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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
27923
|
A rise in automobile accidents occurs in the aftermath of the Super Bowl.
|
Even those fans who don’t drink during or after the game pose a risk to themselves and others once they hit the road because of the distraction factor. “If you’re replaying things in your head, you’re not paying attention” to your driving, said Stephanie Faul, spokeswoman for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
|
true
|
Automobiles, football, super bowl, Traffic Accidents
|
In 2003, a study of U.S. accident data performed by University of Toronto researchers uncovered a 41% increase in motor vehicle collisions in the hours following the Super Bowl. The study compared crash data from 27 Super Bowl Sundays with that of the Sundays preceding and following the big game from 1975 to 2001. The first hour immediately following the Super Bowl was the worst, with the accident rate jumping 70%. (There was a 10% drop in the accident rate during the game itself, presumably because far fewer people were on the road on that time.) The study, subsequently reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, noted that the largest surges in the accident rate occurred in the home states of the losing team, where the number of crashes increased 68% after the telecast ended, while accidents rose only 6% in the winner’s state. Accidents climbed an average of 46% in “neutral” states. The average number of people killed in crashes after the Super Bowl was 24, up from 17 on the comparison Sundays. Likewise, the number of people injured in automobile accidents jumped to 1,900 from 1,300, and the number of crashes topped 4,000, up from nearly 3,000. The researchers theorized that drinking during the game, driver fatigue because of the late hour, and distraction and disappointment among drivers whose teams lost all contributed to the rise in accidents. “We think that it may be alcohol and fatigue and inattention, and in particular the sort of what-if conjectures and Monday morning quarterbacking that occurs” after the loss, said Dr. Donald A. Redelmeier, a professor of medicine who also works at Canada’s largest trauma center.
|
7935
|
Not a square to spare: Australian shops ration toilet paper amid coronavirus panic.
|
Australia’s major grocers put strict limits on purchases of toilet paper on Wednesday, after shoppers stripped shelves in a rush of panic buying spurred by fears over a coronavirus, while the country recorded its fourth case of local transmission.
|
true
|
Health News
|
One of the first nations to take a hard line in tackling the epidemic, Australia imposed border controls a month ago on visitors from the epicenter of the outbreak in China. However, Australia now has 44 cases, four of them involving people who caught the disease despite not having left the country. Despite the few sufferers compared to countries such as Iran and South Korea, social media has been awash in recent days with photographs and videos of people stockpiling goods, from staples to sanitizers. The demand for toilet paper, in particular, has sparked the trending hashtags #toiletpapergate and #toiletpapercrisis on Twitter, along with photographs of overloaded shopping trolleys, and calls for calm from baffled officials. “We are trying to reassure people that removing all of the lavatory paper from the shelves of supermarkets probably isn’t a proportionate or sensible thing to do at this time,” Chief Medical Officer Brendan Murphy told a parliamentary panel on Wednesday. The biggest grocery chain, Woolworths Group Ltd, limited sales to four packs a shopper, to keep up stock levels while suppliers ramp up production. The local arm of Costco Wholesale Corp limited buyers to one bulk buy pack each. Even Prime Minister Scott Morrison has weighed in on a purchasing trend that appears to be at odds with other countries’ stockpiling of items with a long shelf-life, such as tinned goods, telling the public major grocers had assured him they could meet any spike in demand. Police confirmed they were called to a supermarket in Sydney to deal with “a disturbance in an aisle”, with media saying the authorities had cordoned off the toilet paper shelves as a result. Shoppers have swooped on other products also. Costco has put limits on purchases of milk, eggs, rice, disinfectants and soap. Weeks ago, Coles Group Ltd began posting signs in stores warning of shortages of hand and laundry sanitizer. Coles said it was working with suppliers and transport partners to improve availability of popular products, but did not confirm if it was also rationing sales of some. “We have increased deliveries from our distribution centers and our teams are working hard to fill the shelves,” it said in an emailed statement. German-owned discounter Aldi Inc and U.S.-listed Kimberly-Clark Corp, which makes toilet paper for the Australian market via domestic units, were not immediately available for comment. While the bulk of Australia’s virus victims caught it overseas, the two latest cases involve people who have not left the country. The most populous state of New South Wales said a female aged care worker had caught the virus, which has spread to at least one resident of the center where she worked. It said an 82-year-old man was in hospital, while officials await results of a test on a 95-year-old woman who died on Tuesday after developing a respiratory illness. “Whether it was related to coronavirus, we don’t know,” state health minister Brad Hazzard told reporters about the death. State officials were already investigating how a 53-year-old doctor was stricken, despite having no infected patients. A fourth case, announced on Monday, involved a woman who could have caught it from her brother. Since Feb. 1, Australia has banned foreigners who recently traveled through China, and extended its ban last week to arrivals from Iran, but cautioned it could no longer guarantee an infected person would not penetrate border checks. The government on Wednesday confirmed a man who had recently returned from Iran had caught the virus, prompting officials to order two weeks of self-isolation for anyone arriving from Iran since Feb. 19.
|
30633
|
The FDA has ruled that homeopathic drugs are now illegal.
|
Because the FDA document cited by Mercola represents no change in law, however, we rank the claim that the FDA has recently deemed all of them illegal as false.
|
false
|
Medical, alternative health, big pharma, FDA
|
On 30 January 2018, Joseph Mercola — the doctor behind the pseudoscientific alternative health and supplement empire Mercola.com — published a story with a factually incorrect claim characteristic of the site’s dubious commitment to accuracy: FDA Declares Homeopathic Drugs Illegal, Plans to Ramp Up Enforcement Actions The document cited in support of this claim is a December 2017 draft of an FDA guidance statement that a.) changes no laws and creates or alters no existing regulations; and b.) is still in the public review stage and therefore not even a finalized form of a non-legally binding document. That document contains this disclaimer: This draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. FDA guidance documents, as described by federal law, are documents that have been prepared “for FDA staff, applicants/sponsors, and the public that describe the agency’s interpretation of or policy on a regulatory issue.” True to form, this draft proposes an updated interpretation of the the agency’s handling of over the counter products branded as homeopathic, a specific alternative health modality that relies on discredited 18th century pseudoscience requiring — among other things — a belief in the scientifically baseless concept that water retains a “memory” of chemicals it no longer contains: Under U.S. law, homeopathic drugs are required to meet the same approval rules as other drugs. But under a policy adopted in 1988, the agency has used “enforcement discretion” to allow the items to be manufactured and distributed without FDA approval. Agency officials don’t plan to begin requiring that homeopathic products get approval — officials say that would be impractical — but they are signaling stepped-up scrutiny for items deemed a possible health threat. […] Under its planned approach, many products won’t be considered high risk and will remain available to consumers, Janet Woodcock, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, told reporters during a teleconference. But she said, the agency would “go after” products that cause — or might cause — “overt harm.” Since 1988, it has been the de facto policy of the FDA to treat homeopathic remedies listed in the Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States (a collection of homeopathic ingredients and practices continually updated since 1897), as safe and legal to market — so long as that marketing does not meet the FDA’s definition of making fraudulent claims. In March 2015, the FDA proposed a re-evaluation of its regulatory approach to over-the-counter homeopathic remedies in light of the fact that the industry and the products and ingredients it promotes have greatly expanded since 1988. The draft guidance issued by the Food and Drug Administration in December 2017 is a result of those 2015 discussions, and it would serve, primarily, as a notice to those marketing homeopathic products that the informal policy of treating homeopathic remedies as exempt from new drug regulations — an expensive process requiring a scientific study of the safety and efficacy of a product — will not apply necessarily apply to homeopathic products that may present a risk to public health. Since no homeopathic remedies have gone through any new drug approval process, any homeopathic remedy would theoretically be susceptible to this higher bar of scrutiny. However, as stated in their draft guidance document, the Food and Drug Administration has always had this authority, and this therefore represents no legal change in regulation: Nothing in the [United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, FD&C] exempts drugs labeled as homeopathic from any of the requirements related to approval, adulteration, and misbranding, including labeling requirements. If a drug labeled as homeopathic is a new drug under the FD&C Act, it is subject to the same premarket approval requirements and the same standards for safety and efficacy as all new drugs. Because reassessing the entire pharmacopoeia of homeopathic remedies is not plausible or feasible, the agency has said that it will focus its attention on those products that fall into one of six “high risk” categories: This interpretation of existing law would not have any effect on a vast majority of homeopathic products currently available in the United States, making Mercola’s headline claim (“All Homeopathic Products Now Illegal?”) false. Homeopathy should not be confused with other alternative, holistic, or natural remedies. It refers specifically to a scientifically discredited practice invented in 1796, which was and is based on the belief that chemicals that cause symptoms in healthy people can, in an absurdly diluted form, cure sick individuals of those same symptoms. Proponents of the practice claim that the more dilute the chemical, the more powerful its healing abilities, making it statistically likely that many homeopathic preparations are so diluted that they contain not a single atom of the chemical in question. This is not an issue for proponents of the practice, because according to its guiding theories, water “remembers” what was in it. In an effort to suggest that the medical experts are opposed to regulation of homeopathy, and to conflate homeopathy with other alternative health practices to generate maximum outrage and thus clicking and sharing potential, Mercola cites quotes given by Dr. Lee Hieb, the director of the “Association of American Physicians and Surgeons,” to a fringe conspiracy web site: “I’m not here to tout any particular over-the-counter remedy, but who gave the FDA total ability to limit what we can take into our bodies, while virtually forcing us to be given what they prescribe? It’s none of their business whether a ‘homeopathic remedy’ is worthless. That’s an issue of commerce and truth in advertising. I, for one, want the freedom to research and decide for myself what supplements to take, even if my supplements ultimately do me no good. The “Association of American Physicians and Surgeons” is a far-right political (not medical) organization that in no way represents any consensus view of medical professionals in the United States. Their official publications have espoused pseudoscientific claims, including the notion that being gay reduces life expectancy, that HIV does not cause AIDS, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a proven causal connection between autism and vaccines. In terms of homeopathy being an issue of truth in advertising, the United States Federal Trade Commission agrees. In 2016, the FTC issued a new policy regarding the marketing and promotion of over-the-counter homeopathic remedies, stating that such products would be deemed deceptively advertised if they did not include language indicating that there is no scientific proof that homeopathy works.
|
8874
|
Group to Test Merck AIDS Drug in Gel.
|
A group working to develop a gel or cream women could use to protect themselves against the AIDS virus said on Tuesday they have permission to use an experimental drug from Merck and Co (MRK.N).
|
true
|
Science News
|
It is the sixth HIV drug to be tested by the International Partnership for Microbicides, said the group’s chief executive officer, Dr. Zeda Rosenberg. The drug is known only by its experimental name L’644. It is a member of a class of drugs known as gp41 fusion inhibitors. They stop the AIDS virus from attaching to the immune system cells it targets. “It’s a completely different mechanism of action to what we have currently under development and what the field has under development,” Rosenberg told Reuters in a telephone interview. “It’s pretty early in the life cycle for HIV. Most of us feel that, for a microbicide to be really effective, it has to get at the infection in its earliest timepoints.” Microbicides are products, such as gels or creams, that could be applied vaginally or anally to prevent transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS. So far, attempts to create a microbicide have failed. The AIDS virus has infected 33 million people globally, according to the World Health Organization. It has killed 25 million, and there is no vaccine to prevent the fatal and incurable virus. Condoms can protect men and women, but health experts note that many men refuse to use them. In many countries, a women who demands that her husband or partner use a condom can face refusal or even a beating. According to the United Nations, in sub-Saharan Africa almost 61 percent of adults infected with HIV are women. Most cases of HIV are transmitted sexually. Merck said it was not developing the drug to treat HIV infection. “L’644 is a peptide that would need to be injected to act as an effective antiviral. As such, it was not deemed to have a favorable profile for patient convenience,” said Dr. Daria Hazuda, vice president of scientific affairs for infectious disease and HIV at Merck Research Laboratories. The nonprofit IPM has another agreement with Merck for a royalty-free license to develop another compound, called L’167/CMPD167, which belongs to the class of molecules known as CCR5 blockers. The microbicides group also has agreements with Pfizer to develop its CCR5 blocker maraviroc; with Gilead Sciences to develop tenofovir, a licensed HIV drug; with Bristol-Myers Squibb; and with Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Tibotec Pharmaceuticals to try to make a microbicide out of its HIV drug dapivirine. The field could use some successes. Last month a study showed one microbicide candidate, called Carraguard, did not protect women from infection. Two other potential microbicides have made women more likely to become infected — a spermicide called nonoxynol-9 and a product called Ushercell, made by Toronto-based Polydex Pharmaceuticals.
|
9523
|
Melanoma survivors' friends can help spot new moles
|
This is a bite-size but informative story from Reuters Health reporting new research that assessed the confidence levels and feelings of embarrassment in people helping melanoma survivors to look for suspicious moles in hard-to-see body parts. One downside to this story is the lack of independent sources. Without a third-party opinion, it is hard to understand how important this new research is. Over a million people in the United States alone are at high risk of secondary melanomas after having treatment to remove a malignant tumor. Barriers to finding secondary tumors, such as feelings of embarrassment or a lack of confidence in people helping melanoma survivors with skin exams, are important to find out about and mitigate.
|
true
|
melanoma
|
Although presumably there is a cost associated with training people to recognize melanomas, having a partner help check for suspicious moles can be assumed to be cost-free. The research letter in JAMA Dermatology used survey questions to assess the confidence and embarrassment that partners felt when helping to search for cancerous moles. The story from Reuters reported the survey results, though it didn’t quantify them: Among people who received the skin exam training, the researchers found a steep increase in their confidence at performing skin exams between the start of the study and four months later. “Their confidence level goes up and plateaus at eight to 12 months, and it doesn’t go down,” said Robinson. The exams didn’t become more embarrassing or less comfortable, either. But, we’re left to wonder: How much did their confidence levels go up? When the study or news release doesn’t spell that out clearly (nor use laymen’s terms), it’s up to the reporter to find out and let readers know. We recognize this isn’t easy to do on deadline, but it would have made an average story stand above the competition. Having a partner check for melanomas doesn’t have immediate harms, so we’ll rate this N/A. It could be harmful if a person relies too heavily on a friend’s assessment versus a physician’s though. The study is a straightforward survey of people’s feelings of confidence and embarrassment, with appropriate statistical analysis applied to the results. There is little for the writer to interrogate in the quality of the evidence, though perhaps it would have been useful to hear from an expert in patient psychology to understand how these kind of surveys relate to real-life health behaviors. We also liked how the story included this caveat: Bringing this program into the mainstream presents some challenges, however. Each person in the study was trained on how to find melanoma and attended booster sessions every four months. “We are now trying to see if people can learn, perform and have continuing confidence without the physician reinforcement,” said Robinson. It is well established that early detection of secondary melanomas leads to improved chances of survival. The story could have stressed that it still remains to be fully determined what sorts of follow-up can most efficiently lead to early detection of secondary melanomas. Seeing a dermatologist every week might work, but is unlikely to be necessary. Supplementing doctor visits with self or partner skin examinations has evidence of likely benefit in other studies. The only person quoted in the story is the lead author of the study. It is always important to hear from at least one independent expert in order to put new results the views of researchers into context. Without hearing from a dispassionate third party, it is hard to know how important this new research actually is. Early on in the news story, the writer mentions that without a partner to assist in skin examinations, patients are told to use mirrors to check out hard-to-reach body parts. The availability of having a partner help with mole-spotting would seem to depend on the individual patient. The writer does mention that bringing a partner program into standard practice “presents some challenges” due to the need for training, and that the researchers are looking at ways to help people learn to identify melanomas without reinforcement by physicians. This is enough to earn a satisfactory rating. The newsworthy results in this study are the measurements of confidence levels and embarrassment among partners helping with self examinations for melanomas. The story does acknowledge this here: The researchers previously found that skin cancer survivors and their partners could be trained to spot potentially cancerous moles by doing skin exams. The new report shows that during the two years, those same people had increasing confidence in their skills, with no increase in embarrassment or discomfort. However, this is proceeded by a sentence that states melanoma survivors “may want to enlist partners to help search their bodies for suspicious looking moles,” suggesting that this is a new approach. In reality, this research focused on a psychological aspect of a previously established practice. It is OK for some science to be looking at small details rather than looking for big breakthroughs, but the news story should not puff up small results for big headlines. A news release from Northwestern University is likely the spark responsible for the news story, but the writer has clearly contacted the lead researcher independently and included information beyond what is written in the news release.
|
33980
|
In September 2019, U.S. President Donald Trump signed into law a bill that provides $1.8 billion in funding for autism research and services.
|
In the past, President Trump has repeatedly promoted the long-debunked theory that vaccinations cause autism, but his position may have shifted somewhat. Earlier in 2019, he urged parents to vaccinate their children against measles, in the midst of an outbreak of the disease.
|
true
|
Politics
|
We received multiple inquiries from readers in October 2019 about the accuracy of news reports that claimed U.S. President Donald Trump had signed legislation that would provide $1.8 billion in funding for autism-related programs and research. For example, on Oct. 2, ABC News published an article with the headline, “Trump Signs $1.8 Billion Autism Funding Bill” which reported that: “President Donald Trump signed the Autism Collaboration, Accountability, Research, Education and Support Act (CARES) into law Monday, which allocates $1.8 billion in funding over the next five years to help people with autism spectrum disorder and their families … The funding, which backs autism research and autism-related support programs, will also prioritize grants for rural and underserved areas.” Various Fox-owned regional news channels published an article with the headline, “President Trump Signs Bill Providing $1.8 Billion in Funding for Autism Programs,” which reported that: “President Trump has signed a bill that allocates $1.8 billion in funding to help people on the autism spectrum. The Autism Collaboration, Accountability, Research, Education and Support (CARES) Act was signed into law Monday. The bill provides funding for autism programs and research at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. “The bill, which reauthorizes the previous Autism CARES Act of 2014, expands government programs to include older people with autism ‘who were — and are– often misdiagnosed, underdiagnosed and overlooked,’ according to Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), one of the bill’s co-sponsors in the House of Representatives.” Those reports were accurate. On Sept. 30, Trump did indeed sign into law H.R. 1058, the Autism Collaboration, Accountability, Research, Education and Support Act of 2019, as the Congressional Record shows. The “Autism CARES Act” become law on that date. The legislation, which was authored by U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., commits to spending $369.7 million every fiscal year between 2020 and 2024 — a total of $1.85 billion over five years. As such, the news articles were also highly accurate in reporting that the bill Trump signed allocates $1.8 billion. In fact, the total is slightly higher. That funding commitment represents a 42 percent increase on the $1.3 billion that Congress allocated for 2015-2019, in the 2014 Autism CARES Act. The bill had sponsors from both parties and received wide bipartisan support in both houses. It was passed without need for a roll-call vote in the House on July 24 and in the Senate on Sept. 19. The bill essentially reauthorized the Autism CARES Act of 2014, which had been sponsored by Smith in the House, and Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., in the Senate. It provided funding for the disbursement of grants to researchers, as well as autism spectrum disorder (ASD) programs and centers across the country. Former President Barack Obama signed the bill into law on Aug. 8, 2014. The 2019 bill added new provisions whereby the Director of the National Institutes of Health could prioritize funding for research, programs and services in “rural or underserved areas,” and take into account the extent to which an applicant served “youth and adults from diverse racial, ethnic, geographic, or linguistic backgrounds.”
|
11386
|
Deaths Halt Part of Diabetes Study
|
This story covered a randomized clinical trial which was stopped because of excess deaths seen in a group of high risk diabetics receiving more intensive blood sugar management as compared to a group of high risk diabetics whose blood sugar was not as tightly managed. Several experts interviewed for the story commented that this outcome was unexpected. An important message for readers is that the importance of a clinical endpoint (such as death, in this case) is more meaningful than an intermediary or surrogate endpoint (such as blood sugar level or glycosylated hemoglobin). It’s also a good example of the importance of randomized clinical trials. The story provided: good details on the trial; death rates between the two groups in absolute terms, which is helpful for reader understanding. good balance with multiple sources interviewed.
|
true
|
There was no cost information provided; it is both relevant and available. The medications used to more tightly control sugar levels are expensive. The story differentiated the two groups as having been treated to have blood sugar levels like ‘the average person with diabetes’ and ‘closer to those of someone without diabetes.’ We would wish for more specific information about what those blood sugar levels were. The point of the story was not that blood sugar levels ought not be treated, but rather what the goal ought to be in order to maximize the benefit of treatment. This story was about the new finding that more intensive management of sugar levels in high risk patients increases mortality risk. Differences in death rates were given in absolute terms. The story did a good job of providing sufficient detail to help readers understand the magnitude of the difference in deaths between the two groups. Although the story didn’t specify that this was a randomized clnical trial – and why that’s important – it can be inferred from the otherwise detailed description of how the study was done. The story did not engage in overt disease mongering. Comments from interviews with several individuals knowledgeable about the trial (i.e. cardiologist, people at the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute) were included in this story. While the story stated that the blood sugar levels of those in the group attempting more intensive management were lower than those of typical patients, the story did not provide context for readers to know how their treatment actually would compare to those in the study. The story stated that the medications used in this study where those that are commonly used for lowering blood sugar. The story is about the results from a newly released study. Does not appear to rely on a press release.
|
|
8857
|
Roche's Xenical helps lower blood pressure: study.
|
Roche Holding AG’s fat blocker Xenical helped people with high blood pressure to lower it, while Abbott Laboratories’ appetite suppressant Meridia did not, European researchers reported on Monday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The findings came in research led by Dr. Karl Horvath of the Medical University of Graz in Austria analyzing dozens of previously published studies on weight-loss interventions for people with high blood pressure, also called hypertension. This type of research is called meta-analysis. The findings were published in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine. Some of the studies assessed orlistat, a drug sold under the name Xenical that reduces the amount of fat the body absorbs from food. It is available in an over-the-counter version called alli, licensed by GlaxoSmithKline Plc, that is a half-dose version of the prescription medicine Xenical. Some studies examined sibutramine, a prescription drug marketed by Abbott Laboratories under the brand names Meridia or Reductil. People who were given orlistat or sibutramine or took part in a weight-loss diet lost more weight than people who did not have such interventions, the researchers said. Orlistat and weight-loss diets also were effective at reducing the patients’ blood pressure, the researchers said. But sibutramine treatment did not lower overall blood pressure and appeared to increase systolic blood pressure — the top number in blood pressure readings, the researchers said. “Although sibutramine reduced body weight about the same amount as orlistat, it did not show the same beneficial effects on BP (blood pressure),” the researchers wrote. High blood pressure that is left uncontrolled raises one’s risk of heart attack, stroke and other serious health problems. Reducing blood pressure in people with hypertension has been shown to reduce these cardiovascular risks.
|
4793
|
Mets GM Sandy Alderson steps down after cancer returns.
|
His voice quavering at an unexpected news conference, Sandy Alderson revealed what he had just told his team moments before.
|
true
|
Baseball, Jeff Wilpon, Health, New York Mets, North America, MLB baseball, Sports, New York, Sandy Alderson
|
His cancer has returned, he’s taking a leave of absence — and his up-and-down tenure as New York Mets general manager is essentially over. With the team in a massive tailspin, chief operating officer Jeff Wilpon and the 70-year-old Alderson made the announcement before Tuesday night’s game against Pittsburgh. “With respect to the future, I would say two things: One is, notwithstanding the good prognosis, my health is an uncertainty going forward,” said Alderson, who agreed to a contract extension in December. “And secondly, if I were to look at it on the merits, I’m not sure coming back is warranted.” Asked whether he would like Alderson to resume his GM duties if his health eventually allowed that, Wilpon answered the same way twice: “I think his health and his family are first and foremost.” Assistant general manager John Ricco and special assistants J.P. Ricciardi and Omar Minaya will run the club’s baseball operations in Alderson’s absence. Minaya preceded Alderson as Mets general manager, and Ricciardi was GM of the Toronto Blue Jays from 2001-09. Alderson was hired by the Mets after the 2010 season. He was diagnosed with cancer at the end of the 2015 season and had surgery, but stayed on the job. He reduced his work schedule at times but remained in a full-time role while undergoing chemotherapy treatments. “One difference between then and now is that that took place in the offseason,” Alderson said. “I had a surgery in the offseason, I had some chemo in the offseason. Much easier to manage that with offseason activity. I had the decision-making authority basically at that time. I will not have the decision-making authority going forward. If people want to call me, they’re welcome to do so. But at the same time, I don’t expect to be involved in day-to-day activity.” Ricciardi, Minaya and first-year manager Mickey Callaway were all in the interview room at Citi Field when Alderson and Wilpon made the announcement. Wilpon said Alderson informed him of his decision Sunday. “It is paramount to all of us that care greatly for Sandy that he makes this a priority for him and his family,” Wilpon said, later adding: “The wear and tear on Sandy, I’ve seen up close and personal. I talked to him a couple times about maybe taking a leave, maybe stepping away a little bit, and I had sort of forgotten about it because so much has been going on.” According to players, Alderson broke down a bit as he spoke to his teary-eyed team in the clubhouse before addressing the media. “It definitely puts life in perspective,” said outfielder Brandon Nimmo, who was Alderson’s first amateur draft pick in 2011. “Just very somber news that we received. Our heart’s broken for him. He’s been through this battle before. He knows what’s in store.” Mets captain David Wright, sidelined by injuries for more than two years, said players stood and gave Alderson a round of applause. “I think there was a lot of jaws hitting the floor,” Wright recalled. “I think we had a bit of an emotional talk. It wasn’t long, but at the end we certainly wanted to pay him respect.” Alderson said a recurrence of his cancer was detected around late April or early May and he’s been receiving treatment since. “I expect that the treatment will continue, expect to have surgery later this summer. My prognosis is actually good. But in the meantime, the chemotherapy, the surgery, all take their toll,” Alderson said. He said the treatment affects his energy level and leads to other side effects, explaining why he hasn’t been traveling on road trips lately. “Which makes it difficult to stay up with sort of the pace, the tempo of the every day,” Alderson said. “Operations continue, the game continues, we have a season to play. So I think in the best interests of the Mets and for my health, this is the right result. “I feel badly that we’ve had the season that we have had to date. I feel personally responsible for the results that we’ve had,” he added. “At the same time, I have confidence in our manager, our coaching staff, our players, that this will change. John, Omar, J.P., I’m sure will take a hard look at where we are, maybe take a fresh look at where we are and I have every confidence that they will serve the franchise well over the next few months through the end of the season.” Alderson’s departure comes at a pivotal time for the Mets ahead of the July 31 trade deadline. Needing an infusion of young talent, they will likely look to sell off pending free agents such as closer Jeurys Familia, second baseman Asdrubal Cabrera and outfielder Jose Bautista. But ace pitchers Jacob deGrom and Noah Syndergaard could command a huge return, and the front office must decide whether to embark on such a significant overhaul. New York reached the 2015 World Series after rebuilding under Alderson and made it back to the playoffs the following year, but injuries and underperformance have decimated the team since. After going 70-92 last year, the Mets replaced manager Terry Collins with Callaway and spent nearly $90 million to fill holes in free agency. They jumped out to an 11-1 start this season, but a 6-24 slide left them 31-45 with the fewest wins in the National League going into Tuesday night’s game. “It’s been incredibly difficult,” Alderson said. “And I’m really disappointed with where we are and disappointed to have left Mets fans basically in this situation. I’ve said many times, you really do this to make other people happy. And when you’re not making people happy, it’s difficult.” As the team has plummeted, Alderson has drawn more and more criticism. “We’re going to be there for Sandy as much as Sandy’s been there for us. A lot of times he has taken the heat on our behalf,” Wright said. Alderson, a Marine Infantry Officer who served in Vietnam, is a Harvard Law School graduate. Before joining the Mets, he worked in the commissioner’s office and had success running the Oakland Athletics and San Diego Padres. “Difficult day for me, but I appreciate everybody being here, appreciate the support that everyone has provided me,” he said. “And I’m looking forward to the Mets getting back on track.” ___ AP freelancer Jerry Beach contributed to this report. ___ More AP baseball: https://apnews.com/tag/MLBbaseball
|
11382
|
Study: Kidney angioplasty brings risks, no benefit
|
"This is another study – of which there have been several notable ones recently – that shows that newer isn’t always better in health care. As Yale’s Harlan Krumholz said in a key quote in this story, ""What’s remarkable is that this procedure got so popular and adopted into widespread use before a study like this was conducted to show us what its value may be."" Overall, the AP story did a good job. It could have been improved by: providing at least a ballpark estimate of costs, instead of just calling the angioplasty a ""pricey procedure"" providing some data on how ""benefit"" was measured. So how well do medications work? What were the rates of death, heart attack, stroke, heart failure, etc.? The story didn’t tell us."
|
true
|
"The story refers to kidney angioplasty as a ""pricey procedure"" but offers no ballpark estimates of what that means. While the story included the important statement from one researcher that ""There really was no benefit,"" the story nonethless never gave any data on how ""benefit"" was measured. Or what the absolute data were for either treatment group. So how well do medications work? What were the rates of death, heart attack, stroke, heart failure, etc.? The story didn’t tell us. The story provided absolute numbers of harms in the angioplasty group within the first month after treatment. The story provided an adequate explanation of the nature of the evidence. The story provides National Kidney Foundation estimates of the scope of the problem. 3 different independent sources were quoted. The story was about different treatment options for blocked kidney arteries. And it did an adequate job presenting the data comparing the options. The story gives an estimate of how widely kidney angioplasty is used. A kidney foundation spokesman said this report was ""the first hint"" that medication may produce equal results to angioplasty. Given that several sources were interviewed, it is unlikely that the story relied solely or largely on a news release."
|
|
9047
|
Cancer targeted with reusable 'stinging nettle' treatment
|
Getty Images The news release focuses on a study published in Nature Chemistry Jan. 8, which found that a compound called JPC11, found in stinging nettle plants and ants, is effective at attacking some kinds of cancer cells. However, while the release explains how JPC11 can attack cancer cells, it does not tell readers of the many hurdles that lie between the current discovery and any possible future use of the compound to fight cancer in humans. The research published in Nature Chemistry reflects only work done testing JPC11 against some types of cancer cells in vitro. In other words, JPC11 has not yet been tested in an animal model, much less begun the lengthy process of clinical trials that are necessary to determine whether it may be used on a large scale by human patients. The release acknowledges in a quote from a lead researcher that “It will take time to progress from the lab to the clinic” but the caution seems weak in comparison to the claims and speculation made elsewhere in the release, including in the headline. While estimates can vary, most agree that it takes more than a decade to move a new drug from the laboratory to clinical practice — as well as research funding that is estimated to range from hundreds of millions to billions of dollars. Given that JPC11 has yet to be tested in animals (or, at least, those tests are not yet published), it will be a long time before it could be used to treat cancer patients. And there is the very real possibility that it will never be used to treat cancer patients. Most potential pharmaceutical treatments wash out during animal testing or clinical trials. It’s important for releases on anti-cancer research to be clear on where potential new treatments are in the development process. This release does not do that.
|
false
|
sodium formate,stinging nettle,University of Warwick
|
Given how early this research is in the development process, it would be impossible to place a specific cost on the potential treatment — or even a range of costs. However, the release could tell readers whether the process used to make JPC11 is expensive, time-consuming, relies on novel technologies, or has the potential to be easily scaled up — all of which can affect ultimate cost. For example, if it’s a relatively straight-forward process that does not rely on specialized equipment or high-cost components, that’s worth mentioning. If it’s a complex, multi-step process that relies on highly-processed (and expensive) ingredients or technologies, that’s worth mentioning too. The release doesn’t address potential issues related to cost. The release doesn’t adequately explain the limitations of the in vitro model and that it remains unclear how the compound would perform in human studies. The release does not tell readers how effective JPC11 was at attacking cancer cells during in vitro testing. How effective was it at killing cancer cells, or preventing cancer cells from multiplying? For that matter, the release does not tell readers what types of cancer cells were used in the testing. While the release does mention that “researchers have been focusing on the potential to use this compound on ovarian and prostate cancers,” it’s not clear whether those cancers were the subject of this particular paper. More on this under the section on Quality of Evidence. The release notes that “the development opens up a possibility for a more selective cancer treatment as JPC11 was observed to specifically target the biochemistry of cancer cells, leaving healthy cells largely untouched” (emphasis added). What does “largely untouched” mean? Was there some level of harm or change induced in healthy cells? In the context of human health, vague statements like that make us nervous. That’s particularly true when a release does not disclose what sort of testing has been done — and remains to be done — for a potential treatment. It’s always a good idea to point out that in research this preliminary, we have almost no idea what kind of adverse effects might occur when the compound is actually administered to patients. This also plays to the popularity of terms like “precision oncology” and “selective’ or “targeted” cancer treatment.” We are finding more and more that lots of our targeted treatments still can and do have “off target” harms. Gleevec and subsequent generation molecules are examples (prototypes) of great “targeted therapies” but they still have other common side effects. Also, always comparing targeted molecules to chemotherapy is becoming less fair these days given that we have a better understanding of how to anticipate and manage side effects in general. Based on the paper, we can tell you that in vitro tests were performed, but the release doesn’t give readers even that much information. What sort of tests were performed? What were the researchers evaluating? How were they evaluating those things? We don’t necessarily expect a news release to go into all of the technical details, but in this case the study is simply not described. That makes it impossible to assess the quality of the evidence. Taking a look at the methods, this research team does all of the requisite pre-clinical work one would expect prior to moving into animal models. The standard benchmarks were met, which is why it was worthy of publication. This could have then been put into context as research that faces a long road to clinical trial but in the end, the release does not do the work justice. No disease mongering here. The release notes the sources of funding for the study. The release does not explicitly state that there are no conflicts of interests, but there do not appear to be competing interests here. The release refers to alternatives, but does not really compare them. For example, it notes that ovarian cancers are becoming more resistant to drugs such as cisplatin. The release also refers to unspecified adverse health effects associated with other anti-cancer drugs. However, this is not enough to earn a satisfactory rating here. To compare apples to apples, it would be useful to know whether JPC11 is at least as effective as any of these other drugs in in vitro testing. Again, the fact that JPC11 is in the earliest stages of development makes a comparison difficult, but there should be some attempt to address the issue in a meaningful way or, at the very least, to make clear to readers that JPC11 is in the earliest stages of development. At the beginning of the 14th paragraph, the release notes that “It will take time [for JPC11] to progress from the lab to the clinic.” Those are the only words that tell readers anything about where JPC11 is in the development process. The release does not tell readers what has been accomplished (some in vitro testing), what is next, what hurdles lie beyond that, or anything else pertaining to how long it may take for this to develop into a useful clinical tool. And there is no acknowledgment that it may never become a practical treatment. The release clearly articulates JPC11’s mechanism for action for affecting cancer cells, as well as why and how that is novel. The problems with this release lie in what it does not say. There is nothing wrong with the language used here. For example, the release states that “cancer cells can be destroyed more effectively and selectively…” but it doesn’t give readers crucial information. For example, the release says JPC11 is “more effective” at destroying cancer cells. More effective than what? How much more effective? What sort of cancer cells were tested? Any time one says Thing A is “more effective” or “better” or “safer” or whatever, there has to be a Thing B. This release doesn’t do that. It’s not that the release makes outrageous claims, there’s just a complete lack of context for the information that’s there. That makes the release virtually useless for readers.
|
35092
|
The 2020 U.S. presidential election could be postponed if the coronavirus pandemic threatens to keep people from voting.
|
What's true: The date of a U.S. presidential election could theoretically be postponed with the approval of Congress and the president. What's false: However, such a postponement would be extremely difficult to achieve in time for the 2020 presidential election and would not provide much temporal leeway for voters.
|
mixture
|
Politics, COVID-19
|
In March 2020, the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic resulted in the curtailment of social gatherings; severely impacted businesses such as restaurants, entertainment venues, and airlines; and brought rumors of government-mandated curfews and “national lockdowns” throughout the U.S. The pandemic also prompted the postponement of primary elections in some states, an event that brought a sober question to the mind of many Americans: Could the U.S. presidential election scheduled for Nov. 3 be delayed if necessary? Although some alternative voting methods exist, most citizens still vote by reporting to polling places in person to cast their ballots. If the pandemic still required the maintaining of social distancing as much as possible come November, thereby forcing millions of Americans to choose between skipping voting or risking the spreading of an infectious disease, what would the alternative be? Could the U.S. delay the election until pandemic-related restrictions had been eased? The answer to the latter question is: Possibly, but with great difficulty and little flexibility. Although the United States’ use of the Electoral College system means that the president is essentially chosen via electors selected through 50 different state elections rather than by one nationwide election, federal law requires that all of those electors be appointed on a particular date. The Presidential Election Day Act, passed by Congress in 1845, mandates that “the electors of President and Vice President shall be appointed in each State on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in the month of November of the year in which they are to be appointed.” The sitting president has no ability on his own to alter that date — he cannot issue an executive order or otherwise act unilaterally to change the deadline. All of the individual states could conceivably change the method by which they choose their electors to something other than popular vote, but that option would require, for the most part, that the state legislatures and governors in all 50 states approve new methods for selecting electors by Nov. 3. But such a course of action would likely be quite difficult to accomplish in time and prove extremely unpopular with voters. Another option for states to be able to choose their electors via elections held later than Nov. 3 would be for both houses of the U.S. Congress to pass, and the president to sign, a law superseding or modifying the Presidential Election Day Act to establish a new date. But given the current highly polarized state of U.S. politics, the chances that such a feat could be accomplished in sufficiently timely fashion — if at all — are also extremely unlikely. And even if the U.S. legislative and executive branches could sufficiently cooperate to buy some additional time by delaying the next election, they wouldn’t have much leeway. The 20th amendment to the U.S. constitution states that the current president’s four-year term ends at noon on Jan. 20. So the election couldn’t be put off by much more than two months without incurring the risk of leaving the U.S. without a president or vice president come Jan. 20, and leaving Congress the chaotic task of having the Speaker of the House temporarily govern while figuring out how to rectify the absence of a duly-elected chief executive. (Altering that Jan. 20 deadline would require amending the U.S. Constitution in a matter of months, a virtually impossible feat.)
|
31316
|
Three Florida men were arrested for eating human flesh, a practice they claimed cures depression and diabetes.
|
Reports of the arrest of three cannibalistic Floridians who feasted on human remains for medical reasons are fake news.
|
false
|
Junk News, miami herald
|
On 30 May 2017, the Miami Herald web site published an article positing that three Florida men were arrested for eating human flesh, a practice the suspects claimed cures depression and diabetes: Police in Vernal Heights, Florida, arrested 3-practicing cannibals who claim eating human flesh cures both type-1 and type-2 diabetes and depression. According to Vernal Heights Chief of Police, Gregory Moore, the 3-men were arrested when officers responded to what they assumed would be a routine noise complaint. Police arrived at 3845 Toolson Lane (the home of William Provost) at approximately 7:45 PM on Sunday evening in response to a neighbor complaining of strange sounds coming from the home. According to the officers, a bizarre crime scene was quickly uncovered upon entering the basement. Three men, which have since been identified as 62-year-old William Provost, 51-year-old Dennis Ratcliff, and 36-year-old Michael Dore were sitting in a circle on the basement’s concrete floor and ritualistically chanting while eating what police initially believed was an animal carcass, but was later identified as human remains. There was no truth to this story, whose sole source was the Miami Gazette web site, which is not the online operation of a legitimate newspaper but rather a fake news site. The Gazette’s disclaimer notes that the site’s original material is “satirical” in nature and fake news: The Miami Gazette is an entertainment and satire web publication. The Miami Gazette also publishes largely NON-POLITICAL, satirical in nature, fake news articles — also created for your entertainment. When it comes to fake or satirical news — we attempt stay away from publishing anything of a political nature (unless it’s something really silly) as our intent is not to stir up political outrage or debate. We simply aim to provide an outlet for our writers and contributors to develop creative, outrageous, and 100% fictional, tall-tales that our audience can enjoy reading and sharing with friends. All mugshots used in our satirical news articles are for illustrative purposes only. All news articles contained within The Miami Gazette are fictional and presumably satirical news — with the exception of our ‘list style’ articles and quizzes that include relevant sources. The content published on The Miami Gazette is intended to be entertainment and is often intended to generate thought and discussion among its readers. Any resemblance to the truth is purely coincidental. Advice given is NOT to be construed as professional. If you are in need of professional help, please consult a professional.
|
10241
|
Choir singing boosts immune system activity in cancer patients and carers, study shows
|
We wish we could sing the praises of a study about how choir participation may strengthen the immune systems of cancer patients, but we find this news release missing its fundamental notes. This study of 193 singers includes both cancer patients and caregivers in choirs organized by the nonprofit Tenovus Cancer Care in the United Kingdom. They measured levels of biomarkers in subject’s saliva before and one hour after they sang, but the release gives us no numbers at all for the results. Reading it is like hearing a singer fail to hit the high note — it’s painful to know how close she came without reaching it. With numbers and some context about how immune systems are measured, it could have made a clearer case for a very small study. Measuring immune markers just one hour after singing does not mean they will remain elevated long enough to make a material change in the person’s response to disease. We also have to point out that being with other people — just that social contact — may accomplish the same thing without singing. Supporting cancer patients is essential to millions of people dealing with this family of diseases. Depression and other mental health issues are known to influence the immune system, which is vital to maintaining health. But this news release about a study that only measured 55 patients (others were caregivers and grieving people) after one hour of singing does not give readers proof of its claims. As it is written, it might raise hopes for people or mislead them into thinking that by singing they could prevent a recurrence of their cancer. We don’t think this sentence is supported by evidence in the release: “singing in choir rehearsals could help to put people in the best possible position to receive treatment, maintain remission and support cancer patients.” What does “put people in the best possible position” mean? We think that a one-hour study does not prove singing could “maintain remission” in a majority of patients, especially since it isn’t clear if different diagnoses were grouped together. Cancer is not a single disease, but hundreds. Because cancer diagnoses and treatment are so stressful, it is important that we are clear-headed when doing scientific appraisal of treatments, including things that might appear benign. People who do not participate may feel they are missing something essential for them.
|
mixture
|
Cancer,Exercise,Foundation/nonprofit news release,mental health
|
The release does not mention any costs. While the non-profit Tenovus makes choir singing available to people for free that doesn’t mean such an activity would be free to people everywhere if they wished to access it. If a cancer treatment center needed to establish a new choir program, with a director, that would require resources — financial and otherwise. The actual benefits in the results section of the manuscript were very modest, albeit statistically significant. This needed attention in the news release. The release does not use any numbers to give us a firm grasp on benefits for the study group. The release claims study participants had “significant reductions in stress hormones,” but does tell us the significance. Here is an excerpt that tantalizes but disappoints: “The study tested 193 members of five different choirs. Results showed that singing for an hour was associated with significant reductions in stress hormones, such as cortisol, and increases in quantities of cytokines — proteins of the immune system — which can boost the body’s ability to fight serious illness.” We wish this paragraph — explaining how samples were taken — had included some numbers for at least one of what it calls the “changes:” “Choir members gave samples of their saliva before an hour of singing, and then again just after. The samples were analysed to see what changes occurred in a number of hormones, immune proteins, neuropeptides and receptors.” We’d also like to see the findings put into context. Since these biomarkers have been studied for many years by others, it would be appropriate to explain how the research community agrees on the significance of a change. What level of cortisol change, for example, is considered “significant?” The release does not mention harms but it’s very unlikely there’s any harm in this activity. This research may show some statistically significant evidence, but the release does not give us enough information to determine that. There is very little detail about the conduct of the study and no numbers are provided for the benefits. We are also disappointed that the release uses the total number of study subjects, 193, but doesn’t specify that there were only 55 actual cancer patients, according to the published study. The others (the vast majority) were caregivers or “bereaved” caregivers. There is no disease mongering. The release notes that the non-profit Tenovus conducted the research, in collaboration with The Centre for Performance Science, which is a new partnership of the Royal College of Music and Imperial College London. Many studies have given cancer patients access to meditation, massage and other forms of stress-reduction in order to influence their immune systems. Choir singing should be compared to those existing results to show us — does it lower cortisol as much as meditation, for example? This comparison would have helped make the release much better. Patients who do not already belong to a choir or sing regularly may in fact benefit more from other types of interventions to improve emotional well-being. We think choir-singing is widely available. The news release provides a link to 17 Tenovus Cancer Care centers that offer group singing in England and Wales. However, it’s worth noting that most people do not have access to choirs that are meant to support people in cancer treatment and their caregivers. The release does not clearly explain whether this is the first study ever to measure stress hormones in the blood of singers before and after singing. The release makes the findings appear more novel than they are. As we’ve said above, there are hundreds of research articles about the impact of stress-reduction techniques of all sorts on people, including cancer patients. This territory is not new. Music therapy is widely available in many cancer centers across the country, as well as pet therapy and art therapy. All of these modalities are aimed at easing stress. We think the release skated very close but escaped using unjustifiable language. It is important not to overstate findings and raise unrealistic hopes. We thought this sentence with the reference to “possibility” helped keep the study in perspective: “The research raises the possibility that singing in choir rehearsals could help to put people in the best possible position to receive treatment, maintain remission and support cancer patients.” We agree it raises a possibility, but it is equally possible that the hypothesis is not true.
|
10454
|
New Colon Cancer Screening Test in the Works
|
Framing – and placement of components within a story – can make such a difference. There was good balance and independent perspective in this story – such as this quote: “The (test’s) performance may decrease considerably when the test is used in a large population of healthy individuals.” But it came late, long after the story had led with the cheerleading sentence above. The story says that “probably only 40% adhere to the (colon cancer) screening schedule over time” That was one researcher’s estimate – someone with a vested financial interest in this research (as Philadelphia Inquirer reported, some of his technology was licensed by the company for this test). But the fact is that the CDC BRFSS survey estimates that about 60% of US adults are up to date with screening, most with colonoscopy. That is a big difference from 40%, and one has to wonder why that was not double-checked. Still, there clearly are a lot of people being missed. How to improve those numbers is up for debate. Stories about new types of screening need to make clear comparisons between the success rates of colonoscopies now and the possible success rates of these emerging technologies.
|
mixture
|
Cancer,Screening,WebMD
|
No mention of possible or projected costs. Other stories estimated in the $300 per test ballpark. The story gave the same basic benefits data that the other stories gave, but it, too, didn’t compare this data with any of the existing colon cancer screening methods, leaving readers with no good sense of the potential scope of the benefits suggested. There was only one vague reference to the new approach being able to find tumors on both sides of the colon, “a feat that is not always accomplished by colonoscopy.” No discussion of potential harms. The story included WebMD’s boilerplate language for such stories: “This study was presented at a medical conference. The findings should be considered preliminary as they have not yet undergone the “peer review” process, in which outside experts scrutinize the data prior to publication in a medical journal.” Better yet, though, was the quote provided by Dr. Durado Brooks of the American Cancer Society: “The (test’s) performance may decrease considerably when the test is used in a large population of healthy individuals.” That’s the value of getting independent perspectives to evaluate evidence. However, a significant limitation that is only indirectly noted is that initial accuracy studies in non-representative samples of cases and non-cases (like this study) usually overestimate performance. That is why they are planning another study. No disease mongering in this story Mixed bag: The story did include comments from two independent experts, which was good. But the story never fully explained the lead researcher’s true ties to the company making the test. There was only this vague and unhelpful line: “Ahlquist and Mayo Clinic are working in collaboration with Exact Sciences Corp. of Madison, Wis., to develop the test.” Nonethless, we’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. No meaningful comparison with existing colon cancer screening tests and no acknowledgement that there are other new tests now in development. The story explains that a clinical trial may begin in 2011 and said that the lead researcher believed that “if all goes well the test could be available soon after that.” Some attempt was made to explain what might be novel about this approach, but the story never mentioned that there are competing tests now in development. The New York Times was much better on this point, mentioning the competition in its very first words. The story appears to be based on things said at a news conference, not things said in a news release.
|
35271
|
News reports used photographs taken in a different time or place to illustrate articles about the opening of Jacksonville beaches in April 2020.
|
Jacksonville-area journalists were accused of lying to the public about photographs of the Jacksonville Beach partial re-opening during the COVID-19 pandemic.
|
false
|
Fauxtography
|
The post-Easter weekend of April 17-19, 2020, fell in the midst of both the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic and a public controversy over whether social-distancing rules should be relaxed and some public facilities (such as beaches) reopened to public use, if only on a limited basis: As a divide appeared to deepen between Americans who want to reopen the country and those who urge continuing social distancing to slow the spread of coronavirus, one microcosm of the debate centered on some newly reopened Florida beaches. Despite the fact that bustling stores, trails and parks don’t seem to evoke the same level of outrage among stay-at-home advocates, enough social media users were upset by beaches reopening in the Jacksonville area that the #FloridaMorons hashtag started trending on Twitter late Friday and early Saturday. Some Twitter users said they feared the reopenings would lead to crowds and an uptick in cases that could extend quarantine durations. They criticized the government officials who made the decision as well as the residents and visitors who went to the beach. Others spoke out in support of the beach reopenings, some of them saying Floridians need fresh air and exercise, and others stating that grocery store shoppers are closer to each other than the beachgoers have been so far. The news reporting on that controversy caused a controversy of its own, however. Some social media users asserted that photographs showing crowds of beach-goers in Jacksonville that were used to illustrate news articles were simply stock photos or unrelated pictures that did not reflect the reality of the situation:
|
11319
|
Can lasers help you stop smoking? Check the data
|
This story does something that few stories accomplish. It takes on a flashy topic – lasers to stop people from smoking – and deconstructs the science, or lack thereof, being used to sell it. Often stories about buzzworthy treatments focus on the weird factor and not on the evidence. This story, through great use of independent experts and scientific literature, provides readers with a full picture. Smoking causes about one out of every five preventable deaths in the US, and it is one of the toughest addictions to kick. Obviously people with the will to quit would like to be able to do so in one easy visit to a laser spa. By allowing scientific claims like the ones these laser spas use to go unchecked, health reporters are doing their readers a disservice. This story may actually encourage people to save their money and make a more serious effort to quit.
|
true
|
"The story explains that the company profiled ""charges $350 for a one-time treatment that takes less than an hour, and offers free extra treatments to patients who are still struggling with quitting in the following 6 months. Other companies do a few shorter therapy sessions as part of their regular treatment plan."" The alleged benefits are quantified, and, from there, the story takes pains to explain how much evidence supports these claims. The story does not address the potential harms of laser therapy, which was surprising given how careful the story is in other regards. We don’t often see subheads like this: ""’NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE’ IN SCIENTIFIC TERMS; NOT FDA-APPROVED FOR QUITTING SMOKING; WON’T WORK ON EVERYBODY."" Beneath each subhead, the story dismantles the scientific claims of laser therapy proponents piece by piece. The story does not disease-monger smoking, although it could have spent a little more time with the health effects and societal costs of smoking. The story makes extensive use of independent sources and the scientific literature. This story could be a lesson plan for someone wanting to teach a course in how to cover ""breakthrough"" treatments. 1. Find the studies being used to make these claims. 2. Read them. 3. Talk to the authors. 4. Talk to others who have done research in a similar vein. The story does a great job placing the therapy into the larger context of interventions to help people quit smoking, particularly acupuncture. The story explains how these laser treatments are part of an emerging trend that grew out of acupuncture. The story makes it clear that the treatments are new but not necessarily different from acupuncture. There is no news release. In fact, the story is a direct response to inflated claims made about laser therapy."
|
|
34266
|
'Clubbed' or curved fingernails are indicators of a serious underlying health issue.
|
Despite its seemingly clear association with disease, the combination of a lack of data and a lack of consensus about clubbing’s underlying mechanisms make its clinical relevance somewhat unclear. Clubbed fingers could be a sign of illnesses of varying degrees of severity, but they could also be a phenomenon that occurs without any specific medical cause.
|
unproven
|
Medical, fingernails
|
Curved fingernails, referred to in scientific literature as digital clubbing, are associated with myriad health conditions and have been a part of medical lore since Hippocrates first described them as an indicator of health in 400 B.C. Clubbed nails are clinically defined, generally, based on the angle of the nail relative to the finger: As a diagnostic tool, clubbed nails are not all that useful on their own, because they are associated with several different conditions, and because the mechanism behind their occurrence is not fully understood. Many of the conditions they are associated with involve the circulatory system, including a variety of lung cancers and cyanotic congenital heart diseases, so clubbed nails may be linked to oxygen levels in the blood. Clubbed nails have also been seen in connection with several chronic infections, liver diseases, inflammatory bowel diseases, chronic parasitic infections, and HIV. Clubbed nails received increased online attention in August 2018, thanks to a viral post on Facebook telling the tale of someone who posted a picture of clubbed nails online before being told to go to the doctor and was ultimately diagnosed with lung cancer: We’re not seeking here to confirm or debunk that specific story, but rather to point out that clubbed nails are associated with several negative health conditions. However, they are not, in and of themselves, evidence that a person has lung cancer or some other life-threatening condition. A 2008 study in the European Journal of Internal Medicine looked at 1,511 emergency room admissions and found that “Clubbing is present in 1% of admissions in a department of general internal medicine and is associated in nearly 40% with serious disease.” The other 60% of clubbing cases, the study reported, had no obvious cause but were likely not due to cancer (based on a one-year follow-up of those cases). Studies that document clubbed nails typically look at pools of people who have already been diagnosed with a particular condition and then seek to figure out what percentage of people with that same condition also have clubbed nails. A 1998 study that looked at 111 patients diagnosed with lung cancer, for example, found that around 30% of those individuals had clubbed nails.
|
16289
|
"Blocking travel from countries with Ebola should be possible because President Barack Obama ""has sealed off Israel in the past."
|
"Murphy said that blocking travel from countries with Ebola should be feasible because Obama ""has sealed off Israel in the past."" However, the two-day air-travel ban imposed by the FAA earlier this year affected U.S.-owned carriers without halting travel into and out of Israel by foreign-owned carriers, who may have been carrying either Americans or foreigners, and who may have been flying unimpeded into U.S. airports. Comparing this to a travel ban designed to stop Ebola from leaving west Africa is a case of apples and oranges. The claim contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."
|
false
|
National, Ebola, Israel, Foreign Policy, Public Health, Transportation, Tim Murphy,
|
"Ebola was once again Topic A on the Sunday news shows. On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace had an exchange with Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pa., over one of the most contentious Ebola-related issues -- whether to enact a travel ban from countries where Ebola is spreading, such as the west African nations of Liberia and Sierra Leone. Here’s the exchange: Wallace: ""I want to talk about the threats from those countries -- the ‘hot zone’ -- to this country, because one of the big issues, of course, is this idea of a travel ban. … Congressman Murphy, this is what President Obama said this week:"" Obama: ""Trying to seal off an entire region of the world, if that were even possible, could actually make the situation worse."" Wallace: ""Congressman Murphy, why is the president wrong?"" Murphy: ""Well, look, first of all, the president has sealed off Israel in the past, and we sealed off other areas temporarily. We can have travel restrictions until we get the rest right. And the rest is not right."" For this fact-check, we’ll focus on whether blocking travel from countries with Ebola should be because Obama ""has sealed off Israel in the past."" We didn’t hear back from Murphy’s office, but the only example involving Israel that experts could recall was the two-day ban earlier this year on American airlines flying into or out of Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport. The Israel flight ban became a cause celebre earlier for conservatives such as Ted Cruz, and the comparison of the Israel ban and a possible Ebola flight ban has been the subject of comment on some conservative blogs. That ban was in effect for parts of July 22 and July 23, in the middle of a weeks-long battle between Israel and Hamas. The Federal Aviation Administration ban was enacted after a Hamas rocket landed within a mile of the airport, prompting safety concerns for airliners flying into and out of the airport, according to news reports. (This was less than a week after a Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 was shot down while flying over a war zone in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014.) As the official FAA notification about the ban put it, ""At 12:15 EDT on July 22, 2014, the FAA issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) informing U.S. airlines that they are prohibited from flying to or from Israel's Ben Gurion International Airport for a period of up to 24 hours."" The notification went on to clarify that the move ""applies only to U.S. operators, and has no authority over foreign airlines operating to or from the airport."" This is an important distinction. The FAA’s decision prevented U.S. carriers from flying into or out of Ben Gurion Airport -- but it did not prevent foreign-owned carriers from flying into or out of Ben Gurion, including those headed to the United States, carrying Americans or people of any other nationality. Indeed, some supporters of Israel, such as former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, made a show of solidarity with Israel by flying to Ben Gurion despite the ban, using foreign carriers such as Israel’s El Al. On July 23, Bloomberg tweeted, ""Safely landed at Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv - here to show support for Israel's right to defend itself."" In other words, the Israel example was hardly a case of a country being ""sealed off."" The FAA did not act to stop airliners carrying Americans and foreigners flying from Israel to the United States -- only U.S. airplanes. ""U.S. citizens could still travel on international air carriers into and out of Israel during this time,"" said Jeffrey C. Price, a professor of aviation and aerospace science at the Metropolitan State University of Denver. This situation isn’t comparable to what would be needed to stop air traffic from west African nations currently grappling with Ebola. To truly keep out Ebola-infected patients from west Africa, the government would need to ban all flights originating in west Africa from landing in the United States. That’s a more all-encompassing ban than the one imposed on Israel. If the FAA simply followed the Israeli example, foreign carriers could continue to fly passengers unimpeded into the United States, something that would defeat the purpose of an Ebola-related ban. (It’s not even clear what a U.S. flight ban might look like. According to CNN, there are no direct flights to the United States from either Liberia, Sierra Leone or Guinea, the three countries most heavily affected by Ebola today.) ""It’s wrong to compare what happened in Israel with what has been discussed regarding Ebola and Africa,"" said Henry H. Harteveldt, founder and travel industry analyst with the Atmosphere Research Group. Separately, the United States could enforce a ban against anyone infected with Ebola. The only notable precedent for that was a ban that lasted for more than 20 years that kept travelers with H.I.V. -- the virus that causes AIDS -- from entering the country. (This ban was ended in 2009 under Obama.) However, if that’s the kind of ban Murphy was referring to, then his on-air comparison is off-base. The AIDS ban never specifically targeted any one country, and it was implemented by President Ronald Reagan, not Obama. Our ruling Murphy said that blocking travel from countries with Ebola should be feasible because Obama ""has sealed off Israel in the past."" However, the two-day air-travel ban imposed by the FAA earlier this year affected U.S.-owned carriers without halting travel into and out of Israel by foreign-owned carriers, who may have been carrying either Americans or foreigners, and who may have been flying unimpeded into U.S. airports. Comparing this to a travel ban designed to stop Ebola from leaving west Africa is a case of apples and oranges. The claim contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, so"
|
29794
|
A form of tuberculosis dubbed “Mexican blood flu” is being brought into the U.S. by immigrants crossing the Southern border.
|
All told, there is no basis for the claim that an XDR-TB outbreak is present at the Southern border. Belief in such a claim would require taking the word of a company that once sold a $74 eBook created to teach readers how to find an “incredible cure for cancer hidden in the Book of Matthew,” over the reports of health officials on the ground and health monitoring agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As such, we rank the claim false.
|
false
|
Politics
|
In mid-May 2019, viral claims began to emerge on Facebook warning about XDR-TB, or “extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis,” wreaking havoc at the Southern border. For example, a representative Facebook post asserted: As it turns out, these rumors are not driven by reality but by a company with a history of politically charged health misinformation selling a bogus “natural health” supplement. The claims made on Facebook mirror the claims made by an entity that calls itself the “Institute for Natural Healing” in a thinly sourced advertisement: Let me describe how dire the current situation is—because the Government is staying tight-lipped. It’s known as the “Mexican Blood Flu” or its scientific name… XDR-T. And you wouldn’t wish the symptoms (internal bleeding, coughing up blood, seizures and even suffocation) on your worst enemy. For years it was seen as a “third world problem,” killing scores of people in the world’s poorest countries… And a major outbreak within the U.S. was considered unthinkable. But here’s the horrifying truth they don’t want you to know… a U.S. outbreak has already begun. And officials have no idea how to contain it. The first case was discovered in McAllen, Texas near the Mexican border. An illegal alien was detained by the U.S. Border Patrol suffering from a scorching fever and coughing up blood. The Institute for Natural Healing is a subsidiary of a publishing company known as Agora, Inc., which has a lengthy history of using misleading tactics and politically charged language to get people to purchase supplements, ebooks, or stock tips. Snopes has previously debunked Agora content that suggested Hillary Clinton was hiding a cure for cancer, and an Agora advertisement for a 74-dollar eBook explaining how to protect yourself from an alleged “Klebsi plague” set to ravage America. The founder of Agora once declared that “our customers don’t pay us to be right.” In point of fact, the scientific name of the disease in question is not “XDR-T,” but “XDR-TB,” a disease categorization that is a step more serious than multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), MDR-TB “is resistant to at least isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF), while XDR-TB is “resistant to INH and RIF, any fluoroquinolone, and at least three of the injectable second-line anti-TB drugs.” Agora often uses made-up names for commonly known conditions or “cures” to make it harder for potential buyers of supplements or ebooks to research them on their own. “Mexican blood flu” is another made-up name, and it’s also a poorly chosen one from a truth standpoint. The McAllen, Texas, incident referenced in the Institute for Natural Healing’s advertisement took place in 2013 and concerned a Nepalese man who had traveled through South Asia, Brazil, and Mexico before crossing illegally into Texas, as reported by the Wall Street Journal: In medical isolation in South Texas, 100 miles or so from Mexico’s border, is a man who embodies one of U.S. health officials’ greatest worries: He is the first person to cross and be held in detention while infected with one of the most severe types of drug-resistant tuberculosis known today … The Nepalese man detained at the U.S. border carries a particularly deadly strain—XDR, “extensively drug-resistant” TB. His TB is resistant to at least eight of the 15 or so standard drugs, according to a U.S. government description of the case reviewed by the Journal. His XDR strain has been seen only once before in the U.S., in another patient of Nepalese origin, according to the government description. The assertion that “a U.S. outbreak has already begun” is similarly incorrect: following the McCarren incident, the United States reported zero XDR-TB cases in 2014 and 2015. In 2016, one case was reported in the entire United States. In 2017, the most recent year for which CDC data is available, two cases were reported. According to CDC data, “the percentage of TB cases that are drug resistant has remained stable for the last 20 years.” The topic of multiple drug-resistant TB (not XDR-TB) at the Southern border was briefly revived in statements made by U.S. Rep. John Joyce, who in April 2019 participated in a “fact-finding” mission to the U.S.-Mexico border in Yuma, Arizona. During that trip, according to reporting by the Associated Press, Joyce said “that there are 12 cases of multiple-drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis” that had been identified in immigrants held in detention in Yuma, Arizona. Yuma, Arizona officials later stated that this information was incorrect, although the person who made the claim to the politician stood by it, according to the Arizona Republic: After a question from The Arizona Republic about a tuberculosis outbreak, Yuma County officials sought to set the record straight. “I can say, after confirming with the Yuma County Health District, there is no drug-resistant tuberculosis in Yuma County,” said Kevin Tunell, a spokesman for the county. “Further, there are no cases of tuberculosis involving migrants in Yuma County at this time.
|
23257
|
"Erik Wallin Says Peter Kilmartin voted ""in favor of expanding the 'good behavior' statute to sex offenders."
|
Wallin says Kilmartin voted to expand 'good behavior' law to jailed sex offenders
|
false
|
Rhode Island, Crime, Voting Record, Erik Wallin,
|
"There are few things that scare the public more than the possibility of sex offenders running loose on the streets. So when Republican candidate for attorney general Erik Wallin issued a news release warning voters that his opponent, Democrat Peter Kilmartin, voted to allow sex offenders to shave time off their prison sentences for good behavior, it caught our attention. His claim began like this: ""Erik Wallin, candidate for Attorney General, today criticized Representative Kilmartin for his vote in favor of expanding the 'good behavior' statute to sex offenders and called for its overall repeal for those who commit violent felonies (including sex crimes) and domestic violence offenses."" He repeated much of that accusation in a subsequent appearance on WPRO 630-AM's ""John DePetro Show."" The good behavior statute he's talking about is part of a state law that dictates when and how prison inmates are allowed to earn time off their sentences. He is referring to a change in that policy enacted by lawmakers in 2008. But let's go back to what the law said before that rewrite. Since 1976, the statute has allowed well-behaved prison inmates -- except those serving life sentences -- to trim up to 10 days a month off their prison stays under a formula that was tied to the length of their sentence. For example, an inmate sentenced to eight years could knock eight days per month off his or her prison time, while someone serving five years could earn up to five days off a month. Prisoners could also earn small amounts of additional time off for what is known as meritorious service. Sex offenders were not excluded from those guidelines. Nor were violent felons or anyone else besides those with life sentences. In 2008, faced with cost concerns, crowding and calls for a good conduct policy that would allow those serving short sentences to earn as much time off as those imprisoned for more serious crimes, the state convened a panel to revamp the policy. That group was made up of prosecutors, public defenders, state police, the chief judge of the Superior Court, corrections officials and legislators. The result was a line item in Governor Carcieri's midyear budget that would have allowed all inmates except those serving life sentences to earn up to 10 days per month off their time -- a full third -- regardless of their crimes. The proposal also allowed inmates to earn up to five days more per month off for participating in rehabilitation programs such as substance-abuse treatment and anger management. House leaders later decided to consider the measure as a separate bill, rather than a budget item. (It is worth noting that as the House whip, Kilmartin was a member of that leadership team.) But as that bill made its way to the House floor, a small group of legislators on both sides of the aisle roared in protest. The new rules, they said, did not specifically exclude sex offenders, meaning they too were eligible for the increased good behavior benefits. House lawmakers rewrote the bill to specifically exclude sex offenders from benefiting from the new policy. In other words, they were still governed by the less generous statute from the 1970s. The legislation passed March 27, 2008, with Kilmartin voting yes. For procedural reasons, it found its way back into the midyear budget bill. It passed, complete with the language excluding sex offenders, in May of that year. Kilmartin again voted yes. But neither of his two votes that year gave any new privileges to sex offenders, as Wallin suggests. In fact, they did exactly the opposite, targeting sex offenders as the only inmates -- along with those serving life sentences -- who could not benefit. ""Basically every other inmate at the [Adult Correctional Institutions] got a real benefit from this change, and the sex offenders did not,"" said Patricia Coyne-Fague, chief legal council for the state Department of Corrections. So why did Wallin accuse Kilmartin of a vote the representative never made? Wallin acknowledged that the new rules excluded sex offenders, and he said his initial new release contained ""bad wording,"" noting that he sent out a subsequent statement that downplayed the sex offender side of what he said. In retrospect, Wallin said the essence of his claim had more to do with what Kilmartin didn't do than what he did. ""My argument is simply that [Kilmartin] voted for a bill that continues to allow sex offenders to get credit for good behavior ... He failed to close the loophole,"" or repeal the older portion of the law that rewards sex offenders. Wallin is right about that. Sex offenders are still eligible to trim time off their sentences under a policy that some voters might not approve of. But that is the result of a law that passed in 1976, when Kilmartin was 14 years old. It had nothing to do with the 2008 votes. The claim stops short of receiving a because Wallin acknowledges that the news release was poorly worded. But that doesn't change the fact that he accused his opponent of voting in favor of something he didn't vote for. We find this claim ."
|
38428
|
A viral report alleges that Summer Zervos, an “Apprentice” contestant who came forward with sexual assault allegations against Donald Trump, was paid $500,000 by Gloria Allred to fake the story.
|
Trump Accuser Summer Zervos Was Paid $500,000
|
unproven
|
9/11 Attack on America
|
These unfounded allegations are based on anonymous sources that can’t be verified. The story first appeared at GotNews under the headline, “Breaking: Ex-Apprentice #SummerZervos Paid $500,000 by @GloriaAllred to Accuse Trump, Deal Went to Others Too,” accused Zervos of being a “fake rape.” The story beings: The Apprentice loser and Trump “fake rape” accuser Summer Zervos was bribed $500,000 by Democrat fundraiser and lawyer Gloria Allred to make her accusations against Donald Trump, a deal that was shopped around to other ex-Apprentice contestants too, according to anonymous sources familiar with the matter. GotNews’ source tells us that Zervos’ sexual harassment accusation against Trump is a “completely fabricated hoax.” Zervos was paid half a million dollars by Gloria Allred, which is being paid out “slowly over time” according to our source. The story was quickly picked up and circulated on right-wing websites. Later, the original was updated with a comment from Gloria Allred, an attorney and Democratic booster, who denied the allegations: Your “tip” is completely false. I have never paid anyone to come forward. Feel free to tell your tipster, who is probably a Trump supporter that I said so. Zervos came forward in October with allegations that she was sexually assaulted by Trump. Zervos, who was represented by Allred, said Trump groped and kissed her in 2007 when she approached him about a job opportunity, ABC News reports: “When I arrived, he kissed me on the lips. I was surprised, but felt that perhaps that was just his form of greeting,” Zervos said in a statement that she read, sometimes haltingly and and often with tears. Trump praised her intelligence and attractiveness and said “that he would love to have me work for him,” according to Zervos. He promised to contact her a few days later, when he was in Los Angeles, then sent her off with another kiss on the lips. “This made me feel very nervous and embarrassed,” Zervos said. “When I arrived, he kissed me on the lips. I was surprised, but felt that perhaps that was just his form of greeting,” Zervos said in a statement that she read, sometimes haltingly and and often with tears. Trump praised her intelligence and attractiveness and said “that he would love to have me work for him,” according to Zervos. He promised to contact her a few days later, when he was in Los Angeles, then sent her off with another kiss on the lips. “This made me feel very nervous and embarrassed,” Zervos said. After that, Zervos agreed to meet Trump in Los Angeles, at the Beverly Hills Hotel. Trump, she said, greeted her with an “open-mouthed” kiss and pulled her towards him, then kissed her again and put his hand on her breast, as she attempted to push him away. “Come on man, get real,” she said she told him. Trump “thrusted his genitals” against her. He eventually stopped and their conversation turned to finances, she said. Their evening ended abruptly when he said he was tired, but he then asked her to meet him at his Palos Verdes golf course, Zervos said, and she wondered whether his advances had been “some kind of test,” since it seemed he was still considering her for a job. Trump has denied Zervos’ allegations. Comments
|
10589
|
“Mind-body” therapy shows promise for fibromyalgia
|
"The story gets high marks for its evaluation of the evidence and especially for pointing out the limitations of psychotherapy studies that use a waiting list as a control group. The story would have been improved by the inclusion of some truly independent expert sources to comment on the research. Such experts may have emphasized that this ""new"" therapy may not differ very dramatically from existing psychotherapeutic approaches. Because of the controversy that has surrounded the diagnosis of fibromyalgia for decades (and which still persists today), researchers have been slow to develop new therapies for treating the condition. The new approach discussed here is especially welcome because it addresses the ""mind-body"" connection in the development of chronic pain. That is, it acknowledges–as research increasingly suggests– that the source of chronic pain for some patients lies not only in achy muscles and joints but also in the central nervous system. Much more research will be needed to demonstrate whether this new approach is broadly effective for fibromyalgia patients."
|
true
|
"Chronic pain takes a huge financial toll in terms of direct medical costs and lost productivity, but the story didn’t cover this angle. It would have been interesting to hear how costs of this psychotherapy compare with those of drug therapy. Also, no word on whether the costs would be covered by insurance or borne out of pocket by patients. The story reports that 46% of patients receiving affective self-awareness therapy had a 30% or greater reduction in pain severity, which was the study’s primary outcome, compared to zero patients in the control group. This succinct summary, presented in absolute terms and unembellished with patient anecdotes, is enough to merit a satisfactory. But we wish the story had explained whether a 30% reduction in this pain rating scale is a clinically important finding. In addition, it is not clear why the article failed to mention that patients receiving affective self-awareness therapy had improved self-reported functional status. This is an important measure of how patients are able to get along in their daily lives. We’ll grade this one not applicable because the story didn’t mention any potential harms of psychotherapy – which is understandable since these are generally thought to be small. But there are some theoretical risks which the story could have mentioned. The story does a relatively thorough job of explaining the study and included key information such as the number of patients, a description of the intervention, and the length of follow-up. It could have done a better job of pointing out strengths of the research, including the fact that the evaluators were blinded to the treatment status of the subjects. Moreover, the story didn’t comment on the the fact that the therapy was provided only in the first month of the study (and was limited to the initial evaluation followed by three two hour group sessions), and yet the positive effect on pain was noted at 6 months–evidence of a durable effect of the treatment. Importantly, the story drew attention to several limitations such as the small sample size and the fact that the control group was on a wait list and didn’t receive as much attention as the intervention group. The latter point is important, the story points outs, because patients tend to get better when they are seen by health care professionals, regardless of whether any effective treatment is provided. Accordingly, the improvements seen with affective self-awareness therapy might be due in part to the increased number of office visits these patients made rather than any specific effect of the treatment. Fibromyalgia is a controversial diagnosis that some experts maintain isn’t a real illness. Nevertheless, the disease is recognized by the FDA, insurers, and the American College of Rheumatology, who estimate that 5 million Americans suffer from this condition. This prevalence estimate is accurately cited in the article. The story included only one expert source, Dr. Howard Schubiner, who in addition to being an author on the paper is also the original developer of affective self-awareness therapy. While these credentials no doubt make him an authority on the treatment and an important interview subject, they also create the appearance that he could be biased in favor of the approach. Another expert perspective would have been useful, for example, to explain why some professionals disagree with Schubiner’s approach to fibromyalgia treatment. Schubiner suggests that his ideas are ""controversial,"" but we never learn what it is that other experts in the field object to. The story mentions other common approaches to treatment, including painkillers, antidepressants, CBT and exercise therapy. It also provides some discussion of the overlap between CBT and affective self-awareness, both of which focus on recognizing and modifying maladaptive responses to emotions and thoughts. For comparison purposes, we think it would have been interesting to hear how these other therapies have performed in similarly designed studies of fibromyalgia pain. Nevertheless, the story does enough to earn a satisfactory. The story notes that only a small number of healthcare providers practice affective self-awareness, suggesting that the treatment is not widely available. The story earns a satisfactory for not over-selling the novelty of the therapy. Cognitive-Behavioral therapy (CBT), an established psychotherapy treatment, deals with the recognition of emotions and their relationship to cognition, function and maladaptive responses. Affective self-awareness seems to deal with similar issues, so It is not clear how novel this treatment really is. The story adequately describes this, and is not overly assertive It’s clear that the story interviewed the author of the study, so it’s apparent that it was not lifted entirely from a news release."
|
|
9499
|
Here's What You Need To Know About The Female Condom
|
Credit: Anka Grzywacz This is a well-rounded “explainer” story looking at female condoms, a less frequently used form of contraception compared to male condoms. The story is not directly tied to a specific research study, but does include numbers for efficacy which are nearly equal to those for male condoms. The story comes with a sizable dose of speculation about potential benefits (such as decreased risk of infection and increased sexual pleasure) that are unproven. On the other hand, it offers refreshing candor about the availability of the device and how it is used. We were especially pleased to see so much attention given to cost and availability of the product. It also openly disclosed one of the source’s relationships with the condom’s manufacturer. Women can be at a cultural disadvantage in asking for birth-control prevention at the time of intercourse, and are at risk for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV because of exposure. Female condoms could be a relatively low-cost answer to this problem if they became better known and understood.
|
true
|
contraceptives
|
Hooray for details on cost, including nuances about “free” but only with prescription. We also believe the details on availability and position on shelves is very important. Here’s what story says: “Up until the past few months, the female condom lived on store shelves, usually right next to the male condoms. But it was difficult to get shelf space and secure the product in every outlet, Fisch tells BuzzFeed Health. Plus, the female condoms came in three-packs, making them more expensive than a big box of male condoms. Recently, Veru Healthcare moved FC2 behind the counter, where it’s available in packs of 12 with a prescription from your provider. Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance plans must cover at least one form of contraception from each FDA-approved method at no cost. And since FC2 is the only FDA-approved female condom, it will be free with a prescription from your doctor.” Here the story excels at providing important context. Benefits, in the case of barrier condoms, are measured in “failure rates.” These rates depend on behavior. The story makes this clear. Some of what the story gave us in benefits: “Before we get into the numbers, it’s helpful to understand that birth control effectiveness is measured in terms of failure rates, or the percentage of people who get pregnant within the first year of using this method. Female condoms have a 5% failure rate with perfect use (using it consistently and correctly every single time), making them 95% effective. In contrast, male condoms have a perfect use failure rate of 2%, making them 98% effective. The failure rate for both male and female condoms goes up when you also include people who used the method inconsistently or incorrectly (referred to as “typical use”). Female condoms have a typical use failure rate of 21%, while male condoms have a typical use failure rate of 18%. The effectiveness of FC2 is actually taken from research on the effectiveness of its predecessor, FC1 (the original female condom approved in 1993). Since the FC2 is an improved version of FC1 (made of nitrile instead of polyurethane), no further FDA studies were required, said Fisch.” It also discussed two possible, but not proven, benefits that the condom may decrease the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and improve sensation. We wish the story had hedged a little more on these–even a minimal degree of skin-to-skin contact can transmit some infections, such as herpes or human papilloma virus. There is a good discussion of the drawbacks of condom use, for both male and female condoms. The story is not about new research findings, so it is not held to the same standard as a story directly about new clinical research. Still, we were pleased the story had hyperlinks to two research articles to back up the statistics about efficacy. We were a little disappointed that one of those studies was from 2011, which may not be the most up-to-date findings. There is no disease mongering. We also applaud the context in behavioral and financial realities that is part of the story. The story makes it clear that one of the sources is chief corporate officer of Veru Healthcare, which distributes the female condom known as FC2. The story does a good job of talking about many alternatives that couples have for birth control. The story does a good job of handling the nuances of availability. The story explains that female condoms have been around for a while, but within the past few months one manufacturer made them available by prescription. The story contains fresh interview material from scientists and does not rely on a news release.
|
16644
|
What (the Obama administration is) going to come out with in the next several months is you're not even going to be able to burn coal very limitedly in the existing plants.
|
"Capito said ""What (Obama is) going to come out with in the next several months is you're not even going to be able to burn coal very limitedly in the existing plants."" The proposal Capito is referring to is an EPA plan to cut carbon emissions in existing power plants. Those rules do not prohibit current facilities from burning coal, and even Capito’s spokeswoman said the rule ""doesn't mean that every plant has to close."" Some facilities will close down within the next decade, but many of those plants were scheduled to be retired anyway due to age and other factors. States and power companies have options to continue to utilize coal for energy, and experts said they expect coal to remain part of the national portfolio for years to come."
|
false
|
Environment, National, Climate Change, Energy, Government Regulation, Shelley Moore Capito,
|
"Is President Barack Obama poised to stop any more coal from burning in the United States? That’s the message from U.S. Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican running for Senate in West Virginia against Democrat Natalie Tennant. In a campaign ad released July 29, Capito, surrounded by blue-collar workers, warns against Obama’s coal regulations. ""The president's come out with rules that say 'no new coal-fired power plants,’"" Capito says. ""But what he's going to come out with in the next several months is you're not even going to be able to burn coal very limitedly in the existing plants."" We already fact-checked the claim that new regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency say ""no new coal-fired power plants."" We said it was Mostly . But what about existing power plants? We decided to take a look. What the EPA is doing In June 2014, the EPA, at Obama’s direction, proposed a plan to reduce carbon emissions by 30 percent compared to 2005 base levels over the next 25 years. The plan is now in a 12-month review period before it is finalized. The proposal does not say that existing coal plants must be shut down or can’t burn coal. So in a literal sense, Capito’s claim falls flat. In fact, baked into the EPA’s own estimates is an assumption that 30 percent of the country’s energy will still come from coal in 2030. (In 2013, about 39 percent of U.S. power came from coal.) Here’s what the EPA is actually doing. Under the new rules, the EPA has given each state its own goal for reducing carbon emissions over the next 25 years. While the goal is a 30 percent reduction in greenhouse gases nationally, every state has a different threshold it must reach based on feasibility, cost and current pollution levels, among other factors. How are these goals achieved? The EPA basically says it's up to states to decide. There are a variety of options, including proposals for states to create regional cap and trade networks, invest in renewable energy and build smart grid technology. And, yes, they could phase out existing coal plants. But experts we spoke with said that’s far from a certainty or the only option. First, the steps toward reaching these goals will be gradual. So to insinuate that within several months the EPA is going to stop plants from burning coal is just fear mongering. Second, it’s important to keep in mind that many of the coal plants already in existence are quite old — most have been in operation at least 30 years — and were on track to be retired in the next decade anyway. Perhaps these new rules accelerate that process, but it was coming. Another reason many coal plants were set to close is because of existing federal rules against mercury emissions. These rules are much more stringent than the new carbon rules, experts told us. But plants that weren’t scheduled for retirement that can meet the mercury standards have other options to stay open. For example, they can retrofit their facilities with technology that will result in cleaner emissions, such as scrubbers that remove some of the carbon. ""In no way does this program say coal can’t live,"" said Michael Webber, the deputy director of the Energy Institute at The University of Texas at Austin. ""What it is is a death blow for outdated, old, vintage coal plants, unless they pay for"" technology upgrades. So how does the EPA proposal say ""you're not even going to be able to burn coal very limitedly in the existing plants""? We asked Capito’s campaign for evidence. Spokeswoman Amy Graham told us that, ""Not a single West Virginia coal plant meets the average standard set for our state in the EPA rule. That doesn't mean that every plant has to close, but because 95 percent of our state's electricity production comes from coal, in order to reduce the state's emissions rate to the required average, coal capacity will have to close."" But that’s not remotely close to what Capito said. In fact, the idea that the EPA proposal ""doesn’t mean that every plant has to close"" seems to entirely contradict Capito’s claim in the ad. What’s next for coal? Some energy companies might find technological upgrades too costly, and will seek alternatives such as natural gas, which is much cheaper right now. But for other facilities, particularly larger ones, the initial upfront costs may be offset by savings from creating more efficient, modern plants, said Dallas Burtraw, associate director of the Resources for the Future Center for Climate and Electricity Policy, an energy think tank funded by government, nonprofits and energy companies. ""We’re going to see a shakeout of older and smaller coal plants, the least efficient ones anyway,"" Burtraw said. ""The ones that remain will have a high level of environmental controls and will run relatively efficiently with a high utilization rate."" States, too, will influence this process when they create their blueprint for decreasing emissions, said Amy Jaffe, executive director of Energy and Sustainability at the University of California, Davis. ""It may be in some places there is nothing you can do other than stop using coal, but there's nothing in the rules that says there can’t be coal,"" Jaffe said. ""States have been given targets based on their existing profiles and will come back to the EPA with state plans for how to meet a target of reduction. Some states that are using coal will continue to burn coal and find other ways to cut emissions."" We asked Paul Meier, an associate scientist and director of the University of Wisconsin Energy Institute, to review what impact the rules might have on West Virginia in particular. Coal plants in West Virginia on average emit 2,056 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt hour. The EPA’s proposed guidelines would require West Virginia coal plants to average 1,748 pounds of carbon per megawatt hour by 2020 and 1,620 pounds per megawatt hour by 2030, a 21 percent decrease that Meier said ""requires only a slight reduction in coal reliance."" ""This can be accomplished by improving the efficiency of the coal plants, or by displacing some of the coal generation with natural gas, nuclear, renewable electricity,"" Meier said. ""States may propose their own plan to accomplish this, and may also receive credit for increasing conservation and efficiency efforts."" Our ruling Capito said ""What (Obama is) going to come out with in the next several months is you're not even going to be able to burn coal very limitedly in the existing plants."" The proposal Capito is referring to is an EPA plan to cut carbon emissions in existing power plants. Those rules do not prohibit current facilities from burning coal, and even Capito’s spokeswoman said the rule ""doesn't mean that every plant has to close."" Some facilities will close down within the next decade, but many of those plants were scheduled to be retired anyway due to age and other factors. States and power companies have options to continue to utilize coal for energy, and experts said they expect coal to remain part of the national portfolio for years to come."
|
9315
|
Reuters: Merck drug Keytruda succeeds in late-stage esophageal cancer trial
|
This story was reported entirely from a Merck news announcement that immunotherapy drug Keytruda (pembrolizumab) did better than chemotherapy at extending the lives of certain patients with esophageal cancer. On the plus side, the story conveyed some information about the drug’s availability. However, it didn’t didn’t say how much the drug costs, how long it extended survival, or what the potential harms might be. It also passed along without scrutiny Merck’s assertion that this is the first time a drug of this type has helped those patients live longer. We can anticipate Reuters reading our review and responding that their audience is different – it’s a business audience. Well, whether you’re flying in business class or coach, you may run into this story in the same way – by searching for Keytruda online. And whether you’re an investor or a patient, some of your basic informational needs are the same. And you didn’t get those needs answered in this piece. The new trial results on Keytruda for digestive tract cancers haven’t been presented at a scientific conference yet, much less been submitted for peer review. Too much, too soon. No matter whom you’re writing for, it’s the job of journalism to independently vet claims. And there was no evidence of that in this story. That’s the biggest take-home of what matters in this story: an example of health care journalism abdicating its responsibility.
|
false
|
Keytruda
|
Costs were not mentioned and that’s a big omission when you’re discussing Keytruda. Drugs in this class of checkpoint inhibitors are estimated to cost about $150,000 a year. Passing along the drug company’s announcement that a drug “met the main goal of a late-stage trial” doesn’t come anywhere close to explaining what was found in that trial. The story said “Keytruda, when compared to chemotherapy, enabled certain patients with esophageal cancer to live longer.” But what percentage of patients lived longer? And by how much? How did the drug affect their quality of life? Those questions weren’t addressed. When you’re simply passing along information spoonfed to you by a drug company, you’re not likely to explain or quantify the potential harms. And, indeed, Reuters didn’t even nod in the direction of discussing harms. Merck’s news release unhelpfully said the “safety profile of Keytruda in this trial was consistent with that observed in previously reported studies.” In our 6 tips for writing about immunotherapy, we note that harms of immunotherapy drugs — which can include serious adverse effects such as diarrhea and pneumonitis — are often downplayed The quality of the evidence is impossible to ascertain since the story is based on a Merck announcement – made before the trial results were even presented at a scientific conference, much less published. The story didn’t engage in disease-mongering, but it also didn’t include information beyond what was in Merck’s news release. It only passed along the company’s information that esophageal cancer is the “seventh most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world.” The story could have reported that according to government data, 17,290 new cases of esophageal cancer are expected in the U.S. this year, comprising 1% of all new cancers and 2.6% of cancer deaths. About a fifth of patients die within five years. There were no independent sources quoted in the story – only Merck statements about Merck’s own drug. The story simply stated that “Keytruda, when compared to chemotherapy, enabled certain patients to live longer.” No basis for that comparison was provided. A review of this class of drugs pointed out that another PD-1 inhibitor, Bristol-Myers Squibb’s Opdivo (nivolumab), has also shown to improve survival (albeit marginally) in gastric cancers. In addition, Endpoints News noted that another PD-1 drug is being tested by Celgene and BeiGene to treat esophageal and esophagogastric cancers. We’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt on this one because it explained that the drug is Merck’s top selling drug and has already been FDA-approved for use in other cancers. However, the story didn’t explain that because Keytruda is not approved for use in gastric cancers, some providers including Medicare supplement providers, may not provide coverage. The story quotes a Merck executive saying this was “the first time an anti-PD-1 therapy has achieved overall survival for this patient population.” However, as we noted earlier, published reports suggest otherwise. Everything in the story appears to be based on a Merck announcement.
|
2455
|
U.S. scientist operates colleague's brain from across campus.
|
Scientists said Tuesday they have achieved the first human-to-human mind meld, with one researcher sending a brain signal via the Internet to control the hand motion of a colleague sitting across the Seattle campus of the University of Washington.
|
true
|
Science News
|
"The feat is less a conceptual advance than another step in the years-long progress that researchers have made toward brain-computer interfaces, in which electrical signals generated from one brain are translated by a computer into commands that can move a mechanical arm or a computer cursor - or, in more and more studies, can affect another brain. Much of the research has been aimed at helping paralyzed patients regain some power of movement, but bioethicists have raised concerns about more controversial uses. In February, for instance, scientists led by Duke University Medical Center’s Miguel Nicolelis used electronic sensors to capture the thoughts of a rat in a lab in Brazil and sent via Internet to the brain of a rat in the United States. The second rat received the thoughts of the first, mimicking its behavior. And electrical activity in the brain of a monkey at Duke, in North Carolina, was recently sent via the Internet, controlling a robot arm in Japan. That raised dystopian visions of battalions of animal soldiers - or even human ones - whose brains are remotely controlled by others. Some of Duke’s brain-computer research, though not this study, received funding from the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or DARPA. For the new study, funded by the U.S. Army Research Office and other non-military federal agencies, UW professor of computer science and engineering Rajesh Rao, who has studied brain-computer interfaces for more than a decade, sat in his lab on August 12 wearing a cap with electrodes hooked up to an electroencephalography machine, which reads electrical activity in the brain. He looked at a computer screen and played a simple video game but only mentally. At one point, he imagined moving his right hand to fire a cannon, making sure not to actually move his hand. The EEG electrodes picked up the brain signals of the “fire cannon!” thought and transmitted them to the other side of the UW campus. There, Andrea Stocco of UW’s Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences was wearing a purple swim cap with a device, called a transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) coil, placed directly over his left motor cortex, which controls the right hand’s movement. When the move-right-hand signal arrived from Rao, Stocco involuntarily moved his right index finger to push the space bar on the keyboard in front of him, as if firing the cannon. He said the feeling of his hand moving involuntarily was like that of a nervous tic. “It was both exciting and eerie to watch an imagined action from my brain get translated into actual action by another brain,” Rao said. Other experts suggested the feat was not particularly impressive. It’s possible to capture one of the few easy-to-recognize EEG signals and send “a simple shock ... into the other investigator’s head,” said Andrew Schwartz of the University of Pittsburgh, who was not part of the research. Rao agreed that what his colleague jokingly called a “Vulcan mind meld” reads only simple brain signals, not thoughts, and cannot be used on anyone unknowingly. But it might one day be harnessed to allow an airline pilot on the ground help someone land a plane whose own pilot is incapacitated. The research has not been published in a scientific journal, something university spokeswoman Doree Armstrong admits is “a bit unusual.” But she said the team knew other researchers are working on this same thing and they felt “time was of the essence.” Besides, she said, they have a video of the experiment which ""they felt it could stand on its own."" The video is here The absence of a scientific publication that other researchers could scrutinize did not sit well with some of the nation’s leading brain-computer-interface experts. All four of those reached by Reuters praised UW’s Rao, but some were uneasy with the announcement and one called it “mostly a publicity stunt.” The experiment was not independently verified. (The story corrects funding source in fifth paragraph and eliminates reference to Skype in eighth)"
|
7946
|
Doctors, and insurers too, urge patients to get medicine on hand.
|
As Americans stay home to try to help stop the spread of a new coronavirus, many patients with conditions that require prescription drugs are being urged to refill their medications for a longer period.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Doctors, patient advocates and insurers themselves are telling Americans with chronic conditions such as diabetes that require life saving medications to make sure they have more than enough medicine on hand. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also says people should have extra medicine available. “Typically for say a month or two you should have access to medicines, and any basic essentials that you might need to leave the house for,” said Dr. Neha Nanda, medical director of infection prevention and antimicrobial stewardship with Keck Medicine of the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which provides health services to people infected with HIV, said it was extending the usual 30-day refill time for antiretroviral treatment and other medications to 60 days even without medical provider approval, AHF spokesman Ged Kenslea said. Health insurers and pharmacy benefit managers have been pressured to address potential access issues around COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus. Many have responded by waiving copayments related to the diagnostic test and other upfront out-of-pocket costs. David Dross, who leads the managed pharmacy practice at health benefits firm Mercer, said the industry is being flexible because of the unprecedented impact of the outbreak. More than 1,600 people have tested positive for the virus across 47 states, according to the CDC. The effort to slow its spread has led to mass disruption including closures of schools, offices, and large gatherings like sporting events. They are thinking “if they canceled March Madness for God’s sake ... we need to be flexible,” Dross said, referring to the popular annual college basketball playoffs. In addition to diabetes or HIV, access to medicines that treat chronic conditions such as pulmonary disease and high blood pressure are of particular concern. CVS Health Corp said patients who typically pick up a 30-day prescription should consider changing that to 90 days. It also said Aetna patients who typically refill prescriptions every 30 days can extend that to a 90-day supply. Anthem is urging members who have a pharmacy plan that allows for a 90-day benefit to talk to their doctor about whether extending their prescription is appropriate, spokeswoman Leslie Porras said in a statement. Cigna Corp, which owns the Express Scripts pharmacy benefit manager, is recommending that patients who currently receive a 30-day supply switch to a 90-day supply, according to spokeswoman Jennifer Luddy. UnitedHealth Group Inc, which owns OptumRX pharmacy benefit manager, also said customers could call for early refills on their prescriptions.
|
16529
|
"Ending Spending Action Fund Says Sen. Jeanne Shaheen’s ""wealth has surged while in public office."
|
"The Ending Spending Action Fund ad claims ""Shaheen’s wealth has surged while in public office."" By one measure, Shaheen’s net worth has actually gone down since she took office. Though she and her husband have listed more assets, investments and financial ventures than in 2008, they also have considerably more debt from more mortgages. Her tax returns, filed jointly with her husband, have shown wide fluctuations in income since 2006, making it hard to discern whether her wealth ""surged."" Her 2013 income was just slightly higher than her average earnings during the past eight years. Ending Spending pointed to a story that has raised questions about the business practices of Shaheen’s husband and their relation to her votes in Congress. However, the findings of the story don’t indicate a surge in wealth by the family. The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."
|
false
|
National, Congress, Income, Message Machine 2014, Negative Campaigning, Ending Spending Action Fund,
|
"Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., insists an ad running against her is so blatantly false that her campaign asked a station to take it down. Meanwhile, the makers of the ad, the conservative group Ending Spending Action Fund, told us the ad is ""100 percent accurate."" Sounds like a job for PolitiFact. The ad, a 60-second spot, claims that New Hampshire families are struggling, but ""Shaheen’s wealth has surged while in public office."" The ad goes on to say that ""news reports raise questions about Shaheen’s family profiting from her votes in Congress, a shady stock deal and a conflict of interest."" The ad concludes: ""The Shaheen family gets richer. New Hampshire families get the bill."" Shaheen’s Republican opponent will be determined in a primary on Sept. 9 and the odds on favorite is former Sen. Scott Brown. Has Shaheen’s wealth surged in office? Shaheen’s worth Brian Baker, president of Ending Spending, emailed us the backup for the ad. He also told us that the despite Shaheen's protests, the ad continues to run in New Hamsphire, though it was tweaked to add a citation at the request of one television station. The evidence for this claim comes from OpenSecrets.org, a website run by the campaign finance watchdog group Center for Responsive Politics. OpenSecrets.org estimates a candidate’s net worth using financial disclosure reports. But it’s not an exact science. The forms don’t require candidates to list their actual holdings, but rather check a range of values for every job, bank account, investment or asset they hold, as well as their debts. For example, Shaheen marked down in 2008 that she has between $15,001 and $50,000 in a Ocean National Bank checking account. According to OpenSecrets.org, in 2008 when Shaheen was elected to the U.S. Senate, her net worth was $3.4 million. This is calculated by finding the mean of her total assets, which ranged from $2.94 million and $6.08 million, and subtracting the mean of her total liabilities, ranging from $650,000 to $1.5 million. Many of her assets are listed as shared with her husband, Bill Shaheen, with whom she files taxes jointly. Using the same methodology, OpenSecrets.org estimated Shaheen’s networth in 2012 was $5.4 million. Ending Spending compared the 2008 numbers with 2012 and came up with a $2 million increase. This is already problematic. Shaheen filed her disclosure forms for 2013 in May. So Ending Spending is not using the most up-to-date figures. Those figures show Shaheen’s net worth is $2.7 million, or $700,000 less than what it was in 2008. How did we get that? Shaheen’s 2013 form indicates that both the low and high end of her total assets are up from 2008, ranging from $3.75 million to $7.89 million. But her liabilities were up, too: between $2.03 million and $4.2 million. A lot of the added liabilities are for mortgages. In 2008, Shaheen had four mortgages and a promissory note. By 2013, she had 10 mortgages and two promissory notes. It’s important to stress that we don’t know where her assets fall in the range. The 2013 values overlap quite a bit with the figures reported in 2008. In that respect, it’s possible her assets haven’t gone up at all. But it’s fair to say that since 2008, the Shaheens have acquired stakes in several commercial and residential real estate properties, and the number of investments and financial ventures listed have increased. When the average voter’s net worth falls, it’s typically not because they are taking out multiple loans and purchasing more real estate property while their investments expand. Baker said only Shaheen's assets should be taken into consideration, not her debts. However, traditionally, wealth is measured by looking at both assets and liabilities to calculate net worth. There’s another way we can look at Shaheen’s finances. In June, her campaign allowed members of the media to view eight years of tax returns. They paint a mixed picture, according to news reports, and show Shaheen's income since taking office is flat and tied to her Senate salary, while her husband's ventures have gone up and down. The Telegraph in Nashua, N.H., reported that the couples’ highest income year came in 2012 — when Shaheen earned $580,000 between her Senate salary and her husband’s law firm. But Bill Shaheen’s business partnerships have also lost nearly $1 million over the past five years, the Telegraph found. For example, in 2010, the Shaheens reported $522,000 in income, but also $300,000 in losses resulting in a gross adjusted income of $186,000, according to the Concord Monitor. In 2013, the couple made about $505,000, the Monitor reported, which is close to their average annual pre-tax salary of $474,000 during the eight years released. Profiting from votes? The ad also insinuates that Shaheen’s wealth is somehow tied to her congressional action. All of the evidence from Ending Spending comes back to a June Boston Globe article largely focused on stock options her husband owned in Ultrawave Labs — stock options the campaign says were never exercised. The Globe reported that Shaheen’s husband had stock options in the company in 2009 valued between $1,000 and $15,000. Around the same time, Ultrawave Labs — a company ""developing new imaging technology to detect breast cancer,"" according to the article — received about $78,000 in stimulus money. Shaheen voted for the stimulus — along with every other Democrat (except a sick Sen. Ted Kennedy). The money for Ultrawave came through the National Science Foundation, and was not specifically earmarked by Shaheen, as FactCheck.org noted in their own analysis of the ad. The ad says Shaheen ""failed to properly report"" the stock. What it doesn’t tell you is the stock options were ""misreported"" only because Shaheen failed to show it had already expired, her campaign said. According to the forms, in 2013 the stocks were valued between $0 and $1,000. The Globe also notes that Ultrawave Labs has lobbied Congress and the Defense Department to allocate more money for breast cancer research. During her time in Congress, Shaheen has pushed legislation to do the same, at one point supporting a program that would fund breast cancer research through the military (Shaheen sits on the Armed Services Committee). The law firm Shaheen’s husband works at, Shaheen & Gordon, also sought to help clients get stimulus money by creating a ""stimulus opportunities team,"" according to the Globe. The firm told the Globe it had no clients and was ""short-lived."" The Globe quoted a good-government group that’s critical of the Shaheens business practices, and it’s certainly worthwhile for voters to consider these findings at the ballot box. However, the points raised in the story don’t seem to prove the central premise of the ad that Shaheen’s wealth has surged as a result of her congressional action. Our ruling The Ending Spending Action Fund ad claims ""Shaheen’s wealth has surged while in public office."" By one measure, Shaheen’s net worth has actually gone down since she took office. Though she and her husband have listed more assets, investments and financial ventures than in 2008, they also have considerably more debt from more mortgages. Her tax returns, filed jointly with her husband, have shown wide fluctuations in income since 2006, making it hard to discern whether her wealth ""surged."" Her 2013 income was just slightly higher than her average earnings during the past eight years. Ending Spending pointed to a story that has raised questions about the business practices of Shaheen’s husband and their relation to her votes in Congress. However, the findings of the story don’t indicate a surge in wealth by the family. The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."
|
1321
|
Breast cancer screening failure may have shortened 270 lives in England.
|
As many as 270 women in England may have died prematurely of breast cancer because of an IT failure that led to 450,000 patients missing out on routine screening appointments.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt apologized in parliament for the “serious failure,” which he said was the result of a mistake in a computer system’s algorithm dating back to 2009 but identified only in January this year. He ordered an independent review. “Our current best estimate, which comes with caveats ... is that there may be between 135 and 270 women who had their lives shortened as a result,” he said. “Tragically there are likely to be some people in this group who would have been alive today if the failure had not happened.” Britain’s state-funded National Health Service (NHS), which provides free healthcare to the entire population, is one of the country’s most popular institutions. However, it is occasionally hit by failures and scandals which reverberate widely across society as almost everyone receives NHS care throughout their lives. Under the routine NHS breast screening program, women aged between 50 and 70 are invited for tests every three years. Around 2 million women are tested every year. The IT error affected some 450,000 women aged between 68 and 71, who should have received their final invitation to a test under the routine program but did not. Of those, around 150,000 have since died. More than 300,000 of the remaining women, now aged 70 to 79, will be offered catch-up tests by the end of May, with all tests expected to be completed by the end of October. “For them and others it is incredibly upsetting to know that you did not receive an invitation for screening at the correct time and totally devastating to hear you may have lost or be about to lose a loved one because of administrative incompetence,” said Hunt. Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer in Britain, with more than 55,000 women diagnosed every year and nearly 1,000 dying of the disease every month, according to non-governmental organization Breast Cancer Now. “It is beyond belief that this major mistake has been sustained for almost a decade and we need to know why this has been allowed to happen,” said Delyth Morgan, chief executive of Breast Cancer Now. “For those women who will have gone on to develop breast cancers that could have been picked up earlier through screening, this is a devastating error.” The body representing radiologists said the catch-up tests would put even more strain on screening units that were already stretched to the limit due to staff shortages. “Ultimately, we need funding for more training posts for radiologists to ensure the screening program – and the NHS as a whole – has the vital imaging doctors it needs,” said Caroline Rubin, vice president for clinical radiology at The Royal College of Radiologists. NHS funding and whether it is sufficient to meet the increasingly complex needs of the aging population is a perennial topic of political debate in Britain. Staff shortages have been a concern for many years. In the previous worst NHS patient care scandal, concerning poor practices at a small hospital in the English county of Staffordshire, an estimated 400 to 1,200 patients died between 2005 and 2009 as a result of inadequate care. England’s breast screening failure follows unrelated news in Ireland last week that more than 200 cervical cancer test results should have resulted in earlier intervention. The Irish government said 17 of the patients involved have since died, though it has not yet established the cause of death, and a further 1,500 women who developed cervical cancer over the last 10 years did not have their cases reviewed. The government has ordered a statutory investigation into the scandal, which has dominated political debate and shaken confidence in the Irish health service.
|
28870
|
As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton artificially depressed Haiti's minimum wage; that action was part of a larger plan by the Clinton Foundation to profit from the country.
|
What's true: The U.S. State Department, among others, pushed to cut Haiti's minimum wage in 2009. What's false: Hillary Clinton was not the sole architect of the move to reduce Haiti's minimum wage.
|
mixture
|
Politics, Haiti, minimum wage, state department
|
Haiti’s relationship with the United States and Europe can most charitably be described as complicated. Haiti’s earliest days were characterized by oppression and opposition: the country (once the French colony of St. Domingue) was born from a successful slave insurgency and declared its independence in 1804. This beginning characterized an often-antagonistic relationship between countries that profited handsomely from African slavery (such as the United States) and Haiti. Foremost among fears about Haiti was that slaves would learn successful uprisings were possible. After Haiti formally declared its independence, the United States suspended all diplomatic and trade relationships with the country. While the U.S. eventually re-opened trading routes, America didn’t recognize Haiti diplomatically for nearly sixty years after that. Other countries followed the United States’ example (and France demanded millions of francs in reparations for its rebellion in exchange for recognizing Haiti as a sovereign nation) plunging Haiti into debt and an economic depression that lasted for years, from which the country never fully recovered. Multiple invasions and economic and political tinkering followed, leaving Haiti in a turmoil of political instability and corruption, economic crisis, and a ravaged infrastructure, historically one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere, despite its fertile land and ability to grow cash crops such as sugar. Today, child labor and trafficking are endemic in Haiti, particularly in the country’s manufacturing sector, which is outsourced to foreign companies (many of them contractors for American companies, such as Hanes, Dockers, and Fruit of the Loom). Even when they are not trafficked, laborers in Haiti’s garment industry earn a pittance by the standards of other countries: the minimum wage was $0.24 (USD) an hour for many years. In June 2009, the Haitian Parliament unanimously passed a law requiring that the minimum wage be raised to $0.61 an hour, or $5 a day. (The average cost of living is estimated to be the equivalent of about $23 a day.) This pay raise was staunchly opposed by foreign manufacturers who had set up shop in the country, and the United States Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development backed those manufacturers. After Haiti’s government mandated the raise, the United States aggressively (and successfully) pushed Haiti’s president to lower the minimum wage for garment workers to what factory owners were willing to pay: the equivalent of about $0.31 an hour (or $2.50 per eight-hour day). In 2011, WikiLeaks released a set of previously-secret diplomatic cables. The American publication The Nation partnered with Haitian news organization Haïti Liberté to cover them, finding (among other things) how strongly the United States had opposed the minimum wage hike: To resolve the impasse between the factory owners and Parliament, the State Department urged quick intervention by then Haitian President René Préval. “A more visible and active engagement by Préval may be critical to resolving the issue of the minimum wage and its protest ‘spin-off’—or risk the political environment spiraling out of control,” argued US Ambassador Janet Sanderson in a June 10, 2009, cable back to Washington. Two months later Préval negotiated a deal with Parliament to create a two-tiered minimum wage increase—one for the textile industry at about $3 per day and one for all other industrial and commercial sectors at about $5 per day. Still the US Embassy wasn’t pleased. A deputy chief of mission, David E. Lindwall, said the $5 per day minimum “did not take economic reality into account” but was a populist measure aimed at appealing to “the unemployed and underpaid masses.” The Obama administration (and the Bush administration before it) had been closely monitoring the situation in the garment manufacturing sector for a long time. In 2006, Congress passed the HOPE bill (which stood for the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement) and provided duty-free entry to garments manufactured in Haiti for U.S. companies. That body also passed an updated version of the bill (HOPE II) in 2008, which mandated a framework for labor reform in factories. According to cables released by WikiLeaks, it was exactly these efforts that the United States claimed would be jeopardized by a higher minimum wage. So it’s true that the State Department (then led by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State) strongly opposed a minimum wage increase in Haiti in 2009. However, the State Department’s efforts did not occur in a political or economic vacuum, and Clinton wasn’t the sole architect of efforts to quash a minimum wage hike (as the meme suggests). It was a concerted effort on the part of Haitian elites, factory owners, free trade proponents, U.S. politicians, economists, and American companies that kept the minimum wage so low, and to lay the blame squarely at the feet of any sitting Secretary of State would be an incomplete assessment, and thus inaccurate. A law establishing a new minimum wage of $5.11 per workday ($0.64 an hour) was finally approved in 2014, which still fell far short of both the demanded raise by workers (to the equivalent of $11.36 per workday, or $1.42 per hour) and the recommended daily wage of 1,006 Haitian gourdes, or USD$22.86. Related rumors of the Clintons’ relationship to Haiti appeared in October 2016, this time alleging that after the Haiti’s infrastructure was devastated by a major earthquake in 2010, the State Department steered relief contracts to personal friends of the Clintons. However, while Hillary Clinton did recommend specific companies to help with the rebuilding process and e-mails have surfaced indicating that special attention was given to “FoBs” (“Friends of Bill”), there’s no evidence that the United States government awarded contracts to any of those contenders.
|
26435
|
“Until this week, they [OSHA] weren’t even enforcing these guidelines [for coronavirus]. Still today, OSHA is not specifying which rules employees must follow or how to keep their workers safe and healthy.”
|
OSHA released coronavirus guidelines in early March, but they function as suggestions or recommendations and are not enforceable. OSHA then released enforcement instructions in mid-April with a focus on enforcing general, existing safety standards and has not told inspectors how to apply those standards to the current crisis.
|
true
|
Corrections and Updates, Workers, Health Check, Coronavirus, Joe Biden,
|
"During an April 15 virtual town hall meeting with front-line workers, former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democrats’ presumptive nominee for the White House, was asked by a meat processing worker what he would do to protect workers like her from COVID-19. ""We lost a co-worker at my plant because there is no regulation to protect meat chain employees,"" said Safaa Elzakzoky, who is also a member of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. ""We can’t work safely and get people the meat that they need to eat. So what would you do to protect a worker like my friend who just died?"" In his response, Biden called attention to steps taken by the Obama administration during the H1N1 outbreak and criticized the Trump administration. He focused on ""failures"" by the Labor Department and its Occupational Safety and Health Administration to use regulatory powers to protect workers, including OSHA’s lack of action in enforcing specific worker safety guidelines related to COVID-19. OSHA issued an advisory guidance in early March on how employers can protect workers from COVID-19, which included encouraging businesses to develop infectious disease plans, to allow frequent hand-washing, to urge workers to stay home when they feel sick and to provide face masks to employees. Biden asserted that the agency’s actions fall far short. ""Until this week, they weren’t even enforcing these guidelines. Still today, OSHA is not specifying which rules employees must follow or how to keep their workers safe and healthy,"" said Biden. With President Donald Trump’s coronavirus response emerging as a political flashpoint in the presidential campaign, we decided to dig into the administration’s role in ensuring worker safety. And, as headlines increasingly detail how those on the front lines — health care workers as well as those in grocery stores and meatpacking plants and across the food supply chain — have contracted and died of COVID-19, we thought it was important to check the veracity of Biden’s claim. We contacted Biden’s campaign to find out the basis for his response. Staffers sent us an April 9 blog post from the National Employment Law Project, an advocacy group for workers, that outlines how the Trump administration’s OSHA has failed to stipulate and enforce adequate employee protections during the pandemic. They also sent us OSHA’s April 13 enforcement directive. OSHA is tasked with ensuring that workplaces are safe and healthy. The agency sets standards and has inspectors determine if workplaces are compliant. If they are not, OSHA issues citations and requires employers to address the problem within a certain timeframe. Failure to do so results in fines or other sanctions. These standards tend to be broad statements that can take a decade to develop and implement. For instance, two Obama-era OSHA officials — David Michaels, the Labor Department’s assistant secretary for OSHA from 2009 to 2017, and Debbie Berkowitz, a senior OSHA official from 2009 to 2015 — told us they had worked on developing an infectious disease standard for years, but that effort was halted in 2017 by the Trump administration. However, OSHA also can issue an ""emergency temporary standard"" during a public health emergency, such as the current coronavirus pandemic. Major unions, including the AFL-CIO and National Nurses United, have petitioned OSHA for an emergency temporary standard that would codify that a variety of types of workers are at risk of exposure to COVID-19 and issue detailed safety requirements for specific industries. So far, though, OSHA has not taken this emergency action. Also, the March advisory guidance is not enforceable, said Michaels and Berkowitz. The guideline includes language stating that it is ""not a standard or regulation and creates no new legal obligations."" And though this document sketched out certain recommendations that would reduce workers’ risk of exposure to COVID-19, when OSHA put out its April 13 enforcement directive, it didn’t mandate that any of those recommendations be followed by workplaces or enforced by OSHA inspectors. Michaels and Berkowitz pointed out that OSHA’s COVID-19 directive is geared toward health care facilities, indicating that workplaces like food processing plants and grocery stores are untouched by the directive. But Edwin Foulke, who ran OSHA during part of President George W. Bush’s administration, had a different take. Since the agency has a limited number of inspectors, the focus on health care facilities is logical, he said. ""Unfortunately, there is a death component to this virus, and obviously health care is the area where workers are most likely to be exposed,"" said Foulke, now a partner at the Fisher Phillips law firm in Atlanta and Arlington, Virginia. ""They put out the general publication on coronavirus, and now they’re doing all these specific industry guidelines on how to deal with health issues. I’m not sure what more, looking at a real world scenario, they could do. What would it entail? And how is it going to help?"" he said. For its part, an OSHA spokesperson reiterated that employers are, and will continue to be, responsible for providing a safe and healthy workplace and that OSHA’s pre-existing standards remain in place and enforceable, as appropriate, to protect workers from coronavirus. As part of answering the meat-processing plant worker’s question, Biden pointed to his experience during the Obama administration with the H1N1 pandemic in comparison to the current coronavirus response. To be clear, OSHA did not issue an emergency standard then, either. But the agency did offer detailed guidance — almost twice as long as the COVID-19 enforcement document — on how to protect workers from H1N1. And, though the H1N1-specific issues raised in the directive also were not enforceable, the document included specific instructions for inspectors on how to use existing agency standards to identify H1N1-related safety hazards in workplaces. For example, the instructions included seven bullet points outlining situations specific to H1N1 in which a citation could be issued under the agency’s general respiratory protection standard. In contrast, the COVID-19 enforcement document does not give the same level of guidance. Biden said that OSHA was not enforcing coronavirus guidelines until the week of April 13, and since then, the agency has not told employers what rules they must implement to keep workplaces safe. It’s that OSHA did not release any COVID-19 enforcement instructions for its inspectors until April 13. However, even when this directive was issued, it told inspectors to focus on its existing general safety standards, not recommendations geared toward the current outbreak. In other words, the coronavirus guidelines are not currently being enforced by OSHA. And while the agency’s April 13 enforcement directive instructs inspectors to focus on general safety standards, it does not guide them on how specific recommendations for COVID-19 — for instance, requiring masks and encouraging hand-washing — fit into such efforts. This story was updated to include comments from an OSHA spokesperson that came after the fact check was posted."
|
26661
|
Instagram posts Says Donald Trump “cut funding to the CDC,” “fired the Pandemic Response Team,” “refused WHO tests” and “wasted two weeks calling this outbreak a ‘Democrat hoax.’”
|
Trump did attempt to cut the CDC’s funding, but Congress prevented it from happening. While officials in charge of the U.S. response to pandemics did leave in 2018, it’s unclear if they were “fired.” The U.S. was not on a list of countries receiving COVID-19 tests from the WHO. But the U.S. doesn’t usually rely on the agency for diagnostic tests, and the testing delay was due mainly to an error with the CDC’s protocol. While Trump has called the Democratic response to the coronavirus a “hoax,” he has not used the term to describe the virus itself.
|
false
|
Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Instagram posts,
|
"Democrats have criticized President Donald Trump’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic as disorganized and short-sighted. On Instagram, the critics include some celebrities. On March 15, actor and comedian D.L. Hughley posted a screenshot of a tweet that makes several claims about the Trump administration’s actions against coronavirus. ""Dear President Trump,"" reads the tweet, which was published March 13 by an account called Translate Trump. ""YOU cut funding to the CDC; YOU fired the Pandemic Response Team; YOU refused WHO tests; YOU wasted 2 weeks calling this outbreak a ‘Democrat hoax.’"" ""This is a (sic) what a failed public response to a pandemic looks like."" This 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.) It had more than 42,000 likes as of March 17. (Screenshot from Instagram) In the United States, the coronavirus had infected 4,226 people in 49 states, with 94 deaths, as of March 17. On March 11, Trump announced several sweeping actions to slow the spread of the virus, including a ban on travel from a slate of European countries. Some public health experts have said the Trump administration’s response to the pandemic has been too slow, but are the four claims shown in Hughley’s Instagram post accurate? We looked at each one. The Instagram post has elements of truth but leaves out a lot of important information. We reached out to Translate Trump and the White House for comments, but we haven’t heard back. While it’s not accurate to say that Trump ""cut"" funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, it is accurate to say he tried. The Trump administration’s initial proposals for the budgets for emerging and zoonotic infectious diseases at the CDC — a key player in the fight against coronavirus — have consistently been lower than what was spent the previous year. However, Congress reshapes presidential recommendations as it sees fit when it crafts final spending bills. Every year since Trump has been president, lawmakers have passed funding bills — which he has signed — that not only exceeded what Trump requested for emerging infections but also exceeded the previous year’s spending. As the chart below shows, funding increased every year from fiscal year 2017 to fiscal year 2020. (We have not included the 2017 proposal, since that was submitted by the Obama administration. The figures for 2020 are preliminary.) On Feb. 24, Trump asked Congress for a $2.5 billion supplemental budget to help combat the emergence of this coronavirus. House Democrats said the amount was insufficient, and instead passed an $8.3 billion bill that Trump signed March 6. The money will fund efforts to develop a vaccine and help local governments respond to the pandemic. This needs context. ""Fired"" is a strong term for what happened, and Trump recently created a team to lead the government’s response to COVID-19. In May 2018, Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer, the senior director of global health and biodefense on the National Security Council, left the administration. He was in charge of the U.S. response to pandemics. After Ziemer’s departure, the global health team was reorganized as part of an effort by then-National Security Adviser John Bolton. Meanwhile, Tom Bossert, a homeland security adviser who recommended strong defenses against disease, left shortly after Bolton arrived. The White House didn’t replace either White House official or his team. Instead, Trump looked within his administration to fill roles for the coronavirus response. In January, Trump appointed his Health and Human Services secretary, Alex Azar, to chair a coronavirus task force. On Feb. 26, he announced that Vice President Mike Pence would take charge of the U.S. response to the coronavirus. This contains a hint of truth, but it’s mostly inaccurate. Former Vice President Joe Biden made a similar claim during the March 15 Democratic presidential debate. A March 6 Politico article says the World Health Organization shipped coronavirus tests to nearly 60 countries at the end of February, but the U.S. was not among them. That is correct, but it suggests that the U.S. would normally have been on the list, which is not the case. ""No discussions occurred between WHO and CDC about WHO providing COVID-19 tests to the United States,"" said WHO spokeswoman Margaret Harris. ""This is consistent with experience since the United States does not ordinarily rely on WHO for reagents or diagnostic tests because of sufficient domestic capacity."" This caused a lag in testing for the virus in the U.S. The CDC’s test was different and more complicated than a test published in Germany on Jan. 17. It worked in the CDC lab, but when the materials went out to state labs, some of them got inconsistent results. The CDC had to resend packages with new chemical reagents. State laboratories started developing their own tests and were ready to use them, but had to wait for emergency approval from the Food and Drug Administration. The combined delays resulted in fewer Americans being tested and a slower U.S. response overall compared with some other countries. This is inaccurate. During a Feb. 28 campaign rally in North Charleston, S.C., Trump called the Democratic response to COVID-19 a ""hoax."" But he did not use the term to describe the virus itself. During a press conference Feb. 29, Trump was asked about his remarks. ""I'm not talking about what's happening here; I'm talking what they're doing,"" he said, referring to Democrats. ""That's the hoax."" Trump’s comments feed into a conspiracy theory that claims Democrats and the media are fabricating the threat of COVID-19 to hurt the economy and the president’s re-election chances. And the president appeared to downplay the threat of the virus at several points in recent weeks. But to say that Trump called the virus itself a hoax is false. Plus, the administration took its first action in January by setting up a task force to address the spread of the coronavirus. An Instagram post made four claims that criticize Trump’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The first, that he ""cut funding to the CDC,"" is partially accurate; Trump tried to cut the agency’s funding, but Congress prevented it from happening. On the second claim, while saying Trump ""fired"" the ""Pandemic Response Team"" is a stretch, it’s true that National Security Council staffers left abruptly in 2018 and were not replaced. The third claim, that Trump ""refused WHO tests,"" contains a hint of truth, but is mostly inaccurate since the U.S. does not usually rely on the WHO for testing protocols. And the fourth claim, which says Trump ""wasted two weeks calling this outbreak a ‘Democrat hoax,’"" is inaccurate — the president has not called the virus itself a ""hoax,"" just the Democrats’ response to it. As a whole, the Instagram post contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."
|
16774
|
Mark Sickles Says 70 percent of Virginia’s Medicaid cost is for seniors in nursing homes.
|
Sickles said that 70 percent of the state’s Medicaid spending goes to seniors in nursing homes. He’s way off; only 9.7 percent of the money goes to that cause.
|
false
|
Medicaid, Virginia, Mark Sickles,
|
"Del. Mark Sickles, D-Fairfax, says increased demand for nursing home care is a major reason why the Virginia’s Medicaid costs have soared. ""We’re living longer than ever and you have to spend down until you get to $2,000 of assets before you qualify for (Medicaid funded) nursing home care in our state,"" Sickles said in a recent floor speech. ""$2,000. That’s where the money goes. That’s where 70 percent of the money goes in our Medicaid program – to help our seniors live with skilled nursing who need it."" Let’s start by noting that Sickles is correct is saying that Virginia’s Medicaid will only pay for nursing home care to elderly and disabled people whose total financial resources don’t exceed $2,000. What we want to explore in this Truth-O-Meter is Sickle’s claim that 70 percent of the state’s Medicaid money goes to provide elderly care in nursing homes. The statement comes amid a partisan battle over whether expand Medicaid to up to 400,000 additional low-income Virginians. Under Obamacare, the federal government would always pay at least 90 percent of the tab. The GOP-led General Assembly blocked the expansion last month, saying Washington can’t be trusted to pay its promised shares. Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, is exploring whether he can broaden the program without legislators’ consent. Sickles told us he can’t recall the exact source of his nursing home claim but, as a long time member of the Health, Welfare and Institutions Committee, he’s often heard that 70 percent of the Medicaid money goes to 30 percent of the recipients. He said he understood that trend was ""largely caused"" by seniors in nursing homes. But Craig Markva, a spokesman for the Department of Medical Assistance Services, which runs the state’s Medicaid program, gave us a different explanation. He said 70 percent of the money is spent on the medical expenses of all elderly and disabled patients, who comprise 32 percent of Virginia’s Medicaid recipients. Markva sent us Medicaid statistics for the budget year that ended June 30, 2013 -- the latest numbers available. They show that of the slightly more than 1 million Medicaid enrollees in Virginia, only 22,513 -- or 2.2 percent -- were seniors in nursing facilities. Out of a $6.7 billion Medicaid budget that fiscal year, the state spent $648 million to care for seniors in nursing homes. That boils down to 9.7 percent of the money. All told, seniors accounted for about 7 percent of Virginia’s Medicaid recipients during the 2012-13 budget year and received about 17 percent of the funds, or slightly more than $1.1 billion. Our ruling Sickles said that 70 percent of the state’s Medicaid spending goes to seniors in nursing homes. He’s way off; only 9.7 percent of the money goes to that cause."
|
9110
|
Resistance training may slow down the progression of multiple sclerosis
|
This news release from Aarhus University in Denmark claims that resistance training twice a week could protect the nervous system by minimizing brain shrinkage in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, but offers no numbers backing the claims. The release summarizes a study published in the Multiple Sclerosis Journal on the protective effects of resistance training. It emphasizes to readers that resistance training should not replace medication, but instead supplement it. It also provides a study limitation — something not all news releases do. The release notes that it’s unclear whether the training could benefit all MS patients since this “has not been sufficiently tested in more severely affected patients.” The lead author further notes that he is not “recommending that all multiple sclerosis patients throw themselves into intensive physical training regimes without first seeking professional advice.” We applaud the inclusion of this information. However, the main thing missing in this release is context. No numbers are given to back up its benefit claims. How much brain shrinkage was seen in patients undergoing resistance training compared to those who weren’t? And how much brain growth did researchers see in response to resistance training? Finally, does a change in cortical thickness translate to improvements in quality of life or cognitive abilities? Although thicker layers on a brain scan sounds good, it is how well a person feels and functions and how long they live that is more important. MS is the most common disabling neurologic disease of young people and affects approximately 400,000 people in the United States and 2.5 million worldwide. The disease can cause mild symptoms or be profoundly tragic. About half of people with MS experience cognitive impairments, according to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Patients with severe progressive MS often become wheelchair bound and suffer from dementia as their brains shrink over time. They become dependent on others and may end up in a nursing home if strong family support is not available. There is no cure for MS. Most treatments are centered around managing symptoms, quality of life and assistive technology to help cope with disability. If there is a cost-effective, low-risk alternative for slowing MS progression, this would certainly be newsworthy for the public, especially if it is supported by medical evidence.
|
mixture
|
Aarhus University,multiple sclerosis
|
Patients in the intervention group underwent resistance training twice a week for 6 months. The news release does not specify what types of exercises were included. It’s unclear whether the exercise program would require supervision by a physical therapist or whether it could be adapted to be done at home, perhaps with friend or family help. In any case, there are cost implications that should have been addressed. No numbers putting the benefits in context are given. Instead, the release uses broad, sweeping language to describe the benefits of resistance training. “The study shows that resistance training has a number of positive effects on the brain,” it states. Resistance training also “minimizes brain shrinkage in patients already receiving medication,” while some patients saw their brains “grow in response to training.” In the original journal article, researchers state that 19 out of 74 cortical areas showed absolute increases in thickness, with a mean thickness being 0.03 mm, when comparing absolute values before and after resistance training of all participants. Researchers then compared these cortical areas to changes in muscle strength and motor function by looking at various physical and psychological parameters. Patients in the intervention group had increased knee muscle strength and performed better on a couple of motor tests (9-hole peg test and the timed 25-foot walk test) compared to those in the control group. We wish the news release would have explained how these numbers might differ from what researchers would expect to see. It is unclear from the journal article whether all patients displayed thicker brain cortexes after resistance training. We feel the news release could have included this information by following up with researchers. Therefore, we give it a Not Satisfactory rating here. The news release points out that MS patients were advised against exercise in the past for fear of exacerbating the condition. But only positive effects correlated with the study are addressed in the release, with no mention of potential harms. Weight training and other types of exercise have the potential to cause injury, which might be more likely in MS patients with reduced muscle function, impaired balance, or other issues. Consequently, we give the news release, a Not Satisfactory rating here. The news release tells readers that 35 MS patients participated in the study, with half of the group receiving resistance training twice a week and the other half serving as controls with “no systematic training.” We don’t know what types of exercises were included in the training regimen, but the news release mentions this type of exercise has not been sufficiently tested in more severely affected MS patients. It also emphasizes to readers that resistance training should not replace medication and that more research is needed to discover why training has a “positive effect.” In the original journal article, researchers point out that the patient population was “highly selected,” since all of them were being treated with the same drug — beta interferons. Patients then were randomized to either an immediate training or control group. Every training session — consisting of four lower and two upper body exercises — was separated by at least 48 hours from the previous exercise bout. Other study limitations are the small sample size and relatively short study duration. As a result, this research is classified as a pilot/explorative study, something authors acknowledged in the published study. We would have liked this information to be included in the news release, but since it did provide some other caveats to caution readers, we give it a Satisfactory rating here. There is no disease mongering in the news release. The news release names the study’s funders in a sidebar on the EurekAlert! website as the Augustinus Foundation, Hestehandler Ole Jacobsens Mindelegat and Biogen Idec. We encourage news release writers to include funders in the text of the release as well. The news release mentions drugs as a treatment option for patients with MS. These include immunosuppressants, like corticosteroids to reduce nerve inflammation and beta interferons to reduce the frequency and severity of relapses. Plasma exchanges can also help patients who haven’t responded to steroids and whose symptoms are new and severe. Other treatments options include physical therapy and muscle relaxants to help relieve MS signs and symptoms. Although we would have liked more detail on established therapies, we feel the mention of medication was good enough for a Satisfactory rating here. The release provides too little information on what types of exercises are included in the training program and whether they require coaching and monitoring from a trained physical therapist. Is this training widely available for MS patients? We can’t know from this release. The news release makes it seem as if this study is the first to show the correlation between resistance training and slowing MS progression. The principal investigator of the study says in the lead quote, “…this study provides the first indications that physical exercise may protect the nervous system against the disease” and adds that this is “new and important knowledge.” This comment is ambiguous and only half true. Iranian researchers found in 2015 that resistance training could slow MS disease progression and improve muscle strength and motor function. Another 2009 study by Spanish researchers showed resistance training could improve muscle function without injuries and “delay the functional deterioration in multiple sclerosis patients.” What is new about this study, according to the original journal article, is that it’s the first randomized, controlled trial looking at “long-term exercise intervention” (24 weeks) with accompanying MRI images measuring brain degeneration and regeneration. They reported that patients engaging in resistance training also had thicker cerebral cortexes compared to controls. We wish this information was more clearly and explicitly stated, which is why we give the news release a Not Satisfactory rating here. The news release does not include unjustifiable, sensational language.
|
10280
|
Health Buzz: Common Painkiller Fights Cancer; Diclofenac could be the next cancer treatment.
|
A very short story explains how an old drug for pain, dicloflenac, might have some new uses in cancer patients. But we found the story lacked a basic explanation of how the researchers measured the benefits of the drug. It also did not include any original reporting and appeared mostly to be a rewrite of the original news release. We understand that short stories – this was 265 words – can’t have everything. But this story could have done a better job. The idea of re-purposing existing drugs, already widely used and cheap, is a great potential resource for chronic diseases, including cancer. But this extremely short story does not meet most of our standards for explaining research. The article referenced in the story cites animal studies and studies on cell lines that, while promising, are a long way from the evidence needed to make claims about cancer-fighting potential. There are four clinical studies in progress; this all could have been mentioned.
|
false
|
Cancer,U.S. News & World Report
|
The story calls the drug, which has already been on the market for other uses, “affordable.” We wish the story had provided an actual price, and also some acknowledgment that if this drug is found to have anti-cancer properties, the price will likely go up. The story does not quantify at all. It barely describes the “cancer-fighting properties” of this compound, dicloflenac. The story says the compound “may improve the immune system, the effectiveness of chemotherapy and radiation and the development of blood vessels.” Although the story is short, we think more detail should have been given on what was measured in these small, preliminary studies. Just one example of some numbers, such as how immune response was measured, would have helped. The story did not mention harms. Like all medications, dicloflenac use carries risks and the story should have mentioned some of the most important ones. The story was so brief, and based on such a short news release, that a reader is not able to judge the quality of the evidence. The story could have noted, for example, that there are no human clinical studies, only animal-based basic science research. That’s a flimsy basis upon which to state that the drug “could be the next cancer treatment.” There was no disease mongering. The story does not show any reporting separate from the news release information. It’s nearly a word for word reproduction of the release. The story does not discuss any alternatives. But since the potential universe of alternatives is so broad (basically all experimental cancer treatments), we’ll rate this Not Applicable. The drug is already widely available and the story makes this clear. However, it’s worth noting that we don’t know what doses might be used for cancer treatment, if it proves useful. The story is clear that this study of dicloflenac is not the first one to look for other uses, beyond those already known. The story appears to rely just on the news release. This quote – for example – is taken directly from the release. The story does not quote anyone independent of the release. “It’s still somewhat surprising that there is still so much we don’t understand about how many of the standard drugs we use every day, like diclofenac, work,” says study author Pan Pantziarka, PhD, member of the ReDO project and the Anticancer Fund, in a press release. Kudos to the story for acknowledging the source of the quote, but without any other reporting we can’t award a Satisfactory rating here.
|
7610
|
Opioid overdose deaths surge in Tennessee’s largest county.
|
Health officials in Tennessee’s largest county say the number of overdoses related to opioids and other drugs has surged in the past month, reaching 58 deaths in a 30-day period.
|
true
|
Opioids, Health, General News, Tennessee, Virus Outbreak, Memphis
|
Shelby County, which includes Memphis, reported 391 suspected overdoses from April 7 to May 7, according to a news release from the county health department. The 58 deaths is the highest county total for a 30-day period since record keeping began in January 2019 using a database of incidents reported by first reponders and the West Tennessee Regional Forensic Center. The county health department said it has issued seven “spike alerts” in the past month. The alerts call attention to a sharp rise in drug overdoses, including those involving opioids. In a news release, health department director Alisa Haushalter said the contributing factors are not clear, “but the trend is concerning.” “Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important that those with substance use issues continue to have access to the care they need,” Haushalter said. In a news conference last week, Haushalter said it is important for communities to have access to Narcan, a medication used to reverse opioid overdoses.
|
36829
|
Hillary Clinton is quoted as saying “I will get the NRA shut down for good if I become president. If we can ban handguns we will do it” in an interview with the Des Moines Register in August 2015.
|
Hillary Clinton Vows to Get the NRA Shut Down for Good
|
false
|
Politics
|
There’s no record of Hillary Clinton vowing to “get the NRA shut down for good,” and the Des Moines Register has debunked claims that it reported she made the statement. The rumor started with a meme that went viral on an anti-Clinton Tumblr page called “Shocking Hillary Clinton Quotes.” The meme links to an interview Clinton gave to the Des Moines Register in September 2015, but Clinton’s alleged promise to “shut down” the NRA for good doesn’t appear in the transcript. The Des Moines Register denied the rumor in a report that noted Clinton wasn’t in the state when the interview supposedly took place, and that there was no record of her making the comment: But here’s the thing: The quote is wholly fabricated. Clinton was never quoted in the Register making that statement, and it appears she has not made such a statement anywhere else. Clinton campaigned heavily in Iowa throughout the summer and fall of 2015, and Register reporters and the paper’s editorial board interviewed her several times. But she was not in Iowa on Aug. 8, when she allegedly made the statement. Clinton’s first visit to Iowa in the month of August occurred on Aug. 14, followed by public events on Aug. 15 and Aug. 26. And the paper quoted Clinton extensively on the issue of gun control and gun ownership in 2015, but we couldn’t find any record of her addressing the NRA or promising to ban handguns for good. In July 2015, Clinton addressed gun laws during the Democratic primary: I’m going to speak out against the uncontrollable use of guns in our country because I believe we can do better than that. A majority of Americans and a majority of gun owners agree with universal background checks to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and people who are mentally unstable and even terrorists.” In August 2015, Clinton was quoted talking about guns in the Register after a television cameraman was shot and killed on air: In answering questions about the murder of a TV reporter and cameraman in Virginia, Clinton said she was deeply saddened, but added that their deaths need to spark action to restrict access to handguns. “We’ve got to do something,” she said. “It’s a very difficult political issue. But we are smart enough, compassionate enough to balance legitimate Second Amendment rights concerns with preventive measures and control measures, so whatever motivated this murderer … we will not see more needless, senseless deaths.” Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton gives her remarks on the Virginia shooting and gun violence following her speech highlighting her rural policy plan at DMACC in Ankeny. “If guns weren’t so readily available, if we had universal background checks, if we could put some time out between the person who got fired, or domestic abuse, or whatever other motivation … maybe we could prevent this kind of carnage.” In October 2015, Clinton promised “tighter but sensible” gun laws. She talked about the gun lobby, and the influence of the NRA in particular: “I’m tired of people in public life saying, ‘Our thoughts and prayers are with families whose children are murdered at community colleges or elementary schools or people killed at Bible studies or going to the movies,’ ” the Democratic presidential candidate said. “We can’t tolerate that. This doesn’t just happen. … We let it happen.” “We keep getting stymied because of the lobby for a very small minority of gun owners and the gun manufacturers, which stand in the way,” she said. Clinton has spoken throughout the campaign about her intention to implement tighter gun rules, despite pressure from the National Rifle Association. This week, she released specifics of her proposals. “I feel like this is unfinished business in our country, and I am very determined that we are going to try to bring some sanity back, so that people’s Second Amendment rights are protected — but they are not absolute, the way the NRA wants them to be. There are common-sense ways to make sure people are not using guns to commit mass murders.” Finally, the Register quoted Clinton talking about gun violence after the San Bernardino terrorist attacks in December 2015: When Clinton met with reporters after her campaign appearance here Friday, The Des Moines Register asked if she believed the proposed ban on gun sales to people on the no-fly list could have prevented the San Bernardino shootings or any of the other massacres. “That’s like the question, ‘How do you prove a negative?’” she replied. “I don’t know exactly what it would have or could have prevented, but I do know that we’ve got to start implementing sensible gun-safety measures, and this seems like the most sensible that I know of. There have been numerous sales to people on the no-fly list for years now. And where those guns go, who ends up with them, we don’t have any idea.” Clinton said the proposed rule would be similar to bans on gun sales to felons, people with restraining orders or those with serious mental illnesses. “I think we’ve got to be more willing to start imposing these kinds of gun-safety measures. I’m certainly going to continue advocating for them.” So, we couldn’t find any record of Clinton talking promising “get the NRA shut down for good,” or to ban handguns. That’s why we’re calling this one “fiction.”
|
16689
|
I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I never allow conspiracy theorists on my program.
|
"""Never"" is a strong word, yet Lavelle claimed he is a not a conspiracy theorist and has ""never allowed a conspiracy theorist on his show."" We’ll agree there is a somewhat subjective definition of what constitutes a conspiracy theory. But we think of the four we quickly found -- Ukraine downed MH 17 to drum up sympathy, AIDS drugs are what are killings AIDS patients, 9/11 was an inside job, and an assistant secretary of state devised a plan to break-up Ukraine -- at least one would fit most people’s definition of a conspiracy theory. Lavelle’s hypothesis about MH 17, we should note, was uttered in the breaths after saying he doesn’t allow conspiracy theories on his show."
|
false
|
Pundits, PunditFact, Peter Lavelle,
|
"Peter Lavelle hosts CrossTalk on RT, an English language cable news network funded by the Russian government. Lavelle opens each edition of CrossTalk by saying it’s a place ""where all things are considered."" Everything except, he says, conspiracy theories. Lavelle’s commentary on Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 thrust him into the media spotlight with a contentious, 10-minute interview with CNN’s Chris Cuomo, who accused Lavelle of being obsessed with ""clearing Russia from culpability"" in the plane’s shooting. American officials have said the plane was likely shot down by Ukrainian separatists in Donetsk with a surface-to-air missile. Lavelle, an American who works as a journalist in Moscow, says the United States is too quick to tie Russian-backed rebels to the tragedy, berating the U.S. State Department for relying on social media as evidence for its claims and not looking at Ukraine as a responsible party. ""I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I never allow conspiracy theorists on my program,"" Lavelle said on the July 23 CrossTalk, addressing guest Vladimir Suchan. Then Lavelle proposed a theory that involves Ukraine bringing down the plane in effort to earn worldwide sympathy amid woes with its new government. ""But if I look at the timing of this tragedy in Ukraine, the (Petro) Poroshenko government was, well, in trouble with its latest offensive in the east, it was losing badly, soldiers were being circled, it was really bad news,"" Lavelle said. ""And all of a sudden we have this tragedy of killing civilians on this flight, and this puts Ukraine back on the front page, it competes with Gaza, a lot of ‘sympathy,’ for the Kiev regime, this is good timing in a way for the coup regime that hasn't been achieving too many successes since February."" Um, so in essence Lavelle is suggesting Ukraine shot down MH 17 so it could blame the Russian separatists so the flailing Ukraine government could become front-and-center again in the news? Sounds like a conspiracy theory to us. But so that we don’t be accused of reaching a conclusion too quickly, we decided to search around Lavelle’s other shows. We didn’t search every program, but we looked at enough to find that conspiracy theories are very much raised by Lavelle and featured on his show. RT is a curiosity for Western journalists, some of whom see its coverage as Kremlin-directed propaganda. As a star host, Lavelle has gotten and dismissed questions about the network's perceived bias. In 2008, he told a New York Times reporter, ""No one is telling me what to say."" He did, however, note that part of the network's ""mission is public relations."" RT has also carved out a reputation for bringing in obscure guests to discuss unusual topics related to America, devoting time to questioning President Barack Obama’s birth certificate. Lavelle, too, has expressed his preference to be ""counterintuitive"" compared to corporate-owned American cable news networks. In a 2010 interview with Columbia Journalism Review, Lavelle said, ""Being mainstream has been very dangerous for the West."" Here’s a few of those conspiratorial, er, counterintuitive moments that we found with a simple Google search. Conspiracy No. 1: 9/11 was an inside job Lavelle invited several skeptics of the American government's Sept. 11 findings ""to try to find out what really happened"" on 9/11 for a March 2010 segment. The roster included Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth founder Richard Gage, who said three World Trade Center skyscrapers (the Twin Towers and a surrounding WTC building) that collapsed that day ""were brought down by explosive demolition on 9/11, not by fire and jet plane impacts."" Lavelle also asked blogger Ian Henshall, a blogger and author of 9/11 Revealed: The New Evidence, about what it's like to be called a conspiracy theorist when he's just raising questions. ""Conspiracy theory, if it means anything, is a simple story which you know claims to explain a major complicated event. That is exactly what the official story of the 9/11 attacks is,"" Henshall said. ""Very simple story, all organized by a guy in the cave with 17 hijackers who were just incredibly lucky. You could not get more of a conspiracy theory than that."" Henshall went on to talk about the ""worrying evidence"" that the towers-takedown was an inside job. Just so we don't raise the eyebrows of conspiracy theorists, we took three screengrabs of Lavelle and his guests talking about 9/11 conspiracy theories from RT's YouTube page: 1. ""WTC towers collapsed due to a controlled demolition;"" 2. ""Attacks an inside job to justify wars in Afghanistan and Iraq;"" 3. ""9/11 attacks in 2001 were intentionally allowed to happen."" It wasn't the first time Lavelle raised eyebrows about the official story of Sept. 11. In February 2010, Lavelle posited on CrossTalk that the Sept. 11 hijackers were ""not even fundamentalists at all"" -- much to the shock of the two people he was interviewing about a proposed burqa ban in France. This time he was challenged by a guest, former British journalist Douglas Murray of the Centre for Social Adhesion, who asked Lavelle, ""How can you keep speaking, let alone hosting a show, and know so little? How can you know so little and keep on talking?"" Murray detailed the appearance on the ""strange propaganda outfit"" in a blogpost. The other guest, Anne-Elisabeth Moutet of the Jean-Jacques Rousseau Institute, said al-Qaida is a completely fundamentalist group. Conspiracy No. 2: AIDS drugs kill people with AIDS Lavelle later convened a panel to talk about the business of HIV/AIDS on July 21, 2010, asking questions that highlighted critics of antiretroviral therapy for people infected with HIV who say the treatments are nothing but a ""huge moneybag"" for Big Pharma. Lavelle invited on guest Peter Duesberg, a University of California-Berkeley professor of molecular and cell biology, who believes that AIDS treatments are killing people infected with ""the so-called AIDS virus, which doesn’t do anything."" So AIDS isn’t killing people, AIDS drugs are. ""The companies try to treat the virus that doesn’t do anything with drugs that are inevitably toxic,"" Duesberg said. ""The AZT was developed 40 years ago for one purpose: to kill human cells for cancer, chemotherapy. And the result is they have never ever cured one AIDS patient."" Lavelle asked Dr. Denis Broun of UNAIDS for feedback. ""We have 2 million people die of HIV infection every year. And these are not people who die of old age, I can tell you that. The average age of people who die in Russia is 32 years. This is preposterous,"" Broun said. ""The antiretrovirals are keeping people alive, and people are staying alive thanks to administration of these products."" Lavelle went back to Duesberg, who said the world’s 30-40 million HIV-infected population is doing well and the people who die are the ones ""getting these drugs that are inevitably toxic."" ‘They are designed to terminate DNA synthesis, that’s the central molecule of life, you’re dying from that,"" Duesberg said. ""That is AIDS by prescription. And 500,000 people are prescribed these drugs alone in the U.S. and all of them die, about half of them die from diseases that have nothing to do with HIV."" Another guest, Steve Caterer of Global Pharma Insights, said Duesberg’s opinions ""on the good side are disrespectful and on the worst side are tantamount to murder."" Later in the program, Broun said the three-drug HIV/AIDS drug treatment used today is much less toxic than the AZT-only treatment (azidothymidine) used 25 years ago. ""No one in his right sense is suggesting to use AZT alone today,"" he said. ""It's as if people were suggesting to treat syphilis with arsenic, as was done at the beginning of the century. ... We cannot discuss today's situation with antique data that are no longer valid in any way."" Broun said researchers debate some points of treating the virus, but ""no one is saying, like denying the role of HIV in creating AIDS or saying the drugs are dangerous for people."" Conspiracy No. 3: U.S. official planned to break up Ukraine Back to Ukraine, where Lavelle lambasted American media coverage of the ""Western-induced crisis"" in May 2014, and claimed that Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland was trying to break up Ukraine. ""It seems to me that there’s this habit now in Western media, particularly in the United States, that no one wants to see fault in themselves or their own governments here. Because this was so predictable, as you said at the beginning of the program, this plan that Victoria Nuland had was just nonsense. She was just going to break up the country, but they had a Plan B. If they don’t succeed, then Russia is a very easy enemy to blame everything on, and that’s exactly what we’re seeing right now."" Even guest Dmitry Babich, an employee of the Russian-government owned radio station The Voice of Russia, thought Lavelle was going a bit too far. ""I don’t think Victoria Nuland planned to break up the country. She thought that the east of Ukraine would just submit to the new government, the new government would be pro-Western, then as the Western media said, we should all take deep breath and then wait until Ukraine becomes completely anti-Russian,"" Babich said. ""And of course Victoria Nuland, just like John Kerry, they don’t know a thing about Ukraine."" Nuland became a notorious figure in the East as U.S. diplomats responded to Ukraine's political crisis, but there's no evidence she had a plan to break up Ukraine. A phone conversation between Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt about Ukraine's next steps was leaked, in which she was heard as saying ""F--- the EU."" Routine remarks from Nuland about the United States' investment in pro-democracy initiatives in Ukraine since it broke off from the Soviet Union in 1991 were widely misconstrued on social media and by RT, which held up her comments as evidence that the U.S. was spending $5 billion to incite the riots (a claim we rated ). Our ruling ""Never"" is a strong word, yet Lavelle claimed he is a not a conspiracy theorist and has ""never allowed a conspiracy theorist on his show."" We’ll agree there is a somewhat subjective definition of what constitutes a conspiracy theory. But we think of the four we quickly found -- Ukraine downed MH 17 to drum up sympathy, AIDS drugs are what are killings AIDS patients, 9/11 was an inside job, and an assistant secretary of state devised a plan to break-up Ukraine -- at least one would fit most people’s definition of a conspiracy theory. Lavelle’s hypothesis about MH 17, we should note, was uttered in the breaths after saying he doesn’t allow conspiracy theories on his show."
|
10425
|
Heart failure drug eases symptoms
|
"This story reports on the results of a randomized trial published in this week's Journal of the American Medical Association on a novel approach to treating severe, acute heart failure. The trial evaluated the performance of tolvaptan, the first drug in its class, in combination with diuretics (the standard therapy) compared to placebo plus diuretics. The study found that tolvaptan did not prevent death or rehospitalization but did improve some important symptoms associated with heart failure. This story does a decent job of describing the problem of managing heart failure and the design of the current study, however it does not quantify the benefits of the drug nor does it mention the costs. The story adequately represents the novelty, availability and harms associated with the drug. The story also adequately describes the strength of the current study. The story does quote multiple experts, however only one of them was not involved with the study in any way. The story could have quoted other, independent experts who could have provided other perspectives. However, the story does not adequately describe the other available treatment options and how this drug will fit with existing therapies. The story mentions diuretics as the standard treatment, but does not mention that in acute hospitalizations, diuretics are given by IV and other medications are used. Nor does the study mention other things that an individual can do to prevent an acute episode. Finally, the story does not adequately quantify the benefits of treatment. The story does mention that the drug was not associated with any differences in death or rehospitalization. However, the story does state that it ""significantly improved breathing and reduced swelling."" How many people reported improved breathing and reduced swelling compared to placebo? The story should have provided this quantitative information in absolute terms so the reader can get a sense of the scope of the improvement."
|
true
|
"The story does not mention costs, which could be very high, especially compared to the very inexpensive diuretics which are the standard therapy. The story does not adequately quantify the benefits of treatment. The story does mention that the drug was not associated with any differences in death or rehospitalization. However, the story does state that it ""significantly improved breathing and reduced swelling."" How many people reported improved breathing and reduced swelling compared to placebo? The story should have provided this quantitative information in absolute terms so the reader can get a sense of the scope of the improvement. The story mentions that the drug was associated with several side effects, but that none of them were serious. The story adequately describes the design of the current study. The story does not exaggerate the seriousness or prevalence of heart failure and the story rightly points out that this drug is for people with severe heart failure. The story does quote multiple experts, however only one of them was not involved with the study in any way. The story could have quoted other, independent experts who could have provided other perspectives. The story does not adequately describe the other available treatment options and how this drug will fit with existing therapies. The story mentions diuretics as the standard treatment, but does not mention that in acute hospitalizations, diuretics are given by IV and other medications are used. Nor does the study mention other things that an individual can do to prevent an acute episode. The story does mention that the drug is still ""experimental"" and that the company plans to apply for approval. The story correctly points out that this drug, tovaptan, is the first of its class and represents a novel approach to treating heart failure. Because the story quotes multiple experts, the story does not appear to have relied on a press release as the sole source of information."
|
|
22774
|
"Following the 2009 session,"" Texas House Speaker Joe Straus ""was acknowledged and ‘thanked’ for his ‘tireless efforts’ by Planned Parenthood, the nation’s premier abortion provider."
|
Activists say Planned Parenthood, nation's premier abortion provider, thanked Speaker Joe Straus after 2009 session
|
true
|
Abortion, Texas, Heidi Group,
|
"A letter distributed by a conservative group Jan. 4 ticks off reasons it says Texas House Speaker Joe Straus is not ""pro-life,"" ranging from his past authorship of legislation authorizing stem-cell research to his past designation of a former Democratic legislator as chief of staff. The letter urges Republican legislators, who will have a 101-vote House majority, to deny the San Antonio Republican a second two-year stint as speaker. Straus drew 70 of 100 GOP member votes in the party's caucus meeting Monday and is expected to prevail today when the post is formally filled by the 150-member body after the session starts Tuesday. The Jan. 4 letter, signed by more than 30 anti-abortion activists, floated an unusual warning sign about Straus--involving a thank you. ""Following the 2009 session,"" the letter says, Straus ""was acknowledged and ‘thanked’ for his ‘tireless efforts’ by Planned Parenthood, the nation’s premier abortion provider."" Some perspective: Planned Parenthood is a reproductive health care provider with facilities nationwide that offer family-planning services, including abortion. The organization advocates for comprehensive sexual health care and education. Carol Everett of Round Rock, a signer of the anti-Straus letter and founder and CEO of the Heidi Group, a non-profit that has run crisis pregnancy centers in Dallas advising women with unplanned pregnancies about giving birth, told us the reference to Planned Parenthood as the nation’s premier abortion provider reflected on her understanding that its clinics provide more than 300,000 of the nation’s 1.2 million legal abortions a year. She forwarded a 2009 report by an anti-abortion group, the Virginia-based American Life League, terming Planned Parenthood the largest ""abortion chain"" in America with 817 clinics around the country. According to the Guttmacher Institute, which studies and advocates on issues related to reproductive health, 1.2 million legal abortions were performed in the United States in 2008. Institute spokeswoman Rebecca Wind told us the institute doesn’t break down which groups provide abortions, but stand-alone clinics provide more abortions than all U.S. Planned Parenthood clinics combined. By our accounting, about 27 percent of abortions in the U.S. are performed at Planned Parenthood clinics versus 73 percent at other medical facilities. To our inquiry, Tait Sye of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America said that in 2008-09, Planned Parenthood provided 328,000 abortions. Sye said in an e-mail: ""Our health centers do much more than provide abortions. They provide a wide range of safe, reliable health care--and more than 90 percent is preventive, primary care, which helps prevent unintended pregnancies through contraception, reduce the spread of sexually transmitted infections through testing and treatment, and screen for cervical and other cancers."" Straus has been slammed before from the right for links to Planned Parenthood. In the early 1990s, his wife served on the board of San Antonio’s Planned Parenthood affiliate. And in 2008, before Straus was a candidate for speaker, the local group’s political arm contributed $1,000 to Straus’s campaign kitty. Everett pointed us to an article headlined ""2009 Patron Party"" in the fall 2009 edition of Horizons, the newsletter of the Planned Parenthood Trust of San Antonio and South Central Texas. The article says the Planned Parenthood affiliate’s president and CEO, Jeffrey Hons, thanked three legislators attending the Oct. 6, 2009, gathering at a San Antonio home, plus state Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio, and Straus, both in absentia, ""for their tireless efforts on behalf of Texas women and children during the last legislative session."" Everett said such a mention carries a taint. ""If I got any mention from Planned Parenthood, people would wonder about it,"" Everett said. ""You show one other conservative pro-lifer who has had any mention from Planned Parenthood, I would eat the paper that shows it."" In an interview, Yvonne Gutierrez, spokeswoman for the San Antonio Planned Parenthood group, said Hons’ shout-out was not intended to underscore any particular action by Straus. The party was at a home in Straus’ district, Gutierrez said, and Hons ""thanked the speaker because he thought that for his first session (as speaker) he did an excellent job for women and families... It was almost as if how could you be sitting in the speaker’s district talking about the legislative session and not mention the speaker?"" Gutierrez said. The thanks ""was really nothing more than that."" The four-paragraph newsletter article focuses on more than 120 individuals whose gifts to the group exceed $1,000 a year. But the story also quotes Mindi Alterman, then the departing board chair, stressing strides the group had made in cervical cancer prevention, testing and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases and permanent birth control. The 18-page issue opens with a message from Hons describing Planned Parenthood as the city’s most effective teen pregnancy prevention program. ""Finally, and perhaps as a footnote, the people who protest on the sidewalk outside my office window do nothing, absolutely nothing, to prevent so much as one teen pregnancy,"" his message says. ""They do nothing to prevent one abortion while Planned Parenthood prevents thousands of abortions with our family planning clinics. And their protests do nothing to help vulnerable, at-risk teens keep their fragile lives pointed toward a successful adulthood."" We asked Tracy Young, Straus’s communications director, for the speaker's take. She made no comment."
|
27582
|
The United States is deporting military veterans.
|
Honorably-discharged veterans of the U.S. military have, under certain circumstances, either received deportation orders or been deported.
|
true
|
Politics Immigration, deported veteran, immigration, mexico
|
Immigration is a sensitive and touchy issue, and never more so than in the United States during an election year. Thus, when stories started to emerge in 2016 about a group of veterans of the U.S. military living in Mexico after they had been deported from the United States (a story we previously reported on) it seemed natural to question what looked like nothing more than a chunk of political kryptonite. However, deported veterans exist, although no one — not even the Department of Homeland Security — knows how many. Their issue has been slowly brought into mainstream American consciousness largely by the efforts of committed activists in Tijuana. “The Bunker,” also known as the Deported Veterans Support House, is in a small cinderbrick building tucked away on a side street in Mexico’s border town of Tijuana, and is frequented by veterans of every branch of the United States military, who fought everywhere from Vietnam to Afghanistan. Former Army paratrooper Hector Barajas, 39, opened it to be a gathering place and a refuge for veterans who, like him, had been deported: “I started The Bunker because there was a need,” Barajas told us. He said since his deportation, he had been meeting others like him living in Tijuana, and discovered that they lived throughout Mexico — but not just Mexico. There are hundreds of deported military vets living in at least twenty countries, he said. Since then, The Bunker has since become less a refuge and more a cause: Our vision is to end the deportations of Deported Veterans, repatriate the ones who have already been deported, and offer support until they all go home. We shouldn’t honor our Deported Veterans by allowing them to return upon death. Honor them by allowing them to return home to their families and give them any benefits that they are eligible for. It may come as a surprise to learn that serving in the United States military does not automatically confer citizenship, but it doesn’t. It can smooth the way, provided the aspiring citizen is aware of what they need to do in order to apply for citizenship and gets it done within a certain timeframe. However, it’s not uncommon for enlistees to wrongly assume (having never been told otherwise) they have done all they need to do in order to be awarded citizenship, and thus all they have to do after their honorable discharge is wait. Sometimes, too, there are bureaucratic foulups. One man was deported after he was unable to attend a hearing, despite his reason: he was in the hospital receiving surgery at the time. Others do everything the way they’re supposed to, filing their paperwork and appearing at their meetings, but still get deported, and no one seems to know exactly why. Once they are outside the U.S., they maintain a legal right to VA benefits such as healthcare, and to whatever funds they might be entitled, but they have no way of getting back into the United States to obtain that assistance, and there are no satellite offices outside the country to help them. Because these particular veterans are either in the United States on green cards or without documentation after their discharges, they can be deported with cause, or for no reason at all. Past and present members of the armed forces are supposed to receive special consideration during deportation hearings, but the guidelines are inconsistently applied. However, some of these veterans have spent time in prison for assault or drug offenses, which makes their situation more difficult to parse, at least politically. Elected officials (and candidates) who might ordinarily be in full-throated cry about the importance of military rights tend to go oddly silent when confronted with the spectres of undocumented soldiers. Sympathy for those wounded on the battlefield under the American flag suddenly falters when it turns out they had entered the country without documentation years before. Miguel Perez, a United States Army veteran, falls under that category. The 39-year-old Illinois man, who served two tours in Afghanistan and who has been in the U.S. since he was eight, was convicted of a drug trafficking offense in 2008. The green card holder had served half of a 15-year prison sentence when Immigration, Customs, and Enforcement took him for deportation proceedings. After losing an appeal, Perez was deported in March 2018: Perez was flown from Gary, Indiana, to Brownsville, Texas, where officers escorted him across the border and turned him over to Mexican authorities, ICE officials said. Perez appeared shocked by his treatment during his final moments on U.S. soil. An ICE agent who described himself as a fellow veteran told Perez they would “fix this” while leading him to a gate, Perez said. “When we go there he just closed the gate behind me and he said, ‘OK, we’re done here,'” he said. “He said, ‘You see those green lights? You go that way and when you get there just ask for help. '” Perez recalls thinking, “Really? This is it?” The veteran said he immediately contemplated suicide but then said he felt he needed to keep walking and continue the fight to let others know how he and other undocumented veterans are treated by the U.S. Unless something changes for them, the only way most of the deported veterans will be able to return to the United States is by dying. By law, all military veterans (except those who have been dishonorably discharged) are entitled to burial in a national cemetery, and immigration laws don’t apply to corpses. On 20 April 2016, lawmakers introduced a bill to readmit military veterans who were deported and who were not previously convicted of serious crimes. It would also prevent the removal of military veterans from the U.S. in the future. On 13 April 2018, Hector Barajas, the deported veteran who was one of the first to shine a spotlight on their plight, received his American citizenship, potentially paving the way for hundreds of other former United States military members:
|
28983
|
The FDA admitted in 2015 that 70% of chickens sold for food in the U.S. contain cancer-causing arsenic.
|
What's true: The FDA announced in 2011 that Pfizer would discontinue sales of an arsenic-containing feed additive. What's false: The FDA did not announce in 2015 that '70% of chickens contain cancer-causing arsenic.'
|
mixture
|
Politics, Odd Ingredients
|
On 15 January 2015, MSN republished a Parent Society article entitled “Finally! The FDA Admits That Nearly Over 70% of U.S. Chickens Contain Cancer-Causing Arsenic.” This article circulated widely following its republication on a well-trafficked, popular website and caused widespread concern on social media sites about the current safety of commercially produced chicken products. According to the article, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had recently announced “nearly over 70%” [sic] of chicken sold for human consumption in the United States contained a known carcinogen, arsenic: I don’t know about the rest of you, but lately my poultry purchases at my local market have become more and more of a ‘hit-and-miss‘ situation, with more ‘misses’ if I’m being honest. As I bite into my homemade chicken nuggets or Coq au Vin (when I’m feeling fancy) I can’t help but feel that the chicken just tastes weird, stringy, just … funny. So a few days ago when I turned on the tube and saw the news headlines stating that the FDA has finally confirmed that chicken meat sold in the USA contains arsenic, my head, and stomach, nearly hit the roof. This cancer-causing toxic chemical, that in high doses could kill you, is actually being added to chicken feed on purpose, giving store-bought chicken the illusion of healthy coloring and plump appearance. Shockingly, this is the case with more than 70 percent of all U.S. chickens! That is just awful! The first paragraph of that article stated an FDA announcement regarding arsenic in chicken had been reported in the news “a few days ago,” but in fact that news had been reported several years earlier (as related in an 8 June 2011 Wall Street Journal piece, “Pfizer to Stop Sale of Animal Drug,” linked from that article). What was reported at the time was that a single study of 100 chickens had found chickens who ate feed containing Roxarsone (an arsenic-containing additive used to kill parasites and promote growth) did not eliminate as much inorganic arsenic through waste as previously thought and therefore had higher levels of inorganic arsenic in their livers than chickens who had not been fed Roxarsone. Although the FDA stressed “the amount [of arsenic] is too tiny to be dangerous to people who eat it,” Pfizer, the manufacturer of Roxarsone, announced it would discontinue sales of that feed additive: The Food and Drug Administration says some chicken meat may contain small amounts of arsenic, though the agency is stressing that the amount is too tiny to be dangerous to people who eat it. The FDA said that a new study by the agency shows that an ingredient in chicken feed that contains arsenic, called Roxarsone, may make its way into parts of the bird that are eaten. Previous studies have indicated the arsenic was eliminated with chicken waste. Pfizer, which makes the feed ingredient, said that it will pull it off the market in the United States. Many poultry producers have already stopped feeding their birds the ingredient, which was used to kill parasites and promote growth. The FDA said people do not need to stop eating chicken that may have been treated with the drug. Michael Taylor, FDA’s deputy commissioner for foods, says the study raised “concerns of a very low but completely avoidable exposure to a carcinogen.” Pfizer said in a statement that its subsidiary, Alpharma, is suspending sales in response to the FDA findings. The National Chicken Council, which represents companies that produce and process chickens, said in a statement that the ingredient has been used to maintain good health in chickens for many years, and that it is used in “many, but not all” flocks. “Chicken is safe to eat,” the group said. The FDA clarified its decision at length on their web site back in 2011, long prior to the January 2015 circulation of the rumor: Q: What did FDA announce? A: FDA announced that Alpharma, a subsidiary of Pfizer Inc, will voluntarily suspend sale of the animal drug 3-Nitro (Roxarsone) in response to a new FDA study of 100 broiler chickens that detected inorganic arsenic, a known carcinogen, at higher levels in the livers of chickens treated with the drug 3-Nitro (Roxarsone) than in untreated chickens. FDA officials stress that the levels of inorganic arsenic detected were very low and that continuing to eat chicken as 3-Nitro is suspended from the market does not pose a health risk.
|
30875
|
"The Department of Defense has planned communications drills to coincide with ""antifa protests"" on 4 November 2017."
|
Both MARS and English explicitly stated no blackout would occur in relation to the exercise, a quarterly training which began in 2013 and antedated Antifa. The claim is not the first to raise alarms over basic disaster drills. For example, the Jade Helm conspiracy theory appeared in 2016; the next year, a rumor appeared about Federal Emergency Management Agency drills in the Pacific Northwest called “Cascadia Rising.” In both instances, the numerous conspiracy-related claims amounted to nothing and the events were carried off without any “false flag” activity.
|
false
|
Politics Conspiracy Theories, antifa, department of defense, electronic magnetic pulse
|
In October 2017, rumors about violent anti-fascism protests intensified alongside October 2017 announcements that the Department of Defense, alongside amateur ham radio association the American Radio Relay League (ARRL), had scheduled a “communications interoperability” exercise: Elements of the US Department of Defense (DOD) will conduct a “communications interoperability” training exercise November 4-6, once again simulating a “very bad day” scenario. Amateur Radio and MARS organizations will take part. “This exercise will begin with a national massive coronal mass ejection event which will impact the national power grid as well as all forms of traditional communication, including landline telephone, cellphone, satellite, and Internet connectivity,” Army MARS Program Manager Paul English, WD8DBY, explained in an announcement. “We want to continue building on the outstanding cooperative working relationship with the ARRL and the Amateur Radio community,” English said. “We want to expand the use of the 60-meter interop channels between the military and amateur community for emergency communications, and we hope the Amateur Radio community will give us some good feedback on the use of both the 5-MHz interop and the new 13-MHz broadcast channels as a means of information dissemination during a very bad day scenario. The date the training exercise begins coincides with a conspiracy theory which appears to have originated with an amateur video from Kansas bounty hunter Jordan Peltz, who despite the patch ironed onto his shirt is not official law enforcement; in the video, he warns — without any supporting evidence — that “antifa” has been planning a violent “Day of Rage” for 4 November 2017. Paul English, the Army MARS program manager quoted in the press release, confirmed to us that it was a pre-planned training exercise: Yes the ARRL announcement about this exercise is legitimate. The coronal mass ejection scenario is simulated…notional. Resulting from the CME is the simulated…notional power and communication outages. These events are all notional…simulated. There is no actual power or comms outages that will occur in conjunction with this exercise. We have done this exercise every quarter since 2013. Our primary focus is to work with the amateur radio operators to collect real world county status reports…basically are the lights on…is water still running…how’s the medical situation at hospitals…etc. The average citizen will not even know this exercise is taking place. Our focus is to interoperate with the amateur radio community. I hope this helps. The Department of Defense bulletin was, naturally, rapidly picked up by conspiracy sites and presented as overly coincidental given its starting date: According to The National Association for Amateur Radio (ARRL), elements of the US Department of Defense (DOD) will simulate a “communications interoperability” training exercise across the United States on November 04-06. The announcement released on October 24 has not been widely distributed to the media, because the drill is simulating a total grid collapse and could spark public fear…. Bizarrely enough… the US Department of Defense (DOD) training exercise will occur on ANTIFA’s day of rage across the United States. Readers also asked about different variations of the rumor on Facebook and Twitter, most of which claims that there would be an extended loss of power: : Please hurry with this one. Is there really going to be an electric pull that will last November 4-6? I found this video on Facebook. Tried researching, but came up with nothing. [link] Are all the lights and water gonna be off.my baby would be in danger. Hello I’m really scare of what’s going to happen on November 4-6. Are we not going to have light for thoes days? I live in a bad place and I have kids what can I do?? Go to a police station?? For those days WARNING: DOD Announces EMP DRILL November 4-6th. Is this true? Will there be a black out on November 4th through November 6th? On 25 October 2017, the Army Military Auxiliary Radio System Facebook page published a version of the announcement. In a comment responding to a number of concerned people, the page clarified the purpose of the exercise: In this exercise Amateur Radio operators are conducting a routine training that we do four times a year. The purpose of the training is to prepared for an event we hope will never happen, but should be ready for if it ever does. These exercises are all about coordinating existing capabilities like amateur radio, and citizen volunteers like MARS members, to be a productive part of the solution in the event something like a severe solar storm ever happens. To answer some of the questions: a. Yes we will try to talk to Amateur Radio operators in all 3000+ counties in the United States. We hope all Amateur Radio operators will help us with that by tuning into 60 meter channel on on Saturday night (date/time noted in ARRL bulletin above) b. No we will not **actually** be turning off the electrical power grid. While I strive for realism when planning exercises, turning off the electricity all across the US is way above my pay-grade, so we just have to simulating that. c. No, we did not plan this to coincide with any particular protest. The date for COMEX 17-4 was set more than a year in advance. Keeping track of the various protest groups calendar of events is more than a little out of our lane. d. Yes, will will actually practice a solar storm scenario, go off the air, protect our radio equipment. After the notional storm, we will practice using emergency power (at least for a little while just to say we can, but not long enough to waste gasoline since the electrical service will actually still work), and of course establish radio contact with Amateur Radio Operators throughout the United States. e. No, there will not really be a solar storm. We are just simulating that too. f. If you are a US citizen, YOU can help by becoming an Amateur Radio Operator. Check out www.arrl.org for information about becoming a ham. If you are already an Amateur Radio operator, learn as much as you can about using High Frequency radio. Build an effective station. Use the 60 meter band. Become proficient with your computer, learn to restore your software and operating system, learn how to set up and maintain basic networks. If you have done that, and want to do more, join MARS. Go to the link and fill out the on line form. http://www.usarmymars.org/home/applications-and-forms You will have to train, A LOT, use new digital modes and procedures. You will solve problems, and make a lot of new friends in your team. Most of all, you will be part of the solution to big problems like how to recover from a severe solar storm. In response to our e-mail inquiry about the rumors, Paul English explained that there would be no loss of power, and that they hold the exercise quarterly and have for years: Thanks for your email. Yes the ARRL announcement about this exercise is legitimate. The coronal mass ejection scenario is simulated…notional. Resulting from the CME is the simulated…notional power and communication outages. These events are all notional…simulated. There is no actual power or comms outages that will occur in conjunction with this exercise. We have done this exercise every quarter since 2013. Our primary focus is to work with the amateur radio operators to collect real world county status reports…basically are the lights on…is water still running…how’s the medical situation at hospitals…etc. The average citizen will not even know this exercise is taking place. Our focus is to interoperate with the amateur radio community. Other variations of the rumor included references to an old, phony claim that NASA had announced that there would be “15 days of darkness“: There are claims of an electro magnetic pulse being done by the gov’t on Nov 4 thru the 6th 2017 that will disable everything using electricity. The claims state there is info on the DoD website concerning this. (I couldn’t find anything to that affect.) Claims state the entire North American continent will affected by this EMP and we all need to be prepared with water and canned foods for at least a week. Also the same claim states there will be total darkness from Nov 15 thru the 30th 2017 and everyone should be prepared not only with food and water, but with ammunition and firepower. Please advise. That version of the rumor originated as fake news, again well before any protests were rumored or scheduled.
|
28284
|
"Washington state Sen. Maureen Walsh said nurses ""play cards for a considerable amount of the day."" "
|
"What's true: On 16 April, Washington state Sen. Maureen Walsh said nurses in Critical Access Hospitals with relatively few patients ""probably do get breaks"" and ""probably play cards for a considerable amount of the day."" What's false: Walsh was speaking specifically about nurses at small, rural Critical Access Hospitals. She was not referring to all nurses in all contexts."
|
mixture
|
Politics
|
In April 2019, Washington state Sen. Maureen Walsh attracted local and national attention — and criticism — for remarks she made during a debate about legislation intended to improve nurses’ working conditions. On 19 April, the website Nurse.org posted a widely shared article whose headline read: “Senator Remarks Go Viral: Nurses ‘Play Cards for a Considerable Amount of the Day. '” The article went on: “Yes, you read that correctly, Senator Maureen Walsh of Washington State (R-Washington State) seems to believe that nurses actually have time to sit around and play cards at work. Nurses everywhere are responding that they are actually busy saving lives and rarely receive their lawful breaks.Senator Walsh made the comments on April 16, 2019, and was said to be referring to the nurses who work in critical access hospitals. She believes that they should be exempt from Washington State bill SHB 1155 that would protect nurses from mandatory overtime and protect their meal and rest breaks.” Walsh did say, of nurses in certain hospitals, that they “probably play cards for a considerable amount of the day,” and she has since said she regrets having done so. However, she made her remarks in a very specific context, and was not referring to all nurses everywhere, despite the impression given in much subsequent commentary and reporting. The Walla Walla senator was speaking during a Washington Senate floor debate on 16 April, on the subject of SHB 1155, a piece of legislation that would require health-care providers to give clinical employees uninterrupted meal and rest breaks during their shifts, except in emergencies. More specifically, Walsh was speaking in support of Amendment 724, which was put forward by her Republican colleague State Sen. Curtis King. That amendment would exempt a certain category of hospitals (Critical Access Hospitals) from the requirements of the bill. Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) are smaller, typically rural hospitals with fewer than 25 in-patient beds that are legally designated as CAHs by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Because they typically serve relatively isolated rural communities, they receive certain financial support and benefits from the federal government in order to ensure their ongoing sustainability. Walsh supported the proposed exemption of CAHs from the meal and rest-break requirements in SHB 1155, arguing that staff there were not typically as busy as their counterparts in other hospitals, and therefore did not require such mandatory regular breaks. In the interest of completeness, here are Walsh’s remarks in full, which can also be watched here (beginning at around 9:10): I have a Critical Access Hospital in my district, this [SHB 1155] is not workable for it. Do you have a Critical Access Hospital in your district? This does not apply to them. They may have six patients in that hospital. I’m in an underserved area, and all we’re doing is making it more difficult to be served. I understand helping with employees and making sure that we have rest breaks and things like that, but I also understand that we need to care for patients, first and foremost. And by putting these types of mandates on a Critical Access Hospital that literally serves a handful of individuals — I would submit to you those nurses probably do get breaks. They probably play cards for a considerable amount of the day. But the reality is this bill does not apply to Critical Access Hospitals. Please support this amendment and help out some of these under-served areas in the state that have these Critical Access Hospitals that, frankly, we’re being told may not be able to survive if they have to comply with these types of mandates. Please support this amendment. In a statement sent to Snopes, the Washington State Nurses Association rejected one of the premises of Walsh’s call for CAHs to be exempted from the proposed new requirements, arguing that, far from being in grave financial danger, “the majority of these small, rural hospitals are financially healthy and well equipped to implement SHB 1155’s patient safety standards,” adding that: “Over the last four years of reports, the total net income (surplus) for Washington’s 40 critical access hospitals is $208,657,776, with an average surplus of $5,216,444 per hospital. When one views Walsh’s remarks in their full and proper context, it’s clear that her “playing cards” comment related specifically to nurses in CAHs (“those nurses”). She was not claiming that all nurses everywhere spend much of their working days playing cards. This is in contrast to the impression created by much of the subsequent coverage of her remarks. For example, Nurse.org summarized her remarks as “Nurses ‘play cards for a considerable amount of the day,'” without reflecting that Walsh was actually describing only a relatively small subcategory of nurses. On 19 April, Juliana Bindas started an online petition on Change.org that called for Walsh to follow a nurse around during a 12-hour shift. The text that accompanied the petition (which had more than 500,000 signatures as of 22 April) also provided a misleading characterization of the senator’s comments, claiming “Senator Maureen Walsh stated that we as nurses mostly spend our 12 hour shifts playing cards.” Similarly, many online memes and social media responses markedly failed to recognize that Walsh’s remarks had referred to a specific cohort of nurses, and not all nurses in every context. Headlines published by major national news outlets including CNN and The Hill also failed to reflect the specific context of Walsh’s comments, instead giving the misleading impression she had been talking about all nurses. On 20 April, Walsh told the Tri-City Herald newspaper she regretted her comments, saying “I was tired. I said something I wish I hadn’t.” In a statement provided to the local KEPR television station, the state senator elaborated further and clarified that her remarks were indeed specifically in reference to nurses at CAHs: “My Mother was [a registered nurse] for many years and I have the greatest respect for nurses. The comment made about the ability to play cards was referring to the staff at the very rural and small critical access hospitals who may only serve a handful of patients and [where] the staffing mandates are unnecessary.” On 16 April, the Washington State Senate passed Amendment 724, along with the revised version of SHB 1155, which subsequently included an exemption for CAHs. In the House, a different version of the bill had already been passed, meaning the legislation was scheduled for reconciliation between the two chambers, as of 22 April.
|
41038
|
Drinking warm water is effective for all viruses. Try not to drink liquids with ice.
|
There’s no evidence that the temperature of liquids consumed can protect you from viruses.
|
unproven
|
online
|
If you have a runny nose and sputum, you have a common cold. These are the symptoms for the common cold, but they don’t rule out Covid-19. Coronavirus pneumonia is a dry cough with no runny nose. Some Covid-19 patients do get pneumonia, and one of the symptoms is a dry cough. A runny nose doesn’t rule out Covid-19. The new virus is not heat-resistant and will be killed by a temperature of 26/27 degrees. It hates the Sun. There’s no evidence for this. There’s evidence that similar viruses transmit less well in the heat, but many countries with reported Covid-19 cases are experiencing temperatures higher than this. If someone with the new coronavirus sneezes, it travels about 10 feet before it drops to the ground and is no longer airborne. Environmental factors impact how far droplets from a sneeze can travel, but it is likely to be several metres. If it drops on a metal surface it will live for at least 12 hours - so if you come into contact with any metal surface - wash your hands as soon as you can with a bacterial soap. It’s not yet known exactly how long the virus survives on surfaces. It can survive for 6-12 hours on fabric and will be killed by normal laundry detergent . There’s no evidence the virus can survive in clothing and be transmitted this way. Drinking warm water is effective for all viruses. Try not to drink liquids with ice. There’s no evidence that the temperature of liquids consumed can protect you from viruses. Wash your hands frequently as the virus can only live on your hands for 5-10 minutes. There is no evidence yet on how long the virus can survive on the skin. But it is important to regularly wash your hands. You should gargle as a prevention with salt in warm water. There’s no evidence this will prevent or cure the virus. Covid-19 starts with a sore throat lasting 3-4 days. It then blends into a nasal fluid that enters the trachea and the lungs, causing pneumonia, which takes about 5 or 6 days. With pneumonia comes high fever and difficulty breathing. The nasal congestion makes you feel like you’re drowning. This is a roughly accurate description of the most common symptoms, although not everyone with Covid-19 gets pneumonia. The symptoms may not come in this order or at these times. There have been no reports of sufferers experiencing nasal congestion that makes them feel they are drowning. Claim 1 of 11
|
11211
|
The importance of folic acid
|
This piece was a story about the importance of adequate folic acid intake to reduce the risk of certain birth defects. While it did mention the amount of folic acid that is the goal, it could have done a better job of providing specific information that viewers could use to insure that they attained their folic acid intake goal. This is especially the case as the piece mentioned that recent studies have shown that only about a third of women have sufficient folic acid intake, as well the fact the number of women with adequate folic acid intake is decreasing.
|
mixture
|
There was no mention of costs in this piece. It would have been very easy to note that it is CHEAP! That adequate folic acid intake reduced risk (a 28% reduction in neural tube defects; 40% reduced risk of cleft lip or palate) was presented as relative risk only. Especially as these are both rare birth defects, the change in numbers that potentially results from insuring adequate folic acid intake is small. The context of absolute risk reduction was important, but missing. There was no discussion of harms or lack of harms that are associated with adequate folic acid intake in women of child bearing age. This piece mentioned one study that found inadequate folic acid consumption prior to conception was associated with an additional birth defect. However, the piece discussed the long standing body of evidence of benefit from adequate folic acid consumption that was associated with decreased risk of neural tube defects. While this piece did not exactly engage in disease mongering, it provided information about yet another birth defect for which adequate intake of folic acid reduced the risk even though this information does not affect the long standing recommendation for folic acid intake. The problem is that it failed to note that the incidence of cleft palate and cleft lip are rare. There were no comments from experts in B vitamins or prenatal development. We really don't what sources were used. Recommendations of adequate folic acid intake were presented. The treatment options, obtaining folic acid from dietary sources or from supplements were both presented. This story discussed folic acid supplements, but would have been better if it had explicitly mentioned that these are available over the counter. The story mentioned multivitamins, but would have been better had it included the caveat that consumers need to check the label to determine whether the product contained 400 mcg. The story also discussed food sources (leafy green vegetables, liver, dried beans, citrus fuits, whole grain bread and cereals); however this was somewhat incomplete because without mention of the amounts of folic acid or the % of the recommended 400 mcg they might get in a single serving a person does not know how to use these foods to insure sufficient folic acid intake. Including guidance, such as reading labels, would have made this story more useful for the viewer interested in meeting the recommended intake. Although presenting some new data on a different type of birth defect, the story was clear that the importance of adequate folic acid consumption is not new. We can't be sure if the story relied solely or largely on a news release.
|
|
3888
|
Program to bring mental health resources to Detroit schools.
|
The Detroit Public Schools Community District announced it’s teaming up with a University of Michigan program aimed at helping students effectively manage symptoms of anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress.
|
true
|
Anxiety, Mental health, Health, General News, Detroit, Education, Michigan, Depression
|
TRAILS — Transforming Research into Action to Improve the Lives of Students — will make mental health resources available to 50,000 students and 4,000 staff members throughout the district. The program has trained more than 400 school mental health professionals in 64 counties. District officials in Detroit said they expected the collaboration with TRAILS to help improve social and academic outcomes across all grade levels. “Unfortunately, federal and state education funding does not take into account that our schools and their employees must overcome the daily socio-emotional challenges our children face every day,” said Supt. Nikolai Vitti. “This means we cannot simply focus on teaching and learning.” The partnership and associated funding “starts the process of building an integrated system of support and care for students” that includes screenings and intervention, Vitti said. Staff will be trained on cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness, evidence-based mental health approaches. Each school also will be paired with a local mental health provider trained as a TRAILS coach. “We are grateful to partner with the district to reach students affected by a wide range of stressors from academic pressure to far more complex hurdles, such as food and housing insecurity, and exposure to violence, abuse or neglect,” said Elizabeth Koschmann, TRAILS program director. Programming is expected to roll out in roughly 30 schools a year through 2022.
|
10182
|
Key health websites blindfold consumers on tobacco product risks
|
This news release raises important and fair questions about how forthcoming agencies purporting to serve the public health should be in detailing relative risk when comparing one perceived societal ill against another. In this case, we are talking about smoking versus smokeless tobacco products including snus, smokeless tobacco and vape. The source study, which includes a brief content analysis component, is less a traditional medical study and more a philosophy or ethics discussion of the principles involved in withholding or disclosing information to the public that has implications about health benefits and risks. But the news release fails to be as even-handed as it might be. For example, it points an accusing finger at the American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Mayo Clinic, but fails to get a response from any of them (even though the study itself does include a response from CDC as well as an acknowledgment by ACS that smoking tobacco is more dangerous than using smokeless products). And it fails to quantify what is known — and not known — about the relative risk of using cigarettes versus smokeless tobacco. We are aware the stakes are high: with the establishment of addiction, an individual’s exercise of free-will is diminished to choose to use or not to use the substance. Good initial information about the risks of this choice, while it remains a choice, is therefore crucial. If, as is mentioned in the source article, exposure to non-combustible tobacco increased likelihood of addiction to combustible tobacco, then under-stating the risks would be tragic. The study itself put it best: “If science learned that one type of alcoholic beverage caused 3 in 5 regular users to die prematurely, losing 10 years of life, while another alcoholic beverage caused 95% or even 9.5% fewer premature deaths, consumers would want to know which legal product was which. (With alcohol the especially dangerous item would be banned, but assume that, as with current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tobacco law, this is impossible.) It would be scandalous, even criminal, to keep such facts from consumers. Yet, such facts are being kept from adult consumers of legal tobacco/nicotine products either by not informing or actively misinforming consumers. It is as if tobacco consumers were blindfolded and not allowed to see dramatic differences in harm from different products.” The World Health Organization tallies the toll: Tobacco kills up to half of its users. Tobacco kills around 6 million people each year. More than 5 million of those deaths are the result of direct tobacco use while more than 600 000 are the result of non-smokers being exposed to second-hand smoke. Nearly 80% of the world’s 1 billion smokers live in low- and middle-income countries.
|
false
|
Academic medical center news release
|
No mention is made of the costs of either cigarettes (whose cost has skyrocketed in recent years in some areas) or of smokeless tobacco products. One can argue that that is immaterial when comparing lives saved versus lives lost, but that argument may not carry weight with people who are addicted to nicotine, and trying to figure out how to feed their addiction while limiting their risk. The news release gives the example that 3 in 5 regular users of cigarettes die prematurely, while smokeless tobacco products cause “massively fewer deaths.” A news release that is going to focus on risk reduction needs either better quantification of that risk reduction, or a sentence explaining why a more detailed description of the risk reduction is not possible. It is all well and good to say that smokeless products are far less lethal than cigarettes, but it behooves the news release to point out what, if any, drawbacks they may pose. But this release doesn’t give us any actionable information to show why substitute tobacco products are safer. We are instead told, The news release needs to tell readers what those risks are so they can make informed decisions about their own use — or not — of smokeless tobacco products. The CDC says the use of smokeless products: Still relatively new on the scene, but exploding in popularity, vaping delivers many unknown elements and chemicals to the lungs. Compared to Canada and the UK, the US severely lags in safety studies that compare harms from vaping and traditional tobacco products. The news release tells us that smokeless products cause “massively fewer” deaths than do traditional cigarettes. If that cannot be further broken down, then the news release might at least tell the reader why. The evidence (as provided in the study but not the news release) relies on previously published reports — primarily completed by the US governemnt — that offer the current understanding of harms from smokeless tobacco (SLT) products. But these are limited and no large-scale comparative studies between SLTs and combustible tobacco products have been undertaken. The release does note that an analysis of the content on the websites of the CDC, Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), American Cancer Society (ACS) National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Mayo Clinic “found three types of examples of information on SLT [smokeless tobacco], but no to modest efforts to inform consumers of the significantly lower risks compared to cigarettes for lifelong users.” The release did not include any of the quantitative risk reduction data the authors accuse the health organizations of omitting. How is this helpful to an already confused public and public policy makers? The news release does not take part in disease mongering. The release might have been stronger had it included some figures on the number of people who smoke and how many use smokeless products. After years of reading stories about how Big Tobacco was behind many studies that questioned the danger posed by traditional cigarettes, a reader can be excused for thinking that, perhaps, the smokeless tobacco industry was funding the work published here. A look at the study shows that that was not the case, but few people reading the news release would get to that point. In cases where the index of suspicion is high, the news release would boost its own credibility if it was explicit that there were no conflicts of interest. Smokeless tobacco products are clearly the comparable product here and the topic of the release. Anyone who has been to a drug or convenience store knows that smokeless tobacco products are readily available. The news release does not establish that this study is an update of an earlier 2003 study that reported similar conclusions. The news release says that the study authors “found that the Mayo Clinic perpetuated a misrepresentation discovered in 2003 — erroneously informing visitors that smokeless tobacco was as dangerous as cigarettes. The day after the article was released, the Mayo Clinic removed the headline, replacing it with the still misleading statement that smokeless tobacco was ‘not a safe product. '” The news release does not say why that is misleading. It adds that “many government websites are actually misleading or under-informing the public” when it comes to learning about the differences in risk among certain types of nicotine products, but offers no examples. “This in turn helps explain the woeful lack of public knowledge about relative risks, violating basic consumer rights as well as the public health principles of individual rights and health literacy,” it says, but does not tell us just how woeful that lack of public knowledge about relative risks is.
|
13633
|
On the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
|
Pat Toomey wrote in an op-ed this week that he’s against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, though he voted in favor of a bill in 2015 that fast-tracked its passage. While experts say voting in favor of the Trade Promotion Authority legislation wasn’t necessarily a symbolic vote of confidence in the TPP, the final outcome was that the TPP couldn’t have happened without it. In addition, Toomey -- who has been largely pro-trade in the past -- was interviewed on MSNBC last year and supported a trade deal, not just the TPA, which was a procedural vote in Congress. Asked multiple times during the interview, Toomey touted the benefits of a trade deal and didn’t temper his feelings by saying he’d reserve judgement on the TPP until negotiations wrapped up. He only says now, while he’s up for re-election, that he wanted to wait to decide on whether or not he supported TPP.
|
false
|
Trade, Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey,
|
"Sen. Pat Toomey has historically been one of the most pro-trade lawmakers in the Senate. The Pennsylvania Republican -- now in the political fight of his life in an attempt to keep his seat -- even wrote a book in 2009 called The Road to Prosperity, which touted the benefits of free trade. But last week, Toomey penned an op-ed that appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette denouncing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal being spearheaded by the Obama administration, writing ""we should not pass a flawed deal just to get a deal done."" He continued: ""We should dump the TPP and return to the negotiating table to get an agreement that would create jobs and economic growth here at home."" Coming from Toomey, this stance was surprising, largely because the senator last year voted for and applauded the Trade Promotion Authority that was largely branded as a way for Washington to fast-track the TPP. So did Toomey flip-flop his stance on the TPP, especially as public support for the deal fades? We’re not making a judgement call on the policy itself, but let’s look at the facts of whether or not Toomey changed his stance. The TPP would be one of the largest regional trade deals in history. It involves the United States and 11 other countries -- including Japan, Australia, Mexico and Singapore -- on the Pacific rim that represent a third of worldwide trade, and has been seen as an effort by the Obama administration to lessen China’s influence in the region. But the deal has left both parties split, as some consider the effort to be one that will kill jobs in the United States and encourage foreign outsourcing. Former Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders greatly opposed the deal, as has Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who once supported the TPP as secretary of state, came out against it as a presidential candidate, and PolitiFact rated it a . Toomey’s spokeswoman E.R. Anderson says Toomey never made a decision on his support for the TPP. Meanwhile, his opponent Democrat Katie McGinty has been launching public attacks on Toomey over the last week, claiming his stance on TPP is a 180 compared to what he said before. ""Pat Toomey has spent his entire career pushing bad trade deals and policies that ship Americans jobs overseas, so nobody is buying this ridiculous flip flop,"" McGinty said in a statement. Her campaign has pointed out that in 2015, Toomey voted in favor of the Trade Promotion Authority, or the TPA, which was known as the ""fast-track"" bill. That legislation was basically a procedural vote in Congress that would make it easier for a final trade deal to pass because it requires lawmakers give a final trade deal an up or down vote without making any amendments. The Obama administration said this was a critical step in the process of negotiating with the other countries involved in the TPP. Before the TPA was passed, Toomey appeared on ""Morning Joe"" on MSNBC and urged support for the bill’s passage, saying ""this trade agreement is going to knock down barriers to allow us to export more manufactured goods from Pennsylvania."" The interview was branded as being about the TPA. But interviewer Joe Scarborough asked Toomey about ""the trade deal."" Toomey went on to discuss ""countries that we’re dealing with,"" implying he was talking about the TPP -- not the TPA, which was a congressional procedural amendment. ""This helps to encourage economic growth in the United States, job creation in Pennsylvania and the United States, and importantly Joe, you know these countries that we’re dealing with, they’re changing, they’re evolving some of them are rapidly developing,"" Toomey said during the interview. ""They’re either going to do that under the influence of the Chinese, who are very aggressively trying to insert themselves, or they’re going to do it with us."" MSNBC showed a graphic of countries involved with the TPP, and Scarborough asked Toomey, ""Isn’t this one more step in a globalization process that has gutted manufacturing not only in Pennsylvania, but across America?"" Toomey, responded ""no"" and said, ""we’ve got an opportunity with this trade agreement to knock down some of the barriers that keep our products out, so I think this is going to be very constructive."" At no point during the interview did Toomey say he was waiting to reserve judgement on the substance of the TPP, unlike other senators who voted in favor of the TPA. Democrat Sen. Tim Kaine, now Clinton’s running mate, also voted in favor of the TPA, but was explicit at the time in saying he would not vote in favor of the TPP once negotiations were finalized if it didn’t include certain assurances. Kaine has since come out against the TPP. When the TPA was passed, Toomey’s office put out a press release reading: ""Today, we are a big step closer toward creating more jobs, lifting wages, and boosting economic growth for Pennsylvania."" The statement continued: ""In fact, at a Senate Finance Committee hearing in April senior administration officials assured me that if the 11-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement is enacted, our state would likely see a further surge in exports."" Again, Toomey didn’t express that he waiting on negotiations to conclude before he made an endorsement of the TPP itself. Now, Anderson says that was simply an approval of the TPA and an expression of optimism that a final TPP deal would ""be good for Pennsylvania."" ""He’s not saying anything is a direct correlation,"" Anderson said. ""He’s saying this process will lead to negotiations that lead to a better result, and the result is not to his liking."" Joshua P. Meltzer, a senior fellow in the Global Economy and Development department at the Brookings Institute, told PolitiFact that though the TPP could likely not have been completed without the TPA, the TPA was not created solely for the passage of the TPP. For instance, he said, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Trade in Services Agreement could also be passed under TPA if finished in time. ""The debate around TPA, while certainly influenced by the expected completion of TPP,"" he said, ""was more general in nature and focused on the impacts of trade more broadly than the specific benefits of TPP."" Toomey wrote in the Post-Gazette op-ed that his biggest problems with the TPP are that one, he believes there aren’t enough intellectual property protections for innovations in the life science and pharmaceutical sectors, and two, he says the TPP falls short in its protections for dairy farms in Pennsylvania who largely depend on exports. However, during that 2015 MSNBC interview, Toomey told Scarborough: ""It's definitely going to increase our ability to sell agricultural products overseas. It's going to help to protect the intellectual property of some of our really terrifically dynamic companies like pharmaceuticals and medical device companies."" McGinty has been against the TPP, but did support the North American Free Trade Agreement 20 years ago while working in the White House’ Office of Environmental Policy under former President Bill Clinton. Our Ruling Pat Toomey wrote in an op-ed this week that he’s against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, though he voted in favor of a bill in 2015 that fast-tracked its passage. While experts say voting in favor of the Trade Promotion Authority legislation wasn’t necessarily a symbolic vote of confidence in the TPP, the final outcome was that the TPP couldn’t have happened without it. In addition, Toomey -- who has been largely pro-trade in the past -- was interviewed on MSNBC last year and supported a trade deal, not just the TPA, which was a procedural vote in Congress. Asked multiple times during the interview, Toomey touted the benefits of a trade deal and didn’t temper his feelings by saying he’d reserve judgement on the TPP until negotiations wrapped up. He only says now, while he’s up for re-election, that he wanted to wait to decide on whether or not he supported TPP."
|
33167
|
The Rumblr mobile app enables users to find locals with whom they may arrange street fights.
|
As is often the case, the media hoaxers behind Rumblr claimed they intended to create a career-launching viral phenomenon while simultaneously maintaining an altruistic motive (in this case, the oft-present goal of “raising awareness”). And so long as media outlets eagerly heap free publicity on exposure-seeking grifters without corroborating their claims, no disincentive exists to dissaude them from clogging up social media fanciful tales of horrifying (but fake) app concepts.
|
false
|
Viral Phenomena
|
In early November 2015, online rumors reported that a new app called Rumblr enabled users to arrange real-time organization of street fights. Inevitably, Rumblr was compared to “hookup app” Tinder (which users can employ to swipe through concise profiles of local individuals seeking dating and sex) as a “Tinder for Fighting”: On 9 November 2015, the Daily Mail published a provocative article about the putative app headlined “‘Tinder for Fighting’ App Lets You Challenge People to Brawls: Rumblr Pits Users Against Each Other in Bare-Knuckle Clashes,” reporting that: According to the app creator’s website: ‘Rumblr is an app for recreational fighters to find, meet, and fight other brawl enthusiasts nearby.’ IS THE RUMBLR APP LEGAL? People using the app may find themselves in breach of the law in some states and countries. Fighting in a public place is classed as disorderly conduct while arranging a fight to be attended by an audience could be considered an unlawful public assembly. In some areas seriously injuring someone in a fight can result in criminal charges even if the other person does not seek to press charges. Speaking to MailOnline, Rumblr’s developers Matt Henderson and Jack Kim, said: ‘We’ve been recreational fighters our entire lives and were tired of the inefficiencies that exist when trying to find someone to fight’. In a fashion similar to the earlier hubbub over vaporware apps such as Peeple, the Daily Mail (and other news outlets) repeated verbatim statements about Rumblr from its creators without undertaking any actual verification efforts. For example, according to the New York Daily News, Rumblr was set for release at a very specific time: 5:00 PM EST on 9 November 2015: Neither of those articles mentioned the possibility of a hoax in their reports, despite red flags indicating such (including the app’s sudden appearance, glaring questionable legality, and lack of public demand for arranging random street fights with any sort of regularity). No to mention that the app purportedly provided for women arranging street fights using a filter dubbed “RumblrHER.” In a wholly unsurprising twist, the allotted app launch time of 9 November 2015 came and went without the appearance of Rumblr. On its purported launch day, Rumblr was itself rumbled by a Fusion article positing that the non-existent app was publicized as a marketing stunt for the von Hughes consulting firm: Doubts were raised prior to Monday’s 5PM launch. A WHOIS search for getrumblr.com pointed to the website of Jack Kim, a Stanford student. Kim is involved with a music startup called OneTune and previously started a now-defunct “search engine” (it ran on Google, then Bing) that “donate[d] 100% of revenues to charity,” according to a glowing 2012 mini-profile. Once the “web app” went live, it took users through a brief conversation with a chat bot who talked tough before redirecting to a page announcing von Hughes. There, the three describe the endpoint of the ruse as their “attempt to turn this entire story into something positive.” Now they’re directing people towards groups working to stop domestic violence and gang violence. The people behind Rumblr published a blog post admitting that the stunt was engineered to launch an unrelated marketing venture: Rumblr started as a portfolio project to help us launch our creative consulting agency, von Hughes. We’re a team of college dropouts with backgrounds in marketing, design, and engineering. Rumblr came about organically as a funny idea amongst a group of friends, but quickly budded into an opportunity to showcase our branding skills. Within a day or two, VentureBeat picked it up as a news story and, within another day or two, it spread to over two hundred news outlets globally. We saw it as an opportunity to show the world our ability to produce a brand and market a product, and that’s what we did. This is our attempt to turn this entire story into something positive. We’ve collectively slept for twenty hours the last three days producing the web application, managing social media marketing efforts, and pursuing news coverage. Rumblr became a relevant topic in multiple countries, cultures, and languages. We understand that some of you were genuinely looking forward to using an app like Rumblr, and we’re sorry to disappoint. However, if you still are truly wishing to release some built-up angst, consider fighting more pressing issues such as gang violence, domestic abuse, and at-risk youth culture.
|
30447
|
Maine's House Democrats voted to allow female genital mutilation.
|
Nonetheless, the claim that Maine Democrats voted to “allow” female genital mutilation is false, as both Democrats and Republicans in Maine advanced legislation specifying criminal penalties for the practice. The two sides voted along party lines on the different bills, with the version favored by Democrats being passed. Despite reports to the contrary, no part of the passed bill “allows” or legalizes female genital mutilation.
|
false
|
Politics Sexuality, female genital mutilation, fgm, jihadwatch
|
On 23 April 2018, the JihadWatch.org blog published an article reporting that Maine’s House Democrats had voted to allow female genital mutilation (FGM) in that state. The article linked to blog post from a shaky source, and even that item diverged from the claim that politicians in Maine had opted to “allow” female genital mutilation, stating instead that the Maine State House passed a “toothless” amended bill banning the act: “[T]he State Senate unanimously passed LD 1904, the strict FGM ban holding the mutilator, consenting parents/guardians and the transporters accountable for this barbaric form of child abuse. That is not the bill the House passed. First, the House brought forward one of the two minority reports from the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee — that the bill ‘ought not to pass.’ And the motion almost prevailed. In fact, 65 swamp creatures — entirely made up of Democrats and independents — voted AGAINST banning FGM. Failing to kill the bill outright, Democrat “leadership” next brought forward the second of the minority report from the CJPS Committee. This one being the controversial amended bill, removing penalties for all accomplices to the crime … The watered-down, feckless ban passed with mostly party-line support, in a 73-68 tally. Not a single Republican voted for the toothless version of the ban. Performing FGM on minors in the United States has been illegal since 1996, with regulations stating that “whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.” A February 2018 article on the legislative efforts in Maine regarding female genital mutilation reported that both Democrats and Republicans in the state opposed the practice, but that rival bills addressing FGM had been filed with the state’s legislature. In essence, both parties put forth FGM legislation but disagreed on the details: A fight is brewing in the Maine Legislature on new proposals to pass a state law banning female genital mutilation, a cultural practice that violates federal law and that virtually nobody in the Western world wants to see here or elsewhere. Yet Gov. Paul LePage has filed a bill to criminalize it, and Democrats filed a rival proposal. It may continue a partisan fight on the topic that cropped up last year, although it’s unclear how much the practice is happening in Maine. This year’s LePage-Sirocki [Republican] bill would make female genital mutilation a Class A felony for someone to perform it on a minor that isn’t their child and a Class B felony for a parent. The Democratic bill would make it a Class A crime to perform it on a minor and authorize the Department of Health and Human Services to do outreach on it. Local reporting on the partisan dispute aligned with a June 2017 statement from Maine’s American Civil Liberties Union positing that the Republican version of the bill was intended to target “certain religious and ethnic communities”: The original version of LD 745, which would create multiple new felony penalties for FGM, is redundant; there are already severe penalties under both Maine and federal law that cover FGM. This bill is nothing more than an attempt to single out behavior that is commonly attributed to certain religious and ethnic communities as different from other forms of abuse. We’re also concerned that the bill was crafted without the input of policy experts or affected communities. After hearing from women in Maine who were directly affected by female genital mutilation as well as advocates against domestic violence, we opposed the original version of LD 745. The state Senate now will have to decide whether to accept the House-passed version of the bill, or insist on sticking to the Senate-passed version (or reach some other form of agreement or compromise).
|
41010
|
Scientists in Israel are likely to announce the development of a coronavirus vaccine.
|
Scientists in Israel and elsewhere are working on developing a vaccination to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus, but it won’t be ready for the public for over a year.
|
true
|
online
|
Doctors in India have been successful in treating coronavirus with a combination of drugs (Lopinavir, Retonovir, Oseltamivir along with Chlorphenamine) and are going to suggest the same medicine globally. India’s ministry of health has advised that the anti-HIV drugs, Lopinavir and Retonovir, are used in some groups of Covid-19 patients. But it is unclear how successful this treatment has been. The other two drugs from the claim are not mentioned in their guidance. Researchers at the Erasmus Medical Center claim to have found an antibody against coronavirus. Researchers in the Netherlands have released research, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, on an antibody against the new coronavirus. A 103 year-old Chinese grandmother has made a full recovery from Covid-19 after being treated for 6 days in Wuhan, China This has been widely reported in the media. Apple has reopened all 42 China stores. Correct. On 13 March 2020, Apple announced that it had reopened all 42 stores in mainland China after a closure of almost six weeks. Cleveland Clinic developed a Covid-19 test that gives results in hours, not days. The number of new cases in South Korea is declining. Italy is hit hard, experts say, only because they have the oldest population in Europe. Whilst it is true that an older population has contributed to a high number of deaths in Italy, it may not be the sole reason. Scientists in Israel are likely to announce the development of a coronavirus vaccine. Scientists in Israel and elsewhere are working on developing a vaccination to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus, but it won’t be ready for the public for over a year. Three Maryland coronavirus patients fully recovered and are able to return to everyday life. Correct. On 13 March 2020, Montgomery County, Maryland confirmed that three residents who previously had the virus no longer tested positive. A network of Canadian scientists are making excellent progress in Covid-19 research. At least one group of Canadian scientists has recently announced some progress in understanding Covid-19. A San Diego biotech company is developing a Covid-19 vaccine in collaboration with Duke University and National University of Singapore. Tulsa County's first positive Covid-19 case has recovered. This individual has had two negative tests, which is the indicator of recovery. Correct, this patient has recovered according to official Tulsa County sources. Two negative tests is one of three official indicators of recovery among people with Covid-19 (who showed symptoms). All seven patients who were getting treated for Covid-19 at Safdarjung hospital in New Delhi have recovered. There is a news story reporting that seven patients in this hospital in New Delhi had recovered. However, these were not the only Covid-19 patients in the city. Plasma from newly recovered patients from Covid -19 can treat others infected by Covid-19. This is being used as a treatment in some countries, but clinical trials have not yet proved that this is effective. Claim 1 of 15
|
9028
|
Why the latest shingles vaccine is more than 90 percent effective
|
This news release describes the results of a published study that examined how well a new shingles vaccine, Shingrix, provoked immune responses during clinical trials led by researchers in Australia. The news release does a good job of describing why Shingrix offers stronger protection compared with other vaccines. However, it isn’t clear what this new information means for patients. The news release doesn’t address costs, harms, and the fact that the study was conducted by employees of GlaxoSmithKline and others holding a financial stake in the vaccine. Almost one-in-three people in the U.S. will develop shingles, which is caused by the herpes zoster virus, according to the CDC. Incidence increases with age as the immune system declines, so vaccines are generally recommended for people over the age of 50. Shingrix, which was approved in October 2017, contains an adjuvant, a substance that boosts the immune system’s response, and that appears to make it more effective and longer lasting than an older vaccine, Zostavax. It would have been helpful if the release would had informed readers how well the established vaccine works in comparison.
|
mixture
|
shingles vaccine
|
No cost information is provided. According to GoodRx, Shingrix costs about $300 out-of-pocket for a course of two injections. The primary benefit being reported here is that “90% of recipients had an increased immune response sustained across the 3-year duration of the study.” It would have been more helpful if the release had noted the actual incidence of shingles in those vaccinated with the new vaccine versus the old (or no vaccine). The news release says the study “shows that the vaccine stimulates your immune system to produce more antibodies and it generates a 24-fold increase in T cells. This is 12 times higher than other less effective shingles vaccines.” T cells are white blood cells that kill infected cells. We did have some concerns with a statement in the release projecting how long the vaccine protects against shingles. The release quotes a researcher saying, “We anticipate that this protection will actually last much, much longer. We are now measuring the efficacy of the vaccine over the next 10 years and are very optimistic about the results.” However, it doesn’t say when and if that will translate into a benefit for patients. There’s no information on harms. Most people had pain around the injection site, and a variety of other symptoms such as muscle plain, headache and nausea were reported during clinical trials. The news release states that data encompasses more than 15,000 people in 18 countries who received two doses of the vaccine, with the doses given two months apart. There’s no disease mongering. The news release states that most “Australian adults have been infected with the herpes zoster virus and are at risk of shingles, even if they do not remember having chicken pox. By age 85, approximately 50% of the population will develop shingles. Vaccination is the only way to protect against shingles.” The study was funded by the manufacturer of Shingrix, GlaxoSmithKline, and many of the authors are listed in the study as being GSK employees or having other financial interests in shingles vaccines. None of that is mentioned. The news release states: Shingrix is different from most other vaccines. Many vaccines are made from a weakened form of the virus, but Shingrix is made from just a single protein–known as glycoprotein E–that comes from the outer shell of the herpes zoster virus. As noted above, it would have been helpful if the release had stated how the established vaccine compared in the rate of effectiveness. There’s no mention of whether Shingrix is widely available. It is, including in the US where it received FDA approval in October 2017. It states: The vaccine also contains an adjuvant–a substance that helps your body fight off the virus. It is the first shingles vaccine to combine a non-live antigen with a specifically designed adjuvant. However, there are non-shingles vaccines that use this approach in vaccines recommended for older adults. According to a report in the American Osteopathic Association: Strategies that may improve vaccine effectiveness in older individuals include using higher doses, adding extra boosters, changing the route of vaccination, or combining vaccine antigens with adjuvants (adjuvanted vaccines) or a more immunogenic protein (conjugated vaccine). Adjuvanted and conjugated vaccines, as well as altering the vaccine dose, have all been applied to 3 vaccines currently recommended for older adults: influenza virus, Streptococcus pneumonia, and VZV vaccines. There’s no unjustifiable language. However, the news release would have been stronger if it had given data to back up this statement: “This is quite remarkable because there are no other vaccines that perform nearly so well for people in their 70s and their 80s. We are seeing results comparable to those of childhood vaccinations.”
|
16656
|
There has never been an alderman who has defeated an incumbent mayor in the history of this great city.
|
No Milwaukee alderman has defeated an incumbent to become mayor, according to Donovan. It’s relatively rare for aldermen or former aldermen to run for mayor. It’s even more rare for them to win. And none has ever bested a sitting mayor, experts agree.
|
true
|
Elections, Wisconsin, Bob Donovan,
|
"Milwaukee Ald. Bob Donovan harbors no illusions of a cakewalk to the mayor’s office in 2016. The well-funded and entrenched incumbent, Tom Barrett, appears poised to seek a fourth four-year term. And history’s not on Donovan’s side, the alderman told supporters July 29, 2014, when he announced his bid. ""What we are proposing is monumental and also unprecedented,"" Donovan said. ""As a matter of fact to the best of my knowledge there has never been an alderman who has defeated an incumbent mayor in the history of this great city."" Milwaukee’s modern-day tendency to return incumbents to office is well documented: it’s been almost 75 years since a mayor fell (Carl Zeidler stunned Daniel Hoan in 1940). But never’s a long time. No alderman has ever dethroned a mayor? To the history books We took up Donovan’s history challenge, looking back to the early days of city government, when aldermen received no salary and worked out of a church and above a livery stable. Milwaukee has elected a ""boy mayor"" (flashy 29-year-old Sherburn Becker, 1906). It has backed mayors born in Germany, Ireland and France. It voted in a mayor (Zeidler) whose surprising win was engineered by the future writer of ""Psycho."" The city’s voters have made a mayor of the man who wrote the ""Peck’s Bad Boy"" books (George W. Peck), and have tapped surgeons, liquor peddlers, judges, congressman, bankers and many lawyers to the post. Democrats are the rule, but a few Republicans have broken through. But relatively few aldermen even have run against an incumbent. The last to try, unsuccessfully, was Rod Lanser in the 1968 primary. Mayor Henry Maier won a third term and served until 1988. The last to win a mayor’s race as an alderman: Emil Seidel (1910), owner of a small pattern shop. Seidel is remembered not for that, but for starting the city’s half-century of mainly Socialist Party mayors. He made a national splash, becoming the first Socialist to run a major U.S. city. But Seidel didn’t defeat a sitting mayor. He tried, but in 1908 lost narrowly to David S. Rose, described by historian John Gurda as ""a political prince of darkness who allowed prostitution, gambling dens, all-night saloons and influence-peddling to flourish on his watch"" while fighting off criminal charges. Rose wasn’t re-nominated by the Democrats in 1910, and Seidel defeated Republican physician John Beffel (""Dr. Good Government""). Like Donovan, Seidel was fond of meeting constituents in taverns. so much so that ""Seidel"" became a nickname for a beer mug, Martin Hintz recounts in ""A Spirited History of Milwaukee Brews & Booze."" Back to Donovan’s claim that since the city charter was signed in 1846, no alderman has defeated a sitting mayor. Echoing Donovan, to the best of our knowledge, he is correct. We examined newspaper archives and the Milwaukee Public Library’s ""Milwaukee Mayors"" digital collection. We consulted with the city’s Legislative Reference Bureau’s library manager, Eileen Lipinski, Gurda and Milwaukee City Clerk Jim Owczarski. We reviewed races up to the present day. Only a handful of aldermen or former aldermen have advanced to the mayor’s office, and none against an incumbent, Lipinski found after combing through records kept by the non-partisan research agency. A tough challenge What makes the leap from alderman to mayor so tough? After all, there’s only a couple hundred feet separating their second-floor offices in Milwaukee’s 119-year-old City Hall downtown. ""Most alderman are very familiar to voters in their districts,"" offered Donovan. ""But not citywide."" There’s also a general fear among alderman about taking on any sitting mayor, for fear of losing and suffering retribution in terms of help for their districts, Donovan said. ""I’m not accusing the mayor,"" said Donovan, who intends to run for both mayor and his district seat simultaneously. ""That’s always a concern of aldermen. We’re only as good as what we can deliver."" Donovan might not find as much comfort from Seidel’s example if he digs into the deep background on the Socialist. Seidel, we found, was elected in 1908 as an ""alderman at large,"" which meant he had a citywide constituency, rather than representing a smaller geographical area. Our rating No Milwaukee alderman has defeated an incumbent to become mayor, according to Donovan. It’s relatively rare for aldermen or former aldermen to run for mayor. It’s even more rare for them to win. And none has ever bested a sitting mayor, experts agree."
|
26259
|
“If you have had a flu shot in the last 3-5 years, you will probably test positive” for COVID-19.
|
Medical experts say the flu vaccine isn’t causing false positives for people who take COVID-19 tests.
|
false
|
Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Viral image,
|
"A recent Facebook post is fanning the flames of a conspiracy theory that officials are overstating the number of COVID-19 cases. ""I had a phone appointment with my Dr this afternoon, and I asked the question about testing,"" it says. ""He said, ‘If you have had a flu shot in the last 3-5 years, you will probably test positive. Coronavirus antibodies have been in the vaccines since H1N1.’ This would account for all of ‘tested positive (with no symptoms) results."" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We reached out to medical experts about the post. Davidson Hamer, a global health and medicine professor at Boston University as well as a faculty member of the National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory, called it ""nonsense."" ""Coronaviruses have a completely different antigenic (surface protein and glycoprotein structure) from influenza viruses,"" he told PolitiFact in an email. ""They both cause similar syndromes but they are distinct classes of viruses and there is no evidence that I am aware of that would lead to cross reactions between immune responses to the two vaccines."" Plus, he added, there’s ""definitely no trace of coronaviruses in influenza vaccines."" Richard Watanabe, a preventive medicine professor at the University of Southern California, told us that since there’s no evidence the novel coronavirus existed in humans before last year, ""there is no way antibodies existed before then and therefore could not have been identified and isolated."" ""But more importantly,"" he said, ""this post seems to imply that vaccines work by directly giving you antibodies against whatever bug. That’s not how vaccines work. Vaccines give you an inactive form of the bug to allow your immune system to create antibodies."" (You can read more about how vaccines do work here.) Several other fact-checkers have also investigated whether a flu shot can result in false positives for COVID-19, and all came to the same conclusion: no. Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital in Philadelphia, told FactCheck.org that there’s no cross reaction between influenza and the new coronavirus, meaning flu traces wouldn’t cause someone to test positive for COVID-19. A spokesperson for the Food and Drug Administration also told FactCheck.org that all FDA-approved COVID-19 tests are checked for cross-reactivity with influenza virus and influenza antibodies and so far, no cross-reactivity has occurred."
|
33083
|
A study proved you're thousands of times more likely to be killed by a doctor than a gun in the United States.
|
In any case, the e-mail forward reproduced above was never intended to be taken seriously as a legitimate comparison of deaths caused by doctors versus deaths caused by guns. The sheer number of variables makes such a comparison completely meaningless though any imaginable manipulation of the underlying statistics, and the root claim that 700,000 Americans die each year due to medical mistakes appears to be cut from whole cloth. As such, this once-humorous meme remains false.
|
false
|
Politics Guns, doctors vs. guns, guns, inquisitr
|
On 5 January 2016, President Obama announced novel executive measures intended to reduce gun violence. Predictably, his remarks met with a mixed reception, and a number of old gun control rumors began recirculating online. Among those rumors were an ancient e-mail forward commonly titled “Doctors vs. Guns” or “Fun with Statistics.” As excerpted above, the claim compares unsourced numbers of deaths attributable to doctors vs. accidental gun deaths, and concludes that Americans were 2,450 to 9,000 percent more likely to be killed by doctors than guns. The rumor and its iterations were elderly by Internet standards at the time of its 2016 circulation: our earliest online sighting of this piece dates from February 2004, but a pprinted newsletter dated 2003 [PDF] included the same material, describing the information as a joke obtained from the Internet (dating it to at least 2002 and making its updated “citations” suspect): John Joyce got a chuckle from every one by reading an article he had gotten off the internet, called “Sumpin’ to think about”. a. The number of physicians in the US is 700,000. b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year is 120,000. c. Accidental deaths per physician are 0.171. (US Dept of health & Human Services) a. The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000. b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500. c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .0000188. Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners. A common aspect of early versions of this item its labeling as a joke or funny e-mail forward, not a straightforward comparison of credible or serious statistics. That framing was underscored by the ambiguity of its quantitative units and descriptors, along with vague mentions of statistics compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). To that point, actually determining whether the numbers cited had any basis in reality was challenging, as there was no year given in which either number might have originated. Viewed through that lens, the numbers were barely worth quantifying: the basic gist was that doctors were far more likely to accidentally kill another person than a responsible gun owner. The text didn’t specify what constituted “accidental deaths caused by physicians” or details whether that figure included only clear malpractice or all deaths remotely linked to medical treatment (including folks who would have died irrespective of medical attention). At some point after its presentation as a joke in 2003 to 2004, the claim evolved from humorous to straightforward. On 31 January 2013 Natural News‘ “Health Ranger” Mike Adams penned a column titled “Doctors kill 2,450% more Americans than all gun-related deaths combined,” the assertions of which paralleled the claims of the original humorous e-mail: Your doctor is FAR more likely to kill you than an armed criminal It’s true: You are 64 times more likely to be killed by your doctor than by someone else wielding a gun. That’s because 19,766 of the total 31,940 gun deaths in the USA (in the year 2011) were suicides. So the actual number of deaths from other people shooting you is only 12,174. Doctors, comparatively, kill 783,936 people each year, which is 64 times higher than 12,174. Doctors shoot you not with bullets, but with vaccines, chemotherapy and pharmaceuticals … all of which turn out to be FAR more deadly than guns. This is especially amazing, given that there are just under 700,000 doctors in America, while there are roughly about 80 million gun owners in America. How do 700,000 doctors manage to kill 783,936 people each year (that’s over one death per doctor), while 80 million gun owners kill only 31,940? Because owning a gun is orders of magnitude safer than “practicing” medicine! Adams asserted the numbers reflected “over one death per doctor,” whereas the original placed that figure at 0.171. The article was accompanied by a cherry-picked infographic, which in part cited a separate Natural News article: One of the two other citations was from a supplement sales company’s March 2004 article “Death by Doctor,” which purportedly supported the figure of doctor-caused deaths. An excerpt from that article read more like a vitamin sales pamphlet than a study or other credible research: Natural medicine is under siege, as pharmaceutical company lobbyists urge lawmakers to deprive Americans of the benefits of dietary supplements. Drug-company front groups have launched slanderous media campaigns to discredit the value of healthy lifestyles. The FDA continues to interfere with those who offer natural products that compete with prescription drugs. These attacks against natural medicine obscure a lethal problem that until now was buried in thousands of pages of scientific text. In response to these baseless challenges to natural medicine, the Nutrition Institute of America commissioned an independent review of the quality of “government-approved” medicine. The startling findings from this meticulous study indicate that conventional medicine is “the leading cause of death” in the United States . What you are about to read is a stunning compilation of facts that documents that those who seek to abolish consumer access to natural therapies are misleading the public. Over 700,000 Americans die each year at the hands of government-sanctioned medicine, while the FDA and other government agencies pretend to protect the public by harassing those who offer safe alternatives. Neither Natural News nor the vitamin sales company detailed the means by which they concluded that 700,000 Americans died each year due to medical accidents (Natural News‘ infographic cited only themselves and the LifeExtension nutritional supplement company as sources), and on 1 February 2013, the Inquisitr published an article in which the dodgy Natural News infographic was incredibly described as a “study”: US Department of Health and Human Services statistics were used to compile a Natural News infographic about doctor related deaths versus gun crime figures. There are currently 700,000 doctors in the United States. According to the study, there are 120,000 accidental deaths caused by doctors each year. The infographic of accidental doctor deaths notes that medial errors accounted for 98,000 deaths. We were unable to locate any matching study, nor any statistics compiled by the HHS at any point in time pertaining to “doctor-related deaths” (as it didn’t appear that agency maintained such records). In September 2013, NPR published a piece that cited some more tangible data on medical mistakes: In 1999, the Institute of Medicine published the famous “To Err Is Human” report, which dropped a bombshell on the medical community by reporting that up to 98,000 people a year die because of mistakes in hospitals. The number was initially disputed, but is now widely accepted by doctors and hospital officials — and quoted ubiquitously in the media. Now comes a study in the current issue of the Journal of Patient Safety that says the numbers may be much higher — between 210,000 and 440,000 patients each year who go to the hospital for care suffer some type of preventable harm that contributes to their death. Both previously excerpted claims antedated the NPR piece and its source study by several months, so the 2013 Journal of Patient Safety article cited by NPR couldn’t have been the source for the 700,000 figure. (The Journal of Patient Safety figures, while high, topped out at 440,000). Even then, as NPR noted, the estimates were perpetually in dispute, partially due to the fact that such figures are next to near impossible to quantify: Asked about the higher estimates, a spokesman for the American Hospital Association said the group has more confidence in the IOM’s (Institute of Medicine’s) estimate of 98,000 deaths. ProPublica asked three prominent patient safety researchers to review James’ study, however, and all said his methods and findings were credible. What’s the right number? Nobody knows for sure. There’s never been an actual count of how many patients experience preventable harm. So we’re left with approximations, which are imperfect in part because of inaccuracies in medical records and the reluctance of some providers to report mistakes. In short, there’s absolutely nothing close to a solid figure on deaths by medical error per year. At best, experts have settled on a range of 98,000 to 440,000, but no one knows whether those numbers are grossly exaggerated or horribly underestimated. Natural News cited GunPolicy.org’s 2011 statistics, but the infographics numbers demonstrated significant variance from what we found when we viewed the same statistics in January 2016 (possibly due to adjusted data). The infographic claimed total gun deaths as 31,940 from homicide (11,101), suicide (19,766), unintentional shooting (851), and undetermined intent (222). In January 2016, the 2011 stats displayed as 32,351 total, from homicide (11,068), suicide (19,990), unintentional shooting (591), and undetermined intent (248). The larger total included additional gun deaths not attributed to any of those four causes, whereas the smaller initial number did not. The CDC’s data tool returned the updated number of 591 accidental gun deaths in the U.S. in 2011, matching the statistics we located on GunPolicy.org. That same tool enabled us to pull a solid number of deaths by adverse event for that same year (2011), either by prescribed drugs or medical care. That number was actually 2,584, which was not only far lower than the numbers estimated in contemporaneous research, but also than the unsourced count of 700,000 which appeared in the original joke e-mail forward before it transmuted to become a “study.” Finally, whatever the real numbers might be, trying to draw meaningful conclusions based on the number of accidental deaths per doctor or per gun is a very, very poor metric, because those measurements don’t take frequency into account (i.e., how often one is in a position to be killed by a doctor or a gun in the first place). When we want to analyze statistics regarding fatal traffic accidents, for example, we typically don’t look at the number of deaths per automobile, because some automobiles are on the road much more than others; instead, we look at the number of deaths per mile driven. So to make a valid comparison between doctors and guns, we would need to know the number of times the average person is typically treated by a doctor per year, as well as the number of times the average person is within range of a gun that could be accidentally discharged, and take those factors into account.
|
9330
|
Antidepressants, psychotherapy may help ease irritable bowel syndrome
|
The story focuses on a recently published journal article that evaluates the available research on whether antidepressants or psychotherapy may reduce the symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The article does a good job of addressing the limitations of the research and incorporating input from independent experts. However, the story fumbled a bit when explaining the results of the meta-analysis, and didn’t discuss costs or harms of treatments. According to the CDC, IBS affects more than 1 percent of the U.S. adult population. And those living with IBS can often suffer from a reduced quality of life. In other words, a great many people are very interested in news about therapeutic options for addressing their condition. While we think the story does a good job of stressing that antidepressants and psychotherapy don’t constitute a “silver bullet” for addressing IBS, we think it’s important to highlight that one of these options (antidepressants) carries risks of its own. And both options can carry significant costs.
|
mixture
|
Irritable bowel syndrome
|
Costs are not addressed. Antidepressants and psychotherapy can be expensive, and are not always covered even for those patients with health insurance. The story attempts to quantify the benefits. We’re told that “rates of ‘no relief’ were highest with placebo treatments. People were 34 percent less likely to have no relief from antidepressants and 31 percent less likely to get no relief from psychotherapy, the study found.” However, that phrasing is difficult to parse. The story would have been stronger if it had specified whether it was addressing absolute risk or relative risk, and expressed that information in clearer terms. What does “relief” mean? Complete resolution of symptoms or something less dramatic? Potential harms are also not addressed. This is particularly problematic for the sections of the piece that deal with antidepressants. For example, the story specifically mentions both tricyclic antidepressants (which have potential side effects ranging from constipation to sexual problems) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (which can also pose health risks). We don’t expect a story like this one to provide an exhaustive overview of risks associated with these classes of drugs, but we do think it should at least acknowledge that there are risks. The story does a pretty good job of describing the study, which evaluated evidence from 53 trials — including language that highlights the limitations of those studies. No disease mongering here. The story incorporates input from two third-party experts. The story does not speak to potential conflicts of interest, which is a shortcoming. We found no potential conflicts to report, but think it is worth making that clear in a story. The story does refer to dietary interventions that are used to reduce IBS symptoms. The story would have been stronger had it mentioned pharmaceutical interventions that may be used in IBS treatment. These pharmaceuticals often have limitations and potential drawbacks of their own, but given that the story specifically evaluates the use of antidepressants as a therapeutic intervention for IBS, this seems like a significant oversight. Why? Comparing some treatment to no treatment is very different from comparing some treatment to established treatment to see if benefits are comparable or better. The story doesn’t specifically state that the antidepressants and treatment options studied in these various trials are available for clinical use. However, we think it can be broadly assumed that readers know these treatment options are available. As such, we’ll rate this as not applicable. The paper being reported on in this story is an update of an earlier journal article that reviewed the available research on whether antidepressants or psychotherapy may reduce the symptoms of IBS. Of the 53 trials incorporated into this most recent review, 48 of them also appeared in the previous review. In other words, the current review incorporates data from only 5 new trials — four on psychotherapy and one on antidepressants. To what extent, if any, did the incorporation of data from these five trials change the findings of the review? Did the new data support what researchers already knew? Or did the data change our understanding of the relationship between IBS and antidepressants or psychotherapy? The story incorporates original reporting and does not appear to be based on a news release.
|
13516
|
My opponent has no child care plan.
|
"Trump said that ""my opponent has no child care plan."" Even under the campaign’s unusual, age-related definition of policies for children aged 0 to 4, Clinton has several policies to offer on her website."
|
false
|
National, Children, Corrections and Updates, Donald Trump,
|
"In a Sept. 13 campaign event in Aston, Pa., Donald Trump unveiled a new, multi-pronged child care agenda. Trump’s plan would exclude child care costs up to age 13 from the federal income tax, including costs for both stay-at-home family members and paid caregivers. Those who don’t pay income taxes would be eligible to wipe out 50 percent of one parent’s payroll taxes through the earned income tax credit. Trump would also allow dependent-care savings accounts with a 50 percent government match on some contributions, as well as six weeks of paid leave for new mothers. But Trump didn’t stop with his policy offering. Trump accused Clinton -- who started her career at the Children’s Defense Fund and who’s considered child care a signature issue of her political career -- of not having any proposals for parents worried about their child care challenges. ""While critical, meaningful policy work has been done in this area, my opponent has no child care plan,"" Trump said. ""She never will. They'll never evolve into a plan. They'll never get done anyway."" Trump wasn’t the only member of his campaign to make this point. His daughter Ivanka -- who became the first person involved in the campaign to publicly focus on child care policy when she gave an address at the Republican National Convention -- echoed that point in an interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly. ""There’s no policy on Hillary Clinton’s website pertaining to any of these issues -- child care, elder care, or maternity leave or paternity leave, for that matter,"" Ivanka Trump said. Ivanka Trump was incorrect about elder care policy not being on Clinton’s website (it’s here) and also wrong about parental leave being absent (it’s here). But since the candidate himself specifically mentioned ""child care,"" we’ll focus on that in this fact-check. Fairly quickly, we found two headings on the issues page of Clinton’s website that seemed to address the question -- one labeled paid family and medical leave and the other titled early childhood education. When we asked the Trump campaign to reconcile these headings with his comment, they responded that those two topics are separate and distinct from ""child care."" The campaign argued that ""child care"" refers to ages 0 to 4 -- before ""early childhood education"" begins at age 4 with preschool. The campaign also said that paid maternity leave is a policy area that’s separate from child care policy. Alan Viard, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who was cited favorably in Trump’s policy proposal, said he has ""never before heard of ‘child care’ being defined as limited to ages 0 to 4."" He added that the Trump campaign’s decision to include children up to age 13 suggests that ""the campaign does not itself define child care in that odd manner."" Still, let’s set aside whether the Trump campaign’s definitions are widely accepted. Instead, let’s use the campaign’s definition to see whether Clinton really has no policies relating to child care for those age 0 to 4. As long as you look deeper than the section headings on her website, Clinton does have policies addressing that age range. Specifically, she says: • ""No family in America (should have to) pay more than 10 percent of its income to afford high-quality child care,"" a goal to be accomplished by ""by significantly increasing the federal government’s investment in child care subsidies and providing tax relief for the cost of child care to working families."" • ""Double our investment in Early Head Start and the Early Head Start–Child Care Partnership program."" (Early Head Start serves infants, toddlers, and pregnant women.) • ""Award scholarships of up to $1,500 per year to help as many as 1 million student parents afford high-quality child care."" • ""Hillary will work to dramatically increase access to child care on campus by increasing funding for campus-based child care centers."" So there are policies on Clinton’s website that address child care for ages 0 to 4. The Trump campaign didn’t respond after we forwarded them these examples. Viard agreed that the Clinton campaign ""clearly has proposals for many aspects of child care, as commonly defined, and even under the odd 0 to 4 definition. Her 10 percent plan would apply to children in that age range, as well as to older children, and Early Head Start is targeted to children under the age of 3."" Our ruling Trump said that ""my opponent has no child care plan."" Even under the campaign’s unusual, age-related definition of policies for children aged 0 to 4, Clinton has several policies to offer on her website. CORRECTION, Sept. 15, 2016: This version of the article corrects the location of Trump's speech. It was held in Aston, Pa.
|
11334
|
Newer lung-cancer scans may save lives, a study suggests
|
(First, please note that this is a version of an original Chicago Tribune story as published by the Houston Chronicle. We were reviewing the Houston paper on this particular day, not the Chicago paper. The original version ran 1,244 words; the Houston version less than half that, at 572 words. This happens often, as we've commented on.) Lung cancer is responsible for more deaths in the U.S. than any other type of cancer. It would be difficult to underestimate its importance. But the value of early detection remains open to debate. The news article covering the recent study on CT screening for early lung cancer in high-risk individuals highlights the main problem with the study—the absence of a comparison group. It hints that extended survival may be a mirage reflecting only an earlier diagnosis, rather than longer life, and rightly asks, “Does screening, in the end, save lives?” It also notes that better information from a huge randomized trial of nearly 55,000 participants may offer better information in the future. But the story trips up when it attempts to quantify the potential benefits of screening. And it passes up an opportunity to flesh out the debate on over-diagnosis and potential harms. According to the National Cancer Institute, anywhere from 25% to 60% of CT scans of high-risk individuals will detect an abnormality that is later discovered to be benign—causing a lot of trepidation among those undergoing the lung cancer screen. The biopsies prompted by positive scans also pose substantial hazards—partial lung collapse, bleeding, infection, pain, and even death. (See http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/lung-spiral-CTscan.) With hospitals and others now marketing the scans at prices ranging from $200 to $1000, more education about its limitations would have been helpful. In addition, the final paragraph of the article overstates the current evidence on the curability of early stage cancer. Whether aggressive treatment of Stage I cancer leads to a cure has yet to be determined, and is at the heart of the current controversy. It will remain theoretical until there is better data from randomized controlled trials.
|
mixture
|
"The article does not mention costs of lung cancer screening with CT scans. According to various estimates, these can range from less than $200 to as much as $1000. The article attempts to quantify survival rates with and without screening, but seems to trip up along the way. It states that the NEJM study estimated that “at least 88%” of patients diagnosed with early cancer “would survive for 10 years after the tumor was surgically removed.” It follows this by noting that 10-year survival among these patients is “usually about 70%” However, the study’s authors say that among patients with early stage cancer the 10-year survival rate “was 92%.” Ten-year survival was 88% in all patients diagnosed with early lung cancer, regardless of treatment–i.e., including chemotherapy, radiation, etc. (The article later corrects this.) In addition, the article’s statement that 10-year survival among these patients is “usually about 70%” is at odds with data presented in both the study and an editorial accompanying the NEJM study. Editorialist Michael Unger, MD, notes that about 70% of these patients are surviving at five years, not 10. The study’s authors cite higher survival rates in registry-based reports. In addition, the final paragraph of the article overstates the current evidence on the curability of early stage cancer. Whether aggressive treatment of Stage I cancer leads to a cure has yet to be determined, and is at the heart of the current controversy. A “cure” will remain theoretical until we have better data from randomized controlled trials. The article does not mention several potential harms of CT screening in high-risk individuals. These range from radiation exposure to needless anxiety after receiving a potentially false positive result to significant medical complications associated with biopsies. The article points out the major limitation of the NEJM study—that it lacked a comparison group and thus was unable to determine whether screening actually saves lives. It also points out that a randomized trial under way at the National Cancer Institute will contribute more information in the future. The article refrains from disease mongering. Lung cancer kills more people in the U.S. than any other cancer—some 162,000 in 2006, according to NCI estimates. Almost all who suffer with the disease are smokers or former smokers. The article cites a single researcher not associated with the study, and provides his credentials. It also cites several organizations who remain skeptical about CT screening, though additional sources would have helped to flesh out the debate. The story notes that the alternative to early CT screening for high-risk individuals is no screening. But it could have devoted more space to explaining the disadvantages associated with CT screening, including its potential harms. (See ""Harms of Treatment"" above.) The article does not describe the availability of CT screening for early lung cancer. According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), 60% of hospitals have machines capable of performing lung CTs, usually to stage cancer after it has already been diagnosed. But hospitals and private diagnostic centers are now beginning to market CT screening for early disease. The opening sentence of the article suggests that this is a relatively new use of CT technology. However, researchers have investigated the use of CTs for lung cancer screening for years, and the studies—including this latest one–remain controversial. The article does not attempt to put the new findings into the context of previous scientific studies on this topic. There was no obvious use of material from a press release, and it used several sources."
|
|
31057
|
A 25-year-old woman was drugged and nearly abducted by sex traffickers in the bathroom of a Shelby Township Meijer in August 2017.
|
As a survivor of legitimate human trafficking once wrote in a Los Angeles Times editorial, experts agree that stories such as these never align with legitimate tactics, which almost invariably target at-risk populations.
|
false
|
Crime, facebook trafficking rumors, human trafficking, sex trafficking
|
In late August 2017, Facebook user Jennifer Sondey claimed that a “friend of a friend” was drugged and nearly abducted at a Meijer in Shelby Township, Michigan. Although the original post was quickly deleted, various versions of it remained in circulation on Facebook: Urgent … please, share!!!!!!!!! Shelby TWP … My clients daughter wanted me to share. So while at work today I found something very important for all you parents to know about! PLEASE be very vigilant while out at the Meijer on hall Rd in Shelby TWP mi! According to her pastor, one of their member was almost abducted from the bathroom inside of the Meijer. This woman and her daughter who is 25 years old went to this Meijer and while they were there, the 25 year old had to use the bathroom. Well her mother started to worry when she hadn’t came out for awhile, so she went to check on her. As she was walking up to the bathroom door, 2 women had her daughter by each arm and was dragging her daughter out of the bathroom saying move out of my way we need to get my friend help! she was passed out. The woman’s mother immediately started yelling at these women saying you’re not my friend’s daughter, I don’t know you! you leave her alone I’m calling the police. They then ran out of the store and into a van with 2 other males in it. 911 was called and she was transported to the hospital and her stomach was pumped. The doctors still don’t know what these people drugged her with but suspect chloroform. She is almost 25 and almost abducted for sex trafficking in broad daylight inside the Meijer bathroom. Please watch your loved ones close and stay together. This is too close to home!! Please share to as many people as you can so they can be on the lookout too. Thank-you! So according to the rumor, Jennifer Sondey’s client’s daughter’s pastor said that a 25-year-old congregant from her church was drugged and nearly abducted from a Shelby Township Meijer bathroom. Medical personnel purportedly surmised afterward that she had been subdued and incapacitated with chloroform so that she could be transported to a waiting van. The purpose of the ruse was, predictably, so that the woman could be abducted “in broad daylight” for sex trafficking purposes. Social media users might recognize this as yet another iteration of human trafficking abduction urban legends, but one citizen who reported the story to the Shelby Township Police Department via Facebook added that Sondey was adamant the story was legitimate, because according to her, police were investigating: The gal who posted is arguing with people on the post that the police are investigating and she believes her client. ? ?♀️ In a comment on that post, a police department representative denied the claim: Nope, we have had no reports of abductions or attempted abductions like this in Shelby Twp. Thanks for checking and thanks for looking out for your community! Trafficking warnings began to take on a new life on Facebook in mid-2015, perhaps reaching critical mass with a claim about kidnappers in IKEA in March 2017. Warnings abounded of unsubstantiated tactics such as the use of jewelry, windshield-blocking shirts, and stolen license plates. These tales are designed to quell fears relating to the randomness of crime and offer a sense of control in a world that often seems horribly random. We have looked at dozens of identical warnings over the years about sex trafficking and human trafficking and how its perpetrators purportedly operate, and noted the toll they take on communities and targeted businesses: The promise of receiving virtual back-pattings for “spreading the word” lures eager users into sharing such accounts, thereby spreading useless parables about dangers that do not exist in the forms in which they are so often presented. Such reports are inconsistent with the patterns typically exhibited by kidnappers or sex traffickers (as reported, for example, in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime FAQ about human trafficking). In instances where we have managed to track down and communicate with the people who originated such claims, they are usually reluctant to answer inquiries or provide additional information, and they generally act affronted or defensive about our taking a skeptical approach to their tales … In addition to sapping resources from law enforcement and harming local businesses who have done nothing to deserve being targeted by spurious rumors, such claims have a secondary adverse effect: passed on under the guise of being useful information, such attention-seeking Facebook posts serve to spread misinformation about serious matters such as human trafficking and thereby hamper the public’s understanding of real risks and dangers from criminals.
|
10538
|
Study links MRI breast cancer detection to rise in mastectomies
|
"The story focuses on a preliminary report of an upward trend of mastectomy at one institution, possibly related to greater use of pre-operative MRI screening. However, it is not clear other than mastectomy rates falling then rising that there has really been much of a finding here. The story mentions that pre-operative screening with MRI is relatively new; however, the story does not mention if pre-operative MRI is standard practice at most breast cancer treatment centers. The story suggests several hypotheses for the upward trend in mastectomy, even among women not screened with MRI. On this point, the story does not mention the cost of pre-operative screening via MRI, or if changes to healthcare reimbursement policies have affected the decision to have a mastectomy v. lumpectomy w. radiation. Federal law requires that health insurance cover the cost of breast reconstruction following mastectomy. The story mentions lumpectomy as another treatment option for breast cancer, but radiation is not discussed. (Without radiation, recurrence is higher with lumpectomy than mastectomy; with radiation, the treatments are considered equal.) The focus of the report is that MRI may detect more diffuse cancer, or early-stage cancer in the contralateral breast (the breast not being treated), which may limit options for surgical treatment. More than one site of low-grade Stage 0 cancer would not necessarily preclude lumpectomy and radiation. For Stage 0 cancer, or Ductal Carminoma in Situ, lumpectomy in several parts of the breast may not be cosmetically acceptable, but this is a subjective assessment that requires input from a patient and not only provider opinion (in a sense the cosmetic result only is ""better"" after mastectomy if a woman has reconstruction); Someone may prefer a smaller or moderately misshapen breast compared to flat chest wall. Lastly, there is little independent reporting and the story seems to rely heavily on an ASCO press release, although information is not taken verbatim. But there are lots of caveats to this data (or lack thereof) to figure out what it means, if anything. and there is some effort at putting the results of this early clinical data in context."
|
false
|
"The story does not mention the cost of pre-operative screening via MRI, or if changes to healthcare reimbursement policy have affected the decision to have a mastectomy v. lumpectomy w. radiation. On this point, federal law requires that health insurance cover the cost of breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Time and energy away from work and family may also influence the decision to have a mastectomy v. lumpectomy w. radiation. Radiation can take several weeks following surgery. The story reports on an upward trend for mastectomy with greater use of MRI screening. This is a claim that has not been well substantiated — namely whether MRI lowers recurrence by better targeting those who need mastectomy. The story does not mention this. The story does not mention any potential harms. The story describes the basic study design and suggests several hypotheses for the upward trend in mastectomy, even among women not screened with MRI. However, it is not clear other than mastectomy rates falling then rising that there has really been much of a finding here. The story does mention that this study is a preliminary report from a single institution, but does not mention that that results have not been published in a peer-reviewed journal. The story does not engage in disease mongering. However, the story does not mention that not all DCIS (or stage 0 cancer) needs to be treated and that even if there were several sites of low-grade cancer, a woman might still be a candidate for lumpectomy and radiation. The story seems to rely heavily on information taken from an ASCO news release. One of the study invesitgators is cited, but there is no other independent reporting. The story mentions lumpectomy as another treatment option for breast cancer, but radiation is not mentioned. The focus of the report is that MRI may detect more diffuse cancer, or early-stage cancer in a contralateral breast (the other breast not being treated), which may limit options for surgical treatment; however, several sites of low-grade Stage 0 cancer would not necessarily preclude lumpectomy and radiation. For Stage 0 cancer, or Ductal Carminoma in Situ, lumpectomy in several parts of the breast may not be cosmetically acceptable, but this is a subjective assessment that requires input from patient not only provider opinion (in a sense the cosmetic result only is ""better"" after mastectomy if a woman has reconstruction) someone may prefer a smaller or moderately misshapen breast compared to flat chest wall. The story does not mention if pre-operative MRI is standard practice at most breast cancer treatment centers. The story focuses on a preliminary report that MRI screening prior to breast cancer surgery may increase detection and influence a woman’s surgical choice, with more women choosing mastectomy. The story mentioned that pre-operative screening with MRI is relatively new. The story seems to rely heavily on an ASCO press release, but information is not taken verbatim, and there is some effort at putting the results of this early clinical data in context, but there are lots of caveats to this data (or lack thereof) to figure out what it means, if anything. E.g. ""It is not clear that the experience at the [Mayo] clinic reflects that of the entire nation."""
|
|
8032
|
Ireland may ease coronavirus restrictions from mid-April.
|
Ireland hopes to be in a position in two weeks to tweak or remove some of its new highly restrictive coronavirus-related measures if it can slow down the rate of admissions to intensive care units, Health Minister Simon Harris said.
|
true
|
Health News
|
Ireland’s prime minister ordered citizens on Friday to stay home until April 12 to help slow the spread, telling them they can only leave to shop for groceries, for brief individual physical exercise or to make absolutely essential family visits. Ireland reported 14 deaths on Saturday, the most on a single day so far as total fatalities rose to 36. A further 294 cases brought the number of infections to 2,415, slightly down on the 302 new cases reported on Friday. “Will we be in a position on April 12 where life in Ireland can return to normal? Absolutely not. Let’s be honest with each other, these are measures that we are going to need continue to work at,” Harris told national broadcaster RTE on Saturday. “Do we hope to be in a position in two weeks’ time to say that we’ve made progress and some of the measures can be tweaked, removed, changed? Absolutely. “The measures that we put in place last night were so significant that they cannot be kept in place for too long. You cannot ask people to sustain this for a very long time.” Seventy-one patients were in intensive care units (ICU) by Thursday, a near doubling in three days. Prime Minister Leo Varadkar warned on Friday that ICU units would be at capacity within a few days given the rate of the spread. The government detailed on Saturday who could and could not go to work, giving a grace period until Monday for non-essential operations to wind down and for staff to work from home where they could. All construction bar healthcare-critical projects and critical road and utility infrastructure were shut down. Police mounted a major nationwide operation, with officers on horseback patrolling parks to ensure people were not gathering outside their household units and traffic police stopping cars to check journeys beyond 2 kilometers (1.25 miles) were essential trips only. With so much economic activity halted, the head of the body representing Irish banks said lenders were processing more than 28,000 three-month mortgage breaks for customers whose incomes have been cut by the coronavirus outbreak.
|
9236
|
Prostate drug offers new relief for kidney stone suffers
|
This release discusses the results of a clinical trial that tested tamsulosin (marketed in the US as Flomax), a drug used to treat enlarged prostate, as an aid in easing the passage of kidney stones in Australian patients, thus avoiding emergency treatment and surgery. The study enrolled 403 patients of whom 316 completed the study and only 77 had stones between 5 and 10 mm in diameter, the ones claimed to benefit from tamsulosin use. The release didn’t provide any numerical measurement when describing the drug’s benefits or any insights into cost or side effects associated with the drug. [Editor’s note: The news release links directly to a meta-analysis of several other related trials, instead of the trial described in the release. Reviewers located the correct study and used it as a reference point instead of the meta-analysis.] As the release points out, “up to 15 per cent of the Australian adult population and 1 in 11 people in the United States suffer from kidney stones,” which “can be excruciating to pass through the urinary tract.” If taking a readily available drug might remedy that situation it would be a real benefit to a vast number of people. But the release paints a rosy picture of the research that isn’t warranted. According to the published study, the majority of patients (76%) had stones less than 5mm in diameter and did not benefit from the drug.
|
mixture
|
Emergency Medicine Foundation,kidney stones
|
The release gives a brief nod to costs when it quotes the lead author stating “this has potential to improve care and reduce costs,” but it goes no further. There is no mention of the cost of tamsulosin, nor the length of time patients might need to take it to relieve kidney stones. In the release, the clinical trial leader describes the benefits as: “Of more than 400 patients in the trial, we found those who received tamsulosin passed their large kidney stones more often than the placebo group. “This means patients with large stones might not need more complicated treatments including surgeries, and this has potential to improve care and reduce costs. We’re very excited because Tamsulosin treatment may also allow patients to be treated closer to home rather than needing referral to a major centre.” The release would have been much better had it stated what “more often” actually meant. How many more patients on tamsulosin passed their stones compared to those on placebo? In addition, the release could have more carefully differentiated which patient group might benefit from the drug intervention. According to the study abstract: “We found no benefit overall of 0.4 mg of tamsulosin daily for patients with distal ureteric calculi less than or equal to 10 mm in terms of spontaneous passage, time to stone passage, pain, or analgesia requirements. In the subgroup with large stones (5 to 10 mm), tamsulosin did increase passage and should be considered.” The published study reported that of the 36 patients on the drug with large kidney stones — those between 5 and 10 mm — 30 (83.3%) passed their stones compared with 25 of the 41 (61%) volunteers with large stones who were given placebo. Those would have been good numerical reference points to include in the release. There are no mentions of potential harms from the use of tamsulosin mentioned in the news release, although a simple web search reveals a host of minor side effects — drowsiness, dizziness, blurred vision, lightheadedness, fainting, back pain, cough, decreased sexual ability, diarrhea, headache, runny or stuffy nose, sinus inflammation, trouble sleeping, or weakness — and possible severe side effects including severe allergic reactions, chest pain or irregular heartbeat, fever or chills, or other conditions. The release describes the trial only briefly, noting that it involved 400 and was conducted in five Australian hospital emergency departments. It would have been helpful to note that the trial was randomized with roughly half of the patients getting the drug intervention and half getting placebo. No disease-mongering here. The release notes that the research was funded by Emergency Medicine Foundation Australasia, and that the quoted researcher has received “more than $270,000” from that group to support his research. While the study leader states that patients using this drug “might not need more complicated treatments including surgeries,” that doesn’t meet our criteria for comparing alternatives. Are there other drugs similar in function to tamsulosin that might also benefit patients? Alpha blockers which relax the ureter muscles have helped some pass stones with less pain. Some patients with larger stones are treated with lithotripsy which employs sound waves that break stones into smaller pieces. Tamsulosin is currently prescribed for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), or enlarged prostate and other conditions and is readily available. The release claims that the researchers “discovered” that this drug has benefits which suggests to readers that this was the first and only study to look at the use of tamsulosin for kidney stones. Previous studies with similar findings have been published over the past few years. Aside from an over-generalized headline, the release doesn’t engage in unjustifiable language.
|
36590
|
"The word ""bar"" is an acronym for ""beer and alcohol room."
|
Is ‘Bar’ an Acronym for ‘Beer and Alcohol Room’?
|
false
|
Fact Checks, Viral Content
|
A meme with the claim that the word “bar” is an acronym for “beer and alcohol room” suddenly appeared in late December 2018:The meme was virtually identical in both presentation and format to a similar post claiming the word “hospital” had a similar etymology; this version also utilized the “today years old” theme. It was captioned “Don’t lie either 😒,” and it read:How old were you when you learned that “BAR” stood for Beer & Alcohol Room?These types of amusing (but often baseless) claims about the supposed etymology of common words are very popular on social media, possibly because they’re almost certain to rack up likes, shares, and engagement in the form of comments. (The “bar = ‘beer and alcohol room'” version delivered, with tens of thousands of shares.) Overwhelmingly, the backronym (a back-formed word construction purporting to be a legitimate acronym) was favored in this style of post. Some are solely humorous in intent, but others are folk etymology or outright falsehoods.As with the “hospital” claim, we were unable to locate any evidence that “bar” stood for “beer and alcohol” room that predates the meme displayed above, although there are prominent searches for the question “What is the acronym for bar?” But the context of the word “bar” in that post was unclear, as there were multiple other meanings for it — such as state bar examinations, or metal bars. We were unable to locate any existing claims that the word “bar” (as it relates to an establishment serving primarily alcoholic beverages) was ever believed sincerely to be an acronym for anything at all.The etymology of the word “bar” in all its variations (a tavern, a steel rod, a line on a graph) appeared to be consistent:From Middle English barre, from Old French barre (“beam, bar, gate, barrier”), from Vulgar Latin *barra, of uncertain origin. Perhaps from Old Frankish *bara (“bar, beam, barrier, fence”), from Proto-Germanic *barō (“beam, bar, barrier”), from Proto-Indo-European *bʰAr- (“log, board, plank”). If so, then cognate with Old High German para, bara (“bar, beam, one’s cherished land”), Old Frisian ber (“attack, assault”), Swedish bärling (“a spoke”), Norwegian berling (“a small bar in a vehicle, rod”), Latin forus (“gangway, plank”), Russian забо́р (zabór, “fencing, paling, fence”), Russian бо́р (bór), Ancient Greek φάρος (pháros, “piece of land, furrow, marker, beacon, lighthouse”). May well have been reinforced by existing Old English term from the same root.Overall, dictionaries (and etymology blogs) appeared to be in agreement that the use of “bar” in that context was “so called in reference to the bars of the barrier or counter over which drinks or food were served to customers.” Even when terms such as “saloon” or “tavern” were in favor, the area in which beverages were served was typically described as the “bar.”
|
6399
|
Heavy smog, worsened by weather, raises alarm across Asia.
|
Unusually high levels of smog worsened by weather patterns are raising alarm across Asia, with authorities in Thailand’s hazy capital Bangkok handing out face masks and preparing to seed clouds for rain to clear the air.
|
true
|
Weather patterns, Health, Asia, Bangkok, International News, Weather, Asia Pacific, Thailand, Smog, Air quality, Pollution
|
A combination of construction dust, auto exhaust and other pollutants, lingering over Bangkok due to prevailing weather patterns, has taken air quality to unhealthy levels in recent days. “I admit these are temporary solutions but we have to do it. Other long term measures will also be implemented, Police Gen. Aswin Kwanmuang told a meeting of army, police, pollution control and other officials on Monday. The city was handing out some 10,000 face masks, spraying water to help settle dust and tightening controls on when big trucks can use city streets — the Thai Pollution Control Department said that about half of the high levels of PM 2.5, tiny particulate matter that can dangerously clog lungs, was due to diesel engine emissions. The Department of Royal Rainmaking and Agricultural Aviation said it was preparing to deploy two planes for cloud seeding on between Tuesday and Friday, if conditions are suitable. In South Korea, unusually high PM 2.5 levels prompted emergency measures to reduce the health hazard. The country’s National Institute of Environmental Research said the daily average of 120 micrograms per cubic meter in Seoul as of late Monday afternoon was the worst since it began monitoring for PM 2.5 in 2015. Over the years, South Korea has suffered repeated spells when silt and pollution-laden winds have swept over from northern China. But vehicle emissions are also a problem. Thailand’s air pollution problem tends to wax and wane partly depending on the season. As in much of the rest of Asia, burning of fields after harvests can cause severe smog at certain times of the year. The spring smog has come early to tropical Bangkok. “There are a lot of factories and now that the pollution score is higher we have to be more careful,” said Oranart Phongpreecha, 55, a housewife who lives just outside of Bangkok. “It’s not that I get sick more often. But when I go outside, I have a sore throat and I can’t see clearly. ... I’m afraid that polluted air is going into my lungs so I have to protect myself.” Pralong Dumrongthai, head of the Thai Pollution Control Department, said long term solutions would include switching to use of electric vehicles and better quality gasoline. He said the weather patterns suggest Bangkok might be stuck with bad air for up to three months. “I ask for public understanding when your vehicles are being checked, especially those that emit black smoke or big trucks,” he said. “We need your cooperation.” Pollution generally is out of control by the time countries take action. India’s cities are among the world’s smoggiest and it is just starting to tackle the problem. The Indian government has announced a five-year program to cut air pollution by up to 30 percent from 2017 levels in the country’s 102 worst-affected cities. Key targets include reducing burning of field waste, firewood and charcoal, cleaning up thermal power and auto emissions and heavily polluting brick production and controlling dust from construction. Critics say the plan lacks details on enforcement and funding. ___ Associated Press writers Hyung-jin Kim in Seoul, South Korea, and Vineeta Deepak in New Delhi, India contributed.
|
2144
|
For women, battle of bulge just got tougher.
|
Women need to get at least an hour a day of moderate exercise if they hope to ward off the creep of extra pounds that comes with aging, U.S. researchers said on Tuesday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The weekly total of 420 minutes is nearly triple the 150 minutes of moderate daily exercise currently recommended by U.S. health officials and illustrates the challenge American women face in maintaining a healthy weight. Winning that war will require individuals to make changes in their daily routines — like walking or biking to work — but it may also take a shift in policy to make it easier for people in fit exercise into their lives, researchers said. Two-thirds of American adults are overweight or obese, increasing the risk of heart disease, diabetes and other chronic illnesses, and adding about $150 billion a year to U.S. healthcare costs. “From a public health perspective, it would be better to prevent the weight gain in the first place,” said I-Min Lee of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, whose study appears in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Lee said there is ample research on people who are already overweight, but little on how to prevent weight gain as people grow older. Current U.S. exercise recommendations differ, with 2008 guidelines recommending 150 minutes of moderate exercise — brisk walking, gardening, ballroom dancing — as a way to improve overall health, and a 2002 report by the Institute of Medicine, one of the National Academies of Sciences, recommending an hour a day. If people exercise vigorously, by running or cycling hard, for instance, less time is needed to get the same benefits. Lee’s team studied the guidelines in more than 34,000 healthy U.S. women with an average age of 54 who ate a typical American diet. The women reported their weight and weekly exercise totals in the first year, and then at 3-year intervals from 1992 to 2007. Over the course of the study, the women gained an average of 5.7 pounds (2.6 kg) overall. Only 13 percent of women in the study maintained a healthy weight throughout the study — and those who got an hour of exercise a day on average or more were by far the most likely to be in that group. “Only in this group of women did we find physical activity was associated with less weight gain,” Lee said. For the heaviest women, no amount of exercise helped, they found. They needed to diet, also. Lee said the results suggest that the current recommendations of two and a half hours per week are not enough to keep middle-aged women from gaining weight as they age. Lee said women should not let the findings discourage them from exercising at all, but they may want to make small changes now to prevent later weight gain. “I think the easiest thing is actually commuting,” she said, suggesting people walk or bike to work, and if they drive, to park farther away from the office. If seven hours a week are just too hard to fit in, Lee said people might want to consider vigorous exercise such as jogging, which can cut the weekly time requirement in half. And she said policymakers need to consider changes that make it easier for people to exercise, such as building sidewalks or bike lanes that make it easier and safer for people to exercise.
|
33814
|
Ordinary use of canola oil is dangerous to consumers.
|
Rapeseed oil has been used for cooking for centuries in Europe, India, China, and Japan.
|
false
|
Medical
|
A persistent chain e-mail still makes the rounds years after it first appeared, about the origin of canola oil. What it offered was a bit of truth about a product’s family history worked into a screed against the product itself: Before you buy your next bottle of cooking oil . . .I think it’s important that as many people as possible KNOW about the origins of this product. Then, if you choose to buy it, at least you’re doing so with your eyes open. RAPE IN A DIFFERENT GUISE Dear Editors Recently I bought a cooking oil that’s new to our supermarkets, Canola Oil. I tried it because the label assured me it was lowest in “bad” fats. However, when I had used half the bottle, I concluded that the label told me surprisingly little else and I started to wonder: where does canola oil come from? Olive oil comes from olives, peanut oil from peanuts, sunflower oil from sunflowers; but what is a canola? There was nothing on the label to enlighten me, which I thought odd. So, I did some investigating on the Internet. There are plenty of official Canola sites lauding this new “wonder” oil with all its low-fat health benefits. It takes a little longer to find sites that tell the less palatable details. Here are just a few facts everyone should know before buying anything containing canola. Canola is not the name of a natural plant but a made-up word, from the words “Canada” and “oil”. Canola is a genetically engineered plant developed in Canada from the Rapeseed Plant, which is part of the mustard family of plants. According to AgriAlternatives, The Online Innovation, and Technology Magazine for Farmers, “By nature, these rapeseed oils, which have long been used to produce oils for industrial purposes, are… toxic to humans and other animals”. (This, by the way, is one of the websites singing the praises of the new canola industry.) Rapeseed oil is poisonous to living things and is an excellent insect repellent. I have been using it (in very diluted form, as per instructions) to kill the aphids on my roses for the last two years. It works very well; it suffocates them. Ask for it at your nursery. Rape is an oil that is used as a lubricant, fuel, soap and synthetic rubber base and as a illuminate for color pages in magazines. It is an industrial oil. It is not a food. Rape oil, it seems, causes emphysema, respiratory distress, anemia, constipation, irritability, and blindness in animals and humans. Rape oil was widely used in animal feeds in England and Europe between 1986 and 1991, when it was thrown out. Remember the “Mad Cow disease” scare, when millions of cattle in the UK were slaughtered in case of infecting humans? Cattle were being fed on a mixture containing material from dead sheep, and sheep suffer from a disease called “scrapie”. It was thought this was how “Mad Cow” began and started to infiltrate the human chain. What is interesting is that when rape oil was removed from animal feed, ‘scrapie’ disappeared. We also haven’t seen any further reports of “Mad Cow” since rape oil was removed from the feed. Perhaps not scientifically proven, but interesting all the same. US and Canadian farmers grow genetically engineered rapeseed and manufacturers use its oil (canola) in thousands of processed foods, with the blessings of Canadian and US government watchdog agencies. The canola supporting websites say that canola is safe to use. They admit it was developed from the rapeseed, but insist that through genetic engineering it is no longer rapeseed, but “canola” instead. Except canola means “Canadian oil”; and the plant is still a rape plant, albeit genetically modified. The new name provides perfect cover for commercial interests wanting to make millions. Look at the ingredients list on labels. Apparently peanut oil is being replaced with rape oil. You’ll find it in an alarming number of processed foods. There’s more, but to conclude: rape oil was the source of the chemical warfare agent mustard gas, which was banned after blistering the lungs and skins of hundred of thousands of soldiers and civilians during W.W.I. Recent French reports indicate that it was again in use during the Gulf War. Check products for ingredients. If the label says, “may contain the following” and lists canola oil, you know it contains canola oil because it is the cheapest oil and the Canadian government subsidizes it to industries involved in food processing. I don’t know what you’ll be cooking with tonight, but I’ll be using olive oil and old-fashioned butter, from a genetically unmodified cow. Here is more information…. Canola oil from the rape seed, referred to as the Canadian oil because Canada is mainly responsible for it being marketed in the USA. The Canadian government and industry paid our Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) $50 million dollars to have canola oil placed on the (GRAS) List, “Generally Recognized As Safe”. Thus a new industry was created. Laws were enacted affecting international trade, commerce, and traditional diets. Studies with lab. animals were disastrous. Rats developed fatty degeneration of heart, kidney, adrenals, and thyroid gland. When canola oil was withdrawn from their diets, the deposits dissolved but scar tissue remained on all vital organs. No studies on humans were made before money was spent to promote Canola oil in the USA. Adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD) is a rare fatal degenerative disease caused by a build up long-chain fatty acids (c22 to c28) which destroys the myelin (protective sheath) of the nerves. Canola oil is a very long chain fatty acid oil (c22). Those who will defend canola oil say that the Chinese and Indians have used it for centuries with no effect, however it was in an unrefined form (taken from FATS THAT HEAL AND FATS THAT KILL by Udo Erasmus). My cholesterol level was 150. After a year using Canola oil I tested 260. I switched back to pure olive oil and it has taken 5 years to get it down to 160. Thus began this project to find answers since most Doctors will say that Canola oil is O.K. My sister spilled Canola oil on a piece of fabric, after 5 pre-treatings and harsh washings, the oil spot still showed. She stopped using Canola oil, wondering what it did to our insides if it could not be removed from cloth easily. Our Father bred birds, always checking labels to insure there was no rape seed in their food. He said, “The birds will eat it, but they do not live very long.” A friend, who worked for only 9 mo. as a quality control taster at an apple-chip factory where Canola oil was used exclusively for frying, developed numerous health problems. These included loose teeth & gum disease; numb hands and feet; swollen arms and legs upon rising in the morning; extreme joint pain especially in hands, cloudy vision, constipation with stools like black marbles, hearing loss; skin tears from being bumped; lack of energy; hair loss and heart pains. It has been five years since she has worked there and still has some joint pain, gum disease, and numbness. A fellow worker, about 30 years old, who ate very little product, had a routine check up and found that his blood vessels were like those of an 80 year old man. Two employees fed the waste product to baby calves and their hair fell out. After removing the fried apple chips from the diet their hair grew back in. My daughter and her girls were telling jokes. Stephanie hit her mom’s arm with the back of a butter knife in a gesture, “Oh mom” not hard enough to hurt. My daughters arm split open like it was rotten. She called me to ask what could have caused it. I said, “I’ll bet anything that you are using Canola oil”. Sure enough, there was a big gallon jug in the pantry. Rape seed oil is a penetrating oil, to be used in light industry, not for human consumption. It contains a toxic substance. Even after the processing to reduce the erucic acid content, it is still a penetrating oil. We have found that it turns rancid very fast. Also it leaves a residual rancid odor on clothing. Rape seed oil used for stir-frying in China found to emit cancer causing chemicals. (Rapeseed oil smoke causes lung cancer) Amal Kumar Maj. The Wall Street JournaL June 7, 1995 pB6(W) pB6 (E) col 1 (11 col in). Compiled by Darleen Bradley. Canola oil is a health hazard to use as a cooking oil or salad oil. It is not the healthy oil we thought it was. It is not fit for human consumption, do not eat canola oil, it can hurt you. Polyunsaturated or not, this is a bad oil. Be Sure to also read this informative report written by leading health expert Tom Valentine, Canola Oil Report. Go to Ask Jeeves yourself: http://www.askjeeves.com/ and type in (Where does Canola Oil come from?) and see what you come up with. Happy Frying, There is no earthly reason to give any credence to this rumor: Canola oil is not the horrifying product this widely-disseminated e-mail makes it out to be, nor has the FDA turned loose on the American public a health scourge worthy of being named one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. An appreciation of what this scare is based upon begins with a better understanding of what canola oil and how it came into being. The rape plant (Brassica napus) is a member of the mustard family, as claimed in the e-mail. However, before associations between rape and mustard gas set in too strongly, it should be noted turnip, cabbage, watercress, horseradish, and radish are also members of this family of plants. Rapeseed oil has been used for cooking for centuries in Europe, India, China, and Japan. As modern science is finding out, its previous use wasn’t necessarily a guarantee of safety. Cooking at high temperatures with unrefined rapeseed oil now appears to be related to an increased risk of lung cancer because at high temperatures cooking oil gives off chemicals capable of causing mutations in cells. Unrefined rapeseed oil is particularly notable for this, but other oils also have this association. Those intent upon doing large amounts of wok cooking with any sort of cooking oil should therefore lower their frying temperature from the 240°C to 280°C called for in Chinese cooking to 180°C. Rapeseed oil naturally contains a high percentage (30-60%) of erucic acid, a substance associated with heart lesions in laboratory animals. For this reason rapeseed oil was not used for consumption in the United States prior to 1974, although it was used in other countries. (Americans chose to use it as a lubricant to maintain Allied naval and merchant ships during World War II.) In 1974, rapeseed varieties with a low erucic content were introduced. Scientists had found a way to replace almost all of rapeseed’s erucic acid with oleic acid, a type of monounsaturated fatty acid. (This change was accomplished through the cross-breeding of plants, not by the techniques commonly referred to as “genetic engineering.”) By 1978, all Canadian rapeseed produced for food use contained less than 2% erucic acid. The Canadian seed oil industry rechristened the product “canola oil” (Canadian oil) in 1978 in an attempt to distance the product from negative associations with the word “rape.” Canola was introduced to American consumers in 1986. By 1990, erucic acid levels in canola oil ranged from 0.5% to 1.0%, in compliance with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standards. This light, tasteless oil’s popularity is due to the structure of its fats. It is lower in saturated fat (about 6%) than any other oil. Compare this to the high saturated fat content of peanut oil (about 18%) and palm oil (at an incredibly high 79%). It also contains more cholesterol-balancing monounsaturated fat than any oil except olive oil and has the distinction of containing Omega-3 fatty acids, a polyunsaturated fat reputed to not only lower both cholesterol and triglycerides, but also to contribute to brain growth and development. In other words, it’s a healthy oil. One shouldn’t feel afraid to use it because of some Internet scare loosely based on half-truths and outright lies.
|
9262
|
Novel Test Distinguishes Atypical Moles From Melanoma
|
This news release from a large dermatology practice plugs a study asserting that imaging mass spectrometry (IMS) — a procedure that involves ionizing a tumor sample in order to identify its protein content — does a better job at determining whether a certain type of atypical mole is benign or a potentially fatal melanoma than the standard practice of examining the tissue under a microscope. The study, authored in part by the practice’s director of dermatopathology, was published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. The news release does not give data to quantify how well IMS diagnoses skin tumors or compares with an old-fashioned microscope. Nor does it discuss costs, availability, or study limitations. As a result, it’s difficult to assess how much this technology could help patients. A Spitz tumor is an uncommon skin lesion that usually occurs in children and young adults. It’s benign, but in some cases difficult to distinguish from a malignant melanoma. Moles that are impossible to classify are called “atypical Spitzoid neoplasms,” or ASMs. They often turn out to be benign but present a dilemma for patients and physicians because it’s unclear whether they should be treated. Developing an accurate test for these tumors would reduce anxiety and unnecessary treatments. Better diagnosis methods in order to “prevent aggressive surgical treatment in children and young adults” is an aim of the Yale School of Medicine’s Spitzoid Neoplasm Repository, which was a key player in the study. That’s a laudable goal that IMS might help to achieve.
|
mixture
|
California Skin Institute,Melanoma,skin cancer
|
The news release does not say how much IMS costs or how it compares with using a microscope. According to an article posted by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry, most mass spectrometry methods “require labor-intensive—and hence costly—sample preparation. Other factors include limited sample counts over which to amortize fixed expenses, and the fact that expertise for maintenance and assay development may be in short supply.” A report on a diagnostic procedure should at the very least tell readers the proportion of patients with disease who tested positive (sensitivity) and the proportion of patients without disease who tested negative (specificity). Neither the news release nor the study on which it’s based offer these numbers. In fact, there are no figures in the news release summarizing the accuracy of IMS in diagnosing the 102 ambiguous tumors included in the study, or comparing it with the accuracy of using a microscope. In each case, the initial diagnosis with a microscope was compared to a diagnosis of the same tumor with IMS and the patient’s clinical outcomes. According to our review of the study data, IMS correctly identified as benign 38 tumors that had been classified as ASM, or indeterminate, when previously examined under a microscope. The news release offers this quote from a researcher: “Instead of pathologists being dependent solely upon the physical appearance of the cells, they now have the additional advantage of molecular information regarding the protein makeup (of cells) provided by mass spec imaging. … This test integrates anatomic pathology and analytical chemistry in a very useful and meaningful way.” If it’s useful and meaningful, there should be data showing how. In addition, even some reporters without a strong grasp of statistics may have difficulty gleaning the numbers from the published manuscript. That makes it even more important to include reliable data in a news release. The news release does not mention potential harms. Like any diagnostic or screening test, IMS carries a risk of a false negative and false-positive tests that could lead to a false sense of security or anxiety/unnecessary treatment. In addition, a biopsy is required to test a tissue sample (for both a standard evaluation and IMS). Though generally safe, a biopsy can result in scarring, bleeding, infection or allergic reaction to a topical antibiotic. The release could have mentioned these potential harms. The news release does not address potential study limitations, including whether the sample size was great enough to show statistically significant differences between IMS and a microscope for all types of cases. The release states that IMS “was a more accurate predictor, both of benign lesions and melanomas.” But in fact both methods did similarly well in finding the small number of actual melanoma cases. In four cases, patients developed cancer that spread to other organs or lymph nodes, and all were correctly identified as melanoma by both a microscope and IMS. In four other cases, patients developed disease that healed and did not spread. In three of those cases, the different diagnostic methods arrived at the same conclusions. The study itself does not address potential limitations. We wonder whether the use of microscopic tissue exams from labs in 11 different countries going back several years accurately reflects the accuracy of current U.S. diagnostic methods. Also, it’s unclear how accurate IMS would be in clinical practice versus in this study. It could be that more study is needed to determine whether IMS should be widely adopted in the analysis of atypical moles. The news release correctly states that melanoma “is one of the most common forms of cancer and the most serious type of skin cancer.” According to the National Cancer Institute, 76,380 cases are expected in the U.S. this year, with 10,130 deaths. The news release could have helped readers understand the significance of this test better by giving readers an idea of how many people have moles that are difficult to diagnose. The news release states that the study was “supported” in part by the National Institutes of Health. However, neither the news release nor the study explains where other funding was obtained. The news release does not say whether any of the researchers had conflicts of interest, although no conflicts of interest were declared in the study. The news release mentions the current standard of practice but does not offer a data-based comparison, as we note in the “quality of evidence section.” While IMS use is growing in different fields of medicine, the news release doesn’t explain how accessible it is. Can a patient request one from their local dermatologist? Would most dermatologists know how to interpret the test results? The news release makes no attempt to inform us. The news release does not exaggerate the novelty of this test. However, it could have clarified its description of mass imaging spectrometry to analyze moles as a “recently developed test.” Mass imaging spectrometry has been around since the 1960s, but it’s only recently been used to analyze moles. The news release does not use sensational language.
|
3739
|
Wyoming health agency reviews Park County pneumonia cases.
|
Wyoming health officials are investigating more than 30 pneumonia cases in a single county this year.
|
true
|
Health, Wyoming, Pneumonia
|
The Cody Enterprise reports that the earliest cases occurred in February but health officials found a spike in late April. The Wyoming Department of Health is handling the investigation into the 31 cases. Officials say most of the people infected are elementary-aged children. Pneumonia is a lung infection that can be caused by bacteria, viruses or fungi. Symptoms can include a cough, fever, chills and trouble breathing; they may be mild or become severe.
|
1690
|
India builds first 'smart' city as urban population swells.
|
India’s push to accommodate a booming urban population and attract investment rests in large part with dozens of “smart” cities like the one being built on the dusty banks of the Sabarmati river in western India.
|
true
|
Environment
|
So far, it boasts modern underground infrastructure, two office blocks and not much else. The plan, however, is for a meticulously planned metropolis complete with gleaming towers, drinking water on tap, automated waste collection and a dedicated power supply - luxuries to many Indians. With an urban population set to rise by more than 400 million people to 814 million by 2050, India faces the kind of mass urbanization only seen before in China, and many of its biggest cities are already bursting at the seams. Ahead of his election last May, Prime Minister Narendra Modi promised 100 so-called smart cities by 2022 to help meet the rush. At a cost of about $1 trillion, according to estimates from consultants KPMG, the plan is also crucial to Modi’s ambition of attracting investment while providing jobs for the million or more Indians who join the workforce every month. His grand scheme, still a nebulous concept involving quality communications and infrastructure, is beginning to take shape outside Gandhinagar, capital of the state of Gujarat, with the first “smart” city the government hopes will provide a model for India’s urban future. “Most (Indian) cities have not been planned in an integrated way,” said Jagan Shah, director of the National Institute of Urban Affairs which is helping the government set guidelines for the new developments. Among the challenges to getting new cities built or existing cities transformed is the lack of experts who can make such huge projects work and attracting private finance. “To get the private sector in, there is a lot of risk mitigation that needs to happen because nobody wants a risky proposition,” he told Reuters, stressing the need for detailed planning. To build smart cities, India allocated 60 billion rupees ($962 million) in its annual federal budget for the financial year starting April 1, even as it spent just a fraction of last year’s allocation of 70.6 billion rupees, said Shah. Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (GIFT), as the smart city is called, will double up as a financial hub, with tax and other breaks to lure banks, brokerages and other businesses. Developed in partnership with IL&FS Engineering and Construction, it aims to compete with India’s own financial capital of Mumbai as well as overseas rivals like Dubai and Singapore. Pressure on India’s existing urban centers is already intense, with cities like Mumbai gridlocked by traffic and hampered by poor infrastructure and a lack of amenities like parks and effective public transport. Yet some experts believe that building new cities may not be the answer to India’s swelling urban population. “To address India’s urbanization challenge we have to start looking at our existing cities,” said Shirish Sankhe, director at consultant McKinsey and Company, India. He added that new cities would be only a small part of the solution relative to brownfield projects. India has built planned cities in the past, including Chandigarh, designed by French architect Le Corbusier, and Gandhinagar itself. But the scale of its current push is unprecedented. A bird’s eye view from atop one of the two office buildings on the 886-acre GIFT site, a venture which began when Modi was chief minister of Gujarat, shows little sign yet of the 9 billion rupees spent on the first phase. But the sandy plain hides infrastructure including an underground tunnel for utilities, a first in India. The government has yet to decide what exactly will make a city “smart”, but the program is expected to include building new centers as well as adapting existing ones. A detailed definition with guidelines is due soon, said the National Institute of Urban Affairs’ Shah. Existing cities like Dholera and Surat in Gujarat, and Visakhapatnam in the east, have already begun work to transform into smart cities with help from companies such as Microsoft Corp, IBM Corp and Cisco Systems. Beyond GIFT, greenfield projects are likely to face hurdles including land acquisition rights and lengthy approval processes, as well as finding the right location. GIFT has the advantage of being flanked by a river on one side and a national highway on the other, and also sits between Gujarat’s political capital of Gandhinagar and its business hub of Ahmedabad, with a large international airport. The key, experts say, is time. “Physical master planning takes time. Complexity is built into this. And my sense is it is probably going to take longer than what most people think,” said McKinsey’s Sankhe.
|
40468
|
Various warnings about the USA, Canada and Mexico losing their sovereignty, merging into a North American Union and switching to a single currency known as the Amero. A video by Hal Turner claims that these are already in use in trade agreements with China.
|
Canadian-American cosmologist James Peebles and Swiss scientists Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz won the 2019 Nobel Prize for Physics on Tuesday for revealing the wonder of the evolution of the universe and discovering planets orbiting distant suns.
|
false
|
Warnings
|
Peebles, of Princeton University in the United States, was awarded half of the 9-million-Swedish-crown ($910,000) prize while Mayor and Queloz, from Switzerland’s University of Geneva and Britain’s Cambridge University, shared the rest. “This year’s Nobel laureates have painted a picture of our universe far stranger and more wonderful than we could ever have imagined,” Ulf Danielsson, a professor and member of the Nobel Committee for Physics, told reporters as the prize was announced. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said the scientists’ research had “transformed our ideas about the cosmos”. Mayor and his one-time doctoral student Queloz said it was “simply extraordinary” to be awarded a Nobel for what they described as “the most exciting discovery of our entire career”. The pair announced the first discovery of a planet outside our own solar system, a so-called “exoplanet”, in 1995. “The study of exoplanets is perhaps the most vibrant field of astronomy,” Martin Rees, a Cambridge University professor and Astronomer Royal, said in a emailed comment. “We now know that most stars are orbited by retinues of planets; there may be a billion planets in our galaxy resembling the Earth,” Rees added. Since their discovery, more than 4,000 exoplanets have been found in the Milky Way, many of them nothing like our own world. Indeed, the first planet they found, 51 Pegasi b, orbits a sun 50 light years away that heats its surface to more than 1,000 degrees centigrade, the award-giving academy said. With numerous ongoing searches for more exoplanets, this science might eventually also “find an answer to the eternal question of whether other life is out there,” it said. At a news conference in London, Queloz said the focus of research had now shifted from finding more planets to finding out more about them - about their atmosphere, chemistry and formation. Queloz also fielded inevitable questions about the possibility of extraterrestrial life. “I can’t believe that we’re the only living entities in the universe,” he said when asked if he believes “aliens” exist. “The chemistry that led to life is everywhere, so I’m a strong believer that there must be life elsewhere.” Peebles thanked the Nobel committee for the award, although he said his advice to young people wishing to go into science would be not to be lured by the prospect of such prizes. “The awards and prizes, well, they are charming and very much appreciated, but...you should enter science because you are fascinated by it. That’s what I did,” he told reporters by telephone after the award announcement. Physics is the second Nobel to be awarded this week; William Kaelin, Gregg Semenza and Peter Ratcliffe shared the medicine prize on Monday for discoveries about how cells respond to oxygen levels. The Nobel prizes were created in a bequest by Swedish dynamite inventor and businessman Alfred Nobel and have been awarded since 1901. This year’s physics prize will be followed by the awards for chemistry on Wednesday, literature on Thursday and the peace prize on Friday. Among the Nobels, physics has often taken centre stage with winners featuring some of the greatest names in the history of science such as Albert Einstein, Marie Curie and Niels Bohr, as well as inventors such as radio pioneer Guglielmo Marconi. Using theoretical tools and calculations, Peebles was able to interpret trace radiation from the infancy of the universe and discover new physical processes, the Nobel academy said. He showed that matter readily seen around us, be it pebbles, mountains or stars, actually make up only 5%, with the rest made up of dark energy and dark matter. For a graphic of Nobel laureates: here
|
5888
|
Indiana to get more baby boxes for abandoned newborns.
|
Indiana is adding more baby boxes that allow people to anonymously leave newborns in hospitals and firehouses, various officials said. Crown Point added one box last week at a firehouse after an anonymous donation, the Post-Tribune reported.
|
true
|
Health, Indiana, General News, Michigan City
|
Now there are six boxes in Northwest Indiana, including one at a Michigan City fire station and another at Franciscan Health. Baby boxes are padded, climate-controlled boxes where people can leave newborns safely and anonymously at hospitals or firehouse. The boxes cost between $10,000 and $15,000, hospital officials said. St. Catherine Hospital in East Chicago unveiled a baby box weeks ago. The hospital donated $10,000 to finish the installation, according to a release. Safe Haven Baby Boxes founder Monica Kelsey said three babies have been saved in Northwest Indiana. “Don’t you think $15,000 is a small price to pay to save that child’s life?” Indiana’s Safe Haven Law allows people to leave newborns at any hospital emergency room, police or fire station without any questioning, risk of arrest or prosecution. One baby was found at a baby box installed at Franciscan Health Hammond. The other two babies were left at boxes in Michigan City. “These boxes are not the answer to abandonment,” said Kelsey, a former medic and firefighter. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the state has the highest infant mortality rate in the Midwest at 7.3%. Lake County’s mortality rate is even worse at 8.5%, according to the Indiana State Department of Health. The county’s mortality rate for black children is 16.5%. Recently, Lake Station officials announced a baby box is expected to be at the firehouse. Franciscan Health director of mission integration Sister Cheryl Dazey said via email through a hospital spokesman that her heart ached reading about babies being found in dumpsters and fields. “Our state has a Safe Haven Law for babies up to three days old, but many do not want to hand their baby over at a hospital, fire station or police station for fear of the recognition,” Dazey said. “The Safe Haven Baby Box gives them anonymity.” Dazey said with more funding they plan to add boxes at Franciscan Health Lafayette East and later in Rensselaer and Crawfordsville. Kelsey said the boxes have evolved over time. The first two babies surrendered still had their placenta attached, leading the organization to add a medical bassinet. “It was pretty apparent that we needed to do a little bit more.” Kelsey noted that 60 infants have been left safely in boxes in Indiana, Ohio, and Arkansas so far. Their organization can get 5,000 calls in a 24-hour period. “The program is working,” Kelsey said. “We should have been doing this a long time ago.” ___ Information from: Post-Tribune, http://posttrib.chicagotribune.com/
|
27847
|
German and British front-line soldiers sang carols, exchanged gifts, and played soccer during a World War I Christmas truce.
|
Although the Christmas Truce of 1914 may seem like a distant myth to those now at arms in parts of the world where vast cultural differences between combatants make such an occurrence impossible, it remains a symbol of hope to those who believe that a recognition of our common humanity may someday reverse the maxim that “Peace is harder to make than war.”
|
true
|
History, christmas, world war I
|
Of the British and German soldiers who faced each other across the muddy fields of Flanders on Christmas Eve in 1914, even those who no longer believed the optimistic predictions of a short war would have been shocked to learn that it would drag on for another four years — and that it would ultimately see the staggering totals of 8½ million dead and 21 million wounded. Nonetheless, by December 1914 the European War — being fought by men who were weary, frustrated, and dispirited, bogged down in the glue-like muck, waterlogged trenches, and barbed-wire entanglements of Belgium, with little sense of national purpose other than to defeat the enemy — had already claimed hundreds of thousands of casualties since the beginning of hostilities in early August. Despite the constant machine gun fire and artillery bombardments of the western front, and even though in some places front-line troops were a mere 60 yards away from the enemy’s lines, soldiers on both sides received gift boxes containing food and tobacco prepared by their governments that Christmas: During World War I, in the winter of 1914, on the battlefields of Flanders, one of the most unusual events in all of human history took place. The Germans had been in a fierce battle with the British and French. Both sides were dug in, safe in muddy, man-made trenches six to eight feet deep that seemed to stretch forever. All of a sudden, German troops began to put small Christmas trees, lit with candles, outside of their trenches. Then, they began to sing songs. Across the way, in the “no man’s land” between them, came songs from the British and French troops. Incredibly, many of the Germans, who had worked in England before the war, were able to speak good enough English to propose a “Christmas” truce. The British and French troops, all along the miles of trenches, accepted. In a few places, allied troops fired at the Germans as they climbed out of their trenches. But the Germans were persistent and Christmas would be celebrated even under the threat of impending death. According to Stanley Weintraub, who wrote about this event in his book, Silent Night, “signboards arose up and down the trenches in a variety of shapes. They were usually in English, or – from the Germans – in fractured English. Rightly, the Germans assumed that the other side could not read traditional gothic lettering, and that few English understood spoken German. ‘YOU NO FIGHT, WE NO FIGHT’ was the most frequently employed German message. Some British units improvised ‘MERRY CHRISTMAS’ banners and waited for a response. More placards on both sides popped up.” A spontaneous truce resulted. Soldiers left their trenches, meeting in the middle to shake hands. The first order of business was to bury the dead who had been previously unreachable because of the conflict. Then, they exchanged gifts. Chocolate cake, cognac, postcards, newspapers, tobacco. In a few places, along the trenches, soldiers exchanged rifles for soccer balls and began to play games. It didn’t last forever. In fact, some of the generals didn’t like it at all and commanded their troops to resume shooting at each other. After all, they were in a war. Soldiers eventually did resume shooting at each other. But only after, in a number of cases, a few days of wasting rounds of ammunition shooting at stars in the sky instead of soldiers in the opposing army across the field. For a few precious moments there was peace on earth good will toward men. All because the focus was on Christmas. Happens every time. There’s something about Christmas that changes people. It happened over 2000 years ago in a little town called Bethlehem. It’s been happening over and over again down through the years of time. This year, Lord willing, it will happen again. The Germans, who had a direct land link to their home country (British soldiers in Belgium were separated from London by sixty miles and the English Channel), also managed to send small Christmas trees and candles to troops at the front. And, notwithstanding the fact that a Christmas cease-fire proposed by Pope Benedict XV had already been rejected by both sides as “impossible,” on Christmas Eve the “law of unanticipated consequences went to work,” as Stanley Weintraub, author of Silent Night: The Story of the World War I Christmas Truce, described it: [T]he Germans set trees on trench parapets and lit the candles. Then, they began singing carols, and though their language was unfamiliar to their enemies, the tunes were not. After a few trees were shot at, the British became more curious than belligerent and crawled forward to watch and listen. And after a while, they began to sing. By Christmas morning, the “no man’s land” between the trenches was filled with fraternizing soldiers, sharing rations and gifts, singing and (more solemnly) burying their dead between the lines. Soon they were even playing soccer, mostly with improvised balls. According to the official war diary of the 133rd Saxon Regiment, “Tommy and Fritz” kicked about a real football supplied by a Scot. “This developed into a regulation football match with caps casually laid out as goals. The frozen ground was no great matter … The game ended 3-2 for Fritz.” The spontaneous truce (which included French and Belgian troops in some sectors) was largely over by New Year’s Day, however. Commanders on both sides ordered their troops to restart hostilities under penalty of court martial, and German and British soldiers reluctantly parted, in the words of Pvt. Percy Jones of the Westminster Brigade, “with much hand-shaking and mutual goodwill.” The Great War stretched on through another three Christmases and beyond, but all subsequent attempts to organize similiar truces failed, and millions more died before the armistice of 11 November 1918 finally ended the shooting for good. As Stanley Weintraub noted at the close of his book on the 1914 Christmas truce: However much the momentary peace of 1914 evidenced the desire of the combatants to live in amity with one another, it was doomed from the start by the realities beyond the trenches. As the English rock band The Farm, decades later, summed up the results after the enemies “joined together and decided not to fight,” but failed, there was “nothing learned and nothing gained.” A celebration of the human spirit, the Christmas Truce remains a moving manifestation of the absurdities of war. A very minor Scottish poet of Great War vintage, Frederick Niven, may have got it right in his “A Carol from Flanders,” which closed: O ye who read this truthful rime From Flanders, kneel and say: God speed the time when every day Shall be as Christmas Day.
|
33710
|
The word 'fuck' derives from an acronymic phrase, either 'For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge' or 'Fornication Under Consent of the King.'
|
Sightings: The rock group Van Halen put out an album entitled “For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.”
|
false
|
Language, acronyms, etymology, fuck
|
Though a few common English words have grown out of acronyms (words created by taking the first letter(s) of major words in a phrase), ‘fuck’ isn’t one of them. With precious few exceptions, words of acronymic origin date from the 20th century and no earlier. It’s almost guaranteed, therefore, any word from before the time of automobiles did not spring to life from a series of initials becoming so common that folks began pronouncing it as its own word. The acronymic explanation of the origin of ‘fuck’ takes one of two paths: Fornication Under Consent of the King or For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge. Dealing with the first of these, though it’s pleasing to think couples looking to procreate in those Dark Old Days had to first obtain the sovereign’s permission and then post a notice of what they were up to so all the neighbors could enjoy a good snicker, a moment’s thought should set that one to rest. Were the king responsible for handing out such permissions, he wouldn’t have time to do anything else (or even to keep up with that one task). Likewise, though there have been times when conquering forces have engaged in rape, it wasn’t by royal fiat at the behest of a king looking to further dispirit the conquered. One last nail in the coffin of the ‘fornication under consent of the king’ origin comes from the word ‘fornication’ itself. Though many reasonably conclude fornication is the old-time word for having sex, the term specifically excludes the physical union of man and wife. One can fornicate premaritally or extramaritally, but not intramaritally. In light of this, any claim wedded couples trying to entice the stork down their chimney were granted fornication permits crashes against the rock of the wrong word being used. The second path has the word deriving from the short form of ‘For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.’ Variously, adulterers, rapists, child molesters, and them wot engaged in premarital hanky panky were, as part of their punishment, sentenced to wear a placard announcing their wrongdoing. According to this origin, adulterers locked the stocks in village squares sported ‘FUCK’ around their necks as did rapists walking around in prison yards. Here, the word that trips that proposed etymology is the least obvious one — ‘For.’ Though displaying miscreants in stocks and public shaming were popular punishments in 18th and 19th century USA, any placards left either on the prisoner or on top of the stock would list the crime succinctly. Thus, someone who’d been caught filtching would have a placard that said ‘Thief’ or ‘Stealing,’ maybe even ‘Stealing a Cow,’ but never one that read ‘For Stealing a Cow.’ The ‘For’ would be superfluous. Okay, so the word didn’t come to us from an acronym; where did it come from then? According to the alt.usage.english FAQ: [Fuck] is a very old word, recorded in English since the 15th century (few acronyms predate the 20th century), with cognates in other Germanic languages. The Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang (Random House, 1994, ISBN 0-394-54427-7) cites Middle Dutch fokken = “to thrust, copulate with”; Norwegian dialect fukka = “to copulate”; and Swedish dialect focka = “to strike, push, copulate” and fock = “penis”. Although German ficken may enter the picture somehow, it is problematic in having e-grade, or umlaut, where all the others have o-grade or zero-grade of the vowel. AHD1, following Pokorny, derived “feud”, “fey”, “fickle”, “foe”, and “fuck” from an Indo-European root peig2 = “hostile”; but AHD2 and AHD3 have dropped this connection for “fuck” and give no pre-Germanic etymon for it. Eric Partridge, in the 7th edition of Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (Macmillan, 1970), said that “fuck” “almost certainly” comes from the Indo-European root *peuk- = “to prick” (which is the source of the English words “compunction”, “expunge”, “impugn”, “poignant”, “point”, “pounce”, “pugilist”, “punctuate”, “puncture”, “pungent”, and “pygmy”). Robert Claiborne, in The Roots of English: A Reader’s Handbook of Word Origin (Times, 1989) agrees that this is “probably” the etymon. Problems with such theories include a distribution that suggests a North-Sea Germanic areal form rather than an inherited one; the murkiness of the phonetic relations; and the fact that no alleged cognate outside Germanic has sexual connotations. In plain English, this means the term’s origin is likely Germanic, even though no one can as yet point to the precise word it came down to us from out of all the possible candidates. Further, a few scholars hold differing pet theories outside of the Germanic origin one, theories which appear to have some holes in them. ‘Fuck’ is an old word, even if it’s been an almost taboo term for most of its existence. It was around; it just wasn’t used in common speech all that much, let alone written down and saved for posterity. Likely its meaning contributed to its precise origin becoming lost in the mists of time — scholars of old would have been in no hurry to catalogue the growth of this word, and by the time it forced its way into even the most respectable of dictionaries, its parentage was long forgotten. The earliest cite in The Oxford English Dictionary dates from 1503. John Ayto, in his Dictionary of Word Origins cites a proper name (probably a joke or parody name) of ‘John le Fucker’ from 1250, quite possibly proof the word we casually toss about today was being similarly tossed about 750 years ago. Spurious etymologies such as this one satisfy our urge for completion — we want to believe such a naughty word has a salacious back story, something replete with stocks and adulterers, or fornication permits handed out by a king. How utterly prosaic to find out ‘fuck’ came to us the way most words sneak into the language — it jumped the fence from another tongue, was spelled and pronounced a bit differently in its new home, and over time drifted into being a distinct word recognized by everyone. Takes all the fun out of it, it does. Acronymic explanations catch our fancy due to the “hidden knowledge” factor. Most of us feel a bit of a glow when we think we’re in possession of information others aren’t privy to, and when a titillating or apt story is thrown in behind the trivia, these things just take off. “Tips” does not come from “To insure prompt service,” yet that canard is widely believed. Likewise, “golf” didn’t spring to life out of “Gentlemen only; ladies forbidden,” and “posh” did not take its place in our vocabulary from a shortening of “Port out; starboard home.”
|
11333
|
In Early Test, New Hepatitis C Drug Shows Promise
|
"This story about an experimental hepatitis C treatment known as BMS-790052 wants to have it both ways. It leads off by telling us the drug is in very early clinical testing; we don’t know if the drug works; and that it will be years before it could ever be dispensed to patients. But then it proceeds to speculate irresponsibly about how the drug could be used with two other experimental drugs to potentially ""cure"" many people with hepatitis-C and encourage others to get tested. Also troubling is a prediction that these other experimental drugs will get approved by 2011 and become a ""standard treatment"" for many people with hepatitis C. This crystal ball-gazing comes courtesy of a researcher who has financial ties, not disclosed in the story, with all three drug manufacturers who are developing the new treatments discussed in the article. Hepatitis C is an important public health problem. Most of the 3.2 million people in the United States and over 200 million worldwide infected with hepatitis do not know they have the disease. Left untreated, the infection can lead to liver failure and death. The relative lack of symptoms in many people infected makes both treatment and control difficult. The current treatment regimen of interferon and ribavirin is effective in 50% -80% of cases depending on the genotype of the virus. The treatment regimen is long (up to 48 weeks of weekly interferon injections) and can produce significant side effects. Newer drugs, especially those with the potential to reduce or eliminate the need for expensive and side effect -producing interferon, are sorely needed in the US and worldwide."
|
false
|
"Since BMS-790052 is still in early testing, we don’t know what it will cost, so the criterion is not applicable. However, given the huge costs of the existing treatment regimen of an interferon and ribavirin, a comment on the potential economic impact of a third drug would have been helpful. Current treatments cost several thousand dollars per month with treatments lasting for 6-12 months. The addition of a third and presumably expensive antiviral is an important aspect of the costs of treatment. According to the story, patients who received BMS-790052 had lower levels of the hepatitis-C virus in their bodies for several days. While this is an appropriately sober description of an early phase clinical test, the discussion of the other two experimental drugs mentioned in the article was, as discussed above, not nearly as judicious. Saying these unapproved drugs will ""boost cure rates,"" without delving into any of the evidence which supports the claim, strikes us as hype rather than help. The story mentions that the main side effect of BMS-790052 in early testing was headache. But considering that this was a phase 1 study designed primarily to collect information about drug safety, we think it’s unfortunate that the story chose to emphasize a secondary test result –reduction in viral load — and downplay potential safety issues. There is also no discussion of the potential harms associated with the other experimental drugs that the story suggested would help treat hepatitis C. If a story is going to pass long claims that unapproved drugs are going to cure hepatitis C, we feel it also needs to provide the full picture of the harms these treatments may entail. The story emphasized the early nature of the research on BMS-790052 and included important caveats about the small size of the study and the lack of data showing effectiveness. The story probably should have been more explicit in stating that these short-term results do not automatically suggest that the benefits will endure over the long-term. The story showed distressingly little restraint when discussing two other investigational drugs which are in late-stage clinical testing. It said these drugs would become a ""standard treatment"" for hepatitis C and would ""boost cure rates into the range of 70 to 80 percent."" But the only support offered for these statements is the word of a University of Miami researcher who consults for the companies developing the drugs. Such bold predictions need to be backed up by a discussion of the clinical evidence. No disease-mongering in this story. This story leans heavily on the comments of Dr. Eugene Schiff, who is identified only as the director of the University of Miami’s Center for Liver Diseases. However, as a recent disclosure statement from a continuing medical education program in which he participated shows, Dr. Schiff is a consultant to Bristol Myers Squibb, which is developing BMS-790052, as well as Vertex and Schering Plough, which are developing the other two experimental drugs mentioned in the article. We feel these relationships should have been disclosed to readers. The story gives an inaccurate portrait of how the treatment approach with the new antiviral drugs will differ from the current standard regimen. The story suggests that the new drugs will replace existing treatments, but studies of newer antivirals have used the drugs in combination with standard therapy not in replacement of it. The story should have clarified that the newer agents will, at least initially, be used as an adjunct to existing therapies if and when they receive FDA approval. Although the story points out that BMS-790052 is in an early phase testing and nowhere near being available to patients, it improperly relayed the prediction of a researcher who said that two other investigational drugs were expected to become available by 2011. The prediction is especially troubling given the undisclosed financial ties between the researcher and the manufacturers of the investigational agents (see source/conflict of interest criterion below). The story notes that there are other drugs like BMS-790052 currently in development for hepatitis C. We can’t be sure to what extent this story relied on a news release, so we’ll call it not applicable."
|
|
3702
|
Health program offers free HIV prevention drug to uninsured.
|
The government launched a new program on Tuesday to provide an HIV prevention drug for free to people who need the protection but have no insurance to pay for it.
|
true
|
Alex Azar, Epidemics, General News, Politics, Health, Business
|
Taking certain anti-HIV drugs every day dramatically reduces the chances that someone who is still healthy becomes infected through sex or injection drug use. But only about 18% of the 1.2 million Americans who might benefit got a prescription last year, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said. And for those without insurance, the drugs can cost up to $2,000 a month. Expanding access to what’s called PrEP — for pre-exposure prophylaxis — is one key to the Trump administration’s ambitious goal of ending the nation’s HIV epidemic by 2030. “We have the tools to stop the spread of HIV in its tracks. It’s about execution,” Azar told The Associated Press. The HHS program is for the uninsured to seek free PrEP doses. Drugmaker Gilead Sciences Inc. has agreed to donate enough of its HIV prevention medicines for up to 200,000 people a year over 10 years. To qualify, people must have a valid prescription and a negative HIV test and must lack prescription drug coverage. They can apply through a new website, GetYourPrEP.com. Once approved, they’ll be provided a card with a number necessary for their pharmacy to fill the prescription at no cost, officials said. The uninsured aren’t the only the concern. Even though most insurers cover PrEP, co-pays still can be obstacles, especially for people with high-deductible plans. Gilead, based in Foster City, California, sells the only two brands of PrEP, Truvada and Descovy, approved in the U.S. A cheaper generic version of Truvada is expected next fall. Getting doctors to ask their patients about HIV risk factors and educating the public about PrEP also are hurdles. PrEP use has increased since 2016, when just 9% of those qualified got a prescription for HIV prevention, said Dr. Jonathan Mermin, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The increase is a good sign, but “progress is not fast enough,” Mermin said. There are about 38,000 new HIV infections in the U.S. each year. President Donald Trump’s administration aims to reduce those by 75% in five years and by 90% in 10 years. Azar said the Gilead donation, first announced in May, wasn’t affected by a patent-infringement lawsuit HHS recently filed against the company, arguing taxpayer-funded research helped lead to the recognition that certain drugs initially used to treat HIV also could prevent it. ___ AP Medical Writer Mike Stobbe in New York contributed to this report. ___ 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.
|
35157
|
"U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham said, ""President Trump probably knows more about medicine and specifically viruses than any of the so-called scientists at the NIH and CDC."
|
Trump was criticized for his handling of the new coronavirus outbreak, with some saying that he downplayed the threat it posed to the United States. Trump, in turn, accused Democrats of “politicizing” the virus. While Graham did not say that Trump knew more about viruses than the CDC, he did defend the president’s handling of the outbreak.
|
false
|
Politics, COVID-19
|
On Feb. 26, 2020, a quote ostensibly uttered by U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham defending President Donald Trump’s handling of an outbreak of new coronavirus was circulated on social media. Graham supposedly said: “President Trump probably knows more about medicine and specifically viruses than any of the so-called scientists at the NIH and CDC. If anyone is going to eradicate this plague it’ll be the president.” This is not a genuine quote from Graham. We could not find the quote published by any credible publication. Our search of the senator’s social media pages for this quote also turned up empty-handed. The above-displayed tweet appears to be the originating source for this quote. And since this account belongs to Dan Lyons, a writer who frequently shares jokes, sarcastic quips, and outright fabrications on his Twitter feed (Lyons was behind the viral Fake Steve Jobs account), it’s safe to say that this quote was conjured out of thin air. In the last few days, Lyons has also shared fake quotes from Trump’s spiritual adviser Paula White and U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes, as well as this fictional exchange involving Trump: We reached out to Graham’s office for comment and will update this article if more information becomes available.
|
9770
|
Organ-On-Chip Could Revolutionize Drug Testing
|
Will new technology reduce the need for animal testing? This Newsweek story addresses an important topic with plenty of research and reporting. It tells how new chip-based technology that models human organs could potentially replace animal studies as a means of testing new drug candidates — possibly leading to cheaper and faster approvals. But while there’s a reasonable exploration of the evidence and some caution about the early state of the technology, the story feels unbalanced. The story only quotes researchers with a vested interest in the success of the technology, and its language describing potential benefits gets a little ahead of the evidence in places. Inclusion of an independent source with expertise in this area probably would have helped with many of these concerns. We make some other suggestions for improvement below in our review comments. Many non-profit organizations call for the end of animal experimentation, which is a controversial topic around the world. In addition, a common refrain from companies and researchers developing novel agents is the time and capital required to take a therapeutic from conceptualization to testing in non-animal then animal and finally human subjects. It is recognized that we need better experimental systems to identify new therapeutics and test their effectiveness and safety before trying them in human subjects. So it is welcome to see novel systems being designed that may do a better job. However exciting such new technology may be, this article presents an optimistic picture that is not fully supported by evidence. While we can hope that this will represent a better way to screen therapeutics for human studies, we can’t yet say that there is evidence that this is safer, less costly, or that it better identifies successful agents.
|
mixture
|
organ-on-a-chip
|
The Newsweek report generally addresses the costs to put a new drug on the market, and it states that “Incorporating the chips into drug testing could save millions of dollars and years of time on research.” We’ll reward the story’s impulse to address cost with a Satisfactory rating, but we’d note that the issue is more complicated than readers may appreciate based on the coverage. The article starts by projecting benefits – cost of drug development and time to FDA approval. And only later does it imply that the new technology initially will add to the cost because it will be done along with the old technology (animal studies). Only if it is as good or better may it be a substitute. Then the question is whether it will indeed be cheaper. It may be cheaper if the chips are less expensive than animal studies or if they better identify agents that do or don’t work in humans. But costs are difficult to predict and the totals can add up quickly — for example, a vial of human lung cells costs over $700. This all seems very speculative at this point. The article cites two experiments, in which the chip’s lung channel behaved like human lungs. In both cases the story says the results were “exactly” what would happen in human lungs under the same circumstances. It’s probably difficult or impossible to provide any quantitative benefit regarding this technology at the current time. Nevertheless, we think the language of the story is not measured enough. Human organs work with millions of other cells and are influenced by countless other genetic and environmental factors that cannot be duplicated in these early experiments. Human systems are variable and dynamic, and doctors often don’t know ahead of time how patients would respond to a disease or treatment. So to suggest that the organs-on-a-chip behave exactly like human organs is not really supported at present. Another example of the story’s enthusiasm: “The chips will also provide researchers with information on dosing at a much earlier stage in drug studies—particularly helpful because animals metabolize chemical substances at a different rate than humans.” While these initial studies are encouraging, these chips haven’t yet been compared to existing tools used in drug development. Until this is done, a more cautious tone regarding benefits — “may,” “might,” and “could” rather than “will” — is warranted. This is a tough one. The article does mention limitations, but doesn’t specifically state that conceivably this chip technology could have unforeseen problems — that it may say everything is ok when it isn’t and that could lead to harm. Given the early stage of this research, it would be prudent to include a caveat about potential for unknown or unpredictable downsides to the technology. As noted above under “Benefits,” it’s not possible for these systems at present to replicate the dynamic processes of the human body, and the story doesn’t alert readers to that limitation. But we’ve already dinged the story for that concern, and the story does mention some other limitations, including that researchers can’t mimic consciousness or compression on a joint. It’s also clear from reading that this is still a technology that isn’t yet available or proven. The story does a reasonable job of describing what has been done so far and what needs to be done in the future. We’ll rate this Satisfactory. This story addresses a new technology that can potentially improve the testing of new therapeutics. This is an important topic and it is presented in a reasonable way, without resorting to disease-mongering. This was a two-source story, but both quoted researchers are leading organ-on-chip projects and so have a clear stake in this technology. One researcher created the organ-on-chip and is part of a team seeking to commercialize the technology. The other, though based at NIH, would seem to have a strong professional interest in seeing the technology succeed. The report needed an independent source, who could talk more thoroughly about the limitations of this technology and whether the expectations put forth by the article are realistic. For example, the story could have asked the head of research for a major drug company about their views on such new technologies, and whether they had any immediate plans to replace existing systems with this new one. The report describes laboratory testing on animal models, like mice and monkeys, and says chemicals are metabolized at a different rate in animals. We think that’s enough for a Satisfactory rating here. It is clear from the story that this technology is still under development, with a recent grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to create chips for all systems in the body. But we were concerned that the story allows a researcher who, according to this story is part of a team seeking to commercialize the technology, to speculate about FDA approval within two years and to say that it’s “only a matter of time” before these chips replace rodents. Those statements seem highly optimistic to us — another reason why the story should have consulted with an independent authority. The article mentions that the first “organoid” chip was built and tested in 2008 to mimic the mechanical function of human lungs. What’s new in this story is that this project won the “Design of the Year” award for 2015 from the Design Museum. The Newsweek report does not rely on any news releases that we found online.
|
31237
|
A nude sunbather was injured when a predatory bird ripped away one of his testicles.
|
Harrowing stories about hapless male sunbathers attacked by predatory sea birds.
|
false
|
Junk News Did a Seagull Rip Offa Man’s Testicle as He Sunbathed Naked?, foreign journal, suffolk gazette
|
In June 2017, articles published on various web sites reported that a nude tourist’s beach vacation was ruined when he was painfully attacked by a predatory bird who thought it was making off with a pair of turtle’s eggs: A male tourist who chose to sunbathe in the nude on a popular beach near Townsville on the north-eastern coast of Queensland is recovering from serious injuries to his genitals after being bitten by a sea eagle. According to a source at the clinic that treated him, he has completely lost one testicle which imploded under the pressure of the eagle’s beak. The other testicle was almost severed but remains ‘hanging by a thread.’ Witnesses at Saunders Beach, a popular nudist beach west of Townsville, say that the man’s undoing may have been applying sunscreen too liberally to his genitals. The web site that originated this article, the Foreign Journal, states that it is a “widely considered as a leader in world journalism,” but its sunbather vs. sea eagle story was missing key details such as the name of the victim, the hospital where he was treated, and the country in which the alleged sea eagle attack took place (although it did reference a state and city name). The Foreign Journal was the sole source for this story: we checked various Queensland news outlets and found no mention of this alleged incident. White-bellied sea eagles, which are native to Australian coastal regions (as well as to Indonesia, India, China, and other parts of southeast Asia) are not technically eagles at all, but smaller raptors known as kites. Their feeding habits can be best described as “opportunistic,” which means that even the most courageous bird would think twice about launching itself into even a particularly juicy-looking pair of turtle eggs if the prize were surrounded by humans, preferring instead to pirate prey away from other sea birds. Foreign Journal has a history of publishing fake news, such as a rather Freudian hoax story about a man getting a fidget spinner lodged in his own anus. In August 2017, the Suffolk Gazette web site (which also traffics in fake news, including hoax fidget spinner stories), replicated the earlier Foreign Journal account about a sunbather’s losing a testicle to a sea bird, with only minor changes in detail: A rogue seagull ripped off a man’s right testicle as he sunbathed naked in his back garden, it has emerged. Experts say the fearsome bird mistook the man’s exposed privates as a couple of birds eggs and dropped in for a tasty snack. As the man – who has not been named – dozed on his patio in his detached home near Ipswich, the seagull swooped from the sky, and with one bite of its beak ripped away the right testicle. He woke screaming in agony, and saw the bird flying away with one of his ‘crown jewels’ wedged in its yellow beak.
|
1861
|
"Ammonia used in many foods, not just ""pink slime""."
|
Surprise rippled across America last month as a new wave of consumers discovered that hamburgers often contained ammonia-treated beef, or what critics dub “pink slime”.
|
true
|
Science News
|
"Packs of ground beef are seen in a crate at the Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Market meat processing facility in Riverside, California, March 29, 2012. U.S. meat packers' losses on beef sales have doubled since a controversy over ammonia-treated scraps dubbed ""pink slime"" exploded some weeks ago, with margins nearing their lowest in at least 22 years, an industry estimate showed. Fresh & Easy says they do not use the ammonia-treated filler in their beef products. REUTERS/Alex Gallardo What they may not have known is that ammonia - often associated with cleaning products - was cleared by U.S. health officials nearly 40 years ago and is used in making many foods, including cheese. Related compounds have a role in baked goods and chocolate products. Using small amounts of ammonia to make food is not unusual to those expert in high-tech food production. Now that little known world is coming under increasing pressure from concerned consumers who want to know more about what they are eating. “I think we’re seeing a sea change today in consumers’ concerns about the presence of ingredients in foods, and this is just one example,” said Michael Doyle, director of the University of Georgia’s Center for Food Safety. Ammonia, known for its noxious odor, became a hot topic last month with the uproar over what the meat industry calls “finely textured beef” and what a former U.S. government scientist first called “pink slime”. Used as a filler for ground beef, it is made from fatty trimmings that are more susceptible to contamination than other cuts of beef, and are therefore sprayed with ammonium hydroxide - ammonia mixed with water - to remove pathogens such as salmonella and E.coli. After critics highlighted the product on social media websites and showed unappetizing photos on television, calling it “pink slime,” the nation’s leading fast-food chains and supermarkets spurned the product, even though U.S. public health officials deem it safe to eat. Hundreds of U.S. school districts also demanded it be removed from school lunch programs. One producer, Beef Products Inc, has since idled three factories. Another, AFA Foods, filed for bankruptcy protection. The outrage, which many experts say has been fueled by the term “pink slime,” seems more about the unsavoriness of the product rather than its safety. “This is not a health issue,” said Bill Marler, a prominent food safety lawyer. “This is an ‘I’m grossed out by this’ issue.” Still, critics of so-called “Big Food” point out that while “pink slime” and the ammonia in it may not be harmful, consumer shock over their presence points to a wider issue. “The food supply is full of all sorts of chemical additives that people don’t know about,” said Michele Simon, a public health lawyer and president of industry watchdog consulting firm Eat Drink Politics. The meat industry has been trying to raise awareness of other foods that contain ammonia, in response to what it has characterized as an unfair attack on a safe and healthy product. For example, ammonia compounds are used as leavening agents in baked goods and as an acidity controller in cheese and sometimes chocolate. “Ammonia’s not an unusual product to find added to food,” Gary Acuff, director of Texas A&M University’s Center for Food Safety, told a recent press conference hosted by Beef Products Inc. “We use ammonia in all kinds of foods in the food industry.” Kraft Foods Inc, whose brands include Chips Ahoy cookies and Velveeta cheese, is one company that uses very small amounts of ammonium compounds in some of its products. It declined to specify which products. “Sometimes ingredient names sound more complicated than they are,” said Kraft spokeswoman Angela Wiggins. She also pointed out that ammonia, made up of nitrogen and hydrogen, occurs naturally in plants, animals, water, air and in some foods, including milk. Wiggins said that in turning milk to cheese, a tiny amount of ammonium hydroxide is added to a starter dairy culture to reduce the culture’s acidity and encourage cheese cultures to grow. “It is somewhat similar to activating yeast for dough by adding warm water, sugar and salt to create the proper environment for yeast growth,” Wiggins said. In the case of ammonium phosphate, used as a leavening agent in baking, she said the heat during baking causes the gas to evaporate so no ammonia is left in the product. “It is quite similar to adding wine to a sauce and cooking away the alcohol.” Compounds such as ammonium hydroxide, ammonium phosphate and ammonium chloride are considered safe in small amounts. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted ammonium hydroxide status as a GRAS, or Generally Recognized as Safe, substance in 1974. Ammonium hydroxide is also an acceptable ingredient under the conditions of “good manufacturing practices” in dozens of foods, from soft drinks to soups to canned vegetables, according to the General Standards for Food Additives set forth by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, a group funded by the World Health Organization and the United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization. A trip to the grocery store revealed ammonium chloride - a salt - present in Wonder Bread and Chef Boyardee Mini Ravioli, made by ConAgra Foods. Ammonium phosphate, another type of salt, is listed on Chips Ahoy cookies. But ammonium hydroxide, the chemical often used to sanitize the “pink slime,” was harder to find. That is because it is often considered a “processing aid,” which is not required by U.S. regulators to be included on food labels. “If it helps facilitate a process, it’s not required and (if) it’s used at a percent less than 1 percent, it doesn’t have to be declared on the label,” said Roger Clemens, president of the Institute of Food Technologists and chief scientific officer of E.T. Horn Co, a private chemical and ingredient company. He said ammonia in food is now being used less than before, as replacement products gain popularity. Kansas Governor Sam Brownback (L), Texas Governor Rick Perry (C) and Iowa Governor Terry Branstad (R) examine a package of the beef product known as pink slime or lean finely textured beef during a tour of Beef Products Inc.'s plant in South Sioux City, Nebraska March 29, 2012, where the beef product is made. The governors of Iowa, Texas and Kansas and lieutenant governors of Nebraska and South Dakota toured the plant to show their support for the company and the several thousand jobs it creates in Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota and Texas. REUTERS/Nati Harnik/Pool When asked if their products were made with ammonium hydroxide, Sara Lee Corp, Hormel Foods, Kellogg and ConAgra said they were not. Hershey said it uses “natural cocoa” in most of its chocolates, but in the few products that use “alkalized cocoa,” it uses potassium carbonate, not ammonium hydroxide. General Mills said the company does not discuss its production processes. Campbell Soup Co did not respond to repeated requests for comment."
|
3721
|
Failing ice cellars signal changes in Alaska whaling towns.
|
For generations, people in Alaska’s far-north villages have relied on hand-built ice cellars dug deep into the permafrost to age their whale and walrus meat to perfection and keep it cold throughout the year.
|
true
|
Climate, AP Top News, Climate change, Whales, General News, Alaska, Lifestyle, Science, U.S. News, Weekend Reads
|
Scores of the naturally refrigerated food caches lie beneath these largely Inupiat communities, where many rely on hunting and fishing to feed their families. The ice cellars range from small arctic root cellars to spacious, wood-lined chambers, some topped with sheds. Now, a growing number of these underground cellars are being rendered unreliable as global warming and other modern factors force changes to an ancient way of life. Some whaling villages are working to adapt as more cellars — some stocked with tons of subsistence food — turn up with pooling water and mold. “I’m worried,” said Gordon Brower, a whaling captain who lives in Utqiagvik, the nation’s northernmost community, which logged its warmest May through September on record this year. His family has two ice cellars: One is more than 100 years old and used to store at least 2 tons (1.8 metric tons) of frozen bowhead whale meat set aside for community feasts; the other was built in 1955, and is used as the family’s private subsistence-food cache. Brower recently asked his son to retrieve some whale meat from one of the cellars, and discovered liquids had collected in both. “He came back and said, ‘Dad, there’s a pool of blood and water at the bottom,’” recalled Brower, the North Slope Borough’s planning and development director. He pulled the community meat outside and has kept it under a tarp because the weather is cold enough now to keep it from spoiling. “It seems like slight temporary variations in the permafrost — that active layer — is affecting the temperature of our cellar,” Brower said. Residents and researchers say the problem has been building for decades as a warming climate touches multiple facets of life in the far north — thawing permafrost, disruptions in hunting patterns and shorter periods of coastal ice that historically protected coastal communities from powerful storms. Other factors include development and soil conditions. The changes have increased vulnerability to foodborne illnesses and raised concerns about food security, according to studies by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. The group and state health officials say they have so far not heard of anyone getting sick. There were once at least 50 ice cellars in Point Hope, an Inupiat whaling village built on a triangular spit surrounded by a large inlet and the Chukchi and Arctic oceans. Now, fewer than 20 remain, according to village services supervisor Russell Lane, a whaling captain who has lived his 52 years in the community of 750. The problems with cellars have become more pronounced in the past two decades, he said. To compensate, Point Hope whaling captains have use of three walk-in freezers that were donated for use by the whaling community. But the much colder freezers do not impart the taste of aged whale meat so favored throughout the region. Lane himself initially stores meat in the traditional ice cellar his wife’s family owns, frequently checking it until it reaches the right maturity before he transfers it to a freezer. “It’s definitely a challenge at this time to be able to feed our people that acquired taste,” Lane said. Despite the unprecedented rate of climate change today, however, ice cellars failed in the past, including one account of a cellar developing mold in the early 1900s, according to a study published in 2017 that looked at traditional cellars in Utqiagvik, formerly named Barrow, following reports of flooded and collapsed cellars. The study, funded by the National Science Foundation and George Washington University, found ice cellars don’t meet federally recommended temperature standards, but allow the culturally preferred aging to occur. The study was inconclusive about the cause of ice cellar failures, citing an absence of extensive scientific analysis. Researchers mapped 71 ice cellar locations around town and monitored five functioning cellars from 2005 to 2015, finding little thermal change over that relatively short timeframe. One of those cellars has since failed, however, and another is starting to collapse, according to one of the study’s authors, George Washington University research scientist Kelsey Nyland. The study concluded that while a changing climate has great potential to affect ice cellars, there are other factors, including soil conditions and urban development. For example, some Utqiagvik residents might inadvertently warm the soil beneath their cellars by putting sheds on top of the entrances to keep them free of snow, Nyland said. “Climate change, air temperatures, all these physical changes are affecting them,” she said. “But also, a lot of it has to do with development and modern life in an arctic setting.” To adapt to the new environment, the village of Kaktovik, on the Beaufort Sea coast, took ambitious steps after it lost all but one family’s cellar to flooding. In 2013, the village launched a project to build a community ice cellar incorporating traditional designs with contemporary technology used in Alaska’s North Slope oil fields — thermosyphons, off-grid tubelike refrigeration devices that cool the ground by transferring heat outside. The hand-excavated cellar was ready for use in 2017, but it has yet to be filled. Whaling captains want to expand it first, according to whaling captain George Kaleak Sr., who represents Kaktovik on the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission. Temperature sensors inside the cellar show it’s working as intended, Kaleak said. He expects the expansion to begin as early as next spring. In the meantime, subsistence foods are stored in three 40-foot (12-meter) village freezer vans. But that equipment is no substitute for imparting that aged taste so prized in the region, Kaleak noted. He hopes the new cellar mimics that process. “There’s nothing that tastes better than ice cellar food,” he said. ___ Follow Rachel D’Oro at https://twitter.com/rdoro
|
34360
|
Bill Clinton was expelled from Oxford University for raping a British classmate named Eileen Wellstone.
|
All in all, the rumors about Bill Clinton’s having been expelled from Oxford over a rape allegation appear to have stemmed from a single uncorroborated, anonymous second-hand report published on a web site of dubious repute in 1999, combined with mere speculation about Clinton’s having departed Oxford prior to the completion of a full two-year course of study. We haven’t yet turned up anything that would counter the notion that the “Eileen Wellstone” claim was simply a fabrication made up in 1999.
|
unproven
|
Crime, bill clinton, crime, eileen wellstone
|
As the 2016 presidential campaign closed in on the finish line, the Washington Post published an eleven-year-old tape of Republican nominee Donald Trump’s making controversial remarks about women. The inevitable partisan rancor that ensued largely targeted the behavior Bill Clinton, husband of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, including the repetition of rumors that he had been expelled from Oxford University in 1969 for raping classmate Eileen Wellstone. The allegations weren’t new — Republican opposition research strategist Roger Stone had tweeted about them a year earlier: In 1969, Bill Clinton was expelled from Oxford for raping nineteen-year-old Eileen Wellstone.… https://t.co/sxR2lCRQ2w — Roger Stone (@RogerJStoneJr) October 13, 2015 The backdrop for these rumors was that just prior to his graduation from Georgetown University, Bill Clinton won a prestigious Rhodes Scholarship to study at University College, Oxford, for two years and headed off to England for the 1968-69 academic term — but he returned to the United States before finishing out the full two-year course of study. In October 1992, during Bill Clinton’s first presidential campaign, a British news report included interviews with a number of Clinton’s Oxford classmates. The article described Clinton’s truncated study trajectory at Oxford as one that was disrupted by the Vietnam-era draft, not by penalties for misbehavior. Had Clinton left Oxford under dubious circumstances, reporting on such a scoop just prior to the presidential election of 1992 would have been irresistible for the British (and American) press. But Clinton’s classmates made absolutely no mention of his departing abruptly or in disgrace: Clinton never completed his degree. In part this was due to his worry about the draft. According to one contemporary, he thought his first year would be his last and so there was little point in doing the work for a two-year degree; in his second year it was too late to start. This was not seen to matter. Many American Rhodes scholars treated their time at Oxford as a version of the Grand Tour. They had their degree and planned to go to law school when they returned to the US; Oxford was an interesting interlude. Clinton’s non-completion of the scholar program at Oxford was public knowledge more than 20 years prior to the origination of rumors that he had been expelled from that university for sexual misconduct. And as documented in a separate article on this site, Clinton’s efforts to avoid the military draft (ostensibly by joining the ROTC at the University of Arkansas) were the likely reason behind the timing of his movements between the U.S. and England. Nonetheless, by June 2004 the Eileen Wellstone rape allegation had appeared in the Washington Times, published in an article that lacked an author, a citation, or any other information supporting the claim: Bill Clinton calls his sexual encounters with White House intern Monica Lewinsky “immoral and foolish” and said his “relationship” with Gennifer Flowers was one he “should not have had.” But in his autobiography flying out of bookstores, he doesn’t mention several other women whose names were linked in scandal with his … He is less forthcoming about, or does not mention, other women who say they were either sexually involved with him, or that they had been sexually harassed or assaulted. These include: – Eileen Wellstone, an English woman who said Mr. Clinton sexually assaulted her after she met him at a pub near Oxford University where Mr. Clinton was a student in 1969. Although often unattributed, the claim appears to have originated with a February 1999 article on Capitol Hill Blue (a web site known for publishing dubious information at that time). That primary iteration (since deleted) mentioned nothing about Clinton’s having been expelled from Oxford, but it alleged — based on a second-hand report from an anonymous source — that Wellstone had accused Clinton of sexually assaulting her during his time at Oxford: Eileen Wellstone, 19-year-old English woman, said Clinton sexually assaulted her after she met him at a pub near the Oxford where the future President was a student in 1969. A retired State Department employee, who asked not to be identified, confirmed that he spoke with the family of the girl and filed a report with his superiors. Clinton admitted having sex with the girl, but claimed it was consensual. The victim’s family declined to pursue the case. In an interview with Capitol Hill Blue, the retired State Department employee said he believed the story Miss Wellstone, the young English woman who said Clinton raped her in 1969. “There was no doubt in my mind that this young woman had suffered severe emotional trauma,” he said. “But we were under tremendous pressure to avoid the embarrassment of having a Rhodes Scholar charged with rape. I filed a report with my superiors and that was the last I heard of it.” Miss Wellstone, who is now married and lives near London, confirmed the incident when contacted, but refused to discuss the matter further. She said she would not go public with further details of the attack. Afterwards, she changed her phone number and hired a barrister who warned a reporter to stay away from his client. In his book, Unlimited Access, former FBI agent Gary Aldrich reported that Clinton left Oxford University for a “European Tour” in 1969 and was told by University officials that he was no longer welcome there. Aldrich said Clinton’s academic record at Oxford was lackluster. Clinton later accepted a scholarship for Yale Law School and did not complete his studies at Oxford. Oxford officials refused comment. The State Department also refused to comment on the incident. A Freedom of Information request filed by Capitol Hill Blue failed to turn up any records of the incident. This account doesn’t jibe with the timeline established in our own research and stated elsewhere, which has Clinton in the United States (not on a “European tour”) during the summer of 1969, and then returning to England for his second year at Oxford (rather than being told “he was no longer welcome there”) where he remained at least as late as January 1970: In his second year at Oxford, Clinton shared a house at 46 Leckford Road with Aller, Strobe Talbot, now an editor at Time, and David Satter, now a judge in Massachusetts. Mandy Merck, now lecturing on feminist writing in New York, arrived at Oxford as an American graduate student in 1969. She met Clinton in her second term and recalls going with him and Sara Maitland, in January 1970, to hear Germaine Greer deliver a lecture on women in literature. Roger Stone was a primary catalyst of the rumor’s spread. But while he maintained in 2014 that Clinton was expelled from Oxford over a sexual assault incident, he said in 2015 that little to no action was taken. His later reference didn’t involve Clinton’s expulsion and hinged on what Stone “believed” may have taken place: Ironically, Bill Clinton’s first alleged rape was of a 19-year-old coed named Eileen Wellstone. We believe that he was not prosecuted because the State Department did not want a Rhodes Scholar charged with rape. Stone also made two mentions of Wellstone in his 2015 book The Clintons’ War on Women, co-authored by Robert Morrow, who was the subject of a 2008 Tampa Bay Times profile which didn’t imply an overabundance of credibility or tendency toward critical examination of Clinton conspiracies: Robert Morrow is on a roll, talking loud enough to draw wary glances from two women lunching nearby at Macaroni Grill. “Chelsea is the seed of Web Hubbell and not Bill Clinton. Would I bet my life on it? No. I would bet my pickup truck,” he declares between bites of salmon. “Hillary Clinton was sleeping with both of her law partners, Webb Hubbell and Vince Foster. And she’s a lesbian, too.” Morrow, a perpetually indignant, single 43-year-old, pretty much devotes his life to hating the Clintons and spreading wild, unsubstantiated allegations about them. With no job except occasional day trading of stocks, Morrow spends anywhere from one to 10 hours a day researching Clinton dirt or e-mailing and phoning reporters across the country about his conclusions. “I’ve got other aspects of my life when I’m not, you know, stopping Clinton pond scum,” insists Morrow, who has no steady job but enjoys a family inheritance. Lack of proof means nothing to Morrow. Morrow started his anti-Clinton crusade about three years ago, when he decided he needed to devote himself to making sure Hillary Clinton never wins the White House. He can’t pinpoint what set him on this path beyond his conviction that the Clintons are ruthless “sociopaths that need to be crushed and defeated.” Stone and Morrow’s book contained two passages about Wellstone which appeared be be based on second- or third-hand information. Moreover, those passages contained contradictory information: in one, the authors said Clinton’s expulsion or coerced departure from Oxford “could not be confirmed”; in another, the authors plainly asserted without qualification that Clinton had been expelled. And all of the cited information traced back to the single questionable 1999 Capitol Hill Blue report: The original Capitol Hill Blue piece included several instances that all followed the same pattern: A young woman whom no one had ever heard of (in most cases the women weren’t even identified by name) had supposedly accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault decades earlier but had declined to pursue any charges against him at the time. Capitol Hill Blue somehow managed to track all these women down, and all of them allegedly “confirmed” their experiences — yet none of them was directly quoted, and all of them declined to go on record or discuss the matter any further. Moreover all of these incidents were coincidentally also “confirmed” by other people (e.g., government officials, retired policemen, former students), none of whom was identified by name or directly quoted either. Even more curiously, as far as we know no one else has ever located, talked to, or interviewed Eileen Wellstone or any of the other women referenced in Capitol Hill Blue who were supposedly the victim of sexual assaults by Bill Clinton between 1969 and 1974. Nor has anyone else ever identified, located, talked to, or interviewed the anonymous State Department official and others who purportedly “confirmed” these rumors.
|
10702
|
In melanoma patients, immune therapy may boost survival
|
"In just 310 words, this story covered key points of study results clearly, concisely and without hyperbole. It used terms like ""may boost survival…may provide a new way…modest success"" instead of overstating. It is a difficult balance reporting on promising study results for a terrible disease and doing so without sensationalism. This story found that balance nicely. It proves that in only 310 words, health news stories can do a reasonable job addressing our criteria on how new findings should be reported."
|
true
|
"Not applicable. Costs not discussed but we understand that at this point in the research. Nonetheless, we wish the story had used even one short line, as the Wall Street Journal did, to say the drugmaker said it was too soon to discuss pricing. Good job on this, especially putting results in context in calm, measured terms: Good job quantifying the harms found in the study, the severity of those harms, and including one – death (in 1.5% of patients on the experimental approach) – that many news stories didn’t report. The story didn’t discuss a key point raised in some other stories, such as one by TheStreet.com that reported that the study ""lacked a comparison to a placebo or true control, which makes the results harder to interpret."" No disease mongering in this story. The study author was interviewed along with a clinician who has used the drug. Drug company funding of the study was disclosed. Story explains that this is ""the first drug to improve advanced melanoma patients’ survival in a large, definitive trial."" The story was clear about the experimental stage of the approach. The novelty – that is ""the first drug to improve advanced melanoma patients’ survival in a large, definitive trial"" – was explained. It’s clear the story didn’t rely on a news release."
|
|
30276
|
"A photograph shows a ""cow crusher,"" a device designed to literally crush cows."
|
Photographs and videos of farming equipment are often met with incredulity by those unfamiliar with farm life. In April 2016, for instance, a video of a Fistulated Cow caused consternation as it was shared along with the largely inaccurate accusation that it showed a form of animal abuse.
|
false
|
Fauxtography, cattle crush, cow crush, cows
|
An image showing a cow inside of a strange metal device was shared online in July 2018 along with a caption saying it depicts a “cow crusher” — a device designed to crush cows: Cow crushers designed to crush cows to death is one horrid thing but this is a whole new level or cow torture! This device gives farmers a kick from LITERALLY crushes the poor animal whilst rotating it up, down, side to side in a rapid movement controlled by a big tractor machine, shaking it around in HORROR! This is NOT a theme park! This poor cow had no hope, the blood would have rushed to her head until she passed out and who knows what the “farmers” did to the poor animal after that. All I know is that she is dead now and is probably covered in urine. I found this photo on google, which I thought was a G rates site. I WILL find the cowards who did this to poor Stephanie (my children named her that out of respect) and let it be known that my eldest son is in the group ANTIFA, so let that be a warning to anyone else who takes sexual pride in torturing poor animals. Have a great day, Sam 💋💄 The photograph is real and this device is sometimes referred to as a “livestock crush,” “cow crush,” or a “cattle crush.” However, it was not designed to “LITERALLY” crush cows. These enclosures are used to restrain livestock in order to give farmers and veterinarians the opportunity to safely administer various types of care to the animal. These devices can be a customized in different ways to accomplish specific tasks, but are most commonly used to perform routine operations such as tagging, weighing, and vaccinating large animals. The piece of equipment in the viral photograph is likely a sort of “tilt table” which gives farmers better access to the hooves. The research and marketing company Meat & Livestock Australia explained in a 2016 paper: Cattle have to be constrained during routine operations, such as recording, vaccinating, ear tagging, weighing and animal health tasks (and possibly veterinary procedures). A cattle crush holds the animal immobilised to minimise the risk of injury to both the animal and the handler. An effective livestock handling system requires a suitable choice from a wide range of commercially available cattle crushes. The operations to be performed will determine what features the crush will need, including veterinary sections, baulk gates, a squeeze mechanism or split side gates. Crushes to be used in the processing facility usually have more functions than those needed for hospital facilities. Functionality and ease of use by handlers should be prime considerations. Operator safety may be improved if the squeeze section of the crush is operated hydraulically or pneumatically rather than manually. All crushes should be made according to good manufacturing standards using quality materials. Cattle crushes can be equipped with ancillary equipment, such as chin bars and automated drafting systems. Electronic scales and a National Livestock Identification System (NLIS) identification reader are now standard in most feedlot cattle crushes. Here’s a video of a similar hydraulic cattle crush in action: This safe and stressless, easy to operate crate can be controlled using electro-hydraulics or by using the tractor spool valves. It is easy to transport and is galvanised for instant cleaning and longevity.
|
16935
|
Jim Rubens Says when armed civilians stop mass shootings with guns, an average of 2.5 people die; otherwise, an average of 18 people die.
|
For Jessica Lescault there is no question that her 6-year old English bulldog “Moose” deserves cutting-edge biotechnology cancer treatment as much as any human patient.
|
false
|
New Hampshire, Guns, Jim Rubens,
|
“Pets are your loved ones, pets should be your family, pets are not something you keep on a chain in the backyard,” the intensive-care nurse from Somers, Connecticut, said. Lescault, 43, who enrolled Moose in a clinical trial of an experimental drug designed to help his immune system fight his cancer, represents the type of pet lover that has spurred animal health companies around the globe to invest in developing complex new treatments previously reserved for humans. Biotechnology, which produces medicines from living cells, revolutionized the drug industry more than a quarter century ago with breakthrough medicines at prices that now run as high as hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. In recent years, the cost of genetic testing and biotech drug production has fallen sharply, making biotechnology for pets financially viable at much lower prices, industry experts said. For a FACTBOX, click Sector leader Zoetis (ZTS.N) and others say animal drug development is faster, less expensive and more predictable than drugs for people. “It’s not nearly as common for pivotal studies to fail in animal health as it is in human medicine. Most of them are successful,” said Cheryl London, professor in comparative oncology at Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University in Massachusetts. Biotech drugs for pets, if proven safe and effective, would be a boon to a $44 billion veterinary medicines market currently dominated by vaccines, flea and tick repellents and anti-infectives. A recent product launch has galvanized the industry. Cytopoint for canine itch relief sold by Zoetis reached blockbuster status by animal health standards in its second year on the market. Launched in late 2016, Cytopoint generated 2018 sales of $129 million, and first-quarter 2019 sales jumped 65% from a year earlier. Produced from cloned genetically engineered hamster cells over at least eight bio-processing steps, the monoclonal antibody is no less complex than comparable therapeutic proteins used in human medicine. But the cost to consumers is far less. Like many biotech drugs, dose and cost is determined by weight. Zoetis declined to disclose its prices. But an animal hospital in Stamford, Connecticut, for example, charges $104 for a 40-pound (18 kg) dog. For much smaller dogs, a Cytopoint injection, which lasts about four to eight weeks, costs about $35 to $50. To keep a large dog from scratching itself raw could run $140 per shot. The cost of a highly effective new anti-itch biotech drug to treat severe atopic dermatitis in humans can run about $30,000 a year. “Cytopoint was a turning point that has made it clear that (biotech drugs) can be successful in this space,” London said. “Now there are an estimated five to ten companies developing antibodies for the veterinary market.” That has created increased business for related services. “It’s a big challenge for us to keep up with the pace of demand growth,” said Klaus Hellmann, managing director at Munich-based Klifovet AG, Europe’s largest contractor for late-stage clinical trials of veterinary drugs. While Cytopoint sparked investment interest in biotech treatments for animals, drug development still comes with inherent risks and uncertainty. Aratana Therapeutics Inc’s canine lymphoma drug, Blontress, was launched in 2015, but later withdrawn after scientific data led the company to determine it was unlikely to be a financial success. Declining costs has mitigated some of the risk. “Over the past several years, human health has been able to advance the technology to improve efficiency of their cell production systems,” said Rob Polzer, head of global therapeutics research for Zoetis. Zoetis can repurpose and optimize existing procedures, mechanisms of action and technologies, it said. The company is seeking approval for a biotech medicine to treat osteoarthritic pain in cats, with plans for a 2021 market launch and a similar product for dogs thereafter. Others have jumped on the bandwagon. German start-up Adivo was spun out of biotech firm Morphosys (MORG.DE) in March 2018 out of frustration by its founders that scientific advances for humans were not translating into better treatment options for their dogs. It has since struck a global collaboration deal with Bayer’s (BAYGn.DE) animal health unit for its early-stage research platform for animal-specific monoclonal antibodies - the backbone of biotechnology. “Over the last few years, the veterinary market has seen an incredibly dynamic development,” said Adivo co-founder Kathrin Ladetzki-Baehs. This could prove a lifesaver for Moose, the bulldog in the oncology drug trial. In early August, Lescault discovered a mass on Moose’s throat, soon followed by deteriorating health and a diagnosis of canine B-cell lymphoma. Moose was given one to two months to live without treatment or about a year with 25 weeks of punishing chemotherapy. Lescault’s local vet suggested the Tufts trial testing an experimental protein that could help advance the current immuno-oncology craze into the animal health arena. Tufts declined to disclose the compound or the study’s sponsor. But more than three weeks into the trial, Moose’s cough and labored breathing has disappeared and he is back to his playful and boisterous self, Lescault said. While treatment in a clinical trial is free, Lescault said she would not hesitate to pay thousands of dollars for a safe and effective drug to save Moose. “I wouldn’t blink an eye,” she said. That is exactly what drug companies are banking on.
|
16912
|
"FIFA ""pressured Brazil into passing a so-called Budweiser bill, allowing beer sales in soccer stadiums."
|
"Oliver called out FIFA for having ""pressured Brazil into passing a so-called Budweiser bill, allowing beer sales in soccer stadiums."" There is no doubt that FIFA demanded beer be allowed to be sold at this summer’s World Cup, and that it was part of an agreement to host the World Cup in the first place. That fits a typical definition of pressure. Oliver took a bit more creative license in calling it the ""so-called Budweiser bill,"" but the characterization does not diminish Oliver’s overall point."
|
true
|
Sports, PunditFact, John Oliver,
|
"Brazilians are famous for their passion for soccer, though the fervor sometimes is so intense that people die. The country’s lawmakers banned alcohol at stadiums 11 years ago in effort to curb game-related violence. One problem: Budweiser, famous for its beer, is a major sponsor of the 2014 FIFA World Cup being held in Brazil. So something had to give. And according to comedian John Oliver, it was the alcohol ban. ""The amazing thing is here FIFA won. They successfully pressured Brazil into passing a so-called Budweiser bill, allowing beer sales in soccer stadiums,"" Oliver said June 8 on his HBO show Last Week Tonight. ""And at this point you can either be horrified by that or relieved that FIFA was not also sponsored by cocaine and chainsaws."" We decided to investigate the brewhaha. FIFA spokeswoman Delia Fisher said ""there is no Budweiser bill,"" though ""it’s that at the World Cup we will be able to sell beer, and that was part of our requirements."" Brazil knew about FIFA’s requirements when it bid to host the World Cup, she said. Indeed, Budweiser and Brahma, owned by Belgian-Brazilian company Anheuser-Busch InBev, are on tap and will be sold in plastic cups at matches, she said. So what happened? Oliver’s research team sent us many news stories to back up his claim, including a January 2012 CNN International story highlighting the controversy and comments from FIFA secretary general Jerome Valcke. ""Alcoholic drinks are part of the FIFA World Cup, so we’re going to have them,"" Valcke said in January 2012. ""Excuse me if I sound a bit arrogant, but that's something we won't negotiate."" Valcke was also irritated about the country’s all-around lack of progress for the tournament. His comments, in turn, outraged Brazilians two years ago, with leaders at one point refusing to meet with him. Slowly and controversially, FIFA got what it wanted. A World Cup-related bill passed Brazil’s Senate in May 2012 and President Dilma Rousseff signed it into law in June 2012. Rousseff announced a temporary amendment that allowed beer to be sold at the World Cup and also the Confederations Cup in 2013. The bill that passed actually did not explicitly authorize beer sales at the matches, but government leaders said it allowed Brazil to lift the alcohol ban during the World Cup month, per FIFA’s demand. One senator explained the law simply ratified what the executive branch had already done by agreeing to FIFA’s requirements when it bid for the Cup, according to an Associated Press account. In short, the bill that passed in Brazil set the guidelines for hosting the World Cup. And by not including a ban on alcohol, alcohol effectively is permitted. Oliver referred to the measure as a ""so-called Budweiser bill,"" but we did not find that characterization widely spread in news stories in a Nexis search, though the connection is unmistakable. His research team pointed to the phrase used in a New Zealand study of alcohol consumption at sporting events (referring to FIFA’s lobbying in Brazil over beer) and also on a blog called Left Foot Forward. This probably won’t be the last time we hear about a country bending its alcohol prohibitions to please FIFA. Similar stadium bans exist in Russia, host of the 2018 World Cup, and Qatar, the small Middle Eastern country that will host in 2022. Our ruling Oliver called out FIFA for having ""pressured Brazil into passing a so-called Budweiser bill, allowing beer sales in soccer stadiums."" There is no doubt that FIFA demanded beer be allowed to be sold at this summer’s World Cup, and that it was part of an agreement to host the World Cup in the first place. That fits a typical definition of pressure. Oliver took a bit more creative license in calling it the ""so-called Budweiser bill,"" but the characterization does not diminish Oliver’s overall point."
|
3450
|
Notre Dame: Lead fears prompt new cleanup rules, equipment.
|
Cleanup work at fire-ravaged Notre Dame Cathedral will resume later this month but under stricter lead-protection rules, amid growing public concern about toxic pollution.
|
true
|
Health, General News, Notre Dame Cathedral, International News, Paris, Europe, Pollution
|
Under pressure from labor inspectors concerned about lead risks, the Paris region administration suspended cleanup work at the cathedral last week, and ordered new checks of schools and nurseries in the neighborhood. The administration announced in a statement Friday that workers will be allowed back starting Aug. 12, but in smaller numbers and with tougher new decontamination measures and equipment “to prevent any release of polluting elements to the outside.” Critics say authorities didn’t move fast enough to protect workers and residents when the cathedral’s massive lead roof and spire melted in the April fire, spewing toxic dust into the Paris air. A lawsuit has been filed, and a union-led collective is demanding the “total confinement” of the site. Astronomical levels of lead were measured in the area at the time. And they remain exceptionally high at some spots inside the cathedral, and in soil of the adjacent park and forecourt, according to the Paris regional health agency. Those areas have been closed to the public since April 15 and are likely to stay that way for years. No dangerous levels have been registered, however, in nearby streets, where tourists and residents continue to circulate and souvenir shops and restaurants have reopened. The health agency released a 109-page report last month detailing efforts to monitor lead levels among the population and in the soil and nearby buildings. But environmental groups say authorities weren’t aggressive or open enough about warning the public about lead levels at the time of the fire. Children are especially vulnerable to health problems from lead poisoning and exposure, so authorities ordered a deep clean for neighborhood schools and recommended blood tests for children under 7 and pregnant women who live near Notre Dame. The new security measures for the cathedral will limit the number of workers allowed inside at any time to 30-40 instead of the 60-70 currently allowed, at least until new decontamination kits are delivered in the autumn when the pace of work is expected to pick up. The main focus is “to ensure that the work doesn’t generate any pollution outside the work zone,” the statement said. ___ This story has been corrected to show that work will resume later this month, not next month.
|
28304
|
Jacob Walter Anderson repeatedly raped a young woman but received only a $400 fine and deferred probation as punishment.
|
"What's true: Anderson received a $400 fine, in addition to three years' probation, for the offense of ""unlawful restraint."" What's false: Anderson's punishment was not limited to a $400 fine, and he was not tried or convicted of rape. What's undetermined: Anderson was accused of raping a young woman, but the veracity of that allegation is unclear because he never faced a trial on charges of sexual assault, and therefore witnesses were not examined, crucial evidence is not publicly available, and a jury never issued a verdict."
|
mixture
|
Politics
|
Social media is often where activists, politicians, non-profit groups, or simply members of the public share their concerns and outrage over what they perceive as miscarriages of justice. Excessive punishments, racial disparities in sentencing, and an apparently permissive attitude towards sexual assault among some judges and prosecutors have all formed the basis of viral Facebook and Twitter memes in recent years. Towards the end of 2018 and in the beginning of 2019, one case in particular caught the attention of social media users: Jacob Walter Anderson, a former student and fraternity president at Baylor University in Texas, was accused of raping a sophomore outside a frat party but ended up receiving what many observers viewed as an outrageously insufficient punishment. NOTE: The following article includes details and descriptions of an alleged sexual assault, which might be upsetting to some readers. On 13 December 2018, Facebook user Lesley Templeton Keith posted what became a widely shared set of claims about Anderson’s case, accompanied by what was presented as a photograph of him: Disgusting. Disgrace. His name is Jacob Walter Anderson. ‘He nearly choked her to death [forcing his penis down her throat]. He raped her violently. He left her passed out in her own vomit — the rape exam confirmed rape.’ ‘If the 24-year-old successfully completes three years of deferred probation and pays a $400 fine, his criminal record will be wiped clean of the charge, and he won’t have to register as a sex offender, CNN affiliate KWKT said.’ Make him famous. The internet never forgets. Similarly, @Ness_Qwik tweeted on 11 December: “JACOB WALTER ANDERSON former president of Phi Delta Theta drugged, gagged, & repeatedly raped his victim til she lost consciousness. He got a $400 fine & will not have to register as a sex offender. Twitter please spread his name & face & fucking ruin him!” *Trigger Warning* JACOB WALTER ANDERSON former president of Phi Delta Theta drugged, gagged, & repeatedly raped his victim til she lost consciousness. He got a $400 fine & will not have to register as a sex offender. Twitter please spread his name & face & fucking ruin him! https://t.co/AvVKy76knt — Virgin Jones (@Ness_Qwikk) December 11, 2018 And on 12 December, @Nicoxw1 tweeted what appeared to be photographs of Anderson and 19th District Court Judge Ralph Strother, along with the following message: “On the left, Jacob Walter Anderson, who raped a virgin and left her unconscious. On the right, Judge Ralph Strother, who thought a $400 fine was appropriate. Remember their names and faces, this must follow them wherever they are for the rest of their lives.” On the left, Jacob Walter Anderson, who raped a virgin and left her unconscious. On the right, Judge Ralph Strother, who thought a $400 fine was appropriate. Remember their names and faces, this must follow them wherever they are for the rest of their lives. pic.twitter.com/KTQFIiMti6 — NicoXW (@Nicoxw1) December 12, 2018 Some of these claims were accurate, while others lacked context or left out relevant information. However, the central and most substantial claim, that Anderson brutally raped the woman and left her unconscious, remains unproven because the case never went to trial and therefore crucial evidence is not publicly available, no examination of witnesses took place, and no jury issued a verdict. Waco police arrested Anderson on 3 March 2016 over an incident that had taken place at a party almost two weeks earlier, as the Waco Tribune-Herald reported at the time: The 20-year-old Phi Delta Theta president at Baylor University was arrested on a sexual assault charge for allegedly forcing himself on a woman outside of a fraternity party, Waco police Sgt. W. Patrick Swanton said. Jacob Anderson was charged after a female was taken to Baylor Scott & White Hillcrest Medical Center for a sexual-assault medical exam following a fraternity party at a house in the 2600 block of South Third Street on Feb. 21. Hospital officials notified Waco police of the alleged assault. “The female said that she had been at a party at a fraternity in South Waco. She said she was handed a drink of some kind of punch and was told, ‘Here you go. Drink this,’” Swanton said, citing police reports. “She said shortly after that she became very disoriented, was taken outside by our suspect, who is Jacob Walter Anderson, and she said when they got outside, Anderson forcibly sexually assaulted her.” According to the arrest affidavit, Anderson took the victim “to a secluded part of the grounds behind a tent in order to get some air, however once away from everyone else attending the party” he sexually assaulted the woman. Court documents stated that the victim lost consciousness, but awoke alone a short time later in the same outside area before returning to the house and finding a friend, who took her immediately to the hospital. On 11 May, the office of McLennan County District Attorney Abelino Reyna indicted Anderson on four counts of sexual assault, a second-degree felony under Texas law punishable by between two and 20 years in prison. The indictment alleged that Anderson had repeatedly raped the young woman, both vaginally and orally. In a victim impact statement submitted to Judge Ralph Strother, the young woman outlined her account of the night in question, using details and descriptions that some readers might find upsetting (Snopes is not identifying the woman in order to protect her privacy, as is standard practice in the news media in sexual assault cases): On February 21, 2016 when I was a 19 year old Sophomore at Baylor University, Jacob Walter Anderson took me to a secluded area behind a tent and proceeded to violently and repeatedly rape me. He repeatedly raped me orally and vaginally while choking me, gagging me and physically forcing my body into positions so he could continue to rape me. I had no control over my body and no way to stop him (please see my original written police statement). When I collapsed on the ground he pulled down his pants and shoved his penis in my mouth and down my throat gagging me. When he forcefully picked me up and shoved me into a wall to rape me vaginally from behind he calmly and coldly said “It’s fine. You’re fine.” When I tried to pull up my pants or sit he shoved me to the ground and shoved his penis back down my throat and continued to choke me. When he forced me up again and started to rape me vaginally again I blacked out permanently. When I was completely unconscious he dumped me face down in the dirt and left me there to die. He had taken what he wanted, had proven his power over my body. He then walked home and went to bed without a second thought to the ravaged, half dead woman he had left behind. When I regained consciousness I did not know where I was. I was lying in the grass and dirt and something sticky was on my face. As I continued to throw up I realized I had been vomiting and aspirating while I was unconscious. My friends immediately took me to the hospital and a SANE exam verified the rape. I had trauma and tearing and grass inside my vagina. I was treated for HIV and many STDs and told to take plan B. I had to get labs done two more times over the next year to make sure I do not have HIV or STDs. Everytime is stressful, wondering if I might still die as a result of being raped. The police arrived and took a report. Over the course of two years, defense and prosecution attorneys supboenaed witnesses and examined evidence, and in February 2018 the woman filed a lawsuit against Anderson and 21 other members of the Baylor University Phi Delta Theta fraternity, accusing them of facilitating and contributing to her alleged sexual assault in multiple ways — including allegedly allowing her drink to be drugged, serving alcohol to minors, and in general, being negligent with respect to the safety of guests at the February 2016 party in question. In his response to the lawsuit, Anderson denied each of the woman’s allegations and demanded a jury trial in civil court. As of 15 February 2019, that civil case was ongoing. The criminal case against Anderson took a dramatic turn on 23 August 2018, when the Waco Tribune-Herald reported that the District Attorney’s office would be agreeing to a plea bargain in the case: “A former Baylor University fraternity president who is charged with four counts of sexual assault has reached a plea agreement with the McLennan County District Attorney’s Office. Jacob Walter Anderson, 23, of Garland, is set to enter a plea Sept. 4, according to court records, which do not specify the terms of the plea bargain. The records show only that state prosecutors intend to file a superseding charging document, likely to a lesser charge than sexual assault, in exchange for Anderson’s plea.” That decision was made without consulting the woman, and in a later court filing her attorney, Vic Feazell, wrote that she had in fact found out about the impending plea bargain by reading the Tribune-Herald on 23 August. That evening, the woman’s mother emailed Feazell, asking: “What is going on? Why are we reading that the D.A. [District Attorney] is offering a plea less than sexual assault? This man raped our daughter four times and left her to die!” The same evening, the young woman’s father emailed McLennan County Assistant District Attorney Hilary LaBorde, the lead prosecutor against Anderson. According to that same court filing, he wrote: “A plea by this rapist to a lower crime is unacceptable and will not go away quietly. My daughter was brutally raped and left to die. Why is this rapist allowed to walk away from this crime? … The last time you spoke with my wife you said there would be no plea bargains.” We asked the McLennan County District Attorney’s office to respond to the claim that LaBorde had assured the victim’s family there would be no plea bargain, but we did not receive a response in time for publication. The day after the Tribune-Herald article was published, LaBorde emailed the young woman and her parents, apologizing that they had found out about the plea bargain through the news media, and outlining her reasons for dropping the sexual-assault charges. She referred to a recent case involving Hunter Michael Morgan, also a Baylor University student, accused of sexually assaulting an unconscious female student after a party at his apartment. In that case, LaBorde and her fellow prosecutors had also offered a plea bargain that would have lessened the charges to unlawful restraint, but Morgan rejected the deal and was acquitted of sexual assault at trial. Here are some excerpts from LaBorde’s email: I apologize for not telling you both about this agreement before there was a story in our newspaper. I didn’t know there would be a story about a plea that hasn’t occurred and about which nothing has been made public. I’ve accepted an offer on Jacob Anderson. It’s for probation on the charge of felony unlawful restraint not sexual assault — therefore, he will not have to register as a sex offender. I realize this is not the outcome we had hoped for or that I had originally offered, but I tried a very similar case to this one last month, and lost. Which was devastating to the family and victim involved. In light of the similarities between the cases, it’s my opinion it would be worse to try Anderson and lose and have the entire matter wiped from his criminal history than to accept this plea offer. Not to mention the emotional damage [the woman] would have to deal with if she had to testify and then felt the jury thought she was a liar. … The victim [in the Hunter Morgan case] had injuries to her genitals and the defendant’s DNA in her underwear. I actually thought the Hunter Morgan case was stronger than Jacob Anderson’s because Morgan admitted the victim was intoxicated, too intoxicated to consent, and he admitted he wasn’t intoxicated at all. One weakness I’ve always identified with Anderson is that he was drinking also — and although I think he’s exaggerating — he acts as though he was extremely intoxicated at the time he was at the frat party. … To speak frankly as to the injuries in [the] Anderson [case], the research suggests that victims with no sexual experience are more likely to be injured because a sexual encounter is their first. So medically speaking, [the woman’s] innocence and lack of experience makes the medical evidence less helpful. … In short, I think this jury [in the Morgan case] was looking for any excuse not to find an innocent-looking young defendant guilty. They engaged in a lot of victim blaming — and the behavior of that victim and [Anderson’s victim] is very similar. … While I can’t imagine the upset that y’all will feel at believing Anderson isn’t getting what he deserves, I don’t want him to get away with his crime entirely. Part of his probation will be getting sex offender treatment and alcohol treatment. Without these terms, and if he’s just found not guilty, there will be no reason to think his conduct will be different the next time he’s in a bar and finds a woman who can’t defend herself. Given the similarities, I’m surprised the defense attorneys on Anderson are willing to plea him to anything and I don’t want to squander the opportunity for there to be some consequence for him that might alter his behavior in the future. Four days later, on 28 August, the woman in the Anderson case emailed her attorney about LaBorde’s response in scathing terms, writing, “I truly feel betrayed by the one person who was able to get justice,” and adding: “The case she lost [Texas vs. Hunter Michael Morgan] is nothing like my case … Why is she so worried about [Anderson] getting counseling instead of him being convicted for rape? Put him in jail and he will not be able to rape another person! He can get counseling in jail!” The woman added that she felt “utter shock” at LaBorde’s rationale for offering Anderson a plea bargain, summarizing it as being “because she lost a completely different case so she didn’t trust a jury to do the right thing.” We asked the McLennan County District Attorney’s office for a detailed explanation of the decision to offer Anderson a plea bargain, but we did not receive a response in time for publication. In the end, the prosecutors did indeed drop all four charges of sexual assault against Anderson, and on 11 October 2018 indicted him on one charge of “unlawful restraint,” an offense defined as “intentionally or knowingly restraining another person.” Under Texas law, unlawful restraint is typically a misdemeanor crime, but it becomes a third-degree felony if the assailant “recklessly exposes the victim to a substantial risk of serious bodily injury.” Anderson was indicted on third-degree felony unlawful restraint, a crime punishable in Texas by a prison sentence of between two and 10 years. Under the terms of his plea agreement, Anderson pleaded “nolo contendere” (no contest) to the charge of unlawful restraint, an action that has the same effect as a guilty plea. However, in exchange for this plea, prosecutors agreed with Anderson’s lawyers that they would recommend to the judge the following punishment: The young woman and her attorney vociferously rejected the plea agreement and appealed to Judge Strother to dismiss it. On 22 November 2018, the woman submitted a lengthy and detailed statement to the court, pleading with the judge not to “set free the man who raped me and ruined my life”: “I am writing this letter to hold the D.A. accountable to do their job and seek justice. To hold Jacob Anderson accountable for his crimes. He raped me. He almost killed me. A grand jury indicted him on four counts of sexual assault, not unlawful restraint … There is no reason why this case should not go to trial. I would like this case to go to trial. The evidence should be heard. Witnesses should be heard. A judge and jury of [Anderson’s] peers should decide if he is innocent or guilty and then and only then should he be sentenced and have to register as a sex offender.” In the end, however, that jury trial never took place, and on 10 December 2018, Strother carried out the order of deferred adjudication probation for three years with several conditions for Anderson, including: Significantly, Anderson did not have to register as a sex offender because unlawful restraint was not one of the offenses that required such registration under Texas law. If he completes his three years of probation, he will not have to go to prison for his offense, and no conviction will appear on his criminal record. If he violates any of the terms of his probation, the court could convict him of unlawful restraint and impose a prison sentence of between two and 10 years. Some of the factual claims in the social media posts highlighted above were accurate, for example the claims that Anderson was ordered to pay a fine of $400 and did not have to register as a sex offender. The photographs included in the memes did indeed show Anderson and Judge Strother. However, the posts gave a limited picture of the penalties imposed upon Anderson. Notwithstanding the fact that many observers found the terms of the plea bargain to be woefully insufficient, Anderson’s punishment did extend beyond a mere $400 fine and included probation terms that, among other requirements, restricted his freedom of movement. None of the posts mentioned the fact that if Anderson violated any terms of his probation, he would be convicted of a felony and would face a prison sentence of up to 10 years. We cannot make a determination on the veracity of the central and most substantial claim made in the memes, that Anderson repeatedly raped the woman and left her unconscious. Because no criminal trial took place, important evidence is not publicly available, no witnesses were examined, and no jury had the opportunity to issue a verdict. Anderson was never tried or convicted on any charges of sexual assault. We invited attorneys for Anderson to respond to the many allegations made against him by the young woman, her attorney, and members of the public. We did not receive a response in time for publication, but two of the attorneys who represented Anderson in the criminal case against him, Mark Daniel and Jim Moore, have in the past publicly challenged the allegations of rape made by the woman. Speaking after Judge Strother ordered deferred adjudication probation in December 2018, the attorneys told the Waco Tribune-Herald that the impact statement written by the woman at the center of the case had been “riddled with distortions and misrepresentations”: “What seems to have been left out of her representation was some passionate kissing, groping and grinding by this girl and Mr. Anderson that occurred in front of more than 100 people at this party,” the attorneys said. “Many witnesses saw them kissing passionately several times during the party.” The woman’s claims that she was choked is “absolutely contrary” to the physical evidence and her statements to police and medical personnel that night, they said. They also disputed her claim that she was drugged, saying no drugs were found in her system. “She drank significantly before she ever came to the party, but her blood-alcohol level was barely above intoxication level (0.12) at the hospital,” Daniel said. “She made statements to two separate male students that this may have been consensual. Those boys said she seemed fine, seemed calm and collected immediately afterward as if nothing had happened. She appears in a photograph in the hospital an hour and a half later. She is smiling and eating a cheese cracker with a full grin on her face.” The attorneys said there was no genetic evidence tying Anderson to the alleged offense and that the woman gave “numerous inconsistent statements to the prosecution.” Attorney Vic Feazell called those claims outlandish. Speaking to the Tribune-Herald at the time, he said: “It’s easy for them to say all that bullshit after the fact. That’s what trials are for … It is not fair for them to come out with this bullshit without anybody being able to be cross-examined. If they wanted to cross-examine her, we should have had a trial. I don’t believe that fraternity bullshit. They are all just sticking together … If they had such a damn good case, let’s go try it.”
|
9065
|
Devenish Announces World's First Naturally Enriched Omega-3 Chicken and Eggs With Proven Health Claims - Likely to Reduce Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke, Dementia and Depression
|
This news release touts the results of an unpublished clinical trial aimed at evaluating the increase in levels of omega-3 fatty acids in people who consume chicken and eggs enriched with an omega-3 poultry feed. It uses vague terms to describe the result of the trial and suggests a clinical advantage without giving any real information to back up those claims. It neglects issues of the cost of the new feed and the quality of the research itself. The release appears to be aimed more at touting a new commercial product than it is explaining how omega-3 feed supplementation benefits health. The diseases that the release mentions — heart attack, stroke, dementia and depression — are substantive concerns among the public so any news presented to the public needs to provide ample evidence to back up the claims it makes. This release doesn’t do that. Instead, it generalizes about the benefits of poultry products from chickens fed an enriched diet, and assumes that consumers will buy those products. That may be true but readers deserve accurate and fact-based information backing up such claims before being asked to buy.
|
false
|
chicken and eggs,Devenish,omega-3
|
There is no mention of the costs that might be incurred by consumers interested in choosing chicken and eggs that ate this new feed. Will the new feed cost more than conventional feed, which is likely to be passed along to customers? The only mentions of cost are a vague assertion that chicken and eggs are “very affordable sources of quality protein.” But that doesn’t tell us what the cost will be of chickens that consume the enhanced feed. The release also makes an unsubstantiated claim that nutrient-rich foods such as this feed will help reduce the UK’s and the whole world’s cardiovascular disease burden. It says: “The cost to the health service of treating cardiovascular related illness in the UK is £10billion/year. Having access to sustainably produced nutrient-rich food, with a scientifically proven health claim, offers huge potential to turn this around globally.” There wasn’t any evidence provided to support that claim. The news release gives only vague references to the benefits gained by study participants who consumed chickens, or their eggs, raised using the supplemented feed. We’re never told how much omega-3 was consumed, just that participants ate the special meat or eggs at least three times a week. How much omega-3 did each serving contain? The release doesn’t say. The lede of the release states use of the feed “is likely to reduce risk of heart attack, stroke, dementia and depression,” but offers no numbers to back up that claim or quantify that supposed risk reduction. Later, it states, “The results from the clinical study saw an increase in omega-3-PUFA levels in blood and a positive shift in what is described as the ‘omega-3 Index’-a test that measures the amount of the omega-3 fatty acids, Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) and Eicosapentaenoic Acid (EPA) in red blood cell membranes, which reflects the levels in your heart and other tissues.” Regardless, readers have no way of knowing the amount of “increase” or “positive shift,” so the statement is meaningless for gaining actual information about changes that can be traced back to the new food. We’ll give the release a Not Applicable in this category since the study involved eating a moderate amount of chicken and eggs in their normal diet. Based on what little the release actually tells us about the trial, it’s hard to see where people would be harmed from eating this amount of these particular foods. The release touts this as “a world-first clinical trial,” although we’re unsure of exactly what that means. It’s also described as a “novel 6-month clinical trial” involving “161 subjects,” although that offers no real insight into the study’s methodology. Did all subjects consume a standardized diet? How were variables controlled among participants, if they were at all? What evidence was there that the change in levels of these compounds actually had a clinical significance? Basically, the release touts an undefined increase in the levels of compounds that have been associated with some health improvements in some people. Another drawback is that the claims are based on surrogate endpoints rather than on clinical outcomes. For example, the release states, “The results from the clinical study saw an increase in omega-3-PUFA levels in blood and a positive shift in what is described as the ‘omega-3 Index’-a test that measures the amount of the omega-3 fatty acids, Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) and Eicosapentaenoic Acid (EPA) in red blood cell membranes, which reflects the levels in your heart and other tissues.” This doesn’t automatically translate into proof of health improvement. The release doesn’t disease monger. However, we think the release steps over the line into “treatment mongering” without evidence. The release never specifically says who funded the research, although most readers would assume it was Devenish, the manufacturer of the chicken feed being touted and the company that issued the release. The release does disclose that “The chicken meat and eggs used in the study came from birds offered OmegaPro, a sustainable and algae-based source of omega-3 PUFA, developed by Devenish.” The release should have noted whether there were any financial ties between the researchers and Devenish. Without a published study this is hard for us to verify. We’ll give this category a Satisfactory since the alternative to this new, supposedly enhanced feed is regular chicken feed now on the market. The story also mentions that the primary source of omega-3 fatty acids is oily fish and/or dietary supplements. Although it isn’t made clear in the release whether the new chicken feed is on the market yet, one might assume that it will be shortly, based on the fact that the release seems aimed more at promoting a commercial product than it does describing actual clinical research. Since the news release fails to provide real information about the research and instead concentrates on grooming the market for a new product, it’s questionable how novel this work is. The headline on the release claims the new feed is “likely to reduce risk of heart attack, stroke, dementia and depression,” which is a claim not supported by what the release offers. And as we’ve mentioned before, the release also touts the study as “a world-first clinical trial,” a descriptor that we don’t perceive as being accurate.
|
10172
|
Antibodies seen stopping Alzheimer’s
|
The story accurately reports that while intravenous immunoglobin therapy (IVIg) has been used in the treatment of autoimmune diseases, it is not yet FDA approved for treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. The story appropriately cites researchers not affiliated with the clinical trials who express caution about off-label use until there is more data on the safety and efficacy of this treatment for Alzheimer’s patients. The story provides no quantitative evidence from this pilot trial of IVIg therapy in 8 Alzheimer’s patients. We are not told very much about these patients’ cognitive improvement from baseline to the end of the 18-month trial. Additionally, the results described here were presented at a conference and have also not been peer-reviewed in a medical journal. The story does note that larger controlled trials are necessary to further investigate antibody therapy for Alzheimer’s. Adverse reactions within this small trial are not provided. IVIg is a human blood product that comes from multiple donors, and while it is screened for HIV and Hepatitis B and C, there is still a very small risk of contracting these infections via IVIg therapy. The most common complications of IVIg therapy include headache, skin reactions, nausea and fatigue during and shortly after an infusion. More serious allergic reactions can also occur with IVIg therapy, but the story does not mention any side effects of this treatment. The story provides the estimated cost of treatment for IVIg therapy for Alzheimer’s patients; however, we are not told if more than one dose is required. The story acknowledges that Baxter International, Inc., a producer of IVIg, is funding early trials of this treatment. While the story does not overtly engage in disease mongering, it should make clearer to the reader that the connection between diabetes and Alzheimer’s is not yet proven. There may be a link between insulin resistance, inflammation and the development of Alzheimer’s disease, and drugs used to treat type 2 diabetes may subdue brain inflammation contributing to Alzheimer’s disease.
|
true
|
The story provides the estimated cost of treatment for IVIg therapy for Alzheimer’s patients: $300 for a single dose. We are not told if more than one dose is required. The story provides no quantitative evidence from the pilot trial of IVIg therapy in 8 Alzeimer’s patients. There is no mention of the safety of IVIg in Alzheimer’s patients. Adverse reactions within this small trial are not provided. IVIg is a human blood product that comes from multiple donors, and while it is screened for HIV and Hepatitis B and C, there is still a very small risk of contracting these infections via IVIg therapy. The most common complications of IVIg therapy include headache, skin reactions, nausea and fatigue during and shortly after an infusion. More serious allergic reactions can also occur with IVIg therapy. The story describes the results of very small trial of 8 patients; however, the story only provides brief anecdotal evidence of cognitive improvement in these patients. We are not told how much these patients improved from baseline. The results decribed here were presented at a conference and have not been peer-reviewed in a medical journal. The story does note that larger controlled trials are necessary to further investiage antibody therapy for Alzheimer’s. The story provides prevalence data on Alzheimer’s disease in the U.S. While the story does not overtly engage in disease mongering, it should make clearer to the reader that the link between diabetes and Alzheimer’s is not yet proven. The story provides sources of information other than the study authors and those affliated with the trial to provide perspective on IVIg therapy to slow the progression of Alzheimer’s. The story acknowledges that producers of IVIg therapy are funding early trials. The story briefly mentions that there are drugs to help with symptoms of Alzheimer’s. The story also discusses diabetes medications that may help prevent Alzheimer’s in people with type 2 diabetes by reducing brain inflammation. The story accurately reports that intraveneous immunoglobin therapy (IVIg) is still in clinical trials and not yet approved for treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. The story appropriately cites a researcher who expresses caution about off-label use until there is more data on the safety and efficacy of this treatment. The story reports that this treatment to halt– and possibly reverse– the progession of Alzheimer’s disease is new and still in clinical trials. IVIg therapy is not new for treating autoimmune diseases, but it is not FDA approved for use in Alzheimer’s patients. The story does not appear to rely on a press release and there is coorboration with experts in the field of Alzheimer’s research.
|
|
26575
|
“We inherited a broken test” for COVID-19.
|
China reported a totally new viral disease, now called COVID-19, on Dec. 31, 2019. The U.S. government began sending test kits out on Feb. 5, 2020. There was no inherited test because a test couldn’t be created until the new virus had emerged.
|
false
|
National, Coronavirus, Donald Trump,
|
"President Donald Trump deflected blame for the slow start of testing for the new coronavirus in the United States. ""We inherited a broken test,"" he said on Fox News’ ""Fox and Friends"" March 30. Trump said much the same the day before during a Rose Garden press conference. ""We took over a dead, barren system,"" Trump said. ""That didn’t work, because when CDC first looked at their test, the biggest problem they had is, the test didn’t work. That wasn’t from us. That’s been there a long time. Now we have the best tests in the world."" Trump’s assertion that the test ""wasn’t from us,"" gets things backwards. There could be no test for the virus that causes COVID-19 until the virus emerged. Trump’s claim that his administration inherited a broken test ""doesn’t make sense,"" said infectious disease researcher Christopher Mores at George Washington University’s School of Public Health. ""The (Centers for Disease Control) designed it and validated it and deployed it,"" Mores said. ""It has since been found to have multiple problems and has been changed to address some of these."" China officially reported the new disease Dec. 31, 2019. It sent a genetic map of the viral DNA to the world community Jan. 7, 2020. Within 10 days, a German lab had published a recipe for a test to detect the virus. The World Health Organization adopted that test and began helping low- and middle-income countries roll it out. But there was a hitch. The tests needed clean reagents, chemicals essential to providing reliable results. Some of the reagents were tainted and states had to send their samples to be tested back to the CDC. All of this cost public health officials precious time learning how far the coronavirus had spread. By mid February, CDC and state labs had tested just under 2,200 samples. This was at a time when South Korea had performed over 7,900 tests. According to the COVID Tracking Project, by March 29, the country had conducted more than 831,000 tests. Trump has incorrectly blamed the Obama administration for creating a policy that hamstrung the development of a testing regime. It is true that Food and Drug Administration rules slowed the process for private labs, but that practice dated back to the days of the President George W. Bush administration. Trump also falsely said the WHO had a bad test. Three independent labs validated that test. We asked the White House how a previous administration could be responsible for a test created three years into the Trump presidency. We did not hear back. Trump said that his administration inherited a broken test. That flies in the face of logic. There could be no test until the virus emerged."
|
14027
|
There are tens of thousands of homes right here in California where you turn on the faucet but you can't drink the water.
|
"Sanders said, ""There are tens of thousands of homes right here in California where you turn on the faucet, but you can't drink the water."" But surprisingly, neither the federal nor state governments has a reliable tally for public water supplies, never mind private wells that are not regulated. Clearly California has a lot of polluted water, but in many cases that water can be treated or mixed with unpolluted water to bring the contaminants down to safe levels. Thus, the number of households with undrinkable tap water remains uncertain. Sanders is right about the problem but his assessment of its scope — tens of thousands of households — lacks good data. For that reason."
|
mixture
|
Environment, Agriculture, National, Consumer Safety, Public Health, Water, Bernie Sanders,
|
"The wisdom of using hydraulic fracking, the controversial process of squeezing oil and gas out of rock using pressured fluid, has been one of the issues that separates Democrats Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, with Sanders advocating an outright ban on the technique. Sanders repeated his opposition during a news conference in Spreckels, Calif., in Monterey County, and said it was part of a larger concern about the availability of clean water, which he characterized as ""one of the looming crises"" in the United States and around the world. ""It is not just Flint, Mich., that is struggling with clean water. It is hundred of communities all over this country,"" he said. ""There are tens of thousands of homes right here in California where you turn on the faucet, but you can't drink the water."" ""They have to bring in bottled water, and, by the way, at great expense,"" Sanders said. ""And if we do not act aggressively on fracking and other issues, this problem will only spread."" (There was a moment of confusion during Sanders' comments when someone to Sanders' left injected a comment and, based on that, Sanders said it was tens of thousands just in that county. When we contacted that other person, environmental lawyer Gary Alan Patton, he told PolitiFact that he and Sanders misunderstood each other and the ""tens of thousands"" was not a county number.) For this fact-check, we will look at whether Sanders correctly reported the scope of the problem in California as a whole. The short answer: We couldn't find any clear data. The federal Environmental Protection Agency — with a budget of over $9 billion — said it doesn't have a running tally of households or individuals in the United States or by state who can't drink their tap water. EPA referred us to California's EPA and its State Water Resources Control Board. They don't have a tally either. What the control board does have is an annual report covering 2014 with numbers that are only suggestive of the scope of the drinking water problem in California's 7,789 public water systems. It focuses on the 167 water systems in the state that have had drinking water violations. The only time it counts people is in the sections that list water systems with arsenic, nitrate and nitrite contamination. By our tally, in 2014, 168 water systems serving 158,354 residents were cited at least once for high arsenic concentration. An additional 124 systems serving 36,652 residents were cited for high concentrations of nitrate or nitrite, substances common in fertilizers. In total, those water systems serve just over 195,000 people. With an average household size of 2.58 people, that would be about 75,600 households, putting Sanders in the ""tens of thousands"" ballpark. The problem is saying a water system has been cited for violations in 2014 doesn’t mean those households don’t have drinkable tap water. Some of those violations may have since been corrected. Some of those water systems may have adjusted for the contamination. Consider contamination with arsenic, the legendary poison that, in small doses over a long period of time can cause diabetes, heart disease and cancer. The element usually comes from the erosion of natural deposits. We contacted people in two of the largest systems cited for arsenic contamination. In Arvin, Calif., the levels are so high, the 18,000 or so residents supplied by local water district are drinking bottled or filtered water provided by the city. The schools, parks and the library, for example, have their water filtered. The city is working on three new wells to try to correct the longstanding problem. Yet a few miles northwest, in Lamont, which serves a population of 18,290, people are drinking the water in spite of one well with high arsenic levels. That well is shut down, so the tap water is drinkable. Water district officials are hoping a new well will have low levels so they can blend it with the now-offline well to dilute the arsenic. ""We never had a case where people had to purchase water because it was unsafe to drink,"" said Rolando Marquez, water system supervisor. Point being, they shouldn't be included in any count to assess whether Sanders is correct. But there's another factor that makes the state report even less reliable as a gauge of how many California residents have tap water that's not safe to drink. Between 660,000 and 2 million people in the state rely on unregulated water from home wells that may also be polluted and don't have to be tested. People may be drinking it because the cost to homeowners to treat that water may be prohibitively high. The only official estimate we could find for the state was a 2013 news release from the state water board reporting that, ""More than 95 percent of California’s 38 million residents get their drinking water from a public water supply and, of that number, 98 percent are served safe drinking water, according to CDPH,"" the acronym for the California Department of Public Health. If that means 2 percent are served unsafe drinking water, that works out to about 722,000 residents or roughly 280,000 households. That's hundreds of thousands, not tens of thousands. If that estimate is correct, Sanders is low-balling the tap water pollution problem in The Golden State. When we contacted the Sanders campaign, they didn't have any hard numbers either, just media reports, including an Associated Press story about 2 million people living near groundwater containing uranium (but that's untreated water and the number goes beyond California), another AP story reporting that 57 water systems in California had too much lead in their drinking water (but no indication on how many households they served) and a story from the Visalia Times Delta saying that nearly one fifth of groundwater used for public drinking supplies is polluted (again, that's before treatment). Our ruling Sanders said, ""There are tens of thousands of homes right here in California where you turn on the faucet, but you can't drink the water."" But surprisingly, neither the federal nor state governments has a reliable tally for public water supplies, never mind private wells that are not regulated. Clearly California has a lot of polluted water, but in many cases that water can be treated or mixed with unpolluted water to bring the contaminants down to safe levels. Thus, the number of households with undrinkable tap water remains uncertain. Sanders is right about the problem but his assessment of its scope — tens of thousands of households — lacks good data. For that reason,"
|
9044
|
Prebiotics in infant formula could improve learning and memory and alter brain chemistry.
|
Using piglets to test hypotheses related to infant brain development and the consumption of prebiotics seems to be important research, but at this point, it is hard to tell how relevant this research is to humans. A better discussion of the benefits and harms found in the study, as well as the human relevance of the overall research would have greatly improved this release. Nothing in the release relates to breast milk — it only compared formulas. Any discussion of formula versus breast milk in infant development needs to refer to the overall context of what we know about the topic already and this release skipped those details. It could be important if nutrition research, focused on giving prebiotic formula to piglets, were demonstrated to be applicable to humans. While formula-fed piglets might have shown higher scores on a “novel object recognition” test, it is far too early to imply that these results would be replicated in humans. The likely value of this research is in better understanding of the relationships between gut and neurological function. That’s important basic science, but not ready for clinical application. Reports of animal research sponsored by a major manufacturer of the product being researched needs to be treated with a high level of scrutiny and possibly skepticism.
|
false
|
infant nutrition,prebiotics,University of Illinois
|
There is no discussion of the associated costs of both formula and prebiotic-enhanced formula which could be considerable considering the amount and length of time an infant would consume it. The description of benefits lacks any mention that trials in piglets may have little bearing on how human infants would respond to the prebiotic formula. All we learn is that two-day old piglets given a cow’s milk-based infant formula supplemented with polydextrose (PDX) and galactooligosaccharide (GOS) were tested at 25 days old with learning, memory, and stress tests. There is no evidence to suggest that the same result would be found in human infants. There are known disadvantages of formula over breast milk so harms should be included in any discussion of changing infant nutrition patterns. The strength of the research, its validity and relevance to humans were mostly missing from this research. If piglets fed PDX and GOS spent more time playing with new objects than pigs who didn’t receive prebiotic supplements it is premature to declare this any sort of real medical advance. There is no obvious disease-mongering here. The release notes that the research was funded by Mead Johnson Nutrition, the manufacturer of a prebiotic infant formula. There was a clear need to discuss the alternative to infant formula which is, of course, breast milk of the mother mammal. It is curious to know if the control piglets were able to suckle with their mother, and thus gain other socio-emotional benefits of that bonding (plus probably other important developmental constituents of breast milk) denied to the formula-fed pigs. This published study (but not the release) mentions that infant formula supplemented with prebiotics are currently available. The release hints that the novelty of the research is that the formula testing involved piglets instead of the traditional rodents used in such studies. “Piglets are widely considered a more informative model for human infants than mice and rats; their digestive systems, behavioral responses, and brain development are remarkably similar to human infants,” the release claimed. There is no mention in the title or first paragraph that this was piglet research (which could be misleading for those who only read the title and the first paragraph) yet the language used was largely appropriate.
|
7593
|
Illinois students creating video games for social good.
|
Students at DePaul University in Chicago are creating video games that raise awareness for mental illnesses and other afflictions.
|
true
|
Anxiety, Chicago, Health, Illinois, Games, DePaul University, Video games
|
Students at Deep Games Laboratory in DePaul’s College of Computing and Digital Media are working on projects that address bullying, help those with anxiety overcome their fears and teach sickle cell anemia patients ways to stay healthy, The Chicago Tribune reported . All of the projects involve “the human experience and insight into ourselves,” said associate professor Doris Rusch. The games are like a self-help book that give people the tools to help themselves, she said. “But you have to do the work,” she said. No studies have yet proven that video games are effective treatment on their own, but they can present a new method to reach patients who have mental health afflictions, said Psychiatrist Dr. Nina Vasan of Stanford University. In one game, called Soteria, players control the actions of a character who suffers from anxiety and must work to overcome the character’s fears. The game teaches patients that avoiding what makes them anxious may be advantageous in the short term, but won’t be the most beneficial in the long term, Vasan said. The games would ideally be used alongside counseling from a mental health professional, but provide an option that may be less daunting and more accessible, Rusch said. “The number of people who need mental health help is so much more than we can provide,” she said. “We need to find new tools to help them.” The laboratory’s games are all available to play for free online, Rusch said. Some are also marketed to organization or mental health professionals, she said. Vasan noted that like most medications and treatments, there are benefits and risks. Video games can be addictive, she said. The World Health Organization recently recognized video game addiction as Gaming Disorder. ___ Information from: Chicago Tribune, http://www.chicagotribune.com
|
39966
|
This is a forwarded email about onions. It says that during a 1919 influenza scare farmers would cut onions and place them on plates to ward off infection. It also warns about leftover onions and how they can be poisonous to dogs.
|
Onions Prevent Influenza Infection
|
unproven
|
Food / Drink, Medical
|
There is no medical evidence that onions attracts viruses. Onions have been mythically thought to ward off diseases since the days of the bubonic plague in the middle ages. The Vetinfo.com web site does warn that onions are unsafe for dogs and included the tasty vegetable on their list of toxins for dogs. Left over onions, alone, may not be toxic but can easily pick up contamination from preparation utensils. FoodHygieneTraining.com, a website in the United Kingdom offering expert food safety tips, suggests using different cutting boards when preparing meals and vegetables, to prevent cross-contamination. The web site also warns that bacteria, viruses and parasites can grow in a matter of 20 minutes on a cutting board that was used for uncooked meat if not cleaned properly. It is not difficult for onions and other vegetables to pick up such microorganism that are invisible to the naked eye. Natural enzymes in vegetables may even inhibit growth. If stored improperly, onions can eventually go bad. The National Onion Association posted suggestions on their web site regarding the storage of unprepared onions recommending that be stored in a cool dry place where air can be allowed to circulate. Depending on the type, onions can be last in storage between 30 to 180 days. They also said that “Chopped or sliced onions can be stored in a sealed container in your refrigerator for up to 7 days.” updated 02/26/10 Comments
|
16854
|
NASA scientists fudged the numbers to make 1998 the hottest year to overstate the extent of global warming.
|
Doocy with Fox News said NASA scientists fudged the numbers to overstate the extent of global warming. This exaggerated the thrust in the underlying blog post. It accused government scientists of altering the U.S. temperature record, not the record for the entire earth. As for what the blog said, we found that experts across the spectrum found fundamental flaws in its analytic methods. By relying on raw data, it ignored that the number and location of weather stations and the methods of measuring temperatures across the United States have changed greatly over the past 80 years. The experts we reached or whose work we read generally agree that the corrections for flawed data produce valid results. The bare bones approach used in the blog post provides no solution to the issues of weaknesses in the raw data.
|
false
|
Environment, Climate Change, PunditFact, Steve Doocy,
|
"On climate change, Gallup pollsters say Americans divide into three groups -- the ""Concerned Believers,"" the ""Mixed Middle,"" and the ""Cool Skeptics."" Believers have a slender plurality at 39 percent but skeptics make up a solid 25 percent. They think there’s little to worry about and that media reports on the topic are exaggerated. Fox News host Steve Doocy gave the doubters some ammunition on June 24, 2014. In a segment on Fox and Friends called ""News by the Numbers,"" Doocy drew viewers’ attention to the year 1934. ""That's the hottest year on record in the United States,"" Doocy said. ""At least until NASA scientists fudged the numbers to make 1998 the hottest year to overstate the extent of global warming. The 1930s were by far the hottest decade in the United States."" A reader wondered if NASA really did cook the books (we love reader suggestions! ), so we are checking Doocy’s claim about fudging the numbers. We asked Fox News for their source and while they didn’t respond, a number of conservative news outlets have made much in recent days of a blog post from a man who writes under the pseudonym Steven Goddard. Goddard charged that until 2000, NASA reported that in the United States, 1934 was hotter than 1998 and that the country has been cooling since then. ""Right after the year 2000, NASA and NOAA dramatically altered U.S. climate history, making the past much colder and the present much warmer,"" Goddard wrote. He provided this animated chart to prove his point (the chart marked ""a"" is the old version): Climate science experts say not so fast Doocy exaggerated the findings in this blog post when he applied it to global warming. The post itself only talks about U.S. land temperatures and what happens in the United States is separate from global shifts. As far as what the blog actually claimed, while it accurately copied the changes in the government charts, experts in U.S. temperature measurement say it ignores why the charts shifted. There were major changes in how the country gathered temperature information over the decades. Zeke Hausfather is a data scientist with Berkeley Earth, a research group that has expressed doubts about some of the reports on climate change coming from Washington and international bodies. Hausfather took Goddard to task when Goddard made a similar claim about numbers fudging earlier this month. The missing piece in Goddard’s analysis, Hausfather said, was he ignored that the network of weather stations that feed data to the government today is not the one that existed 80 years ago. ""He is simply averaging absolute temperatures,"" Hausfather wrote. ""Absolute temperatures work fine if and only if the composition of the station network remains unchanged over time."" Weather stations that once were in a valley might now be on a hill top and vice versa. But the shift could be greater than simple elevation. Stations were moved from one part of a state to another. The number of stations within a given area shifted. All these differences, Hausfather and other experts said, will alter the typical temperatures gathered by government meteorologists. Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said the raw data used in the blog post suffered from an equally troubling flaw. The temperatures were not measured at the same time of day. ""Over time, the U.S. network went from recording max/min temperatures at different points of the day, to doing it at midnight,"" Schmidt said. In fact, volunteers staffed many of the stations. Before 1940, most followed Weather Service guidelines and recorded the temperature at sundown. Through the second half of the century, there was a gradual shift to recording morning temperatures. This change produced the appearance of a cooling trend when none existed. Comparing apples to apples Better instruments and more consistent methods have allowed scientists to collect more reliable data. But for climate studies, long-term trends are key and the challenge has been how to make the best use of the older readings. In the mid 1980s, the government settled on a list of about 1,200 stations across the country to track temperature trends. Around 1990, climatologists began delivering computer programs to factor in the artificial changes that systematically pushed the readings one way or the other. Over time, they accounted for the impacts of equipment, location, the time of day of measurements and urbanization (more asphalt leads to higher surface temperatures). There is no question that running the raw data through these programs changes the graphs of average temperatures. However, multiple researchers from a variety of institutions have fed into this process and come up with their own computer models. Results from different teams largely match up. John Nielsen-Gammon is a researcher at Texas A&M University and is the Texas state climatologist. Nielsen-Gammon finds nothing nefarious in the government analysis of temperature trends. ""It is reasonable to expect the adjusted data record to change over time as the technology for identifying and removing artificial changes improves,"" Nielsen-Gammon said. ""If there are any biases, they are caused by the quality of the underlying data, not by any biases intentionally introduced into the adjustment process."" All of the experts we reached or whose work we read rejected Goddard’s conclusions. Mark C. Serreze, professor of geography at the University of Colorado-Boulder, said no fabrication has taken place. ""Goddard's results stem from an erroneous analysis of the data,"" Serreze said. Anthony Watts, a popular skeptic of most climate change data, posted his objection to Goddard’s claim. ""I took Goddard to task over this as well in a private email, saying he was very wrong and needed to do better,"" Watts wrote. Our ruling Doocy with Fox News said NASA scientists fudged the numbers to overstate the extent of global warming. This exaggerated the thrust in the underlying blog post. It accused government scientists of altering the U.S. temperature record, not the record for the entire earth. As for what the blog said, we found that experts across the spectrum found fundamental flaws in its analytic methods. By relying on raw data, it ignored that the number and location of weather stations and the methods of measuring temperatures across the United States have changed greatly over the past 80 years. The experts we reached or whose work we read generally agree that the corrections for flawed data produce valid results. The bare bones approach used in the blog post provides no solution to the issues of weaknesses in the raw data."
|
8004
|
Romania places eastern city of Suceava under quarantine.
|
Romania’s government has placed the eastern town of Suceava and eight surrounding villages under quarantine to limit the spread of the coronavirus, with more than a quarter of all cases in the country located in the area, Interior Minister Marcel Vela said late on Monday.
|
true
|
Health News
|
The European Union state, which has recorded 2,109 coronavirus infections and 65 deaths, declared a state of emergency on March 16. With a population of around 100,000, Suceava has 593 cases and a third of all deaths. More than half of the country’s 285 infected doctors, nurses and other medical staff were in Suceava, officials said. Health Minister Nelu Tataru said the spread was caused by poor management and people not respecting self-isolation rules. The quarantine will last until mid-April at the end of the 30-day emergency period. Movements in the rest of the country have been restricted for almost a week.
|
21527
|
The United States death rate is two-and-a-half times higher for those who do not have a high school education.
|
U.S. Surgeon General says less education means higher mortality rates
|
true
|
Georgia, Education, Health Care, Regina Benjamin,
|
"School is back in session. Having trouble persuading Junior to go to class? Tell him that if he doesn’t graduate high school, he’s more likely to die. U.S. Surgeon General Regina Benjamin said as much during an interview on WABE-FM (90.1), as she talked about what she said was the close link between education and health. ""The United States death rate is two-and-a-half times higher for those who do not have a high school education,"" Benjamin said. PolitiFact Georgia’s team of reporters was skeptical. Doesn’t that sound like something your mom would say to scare you into behaving? Like, ""if you keep making that face, it’ll stick that way""? We called up the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the Surgeon General’s Office. Their officials replied with a pile of information. Chief among them was a 2007 report from the National Vital Statistics System, a collection of public health data overseen by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It calculated death rates based on 2004 statistics. According to this data, the gap was even worse than Benjamin said. People ages 25 through 64 with 13 or more years of education died at the rate of 208.3 per 100,000. The rate for those with fewer than 12 years of education was 667.2, or 3.2 times higher. University of Colorado at Boulder professor Richard Rogers pointed us to a NVSS report released in 2010 that says Benjamin is closer to the mark. Data from 2007 shows the death rate for those with less than a high school diploma is 529.5, or 2.7 times the rate for those with at least some college, it said. PolitiFact Georgia also consulted with experts and read studies on the subject. They agreed that Benjamin is correct. Since the 1970s, researchers have been aware that education is closely linked to health. In fact, much of the increase in life expectancy has taken place among high-education groups. Life expectancy actually declined for less-educated white women. According to a 2008 study, better-educated black men can expect to live more than eight years longer than their less-educated counterparts. It’s not entirely clear why people with more education tend to live longer lives. Researchers we interviewed said there are likely many reasons. Those with at least some college are less likely to smoke, be obese, live in dangerous places, or have a host of other characteristics that can shorten their lives, studies show. They have healthier behaviors in part because they have more financial and social resources. Recent evidence also suggests that cognitive ability helps people make better health decisions, said Adriana Lleras-Muney, a University of California Los Angeles professor who has worked on the problem for about a decade. So parents, go ahead. Scare your children into going to school. You won’t be lying. Benjamin earns a ."
|
32665
|
Hillary Clinton's campaign created a #ManEnough4Hillary ad featuring a male model also associated with a syphilis PSA.
|
Whether the image was used for a standalone joke or specifically arranged to fit in with the “syphilis” quips, the #ManEnough4Hillary ad was not an authentic Clinton campaign effort, which was confirmed by a spokesperson from the Hillary Clinton campaign.
|
false
|
Fauxtography, fake campaign ads, hillary clinton, politics
|
On 26 May 2016, the image reproduced above was shared on Twitter by National Review writer Charles C.W. Cooke. The purported Hillary Clinton campaign ad showed a male model and the hashtag #ManEnough4Hillary: #ManEnoughforJohnson pic.twitter.com/3uskgF0Azg — Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) May 26, 2016 The image from the purported campaign ad appeared to be a stock photo that was also used for a public service announcement about syphilis: @adamjohnsonNYC He’s a fake just like most of Hillary’s supporters. #ManEnough4Hillary pic.twitter.com/SY4hxxHVF2 — #SeeYouInPhilly (@MalyndaNyc) May 26, 2016 The ad was apparently accepted as legitimate, and the web sites Daily Caller and the Daily Wire both published articles mocking the campaign for its lack of due diligence. In the latter, Ben Shapiro wrote: On Thursday, the Hillary Clinton campaign released one of the worst ads in political history. A stock photo male model smoldering into camera, a tattoo sleeve down his arm, his face bearded nearly as much as Hillary’s marriage, with the caption “I am man enough to vote for a woman…Are you?” This is everything wrong with the Hillary campaign. First off, grabbing a stock photo of popular male models comes with some problematic search results [image of bus ad.] Hillary, like syphilis, is the gift that keeps on giving. Social media users appeared to be amused by what they perceived to be either poor vetting of campaign imagery, or simply a humorous juxtaposition showing what appeared to be the same male model. Most took the images at face value, presuming that the Clinton campaign selected the same male model (or a very similar looking one) for a male-targeted ad as was featured in a PSA regarding sexually transmitted infections: The hashtag #ManEnough4Hillary first appeared in late March 2016. The user who tweeted the hashtag added an Instagram photograph to the first tweet: #ManEnough4Hillary #imwithher #dem4life #hrc #hillaryclinton A photo posted by Craig Robert Young (@craigyoung26) on Mar 26, 2016 at 9:32pm PDT That version appeared to involve one social media user who applied it to himself, and there was no indication that the Clinton campaign had either created or adopted it as a social media tool at any time. The hashtag didn’t begin popping up again until early May 2016, when the initial image was mocked by a Twitter user: Yeah, it takes real courage to support a gyno-socialist and her man hating ilk#ManEnough4Hillary #CorruptHillary pic.twitter.com/amLKDSl7VL — Un’ Ardrito (@volksgenosse) May 11, 2016 no, the #ManEnough4Hillary lumbersexual syphilis stock-photo man is not from Team Hillary smh — Asawin Suebsaeng (@swin24) May 26, 2016
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.