Split (3)

train · 9.81k rows

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
34741	Former president Jimmy Carter has announced that the cancer in his liver has spread to other parts of his body.	Viral social media posts rehashed a three-year-old announcement about the former president, who has been cancer-free since December 2015.	mixture	Inboxer Rebellion, jimmy carter	In August 2015, former president Jimmy Carter announced that he had cancer which had spread from his liver to other parts of his body. However, after less than four months of treatment, the 39th president was able to announce to his fellow congregants at Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains, Georgia, that he was free from cancer, as the Washington Post reported: Carter’s announcement came four months after he had disclosed a daunting diagnosis: a form of melanoma that had spread across parts of his brain and that only a decade earlier would have qualified as a near-certain death sentence. But in this case, a combination of radiation treatments and a new immune-based therapy have raised the odds of survival, according to doctors and medical experts … Carter, 91, had a small cancerous mass removed from his liver on Aug. 12, and shortly afterward, doctors found four spots of melanoma on his brain. He has been in treatment since then and has been receiving a newly approved drug aimed at helping the immune system recognize and fight cancer cells. Almost three years later, several posts went viral on social media that contained language very similar to Carter’s original 2015 cancer announcement. For example, on 20 August 2018 a Twitter user with the handle @clae48 posted a “Prayers for President Carter” graphic bearing the logo of the Columbus, Ohio, ABC affiliate WSYX: PRAYERS FOR CARTER — President Jimmy Carter has announced his recent liver surgery found cancer that has spread to other parts of his body. Spread the word and pray for our 39th President by sharing this image made by ABC 6. pic.twitter.com/yiKrzi9TPG — clae (@clae48) August 21, 2018 That tweet was shared 26,000 times within a week, and two days later a Facebook user named Sheree Williams posted the same graphic with the same message, garnering 156,000 shares in one week and prompting inquiries from our readers: The August 2018 rumors were outdated information. The text of the social media posts, as well as the graphic, were both taken from a 13 August 2015 Facebook post by WSYX. In August 2018, the station added an “editor’s note” emphasizing that the original post dated from 2015 and was not a “current story.” The former president did not experience a re-emergence of his cancer in August 2018, as the Carter Center pointed out in a public response to the misleading memes. The 93-year-old Carter still has “no cancer,” the center confirmed: Stories in the last day on social media stating that Jimmy Carter has cancer again are based on old news reports in 2015. There are no updates to our last statement about his health, and a recent scan showed no cancer. — The Carter Center (@CarterCenter) August 22, 2018
8687	WHO officials rethink epidemic messaging amid pandemic debate.	The World Health Organization is considering changing the way it classifies and describes international epidemics, amid a protracted public debate over whether to call the outbreak of the new coronavirus a pandemic.	true	Health News	Officials at the Geneva-based WHO – who this week described it as a pandemic for the first time - are reviewing how the health agency communicates its risk assessment of disease outbreaks in the future, said two people familiar with the discussions. They said that included use of the term pandemic as well as PHEIC, which stands for public health emergency of international concern. Among ideas that have been discussed is whether to use a more graded approach to capture different levels of severity, rather than binary terminology, the two people said. That would enable the WHO to dial up the severity of its messaging to prompt global cooperation on issues such as funding and drug development across the public health and scientific community, but without causing unnecessary public alarm. WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has publicly signaled support for a more nuanced approach, saying the current system of declaring a public health emergency is too blunt. “It’s either red or green,” Tedros said during a Jan. 29 conference with news media. “I think we have to now revise that. You cannot have just yes or no. There could be some intermediate situation.” He suggested a yellow stage that could be “a warning…serious enough but not really red.” The agency’s emergency committee on the new coronavirus, which is made up of independent experts, alluded to the internal discussions the following day. In a Jan. 30 statement following a meeting at which it declared a public health emergency, the panel said it recommended that the WHO “continue to explore the advisability of creating an intermediate level of alert” between PHEIC or no PHEIC. WHO spokeswoman Margaret Harris said that currently the decision on declaring a public health emergency of international concern, or PHEIC, is “binary.” She said the WHO’s emergency committee on coronavirus suggested, and the director general agreed, to meet to “review whether the existing instrument is still fit for purpose.” The discussion around the agency’s messaging on epidemics comes as it seeks to coordinate the global fight against an outbreak of infection with the newly identified coronavirus, which emerged in December. Now known as COVID-19, it has spread from China to more than 100 countries, killing thousands of people with more expected to die. While many public health experts say the WHO’s response to this epidemic has been timely and decisive, the agency has also drawn criticism from some commentators who say it has been too quick to heap praise on China – a criticism Tedros has strongly rejected, saying China’s drastic measures have slowed the virus spread and allowed other countries to prepare. The agency also came under intense media scrutiny in recent weeks as it refrained from calling the infectious disease’s spread a pandemic, even as it took grip in scores of countries around the world. When the WHO did on Wednesday describe COVID-19 as a pandemic, Director General Tedros said the agency was concerned about “the alarming levels of spread and severity” of coronavirus. While the characterization doesn’t trigger any formal change in what the agency does or it recommends countries do, some public health experts said it might prompt governments to move more swiftly to make interventions, such as banning or restricting public gatherings or travel. Under the WHO’s International Health Regulations, the agency can formally declare a PHEIC (pronounced “fake”), or global health emergency, which it did with COVID-19 on Jan. 30. Such declarations are made when an epidemic meets two criteria: The outbreak poses a risk to more than one country and it requires a coordinated international response. The formal designation triggers various moves, including calls for increased funding and resources, recommendations to countries aimed at preventing or reducing cross-border spread of disease and boosting public health measures. The WHO has declared PHEICs on five previous occasions, including the West Africa Ebola outbreak starting in 2014 and the 2016 Zika virus outbreak that spread from Brazil. In 2009, the WHO declared the outbreak of H1N1 flu a pandemic. That move later drew criticism from some governments that it triggered some countries to take expensive measures, including stockpiling and prescribing anti-viral drugs and undertaking mass vaccinations against a flu that ultimately turn out to be milder than originally thought. The then-director general, Dr. Margaret Chan, has defended her decision as the “right call.” How the WHO communicates around global epidemics was under review even before the COVID-19 outbreak began in December, according to the two people familiar with the discussions. According to one of those people, the discussion was prompted in part by last year’s outbreak of Ebola in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, which the WHO declared a PHEIC in July 2019. WHO officials wanted to sound an alarm and prompt a global response in terms of funding and vaccines, but there were questions among some officials at the WHO and member states about whether it was truly an international issue because the Ebola outbreak affected only Congo and neighboring Uganda, the person said. They added that these questions focused discussion on whether a graded approach might be more appropriate. When COVID-19 began spreading beyond China, global health officials and experts looked to the WHO to declare a PHEIC. Even after it did so in late January, the agency faced repeated questions from international media on whether or not the outbreak was a pandemic. Some WHO chiefs have expressed concern that using the label pandemic might signal to governments and the public that the coronavirus outbreak had developed to a level where there was no longer action they could take to control its spread. That was a key part of the WHO’s message when it did ultimately call the coronavirus as a pandemic. “We cannot say this loudly enough, or clearly enough, or often enough: all countries can still change the course of this pandemic. This is the first pandemic that can be controlled,” Tedros said in a tweet Wednesday. WHO officials and some global health experts said the media’s focus on the word pandemic was an unwanted distraction for them because, unlike the PHEIC classification, it doesn’t trigger specific responses within countries. “There is an unhelpful alignment in people’s minds between this ‘pandemic’ word and some sort of major shift in approach - but this is not the case,” Mike Ryan, head of WHO’s health emergencies program, told reporters at a March 3 briefing for news media. A sign of the WHO’s frustration was visible during a news conference this week – one of around 30 hour-long briefings the WHO has held for international media since the COVID-19 outbreak began. A senior official who had been asked repeatedly by journalists about whether the disease constituted a pandemic gave a half-joking but tetchy response: “This is a word you love, right? You just can’t wait, can you?” Some specialists agree that the external focus on the label pandemic have been a distraction, including Lawrence Gostin, a global health expert at Georgetown University Law School in Washington. Gostin has been openly critical of the WHO in the past - in particular for what he considered to be moving too slowly to declare international emergencies over Ebola and Zika. With the COVID-19 outbreak, however, Gostin said the WHO was right to not describe it as a pandemic prematurely because the word tends to generate fear. Global health specialists say that more subtleties in how WHO messages around epidemics could be useful, but say they doubt it will make much practical difference. “In the end if you move from a binary to a three or four stage process, you’ll always have these semantic arguments,” said Jeremy Farrar, an expert in infectious disease epidemics and director of the Wellcome Trust global health charity. “And is there really a difference between a global epidemic and a pandemic? And does it make a difference to what we do?” he said. “I don’t think so.”
27897	Mold has occasionally been discovered in packages of Capri Sun fruit drink.	The development of mold is an occasional and inevitable result of packaging food without preservatives.	true	Food	A warning about a consumer finding mold inside a container of Capri Sun fruit drink was posted to Facebook in February 2013 and echoed similar confirmed incidents consumers had experienced with Capri Sun products in the previous years: WARNING TO ALL PARENTS: my friend Jennifer gave her son a caprisun Saturday and he told her it tasted funny. She took a sip and said it tasted like straight alcohol. Cut it open and it was nothing but mold inside. Evidently, this happens a lot. They say the lack of preservatives leaves them susceptible to fermentation. I will never let Delo drink another. In July 2012, for example, two families in Virginia Beach, Virginia, reported containers of Capri Sun drink that did not taste right and showed evidence of mold formation: Two Virginia Beach families [said] they recently purchased did not taste right and had even grown mold. Jaquan Harbison told his aunt something wasn’t right with his Capri Sun. “It tasted nasty,” Harbison said. “It really tasted like champagne,” [his aunt Shaneka] Bellomy said. Two days earlier, a Virginia Beach mom [took] a picture of what she said she found when she pulled the straw out of her son’s Capri Sun. [We] contacted Kraft Foods, and Senior Manager of Corporate Affairs Bridget MacConnell. “Our experience has shown that because the product has no preservatives, which is a positive for most moms, if air does get into the pouch even through the smallest hole, fermentation can begin and mold can grow,” MacConnell said. A small warning on the side of the box reads: “Capri Sun contains no preservatives. Do not drink if pouch is leaking, damaged, or swollen as fermentation can occur.” Bellomy said she never noticed the warning and she and her nephew did not notice the package was swollen. [We] found what appeared to be a small hole in the side of the pouch where air could have entered the pouch. There was no mold when Bellomy poured the Capri Sun out, but there appeared to be some type of residue on the inside of the pouch. Kraft Foods said the mold that can grow inside of the drink is similar to common bread mold. “Generally speaking we believe it’s not harmful,” MacConnell said. “It might make you sick to your stomach and if it did, I would suggest that you speak with your family health care provider.” A nurse at Virginia Poison Center confirmed the mold could give you a stomach ache but would not be poisonous or toxic if ingested. And in February 2012, a Pennsylvania woman maintained she found a glob of mold inside her daughter’s Capri Sun drink: Ashley Parks, who lives in Havertown, says a black substance was clogging the straw of a Capri Sun fruit punch her daughter, Emma, was drinking. When she cut open the pouch, she saw a glob of something. “Very gross looking, and then if you turn it, you can see little black particles,” explained Ashley. Stephanie asked Emma, “what did you think when you saw it?” Emma replied, “Ew, it was gross.” The 8-year-old says it didn’t taste funny, and it didn’t make her sick. Ashley got online and quickly found a litany of complaints about mold in Capri Sun drinks. “I’m concerned about my daughter’s health, about kids drinking this and if they’re at risk,” said Ashley. Ashley says she found out online there can be undetectable holes that allow air inside the pouch. And on the Capri Sun box, there’s a warning that says if the pouch is damaged, fermentation can occur. But there’s no way to know if this is inside until you take a sip. Further, in January 2012, a North Carolina boy found a slimy object his mother believed to be a worm inside a Capri Sun container: A 10-year-old Mooresville boy made a disturbing discovery in his Capri Sun juice pack. “He went to go take a sip of the drink and he started choking,” said Christina Stewart. “So he pulled the worm out of his mouth and he was like, ‘Oh mommy, this is nasty. '” Stewart said she called Kraft Foods, the parent company of Capri Sun. “She was like, ‘Well, I’ll just give you your money back, like it wasn’t a big deal,” said Stewart. Stewart took her son to the doctor, showed him the juice pack, and the slimy substance she was convinced was a worm. She said the doctor also thought it was a worm, and he sent it to a lab to be tested to know for sure. Kraft Foods, the parent company of the Capri Sun brand, stated the “worm” was likely a mold formation, a phenomenon sometimes found in packages of Capri Sun that have been accidentally breached, as the product is made without preservatives: Without seeing the material, we can only surmise, but we believe what she’s identified as a worm may actually be mold. Since our Capri Sun products are made without preservatives — a fact many moms like — if there’s even a small hole in a pouch and air gets into it, mold similar to common bread mold can form. This is why we advise on the side of the box to discard any leaking pouches. Kraft later confirmed and reiterated this information on its web site’s Capri Sun FAQ: The recent case of a “worm” found inside a Capri Sun pouch was, in fact, mold (the consumer actually returned to our page to confirm this). While this is not a common occurrence, it does happen from time to time because the product is preservative free. That’s why we recommend discarding leaking or damaged packages and have included a statement on our cartons for consumers. Mold that forms on food and beverages is usually a common mold. It’s generally much like common bread mold, though it may look different depending on where it forms. And yes, it can be ugly, gross and totally unappealing. It would be great if foods stayed fresh forever. But the basic laws of science and nature dictate that most foods eventually spoil and get moldy. Philadelphia television station KYW reported that despite its appearance, the type of mold found in damaged Capri Sun products probably would not cause harm if accidentally ingested: We talked to experts from the Poison Control Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia about ingesting mold. They say it may be unappetizing and upsetting to the stomach, but it’s usually not medically dangerous.
3693	Capitol Watch: Nurses, midwives look for clarity on abortion.	There is still some some uncertainty about how nurse practitioners and midwives are affected by a law that was supposed to expand the number of New York health care providers who can perform abortions.	true	Legislature, Health, Andrew Cuomo, General News, Abortion, New York, Laws	In January, the state Legislature codified a “fundamental right” to have an abortion at a time when some states have restricted access. The law legalized abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy if a woman’s health is at risk or if the fetus is not viable. The law says a health care provider acting within “his or her lawful scope of practice” may perform an abortion, but it doesn’t specify which practitioners can provide which types of abortion services. That lack of detail has prompted the state’s education department, which licenses health care professionals, to reach out to Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the Legislature to understand how the law applies to midwives and nurse practitioners. Existing rules don’t exactly say “whether abortion services are even within the scope of practice for midwives,” the department said in an email responding to questions from The Associated Press. Nurse-midwife Eugenia Montesinos, who works in New York City and is one of the state’s roughly 1,200 licensed midwives, said midwives often work in hospitals and can already administer medication that brings about abortion in New York. She said the state should make it clear that midwives are “independent professionals” who can provide abortions in the first trimester with adequate training. “Even though we mostly do pregnancies, we should also participate when a women does want to go through that,” she said. WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY? The New York Department of Health has previously said physician assistants can provide abortion care under a physician’s supervision, and the New York State Board for Nursing has recognized nurse practitioners can perform abortion procedures that don’t include surgery. Midwives, meanwhile, can prescribe and administer drugs in New York. One of the law’s lead sponsors, Sen. Liz Krueger, a New York City Democrat, said before it passed that it would ensure that physician assistants, nurse practitioners and midwives can provide abortion care if their license allows it and they have the training. “The goal of the legislation was to get out of the way and let the medical professionals determine who is qualified to provide any particular kind of abortion care,” Krueger told the AP in an email Friday. Existing rules are less clear about whether nurse practitioners and midwives can perform certain abortion procedures without the oversight of a physician. Pregnancies can be aborted by taking medication, through the use of suction, or through a procedure called dilation and evacuation that involves both suction and the use of medical tools. Health care practitioners can face penalties for professional misconduct if they perform a service that’s beyond the scope of their profession. WHAT DO SUPPORTERS, CRITICS THINK? Groups that support expanded access to abortion — including the New York Civil Liberties Union and the state’s midwifery association — are pushing New York to clearly lay out which non-doctors can provide certain kinds of abortions. “Part of improving access is ensuring that the providers who are qualified to provide care can actually provide care,” said Katharine Bodde, senior policy counsel at the New York Civil Liberties Union. Stephen Ferrara, executive director of the statewide nurse practitioner association, said many nurse practitioners in New York have long provided abortion medication. But he said the lack of clarity on whether nurse practitioners can now provide abortions involving suction means New York’s new law hasn’t changed anything when it comes to who can provide abortions. “It certainly can potentially delay women accessing abortion services because nurse practitioners and midwives are not explicitly permitted to do so,” he said. He said it’s open to interpretation whether such suction procedures count as surgery. As some states and courts strike down physician-only abortion laws, it can be up to professional licensing boards to fill in the details about who exactly can provide abortion care, according to Elisabeth Smith, an attorney for the Center for Reproduction Rights. “What has happened is that state governments have removed physician-only requirements, and not replaced them,” Smith said. “Which creates an area in which it would be possible to provide, but there aren’t affirmative protections, so it’s difficult to trace if it’s happening.” Abortion opponents, including the Archdiocese of New York, have said that New York’s new law will harm women and children by allowing state regulators to decide which non-doctors can perform abortions involving suction. WHY DO SUPPORTERS WANT TO EXPAND WHO CAN PERFORM ABORTIONS? A recent wave of abortion restrictions across the nation has led abortion rights groups including Planned Parenthood and several medical associations to call on states to allow more trained health practitioners to perform abortions. Those groups are now targeting “physicians-only” abortion laws passed decades ago by states wanting to prohibit unscrupulous abortion providers. Midwives in roughly a dozen states have filed lawsuits to strike down those laws. Nationwide, 34 states allow only physicians to perform medication abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports expanded access to abortion rights. A handful of states allow nurse practitioners, physician assistants and midwives who are also nurses to perform both medication and suction abortions. A 2013 University of California San Francisco study found that those three types of providers can safely perform abortions by medication and vacuum just as safely as doctors. Still, abortion opponents argue that allowing people other than doctors to perform the procedures lowers the standard of care for women. The American Medical Association, which fought to ban abortion in the 1880s and later pushed to restrict midwives and nurse practitioners, reaffirmed in 2010 its stance that only doctors should perform abortions. The group didn’t respond to requests for comment. “Abortion is a medical procedure and should be performed only by a duly licensed physician and surgeon in conformance with standards of good medical practice and the medical practice act of his state,” reads the group’s policy.
13220	Several elected state officials have opened their homes to children in need of loving families.	"Patrick, calling for help finding families able to provide foster care, said: ""Several elected state officials have opened their homes to children in need of loving families."" Five Republican elected officials singled out by Patrick’s office have all adopted at least one child. Two also provided foster care, leaving plenty of opportunities for other elected leaders to consider such a commitment."	true	Children, Texas, Dan Patrick,	"News reports show a persistent crisis at Texas’ Child Protective Services, where investigators missed a key deadline to meet with thousands of at-risk kids and dozens of children are sleeping in state offices due to a foster parent shortage. For his part, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick -- who has not been an adoptive or foster parent, according to spokesman Keith Elkins -- called on the state’s ""many faith-based communities"" in advance of November’s National Adoption Month to ""help identify homes open to children in need of foster care."" ""Thousands of children in Texas’ foster care system need your help,"" Patrick said in an Oct. 17, 2016, press release. ""They need safe and loving homes, and many are looking for a forever home."" Patrick went on: ""Several elected state officials have opened their homes to children in need of loving families and are working with me to inspire a statewide movement to answer this calling. I hope you and your family will consider doing the same."" Have elected officials been providing foster care to needy children? A reader asked us to check. To our inquiry, Elkins gave us the names of five Republican elected officials who had each videotaped a testimonial about her or his ""adoption/foster experience."" We watched one video, uploaded to YouTube Oct. 14, 2016, that shows state Sen. Konni Burton, R-Colleyville, talking about her adoption of two girls. ""My husband and I are adoptive parents,"" she says in the video. ""They were fostered by wonderful, loving families who opened their homes to care for them before joining our forever family."" Elkins said the video rotation began Oct. 10, 2016 and others would roll out each Monday for several weeks. Next, we looked for independent confirmation that the officials identified by Patrick’s office — several legislators and a statewide elected leader — had fostered or adopted children. In each instance, we found, the official had adopted one child or more. It looked to us like two of the officials provided foster care before adopting. What we found: Railroad Commissioner Christi Craddick adopted her daughter Catherine, according to a January 2015 profile in SHALE Oil & Gas Business magazine. In a March 2014 video in which she talked about the experience, Craddick, a single mother, said her daughter was 2 years old and that Craddick became an adoptive parent during her 2012 campaign. State Sen. Konni Burton of Colleyville years ago adopted two daughters, who were both adults as of October 2016, from the Gladney Center for Adoption in Fort Worth, according to an October 2016 YouTube video in which Burton speaks about the experience. She has not been a foster mother, Burton told us by text. Sen. Donna Campbell of New Braunfels, was described as the adoptive parent of four children in a May 2015 Austin American-Statesman news story. She hasn’t been a foster parent, Krista Heiden in Campbell’s office told us. State Rep. James Frank of Wichita Falls, has adopted two boys, Eli and Isaiah, in 2016, per an Oct. 5, 2016, post on Frank’s Facebook page. He was a foster parent, an aide to the representative, Jim Johnson, said by phone. Rep. John Lujan of San Antonio, is the adoptive father of three sons, including one he and his wife adopted in 2012 after years of foster care and two other children who they adopted in 2015 after about a year of foster care. Lujan told us by phone that in spring 2016, he served as a foster parent to three other children. Wondering if other state officials had provided foster care or adopted children, we queried the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. In reply, spokesman Patrick Crimmins said by email that due to privacy concerns, the agency could not discuss such details. For years, CPS has struggled to find homes for approximately 29,000 children needing foster care, according to an Oct. 7, 2016, Austin American-Statesman news story. Also, as of October 2016, 6,388 children in Texas foster care were eligible for adoption, DFPS spokesman John Lennan told us by phone. To be a foster or adoptive parent, Texans must attend an informational meeting and meet basic requirements, such as being at least 21 years old, agree to a home study, and allow for a criminal background check. More information has been posted by the state-created Texas Adoption Resource Exchange. According to the website, foster families are offered monthly reimbursements to help pay for each foster child’s clothing, food and transportation, paid from a combination of local, state, and federal funds. The site states that foster parents must inform caseworkers, who visit with the child at least once a month, about changes at home or school. Foster parents also must ""make efforts as team members with children’s caseworkers toward reunifying children with their birth families,"" it reads. Our ruling Patrick, calling for help finding families able to provide foster care, said: ""Several elected state officials have opened their homes to children in need of loving families."" Five Republican elected officials singled out by Patrick’s office have all adopted at least one child. Two also provided foster care, leaving plenty of opportunities for other elected leaders to consider such a commitment.
16402	"David Perdue ""proposes rolling back the clock on women’s health care."	. The super PAC, Georgians Together, makes a claim that contains some truth. Some women could be hurt by repeal or replacement of the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, which has expanded some benefits for some women. But the ad never mentions Obamacare. That’s a major omission. Voters also need to know what Perdue is proposing -- repeal and replacement of Obamacare -- others have tried to do and failed. And you could argue that almost any group helped by Obamacare could be hurt with its repeal. There is a lot of missing context in this attack ad.	mixture	Georgia, Health Care, Georgians Together,	"As election day draws closer and the push for votes intensifies, the airwaves are being flooded with political attack ads. One new ad for Michelle Nunn, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, makes a claim about her Republican opponent, businessman David Perdue, that piqued our interest. Perdue ""proposes rolling back the clock on women’s health care,"" the ad states. The Nunn camp has already been trying to turn female voters against Perdue with ads about a lawsuit filed during his tenure as CEO of discounter Dollar General. The lawsuit accused Dollar General of paying male managers more than female managers for the same work. The new ad from super PAC Georgians Together opens talking about the wage discrimination lawsuit, which was settled by Dollar General’s parent company for $18.75 million several years after Perdue left the company. The ad closes with these lines: ""David Perdue -- Georgia women just can’t trust him. Michelle Nunn -- Georgia women can always trust her."" For our fact check, we reached out to Keith Mason, a longtime Democratic operative and treasurer of Georgians Together, the super PAC that was launched to support Nunn’s campaign and that is funding the new ad. We asked for evidence to support the ad claim that Perdue proposes rolling back the clock on women’s health care. ""Perdue supports outright repeal of ACA [the Affordable Care Act],"" Mason said in an email. Perdue has had on his campaign website that he wants to repeal and replace the ACA, also known as Obamacare, Mason said. He also pointed us to a news report that Perdue and four of his primary opponents publicly backed a plan by U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to strip funding for the ACA as part any government spending bill, an effort that led to a government shutdown and ultimately did not succeed. How does that translate to women’s health? Mason forwarded us a link to a Chicago Tribune story headlined: ""Numerous Affordable Care Act Provisions Specifically Benefit Women."" The article said most plans under the ACA include preventive care, and, for women, that means an annual ""well-woman visit,"" breast-feeding support, contraceptives, contraceptive counseling, annual mammograms and cervical cancer screenings. William S. Cluster, director of the Center for Health Services Research at Georgia State University, said there’s an argument for stating that women of childbearing years would be more adversely impacted by repeal of the ACA. Women under 45 have more health care needs than men in the same age group, he said. Prior to the implementation of the ACA, premiums in the individual market were higher for women than for men and the coverage often excluded preventative care -- mammograms for example -- and maternity care, Custer said. ""The Affordable Care Act prohibits insurers from charging different premiums to men and women. It also requires plans to offer maternity care and preventive health (coverage)."" he said. ‘So while a lot of Georgians would lose coverage, or face higher costs with the repeal of the ACA, women may feel that loss more than men."" Perdue spokesman Derrick Dickey said the candidate’s position has been clear. ""David does support the outright repeal of Obamacare,"" Dickey said. Perdue would like to see it replaced with ""a consumer-driven"" alternative, such as U.S. Rep. Tom Price’s Empowering Patients First Act, the spokesman said. But the ad claim by the Nunn camp is ""misleading,"" Dickey said. ""If the Nunn campaign thinks repealing Obamacare is ‘rolling back the clock on women’s health care,’ they should just say that,"" he said. ""However, they can’t because Obamacare is incredibly unpopular."" Polls indicate Dickey’s right on the public’s sentiment. In a poll taken in August and September, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that public opinion of the Affordable Care Act remains more negative than positive. Among registered voters, 49 percent view the law unfavorably, 35 percent favorably. Opinion tilts even more negatively among likely voters, 51 percent vs. 35 percent, the poll found. Republicans in Congress have repeatedly maneuvered over the past four years to try to repeal or defund the ACA, which was signed into law on March 23, 2010 and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 28, 2012. Some political analysts link the rise of the conservative Tea Party movement and the Republican takeover of the U.S. House in the 2010 midterm elections to the public furor over the law’s debate and enactment. Kerwin Swint, head of the political science department at Kennesaw State University, said he ""completely understands"" the strategy behind the Georgians Together ad claim. ""The Nunn camp and their supporters want to take full advantage of the gender gap by driving up Perdue's negatives among female voters,"" Swint said. ""But if their only evidence for ‘rolling back the clock on women's health care’ is Perdue's support for repealing the ACA, that's pretty flimsy."" The latest reports show about 316,00 Georgians have selected marketplace plans, 57 percent females and 43 percent males Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said these type of ads have become standard in Democratic campaigns this year. If its not ACA repeal, its GOP backing of a personhood amendment or backing of stricter controls on abortion, Sabato said. ""Democrats have to do everything possible to expand the gender gap in their direction. Control of the Senate is riding on whether women heavily support candidates such as Nunn,"" he said. ""Republicans will carry men, as usual, and Democrats will win women, but the margins matter."" Our Ruling. The super PAC, Georgians Together, makes a claim that contains some truth. Some women could be hurt by repeal or replacement of the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, which has expanded some benefits for some women. But the ad never mentions Obamacare. That’s a major omission. Voters also need to know what Perdue is proposing -- repeal and replacement of Obamacare -- others have tried to do and failed. And you could argue that almost any group helped by Obamacare could be hurt with its repeal. There is a lot of missing context in this attack ad."
12275	"Tony Fabrizio Says Adam Putnam ""was for amnesty."	"Fabrizio said that Putnam ""was for amnesty."" While in Congress, Putnam supported legislation that would have expanded work visa categories for undocumented immigrants and put them on a path to legal permanent status. After leaving Congress, he supported the 2013 immigration legislation, which wasn’t blanket legal residency but did include a path, albeit a long one, to legal status. Putnam’s campaign points to examples of legislation he supported that weren’t favorable to undocumented immigrants such as toughening up border security and opposing the Dream Act. The claim is partially accurate, but lacks important context."	mixture	Immigration, Florida, Tony Fabrizio,	"Florida Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam has largely had the Republican field for governor to himself, but the camp of one potential primary challenger has portrayed Putnam as soft on immigration and undocumented immigrants. Tony Fabrizio, a pollster hired by Florida House Speaker Richard Corcoran who may challenge Putnam in the 2018 primary, cast Putnam as not being conservative enough. ""He was for amnesty,"" Fabrizio told Politico July 10, while criticizing Putnam’s positions on a long list of issues. That a-word can be a powerful weapon in a Republican primary. But we found that Putnam’s record on immigration can’t be boiled down to a soundbite. As a member of Congress from 2001 to 2010, Putnam represented a Central Florida district that included agribusiness interests that wanted immigrant labor. Putnam supported legislation that would have benefitted undocumented farm workers, and he supported changing immigration laws which included a path to citizenship. But he also took some stances that didn’t benefit undocumented immigrants, such as opposing the DREAM Act and increasing enforcement. The challenge in fact-checking attacks about ""amnesty"" is that it is a vague term and people with opposing views about immigration may define it differently. Some view amnesty as blanket permission for undocumented immigrants to remain in the United States, while others view amnesty as any measure that is favorable to any undocumented immigrants, even if it includes a list of tough measures they have to meet. (Dictionary definitions generally view amnesty as a pardon.) However, there is one key piece of legislation that was undoubtedly amnesty, and it was signed by Republican President Ronald Reagan. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 said that illegal immigrants could become legal permanent residents if they could prove they were in this country by Jan. 1, 1982, and met a few other minimal requirements. The law was widely described as an amnesty program. By contrast, the legislation written by eight senators (including Marco Rubio) in 2013 had several hurdles before undocumented immigrants could get legal status and on a path to citizenship. When Rubio said that the bill wasn’t amnesty, we rated his statement . Fabrizio pointed to stances Putnam took in favor of expanding visas for workers and in favor of changing immigration laws. Here are some examples: Work visas: In 2003, three Arizona Republicans in the House and Senate introduced the Border Security and Immigration Improvement Act, which would have given migrants temporary work visas for three-year terms and then allow them to seek lawful permanent resident status. Those who were already here illegally would get a separate visa and have to wait six years to apply for legal status and pay a $1,500 fine. Critics derided the legislation as amnesty, but sponsors said it wasn’t amnesty because illegal crossers would have to get in the back of the line. Putnam was one of 12 cosponsors of the house. The legislation never reached a vote. AgJobs: Putnam co-sponsored AgJobs bills in 2007 and 2009 that would have provided a ""blue card"" to undocumented farm workers already in the United States. After paying a fine, they could eventually apply for a green card to get permanent legal status if they continued to work in agriculture. The legislation was also intended to overhaul rules on farm worker visas. These measures died without reaching a vote. In 2009, Putnam defended the legislation as an ""effort to have a stable, legal workforce for agriculture, so this country won't be as dependent on others for food as it is for fuel."" Path to legal status: During his tenure in Congress and after he left, Putnam made statements in favor of legislation that included a path to legal status and eventual opportunity for citizenship. In June 2013 while he was Florida’s agriculture commissioner, Putnam told reporters that he supported the ""Gang of Eight"" bill which he saw as a benefit to multiple industries including agriculture. ""It makes improvements at the border and employee verification, while also creating a more modern visa program so that jobs in our economy can be filled when there is a shortfall of domestic labor,"" he told the Lakeland Ledger. ""That has been particularly acute in agriculture."" Arizona-style law: In 2011, while agriculture commissioner, Putnam was against a proposal in Florida to adopt an Arizona-style law to give police the ability to request immigration documents. He called for a national solution to immigration laws instead and said Florida couldn’t cut and paste legislation from Arizona, a border state. Putnam’s campaign spokeswoman Amanda Bevis pointed to stances Putnam took that showed he was against sanctuary policies created by cities or states that won’t share immigration information with federal officials and votes in favor of securing the border. Sanctuary cities: Putnam voted for measures that would ban federal funding for states and localities that have sanctuary policies in 2006 and 2007. Border security: Putnam took several votes in favor of border security measures and funding enforcement. For example, he was one of multiple cosponsors of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 and voted for the legislation. The law signed by President George W. Bush authorized about 700 miles of fencing between the border of the United States and Mexico. Law enforcement: Putnam supported measures to empower state and local law officials to help enforce federal immigration laws in 2006 and 2007. Dreamers: In 2010, Putnam voted against a Senate amendment on a bill that included a DREAM Act provision, which would have allowed children brought illegally to the United States as minors to stay. Against other benefits: In 2008, Putnam voted that undocumented immigrants should be ineligible for federal housing assistance. After meeting with President Barack Obama and lawmakers at the White House in 2009, Putnam said in a statement that he was in favor of securing borders and making reforms to help draw workers to the country. But he stressed that one option is off the table: ""Immigration is a complex issue, so there are any number of reforms possible, but granting amnesty to people who are here illegally must not be one of them."" On his campaign website video about immigration, Putnam makes no mention of a path to citizenship and speaks of supporting President Donald Trump’s policies. ""As governor we will work with President Trump to cut funding for sanctuary cities, we will support tighter border security and vetting for refugees from Muslim countries,"" he said. Fabrizio said that Putnam ""was for amnesty."" While in Congress, Putnam supported legislation that would have expanded work visa categories for undocumented immigrants and put them on a path to legal permanent status. After leaving Congress, he supported the 2013 immigration legislation, which wasn’t blanket legal residency but did include a path, albeit a long one, to legal status. Putnam’s campaign points to examples of legislation he supported that weren’t favorable to undocumented immigrants such as toughening up border security and opposing the Dream Act. The claim is partially accurate, but lacks important context."
9020	Canadian neuroscientists say daily ibuprofen can prevent Alzheimer's disease	It’s unclear why there is a news release for this study published in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease under the heading, “Conquering Alzheimer’s Disease by Self Treatment.” There is no new research data in the paper. Four of the eight references in the paper — which reads more like an opinion piece — are from the primary author. The news release emphasizes his credentials and the huge medical and financial impact of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). It focuses on the author’s previous work with using amyloid beta protein 42 (Abeta42) as a potential predictor of AD, as well as his theory that daily ibuprofen — “if started early enough” — may “prevent” the disease. However, the news release doesn’t let readers know that — to date — there is no proven screening test to identify those who will develop the disease, no proven treatment, and no new data to support the hyperbolic language employed. Alzheimer’s disease affects roughly 6 million people in the US and approximately 45 million people worldwide. Those numbers are expected to triple by 2050. Because treatment focuses on slowing the disease, not a cure, and because there is no single test which can reliably predict who will develop the disease, any research which touches on either screening or cure is usually highly newsworthy. This places a premium on rigorous and cautious reporting. We’ve covered dozens of news releases and stories about both treatments and screening tests for Alzheimer’s disease. Here are some things we’ve learned. First, before anyone can make a conclusion that a screening test is truly accurate, or a treatment is truly curative, it will need to be supported by multiple, large-scale studies. Second, when it comes to screening tests one always has to ask two questions: What is the rate of false positives and false negatives? The emotional consequences of both are substantial. Also, where does a “truly” positive test leave someone if the disease has no effective treatment? Early detection works best if it leads to an action that actually affects the course of a disease.	false	ibuprofen,IOS Press	This news release mentions both a treatment and a screening test. The treatment is ibuprofen, an over-the-counter, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug that is probably widely known to be quite affordable. The screening test is measuring levels of amyloid beta protein 42 (Abeta42) in the saliva. The cost of that test is not included in the news release. This is a major weakness of the news release. Both the headline and the accompanying text strongly suggest that ibuprofen can “prevent” or “ward off” Alzheimer’s disease. However, no data are included to support this. The news release suggests that the way to diagnose AD early is by looking for elevated levels of Abeta42 in the saliva, thereby allowing early treatment with ibuprofen. However, no data on the accuracy of this screening method is included. No mention is made of the potential side effects associated with daily use of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. Potential harms of ibuprofen taken for years can be substantial and include increased risk of stroke, heart attack, gastrointestinal bleeding and kidney disease. No mention is made of the potential harms associated with either false-positive, or false-negative, tests for Abeta42. There is no evidence here. The paper referenced offers no data to back up the author’s claims that this is a “true breakthrough … a game changer.” The release claims that the lead author has international stature as a researcher and that he feels daily ibuprofen may prevent Alzheimer’s disease. There is no longitudinal data here showing the saliva test will work in future samples with reasonable positive and negative predictive values, much less a clinical trial involving NSAIDs. An accompanying review paper repeats data published in the same journal last year. That paper described a small, cross-sectional study showing that those who already have been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease have higher levels of a toxic protein thought to be involved in Alzheimer’s pathology, compared with (23) controls, and (all of 6) people who are at risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Some of the people included in the sample are as young as 8 years old (! ), so presumably the researchers were looking at people who had the early-onset form of Alzheimer’s, which some think is a different disease than the much more common late-onset. To not make this clear in the scientific paper and in a news release is extremely misleading. No disease mongering. However, it’s potentially alarmist to suggest to readers that the presence of elevated levels of Abeta42 inevitably leads to the development of Alzheimer’s disease. There is no specific trial referenced, just a review of the author’s past work relating to blood and saliva screening tests and his opinions that AD can be prevented through “self treatment by consumption of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, adhering to a Mediterranean diet, and consuming antioxidants such as quercitin which is contained in coffee.” The release makes many claims and cites a lot of research, but as readers we have no idea who may stand to gain what. It’s not clear who funded the studies, nor what stake Dr. Greer, the president and CEO of Aurin Biotech, may have in any products that eventually result from this research. The news release focuses on two things. First, previous research by the lead author focused on Abeta42 which we’re told — when found in high levels — can show “those individuals destined to develop Alzheimer’s disease.” No other screening methods for Alzheimer’s disease are mentioned. It’s not mentioned that there is no screening test that can reliably predict if someone will develop the disease. That’s important context. Second, we’re told that daily ibuprofen, “if started early enough” can “ward off the disease.” It’s not mentioned that, to date, there are no proven treatments for AD. Again, that’s very important context that would help readers. Most readers will know that ibuprofen is a widely available, over-the-counter drug. However, it’s not made clear how available (or accurate) the saliva test for Abeta42 is. Existing research into screening for AD (in particular Abeta42), and the impact of NSAIDs on the disease are not mentioned. This leaves the reader with no idea regarding how novel this approach is or is not. No data are included to back up the provocative headline. Stating that daily ibuprofen can “prevent” or “ward off” Alzheimer’s disease is unjustified. Furthermore, quoting the lead author as calling this unproven therapy a “game changer” and “true breakthrough” — or that “AD can eventually be eliminated” — is hyperbolic.
1961	HIV infections in U.S. stable but disparities exist.	The number of Americans newly infected with HIV remained stable between 2006 and 2009, but infections rose nearly 50 percent among young black gay and bisexual men, U.S. experts said on Wednesday.	true	Health News	An AIDS activist holds a sign while demonstrating near the site of the G20 Pittsburgh Summit against the policies of the world's wealthiest nations regarding AIDS research and treatment funding in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania September 22, 2009. REUTERS/Eric Thayer New data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reveal progress since the peak of the HIV epidemic in the 1980s. But the sharp increases in infection rates among young black men who have sex with men show there is much more work to do, they said. “We’re very concerned about these increases among young gay men,” Dr. Kevin Fenton, director of the CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention, said in a telephone interview. “We can’t allow the health to a new generation to be lost to what is essentially a completely preventable disease.” According to the new estimates, published in the journal PLoS ONE, there were 48,600 new HIV infections in the United States in 2006, 56,000 in 2007, 47,800 in 2008 and 48,100 in 2009. Over the four-year period, that amounts to an average of 50,000 cases per year. But communities of color, and especially blacks, were disproportionately affected. While blacks represent 14 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for 44 percent of new HIV infections in 2009. HIV infection rates among blacks were nearly eight times higher than rates in whites, according to the study. Hispanics, who represent about 16 percent of the population, accounted for 20 percent of new HIV infections in 2009 — a rate that was nearly three times as high as that of whites. Currently, about 1.2 million people in the United States are infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, and about one out of five people who are HIV positive do not know it. Men who have sex with men — which includes openly gay and bisexual men and those who do not identify themselves as gay or bisexual — remain most heavily affected. While this group represents 2 percent of the overall U.S. population, they accounted for 61 percent of all new HIV infections in 2009. And young men who have sex with men — those aged 13 to 29 — are the hardest hit, accounting for more than one quarter of all new HIV infections nationally. New HIV infections affected young men who have sex with men of all races, but the CDC saw very sharp increases among young black men who have sex with men. “We saw increases of up to 48 percent — nearly a 50 percent increase between 2006 and 2009,” Fenton said. The reasons are not yet clear, but the CDC said several factors are influencing this trend. They said young black men who have sex with men are less aware of their infection status. They may encounter more homophobia than other groups, which could keep them from getting tested. They may have less access to treatment, and they have higher rates of other sexually transmitted diseases, which increases the risk of HIV transmission. To fight these increases, the CDC will focus on areas where HIV infection is most heavily concentrated — among gay and bisexual men of all races, blacks and Hispanics, as outlined in the National HIV/AIDS Strategy introduced by the White House last summer. AIDS activists demonstrate carrying mock coffins near the site of the upcoming G20 Pittsburgh Summit as they protest against the policies of the world's wealthiest nations regarding AIDS research and treatment funding in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania September 22, 2009. REUTERS/Eric Thayer “We’re overhauling how we give out money to states and localities to make sure we are giving the money where it is needed most, to the population groups that need it most, and with the interventions that are most effective,” CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden told a press briefing. The plan calls for better methods to gather data among affected populations and better use of prevention tools, including earlier testing and efforts to ensure that people who test positive with HIV get treated with drug cocktails that have been shown to keep AIDS in check and reduce HIV transmission. “It’s crucial that we work with communities, with healthcare providers, with people who are infected and with people who are at risk to drive down the rate of new HIV infections,” Frieden said.
17858	"Domestic violence ""is seen as a pre-existing"" health condition and ""women had to pay 50 percent more for health care because of gender ratings,"" but under Obamacare, ""all of that is over."	"Moore said domestic violence ""is seen as a pre-existing"" health condition and ""women had to pay 50 percent more for health care because of gender ratings,"" but under Obamacare, ""all of that is over."" The thrust of what Moore said is partially accurate, in that there is some evidence to back the pre-existing condition and 50 percent parts of her claim. She’s correct that the Affordable Care Act eliminates the treatment of domestic violence as a pre-existing condition and eliminates gender rating. For a statement that is partially accurate but leaves out important details, we give Moore a Half True. If you would like to comment on this item, you can do so on the Journal Sentinel’s web page."	mixture	Health Care, Crime, Government Regulation, Women, Wisconsin, Gwen Moore,	"On Sept. 29, 2013, two days before a political showdown over Obamacare led to a government shutdown, U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore defended the health care law. On MSNBC’s ""Disrupt with Karen Finney"" show, the Milwaukee Democrat described how bad women have had it -- and how things will improve with the Affordable Care Act. She stated: ""If you’re a victim of domestic violence, even that’s seen as a pre-existing condition. Women had to pay 50 percent more for health care because of gender rating. All of that is over."" So, we need to determine whether being a domestic violence victim is regarded as a pre-existing health condition; and whether women have had to pay 50 percent more for their health care because of ""gender rating."" We also need to see how the health care law handles domestic violence and gender rating. Pre-existing conditions In 2009, first lady Michelle Obama made a statement similar to the first part of Moore’s claim. She said it was legal in some states to regard domestic violence as a pre-existing condition and use it as a basis for denying health insurance coverage. PolitiFact National rated Obama’s statement True because at the time, eight states permitted treating domestic violence as a pre-existing condition, according to the National Women’s Law Center. The law center told us that its most recent check, in 2010, showed the District of Columbia as well as six states -- Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Vermont and Wyoming -- had no law prohibiting the insurers from designating domestic violence as a pre-existing condition. However, there were restrictions in some of those states. (The Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health policy research group, also referred us to the law center on this question.) In rating Michelle Obama’s statement, our colleagues pointed out that just because it's legal in some states for insurance companies to cite domestic violence as a pre-existing condition, it doesn't mean insurance companies are actually taking advantage of the loophole. Indeed, an insurer might deny a woman coverage based on an injury or condition without it being disclosed that the injury or condition was a result of domestic violence. There was evidence in the 1990s that using domestic violence to deny coverage was widespread, but the law center told us it is not aware of any data on how many insurance companies actually use domestic violence now as a pre-existing condition. Beginning on Jan. 1, 2014, the Affordable Care Act will prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to people who already have health problems, such as high blood pressure, depression or diabetes, as well as ""conditions arising out of domestic violence."" So, while there isn’t evidence that health insurers commonly use domestic violence as a pre-existing condition to deny coverage, it is ""seen"" as such in that it is legal in a handful of states for health insurers to do so. Moore is also correct that practice is being outlawed under Obamacare. ""Gender rating"" The second part of Moore’s claim is that women have had to pay 50 percent more for their health care because of ""gender rating."" There’s no dispute that health insurers use gender as one factor in setting rates; others include age, family size, geographic region and health status. But Moore’s broad claim that women pay 50 percent higher rates isn’t so clear. Moore cited a March 2012 report, again from the National Women’s Law Center. The center said it used the eHealthInsurance website to calculate premiums in the individual market -- in other words, premiums for women who purchase health insurance themselves, rather than getting it through their employer or spouse. The individual market is a key target of the Affordable Care Act. The center said premiums were at least 50 percent higher for women than for men in a number of instances, including health plans for 25-year-olds in Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia and Wyoming; and for 40-year-olds in Alabama, Arizona, Kansas and Kentucky. Although federal anti-discrimination protections enacted prior to the Affordable Care Act generally prohibit employers from charging female employees higher premiums than male employees, businesses with predominantly female workforces are routinely charged more for group coverage, according to the law center. The reform law prohibits gender rating, beginning Jan. 1, 2014. So, there is evidence that some women buying health insurance in the individual market, a key target of Obamacare, are charged 50 percent more than men for the same coverage. Such gender rating is made illegal under the health reform law. Our rating Moore said domestic violence ""is seen as a pre-existing"" health condition and ""women had to pay 50 percent more for health care because of gender ratings,"" but under Obamacare, ""all of that is over."" The thrust of what Moore said is partially accurate, in that there is some evidence to back the pre-existing condition and 50 percent parts of her claim. She’s correct that the Affordable Care Act eliminates the treatment of domestic violence as a pre-existing condition and eliminates gender rating. For a statement that is partially accurate but leaves out important details, we give Moore a . If you would like to comment on this item, you can do so on the Journal Sentinel’s web page."
7564	Zoos turn to social media to delight, raise money amid virus.	The Phoenix Zoo, struggling like others worldwide during coronavirus closures, has found an unlikely savior in a sloth.	true	AP Top News, Animals, Phoenix, Technology, Media, General News, Entertainment, Social media, Lifestyle, Business, Science, Travel, Virus Outbreak, U.S. News	While Fernando may be a slow mover offline, the 4-year-old Linne’s two-toed sloth has risen rapidly on the internet. Since Fernando joined Cameo, a video-sharing platform where people pay for celebrity shoutouts, the zoo has received 150 requests for a personalized clip. His popularity let the zoo boost his fee from $25 to $50. “I think we’ve gotten more creative, kind of thinking a little bit outside the box. We’re trying things we never have before,” said Bert Castro, Phoenix Zoo’s president and CEO. Social media is one way zoos worldwide are engaging with people who can no longer visit — their main source of income — and raise some much-needed cash. Zoos and aquariums have brought adorable distraction by posting photos and videos of animals, but the closures mean they’re still in jeopardy. While a smattering of zoos, from Utah to Germany, have started reopening with social distancing rules, there’s no telling when they will reach their usual levels of visitors and revenue. Besides jobs, the well-being of the animals is at stake. “They can’t just send their employees home and turn off the lights and lock the doors. They have to care for animals,” said Dan Ashe, president of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. The association’s 220 U.S. zoos and aquariums, which typically host a combined 200 million people annually, all closed, Ashe said. A recent survey showed more than 60% have laid off or furloughed employees. About 60% of its members have applied for loans through the federal coronavirus relief package intended to limit layoffs at small businesses and nonprofits. The Phoenix Zoo, a $1 million-a-month operation, has been losing $80,000 a day since shuttering March 18, Castro said. The facility in the nation’s fifth-largest city has been approved for $2.7 million in loans under the federal program and has raised hundreds of thousands online for its 3,000 animals. Castro believes behind-the-scenes Facebook Live videos make people feel more connected to the zoo. In the past month, viewership has spiked 350%, and its Instagram following is growing. Fernando’s Cameo appearances may be a tiny boost, but “it’s so popular we’ll continue it for as long as we can,” Castro said. The Oakland Zoo in the San Francisco Bay Area recently brought back more than 200 full-time employees — at least until June — after getting loans under the federal program. It also started an online subscription program offering daily behind-the-scenes videos with animals and zookeepers. It’s $14.95 a month; $9.95 for zoo members. “Our objective is to just make it to the point where they allow us to reopen for business and the people can come and enjoy the animals,” zoo president Joel Parrott said. The Toronto Zoo is live-streaming moments like weigh-ins of red pandas, drawing tens of thousands of new social media followers, spokeswoman Amanda Chambers said. The strategy also helps spotlight lesser known animals. “It’s the opportunity to highlight species that often don’t get high-profiled,” CEO Dolf DeJong said. “For us, it’s being able to talk about Blanding’s turtles, an endangered species from our community that we’re breeding.” California’s Monterey Bay Aquarium is captivating people by live-streaming African penguins and sharks. It also created YouTube “MeditOceans” videos for meditating to sights and sounds of ocean creatures. Divers jazzed up their kelp forest maintenance routine with a dance to the Sugarhill Gang’s “Jump On It” in a popular video. The financial scramble is reverberating for zoos worldwide. Bioparque Estrella, a safari theme park outside Mexico City, is hoping to get by with enough funding until a tentative reopening this month. It’s been using social media primarily to promote reduced-price advance tickets. More than 1,000 tickets have been sold — far below the 10,000 visitors seen at Easter last year. In Germany, the government is letting zoos reopen with social distancing restrictions. Zoos were trying reduce costs during the closures — the biggest being staff salaries — and some sought public donations, said Volker Homes, head of Germany’s Association of Zoological Gardens. Recent reports that a cash-strapped German zoo planned to feed some animals to others sparked outrage. But Homes said last month that there’s no reason to fear for any animal’s safety. In Poland, where zoos have been closed since mid-March, the lack of income from tickets is threatening their future, and they’re asking people for financial support. Private-owned zoos are in especially dire straits. The popular Zoo Safari in central Poland, known for breeding rare white lions and tigers, lost most of its income overnight. It’s offering advance ticket vouchers for the 2020 and 2021 seasons to help fund care for its 600 animals. It also launched a crowdfunding page. The ZSL London Zoo has used social media to promote itself and front-line workers. It’s near several hospitals and has let medical employees use its parking lot, where many glimpse giraffes Maggie and Molly through the fence during lunch breaks, according to the zoo’s Facebook page. It’s shared photos and videos of the giraffes in front of a sign honoring medical workers. ___ Associated Press writers Terry Chea in Oakland, California, Frank Jordans in Berlin and Monika Scislowska in Warsaw, Poland contributed to this report. ___ Follow Tang on Twitter at https://twitter.com/ttangAP.
22046	"The Paul Ryan budget proposal would ""privatize Medicare."	Throw-granny-from-the-cliff ad says Paul Ryan plan would privatize Medicare	true	National, Federal Budget, Health Care, Medicare, The Agenda Project,	"Amid discussion of the Medicare overhaul proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., an ad created by the Agenda Project, a liberal group, cut through the clutter quite dramatically -- though with critics saying it was literally over the top. The ad, set to ""America the Beautiful,"" shows a man pushing an elderly woman in a wheelchair toward a scenic overlook. At first, the woman is happy, enjoying the sights. But then the man picks up the pace, veers past warning signs and rushes toward a cliff. When he reaches the edge, he tips over the wheelchair, and the woman falls dramatically over the ledge. The man walks calmly away. The ad contains no dialogue, so its point is made through a series of superimposed statements. ""In 1965, Americans made Medicare into Law. Today, Medicare provides the health insurance for 46 million Americans. More than half of Americans on Medicare live on less than $28,000 a year. Now, Republicans want to privatize Medicare. Is America beautiful without Medicare?"" We decided to check two claims in this ad. One, which we’ll look at in a different item, is whether the Ryan plan would leave the country ""without Medicare."" The second, which we’ll investigate here, is whether the Ryan budget proposal would ""privatize Medicare."" First, we’ll provide a summary of the Ryan plan, which was passed by the House in a near-party-line vote and which has more recently prompted some Republicans to oppose it, amid fears that voters will not be comfortable with its approach. Ryan’s plan would dramatically cut federal spending in the name of fiscal discipline. One of its major features is dramatically restructuring Medicare, the government-run health insurance program for those 65 and older. Right now, Medicare pays doctors and hospitals set fees for the care beneficiaries receive. Medicare beneficiaries pay premiums for some types of coverage, and younger workers contribute payroll taxes. Ryan’s plan leaves Medicare as is for people 55 and older. In 2022, though, new beneficiaries would be insured by private insurance companies rather than the federal government, although they would receive ""premium support"" -- financial assistance from the government for buying insurance. People who need more health care would get a little more money. The proposal requires private insurers to accept all applicants and to charge the same rate for people the same age. The plans would comply with standards set by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which administers the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. The plan gradually raises the Medicare eligibility age to 67 and provides smaller premium support to high earners. In analyzing the claim that Ryan's plan privatizes Medicare, we see at least three questions to consider, based on our discussions with a range of policy experts: How do you define ""privatization""? When we contacted Erica Payne, the founder and president of the Agenda Project, she defended the use of ""privatization"" by arguing that under the current system, the purchaser is the government and the vendor is the health provider, while under the Ryan plan, the purchaser would be the patient and the vendor would be the insurance company. ""Because the choice of vendor is now in the hands of an individual who will in essence ‘shop’ for an insurance plan provided by a private company, this change will have the effect of transforming Medicare into a private insurance system,"" Payne said. ""As such, we conclude that this plan seeks to ‘privatize’ Medicare. Supplanting a government system that pays directly for benefits with a plan that inserts private companies into the exchange of goods and services seems like a fairly standard interpretation of the privatization concept."" Is she right? There are actually a number of definitions of privatization, but Steven Berry, a Yale University economist, said that at least one common definition does seem to fit what he calls ""Ryancare."" In what Berry says is an oft-cited 1988 law journal article, Paul Starr, a liberal professor of sociology and public policy, wrote that one acceptable definition of ""privatization"" is, ""Instead of directly producing some service, the government may finance private services, for example, through contracting-out or vouchers."" While the Congressional Budget Office has followed Ryan’s lead in calling the subsidies ""premium supports"" rather than ""vouchers,"" Berry said the definition still applies. ""The Ryan plan takes some functions the government currently provides and transfers these to private sector insurance companies, providing a government subsidy to pay for the private sector services,"" he said. ""Ryan is clear about this -- he thinks the private sector will do a better job in these activities as opposed to the ‘monopoly’ government agency. This is a traditional argument in favor of this kind of privatization."" Is Medicare fully public now? In many important ways, Medicare is a public program today. Payments to doctors are made with government money, collected through mandatory tax assessments. There’s a large bureaucracy called the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that sets standards for the program and carries out enforcement. But Robert Moffitt, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, points out that Medicare -- despite its reputation as an exemplar of single-payer health care -- has some noteworthy aspects that are more accurately considered private. ""The entire Medicare delivery system -- doctors, hospitals, home health care agencies, nursing homes, hospice care facilities -- are almost all private agents or institutions,"" Moffitt said. ""Exceptions would include county or public hospitals that are reimbursed for treating Medicare patients."" In addition, most Medicare enrollees have supplemental insurance to cover costs the program doesn't, and most of this supplemental coverage is either bought on the private market or secured through employers. The Medicare Advantage program, which accounts for roughly a quarter of Medicare enrollees, is run by private insurers using Medicare funds. About 60 percent of seniors are enrolled in private drug plans in the Medicare Part D Program. Finally, the federal government already administers Medicare through private contractors, usually large private insurance carriers that process Medicare claims. So while the Ryan plan would shift the needle further toward the private sector than it is today, it’s important to remember that Medicare today is not simply a government program without a private-sector role. How much of a government role would remain under the Ryan plan? Ryan’s spokesman, Conor Sweeney, emphasizes that under the proposal, Medicare will retain significant government aspects. ""The government continues to collect payroll taxes to fund Medicare for future seniors,"" Sweeney said. ""It provides financial support to guarantee that future seniors are covered. And it tightly regulates the plans among which future seniors get to choose, so that they are protected from discriminatory pricing. Under our plan, Medicare remains a government program dedicated to help fulfill the health security for America’s seniors. The real question on Medicare is not whether government should be involved, it is how much power should the government have over individual health care decisions?"" Several economists with experience in privatization issues told us there’s enough evidence to call the Ryan proposal a privatization plan. ""I would have to say that (privatization) is a correct characterization of the plan's operation,"" said Ellen Dannin, a Penn State law professor. ""It isn't private in the sense that a mom-and-pop store is private but, rather, it would operate more or less as a regulated and heavily subsidized private industry. Because someone reaching the age for enrollment in Medicare after the bill's threshhold date would have no ability to enroll in Medicare (as currently structured), their best and only option seems likely to be taking the plan's payment and enrolling in a private plan provided by an insurance company."" Roger Noll, a Stanford University economist, said that the Ryan plan would clearly shift the duties for paying expenses from a federal agency to a private insurance company. The act of the government providing regulatory oversight, he said, isn’t the same as the government providing a service. Noll added that confusion on this issue may stem from an imprecise understanding of how Medicare actually works. ""Health care and insurance are separate services,"" he said. ""Medicare always has relied on privatized health care. What's being privatized in the Ryan plan is health insurance services."" So where does this leave us? It’s true that under the Ryan proposal, the government will retain important duties in running Medicare. But ""privatization"" does not have to mean that the government has nothing further to do with the enterprise. Under longstanding definitions, privatization could take place without the government giving up its right to regulate a privately provided service, such as an electric utility. That said, we think it’s fair to note that Medicare already provides some types of coverage through private insurance now, so the shift toward the private sector prompted by the Ryan plan would be more a question of degree than kind."
9717	IUDs and Hormonal Implants Remain Underused Contraceptives	Hormonal and copper IUDs. Changes in the behavior of doctors could make a big difference in how many women opt for using long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs). This Jane Brody column reports on a committee’s strong argument urging obstetricians and gynecologists to increase their prescribing of long-acting alternatives. The committee states that only about half of all doctors offer these devices in their practice, even though research shows these alternatives are more effective and relatively safe. The story does a great job of examining the way that up-front higher cost may be confusing some patients about the true long-term savings these devices can provide. It would have been nice to hear from someone — a clinician perhaps — who does not routinely prescribe LARCs and why that’s the case. What are their concerns and what are the obstacles to making this more widely available? Preventing unwanted pregnancies could work much better if the doctors who see women recommended better options known as long-acting reversible contraceptives or LARCs more often. Some of the resistance to LARCs is likely among older docs who remember the scary history of pelvic inflammatory disease (and infertility) from IUDs. And the rest may be from those with concerns about high upfront costs. In addition, insertion of IUDs and Implanon are specialized skills that not all practitioners have (gynecologists and family practitioners are usually the ones to offer these methods, not internists), whereas as most practitioners are comfortable prescribing the pill.	true	contraceptives,drug costs,health costs,IUD,Pregnancy,teens,women's health	We applaud the way this story examines what may be the “under use” of devices and clearly explains some of the nuance about up-front costs versus the long-term cost of contraception. Bravo for pointing out that the Affordable Care Act now covers these devices, which at one time may have seemed “too expensive” for some patients. We think it would have been even better if the story had a few actual figures in it – to demonstrate this. For example, one website from Planned Parenthood explains the cost for the copper IUD this way: “The cost for the medical exam, the IUD, the insertion of the IUD and follow-up visits to your health care provider can range from $500 to $900. That cost pays for protection that can last more than a decade.” As the story points out – that cost will not fall to an individual patient who is covered under the ACA. But the old prejudices about cost may be part of the reason for the gap in popularity. The story gives figures on the effectiveness of a variety of contraception methods. Here is an excerpt: In a 2012 study of 7,486 women aged 14 to 45, long-acting reversible contraceptives, or LARCs, were shown to be 20 times as effective in preventing pregnancy than the pill, contraceptive patch or vaginal ring. The risk of an unwanted pregnancy with these other methods was especially high among women under 21, whose rate of unintended pregnancy was nearly double that among older women. Absolute risks are also cited in the report on one-year pregnancy rate with real-world use, which is another strength of the story. The story lists some of the potential side effects of long-acting implants or IUDs. These include “irregular bleeding and cramping” as short-term impacts. We’ll give the benefit of the doubt, but we would have liked an additional comment by someone not connected to the committee report on whether there are any long-term studies underway about downstream potential impacts for women 5 or 10 years after using these. In addition, rare but potentially serious complications of copper IUDs, such as perforation (when the IUD pushes through the wall of the uterus), could have been mentioned. The Committee report from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology relied on reviews of many high-quality peer-reviewed studies related to long-term contraception alternatives. However, the story doesn’t establish what kinds of evidence the committee based its recommendations on. Had the story taken greater pains to discuss this aspect of the report, readers could be more confident that the recommendations are solid and worth following. There was no disease mongering in this story. The story quotes one expert, Megan Kavanaugh, who is one of the authors of one of the studies referenced in the article. Kavanaugh works for the Guttmacher Institute, and has declared no conflicts in other publications on contraception. It would have been nice to hear from someone who is totally independent of the studies and report covered in the column, but we think Dr. Kavanaugh qualifies as sufficient for a Satisfactory rating here. This story did a great job of outlining many different alternative methods of contraception and their effectiveness. You could say this story was about availability itself, and especially about why things that are widely available are not prescribed by doctors more often. All of these long-term contraceptives are available. LARCs are not novel and the story establishes this. The story does not appear to rely on a news release.
16280	We've had 27 (Ebola) outbreaks around the globe and they've never spread outside of the confines of the countries that were initially affected.	Hebert said there have been 27 outbreaks of of Ebola and in no case did the disease spread to a second country. His number is high. A more accurate figure would be between 16 and 22. However, he is correct in his main point, that past efforts have successfully contained the disease. The combination of an exaggerated number and an accurate assessment of the importance of the public health response leads us to rate this claim Mostly True.	true	Ebola, Public Health, PunditFact, Corey Hebert,	"The latest news on Ebola finally seems to be headed in the right direction. The World Health Organization declared Nigeria and Senegal to be Ebola-free. None of the people who lived in the apartment of Thomas Eric Duncan, the man who died in Dallas, have contracted the disease. Beyond the two nurses now in treatment, there are no reports that hospital staff who helped care for Duncan have the virus. While the situation in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea remains dire, more equipment and medical professionals are arriving on the scene. Based on all this, MSNBC host Chris Hayes took an optimistic stance during his show on Oct. 20. ""It is a disease that can be wrestled to the ground and essentially snuffed out the way you might fight a forest fire,"" Hayes said. ""If there's sufficient resources in those three West African countries."" Hayes’ guest, pediatrician and health care television personality Corey Hebert, backed up that view. ""We've had 27 outbreaks around the globe and they've never spread outside of the confines of the countries that were initially affected,"" Hebert said. ""So, it's not something that we have to worry about like in the movie Outbreak. It's not like that."" The 1995 film Outbreak did pretty well at the box office, but our fact-check focuses on Hebert’s numbers, not his taste in movies. We emailed him to learn where he got his figures and did not hear back. We found two lists of Ebola outbreaks, and while it's pretty clear that Hebert overshot the number of outbreaks, his general point is accurate. In the past, thanks to public health efforts, the virus has not spread beyond the borders of the countries that were first affected. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lists a total of 34 incidents involving one strain or another of the Ebola virus since it was first identified in 1976 in Zaire. However, not every incident meets the definition of an outbreak. In places such as England, Italy and Russia, some people caught it in their labs. A strain of the virus infected some pigs in the Philippines and some workers there developed antibodies but never showed any symptoms. There were instances where just a single person died. If you discount exposures in the laboratory, infections of animals, you are left with 19 outbreaks before the current one. Add in the three lone deaths unrelated to a lab exposure, and the total is 22. The World Health Organization has its own list that doesn’t include lab or animal infections. Its list has 20 episodes and includes four incidents in which there was a single death or no deaths at all. Adjusting for those individual cases, the WHO’s outbreak count is 16. Here’s the WHO list: Year Country Cases Deaths 2012 Democratic Republic of Congo 57 29 2012 Uganda 7 4 2012 Uganda 24 17 2011 Uganda 1 1 2008 Democratic Republic of Congo 32 14 2007 Uganda 149 37 2007 Democratic Republic of Congo 264 187 2005 Congo 12 10 2004 Sudan 17 7 2001-02 Congo 59 44 2001-02 Gabon 65 53 2000 Uganda 425 224 1996 South Africa (ex-Gabon) 1 1 1995 Democratic Republic of Congo 315 254 1994 Cote d'Ivoire 1 0 1994 Gabon 52 31 1979 Sudan 34 22 1977 Democratic Republic of Congo 1 1 1976 Sudan 284 151 1976 Democratic Republic of Congo 318 280 Source: World Health Organization In both tallies, each outbreak happened in just one country. The current crisis is the first where Ebola has hit several nations simultaneously. (Through Oct. 17, Ebola has affected seven countries and 9,216 people have been diagnosed with the virus. There are 4,555 reported deaths so far.) A likely explanation for the difference this time has to do with where the virus struck, and not the nature of the disease itself. According to a recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine, the latest outbreak started in Guinea in December 2013. That was a very unfortunate location with many residents and decent transportation.There are plenty of roads that allow the people in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia to move easily among the three countries and between rural areas and dense urban centers. But the research team that wrote the article said that the biological characteristics of the virus are largely the same. Quick and robust public health measures could have stopped the Ebola outbreak early, but the steps that were taken fell short. ""The critical determinant of epidemic size appears to be the speed of implementation of rigorous control measures,"" the article authors wrote. Our ruling Hebert said there have been 27 outbreaks of of Ebola and in no case did the disease spread to a second country. His number is high. A more accurate figure would be between 16 and 22. However, he is correct in his main point, that past efforts have successfully contained the disease. The combination of an exaggerated number and an accurate assessment of the importance of the public health response leads us to rate this claim ."
10660	OrCam helps the blind math teacher 'see' again	The OrCam deviceThis story is basically a testimonial about a math teacher whose medical condition — Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy — left her with impaired vision. The teacher was able to use a new product, a camera that fits beside the wearer’s glasses and “reads” to the wearer, restoring at least in part her ability to “see.” Unfortunately, a description of one woman’s very positive experience with this device isn’t going to give readers the full story here. There’s no discussion of evidence (it’s unclear if there is, in fact, any evidence on this device), and the benefits described by the woman in the story may not be representative of broader experience with it. The story needed to dig deeper and more widely to give readers an accurate portrait of this technology. For people whose vision suddenly deteriorates, any aid which provides them with either a fix for the situation or an alternative method of “seeing” is a huge plus for their quality of life. In the case cited in this story, the OrCam apparently provided that for this individual. But whether such benefits are experienced more broadly is an open question that this story doesn’t attempt to answer.	mixture	Fox News	The story does state the cost of the OrCam camera as being $3,500. The story cites one case of a single individual who has a comparatively rare form of vision loss, which the OrCam device seemed to remedy, at least in part. The individual told the writer that she now can read things in a short period of time where before, she had to read letter-by-letter, a slow, cumbersome method of gaining information. That’s fine as far as it goes, but what’s lacking is whether this experience is representative of others who’ve used the product. Has the product ever been studied? If not, then the story should have said so. In our view, the presentation of a single person’s very positive experience with the device doesn’t provide a balanced enough view of the benefits The device apparently “reads,” deciphers and then dictates what it “sees” to the wearer. We suppose it’s possible that the product could misread something that puts the user at risk of harm, but that seems to be a very hypothetical concern. We’ll rate it Not Applicable. As we said, this is a testimonial. It concerns a single case involving a rare disease. There was no study, no population of participants, no publication of results, and certainly no scientific examination offered. Case studies, which one might charitably describe this as, can be informative but they in no way signify any kind of scientific discovery or indication that might apply to a large population, or to the public in general. The story doesn’t include any discussion of the limitations of this one-person case study, and the headline is a bit misleading. While the teacher may well be legally blind, the product does not actually help her to “see” or actually repair her vision. OrCam performs what seems to be an amazing feat of technology by reading written documents to the user, but it does not “heal the blind.” The story does not commit disease-mongering. Aside from the teacher who’s the subject of this story, one of two quoted sources is Bryan Wolynski, described as “an optometrist who promotes OrCam to doctors and trains patients on how to use the device” — hardly an independent source but we think it’s good that his relationship with the manufacturer is clearly identified. The second referenced source, Dr. Marc Werner, is only described as “another ophthalmologist,” but he does describe some drawbacks to the technology that help balance out the coverage. Given the somewhat promotional nature of the story (the link at the end of the story points to the commercial webpage for the OrCam product),.it would have been nice to have an official acknowledgment of Werner’s independence from the manufacturer, as well as some indication of his specific qualifications in discussing this device. But the story does seem to do the minimum necessary for a Satisfactory rating here. While the story does mention in passing other approaches which can help impaired people see better, these options, described as “large and bulky,” do not represent a Satisfactory range of alternatives. The story offers the OrCam as one option, but it fails to point out that there are numerous other mobile digital devices to help restore some vision, or alternative sensory substitution devices that can translate visual signals into either audible or tactile signals. A casual reader might believe that the OrCam was the only such aid available, based on this story. Since the story links to a website describing the OrCam product, it’s logical to assume it is available on the market. As stated above, this is not the only assist device of its kind available to the visually impaired, and is therefore not as novel as a reader might assume based on the story. The story does not state that this is the only solution to such problems, but readers certainly might get that impression. The somewhat promotional tone of this story gives us pause, but we couldn’t find any news release that this story might be based on. And since there is input from an expert who doesn’t appear to be involved with the product, it seems that the story does have some original reporting that went beyond any news release.
9863	Sounds gross, works great: Fecal transplants cure nasty C. diff infections	The story provides good information about the potential benefits of the procedure. We wish it had done the same in regard to costs and the potential harms. The story could have benefited from a good independent source who was not tied to the study or to the procedure itself. Such an independent source could have provided a critical analysis of the potential limitations in a review of a series of case studies – which is what this study was. Another significant gap in the story was the issue of quality control. How do we make sure the donor is the right donor? Is a family member always the right choice? It seems this type of treatment will require more compelling evidence to make this “gross” sounding option one that is widely supported and available. C. difficile is a serious infection that is increasing as a result of the widespread use of potent antibiotics. Some individuals who develop C. diff. may never have needed the antibiotic that caused the problem in the first place. Once one has C. diff., the standard treatment is another antibiotic that specifically targets the C. diff. Eradicating C. diff in some cases is tough to do, especially individuals who are chronically ill and debilitated, such as individuals in nursing facilities. Recurrence can occur after the antibiotic is stopped. This study addresses such individuals who have had recurrences or are otherwise failing standard therapy. Fecal transplants have been marketed for a wide variety of disorders, which is one of the reasons the story refers to them as “fringe”. In a very good Slate piece earlier this year, the reporter notes that “true believers have even bigger plans. They hope fecal transplants might be used to treat other gut-related conditions, such as ulcerative colitis and even obesity. Some very overweight people, for example, are thought to have more of a certain type of bacteria in their intestines, which causes them to extract extra calories from complex carbohydrates. With this in mind, researchers found that fat mice would lose weight if transplanted with feces from thin ones.” That’s what makes it so important to talk about the science in measured tones and to show people where the evidence truly sits. While a bunch of case reports is intriguing, only studies that compare this novel treatment to established ones and that carefully follow-up patients can answer whether this treatment should be more widely available.	mixture	MSNBC	The story did not discuss costs. Given that the story at one point describes them as “regarded as something of a fringe treatment,” we wonder whether they are often covered by insurance. So both cost and insurability were issues that should have been addressed in our view. The story does quantify the benefits in one sense. It says, “A new review of more than two dozen scientific reports involving 317 patients, some dating back 50 years, finds that fecal bacteriotherapy, commonly known as fecal transplant, cured the problem in 92 percent of the cases.” There should have been a mention of how shaky this result is. As previously cited, this is a compliation of case series. So one should have questions about how meaningful this number is. We know from many studies that when rigorously studied, the results of case series are almost alway less impressive than initially reported. One can only “quantify” the potential benefits by studying this treatment in a scientific manner. That hasn’t been done here. We didn’t think it was right to ding the story in both the “evidence” and “benefits” criteria for the same problem, so, given that we ruled “evidence” unsatisfactory, we’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt here. No harms were mentioned in the story. This seems like a significant oversight. One of the reasons the transplants work is because fecal matter carries so much bacteria, but this is also what can make them dangerous because diseases can be transmitted. How do you know which donor to use? Do you need to test their stool to make sure it’s ok? There are a lot of quality control problems that may affect the safety of this procedure. What if you ask someone who doesn’t want to let on that they have gastrointestinal problems? Would they feel pressured to donate? This is an issue that occurs on organ donation programs. The story calls the study “the most comprehensive evidence so far” but we would have expected at least a little more critical analysis of the potential holes in such a review. We would have liked to have seen more discussion of the study’s limitations, particularly the fact that this is a retrospective review, not a clinical trial comparing fecal transplants to other procedures or to a placebo. This level of evidence represents a lower rung on the evidence ladder. In case series, there is no control group and one always worries about bias in reporting. It’s interesting to report patients responding to a new treatment but not always so interesting to to report when it doesn’t work. We could have gone either way with this score, but we’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt. Not only does the story avoid disease-mongering, it does a very nice job describing exactly who would be the target for these treatments. The story says, “Rates of C. diff acquired in health care settings have skyrocketed in recent years, climbing more than 200 percent in people older than 65 between 1996 and 2009, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Between 20 percent and 50 percent of those patients may wind up with hard-to-treat recurrent infections, Rubin said.” The story could have done a better job saying that antibiotics are used for C. diff with generally good results. This treatment refers to those individuals who have already been on antibiotics and are having recurrences or other problems. The story fell down a little here. It starts and ends with anecdotes from a woman who is described as essentially an evangelist for fecal transplants. Then it quotes the lead author of the review. And it quotes “Dr. Tim Rubin, a gastroenterologist with Essentia Health in Duluth, Minn., whose team performed its 119th fecal transplant last week.” No one is brought in to independently evaluate the evidence or to give an assessment of the safety or efficacy of these treatments. The story does not provide an in-depth comparison, but it does at least mention the other options. It says that the transplants have “a better record than other treatments, including probiotics, toxin-binding molecules and an experimental vaccine.” The story does not make it clear that this is not a widely available therapy. It cites one Duluth gastroenterologist who has done over 100 of the procedures. But we don’t all live in Duluth. Our medical editor reviewing this piece – a physician in Boston – didn’t know about availability of the approach in that medical Mecca. There is a confusing sentence in this piece: “For most of the last decade, fecal transplants have been regarded as something of a fringe treatment by outsiders, but as a viable treatment by doctors who see desperate C. diff patients every day.” We are not experts in fecal transplantation, but our understanding is that it has been around for much longer than a decade, as evidenced by the fact that some of the studies included in this review are 50 years old. We thought that the lead researcher put it best in saying, “It’s considered a treatment of last resort.” The story does not rely on a news release.
26990	"Better Future Michigan Says Gary Peters ""supports ‘Medicare for All,’ siding with radical liberals."	"A TV ad by Better Future Michigan claimed that Peters ""supports Medicare for All, siding with radical liberals."" The statement is based on two videos from a 2018 town hall meeting. Though the senator does not tell a Medicare for All supporter that he backs this approach, he agreed that it could be a ""pathway"" in the future. But from this comment to the ad’s overall assertion is a big stretch. Specifically, Peters is on the record as supporting efforts to protect the Affordable Care Act from Republican changes, offering a public option and lowering the eligibility age for Medicare. He also supports keeping private insurance. In addition, he is not a co-sponsor of Sanders’ Medicare for All legislation, and single-payer advocates within Michigan said he ""definitely"" does not support this approach."	false	Health Care, Health Check, Better Future Michigan,	"Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), who is running for a second term as Michigan’s junior senator, is the subject of an attack ad that takes issue with his position on ""Medicare for All."" The ad claims that ""Peters supports Medicare for All, siding with radical liberals."" But Peters’ legislative record and public statements suggest otherwise. One Michigan advocate for this single-payer approach even said Peters has never been a part of their cause. The ad aired on TV stations across the state starting Dec. 12 and was funded by Better Future Michigan. Initially, the commercial was pulled from some airways after being challenged by the Peters’ campaign for ""being objectively and unquestionably ."" Better Future Michigan updated and re-released the ad Dec. 16, saying Peters ""supported"" rather than ""endorsed"" Medicare for All, and ran it through Dec. 20. The commercial drew our interest ― not only because of the questions it triggered about Peters’ position on health reform, but also because it highlights how the debate over Medicare for All could play out in races ranging from the presidential campaign to House and Senate contests. A matter of ‘he said, she said’ We started out by checking with Better Future Michigan, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit group, to find out the basis for the ad. (Under IRS rules, 501 (c)(4) groups do not have to disclose their donors.) Tori Sachs, its executive director, pointed to two videos from a 2018 town hall meeting, featuring an exchange between Peters and a voter who supports the single-payer approach to health reform. Peters responded by saying he wants to protect the Affordable Care Act from Republicans and introduce a public option in the insurance exchange. But Peters also said: ""The path forward is where you’re going to have Medicare for All down the road. That’s probably where we’re going to go. But we’ve got to deal with the problem we have right now."" This statement, according to Sachs, is central to Better Future Michigan’s position. ""If Peters is (or was) so staunchly against Medicare for All, why did he acknowledge that it’s the future?"" she wrote in an email. ""Someone opposed to an issue or policy would at minimum qualify such a statement, but instead, Peters’ surrounding discussion with the town hall participant shows otherwise."" (Sachs managed John James’ failed 2018 challenge to unseat Michigan’s senior Democratic senator, Debbie Stabenow. James is now running against Peters.) An April 2019 press release from the National Republican Senatorial Committee advanced a similar argument, saying Peters is ""playing both sides"" of the Medicare for All debate. The Peters campaign pushed back. ""This dark money group with close ties to John James is pushing objectively claims in their attack ads in a desperate attempt to lie to Michigan voters. Senator Peters’ position has been clear and consistent that he supports strengthening the Affordable Care Act and expanding access to health insurance through common sense policies like adding a public option and letting people 50 and older buy into Medicare but does not support Medicare for All or eliminating private health insurance,"" said Dan Farough, Peters’ campaign manager, in an email. The campaign also provided several articles in which the senator shied away from supporting Medicare for All. In an August 2019 interview with Politico, when asked if Medicare for All proponents could win his state, Peters said they would ""have to show and be able to explain exactly how that would help folks here in Michigan,"" and ""I think people do want to have the opportunity to keep private insurance."" His position appeared consistent in other press reports, too, ranging from Michigan TV interviews to a CNN article. Peters generally voiced his support for shoring up the Affordable Care Act, offering a public option on the insurance marketplace and lowering the eligibility age for Medicare. In 2019, he co-sponsored a bill that would allow anyone over 50 to buy into Medicare and another bill that would establish a public health plan option on the insurance exchange. Peters has not co-sponsored Sanders’ Medicare for All legislation. Eli Rubin, president of the advocacy group Michigan for Single Payer Healthcare, said that Peters ""definitely does not support Medicare for All,"" but that he also doesn’t like to take a position or directly answer questions about it. ""We’ve had many encounters with him and asked him about it, and he won’t say, ‘No, out of the question,’ but he dodges the question every time,"" said Rubin. ""He turns the conversation every time to where he talks about his defense of the Affordable Care Act."" Marianne Udow-Phillips, the director of the nonpartisan Center for Health and Research Transformation at the University of Michigan, offered another take. ""What he is trying to do is not foreclose strategies, but to essentially say that is not his area of focus on health care right now,"" she said. ""Michigan is like the rest of the country,"" said Udow-Phillips. ""People are primarily concerned with the cost of health care and pocketbook issues. They’re worried about deductibles and copays. They’re worried about surprise bills. I don’t think on a statewide basis Medicare for All is a motivating issue or speaks to people in a broad way."" Still, pollsters and policy experts point out that for some voters in the progressive wing of the Democratic Party support for Medicare for All can become a litmus test. Why there’s such a fuss With the 2020 election fast approaching, there’s a sense among some Democrats in Michigan and other battleground states that supporting progressive issues like Medicare for All could translate into political baggage on the campaign trail. ""Independents and swing voters are more negative against Medicare for All,"" said Robert Blendon of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who is an expert on public opinion of social policy. For instance, 65% of swing voters in Michigan said a national Medicare for All plan that would eliminate private health insurance is a bad idea, according to a November 2019 Kaiser Family Foundation poll. (Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent program of the foundation.) The issue can also be weaponized against Democratic candidates. Colleen Grogan, a professor at the University of Chicago’s School of Social Service Administration, pointed out that it is a common GOP strategy to associate Medicare for All with socialized medicine. It can also be used to play on the public’s lack of confidence in government-run social programs, she added. ""The whole idea is that the government is such a demon in the U.S.,"" said Grogan. ""It’s easy for Republicans to demonize the government … and say, ‘You don’t want them [the government] running your health care program.’"" Another benefit of this attack method, which could be used frequently in the run-up to November, according to Blendon, is that it doesn’t require the GOP to offer a policy alternative and instead focuses on how Medicare for All would eliminate private insurance. ""From the Republican point of view, it doesn’t require you to take a stand on what you’ll do for health care,"" he said. ""But it does allow you to say, you won’t have any choice in your health care."" Our ruling A TV ad by Better Future Michigan claimed that Peters ""supports Medicare for All, siding with radical liberals."" The statement is based on two videos from a 2018 town hall meeting. Though the senator does not tell a Medicare for All supporter that he backs this approach, he agreed that it could be a ""pathway"" in the future. But from this comment to the ad’s overall assertion is a big stretch. Specifically, Peters is on the record as supporting efforts to protect the Affordable Care Act from Republican changes, offering a public option and lowering the eligibility age for Medicare. He also supports keeping private insurance. In addition, he is not a co-sponsor of Sanders’ Medicare for All legislation, and single-payer advocates within Michigan said he ""definitely"" does not support this approach."
34171	Colonel Sanders' original fried chicken recipe was stolen from a black woman named Miss Childress.	Alternatively, Sanders might have borrowed and taken elements of several fried chicken recipes, perhaps some of them invented by, or passed down or shared between, African American women — in the way that many recipes evolve and change over the years. “Miss Childress” might simply be a stand-in or symbolic victim in the wider legacy of appropriation and intellectual property theft that characterized much of the cultural relations between whites and blacks in early 20th-century America. Until and unless we obtain concrete evidence that clears up that uncertainty.	unproven	Food	In September 2019, we received multiple inquiries from readers regarding an old story about the origins of the famous KFC original recipe — the blend of herbs and spices that went into creating “Colonel” Harland Sanders’ original Kentucky Fried Chicken. The African Diaspora Facebook page wrote: “Meet Mrs. Childress. Colonel Sanders Stole His Famous Fried Chicken Recipe From A Black Woman Named Mrs. Childress. He later paid her $1,200 for her recipe. KFC is worth 15 Billion Dollars today.” That text was accompanied by the following image: On Sept. 3, a Facebook account with the name Glenn Dickens wrote, “In case you didn’t know. Meet Miss Childress, she died in poverty. She is the woman behind the original #KFC recipe. He took all her profits and made us think it was his recipe.” In recent years, this story has appeared in many other social media posts, memes, and articles, all of them claiming that the recipe that made Sanders rich and gave rise to one of the most popular fast-food chains in American history was initially stolen from a black woman (sometimes named “Mrs. Childress,” sometimes “Miss Childress,” and in some instances not named). Many iterations of the story hold that Sanders later handed over the relatively meager amount of $1,200 after getting pressured by the woman’s family, and most posts include an image of an African American woman preparing fried chicken in a kitchen, describing her as “Miss Childress.” In reality, the image was taken from a 1920s magazine advertisement for Snowdrift shortening, one that played on racist and painfully outdated stereotypes of that era, and depicted the woman (named only as “Sarah”) as an exemplar of the racist “mammy” caricature — a cheerful, black, female domestic servant to white families, especially in the segregation-era American South. It’s possible the image is a photograph, but it is perhaps more likely a painting, since the norm for popular American magazines in the 1920s — such as Ladies’ Home Journal, where the “Sarah” advertisement was published — was for photographs to be printed in black and white, with illustrations presented in color. It’s not clear who the woman depicted in the advertisement was or on whom she was modeled, so we cannot rule out the possibility that she was the “Miss Childress” described in the KFC memes. Also, evidence is lacking in support of the main claim — that Sanders stole his famous original fried chicken recipe from a black woman named Miss Childress. A 2010 blog post claimed that: “Ron Douglas in ‘America’s Most Wanted Recipes’ says that Sanders took his secret recipe from a black woman, one Miss Childress of Kentucky, whose family he paid $1,200 when they complained.” However, Douglas’ book does not, in fact, make any such claim. We found no evidence to support the “Miss Childress” story in a newspaper archive that stretches back more than 100 years, and the prominent food writer Joshua Ozersky made no mention of Sanders’ having stolen the recipe from a specific black woman, in his widely cited 2003 biography “Colonel Sanders and the American Dream.” The version of events presented there by Ozersky is the conventionally accepted one: Sanders set up a gas station in Corbin, Kentucky, during the 1930s, then began serving food there, including fried chicken. His food and hospitality garnered the gas station a good reputation among passing travelers, and he eventually converted the business into a restaurant and motel. Sanders settled upon a blend of 11 herbs and spices that went into making his fried chicken, and began using a pressure cooker to fry the chicken. In later years, he franchised out the use of his recipe to restaurants across the United States, and from there the iconic brand emerged. Sanders’ decision to use a pressure cooker (rather than a pan or deep fryer) to make the chicken was arguably the key factor in the development of fried chicken as “fast food” and the extraordinary success of Kentucky Fried Chicken. This is a factor the “Miss Childress” memes and social media posts typically neglect, suggesting as they do that the success of Sanders and KFC was entirely attributable to the blend of herbs and spices used to season the chicken itself. According to Ozersky, for example, the use of the pressure cooker was considerably more important. As he wrote in his 2003 biography of Sanders: “… What made the chicken great was the innovation of using a pressure cooker to make it. It’s much less glamorous than any secret mixture of herbs and spices but far more important … No one was going to start a fast food empire using cast-iron skillets, even if those were the best way to cook chicken. (And they are …) It takes too long to make chicken in a pan and even the most colossal version hammered out by a southern smithy can only hold thirty pieces at a time at most.” Sanders patented his pressure cooker process in 1966, writing in his application that the method he had come up with allowed a cook to create “accurately controlled conditions of temperature, pressure, time, sizes of serving pieces, and amount and composition of breading used, for the purpose of producing superior taste, texture and appearance in the finished product.” While Ozersky cited no specific act of intellectual property theft on the part of Sanders, he did allude to the racial tensions and cultural appropriation involved in the development of fried chicken in the early 20th century American South, writing that Sanders embodied the following “paradox”: “Anyone who knew anything of the South knew that no Kentucky colonel would have cooked the fried chicken in a southern household; the chicken in prosperous southern households, particularly in the Colonel’s era, was inevitably cooked by a black maid or family housekeeper. Colonel Sanders created an alternative reality in which the white planter not only ate the chicken but implicitly made it. Nothing could have been further from the truth.” We also put the “Miss Childress” story to Psyche Williams-Forson, chair of the department of American Studies at the University of Maryland College Park, an expert in the interaction of food, cultural history and women’s studies and author of the 2006 book “Building Houses Out of Chicken Legs: Black Women, Food and Power.” She told us she had found “no direct evidence that Colonel Sanders ‘stole’ the KFC recipe from an African American woman,” and had come across no information that indicated Sanders later paid the woman $1,200 under pressure from her family. However, Williams-Forson emphasized that a history does exist of white entrepreneurs and chefs taking recipes from African American women and men, without giving them proper credit. She pointed to the example of Idella Parker, who was a long-time maid to the white cookbook author Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings, and later an author in her own right. In her 2006 book, Williams-Forson wrote: “The cookbook, according to Parker, required ‘months and months together’ in Rawlings’ tiny kitchen extracting the recipes from ‘[Parker’s] hands and head.’ [Parker] says: ‘Many of the recipes in the book were mine, but [Rawlings] only gave me credit for three of them, including ‘Idella’s biscuits.’ There were several others that were mine too, such as the chocolate pie, and of course it was me who did most of the cooking when we were trying the recipes out.’ “In the end, Parker, whose many contributions made the cookbook a reality, only received an autographed copy. But of this she says, ‘in those days I was grateful for any little crumb that white people let fall, so I kept my thoughts about the cookbook strictly to myself. '” More broadly, Williams-Forson told us, “some black women who performed domestic service had their recipes improperly ‘borrowed. '” She added: “Given that throughout enslavement and long after, African American and white women often worked together in the kitchen instructing and cooking various recipes, it is quite difficult to make a strong assertion of whose recipe belongs to whom. The issue, however, is that African American women were never credited in cookbooks. How is this possible given the proven evidence of African American culinary skill?” Despite the absence of documentary evidence to support the “Miss Childress” theory, Williams-Forson outlined the reasons why it should not be dismissed, writing to us in an email: “This is not to say it did not happen. I am saying I did not find this evidence. And where might this evidence be uncovered? Would Sanders have acknowledged it? Might the African American family have kept a receipt? This is a needle in a haystack because it happened so often to African Americans, who were denied the opportunity to read and write, and thus were unable to document their culinary practices.” Although we have found no evidence to support the claim, it is possible that Sanders did directly steal his fried chicken recipe from a specific African American woman, who may or may not have been named Childress. If he did, it is also plausible that no documentary evidence of that act of plagiarism ever existed, or that if it did, it has not survived.
26020	“The (COVID-19) cases are going up, but it's because the testing is going up.”	Testing rates were dropping — not rising — as COVID-19 cases rose in late June. Health officials say contract tracing has revealed many new cases stem from bars, parties and other events where social distancing is not being maintained, particularly among residents in their 20s.	false	Public Health, Wisconsin, Coronavirus, Chris Kapenga,	"After an extended period of mostly positive trends, COVID-19 is making a resurgence in America. At least 21 states were pausing reopening plans or taking new steps to limit the virus as of June 30, USA TODAY reported. In Wisconsin, new cases rose noticeably the last two weeks of June after falling steadily in the first half of the month. The reversal has led to an increased push for mask usage and other measures to limit the spread. But one Wisconsin lawmaker said a step like mandating masks isn't needed, pointing in part to the number of tests being conducted. ""The cases are going up, but it's because the testing is going up,"" Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, said in an interview with WISN-TV on June 29, 2020. ""The hospitalization rate is still within the comfort zone of every single hospital."" We’ll focus on the first part of this phrase, since the interplay of testing and case trends is critical to understanding what the virus is doing in our state. Essentially, Kapenga is blaming the increase only on the volume of tests. Here’s why that’s wrong. Wisconsin isn’t seeing a surge as significant as some states in the South, but the cases are clearly rising. The seven-day average of new cases was around 270 in mid-June, but it rose to more than 400 by late June when Kapenga made his statement. The seven-day average is the best judge of general trends since it smooths out the daily stats, which can jump up and down for a variety of reasons. But Kapenga’s reasoning fails on two fronts. First, this ignores the more detailed stats that show what is actually driving the increase. Experts say people here are letting their guard down, particularly residents in their 20s who went from 20% of the state’s positive tests before June 22 to 40% after that date. They point to the increasing willingness — in that age group and others — to get together at bars, parties and other social events. Contact tracing has confirmed these get-togethers as an increasingly common source of COVID-19 infections. The trend has spurred officials in Madison to order bars to close again. Second, his basic premise is flat wrong — testing isn’t going up. The seven-day average of daily tests in Wisconsin peaked at 12,000 on June 9 and has marched steadily downward since. The average was just over 9,000 on June 29 when Kapenga made his claim. Throughout May, new cases and testing volume both generally rose. But the trends separated after that. And in the last half of June new cases rose as testing dropped. The seven-day average of daily tests in Wisconsin peaked at 12,000 on June 9 and has marched steadily downward since. The average was just over 9,000 on June 29 when Kapenga made his claim. In a statement to PolitiFact Wisconsin, Kapenga said his full comments to WISN focused on hospitalizations, which have continued to drop throughout June. ""The interview was largely about face mask mandates and not a detailed analysis of testing data and trends,"" Kapenga said. ""This statement was a generality and not intended to be a commentary on any new trend beginning at that time of the interview."" Addressing rising COVID-19 case counts in Wisconsin, Kapenga said measures like mandatory mask use aren’t necessary because cases are rising due to increased testing. That’s flat wrong. Experts say there are clear drivers to the recent uptick, like residents in their 20s largely ignoring social distancing. So Kapenga’s attempt to minimize the trend to a result of testing frequency is misguided. Most notably, Kapenga’s core premise is simply not accurate. Testing was dropping, not rising, in late June as cases rose. He defended his claim as a ""generality,"" but it’s a generality that hasn’t been true since May."
3709	Surgeon General, former state commissioner, heads to Purdue.	The federal government’s top doctor is making a stop at Purdue University to discuss the nation’s efforts to combat the opioid epidemic.	true	Epidemics, General News, Health, Lafayette, Indiana, Donald Trump	U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams was appointed to that post in 2017 by President Donald Trump after serving as Indiana’s state health commissioner. During Monday’s visit to Purdue, Adams will deliver a speech titled “The Road to Recovery: Combating the Opioid Crisis” and participate in a question and answer session with students. The Journal & Courier reports that Adams’ visit will come the same day Purdue unveils a new “Hope Stems” art exhibit focused on how opioid use damages the brain that will feature a brain-shaped sculpture. State health officials say Indiana had 1,800 drug overdose deaths in 2017, with nearly two-thirds of those deaths involving opioids.
31394	A video captures a cat with an extremely deep meow.	A video purportedly shows a feline with an extremely deep meow.	false	Fauxtography	In May 2017, a 2015 video featuring a cat with an unusually deep voice inexplicably went viral, and was duly picked up by various tabloids: Don’t let this cat’s small stature fool you – he has a bass voice that would put Barry White to shame. In a video filmed by the kitty’s owner, he’s just chilling on the kitchen counter. Unsurprisingly, his ridiculously low voice has gone viral, with a lot of people wondering how it’s physically possible for such a tiny cat to produce such a noise. There are several reasons to be skeptical about this footage. The video was originally posted to YouTube by “Cash CatFlava” in December 2015, bearing the description “So this is Jack and he has some sort of type of laryngeal paralysis? At least thats what the vet told me.” Some cats do suffer laryngeal paralysis, but a deep meow is not a known symptom of the disease. Dr. Jessica Vogelsang, a California-based veterinarian with expertise in small animals, told us: “While certain medical conditions such as hyperthyroidism or masses can alter a cat’s meow, I’ve yet to see a cat who developed a deep and humanlike meow like this. Any change in a cat’s meow is a good reason to visit the vet because the meow shouldn’t change over time!” According to the American College of Veterinarian Surgeons, a cat with laryngeal paralysis may display harsh panting or a coarse (not deeper) voice: In dogs and cats with laryngeal paralysis, the muscles that normally pull the airway open do not function properly. When an affected pet breathes in, the walls of the airway do not pull open—rather, they are sucked into the opening, or in severe cases sucked shut. Early in the condition, this creates increased noise when they breathe; later, it can completely obstruct their airway, and they can suffocate. The early signs of laryngeal paralysis can be quite subtle. You may notice: harshness in their panting increased panting or panting when cool and calm a hoarse or raspy-sounding bark A video of a cat suffering from laryngeal paralysis shows that their meows are not comically deep, but squeaky (and arguably a little sad):
11610	Fewer clogged arteries need heart stents, study finds; blood-flow test can show which ones do	Coronary artery stenting has not been shown to prevent deaths or other adverse events compared to medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease. One reason for this is that many people are given stents based on the results of coronary angiography and this test cannot predict who will benefit from the procedure and who will not. Adding an additional test at the time of angiography, the Functional Flow Reserve Test (FFR, also known as the blood-flow test) may add more information on who could benefit from the placement of a stent. A study released in January 15th’s New England Journal of Medicine found that adding FFR to conventional angiography allowed the researchers to better identify and intervene on those who are more likely to benefit from stenting. This story does a good job of describing the current study and its potential implications for clinical practice. It adequately quantifies the benefits of angiography+FFR, quotes multiple sources, does not engage in disease mongering and accurately describes the novelty of FFR. The story could have better described the alternatives to angiography with FFR. Clearly angiography alone is the alternative to angiography + FFR. The story briefly mentions stress testing but could have done more to describe the pros and cons of these different testing strategies. Stress testing is underutilized as a first step prior to angiography and it is currently unknown what role it should play in a testing strategy that would include angiography + FFR. Finally, the story could have done a better job explaining the availability of FFR. The story mentions that the FFR test is used in only 10% of angiographies currently. What is not clear is if that low percentage is due to lack of availability of the technology or practitioners who are trained to use it and where a consumer could expect to find it (in large, academic medical centers only, for example). Overall, the story did a good job and addressed most of our criteria.	true		The story adequately describes the cost of performing the test, although it could have been compared to the cost of no stenting. The story quantifies the mortality rate in the angiography alone versus angiography + FFR group. The story also quantifies the number of stents placed in both groups. The story could have also highlighted the fact that FFR did not reduce the number of people getting stents in the first place. The story does not mention any harms of FFR. In this context, however, the potential for harms of FFR are insignificant compared to risks of angiography and stenting. The story adequately describes the design of the current study and notes that more studies are needed to confirm the results. The story clearly states who this test is appropriate for – those experiencing chest pain symptoms or recovering from a heart attack – and not assymptomatic individuals or those with elevated risk factors for heart disease. The story quotes multiple experts, including one who is identified as not being associated with the study. Clearly angiography alone is the alternative to angiography + FFR. The story briefly mentions stress testing but could have done more to describe the pros and cons of these different testing strategies. Stress testing is underutilized as a first step prior to angiography and it is currently unknown what role it should play in a testing strategy that would include angiography + FFR. The story mentions that the Functional Flow Reserve Test (FFR, also known as the blood-flow test) is used in only 10% of angiographies currently. What is not clear is if that low percentage is due to lack of availability of the technology or practitioners who are trained to use it and where a consumer could expect to find it (in large, academic medical centers only, for example) The story clearly states that FFR is not a new test but it has not been widely used. The story quotes more than one expert, one of whom is identified as not being associated with the study. Although the content of the story is very similar to the Stanford press release, it is clear that there was enterprise reporting.
928	Democrats take aim as Trump abandons drug pricing plan.	Democrats see U.S. President Donald Trump becoming increasingly vulnerable to criticism about healthcare costs after the administration’s decision to scrap a proposal to lower drug prices, and 2020 White House candidates are rushing to seize the spotlight on the issue.	true	Health News	The debate over the future of the American healthcare system has become a focal point of the Democratic presidential nominating contest. As Trump has failed to make strides to remedy the problem, Democrats are becoming more vocal. Some Democrats have been making big promises on healthcare, vowing to sweeping overhauls and complete government takeovers. But even candidates like U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, who would abolish private health insurance, are wading into the debate about lowering costs for consumers buying drugs in the current market. Trump talked regularly about drug prices during his 2016 campaign, but has failed so far to deliver the changes he promised. On Thursday his administration scrapped one of its most ambitious proposals for lowering prescription medicine prices, backing down from a policy aimed at health insurers and raising the possibility of new measures focused on drugmakers. The abandoned proposal would have required health insurers to pass billions of dollars in rebates from drugmakers to Medicare patients. Drug prices directly affect consumers, making it a more pressing concern for voters than debates over the structure of the healthcare system, said Robert Blendon, a political scientist at Harvard University who researches public opinion on healthcare. Blendon said Trump, having failed to broker any deals in Congress, made his drug price plan too complicated, and voters are unlikely to see him as having made any strides. That is an opportunity for Democrats to offer their own effort at messaging. A study Blendon produced earlier this year found that given a list of problems, nine out of 10 Americans chose the price of prescription drugs as an extremely important issue. But voters’ concerns do not extend to the stability or structure of government, with only 25% saying they are concerned about the stability of Medicare. “Whoever gains anything politically out of this is going to have to talk about this (so that) it sounds like you understand,” Blendon said. “It really is a pocketbook issue.” On Thursday, U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand unveiled a plan to lower drug prices. On Friday, Democrat Amy Klobuchar announced a plan to help lower the cost of pharmaceuticals purchased by seniors. Warren also has a Medicare pricing plan. Sanders is heading to Canada later this month for an event to highlight the difference in the price of insulin. Blendon said it was becoming obvious to candidates like Sanders that they cannot peg their entire healthcare message to arguing for a universal system. “Medicare for all is not a top issue for older voters,” Blendon said. Klobuchar’s proposal, which includes investing in research for a cure for Alzheimer’s disease and improving the stability of Social Security, would allow the government to negotiate Medicare Part D costs, which cover prescriptions for seniors. Klobuchar, a U.S. senator from Minnesota, would also let people order prescription drugs from countries like Canada, a proposal proponents say would lower costs. Blendon said import changes are the most popular with voters, who fail to see how drugs from Canada or England are any more risky than ones made in the United States.
11117	Heart Attack Study Casts Doubt On Routine Use of Angioplasty	The article describes a new study that shows a commonly used procedure, angioplasty, is not more effective than medical therapy (taking medications and lifestyle change) in preventing heart attack or death in people with stable heart disease. The story does a good job of clearly letting readers know the availability of this treatment, that it's not new, the costs of treatment, and the alternate treatment options. It also turned to several independent sources. One area that could have been clearer was stating that this was a randomized trial – the gold standard in research. It's hinted at several times in the article, but it's never clearly disclosed and this is a major point to make to establish the strength of the evidence. The story could have also done a better job quantifying the benefits seen in the trial, although a secondary outcome is given in absolute terms. The actual numbers for the primary outcome were not given, except to state that they were not statistically significant. Yet, readers aren't given any context about what that might mean. Finally, harms of angioplasty are not discussed.	true		"The story mentions that angioplasty typically costs $50,000. While it would have been helpful to have a sense for the cost of angioplasty in in comparison to medical therapy, the story does give a sense of the cost burden to the healthcare system by providing procedures that don't benefit a significant proportion of patients. The story does not provide actual rates of events (the primary outcome) between the two groups, although it does state that the numbers were not statistically significant. The story does provide absolute rates for angina, a secondary outcome which was significantly different between groups. Yet, it would have been best to report absolute rates, even if they are non-significant, for the primary outcome. There was no discussion about what ""statistically non-significant"" might mean. The story states the procedure is considered ""safe"" but that it does carry some risks. However, what those risks are and their frequency or severity is not discussed. The story doesn't mention explicitly that this study was a randomized trial, the gold standard in research, even though there were multiple opportunities to clarify the type of evidence the findings are based on. The story describes the study as ""the first well-designed comparison…"" which doesn't make it explicit that this is a randomized trial. A quote from a clinician talks about the fact that ""nobody had done a proper randomized trial"" but that doesn't necessarily make it clear that this is a randomized trial. Nonetheless, we'll give the story the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. No obvious disease-mongering. Several sources are quoted. The story discusses lifestyle changes and medication as alternate treatment options, and these alternate options were directly compared to angioplasty in the study. The article states the new study challenges routine use of a procedure – angioplasty – that has become standard care, thereby letting readers know that this procedure is currently used and widely available. The story accurately states this has been routine practice for the past 20 years. Since several sources were used, it is safe to assume that this story did not rely solely or largely on a news release."
11347	Investigational CDK4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib is active against a range of cancer types	This release about the first set of tests in patients prescribed an experimental cancer drug, abemaciclib, uses language that mostly hews to the careful tone of the researchers’ journal article. It does not make any premature claims of cure or even extended survival. The release includes sections labeled “Limitations” and “Funding & Disclosures” that highlight these vital elements. We would have liked to see at least some discussion of the possible cost of the drug, especially since a similar drug mentioned in the release is priced around $10,000/month. The release could have explicitly noted that the new drug could fail ongoing trials, instead of using language that implies eventual success. Even with expedited status and favorable study results, it would likely be 1-3 years before this drug could be approved for routine use. People with cancer are on the lookout for any potential new treatment. Writers of news releases about experimental cancer drugs must be careful not to imply benefits that have not been proven. As this release demonstrates, even when there are no claims of cure or even extended survival, readers can come away with an inflated sense of the likely success of a drug that is only beginning to be tested in people. This study highlights a second agent in a new class of medicines that may broadly target a range of cancer types that may have similar mechanisms of action. Which cancers, at what stage and for which patients still needs to be determined. Moreover, it will need to be compared to other established and experimental medicines to determine its relative benefits and harms.	true	Association/Society news release,Cancer	While one could say it is far too soon to start talking about the cost of a drug that is only beginning to be tested in people, the release compared abemaciclib to a somewhat similar drug, palbociclib (brand name: Ibrance) that is listed at approximately $10,000/month. The release could have referred to the costs of similar drugs… and perhaps included some mention of how long researchers anticipate patients would be treated with this sort of drug. As an aside, the Wall Street Journal reported a fascinating story on how Pfizer set the (just under) $10,000/month list price of Ibrance. The release is appropriately restrained in its description of the potential benefits of a drug just starting the long process of trials in patients. It specifically reports the number of trial participants whose tumors appeared to respond or at least not advance during the test, without making premature claims of effectiveness. However, we would like to see news releases about early trials of cancer drugs go further, to state explicitly that signs of partial responses or stable disease do not imply potential cures or even extended survival. More emphatic cautionary statements seem particularly appropriate to releases like this one that point out an experimental drug has been given “breakthrough therapy designation” by the FDA, which is a technical definition that the FDA notes is frequently misinterpreted by the public and even health care professionals. Since it referenced “durable response,” it would have been nice to see the release include a definition. In brief, the term refers to the length of time that a partial or complete response is observed as a result of treatment. The release notes that “the most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, weight loss, kidney dysfunction, and decreased red and white blood cell counts.” Although the release does not go into specific detail about the number of patients who reported side effects, or the degree of severity of the side effects, the list of harms seems adequate for a drug just beginning the clinical trial process. The release clearly summarizes what the researchers reported in their article in the Cancer Discovery medical journal; that is, that this test involving just a couple of hundred patients showed the drug could be tolerated at doses that seem to show some effects on some tumors. We applaud the news release for including a paragraph labeled “Limitations” that stated only 225 patients with different forms of cancer were involved, so further tests are needed to determine what role this drug might have in cancer care. The release would have been stronger if it had spelled out that the study was performed in patients who had failed prior treatments so readers won’t assume this drug could be used for first line therapy. The release does not exaggerate the seriousness of the cancers that were studied. The release includes a “Funding & Disclosures” paragraph. It lists funding by Eli Lilly and Company. It also lists some of the payments and other connections between key researchers and the company. We like the format used for this EurekAlert version of the release, which also notes the funder in a box just to the right of the release’s headline. The release spells out some specific features of abemaciclib that explain why researchers think it has potential advantages over a similar drug that is already FDA-approved. However, this comparison puts the new drug in an entirely positive light, which it has yet to demonstrate it deserves. We’ll dock points for that concern here. Since the comparison with the competing drug also speaks to abemaciclib’s novelty, we’ll award a Satisfactory for that criterion (see below) so as not to double-ding the release. The release notes that abemaciclib is now being tested in trials designed to “define the role of abemaciclib in cancer care.” However, it never explicitly states that these trials might end up finding that the drug does not ultimately provide sufficient advantages over existing treatments. Its reference to “investigational” in the title and text may be enough to give some readers the tip-off that this drug won’t be available anytime soon. However, we recommend news release writers make it abundantly clear when a drug is only available as part of research trials and that it is not available for use in routine clinical practice. The statement, “FDA decision to grant breakthrough therapy designation,” may lead a reader to think this could be available for use more broadly. The release explains that although there are other drugs that attack cancer cells in a similar way, this drug has some differences. As noted above, the release casts all the differences with existing drugs as advantages, when of course these features have yet to be adequately tested. The release avoids unjustified claims, although the overall cast is entirely positive, leaving it to journalists and other readers to balance the rosy image with some skepticism.
189	Reuters asks judge to release secret Propecia documents.	Reuters asked a U.S. judge on Thursday to unseal documents filed in court regarding potential risks associated with Propecia, Merck & Co’s popular baldness drug.	true	Health News	"The motion was filed in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, after a Reuters article on Wednesday revealed accusations that Merck did not fully disclose on Propecia’s label the incidence and duration of sexual dysfunction in men who took Propecia in clinical trials. Those allegations are contained in court filings that had been intended to be filed under seal. Read the Reuters report here Federal District Judge Brian Cogan has allowed Merck to keep secret internal company documents in litigation brought by Propecia users against the company. A faulty redaction allowed Reuters to view some of the details in a plaintiff’s brief, but the underlying Merck documents cited in that brief are still sealed. Those are the documents the Reuters motion seeks to make public. “This is a case of tremendous importance that has been sealed without on-the-record findings explaining that sealing,” Reuters argued in its motion to intervene in the case. “The First Amendment precludes such an outcome.” Merck did not respond to a request for comment. The company previously told Reuters it “stands behind the safety and efficacy of Propecia” and noted that the drug has been prescribed safely to millions of men since the late 1990s. A June 25 Reuters investigation revealed how judges have allowed the makers of dozens of consumer products to file under seal in their courts information that is pertinent to public health and safety. They often do so without explanation, though in most jurisdictions, they are required to provide one. Read the Reuters investigatihere The investigation found that hundreds of thousands of Americans have been killed or seriously injured over the past couple of decades by allegedly defective products — drugs, cars, medical devices and other products — while evidence that could have alerted consumers and regulators to potential danger remained under seal. More than 1,100 Propecia-related lawsuits filed across the U.S. against Merck were consolidated before Judge Cogan in so-called multidistrict litigation (MDL). Merck agreed to settle most of them last year for $4.3 million, to be divided among the plaintiffs. Prior to the settlement, plaintiffs’ lawyers cited internal company communications to allege that in revisions to the drug’s original label, Merck understated the number of men who experienced sexual symptoms in clinical trials, and how long those symptoms lasted. Merck settled before responding to the allegation in court. Under U.S. law, court filings are presumed to be public, and the bar for secrecy is particularly high for the Propecia documents Reuters seeks to unseal, the motion states, because they are essential to plaintiffs’ claim that the drug causes persistent sexual side effects. ""These documents should not remain under seal absent the most compelling reasons,"" Reuters argued. Read the Reuters motihere"
10431	Study: Many elderly get colon screening too often	As the WSJ blog did, this story’s interview quotes provided important perspectives: Researcher Goodwin saying “I was surprised by the magnitude of the issue.” “Robert Smith, director of cancer screening at the American Cancer Society, said some doctors may recommend more frequent colonoscopies because they think 10-year intervals are too risky. Some may think, incorrectly, that finding any growths, even non-suspicious polyps, means a repeat exam should be done within less than 10 years, Smith said. Some doctors also order repeat tests “because they want to bring in income,” he said. Besides being risky and costly, too-frequent screenings make colonoscopy resources less available for people who really need them, Smith said. This was a well done story about a very well done study with important practice and policy implications.	true	Associated Press,Screening	The story stated: “Colonoscopy costs vary widely but typically exceed $1,000. While Medicare rules say the government won’t pay for too-frequent colonoscopies, only 2 percent of the study claims were denied for repeat exams in people without symptoms.” We’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt for deftly summarizing the story in this way: “The older you are, the more likely you are to die from other causes before cancer becomes deadly, which means the screening procedure’s risks may outweigh its benefits in many aged patients, the study authors said.” Mixed bag, but we’ll give the story the benefit of the doubt because, in comparison with some stories we reviewed at least this story mentioned what some of the harms were, stating: “The exam is generally pretty safe, but does have risks that occur more often with older patients, including complications from sedation, accidental perforation of the colon and bleeding.” We wish the story had given some sense of how often these problems occur. Adequate job explaining the study. The theme of this story was the opposite of disease-mongering. The story turned to an American Cancer Society source and to a Medicare spokesperson for comment. The story did include the perspective that “while colonoscopies may be overused in the elderly, the exams and other colon cancer screening methods are underused among some groups, including the uninsured, blacks and Hispanics.” Besides not offering any comparison with other screening methods, the story never mentioned what other screening methods are and it would have taken only a line to do so. The availability of colonoscopies is not in question. The relative novelty of this study was clear from the story. It’s clear that the story did not rely solely on a news release.
8776	Merck Vioxx study was for marketing: researchers.	The primary purpose of a 1999 clinical study that Merck & Co Inc said was done to test side effects of Vioxx was actually to support a marketing campaign before the now-withdrawn painkiller’s launch, according to U.S. researchers.	true	Health News	A pharmacist holds bottles of the prescription arthritis and pain medication VIOXX at a New York City Pharmacy after manufacturer Merc Research Laboratories announced a worldwide voluntary withdrawal of the drug September 30, 2004. REUTERS/Mike Segar The real aim of the study, called Advantage, was to promote prescription of the new medicine when it became available — a so-called “seeding” project — the researchers said on Tuesday. The research team based its conclusions on an extensive trawl of Merck internal and external documents collected by plaintiffs’ lawyers preparing for Vioxx lawsuits. “Documentary evidence shows that Advantage is an example of marketing framed as science,” they wrote in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine. Kevin Hill, a psychiatrist at McLean Hospital in Belmont, Massachusetts, and colleagues said the findings showed how studies masquerading as clinical science could be used to bolster marketing plans. “Failure to disclose the primary purpose of a trial has ethical ramifications for patients, physicians and the design of clinical trials,” they said. “Seeding trials like Advantage, in which the study medication has yet to receive (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) approval, may cause patient injury for marketing purposes.” Merck denied that Advantage was a seeding study. It said the clinical trial had a legitimate scientific purpose in testing the gastrointestinal tolerability of Vioxx compared to the commonly used pain medicine, naproxen. The drug maker also said the journal article contained “numerous inaccuracies” and that its conclusions were based on a limited selection of documents produced in the Vioxx litigation. “We believe we acted appropriately with respect to the Advantage trial, and stand behind our strong beliefs in the principles of scientific integrity,” Merck said in an open letter to the editors of the medical journal. Vioxx generated annual sales of $2.5 billion before the arthritis and chronic pain pill was withdrawn from U.S. drugstores nearly four years ago, when a Merck study showed that long-term users had twice the risk of heart attack and stroke. Last year the company took a pretax charge of $4.85 billion for a proposed settlement with U.S. patients or their survivors who had filed Vioxx product liability lawsuits against it.
28909	Febreze and other Procter & Gamble products contain undeclared peanut and tree nut oils or byproducts, posing a risk to individuals with nut allergies.	What's true: Ingredient lists published by P&G in 2013 and 2014 stated that peanut oil and other nut derivatives were among the compounds used in fragrancing their products. What's false: Febreze odor elimination spray currently contains peanut or tree nut oil derivatives. What's undetermined: Whether Febreze ever contained peanut oil or other nut derivatives.	mixture	Viral Phenomena, Contaminated Products, febreze, peanut allergy	In early 2016, the above-reproduced screenshot of an online comment began circulating online via social media, alleging that Procter & Gamble’s Febreze brand odor elimination spray had triggered symptoms of a child’s peanut allergy. The original author of the message, where the message was posted to, the date of the posting, and the circumstances under which the child’s purported reaction occurred were unclear. One of the most popular iterations was published on 24 January 2016 by a Facebook user who said she spotted had it in an unspecified group: My son has a peanut allergy and I found out something the hard way today and I wanted to share in the hopes of helping someone else avoid a similar situation. Yesterday, I sprayed Febreeze in his room and last night he woke up covered in welts, coughing, and ashen around his eyes. I learned that P&G (Procter and Gamble) puts peanut and tree nut oil in their products without disclosing it on their packaging. It’s the worst feeling realizing that you inadvertently poisoned your child while trying to clean their room after having strep throat. I hope this information is helpful to you. This singular account lacked any detail and provided no information how it was supposedly determined that Febreze had definitively triggered a child’s peanut allergy, or how the parent came to discover that P&G purportedly adds peanut or tree nut oil to their products without declaring them (despite the clear danger presented by such a labeling oversight). Moreover, the comment stated the child in question had recently suffered strep throat at the time of the flare-up and therefore might have been susceptible to any number of things that could have caused such a reaction (aside from an allegedly nut-containing odor elimination spray). Overall, it appears that the parent observed a possible reaction to an environmental trigger affecting her recently-ill (or still-ill) child and simply attributed it to the coincidental spraying of Febreze. One of the only other online mentions of P&G products purportedly containing peanut oils we’ve found is a 2 September 2014 post on the blog Scratch & Sniff that contained some unconfirmed and conflicting information about whether fragranced P&G products were safe for individuals with peanut allergies: Procter & Gamble Co. brands include Swiffer, Febreze, Dawn, Ivory, Pampers, and Tide. [P&G lists all brands here.] The products themselves do not have nut or seed oils listed on the packaging. On the P&G website, no nut oils are listed under the products’ respective ingredients, but “fragrance” is listed. P&G breaks down what “fragrances” means on their corporate site, and lists peanut oil, almond oil (sweet), almond oil (bitter), sesame oil, and coconut oil in the 20-page document listing their full arsenal of ingredients — not spelling out exactly which ingredients make up the particular fragrance of any given product. So which of their products actually contain peanut oil or tree nut oil? It’s proving to be a question no one can answer. Scratch or Sniff has made several calls and emails to the respective brands — Ivory, Pampers, Dawn — but the results have been disconcerting. The post described separate efforts to determine whether individual P&G brand items were fragranced with peanut or tree nut oil derivatives: Ivory soap was deemed inconclusive, Dawn dishwashing liquid was named as a potential peanut allergen, and Febreze was also marked as an inconclusive item. Among a number of embedded images of communications with P&G brands and online comments was one that suggested Swiffer brand products contained peanut oil: On 8 September 2014, Scratch & Sniff published a follow up post that contained a transcript of a conversation between the blogger and a P&G representative, during which the representative maintained that P&G products didn’t contain undeclared peanut or tree nut derivatives: Dawn called me (as a consumer, not as the owner of Scratch or Sniff) and we had this conversation: Dawn rep: “We did look into your question further. We have received confirmation that none of our Dawn dishwashing liquids contain any kind of peanut oil or their derivatives. We also want to let you know that we require that all perfumes and fragrances in our products are free of peanut oil or their derivatives. If any of our products do contain nut oils it will be stated on the packaging. We do require it on the labels, that if they do have nut oil, that it is on there. So we wanted to let you know. We are also working to update the information on our website so it does have the correct information there.” RC: “When I spoke with Dawn last week, I was told there absolutely are traces of peanuts in the product. You’re telling me moving forward there will no longer be, or currently there aren’t any? Dawn rep: “There are not any. There has not been any. If there had been any, we would definitely have it on the label.” RC: “Do you know why I was told otherwise?” Dawn rep: “I don’t know why that information was shared. In general, we do just say that unless it specifically states it on the packaging, it could possibly contain some trace amounts, because our perfumes are usually purchased through other businesses. But with this, basically, we do actually have done that additional research at this time to verify that there are no peanut oil or peanut byproducts at all.” (On a separate web site, a user asserted that P&G had refused to disclose ingredients to concerned parents without a doctor’s note, but we were unable to substantiate that assertion.) Both Scratch or Sniff posts referenced a 20-page P&G document titled “Perfume & Scents” [PDF] whose introductory paragraphs explained: The list below represents all the ingredients our perfumers select from to create consumer appealing scents, in alphabetical order. This list is regularly updated to reflect changes in the palette of ingredients. We were unable to find any variation of “peanut” or “nut” on the most recently published version of P&Gs scent list (“coconut oil” and “nutmeg oil” were the only hits for “nut”). According to the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI), most individuals allergic to tree nuts can consume or tolerate coconut and/or nutmeg: People with tree nut allergies often wonder if they must also avoid coconut and nutmeg. Coconut is not a botanical nut; it is classified as a fruit, even though the Food and Drug Administration recognizes coconut as a tree nut. While allergic reactions to coconut have been documented, most people who are allergic to tree nuts can safely eat coconut. If you are allergic to tree nuts, talk to your allergist before adding coconut to your diet. Nutmeg is a spice that is derived from seeds, not nuts. It may be safely consumed by people with a tree nut allergy. A separate 2014 blog post by Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) held that non-food items containing such allergens are “not required to be labeled,” but many such products are nonetheless irrespective of labeling requirements. Moreover, that post featured an example of ostensible allergens having minimal effect on food allergy sufferers in a different context: Pharmaceutical grade lactose may contain trace milk proteins and could rarely induce reactions in inhaled or injected medications. A 2014 article in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology indicated that reactions are “quite a rare phenomenon given the large number of children with milk allergy who use lactose-containing dry powder inhalers uneventfully.” Any inhaler that contains milk should indicate so in the patient information insert. Another blog maintained by a food allergy expert and lawyer examined whether coconut typically triggered allergic reactions in individuals with peanut or tree nut allergies: [Allergist Dr. Wade] Watson’s answer was: “Coconut is a member of the palm family, which is not related to nuts or peanuts. Coconuts are large seeds adapted for water-born dispersal and remain viable after having floated in the sea for six months or more. If your son is allergic to peanuts or tree nuts, there is no reason for him to avoid coconut.” I checked with Gwen Smith, the editor of Allergic Living magazine, to see if this answer remains correct, and she assured me Dr. Watson stands by that advice. Gwen further wrote “It’s really a seed not a nut, and most allergists don’t tell you to avoid it with tree nut allergy. The few reactions to coconut are allergy just to it, unrelated to tree nut allergy. But the FDA confused everyone a couple of years back by adding coconut to the list of tree nut allergens … if you’re tree nut allergic, ask your doctor if coconut flour is ok for you. Most with tree nut allergy do have the green light to eat coconut.” The Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network (FAAN) also weighed in on this subject … The FAAN response is “Discuss this with your doctor. Coconut, the seed of a drupaceous fruit, has typically not been restricted in the diets of people with tree nut allergy. However, in October of 2006, the Food and Drug Association (FDA) began identifying coconut as a tree nut. The available medical literature contains documentation of a small number of allergic reactions to coconut; most occurred in people who were not allergic to other tree nuts. Ask your doctor if you need to avoid coconut.” Finally, a somewhat difficult to locate page on the P&G web site definitively addressed whether Febreze specifically contained nuts or derivatives, outlining the brand’s general policy on such ingredients: The safety of the people who use our products is our top priority. P&G’s policy requires that our labels indicate if the product contains nut oils. Additionally, we require that all perfumes and fragrances in our products are free of peanut oil or any of its derivatives. However, cached versions of the above-linked ingredient list captured on 18 April 2013 [PDF] and 22 December 2014 [PDF] indeed listed peanut oil, sesame oil, and two variations of almond oil among potential fragrance components; a 10 September 2015 capture [PDF] retained the almond oil and sesame oil entries but lacked peanut oil. The 2013 and 2014 ingredient lists were current at the time the original Scratch & Sniff posts were published, and the most current published list included almond and sesame oil. On 8 February 2016, a P&G representative responded to our initial inquiry and stated: Thanks for reaching out. I can confirm that Febreze products do not contain peanut oil or any of its derivatives. As you’ve already noted in your article, the safety of the people who use our products is our top priority. P&G’s policy requires that our labels indicate if the product contains nut oils. Additionally, we require that all perfumes and fragrances in our products are free of peanut oil or any of its derivatives. In reply to P&G’s response, we asked whether Febreze or any other P&G products contained peanut or tree nut oils at any point; on 10 February 2016, a representative replied: P&G does not use peanut oil in any of our products or perfumes and has not for well over a decade. We do however use other tree nut oils in some of our product perfumes. The safety of the people who use our products is our top priority, so we use highly refined tree nut oils to address allergy concerns. We also have fragrance-free versions of many of our products for those who may have unique sensitivities, and can answer more specific questions about a particular product as needed.
17999	"In the Wisconsin health insurance exchange, ""the Society of Actuaries points out that there'll be, according to them, an 82 percent increase in individual premiums over the next couple years under Obamacare."	"Walker said the study by the Society of Actuaries projected an 82 percent increase in premiums over time. The actual figure was 80 percent, and the report explicitly did not try to predict premiums. What it looked at was the cost of claims in the non-group market, which pertains to less than 20 percent of people with private insurance. Higher costs for insurers typically mean higher premiums for consumers, but there are many uncertainties. When most people hear the word ""premiums,"" they think of the bill they will get, and that is not what the report attempted to describe. Walker was reasonably close in relaying the strong upward pressure on costs, but he mischaracterized that as a change in actual premiums, and he ignored the significant subsidies that will cushion the impact of those cost increases for about half of the people who buy insurance on their own. Still, the half that don’t receive subsidies will likely see higher premiums."	mixture	National, Health Care, Scott Walker,	"The new health care law faces tough sledding in many states controlled by Republicans. Wisconsin is a good example, There, Republican Gov. Scott Walker has opposed opening a state-run online site called an exchange where individuals and families can shop for health insurance. Walker left that to Washington to operate. In explaining his reasons, Walker said on Fox News, ""there's the practical issue of what it means for people who may or may not want to be a part of the exchange."" He claimed the rates would skyrocket. Citing a report from the Society of Actuaries, Walker said in Wisconsin, there would be ""an 82 percent increase in individual premiums over the next couple years under Obamacare."" As it turns out, the Society of Actuaries told us that a report it released in March is often misinterpreted by politicians and the media alike. We thought it worthwhile to clarify what the report does and doesn’t say. We contacted Walker’s office to make sure that we were looking at the same document. Spokeswoman Jocelyn Webster referred us to the March study and said the governor ""misspoke"" slightly. The actual number in the report is 80 percent, which is very close to what Walker said. More fundamental is what the 80 percent figure describes. The study The study’s goal was to give policymakers a sense of what it would mean when millions of Americans who currently lack insurance joined the pool of the insured. It aimed to predict how much health care these new people would require. That’s an exercise of looking partly at their health and partly at their behavior. If as a group, they are a little sicker than the current group, then the average cost of care would rise. If they are healthier, the average cost of care would fall. Even if there were no difference, the cost of care might rise simply because they might use more services when they become more affordable. Importantly, the study dealt only with that part of the insurance market where families and individuals buy policies on their own rather than through an employer. It said nothing about what would happen with employer-provided insurance, which covers more than 80 percent of the population under 65 years old. The technical name for the slice of the market the study examined is ‘non-group’. The report’s authors estimated that the new law would bring a major cut in the number of the uninsured. Nationally, the percentage would fall from 16.6 percent of Americans down to about 6.8 percent. That result would play itself out over several years. The report aimed to paint a picture of the insurance market in approximately 2017 under two circumstances: if every state expanded Medicaid and if no state expanded Medicaid. The key finding, and the one that drove Walker’s comment, was that under the Affordable Care Act, with full expansion of Medicaid, the cost of medical claims would go up 80 percent in the non-group market in Wisconsin. There is enormous variability across the country. Nationally, the number was 32 percent. Claims are the single largest driver of premiums. That said, the report emphasized again and again that it was not estimating what would happen to premiums. The authors wrote, ""Note that the ACA’s affect on premium is not modeled in this research; rather, long-term relative claims cost is modeled. Many aspects of the ACA will affect premiums, including changing benefit designs, new taxes and assessments, federal risk mitigation programs, minimum loss ratio rules, rate review rules, and premium subsidies."" We spoke with David Tuomala, director of actuarial consulting for the Lewin Group, one of the organizations commissioned by the Society of Actuaries to do the analysis. The Lewin Group is owned by UnitedHealth Group, a holding company that includes a large insurer of the same name. Tuomala said the 80 percent figure for Wisconsin was their best estimate for the total claims for service in the total non-group market. Three factors drove the projected increase. The newly insured people would need more care because they would tend to be sicker than the current group. The insurance plans they would buy would be fairly generous. And people with insurance tend to use more services once they become more affordable. Tuomala said many steps lie between claims and premiums. As noted in the report, many people will be eligible for premium subsidies that will reduce the prices they pay. Those subsidies will be hefty, especially for families making about $95,000 or less. According to a government estimate, about half of the people in the exchanges will receive some level of subsidy. That would represent a large share of the group the actuaries focused on. They predicted that 85 percent of the total non-group market in Wisconsin would get policies offered on the exchange. The exchanges are expected to create competition and lower prices, with insurance companies setting prices strategically to gain market share. Still, ""ultimately, claims will be reflected in the premium,"" Tuomala said. Uncertainties ahead Making accurate predictions is challenging. The higher cost estimate for Wisconsin assumed the state would expand Medicaid, something it doesn’t plan to do. That difference however has little impact on the cost of claims. Importantly, other projections by different organizations come up with different results. For example, the Congressional Budget Office predicted premium increases of 10 to 13 percent in the non-group market. Its methods and assumptions were different from the actuaries’ report. Whether this report’s projection turns out right depends largely on who actually signs up for coverage. ""This is the great unknown,"" said Gerard Anderson, director of the Center for Hospital Finance and Management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. ""In the initial years, 7 million people are expected to sign up. The mix of that 7 million will be absolutely critical."" Interestingly, while the actuarial study predicts a large rise in the cost of claims in the non-group market, it sees a modest increase in overall health care spending of just 2 percent. A major reason goes back to the reality that the non-group market is a smaller slice of the total marketplace. Since most people with insurance get it through their employers, there would be little change in the total demand for health care, along with little change in premiums. Our ruling Walker said the study by the Society of Actuaries projected an 82 percent increase in premiums over time. The actual figure was 80 percent, and the report explicitly did not try to predict premiums. What it looked at was the cost of claims in the non-group market, which pertains to less than 20 percent of people with private insurance. Higher costs for insurers typically mean higher premiums for consumers, but there are many uncertainties. When most people hear the word ""premiums,"" they think of the bill they will get, and that is not what the report attempted to describe. Walker was reasonably close in relaying the strong upward pressure on costs, but he mischaracterized that as a change in actual premiums, and he ignored the significant subsidies that will cushion the impact of those cost increases for about half of the people who buy insurance on their own. Still, the half that don’t receive subsidies will likely see higher premiums."
37858	H. R. 6666 (the TRACE Act) was introduced to allow the government to enter private homes, force COVID-19 testing on people, and remove children or adults from the home with legal force.	Does House Bill 6666 (the TRACE Act) Allow the Government to Enter Your Home, Test for COVID-19, and Take Your Children or Parents?	false	Disinformation, Fact Checks	In early May 2020, a number of panicked posts about proposed legislation (H.R. 6666, also called the Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone, or TRACE Act) began spreading on social media, including a May 8 2020 video with a massive 2.5 million view count from anti-vaccination conspiracy theorist Rashid Buttar:That clip was titled “URGENT! Full Disclosure from ‘INSIDE’ – Dr Rashid A Buttar,” and as mentioned, covered the TRACE Act and its purportedly frightening implications. As the high level of engagement suggested, the claims were not limited to Buttar’s Facebook post, with similar claims circulating on Twitter:Seems legit… House Resolution 6666. TRACE ACT. Covid-related bill passed to allow government to remove members of your household (your kids, spouse, grandparents… you) if suspected sick… get ready for #HR6666 and #FalsePositives to start trending. https://t.co/7SBGSQPCwL— George Lista 🐾 (@George_Lista) May 9, 2020@joerogan HR6666 will allow them into your home to force test and then take you or your kids. when are you going to have on people that will speak out against this insanity! you have over 8 million subscribers! what are you waiting for!? https://t.co/GmQi8DQ11O— Kathy Nobrega (@kalijuri) May 9, 2020Although claims about H.R. 6666 were legion, the biggest and most alarming claims were that the legislation “allowed” the government to enter homes, “force test” their occupants, and subsequently remove children or adults from the home to be put into mandatory quarantine or foster care.A May 7 2020 blog post made related claims about H.R. 6666. The post, titled “US House Introduces HR 6666 for forced Covid-19 testing in residences by contact tracers,” began (emphasis ours):On May 1, 2020 the US House introduced H.R. 6666. US House Introduces HR 6666 for forced Covid-19 testing in residences by contact tracers. This bill is intended to:Authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to award grants to eligible entities to conduct diagnostic testing for COVID-19, and related activities such as contact tracing, through mobile health units and, as necessary, at individuals’ residences, and for other purposes.This bill, should it become law, will give contact tracers the full legal right to come to your home and demand a test if you are shown to have come across any individual who has tested positive for COVID-19.If you weren’t aware, your phone is being tracked to determine if you have been in the vicinity of anyone who has tested positive.Should you test positive for coronavirus, even with the countless false positives being reported, you will be force-quarantined and potentially have your children removed from your home.[H.R. 6666] will likely end up on President Trump’s desk and become law.The claims were noticeably similar to the details of a hoax letter falsely attributed to the California Department of Social Services. As the H.R. 6666/TRACE Act claims began spreading, a letter also was circulated in the same circles, which falsely stated that any recipients of CalFresh (food assistance) or MediCal (medical benefits) in the state would be subjected to mandatory testing and possible removal of their children from the home if they tested positive.The circulation of the two claims together appeared to be coordinated to bolster one another as part of a larger disinformation campaign designed to frighten people and cause general chaos:Is the California Department of Social Services Mandating COVID-19 Testing for Eligible Families — and Threatening to Place Children in Foster Care?As much was evident in shares of posts linking the phony letter with rumors about H.R. 6666 (and the latter’s connection with the number 666, even though as a “Mark of the Beast” type sign it was off by 6,000.) Alongside a photograph of the hoax letter above, a user wrote:It’s unbelievable how this government is using this situation to control the people. This is HB 6666. And how did it come to be this particular number?“The second beast of Revelation 13 will cause ‘all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name’ (Revelation 13:16-17).Others shared Buttar’s video with comments like:HB 6666. Just look at the numbers and you already know it’sbad!Also circulating was a petition on petitions.whitehouse.gov, titled “Oppose HR 6666 the TRES Act [sic] Please Act Immediately.” More than 20,000 people signed the petition between May 8 and May 11 2020:HR 6666 The TRES Act was just proposed in Congress. This Act will allow government officials to enter ANYONE’S HOME and force Test them for COVID-19/ and or antibodies. Then the government officials would have the right to remove children from the home/ remove anyone testing positive from the home, etc. I can’t imagine how removing someone from their home is going to protect anyone. I have a husband with Alzheimer’s Disease. I don’t have Covid19 but if I tested positive who would take care of my husband if I were removed from my home? We must be living in NAZI Germany for such an Act like this to be brought forth in Congress. Please STOP this ASAP.The petition’s creator misspelled the name of the TRACE Act, and appeared to have based their summary on rumors rather than actually reading the legislation.On May 1 2020, “H.R.6666 – COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act” was introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Bobby Rush, a Democrat from Illinois. It began with a short summary of the bill’s purpose:H. R. 6666 To authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to award grants to eligible entities to conduct diagnostic testing for COVID–19, and related activities such as contact tracing, through mobile health units and, as necessary, at individuals’ residences, and for other purposes.The legislation was a funding bill to appropriate funds for ongoing COVID-19 testing and contact tracing. Contact tracing is by no means new; it is defined by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) as a necessary part of fighting a pandemic:After co-sponsors of the bill [PDF] were listed, further detail on its purposes appeared. In fact, H.R. 6666 was so concise, its entire text follows:Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.This Act may be cited as the “COVID–19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act”.SEC. 2. COVID–19 TESTING AND CONTACT TRACING USING MOBILE HEALTH UNITS. (a) In General.—The Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, may award grants to eligible entities to conduct diagnostic testing for COVID–19, to trace and monitor the contacts of infected individuals, and to support the quarantine of such contacts, through—(1) mobile health units; and(2) as necessary, testing individuals and providing individuals with services related to testing and quarantine at their residences. (b) Permissible Uses Of Funds.—A grant recipient under this section may use the grant funds, in support of the activities described in subsection (a)—(1) to hire, train, compensate, and pay the expenses of individuals; and(2) to purchase personal protective equipment and other supplies. (c) Priority.—In selecting grant recipients under this section, the Secretary shall give priority to—(1) applicants proposing to conduct activities funded under this section in hot spots and medically underserved communities; and(2) applicants that agree, in hiring individuals to carry out activities funded under this section, to hire residents of the area or community where the activities will primarily occur, with higher priority among applicants described in this paragraph given based on the percentage of individuals to be hired from such area or community. (d) Distribution.—In selecting grant recipients under this section, the Secretary shall ensure that grants are distributed across urban and rural areas. (e) Federal Privacy Requirements.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede any Federal privacy or confidentiality requirement, including the regulations promulgated under section 264(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–191; 110 Stat. 2033) and section 543 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290dd–2). (f) Definitions.—In this section:(1) The term “eligible entity” means—(A) a Federally qualified health center (as defined in section 1861(aa) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(aa)));(B) a school-based health clinic;(C) a disproportionate share hospital (as defined under the applicable State plan under title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) pursuant to section 1923(a)(1)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r–4));(D) an academic medical center;(E) a nonprofit organization (including any such faith-based organization);(F) an institution of higher education (as defined in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001));(G) a high school (as defined in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801)); or(H) any other type of entity that is determined by the Secretary to be an eligible entity for purposes of this section. (2) The term “emergency period” has the meaning given to that term in section 1135(g)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320b–5(g)(1)(B)). (3) The term “hot spot” means a geographic area where the rate of infection with the virus that causes COVID–19 exceeds the national average. (4) The term “medically underserved community” has the meaning given to that term in section 799B of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295p). (5) The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of Health and Human Services. (g) Authorization Of Appropriations.—To carry out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated—(1) $100,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; and(2) such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal year 2021 and any subsequent fiscal year during which the emergency period continues.Simply reading the text of H.R. 6666 (“COVID–19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone [TRACE] Act”) demonstrated that the bill did not mandate testing, did not call for the removal of children or adults from homes under any circumstances, and did not authorize anyone to forcibly enter homes to test residents for COVID-19. Its entire purpose was to fund mobile health units and outreach testing, as well as offer financial support for contact tracing and quarantine. The language of the bill placed no conditions private citizens in any way, shape, or form, but instead described allocation of funds in order to allow widespread COVID-19 testing and contact tracing in the first months of a global pandemic.Comments
31689	U.S. President George Washington had wooden teeth.	Two hundred fifty years later, we’re still talking about Washington’s “wooden teeth.” Like the cherry tree he never chopped down as a child, they are forever enshrined in American legend.	false	History, American History, george washington, teeth	One of the most popular historical exhibits at Mount Vernon, originally the estate of the first President of the United States and now a monument to his life and legacy, is a set of the great man’s dentures. The crude, handmade prosthesis, comprising both upper and lower teeth, is displayed in a circular glass case permitting a 360-degree view. The majority of Mount Vernon’s one million visitors per year, one presumes, pause to stare at the famous choppers for at least a moment before moving on to the table settings. The fascination with George Washington’s false teeth could be attributable to various factors — that they’re a medical curiosity from the 18th century, when dentistry was still just this side of barbaric; that they’re an intimate vestige of the man himself, letting us feel closer to him; or, maybe, that we’re all just eager to see if the scuttlebutt we heard and repeated as kids is true: that the Father of Our Country had wooden teeth. The exhibit does not disappoint. One look at the contraption itself, which is actually made out of metal, ivory, and real teeth (both animal and human), is enough to see that it wasn’t carved out of wood: Plus, there’s a plaque that lays out the facts in black and white: Dentures Worn by George Washington Lead base fitted with cow and human teeth, elephant ivory, brass, and steel. ca. 1775-1799. Although George Washington brushed his teeth regularly, by the time he took the oath of office as president at age 57, he was wearing full dentures. Contrary to popular myth, Washington’s false teeth were not made of wood but of human and cow teeth as well as elephant ivory. The dentures required frequent adjusting to function naturally, and Washington repeatedly sent them to John Greenwood, his dentist in New York City, for repairs. As was common at the time, the dentures were ill-fitting, awkward, and sometimes painful. They distorted Washington’s appearance, mainly by making his lower lip protrude, as can be seen in contemporaneous portraiture of the first president. According to historian Michael Beschloss, his teeth were an embarrassment to him: He once pleaded with his dentist, John Greenwood, by letter, to avoid any change to the denture “which will, in the least degree force the lips out more than now do, as it does this too much already.” Members of his cabinet sadly noted how rarely the tight-lipped president smiled or laughed. Others insisted that his embarrassment about his dentures, which sometimes caused him to hiss as he spoke, made him reclusive. Washington was plagued by dental problems throughout most of his adult life. He attributed the misfortune to “cracking of walnuts in his youth,” his friend John Adams wrote, though heredity must have played a part, as well. Bad hygiene, too, though Washington wouldn’t have been entirely to blame. “It’s not that George Washington was sloppy about dental hygiene,” John L. Smith notes in Journal of the American Revolution, “it’s just that dental hygiene was practically non-existent in the late eighteenth century”: In fact, in some social groups, taking care of your teeth was even considered effeminate or vain. But Washington was very wise about the message an image can send, and knew that in the Continental Congress, and as commander-in-chief and president, he had to look the part of a leader … which meant at least having teeth. Aside from the possible constant pain Washington endured from his bad teeth, he stayed on a constant life quest to (simply said) — have teeth in his mouth. And he paid a lot for professional dental care all through his lifetime. George Washington wore several different sets of dentures over the course of his lifetime, none made of wood. Instead, the dentists treating him would have used the cutting-edge materials of the time: bone, ivory, lead, brass, gold, and the castaway teeth of horses, donkeys, cows, and, yes, human beings. Washington is said to have saved his own extracted teeth for future use in dentures. A longstanding rumor that Washington purchased teeth from his slaves may be true, as well, Michael Beschloss writes: According to his account books, in 1784, emulating some of his affluent friends, he bought nine teeth from unidentified “Negroes” — perhaps enslaved African Americans at his beloved Mount Vernon; the price was 122 shillings. As to how and why the rumor of Washington’s wooden teeth took hold in the first place, no one knows for sure, but there are two main theories, both based on the assumption that his dentures must have looked like they were made of wood. One holds that they turned mottled and brown with age, the other that their “woodiness” was due to Washington’s habit of drinking fortified wine: Ivory and bone both have hairline fractures in them, which normally can’t be seen. With Washington’s fondness for Madeira wine, a very dark wine, over time the darkness of the wine started to darken the false teeth of the dentures. Then the thin fractures in the bone started to darken even more than the rest of the tooth, making the lines look like the grain in a piece of wood “that misled later observers.”
30820	A family dog saved sleeping young children from sexual abuse by biting off an intruder's genitals.	A family dog supposedly saved sleeping young children from sexual abuse by biting off an intruder's genitals.	false	Junk News, neon nettle	On 14 November 2017, various web sites reproduced an article reporting that a family dog had saved sleeping young children from sexual abuse by biting off an intruder’s genitals: A pedophile has been left with “life-altering” injuries after climbing through the bedroom window of two young children, only to be greeted by their pet bulldog who bit his penis off. 52-year-old Randle James of Saline County, Arkansas, climbed into the 1st-floor window of the small family home into the room where the two young sisters were sleeping after passing by and seeing the open window. After climbing into the room of the 3 and 6-year-old sisters, James got more than he bargained for when family’s Pitt Pull Terrier leaped to the girl’s defense. The dog severed the rapist’s genitals clean off and swallowed his penis and testicles. There was no truth to this story, which originated with Neon Nettle, a fake news site that traffics in fabricated clickbait tales. This item wasn’t even original to Neon Nettle, as it strongly resembled an earlier story from a different fake news site positing that a pitbull had torn off the genitals of a man who tried to rape the dog. The photograph that accompanied the Neon Nettle story had nothing to do with a canine attack or an attempted rape. Rather, the picture of the alleged perpetrator was a still image taken from a video showing a man’s reaction to being given ketamine (an anesthetic) after fracturing his ankle in a skateboarding accident:
4328	Honeywell to pay Georgia $4M for pollution in coastal marsh.	A company has agreed to pay the state of Georgia $4 million for environmental cleanup of a former chemical plant.	true	Georgia, General News, Environment, Atlanta, Brunswick, Pollution	The Brunswick News reports Honeywell International has filed the settlement with the state Department of Natural Resources in federal court in Atlanta. The money will cover cleanup costs related to the former LCP Chemicals plant, as well as pay the state for lost fishing opportunities from chemicals polluting nearby marsh and waterways. The site is now being cleaned up under the federal Superfund law. Honeywell and Georgia Power Co. in 2016 agreed to pay the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency $29 million to clean up 760 acres (308 hectares) of marshland. Officials are deciding what to do about land at the site. They’ve recommended that no further action be taken and no residential use of the site be allowed. That’s because an extensive amount of contaminated soil has already been removed and local officials plan to zone the site for industrial use. Later, officials must decide what to do about contaminated groundwater at the site and mercury-containing soil under some buildings. Pollution remains high enough that people are warned not to eat seafood from the marsh. Estuarine dolphins known to feed in the area have tested positive for unhealthy levels of PCBs and other contaminants that can be traced back to the LCP site. The state doesn’t yet have a plan for spending the money. Georgia’s natural resources commissioner will select projects after future public input and consultation with Honeywell, local governments and others. According to the consent decree, the state will create a restoration plan describing how the funds dedicated for natural resources restoration efforts under this section will be used to restore lost recreational uses. All of the money is to go toward “restoration, rehabilitation or replacement of injured natural resources and/or acquisition of equivalent resources related to lost recreational uses.” The public can comment on the consent decree and the court has not yet approved it.
34699	Soup cans are lined with dangerous levels of BPA.	We believe that current can packaging is one of the safest options in the world; however, we recognize that there is some debate over the use of BPA. The trust that we have earned from our consumers for over 140 years is paramount to us and we have been monitoring and working on the issue for several years. Because of this, we have already started using alternatives to BPA in some of our soup packaging and we are working to phase out the use of BPA in the lining of all of our canned products. The cost of this effort is not expected to be material.	unproven	Medical, ASP Article, Toxin Du Jour	Recent studies have found that the chemical bisphenol A (BPA) can migrate from the linings used in soup cans into the product itself, and thereby into the bodies of those who ingest the soup: Example: [Collected via e-mail, June 2012] Charles Drabkin thought that Progresso soup was a healthy option for lunch, but then he found out that chemicals in the can lining have been linked to obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer.Progresso lines its soup cans with bisphenol A, or BPA. Scientists have long warned of BPA’s link to cancer, but a new study has found that it’s related to obesity and diabetes as well. According to the study, BPA basically tricks your fat cells into taking in more fat — and can also trick your pancreas into producing more insulin than necessary, which can lead to Type 2 Diabetes. Consumer Reports says that Progresso uses dangerous levels of BPA in its soup cans — in fact, some samples contained so much BPA that eating just one serving would mean ingesting 80 times more BPA than experts say you should have in one day. Charles is a chef instructor at a community college, and he’s passionate about making sure Americans have access to quality food — that’s why he started a petition on Change.org asking Progresso to stop using BPA in its can linings. How much of a danger, if any, this situation presents to consumers is still a matter of debate: If you read the ingredient list on a can of soup, you’re likely to see items like carrots, wild rice, perhaps some noodles. What you won’t see listed: the industrial chemical BPA, or bisphenol A.But a little canned soup for lunch can dramatically increase exposure to the chemical, according to a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The study confirms that canned food is a source of BPA exposure. But it does nothing to clear up the question of whether this sort of exposure to BPA has health consequences. BPA is found in some plastic bottles and in the epoxy resins used to coat the inside of many food and beverage cans. Previous studies have shown that some BPA from can linings does get into the foods they hold. Some scientists are concerned about BPA exposure because the chemical can act like the hormone estrogen, and studies show that high levels can affect sexual development in animals. But people are exposed to much lower levels. And agencies including the Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection Agency haven’t found evidence that this exposure is causing problems. NPR reported of the most recent study that: In the new study, researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health compared people who were given canned vegetable soup for lunch each day with people who got vegetable soup made without any canned ingredients.And they found that a couple hours after eating, the people who had canned soup had BPA levels in their urine that were about 12 times higher than the people who didn’t. The levels were still within the range that government agencies consider safe. Even so, “We were surprised by the magnitude of the elevation,” says Karin Michels, senior author of the paper. Michels says previous studies have found much less dramatic increases after people drank from polycarbonate bottles. It’s unlikely that soup caused BPA levels to remain high very long, Michels says, because the body tends to excrete most BPA within a few hours. But she says levels could stay high for people who regularly consume foods and beverages from cans. Michels says she can’t comment on the health implications of the finding because that wasn’t part of the study. (Others have criticized the Harvard study as being alarmist.) In March 2012, Campbell’s announced it would begin shifting to BPA-free cans for its soup packaging and other canned products:
36287	A pair of DD breasts weighs between 15 and 23 pounds.	Does ‘a Pair’ of DD Breasts Weigh Between 15 and 23 Pounds?	false	Fact Checks, Viral Content	In June 2019 the Facebook page “Weird Facts“shared the following meme, claiming DD-cup breasts weigh between 15 and 23 pounds (6.8 to 10.4 kilograms):Under a photograph of a woman’s breasts in a bra, text read:A pair of D-cup breasts weighs between 15 and 23 pounds — the equivalent of carrying around two small turkeys.No source for the claim was included with the image, but the same phrasing appeared (again unsourced) in a 2005 Discover magazine article headlined “The Physics of Bras”:One side effect of the obesity epidemic in America is rarely noted: Women’s chests are expanding nearly as fast as their bellies. Poor eating habits, as well as breast implants and the estrogens in birth-control pills, have led to an increase in the past 15 years of more than one bra size for the average American woman—from a 34B to a 36C. For many women, this has been a burdensome trend. A pair of D-cup breasts weighs between 15 and 23 pounds—the equivalent of carrying around two small turkeys. The larger the breasts, the more they move and the greater the discomfort. In one study, 56 percent of women suffered from breast pain when jogging.The piece and possible origin of the claim were frustratingly free of any source or information pointing towards a credible origin. It merely made a very questionable statement — that breasts were individually and collectively quite heavy — and moved on to discuss the manner in which bras supposedly worked. For their part, bra manufacturers typically guess at the weight of breasts based on cup size, as all breasts are different, but the guessed weights are nowhere near the estimate featured in this meme:Bra sizes 32A, 30B, 28C = about 0.5 pound per breast Bra sizes 34A, 32B, 30C, 28D = about 0.6 pound per breast Bra sizes 36A, 34B, 32C, 30D, 28E = about 0.7 pound per breast Bra sizes 38A, 36B, 34C, 32D, 30E, 28F = about 0.9 pound per breast Bra sizes 40A, 38B, 36C, 34D, 32E, 30F, 28G = about 1.2 pounds per breast Bra sizes 42A, 40B, 38C, 36D, 34E, 32F, 30G, 28H = about 1.5 pounds per breast Bra sizes 44A, 42B, 40C, 38D, 36E, 34F, 32G, 30H, 28I = about 1.7 pounds per breast Bra sizes 44B, 42C, 40D, 38E, 36F, 34G, 32H, 30I, 28J = about 2 pounds per breastOne immediate issue with the claim is that it offers very little room for variance in the density of breast tissue. Some breasts are far more “dense” than others, presenting a known issue for matters such as mammography.Furthermore, many women have silicone or saline breast implants, the density of which can differ greatly from organic breast tissue — or even from implant to implant. Once again, no mention of these very common differences is made in the 2005 article or the meme. Going by the measurement unit used for both saline and silicone implants (CCs), an on-the-larger-side 500cc implant weighs under a pound for silicone — saline is marginally heavier than silicone, but neither does it weigh more than two pounds:Obviously the larger the size of the implants, the more they will weigh. Every 100cc of silicone implant weighs 0.23lbs. Every 100cc of saline implant weighs 0.21lbs. For example, a typical 300cc silicone implant weighs 0.69 pounds and a pair of them together weighs 1.38 pounds. 300cc saline implants weigh 0.63lb each or 1.26lbs for both of them. Essentially implants weigh about the same as an equal amount of breast tissue would weigh. There might be a slight weight variation from manufacturer to manufacturer, which is insignificant. The slight difference between the weight of similar size saline and silicone implants is negligible.Additional plastic surgeons place the weight of 580cc implants (silicone) at around 600 grams or 1.2 pounds — not near the five to over ten pounds cited in the meme. Regarding the relationship of weight to cup size, retired plastic surgeon Dr. David Ross explains that this, too, varies:A 500cc implant adds approximately 2.5 cup sizes to your present measurementRule of thumb is that for every 200cc added a patient will experience a one cup increase over her present cup size. Using this rough calculation a 500cc implant would add two and one half cup sizes to your measurements. In your case this size implant will enlarge you to between a C and D cup. I personally do not believe there is an appreciable difference between placing an implant subglandular versus submuscular. However, some would argue that a given implant appears smaller submuscularly.So if a patient wears a standard-sizing B-cup bra and adds 500cc implants, that patient would likely be placed into a DD-cup bra. However, the heaviest implants would weigh under two pounds and not combine to weigh 15 to 23 lbs. together. Universally, plastic surgeons appear to concur that cup sizes are a poor measurement for breast size and weight overall.If saline implants — since they are composed mainly of water — are the heaviest at under two pounds each, a comparison to organic tissue would likely shed light on the actual weight of breasts. According to plastic surgeon Dr. David Dellinger, water is far less dense than breast tissue:The density of breast tissue, which is comprised of fat, water and other tissue elements, is less than that of water itself. So a pound of breast tissue weighs the same but is probably a little larger than a pound of water.580cc is roughly about 1.25 lbsFat is less dense than muscle, and breast tissue is closer to fat than muscle in density. Surgeons routinely weigh in on patient questions about the relative weight of tissue and cup size, presenting calculations more in line with the known density of soft tissue:One pound is 453.59 grams. A cup size is around 200 grams. Bra size is notoriously inaccurateA pound is 454 grams which is about three cup sizes. That would make you about three cup sizes smaller.One pound is about 450 grams. Dr. Paule Regnault, a plastic surgeon who has studied this matter in some detail, offers a general estimate for a 36″ chest – your breasts will diminish by one cup size for every 200 grams that are removed.It is thus estimated that 450 grams will reduce your breasts by two cup sizes.One pound is 2200 grams. That is quite a bit per breast and does not sound correct. Because breast tissue is composed of both fibrous and fatty tissue the volume of that one pound will vary depending on the composition of the breast tissue. It is impossible to predict cup size accurately with breast reduction. Your plastic surgeon should be able to show you pictures of breast reductions and how much was removed from each to give you some idea of what each amount looks like.Yet another factor involves reference to a “DD cup” in the meme. Cup sizes are in no way fixed, and 2011 research into average breast volumes found:The mean breast volume of the left and right breast was 642 and 643 ml, ranging from 125 (size 10A) to 1,900 ml (size 24DD). The average professionally fitted bra band size was 12 (range size 10‐24; Australian sizing) and cup size was DD (range A‐G). A range of breast volumes was found to correspond to the same bra size and the volume of any one cup size was not homogenous amongst different band sizes.For reference, 643 ml is just under 22 ounces. Moreover, cup size is always relative to band size, and a 30DD has a smaller cup than a 40B.The claim that DD breasts collectively weigh 15 to 23 pounds has been floating around since at least 2005, and no citation supported that information when it first appeared. By all reasonable calculations, a large saline breast implant (that is, larger than a DD-cup) weighs less than two pounds by itself; silicone is typically lighter. Given that a saline breast implant is denser than nearly all breast tissue, that under-two-pound implant is presumably heavier than organic tissue and an unaltered DD-cup breast. No calculation or permutation of those estimates would lead to a seven or eight pound individual breast, half of the lower end of that meme’s estimate.By any estimate, DD breasts do not weigh “between 15 and 23 pounds.”
35227	An uninsured 17-year-old boy died of COVID-19 symptoms after being refused care due to a lack of medical insurance.	What's true: A 17-year-old boy in Lancaster, California, died on his way to a hospital while suffering from COVID-19 coronavirus disease symptoms. What's false: Contrary to widespread reports, the boy did have health insurance and was not turned away from an urgent-care clinic.	mixture	Medical, COVID-19	In late March 2020, social media users shared an article published by the website Mic with a headline that read, “An uninsured 17-year-old died after being denied care for coronavirus symptoms.” The headline was widely seen and caused outrage and anxiety over health care access amid an ongoing pandemic with a rising death toll. Citing an article posted by the technology website Gizmodo, as well as comments from a local official, Mic reported, “The teen reportedly felt ill and sought treatment at an urgent care clinic, but was denied. The staff at the facility told the teen to try the emergency room at the local public hospital, Antelope Valley (AV) Hospital,” but the boy died while in transit to the hospital. The Antelope Valley is a community about 45 miles north of the city of Los Angeles.
41290	Measles is at the top of the list of the MMR vaccine’s adverse reactions.	The World Wildlife Fund has rejected the findings of a Kenyan parliamentary inquiry that said the conservation group pushed Kenyan authorities to speed up a botched relocation of 14 rhinos last year that led to the deaths of 11 animals.	false	online	The black rhinos died of salt poisoning following the decision by the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) to ignore water test results in Tsavo East National Park, the committee’s report said. The deaths of the endangered animals, being moved to a more secure home in the face of the threat from poachers, were a major embarrassment to Kenya, which sells itself as destination for wildlife tourism. The inquiry said WWF, which donated $1 million for the relocation in June 2018, applied pressure on KWS to speed up the process in a bid to generate positive publicity and secure funding for itself from Germany. WWF denied the allegations in the inquiry report, which was made public last week, saying KWS had carried out hydrological surveys and given assurances the park was safe and suitable. “At no point either before or during the translocations were any issues raised about the quality of the water on the site,” WWF said by email. “We would never push for a translocation to go ahead against the recommendations of the relevant experts. This was a tragedy we hope will never be repeated.” The parliamentary committee’s inquiry said the relocation took place during a period in 2018 when the term of one KWS board had ended and before a new one had begun, creating a lack of oversight. The report said KWS’s former board of trustees had rejected the relocation three times in part because of the high salinity levels of the drinking water in the park. The report said Najib Balala, the minister of tourism and wildlife, should take overall responsibility for the rhinos’ deaths because he delayed the appointment of the new KWS board. The minister’s spokesman declined to comment. The KWS could not be immediately reached to comment. However, Richard Leakey, former chairperson of KWS, told the inquiry: “WWF-Kenya, as the funding entity, was alleged to have had a major interference on the board resolution against the translocation, and consequently pushed for the exercise after the exit of the board.” WWF said it was saddened by the loss of the rhinos and it fully recognized the “serious failings of this operation”. “In response, we have strengthened existing practices and implemented brand new organizational guidelines to mitigate future risk as far as possible.” Kenya had a rhino population of 1,258 in 2017 of which 745 were black rhinos, 510 were southern white rhinos and three were northern white rhinos, having grown from less than 400 rhinos in the 1980s. Poaching has risen in recent years across sub-Saharan Africa where well-armed criminal gangs have killed elephants for tusks and rhinos for horns. Often the animal parts are shipped to Asia for use in ornaments and medicines.
11179	Electromagnetic Pulses May Stem Arthritic Knee Pain	We’re really not reviewing a story here. We’re reviewing a byproduct of a news release. In fact, the hospital news release upon which this is based was actually better. Journalism should lose credibility for simply shoveling on unvetted hospital news release claims.	false		"Described as ""relatively low-cost in the long run"" in the words of a researcher. But what does that mean? No dollar figures given. No explanation of how ""pain relief"" was measured. No discussion of results in sham device comparison group. No discussion of the limitations of drawing conclusions from a small (34 people) short-term (six weeks) trial. The story says ""the approach has no side effects."" No discussion of whether that statement is based solely on this trial in just 34 people – and, if so, how limited are the conclusions that can be drawn from a study of just 34 people. Inadequate. No explanation of how the active devices were tested against sham devices. Therefore, no discussion of whether there was any placebo effect in sham device users. Also no explanation of how ""pain relief"" was measured or self-reported. No discussion of the limitations of drawing conclusions from an as-yet non-peer-reviewed study in just 34 people. Not applicable because there was really no meaningful discussion of knee arthritis. No independent sources – just quotes from a hospital news release. No comparison with any of the many approaches to treating arthritic knee pain. Even the hospital news release reminded us that ""Current treatments include drug therapies like anti-inflammatory medication or pain relievers; physical therapy; support devices; health and behavioral modifications such as weight loss; surgery and joint replacement."" But the story didn’t. There is no explanation of whether the device is experimental, on the market, and, if so, where or how widely available. No discussion comparing this approach with the myriad other devices tested through the years for pian of knee arthritis. The story admits that a hospital news release is its main source. The quotes come directly from the news release. There was apparently no independent reporting."
33336	Kids are rubbing Burt's Bees lip balm on their eyelids to get high.	Rumor: Kids are rubbing Burt's Bees lip balm on their eyelids to get high.	false	Horrors, ASP Article, burt's bees, drugs	On 19 March 2015, a Richmond-area ABC affiliate TV station published an article warning about a purported teen trend known as “Beezin'” in which kids rub peppermint-flavored Burt’s Bees brand lip balm onto their eyelids in pursuit of a stealthy way of getting high. The rumor involving Burt’s Bees lip balm was not new at the time the article appeared, previously having been circulated online and in the news media in April 2014 and January 2013. The 19 March 2015 article did not explain why the supposed Beezin’ trend suddenly warranted additional parental concern. Moreover, the article paradoxically noted that it isn’t actually possible to get high by rubbing peppermint lip balm on your eyelids (thereby mostly negating any concern that such a practice was common or worth worrying much about): Dr. Mary Romano at Vanderbilt Children’s Hospital says beezin’ could lead to health risks like inflammation of the eye, swelling, and other symptoms similar to pink eye. She said it’s not only dangerous but pointless since there is no active ingredient in the balm that could actually get someone high. “Getting high means you create an effect on your brain where dopamine is released, which creates a pleasurable experience feeling,” Dr. Romano explained. “That’s what happens when you use drugs and that’s why they become addictive, so you’re absolutely not getting high.” Mention of Beezin’ first appeared on Urban Dictionary in 2010, but a video published to YouTube (some language is explicit) in January 2013 likely advanced the spread of the rumor online:
34246	Cream of tartar is an effective treatment for migraine headaches.	With these facts in place, it is clear that the claim of headache relief efficacy as conveyed on viral websites relies on the debatable existence of MSG poisoning as a cause of migraines, as well as the demonstrably impossible notion that one can change blood or body pH through diet. In our view, that makes this specific proposed mechanism for its efficacy untenable and unequivocally false. We also note that such a claim provides no remedy for alleviating migraines caused by anything other than the dubious malady of “MSG poisoning.” If the anecdotal reports of cream of tartar’s efficacy against headaches are real, it apparently works via a different mechanism than the ones proposed on the websites suggesting it to be a remedy.	unproven	Medical, natural news	For well over a century, people have made myriad assertions regarding the medicinal properties of cream of tartar, a cooking ingredient with the chemical name potassium bitartrate. Among the claims associated with the potassium-rich compound are that it can be used to manage high blood pressure, to aid in the cessation of smoking, and to soothe muscle aches. People have also used it in high doses to “cleanse” their bodies in order to lose weight or expunge “toxins,” but ingesting extremely high quantities of the chemical is not advisable as it can result in life-threatening cases of hyperkalemia, which is the abnormally high concentration of potassium in the blood. Recently, an additional claim made of the chemical has gone viral online: That it can serve as a rapid reliever of migraines or other headaches, as exemplified by a well-shared Facebook post from 12 September 2018: This assertion is perplexing, as (historically speaking) the claims made of cream of tartar have not typically included efficacy against headaches (and some cookbooks geared toward people prone to headaches even warn that the ingredient could itself be a cause of migraines). Therefore, it is difficult to pinpoint the origin of the concept of cream of tartar as a headache remedy, or the purported science underlying it. The most explicit online formulation of the notion comes from a 2015 post on the website “Hello Lovely Living,” which posits cream of tartar as a cure, or “antidote”, for the largely unsubstantiated medical malady known as “MSG poisoning”: So, what is this remedy I speak of? To get straight to the point, it is cream of tartar … This has to be one of the fastest working remedies I have tried and I think I have tried everything known to man (well almost) … Cream of tartar is a byproduct of winemaking and is potassium bitartrate, or potassium hydrogen. When taken with water, it neutralizes the effects of MSG poisoning and raises the blood PH of the body, creating an alkaline-forming environment … So, what I did was I mixed 1/2 tsp in 8 oz of water and drank it slowly. The taste is tangy, but not anything disgusting. It reminds me of some type of sour candy, but without the sweetness. Upon drinking this, I immediately began to feel better and the dizziness and brain fog that I was experiencing began to dissipate soon after drinking it. The concept of MSG poisoning is not generally supported by scientific inquiry, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does allow that unrealistically high doses could potentially trigger mild headaches and other symptoms. “Although many people identify themselves as sensitive to MSG,” the FDA wrote in a statement, “in studies with such individuals given MSG or a placebo, scientists have not been able to consistently trigger reactions.” The “source” that Hello Lovely Living (along with several other websites making the same claim) referenced was the conspiracy- and supplement-peddling website Natural News, whose founder is an occasional guest host for Alex Jones’s InfoWars broadcasts. In a Natural News post written by an “herbalist and a classical homeopath”, cream of tartar was listed as a potential treatment for MSG poisoning because it serves to reduce the alkalinity in one’s body, a notion aggressively at odds with any medical science. The concept of “alkalizing” one’s body for health purposes is one of the most common tropes in the pseudoscientific natural health world, and it relies on the false notion that one can affect their blood or cellular pH through diet. Unless you were ingesting a substance such as straight methanol, which would damage your kidneys and prevent them from regulating your body’s blood pH, nothing you consume is going to affect the pH of anything but your urine. Blood and intracellular pH exist within an extremely narrow and precise range meticulously and constantly maintained by various bodily respiratory and excretory functions. As stated in an October 2013 paper in the British Journal of Nutrition, this is true unless one has specific pathologies that prevent the body from sustaining those functions: Food components trigger neither extracellular fluid acidosis nor alkalosis. Any influence of nutritional origin that slightly disrupts the acid–base equilibrium is at once corrected by biochemical buffering systems operating in both the extracellular and intracellular compartments. Then, as indicated above, come into play the homeostatic systems involved in the regulation of pulmonary ventilation and urinary acid excretion.
29821	U.S. President Donald Trump issued a pardon for the leader of the armed group that held migrants at gunpoint in New Mexico.	Hopkins’ past convictions include felony firearm possession and impersonation of a peace officer. According to the FBI, Hopkins said his group was “training to assassinate George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama.”	false	Junk News	On 22 April 2019, a junk news site impersonating NBC News reported falsely that U.S. President Donald Trump had pardoned Larry Mitchell Hopkins, the 69-year-old leader of an armed group depicted in a widely seen video. The group is shown holding a large group of roughly 300 migrants at gunpoint in New Mexico. Hopkins was arrested on 20 April 2019 on suspicion of being a felon in possession of firearms. The fake story published by “nbcnews.world” carried the headline “President Trump Issues Immediate Pardon for Arrested Border Militia Leader” and reported: No … that seems a bit severe. Typically when a Trump supporter has been charged with a felony, it’s because their rights were violated during the Obama administration. In this case, violent assault couldn’t be proven, so they forced him to plead guilty to a lesser felony. They’re not even mad about the right crime! President Trump isn’t having it. Our source inside the West Wing says a dispatch was sent to the border to cease and desist all complaints against Gus [Hopkins]. He has been issued full immunity and a Presidential Pardon for his felony. The dispatch has to legally be delivered in person, so official channels may not see the communication in time for Gus to have Easter Dinner with his family. Trump has not issued a pardon for Hopkins, and nothing that appears on nbcnews.world can be trusted. In fact, if readers click on the website’s logo, they’ll be taken to a suspicious download page (the archived version of which can be viewed here). Hopkins heads the group that dubs itself “United Constitutional Patriots” (UCP). They were seen in the viral video holding rifles while dressed in military-style fatigues and detaining a large group of migrants, which included children, before handing them off to the Border Patrol. The video drew outrage, prompting the American Civil Liberties Union to dub UCP a “fascist militia.”
7668	Infant deaths, poor conditions at Indian hospital spark uproar.	In a dimly lit shanty in northwestern India, Padma Rawal sobs inconsolably as she recalls losing her 5-month-old infant, and recounts the hospital ordeal she endured last month.	true	Health News	Her infant, Tejash, is one of more than a 100 children who have died at a government hospital in Kota in the state of Rajasthan since early December. Infant deaths are common in India, but the spike in fatalities at a state-run institution and evidence of poor hygiene, broken equipment and staff shortages has made headlines and triggered a row between the two main political parties. District data in fact shows the infant mortality rate at the JK Lon Hospital in Kota has improved to 5.69% with 963 deaths in 2019 down from 6.11% in 2018, when 1,005 deaths were reported. But details from affected families and two preliminary investigations have emerged, embarrassing the regional government and local health authorities. Padma said there were three or four infants in each bed when she was there in late December. “Why are you crying? Your child is going to die anyway,” Padma recalled one doctor telling her, as she sat weeping beside her husband, Sanjay, and daughters - Kanika, 6, and Purvi, 4. Reuters spoke with the parents of nine children who either died or were being treated at the hospital. All described staff shortages, poor sanitary conditions and a lack of basic provisions such as blankets despite very cold weather. Rajasthan Health Minister Raghu Sharma tweeted that most of the infants who died had low birth weights and were in critical condition. He vowed “strict action” would be taken against any officials found guilty of negligence. At least 112 children have died at the hospital since the start of December, even as authorities scrambled to bring in additional staff and equipment amid public outcry. Around three quarters of the recent deaths occurred in JK Lon’s neo-natal intensive care unit (NICU), which treats babies up to a month old, said an official directly aware of the matter. Hospital officials said infant mortality rates may appear high, partly because it handles many referral cases and is a hospital of last resort. It is the only one with an NICU in a 200 km radius. Shubham Hada, who lost his two-day-old son at the hospital to what he was told was a severe infection, said: “Parents had to monitor their babies all night by themselves in the NICU. There were no doctors after 10 pm, when the shift changed.” Pooja, holding her sick 2-month-old infant in her lap, said authorities distributed blankets and room heaters only late last week, despite a severe cold wave across northern India since late December. “We’ve been living in hell,” she said. “At least they have started cleaning the place once a day after the media uproar and visits by ministers.” A preliminary probe into the deaths at JK Lon found that of 533 pieces of equipment in its paediatrics section, 320 were out of order, including defibrillators and ventilators. JK Lon’s medical superintendent, Suresh Dulara, who took additional charge of the center in late December, said that the hospital had started repairing equipment. A separate probe by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, a government agency, found that infrastructure and sanitation was “pathetic”. “Pigs were found roaming inside the campus of the hospital,” it said. The deaths and surrounding furore set off a row between India’s two main political parties. The Congress party, which sits in opposition nationally, won Rajasthan state in December 2018 elections. It pointed to the higher overall death rate at the hospital under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which ran Rajasthan previously. The BJP hit back, saying appropriate funding has been assigned to the state under the National Health Mission and urged the state to request further financial support. Modi’s government has raised expenditure on healthcare recently and set a target to take the annual health spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2025. It was 1.4% in 2017-18. Latest government data show a decrease in infant mortality nationwide to 33 per 1000 live births in 2017 from 53 in 2008. Despite the government’s attempts to improve healthcare in India, infant mortality remains a concern. The United Nations in a 2017 report said more babies die in India than any other country, with roughly 600,000 deaths recorded annually, or one quarter of the world total. India, in comparison, accounts for about 18% of global population.
32553	A woman was injured while trying to steal fireworks from Walmart by hiding them in her vagina.	The photograph used to accompany the article was actually a mugshot of a woman who was arrested in 2010 on charges unrelated to stealing fireworks.	false	Junk News, fireworks, news10live, walmart	On 5 July 2016, the web site News10Live published a hoax news article reporting that a woman was injured while trying to steal fireworks from a Walmart by putting them in her vagina: A Philadelphia woman has been hospitalized and now in police custody after she attempted to steal fireworks from a Walmart in Philadelphia. According to authorities, Smith exited the restroom and made it halfway through the store before shoppers around her said they smelled something burning shortly before a sizzling sound. They saw the woman running with her children towards the exit as her yoga pants caught fire. The woman fell to the floor and began to scream as the fireworks blasted off from between her legs. This story is not real; it’s another clickbait fabrication published by News10Live, , a fake news web site that puts up articles under the auspices of “satire.” The site is one of many that attempts to add legitimacy to their outlandish, often prurient articles by mimicking the appearance of genuine television news outlets, often using stolen mug shots of people pulled from unrelated incidents. This story is extremely similar to another hoax article published by the same site, in which a man was purportedly arrested while smuggling a can of dough from a Walmart in his anus. That story was itself a rehashed version of yet another article involving cookie dough, a vagina, and a Walmart.
36483	A vintage photograph shows different, far more relaxed safety standards in the 1960s.	Safety Standards in the 1960s Chairlift Photo	mixture	Fact Checks, Viral Content	On February 20 2019, the Facebook page Pictures in History shared a version of the photograph of a chairlift seen above simply captioned: “Safety standards in the 1960s.”The photograph was not new to the internet, and the meme-style version here was shared to me.me in November 2018 and by BoingBoing in September 2018. That same photograph was accompanied by the following text:Prior to all the PC BULLSHIT, WE SURVIVED on common sense and lotsa luck!Underneath that photograph was an additional caption, “we survived,” with both captions heavily implying that the events depicted here would never occur in a safety-crazed and “politically correct” 2019 climate. In the background of the photograph, a scoreboard-type sign reads “SNOW KING CHAIRLIFT, JACKSON HOLE, WYO.” On the sign, the date is displayed as June 28, 1965.Other iterations of the same photograph appeared on Reddit’s r/wyoming in and r/sweatypalms in September 2018, and on r/OldSchoolCool in June 2018. Interestingly, comments in all three threads fell along similar lines: people with aversions to heights expressing an unpleasant reaction to the photograph, and people familiar with skiing perplexed that so many users were unfamiliar with the conventions around using chairlifts in both 1965 and 2019:Doesn’t seem like there are many skiers on this thread. Everyone on here is acting like this is really dangerous.Its a chair lift. It is probably the safest part of skiing and the modern ones are about the same but they have a safety bar that is used maybe half of the time.You do realise that it’s not that far off of the ground? Mountains are sloped and lift chairs follow this slope. The background looking so far below is a matter of forced perspective.As noted, the device shown was not some long-lost contraption absent completely from lawsuit-happy modern day American life. Chairlifts are exceptionally common at ski locales (such as in Jackson Hole, Wyoming) and largely rely on a lack of restraints to be useful in their primary function:An elevated passenger ropeway, or chairlift, is a type of aerial lift, which consists of a continuously circulating steel cable loop strung between two end terminals and usually over intermediate towers, carrying a series of chairs. They are the primary onhill transport at most ski areas (in such cases referred to as ‘skilifts’), but are also found at amusement parks, various tourist attractions, and increasingly in urban transport.Safety bars are sometimes used on chairlifts, but not always. Their presence arguably interferes with the primary application of chairlifts in their contexts — enabling riders to enter them and, a few minutes later, disembark onto ski slopes with ease:Pretty much all double chairs don’t have safety bars. That’s normal all over the country. Triple chairs are hit and miss, maybe half have a safety bar built in.High speed quads and sixers pretty much always have safety bars.Another Reddit user recounted an amusing tale of parental sangfroid involving chairlifts, except for the fact that the anecdote was from the late 2010s, not the 1960s. It involved dangling a five-year-old by his jacket after the child attempted to exit the chairlift prematurely:Note: When preparing to get off, my 5-year-old son scooted too far forward too early and almost dropped about 15 feet to the snowbank below but I grabbed the back of his coat and he just hung there for the few seconds it took to get to the unload area. I don’t think he would have damaged anything if he fell, but it woulda scared him pretty good. The dad-bar worked.Youth skiing safety website KidsOnLifts.org featured a Frequently Asked Question page that addressed both the overall safety of chairlifts (even for children), as well as the presence of lack of safety bars:While riding a chairlift is extremely safe, ski areas cannot entirely prevent incidents or falls from chairlifts. In a 2012 study that reviewed more than ten years of falls from lifts, more than 90 percent of all falls from chairlifts were the result of human error or medical conditions; only 2 percent of falls were related to operator error – your personal behavior, therefore, is critical for overall chairlift safety. Still, falls from chairlifts remain exceedingly rare, and ski resorts nonetheless work diligently and effectively to minimize and mitigate incidents and falls from lifts. Take comfort in knowing that riding chairlifts is an exceptionally safe mode of transportation, and enjoy the ride.There are various types of lifts such as T-bars, conveyors, gondolas, etc. The loading process and responsibilities are similar regardless of the style of lift.….in fact, many chairlifts do not have restraint bars, but this does not make those chairlifts any less safe. Only a small number of states require that ski areas have restraint bars installed on all chairlifts. Restraint bars are not the “silver bullet” to preventing incidents or falls from lifts – through industry experience and studies, it is well understood that incidents occur on chairlifts with and without restraint bars. Individual behavior and human error – not any restraining device or lack of restraint bar – is usually the contributing factor in most lift incidents.Immediately following a comment in the r/Wyoming thread of “vintage! I love it!” was a separate user’s link to what appeared to be the same chairlift in operation in August 2018. That chairlift did appear to feature a restraint bar, but again, such a feature was designed to still enable riders to jump from ski lifts at higher points on the mountain. Simply put, the chairlift’s sole function was to allow people to ride to higher altitudes without the burden of having to climb a mountain with skiing or snowboarding equipment.A second user shared a more recent photograph of riders on the same chairlift, describing the angle shown in the 1965 photograph as “deceiving”:Like many viral vintage images, the Snow King chairlift photograph spread in part due to a projective narrative that the freewheeling 1960s were a liability-free time of nonstop fun before political correctness and litigious lawyers stepped in to put a stop to it all. But that spin on the image relies on what appears to be a basic lack of awareness that chairlifts and the ability to hop off them on tall mountains is an integral part of the skiing experience, is still common, and is an activity in which parents and toddlers still engage. Although the chairlift may have since been modified to include a restraint bar, the basic function of chairlifts is to enable humans to jump onto them so that they can ride to and then slide down the tops of icy, slippery mountains.
3372	Study: California law lifts vaccination in ‘high-risk’ areas.	A study released this week has found that a law aimed at boosting vaccination rates across California had the greatest effect in high-risk areas where the vaccination rates were the lowest.	true	Measles, Legislation, California, Public health, Laws	The peer-reviewed study published in the journal PLOS Medicine on Monday shows that the 2016 legislation contributed to a 3.3% increase statewide for measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and a 2.4% decrease in the number of requests for non-medical or personal belief exemptions to childhood vaccination requirements. California adopted the strictest childhood vaccination laws in the nation after public health officials connected more than 100 measles cases to an outbreak at Disneyland that began in December 2014. The law requires children to be vaccinated to attend public or private schools. It allows for medical exemptions if there is a clear medical reason that children should not be vaccinated. Researchers told the Sacramento Bee that previous studies concluded the law helped improve the state’s overall vaccination rate from 92.8 percent in 2015 to 95 percent in 2017. But the latest study shows the largest increase in vaccinations occurred in counties with lower rates before the law went into effect. “That 3 to 4 percent increase (statewide) represents much larger vaccine coverage increases in a fraction of California,” said Dr. Nathan Lo, a public health scientist at UCSF Medical Center who co-authored the study. Lo added: “There are a few counties in California that had particularly low vaccine coverage and in those high-risk counties — those low vaccine coverage counties — that’s where it increased dramatically by 10-plus percent.” The study also found that the policy change was associated with a 0.4 percent increase in medical exemptions statewide and a 2.4 percent increase for counties. The trend led lawmakers to pass a bill in September to crack down on doctors who write bogus medical exemptions for school childrens’ vaccinations. Debate over the bill drew hundreds of advocates to the state Capitol in emotional support or opposition. Democratic Sen. Richard Pan, a physician who authored several bills seeking to limit exemptions for child vaccinations, said the latest study shed light to some degree on the 2016 law’s effect on local neighborhoods. “An exposure happens in a neighborhood,” Pan said. “It doesn’t happen across the state at one time.”
34437	The simultaneous death of infant twins in Turkey in 2002 was connected to their having recently received vaccinations.	Thailand opened its first full-time clinic specializing in traditional and alternative cannabis-based medicine on Monday, as part of a move by the government towards developing a medicinal cannabis industry.	unproven	Medical, health nut news, SIDS, vaccinations	“This is a pilot clinic, because we cannot produce enough doctors with expertise in cannabis,” Public Health Minister, Anutin Charnvirakul, told reporters at the opening ceremony in Bangkok. Patients will receive treatment free of charge for the first two weeks, he added. Thailand, which has a tradition of using cannabis to relieve pain and fatigue, legalized marijuana for medical use and research in 2017 to boost agricultural income. There are already around 25 cannabis clinics attached to general hospitals around the country but, unlike the newly-launched pilot clinic, they operate for just a few days a week due to a lack of specialized staff. The largest producer of medicinal cannabis is currently the health ministry’s Government Pharmaceutical Organization. Kasetsart University’s director of medical cannabis research, Natakorn Thasnas, told Reuters that the university would supply 2,200 kilograms of cannabis leaf to the ministry. Cannabis production, cultivation and sale has been limited to licensed Thai producers for the next four years to protect the domestic industry. Currently, only hospitals and research facilities are allowed to apply for cannabis production and extraction licenses, but the government is reviewing regulations to enable Thai businesses to apply for permits. Last year, Thailand dropped cannabis and hemp extracts from its narcotics list and proposed a draft law that would allow each household to grow six cannabis plants. Four types of drugs, containing different combinations of cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psycho-active ingredient in cannabis, were given to patients to treat migraine, insomnia, neck pain and muscle stiffness, the ministry said in a statement. The pilot clinic, based in the Ministry of Public Health, expects to see between 200 to 300 patients daily. “I was worried at first, but I studied the effects and decided it was better because its natural,” said Waraporn Boonsri, 69, who received four vials of cannabis oil to help her sleep. Nearly 2,200 patients have registered at the clinic until March, a health official told Reuters. Anutin said there were plans for 77 clinics to be opened across the country, with one in every province. (This story fixes minister’s name to “Charnvirakul” in second paragraph)
5374	New Hampshire proposes strict water drinking standards.	New Hampshire’s environmental agency proposed drinking water standards Friday that would be among the nation’s strictest for a group of industrial compounds that have increasingly turned up in public water supplies and private wells.	true	New Hampshire, General News, Environment, Chemistry	The Department of Environmental Services filed a proposal to set maximum contaminant levels for four compounds called per- and polyfluoroalykyl substances, known collectively as PFAS. The substances, widely used in firefighting foam, nonstick cookware and other products, have been dubbed “forever chemicals” because they persist so long in the environment. Studies have found potential links between high levels in the body of one form of the contaminant, known as PFOA, and a range of illnesses, including kidney cancer, increased cholesterol levels and problems in pregnancies. A spokeswoman for the American Chemistry Council industry group said it looks forward to reviewing the proposal and providing feedback. The federal government has a nonbinding health threshold of 70 parts per trillion for two forms of the contaminant and has announced plans to consider limits on the potentially toxic chemicals. But several states are moving to enact their own standards. New Hampshire is proposing 12 parts per trillion for PFOA and 15 parts per trillion for PFOS, another form of the contaminant. Scientists advising the state of Michigan suggested earlier this week limits of 8 parts per trillion for PFOA and 16 parts per trillion for PFOS. Meanwhile, Vermont’s Republican Gov. Phil Scott signed a bill this month that put in place an interim drinking water standard of 20 ppt for the sum of five PFAS. The state is working to establish a permanent 20 ppt standard for five compounds in any combination, and on Thursday sued several companies for damage it says has been caused by the chemicals. New Hampshire filed a similar lawsuit last month against eight companies. It has connected more than 700 homes to new water systems in four communities due to contamination and estimates more than 100,000 people eventually could be affected. “Toxic PFAS chemicals are threatening drinking water and public health across New Hampshire,” Tom Irwin, director of the Conservation Law Foundation in New Hampshire, said in a statement. “The new standards proposed today are a significant step in the right direction for protecting our communities, but more needs to be done.” The proposed drinking water standards will be considered by a legislative rules committee next month. If approved, they would apply to public water systems that serve the same 25 people at least 60 days per year. The standards would take effect Oct. 1.
11141	To Heal Diabetes, Doctors Push Weight-Loss Surgery	This is an extremely well-done story about bariatric surgery used not to support weight loss in the morbidly obese, but to treat diabetes in people of more moderate weight. The reporter has made good use of the unusually generous amount of space granted by quoting a variety of sources, citing high-quality research and sketching the history and controversy of the surgical application. He also illuminates the financial self-interest that may motivate advocates. The article itself is well-supported by two infographics, and is extended a bit by an entry on the newspaper’s blog featuring an additional interview and some more facts. The story’s one significant shortcoming is its failure to create a point of comparision by describing conventional diabetes treatment in more detail. A less troublesome problem is the anecdote about the surgery patient; it is slightly off-point and potentially confusing. The woman interviewed is a diabetic who qualified for surgery as a weight-loss treatment. Given the context, the remission of her diabetes is assumed to be due to the surgery, when in fact it may have been due to the weight loss. Kudos to this newspaper for affording this topic the space required to present such a balanced story.	true		"The report states that the operation is costly, about $25,000, and that insurance coverage is not guaranteed. It also indicates that at this time surgery purely to treat diabetes, not reduce body weight, is unlikely to be covered. The report adds useful context by stating that conventional diabetes care costs $10,000 per year. The article opens with a claim that studies show over 75 percent of diabetics who get bariatric surgery ""see their disease disappear."" While this sounds like an exaggerated claim, it is backed up by two specific citations of remission data from credible journals later in the story. The reporter makes clear the serious risks of surgery, including death rate, and their frequency not well-known. It would have been useful to include the risks of death and serious side effects for the more invasive intestinal surgery likely to be used on diabetics. The story states that one reason for the decline in bariatric surgery risks generally is increased use of the less invasive procedure. Since this article is not based on the results of a single research study, the reporter makes references to several papers. This is handled in the form of a narrative indicating how the research has progressed. The studies are described in sufficient detail to help readers understand their relative credibility. The two studies referenced at the end are especially well handled. The reporter indicates that the international studies are too small and recent to support a conclusion, and that the study that will answer the key question most directly–do diabetics who are not sufficiently overweight to qualify for the surgery as a weight-loss treatment see remission of diabetes symptoms?–is well-designed and just underway. The story does an excellent job of detailing the effects of uncontrolled diabetes, and the risks of the surgery, in a clear, factual manner. The reporter interviews both supporters and critics of the diabetes surgery. He also makes clear that the surgeons who advocate using bariatric surgery for diabetes have a big financial stake in the issue. The published papers he cites all appeared in credible journals. The article would have been stronger if it had described the range of treatments for Type 2 now in use, from diet and exercise to medications and insulin. This would have helped readers understand the choices diabetics face–a challenging lifetime regimen that is not always successful, or a somewhat risky surgery that might provide permanent relief. The article makes clear that the surgery is widely available and increasing in frequency. It also indicates the populations for which it is currently recommended. The reporter emphasizes that the proposed treatment is an extension to a new patient population of an existing procedure. The story does a good job clarifying the differences between the two major types of bariatric surgery and their histories. There is no evidence the reporter has drawn information from a press release."
5064	Moroccan vault protects seeds from climate change and war.	Should a doomsday agricultural crisis hit the world’s driest environments, scientists and farmers will turn to an up-and-coming research center and seed bank in Morocco to restock their harvests.	true	North Africa, Climate, Biodiversity, Climate change, Rabat, Africa, Morocco, Business, Agriculture, Environment	Tucked away in the university hub of Irfane in Rabat, the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, or ICARDA, hosts the largest collection of seeds in North Africa. “If for any reason, a particular community lost all their resources, we are capable of providing them with the seeds for restoration and rehabilitation,” says Ahmed Amri, head of ICARDA’s Genetic Resources Unit. The crucial role of seed banks in protecting biodiversity is receiving increasing attention because of climate change, which threatens to wipe out crops as dry areas of the world get even hotter and drier. The impact on African agriculture is among the topics being discussed at U.N. climate talks taking place through next week in Morocco. The site in Rabat has become ICARDA’s primary center of storage and research after its previous hub in Aleppo, Syria, was seized by an Islamist rebel group in September 2015. “We couldn’t continue doing this work because of the situation in Syria, so we decided to make arrangements to move elsewhere to continue our work,” says Amri, who used to work in Aleppo, but is now leading genetic research efforts in Rabat. While many of the research activities moved to Rabat, 98 percent of the Aleppo center’s seeds were safely transferred to ICARDA’s center in neighboring Lebanon. Duplicates were also sent to a “doomsday” seed vault in Svalbard in the Norwegian Arctic, which serves as a backup for other seed banks worldwide. Rebels from the ultraconservative Ahrar al-Sham group have occupied the Aleppo center since September 2015, cutting off access to its 75 employees. Amri has daily contact with the five staff members who remain in Aleppo, including associate scientist Ali Shehadeh. “With the cease-fire, it’s stable and unstable at times,” Shehadeh told The Associated Press from Aleppo in a Skype interview facilitated by Amri. The Rabat center holds tens of thousands of seeds spanning from wheat and barley to lentils and chickpeas inside a vault in near-freezing temperatures. The seed bank not only preserves these essential staples but develops them to become more resistant to disease and a warming climate. Last year, Morocco faced an unprecedented drought that scientists and the government and have linked to climate change, with drier and warmer winters in Morocco and neighboring countries. Domestic grain production dropped, forcing the government to drop tariffs on imports to avoid shortages and stem rising prices. Last month, the government decided to temporarily remove import duties for lentils to lower the price just in time for the winter season — a time when lentils are widely consumed in Morocco. Scientists at the Rabat center work closely with farmers in Marchouch, a nearby rural town. The scientists provide seed samples to farmers who allocate about 2 percent of their own farm land to test the seeds and provide feedback to scientists. “We are looking for science-based solutions for farmers’ problems,” says Shiv Kumar Agrawal, a lentil breeder with ICARDA. These problems include contending with droughts, invasive insects and increasing production. Farmers report back to scientists on the results of the harvest yielded from the seed samples, after which further tests are conducted to improve the seeds’ durability and production yield. Farmer Abdellah Slimani, 48, president of a farmers’ cooperative in Marchouch, believes the feedback loop has helped him and fellow farmers to improve their own methods as climate change continues to impact harvests. “We hope that this year’s harvest will be better, God willing,” Slimani says. Bruce Campbell of the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers says the climate conference in Marrakech offers a unique opportunity to address the impact of climate change on African agriculture. “Considering all African countries have included agriculture in their climate adaption strategies, (the conference) will be the ideal setting to discuss how the most promising solutions can be deployed and indeed, funded,” he says.
27087	A photograph shows a long line of climbers waiting to ascend Mount Everest.	A remarkable photograph showing a long line near the summit of Mount Everest was met with disbelief from online viewers.	true	Fauxtography	Freezing temperatures, avalanches, and altitude sickness are common hazards among mountain climbers along the route to the peak of Mount Everest. But in May 2019, another factor, overcrowding, was partially to blame for the deaths of several climbers on the 8,848-meter (29,029-foot) Himalayan summit: At least 11 people died trying to reach the summit of the world’s tallest mountain this year, the deadliest climbing season for the peak in four years. One factor contributing to this year’s toll appears to have been crowding as scores of people attempted to ascend in a short window of good weather, producing delays that extended the time climbers spent at deadly altitudes. Before you even make it to the top – an icy platform no wider than two ping pong tables – there are traffic jams on the final few feet in an area known as the “death zone.” At that altitude there is not enough oxygen for humans to breathe, so vital supplies are used up while the climbers just wait. Many news outlets that reported on these dangerous conditions illustrated their articles with a remarkable photograph supposedly showing a long queue of climbers waiting to ascend to Everest’s summit. Although this image was published by legitimate news organizations, such as the New York Times, Agence-France Presse, the Washington Post, CNN, CBS News, and BBC News, some viewers found the visual of hundreds of climbers lined up along the ridge of one of the world’s tallest mountain simply too strange for reality: This is a genuine photograph from near the summit of Mount Everest. It was taken on 22 May 2019 by Nirmal Purja, a mountaineer attempting to climb all 14 of the 8,000-meter Himalayan peaks in a single seven-month season. Purja uploaded the image to his social media pages along with a brief description of what it showed: “On 22nd of May, I summited Everest at 5:30 am and [reached] Lhotse 3:45 pm despite of the heavy traffic (roughly 320 people )”: A video of this “traffic jam” on Everest was also available via the Twitter account Everest Today: Several high altitude tourists, Sherpas ascending/descending at death zone of Mt #Everest on 22 May, 2019. https://t.co/LzeFw6AErk #Everest2019 pic.twitter.com/sNoXQsj00o — Everest Today (@EverestToday) May 25, 2019 Purja is attempting to climb all 14 of the peaks in a single season as part of his “Project Possible” expedition, a fundraising effort that “supports orphanages, disabled and children in need of support in Nepal.” Purja wrote on the Project Possible’s GoFundMe Page that: I firmly believe that everything in life is possible armed only with a determined approach and positive mindset. That is how I managed all of the above and how I continue to live now. Now that my military career is behind me, I will strive to break more boundaries and help others move forward in their lives, realise their dreams and exceed my and their limitations. Purja isn’t the first person to capture a photograph of large crowds on Mount Everest. In fact, this phenomenon has been a growing problem on the popular peak. In May 2012, climber Ralf Dujmovits took a similar photograph of a long line of people making their way up the mountain, which can be seen in a broadcast from ABC News:
35914	The reason the U.S. documented the most COVID-19 cases in the world in 2020 was because it had tested more residents at a faster rate than any other country.	Yes I am aware that testing turns up more cases. That is indeed the point. But in many of the states experiencing a resurgence, hospitalizations are up and the percent of tests that are positive is rising. Those are signs of trouble. […] It’s not just testing.	false	Politics Medical, COVID-19	Since the early months of the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump alleged a scheme by his opponents and journalists to purposefully ignore his administration’s success with testing Americans for the potentially deadly virus and curbing its spread. On April 25, for example, Trump tweeted the U.S. had conducted “far more [tests] than any other country in the world” and suggested that news reporters were purposefully keeping that achievement quiet to undermine his office’s work to combat the pandemic. Then, less than two weeks later, the president again made the claim while retweeting a graph that depicted the number of COVID-19 tests performed in Japan, South Korea, France, Canada, Italy, Germany, and the U.S., with the caption: “[Here] is the newest chart on our great testing ‘miracle’ compared to other countries.” He doubled down on the alleged conspiracy as the pandemic worsened. The president claimed that not only was the U.S. testing for the virus better than other countries, but also America’s skyrocketing case numbers were a direct result of the rate of testing — not the fact that more Americans were passing the virus to one another. For example, after a July 31 congressional hearing in which Rep. James Clyburn, a Democrat from South Carolina, asked national public health leaders why Europe had largely contained the virus while the U.S. had not, Trump claimed such comparisons were erroneous because “we do MUCH MORE testing” than anywhere else. The theory spurred a wave of viral posts (like the one displayed below) from Trump’s followers and other politicians, all with the same underlying assertion: that the U.S. tallied the highest number of COVID-19 cases globally for one reason: It had tested more residents at a faster rate than any other country. But, as we’ll show below, that argument is flawed because it misunderstands — or purposefully overlooks — the evidence epidemiologists use to measure whether people were indeed stopping the spread of the virus to new people or communities. To begin our analysis, we first considered whether the country had tallied the most coronavirus cases globally, and whether it had tested more residents at a faster rate than anywhere else. For the former point, Snopes referred to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University that showed the U.S. case load surpassed all other countries’ individual totals beginning in late March (about two months after the first U.S. COVID-19 report), with more than 82,400 confirmed cases at that time. Simultaneously, China, the pandemic’s epicenter, recorded about 81,700. After that, the number of U.S. cases increased and the nation maintained its status as the country with the most coronavirus cases, confirming the basis to the claim. As of this report, the country has documented more than 6.9 million cases, topping India with roughly 5.6 million cases and Brazil with about 4.6 million. (Note: Per every one million people, Brazil had roughly 22,000 cases — the highest per capita case load globally — while the U.S. ranked second by that standard with about 21,000 cases, according to an analysis of global data by a Nova School of Business & Economics researcher.) Next, we considered whether it was true that America had tested more residents for the coronavirus than any other country since the start of the pandemic. According to testing statistics compiled by Johns Hopkins, yes, the U.S. had conducted more tests per capita than any other nation, with a seven-day average of 263 tests per 100,000 Americans, as of late September. That statistic, however, did not consider the size of the outbreaks country-by-country but only measured raw testing numbers per population size. The Johns Hopkins database included the following caveat, as of Sept. 23: In order for governments to identify new cases and effectively respond to the pandemic through tracing and treatment, testing programs should be scaled to the size of their epidemic, not the size of the population. […] [Several] countries effectively controlled the spread of the virus through testing programs that had a far lower number of tests per capita than the U.S. Meanwhile, despite having the highest rate of tests per capita, the U.S. faces the largest outbreak in the world and new cases continue to trend upwards in many states. Looking at the positivity rate (ie, out of all tests conducted, how many came back positive for COVID-19) is the most reliable way to determine if a government is testing enough. A high rate of positive tests indicates a government is only testing the sickest patients who seek out medical attention and is not casting a wide enough net. Without question, increased testing would reveal more positive cases — that’s the nature of probability. However, the president’s claim that there is an “x” equals “y” relationship between testing and total cases was misleading and potentially discouraged people from taking the responsibility to make lifestyle changes that would further contain the virus. First, let us consider the comparison made in above-displayed meme. By giving more people IQ tests, you would not necessarily see an increase in the share of test-takers with low scores. You would likely notice roughly the same results on average if no other conditions, besides more people taking the tests, changed. But if you adjusted for how many people completed the test or how much time they had to finish it — while simultaneously giving out tests to more people — you may see different results overall. In other words, other factors were at play in the growth of U.S. COVID-19 case numbers, though they were not acknowledged in Trump’s tweets. For his claim to be true — that expanded testing was the sole reason for increasing COVID-19 cases in America — the virus would not be spreading to new people or communities, and the proportion of positive tests (within the sum of tests) would decrease, or remain steady, over time. But according to our analysis of testing data and daily COVID-19 cases, that was not the case. We’ll show you the numbers: In early June, the country was administering an average of about 417,000 tests daily, according to The COVID Tracking Project. Also at that time, about 5.2 tests out of every 100 came back positive, which meant the U.S. tallied about 20,000 new cases each day, per the Johns Hopkins data. Comparatively, in early September, the U.S. was conducting an average of roughly 760,000 tests daily — which is more than 180% higher than in June, the data showed. But about 5.7% of tests were positive, totaling about 42,000 new cases daily. As you can see, yes, testing had become available to more Americans over time. But the share of people who tested positive for the virus at times increased — it did not decrease or remain consistent in conjunction with the increased access to testing. “The fact that the test positivity rate is increasing (in the U.S.) while we’re increasing the number of tests is extremely strong evidence that the surge in cases is real,” Dr. Justin Lessler, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins, told USA Today, in July. A similar trend — rising positivity rates amid expanded testing — appeared in examinations of state-level data, too. For example, Florida documented a positivity rate of about 2.6% in early June and more than 12% in early September. Meanwhile, the state’s rate of testing at times grew, but at a pace slower than the positivity rate. Furthermore, a state-by-state analysis in late July by STAT, a news outlet for science stories, found the rate of disease outpaced the expansion of testing in 26 states. “It’s hard to argue that extremely sick people, let alone dead people, had been obscured by low levels of testing but suddenly revealed by higher levels,” the report stated. Caitlin Rivers, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins, made that point in a series of tweets about a month earlier, writing:
2137	Study links chemical exposure to breast cancer.	Exposure to certain chemicals and pollutants before a woman reaches her mid-30s could treble her risk of developing breast cancer after the menopause, Canadian scientists said on Thursday.	true	Health News	In a study in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, a British Medical Journal title, the researchers found that women exposed to synthetic fibers and petrol products during the course of their work appeared to be most at risk. “Occupational exposure to acrylic and nylon fibers, and to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons may increase the risk of developing postmenopausal breast cancer,” they wrote. But some experts commenting on the study expressed caution, saying such links can crop up by chance. “In a study of this sort positive associations often occur simply by chance,” said David Coggon, a professor of occupational and environmental medicine at Britain’s Southampton University. “They carry little weight in the absence of stronger supportive evidence from other research.” The Canadian scientists conceded their findings could be due to chance, but also said they were consistent with the theory that breast tissue is more sensitive to harmful chemicals if the exposure occurs when breast cells are still active — in other words, before a woman reaches her 40s. The researchers, led by France Labreche, of the Occupational Health Research Institute in Montreal, Canada, based their findings on more than 1,100 women, 556 of whom were diagnosed with breast cancer in 1996 and 1997 when they were aged between 50 and 75 and had gone through the menopause. A team of chemists and industrial hygienists investigated the women’s levels of exposure to around 300 different substances during their employment history. After taking account of the usual factors associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, the analysis indicated a link between occupational exposure to several of these substances, Labreche’s team wrote. Compared with the comparison group, the risk peaked for exposures before the age of 36, and increased with each additional decade of exposure before this age, they found. This meant women who were exposed to acrylic fibers appeared to run a seven-fold risk of breast cancer, while those exposed to nylon fibers almost doubled their risk. The scientists said more detailed studies focusing on certain chemicals were now needed to try to establish what role chemical exposure plays in the development of breast cancer.
17017	"Karl Rove Says Hillary Clinton spent 30 days in the hospital in 2012 and appeared ""wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury."	Rove said Clinton spent 30 days in the hospital and then emerged wearing glasses that only people with traumatic brain injury use. Rove since said he was wrong about the length of her hospital stay. The actual number is four days. By describing a long hospital stay and tying it to signs of traumatic brain injury, Rove associated Clinton with a more profound medical episode. Experts reject that association. Concussions are the mildest form of traumatic brain injury. The glasses Clinton wore are an optional treatment for temporary problems of double vision that are relatively common among people who suffer concussions along with other conditions. She has not worn the glasses for some time, and the neurologists we contacted said most people recover fully. While Rove never claimed Clinton suffered brain damage, he was wrong about the hospital stay and combined that with the glasses to exaggerate the nature of Clinton’s injury. His claim is inaccurate.	false	Elections, PunditFact, Karl Rove,	"If Hillary Clinton decides to run for president, she knows every bit of her life will be put under a microscope. Republican strategist and Fox News commentator Karl Rove proved the point at an event near Los Angeles last Thursday. In remarks reported in the New York Post, Rove raised questions about Clinton’s health following a mild concussion in 2012. ""Thirty days in the hospital,"" Rove said. ""And when she reappears, she's wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury? We need to know what's up with that."" Many people took Rove’s comments to mean that he thinks Clinton has a brain injury, though Rove says he was just raising the question and that it should be part of any presidential vetting. There are two points for us to cover in this fact check -- the time Clinton spent in the hospital and the nature of the glasses she wore for weeks afterward. (She doesn’t wear them now.) First, the background. In December 2012, a stomach virus kept Clinton at home where she fainted and hit her head. During a follow-up visit, doctors spotted a blood clot, admitted her to the hospital and treated her with blood thinners. Clinton was in the hospital for about four days, not 30, a point Rove got wrong. (In a subsequent interview, Rove said it was a ""30-day period where she’s fighting something."") Clinton testified near the end of January at a House hearing on the Benghazi, Libya, attack, and was seen wearing the glasses Rove referred to. A State Department spokesman said they were related to issues stemming from her concussion. The peculiar shape of one of the lenses led experts and doctors to conclude they were prismatic glasses. The glasses are designed to help with blurred or double vision, experts told us. We spoke with Steven Galetta, who is chair of the Neurology Department at New York University Medical Center. ""About 30 to 50 percent of concussions lead to some kind of visual problem,"" Galetta said. ""When there’s double vision, we can manage it by putting a prism over one eye. It bends the light to line up the image from the other eye."" Galetta said the glasses are often optional. Whether someone wears them depends on how quickly the person wants to get back to work. ""Most patients resolve (the issues) on their own,"" he said. ""I’d say 85 to 90 percent of these patients do incredibly well and have no recognizable symptoms afterwards."" Given Clinton’s job as Secretary of State, Galetta said he could see why her doctors might have jumped in to deal with her complaint. Rove exagerated the tie between the glasses and trauma. Galetta said such lenses are used in cases other than traumatic brain injury. Anything that affects the ocular motor nerves or the way the eyes work together can produce double vision that then might be treated with prismatic glasses. So while Rove said the glasses are used ""only"" for people with traumatic brain injury, doctors say that is incorrect. More broadly, Rove’s characterization of Clinton’s concussion as a traumatic brain injury generated a bit of concern among the physicians we reached. Doug Smith is a professor of neurosurgery and director of the Center for Brain Injury and Repair at the University of Pennsylvania. Smith said the public might not understand how broadly the term applies. The Centers for Disease Control report that 2.2 million head injuries sent people to the emergency room in 2010. ""Technically, a concussion is a mild traumatic brain injury,"" Smith said. ""But Rove made a linkage that doesn’t fit. Having a concussion and wearing those glasses tell you nothing about a person’s cognitive status. The vast majority of people with concussions make a full recovery."" Our ruling Rove said Clinton spent 30 days in the hospital and then emerged wearing glasses that only people with traumatic brain injury use. Rove since said he was wrong about the length of her hospital stay. The actual number is four days. By describing a long hospital stay and tying it to signs of traumatic brain injury, Rove associated Clinton with a more profound medical episode. Experts reject that association. Concussions are the mildest form of traumatic brain injury. The glasses Clinton wore are an optional treatment for temporary problems of double vision that are relatively common among people who suffer concussions along with other conditions. She has not worn the glasses for some time, and the neurologists we contacted said most people recover fully. While Rove never claimed Clinton suffered brain damage, he was wrong about the hospital stay and combined that with the glasses to exaggerate the nature of Clinton’s injury. His claim is inaccurate."
17770	"Next Generation Climate Action Committee Says Ken Cuccinelli wants ""to eliminate all forms of birth control."	"NextGen Climate Action Committee says Cuccinelli wants to ""eliminate all forms of birth control."" The group cites an editorial that said personhood legislation Cuccinelli supported could have fostered legal challenges to types of contraception that prevent the implantation of fertilized eggs. But the editorial made no assertion Cuccinelli wants to ban all birth control devices. Cuccinelli has repeatedly said he has no interest in restricting contraception, which generally works by preventing ovulation or the fertilization of a human egg. NextGen doesn’t have a speck of proof to bolster its incendiary claim that Cuccinelli wants to ban all forms of birth control -- even condoms and spermicides."	false	Sexuality, Virginia, Next Generation Climate Action Committee,	"As the campaign reaches its final stretch, Democrats and their allies continue to accuse Ken Cuccinelli of holding extreme views on everything from climate change to birth control. NextGen Climate Action Committee, a Democratic-aligned super pac, has fired out a series of mailers during the last two weeks accusing Cuccinelli, among other things, of ""wanting to eliminate all forms of birth control."" We asked Brian Mahar, a spokesman for the super pac, for proof of the claim. He cited a Sept. 4 editorial in The Washington Post criticizing Cuccinelli’s support of a 2007 bill in the General Assembly that would have extended to human embryos a ""right to the enjoyment of life"" from the moment of fertilization. The editorial said the failed legislation would have ""provided an opening to prohibit common methods of birth control, including the pill and intrauterine devices."" The Post editorial, however, made no claim that every form of birth control -- including condoms and spermicides -- would have been banned under the bill. Debate over the impact of legislation that confers personhood from the moment of conception centers on how various forms of birth control work. No one disputes that devices that merely prevent fertilization wouldn’t be affected by personhood laws. The issue is that some forms -- including the intrauterine device, emergency contraception and birth control pills -- may also work by preventing implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus. Some people say those methods go beyond mere contraception and are tantamount to causing an abortion. In 2012, as Virginia was debating another personhood measure, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released a statement saying laws that bestow rights from the moment of fertilization would restrict contraception choices. The group wrote, ""some of the most effective and reliable forms of contraception, such as oral contraceptives, intrauterine devices,, and other forms of FDA-approved hormonal contraceptives could be banned in states that adopt ‘personhood’ measures."" But the organization’s statement, which was cited in editorial NextGen references, never said all forms of contraception would be banned. It said personhood laws would leave ""condoms, natural family planning and spermicides the only legally allowed forms of birth control."" In a September Truth-O-Meter, we gave a Half True to Cuccinelli’s statement that he’s never supported legislation that invades contraceptive choices. We noted that while the personhood bills he’s backed never explicitly sought to ban birth control, they could have opened legal avenues to challenge certain forms of contraception. Cuccinelli has repeatedly said he would not seek to restrict contraception. We asked his campaign how he defines birth control but did not receive a clear response. As a state senator in 2003, Cuccinelli voted against a bill that would have specified that contraception that prevents implantation of a fertilized egg is not an abortion. Our ruling NextGen Climate Action Committee says Cuccinelli wants to ""eliminate all forms of birth control."" The group cites an editorial that said personhood legislation Cuccinelli supported could have fostered legal challenges to types of contraception that prevent the implantation of fertilized eggs. But the editorial made no assertion Cuccinelli wants to ban all birth control devices. Cuccinelli has repeatedly said he has no interest in restricting contraception, which generally works by preventing ovulation or the fertilization of a human egg. NextGen doesn’t have a speck of proof to bolster its incendiary claim that Cuccinelli wants to ban all forms of birth control -- even condoms and spermicides."
969	Missouri's only abortion clinic to stay open until at least August 1.	Missouri’s only abortion clinic will remain open for now after a state arbiter on Friday ordered a stay in response to Planned Parenthood’s challenge of the state health department’s refusal to renew the clinic’s license.	true	Health News	Planned Parenthood, the women’s healthcare and abortion provider that operates the clinic, filed a petition with Missouri’s Administrative Hearing Commission on Tuesday after the group challenged the health department’s denial in state court and a judge referred the matter to the commission. The clinic would have had to stop providing abortion services on Friday if the commission did not grant the stay, which allows it to stay open until its initial Aug. 1 hearing date. In its ruling, the commission noted that the issue of abortion entails great public interests for opponents and proponents, but that the only question it was considering was a motion to stay the expiration of a statutory license. “Consequently, the public interest of our concern is the procedural due process of licensees to appeal the decisions of regulatory bodies. We find that granting this stay sufficiently protects that interest,” the commission said. Dr. Colleen McNicholas of the Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region said in a statement that they were relieved by the last-minute reprieve. “This has been a week-to-week fight for our patients and every Missourian who needs access to abortion care,” McNicholas said. “There are two things that remain unchanged in Missouri: the uncertainty our patients face, and our will to continue fighting for their right to access safe, legal abortion.” Missouri health officials declined to renew the St. Louis clinic’s license last week on the grounds it failed to meet their standards. If Missouri officials succeed in closing the clinic, it would become the only U.S. state without a legal abortion facility. Abortion is one of the most divisive issues in the United States. Missouri is one of 12 states to pass laws restricting abortion access this year, some aimed at provoking a U.S. Supreme Court review of the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy. “The terrifying reality is that access is hanging on by a thread with a narrowing timeline,” McNicholas, who is a physician at the clinic, said in a statement ahead of the ruling. Judge Michael Stelzer had issued a temporary injunction on Monday letting the clinic stay open until Friday at 5 p.m. CT (2200 GMT), ahead of the decision of the commission, which serves as an independent arbiter in disputes between state agencies and individuals or groups. On Friday, a group of civil rights groups, doctors and clinics sued Georgia seeking to overturn a law passed in March that bans abortions if an embryonic or fetal heartbeat can be detected. And the U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped a major new challenge to abortion rights by declining to hear Alabama’s bid to revive a Republican-backed state law that would have effectively banned the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Separately in New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio said the city’s public health system will stop participating in the federal Title X program for as long as a “gag rule” is in effect that prevents medical providers from sharing information and counseling about abortion with their patients. Missouri state officials have said one of their conditions for renewing the clinic’s license was to be allowed to interview several physicians who were involved in what they said were multiple life-threatening abortions at the clinic. Planned Parenthood officials have said they do not directly employ all the clinic’s staff and cannot force certain health workers to give interviews.
29587	A recent study revealed that one-third of pediatricians refuse to recommend the Gardasil HPV vaccine to patients.	"What's true: An item published in the journal 'Pediatrics' indicated that a third of 600 doctors surveyed failed to recommend Gardasil to patients, primarily due to anticipated parental objection or underestimating the likelihood of teen sexual activity. What's false: That third of surveyed doctors ""refused"" to recommend Gardasil; the doctors forewent the recommendation due to reservations about Gardasil's safety; the published item was a study."	false	Uncategorized, gardasil, not actually a study	In early January 2015, social media users began sharing links to articles about an item published in the journal Pediatrics, with many of their posts claiming a study had indicated a third of pediatricians refused to recommend the Gardasil HPV vaccine to patients. A popular iteration from Facebook, through which many readers were only exposed to comments and excerpts lacking context, misconstrued the Pediatrics item’s assertions, implying that a significant number of doctors didn’t recommend the vaccine due to “adverse side effects.” That, in turn, created the impression the doctors were shunning Gardasil over rumors about its safety. A popular excerpt described doctors as “increasingly hesitant” to recommend Gardasil due to the purportedly “high amount of adverse side effects” described in the quoted material: More bad news for Gardasil and the HPV vaccine. As countries around the world begin to investigate or stop recommending the HPV vaccine due to the high amount of adverse side effects, which includes Primary Ovarian Failure (or “premature menopause” where young ladies will never be able to bear children) and severe disabilities, a new study just published in the journal Pediatrics again shows that doctors in the U.S. are increasingly hesitant to recommend the vaccine. This hesitation regarding the HPV vaccine mirrors a similar study published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Preventionlast month showing that nearly half of the doctors in U.S. are not routinely recommending the HPV vaccine. Not all social media users were fooled by the sleight of hand, however, and some reporting was clearer on the source material’s findings: 1/3 doctors don’t recommend giving HPV vaccine to teens mostly b/c they anticipate objections from parents. #TheFullHeadline — Mike Kearney (@kearneymw) January 6, 2016 Study finds many doctors are not urging their preteen patients to get the HPV vaccine. https://t.co/Xwsgy66Z6x pic.twitter.com/gpttXu17mW — Here & Now (@hereandnow) January 5, 2016 The material on which both news articles and inaccurate rumors were based originated with the February 2016 edition of Pediatrics. The item in question, titled “PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIANS’ PERSPECTIVES ABOUT HPV VACCINE,” didn’t describe its method of research as “a study.” Also, the published material clearly took the perspective that Gardasil vaccination rates appeared to be suboptimal and tried to determine why doctors might not be recommending the vaccine to patients consistently: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because physicians’ practices could be modified to reduce missed opportunities for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, our goal was to: (1) describe self-reported practices regarding recommending the HPV vaccine; (2) estimate the frequency of parental deferral of HPV vaccination; and (3)identify characteristics associated with not discussing it. METHODS: A national survey among pediatricians and family physicians (FP) was conducted between October 2013 and January 2014. Using multivariable analysis, characteristics associated with not discussing HPV vaccination were examined. The article concluded by noting: Addressing physicians’ perceptions about parental acceptance of HPV vaccine, the possible advantages of discussing HPV vaccination with other recommended vaccines, and concerns about waning immunity could lead to increased vaccination rates. A 4 January 2016 Associated Press article reported on the research’s in-depth findings: While nearly all doctors surveyed discuss the vaccine with at least some patients that young, more than one-third don’t strongly recommend it for those ages. They were most likely to recommend vaccination and to give the shots to older kids and girls. The most common reasons doctors cited for delaying HPV discussions and vaccinations included a belief that patients hadn’t had sex and that parents would object. Noting that about one-third of all youth have had sex by age 16, the researchers said some doctors need a clearer understanding of reasons to vaccinate preteens. In short, it was true that researchers surveyed 600 doctors and that the result of that survey appeared in a February 2016 Pediatrics article about Gardasil vaccination rates. However, the study found the only thing about which doctors were “hesitant” was parental objection, not vaccine safety, and that a secondary cause of their hesitation was an underestimation of teen sexual activity rates. A number of social media items inaccurately suggested that a third of doctors had expressed reservations the efficacy and/or safety of Gardasil itself, even though the Pediatrics article plainly stated that was not the case.
11408	Eye’s lament: How dry I am	The story describes the condition of dry eyes, including what it is, how it may affect people, who is affected, and what treatments might be tried (although the information on available treatments is cursory). The story misses an opportunity to develop treatment information. Story limitations include no clinical trial data on specific treatments, including whether any of the treatments mentioned are effective (other than they “help”) and whether one is any better than another. Info is also lacking on what exactly is in the prescription eye-drops, other than to say an “anti-inflammatory” medication. Readers are told how often one drug must be taken “for maximum effect,” but weâ€™re not told what that maximum effect may be. Is it complete relief? Partial? Readers should also be aware that long-term safety of the prescription eye drops may be unknown if the duration of studies used for FDA approval were of short duration (a few months). Other limitations include lack of information about side effects, including short- or long-term side effects, and treatment costs. Last, the prescription eye drop treatment strategy is endorsed by a physician with ties to the manufacturer without attempt to obtain more objective input. If asked, many geriatricians would likely acknowledge that dry eyes is a common and bothersome symptom that can be easily managed and controlled with over-the-counter moisturizing drops. Yet, this story has elements of disease-mongering, telling readers about almost 5-million Americans over age 50 with symptoms ranging “from annoying to life-altering.” How many have simply annoying symptoms and may need nothing more than over-the-counter drops? No mention is made of the costs of any of the named approaches.	false		No mention of costs. No evidence, including quantifiable benefits. The story does not state what any of the treatments actually do or how they help. No discussion of benefits or harms. There simply is no evidence provided. This story has elements of disease-mongering because the condition is not serious, although it may be troublesome to those who have it. We have no idea whether taking prescription eye drops helps any more than any other treatment. When talking about treatment, the article quotes a physician who recommends treatment with prescription eye drops and discloses that she is also funded by the maker of prescription eye drops. Two other sources are interviewed. The story lists existing treatments for dry eyes, but no mention is made of possible advantages or disadvantages of options. Story states treatments are available over-the-counter or as prescription. No mention of whether any of the multiple treatments listed at the end of the story are new.
24445	"Health care reform ""establishes a new board of federal bureaucrats (the 'Health Benefits Advisory Committee') to dictate the health plans that all individuals must purchase."	The Health Benefits Advisory Committee doesn't tell you what plan to buy	false	National, Health Care, House Republican Conference,	"A few months ago, a chain e-mail purporting to be a line-by-line analysis of the House health care reform bill reached in-boxes all over the country, warning people of the dire consequences of the Democratic plans for reform. Taking a page from the same playbook, the House Republican Conference has created a similar list for the new health care bill that will be coming to the House floor in the next few weeks. You can read our fact-check of the Republican analysis in its entirety. Here, we're looking only at the statement, ""Page 111 - Section 223 establishes a new board of federal bureaucrats (the 'Health Benefits Advisory Committee') to dictate the health plans that all individuals must purchase."" Under the Democrats' health care reform plan, people will have to buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty, and policymakers have said they want everyone covered. The House bill also says what basic coverage should include: hospitalizations, physicians' visits, prescription drugs, mental health and substance abuse treatment, preventive care, maternity care, well-baby and well-child care, and durable medical equipment. But it doesn't provide specifics, like what kinds of prescription drugs or specific medical procedures must be covered. The bill creates the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to advise the secretary of Health and Human Services on what the specifics should be. The committee will have up to 27 members appointed by the president and the Comptroller General, and it will represent the major stakeholders in the health care system, according to the bill. The committee doesn't dictate health plans, though: It advises the secretary, who can reject the recommendations. Another important caveat is that the committee helps set a baseline for different types of coverage. People are then free to select any health plan they like that meets or exceeds the basic requirements. So the committee does not dictate which health plans all individuals must purchase. We find the House Republican Conference's statement, ""Page 111 - Section 223 establishes a new board of federal bureaucrats (the 'Health Benefits Advisory Committee') to dictate the health plans that all individuals must purchase,"" makes it sound as if bureaucrats tell you which plan you have to buy. In reality, the committee advises the secretary of Health and Human Services on what baseline coverage should include."
4238	Breast cancer risk from menopause hormones may last decades.	Women who use certain types of hormones after menopause still have an increased risk of developing breast cancer nearly two decades after they stop taking the pills, long-term results from a big federal study suggest.	true	Cancer, Health, General News, Breast cancer, San Antonio, Menopause, Womens health	Although the risk is very small, doctors say a new generation of women entering menopause now may not be aware of landmark findings from 2002 that tied higher breast cancer rates to hormone pills combining estrogen and progestin. “The message is probably not clear” that even short-term use may have lasting effects, said Dr. Rowan Chlebowski of Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Torrance, California. He discussed the new results Friday at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. The results are from the Women’s Health Initiative, a federally funded study that tested pills that doctors long thought would help prevent heart disease, bone loss and other problems in women after menopause. More than 16,000 women ages 50 to 70 were given combination hormone or dummy pills for five to six years. The main part of the study was stopped in 2002 when researchers surprisingly saw more heart problems and breast cancers among hormone users. Women were advised to stop treatment but doctors have continued to study them and have information on about two-thirds. With roughly 19 years of followup, 572 breast cancers have occurred in women on hormones versus 431 among those on dummy pills. That worked out to a 29% greater risk of developing the disease for hormone takers. Still, it was a difference of just 141 cases over many years, so women with severe hot flashes and other menopause symptoms may decide that the benefits of the pills outweigh their risks, doctors say. The advice remains to use the lowest possible dose for the shortest time. Why might hormones raise breast risk? “The hormones are stimulating the cells to grow” and it can take many years for a tumor to form and be detected, said Dr. C. Kent Osborne, a Baylor College of Medicine breast cancer expert. Women are prescribed hormones in combination because taking estrogen alone raises the risk of uterine cancer. However, one-quarter of women over 50 no longer have a uterus and can take estrogen alone for menopause symptoms. So the same study tested estrogen alone versus dummy pills in more than 10,000 such women, and the conclusion was opposite what was seen with combination hormones. Women on estrogen alone for seven years had a 23% lower risk of developing breast cancer up to 19 years later. There were 231 cases among them versus 289 in the placebo group. These results contradict what some observational studies have found, though, and doctors do not recommend any hormone use to try to prevent disease because of the murky picture of risks and benefits. The federal study only tested hormone pills; getting hormones through a patch or a vaginal ring may not carry the same risks or benefits. The results are another reason that hormone users should follow guidelines to get regular mammograms to check for cancer, said Dr. Jennifer Litton, a breast specialist at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. “Continuing to screen appropriately remains important,” she said. __ Marilynn Marchione can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP ___ 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.
2665	Scientists find gene linked to alcohol consumption.	Scientists have identified a gene that appears to play a role in regulating how much alcohol people drink and say their finding could help the search for more effective treatments for alcoholism and binge drinking.	true	Science News	A guest inspects the colour and body of wine at Chateau Malartic Lagraviere in Leognan, southwestern France, April 4, 2011. REUTERS/Regis Duvignau In a study of more than 47,000 people, an international team of scientists found that people who have a rarer version of a gene called AUTS2 drink on average 5 percent less alcohol than people with the more common version. The AUTS2 gene, also known as called “autism susceptibility candidate 2” has previously been linked to autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but its actual function is not clear, the researchers said. “Of course there are a lot of factors that affect how much alcohol a person drinks, but we know...that genes play an important role,” said Paul Elliott of Imperial College London, who was part of the team conducting the study. “The difference this particular gene makes is only small, but by finding it we’ve opened up a new area of research.” According to the World Health Organization, harmful use of alcohol results in 2.5 million deaths a year globally. It is the world’s third largest risk factor for causing diseases such as neuropsychiatric disorders like alcoholism and epilepsy, as well as cardiovascular disease, cirrhosis of the liver and various forms of cancer. Gunter Schumann from the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London said combining genetic studies and behavioral data should help scientists better understand the biological basis of why people drink, some of them to excess. “This is an important first step toward the development of individually targeted prevention and treatments for alcohol abuse and addiction,” he said. In their study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) journal, the team analyzed DNA samples from over 26,000 volunteers to search for genes that appeared to affect alcohol consumption, and then checked their findings in another 21,000 people. The volunteers answered questionnaires to report how much alcohol they drank. After identifying AUTS2, the scientists analyzed how active the gene was in samples of donated brain tissue. They found that people with the version of the gene linked to lower alcohol consumption had higher activity of the gene. The researchers also looked at strains of mice that had been selectively bred according to how much alcohol they drink voluntarily, and found there were differences in the AUTS2 gene activity levels among different breeds. In another part of the study using flies, the researchers found that blocking the effect of a fruit fly version of the same gene made the flies less sensitive to alcohol. This suggests AUTS2 seems to be involved in regulation of alcohol intake in a number of different species, they said.
37727	Using chemical agents against medical facilities is considered a war crime by international treaty.	Is Pepper-Spraying Medical Supplies a War Crime?	true	Fact Checks, Viral Content	Footage posted by a journalist covering the ongoing protests against police brutality brought back to light an apparent loophole exploited by law enforcement.As part of his coverage on July 22 2020, Portland-area reporter Sergio Olmos posted footage of damaged medical items and observed, “It appears federal officers, during dispersal, pepper sprayed the medical supplies in the tents.” One clip was shared more than 8,000 times on the platform:It appears that federal officers, during dispersal, pepper sprayed the medical supplies in the tents pic.twitter.com/Y9HGqzcepB— Sergio Olmos (@MrOlmos) July 22, 2020As others pointed out, that type of attack would be considered criminal in a wartime environment. As the 1949 Geneva Convention states:Fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service may in no circumstances be attacked, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict. Should they fall into the hands of the adverse Party, their personnel shall be free to pursue their duties, as long as the capturing Power has not itself ensured the necessary care of the wounded and sick found in such establishments and units.The responsible authorities shall ensure that the said medical establishments and units are, as far as possible, situated in such a manner that attacks against military objectives cannot imperil their safety. […]The protection to which fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy. Protection may, however, cease only after a due warning has been given, naming, in all appropriate cases, a reasonable time limit and after such warning has remained unheeded.Like tear gas, pepper spray is considered a “riot control agent” and is thus banned under the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which went into effect in 1997. According to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which oversees the enforcement of that agreement:Riot control agents, such as tear gas, are considered chemical weapons if used as a method of warfare. States can legitimately possess riot control agents and use them for domestic law enforcement purposes, but states that are members of the Chemical Weapons Convention must declare what type of riot agents they possess.In a July 2019 interview, Jamil Dakwar, director of the American Civil Liberty Union’s human rights program, went into more detail about the exemptions granted for domestic law enforcement:At the time when it was negotiated in the 1990s, there was a lot of pressure to ban chemical weapons and they were used by law enforcement. That obviously got pushback from many countries who said, “Well, we can’t really give up this weapon because if we don’t use tear gas we will have to resort to more lethal weapons.” The compromise that was reached was to leave that option open for using tear gas or riot control agents in law enforcement and only in law enforcement.Besides spurring on further protests from residents, the deployment of federal personnel into Portland has been criticized by Mayor Ted Wheeler and Gov. Kate Brown. Wheeler himself was hit with tear gas while speaking to demonstrators on July 22 2020. (However, local activists at the scene criticized Wheeler, saying that local police has done the same to them even without the presence of DHS operatives. )Chad Wolf, acting Secretary of Homeland Security, has responded by claiming that he needs “no invitation” to send operatives into the city and that they are “proactively arresting” people –by taking them into unmarked vehicles — in response to alleged threats against federal officers.On July 23 2020, a federal judge added DHS operatives as well as officials from the U.S. Marshals Service to an existing restraining order barring Portland police from attacking journalists and legal observers working during the demonstrations in the city — but those attacks continued, despite the federal incursion.However, the efforts to push federal operatives into cities will likely not stop with Portland. As The Nation reported, a document from Customs and Border Protection shows requests from several local police departments asking for personnel and aircraft to be deployed in their cities. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said on July 22 2020 that while federal “resources” will be deployed in her city, they will not engage in any secretive actions.Trump himself has threatened to send federal operatives into cities with Democratic Party mayors, which he has falsely characterized as being hit with unrest “worse than Afghanistan.”Comments
31883	Liquor and wine are illegal in the U.S. unless they are radioactive.	Ultimately, this is a cool bit of counterintuitive science that presents a less common use for carbon-14 analysis. However, the evidence that this scientific information is currently used by the United States federal government to prevent synthetic alcohol in beverages is lacking.	false	Legal Affairs, alcohol, atf	The claim that “Liquor and wine are illegal in the U.S. unless they are radioactive” stems from an excerpt that appears in multiple books authored by Berkeley physicist Richard Muller, including “Energy for Future Presidents“. Muller also posted the text of this claim on a Quora thread “What are some mind-blowing facts that sound like BS but are actually true?” Here are the points Muller laid out in that post: Liquor and wine is [sic] illegal in the U.S. unless it is radioactive. When tested, drinking alcohol is required to have at least 400 radioactive decays per minute for each 750 ml. Explanation: The United States government has decided that alcohol for consumption must be made from “natural” materials, such as grains, grapes, or fruit. That rules out alcohol made from petroleum. […] How can you tell the difference between natural alcohol and alcohol made from petroleum? There’s no chemical difference. The United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, charged with enforcing the natural alcohol rule, has only one reliable test: check for radioactivity Natural alcohol gets its carbon from plants; the plants got the carbon from atmospheric carbon dioxide. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is radioactive because of the continued bombardment of cosmic rays – particles coming from space that collide with nitrogen molecules and turn it into C-14, radiocarbon. Only one atom in a trillion carbons in the atmosphere is radiocarbon, but that’s enough to be detectable. (One of the authors of this book, RM, invented the most sensitive way to detect C-14, called “Accelerator Mass Spectrometry.”) Petroleum was also made from atmospheric carbon, but it was buried hundreds of millions of years ago, isolated from the radioactive atmosphere. Radiocarbon has a half-life of about 5700 years, and after a hundred million years, there is nary an atom of C-14 left. The science in the above-stated claim is an accurate explanation for why alcohol derived from plants would be radioactive whereas synthetic alcohol derived from petroleum products would not. What is not supported by any available evidence are the two non-scientific claims associated with this story: That synthetic alcohol is prohibited in beverages and that they federal government tests beverages for compliance based on this law. The only official policy statement that directly touches this topic is a memo, termed a “compliance policy guide” issued in response to a 1957 internal inquiry between the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms taxation and enforcement offices: Questions have been raised as to whether we can or should continue to consider synthetic alcohol unsuitable for food use. In order to secure more information, we wrote to the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division, Internal Revenue Service. Their reply included the following paragraphs: Presently, we authorize the manufacture of vinegar from ethyl alcohol synthesized from natural gas or petroleum derivatives. It is our opinion that most of the distilled spirits used in the production of vinegar are derived from natural gas and petroleum. When such alcohol is used in the production of vinegar, we would consider any reference to ‘grain alcohol’ or ‘neutral grain spirits’ would be misleading for the alcohol and also the name ‘grain vinegar’ would be misleading, except for connoting strength, e.g., 40-grains. When alcohol is used in the production of beverage products, our regulations require that the source of the alcohol be shown on the label except for cordials and liqueurs. Incidentally, I might add that most of the alcohol used in the production of medicinal preparations and flavors is synthetic.” Practically and scientifically, pure ethyl alcohol synthesized from natural gas or petroleum products does not differ from that obtained by fermentation with subsequent distillation. Furthermore, foods in which one is used cannot be distinguished objectively from those in which the other is used. Based on this inquiry, the FDA issued the following policy statement, which does not outlaw the use of synthetic alcohol (derived from petroleum) so long as it is labeled accordingly: Synthetic ethyl alcohol may be used as a food ingredient or in the manufacturing of vinegar or other chemicals for food use, within limitations imposed by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Alcohol Administration Act, and regulations promulgated under these acts. Any labeling reference to synthetic alcohol as “grain alcohol” or “neutral grain spirits” is considered false and misleading. We asked the Tobacco and Alcohol Tax Bureau, the group that would currently be in charge of enforcing such a ban, if any current laws that would prohibit the use of synthetic alcohol in beverages. Thomas Hogue, the Director of Congressional and Public Affairs for the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, provided this response: I’m not aware of anything that prohibit you from using synthetic alcohol to produce a beverage alcohol product. He added that it is up to the FDA to determine what is safe, but up to the Tobacco and Alcohol Tax Bureau to prevent consumers from being misled. In that respect, he stated that while it would be legal to use synthetic alcohol, it would have to be labeled accordingly: I think you can reasonably assume that most consumers are going to expect that any beverage alcohol product they’re drinking comes from fermentation of grains, fruits, or other plant materials. They’re not going to automatically assume that it comes from a synthetic alcohol derived from petroleum or something like that. With that in mind, we would be requiring anybody who makes any product along those lines to label it with a truthful statement of composition. That label would need to have some sort of statement on it that it’s synthetic alcohol derived from petroleum or something very similar to that, and make sure the consumer is not misled about what it is that they’re purchasing. There is, as well, an established protocol to test a carbon-based substance for its relative fraction of petroleum versus biologically derived material, and this test, ASTM D6866, is indeed based on carbon-14 radioactivity. However, this is not a test that the Tobacco and Alcohol Tax Bureau utilizes, per Hogue: We do regularly test beverage alcohol. We pull product from the marketplace. Every year we pull a representative sample from the marketplace and test it for a variety of things, but not to determine whether or not it’s synthetic.
36198	"The Only Existing Footage Of 1st Plane Hitting WTC"" YouTube video shows the only existing footage of Flight 11 striking the north tower of the World Trade Center on September 11 2001."	Is This the Only Existing Footage Of the First Plane Hitting the World Trade Center?	false	Fact Checks, Viral Content	As the anniversary of September 11 2001 approached in 2019, a video called “The Only Existing Footage Of 1st Plane Hitting WTC” circulated on social media in remembrance of a brief but pivotal moment in American history — but it’s straight from a disinformation site.That video was first shared to a conspiracy theory YouTube channel (“Real 911questions”) in June 2015, accruing millions of views. The first clip’s title belied that sentiment in saying it was the “only existing footage” of Flight 11 as it crashed into the World Trade Center’s north tower at 8:46 AM, on a day that shocked Americans to the core.At the time it was filmed, several things were undeniably true. As of 8:45 AM (one minute before), few Americans other than the doomed passengers of the flight and air traffic controllers had any inkling anything that was amiss on what was by all accounts a beautiful September day in New York City. Smartphones as we know them were virtually non-existent, along with the videos and photographs they have the ability to capture. Snapchat, Facebook, and Instagram had not yet been developed, and the world as a whole was far less documented at any given moment — a cultural circumstance that has vastly changed in the intervening two decades.A consequence of that was that aside from surveillance footage, few people, if any, captured the moment that shocking and surprising things were going to happen, making the attacks a fertile ground for conspiracy theories to take root. No one was expecting Flight 11’s collision with the North Tower (also known as 1 WTC), and thus few cameras were intentionally trained on the boring building on an otherwise quotidian morning. That was obviously not the case for the subsequent strike on the South Tower (2 WTC); Flight 175 crashed into the second tower at 17 minutes later at 9:03 AM, immediately signaling that the initial and subsequent collisions were intentional.The video, then, didn’t just depict the first plane striking the first tower. It depicted the final seconds of an America before what would come to be called 9/11, a place where the 2,977 deaths reported on that day alone had not yet occurred. (As we later learned, the “latent death toll” of September 11th would be higher still, along the deaths of servicemen, women, and civilians for which there has been “no formal accounting.”)Through that lens, the video is far more than the sum of its elements, likely the reason the clip experienced such a high rate of interest in the days leading up to the anniversary of those compounding tragedies:The footage as presented here is not in its original form. The 1:33 clip begins with studio interviews of Jules and Gedeon Naudet, a pair of French filmmakers. The Naudet brothers (as they are sometimes called) were in the process of following the trajectory of a rookie firefighter at the New York Fire Department (NYFD)’s Engine 7, Ladder 1. In a ten-year retrospective of the attack, Public Radio International reported how the Naudet brothers’ project radically shifted at 8:46 AM on September 11 2001:In 2001, Jules and Gedeon Naudet had spent the summer with New York City’s Engine 7, Ladder 1 firehouse originally to make a film about a rookie firefighter. One Tuesday morning in September, Jules Naudet heard a roar overhead and as he pointed his camera upward, he caught the only documented footage of the first plane hitting the North Tower of the World Trade Center. While most of Manhattan ran away or stood frozen in fear, the Naudet brothers went [further] downtown — with Jules Naudet entering the North Tower as it was burning.A documentary titled 9/11, composed with the Naudet brothers’ resulting footage of the attacks and their aftermath, aired on CBS on March 10 2002 to mark the event’s six-month anniversary. Jules Naudet later said of his actions in capturing the unfolding attack:Keeping filming became almost a drive, a defense mechanism because if I kept filming and kept looking at the images through that little screen on the side of my camera, it was not happening to me. I was looking through a window so I could protect myself from going crazy.The relevant footage begins with firefighters gathered on the street operating a tool near a street grate, and the rapid progression of the events comes into immediate, sharp focus. Between 1:02 and 1:03, the roaring sound of a commercial jetliner becomes audible; just prior, no one in the frame seems aware of it. At 1:05 and 1:06, the gathered firefighters begin looking to the sky as the sound intensifies. At 1:08, the camera awkwardly pans to the final second of the intact Twin Towers.And at 1:09, American Airlines Flight 11 (out of Boston Logan Airport, heading to Los Angeles) strikes the North Tower. Bystanders and firefighters react with loud shock, first as the plane disappears into the mammoth skyscraper, and again when a large fireball appears four seconds later at 1:13. The remaining twenty seconds of footage remains trained on WTC, engulfed in flames. No additional action appears in that version of the clip.In the PRI retrospective, the piece stated Jules Naudet captured “the only documented footage of the first plane hitting the North Tower of the World Trade Center,” a claim repeated in the title of the viral video. Another, shorter clip of Naudet’s shared to YouTube in April 2008 had three million views. A Wikipedia page for Flight 11 used phrasing suggestive of additional footage, stating that Jules Naudet filmed the “only known footage of the initial impact from start to finish.”On September 7 2003, the New York Times published an article describing the scarcity of specific 9/11 moments. It begins by describing footage captured by immigrant worker Pavel Hlava, “a kind of accidentally haunting artifact,” as the only clip of “both planes on impact, and only the second image of any kind showing the first strike”:The S.U.V., carrying an immigrant worker from the Czech Republic who was making a video postcard to send home, then entered the mouth of the tunnel and emerged, to the shock of the three men inside the vehicle, nearly at the foot of the now burning tower.The camera, pointed upward, zoomed in and out, and then, with a roar in the background that built to a piercing screech, it locked on the terrifying image of the second plane as it soared, like some awful bird of prey, almost straight overhead, banking steeply, and blasted into the south tower.It was not until almost two weeks later that the worker, Pavel Hlava, even realized that he had captured the first plane on video. Even then, Mr. Hlava, who speaks almost no English, did not realize that he had some of the rarest footage collected of the World Trade Center disaster. His is the only videotape known to have recorded both planes on impact, and only the second image of any kind showing the first strike.While journalists were initially aware of Naudet’s Flight 11 footage, Hlava’s was initially “lost”:At one point, a friend of Mr. Hlava’s wife traded a copy of the tape to another Czech immigrant for a bar tab at a pub in Ridgewood, Queens. Mr. Hlava and his brother, Josef, who was also in the S.U.V. on Sept. 11, tried at various times to sell the tape, both in New York and in the Czech Republic. But with little sophistication about the news media and no understanding of the tape’s significance, the brothers had no success.Eventually, a woman happened to learn of the tape from the pub deal at a school where one of the Czech immigrants was studying English. She brought it to the attention of a freelance news photographer who doubled as her ballroom dancing partner, and that man, Walter Karling, brought the tape to The New York Times.In addition to a language barrier inhibiting Hlava’s ability to talk to American reporters, another passenger in the vehicle was Hlava’s boss David Melichar. Melichar vociferously objected to distribution of the video, telling the New York Times that he had warned Hlava if the video surfaced he would lose his job:Three thousand people died in that place … I told [Hlava] the day he’s gonna sell that film, he’s not gonna work for me anymore.Consequently, Hlava’s video of the first tower strike was largely little-known until the September 2003 Times piece. By that point, the Naudet footage had largely been deemed the “only existing footage” of Flight 11 hitting WTC 2. It was also fair to say Hlava’s footage, while presenting a continuous view of the towers encompassing both the crash of Flight 11 into Tower Two and the crash of Flight 173 into the South Tower, was filmed from a greater distance.Nevertheless, Hlava’s video also made its way to YouTube, in a shorter clip (“1st Plane Hitting North Tower [Pavel Hlava]”) shared in September and October 2018:Those two clips were between 16 and 17 seconds long, zooming in on the crash after about seven seconds. In September 2018, a Freedom of Information Act request led to the release of other captures, none of which seem to show the 8:46 AM crash.The YouTube clip “The Only Existing Footage Of 1st Plane Hitting WTC” is not accurately titled. It is true that Jules Naudet captured one of two known videos of Flight 11 striking WTC 2 at 8:46 AM on September 11 2001. A second clip filmed at the entrance of the Brooklyn-Battery tunnel by Pavel Hlava also captured the first strike and the second continuously, but that clip was virtually unknown at the time the Naudet video aired. The Naudet clip is considered the most detailed video of Flight 11’s fateful collision with the North Tower, and Hlava’s is notable for continuous filming of both tower strikes (at 8:46 and 9:03 AM respectively).The fact that the viral YouTube video is misleadingly titled on a channel devoted to conspiracy theories indicates that it is an intentional disinformation vector that was intentionally created to funnel viewers to other similar sites and thus seed and spread disinformation. It should be treated accordingly.
28538	"Donald Trump ""bankrupted"" a golf course in Puerto Rico, leaving taxpayers there on the hook for $33 million worth of debt."	What's true: A Trump company was unable to save a floundering Puerto Rico golf club and resort from bankruptcy after entering into a management and brand licensing agreement with its owners in 2008. As a result of the episode, $32.6 million in government investment was not recouped. What's false: Puerto Rico had been hard hit by a recession, and the club had taken on substantial debt and was suffering annual losses for years before Trump's company intervened.	mixture	Politics, donald trump, puerto rico	In the aftermath of a series of hurricanes in September 2017 — particularly Maria, which devastated the United States territory of Puerto Rico — President Donald Trump reflected on the infrastructural damage caused by those storms in a 25 September 2017 tweet: Texas & Florida are doing great but Puerto Rico, which was already suffering from broken infrastructure & massive debt, is in deep trouble.. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 26, 2017 In response, public relations and marketing executive Lainie Green issued a series of tweets that went viral, accusing President Trump of having added to Puerto Rico’s debt by bankrupting a golf course there and defaulting on $33 million worth of government-issued bonds: Massive debt you and your sons helped when you bankrupted your golf course & never paid back the $33 mil bond you left Puerto Ricans with — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 You remember because you filed for the bankruptcy a month after you started running for president in 2015 — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 And you claimed because you didn’t own it wasn’t your fault that you were just managing for 5 years leading up to the bankruptcy — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 So how much are you going to give back of that $600,000 paycheck you got for sticking Puerto Rico with a $33 million debt? — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 Green’s account of the episode got some facts right, but it also left out some important context necessary for any assessment of Trump’s responsibility for the bankruptcy of the golf course. According to documents first detailed in a 2016 BuzzFeed investigation, in 2008 Trump International entered into an arrangement with the owners of Coco Beach Golf & Country Club, a foundering resort and golf course that had opened in 2004 on the northeast coast of Puerto Rico about 30 miles from San Juan. Under the agreement, the future president’s company licensed the Trump name to the owners and took on a share of the resort’s day-to-day management in exchange for a fee. The owners of the resort, which was renamed Trump International Golf Club Puerto Rico after 2008, had already received significant financial assistance from the Puerto Rican government before Trump’s intervention. In 2000 and 2004, Puerto Rico’s Industrial, Tourist, Educational, Medical and Environmental Control Facilities Financing Authority (AFICA) issued the owners of the club a total of $25,497,854 in bonds to help build and launch the resort. In 2009, the Puerto Rican government also invested $50 million in the Hotel Gran Melia, which was part of the resort and provided a crucial stream of customers for the golf club, according to BuzzFeed. By October 2011, Coco Beach had defaulted on $26 million in bonds and had to seek another round of financing. In 2015, the company filed for bankruptcy under its original name, Coco Beach Golf and Country Club, citing debts of more than $78 million but only $9 million in assets. Bankruptcy court records show that Puerto Rico’s Tourism Development Fund made a claim of $32,606,821, essentially leaving Puerto Rican taxpayers on the hook for the better part of $33 million. Does all this mean that Trump “bankrupted” the golf course, though? Not exactly. The evidence shows that Coca Beach had consistently been operating at a loss and accumulating debts in the years before Trump International became involved with its management. And a significant portion of the financial assistance provided by the Puerto Rican government was given in 2000 and 2004, well before the future U.S. president’s company arrived on the scene. Puerto Rico had already been hard hit by a recession well before the Trump International contracted to assist with the club’s management, and in the two years before Trump International’s intervention (2006-07), Coco Beach operated at an average annual net loss of $5.3 million, according to BuzzFeed. Moreover, neither Donald Trump nor Trump International held an ownership stake in the property, took part in its development, or was involved with its financing; they only operated and managed the resort. Holding Trump to be solely or primarily responsible for the bankruptcy of a business they didn’t own, that was already heavily in debt, and was losing several million dollars a year before Trump arrived on the scene would be something of an unfair standard. However, one could argue that Trump International received a good deal of money from the Coco Beach deal yet failed to turn the club around, or even stanch its financial bleeding. According to the March 2011 bond offering (which was itself required to cover losses on the Puerto Rican government’s 2000 and 2004 bond investments), Trump International had given certain assurances about the future viability of the resort: The continued operations of the Partnership are dependant [sic] upon the ability of the Club to attract customers and control operating expenses. Trump International Co. (Club Manager) has developed a plan to achieve and maintain positive operating cash flows sufficient to allow the Partnership to continue as a going concern. In particular, the Club Manager [Trump International] has developed programs to attract members and use the Club, while containing operating costs. Whatever that plan was, it did not succeed. The 2012 financials show that the club’s average annual losses rose to $6.3 million during the period that Trump’s company provided management services to the resort (2008-2012), $1 million more per year than the business had been losing before. Further, for this lack of success, Trump International garnered a total of $609,607 in management fees between 2008 and 2012. (This figure is likely the source of Lainie Green’s reference to a “$600,000 paycheck” received by Donald Trump.) Donald Trump did not set Coco Beach Golf and Country Club on course for ruin, but he wasn’t able to save it from that fate. His role in the bankruptcy of the company, which ended up costing Puerto Rican taxpayers $32.6 million, was significant but limited. That $32.6 million loss constituted 0.03 percent of the territory’s total $123 billion debt, which prompted the Puerto Rican government to file for bankruptcy relief in May 2017.
8130	China sees drop in new coronavirus cases; all of them imported.	Mainland China on Monday reported a drop in its daily tally of new coronavirus cases, reversing four straight days of increases, as the capital, Beijing, ramped up measures to contain the number of infections arriving from abroad.	true	Health News	China had 39 new confirmed cases on Sunday, the National Health Commission said, down from 46 a day earlier. All the new ones involved travelers arriving from abroad, many of them Chinese students returning home. Beijing stepped up measures to contain imported infections, diverting all arriving international flights from Monday to other cities, including Shanghai and as far west as Xian, where passengers will undergo virus screening. Foreigners who miss international connections as a result of the measure would have to leave China, an immigration official said at the health commission’s daily briefing, adding that foreign visitors should “think carefully” before choosing Beijing as a transit point. Beijing reported 10 new imported cases, the National Health Commission said, down from 13 a day earlier. City authorities said cases came from Spain, Britain, France, the United States and Pakistan. Infections from abroad in Beijing hit an all-time daily high of 21 on March 18. Shanghai and Guangzhou have also said all arriving international passengers will be tested to screen for the coronavirus, expanding a program that previously only applied to those coming from heavily affected countries. The coastal province of Zhejiang, near Shanghai, will also put all arrivals from overseas in centralized quarantine facilities for 14 days, media reported. Zhejiang on Monday lowered its emergency response level from 2 to 3, the lowest level, reflecting easing concern about the virus’ spread. Shanghai, which reported 10 new cases on Sunday, down from a record 14 a day earlier, lowered its emergency response level to level 2 from level 1. Guangdong province saw seven new imported infections, Fujian had four and Jiangsu had two. Hebei, Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Shandong and Sichuan each saw just one case, bringing the total number of imported cases in China to 314. Amid the growing threat posed by imported infections, the Canton Fair, China’s oldest and biggest trade fair, will be postponed, Ma Hua, deputy director general of Guangdong’s commerce department, told a press conference on Monday. The event was due to begin on April 15 in Guangzhou. In Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak, authorities have eased tough lockdown measures as the city saw no new infections for the fifth day. Downtown Wuhan remains the only high-risk area in Hubei province, with other cities and counties classified as low-risk. Wuhan went into a virtual lockdown on Jan. 23 to contain the spread of the virus. According to authorities on Sunday, people can enter the city if they are certified healthy and have no fever. Hubei residents who are in Wuhan can apply to leave but have to be tested for the virus. There has been no indication Wuhan residents can leave the city for non-essential reasons. As of Sunday, the total number of cases in mainland China stood at 81,093. The death toll rose to 3,270, up nine from the previous day.
14345	"The ""rate of uninsured Americans (is) 8.8 percent."	Barack Obama jumps the gun on U.S. uninsured rate, then reverses course	mixture	National, Health Care, Barack Obama,	"On the sixth anniversary of his signing of the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama took a victory lap on Medium. In a brief article punctuated by several celebratory photographs, Obama wrote, ""20 million. That’s how many people now have the health coverage they need thanks to the president’s health care law. In fact, for the first time ever, more than 90 percent of Americans have health coverage, putting the U.S. rate of uninsured Americans at 8.8 percent."" When we began to check the percentage of uninsured Americans, we found some discrepancies. After we told the White House about our concerns -- but before we were able to publish our fact-check -- the White House made a change to the text of the Medium post and noted that a correction had been made. The White House confirmed that it had changed the language after our inquiries. Fact-checker success! We’ll address the White House’s correction and change in this fact-check, but our policy is to fact-check the way a claim was phrased originally. The confusion generated by this case stems from the reality that there are several different measurements of uninsured Americans, each with their own benefits and drawbacks. (The Kaiser Family Foundation has assembled a helpful cheat sheet to sort through the various measurements.) The gold standard of measurements is considered to be the data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau. However, the bureau only publishes its uninsured number once a year, and the figure released most recently -- 10.4 percent uninsured for calendar year 2014 -- is out of date. Here’s the summary of the Census Bureau’s most recent data. A more frequently updated yardstick -- released every quarter -- is Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index. The most recent number from Gallup, for the fourth quarter of 2015, shows the uninsured rate at 11.9 percent. That’s higher than what Obama cited in his Medium post, but Gallup’s figure is always a bit higher than other numbers because it only surveys adults. On average, adults are somewhat more likely to be uninsured than children. Here’s what Gallup’s recent trend line looks like. When we asked health policy experts if they could think of what Obama might have been pointing to, they suggested the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Health Interview Survey. The most recent data from this survey covers the first three quarters of 2015, making it the most recent large-scale federal source for data on the uninsured. Using this survey, Obama came pretty close: The uninsured rate through September 2015 was 9.1 percent, and as the chart below shows, this came after consistent declines in the uninsured rate since 2010, the year the Affordable Care Act was signed."
9529	Exercise May Be the Key to Better Sperm	This short Time magazine story describes a study that looked at whether the quality of semen could be improved through one of three different exercise approaches, compared to that of men who did not exercise. The story did a good job establishing what made this study unique, and it included a comment from a source independent of the research. But, unfortunately it didn’t delve into enough specifics, such as providing numerical data about the different findings that could help readers better understand the research: What were researchers measuring, and by how much did those measurements change via the intervention? And it left out a very important limitation of the study: It didn’t look at whether these changes had any impact on fertility. The story rightfully points to semen quality as a major factor for couples facing infertility problems–but the study under discussion wasn’t designed to test if exercise has any impact on pregnancy rates. To not mislead readers, any connections drawn between exercise, sperm quality and fertility must be done very cautiously here, and that didn’t happen in this story.	true	exercise,fertility,men's health	There was no mention of the cost of the methodology used in this study. Yes, in general exercise is free via walking or jogging, so we’ll rate this N/A. But, it’s worth pointing out that one of the studied exercise methods here–known as high-intensity interval training–was done on a treadmill, and may require paid expertise to learn how to do it safely and correctly. There was no quantification of benefits provided in this story, only a statement that “all of the men who followed a physical activity program showed improvements in a variety of measures of their sperm,” compared to those men who were in the non-exercise group. The story states that, “the men in the moderate intensity, continuous activity program showed the most improvements compared to men in the other two more intense groups,” but it doesn’t characterize those improvements except in the vaguest of ways. Readers are left to wonder the degree of differences between the three exercise groups. There is no mention of potential harms in this story. Because one of the exercise interventions was high-intensity interval training (HIIT), a brief discussion of harms was needed (see safety concerns of this PDF). The story does indicate it was a randomly assigned, controlled trial of 280 men, and it tracked them for six months. However, we’re not given any sense of the study’s limitations (an important one being that the study didn’t prove this intervention improved fertility). No evidence of disease mongering here. The story does provide a quote from an expert unaffiliated with the research team, and we found no conflicts of interest that should have been noted. The story does suggest in the first paragraph other approaches to improving semen quality. “Among the most (advice) dispensed: eat a healthy diet, keep a healthy weight, avoid alcohol and tobacco and stay away from certain medications, such as blood pressure and depression drugs.” Exercise — in this case, running — is clearly a readily available activity for most individuals. They simply have to decide to do it. Some explanation of the availability of effective HIIT training could have been added, though. Novelty is established via this quote: “This fits reasonably well with what we thought about the effects of exercise,” says Dr. Peter Schlegel, vice president of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine and chairman of urology at New York Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center. “But this is a much better done study than almost anything that’s been done before on the subject.” He notes that most previous studies did not randomly assign people to exercise groups and compare the outcome on sperm quality, but rather recorded sperm measures among men who reported their exercise habits after the fact. There is no indication that this story relied on a news release.
2529	Aging a concern for many Americans but harder for women : poll.	Aging is a concern for many Americans, particularly its impact on health, but men seem to have an easier time dealing with the hallmarks of passing years than women, according to a new survey.	true	Health News	The national poll of 2,000 U.S. adults found that nearly 90 percent of people think women are under more pressure to look younger than men are. Men are also considered old about five years later than women, and sexier at an older age. While gray hair was thought to make men look distinguished, on women it was associated with being old. And the age when women were thought to be the most attractive was 30, compared with 34 for men. “The survey definitely shows that aging, when we are talking about appearance, is a real emotional touch point for both men and women, no matter whether they are 20, 40, 60,” said Kristin Perrotta, the executive editor of Allure magazine, which commissioned the poll. “People overwhelming said they were concerned about the effects of aging. They were concerned about how it would affect their attractiveness to the opposite sex and particularly with women, how aging would affect their career.” Forty-two percent of women aged 50-59 years old said they felt they needed to look young to be successful at work, nearly double the number of men, but overall men and women thought that gender played a larger role in workplace discrimination than age. Although aging is a concern for both sexes, about 60 percent of men and women said they thought they looked younger than other people their own age, and a similar number of both sexes said sex gets better with age. Nearly 70 percent of African American women said they are not concerned about the signs of aging at all, more than any other race. “People did overwhelmingly have a much more positive view towards aging and toward themselves and their look as they grew older,” Perrotta explained. When asked to name celebrities who have aged well, actor George Clooney was by far the top choice among both sexes and all ethnic groups, ahead of Sean Connery, former U.S. President Bill Clinton and actors Brad Pitt and Richard Gere. The top choice among women was less clear cut, but actresses Meryl Streep, Jamie Lee Curtis and Julia Roberts all ranked high. “Leading men in Hollywood, they are portrayed as sex symbols well into their 70s. Sean Connery is a perfect example,” said Perrotta. “Unfortunately, although we do have many female stars who are continuing to grab major roles as they get older, they are less likely to be portrayed as a sex symbol.” Five percent of people questioned in the poll said they have had plastic surgery or injections such as Botox to fight the signs of aging. Forty-two percent of women and 18 percent of men said they would consider it in the future. One in three people who have had injections or plastic surgery have kept it a secret. “As public as plastic surgery has become in our culture, it is still on a personal level, still private,” said Perrotta. “Most people who did have Botox or plastic surgery said they were least likely to tell their spouse, girlfriend, boyfriend or best friend.” The online survey by Penn Schoen Berland has a margin of error of plus or minus three percent.
38843	A Texas slaughterhouse employee killed 71 employees over a 17-year span without being detected.	Slaughterhouse Employee Murdered 71 Coworkers Over 17 Years	false	Crime / Police	A fake news website is behind this hoax. World News Daily Report started the rumor that a slaughterhouse employee had been accused of murdering 71 coworkers over a 17-year period. The fake news website reported that Jeremiah Burroughs, a 57-year-old Gulf War veteran, killed 71 coworkers because he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and paranoia: The discovery this week of human bones in a neighboring rendering plant which recycles slaughterhouse byproducts had raised the alarm and forced local authorities to crack down on potential suspects. Jeremiah Burroughs, who is a Gulf war veteran, is suspected of suffering from PTSD syndrome and of extreme paranoia, explains police officer Emet Rubbens. “We have no idea why he committed these atrocious crimes, there seems to lack a motive. What is most distressing is how he got away with these atrocious crimes for such a long period of time. It seems he just processed his victims meat as he would’ve done with any other cow. His victims all disappeared somewhere in the meat packing process” he expressed with disgust. Within days, the story had been shared 90,000 times on social media sites. Taken out of context, many readers were duped into believing that it was an actual report: I’d like to know how the police did not find this suspicious throughout the 17 years ?? Every single person that died, worked at the same place ?? Who’s the worst police station in the entire world ?? idiots ! However, World News Daily Report is a fake news website that, according to its disclaimer, “assumes all responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles and for the fictional nature of their content.” Comments
1052	Death toll rises to 58 as hope dims after Brazil dam collapse.	Brazilian rescuers searched into the night on Sunday for hundreds of people missing after a burst mining dam triggered a deadly mudslide, as the death toll rose to 58 and was expected to keep climbing more than two days after the disaster.	true	Environment	Rescuers worked past sunset to search a bus thought to have bodies inside and a home where three bodies were already found, state fire department spokesman Pedro Aihara told reporters. The collapsed dam at Vale SA’s Corrego do Feijao mine buried mining facilities and nearby homes in the town of Brumadinho, killing dozens and leaving the community in shock. “Until the last body is found, the fire department is acting on the possibility there could be people alive,” Aihara told reporters. “Obviously, given the nature of the accident, as time passes, this chance will go down.” After announcing the latest number of confirmed dead, state civil defense agency spokesman Flavio Godinho told reporters he expected the death toll to continue rising. Just over 300 people were still missing, with the list of those unaccounted for being constantly updated, Godinho said. Most of the missing are presumed dead, officials said. The cause of the dam burst remained unclear. Recent inspections did not indicate any problems, according to the German firm that conducted the inspection. Avimar de Melo Barcelos, the mayor of Brumadinho, blasted Vale for being “careless and incompetent,” and blamed the mining company for the tragedy and the state of Minas Gerais for poor oversight. He vowed to fine the miner 100 million reais ($26.5 million). Vale Chief Executive Officer Fabio Schvartsman said in a television interview on Sunday the disaster happened even after the company followed experts’ safety recommendations. “I’m not a mining technician. I followed the technicians’ advice and you see what happened. It didn’t work,” Schvartsman said. “We are 100 percent within all the standards, and that didn’t do it.” The CEO promised “to go above and beyond any national or international standards. ... We will create a cushion of safety far superior to what we have today to guarantee this never happens again.” Vale’s board of directors suspended its planned shareholder dividends, share buybacks and executive bonuses in light of the disaster, according to a securities filing on Sunday. The board also created independent committees to investigate the causes of the dam burst and to monitor relief efforts. In 2015, a tailings dam collapsed at an iron ore mine belonging to Samarco Mineracao SA, a Vale joint venture with BHP Group, less than 100 km (60 miles) to the east. The resulting torrent of toxic mud killed 19 people, buried a small village and contaminated a major river in Brazil’s worst environmental disaster on record. Fears of another dam burst in Brumadinho on Sunday triggered evacuation sirens in the town before dawn, adding to the anxiety of residents waiting for word about lost relatives and friends. Firefighters halted searching and evacuated thousands from their homes until the afternoon when civil defense authorities ruled out the risk of another dam burst, calling off the evacuation and reinstating search-and-rescue efforts. Aihara initially said 24,000 people would be evacuated, but later lowered the total to 3,000. In all, 24,000 people have been affected by the disaster, he said. Renato Maia, a 44-year-old salesman whose best friend’s daughter remained missing, fled his home in panic early on Sunday and waited for hours with his wife at a police barricade on the outskirts of town. “We’re all fed up with Vale ... and this is really adding to the tension,” he said. “It was a huge tragedy and now we don’t know what might come next.” The Brazilian government ordered Vale to halt operations at the Corrego do Feijao mining complex. On Sunday, courts nearly doubled to 11 billion reais the amount of Vale assets frozen in anticipation of damages and fines. Federal prosecutor Jose Adercio Sampaio told Reuters on Saturday that state and federal authorities had failed to apply more stringent regulation to the hundreds of tailings dams around the country. Schvartsman said all of Vale’s tailings dams were checked after the 2015 disaster and periodic reviews carried out. ($1 = 3.7695 reais)
9616	A Scientist's Dream Fulfilled: Harnessing The Immune System To Fight Cancer	Immunotherapy researcher Jim Allison. Credit: MD Anderson Cancer Center The story provides an overview of researcher Jim Allison and his role in developing the cancer immunotherapy treatment drug ipilimumab (also referred to as “Ippy”) that is used in treating some melanoma cases. It is an interesting story, and holds the reader’s attention. However, while the story plays up the significant benefits ipilimumab can provide for some people (drawn heavily from one patient’s heartwarming success story), it also gives readers an unrealistic set of expectations. Ipilimumab doesn’t have the same benefits for all patients, and it can be both extremely expensive and cause significant adverse side effects. That doesn’t take anything away from Allison’s accomplishments, but it may mislead readers who are either battling with melanoma or who have loved ones facing a melanoma diagnosis. We applaud Jim Allison’s work, and think it’s worthwhile to draw attention to what he has accomplished through his development of ipilimumab. However, we think it’s important to clarify the limitations of ipilimumab, as well as its potential. When many readers (or listeners) may be people who are desperate for treatment options that can give them hope, it’s critical that they receive a clear picture of what that hope may look like–and that it isn’t a cure-all. The National Cancer Institute estimates that 76,380 people will be diagnosed with melanoma this year — that’s 4.5 percent of all new cancer cases. Overall, melanoma patients have a 91.5 percent survival rate — but that survival rate varies significantly depending on how far the cancer has developed before treatment begins: while 98.4 percent of patients with localized melanoma survive for at least five years, that number dips to 17.9 percent for patients whose melanoma has metastasized, or spread. In short, melanoma is both fairly common and very scary for both patients and their loved ones.	mixture	immunotherapy,ipilimumab	The story doesn’t address cost. Given that ipilimumab treatment can cost $120,000 (according to this 2012 paper in the journal Pharmacy & Therapeutics), and is not necessarily covered by insurance, that’s a significant oversight. A quick acknowledgement of the steep price tag would have made helped readers more fully understand what this treatment involves. Benefits aren’t quantified. The story relates the experiences of one patient who went into full remission, and notes that “Each case is different, and using a patient’s own cells to destroy tumors won’t work in every patient or in every type of cancer.” But it offers no information on how often ipilimumab results in complete remission, how often it causes tumors to shrink, how long it prolongs survival in patients, or how often it fails to work at all. For one patient, at least, it worked amazingly well — which is great. Without offering broader information about how well it works in larger populations, this could easily mislead readers into thinking it works for almost everybody. Yet, it doesn’t work for everybody — and even for patients that see benefits, it doesn’t always mean long-term remission (as the FDA noted in a news release about ipilimumab last year). Harms are not mentioned, which is a significant oversight. We understand that this is a story about a man and his accomplishments in developing a tool to fight cancer. But to paint a full picture, you have to describe the tool. And it’s impossible to discuss ipilimumab without discussing either its cost or its potential harms. The manufacturer’s own website states that ipilimumab “can cause serious side effects in many parts of your body which can lead to death. These serious side effects may include: intestinal problems (colitis) that can cause tears or holes (perforation) in the intestines; liver problems (hepatitis) that can lead to liver failure; skin problems that can lead to severe skin reaction; nerve problems that can lead to paralysis; hormone gland problems (especially the pituitary, adrenal, and thyroid glands); and eye problems.” Just as with costs of the drug, we don’t expect a story to offer a thorough inventory of potential adverse health effects, but failure to acknowledge them in any way is a significant oversight — particularly when they can be this severe. The story mentions a clinical trial, but doesn’t describe it. Similarly, the story mentions that ipilimumab is currently on the market, but doesn’t address how or whether it has been successful in wider clinical use. Again, we appreciate that this is as much a profile of a researcher as it is a conventional health story, but a little information would have gone a long way here. The story refers to the drug as a “lifesaver” and a “fourth treatment option” without backing that up. No disease mongering here. The story quotes a former director of the National Cancer Institute, which is good. And the story clearly outlines Allison’s search for pharmaceutical industry partners to develop ipilimumab into a drug that can be used in clinical practice. The story refers to other treatment options, including surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. The story makes clear that ipilimumab is currently available for clinical use, marketed under the name Yervoy. In a sense, the entire story revolves around the novelty of ipilimumab — particularly on the (then-novel) mode of action it uses to fight cancer in melanoma patients. The story does not appear to rely on a news release at all.
2105	Now scientists read your mind better than you can.	Brain scans may be able to predict what you will do better than you can yourself, and might offer a powerful tool for advertisers or health officials seeking to motivate consumers, researchers said on Tuesday.	true	Science News	They found a way to interpret “real time” brain images to show whether people who viewed messages about using sunscreen would actually use sunscreen during the following week. The scans were more accurate than the volunteers were, Emily Falk and colleagues at the University of California Los Angeles reported in the Journal of Neuroscience. “We are trying to figure out whether there is hidden wisdom that the brain contains,” Falk said in a telephone interview. “Many people ‘decide’ to do things, but then don’t do them,” Matthew Lieberman, a professor of psychology who led the study, added in a statement. But with functional magnetic resonance imaging or fMRI, Falk and colleagues were able to go beyond good intentions to predict actual behavior. FMRI uses a magnetic field to measure blood flow in the brain. It can show which brain regions are more active compared to others, but requires careful interpretation. Falk’s team recruited 20 young men and women for their experiment. While in the fMRI scanner they read and listened to messages about the safe use of sunscreen, mixed in with other messages so they would not guess what the experiment was about. “On day one of the experiment, before the scanning session, each participant indicated their sunscreen use over the prior week, their intentions to use sunscreen in the next week and their attitudes toward sunscreen,” the researchers wrote. After they saw the messages, the volunteers answered more questions about their intentions, and then got a goody bag that contained, among other things, sunscreen towelettes.” “A week later we did a surprise follow up to find out whether they had used sunscreen,” Falk said in a telephone interview. About half the volunteers had correctly predicted whether they would use sunscreen. The research team analyzed and re-analyzed the MRI scans to see if they could find any brain activity that would do better. Activity in one area of the brain, a particular part of the medial prefrontal cortex, provided the best information. “From this region of the brain, we can predict for about three-quarters of the people whether they will increase their use of sunscreen beyond what they say they will do,” Lieberman said. “It is the one region of the prefrontal cortex that we know is disproportionately larger in humans than in other primates,” he added. “This region is associated with self-awareness, and seems to be critical for thinking about yourself and thinking about your preferences and values.” Now, Falk said, the team is looking for other regions of the brain that might add to the accuracy of the technique. While the findings can be important for advertisers seeking to hone a motivational message, they can be equally important for public health experts trying to persuade people to make healthier choices, Falk said. The team is now preparing a report on experiments to predict whether people would quit smoking after seeing motivational messages.
10536	Cancer drug dramatically shrinks prostate tumors, study finds	"This Los Angeles Times story reports on research into abiraterone, a new drug being studied to treat aggressive prostate cancer. The report overstates the importance of early research and improperly anticipates the findings of studies not yet completed. It predicts approval and arrival on the market the same year as the lead investigator, whose work is funded by the drug’s patent holder. It garbles the findings in a way that exaggerates the benefits shown. These significant shortcomings are unfortunate. The story itself, unlike many that involve early stage trials, is probably worth reporting. The drug operates by a novel mechanism and appears to be very effective against a fatal form of cancer that resists most treatments. A number of other studies are underway and experts in the field are genuinely hopeful this drug will provide an effective treatment for aggressive cancer. With a few key additions, the story could have been more responsible. The report should have said the results are from a Phase I trial and that efficacy and safety have not been proven. In order to justify its enthusiasm, the story should have provided some detail about what similar published studies have found. The reporter should have described the benefits shown in the research more accurately. The story should have said the drug may not be approved; it should not have predicted a date for an event that is not certain to happen. It should not have speculated that the drug ""could find use among most"" of the 28,000 U.S. men diagnosed with aggressive prostate cancer each year. And it most certainly should not have taken quotes from a patient directly from a press release. That is inexcusable."	mixture		"The drug is not commercially available. And since it is being tested to treat only a very aggressive, usually fatal form of cancer and not a chronic condition, we can accept the fact that cost wasn’t mentioned at this point. The story does not appear to describe the findings accurately. The lede of the story says: ""the drug shrank prostate tumors dramatically and more than doubled survival in 70% to 80% of patients with aggressive cancers."" According to the press release: ""Clinical benefits included evidence of PSA falls and tumour shrinkage which was observed in 70-80 per cent of patients."" According to the study abstract: ""Declines in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 30%, 50%, and 90% were observed in 14 (66%), 12 (57%), and 6 (29%) patients, respectively…"" The story mentions that ""Side effects were minimal."" The study itself suggests that there were complications, particularly involving hypertension and adema, but they were easily managed. The way the story ends–with the thought that the drug could have applications to those with less aggressive or deadly cancers–raises questions about the side effects. Those whose cancers are less serious would need to take into account the balance of benefits and harms. The drug appears to remove all testosterone and also blocks estrogen. The reporter should not accept the assertion that side effects of this are ""minimal."" The story is based on the findings of a very small Phase I study of only 21 men. The study was published in a major journal. A following study of 250 men continues and is reported to show ""similar results."" The latter is risky speculation that at least should have been hedged with a reminder that it’s too early to conclude the drug is safe and effective. The story properly discloses the drugmaker’s interest in the study. The story does nothing to exaggerate the frequency or danger of aggressive prostate cancer. The story quotes the lead investigator, whose work is funded by the drug’s owner. The story reports this relationship. It also quotes three independent experts, two of them local in the Los Angeles market. This sourcing is sufficient to meet the minimum criteria here. The story satisfactorily describes the current drugs used to treat advanced aggressive prostate cancer and indicates that they are generally ineffective. The story makes clear that the drug abiraterone is experimental and is not yet available. The report says experts predict the drug will be ""widely available"" by 2011. This statement comes directly from the lead researcher, whose work is supported by the drug’s maker. He makes the statement in the press release. This prediction should not have been published, or it should have been attributed to the self-interested researcher. It should certainly not have been attributed to ""experts,"" unless someone other than the lead investigator made this precise prediction independently. The story does an extraordinary job of explaining the novel mechanism by which the drug works, and how it is different from other ""chemical castration"" treatments. The man featured in the anecdote at the end of the story also appears in the press release. Two of the quotes are identical. [Emphasis added below.] The press release: Simon Bush, 50, from London, was involved in the abiraterone clinical trial. He said: ""Last year I was in severe pain because of my prostate cancer, which had worsened and spread to my bones. Chemotherapy and other treatments had failed and news that I had very few treatment options available to me was devastating for my family. Fitness and travelling were always my main interests and abiraterone has allowed me to have a year so far of near normality. The changes in my life have been dramatic, from managing thousands of people in a major bank, to facing a very uncertain future, then to renewed hope thanks to this drug trial."" The L.A. Times story: Simon Bush, a 50-year-old retired banker in London, was one of the patients in the trial. First diagnosed with prostate cancer three years ago, he tried all other forms of therapy without success. ""Last year, I was in severe pain because of my prostate cancer, which had worsened and spread to my bones,"" he said. He began taking abiraterone in May 2007, and the improvement began within a week. Within two months, he said, his PSA level — a marker of tumor growth — had dropped by 95%. Within three months, he had stopped taking painkillers entirely and was able to resume a normal life. ""The changes in my life have been dramatic, from managing thousands of people in a major bank, to facing a very uncertain future, then to renewed hope thanks to this drug trial,"" Bush said."
16385	"Reza Aslan Says female genital mutilation is ""a central African problem,"" not an Islamic problem, as Bill Maher suggested."	"Aslan rejected Maher’s characterization of female genital mutilation as an Islamic problem, saying instead that it’s actually ""a central African problem."" Due to immigration, the term ""central African"" may be too restrictive, but his larger point -- that this is not a problem in only Muslim countries -- is valid. Countries with majority-Christian populations also carry out this practice, while Islamic-majority countries like Iraq and Yemen have rates on the lower side."	true	Human Rights, Islam, Religion, PunditFact, Reza Aslan,	"Comedian and HBO host Bill Maher is outspoken about his atheism, a fact not lost on many viewers of his recent rant about the passive approach of some liberals toward human rights abuses in Muslim countries. Yet a scholar of religion called his commentary ""not very sophisticated"" on national TV. Why? Maher was condemning the collective uproar over racist, homophobic or distasteful comments by American celebrities Donald Sterling, Jonah Hill, Rush Limbaugh and Mel Gibson when more serious offenses against women in Muslim countries are usually overlooked. ""Not only does the Muslim world have something in common with ISIS, it has too much in common with ISIS,"" Maher said at one point. As an example, Maher brought up female genital mutilation, which refers to procedures that remove, in part or in whole, external genitalia for a non-medical reason. International groups such as the World Health Organization, UNICEF and Human Rights Watch condemn the practice as a flagrant example of gender inequality -- one that carries risks of prolonged bleeding, infection, infertility and complications during birth. When performed, the procedure is usually done on young girls. Maher said 91 percent of Egyptian women and 98 percent of Somali women have been cut that way. CNN Tonight hosts Don Lemon and Alisyn Camerota picked up this thread the following day in an interview with Reza Aslan, an author and University of California-Riverside professor of religious studies. Aslan criticized Maher for making ""facile arguments"" when he generalized about Muslims and mislabeled female genital mutilation an Islamic problem. ""It's a central African problem,"" Aslan said. ""Eritrea has almost 90 percent female genital mutilation. It's a Christian country. Ethiopia has 75 percent female genital mutilation. It's a Christian country. Nowhere else in the Muslim, Muslim-majority states is female genital mutilation an issue."" Aslan later tweeted an infographic showing a swath of African countries where female genital mutilation is concentrated. Is Aslan’s point accurate? The map, taken from a July 2013 UNICEF report, shows the percentage of girls and women ages 15-49 who have undergone female genital mutilation in 27 Central African countries and two Middle Eastern countries (Iraq and Yemen). Seven of the top eight countries with very high rates of female circumcision are majority Muslim, including the ""almost universal"" levels in Somalia, Egypt, Guinea and Djibouti. But Eritrea, as Aslan said, is No. 5 among countries with high prevalence at 89 percent, and it is home to more Christians than Muslims, according to Pew Research’s Religion and Public Life Project. Ethiopia, which is 63 percent Christian and 34 percent Muslim, has a moderately high rate of 74 percent, making it No. 11 on the list. So the countries in which female genital cutting is a practice are mostly Muslim, but they are not exclusively Muslim. Of the 29 countries tracked by UNICEF, 14 are home to more Christians than Muslims. The two Middle Eastern, and predominantly Muslim, countries, Yemen and Iraq, have much lower rates of 23 percent and 8 percent, respectively. Other majority-Muslim countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, are not listed. ""It is extremely clear that in many countries that have a very high population of Muslims, female genital mutilation/cutting is not practiced,"" said Francesca Moneti, the UNICEF senior child protection specialist who co-authored the report. Experts say the practice stems from social pressure to conform to traditions passed down for centuries -- one that predates not just Islam but also Judaism and Christianity. (The origins of the practice are subject to some dispute, but some scholars say it may correspond to areas of ancient civilizations, in which the cutting of females ""signalled controlled fidelity and the certainty of paternity,"" the UNICEF report states.) In areas of high prevalence today, ""this is perceived to be the normal and correct way of bringing up a girl,"" Moneti said. ""If a girl is not cut, she may be considered impure and not marriageable, and she and her entire family may be ostracized."" While it stems from neither Christianity nor Islam, some women in Chad, Guinea and Mauritania report a ""religious requirement"" as a benefit of cutting. Some communities consider a clitoridectomy -- one type of female genital mutilation -- as ""sunna,"" which is Arabic for ""tradition"" or ""duty,"" according to the UNICEF report. However, it is not a requirement of the Koran and has been specifically rejected by some Muslim leaders in Egypt. ""There are different positions within Islam on the issue,"" said Marit Tolo Østebø, a University of Florida lecturer on human rights and culture, global sexuality, and anthropology of religion. ""So you would have some Islamic scholars who will say, and might use parts from the hadith, to support that it’s good to do some cutting, but they will often emphasize that it is not an obligation."" (The hadith refers to commentary about the Koran that explains the traditions of the Prophet Mohammad.) The fact that it is also practiced by Christians and other groups with ancient beliefs makes it hard to say the practice is particularly Muslim, she said. ""Very often we tend to think that Islam is one thing -- that it’s one homogeneous religion,"" she said. ""But if we just look at Christianity, there are so many different traditions and views on things. That is exactly the same in Islam."" Aslan acknowledges that some may object to his ""central African"" characterization. He said he was trying to refer to the ""stripe"" of countries across Africa along the equator where this practice is common. However, UNICEF and international groups consider it a ""global"" problem since it happens in parts of Asia, Europe and North America because of immigration. ""All of this is to say that while it is almost impossible to come up with some sort of connection that binds countries that have (a female genital mutilation) problem, it is clear that whatever that connection is, it’s not religious,"" Aslan told PunditFact. Our ruling Aslan rejected Maher’s characterization of female genital mutilation as an Islamic problem, saying instead that it’s actually ""a central African problem."" Due to immigration, the term ""central African"" may be too restrictive, but his larger point -- that this is not a problem in only Muslim countries -- is valid. Countries with majority-Christian populations also carry out this practice, while Islamic-majority countries like Iraq and Yemen have rates on the lower side."
29123	Costumed cast members have been accused of molesting Disney theme park guests.	What's true: Costumed cast members have been accused of molesting Disney theme park guests. What's false: Such accusations have generally not been sustained by courts when complainants have pursued legal redress.	mixture	Disney, disney parks, sexual harassment, Theme Parks	We expect the costumed characters who roam the grounds at Disney theme parks to be nothing less than kind and cuddly all the time. Even the not-so-cute “evil” characters (e.g., Jafar, Captain Hook) are supposed to exhibit nothing but boundless patience and good cheer in accommodating guests and posing for endless streams of souvenir photographs, however much they may be pushed, pulled, punched, taunted, or otherwise abused by some of Disney’s less well-behaved clientele. It’s all too easy for some park visitors to lose themselves in the fantasy and forget that those figures are not really indestructible cartoon characters but flesh-and-blood people laboring inside of hot, heavy, cumbersome costumes. These cast members generally exhibit nothing but good cheer while working under difficult circumstances for relatively little pay, but should any of them ever lapse and momentarily display the very human reactions of frustration or exasperation, you can bet that someone will complain about it. Sometimes the complaints lodged are quite serious, with guests maintaining that a costumed cast member was not just rude or uncooperative, but acting in a hostile and physically abusive manner — to the extent that some complaints have resulted in civil or criminal proceedings. In most cases, though, the defense that character costumes so limit cast members’ peripheral vision and body movements that the alleged actions would be impossible or extremely difficult to perform intentionally wins out. In 1981, for example, Disneyland was the target of a lawsuit alleging that, three years earlier, a nine-year-old girl had received a beating delivered by one Winnie-the-Pooh. The lovable bear had supposedly slapped her in the face, resulting in bruising, recurring headaches, and possible brain damage. As writer David Koenig described the ensuing trial: [Disney attorney W. Mike] McCray’s first witness was Robert Hill, the actor who portrayed Pooh bear at the park that day. Hill testified that while in costume, his vision and movements are severely restricted. The girl, then nine years old, was tugging at him from behind and, in turning to see who it was, he accidentally struck her with an ear. “We’re trained not to retaliate,” he said. McCray then asked for a brief recess. After jurors returned to their seats, Hill reentered the courtroom in costume. Taking the witness stand, Pooh answered the lawyer’s questions by nodding his head and stomping his feet. “What do you do at Disneyland?” McCray asked. Pooh got up and did a jig down the aisle. The courtroom audience burst into laughter. “Have the record show that he’s doing a two-step,” noted the judge. By calling Pooh to the stand the attorney was able to present a lovable, sympathetic witness who wouldn’t — and couldn’t — hurt anyone. The bear demonstrated that he couldn’t have slapped the girl in the face as she claimed. The costume’s arms were too low to the ground. The jury took just 21 minutes to acquit Pooh on all charges. In another civil case, in 1976 a woman filed a lawsuit against Disneyland and sought $150,000 in damages for assault and battery, false imprisonment, and humiliation, asserting that a park employee wearing a pig costume had run up to her near the “It’s a Small World” attraction, grabbed her, and fondled her breasts while squealing “Mommy! Mommy!” — an experience that had supposedly left her so upset that she gained 50 pounds. That complaint never saw the inside of a courtroom, as the plaintiff dropped her case after Disney’s showed her a photo of the pig costume which revealed that the outfit had no operable arms, only stubs. In 2004, a Disney cast member was actually prosecuted on criminal charges. Michael C. Chartrand, a Walt Disney World employee who worked inside a Tigger costume, was the subject of a police investigation after a 13-year-old girl complained that he had fondled her breast while she posed for a photo with him and her mother in WDW’s Magic Kingdom park on 21 February 2004. (The girl’s mother maintained that she had been similarly fondled, but her allegation was not an element of the criminal case.) Mr. Chartrand was arrested in April 2004 and charged with lewd and lascivious molestation of a child and simple battery; by the following week 24 more complaints about him had been lodged with authorities. (All of the other complainants either lacked sufficient evidence to press charges or were unwilling to do so, however.) Mr. Chartrand declined a plea bargain and took his case to trial, and in August 2004 a jury deliberated for less than an hour before returning a verdict of “not guilty” on the charge of lewd and lascivious molestation. As part of his closing argument, Mr. Chartrand’s attorney, Jeffrey Kaufman (who himself worked for Disney as a costumed character), donned the Tigger costume to demonstrate to jurors the difficulty of maneuvering and seeing while inside in the outfit.
26249	“The COVID-19 future vaccine will come with the ID — a mark. The ID tells everyone you are free of COVID.”	A study that started in 2016 looked at using invisible dye to help doctors in developing countries track vaccination histories, but there are no plans to require such an identifier with a future COVID-19 vaccine.	false	Religion, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,	"The race to develop a vaccine against COVID-19 is underway, and so are online efforts to dissuade people from getting one whenever it is available. Among the many unfounded claims about a possible vaccine is this one: that it will ""come with the ID — a mark."" Not just any mark. ""The ID tells everyone you are free of COVID, and ultimately where you spend eternity,"" says the April 11 Facebook post with an image of a finger pointing to a tattoo. ""I suggest you resist this if you plan to go to heaven someday. That’s what everyone should be scared about #BillGates #MarkoftheBeast Certification of Vaccination ID (COVID) #NotWorthGoingToHellFor."" The post then quotes a Bible verse, Revelation 14:11: ""And the smoke of their torment will rise forever and ever. Day and night there will be no rest for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name."" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) First, COVID-19 stands for ""coronavirus disease 2019,"" not Certification of Vaccination ID. Media such as Yahoo News have noted in recent stories that comments Bill Gates has made about a COVID-19 vaccine have left some Christians worried about the ""mark of the beast."" ""Prominent evangelical pastors, including one who has since died of COVID-19, have promoted baseless claims about Bill Gates, implantable microchips that could be used to control the population under the guise of tracking COVID-19 infections and immunity, and a link between coronavirus vaccinations and the mark of the beast, a signifier, in biblical prophecy, of submission to the Antichrist,"" Yahoo News reports. We’ve fact-checked a bunch of claims about tracking devices and the coronavirus. Here’s what we know about vaccine tattoos: More than three years before the first novel coronavirus cases were reported, in July 2016, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology started studying how using an invisible ink that could be injected into children along with vaccines could address vaccine tracking challenges in developing countries. The dye would be visible under near-infrared light for up to five years and provide a quick, affordable way of helping health providers know if a child’s vaccinations were current. The Gates Foundation contributed funds for this research. But Kevin McHugh, a Rice University bioengineering professor who worked on the study, told Reuters that, to his knowledge, ""there are no plans to use this for coronavirus."""
37610	"Fish Mox"" and other fish antibiotics are acceptable substitutes for amoxicillin if a patient lacks access to healthcare services or treatment."	Fish Mox: ‘Same Antibiotic, Same Pill, Same Manufacturer, Same Drug’ as Amoxicillin?	unproven	Fact Checks, Viral Content	On February 17 2020 a Facebook user shared the following post, claiming that a product called “Fish Mox” is the “same antibiotic, same pill,” and “same drug” as the common antibiotic amoxicillin:Alongside three photographs, text read:Same antibiotic, same pill, same manufacturer, same drug. One you have to have insurance and you gotta get a Rx from a Doctor and get it from the pharmacy. The other you can get from the pet store in the aquatic department. Thank me later. 😎A large image to the right showed a prescription of 30 500mg amoxicillin pills (a dose of two capsules), next to a bottle of Thomas Labs “Fish Mox,” 100 capsules of 250mg pills. The second image displayed both bottles open, appearing to contain identical blue and pink capsules. The third showed one pill in front of the open prescription bottle, and two in front of the Fish Mox bottle.Indeed, the capsules appeared to be identical (assuming the contents of the respective bottles were accurately represented), down to the specific navy blue and pink colored caplets with black markings. What was not clear was whether the pills were indeed correctly labeled, or if the photographs were staged to further the original user’s point.We contacted our local CVS to ask a pharmacist about the basic claims — whether fish antibiotics were identical to those dispensed by pharmacists. The individual to whom we spoke told us that amoxicillin was not expensive, and we noted that the doctor’s visit to obtain the prescription might be the actual barrier. The pharmacist did not elaborate further, and would only say that CVS did not sell fish antibiotics.As of the February 2020 post’s spread, the notion of underinsured Americans resorting to using fish antibiotics was not necessarily novel; in fact, it was something of a meme in its own right. As far back as August 2017, Smithsonian Magazine came out with an article warning those who might be in a difficult situation not to risk using fish antibiotics if they were unable to afford a doctor’s visit. A primary reason cited was that fish antibiotics are not expressly regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the same manner as antibiotics or amoxicillin intended for human consumption:But there are a few key reasons why taking your fish’s drugs is a very bad, no good idea. Let’s start at the top.First, fish antibiotics are completely unregulated. Technically, they should fall under the purview of the Food and Drug Administration, which oversees both human and animal drugs. Those animals including companion animals (dogs, cats, horses) and food animals (cattle, pigs, chickens). Yet no ornamental fish antibiotics are approved by the FDA.If a person had a potentially serious infection and no way to access a doctor to obtain a prescription, that particular risk might not be too much of a disincentive. Assuming fish tolerated their antibiotics well and weren’t regularly dying from exposure to the products, humans might deduce Fish Mox was not too risky.Incidentally, Thomas Labs (maker of Fish Mox) says on their website of their products:The only FDA registered and inspected fish antibiotic facility offering USP certified quality antibiotics. Quality you can trust.Another cited reason was that patients are notoriously quick to request antibiotics for viruses and other conditions for which antibiotics are not an appropriate treatment. This behavior in the aggregate can causes antibiotic resistance, rendering common antibiotics less effective, or not effective at all, against once-treatable infections.Antibiotics are inexpensive — often $5-$10 for a full prescription — and a tempting solution to an illness you can’t seem to shake. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), antibiotic resistance caused by overuse of antibiotics remains “one of the biggest threats to global health, food security, and development today” and “leads to higher medical costs, prolonged hospital stays, and increased mortality.”That claim related to Smithsonian‘s third point in favor of eschewing fish antibiotics. Namely, antibiotics are typically dispensed by prescription, and a doctor doesn’t usually hand out any old antibiotic, such as the commonly recognized amoxicillin seen in the photographs. The piece noted doctors usually confirm the patient is indeed fighting a bacterial (not viral) infection, and the antibiotics prescribed are one of many used to treat varying types of infection:When a doctor prescribes you antibiotics, the first step is to make sure you’re dealing with a bacterial infection by running the proper tests. Antibiotics, which are intended to kill or slow the growth of bacteria that cause infection, are useless against a virus—and you don’t want to use them if you don’t have to, or it might lead to bacterial resistance.The next step is to find out what kind of bacteria you’re up against. Even broad spectrum antibiotics work differently to target different kinds of infections. Moxifish, for instance, contains amoxicillin, a type of penicillin. When a fish absorbs this compound through their skin, it travels through the bloodstream until it latches onto a bacteria’s rigid cell wall. There, it interferes with wall-building, leading to a build-up of pressure that eventually causes the the cell to burst. Unfortunately, many types of bacteria have grown resistant to penicillin: Staphylococcus Aureus, the bacteria commonly responsible for skin infections no longer responds to this class of antibiotics.As such, consulted experts said, patients could cause more harm to themselves by selecting the wrong antibiotics on Amazon or Chewy:So what if you skip the doctor, take a gamble and choose wrong? Well, each drug comes with its own set of potential side effects and allergic reactions. Taking amoxicillin while suffering a viral infection such as mono, for instance, can cause the body to erupt in rashes, says Morgan. Ciprofloxacin, previously a go-to for UTIs and sinus infections, has come under recent scrutiny for causing lasting damage to tendons, muscles, joints, nerves and the central nervous system. Many other antibiotic classes come with their own unpleasant effects.And even choosing correctly doesn’t guarantee success … antibiotics kill off both good and bad bacteria. That means that, to avoid unwanted side effects, it’s crucial to take them for the proper amount of time. Ending an antibiotic regimen too soon—or taking one for too long—can both breed further bacterial resistance. Stop too soon and you risk relapse, potentially allowing the microbes causing the disease to proliferate and form resistance.In December 2019, study authors presented research on the prevalence and risk of humans using fish antibiotics at the ASHP (American Society of Health-System Pharmacists) 54th Midyear Clinical Meeting & Exhibition in Las Vegas. A brief summary of the presentation and presumably upcoming study reiterated some of the concerns raised in the 2017 article quoted above, mainly concerning doctor/pharmacist oversight and compliance in completely a course of antibiotics:“While human consumption of fish antibiotics is likely low, any consumption by humans of antibiotics intended for animals is alarming,” [study co-author Brandon Bookstaver, PharmD, director of residency and fellowship training at the University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy] said, in a prepared statement. “We were particularly concerned that the high volume of positive feedback on the comments about human use might encourage others to attempt to use these drugs.”Fish antibiotics are currently available over the counter, ranging in prices from $8.99 for a bottle of 30 capsules of amoxicillin to $119.99 for a bottle of 100 ciprofloxacin tablets.The researchers also obtained and examined 5 antibiotics that were being marketed online for fish: amoxicillin, penicillin, cephalexin, metronidazole, and sulfamethoxazole. These products carry the exact imprints, color, and shape of available products meant for human consumption.Pharmacists can play a critical role in helping patients access safe and appropriate medications, and in educating people about the dangers of taking antibiotics not prescribed to them, according to ASHP Director of Pharmacy Practice and Quality Michael Ganio, PharmD, MS, BCPS, CPHIMS, FASHP.“What might seem like a less expensive, easier way to treat an assumed infection can ultimately have very serious negative consequences,” said Ganio, in a prepared statement. “Unlike antibiotics for humans or other animals, these medications are completely unregulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Even if the pills look the same, it’s impossible to know that medications purchased in this manner contain what the label says and are safe for humans. Antibiotics, like all medications, should be dispensed from a licensed pharmacy after a diagnosis and prescription from a medical professional.”Emphasized above is a portion indicating that researchers observed the five “products carry the exact imprints, color, and shape of available products meant for human consumption.” It wasn’t immediately clear if the researchers meant the products were visually identical (thus confusing prospective patients), or if they were saying the products were literally the same exact pills dispensed in pharmacies. (We were unable to find the study itself, suggesting that publication was still pending as of February 2020. )The summary’s final sentence suggested the former, not the latter was true:The authors of the study plan to verify the contents of the antibiotics as a next step in their research.Bookstaver also emphasized concerns about antibiotic resistance:“While human consumption of fish antibiotics is likely low, any consumption by humans of antibiotics intended for animals is alarming,” Bookstaver said. “Self-medication and the availability of antibiotics without healthcare oversight might contribute to increasing antimicrobial resistance and delayed appropriate treatment. We were particularly concerned that the high volume of positive feedback on the comments about human use might encourage others to attempt to use these drugs.”Concerns notwithstanding, it was also clear a segment of the population felt they had no choice but to risk using antibiotics for fish and animals due to a lack of health care access. In August 2017, Mashable spoke to many users of fish antibiotics about the reasons they used the medications:Even with insurance, Carrera Howie couldn’t afford a visit to the doctor. Her mother recommended she take fish antibiotics, and gave her a bottle that she’d purchased from a pet store. She said she didn’t know where the idea originated from.“They worked incredibly,” she told Mashable in an email. “The UTI was completely gone within a week and I didn’t get another one for at least 4 more years.”She even said she’d use them again.“Urgent care and doctors’ copays are so expensive and it sometimes feels like I have to make a choice between having a provider and having groceries,” she explained.37-year-old Amy Wareham has also turned to fish antibiotics more than once to help cure an illness.Wareham said went 10 years without insurance, and used fish antibiotics four times during that period to self-medicate. At the time, she compared the pills to pills her family members had gotten from the pharmacy, and claimed that they were identical.Today, she has health insurance under the Affordable Care Act, and said she wouldn’t use fish antibiotics again — unless she became uninsured.A viral Facebook post that claims people without access to healthcare have used fish antibiotics for infections is neither unknown nor a major secret. As for whether the medications are genuinely identical. that is truly unknown. Researchers are currently testing fish antibiotics alongside those manufactured or marketed for human consumption. Doctors and pharmacists asked about the safety of fish antibiotics cite mainly concerns over FDA oversight of the pills, as well as the risk of inaccurate or complete antibiotic courses and a larger risk of contributing to antibiotic resistance.
10487	Foreign Clinics Lure Americans With Unproven Treatments	This report describes the trend of some patients going overseas to get medical procedures that are not approved in the U.S. The articles focuses on one such treatment: adult stem cell treatment for advanced heart failure. The piece follows most health journalism best practices, including reporting on costs and availability and using a variety of sources. Its most serious flaw is that it creates the impression–via anecdote, quote and a physician comment–that heart failure is untreatable by conventional methods. This simply isn’t accurate, and it could create unjustified fear and despair among those with heart failure. With that one exception, the article delivers a high level of public service by inviting readers’ skepticism throughout. It notes how the clinic’s operator made outcome claims but won’t release data, how available data on U.S. clinical trials is inconclusive, and it quotes a spokesman for a research association who recommends specific factors patients considering an oversees procedure should consider.	true		"The story reports that overseas stem cell treatment for heart failure cost one patient $13,000. The article briefly summarizes a major journal report on stem cell treatment for heart failure that finds little risk and only a ""modest benefit."" Since the story is premised on the fact that little evidence supports the treatment, this is sufficient. However, given all of this, it may have been better for the story to put more emphasis on the fallacy in the statements by the company’s medical director that 75 to 80 percent of patients improve significantly, and that ""We are their last resort."" The story does not describe the potential harms of getting the treatment overseas. It implies the waste of money and potential safety issues but should have included more detail. The article makes clear that there is no high-quality scientific evidence demonstrating the treatment’s efficacy. The article does nothing to exaggerate the danger of heart failure or the promise of the stem cell treatment. The reporter drew on a variety of sources: The article does not report on other treatment options for heart failure patients. Combined with the unsubstantiated claim of 75 to 80 percent efficacy–and the comment that the overseas treatment is a ""last resort""–this creates the impression that other treatments for heart failure don’t exist or are futile. This is the article’s most serious flaw. The story does an excellent job of describing the conditions under which adult stem cell treatments for heart failure are available both overseas and domestically. The article reports that the treatment is in clinical trials here and about 300 people have had the procedure overseas. There is no evidence that the story is based on a press release."
9072	Research pinpoints powerful biomarker of multiple sclerosis	A study by a group of Australian scientists has found a link between micro-RNA molecules in blood and multiple sclerosis, a chronic disease that remains difficult to diagnose. The release does a credible job of explaining the target focuses of this basic research—micro-RNAs and exosomes, constituents of cells that find their way in the bloodstream—but offers little in the way of methodological details. The text also jumps the gun by labeling the study a “breakthrough” and making claims about treatment benefits that are completely hypothetical at this point. Any blood test resulting from the effort has miles to go before it is ready for clinical use. If this link between constituents of blood and multiple sclerosis does survive further testing, it could pave the way for earlier diagnosis and earlier treatment of a disease that, according to the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, affects more than 2 million people worldwide.	false	blood test,multiple sclerosis,University of Sydney	Although this research is basic stuff, a source in the release is already talking about its diagnostic value. Claims of that sort should be accompanied by at least cursory information about possible cost. In reality, this test is so far from clinical use that estimating cost would be difficult. A source describes possible benefits stemming from earlier and more accurate MS diagnosis — but these benefits from earlier and more accurate diagnosis are hypothetical. There was no discussion or numerical context relating to the differences in the RNA levels between MS patients and controls. Benefits of the test were not quantified. The possible debits of this blood test—false positives and false negatives, for example—are not broached. These are very likely to occur in a larger group of subjects. The release does a nice job of describing micro-RNAs and exosomes and their roles in the body, but it offers virtually no information about how these scientists actually uncovered the link between these molecules and MS. The only reference to “how” is a sentence at the end of the release tagging the use of “next generation sequencing and integrative bioinformatics,” references that will be uninterpretable by many journalists and lay readers. The release claims that the results can differentiate between MS and non-MS, and between MS subtypes, but there are no numbers provided for us to assess that. The release doesn’t engage in disease mongering. MS is a chronic disease with serious, disabling consequences for the nervous system. The funding source is identified. Since the goal is to devise a commercial diagnostic test, we would also encourage releases to point out any potential conflicts of interest. In this case, there doesn’t appear to be any. Several existing diagnostic elements are mentioned in the release; they are identified as “costly” and as offering only limited help. We’ll rate this a marginal Satisfactory. More could have been said about the alternatives. What is the sensitivity/specificity and positive predictive value of these alternative tests? How do they compare as far as cost? This research is basic, so one might expect a reader to infer that the blood test is not yet available. But the text could have reinforced that by indicating what next steps need to be taken in order to validate this discovery and move it into clinical use. The text repeatedly notes that this blood test could become the first definitive diagnostic test for MS. Unfortunately, the news release labels this diagnostic effort as “a breakthrough study” in the very first sentence of the text. Bad idea. The release engages in unjustifiable language elsewhere, too. This statement: “This, in turn may lead to fewer relapses and a slower loss of brain volume, resulting in slowing or potentially halting progression of the disease for the person living with MS. It will also help remove the uncertainty surrounding which sub type of the disease an individual has and therefore be a catalyst for better outcomes for all people with MS.” is unjustifiably optimistic about a blood test that “might” diagnose a condition and is totally unproved at this stage. Even if the test works well for diagnostic purposes, there’s no guarantee that patients will experience better treatment outcomes because of it.
6206	As shock wears off, mental health concerns grow in Bahamas.	One woman and her husband huddled on top of a bedroom dresser for two days, surrounded by floodwaters.	true	Caribbean, AP Top News, Mental health, Hurricane Dorian, Health, General News, Storms, Latin America, Bahamas, International News, Hurricanes	Another man sat in his wheelchair for nearly 48 hours in water up to his chest, alone in his home. A third rescued a friend who sat in shock when part of a building where they sought shelter blew away. Stories of survival are trickling out across northern Bahamas as the initial shock wears off from Hurricane Dorian, one of the strongest Atlantic hurricanes in history. And the extent of the storm’s terror lingers on in the minds of many. Mental health counselors are now fanning out into communities to help those traumatized by the direct hit of the Category 5 storm that forced the evacuation of nearly 5,000 people and killed at least 50 others. Some 1,300 still missing in the hard-hit islands of Grand Bahama and Abaco, although the government has said many could be in shelters and with loved ones. “I think some persons can’t believe that it happened, and others are still processing it,” said Pastor Robert Lockhart of Calvary Temple in Grand Bahama. He offered his pulpit on Sunday to more than 200 people in attendance, offering to let congregants share their stories as part of an island-wide effort to prevent what officials warn could become a mental health crisis as people struggle to absorb the extent of the devastation. Only six people spoke, but the crowd clapped and cried with them. “They needed to have an outlet and share these emotions,” Lockhart said. “People felt like they were going to die.” Among those who shared survival stories was 49-year-old Carlos Evans, who began to use a wheelchair after he was injured while working at an oil refinery. He recalled how he kept shining the light from his cellphone on the rising water as he tried not to panic. The water finally stopped surging when it reached his chest, and he waited alone for nearly two days until he was rescued. “I wanted to encourage somebody else,” he said of his decision to speak. “It’s not just dem going through it, it’s all of us.” Dorian hit the northern Bahamas on Sept. 1 with sustained winds of 185 mph (295 kph), unleashing flooding that reached up to 25 feet (8 meters) in some areas. It then remained nearly stationary for a day and a half, flattening homes, sweeping away children and adults and stripping people of their most treasured possessions, leading the U.N. Secretary General to call the storm a “Category Hell.” Members of the International Medical Corps planned to open a clinic on Monday in High Rock in eastern Grand Bahama — one of the hardest-hit communities — to help those who have physical injuries or are struggling emotionally. But mental health specialist Eoin Ryan said it will take a couple of weeks or even months to determine the storm’s psychological toll. He also said many are still seeking food, water and shelter and will deal with the emotional impact once they’re out of shock. Susan Mangicaro, senior adviser for the team’s emergency response unit, said that reactions from survivors in the Bahamas are similar to those she saw in Haiti after the 2010 earthquake. “I’ve seen a lot more shock because entire villages were demolished overnight,” she said. For now, some are still in a daze. Eulese Cooper, a 46-year-old fisherwoman from Grand Bahama, was one of those processing her loss as she sifted aimlessly through her family’s belongings in the fishing village of McLean’s Town. She had a gash on her head and said she was recovering from a concussion after a truck she was riding in hit a fallen wire that snapped on her head. The doctors advised her to rest, but she could not. “When I’m sleeping, I have nightmares,” she said.
14294	We have tougher standards holding toy gun manufacturers and sellers to account than we do for real guns.	"Clinton said, ""We have tougher standards holding toy gun manufacturers and sellers to account than we do for real guns."" She’s parroting a line she has stated previously. Clinton points to a 2005 law granting the gun industry certain immunity from lawsuits. In her camp are scholars who believe the law made the gun industry less susceptible to liability than other industries, including the toy gun industry. But other scholars think the law made the gun industry’s liability about the same as that of a toy gun manufacturer. And because real guns carry so much more risk for injury than toy guns, it’s hard to compare them effectively. This is a complex legal question, on which reasonable minds can disagree.	mixture	National, Debates, Voting Record, Guns, Hillary Clinton,	"Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders voted for a law that gave higher standards to toy guns than real guns, opponent Hillary Clinton charged at the New York Democratic debate. A 2005 law put restrictions on people’s ability to sue the gun industry for crimes committed using their products. As Clinton often points out, she voted against this law, while Sanders voted for it. ""We have tougher standards holding toy gun manufacturers and sellers to account than we do for real guns,"" Clinton said April 14. The claim that this law gives higher standards to toy guns is something Clinton has said in recent weeks. It’s not a settled question. Here’s why. A liability gap? The law at issue is the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush and seen as a victory for gun rights advocates. The purpose of the law is to protect gun dealers and manufacturers from lawsuits when their products are misused, meaning if a gun dealer legally sells a person a gun, and then the buyer uses the gun to commit a crime, the gun dealer and manufacturer cannot be held liable for the crime. The law arose after victims, cities and states started to bring lawsuits against gunmakers that pursued new legal paths, such as one that argued manufacturers Glock Inc. and China North Industries had oversaturated the market, producing so many guns that it was inevitable some would fall into criminal hands. Most judges dismissed these kinds of lawsuits, but a minority allowed them to proceed. There are several situations that are not protected from lawsuits under the law. It does not protect gun dealers who transfer a gun knowing it would be used for criminal purposes, nor those who knowingly break state or federal law if the violation results in harm. Gun manufacturers can also be sued if the gun, when used properly, causes injury because the product is defective. Opponents argue that the law stops some victims from having their day in court because the liability immunity is so broad and ambiguous, while the exceptions are narrow. Supporters, though, say the law protects gun dealers and manufacturers from frivolous and expensive legal proceedings. We’ve written before that Congress has passed laws giving some other industries varying levels of immunity. A couple experts told us Clinton’s statement is unsound because the law sought to impose equivalent, rather than fewer, standards for gun makers that are already established for manufacturers of other products. As it stands, the victim of a crime committed with a toy — say, if a person seriously injured another person by shooting them with bb gun pellets — generally cannot sue the toy manufacturer, just as they can’t sue Toyota or Budweiser if they’re struck by a drunk person driving a Prius. The 2005 law ""basically put gun manufacturers in the same position that other product manufacturers are in,"" said Eugene Volokh, a law professor at the University of California Los Angeles. ""They’re responsible for defectively manufactured and designed products but not for failing to prevent criminal misuse of their products."" Additionally, toy guns and real guns pose fundamentally different risks because real guns are much more likely to be used in a crime than a toy gun, said Timothy Lytton, a Georgia State University law professor who edited a book on suing the gun industry. So before the law, the gun industry was subject to a wider range of liability that just doesn’t apply to a toy. As such, it’s hard to imagine a realistic incident with a toy gun that would cause someone to bring a suit against the toy company, yet they would not be able to sue a gun manufacturer for an equivalent situation involving a real gun. A hypothetical situation might be if a city experienced an epidemic of deaths or injuries that resulted from a prevalence of realistic-looking toy guns; think of the recent story of Tamir Rice, a Cleveland child carrying a toy gun who a police officer shot and killed, said Alexandra Lahav, a professor of civil procedure at the University of Connecticut School of Law. In that case, a city might want to bring a suit against the toy gun manufacturer or seller for creating a public nuisance. But under the 2005 law, a city cannot sue a gun company if there is an epidemic of people being injured or killed by their guns. Lahav added, though, that she thinks the idea someone would bring a suit like this against a toy company is highly unlikely. In theory, there might be a liability gap between toy guns and real guns, but that wouldn't necessarily play out in reality, she said. Toy and real gun manufacturers can be sued for product defects that cause injury when the product is used as intended. But if an injury is caused by a product defect coupled with a criminal misuse of the product, a toy gun manufacturer could be held liable, but a real gun manufacturer could not under the 2005 law, said Adam Winkler, also a UCLA law professor and an expert in the Second Amendment. That limits the gun industry’s incentives to make their products as safe as possible. The fact that a party cannot even attempt to bring these kinds of lawsuits against real gun manufacturers sets them apart from other industries, including toys, said Mark Geistfeld, a law professor at New York University and an expert in products liability. Such lawsuits against the gun industry might be destined to fail, but the 2005 law doesn’t even allow for the arguments to be tested. ""You’ve granted an immunity to the gun industry that you haven’t granted to any other industry,"" Geistfeld said of Sanders, noting that this supports the gist of Clinton’s point: that Sanders holds guns to a lower standard. Lytton noted, though, that he would not presume to know whether Sanders or anyone else who voted for the law would grant similar immunity to the toy industry if the opportunity arose. ""It’s not fair to basically enter into hyperbole that somehow he treated firearms differently (so) he would come down harder on toy guns,"" Lytton said. Our ruling Clinton said, ""We have tougher standards holding toy gun manufacturers and sellers to account than we do for real guns."" She’s parroting a line she has stated previously. Clinton points to a 2005 law granting the gun industry certain immunity from lawsuits. In her camp are scholars who believe the law made the gun industry less susceptible to liability than other industries, including the toy gun industry. But other scholars think the law made the gun industry’s liability about the same as that of a toy gun manufacturer. And because real guns carry so much more risk for injury than toy guns, it’s hard to compare them effectively. This is a complex legal question, on which reasonable minds can disagree.
11484	Tai Chi May Help Ease Fibromyalgia	This story (one of five we reviewed on this study) summarizes the findings of a recent study into the potential of benefits of tai chi for patients suffering from fibromyalgia. Though somewhat longer than all but one of the other stories under review, the story provides only a surface look into the merits of the research and the circumstances of the condition. A study like this will have so many people reading the coverage that it is important for reporters to fully explain the study’s limitations and the context around the condition and its possible therapies.	false		"The story does not mention costs. The story does not attempt to quantify benefits. Readers are left to make their own assumptions about what percentage of fibromyalgia patients in the US might benefit from tai chi classes. The story does not identify any possible harms. It is difficult to imagine that twice-weekly tai chi, like any other form of moderate exercise, would be harmful, but, at a minimum, the story could have reported upon the study’s adverse events registry. The NEJM authors clearly state: ""No adverse events were noted during the study interventions."" The study did not consider worse muscle soreness to be an adverse event so long as it resolved before 3 days’ time, so we don’t know how much of that occurred in either arm of the study. So why not drop in a line about the lack of adverse events? Wouldn’t a reader be interested that this exercise appears safe? The results publicized here are based on a small study of 66 fibromyalgia patients who were followed for a few months. The story does not discuss any of the limitations associated with a study of this nature. In addition, the story does not include any information about the group of patients who received wellness education training followed by gentle stretching instead of tai chi, so there is no point of comparison. The story cites a questionable statistic about the scope of problem. Citing the National Fibromyalgia Association, the story says there are approximately 10 million sufferers of the condition in the U.S. It would have been more appropriate to rely on a number from an disinterested government source. (The National Institutes of Health estimates 5 million as the disease prevalence among adults over 18.) The story does cite the opinions of a researcher who wrote an accompanying article in the journal. More outside voices would have been a nice addition. This criterion is barely satisfactory. Very brief mention is given to existing alternatives, such as exercise, sleep techniques and medication, but no discussion of the track record of how well the alternative methods work. Readers are left to make their own assumptions about the availability of tai chi classes in their communities. More problematic is that the story does not provide any detail about the style or rigor of the tai chi classes (aside from the fact that the classes last an hour), making it difficult for a patient, or health care advisor, to make an informed decision as to how to proceed. The story explains that doctors routinely recommend exercise as one method of treatment for fibromyalgia patients, but with limited success. So in that sense, the story does undercut some of the novelty of the study’s findings. An excellent question for the researchers would have been: What is it that potentially makes tai chi a better form of exercise for this condition? The story is based on an study appearing in the New England Journal of Medicine. The writer did contact the lead author and another researcher for quotes."
4827	18 sickened at NH restaurant popular with politicians .	Eighteen people were sickened with a gastrointestinal illness after attending a private function last month at a restaurant co-owned by a Democratic congressman that’s popular with presidential candidates, state health officials said Friday.	true	Health, General News, Manchester	People who became ill with norovirus attended the private function Nov. 24 at the Puritan Backroom in Manchester, the state Department of Health and Human Services said. One person later died but it was unclear if the death was related to the norovirus outbreak, the department said. The restaurant is co-owned by Rep. Chris Pappas and is famous for its chicken tenders. It has been in his family for more than a century and is a frequent stop for presidential candidates of both parties. The manager of the Puritan Backroom, Erik Zink, said in a statement that the restaurant’s top priorities are promoting health and excellent food safety and that he was confident it was doing everything possible to maintain those practices. Zink also said the restaurant had reached out to the family of the person who died to express “our condolences” for the death which he blamed on unidentified causes. After the outbreak, the Manchester Health Department conducted an inspection of the facility. Based on the inspection, health officials determined there was no ongoing norovirus risk to the public. The common symptoms of norovirus are diarrhea, vomiting, nausea and stomach pain, health officials said. The state sees from 50 to 75 norovirus outbreaks every year.
3428	Wisconsin lawsuit blames drug makers for opioid crisis.	Nearly two dozen Wisconsin counties are suing makers of prescription painkillers, alleging in a federal lawsuit Tuesday that the companies’ “nefarious and deceptive” marketing campaigns precipitated the nation’s opioid overdose epidemic.	true	Wisconsin, Epidemics, Lawsuits, Marketing campaigns, North America, Health	The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages and says the county health and law enforcement services “have been strained to the breaking point” because of the overdose crisis that has claimed thousands of lives. More than two dozen states, cities and counties have filed similar lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies, accusing them of making false claims about the dangers of their drugs to make a profit. “Defendants’ goal was simple: to dramatically increase sales by convincing doctors that it was safe and efficacious to prescribe opioids to treat not only the kind of severe and short-term pain associated with surgery or cancer, but also for a seemingly unlimited array of less severe, longer-term pain, such as back pain and arthritis to name but two examples,” the lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Wisconsin says. Drug companies knew their “products were addictive, subject to abuse, and not safe or efficacious for long-term use,” that lawsuit says. It names Purdue Pharma, Johnson & Johnson, Endo Health Solutions, Inc. and subsidiaries of the companies. Three doctors in California and Utah are also listed. “We vigorously deny these allegations and look forward to the opportunity to present our defense,” Purdue Pharma said in a statement that also said the company is “deeply troubled by the opioid crisis and we are dedicated to being part of the solution.” Endo Health Solutions said in a statement its “top priorities include patient safety and ensuring that patients with chronic pain have access to safe and effective therapeutic options” while preventing opioid abuse. It said it couldn’t comment further on pending litigation. Johnson & Johnson said in a statement it had not yet received the counties’ complaint but that the allegations in similar lawsuits are “legally and factually unfounded.” “Responsibly used opioid-based pain medicines give doctors and patients important choices to help manage the debilitating effects of chronic pain,” the company’s statement said. “At the same time, we recognize opioid abuse and addiction is a serious public health issue that must be addressed.” More than 52,000 Americans died in 2015 from drug overdoses, most of them involving prescription opioids or related illicit drugs such as fentanyl and heroin, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In Wisconsin, 1,824 people died from opioid overdoses from 2013 to 2015, according to the lawsuit. One of the local governments taking legal action, Washington County, with a population of about 131,900, had 542 hospitalizations involving opioids last year, according to the lawsuit, and 70 opioid overdose deaths from 2013 to 2016. ___ Find Ivan Moreno on Twitter: http://twitter.com/Ivanjourno
22741	"Under federal law, Jared Loughner ""would not have been able to buy a gun"" had he been identified as mentally ill."	Sen. Sherrod Brown laments system failure that allowed Jared Loughner to buy a gun	true	Ohio, Guns, Sherrod Brown,	"Jared Loughner, the 22-year-old Tucson man accused of killing six people and injuring 13 others including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, scared community college classmates even before his alleged rampage. He should have been diagnosed, treated and kept in a mental health institution as long as he was a danger to others, or so goes the national conversation. But that never happened. And the shameful irony is that under a bill that President George W. Bush signed, ""if he had been identified with this mental illness, he would not have been able to buy this gun,"" U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown said in a discussion of the mental health safety net during an appearance on MSNBC’s ""Morning Joe"" program. ""I mean, the laws were there, but he fell through the system, he fell through the cracks, because he wasn’t identified because when he left the community college, nobody approached him, apparently."" The system’s failure will be discussed by others for some time, but Brown, an Ohio Democrat, caught our attention for his other point on the Jan. 11 TV segment -- that ""laws were there"" already to prevent Loughner from buying a firearm, if only he had been diagnosed. So we checked with the FBI, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the Ohio attorney general’s office, a group called Legal Community Against Violence and the Buckeye Firearms Association, a pro-Second Amendment group. There was no disagreement: A federal law passed in 1968 made it illegal to possess a firearm if you had been found by a court or legal authority to be a ""mental defective."" The prohibition also applied to anyone involuntarily committed to a mental institution. Enforcement was strengthened with the Brady Handgun Protection Act of 1993, which established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, to conduct electronic background checks when individuals purchase guns. Another measure, signed by President George W. Bush, improved the reporting system as it pertained to mental health issues after the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007. Individuals may be released from the federal gun ban if they have deemed rehabilitated and are discharged from all monitoring. Under Arizona law, it would not have been hard to get Loughner committed, according to reviews by news organizations. ""Arizona has one of the least restrictive laws when it comes to detaining apparently mentally ill people against their will,"" Reuters, a wire service, reported on Jan. 13. ""Under the state's broad involuntary-commitment statute, the government can mandate in-patient treatment for anyone determined to be ‘persistently or acutely disabled.’ That could include a broad range of seemingly troubled individuals."" But the federal gun law has exceptions. The big one: Those who voluntarily get institutional treatment and bypass the need for court action aren’t barred from gun ownership, according to the groups with which we checked. That means that if community college officials, counselors or Loughner’s parents had convinced Loughner to check in on his own, he still would have qualified to buy a gun. ""Just being mentally ill is not going to be the triggerer"" for the prohibition, said Becca Knox, the Brady Center’s director of research. For reasons that most agree are good, this country doesn’t keep a registry on mental illness. Mental illness is stigmatized enough already, and the majority of people who seek treatment ""will never commit a crime,"" said Jim Irvine, chairman of the Buckeye Firearms Association. ""We have talked about this and looked at it, and none of us at Buckeye have come up with a good solution. I don’t know how you deal with it, because you will have problems on all sides."" Yet there’s another problem, gun control advocates say. Some people who have been forced into psychiatric treatment by state courts -- and therefore have a record at the state level -- still don’t show up in the NICS system. Only 26 states have statutes authorizing or mandating that their mental health adjudications be sent to the federal system, according to the Legal Community Against Violence. Arizona does not have such a law, but it is one of nine states that provide the information to NICS anyway, said Robyn Thomas, executive director of Legal Community Against Violence. Ohio, too, provides the information voluntarily -- but it didn’t until the state passed a concealed carry law that took effect in 2004, according to Toby Hoover, executive director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence and a Brady Center board member. This was confirmed by Lisa Peterson Hackley, spokeswoman for Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine. The bill that Bush signed provided financial incentives for all states to participate, but no federal laws make participation mandatory. So we come back to Brown’s claim that if Loughner ""had been identified with this mental illness, he would not have been able to buy this gun."" Brown’s statement was generally correct. We’ll concede that Brown was speaking as a guest on a fast-moving TV program where four other people were jumping in with opinions -- not exactly a forum for discussing the nuances of federal gun law. Nevertheless, his statement lacked the caveat that if Loughner had been diagnosed but had committed himself voluntarily and was not adjudicated by a court, he still could have bought a gun legally. That’s a point of clarification important for a full understanding of his statement."
25739	“In West Virginia alone, overdoses have increased by 50% during the #COVID-19 pandemic.”	West Virginia has seen an overdose spike during the pandemic. For the period from April through June, responses by emergency medical services for suspected overdoses rose 33% compared to the same period a year earlier. But for May and June alone, the number rose 47%, which is close to the 50% Miller cited.	true	West Virginia, Drugs, Health Care, Coronavirus, Carol Miller,	"Has the coronavirus pandemic also sent drug overdoses soaring? That’s what Rep. Carol Miller, R-W.Va., said in a July 30 tweet. Miller tweeted, ""In West Virginia alone, overdoses have increased by 50% during the #COVID-19 pandemic. We must stop the illegal drug flow across our Southern Border. That’s why I added an amendment to 2021 government funding to #BuildTheWall. Sadly, House Democrats voted this down."" We’ve previously rated the statement by fellow West Virginia Republican Rep. David McKinney that ""$53 million a week is coming across the border in drugs."" We’ve also rated True the statement that West Virginia has the highest overdose rate of any state. In this article, we’ll focus on Miller’s assertion that the pandemic and the economic dislocation that has followed have driven an increasing number of overdoses in West Virginia. We found evidence in two West Virginia media reports published not long before Miller’s tweet that supports the idea that the state has seen a rise in overdoses since the pandemic. In late June, the Charleston Gazette-Mail reported on increases in overdoses. West Virginia Public Broadcasting did so in early July. (Both outlets are PolitiFact West Virginia partners.) Both news reports cited data from the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources showing that emergency responses for suspected overdoses had increased by close to 50%. At the time of those reports, the agency had recorded 923 emergency responses for May 2020, compared with 650 in May 2019. That was a 42% increase. The article also reported a more than fivefold increase for June in average weekly overdoses that are reversed by naloxone, a medication used to rapidly reverse opioid overdoses. Overdoses reversed by naloxone averaged 16 per week in June 2020, compared with norms of three per week and 12 per month, according to the article. Miller’s office referenced the articles when we inquired, but because the articles had appeared several weeks before Miller’s tweet, we looked for state Health Department data that was available closer to the date of her statement. The data for each month are updated on the 15th day of the following month, Allison Adler, the department’s director of communications, told PolitiFact, but the updates could include some earlier months. Counting all the updates made as of Aug. 15, the number of overdoses in April 2020 held steady compared with the previous year, but the numbers did spike in May and June. Emergency response for suspected overdoses increased by 64% in May and 30% in June. So for the three months combined, the number increased by 33% from a year earlier, but during May and June alone, the numbers rose by 47%, which is close to Miller’s figure. July numbers were on par with those in 2019, but Miller wouldn’t have known about that data point when she sent her tweet. The department also offers another metric: emergency room visits related to overdoses. These increased by 12% in May and June compared to the year prior. (It would later rise by 28% in July.) This pattern has been echoed elsewhere in the United States. The New York Times has reported that drug overdose deaths rose to record numbers in 2019, and are already 13% higher than average in 2020, according to mortality data from local and state governments covering 40% of the U.S. population. The Association of American Medical Colleges also reported that suspected drug overdoses rose 18% from mid-March through May, which would be consistent with the notion that the pandemic is pushing overdoses higher. Miller said, ""In West Virginia alone, overdoses have increased by 50% during the #COVID-19 pandemic."" For the three months from April through June, EMS responses rose by 33%. Looking just at May and June, the increase was 47%."
12165	Rick Baker Says Rick Kriseman is $35 million over budget on St. Petersburg’s new police station.	Baker said that the new police headquarters is over budget. Baker considers the budget for the police department to be $50 million, which was the amount that was originally set aside in 2006 when he was mayor. However, before Kriseman took office, a consultant said the city would need $74 million to build a new police headquarters. With the addition of features such as a shooting range and a parking garage, the project’s expected cost is now $86 million. Baker’s insistence that Kriseman should have stuck to a budget developed 11 years ago ignores the changed expectations before Kriseman took office. Moreover, the city is not far enough along on the project to say that it is over budget. So far, there’s no indication that the city is spending more than what the council approved. Baker’s statement is inaccurate.	false	Infrastructure, Florida, Rick Baker,	"All summer long, Rick Baker has hammered opponent and current Mayor Rick Kriseman over what he sees as exorbitant spending on the new pier and new police station. In a Tampa Bay Times article on June 14, Baker said: ""To me it's all about quality of life. Whether it's dog parks, skate board parks, rec centers ... And the trouble is, if you're $35 million over budget on the Pier and $35 million over budget on a police station, it's very hard to do that stuff."" Kriseman, on the other hand, argued the police station is under budget and ahead of schedule — a premature statement that we rated Mostly . Here, we wanted to test Baker’s claim that the city is over budget on the police station. Plans for a new police station have been in the works since Baker was mayor more than a decade ago. The city’s police building on 1300 First Ave. N. was built in multiple phases, with the first part unveiled in 1951 and the other in 1978. Baker argues the current budget is way more than what was originally determined in 2006, when he was in his second term. The estimate to replace the police station came in at $50 million, according to the Tampa Bay Times. The latest price tag to replace the aging station is $86 million. That’s about $35 million higher than the 2006 estimate. Contrary to Baker’s point, the expected price hike does not prove dramatic cost overruns driven by the current mayor. Baker’s point essentially compares two different projects, holding Kriseman to an estimate that low-balled the expected costs and obviously pre-dated him. The city knew years before Kriseman became mayor that it would take more than $50 million to replace police headquarters. In 2010, a consultant hired by the city unveiled a report detailing that St. Petersburg needed to spend $74 million to replace its police headquarters. Given the state of the economy, city officials knew the $74 million price tag was too steep. ""I don't think we can afford this,"" said City Council member Karl Nurse in 2010. As the economic downturn set in, the city looked at other options, including building a scaled-down version while making updates to the old facility. However, after the economy picked back up, Kriseman announced in 2015 the city would have enough money to build a new station again for $70 million. After the budget was set at $70 million (a decision approved by the City Council 7-1), additional costs were added for parking, energy efficient features, and a new shooting range, bringing the final budget for new police facilities to $86 million. Here’s how the budget changed over the years: To Baker, this does not matter. ""The bottom line is the budget was $50 million dollars for the police station, anything the department needed, should have been built into that initial $50 million dollar budget, period,"" said Rick Baker. ""The fact that Kriseman is playing budgetary games does not hide the fact that, as documented by the Tampa Bay Times on multiple occasions, he is on a ‘spending binge,’ and is tens of millions of dollars over budget on the police station project."" Budget adjustments are not synonymous with being over budget, though. The city is not yet anticipating to spend more than what the council approved. The city says it has spent $4 million towards the construction of the project, which started in late spring. Construction costs eat up the majority of the budget, at $61 million. The rest of the spending is for architecture, planning and other services related to the pre-development of the project. City officials estimated the project will be done in December 2018, and fully operational in spring 2019. Baker is not alone in criticizing the added features cooked into the final project. His staff highlighted how the Tampa Bay Times editorial board criticized Kriseman’s spending on the police station and pier. The editorial does not call the police project over budget. Our ruling Baker said that the new police headquarters is over budget. Baker considers the budget for the police department to be $50 million, which was the amount that was originally set aside in 2006 when he was mayor. However, before Kriseman took office, a consultant said the city would need $74 million to build a new police headquarters. With the addition of features such as a shooting range and a parking garage, the project’s expected cost is now $86 million. Baker’s insistence that Kriseman should have stuck to a budget developed 11 years ago ignores the changed expectations before Kriseman took office. Moreover, the city is not far enough along on the project to say that it is over budget. So far, there’s no indication that the city is spending more than what the council approved. Baker’s statement is inaccurate."
15881	"Cigarette butts ""poison babies and small children because of the nicotine in them."	R.I. Lung Association representative says cigarette butts poison babies and small children	true	Environment, Rhode Island, Children, Public Health, Karina Wood,	"A bill before the General Assembly would prohibit smoking on public beaches; the Senate Judiciary Committee took testimony on the proposal Feb. 12. There were only two speakers. One was Steven Brown, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union,’s Rhode Island chapter, who objected to the provision calling for violators being charged with a misdemeanor. The other was Karina Wood of the American Lung Association, who cited the health dangers of secondhand smoke. But she also talked about another aspect of the issue -- the environmental problems posed by beach butts (the cigarette kind, not the anatomical variety). ""Environmentally, cigarette butts are unsightly. They are the number one polluting litter on our beaches,"" she said. ""I've been involved in beach cleanups myself with my kids and you'll be amazed, or maybe you won't, at how many of those butts are littering our beaches. And they're dangerous to animals -- wildlife, birds."" ""And also they poison babies and small children because of the nicotine in them."" We've heard plenty of reports over the years that cigarette butts are the biggest source of beach pollution in Rhode Island. But we wondered whether they are really poisoning children, especially babies, whom we think of as not being able to get around on their own. It turns out that Wood was talking about the risks to children of eating discarded butts. When we contacted her to ask for some documentation, she sent us to a few pieces of research. We also sought our own information on the toxicity of nicotine. Common blends of tobacco contain roughly 15 to 25 milligrams per cigarette. The amount of nicotine in a cigarette butt could vary but just a milligram or two can be enough to produce poisoning symptoms in a child. Those symptoms include ""agitation, headache, sweating, dizziness, auditory and visual disturbances, confusion, weakness and lack of coordination,"" according to safety guide for various chemicals on the International Programme on Chemical Safety’s website. That database says the mean lethal dose for children who consume nicotine is about 10 milligrams, although we found another source that reported that the fatal dose was 40 mg to 60 mg for children. Nicotine, a neurotoxin, can kill by causing lung failure or by paralyzing the muscles that control breathing. How common is nicotine poisoning among babies or children? Wood pointed us to two studies. The first was published in the September 2009 edition of the journal Public Health by Jeffrey T. Quirk of the Erie County Department of Health in Pennsylvania. Using a national database covering about 100 U.S. hospitals, it estimated that there were 3,616 cases of cigarette poisonings and 756 cases of cigarette ingestion among children in the United States from 2002 to 2007. That's two a day, typically involving a child age 2 or younger.. Because Quirk only tallied injuries that received or required hospital treatment and didn't include children who might have been treated in homes or doctor's office, ""the actual number of children's cigarette-related injuries may be much greater,"" he concluded. Although they were mostly ""generally minor injuries, these events have the potential to induce serious complications,"" he said. The second study was done, coincidentally, in Rhode Island. For the 31-month period that began in January 1994, the state's Poison Control Center logged 146 cases in which children age 24 months or younger had ingested cigarettes or cigarette butts. Only one case occurred outside a residence -- in this instance it was a public park. In one third of the cases, the child vomited, often more than once. Two thirds of the children had no symptoms.There were no fatalities and the children generally recovered within 12 hours. Once again, that number probably underestimates the actual number of cases, the researchers said, because many parents might not have thought to call poison control. The youngest children in the study, age 6 to 12 months, accounted for 75 percent of the cases. Finally, we found a 2011 review article in Tobacco Control, a journal from the publishers of the British Medical Journal (now BMJ), which reports on 1,289 additional cases that appeared in the medical literature, 239 of which produced symptoms. ""We found that severe poisoning by cigarette butts among young children was rare but possible,"" the researcher said. ""It is clear that smokers must treat cigarette butts as toxic waste products and take more care in discarding them; children will mimic parental behaviour by putting these items into their mouths and sometime consume them in quantities sufficient to be toxic."" Finally, we asked Wood if she meant to include babies in her statement. After all, most babies -- before they become toddlers -- can only eat what people feed them. She pointed out that older babies find plenty of stuff on the floor when they're learning to crawl. ""By way of a personal anecdote, I observed my own daughter, when she was a baby of 11 or 12 months old and crawling, pick up a discarded cigarette butt on the beach and bring it to her mouth,"" Wood said. Dr. William Lewander, coauthor of the 1994 study and current director of pediatric emergency medicine at Hasbro Children's Hospital, said another child who picks up a butt might offer it to a baby and ""once they start crawling, if a cigarette butt is dropped on the floor it's possible"" for poisoning to occur. ""A toddler running around is probably most at risk,"" said Dr. Thomas Novotny, of San Diego State University, coauthor of the 2011 study. For younger children ""it's possible they would crawl around in the sand and put something in their mouth. If a 1 year old were to eat a few butts, they likely would have nicotine toxicity -- increased heart rate, irritability - and there have been some reports of seizures in the past."" In sum, the scientific literature shows that it's not a rare event for doctors and poison control centers to have to deal with young children -- who tend to put just about anything in their mouths -- who have consumed cigarettes or cigarette butts. It's seldom fatal, but it can qualify as a medical emergency, and it doesn't take much to give a child symptoms of poisoning. (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, email us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)"
41945	"It’s time that a president stepped up"" to address gun violence. ""And I’m talking Democrat and Republican presidents. They have not stepped up."	In a bipartisan meeting with members of Congress, President Donald Trump made false and misleading claims about his predecessors’ actions on gun control legislation and shootings in “gun-free zones.”	mixture	gun control, Guns,	In a bipartisan meeting with members of Congress, President Donald Trump made false and misleading claims about his predecessors’ actions on gun control legislation and shootings in “gun-free zones.”During the meeting, Democrats repeatedly told the president that as a Republican he is in an unique position to convince other Republicans to buck the National Rifle Association and pass a gun-control bill. Trump agreed, describing himself at the meeting as the “biggest fan of the Second Amendment.”Sen. Christopher Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, told Trump, “It’s going to have to be you that brings the Republicans to the table on this because right now the gun lobby would stop it in its tracks.”Trump: I like that responsibility, Chris. I really do. I think it’s time. It’s time that a president stepped up, and we haven’t had them — and I’m talking Democrat and Republican presidents. They have not stepped up.Past presidents have “stepped up,” but with mixed results.In 1993, President Clinton signed the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act — so named after former White House Press Secretary Jim Brady, who was severely wounded in an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan’s life in 1981. The law initially imposed a five-day waiting period before a licensed firearm dealer could sell or transfer a handgun, providing law enforcement with time to conduct background checks on prospective buyers. It also required the creation of an instant background check system, which was implemented five years after the Brady bill took effect.In 1994, Clinton signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which included a ban on certain semi-automatic weapons for 10 years. The ban expired in 2004, and Democrats — led by Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California — have attempted to revive it ever since. During the 2016 campaign, Trump opposed reinstating the ban, saying such weapons are needed for protection.President Obama had less success, although not for lack of trying. He proposed reinstating the ban as part of his 2013 plan to reduce gun violence. That plan also called for legislation requiring universal background checks for anyone trying to buy a gun and a 10-round limit for magazines. A divided Congress did not consider any of those proposals.Obama also proposed 23 “executive actions” that did not require legislative approval, such as a rule that required “federal agencies to make all relevant records, including criminal history records and information related to persons prohibited from having guns for mental health reasons, available to the federal background check system.” One of those agencies, the Social Security Administration, did enact a rule to expand its reporting requirements, but Trump signed legislation last year repealing it.Trump would have been right to say no meaningful legislation passed under Obama, but he ignores Clinton’s success in passing gun laws and minimizes Obama’s attempts when he says past presidents did not step up to address gun violence.Later in the meeting, Trump had this exchange with West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat who co-sponsored a bipartisan bill with Republican Sen. Pat Toomey to expand background checks for prospective gun buyers. Again, the exchange illustrates Democrats pressing Trump, as a Republican, to take a lead in pushing legislation through a GOP-controlled Congress, and Trump again being dismissive of his predecessor.Manchin: Mr. President, the difference is this: There’s not a person in West Virginia that believes that you’re not going to defend their Second Amendment rights — not a person. With you taking a lead on something like this, it gives them the comfort that something reasonable — and this bill’s been vetted for over five years, and over 70, 80 percent, even, of gun owners say, “We like your bill, Pat and Joe. We’re just afraid that President Obama would take it further, and take more rights away.” That’s what I was running into in West Virginia.Trump: Or use that as an excuse not to sign it.Manchin: Well, this is not …Trump: Because he was not proactive in getting a bill signed, in all fairness.Trump misrepresents Obama’s actions leading up to the April 17, 2013, vote on a bipartisan compromise offered by Toomey and Manchin as an amendment to the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013. Obama supported the bipartisan measure.He put out a statement on April 10, a week before the vote, that said he wished it were “stronger,” but nevertheless it represented “welcome and significant bipartisan progress.” He urged Congress to “finish the job,” and asked the Senate to “overcome obstruction by defeating a threatened filibuster, and allow a vote on this and other commonsense reforms to protect our kids and our communities.”A day later, he put out an official statement of support for the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act, and that weekend he turned over his weekly address to the mother of a child who was killed in a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The weekly address was part of a public lobbying campaign to pressure Congress to pass the bill.“Now that the Senate has agreed that commonsense gun safety reforms deserve a vote, they must finish the job and pass those reforms to protect our children and our communities,” the Obama White House said on a web page hosting the weekly address. “Now is the time for all Americans to help make this a moment of real change.”The bill received 50 votes from the Democratic caucus, but only four Republican votes — falling six votes shy of the 60 votes needed to end the filibuster.After the vote, Obama criticized the Senate for blocking “common-sense gun reforms,” calling the bill’s defeat “a pretty shameful day for Washington.”Contrary to Trump’s claim, Obama was proactive in trying to get the Manchin-Toomey legislation approved. And, contrary to Trump’s speculation, there was no indication that Obama would use his desire for more sweeping gun control measures as “an excuse not to sign” the Manchin-Toomey measure.The president used a disputed statistic on mass shootings in “gun-free zones” and repeated a false claim he had made during the 2016 campaign about the shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando.Trump: But 98 percent of all mass shootings in the United States, since 1950, have taken place in gun-free zones, where guns were not inside the school or, as an example, you take the Pulse nightclub. If you had one person in that room that could carry a gun and knew how to use it, it wouldn’t have happened, or certainly not to the extent it did, where he was just in there shooting and shooting and shooting, and they were defenseless.Trump is wrong about the June 12, 2016, Pulse nightclub shooting in which 49 people were killed. There was indeed “one person” there who had a gun, “knew how to use it” and in fact did use it against the shooter.An Orlando police officer, Adam Gruler, was working security for the club that night, and he traded gunshots with the gunman, Omar Mateen, near the club’s entrance. Gruler had been a member of the Orlando Police Department since 2001.Here’s the OPD statement on the exchange of gunfire:OPD statement, June 12: On June 12, 2016, just after 2 a.m., an Orlando Police Officer working extra duty at the Pulse Nightclub, located at 1912 S. Orange Ave., responded to shots fired. Our officer engaged in a gun battle with that suspect and the suspect went deeper into the club where more shots were fired. The incident then turned into a hostage situation.Also, two of the responding officers were nearby and arrived not long after, firing at Mateen before he retreated to a club bathroom with hostages, several news reports said.Days after the shooting, Trump twice made the false claim that there were “no guns on the other side.” As for Trump’s claim that “98 percent of all mass shootings in the United States, since 1950, have taken place in gun-free zones,” that figure has been disputed. It comes from an updated 2014 report from the Crime Prevention Research Center, founded by economist John Lott, whose work is often cited by gun rights advocates.Calculating such a statistic depends on one’s definition of “mass shooting” and “gun-free zone.”Lott’s research cites “six mass public shootings since at least 1950 that have not been part of some other crime where at least four people have been killed in an area where general civilians are allowed to have guns.”But in the book “Rampage Nation,” Louis Klarevas, who teaches at the University of Massachusetts-Boston, identified 111 shootings since 1966 (where six or more people, not including the perpetrator, had been killed per incident, whether in a public or private place) and found 13 in a gun-free zone and five in a “gun-restricting zone” (where civilians can’t have guns but there is regular armed security). That would be just 16 percent of mass shootings in a gun-free or gun-restricted zone.To highlight one of the discrepancies: Lott says the 2015 shooting at an Oregon community college was in a gun-free zone, but as we found when researching the issue, that’s not exactly the case. While Umpqua Community College does have policies prohibiting firearms on campus, a college official told us those prohibitions “would not apply to those with valid concealed weapon permits pursuant to Oregon law.”Klarevas counts that incident as occurring in a gun-allowing zone.Trump joked (maybe?) that Republican Sen. Toomey didn’t include a provision to increase the minimum age to purchase some guns to 21 in his 2013 amendment because he was “afraid of the NRA.” Toomey later called that suggestion “ridiculous.” And, in fact, Toomey didn’t get any contributions from the NRA in his 2016 Senate race.As we explained, Toomey and Democratic Sen. Manchin were the co-authors of the 2013 Manchin-Toomey amendment, which would have expanded background checks to private sales by unlicensed individuals at gun shows and over the internet.In the bipartisan meeting this week, Trump asked legislators to use that Manchin-Toomey amendment as a starting point and to consider adding a provision that would raise the minimum age required to purchase some guns, like the one used in the Parkland, Florida, shooting, from 18 to 21. Trump asked Toomey if such a provision was considered for inclusion in the 2013 amendment.“We didn’t address it, Mr. President,” Toomey said.“You know why?” Trump said. “Because you’re afraid of the NRA, right?”The president was smiling, but it was a pointed comment.Manchin responded that raising the age to 21 wasn’t an issue back then, and such a provision never came up for a vote.On “Fox & Friends” the following morning, Toomey was asked about Trump’s jab. He called it “ridiculous.”The NRA strongly opposed the Manchin-Toomey amendment. NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told us then that the vote on the Manchin-Toomey amendment “was considered a gun control vote” and that it would have “diminished 2nd Amendment rights.”Only four Republicans, including Toomey, voted for the amendment, which failed to move forward after a 54-46 vote.As a result of the legislation, Toomey’s rating with the NRA dropped from an “A” to a “C,” and the endorsements and contributions Toomey got from the NRA in previous House and Senate races disappeared. In 2016, the NRA stayed out of Toomey’s Senate race altogether; his Democratic opponent, Katie McGinty, had an “F” grade from the NRA. In that race, Toomey got the endorsement of a gun-control group, Everytown for Gun Safety, which ran ads supporting him.Later in the meeting, Trump boasted that while the NRA has “great power over you people [congressmen], they have less power over me. I don’t need it.”Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy: I think you underestimate the power of the gun lobby.Trump: No, I tell you what — the reason I had lunch with the NRA on Sunday — I called them; I said, you got to come over. I said, fellas, we got to do something. And they do have great power, I agree with that. They have great power over you people. They have less power over me. I don’t need it. What do I need?Trump may not need the NRA, but he got an awful lot of financial support from it in the presidential election. The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics wrote that while it is “not at all clear how much of a factor [Trump’s] embrace of the NRA’s hardline position on gun rights played into the outcome” of the election, the NRA’s $30.3 million investment in support of Trump and in opposition to Hillary Clinton was unmatched by any other outside group. Mike Spies and Ashley Balcerzak, Center for Responsive Politics, Nov. 9, 2016: In October alone, according to the Center for Public Integrity, roughly one out of every 20 television ads in Pennsylvania was sponsored by the NRA. That same month, the group paid for one in nine ads in North Carolina, and one of every eight in Ohio. … Trump won all three states.
10917	Yes Please to Yogurt and Cheese: The New Improved Mediterranean Diet	This news release summarizes findings from a recently published study on the effects of a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet on heart disease risk factors in 41 high risk patients. The news release neglects to provide readers with important study details like the types of dairy products consumed, while misreporting others, like how much dairy was consumed on average each day. It also neglected to note that the study was partially funded by an industry trade group (Dairy Australia) or to provide any context on the effects of the dairy-supplemented diet on heart disease risk factors leaving readers in the dark about the diet’s ultimate effectiveness. According to the World Health Organization, heart disease is the leading cause of death globally. Several lifestyle factors contribute to heart disease risk with one being diet. Making healthy dietary choices can significantly lower heart disease risk but individuals need accurate and comprehensive information in order to make these choices. If a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet was proved effective at reducing heart disease risk that would be useful for the public to know. Unfortunately, readers won’t find the details of the study in this news release.	false	dairy,Mediterranean diet,University of South Australia	The news release doesn’t discuss the costs of adhering to a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet. However, many people know the costs for typical Mediterranean diet food items like nuts, fruits, and fish and dairy products like milk and cheese. A statistically significant reduction in blood pressure doesn’t always translate to a clinically significant reduction. This release doesn’t make that distinction for readers. It mentions that a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet significantly improved blood pressure, heart rate, cholesterol, mood and cognitive function, but it doesn’t describe how much each outcome improved. The release doesn’t address harms from a dairy enriched diet. Since the release is encouraging greater dairy consumption, including up to 4 servings of cheese a day, it would be important to mention that there are potential harms from consuming more saturated fats found in many dairy products. The research involved a randomized crossover design but there’s no mention of this in the news release. There’s also no discussion of the small sample of 41 volunteers which limits the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, readers don’t learn what types of dairy products were consumed, such as Greek yogurt and full and reduced fat cheese slices. The release also misreports the number of dairy servings consumed per day. It was not 2-3 servings per day as listed but 3-4 servings per day with participants averaging 3 servings per day, according to the study. Finally, the study was just 8 weeks long. Findings from such a short study may be considered surrogate endpoints, not clinical ones. To claim a clinical benefit would require a much longer study. There is no evidence of disease mongering in this release. The release provides useful context on the prevalence of cardiovascular disease in Australia and globally. The news release didn’t include funding information. It should have noted that the research received funding from Dairy Australia, an industry trade group, as well as government and foundation grants. There’s no discussion about how the effectiveness of a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet might compare to a traditional Mediterranean diet as it relates to heart disease risk. The release claims a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet “is more effective” than a low-fat diet but offers no data to back up the claim. Although the news release doesn’t discuss availability, it’s generally understood that items for a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet can likely be found in many grocery stores. The news release doesn’t explain how the diet is novel or discuss whether other research has examined how a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet impacts heart disease risk. The news release begins by stating that a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet “will significantly increase health outcomes for those at risk of cardiovascular disease – and it’s even more effective than a low-fat diet.” However, a definitive statement like this should not be made based on a single randomized trial with a small sample. (And without an explanation of what “significantly” actually amounts to.) More appropriate language would be that a dairy-supplemented Mediterranean diet may improve the risk of heart disease.
10039	Study: New way to spot breast cancer shows promise	Bayer AG on Monday said it has asked a U.S. federal appeals court to throw out a $25 million judgment it was ordered to pay to a California man who blamed the company’s Roundup weed killer for his cancer.	true		In a filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit dated Friday, Bayer said the verdict defied regulatory findings and sound science, adding that the “speculative case” should never have made it before a jury. Bayer in a statement said it stood behind the safety of Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate and planned to vigorously defend the more than 42,700 U.S. Roundup cancer lawsuits it faces. In its court filing, Bayer said the Hardeman appeal had the potential to shape how every subsequent Roundup case is litigated. The widely-used weed killer is made by Monsanto, which Bayer acquired last year for $63 billion. Bayer stock has lost about 23% in value since the first Roundup verdict for plaintiffs in August 2018. The case on appeal before the 9th Circuit involved the claims of Edwin Hardeman, which was the third Roundup case to go to trial in a U.S. court. A jury in March ordered Monsanto to pay $80 million in damages, saying Roundup had caused the man’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The trial court judge in July reduced that verdict to $25 million. Lawyers for Hardeman on Monday did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Bayer’s appeal. The lawyers during the trial argued Monsanto had failed to warn consumers of Roundup’s cancer risk and said the company concealed damaging evidence from public and regulatory view. Bayer rejects those allegations. The German company’s main appeal argument in Hardeman’s case centers on repeated findings by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that glyphosate is not a carcinogen and not a risk to public health when used in accordance with its current label. Bayer argued it would be impossible to comply with the Hardeman verdict, a lawsuit brought under state law, because any warning label would be in conflict with guidance from a federal agency. Some legal experts consider this preemption defense a “silver bullet” because it would stop claims across the board, but said the argument faced big hurdles on appeal. The company also said the trial judge had committed “a host of errors” by allowing jurors to hear unreliable expert testimony.
7862	Attackers torch Ebola treatment center in Congo, patients evacuated.	Attackers set fire to an Ebola treatment center run by Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo late on Sunday, forcing staff to evacuate patients, the charity said.	true	Health News	There were no immediate details on the identity or motive of the people who torched the center in the district of Katwa, at the heart of the country’s worst outbreak of the deadly disease. But the World Health Organization has said aid workers face mistrust in some areas, fueled by false rumors about treatments and preference for traditional medicine. “As a result of the burning of the building, it is no longer possible to care for patients there,” MSF said on Twitter on Monday. None of the patients or staff were harmed, it added. The outbreak has killed 546 people since July, according to the Congolese health ministry. Most of the cases since the start of the year have been in Katwa, which is close to the border with Uganda. Three volunteers for the Congolese Red Cross were attacked as they helped with the burial of an Ebola victim in eastern Congo in October. Two months later, political protesters ransacked a nearby Ebola isolation center.
1867	Health care among top jobs for young people.	Young people looking for a job with good pay, flexible hours and job security should consider working in health care, according to a list of the top 15 best jobs in the U.S. for young people.	true	Health News	Health care is the fastest growing sector of the U.S. economy and nearly half of what are considered the top jobs for young people are in the sector, Forbes.com said. With a medium annual salary of $33,470, dental assistants topped the ranking, while medical assistants, who earn about $28,860, came in No. 3, followed by physical therapist assistants who make a medium salary of nearly $50,000 and health aides who earn $20,560. Teachers of self-enrichment courses such as pottery and art, were the only non-health job in the top five. “Almost every one of these requires physical contact,” Laurence Shatkin, the author of the book “150 Best Jobs for Your Skills,” told Forbes. com. “You have to show up to do them, so you’re not being shipped overseas, and they can’t be done by a robot.” Shatkin studied which jobs have the highest concentration of 16 to 24 year olds, pay well and have opportunities for entry level positions. He based the ranking on annual salary and openings and projected growth. Many of the jobs do not require a college degree. Fitness trainers and aerobics instructors, pharmacy technicians and surgical technologists were also among the top 10 jobs for young people. The top jobs had percentage growth ranging from 17.7 percent for customer service representative, which came in ninth to 35.7 percent for dental assistants. Because many of the jobs can be done on a part-time basis, they offer the flexibility for people to continue their education while doing them. Some of the jobs offer career prospects and advancements. “Young people may not have figured out what their priorities are yet,” Shatkin told Forbes.com. “They may use these jobs to discover what they like and where they fit in.” The full list can be found here
9063	Simple Electrocardiogram Can Determine Whether a Patient Has Major Depression or Bipolar Disorder, Study Finds	A news release by Loyola Medicine covers what it called a “groundbreaking” study that measured heart rate variability to help differentiate between major depression and bipolar disorder. It adds this would be a “major breakthrough in psychiatric and primary care practices” — made possible by a “simple 15-minute electrocardiogram.” We caution against the use of such language in a news release because medical research rarely uncovers earth-shattering, dramatic findings. This study is no different and is actually not the first of its kind. The news release also uses ambiguous terminology when revealing the study’s findings, such as the word “significant.” Many details on the study design, including limitations and funding sources, are left out. There is no discussion of costs, and no data are given to back up the news release’s claims. It also would have been helpful to note how major depression and bipolar disorder are traditionally diagnosed. The news release does a good job summarizing the profiles of both conditions, including the consequences of misdiagnosing bipolar disorder as major depression. Clinicians diagnose major depression and bipolar disorder based on subjective psychiatric evaluations, such as through interviews and questionnaires. Lab tests and physical exams are usually performed to rule out other physiological conditions. Currently, no reliable, objective, psycho-physiological markers are available to aid medical diagnosis. If there were a quick, noninvasive and cost-effective test to objectively differentiate the two, that certainly would be newsworthy to clinicians and the general public.	false	bipolar disorder,Electrocardiogram,Loyola Medicine,major depression	According to CostHelper.com, patients with health insurance typically pay between $30-$100 in copays for both the electrocardiogram (ECG) and its analysis. Uninsured patients can expect to pay $500-$3,000 in total. Since costs are not discussed in this news release, we give it a Not Satisfactory rating here. No numbers are given to support the claims of the news release. Instead, readers are only told that subjects with major depression had “significantly higher RSA” (respiratory sinus arrhythmia) than those with bipolar disorder. Exactly what does this mean? How distinctive was the pattern seen in participants with depression as compared to those with bipolar disorder? In addition, the news release states that patients with bipolar disorder had “higher blood levels of inflammation biomarkers than patients with major depression.” Was this second factor required to define the differences between participants? We caution against the use of the word “significant” in this context, since it likely means “statistically significant” — which means the result is probably true or not due to chance. However, this doesn’t mean that the result provides meaningful information to clinicians and patients. No further information is given on the findings of the study. We would have liked to have seen some numbers here to put “significantly higher” and “higher” into context. An ECG is a safe procedure and records the activity of the heart. Minor discomfort may be felt when the electrodes are removed — similar to when a bandage is taken off. In rare instances, a reaction to the electrode adhesive may cause redness or swelling where the patches were placed. There is no risk of an electrical shock during the test, since the electrodes placed on the heart do not emit electricity. But all tests carry the risk of false positive results and those risks are magnified in people with a low risk of disease. Take for example, evidence of ischemia — a situation when blood flow (and thus oxygen) is restricted or reduced in a part of the body. A false positive finding of ischemia on an ECG can lead to more invasive testing in an otherwise healthy adult without evidence of heart disease. Since harms, including the risk of false positives or over-diagnosis, are not addressed in the news release. We’re not given much information on the study design, including limitations of the evidence. Only vague information is given on the “special software packages” that were used to convert and correct the data. The news release states that heart rate variability measured by an ECG indicated whether subjects had major depression or bipolar disorder. But the actual journal article found that researchers considered heart rate variability together with higher levels of inflammatory markers to distinguish between bipolar disorder from major depressive disorder. The news release also does not mention the lack of a control group in this study. That’s troubling. Instead, participants with major depression are directly compared to those with bipolar disorder. When there’s no control group, it’s helpful to know what the baseline findings are in healthy unaffected controls so that we understand how all the results stack up against each other. We would have liked more details on the study. There is no disease mongering in this news release. The news release does not disclose the study’s funding sources or any possible conflicts of interest. The specialized software used in the study was developed by one of the authors. The University should disclose whether or not it holds patent rights on the software. The news release is silent on alternative strategies. Both depression and bipolar disorder are currently diagnosed on the basis of a thorough psychiatric and medical examination. Clinicians then examine findings and criteria for the disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders by the American Psychiatric Association. These methods were likely used to distinguish between the two cohorts of participants in the study. Other methods under study include the identification of unique metabolic compounds in urine as a method of distinguishing between the two disorders. Since the news release does not describe the traditional methods of diagnosing bipolar disorder and depression. Although electrocardiograms have been widely used in clinical practice since their introduction in the early 1900s, the specialized software developed by one of the authors is likely not widely available. Although implied in the release, we would have liked to have seen an explicit statement about general availability. From the news release, it’s hard to determine what exactly is new in this study. A Google search yields a similar study published in the IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics. In this 2016 study, researchers analyzed ECGs and investigated heart rate variability of 14 bipolar spectrum patients to predict future mood states. On average, the accuracy of such predictions was 69 percent. Another 2002 study published in the Journal of Affective Disorders looked at levels of respiratory sinus arrhythmia to predict the course of major depressive disorder. If the news release uses terms like “groundbreaking” and “major breakthrough” (see the unjustifiable language section), we especially need more context on exactly how this research differs from other studies and what it brings to the current body of literature. The news release uses terms like “simple electrocardiogram,” “groundbreaking” and “major breakthrough.” We advise against the use of such words, since they are misleading. In medical research, rarely do we see “breakthroughs” from “simple” procedures. More often than not, there are caveats attached to such studies. For these reasons.
20230	Under a new law, doctors performing drug-induced abortions could be charged if women don’t return to them for follow-up care	Wisconsin Medical Society president says doctors could be charged if women don’t return for follow-up care after drug-induced abortions	false	Abortion, Legal Issues, Women, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Medical Society,	"The debate over a Republican-sponsored measure that requires new medical protocols in abortions has spawned confusion -- and its own debate -- over liability for doctors. The law, signed by Gov. Scott Walker in April, added penalties if physicians perform medication-induced abortions without an in-person exam before the procedure -- a move aimed at blocking the potential use of so-called ""webcam abortions"" in Wisconsin. Medication-induced abortions are limited to the first nine weeks of pregnancy. The law also required that doctors tell patients they ""must return"" for a post-abortion follow-up appointment at the same facility within 12 to 18 days instead of, for example, seeing their primary care doctor where they live. Critics, such as Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, say this places an undue burden on women, especially in rural areas. Indeed, in the wake of the law, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin said April 20, 2012 it would stop providing medication-induced abortions, citing legal uncertainty for doctors. The bill’s passage also drew a strong reaction from the Wisconsin Medical Society, which said the law intruded on the patient-doctor relationship. In an April 19 interview with the Wisconsin State Journal, the society’s new physician-president, Tosha Wetterneck of Madison, spoke about the mandate that women return to the same facility for follow-up care. The story paraphrased Wetterneck’s remark this way: ""If she refuses, or prefers to see her personal physician, the patient would face no penalty but the doctor could be charged, Wetterneck said."" The remark prompting a reproductive rights group, RH Reality Check, to say that doctors could face a Class I felony and up to 42 months in jail if the patient does not return for the recommended visit. Its Web posting cited Wetterneck’s comment. Meanwhile, state Sen. Mary Lazich, R-New Berlin, author of the original bill, denounced critics’ descriptions of it as ""grossly misstated,"" and the claim about criminal charges when patients no-show as ""patently ."" So, who’s right? Can doctors be charged if a patient fails to do something? While debate rages on about the broad impact of the law -- critics say it limits access to the procedure, proponents say it protects women from substandard care -- we found wide agreement on this narrow question. The consensus: Doctors could face a fine of up to $10,000 if they don’t advise women to return in 12 to 18 days -- but not criminal liability. And the forfeiture only applies if the doctor fails to inform -- it’s not dependent on what a patient does later. We heard that from Lazich and Wisconsin Right to Life, but also the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Council, a state government agency that analyzed the bill -- and even the Medical Society itself. They all said that even though the bill says patients have to be told they ""must return,"" there is no accountability built into the law for either the woman or the physician if the woman does not come back. So why was Wetterneck of the Medical Society quoted as saying doctors could be charged? Medical Society lobbyist Mark Grapentine told us Wetterneck is not a lawyer and likely thought ""charged"" was an appropriate description even for forfeitures. He said she and the Medical Society understood the lack of criminal penalties for the no-return scenario, while strongly objecting to felony liability for other aspects of drug abortion protocols. We think the term ""charged"" would be heard by most listeners as a reference to criminal liability -- as evidenced by the reaction from RH Reality Check. Perhaps confusion on the issue was inevitable. The law does create a criminal felony penalty for failing to follow certain procedures related to a medication-induced abortion. Just not the protocol on the post-abortion follow-up. Specifically, Act 217 requires that the same doctor who prescribes the drugs do the pre-procedure exam and be physically present when the drug is given. Bill authors say those rules were aimed to block use of Web cameras to consult with women about the drugs, as is done in some states to make abortions more possible in rural areas. By law, at least 24 hours must pass between the patient’s voluntary consent and an abortion. The potential criminal penalty on that point, for the person who provides the drugs, is up to 42 months imprisonment and a $10,000 fine. Our conclusion The president of the Medical Society said a new abortion law means doctors could be charged if patients don’t return for a follow-up appointment after a drug-induced abortion. On that specific portion of the law, no criminal liability was inserted, and doctors’ duty is limited to orally informing the patient she must return. There is a new criminal penalty for failing to personally supervise such abortions, but Wetterneck clearly was referring to the follow-up care section of the bill. (You can comment on this item on the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's web site)"
36157	An image shows a man's mostly-consumed Red Bull energy drink, after he found a dead mouse in the container.	Did a Man Find a Dead Mouse in a Nearly Empty Red Bull Can?	unproven	Fact Checks, Viral Content	On September 5 2019, Facebook user Seth Bowman shared the following post (archived here), alongside a claim his Red Bull energy drink was contaminated by a dead mouse. According to Bowman’s claim, he had nearly finished drinking the can of Red Bull when “chunks” alerted him to the presence of the former rodent:So I drank a whole Red Bull the other night at work and found this at the bottom. I’ve tried contacting Red Bull and haven’t heard a word back. So do me a favor and let’s make this viral.Bowman requested that predictably disgusted Facebook users do him “a favor” and “make this viral”; they did, sharing the post over 150,000 times. We did not see users sharing the post to Red Bull’s social media accounts, nor did we find any public acknowledgement of Bowman’s claim. A friend of the poster shared the claim to Reddit’s r/WTF, where readers were skeptical.Bowman was certainly not the first person to claim they found a dead rodent in a soft drink or energy drink. In a 1988 newspaper column, folklorist Jan Harold Brunvand examined claims that at the time spread without Facebook or email, indicating they appeared to be as old as bottled soft drinks themselves, and instances of ostension — when people took the claim to real life.Brunvand explained how the stories existed on two levels — one being the claims as they appeared as early as 1914, and another being representative of our fears involving handing off the responsibility for food safety from our homes to faceless corporations:A search of published appeals-court records conducted in 1976 turned up 45 such cases against soda bottlers, the first in 1914. And one can only guess how many similar cases were never appealed or were settled out of court.Most of the people who tell the mouse-in-Coke legend don’t know the legal history, though. What they do know is a good story, whether it’s told by a friend, a neighbor or co-worker. The tellers assume that somewhere, sometime, an actual lawsuit was brought against a soft-drink bottling company.So while the lawsuits are real, the stories are not, because they are so far separated from the original facts that they’ve turned into folklore. In this way, a story can be both an actual event and a legend. And the mouse-in-Coke legends, like most urban legends, have lives of their own completely separate from the facts.What has occurred, I believe, is something like this: The theme of foreign matter contaminating food is a popular one in urban legends. And “Coke” has become virtually a generic way to refer to soft drinks. So the legends get started and gain credibility from lawsuits that people vaguely remember, in which mice were said to be found in soda bottles. And naturally, it is usually Coke that is mentioned in the legend whether or not the original suits were against Coke.As the legend spreads by word of mouth, the trauma is exaggerated, the drama heightened. And the size of the settlement, of course, grows and grows. The end result: The indignation against the giant corporation that is selling contaminated food is pumped up to a full measure of outrage.In 2016, The Verge published a “brief history” of viral claims about dead mice or rats in sodas and energy drinks. Following yet another claim involving a deceased rodent and Dr. Pepper, the news organization examined several such claims, many of which appeared in 2012.The article referenced a notable 2012 lawsuit against PepsiCo, brought by a man who alleged he found a dead mouse in a can of Mountain Dew:Ronald Ball, 52, from Madison County, Ill., claims he tasted something foul in the can of drink he purchased from a vending machine at his work.According to his lawsuit, Ball claims he spat out the soda, the Madison County Record reported. He said he “took a drink, and immediately became violently ill such that he began to vomit … The contents of said can of Mountain Dew were immediately poured into a Styrofoam cup wherein a dead mouse was found,” the lawsuit alleges.Ball sent the mouse to PepsiCo — along with a letter of complaint — but the oil company worker says the soda giant destroyed the body of the mouse, and therefore, his evidence.The incident happened in November 2009 and Ball [was] seeking $50,000 damages.Ball’s suit led to a rather nauseating spate of articles about whether the composition of Mountain Dew would degrade or preserve the corpse of a small animal, with lawyers arguing that the beverage would rapidly dissolve a mouse’s remains:Key to Pepsi’s legal argument is that there’s no chance a mouse’s corpse could survive, intact, for 15 months swimming in Mountain Dew. While published studies have not been conducted on how rapidly Mountain Dew would dissolve a mouse, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the neon green soda can eat away teeth and bones in a matter of months, and would likely do quite a number on a rodent.“I think it is plausible that it could dissolve a mouse in a few months,” said Yan-Fang Ren of the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, who has studied the effects of citric acid on bones and teeth. “But dissolving [the mouse] does not mean it will disappear, because you’ll still have the collagen and the soft tissue part. It will be like rubber.”A similar claim was reported in 2011, involving the Monster brand of energy drinks. Another brand of energy drink was at the center of similar claims in 2016, when a consumer was purportedly sickened by a dead mouse in a beverage can:[Jordan] Bell started dry heaving and went straight to a doctor, who advised he go to the hospital. At the Mission Hospital they contacted BC Poison Control and told Bell that in about 24 hours he would probably experience nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea.And in March 2018, an Arkansas Red Bull drinker reported finding a rodent at the bottom of his can. His claim went viral on Facebook, but many users were skeptical of its legitimacy:While [claimant Josh] Henley said it was not possible the rodent got inside the can when he left it in the car overnight, many people on social media said it was the highest possibility.The video, which was shared [in March 2018], went viral and was viewed more than 100,000 times and counting. It was first shared by Henley on Facebook.Some social media users also raised doubts about the legitimacy of the video.Joshua Nightingale commented: “You drank it last night, most likely that mouse got in after you drank it and went to sleep. Wouldn’t you have noticed it last night after or while you were drinking it?” Another comment said: “It obviously went in after you drank it.”In a statement to Mirror Online, a spokesman for Red Bull said: “It is inconceivable that a particle — let alone anything like this — could pass through the process of world-class, modern beverage manufacture.”In April 2017, beverage corporation lawyers once again argued the claims were impossible, and that the specimen was not sufficiently decomposed:[The claimant was] suing Coca-Cola for a modest amount, having medical bills related to his illness that total around $1,000, and he missed 60 hours of work. He also says that he lost thirty pounds due to his illness.Coca-Cola, however, disputes that it’s possible to find such an intact mouse in one of its beverage cans. In the time that it would take for a mouse to be sealed inside a can at a bottling plant, then for the can to be distributed to a retail store and purchased, the mouse would have decomposed enough to have “compromised the can,” or given off gases that would make the can bulge or burst.An attorney from Minnesota who is on the team representing Coke explained to the Mitchell Republic that the company “takes these cases extremely seriously and tries them all,” since allegations of mouse contamination are damaging to its brand. Settling for a modest amount would be cheaper and easier, but the company would rather defend itself at trial … The plaintiff is seeking $2,026 and general damages, plus interest.That coverage raised two interesting aspects about dead-mouse-in-soda-can claims: that beverage companies maintain that they always take such suits to trial, and tacitly that claims of this sort seem to be somewhat common. It also appears that beverage manufacturers often feel confident rodent-in-soda claims are unlikely to hold up in court. The outlet quoted above also linked to a similar legal claim, with findings that the creature was a “toad” and that no mechanism for its presence was ever determined.In 2012, however, Ball’s claim was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum, and it was conditional in part on PepsiCo disclaiming responsibility. The 2009 case involving what appeared to be a toad yielded little useful information with respect to such contamination and how it might occur. At the time, a PepsiCo spokesman declined via email to speculate on how the toad got there:The FDA also conducted an investigation at the local Pepsi bottling plant in Orlando from August 4 to 11 [2009] and “did not find any adverse conditions or association to this problem,” spokeswoman Siobhan DeLancey said.“We have not determined when or how the contamination occurred,” DeLancey said in an e-mail.Pepsi says the FDA results “affirmed” the company’s confidence “in the quality of our products and the integrity of our manufacturing system,” according to spokesman Jeff Dahncke.“The speed of our production lines and the rigor of our quality control systems make it virtually impossible for this type of thing to happen in a production environment. In fact, there never has been even a single instance when a claim of this nature has been traced back to a manufacturing issue … The FDA conducted a thorough inspection of our Orlando facility and found no cause for concern. In this case, the FDA simply was unable to determine when or how the specimen entered the package.”When asked if Pepsi believed it was not responsible for the animal getting into the can, Dahncke said, “We have addressed the facts of the investigation and stated our position. It’s not appropriate for us to comment beyond that.”A September 2019 Facebook post claiming a user found a dead mouse in his can of Red Bull was virally popular, but neither unique in structure nor even as it pertained to Red Bull. Stories about dead rodents in bottled or canned soft drinks date back more than a century, and occasionally cross from the realm of folklore into the news by way of claims like the one to hand. A great many stories about a dead mouse in soda are just stories, but a few escalated to lawsuit levels.We contacted Red Bull to determine if Bowman formally submitted his claim, but have not yet received a response.
29240	A npedophile was found dead in his prison cell after his testicles were removed and his injuries went untreated.	Neon Nettle is a fake news site with a particular focus on reporting made-up and exaggerated clickbait stories about pedophiles. This report about Daniel Davey is a near-duplicate of a previous article from the same site that similarly overlaid genuine news of a prison death with fabricated details attributing the death to a grisly jailhouse killing.	false	Junk News, neon nettle	In December 2017, a 21-year-old British man named Daniel Davey received a six-and-a-half year sentence for having sexually abused a five-year-old boy: A 21-year-old man, who used to live in Bradford on Avon, has been sentenced to six and a half years in jail after admitting to sexually assaulting a young boy. Daniel Davey was found guilty of two counts of sexually abusing the boy, who was aged five and six at the time, six times over an 18-month period between 2015 and 2016. Davey, who was sentenced at Swindon Crown Court, will also have to serve a lifetime Sexual Harm Prevention Order and sign the sex offenders register. A restraining order has also been put in place to protect the child. Just a little over a month into his sentence, however, Davey died while in custody at HMP (Her Majesty’s Prison) Bullingdon, in Oxfordshire, Three months later, the Neon Nettle web site published an article reporting that the cause of Davey’s death was that his testicles had been cut off (presumably by other prisoners), and he subsequently bled to death: A notorious pedophile has been found dead in his prison cell after his testicles were “removed” and his injuries went untreated. Davey’s body was discovered by guards during morning wake up when he failed to respond.According to one prison guard, Davey appeared to have received “a beating,” and there was “blood everywhere.” The guard also noted that Davey’s “testicles were gone” and he appeared to have bled to death.Although not a life-threatening injury in itself, if left untreated, a person would likely bleed out over several hours and may suffer from shock due to the extreme pain. It is still unclear how his injuries went unnoticed by staff members until the morning, or why Davey himself didn’t raise the alarm or seek help. These gruesome details about the purported manner of Davey’s death were fabricated by Neon Nettle and reported nowhere else. In fact, UK government officials announced only that an inquest into Davey’s death would be held at a later date: A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said his death in custody would be investigated by the Prison Service Ombudsman. An inquest into his death [was] opened in Oxford and was adjourned to a date to be fixed. Because Davey died in custody, when the inquest resumes, it will by law have to be held by the coroner sitting with a jury. It will be the jury that decides the verdict.
2178	Cholera cases reported as hunger, disease stalk African cyclone survivors.	Cholera cases were reported on Friday in the Mozambican city of Beira, adding a risk of deadly illnesses for hundreds of thousands of people who are scrambling for shelter, food and water after catastrophic flooding in southern Africa.	true	Environment	“There is growing concern among aid groups on the ground of potential disease outbreaks,” the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) said. “Already, some cholera cases have been reported in Beira along with an increasing number of malaria infections among people trapped by the flooding,” it said in a statement. Cyclone Idai battered Beira, a port city of 500,000 people, with strong winds and torrential rains last week, before moving inland to neighboring Zimbabwe, where it flattened homes and flooded communities, and Malawi. The storm killed 242 people in Mozambique and 259 in Zimbabwe, and numbers were expected to rise, relief agencies said. In Malawi, 56 people died in heavy rains before the onset of Idai. Cholera is spread by faeces in sewage-contaminated water or food, and outbreaks can develop quickly in a humanitarian crisis where sanitation systems are disrupted. It can kill within hours if left untreated. As survivors gathered in informal camps and health officials warned of the danger of cholera and other diseases, UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta Fore said the situation on the ground was critical with no electricity or running water. “Hundreds of thousands of children need immediate help,” she said, estimating 1.7 million people were affected by the storm. Around 45 km (28 miles) west of Beira, in the village of Guara Guara, the government set up a makeshift camp for people rescued nearby, with little water and no toilets. As for many such camps, progress was slow as aid had to be delivered by helicopter. “The help is coming, but it’s coming very slowly,” said Esther Zinge, 60, from near the town of Buzi, adding that what did arrive had to be given to children first. “The conditions are terrible, and more people keep coming.” On a beach in Beira, where the Red Cross estimated 90 percent of the city was damaged or destroyed, survivors clutching infants and bags disembarked from rescue boats beside a ship marooned on the sand and began receiving Red Cross help. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was saddened by the “heart-wrenching images of human suffering” and urged the world to step up support for the relief effort. In Zimbabwe’s Coppa Rusitu Valley, a township in Chimanimani near the Mozambican border, hundreds of homes were flattened by large rocks and mudslide from a nearby mountain, burying some residents, who never stood a chance as the cyclone unleashed its fury at night when most were sleeping. Relatives and rescuers were digging through the debris, hoping to find bodies, but some of the rocks were so big they need blasting, a Reuters witness said. Most people lost relatives, workmates or friends in the township, which also housed government workers, including police. President Emmerson Mnangagwa said on Thursday night he had come face to face with horrific accounts of people grieving the loss of family and friends in Chimanimani. Some survivors have taken refuge at churches and centers offering temporary shelter as they deal with the trauma of their losses while private citizens, international aid agencies and the government rushed humanitarian aid to affected areas. Zimbabwean Energy Minister Joram Gumbo said the pipeline bringing fuel from Beira had not been affected by the cyclone but the docking terminals at Beira port had been damaged. He said Zimbabwe had 62 days supply of petrol and 32 days for diesel, which is in short supply and has led to long queues in the capital. In the city of Mutare, near Mozambique, diesel shortages were worse, according to a Reuters witness. In Beira, Saviano Abreu of the U.N. humanitarian arm OCHA said the main problem with getting aid to relief camps outside of Beira was that they could be reached only by helicopter, since floods had cut off roads, and helicopters were scarce. Large parts of Beira lacked running water, but everyone affected was getting 20 liters of water for washing, cooking and drinking. Briefing his team late on Thursday night, Connor Hartnady, rescue operations task force leader for Rescue South Africa, said Beira residents were getting fed up with shortages. “There have been three security incidents today, all food related,” he told his team, without giving further details. Commenting on Beira, U.N. humanitarian spokesman Jens Laerke said if people were desperate to get aid, that should be treated as part of the community response and not as a security matter. “These are desperate people,” Laerke said. “I don’t think anybody would blame a desperate mother or father who have children who do not have clean water to drink or food to eat who grab it from wherever they find it in a shop.” The storm’s rains caused the Buzi and Pungwe rivers, whose mouths are in the Beira area, to burst their banks. Roads into Beira were cut off by the storm and wide swathes of the Indian Ocean port city lacked power.
8584	France is fourth country to pass 10,000 coronavirus deaths.	France has officially registered more than 10,000 deaths from coronavirus infections, making it the fourth country to cross that threshold after Italy, Spain and the United States.	true	Health News	The rate of increase in the number of fatalities also rose on Tuesday for the second consecutive day, official figures showed. Jerome Salomon, head of the public health authority, told a news conference the pandemic was still expanding in France, which is now in the fourth week of a national lockdown to try to curb its spread. But he said the number of serious coronavirus cases being treated in intensive care units had risen by only 0.8% in the previous 24 hours - the eighth consecutive day that this rate has decelerated. “The need to find new (ICU) places is less urgent. But the balance of additional patients needing care remains positive, which means the pandemic is still expanding”, Salomon said. Earlier on Tuesday, Italy, the country with the highest coronavirus death toll at 17,127, reported a fourth consecutive daily decline in the number of people in intensive care. France closely monitors its neighbour, which introduced a national lockdown on March 9, to evaluate the efficiency of its own measures. French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe said the unwinding of the lockdown, which at this stage is supposed to run until April 15, would not “happen overnight”. Authorities tightened their lockdown measures in Paris, banning outdoor sports activity between 10 a.m. and 7 p.m. Salomon said the number of people who have died in French hospitals after contracting the coronavirus had risen to a cumulative total of 7,091. But if partial data on deaths in nursing homes is included, the death toll from the disease is now 10,328, he said. The total number of confirmed coronavirus cases in hospitals is now 78,167, and the number of confirmed or possible cases in nursing homes is 30,902.

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.