us that in future they will communicate over longer and longer distances, so we want to initiate the discussion now,” he said. The defibrillators, known as ICDs, can deliver a shock to an out-of-rhythm heart, and can include a pacemaker to keep the heart beating properly. They also can keep a record of heart activity, transmit information to a bedside station and alert health workers to any dangerous or unusual heart activity. Defending against attacks should not be difficult, the researchers said. “Our defenses do not require battery power and therefore may require only minimal design changes to future implantable devices,” the researchers wrote. Maisel and colleagues reported in 2006 that between 1990 and 2002, more than 2.6 million pacemakers and ICDs were implanted into patients in the United States. Among them is Vice President Dick Cheney, who is 67 and has survived four heart attacks.
|
5285
|
Actress-writer Waithe: Films fall short of ethnic equality.
|
Hollywood is falling short of ethnic equality despite black-led films including “Black Panther,” actress and award-winning writer Lena Waithe said.
|
true
|
Los Angeles, Race and ethnicity, Music, Entertainment, Movies, North America, Lena Waithe, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Hollywood, TV
|
There are “a million ‘La La Lands’ every year. How often do we get a ‘Moonlight’? How often do we get ‘Black Panther’?” she said. “What to me will be true equality is when ‘Black Panther’ comes out and it’s just like ‘Captain America.’” Waithe, an actress and Emmy-winning screenwriter with the streaming comedy “Master of None” who was in the film “Ready Player One,” joined in conversation with comedian Hannah Gadsby at an Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences lunch. The event marked the launch of Action: The Academy Women’s Initiative, aimed at creating opportunities for female filmmakers to network and celebrate inclusiveness. It included the presentation of a newly established Academy Gold Fellowship to young filmmaker Geeta Malik, writer-director of the award-winning online short “Aunty Gs” and films including “Beast” and “Troublemaker.” Music legend Annie Lennox also spoke at the lunch, recounting how her activism was inspired after hearing South African leader Nelson Mandela describe how the scourge of HIV and AIDS was particularly devastating for women. There are many other crises faced by women and girls worldwide, Lennox said, including sex trafficking, physical and sexual abuse and illiteracy. “That is why I endorse global feminism,” she said, which encompasses Western nations as well as places where women “can’t reach the lowest rung.” Men must also be welcomed into the cause, she said. “If men and boys are excluded from the dialogue, we’re left with the same old misogyny,” Lennox said. Gadsby, an Australian comic who made a splash with her standup special “Nanette,” said her autism has made her acutely aware of screen characters who are relegated to the “periphery” of the action. She said television has become a “Trojan horse” that brings such sidelined characters into the forefront of stories. When Gadsby lauded Waithe for bringing diversity to the screen, Waithe said she felt the pressure of falling short as a representative of her ethnic group. “No straight white man represents anything but himself,” she said. Waithe also touched briefly on TV personality Megyn Kelly’s defense of blackface as a Halloween costume, which led to the cancellation of her NBC “Megyn Kelly Today” morning show. Waithe suggested that blackface was something that whites used to denigrate blacks but, “in a weird way,” also indicated they want to experience being black. “There’s a love for us. But how do you love us?” she said. “I want us to cherish Trayvon Martin alive, as much as we do when he’s gone,” referring to the unarmed African-American teenager shot to death in Florida by a former neighborhood watch volunteer in 2012. Amy Adams, Anika Noni Rose, Rashida Jones and Lily Collins were among those attending the event held by the academy and initiative partners E! Entertainment and Swarovski. ___ Follow Lynn Elber on Twitter at http://twitter.com/lynnelber
|
2212
|
Bulgaria steps up measures to prevent spread of African swine fever.
|
Bulgaria has stepped up measures to prevent the spread of deadly African swine fever and protect the country’s 600-million lev ($344 million) pig-breeding industry, the agriculture minister said on Wednesday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The highly contagious disease, which is incurable in pigs but harmless to humans, has spread rapidly across the northern part of the European Union member. The Black Sea state has reported more than 30 cases of African swine fever in several regions, including border provinces with Romania, in July. Bulgaria found three new cases of the disease in dead wild boar in separate regions of northern Bulgaria on Wednesday, as well as one case among backyard pigs in the town of Targovishte in the north east of the country, the food safety agency said. All pigs within a 3-kilometre quarantine zone established around the Targovishte backyard will be culled, the agency said in a statement. “The pig-breeding is a competitive 600-million levs industry, which covers 40% of the domestic consumption of pork,” Agriculture Minister Desislava Taneva, who announced several protective measures on African swine fever, told a news conference. Taneva said forestry enterprises will pay 150 levs for each wild boar killed as the Bulgarian authorities are aiming to reduce significantly the wild boar population density in 20km zones around the African swine fever outbreaks. The head of Bulgaria’s food safety agency Damyan Iliev said last week the damage the country could sustain if it fails to cope with the disease could total as high as 2 billion levs. Preventative measures also include enhancing traffic control in these areas and border points with the help of police and the army, disinfecting farms and restricting sales of pork and processed meat, Taneva said. The Bulgarian government last week granted 3.7 million levs to combat African swine fever in the Balkan country with 1.2 million farm-raised pigs. Bulgaria’s food safety agency turned to farmers in the country on several occasions, saying it is essential for them to comply with the rules on disease prevention, and all sick and dead pigs should be reported immediately.
|
31122
|
The August 2017 fight between Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Conor McGregor was called off after the former was arrested in July 2017.
|
However, we found no reports of Mayweather having been arrested in 2017, and his August 2017 fight against Connor McGreggor has not been cancelled.
|
false
|
Fauxtography, connor mcgreggor, floyd mayweather, mayweather arrested
|
A news report featuring footage of boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr. walking into a court room was recirculated in July 2017 along with the inaccurate claim that the boxer had been arrested and that his much-hyped August 2017 fight against UFC star Connor McGregor had been cancelled. The video was published to the web site Top Buzz under the title “McGregor vs Mayweather FIGHT IS OFF! Mayweather ARRESTED!! LIVE FOOTAGE”: This video actually comes from 2012 and documents the start of Mayweather’s 90-day prison sentence stemming from the boxer’s September 2010 arrest for domestic violence. The Associated Press reported at the time: Free time is about to run out for Floyd Mayweather Jr., who is due to begin a three-month jail sentence in Las Vegas stemming from a hair-pulling, arm-twisting attack in September 2010 on the mother of three of his children. The unbeaten five-division champion’s legal and ring advisers weren’t immediately commenting Thursday about Mayweather’s scheduled Friday morning surrender before Las Vegas Justice of the Peace Melissa Saragosa. The judge sentenced him Dec. 22 for his guilty plea to reduced charges in the domestic battery case. Mayweather’s lawyers, Karen Winckler and Richard Wright, said previously they didn’t plan to seek another postponement or delay. Mayweather, now 35, was initially due to begin his sentence Jan. 6. But Saragosa agreed at the last minute to let him remain free long enough to fight Miguel Cotto on May 5 in Las Vegas. The fighter who goes by the nickname “Money” won the bout and a guaranteed $32 million. Cotto was paid $8 million. Mayweather has been accused of, and charged with various crimes throughout his career. A 2015 CNN article asked “Why do we ignore Mayweather’s domestic abuse?” and listed some of the boxer’s run-ins with the law: Some examples: In 2001, he allegedly struck the mother of one of his children in the face with a car door and then punched her several times in the face.According to an account in the Las Vegas Review-Journal: “Mayweather was charged with two counts of domestic battery. He pleaded guilty in March 2002 to those counts and one count of misdemeanor battery in an unrelated case. “Under the plea agreement with prosecutors, the boxer got a suspended six-month jail sentence, a $3,000 fine, 48 hours of community service and two days of house arrest.” For attacking two women at a Las Vegas nightclub in 2003, he was found guilty on two counts of domestic battery and given a suspended six-month prison sentence for each as well as a $500 fine for each count, or community service. In 2010, he attacked the mother of three of his children at her home and punched her in the head. His oldest son called the police. He did a plea deal to domestic assault and pleaded no contest to harassment charges, serving two months of a 90-day sentence.
|
13384
|
"As a result of Chris Sununu’s vote against a Planned Parenthood contract, ""nearly 3,000 fewer"" women and families statewide accessed health care for birth control, cancer screenings and annual exams."
|
"Democratic candidate for governor Colin Van Ostern said as a result of Chris Sununu’s vote against a Planned Parenthood contract, ""nearly 3,000 fewer"" women and families statewide accessed health care for birth control, cancer screenings and annual exams Sununu, a Republican, did vote against a $639,000 Planned Parenthood contract in 2015. It led to fewer shifts at clinics, but no patients were ever turned away or denied care, the organization said. The numbers cited by Van Ostern weren’t accurate. About 1,000 fewer women accessed Planned Parenthood from one year to the next. His numbers, however, failed to account for one clinic moving out of state, and another one being closed for 5 weeks following an incident of vandalism. Still, some patients may have stayed away following the publicity surrounding the vote."
|
false
|
Abortion, New Hampshire, Health Care, Voting Record, Colin Van Ostern,
|
"Over the past few years, the issue of Planned Parenthood funding has turned New Hampshire’s little-known Executive Council into a lightning rod for controversy. Now that two executive councilors - Republican Chris Sununu and Democrat Colin Van Ostern - are running for governor, their votes on Planned Parenthood have become a significant issue on the campaign trail. Van Ostern has repeatedly claimed Sununu’s 2015 vote against $639,000 of state funding to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England denied health care to thousands of women and families in the state, saying nearly 3,000 fewer women and families accessed services statewide because of the defeated contract. Van Ostern has repeatedly said the lost funding has affected ""thousands"" of women and families. ""Real damage can come from one vote on the executive council,"" he said during an August speech. As a result of Sununu’s vote, ""nearly 1,000 fewer women and families accessed health care here for birth control and cancer screenings and annual exams in this city of Manchester and nearly 3,000 fewer did statewide,"" he said. Van Osten went back to the point again at a Concord Monitor/NECN debate on Oct. 5, saying as a result of Sununu’s vote, ""fewer women got birth control, cancer screening and annual exams."" PolitiFact decided to take a look at the numbers. There’s little question Sununu was the swing vote on Planned Parenthood funding. He had voted for similar contracts in the past, and when the funding came up in August 2015, he cited concerns about videos that purportedly showed Planned Parenthood officials discussing the sale of fetal tissue. In June, 2016, he changed course, and the funding was ultimately restored by a 3-2 vote. To get a scope of the numbers of women that were affected, we reached out to Van Ostern’s camp, which cited a 2015 WMUR article that quoted Planned Parenthood of Northern New England Senior Policy Advisor Jennifer Frizzell. ""According to details provided by Frizzell, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England served 14,191 patients at the end of 2014, but that number dropped by 21 percent, to 11,119, by the end of 2015 as a result of the ‘lost funding,’"" the article said. But numbers from Planned Parenthood show something different. The five Planned Parenthood clinics in New Hampshire saw 11,078 patients in 2014; the following year, they saw about 1,000 fewer patients statewide, according to numbers provided by the organization. It turns out that the 21 percent drop the WMUR article references included patients that were lost when a West Lebanon Planned Parenthood clinic relocated to neighboring White River Junction, Vt. in 2014. Before the relocation, Planned Parenthood clinics in New Hampshire saw about 14,000 patients. That number dropped to about 11,000 after the West Lebanon clinic moved. The drop of 1,000 patients between 2014 and 2015 also takes into account a 5-week closure of the Claremont Planned Parenthood clinic after it was vandalized and heavily damaged. That clinic served 948 patients in 2014, which fell 20 percent to 755 the following year, the steepest drop out of all the clinics. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England spokeswoman Victoria Bonney said the lost funding from Sununu’s 2015 Executive Council vote affected access to services including family planning, birth control, well-woman visits, cancer screenings and STI testing and treatment, but patients were never turned away. Bonney said the lost funding did not result in staff layoffs or denying patients care. Rather, it impacted scheduling and meant fewer patients were seen each day. Some health centers normally staffed with three practitioners a day had to scale back to two, according to Bonney. ""During the defund, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England never turned patients away and tried to meet demand with fewer resources,"" Bonney said. ""But when patients hear Planned Parenthood has been defunded, they put off health care. With so much media attention on Chris Sununu’s 2015 vote to defund Planned Parenthood, patients may have been uncertain if they could still access necessary services."" Our ruling Democratic candidate for governor Colin Van Ostern said as a result of Chris Sununu’s vote against a Planned Parenthood contract, ""nearly 3,000 fewer"" women and families statewide accessed health care for birth control, cancer screenings and annual exams Sununu, a Republican, did vote against a $639,000 Planned Parenthood contract in 2015. It led to fewer shifts at clinics, but no patients were ever turned away or denied care, the organization said. The numbers cited by Van Ostern weren’t accurate. About 1,000 fewer women accessed Planned Parenthood from one year to the next. His numbers, however, failed to account for one clinic moving out of state, and another one being closed for 5 weeks following an incident of vandalism. Still, some patients may have stayed away following the publicity surrounding the vote."
|
10837
|
Drug for Irritable Bowel Achieves Goals in Trial
|
This New York Times story about an experimental drug for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) satisfied most of our criteria. Its few shortcomings, however, were significant and threw the overall story out of balance. First, the story reported on clinical trial results obtained directly from the manufacturer of the drug being tested prior to peer review or publication in a journal. The story should have cautioned readers about the lack of external scrutiny of the findings or the conflict of interest inherent in such a scenario. The story then compounded this problem by failing to obtain any independent perspective of its own about the research. The only outside comment the story solicits is from an expert who consults for the company. The result is a story with content that comes almost entirely from the drug manufacturer–not what readers expect to see in the pages of the New York Times. There are few effective treatments for irritable bowel syndrome, and most of the treatments that are effective bring limited relief to a minority of patients. The prospect of a useful new therapy for this condition is excellent news for patients, but we need independent scrutiny of the research to make sure the results aren’t being overhyped.
|
true
|
"The story notes that the new drug would likely cost ""several dollars a day."" We’ll call this satisfactory since we can’t know exactly how much this drug will cost, but we’d suggest that a cost-per-month metric would be a better way to quantify the costs of treatment. It would allow for easier comparison with other recurring costs like the cable or phone bill. This story did a pretty good job with the statistics. Importantly, it provided the absolute percentage of patients who experienced benefits in each group according to the various assessments used in the study. The story tell us: ""Fifty percent of those on the drug had a significant reduction in pain, compared to 37 percent for those on the placebo."" Had the story used relative measures instead, it might have told us something along the lines of ""…35% more patients treated with linaclotide experienced significant reductions in pain."" We think the first description is a much more accurate and complete way to characterize the results. The story hit most of the issues we wanted to see addressed with respect to the study, including number of patients, the type of intervention, length of follow-up and outcomes measures. But it glossed over the fact that the study results appear to have come directly from the manufacturer of the drug being studied and not from a peer-reviewed journal or even the researchers who conducted the study. The drug manufacturer obviously has a strong incentive to present the results in the most positive possible light and avoid any critical analysis. It was incumbent on the story to provide some cautionary language about the preliminary nature of the findings and lack of peer review. Irritable bowel syndrome is a controversial diagnosis. Some view it as a minor problem that has been medicalized by the drug industry to sell new medicines. However, there are clear criteria for identifying the condition, and it is now a generally accepted diagnosis. The story captures some of this uncertainty when it says the condition is ""poorly understood and somewhat vaguely defined."" We don’t think this story is an example of disease-mongering. There was no mention of the fact that the study being reported on was conducted and funded by the manufacturer of the drug being tested. In addition, almost all of the information in this story came from the drug manufacturer or someone with ties to it. Examples: We think this story could have benefited from an alternative perspective. This story mentioned opioids, laxatives, and the drug Amitiza as other potential treatments for IBS with constipation. But the story didn’t discuss the mainstays of treatment for IBS — exercise and dietary changes (along w/ stress management). It also didn’t mention many other treatments that have at least some evidence to support their use, including antidepressant drugs, fiber supplements, probiotics, anti-spasmodic drugs, and peppermint oil. In addition, there was also no discussion of how the benefits of the new experimental drug stack up against any of these alternatives. The story makes it clear that this is an experimental drug that is not yet approved by the FDA. It notes that the drug will have to succeed in another phase 3 trial before the manufacturer plans to submit an application for approval to the FDA. It doesn’t speculate inappropriately about when the drug is expected to be approved. The story could have mentioned the many other drugs that are in development for treatment of IBS, including one–prucalopride–which was recently approved in Europe. However, we don’t think this story oversold the novelty of the new treatment. Since the story includes interviews with two experts — an IBS expert who consults for the drug manufacturer and the company CEO — we can be sure the study wasn’t based entirely on a press release."
|
|
26555
|
Facebook post Says the U.S. is developing an “antivirus” that includes a chip to track your movement.
|
This is a hoax. There is no “antivirus” or vaccine being developed that includes a chip to track movements.
|
false
|
Fake news, Technology, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"According to a theory circulating on the internet, the United States government will soon have an ""antivirus"" for the novel coronavirus that involves inserting a chip into your body to track your movements. That's news to us. We came across a lengthy Facebook post that claims an ""RFID chip"" will be included in the antivirus, enabling the government to ""watch your location, the speed your (sic) walking and even WHAT’S IN YOUR BLOODSTREAM."" The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) This is a hoax. There is no credible evidence that supports this theory. What’s more, the term ""antivirus"" typically refers to software designed to detect and eliminate computer viruses — not a vaccine for the human body. Related: 7 ways to avoid misinformation during the coronavirus pandemic RFID refers to radio-frequency identification technology, which has been around in one form or another since the 1970s. It uses small chips that emit radio waves to identify people or objects, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Dr. Wilbur Chen, an infectious-disease scientist at the University of Maryland’s Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health, said the idea of a vaccine containing RFID technology is preposterous. ""Even the smallest version of RFID chips are rather large such that none would ever fit into a vaccine needle — these are very small-bore needles,"" Dr. Chen told PolitiFact in an email, referring to the diameter of the needles. ""The RFID chips that are routinely used for the tracking of pets are as small as a grain of rice … or in other words, they are as large as a grain of rice, and no vaccine needles in use are that large in diameter."" Mark Fenster, a law professor at the University of Florida who has written extensively about conspiracy theories, told us this type of hoax is typical of many theories rooted in otherwise legitimate concerns about privacy. It isn’t surprising that the hoax has been adapted to the current outbreak and included in misinformation about the novel coronavirus, he said. Tracking technology has been deployed in the battle against the coronavirus. Singapore, China and South Korea have employed a number of data-generating tools to help track movement, monitor quarantines and identify where infected people are, for example. Human-rights organizations say the ramped up surveillance comes with significant privacy concerns and ethical challenges that the U.S. is still grappling with. But while there is ongoing discussion of how to use technology to help track virus spread, this ""antivirus"" implant notion remains very far afield from what is actually unfolding. ""The fear of insertion of tracking chips and other things like that into our bodies has been a longstanding bogeyman for theorists,"" Fenster said. ""There is a lot of tracking that goes on, but the suggestion that it’s being used in this manner and this way seems absurd. This comes from the stream of conspiracy theories of the last 50 years. It has nothing to do with science and everything to do with conspiracy theories."" Social media has been rife with falsehoods and hoaxes about the novel coronavirus, and the response to it. This is another one. !"
|
28414
|
"In 1943 the Supreme Court ruled that no one can be forced to participate in patriotic rituals such as the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem, so calling for NFL players to be fired for ""taking a knee"" in protest amounts to calling for the law to be broken."
|
What's true: The Supreme Court ruled in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) that under the free speech provisions of the First Amendment, public school students cannot be compelled to participate in patriotic rituals such as the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem. What's false: Neither the First Amendment nor the Supreme Court's 1943 ruling applies to private entities such as the NFL.
|
mixture
|
Legal Affairs, national anthem, national anthem protests, National Football League
|
National Football League quarterback Colin Kaepernick sparked a national controversy in 2016 by refusing to participate in pre-game renderings of the U.S. national anthem, “taking a knee” instead to protest police brutality and the oppression of people of color in America. Many of Kaepernick’s fellow athletes in the NFL and other sports organizations followed suit, opening themselves up to public criticism for being “disrespectful” and “unpatriotic.” They were even attacked by the President of the United States, Donald Trump, who repeatedly called on the NFL to suspend or fire them: If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL,or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect…. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2017 …our Great American Flag (or Country) and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU’RE FIRED. Find something else to do! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2017 Other politicians, such as Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, defended the players’ right to free speech: Hey Trump, @NFL players don’t work for you and they have freedom of speech as Americans. #TakeAKnee https://t.co/5VJNLUGUdO — Rep. Jamie Raskin (@RepRaskin) September 24, 2017 Expanding on that defense, a meme shared via social media in late 2017 promoted the claim that a 1943 U.S. Supreme Court decision affirmed everyone’s legal right under the First Amendment to refuse participation in “patriotic rituals” such as the Pledge of Allegiance and national anthem. “When you call for an NFL player to be fired,” the argument went, “you are calling for the law to be broken”: But this argument partakes of a common misconception concerning the First Amendment, namely the idea that it prohibits the abridgment of free speech not just by the government, but also by non-governmental entities such as private sector businesses. As employees of such businesses, National Football League players are subject to contractual obligations that can include limitations on their speech and behavior during the performance of their jobs, with no recourse to First Amendment guarantees. The First Amendment itself makes no mention of free speech protections outside the context of government actions: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. The above-referenced Supreme Court decision (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, decided on 14 June 1943) held, by a 6-3 vote in favor, that forcing students to stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance in public school classrooms constitutes compelled speech and violates the students’ First Amendment rights. The decision was actually a reversal of an early ruling (Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 1940) in which the justices upheld a local Pennslyvania school board’s right to impose a compulsory flag salute on Jehovah’s Witness students who wished to be excused from the ritual on religious grounds. The opinion held that the state’s interest in fostering patriotic unity was greater than that in defending individual citizens’ freedom of expression. In its 1943 decision overturning Minersville, the court’s rejection of that opinion was unambiguous: If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us. We think the action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute and pledge transcends constitutional limitations on their power and invades the sphere of intellect and spirit which it is the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from all official control. But the court was also clear in specifying that it is government officials (in this instance school board members) who are proscribed from forcing people to participate in the flag salute or other patriotic ceremonies. No mention was made of such protections’ covering employees of private sector businesses. With regard to “taking a knee,” this means that while students in public school athletics programs may be protected by the First Amendment from disciplinary action by school authorities, professional football players aren’t protected from the same punishments by their teams or the NFL. Arizona State University law professor James Weinstein confirmed the point in an interview with KPNX News in Phoenix: “The NFL is not bound by the First Amendment. The First Amendment only applies to the government — state, federal, local.” It is not illegal, therefore — as regards the First Amendment or the Supreme Court’s 1943 decision, at least — for the NFL to take disciplinary action against protesting players. That is not to say the court’s opinion doesn’t inform the public debate over the NFL controversy, however. The justices were firm in upholding the importance of intellectual and spiritual diversity in the face of strident demands for patriotic unanimity, whatever their source: Struggles to coerce uniformity of sentiment in support of some end thought essential to their time and country have been waged by many good as well as by evil men. Nationalism is a relatively recent phenomenon but at other times and places the ends have been racial or territorial security, support of a dynasty or regime, and particular plans for saving souls. As first and moderate methods to attain unity have failed, those bent on its accomplishment must resort to an ever-increasing severity. As governmental pressure toward unity becomes greater, so strife becomes more bitter as to whose unity it shall be. To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds. … [F]reedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order. As of mid-August 2018, the enforcement of National Football League rules pertaining to player protests remained on hold pending an announcement by the league and the NFL Players Association of what the official NFL policy for the 2018-19 season would be. At the season’s first game, an exhibition match between the Miami Dolphins and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, three players took a knee at the opening bars of “The Star-Spangled Banner.”
|
9497
|
Blood test by Britain's Angle detects ovarian cancer in study
|
Promising but preliminary studies of the ability of a blood test to detect the presence of ovarian cancer were heralded in a company press release and picked up in this Reuters story. Although devoid of many evidentiary details, this text’s bigger problem is that it turns unpublished pilot studies into news. The blood test has a long way to go to surmount regulatory hurdles, and success is uncertain. Better to wait, we think, until more evidence is in hand. Early and accurate diagnosis of ovarian cancer is a high priority, as many of these cancers are found too late to permit long-term survival. Existing blood tests for the early diagnosis of ovarian cancer have a relatively high sensitivity to detect the disease but are limited due to their false positive rate. A more sensitive and specific test would be a clear advancement. While the intended audience may be investors, and not the general public, this story is easily discoverable and will likely be read by patients and loved ones. But sharing diagnostic news prematurely and incompletely is problematic, as stories such as this could send many women to their doctor’s offices looking for help that is simply not yet available.
|
false
|
ovarian cancer
|
Cost is not discussed here. Cost is always a consideration when discussing a new testing method. The existing blood tests (CA-125 and OVA-1) are relatively inexpensive ($60 and $650 respectively). Although this new method may be more sensitive and specific, its cost effectiveness is uncertain at the moment. Existing tests have a relatively high ability to identify ovarian cancer (known as “sensitivity”) but are hampered by false positives (50% specificity). The story attempts to quantify the benefits of the test (“…correctly identified cancer in up to 95 percent of cases…” and “The test was nearly twice as successful in eliminating false-positives than current tests.”) but does not do so adequately. We would have liked to have seen a quantification of the specificity rate to meet this criterion–how many tests come up as positive for ovarian cancer, but are actually wrong (false positive)? Although the rate of false positive diagnoses in the pilot studies described here were quite low, they still occurred. The story would benefit from directly addressing that and other possible debits of the test. Sadly, this story appears to have jumped the evidentiary gun. The British company that funded the studies, Angle, generated a press release based on two relatively small (200 patients per study) proprietary pilot studies that have not yet been subjected to peer review. Even worse, those studies are only the first in an evidentiary chain of clinical studies needed to allow regulatory bodies to evaluate this blood test for commercial use. Ovarian cancer diagnosis is a difficult challenge. The story’s sole source is clearly identified as the chief executive of the company that appears to have funded the work. But the presence of only that source is a problem, as the text offers no independent viewpoints. The story dances around a key issue, that of comparative effectiveness. Although the point of this story is that this new blood test does a better job of detecting ovarian cancer than do available diagnostic tests, the story offers no information about those alternatives. The story indicates that further studies are needed to fulfill European and US regulatory requirements, implying that the test is not yet available. But the comments of the company spokesperson make the likelihood of approval seem like a foregone conclusion. There are multiple efforts to utilize the detection of circulating tumor cells (CTC’s) as a method of early redirection of cancer. The technology has been under study for a number of years. So, while perhaps an improvement over existing methods, the test method is not novel. We have repeatedly taken issue with the use of “breakthrough” in stories and this one is no exception. If the results of this relatively small study are repeatable, the Angle test would be an improvement over existing methods. Parts of this story (a direct quote, for example) are independent of the company’s news release.
|
4973
|
Recuperating Sanders says he may slow down campaigning pace.
|
Bernie Sanders began reintroducing himself to the 2020 campaign on Tuesday, venturing outside his Vermont home to say that he doesn’t plan on leaving the presidential race following last week’s heart attack — but that he may slow down a frenetic pace that might have contributed to his health problems.
|
true
|
Vermont, AP Top News, Health, General News, Politics, Campaigns, Election 2020, Heart attack, Burlington, Bernie Sanders
|
“We were doing, in some cases, five or six meetings a day, three or four rallies and town meetings and meeting with groups of people. I don’t think I’m going to do that,” Sanders told reporters when asked what his schedule may look like going forward. “But I certainly intend to be actively campaigning. I think we’re going to change the nature of the campaign a bit. I’ll make sure that I have the strength to do what I have to do.” Pressed on what that meant, Sanders replied: “Well, probably not doing four rallies a day.” Sanders’ campaign has said he will be at next week’s Democratic presidential debate in Ohio. But it hasn’t commented on if or when he’ll resume campaigning before that — or what his next steps will be. NBC News announced it would air an “exclusive” interview with Sanders, his first since the heart attack, on Wednesday. His health problems come at a precarious time, since Sanders was already facing questions about being the oldest candidate seeking the White House, and he has seen his recent poll numbers decline compared to 2020 rival Elizabeth Warren, his chief competitor for the Democratic Party’s most-progressive wing. Sanders, a Vermont senator, also recently shook up his campaign staff in Iowa and New Hampshire, which kick off the presidential nominating process. “I must confess, I was dumb,” Sanders said in front of his house, speaking in soft, calm tones with his wife, Jane O’Meara Sanders, looking on behind him. “Thank God, I have a lot of energy, and during this campaign I’ve been doing, in some cases, three or four rallies a day all over the state, Iowa, New Hampshire, wherever. And yet I, in the last month or two, just was more fatigued than I usually have been. And I should have listened to those symptoms.” Supporters privately conceded that the timing of the heart attack — which came just as the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump was escalating — helped limit the political fallout. But they also acknowledge that he will have to more directly address lingering health concerns then, if not before. And they hinted changes would be coming to better keep their candidate healthy. “We’re going to look at everything — the whole campaign in its totality — and make adjustments where necessary,” said national campaign co-chair Nina Turner, who spoke with Sanders at length on Tuesday during a call with his four national co-chairs. “But make no mistake: Sen. Bernie Sanders is as committed — more so, even more now than he always has been, if that’s even possible.” Last week began on a high note when Sanders announced that he’d raised $25.3 million during the year’s third quarter, more than Warren and any other Democratic presidential hopeful. But word of that was overshadowed hours later Tuesday, when Sanders was at a campaign event in Nevada, experienced chest discomfort and was taken to a hospital, where he was diagnosed with a heart attack. Doctors inserted two stents to open up a blocked artery in his heart. Sanders left the hospital on Friday and flew home to Vermont the following morning. “It wasn’t a major heart attack. He had a minor heart attack. The stents will be extremely helpful in terms of blood flow. I assume he’ll be far more vigorous,” said RoseAnn DeMoro, a Sanders’ confidante and former executive director of National Nurses United. “Heaven help the opposition.” His campaign noted that he had $33.7 million in cash on hand in the quarter that ended last month and, on Monday, he released a plan to impose stricter campaign finance limits. The plan was in the works for weeks before Sanders took ill, advisers say, but they declined to comment on the effectiveness of campaigning via press release — simply issuing policy statements without a candidate out there campaigning to back them up. Surrogates have taken Sanders’ place on the campaign trail in the meantime, including Carmen Yulín Cruz, mayor of San Juan, Puerto Rico, who visited New Hampshire on Saturday. Sanders has been active in recent days communicating with his staff and broader network of longtime supporters. Those who have spoken to him say he is quick to shout down questions about his health, insisting that he’s fine — and that he vowed to remain committed to the 2020 race in a Monday conference call with his entire campaign staff. Supporters also say the campaign has seen a surge in fundraising while he recuperates — though it hasn’t released figures to quantify that. Sanders said Tuesday that he would be meeting with the cardiologist on a regular basis and getting some checkups, but that his main doctor is in Washington, meaning he didn’t have a physician in Vermont, “let alone a cardiologist.” He previously promised to release his medical records and reiterated that, saying, “We will release them at the appropriate time.” ___ Peoples reported from New York. Weissert reported from Washington.
|
11301
|
Pitt program to prevent diabetes shows promise
|
"This report takes a useful approach to coverage of a complicated study on diabetes prevention in high-risk groups: It focuses on one local man who participated in the study. By describing his participation in some detail, the reporter does a good job of illustrating the protocol and the health situation the study addresses without being overly technical and abstract. This is an excellent journalistic approach to handling a complex study and provides a richer takeaway message than many other stories reporting on these studies. The fact that the man’s outcomes were mixed–weight loss, an active life at 78 and a controlled diet, yet status quo blood sugar levels hovering near trouble–is useful in illustrating the all-important ""not-a-magic-bullet"" message. Yet the story stumbles in three significant ways: by suggesting the study ""proves"" certain benefits. That’s overstatement. The results suggest a link between treatment and outcomes but prove nothing by failing to consult an independent source to put the findings in context by failing to include cost, availability and treatment option information It’s also worth noting the value of a local story that puts a national study in a local context. For local readers, it keeps a story close to the ground–and makes it more relevant. If only the story had connected the dots to provide readers with the information needed to take action."
|
false
|
"The reporter misses an opportunity to say how much it costs to participate in a diabetes prevention program–or to take metformin. A creative reporter could then have compared those costs to the costs of managing diabetes. During a time when costs of health care are so much in the public’s mind, people reporting on treatments should always probe the question of costs vs benefits. The reporter quantifies the benefits of the lifestyle or drug intervention, but never does so in absolute risk reduction terms. So when the story states risk reductions of 34% or 18%, we want to know ""34% or 18% of what?"" The story fails to mention the side effects of metformin, which include gastro-intestinal side effects that can inhibit compliance. A serious condition, lactic acidosis, is a rare but significant side effect. The study on which the story is based is riddled with caveats. Some findings baffle the researchers. However, the reporter twice makes the mistake of saying the story ""proves"" certain benefits. The study suggests, or demonstrates a link, but it does not prove anything. By using the word ""proves"" the reporter over-interprets the findings, exaggerating the quality of evidence. Therefore the story earns an Unsatisfactory rating under this criterion. The story does nothing to exaggerate the prevalence or severity of type 2 diabetes. The reporter spoke only with two study participants–an area man who was a subject and a researcher who headed local efforts. The local researcher does offer properly moderated comments, casting the study as suggestive of benefits under certain conditions. This is a good start for sourcing but insufficient. At minimum the reporter should have spoken with one disinterested diabetes or obesity clinician or epidemiologist who could help put the findings in context. The study itself implicitly lays out the options to preventing diabetes–lifestyle changes, drugs or doing nothing. But the story could have been improved significantly by indicating there are many different diet-and-exercise approaches beyond those used here, as well as numerous drug treatments and bariatric surgery. The reporter fails to mention how and where diabetes prevention programs are available. Lifestyle-modification diabetes prevention programs are a staple offering of hospitals, community centers, insurance companies and corporate wellness programs. The article could at least have mentioned this–and provides a local resource–to allow readers to follow up if they wanted to. Many people with high blood sugar but not diabetes take metformin as prevention. It would be useful to know how widely used the treatment is. No claim of novelty is made for the lifestyle or drug interventions. There is no evidence the reporter drew inappropriately from the press release."
|
|
5187
|
Book: Trump mulled order to close parts of VA health system.
|
Eager for changes at the Department of Veterans Affairs, President Donald Trump toyed early on with issuing an executive order to close parts of the VA health system without consulting Congress, according to an upcoming book by his former VA secretary.
|
true
|
AP Top News, Health, Privatizations, General News, Politics, Business, David Shulkin, Veterans, Veterans affairs, Donald Trump
|
In the book, obtained by The Associated Press, David Shulkin describes a March 6, 2017, conversation in the Oval Office where Trump explored ways his administration could act quickly to shutter government-run VA medical centers that he viewed as poorly performing. Trump was fresh off his 2016 campaign in which privatizing VA had become a political hot button after he pledged to steer more veterans to private-sector doctors outside the VA. He had said the VA was the “the most corrupt” and “probably the most incompetently run” Cabinet department. Democrats and major veterans’ groups oppose “privatization” and say VA facilities are best-suited to treat battlefield injuries such as post-traumatic stress disorder. At the meeting, Trump asked whether “we should begin to close the VAs,” according to the book. Legislation prohibited that, so Shulkin responded that the VA was working with Congress to set up a system-wide review to address underperforming facilities, whether by fixing or closing. “But this takes time,” Shulkin said. Trump exclaimed, “So let’s just do an executive order!” “This is a legislative issue,” Shulkin said. Trump then offered, “Can’t we just declare a national emergency?” At that point, according to the book, Trump’s son-in-law and White House adviser, Jared Kushner, chimed in, “Yes. We’re still in a war, so we could.” Shulkin told the AP that ultimately he dissuaded Trump from pursuing that route, persuading him to sign executive orders for changes with wider support, such as expanded telehealth options for veterans. The 2017 Oval Office conversation is illustrative of Trump’s early intentions toward the VA and remains significant as he pushes for reelection, citing in part his accomplishments in expanding Choice and boosting mental health care for veterans. Veterans as a group have largely backed Trump throughout his presidency, despite lingering questions about his intentions about preserving the VA. In response to a request for comment, White House spokesman Judd Deere said in an email: “While the former VA secretary chooses to profit off his time in office and share outlandish claims about his private conversations with the President, President Trump remains focused on ensuring veterans receive the care they have earned through their incredible sacrifice for our Nation.” Shulkin, a former Obama administration official, was fired by Trump in March 2018 amid an ethics scandal over a trip to Europe that Shulkin took with his wife that mixed business and pleasure, as well as mounting rebellion by political appointees in his agency. His book, “It Shouldn’t Be This Hard to Serve Your Country,” will be released next Tuesday. He said the expansion of the Veterans Choice program under his successor, VA Secretary Robert Wilkie , has put the agency at risk “as never before.” Shulkin cited political forces inside and outside the administration that are more interested in putting “companies with profits” over the care of veterans, and suggested that only new leadership — at the department, probably at the White House, too — could save VA. Yet, as VA secretary, Shulkin pushed a plan to give veterans wider access to doctors outside the VA medical system. Veterans should get “more choice in the say of their care,” he told the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee in October 2017. “Nobody should feel trapped in the VA system.” Shulkin says Trump’s plans regarding “privatization” were still an open question when Shulkin was fired. A few weeks before, Shulkin said he was explaining to Trump in an Oval Office meeting why an aggressive expansion of private care for veterans could be very costly for the government, at more than $50 billion. Trump decided to call Pete Hegseth, a Fox News commentator who was once considered for the VA secretary job , to ask his opinion. “We can find the money from within the VA,” Hegseth told Trump, according to the book, suggesting significant cuts to VA care. “Much of my narrative deals with the factions pushing me to simply close the VA or at least large parts of it that weren’t working well,” Shulkin wrote. “But I didn’t see how shutting down a system specifically designed to care for veterans could be in the veterans’ best interests.” The legislation that Trump ultimately signed last year gives veterans more freedom to see doctors outside the VA in an effort to cut wait times, paving the way for new rules that Shulkin says will “lead to the rapid dismantling of the current VA system.” Recent studies have actually found that veterans got into a VA facility for an appointment faster on average and received better care than if they went to a private facility, raising questions about the value of steering veterans to the private sector if it results in inferior care. The legislation expanding the Choice program includes a provision for a presidentially appointed commission to be set up in 2021, after voters elected the next president, to compile a list of VA facilities nationwide to be closed or reconfigured. If the president approves, closures would then begin unless Congress voted down the entire list, giving lawmakers no input on individual facilities to be added or removed. Wilkie in recent months has been urging Congress to pass legislation to allow the commission to start before the November 2020 election, citing market assessments the VA will have completed by then to judge which facilities to keep. Wilkie insists he’s opposed to privatizing VA. “I am convinced that the path now chosen, if allowed to continue, will leave veterans with fewer options, a severely weakened VA, and a private health care system not designed to meet the complex requirements of high-need veterans,” Shulkin wrote. ___ Associated Press writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.
|
26487
|
“Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer bans buying US flags during lockdown.”
|
In Michigan, an executive order requires businesses to close areas of the store that are dedicated to carpet, flooring, furniture, garden center and plant nurseries and paint. Michiganders aren’t prohibited from buying American flags.
|
false
|
Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"Since the first COVID-19 cases were identified in Michigan in March, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has tapped her emergency powers to try to slow the spread of the coronavirus. A recent blog post on TeaParty.org claims that includes prohibiting Michiganders from buying American flags. ""And there it is…"" reads the post’s headline. ""Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer bans buying US flags during lockdown."" The post features an April 11 tweet that shows a photo of American flags behind yellow caution tape. ""No buying flags in MI,"" the tweet says. ""This is Costco."" This 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.) Citing ""deaths in the hundreds"" and ""confirmed cases in the thousands,"" Whitmer, a Democrat elected to her office in 2018, issued executive order 2020-42 to take effect on April 9, 2020. The order, described as a ""temporary requirement to suspend activities that are not necessary to sustain or protect life,"" does not mention flags. It does direct people to stay home, with exceptions, and requires businesses that remain open for in-person sales to follow rules including limiting how many people can be in a store at the same time. The order also requires businesses to close areas of the store — ""by cordoning them off, placing signs in aisles, posting prominent signs, removing goods from shelves, or other appropriate means"" — that are dedicated to carpet, flooring, furniture, garden center and plant nurseries and paint. Flags are not listed, but they’re addressed at the top of a ""frequently asked questions"" page on the governor’s website. Q. Does Executive Order 2020-42 prohibit buying an American flag? A: No. While the order places certain limits on how goods are sold, it does not ban Michiganders from buying any item, including flags. Shelter-in-place orders around the country have disrupted daily life and in some cases made it more difficult to obtain everything from toilet paper to appliances. It’s possible that it could be harder for someone in Michigan, or other states, to buy an American flag. But that’s different from the governor banning residents from making such a purchase."
|
24925
|
"Sarah Palin endorsed a Wasilla policy that charged sexual assault victims for their ""rape kits."
|
Wasilla had the policy, but Palin didn't comment on it
|
mixture
|
National, Crime, Bloggers,
|
"As bloggers have scrutinized every aspect of Sarah Palin’s record as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, many of them have criticized a city policy that sought reimbursement for forensic exams from victims of sexual assaults. The bloggers contend Palin supported the policy and have criticized her for allegedly being insensitive toward rape victims. To check out their allegations, we examined documents from the city and the Alaska Legislature and interviewed people in Wasilla, advocates for sexual assault victims and a former state legislator. We found the truth is murky. Although Wasilla had such a “rape kit” policy while Palin was mayor, there is no evidence that she explicitly endorsed the policy. But nor have we found any evidence that she opposed it. The policy sought to have rape victims’ health insurance companies reimburse the city for the $500 to $1,200 cost of a forensic exam that is conducted after a sexual assault. Presumably, some of the cost might have been passed along to the victim through requirements for deductibles or co-payments, although victim advocates say they don’t know of anyone in the small town who had to pay such a fee. The policy generated little if any controversy during the first four years after Palin became mayor in 1996. Anne Kilkenny, a civic activist in Wasilla who has written a widely circulated e-mail criticizing Palin, told PolitiFact she does not recall that the issue ever came up. The policy came to light briefly in 2000 when the Alaska Legislature passed a law that required state and local law enforcement agencies pay the full cost of the exams. “We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence,” then-Gov. Tony Knowles said when he signed the bill into law. “Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.” Legislators and activists have said the law was prompted by Wasilla and several other communities with a similar policy. But a search of the committee minutes for the bill found no mention of Wasilla or Palin. Nor could we find any indication that city officials spoke up about the bill until after it was passed, when Police Chief Charlie Fannon was quoted in the local newspaper The Frontiersman saying he opposed it. “In the past we’ve charged the cost of exams to the victims’ insurance company when possible,” he told the newspaper. “I just don’t want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer.” He estimated the new law would cost his department $5,000 to $14,000 per year. His comments suggest the city sought the money more from insurance companies than the victims themselves. The paper quoted him as saying that ""ultimately, it is the criminal who should bear the burden of the added costs.” Fannon could not be reached for comment. His phone number has been disconnected. City officials, who have been swamped with calls and public records requests about Palin, referred PolitiFact to items on the city Web site. (They've gotten so many requests they created a page of Questions & Answers Concerning Former Mayor Palin . But those documents provide an incomplete picture because some don’t include details prior to 2000, when Wasilla had the policy. There’s no evidence that Palin ever commented on the rape kit policy. Bloggers and other critics contend that she must have known about it because she approved the city budget. “If she was against charging for the rape kit, as mayor she could have made the decision not to charge for the rape kit,” Andrew Halcro, a Republican who co-sponsored the bill when he was a state legislator, said in an interview. He ran for governor as an independent in 2006 but was defeated by Palin. City documents are inconclusive. The budget documents we reviewed were signed by Palin but don’t explicitly mention the policy. In response to recent criticism, the McCain-Palin campaign said in a statement that Palin “does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence gathering test."" Yet the campaign has not provided any evidence that Palin ever opposed the policy. So where does that leave us? Wasilla clearly had the policy. Bloggers have portrayed it as a heartless rule seeking money from rape victims, but they have neglected to mention that the policy seems to have been aimed more at getting money from insurance companies than from victims. We can’t find that Palin ever commented on the policy, pro or con. But as mayor, she indirectly endorsed it by approving city budgets that relied on the revenue. So we find the bloggers' charge to be ."
|
22824
|
We have dozens of districts that go for 150 to 200 miles, splitting counties, splintering cities and connecting areas that have very little in common.
|
"Reform advocate says ""dozens'' of Florida political districts split counties and splinter cities"
|
true
|
Elections, Florida, Ellen Freidin,
|
"Following a polarizing midterm election, and with intensifying partisan bickering over everything from taxes to health care, a group dubbing itself No Labels is hoping to start an earnest discussion about policy over politics. The group, comprised of Democrats, Republicans and independents, launched its website on Dec. 13, 2010, in the hopes of starting a movement that ""encourages leaders to ‘put the labels aside’ in an effort to seek common sense solutions to our nation's problems."" The launch brought out independents like outgoing Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who both spoke at a kickoff event in New York City that was live-streamed on the No Labels website. Also speaking was Ellen Freidin, chairwoman of Fair Districts Florida, a group behind the passage of two constitutional amendments that set new guidelines for how legislative and congressional districts are drawn up. Freidin used the occasion to note: ""We have dozens of districts that go for 150 to 200 miles, splitting counties, splintering cities and connecting areas that have very little in common."" We decided to take a closer look at Freidin’s statement. The Fair Districts Florida website cites two examples of such districts, but we were curious to see if there were dozens of examples, as Freidin stated. About redistricting First, some background on how Florida’s districts are created. It’s an issue bound to be back in the limelight as state legislators restart the process of translating those numbers into political boundaries on a map. Every 10 years -- two years after U.S. Census figures are compiled -- state lawmakers redraw state and congressional legislative districts. The objective is to adjust district sizes to reflect changes in the population. Occasionally, new congressional districts are added when a state gains population. For example, Florida gained two House seats this time. The civics book reason for periodic redistricting is to protect the value of each voter’s ballot by preventing it from being diluted by a population surge -- the goal being for each person's vote to carry relatively equal weight in elections. But the process of redistricting is never without accusations of ""gerrymandering"" often brought up against the party in power. The term dates back to 1812 when Massachusetts Gov. Eldbridge Gerry signed a bill to redistrict Massachusetts. A newspaper noted that the contorted districts on the map resembled salamanders, and the term ""gerrymander'' has since come to mean creating districts for political motive over geographical proximity. The Florida website for the redistricting that was carried out in 2002 gives a sense of the process and numbers involved. The Legislature divided the state’s population evenly into 120 state House districts, each containing a little over 130,000 people. Records show the number of registered voters per district ranged between 45,000 and 98,000. The same population is divided evenly into 40 state Senate districts. Each district's population hovered around 399,000, with the number of registered voters varying from about 134,000 to 280,000. Florida's Congressional districts contained a uniform population of 639,295, give or take a few people, and had voter registration ranging from about 232,600 to 418,700. During the November 2010 election, Florida voters approved two amendments to the state constitution that set specific guidelines in the creation of such districts. Amendment 5 was geared toward state districts and Amendment 6 was to be applied to congressional districts. Both amendments say districts should not be drawn to favor incumbents or a particular political party. Districts must be contiguous, compact and follow local and geographical boundaries. The districts shall also not be drawn to interfere with minority representation as provided for in the Voting Rights Act. The amendments were brought forth by Fair Districts Florida, a group that collected 1.7 million signatures to get the questions on the state ballot. A look at our districts So, do the districts created in 2002 ""go on for 150 to 200 miles, splitting counties, splintering cities and connecting areas that have very little in common?'' Here, with the distances for the larger districts approximated by plugging cities into Mapquest, are some examples we found of both state and congressional districts that speak to the issue at hand: The 2nd Congressional District This Panhandle district represented by newly elected Republican Steve Southerland contains the largest number of counties in the state's delegation -- 16. It takes in some or all of Bay, Calhoun, Dixie, Franklin, Gadsden, Gulf, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Leon, Liberty, Okaloosa, Suwannee, Taylor, Wakulla and Walton counties. Approximate distance covered: 240 miles. The 3rd and 4th Congressional Districts The 3rd District, represented by Democratic Rep. Corrine Brown, contains portions of larger cities like Jacksonville and Orlando, while also taking in smaller communities like Gainesville and Apopka. The 2010 edition of the Almanac of American Politics notes that the district has three sets of borders. Designed in 1992 to be North Florida's black majority seat, from a partisan point of view it was also created ""to shift as many Democrats as possible to the 3rd District to strengthen Republicans elsewhere,'' the Almanac says. It taps Democratic voters in the center of Jacksonville, then picks up voters in Orlando and Gainesville, with stops in Sanford and smaller communities. Approximate distance covered: 210 miles. Meanwhile, Republican Rep. Ander Crenshaw's 4th District stretches across the northern border of the state from the Atlantic shore in Nassau County to Tallahassee in the center. It includes, as the Almanac notes, ""much of Jacksonville, minus the African-American neighborhoods,'' and runs west through Baker, Union, Columbia, Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson and Leon counties. Approximate distance covered: 165 miles. The 5th Congressional District Carved from west-Central Florida, this district represented in the upcoming Congress by Republican Rich Nugent stretches from the northern tip of Polk County to include nearly all of distant, rural Levy County, large portions of Lake, Marion and Pasco counties and all of Sumter, Citrus and Hernando counties. Approximate distance covered: 140 miles. The 6th Congressional District Republican U.S. Rep. Cliff Stearns' district is another that takes a bite out of the metropolitan Jacksonville area. From there it wobbles south through wooded north-central Florida, shaving off part of Gainesville and stopping in Lake County, a short drive from Orlando. In the process it takes in some or all of Duval, Clay, Bradford, Alachua, Gilchrist, Levy, Marion and Lake counties. Approximate distance covered: 146 miles. The 10th and 11th Congressional Districts Democratic Rep. Kathy Castor's 11th District used to be entirely in Tampa and Hillsborough County, but during the 2002 redistricting, a sizable pocket of Democratic voters in South St. Petersburg were frog-marched across Tampa Bay, electorally speaking, to be joined with Democratic kindred spirits. The district also picked up a piece of Manatee County. The effect boosted the GOP margins in Pinellas County, where Republican Rep. C.W. Bill Young holds the 10th District, which voted for Bill Clinton in 1996 and Al Gore in 2000. Young's district is the only one in Florida contained wholly within a single county's borders. The 16th Congressional District Represented by Republican Tom Rooney, the district stretches from the Atlantic coast on the east almost to the Gulf of Mexico, and was described in the 2010 edition of the Almanac of American Politics as ""one of the most oddly designed districts in the nation.’’ The district spans parts of Charlotte, Glades, Hendry, Highlands, Okeechobee, St. Lucie, Martin and Palm Beach counties. Approximate distance covered: 155 miles. The 22nd Congressional District While the district was once a Democratic stronghold, it recently traded hands into the Republican party when Allen West defeated Democrat Ron Klein. the narrow coastal district, which stretches from Palm Beach Gardens down to Cooper City Broward County, may be a straight shot down the coast, but the western portion of the district is a series of electoral cul-de-sacs. The 25th Congressional District The needs of voters in the largely Hispanic enclaves of West Miami-Dade County like Hialeah Gardens may have little in common with the needs of older rural voters in Collier County, but the two Republican-leaning areas are linked in the same congressional district. The 25th District was one of two new districts carved out by the Legislature in 2002. Mario-Diaz Balart, who was Florida House majority leader at the time, also chaired the redistricting committee that created the district. Diaz-Balart, a Republican, was subsequently elected the district’s first congressman in 2002. It is about to pass to newly elected U.S. Rep. David Rivera, also a Republican. State Senate District 1 Sen. Tony Hill's district cascades south through Duval County, spreading out in central St. Johns, and sending a spur line into Putnam County, and dips south to take in a large swath of Flagler County and a looping portion of Volusia County. Approximate distance covered: 108 miles. State Senate District 3 State Sen. Charlie Dean’s district covers Baker, Dixie, Hamilton, Lafayette, Suwannee and Taylor counties, in addition to parts of Citrus, Columbia, Jefferson, Leon, Levy, Madison and Marion counties. Approximate distance covered: 272 miles. State Senate District 7 Represented by Republican Sen. Evelyn J. Lynn, this district snakes from Clay County down to Putnam and Marion counties and covers most of Volusia County. Approximate distance covered: 165 miles. State Senate District 8 Republican Sen. John Thrasher’s district is spread along the Atlantic coast, running through Nassau, Duval, St. Johns, Flagler and Volusia counties. Approximate distance covered: 144 miles. State Senate District 14 Republican Sen. Steve Oelrich's district covers Alachua, Bradford, Gilchrist and Union counties with portions of Columbia, Levy, Marion, and Putnam counties in the fold. Approximate distance covered: 85 miles. State Senate District 15 Republican Sen. Paula Dockery's district is carved where four counties converge -- Hernando, Sumter, Lake and Polk, throwing in a piece of Osceola County to fill it out. Approximate distance covered: 159 miles. State Senate District 18 The district, represented by Democratic Sen. Arthenia Joyner, covers parts of East and South Tampa, South St. Petersburg in Pinellas County and a sliver of Manatee County. Approximate distance covered: 57 miles. State Senate District 21 Republican Sen. Mike Bennett's district covers nearly all of Manatee County, plus pieces of Sarasota, DeSoto, Charlotte and Lee counties (and the Senate misspells Charlotte on its website map). Approximate distance covered: 124 miles. State Senate District 26 The district represented by Republican Senate President Mike Haridopolos covers coastal areas of Brevard County, but also covers portions of Osceola and Indian River counties. Approximate distance covered: 164 miles. State Senate District 27 The district, currently represented by Palm Beach County Republican Lizbeth Benacquisto, spans five counties (Palm Beach, Glades, Hendry Charlotte and Lee) and travels nearly coast to coast from West Palm Beach in the east to Fort Myers in the west. Approximate distance covered: 140 miles. State Senate District 28 Republican Sen. Joe Negron's district hugs the highly developed southeastern coast, except when it veers deep into the state to pick up portions of Okeechobee, St. Lucie, Martin and Palm Beach counties. Approximate distance covered: 109 miles. State Senate District 39 Democratic Sen. Larcenia Bullard’s district covers a vast geographic terrain from Hendry County to rural Immokalee in Collier County, plus urban areas in Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties and down to the Florida Keys in Monroe County. Approximate distance covered; 268 miles. State House districts are more compact because they take in a smaller population, but they do meander from time to time, with electoral ramifications for the counties and towns affected. Here are a few notable clusters: State House Districts 29, 30, 31, 32 This Atlantic coast region is solidly Republican, with Tom Goodson in district 29, Ritch Workman in district 30, John Tobia in district 31 and Steve Crisafulli in district 32. Despite the GOP nature of the territory, it is still carved into byzantine interlocking connections of neighborhoods and towns around Melbourne and the beach communities to the north and south. State House Districts 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 49 These districts, taken together, are a case study of the political legerdemain when district lines are drawn. Districts 36, 39 and 49 rub shoulders in the urban Orlando area, and present three faces of the Democratic Party -- white liberal, African American and Hispanic. The state House district interactive map puts them in political perspective. District 36, represented by liberal Democrat Scott Randolph, is shaped vaguely like a lobster, with its claws in northern and eastern Orange County and its body in the center of Orlando. District 39, represented by African American Rep. Geraldine Thompson, is a more solid, cohesive block of voters. District 49, represented by Darren Soto, tracks the Hispanic population through west Orlando, down to Kissimmee and elsewhere, spreading across Orange and Osceola counties. All around them are Republican districts enjoying a carefully crafted symbiotic relationship. Between the lobster's claws rests the wealthy enclave of Winter Park, in district 35, home to Republican House Speaker Dean Cannon. Nearby is the southern edge of Apopka Republican Rep. Bryan Nelson's district 38, which picks up voters in the gaps between Democratic districts 36 and 39. District 40, represented by Republican Eric Eisnaugle, is another odd configuration, cobbling together disparate suburbs in lumps and bulges constituting southern GOP border of this political nexus. Neighboring district 41, represented by Republican Stephen Precourt, is where the tidy urban divisions really begin to break down. With districts 36 and 39 holding large groups of Democrats across the border, this Republican district sprawls west from Orange County into the old Florida region of south Lake County, and dips into Osceola County to the south. State House Districts 55, 67, 68 and 69 With its southern end sandwiched narrowly between three Republican districts, district 55, represented by Democrat Darryl Rouson, combines voters in Sarasota, Manatee, Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. Meanwhile, Republican Rep. Greg Steube's district 67 takes eastern chunks of Sarasota and Manatee counties along with an oddly shaped section of southern Hillsborough County. Republican Rep. Jim Boyd's district 68 covers the more affluent beach communities around Bradenton, and district 69, represented by Republican Jay Pilon, takes in south Manatee and Sarasota, enveloping the southern tip of Rouson's district. State House Districts 78, 79, 80, 84 District 78, represented by Democrat Stephen Perman, contains a large portion of western Palm Beach County, plus odd pieces of Martin, St. Lucie and Okeechobee counties, including what looks like a surgical sliver of metropolitan Fort Pierce. It also wraps around district 84, represented by Haitian-born Democrat Mack Bernard, whose district includes Belle Glade and the surrounding area, then tracks along a road east to pick up more voters in neighborhoods around West Palm Beach. North of this oddly shaped pair of Democratic districts it is solidly Republican. Mike Horner's district 79 runs north from Okeechobee County through Osceola County and picks up chunks of Orange and Polk counties. And Debbie Mayfield's district 80 tracks the jagged edge of Perman's district to the Atlantic Ocean. State House Districts 101 and 112 Naples Republican Matt Hudson's district is a political oddity with two nodes of urbanization separated by thousands of square miles of swamp, farms and open land. To the east it picks up a little of urban Broward County along the edge of Pembroke Pines, then it slides west through a long, narrow passage that includes the Everglades and Big Cypress swamp, emerging amidst a host of suburban neighborhoods around Naples, in Collier County. Approximate distance covered; 108 miles. The same strange geography and approximate distance applies with district 112, represented by Miami Republican Jeanette Nunez. Winnowing people by party alliance does raise a basic question about representative government -- Should a politician be given carte blanche to discard certain voters, or would the public good be better served if the offfice-holder were required to take divergent views into account? But that discussion is not why we're here. So, back to the question at hand. Was Freidin accurate in stating that Florida has ""dozens of districts that go for 150 to 200 miles, splitting counties, splintering cities and connecting areas that have very little in common?"" Florida has a total of 185 legislative and congressional districts -- 120 in the state House, 40 in the Senate and 25 in Congress. Of those, 67, or 36 percent, are contained within the borders of a single county. In less populated regions, a district must, of necessity, spread out to meet its population number. But, as the maps above show, that's not always the reason for the shifting lines. The state's major cities are carved into all manner of peculiar bits and pieces to assemble state House, Senate and even Congressional districts. Fort Lauderdale and Orlando are each divvied up into four congressional districts, often being grouped with smaller rural communities that share little common interest. It is also clear that the integrity of county lines is not a concern when district lines are drawn. As we mentioned before, only one of the state's 25 congressional districts is wholly contained in one county. Among the rest, one includes some or all of 16 counties, and the average number of counties per district is 4.8. Miami-Dade and Broward counties are in five congressional districts. Hillsborough, Pinellas and Duval counties are in three. The state House and Senate are not much better. In the House, 59 -- slightly less than half -- of the districts fall within one county. One district takes in portions of 10 counties, and the average number of counties included wholly or partially in a state House seat is 1.96. Only seven of the 40 state Senate seats fall within one county, and on average, senate districts spread over three counties. What about the claim that districts ""go for 150 to 200 miles?'' Many do, as our rough approximations illustrate. Strictly speaking, there are not ""dozens'' that run over 150 miles, but there are at least nine on our list, and if you loosen the standard slightly to take in those over 140 miles, we found 13. One might argue that districts should be measured not just from end to end, but by the sprawling territory they take up, which would likely add to the list. Whether it would get it to ""dozens'' is debatable. Inarguably, the districts meander and wind in jagged jigsaw patterns that crisscross cities and counties. We highlighted more than three-dozen examples. With a slight penalty for fuzzy math on the number of giant districts."
|
10155
|
Medical Alert: Government Approves New Depression Treatment
|
This story covers a newly FDA approved for the treatment of major depression disorder: transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). This story fails to provide any scientific or clinical evidence about the device and the specific patients that it might help. No independent expert was interviewed to provide objective information regarding the potential benefit and risks of TMS. This story failed to indicate that TMS treatment is only available at one location in the U.S. It provides some bare bones factual information about how TMS works and an on-air demonstration by a scientist involved in researching the device (who was not identified as such). The piece did not provide any detail at all regarding how well TMS works or how well it works compared with typical depression treatment (talk therapy and/or antidepressant medication). Overall the piece makes little contribution to a lay person’s understanding of who might benefit from this new treatment, how to get access to the treatment, and what benefits and harms they might expect.
|
false
|
"This story correctly indicates that a typical treatment cost between $6,000 to $10,000. This cost, for 40 minute treatments, several times per week for 4-6 weeks, was verified with the manufacturer. This story relies on the anecdotal experience of one patient to describe the potential benefits of treatment. Potential benefits of TMS, as compared to a sham procedure, include improvements in depressive symptoms and complete resolution of symptoms. However, it does not appear that these benefits were tested in a head-to-head comparison with antidepressant medication. No adverse effects of TMS treatment were provided. This information could have been presented in a concise manner. Side effects reported by the manufacturer include transient scalp pain and discomfort ranging from mild to severe that occurred mainly during the initial week of treatment. The story does not mention that TMS treatment is contraindicated for patients with implanted metallic devices or non-removable metallic objects in or around the head. The story also does not mention that TMS has been shown to benefit patients who have tried 1 or more antidepressant medication at effective doses and duration of treatment. This story does not mention any of the relevant information from the research that led to FDA approval of TMS therapy. (See comments for Harms of Treatment, Benefits of Treatment, and Sources of Information.) This story did not make it clear that this treatment is only FDA approved for patients who have not responded to antidepressant medication. Instead it lumped one personal anecdote in with 19 million other cases (""Nineteen million Americans suffer from depression every year. And like so many, Martha tried anti-depressants and therapy. But for her, none worked."") That’s disease-mongering. How many Americans do fail to respond to antidepressant medication? Answering that requires journalism. This story does not provide any expert opinion from an independent source. It fails to mention that the doctor providing commentary and demonstrating the treatment procedure was a primary author for some of the research conducted on TMS. This story is correct in indicating that TMS is a non-systemic, non-invasive alternative to antidepressant medications, other drugs, or ‘other measures’ to help patients suffering from depression, presuming that ‘other measures’ means cognitive-behavioral therapy. No information was provider for the availability of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) treatment. The manufacturer, Neuronetics, indicated that its Neurostar TMS will only be available at a limited number of treatment center around the country. After contacting the manufacturer, HNR learned that the treatment is only available at 1 site in the U.S. (See www.NeuroStarTMS.com) This is a novel treatment that was recently been approved by the FDA. We can’t be sure if the story relied on a news release for most of its information. We do know that only one patient of only one doctor at only one medical center was interviewed in the piece. No independent perspectives."
|
|
10365
|
Targeted Beams: New Machine Speeds Radiation Treatment
|
"This was a totally uncritical story about a newly approved radiation treatment which can be used against prostate cancer. It describes a modification of an existing treatment (IMRT) that merely decreases treatment time, though not the number of treatments. The quality of life benefit of reducing treatment time by 3 to 7 minutes seems marginal, and there is no evidence that this would lead to better treatment outcomes. Although the manufacturers have distributed news releases on this technology, one wonders why the WSJ chose to publish this story now. The story failed to: quantify the harms and benefits of the approach; disclose the actual costs of the treatment; include any independent expert perspective; explain what options were available to patients. The story even referred to the manufacturer as ""the industry leader in radiation technology."" That line, and the entire story, reads more like a paid advertisement than independent journalism. The Wall Street Journal does some of the finest health care reporting in this country on most days. This story was a major disappointment. In an era in which healthcare costs are skyrocketing, it is not responsible reporting to herald a new device without critically evaluating its contribution."
|
false
|
"The story states that ""The cost of RapidArc is similar to other radiation therapies. It is covered by Medicare and most insurers"". But that doesn’t tell us the cost, and it seems to suggest that since it is covered by insurers, the consumer need not worry about the costs. In fact, the acquisition of this sort of equipment is quite expensive and the doctors investing in the technology will need to recover their costs, which may lead to unnecessary treatments. That’s why actual cost is a big deal and should have been in the story. The story provided no information about how effective the radiation from this device is in the treatment of prostate cancer. How do the lifespans of men treated with the RapidArc compare to men receiving radiation treatment from other devices? How about those having surgery? The major cited benefit is that treatment time is reduced from 5 to 10 minutes to less than 2. It does not reduce the number of treatments. The only harm of treatment mentioned was that the patient interviewed for the story feels a little sleepy in the afternoon after treatment. However the experience of a single individual cannot be considered sufficient information on the possible harms associated with a treatment. The story both laid out the thinking behind the use of more targeted radiation (i.e. to minimize radiation exposure of surrounding tissue) and indicated that data comparing treatments is difficult to come by. It then went on to state categorically that the use of this technology reduces risks. However it never provided insight about how the reader could ascertain that this was the case. The story actually gave no information documenting the effectiveness of this treatment or anything about the incidence of side effects. The story did not engage in overt disease mongering. The story included comments from a number of individuals, all of whom have a vested interest in the RapidArc (a company spokesperson, a spokesperson for a cancer center that has acquired the technology, a professional society spokesperson, and a patient who has selected this treatment). The story should have included comment(s) from someone who could have provided an unbiased evaluation of what, if any, added benefit this approach contributes to the arsenal of available treatment options. The story stated that the radiation provided by the RapicArc is much greater than that of 40 years ago. That said, the story provided the reader with no information about the treatment options available to those diagnosed with prostate cancer beyond radiation. The story indicated that the highlighted device, the RapidArc, was currently in use in only 30 locations in the US. While the RapidArc may be new to the market, the story provided no insight as to how the radiation treatment from this device compares to others on the market. Is it delivering something that is truly unique or are there other systems out there that can similarly focus the radiation beam used in treatment? (In fact – going to the company website, it appears that RapidArc is just a modification of existing intensity-modulated radiation therapy technology. The story says RapidArc is used in conjunction with IMRT and image-guided radiation therapy. But what does that mean?) We are tempted to give this an unsatisfactory score, but because we see no text that is identical in the story and in the company’s news releases, we will post a N/A score because of our uncertainty. What fuels our suspicion is:"
|
|
7393
|
China halts work by team on gene-edited babies.
|
China’s government ordered a halt Thursday to work by a medical team that claimed to have helped make the world’s first gene-edited babies, as a group of leading scientists declared that it’s still too soon to try to make permanent changes to DNA that can be inherited by future generations.
|
true
|
AP Top News, International News, Hong Kong, Genetic Frontiers , Health, China, Science, Asia Pacific
|
Chinese Vice Minister of Science and Technology Xu Nanping told state broadcaster CCTV that his ministry is strongly opposed to the efforts that reportedly produced twin girls born earlier this month. Xu called the team’s actions illegal and unacceptable and said an investigation had been ordered, but made no mention of specific actions taken. Researcher He Jiankui claims to have altered the DNA of the twins to try to make them resistant to infection with the AIDS virus. Mainstream scientists have condemned the experiment, and universities and government groups are investigating. He’s experiment “crossed the line of morality and ethics adhered to by the academic community and was shocking and unacceptable,” Xu said. A group of leading scientists gathered in Hong Kong this week for an international conference on gene editing, the ability to rewrite the code of life to try to correct or prevent diseases. Although the science holds promise for helping people already born and studies testing that are underway, a statement issued Thursday by the 14-member conference leaders says it’s irresponsible to try it on eggs, sperm or embryos except in lab research because not enough is known yet about its risks or safety. The conference was rocked by the Chinese researcher’s claim to have helped make the world’s first gene-edited babies. Conference leaders called for an independent investigation of the claim by He, who spoke to the group Wednesday as international criticism of his claim mounted. There is no independent confirmation of what He says he did. He was scheduled to speak again at the conference on Thursday, but he left Hong Kong and through a spokesman sent a statement saying “I will remain in China, my home country, and cooperate fully with all inquiries about my work. My raw data will be made available for third party review.” Several prominent scientists said the case showed a failure of the field to police itself and the need for stricter principles or regulations. “It’s not unreasonable to expect the scientific community” to follow guidelines, said David Baltimore, a Nobel laureate from California Institute of Technology who led the panel. There already are some rules that should have prevented what He says he did, said Alta Charo, a University of Wisconsin lawyer and bioethicist and a conference organizer. “I think the failure was his, not the scientific community,” Charo said. Gene editing for reproductive purposes might be considered in the future “but only when there is compelling medical need,” with clear understanding of risks and benefits, and certain other conditions, said Dr. Victor Dzau, president of the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, one of the conference sponsors. “Not following these guidelines would be an irresponsible act,” he added. Other sponsors of the three-day conference are the Academy of Sciences of Hong Kong, the Royal Society of the United Kingdom and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. ___ Marilynn Marchione can be followed at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP The Associated Press Health & Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
|
4284
|
Report reveals widespread abuse of women during childbirth.
|
A new report says more than one-third of women in four low-income countries in Africa and Asia were slapped, mocked, forcibly treated or otherwise abused during childbirth in health centers and suggests that such mistreatment occurs worldwide.
|
true
|
Ghana, International News, Abuse of women, General News, Africa, Health, Guinea, Nigeria
|
The study published Wednesday in The Lancet medical journal says women in Nigeria, Myanmar, Ghana and Guinea also experienced high rates of cesarean sections and surgical cuts to the vagina, or episiotomies, without their consent — and often without a painkiller. “Mistreatment during childbirth can amount to a violation of human rights, and could be a powerful disincentive from seeking facility-based maternity care,” the study said in a discussion of similar research. The new study led by the World Health Organization followed more than 2,000 women during labor and interviewed more than 2,600 women after childbirth. Some 42% reported physical or verbal abuse or discrimination during childbirth. Some women were punched, shouted at, scolded or forcibly held down. Younger, less-educated women are at risk of such mistreatment which also includes neglect by health workers or the use of force during procedures, the study said. Most of the abuse occurred in the 15 minutes before and during childbirth. The study cited research that found that “midwives and doctors described women as ‘uncooperative’ during this period and some justified using physical and verbal abuse as ‘punishment.’” Health officials say the mistreatment of women during childbirth appears to be global, including in developed countries. But the practices are rarely documented and women often fear reporting such violations. Previous reports have documented physical abuse of women in eastern Europe, particularly those of Roma descent, including instances where women are forcibly separated from their newborns for several days. Abusive practices during maternal care have also been widely reported across Latin America, where Venezuela became the first country to legislate against specific unethical practices by adopting a law to ban so-called “obstetric violence” in 2007. Among the 2,016 women observed in the new study, 13% of the cesarean sections and 75% of the surgical cuts to the vagina were performed without consent. In 59% of cases, vaginal examinations were performed without consent. “Younger, unmarried women were more likely to have non-consented vaginal examinations,” the study said. Of the 2,672 women interviewed after childbirth, more than half or 57% said they had not been offered any relief for pain. Some women were then detained afterward at the health centers for not being able to pay the bill. The study suggested allowing women to have a companion of their choice present during childbirth, improving the informed consent process and redesigning maternity wards to improve privacy. ___ Follow Africa news at https://twitter.com/AP_Africa
|
2691
|
Roche aims to 'underwhelm' on SMA drug price to challenge rivals.
|
Swiss drugmaker Roche plans to price its oral spinal muscular atrophy drug (SMA) risdiplam aggressively to challenge two of the world’s most expensive medicines, Biogen’s Spinraza and Novartis’s gene therapy Zolgensma.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Spinraza’s list price is $750,000 in the first year, and $375,000 thereafter, while Novartis’s gene therapy for the genetic muscle wasting disease lists at $2.1 million, making it the drug industry’s most expensive one-time treatment. Third-to-market risdiplam is due for a U.S. Food and Drug Administration decision by May 24. While Roche has not released risdiplam’s price, drug chief Bill Anderson said the Basel-based company will price the drug much as it did its hemophilia A medicine Hemlibra in 2017, when it undercut traditional therapies made by rivals NovoNordisk and Takeda to help win patients. “With Hemlibra, we priced at about half of bypassing agent,” Anderson said in an interview on Monday at the JP Morgan Healthcare Conference in San Francisco. “We aim to underwhelm with our price” with risdiplam, he added. Hemlibra costs around $500,000 a year. Treatment that includes bypassing agents given to stop bleeding in hemophilia patients with resistance to traditional clotting factor treatments can top $1 million. Experts see Zolgensma becoming the treatment of choice for newborn patients who test positive for SMA, because gene therapy may offer infants yet to exhibit symptoms hope for normal development. Risdiplam, seen by analysts as topping $1 billion in annual sales, and Spinraza, already a roughly $2 billion per year seller, are seen competing for older patients. Oral, daily risdiplam may be less complicated, given Spinraza is given every four months via an infusion in the spine. Zolgensma is also being tested in older patients with a spinal infusion, though the trial has been halted due to safety concerns. Novartis is awaiting the FDA’s go-ahead to restart. Novartis also is developing an oral drug, branaplam, though its chief researcher, Jay Bradner, in December indicated the company had cooled to the medicine, saying he did not “see a big opportunity for oral therapy there, or we would develop this molecule further”. Novartis has since clarified its stance, saying its trial of branaplam would continue, with a decision to be made after the study produces data later this year.
|
7957
|
Countries face 'fights' over facemasks in China: German health minister.
|
Countries’ procurement agents are fighting each other in China for access to the protective equipment that must play a key role in stemming the spread of the novel coronavirus, German Health Minister Jens Spahn said.
|
true
|
Health News
|
He was responding to a spate of reports of consignments of protective masks destined for European countries being bought up by United States officials, sometimes even as aeroplanes stood ready for departure on the tarmac. “You hear stories of people fighting in the truest sense of the word over these masks in China,” he told reporters on Friday during a visit to a logistics company that is acting for the German government. “That’s not a good development, but it reflects the strong demand.” Germany’s mix of lockdown measures and aggressive testing for the novel coronavirus has so far been successful in slowing the spread of the disease, with each patient only infecting one other on average in recent days. But that development, while encouraging, has focused more attention on the supplies of protective equipment that will become necessary if the disruptive curfews in force are ever to be lifted. “This crisis is not a sprint but a long-distance run,” Spahn said, warning the public not to expect a sudden or complete relaxation of lockdown and quarantine rules. He said Europe was in a strong position to manufacture much of the protective equipment it needed, even in the face of international competition for the output of the largest suppliers in China. “We make masks only on a small scale here in Germany, but we build the machines that are used to make the masks,” he said. “And much of the animal fleeces that are used to make the masks are produced in Europe and Germany. So if the machines and the fleeces are from Germany and Europe, we should be able to have production in Europe again.”
|
9834
|
Brain stimulation may help some stroke patients
|
The major difference is that Reuters attempted to put the study’s main finding — a 23% improvement with the new treatment on a test of cognitive abilities — into meaningful terms for readers. And although WebMD quoted more sources (four independent experts compared with Reuters’ one), we think Reuters managed to cover most of the same ground and deliver the same cautious messages despite relying on fewer sources. Overall, we were impressed with how effortlessly this story checked off nearly all of our 10 boxes without wandering or getting too wordy. This is a great example of health journalism that is interesting to read and provides a valuable service to patients. It is telling that researchers with this study really couldn’t say whether the results they observed would matter to patients. It’s a reminder that benefits deemed “significant” in research studies may not always lead to improvements that are meaningful in the real world. Journalists perform an important service when they raise awareness of the gap between research results and the reality experienced by their readers.
|
true
|
Reuters Health,Stroke
|
The story states that the transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) machine costs about $50,000, but it could also have noted — as WebMD did — that there are costs associated with training clinicians to use the machine. In addition, neither story tried to estimate what a course of treatment might cost patients or their insurers — information which probably could be gleaned by looking at the costs of TMS treatment for depression. Although there was room for improvement here, we think the story does enough to merit a satisfactory. This story provides a more nuanced look at potential benefits of TMS than the competing WebMD coverage. In addition to providing statistics on the amount of improvement seen in the stimulation group, the story notes that “it’s not clear what the amount of improvement they observed would mean for patients in their daily lives.” It also explains that the benefits were more pronounced among those with more serious symptoms. This is important context for patients or caregivers who want to know how the research findings might apply to them. The story did not mention potential adverse effects of TMS or state whether any adverse effects were seen in the study. Although the story describes features of the study that reduce the potential for biased results (e.g. randomization, inclusion of a placebo control group that received fake magnetic stimulation), we thought it could have lingered a bit longer on the limitations of such a very small study that included only 20 people (only 9 of which actually received a full course of TMS treatment). Nevertheless, the story delivers the correct take-home message when it says, “larger studies at multiple treatment sites are needed to determine how helpful magnetic stimulation can be in stroke recovery.” The story notes that about half of the 800,000 people who suffer a stroke each year experience symptoms similar to those of patients in this study. This gives readers a good frame of reference for judging the impact the treatment might have. The story quotes an author of the new study as well as a neurologist who wasn’t involved with the research. In fact, that independent expert was quoted before the study author was. The story says that doctors typically prescribe cognitive rehabilitation for patients with post-stroke “neglect” symptoms, but that progress is often slow and the associated hospital stays costly. The story states: “…brain stimulation is still an experimental technique, and not ready to be used as part of normal stroke rehabilitation.” The story explains that TMS is currently used for depression and during spinal surgery, and that its use for stroke patients is novel. This story clearly did not rely solely or largely on a press release.
|
11614
|
Breaching a Barrier to Fight Brain Cancer
|
This story, on a novel approach to infusing chemotherapy for a brain tumor, just goes to show what a careful, engaged reporter can accomplish when given sufficient time and space to write a story. As the story’s ratings show, the reporter follows all health reporting best practices. But the story accomplishes a great deal more. Starting with a single patient’s experience in a trial of a novel cancer treatment, the reporter illuminates the function of the blood-brain barrier; the nature of a deadly brain tumor recently in the news; the structure of clinical trials; some recent advances in chemotherapy; and the nuances of the patient-researcher relationship. The reporter also manages to humanize the patient and locate the disease in a family’s life, without getting mawkish or exploitive. It’s the kind of story that leaves one with hope–that quality health journalism does still exist.
|
true
|
"Costs of the treatment were not mentioned. But we can understand that in an article about an experimental approach so far from clinical use. With only a Phase I study underway, there is no data to report. The story makes this clear. The story explains that the infusion method has not been proven safe–indeed, that’s what the current study is designed to find out. In addition, the reporter cites the doctor’s estimated risks of the treatment the featured patient faces: a 5 percent chance of becoming ""visibly weak"" and a 1 percent chance of left-side paralysis. The story plainly discloses that there is no evidence that the procedure treats glioblastoma successfully. (Although the anecdotes about spots on MRIs ""melting away"" did suggest efficacy. This was potentially misleading as they may recur in the vast majority of cases.) The article describes glioblastoma’s deadliness with facts and data rather than appeals to emotion. The language is in some places dramatic but not inappropriately so. The reporter draws on three principal sources: two physicians involved with the research and an independent expert on glioblastoma from NIH. The story describes the conventional treatments for glioblastoma–surgery, radiation and/or chemotherapy via pill or IV. The story makes very clear that the approach described is experimental and not clinically available. It is the subject of a Phase I trial of 30 patients. The novelty of this approach to glioblastomas is implicit: The featured patient is only the second to receive the treatment. The story also explains that the studied method of infusion uses an existing drug in a novel way. There is no evidence that the story relied on a news release."
|
|
10143
|
Atkins fares best in study of four weight-loss regimens
|
This is a story describing a recent study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association which compared weight loss after a year of following one of four popular diet plans. It is the best comparison of these popular diets to date. The story details the weight loss and changes to the lipid profiles and includes helpful comments by nutrition experts. It would have been a stronger study if it had included costs of treatment and treatment options for obesity. In addition, the perspective that the weight loss was minimal in all groups should have been emphasized. However, if most Americans are gaining several pounds per year, even a modest weight loss may represent benefit from any dieting plan. The study found that the weight loss observed in the study ranged from 3.5 lbs to 10.4 lbs after one year of dieting. While this might be discouraging to readers, it would have been helpful to clarify that the weight loss of the study participants was less than might be expected for individuals actually following any of the diet plans that were studied. This is an important perspective to share with readers interested in making an informed decision about diet for weight loss. Overall, though, this was a balanced and complete story with good input from good sources.
|
true
|
The story did not mention the relative costs for following any of the particular diets mentioned. It did not mention the cost of the books nor the costs associated with dietician visits. The primary outcome of the study was weight loss; after a year, individuals on the Atkins diet were reported to have lost about 10 pounds as compared to about a six pound loss on the other four diets. The quantitative information on the other clincial parameters measures were not reported. The story mentioned a concern with the Atkins diet that it would result in increased LDL cholesterol but that the study did not find this to be the case. The article on which the story was based reported on the reasons people did not complete the study; there were no serious medical harms found. The story presented the results of a recently published scientific article on a randomized trial comparing four popular weight loss diets. It presented estimates of the weight loss observed after one year and mentioned changes in other clinical parameters (triglcyerides, blood pressure, HDL cholesterol) without providing precise details about these. The story did not engage in disease mongering. The story included interview material with several nutrition scientists who had no connection with the study that was the subject of the story. It also contained critical comments from two individuals whose diet plans were studied. These comments came from respected individuals in the field and are a particularly valuable addition to the content. The story reported on weight loss outcomes comparing four different methods for altering food consumption to result in weight loss. However additional treatment options were not even mentioned, such as balancing caloric intake with exercise, and weight loss surgery for the morbidly obese. This story reported on a study that compared weight loss of overweight and obese individuals who followed one of four popular weight loss diets. The story mentioned that the people in the study were given a book on the diet that they were assigned to follow and the books used are available commerically. It would have been helpful to readers to include explicit details on the specific books used. The information presented is not novel and was not presented as a new finding. Does not appear to have relied solely or largely on a press release.
|
|
36062
|
A pathologist said that Jeffrey Epstein's death looked more like homicide than suicide.
|
Did a Forensic Pathologist Say That Jeffrey Epstein’s Death Looks More Like Homicide Than Suicide?
|
mixture
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
On October 30 2019, media and its social counterpart were awash in a bombshell claim that a pathologist said that Jeffrey Epstein’s death looked more like a homicide than a suicide:Jeffrey Epstein's autopsy shows signs of homicide, not suicide, according to forensic pathologist https://t.co/D4RhYb9DvP— fox8news (@fox8news) October 30, 2019Jeffrey Epstein's death was 'likely homicide, not suicide', says famed NYC pathologist https://t.co/nl1uXtjzQB— The Independent (@Independent) October 30, 2019Medical Examiner: Epstein Autopsy More Consistent with Homicidal Strangulation Than Suicide https://t.co/gIHlwvhInX— Chris From WI (@ChrisFromWI) October 30, 2019Forensic pathologist says in 50 years he's never seen injuries like the ones Epstein experienced in a suicidal hanging https://t.co/SoyE12wrti— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) October 30, 2019Headlines like “Medical Examiner: Epstein Autopsy More Consistent with Homicidal Strangulation Than Suicide” led to the widespread belief that a medical examiner had ruled that Epstein’s injuries resembled those of a homicide (as widely speculated) versus a suicide (the “official” line.) A Breitbart article with that headline stated in part:Epstein, who was found hanging in his prison cell at the high-security Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, had been on suicide watch and was found after a “total breakdown” in security surveillance, [Dr. Michael] Baden noted.“I think that the evidence points toward homicide rather than suicide,” Baden, who was asked by Epstein’s family to investigate the death, declared.Use of the word “declared” hinted — perhaps inadvertently — that Baden’s commentary constituted official findings in an investigation. An October 30 2019 Miami Herald piece (“Jeffrey Epstein’s injuries look more like murder than suicide, noted pathologist says”) began by reporting that Epstein’s brother Mark did not believe Epstein killed himself, and so he hired Baden, who also moonlights as a television show host and Fox News contributor, to offer a second opinion:Since his brother was found dead in a New York City federal jail in August [2019], Mark Epstein has been worried that his life, and the lives of other people, may be in danger because federal authorities, believing that Epstein committed suicide, have not fully investigated what happened to his brother, sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.Now a private forensic pathologist hired by Mark Epstein to oversee his brother’s autopsy bolsters what conspiracy theorists have suggested for months: that the evidence does not support the finding that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself.Dr. Michael Baden, one of the world’s leading forensic pathologists, viewed Jeffrey Epstein’s body and was present at the autopsy … In an interview with the Miami Herald, Baden described Epstein’s jail cell, the ligature he allegedly used to hang himself, and his own suspicions that federal authorities have not conducted a thorough probe into Epstein’s cause and manner of death.“They rushed the body out of the jail, which they shouldn’t do because that destroys the evidence,’’ Baden told the Herald.“The brother doesn’t think it was suicide — he is concerned it might be murder. It’s 80 days now and if, in fact , it is a homicide other people might be in jeopardy,” Baden said.During an October 30 2019 appearance on the Fox News show Fox & Friends, Baden claimed that Epstein “had two fractures on the left and right sides of his larynx.” Baden, who says he was “present” at Epstein’s autopsy and “viewed” his body, said that it was unusual for one or more bones to be fractured in a hanging. Epstein suffered multiple fractures. The Herald quoted Baden as saying fractures in general “are extremely unusual in suicidal hangings and could occur much more commonly in homicidal strangulation.”Baden also observed hemorrhaging in Epstein’s eyes, which he said are “more common” in strangulation than hanging. The outlet noted that Baden’s conclusions based on his observation were not totally aligned with the ruling of New York City Medical Examiner Barbara Sampson of a suicide by hanging, adding:[Baden] also explained that the pathologist who actually conducted the autopsy, Dr. Kristin Roman, also had trouble determining that Epstein hanged himself, and ruled that he manner of death was “pending.’’“The autopsy did not support suicide,’’ Baden said. “That’s what she put down. Then Dr. Sampson changed it a week later to manner of death to suicide. The brother has been trying to find out why that changed … what was the evidence?”Fox News also published an article about Baden’s commentary:While there’s not enough information to be conclusive yet, the three fractures were “rare,” said Baden, who’s probed cases involving O.J. Simpson, President John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, record producer Phil Spector, New England Patriots star Aaron Hernandez and many others.“I’ve not seen in 50 years where that occurred in a suicidal hanging case,” the 85-year-old medical legend told Fox News … There were also hemorrhages in Epstein’s eyes that were common in homicidal strangulation and uncommon, though not unheard of, in suicidal hangings, the forensic pathologist said. […]“Those three fractures are extremely unusual in suicidal hangings and could occur much more commonly in homicidal strangulation,” Baden, who is also a Fox News contributor, said.The New York Post also quoted Baden’s Fox & Friends appearance on October 30 2019:“The issue would be, did somebody come in and cause his death?”There would be no shortage of people keen to kill the pedophile, the pathologist admitted.“There were 800 other people in the correctional facility and most of them would have liked to have gotten their hands on him,” he said, both because of the sex crimes and the chance to “make a name for themselves.”However, he stressed, “A number of people had to be involved if this was a homicide.”“It’s 80 days now and the brother feels he is getting a runaround,” Baden said.On August 13 2019, the New York Daily News published an op-ed about Epstein’s death three days before. The piece, written by a former inmate familiar with jailhouse methods of suicide, the article explains exactly how a suicide by hanging differs in prison:At night, guards cannot wake everyone up every half-hour to make sure they’re alive. Instead, guards check for breathing. Staff makes rounds every half-hour, peeking in to make sure everything’s alright. A friend in a maximum security prison simply waited for rounds to pass to hang himself with a sheet from the top of his door immediately after. No great height is required if you tuck your knees in and drop off the steel sink. Soaping the noose ensures that it will swiftly and silently break your neck rather than strangling you slowly.Although hanging is typically associated with a drop from a height, inmates must circumvent the lack of closets, rails, and kickable chairs to end their lives in a suicide.On August 16 2019, the New York Times reported further details of Epstein’s death from his autopsy, noting Baden’s presence as an observer, but referring to him only as “a private pathologist” without naming him:Guards on their morning rounds found Mr. Epstein at about 6:30 a.m. [on August 10 2019], prison officials said. He appeared to have tied a bedsheet to the top of a set of bunk beds, then knelt toward the floor with enough force that he broke several bones in his neck, officials said … Dr. Sampson, the medical examiner, said on Sunday night that her office had conducted an autopsy of Mr. Epstein but declined to release a determination about the cause of death. A city official said at the time that she wanted more information from law enforcement before releasing her determination. A private pathologist hired by Mr. Epstein’s lawyer observed the autopsy.The Times article concluded by noting that the broken bones cited by Baden fueled suspicion at the time the story was first reported, for the same reasons. Sampson, who performed the autopsy, indicated that particular finding alone was not entirely out of the realm of possibility:[On August 15 2019], an article in The Washington Post fueled further speculation when it reported that Mr. Epstein’s autopsy showed that he had a broken hyoid bone that could have been a sign of strangulation as well as of suicide by hanging. But Dr. Sampson and several experts cautioned against drawing conclusions, saying the broken bones were consistent with hanging, especially in an older man.After Dr. Baden’s October 30 2019 Fox & Friends appearance, many news organizations reported that a private pathologist had claimed that Epstein’s death was a homicide and not a suicide. However, what we really found out was who the private pathologist present at the autopsy and hired by Mark Epstein had been — Dr. Michael Baden. Baden pointed to elements of the suicide that were uncommon, but Epstein’s hanging death was itself uncommon due to its location (a jail) and workarounds undertaken because of that. Baden said the findings — reported initially after Epstein’s death — could point to homicide, not that they did point to homicide.Baden was observing and hired on behalf of Mark Epstein, partly due to his client’s fear that he and other family members were endangered if Jeffrey Epstein had indeed been murdered. Baden acknowledged that Mark Epstein’s fears were unfounded, and while he observed the autopsy and the body, he was not performing it and drew his inferences through observation. The same details (broken or fractured bones and ocular hemorrhage) were noted in the official autopsy, which ruled that Epstein’s death was a suicide by hanging.
|
8797
|
Group says Herbalife products have too much lead.
|
Six dietary supplements sold by Herbalife Ltd contain dangerous amounts of lead if taken in the recommended dosages, according to information posted on Monday on a Web site linked to a long-time critic of the firm.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Herbalife disputed the claim, saying its weight-loss and nutritional products met regulatory requirements in all of its markets. “The FDA hasn’t established a general limit on lead in foods, but we are certainly well within their suggested guidelines,” Herbalife spokesman George Fischer said in a telephone interview, referring to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which sets dietary guidelines. The Fraud Discovery Institute posted a letter on its Web site on Monday attributed to Christopher Grell, an attorney in Oakland, California, who specializes in product liability cases. The letter said recommended daily doses of six Herbalife products contained levels of lead that are dangerous and in excess of what California law allows under its Safe Drinking and Toxic Environment Act. It urged the state to order Herbalife to place “clear and reasonable warnings” on those products. Barry Minkow, founder of the institute, has $50,000 invested in Herbalife “put” options, betting that the company’s shares will fall. Minkow, a San Diego pastor who served more than seven years in jail for stock fraud, now works to uncover fraud through the institute. He has a history of criticizing Los Angeles-based Herbalife. Minkow said in a telephone interview that his bet that the company’s shares will fall was only intended to finance his investigation. California law requires businesses to warn consumers if their products contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The six products mentioned in the letter are the ShapeWorks Protein Drink Mix, Healthy Meal Nutritional Shake Mix, Tang Kuei Plus herbal tablets, Thermojetics Nature’s Raw Guarana instant tea mix, ShapeWorks Cell Activator and Multivitamin Complex. The company says products are sold in 65 countries by a network of over 1.8 million distributors. Herbalife shares closed down 4.2 percent at $40.17 on Monday on the New York Stock Exchange. Grell said in an interview Monday that individual tablets may not exceed California’s 0.5 microgram limit on lead in dietary supplements, but he said the daily recommended dosage would result in lead exposure large enough to warrant a warning label. A document purported to be an invoice from Analytical Laboratories in Anaheim Inc, based in Brea, California, for $5,820 for testing the six products was posted on Fraud Discovery’s Web site. Analytical Laboratories did not reply to calls and an e-mail to discuss any tests. Minkow previously uncovered a discrepancy in the biography of Gregory Probert, who was then Herbalife’s president and chief operating officer, that led to Probert’s resignation in April. Probert had said he had earned an MBA degree at California State University. The company said he had been enrolled at the university during the 1980’s but never obtained a degree. Herbalife’s market value, after Monday’s stock decline, was $2.61 billion. It had sales of $2.15 billion in 2007. Last month, Herbalife said that Spain had issued an alert cautioning on the consumption of Herbalife products due to suspicious cases of liver damage. Herbalife said it was in discussions with the ministry. “For more than 28 years, tens of millions of Herbalife consumers worldwide have been safely using Herbalife products with an extremely low incidence of serious adverse event reports citing liver function abnormalities,” the company said at the time.
|
24655
|
Every year tobacco kills more Americans than did World War II — more than AIDS, cocaine, heroin, alcohol, vehicular accidents, homicide and suicide combined.
|
Claims that smoking kills more people annually than other dangerous activities combined
|
true
|
National, Consumer Safety, George Will,
|
"Congress recently gave the Food and Drug Administration the ability to regulate tobacco, and George Will is not impressed. He said the new law is flawed because it restricts advertising (new rules could ""merit a constitutional challenge""), because it is supported by the tobacco industry (""a crystalline example of Washington business as usual"") and because it it perpetuates what Will calls a government ""addiction to tobacco tax revenue."" ""The February expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program is supposed to be financed by increased tobacco taxes, so this health care depends on an ample and renewable supply of smokers,"" he wrote in a June 18, 2009, Washington Post column. Governments will never outlaw smoking because ""governments cannot loot tobacco companies that do not flourish."" Will thinks the new law is no good, but he's certainly no fan of smoking either, and he made this claim to demonstrate his aversion to the habit: ""Three decades ago, public outrage killed an automobile model (Ford's Pinto) whose design defects allegedly caused 59 deaths,"" he wrote. ""Yet every year tobacco kills more Americans than did World War II — more than AIDS, cocaine, heroin, alcohol, vehicular accidents, homicide and suicide combined."" More than AIDS? More than car accidents? We were skeptical, so we decided to take a look ourselves. It seems that Will plucked part of his claim from the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a leading advocate for the new law. According to the organization, about 400,000 people die from their own smoking each year, and about 50,000 die from second-hand smoke annually. And according to the group's Web site, ""Smoking kills more people than alcohol, AIDS, car accidents, illegal drugs, murders and suicides combined."" Even though that fact is repeated by many antismoking campaigns, and by the American Cancer Society, we decided to crunch the numbers ourselves. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2006, when their database was last updated, 22,073 people died of alcohol, 12,113 died of AIDS, 43,664 died of car accidents, 38,396 died of drug use — legal and illegal — 18,573 died of murder and 33,300 died of suicide. That brings us to a total of 168,119 deaths, far less than the 450,000 that die from smoking annually. As for the part about World War II, Will came up with this comparison himself. About 292,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines were killed in battle during World War II, according to a U.S. Census Bureau April 29, 2004, report in commemoration of the new World War II memorial in Washington, D.C. An additional 114,000 members of U.S. forces died of other causes during the war, bringing the total to 406,000 people. Will's claim — that smoking kills more people annually than in World War II or from other dangerous diseases and habits — holds up with the CDC and the Census Bureau. As a result, we give Will a ."
|
4288
|
Kenya becomes 3rd country to roll out malaria vaccine.
|
Health authorities in Kenya on Friday started administering doses of the world’s only licensed malaria vaccine to young children in rural areas facing high transmission rates.
|
true
|
Ghana, Malaria, Health, General News, East Africa, Africa, International News, Uganda, Kenya, Malawi
|
Kenya became the third African country to introduce the vaccine, after Malawi and Ghana. The aim is to reach about 360,000 children per year across the three countries. The health ministry described the milestone on Twitter as “a historic day” for the East African country as the health minister launched vaccinations in remote Homa Bay county. Malaria is a top killer in many African countries. According to the World Health Organization, the region accounted for 92% of the cases and 93% of malaria deaths in 2017. The parasitic disease kills about 435,000 people every year, most of them children under 5 in Africa. The vaccine is the first and only vaccine to significantly reduce malaria in children, WHO said in a statement. “Africa has witnessed a recent surge in the number of malaria cases and deaths. This threatens the gains in the fight against malaria made in the past two decades,” said Dr. Matshidiso Moeti, WHO regional director for Africa. “The ongoing pilots will provide the key information and data to inform a WHO policy on the broader use of the vaccine in sub-Saharan Africa. If introduced widely, the vaccine has the potential to save tens of thousands of lives.” It took GlaxoSmithKline and partners more than 30 years to develop the vaccine, at a cost of around $1 billion. GSK is donating up to 10 million vaccine doses in the current vaccination initiatives. Although the malaria vaccine only protects about one-third of children who are immunized, those who get the shots are likely to have less severe cases of malaria. “I am sure the vaccine will help in reducing malaria and will cut the cost of going to the hospital every now and then,” said Newton Kawinio, a local traditional chief. “By reducing the number of cases of malaria by 40% in the area where this has been rolled out, we are going to free up the number of resources in terms of health care workers in order to address other diseases, we are gonna save a tremendous number of lives,” said Dr. Aaron Samuels with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “For every 200 children vaccinated, it’s estimated that one child’s life will be saved.” Experts have begun testing out other new tools to fight malaria, including the development of genetically modified mosquitoes with an infertility gene. Resistance is growing to medicines that treat the disease, while mosquitoes are becoming more resistant to insecticides. In addition, funding for malaria efforts has plateaued in recent years. In neighboring Uganda, health officials last month reported a surge in malaria cases as cases rise even among adolescents. They cited global warming and longer wet seasons for the increase. ___ Follow Africa news at https://twitter.com/AP_Africa
|
30483
|
"A CDC doctor who swarned the public that flu shots had caused a ""deadly flu epidemic"" was found dead:"
|
“Dr. Cunningham worked in the chronic disease unit, which is not the infectious disease unit, he had no access to classified material,” [Major Michael] O’Connor [of the Atlanta Police Department] said.”[The CDC doesn’t] believe that his employment would be cause for something like that to occur because he simply doesn’t have access to those types of things.”
|
false
|
Junk News, cdc, centers for disease control and prevention, your news wire
|
On 5 April 2018, the Your News Wire web site published an article reporting that a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doctor who supposedly had warned the public that flu shots had caused a “deadly flu epidemic” was found dead: The body of the missing CDC doctor who controversially warned that this year’s “disastrous” flu shot was responsible for the deadly flu epidemic, was found in an Atlanta river on Tuesday evening. Dr. Timothy J. Cunningham, 35, a team lead with CDC’s Division of Population Health, went missing on February 12th, according to Atlanta police, with family and police desperate for answers regarding his sudden disappearance. In January, Dr. Cunningham shared his opinion that this year’s flu shot was behind the deadly outbreak of the flu, while warning that if his name was attached to the widely-circulated quotes, he would lose his job – or suffer an even worse fate. It is true that the body of Timothy Cunningham, an epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was found in an Atlanta river more than six weeks after he was reported missing. (The circumstances of his drowning death have not yet been determined.) However, no credible information documents that Dr. Cunningham had opined that flu shots were actually responsible creating a flu epidemic. Your News Wire is a fake news site that has published multiple false articles about the alleged deleterious effects of flu shots, and their “reporting” in this case cited nothing other than their own fabricated material. As Atlanta television station WXIA reported, Your News Wire’s account was “hollow of credible sources and verified facts” and included multiple false statements. Moreover, Dr. Cunningham did not deal with infectious diseases and did not have access to sensitive information in that area: [Cunningham’s disappearance] led conspiracy theorists to spin fantastic rumors online. Some claimed he knew the cure to cancer. Most believed he was holding back a CDC bombshell: that the flu vaccine caused the current epidemic. Our researchers traced that claim back to an article on a site called YourNewsWire.com from January 2018. The article quoted an anonymous CDC doctor who said, “we have seen people dying across the country of the flu, and one thing nearly all of them have in common is they got the flu shot.” While the article doesn’t name Cunningham, some are outing him as the Whistleblower, saying it was too convenient he went missing. YourNewsWire.com made several false statements in their article including that the flu vaccine is only 10 percent effective (it’s not — it’s 36% effective according to health officials) and that 2018 has been the deadliest flu season (it hasn’t — in 1918 the epidemic killed millions according to National Archives). The article says not to trust ‘Big Pharma’ and the ‘Mainstream Media.’ It was hollow of credible sources and verified facts. We checked with police and they say they are aware of these conspiracies. They say Cunningham wasn’t authorized to see classified information.
|
25915
|
Quotes President Donald Trump as saying, “Everybody says I’ve done a tremendous job with COVID… I think a little gratitude would be nice. Maybe a big ‘Thank you Mr. President’ is called for.”
|
This quote can only be found in two opinion pieces that were originally published by the News-Times in Connecticut. Trump didn’t say this quote on the two dates the opinion pieces claimed he did, and there is no evidence he’s ever said it. The newspaper has clarified its post to say it cannot confirm the quote.
|
false
|
Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,
|
"During the COVID-19 pandemic, President Donald Trump has fixated on gratitude from state leaders and a lack of positive news coverage of his administration’s response. ""We've done a fantastic job,"" Trump said at a press conference in March. ""The only thing we haven't done well is to get good press. We've done a fantastic job but it hasn't been appreciated."" A few weeks later, Trump said that Gov. Andrew Cuomo, D-N.Y., had thanked his administration for building temporary hospitals. And in April, Trump made a point to bring up that Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., publicly thanked him for supplying ventilators and COVID-19 tests, while the media had given him ""very little credit for the great job."" Yes, Trump would like some credit. But a recent post on Facebook that includes ""an actual Trump quote"" similar to these comments didn’t really happen. The quote from Ridin’ With Biden, a Facebook group started by Occupy Democrats, reads as follows: ""Everybody says I’ve done a tremendous job with COVID. My leadership has been extraordinary, best in history. My quick actions have all but wiped out the virus, saving millions of lives, and I’ve got the economy ready to roar back to better than ever before. I think a little gratitude would be nice. Maybe a big ‘Thank you Mr. President’ is called for."" Below the quote is a banner that says ""Trump thinks we should thank him for 137,000 dead."" There is no evidence that Trump ever said this exact quote. We searched Nexis (which compiles news reports from across the world), Factba.se (a website that tracks Trump’s public comments), and the White House website to see if Trump ever said this in a tweet, news interview, or press conference. Searching for excerpts of this quote leads to two opinion pieces about what Trump has said about COVID-19, published on many local news sites. The News-Times and The Norwalk Hour first published these pieces. Because both newspapers are part of the Hearst Newspaper group, these articles became part of their common digital publishing system and exist on other Hearst sites. Both articles are composed of Trump quotes that have been collected and listed by date. They were written by Gail Lehmann, a Ridgefield, Conn., resident who has been documenting Trump ""in his own words"" about the pandemic and protests since March. Lehmann told PolitiFact that her opinion pieces listing Trump quotes were first created to keep track of what the president said, like a ""time capsule,"" and didn’t have any partisan intent. Lehmann’s two opinion pieces with the ""gratitude"" Trump quote were published two months apart. The July 14 opinion piece stated the quote was from July 13. The May 12 opinion piece repeated the same quote, saying it was from May 7. Trump didn’t say this quote at any public appearances on these days. He also didn’t tweet it. Lehmann explained in a phone call that she usually tracks tweets and that she may have published the quote twice if it was retweeted. Now she can’t find the quote anywhere except on a ""great quotes"" page. On July 22, Jacky Smith, the Hearst editorial page editor, told us that a clarification was issued in The Norwalk Hour and The News-Times that they ""have been unable to confirm this quote."" Our ruling The Facebook post claims Trump asked for ""gratitude"" for how he has dealt with COVID-19 and said ""maybe a big ‘thank you Mr. President’ is called for."" The quote originates from two opinion pieces that attribute the quote to two different dates. There is no evidence that Trump said this quote."
|
11323
|
For heart bypass, old way is better
|
This story reported on the results of a recent study comparing two ways of performing cardiac bypass surgery. It did a good job of providing readers with the insight that avoiding use of a heart-lung machine did not appear to provide either short or long term benefit and that at least for the population studied, long term outcomes were not as good for those who had off-pump procedures. In addition, the story accurately reported there were no signs of mental decline in those on the machines – a worry that fueled interest in the so-called “off-pump” procedures. The story included a cautionary suggestion from an editorial writer who felt that the results of the study would not affect the surgical choice of surgeons who do a lot of these procedures. Overall, the story was well done.
|
true
|
The story did not mention how the cost per patient compared for the two procedures, though the journal article indicated that at least within the first 30 days after the operation, costs were similar. The story used absolute risk and compared the relevant outcomes in the two groups studied. The story would have been strengthened if it had included some discussion about how individuals who did not undergo either treatment could be expected to compare with those who chose these active treatments. Data on harms such as heart attack, need for additional revascularization procedures, strokes and cognitive impairment and death were included in this story. The story detailed that the study reported on had been a randomized clinical trial involving 2,203 individuals and that the results might not be generalizable to other groups such as women, the elderly or those with other illnesses. The story did not engage in overt disease mongering. The story did provide some interesting statistics. For example, it stated that cardiac bypass is the most common surgery in the world with 235,00 Americans undergoing the procedure each year but failed to reference where this information came from. The story included a perspective from the writer of an editorial that accompanied the journal article. This was a story about a study comparing on- and off-pump cardiac bypass surgery. It reported on the comparative use of these two options. It might have been helpful to provide readers with perhaps a bit broader perspective that cardiac bypass is often not the only treatment choice available for dealing with coronary artery disease; the roles for medical therapy and percutaneous procedures in the treatment of heart disease could have been mentioned. This story was about comparing outcomes for on- and off- pump cardiac bypass surgery. It stated that 1 in 5 bypasses are done off-pump. It also mentioned that ‘Patients are sometimes offered a choice of methods’. The story included relevant information about the use of both procedures in current clinical practice. There’s no evidence that the story relied on a news release.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.